Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 - CDD_North Newport Center PC AmendmentCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH C9C /Fp0.N`P City Council Staff Report Agenda Item No. 15 July 24, 2012 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Community Development Department Kimberly Brandt, AICP, Director 949 - 644 -3226, kbrandt @newportbeachca.gov PREPARED BY: Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner APPROVED: 0.K TITLE: North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment which includes Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500 and San Joaquin Plaza of Newport Center (PA2012 -020) ABSTRACT: Amendment of the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan increasing the residential development allocation from 430 units to a total of 524 units (increase of 94 units) and allocating the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the NNCPC. The project application also includes a transfer of development intensity, a development agreement amendment, a traffic study, an affordable housing implementation plan amendment, and a water supply assessment. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. 2012- 62 (Attachment No. CC1) adopting Addendum No. 2 to the Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No 2006011119) for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and the Water Supply Assessment prepared for the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K -3; and 3) Adopt Resolution No. 2012- 63 (Attachment No. CC2) approving Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002; and 4) Introduce Ordinance No. 2012 - 99 (Attachment No. CC3) approving Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001 and pass to second reading on August 14, 2012; and 94 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 2 5) Adopt Resolution No. 2012- 64 (Attachment No. CC4) approving Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004; and 6) Adopt Resolution No. 2012- 65 (Attachment No. CC5) approving the proposed Amendment of the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan; and 7) Introduce Ordinance No. Amendment to Development reading on August 14, 2012. FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: 2012-20 (Attachment No. CC6) approving an Agreement No. DA2007 -002 and pass to second There is no fiscal impact related to this item. However, approval would lead to the future payment of public benefit fee contributions to the City, including a Public Benefit Fee for Parks (approximately $2.45 million), a Public Benefit Fee (approximately $5.92 million), and Bayside Drive Walkway Connection reimbursement ($200,000). See Development Agreement section of this report for additional details. 2 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 3 .3 ♦!jam `,��p ��,� � �y'���„�i � ti rrdrrrt ; rrb�f�fM� ■ Block 900 6jrfr�ffrf� '.,:;:N:S: Anomaly 43 (Marriott Hotels ' °•'• `�` �' WmfL ����� �►��� ,tea ♦ � j �� .r .3 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 4 GENERAL PLAN ZONING 1306UU RSA / �° x PF PC PCB fir. A... £ at s Y ^\ y � \v\- ` PC 41 CVU NMALY CPC a6 +J CR \ \\ 0.MF f \/ L 3 MU H]PR PL GO ]11tN LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE Regional Commercial (CR); Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU- Regional shopping center; hotel, ON -SITE H3); Medical Commercial Office (CO -M) Regional North Newport Center PC business and professional , R Open Commercial (C (PC-56) offices, and multiple -unit Space (OS); Multiple -Unit residential Residential RM Single Unit Residential NORTH Attached (RS -A); Single Unit Residential Detached Big Canyon Planned Single -unit residential and (RS -D); Multiple Unit Community (PC -8) multiple -unit residential Residential RM Medical Commercial Office Regional Business and professional SOUTH Office (CO -M); Multiple Commercial (OR); Multi- offices, and multiple -unit Unit Residential RM Unit Residential (RM) residential EAST Mixed Use Horizontal 3 (MU- H3); Medical Commercial Block 500 Planned Community (PC -46); Business, medical and Office (CO -M) Block 400 Planned professional offices Community PC -28 General Commercial Office Regional (CG); Public Facilities Commercial (OR); Land Service station; automobile (PF); Private Institutional (PF); Regional Rover Planned Community (PC -20); dealership; Fire Station WEST Commercial Office (CO- Government, Public p 3; museuum; m; business and ro Professional office; hotel; golf R); Visitor Serving Facilities (PF); Santa course and country club Commercial (CV); Barbara Residential (PC- Multiple Unit Residential 54); Newport Beach RM Country Club (PC -47) �t North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 5 INTRODUCTION Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission reviewed the project at their July 5, 2012, meeting and by a vote of 7 -0, recommended City Council approval of the project and all related application requests. The draft minutes are included in Attachment No. CC7. Project Setting The NNCPC is located in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area L1 of the General Plan), a regional center of business and commerce that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential. The Newport Center Statistical Area is bounded by Jamboree Road, San Joaquin Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and East Coast Highway. The NNCPC primarily comprises the northern portions of the Statistical Area and consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800, and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza. The subject portion of San Joaquin Plaza (approximately 23 acres) is currently developed with a complex of low -rise business and professional offices, a parking structure, and surface parking. The proposed transfer of development intensity involves the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (General Plan Anomaly Site 43) that is also located within the Newport Center Statistical Area, more specifically at the southwestern corner of Santa Barbara Drive and Newport Center Drive. See Vicinity Map on Page 3 for NNCPC boundaries and location of San Joaquin Plaza and the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel. Project Description The applicant is requesting to amend the NNCPC Development Plan, which is the zoning document that establishes land uses, development standards, and procedures for development within seven sub -areas of the Newport Center area. The primary intent of this request is to increase the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. Of the 94 units, 15 of the units are currently allowed by the General Plan, but are unassigned to any specific property within Newport Center; the remaining 79 units would result from the conversion and transfer of unbuilt non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family development intensity (79 multi - family units). No specific development is proposed at this time; rather, the allocation of the 524 total residential units to San Joaquin Plaza will support future development. The project consists of the following applications that are necessary to implement the applicant's request: 1. Transfer of Development Intensity- The General Plan currently allows a maximum development of 611 hotel rooms at the Newport Beach Marriot Hotel J North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 6 site (Anomaly No. 43); however, the hotel is only developed with a total of 532 rooms. Therefore, the applicant is requesting to convert the non - residential development intensity associated with the unbuilt 79 hotel rooms to residential development intensity for 79 multi - family residential units. The development intensity would then be transferred from Anomaly No. 43 to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the NNCPC; 2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment- The NNCPC Development Plan is proposed to be amended to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 3. Development Agreement Amendment- The existing Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Development Agreement) between the City and the Irvine Company is proposed to be amended to vest the increased residential development intensity within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City; 4. Traffic Study- Preparation of a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (traffic study for 430 residential units was previously approved); 5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- The existing AHIP approved for the NNCPC specifying how the Irvine Company will address the City's affordable housing goals is proposed to be amended to account for the increased residential development intensity; and 6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- The preparation of a water supply assessment pursuant to Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and Water Code Section 10910 et seq.), to demonstrate that adequate water supplies are and will be available to meet the water demand associated with anticipated residential development of San Joaquin Plaza. Background On July 25, 2006, the City adopted the comprehensive update to the General Plan. The updated General Plan contains several policies that allow for the introduction of new residential opportunities, new retail square footage, hotel units and expanded office development into the Newport Center Statistical Area. Specifically, the General Plan established a development intensity of 450 residential units that could be developed within any of the sub -areas within Newport Center with the MU -H3 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) General Plan land use designation, which includes Blocks 500, Block 600, San Joaquin Plaza, and portions of the Newport Beach Country Club. On December 18, 2007, the City Council adopted the NNCPC Development Plan and Design Regulations. The NNCPC establishes development allocations for each sub- area. Of the 450 residential units that could be developed in Newport Center, the 9 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 7 NNCPC was assigned 430 units, which were allocated to Blocks 500, 600, or San Joaquin Plaza. In conjunction with the adoption of the NNCPC, a traffic study, an AHIP, and a development agreement were also approved. The development agreement ( "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement ") specifies circulation improvements, dedication of street right -of -way and open space, and the contribution of public benefit fees for which the applicant will be responsible. The agreement also vests the applicant's right to develop the 430 residential units in Blocks 500 or 600 or San Joaquin Plaza. At the time of the original adoption of the NNCPC in 2007, the NNCPC boundaries only included Fashion Island, Block 600 and portions of Block 500 and San Joaquin Plaza. On November 24, 2009, the City Council approved the first amendment to the NNCPC, incorporating Irvine Company owned portions of properties located in Blocks 100, 400, and 800. On May 24, 2011, the City Council approved the second amendment to the NNCPC, incorporating the remaining of Block 800. The properties added to the NNCPC with these two subsequent amendments are not subject to the terms of the original development agreement. General Plan The sub -areas of the NNCPC include General Plan land use designations of Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1­13), Regional Commercial Office (CO -R), Medical Commercial Office (CO -M), Regional Commercial (CR); Multiple -Unit Residential (RM), and Open Space (OS). No changes to the General Plan land use designations are proposed and the only changes in development intensity are associated with the proposed transfer of development intensity. The subject 94 residential units, plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza portions of the NNCPC, are proposed to be solely allocated to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. San Joaquin Plaza is designated MU -H3, which is intended to provide for the horizontal intermixing of regional commercial office, hotel, single - family and multi - family residential and ancillary commercial uses within Newport Center. Future development of the site with up to 524 residential units would be consistent with this designation. As previously mentioned, the General Plan establishes a maximum development limit of 450 residential units that can be assigned to any of the sub -areas of Newport Center designated MU -H3. A total of 430 residential units have been previously assigned to the NNCPC and five units have been assigned to the Newport Beach Country Club site. Therefore, the assignment of the remaining 15 residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the NNCPC is consistent with the General Plan. 7 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 8 To maintain consistency with the development limits established under the General Plan, the applicant is requesting to convert the development intensity associated with 79 unbuilt hotel rooms currently assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43 (Newport Beach Marriot Hotel) to 79 residential units and transfer the development intensity to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. The proposed transfer is permissible in accordance with General Plan Land Use Policies LU 4.3(d) and LU 6.14.3. Please refer to the Transfer of Development Intensity section of this report for detailed information. The project is consistent with the following goals and policies of the General Plan: LU 3.3 Opportunities for Change Provide opportunities for improved development and enhanced environments for residents in the following districts and corridors... Fashion Island /Newport Center., expanded retail uses and hotel rooms and development of residential in proximity to jobs and services, while limiting increases in office development. LU 5.3.4 District Integrating Residential and Nonresidential Uses Require that sufficient acreage be developed for an individual use located in the district containing a mix of residential and nonresidential uses to prevent fragmentation and ensure each use's viability, quality, and compatibility with adjoining uses. LU 6.14.2 Newport Center Provide the opportunity for limited residential, hotel, and office development in accordance with the limits specified by Tables LU1 and LU2. H 2.3 Approve, wherever feasible and appropriate, mixed residential development and commercial use developments those improve the balance between housing and jobs. HP 2.2.1 Require a proportion of affordable housing in new residential developments or levy an in -lieu fee. The City's goal over the five year planning period is for an average of 15 percent of all new housing units to be affordable to very low -, low -, or moderate - income households.... The intent of the policies and goals above is to create a viable mixed -use district that integrates new commercial and residential uses seamlessly with existing commercial, office, entertainment, and residential uses that are supported by a more pedestrian friendly environment. Although the project would decrease the hotel development intensity anticipated in Newport Center under the General Plan, the conversion to the residential units enhances the opportunity for future residential development in Newport Center and furthers the City's goal of providing opportunities for residents to reside near jobs, commerce, recreation and entertainment activities. The project applicant also responds to the City's affordable housing goals through an AHIP that includes provisions for restricting rental costs for existing units located at The Bays, a nearby apartment complex owned and operated by the applicant (see AHIP section of this report for details). ON North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 9 In summary, the Planning Commission found the proposed project consistent with the General Plan, provided the transfer of development intensity is approved. Transfer of Development Intensity The applicant is requesting to convert the development intensity associated with 79 unbuilt hotel rooms currently assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43 (Newport Beach Marriot Hotel) to 79 multi - family residential units and transfer the development intensity to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel site is currently developed with 532 rooms, resulting in 79 unbuilt hotel rooms remaining from the maximum 611 hotel room development limit established under the General Plan. General Plan Land Use Policy LU4.3 lists a number of criteria for transfer of development intensity. In particular, transfer of development intensity in the Newport Center Statistical Area is governed by Policy LU6.14.3: LU 6.14.3 Transfers of Development Rights Development rights may be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The applicant's request to convert and transfer the nonresidential development intensity is consistent with the General Plan in that it relocates unbuilt development intensity within Newport Center, while maintaining the balance of uses envisioned by the General Plan for Newport Center. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel site has a General Plan Land Use designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV) and the reduction of allowable development intensity by 79 hotel units would not result in any physical changes at the site nor would it result in a change in land use. The hotel would continue operating with 532 rooms and serve visitors to the City consistent with the intent of the General Plan's CV land use designation. The San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of NNCPC is designated MU -H3 (Mixed Use Horizontal), which allows residential uses. Both the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan identify the San Joaquin Plaza for potential development with multi - family residential uses. Therefore, the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity can be found consistent with the General Plan. A trip generation analysis was prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (Attachment No. CC8), to compare the trip generation of the unbuilt 79 hotel rooms and the proposed 79 multi - family residential units to ensure the proposed conversion would not result in a net increase of development intensity. The analysis concludes that 79 residential units would generate 17 fewer AM peak hour vehicle trips, 17 fewer PM peak hour vehicle trips, and 315 fewer daily vehicle trips than 79 hotel rooms. The development intensity associated with the unbuilt hotel units would be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area and would be unavailable for future use by the Newport Beach Marriot Hotel or future user of the Anomaly Site No. 43 should the project be approved. The net balance of trips resulting from the conversion could be used by the I North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 10 applicant to off -set future increases in traffic associated with other projects in the NNCPC if needed. Also, as discussed in more detail within the Traffic Study section of this report, a traffic analysis was prepared pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance to analyze the potential traffic impacts that may be associated with the development of the 94 residential units. This traffic analysis also takes into account the cumulative traffic associated with the currently assigned 430 residential units allowed in NNCPC. The results of the traffic study conclude that the project would not result in a significant impact to any study intersection or require any traffic improvements. In summary, the Planning Commission found the proposed transfer of development intensity consistent with the General Plan, including General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, and will that it would not result in adverse traffic impacts in Newport Center or surrounding roadways. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment The applicant is proposing to amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the maximum allowable residential development intensity from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. In addition, the applicant is proposing a number of minor revisions to the PC Development Plan. The complete NNCPC Development Plan is included as Exhibit A of Attachment No. CC3 with all revisions illustrated in Underline /Strikeout format. All other provisions of the Development Plan remain unchanged. In summary, the revisions are as follows: 1. Revising Table 2 (Development Limits) in Section 11.13 to reflect the increase in residential development intensity from 430 units to 524 units. 2. Revising Table 2 to reflect the current development limits for Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza, consistent with the most recent Transfer of Development Rights (TD2011 -001) approved by the City Council on November 8, 2011 (Resolution No. 2011 -102). 3. Revising Table 2 to eliminate a footnote (previous Footnote "C ") that allowed the residential units to be developed in Block 500, Block 600, or San Joaquin Plaza. As a result, residential units will solely be allocated to San Joaquin Plaza. 4. Revising a reference in Section II.B.1 of "the 1,700 seat movie theater" to read 1,700 movie theater seats ", so as to accurately refer to allowed development intensity. 5. Revising Section LB (Relationship to Municipal Code) clarifying that Blocks 500, 600, San Joaquin Plaza, and Fashion Island are subject to the version of the WIN North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 11 Municipal Code in effect on December 18, 2007, consistent with the terms of the original Development Agreement adopted for the NNCPC. Also Blocks 100, 400, and 800 that were added to the NNCPC after its original adoption are proposed to be subject to the version of the Municipal Code in effect on June 5, 2012, consistent with the terms of the proposed Development Agreement Amendment. Development Agreement The project requires the preparation of a development agreement pursuant to General Plan Policy 6.14.8 and Chapter 15.45 of the Municipal Code. General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 reads as follows: LU 6.14.8 Development Agreements Require the execution of Development Agreements for residential and mixed -use development projects that use the residential 450 units identified in Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations). Development Agreements shall define the improvements and benefits to be contributed by the developer in exchange for the City's commitment for the number, density, and location of the housing units. Municipal Code Section 15.45.020 also requires a development agreement for this project because it is required by General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 and requires a Planned Community Development Plan amendment that increases development intensity greater than 50 residential units. An existing development agreement (formally titled "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement') between the applicant and the City was executed in conjunction with the original adoption of the NNCPC Development Plan in 2007 and included the vesting of rights to develop 75,000 sq. ft. of retail space, 205,161 square feet of office space (through the transfer of development rights) and 430 residential uses in North Newport Center for 20 years. Public benefit contributions to the City included circulation improvements, dedication of property, payment of in -lieu park fees totaling $11,199,999 (regardless if residential units are developed as for -sale or rental units) and the payment of Public Benefit Fees totaling $27,090,000. A copy of the existing development agreement (DA2007 -002) is available for review online at: http:// www. newportbeachca .gov /developmentagreements. The original City Council ad -hoc appointed committee (Council Members Rosansky and Selich) that negotiated the terms of the original development agreement also negotiated the terms of the proposed development agreement amendment. The draft development agreement amendment is included as Exhibit A of Attachment No. CC6 and includes the mandatory elements for consideration. Major provisions of the amended agreement are outlined below, with reference to the relevant sections of the amended agreement. 1. Vesting of rights to develop the additional 94 residential units (Section 3). Gil North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 12 2. Extending the term of the development agreement to 20 years from the effective date of the amendment (Section 12). 3. Provisions for affordable housing pursuant to the proposed AHIP Amendment (Section 4). 4. Payment of Public Benefit Fee for Parks in the amount $26,046.71 for each of the 94 units and shall be payable in full to the City by July 2013 (Section 7). 5. Payment of Public Benefit Fee in the amount of $63,000 for each of the 94 units, for a total of $5,922,000, which may be used for any municipal purpose (Section 6). 6. Reimbursement of up to $200,000 for costs associated with plans, specifications, permits, and /or construction of the Bayside Drive Walkway Connection, a future connection from an existing public access walkway to the Marine Avenue Bridge. The payment would be payable within 90 days after receipt of written notice from the City that it has awarded a construction contract for the project. 7. Limiting future amendments to the Municipal Code pertaining to development of Block 800 and portions of Block 100 and 400 of the NNCPC, which were properties added to the NNCPC subsequent to the execution of the original development agreement. These blocks would be subject to the Municipal Code in effect as of June 5, 2012 (Section 2.2). The Planning Commission found that the proposed development agreement satisfies the requirements of the General Plan policy for Newport Center development agreements. It specifies public benefit contributions for which the applicant will be responsible. The agreement also vests the applicant's right to build the subject 94 residential units, in addition to the original 430 residential units, in San Joaquin Plaza. Traffic Study- Traffic Phasing Ordinance Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance, or TPO) requires that a traffic study be prepared and findings be made before building permits may be approved if a proposed project will generate in excess of 300 average daily trips (ADT). Although no specific development project is proposed at this time, development of the 94 residential units was assumed to be completed in 2015 and is forecast to generate 393 additional trips per day, including 32 additional a.m. peak hour trips and 36 p.m. peak hour trips. It should be noted that the 430 residential units currently allocated and vested within the NNCPC were previously analyzed and approved under Traffic Study No. TS2007 -001 and added to the approved projects list. Traffic associated with projects on the approved projects list has been included in the cumulative traffic impact analysis included in the subject traffic study for this project. 12 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 13 Pursuant to Section 15.04.030.A, the City Council must make the following findings in order to approve the project: That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and Appendix A; 2. That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (B) can be made: 15.40.030. B.1 Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of project approval; and 15.40.030. B.1(a) The project will neither cause nor make an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted intersection. 3. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all conditions of approval. A traffic study, entitled "North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis" and dated May 2012, was prepared by Stantec Consulting, Inc., under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the TPO and its implementing guidelines (Exhibit • of Attachment No. CC41 ). • total of 20 primary intersections in the City were evaluated. The traffic study indicates that the project will increase traffic on 12 of the 20 study intersections by one percent (1 %) or more during peak hour periods one year after the completion of the project, and therefore, these 12 intersections required further Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis. Utilizing the ICU analysis specified by the TPO, the traffic study determined that the 12 primary intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Since implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City, no improvements are necessary. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the traffic study and find that it has been prepared in compliance with the TPO. A complete copy of the Traffic Study with Appendices is available for review online at: htti):/ /www.newi)ortbeachca.gov /i)ln /CEQA REVIEW / North% 20Newport%20Center %20PC %20Addendu m2/05 Appendix D Traffic Impact Analvsis.0f i3 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 14 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan Amendment Housing Element Program 2.2.1 includes a goal that an average of 15% of all new units be affordable to very low -, low -, or moderate - income households. Also, an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) is required to be prepared for projects with more than 50 residential units to specify how the project will meet the City's goal. The existing North Newport Center Planned Community AHIP was adopted in 2007, in conjunction with the adoption of the NNCPC Development Plan, which addresses affordable housing requirements associated with the 430 residential units currently allocated to NNCPC. At that time, two options for providing affordable housing were specified. The first option was to develop an affordable housing development with up to 14 units on a vacant property (1691 San Miguel Dr.) formerly owned by the applicant; however, that site has since been sold to another developer who is in the process of constructing four new single - family residences on the site and this option is no longer feasible. The second option is to record affordability covenants with a term of 30 years on existing apartment units (The Bays at 1 Baywood Dr.) located nearby along San Joaquin Hills Road. The applicant is proposing to amend the AHIP to address the requested 94 unit increase in residential development intensity (Exhibit A of Attachment No. CC5). The amended AHIP proposes to restrict rental costs on additional units within The Bays apartment complex consistent with the provisions of the existing AHIP. The number of affordable units and income levels would be based on the percentages shown in tables below: 524 Units: Number of Affordable Units and Income Levels Income Category Percentage Required Total Amount Very Low 10% 52 units Low 15% 79 units Moderate 20% 105 units The AHIP indicates that the affordable units will be provided incrementally, with one - third of the requirement provided with each 100 market rate units constructed. This schedule will result in meeting the entire affordable requirement before all of the market rate units are built. The Planning Commission found this to be an acceptable solution for this project. The off -site location of The Bays is within walking distance to Newport Center and provides a housing opportunity for moderate- and lower- income employees of employees of the area. The proposed AHIP satisfies the affordable housing goal of the Housing Element. It should be noted that the requirements of Chapter 19.54 of the Municipal Code (Inclusionary Housing) would not apply should the residential units be developed as _4 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 15 rentals; however, compliance with the AHIP would still be required as a public benefit under the proposed development agreement amendment. Water Supply Assessment California Senate Bill 610 (SB610), adopted in 2001, requires that a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) be prepared for proposed projects of more than 500 residential dwelling units evaluating water supplies that will be available to the project over a 20 year period. The evaluation needs to address water supply availability during a normal year as well as during single -dry year and multiple -dry year events. The WSA must consider existing demands as well as reasonably foreseeable planned future water demands and must use information contained in adopted Urban Water Management Plans as required by the State Urban Water Management Act. The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 residential units; however, should the requested transfer of development intensity and amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan be approved, an additional 94 units would be permitted in NNCPC, bring the maximum number of permitted residential units to 524 units. Therefore, pursuant to the requirements of SB610, a WSA for the project was prepared by T& B Planning in conjunction with the City's Municipal Operation Department (Exhibit B of Attachment No. CC12). The City provides water service to the project site, and as the water provider, the City Council serves as the lead agency with the authority to approve the WSA. City approval of the WSA would certify that the document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of SB610 and the information and findings contained in the WSA are reasonable and may be incorporated into the environmental documentation for the project as required by CEQA. The City's water supply comes from three sources: 1) imported water from Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan) as wholesaled to the City by the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC); 2) local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin by wells owned and operated by the City and managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD); and 3) recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project. The analysis and conclusions of the WSA are based on the City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan, MWDOC's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan, and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. Information contained within the four documents concludes that there is sufficient water supply capacity to serve the respective service area through 2035, including projected water demand in the City associated with the build out of the City's General Plan. Furthermore, the WSA concludes that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed project for the next 20 years. 2 A complete copy of the Water Supply Assessment with Appendices is available for review online at: htti): / /www.newi)ortbeachca.gov /i)ln /CEQA REVIEW / North% 20Newport%20Center %20PC %20Addendu m2/06 Appendix E Water Supply Assessment.0 15 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 16 Airport Environs Land Use Plan North Newport Center is located within the Planning Area for John Wayne Airport in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). The Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) has found the City of Newport Beach to be a consistent agency with the AELUP. ALUC has also previously reviewed and found the NNCPC Development Plan to be consistent with the AELUP. However, the AELUP requires that zone changes for consistent agencies be referred to the ALUC for a determination prior to City action. The proposed amendments to the NNCPC are scheduled for ALUC review on July 19, 2012. Staff will provide the City Council with an update on ALUC's determination at the July 24, 2012, City Council meeting. However, since the proposed amendments primarily involve a conversion and reallocation of development intensity and do not change development standards, staff does not foresee any consistency issues. Alternatives 1. The City Council may modify the project approvals; or 2. If the City Council believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, the City Council may deny the application and provide facts in support of denial to be included in the attached draft resolution for denial (Attachment No. CC 9). Summary The Planning Commission found that the proposed amendment to the NNCPC and transfer of development intensity are consistent with the overall development intensity projected for Newport Center by the 2006 General Plan. The increased residential development intensity enhances the opportunity for future residential development in Newport Center and furthers the City's goal of providing opportunities for residents to reside near jobs, commerce, recreation and entertainment activities. Public benefit contributions will be provided to the City through the proposed amendment to the development agreement, including provisions for affordable housing as specified in the proposed AHIP. Potential traffic impacts associated with the project have been reviewed and determined that the project would not result in a significant impact to any study intersection or require any traffic improvements in the area or surrounding road ways. Additionally, a water supply assessment has been prepared and determined that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed project. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the project and related requests. 10 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 17 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: An Addendum (Addendum No. 2) to the Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No 2006011119) certified on July 25, 2006 has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code § §21000, et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations § §15000, et seq. The Addendum was prepared by T &B Planning and is included as Exhibit A of Attachment No. CC13. The purpose of the Addendum is to analyze the potential differences between the impacts evaluated in the General Plan Program EIR and those that would be associated with the proposed project. State CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously certified EIR for projects that have changed or are different from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or additions occur with no new significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared (CEQA Guidelines §15164). The 2006 General Plan allocated a certain amount of development intensity to the Newport Center Statistical Area. In 2007, the applicant proposed to vest a portion of that development intensity through the approval of a zoning amendment resulting in the City adopting the NNCPC. In compliance with CEQA, the City prepared and approved Addendum No. 1 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR. The proposed project is within the scope of the previously certified program EIR considering Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2. The potential impacts associated with the proposed changes would either be the same or less than the anticipated levels as described in the certified General Plan EIR, including Addendum No. 1. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which future development projects subject to the 2006 General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan would be undertaken. Copies of the previously prepared General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, and supporting documents are available for review online at: http:// www. newportbeachca .gov /Genera]PlanEIR. NOTICING: Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot and on the City's website, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the NNCPC boundaries and posted at various 'A complete copy of the Addendum No. 2 with Appendices is available for review online at: htto : / /www.newi)ortbeachca.gov /oln /CEQA DOCS.aso ?path= /North Newport Center PC Addendum2 17 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment (PA2012 -020) July 24, 2012 Page 18 locations within the NNCPC boundaries, including San Joaquin Plaza, a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Submitted by: Kimberly All Director ATTACHMENTS CC 1 Resolution adopting Addendum No. 2 to the General Plan 2006 Update Program EIR for and the Water Supply Assessment CC 2 Resolution approving TD2012 -002 CC 3 Ordinance approving PD2012 -001 CC 4 Resolution approving TS2012 -004 CC 5 Resolution approving an Amendment to Implementation Plan NNCPC Affordable Housing CC 6 Ordinance approving an Amendment to DA2007 -002 CC 7 Draft July 5, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes CC 8 Trip Generation Analysis CC 9 Resolution of denial WN Attachment No. CC 1 Resolution adopting Addendum No. 2 to Program EIR for 2006 General Plan Update and Water Supply Assessment GC 1/19 GC 1/20 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING THE SECOND NORTH NEWPORT CENTER ADDENDUM (ADDENDUM NO. 2) TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2006011119) AND WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the Irvine Company wishes to implement the General Plan 2006 Update with the implementation of the North Newport Center Planned Community, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area. WHEREAS, in that regard, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for approval of the following project (the 'Project "): 1. Transfer of Development Intensity (TD2012 -002) - Conversion of un -built non- residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi- family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC); 2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (PD2012 -001) - Amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units result from the conversion and transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15 units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area L1; 3. Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 - Amending the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company to vest the revised development intensities and allocations within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City; 4. Traffic Study (TS2012 -004)- Traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; 5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) - Amendment to an AHIP specifying how the Project will meet the City's affordable housing goal; and 6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA) - Evaluation of water supply availability for the Project. SD \847681.1 CC 1/21 WHEREAS, on July 25, 2006, the City Council certified the adequacy and completeness of the EIR for the General Plan 2006 Update (EIR No. 2006011119) by adopting Resolution No 2006 -75. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15168, the City prepared the EIR for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update as a program EIR (the "Program EIR "). WHEREAS, on December 11, 2007, the City Council certified the adequacy and completeness of the Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update ( "Addendum No. 1 ") by adopting Resolution No. 2007 -79. WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach has prepared a second Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update ( "Addendum No. 2 "). WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has determined that the Addendum No. 2 complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA °). WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of California Senate Bill 610, adopted in 2011, the City of Newport Beach has prepared a Water Supply Assessment ( "WSA ") for the Project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and Addendum No. 2, and the WSA. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the Project, Addendum No. 2, and the WSA by majority vote. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on July 24, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the City Council considered the Project, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and Addendum No. 2, and the WSA. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. WHEREAS, after thoroughly considering the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, Addendum No. 2, the WSA, and the public testimony and written submissions, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the City Council finds the following facts, findings, and reasons to support certifying the Addendum No. 2: SD \847681.1 CC 1/22 The Project is consistent with and implements the General Plan Update. 2. The Program EIR, which is conclusively presumed to be valid pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21167.2, reviews the existing conditions of the City and Newport Center; analyzes potential environmental impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center; identifies policies from the General Plan Update that serve to reduce and minimize impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center; and identifies additional mitigations measures, if necessary to reduce potentially significant impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center. 3. The Project does not increase development intensities or associated impacts beyond the levels considered in the Program EIR. 4. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan Update has been implemented for the Project. 5. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes to the environmental setting of the General Plan Update have occurred. 6. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no new information of substantial importance has become available that was not known and that could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at that time of certification. Thus, no new information indicates that: (A) The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the Program EIR; (B) Significant effects from the Project will be substantially more severe than identified in the Program EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the Project, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the Program EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measures or alternative. 7. Since no substantial changes to the circumstances or environmental setting have occurred, and since no new information relating to significant effects, mitigation measures, or alternatives has become available, the Project does not require additional environmental review, consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15168. SD \847681.1 CC 1/23 8. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and the Addendum No. 2, the City Council has determined that the Project falls within the scope of the Program EIR, and that the Program EIR therefore applies to the Project, consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15168. 9. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and the Addendum No. 2, the City Council has determined that no subsequent EIR or supplemental EIR is required or appropriate under Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162; 15163, and 15164. The Addendum No.2 therefore satisfies CEQA's environmental review requirements for the Project. 10. The Addendum No. 2, which the City prepared to evaluate whether the Project would cause any new or potentially more severe significant adverse effects on the environment, specifically analyzed, in addition to several other potential impacts, potential impacts related to aesthetics, climate change, and traffic. The analysis and conclusions for potential traffic impacts were based on, and relied upon, the traffic study entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis, which, together with the Addendum No. 2, provide the substantial evidence upon which the City Council has based its findings. 11. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the Addendum No. 2, the City Council finds that the Project will not have, when compared to the Program EIR, any new or more severe adverse environmental impacts, including, without limitation, no new or more severe significant adverse impacts related to aesthetics, climate change, or traffic. 12. The City Council also makes the following, more specific finding: The Addendum No.2 specifically analyzes the Project's potential impacts on traffic and circulation, based on the traffic study entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis, attached to the Addendum No. 2. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the Addendum and the traffic study, the City Council finds that the Project will not have any new or more severe significant traffic or circulation impacts. 13. The Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 14. The Project does not have the potential to disadvantage long -term environmental goals in order to achieve short-term environmental goals, as documented in the Addendum No. 2, which identified no new or more severe significant adverse effects on the environment. SD \847681.1 CC 1/2.4 15. The Project will not result in any new or more severe significant impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, when viewed in connection with planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity. 16. The Project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, in that no new or more severe significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health or public services. 17. These factual findings are based on the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, the Addendum No. 2, and all documents referred in or attached to it, including without limitation the traffic studies, the submissions of the applicant, the records and files of the City's Community Development Department related to the Project, and any other documents referred to or relied upon by the City Council during its consideration of the Project on July 24, 2012. 18. The City Council has considered the Program EIR and the Addendum No.2, and has concluded that the Addendum No. 2 reflects the independent judgment of the City. 19. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in California Code Regulations, Title 14, Section 753.5(d). 20. The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. 21. The WSA evaluates whether the total projected water supplies, determined to be available by the city or county for the project during normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years during a 20 -year projection, will meet the projected water demand associated with the Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses. 22. The WSA identifies all existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the water supply for the Project and describes the quantities of water received in prior years by the existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts. 23. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the WSA, the City Council finds that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed project for the next 20 years. SD \847681.1 CC 1/215 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds that the preceding recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council for the Addendum No.2 and WSA. 2. The City Council hereby certifies the Addendum No. 2, attached as Exhibit "A ", for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in the Addendum No. 2. 3. The City Council hereby approves the WSA, attached as Exhibit "B ", to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in the WSA. 4. 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. This resolution was approved. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 24th day of July, 2012. AYES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ATTEST: (Seal) SDA847681.1 CC 2 /2l0 Exhibit "A" Addendum No. 2 to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (Appendices to be attached upon approval. A complete copy of the Addendum No. with Appendices is available for review online at: http:/ /www.newportbeachca.gov /pin /CEQA DOCS.asp ?path= /North Newport Center PC Addendum2) SDA847681.1 CC 2 /2j CC 1/22 ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) SCH No. 2006011119 i Lead Agency City of Newport Beach Community Development Department Planning Division 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 CEQA Consultant T &B Planning, Inc. 17542 East 17 1h Street, Suite 100 Tustin, California 92780 June 15, 2012 CC 1/29 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Number/Title Page 1.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 1 -1 1.1 Project Summary ............................................................................................... ............................... 1 -1 1.2 The California Environmental Quality Act ................................................. ............................... 1 -2 1.3 Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and Final Program EIR ..... ............................... 1 -2 1.4 Addendum No. I to the Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and Final ProgramEIR ....................................................................................................... ............................... 1 -3 1.5 California Environmental Quality Act Requirements ............................... ............................... 1 -3 1.6 Type of CEQA Compliance Document and Level of Analysis .............. ............................... 1 -4 1.7 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum .............................................. ............................... 1 -7 1.8 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum .................................. ............................... 1 -8 2.0 Project Description ............................................................................................................ ............................2 -1 3.0 Project Information ............................................................................................................ ............................3 -1 4.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis ............................................... ............................4 -1 4.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .................................................. ............................4 -1 4.2 Determination (To Be Completed By the Lead Agency) ........................ ............................... 4 -1 4.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts .............................................................. ............................4 -2 4.3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................... ............................4 -2 4.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................ ............................4 -6 4.3.3 Air Quality .............................................................................................. ............................4 -9 4.3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................... ...........................4 -18 4.3.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................. ...........................4 -21 4.3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources ........................................... ...........................4 -24 4.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................... ...........................4 -29 4.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................... ...........................4 -35 4.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality .......................................................... ...........................4 -40 4.3.10 Land Use and Planning ........................................................................ ...........................4 -45 4.3.11 Noise ...................................................................................................... ...........................4 -49 4.3.12 Population and Housing ..................................................................... ...........................4 -61 4.3.13 Public Services ................................ .................................................................... ............. 4 -62 4.3.14 Recreation and Open Space .............................................................. ...........................4 -66 4.3.15 Transportation/ Traffic ........................................................................ ...........................4 -68 4.3.16 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................. ...........................4 -81 5.0 References ............................................................................................................................ ............................5 -1 6.0 Persons Contributing to Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Preparation........................................................................................................................ ............................... 6 -1 6.1 Persons Contributing to Initial Study /Addendum Preparation ................. ............................6 -1 6.2 Resumes for Key Personnel .............................................................................. ............................6 -1 7.0 Technical Appendices ........................................................................................................ ............................7 -1 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CV I /so Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number /Title Page Figure I Proposed Development Intensity Transfer ................................................... ............................2 -3 Figure2 Project Location Map .......................................................................................... ............................3 -3 Figure 3 Existing and Surrounding Land Uses ............................................................... ............................3 -4 Figure 4 TPO Analysis Study Intersections ................................................................... ...........................4 -70 Figure 5 General Project Trip Distribution and Project ADT ................................. ...........................4 -72 LIST OF TABLES Table Number /Title Paae Table I Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB ............................... ...........................4 -10 Table 2 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions ...................................................... ...........................4 -13 Table 3 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs ..........................4 -31 Table 4 Total Annual Project GHG Emissions ........................................................... ...........................4 -33 Table 5 Allowable Exterior Noise Levels .................................................................... ...........................4 -51 Table 6 Allowable Interior Noise Levels ...................................................................... ...........................4 -51 Table 7 Existing Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts ............................ ...........................4 -54 Table 8 Year 2016 Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts ....................... ...........................4 -56 Table 9 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ............................... ...........................4 -58 Table 10 Approved Projects Summary ........................................................................... ...........................4 -71 Table I I Trip Generation Summary ................................................................................ ...........................4 -71 Table 12 Cumulative Projects Summary ........................................................................ ...........................4 -73 Table 13 Existing ICU Summary ....................................................................................... ...........................4 -73 Table 14 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary ............................................................... ...........................4 -74 Table 15 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary ......................................................... ...........................4 -75 Table 16 Year 2016 ICU Summary ..... ............................... .......................4 ................... ............................... -76 Table 17 Cumulative ICU Summary ................................................................................ ...........................4 -77 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC 1 /3i Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 LIST OF ACRONYMS Acronym Definition AB Assembly Bill ADT Average Daily Traffic AELUP Airport Environs Land Use Plan AFY Acre -Feet per Year AHIP Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ALUC Airport Land Use Commission APS Alternative Planning Strategy AQMP Air Quality Management Plan BMPs Best Management Practices CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards CARB California Air Resources Board CBC California Building Code CDC California Department of Conservation CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CHa Methane CGS California Geological Survey CMP Congestion Management Program CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level DAMP (Orange County) Drainage Area Master Plan dB Decibels EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAR Federal Aviation Regulations FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program GCC Global Climate Change GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) GWP Global Warming Potential HCP Habitat Conservation Plan HFC Hydrofluorocarbon ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization IPPC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JWA John Wayne Airport NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC i/32 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 LIST OF ACRONYMS (cont'd) Acronym Definition Leq Equivalent Level (noise) LOS Level of Service MFR Multi - Family Residential Uses mgd million gallons per day MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MRZ -3 Mineral Resources Zone 3 MTCO2e Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent MU -H3 Mixed -Use Horizontal 3 MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NBFD Newport Beach Fire Department NBPD Newport Beach Police Department NBPL Newport Beach Public Library NCCP Natural Community Conservation Plan NMUSD Newport Mesa Unified School District NNCPC North Newport Center Planned Community NOx Oxides of Nitrogen NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority OCWD Orange County Water District PC -56 North Newport Center Planned Community PFC Perfluorocarbon PM2.5 Fine Particulate Matter PMio Inhalable Particulate Matter pph person(s) per household REMEL Reference Energy Mean Emission Level RM Multiple Residential RTP Regional Transportation Plan SB Senate Bill SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCGC Southern California Gas Company SCH State Clearinghouse (Governor's Office of Planning & Research) SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy SIP State Implementation Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC i /33 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 LIST OF ACRONYMS (cont'd) Acronym Definition SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TPO Traffic Phasing Ordinance USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service UWMP Urban Water Management Plan V/C Volume to Capacity Ratio VdB Vibration Decibels VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds vph vehicles per hour WQMP Water Quality Management Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CV 1/3 t Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 1.0 Introduction The City of Newport Beach (hereafter "City ") received an application from the Irvine Company (hereafter "Project Applicant ") in February 2012 requesting to assign un -built development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) and to vest that development intensity to the NNCPC subarea named "San Joaquin Plaza" (hereafter "proposed Project site "). Specifically, the application (hereafter "Project" or "proposed Project ") proposes the following: 1) convert 79 un -built hotel units to 79 multi - family residential units and transfer and vest those 79 units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; 2) assign and vest 15 un -built multi - family residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; and 3) reallocate 430 units already allowed within the NNCPC's Block 500, Block 600 and the San Joaquin Plaza, solely to the San Joaquin Plaza. The proposed Project is the subject of analysis in this document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15367, the City is the lead agency with principal responsibility for considering the proposed Project for approval. This Introduction will discuss: 1) the requirements of CEQA; 2) the Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 200601 1 19) certified by the Newport Beach City Council for the General Plan 2006 Update (hereafter "General Plan EIR ") in compliance with CEQA; 3) Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR that supported the approval of the NNCPC Development Plan and associated actions; 4) the primary purpose of an EIR Addendum; 5) the standards for adequacy of an EIR Addendum pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines; 6) the format and content of this EIR Addendum; and 7) the City's processing requirements to consider the proposed Project for approval. 1.1 Prolect Summary The proposed Project evaluated in this EIR Addendum is located in the City's Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI). This area is commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (hereafter, "General Plan" or "2006 General Plan ") describes the City's existing and planned development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and assigns maximum development limits (also called development "intensity ") to specific locations. The General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built development intensity. The Project Applicant is requesting the following: a. The conversion of development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area LI from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and the transfer and vesting of the converted units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; b. The assignment and vesting of 15 un -built multi - family residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of Newport Center to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; and c. The reallocation of the 430 residential units currently allocated to the Mixed -Use Horizontal 3 (MU -H3) portions of the NNCPC (Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza) solely to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -1 CC i /3,5 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 The above actions, combined, would result in a net increase in the number of multi - family residential dwelling units allowed within San Joaquin Plaza by 94 dwelling units (from 430 units to 524 units) and would eliminate residential unit allocations from NNCPC Blocks 500 and 600. The above actions do not, however, increase the overall intensity currently allowed by the General Plan. A General Plan Amendment is not required to accomplish transfers of development intensity, but the transfers must be approved by the City Council pursuant to Land Use Policy LU 6.14.3 of the General Plan (Transfers of Development Rights). The following actions require consideration by the Newport Beach City Council in order to approve the proposed Project: 1) Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2) Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza; 3) Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 4) Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities and allocations; 5) Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and 6) Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). Additional detail regarding the proposed Project and the six (6) actions listed above is provided in Section 2.0 of this document. 1.2 The California Environmental Quality Act CEQA, a statewide environmental law contained in Public Resources Code §§21000-21177, applies to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize, or approve actions that have the potential to adversely affect the environment. The overarching goal of CEQA is to protect the physical environment. To achieve that goal, CEQA requires that public agencies inform themselves of the environmental consequences of their discretionary actions and consider alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce significant adverse impacts when avoidance or reduction is feasible. It also gives other public agencies and the general public an opportunity to comment on the information. If significant adverse impacts cannot be avoided, reduced, or mitigated to below a level of significance, the public agency is required to prepare an EIR and balance the project's environmental concerns with other goals and benefits in a statement of overriding considerations. 1.3 Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and Final Proaram EIR In 2006, the City of Newport Beach prepared an update to its General Plan, which required the preparation of a program EIR. As defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, a program EIR is "an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related...." To reduce duplicative paperwork, program EIRs are intended to be used with later activities if the CEQA lead agency finds that no new adverse environmental effects could occur or no new mitigation measures would be required. See CEQA Guidelines § 15168. In that case, the agency can approve the NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -2 CC i /36 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 implementing activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. The City's General Plan EIR (SCH No. 20060 1 1 1 1 9) was certified by the Newport Beach City Council on July 25, 2006, as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with planned buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of the property encompassing the NNCPC and the specific area of the NNCPC that is the subject of evaluation in this document (San Joaquin Plaza). The location of the NNCPC, previous approvals granted, and the actions addressed as part of the proposed Project evaluated in this EIR Addendum are further addressed in Section 2.0, Project Description. On July 25, 2006, the Newport Beach City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006 -75 in association with certifying the General Plan EIR, making associated Findings and Statement of Facts, and adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations in compliance with CEQA. The General Plan EIR and Resolution No. 2006 -75 are herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and are available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663 and online at www.newportbeachca.gov. 1.4 Addendum No. 1 to the Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and Final Program EIR When the 2006 General Plan was adopted by the City, a certain amount of development intensity was allocated to the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI). In 2007, the Irvine Company proposed to assign a portion of the development intensity allocated to Statistical Area LI through the approval of a zoning amendment that would result in the City adopting the NNCPC Development Plan. Associated actions also were proposed, including but not limited to a Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center and an AHIP. In compliance with CEQA, the City prepared and approved Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR (hereafter, "Addendum No. I ") in association with the City's approval of that project. Addendum No. I is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. 1.5 California Environmental Quality Act Reauirements The CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously certified EIR for projects that have changed or are different from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or additions occur with no new significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines § 15164. The following describes the requirements of an Addendum, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15164: a. The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an Addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR have occurred. b. An Addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR. c. The decision - making body shall consider the Addendum with the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -3 CC 1/3 j No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 d. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a Subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an Addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. As noted above, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a) allows for the preparation of an Addendum if none of the conditions described in Section 15162 are met. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 describes the conditions under which a Subsequent EIR must be prepared, as follows: a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following: I. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR; 2. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; 3. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternatives; or 4. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. If none of these circumstances are present, and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to update the previously certified EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines § 15164. As described in detail herein, none of the above circumstances that warrant the preparation of a Subsequent EIR are present. 1.6 Type of CEQA Compliance Document and Level of Analysis This document is Addendum No. 2 to the previously - certified City of Newport Beach General Plan EIR (SCH No. 200601 1 1 19). As such, this Addendum analyzes the potential differences between the impacts in the General Plan EIR and those that would be associated with the proposed Project described in Section 2.0, Project Description. CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(a) states that a Program EIR is appropriate for a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: 1) Geographically, NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -4 CC i /3g Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 2) A logical parts [sic] in the chain of contemplated actions, 3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or 4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways. CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) states that subsequent activities undertaken pursuant to a Program EIR must be examined in the light of the Program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(4), "Where the subsequent activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in the Program EIR." This EIR Addendum provides the environmental information necessary for the City to make an informed decision about the proposed Project, which consists of the actions summarized above in Section 1.1 and more fully described in Section 2.0, Project Description. The City has determined that an Addendum to the General Plan EIR should be prepared, rather than a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR, based on the following facts: a. As demonstrated in the accompanying Environmental Checklist Form and its associated analyses (refer to Section 4.0), the proposed Project would not require major revisions to the previously - certified Program EIR because the Project would not result any new significant impacts to the physical environment nor would it create substantial increases in the severity of the environmental impacts previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. In summary, the proposed Project consists of assigning un -built development intensity within the General Plan's Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI), as summarized above in Section 1.1 and described in detail in Section 2.0. Although the total number of multi - family residential dwelling units allowed within the NNCPC would increase by 94 units, the total number of dwelling units (including hotel rooms) allowed within the Newport Center Statistical Area would remain unchanged. b. Although the Project would convert 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units, hotel rooms have a higher peak hour traffic generation rate as compared to multi- family residential; thus, the conversion of un -built hotel rooms to multi - family residential dwelling units would have a reduced impact on transportation and traffic as compared to that evaluated in the General Plan Update Final Program EIR. c. The Project's related discretionary actions, including but not limited to an amendment to the NCCP Development Plan, an amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company, and an amendment to an existing AHIP, would not result in any new significant environmental impacts beyond those disclosed in the General Plan EIR. d. Subsequent to the certification of the General Plan EIR, no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project is undertaken have occurred. e. Subsequent to the certification of the General Plan EIR, no new information of substantial importance has become available which was not known at the time the General Plan EIR was prepared. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -5 CC 1/39 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 f. Technical reports that evaluate the proposed Project were prepared for the subject areas of air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, traffic, water supply, and local sewer capacity. Copies of these reports are contained within the appendix of this document. These technical reports do not identify any new impacts or substantial increases in impacts to the environment beyond that which was disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Specifically, these technical reports concluded as follows: 1. The Air Quality Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix A), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. and dated June 6, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or more severe impacts associated with air quality than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR; 2. The Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Technical Appendix B), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. and dated June 6, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not generate substantial amounts of greenhouse gases that could result in a new impact or more severe significant impact on the environment than would otherwise occur with implementation of the City's General Plan, nor would the Project conflict with any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions; 3. The Noise Impact Analysis (Technical Appendix C), prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. and dated June 6, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not generate a new impact or more severe impact related to construction or operational noise than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Additionally, the Project would not generate a substantial permanent increase in transportation- related ambient noise levels or expose persons to noise levels in excess of City standards; 4. The North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Technical Appendix D), prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. and dated May 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not result in a significant impact to any study area intersection and finds that the proposed Project would generate less traffic than currently allowed under the General Plan; S. The Water Supply Assessment (Technical Appendix E), prepared by T &B Planning, Inc. and dated June 13, 2012, concludes that the City will receive a sufficient supply of water from imported, groundwater, and recycled sources in average year, single dry year, and multiple dry year conditions to service the proposed Project and other existing and planned development in the City with domestic water through the horizon analysis year of 2035. As such, the Project would not create a new impact or more severe impact than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. 6. The Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increase Allocation of Residential Development (Technical Appendix F), prepared by RBF Consulting and dated May 10, 2012, concludes that the proposed Project would not result in or require any physical upgrades to the local sewer system. As such, the Project would not create a new impact or more severe impact than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. g. Mitigation measures identified in the General Plan EIR would be appropriate and feasible for the proposed Project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� /r�� PPage 1 -6 3C l/40 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Based on these facts, the City determined that an Addendum to the previously certified General Plan EIR is the appropriate type of CEQA document to prepare for the proposed Project. The purpose of this Addendum is to evaluate the proposed Project's level of impact on the environment in comparison to the approved 2006 General Plan and its accompanying Final Program EIR. 1.7 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum The following components comprise the EIR Addendum in its totality: a. This Introduction (Section 1.0) and the Project Description (Section 2.0). b. The completed Environmental Checklist Form and its associated analyses (Sections 3.0 and 4.0), which concludes that the proposed Project would not result in any new significant environmental impacts or substantially increase the severity environmental impacts beyond the levels disclosed in the General Plan Update 2006 Final Program EIR. c. Six (6) technical reports that evaluate the proposed Project, which are attached as EIR Addendum Technical Appendices A — F. Appendix A: Air Quality Analysis Appendix B: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis Appendix C: Noise Study Appendix D: Traffic Report Appendix E: Water Supply Assessment Appendix F: Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability d. The General Plan EIR, accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), Technical Appendices to the General Plan EIR, Findings and Statement of Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and City Council Resolution No. 2006 -75, which are all herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and are available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663 and online at www.newportbeachca.gov. e. Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR, which is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. The Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County staff report, entitled "City of Newport Beach: Request for Consideration of Proposed Planned Community Zoning Amendment" and dated November 15, 2007, which is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. g. An analysis conducted by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., entitled "San Joaquin Plaza — Trip Generation Comparison" and dated May 16, 2012, which is herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and is available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -7 CC 1/41 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 1.8 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum The City of Newport Beach Planning Division directed and supervised the preparation of this EIR Addendum. Although prepared with assistance of the consulting firm T &B Planning, Inc., the content contained within and the conclusions drawn by this EIR Addendum reflect the sole independent judgment of the City. This EIR Addendum will be forwarded for review, along with the previously certified General Plan EIR and Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR, to the Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council for review as part of their deliberations concerning the proposed Project. A public hearing(s) will be held before the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission, which will provide a recommendation to the City Council as to whether to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposed Project. A public hearing(s) will then be held before the City Council to consider the proposed Project and the adequacy of this EIR Addendum. Public comments will be heard at the hearing(s). At the conclusion of the public hearing process, the City Council will take action to approve, conditionally approve, or deny approval of the proposed Project. If approved, the City Council also will adopt findings relative to the Project's environmental effects. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -8 CC 1/x{-2 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 2.0 Project Description The Project evaluated by this EIR Addendum is located in the City of Newport Beach, within the City's Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI). This area is commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Center Statistical Area consists of several sub -areas with separate and distinct zoning designations, including multiple planned communities. The sub -areas involved in this Project include: 1) the NNCPC, which is the largest planned community and includes Fashion Island (located in the central portion of Statistical Area LI), as well as Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800, and San Joaquin Plaza (located northerly, southerly, and easterly of Fashion Island); and 2) the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (a 532 -room resort hotel located immediately west of Fashion Island). Other sub -areas within Newport Center include the Newport Beach Country Club and golf course (located westerly of Fashion Island), existing single - family neighborhoods (located westerly and southwesterly of the golf course), other professional office complexes (located northerly and southerly of Fashion Island), and the Corona del Mar Shopping Center and future Civic Center (located along the eastern edge of the Newport Center boundary). In February 2012, the Project Applicant submitted an application to the City's Planning Division requesting to assign un -built development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan in the Newport Center Statistical Area to the NNCPC, and to vest the resulting additional development intensities through an amendment to an existing Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement. That application is the subject of analysis in this document pursuant to CEQA. The Newport Beach City Council will consider the following actions requested by the Project Applicant. In advance of the City Council's consideration, advisory recommendations regarding the actions listed below will be considered by the City's Planning Commission. I. Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2. Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC; 3. Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 4. Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities and allocations; S. Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and 6. Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). Each of the proposed actions is described in more detail below. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -1 CC 1/43 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 ♦ Convert Un -built Non - Residential Development Intensity (79 Hotel Rooms) to Multi - Family Residential Development Intensity (79 Multi- Family Units) and Transfer the Converted Development Intensity to the NNCPC The Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element describes the City's existing and planned development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and allocates maximum development limits (also called development "intensity ") to specific locations. Certain areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU I and LU2. The General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built development intensity. Anomaly Location 43 in Statistical Area LI is developed with a 532 room resort hotel presently operated by Marriott Hotels and Resorts. General Plan Table LU2 allows a maximum of 611 hotel rooms in Anomaly Location 43; therefore, 79 hotel rooms allowed by the General Plan are un- built. The Project Applicant requests to convert the 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and then transfer them to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 4.3(d), transfers of development rights or development intensity in Newport Center are governed solely by General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3. General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 allows development rights or development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to a finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in adverse traffic impacts. A General Plan Amendment is not required to accomplish the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity, but the conversion and transfer must be approved by the City Council. Refer to Figure I for a graphic depiction of the proposed development intensity transfer. ♦ Assign 15 Residential Units Currently Allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 Portions of Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza In addition to the land use and development intensity designations assigned to certain locations of the City by the 2006 General Plan, several areas of the City are regulated by planned community development plans. The NNCPC Development Plan, which is applicable in the case of the proposed Project, specifies more detail than the General Plan and includes development standards, design guidelines, and administration procedures that must be adhered to when development actions occur within the NNCPC boundaries. The NNCPC serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for activities within its boundaries. The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 multi - family residential units to be developed in areas of the NNCPC designated MU -113 by the General Plan. In comparison, the General Plan allows a maximum of 450 units in the MU -H3 category throughout the Newport Center Statistical Area. In other words, of the 450 MU -H3 residential units allowed by the General Plan in the Newport Center Statistical Area, 430 are allowed to be developed within the areas of the NNCPC designated by the NNCPC Development Plan as Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza and are vested through an existing Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement. The additional 20 units are allowed to be developed in any MU -H3 designated area in the Newport Center Statistical Area. The City previously assigned five (5) of the 20 MU -H3 units to the Golf Realty Fund Tennis Club development, which are vested to that property through a development agreement. The other 15 MU -H3 units have not been NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page � 2- -2 CC � /1 l t No 0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No 2 LEGEND 0 Newport Center/ Fashion Island (Statistical Area Ll) 0 North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) 0 Marroitt Hotel Block 900 0 San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNCPC Donor Sites / Receiver Site Development Limit Before Transfer or Vesting Development Limit After Transfer or Vesting Marriott Hotel Block 900 (General Plan Anomaly bl l Hotel Units 532 Hotel Units Location 43 Un -Built and Un- vested Multi - Family Units 15 Multi - Family Units 0 Multi- Family Units Allocated Statistical Area L1 By General Plan San Joaquin Plaza (General Plan Anomaly 430 Residential Units 524 Multi - Family Units Location 48 Figure 1 HE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY TRANSFER NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -3 121(211/45 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 assigned to any particular property in Newport Center. As discussed below, the Project Applicant requests to assign and vest the 15 un -built MU -H3 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC through an amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement, consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 (Development Agreements). Refer to Figure I (previously presented) for a graphic depiction of the proposed development intensity transfer. ♦ Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to Increase the Allowable Residential Development Intensity by 94 Units and to Allocate the 94 Units Plus the 430 Residential Units Currently Allocated to the MU -1­13 Portions of the NNCPC Solely to San Joaquin Plaza As described above, the Project Applicant proposes to increase the residential development intensity allowed in the NNCPC by transferring 79 converted hotel units and assigningl5 un -built multi - family units from outside the NNCPC to inside the NNCPC. In addition, the Project Applicant seeks to modify NNCPC Table 2, Development Limits, to specifically allocate 524 residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza. These 524 units consist of the 430 residential units already allocated to the NNCPC's MU -H3- designated areas (Block 500, Block 600, and the San Joaquin Plaza), the 79 converted and transferred hotel units, and the 15 un -built units of allowed MU -H3 development intensity that are proposed to be assigned to the NNCPC. The proposed increase in the maximum number of residential units would require that the City approve an Amendment of the NNCPC Development Plan. Specifically, NNCPC Table 2, Development Limits, is proposed to be amended as follows: Table 2 — Development Limits (A) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. 8C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council Action on 11/8/11 via Resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted officelcommercial developmentfor Block 500 is 599.659 sq. ft.. Block 600 is 1.340.609 sq. ft., and for San loaquin Plan is 95.550 sq. ft. No specific development project is proposed at this time. A proposal to develop a specific residential project in the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the procedures for development specified in the NNCPC Development Plan. The Project does not propose to change the boundaries of the NCCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NCCPC Development Plan Amendment. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -4 CC 1/46 Fashion San Joaquin Land Use Island Block 100 Block 400 Block 500 Block 600 Block 800 Plaza Total Regional 1,619,525 sq. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,619,525 sq. ft. Commercial k Movie Theater 1,700 seats 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,700 seats (27,500 sq. (27,500 sq. ft.) ft.) Hotel (B) 0 0 0 295 0 0 295 Residential 0 0 0 131)(C) (C)0 245 524P 675769 Office/ 0 -0- sq. ft. 91,727 sq. ft 599,659 sq. 1,340,609 sq. 286,166 95,550 sq. ft 2,413,711 sq. ft. Commercial (✓ 4LCI ft f D) ft. M UD A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. 8C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council Action on 11/8/11 via Resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted officelcommercial developmentfor Block 500 is 599.659 sq. ft.. Block 600 is 1.340.609 sq. ft., and for San loaquin Plan is 95.550 sq. ft. No specific development project is proposed at this time. A proposal to develop a specific residential project in the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the procedures for development specified in the NNCPC Development Plan. The Project does not propose to change the boundaries of the NCCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NCCPC Development Plan Amendment. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -4 CC 1/46 NO O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 ♦ Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company to Vest the Revised Development Intensities and Allocations to the San Joaquin Plaza Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8 (Development Agreements), the Project Applicant proposes an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza) (Amendment). Pursuant to this Amendment, the Project Applicant would have a vested right to develop the 94 new residential units, of which IS currently are not assigned to a specific property within North Newport Center and 79 currently are assigned to Block 900 as hotel rooms. Such 79 hotel rooms would be converted to residential units and transferred from Block 900 into North Newport Center Planned Community and allocated to San Joaquin Plaza subsequent to conversion, as reflected in the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan. The Amendment also specifies public benefit fees to be contributed by the developer, pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8. ♦ Approve a Traffic Study for 94 Units Pursuant to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), as set forth in Chapter 15.40 of the City's Municipal Code, is the City's primary tool for analyzing the short-term traffic impacts associated with new development. The TPO is intended: "I) To provide a uniform method of analyzing and evaluating the traffic impacts of projects that generate a substantial number of average daily trips and /or trips during the morning or evening peak hour period, 2) To identify the specific and near -term impacts of project traffic as well as circulation system improvements that will accommodate project traffic and ensure that development is phased with identified circulation system improvements, 3) To ensure that project proponents, as conditions of approval pursuant to [Chapter 15.401, make or fund circulation system improvements that mitigate the specific impacts of project traffic on primary intersections at or near the time the project is ready for occupancy, and 4) To provide a mechanism for ensuring that a project proponent's cost of complying with traffic related conditions of project approval is roughly proportional to project impacts." A traffic study was prepared for the proposed Project in compliance with the TPO methodology and requirements. See Appendix D of this document. A total of 430 multi - family units already are permitted within the San Joaquin Plaza pursuant to the General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan; accordingly, and in conformance with the TPO, the traffic study evaluates only the proposed assignment of 94 additional un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza. As part of its consideration of the proposed Project, the City Council will consider whether to approve the traffic study and make appropriate findings pursuant to § 15.40.030 of the Municipal Code. ♦ Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) Housing Program No. 2.2.1 of the City's General Plan Housing Element includes a goal that 15% of all new housing units in the City of Newport Beach be affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. New residential projects with more than 50 units are required to prepare an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) that specifies how the project will meet the city's 15% goal. The General Plan Housing Element allows for the affordable units to be for -sale or for -rent, to be provided on either the same site or a different site than the proposed market -rate units, and to be encumbered ' City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, Section 15.40.020 (Objectives). Available on -line at: http:// www. codepublishing .com /CA/NewportBeach /. Accessed June 4, 2012. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -5 CC 1/47 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 with restrictions that maintain their affordability for a minimum of 30 years. Although the Project Applicant's proposal is limited to a development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment and does not involve the construction of a residential project, the Project Applicant proposes to amend their existing AHIP to demonstrate how the City's 15% affordable housing goal would be satisfied as it applies to the 524 residential units that would be allocated to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The NNCPC AHIP was originally approved by the City of Newport Beach in December 2007, when the NNCPC Development Plan was adopted. The proposed AHIP Amendment specifies that the Project Applicant will restrict rental costs for existing apartment units located in The Bays, a nearby apartment complex owned by the Project Applicant located at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road. No physical changes at The Bays apartment complex would occur as a result of the proposed AHIP Amendment. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -6 CC i/42 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 3.0 Project Information 1. Project Title North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions 2. Lead Agency Name and Address City of Newport Beach Community Development Department Planning Division 3300 Newport Boulevard, Building C Newport Beach, CA 92663 3. Contact Person and Phone Number Mr. Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner (949) 644 -3209 4. Project Locaflon The proposed Project involves the transfer of development intensity for 79 multi - family units (which would be converted from hotel units as part of the Project) from Anomaly Location 43 in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI) to the NNCPC and specifically to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The Project also involves the assignment of 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of Statistical Area LI to San Joaquin Plaza. Statistical Area LI is commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Center Statistical Area is bounded on the southwest by Coast Highway, on the southeast by MacArthur Boulevard, on the northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and on the northwest by Jamboree Road. The Newport Center Statistical Area consists of several sub -areas with separate and distinct zoning designations, including multiple planned communities. The sub -areas involved in this Project include: 1) the NNCPC, which is the largest planned community and includes Fashion Island (located in the central portion of Statistical Area LI) and Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and San Joaquin Plaza (located northerly, southerly, and easterly of Fashion Island); and 2) the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (a 532 -room resort hotel located immediately west of Fashion Island). Other sub- areas within Newport Center include the Newport Beach Country Club and golf course (located westerly of Fashion Island), existing single - family neighborhoods (located westerly and southwesterly of the golf course), other professional office complexes (located northerly and southerly of Fashion Island), and the Corona del Mar Shopping Center and future Civic Center (located along the eastern edge of the Newport Center boundary). The NNCPC comprises the northern portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area, including Block 100, Block 400, Block 500, Block 600, Block 800, Fashion Island Regional Center, and San Joaquin Plaza. San Joaquin Plaza, which is the proposed Project site evaluated in this Initial Study and EIR Addendum, is generally bounded on the south by San Clemente Drive, on the east by Santa Cruz Drive, on the northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and is located just southeasterly of jamboree Road. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (also referred to herein as General Plan Anomaly 43) is located at the southwestern corner of Santa Barbara Drive and Newport Center Drive, and abuts the Newport Beach NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -1 CC 1/4 9 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Country Club golf course on the east. Figure 2, Project Location Map, depicts the Newport Center Statistical Area, the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel, the NNCPC area, and the San Joaquin Plaza. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address Irvine Company c/o Mr. Dan Miller 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General Plan Designation Mixed -Use Horizontal 3 (MU -1­13) 7. Zoning North Newport Center Planned Community (PC -56) 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the Project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Please refer to Section 2.0 for a detailed description of the proposed Project. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the Project's surroundings: As previously noted, the Project site consists of the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The Project site and surrounding land uses are depicted on Figure 3, Existing and Surrounding Land Uses. The San Joaquin Plaza is approximately 23 acres in size. It is currently developed with multi- tenant commercial office land uses, surface parking lots, a parking structure, and ornamental landscaping. Abutting the site on the northwest is the Newport Beach Police Department, the Newport Beach Fire Department Fire Station 3, and an automotive dealership. To the south is a commercial office building and the Orange County Museum of Art, beyond which and further to the south is the Fashion Island shopping mall. To the southwest is a commercial office building and a rental apartment complex. To the northeast of the San Joaquin Plaza, across San Joaquin Hills Road, is a single - family residential neighborhood. To the southeast, across Santa Cruz Drive, is Block 600 of the NNCPC, which is developed with multi- tenant office /commercial land uses, a hotel with 295 rooms presently operated as the Island Hotel, and several parking structures. 10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) The proposed Project would require review by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County for consistency with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport U WA). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: city of Newport Beach /'� n Page 3 -2 lilt 1150 No 0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 �. Marriott Hotel Black 9 (General Plan Anomaly 43I 3) Banry quip \ /SANTA CRUZ DR. Black 800 V G LEGEND C3 Newport Center/ Fashion Island (Statistical Area Ll ) 0 North Newport Center Planned Community 0 Marroitt Hotel Block 900 0 Proposed Project Site (San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNCPC) Black 600 Fashion Island Regional Center Bixit 100 Bloek Soo SANTA ROSA DR. C Figure 2 HE PROJECT LOCATION MAP NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach n Page 3 -3 No 0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Z Figure 3 HE EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -4 cc 1/152 Residential Residential �� ,, goy °I Gas s �09> Station RoeFanro. �o °�e O0� koy D I- i °p Residential Po e 0 , Station o a alfe �korftercial f Y un ;/ 7r� � � ; '' 00, Comm Comm ial � I l f ,se, of -Art J c . oan Newport ReSidentrZlf �• � � Beach , Golf Course ✓ nor CornrnerciaP ,- t ort Center Dr Nev+P _ Figure 3 HE EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -4 cc 1/152 No ■ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 4.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis 4.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" not identified in the previous EIR as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the Aesthetics project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Agriculture and Forestry I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an Air Quality ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Resources mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is Geology /Soils Greenhouse Gas Emissions Hazards & Hazardous Hydrology/ Water Quality DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to Materials that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources ❑ Noise Population and Housing Public Services ❑ Recreation r] Transportation/ Traffic Utilities/ Service Systems ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance 4.2 Determination tTo Be Completed By the Lead Agency] On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15162 exist. An ADDENDUM to a previously - certified EIR or Negative Declaration will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature bate Signature Date NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -1 CC 1/53 ■1 ■1 4.3 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts 4.3.1 Aesthetics The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on aesthetics /visual quality if it would result in any of the following: • Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista • Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway • Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings • Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Aesthetic and visual impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista As noted in the General Plan EIR, there are no officially designated scenic vistas in the City. However, the General Plan EIR notes that many areas in the City provide open coastal views, which are local scenic vistas.2 The General Plan EIR identifies prominent coastal viewing locations throughout the City. Major roadway corridors near the proposed Project site include San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road. San Joaquin Hills Road and segments of jamboree Road within close proximity of the Project site are not identified in the General Plan EIR as providing for public scenic coastal views.3 Although the General Plan EIR identifies nearby segments of Coast Highway, Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Newport Center Drive as providing scenic coastal views, the Project site is located inland relative to these roadway segments and future residential development in San Joaquin Plaza would therefore have no potential to interfere with coastal views from these roadway segments. Furthermore, the General Plan EIR states that "...existing and future development would be regulated by the proposed General Plan Update policies, and scenic vistas would not be adversely affected. Therefore, impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant." Future development within the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the General Plan policies regulating scenic views and aesthetics. Finally, development within San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the NNCPC Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations, which incorporates the following requirement related to view corridors: General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -16. ' Ibid, Page 4.1 -9. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /-� /� Page 4- -2 cc1/5 t Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 "a. New development should preserve views of major retail tenants in Fashion Island from Newport Center Drive. "4 Mandatory compliance with the NNCPC Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations would further ensure that adverse effects to scenic vistas would not occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not have the potential to cause a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway There are no officially designated scenic highways in the City of Newport Beach, although State Route I (Pacific Coast Highway or Coast Highway) is eligible for a State Scenic Highway designation .5 The Pacific Coast Highway is not contiguous to the proposed Project site, nor is San Joaquin Plaza visible from Pacific Coast Highway. Furthermore, because San Joaquin Plaza is already developed with multi - tenant commercial office uses, surface parking lots, a parking structure and ornamental landscaping with species typically found in urbanized areas of Newport Beach and Orange County, development on the Project site would not substantially affect any scenic trees, rock outcroppings, historic buildings, or other scenic resources that may be visible from Pacific Coast Highway. The Project site does not contain any such scenic resources. In addition, the General Plan EIR concludes as follows: "if in the future, the City decides to pursue these actions [pursue designation of Pacific Coast Highway as a State scenic highway], it would also be required to take actions to preserve views within the corridor. However, these procedures are beyond the scope of the proposed General Plan Update. Consequently, because no scenic highways are currently designated within the City, implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would have no impact "6 Since certification of the General Plan EIR in 2006, Pacific Coast Highway has not been formally designated as a State scenic highway. Accordingly, a significant impact to scenic resources that may be visible from a State scenic highway could not occur with implementation of the proposed Project and residential development in San Joaquin Plaza would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings The General Plan EIR states that Newport Center /Fashion Island (which includes the proposed Project site): `...might be considered to have high overall visual quality. In these areas, new development allowed under the proposed General Plan Update would be done in such a way as to fit into the existing visual " North Newport Center Design Regulations, Page 23 s General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -13. 6 Ibid, Page 4.1 -17. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� /� lt Page 4 -3 li 115 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 setting. [General Plan] Policy LU 1.1 requires that new development `maintain and enhance' existing development. "r New development within the San Joaquin Plaza would be required to demonstrate consistency with General Plan Policy LU 1. 1. Additionally, all development within the NNCPC would be subject to the NNCPC Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations, which establish design regulations related to building location, building massing, landscape design, streetscapes, and orientation /identity (gateways, view corridors, signage, etc.). Mandatory compliance with the North Newport Center Design Regulations would ensure that any future residential development resulting from approval of the proposed Project would be compatible with, and of similar quality to, existing development within the NNCPC. Furthermore, the NNCPC Development Plan restricts buildings within San Joaquin Plaza to 65 feet in height. Accordingly, buildings constructed within San Joaquin Plaza would not have a potential to create shade or shadow impacts on the existing residential uses north of San Joaquin Hills Road. As concluded in the General Plan EIR: "in general, the proposed General Plan Update would provide development opportunities which would complement and enhance the City's existing visual character. Development would be required to conform to `[a] development pattern that retains and complements the City's residential neighborhood, commercial and industrial districts, open spaces, and natural environment' (Proposed General Plan Update, Goal 3 of the Land Use Element). Therefore the proposed General Plan Update would have a less- than - significant impact on the visual character of developed urban areas." 8 With mandatory adherence to the requirements given in the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views Glare Impacts General Plan Policy LU 5.6.2 requires "...that new and renovated buildings be designed to avoid ... the use of surface materials that raise local temperatures [or] result in glare and excessive illumination of adjoining properties and open spaces..." In addition, the North Newport Center Design Regulations Policy D.5.c. requires that "Light fixtures should not cast off -site glare." 9 Future residential development on the proposed Project site would be required to demonstrate compliance with General Plan Policy LU 5.6.2 and would be reviewed for conformance with the Design Regulations of the NNCPC Development Plan. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not have the potential to create any new sources of substantial glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or Ibid, Page 4.1 -18. 8 Ibid, Page 4.1 -19. 9 North Newport Center Design Regulations, Page 36. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4- -4 CC 1/5° Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Lighting Impacts As noted in the General Plan EIR, "...the majority of new development would be located in areas that commonly experience at least minimal impacts from existing light sources. "10 The proposed Project site is fully developed under existing conditions with commercial office land uses containing urban -scale lighting. Although the General Plan EIR notes the potential for lighting impacts due to new construction and the co- location of residential and commercial uses as allowed by the General Plan, the General Plan also includes several policies to address these lighting concerns. General Plan Policy LU 5.6.3 (Ambient Lighting) requires that outdoor lighting "...be located and designed to prevent spillover onto adjoining properties or significantly increase the overall ambient illumination of their location." Other policies, such as LU 5. 1.1 (Compatible but Diverse Development), LU 6.1.3 (Architecture and Planning that Complements Adjoining Uses), and LU 6.2.5 (Neighborhood Supporting Uses), require new development to be compatible with existing land uses, which would preclude incompatibilities due to artificial lighting. Any new development in San Joaquin Plaza also would be subject to Municipal Code Section 20.30.070 requirements for lighting, which require lighting to be shielded and confined within site boundaries to prevent spillage. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, "with implementation of the above - mentioned policies, nighttime lighting impacts and potential spillover would be less than significant "'' In addition, future development on the proposed Project site would be subject to the North Newport Center Design Regulations, which includes the following design guidelines related to lighting (refer to NNCPC Design Regulations Section D.S., Lighting): "d. Building walls may be illuminated by downlights and uplights; light sources should not be visible from public view. f Utilitarian light fixtures, such as floodlights and wallpacks, may only be used in service areas. i. In pedestrian areas such as courtyards, plazas, and walkways, lighting fixtures should be Pedestrian scale." 12 Future development on the proposed Project site would be required to demonstrate compliance with General Plan policies related to lighting and land use compatibility, and would be reviewed for conformance with the Design Regulations of the NNCPC Development Plan. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not create any new sources of substantial light that could adversely affect day or nighttime views. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimizes impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. 0 General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -21. " Ibid, Page 4.1 -22. 12 North Newport Center Design Regulations, Page 36. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -5 GC 1 /�j Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which states, "...all other project impacts associated with aesthetics and visual resources would be less than significant under the proposed Newport Beach General Plan Update. "13 Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to aesthetics. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to aesthetics, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Initial Study to the General Plan EIR (General Plan EIR Appendix A), which states: "7n determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (199 7) prepared by the California Dept of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: • Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use? • Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? • Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use ?" In addition, since certification of the General Plan EIR in 2006, Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines was revised to include thresholds of significance related to forestry resources, as follows: "7n determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project • Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? • Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use? " Visual impacts associated with Banning Ranch were found to be unavoidable. The proposed Project is not located within Banning Ranch. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -6 CC 1/58 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non - forest use? No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. A detailed analysis of potential impacts to Agricultural Resources was not included in the General Plan EIR because a) the City of Newport Beach contains no designated farmland by the California Department of Conservation (CDC), Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), b) no designated Farmland would be converted to non - agricultural use as a result of implementing the 2006 General Plan, c) no sites in the City are zoned for agricultural use, and d) no sites would be affected by a Williamson Act contract. Although impacts to forest resources were not evaluated as part of the 2006 General Plan EIR, the City of Newport Beach similarly does not have any lands zoned for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production, and implementing the General Plan would not directly or indirectly result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Summary Analysis Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use The proposed Project site consists of urban, developed land that is not designated by the FMMP as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance14. Accordingly, no impact to agricultural resources would occur as a result of future residential development in San Joaquin Plaza. As such, the proposed Project is in conformance with the conclusion reached in the Initial Study to the 2006 General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract The NNCPC Development Plan serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for development activities within its geographical boundary. The NNCPC Development Plan designates San Joaquin Plaza for development with residential and office /commercial land uses. No area of the NNCPC contains an agricultural zoning designation. Additionally, the Project site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use No Farmland exists in the vicinity of the proposed Project site that could be converted to nonagricultural use as a result of the Project. All lands within the Project vicinity already are designated by the General Plan for non - agricultural use15. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not involve changes to the existing environment which, due to its location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to nonagricultural use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result " California Department of Conservation, 2010. Orange County Important Farmland 2010. Available on -line at: ftp: / /ftp .consrv.ca.gov /pub /dlrp /FMMP /pdf /2010 /oraIO.pddf. Accessed May 10, 2012. 15 City of Newport Beach 2006 General Plan, Figures LU 10 and LU 13. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -7 CC i /�9 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g)) City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Title 20, Planning and Zoning, Part 2, Zoning Districts, Allowable Land Uses, and Zoning District Standards, sets forth the zoning districts throughout the City and does not include any zoning for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Additionally, the NNCPC Development Plan does not designate any forest areas or timberlands within its boundaries. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use The proposed Project site comprises a fully developed site that contains no forest land resources. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non - forest use No forest land exists in the vicinity of the proposed Project site that could be converted to non - forest use, and no lands in the Project vicinity are designated for forest land production16. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not involve changes to the existing environment which, due to its location or nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program As indicated above, an analysis of impacts to Agricultural Resources were focused out of the General Plan EIR based on substantial evidence that no farmlands or agriculturally zoned properties are located in the City of Newport Beach; accordingly, no mitigation measures related to Agricultural Resources were included in the General Plan EIR. In addition, the issue of forestry resources was not previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR; as such, no mitigation related to forestry resources was identified in the General Plan EIR. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the Initial Study to the 2006 General Plan EIR, which states, "The City of Newport Beach does not contain any significant agricultural resources as the City is almost entirely built out. No impact would occur on agricultural resources and this issue area will not be analyzed in the EIR." 16 Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -8 CC 1/(00 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to agriculture and forestry resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to agriculture and forestry resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.3 Air Quality The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on air quality if it would result in any of the following. • Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan • Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation • Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard • Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations • Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Air quality impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis In order to evaluate whether the proposed Project would result in air quality impacts that were not examined in the General Plan EIR, an air quality impact analysis was prepared for the proposed Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. This study, entitled, North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis, and dated May 29, 2012, is provided as Appendix A. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan The Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB or "Basin "). The SCAB encompasses approximately 6,745 square miles and includes Orange County and the non - desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The SCAB is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the west; the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east, respectively; and the San Diego County line to the south. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is principally responsible for air pollution control in the SCAB. The SCAQMD works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation commissions, local governments, and state and federal agencies to reduce emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� / Page 4 -9 lilt 1/01 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table I, Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB, summarizes the current state and federal attainment status of the SCAB for criteria pollutants. As shown, state and federal air quality standards are not attained in most parts of the Basin for Ozone (I -hour and 8 -hour standard), Inhalable Particulate Matter (PM,o), Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), and Nitrogen Dioxide (NOx). In response, the SCAQMD adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards. The AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy. The SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the Draft Final 2007 AQMP for the SCAB on June I, 2007. In September 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted the SCAQMD's 2007 AQMP as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). On September 27, 2007, the CARB Board adopted the State Strategy for the 2007 State Implementation Plan and the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan as part of the (SIP). On November 22, 2010, U.S. EPA published its notice of proposed partial approval and partial disapproval of the 2007 AQMP PM2.5 Plan. The proposed disapproval is primarily due to the fact that the attainment demonstration relies heavily on emissions reductions from several State rules that have not been finalized or submitted to U.S. EPA for approval. No timetable for full adoption of the 2007 AQMP is available at this time. The SCAQMD is currently working on a 2012 AQMP but it is not yet adopted so the SCAQMD 2007 AQMP remains the applicable air quality plan for the proposed Project. Table 1 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB Criteria Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation Ozone - 1 hour standard Nonattainment No Standard Ozone - 8 hour standard Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment PMtp Nonattainment Serious Nonattainment PIM2,6 Nonattainment Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide Attainment Attainment/Maintenance Nitrogen Dioxide Nonattainment Attainment/Maintenance Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Attainment Lead Attainment/Nonattainmenta AttainmenUNonattainment` All others I Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Source; California Air Resources Board 2010 ( hap : / /www.arb.ca.gov /reeact/2010 /area I Wares l 0.1atm, httv// wvw .arb.ca.zov /desig/feddesig.htm) I The USEPA approved re- designation from Severe 17 to Extreme Nonattainment on May 5, 2010 to be effective June 4, 2010. 2 The SCAB was reclassified from attainment to non - attainment for nitrogen dioxide on March 25, 2010. 3 Los Angeles County was reclassified from attainment to nonattainment for lead on March 25, 2010; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State Standard. 4 The Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB is classified as nonaminment; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State Standard. The 2007 AQMP is based on assumptions on motor vehicles provided by CARB and on demographics information provided by SCAG. These assumptions are reflected in the most recent EMFAC2007 computer model. The air quality levels projected in the 2007 AQMP are based on several assumptions. For example, the 2007 AQMP assumed that development associated with general plans, specific plans, residential projects, and wastewater facilities would be constructed in accordance with population growth projections identified by SCAG in its 2004 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The 2007 AQMP also assumed that such development projects would implement applicable regulatory requirements to reduce air emissions generated during the construction and operational phases of development. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -10 CC 1/62 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Criteria for determining consistency with the 2007 AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). The indicators for consistency are discussed below: • Consistency Criterion No. I: The proposed Project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. According to the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook, the proposed Project would be consistent with the AQMP if the Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. Construction Emissions Discussion No specific development project is proposed as part of the Project at this time; therefore, it is not possible to calculate specific emission quantities that may be associated with future construction activities. Nevertheless, it is recognized that construction effects would be expected to follow approval of the Project (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15146). Construction - related impacts to air quality were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which concluded that buildout of the General Plan would result in construction activities that would exceed the SCAQMD's construction - related air quality standards. As such, the General Plan EIR disclosed construction - related air emissions as a significant and unavoidable impact17. Any future Project - related construction activities would be required to comply with General Plan policies NR 8.1 through 8.5, which when implemented would help to reduce construction - related air pollutant emissions. Further, construction activities that may be associated with future residential development on the proposed Project site would be required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and current California Building Code requirements (California Code of Regulations, Title 24), some provisions of which are more stringent now than when the General Plan EIR was certified in 2007. Construction - related air emissions and resulting impacts associated with the proposed allocation of 524 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of analysis previously provided in the General Plan EIR. Of the 524 units, the General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC and also assumed that an additional 15 multi - family units would be constructed within the Newport Center Statistical Area. The remaining 79 units were assumed by the General Plan EIR to consist of hotel units. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to create new construction - related air quality impacts because construction of the remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction of 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in construction - related air emissions. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities would be very similar for hotel units or multi - family units. Additionally, the conduct of construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate air emissions that would be different or more severe than the conduct of construction activities in other parts of Newport Center. Accordingly, future Project - related construction emissions would not result in any new impacts or "General Plan EIR, Pages 4.2 -13 and 4.2 -14. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -11 CC 1/63 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 substantially increase the severity of the significant and unavoidable construction - related air quality impact previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR.11 Operational Emissions Analysis Although the General Plan EIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP, the conflict was related only to the increase in population that would be associated with buildout of the General Plan (and is discussed below under the analysis of Consistency Criterion No. 2). As indicated in the General Plan EIR: "Another measurement tool in determining consistency with the AQMP is to determine how a project accommodates the expected increase in population or employment. Generally, if a project is planned in a way that results in the minimization of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), both within the project area and the surrounding area in which it is located, and consequently the minimization of air pollutant emissions, that aspect of the project is consistent with the AQMP." 19 The General Plan EIR determined that VMTs would be reduced through compliance with the General Plan goals and policies, and that the reduction in VMTs would be consistent with the AQMP. For example, the General Plan would "...promote a mixed -use pedestrian - friendly district for Balboa Peninsula, Airport Area, Newport Center /Fashion Island, Mainers Mile, and which would contribute to decreases in vehicle miles traveled." 20 Additionally, the General Plan EIR identifies several other policies, including Policies LU 3.3 (Opportunities for Change), LU 6.15.9 (Subsequent Phase Development Location and Density), 6.14.5 (Urban Form), NR 6.1 (Walkable Neighborhoods), NR 6.2 (Mixed -Use Development), NR 6.3 (Vehicle -Trip Reduction Measures), NR 6.4 (Transportation Demand Management Ordinance), and NR 6.5 (Local Transit Agency Collaboration), that would serve to reduce VMTs within the City. The proposed Project would contribute to the mixed -use nature of Newport Center /Fashion Island by locating multi - family residential uses within the San Joaquin Plaza where commercial and office land uses exist. The Project also would be required to comply with all applicable General Plan goals and policies. Furthermore, the proposed Project would not increase the amount of daily trips as compared to what was assumed under the General Plan EIR21. Accordingly, VMTs associated with the proposed Project would be within the scope of analysis as presented in the General Plan EIR, and would not contribute to a substantial increase in the severity of the General Plan's significant and unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP. Project - related air quality emissions were calculated to determine whether the proposed Project could result in a direct increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. To provide consistency with the Project's traffic study (Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), the air quality analysis (Appendix A) assumes that the Project would result in a net increase of 94 multi - family units in San Joaquin Plaza. This represents a "worst case" (conservative) assumption of potential operational air quality impacts associated with allowed development in Newport Center as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR because no credit is taken in the Project - specific analysis for reducing by 79 the number of hotel units allowed within Statistical Area LI, nor credit for the 15 MU -H3 units 8 Ibid. " Ibid, Page 4.2 -12. 20 Ibid, Page 4.2 -12. 21 Stantec Consulting Services, 2012b. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -12 CC l /04 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 already allowed in Newport Center by the General Plan. An analysis of operational impacts associated with the other 430 multi - family residential units allocated to San Joaquin Plaza is not necessary because these 430 multi - family units are already allowed in San Joaquin Plaza under existing conditions and were assumed in the General Plan EIR and Addendum No. I. Table 2, Summary of Peak Operational Emissions, summarizes the proposed Project's estimated operational emissions of criteria pollutants associated with assigning an additional 94 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza for both summer and winter months, and compares those emissions to the SCAQMD Regional Thresholds. (Refer to Section 3.5 of the Project's Air Quality Impact Analysis [Appendix A] for a discussion of the operational activities assumed in the analysis.) As shown in Table 2, air emissions associated with the allocation of 94 additional multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza would not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx, VOC, PMIo, or PM2.5; therefore, it follows that the Project's emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative exceedance of a pollutant for which the SCAB is in nonattainment (ozone, nitrogen dioxide, PMIO, PM2.5). Because Project emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative exceedance of a pollutant for which the Air Basin is in nonattainment, operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts due to a conflict with the AQMP, nor would the Project's operational emissions create a substantially more severe impact due to conflict with the AQMP than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Table 2 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions Summer Months Operational Activities VOC NOx CO SOx Area Source Emissions a 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 Energy Source Emissions° 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 Mobile Emissions ` 1.92 3.47 18.87 0.04 E4.64 Maximum Dail Emissions 14.31 4.63 58.20 0.12 SCAQMD Re ional Threshold 55 55 550 150 Si nificant? NO NO NO NO Winter Months O erational Activities VOC NOx co So, PMtO I PMz.S Area Source Emissions a 12.32 055 39.07 0.08 5.01 5.01 Energy Source Emissions" 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.05 0.05 Mobile Emissions ` 2.03 3.84 18.37 0.04 4.64 0.33 Maximum Daily Emissions 14.42 5.00 57.70 0.12 9.70 5.39 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant? I NO I NO NO NO NO NO Note: values shown are pounds per day. Please refer to Appendix A to the Air Quality Impact Analysis (see Appendix A) for the CaIEEMod TM output files and additional supporting information for the estimated emissions. a. Includes emissions of landscape maintenance equipment and architectural coatings emissions b. Includes emissions of natural gas consumption C. Includes emissions of vehicle emissions and fugitive dust related to vehicular travel On the basis of the preceding discussion, the proposed Project would be consistent with the scope of analysis as presented in the General Plan EIR and is determined to be consistent with Consistency Criterion No. I. • Consistency Criterion No. 2: The proposed project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the years of project build -out phase. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -13 cc 1/05 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 The General Plan EIR identified a significant unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP because buildout of the General Plan "...would result in population levels above those uses in the 2003 AQMP" 22 Assumptions of the AQMP used in projecting future emissions levels are based in part on land use data provided by lead agency general plan documentation. Projects that propose general plan amendments and changes of zone may increase the intensity of use and /or result in higher traffic volumes, thereby resulting in increased stationary area source emissions and /or vehicle source emissions when compared to the AQMP assumptions. If however, a project does not exceed the growth projections in the applicable local General Plan, then the project is considered to be consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP. As discussed under the analysis of Consistency Criterion No. I, construction - related emissions that may be associated with future development at the proposed Project site would be consistent with the assumptions previously evaluated and disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed Project would not exceed growth assumptions for construction - related activities. The proposed Project does not involve a General Plan Amendment, but it does involve a zoning amendment associated with a proposed amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for properties within its geographic boundaries. The amendment proposes to allocate a total of 524 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of NNCPC, including 430 units already allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, the assignment of 15 un -built units to the San Joaquin Plaza, and through the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family units and the transfer of those units to the San Joaquin Plaza. Population growth associated with the 430 multi - family residential units already allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un- assigned and un -built multi- family units within Statistical Area LI are consistent with the growth projections assumed in the General Plan EIR, and are therefore accounted for as part of the significant and unavoidable conflict with the 2003 AQMP as disclosed by the General Plan EIR. By contrast, the conversion of 79 un -built hotel units to residential units would result in an estimated increase in the City's permanent population by 173 persons (based on a person per household [pph] value of 2.19 cited in the General Plan EIR) 23 It should be noted that the increase in the permanent population would be somewhat off -set by the reduction in transient population (i.e., hotel patrons) due to the reduction in the number of hotel units allowed within the City (79 units). The 79 residential units proposed by the Project to be converted from hotel room units would not result in a net increase in daily trips24, and therefore would not result in increased operational air emissions beyond emissions that would be associated with the 79 hotel rooms that already were assumed in the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, because the 2007 AQMP relied on land use and demographic data from the General Plan and the proposed Project would generate fewer emissions than assumed for General Plan buildout, the Project would not exceed the growth assumptions in the AQMP. Based on the discussion presented above, the proposed Project is in compliance with Consistency Criterion No. 2 and would not result in greater emissions than what is already assumed in the General Plan or evaluated in the General Plan EIR. 22 General Plan EIR, Page 4.2 -13. 23 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5 ' Stantec Consulting Services, 2012b NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -14 GC 1/06 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Since the project satisfies Consistency Criterion No. I and Consistency Criterion No. 2, the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts due to a Project- specific conflict with the AQMP, nor would the proposed Project result in a substantial increase in the severity of the General Plan's significant and unavoidable conflict with the AQMP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard The current attainment status for criteria pollutants within the SCAB was previously presented in Table I. As shown, the SCAB violates the CAAQS and /or NAAQS standards for ozone, NOx, PMio, and PM23. Provided below is a discussion of construction and operational emissions associated with the proposed Project, and an analysis of whether those emissions would violate any air quality standards, contribute to any existing or projected air quality violations, or cumulatively contribute to the net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the SCAB is in non - attainment (as presented in Table 1). Emissions Associated with Construction Activities Emissions associated with construction activities resulting from buildout of the General Plan were previously evaluated and disclosed as a significant unavoidable impact as part of the General Plan EIR due to their potential to violate the SCAQMD construction - related air quality standards25 and because it could not be assured that the General Plan policies would achieve the performance standard for annual emissions reductions determined necessary by the SCAQMD to obtain attainment status for criteria pollutants.26 Because no specific development project is proposed in San Joaquin Plaza at this time, it is not possible to calculate air emissions that may be associated with future construction activities. Regardless, construction activities that may be associated with future residential development on the Project site would clearly fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR anticipated the construction of 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within Newport Center, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to create new construction - related air quality impacts because construction of the remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction of 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in construction - related air emissions. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities would be very similar for hotel units or multi - family units. Additionally, the conduct of construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate air emissions that would be different or more severe than the conduct of construction activities in other parts of Newport Center. Accordingly, future Project - related construction emissions would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of the significant and unavoidable construction - related air quality impact previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. 05 General Plan EIR, Page 4.10 -5. 26 lbid, Page 4.2 -I5. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -15 CC 1/07 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 As previously stated, the General Plan EIR disclosed a significant and unavoidable impact because the City could not assure that the General Plan policies would achieve the performance standard for annual emissions reductions determined necessary by the SCAQMD to obtain attainment status for criteria pollutants.27 Long -Term Operational - Related Emissions Operational impacts were not specifically evaluated in the General Plan EIR because the SCAQMD does not recommend calculation of operational emissions for a planning document, such as a General Plan Update.28 Emission quantities associated with operational activities that may result from allocating an additional 94 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza were previously presented in Table 2. As previously noted, in order to provide consistency with the Project's traffic study (refer to Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's TPO, the values presented in Table 2 relate only to the proposed increase of 94 dwelling units allocated to San Joaquin Plaza. The values presented in Table 2 reflect a "worst case" (conservative) analysis because no credit was taken for reducing by 79 the number of hotel units that are allowed within Statistical Area LI, nor credit for the 15 MU -H3 units already allowed in Newport Center by the General Plan. An analysis of operational impacts associated with the other 430 dwelling units allocated to San Joaquin Plaza is not necessary because these 430 multi - family units are already allowed in San Joaquin Plaza under existing conditions and were assumed in the General Plan EIR and Addendum No. I. As presented in Table 2, the addition of 94 units to San Joaquin Plaza would not result in any exceedances of the SCAQMD regional thresholds during either summer or winter months. Accordingly, Project - related emissions would not violate the SCAQMD standards for criteria pollutants. Furthermore, if Project emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx, VOC, PMio, or PM2.5, it follows that the emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative exceedance of a pollutant for which the SCAB is in nonattainment (i.e., ozone, NOx, PMio, and /or PM2.5). Additionally, and according to the Project's Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A), operational activities associated with the proposed Project would not result in a violation of the CAAQS or NAAQS standards for CO "hot spots. "29 There are no other air quality standards or violations relevant to Project operational activities. Accordingly, operational emissions associated with the proposed Project would not result in the violation of any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation beyond that previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Additionally, Project - related operational emissions would not result in a new or more severe impact associated with a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations Sensitive receptors can include uses such as long term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. The only sensitive receptors within the Project vicinity include the existing multi - family and single - family residential uses located south, west, northwest, and northeast of the proposed Project site (refer to 27 Ibid, Page 4.2-1 S. 281bid, Page 4.2 -14. ' Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A), Pages 28 -29 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -16 C^ 1102 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Figure 3). None of these uses directly abut the Project site and all nearby sensitive receptors are separated from the Project site by public roadways and some also are separated from the Project site by intervening land uses. As previously discussed, because no specific development project is proposed in San Joaquin Plaza at this time, it is not possible to calculate air emissions that may be associated with future construction activities. Regardless, construction activities associated with future residential development on the Project site fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR anticipated the construction of 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within Newport Center, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction and operation of 79 multi- family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in pollutant concentrations. Airborne pollutants associated with hotel room construction and operation and multi - family dwelling unit construction and operation are similar. Additionally, the conduct of residential construction and operational activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate airborne pollutant concentrations that would be different or more severe than the conduct of similar activities in other parts of Newport Center. As indicated in the General Plan EIR, with respect to potential air quality impacts to sensitive receptors, "...the SCAQMD is primarily concerned with high localized concentrations of CO" also known as CO "hotspots. "30 As concluded in the Air Quality Impact Analysis, even very busy intersections within the SCAB do not result in any CO "hotspots" since the region has achieved attainment status for CO since 2007, and because CO "hotspots" do not occur at the busiest intersections within the SCAB (where traffic volumes are much greater than those that would ever occur in the Project area).31 Furthermore, the proposed Project would not exceed the applicable regional thresholds during long -term operational activity. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in or contribute to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people The General Plan EIR acknowledges that construction activities would result in the generation of airborne odors (e.g., odors from architectural coatings), but concludes that such odors would not represent a significant impact because "...these odors are not generally considered to be especially offensive" since they would occur only during daytime hours and only would occur in close proximity to construction activities.32 Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, construction activities that may be associated with the proposed Project would occur only during daytime hours, and any odors generated would only affect a limited number of people who are living and working in close proximity to construction activities. Therefore, construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 3° General Plan EIR, Page 4.2 -16 3' Air Quality Impact Analysis (Appendix A), Pages 28 -29. 32 General Plan EIR, Page 4.2 -17. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -17 CC 1/09 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 The General Plan EIR also acknowledges that under long -term operating conditions some odors could be generated from residential cooking activities or through the use of trash receptacles. Odors associated with residential cooking are not considered to be "objectionable." As noted in the General Plan EIR, trash "...receptacles would be stored in areas and in containers as required by City and Health Department regulations, and be emptied on a regular basis, before potentially substantial odors have a chance to develop. "" There are no characteristics of the proposed Project that would introduce any new sources of objectionable odors that could affect a substantial number of people. Therefore, long- term operation of residential units in San Joaquin Plaza that may result from approval of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impact of increased population on implementation of the Air Quality Management Plan; to reduce cumulative impacts associated with construction emissions; or to reduce operational activities. These impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to air quality. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to air quality, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.4 Biological Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on biological resources if it would result in any of the following: • Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or the CDFG or USFWS • Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFG or USFWS " Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -18 CC 1 /j0 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means • Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites • Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance • Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Biological resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or the CDFG or USFWS The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel of land that includes commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. The Project site does not contain any sensitive biological resources, nor is the site identified within an Environmental Study Area that has the potential to contain candidate, sensitive, or special status species.34 Although ornamental landscaping existing within the Project site includes several species of trees, these trees are small in stature and do not have the characteristics to serve as habitat for migratory birds or raptors. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or the CDFG or USFWS. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the CDFG or USFWS Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel of land comprising existing commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. All drainage from San Joaquin Plaza is currently diverted into man -made drainage structures (i.e., storm drains), thereby precluding the presence of any riparian habitat or wetlands. Additionally, the only vegetation community existing on the proposed Project site consists of ornamental landscaping, which is not a sensitive natural community identified in any local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and 34 Ibid, Figures 4.3 -1 and 4.3 -2. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -19 CC 1/71 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Game (CDFG) or the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would have no effect on any riparian habitats, sensitive natural communities, or wetlands. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites The proposed Project site comprises a fully developed parcel of land surrounded by existing urban development and roadways that exhibit moderately high traffic volumes. The proposed Project site does not provide for any wildlife movement corridors under existing conditions, nor does the site comprise a wildlife nursery site. In addition, there are no wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites within the Project vicinity that could be impacted, either directly or indirectly, by Project development. As such, development of the proposed Project site would not substantially interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory wildlife species, nor would it impede the use of any native wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel of land comprising existing commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping, including low stature trees. Abutting public roadways also include trees in the public right -of -way ( "City trees "). Applicable Newport Beach policies and ordinances related to the protection of biological resources include City Council Policy G -1 (Retention or Removal of City Trees) and Chapter 7.26 of the City's Municipal Code (Protection of Natural Habitat for Migratory and Other Waterfowl). Council Policy G -1 was adopted to establish definitive standards for the retention, removal, maintenance, reforestation, tree trimming standards, and supplemental trimming of City trees. If construction activities occur in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the permitted residential development intensity proposed by the Project, such activities would be required to comply with the provisions of Council Policy G -1, which includes a requirement to preserve all existing City trees to the extent practical; if trees must be removed, the approval of a tree removal request would be required from the City's Municipal Operations Department Director addressing the replacement of any such trees. As such, the proposed Project would not conflict with City Council Policy G -1. Municipal Code Chapter 7.26 provides for the protection of natural habitat for migratory waterfowl and other birds, such as ducks, gulls, terns and pelicans. The proposed Project site does not contain any natural habitat for migratory waterfowl or other water - related bird species. As such, the proposed Project would have no potential to conflict with Municipal Code Chapter 7.26. The proposed Project also would not conflict with any General Plan policies related to biological resources, which are primarily contained within the General Plan Natural Resources Element. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -20 CCi /j2 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan The proposed Project site is located within the Orange County Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) & Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion (July 17, 1996). Policy NR 10.1 of the General Plan requires the City to cooperate with state and federal resource protection agencies and private organizations to protect terrestrial and marine resources, which would require compliance with local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. In addition, according to NCCP Figures 9 and 10, NCCP Habitat Evaluation Map, the proposed Project site is not identified as having any conservation value. Additionally, and according to NCCP Figure 12, Proposed Habitat Reserve System, the proposed Project site is not identified for inclusion within the NCCP /HCP Reserve System. There are no other policies of the NCCP /HCP that are applicable to the proposed Project; accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that compliance with existing federal, State, and local regulations would mitigate biological resources impacts to a level considered less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to biological resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to biological resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.5 Cultural Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on cultural resources if it would result in any of the following: • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -21 CCi /j3 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 • Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature • Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Cultural resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed, to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 Nationally, state, and locally recognized historical resources within the City of Newport Beach are identified in the Historical Resources Element of the General Plan. None of the existing historical resources identified by the Historical Resources Element occur within the proposed Project site or in areas immediately adjacent to the proposed Project site.35 In addition, the proposed Project site has been fully disturbed by development activities that have occurred over the past 40 years, indicating that there is no potential for previously undiscovered historical resources in San Joaquin Plaza. Furthermore, none of the existing buildings in San Joaquin Plaza are recognized as historical resources, nor are they eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. As such, no historical resources would be impacted by the proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5 Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature San Joaquin Plaza is fully developed with commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. When the property was developed approximately 40 years ago, native soils were graded and disturbed, indicating that there remains no potential for the presence of any surficial archaeological resources or paleontological resources. Although the property was previously subjected to mass grading and the likelihood to discover subsurface resources is low, there is still a potential for previously undiscovered subsurface resources to be uncovered in the event that future grading activities to implement permitted residential development intensity on the property extend to depths of previously undisturbed subsurface soils. The City's General Plan contains several goals and policies that are intended to ensure that archaeological and paleontological resources are protected and preserved. General Plan Policies NR 18.1 and HR 2.1 require that new development protect and preserve paleontological and archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid, minimize, and /or mitigate impacts to such resources in accordance with the requirements of CEQA. General Plan Policy HR 2.2 requires "...a qualified paleontologist/archaeologist to monitor all grading and /or excavation where there is a potential to affect cultural, archaeological, or paleontological resources..." Policy HR 2.3 requires notification of cultural organizations of any proposed developments with the potential to adversely impact cultural resources, 35 City of Newport Beach General Plan, Figure HR I. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -22 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 and Policy HR 2.4 requires that any recovered resources be donated to an appropriate organization for preservation. The Newport Beach City Council has also established "Paleontological Guidelines (K -4)" requiring that the City prepare and maintain sources of information regarding paleontological sites. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, compliance with General Plan Goals NR 18 and HR 2 would ensure that potential impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources are reduced to less than significant levels. The proposed Project is consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR with respect to impacts to archaeological and /or paleontological resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries The proposed Project site has been fully disturbed by past grading and development, indicating that there is no potential for the presence of any surficial human remains. Although the site has been subject to previous mass grading and the likelihood to discover buried human remains during future construction activities is low, there is still a potential for previously undiscovered human remains to be uncovered in the event that grading activities encounter previously undisturbed subsurface soils. The California Health and Safety Code §7050.5, as well as Public Resources Code §5097 et. seq., require that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a formal cemetery, no further excavation of disturbance of the site or site vicinity can occur until the County Coroner has examined the remains and makes a report. The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) is required to be notified within 24 hours if the Coroner determines or suspects the remains to be of Native American descent. Additionally, further development of the proposed Project site would be required to comply with General Plan Goals HR 2 and NR 18, which are intended, in part, to protect human remains. Accordingly, in the event that human remains are discovered during Project grading or other ground disturbing activities, the Project Applicant would be required to comply with the applicable provisions of California Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097 et. seq., and General Plan Goals HR 2 and NR 18, which would ensure that any discovered human remains are properly treated. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources, and human remains could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to cultural NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -23 CC 1-/7,5 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to cultural resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.6 Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "Implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would result in a significant impact if the project would: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving. o Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault o Strong seismic ground shaking o Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction o Landslides • Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil • Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or offsite landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse • Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 1 B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property • Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water • Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State • Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Geology, soils, and mineral resources impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -24 CC 1/70 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving. ♦ Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault ♦ Strong seismic ground shaking ♦ Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction ♦ Landslides There are no Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the City of Newport Beach.36 Accordingly, and consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts due to the rupture of an Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. However, and as also noted in the General Plan EIR, the City of Newport Beach is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province, an area that is exposed to risk from multiple earthquake fault zones. The highest risks originate from the Newport - Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone, each with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that would cause ground shaking in Newport Beach, including the proposed Project site.37 As concluded in the General Plan EIR, policies contained in the General Plan's Safety Element would attenuate impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking. Specifically, Policy S 4.1 requires the City to conduct regular updates to the building and fire codes to address fire safety and design. Policy S 4.7 requires further seismic studies for new development in areas where potentially active faults may occur. In addition, the construction of new residential buildings in San Joaquin Plaza that could occur to implement the residential development intensity proposed by the Project would be required to comply with the seismic safety standards of the California Building Code, which requires compliance with special structural design standards to attenuate hazards associated with credible seismic ground shaking events that are anticipated in the Project area. Accordingly, with mandatory compliance with General Plan Goal S4 and the California Building Code, impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking would not be significant. Areas within the City of Newport Beach subject to strong seismic ground shaking associated with liquefaction hazards are limited to West Newport, Balboa Peninsula, the harbor islands, and lands adjacent to these areas. The proposed Project site is located in the Newport Center portion of the General Plan, and is not identified as being subject to liquefaction hazards.38 Accordingly, a significant impact associated with seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction, would not occur. The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel that does not contain significant areas of slopes. The General Plan EIR notes that landslide conditions are possible in the area between Los Trancos Canyon and the Crystal Cove State Park boundary, the sedimentary bedrock that crops out in the San Joaquin Hills, along stream banks and coastal bluffs (e.g., Big Canyon), around San Joaquin 36 General Plan EIR, Page 4.5 -13. 3' Ibid, Page 4.5 -3. 381bid, Page 4.5 -14 and Figure 4.5 -2. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -25 cc 1/77 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Reservoir, Newport and Upper Newport Bays, and Corona del Mar.39 The proposed Project site is located in Newport Center and is not located in any of the areas that are identified as having the potential for hazards associated with landslides. Accordingly, a significant impact due to landslide hazards would not occur. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, "With compliance of applicable regulations as well as policies identified in the General Plan Update, impacts would be less than significant." The proposed Project is consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR with respect to seismic - related hazards. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil Soil erosion and the loss of topsoil can occur when soils are exposed to erosive elements (i.e., wind and water) and in the absence of stabilizing vegetation. Under existing conditions, substantial soil erosion and /or the loss of topsoil does not occur in San Joaquin Plaza because the proposed Project site is developed with commercial office buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping. Construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to compliance with state, regional, and local regulations that would serve to minimize the potential for erosion of topsoil, including, but not necessarily limited to, California Building Code (CBC) standards, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit and associated Best Management Practices (BMPs), and the provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations concerning the discharge of eroded materials and pollutants from construction sites. Additionally, any future construction activities would be subject to compliance with General Plan Policies NR 3.1 through NR 3.22, and Policies NR 4.1 through NR 4.4, which address water quality and soil erosion and would further serve to prevent substantial erosion or the loss of topsoil during Project construction. Near -term impacts due to substantial soil erosion and /or the loss of topsoil would be consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which concluded that such impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Under long -term operating conditions, the Project site would continue to be fully developed with buildings, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping, and would not be subject to substantial amounts of soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. As such, a significant impact associated with erosion would have no potential to occur. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 39 lbid, Pages 4.5 -9 and 4.5 -15. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -26 CC 1/72 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -8 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property Potential impacts associated with liquefaction hazards are addressed above under the analysis of the first threshold under Geology, Soils, and Mineral Resources, which concludes that such impacts would not be significant. Construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be required to comply with California Building Code (CBC) requirements for soil stability and grading plans are required to incorporate remediation measures for any expansive or compressible materials (e.g., replacement, grouting, compaction, drainage control, etc.). Additionally, the design of structures must conform to CBC criteria for foundational design and support. Furthermore, the City's Municipal Code requires the provision of a detailed site - specific soils engineering report and engineering geology report prior to the issuance of grading permits and further requires that measures be incorporated into the grading plans to address potential unstable soil conditions such as landslide, lateral spreading, liquefaction, or collapse. Construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be consistent with the assumptions in the General Plan EIR, which concluded that with compliance with the CBC and Municipal Code requirements, impacts due to unstable geologic units or soils (including expansive soils) would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water The proposed Project site is fully developed under existing conditions and is served by a sanitary sewer system 40 Future residential development that could occur in San Joaquin Plaza resulting from approval of the proposed Project would not require the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. As such, and consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State The California Geological Survey (CGS) classifies the proposed Project site as Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ -3), which is applied to areas containing known mineral occurrences of undetermined mineral resource significance41 Although portions of the City contain active oil wells and oil fields, these areas are concentrated in the western portions of the City within the Banning Ranch subarea. Although General Plan EIR Figure 4.5 -3 identifies one existing oil well near the proposed Project site (near the 40 Ibid, Figure 4.14 -2. 41 Ibid, Figure 4.5-4. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -27 CC 1 /j9 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 intersection of Newport Center Drive and Corporate Plaza Drive), there are no active oil wells present within San Joaquin Plaza and the Project site is not located in an identified oil field. General Plan policies related to oil fields generally encourage continued oil production within the Banning Ranch portion of the City, while General Plan Policy NR 19.1 and Section 1401 of the City's Charter prohibit any new drilling for exploration or extraction of oil resources within the City.42 Accordingly, and as concluded in the General Plan EIR, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the loss of the availability of any known mineral resources that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan" The City of Newport Beach General Plan indicates that the only important mineral resources within the City are related to oil; however, Section 1401 of the City's Charter does not allow new drilling or production or refining of oil, gas, or other hydrocarbon substances within the City.43 Additionally, the discussion on the previous threshold regarding the lack of impact to known mineral resources would be equally applicable to locally important mineral resource recovery sites. As such, the proposed Project would not result in any significant impacts to any locally important mineral resource recovery sites, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to geology and soils could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No impacts to mineral resources were identified. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to geology, soils, and mineral resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to geology, soils, and mineral resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. "z City of Newport Beach General Plan, Page 10 -16. 43 Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -28 CC 1/20 No ■ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 4.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Since certification of the General Plan EIR in 2006, Appendix G to the State CEQA Guidelines was revised to include thresholds of significance related to greenhouse gas emissions, as follows: "Would the project: • Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? • Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases ?" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Although climate change impacts due to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were not specifically evaluated as part of the 2006 General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with buildout of the City, inclusive of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHG emissions. The General Plan EIR also addressed vehicle emissions (both construction and operational) and operational emissions from energy consumption, which are the most common sources of greenhouse gas emissions. As such, GHG emissions and the issue of global climate change (GCC) do not represent new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the General Plan EIR was certified. Information on the effect of GHG emissions on climate was known long before the City certified the General Plan EIR. GCC and GHG emissions were identified as environmental issues since as early as 1978 when the U.S. Congress enacted the National Climate Program Act (Pub L 95 -367, 92 Stat 601). In 1979 the National Research Council published "Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment" which concluded that climate change was an accelerating phenomenon partly due to human activity. Numerous studies conducted before and after the National Research Council report reached similar conclusions. Information also was widely published in a series of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) dating back to the 1990s, including IPPC's "2001 Third Assessment Report." California adopted legislation in 2002 requiring the California Air Resources Board to develop regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles. As such, information about GCC and GHG emissions was available with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the General Plan EIR was certified in 2006. During the public review period and public hearings associated with the General Plan EIR, no objections or concerns were raised regarding the EIR's analysis of GHG emissions, and no legal challenge was filed within the statute of limitations period established by Public Resources Code §21167(c). Similarly, no objections were raised on the topics of GHG emissions and GCC as part of Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR in 2007. Pursuant to CEQA case law44 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3), the issue of project - related GHG emissions does not provide new information of substantial importance or substantial evidence of a new impact to the environment that was not or could not have been known at the time General Plan EIR was certified; thus, minor additions are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis In order to evaluate whether the proposed Project would result in GHG impacts that were not examined in the General Plan EIR, a GHG analysis was prepared for the proposed Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. This study, entitled, North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis, and dated May 29, 2012, is provided as Appendix B. Refer to Appendix B for a detailed discussion of " See Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development Y. City of San Diego, 196 Cal. App. 4" 515 (201 1). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -29 CC 1 /gi Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 GHGs, the regulatory context for GHG emissions, and for a description of the methodology utilized to calculate the proposed Project's GHG emissions. Would the Project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Introduction to Global Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases GCC is defined as the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to temperature, precipitation, and storms. Scientific evidence suggests that GCC is the result of increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere, including CO, methane (CH4), NOx, and fluorinated gases. Many scientists believe that this increased rate of climate change is the result of GHGs resulting from human activity and industrialization over the past 200 years. Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often referred to as GHGs. GHGs are released into the atmosphere by both natural and anthropogenic (human) activity. Without the natural greenhouse gas effect, the Earth's average temperature would be approximately 61° Fahrenheit (F) cooler than it is currently. The cumulative accumulation of these gases in the earth's atmosphere is considered to be the cause for the observed increase in the earth's temperature. GHGs have varying global warming potential (GWP) values; GWP values represent the potential of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is utilized as the reference gas for GWP, and thus has a GWP of I. The atmospheric lifetime and GWP of selected greenhouse gases are summarized in Table 3, Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs. As shown in Table 3, GWP range from I for carbon dioxide to 23,900 for sulfur hexafluoride. For the purposes of this analysis, emissions of CO, CH4, and NOx are evaluated because these gasses are the primary contributors to GCC from development projects. Although other substances such as fluorinated gases also contribute to GCC, sources of fluorinated gases are not well defined and no accepted emissions factors or methodology exist to accurately calculate these gases. A detailed description of GHGs and their associated health effects is provided in Sections 2.4 and 2.6 of the Project's Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix B). Regulatory Setting The State of California, through its Governor and its legislature, has established a comprehensive framework for the substantial reduction of GHG emissions over the next 40 -plus years, primarily through the implementation of Assembly Bill (AB 32) and Senate Bill (SB 375), which address GHG emissions on a statewide cumulative basis. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. SB 375 aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternative planning strategy (APS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPO's regional transportation plan. Other statewide and federal regulations related to GCC and GHG emissions are discussed in detail in the Project's Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix B). Threshold of Significance for Evaluating Project - Related GHG Emissions GCC is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical development project, even a very large one, does not generate enough greenhouse gas emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. However, development activities may participate in the potential for GCC by incremental contribution of GHGs NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -30 CC 1/22 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 combined with the cumulative increase of all other sources of greenhouse gases, which when taken together constitute potential influences on GCC. Table 3 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs Gas Atmospheric Lifetime (years) Global Warming Potential (100 year time horizon) Carbon Dioxide 50 -200 1 Methane 12 t 3 21 Nitrous Oxide 120 310 HFC -23 264 11,700 HFC -134a 14.6 1,300 HFC -152a 1.5 140 PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CH4) 50,000 6,500 PFC: Hexafluoroethane (C2F6) 10,000 9,200 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 23,900 Source: EPA 2006 (URL: http: //www.epa. goy /nonoo2lecon- invhable,html) Note: nrU = nyaroriaorocaroon; rrU = rernnoroaaroon. For purposes of analyzing the cumulative significance of the proposed Projects GHG emissions, the City relies on guidance from the SCAQMD. Currently, the SCAQMD has not adopted thresholds for GHG emissions for residential development projects within the SCAQMD region. However, the SCAQMD has convened a Working Group to identify GHG thresholds for use by jurisdictions in the SCAB. For projects where the SCAQMD is serving as the CEQA Lead Agency and that are not exempt from CEQA, or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans are directly applicable, SCAQMD applies a screening level threshold of 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) annually for all land use types. This threshold is based on a review of the Governor's Office of Planning and Research database of CEQA projects. Based on their review, 90 percent of CEQA projects would exceed 3,000 MTCO2e per year and require additional technical analysis to determine the level of significance. Although the City is not required to utilize the SCAQMD screening threshold, the SCAQMD screening threshold is used in this analysis to determine whether the proposed Project's GHG emissions require additional analysis.45 If the proposed Project's GHG emissions are below 3,000 MTCO2e, then such emissions do not represent a substantial increase as compared to the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the City's General Plan. Analysis of Project Impacts due to GHG Emissions As discussed in detail in Section 2.0, the Project proposes to vest 524 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC, and also assumed that an additional 15 multi - family units would be constructed within the Newport Center Statistical Area. The remaining 79 units were assumed by the General Plan EIR to consist of hotel units. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units represents the Project's only potential to change the level of greenhouse gas emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the General Plan, since the remaining 445 multi- family units were assumed by the General Plan EIR. In order to provide consistency with the Project's 45 Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of Chula Vista, 197 Cal. App. 4th 327 (2011). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -31 CC 1/83 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 traffic study (Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's TPO, the greenhouse gas analysis (Appendix B) assumes that the Project would result in a net increase of 94 multi - family units, which represents a "worst case" (conservative) assumption of potential impacts to the environment because no credit is taken for the reduction of 79 hotel rooms or for the IS units already allowed by the General Plan. No specific residential development project is proposed in San Joaquin Plaza at this time; therefore, it is not possible to calculate GHG emissions that may be associated with future construction activities. However, construction - related emissions associated with the assignment of 524 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of the analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR assumed 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within the Newport Center Statistical Area, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. There would be no substantial difference in GHG emissions when comparing buildout of the General Plan with and without the proposed Project. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities for hotel units and multi - family units are similar. Also, GHG contributions to GCC are cumulative in nature and thus the specific location of the emissions source, whether it be Newport Center generally or San Joaquin Plaza specifically, has no material bearing. Accordingly, construction - related emissions of GHGs would not represent new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the General Plan EIR was certified. There would be no new or more severe construction related GHG emissions impact than would otherwise occur with implementation of the City's General Plan, as analyzed in the General Plan EIR. GHG emissions generated by long -term operation of the Project would be associated with area sources (natural gas use, landscape equipment, etc.) to serve residential units, transportation emissions associated with vehicles traveling to and from the Project site, and indirect emissions associated with purchased energy, energy associated with water (conveyance, treatment, distribution, and treatment of wastewater), and waste disposal. GHG emissions from Project - related operational activities are summarized in Table 4, Total Annual Project GHG Emissions. As noted above, Table 4 reflects a conservative analysis and depicts future GHG emissions associated with the implementation of 94 multi- family units. As shown in Table 4, the proposed Project would generate approximately 935.04 MMTCO2e per year. Because the GHG emissions associated with the Project would be below the SCAQMD's proposed screening threshold of 3,000 MMTCO2e, the proposed Project's cumulative contribution to GHG emissions would be less than significant and would not comprise a new significant environmental effect. Additionally, because the Project's GHG emissions would be below SCAQMD's screening threshold, the Project's GHG emissions would not represent a significant increase as compared to the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the City's General Plan. In conclusion, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases ?" CARB adopted a Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008, which is California's GHG reduction strategy to achieve the state's GHG emissions reduction target established by AB 32 (i.e., 1990 levels of GHG emission by year 2020). Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), California Appliance Energy Efficiency regulations, California Renewable Energy Portfolio standard, changes in the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards, and other early action measures that would ensure the state is on target to achieve the GHG emissions reduction goals NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -32 CC 1/24 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 of AB 32. GHG emissions in the City, including development activities on the Project site, would be thereby reduced from mandatory compliance with these statewide measures. Table 4 Total Annual Project GHG Emissions Emission Source Coe Emissions (metric tons per year) CH, NO Total CO2E Area Sauce Emissions 69.88 0.03 — 71.00 Energy 244.28 0.01 — 245.79 Mobile Sources 556.77 0.02 — 557.25 Waste 8.78 0.52 — 19.67 Water Usage 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 Total CO2E (All Sources) 935.04 Threshold M T CO2E1Yr 3,000 Significant? NO Source: CalEEMod T'" model output, See Appendix "A" to the Greenhouse Gas Analysis (Appendix B) for detailed model outputs. Note: Totals obtained from CalEEMod- and may not total 100% due to rounding. Development activities in the state of California are currently regulated by the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2010 Green Building Code, which require a greater degree of energy efficiency than the 2005 version of the state building code that was in effect when the General Plan EIR was certified in 2006. Although no specific development project is proposed at San Joaquin Plaza at this time, future construction activities would be required to comply with all applicable building codes. Currently, development activities are required to achieve the energy efficiency standards of the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2008 Standard is 15 percent more energy efficiency compared to the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards (which were the standards in place at the time the General Plan EIR was certified). CARIB and the EPA have also adopted new vehicle fuel efficiency standards for model years 2012 through 2016. The CARB Scoping Plan also calls for more stringent fuel efficiency standards model years 2016 through 2020 under Pavley 11. Because the proposed Project would not exceed the SCAQMD's proposed screening threshold for GHG emissions (refer to Table 4) and residential development in San Joaquin Plaza would be required to achieve efficiency standards mandated as part of the state building code in effect at the time of future construction, the proposed Project would not have the potential to interfere with the State's ability to achieve GHG reduction goals and strategies. Furthermore, the proposed Project would result in fewer GHG emissions than would have been assumed in the General Plan EIR since the 2008 efficiency standards and other statewide measures to reduce GHG emissions were not in place at the time the General Plan EIR was certified. Various characteristics of the Project serve to render its contribution to GCC less than cumulatively considerable. One of the main issues raised by those concerned about the effect of greenhouse gases on climate change is that "leap frog" -type development would potentially increase the number of vehicle miles traveled and consequently increase vehicular emissions (i.e., CO2 that contributes to GCC). The Project is an infill, mixed use development in an urbanized setting, thereby providing opportunities to reduce vehicle trips. In conclusion, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -33 CC 125 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Mitigation Program As noted, the General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with the buildout of future development in the City, inclusive of the NNCPC area. The analysis included carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHG emissions. No mitigation measures specifically related to GHG emissions were identified in the General Plan EIR. However, the General Plan includes several policies that would serve to reduce GHG emissions, including, but not limited to, the following Policies: LU 6.4.6 (Approaches for a Livable Neighborhood); LU 6.15.19 (Walkable Streets); LU 6.15.20 (Connected Streets); NR 6.1 (Walkable Neighborhoods); NR 6.2 (Mixed -Use Development); NR 6.3 (Vehicle -Trip Reduction Measures); NR 6.4 (Transportation Demand Management Ordinance); NR 6.5 (Local Transit Agency Collaboration); NR 6.6 (Traffic Signal Synchronization); NR 6.7 (City Fleet Vehicles); NR 6.8 (Accessible Alternative Fuel Infrastructure); NR 6.9 (Education on Mobile Source Emission Reduction Techniques); NR 7.1 (Fuel Efficient Equipment); NR 7.2 (Source Emission Reduction Best Management Practices); NR 7.3 (Incentives for Air Pollution Reduction); NR 7.4 (Use of Blowers); NR 8.1 (Construction Equipment); NR 8.2 (Maintenance of Construction Equipment); NR 8.3 (Construction Equipment Operation); NR 9.1 (Efficient Airport Operations); NR 9.2 (Aircraft and Equipment Emission Reduction); CE 1.1.1 (Comprehensive Transportation System); CE 1.2.2 (Shuttle Service); CE 1.2.4 (Public Transit); CE 4.1.1 (Public Transit Efficiency); CE 4.1.4 (Land Use Densities Supporting Public Transit); CE 4.1.5 (Airport Shuttles); CE 4.1.6 (Transit Support Facilities); CE 5. 1.1 (Trail System); CE 5.1.2 (Pedestrian Connectivity); CE 5.1.3 (Pedestrian Improvements in New Development Projects); CE 5.1.4 (Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods); CE 5.1.5 (Bikeway System); CE 5.1.6 (Bicycle Supporting Facilities); CE 5.1.9 (Integrated Bicycle Improvements); CE 5. 1.1 1 (School Access); CE 5.1.12 (Pedestrian Street Crossings); CE 5.1.14 (Newport Harbor Trails and Walkways); CE 6. 1.1 (Traffic Signals); CE 6.1.2 (Intelligent Transportation Systems); CE 6.2.1 (Alternative Transportation Modes); CE 6.2.2 (Support Facilities for Alternative Modes); and CE 6.2.3 (Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes). Additionally, and although the proposed Project would not create a new GHG impact or increase the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from buildout of the City's General Plan, the Project would be required to comply with all mandatory regulatory requirements imposed by the State of California and the SCAQMD aimed at the reduction of air quality emissions. Those that are particularly applicable to the Project and that would assist in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions are: • Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) • Regional GHG Emissions Reduction Targets /Sustainable Communities Strategies (SB 375) • Pavley Fuel Efficiency Standards (AB 1493). Establishes fuel efficiency ratings for new vehicles. • Title 24 California Code of Regulations (California Building Code). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for new construction. • Title 20 California Code of Regulations (Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for appliances. • Title 17 California Code of Regulations (Low Carbon Fuel Standard). Requires carbon content of fuel sold in California to be 10% less by 2020. • California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (AB1881). Requires local agencies to adopt the Department of Water Resources updated Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or equivalent by January 1, 2010 to ensure efficient landscapes in new development and reduced water waste in existing landscapes. • Statewide Retail Provider Emissions Performance Standards (SB 1368). Requires energy generators to achieve performance standards for GHG emissions. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -34 li li i�8�0 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Renewable Portfolio Standards (SB 1078). Requires electric corporations to increase the amount of energy obtained from eligible renewable energy resources to 20 percent by 2010 and 33 percent by 2020. Level of Significance After Mitigation The General Plan EIR did not include any mitigation measures related specifically to GHG emissions. However, policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City. Mandatory compliance with the General Plan policies and regulatory requirements summarized above would ensure that Project - related emissions would not create a new GHG impact or increase the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from buildout of the City's General Plan. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to greenhouse gas emissions. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to greenhouse gas emissions, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact to the public or the environment through hazards and hazardous materials if it would result in any of the following. • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials • Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment • Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school • Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment • For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been developed, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area • Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -35 CC 1 /8j Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hazards and hazardous materials - related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials The General Plan EIR acknowledges the potential for increased transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials due to an increase in the amount of commercial development. However, although the Project is consistent with the scope of analysis in the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project consists of a proposal to increase the permitted residential development intensity in the NNCPC by 94units and to vest 524 total dwelling units to the San Joaquin Plaza (including the 94 additional units and 430 units already allocated to the NNCPC). Residential uses are not associated with the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Furthermore, the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials is fully regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), State, Orange County, and /or City of Newport Beach. Additionally, General Plan Policy S 7.3 provides for the education of City residents to reduce or eliminate their use of hazardous materials, which further serves to reduce the potential for significant health hazards associated with residential - generated hazardous materials. As such, and in conformance with the findings of the General Plan EIR, impacts associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment No specific development project is proposed as part of the Project at this time. Nevertheless, it is recognized that construction effects would be expected to follow approval of the Project, which may include but not be limited to demolition, ground preparation, and new construction. Construction - related impacts associated with hazardous materials were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which concluded that impacts would be less than significant. Construction activity that could be associated with the proposed Project falls within the scope of analysis contained in the General Plan EIR, which concludes that impacts due to reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant. Of the 524 units proposed to be vested to San Joaquin Plaza, the General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC and also assumed that an additional 15 multi - family units would be constructed within the Newport Center Statistical Area. The remaining 79 units were assumed by the General Plan EIR to consist of hotel units. The General Plan EIR acknowledges that implementation of the General Plan Land Use Plan would require the demolition of existing structures, which could result in exposure of construction personnel and the public to hazardous substances such as asbestos or lead -based paints. The General Plan EIR also acknowledges the potential for exposing construction workers to contaminated soils, if present, during earthwork activities. The General Plan EIR concludes that compliance with existing regulations and General Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -36 li li ��gg Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 policies would ensure that such potential impacts are less than significant. Specifically, the General Plan EIR notes that demolition activities would be subject to: "South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules and Regulations pertaining to asbestos abatement (including Rule 1403), Construction Safety Orders 1529 (pertaining to asbestos), and 1532.1 (pertaining to lead) from Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, Part 61, Subpart M of the Code of Federal Regulations (pertaining to asbestos), and lead exposure guidelines provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development" 46 Since the certification of the General Plan EIR, revisions and additions were made to SCAQMD Rules and Regulations applicable to hazardous materials, which would apply to the proposed Project. SCAQMD Rules and Regulations are standard regulatory requirements of all construction projects in the South Coast Air Basin, including the City of Newport Beach. Any potentially contaminated sites, including contamination that may be encountered during construction activities on the Project site are required to be remediated in accordance with federal, state, and regional standards. The General Plan EIR also evaluated the potential for future impacts that may be associated with the operation of businesses that handle hazardous materials. However, the proposed Project involves an increase to the permitted residential development intensity in San Joaquin Plaza and does not involve any business operations. Operational characteristics associated with residential uses are not identified with upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; accordingly, a significant operational impact would not occur. In conclusion, the construction and operation of residential uses on the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment The General Plan EIR identified and disclosed a number of hazardous materials sites in EIR Tables 4.6 -1 through 4.6 -5. None of the hazardous materials sites occur on the proposed Project site. Accordingly, because San Joaquin Plaza is not on a list of hazardous materials site compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, future residential development on the property would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school The nearest school to the proposed Project site is the Corona Del Mar High School, which is located 0.5 mile to the north at 2101 Eastbluff Drive in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed Project consists of an application to increase the permitted residential development intensity in the NNCPC by 94 units and vest development rights for 524 units (the 94 additional units and 430 units already permitted in the NNCPC) to the San Joaquin Plaza. As such, the proposed Project does not involve the use or storage of any hazardous materials; and, the use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials are not typically associated with residential development projects. Furthermore, because the nearest school site is 0.5 miles away, the Project is not located within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed 46 General Plan EIR, Page 4.6 -20. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -37 cc 1/29 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 school. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been developed, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area The proposed Project site is located within the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport QWA). Although the General Plan was previously reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), the ALUC requires additional review whenever the City considers projects that require zoning (or planned community development plan) amendments that are located within the AELUP. Pursuant to standard City requirements, the proposed Project will be forwarded to the ALUC for a review of consistency with the AELUP prior to final Project approval by the Newport Beach City Council. In addition, the proposed Project site is subject to notification requirements and height regulations pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces and Notification Area for ]WA. The "notification surface" is defined by the AELUP by extending a slope at a gradient of 100:1 (horizontal to vertical) from the airport facility. If a development application would protrude into the notification surface, then notification to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is required. Although buildings that may be proposed on -site in the future have the potential to penetrate the Part 77 notification surface, a significant environmental effect would not result since notification to the FAA would be required pursuant to FAA FAR Part 77. In addition, a precise and definitive review and assessment will be provided when building plans are submitted, and if any buildings penetrate the notification surface then the required FAA notification would be assured by the City. Based on a prior review of the NNCPC by the ALUC, the FAA FAR Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface for the JWA is approximately 1,050 feet (North American Vertical Datum of 1988, hereafter "NAVD 88 "). The maximum height of buildings allowed within the NNCPC would be 375 feet above finished grade, which equates to a maximum elevation of approximately 575 feet (NAVD 88).47 Furthermore, buildings within the San Joaquin Plaza are restricted by the NNCPC Development Plan to a maximum height of 65 feet, equating to a maximum elevation of approximately 265 feet (NAVD 88)48 Accordingly, future buildings on -site have no potential to penetrate the FAA FAR Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface, and a significant impact would therefore not occur. Based on the foregoing analysis, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 41 Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County, 2007. City of Newport Beach: Request for Consideration of Proposed Planned Community Zoning Amendment November 15, 2007. Available for review at the Newport Beach Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915. 4e NNCPC Development Plan, Page 16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -38 CC 1/90 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area As concluded in the General Plan EIR, there are no existing private airstrips within the City of Newport Beach or within the immediate vicinity of the proposed Project site.49 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to safety hazards associated with a private airstrip, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan The Newport Beach Fire Department Emergency Services Office maintains the City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan, which was most recently updated in 2011. The Emergency Management Plan is intended to provide guidance for the City of Newport Beach's response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, and national security emergencies in or affecting the City of Newport Beach 50 According to the Emergency Management Plan, Jamboree Road is identified as an evacuation route for tsunami hazards.51 Although the proposed Project site is located near this evacuation route, there are no components of the proposed Project that would interfere with the use of jamboree Road in the event of an evacuation. Additionally, the Project site is not identified within any of the primary hazard zones identified by the Emergency Management Plan (e.g., tsunami inundation zones, wildfire hazard zones, etc.).52 Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to impair implementation of or physically interfere with the City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 6cpose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes a "Wildfire Susceptibility Map" that indicates areas of the City that are subject to wildland fires. According to this map, the proposed Project site is identified as having a "Low /None" susceptibility to wildfires.53 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, and a significant impact would not occur. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in San Joaquin Plaza. 49 General Plan EIR, Page 4.6 -I. 50 City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan (2011), Page 3. Available on -line at: http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =506. Accessed May 17, 2012. s' Ibid, Page 101. 52 Ibid, Pages 41, 44, 45, 48, 50, 54, 55, 69, 70, and 100. 53 Ibid, Page 50. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -39 CC 1/91 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to hazards and hazardous materials relevant to the Project could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No impacts to hazards and hazardous materials were identified for the proposed Project. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to hazards and hazardous materials. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to hazards and hazardous materials, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on hydrology and water quality if it would result in any of the following. • Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements • Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g, the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted) • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site • Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site • 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 • Require or result in the construction andlor expansion of new storm drain infrastructure that would cause significant environmental effects • Otherwise substantially degrade water quality • Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map • Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flows • Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding including flooding as a result of a levee or dam NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -40 CC 1/92 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 • Expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hydrology and water quality - related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements Otherwise substantially degrade water quality The General Plan EIR acknowledges that buildout of the City in accordance with the General Plan would increase the potential for degradation of water quality during both construction and long -term operation of planned land uses. Construction activities throughout the City are required to comply with state, regional, and local regulations, including, but not limited to, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit 99- 08 -DWQ, which requires preparation of and compliance with a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and /or a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and the incorporation of best management practices (BMPs) to help reduce the potential for polluted runoff exiting construction sites. The mandatory SWPPPs also are required to incorporate an erosion control plan to prevent runoff of excessive amounts of sediment from construction sites. Additionally, construction activities that could be associated with the proposed Project to implement the residential development intensity proposed in San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to Chapter 14.36 of the City's Municipal Code, which prohibits the discharge of any runoff that would contribute to degradation of water quality. Construction activities also would be subject to compliance with the 2003 Orange County Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP), which sets forth management strategies (including the incorporation of BMPs) to protect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters in the Santa Ana drainage area. Finally, the City's General Plan includes policies that are designed to minimize stormwater and erosional impacts during construction, including Policies NR 3. 10, NR 3.1 I, NR 3.12, and NR 4.4, which require the preparation and enforcement of WQMPs and the incorporation of BMPs to prevent or minimize erosional hazards. Compliance with the regulations and policies described above would ensure that construction - related water quality impacts are less than significant, when and if construction activities occur in San Joaquin Plaza to implement permitted residential development intensity. Such activities would be consistent with the construction - related water quality effects identified and disclosed by the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Under long -term operating conditions, the potential development of residential uses in San Joaquin Plaza is not anticipated to substantially increase the amount of impervious surfaces relative to existing conditions; however, no specific development project is proposed at this time so the coverage percentage is unknown. As disclosed in the General Plan EIR, the potential for infill development (such as the proposed Project) to contribute to polluted runoff "...would be minimal. "54 54 General Plan EIR, Page 4.7 -30. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -41 cc 1/93 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 With implementation of the proposed Project and the residential development intensity that would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza, there would be an increase in residential population producing a concomitant increase in the amount of wastewater contaminated with household chemicals. Wastewater conveyed from San Joaquin Plaza is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) Treatment Plan No. 2, which treats the collected effluent as required to meet applicable State and Federal standards prior to being discharged into the Pacific Ocean. Furthermore, all development in the City of Newport Beach is subject to Municipal Code Chapter 14.36 (Water Quality), which prohibits discharge that would contribute to the degradation of water quality. Operation of residential uses in San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the provisions of the DAMP, including requirements to incorporate nonstructural BMPs to control typical runoff pollutants. General Plan policies also are established to promote water quality, including General Plan Policies NR 3.1 through 5.4. Mandatory compliance with the Orange County DAMP, the City's Municipal Code, and General Plan policies would ensure that operational impacts to water quality are less than significant, and such effects would be consistent with the water quality effects identified and disclosed by the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new operational impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted) The proposed Project would be served by a potable water system and would not involve the use of any groundwater wells, and would have no effect on groundwater supplies. General Plan EIR Figure 4.7 -1 depicts areas within the City that are underlain by the Coastal Plain of Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin), which provides groundwater for much of central and north Orange County, including the City of Newport Beach. According to Figure 4.7- I, the proposed Project site is not located above the Basin, indicating that water infiltrating the Project site does not substantially contribute to groundwater resources. In addition, the General Plan EIR notes that "...the City of Newport Beach is in the pressure area of the Basin, which is an area that is not used for recharge. There are no designated recharge areas in the City." ss The proposed Project could involve an increase in the City's population should the residential development intensity proposed by the Project and vested to San Joaquin Plaza be implemented. As such, the proposed Project could result in an increased demand for potable water (including domestic water received from local groundwater resources). The City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan indicates that the projected use of groundwater supplies, combined with imported and recycled domestic water supplies, will meet projected water demand throughout the City through the Plan's horizon year of 2035.56 The Water Supply Assessment prepared for the proposed Project (refer to Appendix E of this document) similarly concludes that sufficient water supplies are available and the implementation of the proposed Project would not have an adverse effect on local groundwater. In addition, the General Plan includes several goals and related policies addressing water conservation (Goal NR 1) and water supplies (Goal NR 2) that will help ensure that future demand for potable water does not result in a deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in ss Ibid, Page 4.7 -7. 56 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan, Section 3.3 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -42 CC 1/9.4 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of new storm drain infrastructure that would cause significant environmental effects Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff The proposed Project site is fully developed with commercial office buildings, parking areas, and ornamental landscaping. Under existing conditions, the existing storm drain infrastructure is adequate to handle runoff from the site during periods of heavy rainfall. Pursuant to the Residential Open Space Requirements set forth in the NNCPC Development Plan, future residential development on the Project site to implement permitted residential development intensity would be required to provide for common outdoor open space comprising 5 percent of the residential lot area, of which 10 percent must comprise landscaped areas. Additionally, the NNCPC Landscaping Development Standards require that surface parking lots must contain a minimum of one 24 -inch box tree for each five parking spaces 57 Compliance with the NNCPC Development Plan requirements for landscaping would ensure that impervious surfaces do not substantially increase, thereby ensuring that peak runoff from the site does not substantially increase as compared to existing conditions. As such, implementation of the proposed Project would not require new or expanded storm drain infrastructure beyond that assumed by the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR acknowledges that new stormwater infrastructure may be needed to support new development within the City. Policies contained in the General Plan would ensure that residential development, when and if implemented in San Joaquin Plaza, can be adequately supported by utilities such as storm drainage infrastructure. The General Plan EIR concludes that although the installation of storm drain facility upgrades could result in short-term construction impacts, construction of storm drainage upgrades in and of itself would not result in impacts not already identified in association with buildout of the General Plan Land Use Plan. As such, the General Plan EIR concludes that such impacts would be less than significant. The proposed Project is consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR with respect to hydrology and water quality impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 57 NNCPC Development Plan, Pages 19 and 24. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -43 CC 1/9,5 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flows Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off site Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site The City of Newport Beach Emergency Operations Plan identifies areas subject to flood hazards as part of the Flood Hazard Areas and Local Flooding Map exhibits. The proposed Project site is not identified as an area subject to regional or local flood hazards. In addition, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the proposed Project site is located within Flood Zone X, which is defined as "Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain" i8 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not have the potential to place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area, nor would the Project place structures within a 100 -year flood hazard area that would impede or redirect flows. Impacts due to flood hazards would not occur. Under existing conditions, the proposed Project site is fully developed with commercial office buildings, parking, and ornamental landscaping. With implementation of residential development in San Joaquin Plaza as would be permitted by the proposed Project, it is not anticipated that the site's existing drainage pattern would be substantially altered, and any such alterations would not affect the course of any streams or rivers. In addition, and as discussed under the analysis of the previous thresholds, any future residential development associated with the proposed Project would be required to maintain landscaped areas that would ensure that runoff from the site does not substantially increase over existing conditions, thereby preventing any potential for substantial increases to long -term erosion hazards off -site. Furthermore, all runoff from the site is diverted to the City's storm drain system. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site in a manner that increases the potential for flooding either on- or off -site, nor would the revised drainage pattern result in substantial erosion or siltation either on- or off -site; accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of a levee or dam The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes a Dam Failure Inundation Map that identifies areas within the City that are subject to inundation in the event of a dam failure. According to this exhibit, the proposed Project site is located south of the Big Canyon Reservoir Inundation Pathway and east of the Prado Dam Inundation Pathway.59 Accordingly, the proposed Project site is not subject to flooding associated with any levees or dams, and a significant impact to people or structures would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or " FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06059C0382J, December 3, 2009. Available on -line at www.fema.go . Accessed May 16, 2012. " City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan, Page 69. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -44 CC 1/96 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes an exhibit entitled, Tsunami Inundation Map for Newport Beach, which indicates that the proposed Project site is not subject to tsunami hazards, nor would future residents of the Project be subject to evacuation in the event of a tsunami hazard 60 Seiche hazards are associated only with enclosed bodies of water. The only enclosed bodies of water located upstream from the proposed Project site is the Big Canyon Reservoir; as noted in the previous threshold, the proposed Project site is not located within the inundation pathway for the Big Canyon Reservoir. Furthermore, mudflow hazards are primarily associated with steep slopes, which are not prevalent in the Project area. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to hydrology and water quality could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to hydrology and water quality. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to hydrology and water quality, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.10 Land Use and Planning The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on land use and planning if it would result in any of the following. • Intensify development within the Planning Area that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses • Physically divide an established community b0 Ibid, Page 100. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -45 CC i/9 j Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect • Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Land use and planning - related impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Intensify development within the Planning Area that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses The proposed Project has the potential to intensify residential development in the NNCPC and would vest development rights for an additional 94 residential units in the San Joaquin Plaza where only commercial office, parking lots, and ornamental landscaping exist today. With the addition of 94 units of residential development intensity and allocation of 430 units of residential development intensity already permitted in the NNCPC to San Joaquin Plaza, the Project site would have the maximum development potential of 524 multi - family residential units. Property surrounding the Project site has a mixed -use character. Residential uses occur immediately to the southwest and to the northeast of the San Joaquin Plaza, with additional residential uses located westerly of Jamboree Road. Other land uses in the area include office, commercial retail, public facility, and commercial lodging (hotel). As concluded in the General Plan EIR's discussion of Newport Center /Fashion Island: "Residential units have existed in this area since the 1970s, and increased through the 1990s. No conflicts of use between the residential and commercial uses have existed previously in this area, as evidenced by the lack of complaints by area residents." 61 Although the proposed Project would incrementally increase the number of residential units allowed within North Newport Center and consolidate those units to San Joaquin Plaza, such an increase would not result in any incompatibilities with adjacent land uses. Accordingly, a significant impact due to incompatible adjacent land uses would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. divide an established The proposed Project site is located within the Newport Center portion of the City of Newport Beach, which consists of an existing, established mixed use district. The proposed Project involves an increase in the permitted residential development intensity for San Joaquin Plaza (from 430 units to 524 units). Under existing conditions, San Joaquin Plaza contains a multi- tenant commercial office development with parking and landscaping. No residential units are currently constructed on the Project site. San Joaquin Plaza is approximately 23 acres in size and no major public roadways traverse the site. It is generally bounded on the south by San Clemente Drive, on the east by Santa Cruz Drive, on the northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and is located just southeasterly of Jamboree Road. On the opposite sides of these roadways, an established apartment complex occurs to the south and an established residential neighborhood occurs to the northeast. The proposed Project would not physically divide either of 61 General Plan EIR, Page 4.8-11. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -46 CC 1/92 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 these residential areas, nor any other established community. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect The proposed Project site is located within the NNCPC and the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for properties within its boundaries, is proposed to be amended as part of the Project to increase permitted residential development intensity by 94 units. There would be no change to the boundaries of the NCCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NCCPC Development Plan Amendment. Future residential development within San Joaquin Plaza, if and when it occurs, would be required to demonstrate consistency with the NNCPC Development Plan; accordingly, no conflict with the NNCPC Development Plan would occur with implementation of the proposed Project. The NNCPC Development Plan was previously evaluated as part of Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR (dated November 2007), which included an extensive analysis demonstrating how existing and planned development in the NNCPC is consistent with all applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations of other agencies with jurisdiction over the NNCPC area. Provided below is a consistency analysis for the proposed Project. As part of the proposed Project, 79 un -built hotel rooms presently allocated to General Plan Anomaly Location 43 would be converted to residential units and then transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. In addition, the Project proposes to assign 15 un -built and unassigned multi- family residential units permitted in the MU -H3 designation of the Newport Center Statistical Area to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 4.3(d) (Transfer of Development Rights), transfers of development rights or development intensity in Newport Center are governed by Policy 6.14.3. General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 allows development rights or development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to a finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. The proposed Project would be consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 as follows: LU 6.14.3 Development rights may be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. Project Consistency: Consistent. The Newport Beach Marriott site (General Plan Anomaly 43) has a General Plan Land Use designation of CV (Visitor Serving Commercial) and the reduction of allowable development intensity by 79 hotel units would not result in any physical changes at the Newport Beach Marriott site nor would it result in a change in land use. With approval of the proposed Project, the hotel would continue operating with 532 rooms and serve visitors to the City consistent with the intent of the General Plan's CV land use designation. The San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of NNCPC is designated MU -H3 (Mixed Use Horizontal), which allows residential uses. Both the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan identify the San Joaquin Plaza for potential development with multi - family residential uses. The Project's proposal to assign additional multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza would not result in a conflict with the General Plan's MU -H3 land use designation. Although the proposed Project NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -47 cc -/9 9 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 would allow for the development of 79 more multi - family units than currently anticipated in that location by the General Plan and 94 multi - family units more than anticipated in the NNCPC Development Plan, this increase in the number of permitted multi - family units would be consistent with General Plan allowed intensity, goals and policies, including, but not limited to, the following: • General Plan Policy LU 3.3, which encourages the provision of residential uses in proximity to jobs and services. • General Plan Policy LU 5.3.4, which encourages the provision of appropriate acreage for the mixture of residential and nonresidential uses. • General Plan Policy 6.14.2 which encourages provisions for limited residential development in accordance with General Plan Tables LU I and LU2. • General Plan Goal H 2.2, which encourages the provision of housing units that assist in achieving the Regional Housing Needs Assessment construction goals. • General Plan Goal H 2.3, which encourages mixed residential and commercial use developments that improve the balance between housing and jobs. • General Plan Housing Program Policy 3.2.1, which directs the City to make appropriate provisions for the development of housing within the Newport Center. Furthermore, and as concluded in Section 4.3.15, no significantly adverse traffic impacts would result from implementation of the proposed Project. Additionally, and as indicated under the analysis of Hazards and Hazardous Materials in Section 4.3.8, mandatory compliance with the development standards included in the NNCPC Development Plan and Design Regulations and review of the Project by the ALUC would ensure that the proposed Project is fully consistent with the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport. Based on the foregoing analysis and the analysis contained in Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plans, policies, and /or regulations, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan As indicated under the analysis of Biological Resources in Section 4.3.4, the proposed Project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that land use and planning impacts could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /l /1 Page 4-48 lil 1 VO No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to land use and planning. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to land use and planning, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.11 Noise The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse noise impact if it would result in any of the following. • Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies • Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels • A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project • A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project • For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels • For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Noise impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis In order to evaluate whether the proposed Project would result in noise impacts that were not examined in the General Plan EIR, a noise impact analysis was prepared for the proposed Project by Urban Crossroads, Inc. This study, entitled, North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis, and dated May 29, 2012, is provided as Appendix C. Refer to Appendix C for a discussion of noise fundamentals, noise standards, and for a detailed description of the methodology utilized to calculate the proposed Project's traffic- related noise. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� Page 4 -49 CC 1/101 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Methods and Procedures In evaluating the proposed Project's potential for impacts due to noise from vehicular traffic, the projected roadway noise impacts were calculated using a computer program that replicates the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model. The FHWA Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level ( REMEL). Adjustments are then made to the REMEL to account for: the roadway classification (e.g., collector, secondary, major or arterial), the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway), the total average daily traffic (ADT), the travel speed, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the traffic volume, the roadway grade, the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is blocked), the site conditions ( "hard" or "soft" relates to the absorption of the ground, pavement, or landscaping), and the percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24 -hour period. Please refer to Section 5.1 of the Project's Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix C) for a description of the noise prediction model inputs used in the analysis. Threshold of Significance for Evaluating Noise Impacts Noise standards within the City are established by the General Plan Noise Element and the City's Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 10.26, Community Noise Control, and Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, Construction Activity — Noise Regulations). Project - related construction activities would be required to comply with General Plan Policy N 4.6 (Maintenance or Construction Activities) and Policy N 5.1 (Limiting Hours of Activity). Policy N 4.6 directs the City to enforce the City's Noise Ordinance limits on hours of maintenance or construction activity in or adjacent to residential areas, while Policy N 5.1 directs the City to enforce the limits on hours of construction activity. Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 restricts the timing of construction activities within the City to weekdays between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Saturdays between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., and prohibits "loud noise that disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity" on Sundays and holidays. Land use compatibility for noise is governed by General Plan Goal NI, which requires analysis of new development to ensure compatibility with existing land uses. General Plan Policy N 1.5, which addresses "Infill Projects" such as the proposed Project, establishes an interior noise level standard of 45 dBA CNEL. General Plan Noise Policy N 1.8 requires the employment of noise mitigation measures for existing sensitive uses when a significant noise impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs when there is a substantial increase in the ambient CNEL produced by new development impacting existing sensitive uses. Due to the nature of the proposed Project (i.e., multi - family residential uses), only future traffic generated by the proposed Project warrants analysis for compliance with Policy N 1.8 since multi - family residential development is not anticipated to result in any stationary noise sources that could exceed the noise level limits established by the policy. For purposes of analysis (and as required by General Plan Policy N 1.8), off -site transportation - related noise increases would be considered "substantial" if Project- related traffic results in any of the following: a noise level increase of 3 dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 55 to 60 dBA CNEL; a noise level increase of 2 dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL; a NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -50 CC 1/102 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 noise level increase of I dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 65 to 75 dBA CNEL; and /or any off -site transportation project related noise level increase where the existing without project ambient noise levels are over 75 dBA CNEL. If the Project's transportation - related noise increases are substantial and impact sensitive receptors that were previously identified by the General Plan EIR as being impacted by traffic- related noise, then the Project's contribution would be considered to comprise a substantial increase in the severity of a significant effect (CEQA Guidelines §15162(3)(b)). If the Project's transportation - related noise increases are substantial and impact sensitive receptors that were not previously identified by the General Plan EIR as being impacted by traffic- related noise, then the Project's noise contribution would be considered a significant effect not discussed in the General Plan EIR (CEQA Guidelines §15162(3)(a)). Municipal Code Section 10.26.025 (Exterior Noise Standards) establishes allowable exterior noise standards for sensitive land uses, as shown in Table 5, Allowable Exterior Noise Levels. In cases where ambient noise levels exceed the allowable exterior noise level shown in Table 5, then the ambient noise level is the exterior noise standard. Municipal Code Section 10.26.030 (Interior Noise Standards) establishes allowable interior noise level, as presented in Table 6, Allowable Interior Noise Levels. In cases where ambient noise levels exceed the allowable interior noise levels presented in Table 6, then the ambient noise level is the interior noise standard. Table 5 Allowable Exterior Noise Levels Land Use Allowable Exterior Noise Level (Leq) 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Residential Single- two- or multiple family 55 dBA 50 dBA residential 50 dBA Commercial 65 dBA 60 dBA Residential portions of mixed- 60 dBA 50 dBA use properties Industrial or manufacturing 70 dBA 70 dBA Source: Municipal Code Section 10.26.025. Table 6 Allowable Interior Noise Levels Land Use Allowable Interior Noise Level (Leq) 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Residential 55 dBA 50 dBA Residential portions of mixed- use properties 60 dBA 50 dBA source: Municipal Code 6ectlon IU.26.ulu. Impact Analysis Since no specific development project is proposed at this time, it is not possible to calculate noise levels that would be associated with future construction activities at the proposed Project site. However, construction activity is an expected secondary effect of the Project and therefore considered in this analysis (see CEQA Guidelines Section 15146). Consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan EIR for construction impacts, mandatory compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 would ensure that construction activities on the proposed Project site do not result in a significant noise impact that would exceed any established and applicable standards governing construction - related noise. Furthermore, NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -51 CC 1/103 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 construction - related noise that may be associated with the proposed allocation of 524 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR assumed future construction in Newport Center, inclusive of the proposed Project site. Of the 524 units proposed to be vested to San Joaquin Plaza, the General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC and also assumed that an additional 15 multi- family units would be constructed within Statistical Area Ll. Therefore, constructing 79 residential units instead of 79 hotel units and the construction of an additional 94 units in the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC represent the Project's only potential to create construction - related noise impacts beyond the level previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. However, the construction of additional multi - family residential units at the San Joaquin Plaza would not result in a substantial increase in the amount of construction - related noise as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR. As noted in the General Plan EIR, construction activities would be subject to compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, which regulates the allowable days and hours of construction. Any construction noise generated during the days and hours permitted by Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 would otherwise be exempt from the Noise Ordinance requirements, and thereby has no potential to result in any new or more severe impacts as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR's analysis. Furthermore, the construction of 94 additional units at the San Joaquin Plaza would only increase the duration of construction activities and would not measurably increase the intensity of construction - related noise, as it is reasonable to conclude that residential units would be constructed using the same types of construction equipment and building materials. Since the General Plan EIR concludes that mandatory compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 would result in less than significant construction - related noise impacts, future Project - related construction noise would not result in any new noise impacts or substantially increase the severity of construction - related noise impacts previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Operational noise impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which identified significant and unavoidable impacts due to the exposure of existing development to future traffic related noise that would exceed the General Plan noise standards and /or would represent a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. The General Plan EIR notes that compliance with General Plan Goal N -2 (Transportation Noise) would reduce this impact, but not to a level below significant 62 Although the proposed Project would involve the allocation of 94 additional units to the San Joaquin Plaza, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a net increase in the amount of traffic beyond what was assumed in the General Plan EIR.63 To substantiate this conclusion, future noise conditions for study area roadway segments were calculated based on the Project's Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix D) to determine whether traffic generated by the Project would cause or contribute to transportation- related noise levels that could exceed the General Plan standards and /or result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Under existing entitlements, the proposed Project site could be developed with up to 430 multi - family residential units. Accordingly, the analysis presented herein focuses on the Project's proposal to allocate an additional 94 dwelling units to the San Joaquin Plaza (as was done for the Project's traffic study prepared in accordance with the City's TPO; see Appendix D). 62 Ibid, Page 4.9 -42. 63 Stantec Consulting Services, 2012. San Joaquin Plaza Trip Generation. May 16, 2012. Available for review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� f Page 4-52 CC 11104 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Existing noise contours without the addition of Project traffic are presented in Table 6 -1 of the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix C), while Noise Impact Analysis Table 6 -2 presents the existing plus Project traffic noise contours. Table 6 -3 of the Noise Impact Analysis presents the year 2016 without Project noise contours, while Table 6 -4 presents the year 2016 noise contours with the addition of Project traffic. It should be noted that noise contours presented in the Noise Impact Analysis do not take into consideration the noise reducing effect of any existing noise barriers or topography that may affect ambient or projected noise levels. Table 7, Existing Off Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts, presents a comparison of the existing conditions noise levels for study area road segments for with and without the addition of Project traffic associated with adding 94 residential dwelling units to San Joaquin Plaza. Table 8, Year 2016 Off Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts, presents a comparison of year 2016 conditions noise levels for study area road segments for with and without the addition of Project traffic. As previously noted, a significant noise impact occurs when there is a substantial increase in the ambient CNEL produced by new development impacting existing sensitive land uses. According to the significance thresholds specified by Noise Element Policy N 1.8 and shown in Table 7 and Table 8, 72 of the 73 roadway segments within the Project's study area are not expected to be significantly impacted by off -site transportation related noise. According to the noise impact analysis, the Newport Center segment north of San Miguel is the only roadway identified with a potentially significant impact. However, the land uses neighboring this roadway segment consist primarily of commercial retail and office uses that are not considered existing sensitive uses that would require additional off -site noise mitigation. As such, a significant impact for this roadway segment does not exist for future Year 2016 conditions (as shown in Table 8). For all of the 73 study area roadway segments, Project - related noise level increases are expected to be less than 1.0 to 3.0 dBA CNEL in year 2016, which is considered "barely perceptible." All noise level increases attributable to Project - related traffic are also below the thresholds established by General Plan Policy N 1.8, or the projected increase would not impact a sensitive receptor. As such, the proposed Project's contributions to off -site roadway noise increases for both existing and year 2016 conditions would not result in the exposure of persons to or result in the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan, City Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of any other agencies. Additionally, Project - related traffic would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. For General Plan buildout conditions, noise level increases attributable to Project - related traffic would be less than the noise level increases presented in Table 8. This is because buildout of the General Plan would result in an overall increase in background traffic volumes, which would thereby result in an increase in background noise levels as compared to year 2016 conditions. As background traffic- related noise levels increase, noise increases attributable to Project traffic would decrease. Therefore, since Project - related noise increases would be less than the values presented in Table 8, Project - related traffic under General Plan buildout conditions would not result in the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan, City Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of any other agencies, nor would it result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Based on the analysis presented above, traffic associated with the proposed project would not result in any new significant effects not discussed in the General Plan EIR, nor would Project traffic result in a NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach n Page 41�-53 `,Ci 1/10,5 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 7 Existing Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Signifumce Threshold dBAr Potential Significant IM act9' No Project With Project Project Addition Jamboree North of Eastbluff 68.8 68.9 00 1.0 No Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 69.8 69.8 OD 1 0 No Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 68.0 0,0 1 0 No Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 58.3 68.3 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 67.8 57.8 00 1 1 0 No Jamboree North of Coast Highway 67.5 6L5 0.0 1 0 No Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.3 63.3 0,0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 545 545 0.0 30 No Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 53.0 63.4 04 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 629 629 00 1 0 No Santa Cnrz South of San Clemente 61 9 61.9 00 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 613 6t7 00 1,13 No Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.5 58,5 0.0 2,0 No Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 60,9 60.9 0 0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61 3 61.3 00 1 0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.6 60.6 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Cnrz 60.2 60.2 00 1 0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Cn¢ 59.9 59.9 0.0 _ No Newport CTR North of Santa Rose 60.6 60.6 00 10 No Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.0 62.1 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of San Miguel 61.0 62.1 1.1 1 0 Yes Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.7 617 ),Q 1.0 No Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 61 9 61.9 00 1 0 No Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 63.6 63.6 U0 1 0 No Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.2 64.2 00 10 No Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 58.0 0.0 2.0 No Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 638 63.8 00 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63,0 63.0 00 1 0 No Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 60,5 60,5 00 1.0 No Avocado North of San Miguel 57.0 57.0 0.0 2.0 No Avocado South of San Miguel 62.0 610 0.0 1.0 No Avocado North of Coast Highway 604 60.4 00 1.0 No Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.1 71.1 00 1 1.0 No Macarthur South of Bonito Canyon 703 70.3 0.0 1 10 No Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.3 70.3 0,0 1 1,0 No NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -54 CC V-100 Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2 Table 7 Existing Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts (Cont'd) Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Signifcance Threshold dBAr Potential Significant Im act7° No Project Wth Project Project Addition Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.3 68.3 0,0 1.0 No Macarthur North of San Miguel 67,9 67.9 0.0 1 0 No Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.0 67.0 0.0 1 0 No Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.0 67.0 0.0 1'0 No Easfbluff/Ford/Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 63.8 63.8 0.0 1 1 0 No Eastbluff/Ford/Bonita Cyn East of Jam bares 62.8 62.8 00 1.0 No Eastbluff/Ford/Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.1 62.2 0.0 1 0 No Eastbiuff/Ford/Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 67.9 67.9 0 0 1 0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 593 59.3 0 0 2 0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 64.9 65.0 00 1 0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 65.9 65.9 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 63.8 63.9 0 0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.4 64.4 0 0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 65.8 65.8 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 65,7 65.7 00 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 85.6 65.6 0 0 1.0 No San Clem erne East of Santa Barbara 58.3 58.3 0 1 2.0 No San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 584 58.5 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54.0 1 54.0 0.0 3.0 No Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.6 61.7 00 1.0 No Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.6 61.6 00 1 0 No Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 594 59.4 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 58.8 58.8 0 1 2.0 No Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56,0 56.0 0.0 2.0 No San Miguel West of Newport CTR 51.1 61.1 00 1.0 No San. Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.2 63.2 0.0 1 0 No San Miguel West of Avacado 64.3 64.3 00 1.0 No San Miguel East of Avacado 66.0 66.0 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Macarthur 65.6 65.6 00 1.0 No San Miguel East of Macarthur 62.9 62.9 0 0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Jamboree 70.2 70.2 00 10 No Coast Highway East of Jamboree 69.2 69.2 0 0 10 No Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 68.9 1 68.9 00 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 68L 68.0 00 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Avacado 678 6Z8 0 0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Avacado 681 68.1 0 0 10 No Coast Highway lWest of Macarthur 68.1 68.1 00 1,0 No Coast Highway lEast of Macarthur 59.5 69.5 0.0 1,0 No I. Significant noise impact threshold defined by the City of Newport Beach Policy N I.B. 2. Potential noise impact for existing noise sensitive uses. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -55 CC 1-/i0 j Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 8 Year 2016 Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Signifcance Threshold dBA� Potential Significant Impact?, No Project With Project Project Addition Jamboree North of Eastbluff 69.6 69.7 0.0 10 No Jamboree Eastbluffto San Joaquin Hills 70.5 70.5 00 1 0 No Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 68.8 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree North of Santa Barnard 69.0 69.0 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 68.6 68.6 00 1 1.0 No Jamboree North of Coast Highway 683 68.3 00 1.0 No Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.6 63.6 00 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54,5 54.5 0.0 3.0 No Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.1 63.2 0.1 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 63.1 63.1 00 1.0 No Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 62.1 62.2 00 1 0 No Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 62.0 62.0 00 1.0 No Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.8 58.8 0.0 2.0 No Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 611 61.1 00 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 614 61.4 00 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.8 60.8 00 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz ran 5 60.5 0.0 to No Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz ci 1 60.1 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa el l 1 61.1 00 1 0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 615 62.5 00 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Son Miguel 61.3 61.3 00 1.0 No Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.8 62.8 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 610 62.0 no 1 0 No Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 64.0 64.0 00 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.6 64.6 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 58.0 00 2.0 No Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 644 64.4 00 1,0 No Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 637 63.7 00 1 0 No Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 61.2 61.2 00 1.0 No Avocado North of San Miguel 57.8 57.8 0.0 2.0 No Avocado South of San Miguel 627 62.7 00 1.0 No Avocado North of Coast Highway 61.2 61.2 no 1.0 No Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.5 71.5 00 to No Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70.9 70.9 00 1 0 No Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.8 1 70.8 00 1 0 No NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -56 lili 11102 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 8 Year 2016 Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts (Cont'd) Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Significance Threshold dBA' Potential Significant Im act ?2 No Project With Project Project Addition Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 68.8 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of San Miguel 68.3 68.3 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.6 67.6 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67,6 67.6 0.0 1.0 No EastbluftfFord/Bonita Cyr West of Jamboree 64 0 64.0 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff/ForcUBomta Cyn East of Jamboree 63.0 63.1 0.0 1.0 No EastblufNFord/BOnip Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 624 624 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff/Fofd/Bonits Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 68.1 68.1 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 59.4 59.4 0.0 20 No San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 65.5 65.6 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cna 66.2 66.2 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cna 64.2 64.2 no 1.0 No Son Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.8 64.8 0.0 LO No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 56.0 66.1 0.0 1.0 li.:, San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 56.2 66.2 0.0 1.0 4Jo San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 653 65.7 00 1.0 No San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58 3 58.3 0.1 2.0 No San Clemente West of Santa Cna 584 58.5 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 544 54.4 0.0 3.0 No Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61S 61.9 0.0 1.0 No Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61,8 61.8 0.0 1.0 No Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.8 59.8 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 59.2 59.2 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.5 56.5 00 20 No San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.8 1 61.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.8 63.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Avacado 64.8 64.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Avacado 665 66.5 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Macarthur 66 2 66.2 00 1.0 No San Miguel East of Mamrthur 631 63.1 0.0 1 0 No Coast Highway West of Jamboree 710 710 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Jamboree 70.1 1 70.1 0 Q 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 69.8 69.8 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 690 69.0 00 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Avacado 689 68.9 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Avacado 1390 69.0 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway JWost of Macarthur 68.7 69.0 03 1:0 No Coast Highway JEast of Macarthur 704 70.4 0.0 1.0 No I. Significant noise impact threshold defined by the City of Newport Beach Policy N I.B. 2. Potential noise impact for existing noise sensitive uses. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Acfions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -57 CC 1 /log Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 substantial increase in the severity of any noise impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels The General Plan EIR evaluated the potential for exposure of persons to or the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels, which were considered significant if they exceeded 72 vibration decibels (VdB). Impacts associated with the exposure of existing residential developments to noise levels in excess of 72 Vc1B were disclosed in the General Plan EIR as a significant and unavoidable impact, and indicated that mitigation measures for such impacts are not available. Table 9, Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment, presents the typical vibration levels for common types of construction equipment64 Existing residential uses within close proximity to the proposed Project site include existing single - family residential uses to the west (across Jamboree Road), multi - family uses to the northwest (across Jamboree Road and San Joaquin Hills Road), single - family uses to the northeast (across San Joaquin Hills Road), and immediately south of the proposed Project site (across San Clemente Drive). Of theses existing residential land uses, and based on the values presented in Table 9, only the existing multi - family uses to the south of the site are located in close enough proximity to the Project site (i.e., approximately 90 feet) to be affected by vibration from future Project construction, as the remaining residential uses are located more than 150 feet from the proposed Project site. As shown in Table 9, the existing multi - family land uses located south of the site could be exposed to vibration - related noise levels approaching 77 VdB (which is the vibration level given for large bulldozers at a distance of 75 feet). Table 9 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ximrAe Eqt4xnent VdB z5 Feet 50 Feet 75 Feet loo Feet Large Bulldozer 87 81 77 75 Loaded Trucks 86 80 76 74 Jackhammer 79 73 69 67 Small Bulldozer 58 52 48 46 SOURCE: Federal Transit Administration 1995; EIP Associates 2006 Although future construction activities that may occur as a result of the proposed Project have the potential to expose the existing multi - family residential uses to the south to noise levels in excess of 72 Vc1B, construction activities that would result from implementation of the proposed Project fall within the scope of analysis presented in the General Plan EIR. The addition of up to 94 additional multi - family units on the Project site, in addition to the 430 multi - family units already assumed by the General Plan EIR, would not result in a substantial increase in the amount of construction equipment that would be required, and thus would not result in a substantial increase in vibration- related impacts as presented in the General Plan EIR. With respect to long -term operating conditions, multi - family residential uses are not associated with the generation of vibration - related noise. As such, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. w General Plan EIR, Table 4.9 -7. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� �Pa/ge 4 -58 CC -V 1 f l0 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project Since no specific development is proposed at this time, it is not possible to calculate noise levels that may be associated with future construction activities at the proposed Project site. However, construction activities that may be associated with future development at the proposed Project site are within the scope of analysis for the General Plan EIR, since the General Plan EIR assumed future construction on the proposed Project site and because the construction of additional units on -site (i.e., 94 multi - family units) would not substantially increase daily noise levels. As concluded in the General Plan EIR, "...existing and future construction noise levels at individual construction sites may not substantially differ, but previously unexposed areas could experience new sources of construction noise. Both existing and future noise would be exempt from the [Municipal Code] and when construction occurs, impacts would be considered less than significant" 65 Accordingly, since construction activities that may be associated with future construction activities allowed as a result of the proposed Project would be regulated by Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, and because impacts associated with construction activities at the proposed Project site were assumed in the General Plan EIR, construction activities would not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Therefore, construction of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. For long -term operating conditions, the General Plan EIR notes the following: Other sources of noise that occur on a periodic or temporary noise could involve neighborhood or commercial landscape maintenance equipment, street and parking lot maintenance vehicles, loudspeakers, alarm systems, and automobiles and motorcycles with modified exhaust systems. Noise from these uses may be dealt with on a case -by -case basis through enforcement of the City Noise Ordinance provisions.66 The General Plan EIR concludes that such impacts would be less than significant. Operational characteristics that may be associated with future development pursuant to the proposed Project would be within the scope of the analysis provided in the General Plan EIR, since the long -term operation of 94 additional multi - family units on -site (in addition to the 430 multi - family units already allowed by the NNCPC Development Plan) would not result in a substantial increase in the need for landscape maintenance equipment, use of street and parking lot maintenance vehicles, loudspeakers, alarm systems, or automobiles with modified exhaust systems. Moreover, to the extent that the Project would result in an increase in these sources (e.g., increased vehicles with modified exhaust systems), such sources would be addressed through enforcement of the provisions of the City's Noise Ordinance. Accordingly, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 66 Ibid, Page 4.9 -34. 66 lbid, Page 4.9 -35. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -59 CC 1/111 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels According to General Plan EIR Figures 4.9 -5 and 4.9 -6, and the John Wayne Airport Impact Zones exhibit contained in the AELUP,67 the proposed Project site is subject to airport- related noise levels that are less than 60 dB CNEL. As indicated in the AELUP, areas located outside of the 60 dB CNEL contour are not subject to significant airport- related noise levels.68 Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in the exposure of people residing or working in the area to excessive airport- related noise levels. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels As concluded in the General Plan EIR, there are no existing private airstrips within the City or the vicinity of the Project site.69 Accordingly, the proposed Project site would not expose people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels associated with a private airstrip, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to noise impacts related to John Wayne Airport and construction activities could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Groundborne construction vibrations and long -term exposure to increased noise levels were identified to remain significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to noise. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to noise, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. " Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (April 17, 2008), Appendix D (Impact Zones Map). Available on -line at: http: / /www.ocair.com/ commissions /aluc /docs /IWA_AELUP- April- 17- 2008.p_df. Accessed May 17, 2012. Ibid, Page 12. 69 General Plan EIR, Page 4.6 -1. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -60 CC 1/112 No ■ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 4.3.12 Population and Housing The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on biological resources [sic] if it would result in any of the following: • Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) • Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere • Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Population and housing impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) The Project's proposal to assign 15 un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza would not result in an increase in the City's population beyond the projected population for North Newport Center previously evaluated and disclosed as part of the General Plan EIR. The conversion of 79 un -built hotel units to residential units would, however, result in an estimated increase in the City's permanent population by 173 persons (based on a person per household [pph] value of 2.19 cited in the General Plan EIR).70 It should be noted that the increase in the permanent population would be somewhat off- set by the reduction in transient population (i.e., hotel patrons) due to the reduction in the number of hotel units allowed within the City (79 units). The General Plan EIR disclosed that buiidout of the land uses allowed by the General Plan Land Use Plan would result in a future 2030 population of 103,753 persons, while SCAG projected a future 2030 population of only 94,167 persons, or a difference of approximately 9,586 persons. The General Plan EIR identified this increase in the City's population as compared to SCAG's 2030 forecast to be a significant and unavoidable impact of the 2006 General Plan. The future development of residential uses in San Joaquin Plaza as a result of implementing the proposed Project would result in an estimated increase in the City's projected population by 173 persons, which would be in addition to the projected population identified in the General Plan EIR. However, the increase in permanent population attributable to the proposed Project would not represent a substantial increase in the severity of the City's unavoidable cumulative impact to population and housing, considering the proposed Project's population increase of 173 persons would comprise less than two- tenths of one percent (0.17 %) of the projected and estimated General Plan buildout population. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. J0 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -61 CC 1/ii3 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Displace substantial numbers of existing housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere Under existing conditions, the San Joaquin Plaza is developed with commercial office land uses, and does not include any housing units or residents. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people, and would not require the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program No policies were identified in the 2006 General Plan to reduce the substantial increase in growth in the City. Measures were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with resource impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including increases in population and the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to population and housing would remain significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to population and housing. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to population and housing, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.13 Public Services The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on [public services] if it would result in any of the following. • Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives • Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives • Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -62 CC, 11-114 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for schools. • Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered libraries, the need for new or physically altered libraries, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for libraries." It should be noted that impacts to parks, although included as a public service in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, are analyzed separately in Section 4.3.14 (Recreation) of this Initial Study /EIR Addendum. No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Public service impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. Summary Analysis Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives The proposed Project site is served by Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD) Fire Station 3, which is located at 868 Santa Barbara Drive and immediately adjacent to the proposed Project site.71 The desired personnel to population ratio for fire protection services is 0.48 firefighters for each 1,000 residents.72 According to this standard, the Project's projected future population increase of 173 persons73 would result in the need for 0.08 new firefighters. However, as stated in the General Plan EIR, "irrespective of the personnel to population ratio, in the NBFD's estimation, the NBFD's current staffing level adequately suits the current needs of the City's residential population "74 In addition, NBFD's desired response time for emergency response (including a three- to four - person engine company) is five minutes for 90 percent of all structure fire calls within the City75. According to General Plan EIR Table 4.11 -4, Fire Station 3 had a response time of 4 minutes 32 seconds in 2002, which meets the NBFD's five minute standard. It should be noted that given the San Joaquin Plaza's close proximity to Fire Station 3, service times to the proposed Project site would be substantially less than the average response time. Furthermore, it should be noted that the construction of 1,201 dwelling units within Newport Center was assumed in the General Plan EIR (which assumed 751 units allocated to portions of the Newport Center designated as Multiple Residential [RM] and 450 units allocated to portions designated as MU- H3), and the General Plan EIR also assumed the construction of 79 more hotel units than were actually constructed at Anomaly Number 43 (Marriott Hotel). Thus, the construction of 524 multi - family dwelling units at the San Joaquin Plaza, which includes 445 of the 450 dwelling units allocated to the MU- 71 Ibid, Table 4.1 1 -I. 7' Ibid, Page 4.11-5. 73 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19. 74 Ibid, Pages 4.1 1 -5 and -6 J5 bid, Page 4.11 -6. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach P age 4 -63 1/1-15 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 H3 portions of Newport Center and the conversion and transfer of 79 hotel units, would not represent a substantial increase in demand for fire protection services. Accordingly, and consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not result in or require the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which would result in substantial adverse environmental impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives As discussed in the analysis of the previous threshold, implementation of the proposed Project could result in an increase in the City's projected permanent population by 173 persons as compared to what was estimated in the General Plan EIR; 76 however, it should be noted that this increase in the estimated permanent population would be partially off -set by a reduction in the City's transient population because the proposed Project also would result in a reduction of 79 hotel units allowed within Newport Center. Nonetheless, the potential increase in the estimated permanent population would require additional police protection services. The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) has a ratio of 1.7 officers per 1,000 residents77. When and if residential development occurs in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the proposed Project, there would be an estimated 173 person population increase, which would require an additional 0.29 officers to maintain the City's service ratio. Maintaining the NBPD's current ratio of 0.60 non -sworn personnel per sworn officer78 would require the addition of 0.18 non -sworn personnel. Although the General Plan EIR identified that buildout of the General Plan would require new or expanded police facilities, the Project - related demand for 0.29 sworn officers and 0.18 non -sworn officers would not result in or require any new or physically altered police protection facilities beyond what was evaluated and disclosed as part of the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in nor require new or physically altered police protection facilities or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for schools. The proposed Project is located within the Newport Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD), and any future school -age children residing in San Joaquin Plaza would attend the Lincoln Elementary School, Corona Del Mar Middle School, or the Corona Del Mar High School should they attend public schools. 76 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19 77 Ibid, Page 4.11 -16. 78 Ibid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -64 CC 1/110 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Utilizing the ratios provided in the General Plan EIR, the conversion of 79 hotel rooms to 79 multi- family residential proposed by the Project would result in 35 more students than were assumed in the General Plan EIR (consisting of 17 elementary school students, 9 middle school students, and 9 high school students) 79 As indicated in the General Plan EIR, implementation of the General Plan would result in approximately 4,347 total students within NMUSD, which would require the construction of new school facilities 80 However, the General Plan EIR concludes that adherence to policies contained in the General Plan would ensure that impacts related to the provision of new educational facilities would be less than significant. Furthermore, the 35 additional students generated by the proposed Project would not result in the need for additional school facilities beyond those assumed by the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, demand for school facilities associated with the proposed Project in conjunction with the cumulative demand throughout the entire school district would be consistent with the level of impacts identified and disclosed as part of the General Plan EIR. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in substantial adverse environmental impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered libraries, the need for new or physically altered libraries, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for libraries." As concluded in the General Plan EIR, it is increasingly difficult to project the potential need for resources required to adequately serve the future population because the types of resources used at Newport Beach Public Library (NBPL) is changing (i.e., hardcopies vs. electronic documents). "...[I]ncreased development in the City does not necessarily immediately equate to an increase in total volumes or square feet of library space. "81 Accordingly, although the proposed Project could result in an increase in the projected future population of the City by 173 persons as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR,B2 if and when residential development occurs in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the proposed Project, such population increase would not directly result in the need for new or expanded library facilities that would have a significant effect upon the environment. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including increased public service demands associated with the City's projected population, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. ' Ibid, Page 4.11 -23. The General Plan EIR assumes that the 14,215 dwelling unit increase associated with the General Plan Update would result in 6,230 new students, consisting of 3,115 elementary school students, 1,557 middle school students, and 1,558 high school students. This represents a ratio of 0.219135 elementary students 0.109532 middle school students, and 0.109603 high school students per household. 80 Ibid, Page 4.11-23. s' Ibid, Pages 4.11-27 and 4.11-28. 82 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -65 CC 1/1-17 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to public services would be less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to public services. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to public services, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.14 Recreation and Open Space The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on parks and recreational facilities if it would result in any of the following. Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment • Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government services, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for parks" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Park and recreational facility impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -66 CC 1/118 No ■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government services, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives for parks At the time the General Plan EIR was certified (2006), the City had a deficit of approximately 38.8 acres of park and beach acreage citywide. The proposed Project site is located within Service Area 9 (Newport Center), which is identified as having a projected need for 10.9 acres of parkland to serve the future population with buildout of the Service Area. The Service Area contains a total of 19 acres of existing parkland, which represents a surplus of 8.1 acres 83 Based on the standards provided in Municipal Code Section 19.52.040 (Parkland Standard), the City requires five acres of parkland for each 1,000 residents. Implementation of the proposed Project could result in an estimated increase of 173 persons as compared to what was projected by the General Plan.84 If and when residential development is constructed in San Joaquin Plaza to implement the proposed Project, the resulting increase of 173 persons beyond that previously assumed by the General Plan would result in a demand for 0.9 acres of parkland. With implementation of the Project, total demand for parkland within Service Area 9 would increase to 11.8 acres, which would be more than accommodated by the 19 acres of existing parkland within the Service Area. Although the Project would not result in the need for new or expanded recreational facilities, per the General Plan Open Space policies, a Per -Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks would be paid for each of the 94 additional units in exchange for vested development rights as stipulated in the Amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement. The in -lieu fees would be used to maintain existing or acquire new parkland within the City. Accordingly, because there is more than adequate parkland to serve the projected population within Service Area 9, and because a Per -Unit Public Benefit Fee for parks would be required to be paid as an additional public benefit to assist the City in maintaining or expanding parkland within the City should residential development occur in San Joaquin Plaza, the proposed Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. Additionally, the proposed Project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse effect on the environment. The proposed Project also would not result in any substantial adverse physical impacts to the environment associated with the provision of, or need for, new or physically altered government facilities. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. s3 Ibid, Table 4.12 -1 (Parkland Acreages). Ibid, Page 4.10 -5. Based on a pph value of 2.19. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -67 cc 1/i -9 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including increases in parkland and the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that impacts to parks and recreational facilities would be less than significant. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to recreation and open space. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to recreation and open space, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 4.3.15 Transportafton/Traffic The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on transportation or circulation if it would result in any of the following: • Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) • Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways • Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks • Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g, farm equipment) • Result in inadequate emergency access • Result in inadequate parking capacity • Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Transportation impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -68 CC 1/120 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections) As required by the City of Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), a TPO traffic analysis was prepared for the proposed Project. This study, entitled, North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis, and dated May 2012, is provided as Appendix D. The TPO traffic analysis includes an analysis pursuant to the TPO, a cumulative conditions analysis, and a General Plan analysis. Provided below is a summary of the methodology used in the TPO traffic analysis, an overview of existing conditions for study area intersections, and a summary of the findings for the TPO analysis, cumulative conditions analysis, and General Plan Analysis. TPO Traffic Analysis Methodology The proposed Project involves conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family units, which would then be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza. The Project also would result in the assignment of 15 un -built and un- assigned units to the San Joaquin Plaza. These 94 units, along with an additional 430 dwelling units already allowed in the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC, would be allocated specifically to the San Joaquin Plaza. However, since the 430 dwelling units already are allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, and impacts associated with transportation and traffic associated with such allocation was evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR and Addendum No. I thereto, the analysis of impacts to traffic in this section focuses on impacts associated with the increased development intensity within San Joaquin Plaza (i.e., 94 multi - family units) that would be allowed as a result of the proposed Project. Based on the scope of the proposed Project, the City's traffic engineers identified a total of 20 intersections requiring analysis, as depicted on Figure 4, TPO Analysis Study Intersections. Existing intersection levels of service were calculated based on existing traffic counts collected in March 2012 and utilizing intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. The ICU values are a means of presenting the volume to capacity ratios (V /C), with a V/C ratio of .90 representing the upper threshold for an acceptable level of service (LOS D) in the City of Newport Beach. The analysis assumes existing lane configurations and a capacity of 1,600 vehicles per hour (vph) per lane with no clearance factor. Although no specific development project is proposed at this time, the proposed Project is assumed for purposes of the traffic analysis to be complete in 2015; therefore, the study year is 2016 consistent with the TPO guidelines. An ambient growth rate of 1.0 percent per year was added to the existing volumes along jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Coast Highway. Traffic generated by approved projects in the study area (including the 430 dwelling units currently allocated to the San Joaquin Plaza) were added to the existing - plus - growth peak hour volumes to obtain year 2016 background peak hour volumes for the intersections prior to the addition of Project - generated traffic. Table 10, Approved Projects Summary, summarizes the approved projects included in the analysis. Trip rates and the resulting ADT for the proposed Project are summarized in Table 11, Trip Generation Summary. These trips were distributed to the surrounding circulation system according to the general distribution shown in Figure 5, General Project Trip Distribution and Project ADT. Existing -plus- Project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the Project - generated peak hour trips to the existing peak hour volumes. Similarly, background -plus- Project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the 2016 background peak hour volumes discussed above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� f Page 4 -69 CC V12-1 No M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Nor scams ro NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach rlgure 4 TPO ANALYSIS STUDY INTERSECTIONS June 2012 Page 4 -70 CC 1/122 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 10 Approved Projects Summary Fashion Island Expansion 40 Temple Bat Yahm Expansion 65 CIOSA — Irvine Project 91 Newport Dunes 0 Hoag Hospital Phase III 0 St. Mark Presbyterian Church 77 OLQA Church Expansion 0 2300 Newport Blvd 0 Newport Executive Court 0 Hoag Health Center 75 North Newport Center 0 Santa Barbara Condo 0 Newport Beach City Hall 0 328 Old Newport Medical Office 0 Coastline Community College 0 Bayview Medical Office 0 Mariner's Pointe 0 4221 Dolphin Striker 0 Source: Stantec Consuhing Services, Inc. (May 2012). Table 11 Trip Generation Summary Land Use I AM Peak Hour Amount In Out PIM Peak Hour .. Out .. Trip Rates Residential (ITIE 232 DU .06 .28 .34 .24 .14 .38 4.18 Trip Generation Residential 94 DU 6 26 32 23 13 36 393 Source: Trip Generation Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -71 CC 1/123 No M❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Nor scams ro NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Figure o GENERAL PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND PROJECT ADT June 2012 Page 4 -72 CC 1124 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Cumulative traffic volumes were determined based on trip generation and distribution characteristics associated with a list of known but not approved projects compiled by City staff. These cumulative projects are summarized in Table 12, Cumulative Projects Summary. The peak hour cumulative intersection volumes were added to the 2016 background peak hour volumes discussed above, and the proposed Project's peak hour trips were added to the resulting 2016 background- plus - cumulative peak hour volumes. Table 12 Cumulative Projects Summary Source. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Existing Conditions Existing ICU values for the study area intersections are summarized below in Table 13, Existing ICU Summary. As shown in Table 13, all study area intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours under existing conditions. Table 13 Existing ICU Summary 1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastbluff AM .74/C PM .61B Project Land Use Arnount Mariner's Medical Arts Medical Office 12.25 TSF Banning Ranch Single Family Detached 423 DU 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy Condominium/Townhouse 952 DU 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy Retail 75.00 TSF 7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon Hotel 75 Rm Sunset Ride Park Park 13.67 Acre Marina Park Marina /Park 10.45 Acre Koll - Conexant Apa rtment 974 DU Newport Coast TAZ 1 -4 Single Family Detached 954 DU 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente Condominium/Townhouse 389 DU 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center Multi-Family Attached 175 DU Source. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Existing Conditions Existing ICU values for the study area intersections are summarized below in Table 13, Existing ICU Summary. As shown in Table 13, all study area intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours under existing conditions. Table 13 Existing ICU Summary 1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastbluff AM .74/C PM .61B 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .701 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .441A .57/A 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy .56 1A .65113 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .36/A AAA 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .501A 7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon 33/C .82/D 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65/8 .80 1C 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .531A .44/A 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy .661 .648 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26 1A .36/A 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .141A .25/A 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .151A .31/A 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .491A 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa 121A .34/A 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14/A .321A 17. Avocado & San Miguel .311A 49/A 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .WA 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A .331A 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .121A .211A Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 -1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -73 CC 1125 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 TPO Analysis Summary The ICU values for existing -plus- Project conditions are summarized in Table 14, Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary. The TPO analysis consists of a one percent analysis and an ICU analysis at each study intersection. The one percent analysis compares the proposed project traffic with projected background peak hour volumes. To pass the one percent analysis, peak hour traffic from the proposed Project must be less than one percent of the projected background peak hour traffic on each leg of the intersection. If the proposed project passes the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis is not required for that intersection and no further analysis is necessary. If the proposed Project does not pass the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis must be performed for each intersection which fails to pass the one percent test. Table 14 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 60 /A 70 113 .60 1A 701B 00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 44/A .57 /A .441A .57/A .00 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy .56/A 658 .56/A 651B .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast H .36/A .441A .37/A .45/A .01 .01 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .50 /A .441A .50/A .00 .00 7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon .731C .82113 .73/C .82/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .6513 .801C .6513 .80/C .00 .00 9. MacArthur &San Miguel .53/A .441A .531A .44/A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast H .66/13 .6413 .6613 .64/13 .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .261A .36/A .271A .37 1A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .1 VA .25/A .14/A .26/A .00 .01 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .291A .491A .291A .50/A .00 .01 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .121A .341A .12/A .34/A 00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .141A .321A .14/A 32/A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31/A .49/A .31/A .49/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .36/A .18/A .36/A .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente 2VA 33/A 27/A .33/A .00 .00 20. Newport Center &Santa Barbara .12/A .21/A .92/A I .21/A 1 .00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 -1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Table 15, One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary, summarizes the results of the one percent analysis for the proposed Project. As this table indicates, the proposed Project does not pass the one percent analysis at 12 study intersections during the AM or PM peak hour; therefore, an ICU analysis is required and was performed for the 12 intersections that did not pass the one percent test. Table 16, Year 2016 ICU Summary, summarizes the existing, 2016 background, and 2016 background - plus- project ICU values during the AM and PM peak hours. As indicated in Table 16, each of the study area intersections would operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the addition of Project traffic. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no significant direct impact on the study intersections, and no mitigation would be required. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -74 GC 1/126 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 15 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary 111111111111yM off T--= 11111111FIT-M 1. Jamboree & FordlEastbluR 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume i 1,892 1 2,207 j 865 1 697 1 2,766 1 1,891 614 386 Project Peak Hour Trips 10 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 5 1 7 1 0 2 1 Yes 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 1406 1 2,549 395 199 1,644 2,250 143 912 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 8 2 0 1 3 1 6 1 9 1 0 1 1 1 No & Jamboree & Santa Barbara 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,528 1,819 60 181 1,481 1,687 81 726 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 2 0 0 14 6 1 0 7 1 No 4. Jamboree & Coast 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 465 1,243 2,596 1,194 432 1,599 623 284 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 7 1 1 0 3 4 2 Yes S. Newport Ctr & Coast Hwy 2016 Pro -ected Peak How Volume 0 113 2,188 1,292 0 849 1,704 1,690 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 3 1 No & Avocado & Coast Hwy 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 361 1 191 1 1,374 1,455 1 295 603 1,456 1,548 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 0 1 0 1 4 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 1 3 1 1 Yes 7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonito CVn 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 2,133 1 3,156 1 415 1 2.080 1 2.T73 1 3.744 425 1.165 Project Peak Hour Trips 4 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 5 1 2 1 1 Yes • MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 1493 1 3 203 509 1,071 1,613 2.811 1.172 728 Pro ect Peak Hour Tri 0 1 5 0 0 4 3 1 1 No • MacArthur & San Miguel 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 1 1,554 1,536 1 330 470 1 1,125 1,513 1 1,225 1 455 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 Yes 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy 2016 Pro ected Peak Hour Volume 1 0 1 1.092 1 1,653 2,092 1 0 1.359 1 1.650 2.028 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 1 1 4 2 1 0 0 1 2 4 1 Yes 71. Santa Cruz & San Joaqu in Hilk 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 1 118 1 82 932 1 399 1 781 39 1 783 584 Project Peak Hour Trios 4 1 0 1 1 5 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 7 1 5 1 No 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 144 360 95 35 577 315 336 102 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 3 5 1 0 1 2 1 6 1 3 1 0 1 No 13. Santa Cruz & NevTort Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volurne 60 1 269 1 140 1 178 1 254 1 255 1 280 1 317 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 3 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 No 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaqu in Hills 2016 Projected Peak our Volume 169 132 583 1,015 797 143 789 767 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 0 0 5 1 0 0 3 5 Yes 15. Newport Ctr & Santa Rosa 2016 Projected Peak How Volume 204 107 84 400 509 320 270 508 Pro ect Peak Hour Trips 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 No 18. Newport Ctr & San Miguel 2016 Pro eaed Peak Hour Volume 1 255 1 106 39 1 288 1 423 1 298 1 347 1 609 Proect Peak Hour Trips 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 No 17. Avocado & San Miguel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 381 120 218 1,212 720 321 734 893 Pro s ect Peak Hour Tri 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 Yes 18. Newport Ctr & Newport Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 461 24 128 191 1 428 192 1 361 1 472 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 0 2 li 0 1 1 li 0 1 1 1 0 1 No 18. Santa Barbara & San Clannerde 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 100 724 1 0 1 65 1 404 1 278 1 0 1 406 Pro act Peak Hour Trips 1 0 0 1 6 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 4 1 No 20. Newport Ctr & Santa Barbara 2016 Pirjected Peak How Volume 256 146 204 1 40 1 281 1 334 1 280 1 148 Pro ect Peak Four Tri 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 No Note 2016 Projected peak how volume consists of existing volume regional growth, and approved projects volume. Source. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -75 CC i /12j Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 16 Year 2016 ICU Summary 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .65/B .80 /C .65113 .80 1C .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .48/A .61/B 48/A 61/B .00 00 5. Newport Center & Coast H .39/A .48/A .39/A .49 1A .00 .01 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills 69 /13 861D .69B 87/0 .00 .01 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .38/A .30 /A .381A .01 .00 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .1 VA .26/A .14 /A .26/A .00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A 31/A .00 .00 15. New Dort Center & Santa Rosa 15/A 40 1A 15/A 40 /A 00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .15/A 1 .34/A .15/A .34/A .00 .00 18. Newport Carder & Newport Center .18/A I .381A 1 .18/A .38/A .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .281A I .33/A I .28/A MIA .00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .13/A I .22/A I .131A .221A .00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Cumulative Conditions Analysis The previously - presented one percent analysis without cumulative volumes represents the worst -case one percent analysis since the addition of cumulative traffic to the background volumes increases the chances of a project passing the one percent analysis. If an intersection passes the one percent analysis prior to the addition of cumulative traffic, then the intersection will pass the one percent analysis with the addition of cumulative traffic and no further analysis is required at that location. The results of the ICU analysis for cumulative conditions are summarized in Table 17, Cumulative ICU Summary. As indicated in Table 17, all study area intersections would operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to study area intersections, and no mitigation would be required. General Plan Analysis The proposed Project's consistency with the General Plan also was evaluated. San Joaquin Plaza is currently allocated up to 430 multi - family units by the General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan. The General Plan also allows a total of 79 un -built hotel rooms to General Plan Anomaly 43, and allows IS multi - family units within the portions of Newport Center that are designated for MU -H3 land uses. As discussed in Section 2.0, the proposed Project would result in the conversion of the 79 un -built hotel rooms from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and the transfer of the converted units to the San Joaquin Plaza. In addition, the proposed Project would assign IS un -built multi - family residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza. The peak hour and daily trips generated by 79 multi - family dwelling units would not be greater than the trips generated by 79 hotel rooms.85 " Stantec Consulting Services, 2012. San Joaquin Plaza Trip Generation. May 16, 2012. Available for review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -76 CC 1122 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Table 17 Cumulative ICU Summary .P Intersection AM 1. Jamboree & FortiJEastblulf .82/D I .7018 1 .82/D .70/8 - . .00 .00 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .68/13 .83/D .68B .83/D .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .50/A .631`8 .51/A .6316 .01 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy .668 .83/D .67B .831D .01 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast H .42/A .531A .42/A .53/A .00 .00 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .56/A .59 /A .56/A .59JA .00 .00 7. MacArthur& Ford/Bonita Canyon .78/C .89/1) .78/C .891) .00 .00 8. MacArthur &San Joaquin Hills .71/C .891D .71/C .89/D .00 .00 9. MacArthur& San Miguel .60/A .501A .60 /A .50/A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast H .78/C .7510 .78/C 75/C .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .38/A .30 /A .39JA .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente 26/A .15/A .26JA .00 .00 13. Santa Cn¢ & New rt Center 32/A .161A .32JA .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joa uin Hills 54/A .35/A .54JA .00 .00 15. New rt CeMer &Santa Rosa 40/A 16/A 40JA 00 .00 16. New rt Center & San Mi uel .351A .16/A .35 /A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Mi uel 55/A 34/A 55/A 00 .00 18. New rt Center & New ort Center .38/A .19/A .39/A .00 .01 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .33/A .28/A .33/A .00 .00 20. New rt Center & Santa Barbara .23/A .13/A .23/A .00 .00 Level of service ranges: DO- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 -1.00 E Above 1.00 F Source: Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012). Traffic- related impacts associated with buildout of the General Plan were evaluated in the General Plan EIR, which concluded that, with the improvements identified in the General Plan Circulation Element, and without consideration of regional growth, buildout of the General Plan would result in a less than significant impact associated with the projected increase in the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections compared to existing conditions B6 Because the proposed Project would generate less traffic than was assumed in the General Plan EIR, Project traffic under General Plan buildout conditions would not result in any new significant effects, nor would it substantially increase the severity of any significant effects. Conclusion As demonstrated in the above analysis, the proposed Project would not result in any direct or cumulatively significant impacts to study area intersections. In addition, implementation of the proposed Project would result in an increase in the amount of average daily traffic generated within the Newport Center, thereby demonstrating that the proposed Project would be consistent with the assumptions used in the General Plan EIR's analysis of impacts to traffic, which were determined to be less than significant with implementation of the improvements identified in the Circulation Element. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 86 General Plan EIR, Page 4.13 -32. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -77 CC 1/129 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) serves as the congestion management agency for Orange County. The OCTA publishes and regularly updates a Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Orange County, which identifies level of service standards and designates regionally significant intersections, highways, and freeways. The CMP requires that all CMP highway system facilities must maintain a LOS grade of "E" or better.87 Accordingly, a project would have a significant adverse effect on the level of service standards established by the CMP if it would cause or contribute to a LOS below LOS E at any CMP- designated intersection. The 2011 CMP identifies the following facilities within the City of Newport Beach as part of the CMP highway system:88 I. Coast Highway (SR -1) throughout the City 2. MacArthur Blvd from Coast Highway to Jamboree 3. Newport Boulevard (SR -55) from north City limit to Coast Highway 4. Jamboree from northern City boundary to MacArthur Boulevard As indicated previously on Figure 4, portions of all of these CMP facilities occur within the study area for the proposed Project's traffic impact analysis, with exception of Newport Boulevard. As indicated previously in Table 15, the proposed Project contributes less than 1% of projected 2016 peak hour volumes to all intersections along Coast Highway, with exception of the intersection of Newport Center Drive and Coast Highway. As indicated in Table 17, this intersection would operate at an LOS A during all study scenarios; therefore, Project traffic would not result in or contribute to the exceedance of a CMP level of service standard for Coast Highway. As indicated previously in Table 15, the proposed Project contributes less than 1% of projected 2016 peak hour volumes to all intersections along MacArthur Boulevard, with exception of the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills. As indicated in Table 17, this intersection would operate at an LOS D or better during all study scenarios; therefore, Project traffic would not result in or contribute to the exceedance of a CMP level of service standard for MacArthur Boulevard. As indicated previously in Table 15, the proposed Project contributes less than 1% of projected 2016 peak hour volumes to the intersections of Jamboree Boulevard at both Coast Highway and Ford /Eastbluff, but contributes more than 1% to the intersections with San Joaquin Hills and Santa Barbara. As indicated in Table 17, the intersection of jamboree at San Joaquin Hills would operate at LOS D or better during all study scenarios, while the intersection of Jamboree at Santa Barbara would operate at LOS B or better during all study scenarios; therefore, Project traffic would not result in or contribute to the exceedance of a CMP level of service standard for MacArthur Boulevard. Impacts to CMP facilities associated with buildout of the General Plan were evaluated in the General Plan EIR, which concluded that such impacts would be less than significant since all such facilities would 87 Orange County Transportation Authority (2011). 2011 Orange County Congestion Management Program, Page 5. Available on -line at http: / /www.octa.net/pdf /201 I- CMP.pddf. Accessed May 18, 2012. ' Ibid, Figure 2 (201 1 Congestion Management Program Highway System). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -78 CC VISO Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 operate at LOS E or better.89 Because the proposed Project would not cause any new impacts to CMP facilities, and because the General Plan EIR concluded that buildout of the General Plan also would not impact any CMP facilities, the proposed Project would not exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks As indicated under the discussion and analysis of the AELUP for the JWA in Section 4.3.8, the proposed Project would have no potential to penetrate the FAA FAR Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface. If future buildings proposed in San Joaquin Plaza protrude into the FAA FAR Part 77 notification surface, then notification to the FAA would be required; however, this would not result in a significant impact to air traffic patterns since the buildings would be well below the Part 77 Obstruction Imaginary Surface. There are no other components of the proposed Project that would have the potential to affect air traffic patterns in a manner that would result in substantial safety risks; accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g, sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g, farm equipment) Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in or require any design features that could pose a significant hazard to the public. The proposed Project site is currently surrounded by fully improved roadways, and would not require any improvements or expansions to the existing roadway network. Future access points serving on -site multi - family residential units would be subject to review by the City's Transportation and Development Services Division for compliance with Municipal Code standards related to intersection safety and traffic control. Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to substantially increase any hazards due to a design feature, such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections. The proposed Project would consist of increasing the allowable residential development intensity in Newport Center, which is a mixed -use development that includes commercial, office, public facilities, and residential uses under existing conditions. The potential future addition of new multi - family residential units would not represent an incompatible use that could increase safety hazards in the area. Accordingly, safety impacts would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in inadequate emergency access The proposed Project would not result in any changes to existing access routes providing emergency services to the Project site or surrounding area. Future applications for development within the San Joaquin Plaza in accordance with the amended NNCPC Development Plan would be subject to review by the NBFD for compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 9.04 (Fire Code), thereby ensuring that ' General Plan EIR, Page 4.13 -42. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -79 CC VI S-1 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 future development provides for adequate emergency access routes. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Result in inadequate parking capacity Future plans for development within the San Joaquin Plaza pursuant to the proposed Project would be subject to the parking requirements of the NNCPC, which establishes requirements for off - street parking spaces associated with new development. All future development plans would be required to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the NNCPC. Accordingly, a significant impact related to inadequate parking capacity would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks) The General Plan incorporates a number of policies related to alternative transportation modes, transportation systems management, and transportation demand management, including the following policies that are applicable to the proposed Project: Policy CE 4.1.4 (Land Use Densities Supporting Public Transit); Policies CE 5.1.1 through CE 5.1.12 (Trail System, Pedestrian Connectivity, Pedestrian Improvements in New Development Projects, Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods, Bikeway System, Bicycle Supporting Facilities, Bicycle Safety, Bicycle Conflicts with Vehicles and Pedestrians, Integrated Bicycle Improvements, Bicycle Trail Signage, School Access, Pedestrian Street Crossings); Policy CE 5.1.16 (Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety); Policy CE 6. 1.1 (Traffic Signals); and Policies CE 6.2.1 through CE 6.2.3 (Alternative Transportation Modes, Support Facilities for Alternative Modes, Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes). The proposed Project consists of a proposal to assign 15 previously un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza, and to convert 79 previously un- built hotel units to residential units which would be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. As such, although the Project would not conflict with any of these policies, a review for consistency with alternative transportation policies would be conducted by the City in association with precise development plans (e.g., site plans, building permits, etc.), if and when a specific development proposal for residential use in San Joaquin Plaza is submitted to the City Newport Beach for review and consideration. The only policy listed above that is directly applicable to the currently proposed Project is Policy CE 4.1.4, which encourages the provision of residential densities that support public transit. The proposed Project would result in an increase in the residential density allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, and would thereby be consistent with Policy CE 4.1.4. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -80 CC 1/132 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project would be consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that traffic impacts related to intersections, Congestion Management Plan arterials, air traffic patterns, design hazards, emergency access, and parking would be less than significant with mitigation. No feasible mitigation has been identified in the General Plan EIR to reduce impacts to freeway mainlines and ramps; this impact remains significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section IS] 62 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to transportation and traffic. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to transportation and traffic, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section I S 162. 4.3.16 Utilities and Service Systems The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states: "For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on [utilities and services systems] if it would result in any of the following: • Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of water supply facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts • Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed • Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board • Require or result in the construction /expansion of wastewater treatment facilities or recycled water conveyance systems that could cause significant environmental effects • Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs • Fail to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste • Require or result in the construction of new energy production and /or transmission facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects • Require or result in the construction of new natural gas production or transmission facilities, the construction of which could cause a significant environmental impact" No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Utility and service system impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -81 CC 1/133 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Summary Analysis Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of water supply facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed The water demand for development in the City of Newport Beach, including development within Newport Center and the NNCPC, is included in the water demand forecasts for the City as identified in the City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and within the planning documents of water districts, authorities, and agencies that directly or indirectly supply and /or manage the City's water supplies, including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). As such, water demand and supply evaluations conducted by Metropolitan, MWDOC, OCWD, as well as the City of Newport Beach itself are directly applicable to the proposed Project. The General Plan EIR relied on water management plans in effect at the time the General Plan EIR was certified (2006), but because updated information is now available in the form of revised Urban Water Management Plans, that updated information is used as the basis of analysis in this EIR Addendum. A Water Supply Assessment was prepared for the proposed Project, which is included as Appendix E. The Assessment determined that increasing the permitted residential development intensity in San Joaquin Plaza would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY (refer to Technical Appendix E for a detailed discussion of the increased water demand that would result from Project implementation). Based on the information contained in the Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (201 1) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board Require or result in the construction /expansion of wastewater treatment facilities or recycled water conveyance systems that could cause significant environmental effects Wastewater Treatment Facilities The Project Applicant's engineering consultant, RBF Consulting, conducted an analysis of existing localized sewer facilities that would serve the proposed Project site with implementation of the proposed Project. A copy of this analysis is provided as Technical Appendix F. The results of this analysis conclude that the addition of 94 residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza would equate to approximately 15 percent of the most constrained pipe segment capacity within the existing sewer system proximate to the proposed Project. Since the subject segment of the sewer system serves only NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach /� /� Page 4 -8`2 lilt 1Aff 134 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 the subject site and the existing Orange County Museum of Art, RBF Consulting concludes that there is adequate capacity within the most capacity constrained portion of the existing sewer system in the vicinity of the Project to serve the additional units. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not require or result in the construction or expansion of any localized sewer conveyance infrastructure, and a significant environmental effect would not occur. Wastewater generated by the proposed Project would be conveyed via the City of Newport Beach's existing collection system, and would be conveyed via existing pump stations to the OCSD's Plant No. 2 for treatment. Using the wastewater generation rates provided in General Plan EIR Table 4.14 -12 for multi - family residential uses, the 79 additional multi - family residential units that would be permitted within the NNCPC (beyond those already assumed by the General Plan EIR) would generate approximately 16,827 gallons of wastewater per day. The 79 hotel units that would no longer be constructed (but that were assumed in the General Plan EIR) would generate 11,850 gallons per day. Therefore, with implementation of the proposed Project, total wastewater generated within the City of Newport Beach's wastewater service area would increase by 4,977 gallons per day as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR. Treatment Plant No. 2 maintains a design capacity of 276 million gallons per day (mgd), and treated an average flow of 153 mgd as of 2003 (55% of total design capacity) 90 As concluded in the General Plan EIR, if "...the entire City's sewage were directed to Treatment Plant No. 2, its average flow would increase to approximately 157 mgd, an increase of 2.8 percent, and the plant would operate at 57 percent of its design capacity. "91 With an additional increase of 4,977 gallons per day (or 0.005 mgd), Treatment Plant No. 2 would continue to operate at approximately 57 percent of its design capacity. Accordingly, and similar to the conclusion reached in the General Plan EIR, because the increase in wastewater generation that would result from implementation of the proposed Project can be accommodated within the existing treatment infrastructure, expansion would not be required. As such, the proposed Project would not require or result in the construction /expansion of wastewater treatment that could cause significant environmental effects. Wastewater that would be treated by the OCSD would be required to be treated in accordance with federal, state, and regional requirements for water quality prior to being discharged into the Pacific Ocean. The incremental increase in wastewater generated by the proposed Project would not inhibit the ability of the OCSD to achieve required water quality objectives. Accordingly, a significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts related to wastewater treatment or facilities, or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact related to wastewater facilities, as compared to what was previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Recycled Water Conveyance Systems The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed site that contains ornamental landscaping. With implementation of the proposed Project, the amount of area devoted to ornamental landscaping would not change substantially from existing conditions. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in the demand for recycled water, nor would it require the construction of any new recycled water conveyance systems. Furthermore, and as concluded in the General Plan EIR, if "...expansion or creation of new recycled water infrastructure is necessary, further w Ibid, Page 4.14 -23 91 Ibid, Page 4.14 -32 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -83 CC VIS5 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 environmental review would be required when specific details are known regarding the infrastructure. "92 Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not require or result in the construction /expansion of recycled water conveyance systems that could cause significant environmental effects. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts related to recycled water conveyance infrastructure, or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact related to recycled water conveyance infrastructure, as compared to what was previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs Fail to comply with applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste Based on the solid waste generation rates presented in General Plan EIR Table 4.14 -14 for multi - family residential uses (MFR), the 79 additional units that would be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza as part of the proposed Project would result in the generation of approximately 506.39 pounds per day of solid waste. The 79 hotel units that would no longer be constructed (but that were assumed in the General Plan EIR) would generate approximately 197.5 pounds per day of solid waste. Therefore, with implementation of the proposed Project, the total amount of solid waste generated within the City of Newport Beach would increase by 308.89 pounds per day as compared to what was assumed in the General Plan EIR. The analysis contained in the General Plan EIR concluded that buildout under the General Plan would result in a future generation of 21,659.10 tons of solid waste per year, while the remaining capacity of the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill (prior to the proposed expansion) was 44.6 million tons. Furthermore, the solid waste generation rates presented in General Plan EIR do not take into consideration Assembly Bill (AB) 939 mandates to divert a minimum of 50% of solid waste from landfil15.93 The projected increase of 308.89 pounds per day associated with the proposed Project, which would represent 0.26% of the City's total daily solid waste generation, would not exceed the planned capacity of any regional landfill facilities on a direct or cumulative basis. Accordingly, a significant direct impact to permitted landfill capacity would not occur with implementation of the proposed Project. However, buildout under the General Plan, when considered in the context of cumulative development within the region, would incrementally contribute to the ultimate need for new or expanded landfills, which the General Plan EIR identifies as a significant and unavoidable impact. Consistent with the finding of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would contribute to this significant and unavoidable impact. However, the increase in solid waste attributable to the proposed Project would not represent a substantial increase in the severity of the City's unavoidable cumulative impact to solid waste, considering the annual increase in solid waste attributable to the proposed Project would represent only 0.00013% of the remaining capacity at the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill. Public Resources Code §40000 et seq, requires that local jurisdictions divert at least 50 percent of all solid waste generated. The City of Newport Beach consistently meets the objective of Public Resources Code §40000 et seq.94 In addition, the proposed Project would be subject to the City's Recycling Service Fee pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 2.30, which is intended to assist the City in meeting 92 Ibid, Page 4.14 -33 9' Ibid, Page 4.14 -44 941bid. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -84 GC 1/136 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 the 50 percent diversion objective. Commercial waste haulers within the City are subject to Municipal Code Section 12.63.120 (Recycling Requirement), which states, "No person providing commercial solid waste handling services or conducting a solid waste enterprise shall deposit fifty (50) percent or more of the solid waste collected by the person in the City at any landfill." Furthermore, the proposed Project would be required to comply with Municipal Code Section 20.30.120 (Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials Storage), which mandates that all multi -unit projects with five or more dwelling units "...provide enclosed refuse and recyclable material storage areas with solid roofs." Accordingly, the proposed Project would be fully compliant with all applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, and significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Require or result in the construction of new energy production and /or transmission facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects As indicated previously, implementation of the proposed Project would result in a net increase of 79 multi - family residential dwelling units and a net decrease of 79 hotel units within the City, indicating that the proposed Project would result in only a slight incremental increase in the amount of electricity consumed within the City. As indicated in the General Plan EIR, all land uses within the City would be subject to compliance with Title 24 energy efficiency standards. Development within the City also would be subject to General Plan Goal NR 24. 1, which requires increased efficiency in private developments. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, mandatory compliance with current Title 24 energy efficiency standards and adherence to General Plan Goal NR 24.1 would ensure that no impacts related to electricity supply occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Would the project require or result in the construction of new natural gas production or transmission facilities, the construction of which could cause a significant environmental impact As noted in the General Plan EIR, the Southern California Gas Company (SCGC): "...declares itself a "reactive" utility and will provide natural gas as customers request its services. SCGC has also indicated that an adequate supply of natural gas is currently available to serve additional development, and that the natural gas level of service provided to the City would not be impaired by buildout under the proposed General Plan Update. Any expansion of service necessitated by implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would be in accordance with SCGC's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual agreements are made. "95 Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not exceed available or planned supplies of natural gas, and new or upgraded natural gas infrastructure would not be needed to serve the proposed Project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 95 lbid, Page 4.14 -50. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -85 CC 1 /i3 j Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Mitigation Program Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future development in the San Joaquin Plaza. Level of Significance After Mitigation The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the General Plan EIR identifies that all utility and service system impacts can be mitigated to a level of, less than significant with the exception of cumulative impacts to landfill capacity; this impact remains significant and unavoidable. Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to utilities and service systems. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to utilities and service systems, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -86 CC 1/138 Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2 5.0 References Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (2008). Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. April 17, 2008. (Available on -line at: htto: / /www.ocair.com/ commissions /aluc/ docs /[WA_AELUP- April- 17- 2008.pd Accessed May 17, 2012). Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (2007). City of Newport Beach: Request for Consideration of Proposed Planned Community Zoning Amendment. November 15, 2007. (Available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663). California Department of Conservation, 2012. Orange County Important Farmland 2010. (Available on- line at: ftp: / /fti).consrv.ca.eov /pub /dlrp /FMMP /pdf /2010 /ora 10.pd Accessed May 10, 2012.) Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development Y. City of Chula Vista, 197 Cal. App. 4th 327 (2011). Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego, 196 Cal. App. 4th 515 (2011).. EIP Associates (2006). City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Draft Environmental Impact Report ( "General Plan EIR'). April 21, 2006. (Available on -line at: htto: / /www.newportbeachca .gov /index.aspx ?pate =196. Accessed June 6, 2012). Federal Emergency Management Agency (2009). FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06059C0382J. December 3, 2009. (Available on -line at www.fema.eov. Accessed May 16, 2012). Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. (2011). City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2011. (Available on -line at: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid= 10 182. Accessed June 5, 2012). National Climate Program Act. 15 U.S.C. § 2901 (2000). Newport Beach, City of (2012). Newport Beach Municipal Code. As amended through April 10, 2012. (Available for review online at: htto:// www. codepublishiniz.com /CA/NewportBeach /. Accessed June 4, 2012). Newport Beach, City of (2011). North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan (and Design Regulations). As amended on May 24, 2011. (Available on -line for review at: htto: / /www.newportbeachca. gov/ PLN /MAP_DOCUMENTS /PC_TEXT /PC_56 North Newport Center.pdf. Accessed June 5, 2012). Newport Beach, City of (2007). Addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report. November 2007. (Available for review at: City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5 -1 cc J_/-S9 No O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Newport Beach, City of (2006). City of Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan'). Adopted July 25, 2006. (Available on -line at: http: / /www.newportbeachca .gov /index.aspx ?pave =173. Accessed June S, 2012). Newport Beach Fire Department (2011). City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan. (Available On -line at: http: / /www.newportbeachca. gov / Modules /ShowDocument.aspx ?documentid= 11179. Accessed June S, 2012). Orange County Transportation Authority (2011). 2011 Orange County Congestion Management Program. (Available on -line at http: / /www.octa.netlpdf /201 I- CMP.pd Accessed May 18, 2012). RBF Consulting (2012). North Newport Center Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increased Allocation of Residential Development. May 10, 2012. (Technical Appendix F). Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (2012a). North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis. May 16, 2012. (Technical Appendix D). Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (2012b). San Joaquin Plaza —Trip Generation Comparison. May 16, 2012. (Available for review at: City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663). T &B Planning, Inc. (2012). Water Supply Assessment - North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions. May 17, 2012. (Technical Appendix E). Urban Crossroads, Inc. (2012a). North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis. May 29, 2012. (Technical Appendix A). Urban Crossroads, Inc. (2012b). North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis. May 29, 2012. (Technical Appendix B). Urban Crossroads, Inc. (2012c). North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis. May 29, 2012. (Technical Appendix C). NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5 -2 CC 1/1-40 ME ■ ❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No, 2 6.0 Persons Contributing to Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Preparation 6.1 Persons Contributing to Initial Study /Addendum Preparation City of Newport Beach (Lead Agencyl James W. Campbell, Principal Planner, Community Development Department Planning Division Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner, Community Development Department Planning Division T &B Planning. Inc. (Primary CEQA Consultant and Water Supply Assessment Preparer) Tracy Zinn, AICP, Principal Jeramey Harding, AICP, Project Manager Urban Crossroads. Inc. (Air Quality. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. and Noise Technical Consultant) Haseeb Qureshi, Senior Associate (Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Consultant) Bill Lawson, Principal (Noise Technical Consultant) Stantec Consulting Services. Inc. (Tragic Engineering Consultant) Joe Foust, PE, Principal Cathy Lawrence, PE, Transportation Engineer RBF Consulting (Sewer Capacity Assessment) John Nagle, PE, Senior Associate /Senior Engineer 6.2 Resumes for Key Personnel Resumes for the technical consultants responsible for preparing the Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 and /or its associated technical studies are provided on the following pages. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 6- -/1 / CC 1 1-41 A I TmcY ZINN, AICP L I_,, PRINCIPAL M A N N I N G Phone: (714) 397 -4224 E -Mail: tzinn9 ftlanning.com Tracy Zinn, AICP, joined T &B Planning in 1993 and became a Principal in 2006. She is responsible for providing quality control for a majority of the company's environmental documents, as well as preparing and managing specific plans, design guidelines, zoning ordinances, and other planning documents. Summary of Experience Project Management & Public Meeting Facilitation: Tracy takes a strong leadership role in project team meetings, represents clients at public hearings and workshops, manages coordination efforts among public agencies, and directs a staff of analysts, planners, and technical support personnel. Tracy is often looked to by T &B Planning's staff and clients, as well as government officials, to provide overall project management and bring focus to the task at hand. Tracy also is highly experienced with leading large project teams and facilitating public meetings. She is respected for keeping projects within budget and on schedule. Environmental Compliance Documents: Tracy prepares, edits, and directs the preparation of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents and supporting technical studies. Over her career, Tracy has prepared over 100 CEQA documents and has directed the preparation of several hundred technical studies for a wide range of project types, including residential, commercial, and industrial land uses, for both public and private clients. She is respected for preparing environmental documents that are easily understood, accurate, and legally defensible. Master Planning /Historic Preservation Planning /Permitting: Tracy's working knowledge of local and regional planning issues, design standards, zoning laws, and public policies are invaluable, She has processed hundreds of land use permits and prepared dozens of Specific Plans and zoning ordinances in Southern California, in addition to design guidelines and development standards for a variety of project types. She has also prepared several historic preservation action plans, and roadway corridor plans. Due to her experience in both planning and environmental projects, Tracy can critique a project's feasibility comprehensively, saving her clients' time and money. Design Guides: Tracy is skilled in assisting communities with managing their eco- tourism and geo- tourism assets. She has directed the preparation of several regional and local Design Guides in established communities as well as Design Guides for Specific Plans and Master Plans for new construction in Southern California. In 2008, she was recognized by the Pennsylvania Chapter of the American Planning Association for her authorship of The Pennsylvania Wilds Design Guide for Community Character Stewardship. The Urban Land Institute endorsed the Design Guide as "one of the best and most comprehensive regional design guides" and the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR) has identified the Design Guide as a model for other regional initiatives. Certifications American Institute or Certified Planners (AICP) Affiliations American Planning Association • Green Building Alliance • Indiana University of Pennsylvania Planning Department Accreditation Committee • Municipality of Murrysville Zoning Hearing Board • California Association of Environmental Professionals Education Bachelor of Science - Urban and Regional Planning, Indiana University of Pennsylvania CC 1/1.2 A I JERAMEY HARDING, AICP LI_,, SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER I I AN N I N Phone: (760) 452 -2300 E -Mail: jhardingPtbplanning.com Jeramey joined T &B Planning in 2002 and provides supervision, oversight, and management of the firm's environmental services in Southern California. He is primarily focused on ensuring project compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Serving as a Senior Project Manager, Jeramey is responsible for managing the production and review of technical studies and leading project teams in the preparation of all forms of CEQA documentation. Jeramey is a results- oriented manager with a record of successful team coordination and leadership. His problem - solving skills and technical accuracy often exceed the expectations of clients, agencies, and project applicants. Summary of Experience Project Management Jeramey effectively and efficiently manages project teams during the preparation of CEQA documents. He represents clients at public hearings and workshops and manages coordination efforts among public agencies. Jeramey is also experienced with reviewing technical reports for adequacy pursuant to local and state requirements and directs teams of technical experts to ensure projects are completed on -time and on- budget. Environmental Compliance Documents: Jeramey prepares and edits CEQA documents, including Initial Studies /Environmental Assessments (IS /ES), EIRs, Mitigated Negative Declarations (MNDs), Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs (MMRPs), CEQA legal notices, and other environmental documents for residential, commercial, industrial, mixed -use, and public facility projects for both public and private clients. Recent CEQA documents managed by Jeramey include the San Lorenzo Sewer Lift Station FIR in the City of Santa Ana, the Batiquitos Bluffs Residential Project EIR in the City of Encinitas, and the El Sobrante Landfill Expansion Supplemental FIR in the Temescal area of Riverside County. The knowledge and talent that Jeramey brings to each project results in an effective and efficient process and an environmental compliance document that is accurate and defensible. Visual Qualit and nd Liahtino Analusis. Jeramey has prepared several visual quality analyses for projects throughout Southern California. These analyses are often utilized in CEQA documents, such as EIRs, to analyze a proposed project's potential impacts to aesthetics, dark skies, and community character. This analysis addresses topics such as visual quality from surrounding public roadways and lighting issues. Planning /Entitlement Documentation: In addition to environmental compliance documentation, Jeramey prepares planning reports and processes entitlement permits for new construction. Most often, this work is performed in combination with CEQA compliance documents for the same project. He has prepared Change of Zone, Specific Plan, and General Plan Amendment applications; Specific Plans; Zoning Ordinances; and public notices. Certifications American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Affiliations • California Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) American Planning Association (APA) Building Industry Association (BIA) Education Masters in Urban Regional Planning - Eastern Washington University, 2001 Bachelor of Science in Natural Resources Planning - Natural Resources Planning /Humboldt Stale University, 1999 CC 1/1'43 Haseeb Qureshi, MES URBAN Senior Associate/ Senior Air Quality & 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Climate Change Specialist Irvine, CA 92606 ph: (949) 660.1994 Since joining Urban Crossroads in June 2004, Mr. Qureshi has worked on a Areas of Expertise variety of projects, including mobile source (cancer) health risk assessments, Air Quality Analysis /Permitting air quality impact analyses, and air quality conformity analyses for Dispersion Modeling, Health transportation improvement projects. Risk Assessment Air Quality Conformity Since 2006, Mr. Qureshi has been actively involved in responding to various Analysis for Interchange project's needs to address Global Climate Change in their CEQA Documents. Projects Mr. Qureshi co- authored an informational newsletter detailing the passage of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Assembly Bill 32 (AB32) and how it will continue to impact development Evaluation /Inventory projects. Climate Action Planning Mr. Qureshi has a strong technical background in utilizing various air - quality Education models such as the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS), the California Line M.S./EC mental ScienceIe /CS UF Source Dispersion Model (CALINE -4), U.S. EPA - approved CAL3QHC, the Industrial Source Short Term (ISCST3) Model, and the AMS /EPA Regulatory Besign/ron Irvine Analysis 8 Model (AERMOD). Design/ UC Irvine Affiliations At Urban Crossroads, Inc., Mr. Qureshi has participated in hundreds of air American Planning quality analyses studies including numerous mobile source and air toxics Association (APA) health risk assessments for various residential, commercial, and industrial Association of Environmental developments in Orange, Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Professionals(AEF) Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. He is a current member of the Air& Waste Management American Planning Association (APA), Association of Environmental Association(A &WMA) Professionals (AEP), and the Air & Waste Management Association Prof. Accomplishments (A &WMA). San Diego County Approved Consultant List —Air Quality In addition, Mr. Qureshi is an active participant of the South Coast Air Quality Certification -Air Dispersion Management District, San Diego County, and Orange County Association of Assessment—Lakes Lak Environmental Professionals working groups that are collaborating to Assessment —Lakes g 9 P 9 Environmental establish guidance on establishing climate change thresholds for CEQA Certification- AB2588 documents. Mr. Qureshi was also an active participant in the South Coast Air Regulatory Standards— Trinity Quality Management District's working group on establishing PM2.5 Consultants significance thresholds for CEQA projects. Certificate of Completion - Principles of Ambient Air Monitoring- California Air Resources Board Certificate of Completion - Planned Communities and Urban Infill – Urban Land Institute Prof. History Urban Crossroads. Inc. Sr. Associate /Sr. Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist 2007 – Present Urban Crossroads, Inc. Air Quality and Climate Change Specialist 2004 -2006 CC URBAN cwossnonos Areas of Expertise Traffic Impact Analyses Parking Analysis Transportation Planning Noise Impact Modeling & Analysis GIS Database Development Education MS119931civil & Environmental Eng. /Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo BS 11992/City & Regional Planning /Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo Prof. Registration P.E. PTP AICP INCE Affiliations Professional Transportation Planner (PTP) - Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) American Planning Association (APA) Institute of Noise Control Engineering (INCE) Prof. History Urban Crossroads, Inc. Principal 2002 - Present Senior Associate 2000 -2002 RKJK & Associates, Inc. Senior Planner 1996 -2000 Planner 1993-1996 Bill Lawson, P.E., AICP, PTP, INCE Principal During his career, Bill Lawson has developed a wide range of expertise that includes transportation planning, traffic engineering, neighborhood traffic control, and community noise impact analysis. As a founder of Urban Crossroads, Inc. he works with public and private sector clients to provide planning and engineering consulting expertise. His work efforts focus on the larger more complex technical studies or sensitive projects that increasingly require coordination with the project legal team, the applicant and the decision makers. In his current role, Mr. Lawson serves as the contract City Traffic Engineer for Rancho Santa Margarita providing guidance on complex traffic issues and presenting policy changes to ensure uniform application of the legal authority provided by the municipal code and the California Vehicle Code. Mr. Lawson is a Registered Professional Traffic Engineer ( #2537), a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP), a certified Professional Transportation Planner and an associate member of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering (INCE). His educational background includes a Master's Degree in Civic and Environmental Engineering and a Bachelor's Degree in City and Regional Planning from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. In addition to his transportation expertise, Mr. Lawson is a Certified Acoustical Engineer (INCE) and has worked on hundreds of noise studies throughout Southern California for both public and private sector clients. His work as a noise consultant focuses on helping communities identify and control noise impacts by developing meaningful solutions to complex noise issues. Mr. Lawson has served as member of the Rancho Santa Margarita Planning Advisory Committee, Cityhood executive committee member, and political action committee chairperson for Cityhood 2000. He previously served on the Ladera Ranch Maintenance Corporation (LARMAC) from 2000 through 2006, serves today as President of the Santa Margarita Water District (SMWD) Board of Directors and the Ladera Ranch Civic Council (LRCC). `i` 1/145 John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer John Nagle has practiced in the field of civil engineering for over Registration: 20 years, and he has extensive experience in planning, designing, 1991, Civil Engineer, CA, 46972 and providing construction support services for major water and 2001, Civil Engineer, NV, 14762 wastewater facilities. He has been responsible for the preparation of 2009, Civil Engineer, UT, numerous construction plans, specifications and cost estimates for 7214109 -2202 water and sewer pipelines, water pumping stations, wastewater lift 2009, Civil Engineer, AZ, 49684 stations, wells, and reservoirs. He has also prepared master plans Professional Affiliations: for both municipal and private- sector clients for potable water, 2001, State Water - Right sanitary sewer, and recycled water systems. Mr. Nagle has used his Surveyor, NV, 1101 combination of planning and design experience to prepare capital Member, American Water Works improvement programs, condition assessment studies, engineering Years of Experience: 25 feasibility studies, and connection fee and utility rate studies. The Member, American Public Works following summarizes Mr. Nagle's specific project experience: Education: LACCD Sewer System Management Plans (Los Angeles, CA) 2010 - Senior Project Engineer for preparation of the Sewer System Management Plans for the Los Angeles Community Colleges District's nine campuses. The State of California recently added legislation to the General Waste Discharge Requirements requiring all wastewater collection system operators (of collection systems greater than one mile) in the form of sanitary sewer order no. 2006- 0003. The studies included condition assessment using Closed - Circuit Television (CCTV) inspection and hydraulic model analysis using computer simulation techniques to ensure capacity for future campus expansion. The CCTV inspections documented the internal condition of each sewer pipeline televised, and this information was used to develop rehabilitation and replacement CC I/1— 1 ✓ MF CC NSUITING A �_ Company B.S., 1987, Civil Engineering, Loyola Marymount University RELEVANT EXPERIENCE: M.S., 1996, Civil Engineering, Rio Vista Valve #2 Vault Modifications (Santa Clarita, CA) Loyola Marymount University 2011 - Project Manager. The Rio Vista Valve #2 (RV -2) is a 72- inch diameter butterfly valve, owned and operated by CLWA, Professional Affiliations: located on the primary transmission main. CLWA determined that American Society of Civil after approximately 15 years in service, the valve needed to be Engineers (ASCE) replaced because the valve seat was damaged and the valve did not Member, American Water Works fully seal. CLWA also needed to identify the probable cause of the Association damage to the valve to prevent the damage from reoccurring. RBF Member, American Public Works conducted a detailed analysis of existing conditions and operational Association data, including various site investigations and a detailed system Member, National Society of hydraulic analysis to determine the cause of damage to the valve; Professional Engineers identified and evaluated project alternatives for replacing the 72- Member, Orange County Water inch diameter valve, including different types of valves; and Association recommended facility improvements (e.g. modifications and/or replacement of equipment), as well as operational modifications to ensure that the valve is not damaged again. LACCD Sewer System Management Plans (Los Angeles, CA) 2010 - Senior Project Engineer for preparation of the Sewer System Management Plans for the Los Angeles Community Colleges District's nine campuses. The State of California recently added legislation to the General Waste Discharge Requirements requiring all wastewater collection system operators (of collection systems greater than one mile) in the form of sanitary sewer order no. 2006- 0003. The studies included condition assessment using Closed - Circuit Television (CCTV) inspection and hydraulic model analysis using computer simulation techniques to ensure capacity for future campus expansion. The CCTV inspections documented the internal condition of each sewer pipeline televised, and this information was used to develop rehabilitation and replacement CC I/1— 1 ✓ MF CC NSUITING A �_ Company John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer plans. Other particulars, such as sewer overflow response plans, legal authority, and chains of communication were also identified to cover the requirements of the order. Southwest District Pipeline Replacement Projects (Gardena, Hawthorne and Inglewood, CA) - Project Manager for Imperial Highway and Prairie Avenue pipelines. As part of the implementation of Golden State Water Company's capital improvement program, GSWC contracted with RBF to provide professional engineering services for their Southwest District Pipeline Replacement Project. The project includes pipeline replacements in four separate areas. Work completed as part of this project included extensive utility research and field investigation to confirm locations of existing service connections and other appurtenances, preparation of final construction drawings, coordination with the Department of Health Services for utility waivers, and coordination with Caltrans for encroachment permits as required for the temporary closure of connector ramps to I -105. Recycled Water System Tank Siting Study (Santa Clarita, CA) - Project Manager. The Castaic Lake Water Agency (CLWA) owns a 5.5 -acre hillside site where they proposed to construct two projects: 3.5 MG of recycled water storage, and a large array of solar panels. With the solar project moving forward first, CLWA contracted with RBF to prepare a siting study so the land required to construct the tanks could be reserved. RBF considered two alternative tank configurations (I - 3.5 MG tank; and 2 - 1.75 MG tanks), developed preliminary site and grading plans, and prepared preliminary cost estimates. In addition, RBF coordinated a geotechnical field investigation to determine remedial grading and slope setback requirements. Whittier Pumping Plant No. 2 Replacement Project (Pico Rivera, CA) - Project Manager. RBF was contracted to provide engineering, surveying, and construction phase services to the Whittier Utility Authority (WUA) for the replacement of its Pumping Plant No. 2, which provides 100% of the potable water supply to WUA's 48,000 customers. Extensive preliminary engineering studies were completed, including: comprehensive hydraulic analyses of the supply and distribution systems; evaluation of pump station operations and control schemes; life -cycle cost analyses for alternative configurations of pumps, primary power, and backup power; project phasing to ensure the existing facility remains in operations throughout construction; and evaluation of remedial soil treatment alternatives to mitigate potential liquefaction to depths of 30 feet below grade. Final design is underway, and upon completion, the new facility will include: an 18.9 MGD Pumping Station (with 17,500 gpm capacity to enable WUA to pump during off -peak periods); two 2.2 MG reservoirs; a new 6,400 s.f. pump building, including office space for operations personnel. Cook -Riolo Tank and Booster Station (Sacramento County, CA) — QA / QC. This project included design of a 2.75 -MG potable prestressed concrete water storage tank and 3,500 -gpm booster station. Orangethorpe Transmission Main (Anaheim /Placentia, CA) 2009 - Project Manager. RBF is providing professional engineering and surveying services to Golden State Water Company for the design and construction of approximately 6,500 LF of 16" DIP pipeline, in the cities of Placentia and Anaheim. This pipeline will provide a connection between GSWC's Placentia and Yorba Linda Service Areas, and will include three pressure regulating stations. The scope of services includes extensive utility research, topographic survey and right -of -way verification, preparation of PS &E's, and traffic control plans. The project also requires coordination with the Orange County Flood Control District for crossing of the Atwood Channel, and coordination with Orange County Transportation Agency for the future grade separation project at Lakeview Avenue. MF CC NSUITING N � Company CC I/I4 j John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer LVVWD C1244 - Frias 2635 Zone Reservoir and 2745 Zone Pumping Station (Clark County, NV) 2007 to Present - Project Manager. RBF is currently contracted to provide engineering, surveying, and construction phase services to Las Vegas Valley Water District for the design of the Frias 2635 Zone Reservoir and 2745 Zone Pumping Station. The major project elements include: a 30 million gallon (MG) buried, reinforced concrete reservoir; a 53 MGD pumping station (expandable to 106 MGD); pumping station building and buried wetwell (forebay) design; yard piping and valves ranging from 42 -inch to 90- inch in diameter; disinfection facilities; associated electrical and instrumentation & control system design; and off -site street improvements on Cactus Avenue. The project required extensive coordination with Clark County, the Bureau of Land Management, the Mountains Edge Master Planned Community, NV Energy, and the Clark County Regional Flood Control District. SNWA 190 -A Horizon Ridge Reservoir Expansion (Henderson, NV) 2003 - 2005 - Project Manager. RBF Consulting provided engineering services to Southern Nevada Water Authority for the expansion of their existing Horizon Ridge Reservoir Facility. The Project included a 10 MG buried, cast -in- place, reinforced concrete reservoir, and associated inlet, outlet, overflow and drain piping. Other project elements include 42 -inch and 60 -inch valves and valve vaults, telemetry system modifications, chlorine sampling and washdown system modifications and piping, and all related electrical and instrumentation & control works. RBF also completed a stray current analysis for the site, which is located next to a NV Energy substation. Northeast Interceptor Gravity Sewer (Las Vegas, NV) 2008 - 2009 — QA / QC Manager. RBF, as a subconsultant, is currently providing preliminary engineering and surveying services to the City of North Las Vegas for the Northeast Interceptor, an influent gravity sewer to the City's Water Reclamation Facility (WRF). The major project elements include extensive research of existing utilities, a Route Study of alignment options from North Las Vegas to the WRF site on Nellis Air Force Base, a hydraulic analysis to determine sewer pipeline size requirements, and an opinion of probable construction costs for each alignment alternative. Aerial topography, surveying and right -of -way research will be performed for the chosen alignment to produce base maps. The preferred alignment will be further detailed to 30% construction drawings. SNWA 3401 - McCullough Lateral Project (Clark County, NV) 2007 - Deputy Project Manager in charge of reservoirs, cathodic protection, and environmental support. As a subconsultant, RBF provided professional engineering and environmental services for the planning and preliminary design of the McCullough Lateral (MCL) Project in Clark County, Nevada. The MCL Project is a proposed 407 million gallon per day (MGD) water transmission system, which will serve the southerly portion of the Las Vegas Valley. Facilities include a 407 MGD pumping station, a Regulating Reservoir, Rate of Flow Control Stations, and approximately 25 miles of transmission main ranging from 72- inches to 120 - inches in diameter. RBF's responsibilities included planning & predesign of the reservoir facilities and cathodic protection analysis and environmental support services for the entire project. Wigwam / US -95 24 -inch 2120 PZ Main and PRV (Henderson, NV) 2008 - 2009 — QA / QC Manager. RBF Consulting is providing professional engineering and surveying services for the design and construction of 1,700 LF of 24 -inch DIP pipeline and a 10,000 gpm PRV Station, which will supply water to the City's 2007 pressure zone. Project elements include: a cut -in 30- inchx24 -inch Tee at Wigwam Avenue; construction of 24 -inch pipeline beneath a US -95 overpass and across the Pitman Channel to Eastgate Road, while parallel to an active Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way. The construction MFNSUITING CC/ John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer documents included alternative designs for the PRY station. Extensive agency coordination was required with UPRR, NDOT, NV Energy, Basic Management Incorporated (BMI), and BMI's industrial tenants. In -State Groundwater Development Project (Clark, Lincoln, White Pine Counties, NV) 2004 - 2005 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional surveying services to the Southern Nevada Water Authority to establish a Geodetic Control Network for the In -State Water Resources Development Project. The project covered an area approximately 250 miles long from Northern Clark County across Lincoln County and extending into White Pine County. The specific project requirements included mobilization of field survey personnel over unfamiliar locations and terrain in order to establish control monuments along the proposed Corridors / Springs by way of GPS Static Surveys. The data was processed, tied and adjusted to the Continuous Operating Reference Station (CORS) monuments. A 17 -page Record -of -Survey was prepared and recorded by RBF to memorialize all of the various components of this extensive ground survey. This Geodetic Control Network is being utilized for the current planning and design phases of the SNWA In -State Groundwater Project. SNWA 340 -C Hacienda Pumping Station On -site Improvements (Clark County, NV) 2005 - 2007 - Project Manager. RBF provided engineering services and construction phase assistance to SNWA for this project. Preliminary and final design services included: an expanded plant telephone system; anew compressed air piping system (with nine 3 /a-inch service drops located on all three levels of the pumping station); on -site drainage improvements; sub -drain and sump pump installation; grading and soil compaction for a new on -site substation; an 8 -foot high perimeter block wall, and on -site retaining walls; property boundary verification; preparation of 22 legal descriptions and exhibits for wall easements and construction easements; technical support for coordination with 11 adjacent property owners and attendance at Town Board and Clark County Planning Commission meetings; and construction phase services. MacDonald Highlands Potable Water Master Plan Update (Henderson, NV) 2008 - 2009 - QA / QC Manager. The Master Plan Update addresses development changes within MacDonald Highlands since the previously prepared Utility Master Plan. MacDonald Highlands is a Master Planned community consisting of multi- family, and single- family development parcels. RBF developed projections for potable water demands and also completed an extensive analysis of the potable water system and water age with in the master plan development. The WaterCAD software was used to model the on -site distribution system. An extended period simulation was performed to evaluate water age concerns. The Canyons Utility Master Plan Update (Henderson, NV) 2006 - Project Manager. RBF prepared a comprehensive potable water and sewer master plan update for this 632 -acre Master Planned community consisting of commercial, multi - family, and single - family development parcels. RBF developed water and wastewater projections for the development and identified the on -site and off -site utility infrastructure requirements for the development. The project included extensive analysis of the City's off -site water and wastewater infrastructure. Hydraulic models were developed for the City's 2630 potable water pressure zone, the Horizon Ridge Parkway Trunk Sewer System, and the Green Valley Parkway Trunk Sewer System. The analyses included research and investigation of undeveloped parcels, development of water and wastewater generation projections, and analysis of multiple development scenarios to determine off -site system capacity constraints. RBF worked with the City of Henderson Department of Utility Services and the Project WF CC NSUITING CC i/14 9 �_mmpno John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Developer to identify the off -site utility upgrades that would most improve the City's ability to serve this development area. LVVWD C1106 - Montessouri 2745 Zone Pumping Station Discharge Pipeline (Clark County, NV) 2005 - 2006 - Project Manager. This project for the Las Vegas Valley Water District included: the design of approximately 4,800 LF of 42 -inch CML &C welded steel pipe; cut -in of a 42 -inch x 42 -inch tee connection at the intersection of Buffalo Drive and Badura Avenue; two 42 -inch diameter in -line valves and valve vaults; a 4,900 gpm temporary pressure reducing station located on the property of Sierra Vista High School; and all appurtenant facilities. Additional work included: aerial topographic survey; right -of- way coordination; preparation of legal descriptions and exhibits for 14 pipeline and construction easements; corrosion engineering; and scour analyses at drainage channels crossing the pipeline alignment. LVVWD C1012 - Charleston Heights 2420 Zone Pump Station Discharge Pipeline (Las Vegas, NV) 2002 - 2003 - Project Manager. RBF provided engineering services to Las Vegas Valley Water District for design of approximately 7,000 LF of 20 -inch diameter domestic water main. Services included: preparation of construction drawings, specifications, and cost estimates; coordination with the City of Las Vegas for bore and jack crossing of Decatur Boulevard; scheduling coordination with the Nevada Department of Transportation for a nearby freeway improvement project; and alignment and scheduling coordination to minimize impacts with local businesses, including a regional shopping mall. LVVWD C1198 - Multi -Site Surge Tank Upgrades (Las Vegas, NV) 2007 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering services to evaluate nine pumping stations at five LVVWD sites (Gowan, Underhill, Rice, Ronzone, and Grand Canyon). RBF's Team conducted a pressure surge analysis of each pumping station and provided recommendations for required improvements to convert from manual to automated surge control systems. Included in the scope of services were site visits, review of record and shop drawings to verify the accuracy of existing information, and review and verification of LVVWD's hydraulic model data, which was used in the surge analysis. R -28 Reservoir, P -27 Pumping Station and PRV Stations 123,124, and 125 (Henderson, NV) 2009 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering, surveying, mapping, and construction phase services for the design of a potable water pumping station, reservoir, and associated inlet/outlet transmission main to serve the 2760 and 2630 Pressure Zones within Planning Areas 13 and 20 in MacDonald Highlands, in the City of Henderson. The project elements include: a 600,000 - gallon prestressed concrete reservoir; a 24 R x 50 R pump building; disinfection facilities; installation of a mechanical mixing system and automated sampling system in the existing R -27 Reservoir; three pressure reducing stations; and 2,600 LF of 16 -inch DIP inlet outlet pipeline; and hillside grading for the reservoir site and access road. LVVWD Pipeline Failure Analysis and Root Cause Training (Las Vegas, NV) 2005 - 2008 - Project Manager. RBF provided consulting services to Las Vegas Valley Water District to develop a Pipeline Failure Root Cause Training Program, and conduct training sessions for the District's Distribution System staff. In addition to developing the training program, other services included: Forensic engineering services on an "as- requested" basis. These services included field investigations of pipeline failures, collection and testing of pipe material and soil samples, preparation of field investigation reports, and the preparation of an annual summary report. WF CC NSUITING CC 1/1150 omo,, John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Conducting a pressure monitoring study on portions of the District's distribution system. The purpose of the study was to investigate whether there is a correlation between cyclical pressure transients and asbestos cement (AC) pipeline failures. Coastal Water Project (Monterey County, CA) 2007 - Project Engineer, Mr. Nagle performed alignment studies and extensive analysis of potential alternative alignments for 24 miles of pipeline in connection with the CWT. The overall project consists of a 10 million- gallon per day Desalination Plant near the Moss Landing Power Plant, conveyance pipelines, Aquifer Storage and Recovery facilities, and related facilities. This $200 million project will include two booster stations, 24 miles of pipelines, and two reservoirs. A significant portion of the 36 -inch diameter conveyance pipeline will be constructed along the former Southern Pacific Railroad alignment that was acquired by the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC). WS -1 and WS -2 Wellhead Improvements (Apex, NV) 2005 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional civil and electrical engineering services for the equipping of two raw water /fire flow supply wells (WS -1 and WS -2) and Duke Energy facility near Apex, Nevada. This project included an analysis of different alternatives of equipping the wells to meet project objectives, including the use of variable frequency drive motors versus motor operated control valves. The project also includes the design of the pump controls and instrumentation. Ivanpah Airport Utility Planning Study (Primm, NV) 2006 - Project Manager. RBF, as a subconsultant, provided utility planning and right -of -way investigation services to the Clark County Department of Aviation, for the proposed Ivanpah Valley Airport (IVP) near Primm, Nevada. RBF's Water Resources Department identified the IVP infrastructure requirements for potable water supply and transmission, wastewater collection and treatment, recycled water, and jet fuel delivery systems for this site. Planning for the requisite wet utility infrastructure required incorporating data from and basing calculations upon IVP activity projections summarized in the 2004 Conceptual Airport Layout Plan Validation Report. Local agency facility planning projections and recommendations, as well as national existing airport activity, utility and facility capacity requirement research all provided the framework for RBF's design. Comprehensive services were provided for right -of -way research to determine facility easement requirements, capital cost estimates, and development of a facility implementation plan. Extensive communication and coordination efforts were required with local agencies (including the Southern Nevada Water Authority, Las Vegas Valley Water District, Clark County Department of Aviation, Clark County Water Reclamation District, NV Energy, and Kinder Morgan). EM -21 Turnout Facility and 1305 Zone Pipeline Improvements (Temecula, CA) 2006 - 2008 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering and surveying services to the Rancho California Water District for construction of a new 80 cfs turnout facility from San Diego Pipeline No. 6 - a Metropolitan Water District of Southern California facility. As part of the turnout facility design, RBF provided electrical and instrumentation design, structural design, surge analysis, and operational evaluation. The project also included the conversion of 31,000 LF of existing 48" diameter raw water supply pipeline to a potable water transmission main, abandonment of RCWD's existing EM -19 Turnout Facility, design of 6,300 LF of new 48" diameter transmission main in Ynez Road, 1,400 LF of 36" transmission main in Butterfield Stage Road, and 1,500 LF of 24" transmission main in Margarita Road and La Paz Roads. MF CC NSUITING CG 1/ -1151 ,Zy7�Campany John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer EM -20 Turnout and Transmission Main (Riverside County, CA) 1999 - Project Engineer. Design engineering services for approximately 20,000 lineal feet of 54 -inch diameter welded steel pipeline and 100 -cfs turnout from MWD aqueduct. The project will supplement its treated imported water supply by bringing an additional 100 -cfs capacity to its service area in southwestern Riverside County. El Segundo Mitigation Monitoring Program (El Segundo, CA) 1995 - 2000 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional consulting services for the City of El Segundo's Mitigation Monitoring Program of the City of Los Angeles' Hyperion Wastewater Treatment Plant to full secondary treatment. During this project, RBF's duties included: 1) Coordinating and moderating a monthly community meeting between Hyperion staff and neighboring residents; 2) Maintaining a 24 -hour "hotline" to receive, document, and respond to complaints related to odor, light, and noise impacts during Hyperion Secondary Treatment Expansion Project; 3) Periodic site visits to monitor mitigation measures implemented at the Hyperion W WTP, including conducting complaint follow -up with Hyperion staff. Sea Launch Home Port Facility - Sewer Rehabilitation (Port of Long Beach, CA) 1998 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional design and construction inspection services to The Austin Company, the design/build contractor for the project site owned by the Boeing Company. The project included rehabilitation of the on -site gravity sewer collection system consisting of the following: closed circuit television inspection of sewer pipelines; verification of sewer hydraulic capacity; on -site pipeline rehabilitation using cured -in -place pipe (CIPP) lining system -- 950 linear feet of 6 -inch, 400 linear feet of 8 -inch, 900 linear feet of 12 -inch, 350 linear feet of 15 -inch; replacement of 500 linear feet of sewer 12- inch sewer beneath pier; replacement of ship -to -shore sewer connections; on -site manhole rehabilitation using air - placed concrete and polyurethane lining system; and construction inspection services. El Dorado Colonia Sanitary Sewer System Improvements (El Centro, CA) 1998 - 2000 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering services for the conversion of homes in El Dorado Colonia from private septic tank systems to the City's public sewer collection system. The project included the construction of approximately 15,000 LF of 8 -inch sanitary sewer and the extension of sewer laterals to approximately 200 residential parcels. The work for this project included utility research and the preparation of digital base maps by compiling survey data from the County of Imperial. RBF also provided professional surveying services to provide topographic data for areas not covered by the County survey and to verify the County survey data. The project also required extensive coordination with the Imperial Imgation District and the California Department of Transportation. El Dorado Colonia Potable Water System Improvements (El Centro, CA) 1997 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering and surveying services under the Corps of Engineers 219 Program. The work for this project included preparation of digital base snaps by compiling survey data from the County of Imperial. RBF also provided professional surveying services to provide topographic data for areas not covered by the County survey and to verify the County survey data. The project included the construction of 8 -inch, 10 -inch and 12 -inch potable water distribution system and the installation of water meters, and the extension of service laterals to residential parcels. The project also required extensive coordination with the Imperial Irrigation District and the California Department of Transportation. Arcadia and Sierra Madre Water Infrastructure Restoration Special Study and Final Design (Arcadia and Sierra Madre, CA) 1997 - Project Manager. Final design engineering services (PS &E) for water infrastructure restoration for the cities of Arcadia and Sierra Madre that included the following: 4.3 MG reservoir seismic rehabilitation; 1.2 MG reservoir demolition and reconstruction; new 2000 gpm well; three new 8 -inch pressure reducing stations; a water system inter -tie between cities (incl. 12 -inch pipeline); MF CC NSUITING CC 1/1152 omo,, John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer new 8 -inch pipeline; conversion of a standby engine from natural gas engine to diesel fuel at an existing pumping station; and emergency electrical generator backup power performance specifications for sewer pumping station sites. A seismic vulnerability and earthquake safety evaluation for the entire water delivery system was performed, which included pipelines, valves, pump stations, emergency generators, and reservoirs. Dyer Road Surge Analysis (Santa Ana, CA) 2000 - Project Engineer. The Dyer Road Well Field (DRWF) provides one of the two major sources of supply of potable water to the Irvine Ranch Water District's (IRWD) Zone I Central System. RBF performed a surge analysis for the Dyer Road Well Field and the Zone I Central System. The surge analysis modeled three flow scenarios for both year 2000 and year 2025 demands for a total of six different runs, and considered the implementation of future District projects, such was the Deep Aquifer Treatment System (DATS) project. These six runs used pump curve data from IRWD and correlated it with the District's WaterCAD model to determine the flow provided by the well field. The surge analysis showed that surge protection will definitely be required for year 2025 demands with addition of the DATS project. Santa Margarita Water District South County Pipeline (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a detailed analysis of alignment alternatives for the Santa Margarita Water District's South County Pipeline Project. The analysis considered over 30 alternative alignments for a regional water transmission main, and evaluated the environmental, traffic, and institutional impacts to the City of Mission Viejo. Provided overall master planning, environmental documentation, permit processing, and design of this large- diameter pipeline project. RBF prepared plans and specifications, provided construction staking and management for a major portion of this project, including over 13 miles of 66 -inch diameter pipeline, five service connections, five flow facilities, and a regulating reservoir. RBF received the 1990 California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors Grand Award of Excellence for the outstanding design and coordination efforts on the 100 million dollar construction project. Lake Mead Drive Raw Water Transmission Main (Henderson, NV) 2003 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering, surveying, and mapping services for approximately 4,000 LF of 16 -inch ductile iron pipeline constructed along Lake Mead Drive in Henderson, Nevada. The purpose of the project is to provide additional mw water transmission capacity to the Lake Las Vegas development from the City of Henderson's connection to the BMI pipeline. This project also included the design of metering facilities, pressure relief facilities, and a technical drainage study update for the extension of existing culvert crossings at Lake Mead Drive. In addition, the project required extensive coordination with the City of Henderson and NDOT for construction permitting along Lake Mead Drive. Lake Las Vegas Raw Water System Modifications (Henderson, NV) 2003 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional engineering, surveying, and mapping services for the design of approximately 3,900 LF of 16 -inch and 20 -inch raw water pipelines. The facilities are intended to increase the transmission capacity of the existing raw water delivery system, which provides irrigation and lake fill water to the Lake Las Vegas development. Also included in this project is the relocation of the Southshore R -1 pressure reducing station. RBF is responsible for the design of valving, piping and associated equipment for a new pressure reducing station, as well as the abandonment of the existing facility. Legal descriptions and exhibits for two municipal utility easements were also required for this project. Brooks Avenue Waterline Replacement (North Las Vegas, NV) 2001 - Project Manager. RBF provided professional civil engineering services for the relocation of approximately 1,600 LF of cement mortar-lined MF CC NSUITING GC 1/1 ,53 �aomnnov John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer and coated steel water main. The project required close coordination with City engineering department and operations staff to determine the best method for isolating the portion to be relocated, while maintaining the integrity of the existing connections and protecting an adjacent 36 -inch City transmission pipeline. Preston Waterline Replacement (Ione, CA) 2001 - Project Manager. Design engineering services to the State of California, Project Management Branch for approximately 16,500 LF of 10 -inch pipeline and pressure reducing station. Project responsibilities included coordination with multiple landowners for easements, resolution of conflicting record surveys, and coordination with numerous agencies, including Caltrans, the City of lone, the County of Amador, and the Amador Water Agency. Wastewater Utility Rate Study (El Centro, CA) 1997 - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a 5 -Year Wastewater Utility Rate Study for the City of El Centro. This analysis included a review of the City's operating, administrative, and debt service costs. A final rate program was developed which implemented by the City, thereby enabling the City to proceed with their proposed five year Capital Improvement Program. RBF worked closely with City's engineering and administrative staff in developing the rate study and prepared the final presentation to City Council. Steel Tank Retrofit and Seismic Stability (Irvine, CA) - Project Manager. Analysis and design of seismic retrofit for three of the District's flat - bottom, welded steel tanks ranging from 2.5 mg to 15.0 mg capacity. The tanks include: Zone 1 - 15.0 mg domestic reservoir; Zone 4 - 2.5 mg domestic reservoir; and Zone 8 - 2.5 mg domestic reservoir. The reservoirs were originally constructed between 1983 and 1985. RBF's scope of work included: review of available record information, field verification of existing reservoir elements (such as tank dimensions, shell and floor thicknesses), comparison of original design criteria to current seismic design parameters, geotechnical investigation, preparation of a preliminary design report summarizing seismic retrofit recommendations, and contract documents, including construction drawings and a project manual, for the seismic retrofit of all three tanks. Santa Margarita Water District Master Planning (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. Mr. Nagle has prepared numerous Plan Of Works Reports for several communities within the Santa Margarita Water District, including Rancho Santa Margarita, Coto de Caza, Rancho Trabuco, portions of Mission Viejo, and Talega. The Plans of Works included development of water and wastewater planning criteria for both residential and commercial land uses, hydraulic analyses and computer modeling of both water and sewer systems, and development of capital improvement plans and facility financing programs. Santa Margarita Water District ( Talega Development Wastewater Collection and Treatment Alternatives Study) (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. This Study evaluated the feasibility of an on -site wastewater treatment and reclamation facility versus the conveyance of wastewater to an off -site regional facility for treatment and disposal. The project included a cost benefit analysis for each alternative. Santa Margarita Water District, Industrial Waste Discharge Permit Review (Orange County, CA) 1987 - 1992 - Project Engineer. RBF provided Industrial Wastewater Engineering services for the Santa Margarita Water District, and developed the Industrial Wastewater Discharges Regulations for the District. RBF reviewed all industrial permit applications for regulatory compliance, evaluated the industrial treatment process, and made recommendations for permit conditions and monitoring. The industrial wastewater treatment permits analyzed by RBF have included laboratory facilities, research and development facilities, manufacturing, and plating, among other industrial applications. WF CC NSUITING (/''� !I 1 1111� N�COmpany GC /115T John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer County of Orange, James Musick Facility Expansion Sewer Capacity Analysis (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. This preliminary hydraulic analysis for the County of Orange determined the available capacity in the existing Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) sewage collection system. The analysis included verification of existing IRWD facilities, estimating current and ultimate wastewater generation tributary to the IRWD system, and development of phasing criteria for the Musick Facility expansion. Rancho California Water District Water Facilities Master Plan (Riverside County, CA) - Project Engineer. The Master Plan, for 100,000 -acre service area, included detailed land use and population inventory and projections, development of water use factors, development of a hydraulic model and analysis of the RCWD's 19 different pressure zones. The Master Plan also identified proposed capital improvements and funding requirements. Santa Margarita Water District South County Pipeline (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a detailed analysis of alignment alternatives for the Santa Margarita Water District's South County Pipeline Project. The analysis considered over 30 alternative alignments for a regional water transmission main, and evaluated the environmental, traffic, and institutional impacts to the City of Mission Viejo. Provided overall master planning, environmental documentation, permit processing, and design of this large- diameter pipeline project. RBF prepared plans and specifications, provided construction staking and management for a major portion of this project, including over 13 miles of 66 -inch diameter pipeline, five service connections, five flow facilities, and a regulating reservoir. RBF received the 1990 California Council of Civil Engineers and Land Surveyors Grand Award of Excellence for the outstanding design and coordination efforts on the 100 million dollar construction project. Santa Margarita Water District, Bond Issue Reallocations (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a reallocation report for $360 Million in general obligation bonds for the Santa Margarita Water District. This analysis included verifying actual construction costs for existing water and wastewater facilities and verifying the funding capacity for remaining capital improvement projects. Jack Rabbit Trail Specific Plan (Beaumont, CA) - Project Engineer. Prepared opportunity and constraints study and subsequent master plan for water, wastewater, and reclaimed water facilities required to service the proposed Jack Rabbit Trail Project. The Project consists of approximately 1,500 dwelling units. The preliminary alignments and sizes of all onsite and offsite water, sewer, and reclaimed water facilities were identified in a report for incorporation into the Specific Plan document. Catellus Development - Hilarides Development Water and Sewer Master Plan (Chino Hills, CA) - Project Engineer. This study determined the water and sewer facilities required for a remote 300 -unit residential development in the City of Chino Hills. RBF was responsible for identifying not only on -site collection facilities, but off -site needs as well. The investigation resulted in alternative off -site collection scenarios, including up to one -and- one -half miles of sewer; these scenarios were developed from extensive research of record drawings, existing sewers, and discussions with City Staff. City of Douglas Water Master Plan (Douglas, AZ) 1996 - Project Engineer. RBF prepared a Water System Master Plan for the City of Douglas, Arizona. This Master Plan evaluated the existing water supply and distribution systems at the existing and ultimate conditions, identified areas of deficiency, recommended proposed capital improvements, and developed a phased implementation program. MF CC NSUITING CC 1/11515 omo,, John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Poe Colonia (Imperial County, CA) 1998 - Project Manager. Under the Corps 219 program, RBF prepared an analysis of wastewater collection, treatment and disposal alternatives for the Poe Colonia, a low- income residential community in Imperial County. The Project included an evaluation of onsite treatment methods, such as package plants and stabilization ponds, versus exporting the sewage to the City of Brawley. Specific tasks included wastewater flow projections, preliminary facility layouts, evaluation of regulatory and institutional issues, and preparation of cost estimates. University of California, Irvine Utilities Master Plan (Orange County, CA) - Project Manager. This study entailed extensive research to develop a map of existing UCI onsite water, reclaimed water, and wastewater facilities. RBF was responsible for the computer analysis, using the EPANET software for the existing and proposed water and reclaimed water distribution systems. The Master Plan included a summary report of findings and recommendations. Santa Margarita Water District, Debt Service Allocations (Orange County, CA) 1987 - 1994 - Project Engineer. RBF prepared annual debt service analysis and allocation reports for the Santa Margarita Water District's (SMWD) active general obligation bond issues. The studies identified the capital costs, operation and maintenance costs and developed the corresponding facility charges and rate fees for each of the eight Improvement Districts that comprise SMWD. The charges were based on a detailed assessment of the facilities related to each Improvement District and formulated a prorata capacity, where facilities common to more than one Improvement District are applicable. Rancho California Water District Capital Improvement Program (Riverside County, CA) 1990 - Project Engineer. RBF conducted a comprehensive analysis and prepared a capital improvement program for $350 million in facility requirements. Costs were allocated between developed and undeveloped properties. The study also evaluated capital replacement and allocations between service zone areas. The program determined funding and requirements on a yearly, five -year, and ultimate buildout basis. City of Culver City - Sewer Facilities Charge Program (Culver City, CA) 1998 - Project Manager. RBF prepared a Sewer Facilities Charge Fee Program, which will update the City's existing fees. The study includes a comprehensive review and analysis of the City's wastewater flows, user rates, five -year capital improvement program, operation and maintenance costs, capital improvement and replacement costs, and the City of Los Angeles' pass - through costs for the regional conveyance, treatment, and disposal system. Santa Margarita Water District, Las Flores Trunk Sewers and Zone II Water Mains (Orange County, CA) - Project Engineer. This Project included the preparation of plans, specifications and estimates for the construction of approximately 6, 100 linear feet of 10 -inch and 12 -inch trunk sewer and 8,900 linear feet of 16 -inch and 30 -inch water main. The Project included coordination with the California Fish and Game Department and the Orange County Flood Control District for a creek crossing. City of Beverly Hills, Water System Capital Improvement Projects (Beverly Hills, CA) 1993 - 2000 - Project Manager. RBF is currently providing complete design engineering and construction staking services for the City of Beverly Hills Public Works Department's capital improvement program, which includes water transmission main replacements, pressure reducing stations installation, street improvements, and traffic signalization. RBF has coordinated with City staff, local merchants, residents and Caltrans to select pipeline alignments and establish construction schedules which minimize disruption to traffic, local businesses and local residences. MF /'l CC NSUITING C C VIS / A�_ John Nagle, PE Senior Associate / Senior Engineer Santa Margarita Water District, Oso Trunk Sewer Relocation (Orange County, CA) 1991 - Project Engineer. This project included the preparation of construction plans, specifications and estimates for the relocation of a 27 -inch trunk sewer and the installation of a flow diversion structure and parshall flume metering station. The project also included coordination with Caltrans for a 350 -foot long jack- and -bore across the Interstate 5, coordination with the Mission Viejo Country Club for the realignment, and extensive utility investigation. Irvine Ranch Water District, Jeffrey Road (Zone A) Parallel Reclaimed Water Pipeline (Irvine, CA) 1995 - Project Manager. This Project included the preparation of construction drawings, specifications and cost estimates for three miles of 30 -inch reclaimed water pipeline. The Project included preliminary engineering and alternative alignment analyses, which considered 15 alternative alignments. The Project also required coordination with: Caltrans for a bore-and-jack crossing of Interstate 405; the Orange County Department of Harbors, Beaches and Parks for construction in Mason Regional Park; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game for the crossing of the San Diego Creek; and the City of Irvine for traffic control. MF CC NSUITING N � Company CC 1-/157 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 7.0 Technical Appendices The various reports identified below are included within the Technical Appendices to this EIR, and are herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150. Appendix Document /Reference Title A Air Quality Impact Analysis B Greenhouse Gas Analysis C Noise Impact Analysis D North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis E Water Supply Assessment F Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increase Allocation of Residential Development NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 7 -1 CC, 1/152 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix A Air Quality Impact Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. June 6, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC 1/i ,59 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix B Greenhouse Gas Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. June 6, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Lill 1/100 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix C Noise Impact Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. May 29, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC 1101 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix D North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. May 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC 1/102 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix E Water Supply Assessment T &B Planning, Inc. June 13, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC Moos no 01-1 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No, 2 Technical Appendix F Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increase Allocation of Residential Development RBF Consulting May 10, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CC 1/104 Exhibit "B" Water Supply Assessment (Appendices to be attached upon approval. A complete copy of the Water Supply Assessment with Appendices is available for review online at: http:// www.newportbeachca.gov /pin /CEQA REV IEW / North %20Newport %20Center %20 PC %20Addendum2 /06 Appendix E Water Supply Assessment.pdf) SD \847681.1 CC 1/105 CC 1/100 WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915 June 13, 2012 Ct, w rrlk n Prepared by: T &B Planning, Inc. Submitted By: /� eor Murd ch General Manager, Municipal Operations Department CC 1/107 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table of Contents 10 Section 11 Preface........................................................................................................................................... ............................... 2 ProjectDescription ..................................................................................................................... ............................... 2 Purpose of this Water Supply Assessment ........................................................................ ............................... 3 CEQACompliance Background ............................................................................................. ............................... 8 Findings........................................................................................................................................... ............................... 8 Summary of Existing and Projected Demand ................................................................... ............................... 10 WaterSupply Sources ............................................................................................................... ............................... 10 Imported Water from Metropolitan via the MWDOC .................................... ............................... 12 Groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin ......... ............................... 16 RecycledWater ............................................................................................................. ............................... 17 Reliabilityand Supply ................................................................................................................ ............................... 18 Water Conservation Programs and Requirements ......................................................... ............................... 19 Analysisand Conclusions ........................................................................................................ ............................... 21 Figures Figure1, Location Map ............................................................................................................. ............................... 6 Figure 2, Aerial Photograph of Existing Urban Setting ................................................. ............................... 7 Tables Table 1, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Projections ...................................... ............................... 10 Table 2, City of Newport Beach Water Demand by Source ........................................ ............................... 11 Table 3, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Percentage by Source ................ ............................... 11 Table 4, Metropolitan's Water Supply Capacity .............................................................. ............................... 13 Table 5, Historic Groundwater Supplies 2005- 2009 ...................................................... ............................... 15 Table 6, City of Newport Beach Projected Normal Year Water Supply and Demand ...................... 18 Table 7, City of Newport Beach Projected Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand ................ 19 Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Years Water Supply and Demand.......... 19 Table 9, Water Demand for 79 Multi - Family Residential Units ................................. ............................... 22 Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units ............................... ............................... 22 Table 11, Water Demand for430 Multi - Family Residential Units .............................. ............................... 22 Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand in San Joaquin Plaza ............................. ............................... 22 Table 13, Anticipated Water Demand Eliminated from Hotel Rooms .................... ............................... 23 Appendices City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Pagel CC 1/168 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Preface California Senate Bill 610 (Costa) and Senate Bill 221 (Kuehl) amended California State law effective January 1, 2002, to improve the link between information on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 and SB 221 are companion measures that promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to the city and county decision - makers prior to approval of specified large development projects. Both statutes also require that this detailed information be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects. The City of Newport Beach provides water service to the Project site evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment. Therefore, the Newport Beach City Council serves as the lead agency with authority to approve this Water Supply Assessment as well as the lead agency that will consider approval of the proposed Project described below.' Project Description The proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment is located in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Specifically, the subject property is located in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area 1-1), commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element describes the City's existing and planned development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and assigns maximum development limits (also called development "intensity') to specific locations. Specific areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU1 and LU2. The General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built development intensity. In February 2012, Irvine Company (hereafter "Project Applicant ") submitted an application to the City's Planning Division requesting that the development intensity allowed by the General Plan for 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll, Anomaly Location 43, be converted from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC). The Project Applicant also requests that 15 un -built multi - family residential units allowed by the General Plan in MU -H3 designated portions of Statistical Area Ll be specifically assigned to the NNCPC in San Joaquin Plaza. If the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment are approved by the City, a total of 94 additional residential units would be allowed in San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 2 CC :L/109 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Under existing conditions, there is no residential development in San Joaquin Plaza, but 430 multi - family residential units are allowed there pursuant to the City's General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan. With the addition of 94 units, the maximum number of multi - family residential units allowed in San Joaquin Plaza would increase from 430 to 524 units. No specific subdivision map or development project is proposed at this time. The proposed Project is limited to the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment and, in total, the vesting of 94 units of residential development intensity to San Joaquin Plaza (79 converted and transferred units and 15 units previously unassigned) and the reallocation of 430 multi - family residential units already allowed within the NNCPC's Block 500, Block 600, and the San Joaquin Plaza solely to the San Joaquin Plaza. In order for the Project Applicant's application to be approved, the City of Newport Beach would need to approve the following: 1) Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2) Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza; 3) Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 4) Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities and allocations; 5) Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and 6) Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). An exhibit showing the location of San Joaquin Plaza (outlined in red) in relation to the NNCPC (highlighted in yellow) is shown on Figure 1. Purpose of this Water Supply Assessment The purpose of this Water Supply Assessment (Assessment) is to satisfy the requirements under Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and Water Code Section 10910 et seq.) and Senate Bill 221 (Kuehl) (California Government Code Section 66473.7), which require that an assessment be conducted to demonstrate that adequate water supplies are or will be available to meet the water demand associated with proposed projects. SB 610 focuses on the content of a water supply agency's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). It also stipulates that, when an environmental impact report (EIR) is required in connection with a project, the appropriate water supply agency must provide an assessment of whether its total projected water supplies will meet projected water demand associated with the proposed project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 3 CC 1-/170 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Senate Bill 221 requires a water supply verification when a tentative map, parcel map, or development agreement for a project is submitted to a land use agency for approval. Senate Bill 221 applies to proposed residential developments of more than 500 dwelling units with some exceptions. Section 66473.7(1) exempts residential projects proposed on a site located within an urbanized area that has been previously developed for urban uses, or where the immediate contiguous properties surrounding the residential project site are, or previously have been, developed for urban uses. The San Joaquin Plaza is currently developed with multi- tenant commercial office land uses, surface parking lots, a parking structure, and ornamental landscaping. As shown on Figure 2, abutting the site on the Northwest is the Newport Beach Police Department, the Newport Beach Fire Department Station 3, and an automotive dealership. To the South is a commercial office building and the Orange County Museum of Art, beyond which and further to the South is the Fashion Island shopping mall. To the Southwest is a commercial office building and a rental apartment complex. To the Northeast, across San Joaquin Hills Road, is a single - family residential neighborhood. To the Southeast, across Santa Cruz Drive are multi- tenant office /commercial land uses, a hotel with 295 rooms presently operated as the Island Hotel, and several parking structures. As such, the City of Newport Beach is not required to issue a written water supply verification pursuant to Senate Bill 221 because the proposed Project site is in an urbanized area, is currently developed with urbanized uses, and is surrounded by urbanized uses. The City can still opt to issue a written verification, but the verification is not required because the Project site is currently developed with urban uses, is surrounded by developed urban uses, and the proposed Project is clearly an infill project. Senate Bill 610 applies to a proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units, or large commercial, industrial or mixed -use development. The need for a water supply assessment is determined by the lead agency for the project. For the proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment, the City of Newport Beach serves as the lead agency, which required that this Water Supply Assessment be prepared. In accordance with Water Code Section 10910(d) — (f), the Water Supply Assessment shall: 1) Identify any existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed Project, and a description of the quantities of water received in prior years by the public water system, under existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts; 2) If no water has been received in prior years by the public water system, identify the other public water systems or water service contract holders that receive a water supply or have existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts to the same source of water as the public water system. 3) If groundwater is included in the proposed supply, identify the groundwater basin or basins from which the Proposed Project will be supplied; any applicable documentation of adjudicated rights to pump; if the basin is not adjudicated, whether the basin has been identified as over - drafted; a detailed description and analysis of the amount and NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 4 CC 1/171 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT location of groundwater pumped by the public water system for the past five (5) years from any groundwater basin from which the proposed Project will be supplied; a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater from the basin or basins from which the proposed Project will be supped to meet the projected water demand associated with the Proposed Project. Under existing conditions, the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC contains no residential units. However, the City's General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan currently allow for 430 multi - family residential units. Should the development intensity transfers requested by the Project Applicant be approved by the City of Newport Beach, 94 additional residential units would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza, bringing the maximum number of permitted multi- family residential dwelling units allowed in this area to 524 units. Although no specific development project to build these units is proposed at this time, because: 1) the number of permitted residential units in San Joaquin Plaza would exceed 500, 2) approval of the Project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and 3) San Joaquin Plaza is located in the NNCPC, which is the subject of a development agreement titled "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company Concerning North Newport Center," the City of Newport Beach, serving as lead agency, is required to conduct a Water Supply Assessment in compliance with Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9). In addition to meeting the requirements of Senate Bill 610, this Water Supply Assessment also will be used by the City of Newport Beach as part of the proposed Project's environmental review process under CEQA. This Assessment evaluates water supplies that are or will be available during normal year, dry year, and multiple dry -year conditions over a 20 -year projection period, considering existing demands, expected demands from the proposed Project, and reasonably foreseeable future demands in geographic areas that are supplied water by the City of Newport Beach. This Assessment is a technical, informational, advisory opinion only. The information included is based on information available at the time this Assessment was prepared and changing circumstances could affect the water supply evaluation presented in this document. This Water Supply Assessment does not explicitly entitle the San Joaquin Plaza to receive additional water rights, water service, or any water rights or service priorities and allocations. It also does not affect the City's obligation to provide services to its existing water customers and future customers. City Council approval of this Water Supply Assessment is not an entitlement to water rights or service to San Joaquin Plaza, nor is it a commitment to serve the area with increased water service capacities and /or supplies. Because the proposed Project that is the subject of this Water Supply Assessment is limited to a request to vest permitted development intensity to San Joaquin Plaza and because no specific development project is proposed at this time, this Assessment is a general evaluation of water supply and is not an engineered analysis related to any particular or specific residential development project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 5 CC :L/172 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Figure 1, Location Map f Jo p U t•1� SMTACRUZI)R QO Q LE' '(y n frbvl /y C tl J 600 m 9 / •.NTAR08A00. fnoh.nn W.n� 9e,. YrfioO Nalel &a* 900 Ra�AewNy6t) Illn.M IGV Q S yE� �v 11^x` f uu V C/R N 0 Ca JQ LEGEND \ 0 Newport Center / Fashion Island (Statistical Area L7) C3 North Newport Center Planned Community =Manolti Hotel Block 900 C3 Proposed Project Site (San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNC PC) NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page b CCv:Lj3 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Figure 2, Aerial Photograph of Existing Urban Setting NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 7 CC 1/174 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT CEQA Compliance Background In 2006, the City of Newport Beach approved an update to its General Plan and certified the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR (SCH No. 2006011119) as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with planned buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of the property encompassing the NNCPC and San Joaquin Plaza. Section 4.14 of the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR addressed "Utilities and Service Systems," including the topic of water supply. The Final Program EIR concluded, based on substantial evidence cited in the EIR and the City's Administrative Record for the EIR, that with the implementation of mandatory regulatory requirements applicable General Plan goals and policies, impacts associated with water supplies would be less than significant. Similarly, Addendum No. 1 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, which addressed City adoption of the NNCPC Development Plan and related actions, concluded that water supply impacts would be less than significant with adherence to regulatory requirements and the General Plan. The General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR relied on the City of Newport Beach's 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). UWMPs are required by Senate Bill 610 and serve as important source documents for cities and counties as they update their General Plans. Conversely, General Plans are used as source documents as water suppliers update their UWMPs. The City of Newport Beach General Plan and UWMP are linked and their accuracy and usefulness are interdependent. As discussed later in this document, the City of Newport Beach published an updated UWMP in 2010, which is currently pending final approval by the California Department of Water Resources. Because the proposed Project involves a request to transfer development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan from one location to another location, the City's General Plan and 2010 UWMP are used as a primary reference documents in this Water Supply Assessment. Findi The Project involves the proposed conversion of permitted development intensity for 79 un- built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and the transfer of those 79 units and the assignment of an additional 15 un -built units of residential development intensity permitted by the General Plan to the San Joaquin Plaza area of the NNCPC. If the Project is approved, the Project Applicant would have entitlement to construct up to 524 multi - family residential units in San Joaquin Plaza (the 79 transferred units, 15 assigned units, plus 430 units already allocated to the NNCPC). Future residential development in San Joaquin Plaza, if and when it is proposed, would be subject to the development standards, design guidelines, and administration procedures required by the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for activities within its boundaries, including San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 8 CC 1/i ce City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Water demand for the City of Newport Beach, including anticipated demand associated with buildout of the City's General Plan (inclusive of the NNCPC), is included in the water demand forecasts identified in the City's 2010 UWMP and within the planning documents of water districts, authorities, and agencies that directly or indirectly supply and /or manage the City's water supplies. These include the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (hereafter, "Metropolitan "), the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). As such, water demand and supply evaluations conducted by Metropolitan, MWDOC, OCWD, as well as the City of Newport Beach itself are directly applicable to the proposed Project. Given the characteristics of the Project (the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan from one location to another location (79 units) and the assignment of previously unassigned development intensity (15 units) to a specific property in Newport Center, the primary subject of this Water Supply Assessment is to determine if the City has adequate water supplies to serve 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel rooms, and to confirm that water supplies are available to serve 524 residential units in San Joaquin Plaza (94 additional residential units (79 +15) and the 430 units already permitted). As set forth in this Water Supply Assessment, the City's water supply comes from three sources: 1) imported water from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC, 2) local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin by wells owned and operated by the City and managed by the OCWD, and 3) recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project (GAP). As such, the analysis and conclusions reached herein rely exclusively on the water supply projections and reliability information contained in the following documents: a) Newport Beach, 2011. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2011. b) Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Regional Urban Water Management Plan. November 2010. c) Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011. d) Orange County Water District, 2009. Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. July 9, 2010. In the four documents listed above, the City of Newport Beach, Metropolitan, MWDOC, and OCWD all conclude that there are sufficient water supply capacities to serve their respective service areas through year 2035, including projected water demand in the City of Newport Beach associated with buildout of the city's General Plan. As discussed in more detail in the "Analysis and Conclusions" section of this document, this Water Supply Assessment concludes NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 9 CC 1/170 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed Project (the addition of 94 units of development intensity and a maximum overall development intensity of 524 units in San Joaquin Plaza) for the next 20 years. Summary of Existing and Projected Demand The City of Newport Beach provides water service to a population of approximately 67,000 throughout its 35.77 square mile service area. Based on data available in the City of Newport Beach's 2010 UWMP, the total 2010 water demand for retail customers served by the City was approximately 16,645 acre -feet per year (AFY) .2 Between 2005 and 2010, the City's water demand decreased by about 5 percent while population increased by 1.5 percent. This illustrates the City's proactive efforts in promoting water use efficiency. In addition to documenting existing demand, the UWMP also calculates the City's future water demand, using population and land use buildout assumptions from the City's General Plan. Water demand projections for years 2005 to 2035 by land use type are given in the table below. Table 1, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Projections Fiscal Water Demand by Water Use Sectors (AFY) Year Ending Single Multi- Family Commercial /Industrial Institutional is. LandseW is Total Demand 2005 7,482 2,597 3,300 734 3,719 17,831 2010 7,297 2,308 2,960 370 3,710 16,645 2015 7,258 2,300 2,947 378 4,140 17,023 2020 7,411 2,348 3,009 386 4,268 17,422 2025 7,565 2,397 3,072 394 4,346 17,774 2030 7,718 2,446 3,134 402 4,424 18,124 2035 7,872 2,494 3,196 410 4,502 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 2 -4. Water Supply Sources The City of Newport Beach receives its water from three sources: 1) Imported water from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC, 2) Local groundwater stored in the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater basin, which is managed by the OCWD and based on basin pumping percentages (BPP) drawn from four (4) active wells owned and operated by the City of Newport Beach, and 3) Recycled water from the OCWD's Green Acres Project (GAP).3 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 10 CC 1-/177 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT The City's UWMP projects that water demand in the City of Newport Beach will increase by 11% over the 25 period of 2010 — 2035, to 18,474 acre -feet by 2035 as shown on the following table and listed by the source of supply." Table 2, City of Newport Beach Water Demand by Source Water Supply Sources Fiscal Year Ending 2010 2015 2020 2025 MWDOC (Imported Treated Full Service (non- int.)) 6,161 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 BPP Groundwater 10,052 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 432 450 500 500 500 500 Total 16,645 1 17,023 1 17,422 1 17,774 18,124 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 2 -9. As shown in the graph below, in 2010 the City's total water demand of 16,645 acre -feet was supplied by approximately 37% imported water, 60% local groundwater, and 3% recycled water.' These percentages are expected to remain relatively the same though 2035. Table 3, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Percentage by Source 100% sox sou Yox sox sox .on lox lox 10% 0x 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 P Y.. En , ■~XX SSPPG,..ndw ■AIIVa dWtler NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 11 CC 1/172 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT The City's three (3) main sources of water supply are described below. 1. Imported Water from Metropolitan via the MWDOC Overview The City of Newport Beach relies on imported water wholesaled by Metropolitan through the MWDOC. Metropolitan's principal sources of water originate from two sources - the Colorado River via the Colorado Aqueduct and the Lake Oroville watershed in Northern California through the State Water Project (SWP). This imported water is treated at the Robert B. Diemer Filtration Plant located north of Yorba Linda. Typically, the Diemer Filtration Plant receives a blend of Colorado River water from Lake Mathews through the Metropolitan Lower Feeder and SWP water through the Yorba Linda Feeder. The City of Newport Beach has six (6) connections to the imported water system along the Orange County Feeder and the East Orange County Feeder No. 2. The total available capacity is 104 cubic feet per second (cfs). Supply Capacity and Reliability — Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) reports on water supply reliability and identifies projected supplies to meet the long -term demand within its service area. It presents Metropolitan's demand and supply capacities from 2015 through 2035 under three hydrologic conditions: average year, single dry-year, and multiple dry- years. Additionally, Metropolitan completed an updated Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) in 2010 that reports on water use efficiency measures and local resource developments that are projected to meet future water needs. Metropolitan also publishes annual reports that provide information about water supplies, water initiatives, and resource management and operations in addition to other topics. The most recent annual report available is for 2011. Metropolitan receives its water supplies from three (3) primary sources: the Colorado River Aqueduct, the State Water Project, and Storage. Colorado River Supplies A number of water agencies within California have rights to divert water from the Colorado River. Metropolitan is one of those agencies. The water is delivered to Metropolitan's service area by way of the Colorado River Aqueduct, which has a capacity of nearly 1.3 million AFY. The Aqueduct conveys water 242 miles from its Lake Havasu intake to its terminal reservoir, Lake Mathews, near the city of Riverside. Metropolitan is appropriated 550,000 AFY of Colorado River Water per an agreement with the federal Bureau of Reclamation. Up to an additional 842,000 AFY are available to Metropolitan when there is surplus water or when water remains unused by Arizona, Nevada, and higher priority users in California. Metropolitan is party to several agreements regarding the supply, delivery, transfer, and conservation of water from the Aqueduct.6 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 12 CC 1/1-79 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Fiscal year 2010111 began with concerns of prolonged drought conditions in the Colorado Basin. However, the winter of 2010111 saw record - breaking snowfall in much of the Colorado River Basin which substantially raised water levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead. The increased storage has postponed the risk of shortage for several years and increased the chance that surplus water could be made available to Metropolitan in the near future .7 State Water Project The State Water Project (SWP), which is owned by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), is the second source of Metropolitan's imported water supplies. The SWP conveys water from Northern California to the north and south of the San Francisco Bay Area and areas south of the Bay Delta region. That water, along with all additional unused water from the watershed, flows into the Sacramento /San Joaquin Delta. Water from the Delta is then either pumped to water users in the San Francisco Bay area or transported through the California Aqueduct to water users in Central and Southern California. The amount of entitlement DWR approves for delivery varies annually with contractor demands and projected water supplies from tributary sources to the Delta, based on snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, reservoir storage, operational constraints, and demands of other water users. Historically, the SWP has been able to meet all of its contractors' requests for entitlement water except in a few years when there was a shortage. The most recent shortage occurred in 2007 -09, requiring Metropolitan to draft water from its storage supplies; but, a combination of improved SWP supplies and continued investments in water conservation and recycling have allowed Metropolitan to meet demands while also reducing its requirements for SWP water in recent years. Going forward, a primary factor affecting the future reliability and supply of SWP water is the listing of several fish species in the Sacramento /San Joaquin Delta (Delta) under both state and federal Endangered Species Acts. Future SWP deliveries will continue to be impacted by restrictions placed on SWP and Central Valley Project (CVP) Delta pumping required by the biological opinions issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (December 2008) and National Marine Fisheries Service (June 2009).8 SBx7 -7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), "The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 ", was signed into law on February 3, 2010, as part of a comprehensive statewide water legislation package to reduce pumping out of the San Francisco Bay Delta. The bill sets a goal of achieving a 20% statewide reduction in urban per capita water use, which is being complied with in Newport Beach through local water conservation efforts discussed below under "Water Conservation Programs and Requirements." NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 13 lilt 11120 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Storage A key component of Metropolitan's water supply capability is the amount of water in Metropolitan's storage facilities. Storage is a major component of Metropolitan's dry- year resource management strategy. Metropolitan is party to numerous voluntary Central Valley storage and transfer programs, aiming to develop additional dry-year water supplies. To date, Metropolitan's Central Valley /SWP storage programs consist of partnerships with Central Valley agricultural districts. These partnerships allow Metropolitan to store its SWP supplies during wetter years for return in future drier years. Metropolitan's Central Valley transfer programs include partnerships with Sacramento Valley Central Valley Project (CVP) and SWP settlement contractors. They allow Metropolitan to purchase water in drier years for delivery via the California Aqueduct to Metropolitan's service area .9 The end -of -year storage for calendar year 2011 was approximately 2.5 million AF, the highest level of dry -year storage reserves in Metropolitan's history. These increases improve Metropolitan's supply and demand outlook for future years.io Metropolitan's RUWMP concludes that Metropolitan has supply capabilities that are sufficient to meet expected water demands from 2015 through 2035 under the single dry-year and multiple dry-year conditions, as charted below in Table 4. As shown, imported water supplies from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City of Newport Beach by the MWDOC, is a reliable source of water through at least 2035. In the event of a water shortage, Metropolitan has comprehensive plans for stages of actions it would undertake to address up to a 50 percent reduction in its water supplies and a catastrophic interruption in water supplies through its Water Surplus and Drought Management and Water Supply Allocation Plans. Metropolitan also developed an Emergency Storage Requirement to mitigate against potential interruption in water supplies resulting from catastrophic occurrences within the Southern California region, including seismic events along the San Andreas fault. In addition, Metropolitan is working with the State of California to implement a comprehensive improvement plan to address catastrophic occurrences that could occur outside of the Southern California region, such as a maximum probable seismic event in the Delta that would cause levee failure and disruption of SWP deliveries." NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 14 CC 1/121 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 4, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's Projected Water Supply Capacity 45 4.0 3.5 3.0 Million 2.5 Acre -Feet per Year 2,0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 mimasss Supply Capability Single DrpYeor ss_ Supply Capability Muhiple Dry Years — Total Demands on Metropolitan Single Dry-Year Told Dentonds on Metropolitan Multiple Dry -Years Source: Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan, Figure ES -1 Supply Capacity and Reliability — Municipal Water District of Orange County MWDOC is a member agency of Metropolitan and a regional water wholesaler and resource planning agency. It receives imported water from Metropolitan and then wholesales that water to its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach. MWDOC's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan ( RUWMP) addresses the water demand and supplies for all of Orange County, except for the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana, which are not MWDOC member agencies. The regional approach to urban water management planning via the RUWMP allows MWDOC to provide a comprehensive assessment of water resource needs in its service area, but also coordinate the implementation of water conservation programs and determine how to maximize the beneficial use of recycled water and local groundwater supplies, providing the region with new sources of local water to reduce the need for imported supplies from the Metropolitan. As a wholesaler, MWDOC develops and implements regional water use efficiency and water conservation programs on behalf of its retail water agencies and their customers, including the City of Newport Beach. The RUWMP concludes that the MWDOC service area will have sufficient existing and planned supplies from Metropolitan, groundwater, surface water, and recycled water to meet full service demands under average year, dry year, and multi dry year scenarios from 2015 through 203512 During water shortages, MWDOC works with its member agencies to manage the water supply in the region to ensure it meets the demands of its member agencies. During a severe water NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 15 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT shortage (Stage 7 supply reduction as defined in Metropolitan's Water Surplus and Drought Management [WSDM] Plan), the MWDOC Board is responsible for allocating imported water from Metropolitan according to a specific formula.13 2. Groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin The City of Newport Beach uses approximately 10,000 acre -feet of groundwater annually, drawn from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin (Orange County Basin). As of 2010, this local source of supply met approximately 60% of the City's total annual demand. The Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin underlies the north half of Orange County, covering an area of approximately 350 square miles, and is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). The OCWD manages the Basin's water supplies pursuant to a Groundwater Management Plan, the most recent update of which was published in 2009. The 2009 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan addresses several topics, including but not limited to: 1) Basin hydrogeology; 2) groundwater monitoring; 3) groundwater recharge; 4) groundwater quality management; and 5) efforts to protect water supplies and water quality.14 OCWD reports that although the amount of recharge and total pumping from the Basin may not be the same each year, over the long -term the amount of recharge needs to be similar to total pumping.15 The Basin is assured an adequate supply of water by a managed recharge system fed by natural recharge (rainfall and infiltration), water from the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek, water released into the Santa Ana River at Prado Dam by the Western Municipal Water District, and imported and supplemental water released into recharge basins by Metropolitan, San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, and from the Arlington Desalter.16 The Santa Ana River is the largest coastal stream in southern California with a length of 80 miles and a drainage area of 2,470 square miles. OCWD has legal rights to and permits from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to collect and store water from the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek. OCWD operates 1,067 acres of recharge facilities located in and adjacent to the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek .17 The City of Newport Beach obtains groundwater pumped from four (4) wells owned and operated by the City and managed by OCWD. Groundwater production from these wells from 2005 to 2009 is shown below. During certain seasons of 2005, 2006, and 2007, OCWD operated an In -lieu program with Metropolitan by purchasing water from Metropolitan to meet demands of member agencies rather than pumping water from the groundwater basin. In 2008 and 2009, OCWD did not utilize in -lieu water because such water was not available to purchase from Metropolitan.l8 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 16 CC 1/183 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 5, Historic Groundwater Supplies 2005 -2009 Basin Name(s) Fiscal Year Ending 2005 2006 12007 12008 2009 12010 2011 BPP GW 4,984 3,446 3,605 14,338 11,309 10,047 9,574 In -Lieu for OCWS 6,652 7,682 8,553 -- -- Subtotal OCWD Basin GW 11,636 11,228 12,158 14,338 11,309 10,047 9,574 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -6 for years 2005 -2009; City of Newport Beach Water Production Division for years 2010 -2011. The City's wells are located in the City of Fountain Valley, approximately five (5) miles north of the City. The only constraints affecting groundwater supply to the City of Newport Beach are the pumping capacity of the wells and pumping limitations established by OCWD to maintain the groundwater basin.19 Each year the OCWD determines the optimum level of water storage for the following year. The primary mechanism used by OCWD to manage pumping is the Basin Production Percentage (BPP), defined as "the ratio that all water to be produced from groundwater supplies with the district bears to all water to be produced by persons and operators within the District from supplemental sources as well as from groundwater within the District." In other words, the BPP is a percentage of each producer's water supply that comes from groundwater pumped from the basin. The BPP is set uniformly for all producers 20 OCWD uses a pricing approach that serves to discourage, but not eliminate, production above the BPP. Raising or lowering the BPP allows the District to manage the amount of pumping from the basin. The BPP is lowered when basin conditions necessitate a decrease in pumping. A lower BPP results in the need for Producers to purchase additional, more expensive imported water from Metropolitan 21 In summary, Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin serves as a safe, reliable buffer, sufficient source of groundwater for the City of Newport Beach. OCWD manages recharge of the Basin and implements measures that encourage withdraw amounts that secure the Basin's water supply.22 Additionally, the Groundwater Replenishment System jointly implemented by the OCWD and the Orange County Sanitation District secures stability of the groundwater basin by taking highly treated wastewater otherwise released into the ocean and purifies it to augment groundwater supplies. 3. Recycled Water The City of Newport Beach participates in a reclaimed /recycled water program and uses recycled water supplies available to irrigate greenbelts, parkways, golf courses, and other landscape areas that may otherwise use potable water. This reclaimed /recycled water is wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project (GAP). In 2009/10, usage of recycled water within the City's Water Utility service area was about 400 acre feet. Recycled water usage meets approximately 3% of the City's water demand. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 17 CC J-Al g4 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT As reported by the OCWD, the region collects nearly 313,000 AF of wastewater per year and 35% of that wastewater is used for recycled water supply. That the amount of recycled water supply will increase in the future. The amount of wastewater is expected to grow to approximately 440,000 AFY in 2035, with 37% expected to be treated for recycled use. As stated by the MWDOC, recycled water is a significant, reliable source of supply.23 Reliability of Supply in Normal Year, Single Dry Year and Multiple Dry Year Conditions Every urban water supplier is required to assess the reliability to provide water service to its customers under normal, dry, and multiple dry years. As stated above, the City is assured a reliability of supply from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC (Imported), local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin managed by the OCWD (BPP Groundwater), and recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its GAP (Recycled Water). The RUWMPs of Metropolitan and MWDOC document a reliable supply through year 2035. Additionally OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan documents a reliable supply of groundwater through 2035. The tables below show supply and demand for the City of Newport Beach under normal year, dry year, and multiple dry year conditions. Because water supplies are projected to be available from all sources (Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD), supply and demand numbers are identica1.24 Table 6, City of Newport Beach Projected Normal Water Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 18 CC 1/125 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 Total Supply 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 18 CC 1/125 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 7, City of Newport Beach Projected Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -17. Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -17. Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -18. Water Conservation Proqrams and Requirements MWDOC Water Conservation Programs MWDOC works with its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, on water use efficiency programs. In terms of water management, MWDOC became a signatory to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1991, monitored by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), which outlines 14 Best Management Practices (BMP) for urban NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 19 CC 1120 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 First Year Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Supply Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Second Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Third Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -18. Water Conservation Proqrams and Requirements MWDOC Water Conservation Programs MWDOC works with its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, on water use efficiency programs. In terms of water management, MWDOC became a signatory to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1991, monitored by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), which outlines 14 Best Management Practices (BMP) for urban NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 19 CC 1120 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT water use efficiency. The urban water use efficiency practices are intended to reduce long -term urban demands from what they would have been without implementation of these practices, and are in addition to programs that may be instituted during occasional water supply shortages 25 City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance A Water Conservation Ordinance was adopted by the Newport Beach City Council in 2009 and is included in the City's municipal code as Chapter 14.16, "Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations." The Ordinance creates a Water Conservation and Supply Shortage Program that established four levels of water supply shortage response actions to be implemented during times of declared water shortage. Additionally, the City of Newport Beach has been a signatory to the California Urban Water Conservation Council's (CUWCC) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) since August 2005 and implements Demand Management Measures (DMMs) to satisfy the requirements of MOU Section 10631 (f) & 0). Many DMMs also are administered by the MWDOC on behalf of its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach. SBx7 -7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), "The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 ", was signed into law on February 3, 2010, as part of a comprehensive statewide water legislation package in response to legal action brought by the National Resources Defense Council to reduce pumping out of the San Francisco Bay Delta. The bill sets a goal of achieving a 20% statewide reduction in urban per capita water use, and directs urban retail water suppliers to develop targets to meet a 20% reduction in per capita water use by 2020, and an interim 10% reduction by 2015. As the wholesale water supplier to the City of Newport Beach and other member agencies, MWDOC is not required to establish and meet these reduction targets. MWDOC's role in implementing the legislation is to assist each retail water supplier in analyzing the requirements and establishing their baseline and target water use, as guided by the California Department of Water Resources.26 The retail agency may choose to comply with SBx7 -7 as an individual or as a region in collaboration with other water suppliers. MWDOC and 26 of its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, as well as the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana have created the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance in an effort to help these agencies meet the water use reduction targets required by SBx7 -7. With MWDOC's assistance, the City of Newport Beach selected to comply with Option 1 of the SBx7 -7 compliance options, which requires a 20% reduction from baseline water usage by 2020 and 10% by 2015. The City's baseline, calculated from the ten year period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2005, is 253 gallons per capita per day (GPCD). Thus, the City's 2015 interim water use target is 228.1 GPCD and the 2020 final water use target is 202.8 GPCD .27 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 20 CC 1/187 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT and Conclusions The proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment is a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in the City of Newport Beach's Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units' and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The proposed Project also involves assigning previously unassigned development intensity for 15 un -built multi - family residential units permitted by the General Plan in MU -H3 designated areas to the NNCPC in San Joaquin Plaza. If the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment is approved by the City of Newport Beach, a total of 524 units would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza (94 additional residential units and 430 units already permitted by the General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan). Buildout of the City of Newport Beach's General Plan was considered in the water demand projections calculated by Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD. Therefore, Metropolitan's Regional Urban Water Management Plan. (2010), MWDOC's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2011), and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update evaluate the supply that would be required to service the 430 residential units already permitted in San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un -built units allowed by the General Plan that are proposed to be assigned to San Joaquin Plaza. Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD all conclude that there will be adequate supplies in the average year, dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios through 2035. Therefore, Metropolitan's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2010), MWDOC's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2011), and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update evaluate the supply that would be required to service the 430 residential units already permitted in San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un -built units allowed by the General Plan that are proposed to be assigned to San Joaquin Plaza. Thus, the focus of this Assessment primarily involves the proposed conversion of 79 hotel units to 79 multi - family residential units, and whether supplies are sufficient to service 524 units of multi - family residential development that would be vested to the location of San Joaquin Plaza. The water demand for this Project is calculated below for planning purposes only. This estimate is for planning purposes and shall not be construed as guaranteed water rights for the project. Actual water use would likely be reduced through water conservation programs being implemented in the City of Newport Beach and the continued use of recycled water where possible. The demand calculation is based on 228.1 GPCD, which is the City's target goal for year 2015. Because no specific development project is proposed as part of the Project, this Assessment assumes that the number of persons expected to reside in each multi - family residential is 2.19 persons per household, which is the average number of persons per household cited in the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 21 CC 1/1-88 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 9, Water Demand for 79 Multi - Family Residential Units (not considered by the General Plan) Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Units /Population Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi- Family 524/1,148 Residential 79 units /173 228.1 39,463 44.20 Units persons Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Table 11, Water Demand for 430 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Units /Population I Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential 15 units /33 228.1 7,527 8.43 Units persons Table 11, Water Demand for 430 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand Proiected in San Joaquin Plaza Units /Population Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi- Family 524/1,148 Residential 430 units /942 228.1 214,870 240.58 Units persons Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand Proiected in San Joaquin Plaza As mentioned above, the proposed Project involves a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Therefore, this analysis also calculates the projected demand reduction associated with the elimination of 79 hotel rooms. Water use in hotels is highly dependent on occupancy rate, the number of persons occupying each room, the water conservation features incorporated into the hotel building, the water conservation operational practices of the hotel's management and the amount of water conservation practiced by hotel guests. In the City of Newport Beach, the MWDOC encourages water use reduction conservation programs for hotels in its service area, which has some effect on water use reduction. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the water demand of a hotel room equates to the same demand as a residential unit housing one (1) person. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 22 cc 1/129 Units Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential Units persons 2281 261,858 293.2 As mentioned above, the proposed Project involves a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Therefore, this analysis also calculates the projected demand reduction associated with the elimination of 79 hotel rooms. Water use in hotels is highly dependent on occupancy rate, the number of persons occupying each room, the water conservation features incorporated into the hotel building, the water conservation operational practices of the hotel's management and the amount of water conservation practiced by hotel guests. In the City of Newport Beach, the MWDOC encourages water use reduction conservation programs for hotels in its service area, which has some effect on water use reduction. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the water demand of a hotel room equates to the same demand as a residential unit housing one (1) person. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 22 cc 1/129 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 13, Anticipated Water Demand Eliminated from Hotel Rooms (considered by the General Plan) Comparing Table 9 and Table 13, the proposed Project would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY. Based on the information contained in this Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (2011) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. These further reductions are not reflected in the calculated water demands above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 23 CC 1/1°90 Rooms Gallons /Day /Unit Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Hotel Rooms - 79/ -79 persons 228.1 - 18,019 -20.18 Comparing Table 9 and Table 13, the proposed Project would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY. Based on the information contained in this Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (2011) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. These further reductions are not reflected in the calculated water demands above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 23 CC 1/1°90 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Consultant Tracy Zinn, AICP, Principal T &B Planning, Inc. 17542 East 17`h Street, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 City of Newport Beach George Murdoch; General Manager, Municipal Operations Department Kathryne Cho; Junior Engineer, Public Works Department ENDNOTES 1 California Department of Water Resources, 2003. Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 of 200. Page iii. October 8, 2003. 2 Ibid. 3 Newport Beach, 2011. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov/ Modules /ShowDocument.aspx ?documentid= 10182. Pagel. May 2011. 4 Ibid. Page 2 -10 and Table 2 -9. 5 Ibid. Page 2 -10. 6 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http: / /www.mwdh2o.com /mwdh2o /pages /yourwater /RUWMP /RUWMP 2010.Pddf. Pages A.2 -12 to 13. November 2010. 7 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2011. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Annual Report 2011. Available online at htto: / /www.mwdh2o.com /mwdh2o /oaoes /about /ar /arll.htmi. Pages 27 -29. 8 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Page 2 -15. 9 Ibid. Section 3.3 10 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2011. Pages 7 -10. 11 Ibid. Page ES -5. 12 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. 2010 Final Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http:// www .mwdoc.com /filesgallery /MWDOC Final 2010 RUWMP.pddf. Page 2. April 2011. 13 Ibid. Page 6. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 24 CC 1/191 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT 14 Orange County Water District, 2009. Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. Available online at http: / /www.ocwd.com/ Publications - -- Reports /ca- 43.aspx. Pgs. ES -1 to ES -17. July 9, 2010. 15 Ibid. Page 4 -1. 16 Ibid. Page 4 -11. Table 4 -2. 17 Ibid. Page 4 -1. 18 Ibid. 19 Newport Beach, 2011. Page 3 -13. 20 Orange County Water District, 2009. Section 6.7 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. Section 6. 23 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. Page ES -5. 24 Newport Beach, 2011. Pages 3 -18 to 3 -19. 25 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. Page 1 -6. 26 Ibid. Pages 3 to 4. 27 Newport Beach, 2011. Pages 2 -6 to 2 -8. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 25 CC 1/1-92 APPENDIX A — City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance cc 2/29S APPENDIX B — City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan CC 2/19-4- Attachment No. CC 2 Resolution approving Transfer of Development Intensity No.TD2012 -002 CC 2/1°95 cc 2/190 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING THE TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY (TD2012 -002) FOR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for an amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area ('Property"). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company requests approval of the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company also requests approval of the transfer of development intensity (TD2012 -002), an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, and an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan (PD2012 -001) to increase the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 15 of the units are currently allowed by the General Plan, but are unassigned to any specific property; the remaining 79 units would result from the conversion of un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the NNCPC. WHEREAS, General Plan Land Use Policy LU 4.3 lists a number of criteria for transfer of development intensity. In particular, transfer of development intensity in the Newport Center Statistical Area is governed by Policy LU 6.14.3 WHEREAS, General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 permits development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, a traffic study entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec Consulting Services Inc., May, 2012) was prepared for the application and approved by the City Council on July 24, 2012, by Resolution No. 2012- - The traffic study supports the transfer of development intensity in compliance with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3. SD \847835.1 CC 2/i9 WHEREAS, the traffic study found that consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, a trip generation analysis was prepared by Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (dated May 16, 2012) to compare the trip generation of the un -built 79 hotel rooms and the proposed 79 multi - family residential units to ensure the proposed conversion would not result in a net increase of development intensity. The analysis concludes that 79 residential units would generate 17 fewer AM peak hour vehicle trips, 17 fewer PM peak hour vehicle trips, and 315 fewer daily vehicle trips than the 79 hotel rooms, demonstrating that the transfer of development intensity will not result in greater intensity than development allowed without the transfer. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002, the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, as well as the traffic study and trip generation comparison. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the transfer of development intensity by majority vote. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on July 24, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the City Council considered all project - related applications, including Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002, the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, as well as the traffic study and trip generation comparison. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the City Council at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that: (1) Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity is consistent with the General Plan in that it relocates un -built development intensity within Newport Center, maintaining the balance of uses set forth in the General Plan for Newport Center. The Newport Beach Marriott Hotel site (Anomaly Site No. 43) has a General Plan Land Use designation of Visitor Serving Commercial (CV) and the reduction of allowable development intensity by 79 hotel units would not result in any physical changes at the site nor would it result in a change in land use. The hotel would continue operating with 2 SD \847835.1 CC 2/19 2 532 rooms and serve visitors to the City consistent with the intent of the General Plan's CV land use designation. The San Joaquin Plaza is within the NNCPC and is designated MU -H3 (Mixed Use Horizontal), which allows residential uses. Both the General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan identify the San Joaquin Plaza for potential development with multi - family residential uses. Therefore, the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity can be found consistent with the General Plan. (2) Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity will not result in any adverse traffic impacts, as documented in the traffic study. (3) Consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity will not result in greater intensity than that which is allowed without the transfer, as documented in the trip generation comparison. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby approve Transfer of Development Intensity TD2012 -002, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record including the traffic and trip generation studies. 2. This Resolution shall not go into effect until the City Council approves or adopts all of the following: (1) the amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan; (2) Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001; and (3) the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza. 3. 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. 4. This resolution was approved, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 24th day of July, 2012. MAYOR F -A420 O CITY CLERK 3 SDA847835.1 cc 2/ -9 9 CC 2/200 Attachment No. CC 3 Ordinance approving Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001 CC /201 CG 3/202 ORDINANCE NO. 2012- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has filed an application with respect to its property located in North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) and consisting of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area ( "Property "). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company seeks approval of amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan (Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001) to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. WHEREAS, the Property will be governed by the NNCPC Development Plan, which includes the North Newport Center Design Regulations and sets forth land uses, development standards, and procedures. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan by majority vote. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on July 24, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the City Council considered all project - related applications, including the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the City Council at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information in the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan and in the full administrative record, SD \847834.1 CC 3/203 including the North Newport Center Design Regulations, before taking any action approving the amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that: (1) The amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan provides suitable and adequate standards including those relating to uses, development limits, building height limits, setbacks, parking, landscaping, screening, signs, lighting, and noise control. (2) The amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan is consistent with the General Plan and Municipal Code section 20.56.050(C), which mandates the requirements of a Planned Community Development Plan. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No PD2012 -001, which includes the North Newport Center Design Regulations, is approved and adopted as provided in Exhibit "A." The City Clerk shall cause a copy to be recorded with the Orange County Recorder. SECTION 2: 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 it shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall not go into effect until the City Council approves or adopts all of the following: (1) the amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan; (2) the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza); and (3) Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002. SD \847834.1 CC 3/204 This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on July 24, 2012, and adopted on August 14, 2012, by the following vote, to wit: AYES. COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS MAYOR ATTEST: Leilani Brown, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM, OF-FICE OF CITY ATTORNEY: Aaron Harp, City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach SD \847834.1 CC 3/2D5 CC 3/200 EXHIBIT "A" Amendment to North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan SD \847834.1 CC 3 /2D j CC 3/202 North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Land Uses, Development Standards Fx Procedures Adopted December 18, 2007, Ordinance No. 2007 -20 (PA 2007 -151) Amended November 24, 2009, Ordinance No. 2009 -28 (PA 2009 -111) Amended May 24, 2011, Ordinance No. 2011 -16 (PA 2011 -017) Amended . 2012, Ordinance No. 2012- (PA 2012- cc 3/209 [this page intentionally blank] CC 3/210 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Contents I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan .................................................. ............................... 1 A. Sub -Area Purpose .............................................................................................. ............................... 1 B. Relationship to Municipal Code ........................................................................ .............................10 C. Relationship to North Newport Center Design Regulations ............................. .............................10 II. Land Use and Development Regulations ........................................................... ............................... 11 A. Permitted Uses ................................................................................................. ............................... 11 B. Development Limits .......................................................................................... .............................12 C. Transfer of Development Rights ....................................................................... .............................13 III. Site Development Standards .............................................................................. ............................... 15 A. Permitted Height of Structures .......................................................................... .............................15 B. Setback Requirements ....................................................................................... .............................16 C. Parking Requirements ....................................................................................... .............................18 D. Landscaping .................................................................................................... ............................... 19 E. Lighting ............................................................................................................. .............................19 F. Signs .................................................................................................................. .............................19 G. Residential Compatibility .................................................................................. .............................24 H. Residential Open Space Requirements .............................................................. .............................24 IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration ................................... ............................... 25 A. Process for New Structures ............................................................................... .............................25 B. Process for New Signs ....................................................................................... .............................26 C. Transfer of Development Rights ....................................................................... .............................26 V. Def initions ............................................................................................................ .............................29 Appendix A — Design Regulations North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan i 4/26/1 -1 6/5/12 1 CC 3/211 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/212 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan The North Newport Center Planned Community district is comprised of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600 and Block 800 and portions of Block 100, Block 400, Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza. The sub -areas that comprise North Newport Center shall be governed by the North Newport Center Planned Community ( "PC ") Development Plan set forth herein, which includes land uses, development standards, and administration. The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code allows a Planned Community Development Plan to address land use designations and regulations in Planned Communities. The North Newport Center PC Development Plan serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for the sub -areas identified in the Planned Community Development Plan and is authorized and intended to implement the provisions of the Newport Beach General Plan. A. Sub -Area Purpose Newport Center is a regional center comprised of major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential development within the City of Newport Beach. The North Newport Center site comprises approximately 169 acres along San Joaquin Hills Road and Newport Center Drive. The seven sub -areas that make up the site including Fashion Island (75 acres), Block 100 (10 acres), Block 400 (4 acres), Block 500 (15 acres and a 0.4 -acre open space area at the corner of MacArthur Boulevard and San Joaquin Hills Road), Block 600 (25 acres), Block 800 (17 acres), and San Joaquin Plaza (23 acres) are shown on Figure 1 and are described below. The General Plan identifies the goal of creating a successful Mixed -Use district that integrates economic and commercial centers serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the sub - region, with expanded opportunities for residential development. Fashion Island is the primary retail hub within Newport Center and is developed with retail, dining, and commercial entertainment uses. Permitted uses for Fashion Island include uses in support of the existing retail, dining, and commercial entertainment uses. Fashion Island is intended to be a vibrant regional retail and entertainment center and a day /evening destination with a wide variety of uses that will serve visitors, residents, and employees of the area. Figure 2, Fashion Island Sub -Area, shows the boundary of Fashion Island. The Commercial Office blocks include Block 100 (Figure 3), Block 400 (Figure 4) and a portion of Block 800 also referred to as Pacific Financial Plaza. Block 100 is generally comprised of administrative and professional offices that serve local and regional markets. Other uses permitted in the block include limited accessory retail, financial, service and entertainment uses. Block 400 is generally comprised of commercial office, with medical related offices and retail use. The Pacific Financial Plaza portion of Block 800 is generally comprised of commercial office and restaurant uses. The Mixed -Use blocks include Block 500 (Figure 5), Block 600 (Figure 6), and San Joaquin Plaza (Figure 7). The Mixed -Use blocks are generally composed of administrative, professional, and financial office uses. Block 600 contains hotel and related ancillary uses. This Development Plan allows for the diversification of land uses in order to encourage new and original uses consistent with the Mixed -Use concept as established in the General Plan. Permitted uses for the Mixed -Use blocks include offices, light general commercial, hotel, residential and other mixed uses in accordance with the General Plan MU -H3 land use designation. The residential portion of Block 800 (Figure 8) allows for multi - family residential or senior citizen housing uses. While not categorized as a mixed -use area, Block 800 contains two distinct uses which are not interchangeable. The northern portion of Block 800 is designated for residential use and the southern portion is commercial office. The boundaries of the Mixed -Use blocks included in this Development Plan are shown in Figure 5, Block 500 Sub -Area, Figure 6, Block 600 Sub -Area, and Figure 7, San Joaquin Plaza Sub -Area, respectively. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 1 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/2 -3 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan Figure 1 — North Newport Center Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/214- d C� I N 17 �a Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan ■ Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 7 m L oN m m O� r S'a 7 9uel Dr �,> 00 a0 ON Figure 2 — Fashion Island Sub -Area 3 CC 3/215 c v U 4.jI CIL 0 3 ,z Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan 2� ■ Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4/26/11 6/5/12 I NJ Figure 3 — Block 100 Sub Area CC .3/2110 Q) Q Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan Planned Community Not included in Planned Community nN Figure 4 — Block 400 Sub Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 5 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/2i j Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan San Joaquin Hills Rd a01� \O a colas Dr ■ Planned Community Not included in Planned Community m i J 0 HN Figure 5 — Block 500 Sub -Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 6 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/218 J Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan San ✓o a9 tin /Y Rey Newport Cent...O ❑ Planned Community Not included in Planned Community [7 Figure 6 — Block 600 Sub -Area North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 7 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 cc 3/219 J SRI Q) Q) O San Joaquin M Santa Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 Hills Rd n N ■ Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community I Figure 7 — San Joaquin Plaza Sub -Area C7 CC 3/220 f i spot a S Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan San Clemente Drive Z ❑ Planned Community ❑ Not included in Planned Community R = Residential CO = Commercial Office North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 Figure 8 - Block 800 Sub -Area N C lc S/221 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan B. Relationship to Municipal Code Whenever the development regulations of this plan conflict with the regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained herein shall prevail. The Municipal Code shall regulate this development whenever regulations are not provided within these district regulations. All words and phrases used in this North Newport Center PC Development Plan shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in Section V — Definitions. The Municipal Code referred to herein for Blocks 500, 600, San Joaquin Plaza, and Fashion Island is the version of the Code in effect on December 18, 2007 and specifically includes Title 15 of the Municipal Code (Buildings and Construction), Title 19 of the Municipal Code (Subdivisions) and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning) but specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code including Title 5 of the Municipal Code (Business Licenses and Regulations). The Municipal Code referred to herein for Blocks 100, 400 and 800 is the version of the Code in effect on June 5, 2012 and specifically includes Title 15 of the Municipal Code (Buildings and Construction), Title 19 of the Municipal Code (Subdivisions) and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (Planning and Zoning) but specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code including Title 5 of the Municipal Code (Business Licenses and Regulations). C. Relationship to North Newport Center Design Regulations Development in North Newport Center shall be regulated by both the Development Plan and the Design Regulations, which is provided as Appendix A. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 10 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/222. Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations Il. Land Use and Development Regulations A. Permitted Uses 1. General Permitted uses are those uses set forth in this Section for each sub -area as shown on Table 1. The uses identified within the table are not comprehensive but rather major use categories. Specific uses are permitted consistent with the definitions provided in Section V of this Development Plan. Uses determined to be accessory or ancillary to permitted uses, or residential support uses to permitted uses are also permitted. The Planning Director may determine other uses not specifically listed herein, provided they are consistent with the Commercial Office, Regional Commercial, Mixed -Use, and Residential General Plan districts, the purpose of this Planned Community Development Plan, and the purpose of the sub -area in which the property is located. Table 1 - North Newport Center Land Use Regulation Table Uses Fashion Island Block 100 Block 400 Block 500 Block 600 Block 800 San Joaquin Plaza Commercial Office Residential BankslSavin s and Loans P P P P P P P - With drive through services MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Business, Government and Professional P P P P P P - Emergency Healthcare P1 P P P P P - Management and Leasing Offices P P P P P P P - Office, Medical and Dental P P P P P P - Public Safety Facilities P MUP MUP P P MUP P Commercial Recreation and Entertainment P UP UP MUP MUP UP MUP Cultural and Institutional UP UP UP P P UP P Day Care P P1 P1 P P P1 P Day Spas MUP MUP2 MUPz MUP MUP MUPz MUP Eating and Drinking Establishments W MUP MUP P "' P" MUP P" - Bars /Cocktail Lounges MUP UP UP UP UP UP UP Personal Improvement MUP MUP MUP P P MUP P - Health /Fitness Clubs MUP MUP MUP P P MUP P+ P Personal Services P P1 P1 P P Pt P P Residential P P P P Retail Sales P Pi Pr P P P1 P+ P - Animal Sales and Services MUP MUP MUP MUP - Medical Retail P P ++ P"" P P P"" P Visitor Accommodations UP UP UP UP UP UP UP P = Permitted UP = Use Permit MUP = Minor use Permit Issued by the Planning Director 1 = Permitted as Accessory/Ancillary Use 2 = In accordance with Chapter 20.87 of the Municipal Code ' = A Minor Use Permit Issued by the Planning Director is required for the sale of alcohol " =A Use Permit Is required for the Sale of Alcohol += Intended for Residential Support Use + += Accessory and ancillary medical retail, including those in freestanding structures, shall remain subordinate to principal uses - -= Not Permitted North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 11 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/223 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations 2. Open Space Corners The passive landscape areas on the following comers shall be limited to landscaping, and permitted signage. San Joaquin Hills Road and Avocado, Avocado and San Nicolas Drive (northwest and southwest corners), Avocado and San Miguel (northwest), San Joaquin Hills Road and Santa Rosa Drive (southwest and southeast), San Joaquin Hills Road and Santa Cruz Drive (southwest and southeast corners), San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road and San Joaquin Hills Road and MacArthur Boulevard. 3. Special Events The general regional Mixed -Use nature of North Newport Center results in a variety of special events and temporary uses throughout the year. Special community events, such as parades, trade shows, car shows, pageants, community concerts, outdoor displays, recreation/entertainment events and temporary structures are permitted within the North Newport Center Planned Community consistent with the following provisions: a. If the event takes place on private property within Fashion Island the event is not regulated so long as it does not displace required parking. Such events must comply with the City's Municipal Code related to noise control and other pertinent standards. b. If the event takes place anywhere else within North Newport Center or the public right - of -way, such events are permitted as long as they comply with the Municipal Code. B. Development Limits The development limits in this Development Plan are consistent with those established by the General Plan and are identified in Table 2 below. Development limits may be modified through the approval of a Transfer of Development Rights. Carts, kiosks, temporary and support uses are permitted and are not counted towards square footage development limits. Table 2 — Development Limits (A) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections ILC and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater Intensity, than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. DC.The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 12 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/224 Fashion San Joaquin Land Use Island Block 100 Block 400 Block 500 Block 600 Block 800 Plaza Total Regional 1,619,525 sq. 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,619,525 sq. ft. Commercial ft. Movie 1,700 seats 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,700 seats Theater (27,500 sq. ft.) (27,500 sq. ft.) Hotel (B) 0 0 0 295 0 0 295 Residential 0 0 0 4WMI (✓;)0 245 524(&} 675769 Office/ 0 -0- sq. R. 91,727 sq. ft. 349;684 4387,873 286,166 337,267- 2,413,711 sq. ft. Commercial (DC) 599 659 sq. ft. 1.340,609 sq, 95 550 sq. ft. L41 ftu DI A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections ILC and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater Intensity, than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. DC.The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 12 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/224 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations D. Per City Council action on 11/8/11 via resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office /commercial development for Block 500 is 599,659 sq. ft., Block 600 is 1,340,609 sq. Q. and for San Joaquin Plaza is 95,550 sq. fl. 1. Fashion Island The total gross floor area for Fashion Island is 1,619,525 square feet plus the-1,700 seat movie theater seats. The movie theater building area is equivalent to and may be converted to 27,500 square feet of retail development. The conversion of the movie theater to retail space shall not require any additional parking. The gross floor area for Regional Commercial development is the total horizontal floor area of all floors of a building within the exterior walls thereof, measured in square feet, exclusive of common areas such as, but not limited to: covered malls and walkways, carts, kiosks, open or roofed patio areas (defined by planters, awnings, shade structures, fences or rails), covered entries, covered parking, driveways or loading areas. 2. Mixed -Use Sub -Areas The Mixed -Use blocks include Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza. Up to 4524 residential units and 295 hotel rooms are permitted within the Mixed -Use blocks. Residential and hotel uses are measured on a per unit basis. The gross floor area for all other permitted uses is the total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, including halls, stairways, elevator shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms and basement or attic areas having a height of more than seven feet. Excluded are covered porches, walkways and loading docks, service tunnels, and mechanical shafts. Mechanical spaces on roofs, which are inaccessible to tenants, are not counted as square footage. Development limits for residential uses are based on unit counts, and are not within square footage limits. Support uses are not included in the square footage development limits and shall not require parking. 3. Commercial Office Blocks The maximum development limit for the commercial office blocks is specified in Table 2 above. The gross floor area for all permitted uses is the total enclosed area of all floors of a building measured to the outside face of the structural members in exterior walls, including halls, stairways, elevator shafts at each floor level, service and mechanical equipment rooms and basement or attic areas having a height of more than seven feet. Excluded are covered porches, walkways and loading docks, service tunnels, and mechanical shafts. Mechanical spaces on roofs, which are inaccessible to tenants, are not counted as square footage. Support uses are not included in the square footage development limits and shall not require parking. 4. Block 800 Residential The maximum number of dwelling units for multi - family residential use shall not exceed 245. C. Transfer of Development Rights The transfer of development rights among sub -areas of this Planned Community and to /from other areas in the Newport Center/Fashion Island District identified in the General Plan is allowed in accordance with the General Plan. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 13 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC 3/225 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations Development rights may be transferred through a change in location of use(s) and /or a conversion of non- residential use to any other non - residential use allowed by the General Plan and this Planned Community Development Plan or applicable zoning at the receiving site(s). Residential use may be relocated, but may not be converted to or from another use. The transfer of development rights shall be approved, as specified in Section IV.0 below, if the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts and will not result in greater intensity than development allowed without the transfer. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 14 4/26/146/5/12 CC 3/220 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards III. Site Development Standards The following site development standards shall apply to the North Newport Center Planned Community. A. Permitted Height of Structures 1. Standards for Allowable Heights Allowable heights are determined by sub -area. All building heights are measured at finished grade. Fashion Island: The maximum heights of structures within Fashion Island are depicted in Table 3, Fashion Island Height Limits. Table 3 — Fashion Island Height Limits Building Type Height Major Buildings 125' Mall Buildings 75' Parking Structures 55' Periphery Buildings 40' Block 100: The maximum height of all structures shall be 50 feet as measured from finished grade. Blocks 400, 500, and 600: The maximum height of all structures shall be 295 feet as measured from finished grade. Block 800: The maximum height of all structures within the residential portion shall be 200 feet as measured from finished grade. The maximum height of all structures within the commercial office portion shall be 125 feet as measured from finished grade. San Joaquin Plaza: The maximum height of all structures in San Joaquin Plaza shall be 65 feet as measured from finished grade. 2. Standards for Buildings Over 200 Feet in Height a. Aviation Compatibility Prior to issuance of building permits, the project applicant must demonstrate that the following conditions have been satisfied. New development shall be required to comply with the following conditions related to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport: For development of structures that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level at a development site, applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (FAA Form 7460 -1). Following the FAA's Aeronautical Study of the project, projects must comply with conditions of approval imposed or recommended by the FAA. Subsequent to the FAA findings, the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 15 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC 3/227 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards City shall refer the project to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) of Orange County for consistency analysis. 2. No buildings within the North Newport Center Planned Community area shall penetrate the FAA Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77 imaginary obstruction surface for John Wayne Airport. 3. Applicants shall file a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA (Form 7460 -1) for any construction cranes that exceed 200 feet in height above ground level. b. Shade Standards Prior to issuance of a building permit for a structure over 200 feet in height that has the potential to shade residential areas north of San Joaquin Hills Road, a shade study shall be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City. The shade study shall demonstrate that the new development will not add shade to the designated residential areas beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time. The shade study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and the Planning Director shall determine conformance with the standards identified herein as part of the plan review process. C. Rooftop Appurtenances Rooftop appurtenances are permitted and may exceed the maximum building height up to 20 feet. Rooftop appurtenances shall demonstrate compliance with conditions related to the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport, consistent with Section III(A)(2)(a). Rooftop appurtenances must be screened from view; the height of rooftop appurtenances shall not exceed the height of the screening. Supports for window washing equipment are permitted, and are not required to be screened from view. No setbacks are required. The Planning Director shall notify the Planning Commission and City Council if rooftop appurtenances above the height limit are approved, consistent with Section IV(A)(3). d. Architectural Features Architectural features are permitted and may exceed the maximum building height up to 20 feet. Such features must be an extension of the architectural style of the building in terms of materials, design and color. Architectural features shall demonstrate compliance with conditions related to the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport, consistent with Section III(A)(2)(a). The Planning Director shall notify the Planning Commission and City Council if architectural features above the height limit are approved, consistent with Section 1V (A)(3). B. Setback Requirements Setbacks for the seven sub -areas are listed below. Setbacks for surface parking must be screened using hedges, landscaping or other similar methods. Setbacks are the minimum distance from the property line to building, parking structure, or parking lot, unless otherwise specified. This is not intended to apply to interior lot lines or property lines. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 16 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/228 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards Fashion Island Newport Center Drive: 10 feet; may be reduced to 0 feet by the Planning Director through the plan review process. Block 100 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Anacapa Drive: 15 feet Farallon Drive: 15 feet Block 400 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet San Nicolas Drive: 15 feet Block 500 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Santa Rosa: 15 feet San Joaquin Hills: 15 feet San Nicolas: 15 feet Block 600 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Santa Cruz: 15 feet San Simeon: 15 feet — setbacks for parking structure access points may be reduced by the Planning Director through the plan review process San Joaquin Hills: 15 feet — setbacks for parking structure access points may be reduced by the Planning Director through the plan review process Santa Rosa: 15 feet Center Drive (e /w): 0 feet Center Drive (n/s): 0 feet Block 800 Newport Center Drive: 15 feet Commercial office buildings shall be set back 15 feet from Block 800 residential Commercial office parking lots and parking structures shall be set back 5 feet from Block 800 residential Santa Barbara Drive: 15 feet San Clemente Drive: 15 feet Santa Maria Road: 0 feet San Joaquin Plaza San Joaquin Hills: 15 feet Santa Cruz: 15 feet San Clemente: 15 feet Santa Barbara: 15 feet North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 17 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 cc 3/229 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards C. Parking Requirements 1. General Standards Parking requirements are based on gross floor area (as defined in the Development Limits for Fashion Island) for regional commercial uses, net floor area for office /commercial uses, and unit counts for hotel rooms and residential units. Kiosks for retail sales, covered or uncovered, shall not be included in the calculation of required parking. Accessory, ancillary, and support uses for hotel and residential developments shall not be included in the calculation of required parking. Kiosks and sundry shops serving tenants, including accessory, ancillary and support uses less than 5 percent of the gross floor area, are not counted as square footage and do not require parking. Parking management or engineering offices located in parking structures are counted as square footage and require parking. Parking requirements for North Newport Center are shown below on Table 4, North Newport Center Parking Requirements. Table 4 - North Newport Center Parking Requirements Land Use Parking Requirement Regional Commercial 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet' Movie Theater 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet Office 1 space per 375 square feet Medical Office Municipal Code Hotel Municipal Cade Residential 2 spaces per unit includes 1 covered; plus 0.5 spaces per unit up to 50 units, then 0.25 spaces per unit thereafter for guest parking Other Municipal Code For office uses in San Joaquin Plaza, a parking management plan shall be required to utilize the parking ratios identified in Table 4 to demonstrate provision of adequate parking. If a parking management plan is not prepared for office uses in San Joaquin Plaza, parking shall be provided per the Municipal Code. Parking for Block 100, Block 400, and Block 800 Commercial Office shall be provided per the Municipal Code. Parking for Block 800 Residential shall be provided at 2 parking spaces per unit including 1 covered; plus 0.5 spaces per unit for guest parking. 2. Valet Parking Valet parking and satellite parking with shuttle service that involves use of the public right -of -way shall require approval by the City Traffic Engineer. 3. Parking Management Plan Parking management plans may be prepared if the applicant wishes to deviate from the parking standards identified above. Parking management plans may address issues such as modified parking requirements based upon complimentary peak hour demand of uses, off peak shared parking between sub - areas, drop off and I The parking requirement during the peak seasonal period is 4 spaces per 1,000 square feet per an existing parking management plan. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 18 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/230 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards valet services on private property, and tandem parking. The parking management plan shall take into account properties that are not part of the Planned Community district, but that are served by parking located within the district, and shall ensure that no detrimental effects to the existing parking for such properties occur. Parking management plans shall be prepared by an independent traffic engineer at the applicant's expense. Parking management plans shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to the issuance of building permits. D. Landscaping Landscaping shall be installed subject to the following standards and maintained in a healthy, weed - free condition, free of litter and so as not to interfere with traffic safety Surface Parking Lot Landscaping: Parking lots shall be landscaped at a minimum of 1 tree per 5 parking spaces. The minimum size of trees shall be 24 -inch box. 2. Water Conservation: Satellite linked irrigation controllers or appropriate best manage- ment practices shall be incorporated into landscape design for new construction. E. Lighting Parking lots and walkways accessing building and parking areas shall be illuminated with a minimum maintained 0.5 foot - candle average on the driving or walking surface during the hours of operation and one hour thereafter. If the applicant wishes to deviate from this lighting standard, a lighting plan may be prepared by the applicant and submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval. Indirect, decorative halo banding along the top of buildings is permitted. F. Signs 1. General Sign Standards All permanent and temporary signs in North Newport Center that are visible from public right -of- ways and public property shall be consistent with the provisions of these sign standards, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director. All permanent and temporary signs that are not visible from public right -of -ways are not limited in quantity, size, location, or design. Sign illumination is permitted for all sign types. Wall signs that are visible from public right -of -ways must consist of individual fabricated letters; or routed -out letters in an opaque background. Enclosed "box" or "can" signs are not permitted, unless they are logos. All commercial uses are permitted to place at each entry an incidental sign located at or below eye level to be visible to pedestrians, and shall not exceed six square feet. In addition to other signs permitted in this section, signs used to give direction to vehicular or pedestrian traffic are permitted. Directional signs oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic within internal drives or walkways of a development block are not regulated. Directional signs oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic in the public right of way are regulated as follows. Sign content shall not be limited. Signs shall be subject to the review of the City Traffic Engineer to ensure adequate sight distance in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Directional signs are limited North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 19 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3 /2sl Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards to a maximum of 10 square feet in size but are not limited in quantity, location, or design. Temporary signs that are intended to be displayed for 60 days or less are permitted for purposes related to special events, holiday activities, and store openings. Detailed standards for temporary signs are contained below. A comprehensive sign program may be prepared if the applicant wishes to deviate from the sign standards identified herein. Comprehensive sign programs shall be submitted for review and consideration in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Sign programs in place prior to this writing including the Island Hotel and Leasing Sign Programs shall remain in place. 2. Restricted Sign Types Signs visible from public right -of -ways are subject to the following restrictions: a. No rotating, flashing, blinking, or signing with animation shall be permitted on a permanent basis. b. No signs shall be permitted which imitate or resemble official traffic signs or signals. C. No wind signs or audible signs are permitted. Animated signs visible from public streets are not allowed unless otherwise permitted by the Municipal Code. 3. Sign Standards for Fashion Island In addition to the general sign standards identified above, specific sign standards for Fashion Island are provided in Table 6, Fashion Island Sign Standards below. Table 6 — Fashion Island Sign Standards North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 20 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/232 Maximum Letter/ Sign Type Location Maximum Number Maximum Sign Size Logo Height Shopping Center Each vehicle entry drive location 2 per entry drive (one 100 square feet 9 feet Identification Sign on each side) 10 feet high Major Tenant Sign Exterior walls or parapets of 1 sign per building Determined by name 10 feet buildings elevation (maximum 4 of tenant; letter /logo signs for each major height not to exceed tenant) 10 feet Freestanding Exterior walls or parapets of 1 sign per building Determined by name 3 feet Commercial buildings elevation (maximum 4 of tenant; letter /logo signs for each building height not to exceed 3 or structure) feet Monument 1 per building 50 square feet 4.5 feet 5 feet high Tenant Sign Exterior elevations of shopping 1 sign per tenant, per 1 square foot per each 10 feet center and parking structures building elevation lineal foot of storefront facing Newport Center Drive (not to exceed 100 square feet) Theater Signs Facing Newport Center Drive 1 300 square feet Theater name: (exterior wall or parapet of 20 feet high 5 feet building which theater occupies, Each show title: free standing, or on adjacent 3 feet high parking structure) 15 feet wide North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 20 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/232 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards 4. Sign Standards for Mixed -Use and Commercial Office Blocks In addition to the general sign standards identified above, specific sign standards for the Mixed -Use blocks, Block 100, Block 400, and Block 800 are provided in Table 7 below. Primary building address numbers shall be visible from the street (and/or pedestrian walkways in the case of necessity), and be located on the building so that they are visible from adjacent frontage roads and designated parking areas, except for the buildings at 500 and 550 Newport Center Drive, which have their primary address numbers on the cubes along Newport Center Drive. Secondary address signs may be located where appropriate for on -site orientation and safety. All address signs shall have a consistent color, design, and material for any given building. A single letter style is recommended. Table 7 — Sign Standards for Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and San Joaquin Plaza Maximum Letter/ Sign Type Location Maximum Number Maximum Sign Size Logo Height Store Address Each entry to store 1 per store entry 6 square feet 12 inches Entry Marker Signs To be approved by Planning 7 signs 36 square feet (with 2- 2 feet Santa Rosa Drive Director 15 feet high foot overhang) sign located at at San Joaquin Hills Road (1 per corner) 15 feet high 4. Sign Standards for Mixed -Use and Commercial Office Blocks In addition to the general sign standards identified above, specific sign standards for the Mixed -Use blocks, Block 100, Block 400, and Block 800 are provided in Table 7 below. Primary building address numbers shall be visible from the street (and/or pedestrian walkways in the case of necessity), and be located on the building so that they are visible from adjacent frontage roads and designated parking areas, except for the buildings at 500 and 550 Newport Center Drive, which have their primary address numbers on the cubes along Newport Center Drive. Secondary address signs may be located where appropriate for on -site orientation and safety. All address signs shall have a consistent color, design, and material for any given building. A single letter style is recommended. Table 7 — Sign Standards for Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 21 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/233 Maximum Sign Maximum Sign Letter /Logo Type Description Location Maximum Number Size Height A Large cube or blade Santa Rosa Drive 2 15 feet high 24 inches sign located at at San Joaquin Hills Road (1 per corner) 15 feet wide Santa Cruz Drive 2 15 feet high 24 inches entries to Newport Center at San Joaquin Hills Road (1 per corner) 15 feet wide Block 500: 1 15 feet high 24 Inches at San Joaquin Hills Road / Avocado 15 feet wide Block 500: 1 15 feet high 24 inches at San Nicolas / Avocado 15 feet wide MacArthur Boulevard 1 15 feet high 24 inches at San Joaquin Hills Road 15 feet wide San Joaquin Plaza: 1 15 feet high 24 inches at Jamboree / San Joaquin Hills Road 15 feet wide B Small cube located San Nicolas Drive 2 5 feet high 5 inches along Newport at Newport Center Drive (1 per corner) 5 feet wide Newport Center Drive 2 5 feet high 5 inches Center Drive and Santa Rosa (1 per corner) 5 feet wide Block 600: 5 5 feet high 5 inches Along Newport Center Drive 5 feet wide Block 800: 1 5 feet high 5 inches Newport Center Drive and 5 feet wide Santa Maria Road C Other Freestanding Block 100 1 per frontage 5 feet high 10 inches Signs 10 feet wide Block 400: Avocado at San Miguel 2 5 feet high 13 inches Along San Nicolas 1 6 feet wide Between 500 and 550 Newport Center 1 4 feet high 18 inches Drive 12 feet wide North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 21 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/233 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 22 4/26/1 -1 6/5/12 CC 3/234 Maximum Sign Maximum Sign Letter /Logo Type Description Location Maximum Number Size Height Block 600: 2 7 feet high 18 inches Along Santa Cruz Drive 22 feet wide Block 800: 1 5 feet high 14/24 inches Along Santa Barbara Drive 25 feet wide 1 3.5 feet high 20 inches 10 feet wide Santa Cruz Drive 1 15 feet high 24 inches at Newport Center Drive 15 feet wide San Joaquin Plaza: 1 each 6 feet high 5112 inches for Along San Joaquin Hills Road; Santa (3 signs along 12 feet wide Tenant ID; Cruz Drive; San Clemente Drive) IS inches for San Clemente Drive Project ID San Clemente Drive 1 5 feet high 18 inches at Santa Cruz Drive 12 feet wide San Clemente Drive 1 5 feet high 18 inches at Santa Barbara 16 feet wide D Block 400: 1 Determined by 18 inches Signs mounted on landscape walls (includes ground mounted signs in front of landscaping and landscape walls) facing Newport Center Drive name of tenant; letter /logo height not to exceed 18 inches Block 500: facing Newport Center Drive 4 Determined by name of tenant; 26 inches letter /logo height not to exceed 26 Inches Block 600: 2 facing San Joaquin Determined by 18 inches facing streets Hills; name of tenant; 5 facing Newport letter /logo height Center Drive; not to exceed 18 1 facing Santa Rosa inches Block 800: 2 Determined by 36 inches at San Clemente project entry name of tenant; letter /logo height not to exceed 36 inches Block 800: 1 Determined by Winches at San Clemente / Santa Barbara name of tenant; letter /logo height not to exceed 36 inches Block 800 1 Determined by 40 inches Along Newport Center Drive name of tenant; letter /logo height not to exceed 40 Inches North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 22 4/26/1 -1 6/5/12 CC 3/234 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards 5. Temporary Signs The following standards are intended to produce consistent sign design for temporary signs within Newport Center. Temporary signs are to identify a future site or project; or a facility under develop- ment or offered for lease. Temporary signs that are visible from public right -of -ways and identify new construction or remodeling may be displayed for the duration of the construction period beyond the 60 -day limit. Signs mounted on a construction fence are allowed during construction and may be rigid or fabric. The top of the sign must be no greater than 20 feet above grade. Maximum Number: One (1) temporary sign is permitted on a site for each frontage street, up to two (2) signs per building, but not at the same corner of the building. Type: Single- or double -faced ground signs or wall signs. Location: If ground signs, they may be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway. If wall signs, they must be located below the sill of second floor windows. Design: Rectangular shape; rigid, permanent material; not fabric. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 23 4/26/11 6/5/12 1 CC 3/235 Maximum Sign Maximum Sign Letter /Logo Type Description Location Maximum Number Size Height E Building Sign On building elevation, awning or 2 per Primary Tenant Determined by Primary parking structure 1 per Secondary name of tenant; Tenant - Tenant letter /logo height 24 inches 3 for restaurants not to exceed: Secondary Primary 24 inches, Tenant - Secondary 16 16 inches inches Restaurant: Restaurant: 40 40 inches inches high F Building Address On building elevation 1 each 24 inches high 24 inches (additional address signs may be located where appropriate for on -site orientation) G Freestanding Santa Rosa Drive at Newport Center 1 each 8 feet high 18 inches Building Address Drive; San Nicolas Drive at Newport 6 feet wide Center Drive; Santa Cruz at Newport Center Drive; San Joaquin Hills Road 2 28 inches H Advisory Signs Parking Lots and As appropriate for 6 feet high As required by Entries to Parking Lots safety and orientation Fire Department or Building Code for safety purposes I Drive Through Drive Throughs 1 per tenant per 8 feet wide 15 inches Signs elevation, up to 2 on walls of structure J Apartment Leasing Block 800 1 per frontage 5 feet high by 3 24 inches Signs feet wide panel on post K Office Leasing Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800 and 1 per frontage 4.5 feet high by 5 7 inches Signs San Joaquin Plaza feet wide 5. Temporary Signs The following standards are intended to produce consistent sign design for temporary signs within Newport Center. Temporary signs are to identify a future site or project; or a facility under develop- ment or offered for lease. Temporary signs that are visible from public right -of -ways and identify new construction or remodeling may be displayed for the duration of the construction period beyond the 60 -day limit. Signs mounted on a construction fence are allowed during construction and may be rigid or fabric. The top of the sign must be no greater than 20 feet above grade. Maximum Number: One (1) temporary sign is permitted on a site for each frontage street, up to two (2) signs per building, but not at the same corner of the building. Type: Single- or double -faced ground signs or wall signs. Location: If ground signs, they may be parallel or perpendicular to the roadway. If wall signs, they must be located below the sill of second floor windows. Design: Rectangular shape; rigid, permanent material; not fabric. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 23 4/26/11 6/5/12 1 CC 3/235 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards Mounting Technique: Flush with building; entirely on glass or entirely on a wall surface; not overlapping glass or wall surface. Duration: Signs may exist from the time of lease or sale of the parcel until the construction and /or leasing of the facility is complete. G. Residential Compatibility In keeping with the purpose of Fashion Island and the Mixed -Use sub - areas, permitted uses in North Newport Center include uses and events that have the potential to generate noise. Due to the day /evening use of Fashion Island in particular, noise generating activities, lighting, odors from restaurants, and similar occurrences are produced and take place during all hours of operation. Such uses and events are required to comply with the City's Municipal Code regulating these uses. Disclosures shall be made to prospective buyers /tenants of residential developments that there is an expectation for noise levels higher than in typical suburban residential areas as part of the Mixed -Use concept within North Newport Center. Additionally, the disclosure shall indicate that there is an expectation for lighting, odors and similar occurrences in a Mixed -Use setting as compared to suburban residential areas. H. Residential Open Space Requirements The following open space standards shall apply to residential development projects: 1. Common Outdoor Open Space Each project shall provide common outdoor open space either at grade, podium level, or roof level. Common outdoor open space areas shall have a minimum dimension of 30 feet and may contain active and/or passive areas and a combination of hadscape and landscape features, but a minimum of 10 percent of the common outdoor open space must be landscaped. All common outdoor open space must be accessible to all residents. Projects shall provide a minimum of 5 percent common outdoor open space based on the residential lot area. 2. Common Indoor Space Each project shall provide at least one community room of at least 500 square feet for use by all residents of the project. The area should be located adjacent to, and accessible from, common outdoor open space. This area may contain active or passive recreational facilities or meeting space, and must be accessible through a common corridor. 3. Private Open Space At least 50 percent of all dwelling units shall provide private open space, on a balcony, patio, or roof terrace, with a minimum area of 30 square feet each and an average horizontal dimension of 6 feet. Balconies should be proportionately distributed throughout the project in relationship to floor levels and sizes of units. For any project 8 acres or larger, open space shall be provided in accordance with the General Plan. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 24 4/26/146/5/12 CC 3 /23o Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration A. Process for New Structures 1. Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Plan Review process is to provide for review of development proposals for new structures within the North Newport Center Planned Community district. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, all development proposals shall be subject to a Plan Review by the Planning Director for review to determine compliance with the Planned Community Development Plan and North Newport Center Design Regulations. Signs, tenant improvements, carts, kiosks, temporary structures and uses are exempt from this provision. 2. Submittal Contents Each Plan Review submittal or amendment thereof shall contain sufficient details for a thorough review of the relationships between uses on the site and on adjacent sites consistent with the Development Plan and the Design Regulations. At the discretion of the Planning Director, the requirements for submittal of a Plan Review may be altered from those set forth below when the Director determines that other information will be sufficient to allow a thorough review of the project by the approving authority. Submittals for Plan Review shall include plans that contain the following elements in addition to the City's submittal requirements for plan check: a. Existing Conditions including adjacent structures and proposed improvements b. Floor Plans C. Elevations that clearly demonstrate the architectural theme of each face of all structures, including walls and signs, illustrating the following: 1) All exterior materials 2) All exterior colors 3) Building heights d. Parking management plan (where applicable) e. Preliminary Landscape Plan, illustrating: 1) General location of all plant materials, by common and botanical names 2) Size of plant materials 3) Irrigation concept f Lighting Plan, including: locations, fixture height, lighting fixture product type and technical specification g. Permitted and proposed floor area, number of hotel rooms, theater seats, and/or residential units h. Statement of consistency with the General Plan, Planned Community Development Plan and Design Regulations i. Any additional background and supporting information, studies or materials that the Planning Director deems necessary for a clear representation of the projects j. Shade analysis if required k. Open Space Plans for residential projects North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 25 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC S/237 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration 3. Review and Action Submittals shall be reviewed by the Planning Director, and the Planning Director shall approve the project if he /she makes the following findings: a. The proposed use and/or development is consistent with the General Plan. b. The proposed use and/or development is consistent with the North Newport Center PC Development Plan and Design Regulations. The Planning Director shall notify the Planning Commission and City Council if deviations from the height limit are approved. The Planning Director action is the final action unless appealed in accordance with the Municipal Code. B. Process for New Signs Applications for new signs shall follow the process identified in the Municipal Code. Submittal shall be reviewed for consistency with the Development Plan and Design Regulations. C. Transfer of Development Rights The following procedure shall be used for the transfer of development rights. The project applicant shall submit an application to the Planning Director, which identifies the quantity of entitlement (floor area, hotel rooms, theater seats) to be relocated, and the sending and receiving sites. If the requested transfer includes the conversion of non - residential uses, the application shall also identify the quantity of entitlement, by use category, before and after the transfer. 2. The City Traffic Engineer shall perform a traffic analysis to determine the total number of PM peak hour trips that would be generated by development allowed with and without the transfer. Trip generation rates shall be based on standard trip generation values in the current version of ITE's "Trip Generation," unless the Traffic Engineer determines that other rates are more valid for the uses involved in the transfer. 3. Depending on the location of the sending and receiving sites, the Traffic Engineer may determine that a more detailed traffic analysis is required to determine whether adverse traffic impacts will result from the transfer. This analysis shall demonstrate whether allowed development, with and without the transfer, would either cause or make worse an unsatisfactory level of service at any primary intersections for which there is no feasible mitigation. This analysis shall be consistent with the definitions and procedures contained in the Traffic Phasing Ordinance of the Municipal Code, except that "unsatisfactory level of service" shall be as specified in the General Plan. 4. If the transfer request involves the conversion of uses, the Planning Director shall perform a land use intensity analysis to determine the floor area that could be developed with and without the transfer. For purposes of this analysis, theater use shall be allocated 16.1765 square feet per seat. Hotel use shall be allocated the number of square feet per room at which it is included in the General Plan. When the General Plan does not specify intensity for hotel rooms, it shall be as determined by the Planning Director. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 26 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/238 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration 5. Applications for transfer of development rights shall be considered by the City Council as a ministerial action. The City Council shall approve a transfer of development rights if it finds that the transfer will result in no more trips and no greater intensity of land use than the development allowed without the transfer. In addition, if the traffic study in Subsection c. is required, the City Council shall approve the transfer if it results in no greater traffic impact than the development allowed without the transfer. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 27 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/239 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 28 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/24 0 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions V. Definitions All words and phrases used in this North Newport Center PC shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in this section. Architectural Features: A visually prominent or formally significant element of a building which expressed its architectural language and style in a complementary fashion. Architectural features should be logical extensions of the massing, details, materials and color of the building which complement and celebrate its overall aesthetic character. Advisory Sign: Any sign that contains directional or safety information; does not contain advertisements. Audible Signs: Any sign that uses equipment to communicate a message with sound or music. Banks /Savings & Loans: Establishments that provide a full range of retail banking and mortgage loan services to individuals and businesses. Includes only those institutions engaged in the on -site circulation of cash money. Also includes businesses offering check - cashing services. Drive - through or drive -up service included. Bars and Cocktail Lounges: Establishments engaged in selling or serving alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises or establishments having any of the following characteristics: Licensed as a "public premises" by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Provides an area for serving alcoholic beverages that is operated during hours not corresponding to regular meal service hours. Food products sold or served incidentally to the sale or service of alcoholic beverages shall not be deemed as constituting regular food service. Building Elevation: The exterior wall surface formed by one (1) side of the building. Building Height: Building height is measured from the corresponding point on the roof to the exterior finished grade. If the building is on a sloping surface, the height measurement is taken from the building entrance. Exceptions include but are not limited to below grade parking structure entrances, motor courts, and retaining walls. See Graphic t on page 34. Business, Government and Professional: Offices of firms, individuals or organizations that provide professional, executive, management or administrative services (e.g., architectural, engineering, government, insurance, investment, legal, planning). Includes administrative, clerical or public contact offices of a government agency, including incidental storage and maintenance of vehicles. Support retail and service uses also allowed. Carts and Kiosks: Carts and kiosks are small, freestanding structures used for retail sales and services. Generally mobile in terms of ease of relocation, the structures can be seasonal, temporary or for a more permanent use. Commercial, Recreation and Entertainment: Establishments providing participant or spectator recreation or entertainment, either indoors or outdoors, for a fee or admission charge. Illustrative examples of these uses include: North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 29 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC 3/241 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions arcades or electronic games centers having three or more coin - operated game machines bowling alleys billiard parlors cinemas ice /roller skating rinks live entertainment pool rooms tennis /racquetball courts theaters Cultural Institutions: Public or private institutions that display or preserve objects of community, or cultural interest in one or more of the arts or sciences. Day Care: Non- medical care and supervision of children or adults on a less than 24 hour basis, including nursery schools, preschools, and day care centers. Day Spas: Establishments that specialize in the full complement of body care including, but not limited to, body wraps, facials, pedicures, make -up, hairstyling, nutrition, exercise, water treatments and massage which is open primarily during normal daytime business hours and without provisions for overnight accommodations. Department Store: A store selling a wide variety of goods or services arranged in several departments. Eating and Drinking Establishments: Establishments engaged in serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the premises. Emergency Health Care: Establishments that provide emergency medical service with no provision for continuing care on an inpatient basis. Entry Marker Sign: Sign used to provide information on activities and events, as well as advertise stores and shops within a shopping center. Eye Level: The height of 5 feet measured from grade. Freestanding Commercial: Any building with a commercial use which is separated from other commercial uses by parking and /or streets. Internal Pedestrian Street: Any walkway, path, plaza, arcade or corridor, either covered or open to the sky, which is primarily for use by people on foot and is not adjacent to the frontage road or common parking areas. Major Building: A mall building over 50,000 square feet. Major Tenant: A store or restaurant having a minimum of 10,000 square feet of floor space, which is located within or between other commercial buildings. Mall Building: Retail buildings where stores front a pedestrian walkway, which may be enclosed or open. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 30 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/24.2 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions Medical Retail: Sales of medical goods or services that are retail oriented. Illustrative examples of these uses include: eye exam, eyeglass /contact lens sales skin treatments body scanning dental enhancement treatments Minor Use Permit: Use permit issued by the Planning Director Monument Sign: Any sign that is supported by its own structure and is not part of or attached to any building. Parking Structure: Structures containing more than one story principally dedicated to parking. Parking structures may contain accessory, ancillary and resident support uses. Periphery Building: Building located along the ring of Fashion Island adjacent to Newport Center Drive. Personal Improvement: Includes those services that are personal and that promote the health and well -being of an individual. Personal Services: Establishments that provide recurring services of a personal nature. Illustrative examples of these uses include: barber and beauty shops clothing rental shops dry cleaning pick up store with limited equipment dry cleaning with no on -site equipment home electronics and small appliance repair postal services locksmiths self - service laundries shoe repair shops tailors and seamstresses tanning salons printing & duplicating travel agencies/services nail salon Podium Level:A superposed terrace conforming to a building's plan, a continuous pedestal; a level of vertical segregation linking separate areas. Primary Tenant: The largest tenant of a building. Project Identification Sign: A free - standing (single or double faced) monument sign containing the project name. Public Safety Facilities: Police, fire, paramedic and emergency service facilities. Regional Commercial Gross Floor Area: Refer to Section II.B.1 above. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 31 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC 3/243 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions Residential: An area within a structure on a parcel that contains separate or independent living facilities for one or more persons, with area or equipment for sleeping, sanitation or food preparation. Retail Sales: Stores and shops which sell various lines of merchandise for profit. This includes the sales of non - durable and durable goods to customers. Illustrative examples of these stores and lines of merchandise include: antiques appliances artists supplies automotive accessories (no installation) animal sales and services bakeries bicycles books cameras and photographic supplies carpeting and floor covering clothing and accessories convenience markets /stores department stores drug and discount stores dry goods electronic equipment (including automotive installation) food and beverages gift shops handcrafted items hardware hobby materials jewelry real estate information center luggage and leather goods medical supplies and equipment musical instruments, parts and accessories office supplies paint and wallpaper pharmacies shoe stores specialty shops sporting goods and equipment supermarkets tobacco toys and games Rooftop Appurtenance: Rooftop appurtenances include, but are not limited to, mechanical equipment, stairwell and elevator shaft housing, antennae, window washing equipment, and wireless communication facilities. See Graphic 1 on page 34. Secondary Tenant: A small tenant; not the primary tenant of an office building. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 32 4/2&/1 - 46/5/12 CC 3/244 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions Senior Citizen Housing: A residential development for senior citizens (i.e., persons 55 years of age or older) that has at least 35 dwelling units and conforms to Civil Code 513(b)(4). Service Tunnels: A corridor limited to access for building supply and maintenance personnel and equipment including horizontal and vertical tunnels and shafts, and freight elevators, not intended for customer circulation or access, and not for use as storage or office space. Sign: Any media, including their structure and component parts which are used or intended to be used out -of -doors to communicate information to the public. Sign Area: The area enclosed by a rectangle drawn around the working, numbers or images composing the sign. Sign Face: The physical plane and /or surface upon which the working or images are applied. Sign Letter: The individual symbols of the alphabet used in forming the words of a message. Shopping Center Identification Sign: A monument sign identifying a shopping center. Support Uses: Uses within residential developments, offices and hotels, and parking structures designed, oriented, and intended to primarily serve building occupants. This includes uses such as dry cleaners, coffee vendors, and sundry shops. Such uses must be consistent with the pertinent regulations in Table 1. Tenant Sign: Any permanent sign of an establishment that is located on or attached to the storefront elevation, a covered walkway, or an awning for the purpose of communicating the name of the tenant. Temporary Sign: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance, or advertising display constructed of cloth, canvas, plywood, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials, with or without frames, intended to be displayed for a limited period of time. Theater Sign: Any permanent sign used to communicate to the public the name of a theater and the show(s) or movie(s) that are offered. Vehicle Entry: Any intersection points along the public right -of -way that provide access for automobiles. Visitor Accommodations: Establishments offering lodging rooms, including bed and breakfasts, inns, hotel, and motels. Incidental support facilities are included within these uses. Wind Sign: A series of similar banners or objects of plastic or other light material more than 2 inches in diameter which are fastened together at intervals by wire, rope, cord, string or by any other means, designed to move and attract attention upon being subjected to pressure by wind or breeze. North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 33 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/24,5 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions I IT, IdlwyK[rNAt9 =10"N1.pFy=1 dI=k%N ,:IMyi401q ,RAPET SPACE NOTE: In no instance shall any part of the building, including rooftop appurtenances or architectural features, penetrate the FAA (Part 77) imaginary obstruction surface for John Wayne Airport. Graphic 1, Example of Building Height and Rooftop Appurtenances North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan 34 4/26/146/5/12 CC 3/240 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations NORTH NEWPORT CENTER DESIGN REGULATIONS North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC S/247 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/2&11 - 46/5/12 CC 3/24 2 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... ............................... 1 A. Purpose of Design Regulations .......................................................................... ..............................1 B. Newport Center Design Framework .................................................................. ............................... 1 C. North Newport Center ........................................................................................ ..............................4 I1. Design Regulations .............................................................................................. ............................... 7 Usingthese Regulations .............................................................................................. ............................... 7 A. Building Location and Massing ........................................................................ ............................... 7 1. Site Planning Elements ........................................................................... ............................... 7 2. Building Envelope .................................................................................. ............................... 9 3. Building Character and Style .................................................................. ............................... 9 4. Building Materials and Colors ................................................................ .............................12 5. Parking Structures ................................................................................... .............................12 B. Landscape .......................................................................................................... .............................13 1. Overall Landscape ................................................................................. ............................... 13 2. Perimeter and Street Landscape .............................................................. .............................14 3. Parking Lot Landscape ............................................................................ .............................15 4. Internal Landscape .................................................................................. .............................16 C. Circulation ......................................................................................................... .............................16 1. Streets and Pedestrian Activity ............................................................... .............................16 2. Service and Emergency ........................................................................... .............................20 3. Parking Lots ............................................................................................ .............................21 D. Orientation and Identity .................................................................................... .............................22 1. Gateways and Entrances ......................................................................... .............................22 2. View Corridors ........................................................................................ .............................23 3. Landmarks ............................................................................................... .............................24 4. Signage .................................................................................................... .............................25 5. Lighting ................................................................................................... .............................36 North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/14 6/5/12 CC 3/249 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC 3/250 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations I. Introduction A. Purpose of Design Regulations The Design Regulations expand upon the regulations set forth in the Planned Community Development Plan. The Design Regulations are intended to be used for reference by the City of Newport Beach as part of the plan review process. It is recognized that North Newport Center will be built and redeveloped over time and that not all regulations may be achieved nor are applicable for any given project. All new commercial and residential development shall be subject to the North Newport Center Design Regulations. Review for compliance of projects under this section shall occur through the plan review process, as defined in the Development Plan, prior to building permit issuance. B. Newport Center Design Framework Newport Center is a 600 -acre master planned area. Development within Newport Center began in the 1960s and generally has followed the following guiding principles: 1, Strong physical urban design framework which provides structure and character yet allows flexibility 2. Synergistic mix of land uses, market driven to insure economic vitality 3. Balanced and dispersed auto access 4. Organized in "blocks" and districts to break down scale and provide identity 5. Pedestrian Orientation 6. Building massing that responds to topography, with taller buildings located along San Joaquin Hills Road 7. Unifying architectural and landscape character Aerial view of bluff (circa 1960) North Newport Center Design Regulations 1 4/26/1- 46/5/12 CC 3/251 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Early Newport Center Planning Diagrams and Sketches (circa 1960) The design regulations provide standards that govern future development so that, to the extent feasible, the initial design framework is carried forward and the design and development policies from the Land Use Element of the General Plan are implemented. North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CC 3/252 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations General Plan Policies Newport Center The following policies from the Land Use Element are for Newport Center as a whole. Development within North Newport Center should contribute toward the policies whenever possible. • Development Scale; Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway. • Urban Form: Encourage that some new development be located and designed to orient to the inner side of Newport Center Drive, establishing physical and visual continuity that diminishes the dominance of surface parking lots and encourages pedestrian activity. • Pedestrian Connectivity and Amenity: Encourage that pedestrian access and uses within the district be improved with additional walkways and streetscape amenities concurrent with the development of expanded and new uses. • Fashion Island Architecture and Streetscape: Encourage that new development in Fashion Island complement and be of equivalent or higher design quality than existing buildings. Reinforce the existing promenades by encouraging retail expansion that enhances the storefront visibility to the promenades and provides an enjoyable retail and pedestrian experience. Additionally, new buildings shall be located on axes connecting Newport Center Drive with existing building to provide visual and physical connectivity with adjoining uses, where practical. Mixed -Use District and Neighborhood The following policies from the Land Use Element are City-wide in orientation. Development within North Newport Center should contribute toward the policies whenever possible. • Mixed -Use Buildings: Require that Mixed -Use buildings be designed to convey a high level of architectural and landscape quality and ensure compatibility among their uses in consideration of the following principles: - Design and incorporation of building materials and features to avoid conflicts among uses, such as noise, vibration, lighting, odors, and similar impacts - Visual and physical integration of residential and non - residential uses - Architectural treatment of building elevation and modulation of their massing - Separate and well- defined entries for residential units and non - residential businesses - Design of parking areas and facilities for architectural consistency and integration among uses - Incorporation of extensive landscape appropriate to its location; urbanized streetscapes, for example, would require less landscape along the street North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1- 46/5/12 CC 3/253 3 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations frontages but integrate landscape into interior courtyards and common open spaces • Mixed -Use Building Location and Size of Non - Residential Uses: Require that 100 percent of the ground floor street frontage of Mixed -Use buildings be occupied by retail and other compatible non - residential uses, unless specified otherwise by policies for a district or corridor. • Parcels Integrating Residential and Non - Residential Uses: Require that properties developed with a mix of residential and non - residential uses be designed to achieve high levels of architectural quality in accordance with policies related to the character and quality of multi - family residential and the architecture and site design of commercial districts, be planned to assure compatibility among the uses, and provide adequate circulation and parking. Residential uses should be seamlessly integrated with non- residential uses through architecture, pedestrian walkways, and landscape. They should not be completely isolated by walls or other design elements. • Districts Integrating Residential and Non - Residential Uses: Require that sufficient acreage be developed for an individual use located in a district containing a mix of residential and non - residential uses to prevent fragmentation and assure each use's viability, quality, and compatibility with adjoining uses. C. North Newport Center North Newport Center consists of properties on the higher elevations of Newport Center between San Joaquin Hills Road and the Newport Center ring road (Blocks 400, 500, 600 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza), as well as the core of Newport Center, Fashion Island, and Block 100. North Newport Center Design Regulations 4 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CC 3/254 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations To the northeast is San Joaquin Hills Road, a wide boulevard on the ridge that forms the upper edge of Newport Center. To the south and southeast are office buildings, movie theaters, restaurants, service retail, the Newport Transportation Center, the Newport Beach Central Library, and Corona del Mar Plaza, a community retail center. Adjacent uses within Newport Center are office buildings, an apartment community, a resort hotel, art museum, police station, fire station, auto dealership, service station, and the Newport Beach County Club. North Newport Center is a mixed -use district that features an open -air regional shopping center, Fashion Island; a resort hotel; and a variety of office buildings that help form the skyline of Newport Beach; connected by a network of tree -lined streets and sidewalks, within a master planned environment featuring a consistent landscape. North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1- 46/5/12 CC 3/2155 5 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations [this page intentionally blank] North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CG 3/250 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations II. Design Regulations Using these Regulations These regulations are intended to be used in conjunction with other applicable codes, documents, and ordinances to assess compliance of proposed projects. Each category of regulations begins with the intent, which describes the overall character that is envisioned and what objectives are necessary to attain the desired effect. A. Building Location and Massing Intent The intent of the building massing and location standards is to ensure that new development has an appropriate scale, is related to its use and location, and is properly integrated with adjoining land uses and features. 1. Site Planning Elements a. New commercial and residential buildings should respect the existing urban form, which generally consists of buildings that are organized orthogonally to create pedestrian - friendly courtyards and promenades that visually link the buildings into clusters, as seen in the diagrams below. Pedestrian promenade at Fashion Island North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1- 46/5/12 Pedestrian courtyard at 550 Newport Center Drive Building interface at San Joaquin Plaza CC S/257 7 1 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations b. In Mixed -Use sub - areas, the development of a complex of buildings is preferable to a single large structure because the varied massing provides visual interest and a human scale. Additionally, the spaces created between the various buildings provide opportunities for pedestrian plazas, courtyards and other outdoor gathering areas. C. New buildings should be oriented to and have features which reinforce and enhance the existing pedestrian experience. Mixed -Use sub -areas should emphasize pedestrian orientation by utilizing features such as plazas, courtyards, interior walkways, trellises, seating, fountains, and other similar elements. d. New retail buildings should be located to enhance tenant visibility and identity, while maintaining compatible relationships with adjacent structures and street frontages. e. New buildings should be arranged to provide convenient access to entrances and efficient on -site circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. Projects should develop a comprehensive open space network that uses plazas and other open space elements to connect uses. Open space areas and the paths that link them should facilitate the integration of adjacent land uses on the site. f. New buildings with a strong street presence are encouraged in Fashion Island. g. Residential development shall provide common outdoor open space areas for residents. These areas should be configured and designed so as to address privacy for residential uses while also providing linkages to the public open space components of the project. h. Planning and developing shared facilities such as driveways, parking areas, pedestrian plazas and walkways, with adjoining properties, including those outside of the North Newport Center Development Plan, is strongly encouraged. Example of resident open space Example of office courtyard North Newport Center Design Regulations 8 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CC 3/252 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 2. Building Envelope a. New buildings should respect the existing development scale, which generally consists of high -rise buildings (10+ stories) clustered along the northerly section at the highest point in Newport Center. Mid -rise office buildings (5 -10 stories), low - rise office buildings, and retail development are generally located at lower elevations towards Pacific Coast Highway. 3. Building Character and Style a. The character and style of new buildings located in Fashion Island should be compatible with the classically inspired architecture of the existing buildings in Fashion Island. The character and style of new commercial and residential buildings located in the mixed -use sub -areas should be compatible with the existing contemporary architecture or the classically inspired architecture of the existing buildings. b. New buildings within Fashion Island should continue and enhance the existing pedestrian experience by promoting storefront visibility. C. New buildings should reflect a timeless architecture with straightforward geometry, a unified composition, the expression of floor levels and structure, and solid parapets. Trendy, short- lived, idiosyncratic architectural styles are not appropriate; although retail storefronts may reflect the design theme of the merchant. d. The top of all roof - mounted equipment and communications devices should be below the building parapet or equipment screens in a manner that hides them from the street. The height of rooftop appurtenances shall not exceed the height of the screening. e. Ground level equipment, refuse collection areas, storage tanks and infrastructure equipment should be screened from public right -of -ways views with dense landscaping and /or walls of materials and finishes compatible with adjacent buildings. f Above grade equipment, including backflow preventers at domestic water meters, irrigation controllers, and cable television pedestals should not be visible from public right -of -ways, when feasible. g. Chain link fencing is not allowed, except to screen construction areas. h. Avoid long, continuous blank walls, by incorporating a variety of materials and design treatments and/or modulating and articulating elevations to promote visual interest. i. Architectural features should accomplish the architectural goal of extending the design elements of the building. j. New buildings on sites with sloping surfaces should be encouraged to utilize the existing terrain. Entrances to motor courts and parking structures are not included in the measurement of building height. North Newport Center Design Regulations lQ6/1- 46/5/12 CC S/25_9 U Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Example of appropriate high -rise architecture Example of straight forward geometry and expression of floor levels Examples of classically inspired architecture Example of appropriate low -rise form Example of retail storefront visibility to pedestrians North Newport Center Design Regulations 10 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 cc 3/200 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Example of architectural feature Example of architectural feature MECHANICAL PENTHOUSE ELEVATOR OVERUN / ROOF OF LAST OCCUPIED SPACE TOWER h� e F1111,H GRADE Example of building height measurement on sloping terrain North Newport Center Design Regulations 11 4/26/1- 46/5/12 CC 3/201 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 4. Building Materials and Colors a. Colors, materials, and finishes should be coordinated on all exterior elevations to achieve continuity of design. Stripes and patterns are not appropriate; although retail storefronts may reflect the design theme of the merchant. b. Clay tile, concrete tile, metal, and fabric are acceptable materials for low- and mid - rise roofs. C. Stone, metal, exterior plaster, exterior insulated finishing systems (EIFS), brick, concrete, wood, and glass are acceptable materials for building walls. d. Stone, metal, exterior plaster, exterior insulated finishing systems (EIFS), brick, concrete, wood, and glass are acceptable materials for railings. e. Service door and mechanical screen colors should be the same as, or compatible to, the adjacent wall colors. Example of appropriate retail finishes 5. Parking Structures Example of appropriate low -rise finishes a. The architecture of new parking structures should be compatible, complementary, and secondary to principal buildings. b. The design of new parking structures in Fashion Island shall incorporate elements (including landscaping) to soften their visual impact. C. New parking structures in Fashion Island shall be located and designed in a manner that is compatible with the existing pedestrian scale and open feeling of Newport Center Drive. d. Simple, regular forms are encouraged. e. Views of parked vehicles should be screened. f The visual appearance of sloping floors should be minimized. g. Interiors should be designed to promote a safe vehicular and pedestrian experience. h. Vehicular entries for non - residential parking structures should be obvious and inviting. North Newport Center Design Regulations 12 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CC 3/262 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Vehicular entries to exclusively residential structures should be incorporated into the structure so as to minimize the street presence of the parking structure entrance and to avoid interrupting the continuity of the street facing building elevations. Block 600 parking structure demonstrating rectangular form and vines to soften visual impact B. Landscape Intent West parking structure at Fashion Island demonstrating rectangular form and varied landscape to soften visual impact The intent of the landscape standards is to ensure that new commercial and residential development preserves and enhances the existing landscape character of North Newport Center. 1. Overall Landscape a. New development should promote an evergreen plant palette that is appropriate in the Mediterranean climate of Southern California. Plant materials should be of a native or drought- tolerant species where appropriate and provide variety, while being consistent with the existing landscape pattern and architectural design of the building. b. Landscape and site design will incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address low -flow runoff and storm water runoff. Landscaped areas within the project will be provided and used to treat runoff from impervious surfaces and roof drains prior to being discharged into the storm drain system. C. The landscape palette should consist of two distinct groups of plant materials: - Accent planting, including palms, cypress, and color accents - Background planting, including evergreen canopy trees and shrubs d. The overall landscape should be dominated by background planting with accent planting in key areas corresponding to the land use and development intensity. North Newport Center Design Regulations 13 4/26/1- 46/5/12 CC 3/203 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations e. Planting should be organized in layers of plant size and variety such as flowering, cascading, or climbing plants. Contrasts in color and texture should be used to enhance the layering of plants. Example of appropriate landscape variety complementing the building form Example of layering principles Example of vertical and horizontal plant forms 2. Perimeter and Street Landscape a. The landscape on the perimeter of sub -areas and along streets of new commercial and residential development should complement the street tree pattern, enhance the pedestrian experience, screen parked vehicles, and soften the view of parking structures. b. Existing trees along public streets should be preserved, and new trees should be installed to fill in gaps. C. Evergreen hedges should be used to screen the lower portions of parked cars. d. Evergreen planting should be used to screen parking structures. North Newport Center Design Regulations 14 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CC 3/264 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Newport Center Drive landscape variety San Nicolas landscape showing screening of parked cars San Joaquin Hills Road landscape 3. Parking Lot Landscape Landscape adjacent to 888 San Clemente parking structure a. New surface parking lots should have evergreen canopy trees to provide shade. b. A uniform evergreen tree type should be used for parking lot fields, with a different uniform evergreen tree type used to highlight the major parking aisles. C. Evergreen hedges should be used to screen parked cars. North Newport Center Design Regulations 15 4/26/1- 46/5/12 Cc 4. Internal Landscape Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations screen parked cars a. New courtyards and promenades should continue the existing pedestrian experience by promoting visual continuity, shade and an evergreen landscape. b. Trees should be installed to shade appropriate walkways and cause an interesting and varied pedestrian experience. Example of trees adding variety to pedestrian experience C. Circulation Intent Example of landscaping creating strong visual continuity The intent of the circulation criteria is to ensure that new commercial and residential development enhances existing circulation patterns by maintaining existing, upgrading existing and providing new street and walkway connections. 1. Streets and Pedestrian Activity a. New development should preserve and enhance the existing attractive street scene, promote safe and convenient driving practices, and encourage street level pedestrian activity. North Newport Center Design Regulations 16 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CC 3/200 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations b. All buildings should be publicly accessible via a path or walkway from a public sidewalk. C. The crescent walk linking Block 400, Block 500 and Block 600 along Newport Center Drive and pedestrian connections to /in Fashion Island should be preserved and enhanced where feasible. Connections from the crescent walk into courtyards, plazas, and other gathering areas in Block 400, Block 500 and Block 600 should be provided where possible. d. Each sub -area should demonstrate an internal pedestrian network of walks and paseos that connect to the larger Newport Center pedestrian system. e. Strong pedestrian connectivity, reinforced by protected walkways and landscaping, should occur between Newport Center Drive and the retail core of Fashion Island. f. Amenities such as benches, plazas and other pedestrian- oriented facilities should be provided at pedestrian destinations. g. To promote the vitality of the public street scene, pedestrian bridges and tunnels which remove pedestrians from the street level are not allowed. h. New benches, street trees, directional signs, trash receptacles, and exterior lighting are encouraged in the public right -of -ways to reinforce pedestrian activity. i. Enhanced paving in crosswalks to highlight pedestrian pathways is allowed if it is compatible with the character of the existing development. Center Drive to Fashion Island Example of pedestrian connectivity to the street (between 500 and 550 Newport Center Drive) Example of pedestrian amenities Example of the crescent walk design framework North Newport Center Design Regulations 17 4/26/1- 46/5/12 CC 3/207 Pedestrian amenities in Fashion Island Pedestrian amenity in Fashion Island Example of a strong pedestrian pathway Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Storefront interface with pedestrians Fashion Island paseo North Newport Center Design Regulations 18 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 CC S/202 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Crescent Walk Vehicular Circulation Pedestrian Connection to Fashion Island North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC 3/269 19 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 2. Service and Emergency a. New commercial and residential development should promote efficient circulation for service and emergency vehicles. b. Major loading docks should be located away from front doors and from residential areas to separate service traffic from other traffic. C. Loading bays should be designed to minimize their visual prominence and any interference with pedestrian and vehicular flows. d. Turf -block may be used in landscape areas where fire access is necessary. e. Truncated domes should be a contrasting color, other than yellow, and should be coordinated with the paving material unless otherwise required by federal or state standards. Fashion island loading dock Fashion Island loading dock North Newport Center Design Regulations 20 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC S/270 3. Parking Lots Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations a. Parking areas should not create a separation between adjacent land uses and buildings. b. Parking lots at new development should promote efficient circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. C. Convenient, well marked and attractive pedestrian access should be provided from parking lots to buildings. d. The use of permeable surfaces is encouraged. 680 Newport Center Drive demonstrating flow from parking to building Newport Center Drive parking lot Well- defined walkway from Newport Center Drive into Fashion Island at San Nicolas North Newport Center Design Regulations 21 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC 3/27i Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations D. Orientation and Identity Intent The intent of the standards for orientation, identity, and safety is to ensure that new commercial and residential development promotes wayfmding for residents and visitors, strengthens North Newport Center's sense of place, and produces a safe environment. 1. Gateways and Entrances a. New development should respect existing entries and, if entry modifications are required, should integrate with the existing vehicular and pedestrian circulation system. b. Key landscape elements at the "landscape corners" should be retained. San Joaquin Hills Road and Jamboree Road San Joaquin Hills Road and MacArthur San Joaquin Hills Road and Santa Cruz San Joaquin Hills Road and Santa Cruz North Newport Center Design Regulations 22 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 CC S/272 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 2. View Corridors a. New development should preserve views of major retail tenants in Fashion Island from Newport Center Drive. b. New development should capture views of the ocean from windows and decks at new restaurants, offices, and residences, where feasible. Fashion Island major tenant visibility Fashion Island major tenant visibility Balconies at 888 San Clemente featuring ocean views North Newport Center Design Regulations 23 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC 3/2j 3 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 3. Landmarks a. As appropriate, major new development may be positioned and designed to serve as a landmark within North Newport Center. b. Landmark elements may be included in building design to distinguish individual buildings and enhance way£mding. The Island Hotel as a landmark building Wind chime as a landmark at Macy's Palms as a landmark at the southern entry into Fashion Island North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 24 CC S/274 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 4. Signage a. New development should have signs that promote identity and wayfinding. b. Signs should be designed to clearly communicate their messages. C. Signs should be designed to complement the architecture and landscape. d. Identification signs should be designed to convey the image of the project or business. e. Wayfmding signs should be unified within each sub -area. f Simplicity and legibility are encouraged. g. Ample blank space around sign copy is encouraged. h. Animated signs visible from public streets are not allowed unless otherwise permitted by the Municipal Code. i. Signs may be internally - illuminated, halo - illuminated, externally illuminated, or non - illuminated. j. Sign types A -K and their corresponding locations are shown on the following pages. Project identification sign Directional sign Business identification sign �r NORDSTROM oPENING2010 Temporary signs mounted on construction fence North Newport Center Design Regulations 25 4/26/1 -4 6/5/12 1 CC S/275 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Sign A — Large Cube or Blade Sign Sign: 13'-0" high; 12' -2" wide Letters: 15 inches high max. Sign: 11'-0" high; 12' -2" wide Letters: 15 inches high max. Symbol: 22 inches high Existing Signs Block 100, 400, 500, 600, 800; and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/1- 46/5/12 Letters: Symbol Sign A5 Sign: Letters: Symbol: 11' -0" high; 12' -2" wide 15 inches high max. 22 inches high 11'-0" high; 12' -2" wide 15 inches high max. 22 inches high Sign: 11'-0" high; 12'-2" wide Letters: 15 inches high max. Symbol: 22 inches high Sign A6 Sign: 13' -0" high; 12'-2" wide Letters: 15 inches high max. (est) CC 3/270 26 Sign B — Small Cube Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations i9m Sign: 5' -0" high; 5'-0" wide Letters: 9 inches high Sign: 5'-0" high; 5'-0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 24 inches high max. Am Sign: 5' -0" high; 5'-0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 24 inches high max. Existing Signs Block 100, 400, 500, 600, 800; and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/446/5/12 Sign B7 Sign: 5'-0" high; 5'-0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 24 inches high max. Letters: Numerals: Sign B8 Sign: Letters: Numerals: 5W' high; 5' -0" wide 5 inches high max. 24 inches high max. 5W' high; 5'-0" wide 5 inches high max. 24 inches high max. Sign: 5-0" high; 5' -0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 24 inches high max. CiCi J'7 /� 27 Sign B6 Sign: 5' -0" high; 5' -0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 24 inches high max. North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/446/5/12 Sign B7 Sign: 5'-0" high; 5'-0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 24 inches high max. Letters: Numerals: Sign B8 Sign: Letters: Numerals: 5W' high; 5' -0" wide 5 inches high max. 24 inches high max. 5W' high; 5'-0" wide 5 inches high max. 24 inches high max. Sign: 5-0" high; 5' -0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 24 inches high max. CiCi J'7 /� 27 Sign C - Freestanding Signs Sign C7 Sign: 5' -3" high; 11' -0" wide Letters: 11 inches high Sign C12 Sign: 4'-4" high; 9' -6" wide Letters: 10 inches high max. 111111L�Y " S: Sign C8 Sign: 6' -10" high: 6' -0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals: 11 inches high max. Sign C13 Sign: 4' -4" high; 9' -6" wide Letters: 10 inches high max. L THE ISLAND HOTEL An Sign C9 Sign: 6'-2" high; 20'-6" wide Letters: 17 inches high max. Sign C14 Sign: 9' high; 4' -9" wide Letters: 6 inches high max Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Sign C1 Sign: 6' -6" high; 15' -4" wide Letters: 13 inches high max. Symbol: 18 inches high Sign C3 Sign: 4' -2" high; 7'-0" wide Letters: 4 inches high max. 1 1 Sign C5 Sign: 4' -9" high; 12' -0" wide Letters: 12 inches high Ellin Mal la Sign C10 Sign: 4' -2" high; 5' -0" wide Letters: 6 inches high max. Symbol: 13 inches high max. Sign C15 Sign: 9' high; 4' -9" wide Letters: 6 inches high max Sign C2 Sign: 4' -4" high; 9' -3" wide Letters: 11 inches high max. Sign C4 Sign: 5' -3" high; 11' -0" wide Letters: 11 inches high Sign C6 Sign: 5' -3" high; 11' -0" wide Letters: 11 inches high Sign C11 Sign: 4'-4" high; 9' -6" wide Letters: 10 inches high max. r Sign C16 Sign: 5' high; 25' wide Letters: 14 inches high max. Symbol: 24 inches high max. North Newport Center Design Regulations 28 4/26/116/5/12 CC 3/272 Sign C - Freestanding Signs (continued) Existing Signs Block 100, 400, 500, 600, 800; and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations a — � w Sign C17 Sign: T -5 high; S wide Letters: 20 inches high max North Newsp 2 Center Design Regulations 29 6 CC S/279 Sign D — Landscape Walls Sign D7 location I go Sign D12 Letters: 11 inches high Numerals: 12 inches high w Sign D8 Letters: 15 inches high max. Sign D13 Letters: 40 inches high II1� Sign D9 location Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations �6e�olony Sign D1 Letters: 37 inches high max. Sign D3 Letters: 35 inches high max. Sign D5 location Sign D19 Symbol: 17 inches high Sign D2 Letters: 35 inches high max. Sign D4 Letters: 15 inches high max. EM Sign D6 location 11 ', Sign D11 Letters: 18 inches high max. Symbol: 26 inches high Existing Signs Block 100, 400, 500, 600, 800; and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center North Newport Center Design Regulations 30 4/26/146/5/12 CC 3/280 Sign E — Building Sign Sign E* Sign: Mounted directly on building face Letters: 24 inches — primary tenant 16 inches — secondary tenant Sign F — Building Address Sign F* Sign: Mounted directly on building face Letters: 24 inches Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Sign E* Sign: Sign on Awning at entrance to restaurant Letters: 36 inches high * Photographs of sign types E and F provided for reference purposes. A full inventory of those signs is not provided herein. North Newport Center Design Regulations 31 4/26/446/5/12 1 CC S/221 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Sign G — Freestanding Building Address Sign G1 Sign: 8W' high; 6' -0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals 28 inches high Sign G2 Sign: 8' -0" high; 6' -0" wide Letters: 5 inches high max. Numerals 28 inches high Existing Signs Block 100, 400, 500, 600, 800; and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center North Newport Center Design Regulations 32 4/26/146/5/12 CC S/2g2 Sign H — Advisory Signs Sign I — Drive Through Signs Sign H* Sign: 6 feet high Sign: 8 feet wide Letters: 15 inches high * Photographs of sign types H and I provided for reference purposes. A full inventory of these signs is not provided herein. North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/446/5/12 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 33 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Sign J —Apartment Leasing Signs Sign panel: 4W' high; 3' -0" wide (est.) Letters: 6 inches high max. (est.) Sign J2 Sign panel: 4'-0" high; 3'-0" wide (est.) Letters: 6 inches high max. (est.) Existing Signs Block 100, 400, 500, 600, 800; and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center North Newport Center Design Regulations 34 4/26/116/5/12 CC 3/224 Sign K — Office Leasing rw- Sign K7 Sign: 5' -0" high; 5' -0" wide Letters: 7 inches high Numerals: 6.5 inches high M Sign K8 location North Newport Center Design Regulations 4/26/116/5/12 Sign: 5' -0" high; 5' -0" wide Letters : 7 inches high Numerals: 6.5 inches high Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations Sign K1 Sign: 5' -0" high; 5'-0" wide Letters: 7 inches high Numerals: 6.5 inches high Sign K5 Sign: 5' -0" high; 5'-0" wide Letters: 7 inches high Numerals: 6.5 inches high Sign: 5' -0" high; 5' -0" wide Letters: 7 inches high Numerals: 6.5 inches high Existing Signs Block 100, 400, 500, 600, 600; and San Joaquin Plaza North Newport Center IIft. Sign K2 Sign: 5' -0" high; 5'A" wide Letters: 7 inches high Numerals: 6.5 inches high Sign: 5' -0" high; 5'A" wide Letters: 7 inches high Numerals: 6.5 inches high Sign K6 location Numerals: 6.5 inches high Sign K12 is similar to K11 Sign K13 is similar to K11 CC 3/225 35 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Appendix — Design Regulations 5. Lighting a. The exterior lighting at new commercial and residential development should be compatible with and enhance the existing lighting of the sub -area. b. Light fixtures at walkways and parking lots should be coordinated in height, color, and style. C. Light fixtures should not cast off -site glare. d. Building walls may be illuminated by downlights and uplights; light sources should not be visible from public view. e. Tops of buildings may be highlighted with bands of light. f Utilitarian light fixtures, such as floodlights and wallpacks, may only be used in service areas. g. Low sodium lighting is not allowed. It. ATM lighting shall conform to state code without causing offsite glare, such as through the use of bollards, tree lights, pole lights, and soffit lights, rather than floodlights and wallpacks. i. In pedestrian areas such as courtyards, plazas, and walkways, lighting fixtures should be pedestrian scale. Appropriate light bollard at Block 600 Non -glare producing lights at 888 San Clemente North Newport Center Design Regulations 36 4/26/1 -1- 6/5/12 n V S/220 Attachment No. CC 4 Resolution approving Traffic Study No.TS2012 -004 CC -4/22 GC 4/222 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -004 REGARDING NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for the an amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub- areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza ( "Property "). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company requests approval of the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company also requests approval of the transfer of development intensity (TD2012 -002), an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, and an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan (PD2012 -001) to increase the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and to allocate the units to the San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 15 of the units are currently allowed by the General Plan, but are unassigned to any specific property; the remaining 79 units would result from the conversion of un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the NNCPC. WHEREAS, General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 permits development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject to the approval of the City with the finding that the transfer is consistent with the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance, or TPO) requires that a traffic study be prepared and findings be made before building permits may be approved if a proposed project will generate in excess of 300 average daily trips (ADT). WHEREAS, a traffic study (TS2012 -004), entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec Consulting Services Inc., May 2012), was prepared under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the Chapter SD \847837.2 CC 4/229 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) and its implementing guidelines. Although no specific development project is proposed at this time, development of the 94 residential units was assumed to be completed in 2015 and is forecasted to generate 393 additional trips per day, including 32 additional a.m. peak hour trips and 36 p.m. peak hour trips. It should be noted that the 430 residential units currently allocated and vested within the NNCPC were previously analyzed and approved under Traffic Study No. TS2007 -001 and added to the approved projects list. Traffic associated with projects on the approved projects list has been included in the cumulative traffic impact analysis included in the subject traffic study for this project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the proposed traffic study. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the traffic study by majority vote. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on July 24, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the City Council considered all project - related applications, including proposed traffic study. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the City Council at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the City Council finds (1) The traffic study, entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec Consulting Services Inc., May 2012), was prepared under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) and its implementing guidelines. (2) The traffic study indicates that the project will increase traffic at 12 of the 20 study intersections by one percent (1 %) or more during peak hour periods one year after the completion of the project and, therefore, these 12 intersections require further Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis. (3) Utilizing the ICU analysis specified by the TPO, the traffic study determined that the 12 primary intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and no improvements are required. 2 SD \8478373 CC 4/290 (4) Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, the implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach. (5) Since implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach, no improvements or mitigation are necessary. (6) The traffic study supports the finding that the proposed transfer of development intensity will have no direct or cumulative adverse impact on the study intersections, and no mitigation is required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby approve Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004, attached as Exhibit "A ", based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record. 2. 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. 3. This resolution was approved, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 24`h day of July, 2012. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK 3 SD \8478373 CC 4/291 rd SD \847837.2 CC x-/292 Exhibit "A' North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Appendices to be attached upon approval. A complete copy of the Traffic Analysis with Appendices is available for review online at: http:/ /www.newportbeachca.gov /pin /CEQA REV IEW / North %20Newport %20Center %20 PC %20Addendum2 /05 Appendix D Traffic Impact Analysis.pdf) SD \847837.2 cc 4/295 cc 4/294 v" North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis Stantec May 2012 Prepared For: City of Newport Beach 2073006780 CC 4/295 North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis City of Newport Beach May 16, 2012 Prepared for: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Submitted by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 19 Technology Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92618 Prepared by: Cathy Lawrence, PE No.TR001635 Transportation Engineer ,t Up, 3o t Stantec Consulting Services Inc. sTA TRFlFF��� Joe Foust, PE Reviewed by: Pri�ci _al, Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering St tec Consulting Services Inc. stantec CC 4/290 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... ..............................1 2.0 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE ANALYSIS ...................................... ..............................1 3.0 CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS ............................................... ..............................6 4.0 GENERAL PLAN ANALYSIS ................................................................ .............................17 5.0 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ .............................17 City of Newport Beach CAL, Ipo \report \rpt_sonjoaquinplam ipo_051672 docx S` a ntec CC 4/297 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table of Contents List of Figures Figure 1 San Joaquin Plaza Project Description ...................................... ............................... 2 Figure 2 TPO Analysis Study Intersections ............................................. ............................... 3 Figure 3 General Project Trip Distribution and Project ADT ...................... ............................... 8 Figure 4 AM Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips .................................... ............................... 9 Figure 5 PM Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips ................................... ............................... 10 Figure 6 Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips ........................................ ............................... 11 List of Tables Table 1 Existing ICU Summary .............................................................. ..............................4 Table 2 Approved Projects Summary ..................................................... ..............................5 Table 3 Trip Generation Summary ........................................................ ............................... 7 Table 4 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary ........................................... ............................... 12 Table 5 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary .................................... ............................... 13 Table 6 Year 2016 ICU Summary ...................................................... ............................... 15 Table 7 Cumulative Projects Summary ................................................. ............................... 16 Table 8 Cumulative ICU Summary ...................................................... ............................... 18 Appendices Appendix A: ICU Analysis Calculations Appendix B: One Percent Analysis Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL, \ 2073\ active\ 2073006780 \san_jaoquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt_ son loaquinplaza 1po_051612 doox S` + ntec CC 4/292 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 1.0 Introduction This report summarizes an analysis performed for the proposed development of 524 residential units in the San Joaquin Plaza area of North Newport Center in the City of Newport Beach. A portion of the units (430 dwelling units) is currently entitled on the proposed site, a portion (79 units) is a conversion from unbuilt hotel rooms on a site within Newport Center to dwelling units, and the remainder (15 units) is unbuilt within Newport Center area (project location shown in Figure 1). The units which are not currently entitled on the site (94 units) are being analyzed in this report based on the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) methodology. In addition, this report summarizes the results of an analysis of cumulative conditions in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. 2.0 Traffic Phasing Ordinance Analysis The City of Newport Beach identified 20 intersections for analysis to determine the impact of the proposed residential project. These intersections are illustrated in Figure 2. Existing peak hour intersection volumes for the study locations were counted in March 2012 by Traffic Data Services, Inc., consistent with the TPO requirements. Existing intersection levels of service are based on intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. The ICU values are a means of presenting the volume to capacity ratios, with a V/C ratio of .90 representing the upper threshold for an acceptable level of service (LOS D) in the City of Newport Beach. Existing lane configurations were assumed, and a capacity of 1,600 vph per lane with no clearance factor was utilized. The City methodology calculates the ICU value to three decimal places, and then reports the resulting ICU value rounded to two decimal places. Existing ICU values for the study intersections assuming existing lane configurations are summarized in Table 1 (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As this table shows, the study intersections are currently operating at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. An ambient growth rate of 1.0 percent per year was added to the existing volumes along Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Coast Highway. The project is assumed to be complete in 2015; therefore, the study year is 2016 consistent with the TPO guidelines. Traffic generated by approved projects in the study area (including the entitled 430 DU in San Joaquin Plaza), obtained from City Staff, were added to the existing -plus- growth peak hour volumes to obtain year 2016 background peak hour volumes for the intersections prior to the addition of project - generated traffic. Table 2 summarizes the approved projects included in this analysis. City of Newport Beach CAL. v.\ 2073\ active\ 2073006760 \san_jonquin_plazo_tpo\ report \rpt sonjooquinplam_tpo_051612.docz StaWK CC 4/299 C 3 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 1 Existing ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff Existing AM PM .74/C .6178 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .70/13 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .44/A .57/A 4. Jamboree & Coast H .56/A .65/13 5. Newport Center & Coast H .36/A .44/A 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .50 /A 7. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Canyon .73/C .82/D 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65/13 .80 /C 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .53/A .44/A 10. MacArthur & Coast H .66/13 .64/B 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26/A .36 /A 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .25/A 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .49/A 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .12/A .34/A 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14/A .32/A 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31/A .49/A 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .36/A 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A .33/A 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .12/A .21/A Level of service ranges: .00 - .60 A .61 - .70 B .71 - .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ repotl\ rpt_ sonjoaquinplaza_tpo_051612.docz JWnW CC 4/3O2 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 2 Approved Projects Summary City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz swiftc CC 4 /303 Project Fashion Island Expansion . . - 40 Temple Bat Yahm Expansion 65 CIOSA — Irvine Project 91 Newport Dunes 0 Hoag Hospital Phase III 0 St. Mark Presbyterian Church 77 OLQA Church Expansion 0 2300 Newport Blvd 0 Newport Executive Court 0 Hoag Health Center 75 North Newport Center 0 Santa Barbara Condo 0 Newport Beach City Hall 0 328 Old Newport Medical Office 0 Coastline Community College 0 Bayview Medical Office 0 Mariner's Pointe 0 4221 Dol hin Striker 0 City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz swiftc CC 4 /303 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Trip rates and the resulting trip generation for the proposed project are summarized in Table 3. These trips were distributed to the surrounding circulation system according to the general distribution shown in Figure 3. Figures 4 through 6 illustrate the peak hour project - generated trips at the study intersections. Existing - plus - project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the existing peak hour volumes. The ICU values for existing - plus- project conditions are summarized in Table 4. Similarly, background - plus - project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the 2016 background peak hour volumes presented above. The TPO analysis consists of a one percent analysis and an ICU analysis at each study intersection. The one percent analysis compares the proposed project traffic with projected background peak hour volumes. To pass the one percent analysis, peak hour traffic from the proposed project must be less than one percent of the projected background peak hour traffic on each leg of the intersection. If the proposed project passes the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis is not required for that intersection and no further analysis is necessary. If the proposed project does not pass the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis must be performed for each intersection which fails to pass the one percent test. Table 5 summarizes the results of the one percent analysis for the proposed project (the one percent analysis sheets are included in Appendix B). As this table indicates, the proposed project does not pass the one percent analysis at 12 study intersections during the AM or PM peak hour; therefore, an ICU analysis is required for these 12 intersections. An ICU analysis was performed for the 12 intersections which did not pass the one percent test. Table 6 summarizes the existing, 2016 background, and 2016 background - plus - project ICU values during the AM and PM peak hours (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As the ICU summary table indicates, each of the intersections will operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. The project has no significant impact on the study intersections, and no mitigation is required. 3.0 Cumulative Conditions Analysis City Staff provided a list of six known but not approved projects for use in a cumulative conditions analysis. These cumulative projects are summarized in Table 7. Trip generation and distribution for each cumulative project was also provided by City Staff. The peak hour cumulative intersection volumes were added to the 2016 background peak hour volumes presented earlier, and the project peak hour trips were added to the resulting 2016 background - plus - cumulative City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_jonquin_plam tpo\ repor l\r pt _sonjooquinplaza_tpo_051612A... Ranh CC 4/304 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 3 Trip Generation Summary City of Newport Beach CAL.¢\ 2073 \.dive \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz J anW CC 4/30,5 I Amount AM Peak Hour PM Peak Ho r In Out .. • "Total ■ Trip Rates Residential ITE 232 DU .06 .28 .34 .24 .14 .38 4.18 Trip Generation Residential 94 DU 6 26 32 23 13 36 393 Source: Trip Generation Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers City of Newport Beach CAL.¢\ 2073 \.dive \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz J anW CC 4/30,5 L R m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 4 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff 74/C .61 /B • . - .74/C .61/B Project Increase AM .00 PM .00 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .70/B .60 /A .70/13 .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .44/A .57/A .44/A .57/A .00 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy .56 /A .65/B .56/A .65/13 .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .36/A .44/A .37/A .45/A .01 .01 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .50 /A .44/A .50 /A .00 .00 7. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Canyon .73/C .82/D .73/C .82/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65 /B .80 /C .65 /B .80 /C .00 .00 9. MacArthur& San Miguel .53/A .44/A .53/A .44/A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy .66/B .64/B .66/13 .64/B .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26/A .36/A I .27/A .37/A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .25/A .14/A .26/A .00 .01 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .49 /A .29/A .50 /A .00 .01 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .12/A .34/A .12/A .34/A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14/A .32/A .14/A .32/A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31/A .49/A .31/A .49/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center 181A .36/A .18/A 36/A .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A 33/A .27/A 33/A 00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .12/A 21IA 12/A 21/A 00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz Ratftc GC 4/31-0 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 5 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary Less Than 1 % AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Of Intersection M��Ezzx Peak Hour Volumes? 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 1,892 2,207 865 697 2,766 1,891 614 386 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 10 2 0 1 5 1 7 0 1 2 Yes 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,406 2,549 395 199 1,644 2,250 143 912 Project Peak Hour Tri s 8 2 0 3 6 9 0 1 No 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,528 1,819 60 181 1,481 1,687 81 726 Project Peak Hour Tri s 2 0 0 14 6 1 0 7 No 4. Jamboree & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 465 1,243 2,596 1,194 432 1,599 2,623 2,284 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 0 7 1 1 0 3 4 2 Yes 5. Newport Ctr & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 0 113 2,188 1,292 0 849 1,704 1,690 Project Peak Hour Trip 1 0 2 2 2 0 1 1 3 No 6. Avocado & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 361 191 1,374 1,455 295 603 1,456 1,548 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 0 0 4 2 0 0 2 3 Yes 7. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita C n 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 2,133 3,156 415 2,080 2,773 3,744 425 1,165 Project Peak Hour Tri s 4 1 1 2 0 2 5 2 1 Yes 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,493 3,203 509 1,071 1,613 2,811 1,172 728 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 1 5 0 0 1 4 3 1 No 9. MacArthur & San Miguel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,554 1,536 330 470 1,125 1,513 1,225 455 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Yes 10. MacArthur & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 0 1,092 1,653 2,092 0 1,359 1,680 2,028 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 4 2 0 0 2 4 Yes Continued City of Newport Beach CAL v: \2073 \active\ 2073006780 \san_joaquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_Ipo 05I 612.docx N CC 4/311 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 5 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary (Continued) Less Than 1 % AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Of Intersection Peak Hour Volumes? 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 118 82 932 399 781 39 783 584 Project Peak Hour Tri s 4 0 5 1 2 0 7 5 No 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 144 360 95 35 577 315 336 102 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 3 5 0 2 6 3 0 No 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 60 269 140 178 254 255 280 317 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 No 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 169 132 583 1,015 797 143 789 767 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 0 5 1 0 0 3 5 Yes 15. Newport Ctr & Santa Rosa 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 204 107 84 400 509 320 270 508 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 No 16. Newport Ctr & San Mi uel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 255 106 39 288 423 298 347 609 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 No 17. Avocado & San Miguel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 381 120 218 1,212 720 321 734 893 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Yes 18. Newport Ctr & Newport Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 461 24 128 191 428 192 361 472 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 No 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 100 724 0 65 404 278 0 406 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 0 0 6 1 2 0 4 No 20. Newport Ctr & Santa Barbara 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 256 146 204 40 281 334 280 148 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 No Note: 2016 Projected peak hour volume consists of existing volume, regional growth, and approved projects volume. City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073 \.Dive\ 2073006780 \san_jooquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt_sonjoaquinplazo_Ipo 051612.do x CC 4/312 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 6 Year 2016 ICU Summary Intersection 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .65/B .80 /C .65/B .80 /C .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .48/A .61/B .48/A .61/B .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .39/A .48/A .39/A .49/A .00 .01 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .69/B .86/D .69/B .87/D .00 .01 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .38/A .30 /A .38/A .01 .00 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .26 /A .14/A .26/A .00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .15 /A .40 /A .15/A .40 /A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel A 5/A .34/A .15/A .34/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .38/A .18/A .38/A .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente 28/A 333 28/A .33/A 00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 13/A 22/A 13/A 22/A 00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JW.IIR CC 4 /3i3 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 7 Cumulative Projects Summary •.- . Mariner's Medical Arts Medical Office 12.25 TSF Banning Ranch Single Family Detached 423 DU Condominium/Townhouse 952 DU Retail 75.00 TSF Hotel 75 Rm Sunset Ridge Park Park 13.67 Acre Marina Park Marina /Park 10.45 Acre Koll- Conexant Apartment 974 DU Newport Coast TAZ 1 — 4 Single Family Detached 954 DU Condominium/Townhouse 389 DU Multi-Family Attached 175 DU City of Newport Beach CAL.¢\ 2073 \.dive \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz s' ntK m 33 4/3i-4- NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS peak hour volumes. The previous one percent analysis without cumulative volumes represents the worst -case one percent analysis since the addition of cumulative traffic to the background volumes increases the chances of a project passing the one percent analysis. If an intersection passes the one percent analysis prior to the addition of cumulative traffic, then the intersection will pass the one percent analysis with the addition of cumulative traffic and no further analysis is required at that location. The results of the cumulative ICU analysis are summarized in Table 8 (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As the cumulative ICU table indicates, the proposed project will have no significant impact on the study intersections, each of which will operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours, and no mitigation is required. 4.0 General Plan Analysis The TPO analysis evaluates a project's potential short -term impacts. The project's consistency with the General Plan was also evaluated. San Joaquin Plaza has 430 DU currently entitled on the project site. Newport Center has 79 hotel rooms and 15 DU that are currently unbuilt but are identified in the General Plan. The proposed project consists of converting the 79 hotel rooms to 79 dwelling units, and developing 94 DU (79 DU + 15 DU) not currently entitled in San Joaquin Plaza. The peak hour and daily trips generated by 79 DU are less than the trips generated by 79 hotel rooms; therefore, the impact of residential units in Newport Center is less than the impact of an equivalent amount of hotel rooms. The proposed project will have less impact than the uses identified in the General Plan; hence the project is consistent with the General Plan. 5.0 Conclusion The proposed 94 DU will generate 32 AM peak hour trips, 36 PM peak hour trips, and 393 daily trips. The marginal impact of project traffic on the street system was determined at 20 intersections in the vicinity. Of the 20 intersections, 12 did not pass the City's one percent analysis; however, the project had no marginal impact on the ICU values at these 12 intersections, which will continue to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours under 2016 conditions. Consequently, the proposed project has no significant impact on the study intersections, and no additional intersection improvements are required. The impact of traffic from known but not approved projects was included in a cumulative conditions analysis. Under cumulative conditions, the project had no marginal impact during the City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz s' ntK m CC 4/315 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 8 Cumulative ICU Summary Existing + Growth Approved + Cumulative Intersection AM � PM 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff .82/D .70/6 + Approved '. .82/D I .70 /B Project Increase 00 .00 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .68/B .83/D .68/B .83/D .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .50 /A .63/B .51/A .63/B .01 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast H .66/B .83/D .67/B .83/D .01 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .42/A .53/A .42/A .53 /A .00 .00 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .56/A .59/A .56/A .59/A .00 .00 7. MacArthur& Ford /Bonita Canyon .78/C .89/D .78/C .89/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .71/C .89/D .71/C .89/D .00 .00 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .60 /A .50 /A .60 /A .50 /A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy .78/C .75 /C .78/C .75/C .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .38/A .30 /A .39/A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .15 /A .26 /A .15/A .26/A .00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .16 /A .32/A .16 /A .32 /A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .35 1A .54 /A .35 /A .54 /A .00 .00 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .16 /A .40 /A .16/A .40 /A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .16/A I .35/A 1 .16 /A .35/A .00 1 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel .34/A .55/A .34/A .55 /A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center 19/A 3WA .19/A .39/A .00 .01 19. Santa Barbara &San Clemente 28 /A 33/A 28/A 33/A 00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .13 /A .23/A 13/A 23/A .00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JW.IIR GC 4 /310 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AM or PM peak hour on the ICU values at all of the study intersections. Therefore the proposed project has no significant impact on the study intersections under cumulative conditions, and no intersection mitigation measures are required. The proposed project will generate less peak hour and daily traffic than the land uses identified in the General Plan; therefore the project is consistent with the General Plan. City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JWiIl0. m CC 4/3i j NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX A ICU Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073 \active\ 2073006760 \san_joaquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt sonjoaquinplam_tpo_051612.docx StanW '® CC 4 /3i8 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX 6 1% Analysis Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073 \active\ 2073006760 \san_joaquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt sonjoaquinplam_tpo_051612.docx StanW M CC 4/319 CC 4/320 Attachment No. CC 5 Resolution approving an Amendment to NNCPC Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC VS21 CC 5/322 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING THE AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach an amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza ('Property "). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company requests approval of an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza). WHEREAS, as part of its application, the Irvine Company also requests approval of an amendment to the NNCPC Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ( "AHIP "). WHEREAS, the amendment to the NNCPC AHIP was prepared in accordance with General Plan Housing Policies H2.1 and H2.2 and General Plan Housing Programs 2.1.2, 2.2.1,and 2.2.6. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the amendment to the NNCPC AHIP. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the amendment to the NNCPC AHIP by majority vote. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on July 24, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the City Council considered all project - related applications, including the amendment to the NNCPC AHIP. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the City Council at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. SD \847835.1 CC S/323 WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information in the amendment to the NNCPC AHIP and in the full administrative record, before taking any action approving the amendment to the NNCPC AHIP. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that: The amendment to the NNCPC AHIP satisfies any obligation of the Irvine Company to the City under General Plan Housing Policies H2.1 and H2.2 and General Plan Housing Programs 2.1.2, 2.2.1, and 2.2.6 with respect to the development of the Property pursuant to and during the term of the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby approve the amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan, attached as Exhibit "A ". 2. This Resolution shall not go into effect until the City Council approves or adopts all of the following: (1) Planned Community Development Amendment No. PD2012 -001; (2) the amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza); and (3) Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002. 3. 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. 4. This resolution was approved. Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 24th day of July, 2012. MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK SD \847836.1 CC 15/324 Exhibit "A" North Newport Center Planned Community Amended Affordable Housing Implementation Plan SD \847835.1 CC S/3215 CC 5/320 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Prepared For: The City of Newport Beach June 2012 CC S /327 Contents 1. Introduction II. Affordable Housing Plan 1 1 c ProposedPlan ................................................................................................. ..............................3 Number of Affordable Units /Income Levels .................................................. ..............................5 Implementation.............................................................................................. ............................... 5 Conclusion..................................................................................................... ............................... 5 III. Consistency with Housing Element ................................................................ ..............................6 IV. Amendments to the AHIP ............................................................................... ..............................7 V. Authority ......................................................................................................... ..............................7 Figures Exhibit I - North Newport Center Planned Community .......................................... ..............................2 Exhibit 2 - The Bays Apartment Complex Locations .............................................. ..............................4 North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan C1(215/322 I. Introduction The North Newport Center Planned Community (Planned Community) approval by the City of Newport Beach includes a Planned Community Development Plan that implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan. The Planned Community, as shown on Exhibit 1, consists of seven sub -areas within North Newport Center, a regional center comprised of major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, hotel, and residential development. Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are designated in the General Plan as MU -H3, a designation that allows for a mixed -use area combining commercial, office, entertainment, and residential uses. The Planned Community Development Plan for North Newport Center allows construction of 524 residential units in these blocks, and affordable housing units must be provided in accordance with the City Housing Element. This Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) outlines how the required affordable housing will be provided. Background The City's Housing Element includes a goal that 15% of all new housing units in the City be affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. The Housing Element identifies moderate income households as those with annual incomes between 80% and 120% of the county median household income. Low income households are those with annual incomes between 51% and 80% of the county median household income. Very low income households are those with annual incomes of 50% or less of the County median household income. Projects with more than 50 units are required to prepare an AHIP that specifies how the development will meet the City's affordable housing goal. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) prepares the state - mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The City's General Plan Housing Element must include its "fair share" regional housing needs allocation for all income groups which must be updated periodically. The most recently published SCAG RHNA identifies the City allocation as follows: • Total allocation between 1/1/06 and 6/30/14 -1,769 • Very low income allocation — 22% (389 units) • Low income allocation — 18% (319 units) • Moderate income allocation — 20% (359 units) North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan cc S/329 0 San Jna9uln a Plava HV /d C4V2 DIf /a I� Im �� Q Blocx soo �l aoo - 1•nAHOSnnH raselon island Bm�x j Raglonal Center soo Q \\ O Bind 11 a aoo ¢ eP O ty� S92 N V !look 100 z C0 S 2 9SJ i lygy � FP a North Newport Center Planned `� Community \w/ Exhibit 1 - North Newport Center Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC 15/330 II. Affordable Housing Plan Proposed Plan The City's General Plan Housing Element allows for sale or for rent options in order to meet the obligation for affordable housing units. In addition, affordable housing may be provided off -site, with City approval. Consistent with these Housing Element provisions, this Affordable Housing Implementation Plan includes the following plan. The location of the site is included on Exhibit 2. A. Covenants on Existing Units The Irvine Company owns The Bays, an apartment complex consisting of three buildings known as Baywood, Bayview, and Bayport, which is shown on Exhibit 2. The total number of units in The Bays is 556. Forty -six units in Baywood are restricted as low- income units through 2011. The Irvine Company will restrict tenant incomes and rental costs for housing units located in The Bays complex for a period of 30 years with a recorded document. The number of restricted units will be sufficient to provide the number of affordable units described later in this AHIP, depending on the income level to be served. The Irvine Company will identify which apartments are proposed to meet the affordable housing obligation, and will not use units that are under any other affordable housing covenant at the time they are proposed to meet the obligation for North Newport Center. The City will inspect the apartments designated to meet the affordable housing requirement to ensure compliance with relevant codes, proper maintenance, and adequate common areas. The Irvine Company will agree to make improvements, if necessary, to ensure viable housing for the 30 year period. The units must be rented to households qualifying as very low, low, or moderate income households. The annualized rents chargeable for occupancy of the Affordable Units shall not exceed thirty percent (30 %) of the Very Low, Low or Moderate Income limits. North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC S /33i -Si K z .rw Y�iii i Harbor View D X47 Fashion Island I 611711 C °c 5 ��� Zo 1iJ YiM1.t xT � S" C rn.*si "c is The Bays Apartment Complex Exhibit 2 - The Bays Apartment Complex Locations North Newport Center Planned Community 4 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC J5/SS2 The restriction on these units — for example, tenant selection procedures, monitoring — will be included in an affordable housing agreement, which shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and recorded against the property(ies). B. Concentration of Units Affordable units shall not be concentrated in any one building in The Bays. Number of Affordable Units /Income Levels The requirement for affordable housing shall be based on income categories. The Irvine Company will provide very low, low, or moderate income housing, or a combination of income categories, using the percentages shown in the table below. Income Category Percentage Required Total Amount Very Low 10% 52 units Low 15% 79 units Moderate 20% 105 units Implementation The affordable housing units required under this AHIP will be provided incrementally. The affordable units shall be phased as follows: • Certificate of use and occupancy for 100`h market rate unit / one -third of required units • Certificate of use and occupancy for 200`s market rate unit / one -third of required units • Certificate of use and occupancy for 300`h market rate unit / one -third of required units Affordable housing agreements shall be executed and recorded at each phase identified above for designated affordable units in The Bays apartment complex prior to the point where a certificate of use and occupancy is issued for the related market rate units. Conclusion Implementation of this AHIP will result in the availability of affordable housing units as identified above within the City of Newport Beach in accordance with the City's Housing Element. North Newport Center Planned Community 5 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC 15/333 M. Consistency with Housing Element The City of Newport Beach adopted a General Plan in 2006. A Housing Element was included in the General Plan in accordance with State law. The Housing Element was updated in 2011. The Housing Element identifies goals and programs for the provision of affordable housing in the City. The AHIP is intended to meet the specific goals of the Housing Element as follows: Policy 112.1 Encourage preservation of existing and provision of new housing affordable to extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households. Program 2.1.2 Take all feasible actions, through use of development agreements, expedited development review and expedited processing of grading, building and other development permits, to ensure expedient construction and occupancy for projects approved with low and moderate income housing requirements. The AHIP supports the City's requirement for the provision of affordable housing for all new development with more than 50 residential units. The Irvine Company has prepared a Development Agreement in accordance with this Policy /Program. Policy H2.2 Encourage the housing development industry to respond to housing needs of the community and to the demand for housing as perceived by the industry, with the intent of achieving the Regional Housing Needs Assessment construction goals within six years. Program 2.2.1 Require a proportion of affordable housing in new residential developments or levy an in -lieu fee. The City's goal over the five year planning period is for an average of 15 percent of all new housing units to be affordable to very low, low and moderate - income households. The City shall either (a) require the payment of an in -lieu fee, or (b) require the preparation of an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) that species how the development will meet the City's affordable housing goal, depending on the following criteria for project size: 1. Projects of 50 or fewer units shall have the option ofpreparing an AHIP or paying the in -lieu fee. 2. Projects where more than 50 units are proposed shall be required to prepare an AHIP. Implementation of this program will occur in conjunction with City approval of any residential Tentative Tract Maps. To insure compliance with the 15 percent affordability requirements, the City will include conditions in the approval of Tentative Tract Maps to require on -going monitoring of those projects. Program 2.2.6 All required affordable units shall have restrictions to maintain their affordability for a minimum of 30 years. As described in Section 11, the affordable housing provided per the AHIP will meet the Housing Element requirement for the total affordable units required. The units will be deed restricted to remain affordable for a period of 30 years. In addition, the developer will provide periodic reports in North Newport Center Planned Community 6 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC ,5/SS4 the form required by the City. The provision of the affordable housing units will assist the City in meeting the RHNA construction goals. hi conclusion, the AHIP is consistent with the relevant goals and programs in the City's 2011 General Plan Housing Element. IV. Amendments to the AHIP This AHIP may be amended with the approval of the City Council. No modification of the General Plan requirement for affordable units is allowed, unless the requirement is reduced through an amendment to the General Plan prior to implementation of development. V. Authority The AHIP has been adopted by the City of Newport Beach per Resolution No. 2012 -_ on the day of , 2012. North Newport Center Planned Community 7 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC S /335 CC 5 /3SO Attachment No. CC 6 Ordinance approving an Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007- 002 CC O /33 j CC � /SS2 ORDINANCE NO. 2012- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2007 -002 WHEREAS, the Irvine Company has filed an application with respect to its property located in North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Statistical Area ( "Property "). As part of the application, the Irvine Company requests approval of an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, entitled Amendment to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company LLC Concerning Addition of Properties and Residential Units to Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement (Portions of Newport Center Blocks 100, 400 and 800 and San Joaquin Plaza), to allow future development on the Property (the "Amendment "). WHEREAS, the Amendment was prepared and is attached as Exhibit "A." WHEREAS, during the term of the Amendment, and subject to any approvals required under the development regulations applicable to the Property, as specified in the Amendment, the Irvine Company shall have a vested right to develop the following entitlements on the Property: Development Limits (A) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council action on 11/8/11 via resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office /commercial development for Block 500 is 599,659 sq. ft., Block 600 is 1,340,609 sq. ft. and for San Joaquin Plaza is 95,550 sq. ft. SD \847676.1 CC 0/339 San Fashion Block Joaquin Land Use Island 100 Block 400 Block 500 Block 600 Block 800 Plaza Total Regional 1,619,525 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,619,525 sq. Commercial sq. ft. ft. Movie 1,700 seats 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,700 seats Theater (27,500 (27,500 sq. sq. ft.) ft.) Hotel (B) 0 0 0 295 0 0 295 Residential 0 0 0 0 0 245 524 769 Office/ 0 -0 -sq. 91,727 sq. 286,166 2,413,711 sq. Commercial ft. ft. 599,659 1,340,609 95,550 sq. ft. (C) sq. ft. (D) sq. ft. (D) ft. (D) A. Square footage indicated in Table 2 may not reflect current development limits because of the transfer of development rights provision described in Sections II.0 and IV.0 herein. Transfers may result in increased or decreased development limits, so long as the transfers are consistent with the General Plan and do not result in greater intensity than allowed in the Newport Center statistical area. A transfer of development rights must be approved by the City Council and is recorded on the City's Tracking Development Rights table for North Newport Center Planned Community. B. Hotel rooms are permitted in Fashion Island through the transfer of development rights. C. The maximum development for Block 100 may not exceed 121,114 square feet. Transfers of development rights shall be permitted, provided the maximum development limit of 121,114 square feet is not exceeded. Transfers have resulted in no remaining intensity in Block 100. D. Per City Council action on 11/8/11 via resolution 2011 -102, the maximum permitted office /commercial development for Block 500 is 599,659 sq. ft., Block 600 is 1,340,609 sq. ft. and for San Joaquin Plaza is 95,550 sq. ft. SD \847676.1 CC 0/339 WHEREAS, during the term of the Amendment, and subject to any approvals required under the development regulations applicable to the Property, as specified in the Amendment, the Irvine Company shall also have a vested right to develop 94 additional residential units within San Joaquin Plaza, of which 15 currently are not assigned to a specific property within Newport Center and 79 currently are assigned to Anomaly Site No. 43 as un -built hotel rooms. Such 79 hotel rooms shall be converted to 79 residential units and transferred from Anomaly Site No. 43 into the NNCPC and allocated to San Joaquin Plaza subsequent to conversion. WHEREAS, consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3, the transfer of development intensity is consistent with the General Plan and will not result in any adverse traffic impacts. WHEREAS, The Irvine Company has agreed to provide public benefits as consideration for the Development Agreement, including the following: 1. Provisions for affordable housing pursuant to the proposed NNCPC Amended Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. 2. Payment of Public Benefit Fee for Parks in the amount $26,046.71 for each of the 94 units and shall be payable in full to the City by July 2013. 3. Payment of Public Benefit Fee in the amount of $63,000 for each of the 94 units, for a total of $5,922,000, which may be used for any municipal purpose. 4. Reimbursement of up to $200,000 for costs associated with plans, specifications, permits, and /or construction of the Bayside Drive Walkway Connection, a future connection from an existing public access walkway to the Marine Avenue Bridge. The payment would be payable within 90 days after receipt of written notice from the City that it has awarded a construction contract for the project. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications, including the amendment to Development Agreement No.2007 -002. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of the amendment to Development Agreement No.2007 -002 by majority vote. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on July 24, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the City Council considered all project - related applications, including the 2 SD \847676.1 GC O /34 D amendment to Development Agreement No. 2007 -002. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the City Council at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information in the Amendment and in the full administrative record, before taking any action approving the Amendment. WHEREAS, in recognition of the significant public benefits that the Amendment provides, the City Council finds that: (1) The Amendment is entered into pursuant to, and constitutes a present exercise of, the City's police power. (2) The Amendment is in the best interests of the health, safety, and general welfare of the City, its residents, and the public. (3) The Amendment is consistent with the General Plan as of the date of this Ordinance. (4) The Amendment ensures that zoning implementation and utilization of the building entitlements applicable to the Property are consistent with the General Plan's standards for land use, housing, circulation, open space, noise, safety, and conservation, and with the General Plan's goals of improving and providing transportation infrastructure, parks, public services, open space, water resources, and environmental resources. (5) Existing utility capacity, circulation infrastructure, and other public services already exist to support development consistent with the development regulations applicable to the Property. (6) The Amendment is consistent with Municipal Code section 15.45.020(A)(2), which requires a development agreement for projects that include a Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and include development of 50 or more residential units. (7) The Amendment is consistent with General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8, which applies to Newport Center and requires the execution of development agreements for residential projects and mixed -use development projects with a residential component. (8) The Amendment is consistent with provisions of state law (California Government Code sections 65864 - 65869.5) and local law (Municipal Code chapter 15.45) that authorize binding agreements that: (i) 3 SD \847676.1 CC 0/341 encourage investment in, and commitment to, comprehensive planning and public facilities financing; (ii) strengthen the public planning process and encourage private implementation of the local general plan; (iii) provide certainty in the approval of projects in order to avoid waste of time and resources; and (iv) reduce the economic costs of development by providing assurance to the property owners that they may proceed with projects consistent with existing policies, rules, and regulations. More specifically, the Amendment is consistent and has been approved consistent with provisions of California Government Code sections 65867 and 65868 and Municipal Code chapter 15.45. (9) The Amendment is consistent with the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), the Addendum No. 1 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), and Addendum No. 2 to the Final Environmental Impact Report for General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), all of which analyze the environmental effects of the proposed development of the Property. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: The Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 is approved and adopted as provided in Exhibit "A." The Mayor is authorized to execute the Amendment, and the City Clerk shall cause a copy to be recorded with the Orange County Recorder. SECTION 2: 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 it shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall not go into effect until the City Council approves or adopts all of the following: (1) the amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan; (2) Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001; and (3) Transfer of Intensity No. TD2012 -002. B SD \847676.1 CC O/3.42 This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on July 24, 2012, and adopted on August 14, 2012, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT. COUNCIL MEMBERS ATTEST: Leilani Brown, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM, ,OFFICE OF CITY, ATTORNEY: Aaron Harp, City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach 5 SD \847676.1 MAYOR CC O /S4S m SD \847676.1 CC O/344 Exhibit "A" Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 7 SD \847676.1 CC 6/34,5 CC O /S4 0 DRAFT PROPOSED BY IRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10:00 AM SDA848171.6 800855 -0000 CC 0/z47 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3884 Attn: Citv Clerk DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10:00 AM (Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only) This Amendment is recorded at the request and for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383. AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT between CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH and THE IRVINE COMPANY LLC CONCERNING ADDITION OF PROPERTIES AND RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT (PORTIONS OF NEWPORT CENTER BLOCKS t00, 400 AND 800 AND SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA) SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 CC O/S42 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10:00 AM AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT THIS AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT (the "Amendment ") is executed this day of , 2012, by and between: (1) CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ( "CAZ'), and (2) THE IRVINE COMPANY LLC ( "Landowner ") (Landowner and City together shall be referred to as "Parties "). RECITALS City and Landowner entered into Development Agreement No. DA 2007 -002, entitled Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement Between the City of Newport Beach and The Irvine Company LLC Concerning North Newport Center (Block 600, Fashion Island, and Portions of Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza), ( "2007 Development Agreement "), which the City of Newport Beach adopted by Ordinance No. 2007 -21 on December 18, 2007. The 2007 Development Agreement provides for the Landowner's entitlement and transfer rights within the North Newport Center Planned Community (PC- 56). 2. This Amendment is intended to be an amendment pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868. This Amendment has been considered and approved in the same manner as the 2007 Development Agreement with public hearings pursuant to California Government Code Section 65867. 3. The 2006 City of Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan ") established a development intensity of 450 residential units within the Newport Center Statistical Area Ll sub -areas designated MU -H3, including Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza. The North Newport Center Planned Community has been assigned 430 such residential units, which could be built in any of the sub -areas of the North Newport Center Planned Community designated MU -113. As of the Effective Date of this Amendment, fifteen such residential units within the General Plan have not been vested or assigned to a specific property. In light of market demand in the North Newport Center Planned Community, the Parties have decided to assign such residential units to San Joaquin Plaza. 4. As of the Effective Date of this Amendment, 79 unbuilt hotel rooms were assigned by the General Plan to Block 900 (Anomaly Location 43 in Statistical Area Ll), located outside of the North Newport Center Planned Community. In light of existing development needs in Block 900 and the North Newport Center Planned Community, the Parties desire to convert such 79 unbuilt hotel rooms into 79 residential units. Subsequent to such conversion and pursuant to the terms of this Amendment, such 79 residential units shall transfer into the North Newport Center Planned Community and be allocated to San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. 5. Subsequent to the original adoption of the North Newport Center Planned Community in 2007, Block 800 and the portions of Blocks 100 and 400 have been added to the North -2- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 cc 0/349 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM Newport Center Planned Community through subsequent amendments. The legal descriptions of Newport Center Block 100, Newport Center Block 400, and Newport Center Block 800 are attached hereto as Exhibit A. 6. In light of the time that has passed since the adoption of the 2007 Development Agreement and the actions described above, the Parties have decided that portions of the 2007 Development Agreement should be amended to include 94 new residential units in the North Newport Center Planned Community, which include the 79 hotel units and the 15 residential units, and the addition of the Block 800 and the portions of Block 100 and 400, which have been added into the North Newport Center Planned Community. This Amendment is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.8, which applies to Newport Center and requires the execution of development agreements for residential projects and mixed -use development projects with a residential component. 8. The City Council has found, based on appropriate findings as required by the City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3 and the analysis included in the North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (May 2012), that the inclusion of the 94 additional residential units in the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area of the North Newport Center Planned Community would not result in adverse traffic impacts. 9. The City Council has evaluated the potential environmental impacts of this Amendment and has determined that any potential impacts have been analyzed pursuant to the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), the North Newport Center Addendum (Addendum No. 1), and the second Addendum (Addendum No. 2) to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119). There are no circumstances present that would require a new, subsequent or supplemental environmental impact report for this Amendment, under the provision of the California Environmental Quality Act. 10. On , 2012, City's Planning Commission held a public hearing on this Amendment, made findings and determinations with respect to this Amendment, and recommended to the City Council that the City Council approve this Amendment. 11. On 2012, the City Council also held a public hearing on this Amendment and considered the Planning Commission's recommendations and the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Landowner [and members of the public]. On [insert date], pursuant to the applicable state law (California Government Code sections 65864- 65869.5) and local law (City of Newport Beach Municipal Code chapter 15.45), the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. , finding this Amendment to be consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and approving this Amendment. AGREEMENT -3- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 CC 0/350 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10:00 AM NOW, THEREFORE, City and Landowner agree as follows: 1. Property. The Parties hereby amend the term "Property" to add to its existing definition Newport Center Block 800 and the portions of Blocks 100 and 400, which are the parcels of real property that are described in the legal description attached to this Amendment as Exhibit A and depicted on the site map attached to this Amendment as Exhibit B, ( "Added Property'). All of the Added Property is owned by the Landowner. 2. Development Regulations. The following Development Regulations (as defined in Section 1.9 of the 2007 Development Agreement) shall apply: 2.1. Newport Center Block 600 and the portions of Block 500, San Joaquin Plaza, and Fashion Island covered by this Agreement shall remain governed by the Development Regulations in effect as of the Effective Date of the 2007 Development Agreement, as set forth in Section 1.9 of the 2007 Development Agreement, with the exception that the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan that the City Council is adopting pursuant to Ordinance No. 2012- , shall apply. 2.2. Newport Center Block 800 and the portions of Blocks 100 and 400 covered by this Agreement shall be governed by the Development Regulations in effect as of the Effective Date of this Amendment, including without limitation the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan that the City Council is adopting pursuant to Ordinance No. 2012 - 3. Landowner's Vested Rights. Section 6.2 of the 2007 Development Agreement, which regards Landowner's vested rights, is amended to apply to the Property as defined in this Amendment. 4. Affordable Housing Obligation. The Parties agree that Landowner's compliance with the amended 2012 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan attached as Exhibit C satisfies any obligation of Landowner to City under the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Program 2.2.1 with respect to additional residential housing units provided for in this Amendment and the residential housing units provided in the 2007 Development Agreement. Should the additional units be developed as for sale units requiring a subdivision map, the amended 2012 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan shall be deemed to comply with the Inclusionary Housing requirements of Section 19.54.040. 5. Description of Certain Project Components. Concurrently with the adoption of this Amendment, City has approved the potential location of 524 residential units in San Joaquin Plaza under the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Therefore, Section 6.3(2) of the 2007 Development Agreement is amended to read in its entirety as follows: "524 residential units in Newport Center Block 500, Newport Center Block 600, or San Joaquin Plaza; provided however, that to the extent Landowner desires to develop any of said residential units in Newport Center Block 500 or 600 it shall be required to comply -4- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 CC 6/3151 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10:00 AM with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance relative to potential impacts associated with such change in location." 6. Public Benefit Fee. The amount payable by Landowner to City for each of the 94 residential units added to the North Newport Center Planned Community pursuant to this Amendment shall be the sum of $63,000 per unit, for a total of $5,922,000. This fee shall be paid for each additional individual housing unit at the time the building permit for such unit is issued by the City. For purposes of implementation, the first 430 units applied for by Landowner will be subject to a public benefit fee in the sum of $31,500, as set forth in Section 4.2 of the 2007 Development Agreement. The public benefit fee for the 431 st unit and all subsequent units shall be the sum of $63,000. This fee is in addition to the other fees required by the City for these units under the Development Regulations. The dollar amount specified in this section shall not accrue interest if paid when due and shall not be increased or decreased by reason of any cost of living or other inflation/deflation adjustment. 7. Per Unit Public Benefit Fee For Parks. Prior to and as a condition to City's issuance of each building permit for residential development, Landowner shall pay to City a per unit fee that is a Public Benefit Fee for Parks in the sum of $26,046.51 for each of the 94 residential units added to the North Newport Center Planned Community pursuant to this Amendment, for a total of $2,448,372, to be paid to City by Landowner on or before July 1, 2013. This fee is in addition to the other fees required by the City for these units under the Development Regulations. City acknowledges that Landowner has advanced an Initial Park Fee in the amount of $5,600,000, entitling Landowner to a credit against payment of the Per Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks for the first 215 residential units to be developed on the Property. In addition to the foregoing, at the time that Landowner advances the $2,448,372 Public Benefit Fee for Parks, Landowner shall be entitled to a credit against payment of the Per Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks for an additional 94 residential units, for a total credit against payment of the Per Unit Public Benefit Fee for Parks for the first 309 residential units to be developed on the Property. The dollar amount specified in this section shall not accrue interest if paid when due and shall not be increased or decreased by reason of any cost of living or other inflation/deflation adjustment. This fee does not replace the fees that the City may charge for parks when and if the additional units were included in a subdivision map or otherwise converted to individually saleable housing units, but the City shall grant Landowner a credit against such parks fee in the amount of the net fee per unit that was previously paid to the City for such unit. 8. Reimbursement for Bayside Walkway Connection. Landowner shall pay to City up to $200,000 as a public benefit reimbursement for costs that the City may incur related to plans, specifications, permits, and/or construction for the Bayside Walkway Connection project. Payment by Landowner shall be made within 90 days after receipt of written notice from City that it has awarded a construction contract for the Bayside Walkway Connection project. The amount of the public benefit reimbursement shall be no more than $200,000 and shall be for the City's actual costs for plans, specifications, permits, and /or construction, as documented by the City in its written notice. 9. Expiration, Completion or Exhaustion of Certain Obligations. -5- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 CC O /3 ,52 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM 9.1. The Parties agree that the obligations of both Parties under the following sections of the 2007 Development Agreement have fully expired or have been fully exhausted or fully completed: 9.1.1. Landowner's payment to City of the Initial Park Fee pursuant to Section 4.1 by a payment of $5,600,000 to the City by Landowner on March 10, 2009; 9.1.2. Landowner's payment to City of the Initial Public Benefit Fee pursuant to Section 4.2 by a payment of $13,345,000 to the City by Landowner on July 26, 2011 as a condition of the issuance of the First Building Permit, issued for 650 Newport Center Drive; 9.1.3. Section 4.5, "Dedication of Public Rights of Way "; 9.1.4. Section 4.6, "Open Space Dedication"; 9.1.5. Section 4.8, "City's Option to Purchase New City Hall Site; Parking Structure"; 9.1.6. Section 4.9A, "Retrofit Sprinkler Systems"; 9.1.7. Section 4. 10, "Cooperation of Landowner if City Hall Constructed on Property North of Library "; and 9.1.8. Section 4.11, "Dedication of Lower Castaways ". Therefore, no remaining obligations remain for either Party to complete under Section 4.5, Section 4.6, Section 4.8, Section 4.9A, Section 4. 10, and Section 4.11 of the 2007 Development Agreement. 10. No Conflicting Enactments. Except to the extent City reserves its discretion as expressly set forth in the 2007 Development Agreement, during the Term of this Amendment City shall not apply to the Project any ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, or other measure relating to development of the Project, as contemplated by this Amendment, that is enacted or becomes effective after the Effective Date to the extent it conflicts with this Amendment. No City moratorium or other similar limitation relating to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the development or construction of all or any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or another method, affecting subdivision maps, building permits, occupancy certificates, or other entitlement to use, shall apply to the Project to the extent such moratorium or other similar limitation restricts Landowner's vested rights in this Amendment or otherwise conflicts with the express provisions of this Amendment. 11. Compliance with Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The following provisions are added with respect to the Traffic Phasing Ordinance: 11.1. Scope of Traffic Study. The traffic study prepared in conjunction with this Amendment, entitled "North Newport San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis " and dated May 2012, covers all development authorized by this Amendment. -6- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 CC X0/3153 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM 11.2. Sufficiency of Traffic Study. City acknowledges that the traffic study for the North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment project satisfies the provisions of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance. The City shall not require any additional Traffic Phasing Ordinance traffic studies in conjunction with any application for approvals or permits necessary to construct development authorized by this Amendment as long as the application is consistent with the provisions of this Amendment and the relevant Development Regulations. 12. Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Amendment is 2012, the 31 st day following adoption of this ordinance approving this Amendment by the City Council. This Amendment does not change the Effective Date of the 2007 Development Agreement. 13. Term. The term of this Amendment ( "Term ") shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue thereafter until the earlier of the following: (i) the date that is twenty (20) years after the Effective Date; or (ii) the date this Amendment is terminated pursuant to Sections 12 or 15.1 of the 2007 Development Agreement. 13.1. Section 11 of the 2007 Development Agreement is amended at paragraph two to read as follows: "The term of this Agreement ( "Term ") shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue thereafter until the earlier of the following: (i) the date that is twenty (20) years after the Effective Date of the Amendment; or (ii) the date this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Sections 12 or 15.1 of this Agreement." 14. Conflicts. Except as otherwise set forth herein to the contrary, all terms and provisions of the 2007 Development Agreement shall remain unamended and continue in full force and effect. This Amendment and the 2007 Development Agreement, along with any previous or future amendments, shall be construed together and shall constitute one agreement. In the event of any inconsistency between this Amendment and the 2007 Development Agreement, the provisions of this Amendment shall prevail. 15. Notice of Intention to Amend. In enacting this Amendment, the City has provided for public notice and hearing in the manner provided by California Government Code Section 65867. 16. Compliance with California Government Code Section 65867.5. California Government Code Section 65867.5 provides that a development agreement is a legislative act that shall be approved by ordinance and subject to referendum. A development agreement shall not be approved unless the legislative body finds that the provisions of the agreement are consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan. These requirements of California Government Code Section 65867.5 have been satisfied by the City's finding that this Amendment is consistent with the City's General Plan and the City's approval of this Amendment by ordinance. -7- SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 CC O/S,54 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10:00 AM 17. Compliance with California Government Code Section 66473.7. The area subject to the Amendment may include a future subdivision, and the City may, in its sole and absolute discretion, approve certain tentative maps for such subdivision. Any such subdivision will comply with all of the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act including, but not limited to, California Government Code Section 65867.5 in that any tentative maps will be approved by the City in compliance with California Government Code Section 66473.7. 18. Section Headings. All section headings are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect construction or interpretation of this Amendment. 19. Incorporation of Exhibits. Exhibits A, B and C are attached to this Amendment and incorporated by this reference as follows: EXHIBIT DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION A Legal Description of Property B Depiction of the Property C Updated 2012 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan 20. Authority to Execute. The persons executing this Amendment warrant and represent that they have the authority to execute this Amendment on behalf of the party for which they are executing this Amendment. They further warrant and represent that they have the authority to bind their respective party to the performance of its obligations under this Amendment. The City Manager or his /her designee has the authority to implement the terms of this Amendment and execute any documents in furtherance of the terms of this Amendment and the 2007 Development Agreement so long as they have been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney. 21. Recordation. This Amendment and any amendment, modification, or cancellation to it shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange, by the City of Newport Beach City Clerk in the period required by California Government Code section 65868.5 and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code section 15.45.090. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] M SD \848171.6 800855 -0000 GC l0 /315 DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVBVE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10: 00 AM SIGNATURE PAGE TO AMENDMENT TO ZONING IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC BENEFIT AGREEMENT ii) wag IgnIATImclaw THE IRVINE COMPANY LLC By: Its: By: Its: "CITY" ATTEST: City Clerk VE AS O FORM: C. Harp City Attorney SM848171,6 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 0 Its: Mayor 800855 -0000 CC O /350 State of California County of Orange Fr appeared before me, DRAFT PROPOSED BYIRVINE COMPANY DATE: June 25, 2012 TIME: 10:00 AM personally who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature -II- SD \848171.5 (Seal) 800855 -0000 CC O /35 j EXHIBIT A: LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF ADDED PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION Real property in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, described as follows: Newport Center Block 100: PARCEL 1: APN 442 - 231 -02, 442 - 231 -03, 442 - 231 -04, 442- 231 -05, 442 - 231 -06, 442 - 231 -07, 442-23 1 -11 and 442 -231 -14 Parcels 2 through 7 and `B" as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book 52, Page 37 of Parcel Maps, together with Parcel "A" as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book 76, Page 32 of Parcel Maps, both in the Office of the County Recorder of said Orange County. Newport Center Block 400: PARCEL 1: APN 442 - 082 -05 Parcel 1 as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book 61, Page 10 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said Orange County. PARCEL 2: APN 442 - 082 -04 Parcel 2 as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book 37, Page 23 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said Orange County. PARCEL 3: APN 442 - 082 -09 Parcel "A" as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book 91, Page 19 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said Orange County. Newport Center Block 500: PARCEL 1: APN 442- 014 -23 Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 88 -163 as shown on a map filed in Book 253, Pages 34 and 35 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said Orange County. CC O /352 Exhibit A: Newport Center Block 800: PARCEL l: APN 442- 262 -03, 442-262-05,442-262-06, 442- 262 -07 442-262-08,442-262-09 and 442- 262 -10. Parcel I as shown on a Parcel Map filed in Book L36, Pages 22 and 23 of Parcel Maps, together with Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and private streets Colony Plaza and Santa Maria Road of Tract No. 15178 as shown on a map filed in Book 737, Pages 45 through 47 inclusive, of Miscellaneous Maps, both in the Office of the County Recorder of said Orange County. SAND gU�G� y KURT R. o TROXELL 7854 Kurt R. Troxell, L.S. 7854 Date x. �pu .�,�io�oainvam��a.�,isw�wponc�. ni«�s.eo�R CC O /359 Exhibit B Depiction of Added Property 0 San Joaquin Plow i lzl�, O O CLE 0 m 9 � Black DOZ - BI eo ,p O / SANTA ROSA DR Fashion island Block Regional Center 500 0� �2ti s9 � rc ✓ (11 1{i A uu O o q cO g C J 9sT z yGS P 4P P I� ❑ Added Property LE EXHIBIT C NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN CC r /soi NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Prepared For: The City of Newport Beach June 2012 CC 6/362 Contents 1. Introduction II. Affordable Housing Plan 1 1 c ProposedPlan ................................................................................................. ..............................3 Number of Affordable Units /Income Levels .................................................. ..............................5 Implementation.............................................................................................. ............................... 5 Conclusion..................................................................................................... ............................... 5 III. Consistency with Housing Element ................................................................ ..............................6 IV. Amendments to the AHIP ............................................................................... ..............................7 V. Authority ......................................................................................................... ..............................7 Figures Exhibit I - North Newport Center Planned Community .......................................... ..............................2 Exhibit 2 - The Bays Apartment Complex Locations .............................................. ..............................4 North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC O /3o3 I. Introduction The North Newport Center Planned Community (Planned Community) approval by the City of Newport Beach includes a Planned Community Development Plan that implements the goals and policies of the City's General Plan. The Planned Community, as shown on Exhibit 1, consists of seven sub -areas within North Newport Center, a regional center comprised of major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, hotel, and residential development. Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are designated in the General Plan as MU -H3, a designation that allows for a mixed -use area combining commercial, office, entertainment, and residential uses. The Planned Community Development Plan for North Newport Center allows construction of 524 residential units in these blocks, and affordable housing units must be provided in accordance with the City Housing Element. This Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) outlines how the required affordable housing will be provided. Background The City's Housing Element includes a goal that 15% of all new housing units in the City be affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. The Housing Element identifies moderate income households as those with annual incomes between 80% and 120% of the county median household income. Low income households are those with annual incomes between 51% and 80% of the county median household income. Very low income households are those with annual incomes of 50% or less of the County median household income. Projects with more than 50 units are required to prepare an AHIP that specifies how the development will meet the City's affordable housing goal. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) prepares the state - mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The City's General Plan Housing Element must include its "fair share" regional housing needs allocation for all income groups which must be updated periodically. The most recently published SCAG RHNA identifies the City allocation as follows: • Total allocation between 1/1/06 and 6/30/14 -1,769 • Very low income allocation — 22% (389 units) • Low income allocation — 18% (319 units) • Moderate income allocation — 20% (359 units) North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC 6 /3O4 0 San Jna9uln a Plava HV /d C4V2 DIf /a I� Im �� Q Blocx soo �l aoo - 1•nAHOSnnH raselon island Bm�x j Raglonal Center soo Q \\ O Bind 11 a aoo ¢ eP O ty� S92 N V !look w 5C ,Q 1-C p 0 0011 T lygy � FP a North Newport Center Planned `� Community \w/ Exhibit 1 - North Newport Center Planned Community North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC O /3O5 II. Affordable Housing Plan Proposed Plan The City's General Plan Housing Element allows for sale or for rent options in order to meet the obligation for affordable housing units. In addition, affordable housing may be provided off -site, with City approval. Consistent with these Housing Element provisions, this Affordable Housing Implementation Plan includes the following plan. The location of the site is included on Exhibit 2. A. Covenants on Existing Units The Irvine Company owns The Bays, an apartment complex consisting of three buildings known as Baywood, Bayview, and Bayport, which is shown on Exhibit 2. The total number of units in The Bays is 556. Forty -six units in Baywood are restricted as low- income units through 2011. The Irvine Company will restrict tenant incomes and rental costs for housing units located in The Bays complex for a period of 30 years with a recorded document. The number of restricted units will be sufficient to provide the number of affordable units described later in this AHIP, depending on the income level to be served. The Irvine Company will identify which apartments are proposed to meet the affordable housing obligation, and will not use units that are under any other affordable housing covenant at the time they are proposed to meet the obligation for North Newport Center. The City will inspect the apartments designated to meet the affordable housing requirement to ensure compliance with relevant codes, proper maintenance, and adequate common areas. The Irvine Company will agree to make improvements, if necessary, to ensure viable housing for the 30 year period. The units must be rented to households qualifying as very low, low, or moderate income households. The annualized rents chargeable for occupancy of the Affordable Units shall not exceed thirty percent (30 %) of the Very Low, Low or Moderate Income limits. North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC O /SOO -Si K z .rw Y�iii i Harbor View D X47 Fashion Island I 611711 C °c 5 ��� Zo 1iJ YiM1.t xT � S" C rn.*si "c is The Bays Apartment Complex Exhibit 2 - The Bays Apartment Complex Locations North Newport Center Planned Community 4 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC O /3O7 The restriction on these units — for example, tenant selection procedures, monitoring — will be included in an affordable housing agreement, which shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Attorney and recorded against the property(ies). B. Concentration of Units Affordable units shall not be concentrated in any one building in The Bays. Number of Affordable Units /Income Levels The requirement for affordable housing shall be based on income categories. The Irvine Company will provide very low, low, or moderate income housing, or a combination of income categories, using the percentages shown in the table below. Income Category Percentage Required Total Amount Very Low 10% 52 units Low 15% 79 units Moderate 20% 105 units Implementation The affordable housing units required under this AHIP will be provided incrementally. The affordable units shall be phased as follows: • Certificate of use and occupancy for 100`h market rate unit / one -third of required units • Certificate of use and occupancy for 200`s market rate unit / one -third of required units • Certificate of use and occupancy for 300`h market rate unit / one -third of required units Affordable housing agreements shall be executed and recorded at each phase identified above for designated affordable units in The Bays apartment complex prior to the point where a certificate of use and occupancy is issued for the related market rate units. Conclusion Implementation of this AHIP will result in the availability of affordable housing units as identified above within the City of Newport Beach in accordance with the City's Housing Element. North Newport Center Planned Community 5 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC O /3O8 M. Consistency with Housing Element The City of Newport Beach adopted a General Plan in 2006. A Housing Element was included in the General Plan in accordance with State law. The Housing Element was updated in 2011. The Housing Element identifies goals and programs for the provision of affordable housing in the City. The AHIP is intended to meet the specific goals of the Housing Element as follows: Policy 112.1 Encourage preservation of existing and provision of new housing affordable to extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households. Program 2.1.2 Take all feasible actions, through use of development agreements, expedited development review and expedited processing of grading, building and other development permits, to ensure expedient construction and occupancy for projects approved with low and moderate income housing requirements. The AHIP supports the City's requirement for the provision of affordable housing for all new development with more than 50 residential units. The Irvine Company has prepared a Development Agreement in accordance with this Policy /Program. Policy H2.2 Encourage the housing development industry to respond to housing needs of the community and to the demand for housing as perceived by the industry, with the intent of achieving the Regional Housing Needs Assessment construction goals within six years. Program 2.2.1 Require a proportion of affordable housing in new residential developments or levy an in -lieu fee. The City's goal over the five year planning period is for an average of 15 percent of all new housing units to be affordable to very low, low and moderate - income households. The City shall either (a) require the payment of an in -lieu fee, or (b) require the preparation of an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) that species how the development will meet the City's affordable housing goal, depending on the following criteria for project size: 1. Projects of 50 or fewer units shall have the option ofpreparing an AHIP or paying the in -lieu fee. 2. Projects where more than 50 units are proposed shall be required to prepare an AHIP. Implementation of this program will occur in conjunction with City approval of any residential Tentative Tract Maps. To insure compliance with the 15 percent affordability requirements, the City will include conditions in the approval of Tentative Tract Maps to require on -going monitoring of those projects. Program 2.2.6 All required affordable units shall have restrictions to maintain their affordability for a minimum of 30 years. As described in Section 11, the affordable housing provided per the AHIP will meet the Housing Element requirement for the total affordable units required. The units will be deed restricted to remain affordable for a period of 30 years. In addition, the developer will provide periodic reports in North Newport Center Planned Community 6 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC (0/30°9 the form required by the City. The provision of the affordable housing units will assist the City in meeting the RHNA construction goals. hi conclusion, the AHIP is consistent with the relevant goals and programs in the City's 2011 General Plan Housing Element. IV. Amendments to the AHIP This AHIP may be amended with the approval of the City Council. No modification of the General Plan requirement for affordable units is allowed, unless the requirement is reduced through an amendment to the General Plan prior to implementation of development. V. Authority The AHIP has been adopted by the City of Newport Beach per Resolution No. 2012 -_ on the day of , 2012. North Newport Center Planned Community 7 Affordable Housing Implementation Plan CC 6 /3j D Attachment No. CC 7 Draft July 5, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes CC 7/371 cc /S�L2 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/05/2012 ITEM NO. 3 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT (PA2012- 020) Site Location: Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500 and San Joaquin Plaza of Newport Center Associate Planner Jaime Murillo presented details of the report including background, original 2007 approval of the North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) Development Plan by the City Council, the Development Agreement and associated traffic study and the approval of an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. He presented details of the proposed amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan, including increasing the residential development allocation from 430 units to 524 units and allocating the units to San Joaquin Plaza. He noted that all existing development regulations will remain unchanged and that the amendment primarily involved an increase in residential development intensity. He reported that of the 94 unit increase, 15 units are allowed by the General Plan but are unassigned. The remaining 79 units would result from the conversion and transfer of un -built development intensity which is currently allowed for under the General Plan at the Newport Beach Marriott site. He noted that the hotel is currently developed with 532 hotel rooms and that the General Plan allows for up to 611 hotel rooms to be developed and that the applicant is proposing to convert those un -built hotel rooms and transfer them to the NNCPC boundaries. He noted transfer of development intensities are allowed under the General Plan. He presented findings and reported on a trip generation comparison by the City to evaluate whether the conversion would result in increased development intensity and noted the results. He also presented the results of the traffic study in support of the findings. Mr. Murillo addressed the amendment to the existing Development Agreement noting that it will vest the development rights for the 94 units and extend the term for twenty (20) years from the effective date of the approval. In addition, the applicant will be providing provisions for affordable housing and monetary public benefits. In response to Vice Chair Hillgren's inquiry regarding the public benefits, Mr. Murillo affirmed that they are solely for the proposed 94 units. Mr. Murillo presented details of the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) and noted that the applicant has the ability to record affordable housing covenants for a thirty (30) -year term on existing apartment units owned by the applicant and that as part of the amendment, the applicant will increase the number of units to be provided depending on the designation of units for very-low- income, low- income or moderate income households. He reported that a water supply assessment was prepared as required by the State Senate Bill 610 and addressed compliance with CEQA requirements. He referenced a map that was distributed under separate cover that should be added as an exhibit to the Amendment to the Development Agreement. Assistant City Attorney Mulvihill identified the map provided by Mr. Murillo as Exhibit B and referenced Exhibit C; the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). Vice Chair Hillgren addressed consideration of the hotel units under the Newport Beach Country Club application and noted that the Commission worked hard to protect and preserve them and stated there is good value to them in terms of assets for the community and a desire to have them developed at Newport Center. He inquired regarding ownership by the Irvine Company and asked regarding the possibility of extending the units for twenty (20) years, which is in contrast to the General Plan provision regarding desirability of mixed -use developments. Community Development Director Brandt referenced the earlier conclusion of the Newport Beach Country Club application noting that there was a proposal to take five (5) of the twenty (20) units remaining in Newport Center that were unassigned and bringing them into the tennis club property as well as to transfer Page 1 of 3 CC j /3j3 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/05/2012 twenty -seven (27) of the hotel rooms from the Marriott site to the tennis club location. At that time, the Marriot organization was opposed to the proposal. Through the course of the numerous public hearings, there was a proposal brought forward to convert the tennis court entitlement into the needed hotel rooms. Staff made it clear that the 79 hotel rooms were not a vested right to the Marriott Hotel Corporation and that there was no development agreement associated with those hotel rooms. Subsequent to that application being heard by Council, the current application is presented to the Planning Commission to transfer the 79 hotel rooms and convert them to residential units. She reported that staff has received no objections from Marriott regarding the current proposal. She added that it has always been staffs position the units can be moved within Newport Center and she stated that the property owner's permission is not required. Chair Toerge invited the applicant to address the Commission on this item. Dan Miller, representing the Irvine Company, presented a brief history of the matter including an agreement with Mr. O'Hill relative to the Newport Beach Country Club project. He addressed an agreement with the Marriott in return for the Irvine Company's support of their application through the County planning process in Newport Coast. He noted that additional hotel units will be built in Newport Coast, not Newport Center. He addressed the public benefit fees and noted that the Irvine Company will advance $2.5 million of that fee for the parks, whether they pull permits or not. Mr. Miller reported the intent to move forward with the residential project in 2014. He addressed previous approval of the AHIP and increases with the proposed amendment. He stated agreement with the findings in the staff report and offered to respond to questions. Commissioner Kramer requested clarification of the calculation of public benefit fees as well as additional details on the Bayside Drive walkway connection. Mr. Miller reported that the starting point used in calculating the public benefit fees was the per -unit fee proposed in 2007 and advancement of those fees. Regarding the Bayside Drive walkway connection, he reported that was suggested by two Members of Council and involves a connection to the bridge to Balboa Island. Commissioner Kramer asked regarding inclusionary housing as part of the affordable housing provision. Mr. Murillo reported a previous adoption of the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance which was intended to implement the housing goal in the General Plan and referenced a court case that found that application of Inclusionary Housing Ordinances to rental housing projects violated a rent - control act. When the Ordinance was presented to Council, it was revised to only apply to subdivision /for -sale developments. He noted that in this case, it is not known if the units will be rental or for -sale condominiums and that is why the provision of affordable housing was added to the development agreement. Chair Toerge inquired regarding no public benefit fees associated with the previous 430 units. Mr. Miller noted that was part of the original Development Agreement and addressed the public benefit fees. Mr. Murillo added that there are also a number of roadway improvements and dedication of land that were provided as public benefits in the original Development Agreement. Interested parties were invited to address the Commission on this item. Jim Mosher thanked Vice Chair Hillgren for his inquiry regarding the 79 hotel units and expressed concerns regarding future changes to the Municipal Code not applying to the subject Development Agreement. He questioned the total residential entitlement referred to within the staff report. Page 2 of 3 CG 7/S74 NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 07/05/2012 There being no others wishing to address the Commission, Chair Toerge closed public comments for this item. Mr. Murillo reported that the 245 units that are allocated to Block 800 in the NNCPC reflect the existing Colony apartment development. Commissioner Tucker stated that the comment regarding future changes to the Municipal Code is typical of development agreements, noting that the trade -off is the public benefits to be provided by the developer and is applicable only to planning fees and development regulations. He noted that Newport Center is a major area to plan and felt the proposal is consistent with the ultimate plan for Newport Center and felt it is good for all interested parties. Assistant City Attorney Mulvihill suggested that separate motions be taken on the recommended actions. Commissioner Ameri inquired regarding the legality of motion protocol. Assistant City Attorney Mulvihill reported the need for clarity regarding actions taken, especially with large projects that involve various elements. She noted that there are findings for each specific item and the importance of affirming that each finding was acted upon. Commissioner Kramer commented and expressed his support for the project. Motion made by Commissioner Tucker and seconded by Commissioner Ameri, and carried 7 — 0, to adopt draft resolution recommending the City Council adopt Addendum No. 2 to the Program Environmental Impact Report (SCH No 2006011119) for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update and the Water Supply Assessment prepared for the project. AYES: Ameri, Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Myers, Toerge, and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT (Excused): None Motion made by Commissioner Tucker and seconded by Commissioner Ameri, and carried 7 — 0, to adopt the draft resolutions recommending the City Council approve Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001, Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004, and the proposed Amendment of the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. AYES: Ameri, Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Myers, Toerge, and Tucker NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT (Excused): None Page 3 of 3 CC 7/37,5 cc 7 /s7o Attachment No. CC 8 Trip Generation Analysis CC g/3 77 cc R /S72 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 19 Technology Drive Suite 200 Irvine CA 92618 -2334 Tel: (949) 923 -6000 Fax: (949) 923 -6121 May 16, 2012 City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Reference: San Joaquin Plaza - Trip Generation Comparison Attention: David Keely Dear Mr. Keely: The proposed San Joaquin Plaza development consists of a total of 524 dwelling units (DU). Of these 524 residential units, 430 DU are currently unbuilt but entitled on the site and 15 DU are unbuilt within Newport Center area. The remaining 79 DU are being converted from unbuilt hotel rooms from another site in Newport Center. This letter summarizes a trip generation comparison of the unbuilt 79 hotel rooms and the proposed 79 DU. Trip generation rates for the hotel rooms and the residential units are based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, Eighth Edition. Table 1 summarizes the trip rates and resulting trip generation. As this table indicates, 79 DU would generate 17 fewer AM peak hour trips, 17 fewer PM peak hour trips, and 315 fewer daily trips than 79 hotel rooms. The conversion of 79 hotel rooms to 79 residential units would have less impact on the surrounding circulation system during the AM peak hour, PM peak hour, and daily than 79 hotel rooms. Sincerely, STANTECCOjN /S�UA/LJ7TING SERVICES INC. Cathy Lawrence, P.E. Transportation Engineer Tel: (949) 923 -6064 Cathy. Lawrence @stantec.com cal v:@ 073\ active\ 2073006780 \sanJoaquinyla¢a_tpo\mport let_ sanjoaquinplaza _trips_051612.doo CC 8/3 j 9 Starttec May 16, 2012 David Keely Page 2 of 2 Reference: San Joaquin Plaza - Trip Generation Comparison Table 1 Trip Generation Comparison CC g /380 Trip Rates Hotel ITE 310 Rm .34 .22 .56 .31 .28 .59 8.17 Residential ITE 232 DU .06 .28 .34 .24 .14 .38 4.18 Trip Generation Hotel 79 Rm 27 17 44 25 22 47 645 Residential 79 DU 5 22 27 19 11 30 330 Source: Trip Generation r Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers CC g /380 Attachment No. CC 9 Resolution of Denial cc 9/3g2 cc 9/s22 RESOLUTION NO. 2012- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DENYING PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT NO. PD2012 -001, TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY NO. TD2012 -002, AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2007 -002, TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -004, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT AND WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR THE NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PROJECT (PA2012- 020) THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS 1. An application was filed by the Irvine Company with respect to its property located in North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) Development Plan to allow future development in NNCPC, which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800, and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza ( "Property "). 2. The Irvine Company has applied to the City of Newport Beach for approval of the following project (the "Project'): a. Transfer of Development Intensity (TD2012 -002) - Conversion of un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC); b. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (PD2012 -001) - Amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units result from the conversion and transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15 units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area L1; c. Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002 - Amending the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company to vest the revised development intensities and SD \847681.1 CC 9 /3R3 allocations within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City; d. Traffic Study (TS2012 -004)- Traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; e. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) - Amendment to an AHIP specifying how the Project will meet the City's affordable housing goal; and f. Water Supply Assessment (WSA) - Evaluation of water supply availability for the Project. 3. The sub -areas of the NNCPC include General Plan land use designations of Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H3), Regional Commercial Office (CO -R), Medical Commercial Office (CO -M), Regional Commercial (CR), Multiple -Unit Residential (RM), and Open Space (OS). 4. The subject property is not located within the coastal zone. 5. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the Planning Commission considered all project - related applications. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting. At the conclusion of the hearing and after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties, the Planning Commission adopted a resolution recommending approval of all project - related applications by majority vote. 6. The City Council held a public hearing on July 24, 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, at which time the City Council considered all project - related applications. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by City Council at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION 1. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. SD \847681.1 cc 9/SR4 SECTION 3. DECISION NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach does hereby deny without prejudice Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No. PD2012 -001, Transfer of Development Intensity No. TD2012 -002, an Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -004, and the proposed Amendment Affordable Housing Implementation Plan. 2. This resolution was approved, passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the 24th day of July, 2012. AYES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS NOES, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ABSENT, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ATTEST: (Seal) SD \847681.1 cc 9/325 July 24, 2012 The Honorable Nancy Gardner, Mayor of Newport Beach and Members of the Newport Beach City Council 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 RE: North Newport Center Affordable Housing Implementation Plan Dear Mayor Gardner and Members of the City Council: wwvv.kennedycommission.org 17701 Cowen Ave., Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949 250 0909 fax 949 263 0647 The Kennedy Commission (the Commission) is a broad based coalition of residents and community organizations that advocates for the production of homes affordable for families eaming less than $20,000 annually in Orange County. Formed in 2001, the Commission has been successful in partnering and working with jurisdictions in Orange County to create strategic and effective housing and land -use policies that has led to new construction of homes affordable to lower income working families. With a significant lack of quality affordable homes, it is evident that Orange County is a very expensive place to live in. While the economic downturn has allowed home prices to be at an all time low, many lower income working families are still not able to purchase a home and remain as renters; however, many of these renting families continually struggle financially to live in the city they work in. Over the past year, Orange County had the biggest rental increase in Southern California (13 %) and compared to other cities in Orange County,' housing costs are significant higher in Newport Beach .2 Newport Beach is the most expensive place to rent in Orange County (average rent of $2,118 a month) and had the county's "biggest rent hike in the year... with average big- complex apartment rents rising by $167 a month... "3 As the City moves forward in the addressing housing needs for all income segments of the community, the Commission would like to acknowledge and commend the City's leadefship in facilitating and encouraging the development of homes affordable to lower income families in the proposed North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) development. The Commission believes the City is moving in the right direction in implementing an Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) for NNCPC. For the 2008 -2014 Housing Element planning period, the City's total Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RFINA), including the un- accommodated portion of the 2000 -2005 RHNA, for lower income households are: 451 homes at very low- income, 319 homes at low- income and; 442 homes at moderate- income.4 The NNCPC is expected to develop Rising Rents May Signal a Housing Market Recovery, Los Angeles "rimes, March 13, 2012. Z City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element Draft, p. 5 -30 and 5 -31. August 2011. 3 Newport Beach Rents. Up $167 a Montle, Orange County Register, July 18, 2012. "City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element Draft, p. 5 -45, August 2011. f orhmg or systern'ic a nge esu tin fn t e roduc4ion of- ,housing tor:0 "rarigeaCoun[y s extremely low income- households: Mayor Gardner and City Council Members July 24, 2012 Page 2 of 2 524 homes (an increase of 94 homes from 430 homes currently allocated to NNCPC)5 and the NNCPC's AHIP will be amended to reflect the increase and provide the following: very low- income homes at 10 percent of total units (52 homes) or; low - income homes at 15 percent of total units (79 homes) or; moderate - income homes at 20 percent of total units (105 homes) or; a combination of all three income categories.6 The amended AHIP is proposed to be consistent with the current AHIP to provide affordability covenants of 30 years that will restrict the rental costs on the existing Bays Apartment Complex. While the City will provide affordability covenants on an existing residential development, the Commission would like the City to continue to encourage and facilitate the construction of new homes affordable to lower income families. The Commission supports the City's efforts in planning the development of homes affordable to lower income working families. The proposed AHIP implementation in NNCPC will not only provide quality and affordable homes for the City's work force, but it will also build and contribute to a more economically competitive and opportunity rich community Please keep us informed of any upcoming meetings and additional information on the proposed NNCPC development and the implementation of the AHIP. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at (949) 250 -0909 or cesarc @kennedycommission.org. Sincerely, i t / Cesar Covarrubias ✓� Executive Director cc: Melinda Benson, State Department of Housing and Community Development 'Newport Beach City Council Staff Report Agenda Item 15, p. 14, July 24, 2012. n North Newport Center Planned Community Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP), p. 5, June 2012. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, July 24, 2012, at 7:00 p.m., or soon thereafter as the matter shall be heard, a public hearing will be conducted in the City Council Chambers (Building A) at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach will consider the following application: North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment — Amendment to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC), which is the zoning document that establishes land uses, development standards, and procedures for development within seven sub -areas of the Newport Center Statistical Area of the City. Primarily the request involves increasing the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and allocating the units to the San Joaquin Plaza sub -area. No specific development is included in the proposed project and there is no change in permitted uses or building heights. Rather, the allocation of the 524 total residential units to San Joaquin Plaza will allow for future development. Project implementation requires the approval of the following applications or actions to implement the project as proposed: 1. Transfer of Development Intensity- Conversion of un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment- Amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units result from the conversion and transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15 units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area L1; 3. Development Agreement- Amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company to vest the revised development intensities and allocations within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City; 4. Traffic Study- Traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; 5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- Amendment to an AHIP specifying how the project will meet the City's affordable housing goal; and 6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- Evaluation of water supply availability for the project. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that all significant environmental concerns for the proposed project have been addressed in a previously adopted Program Environmental Impact Report for the City's 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No 2006011119). The City's General Plan EIR is considered a Program EIR because it describes a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project (CEQA Guidelines §15168(a)) This Notice is in compliance with CEQA Guidelines §15168(e). State CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously certified EIR for projects that have changed or are different from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or additions occur with no new significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared (CEQA Guidelines §15164). The 2006 General Plan allocated a certain amount of development intensity to the Newport Center Statistical Area. In 2007, the applicant proposed to vest a portion of that development intensity through the approval of a zoning amendment resulting in the City adopting the North NNCPC. In compliance with CEQA, the City prepared and approved Addendum No. 1 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR. 1 of 2 NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the City has prepared Addendum No. 2 to the Environmental Impact Report for the above noted project and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said documents in conjunction with the consideration of the proposed project. Additionally, the proposed project is within the scope of the previously certified program EIR considering Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2. It is the present intention of the City to accept Addendum No. 2 and supporting documents to the Final Environmental Impact Report since no new environmental impacts and no impacts of greater severity would result from approval of the proposed project. The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the previously prepared General Plan 2006 Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report, Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2 to the Final Environmental Impact Report, and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection at the Planning Division or at the City of Newport Beach website at http:// www. newportbeachca .gov /GeneralPlanEIR. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that on July 5, 2012, by a vote of 7 -0, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach recommended that the City Council adopt the Addendum No. 2 to the Program Environmental Impact Report and approve the above noted project applications. All interested parties may appear and present testimony in regard to this application. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City, at, or prior to, the public hearing. Administrative procedures for appeals are provided in the Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 20.64. The application may be continued to a specific future meeting date, and if such an action occurs additional public notice of the continuance will not be provided. Prior to the public hearing the agenda, staff report, and documents may be reviewed at the City Clerk's Office (Building B), 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, 92663 or at the City of Newport Beach website at www.newportbeachca.gov. Individuals not able to attend the meeting may contact the Planning Division or access the City's website after the meeting to review the action on this application. For questions regarding this public hearing item please contact Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner, at (949) 644 -3209, jmurillo @newportbeachca.gov. Project File No.: PA2012 -020 Activity Nos.: PD2012 -001, TD2012 -002, Amendment to DA2007 -002, and TS2012 -004 Applicant: The Irvine Company Zone: PC -56 (North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan) General Plan: MU -1­13 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Project Location: North Newport Center Planned Community (PC -56) (Statistical Area L -1). The existing North Newport Center Planned Community consists of Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center Area. Newport Center is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, MacArthur Boulevard to the southeast, East Coast Highway to the southwest, and Jamboree Road to the northwest. SEW voRr �j Le ani Brown, City Clerk c = City of Newport Beach `''`�`oR„�r 2 of 2 AN31V-0 9:008-L uogpnj;sul,p ,wo»tjanennnnnn alpq el za- Insuo:) Dan Willer The Irvine Company 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Dan Miller The Irvine Company 550 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 ;uawa6jey3 ap suaS ®09LS ®Aa3AV tljege6 al zasimn V jalad @ same; sauanbij� Evelyn Hart 49 Balboa Coves Newport Beach, CA 92663 Newport Center Association No contact info Canyon Mesa Community Assn. Canyon Fairway Community Assn c/o Village Way Management Co. c/o Village Way Management Co. Attn: Management Rep Attn: Management Rep 2 Venture 500 2 Venture 500 Irvine, CA 92618 Irvine, CA 92618 Canyon View Community Assn. c/o Total Property Mgmt. Inc. Attn: Michelle Benson 2 Corporate Park 200 Irvine, CA 92602 Harbor Cove Community Assn. c/o Keystone Property Mgmt. 16845 Von Karman Irvine, CA 92606 Shawna Schaffner CAA Planning, Inc. 65 Enterprise, Suite 130 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 Shawna Schaffner PA2012 -020 for PD2012 -001 CAA Planning, Inc. 2 San Joaquin Plaza 65 Enterprise, Suite 130 Dan Miller, The Irvine Company Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 CD 5 24kLabels Qajnlead 18ad Ase3 jo; jaded paajq @09LS 31VldW3i @AjaAv asn 0 I ;aayS uolUnjlsul aa5 ® ® i slage-1 lead Ase3 E.-V, PeePlabels ' ' Use Avery® Template 51600/8160T^' #4961 3/1912012 300' (excluding intervening right -of -ways) Prepared for: 442-021-08,10,11,13,17,21,23,25,26,27,28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 442-081- 01, 07, 08,13,14 442-082-04,05,09 442-101 -09, 11, 13,14,16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 442 -231- 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 11, 14 442-261-01,03,16, 17,19 442 - 262 -03, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10 NEWPORT BEACH CA 440 - 251 -04 PARK NEWPORT LAND LTD 201 FILBERT ST 700 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94133 440 - 361 -16 MAAD OKKO 1631 ARCH BAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA A ® Bend along line to Feed Paper expose Pop. Edge*"! Advanced Listing uervicks Ownership Listings & Radius Maps P.O. Box 2593 - Dana Point. CA • 92624 Office: )949) 3613921 -Fax )949) 361 -3923 www.Advancedlisting.com 440 - 361 -14 FRANK FRAIN 1627 ARCH BAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA ,,gy�pp 1 ,ygCEI�' 1 SAVERVO6240Tra i 1� � COMMUNITY MAR 2 0 2012 C,, DEVELOPMENT O� ?r 0�P CAA IRr �gpf?� 65 Ente , uite 130 Aliso California 92656 440 - 361 -15 ANN ANTHONY 1629 ARCH BAY DR 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 440 - 361 -17 STARLENE M LICUDINE 1633 ARCH BAY DR 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 440 - 361 -19 VALERIE C CHAN 1618 ARCH BAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 011 -24 SCOTT T BURNHAM 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 011 -64 -- _ GOLE REALTY FUND_INC- _- 1 UPPER NEWPORT PLZ NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 011 -68 442 - 011 -69 HHR NEWPORT BEACH LLC PO BOX 579 LOUISVILLE TN 37777 442 - 021 -08, 10 IRVINE CO OF W VA 550 NEWPORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 021 -17 IRVINE COMPANY PO BOX 2229 SEATTLE WA 98111 440 - 361 -20 PRACHUM MALEENONT 1616 ARCH BAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 440 - 361 -18 NAN XU 8 THUNDERBIRD DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 440 - 361 -31 HARBOR COVE COMMUNITY ASSN 23726 BIRTCHER DR LAKE FOREST CA 92630 442 - 011 -37 442- 011 -39 442- 011 -51 442 - 011 -52 DAVID ELLIS FAINBARG III LP 1470 JAMBOREE RD 2600 .E COAST HWY NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663 442- 011 -65 442 - 011 -66 442- 014- 23,442- 081 -13,14 0 HILL PROPERTIES INC_ .---4.42=082-05 ' 09 _.- 1 UPPER NEWPORT PLZ IRVINE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 550 ORT CENTER DR 442 -021- 21,25,26 WPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 014 -22 442- 014 -24,27 442 - 261 - 07,08,09 ORANGE COUNTY TRANSIT CITY iF ORT BEACH DISTRICT 3300 ORT BLVD 11222 ACACIA PKWY NE ORT BEACH CA 92663 GARDEN GROVE CA 92840 442 - 021 -11 442 - 021 -13 IRVINE CO IRVINE CO 5660 KATELLA AVE 100 1201 ELM ST 2800 CYPRESS CA 90630 DALLAS TX 75270 442 -021- 21,25,26 442 - 021 -23 IRVINE CO BANK JPMORGAN CHASE NA 7 W 7TH ST 1111 POLARIS PKWY IJ CINCINNATI OH 45202 COLUMBUS OH 43240 ttiquettes fadles a peter ; ® Repltez a la hachure afin de i www.avery.com com Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 511600/8160m` J charaement reveler le rebard Pao-uo "r 1. 800 -GO -AVERY easy reer— r.aoeis i A ® Bend along ine to i Use AveryO Template 516A8160'r- j feed Paper expose Pop -up Edge*^' ; A R�® 6240T" d 442 - 021 -27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33 IRVINE CO 550 T CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 021 - 35,36,39 IRVINE 550 WPORT CENTER DR WPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 032 -44 IRVINE FOUR LLC 925 E MEADOW DR PALO ALTO CA 94303 442- 081 - 01,06,07,08 IRVINE CO OF W VA 550 NE RT CENTER DR NE�KPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 081 -05 AMALFI INVESTMENTS GP PO BOX 7099 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 081 -12 NEWPORT DIAGNOSTIC CENTER INC 1605 AVOCADO AVE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 082 -11 NCMB NO I LLC 1401 AVOCADO AVE 901 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 082 -14 NCMB NO 2 LLC 1401 AVOCADO AVE 901 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 091 -04 BURNHAM FAMILY TRUST 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DR I NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 091 -07 JAMES E RICH 802 S BAY FRONT NEWPORT BEACH CA 92662 442 - 021 -29 IRVINE COMPANY LLC 100 INNOVATION DR IRVINE CA 92617 442 - 021 -37,38 IRVINE CO LLC 100 I ION DR IR , CA 92617 442- 032 -58,69 BIG CANYON COUNTRY CLUB 1 BIG CANYON DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 081 -02 KNOTT AVENUE PROPERTY INC 1 100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 081 -09 SAN JOAQUIN 2161 LLC 100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 200 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 082 -04 IRVINE NT 550 NEW CENTER DR NEWVORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 082 -12 NCMB NO 4 LLC 1401 AVOCADO AVE 901 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 091 -01 442 - 091 -02 EASTLUND PROPERTIES PO BOX 9888 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 091 -05 IRVINE CO W VA 550 ORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 091 -08 TRAIL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC 7 CORPORATE PLZ NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 021 -34 IRVINE CO 7W& ST CflqCINNATI OH 45202 442- 032 - 25,37,40 BIG CANYON COMMUNITY ASSN PO BOX 7091 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 032 -71 ST CHURCH 2200 SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 081 -03 BURNHAM - NEWPORT LLC 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 081 -11 1601 AVOCADO LLC 1605 AVOCADO AVE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 082 -08 NCMB NO 3 LLC 1401 AVOCADO AVE 901 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 082 -13 NCMB NO 4 LLC 1401 AV O AVE 901 NEWVORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 091 -03 BENJAMIN KRAUT 366 SAN MIGUEL DR 310 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 091 -06 BEACH NEWPORT PO BOX 9888 SAN DIEGO CA 92169 442 - 091 -12 TRAIL PROPERTIES LLC INC 7132 REGAL LN KNOXVILLE TN 37918 @tiquettes faciles a peler I A Repliez 6 la hachure afin de' www.avery.com I Utilisez le abarit AVERY 5160 /8160 Sens de r €veler le tabard Po u 1- 800 -GO -AVERY g ® ® Mc chargement p- p' "c Easy Peeff Labels i o ® Bend along line to i ® AVERY ® 6240 TM Use AveryO Template 51600%8160Tm ' Feed Paper expose Pop -up Edger" b 442 - 091 -15 SAN MIGUEL PLAZA OWNERS ASSN 1367 AVOCADO AVE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 101 - 19,20,21,22,23,24 'RVINE CO VA 550 NE RT CENTER DR NEW ORT BE CA 92660 442- 161 -05 240 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE ASSOC 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 161 -12 RONALD B SCHWARTZ 202 NEWPORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 171 -50 JAMES GLABMAN PO BOX 11538 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 171 -53 RICHAD L DE WITT 2 RUE SAINT CLOUD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 171 -56 VIVIAN MONROE 5 RUE SAINT CLOUD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 171 -59 ROBERT E BACON 1 I RUE SAINT CLOUD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 180 -01 442 - 180 -02 ERICKSON INDSTS INC 3861 WISTERIA ST SEAL BEACH CA 90740 442 - 181 -23 VERTICAL PARTNERS LLC 3 SUNRISE NEWPORT COAST CA 92657 442 - 091 -16 442 - 161 -16 TRAIL PROPERTIES LLC INC PO BOX 9888 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 161 -03 220 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE LLC 220 NEWPORT CENTER DR 19 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 161 -06 JOYCE BEALL PO BOX 309 PLACENTIA CA 92871 442 - 161 -17 DESIGN PLAZA OWNERS ASSN 505 S VILLA REAL 505 ANAHEIM CA 92807 442 - 171 -51 ROBERT T BARMAN PO BOX 7805 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 171 -54 DARREL D ANDERSON I RUE SAINT CLOUD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 171 -57 FLAMSON 7 RUE SAINT CLOUD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 171 - 63,64,99 BIG CANYON N C A4MUNITY PO BOX NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442- 180 -03 IRVINE CO 442 - 101 - 09,11,13,14,16,18 IRVINE CO 550' CENTER DR NEWITORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 161 -04 230 NEWPORT CENTER DR LLC 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 161 -11 EASTLUND PROPERTIES LLC PO BOX 9888 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442- 161 -18 270 NEWPORT CENTER DR LLC 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 171 -52 BETTY B BARMAN 4 RUE SAINT CLOUD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 171 -55 CYNTHIA S GRAFF 3 RUE SAINT CLOUD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 171 -58 EUGENIA LYONS 7 WHITFORD IRVINE CA 92602 442 - 171- 65,66,98 ASSN CANYON VIEW COMMUNITY ASSN PO BOX 4708 IRVINE CA 92616 550 NEWP Wr(CENTER DR NEWPQKT BEACH CA 92660 442- 181 -24 TODD K KIM 31 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -22 JOAN SHORT 35 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -25 SHARON E MYERS 30 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 Etiquettes faciles a peter SeA de Repliez h la hachure afin de www.avery.com Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160 0/8160 "1 chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop -up "` 1- 800 -GO -AVERY Easy Peelv'Labels i A ® Bend along line to i ® TM Use AveryQ Template 51600/8160Tm ' Feed Paper expose Pop -up Edge*"' J �����® 6240 1 442 - 181 -26 GREGORY BERRY 32 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -38 CHRISTY F FOSTER 2444 RIVIERA DR LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 442 - 181 -41 MICHAEL THOMSON 3 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -44 JOHN GAUGHAN 17291 IRVINE BLVD 411 TUSTIN CA 92780 442 - 181 -47 PANNIER FAMILY INV FUND LLC 40 BELCOURT DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -50 JUDITH E FREEMAN 3 RUE MONTREUX NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -53 WILLIAM & MARY DUGGAN 18814 WILLOWTREE LN PORTER RANCH CA 91326 442- 181 -56 CANYON MESA C UNITY ASSN PO BOX 7931 NEWPO BEACH CA 92658 442 - 182 -04 ONEWEST BK FSB 888 E WALNUT ST PASADENA CA 91101 442 - 182 -07 DOLORESLJONES 10 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 Etiquettes faciles i peter Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160 0/8160"" / 442- 181 -27 MARY MORGAN 34 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -39 JOHN HOFFERLIN 7 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181-42 BEHDAD AKBARPOUR 1 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -45 DONNA L HOLDEN 6 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -48 DALE MARLIN 12 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -51 SULLIVAN FAMILY 1RUE MONTREUX NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -54 MOIRA PODLISKA 17 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 181 -59 CANYON MESA COMMUNITY ASSN PO BOX 7931 NEWPORT EACH CA 92658 442 - 182 -05 MASAKO CHIKUSA 19 TRINITY IRVINE CA 92612 442 - 182 -08 VIRGINIA MACDONALD 4 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 Se ®de Repliez 3 la hachure afin de' chargement r6veler le rebord Pop -up "c 442 - 181 -28 CHARLES I SCHREI13ER 36 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 181 -40 BEKJR & HEATHER BESE-N 5 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 181 -43 COLLEEN B MANCHESTER 2 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 91.660 442- 181 -46 TILLMAN I & BARBARA SEGAL 8 RUE CHATEAU ROYAL NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181-49 ELAINE A BONUGLI 5 RUE MONTREUX NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 181 -52 DOUGLAS C COULTER 21 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 181 -55 CANYON MESA COMMUNITY ASSN PO BOX 7931 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442- 181 -61 CANYON MESA COMMUNITY ASSN PO BOX 7�9 1, NFWP' RT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 182 -06 DOROTHY V FISCHER 2 RUE MONTREUX NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -09 NANCY S SOROSKY 2 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 www.avery.com 1- 800 -GO -AVERY easy ree —Laoeis i o Bend along line to ® R 6240r- Use i Avery® Templat 6����0 e 5160 ® /8160r" j Peed Paper expose Pop -up Edger , A 442 - 182 -10 ROBERT A COVENEY I RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 182 -13 JENE M WITTE 6 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 182 -16 ARDISTE R REIS 12 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -19 DOROTHY M TURNBULL 11 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -22 DUANE KIME PO BOX 12829 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 182 -25 RALPH BOLLINGER 5152 PICCADILLY CIR WESTMINSTER CA 92683 442 - 182 -28, 29, 31, 32 CANYON MESA MMUNITY ASSN PO BOX 79 NEWP BEACH CA 92658 442 - 231 -08 180 NEWPORT CENTER LLC 18101 VON KARMAN AVE 1050 IRVINE CA 92612 442 - 231 -13 HAMILTON 100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 200 NEWPORT BEACIi CA 92660 442 - 261 -05 442- 261 -17 ORANGE COUNTY MUSEUM OF ART 850 SAN CLEMENTE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 ttiquettes faciles a peler Utilisez le gabarit AVERYO 5160 0/8160mc 442 - 182 -11 M KRUSE 24082 PASEO DEL CAMPO LAGUNA NIGUEL CA 92677 442 - 182 -14 HEDWIG A CORTESE 218 MARIGOLD AVE CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 442 - 182 -17 DOROTHY METCALF 14 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 182 -20 DANIEL M CLAUSS 9 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 182 -23 SUSAN P MUNTHE 3 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -26 IRAJ TABEBZADEH 11 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -33 BIG CANYON MUNITY ASSN PO BOX NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442- 231 -09 SOUTHWEST INVESTORS PO BOX 1960 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 442 - 261 - 01,03,16 IRVINE CO 550 NEWPORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 261 -10 442- 261 -11 JAA DEV LP PO BOX 1290 AGOURA HILLS CA 91376 A Repliez a la hachure afin de Sens de chargement reveler le rebord Pop.upm' 442- 182 -12 LINDA MOORE 303 ARLINGTON DR PASADENA CA 91105 442 - 182 -15 PATRICK T & MARLENE TON 10 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -18 P BALDWIN 15 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -21 SUZANNE Y MOYER 21031 BECKWOURTH CIR HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92646 442- 182 -24 AVRO & BOJANA GAON 1 RUE MARSEILLE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 182 -27 WARSAW 15 RUE FONTAINBLEAU NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 231 -02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 11, 14 IRVINE CO OF W VA 550 NEWPORT- CENTER DR NEWPPfT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 231 -12 BEACON BAY ENTERPRISES 1600 SUNFLOWER AVE 1100 COSTA MESA CA 92626 442 - 261 -02 TERRIBLE HERBST INC 5195 LAS VEGAS BLVD LAS VEGAS NV 89119 442- 261 -19 IRVINE COMP�,bw 550 NE 19RT CENTER DR ORT BEACH CA 92660 www.avery.com 1- 800 -GO -AVERY Easy Peel• Labels i A ® Bend along line to i ® ����® 6240T" i Use Avery® Template 5160 ® /8160TM' ! Feed Paper expose Pop -up Edge ❑ A 442- 262 -01 PACIFIC MUTUAL LIFE 700 NEWPORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 262 -06, 07, 08, 09 IRVINE CO LLC 550 NE ORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 271 -14 KATHLEEN LFITZPATRICK 1301 DOVE ST 860 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 271 -17 17 CORPORATE PLAZA ASSOC LLC 17 CORPORATE PLAZA DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 381 -01 GERALD H MC QUARRIE 1095 S 800 1 OREM UT 84097 442 - 381 -04 WILLIAM K RUSSELL 8 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 381 -07 JAMES TOMYUNSON 2 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 381 -10 RAMON & JAMIE LOPEZ 5 CANYON CT NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 -381- 13,14,15,16,17,18 442 -391- 10,11,12,13,14 CANYON FAIRWAY COMMUNITY ASSOCIA PO BOX 4708 L fJi ne,CA q 2(ulb 442- 391 -03 SEBASTIAN MUSCO 28 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 262 -03 IRVINE CO L 550 NE RT CENTER DR NE ORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 271 -12 MITCHELL A JUNKINS 12 CORPORATE PLAZA DR 140 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 271 -15 TRUST 455 BELLMORE WAY PASADENA CA 91103 442- 271 -30 IRVINE CO ANY 550 ORT CENTER DR NE 0RT BEACH CA 92660 442- 381 -02 PETER B PERRIN 12 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 381 -05 WESLEY HACKER 6 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 381 -08 KIM E CATANZARITE I CANYON CT NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 381 -11 TADASHIFUNAHASHI 7 CANYON CT NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 391 -01 MIE KATAYAMA 2233 MARTIN 402 IRVINE CA 92612 442 - 391 -04 RICHARD R MC CLOSKEY 4001 MACARTHUR BLVD 3 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 262 -05 442- 262 -10 IRVINE APARTMENT COMMUNITIES 550 NEWPORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 271 -13 WILLIAM W LANGE 13 CORPORATE PLAZA DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 271 -16 NEWPORT CORPORATE PLAZA 1100 NEWPORT CENTER DR 150 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 271 -34 SCOTT BORAS 18 CORPORATE PLAZA DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 381 -03 ALBERT J CROSSON 10 CANYON FAIRWAY DR. NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 381 -06 JAMES J MUFFIE 4 CANYON FAIRWAY DR. NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 381 -09 BRIAN MARTINI 3 CANYON CT NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 381 -12 SANDRA L MITCHELL 9 CANYON CT NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 391 -02 WAH LIM 30 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 391 -05 JAMES & D MYERSON 24 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 @tiquettes faciles a peter I Sens de Repliez A la hachure afin de! www.avery.com Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160 ®/8160" chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop -up "" 1- 800 -GO -AVERY Easy PeelP Labels i A ® Bend along line to VERVO 6240TM Use Avery® Template 5160 ® /8160TM' 1 Feed Paper expose Pop -up Edger" / �a d 442 - 391 -06 ISIDORE C MYERS 22 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442 - 391 -09 MARILYN J FRENCH 16 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 458- 301 -03 RG REALITY LLC 2301 SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 458- 631 -09 MICHLE MOFTAKHAR 5 HARBOR IS NEWPORT BEACH CA 92625 458- 631 -16 MAHMOOD REZAI 1041 S PLACENTIA AVE FULLERTON CA 92831 458- 631 -19 MARIA CHAN 1672 PLACENTIA AVE COSTA MESA CA 92627 458- 631 -23 DESMOND MC GUIRE 6 HARBOR POINTE DR CORONA DEL MAR CA 442- 391 -07 SEBASTIAN P MUSCO 20 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442- 421 -09 442- 421 -11 GRANVILLE COMMUNITY PECKENP 4 PARK PLZ 16TH IRVINE CA 92614 442 - 391 -08 RALEIGH L SHAKLEE 18 CANYON FAIRWAY DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 442-421 -10 ASSN CRE LJ CA LLC 1000 NEWPORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 458- 301 -08 ROGERS REALTY LLC 2301 SAN JOAQUIN HILLS RD CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 458- 631 -10 SIDNEY MEHRDADY PO BOX 852 LA HABRA CA 90633 458- 631 -17 GERALD T & SHARYN KELLY 23 HARBOR IS NEWPORT BEACH CA 92625 458- 631 -20 ZANG CHO 29 HARBOR POINTE DR CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 458- 631 -24 HOUSHANG KHADEMI 8 HARBOR POINTE DR 92625 CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 458- 631 -27 HAL MORRIS COMPANIES INC 4 HARBOR POINTE DR CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 939 -63 -730 RICHARD ROBERTS PO BOX 701533 TULSA OK 74170 939 -63 -733 PAUL & JANE HITZELBERGER 4760 HIGHLAND DR 604 SALT LAKE CITY UT 84117 458- 632 -03 NASAR ABOUBAKARE 1400 SAN MIGUEL DR CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 939 -63 -731 URSULA COOK PO BOX 1313 LAGUNA BEACH CA 92652 939 -63 -734 PAUL W HI LBERGER 4760 H LAND DR 604 SAL LAKE CITY UT 84117 458- 302 -09 IRVINE COMPANY LLC 550 NEWPO ENTER DR NF T BEACH CA 92660 458- 631 -11 MICHAEL CROSSLEY 1 HARBOR POINTE DR CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 458- 631 -18 DANIEL JDOUD 1280 BISON AVE B9525 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 458- 631 -21 458- 631 -22 POINTE - NEWPORT HARBOR 431 N BROOKHURST ST 100 ANAHEIM CA 92801 458 - 631 -26 MARSHALL S FREEDMAN 2 HARBOR POINTE DR CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 939 -63 -729 JAMES & ESTHER CAVANAUGH 554 DORSET RD DEVON PA 19333 939 -63 -732 LOUIS F SABATASSO 1009 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -735 E DORSEY 177 RIVERSIDE AVE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663 ttiquettes faciles 6 peler 5eA de Repliez a la hachure afin de www.avery.com Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160 0/8160 ` chargement rev6ler le rebord Pop -up"" 1- 800 -GO -AVERY Easy PeelQ Labels i A ® Bend along line to i a /A'@g���0 6240T^' Use Avery® Template 51606/8160Tm' j Feed Paper expose Pop -up Edge*" d 939 -63 -736 JOHN C WARNER 1017 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -739 ALEX JIANAS 1023 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -742 HOBART A SMITH 1029 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -745 RED ROCK 2532 DUPONT DR IRVINE CA 92612 939 -63 -748 JOHN R & NANCY FRENCH 3800 SANDUNE LN CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 939 -63 -751 MARK SUSSON 1047 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -754 FRANK MCGEOY 1053 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -757 ANNE M DIORIO 1059 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -760 RALPH L OZORKIEWICZ 1065 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -764 DAVID W & MAUREEN CROSS 1073 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -737 939 -63 -762 EUGENE DORSEY 177 RIVERSIDE AVE NEWPORT BEACH CA 939 -63 -740 RENE WOOLCOTT 3213 FIVE POINTS RD MARSHALL VA 20115 939 -63 -743 DRUCILLA D FINKLE 1031 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 939 -63 -738 KMS HOLDING LLC 1021 GRANVILLE DR 92663 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -741 RENE WOOLCOTT PO BOX 1906 MIDDLEBURG VA 20118 939 -63 -744 LEGRAND FAMILY TRUST 1033 GRANVILLE DR 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -746 ROBERT E FRENCH 1037 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -749 DOUGLAS A NEWCOMB 1043 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -752 DOROTHY M KANOWSKY 1049 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -755 WILLIAM N EDDY 1055 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 939 -63 -758 JACK S LEIDER 1061 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 939 -63 -761 OLIVIA CHAMI 5 RUE FONTANE NEWPORT BEACH CA 939 -63 -747 DONALD ROBINSON 1039 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -750 MICHAEL & JAMES MITCHELL 3187 AIRWAY AVE D COSTA MESA CA 92626 939 -63 -753 LILLIAN FLUOR 1051 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -756 SCHIELEN FAMILY LLC 1221 W COAST HWY 314 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663 939 -63 -759 STEVEN N & NANCY NELSON 1063 GRANVILLE DR 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -763 KATHLEEN CHAPMAN 1071 GRANVILLE DR 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -765 GORDON MEYER 49511 CANYON VIEW DR PALM DESERT CA 92260 939 -63 -766 THOMAS J MILANO 1101 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 @tiquettes faciles A peter i A Repliez 6 la hachure afin de www.avery.com Utilisez le gabdrit AVERY® 5160 ®/8160 "" Sens de I chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop -up "` 1- 800 -GO -AVERY Easy PeelqO Labels i 0 ® Bend along line to i L�@ ERW 6240TM Use Avery® Template 51600/8160" -' 1 Feed Paper expose Pop -up EdgOm / d 939 -63 -767 JOHN E STONEMAN 1103 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -770 KATHLEEN HANSEN PO BOX 6120 KETCHUM ID 83340 939 -63 -773 PAUL G & SUZANNE MAC MILLIN 1115 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -776 CATALYST PROPERTIES LLC 14800 ASHWORTH AVE SHORELINE WA 98133 939 -63 -768 CHARLES H & A LOOS 1105 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -771 MARION C BUIE 1111 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -774 MARCEL BLATTER 1117 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -777 RICHARD S LEANER 1123 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -779 939 -63 -780 WILLIAM P FICKER ARTHUR SHAPIRO 1127 GRANVILLE DR 1129 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -782 939 -63 -783 DAVID R BALL JAMES MYERSON 1133 GRANVILLE DR 47111 VINTAGE DR 104 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 INDIAN WELLS CA 92210 939 -63 -785 939 -63 -786 SHAMIR SHETH WILLIAM E KEENAN 1139 GRANVILLE DR 1141 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -788 939 -63 -789 ILEANE DOOLIN RUSSELL G ALLEN 1145 GRANVILLE DR 1147 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -791 939 -63 -792 CRAIG DAVENPORT MICHAEL & CAROLE WADE 1120 GRANVILLE DR 1110 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -794 MICHAEL H &N FUSCO 2 RUE CANNES NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 @tiquettes faciles a peter Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160 0/8160'"` 939 -63 -795 ALMA CHERIAN 1070 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 & Repliez 6 l hachure afin de' Sens de chargement r6v6ler le rebord Pop- up`''c 939 -63 -769 OLIVIA ABEL 1107 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -772 JESSE W SPEARS 1113 GRANVILLE DR 44 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -775 CLIFFORD R & BARBARA HOSTETLER 1119 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -778 BARBARAJGRANT 1125 GRANVILLE DR 50 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -781 KMA HOLDING LLC 1131 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -784 LINDA G KROLOP 1137 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -787 PAUL D CHRIST PO BOX 9757 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 939 -63 -790 JAMES J BIRMINGHAM 1801 PARK COURT PL I SANTA ANA CA 92701 939 -63 -793 DANIEL D DARROW 1100 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 939 -63 -796 KLINGAMAN FAMILY TRUST 1060 GRANVILLE DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 www.avery.com 1- 800 -GO -AVERY r \ f ❑ PC 56 San Joa uin ��,<•lI __ �/\ `� I, Plaza ���_ , ° y ` V w i ��� � r T 1 P SAN CLC MFNiEO Y R % / ¢ V X90'4 S\`G Block Block '\ AN 800 600 �4 , i ♦ �• t� 1 / pJ �tiY � ��� 4 SNnN i� 1l/ Fashion Block \" Jif Block WO, o \r Island Ax�fornaly 43 \� m9 ( Bloc lqk '40,0 \�N, Block S \ t Iqy 00 Off, \ ' p °� e AL AIR j 17 �vIC.Y \�r�`�`) / Si 9i1^/ rte\ ^ \`\ l/ �/ i� �\ ,�\ \ a?' ��r�' \P bs? ��• / Vicinity Map ° 51° '•020 — Peet North Newport Center ?% Planned Community PC-56 NL PA2012- 020_North_Newport_Center June /2012 ...— " " "° CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING �I On J U 2012, 1 posted the Notice of Public Hearing regarding: 1 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment PA2012 -020 (8 notices) Date of City Council Public Hearing: July 24, 2012 o _T !T 1 712,40-- L VtD RF t PU B L,ICATI6VJ [___r, , , ;tetOF ff 7 jr t~[+ , STATE OF CALIFS M) ) SS. COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County of Los Angeles; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the notice published. I am a principal clerk of the NEWPORT BEACH/COSTA MESA DAILY PILOT, which was adjudged a newspaper of general circulation on September 29, 1961, case A6214, and June 11, 1963, case A24831, for the City of Costa Mesa, County of Orange, and the State of California. Attached to this Affidavit is a true and complete copy as was printed and published on the following date(s): Saturday, March 31, 2012 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on April 4, 2012 at Los Angeles, California r Signature NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING rJOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, July 24, 2012, at 7:00 p.m., or soon thereafter as the matter shall be heard, a public hearing will be conducted in the City Council Chambers (Building A) at3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, The City Council of the City of Newport Beach will considerthe following application: Nath Newport Center Planned Community Amendment —Amendment to the North NewportCenter Planned Community(NNCPC), which is the zoning document that establishes land uses, development standards, and procedures for development within seven sub -areas of the Newport Center Statistical Area of the City. Primarily the request involves increasing the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and allocating the units to the San Joaquin Plazasub-area, No specific development is included in the proposed projectand there is no change in permitted uses or building heights. Rather, the allocation of the 524 total residential units to San Joaquin Plaza will allow for future development, Project implementation requires the approval of the following applications or actions to implement the project as proposed: 1. Transferof Development Intensity- Conversion of un-builtnon-residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi -family residential development intensity (79 multi -family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment- Amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units result from the conversion apd transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15 units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the MU -113 portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area 1.1; 3. Development Agreement- Amendment to the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine Company to vest the revised development intensities '/I and allocations within NNCPC and to establish public benefit ❑ PC -56 contributions to the City; 4. Traffic Study- Traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; A +P t r SanPl�qutn % v y,: 5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- Amendment to an AHIP specifying how the project will meet the City's affordable housing goal; and air' if - 6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- Evaluation of water Bloc ' Block coo supply availability for the project. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that -all significant environmental concerns for the proposed project have been /fie �4 addressed in a previously adopted Program Environmental Impact Report for the City's 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No 2006011119). The City's General Plan EIR is considered n asook' a Program EIR because it describes a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project (CEQA Guidelines §15168(a)) This Notice is in compliance with CEQA Guidelines ;aerock ` §15168(e). State CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously certified ElRfor projectsthathave changed or are different from the previous project or conditions y" analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or ! Belo` additions occur with no neva significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared (CEQA Guidelines §15164). The 2006 General a P a Plan allocated a certain amount of development intensity to # the Newport Center Statistical Area. In 2007, the applicant proposed to vest a portion of that development intensity t through the approval of a zoning amendment resulting in the City adopting the North NNCPC. In compliance with CEQA, the Vicinity Map City prepared and approved Addendum No.1 to the General Y= Nord, Newport center Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, Planned Community e NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the City has PC -56 prepared Addendum No. 2 to the Environmental Impact Report for the above noted project and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said documents in conjunction with the consideration of the proposed project. Additionally, the proposed project is within the scope of the previously certified program EIR considering Addendum No.1 and Addendum No. 2. It is the present intention of the City to accept Addendum No. 2 and supporting documents to the Final Environmental Impact Reportsince no new environmental impacts and no impacts of greater severitywould result from approval of the proposed project. The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the previously prepared General Plan 2006 Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report, Addendum No.1 and Addendum No. 2 to the Final Environmental Impact Report, and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection atthe Planning Division or atthe City of Newport Beach website at http://wsaw.newportheachca.gov/GeneralPlanEIR. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that on July 5, 2012, by a vote of 7-0, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach recommended that the City Council adopt the Addendum No. 2to the Program Environmental Impact Report and approve the above noted project applications. All interested parties may appear and present testimony in regard to'this application. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City, at, or prior to, the public hearing. Administrative procedures for appeals are provided in the Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 20.64. The application may be continued to a specific future meeting date, and if such an action occurs additional public notice of the continuance will not be provided, Prior to the public hearing the agenda, staff report, and documents may be reviewed at the City Clerk's Office (Building B), 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, 92663 or atthe City of Newport Beach website at v nv.newportbeachca.gov. Individuals not able to attend the meeting may contact the Planning Division or access the City's website after the meeting to review the action on this application. For questions regarding this public hearing item please contact Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner, at (949) 644-3209, jmurillo@ newportbeachca.gov. Project File No.: PA2012.020 Activity Nos,: PD2012-001, TD2012.002, Amendment to DA2007-002, and TS2012.004 Applicant: The Irvine Company Zone: PC -56 (North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan) General Plan: MU -113 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Project Location: North Newport Center Planned Community (PC-56) (Statistical Area L-1). The existing North Nevrport Center Planned Community consistsof Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport •CenterArea. Newport Center is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, MacArthur Boulevard to the southeast, East Coast Highway to the southwest, and Jamboree Road to the northwest. /s/ Leilani Brown, City Clerk City of Newport Beach r`z�flt� P�00 OF P S IL�CAI Iu STATE O xA. j R itis f COUNTY OF ORANGE ) I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County of Los Angeles; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the notice published. I am a principal clerk of the NEWPORT BEACH/COSTA MESA DAILY PILOT, which was adjudged a newspaper of general circulation on September 29, 1961, case A6214, and June 11, 1963, case A24831, for the City of Costa Mesa, County of Orange, and the State of California. Attached to this Affidavit is a true and complete copy as was printed and published on the following date(s): Saturday, July 14, 2012 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on September 19, 2012 at Los Angeles, California I y Signature NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Tuesday, July 24, 2012, at 7:00 p.m,, or soon thereafter as the matter shall be heard, a public hearing will be conducted in the City Council Chambers (Building A) at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach will consider the following application: North r1wuport Center Planned Community Amendment- Amendmentto the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC), which is the zoning document that establishes land uses, development standards, and procedures for development within seven sub -areas of the Newport Center Statistical Area of the City, Primarily the request involves increasing the residential developmenl allocation within the NNCPCfrom 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units) and allocating the units to the San Joaquin Plazasub-area, No specific development is included in the proposed projectand there is no change in permitted uses or building heights. Rather, the allocation of the 524 total residential units to San Joaquin Plaza will allow for future development Project implementation requires the approval of the following applications or actions to implement the project as proposed: 1. Transfer of Development Intensity- Conversion of un -built non-residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan Anomaly Site No: 43) to multi -family residential development intensity (79 multi -family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment- Amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin Plaza portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units resultfrom the conversion and transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15 units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the CIU -113 portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area Li; 3. DevelepmentAgreement-Amendmentto the Zoning Implementation and Public BenefitAgreement between the City and the y � (r'k",� � . ,. �f4 ��r �1�� � V Irvine Company Y tc vest the revised development intensities ., and allocations within NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the Cit PC -56 4. Traffic Study- Traffic El study for 94 units pursuant to the Y" City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; -" `Q0'" 5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- Pty I , Amendment to an AHIP specifying how the project will meet r the City's affordable housing goal; and • e� �e r 6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- Evaluation of water supply availability for the project. f70TICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that all significant environmental concerns for the proposed project have been !'g ! addressed in a previously adopted Program Environmental Impact Report for the City's 2006 General Plan Update (SCH No 2006011119). The City's General Plan EIR is considered r Islaoa o0o a Program EIR because it describes a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project (CEQA Guidelines - §15168(a)) This Notice is in compliance with CEQA Guidelines 16100 § §15168(e). State CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and 0\ useof apreviously certified EIRfor projects that have changed or are different from the previous project or conditions w' 4 ip analyzed in the certified EIR. In cases where changes or goo additions occur with no new significant environmental s' impacts, an Addendum to a previously certified EIA may w xf' be prepared (CEQA Guidelines §15164). The 2006 General Plan allocated a certain amount of development intensity to the Newport Center Statistical Area, In 2007, the applicant proposed to vest a portion of that development intensity through the approval of a zoning amendment resulting in the City adopting the North NNCPC. In compliance witbCEQA, the V cinity Map 'a City prepared and approved Addendum No.1 to the General North Newport Center F. Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR. Planned Community e NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the City has PC -56 prepared Addendum No. 2 to the Environmental Impact U-n Report for the above noted project and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said documents in conjunction with the Consideration of the proposed project. Additionally, the proposed project is within the scope of the previously certified program EIR ciinsidering Addendum No.1 and Addendum 116.2. It is the present intention of the City to accept Addendum No, 2 and supporting documents to the Final Environmental Impact Report since no neer environmental impacts and no impacts of greater severity would result from approval of the proposed project. The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the previously prepared General Plan 2006 Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report, Addendum No.1 and Addendum No. 2 to the Final Environmental Impact Report, and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection atthe Planning Division or atthe City of Newport Beach website at http:l/wvNv.nevipartheachea.gov/Genera]PlanE[R. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that on July 5, 2012, by a vote of 7-0, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach recommended thatthe City Council adopt the Addendum No. 2 to the Program Environmental Impact Report and approve the above noted project applications. All interested parties may appear and present testimony in regard to this application, If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City, at, or prior to, the public hearing. Administrative procedures for appeals are provided in the Newport Beach Municipal Code Section, 20.64. The application may be continued to a specific future meeting date, and if such an action occurs additional public notice of the continuance will not be provided. Prior to the public hearing the agenda, staff report, and documents may be reviewed at the City Clerk's Office (Building B), 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California, 92663 or at the City of Newport Beach website at en vixewportbeachca.gov. Individuals not able to attend the meeting may contact the Planning Division or access the City's website afterthe meeting to review the action on this application. For questions regarding this public hearing item please contact Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner, at (949) 644-3209, jmurillo@ newportbeachca.gov. Pro sctFila too.: PA2012.020 Activity Nos.: PD2012-001, TD2012-002,.Amendment to DA2007-002, and TS2012-004 I Applicant: The Irvine Company Zona: PC -56 (North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan) General Plan: MU -113 (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Pro;act laaatian: North Newport Center Planned Community (PC -56) (Statistical Area L-1), The existing North Newport Center Planned Community consists of Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800 and portions of Blocks 100, 400, Block 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport CenterArea. Newport Center is generally bound by San Joaquin Hills Road to the northeast, MacArthur Boulevard to the southeast, East Coast Highway to the southwest, and Jamboree Road to the northwest, Leilani Brown, City Clerk City of Newport Beach Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix A Air Quality Impact Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. June 6, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach OURBAN CROSSROADS 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Irvine, CA 92606 Prepared by: Haseeb Qureshi, MES Prepared for: Ms. Tracy Zinn T &B Planning 17542 East 17 "' Street, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA June 6, 2012 JN:08210 -05 AQ REPORT HQ TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 Executive Summary ............................................... ..............................6 2.5 1.1 Purpose of Report ................................................................... ..............................6 1.2 Project Overview ..................................................................... ..............................7 Local Air Quality ..................................................................... .............................15 1.3 Operational Activity Recommended Mitigation Measures ....... ..............................9 2.7 1.4 Summary of Findings .............................................................. ..............................9 2.0 Existing Conditions ................................................ .............................10 2.1 South Coast Air Basin ............................................................ .............................10 2.2 Regional Climate .................................................................... .............................10 2.3 Wind Patterns and Project Location ....................................... .............................12 2.4 Existing Air Quality ................................................................. .............................12 2.5 Regional Air Quality ............................................................... .............................15 2.6 Local Air Quality ..................................................................... .............................15 2.7 Regulatory Background .......................................................... .............................22 2.7.1 Federal Regulations 2.7.2 California Regulations 2.7.3 Air Quality Management Planning 3.7.3 Air Quality Management Planning 2.8 Existing Project Site Air Quality Conditions ............................ .............................24 3.0 Project Air Quality Impact ...................................... .............................25 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................ .............................25 3.2 Standards of Significance ....................................................... .............................25 3.3 Project - Related Sources of Potential Impact .......................... .............................26 3.4 Construction Emissions .......................................................... .............................26 3.5 Operational Emissions ........................................................... .............................27 3.5.1 Construction Emissions Summary 3.5.2 Combustion Emissions Associated with Natural Gas and Electricity 3.5.3 Fugitive Dust Related to Vehicular Travel 3.5.4 Landscape Maintenance Equipment 3.5.5 Consumer Products 3.5.6 Architectural Coatings 3.5.7 Operational Emissions Summary 3.6 CO Hot Spot Analysis ............................................................ .............................31 3.7 Air Quality Management Planning .......................................... .............................32 North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 3.8 Potential Impacts to Sensitive Receptors ............................... .............................37 3.9 Odors ..................................................................................... .............................37 3.10 Cumulative Impacts ................................................................ .............................38 4.0 References ............................................................ .............................41 North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis � URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) `, CROSSROADS LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Paqe CaIEEModTM Input/Output Construction and Operational Emissions........... A North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis � URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) `, CROSSROADS LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Page 2 -1 Wind Rose ............................................................. .............................13 North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis � URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) `, CROSSROADS iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2 -1 State and Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards . .............................14 2 -2 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the South Coast Air Basin( SCAB) ........................................................ .............................17 2 -3 Project Area Air Quality Monitoring Summary 2008 - 2010 ..................18 3 -1 Maximum Daily Emissions Thresholds .................. .............................26 3 -2 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions (SummerMinter) Pounds Per Day (Without Mitigation) .................... .............................30 North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) m LIv► URBAN NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the air quality impact analysis (AQIA) prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. for the proposed North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) (referred to as "Project "). 1.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to satisfy CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), which requires the City to analyze whether subsequent activities regarding the North Newport Center zoning require an additional environmental document beyond the Final Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR') for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 200601119) ( "General Plan EIR "), and the first North Newport Center Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update, approved by Resolution No. 2007 -79 on December 11, 2007. The General Plan EIR was certified by the Newport Beach City Council on July 25, 2006, as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with the buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of North Newport Center. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), this report analyzes whether the Project would have effects that were not examined in the General Plan EIR and confirms that the Project will not result in new effects and will not require new mitigation measures so that the City can determine whether it is appropriate to approve the Project as within the scope of the General Plan EIR. As required by CEQA Guidelines section 15168(e), this report also analyzes whether: (i) the Project is within the scope of the General Plan 2006 Update; and (ii) the General Plan EIR adequately describes the subsequent activity for the purposes of CEQA. CEQA Guidelines section 15164(a) states: "The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162, no subsequent EIR may be required for the project unless the City determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that one or more of the following conditions are met: (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 6 (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR, was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (8) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. In order to provide the analysis necessary for the City to make its determination under CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), this AQIA evaluates the potential impacts to air quality associated with construction and operation of the proposed Project. Additional information beyond that required for the City's determination is included for public information. 1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 multi - family residential units to be developed in areas of the NNCPC designated MU -1-13 by the General Plan. In comparison, the General Plan allows a maximum of 450 units in the MU -1-13 category throughout the Newport Center Statistical Area. In other words, of the 450 MU -1-13 residential units allowed by the General Plan in the Newport Center Statistical Area, 430 are specifically assigned to the areas of the NNCPC designated by the NNCPC Development Plan as Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza. The remaining 20 units are allowed to be developed in any MU -1-13 designated area in the Newport Center Statistical Area. Five (5) MU -1-13 units have been assigned to the Golf Realty Fund Tennis Club development and the other 15 MU -1-13 units are not assigned to any particular property. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 7 In addition, certain areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU1 and LU2. Anomaly Location 43 in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area L1) is developed with a 532 room resort hotel presently operated by Marriott Hotels and Resorts. General Plan Table LU2 allows a maximum of 611 hotel rooms in Anomaly Location 43; therefore, 79 hotel rooms allowed by the General Plan are un- built. The proposed Project would convert the 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and then transfer them to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Under existing conditions, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are developed with commercial /office land uses and the Island Hotel. No multi - family residential units are constructed in these areas, although the NNCPC Development Plan allows for up to 430 residential units. Thus, the City's General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan currently allow for the existing land uses in Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza to be supplemented by or partially replaced with multi - family residential housing. The Project Applicant proposes an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by 94 units (comprising 15 un- assigned and un- built multi- family units and the 79 hotel units that would be converted to multi- family units) and to assign those 94 units, along with 430 units already allocated to the NNCCP, to the portion of the NNCCP designated as San Joaquin Plaza. No specific development project is proposed at this time. A proposal to develop a specific residential project in the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the procedures for development specified in the NNCPC Development Plan. There would be no change to the boundaries of the NNCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NNCPC Development Plan Amendment. Since no specific development is proposed at this time, and the exact location of the units is unknown, a specific calculation of emissions that may be associated with future construction activities is not possible and is not provided in this analysis. However, construction activities would be consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR and would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of any impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR. For purposes of this analysis, the air quality impacts centered on the on -going operations of the 94 units are evaluated. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 8 1.3 OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES The proposed project will not result in a significant regional or localized air quality impact during operational activity, nor would the project substantially increase the severity of any impacts previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR; accordingly, mitigation is not required. 1.4 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS • The Project will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. • The Project will not violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. • The Project will not 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. • The Project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. • The Project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 9 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS This section provides an overview of the existing air quality conditions in the project area and region. 2.1 SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN The project site is located in the SCAB within the jurisdiction of SCAQMD. The SCAQMD was created by the 1977 Lewis - Presley Air Quality Management Act, which merged four county air pollution control bodies into one regional district. Under the Act, the SCAQMD is responsible for bringing air quality in areas under its jurisdiction into conformity with federal and state air quality standards. As discussed above, the Project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin, a 6,745- square mile subregion of the SCAQMD, which includes portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties, and all of Orange County. The SCAB is bound by the Pacific Ocean to the west and the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to the north and east. The Los Angeles County portion of the Mojave Desert Air Basin is bound by the San Gabriel Mountains to the south and west, the Los Angeles / Kern County border to the north, and the Los Angeles / San Bernardino County border to the east. The Riverside County portion of the Salton Sea Air Basin is bound by the San Jacinto Mountains in the west and spans eastward up to the Palo Verde Valley. 2.2 REGIONAL CLIMATE The regional climate has a substantial influence on air quality in the SCAB. In addition, the temperature, wind, humidity, precipitation, and amount of sunshine influence the air quality. The annual average temperatures throughout the SCAB vary from the low to middle 60s (degrees Fahrenheit). Due to a decreased marine influence, the eastern portion of the SCAB shows greater variability in average annual minimum and maximum temperatures. January is the coldest month throughout the SCAB, with average minimum temperatures of 47 °F in downtown Los Angeles and 36 °F in San Bernardino. All portions of the SCAB have recorded maximum temperatures above 100 °F. Although the climate of the SCAB can be characterized as semi -arid, the air near the land surface is quite moist on most days because of the presence of a marine layer. This shallow layer of sea air is an important modifier of SCAB climate. Humidity restricts visibility in the SCAB, and the conversion of sulfur dioxide to sulfates is heightened in air with high relative humidity. The marine layer provides an environment for that conversion process, especially during the spring and North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 10 summer months. The annual average relative humidity within the SCAB is 71 percent along the coast and 59 percent inland. Since the ocean effect is dominant, periods of heavy early morning fog are frequent and low stratus clouds are a characteristic feature. These effects decrease with distance from the coast. More than 90 percent of the SCAB's rainfall occurs from November through April. The annual average rainfall varies from approximately nine inches in Riverside to fourteen inches in downtown Los Angeles. Monthly and yearly rainfall totals are extremely variable. Summer rainfall usually consists of widely scattered thunderstorms near the coast and slightly heavier shower activity in the eastern portion of the SCAB with frequency being higher near the coast. Due to its generally clear weather, about three - quarters of available sunshine is received in the SCAB. The remaining one - quarter is absorbed by clouds. The ultraviolet portion of this abundant radiation is a key factor in photochemical reactions. On the shortest day of the year there are approximately 10 hours of possible sunshine, and on the longest day of the year there are approximately 14 -1/2 hours of possible sunshine. The importance of wind to air pollution is considerable. The direction and speed of the wind determines the horizontal dispersion and transport of the air pollutants. During the late autumn to early spring rainy season, the SCAB is subjected to wind flows associated with the traveling storms moving through the region from the northwest. This period also brings five to ten periods of strong, dry offshore winds, locally termed "Santa Anas" each year. During the dry season, which coincides with the months of maximum photochemical smog concentrations, the wind flow is bimodal, typified by a daytime onshore sea breeze and a nighttime offshore drainage wind. Summer wind flows are created by the pressure differences between the relatively cold ocean and the unevenly heated and cooled land surfaces that modify the general northwesterly wind circulation over southern California. Nighttime drainage begins with the radiational cooling of the mountain slopes. Heavy, cool air descends the slopes and flows through the mountain passes and canyons as it follows the lowering terrain toward the ocean. Another characteristic wind regime in the SCAB is the "Catalina Eddy," a low level cyclonic (counterclockwise) flow centered over Santa Catalina Island which results in an offshore flow to the southwest. On most spring and summer days, some indication of an eddy is apparent in coastal sections. In the SCAB, there are two distinct temperature inversion structures that control vertical mixing of air pollution. During the summer, warm high - pressure descending (subsiding) air is undercut by a shallow layer of cool marine air. The boundary between these two layers of air is a persistent marine subsidence /inversion. This boundary prevents vertical mixing which effectively acts as an impervious lid to pollutants over the entire SCAB. The mixing height for the inversion structure is normally situated 1,000 to 1,500 feet above mean sea level. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 11 A second inversion -type forms in conjunction with the drainage of cool air off the surrounding mountains at night followed by the seaward drift of this pool of cool air. The top of this layer forms a sharp boundary with the warmer air aloft and creates nocturnal radiation inversions. These inversions occur primarily in the winter, when nights are longer and onshore flow is weakest. They are typically only a few hundred feet above mean sea level. These inversions effectively trap pollutants, such as NOx and CO from vehicles, as the pool of cool air drifts seaward. Winter is therefore a period of high levels of primary pollutants along the coastline. 2.3 WIND PATTERNS AND PROJECT LOCATION The distinctive climate of the Project area and the SCAB is determined by its terrain and geographical location. The Basin is located in a coastal plain with connecting broad valleys and low hills, bounded by the Pacific Ocean in the southwest quadrant with high mountains forming the remainder of the perimeter. Wind patterns across the south coastal region are characterized by westerly and southwesterly on -shore winds during the day and easterly or northeasterly breezes at night. Winds are characteristically light although the speed is somewhat greater during the dry summer months than during the rainy winter season. Wind speed and direction data is monitored by the SCAQMD for the Project area (Source Receptor Area) (SRA) 18; this data was obtained from North Orange County Coastal monitoring station, which is the nearest monitoring station to the proposed project. As shown in the following wind rose exhibit (Exhibit 2 -1), the prevailing winds move predominately from the northwest to the southeast with an average wind speed of 1.06 meters per second (m /s) or 3.48 feet per second (f /s). 2.4 EXISTING AIR QUALITY Existing air quality is measured based upon ambient air quality standards. These standards are the levels of air quality that are considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) currently in effect, as well health effects of each pollutant regulated under these standards are shown in Table 2 -1. The determination of whether a region's air quality is healthful or unhealthful is determined by comparing contaminant levels in ambient air samples to the state and federal standards presented in Table 2 -1. The air quality in a region is considered to be in attainment by the state if the measured ambient air pollutant levels for 03, CO, SO2, NO2, PMio, and PM2.5 are not equaled or exceeded at any time in any consecutive three -year period; and the federal standards (other than North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis 4 City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 12 WND ROSE PLOT. esta DISPLAY Wind Speed Direction (blowing from) NORTH i I 10ek• i I 6%1 \ \\ \\\ i11 1 I y WEST 1 I I II � 1 1 I I \ \ I 1 I 1\ \ _ 4%, 1 _, 1 EAST, I � i f SOUTH COMMENT DATAPERIOD COMPANY NAME' 13.40% 2005.2007 AVG. WND SPEED' Jan 1 - Dec 31 PROJECT NO 1.06 We 00:00 - 23:00 MOM R: MPLOT View - Lekes EnvlrmmarRel Soflwere EXHIBIT 2 -1 WIND ROSE WIND SPEED (Ms) ® >= 11.0 - 4.0 - 6.0 - 2.0- 4.0 O 0.5 - 2.0 O 0.1 - 0.5 Calms: 13.40% CALM WINDS. TOTAL COUNT 13.40% 25365 hrs. AVG. WND SPEED' DATE PROJECT NO 1.06 We 1/29/2009 North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 13 0 TABLE 2 -1 STATE AND NATIONAL CRITERIA POLLUTANT STANDARDS, EFFECTS, AND SOURCES Averaging State National Health and Atmospheric Pollutant Time Standard Standard Effects Major Sources 1 hour 0.09 ppm - -- High concentrations can directly Formed when reactive organic Ozone 8 hours 0.07 ppmt 0.075 ppm affect lungs, causing irritation. gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxides - -- - -- injurious to lung tissue. Can sulfur recovery plants, and metal Long -term exposure may cause (NOx) react in the presence of processing. kidney disease, and facilities. Past source: combustion damage to lung tissue. sunlight. Major sources include on- steel. Limits visibility and of leaded gasoline. road motor vehicles, solvent reduces sunlight. Inhalable evaporation, and commercial / 50 pg /m3 150 pg /m3 May irritate eyes and Dust and fume - producing industrial Particulate Annual Avg. industrial mobile equipment. Carbon 1 hour 20 ppm 35 ppm Classified as a chemical Internal combustion engines, Monoxide 8 hours 9.0 ppm 9 ppm asphyxiant, carbon monoxide primarily gasoline - powered motor haze and limits visibility. natural activities (e.g., wind- raised interferes with the transfer of vehicles. dust and ocean sprays). Fine fresh oxygen to the blood and -- 35 pg /m3 Increases respiratory disease, Fuel combustion in motor vehicles, Particulate Annual Avg. deprives sensitive tissues of equipment, and industrial sources; Nitrogen Dioxide 1 hour Annual Avg. 0.18 ppm -- Irritating to eyes and respiratory 0.030 0.053 ppm tract. Colors atmosphere reddish- brown. Motor vehicles, petroleum refining operations, industrial sources, aircraft, ships, and railroads. Sulfur 1 hour 0.25 ppm 75 ppb Irritates upper respiratory tract; Fuel combustion, chemical plants, Dioxide 3 hours - -- - -- injurious to lung tissue. Can sulfur recovery plants, and metal 24 hours 0.04 ppm -- yellow the leaves of plants, processing. kidney disease, and facilities. Past source: combustion destructive to marble, iron, and Month Avg. steel. Limits visibility and of leaded gasoline. reduces sunlight. Inhalable 24 hours 50 pg /m3 150 pg /m3 May irritate eyes and Dust and fume - producing industrial Particulate Annual Avg. 20 pg /m3 -- respiratory tract, decreases in and agricultural operations, Matter lung capacity, cancer and combustion, atmospheric (PM -10) Petroleum Production and refining increased mortality. Produces photochemical reactions, and haze and limits visibility. natural activities (e.g., wind- raised dust and ocean sprays). Fine 24 hours -- 35 pg /m3 Increases respiratory disease, Fuel combustion in motor vehicles, Particulate Annual Avg. 12 pg /m3 15 gg /m3 lung damage, cancer, and equipment, and industrial sources; Matter 24 hour premature death. Reduces residential and agricultural burning; (PM -2.5) Produced by the reaction in the air visibility and results in surface Also, formed from photochemical Standard soiling. reactions of other pollutants, including NOx, sulfur oxides, and Lead Monthly Ave. 1.5 pg/m3 - -- Disturbs gastrointestinal Present source: lead smelters, Quarterly — 1.5 pg /m3 system, and causes anemia, battery manufacturing & recycling Rolling 3- - -- 0.15 pg /m3 kidney disease, and facilities. Past source: combustion Month Avg. neuromuscular and of leaded gasoline. neurological dysfunction. Hydrogen 1 hour 0.03 ppm No National Nuisance odor (rotten egg Geothermal Power Plants, SuBde Standard smell), Petroleum Production and refining headache and breathing difficulties (higher concentrations) Sulfates 24 hour 25 pg /m3 No National Breathing difficulties, Produced by the reaction in the air Standard aggravates asthma, reduced of S02. vialbility Visibility 8 hour Light No National Reduces visibility, reduced See PM10 /PM2.5. Reducing extinction Standard airport safety, lower real estate Particles of 0.23 11km; value, discourages tourism. visibility of 10 miles or more NOTE: ppm = parts per million; pg /m3 = micrograms per cubic meter. 1 This concentration was approved by the Air Resources Board on April 28, 2005 and became effective May 17, 2006. SOURCE: California Air Resources Board, 09108/2010 intto: / /www.arb.ca.00v /research /aaos /aaas2.odf). Ambient Air Quality Standards, available at http: / /www.arb.ca.gov /research /aagslaags2.pdf Standards last updated November 17, 2008. California Air Resources Board, 2001. CARB Fact Sheet: Air Pollution Sources, Effects and Control, http: / /www.arb.ca.gov /research /health /fs /fs2 /fs2.htm, page last updated December 2005. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 14 03, PM10, PM2.5, and those based on annual averages or arithmetic mean) are not exceeded more than once per year. The 03 standard is attained when the fourth highest eight -hour concentration in a year, averaged over three years, is equal to or less than the standard. For PM10, the 24 -hour standard is attained when 99 percent of the daily concentrations, averaged over three years, are equal to or less than the standard. 2.5 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY The SCAQMD monitors levels of various criteria pollutants at 30 monitoring stations throughout the air district. In 2009, the federal and state standards were exceeded on one or more days for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 at most monitoring locations. No areas of the SCAB exceeded federal or state standards for NO2, S02, CO, sulfates or lead. See Table 3 -2 for attainment designations for the SCAB. 2.6 LOCAL AIR QUALITY Relative to the Project site, the nearest long -term air quality monitoring site for Ozone (03), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Inhalable Particulates (PM10), Fine Particulates (PM2.5) and is the South Coast Air Quality Management District North Coastal (SRA 18) monitoring station. The most recent three (3) years of data available' is shown on Table 2 -3 and identifies the number of days standards were exceeded for the study area, which was chosen to be representative of the local air quality at the Project site. Additionally, data for S02 has been omitted as attainment is regularly met in the South Coast Air Basin and few monitoring stations measure S02 concentrations. Criteria pollutants are pollutants that are regulated through the development of human health based and /or environmentally based criteria for setting permissible levels. Examples of sources and effects of the criteria pollutants are identified below: • Carbon Monoxide (CO): Is a colorless, odorless gas produced by the incomplete combustion of carbon - containing fuels, such as gasoline or wood. CO concentrations tend to be the highest during the winter morning, when little to no wind and surface - based inversions trap the pollutant at ground levels. Because CO is emitted directly from internal combustion engines, unlike ozone, motor vehicles operating at slow speeds are the primary source of CO in the Basin. The highest ambient CO concentrations are generally found near congested transportation corridors and intersections. • Sulfur Dioxide (S022): Is a colorless, extremely irritating gas or liquid. It enters the atmosphere as a pollutant mainly as a result of burning high sulfur- content fuel oils and coal and from chemical processes occurring at chemical plants and refineries. When ' Year 2011 air quality monitoring station data was not available at the time of preparation of this report from the SCAQMD. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis V RB City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) � � R@ 15 SO2 oxidizes in the atmosphere, it forms sulfates (SO4). Collectively, these pollutants are referred to as sulfur oxides (SOX). • Nitrogen Oxides (Oxides of Nitrogen. or NO.): Nitrogen oxides (NOx) consist of nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O) and are formed when nitrogen (N2) combines with oxygen (02). Their lifespan in the atmosphere ranges from one to seven days for nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide, to 170 years for nitrous oxide. Nitrogen oxides are typically created during combustion processes, and are major contributors to smog formation and acid deposition. NO2 is a criteria air pollutant, and may result in numerous adverse health effects; it absorbs blue light, resulting in a brownish -red cast to the atmosphere and reduced visibility. Of the seven types of nitrogen oxide compounds, NO2 is the most abundant in the atmosphere. As ambient concentrations of NO2 are related to traffic density, commuters in heavy traffic may be exposed to higher concentrations of NO2 than those indicated by regional monitors. • Ozone (03): Is a highly reactive and unstable gas that is formed when volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX), both byproducts of internal combustion engine exhaust, undergo slow photochemical reactions in the presence of sunlight. Ozone concentrations are generally highest during the summer months when direct sunlight, light wind, and warm temperature conditions are favorable to the formation of this pollutant. • PM10 (Particulate Matter less than 10 microns): A major air pollutant consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles of soot, dust, smoke, fumes, and aerosols. The size of the particles (10 microns or smaller, about 0.0004 inches or less) allows them to easily enter the lungs where they may be deposited, resulting in adverse health effects. PM10 also causes visibility reduction and is a criteria air pollutant. • PM25 (Particulate Matter less than 2.5 microns): A similar air pollutant consisting of tiny solid or liquid particles which are 2.5 microns or smaller (which is often referred to as fine particles). These particles are formed in the atmosphere from primary gaseous emissions that include sulfates formed from SO2 release from power plants and industrial facilities and nitrates that are formed from NOX release from power plants, automobiles and other types of combustion sources. The chemical composition of fine particles highly depends on location, time of year, and weather conditions. PM2.5 is a criteria air pollutant. • Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC): Volatile organic compounds are hydrocarbon compounds (any compound containing various combinations of hydrogen and carbon atoms) that exist in the ambient air. VOCs contribute to the formation of smog through North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 16 TABLE 2 -2 ATTAINMENT STATUS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS IN THE SOUTH COAST AIR BASIN (SCAB) Criteria Pollutant State Designation Federal Designation Ozone - 1 hour standard Nonattainment No Standard Ozone - 8 hour standard Nonattainment Extreme Nonattainment' PM10 Nonattainment Serious Nonattainment PM2.5 Nonattainment Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide Attainment Attainment /Maintenance Nitrogen Dioxide Nonattainment' Attainment/Maintenance Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Attainment Lead Attainment/Nonattainment Attainment/Nonattainment4 All others Attainment/Unclassified Attainment/Unclassified Source: California Air Resources Board 2010 ( htto:// www. arb. ca. oov /regact/20101arealO /arealO.htm, http:// www .arb.ca.gov /desio /feddesig.htm) 'The USEPA approved redesignation from Severe 17 to Extreme Nonattainment on May 5, 2010 to be effective June 4, 2010. 2 The SCAB was reclassified from attainment to nonattainment for nitrogen dioxide on March 25, 2010. 3 Los Angeles County was reclassified from attainment to nonattainment for lead on March 25, 2010; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State Standard. ° The Los Angeles County portion of the SCAB is classified as nonattainment; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State Standard. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 17 TABLE 2 -3 PROJECT AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY 2008 -2010 NORTH COASTAL (SRA 18) AIR MONITORING STATION DATA LLUTANT STANDARD YEAR 2008 2009 2010 Ozone 03 Maximum 1 -Hour Concentration m .094 .087 .097 Maximum 8 -Hour Concentration (ppm) .079 .075 .076 Number of Days Exceeding State 1 -Hour Standard > 0.09 ppm 0 0 1 Number of Days Exceeding State 8 -Hour Standard > 0.07 ppm 6 3 2 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 1 -Hour Standard > 0.12 ppm 0 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 8 -Hour Standard > 0.075 ppm 3 0 1 Number of Days Exceeding Health Advisor ? 0.15 PPM 1 0 0 1 0 Carbon Monoxide CO Maximum 1 -Hour Concentration (ppm) 3 3 2 Maximum 8 -Hour Concentration m 2.0 2.2 2.1 Number of Days Exceeding State 1 -Hour Standard > 20 ppm 0 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding Federal / State 8 -Hour Standard > 9.0 ppm 0 0 0 Number of Days Exceeding Federal 1 -Hour Standard > 35 ppm 0 0 0 Nitrogen Dioxide NOZ Maximum 1 -Hour Concentration m .08 .07 70.0 Annual Arithmetic Mean Concentration (ppm) .0132 .0130 11.3 Number of Days Exceeding State 1 -Hour Standard > 0.18 ppm 0 0 0 Inhalable Particulates (PM ,a a Maximum 24 -Hour Concentration /m3 42 56 34 Number of Samples 55 60 58 Number of Samples Exceeding State Standard > 50 /m3 0 1 0 Number of Samples Exceeding Federal Standard > 150 pgIm 3 0 0 0 Fine Particulates PM2.5 a Maximum 24 -Hour Concentration (p /m' 32.6 39.2 19.9 Annual Arithmetic Mean /m3 10.4 9.5 8.0 Number of Samples Exceedino Federal 24 -Hour Standard > 35 /m3 0 1 0 a Saddleback Monitoring Station used where data not available from North Coastal Orange County. Source: South Coast AQMD (www.aqmd.qov) North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 18 atmospheric photochemical reactions and /or may be toxic. Compounds of carbon (also known as organic compounds) have different levels of reactivity; that is, they do not react at the same speed or do not form ozone to the same extent when exposed to photochemical processes. VOCs often have an odor, and some examples include gasoline, alcohol, and the solvents used in paints. Exceptions to the VOC designation include: carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate. VOCs are a criteria pollutant since they are a precursor to 03, which is a criteria pollutant. • Reactive Organic Gasses (ROG): Similar to VOC, Reactive Organic Gasses (ROG) are also precursors in forming ozone and consist of compounds containing methane, ethane, propane, butane, and longer chain hydrocarbons, which are typically the result of some type of combustion /decomposition process. Smog is formed when ROG and nitrogen oxides react in the presence of sunlight. ROGs are a criteria pollutant since they are a precursor to 03, which is a criteria pollutant. • Lead (Pb): Lead is a heavy metal that is highly persistent in the environment. In the past, the primary source of lead in the air was emissions from vehicles burning leaded gasoline. As a result of the removal of lead from gasoline, there have been no violations at any of the SCAQMD's regular air monitoring stations since 1982. Currently, emissions of lead are largely limited to stationary sources such as lead smelters. It should be noted that the proposed Project is not anticipated to generate a quantifiable amount of lead emissions. Lead is a criteria air pollutant. Health Effects of Air Pollutants Ozone Individuals exercising outdoors, children, and people with preexisting lung disease, such as asthma and chronic pulmonary lung disease, are considered to be the most susceptible sub- groups for ozone effects. Short-term exposure (lasting for a few hours) to ozone at levels typically observed in Southern California can result in breathing pattern changes, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of the lung tissue, and some immunological changes. Elevated ozone levels are associated with increased school absences. In recent years, a correlation between elevated ambient ozone levels and increases in daily hospital admission rates, as well as mortality, has also been reported. An increased risk for asthma has been found in children who participate in multiple sports and live in communities with high ozone levels. Ozone exposure under exercising conditions is known to increase the severity of the responses described above. Animal studies suggest that exposure to a combination of pollutants that includes ozone may be more toxic than exposure to ozone alone. Although lung volume and North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis y City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) �r 19 resistance changes observed after a single exposure diminish with repeated exposures, biochemical and cellular changes appear to persist, which can lead to subsequent lung structural changes. Carbon Monoxide Individuals with a deficient blood supply to the heart are the most susceptible to the adverse effects of CO exposure. The effects observed include earlier onset of chest pain with exercise, and electrocardiograph changes indicative of decreased oxygen supply to the heart. Inhaled CO has no direct toxic effect on the lungs, but exerts its effect on tissues by interfering with oxygen transport and competing with oxygen to combine with hemoglobin present in the blood to form carboxyhemoglobin (COHb). Hence, conditions with an increased demand for oxygen supply can be adversely affected by exposure to CO. Individuals most at risk include fetuses, patients with diseases involving heart and blood vessels, and patients with chronic hypoxemia (oxygen deficiency) as seen at high altitudes. Reduction in birth weight and impaired neurobehavioral development have been observed in animals chronically exposed to CO, resulting in COHb levels similar to those observed in smokers. Recent studies have found increased risks for adverse birth outcomes with exposure to elevated CO levels; these include pre -term births and heart abnormalities. Particulate Matter A consistent correlation between elevated ambient fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) levels and an increase in mortality rates, respiratory infections, number and severity of asthma attacks and the number of hospital admissions has been observed in different parts of the United States and various areas around the world. In recent years, some studies have reported an association between long -term exposure to air pollution dominated by fine particles and increased mortality, reduction in life -span, and an increased mortality from lung cancer. Daily fluctuations in PM2.5 concentration levels have also been related to hospital admissions for acute respiratory conditions in children, to school and kindergarten absences, to a decrease in respiratory lung volumes in normal children, and to increased medication use in children and adults with asthma. Recent studies show lung function growth in children is reduced with longterm exposure to particulate matter. The elderly, people with pre- existing respiratory or cardiovascular disease, and children appear to be more susceptible to the effects of high levels of PM10 and PM2.5. Nitrogen Dioxide Population -based studies suggest that an increase in acute respiratory illness, including infections and respiratory symptoms in children (not infants), is associated with long -term North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis 4 City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 20 exposure to NO2 at levels found in homes with gas stoves, which are higher than ambient levels found in Southern California. Increase in resistance to air flow and airway contraction is observed after short-term exposure to NO2 in healthy subjects. Larger decreases in lung functions are observed in individuals with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (e.g., chronic bronchitis, emphysema) than in healthy individuals, indicating a greater susceptibility of these sub - groups. In animals, exposure to levels of NO2 considerably higher than ambient concentrations results in increased susceptibility to infections, possibly due to the observed changes in cells involved in maintaining immune functions. The severity of lung tissue damage associated with high levels of ozone exposure increases when animals are exposed to a combination of ozone and NO2. Sulfur Dioxide A few minutes of exposure to low levels of SO2 can result in airway constriction in some asthmatics, all of whom are sensitive to its effects. In asthmatics, increase in resistance to air flow, as well as reduction in breathing capacity leading to severe breathing difficulties, are observed after acute exposure to SO2. In contrast, healthy individuals do not exhibit similar acute responses even after exposure to higher concentrations of SO2. Animal studies suggest that despite SO2 being a respiratory irritant, it does not cause substantial lung injury at ambient concentrations. However, very high levels of exposure can cause lung edema (fluid accumulation), lung tissue damage, and sloughing off of cells lining the respiratory tract. Some population -based studies indicate that the mortality and morbidity effects associated with fine particles show a similar association with ambient SO2 levels. In these studies, efforts to separate the effects of SO2 from those of fine particles have not been successful. It is not clear whether the two pollutants act synergistically or one pollutant alone is the predominant factor. Lead Fetuses, infants, and children are more sensitive than others to the adverse effects of Pb exposure. Exposure to low levels of Pb can adversely affect the development and function of the central nervous system, leading to learning disorders, distractibility, inability to follow simple commands, and lower intelligence quotient. In adults, increased Pb levels are associated with increased blood pressure. Pb poisoning can cause anemia, lethargy, seizures, and death; although it appears that there are no direct effects of Pb on the respiratory system. Pb can be stored in the bone from early age environmental exposure, and elevated blood Pb levels can occur due to breakdown of bone tissue during pregnancy, hyperthyroidism (increased secretion of hormones from the thyroid North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis 4 City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 21 gland) and osteoporosis (breakdown of bony tissue). Fetuses and breast -fed babies can be exposed to higher levels of Pb because of previous environmental Pb exposure of their mothers. Odors The science of odor as a health concern is still new. Merely identifying the hundreds of VOCs that cause odors poses a big challenge. Offensive odors can potentially affect human health in several ways. First, odorant compounds can irritate the eye, nose, and throat, which can reduce respiratory volume. Second, studies have shown that the VOCs that cause odors can stimulate sensory nerves to cause neurochemical changes that might influence health, for instance, by compromising the immune system. Finally, unpleasant odors can trigger memories or attitudes linked to unpleasant odors, causing cognitive and emotional effects such as stress. 2.7 REGULATORY BACKGROUND 2.7.1 FEDERAL REGULATIONS The U.S. EPA is responsible for setting and enforcing the NAAQS for 03, CO, NOx, S02, PM10, and lead. The U.S. EPA has jurisdiction over emissions sources that are under the authority of the federal government including aircraft, locomotives, and emissions sources outside state waters (Outer Continental Shelf). The U.S. EPA also establishes emission standards for vehicles sold in states other than California. Automobiles sold in California must meet the stricter emission requirements of the CARB. The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) was first enacted in 1955, and has been amended numerous times in subsequent years (1963, 1965, 1967, 1970, 1977, and 1990). The CAA establishes the federal air quality standards, the NAAQS, and specifies future dates for achieving compliance. The CAA also mandates that states submit and implement State Implementation Plans (SIPS) for local areas not meeting these standards. These plans must include pollution control measures that demonstrate how the standards will be met. The 1990 amendments to the CAA that identify specific emission reduction goals for areas not meeting the NAAQS require a demonstration of reasonable further progress toward attainment and incorporate additional sanctions for failure to attain or to meet interim milestones. The sections of the CAA most directly applicable to the development of the Project site include Title I (Non - Attainment Provisions) and Title II (Mobile Source Provisions). Title I provisions were established with the goal of attaining the NAAQS for the following criteria pollutants 03, NO2, S02, PM10, CO, PM2.5, and lead. The NAAQS were amended in July 1997 to North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 22 include an additional standard for 03 and to adopt a NAAQS for PM2.5. Table 3 -1 (previously presented) provides the NAAQS within the basin. Mobile source emissions are regulated in accordance with Title II provisions. These provisions require the use of cleaner burning gasoline and other cleaner burning fuels such as methanol and natural gas. Automobile manufacturers are also required to reduce tailpipe emissions of hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides (NO.). NO, is a collective term that includes all forms of nitrogen oxides (NO, NO2, NO3) which are emitted as byproducts of the combustion process. 2.7.2 CALIFORNIA REGULATIONS The CARB, which became part of the California EPA in 1991, is responsible for ensuring implementation of the California Clean Air Act (AB 2595), responding to the federal CAA, and for regulating emissions from consumer products and motor vehicles. The California CAA mandates achievement of the maximum degree of emissions reductions possible from vehicular and other mobile sources in order to attain the state ambient air quality standards by the earliest practical date. The CARB established the CAAQS for all pollutants for which the federal government has NAAQS and, in addition, establishes standards for sulfates, visibility, hydrogen sulfide, and vinyl chloride. However at this time, hydrogen sulfide and vinyl chloride are not measured at any monitoring stations in the SCAB because they are not considered to be a regional air quality problem. Generally, the CAAQS are more stringent than the NAAQS. Local air quality management districts, such as the SCAQMD, regulate air emissions from commercial and light industrial facilities. All air pollution control districts have been formally designated as attainment or non - attainment for each CAAQS. Serious non - attainment areas are required to prepare air quality management plans that include specified emission reduction strategies in an effort to meet clean air goals. These plans are required to include: • Application of Best Available Retrofit Control Technology to existing sources; • Developing control programs for area sources (e.g., architectural coatings and solvents) and indirect sources (e.g. motor vehicle use generated by residential and commercial development); • A District permitting system designed to allow no net increase in emissions from any new or modified permitted sources of emissions; • Implementing reasonably available transportation control measures and assuring a substantial reduction in growth rate of vehicle trips and miles traveled; • Significant use of low emissions vehicles by fleet operators; North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 23 • Sufficient control strategies to achieve a five percent or more annual reduction in emissions or 15 percent or more in a period of three years for ROGs, NO., CO and PM10. However, air basins may use alternative emission reduction strategy that achieves a reduction of less than five percent per year under certain circumstances. 2.7.3 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING Currently, the NAAQS and CAAQS are exceeded in most parts of the SCAB. In response, the SCAQMD has adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards. AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy. A detailed discussion on the AQMP and Project consistency with the AQMP is provided in Section 3.7. 2.8 EXISTING PROJECT SITE AIR QUALITY CONDITIONS The Project site is currently not vacant and the existing land uses are generating emissions, the exact amount of emissions are unknown and not easily quantifiable. Therefore the existing air quality conditions at the Project site would generally reflect ambient monitored conditions as presented previously at Table 2 -3 (ambient monitored conditions occur in a generally similar built environment). North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) 24 3.0 PROJECT AIR QUALITY IMPACT 3.1 INTRODUCTION The Project has been evaluated to determine if it will violate an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. Additionally, the proposed Project has been evaluated to determine if it will result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of a criteria pollutant for which the SCAB is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. The significance of these potential impacts is described in the following section. The City of Newport Beach does not have its own thresholds of significance. 3.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE The criteria used to determine the significance of potential Project- related air quality impacts are taken from the Initial Study Checklist in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations § §15000, et seq.). Based on these thresholds, a project would result in a significant impact related to air quality if it would: (1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. (2) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. (3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). (4) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (5) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Within the context of the above threshold considerations, based on the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993), project impacts would be significant if they exceed the following California standards for localized CO concentrations: • 1 -hour CO standard of 20.0 parts per million (ppm) • 8 -hour CO standard of 9.0 ppm. The SCAQMD has also developed regional and localized significance thresholds for other regulated pollutants, as summarized at Table 3 -1. The SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 25 (March 2009) indicate that any projects in the SCAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the indicated thresholds should be considered as having an individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact. TABLE 3 -1 MAXIMUM DAILY EMISSIONS THRESHOLDS (REGIONAL THRESHOLDS) Pollutant Construction Operational NO, 100 lbs/day 55 Ibs /da VOC 75 lbs/day 55 Ibs /da PM10 150 lbs/day 150 Ibs /da PM2.5 55 lbs/day 55 Ibs /da sox 150 lbs/day 150 Ibs /da CO 550lbs /day 550lbs /day Lead 3 Ibs /da 3 Ibs/da 3.3 PROJECT - RELATED SOURCES OF POTENTIAL IMPACT Land uses such as the proposed Project impact air quality through emissions associated with short-term construction, and long -term operational activity. On February 3, 2011, the SCAQMD released the California Emissions Estimator ModelT" (CalEEMod TM ). The purpose of this model is to accurately calculate criteria pollutant (NOx, VOC, PM10, PM2.5, SOx, and CO) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from direct and indirect sources and quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from mitigation measures. As such, the latest version of CalEEModT1 has been used for this Project to determine operational air quality impacts. Output from the model runs for operational activity is provided in Appendix "A ". 3.4 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Since no specific development project is proposed at this time and the exact location of proposed development is unknown, a calculation of emissions that may be associated with future construction activities is not possible and is not provided in this analysis. Regardless, construction activities that may be associated with future residential development on the Project site would clearly fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR anticipated the construction of 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within Newport Center, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to create new construction - related air quality impacts because construction of the remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) cnRB M 26 and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction of 79 multi- family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in construction - related air emissions. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities would be very similar for hotel units or multi - family units. Additionally, the conduct of construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate air emissions that would be different or more severe than the conduct of construction activities in other parts of Newport Center. Accordingly, future Project - related construction emissions would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of the significant and unavoidable construction - related air quality impact previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. 3.5 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS As previously noted, the Applicant proposes an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by 94 units and to assign those 94 units, along with 430 units already allocated to the NNCCP, to the portion of the NNCCP designated as San Joaquin Plaza. It should be noted that of the 94 units, 15 dwelling units are currently assigned to Newport Center and impacts from these dwelling units were accounted for by the General Plan EIR. The remaining 79 units consist of hotel units that would be converted to multi - family residential units. In order to provide consistency with the traffic study, this analysis relates to the proposed increase of 94 dwelling units allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza (as is done for the traffic study), and represents a "worst case" (conservative) analysis since there would be no credit taken for reducing by 79 the number of hotel units that can be constructed within Statistical Areal-1, nor would any credit be applied for the 15 MU -1­13 units already allowed in Newport Center by the General Plan. Operational activities associated with the proposed Project will result in emissions of ROG, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, and PM2.5. Operational emissions would be expected from the following primary sources: • Vehicles • Combustion Emissions Associated with Natural Gas and Electricity • Fugitive dust related to vehicular travel • Landscape maintenance equipment • Emissions from consumer products • Architectural coatings 3.5.1 VEHICLES Project operational (vehicular) impacts are dependent on both overall daily vehicle trip generation and the effect of the project on peak hour traffic volumes and traffic operations in the vicinity of the project. The project related operational air quality impact centers primarily on the vehicle trips generated by the North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 27 project. Trip characteristics available from the report, North NewDOrt Center San Joaguin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec, May 2012) were utilized in this analysis. The estimated emissions resulting from vehicle operations are summarized in Table 3 -2. 3.5.2 COMBUSTION EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH NATURAL GAS AND ELECTRICITY Electricity and natural gas are used by almost every project. Criteria pollutant emissions are emitted through the generation of electricity and consumption of natural gas. However, because electrical generating facilities for the Project area are located either outside the region (state) or offset through the use of pollution credits (RECLAIM) for generation within the SCAB, criteria pollutant emissions from offsite generation of electricity is generally excluded from the evaluation of significance and only natural gas use is considered. The emissions associated with natural gas use were calculated using the CalEEModTM model. The estimated combustion emissions are provided in Table 3 -2 (presented later in this report.) Detailed emission calculations are provided in Appendix "A ". 3.5.3 FUGITIVE DUST RELATED TO VEHICULAR TRAVEL Vehicles traveling on paved roads would be a source of fugitive emissions due to the generation of road dust. The emissions estimates for travel on paved roads were calculated using the CalEEModTM model. The estimated PM,() and PM2.5 emissions from vehicles for fugitive dust are summarized in Table 3 -2 (presented later in this report.) Detailed emission calculations are provided in Appendix "X. 3.5.4 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT Landscape maintenance equipment would generate emissions from fuel combustion and evaporation of unburned fuel. Equipment in this category would include lawnmowers, shedders /grinders, blowers, trimmers, chain saws, and hedge trimmers used to maintain the landscaping of the Project. The emissions associated with landscape maintenance equipment were calculated based on assumptions provided in the CalEEModTM model. The estimated landscape maintenance emissions are provided in Table 3 -2 (presented later in this report.) Detailed emission calculations are provided in Appendix "A ". 3.5.5 CONSUMER PRODUCTS Consumer projects include, but are not limited to detergents, cleaning compounds, polishes, personal care products, and lawn and garden products. Many of these products contain organic compounds which when released in the atmosphere can react to form ozone and other photochemically reactive pollutants. The estimated emissions from consumer products are provided in Table 3 -2 (presented later in this report.) Detailed emission calculations are provided in Appendix "A ". 3.5.6 ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS Over a period of time the buildings that are part of this Project will be subject to emissions resulting from the evaporation of solvents contained in paints, varnishes, primers, and other surface coatings as part of Project maintenance. The emissions associated with architectural coatings were calculated North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 28 using the CalEEModTM model. The estimated architectural coating emissions are provided in Table 3 -2 (presented later in this report.) Detailed emission calculations are provided in Appendix "A ". 3.5.7 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS SUMMARY The Project - related operations emissions burdens, along with a comparison of SCAQMD recommended significance thresholds, are shown on Table 3 -2. Detailed operational model outputs are presented in Appendix "K. Results of the analysis indicate that the addition of 94 units to San Joaquin Plaza would not result in any excedances of the SCAQMD regional thresholds during either summer or winter months. Accordingly, Project - related emissions would not violate the SCAQMD standards for criteria pollutants. Furthermore, if Project emissions do not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds for NOx, VOC, PMio, or PM2.5, it follows that the emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative excedance of a pollutant for which the SCAB is in nonattainment (i.e., ozone, NOx, PM,o, and /or PM2.5). Operational impacts were not specifically evaluated in the General Plan EIR because the SCAQMD does not recommend calculation of operational emissions for a planning document, such as a General Plan Update; therefore, long -term operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR and no mitigation would be required. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 29 TABLE 3 -2 SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS (SUMMER) (POUNDS PER DAY) (WITHOUT MITIGATION) Operational Activities VOC NO. CO S% PM,ii I PM2.5 Area Source Emissions a 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 5.01 5.01 Energy Source Emissions 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.05 0.05 Mobile Emissions' 1.92 3.47 18.87 0.04 4.64 0.33 Maximum Daily Emissions 14.31 4.63 58.20 0.12 9.70 5.39 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant? NO NO NO NO NO NO SUMMARY OF PEAK OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS (WINTER) (POUNDS PER DAY) (WITHOUT MITIGATION) Operational Activities VOC NOx CO SOx PM,ii I PM2.5 Area Source Emissions a 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 5.01 5.01 Energy Source Emissions ° 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.05 0.05 Mobile Emissions C 2.03 3.84 18.37 0.04 4.64 0.33 Maximum Daily Emissions 14.42 5.00 57.70 0.12 9.70 5.39 SCAQMD Regional Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant? NO NO NO NO NO NO Note: Please refer to Appendix A for the CaIEEIvIodTM output files and additional supporting information for the estimated emissions. a Includes emissions of landscape maintenance equipment and architectural coatings emissions Includes emissions of natural gas consumption ` Includes emissions of vehicle emissions and fugitive dust related to vehicular travel North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnosBAM 30 3.6 CO "HOT SPOT" ANALYSIS A carbon monoxide (CO) "hot spots' analysis is needed to determine whether the change in the level of service (LOS) of an intersection due to the Project would have the potential to result in exceedances of the California or National Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS or NAAQS). It has long been recognized that CO exceedances are caused by vehicular emissions, primarily when idling at intersections. Vehicle emissions standards have become increasingly more stringent in the last twenty years. Currently, the CO standard in California is a maximum of 3.4 grams /mile for passenger cars (there are requirements for certain vehicles that are more stringent). With the turnover of older vehicles, introduction of cleaner fuels and implementation of control technology on industrial facilities, CO concentrations in the Project vicinity have steadily declined, as shown based on historical data presented on Table 2 -3. Accordingly, with the steadily decreasing CO emissions from vehicles, even very busy intersections do not result in exceedances of the CO standard. The analysis prepared for CO attainment in the SCAB by the SCAQMD can be used to assist in evaluating the potential for CO exceedances in the South Coast Air Basin. CO attainment was thoroughly analyzed as part of the SCAQMD's 2003 Air Quality Management Plan (2003 AQMP) and the 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan). As discussed in the 1992 CO Plan, peak carbon monoxide concentrations in the South Coast Air Basin are due to unusual meteorological and topographical conditions, and not due to the impact of particular intersections. Considering the region's unique meteorological conditions and the increasingly stringent CO emissions standards, CO modeling was performed as part of 1992 CO Plan and subsequent plan updates and air quality management plans. In the 1992 CO Plan, a CO hot spot analysis was conducted for four busy intersections in Los Angeles County at the peak morning and afternoon time periods. The intersections evaluated included: Long Beach Blvd. and Imperial Highway (Lynwood); Wilshire Blvd. and Veteran Ave. (Westwood); Sunset Blvd. and Highland Ave. (Hollywood); and La Cienega Blvd. and Century Blvd. (Inglewood). The analysis in the 1992CO Plan did not result in a violation of CO standards. The busiest intersection evaluated was that at Wilshire Blvd. and Veteran Ave., which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority evaluated the LOS in the vicinity of the Wilshire Blvd. /Veteran Ave. intersection and found it to be Level E at peak morning traffic and Level F at peak afternoon traffic. This highest Project -area average daily traffic is lower than the values studied in the 1992 CO Plan. Consequently at buildout of the Project, according to the Traffic Impact Analysis, none of the intersections in the vicinity of the Proposed Project Site would have peak hourly traffic volumes exceeding those at the intersections modeled in the 2003 AQMP, nor would there be any reason unique to project area North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 31 meteorology to conclude that this intersection would yield higher CO concentrations if modeled in detail. As a result, the South Coast Air Basin has been designated as attainment for CO since 2007 (SCAQMD 2007) and even very busy intersections do not result in exceedances of the CO standard. 3.7 AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLANNING The Project site is located within the SCAB, which is characterized by relatively poor air quality. The SCAQMD has jurisdiction over an approximately 12,000 square -mile area consisting of the four - county Basin and the Los Angeles County and Riverside County portions of what use to be referred to as the Southeast Desert Air Basin. In these areas, the SCAQMD is principally responsible for air pollution control, and works directly with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), county transportation commissions, local governments, as well as state and federal agencies to reduce emissions from stationary, mobile, and indirect sources to meet state and federal ambient air quality standards. Currently, these state and federal air quality standards are exceeded in most parts of the Basin. In response, the SCAQMD has adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the state and federal ambient air quality standards. AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions, accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the economy. The SCAQMD has published the Draft Final 2007 AQMP, which was adopted by the SCAQMD Governing Board on June 1, 2007. In September 2007, the CARB Board adopted the SCAQMD 2007 AQMP as part of the SIP. The purpose of the 2007 AQMP for the SCAB (and those portions of the Salton Sea Air Basin under the SCAQMD's jurisdiction) is to set forth a comprehensive program that will lead these areas into compliance with federal and state air quality planning requirements for ozone and PM2.5. On September 27, 2007, the CARB Board adopted the State Strategy for the 2007 State Implementation Plan and the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan as part of the (SIP). On November 22, 20102, U.S. EPA published its notice of proposed partial approval and partial disapproval of the 2007 AQMP PM2.5 Plan. The proposed disapproval is primarily due to the fact that the attainment demonstration relies heavily on emissions reductions from several State rules that have not been finalized or submitted to U.S. EPA for approval. No timetable for full adoption of the 2007 AQMP is available at this time. As part of the 2007 AQMP, the SCAQMD requested, and the U.S. EPA's subsequently approved a "bump - up" to the "extreme" nonattainment classification for ozone in the SCAB, which extends the attainment date to 2024 and allow for the attainment demonstration to rely on emission reductions from measures that anticipate the development of new technologies or improvement of existing control technologies. Although PM2.5 plans for nonattainment areas were due in April 2008, the 2007 AQMP also focuses on attainment strategies for the PM2.5 standard through stricter control of sulfur oxides, directly- emitted PM2.5, NOx, and VOCs. The need to commence PM2,5 control strategies before April 2008 is due to the attainment date for 2 http: / /www.aamd.00v /hb/ attachments / 2011 - 2015/2011 Jan /2011- Jan7- 019.pdf North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 32 PM2.5 (2015) being much earlier than that for ozone (2021 for the current designation of severe -17 or 2024 for the extreme designation). However, it should be noted that the PM2.5 plans are still in the process of being submitted. Control measures and strategies for PM2.5 will also help control ozone generation in the region because PM2.5 and ozone share similar precursors (e.g., NOx). The SCAQMD has integrated PM2.5 and ozone reduction control measures and strategies in the 2007 AQMP. In addition, the AQMP focuses on reducing VOC emissions, which have not been reduced at the same rate as NOx emissions in the past. Hence, the SCAB has not achieved the reductions in ozone as were expected in previous plans. The 2007 AQMP was based on assumptions on motor vehicles provided by the CARB and on demographics provided by SCAG. These assumptions are reflected in the new EMFAC2007 computer model. The air quality levels projected in the 2007 AQMP are based on several assumptions. For example, the 2007 AQMP has assumed that development associated with general plans, specific plans, residential projects, and wastewater facilities will be constructed in accordance with population growth projections identified by SCAG in its 2004 RTP. The 2007 AQMP also has assumed that such development projects will implement strategies to reduce emissions generated during the construction and operational phases of development. The Project's consistency with the 2007 AQMP is discussed as follows: Criteria for determining consistency with the AQMP are defined in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993). These indicators are discussed below: • Consistency Criterion No. 1: The proposed Project will not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. Project's Contribution to Air Quality Violations According to the SCAQMD, the proposed project would be consistent with the AQMP if the project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP. Emissions Associated with Construction Activities No specific development project is proposed as part of the Project at this time; therefore, it is not possible to calculate specific emission quantities that may be associated with future construction activities. Nevertheless, it is recognized that construction effects would be expected to follow approval of the Project. See CEQA Guidelines Section 15146. Construction - related impacts to air quality were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which concluded that buildout of the General Plan would result in construction activities that would exceed the SCAQMD's construction - related air quality standards. As North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 33 such, the General Plan EIR disclosed construction- related air emissions as a significant and unavoidable impact. Any future Project - related construction activities would be required to comply with General Plan policies NR 8.1 through 8.5, which when implemented would help to reduce construction - related air pollutant emissions. Further, construction activities that may be associated with future residential development on the proposed Project site would be required to comply with all applicable SCAQMD Rules and current California Building Code requirements (California Code of Regulations, Title 24), some provisions of which are more stringent now than when the General Plan EIR was certified in 2007. Construction - related air emissions and resulting impacts associated with the proposed allocation of 524 multi - family residential units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of analysis previously provided in the General Plan EIR. Of the 524 units, the General Plan EIR assumed that 430 of those units would be constructed within the NNCPC and also assumed that an additional 15 multi - family units would be constructed within Statistical Area U. The remaining 79 units were assumed by the General Plan EIR to consist of hotel units. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to create new construction - related air quality impacts because construction of the remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction of 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in construction - related air emissions. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities would be very similar for hotel units or multi - family units. Additionally, the conduct of construction activities in San Joaquin Plaza would not have the potential to generate air emissions that would be different or more severe than the conduct of construction activities in other parts of Newport Center. Accordingly, future Project - related construction emissions would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of the significant and unavoidable construction - related air quality impact previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Long -Term Operational - Related Emissions Although the General Plan EIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP, the conflict was related only to the increase in population that would be associated with buildout of the General Plan (and is discussed below under the analysis of Consistency Criterion No. 2). As indicated in the General Plan EIR: ; The General Plan EIR determined that VMTs would be reduced through compliance with the General Plan goals and policies, and that the reduction in VMTs would be consistent with the AQMP. For example, the General Plan would "...promote a mixed -use pedestrian - friendly district for Balboa Peninsula, Airport Area, Newport Center /Fashion Island, Mainers Mile, and which would contribute to decreases in vehicle miles traveled." Additionally, the General Plan EIR identifies several other policies, including Policies LU 3.3, LU 6.15.9, 6.14.5, 6.15.9, NR 6.1, NR 6.2, NR 6.3, NR 6.4, and NR 6.5, that would serve to reduce VMTs within the City. The proposed Project would contribute to the mixed -use nature of Newport Center /Fashion Island by locating multi - family residential uses within the San Joaquin Plaza where commercial and office land uses exist. The Project also would be required to comply with all applicable General Plan goals and policies. Furthermore, and as concluded in the Project's traffic study, the proposed Project would generate 315 fewer daily trips than was assumed under the General Plan EIR, and would therefore result in a net reduction in VMTs. Accordingly, VMTs associated with the proposed Project would be within the scope of analysis as presented in the General Plan EIR, and would not contribute to a substantial increase in the severity of the General Plan's significant and unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP. Project- related air quality emissions were calculated and presented previously in Section 3.5. As discussed in Section 3.5 and shown in Table 3 -2, air emissions associated with the allocation of 94 additional multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza will not violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Therefore, it follows that the Project's emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative excedance of a pollutant for which the SCAB is in nonattainment (ozone, nitrogen dioxide, PM10, PM2.5). Because Project emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative excedance of a pollutant for which the Air Basin is in nonattainment, operation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts due to a conflict with the AQMP, nor would the Project's operational emissions create a substantially more severe impact due to conflict with the AQMP than previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR. On the basis of the preceding discussion, the Project would be consistent with the scope of analysis as presented in the General Plan EIR and is determined to be consistent with the first criterion. • Consistency Criterion No. 2: The proposed project will not exceed the assumptions in the AQMP or increments based on the years of project build -out phase. The General Plan EIR identified a significant unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable AQMP because buildout of the General Plan "...would result in population levels above those uses in the 2003 AQMP." North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 35 Assumptions of the AQMP used in projecting future emissions levels are based in part on land use data provided by lead agency general plan documentation. Projects that propose general plan amendments and changes of zone may increase the intensity of use and /or result in higher traffic volumes, thereby resulting in increased stationary area source emissions and /or vehicle source emissions when compared to the AQMP assumptions. If however, a project does not exceed the growth projections in the applicable local General Plan, then the project is considered to be consistent with the growth assumptions in the AQMP. As discussed under the analysis of Consistency Criterion No. 1, construction - related emissions that may be associated with future development at the proposed Project site would be consistent with the assumptions previously evaluated and disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed Project would not exceed growth assumptions for construction - related activities. The proposed Project does not involve a General Plan Amendment, but it does involve a change of zone associated with a proposed amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for properties within its geographic boundaries. The amendment proposes to vest a total of 524 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of NNCPC, including 430 units already allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, the assignment of 15 un -built units to the San Joaquin Plaza, and through the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi- family units and the transfer of those units to the San Joaquin Plaza. Population growth associated with the 430 multi - family residential units already allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un- assigned and un -built multi - family units within Statistical Area L1 are consistent with the growth projections assumed in the General Plan EIR, and are therefore accounted for as part of the significant and unavoidable conflict with the 2003 AQMP as disclosed by the General Plan EIR. By contrast, the conversion of 79 un -built hotel units to residential units would result in an estimated increase in the City's permanent population by 173 persons (based on a person per household [pph] value of 2.19 cited in the General Plan EIR). It should be noted that the increase in the permanent population would be somewhat off -set by the reduction in transient population (i.e., hotel patrons) due to the reduction in the number of hotel units allowed within the City (79 units). As evaluated in the San Joaquin Plaza — Trip Generation letter (Stantec, May 2012), the 79 residential units proposed by the Project to be converted from hotel room units would generate 315 fewer daily trips, and thereby fewer operational air emissions than the 79 hotel rooms that were assumed in the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, because the 2007 AQMP relied on land use and demographic data from the General Plan and the proposed Project would generate fewer emissions than assumed for General Plan buildout, the Project would not exceed the growth assumptions in the AQMP. As such, the proposed project is in compliance with Consistency Criterion No. 2 and would not result in greater emissions than what is already included in the General Plan. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 36 Since the project satisfies both of the two aforementioned criterion for determining consistency, the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts due to a Project- specific conflict with the AQMP, nor would the proposed Project result in a substantial increase in the severity of the General Plan's significant and unavoidable conflict with the AQMP. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.. Additionally, to ensure continued progress toward clean air and compliance with state and federal requirements, the SCAQMD, in conjunction with the CARB and SCAG, is currently preparing the 2012 revision to its 2007 AQMP3. The 2012 AQMP will incorporate the latest scientific and technological information and planning assumptions, including the 2012 Regional Transportation Plan /Sustainable Communities Strategy, comprehensive strategy aimed at controlling pollution from all sources, and updated emission inventory methodologies for stationary sources, on -road and off -road mobile sources, and area sources. No timetable for the release of the 2012 AQMP is available at this time, however, since the Project is deemed consistent with the 2007 AQMP it follows that the Project would also remain consistent with the 2012 AQMP, when it is released. 3.8 POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO SENSITIVE RECEPTORS The potential impact of Project - generated air pollutant emissions at sensitive receptors has also been considered. Sensitive receptors can include uses such as long term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, and retirement homes. Residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities can also be considered as sensitive receptors. The Project will not exceed the applicable regional thresholds during long -term operational activity, as such, a less than significant impact to any sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project is expected. The proposed Project would not result in a significant CO "hotspot" as a result of Project related traffic during ongoing operations, thus a less than significant impact to sensitive receptors during operational activity is expected. 3.9 ODORS The potential for the Project to generate objectionable odors has also been considered. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include: • Agricultural uses (livestock and farming) • Wastewater treatment plants 3 http : / /www.aamd.00v /aamo /2012aamp /index.htm North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 37 • Food processing plants • Chemical plants • Composting operations • Refineries • Landfills • Dairies • Fiberglass molding facilities The Project does not contain land uses typically associated with emitting objectionable odors. Potential odor sources associated with the proposed Project may result from construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural coatings during construction activities, and the temporary storage of typical solid waste (refuse) associated with the proposed Project's (long -term operational) uses. Standard construction requirements would minimize odor impacts resulting from construction activity. It should be noted that any construction odor emissions generated would be temporary, short-term, and intermittent in nature and would cease upon completion of the respective phase of construction activity and is thus considered less than significant. It is expected that Project - generated refuse would be stored in covered containers and removed at regular intervals in compliance with the City's solid waste regulations. The proposed Project would also be required to comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 to prevent occurrences of public nuisances. Therefore, odors associated with the proposed Project construction and operations would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. 3.10 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As previously indicated, air quality emissions associated with future construction activities would be consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, future construction activities would not result in any new or more severe cumulative impacts to air quality beyond what was previously evaluated and disclosed in the General Plan EIR. The Project area is designated as an extreme non - attainment area for ozone, and a non - attainment area for PM10 and PM2.5. Germane to this non - attainment status, the Project- specific evaluation of emissions associated with the addition of 94 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza presented in the preceding analysis demonstrates that the Project will not result in an increased impact due to a conflict with the AQMP, which is designed to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and national ambient air quality standards. Furthermore, the Project - related emissions would not exceed the regional thresholds established by the SCAQMD for NOx, VOC, PM10, or PM2.5; as such, it follows that the emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative excedance of a pollutant for which the SCAB is in nonattainment (i.e., ozone, NOX, PM10, and /or PM2.5). The Project would comply with SCAQMD's Rule 403 (fugitive dust control) during construction, as well as all other adopted AQMP emissions control measures. Per SCAQMD rule and mandates, as well as the CEQA requirement that significant impacts be mitigated to the extent feasible, these same requirements would also be imposed North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 38 on all projects Basin -wide, which would include all related projects. As such, Project - related criteria pollutant emissions would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as analyzed in the General Plan EIR. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 39 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 40 4.0 REFERENCES 1. California Air Resources Board, 2007. California Air Resources Board Almanac. 2. California Air Resources Board, 2007. EMFAC 2007. 3. EIP Associates, 2006. City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. 4. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 5. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEModTM) 6. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), March 2009. CEQA Air Quality Significance Thresholds. 7. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2003. Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology. 8. Stantec, 2012. North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis. North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 41 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) U cnRB M 42 F -ITa TUT-11 CaIEEModTM Input/Output Construction and Operational Emissions North Newport Center Planned Community Air Quality Impact Analysis � URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 AQ Report) `, CROSSROADS A CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment Orange County, Summer 1.0 Proiect Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Condo /Townhouse High Rise 94 Dwelling Unit 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m /s) 2.2 Utility Company Southern California Edison Climate Zone 8 Precipitation Freq (Days) 30 1.3 User Entered Comments Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - Off -road Equipment - the project does not require emissions for the construction phase Trips and VMT - the project does not require emissions for the construction phase Vehicle Trips - trip rate data was sourced from Trip Generation 8th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE 232) Date: 5/17/2012 2.0 Emissions Summary 1 of 10 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2011 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Mitigated Construction 2of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2011 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2of10 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Total CO2 CO2 Category Category lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Area 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 39.07 0.00 5.01 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 ' 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 ----------- . .._._ .__. .._ _ .__ _ Energy 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 .._._ 781.00 Mobile 1.92 3.47 18.87 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 0.15 0.18 0.33 ? 3,693.29 0.15 Mobile 3,696.35 Total 14.31 4.63 58.20 0.12 4.46 0.18 9.70 0.15 0.18 5.39 663.33 6,175.70 2.80 0.05 6,914.85 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail 3of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb/day lb/day Area 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 ' 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 Energy 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 _ __ _ 0.00 ____ 0.05 ____ ____ _____ 776.28 ____ 0.01 ------ 0.01 _____ 781.00 Mobile 1.92 3.47 18.87 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 0.15 0.18 0.33 ? 3,693.29 ' 0.15 3,696.35 Total 14.31 4.63 58.20 0.12 4.46 0.18 9.70 0.15 0.18 5.39 663.33 6,175.70 2.80 0.05 6,914.85 3.0 Construction Detail 3of10 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2011 Unmitigated Construction On -Site Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 P1,12.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb /day PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total lb /day CO2 Off -Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site 4of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb /day lb /day Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4of10 3.2 Demolition - 2011 Mitigated Construction On -Site Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -CO2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total lb/day CO2 Off -Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mitigated Construction Off -Site EIII]1 ITIP111la1MM 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 5of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 13io -0O2 NBio- TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 _---- _:_..- ._ }_ - - - -_ .____ - - _ _ .___ Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ------ 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ----------- . 0.00 ... T 0.00 _ - - -_ .___ ...... 0.00 _ 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 EIII]1 ITIP111la1MM 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 5of10 4.2 Trip Summary Information ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 Condo /Townhouse High Rise CH4 N20 CO2e 1,280,920 1,280,920 Total 392.92 405.14 PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category 16 /day 16 /day Mitigated 1.92 3.47 18.87 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 0.15 0.18 0.33 3,693.29 ' 0.15 3,696.35 Unmitigated 1.92 3.47 18.87 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 0.15 0.18 0.33 f 3,693.29 0.15 3,696.35 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daiiy Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday H -W or C -W Saturday H -O or C -NW Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Condo /Townhouse High Rise 392.92 405.14 322.42 1,280,920 1,280,920 Total 392.92 405.14 322.42 1,280,920 1,280,920 4.3 Trip Type Information 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 6of10 Miles Trip % Land Use H -W or C -W H -S or C -C H -O or C -NW H -W or C -W H -S or C -C H -O or C -NW Condo /Townhouse High Rise 12.70 7.00 9.50 40.20 19.20 40.60 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 6of10 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e CO2e Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM25 Total 0.00 CO2 0.00 0.05 0.00 Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 Mitigated --- _____ --- ______ ______ ______ ______ ------ ------ r------ ______ _____ _____ .____ ' _------ r_.____-______ �------ :------ NaturalGas 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 ' 781.00 Unmitigated Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated 7of10 NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM I Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day 7ondo /Townhouse' 6598.36 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 High Rise Total 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 7of10 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO 502 Fugitive PM10 I Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day 7ondo /Townhouse 6.59836 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 High Rise Total NA 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 NA 0.00 0.05 NA 0.00 0.05 NA 776.28 NA 0.01 0.01 781.00 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 8of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category Ib /day Ib /day Mitigated 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 ' 2.64 0.04 ' 2,437.50 ______9__- _------ r------ ______ __ ____ ______ ______ }______ _____ ____ ____ _ -__ ______ ____ ____ ____ ______ Unmitigated 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 ? 1,706.13 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8of10 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Consumer 1.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products Hearth 10.01 0.46 31.11 0.08 0.00 4.97 0.00 4.97 663.33 1,692.00 • 2.63 0.04 2,423.06 _______ P_ 9_: ------ r------ i------ i------ i------ ------ i------ i------ _____ _____ ____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ Landscaping 0.25 0.09 7.96 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 14.13 0.01 14.44 Total 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 Mitigated 9of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- TctaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating ______;______:______r___ ___�______ ______�______ ______ __________________r______ ------------- ______ ------ Consumer 1.86 0.00 ;------ 0.00 ;------ 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products ........... ...... ------ ______ ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... Hearth 10.01 0.46 31.11 0,08 0,00 4.97 0.00 :...... r...... 4.97 663.33 1,692.00 2.63 �...... 0.04 �...... 2,423.06 ----------- 4 ------ .------- ...... }...... p...... }...... p...... }...... p...... }...... e------ ...... }...... p------ }...... Landscaping 0.25 0.09 7.96 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 14.13 0.01 14.44 Total 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 9of10 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Vegetation 10 of 10 CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment Orange County, Winter 1.0 Proiect Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Condo /Townhouse High Rise 94 Dwelling Unit 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m /s) 2.2 Utility Company Southern California Edison Climate Zone 8 Precipitation Freq (Days) 30 1.3 User Entered Comments Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - Off -road Equipment - the project does not require emissions for the construction phase Trips and VMT - the project does not require emissions for the construction phase Vehicle Trips - trip rate data was sourced from Trip Generation 8th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE 232) Date: 5/17/2012 2.0 Emissions Summary 1 of 10 2.1 Overall Construction (Maximum Daily Emission) Unmitigated Construction Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2011 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Mitigated Construction 2of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year lb/day lb/day 2011 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 2of10 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational Mitigated Operational ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Total CO2 CO2 Category Category lb/day lb/day lb/day lb/day Area 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 39.07 0.00 5.01 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 ' 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 ----------- . .._._ .___ .._ _ .__ _ Energy 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 ' 0.01 0.01 .._._ 781.00 Mobile 2.03 3.84 18.37 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 0.15 0.18 0.33 ? 3,486.56 ! 0.15 Mobile 3,489.62 Total 14.42 5.00 57.70 0.12 4.46 0.18 9.70 0.15 0.18 5.39 663.33 5,968.97 j 2.80 j 0.05 j 6,708.12 Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail 3of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb/day lb/day Area 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 ' 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 Energy 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 _ __ _ 0.00 ____ 0.05 ____ ____ _____ 776.28 ____ 0.01 ------ 0.01 ____ 781.00 Mobile 2.03 3.84 18.37 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 0.15 0.18 0.33 ? 3,486.56 ' 0.15 3,489.62 Total 14.42 5.00 57.70 0.12 4.46 0.18 9.70 0.15 0.18 5.39 663.33 5,968.97 2.80 0.05 6,708.12 3.0 Construction Detail 3of10 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 3.2 Demolition - 2011 Unmitigated Construction On -Site Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 P1,12.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb /day PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total lb /day CO2 Off -Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site 4of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb /day lb /day Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4of10 3.2 Demolition - 2011 Mitigated Construction On -Site Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -CO2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category lb/day PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total lb/day CO2 Off -Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mitigated Construction Off -Site EIII]1 ITIP111la1MM 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 5of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 13io -0O2 NBio- TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category lb/day lb/day Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 _---- _:_..- ._ }_ - - - -_ .____ - - _ _ .___ Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ------ 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ----------- . 0.00 ... T 0.00 _ - - -_ .___ ...... 0.00 _ 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 EIII]1 ITIP111la1MM 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 5of10 4.2 Trip Summary Information ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 Condo /Townhouse High Rise CH4 N20 CO2e 1,280,920 1,280,920 Total 392.92 405.14 PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category 16 /day 16 /day Mitigated 2.03 3.84 18.37 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 0.15 0.18 0.33 3,486.56 ' 0.15 3,489.62 ___._. .._._...._r ...... ....... ------------- ------ Unmitigated 2.03 3.84 18.37 0.04 4.46 0.18 4.64 ------ 0.15 0.18 ----------- 0.33 ------ .____ f 3,486.56 .._ _ 0.15 .____ ------ 3,489.62 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daiiy Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday H -W or C -W Saturday H -O or C -NW Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Condo /Townhouse High Rise 392.92 405.14 322.42 1,280,920 1,280,920 Total 392.92 405.14 322.42 1,280,920 1,280,920 4.3 Trip Type Information 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 6of10 Miles Trip % Land Use H -W or C -W H -S or C -C H -O or C -NW H -W or C -W H -S or C -C H -O or C -NW Condo /Townhouse High Rise 12.70 7.00 9.50 40.20 19.20 40.60 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 6of10 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e CO2e Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM25 Total 0.00 CO2 0.00 0.05 0.00 Category lb/day lb/day NaturalGas 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 Mitigated --- _____ --- ______ ______ ______ ______ ------ ------ r------ ______ _____ _____ .____ ' _------ r_.____-______ �------ :------ NaturalGas 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 ' 781.00 Unmitigated Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated 7of10 NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM I Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day 7ondo /Townhouse' 6598.36 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 High Rise Total 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 7of10 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO 502 Fugitive PM10 I Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use kBTU lb/day lb/day 7ondo /Townhouse 6.59836 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 776.28 0.01 0.01 781.00 High Rise Total NA 0.07 0.61 0.26 0.00 NA 0.00 0.05 NA 0.00 0.05 NA 776.28 NA 0.01 0.01 781.00 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 8of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category Ib /day Ib /day Mitigated 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 ' 2.64 0.04 ' 2,437.50 ______9__- _------ r------ ______ __ ____ ______ ______ }______ _____ ____ ____ _ -__ ______ ____ ____ ____ ______ Unmitigated 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 ? 1,706.13 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 8of10 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated Mitigated ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Consumer 1.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products Hearth 10.01 0.46 31.11 0.08 0.00 4.97 0.00 4.97 663.33 1,692.00 • 2.63 0.04 2,423.06 _______ P_ 9_: ------ r------ i------ i------ i------ ------ i------ i------ _____ _____ ____ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ Landscaping 0.25 0.09 7.96 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 14.13 0.01 14.44 Total 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 Mitigated 9of10 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- TctaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 SubCategory lb/day lb/day Architectural 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating ______;______:______r___ ___�______ ______�______ ______ __________________r______ ------------- ______ ------ Consumer 1.86 0.00 ;------ 0.00 ;------ 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products ........... ...... ------ ______ ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... Hearth 10.01 0.46 31.11 0,08 0,00 4.97 0.00 :...... r...... 4.97 663.33 1,692.00 2.63 �...... 0.04 �...... 2,423.06 ----------- 4 ------ .------- ...... }...... p...... }...... p...... }...... p...... }...... e------ ...... }...... p------ }...... Landscaping 0.25 0.09 7.96 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.04 14.13 0.01 14.44 Total 12.32 0.55 39.07 0.08 0.00 5.01 0.00 5.01 663.33 1,706.13 2.64 0.04 2,437.50 9of10 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste 9.0 Vegetation 10 of 10 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix B Greenhouse Gas Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. June 6, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach LOMRBAM CROSSROADS 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Irvine, CA 92606 Prepared by: Haseeb Qureshi, MES Prepared for: Ms. Tracy Zinn T &B Planning 17542 East 17 "' Street, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY GREENHOUSE GAS ANALYSIS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA June 6, 2012 JN:08210 -05 GHG REPORT HQ TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 0 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................ ..............................4 1.1 Purpose of Report ................................................................... ..............................4 12 Project Overview ..................................................................... ..............................7 1.3 Summary of Findings .............................................................. ..............................9 1.4 Requirements .......................................................................... ..............................9 1.5 Construction Activity Recommended Mitigation Measures ... .............................10 1.6 Operational Activity Recommended Mitigation Measures ...... .............................10 2.0 Background ....................................................................................... .............................11 2.1 Introduction to Global Climate Change .................................. .............................11 2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories ................................ .............................11 2.3 Global Climate Change Defined ............................................. .............................13 2.4 Greenhouse Gases ................................................................ .............................13 2.5 Effects of Climate Change In California ................................. .............................17 2.6 Human Health Effects ............................................................ .............................20 2.7 Regulatory Setting .................................................................. .............................22 2.9 Discussion on Establishment of Significance Thresholds ...... .............................31 2.10 City of Newport Beach 2006 General Plan Update Final Program EIR ...............32 3.0 Project Greenhouse Gas Impact ....................................................... .............................34 3.1 Project Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions. ..... ........... ....................... 34 3.2 Life -Cycle Analysis ................................................................. .............................34 3.3 Construction Emissions .......................................................... .............................34 3.4 Operational Emissions ........................................................... .............................35 3.4.1 Building Energy Use 3.4.2 Water Supply, Treatment and Distribution 3.4.3 Solid Waste 3.4.4 Mobile Source Emissions 3.5 Emissions Summary .............................................................. .............................36 3.6 GHG Emissions Findings and Recommendations ................. .............................38 3.7 Requirements ......................................................................... .............................40 3.8 Construction Activity Recommended Mitigation Measures ... .............................41 3.9 Operational Activity Recommended Mitigation Measures ...... .............................41 4.0 References ....................................................................................... .............................42 North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 6 GHG Emissions Calculations ...................................................................... ............................... A North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis � URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) `, CROSSROADS LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2 -1 Top GHG Producer Countries and the European Union ................... .............................12 2 -2 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetime of Select GHGs .........................14 2 -3 Scoping Plan GHG Reduction Measures toward 2020 Target .......... .............................27 3 -1 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Annual) (Metric Tons Per Year) . .............................37 North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY GREENHOUSE GAS ANALYSIS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of the greenhouse gas analysis (GHGA) conducted by Urban Crossroads, Inc., for the proposed North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) (referred to as "Project"). 1.1 PURPOSE OF REPORT The purpose of this report is to satisfy CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), which requires the City to analyze whether subsequent activities regarding the North Newport Center zoning require an additional environmental document beyond the Final Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR ") for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 200601119) ( "General Plan EIR "), and the first North Newport Center Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update, approved by Resolution No. 2007 -79 on December 11, 2007. The General Plan EIR was certified by the Newport Beach City Council on July 25, 2006, as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with the buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of North Newport Center. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), this report analyzes whether the Project would have effects that were not examined in the General Plan EIR and confirms that the Project will not result in new effects and will not require new mitigation measures so that the City can determine whether it is appropriate to approve the Project as within the scope of the General Plan EIR. As required by CEQA Guidelines section 15168(e), this report also analyzes whether: (i) the Project is within the scope of the General Plan 2006 Update; and (ii) the General Plan EIR adequately describes the subsequent activity for the purposes of CEQA. CEQA Guidelines section 15164(a) states: `The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162, no subsequent EIR may be required for the project unless the City determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that one or more of the following conditions are met: (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M 4 (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR, was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (8) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. In order to provide the analysis necessary for the City to make its determination under CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), this GHGA evaluates Project - related construction and operational emissions and determines the level of greenhouse gas (GHG) impacts as a result of constructing and operating the proposed Project. Additional information beyond that required for the City's determination has been included at the request of the City in order to provide public information regarding how the Project standing alone would impact GHG emissions. Crucial to the City's consideration of the above - stated factors in the GHG context is the fact that the proposed Project serves to implement principal goals of the 2006 General Plan. These goals and policies include the following:' A successful mixed -use district that integrates an economic and commercial center serving the needs of Newport Beach residents and the subregion, with expanded opportunities for residents to live close to jobs commerce entertainment, and recreation, and is supported by a pedestrian - friendly environment. ' City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental Impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), July 26, 2006, pages 3 -97 to 3 -98. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN :08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M 5 Provide the opportunity for limited residential, hotel, and office development in accordance with the limits specified by Tables LUI and LU2. Provide the opportunity for an additional anchor tenant, other retail, and /or entertainment and supporting uses that complement, are integrated with and enhance the economic vitality of existing development. Encourage that some new development be located and designed to orient to the inner side of Newport Center Drive, establishing physical and visual continuity that diminishes the dominance of surface parking lots and encourages pedestrian activity. Encourage that pedestrian access and connections among uses within the district be improved with additional walkways and streetscape amenities concurrent with the development of expanded and new uses. Full implementation of entitlements for North Newport Center consistent with the 2006 General Plan will assist the City in achieving its General Plan goals. Regarding long- term air quality impacts, the General Plan EIR states that the nature of North Newport Center has the potential to contribute to decreases in vehicle miles traveled because the project area promotes a mixed -use pedestrian - friendly district 2 This report analyzes and confirms that the Project is not expected to result in any climate change impacts due to greenhouse gas emissions beyond the impacts of the development set forth in the General Plan EIR. The General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with buildout of future development in the City, inclusive of North Newport Center. The analysis included carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions. This report analyzes and confirms that the Project would not generate any new air quality impacts not already identified in the General Plan EIR, and that the Project is in conformance with the assumptions set forth in the General Plan EIR. This report will enable the City to confirm that implementation of the Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. With respect to global climate change (GCC) resulting from greenhouse gas emissions, no new information of substantial importance on climate change is now available that was not known and could not have been known when the City approved the General Plan EIR in 2006. For example, in 1979 the National Research Council published Carbon Dioxide and Climate A Scientific Assessment," which concluded that climate change was an accelerating phenomenon partly due to human activity. Numerous studies conducted before and after the National Research Council report reached similar conclusions. The 2 City of Newport Beach, Final Environmental impact Report for the General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119), July 26, 2006, page 4.2 -12. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M 6 State of California adopted legislation in 2002 requiring the California Air Resources Board to develop regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles. Consideration of strategies to control emissions of greenhouse gases which may contribute in some manner to global climate change is under consideration at all regulatory levels; however, there is no one agency responsible for regulating greenhouse gases, and there are no established standards to evaluate the significance of greenhouse gas emissions. However, the most common greenhouse gas emissions are from vehicle emissions (both construction and operational) and operational emissions from energy consumption. These issues have been addressed in the General Plan EIR. Analyses prepared for or by California State Agencies on climate change issues do not provide for the provision of specific measures to incorporate into particular projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, except for generalized recommendations about such matters as encouraging jobs /housing proximity. The California Energy Commission has explained that accessibility and mixed use are two factors that reduce vehicles trips, which are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions in California 3 In addition, the Project's incremental contribution to any cumulative global climate change impact is mitigated by various characteristics of the Project that serve to render its contribution less than cumulatively considerable. One of the main concerns raised by those concerned about the effect of greenhouse gases on climate change is that "leap frog" -type development would serve to potentially increase the number of vehicle miles traveled and consequently increase those vehicular emissions (i.e., CO2 that contribute to greenhouse gases). The Project would allow for in -fill, mixed use development in an urbanized setting thereby providing opportunities to reduce vehicle trips. While this GHGA indicates that the Project would produce GHG emissions, the potential GHG emissions associated with the Project would not exceed those estimated in 2006 because the Project is not larger in size or scope than the full buildout of the 2006 General Plan analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Thus, this report concludes that there are no new significant GHG impacts resulting from the Project nor is there any substantial increase in the severity of any previously identified GHG impacts. 1.2 PROJECT OVERVIEW The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 multi - family residential units to be developed in areas of the NNCPC designated MU -H3 by the General Plan. In comparison, the General Plan allows a maximum of 450 units in the MU -113 category throughout the Newport Center Statistical Area. In other words, of the 450 MU -H3 residential units allowed by the General Plan in the Newport Center Statistical Area, 430 are specifically assigned to the areas of the NNCPC designated by the NNCPC 3 California Energy Commission, The Role of Land Use in Meeting California's Energy and Climate Change Goals, Draft, June 26, 2007, pages 7, 17 -19. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M 7 Development Plan as Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza. The remaining 20 units are allowed to be developed in any MU -H3 designated area in the Newport Center Statistical Area. Five (5) MU -H3 units have been assigned to the Golf Realty Fund Tennis Club development and the other 15 MU -H3 units are not assigned to any particular property. In addition, certain areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU1 and LU2. Anomaly Location 43 in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area L1) is developed with a 532 room resort hotel presently operated by Marriott Hotels and Resorts. General Plan Table LU2 allows a maximum of 611 hotel rooms in Anomaly Location 43; therefore, 79 hotel rooms allowed by the General Plan are un- built. The proposed Project would convert the 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and then transfer them to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Under existing conditions, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are developed with commercial /office land uses and the Island Hotel. No multi - family residential units are constructed in these areas, although the NNCPC Development Plan allows for up to 430 residential units. Thus, the City's General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan currently allow for the existing land uses in Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza to be supplemented by or partially replaced with multi - family residential housing. The Project Applicant proposes an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by 94 units (comprising 15 un- assigned and un -built multi- family units and the 79 hotel units that would be converted to multi - family units) and to assign those 94 units, along with 430 units already allocated to the NNCCP, to the portion of the NNCCP designated as San Joaquin Plaza. No specific development project is proposed at this time. A proposal to develop a specific residential project in the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the procedures for development specified in the NNCPC Development Plan. There would be no change to the boundaries of the NNCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NNCPC Development Plan Amendment. Since no specific development is proposed at this time, and the exact location of the units is unknown, a specific calculation of emissions that may be associated with future construction - related GHG emissions is not possible and is not provided in this analysis. However, construction activities would be consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR and would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of any impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR. For purposes of this analysis, the greenhouse gas impacts centered on the on -going operations of the 94 units are evaluated. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M 8 1.3 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS • The Project will not generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. • The Project will not conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. 1.4 REQUIREMENTS The issue of GHG emissions was not previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR; as such, no mitigation measures specifically related to GHG emissions was identified in the General Plan EIR. However, the General Plan includes several policies that would serve to reduce GHG emissions, and the proposed Project would be required to comply with all applicable General Plan goals and policies. Additionally, although the Project will not result in a new significant GHG impact or increase the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from buildout of the City's General Plan, the Project would be required to comply with all mandatory regulatory requirements imposed by the State of California and the South Coast Air Quality Management District aimed at the reduction of air quality emissions. Those that are particularly applicable to the Project and that would assist in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions are: • Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) • Regional GHG Emissions Reduction Targets /Sustainable Communities Strategies (SB 375) • Pavely Fuel Efficiency Standards (AB1493). Establishes fuel efficiency ratings for new vehicles. • Title 24 California Code of Regulations (California Building Code). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for new construction. • Title 20 California Code of Regulations (Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for appliances. • Title 17 California Code of Regulations (Low Carbon Fuel Standard). Requires carbon content of fuel sold in California to be 10% less by 2020. • California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (AB1881). Requires local agencies to adopt the Department of Water Resources updated Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or equivalent by January 1, 2010 to ensure efficient landscapes in new development and reduced water waste in existing landscapes. • Statewide Retail Provider Emissions Performance Standards (SB 1368). Requires energy generators to achieve performance standards for GHG emissions. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M 9 • Renewable Portfolio Standards (SB 1078). Requires electric corporations to increase the amount of energy obtained from eligible renewable energy resources to 20 percent by 2010 and 33 percent by 2020. 1.5 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required. 1.6 OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) U cnRB M 10 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 INTRODUCTION TO GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE Global Climate Change (GCC) is defined as the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to temperature, precipitation, and storms. GCC is currently one of the most controversial environmental issues in the United States, and much debate exists within the scientific community about whether or not GCC is occurring naturally or as a result of human activity. Some data suggests that GCC has occurred in the past over the course of thousands or millions of years. These historical changes to the Earth's climate have occurred naturally without human influence, as in the case of an ice age. However, many scientists believe that the climate shift taking place since the industrial revolution (1900) is occurring at a quicker rate and magnitude than in the past. Scientific evidence suggests that GCC is the result of increased concentrations of greenhouse gases in the earth's atmosphere, including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. Many scientists believe that this increased rate of climate change is the result of greenhouse gases resulting from human activity and industrialization over the past 200 years. An individual project like the proposed Project evaluated in this GHGA cannot generate enough greenhouse gas emissions to effect a discernible change in global climate. However, the proposed Project may participate in the potential for GCC by its incremental contribution of greenhouse gasses combined with the cumulative increase of all other sources of greenhouse gases, which when taken together constitute potential influences on GCC. Section 3.0 will evaluate the potential for the proposed Project to have an effect upon the environment as a result of its potential contribution to the greenhouse effect. 2.2 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORIES Global Worldwide anthropogenic (man -made) GHG emissions are tracked by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for industrialized nations (referred to as Annex 1) and developing nations (referred to as Non -Annex 1). Man -made GHG emissions data for Annex I nations are available through 2009. Man- made GHG emissions data for Non -Annex I nations are available through 2007. For the Year 2009 the sum of these emissions totaled approximately 40,084 MMTCO2e.4 Emissions from the top five countries and the European Union accounted for approximately 65 percent of the total global GHG 4 The global emissions are the sum of Annex I and non -Annex I countries, without counting Land -Use, Land -Use Change and Forestry ( LULUCF). For countries without 2005 data, the UNFCCC data for the most recent year were used. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, "Annex I Parties — GHG total without LULUCF," hfto: / /unfcm.int/ghg emissions data /qhq data from unfccc /time series annex i /items /3841.oho and "Flexible GHG Data Queries" with selections for total GHG emissions excluding LULUCF /LUCF, all years, and non -Annex I countries, http:// unfccc .int/di /FlexibieQueries /Event.do ?event= showProjection. n.d. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 11 emissions, according to the most recently available data (see Table 2 -1, Top GHG Producer Countries and the European Union). The GHG emissions in more recent years may differ from the inventories presented in Table 2 -1; however, the data is representative of currently available inventory data. United States As noted in Table 2 -1, the United States was the number two producer of GHG emissions in 2009. The primary greenhouse gas emitted by human activities in the United States was CO2, representing approximately 83 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions.5 Carbon dioxide from fossil fuel combustion, the largest source of US greenhouse gas emissions, accounted for approximately 78 percent of the GHG emissions.6 TABLE 2 -1 TOP GHG PRODUCER COUNTRIES AND THE EUROPEAN UNION' Emitting Countries GHG Emissions (MMT CO2e) China 6,703 United States 6,608 European Union 8,338 Russian Federation 2,159 India 1,410 Japan 1,209 Total 26,427 State of California CARB compiles GHG inventories for the State of California. Based upon the 2008 GHG inventory data (i.e., the latest year for which data are available) for the 2000 -2008 greenhouse gas emissions inventory, California emitted 474 MMTCO2e including emissions resulting from imported electrical power in 2008.8 Based on the CARB inventory data and GHG inventories compiled by the World Resources Institutes, California's total statewide GHG emissions rank second in the United States (Texas is number one) with emissions of 417 MMTCO2e excluding emissions related to imported power. 5 US Environmental Protection Agency, 'Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990- 2009,' http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usqqinventory.html. 2011. a ibid World Resources Institute, " Climate Analysis Indicator Tool (GAIT) Excludes emissions and removals from land use, land -use change and forestry (LULUCF) Emissions Inventory," http: / /cait.wri.org s California Air Resources Board, "California Greenhouse Gas 2000 -2008 Inventory by Scoping Plan Category - Summary," http: / /www. arb.ca.gov /cclinventory/data /data. htm. 2010. P World Resources Institute, " Climate Analysis Indicator Tool (GAIT) -US — Yearly Emissions Inventory," http: / /cait.wri.org North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN .,08210 -05 GHG Report) 12 2.3 GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE DEFINED Global Climate Change (GCC) refers to the change in average meteorological conditions on the earth with respect to temperature, wind patterns, precipitation and storms. Global temperatures are regulated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases such as water vapor, CO2 (Carbon Dioxide), N20 (Nitrous Oxide), CH4 (Methane), hydrofluorocarbons, perrluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. These particular gases are important due to their residence time (duration they stay) in the atmosphere, which ranges from 10 years to more than 100 years. These gases allow solar radiation into the Earth's atmosphere, but prevent radioactive heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth's atmosphere. GCC can occur naturally as it has in the past with the previous ice ages. According to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the climate change since the industrial revolution differs from previous climate changes in both rate and magnitude (CARB, 2004, Technical Support document for Staff Proposal Regarding Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Motor Vehicles). Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are often referred to as greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases are released into the atmosphere by both natural and anthropogenic (human) activity. Without the natural greenhouse gas effect, the Earth's average temperature would be approximately 61' Fahrenheit (F) cooler than it is currently. The cumulative accumulation of these gases in the earth's atmosphere is considered to be the cause for the observed increase in the earth's temperature. Although California's rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions is slowing, the state is still a substantial contributor to the U.S. emissions inventory total. In 2004, California is estimated to have produced 492 million gross metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) greenhouse gas emissions. Despite a population increase of 16 percent between 1990 and 2004, California has significantly slowed the rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions due to the implementation of energy efficiency programs as well as adoption of strict emission controls.10 2.4 GREENHOUSE GASES For the purposes of this analysis, emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide were evaluated (see Table 3 -4 later in this report) because these gasses are the primary contributors to GCC from development projects. Although other substances such as fluorinated gases also contribute to GCC, sources of fluorinated gases are not well defined and no accepted emissions factors or methodology exist to accurately calculate these gases. Greenhouse gases have varying global warming potential (GWP) values; GWP values represent the potential of a gas to trap heat in the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is utilized as the reference gas for GWP, and thus has a GWP of 1. 10 California Energy Commission, "Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, hftp: / /www. energy.ca.gov /2005publ ications /CEC- 600- 2005- 025 /CE C- 600 - 2005 -025. PDF. 2005. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 13 The atmospheric lifetime and GWP of selected greenhouse gases are summarized in the following Table. As shown in the table below, GWP range from 1 for carbon dioxide to 23,900 for sulfur hexafluoride. TABLE 2 -2 GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS AND ATMOSPHERIC LIFETIME OF SELECT GHGS Gas Atmospheric Lifetime (years) Global Warming Potential (100 year time horizon) Carbon Dioxide 50 -200 1 Methane 12 ± 3 21 Nitrous Oxide 120 310 H FC -23 264 11,700 H FC -134a 14.6 1,300 HFC -152a 1.5 140 PFC: Tetrafluoromethane (CH4) 50,000 6,500 PFC: Hexafluoroethane (C2F6) 10,000 9,200 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 3,200 23,900 Source: EPA 2006 (URL: http: / /www.epa.gov /nonco2 /econ- inv /table.html) Water Vapor: Water vapor (H20) is the most abundant, important, and variable greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Water vapor is not considered a pollutant; in the atmosphere it maintains a climate necessary for life. Changes in its concentration are primarily considered to be a result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. A climate feedback is an indirect, or secondary, change, either positive or negative, that occurs within the climate system in response to a forcing mechanism. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change. As the temperature of the atmosphere rises, more water is evaporated from ground storage (rivers, oceans, reservoirs, soil). Because the air is warmer, the relative humidity can be higher (in essence, the air is able to 'hold' more water when it is warmer), leading to more water vapor in the atmosphere. As a GHG, the higher concentration of water vapor is then able to absorb more thermal indirect energy radiated from the Earth, thus further warming the atmosphere. The warmer atmosphere can then hold more water vapor and so on and so on. This is referred to as a "positive feedback loop." The extent to which this positive feedback loop will continue is unknown as there are also dynamics that hold the positive feedback loop in check. As an example, when water vapor increases in the atmosphere, more of it will eventually also condense into clouds, which are more able to reflect incoming solar radiation (thus allowing less energy to reach the Earth's surface and heat it up). North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 14 There are no human health effects from water vapor itself; however, when some pollutants come in contact with water vapor, they can dissolve and the water vapor can then act as a pollutant- carrying agent. The main source of water vapor is evaporation from the oceans (approximately 85 percent)." Other sources include: evaporation from other water bodies, sublimation (change from solid to gas) from sea ice and snow, and transpiration from plant leaves. Carbon Dioxide: Carbon dioxide (CO2) is an odorless and colorless GHG. Outdoor levels of carbon dioxide are not high enough to result in negative health effects. Carbon dioxide is emitted from natural and manmade sources. Natural sources include: the decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals and fungus; evaporation from oceans; and volcanic outgassing. Anthropogenic sources include: the burning of coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. Carbon dioxide is naturally removed from the air by photosynthesis, dissolution into ocean water, transfer to soils and ice caps, and chemical weathering of carbonate rocks 12. Since the industrial revolution began in the mid- 1700s, the sort of human activity that increases GHG emissions has increased dramatically in scale and distribution. Data from the past 50 years suggests a corollary increase in levels and concentrations. As an example, prior to the industrial revolution, CO2 concentrations were fairly stable at 280 parts per million (ppm). Today, they are around 370 ppm, an increase of more than 30 percent. Left unchecked, the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is projected to increase to a minimum of 540 ppm by 2100 as a direct result of anthropogenic sources .13 Methane: Methane (CH4) is an extremely effective absorber of radiation, though its atmospheric concentration is less than carbon dioxide and its lifetime in the atmosphere is brief (10 -12 years), compared to other GHGs. No health effects are known to occur from exposure to methane. Methane has both natural and anthropogenic sources. It is released as part of the biological processes in low oxygen environments, such as in swamplands or in rice production (at the roots of the plants). Over the last 50 years, human activities such as growing rice, raising cattle, using natural gas, and mining coal have added to the atmospheric concentration of methane. Other anthropocentric sources include fossil -fuel combustion and biomass burning. 74 Nitrous Oxide: Nitrous oxide (N20), also known as laughing gas, is a colorless greenhouse gas. Nitrous oxide can cause dizziness, euphoria, and sometimes slight hallucinations. In small doses, it is " ibid. 12 On awarmer Earth, chemical weathering is promoted by more vigorous cycling of water through the atmosphere and higher temperatures. "More chemical weathering removes more CO2 from the atmosphere as carbonic acid reacts with silicate minerals, producing bicarbonate ion" Carbon Cycle and Climate Change — J Bret Bennington, Hofstra University. hftp://www.cengage.com/custom/enrichment _mod u les/data/Carbon_Cycl e_ 0495738557_LowRes. pdf 13 International Panel on Climate Change 2007, "Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report,' North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 15 considered harmless. However, in some cases, heavy and extended use can cause Olney's Lesions (brain damage)15. Concentrations of nitrous oxide also began to rise at the beginning of the industrial revolution. In 1998, the global concentration was 314 parts per billion (ppb).'s Nitrous oxide is produced by microbial processes in soil and water, including those reactions which occur in fertilizer containing nitrogen. In addition to agricultural sources, some industrial processes (fossil fuel -fired power plants, nylon production, nitric acid production, and vehicle emissions) also contribute to its atmospheric load. It is used as an aerosol spray propellant, i.e., in whipped cream bottles. It is also used in potato chip bags to keep chips fresh. It is used in rocket engines and in race cars. Nitrous oxide can be transported into the stratosphere, be deposited on the Earth's surface, and be converted to other compounds by chemical reaction Chlorofluorocarbons: Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane (C2H6) with chlorine and /or fluorine atoms. CFCs are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble and chemically unreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at the Earth's surface). CFCs are no longer being used; therefore, it is not likely that health effects would be experienced. Nonetheless, in confined indoor locations, working with CFC -113 or other CFCs is thought to result in death by cardiac arrhythmia (heart frequency too high or too low) or asphyxiation. CFCs have no natural source, but were first synthesized in 1928. They were used for refrigerants, aerosol propellants and cleaning solvents. Due to the discovery that they are able to destroy stratospheric ozone, a global effort to halt their production was undertaken and was extremely successful, so much so that levels of the major CFCs are now remaining steady or declining. However, their long atmospheric lifetimes mean that some of the CFCs will remain in the atmosphere for over 100 years. Hydrofluorocarbons: Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are synthetic, man -made chemicals that are used as a substitute for CFCs. Out of all the greenhouse gases, they are one of three groups with the highest global warming potential. The HFCs with the largest measured atmospheric abundances are (in order), HFC -23 (CHF3), HFC -134a (CF3CH2F), and HFC -152a (CH3CHF2). Prior to 1990, the only significant emissions were of HFC -23. HFC -134a emissions are increasing due to its use as a refrigerant. The U.S. EPA estimates that concentrations of HFC -23 and HFC -134a are now about 10 parts per trillion (ppt) each; and that concentrations of HFC -152a are about 1 ppt." No health effects are known to result from exposure to HFCs, which are manmade for applications such as automobile air conditioners and refrigerants. " U.S. Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Guideline for Nitrous Oxide. http: / /www.osha.gov /SLTC /healthguidelines /nitrousoxide /recognition. html 16 ibid. " U.S. EPA. High Global Warming Potential (GWP) Gases. http:// www .el)a.gov /hiohgwp /scientific.html North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 16 Perfluorocarbons: Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) have stable molecular structures and do not break down through chemical processes in the lower atmosphere. High- energy ultraviolet rays, which occur about 60 kilometers above Earth's surface, are able to destroy the compounds. Because of this, PFCs have very long lifetimes, between 10,000 and 50,000 years. Two common PFCs are tetrafluoromethane (CF4) and hexafluoroethane (C2F6). The U.S. EPA estimates that concentrations of CF4 in the atmosphere are over 70 ppt.18 No health effects are known to result from exposure to PFCs. The two main sources of PFCs are primary aluminum production and semiconductor manufacture. Sulfur Hexafluoride: Sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas. It also has the highest GWP of any gas evaluated (23,900). The U.S. EPA indicates that concentrations in the 1990s were about 4 ppt.19 In high concentrations in confined areas, the gas presents the hazard of suffocation because it displaces the oxygen needed for breathing. Sulfur hexafluoride is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semiconductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection. 2.5 EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE IN CALIFORNIA The California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) published a report titled "Scenarios of Climate Change in California: An Overview" (Climate Scenarios report) in February 2006 (California Climate Change Center 2006), that while not adequate for a CEQA project- specific or cumulative analysis, is generally instructive about the statewide impacts of global warming. The Climate Scenarios report uses a range of emissions scenarios developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to project a series of potential warming ranges (i.e., temperature increases) that may occur in California during the 2181 century: lower warming range (3.0- 5.5 °F); medium warming range (5.5- 8.0 °F); and higher warming range (8.0- 10.5 °F). The Climate Scenarios report then presents an analysis of future climate in California under each warming range, that while uncertain, present a picture of the impacts of global climate change trends in California. In addition, most recently on August 5, 2009, the State's Natural Resources Agency released a public review draft of its "California Climate Adaptation Strategy" report that details many vulnerabilities arising from climate change with respect to matters such as temperature extremes, sea level rise, wildfires, floods and droughts and precipitation changes. This report responds to the Governor's Executive Order S -13 -2008 that called on state agencies to develop California's strategy to identify and prepare for expected climate impacts a ibid. a ibid. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 17 According to the reports, substantial temperature increases arising from increased GHG emissions potentially could result in a variety of impacts to the people, economy, and environment of California associated with a projected increase in extreme conditions, with the severity of the impacts depending upon actual future emissions of GHGs and associated warming. Under the emissions scenarios of the Climate Scenarios report, the impacts of global warming in California have the potential to include, but are not limited to, the following areas: Public Health According to Cal EPA, higher temperatures may increase the frequency, duration, and intensity of conditions conducive to air pollution formation. For example, days with weather conducive to ozone formation could increase from 25 to 35 percent under the lower warming range to 75 to 85 percent under the medium warming range. In addition, if global background ozone levels increase as predicted in some scenarios, it may become difficult to meet local air quality standards. Air quality could be further compromised by increases in wildfires, which emit fine particulate matter that can travel long distances, depending on wind conditions. The Climate Scenarios report indicates that large wildfires could become more frequent if GHG emissions are not significantly reduced. In addition, under the higher warming range scenario, there could be up to 100 more days per year with temperatures above 90 °F in Los Angeles and 95 °F in Sacramento by 2100. This is a large increase over historical patterns and approximately twice the increase projected if temperatures remain within or below the lower warming range. Rising temperatures could increase the risk of death from dehydration, heat stroke /exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress caused by extreme heat. Water Resources A vast network of man -made reservoirs and aqueducts captures and transports water throughout the state from northern California rivers and the Colorado River. The current distribution system relies on Sierra Nevada snowpack to supply water during the dry spring and summer months. Rising temperatures, potentially compounded by decreases in precipitation, could severely reduce spring snowpack, increasing the risk of summer water shortages. If temperatures continue to increase, more precipitation could fall as rain instead of snow, and the snow that does fall could melt earlier, reducing the Sierra Nevada spring snowpack by as much as 70 to 90 percent. Under the lower warming range scenario, snowpack losses could be only half as large as those possible if temperatures were to rise to the higher warming range. How much snowpack could be lost depends in part on future precipitation patterns, the projections for which remain uncertain. However, even under the wetter climate projections, the loss of snowpack could pose challenges to water managers and hamper hydropower generation. It could also adversely affect winter tourism. Under the lower warming range, the ski season at lower elevations could be reduced by as much as a North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 18 month. If temperatures reach the higher warming range and precipitation declines, there might be many years with insufficient snow for skiing and snowboarding. The State's water supplies are also at risk from rising sea levels. An influx of saltwater could degrade California's estuaries, wetlands, and groundwater aquifers. Saltwater intrusion caused by rising sea levels is a major threat to the quality and reliability of water within the southern edge of the Sacramento /San Joaquin River Delta — a major fresh water supply. Agriculture Increased temperatures could cause widespread changes to the agriculture industry reducing the quantity and quality of agricultural products statewide. First, California farmers could possibly lose as much as 25 percent of the water supply they need. Although higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water -use efficiency, California's farmers could face greater water demand for crops and a less reliable water supply as temperatures rise. Crop growth and development could change, as could the intensity and frequency of pest and disease outbreaks. Rising temperatures could aggravate 03 pollution, which makes plants more susceptible to disease and pests and interferes with plant growth. Plant growth tends to be slow at low temperatures, increasing with rising temperatures up to a threshold. However, faster growth can result in less- than - optimal development for many crops, so rising temperatures could worsen the quantity and quality of yield for a number of California's agricultural products. Products likely to be most affected include wine grapes, fruits and nuts. In addition, continued global climate change could shift the ranges of existing invasive plants and weeds and alter competition patterns with native plants. Range expansion could occur in many species while range contractions may be less likely in rapidly evolving species with significant populations already established. Should range contractions occur, new or different weed species could fill the emerging gaps. Continued global climate change could alter the abundance and types of many pests, lengthen pests' breeding season, and increase pathogen growth rates. Forests and Landscapes Global climate change has the potential to intensify the current threat to forests and landscapes by increasing the risk of wildfire and altering the distribution and character of natural vegetation. If temperatures rise into the medium warming range, the risk of large wildfires in California could increase by as much as 55 percent, which is almost twice the increase expected if temperatures stay in the lower warming range. However, since wildfire risk is determined by a combination of factors, including precipitation, winds, temperature, and landscape and vegetation conditions, future risks will not be uniform throughout the state. In contrast, wildfires in northern California could increase by up to 90 percent due to decreased precipitation. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 19 Moreover, continued global climate change has the potential to alter natural ecosystems and biological diversity within the state. For example, alpine and subalpine ecosystems could decline by as much as 60 to 80 percent by the end of the century as a result of increasing temperatures. The productivity of the state's forests has the potential to decrease as a result of global climate change. Rising Sea Levels Rising sea levels, more intense coastal storms, and warmer water temperatures could increasingly threaten the state's coastal regions. Under the higher warming range scenario, sea level is anticipated to rise 22 to 35 inches by 2100. Elevations of this magnitude would inundate low -lying coastal areas with salt water, accelerate coastal erosion, threaten vital levees and inland water systems, and disrupt wetlands and natural habitats. Under the lower warming range scenario, sea level could rise 12 -14 inches. 2.6 HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS The potential health effects related directly to the emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide as they relate to development projects such as the proposed Project are still being debated in the scientific community. Their cumulative effects to global climate change have the potential to cause adverse effects to human health. Increases in Earth's ambient temperatures would result in more intense heat waves, causing more heat - related deaths. Scientists also purport that higher ambient temperatures would increase disease survival rates and result in more widespread disease. Climate change will likely cause shifts in weather patterns, potentially resulting in devastating droughts and food shortages in some areas (American Lung Association, 2004). Figure 1 presents the potential impacts of global warming. Specific health effects associated with directly emitted GHG emissions are as follows: Water Vapor: There are no known direct health effects related to water vapor at this time. It should be noted however that when some pollutants react with water vapor, the reaction forms a transport mechanism for some of these pollutants to enter the human body through water vapor. Carbon Dioxide: According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) high concentrations of carbon dioxide can result in health effects such as: headaches, dizziness, restlessness, difficulty breathing, sweating, increased heart rate, increased cardiac output, increased blood pressure, coma, asphyxia, and /or convulsions. It should be noted that current concentrations of carbon dioxide in the earth's atmosphere are estimated to be approximately 370 parts per million (ppm), the actual reference exposure level (level at which adverse health effects typically occur) is at exposure levels of 5,000 ppm averaged over 10 hours in a 40 -hour workweek and short-term reference exposure levels of 30,000 ppm averaged over a 15 minute period (NIOSH 2005). North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 20 Highe EI'niSSUn! xer„im Medium High Eris 5ce w Iowa Fmissiar Sreriada Figure 1 Summary of Projected Global Warming Impact, 2070 -2099 I as compared with 1961 -19901 IST 13 dapsinnuiorobw idK ab tires as mary heaNeGled deaths n rrup vbm centers 11 U 1111M.6 Ringe • ]II -!0% 1015 n! siiM2 VW.Pack Ion irxfws cf sea knel dse *m .s maM hex wave drys is major urban ceieea 24tn x nwry hmt -mIa eddenhs i! nupr uOmcwM 2 Medium TS-ffi%n &iwmdryscmhlaretoc fonuoun• Wdnrlm9 Range 2- 231irVS mwe alhcyy dry yeas wns 6 I^irae .nd ctrcty demand 30% deaeue in fo25t p-W p.1 5 SS %nuease in the expected dsk a large wiliffim Lower . 30- bss in Siesra snowyad Warning flange 3 }554', b"Id iKhmof 5NI el nse • 2 -z Imes a nary hey wale drys nnWw urbn uint 2 2- 3vrc3a3m�glraklelaeddeaddilwn1011abaOMr fi>3 • 23- 35% iiol in dayscondwdvewn fonimd ra 1 Up IS MM3m aitically dry yeM • 3d %innealenelectrkrty demaM 0 a- IS%dsvaase nfa yW (pi.) • 10- 35 %ni,e in dw n*&Iage widfie ra hph omn ba 1. w and tl+ 1'a}n NlryiwYh: Source: California Energy Commission, 2006. Our Changing Climate, Assessing the Risks to California, 2006 Biennial Report. Methane: Methane is extremely reactive with oxidizers, halogens, and other halogen- containing compounds. Methane is also an asphyxiant and may displace oxygen in an enclosed space (OSHA 2003). Nitrous Oxide: Nitrous Oxide is often referred to as laughing gas; it is a colorless greenhouse gas. The health effects associated with exposure to elevated concentrations of nitrous oxide include dizziness, euphoria, slight hallucinations, and in extreme cases of elevated concentrations nitrous oxide can also cause brain damage (OSHA 1999). Fluorinated Gases: High concentrations of fluorinated gases can also result in adverse health effects such as asphyxiation, dizziness, headache, cardiovascular disease, cardiac disorders, and in extreme cases, increased mortality (NIOSH 1989, 1997). Aerosols: The health effects of aerosols are similar to that of other fine particulate matter. Thus aerosols can cause elevated respiratory and cardiovascular diseases as well as increased mortality (NASA 2002). North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 21 2.7 REGULATORY SETTING International Regulation and the Kyoto Protocol: In 1988, the United Nations established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to evaluate the impacts of global warming and to develop strategies that nations could implement to curtail global climate change. In 1992, the United States joined other countries around the world in signing the United Nations' Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) agreement with the goal of controlling greenhouse gas emissions. As a result, the Climate Change Action Plan was developed to address the reduction of GHGs in the United States. The Plan currently consists of more than 50 voluntary programs for member nations to adopt. The Kyoto protocol is a treaty made under the UNFCCC and was the first international agreement to regulate GHG emissions. Some have estimated that if the commitments outlined in the Kyoto protocol are met, global GHG emissions could be reduced an estimated five percent from 1990 levels during the first commitment period of 2008 -2012. Notably, while the United States is a signatory to the Kyoto protocol, Congress has not ratified the Protocol and the United States is not bound by the Protocol's commitments. In December 2009, international leaders from 192 nations met in Copenhagen to address the future of international climate change commitments post- Kyoto. Federal Regulation and the Clean Air Act: Coinciding 2009 meeting in Copenhagen, on December 7, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an Endangerment Finding under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, opening the door to federal regulation of GHGs. The Endangerment Finding notes that GHGs threaten public health and welfare and are subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. To date, the EPA has not promulgated regulations on GHG emissions, but it has already begun to develop them. Previously the EPA had not regulated GHGs under the Clean Air Act because it asserted that the Act did not authorize it to issue mandatory regulations to address global climate change and that such regulation would be unwise without an unequivocally established causal link between GHGs and the increase in global surface air temperatures. In Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. (127 S. Ct. 1438 (2007), however, the U.S. Supreme Court held that GHGs are pollutants under the Clean Air Act and directed the EPA to decide whether the gases endangered public health or welfare. The EPA had also not moved aggressively to regulate GHGs because it expected Congress to make progress on GHG legislation, primarily from the standpoint of a cap- and -trade system. However, proposals circulated in both the House of Representative and Senate have been controversial and it may be some time before the U.S. Congress adopts major climate change legislation. The EPA's Endangerment Finding paves the way for federal regulation of GHGs with or without Congress. Although global climate change did not become an international concern until the 1980s, efforts to reduce energy consumption began in California in response to the oil crisis in the 1970s, resulting in the North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 22 incidental reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. In order to manage the state's energy needs and promote energy efficiency, AB 1575 created the California Energy Commission (CEC) in 1975. Title 24 Energy Standards: The California Energy Commission (CEC) first adopted Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6) in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce energy consumption in the state. Although not originally intended to reduce GHG emissions, increased energy efficiency, and reduced consumption of electricity, natural gas, and other fuels would result in fewer GHG emissions from residential and nonresidential buildings subject to the standard. The standards are updated periodically to allow for the consideration and inclusion of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The latest revisions were adopted in 2008 and became effective on January 1, 2010. Part 11 of the Title 24 Building Standards Code is referred to as the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code). The purpose of the CALGreen Code is to "improve public health, safety and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a positive environmental impact and encouraging sustainable construction practices in the following categories: (1) Planning and design; (2) Energy efficiency; (3) Water efficiency and conservation; (4) Material conservation and resource efficiency; and (5) Environmental air quality. ,20 The CALGreen Code is not intended to substitute or be identified as meeting the certification requirements of any green building program that is not established and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). The CBSC has released the 2010 California Green Building Standards Code on its Web site .21 Unless otherwise noted in the regulation, all newly constructed buildings in California are subject of the requirements of the CALGreen Code. California Assembly Bill No. 1493 (AB 1493): AB 1493 requires CARB to develop and adopt the nation's first greenhouse gas emission standards for automobiles. The Legislature declared in AB 1493 that global warming was a matter of increasing concern for public health and environment in California. Further, the legislature stated that technological solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would stimulate the California economy and provide jobs. To meet the requirements of AB 1493, ARB approved amendments to the California Code of Regulations (CCR) adding GHG emission standards to California's existing motor vehicle emission standards in 2004. Amendments to CCR Title 13 Sections 1900 (CCR 13 1900) and 1961 (CCR 13 1961) and adoption of Section 1961.1 (CCR 13 1961.1) require automobile manufacturers to meet fleet average GHG emission limits for all passenger cars, light -duty trucks within various weight criteria, and 20 California Building Standards Commission, 2008 California Green Building Standards Code, (2009). 21 "CALGreen," http: / /www.bsc.ca.gov /CALGreen /default.htm. 2010 North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN .,08210 -05 GHG Report) 23 medium -duty passenger vehicle weight classes beginning with the 2009 model year. Emission limits are further reduced each model year through 2016. In December 2004 a group of car dealerships, automobile manufacturers, and trade groups representing automobile manufacturers filed suit against ARB to prevent enforcement of CCR 13 1900 and CCR 13 1961 as amended by AB 1493 and CCR 13 1961.1 (Central Valley Chrysler -Jeep et al. v. Catherine E. Witherspoon, in her official capacity as Executive Director of the California Air Resources Board, et al.). The suit, heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, contended that California's implementation of regulations that in effect regulate vehicle fuel economy violates various federal laws, regulations, and policies. In January 2007, the judge hearing the case accepted a request from the State Attorney General's office that the trial be postponed until a decision is reached by the U.S. Supreme Court on a separate case addressing GHGs. In the Supreme Court Case, Massachusetts vs. EPA, the primary issue in question is whether the federal CAA provides authority for USEPA to regulate CO2 emissions. In April 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Massachusetts' favor, holding that GHGs are air pollutants under the CAA. On December 11, 2007, the judge in the Central Valley Chrysler -Jeep case rejected each plaintiff's arguments and ruled in California's favor. On December 19, 2007, the USEPA denied California's waiver request. California filed a petition with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals challenging USEPA's denial on January 2, 2008. The Obama administration subsequently directed the USEPA to re- examine their decision. On May 19, 2009, challenging parties, automakers, the State of California, and the federal government reached an agreement on a series of actions that would resolve these current and potential future disputes over the standards through model year 2016. In summary, the USEPA and the U.S. Department of Transportation agreed to adopt a federal program to reduce GHGs and improve fuel economy, respectively, from passenger vehicles in order to achieve equivalent or greater greenhouse gas benefits as the AB 1493 regulations for the 2012 -2016 model years. Manufacturers agreed to ultimately drop current and forego similar future legal challenges, including challenging a waiver grant, which occurred on June 30, 2009. The State of California committed to (1) revise its standards to allow manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with the fleet- average GHG emission standard by "pooling" California and specified State vehicle sales; (2) revise its standards for 2012 -2016 model year vehicles so that compliance with USEPA- adopted GHG standards would also comply with California's standards; and (3) revise its standards, as necessary, to allow manufacturers to use emissions data from the federal CAFE program to demonstrate compliance with the AB 1493 regulations (CARB 2009, http: / /www.arb.ca.gov /regact /2009 /ghgpvO9 /ghgpvisor.pdf) both of these programs are aimed at light - duty auto and light -duty trucks. Executive Order S -3 -05: Executive Order S -3 -05, which was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2005, proclaims that California is vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. It declares that increased temperatures could reduce the Sierra's snowpack, further exacerbate California's air quality problems, and potentially North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 24 cause a rise in sea levels. To combat those concerns, the Executive Order established total greenhouse gas emission targets. Specifically, emissions are to be reduced to the 1990 level by 2020, and to 80% below the 1990 level by 2050. The Executive Order directed the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) to coordinate a multi- agency effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the target levels. The Secretary also is required to submit biannual reports to the Governor and state Legislature describing: (1) progress made toward reaching the emission targets; (2) impacts of global warming on California's resources; and (3) mitigation and adaptation plans to combat these impacts. To comply with the Executive Order, the Secretary of the CaIEPA created a Climate Action Team (CAT) made up of members from various state agencies and commission. CAT released its first report in March 2006. The report proposed to achieve the targets by building on voluntary actions of California businesses, local government and community actions, as well as through state incentive and regulatory programs. California Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32): In September 2006, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the California Climate Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires that statewide GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020. This reduction will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on GHG emissions that will be phased in starting in 2012. To effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs CARIB to develop and implement regulations to reduce statewide GHG emissions from stationary sources. AB 32 specifies that regulations adopted in response to AB 1493 should be used to address GHG emissions from vehicles. However, AB 32 also includes language stating that if the AB 1493 regulations cannot be implemented, then CARIB should develop new regulations to control vehicle GHG emissions under the authorization of AB 32. AB 32 requires that CARIB adopt a quantified cap on GHG emissions representing 1990 emissions levels and disclose how it arrives at the cap; institute a schedule to meet the emissions cap; and develop tracking, reporting, and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the state achieves reductions in GHG emissions necessary to meet the cap. AB 32 also includes guidance to institute emissions reductions in an economically efficient manner and conditions to ensure that businesses and consumers are not unfairly affected by the reductions. In November 2007, CARIB completed its estimates of 1990 GHG levels. Net emission 1990 levels were estimated at 427 MMTs (emission sources by sector were: transportation — 35 percent; electricity generation — 26 percent; industrial — 24 percent; residential — 7 percent; agriculture — 5 percent; and commercial — 3 percent)22. Accordingly, 427 MMTs of CO2 equivalent was established as the emissions limit for 2020. For comparison, CARB's estimate for baseline GHG emissions was 473 MMT for 2000 and 532 MMT for 2010. "Business as usual" conditions (without the 30 percent reduction to be implemented by CARIB regulations) for 2020 were projected to be 596 MMTs. 22 On a national level, the EPA's Endangerment Finding stated that electricity generation is the largest emitting sector (34 %), followed by transportation (28 %), and industry (19 %). North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN .,08210 -05 GHG Report) 25 In December 2007, CARB approved a regulation for mandatory reporting and verification of GHG emissions for major sources. This regulation covered major stationary sources such as cement plans, oil refineries, electric generating facilities /providers, and co- generation facilities, which comprise 94 percent of the point source CO2 emissions in the State. On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted a scoping plan to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels. The Scoping Plan's recommendations for reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 include emission reduction measures, including a cap- and -trade program linked to Western Climate Initiative partner jurisdictions, green building strategies, recycling and waste - related measures, as well as Voluntary Early Actions and Reductions. Implementation of individual measures must begin no later than January 1, 2012, so that the emissions reduction target can be fully achieved by 2020. Table 2 -3 shows the proposed reductions from regulations and programs outlined in the Scoping Plan. While local government operations were not accounted for in achieving the 2020 emissions reduction, local land use changes are estimated to result in a reduction of 5 MMTons of CO2e, which is approximately 3 percent of the 2020 GHG emissions reduction goal. In recognition of the critical role local governments will play in successful implementation of AB 32, CARB is recommending GHG reduction goals of 15 percent of 2006 levels by 2020 to ensure that municipal and community -wide emissions match the state's reduction target. According to the Measure Documentation Supplement to the Scoping Plan, local government actions and targets are anticipated to reduce vehicle miles by approximately 2 percent through land use planning, resulting in a potential GHG reduction of 2 MMTons tons of CO2e (or approximately 1.2 percent of the GHG reduction target). California Senate Bill No. 1368 (SB 1368): In 2006, the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill 1368 ( "SB 1368 "), which was subsequently signed into law by the Governor. SB 1368 directs the California Public Utilities Commission ( "CPUC ") to adopt a greenhouse gas emission performance standard ( "EPS ") for the future power purchases of California utilities. SB 1368 seeks to limit carbon emissions associated with electrical energy consumed in California by forbidding procurement arrangements for energy longer than five years from resources that exceed the emissions of a relatively clean, combined cycle natural gas power plant. Due to the carbon content of its fuel source, a coal -fired plant cannot meet this standard because such plants emit roughly twice as much carbon as natural gas, combined cycle plants. Accordingly, the new law will effectively prevent California's utilities from investing in, otherwise financially supporting, or purchasing power from new coal plants located in or out of the State. Thus, SB 1368 will lead to dramatically lower greenhouse gas emissions associated with California energy demand, as SB 1368 will effectively prohibit California utilities from purchasing power from out of state producers that cannot satisfy the EPS standard required by SB 1368. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 26 TABLE 2 -3 SCOPING PLAN GHG REDUCTION MEASURES TOWARD 2020 TARGET Recommended Reduction Measures Cap and Trade Program and Associated Measures Reductions Percentage Counted of toward Statewide 2020 Target of 2020 169 MMT CO2e Target California Light -Duty Vehicle GHG Standards 31.7 19% Energy Efficiency 26.3 16% Renewable Portfolio Standard (33 percent by 2020) 21.3 13% Low Carbon Fuel Standard 15 9% Regional Transportation - Related GHG Targets'! 5 3% Vehicle Efficiency Measures 4.5 3% Goods Movement 3.7 2% Million Solar Roofs 2.1 1% Medium /Heavy Duty Vehicles 1.4 1% High Speed Rail 1.0 1% Industrial Measures 0.3 0% Additional Reduction Necessary to Achieve Cap 34.4 20% Total Cap and Trade Program Reductions 146.7 87% High Global Warming Potential Gas Measures Sustainable Forests Industrial Measures (for sources not covered under cap and trade program) Recycling and Waste (landfill methane capture) Total Uncapped Sources /Sectors Reductions Total Reductions Counted toward 2020 Target Other Recommended Measures - Not Counted toward 2020 Target State Government Operations Local Government Operations Green Buildings Recycling and Waste Water Sector Measures Methane Capture at Large Dairies Total Other Recommended Measures - Not Counted toward 2020 Target 20.2 1.1 1 27.3 174 1.0 to 2.0 To Be Determirl 26 9 4.8 1 42.8 12% 3% 1% 1% 16% 100% 1% NA 15% 5% 3% 1% Source: CARB. 2008, MMTons CO2e: million metric tons of CO2e 1 Reductions represent an estimate of what may be achieved from local land use changes. It is not the SB 375 regional target. 2 According to the Measure Documentation Supplement to the Scoping Plan, local government actions and targets are anticipated to reduce vehicle miles by approximately 2 percent through land use planning, resulting in a potential GHG reduction of 2 million metric tons of CO2e (or approximately 1.2 percent of the GHG reduction target). However, these reductions were not included in the Seeping Plan reductions to achieve the 2020 Target North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 27 Lam► URBAN Senate Bill 97 (SB 97): Pursuant to the direction of SB 97, OPR released preliminary draft CEQA Guideline amendments for greenhouse gas emissions on January 8, 2009, and submitted its final proposed guidelines to the Secretary for Natural Resources on April 13, 2009. The Natural Resources Agency adopted the Guideline amendments and they became effective on March 18, 2010. Of note, the new guidelines state that a lead agency shall have discretion to determine whether to use a quantitative model or methodology, or in the alternative, rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards. CEQA Guideline § 15064.4(a) "A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to: (1) Use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and which model or methodology to use ...; or (2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards." CEQA emphasizes that the effects of greenhouse gas emissions are cumulative, and should be analyzed in the context of CEQA's requirements for cumulative impacts analysis. (See CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(f)). Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines provides direction for lead agencies for assessing the significance of impacts of greenhouse gas emissions: 1. The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the existing environmental setting; 2. Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project; or 3. The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Such regulations or requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public review process and must include specific requirements that reduce or mitigate the project's incremental contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. The CEQA Guideline amendments do not identify a threshold of significance for greenhouse gas emissions, nor do they prescribe assessment methodologies or specific mitigation measures. Instead, they call for a "good -faith effort, based on available information, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project." The amendments encourage lead agencies to consider many factors in performing a CEQA analysis and preserve lead agencies' North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 28 discretion to make their own determinations based upon substantial evidence. The amendments also encourage public agencies to make use of programmatic mitigation plans and programs from which to tier when they perform individual project analyses. Specific GHG language incorporated in the Guidelines' suggested Environmental Checklist (Guidelines Appendix G) is as follows: VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Executive Order S- 01 -07: On January 18, 2007 California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, through Executive Order S- 01 -07, mandated a statewide goal to reduce the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuel by at least ten percent by 2020. The order also requires that a California specific Low Carbon Fuel Standard be established for transportation fuels. Senate Bills 1078 and 107 and Executive Order S- 14 -08: SB 1078 (Chapter 516, Statutes of 2002) requires retail sellers of electricity, including investor -owned utilities and community choice aggregators, to provide at least 20% of their supply from renewable sources by 2017. SB 107 (Chapter 464, Statutes of 2006) changed the target date to 2010. In November 2008 Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S- 14 -08, which expands the state's Renewable Energy Standard to 33% renewable power by 2020. Senate Bill 375: SB 375, signed in September 2008 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008), aligns regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation. SB 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to adopt a sustainable communities strategy (SCS) or alternative planning strategy (APS) that will prescribe land use allocation in that MPO's regional transportation plan. ARB, in consultation with MPOs, will provide each affected region with reduction targets for GHGs emitted by passenger cars and light trucks in the region for the years 2020 and 2035. These reduction targets will be updated every 8 years but can be updated every 4 years if advancements in emissions technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. ARB is also charged with reviewing each MPO's SCS or APS for consistency with its assigned targets. If MPOs do not meet the GHG reduction targets, transportation projects will not be eligible for funding programmed after January 1, 2012. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 29 This law also extends the minimum time period for the regional housing needs allocation cycle from 5 years to 8 years for local governments located within an MPO that meets certain requirements. City or county land use policies (including general plans) are not required to be consistent with the regional transportation plan (and associated SCS or APS). However, new provisions of CEQA would incentivize (through streamlining and other provisions) qualified projects that are consistent with an approved SCS or APS, categorized as "transit priority projects." CARB's Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal for Interim Significance Thresholds: Separate from its Scoping Plan approved in December of 2008, CARB issued a Staff Proposal in October 2008, as its first step toward developing recommended statewide interim thresholds of significance for GHGs that may be adopted by local agencies for their own use. CARB staff's objective in this proposal is to develop a threshold of significance that will result in the vast majority (approximately 90 percent statewide) of GHG emissions from new industrial projects being subject to CEQA's requirement to impose feasible mitigation. The proposal does not attempt to address every type of project that may be subject to CEQA, but instead focuses on common project types that, collectively, are responsible for substantial GHG emissions — specifically, industrial, residential, and commercial projects. CARB is developing these thresholds in these sectors to advance climate objectives, streamline project review, and encourage consistency and uniformity in the CEQA analysis of GHG emissions throughout the state. These draft thresholds are under revision in response to comments. There is currently no timetable for finalized thresholds at this time. As currently proposed by CARB, the threshold consists of a quantitative threshold of 7,000 metric tons (MT) of CO2e per year for operational emissions (excluding transportation), and performance standards for construction and transportation emissions. These performance standards have not yet been developed. However, CARB's proposal is not yet final, and thus cannot be applied to the Project. Further, CARB's proposal sets forth draft thresholds for industrial projects that have high operational stationary GHG emissions, such as manufacturing plants, or uses that utilize combustion engines. Thus, mobile source emissions are not addressed. This Project's GHG emissions are mostly from mobile sources, and as such, the CARB proposal is not applicable to the Project .23 South Coast Air Quality Management District Recommendations for Significance Thresholds: In April 2008, the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), in order to provide guidance to local lead agencies on determining the significance of GHG emissions identified in CEQA documents, convened a "GHG CEQA Significance Threshold Working Group .,,24 The goal of the working group is to develop and reach consensus on an acceptable CEQA significance threshold for � http:// www .arb.ca.gov /ccllocalgov /cega/ meetings/ 102708 /prelimdraftproposall O2408.pdf �4 For more information visit: http: / /www.agmd.gov /ceqa /handbook /GHG /GHG.htmi. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 30 GHG emissions that would be utilized on an interim basis until CARB (or some other state agency) develops statewide guidance on assessing the significance of GHG emissions under CEQA. Initially, SCAQMD staff presented the working group with a significance threshold that could be applied to various types of projects — residential; non - residential; industrial; etc. However, the threshold is still under development. In December 2008, staff presented the SCAQMD Governing Board with a significance threshold for stationary source projects where it is the lead agency. This threshold uses a tiered approach to determine a project's significance, with 10,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) as a screening numerical threshold for stationary sources. In September 2010, the Working Group released additional revisions which recommended either a 3,000 MTCO2e threshold for all land use types or a land -use specific threshold of 3,500 MTCO2e for residential projects, 1,400 MTCO2e for commercial projects, and 3,000 MTCO2e for mixed use projects, additionally the working group identified project -level efficiency target of 4.8 MTCO2e per service population as a 2020 target and 3.0 MTCO2e per service population as a 2035 target. The recommended plan -level target for 2020 was 6.6 MTCO2e and the plan level target for 2035 was 4.1 MTCO2e. The SCAQMD has not announced when staff is expecting to present a finalized version of these thresholds to the Governing Board. The SCAQMD has also adopted Rules 2700, 2701, and 2702 that address GHG reductions; however, these rules are currently applicable to boilers and process heaters, forestry, and manure management projects. 2.9 DISCUSSION ON ESTABLISHMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS In order to assess the significance of a proposed project's environmental impacts it is necessary to identify quantitative or qualitative thresholds which, if exceeded, would constitute a finding of significance. As discussed above, while project - related GHG emissions can be estimated, the direct impacts of such emissions on climate change and global warming cannot be determined on the basis of available science. There is no evidence at this time that would indicate that the emissions from a project the size of the proposed Project would directly affect global climate change. The SCAQMD has adopted a quantitative GHG emission significance thresholds to assess direct impacts from industrial projects for which the SCAQMD is the lead agency. The SCAQMD and other air quality agencies concur that GHG and climate change should be evaluated as a potentially significant cumulative rather than project- specific impact. AB 32 states, in part, that "[g]lobal warming poses a serious threat to the economic well- being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California." Because global warming is the result of GHG emissions, and GHGs are emitted by innumerable sources worldwide, global climate change is considered to be a significant cumulative impact. GHG emissions from the project would contribute to cumulative GHG emissions in California and to the potential adverse environmental impacts of climate change. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 31 As previously discussed, the CEQA guidelines indicate that a project would potentially result in a significant impact on climate change if a project were to: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, or b) conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. Based on the analysis set forth above, for the purposes of this analysis, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on GHG emissions if it would result in any of the following: 1. Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, based on any applicable threshold of significance. a. A potentially significant impact would occur if the project exceeds the SCAQMD's 3,000 MTCO2e per year screening threshold. For purposes of this analysis, the 3,000 MTCO2e per year screening threshold is used since it is the most conservative threshold under consideration by SCAQMD for a residential land IM:M 2. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. a. Fail to show consistency with AB 32's Scoping Plan. 2.10 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 2006 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL PROGRAM EIR Although climate change impacts due to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were not specifically evaluated as part of the Program EIR prepared in support of the City's 2006 General Plan Update, the General Plan EIR analyzed air quality impacts associated with buildout of the City, inclusive of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other GHG emissions. The General Plan EIR also addressed vehicle emissions (both construction and operational) and operational emissions from energy consumption, which are the most common sources of greenhouse gas emissions. As such, GHG emissions and the issue of global climate change (GCC) do not represent new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the General Plan EIR was certified. Information on the effect of GHG emissions on climate was known long before the City certified the General Plan EIR. GCC and GHG emissions were identified as North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 32 environmental issues since as early as 1978 when the U.S. Congress enacted the National Climate Program Act (Pub L 95 -367, 92 Stat 601). In 1979 the National Research Council published "Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific Assessment," which concluded that climate change was an accelerating phenomenon partly due to human activity. Numerous studies conducted before and after the National Research Council report reached similar conclusions. Information also was widely published in a serious of reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) dating back to the 1990s, including IPPC's "2001 Third Assessment Report." In California, the State adopted legislation in 2002 requiring the California Air Resources Board to develop regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles. As such, information about GCC and GHG emissions was available with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the General Plan EIR was certified in 2006. During the public review period and public hearings associated with the General Plan EIR, no objections or concerns were raised regarding the EIR's analysis of GHG emissions, and no legal challenge was filed within the statute of limitations period established by Public Resources Code §21167(c). Similarly, no objections were raised on the topics of GHG emissions and GCC as part of Addendum No. 1 to the General Plan EIR in 2007. Based on CEQA case Iaw25 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3), the issue of project - related GHG emissions does not provide new information of substantial importance or substantial evidence of a new impact to the environment that was not or could not have been known at the time General Plan EIR was certified. 25 CREED v. City of San Diego (2011), Super. Ct. No. 37- 2009 - 00085307- CU- MC -CTL. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 33 3.0 PROJECT GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACT 3.1 PROJECT RELATED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS CEQA Guidelines 15064.4 (b) (1) states that a lead agency may use a model or methodology to quantify greenhouse gas emissions associated with a project. On February 3, 2011, the SCAQMD released the California Emissions Estimator Model (CALEEMOD) Emissions Inventory Modell"". The purpose of this model is to more accurately calculate air quality and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from direct and indirect sources and quantify applicable air quality and GHG reductions achieved from mitigation measures. As such, the February 2011 CALEEMODM was used for this Project. The CaIEEModTM model includes GHG emissions from the following source categories: construction, area, energy, mobile, waste, water. 3.2 LIFE -CYCLE ANALYSIS A full life -cycle analysis (LCA) is not included in this analysis due to the lack of consensus guidance on LCA methodology at this time .26 Life -cycle analysis (i.e., assessing economy -wide GHG emissions from the processes in manufacturing and transporting all raw materials used in the project development and infrastructure) depends on emission factors or econometric factors that are not well established for all processes. At this time a LCA would be extremely speculative and thus has not been prepared. 3.3 CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS Since no specific development project is proposed at this time and the exact location of proposed development is unknown, a calculation of GHG emissions that may be associated with future construction activities is not possible and is not provided in this analysis. Regardless, construction activities that may be associated with future residential development on the Project site would clearly fall within the scope of analysis provided in the General Plan EIR because the General Plan EIR anticipated the construction of 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units within Newport Center, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43. Therefore, the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family residential units and the conduct of construction activities to the specific location of San Joaquin Plaza represent the Project's only potential to create new construction - related greenhouse gas emission impacts because construction of the remaining 445 multi - family units in Newport Center were assumed and previously evaluated by the General Plan EIR. The construction of 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel units would not represent any measurable difference in construction - related greenhouse gas emissions. The types of construction equipment, material use, and duration of construction activities would be very similar for hotel units or 26 California Natural Resources Agency, Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action, Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines Addressing Analysis and Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Pursuant to SB97, December 2009. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 34 multi - family units. Also, GHG contributions to GCC are cumulative in nature and thus the specific location of the emissions source, whether it be Newport Center generally or San Joaquin Plaza specifically, has no material bearing. Accordingly, future Project - related construction emissions of greenhouse gases would not represent new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the General Plan EIR was certified. There would be no new or more severe construction related GHG emissions impact than would otherwise occur with implementation of the City's General Plan, as analyzed in the General Plan EIR 3.4 OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS As previously noted, the Applicant proposes an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by 94 units and to assign those 94 units, along with 430 units already allocated to the NNCPC, to the portion of the NNCPC designated as San Joaquin Plaza. It should be noted that of the 94 units, 15 dwelling units are currently assigned to Newport Center and impacts from these dwelling units were accounted for by the General Plan EIR. The remaining 79 units consist of hotel units that would be converted to multi - family residential units. In order to provide consistency with the traffic study, this analysis relates to the proposed increase of 94 dwelling units allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza (as is done for the traffic study), and represents a "worst case" (conservative) analysis since there would be no credit taken for the reduction of 79 hotel rooms or for the 15 units already allowed by the General Plan. Operational activities associated with the proposed Project will result in emissions of CO2, CH4, and N20 from the following primary sources: • Building Energy Use • Water Supply, Treatment and Distribution • Solid Waste • Mobile Source Emissions 3.4.1 BUILDING ENERGY USE GHGs are emitted from buildings as a result of activities for which electricity and natural gas are typically used as energy sources. Combustion of any type of fuel emits CO2 and other GHGs directly into the atmosphere; these emissions are considered direct emissions associated with a building. GHGs are also emitted during the generation of electricity from fossil fuels; these emissions are considered to be indirect emissions. Unless otherwise noted, CalEEModTm default parameters were used. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 35 3.4.2 WATER SUPPLY, TREATMENT AND DISTRIBUTION Indirect GHG emissions result from the production of electricity used to convey, treat and distribute water and wastewater. The amount of electricity required to convey, treat and distribute water depends on the volume of water as well as the sources of the water. Unless otherwise noted, CalEEModTM default parameters were used. 3.4.3 SOLID WASTE Residential land uses will result in the generation and disposal of solid waste. A large percentage of this waste will be diverted from landfills by a variety of means, such as reducing the amount of waste generated, recycling, and /or composting. The remainder of the waste not diverted will be disposed of at a landfill. GHG emissions from landfills are associated with the anaerobic breakdown of material. GHG emissions associated with the disposal of solid waste associated with the proposed Project were calculated by the CalEEModT" model using default parameters. 3.4.4 MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS GHG emissions will also result from mobile sources associated with the Project. These mobile source emissions will result from the typical daily operation of motor vehicles by visitors, employees, and customers. Project mobile source emissions are dependent on both overall daily vehicle trip generation. Trip characteristics available from the report, North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis (Stantec, May 2012) were utilized in this analysis. 3.5 EMISSIONS SUMMARY The summary of annual operational GHG emissions from 94 dwelling units is reported in Table 3 -1. The operational GHG emissions for the Project are estimated to be 935.04 MTCO2e per year. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 36 TABLE 3 -1 TOTAL PROJECT GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS (ANNUAL) (METRIC TONS PER YEAR) Emission Source COs Emissions (metric tons per year) CHy N20 Total COTE Area Source Emissions 69.88 0.03 -- 71.00 Energy 244.28 0.01 -- 245.79 Mobile Sources 556.77 0.02 -- 557.25 Waste 8.78 0.52 — 19.67 Water Usage 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 Total COTE (All Sources) 935.04 Threshold MT COiE/Yr 3,000 Significant? NO Source: CaIEEMod' model output, See Appendix "A" for detailed model outputs Note: Totals obtained from CaIEEMod- and may not total 100% due to rounding North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 37 3.6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FACTOR NO. 1: The extent to which the project may generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment, based on any applicable threshold of significance. Less Than Significant Impact. Global climate change is not confined to a particular project area and is generally accepted as the consequence of global industrialization over the last 200 years. A typical project, even a very large one, does not generate enough greenhouse gas emissions on its own to influence global climate change significantly; hence, the issue of global climate change is, by definition, a cumulative environmental impact. The State of California, through its governor and its legislature, has established a comprehensive framework for the substantial reduction of GHG emissions over the next 40 -plus years. This will occur primarily through the implementation of Assembly Bill (AB 32) and Senate Bill (SB 375), which will address GHG emissions on a statewide cumulative basis. GHG emissions generated by the project are associated with the new area sources (natural gas use, landscape equipment, etc.) from the new building structures, transportation emissions associated with vehicles traveling to and from the project site, and indirect emissions associated with purchased energy, energy associated with water (conveyance, treatment, distribution, and treatment of wastewater), and waste disposal. GHG emissions from project - related operational activities are included in Table 3 -1. The proposed project would generate approximately 935.04 metric tons (MTons) of GHG emissions per year. Currently, there are no adopted thresholds for GHG emissions for projects within the SCAQMD region. However, SCAQMD has convened a Working Group to identify GHG thresholds for use in the SoCAB. For projects that are not exempt or where no qualifying GHG reduction plans are directly applicable, SCAQMD requires an assessment of GHG emissions. SCAQMD is proposing a screening level threshold of 3,000 MTons annually for all land use types. This threshold is based on a review of the Governor's Office of Planning and Research database of CEQA projects. Based on their review, 90 percent of CEQA projects would exceed 3,000 MTons per year. Projects that exceed the screening threshold would require additional technical analysis to determine the level of significance. Because the GHG emissions associated with the project would be below the SCAQMD's proposed screening threshold, the proposed project's cumulative contribution to GHG emissions would be less than significant and would not comprise a new significant environmental effect. Additionally, because the Project's GHG emissions would be below SCAQMD's screening threshold, the Project's GHG emissions would not represent a significant increase as compared to the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the City's General Plan. In conclusion, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as analyzed in the General Plan EIR. No mitigation measures are necessary. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 38 FACTOR NO. 2: The extent to which the project may conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases. No Impact. CARB adopted the Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008. The Scoping Plan is California's GHG reduction strategy to achieve the state's GHG emissions reduction target established by AB 32, which is 1990 levels by year 2020. Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), California Appliance Energy Efficiency regulations, California Renewable Energy Portfolio standard, changes in the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards, and other early action measures would ensure the state is on target to achieve the GHG emissions reduction goals of AB 32. The project's GHG emissions would be further reduced from compliance with these statewide measures. The state of California recently adopted the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and the 2010 Green Building Code, which require a greater degree of energy efficiency than the 2005 version of the state building code that was in effect when the General Plan EIR was certified in 2006. Although no specific development project is proposed at San Joaquin Plaza at this time, future construction activities would be required to comply with all applicable building codes. Currently, development activities are required to achieve the energy efficiency standards of the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. The 2008 Standard is 15 percent more energy efficienct compared to the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards. CARB and the EPA have also adopted new fuel efficiency standards for model years 2012 through 2016. The Scoping Plan also calls for more stringent fuel efficiency standards model years 2016 through 2020 under Pavley II. Because the proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD's proposed screening threshold for GHG emissions and residential development in San Joaquin Plaza would be required to achieve efficiency standards mandated as part of the state building code in effect at the time of future construction, the proposed project would not have the potential to interfere with the State of California's ability to achieve GHG reduction goals and strategies. Furthermore, the proposed Project would result in fewer GHG emissions than would have been assumed in the General Plan EIR since the 2008 efficiency standards and other statewide measures to reduce GHG emissions were not in place at the time the General Plan EIR was certified. Various characteristics of the Project serve to render its contribution to GCC less than cumulatively considerable. One of the main issues raised by those concerned about the effect of greenhouse gases on climate change is that "leap frog" -type development would potentially increase the number of vehicle miles traveled and consequently increase vehicular emissions (i.e., CO2 that contribute to greenhouse gases). The Project is an infill, mixed use development in an urbanized setting thereby providing opportunities to reduce vehicle trips. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 39 In conclusion, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. 3.7 REQUIREMENTS The issue of GHG emissions was not previously evaluated in the General Plan EIR; as such, no mitigation measures specifically related to GHG emissions was identified in the General Plan EIR. However, the General Plan includes several policies that would serve to reduce GHG emissions, including, but not limited to, the following Policies: LU 6.4.6 (Approaches for a Livable Neighborhood); LU 6.15.19 (Walkable Streets); LU 6.15.20 (Connected Streets); NR 6.1 (Walkable Neighborhoods); NR 6.2 (Mixed -Use Development); NR 6.3 (Vehicle -Trip Reduction Measures); NR 6.4 (Transportation Demand Management Ordinance); NR 6.5 (Local Transit Agency Collaboration); NR 6.6 (Traffic Signal Synchronization); NR 6.7 (City Fleet Vehicles); NR 6.8 (Accessible Alternative Fuel Infrastructure); NR 6.9 (Education on Mobile Source Emission Reduction Techniques); NR 7.1 (Fuel Efficient Equipment); NR 7.2 (Source Emission Reduction Best Management Practices); NR 7.3 (Incentives for Air Pollution Reduction); NR 7.4 (Use of Blowers); NR 8.1 (Construction Equipment); NR 8.2 (Maintenance of Construction Equipment); NR 8.3 (Construction Equipment Operation); NR 9.1 (Efficient Airport Operations); NR 9.2 (Aircraft and Equipment Emission Reduction); CE 1.1.1 (Comprehensive Transportation System); CE 1.2.2 (Shuttle Service); CE 1.2.4 (Public Transit); CE 4.1.1 (Public Transit Efficiency); CE 4.1.4 (Land Use Densities Supporting Public Transit); CE 4.1.5 (Airport Shuttles); CE 4.1.6 (Transit Support Facilities); CE 5.1.1 (Trail System); CE 5.1.2 (Pedestrian Connectivity); CE 5.1.3 (Pedestrian Improvements in New Development Projects); CE 5.1.4 (Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods); CE 5.1.5 (Bikeway System); CE 5.1.6 (Bicycle Supporting Facilities); CE 5.1.9 (Integrated Bicycle Improvements); CE 5.1.11 (School Access); CE 5.1.12 (Pedestrian Street Crossings); CE 5.1.14 (Newport Harbor Trails and Walkways); CE 6.1.1 (Traffic Signals); CE 6.1.2 (Intelligent Transportation Systems); CE 6.2.1 (Alternative Transportation Modes); CE 6.2.2 (Support Facilities for Alternative Modes); and CE 6.2.3 (Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes). Additionally, and although the Project will not result in a new significant GHG impact or increase the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from buildout of the City's General Plan, the Project would be required to comply with all mandatory regulatory requirements imposed by the State of California and the South Coast Air Quality Management District aimed at the reduction of air quality emissions. Those that are particularly applicable to the Project and that would assist in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions are: • Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) • Regional GHG Emissions Reduction Targets /Sustainable Communities Strategies (SB 375) • Pavely Fuel Efficiency Standards (AB1493). Establishes fuel efficiency ratings for new vehicles. • Title 24 California Code of Regulations (California Building Code). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for new construction. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 40 • Title 20 California Code of Regulations (Appliance Energy Efficiency Standards). Establishes energy efficiency requirements for appliances. • Title 17 California Code of Regulations (Low Carbon Fuel Standard). Requires carbon content of fuel sold in California to be 10% less by 2020. • California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act of 2006 (AB1881). Requires local agencies to adopt the Department of Water Resources updated Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance or equivalent by January 1, 2010 to ensure efficient landscapes in new development and reduced water waste in existing landscapes. • Statewide Retail Provider Emissions Performance Standards (SB 1368). Requires energy generators to achieve performance standards for GHG emissions. • Renewable Portfolio Standards (SB 1078). Requires electric corporations to increase the amount of energy obtained from eligible renewable energy resources to 20 percent by 2010 and 33 percent by 2020. 3.8 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required. 3.9 OPERATIONAL ACTIVITY RECOMMENDED MITIGATION MEASURES No significant impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 41 4.0 REFERENCES 1. California Air Resources Board, 2007. California Air Resources Board Almanac. 2. California Air Resources Board, 2007. EMFAC 2007. 3. California Air Resources Board, 2010. California Greenhouse Gas 2000 -2008 Inventory by Scoping Plan Category - Summary. 4. California Building Standards Commission, 2010. 2008 California Green Building Standards Code. 5. California Energy Commission, 2005. Inventory of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. 6. EIP Associates, 2006. City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Draft Environmental Impact Report. 7. International Panel on Climate Change, 2007. Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report. 8. San Bernardino County, 2011. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Plan for San Bernardino County. 9. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. 10. South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD), 2011. California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEModTM). 11. Stantec, 2012. North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis. 12. United States Department of Labor, 2011. Occupational Safety and Health Guideline for Nitrous Oxide. 13. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2011. Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990 -2011. 14. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2010. High Global Warming Potential (GWP) Gases. 15. World Resources Institute, 2011. Climate Analysis Indicator Tool (CAIT) - US - Yearly Emissions Inventory. North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) 42 0 APPENDIX A GHG Emissions Calculations North Newport Center Planned Community Greenhouse Gas Analysis � URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN:08210 -05 GHG Report) `, CROSSROADS A CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2011.1.1 North Newport Center Planned Community Amendment Orange County, Annual 1.0 Proiect Characteristics 1.1 Land Usage Land Uses Size Metric Condo /Townhouse High Rise 94 Dwelling Unit 1.2 Other Project Characteristics Urbanization Urban Wind Speed (m /s) 2.2 Utility Company Southern California Edison Climate Zone 8 Precipitation Freq (Days) 30 1.3 User Entered Comments Project Characteristics - Land Use - Construction Phase - Off -road Equipment - the project does not require emissions for the construction phase Trips and VMT - the project does not require emissions for the construction phase Vehicle Trips - trip rate data was sourced from Trip Generation 8th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE 232) Date: 5/17/2012 2.0 Emissions Summary 1 of 14 2.1 Overall Construction Unmitigated Construction Mitigated Construction ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year tons/yr MT /yr 2011 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mitigated Construction 2of14 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Year tons/yr MT /yr 2011 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2of14 2.2 Overall Operational Unmitigated Operational 3of14 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- TotaICO2 CR4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category tons /yr MT /yr Area 0.73 0.02 2.04 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 9.98 59.90 69.88 0.03 0.00 71.00 ___._.._. _...._r ...... ...... ...... _.._ _ - -- .__._ .___ ------ Energy 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00' 244.28 244.28 _ .__ _ 0.01 ' 0.00 ------ 245.79 Mobile 0.33 0.61 3.23 0.01 0.70 0.03 0.73 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.00 556.77 556.77 0.02 0.00 557.25 Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.78. 0.00 8.78 0.52 0.00 19.67 ...........:......}_. Water ...__...__ }....._y_...__ }_...._ 0.00 _...__-_. 0.00 ..._�_..___-_...._....._ 0.00 0.00 0.00 }_.... 35.74 ..___ 35.74 ._. 0.19 ...... 0.01 _ 41.33 Total 1.07 0.74 5.32 0.01 0.70 0.03 0.84 0.03 0.03 0.17 18.76 896.69 915.45 0.77 0.01 935.04 3of14 2.2 Overall Operational Mitigated Operational 3.0 Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 4of14 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- TotaICO2 CR4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category tons /yr MT /yr Area 0.73 0.02 2.04 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 9.98 59.90 69.88 0.03 0.00 71.00 ___._.._. _...._r ...... ...... ...... _.._ _ - -- .__._ .___ ------ Energy 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00' 244.28 244.28 _ .__ _ 0.01 ' 0.00 ------ 245.79 Mobile 0.33 0.61 3.23 0.01 0.70 0.03 0.73 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.00 556.77 556.77 0.02 0.00 557.25 Waste 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.78. 0.00 8.78 0.52 0.00 19.67 ...........:......}_. Water ...__...__ }....._y_...__ }_...._ 0.00 _...__-_. 0.00 ..._�_..___-_...._....._ 0.00 0.00 0.00 }_.... 35.74 ..___ 35.74 ._. 0.19 ...... 0.01 _ 41.33 Total 1.07 0.74 5.32 0.01 0.70 0.03 0.84 0.03 0.03 0.17 18.76 896.69 915.45 0.77 0.01 935.04 3.0 Construction Detail 3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction 4of14 3.2 Demolition - 2011 Unmitigated Construction On -Site Unmitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -CO2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 CH4 N20 CO2e Category PM10 tons /yr Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total MT /yr Off -Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Unmitigated Construction Off -Site 5of14 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -0O2 NBio- TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category tons /yr MT /yr Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.00 0.00 0.00 5of14 3.2 Demolition - 2011 Mitigated Construction On -Site Mitigated Construction Off -Site ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -CO2 NBio- CO2 TotaICO2 CH4 CH4 N20 CO2e Category PM10 tons /yr Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total MT /yr Off -Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mitigated Construction Off -Site C91711!7:71l=7I in 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 6of14 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 13io -0O2 NBio- TotaICO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category tons /yr MT /yr Hauling 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Vendor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 ' 0.00 0.00 Worker 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 T 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 C91711!7:71l=7I in 4.1 Mitigation Measures Mobile 6of14 4.2 Trip Summary Information ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- Total CO2 Condo /Townhouse High Rise CH4 N20 CO2e 1,280,920 1,280,920 Total 392.92 405.14 PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 Category tons /yr MT /yr Mitigated 0.33 0.61 3.23 0.01 0.70 0.03 0.73 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.00 556.77 556.77 0.02 0.00 557.25 _.._ _ ._. ..___ .___ ...... Unmitigated 0.33 0.61 3.23 0.01 0.70 0.03 0.73 0.03 0.03 0.06 0.00 556.77 556.77 _ .__ _ 0.02 0.00 ..___ 557.25 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4.2 Trip Summary Information 4.3 Trip Type Information Average Daiiy Trip Rate Unmitigated Mitigated Land Use Weekday H -W or C -W Saturday H -O or C -NW Sunday Annual VMT Annual VMT Condo /Townhouse High Rise 392.92 405.14 322.42 1,280,920 1,280,920 Total 392.92 405.14 322.42 1,280,920 1,280,920 4.3 Trip Type Information 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 7of14 Miles Trip % Land Use H -W or C -W H -S or C -C H -O or C -NW H -W or C -W H -S or C -C H -O or C -NW Condo /Townhouse High Rise 12.70 7.00 9.50 40.20 19.20 40.60 5.0 Energy Detail 5.1 Mitigation Measures Energy 7of14 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e CO2e Land Use kBTU tons /yr Mi PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM25 Total 0.00 CO2 0.00 0.01 0.00 Category tons/yr MT /yr Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 115.76 ' 115.76 ' 0.01 0.00 ' 116.48 Mitigated ....... ..... ..... ..... -- - --- - --- - - -- *----------------- ---•------•------�............. ...... -- .................... Electricity 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 115.76 115.76 0.01 0.00 116.48 Unmitigated _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ........... ............ ......I ...... ...... ... ...�......�...... ......�...... �..... .... .... ... ... .... F r NaturalGas 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 128.52 F 128.52 0.00 0.00 129.30 Mitigated ...... .... ........... ......r...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ... ...�...... ...... �...... r......�......�......�...... NaturalGas 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 128.52 128.52 0.00 0.00 129.30 Unmitigated Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Unmitigated 8of14 NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO 902 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU tons /yr Mi 7ondo /Townhouse 2.4084e +006 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 128.52 128.52 0.00 0.00 129.30 High Rise Total 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 128.52 128.52 0.00 0.00 129.30 8of14 5.2 Energy by Land Use - NaturalGas Mitigated 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated NaturalGas Use ROG NOx CO 502 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e Land Use kBTU 0.00 116.48 Total tons /yr 115.76 0.01 0.00 116.48 MT /yr 7ondo /Townhouse High Rise 2.4084e +006 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 128.52 128.52 0.00 0.00 129.30 Total 0.01 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 128.52 128.52 0.00 0.00 129.30 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Unmitigated 9of14 Electricity Use ROG I NOx I CO 502 Total CO2 CH4 I N2O I CO2e Land Use kWh tons /yr MT /yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise • 397969 115.76 0.01 0.00 116.48 Total 115.76 0.01 0.00 116.48 9of14 5.3 Energy by Land Use - Electricity Mitigated 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area Electricity Use ROG I NOx I CO 502 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 I CO2e Land Use kWh tons/yr MT /yr Condo /Townhouse 397969 115.76 0.01 0.00 116.48 High Rise Total CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons /yr 115.76 0.01 0.00 116.46 6.0 Area Detail 6.1 Mitigation Measures Area 10 of 14 ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive PM10 Exhaust PM10 PM10 Total Fugitive PM2.5 Exhaust PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Bio -0O2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Category tons /yr MT /yr Mitigated 0.73 0.02 2.04 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 9.98 59.90 69.88 0.03 0.00 ' 71.00 ______9__- _------ r------ ______ __ ____ ______ ______ }______ _____ ____ ____ _ -__ _____ ____ ____ ____ _____ Unmitigated 0.73 0.02 2.04 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 9.98 59.90 6938 0.03 0.00 71.00 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 10 of 14 6.2 Area by SubCategory Unmitigated Mitigated ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- TotaICO2 CH4 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 CO2 SubCategory SubCategory tons /yr tons /yr MT /yr MT /yr Architectural 0.04 Architectural 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating Consumer 0.34 0.00 _------ 0.00 _------ 0.00 i------------- 0.00 0.00 r------ 0.00 ;------ 0.00 Consumer 0.34 0.00 Products ...........:......r...__. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Products ... ..._ Hearth 0.31 0.01 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 �...... :...... 0.09 9.98 Hearth 0.31 0.01 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 9.98 57.56 67.55 0.03 0.00 68.61 _______ P_ 9_: Landscaping ------ 0.05 r------ 0.02 i------ 1.45 i------ 0.00 i------ ______ 0.00 ______i______ 0.01 _____ 0.00 _____ 0.01 ___ 0.00 _____ 2.34 _____ 2.34 _____ 0.00 _____ 0.00 ___ 2.39 Total 0.74 0.03 2.04 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 9.98 59.90 69.89 0.03 0.00 71.00 Mitigated 11 of 14 ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio -CO2 NBio- TotaICO2 CH4 N2O CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total CO2 SubCategory tons /yr MT /yr Architectural 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Coating ------------------ ------ ______ ______ ______ ------ ------ ------ Consumer 0.34 0.00 _------ 0.00 _------ 0.00 i------------- 0.00 0.00 r------ 0.00 ;------ 0.00 ;------ 0.00 ;------ 0.00 0.00 Products ...........:......r...__. ------ ------ ...... ...... ... ...�...... ...... ... ..._ Hearth 0.31 0.01 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.00 �...... :...... 0.09 9.98 r......�....._�..._ 57.56 67.55 0.03 0.00 68.61 ........... ------ ------- t.------ }------ }------ }------ p------ }------ p------ }------ e------ .------- ------ }------ p------ }------ Landscaping 0.05 0.02 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 2.34 2.34 0.00 0.00 2.39 Total 0.74 0.03 2.04 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.10 9.98 59.90 69.89 0.03 0.00 71.00 11 of 14 7.0 Water Detail 7.1 Mitigation Measures Water 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated ROG NOx I CC S02 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Category tons /yr MT /yr Condo /Townhouse' 6,12448/ 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 High Rise 3.86108 Total Mitigated ._..._ ._.._.. Unmitigated 35.74 ___ }------------- i------ }------ 35.74 0.19 i.__._. ------ 0.19 0.01 0.01 ' 41.33 ------ 41.33 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 7.2 Water by Land Use Unmitigated 12 of 14 Indoor /Outdoor Use ROG I NOx CO S02 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use Mgal tons /yr MT /yr Condo /Townhouse' 6,12448/ 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 High Rise 3.86108 Total 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 12 of 14 7.2 Water by Land Use Mitigated 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category /Year Indoor /Outdoor Use ROG NOx CO S02 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e Land Use Mgal tons /yr MT /yr Condo /Townhouse 6.12448/ 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 High Rise 3.86108 Total NA NA NA NA NA 35.74 0.19 0.01 41.33 8.0 Waste Detail 8.1 Mitigation Measures Waste Category /Year 13 of 14 ROG NOx I CO I S02 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 I CO2e tons /yr MT /yr Mitigated 8.78 0.52 0.00 ' 19.67 ______9__.___.___ }______ }______ ___ ___ }______ ______ }______ ______ Unmitigated 8.78 0.52 0.00 19.67 Total NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 13 of 14 8.2 Waste by Land Use Unmitigated Mitigated Waste Disposed ROG I NOx I CO 502 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 I CO2e Land Use tons tans/yr MT /yr Condo /Townhouse High Rise 43.24 8.78 0.52 0.00 19.67 Total 8.78 0.52 0.00 19.67 Mitigated 9.0 Vegetation 14 of 14 Waste Disposed ROG I NOx I CO 502 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e Land Use tons tons /yr MT /yr Condo/Townhouse High Rise • 43.24 8.78 0.52 0.00 19.67 Total 8.78 0.52 0.00 19.67 9.0 Vegetation 14 of 14 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix C Noise Impact Analysis Urban Crossroads, Inc. May 29, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach OURBAM CROSSROADS 41 Corporate Park, Suite 300 Irvine, CA 92606 Prepared by: Bill Lawson, P.E., INCE Prepared for: Ms. Tracy Zinn T&B PLANNING, INC. 17542 East 17`h Street, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA June 6, 2012 JN:08211 -04 Noise Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................... ............................... 1 1.1 Project Overview 1.2 Off -Site Transportation Noise Analysis 2.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................. ............................... 2 2.1 Purpose of Report 2.2 Project Description 2.3 General Plan Analysis of Transportation - Related Noise Impacts 3.0 NOISE FUNDAMENTALS .................................................. ............................... 7 3.1 Range of Noise 3.2 Effects of Noise 3.3 Noise Descriptors 3.4 Traffic Noise Prediction 3.5 Ground Absorbtion 3.6 Noise Control 3.7 Noise Barrier Attenuation 3.8 Community Response to Noise 3.9 Land Use Campatibility with Noise 4.0 NOISE STANDARDS ...................................................... ............................... 12 4.1 Transportation Noise Standards 4.2 Significant Noise Impact Criteria 5.0 METHODS AND PROCEDURES ........................................ ............................... 14 5.1 FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model 5.2 Traffic Noise Prediction Model Inputs 6.0 OFF -SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE IMPACTS ................. ............................... 21 6.1 Traffic Noise Contours 6.2 Existing Roadway Noise Levels 6.3 Year 2016 Roadway Noise Levels 6.4 Existing With Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions 6.5 Year 2016 Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions 6.6 Off -Site Transportation Related Project Noise Impacts North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis V URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA PN.08211 -04 Noise Report) caosBAN LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Paqe Off -Site FHWA Traffic Noise Model Printouts .................................................................... ............................6.1 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Page 3 -A Typical Noise Levels and Their Subjective Loudness and Effects .................. ..............................8 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 5 -1 Off -Site Roadway Parameters ....................................................................... .............................15 5 -2 Average Daily Traffic ( 1000' s) ........................................................................ .............................17 5 -3 Hourly Traffic Flow Distribution ...................................................................... .............................20 6 -1 Existing Without Project Conditions Noise Contours ..................................... .............................22 6 -2 Existing With Project Conditions Noise Contours .......................................... .............................25 6 -3 Year 2016 Without Project Conditions Noise Contours ................................. .............................28 6 -4 Year 2016 With Project Conditions Noise Contours ...................................... .............................31 6 -5 Existing Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts ................................. .............................35 6 -6 Year 2016 Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts ............................. .............................38 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis V URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report.doex) ceosBAN NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This noise study has been completed to determine the noise impacts associated with the development of the proposed North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC) (referred to as "Project'). The purpose of this noise assessment is to evaluate the off -site project traffic noise impacts and to recommend noise mitigation measures, if necessary, to minimize the potential project impacts. 1.1 Project Overview The Project involves increasing the residential development allocation within the NNCPC from 430 dwelling units to a total of 524 dwelling units (increase of 94 units). The NNCPC was originally adopted in 2007, for which an addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR was prepared. 1.2 Off -Site Transportation Noise Analysis Traffic generated by the proposed Project will influence the traffic noise levels in surrounding off - site areas. To quantify the off -site traffic noise impacts on the surrounding off -site areas, the changes in traffic noise levels on 73 roadway segments surrounding the Project site were estimated based on the change in the average daily traffic volumes. The traffic noise levels provided in this analysis are based on the traffic forecasts from the North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis prepared by Stantec in May 2012. To assess the off -site noise level impacts associated with the proposed project, noise contour boundaries were developed for Existing and Year 2016 traffic conditions. In order for an off -site transportation related noise impact to be considered a significant impact, the project traffic must create a significant noise level increase as defined by the City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Policy N 1.8. This analysis shows that the project will not generate a substantial permanent off -site traffic noise level increase for existing sensitive uses or expose persons to noise levels in excess of the standards established by the City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Policy N 1.8. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 1 O URBAN CROSSROADS 2.0 INTRODUCTION This noise study has been completed to determine the noise impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed North Newport Center Planned Community. 2.1 Purpose of Report The purpose of this report is to satisfy CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), which requires the City to analyze whether subsequent activities regarding the North Newport Center zoning require an additional environmental document beyond the Final Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR ") for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 200601119) ( "General Plan EIR "), and the first North Newport Center Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update, approved by Resolution No. 2007 -79 on December 11, 2007. The General Plan EIR was certified by the Newport Beach City Council on July 25, 2006, as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with the buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of North Newport Center. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), this report analyzes whether the Project would have effects that were not examined in the General Plan EIR and confirms that the Project will not result in new effects and will not require new mitigation measures so that the City can determine whether it is appropriate to approve the Project as within the scope of the General Plan EIR. As required by CEQA Guidelines section 15168(e), this report also analyzes whether: (i) the Project is within the scope of the General Plan 2006 Update; and (ii) the General Plan EIR adequately describes the subsequent activity for the purposes of CEQA. CEQA Guidelines section 15164(a) states: "The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred." Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15162, no subsequent EIR may be required for the project unless the City determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that one or more of the following conditions are met: North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 2 O URBAN CROSSROADS (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR, was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. In order to provide the analysis necessary for the City to make its determination under CEQA Guidelines section 15168(c), this noise study briefly describes the proposed Project, provides information regarding noise fundamentals, describes the local noise guidelines, provides the study methods and procedures for traffic noise analysis, and evaluates the future off -site exterior noise environment. Additional information beyond that required for the City's determination is included for public information. This study also satisfies the City of Newport Beach noise standards requirements. 2.2 Project Description The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 multi- family residential units to be developed in areas of the NNCPC designated MU -1­13 by the General Plan. In comparison, the General Plan allows a maximum of 450 units in the MU -H3 category throughout the Newport North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 3 O URBAN CROSSROADS Center Statistical Area. In other words, of the 450 MU -H3 residential units allowed by the General Plan in the Newport Center Statistical Area, 430 are specifically allocated to be developed within the areas of the NNCPC designated by the NNCPC Development Plan as Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza. The remaining 20 units are allowed to be developed in any MU -H3 designated area in the Newport Center Statistical Area. Five (5) MU- H3 units have been assigned to the Golf Realty Fund Tennis Club development and the other 15 MU -H3 units are not assigned to any particular property. In addition, certain areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU1 and LU2. Anomaly Location 43 in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area L1) is developed with a 532 room resort hotel presently operated by Marriott Hotels and Resorts. General Plan Table LU2 allows a maximum of 611 hotel rooms in Anomaly Location 43; therefore, 79 hotel rooms allowed by the General Plan are un- built. The proposed Project would convert the 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and then transfer them to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Under existing conditions, Block 500, Block 600, and San Joaquin Plaza are developed with commercial /office land uses and the Island Hotel. No multi- family residential units are constructed in these areas, although the NNCPC Development Plan allows for up to 430 residential units. Thus, the City's General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan currently allow for the existing land uses in Block 500, Block 600 and San Joaquin Plaza to be supplemented by or partially replaced with multi - family residential housing. The Project Applicant proposes an amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by 94 units (comprising the 15 un- assigned and un -built multi - family units and the 79 hotel units that would be converted to multi - family units), and to assign those 94 units, along with 430 units already allocated to the NNCCP, to the portion of the NNCCP designated as San Joaquin Plaza. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 13 O URBAN CROSSROADS No specific development project is proposed at this time. A proposal to develop a specific residential project in the San Joaquin Plaza would be subject to the procedures for development specified in the NNCPC Development Plan. There would be no change to the boundaries of the NNCPC Development Plan area or any constituent blocks or sub - districts, and there would be no change in the permitted types of land uses, development regulations, or design guidelines resulting from approval of the proposed NNCPC Development Plan Amendment. Since no specific development is proposed at this time, and the exact location of the units is unknown, a specific calculation of construction noise levels impacts that may be associated with future construction activities is not possible and is not provided. However, construction activities would be consistent with the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR and would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of any impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR. 2.3 General Plan Analysis of Transportation - Related Noise Impacts Operational noise impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan were previously evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which identified significant and unavoidable impacts due to the exposure of existing development to future traffic related noise that would exceed the General Plan noise standards and /or would represent a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. The General Plan EIR notes that compliance with General Plan Goal N -2 (Transportation Noise) would reduce this impact, but not to a level below significant. Although the proposed Project would involve the allocation of 94 additional units to the San Joaquin Plaza, implementation of the proposed Project would result in the reduction of traffic with buildout of the General Plan. Specifically, the TPO Traffic Analysis shows that the proposed Project, which would convert 79 hotel units to multi - family units, would result in a net reduction in average daily traffic (ADT) of 315 trips, including 17 fewer a.m. peak hour trips and 17 fewer p.m. peak hour trips. Due to the reduction in traffic volumes generated by the Project compared to the assumptions made in the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not result in a substantial increase in the significant and unavoidable transportation noise - related impacts identified in the General Plan EIR. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 5 O URBAN CROSSROADS To substantiate this conclusion, future noise conditions for study area roadway segments were calculated based on the TPO Traffic Analysis to determine whether traffic generated by the Project would cause or contribute to transportation - related noise levels that could exceed the General Plan standards and /or result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. The results are presented in Section 4.0 of this report. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) M O URBAN CROSSROADS 3.0 NOISE FUNDAMENTALS Noise has been simply defined as "unwanted sound." Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal activities, when it causes actual physical harm or when it has adverse effects on health. 3.1 Range of Noise Since the range of sound that the human ear can detect is so large, the scale used to measure sound intensity is a scale based on multiples of 10, the logarithmic scale. The unit of measure in which a sound intensity is described is the decibel (dB). Each interval of 10 decibels indicates a sound energy ten times greater than before, which is perceived by the human ear as being roughly twice as loud. However, due to the internal mechanism of the human ear and how it receives and processes noise, when two sound sources of equal intensity or power are measured together, their combined effect (intensity level) is 3 dBA higher than the level of either separately. Thus, two 72 dBA cars together measure 75 dBA under ideal conditions. The most common sounds vary between 40 dBA (very quiet) to 100 dBA (very loud). Normal conversation at three feet is roughly at 60 dBA, while loud jet engine noises equate to 110 dBA at approximately 100 feet, which can cause serious discomfort. Exhibit 3 -A presents a summary of the typical noise levels and their subjective loudness and effects that are described in more detail below. 3.2 Effects of Noise Harmful effects of noise can include speech interference; sleep disruption and loss of hearing. High background noise levels can affect performance and learning processes through distraction, reduced accuracy, increased fatigue, annoyance and irritability, the inability to concentrate, and sleep prevention. Several factors determine whether a particular noise will interfere with sleep. These factors include the noise level and characteristics, the stage of sleep, the individual's age and motivation to waken. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 7 O URBAN CROSSROADS EXHIBIT 3 -A TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS AND THEIR SUBJECTIVE LOUDNESS AND EFFECTS COMMON OUTDOOR COMMON INDOOR A - WEIGHTED SUBJECTIVE EFFECTS OF ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES SOUND LEVEL dBA LOUDNESS NOISE THRESHOLD OF PAIN 140 NEAR JET ENGINE 130 LE OR G H LOSS 120 JET FLY -OVER AT 300m (1000 ft) ROCK BAND 110 LOUD AUTO HORN 100 GAS LAWN MOWER AT lm (3 ft) 90 VERY NOISY DIESELTRUCK AT 15m(50 ft), at 80 FOOD BLENDER AT 1m(3 ft) 80 km /hr (50 mph) SPEECH NOISY URBAN AREA, DAYTIME VACUUM CLEANER AT 3m (10 ft) 70 LOUD INTERFERENCE HEAVY TRAFFIC AT 90m (300 ft) NORMAL SPEECH AT 1m (3 ft) 60 50 QUIET URBAN DAYTIME LARGE BUSINESS OFFICE MODERATE SLEEP DISTURBANCE QUIET URBAN NIGHTTIME THEATER, LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM (BACKGROUND) QUIET SUBURBAN NIGHTTIME LIBRARY 30 FAINT BEDROOM AT NIGHT, CONCERT QUIET RURAL NIGHTTIME HALL (BACKGROUND) 20 BROADCAST /RECORDING 10 NO EFFECT STUDIO VERY FAINT LOWEST THRESHOLD OF HUMAN LOWEST THRESHOLD OF HUMAN 0 HEARING HEARING North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN - 08211:005.dwg) n SOURCE: NOISE TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT BY CALTRANS URBAN CROSSROADS 3.3 Noise Descriptors Environmental noise descriptors are generally based on averages, rather than instantaneous, noise levels. The most commonly used figure is the equivalent level (Leq). Leq represents a steady sound level containing the same total energy as a time - varying level over a given measurement interval. Leq's may represent any desired length of time; however, one hour is the most commonly used in environmental work. Consequently, Leq's can vary depending upon the time of day. In traffic noise measurements, the noisiest hour of the day is considered the benchmark of a road's noise emissions; therefore, the peak hour Leq is the noise metric used by Caltrans for all traffic noise impact analyses. Peak hour noise levels, while useful, do not completely describe a given noise environment. Noise levels lower than peak hour levels may be disturbing if they occur during times when quiet is most desirable, namely evening and nighttime (sleeping) hours. To account for this, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), representing a composite twenty -four hour noise level, is utilized. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is the weighted average of the intensity of a sound, with corrections for time of day, and averaged over 24 hours. The time of day corrections require the addition of five decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m., and the addition of ten decibels to sound levels at night between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. These additions are made to account for the noise sensitive time periods during the evening and night hours when sound appears louder and it is weighted accordingly. CNEL does not represent the actual sound level heard at any particular time, but rather represents the total sound exposure. 3.4 Traffic Noise Prediction According to the Highway Traffic Noise Analysis and Abatement Policy and Guidance, provided by the Federal Highway Administration, the level of traffic noise depends on three primary factors: (1) the volume of the traffic, (2) the speed of the traffic, and (3) the vehicle mix within the flow of traffic. Generally, the loudness of traffic noise is increased by heavier traffic volumes, higher speeds, and a greater number of trucks. A doubling of the traffic volume, assuming that the speed and vehicle mix do not change, results in a noise level increase of 3 dBA. The North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) W O URBAN CROSSROADS vehicle mix on a given roadway may also have an effect on community noise levels. As the number of medium and heavy trucks increases and becomes a larger percentage of the vehicle mix, adjacent noise level impacts will increase. Vehicle noise is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust, and tires on the roadway. 3.5 Ground Absorption To account for the ground -effect attenuation (absorption), two types of site conditions are commonly used in traffic noise models, soft site and hard site conditions. Soft site conditions account for the sound propagation loss over natural surfaces such as normal earth and ground vegetation. A drop -off rate of 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance is typically observed over soft ground with landscaping, as compared with a 3.0 dBA drop -off rate over hard ground such as asphalt, concrete, stone and very hard packed earth. Caltrans research has shown that the use of soft site conditions is more appropriate for the application of the FHWA traffic noise prediction model used in this analysis. 3.6 Noise Control Noise control is the process of obtaining an acceptable noise environment for a particular observation point or receptor by controlling the noise source, transmission path, receptor, or all three. This concept is known as the source -path- receptor concept. In general, noise control measures can be applied to any and all of these three elements. 3.7 Noise Barrier Attenuation Effective noise barriers can reduce noise levels by 10 to 15 dBA, cutting the loudness of traffic noise in half. A noise barrier is most effective when placed close to the noise source or receptor. Noise barriers, however, do have limitations. For a noise barrier to work, it must be high enough and long enough to block the view of the noise source. 3.8 Community Response to Noise Approximately ten (10) percent of the population has a very low tolerance for noise and will object to any noise not of their own making. Consequently, even in the quietest environment, North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 10 O URBAN CROSSROADS some complaints will occur. Another 25 percent of the population will not complain even in very severe noise environments. Thus, a variety of reactions can be expected from people exposed to any given noise environment. Despite this variability in behavior on an individual level, the population as a whole can be expected to exhibit the following responses to changes in noise levels. An increase or decrease of 1.0 dBA cannot be perceived except in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, a change of 3.0 dBA are considered "barely perceptible," and changes of 5 dBA are considered 'readily perceptible." 3.9 Land Use Compatibility With Noise Some land uses are more tolerant of noise than others. For example, schools, hospitals, churches and residences are considered to be more sensitive to noise intrusion than are commercial or industrial activities. Ambient noise levels can also affect the perceived desirability or livability of a development. For these reasons, land use compatibility with the noise environment is an important consideration in the planning and design process. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 11 O URBAN CROSSROADS 4.0 NOISE STANDARDS Local noise guidelines are often based on the broader guidelines established by state and federal agencies. This section describes the regulatory setting for the proposed North Newport Center Planned Community project. 4.1 Transportation Noise Standards The City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element specifies the maximum noise levels allowable for new developments impacted by transportation noise sources such as arterial roads, freeways, airports and railroads. For the purposes of this project, the noise impacts associated with traffic are controlled by the General Plan Noise Element. The General Plan standards are derived from standards contained in the General Plan Guidelines, a publication of the California Office of Planning and Research. These standards are used by many California cities and counties. The Noise Element includes standards for land use compatibility for community noise exposure. For noise sensitive uses such as schools and single - family homes, exterior noise levels ranging from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL are considered normally compatible. According the Noise Element, the 60 dBA CNEL contour defines the Noise Referral Zone. This is the noise level for which noise considerations should be included when making land use policy decisions that effect existing and proposed noise - sensitive developments. The 65 dBA CNEL contour describes the area for which new noise sensitive developments will be permitted only if appropriate mitigation measures are included. 4.2 Significant Noise Impact Criteria Noise Policy N 1.8 requires the employment of noise mitigation measures for existing sensitive uses when a significant noise impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs when there is a substantial increase in the ambient CNEL produced by new development impacting existing sensitive uses. For purposes of analysis in this report (and as required by General Plan Policy N 1.8), off -site transportation - related noise increases would be considered "substantial' if Project - related traffic results in any of the following: a noise level increase of 3 dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 55 to 60 dBA CNEL; a noise North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.06211 -04 Noise Report.docx) 12 O URBAN CROSSROADS level increase of 2 dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL; a noise level increase of 1 dBA CNEL where the existing without project ambient noise levels range from 65 to 75 dBA CNEL; and /or any off -site transportation project related noise level increase where the existing without project ambient noise levels are over 75 dBA CNEL is considered a significant impact. If the Project's transportation - related noise increases are substantial and impact sensitive receptors that were previously identified by the General Plan EIR as being impacted by noise, then the Project's contribution would be considered to comprise a substantial increase in the severity of a significant effect (CEQA Guidelines §15162(3)(b)). If the Project's transportation - related noise increases are substantial and impact sensitive receptors that were not previously identified by the General Plan EIR as being impacted by traffic- related noise, then the Project's noise contribution would be considered a significant effect not discussed in the General Plan EIR (CEQA Guidelines §15162(3)(a)). North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.06211 -04 Noise Report.docx) 13 O URBAN CROSSROADS 5.0 METHODS AND PROCEDURES The following section outlines the methods and procedures used to model and analyze the future traffic noise environment. 5.1 FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model The projected roadway noise impacts from vehicular traffic were projected using a computer program that replicates the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Prediction Model- FHWA -RD -77 -108 (the "FHWA Model'). The FHWA Model arrives at a predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level ( REMEL). Adjustments are then made to the REMEL to account for: the roadway classification (e.g., collector, secondary, major or arterial), the roadway active width (i.e., the distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway), the total average daily traffic (ADT), the travel speed, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the traffic volume, the roadway grade, the angle of view (e.g., whether the roadway view is blocked), the site conditions ( "hard" or "soft' relates to the absorption of the ground, pavement, or landscaping), and the percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24 -hour period. 5.2 Traffic Noise Prediction Model Inputs Table 5 -1 presents the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model roadway parameters used in this analysis. Soft site conditions were used to develop the noise contours to analyze the traffic noise impacts to the study area. Soft site conditions account for the sound propagation loss over natural surfaces such as normal earth and ground vegetation. The Existing and Year 2016 average daily traffic volumes used for this study and presented in Table 5 -2 were provided by the North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis prepared by Stantec in May 2012.' Table 5 -3 presents the hourly traffic flow distributions (vehicle mix) used for this analysis. The vehicle mix provides the hourly distribution percentages of automobile, medium trucks, and heavy trucks for input into the FHWA Model. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 14 O URBAN CROSSROADS Table 5 -1 (1 of 2) Off -Site Roadway Parameters Roadway Segment Roadway Classification' Lanes Vehicle Speed (MPH) Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon Major Arterial 6 45 Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills Major Arterial 6 45 Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills Major Arterial 6 45 Macarthur North of San Miguel Major Arterial 6 45 Macarthur South of San Miguel Major Arterial 6 45 Macarthur North of Coast Highway Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur Major Arterial 6 45 San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway West of Jamboree Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway East of Jamboree Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway West of Newport CTR Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway East of Newport CTR Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway West of Avacado Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway East of Avacado Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway West of Macarthur Major Arterial 6 45 Coast Highway East of Macarthur Major Arterial 6 45 Jamboree North of Eastbluff Major Arterial 6 45 Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills Major Arterial 6 45 Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills Major Arterial 6 45 Jamboree North of Santa Barbara Major Arterial 6 45 Jamboree South of Santa Barbara Major Arterial 6 45 Jamboree North of Coast Highway Major Arterial 6 45 Jamboree South of Coast Highway Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR West of Newport CTR Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR lNorth of Santa Rosa Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR North of San Miguel Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR South of San Miguel Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR East of Newport CTR Major Arterial 6 45 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 15 Table 5 -1 (2 of 2) Off -Site Roadway Parameters Roadway Segment Roadway Classification' Lanes Vehicle Speed (MPH) Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle Major Arterial 6 45 Newport CTR North of Coast Highway Major Arterial 6 45 Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon Major Arterial 6 45 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree Primary Arterial 4 45 Eastbluff/Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree Primary Arterial 4 45 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon Primary Arterial 4 45 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon Primary Arterial 4 45 San Miguel West of Newport CTR Primary Arterial 4 45 San Miguel East of Newport CTR Primary Arterial 4 45 San Miguel West of Avacado Primary Arterial 4 45 San Miguel East of Avacado Primary Arterial 4 45 San Miguel West of Macarthur Primary Arterial 4 45 San Miguel East of Macarthur Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Cruz North of San Clemente Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Cruz South of San Clemente Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR Primary Arterial 4 45 Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR Primary Arterial 4 45 San Clemente East of Santa Barbara Secondary 4 40 San Clemente West of Santa Cruz Secondary 4 40 Santa Barbara West of Jamboree Secondary 4 40 Santa Barbara East of Jamboree Secondary 4 40 Santa Barbara North of San Clemente Secondary 4 40 Santa Barbara South of San Clemente Secondary 4 40 Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR Secondary 4 40 Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR Secondary 4 40 Avocado North of San Miguel Secondary 4 40 Avocado South of San Miguel Secondary 4 40 Avocado North of Coast Highway Secondary 4 40 'According to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Circulation Element. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 16 Table 5 -2 (1 of 3) Average Daily Traffic Volumes (1000's) Roadway S e ment Average Daily Traffic (1,000's) Existing Year 2016 No Project With Project No Project With Project Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 61.4 61.5 69.1 69.2 Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 61.4 61.5 68.1 68.1 Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 38.8 38.8 43.4 43.4 Macarthur North of San Miguel 34.8 34.8 38.8 38.8 Macarthur South of San Miguel 28.6 28.6 32.4 1 32.4 Macarthur North of Coast Highway 28.7 28.7 32.5 32.5 San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 4.8 4.8 5.0 5.0 San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 17.7 17.9 20.3 20.4 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 21.9 22.0 23.7 23.7 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 13.7 13.8 14.9 15.0 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 15.7 15.8 17.2 17.3 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 21.6 21.7 22.8 22.9 San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 21.2 21.3 23.5 23.6 San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 20.6 20.6 21.3 21.3 Coast Highway West of Jamboree 60.0 60.0 71.5 71.6 Coast Highway East of Jamboree 47.0 47.0 58.3 58.3 Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 43.6 43.6 54.1 54.1 Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 35.7 35.8 45.2 45.3 Coast Highway West of Avacado 34.4 34.5 43.8 43.8 Coast Highway East of Avacado 36.3 36.4 45.0 45.1 Coast Highway West of Macarthur 36.4 36.5 41.8 45.3 Coast Highway East of Macarthur 5.7 50.3 61.7 61.8 Jamboree North of Eastbluff 25.5 43.6 52.2 52.4 Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 53.6 53.7 63.0 63.2 Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 36.0 36.0 43.0 43.1 Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 38.5 38.6 45.1 45.2 Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 34.5 34.6 41.0 41.1 Jamboree North of Coast Highway 32.0 32.1 38.6 38.7 Jamboree South of Coast Highway 12.2 12.2 12.9 12.9 Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 7.0 7.0 7.3 7.3 Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 7.7 7.7 7.9 7.9 Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 6.5 6.5 6.9 6.9 New ort CTR South of Santa Cruz 6.0 6.0 6.3 6.3 Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.8 Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 6.5 6.5 7.3 7.3 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 17 Table 5 -2 (2 of 3) Average Daily Traffic Volumes (1000's) Roadway S e ment Average Daily Traffic (1,000's) Existing Year 2016 No Project With Project No Project With Project Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 9.1 9.2 10.0 10.0 Newport CTR North of San Miguel 7.2 9.2 7.6 7.6 Newport CTR South of San Miguel 10.6 10.6 10.9 10.9 Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 8.8 8.8 1 9.1 9.1 Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 12.9 12.9 14.2 14.2 Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 14.9 14.9 16.4 16.4 Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 72.9 72.9 80.4 80.5 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 14.4 14.4 15.3 15.3 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 11.5 11.5 12.2 12.3 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 9.9 10.0 10.6 10.6 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 37.6 37.7 39.3 39.4 San Miguel West of Newport CTR 7.8 7.8 9.1 9.1 San Miguel East of Newport CTR 12.7 12.7 14.4 14.4 San Miguel West of Avacado 16.4 16.4 18.1 18.1 San Miguel East of Avacado 24.3 24.3 26.8 26.8 San Miguel West of Macarthur 22.1 22.1 25.0 25.0 San Miguel East of Macarthur 11.8 11.8 12.5 12.5 Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.7 Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 12.0 13.2 12.5 12.7 Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 11.7 11.8 12.3 12.4 Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 9.3 9.4 9.9 10.0 Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 8.9 9.0 9.5 9.5 Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 4.3 4.3 4.6 4.6 Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 14.5 14.5 16.8 16.8 Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 12.2 12.2 14.3 14.3 Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 6.8 6.8 7.9 7.9 San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 5.6 5.7 5.6 5.7 San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 5.8 5.9 5.8 5.9 Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.3 Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 12.1 12.2 12.8 12.9 Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 12.0 12.1 12.6 12.6 Santa Barbara ISouth of San Clemente 7.3 7.3 7.9 7.9 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) M Table 5 -2 (3 of 3) Average Daily Traffic Volumes (1000's) Roadway S e ment Average Daily Traffic (1,000's) Existing Year 2016 No Project With Project No Project With Project Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 6.3 6.4 6.9 6.9 Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 3.3 3.3 3.7 3.7 Avocado North of San Miguel 4.2 4.2 5.0 5.0 Avocado South of San Miguel 13.1 13.1 15.5 15.5 Avocado North of Coast Highway 9.2 1 9.2 11.0 1 11.0 Traffic volumes according to the North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis by Stantec, May 2012. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 19 Table 5 -3 (1 of 1) Hourly Traffic Flow Distribution ' Motor - Vehicle Type Daytime (7 am to 7 pm) Evening (7 pm to 10 pm) Night (10 pm to 7 am) Total % Traffic Flow Automobiles 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 97.42% Medium Trucks 84.8% 4.9% 10.3% 1.84% Heavy Trucks 86.5% 2.7% 10.8% 0.74% 1 Typical southern California vehicle mix. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 20 6.0 OFF -SITE TRANSPORTATION NOISE IMPACTS To assess the off -site noise level impacts associated with development of the proposed North Newport Center Planned Community project, noise contours were developed for the following traffic scenarios: Existing With / Without Proiect: This scenario refers to the existing present -day noise conditions, without and with construction of the proposed project. Year 2016 With / Without Proiect: This scenario refers to the background noise conditions at future Year 2016 with and without the proposed project. This corresponds to the existing plus growth plus approved projects plus cumulative project conditions without and with the NNCPC. 6.1 Traffic Noise Contours Noise contours represent the distance to noise levels of a constant value and are measured from the center of the roadway. CNEL noise contours are determined below for the 70, 65, 60, and 55 dBA noise levels. The distance from the centerline of the roadway to the CNEL contours for roadways in the proposed project's vicinity are presented in Tables 6 -1 through 6-4. The noise contours do not take into account the noise reducing effect of any existing noise barriers or topography that may affect ambient noise levels. The off -site FHWA model printouts are included in Appendix 6.1. 6.2 Existing Roadway Noise Levels Table 6 -1 shows that the unmitigated exterior noise levels are expected to range from 54.0 to 71.1 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from each roadway's centerline. Table 6 -2 presents the existing with project conditions unmitigated noise contours that are expected to remain the same and range from 54.0 to 71.1 dBA CNEL at 100 feet from the roadway centerline. Most of the off -site study area is currently developed or planned for development. 6.3 Year 2016 Roadway Noise Levels Table 6 -3 shows that for Year 2016 without project conditions the off -site traffic noise levels are estimated to range from 54.4 to 71.5 dBA CNEL. With the addition of the Project, Table 6 -4 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 21 O URBAN CROSSROADS Table 6 -1 (1 of 3) Existing Without Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Jamboree North of Eastbluff 68.8 84 180 389 837 Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 69.8 96 207 447 962 Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.0 74 159 343 738 Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 68.3 77 166 358 772 Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 67.8 72 155 333 718 Jamboree North of Coast Highway 67.5 68 147 317 682 Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.3 RW 77 167 359 Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54.5 RW RW RW 92 Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.0 RW 73 158 340 Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 62.9 RW 72 155 334 Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 61.9 RW RW 133 287 Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 61.7 RW RW 129 279 Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.5 RW RW 80 172 Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 60.9 RW RW 115 248 Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61.3 RW RW 123 264 Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.6 RW RW 109 236 Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz 60.2 RW RW 104 224 Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 59.9 RW RW 99 214 Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 60.6 RW RW 109 236 Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.0 RW 64 137 295 Newport CTR North of San Miguel 61.0 RW RW 117 252 Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.7 RW 70 152 327 Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 61.9 RW RW 134 289 Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 63.6 RW 80 173 372 Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.2 RW 88 190 410 Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 RW RW 73 158 Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 63.8 RW 83 179 386 Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.0 RW 74 160 344 Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 60.5 RW RW 108 233 Avocado North of San Miguel 57.0 RW RW RW 136 Avocado South of San Miguel 62.0 RW RW 135 291 Avocado North of Coast Highway 60.4 RW RW 107 230 Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.1 118 255 548 1,181 Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70.3 105 227 489 1,054 Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.3 105 227 489 1,054 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 22 Table 6 -1 (2 of 3) Existing Without Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.3 78 167 360 776 Macarthur North of San Miguel 67.9 72 155 335 722 Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.0 RW 136 294 633 Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.0 RW 137 295 635 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 63.8 RW 83 178 384 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 62.8 RW 71 153 330 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.1 RW 64 139 299 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 67.9 73 157 338 728 San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 59.3 RW RW 89 193 San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 64.9 RW 99 213 460 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 65.9 RW 114 246 530 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 63.8 RW 84 180 388 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.4 RW 91 197 425 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 65.8 RW 113 244 525 San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 65.7 RW 112 241 519 San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.6 RW 110 236 509 San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 RW RW 77 165 San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 58.4 RW RW 78 169 Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54.0 RW RW RW 86 Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.6 RW RW 128 276 Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.6 RW RW 127 275 Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.4 RW RW 91 197 Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 58.8 RW RW 83 179 Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.0 RW RW RW 116 San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.1 RW RW 118 255 San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.2 RW 1 76 164 353 San Miguel West of Avacado 64.3 RW 90 194 419 San Miguel East of Avacado 66.0 RW 117 253 544 San Miguel West of Macarthur 65.6 RW 110 237 511 San Miguel East of Macarthur 62.9 RW 72 156 336 Coast Highway West of Jamboree 70.2 104 224 482 1,038 Coast Highway East of Jamboree 69.2 88 190 409 882 Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 68.9 84 181 389 839 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 23 Table 6 -1 (3 of 3) Existing Without Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 68.0 73 158 341 734 Coast Highway West of Avacado 67.8 72 154 332 716 Coast Highway East of Avacado 68.1 74 160 345 742 Coast Highway West of Macarthur 68.1 74 160 345 744 Coast Highway East of Macarthur 69.5 92 198 428 921 ' "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right -of -way of the road North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 24 Table 6 -2 (1 of 3) Existing With Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Jamboree North of Eastbluff 68.9 84 181 389 839 Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 69.8 96 208 447 964 Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.0 74 159 343 738 Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 68.3 77 167 359 773 Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 67.8 72 155 334 719 Jamboree North of Coast Highway 67.5 68 147 317 684 Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.3 RW 77 167 359 Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54.5 RW RW RW 92 Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.4 RW 78 168 362 Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 62.9 RW 72 156 336 Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 61.9 RW RW 134 289 Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 61.7 RW RW 130 281 Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.5 RW RW 80 172 Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 60.9 RW RW 115 248 Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61.3 RW RW 123 264 Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.6 RW RW 109 236 Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz 60.2 RW RW 104 224 Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 59.9 RW RW 99 214 Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 60.6 RW RW 109 236 Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.1 RW 64 138 297 Newport CTR North of San Miguel 62.1 RW 64 138 297 Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.7 RW 70 152 327 Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 61.9 RW RW 134 289 Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 63.6 RW 80 173 372 Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.2 RW 88 190 410 Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 RW RW 73 158 Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 63.8 RW 83 179 386 Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.0 RW 74 160 344 Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 60.5 RW RW 108 233 Avocado North of San Miguel 57.0 RW RW RW 136 Avocado South of San Miguel 62.0 RW RW 135 291 Avocado North of Coast Highway 60.4 RW RW 107 230 Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.1 118 255 548 1,181 Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70.3 105 227 490 1,055 Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.3 105 227 490 1,055 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 25 Table 6 -2 (2 of 3) Existing With Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.3 78 167 360 776 Macarthur North of San Miguel 67.9 72 155 335 722 Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.0 RW 136 294 633 Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.0 RW 137 295 635 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 63.8 RW 83 178 384 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 62.8 RW 71 153 330 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.2 RW 65 140 301 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 67.9 73 157 338 729 San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 59.3 RW RW 89 193 San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 65.0 RW 100 215 463 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 65.9 RW 115 247 532 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 63.9 RW 84 181 390 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.4 RW 92 198 426 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 65.8 RW 113 244 527 San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 65.7 RW 112 241 520 San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.6 RW 110 236 509 San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 RW RW 78 167 San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 58.5 RW RW 79 171 Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54.0 RW RW RW 86 Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.7 RW RW 129 278 Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.6 RW RW 128 276 Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.4 RW RW 91 197 Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 58.8 RW RW 84 181 Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.0 RW RW RW 116 San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.1 RW RW 118 255 San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.2 RW 1 76 164 353 San Miguel West of Avacado 64.3 RW 90 194 419 San Miguel East of Avacado 66.0 RW 117 253 544 San Miguel West of Macarthur 65.6 RW 110 237 511 San Miguel East of Macarthur 62.9 RW 72 156 336 Coast Highway West of Jamboree 70.2 104 224 482 1,038 Coast Highway East of Jamboree 69.2 88 190 409 882 Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 68.9 84 181 389 839 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 26 Table 6 -2 (3 of 3) Existing With Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 68.0 74 158 341 735 Coast Highway West of Avacado 67.8 72 155 333 718 Coast Highway East of Avacado 68.1 74 160 345 744 Coast Highway West of Macarthur 68.1 74 161 346 745 Coast Highway East of Macarthur 69.5 92 199 428 923 ' "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right -of -way of the road North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 27 Table 6 -3 (1 of 3) 2016 Without Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Jamboree North of Eastbluff 69.6 95 204 439 946 Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 70.5 107 231 498 1,072 Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 83 179 386 831 Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 69.0 86 185 398 858 Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 68.6 81 173 374 805 Jamboree North of Coast Highway 68.3 77 167 359 773 Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.6 RW 80 173 372 Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54.5 RW RW RW 92 Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.1 RW 75 162 349 Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 63.1 RW 74 160 346 Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 62.1 RW 64 139 299 Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 62.0 RW RW 135 291 Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.8 RW RW 83 179 Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 61.1 RW RW 118 255 Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61.4 RW RW 125 269 Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.8 RW RW 114 245 Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz 60.5 RW RW 107 231 Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 60.1 RW RW 101 219 Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 61.1 RW RW 118 255 Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.5 RW 68 146 314 Newport CTR North of San Miguel 61.3 RW RW 121 262 Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.8 RW 72 154 333 Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 62.0 RW 64 137 295 Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 64.0 RW 86 184 397 Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.6 RW 94 203 437 Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 RW RW 73 158 Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 64.4 RW 92 197 425 Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.7 RW 82 177 382 Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 61.2 RW RW 119 257 Avocado North of San Miguel 57.8 RW RW 71 153 Avocado South of San Miguel 62.7 RW 70 151 326 Avocado North of Coast Highway 61.2 RW RW 120 259 Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.5 1 126 1 272 585 1,261 Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70.9 114 246 529 1,140 Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.8 113 243 524 1,129 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) Table 6 -3 (2 of 3) 2016 Without Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 84 180 388 836 Macarthur North of San Miguel 68.3 78 167 360 776 Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.6 69 148 319 688 Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.6 69 149 320 690 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 64.0 RW 86 186 400 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 63.0 RW 74 160 344 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.4 RW 67 145 313 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 68.1 75 162 348 750 San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 59.4 RW RW 92 198 San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 65.5 RW 109 234 504 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 66.2 RW 120 259 559 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 64.2 RW 88 190 410 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.8 RW 97 209 451 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 66.0 RW 117 253 544 San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 66.2 RW 120 258 555 San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.7 RW 112 241 520 San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 RW RW 77 165 San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 58.4 RW RW 78 169 Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54.4 RW RW RW 91 Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.9 RW RW 133 287 Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.8 RW RW 132 284 Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.8 RW RW 96 208 Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 59.2 RW RW 88 190 Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.5 RW RW RW 125 San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.8 RW RW 131 283 San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.8 RW 1 83 178 384 San Miguel West of Avacado 64.8 RW 96 208 447 San Miguel East of Avacado 66.5 RW 125 270 581 San Miguel West of Macarthur 66.2 RW 119 257 555 San Miguel East of Macarthur 63.1 RW 75 162 349 Coast Highway West of Jamboree 71.0 117 251 541 1,166 Coast Highway East of Jamboree 70.1 102 219 472 1,018 Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 69.8 97 209 450 968 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 29 Table 6 -3 (3 of 3) 2016 Without Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 69.0 86 185 399 859 Coast Highway West of Avacado 68.9 84 181 390 841 Coast Highway East of Avacado 69.0 86 185 398 857 Coast Highway West of Macarthur 68.7 82 176 378 815 Coast Highway East of Macarthur 70.4 106 228 491 1,057 ' "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right -of -way of the road North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 30 Table 6 -4 (1 of 3) 2016 With Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Jamboree North of Eastbluff 69.7 95 204 440 948 Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 70.5 107 231 499 1,074 Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 83 179 386 832 Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 69.0 86 185 399 859 Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 68.6 81 174 374 806 Jamboree North of Coast Highway 68.3 77 167 360 775 Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.6 RW 80 173 372 Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54.5 RW RW RW 92 Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.2 RW 76 164 353 Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 63.1 RW 75 161 347 Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 62.2 RW 65 140 301 Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 62.0 RW RW 135 291 Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.8 RW RW 83 179 Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 61.1 RW RW 118 255 Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61.4 RW RW 125 269 Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.8 RW RW 114 245 Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz 60.5 RW RW 107 231 Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 60.1 RW RW 101 219 Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 61.1 RW RW 118 255 Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.5 RW 68 146 314 Newport CTR North of San Miguel 61.3 RW RW 121 262 Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.8 RW 72 154 333 Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 62.0 RW 64 137 295 Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 64.0 RW 86 184 397 Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.6 RW 94 203 437 Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 RW RW 73 158 Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 64.4 RW 92 197 425 Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.7 RW 82 177 382 Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 61.2 RW RW 119 257 Avocado North of San Miguel 57.8 RW RW 71 153 Avocado South of San Miguel 62.7 RW 70 151 326 Avocado North of Coast Highway 61.2 RW RW 120 259 Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.5 126 272 586 1,262 Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70.9 114 246 530 1,141 Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 70.8 113 243 524 1,129 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 31 Table 6 -4 (2 of 3) 2016 With Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 84 180 388 836 Macarthur North of San Miguel 68.3 78 167 360 776 Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.6 69 148 319 688 Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.6 69 149 320 690 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 64.0 RW 86 186 400 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 63.1 RW 74 160 346 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.4 RW 67 145 313 Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 68.1 75 162 349 751 San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 59.4 RW RW 92 198 San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 65.6 RW 109 235 505 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 66.2 RW 120 259 559 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 64.2 RW 89 191 412 San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.8 RW 98 210 453 San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 66.1 RW 118 253 546 San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 66.2 RW 120 259 557 San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.7 RW 112 241 520 San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 RW RW 78 167 San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 58.5 RW RW 79 171 Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54.4 RW RW RW 91 Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.9 RW RW 134 288 Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.8 RW RW 132 284 Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.8 RW RW 96 208 Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 59.2 RW RW 88 190 Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.5 RW RW RW 125 San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.8 RW RW 131 283 San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.8 RW 83 178 384 San Miguel West of Avacado 64.8 RW 96 208 447 San Miguel East of Avacado 66.5 RW 125 270 581 San Miguel West of Macarthur 66.2 RW 119 257 555 San Miguel East of Macarthur 63.1 RW 75 162 349 Coast Highway West of Jamboree 71.0 117 252 542 1,167 Coast Highway East of Jamboree 70.1 102 219 472 1,018 Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 69.8 97 209 450 968 North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 32 Table 6 -4 (3 of 3) 2016 With Project Conditions Noise Contours Road Segment CNEL at 100 Feet dBA Distance to Contour (Feet) 70 dBA CNEL 65 dBA CNEL 60 dBA CNEL 55 dBA CNEL Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 69.0 86 185 399 860 Coast Highway West of Avacado 68.9 84 181 390 841 Coast Highway East of Avacado 69.0 86 185 398 858 Coast Highway West of Macarthur 69.0 86 185 399 860 Coast Highway East of Macarthur 70.4 106 228 491 1,058 ' "RW" = Location of the respective noise contour falls within the right -of -way of the road North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 33 indicates that the unmitigated off -site traffic noise levels will remain the same and range from 54.4 to 71.5. Project contributions are discussed in the following sections. 6.4 Existing With Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions Table 6 -5 presents a comparison of the existing conditions noise levels for with and without the addition of project traffic associated with adding 94 residential dwelling units to San Joaquin Plaza. The roadway noise increases will range from 0.0 dBA CNEL to 1.1 dBA CNEL with the development of the proposed project. 6.5 Year 2016 With Project Traffic Noise Level Contributions Table 6 -6 presents a comparison of the Year 2016 noise levels for with and without the addition of project traffic associated with adding 94 residential dwelling units to San Joaquin Plaza. The roadway noise increases will range from 0.0 dBA CNEL and 0.3 dBA CNEL, with the development of the proposed project. 6.6 Off -Site Transportation Related Project Noise Impacts Based on the significance criteria provided in Section 4.2, a new or substantial increase to the transportation- related noise impacts identified in the General Plan EIR occurs when there is a substantial increase in the ambient CNEL produced by new development impacting existing sensitive uses. According to the significance thresholds shown on Tables 6 -5 and 6 -6 (which are based on General Plan Policy N 1.8), 72 of the 73 study roadway segments within the project study area are not expected to create a potentially significant off -site transportation related noise impact. Based on the Existing conditions off -site transportation noise impact analysis, the Newport Center segment north of San Miguel is the only roadway identified with a potentially significant impact. However, the land uses neighboring this roadway segment consist primarily of commercial retail and office uses and not considered existing sensitive uses that would require additional off -site noise mitigation. As such, a significant impact for this roadway segment does not exist in for future Year 2016 condition. For all of the 73 study area roadway segments, project related noise level increases are expected to be less than 1.0 to 3.0 dBA CNEL in Year 2016, which is considered "barely perceptible." All North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 34 O URBAN CROSSROADS Table 6 -5 (1 of 3) Existing Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Significance Threshold (dBA)' Potential Significant Impact ?2 No Project With Project Project Addition Jamboree North of Eastbluff 68.8 68.9 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 69.8 69.8 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.0 68.0 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 68.3 68.3 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 67.8 67.8 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree North of Coast Highway 67.5 67.5 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.3 63.3 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54.5 54.5 0.0 3.0 No Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.0 63.4 0.4 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 62.9 62.9 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 61.9 61.9 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 61.7 61.7 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.5 58.5 0.0 2.0 No Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 60.9 60.9 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61.3 61.3 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.6 60.6 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz 60.2 60.2 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 59.9 59.9 0.0 2.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 60.6 60.6 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.0 62.1 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of San Miguel 61.0 62.1 1.1 1.0 Yes Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.7 62.7 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 61.9 61.9 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 63.6 63.6 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.2 64.2 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 58.0 0.0 2.0 No Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 63.8 63.8 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.0 63.0 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 60.5 60.5 0.0 1.0 No Avocado North of San Miguel 57.0 57.0 0.0 2.0 No Avocado South of San Miguel 62.0 62.0 0.0 1.0 No Avocado North of Coast Highway 60.4 60.4 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.1 71.1 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70.3 70.3 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 1 70.3 70.3 0.0 1.0 No North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 35 Table 6 -5 (2 of 3) Existing Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Significance Threshold (dBA)' Potential Significant Impact ?2 No Project With Project Project Addition Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.3 68.3 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of San Miguel 67.9 67.9 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.0 67.0 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.0 67.0 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 63.8 63.8 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff/Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 62.8 62.8 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.1 62.2 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 67.9 67.9 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 59.3 59.3 0.0 2.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 64.9 65.0 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 65.9 65.9 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 63.8 63.9 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.4 64.4 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 65.8 65.8 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 65.7 65.7 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.6 65.6 0.0 1.0 No San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 58.3 0.1 2.0 No San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 58.4 58.5 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54.0 54.0 0.0 3.0 No Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.6 61.7 0.0 1.0 No Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.6 61.6 0.0 1.0 No Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.4 59.4 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 58.8 58.8 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.0 56.0 0.0 2.0 No San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.1 61.1 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.2 63.2 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Avacado 64.3 64.3 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Avacado 66.0 66.0 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Macarthur 65.6 65.6 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Macarthur 62.9 62.9 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Jamboree 70.2 70.2 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Jamboree 69.2 69.2 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 68.9 68.9 0.0 1.0 No North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 36 Table 6 -5 (3 of 3) Existing Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Significance Threshold (dBA)' Potential Significant Impact ?2 No Project With Project Project Addition Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 68.0 68.0 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Avacado 67.8 67.8 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Avacado 68.1 68.1 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Macarthur 68.1 68.1 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Macarthur 69.5 69.5 0.0 1.0 No ' Significant noise impact threshold defined by the City of Newport Beach Policy N 1.8. 3 Potential noise impact for existing noise sensitive uses. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 37 Table 6 -6 (1 of 3) Year 2016 Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Significance Threshold (dBA)' Potential Significant Impact ?2 No Project With Project Project Addition Jamboree North of Eastbluff 69.6 69.7 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree Eastbluff to San Joaquin Hills 70.5 70.5 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 68.8 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree North of Santa Barbara 69.0 69.0 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Santa Barbara 68.6 68.6 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree North of Coast Highway 68.3 68.3 0.0 1.0 No Jamboree South of Coast Highway 63.6 63.6 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Joaquin Hills 54.5 54.5 0.0 3.0 No Santa Cruz Souh of San Joaquin Hills 63.1 63.2 0.1 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of San Clemente 63.1 63.1 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz South of San Clemente 62.1 62.2 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz North of Newport CTR 62.0 62.0 0.0 1.0 No Santa Cruz South of Newport CTR 58.8 58.8 0.0 2.0 No Newport CTR West of Newport CTR 61.1 61.1 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Barbara 61.4 61.4 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Barbara 60.8 60.8 0.0 1 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Cruz 60.5 60.5 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Cruz 60.1 60.1 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Santa Rosa 61.1 61.1 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Santa Rosa 62.5 62.5 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of San Miguel 61.3 1 61.3 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of San Miguel 62.8 62.8 0.0 1.0 1 No Newport CTR East of Newport CTR 62.0 62.0 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR South of Newport CTR (Circle 64.0 64.0 0.0 1.0 No Newport CTR North of Coast Highway 64.6 64.6 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of San Joaquin Hills 58.0 58.0 0.0 2.0 No Santa Rosa South of San Joaquin Hills 64.4 64.4 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa North of Newport CTR 63.7 63.7 0.0 1.0 No Santa Rosa South of Newport CTR 61.2 61.2 0.0 1.0 No Avocado North of San Miguel 57.8 57.8 0.0 1 2.0 No Avocado South of San Miguel 62.7 62.7 0.0 1.0 No Avocado North of Coast Highway 61.2 61.2 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of Bonita Canyon 71.5 71.5 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur South of Bonita Canyon 70.9 70.9 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of San Joaquin Hills 1 70.8 70.8 0.0 1.0 No North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) Table 6 -6 (2 of 3) Year 2016 Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Significance Threshold (dBA)' Potential Significant Impact ?2 No Project With Project Project Addition Macarthur South of San Joaquin Hills 68.8 68.8 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of San Miguel 68.3 68.3 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur South of San Miguel 67.6 67.6 0.0 1.0 No Macarthur North of Coast Highway 67.6 67.6 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Jamboree 64.0 64.0 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff/Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Jamboree 63.0 63.1 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn West of Bonita Canyon 62.4 62.4 0.0 1.0 No Eastbluff /Ford /Bonita Cyn East of Bonita Canyon 68.1 68.1 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Jamboree 59.4 59.4 0.0 2.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Jamboree 65.5 65.6 0.0 1 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Cruz 66.2 66.2 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Cruz 64.2 64.2 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Santa Rosa 64.8 64.8 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Santa Rosa 66.0 66.1 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills West of Macarthur 66.2 66.2 0.0 1.0 No San Joaquin Hills East of Macarthur 65.7 65.7 0.0 1.0 No San Clemente East of Santa Barbara 58.3 58.3 0.1 1 2.0 No San Clemente West of Santa Cruz 58.4 58.5 0.1 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Jamboree 54.4 54.4 0.0 3.0 No Santa Barbara East of Jamboree 61.9 61.9 0.0 1.0 No Santa Barbara North of San Clemente 61.8 1 61.8 0.0 1.0 No Santa Barbara South of San Clemente 59.8 59.8 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara West of Newport CTR 59.2 59.2 0.0 2.0 No Santa Barbara East of Newport CTR 56.5 56.5 0.0 2.0 No San Miguel West of Newport CTR 61.8 61.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Newport CTR 63.8 63.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Avacado 64.8 64.8 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel East of Avacado 66.5 66.5 0.0 1.0 No San Miguel West of Macarthur 66.2 66.2 0.0 1.0 1 No San Miguel East of Macarthur 63.1 63.1 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Jamboree 71.0 71.0 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Jamboree 70.1 70.1 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Newport CTR 69.8 69.8 0.0 1.0 No North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 39 Table 6 -6 (3 of 3) Year 2016 Off -Site Project Related Traffic Noise Impacts Roadway Segment CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA) Significance Threshold (dBA)' Potential Significant Impact ?2 No Project With Project Project Addition Coast Highway East of Newport CTR 69.0 69.0 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Avacado 68.9 68.9 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Avacado 69.0 69.0 0.0 1.0 No Coast Highway West of Macarthur 68.7 69.0 0.3 1.0 No Coast Highway East of Macarthur 70.4 70.4 0.0 1.0 No ' Significant noise impact threshold defined by the City of Newport Beach Policy N 1.8. 3 Potential noise impact for existing noise sensitive uses. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach CA (JN. :08211 -04) 40 noise level increases attributable to project- related traffic also are either below the thresholds established by General Plan Policy N 1.8, or would not impact a sensitive receptor. As such, the proposed project's contributions to off -site roadway noise increases for both existing conditions and year 2016 would not result in the exposure of persons to or result in the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan, City Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of any other agencies. Additionally, Project- related traffic would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. For General Plan buildout conditions, noise level increases attributable to project- related traffic would be less than the noise level increases presented in Table 6 -6. This is because buildout of the General Plan would result in an overall increase in background traffic volumes, which would thereby result in an increase in background noise levels as compared to year 2016 conditions. As background traffic- related noise levels increase, noise increases attributable to project traffic would decrease. Therefore, since project - related noise increases would be less than the values presented in Table 6 -6, Project - related traffic under General Plan buildout conditions would not result in the generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan, City Noise Ordinance, or applicable standards of any other agencies, nor would it result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Based on the analysis presented above, traffic associated with the proposed project would not result in any new significant effects not discussed in the General Plan EIR, nor would Project traffic result in a substantial increase in the severity of any noise impacts previously identified in the General Plan EIR. North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -04 Noise Report) 41 O URBAN CROSSROADS APPENDIX 6.1 Off -Site FHWA Traffic Noise Model Printouts North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact Analysis ■ -' URBAN City of Newport Beach, CA (JN.08211 -03 Repoddocx) Li caosBAM SCSnario: Esisfln9 6646 4.43 Pioia[1Name• NNCPC Rcad Nam.: Jandoee Job Numhec 8211 Roe(S.,ment NanM1Olistahnuff Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Oessay Oala -120 4,87 SIb Cmoader a Hal 10. SI 15) Avara9a Daily Tia?2(Add, 43.590 veM1ides As. 15 PaskHwr Pemenlaga 10% MWWm TmMs(2 Aside. 15 Peak HO.. Volume.' 4,350 veM1ides Heavy Tmnk.(3k Land) 15 Vanicle Sped: 45 mph Widest We N.../.rLane Iddishce: 76 had yahkdal I Day EvaMn9 Nghl I Deily Site Dade See WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medial 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bethel Height. 0.0 Cann Samar Type(0.WalL 1- Benny: 50 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 158% 0.74% Cashe". Be, to Same, 1.. bet Net.. $wale Eleve Onne(In/eeff Consistent Dist b Sell 1LU.o fed Antes , 2000 Samar olsrenre b obmrv.r: 0,0 Cad Momum rrvrka: 4.000 observer Hei(A.. Ped): 5o reel Hae,Tri 8,006 GradeA aahnt 90 Pad Ebvdio¢ 0.0 Cast 0.0 Cast Lane Equivalent Distance (nh tf Road EbvaNOn: 90 asst Acres : 92.54] Road Grebe: 50% Left View: -900 defense Wd,-1. 92504 Right Wins. W 0 degrees Heavy Tmcke: 92547 PH.. Model cabuletione shwa xolw Model C d culetlene Valise Type I REMF1 I Tra Fbw ..n- I FIN. Rmtl I Frans. 2errlar A. Rerm A!!en Sessai Esistln9 6646 4.43 Pioiacl Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Jandoex Job Number, 8211 Read Segment: EasWluffm San JCaquin Hills Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M96 ✓ay ONe -120 4,87 Sib Cendltloru (Hal =10, a- =1a) Avands, Daily Thal (Add 53600 veM1ides Aulas' 15 Paak Hour Percenmga' 10% MWlum Trucks(2 these. 15 Peak HO.. Volume.' 5360 veM1ides Heavy Tmcka(3k faisf: 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 mph vehkle We N.../.t Lane Disbnm.' 76 had yabkdal I Day Esurerell Neel Daly See WU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91 Mader Tunks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9ht. 0.0 Cann Samar Type (0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 158% 0.74% CanRniM DI5t In Banner 1.. bet No.. SwFe Ebvatbne an/eeff Consistent DW to observer ILU.o fed Aces, 2000 Sealer Dlslense b observer: 0,0 Cad Ulds. rrvrka: 4.000 Gdsarvar H.,01 (A.. Ped): 50 at Henry Tri 8,006 GradeA raiment 90 Pad Ebvdio¢ 0.0 Cast 90 bet Lane Equivalent Distance (in Fees Road EbvaNOrt B seal Aoros: 92 547 Road Grebe: 06% Left View: 90,0 deemaa WO- T . 92504 Right Viaw: 900 degrees Heavy Trucks 9250 shwa xolw Model C d culetlene CNEL Valise Type T REMEL I Trelhc Fbw I Oiamma I FONb Rood I Fleshed I BantrAtten I Rerm Assn Aubs; 6646 4.43 4.11 -130 187 0.090 5000 Aubs; 6346 5.34 4:11 -120 4,87 SSa Lanallicns(Ha df- l -aidn J 0.0W 0.000 9aesum Trunks: 7945 -1290 -411 -1211 -097 3,60 veM1ides 9909 9003 LAI Trueks: 7945 -1190 -411 -1211 -097 Si. Oa. 9990 9000 Heavy Tmck¢' 8425 -1676 -4.11 -120 -516 Cassenine Dial (.@ester cenreMa Did is observe: 0,000 0.003 Hass, Trucks' 84.25 -1585 411 -120 -516 Be red 0,000 0.003 WmHgefed NOho LevNa (wNAOUI Tam and be. ettenuatil 00 Cad Lane Equivalent Dhbna(in has Road ESndion: 90 bet WmHgehd NOho Leal (wHMUf Tope and bonder ettenuetlon) Left View.- -90.0 degas. Wd,- Tmuka: 92.5.4 Rghf Vrew: VenrcJeType LagPoek HCur I Los Day fnq Evwivig Las Mind I Ls, I CNEL I Fkhe Road Fissrrel I.Man Berm A. I Las Poek Hear I LM Day I Loq EVmarg Lee NIgM I Lan I CNEL Asasse 676 65.7 63:9 579 61.1 635 61 Aube' 1 616 (1 530 652 524 686 Medium Trucks: 613 We 53.5 51.9 005 590 004 506 Medium Trucks; US 80] 544 520 59,3 613 61.5 Haavy Tuts: 622 618 Sts 530 614 Sets 613 61.5 Heavy Truck.: 611 61,7 526 53.9 60.2 62.2 624 VahMe Nose: 69A 67.7 US 59.3 686 66.9. 66:4 66.8 Vehicle Neds: 703 68.6 654 We 67.1 693 68.8 CanlMlm Ddsbnn to Mehas Centaur (in TeeO 67.9 BOB Cen.Nfne Distance Be Nase Conroe Cn M(1 Canteens obbnn at m ias Canbur (in rato Cathedral Webnas Be Noes COntae(fn hal M dBA 0 c0 I Be dEA I Be deal 50dB9 I I MdEA 0cSIA I 60 tlBA I Be deal 60 tleA Ltln: 70 16B 002 Be 701 3t. Ltln: 99 193 41. 72 097 334 CNEL 84 180 369 74 637 343 CNEL Be 207 40 77 962 liae,..1 t9. dh1 Stanists Existing I all, Pined Nama: NNCPC Road Nama: J..b..e Jet Number, 8211 RmaSagment BouNdSandmi In Hllla Aubs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hissamy Data -120 4,87 SSa Lanallicns(Ha df- l -aidn J Averege Ddly TraWa(AtlU: 35.IJ00 vebldes Aube 15 Paak Hour PomsMs9a: 10% Maddest TUCke(2AakaJ,- 15 Peak HSm Vdumn' 3,60 veM1ides Heavy Trvuke(3 + Anal : 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 WWI We Naanilil anewhe 76 fed VehkKTyOe I Day Einal Wit I Deily Si. Oa. Si. Oa. Aube: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Mdem Tiunke: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter H."ad, 0.0 Beef BamarType(DWall, I Berm): Bo Heavy Tmcke: Sell 27% 118% 074% Cassenine Dial (.@ester cenreMa Did is observe: I.. red Im.0 fed Nsls. Souree Fievelbse B. fat Alass, I Me Bel Death e Is obaenner 0.0 red Wassa rmcks: a 000 obserr.r ,at (All Pod): Be red Heavy TrvAS: 8006 Grebe Aryudment B. Pad Ets.s s.: 5o Cad 00 Cad Lane Equivalent Dhbna(in has Road ESndion: 90 bet Aube: 92547 Roe.. 00% Left View.- -90.0 degas. Wd,- Tmuka: 92.5.4 Rghf Vrew: 00.. fegrem Heavy Tmds' 9250 (i1WA Ndu MoWl senuhahons (i1WA Ndu MoWl G11nu7ahons Verde Type I It. I Tay Fbw I Okfende I Fkhe Read I Fresna I. Men I Berm A. Tws e, sa %9, 201] Sronanu: Baste, 66,46 361 Pi jed NUma: NNCPC Road Nama: Jamboree Jet Numtac 8211 RwdSagmerat NoMof Banta Barbaa Aubs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey Data -120 4,87 Sea CandlEbru (Hal =f0, SoH= He AvensWOdly TraKs(AtlU: 31 vebldea As. 15 Peek HourPomsmsge: 10% Maddest Trvoka(2Aika),- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 3,850 veM1ides Heavy Trvcke 0, Asses): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 Vehide We NseaFariane Denshe.' 76 tad Vahkhly. I Day Eval Nghl Daly Si. Oa. 9003 Aube: 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Mecum TUnks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 NA SamerType(DWill,I Berm): BO Heavy Tmots: Sell 27% 108% 074% CerRenlne Dirt. Sal cenremlre Ba, b ohcervar: I.. had 1006 fad Noise SOUrw Fieaatbnopnfx) Aaoa' 2000 Barber ourence In oessi, 0.0 Cad Medium rmdrs: a 000 Deserver Hegnl(Above Pods: Be red Heavy TrvAS: 3006' Gage Agudment L. Pad Bkvatlon: 00 Cad Lane EquhalentDktma(Infre) Road Ekvaion: ..feel ANba: 92547 Roe Grebe: 00% Left View.- -90.0 degrees Maemm. 925.4 Rghl Vrew: 90.. degrees HisVTwts' 92547 (i1WA Ndu MoWl G11nu7ahons Leq NIgM Verde Type I It. I Taq Fbw I Oklenae I Fkhe Road Fissrrel I.Man Berm A. Aubs: 66,46 361 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 Aubs: 6346 390 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0.000 Abel TUnks: 7945 - 1363 -4,11 -129 1B7 9009 9003 Medium TUnks: 7945 - 1333 -4,11 -129 1.97 9009 9003 Heavy Tuka 8435 -1258 -4.11 -120 -516 0,000 0003 Heavy TUka 8435 -1229 -4.11 -120 -516 .0.000 0003 [I"maii Ndln Leese (wllnouf TYpn andheMx: aNMYdbnf UnMtlgnfed Ndln Leveb (wMOUf Tapn endhaMx aNMYetlonf VensdeType Leq Peek Mbui La, Day leq EVankg Leq NIgM LM CNEL VeMSeType Lee Penk Hbur Leq Day Leq Evening Led NIgM LM CNEL Autos; 668 US 61.1 57B 651 66.3 Aubs; 620 652 634 523 96.0 Be Madfum Tmcke: 005 590 Us 51.1 595 59.8 Mefum Tmcke: 858 59,3 US 51A 59.9 601 Heavy Tuks' 614 Sets 50.9 52.1 605 606 H., Trucks' 61.6 60.2 512 52A 60.9 MS Vel Notes; 686 66.9. 637 59.0 67.6 68.0 Vel Notes; 699 67.1 660 593 67.9 BOB Cen.Nfne Distance Be Nase Conroe Cn M(1 Cathedral Webnas Be Noes COntae(fn hal need 0tleA I 50dB9 I 55el 1 70 dE4 0dSA 60 tleA 55 tlBA Ldn: Be 145 3t. 809 Ldn: 72 155 334 720 CNEL: 74 159 343 738 CNEL: 77 169 359 in Tumesv. tW 29, m12 6.1 -1 Tumesv. tW 29, m12 Scenario: Enafing 6646 mi mallil NNCPC Road Nam.: JamSmPS -120 4,87 Job Numhec 8211 Rei Segment Scum of Seam. Bal 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oala 4.11 SIb CmtlMOns gal 10. SnN =15) Average Deily Tral(Ad!): 34.590 -hid. ALI 15 Pa.kHwr Pammenim, 10% MWWm TmMS(2 Ahhll 15 Peak Hour Volunre.' 3,450 -hid.. Heavy'oh.(3rlules): 15 Vehicle goll 45 mph Sol We I...l FarLeme Vidal 76 Sande ypa I IEVbVl Nghl I Deily Site CaU Pole WU Anne. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% fammm Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMer Height. 0.0 hM Samar Type l0.Wall, 1- Benny: 09 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% C.nRniM Dlst to Barter 100.0 het Nasa$ -me Elevatbne(In Raid Camwllne Dist an obwrv.r 1LU.o fed Amens, 2000 Benler Dimmee to obamem, go led Mecum Thyme: 4.000 observer Hal (Above Pal 501nd HearyTrvcka 8,006 Grade Adadment 90 Fed Ehvdio¢ 0.0 led 0.0 feel Lane E9ulvalent Chase- gyh t) Road Ebvemn: 90 Ima ANOS: 92.54] Road omde: 60% Left View: -No del b'htllum 1. 92504 Rghl Viaw: W 0 magmas Heavy Tmcke: 92547 Ph.. MOdsl cn eadeflons Hlwa xolw.1.1 calculation. VenidPType I REMF1 I TmT Few I Oismnw I FIN. Rmtl I Fres. I. A. I Berm A!!en SCenalio: Existln9 6646 Pmimallile• NNCPC Road Nam.: JamSOree -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Snead Segment Noth of Comet Highway 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwaY Di 4.11 Sib Condoeme (Hartle 10, SON =15) Average Deily Toll i !): 32.000 -hid.. Aulas' 15 PeakHwr Pamenmga' 10% Ul Trued, in Adam. 15 I HO.. VOlmrre.' 3,200 vehides Heavy Thade Pk Aoaesf: 15 Vehicle Snead: 45 mph yeMCre We I...l Far Lane Dismone, 76 het Sande yps I Dry Eombh9j Nlsm Defy Pole WU Sim Dam Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% fammm Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 kin Samar Type (0.Waq I Berm): 00 Hal TVcks: 66.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CenRnine Dial. Barter 100.0 het Nd.. SOUma EMVatbns (..riff Camwllne I to obsarvar If fed Amens, 2000 Sayler Dammee to oGamen, 0o fad Mammal Thyme: 4.000 Gdsarvar mi (Above two no and Hel Tnlcka 8,006 Grade Siamment 90 Fed Ehvdio¢ 0.0 feel TOpO end barNw tlfMuden) Lane E9ulvaenl Dhlel(in I Road Ebvemn. 001ae1 Auos: 92 54] Road Grade: Oo% Left View: No deal McNUmi da 92504 Right Viaw: 900 degmee Heavy Trvckm 9250 Hlwa xolw.1.1 calculation. Lag any I meien Tyme T Fl I Trait Fbw, I Olsmnea I FONh ROad I Fmcrel I oaylarAtten I Bann Afmn Ames; 6646 343 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Nummac 8211 0.000 0000 Amens ; 6646 3.10 4.11 -120 4,87 Aning,Dilly TmWs(AdO: 12.200 0.000 O.WO Maamm Tmcke: 7945 -1391 -411 -1211 lay Heavy Tonde in +Ayala): 15 9000 9003 Maamm Trmam 7945 -1414 -411 -120 lay Sim Dam goon 9000 Heavy Trucks 54.25 -1777 -4.11 -120 -516 orals. Smame Henley¢ an. 1) 0,000 am Heavy Tracks' 81 -1869 -4.11 -120 -516 Pad Emodon: 0,000 0.003 (emMgefed Nnhu Levda avoi H TOpO end barNw tlfMuden) 90.1 Admi 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left YraW.- WmMgmany Nnhu L.. hil TOpn end banter attenuation) Fell 90.0 megrem Heavy Tmd: 92547 (i1WA al Moral Calaulehoas VenaJeType Laq Perak Haur Lag any I leq Lneyag I Laq NIgM Ldn I I'men Road this. I.Man Berm A. CNEL VanaJeTypn Lam Pock Haar I Lag Day I feq Lneerig Lag Nigh Lan I CNEL Aulnc' 656 64.7 629 569 Amos; 61 66.1 Autos: 662 640 626 565 Medium Trucks: 650 659 Metllum Trucks: 603 58.8 52.5 WS 470 594 596 Medium Trucks; 600 585 52.1 506 567 512 59.0 593 Heavy TUke: 612 511 50.7 520 MA 50.3 604 Heavy Truck.: 60.8 594 50.4 516 5810 60.0 611 Vande N.: 68A 66.7 635 568' 502 67.4 75 Vehice NOSe: 68.1 513 632 565 67.1 67.5 cmmlirm Dmmnn he Han Centel (in Feel cement" oilman roHan canromr (in r r) 70 tlfl4 65 all I 60d@4 1 55 IWA TO di I 55 d8A I So dBA 1 55IWA 55 tlBA 1 TO dBA 65dBA WdSA 1 55IWA Ltln: 67 144 310 669 CNEL: Ltln: 63 137 295 359 636 CNEL: CNEL: 72 155 333 92 718 CNEL W 147 317 602 Sronado: Exial all -LW Reed Name NNCPC Rand Name: Ja doom Job Nummac 8211 Roam Segment @oum of Coast Highway Joaquin Hi6e SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hw.y Di Hvhwey Dse SMCOndaimme (HVde 10, SoH=15) Aning,Dilly TmWs(AdO: 12.200 v¢Mdea Auks: 15 Peak HUrrPomsmilim 10% Mecum Tmini(2Aimd,- 15 Peak HOm Poluma' 1,220v-11 Heavy Tonde in +Ayala): 15 mainly speed' 45 .1 vehicreI Akohl'arLane Diamme,.' 76 feel VehkmT le. I Day Evening Nlghf I Daly Sim De. Sim Dam Amme 77.5)1, 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks 64.6% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r HdpXG' 0.01e¢t BamerType(DWilatI Barmy: @0 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Comem. DI. Semm cenremrm old m obnrvd: 100.0 and 100.0 fed orals. Smame Henley¢ an. 1) Anne, 2 Wo Samar Dial m obsrrver 0.0 red Wel Timid- 4.000 obsarv.r Heghl(An.. Pod): 50 red Hwry TrvAS 8005 Gonda Aryudment o0 Pad Emodon: 6o .d Hei TrvAS 6006 Grade Adfadment 90 Lane Equhalent Dmena(in Seelig Road Elevdion: 90.1 Admi 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left YraW.- -No .eel. Wmmoa TVCka: 92.504 Fell 90.0 megrem Heavy Tmd: 92547 (i1WA al Moral Calaulehoas Hem,Twts 96608 Ve eneiType I S. I TmPm FbW I Lingthe I Finds Road I Frall Hen Me, Barra A. Sronado: Existing all -LW Reed NUme NNCPC Rand Name: Santa Or. Job Nummar 8211 RmaSegmanh Nomh of Ban Joaquin Hi6e 6646 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey Dse .0 Chime gins gal =f0, Soft= f5) Aveaha Ddly TraWc Lodo. 1,700 wal Autos: 15 Paek HwrPomenes, 10% Mecum Tyoks(2Aikd,- 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 170 vehides Heavy Thade 0, Ayala): 15 Vehcle speed' 45 .1 vehicre W. Naar/Farlane Diamme,.' 52 feet Vehldsy. I Day Evening Nght Call Sim Dam Heavy Tn2ks: Auea: 77.5)1, 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks 64.6% 49% 193% 194% @miner Height 0.01¢0 Samm,lone(0.Wall, I Berm): 60 Heavy Tmdts: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cermenlne DI. Semef I.. and lad.SOUma M.nlen.pnil cenremlre I a obnrvc: 1000 fed Amos' 2 900 Barter Deal to obsrrver 0.0 red Welum Tmcke: 4.000 Dhserver mai(An.. Pod): 59 red Hei TrvAS 6006 Grade Adfadment 90 Pad Emodon: 6o fill Wye EquhelantDkhimman1ref) Roetl geode, 90 and Arabs: 98607 Roetl Grade: go% Left Yraw.- -No aegmn Mammon thanni 96596 III 90.0 magmas Hem,Twts 96608 (i1WA NWU Moral Lleulehoas CNEL mmenelType I S. I Tom Few I Dldeme I I'men Road this. I.Man Berm A. Amos: all -LW 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 O:WO Amos: 6646 -9.65 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 O.WO Mammal Tnmks: 7945 - 1633 -4,11 -120 1L7 0 an 9003 Meamm Tnmks: 7945 IF ASS -120 /r.9T 9000 9003 Heavy Tn2ks: 8435 -2226 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 0003 Heavy Toll 8435 -3984 -439 -120 -516 0.000 0003 Unmltlgnetl Nan LeVNS (wIPOUf T.- end hnMxaMnuMen) UnMtlgned Nan LeVd.(wMOUf Tapeandlmlx nuaVal Vnnlde Type Lem Piero Le, Day in,EVemng Lem Nlgn! Len CNEL Venlde Tyne Lm Pe&r Hbc Lei Day Leg Emeng Lem Mind LM CNEL Ands; 62.1 602 5B.4 523 61.0 61.6 Amos; 532 51.3 496 435 521 527 Medium Trucks: 558 54,3 47.9 46A %.9 55.1 Medium Tracks: 470 455 39.1 37.6 460 45.3 Heavy Trucks' 567 512 462 474 55.8 55.9 H., Trucks' 47.8 MA 37.4 366 470 47.1 Vill Ndn: 639 M,2 5810 MA 62.9 633 Vill Ndn: 55.1 513 502 455 54.0 54.5 Cmmmim 04enn ro Nase Cal fin M(1 Cmmmim Dlemnn ro Noes Cal fm Al 70 tlfl4 65 all I 60d@4 1 55 IWA 1 70 tlfl4 65 WRA 50 dB4 55 tlBA Ldn: 33 72 155 331 Idn: 9 19 40 afi CNEL: 36 77 167 359 CNEL: 9 20 43 92 Tumerv. tW 29, dl 6.1 -2 Tumerv. tW 29, m12 SCnnerio: Existing 6646 -1.16 Pm/nettel e•NNCPC Road Name: Santa Graz Job Numher 8211 Road Sagm ohl Soub of Sen Joaquln Hills SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBnway ONe Sib Coadel (HW =10, a- =15) $Ib Cmtl ns(Hard =10. Sol 15) Average Deily Trento if 12.000 veM1idea A.. 15 PaakHour Pemenlsga 10% MWWm TmMS(2 Axks): 15 Peak Hour VOIonhho' 1,200 -hid.. Heavy Trunks l tend): 15 vende Speed: 45 mono vehkleI Near/Farlome 0ialance: 52 feet Vahkial I Cay Eventol Nghl I Deily Site DaU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Bander Hnlght. 0.0 kM Same, Types(0.WalL I Bernal no Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 21%. 118% 0.74% CenRniM Deal at Selmer Ind. reel feet Swma Elsvetenn (In /eeff Cuddlede Dist an Coal ICI fed ANOe, 200. Banter Diemen m Obmrvel: 0o red Medum Trvrks: 4.000 observer Hagd!(om. Pee): 5o rand HaaryTrvska 8,006 Grade AHudmene 90 Fad Senate, 0.0 feel Road Elevation: Lane Equivalent Channel (nActed Road Small 90 IeN Antes : 98607 Roetl omde: 0.0% Left View: -No degrees wallum Pucka' 99599 RgMViaw: W 0 degmes Henry Tmcks: 96605 NiWA. Modal Cakubfions CNEL Venicle Type Vafide Type I REMF1 I TmT l I OisGnce I FNIe ROatl Fmsnel I. A. I Reim A!!an Breit ro: Sell 6646 -1.16 Pm/o[1Nnme• NNCPC Road Name: Santa Cruz Job Number, 8211 Road Stomata, Name W San Clemente Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nweY ONe -120 4,87 Sib Coadel (HW =10, a- =15) Average Daily Trento if 11.700 veM1idea Aulas' 15 Paak Hour Pemecluga' 10% Medium Truske(2 tetanal 15 IHe., Volume: 1.170 -hide. Hal Tmnke(3k Axll 15 Vanlula Speed: 45 neon VehhleI N ... ol'r Lane Distance: 52I Vebkial I Cay Evaning MCI Call Pole WU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WA2% Medum Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMer Height. 0.01 Same, Type(OLVI I Bernal 00 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% Ce.m. Dial 1a Bander 109.. reel No.. sau. EMVatens DoSa ff CsmwNm Chat b Coleman, ICI fed ANDS, 20.. Bomar Olsten m Liberal Do red Uemum Trvrks: 4.000 Observer 11thlh m. Pal 5. reel Henry Trvcka 8,006 Grade indoeterent 90 Pad Senate, 0.0 reel Road Elevation: Lane Equivalent Dhfanre (in fed) Road Small 90he, ANDS: 98607 Roetl Grade: l Left View: No degrees McNUmT cke' 99595 RigMViaw: 900 dogmas Hoary Tucks.' 96606 HIWA NOIx Medal LMSUbtlws CNEL Venicle Type Vandat REMEL I Tminc Fbw I Olsmnce I Feel Rmd I Fmsrrel I Rareamthen I Reim AOan Aubs; 6646 -1.16 4,39 420 4,87 0.000 0000 Aubs; 6646 -127 4,39 -120 4,87 SNa COnnllen- (Hmd= 10,aide ) 0.000 am Madam Tiucke: 7945 -1649 -439 -1 of Ill Peak Hour Volumes 9900 9003 Madura Truaks: 7945 -1951 -439 -129 Ill VehkmTyge I Day Elaral team I Deily 99.9 9000 Henry Tmcks 1 -2235 439 -120 -516 Heavy Tmcks: Still 27% 168% 074% 11.000 am Henry Trucks' 81 - 2246 439 -120 -516 O lee., Henn (An.. Pont: 11.000 0.003 WmMgeNd Nnhn LevMa hell Imam and be. enewe stlenf oo red Pan Salvation. Lan.E9aNstenl Dlatrateoul Q Road Elevation: WmMgated Nnhn L.. haMmn Tel end t mn ll tlNnueennf Roetl.. 60% Lae, raw.- -W.o aagren Withol Total 95595 VenaJe Type Laze Peak Hour I Let Gay Ieq EVmvig Leq Night I Lon I CNEL Venicle Type Laze Heald I Lai they I Iegkefimmg Lee Nhad I Ldn I Into Anecal 617 59.6 53.0 526 III 61@ Autos' 616 59.7 57.9 519 605 61.1 Medium Trucks: 555 54.0 47.6 46.0 X5 547 Noolum Trucks: 55.4 into 47.5 459 ILIA 546 Heavy TUke: 563 51 45.8 47.1 555 55.6 Heavy Teake: 562 54.8 457 470 553 555 Vel Nase: 63.5 1 567 54o US 63.0 Vehide Nose: 63A 617 565 53.9 62.4 62.8 CanlMim Definite he NOiaa Centel (in Teel CanlMihe Di4mnn ae Nan Centel (in Tee4 M dBA 0 c I So call I SS all I Tel call 0 N I 60 JSA I WIWA 1 : 32 60 007 317 Ltln: 31 57 145 312 CNEL: 34 73 153 340 CNEL 33 72 155 334 loin" .1 te. Del deal: Existing (1 - 227 Pi jad Names: NNCPC Roca Name: Santa Cruz Job Norther 8211 Road Segment South of San Clemente Aubs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvial Di -120 4,87 SNa COnnllen- (Hmd= 10,aide ) AveneWOdly TraWs(Atll: 9.300 veMdea Autos: 15 Peek HUrrPomsmsga: 1.% McNUm Tmoks(2Aaka).- 15 Peak Hour Volumes 930 vehil H.a, Tmake p,ealns): 15 vehkle speed 45 neon Vehicre MM NaadFer.a. atememe 52 feel VehkmTyge I Day Elaral team I Deily Site De. 9003 Auras: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Hael 0.0. led BamerType(0.WalL 1- Berm): no Heavy Tmcks: Still 27% 168% 074% Canalm Dirt ro Sal Conmdlne fed to On. tog.. and into fed lanes. Stal Fienlbns Pn fat Autes, 2000 Berner Diemen to Oball, 0.0 feel Wel Tracks: x000 O lee., Henn (An.. Pont: 5. red Hnry Tral 8,006 Gmna Adjudeal 90 Pad Elevation. oo red Pan Salvation. Lan.E9aNstenl Dlatrateoul Q Road Elevation: 9o.1 Auks: 98607 Roetl.. 60% Lae, raw.- -W.o aagren Withol Total 95595 Rom, Vrew: .O.. fennel Heavy Trails 96608 Pal. Ndu Moral Cdaula0ws Pal. Ndu Moral ead aula0ws dead.Type I It. I Tm5 Fbw I Okfenne I Fklln Rnef I Fmsn& I. Men I Reim A. lot,".1De. Del Somill ExiaYng (1 - 227 Pi jed Nama: NNCPC Roca Name: Santa Cruz Job Norther 8211 Road Segment' NAM of Newyrt CTS Aubs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBh-y Ded. -120 4,87 .0 COnnal (HW =f0, Soft= f5) Average Odly ThsXc(A4. 89W veMdea Autos: 15 Peektich' smsge: 1.% McNUm Teeoks(2Aiks).- 15 Peak Hour Vokine,' 890 Vehil Heavy Trvcke 0,e add): 15 vehkle speed 45 neon Ital MM NaadFarlane Dh a me 52 fret VehkKType 1 Day Evening Nghf Daly Sit. OaM 9003 At. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Namara Tmcks 94.9% 49% 193% 194% BaMm Height 0.01 Bamer7ype(0.11alL 1- Berm): 60 Heavy Tmcks: Still 27% 168% 074% CerRenlm DiSL. eemer food and Nols.soumsrienlncousa fxl Canmdlne fed, ta. Obnrvar Into fed Aand 200. Selmer Chien to ObrernG 0.0 feel Medium Tracks: 4.000 Db6erver ,el (An.. Pont: 5. lac Hnry TNAS: 8006' Grade Anfud -rol 90 Pan Salvation. oo red LeectS dedenlDkbnceenfrel Roetl Sammons 90 tool Adem 98607 Roetl Gmne: 60% Lee, Via -Wo degren Wed. Trails: 99595 Food Vrew: 90.0 fe9nel HeavyTwts' 96608 Pal. Ndu Moral ead aula0ws CNEL Vehlde Type I It. I TmPm Fbw I Okfende I FmIa Road Fmsral Rairer Atlato Reim A. Antes : (1 - 227 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 O:WO Aubs: 6646 SAID 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 am MadIYm TUnks: 7945 -1950 -439 -129 1L7 0 an 9003 Madero TUnks: 7945 -19 79 -439 -129 /r.97 9009 9003 Heavy Trul 8435 2346 -439 -120 -516 Cl . 6003 Heavy Trul 8435 1365 -439 -120 -516 Coal 6003 UnMtlgnfetl Ndn LeVds (wMrouf T.im andheMmaMnndknf UnMtlgnfetl Ndn Levels (wMOUf Tepn endhaMm alLMWtlonf Vahoteflpe Leq Paak HOa La, Day leq EVankg Let Nigh LM CNEL ValldeType LnQ Paak HOUr Let Oey (eq Evening Led Nigh LM CNEL Autos; 666 58.7 56.9 A.9 59.5 60.1 Auks; 664 58.5 not 567 Ill 51 Motlium TUCks: 549 529 465 44,9 534 535 Metlium Trucks: 542 52.7 4&3 44.7 53.2 534 Henry Tmcks' 552 53.6 44.7 460 54.3 51.5 Henry Tmcks' 55.0 53.6 44.5 458 542 54:3 Vdidda Non: 634 00.7 575 SLID 61.4 61.9 Vill Non: 622 WC 574 523 61.2 617 Cnterlil Distance of Nase Centel Cn Ml Cnterlil lLmennro Nase Centel on Al 70 tlfl4 0tl8A I W NA I 55 tlBA 1 70 dfl4 0dBet W caBA 55 tlBA !can 27 56 124 267 !flit 26 56 121 259 CNEL 29 62 133 287 Cl 26 60 IN 279 Tumerv. uW 29, ell 6.1 -3 Tumerv. uW 29, m12 Sroame. imad g 6846 -562 me amt Namy NNCPC Rcad Name: Santa Cruz Job Nimher 8211 Road Segment, Souh M Neel CTR Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBbwey Oala -120 4,87 Saa Cmtlldons (Hard = 10. Sol 15) Avenge Daily Tra?s(Al 4.500 -hid.. Autos: 15 PeakHwr Peemia a to% Ual TmMS(2 Al 15 Peak HO.. Vital.' 430 vehides Heavy Tmnke(3k Axles): 15 vanicle spsse: 45 mpn Vehkl. W. I ... vFarLam Distance: 52led Sandie yp. I Day Evandil Night I Deily Site Carl 9000 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9042% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0 kM Banner Typo l0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Hal Tmcks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% C.nRniM Dist to Small Ifid. feel Nds. Scams gendlene(In Read Camwllne Dist to Obaervoc 100.0 fed ANDS, 2000 Sartler Distance to obmrven go feel /,(odium Tmcks: 4.W0 observer Imgdl(A.. Ped): 5o had Hemy Trvcka BW6 Grade AHudment o0 Fad Ekvaiion: 0.0 red Road Emyetim, Lane Equivalent Didenre(nActed Road Elevation: 90 Ielf Area 9f1607 Road Gade: 0.0% Left View. -9O0 deal bledlum Ten. 98598 Rghl Van. WO degrees Heavy Tmcks: 95605 Niwl Al Mods, cakulefions Del L ValuenType T RFMEL Venide Tyne I RFMEL I Tani Flew I Dennee I FONIe Road I F-eme I Fenner Agen Rerm Allen Seamem, : Exisfing 6846 -562 Piois[1 Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Nevryorl CTR Job Numem 8211 Roadsegmenf Westof Newport CTR Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway IM1a -120 4,87 SIb Cmda -me (Hard =10, a- =15) Average Daily Trial (Add 7.000 vol Auras' 15 liml.hur Pemenluga' to% McNUm Thade(2 Anse. 15 I HO.. Vrlurrre,' 700. vehides Haavy Theme, Pk Antes): 15 my. Speed: 15 mph Vehkh W. I ... vFar Lane Distance: 76 feet Sandie ypa I Dry Everenfil Night Dally Site WU 9000 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0 Ili. Banner Typo l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Hal Tmcks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.74% CenRntM DI5t in SamBC 1.. feel No.. son. gendlene an Real Camwllne DW to Obal III fed ANDS, it.. Sandal Disrenae to oGrerver: 0o fad Mangum Tmcks: 4.W0 observer Iml(A.. Ped): 5o feel Hall Trvcka 8 WB Grade Atluelment 90 Pad Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel Road Emyetim, Lane Equivalent Dhlance (in feel Road Elevation. 00 l.el All 92547 Road Greda: 00% Left View: 910 deal WhimaT rake' 92504 Right fill 900 degree Heavy Truck" 92547 shwa Al Model cmurmfi.na Del L ValuenType T RFMEL I Trelnc Fbw I Denney I FmMRoad Friend I Fenre /Aden I Rerm A9an Ans; 6846 -562 4,39 410 4,87 0.000 o0p0 Aubs; 6846 -350 4.11 -120 4,87 Sda Condldo"(HVd= 10,aidel ) o.OW 0.000 M.SUm Tmcks: 7945 -2285 -439 -1211 IL7 Peak HOUr Vdumm 9099 9000 M.SUm Trumm 7945 -2974 -411 -in IL7 VehkhTyoe I Day Evenirq NgM I Deily 9090 9000 Heavy Tmckm 8425 1881 439 -120 -516 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 108% 074% 0,000 0.003 Hmn,Theekm' 6425 1469 -4.11 -120 -516 Dbeerm,H ,at (AD.. Poe): 0,000 0.003 (NmHgefed Nnha LevMa(wNhou11h,mandbandereffleme on) 00 rata Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in feet) Road Emyetim, (NmHgehd Nnha Le. (.1 TOpn end banter eNenuetlonf Roetl.. oe% Left Via-- -W.o aagr"s Womel Till 92.504 VenirJeType Leq Peak mur I Leq Gay lnq Evwhg LM Nigh I Len I Del L I Fnge Read I Fral I. Men I Fe "Aden I Lam Peak Imer I Leg Gay I fnq EVmlirg Lee Nigh I Lan I CNF1 Al ' 573 554 6316 ITS 58.4 56.2 569 Al ' 596 57.7 1 499 55.7 66.5 592 Medium Tmcks: 510 49.5 43.1 416 45.9 501 503 Medium Tmcks; 534 519 45.5 44.0 45.2 524 527 Heavy TUka: 518 51 41.4 42.6 441 EA 511 Heavy T ink.: 543 528 43.8 450 4315 534 53.5 vande Namal 59.1 573 US 49.5 570 56:1 58.5 Vehicle Ndse: 61.5 59.7 586 519 56.3 WZ 60.9 c ntenim oiemnae he Naha Centel (in Feel 606 Ce ftdi" Distance he Noise Call on MQ candling" oiemnae te Nay. Centel (in /xQ Ce ftdi" Wrtann he Noise Call im Al MdRI Mega 1 60 dSA 1 WdB4 1 55 tlBA I MdRI Oil I WWRA I SSdB4 Ltln: 18 34 14 53 180 248 Ltln: 23 So 107 47 231 CNEL: 17 37 W ST 172 264 CNEL 25 53 115 51 248 lam .1 a9. all Seal Existing 66,46 -102 F jed Name NNCPC Road Name: Nexmd CTR Job NUmtar 8211 Send Segment &ah N Sane gal Amin SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data -120 4,87 Sda Condldo"(HVd= 10,aidel ) Aveage Odly TraWs(Add. 7.700 veMdes Amis: 15 PeeklywrPomsmaga: to% McNUm TwethiRAxha),- 15 Peak HOUr Vdumm 710 veMdes Heavy Trimly p + Axles): 15 Vehkle speed 45 mpll Vehicre MM Naanfili a" Diammen 76 feel VehkhTyoe I Day Evenirq NgM I Deily sit. Dale 9003 Aurae: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander H."ad, 0.0 fail S.amerType ill I Be-): 00 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 108% 074% Cemndi "Dirt fa Semef Gametal"I in Ob. too.o red 100.0 fed fal Skeeme rBea.DOns an faap Anna, 2WO Berner Distance to Oburvet 0.0 feel Mangum Tmcks: 4.000 Dbeerm,H ,at (AD.. Poe): 50 red H"ry Trade : BW6 Grads Adfudme,I Pad Ekvatlun: 00 rata Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in feet) Road Emyetim, 90 reel Anse: 92547 Roetl.. oe% Left Via-- -W.o aagr"s Womel Till 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: 90 .o degrem Heavy Tmets.' 92547 (i1WA al MOWI Lllnuladnns Leg fight Ve natiType I S. I TmPwll I psfende I Fnge Read I Fral I. Men I Fe "Aden lam .1 a9. all Sronario: Existing 66,46 -102 P jed NUme: NNCPC Road Name: Neal CTR Job NUmtar 8211 RwdSagment NoMof Banta Barba2 Amin SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dar. -120 4,87 .0 Ganda o" (HW =f0, SoH =15) Aveage Daily Theft (Add. 6.500 veMdes Autos 15 Peek HOUr Poms., to% McNUm Tmoka(2 Al 15 Peak HOm Vdumm 600 veMdes Heavy TNCke 0, Axles): 15 Vehkle speed 4s mpll Vehicre We lieadFarla" Diammen 76 t"t Vigfdds " I Day Evening Night Daily Sit. Dale 9003 Am. 77.5116 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Tmcks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0111 Beams pa(0 -11I 1 -Be "): 00 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 108% 074% CeMBnI "Dirt f. Bamef. CenRhe Old. a Obmrvar: I.. fed 100.0 fed Nose SOUme GYVebbespnfxp ANDS, 2WO Semen Oman. to OLtrervet 0.0 feel Weaken Tmcks: 4.000 Db6erver He,nl(AD.. I 591ad Hall Trade : SW6 Grin Admame , 90 Pan Emnedon: 00 fad Lane EquhalenlDktma(In 1eeQ Roes Ekvetim, 90 feel Al 92547 Roetl ore": 00% Left Via-- -00.0 degrees Madmen TmGS' 92504 Right Vrew: 9o.o degrees Heavy Thyal 92547 (i1WA Ndu MOWl t11nu1ahnns Leg fight VehkeType I S. I TmPWFbw I Oostende I Fkge Road Fee. I.Mam Fe "Aden Amin 66,46 -102 4,11 -120 4,87 0,M) of Amin 6846 -382 4,11 -120 4,87 0,M) 0.000 lemmm Trucks: 7945 1.32 -4,11 -129 -0gT 9009 9003 Meamm Trucks: 7945 - 2108 -4,11 -129 Ifi7 9000 9003 Heavy Trrmka: 5435 -2428 -4.11 -120 -516 (1000 0003 Heavy Tnmka: 5435 1502 -4.11 -120 -516 01 o003 WMtlgafetl Ndae Le.W (wl,Irouf TOpo andheMx: albnudbn) UnMtlgafetl Ndae Le.els (wMOUt TOp. endhanlxallMlndon) Vehinalype Leg Peek Hbui La, Day feq EVamng Leg fight Lne CNEL VenldeType L.Q-.-I Leq Oay (eq Exenorg. Led Night LM CNEL Aubs; 60.1 581 58.4 `A3 59.0 59.6 All 59.3 57A 55.7 498 582 588 Metlium Tmcks: 538. 523 45.9 "A 52.9 53.1 Umium Tmcks: 531 51.6 45.2 43.7 521 524 Heavy Tmckm' 54.7 5312 441 45A sag 53.9 H., Tmckm' 53.9 525 4315 447 [il 533 Deal Nnse: 619 003 570 US W,9 613 Vehkle Nora/ 612 594 56.3 516 00.1 606 Ce ftdi" Distance he Noise Call on MQ Ce ftdi" Wrtann he Noise Call im Al I01 1 65 dBA 1 60 d[N 1 55 tlBA 1 70 dBA 851 50d[i9 55 tlBA fdh T5 53 114 248 idin T2 47 102 220 CNEL: 26 ST 123 264 CNEL: 24 51 159 236 Tyedim uW a4 Nla 6.1 -4 Thedimna a4Nla Seismic, grill 6846 rat] Pmmel Namy NNCPC Roap Nam.: Newport CTR use NUmher 8211 Rand Segment, Sou n of Sand Crum Arms; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "'gamy Gala -120 4,87 SIb Crud ns(Hard= 10. Sol 15) Alemega Daily Traffic (1 8.100 veM1idea Auras: 15 thakHwr Pemcerecal 10% Unusual TmMS(2 Asset. 15 Peak HO.. V.I.-... 600 veM1ides Heavy'harry 3k Sierra): 15 smaken grand : 45 mph Sellcr. We I ... acaluche Dialects: 76 het yarksha pa I Day Evenng Nghl I Deily &Ten DaU 9000 Al ]].5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMel Height 0.0 hM Sal Type l0.Wal(1- Berm): 09 Hall Trucks: 86.5% 2] %. 108% 0.74% Carial idel to Berner 1..del Nds.$ -me Elsvdfor.(In hand Camwllne Dist b Decennial IWIG fed ANOe, I.I. Settler Disfonre to obmrven go feel Medium Tracks: 4.000 observer Haller. sera): 5o last HemyTmeka 8,006 Grade Adimdment o0 Pad Ehvatis, 0.0 had Road Elevation: Lane Equivalent Channel gin filled Road Eevaton: 90 new Areas : 92.54] Road Grape: 00% Left View: -900 dagmes hletllum is,. 92504 Rghl View: W 0 psgrees Henry Tmcke: 92547 Ph. isle Msnai cakmrtlsns CNEL Vati I,, I REMF1 I Thal Few I Oisdnce I FINIa ROatl F.anel I. A. I Berm A!!an Scenario: Sulking 6846 rat] faimel Name• NNCPC Roul Nam.: Newgorl CTR use Number 8211 Road Segment Noun W Sand Cruz Arms; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M96Way IMta -120 4,87 SIB CmEItloN (Hard =10, a-=1a) Arawakan Deily Tre?c(Add 5,600 veM1idea Auras' 15 leak HOUr Pemmical 10% MWlum Tinkin(2 Ax%af: 15 Peak HOU. VOlumr: 560 veM1ides Haavy Thade ftk Sierra): 15 Vrhrclr Speed: 45 mph y kle We I ... all Lane Dishrrm: 76 het yarksha pn I Day Evaning Night Deity ifTen WU 9000 Al ]].5% 12.9% 96 %9]A2% k@dWm Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Braider Height 0.0 Is. Sal Typa l0.Waq I Berm): o0 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 198% 0.74% CanRni. Dial in Barter 1.. del No.. SwF. EMVdfor. an hang Camwbrat DlM b Observer 10U6 fed ANDS, 2000 Berner Disdnre In Observer: eo lad Menpnmn Tracks: 4.0(10 Gbservar malhers. sera): S0Iee1 Heary Trucks, 8,006 Grade Sdmk kl 90 Pad Ehvatis, 0.0 had Road Elevation: Lane Equivalent Ohrac -(in Final Road Ebvffiion. 001ae1 Auras: 92 54] Road Grape: 00% Left View: 900 deghaea McNksT was 92504 Right View: in degrees Heary Trvcks 92547 Hlwa xolw Model cmurmtlo . CNEL V&Iide Type T REMEL I Trelhc Fbw I Oiamncer I Three ROSd I Finares I San Att Rrnn Arran Aubs; 6846 rat] 4.11 -120 4,87 0.000 0000 Arms; 6046 d47 4:11 -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (HVd =10, SoH =13f o.OW O.WO likedders Trucks: 7945 -2141 -411 -1211 II Peak Hmur Polmrre,' 9009 9003 M um Truck.: 7945 -21]1 -411 -1 lis 1W VahkdTyge I Day Evenng W1 I Deily 9900 9000 Henry Thick.' 81 1536 -4.11 -120 -516 Heavy Tmaks: Still 27% 108% 074% 0,000 0.003 Harry Trucks' 81 -2566 411 -120 -516 Ularme,rle ,at (AD.. Pad): 0,000 0.003 (NmHgefed NOhu LevNa(wllhmst Taper and bards, att uatldn) o0 era Lane Equivalent Dhena(in feeQ Road Elevation: WmHgehd NOhu LeveH(wHhout Toper and bonder aNmada* f Rmul Grepk 00% Left Via-- -990 dagrees N:plmm Treaty : 92.504 VenrcJeType Laq Peek flowl Lenq Gay I leq Evwivig IMNigh Ldn Ve ssiType I S. CNEL Venrc Isyki I Lam Pork rear I LM Gay I feq EVwsirg Lee All I List I (CII Arack, 590 57.1 55.3 493 498 579 585 Auer' 581 56.0 55.0 490 51.1 576 682 Medlar Trucks: 53.] 512 44.9 43.3 43.7 518 52.0 Mai lam Tracks; 524 501 44.6 43.0 45.1 515 517 Heavy Trucks : 536 522 43.1 44A 441 521 52.8 Henry Truck.: 53.3 518 428 441 462 524 525 Vaame Nose: 608 59d 559 512 516 59.8 602 Vehide game: Dt5 MA 556 S01 53.0 Bill 59.9 CWrMirW Dladnca he Han. DUnamr (in hag Cenfeeine Demo an Nase Diameter Cn M(1 careens, rddnce in Nan. cmmamr (in TxC Cenfeeine Mite an Nase Concur Cn M6 TO 111 01 1 60 dBA I Still 55 tlBA I TO dBA 01 1 60 dBA I SS dW 55 tlBA Ldn: 21 45 IT 102 203 220 Ltln: 29 43 92 126 199 275 CNEL 22 40 IN 159 224 236 CNEL 21 46 99 137 214 Nssta,.1 au 2011 Sronal Esisung I all, Reed Nama: NNCPC Reap Name: thermal CTR Job Numter 8211 Road Segment Nodh of Banta Rosa Ares: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey Dana -120 487 SM COndltloru (HVd =10, SoH =13f Average Odly Twarm(Apr): 8.50 vehldea Ames: 15 Peek HwrPomsMa 10% Medum TsmintRAaka).- 15 Peak Hmur Polmrre,' 650 veM1ides Heavy Trucks (3 +Arles): 15 Vehele speed' 45 mpg vakice W. Naar/Fariane Didarken 76 feet VahkdTyge I Day Evenng W1 I Deily Sid OaM 9003 Ames: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Meplum Trucks 64.3% 49% 193% 194% Bander H."ad, 0.01ee1 Beme,Type(OWall, I Berm): o0 Heavy Tmaks: Still 27% 108% 074% Centelm Dirt as Bemef Carerllne Dist in Obmrvd: I.. dd 100.0 fed Noer. Swrae.-Indna an. 1) Saud, I Wif Berne, Distance Is Oburvel 0.0 feel Wages Tracks: 4000 Ularme,rle ,at (AD.. Pad): 50 ISd Harry TNAs: 858 Gaapa Adjudmen[ 90 Pad Ekvenlon: o0 era Lane Equivalent Dhena(in feeQ Road Elevation: 90.1 Ades: 92547 Rmul Grepk 00% Left Via-- -990 dagrees N:plmm Treaty : 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: ad.. u.'rear Henry Tmds' 92547 F1WA al MoWI Ll wade isms LM Ve ssiType I S. I TmPw FbW I pdfenpe I Fired RSap I Fern& Hon Me, Dam A. leam.1la. she' Sronads Eliding 5,46 -382 me selince NNCPC Reap Name: Newpad CTR Job Numder 8211 Road Segment' BoYN N Gana Rosa Ares: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey Data -120 487 Sea COndltloru gal -I, Soft= f5) Average Ddly Twaim(Adr): 9.100 vehldea Am. 15 Peek HourPoms., 1056 Medny TrvCka(2Aiaa),- 15 Peak Hour Vdumr' 910 veM1ides Heavy Tucks 0, galas): 15 Venhele speed' 45 mpg versa W. NaadFarlane Dismaken.' 76 hel VehkdType I Day Everting Night Daily Sid Dad 9003 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 M1 Beme,Type(0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Heavy TVdts: Still 2.7% 108% 074% Cerenlne Dirt ro Bernal Canlais Dld, a Obmrval I..fi8d 100.0 fed Nora. sourw 6'evelbna pn fxp Auer, 2000 Barre, DUlence In otmrvel 0.0 real Medium Tracks: 4000 Observer He,nl(AD.. fall 591ad HWry TNAs: 858 Grade AdjYdmer' 90 Pad Ekvetlon: o0 end Lane EquhalenlDkena(Infee) Roetl Ekveter, .. fial Arabs: 92547 RYrn Grade: 00% Left Via-- -990 diseases Madmm TmGa' 92504 RgF1 Vrew: 90.0 degrees HeavyTwts' 92547 Pal.. MOWl tleaahws LM VereelType I S. I TmR Few I Dlelende I Flnila Road Finaake I.Mac Dorm Alen Ares: 5,46 -382 4,11 -120 487 06) O:WO Ares: 68.46 -236 4,11 -120 487 065 9000 Mrearm Tracks: 7945 -2106 -4,11 -129 1 m 9009 9003 Medium Tracks: 7945 - 1960 -4,11 -129 /r.9T 9009 9003 Heavy Truck, 8425 -2502 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 0003 Heavy True ; 8425 -2355 -4.11 -120 -516 o.OW 0003 Un'Zgt era N0 1L., W (wllhout TOpo antlhoMx aMnYdenf UnMtlgafed Ndan Levels (lateral Teton and bmdxal Oon) Vearealype Leq Perk Hour Les, Gay rag Evening Leq Nigh LM CNEL VebldeType Leq Peak Hbui Leq Gay leg Evening Led Night LM CNEL Ames; 59.3 57A 55.7 498 58.2 58.8 Aubs; 698 589 57.1 51.1 59.7 60.3 Moaum Trucks: 53.1 51.6 45.2 43.7 521 524 Metlium Trucks: 54.5 530 LI 45.1 536 538 Henry Tracks' 539 IDS 43.5 441 51 1132 Heay Tracks' 55.4 54.0 44.9 462 S45. 54.] Demands Not 612 St 563 516 60.1 606 VehkJe Noise: 626. 601 577 53.0 61.6 620 Cenfeeine Demo an Nase Diameter Cn M(1 Cenfeeine Mite an Nase Concur Cn M6 70 tlfl4 01 1 5d89 I 55 tlBA 1 70 tlfl4 Dal 60 dB4 55 tlBA Ldn: 2P 41 102 220 ins 26 58 126 275 CNEL: 24 51 159 236 CNEL: 3O 64 137 295 Tknl tW 29, m12 wa Trinity. tW 29, m12 SCenae, Existln9 6646 -338 mead Name•NNCPC Road Name: Neal CTR Job Ammaer 8211 Read Segment NanM1 W San Miguel Amem SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBeway Gala -120 4,87 SIb Commakes (Hard=10. SOl 15) Average Daily Tra ?2 (AOd, 7,200 vehidea Autos: 15 PaakHwrinmemal My, MWWm Tm,*s D Al 15 Peak Hour Volurrre, 720 vehiGes Heavy Tmnka(Sk Axle): 15 vehicle Spend: IS .0 Val We I ... /FarGarre Distance: 76 Mel yehkill I Day Eviedull Nghl I Deily SiTin DaU 9800 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 84.6% 49% 193% 194% Betsey Height. 0.0 MM Samar Tym hX11II Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 2T %. 10.8% 0.749. Caney". Dml IO Samef IC9.O Mel Ndea$ -Me FMad mm(In/eeff Candual Dist In Obanal VOL fed ANDS, 2000 Banner Distance la obeareen go fad Medium Tmcks: 4.W0 Gberver Hagdl(Ahove Pee): 5o feel HeryTrvcka 8,006 Grade Adudmmrn OO Fatl Elevation: 0.0 feel Road Elevder, Lane Equivalent DHhnre(n fill Road Elevation: 90 led ANDS: 92.547 Hoed.. 60% Left View: -900 deal Whims Tmcks 92504 I View: W 0 degree Hery Tmcks: 92547 NiwA Nola. Mani Cakulefioe I Tm5 Fbw I Okknne Venda Type I Sel I Thad, Flaw I am- I FIN. RUad I Froame I. A. I Allen Seadem, : Exiilift 6646 -338 Pigacl Name• Ni Roan Name: thermal CTR Job NUmaer 8211 Read segment snam d San Miguel Amem SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe -120 4,87 SIb CmEItlON (Hand =10, SOk= IN Average Deily Tre ?c (Add: 16600 vehiGea Autos' 15 Peak HOUr Pemillsga' 10% MWWm Trucks (2 Aylam. 15 I HO.. VOlurrre.' I,"vehil Heavy Tmnka(3k eadda: 15 Vadicle 5maed: 45 mph Val We I.../F., Lane fideral 76 Mel yehkill I Day Evening MOO Deny Site WU 9800 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BaMeIHe19M: 0.0 MM Samar Typa l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CanRniM Dml. Sal, 1.. Mel No.. som. Funaaffeand (i sal Carawllne Did In Dalai 1LU6 fed ANDS, 2000 Basler Distance M Ofamem, go lad Marcum Thdam 4.W0 Observer III(Ahove Ped): 50 had Hoary Trvaka 8,006 Grade SdIdement 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 feel Road Elevder, Lane Equivalent Channel (in /eeQ Road Elevation. L O tan, ANDS: 92547 Hoed.. Oo% Left View: WO degrees WO- TI. 92504 Right View: 900 aegreee Hoary Trvcks 91 Hlwa Nolw.1.1 cmurmflom I Tm5 Fbw I Okknne mmuna Tyne T RFMF1 I Trelhc Fbw I Demnal I FONM Read I Fmmrel I SanierAtten I Rem Amara ANDS; 6646 -338 4.11 -120 4,87 0.000 o0p0 Amem 6646 -1 I0 4.11 -120 4,87 SM COndltlom (Hand =10, SoH =13f o.OW O.WO MBmum Tmcks: 7945 -2882 -411 -1211 -097 Peak HOUr Volunre,' 9808 9000 Mayal Trunk.: 7945 -1894 -411 -1211 1W Veddil a I Day Everagal Nlghf I Deily 9888 9800 Henry Tmnkc' 8425 1457 -4.11 -120 -516 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 118% 074% 0,000 O.W3 Hoary Trucks' 6425 -22.89 -4.11 -120 -516 Observer mlgnf(An.. Fal 0,000 0.003 (NmM9eNd NOhe LevNa (wllAOnf TOpo andber/IwelfMUatldnf o0 red Lane Equivalent D..na(in king Road Elevder, UnmMgmad Mel Lial Mellhont TOpn and Mel a. mH ) Rosa Greek 00% Left Via-- -W,O Mg. Womna Tmaks: 92.5.4 VenrcJeType Laq Pek mumal Leq Day I teq EVwavrg I F1WA Nalu MOael Llldule3ons Lag MgM Vinumal ype I S. I Tm5 Fbw I Okknne idlenaTyp. Limillyalkill LM Oily I feq EVmlirg Lee Midi Lan Led MgM CNEL Aides' 598 579 %,1 500 57.0 687 59.3 Alamel 614 59.5 57.8 512 56.6 WA 610 Malum Tmcks: 535' 526 45.7 44.1 465 52f1 528 Malum Tmcks, 55.2 531 47.3 430 48:2 54.2 51 Heavy Tank.: 544 529 0.3.9 462 44.8 53.5 53.6 Heavy Time.: 566 54.6 456 468 l6.4 Si 55.3 Will N.: 616 59.9 567 520 576 IMF 61.0 Vehicle Ndse: 63.3 6115 584 01 582 62.3 111 CanlMim Dhrmnae. Nan Cdn.ur (in TeeQ 636 Connell O4.nn. Norse gadder (in I Ca llMim okMnn. Nasa Centel (in .e4 Connell Wdeal W Mines gadder fir MQ MdO 1 WJBA I WdB 0WBA I Wild I Odd I TOdBA ill WdSA 0 a Wd84 Ltln: 24 51 100 56 235 289 Ltln: 3D 88 141 75 305 CNEL 25 54 117 62 252 289 CNEL 33 70 152 80 327 leameryz9,2p1a Sronadu: Existing (i -261 mjed Norma: NNCPC Road Name: mail CTR Job Nadal 8211 Said Segment End of Newpan CTR Aubs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data -120 4,87 SM COndltlom (Hand =10, SoH =13f Average Odly TraWe(Al 8.800 VeMdea Anne: 15 Peek HUrrPomeral 10% Mecum TmcksRAxhd,- 15 Peak HOUr Volunre,' MMM4es. Heavy Today (l ill IS vehkle speed 45 .1 vehic. W. Naar/Fiel Didarram 76 Mel Veddil a I Day Everagal Nlghf I Deily Si. Oa. 9003 Auke: 77.516 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Baadermil 0.0 bad BamerType(OVhdt I -Bem): 00 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 118% 074% Cedenlm Dist M Bens Can.dlae I in Obmrvm: In. and 100.0 fed NOISeSamme. e-e .Pn fxp ANna, 2WO Bill Distance k Oball, 0.0 feel MaNUm Tmcks: 4,000 Observer mlgnf(An.. Fal 581a. HWry Timed 8006 Oman AdjhdmenL 90 And Ekval o0 red Lane Equivalent D..na(in king Road Elevder, e0 .e1 Auks: 92547 Rosa Greek 00% Left Via-- -W,O Mg. Womna Tmaks: 92.5.4 Rgbf Vrew: g0.. Mimi Heary Tmans' 92547 F1WA Nalu MOael Llldule3ons Lag MgM Vinumal ype I S. I Tm5 Fbw I Okknne I Ruld Rana I Fred I. Men I Rem A. leamed..2pla Sronadu: Exiaiing (i -261 mjed NUme NNCPC Read Name: Nevpad CTR Job Numbed: 8211 Said Segment' Scam d Weal GTR Kira Aubs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dda -120 4,87 .0 Congo- (HW =f0, Soft =15) Avenge Odly TraKs (AtlQ: 12.900 VeMdea Amem 15 Peek Hou'. age: 10% Mecum TrvCka(2Aikd,- 15 Peak Hmni Vdumn' 1,390 adill Heavy Tucks 0, Axles): IS vehkle speed 45 .1 vehia. W. NaamFantmha Dianame 76 Met VehkKType I Day Evening Mail Daily Si. Oa. 9003 Auke: 77.516 12.9% 96% 9742% Mercum Tmcks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Baader Height 0.0 M1 BamerType(Dwelt I -Bem): 00 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 108% 074% Cedealm Dirt M Bane, Genkdlne Did M Obmrvm: In. and 100.0 fed Nadeswmneadvatbn . pnfxp Auka, 2WO Bill DUlanae to Denis e, 0.0 real Maaium Tmcks: 4,000 Dbeerver Hal (An.. I 59 Md HWry Thand 6006' Gmae"imernme, 90 Pad Ekvatkn: o0 fad Lane EquhalenlDktma(In leeQ Roetl Sundial ..heel Al 92547 Rosa.. 00% Left Via-- -910 aegraea Madmm Tmnks 925.4 Rgbf Vrew: 90.. aegees Had,yTwts' 92547 F1WA Neu MoWI L1ku1e8ws Lag MgM Venle.Type I S. I TmPm Fbw I Dragemn I Fkile Road Frenel flamer Atldn Rem A. Audis: (i -261 4,11 -120 4,87 C.W) O:WO Aubs: 68.46 L.85 4,11 -120 4,87 C.W) 0.050 Leeman Tmnkc: 7945 -19 T4 -4,11 -12. 1 L 0l 9003 Mamm Tmnkc: 7945 -1.88 -4,11 -12. /r.97 9000 9003 Heavy Thal 111 1370 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 0003 Heavy Taleal III 21U -4.11 -120 -516 o.OW o003 UnMNgn.tl Nedra L.I etfwNMUI Tel and mumarditanudbnf UnMtlgn.d Nean L.Vds (wi TOpo and haMxand mtlonf Amore Type Lm Paak Hbm La, Day leg Ewnkg. Lag MgM LM CNEL VenldeType Lag Paak Hbm I Lag Oey leg EVaeng Led MgM LM CNEL Aufds; 606 &1 57.0 W,9 59.5 60.1 Aubs; 62.3 614 56.6 52fi 51.2 618 Marcum Tmcks: 594 529 465 45.0 534 537 Metlium Tmcks: WA 51 48:2 48.6 55.1 55.3 Henry Tmcks' 552 33.6 44.8 460 111 54.5 H., Tmcks' 56.9 55.5 l6.4 477 111 562 Vehkk Norse; 62.5 00.7 576 mg 61.4 61.9 Vehkk NOSe: 00.1 MA 582 54k 00.1 636 Connell O4.nn. Norse gadder (in I Connell Wdeal W Mines gadder fir MQ 70 tlfl4 0WBA I WdB4 I Odd 1 70 dfl4 0 a WdBA WtlBA Mel, Z) 56 125 289 ICs: 35 75 181 347 CNEL 29 62 134 289 CNEL: 37 80 173 372 Tumdrv. uW 29, m12 1 Tumerv.uW as, mlz Scenario: Existlng 6646 Pioiocl Name• NNCPC Foal Nam.: Nawporl CTR -130 4,87 Job NUmher 6211 Ral Scill N.. a Coast Highway Joaquin Hllle SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "'Sta y0.1a M9h✓cy IM1a SIb Cmtlltlons(Hal 10. Sol 15) Alhil Deily Trial (Al 14.900 -hid.. A.. 15 PeakHwr Peicenlsya 10% Ual Tolds(2 Axksf: 15 Peak Hour VOlurrre.' 1.49) vehides Hal'th. Pr lutes): 15 Vehicle Spsse: 45 mph Vehicle War I ... vFarGarre Distance: 76 het yadlica ps I Day EVIII Night I Deily Slfe Carl &'fe WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9L42% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Hddgl 0.0 hM Bill Type l0.Wal(1- Berm): 11.0 Heavy TVcks: 66.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% C rhaayhya D'al to Seller 1C9.0 het Fill SwW. Oevalbne (In /eeff ConMllm Dist b Dial 1LU6 fed Ali 2000 Sestet Dimah -b obever: Oo lad Mamoru Thalia: 4.50 Gdserver HegM(A.. Pad): 5o had HearyTrvcka .005 GradeA dhl 90 Fad Ehvaiion: 0.0 fild 0.0 feel Lane Equlvaleal Dlstanre(nFell Road EbvaNOn: 90 aef ANDS: 92.54] Roetl Grele: 00% Left View: -90O degrees Alletllum TCke 92504 RI Vital W 0 a,- Heavy Tmcka: 92547 Phal Nola. Model Cakuletbns HIWA Nolx Mod. CMUrl.flat. Lai Gay I Venide Type I REMF1 I Thal Fbw I Oidiama I FIN. ROatl Freshet I. A. I Rerm A!!an Staa ro: Existing 6646 fhr o Name•NNCPC Foal..: Santa Rol -130 4,87 Job NUmher 8211 Road S. rhyal Nonh of San Joaquin Hllle Al SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9h✓cy IM1a -120 4,87 S.0 -Elan (h.-10, a- =15) Average Daily Trial (Add : 3.800 vehidea Aulll 15 Peak.- rPerulatia a' 10% Ual Trucks (2 Ax %sf: 15 I HO.. V.I 380 vehides Hal TCke(3k Adel 15 V.dicl. Spas.: 45 mph VeMCre War I ... vFar Lane Disance: 52 het yadlica ps I Day Evening Nghl Dally &'fe WU Aube: Ti.5% 12.9% 9.6% 91 Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91.42% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% Barter Ha9ht. 0.0 lad Bill Typo l0.Waq I Bean): ll6 Heavy TVcks: 06.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% C rfaallha DI5t. Ballet 1.. het No.. $wF. D airatbns art Fa ff ConMllm flat to Dial IND fed ANDS, 2000 Samar Disbnre ro observer: Oo fad M.mum Thalia: 4.50 Gdserrar Heydl(A.. Pad): 50 het Hal Trvcka 8,006 Grade Atlualment 90 Fad Ehvaiion: 0.0 feel TOpo anddnrtwelfMUdpnf Lane Equivalent Dhfld. Qn fil Road EbvaNOrt L O last ANDS: 98607 Roil Gade: Op% Left View: 910 call All T cid, 98598 Right Vital 900 degrees Heavy Trucker 96608 HIWA Nolx Mod. CMUrl.flat. Lai Gay I feq EVwit, V&Iide Type T REMEL I TreIOCFbw I Oishnce I FINK Rmd Fr.mrel I tanie/Atten I R.rm All Al 6646 -022 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Nul 8211 0.000 0000 Al 6646 -6.15 4,39 -120 4,87 Avenge Ddly TraWc(AtlQ: 14.50 vehdea 0OQ 0.0W Laahm Tiucke: 7945 -1148 -411 -1211 1I vehicle speed' 9909 953 Mil Take: 7945 -2339 -439 -120 1W Aube: Ti.5% 12.9% 9.6% 91 Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% 9990 905 Heavy Tmcks 8425 21A1 -4.11 -120 -616 Addhy 20. 11.000 O.DW H- ,Thycks' 81 2l 439 -120 -616 00 ral 11.000 0.53 (InmM9eNd Nnhn LevNa (wINOUf TOpo anddnrtwelfMUdpnf Auks 98607 Roa Gtedk LO% Lail Via-- -90.O da.. (InmM9eNd Nn.. L.. hil TOpn end dnrrler alNnue" .O.. le9rem Heavy Trodk. 96608 (i1WA Nau MoWI L11nu.hws VenldeType VenicleType Laq Peek HOUr I Lai Gay I feq EVwit, LM Nigh Lift I Dlf L VenicleTypn Litill'affiti0arl Lai Giy I Ieq EVal.g Laq Nigh I Lift I CNEL Al ' 629 61.0 59.3 532 5.3 54% 61A 62A Al ' 567 53.8 5310 4i0 47.7 55.6 563 Madlum Trucks: 567 55:2 48:8 473 419 557 58.0 Lai Tmcksr 50.5' 49.0 42.6 41.1 49.5 49,7 Heavy Trial 57.5 W.1 47.1 463 f3 567 56.If Heavy Trucks: 513 499 40.9 42.1 63.0 505 506 VelrMe N.: (l 630 59.9 55.2 0.7 642 Vehicle NOS.: 58.5 WA 537 All 01 1 fill 580 CanrMim Olsen to Ctil(in fal 1 70 tlfl4 0SBA 60 dfl4 CanrMim oisbnh, ro Nan otil (in I 55 tlBA ids: 38 77 187 380 fdn: 32 89 320 I MdElI StlBA 60 dSA in SS dB4 30 Ltln: 39 32 m 332 Ltln: 15 32 E8 147 Cl 41 88 193 410 CNEL 16 34 73. 158 Tuss4.Y. kYVae. apla Sronado: E,adng (I L.34 Pi jed Nama: NNCPC Rudd Nam.: SanIa ROSa Job Nul 8211 Road Segment &,th l8an dial In Hllla AaYS: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghmy Dl. SNa COndli. -M. -Iii, -did ) Avenge Ddly TraWc(AtlQ: 14.50 vehdea Aube 15 Peekllwr Pom hbl 10% Meaum Tatks(2A.kl.- 15 Peak HOm V.I.-..' 1,450 vehil Heavy Thhadhi p, Asleep 15 vehicle speed' 45 .1 WI W. liaadF.I.h. adarial, 52 feel VehkKTyOe I Day Evartaill NgM I Deily Si. Oa. Heavy Tmcka Aube: Ti.5% 12.9% 9.6% 91 Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% SaMer Helow, 0.0 feet SamerType(DWall, 1 -Bamf: 00 Heavy Ttuoil 66.5% 27% 108% 074% C rhadlm Dial ...rust cardal I b observe: too.. did 15.0 1.1 fal soars. FB...Dnn. P. fal Addhy 20. Samar Drel m observer, 0.0 red Marpum truck.: 4.00 Utih rHe,at(AD.. Pod): 5o had Hurry Trial B0G Greco AdjudthIh Pad E.vatlon: 00 ral Lane EgaNa.nlD..nre OnheQ Rosa E.vaicn: 9o.1 Auks 98607 Roa Gtedk LO% Lail Via-- -90.O da.. lial TVUka: .8588 Rgbf Vrew: .O.. le9rem Heavy Trodk. 96608 (i1WA Nau MoWI L11nu.hws VenldeType Leq Perk HOUr Leq Gey VenldeType I R. I Tm5 Fbw I Dmad at I F.ks Road I Freest tarcerpryan Bem A. Tws4y. MCVa.. apla Sronado: Exiling (I L.34 Pi,.INama: NNCPC Road Name: Santa Rma Job Nul 8211 Rwtl Segment NoM Of Newyh, CTR AaYS: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HN_y Dla .0 COndltlom (HW =f0, lal =15) Avenge Daily TraKc(A4. 12.20 tall Al 15 Peek Hoh'.Mnge: 10% Meaum Trvcka(2ti l.- 15 Peak HOm Vduma 1,220 vehIl Heavy Tucks 0, paled: 15 ..epees' 45 .1 WI W. Naadlitl Diataria, 52 feel Vehklsy. I Day Eval Nghl Daily Si. Oa. Heavy Tmcka Aube: 7.5% 12.9% 86% 91 Medium Tmcks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% SaMer Height 0.5 Mt Slano pe(0.Wall, 1 -Sal 00 Heavy Tmoil 66.5% 27% 168% 074% CerRenlm Dfit. Bill cen.mm Did, b obrerva: I.. did 1000 hl Nllial urwfda- Van.pn Txp Audis 2 00 Sal Dail it 0b ,vsr 0.0 fill Madtum Truck.: 400 Dd4erver ,01 (AD.. Pod): 59 ref Hurry Thal 658' Grade Alfudment 90 Pad E.vatlon: 00 half Wne E9ahaenlD..nre(Inireff Roetl E.vaicn: 901..1 All 0607 Roetl.. LO% Lail Via-- -O.O dal Mae.m Tmu,a: 93593 Rghl Vrew: 90.O le9rees HeavyTwte.' 0608 (i1WA NWU MoWI Ciamlahona VenldeType Leq Perk HOUr Leq Gey Venld.Type I R. I Tmq Fbw I Dlsfende I Flalle Road FReml J.,I Bem A. AaYS: (I L.34 4,39 -120 4,87 0.00 of AaYS: 6646 -1.0 4,39 -120 4,87 0.00 O.m Mal TCke: 7945 -17M -439 -129 1 gT 0 hh 953 Mal TCke: 7945 -1633 -439 -129 Iraqi 9009 0. Heavy Tmcka 8435 -2153 -439 -120 -516 IlOW of Heavy Tmcka 8435 1226 -439 -120 -516 9.OW of UnMtlgefetl Nas. LeVNe (wlldouf Typo antlheMx: al.nYlbnf UnMtlgefed Nas. LeVe. (wMOUt Tapn endhanlx alLMYetlonf VenldeType Leq Peek HOUr La, Day leq Evening Leq Nigh LM CNEL VenldeType Leq Perk HOUr Leq Gey Leq Evening I Laq Nigh I LM CNEL All 62.5 0.8 58.9 526 61.4 62.0 All 616 59,9 5.1 52.1 60.7 61.3 Medfum Tmcks: 5.3 54% 46A 46:9 55.3 555 Medium Tmcks: 55.5 54.0 47.7 481 546 54.8 Heavy Tmcks' 57.1 65.7 467 419 III 56.4 H., Tmcks' 564 ml 45.9 472 55.5 557 Vital Nase: I 626 595 SIA f3 63.8 VehkJS Nas.: 636 61.9. 58] mk 0.6 63.0 Cen.afm O4.Ymro Nase COnrour Cn MQ Cen.afm Wleam M Nase COnrour On MQ IO LED 1 01 1 fill I 55dBA 1 70 tlfl4 0SBA 60 dfl4 55 tlBA ids: 38 77 187 380 fdn: 32 89 149 320 CNEL: 39 83 in 30 CNEL: 34 74 10 344 1.1la.ta a4N1a 6.1 -7 Tumerv. uW a4 m1a Somme. imad 9 6846 -363 Pried Namy NNCPC Read Name: Santa Reen Job Normal 8211 Rnad Segment, South Of Nexlenrt CTR Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBnwey Oala -120 4,87 SIb CondMOns (Hard=10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tool (Add, 8.000 -hid. An. 15 PeokHwrtheeaill 10% MWlum Tunics (2 Axks): 15 IHO.. Volume. 660 venides Heavy Tmnke(3k Axlns): 15 Veneta Shield: 45 .0 Val War I ... /FarLane 0hommee: 52 feet yahkiel I Day IEVbVl Nghl I Deily Site DaU 9000 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 111 Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 kM Banner Type(0.Wal(1- Berm): 86 Hal TVcks: 86.5% 2T %. 198% 0.74% Cmmmhe Del In Barter Ifid. feel Mem. Saima Elsvafbne(In Read Convention Dist to Obannom 1006 fed ANOe, 2000 Sinner Ded one to Obmrven go fad Mal Tracks: 4.W0 observer hai Ad ieva Pal 5o had Hoary Trvcka .068 90 Fad Elevation: 0.0 feel Rosa Edvdion: Lane Equivalent DHhnre(n Feel Road Elevation: 90 Ielf mull 9f1607 Roatl A. 0.0% Left View. -910 degrees Medium Pucka 99599 Rghl Viaw: W 0 degrees Heavy Tracks: 95605 Phal Al Mods, Cakubgous CALL V&rlde Type T R9,11 Vafide Type I RFMEL I TmT Flew I Oidomea I Felon Road I Fmseen I fanner Atten Rerm Aden Brenario: Existing 6846 -363 Pmial Meme• NNCPC Road Nam.: Avwado Job Nominee 8211 Reed Segment I W San Miguel Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hway NNa -120 4,87 SIb Condom. (Hard =10, a- =1a) Average Daily Tre ?c (Add 4.200 vehidea Autam' 15 Peak.- Pemenni 10% MWWm Ticar(2 Aytem. 15 I HO.. V.I— 420 vehides Heavy Tmnka(3k edied), 15 my. Spell: 40 mil Val Mid NearAF, Lane Dhoome: 36 feet yahkiel I Day EAing MOO Deny Site WU 9000 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %9TA2% Medium Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMeI He1911t 0.0 Id. Banner Type(0.Waq 1- Berm): 90 Hal TVcks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CanRni aDI5t in Barter 1...1 No.. Somme EMVafbns An/eeff C.mwllna Deal to Deal 1006 fed Amme, it.. Beeler Disrenre to OGrerom go lad Marcum Tonal 4.W0 Limerrar mylAie. Pal): 50 half Haag Thiel 8,006 Grade Arluslment 90 Pad Elevation: 0.0 reel Rosa Edvdion: Lane Equivalent Dhhnce (in Fill Road Elevation. L O tall ANOS: 96412 Roatl Greet.: Oo% Left View: 90.0 del Mmamm TAn. 95a72 Right Viaw: W 0 degrees Heavy Trucksr MA13 HIWA NOIx.1.I Calculations CALL V&rlde Type T R9,11 I Tminc Fbw I Oismnca I From Rind I Fmsrrel I leanrerAtten I Rcm Alan Awns; 6846 -363 4,39 420 4,87 0.000 9000 Aubs; 66.51 -521 4,51 -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (Hard =fe, SoH =13f o.00) 0.000 Madum Tromm 7945 -1. ad -439 -1211 Ill Peak HOm Volume' . W 9003 Momma Trunk.: 172 -2245 -451 -1 lid 1W VehkdTyOe I Day Eyerehill Nlghf I Deily 9990 9000 Heavy Tracks 8425 1462 439 -120 -516 Heavy Tracks: Still 27% 188% 074% 0,000 01 Haavy Trucks' Si 1640 451 -120 -516 ohemm, ,at (AD.. Poll: 0,000 0.003 (NmHgefel Nnh. LevNa(lenient Film and banter edenuadon) 80 rad Lan.EWhalenCialmne OnlreQ Rosa Edvdion: (NmH ged.Nnh. Le. hinlwuf TOpn end be., edition. onf Read.. 90% Left Wall -90.0 aatemis N:mmm Tiody 91 VenicleType Lazl Peek Mar I Lee, Gay Inq Evmhhg LM Nigh I Ldn I CALL I Field Roan I Fmrn& I. Men I Berm Aden I Lam Peek lour I Lail Gay I Inq EVwtirg Lee Ni9M I Lou I CNEL Amon' 592 57.3 55.6 495 mg 551 597 Autos 556 53.7 51.9 459 57.1 64.5 fill Mail Tracks: 530 51.5 45.1 436 54.5 Si 51 523 Minlum Tracks: 496 Q11 41.7 40.1 51.5 48.5 48.0 Heavy Ty l:: 538 524 43.4 44.6 558 S4A 536 53.1 HeavyT inks: W.9 495 40.4 412 528 50.0 50.2 VehMe Nose: 61.1 59.3 562 515 625 WA W.0 60.5 Vehide NOS.: 576 55.9 526 450 59.3 006 STO CenlMnw Oddna. to Niue Q.nmmr (in All mO 694 Camargue Oddnn N NOS, C011 Cn M(1 Gn1Mlm Oddna. to Nan canmmr (in r Q Camargue Wrtame f Nase Call fm TwQ Mega Well 1 6 dBA 1 WdB4 6 d89 1 I 70tlBA WJBA I WdSA I WdB4 50 dB Ltln: 22 47 101 27 217 1. Lon : 13 27 59 21 127 1m CNEL 23 50 100 29 233 135 CNEL 14 29 63. 23 136 let, .1 z.. cola Sronano: Existing 6551 -027 P je l Noma: NNCPC Road Name: A-mm Job Normal 8211 Road Segment South W San Miguel Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Done -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (Hard =fe, SoH =13f Averege Odly TaWs(AtlQ: 13.100 veMdes Autos: 15 Peak Hear PomsMaga: 10% Mecum TrucksRAaha).- 15 Peak HOm Volume' 1,310 veMdes Heavy Trial p + Adler): 15 vehkle speed' 40 mpn Vahicre We NaadF.I.ne Diummen' 36 feel VehkdTyOe I Day Eyerehill Nlghf I Deily Sid Odd 0003 Am- 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter HaDden 0.0 reel Beme,lypa i0Walt 1 -Berol 80 Heavy Tracks: Still 27% 188% 074% 0a.mM Dirt to Seiner conremlre Did N Obrarva7: I.. red 100.0 fed No1r. Somme GY.edoer an Nap Amend 2000 Sal Ddaymee to ob um er 0.0 red Madam rucks: 4.000 ohemm, ,at (AD.. Poll: 50 red Hes, Thai Bmfi Ginn Anyrdm.M'90 Pad Ekvatlon: 80 rad Lan.EWhalenCialmne OnlreQ Rosa Edvdion: 9o.1 Auka: 98412 Read.. 90% Left Wall -90.0 aatemis N:mmm Tiody 91 Right Vrew: 90.. negrem Heavy Trolls 98413 F1wa Ndre Model Lllrulexons Let, Might Ve nal Type I A. I Tm5 Flew I Dlsfende I Field Roan I Fmrn& I. Men I Berm Aden leem.1 z.. doll' Sronano: Existing 6551 -027 P jed Name NNCPC Roma Nima: Avomm Jon Normal 8211 Sued Segment' I Of Coast Highway Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Higial DMa -120 4,87 .0 Ccerna ru (Hand =f0, Soft =fall Averege Daily TaWc(Adi 9.200 veMdes Autos: 15 Peak Hear Poms., 10% Mealnn Tool (2 Aika).- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 920 MMdes Heavy Trvcke 0, Adds): 15 vehlde speed' 40 mpn Vahicre We NaadFarLane Diatimen.' 36 het Vehklsy. I Day Evening Nghl Daily Sid Odd 0003 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tracks 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 M1 Beme,lype(0.Walt 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Tucks: Still 27% 188% 074% Cernenlne Dirt to Bell cenrehe Did, a On. I.. red 100.0 feet Nee. SOUme rientbne An fxp Auld 2000 Sal Oman. In obrerver 0.0 red Madura rucks: 4.000 Dbeemer He,nl(AD.. Pall: 59 rind Heavy Trade eWfl Grade Adfudment 90 Pad Emnedon: 80 Net fans EquhalenlDkbna(Infreff Road Edvdion; ..feel Ades: 98412 Roatl.. 90% I Wall -90.0 alight- Marcum Tmmy 91 Rigel Vrew: 90.. ae9reas HmVTwts 98413 F1wa Ndse Model L1NUI.hons Let, Might mentally, I A. I Tmq Fbw I Dlsfenne I FmIa Road Fmcrel I.Man Dorm Aden Autos: 6551 -027 4,51 -120 4,87 Oo00 O:WO Autos: 6551 -160 4,51 -120 4,87 Oo00 0.000 Madam Tmcke: 1,72. -1751 ASS -129 1L7 0fel .003 Mallum Tmnks: 172 -1904 -451 -129 IL7 9000 0003 Heavy Tmeks: 8200 1146 -451 -120 -516 IlOW 9003 Heavy Tracks 8200 -2300 -451 -120 -516 o.OW 9003 UnMtlgeNtl Nden LeVde (wllnouf TOpo andheMx: aNMYdbn) WMtlgeM Ndse LeVels(wehout TOpoandbaMtir MY don) Amen Type Leq Peak Mbui Lag Day leg EVandg Let, Might LM CNEL VebldeType Leq Peek Hnur Lag Day (eq Evening Lot Night I LM I CNEL Autos; 60.5 sag mg 590 59.4 m0 Alone 590 57.1 553 493 57,9 58.5 Medium Tracks: 54.5 Si 458 45.1 53.5 538 Medium Tracks: 530 51.5 45.1 43.5 520 522 Heavy Tracks' 558 S4A 45.4 466 ILI fill Him, Tracks' Si 528 4318 45.1 634 536 VehkJO Norill 625 WA 575 53.0 61.5 62.0 Vidi Noise: 6110 59.3 56.0 51.4 mO 694 Camargue Oddnn N NOS, C011 Cn M(1 Camargue Wrtame f Nase Call fm TwQ 70 tlfl4 0 dBA 1 6 d89 1 fi tlBA 1 70 tlfl4 m dSA I 50 dB I 55 dWi ten 27 59 1. 272 lien 21 46 1m 215 CNEL 29 63 135 291 CNEL: 23 50 107 230 Tumerv.tW a., mlz it Tumerv. tW l'4 mlz SCwrorio: Still 6646 6.56 Pioiocl Name• Ni RLad Nam.: mtaMUr 0.000 Job Numhec 8211 Rel Saari: Nall W Bodies Canyon 7945 -1.. SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Oessay Oala 9000 Sib Cmsade s (110. Sol 15) Avenge Dady Tia?2(Ad, 72.900 veM1idea ALI 15 PaskHwr Pa/tnore a 10% Ual Thanks (2 knell 15 Peak Ho u/ Volume.' 7,290 -hid.. Haavy T/unka(Sr Axles): 15 Vehicle Sell 45 raps WhIshe We NearIll'is rre 1Xdahna. 76 het yalkatil a I Day Evestal fill I Deily Si MU Au(nc' Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% BannAHelght. 9.0 hM Belief Typo l0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Hal TVCks: 86.5% 21 %. 108% 0.74% C shaslne Dist to Seller Ild. het Ness SLAWS EIavMbns (In /eeff Confiders Dist In Observer I(i fed ANDS 2000 Heller Disrenre b obmrvar: 0,0 reel Avell rrvnta: 4.000 observer Hagdf(Abs. Pal 5o fast Haryrrvcka BLW6 GradeA hehanL 90 Pad Elevation: 0.0 feel 666 Lane Equlaent Dlstanre(nhand Road Elevation: 90 IeN ANOs: 92.547 Road Gress: 90% Left View: -90.0 degrees Wan,- rick°' 92504 Right View: W 0 aegees Havy Tracks: 92547 Fif Neal Modal cahubNOns I Nabs°Type I REMF1 I TWT Flew I Oiial I FIN. ROatl Fleash I. A. I Allen Aubs; 6646 6.56 4.11 -120 4,87 0.000 0,000 McSUm Trucks: 7945 -1.. -411 -1 S1 ILI 9909 9000 Heavy Tracks 64.25 -1452 -4.11 -120 -516 11.000 0.003 WmHgefed Nnhu LevMS(wllhmrf Togo and bander attenussai 6,140 Valli Heavy Thai p +Axles): 15 Vehkle ti VeniseType Lazd Pik How I Lad day teq Evaivrg Laq Nigh Lan VehkKTyOe I Day Evenirq all I Deily CNEL Au(nc' 698 679 662 all 667 69.3 deal Trucks: 636 62.1 55.7 542 all 529 Heavy Tuke: 644 630 1 5[11 63.6 637 Val N.: 717 698. 666 621 766 71.1 can.dim Daniel to NWae Dbnrou, (in Aimed Last Via -90.0 aegrea N:di -Thai 92.504 Ral Vrew: 00.0 aa9rea Heavy Tn/ds 9250 TOISO IS d8A 1 60 di I W dI I Fkge Road I Fan& Bert Me, Berm A. Ltln: 119 237 511 I1.1 70 dE4 CNEL 118 255 548 55 all 1,181 Ise,.. z9. .1l Sronado: Exi.,F I all, Pi and Nama: NNCPC Rand Nama: Maaithur -120 4,87 Joss Number 8211 RwdSagment Noll of San Joaquin Hills Madmen.. SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway DMa M9M1wey. SNa COndlSOru(Hard =10,aide ) Average Ddly T/aWc(AtlU: 61,400 sal Autos 15 Peek HU/r Pomstal 10% McNUmTessif2sleal- 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 6,140 Valli Heavy Thai p +Axles): 15 Vehkle ti 45 .1 Vahicre MM Naar/FarLane Distance 76 fat VehkKTyOe I Day Evenirq all I Deily Si. Oa. leq EV frig Ant- 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% Semar Resod, 0.0 lest BamerType(OWdl, 1 -Bell SO Heavy Tracks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cerdedine Dist. Semen I.. rW Nole. SOuWa Fi'evalbna an txp Cassel Did m observe/: Im.0 fad Awes, 2000 all Death. Is Oburver 0.0 red Mosyum rvcka: a0(10 fashrvar He,at(Abova Pod): 59 red Hal TrvAs: 8006 Grade Adfudment 99 Pad Eevation: 60 .d Lane Equivalent D..nce (in Idea Road Elevdian: 90.°1 Al : 92547 Road.. 00% Last Via -90.0 aegrea N:di -Thai 92.504 Ral Vrew: 00.0 aa9rea Heavy Tn/ds 9250 F1WA Neu Model L11eu.hwe 703 Vehice Type I It. I TmPw Few I patens° I Fkge Road I Fan& Bert Me, Berm A. Aubs: [sail 583 4,11 -120 4,87 -120 4,87 0600 O:WO Madmen.. 7945 - 1131 -4,11 -129 1ST M9M1wey. 9009 9003 Heavy Thi 8435 -1526 -4.11 -120 -516 10% .0000 6003 UnVZa,Md Nola L.AN (wNMut Tope antl Is.ahenYaral Heavy Thada(3k still 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 raps Veryk.Le We ValideType La Peek HOW I La, day leq EV frig Lee light LM Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 19396 194% CNEL Aubs; 69,1 672 Sal 594 109.0 het III 686 Mal Tracks: 638 61.3 55.0 53A Momum rnvnta: 4.000 81,9 821 Heavy Tuks' 637 62.3 632 54.5 Lane Equlaent Distance (in Feel 638 62.9 Vehkle NSa: 709 all 660 61.3 Msia -T rake' 92504 69.9 703 Can.rliee Daniel he N Wee Conrour an Al Hlwa xolw.1.1 cmudexons 708 Valise Type T REMEL I TWlac Fbw I Olshnce I then Reed I FWmrel I BenlarAtten I Lan, Aftan 688 70 dE4 0all W111 55 all Ids: 99 212 956 Metal 962 60OSA CNEL: 105 227 469 Ldn: 1054 Teel tW 29, di 1 S Breit ro: Existlng 6646 Pioiaeltil Ni • Roan Name: M.-.L, -120 4,87 Joh Nunds-8211 Read Segment: Sn. W Bonita Canyon All Trueks: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9M1wey. -1211 ILI a- CmEltloN(Rend° 10, a- I: a) Ava/aga lately Tre?c(Add 61.400 veM1idea Auras' 15 Peak. -, Percenlaga' 10% MWWm T/ucks(2 itese. 15 Peak HO.. V.I— 6,140 venues Heavy Thada(3k still 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 raps Veryk.Le We N ... III, Lane Disearri 76 het yalkatil a I Cay Everenjil Nlshf Deity wile WU Vanicle Type Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Banner Height. 0.0 Jan. Belief Typo l0.Waq I Berm): (lo Hal Tucks: 86.5% 27 %. 118% 0.74% C hasllM Dial an Banner 109.0 het No.. Swale EMVMbne an/eeff Containers Dist b Odell IWL fed Asst, 2099 Sender Led see b observer: 0,0 red Momum rnvnta: 4.000 Gdsarvar hal hies. Pal 50 reel Hagry Trvcka 8606 Gnede Atlualment 90 Pad Elevation: 0.0 reel 53A Lane Equlaent Distance (in Feel Road Elevation. 901set Antes 92547 Road Grease: 06% Left View: 90,0 deal Msia -T rake' 92504 Right View: 990 a.,- Heavy Tracker 9250 Hlwa xolw.1.1 cmudexons 708 Valise Type T REMEL I TWlac Fbw I Olshnce I then Reed I FWmrel I BenlarAtten I Lan, Aftan Aubs; 6646 5.93 4.11 -120 4,87 Joss Number 8211 6.000 O.WO All Trueks: 7945 -1131 -411 -1211 ILI Averaga Ddly T/aKc(AtlU: 9999 9000 Heavy ➢asks' 6425 -1526 -4.11 -120 -516 Heavy Trucks 0, Axles): 15 11.000 0.003 W mMlind. Noise L.. hill Tope end be//M/ atten.." 76 het VehkKType I Day Evenirq Nghf Dsly ai.I Led Asi Vanicle Type I Lee Peak Hill I Lad Ley I feq L/sh ra Lee Nigh I Lan I.. find CNEL Auloc' 69,1 672 65.4 594 Moaium rvcka: a0(10 56.0 686 Mellum Trucks: US 813 55.0 53A 90 reel 61,9 62.1 Heavy Thistle: 63.7 603 53.2 11 HeavyTwts 92547 62.8 62.9 Vel Narse: 708 Si 660 617 688 763 cnredim Dan.nre ro Iroiaa cbnrour (in.e4 60089 55 tlBA Ltln: 72 156 336 Metal 5212A 60OSA CNEL: Waal 167 360 Ldn: 93 212 456 fitt 962 CNEL 105 227 468 1,054 Sronadu: Stea g 6646 384 Pi jest NUma: NNCPC Road Nama: Maaithur Joss Number 8211 RmaSagreart SouN W San Joaquin Hills Madmen.. SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey sale .0 COndlbb se (Hal =f0, SlI :la) Averaga Ddly T/aKc(AtlU: 38.&00 tal Autos: 15 Poet Hou/Pomssage: 10% McddmTrvoka(2Aiks),- 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 3,880 vahli Heavy Trucks 0, Axles): 15 Vehkle ti 45 raps Vahicre MM Na//Farlane Deemnse 76 het VehkKType I Day Evenirq Nghf Dsly ai.I Led Asi An. 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Tucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% BaMe/Helght 0.0 Mt BamerType(0.Wel, 1- Berm): BO Heavy TWoks: fail 27% 108% 074% Ceraenine Dirt Is Sell I.. find NaIS.See-ai'eselbnea fx) cenrem/re Did, b obrerva/: IW.G hM AWOS 2000 Belief Diana. In oduarver, 0.0 red Moaium rvcka: a0(10 sbserve/He hissers. Hada : 59 red Had, Till eW5 Grade Agudment 90 Pad Ekndes. 60 .el Lane S9uhalentDkrance(Inlre) Roetl Ekvethr, 90 reel AWbs: 9250 Road Grade: 00% Lest Via -90.0 aearea Madmen TVGa' 92504 Rghf Vrew: 90.0 al,l HeavyTwts 92547 FIWA NWU MoWI L11nu7ahwe Cen.rliee Wdenn he NWae COnrour an MO Vence Type I It. I TmPWFew I Lisfande I Fkife Read FWs/lal Be/ce/Atlan Be/m A. AWOs: 6646 384 4,11 -120 4,87 0600 O.WO Madmen.. 7945 - 1330 -4,11 -127 ILT 9009 9003 Heavy Thi all -1726 -4.11 -120 -516 6.000 6000 UeeZg tad Nola LeVets(sal Topo and bellx aNMYatlonf Valise Type Lee Peak Hbun I Laq day La Evening Led Asi LM CNEL Aubs; 67.1 652 634 574 95.0 696 Matlium Tracks: 608 593 53.0 51A 59.9 601 Havy Trucks' 61Y 60.3 512 52.5 90.8 all VehkJa NSa: 699 57.2 660 593 67.9 all Cen.rliee Wdenn he NWae COnrour an MO IO dB4 0all 60089 55 tlBA Ltln: 72 156 336 723 CNEL: 78 167 360 776 Tueseev.tW a9, m1z Scenario: Existlng 6646 346 Pmiocl Name• Ni So Nam.: MaaMUr Joe Numder 8211 Job NUmnec 8211 Sol Segment, I of San Miguel Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS H+BM1Vey Oala -120 4,87 SIb CmtlMOns g ard=10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tra ?c (Adn, 34.600 veM1ides As. 15 PaakHwrinarme iter 10% MWWm Trades (2 Ahadl 15 I HO.. VOlmrre. 3,480 veM1ides Heavy Tmnke(3k A kkl: 15 Von. Sol or nal Vankle We N ... /Farlam Distance: 76 Mel yehreal I Day IEVbVl Mel I Deily Site Dal four WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: fill 49% 193% 194% Barter Haight. 0.0 RM Samar Typa l0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% Canaan, Dlat to Seller 100.0 .1 Ndsa$ -Me E+evagons(In Reef) Cerebral Dist to obwmer, III fed ANOS, I.S. Beeler Dimence m obamom 0o task Marcum Trucks: 4.000 observer Hal (Above Par): 5o feel HearyTrvcka 8,006 90 Fad Ekvaiion, 0.0 task 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent Dlslnre(nfill Road Emerson: 90 ana Areas 92.54] noel .. 60% Left View: -Mo deal Metllum Tracks 92504 I View: W 0 degrees Hoary Tmcke: 92547 Niwa Al MOdel cakantions sMWANOIae MO del c VafidPType I Sel I Three Fbw I am- I FINl Rmtl Fresrrel I. A. I Ream A!!en Screence : Existlng 6646 346 Pmiocl Mearl Ni Road Nam.: MaaMUr Joe Numder 8211 Job Numbec 8211 Round Segment, Souss ad San Miguel Aubs; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe -120 4,87 SIB CmEItloN (Husk =10, SON =It) Average Deily Traffic : 26600 veM1ides Autos' 15 Paa11mak Percenlral 10% MWlum Trucks (2 Akank. 15 I HO.. VOlmrre.' 2,860 veM1ides Hall Tmcke (3k Axles): 15 fork .So.Pe: 45 mph VOrykr.ONY N.../Far Lane Dishnm.' 76 Mel yehreal I Dry Evaning Nlaht Deity four WU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% Medum Trucks: fill 4.9% 193% 194% BdMer Height. 0.0 kM Samar Type orfil ISuchn: 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% Censer. Dlat in Barter 109...1 No.. SOUFe Elvatbns D. Reef) Cerebral Dar to obsarv.r 10I fed Anne, 20.0 Saner On., are M observer: go tad Marcum Trucks: 4.000 ..server ral (Above Par): no at Haary Trucker 8,006 Grade ArWment 90 Fad Ekvaiion, 0.0 feel Rosa founder, Lane Equivalent Dllnre (in frell Road Ebvral 901.a, Auos: 92 54] Ro.d.. Oo% Left View: No deal McNUmT cke 92504 Right View: 990 aegreee HimWTrvcke 9250 sMWANOIae MO del c CNEL 9glt+Ons V&IIdPType REMF1 I Trelnc Fbw I Olslence I FONT ROOd I Fmsrrel I Rer/le /Atten I Renn Atln Aubs; 6646 346 4.11 -130 4,87 Joe Numder 8211 0.000 0000 Aubs; 6646 261 4.11 -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (HVd =f0, SON =15) 0.000 am Maaum Trucks: 7945 -1377 -411 -1211 Ill 2,870 veM1ldea 9909 9003 Mal Trucks: 7945 -14. -411 -1211 1W Sisk Oat 99.9 9000 He., Trucks 8425 -1773 -4.11 -120 -616 Cdaenlm Oirt ro Sal 0,000 am Hoary Trucks' 84.25 -1658 -4.11 -120 -516 Madam Tracker 4.000 0,000 0.003 (NmMBefed Nnln LevMa(wool Mom and berrlw alfrmatldnf Pad gavel Go task Lane Equraftet Central (in fal Rosa founder, UnmMgafed Nnln Levnl(wMmrf TOpn and barrier aMl dHOnf Roetl.. 00% Left V,aw,- -Mo degrees N:dcon Track 92.504 VenrcJeType Laq Pmktaur Lal.ay I Ieq EVwilg I Laq NIgM Lan VenldeType I S. I CNEL VenrcJ 1 Lag Pock mar I req.ay I feq Evml+rg Lee real I Ldn I CNEL Au(nc' Sob 64.7 629 568 62.1 65.5 66.1 Accur 658 639 621 560 60.8 of 1 Metllum Trucks: BOA No 52.5 51.0 59.5 560 594 59.6 Metllum Trucks; 59.5' Mo 51.6 50.1 51 50.8 58.0 Heavy TUke: 612 598 50:8 520 604 Mo 604 60.5 Heavy Truck.: 60.4 56.8 49.8 511 MIT 59.5 596 VahMa Nader 68A 1 636 53g 676 SSA. 67.4 67.9 Vehida Ndse: 676 65.9 627 506 626 61 111 c.Mwlins natural ho Nan Cartel (in hang 00.3 63.8 CBnlrfim 011nn M Nase Cartel On Mg c.Mwlin,(lien ba Nan Cartel (in Reel Cenlrfim Mel M Nase Cartel To Mg TO dBA 1 0tl8A I 60 dBA 1 55 dB4 fi dBA I 55 tlBA TO dBA 0dEA I 60 JSA 1 55 dB4 50 tlBA Lan: 67 145 312 59 673 275 Ltln: 59 127 Zi4 33 599 1. CNEL: 72 155 335 63 722 2% CNEL 63 136 294 38 633 leay..1 ID. re" deal: ExieBng 6SA6 2.63 mjed Nance NNCPC Read Name: Macairaur Joe Numder 8211 Joe Number 8211 Road Segment ofonh of Carat Hl9M1way AWOs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mail Dal -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (HVd =f0, SON =15) Average Dilly Tr Xic(Ao. 28.700 veM1ldea Autos 15 Peek HUarPomsMnga: to% Mecum Trucks(2Aala),- 15 Peakhkar Vclurem 2,870 veM1ldea Heavy Trvcke(l Awls): 15 venue speed 45.1 Vahicre MM Nearccar ne asseaark 76 feel VehklTyOe I Day Even+rq All I Deily Sisk Oat Sisk Oat Arms: TTIVs 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium TUCks 64.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Heal 0.0 beet Basim1f,e(OWall, I Berm): Bo Heavy Trucks: Sol 27% 108% 074% Cdaenlm Oirt ro Sal Ion. lW Nol S verse Fieaelbns Pn Mel Mora re Dist to observer: 1010 fall Amara I Mo Berner Drum. Is (Marcher 0.0 fel Madam Tracker 4.000 obeerv.r mcra(An.. Pod): 50 red Henry Trucks: 8008 GRda Adjudmen[o0 Pad gavel Go task Lane Equraftet Central (in fal Rosa founder, 90 reel Aube: 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left V,aw,- -Mo degrees N:dcon Track 92.504 I Vrew: go.. ae9rem Heary Trails 9250 (i1WA Ndae NOdel L11cul3ws (i1WA NWU Mtdel Lllcele0tns VenldeType I S. I TmPw Flw I .lines I Finite Road I Formed I. Men I Rerm A. Thasam May la. 201] Sronario: Existing 6SA6 2.63 ma ml Name: Ni Road Name: Eardbuff FortllBOnia Cyn Joe Numder 8211 Road Segment' Weslof Jambcree 0:000 AWOs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBhwey Defer -120 4,87 .0 COndltloru gland =f0, SON =15) Ainni DdlY Talk Ke(A4. 14.400 veblidea As. 15 Paekkawkeek., Mal Mecum TrvCks(2Ails).- 15 Peakhkar Vdumn' 1,440 veM1ldea Heavy Thick, 0, awls): 15 Venue speed 45.1 Vahicre W. tear/Farlane arearce.' 52 Mal Verkill I Day Everang Mi Ding Sisk Oat 9003 Am. TTIVs 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 34.3% 49% 193% 194% Baader HelpllL 0.0 lbt SamerType oroll, I Berm): go Heavy TVCks: Sol 27% 108% 074% Careens. Dirt ro Sual I.. rftd Nose SOU glawaMbnsfln Reeg cenreas fed, to obcerver: 1000 fast Aloe' 2000 Barnet Oman. In obsemer 0.0 red Madam Tracker 4.000 Dbeerver ,or (An.. Pad): 59 red Harry Trucks: 6g06 Grade Adfudment 90 Pad Eternal go tad fate EquhalentDllna(InfreQ Roetl Elvetion, J. reel All 0607 Roetl.. 00% Left V,am- -Mo aegre m Madmen T.a: a3593 Roof Vrew: 9o.. degrees Heary Trots 0608 (i1WA NWU Mtdel Lllcele0tns Las Venda Type I S. I TmPWFlw I Olfende I Flnife Road FRS. I.MaM Renn A. Rubs: 6SA6 2.63 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 AWOs: 6646 -0037 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 am Madam Tn. 7945 - 1491 -4,11 -129 1 L 0 an 9003 Medum Trucks: 7945 -1731 AS9 -129 /r.9T 9009 9003 Heavy Trucks 111 -1657 -4.11 -120 -516 0,000 0003 Heavy Trucks 111 2156 -439 -120 -516 0.000 0003 UnMtlgnitl NaSn LenW (wMrouf TOpn andharneraCMYMlnf UnMtlgnld NaSn Lenel (wMOUf TOpn endhaMx al(anuetltnf VatldPType Leq Paak Hour La, Try Ieq LAmng LW Algol Las CNEL VandeType Leq Punk HOUr Last Try Leq EVaning Lad NIgM Lae CNEL Areas ; 658 L38 62.1 561 Ed 65.3 AWOS; 62.5 60.8 58.6 526 1 620 Mel Tracks: 59.5 560 51.7 .50.1 58.5 58.8 Mel Trucks: MIS 51 al 468 55.3 55.5 He., Trucks' 604 Mo 49.9 512 59.5 596 Him, Trucks' 57.1 MIT 46.6 479 562 564 Vill Noral 676 SSA. 627 58.o 66.6 67.0 Vill Nase: 643 626 594 546 00.3 63.8 CBnlrfim 011nn M Nase Cartel On Mg Cenlrfim Mel M Nase Cartel To Mg TO LEA 0tlBA I fi dBA I 55 tlBA 1 70 dBA Dal 50 tlBA 55 tlBA I 59 127 275 592 ion: 33 77 1. 353 CNEL: 63 137 2% 635 CNEL: 38 83 178 384 Tuesday. Mw 29, m12 6.1 -10 Thassim Mw 29, m12 Bedell Beal 6646 -1M Pmiocl Nelms• NNCPC Road Name: Ea5161ufflFor Aimeia Cyn Job Nmed, 8211 Reems.'menl: ImmAideedee SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Ohady Oaln Avaraga Daily Tre?c(Adf Sib Cmtllgons (Hard = 10. Sol 15) Avarnga Daily Tia?s it 11.500 vehicles Auras: 15 PaakHwr Pemmemle, 10% MWWm Teethe (2 Axksf: 15 Peak HO.. VOlmrre.' 1,150 -hid.. Heavy Tmnka(3k Axlnsf: 15 that. Speed: 45 mph Val W. Near/FarLems Dimand. 52 het Vandil I Day Evadmil Nghl I Daily SH. Dad, Bartel Height. 0.0 lee, Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Madmen Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 led Samar Typa hXe lL 1- Bermf: 09 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 21 %. 198% 0.74% (tanRrIiM DI5L 10 Sal 109...1 Ndsa SOUma ElsvMbne (In .1) Conredlrre Dist m Oddl IWOfe0 ANOe, 20.0 Beeler Disree -to odmrele, 90 red Usel Trucks: 4.000 Gdserver Hagdl(Alme. Pee): 5o had HearyTrvcka 8,006 Grade Aeldee e99 Pad Ekvdiom 0.0 reel Road Elevation. Lane Ell thedeat DHtanre(n h t) Road Elevation: 90 met Ades: 98607 Roe, Grade: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degrees hletllum Pucka WON Rghl Viaw: Al 0 degrees Heary Tmcks: 95606 Ph.. Mods, CahuleNOns I Tmlec Fbw I Oisanea I Finite Rend I Femd I RerlierAtten I Reim Aftan Vafide Type I REMF1 I Thal Few I Dial I F.. Roatl Fee. terrier A. Reim Allen SCenslio: Existing 6646 -1M Pmio[1 Namy NNCPC Read Name: EadelufflFor Alearia Cr Job Numhec 8211 Ral S.,yal West of BOnia Canyon 9000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe 4,39 Sib Cmdam. (Hard =10, SON =15) Avaraga Daily Tre?c(Adf 8900 vehicles Auras' 15 Peak HOUr Pemenluga,' 10% MWWm Trueks(2 Ayleal 15 Peak HO.. Volume: 990 -hide. Heavy Theade Pk Axles): 15 Vehicle 5pesd: 45 mph Vah la W. NeadFaf Lane Disearml 52 het yaddil I Dry Ehmqj MCI Dslty Bid WU LOU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Madmen Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 lee, Samar Typa A0.Waq 1- Benny: 90 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27%. 198% 0.74% Cemallid Did, la Seder 109...1 Nd.. Somme EMVMbne (.heat) CarrMMe DW to Deserver 1OOL fed ANee, 2000 Bsmer Bid ma, m observer: 00 red Medum Thad:s: 4.000 Gdservar Hal Alma. Pal S. reel Henry Trvcka 8,006 Grade Aemeament 90 Pad Ekvdiom 0.0 feel Road Eleyedr, Lead Ell thedeat Blame. 00 Feel Road Elevation. B O feel Alves: 98607 Roe, Grade: 00% Left View: NO daeied McNUm7 cke faild Rigdf Viaw: 900 a.,- Heary Tmi All fHWA NOIx Modal CalnubNons I velide Ty-,i REMEL I Tmlec Fbw I Oisanea I Finite Rend I Femd I RerlierAtten I Reim Aftan Amens; 6646 -1M 4,39 -130 4,87 Job Numdir 8211 0.000 9000 Auras; 6646 IN 4,39 -120 4,87 AlhyaWOdly TmWc(AtlB: 0000 O.WO Limmere Trucks: 7945 -1959 -439 -1211 197 Val veWim. ..W 9oW Medum Trueks: 7.m -1923 -439 -1211 197 SO. Oa. LOU 9BOB Heary Tmcks 84.25 12.54 439 -120 -516 Cddedlm Del roamer cammide Did m observe: 0,000 0.003 Henry Trucks' iWlS 1119 439 -120 -616 50 red 0,000 0.003 (InmMgeNd NOhu LevMa (mVelml Tapp andhmridditenuatlon) Had, Thal 3006' GrmaAgudment 90 Lana E9uhalenlDhhna On fae4 Road Eleyedr, 9o.1 mamMgam d NOhu Lm. (.1 TOpO end hmNer elNnue" fall Vimw.- -90.0 dal N:,iam TVCka: 99599 Rgdf vrew: Venicle Type Lazl Peak lour I Lett Gay teq Evwimg LM Nigh I Ldn I CNEL VenihiType I LM Peak lour I Lai Gay I Ieq EVmdB Leg Nigh I Ldn I CNEL Adds, 615 596 57.9 516 510 60A 610 Auloc' 669 NO 572 512 56.1 699 664 Malum Tmcks: 55.3 53.8 All 459 004 BOA 54.3 568 ladlum Tmcks, 54.8 53.1 48.8 452 003 53] 539 Heavy TUka: 56.1 54] 45] 46.9 613 59.B 51 554 Heavy Tommie : 55.5 FAB 45.0 463 512 54.6 Of .7 Vai Nal 63A 6116 565 53.8' 685 66.6 62.3 76 Vehicle Nal 627 6110 57.8 00.1 581 61.7 62.1 Canlwlim okbnnroHOisa COnrour (in /ee0 SEA BOB CanlerOne Belli Bill Conrour fin MU c%nd lien okbnn at Middy COnrour(in Ted) Canlerme DIONI I Noiau Conrour On Mrj 70111 OdIA I Wall I Wall W dB4 I 1 TO dBA 003A 1 60 OBA I WdSA W d84 Ltln: 31 BE 003 OF 303 315 Ltln: 26 B. 129 19 279 113 CNEL: 33 71 153 73 330 338 CNEL W 64 139 19 289 "im.1 l9. all Beal: Existing 6BA6 3.80 Pi ad Name: NNCPC Road Name: EasWluff /FOrtllBOnia Cyn Job Numdir 8211 Road Segment Ead of Sonia Canyon Road Segmtat Weslof Jamboree SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway DMa Hi9nw¢y Der. SMCOndamns(H.-Ittaide f5) AlhyaWOdly TmWc(AtlB: 31 veMdea Auas 15 Peek Htvr Pomsel 1.% McNUm TmaksRAxka).- 15 Peak HOm V.I.-..' Val veWim. Heavy Trudy p, Allied) 15 Venkle speed' m mph vial MM NaaeFli ne Ddemed,.' 52 feel VahkKTyOe I Day Evenirq Adahf I Deily SO. Oa. SO. Data All 7.5% 12.9% 9.6% 9742% Medium Trucks: 1 49% 193% 194% SaM¢r Helow, 9.0 fed Samm,lype hLWmy I Berm): 90 lBed,Tmcks: BOB% 27% 198% 074% Cddedlm Del roamer cammide Did m observe: 1Lb.o had 100.0 feel NOl sou me flame d. Pn lx) Amen, 2000 Sarver Disrenca at observer 0.0 red Medum Tmcks: 6000 oheerm, ,at (AD.. Pod): 50 red Hwry Tral 3006' Gmda 11thelmed'B Pad Ekvatlon: 90 red Had, Thal 3006' GrmaAgudment 90 Lana E9uhalenlDhhna On fae4 Road Eleyedr, 9o.1 Auks: 98607 Roetl Giadk 90% fall Vimw.- -90.0 dal N:,iam TVCka: 99599 Rgdf vrew: 9o.O oegrem Heavy Trolls: %608 F1WA Ndu Nodal Llleulahons HeavyTwts.' 92547 VemmiType I It. I Tm5 Fbw I Distance I Flake Read I Feem. Rsrner Me, Reim A. I'll,.1ls. all Sidnario: Eydre 6BA6 3.80 Pi jedthma: NNCPC Read Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Nummer 8211 Road Segmtat Weslof Jamboree Ames: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hi9nw¢y Der. -120 4,87 .0 COndltloru(HW= f0,..R =fall Averege Ddly The Ks(A4. 4.800 veMdea Autos: 15 Peek Hour Pores., 1.% McNUm Trvoka(2Aiill 15 Peak Hourimal 460 veWime Heavy Trvcke (3 +gxles): 15 ..speed' m mph vial W. Nam,Farlmm DdVamm 76 fist Vadkls y . I Day Eval Nghl Dsly SO. Data 9003 At. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tmcks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% BaM¢r Height 9.0 M1 Bamm,Typs Ill f- Berm): Bo Heavy Tmcks: BOB% 27% 198% 074% Cerdadlne DI ro Same, 1Lb.9 had laddi SOre-famealbn¢pnfx) cenremlre Did, ta. ob. IODG fief AWSe' 2 M. Selmer Detail m obrerver 0.0 red Modlum Tmcks: 6030 Deserved l(AD.. Po,): 59 Tad Had, Thal 3006' GrmaAgudment 90 Pad Elevatlon: 90 real Lan¢E9uhd¢nlDkrma(Infe¢Q Read Ekvdion: J. Bel Adds: 92547 Roatl.. 90% Lire vaw.- -90.0 dagraea Ma,mm Tmnke 925.4 RCW I 90.o degrees HeavyTwts.' 92547 F1WA Ndu MoWI (madthahona Lee Venide Type I It. I Tndit bw I Dishnde I Flnile Road Fmeme I.Atlem Reim A. Ames: 6BA6 3.80 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 Ames: 6846 -5.14 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 O.WO Madmen Tmnks: 7945 -1344 -439 -129 1 O 0dO 9003 Madmen Tmnks: 7945 1239 -0.11 -129 /r.9T 0MO 9003 Heavy Tmcks SAN -1739 -439 -120 -516 0,000 8003 Heavy Tmcks 5435 -2633 -4.11 -120 -516 0.000 8003 UnMNgaetl Nolan L.I N (wNMuf Top, and heeler d anudbnf UnMtlgefed Nolan Landar(wMauf Tapn andhaMxaNMWtlon) Vnnlde Type Leq P6ek Hhw Lai Gay Leq Evening Let, Nigh Lee CNEL Vnnlde Type Leq Paak.1 Le, Gay Ieq Evening Lee Nigh LM CNEL Amm, 657 BAB 510 BOB 65.6 652 Amks; 550 56.1 543 NA 56.9 57.5 ifiell Tmcks: 004 BOA 52.6 ,51.0 BOB 597 Metlium Tmcks: 510 003 432 423 50.8 510 Heary Tmcks' 613 59.B BOB 521 BOA BOB Heary Tmcks' 52.6 512 421 434 6t8 51.9 Vital Ndse: 685 66.6 636 Fill 67.5 67.9 Vital Nose: 590 581 BOB BOB SEA BOB CanlerOne Belli Bill Conrour fin MU Canlerme DIONI I Noiau Conrour On Mrj 70 d iA 1 0 tlBA I W dB4 I 55tl1A 1 70 tlfl4 W SRI W d84 55 tlBA ldn: OF 149 315 979 tdn: 19 39 113 100 CNEL: 73 157 338 728 CNEL: 19 42 89 193 Tumnrv. eW a4lmz 6.1 -11 mmnrv. eW 24 N1z SCSreIro: E.d, 6846 0.53 Pminalla me•NNCPC Road Name: San Joaquin Hills Job NUmhec 8211 Roadsegmenf: East of JamWtee Auras; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1way Oala -120 4,87 SIBCmtlltlons(HV =10, Sol 15) Average Daily Tra?2(Ad!): 17.70 veM1idsa Auras: 15 PeakHmr Pemenlsga 10% MWWm Tal(2 Al 15 Peak Hour Volurrre.' 1,710 vehiGes Ran, ill. P, Axlas): 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 mph Whials We I ... /FarLarre Distance: 76 fall Saide yps I Dey Evisdal Night I Deily &Te Cal Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Tucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Betsey Haight. 9.0 RM Bander Types maill(1- Saint. 00 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% Caws". Dist to Sandal 100.0 .1 Nana$ -me Elevatlone(In/eeff Caaenria Dist as Deal IDOL fed Ali 2000 Beeler Dimann, to obmrvar: go rail Hallam Trade; 4.W0 Gdnervnr Hegd!(A.. Pnd): So last HsaryTmaka 8005 Grade AHummene 90 Fatl Emission: 0.0 fled Lane Equivalent Didnce (in Fall Lane Equivalent DHtanre(n J t) Road Elevation: 90 led ANDS: 92.54] Road Gredn: 80% Left View: -90O deacon Wd,-1. 92504 Rghf View: W 0 aegreen Heavy Tmckn: 92547 Fg.. Modes Camubnons TmPw Fmw I psfende Venda Type I REMF1 I TmT Fmw I mnm I FIN. ROatl Finarrel I. A. I Be/m A!!en Sam s, Exisling 6846 0.53 Pmio[1Nal NNCPC Rcaa Nama: San Joquin Hills Job Numhec 8211 Read Segment Wind of Santa Cmz Auras; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9h✓cy ONe -120 4,87 S. CmEltloN (d.-10, a- is 151 Average Daily Trelfaided 21.900 vehiGea Auras' 15 I mar Paimedga,' to% MWWm T/uake(2 A slim. 15 IHO.. Volume: 2,190 vehii Heavy Tmnke(3k Antes): 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 mph yehkle We I.../F., Lane Distance: 761eel Saide yps I Day Evening NON Deity Site WU 90.9 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 le. Brinier Type maill I Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% Canal. Dist. Sand, 109.. feel Nasa $wore EMVatbne(I. sal Camwllne Dist b Observer III fed Ali 20.0 Benlef Deda -to oGrervar: go rail Medum Trade; 4.W0 Ems- Heydt(A.. Ped): S. feel Heavy Trial 8008 Grade Arlustment 90 Patl Emission: 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in Staff Lane Equivalent Didnce (in Fall Road Elevation. 901set Autma 92547 Road Gaae: Oo% Left View: Fill deamea McNUmi des 92504 Right View: 990 aegreee Heavylsyman 9250 shwa xolw.1.1 cmurbtlons Ve sselType I S. I TmPw Fmw I psfende vetlde Tyme T REMEL I Tmlac Fmw I Ots.nca I FON. Road I Fmmrel I San.rAtten I Reim Amen All 6846 0.53 4.11 -120 4,87 Hills 0.000 0000 Auras; 6846 145 4.11 -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (Ha/tl =10, SoH =13) 0.000 O.WO MeasYm Trade: 7945 -1671 -411 -1 -097 Peak HOm V.I.-..' 9909 9003 Ul Trunk.: 7945 -1578 -411 -In -097 VahkdTyn I Day Everessirl Nghf I Deily 90.9 9.00 Heavy Tmck¢' 81 1857 -4.11 -120 -516 Heavy Tmom. 66.5% 27% 188% 074% 0,000 0.003 Henvy, Tacks' 6425 -1974 -4.11 -120 -516 dieerv.r ,at (An.. Pod): 0,000 0.003 (NmMgeNd Nphe LevNa (wltlmuf TOpo andde//IwelfMYatldnf 1 o0 red Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in Staff Road Edveterr: UnmMgatd agal a nda(wMwat Tell and danlar.INnaaMt) final .. 00% Left Via-- -900 de..n Nadmm Tracks: 92.504 Venic,Type 1` Hassel L.q Gay I feq EVwi.g I (i1WA Ndu Moral Ca athe3ws Lai Nign! Ve sselType I S. I TmPw Fmw I psfende I Flnke RYad I trial I. Men I Rerm A. ILMIll'aailmni Led may I faq,tereg Lee I Lan I CNEL Ad(nc' 637 61.8 60.0 540 59.9 626 663 Auras' id 62.7 60.9 549 61.3 53.5 64:1 Medium Trucks: 57.4 55:9 49.6 48.0 W.3 54% 555 581 Medium Trucks: U.4 A.8 W.5 489 554 574 576 Heavy TUke: 003 56.9 47.8 49.1 572 517 574 575 Heavy Tacks: 593 578 ".7 500 56.3 Si IRS Initial 111 65.5 63H 516 559' WA 62.7 64.5 649 Vehids NOS.: 65A Si 61.5 56.g 612 65.4 65.9 ceawlim Ddmnae. Nan Ven.ur (in feel &.0 644 Cn.rlim Oddnn. Norse Conroe Cn Ml ca dalim odmnn. Nan Centel (in Sal Cn.rlim Wasnn. Norse Deal far Sol TO aBA 1 01 1 60 SEA 1 55IWA W d89 1 I TO dBA 01 1 WagA I WdB4 50 dB4 Ltln: 43 92 in 38 420 139 Ltln: 49 100 220 W 494 161 ONEL: 46 99 213 39 400 im CNEL' n 114 246 42 530 legled.."'i Seemed., Exil III L,W Reed Nama: Ni Road Name: San Joel Hills Job Numac 8211 Road Segment East of Same Gas Aida; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9nwny One -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (Ha/tl =10, SoH =13) Average Ddly TraWa(Adl: 13.700 veMdea Autos 15 Peek HUrrPomsMaga: 1.% Meaum Tacke(2tied).- 15 Peak HOm V.I.-..' 1,370 reM4ea Heavy Tanday p, aside.) 15 vehicle speed 45 mph vahiare W. NaadFarLane Diaartce, 76 feel VahkdTyn I Day Everessirl Nghf I Deily Sid Odd O. Au.a: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks 84.8% 49% 103% 194% SaMeriall 0.0 lea Sama,lype(0.Wall, I Sears: 00 Heavy Tmom. 66.5% 27% 188% 074% Cement. Dirt. Sarver cenremrre Did m obnrver: 1LYI.o red 100.0 fad Nnlde3wme GYntlona Pn tie/ AWoa, 2000 Semer Deal Is oba , 0.0 red Meal wake: 4000 dieerv.r ,at (An.. Pod): 50 red Hnry, Trand Bn6 Gran Aryudment 00 Pad Easellun: o0 red Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in Staff Road Edveterr: ...1 Aube: 92547 final .. 00% Left Via-- -900 de..n Nadmm Tracks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: 9o.. sign- Heavy Tnrds 9250 (i1WA Ndu Moral Ca athe3ws Lai Nign! Ve sselType I S. I TmPw Fmw I psfende I Flnke RYad I trial I. Men I Rerm A. Tw eg ed.. "'i Sam io: Exisling III L,W Reedle me NNCPC Road Name: San Jaaquin HAIS Job Numac 8211 Road Segment West of San. RCS. Aida; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey Data -120 4,87 .0 COndltloru (HW =f0, Sot =15) Aveage Ddly Tnifl tll: 15.700 veMdea Autos 15 Peektass'.ange: 1.% Meaum TrvCke(2Aiel 15 Peak HOU /Vdumn' 1,570 veMdea Heavy Trvck. 0, aside.) 15 vehicle speed' 45 app vehicre W. Naar/Faiane Duarte, 76 feel VehkdTyn I Day Evening Nghl Daily Sid Odd O. Am. : 77.5)6 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Basler Height O.5 M1 Seme,lype g- Wall,I Berm): BO Heavy Taom. 111 27% 188% 074% Ceraenine Dirt. Bender cenrem/re Did, in ohnrva/: iLb.o red 100.0 fad Note. swmardenlbna pea fxl Aaoe' 2 000 Bill ourenn m obre/ver, 0.0 red Mellum wake: 4000 Ddserver ,at (An.. Pod): 59 red Heavy Trand Sn6 Gradeldmidea' 90 Pad Ed..n: o0 red Lane EquhalenlDisana(In.el Roetl Edvder, ..[Ind ANba: 92547 Roetl Grade: oe% Left Via-- -990 averse Madam T/uGS 92504 Right Vrew: 9o.. a.,.- HeavyTwts 92547 (i1WA Nau Moral L1bYla0ws Lai Nign! Venld.Type I S. I TmPWFmw I Images. I File Road Fms/rel Dere -Alen Re/m A. Adds: III L,W 4,11 -120 4,87 O.nO O:WO Aida; 6846 001 4,11 -120 4,87 O.nO 0.050 Madam Tmnka: nsis - 1752 -4,11 -120 1g7 ofed 9003 Meador Tmnka: 7945 - 1723 -4,11 -120 1g7 900. O. Heavy Tricks 5435 2118 -4.11 -120 -516 (1000 8003 Heavy Tricks 8435 -21.19 -4.11 -120 -516 0.000 8003 UnMtlgn.tl Nan LeeW (wlllrouf TYpn andheMx: al.nYd.n) UnMtlgn.d Nan Leved (wMOUt Tapn nndhartlx aNMYetlon) m aniaType Leq Peak Hnur Lazl Day Iag6Aning Lai Nign! Lan CNEL Venlde Type Leq Peak Hba Lad Day Leq Emrl Lad Nigh LM CNEL Aides 626 W.7 59.9 ME 51.5 62.1 Aubs; 632 61.3 595 53A 521 627 Medium Tacks: W.3 54% I 46:9 554 556 Medium Tacks: III 554 49.0 47.5 580 552 Heavy Tricks' 572 517 46] all WS 56.4 H., Tricks' 57.8 56.3 47.3 485 569 570 Linda Ndn: WA 62.7 585 54.6 614 63.8 Linda Ndn: 650 612 111 55.4 &.0 644 Cn.rlim Oddnn. Norse Conroe Cn Ml Cn.rlim Wasnn. Norse Deal far Sol I01 W 1 1 W d89 1 55 tlBA 1 701 W 1 50 dB4 55 tlBA Lim 38 70 139 361 inn: W 85 161 385 CNEL: 39 84 im 388 CNEL: 42 91 197 425 Tumnrv. oW 29, m12 6.1 -12 Tumnrv. oW 29, m12 SCerelro: Ekistlng 6646 1.39 Pmiie Name• NNCPC Road Name: San Joaquin Hllls Jul NUmbec 8211 Read Segmenb East of St. Rosa Auer; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBnwey Oala -120 4,87 Sib Cmtl ns(HII 10. Son= 15) Avereue Daily Triali ): 21.600 -hid.. Al : 15 peakHwr Percenleya,' 10% Manuel Trucks (2 losill 15 Peak HO Ur VOlurrre. 2,160 veMdea Heavy rrunke(3k Asual 15 Verde Speed: 45 man yahkle We N ... ncrlane 0isranca: 76 hen yakial I Day EVIIII I I Deily &TeI Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %STAY% UndWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% Aohs: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Manuel Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height. 0.0 hM Senior Typa l0.WalL I Berm): 80 Haavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.749, CarhksM Onst to Ranier 1.. het Net.. Swale EMVatbne (In /eeff Currant Dist Is obsual lWL fed aNOe, 2000 Seel« Led ree m oft ausu: 09 red Marcum rrvtl:a: 4.000 observer real (A.. Pee): 5o ed HaaryTrvcka BLW6 Grader uessne 90 Pad Ehvalion: 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent Dhhnce (in Feel Lane Equivalent OHhnre(n Ratf Road Elevation: 901eN ANOs: 92.54] Road Gade: 80% Left View: -900 degrees hlalum 1. 92504 Fight View: W 0 degrees Heavy Trucks: 92547 Niwa. MOe9i cehulegons I Tmq Flew I Onseende VafidPType 1 REMF1 I Thal Few I OnsGnca I FIN. Rind I Fre ark Rattner A. I Berm A!!en SCen ro: Ekistlng 6646 1.39 Priele Name• NNCPC Road Name: San Joal Hills Jul Numhec 8211 Road Segment: WesditacanM1Ur Auer; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe -120 4,87 Sib CmeleoN (Heck =10, SON =15) Average Daily T ?c(Add 21.200 -hid.. Hulas' 15 Peak HOUr Perclkarl' 10% MWWsh Trucks(2 ke%k. 15 Peak HO Ur V.I— 2,120 veMdea Heavy Tmnke(3k tudesf: 15 Ven. Speed: 45 mph yehkle We N...4c, Lane Dishnce: 76 het yakial I Dry Evening Nlahl Dal &Ie WU 9090 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %STAY% UndWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMeI He1911t 0.0 IoM Senior Typa(i 1- Berm): 80 Haavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 188% 0.74% Carhks M idel 1a Bander 1.. het No.. SwF, EMVatbne an sal Currant Dart b Odell IWL fed ANcs, it.. Serra. Led ree In observer: 09 red Uses. rretl:s: 4.000 Odsarvar hal(A.. Peck): 50 reel Heavy Trucks, 8008 GradeAskiment 90 Pad Ehvalion: 0.0 reel Lane Equivalent Dm.na(in feel Lane Equivalent Dhhnce (in Feel Road Elevation. L lset Aoros: 92 547 Road Gade: 09% Left View: 900 dual McNUmTrucks Wful Right View: 900 degrees Heavy Tucks.' 92547 Hlwa xolw.1.1 calculation Venlde Type I It. I Tmq Flew I Onseende VenldPType T REMF1 I Trelhc Fbw I Olsmnca I Fiver RYed I Framrel I BenlarAtten I Berm Attar Aues; 6646 1.39 4.11 -130 4,87 Hills 0.000 8000 Auer; 6846 1.31 4.11 -120 4,87 SNa Churnal oru (Hal =fe, Soe=15J O.OW O.WO duessuch Trucks: 7945 -1584 -411 -1211 197 Peak HOm Vclumn' . W 9W3 duki Trucks: 7945 -1593 -411 -1211 197 VehkdT,,. I Day Evarea Nlghf I Deily 9090 90W Heavy Trucks 64.25 -1980 -4.11 -120 -516 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% 0,000 01 Haavy Trucks' ill -1988 -4.11 -120 -516 observer He,at(abova Pod): 0,000 01 WmMgeNd Nnhu LevNa(wllmmnt TOpo end barer tllMuall 80 red 80.d Lane Equivalent Dm.na(in feel Rued Ekvaicn WmMldn dNn.. Le. (.1 TOpn end benler intentional Itself .. 80% Left Via -m.0 ties. N:ei- Tmuks: 92.504 VenaNeType Lazl Perk lour Lan oay I leq EVwrvrg I F1wa xau Nrdel Llleumhose Let Aught Venlde Type I It. I Tmq Flew I Onseende Vanrcdil I Laze Hank I Lan oay I feq EVareg Lag Nigh I Ldn I CNEL Au(ac' (1 626 W.9 548 m.] ill 640 Auloc' (1 626 MA 54] 53.2 III 640 Mea'lum Trucks: 513 58.8 W:4 48.9 W:2 573 57.6 Manuel Trucks; 58.2 W1 50.3 48.0 429 573 57.5 Heavy Trucks : 59.1 571 All 49.9 48.5 58.3 564 Heavy Trucks: 59.1 576 48.6 498 417 583 58.3 VenMe Nose: I 1346 51.5 56.8' 61.3 and 65.8 Vehicle NOSe: b6.3 1346 51.4 %1 558 653 1 Canlaine Diemen to MI Quelow(in Tea) 583 Cenmrlfne O4mnn a Ni COneur Cn MU Gamer" Diemen at Noiea Centel (in Teel Cenmrlfne Distance a Ni COneur(in MO TO dBA 1 65 still I Of dBA I WdB4 I Mail I TO dW 0dM 1 60 dSA I WWSA Lan: 49 105 2Z! 102 499 474 Ltln: 48 191 220 33 483 CNEL 53 113 244 110 525 50 CNEL 52 112 241 36 519 Ise, .1la.i Sronaho: Ekiahe (1 119 Rjed Nama: Ni Rued Name: Ban Joaquin Hills Job Plunder: 8211 Road Segment Eastis Maareur SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dsta .0 COndlb'oru (Hal =f0, Ill =15) SNa Churnal oru (Hal =fe, Soe=15J Avenge Ddly Takil tlU: W.W0 veMdea Al : 15 Peek HUrrkesure a: 10% Madden TruckeRAamaJ,- 15 Peak HOm Vclumn' 2,060 nahldes Heavy Thinks (3 +rams): 15 vehels sistre 45 man Vehicre We NeaeFariane Dd a rce 76 feat VehkdT,,. I Day Evarea Nlghf I Deily Sim Dam Auma: 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill MedersTisick 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Aues: 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medlun Trucks: 1 49% 193% 194% Bander Hdow, 0.0 feet BamerType(DWal71 -Sal BO Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% Cerdenine Dirt a Barret Careful DiA in observe: I.. and tm.0 led NolseSeeks. Fievefbne an fxp Accra , 2Wif Berner Death e Is observer 0.0 red hed um ruche: 4W0 observer He,at(abova Pod): 50 red Harry Trails Bm6 Greda Adjudment 90 Pad Ekvesch. 80 red 80.d Lane Equivalent Dm.na(in feel Rued Ekvaicn 90.1 Aues: 92547 Itself .. 80% Left Via -m.0 ties. N:ei- Tmuks: 92.504 Ruth, Vrew: 90.0 d.I. Heavy Trucks.' 92547 F1wa xau Nrdel Llleumhose Let Aught Venlde Type I It. I Tmq Flew I Onseende I ii Read I Theater I. Men I Berm A. Iss,'.1la.i deal: Existing (1 119 Rjed NUms: NNCPC Finest Niarre San Clemente Jon Plunder: 8211 Road Segment East of tern BaNam O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HiMemy Data 4,51 .0 COndlb'oru (Hal =f0, Ill =15) Average Cady ThsXk(A4. 5.11W veMdea Al : 15 Paek HOUrPoms., 10% Madder Trvcks(2Aika),- 15 Peak Hour Vduma SW vehil Heavy Tucks 0, rams): 15 vehlde saes,' 40 mph Vehicre We NeaeFarlans Defiance .' 36 hat Vehkd ins. I Day Eval Ni Daly Sim Dam 9000 Auma: 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill MedersTisick 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander Hd9ht 0.0 Mt BamerType(ILWalL 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 2.7% 188% 074% CeMBnlne Cliff, a Berner I.. had NoMa.GYVederiar Txp cenrec, Dim, a obcerva: 1W9 hM Amua' 2000 Ramer ourence In olxrerver 0.0 red hudium ruche: 4m0 Observer He,nl(abova Pod): 59 red Heavy Trails eW6 Grade Adpeacket 90 Pee Ekvesch. 80.d fare E9uhalentDkmna(Infreff Red Eissiden: If fret Aides : 98412 Roa.. LO% Left Via -m.e degmea Maeem Tmeke: 98a72 Rghl Vrew: 90.0 degrees HinVTwts.' 98413 Flwa xau Hired Glmumhose Let Aught Ve ssa Tyne I it. I Thadril I Oremnne I Fails Road Fresnel I.Man Berm A. ruess: (1 119 4,11 -120 4,87 O.mo O:WO Autos: 6651 - 296 4,51 -120 4,87 O.mo O.WO Msdmm Trucks: 7945 - 1895 -4,11 -129 1V 9m9 .. Mseem TU. TI.]2 -2129 -4,51 -129 IV 9000 0. Heavy Truck, Ill -Y091 -4.11 -120 -516 Il000 of Heavy Tracks; Li -2515 -451 -120 -516 O.OW of UnMtlgefetl Naen LeeW (wlPruf TYpn andherrleraCMYdbnf UnMNgefee Naee LaVoie (...t Trpn end henMdbnYetlrnf VaNdPType Lee Peak Hour Lae Thy Leq ESemmg. Let Aught LM CNEL VaNde Type Lee Peak care Leo Gay Leg EVaneg Led Nnga LM CNEL Ares ; 61.3 62A m.] 54fi 63.2 63.8 Autos; 586 54.9 53.2 47.1 55.] W3 Moull Trucks: 55.1 W8 W:2 48.7 57.1 574 Usell Trucks: 508 49,3 429 41A 49.9 501 Heavy Trucks' 569 575 48.5 497 681 682 Heay Trucks' 52.1 W.] 417 428 613 614 VehkJe Nose: 662 LIA 61.3 1 (1 656 VehkJe NOS,: 588 5]1 558 493 0.8 583 Cenmrlfne O4mnn a Ni COneur Cn MU Cenmrlfne Distance a Ni COneur(in MO 70 tlfl4 W all I (I I Mail 1 70 tlfl4 W ell 60 dB4 55 tlBA !de' W 102 229 474 ldn: 15 33 72 154 CNEL: 51 110 236 50 CNEL: 17 36 77 to Tumnrv. tW 29, m12 6.1 -13 Tumnrv. tW 29, m12 Sroblas. Ell 66.51 -381 PioLacl Name• NNCPC R., Name: San Clemente Job NUmhec 8211 Road Segna l: West of Sal Oma Road Segment: WestoTJamomee SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1way Day Highway ONe SIb Cmtlldons nal 10. Sol =15) Average Daily Tia?2(Add, 5.000 veM1idea Auras: 15 PaakHwrPbcddl 10% MWlum Tal(2 IyAll 15 Peak HO Ur V.I.-... 530 vehiGes Has, im. P, Axles): 15 Van. Speed: 40 mpn Whlara W. Near/Farlane 0iassura: 36 tee, yahkill I !My Evsadl Nghl I Deily Site DaU &'fe WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% VAZ%, Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 163% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 RM Banter Typa l0.WalL I Berm): 80 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% CanRni. D's, to Bill 1CO.o feel Nass Sounds Fandthons (In /eeff Camwllne Dist b obae/vec IWL fed ANDS, 2000 Sartler oada -la obmrven OO tad Mail Tracks: 4.W0 Gbsarver laical bass. Pelt): 5o fast HaaryTrvcka 8,W0 Grade Atlludmett 60 Fad Ekvalion: 0.0 feel 0.0 feel Lane Egalvalent DlstanreQnfil Road Statistics. 60 led All 99412 Road.. 0.0% Left View: -90.0 deghea hays m1. 91 RI Viand.- ad. degrees Heavy TmGS: 98413 Fbal NMU.., CalHdaNWa FNWA NOIx Maisel Cdculetlnns Venide Type I REFILL Trelbc Fbw I Distance I Fail Road I Fresain I Ba/rair Aden I Besn Allen Saen ro: Estill 66.51 -381 Pigocllhal NNCPC Road Name: Santa Barnaa Job Numbec 8211 Road Segment: WestoTJamomee Aube; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe -120 4,87 SIB Cmdans. (dandy =10, a- =15) Average Daily T ?c faidd 2,100 vehiGes Aulas' 15 Paak.burPfbduga 10% MWIUm T/uaks(2 Aissa. 15 IHOU. Volume: 210 vehiGes Hal TallPk mitre : 15 Vanicle Speed: 40 mpn andahs W. Near/F. /Lane Dishace: 36 fee, yebkill I Day Eventing Nlshl Dity &'fe WU 600 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 163% 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 Is. Banter Typo l0.Waq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% CanRni. DISt an Seaer 109.. feel No.. $wnde EMVetbne by. /eeff Consultants Dlat fo observer IDW fed Assay, 20.0 Bahr Dislenae to observer: CO fad Mill. Tricks: 4.W0 ..-r Hscantbass. Pelt): 5. feel Henry Tricks, 8,W6 Gradeadfaident 60 Fad Ekvaton, 0.0 feel Rosa Elevdion: Lane Equivalent Dhlans, (in fal Road Statistics. L 0 as, Al : 96412 Road.. 00% Left View: 90O degma9 MaNUmi aka 95a72 Right Vial: WO degrees Heavy Tracks.' MA13 FNWA NOIx Maisel Cdculetlnns CNEL V&ride Type I RFMF1 I Trelbc Fbw I Distance I Finds Road I Fremrel I IMmarAynt I Berm A!!an Aube 66.51 -381 4,51 -130 4,87 0.000 BOW Aube; 66.51 -BR 4,51 -120 4,87 SMCatidlia.-(Hand= 10,Ssil O6W O.WO mum Trucks: 17. -2104 -451 -1211 1b7 Peak HOm V.I.-..' 6900 603 mum T.aku: 172 -2546 -451 -1211 1b7 VehkhTys. I Day EveMrq Plan! I Deily 6000 600 Heavy Tracks' Sil 1500 451 -120 -516 Heavy Tracks: 56.5% 27% 188% 074% 0,000 01 Heavy Tracks' 6289 2l 451 -120 -516 observer ,at (As.. Pod): 0,000 01 WmMgefed Nnhu LevNa (wfibmt TOpo and border eHenua aid 80 rad Lan. EgYhelenl Dlahnae On road Rosa Elevdion: WmMgefed Nn.. L.. (.1 TOpn and dnrrler elNnu radon) filial .. LO% Laft Via-- -W.0 daghea Nadium TVaka: 98a72 VenicleType Laq Peak mar I Loq Gay Laq Evening LM Nigh I Ldn I CNEL Vaniballao I LM Peak Haur I Lad Gay I Ld Ellial Las Nigh I Ldn I I Abanc' 570 55d 53.3 47A W..5 55.9 56.5 Aaac' 526 517 48.9 429 58.3 51.5 62.1 Mai lam Trucks: 510 49.5 43.1 41.5 542 528 500 502 Metllum Trucks: 45.5' 450 30:7 3L1 52.6 456 45.0 Heavy Till 523 519 41.8 43.1 555 54.1 514 51.6 Heavy TUCks: 47.9 464 37.4 367 54.0 47.0 47.1 Veinal Naise: 59.0 523 54.0 49.4 622 W.5 56.0 584 Velado fill 546 US 496 450 WA 536 540 ConlMbh ohmnn at Nan Contour (in road 61.1 616 Carnival O4bnn h Nasn Contour on MQ cndand ohmnn la Naas Cards- (in add Carnival Webnn h Naen Contour Cn MQ M lifts MI I SO III I WIWA Wd89 I I Mlifts 01 1 60 all I WdB4 WdB4 L. 18 34 7S. 28 158 1. Ltln: B 17 37 28 80 119 CNEL 17 36 78 26 169 128 CNEL 9 19 40 27 86 Ins, .1 .. all Sronado: Existing 6651 `0FI 'anal Nama: NNCPC Rand Nama: Santa Barbara Job Nadal 8211 Roatl3agnal East d JamWree Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dan -120 4,87 SMCatidlia.-(Hand= 10,Ssil Average Daily T/aXibi : 1200 all Al : 15 Paak HU/rPo bbilla: t.% Mecum TUaks(2Aand.- 15 Peak HOm V.I.-..' 1,210 reh14es Heavy Trvcke(s, sales): 15 vehicle speed 40 mph Vehicre MM Near/F.I.s. Didarice.' W feel VehkhTys. I Day EveMrq Plan! I Deily Was Dale 0. Auks: 77.591, 12.9% 96% 9242% Mecum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 163% 194% Barter Hill 0.0 fed S.amarType(0.WaIL 1 -Sal 8o Heavy Tracks: 56.5% 27% 188% 074% Distant. DRL as Bemer cenkm. Did k obnrva/: 1LYI.o and tm.0 lad Maas. Sounds 6evalars(I. fxp Asian IW0 Berner ochres. Is obnrvar, 0.0 red Maryum risks: a W0 observer ,at (As.. Pod): 50 red Hwry Tral BW6 Gran 11astabil a0 Rea Ed.n b.: 80 rad Lan. EgYhelenl Dlahnae On road Rosa Elevdion: 6o.1 Auks 98412 filial .. LO% Laft Via-- -W.0 daghea Nadium TVaka: 98a72 Ril Vrew: 9o.. de9ren Heavy Trolls: 98413 F1wa xasa Modal L11nLaxwa Lai Nigh VebldeType I R. I Tm5 Fbw I Dddbde I Fame Road I Flat. I. Man I Berm A. Ins, .1.. all Sail ESidris 6651 `0FI Pi j6ct Nama: NNCPC Road Nama: Santa Barba2 Job Nunar 8211 Road 6egainal I of San Clemente Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Us. -120 4,87 Sea COndlEbru(HW= f0,..R =Ill) Average Daily Tat Xb(A4. 12.00 vahldea Auras: 15 Paak Hon'.asge: t.% Maaum Titaka(2Aild): 15 Peak HOUr Vdumn' 1,20 vehl4ea Heavy Tracks 0, said) 15 vehicle speed' 40 mph Vehicre MM Nea//Faaane andriss, 36 test vdfdds yn I Day Evandif Nghl Daly Was Cal 0. An. 77.591, 12.9% 96% VASS Mecum Tucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Banda-Height 0.5 M1 SamarType(0.WaIL 1- Be/mf: 8o Heavy TVCks: 56.5% 27% 188% 074% CerRenin Dirt as Bemer cenhm. Did An obnrve/: iLb.9 red 1W6 fed Nolsasof-assiitbnapnal Aaoa' 2W0 Sa als, Dana. In obre/var 0.0 fad Modaum rucks: a 00 Ubserver ,al (As.. Pod): 59 red Heavy TrvAS eW8 tirade Adfudmenc 90 Pad Ekval 80 lad Lane EquhalenlDkbnre (In (raft Roatl Sadist, 6. bad Autos: 98412 Roatl Grade: LO% Laft Via-- -W.0 degrees haadium Tmaka: 98a72 Right Vrew: 9o.. degrees HisavyTwts.' 98413 F1wa xasa Modal Candba had Lai Nigh Vehicle Type I REFILL I Teddy tow I Dddbde I Faisa Road F/es.l Dar -stain Be/m A. Aaos: 6651 `0FI 4,51 -120 4,87 O.WO O:WO Autos: 6651 L.65 4,51 -120 4,87 O.WO O.WO bill Trunks: Tr.72. -1785 AS1 -129 -09T 9000 603 bill Trunks: I72 -1759 -451 -129 /r.9T 9000 0. Heavy Trial 820 -2161 -451 -120 -516 .BOW of Heavy Tyal 820 21B4 -451 -120 -516 O.OW of UnMtlgafetl Nasn LeVW (wlllrouf TYpp andheMx: albnYabn) Uydgaatl Nslse LeVas(wIMOUITOpnanddiarfa llMYatlon) VenlulaType Laq Paak Hbur Lam, Day Leq Evening. Lai Nigh LM CNEL Ve slyge Leq Paak.. LM Day Iag EVaning Laq Nigh LM CNEL Autos; 682 583 W..5 A.5 59.1 597 Aube; 60.1 58.3 55:5 584 591 59) Medium Tracks: 542 528 4&3 44.7 53.2 534 Madium Tracks: 51.1 52.6 462 ".7 53.2 534 Heavy Tracks' 555 54.1 45.0 all 64.6 54.7 Heay Tracks' 55.4 54.0 45.0 462 54.6 54.7 Vehkb Ndn: 622 W.5 522 Elk 61.2 616 Vehkb Ndn: 622 WA 57.1 Elk 61.1 616 Carnival O4bnn h Nasn Contour on MQ Carnival Webnn h Naen Contour Cn MQ 701 0 1 Wd89 I 55dBA 1 701 W1 WdB4 55 tlBA List: 28 56 1. 258 lilt: 28 55 119 258 CNEL 26 59 128 276 Cl 27 59 1P 275 Tumnrv. oW 29, m12 6.1 -14 Tumnrv. oW 29, m12 SCWrorio: Ekistlng 66.51 mumal Name• NNCPC So Nam.: Santa games Job Name -8211 Rozd Segment, Souss M San (Demenle Road Begral Weslof Narral CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBbwey Oala Highway ONe SIb Cmtl ns(Nal 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Theffic all Too veM1idea Auras: 15 PaakHwr Parcenrrim 10% MWlum Trader in Al 15 Peak Hour Vofurrre. 730 veM1il Heavy im. p, Axle): 15 Vehicle Speed: s,0 mph Venkla We I ... /FarLame Distance: 36 het Sarvee ypa I Day IEVbVl Night I Deily &'I. Debt fife WU Au10s: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 MadWm Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMer Height 0.0 1 Bucher Typa l0.lismiI Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% Casemie Dul10 Samal 100.. het lads.$ -me Elevstbne(In Read Cadence Dist b Dammam fall fed ANOe, 20.0 Banbr Deda- to Obmrvan go feel Mapium Trucks: 4.000 observer Hagdl usse. Ped): So reel HeryTrvcka ¢005 Grade Adfumment 90 Fatl Ehvaiio¢ 0.0 reel 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent DlstanreQn / eel) Road Ebvallon: 90 not All 98412 Road Grape: 0.0% Left View: -goo degrees Was -Tm. fill Rghl Via-- N.. degnres Han,Try ke 98413 NiWA. Mani CelsdaNSns HIWA Nal Modal Celurleflwa Venda Tyne I REMFJ- I Tmibc Fbw I Oislence I FONT Rmd I Thwart I fewer Att Berm Alle Sumakin : Ekistlng 66.51 PmSel Name• NNCPC So Nam.: Santa Brims. -130 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Road Begral Weslof Narral CTR 8000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe 4,51 Say CmEltloN (Hard =10, SON =It) Average Deily The ?c (Atllp 6.300 veM1ides Auras' 15 PeaRHour Pemenluga' to% MsNUm Trade in Ax %sf: 15 Peak HOU. Volume: 630 -hil Heavy Thade (3k real 15 Vedicl. Speed: 40 mph yenkle We I.../Far Lane Dishrrm: 36 het Sarvee yp. I Day Erening NOW Deity fife WU Aube: 7.5% 12.9% 96% g/.42% Medium Trucks 64.3% 49% 193% 194% Au10s: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %9TA2% MadWm Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0111 Bucher Typo l0.Waq 1- Benno: 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% CanRniM Dul in Barter, 100.. het Nd.. SOame EM h&W -D.eaj Camwllna Dart b Observer, IDI fed Ado¢, 2000 Berner Dlsfenre in OGrerver: go task Mamoru Trucks: 4.000 Observer rmluse. P.do: no he1 Heavy Trucks, 8.006 GradeAWment 90 Patl Ehvaiio¢ 0.0 feel Tian and balinferential Lane Equivalent Ohlance (in Feel Road Ebvallon. CO teal Areas : 96412 Road Grupe: Oo% Left View: No dedual MaNUmTrial 96a72 Right View: W 0 degmee Hevy Trucker MA13 HIWA Nal Modal Celurleflwa Leq de, I VideenType I REMEL I Traffic Fame, I Oislence I Fail Rind I Fmsrrel I oanrerAtten I Ream ingen Aube; 66.51 881 4,51 -130 4,87 fill Segment East of Neepan CTR 0.090 8000 Aubs; 66.51 -3a5 4,51 -150 4,87 3.300 na ldea 0.010 O.WO Madura Trucks: 17. -29.4 -451 -1211 IM vehicle speed 9000 9003 Mayeal Trucks: 172 -2. to -451 -1211 -0g7 Aube: 7.5% 12.9% 96% g/.42% Medium Trucks 64.3% 49% 193% 194% 9000 9000 Heavy Trucks' 82.E 1400 451 -120 -516 December I to Obmrvd: 0,000 0.003 Henry Trucks' 82gB 1464 451 -120 -516 HWry TNAS: 8,006 Lmda Adfudmed' 90 0,000 0.003 (NmHgefed NOhe Levda handsel Tian and balinferential of feel Auks 98412 Roetl Grde: 80% Left Via-- (NmHgefed NO..LeveH(elMmn TOpn end banter ahenuetlsnj Rgbf Vrew: go.. runs- Heavy Tmds: 98413 F1WA Ndu Mandel L11OUle3ws VenrcJeType Laq Pek imerl Leq de, I Ieq EUwivig Leq I Flnlle Read Fmsmel I.Maa Ream A. ILeQ-.-I Leq Day Leq Evening I Lam Peak lack I Laq Day I Ieq Lnkkhg I Lem Night I Ldn I CNEL Au(OS' 58 5611 54.3 483 Arms; Mi Sig Adam 574 55.5 6317 476 Makfum Tracks: Son 560 Ma lum Trucks: 'I 50,5 441 42.5 53.6 51,0 512 Medium Trucks: 513 49.8 43A 41.9 498 1&4 504 506 Heavy Trucks : 533 518 42:8 44.1 no 524 526 Heavy Trucks: 526 512 42:2 43A 515 ES 51.9 Vandis Nose: 680 583 550 SOA 568 590 SBA Vehicle Marem 59A 57.6 54.4 Al MS 58,8 Canlwlim Odmnn b Nal COnbur(in fal Coming" Ddmnce le Metals, Centel (in ral Ian age 1 65 dBA I Sr S89 I Wcov, TO tlBA 651 60 SEA 50 SBA SS SEA 55 tlBA I TO tlBA 1 01 1 So SBA I SS WRA Ldn: 10 40 95 104 CNEL: Ltln: 17 30 TT 116 167 CNEL Cast 30 42 91 255 197 CNEL 18 38 to 179 I nay... Da. all Sronano: Ekisting I all, mjed Nama: NNCPC Rnap Name: Santa Sol Job Numdr 8211 fill Segment East of Neepan CTR Road Segment Wesl of Neal CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlghwey Dafa Hvhwey Ded. SM Londltloru (HW =10, SoH =13j Avenge Oely TraWs(AtlO: 3.300 na ldea A.. 15 Peak HUarkmkm,m 1.% Meadus Trucka(2Axka).- 15 Peak Hour Vclimem 330 se -li Heavy Trader (3 +Axles): 15 vehicle speed 40 man val W. Naa icieliane armake 36 feel VahkKTyge I Day Eserecal NgM I Deily Soh OaM Soh OaM Aube: 7.5% 12.9% 96% g/.42% Medium Trucks 64.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Hid'an 0.0111 Samill(OWdl, I Berm): Bo Heavy Trucks: Sol 27% 188% 074% Cedanlm Dirt ro Bemer 1Lb.o 101 Mal 3wrs..dbns M. fil December I to Obmrvd: 100.0 feel Anne, 2000 Bank Distance to Observe 0.0 feel Mucyum Tracks: 4.000 observerH ,at (Ab.. Fal 5. tan HWry TNAS: 8,006 Lmda Adfudmed' 90 Red Ekvaliun: Bo task Lumm E9uhdholDlahnce0n5am4 Roes, guarder, of feel Auks 98412 Roetl Grde: 80% Left Via-- -No degrees Namara Tmcka: 93.72 Rgbf Vrew: go.. runs- Heavy Tmds: 98413 F1WA Ndu Mandel L11OUle3ws F1WA Ndu MOWI Llbuia o n Ve ssiType I S. I The Fbw I Distance I Fnke Road I Fmsn& I. Men I Ream A. Twwy,.1 zs. all Sronano: Existing 6651 825 Rand Nama: NNCPC Road Name: San Miguel Job Numdr, 8211 Road Segment Wesl of Neal CTR Aubs: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey Ded. -120 4,87 .0 Limitations gland! =f0, SoH =15j Average Daily TraWs(Al 7.800 nal Subs: 15 Peak Has Pomsds, 1.% MuNUm Tral(2 Aihal 15 Peak H.,Vral 780 veM1ll Heavy Trucks 0, Axles): 15 vary. speed' an .1 val W. Naamiariae Dirmake' 52 felt Vaesci a I Day Evening Nghf Daily Soh OaM 9003 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9L42% Madura Trucks: M8% 49% 193% 194% Baold-Helght 0.01N1 Swermlyhy osil all, 1- Benn): 00 Heavy Trucks: Sol 27% 188% 074% dl Cliff se Bemef iLb.o ld Nmid. soumerdevdbns pn fxp CChd s M, in Obmrvar: 1000 fed Aube, 2000 Sarver Duane to OLtawvar 0.0 feel Muamen Tracks: 4.000 Db6erver ,at (AD.. Pod): 591¢. ral TNAS: BLO6 Grade Adfunment 90 Pad Ekvetlon: go fask fare EquhlentDkbnceffn(ref) Roetl Eastman, of feel Al : 98607 Roetl Grade: 80% Left Via-- -No degrees war. T.a: 98593 from Vrew: 9o.. degrees HeavyTwts.' 96608 F1WA Ndu MOWI Llbuia o n t Vehlde Type I S. I TmPWFbw I Dlsfenne I Flnlle Read Fmsmel I.Maa Ream A. Aube: 6651 825 4,51 -120 4,87 0.000 O:WO Aubs: 6646 -3103 -039 -120 4,87 0.000 0.000 Madlum Trucks: TI.72. 12 '. AS1 -120 1g7 9000 9003 Medium Trucks: 79a5 4m 27 AS9 -120 1137 9000 9003 Heavy TUka; 8200 -27.45 -451 -120 -516 .0010 8003 Heavy TUka; Sul -2422 -439 -120 -516 0.010 8003 UnMNgded NdHn LeaW(wllhOuf TOpn and heMx: aNMulbnf UnMNgdedNl Leads(wlMOuf TOpn and heMx dbntual VenldeT ion Leq PUnk Hnm Lear day retinal Leq Nigh LM CNEL VenldeType ILeQ-.-I Leq Day Leq Evening Led Nigh LM CNEL Auras; 51.5 U.6 g0.9 440 534 54.1 Arms; 598 579 56.2 50.1 58] 593 Makfum Tracks: 48.5 47.0 40:8 39.1 476 47.8 Metlium Trucks: 53.6 52.1 a5] 44.2 52.8 529 Henry Trucks' 498 1&4 39.4 486 49.0 49.1 Henry Trucks' SulA no 44.0 452 53.6 537 Dennis Ndse: 565 54.8 515 4io 55.5 660 Vehkin Ndse: 617 59.9. 568 52.1 60.6 61.1 Cenferline Distance la Mines Cartel far MU Cenferline Memse la Mines COnbur far Al Ian age 1 65 dBA I Sr S89 I Wcov, 1 701 0SBA 50 SBA 55 tlBA Lion: 11 23 do 100 Itln' N 51 110 233 CNEL: 12 25 54 116 CNEL 26 55 118 255 Tassims -asmlz 6.1 -15 Tumerv.tW as, mlz Several Esistlng 6646 mea[1Nama• NNCPC Southmark Sandal 410 4,87 Jon Numhec 8211 Read Segment, Each of Newpart GTR 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBhwey Oala 4,39 SIb Cmtlldons (Hard=10. Sol 15) Average Daily Times (Al 12700 veM1idas Am. 15 PaakHwr, Pereari r, 10% MWlum TmMS(2 Al 15 Peak Hour Volurrre. 1.00 -hides Heavy'make (Sr Axle): 15 Vahicln Speed: 15 mph Vanish. We Naar/Falince Disrance: S2 het Venal a I Day Evarl Night I Daily Site Carl -1211 -097 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.01.. Bucher Typao l(1- Benny: ll6 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 2] %. 108% 0.749. CanRniM DI5L In gamer 100...1 Nasa Somme Eandlene(In Real Camwllne Dist as Dense 1LU61e0 ANUe, 20.0 Becher Disrenre to Dhmrrer: go lad Makes Trucks: 4.000 Gd-r rani usseve Ped): 5o reel Hery Trvcka 8,006 Grade AHudmene 90 Fed Ekvdion: 0.0 led (InmM9eNd NOhe LevNa lwllAmrf Lane Equivalent DHtanre(n heal Road Ebvakan: 90 IeN Areas : 98607 Road Gade: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degrees Was- sad LISP Right View: W 0 degree Heavy Tmcks: 95606 NiWA Al Modsl Lnhubtlons Laze Pek immul L, Day I VatinPType I REM¢ I Thal Fbw I Oiremse I Fin. ROatl Fmerrel 2erriar A. Berm Alle Summers, Esistlng 6646 Primal Name• NNCPC She's, .. : San Miguel 410 4,87 Jon Numhec 8211 Road Segment, Wssl of Asnado 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS High✓ey ONe 4,39 S. CmEltloN Vagd =10, a- =1a) Average Daily Thel(Add 16.400 veM1idas Aulas' 15 PaaRHOUrlhar amga' to% MWlum Theder in Asism. 15 Peak He., Volume: 1.640 veM1idas Hal Tcke (3k real 15 Vedicl. Speed: S mph yehkle We I.../Far Lane Dishnca: S2 het yagrial pa I Dry Evearkrall NON Dally fife WU -1211 -097 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 101 194% Barter Height. 0.0 Id. Bucher Typa ort aq I Berm): o 0 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27%. 118% 0.74% CanRniM Drat. Barter 100...1 No.. Somme EMVatlsne D.Fa ff C.nKdln. Dist b Deserver 1LU6 fed Anne, 2000 Becher Disrenre An DGrerver: go fad Medium Trucks: 4.000 Gdserrar rmluseve Ped): no feel Hemy Trvcka 8,006 Grscke Ssasiment 90 Fed Ekvdion: 0.0 feel (InmM9eNd NOhe LevNa lwllAmrf Lane Equivalent Dhfed.(in hQ Road EbvaNOrt D heel Areas : 98607 Road Gade: Oo% Left View. Fad deal McNUm Trace ' 985fi8 Right View: 900 degrees Heavy Themen 95605 HIWA Al Maisel Lelnuleflws Laze Pek immul L, Day I V&IinPType T REM¢ I Tmlec Fbw I Oismnce I FONIe Rmd Fireman I BanierAtten I Bean Ante, Arms; 6646 -091 4,39 410 4,87 Jon NUmtar 8211 0.000 0000 Aube; 6846 0.20 4,39 -120 4,87 Average Ddly Traim(Ado. 24dat) veMdes 0.000 am mum Trucks : 7945 -18 t5 -439 -1 lad -097 vehble speed 900. 9003 mum Trucks: 7945 -11 as -439 -1211 -097 Arms: 7.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Tmcks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% 90.. 9000 Heavy Tmcks 8425 -21 439 -120 -516 Decimal Dist is oanrva: 0,000 am Haary Trucks' 81 1100 439 -120 -516 Hnry Thal 8,006 Gorda AryudmseekD 0,000 0.003 (InmM9eNd NOhe LevNa lwllAmrf TOmo end hauler elementa j 90.1 Auks: 98607 Role Gredk o0% Left Via-- (InmM9s. NO.. L.. (al Til end heeler tltemena raj Rghf thew: go.. aegrea Heavy Tmds 95608 (i1WA al Moral L11crl.3as VenadeType Laze Pek immul L, Day I feq Eikeeksg LazI VatideType Leq Paak HOa Lag Day leg Evening. I Lam Peak lour I Lai Gay I Ieq EVwtng Lee Nigh I Lan I CN¢ Ac(nc' 620 Off 58.3 522 644 111 616 Arch, 63,1 612 59.4 533 58.5 57.0 520 626 Mecum Trucks: EST Sul 47.8 46.3 Si 54.6 55.0 Medium Trucks; 56.8 513 4819 47A 40.9 550 58.1 Heavy Trucks : 566 55] 46.1 473 48.5 55.] 55.8 Heavy Thick.: 5]] 563 47.2 485 57.0 Mg 56.9 Vehicle Name: 638 620 589 54.2 Sol 62.8 632 Vehicle Name: 648 612 60.0 55.3 619 643 canredim Odmnn ro Naaa conrour (hn ne0 Ca dushim, Ddmnn at Nan Centel (in red) 70 LED 1 0tlBA I fal 1 55 tlBA 1 M dElI sil Wtl@A SS d84 lain: 1 10 dBA iti 1 60 age I SSd84 lim Ltln: 33 71 1. 476 329 CNEL: 54 Ltln: 39 84 181 39. CNEL: 51 Cl 35 76 100 353 CNEL 42 90 194 419 I ng,,.1lee. all Scenario: Existing 6&46 L91 Reed Nance NNCPC Road Name: San Miguel Jon NUmtar 8211 ROaa Sagmem Eas[ W AVaraap Aube: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M@hwey One -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (HVd =10, SoH =13f Average Ddly Traim(Ado. 24dat) veMdes Autos: 15 Peek HUrrPomsMnga: t.% Mecum Trucks (2 Axka).: 15 Peak H., Witurre.' 2,430 send Heavy Trvnks(a, Axles): 15 vehble speed 45 .1 vahicreI lieek Fal Dirarrde 52 feel VahkdTyge I Day Evenkq NgM I Deily Sid Dad 900. Arms: 7.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Tmcks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r HdpXG' 0.0 led Sumel(OWall, 1- Bermf: o0 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 118% 074% Gerdenine Dirt ro@emer Ion. his flees. Seeks. F -e .Pre fap Decimal Dist is oanrva: 100.0 fed AWna, IWal Sumer Disrenre Is Obal, 0.0 red hgcyum rmckn: 4000 oearv.r ,at (AD.. Pod): 50 red Hnry Thal 8,006 Gorda AryudmseekD Pad Ekveticn: o0 rata Lae Equivalent Dlutrna an h4 Rosa Edvution: 90.1 Auks: 98607 Role Gredk o0% Left Via-- -90.0 degrees Nedbm TVaka: .Ill. Rghf thew: go.. aegrea Heavy Tmds 95608 (i1WA al Moral L11crl.3as Leq Night LM Venld.Type I REM¢ I Tm5 Fbw I Clsfence I F(de Faced I Finame I. Men I Bamr A. I ngles'..apla Senal: Existing 6&46 L91 Reedlu me NNCPC Read Name: San Miguel Jon Ammer: 8211 Road Segment WesldlaaartM1a Aube: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey Defy -120 4,87 .0C dIO.- (HW =f0, Soft =15) Average Daily The Xk(A4. 22.100 veMdes Autos: 15 Peekkylew s., t.% Mecum7moke(2Aikaf.- 15 Peak HOUr Vduma 2,210 veM1ldes Heavy Tucks 0,tarda): 15 varty. speed 45 .1 vehicre Mai NaadFarlane Dirarrde 521.1 Vaidel a I Day Everang Night Daily Sid Dad 900. Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Taut 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @abler Height 0.5 h1 Bame,lype Di ll, 1- Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 2.7% 108% 074% CeMBnlne Dirt ro Becer Incif and Nase Seems GYntlonepn Tap cenreis Led, b ohnrva: 1000 fed Anna ii M. Barter DUrennm observer 0.0 red hgdlum Tcka: 4000 Dhserver ral(AD.. Podf: 59 red ral TrvAS: 8006 Grade Adfudment 90 Pad Ekvatlon: o0 rata farmer EquhalentDkhammonfreff Roetl Edveter, of reel Stuck 913607 Roetl Gmde: 00% Left Via-- -90.0 degrees Madbm Tnrdka: 98598 Rghl Vhew: 9o.o ae9rea HmVTmas 96608 FIWA NWU Moral admilatias Leq Night LM Venld.Ty(re I REM¢ I TmR Fbw I Dletente I Firkin Road Fres. I.Mac Berm A. Aube: 6&46 L91 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 Aube: 6846 IsS 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 am Museum Treks: 7945 -1533 ASS -12. lay 900. 9003 Museum Tnks: 7945 -1575 ASS -12. laT 900. 9003 Heavy TUka 5435 -1929 -439 -120 -516 0,00) 0003 Heavy TUka 5435 -1910 -439 -120 -516 0.000 0003 UnMNgMed Nan LeaW(wNMuf Topes and ItmaerielYMbnf UnMtlgnfed Nan Le.els(wMOuf Tepnandbarmer b Van) standeT ace Leq Paak HOa Lag Day leg Ewnbg. Leq Night LM CNEL VatideType Leq Paak HOa Lag Day leg Evening. Led NIgM LM CNEL Aubs; US 62,9 61.1 55.1 631 64.3 Areas ; 644 62.5 60.7 54fi 53.3 63.9 Medium Tmcks: 58.5 57.0 111 49.1 575 57.8 Medium Trucks, 501 Si 111 48.7 57.2 574 Henry Trucks' 594 579 40.9 502 68.5 586 Henry Trucks' 59.0 575 48.5 491 681 583 Dennis Ndn: 666 64.9. 61.7 57.0 65.6 66.0 Vehicle Ndn: 662 64.5 61.3 Sol 65.2 all Cndrline Distance of Nase Deal fir MU Cndrline Wamnn of Naes Deal fir Al 70 LED 1 0tlBA I fal 1 55 tlBA 1 701 0tlBA 60 tlB4 55 tlBA lain: 51 109 235 BT lim 48 103 221 476 CNEL: 54 117 253 544 CNEL: 51 110 237 511 Tumerv. uW a4 ml2 6.1 -16 Tumerv. uW a4 Nla BCShathe Esistlng 6846 Pmiocl Nams• NNCPC Rcad Name: San Miguel 420 4,87 Jon NUmhec 8211 Roads.'sna f: Enetol MacaMm 5000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1Vey Oaln 4.11 Sla Cmtlldons gain 10. Sol 15) Average, Daily Tra?2(Al 11.600 vaM1idsa A.. 15 PaakHwr Pamenlega 10% MWWs TmMS D Asks): 15 Peak Hour V.I. -... 1,180 -hides Heavy tins.( Sr Asas): 15 Vanicls based: 45 mph Whale, We Near/FarGarre Distance: 52 het Valksta s I Dry Eveseall Night I Daily Site Dean 0. Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% El Medium Trucks: 84.8% 48% 193% 194% BdMeIHelBnt 0.0 teat Samar Type l0.Wall, I Berm): D0 Hall TVcks: 86.5% 21 %. 158% 0.74% CanRniM Oi5L In Sessar 1CO.O reel Nass $OUWS E1evMbne (In /eeff Candardi Dist In Deal IDOL fed ANOS, 2000 Banter Disrenre m observer: 00 red Mamum Thinks: 4.000 Gdsarver Hegd!(A.. Pad): 5o and Haavy Trvcka 6006 Grade Antentra a 90 Fact Elevation: 0.0 feel TOpo and barrier edenusdon) Lane Egolvalenl Chain asfail Road Ekvffiion: 90 led ANOs: 88607 Road Grebe: 0.0% Left View: -950 degrees Iridium 1. 96506 Fight Vial: W 0 aegrees Heavy Tmcke: 95608 NiwA. Mods, Ceh deflons LM Gay I V&lide Type T REMF1 Venda Type I REMF1 I Thal Flow I Oidinca I FON. Road I Fresrrel 2erriar A. Reim A!!en BCabight Esistlng 6846 Pmiocl Nams• NNCPC Road Name: Goth Nighivay 420 4,87 Jon Numhec 8211 Reette'snal Well oTJamomee 5000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nway Data 4.11 SIB CmEIdON (Hand -10. SON =15) Average Daily T ?c (Add: 60,100 vsM1iGea Auras' 15 P -114 -r Parbiatia a' 10% MWlum Truaks(2 ASks): 15 I HO Ur VOlmrre,' 6,lb0 -Whet. Heavy Thads(3k Axles): 15 Vanicla Speed: 45 mph yehk.Ie We Near/Far Lane Denearba: 76 het Valksta a I Dry Evening Nghl Deity &'is WU 0. Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 kM Lanier Type l0.Waq 1- Berm): 50 Hall TVcks: 86.5% 27%. 158% 0.74% CanRnine Dal 1e, Seller 1CO.O reel No.. SouFe EMVMbne art saeff Camwllne Dist b Observer 100.0 fed ANOe, 2000 Serer Disrenre to oGrervar: 00 red Maalum Thinks: 4.000 Gdsarvar thal(A.. Pad): SO at Heavy Trvcka 6068 Grasse Adhadiaent 90 Pact Elevation: 0.0 reel TOpo and barrier edenusdon) I Equivvalenl Dhtanre (in /el Road Ekvffian. L teal Auras: 92 5A7 Road Gaae: 06% Left View: NO deame5 McNUmi. fbi el Right Vial: 900 ae,- Heavy Thucksr 92547 Hlwa xolw Mold cmudetlons LM Gay I V&lide Type T REMF1 I Trelnc Fbw I Oismnca I Feass ROed I Friend I BenierAden I Lan, Allan Auhs; 6846 -123 4,39 420 4,87 Job Numlor 8211 Owo 5000 Auhs; 6546 5.83 4.11 -120 4,87 Aveage Odly TaWa(Al .0.000 O.WO babbigh Trucks: 7945 -1647 -439 -1. -0g' Heavy Trial p + Axles): 15 9000 9003 M um Trueks: 7945 -1141 -411 -120 -0g' 0. 9000 9000 Heavy Tracks 8425 1243 439 -120 -516 Nasesoume EM¢¢1wn¢ as f¢¢p 0,000 O.W3 Heavy Trucks' 84.25 -1536 -4.11 -120 -516 50 red 0,000 O.W3 WmMgefed Nnhu LevMa(signal TOpo and barrier edenusdon) Road Ebaystarr: 9o.1 Auhs: 92547 Final Gredk 50% dentinal Nnhu LevNS(wMmn TOpn and barrier efNnme ) Nnahm Tricks: 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: 90.0 ae9rea Heavy Tmds.' 92547 VeninJ YI Laq Park Item LM Gay I Inq Eval I IMNigh Lan Leq Park Hbm CNEL lnq Evening I I Lee leek HOUr I LM Oay I 1nq Evanirg Lee Nigh I Lan I I Ab(oc' 616 59.7 580 519 All 111 61.1 Auloc' 690 671 65.3 593 Mill Tracks: 5]9 680 Medium Tsks: 55A 539 47.5 46.0 613 544 547 Medium Trucks, 62] 612 ME 533 625 61.1 61.8 62.0 Heavy TUka: 562 54.8 45.8 470 WE 55A 55.5 Heavy Trucks: 63.6 622 53.1 54.4 649 627 62.8 VahMe Noss: 63.5 61.7 586 53.8' 645 62.4 6729 Vehide Nose: 758 6911 659 612 69.8 782 CanlMim Dkbnn an Mines Contour (in fal CanlMim Okbnn in NOiea Canrour (in 7ee4 101 1 0 tlBA I WdB9 I 55ABA TOdta 1 01 1 SO III I SS dB4 55 tlBA I ndSA 01 1 WdgA 1 55 Win Lan: 31 60 145 313 CNEL: Ltln: 97 20B 449 882 967 CNEL: CNEL: 34 72 156 839 336 CNEL 101 22A 482 I'm Nsscey..1 an all Snnario: Existing MAE Ar Pr jed Nams: NNCPC Rnad things: Coed Highway Job Numlor 8211 Roaa Segment East W Jam Wree Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS ingdwey Dda -120 4,87 SMl:ondism-(Hand= f0,al -b ) Aveage Odly TaWa(Al 47.000 -¢Mdse Al 15 Peek HwrPo bab a: 10% Meaum Thinks (2 Al 15 Peak He, Volmrre,' 4,700 veW4es Heavy Trial p + Axles): 15 vehcle speed' 45 mpll v¢hiere We Nsar/Fle.s. assmribe 76 feel VeskKTyg, I City Extruall Nghf I Deily Sih Odra 0. Auhs: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% @aM¢r HdpXG' 0.0 feet Siena ype 011- Bermf: @0 Heavy Tracks: 81 27% 158% 074% C rbxdin Chat fa BSmsr to0.o red Nasesoume EM¢¢1wn¢ as f¢¢p centers Did h obarvd: 100.0 bad Andby I Wit Samar Disrenre m observer 0.0 red Waal Tindal: 40WO User -., ,at (As.. Ped): 50 red Heavy Trvdis: 6LD6 Grenadfudmenc 90 Pact Eianden: 50 red Lane Equivalent Dhtrne(in heQ Road Ebaystarr: 9o.1 Auhs: 92547 Final Gredk 50% Lail Via-- -90.0 aeghea Nnahm Tricks: 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: 90.0 ae9rea Heavy Tmds.' 92547 F1WA Ndu MoWI L1le shatlas LM Venlde Type I R. I TmPW Fbav I Dlsfenee I Finke Rad I Fesn& R¢rner Men I Berm Aden Twscy,.1as.apla deal: ExiaYng MAE Ar Pi jadism NNCPC Rnad Name,: Coast Highway ge Numlor 8211 Roaa BegmenL' Weslof Newpoh CTR Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS ingdwey Data -120 4,87 Sda Cher acaus (7100 =f0, Ill =15) Aveage Ddly TraKc (AtlQ: 43.600 vehigas Autos 15 Peak HOUrPomsMs, 10% Meaum Trveke(2Aiall 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 4,360 vehl4ea Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles): 15 vehicle speed' 45 mpll Vehicre We iiaswFarlane De aribe 76 hall Vshkss y . I Day Evening Night Daily Sih Oala 0. Auha: 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill MediumToss: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Height 0.0 Mt Baniial(OnAlL 1- Berm): 50 Heavy TVons: WI 27% 158% 074% Ceraenln Dirt fa Semen 1Lm.9 had Nideal Essvelbnapn Gap cenhmlre Dan,, b ohnrvar: 100.0 fad Anne' 2000 Samar Dean. In observar 0.0 red Moaium Tindal 40WO Ddarver Hegia (As.. Ped): 59 red Heavy Thal 6006 Granagudment 90 Pad Ejanden: 80 red Lene EquhalenlDktmrebriled) Roetl Ekvelian: 90 beet Ades: 92547 Roetl Grebe: 50% Led Via-- -90.0 dial Maamm. 92504 Rgbf Vrew: 90.0 in,ra. HeavyTwts.' 92547 FIWA NWU Model Ll ndladas LM Vehlde Type I R. I TmPWFbw I Glsknde I Flnke Road Fraal I.Allan Berm Aden Auhs: MAE Ar 4,11 -120 4,87 0600 O:WO Autos: 68.46 4.00 4,11 -120 4,87 0600 0.000 Medum Tracks: 7945 -1247 -4,11 -120 -09T 9000 9003 Meabm Tracks: 7945 - 1279 -4,11 -120 /r.9T 9000 0. Heavy Tnbka: 84.25 -1642 -4.11 -120 -516 OOM 8OOK) Heavy Tnbka: 84.25 -1675 -4.11 -120 -516 .5000 8000 [Inummult Nola LeeNS(wllns,uf Topo and nenlx: aNaudbnf UnMtlgnfed Naa Lae (w of TOpnandbaMxallaadon) VebldeType Leq Pank Hbm Law, Gay lnq EVanhg Let, Nigh LM CNEL VenldeType Leq Park Hbm Leq Gay lnq Evening I Led Nigh I LM I CNEL Autos; 679 66.0 64.3 BOO 66.8 67.A All 676 LET 63.9 570 WE 67.1 Mill Tracks: 617 111 BOB ,52.3 607 609 Medium Tracks: 613 598 53.5 519 BOA BOB Heavy Trucks' 625 61.1 521 53.3 611 618 Heay Trcks' 622 WE 517 530 61.3 61.5 Vital Noise: 696 BOB 649 802 617 692 Vanden Noise: 694 677 645 599 68.4 68.9 Canfedinu Chlorin h Mal Contour Can MQ Csnfedfne Munn h Nasu Dea lCn MQ 101 1 0 tlBA I WdB9 I 55ABA 1 701 1 65 1 60 dB4 55 tlBA ldn: 82 177 382 822 Len: 78 16B EL 782 CNEL: 88 190 459 882 CNEL: 84 181 389 839 Tumerv. oW e,4 mla 6.1 -17 Tumerv. oW e,4 mla SCwinew Existlng 6646 3.58 miami Nams• NNCPC Read Name: Coast Highway Job Number 8211 Road Segment, East o1 Newport I Amex SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Oneway Oala -120 4,87 SIb Cmtl ns Hall 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Ta?2(Al 35.700 vehides A.. 15 peakHwr Percenleya,' 10% MWWm TmMS(2 Swiss). 15 Peak Hour V.hxr 3,00 vehides Heavy Tmcke(3k Shand): 15 vends Speed: 45 mmen Whkla We I ... /Forinni Channel, 76 het yehadial I Day Evanxi Night I Deily &Te Des, 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% El exammm Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Bander Haight 0.0 hM Bonier Typo l0.WalL I Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% CaemiM Dist In Small 1.. het Nan.$ -me Elavatbnn(In sand Camenris Dist In observer 100Z fed ANOs, 2000 Ssm« Dlsrenre to observer: go reel Medum Thadis: 4.W0 observer Har l(A.. Ped): 5o had Hemy Trvcka 8,006 90 Fad Elevation: 0.0 reel Lane Equivalent DNNna(in half Lane Equivalent Daniel as h Q Road Ebties- 90 Ielf Area 92.547 Roetl.reds: oG% Left View: -900 Stamm hhtllum Tmcks 92504 Fight View: W 0 degrees Heavy Tmcks: 92547 NiwAA lu MOdsl cehmetl.ns CNEL Venda Type I REMF1 I TmT Fbw I Oidinea I FINIe Road I Finame I. A. I Berm Amen Sewers, Existing 6646 3.58 mimet Nemy NNCPC Read Name: Gemin Highway Job Number 8211 Road Segment, West of Amends, Amex SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9heay Data -120 4,87 SIB CmEMON (Hard -10. SON =15) Average Deily Tral(AOQ: 34,400 vol Aulas' 15 Peak Hher Peessinga' 10% MWlum Tru m Swiss. 15 I HO.. V.I.-... 3,440 vehides Heavy Tmnka(3k Aslant: 15 -eyrie Speed: 45 men yanded. We I.../F., Lane Dishnce: 76 het yehadial I Day Evaning NON Dally &'is WU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9TA2% Aledlum Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Barter Height 0.0 kM Bonier Typa l0.Wam I Berm): o0 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 27 %. 10.8% 0.74% Caemin DISL in Barter 1.. het No.. SOUme ElahiOnes as sang Camwllns Dist b obs.rver 10U.o fed Anne, 2000 Semler Dlsrenre An observer: go reel khmum Trucks: 4.W0 Gdsarvar Heynl(A.. Ped): 5o had Henry Thinks, 8,006 Grsde Atlusiment 90 Pad Elevation: 0.0 reel Lane Equivalent DNNna(in half Lane Equivalent Dhtanre (in fixing Road Ebties- L O teal All 92 5L7 Road Gaae: Oo% Left View: 910 deamas McNUmi cks 92504 Right View: 900 aegreee Heavy Thmen 9250 HlwaA lw Modal cmurmtl.n. CNEL sonde Tyme T REMEL I Tminc Fbw I Oidamet I FONh Read I Framed I BarrrerAmen I R..n AOan All 6646 3.58 4.11 -130 4,87 0.000 o000 Amex 6646 341 4.11 -120 4,87 SM COndltl.ru (HVd =10, SO(t =13) o.OW 0.000 MBaum Tmcks: 7945 -1355 -411 -1211 Ill Peak HOm Volume' . W 9003 Maaum Trumm 7945 -1392 -411 -1 lid 1W Sandal yge I Day Everegil NgM I Daly 9090 9000 Heavy Tmckm 8425 -1762 -4.11 -120 -516 Heavy Tmcks: 81 27% 108% 074% 0,000 0.003 Heavy Tmcks' 84,25 -1778 -4.11 -120 -516 0.0 reel 0,000 0.003 WmM9eNd NOhe LevNa(segment TOpO and between alfMUa decd Hwvy TrvAs: BW6 Gorda AafuNment 90 Pad Ekvent. o0 reel Lane Equivalent DNNna(in half WmM9eNd NOh. L.. hillhmrt TOpn and bander alNnue" Al : 92547 Road.. o0% Left Via-- -90.0 aaghes VenicleType Laq Peak fell L, Day I feq EVwivig I Is, Nigh Lan CNEL shenwillpa I Lam Poak Hear I Lan Lay I Leq Lneeg Lee Nigh I Lan I LIEL Atents 6G.T US 5311 570 57.1 FEE 662 Amsm 666 64.7 629 568 611 65.5 SEA Medium Thinks : 005' 510 52.6 51.1 52] IS 59.8 Metllum Trucks; 808 Si 52A 509 52] 594 596 Heavy TUks: 613 599 50.9 521 51 60.5 616 Heavy Tmcks: 61.2 59] 50.7 520 51 60.3 WA Vessels Norse: 666 69.8 61 Ego 637 67.5 66.0 Vehide Nexam 68A 517 635 58.8 637 67.4 67,6 CanrMlre Ddebnn he Nana Conroe. (in All 68.1 Contains OhlNnn as Mal Diameter Cn M(1 Damsels case nn as Nan COnroer (in sand Contains Wshnn as Nasu Diameter Cn Al TO dBA 1 65 SBA 1 Wail I WdB4 I 55 tlBA I Msign 01 1 WdBA I WdI Lan: ed 147 3t6 149 fill 992 Ltln: 97 140 310 149 Em CNEL 73 156 341 160 734 742 CNEL 72 151 332 160 716 law,,.. z9. all Snnario: Existing I all, Rjed Name NNCPC Rudd Name: Coal Highway Job Numher 8211 Road Segment East clAVacaao Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hghway Data -120 4,87 SM COndltl.ru (HVd =10, SO(t =13) Avenge Daily TaWc(Add. 38.300 vehdes Autos 15 Peak Hour Powastal: to% MedumTatintRASks),- 15 Peak HOm Volume' 3,630 vehides Heavy Treatise (3 +Aides): 15 vehdee speed' 45 mpb V¢hicre MM Nsaniiel Diismrten 76 feel Sandal yge I Day Everegil NgM I Daly Sih Oala 9003 Aume: 77.5)t 12.9% 96% g/.42% Medum Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% BaM¢r H."id, 0.0 feel S.amerTypa(DWalt I Berm): oo Heavy Tmcks: 81 27% 108% 074% C rhwmM Dirt fd Bemer 1Lb.o reel NOIse3OUme Elentl.n¢ as Nap cenreMre Liat N observe(: 100.0 fad Anne, 2000 Bemer Deal m observer, 0.0 reel Maeyum rucks: a WO observer ,at (An.. Pod): 50 reel Hwvy TrvAs: BW6 Gorda AafuNment 90 Pad Ekvent. o0 reel Lane Equivalent DNNna(in half Road Esswatert 9o.1 Al : 92547 Road.. o0% Left Via-- -90.0 aaghes twomna Timms : 92.504 Rghf Vrew: ad. aegrese Heavy Tmwd 92547 F1WA al MOnI L11OUl¢Sws m asheiType I S. I Tm5 Fbw I Distends I Fills Road I Fill B¢rcer Me, Berm Amen leamem..2ola Snnario: Existing 6SA6 365 Rject NUma: NNCPC Road Name: Coast Highway Job Numder 8211 Road Segment' West of Maarlhur Autos: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS inghwey Dora -120 4,87 .0 COndltloru gal =f0, Sott =fall Avenge Ddly TaKc(Add. 36.400 yal Autos 15 Peak Hour Pornmes,: to% Medum Trveks(2Aiks),- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 3,640 vehides Heavy Tresses 0,naden 15 vehdde speed' 45 .1 gia icre Ws Nsynsxrdmw Dismrten 76 hsl VahkKTyn I Day EveMrq Nghl Daily Sih Oats 9003 Am. 77.5)t 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tmcks: 90.9% 49% 193% 194% BaM¢r Height 0.0 MI Samm,lype(0-Widi I Berm): Bo Heavy Tmcks: 81 27% 108% 074% Cmammy Dirt se Bemer 1Lb.9 reel NOISe SOU gannegeminifxp cenreis Lid,, b obnrvar: 100.0 hM And 2 000 Gamer Oman. In observer, 0.0 reel Waium Turkel aWO observer ,ft (An.. Pod): 59 rn1 Hnvy Thal 6X6 Grade"ammen, 90 Pad Ekvamon. 0,0 sal Lane EquhalentDkhna(InfeeQ Roetl Ekvetum, 90 heel Anbs: 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left Via-- -90.0 aeghn Maamm. 92504 Right Vrew: 90.o aegrnes HmVTwts' 92547 FIWA NWU MOnI ead-hatlons disman Type I S. I TmPWFbw I Didnede I Finite Road Fmsrnl I.Man Berm Amen Autos: 6SA6 365 4,11 -120 4,87 O.W) of Autos: 6646 366 4,11 -120 4,87 O.W) O.WO ALI Tm. 7945 - 1359 -4,11 -129 -097 o009 9003 MaSUm Tm. 7945 -1359 -4,11 -129 lah, 9009 9003 Heavy Tn2kd: 51 -17,55 -4.11 -120 -516 .DOW o003 Heavy TU2kd: 51 -17,53 -4.11 -120 -516 o.OW o003 UnMNg0Nd NOIn LeVNS(wallut TOpn and deMxalNnuM n) UnMNgnNd Nl LeVeN(wMOut Taps andhmdxallMWtl.nf VetldeType Leq Peak Mbui Late, Ley leq Evening Le, Might LM CNEL VatldeType Leq Peak Hbui Leq Ley leq Evening Led Night LM CNEL Aides ; 668 61 Wd 57.1 551 66.3 All 668 (1 611 57.1 65.7 W 3 Medium Tmcks: WE Ill 52] 51.1 59.6 59.8 Medium Tmcks: 60.6 EPA 52] 51.1 595 59.8 Heavy Trucks' 614 WO 51 522 60.5 61 Hal Tmem' 61.4 000 51 522 WE WT final Ndn: VILS 669. 637 00,1 67.6 68.1 Vail Ndn: WE 669. 637 59.1 67.6 68.1 Contains OhlNnn as Mal Diameter Cn M(1 Contains Wshnn as Nasu Diameter Cn Al 70 1 01 1 W dB4 I 55 tlBA 1 70 al W 1 60 aB4 55 tlBA lain: fig 149 321 992 lain: &n 149 322 993 CNEL: 74 160 345 742 CNEL: 74 160 345 744 Tumerv.tW as, mlz 6.1 -18 Tumerv,wi a4N1z BCenala Existlng Pmiad Name• NNCPC Pioiacl Name• NNCPC Rcad Name: Coast Highway Jon Nurl 8211 Jon Niel 8211 Roads.'a l: Ea.d MapMUr SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Ohaddy Oala Sib Cenddaide (HW =10, a- =1a) SIb Chanda ns (l 10. Sol 15) Avenge Deily Tia ?2(Ad): I vehitlsa Am. 15 Pankl4wr Percanlsga 10% MWlum TruMS (2 Axksf: 15 Peak Hod Volurrre,' 5,020 -hid.. Heavy'Int. 3k Axlnsf: 15 vane Speed: 45 .0 Wankle We N ... 4irGarre Oiddrhaa: 76 Lail yahkati a I Day Evidel I I Deily &Te CaU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% Madera Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Madera Trucks: 04.6% 49% 193% 194% Bander HnlBht. 0.0 Red Banner Than hLIVal(1- Berm): 60 Heavy Trucks: 1 21%. 10.8% 0.74% Canal Del to Same, Ild. Ref Nett. Soul Elevatbne(In ineff ConleAne Dist In Odeal 1LU6fed Adana, 2000 Banter oisrenre to Obadn- Oo reel Maraud Thada: 4.W0 IJeserver Hagnl(A.. Pee): 5o had Hae,Trl 8LW6 Grene AePana e90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 reel Lane Ell tandem Distanre(in Red Lane Equivalent Land- (nFail Road Elevation: 90 ION ANDS: 92.547 Roe, Gade: 30% Left View: -90.0 denied Wd,-1. 92504 RI View: W 0 degrees Heavy Tmcka: 92547 dial Need Mont CaRmefiww Ve.ide Type T n1l Venda Type I REMF1 I Thal Fiuw I Lfral I FNR Roatl I Feenel I. A. I Berm An a Scenario: Existlng Wind PrO att Pmiad Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Jamtlmee 4.11 Jon Nurl 8211 Road Sll,ral NOnM1ul Easlnluff 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwcy Dal 4.44 Sib Cenddaide (HW =10, a- =1a) Avand. Deily Thal i ): 43.600 -hid.. Atari' 15 Peakl4wr Percentage' 10% Uld. Thl (2 these. 15 Peak HO.. VOlurrre.' 4,360 -hide. Heavy Tmnka(3k tLated: 15 v.nicl. Leal 45 mpn I'ankk We N ... hid Lane Dedrd: 76 Laet yahkatil I Day Enarenjil Nlshl Deity &'Ie WU -1211 197 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% Madera Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BandeIH.l9ht. 0.0 kM Banner Typa l0.Waq I Berm): 60 Heavy Trucks: 1 27%. 10.8% 0.74% CanRnine Dial in Send, 1.. Ref No.. Sodda ERVatbns an Reff ConMNre Did bOdell 10I fed Aida 2000 Samar oisrenre In DGrervar: Oo reel Maraud Thada: 4.W0 ..server tial(A.. Pad): 50 at Henry Thl 3006 GradeA dahhent 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 reel (NmM9eR, NOhe LevNa(enhmn Lane Ell tandem Distanre(in Red Road Elevation. L O teal ANOs: 92547 fed,.rede: 06% Left View: 900 deames Adda -T eke 92504 Right View: 900 degrees Heavy Thi 9250 shwa Mend .1.1 Calu fatted Laq Pmk HOm Ve.ide Type T n1l I Trelnc Fbw I Olslence I Finite ROOd Fivend I .enlerAnen I Berm AOan Aubs; 6646 566 4.11 -130 4,87 Road Segment EaaWluff to Ban Juaquln Hilk 0.000 0.000 Aube; 6646 4.44 4:11 -120 4,87 Adrd 15 O.OW 0.000 McNUm Tiucke: 7945 -12 i0 -411 -1211 197 45.1 . W .. Man-T.ake: 7945 -12 IF -411 -1211 197 BaMd H."id, 0.0 feed 9090 90W He.,T.dk¢' 8425 -16.14 -4.11 -120 -616 Sal oisrenre m Obal, 0,000 01 Ha,Theks' 81 -1615 411 -120 - 516 00 rat 0.000 01 (NmM9eR, NOhe LevNa(enhmn Tend and Odder eHenuardal Road.. 00% Left V,sw,- -W.o aaghea N:dbm TVUka: 92.504 UnmM9eR, NOhl Lana( handed Topn and bell ethemadon) Heavy Tmds.' 9250 Pal.. MoWI L11nuhMwe Pal. Nnlu MOdd CalnuhMans Varta.Type I It. I VenrcJeType Laq Pmk HOm Leff in, lnq Evening I Laq NIgM Ldn Laq.ey CNEL Venrc lfhd I LM Peakl I Leal hay I fnq EVwlirg Lan NIgM I Lain I CNEL Au(nc' 682 61 64.5 565 668 61.1 677 Auloc' 67.6 65.7 0..9 579 621 80.7 Ill 67.1 Medium Tracks: 820 60.4 111 52.5 59,0 61,0 512 Medium Thl 613 59.8 53.5 519 526 604 606 Heavy TUka: 628 61.4 52.3 536 50.9 619 62.1 Heavy TUCk.: 623 1 51.7 530 WA 61.3 615 Val N.: 700 683 65.1 0.5 59.0 69:0 69.5 Vehicle Nal 69A 67,7 1 589 CIA 68.9 canredi d Dkmnn R Mine Cdnbur (in Rd) candy ind Dkmnde R mine Cdnbur (in Re4 I0tlB4 1 0 S I Wain I OdBA 1 TO tlBA I Mtl8A I WdBA I WdB4 Idn: 1 10 dBA 0 c 1 60 dBA I Wdill Ine, Ltln: 1 105 389 009 059 CNEL: % Ltln: ]R 190 361 762 CNEL: 74 Cl 92 196 428 921 CNEL 84 181 389 639 "did, .1 l9. ail 1,11 all, Sronaho: Existing Wih Pread Pi jidthr a NNCPC Rudd Name: Jamboree -120 4,87 Job Numac 8211 Road Segment EaaWluff to Ban Juaquln Hilk O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Data 4,11 SNa COndldoru(Hard= f0,aide j AlahaW odly ThaftL U: 53.700 veMdes Adrd 15 Peek Herr Pom hhl 10% Madera Tweet (2 Addl 15 Peak He, Polumn' 5,370 Vehil Heavy Trvuke p, Antos): 15 Veade speed' 45.1 Vehicle We Naar7Fal a.Varice.' 76 fad VehkkT le. I Day Evanirq Night I Daly Slid, Ode Slid, Ode Aab 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium 1 49% 193% 194% BaMd H."id, 0.0 feed BamerType(DWall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cehathd 1. Bader cenreMre Dist in ohaarvd: I.. had Im.0 fed fil Sadear Fiendead. Pn Oe) Aide, I Wd Sal oisrenre m Obal, 0.0 red Morpum rucks: 4800 Deserver ,at (Al Pad): 50 red Heavy TrvAS: 8006 Gre,a Ithaneent 90 Pad Elanden: 00 red 00 rat Lane E9uhalenl Dhtrnce (in Re) Rued Elevaidr: 9o.1 Aube: 9250 Road.. 00% Left V,sw,- -W.o aaghea N:dbm TVUka: 92.504 RI Vrew: 90.0.egret Heavy Tmds.' 9250 Pal.. MoWI L11nuhMwe Pal. Nnlu MOdd CalnuhMans Varta.Type I It. I The Fbw I .isfenda I Fails Road I Feet. Berner Men I Berm Anon mmeay. Nea 2a, mle Sronaho: Existlng With Protect Pi,d NUa: NNCPC Road Name: Jamboree -120 4,87 Jon Numac 8211 Road Sagnal BwNNSan Jmquln Hllla O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey Data 4,11 .0 COndal (HW =f0, SoH =15) AahaW odly Tat Xc(A4. W.000 tel Adrd 15 Peek Hoh'. nge: 10% Mended Trveke(2Aias),- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 3,E40 vehil Heavy Trvcke 0, Antes): 15 Ve .speed' 45 .1 Vehicle We Naar7Fal Didarice.' 76 teat Vehk aT . I Day Evening Nghl Daly Slid, Ode 9009 At. 77.5% 12.9% 86% 9742% Medium 04.0% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 Md BanierType(0.Wa11, I Berm): BO Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CerRenlne Dirt. Sal cenremlre Dial b ohoarvar: Ild. had 1W.G RM Nobitled- fama.lbnepn Gx) Adel 2000 Benner ourenae In Deemer, 0.0 red Waal rucks: 4600 Deserver He,nl(Al Pod): 59 red Heavy Thant 3006' Grade"f,whent 90 Pad Edneem: 00 rat Lane E9uhalentDkhna(In1ed) Roatl Ekvai.n: 901ed, ANas: 9250 Road.. 00% Left V,am- -90.0 dial Madbm. 92504 RI Vrew: 90.0 degrees HaavyTwts: 92547 Pal. Nnlu MOdd CalnuhMans Lan Nigh Venld.Type I It. I Thanall I Oshnne I Faila Road Free. I.Man Berm Anon Aubs: (I 5.35 4,11 -120 4,87 0600 O:WO Aubs: 6646 361 4,11 -120 4,87 0600 O.WO MaSUm TUnka: 7945 - 1199 -4,11 -129 1L7 0fid .. Unal TUnka: 7945 - 1363 -4,11 -129 /r. 97 9009 0. Heavy Tn2ka 04.25 -1565 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOW of Heavy Trudw 1 -1758 -4.11 -120 -516 O.OW OOW UnMtlgnRtl Ndae LIVtlidllnouf Fine and.aMdalbnudbn) UnMtlgnRd NOlae Landas(wMOUf Tend and hddxathanda of Venidatype Leq Peek Hhui LaqDay leq EVanbg Lan Nigh LM CNEL VenideType Leq Paak Hhui Laq.ey leq EVadng I Laq Nigh I LM I CNEL Autos; 68.5 664 64.8 56B 574 68.0 Aubs; 668 84.9 MA 570 65] 663 Mail Tracks: 621 80.7 UA .520 Bid 61.5 Madfum Tracks: 605 59,0 111 51.1 59.6 59.8 Heavy Thel 63.1 61.7 526 539 111 624 Hid, Trucks' 61.4 59.9 50.9 521 90.5 60.6 Vehen Nose: 793 68.6 654 WA 69.3 69.8 VehkJe Nose: 686. 669. 637 59.0 67.6 680 Candid O4bnn he Maine Candour Cn MU Candid Wetannro NOku Candour fin MO I0tlB4 1 0 S I Wain I OdBA 1 70 tlfl4 0all 50 tlB4 55 tlBA Idn: Sp 194 417 090 Ine, &9 14R 319 009 CNEL: % 208 "1 864 CNEL: 74 159 343 738 Taadllail..S12 6.1 -19 Tum4ry. MCV18. Al2 Sterelro: ESistlng Veil Intel Pmiecl Nams• NNCPC Rcad Name: JamOmae -130 4,87 Jon Nunder 8211 Road Segment, them W San. Barham 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBl Oa la 4:11 Sib Cmdldons (Ham=10. Sma =15) Average Daly These i @): 38.600 vehides ALI 15 PaakHwr Pemenel 10% MWWm TmMS(2 Axles): 15 Peak HO.. Vmlurrre, SW vehides Heavy Tmnke(3k Axles): 15 Van. Speed: 45 mpn Venkle We Near/FarLane Oimeme: 76 feel yefaide s I Day Eval Night I Neely &Te Data &Te WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% eammm Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 RM Banner Typa oLVml(1- Sol go Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% C.Ihe idel In Beeer 100.0..1 Mem. Somme E/eve0nne (In /eefj Candi Dist In obmmar 1LU.o fed ANne, 2000 Beeler Dlsrenre b obamen, goad Medum Thiel 4.W0 observer Hal hem. Ped): 5o had HearyTmcka 8,008 cnede Adfudmene 90 Fed stamen, 0.0 .el 0.0.d Lane Equlvalent OH.nm(nh s Road Elevation: 90 half Acres 92.54] Roetl.. 60% Left View: -No del t'le ma uncle. 92504 Still Wall Wo degrees Hmvy Tmcke: 92547 Ph.. Model cak'meflms Hlwa Al Model cmmlatlma VmldPType I REM¢ I Thal Fbw I Ols.nce I FIN. Road I F me 2errlar A. Berm A!!en Seememio: Existing WiNPrefset Pmiecl Name• NNCPC Stec Name: Jandmes -130 4,87 Jon Number 8211 Send Segment, SouN M Sane. Bal 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe 4:11 Sib CmdldoN(Hand= 10,a -I: a) Average Deily Thal (Add 34.600 -hid.. Aulas' 15 Peak HOUr Pn-hea a' 10% MWWm Trucks (2 Sham. 15 Peak HO.. Vemv..' $460 vehides Heavy Tmnka(3k tImmi: 15 Van. Speed: 45 mph Venkle We N.../Fan Lane Dmearm.' 761ed yefaide s I Dry JEh)n91 MCI Calty &Te WU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeI Height 0.0 kM Banner Typa oLVml I Berm): Il6 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 10.8% 0.74% C hurl Dial in Barter 100.0..1 No.. Somme EMeatbne an .1) Candi DW b obmrvar 10U.o fed Adme, 2000 Samar Dlsrenre In oGaren, go bd Mamum Thiel 4.W0 Odeervar mal (Above Ped): no heel Hal Trvcka 8,006 GnsdPAmamhent 90 Fed stamen, 0.0.d Road Em,,terr: Lane Equlvalenl Dh.nm(in hees Road Elevation. Lo heel Aueae 92 54] Road.. Oo% Left View: No del McNUmi. 92504 Right Vial: 900 a.,- Hmvy Tmnal 9250 Hlwa Al Model cmmlatlma TmPW Fbw I ps.nde VmeleTyme T REM¢ I Thaler Fbw I Olsenm I Fnda Reid I Rmnd I oen.rAmn I Rem Seen Aubs; 6646 3.91 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Nummr 8211 owo 0,000 Aube; 6646 344 4:11 -120 4,87 AlameWDdly Traim(Aco. 32.100 tel .0.000 0.000 Mmum Tiunam 7945 -1332 -411 -1 to IL7 H.a, Thal p, keed): 15 9000 9003 Ll Trunk.: 7945 -1390 -411 -120 IL7 Si.I 9000 9000 Heavy Tmck¢' 8425 -1728 -4.11 -120 -616 100.0 reed, 0,000 0.003 Hmvy➢ucks' 81 -1775 411 -120 -516 Offearv.n ,at (An.. Pm): 0,000 0.003 (InmM9e.d NOhe Lewla(wllbmrt Tape and bander tlfmuadeel Ho .e, Lane Equhalen, Dh.nm(in Sees Road Em,,terr: 902.1 flnmMganned .. Lm. (.1 TOpn end banes et.ndal Left V,aw,- -No aagrma Nntlyn Tmdka: 92.504 Right Vrew: VmaJeType Laq Peek meldl Leq ony I feq EVwivig I Leq mat Type I REM¢ I TmPW Fbw I ps.nde I I'med Road I Fe.n& R.rnen Me, Rem Aden I I'min Road Fmran I.Man Rem A. I Lm P..k ll I Leal they I feq EVmng Lee NIgM I Lan Lad Mdat I CN¢ Au(m: 671 65.2 614 578 626 III 696 Aumc' 666 64.7 629 568 56.4 65.5 III Medium Trucks: 608 59.3 52.9 51A 52.1 59.0 50:1 Medlum Trucks: 808 568 52.5 111 47.9 594 596 Heavy TUH.: 61 603 51.2 525 50.4 60.8 60.9 Hem, Thank. : 61.2 598 50.7 520 463 60.3 60.5 Val N.: 660 67.2 64o 59.3' 632 67.9 66.3 Vehide Name: 68A 66.7 635 ofd 5810 67.4 67,A CanfMim Ok.nn he NOiaa COntow(in Ted) 633 Cm.alia, Distance ro Nase Cal Cn Ms CanlMi" Ok.nn ro Naaa camour(in Feet Cm.alia, D.bnm ro Nase Cal pnI TO dBA 1 65 d9A I So dSA 1 55 WRA 1 55dBA 1 70 dBA 0Idea I 60d@A 0SRI 55 WRA Ltln: 72 155 335 137 721 S. Ltln: 67 144 311 72 670 ONEL: TI 167 359 147 773 684 CNEL 72 155 334 77 719 lea 1. Nav m, mle Sronadu: Existng Wih Pmjed P ject Nama: NNCPC Rind Name: Jamhoree -120 4,87 Job Nummr 8211 Rena Segment I of Coast i l9hway 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9dwey Da. 4,11 SMCOndldone(HVd= 1mtedel j AlameWDdly Traim(Aco. 32.100 tel An. 15 Pmk HUrr Pornmell: 10% Mecum TmintRAaka).- 15 Peak HOm Volurrre,' 3,210 nahil H.a, Thal p, keed): 15 vmkle speed 45 mph vatic. N. Nsan7FarLan9 Diamme,.' 76 feet VehkKTym I Day Even/ei NI I Deily Si. Oa. Si.I Autos: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium TUCke 64.6% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Hd9hG' 0.0 lee, BamerType(DWdl, I Berm): @0 Heady Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 168% 074% Cemanine Dirt. Semer 100.0 reed, Im/sesoume Emmeme. an reap cmremm DlA in obmrvm: 100.0 feel Anne, 2 Wo Samar omen. m obsrrver, 0.0 red Wei Tmcks: 4.000 Offearv.n ,at (An.. Pm): 50 red Hwry TrvAS BMS crem Adjudmed, OO Pad Elevation: Ho .e, Lane Equhalen, Dh.nm(in Sees Road Em,,terr: 902.1 Anas: 92547 Rom.. LO% Left V,aw,- -No aagrma Nntlyn Tmdka: 92.504 Right Vrew: 90.0 ae9rem Hevy Tmmn' 92547 (i1WA al Mndd L1hadea s (i1WA Ndu Nndd L11.u.dm. mat Type I REM¢ I TmPW Fbw I ps.nde I I'med Road I Fe.n& R.rnen Me, Rem Aden Tu®ew. utivzs,zwz Stall: Existing With Purled mcadthms: NNCPC Read Name: Jamhoree -120 4,87 Job Nummr 8211 Rena Segment' Somm N Cme[ Highway 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9hwey Da. 4,11 Sea Cfernag ue(HW =f0, Soft =15j Ahml Cady Tat Xc(A4. 12.20 nal Aulm: 15 Peat Hon'.M.9a: 10% Mecum Trveks(2Aika),- 15 Peak H.m VW.mn' 1,220 vehil Heavy Theme 0, thal 15 vmkle speed' 45 mph vatic. W. N.ar7Farlane Diammm.' 76 teal Vehkle y . I Day Evening Nghf Dsly Si.I 9000 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tmcks 64.6% 49% 193% 194% @abler Height 0.5 Net BemerTypeo ll,I Berm): 60 Heavy Tmaks: 66.5% 27% 168% 074% CeMBnlne DI. Seeer I.. red Nals..GYesbb..pnfx) cmremm feel b obmrvm: 100.0 teal Anne' 2000 Barter Deal m onmrver, 0.0 real Madmat Tmcks: 4.000 Dbeerver He,nl(An.. Pm): 59 red H., Trml 8,005 cramldthemem' L. Pad Elevation: Ho .al Lane EquhalenlDkhimmonfees Roetl Elevation: 90 reel Al 92547 Rom.. LO% Left V,sm- -No aegrem Madmen. 92504 III Vrew: 90.0 m9rem Heal 92547 (i1WA Ndu Nndd L11.u.dm. LegI Ve,I.Type I REM¢ I Tmq Fbw I Dle.nde I I'min Road Fmran I.Man Rem A. Amm, 66,46 3.11 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 0:000 Amm; 6646 -los 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 0.000 Meemm Tmnka: 7945 - 1412 -4,11 -120 -09T 9000 9003 Mmlum Tmnka: 7945 -1633 -4,11 -120 /r.97 9000 9003 Heavy Trv2ka 8435 -1668 -4.11 -120 -516 0,00) 6003 Heavy TY2ka 8435 1228 -4.11 -120 -516 0.000 6003 UnMtlge.tl Ndsn LeVW (wlln.uf TYpn andheMxaMnYdmnf UnMtlge.tl Ndsn Levels (wM.uf Tapn endhaMxalLMYetlonj VmlmPType Leq Pam Hbw Lee, Day leq EVanmg LegI Len CNEL VmlmeType L.Q-.-I Laf Dey Leq Evening I Lad Mdat I Leh I CNEL Amm; ; 65.3 1 626 565 51 656 Anon; 62.1 662 56.4 523 51.0 616 Medium Tmcks: w 565 52.1 ,596 50.1 59.3 Medium Tmcks: 558 543 47.9 46A 54.9 55,1 Heavy Tmcks' 60:9 59.4 50.4 5116 60.0 61 Heavy Treks' 567 551 463 474 His 55.9 Val NWe: 68.1 66A 632 1 67.1 675 Val NWe: 639 523 5810 543 Us 633 Cm.alia, Distance ro Nase Cal Cn Ms Cm.alia, D.bnm ro Nase Cal pnI 70 tlB4 1 0SBA 1 60 dBA 1 55dBA 1 70 dB4 1 0SRI 60 dB4 55 tlBA ldn: of 137 293 S. Inn: 33 72 155 334 CNEL: 68 147 317 684 CNEL: 36 77 167 359 Tempel 6.1 -20 Teed Im Ia Vle,A. Severe, Existlng Withmolatt mied Name•NNCPC Rcad Name: Same Cruz 420 4,87 Job Num -8211 Read Segment, Nodh W San Joaguin Hill 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HISiddy Oala 4,39 SIB CmtlMons (hard= 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tra?2(AEQ: 1.700 vshidd Am. 15 PankHwr Pemorealm 10% MWWm Tl(2 Sites). 15 Peak Hour Volmrre.' 170 veM1iGes Hill im. P, Sit.): 15 Vndien Spend: 4s.0 Whial W. I.../Fill Ddiderce: 52 Ret Vandel I Day IEVbVl Neff I Deily Sid Cal Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 134% Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium TUCks: 84.8% 49% 193% 134% Bander Height 0.0 le. Barren Typo OLWal(1- Berm): 09 Heel Tmcks: S6.5% 21 %. 10,8% 0.74% Caeem. Dml to Senior 1...1 aide. Saida. Elevafbns(In/eeff Cadedino Dist to observer 1000 fed ANOe, 2000 Settler Deda- la obmrven 00 fad Mail Tmcks: 4.000 Gdserver HSgd!(A.. Pal 50 Iae1 Hm,v Trvcka 8,006 Grade Adudment 90 Fad Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel Lane Equlvaleal Dhfed.(in Add) Lane Equivalent DHhnre(n h Q Road Elevation: 90 led ANDS: 9f1607 Road Gmdn: 0.0% Left View: -910 degrees kdedlum Tmcks 98596 Ram Viaw: W 0 eegmes Heavy Tmcks: 95608 N4WA Nolu Mods, Cakubfions I Velien pis T REMEL I Venda Type I REMF1 I T.I. Flew I ..nce I F.. ROatl Finamm I. A. I Reim A!!an Sea lie: Existlng W0majad Pied Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Santa Omz 420 4,87 Job Numhec 8211 Send Segment S .h o1 San Joaquln Hills 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hecy IMIa 4,39 SIb Cmdgem. (Hard =10, SON =It) Average Daily Trieft faided 13.200 veM1iGea Aulas' 15 Peak Hnur Pemed,le,,' 10% Lane. Truaks(2 Aylem. 15 I I Volume: 1.nO venides Heavy Tmnka(3k feeem), 15 V.dicl. Speed: S ml yerykle W. I.../F., Lane Dishnam 52 feet Saide yps I Dry Evaning Night Deity Site WU sit. DIN Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 134% Bander Height 0.0 le. Barren Typa OLWaq I Berm): 00 Heel Tmcks: S6.5% 27%. 10,8% 0.74% Careem. Did.. Bander 1...1 Nd.. SOUme EMVatbne(meal Comedian Deal to odal 10I fed Aloe, 2000 Sill Deda -to observer: 00 Tad Mamum Tmnka: 4.000 Gdsarver HeyM(A.. Pal SO feel Hemy Tmaka 8,006 Grade Armideret 90 Pad Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel Lan.E9uhelenlDhhna Onfre) Lane Equlvaleal Dhfed.(in Add) Road Elevation. L led ANDS: 9f1607 Road Gmde: 00% Left View: 910 degmea McNUmT Oka 98598 Right Vial: 900 eegmee Heavy Tamdn 96605 HIWANOIx.1.ICaludeted- Len I Velien pis T REMEL I Tminc Fbw I Deal I Firde Road I Fmmrel I lemayrAgam I ReOO Agen Aides ; 6046 -965 4,39 420 4,87 Jon Plunder: 8211 0.000 0000 Al 6546 -075 4,39 -120 4,87 A,ayaWDdly TaKs(Al 11,800 0.000 O.WO Medum Tmcks: 7945 -2838 -439 -1211 -097 1,180.-Ill . W 9003 M um Tmeke: 7945 -1193 -439 -1211 107 sit. DIN 9090 9000 Heavy Tmcks 81 -SOAd 439 -120 -516 Cadence. Dial. Senor canreMre Did m obsarvd: 0,000 0.003 Heavy Tmcks' 81 1194 -4.39 -120 -516 50 Tad 0,000 0.003 WmHgefed Nnh. Levda (wNAOUf TOpo and be. eHenudlon) Lan.E9uhelenlDhhna Onfre) Said Elevelim, 9o.1 1 Wmfed. Nn h. Le. (.1 Tel and be., ideame tlon) Leh Via-- -910 del.. N:nlam Tanaka: 98598 Rghf Vrew: VenrcJeType Laq Peak Hour I Leq Gay I ,,Evening LM Night I Len I Laf L Venrceallya I Lam Peak Haur I LM Gay I Ieg Lnnmg Lee Night Len I I Al ' 532 51.3 49.6 all S6.0 521 537 Al ' 62,1 Milt 50.5 52A 57.0 61.0 616 Medium Tmcks: 470 1 39.1 37.5 47.5 460 48.3 Medium Tmcks: od Sid 4810 46.5 455 X.9 552 Heavy Tmaka: 478 46.4 37.4 30.6 45.8 47.0 47.1 Heavy TUCk.: 567 55.3 LOS 475 44.8 55.9 56.0 Venda Nose: 55.1 533 502 45.5 506 54.0 54.5 Vehicle fill WO 622 59.1 54A 576 (I 634 c ntagno Ddmnn he Hasa Centel (in All 61.9 CanhHine Disbar he Nase Cal fur MQ C.dal odmnn ro HOise camour (in radj CanhHim Distance he Nees Cal On M(1 70084 SO I SO WSA I SS dB4 I Ill 1 TO dSA 01 65 dBA I SS dB4 Ltln: 9 19 40 fill 36 313 Ltln: 34 73 157 50 333 Call 9 20 43. 72 92 336 Call 36 76 ISO 62 362 em Samem, ExieBng Wil mallet P jed Name NNCPC Real Name: Santa Cruz -120 4,87 Jon Plunder: 8211 Road Oagment NoM of San Damenle 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Did 4,39 S&COlifile ir(HW= 10,SoH=15) A,ayaWDdly TaKs(Al 11,800 vel Autos: 15 Peak HUrr nernme a: 1056 Mecum Tmake(2 Al 15 Peak HOm V.I.-... 1,180.-Ill Heevy Tanana p, itede): 15 Venkle Ell 45 mph vahiare We NaadFarLane andrice .' 52 feel VehkhTya. I Day Eyeal flight I Daly sit. DIN 9099 Auroa: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 134% Bander HeSdan 0.01ed Si merTypa (OWall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cadence. Dial. Senor canreMre Did m obsarvd: I.. Tad 100.0 feel Nola. SOUme Reveller. On txp Anne, 2000 Seiner Dean. m observer 0.0 red Wiffem Tmcks: 4.000 onaem.r He,nl(An.. Pao): 50 Tad Heal TrvAS' 8,006 GmW Angedmem0 Pad Ekvetlon: 00 rad Lan.E9uhelenlDhhna Onfre) Said Elevelim, 9o.1 Al SO 607 Roetl Grenk 00% Leh Via-- -910 del.. N:nlam Tanaka: 98598 Rghf Vrew: 90.O negmm Heavy Tmcks 96608 (i1WA Ndu.., Llkulahwd leg EVankg Leq NIgM Venial.Type I S. I Tm5 Fbw I OkfenW I Field Raan I Fred. Rarcer Men I Reim A. lelew.tma2a.nlz Seentem. ExieBng VIM m... mjed NUma: NNCPC Read Name: Smile Cruz -120 4,87 Job Numdr 8211 Read Segment' &em of San Clemente 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Defy 4,39 .0 CondlEbru (HW =f0, Soft =Ill) Aall Daily TrOKs(A4. 9.400 vel Autos: 15 Peak HwrPommdaga: 10% Mecum Tmoke(2Aikd.- 15 Peak Hourlmll NO need Heevy TlucA90,final 15 Venkle Ell in .1 vahicre We Naadflai a Dmmmm' 52 eel VehkKType I Day Evening Night Daly sit. DIN 9099 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Tmcks 84.8% 49% 193% 134% Bander Height 0.5 M1 Semill (f-Wall, I Be-): BO Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CedenlM Dirt. Bonier cenrer,IIre DIM. In obcervar: Ild. ad 1000 fed Ndde Swm.GYVatlea.pnfxp Anne' it M. Berner Oman. a oberver, 0.e red Well Tmcks: 4.000 Deserver ,at (An.. Pan): 59 Tad Hal TrvAS' eX6 Grade Aefudment 90 Pact Ekvatlon: 00 ad Lane Equhahm Dhbnadrileaf Roetl Emmil: 90 reel Al 98607 Real Gmde: 00% L.8 Via-- -910 deep Mal T.a: add. Right Vrew: 90.0 ee9mes HmVTmd- 96608 (i1WA Ndu MOW, Lllnulahona leg EVankg Leq NIgM Venial.Type I S. I TmR Fbw I Immenne I Fkga Road Fray. I.Affen Reim A. Amm 68.46 - 123 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 Ames: 6546 -232 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 0.0(0 lammm Tmnka: 7945 -1.47 -439 -129 IOT 9099 9003 Martel Tmnka: 7945 -1946 -439 -129 IOT 9099 9003 Heavy Tmcke: 5435 2L43 -439 -120 -516 .BOW 0003 Heavy Tmcke: 5435 -2341 -439 -120 -516 O.OW 0003 UnMNgnted NOldn LeVds(wNMuf Tope and e6alw. adMudbnf UnMtlgnfed Nden Lmdar NEamt TOmandmmf;r l fty) main Type Leq Peek HOUr Lag Gay leg EVankg Leq NIgM LW CNEL VenldeType IL.Q-.-I Leg Gay (eq Evning. Laq Nlgn! LW CNEL Al ; 616 59.7 S6.0 518 60.5 61.1 Auks; 696 58.7 57.0 WS 59.5 602 Medium Tmcks: 554 53.9 47.5 46.0 544 547 Medium Tmcks: 54.4 52.9 455 45.0 534 537 Heavy Tmcks' 562 54.6 45.8 470 S5.4 55.5 H., Tmcks' 552 53.6 44.8 450 MIA 546 L&I Nnse: 635 61.7 506 OF 6L4 62.9 L&I Nnse: 62.5 S07 576 52.9 61.5 61.9 CanhHine Disbar he Nase Cal fur MQ CanhHim Distance he Nees Cal On M(1 70 dfl4 01 1 50dB4 I Ill 1 701 01 60 tlB4 55 tlBA lain: 31 fill 145 313 fall: 27 50 125 289 CNEL: 34 72 156 336 CNEL: 29 62 134 289 leadIni l..Siz 6.1 -21 7adyi.ti le.Ail Samara, Existlng With Purled Purred Name• NNCPC Read Name: Same Cruz 4,39 Job Number 8211 Road Segment, NaNM1 W Normal CTR 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBbwey Oala -562 Sale Contlldons (Hill 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Ta?s(Al 9.000 -hid. Am. 15 PenkHnortheemega 10% MWWm Tmeks D Sill 15 I HO.. VOlmrre.' 000 veMdes Hill 'ne. Pk Axles,: 15 venial speed: 45 mpn Whilcl. 6Fa I ... /Farlae 0isfamee: S2 fed Sanda ype I Day Evandall Night I Deily age Carl -I TO 1g7 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Tucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 104% Barter Height 0.0 kM Samar Typa(lLIVI I Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 2T %. 10,8% 0.74% CBmem me idel In Small Ifid..1 fide. So ma Elevafbne (In /eeff Cadwllne Dist to Observes III fed ANDS, 2000 Bell Ded ma, to obmrven go feel Well Tracks: 4.W0 observer Hegd(A.. Pell: 5o had Hm,v Tml 8,006 Grade AHudment o0 Fad Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel (NmMgefel Nnh. Levda(wllhmrf Lane Equivalent OHhnre(n h Q Road Elevation: 90 IeN ANDS: 9,1607 Roetl oredn: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 deal Medium 1. 9S LISP RI View: W 0 degrees Hevy Tracks: 95.608 Phial A lu Model Cakubffons Leg Pmk flowl Lai day I Venda Tye I REMF1 I TmT Flew I OiaGnea I Fin. Read I F-me terrier A. Berm A!!an Seanalio: Existlng WiNPmatt Purred Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Santa Omz 4,39 Job Number 8211 Roadyi,e end: SouNOf Nmvpon CTR 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dal -562 a- Cmdalme (Hard =10, Sad =15) Average Daily Tre ?c(Add : 4.300 vol Aiding' 15 PeaRHwr Percenmga' 10% MWWmT m(2 Ayine. 15 I HO.. VOlmrre,' 430 vehil Hill Tnka(3k Axle): 15 Venicle Snead: 4s mph yeblcle ONY I.../Far Lane Distance: S2 het Sanda ypa I Day Evening NOW Dally Site WU -I TO 1g7 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91A2% Medium Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Barter Height 0.0 ISM Samar Typo l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 27 %. 10,8% 0.74% CanRni eDI5L in SamBS 1...1 Nd.. Somme EMVatbne an/edf Cadwllne DW to Obseves III fed Anne, 2000 Semler Demme to observer: go fad Medium Timada: 4.W0 Gbaervar Iel(A.. Pell: 50 feel Hemy Trvcka 8,006 Grade Arlueiment 90 Pad Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel (NmMgefel Nnh. Levda(wllhmrf Lana Equivalent Claim. (in /ed) Road Elevation. L O last ANDS: 9,1607 Roetl Gade: Oo% Left View. 900 deal WhimaT cks 995fi5 Right Vial: 900 degrees HmWTnmc 98608 fHWA Al Model CMUrletlwa Leg Pmk flowl Lai day I VeMde Tyne T REMEL I Trains Fbw I Distance I FmM Rmd I Fmmrel I BanierAtten I Rwm Attan Aims; 6646 -2A1 4,39 410 4,87 Rena Segment With of Newport CTR 0.000 o0W Aubs; 6046 -562 4,39 -120 4,87 7.000 veMdes O.OW 0W0 Mamum Trumm 7945 -19 all -439 -1211 1g7 val spee6 . W 9003 M um hunk.: 7945 -2295 -439 -I TO 1g7 Alm- 7.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks 94.9% 49% 193% 104% 9090 9000 Heavy Tmckm 8425 1300 439 -120 -516 Anne, IWO 0,000 0.003 Heavy Trucks' 84.25 1881 439 -120 -516 00 rall 0,000 0.003 (NmMgefel Nnh. Levda(wllhmrf TOeh and barrier eNMUatlonf Al 92547 Roetl.. 00% Leff Via-- -W.O aagrees (N aggeNd Nn h. Le. hi ma ran TOpn end be., eliminated 90.0 a.,m- Heavy Tmans' 92547 F1WA al MoWI Lllnulnaas CNEL VenrcJeType Leg Pmk flowl Lai day I Ieq EVwivig Leq Nigh Ldn CNEL Ands; I Lag Peak Htur I Lai I I Ieq EVabg Lee Ni9M I Lan I I Al ' 685 58.6 %,6 50] 596 all 600 Al ' 573 all 6316 4i5 Meo'ium Tracks: 561 560 Medium TUCks: 51,2 52.1 48.3 440 all US 53.3 53.5 Medlum Tracks; 510 49.5 43.1 41.6 "S 501 503 Heavy Thiele : 55.1 516 M,6 408 51.9 541 543 HeavyT ink.: 51.8 50A 41.4 42.6 510 51.1 VehMe Nose: 62.3 60.5 57.4 all 613 6V Vehide fill 59.1 51,3 &1 Aga SEA 58.5 CaMwlime Dkmnn he NOil Ctntow(in Te.4 I WdM 1 701 Calling" okmnae le NOil Centel (in fat) 60 tlB4 55 tlBA Lim T3 50 107 TO dBA 01 1 SO dBA 1 55 dB4 58 114 I MdRI 01 1 WdSA 1 55 dB4 115 Ltln: 29 56 121 57 262 264 Ltln: 19 34 14 190 CNEL 28 60 13) 281 CNEL iT 37 W. 172 lien ll2a inlz Scenario: Exiatha WiNPmjad Reed Nama: NNCPC Road Name: Nell CTR -120 4,87 Job NUmds 8211 Rena Segment With of Newport CTR O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlghwey One -120 4,87 SNe COndllems(Herd= 10,le -e d Avere9e Odly TaWs(Al 7.000 veMdes Autos: 15 Peek HUrr Pornmel: 10% Madden TUCks(2Axka),- 15 Peak H.ur Vdmrre,' 700 veMdes Heavy Thalia p, Axed) 15 val spee6 45 .1 val We liedFmLae Didame, 76 feel VahkKTyOe I Day Evening NgM I Deily sit. De. Heavy Tnmks: Alm- 7.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks 94.9% 49% 193% 104% Barteriladon 0.0 led BemarType(0Vhalt 1 -Same: 00 Heavy Trucks: fail 27% 108% 074% Cededine Dirt fa Same,. CanleMre Did is Oberva: 1Lb.9 hd 100.0 fed Nolee Seme.-V .On feep Anne, IWO Semen Diem. to Oburver, 0.0 feel Mapum Tracks: 4.000 Obemm, ,at (AD.. Poll: 59 Ind Henry Trade : 8006' Grade Adfudmid, 90 Pad Elevation. 00 rall Lane Equvalenl Cattail (in Sent) Roes Elevetion: 9o.1 Al 92547 Roetl.. 00% Leff Via-- -W.O aagrees N:mam Timmy 92.504 Ram, Vrew: 90.0 a.,m- Heavy Tmans' 92547 F1WA al MoWI Lllnulnaas CNEL Ve entiType I S. I TmWn Flew I psfende I Fnkn Rma I Fran& t.rner Me, Berm A. leymaav2ain4 Scenario: Eyeing With Purled Reed Nama :NNCPC Read Nama: Nenpad CTR -120 4,87 Job NUmds 8211 Road Segment' BouN N Bane Batas O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highwey DMa -120 4,87 Sae COndIO.-(HW =f0, Soft =15) Aveage Ddly TaWelAJQ: 7.700 veMdes Autos 15 Peek Hon'.Mege: 10% Medun Tmoke(2Aika),- 15 Peak HOUr Vduma 910 nehil Heavy Tmene 0, Axles): 15 ve .spee6 45 .1 val We NedFarlane Diamme, 76 feel Vlgfdds a I Day Evenfrlg Night Daily Sit. Dam Heavy Tnmks: Am. Ti.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trucks 94.9% 49% 193% 104% Barter Height 0.0 MI BamarType(0-Walt I Be-): 00 Heavy Trucks: fail 27% 108% 074% Cedealm Dirt fa Bell CenRhe Led, ta. Obervas I.. hd 100.0 fed Ndde SOUme LYeveaonepn Tap Autos, 2000 Semen Oman. m 0.0 feel Madura Tracks: 4.000 Ob6erver He,nl(AD.. Pell: 591ad Heal Trade : SW6 Gme Aljudmed'90 Pad Ekvaaun: 00 fad Lene EquhdenlDklma(Infre) Roed Ekvdion: 901ee1 Al 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left Via-- -00.0 Sears- Mamam. 92504 Rghl Vrew: 90.0 a.,.- HeavyTwts' 92547 F1WA Ndu MoWI Llamlaaas CNEL mmailTyre I S. I TmPWFbw I Oldanae I Fnge ROad Finaal I.Man Berm A. Aube: (1 -300 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO O:WO Aube: 68.46 -31M 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO oW) Mall TCka: 7945 1.74 -4,11 -129 lay 9009 .. Madlum TCka: 7945 1.K -4,11 -129 lay 9009 9003 Heavy Tnmks: all -2469 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 0003 Heavy Trucks: all -2426 -4.11 -120 -516 01 o003 UnMtlgded NOfa Levde(wllnouI TOpo antlheMxdbnudbn) UnMtlgefed Nda Leads(wMOUf TOpmandbanandl Mond mane ye LaP Hbur Let Day Leg EVemng Leg Mail Len CNEL VdlldeTya Leg Pefa Lai day La EVamng Leg Night LM CNEL Ands; 596 57.7 fail 499 58.5 592 All 60,1 582 56A 503 59.0 596 Medium Tracks: 534 51.9 45.5 44.0 524 527 Meo'ium Tracks: 538. 523 4S9 "A 52.9 531 Heavy Trucks' all US 438 480 534 53.5 Havy Tmeks' &1 531 "S 45A 53.9 519 Vehide Noril 615 59.7 566 51.9 WS 60.9 Vehide Nora: 619 002 5)0 MA 00.9 613 Cenlelffae O4dnn ro Noise Call fin MQ Cenlelffae Distance ro NOiae Call fair MQ 70 dfl4 65 SBA I 60l I WdM 1 701 65 WRA 60 tlB4 55 tlBA Lim T3 50 107 231 lim T5 58 114 249 CNEL: 25 53 115 248 CNEL 26 57 123 264 TaedlIAL121.2I 6.1 -22 Taidyi.MeVte.Ai] Srenario: Existlng Wilh Intel mired Name• NNCPC Reap Name: themal CTR -120 4,87 Job Nimner 8211 Send Segment NOnM1 of San. Be.. 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBnway Bala 4:11 SIb Chicadons (Had=10. SON = 15) Ave.ga Daily T. ?c(1 8.590 -hid.. ALI 15 Patellarlhatemmga 10% MWlum Tmem(2 Axlial 15 Peak HOU /V.I.-... f5) -hide. Haavy Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 vanicla Speae: S man Vebkra We I ... /F.1Lmm Distance: 76 feel Sancta yps I Dey Evamill Nghl I Deily Site DyU 9990 All 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMer Height 0.0 RM Banter Typa l0.Wal(1- Sol 09 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 21%. 10,8% 0.74% C hfalhe Dial to Seller Ifid. met Naga$ -me Elave OCns(In Read Condamine Dist to Obse/ver 1006 fed ANOa, 2000 Settler Dislanre to obmrven go feel Mapium Tmcks: 4.000 observer meant hem a Ped): 5o had HearyTrvcka 8,006 GradeA dment 90 Fad Emiation: 0.0 feel Road Eleverirt: Lane li dedeat DHhnre(nAllied Road Elevation: 901elf Acres : 92.54] Roetl G.pe: 00% Left View: -900 del Metllum 1. 92504 Flight View: WO degrees Heay Tmcke: 92547 Ph.. Modal cakubffam I T.PW Flew I psbnae Vatlde Type I REMF1 I Thal Flew I Oismnce I Fin. ROatl Fmsrrel I. A. I Re/m A!!en SCanario: Existlng WiNProsd faimet Nemy NNCPC Roan Nam.: thel CTR -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Send Segment, 60um a Sarim Crim 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwcY ONe 4:11 SIb Cmdamme (famed =10, SON =1a) Anyone Daily T. ?c(Add : 8.000 vol Auras' 15 Peak Hour Pemertail 10% Median T/ucks(2 thism. 15 Peak HOU /V.I.-... 600. -hide. Hal Tmnke(3k temesf: 15 mnicle Snead: 45 man Vebkrs We I ... /I Lane Illegal 76 led Sancta yps I Dey Evaning Nlahl Deity Site WU 9990 All 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medium Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Bartel Height 0.0 kM Banter Typa l0.Waq I Berm): o0 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27 %. 10,13% 0.74% CanRnima Dial in Barter 1..met No.. smal EMVMbns an/eeff ComwNne flat to Observer 1006 fed ANOa, 2000 Berns. Dahmee In observer: 0o rall kiamum Tmtl:e: 4.000 Gbaervar might (Above Ped): 50 at Henry Trvcka 8,006 Grade Atluaiment 90 Pad Emiation: 0.0 had Road Eleverirt: Lane Egavaleat Dhfanre (in feel Road Elevation. LJ meal Auras: 92 54] Roetl G.pe: 00% Left View: 900 deg.es McNUmi ake' 92504 Right View: 900 a.,- HmWTmi 91 shwa xolw Model cmudenmrs I T.PW Flew I psbnae venten Tyne T REMEL I Trelnc Fbw I Oismnce I Final ROed F.sred I faimarAtten I Reim Aftan Aubs; 6846 -382 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.000 0,000 Aube; 6846 d,tT 4:11 -120 4,87 Avaoge Ddly TOWc(Ald. o.OW O.WO Maaum Tmcke: 7945 -2109 -411 - 120 -097 560 Mahn . W 9003 M um T/umm 7.m -21 Al -411 - 120 1W See Dale 9990 9000 He., Tmckc' 8425 1502 -4.11 -120 -516 Deraeain Dial ro Bender Canhdlne I in Obnrver 0,000 0.003 Henry Tmcks' 81 -2536 4.11 -120 -516 5. mod 0,000 0.003 (NmM9efed Nnhn LevNa(wllhmn TOpo and border tlfMUddel Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in feel Road Eleverirt: 9. met UnmM9efed Nnhn Levnb(wllml TOpn and bnnla/ afNadial f Left Via-- -900 aeg.e3 N:mum Tmuke: 92.5.4 Right Vrew: VenrcJeType Laq Penk Mwl Leg day I Ieq Evaivig I IMNIgM Lpn I T.PW Flew I psbnae CNEL Van Ifhya I Lam Poak lemur I Leg Lay I 1eq,therg Leg Nigh I Lan I CNEL Au(oc' 593 574 55.7 496 550 68.2 58.8 Autos' 590 571 65.3 493 55.7 579 58.5 deal Tmcks: 53,1 51.6 452 437 44B 521 524 Million Tmcks: 52.7 512 44.9 433 45.2 51.8 520 Heavy TUka: 539 52.5 43.5 447 428 53.1 532 Heavy Think. : 536 522 0.3.1 "A 4315 527 52.8 VehMe Name: 612 59A 563 516 556 60.1 60.6 Vel Name: bob 59d 559 512 56.3 598 682 CanIMim Dkbnn he Nana Deal (in III 606 Canhdinl D4bnn ro Nase Diameter Cn M(1 GnIMi" Dkbnn at Nan CWroer (in rnQ Canhdinl Wrtunn W Nase Diameter Cn MQ M III &fi tlSA SO SEA 1 55 dB4 1 55 tlBA I M111 01 1 60 dSA 1 55 dI Ltln: 22 47 1@ 43 220 199 Ltln: 21 45 9y 47 290 CNEL 24 51 109 46 236 214 CNEL 22 48 104 51 224 Tu ®ea..,.. N12 I all, Sronariu: Existing Will Pmjed Reed Nama: NNCPC Road Name: Normal CTR -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment Noll of Banta Druz O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hf9hwey Data 4,11 SNa COndagana(HW= f0,atia ) Avaoge Ddly TOWc(Ald. 5.600 veMdes Autos: 15 Peek HourPomsMSga: 10% Meaum TmCk3(2 Al 15 Peak HOm Vduma.' 560 Mahn Heavy Tmcke(S +Axles): 15 vehble sneea 45 .1 vahicre W. NeadFaLane Disanem 76 feel VehkKTyoe I Day Evearq Nlghf I Deily See Dale 9000 Aubs: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 1 49% 103% 194% Banda H."ad, 0.0 lee1 BammrType(OWall, I Berm): o0 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 10,8% 074% Deraeain Dial ro Bender Canhdlne I in Obnrver too.. real 100.0 feel NOfs.ammmsrdamtlens an rasp Aetna, 2p.. Berner Dislanre to Obnrver, 0.0 feel Marpum Tmcks: 4000 Uth,— Hegnf(AD.. Fal 5. mod HWry TNA3: 8008' G.n Adjudmad, h. Pad Emnetlon: o0 rall Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in feel Road Eleverirt: 9. met Aube: 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left Via-- -900 aeg.e3 N:mum Tmuke: 92.5.4 Right Vrew: .O.. there- Heary Tmda' 92547 F1WA Ndu MoWI L11nfati as feginval Ve eneiType I S. I T.PW Flew I psbnae I Filed Real I Femme Hs/ce/Men I Been A. N®ea.., 2a N12 Sronario: Existing WiN Purled Rjed NUma :NNCPC Road Name: Nomehl CTR -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Rwd Segment' Noll of Banta Rosa O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hf9nwey Defy 4,11 .0 Cm dltloru (HW =f0, Soft= fa) Avaoge Daily Tat Ks(A4. 6.500 veMdes Autos: 15 Peek Hou/Poms., 10% Meaum Tmoks(2Ailes).- 15 Peak HOm Vduee 659 Mahn Heavy Tmcke 0, Axles): 15 vehble sneea 45 .1 vahicre W. Naardlia eDmmmm' 76 feel Vahxdsy. I Day Eveeklg fall Daily See Dale 9000 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Tmcks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% BaMe/Hel96t 0.0 M1 SamerType(0.Wall, I Benn): 00 Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 108% 074% Ceraenln Dial. Bender Cenhdlne Dla, b Obnrvar 100.9 dad 100.0 teal Nofs. soumsrievMbns pre fxp Autos, 2 M. Same, Deal to Obre/ver, 0.0 feel Meaum Tmcks: 4000 Db6erve/ myia(AD.. Pelf: 5. lad H., Trade : 6008' G /an Admareent 90 Pad Ejendon: o0 rall Lane E9uhalenlDklana(Infre) Roetl Ekvaim, 9. reel AN63: 92547 Ri el.. 00% Left Via-- -900 aeg.ea Malbm. 925.4 Right Vrew: 90.0 a.,.- HaavyTwta' 92547 FIWA NWU MOWI L1baa0ws feginval mares Tyre I S. I TmPWFbw I Damnee I FInIIe Road F/emen Be/ce/Atlan Be/m A. Aube: 66,46 4A7 4,11 -120 4,87 000) O:WO Amem 68.46 -382 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 O.M Mal TU. 7945 -2171 -4,11 -120 1 m 9009 9003 Mealum TU. 7945 -2105 -4,11 -120 /rg7 9000 9003 Heavy Tmcks 8425 -2566 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 0003 Heavy Tmcks 8425 1502 -4.11 -120 -516 0.000 0003 UnnatlgOhd Nasu L.I NtfwNlwuf Tel add haMxaMnYMbnf UnnatlgOfed Nasn L.. (..I TOpn and hanlxaLMUatlonf VamenType Luq Pa lmlff Le, Ley feginval Lug Night Leh CNEL Venide Type Liel-fle-1 Lai Ll I Lad NIgM I Ldh I CNEL Autos; 5B7 566 550 490. 57,6 582 Aubs; 59.3 57A 55.7 498 582 588 Mil Tmcks: 524 509 44B 43.0 515 517 Metlium Tmcks: 531 51.6 45.2 43.7 521 524 He., Tmcks' 533 51.9 428 44.1 52A 62.5 H., Tmcks' 53.9 525 4315 447 61 532 Vdiden Nimal 60,5 MS 556 00.9 59.5 59.9 VehkJa Noire: 612 594 56.3 516 60.1 606 Canhdinl D4bnn ro Nase Diameter Cn M(1 Canhdinl Wrtunn W Nase Diameter Cn MQ IO LED 1 651 1 WaBA 1 55 tlBA 1 701 1 01 00pBA 55 tlBA Lien 2p 43 92 199 idin 22 47 102 220 CNEL: 21 46 99 214 CNEL 24 51 159 236 leml Me121.2I 6.1 -23 Tumea.lMVta.Al2 Sronario: Exisling Wirth Proleet Plied Name• NNCPC Reap Nam.: Neel CTR -130 4,87 Job Number 6211 Send Segment &. of Sand Rosa 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "'gaga, Dame 4.11 Saa CmtlMOns (Hard = 10, Soal 15) Avenge Daily T ?c (AtlQ: 9.200 -hid.. Auras: 15 Pa.kHwr Pemendga 10% MWWm TmMS(2 ilmill 15 Peak HO.. VOlmrre,' 920 vehides Han, 'made, 3k Axll 15 vehicle Speed: 45 mpn Venkla We N ... /FarLane Distance: 76 feel genteel I Day IEVbVl Nghl I Daily &I Dada 9990 Auras: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Si Medmm Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9nt 0.0 RM Banter Typa mWall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks, 111 21%. 108% 0.74% the.". Dist to Seller 1CO.O del Mi$-me ElevMbne(In Read Conferee Dist fe obaemar 100Z fed Anne, 2000 Settler Day mee la obmrven go feel Medium Tmcks: 4.W0 Gbaerver HegM hum. mad): 5o had HaaryTrvcka e065 GradeA yment OO Fad Ekvalion: 0.0 fed Road Elevation: Lane El detleal OHlanre(n h Q Road Elevation. 90 IeN ANDS: 92.54] Road Grape: 00% Left View: -900 degha Madam 1. 92504 Fight Vial: W 0 aegmes Heavy Tmcks: 92547 PiwA. MOdsl Cakubnons TmPW Few I peenda mmiidPType I REMF1 I Thal Few I Oisdnce I Fads Road I Fmenel I. A. I Berm A!!en Sememio: Exiaft Wilh Pmlatl Pmiacl Name• NNCPC Roan Nam.: Neeoa CTR -130 4,87 Job Nunal 8211 Rhil Segment Nodh of San Miguel 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Del 4.11 Slay Centel... (HUd =10, SAN =15) Average Daily T ?c (Add: 9,200 vehides Auras' 15 GeakHwr PPmarmal 10% MWWm Tmcks(2 Ax %s): 15 Peak HOU. Vemin..' 92) vehides Hal Thad,, Pk Axles): 15 vehicle Lined: 45 mpn Venkle We Naar/F, Lane Distance: 76 feet genteel I Day Evi leg MOO Deity &'fe WU 9990 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91 Medium Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% BaMeIHeight. 0.0 kM Banter Typa mWal {1- Sol 00 Heavy Trucks, 111 27 %. 198% 0.74% Lanni. Dal in Barter 1.. del No.. Somme edien Ones an/eeff Conferee DW fe observer 1LU6fed Anne, it.. Beeler Day mee to oGemen, 0o halal Mama "Tmcks: 4.W0 Gdserrar hal hum. mad): SO had Henry Tull 8,006 Grade Aamdment 90 Pad Ekvalion: 0.0 heel Road Elevation: Lane Equivalent Dhhnre (in /eell Road ElevaQOrt 001ad Auras: 92 5L7 Rued Grape: 00% Left View: Full deal MaNUmi. 91 ful Right View: 900 a.,- Heavy Tml 92547 Plea xolw Model Calculations TmPW Few I peenda vedidPType T REMF1 I Tmlhc Fbw I Oiadnce I Finda RYSd I Finared I BanierAtten I Reim Amen Autim 6646 -231 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Nummr 8211 0.000 0000 Audis 6646 -231 4.11 -120 4,87 Aveage Ddly TraWa(AtlQ: o.OW O.WO Ladmi Trunam 7945 -1955 -411 -1211 Ill 1,060 vehides . W 9003 Uni Truhm 7945 -1955 -411 -1 lad 1W Sih Dee 9990 9000 Heavy Tmckc' 8425 1351 -4.11 -120 -516 Cemadi "Dirt roeemer canal" Dim m observe: 0,000 0.003 Heavy Tmcks' ill -2351 -4.11 -120 -516 50 Tee 0,000 0.003 (NmHgefed Nnha LevNa(wllAmd Fall and berdereherentiaj Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in heQ Road Elevation: 90 rat (NmHgeted Nnha Lm. (al Tep, end be., ettmnuetlonf Left Via -9O0 aegha Wall Tmcks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: VenirJeType Laq Punk Immel LM Gay I leq Evening I IMNigN Lpn TmPW Few I peenda CNEL CNEL I Lam Polk Hem I LM Gay I leq,liveg Lee Nigh I Lan I CNEL Ammar 608 519 573 511 578 Si 60.3 Amon' 608 519 572 511 5817 Si 60.3 Mall Tmcks: SIS 53,1 41 452 55.2 53J 538 53.9 Metllum Tmcks, US 53,1 48.7 452 52.9 538 539 Heavy TUks: 554 54.0 45.0 462 560 546 54.6 54.7 Heavy Theme.: 55.4 94.0 450 462 MS US 51.7 VehMe Name: 1 61 . 578 53.1 633 61.5 616 62.1 Vehicle Same: 1 61 57.8 53.1 111 61.6 62.1 Cangenim Dlebnee he HOiae Ountow(in Teel 61.4 61.9 Cahill O4bnn ro Nase COl Cn Ml Clement" olebnee ea Mel COnrour(in Feet Cahill Weaan f fill COnrom9n Ml TO tlBA 1 65 dBA I 60 di 1 55 Win 60089 1 I TO dBA 0 c 1 60 SEA I 55 Wil 60dSA Ltln: 26 fig 12d 3p 277 141 Ltln: 28 fill 129 27 277 125 Cill 30 64 138 33 297 152 CNEL 80 64 138 29 297 mmnim lxv m, mle Sronario: Existing Wihmnad Peed Name :NNCPC Rnep Name: Nemeth CTR -120 4,87 Job Nummr 8211 Road Segment South of San Miguel of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hi9hwey Data 4,11 SAbLanai's"(HW= 10,eamil ) Aveage Ddly TraWa(AtlQ: 10.600 veMdea Auds 15 Peek Hour Pornmeal: 10% Mecum TUCk4(2 Axed: 15 Peak He, Polurrre,' 1,060 vehides Heavy Trvcks(S +Axles): 15 VPhkle speed' 45 mpn Vital W. NaanFiel Dieariee 76 feel VehkKTyOe I Day Evening Nghf I Deily Sih Dee 9009 Auras: 7.5% 12.9% 96% l/.42% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% SaMer Hei 0.0111 Summ,lype(DWalt 1- Bermf: 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cemadi "Dirt roeemer canal" Dim m observe: 1Lb.9 deed, 100.0 field Nas. Skal GY-e .Pn Nel Anna, 2000 Seiner Dememe m Obeever, 0.0 Tale Madam rmdms 4.00) observer ,at (AD.. Pad): 50 Tee Hill TrvAS: 8908 Gm"Adfuemed, O0 Pad Ekvatlun: 00 real Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in heQ Road Elevation: 90 rat Anas: 92547 Ruled Gredk o0% Left Via -9O0 aegha Wall Tmcks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: ad. aarea Hevy Tnuds.' 92547 F1WA Ndu Model Lalsuhhas teq Evening Venlde Type I S. I TmPW Few I peenda I Finiin Rad I Friame Rsrcer Men I Been A. matim eel ximle Sronario: Existing WiN Purled Peedli me: NNCPC Rasp Name: Nenaaa CTR -120 4,87 Jon Nummr 8211 Road Segment' East of Newpan CTR of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hi9hwey Data 4,11 SNa Damaged- (HW =f0, SoH =fall Avenge Ddly TimalmltlQ: 6800 veMdea Acme 15 Peek Hoc'. Sge: 10% Mecum Trvak4(2Ailes).- 15 Peak HOUr Vahey, Mvehides Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles): 15 VPhkle speed' 4i mpn Vital W. Naar/Flel Diameme.' 76 teat VehkKType I Day Evening fight Daily Sih Date 9009 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 86% 9742% Mediumthedia 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 Net SamerType(0-Wel, 1 -Be "): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cement "Dirt ro Seiner cenrem" Did, b obrorve: I.. hed 100.0 fell Note SOUms GYaatloespn Gal Auld ll W. Seiner Deal m obrerver 0.0 real Madura Tmcks: 4.000 Deserver He,nl(AD.. Poe): 59 rat Heavy Thel 6908' Grade Agudmerrt 99 Pad Ekvatlon: 0,0 hall Lane EquhalentDktma(Inlee) Roetl Ekvdion: 90 reel Anpa: 92547 Roetl Gmae: 00% Left V,am- -900 aegrea Madam TVGx: 92504 Rghl Vrew: 90.0 aarea HmVTmyi 92547 FIWA NWU Mosel L11auh0as teq Evening Venid.Type I S. I TmR Few I Dieleme I Flnile Read Finaal DemarA "n Re "Alfa AWYS: Fill -130 4,11 -120 4,87 0o0) of Aymes 6646 -251 4,11 -120 4,87 0o00 0.0(0 Manem Tnmke: 7945 - 1894 -4,11 -129 -097 9009 9003 Mal Tre. 7945 - 1974 -4,11 -129 /r.97 9009 9003 Heavy Thl 8435 -2269 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 0003 Heavy Tmck4; 8435 -2370 -4.11 -120 -516 o,OW o003 WMtlgefetl Naa LeVW (wllnouf TOpo an of albnYMbnf UnMtlgefetl Naa LeVeh (wMOUt TOpa and henlxalLaatlonf Vebidaligm Leg Peer HOm Let, Gay teq Evening Leg Nigh Len CNEL inamenTya Leg Peer HOYr La Gey leg6Amng. Lag Might I LM I CNEL Amos; 61A 59.5 578 511 60.4 610 Amos; 606 5817 57.0 509 SILS 60.1 Mal Tmcks: 55.2 53J 47.3 458 54.2 54.5 Mal Tmcks: Si 52.9 48:5 45.0 534 537 Heavy Tmcks' 560 546 45.6 466 S62 65.3 Havy Tmcks' 552 MS ".a 460 MA 545 Vdanke Nina: 633 61.5 56.4 53] 62.3 627 Vital Nina: 62.5 111 576 SLID 61.4 61.9 Cahill O4bnn ro Nase COl Cn Ml Cahill Weaan f fill COnrom9n Ml 70 tlfl4 65 SO 1 60089 1 55 tlBA 1 70 dfl4 65 dBA I 60dSA I 55dM Inn: 3p e6 141 305 Inn: 27 58 125 289 CNEL: 33 70 152 327 CNEL: 29 62 134 289 Tum4ay. MCVZS. za1z 6.1 -24 TeymlmneV26,A1z Srena/io: Exiafty /iihi'lolect Protect Name• NNCPC Roam Nam.: Nawpoa CTR Job Numher 8211 RoaO8e smat. &Lord Nmvcen CTR(Qmm SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Osta yONe $Ile CmtlMOns Hal 10. Sol 15) Average Unity T ?s (A@): 12.900 -hid. Ammy 15 PaakHwr Pemenlsga, 10% MWWs, TmMS(2 Amiss). 15 Peak Hour Vofurrre.' 1,290 -hid.. Heavy Trunka(S+ Swell): 15 V.hicl, Speed: 45 mph isabkle We Near/Fa/Lems Distance: 76 Sancta yps I Can Eval Nghl I Dsily &Te MU Anne, 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Madura Trucks: 61 48% 193% 194% BaMelHeight. 0.0 feel Samar Type mime I Berm): 00 Hal Trucks, 86.5% 21%. 198% 0.74% CenRniM Call In Sealer 1C9.0 het 111$ -me egen Onne(In/eeff Conferees Dist In Observer 10U6 fed ANOe, I.I. Beeler Demense m oberver: 0o rall M.mam Trial 4m0 observer Hagdf(Abovs mal 5o had HaaryTrvska 8,005 Grade Adudment o0 I Ehvdios' 0.0 feel 64.25 1204 Lane Equivalent DHhnre(n h t) Road Elevation: 90 ant ANDS: 92.54] Rosd Gmae: oe% Left View: -900 degrees Medium 1. 92504 RgMViaw: W 0 aegmes Heavy Tmcks: 92547 Phal. MOdsi Cahubttems -120 -516 Venda Type I REMF1 I TmT Few I OisGnce I FINK Road I Fmsnel I. A. I A. Srens/io: Exiaft WiNPmlatl Pmiecl Name• NNCPC Roam Nam.: Newport CTR Job Nurme 8211 Send Segment Nom of Coast Highway SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9h✓eY Dill SIB CmEItloN (Hand =10. SON =15) Average Daily T ?c (A @): 16.900 vall Auras' 15 PeakHwr Percenleya,' 10% McNUm T/usks(2 Ax %s): 15 I HO.. VOlurrs..' IAN -hide. Heavy Tmnka(3+ sisal 15 Vadicte Speed: 45 rape Viddele We N ... Ali / Lane Dhimma: 76 het Sancta ypa I Cry Enesifil tight Deity I to WU Anne, 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 61 4.9% 193% 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 feel Samar Tym mWaq I Berm): o0 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CanRniM DIal. Says, 1..het No.. SOume EMVatlene art Faff Conferees I es Observer IND fed Anne, 2000 Sayler Led see An observer: Do rall khalum Trial 4m9 Gdservar hi yessve mal 50 het Hall Trvcka 8,006 GradeAamdment 90 I Ehvdios' 0.0 red 64.25 1204 Lan, Equivalent Dhhn -(in III Road Elevation. L lset Auras: 92 5s7 Roe, Gmae: 90% Left View: 910 deal Hid- T eXe 92504 Right Viaw: 900 aegmee Heavy Trvske 92547 Hlwa xOlw.1.1 Calculations -120 -516 vemenType T REMEL I Tmlhc Fbw I Oisanna I FDNIe Heed I Framed I BayierAtten I Bann Afhn Auee; 6846 ILM 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Numal 8211 0.000 o000 Aumm 6846 -oR 4,11 -120 4,87 SN¢COnalemse(HW= 10,agge ) o.OW 0.000 MBaum Tream 7945 -1606 -411 -120 -09y Peak H., Vdurrre.' . W .. MBaum Trunk.: 7945 -1146 -411 - 120 1W VehkKTyge I Day Evening Night I Deily 9090 90W Heavy Tmnk¢' 64.25 1204 -4.11 -120 -516 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27% 198% 074% 0,000 01 Hawn Theme, fil 21AI -4.11 -120 -516 0.0 feel 0,000 01 (NmM9eN, NOhe LevNa(wllhmd TOpO and banner sentimental H., TNA3: INS Gmna Adedment 90 Pad Elevation. 00 fall La¢EquNalenlOhhna On N¢4 (InmMgeNd NOhe Lis. heal TOpn end darner etNeadia f Auks 9f1607 Roetl Greek oe% Left Yraw.- -910 aaghea VenicleType Lcl Ponk Hill Leq didy I fyq EVw'inig Lcl Nigh Ldn TmPm Fbw I Disease CNEL VenicleType Lag Pock maT I Lai Day I Laq EVmmg Lee Nigh I Lan I CNEL Au(nc' III 60.4 58.6 52.6 61.2 618 Autos' 111 61.0 59.3 532 61.8 634 Medium Trucks: 55,1 MS sill 466 551 553 Medium Trucks; 56] 55.2 4818 473 557 58.0 Heavy TUke: 569 55.5 46.4 477 56.0 562 Heavy Thanks : 575 56d 47.1 483 567 56.8 VahMe Name: W.1 62.4 592 54.6 0.1 63.6 Vehicle Same: 1 610 599 55.2 Cl b42 CanlMim Dkbnnro NOiae Centel (in Ted) CanlMim Dkbnn at NOiae Center (in Tee4 TO dBA 0 c I SO di 1 SS dB4 I TO dBA 65tl6A I Bo III I SS dW Lea 35 75 161 347 Lay 39 82 177 682 ONEL: 37 80 173 372 CNEL 41 88 193 410 Tumew. all, S.:OIs I all, Sronana: Existng W,I Pmjad Reed Nasse NNCPC Rand Name: Sal ROsa -120 4,87 Job Numal 8211 RwaSagment Nom of Son Joel Hills SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data .0 Changed- (HW =f0, SoH =lag SN¢COnalemse(HW= 10,agge ) Awail Odly TraWs Ll 3.8W veMdea Autos: 15 Peek Hour PomsMsga: 10% Mecum Tasks (2 Al 15 Peak H., Vdurrre.' 380 M-Ides. Heavy Thal (S +Arles): 15 vehele tt ee , 45 .1 vial Mh Naar7Far.m. Didemse.' 52 feel VehkKTyge I Day Evening Night I Deily Silly De. @aM¢r Height 0.0 M1 Aues: 7.511, 12.9% 96% Ill Mealum Trucks: 64.6% 49% 103% 194% @aM¢/HdpXG' 0.0 led Basm,lf,e(OWal f- Bermf: o0 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27% 198% 074% Ceraanlne Dirt ro@emef I.. dd lades. Fi-v .Pn Tap Canlealne I in Observer 100.0 feel Autea, IWif Samar Dieters, to Observer, 0.0 feel Mosyum Tracks: 4000 Observer ,at (An.. P¢af: 59 red H., TNA3: INS Gmna Adedment 90 Pad Elevation. 00 fall La¢EquNalenlOhhna On N¢4 Road Elewman: 90 rat Auks 9f1607 Roetl Greek oe% Left Yraw.- -910 aaghea N:nlnm Tracks: 965ea Rgbf Vrew: 90.. magma Heavy Trolls: 96608 F1WA Nda MOWl Gals datia¢ TmPm Fbw I Disease I Flnile Road that d Usii -Man Be/m A. Vealde Type I S. I Tm5 Fes. I Olshnae I Finae Rated I them. I. Men I Be/m A. Tumeey.NaVJa.N1¢ deal: Existing Midi Phips. Reedti me NNCPC Road Name: Selma ROsa -120 4,87 Job Numeir 8211 Roca Sagnmest SouNdStun Joequln HIIIS of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data 4,39 .0 Changed- (HW =f0, SoH =lag Average City T fly s(A4. 14.500 veMdea Autos: 15 Peek HourPomsMsge: 10% Meaurn TrvCk3(2Aikd.- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 1.450 vehldes Heavy Theme (3 +ghal 15 vehicle speed' 45 .1 vial Mh /WssdFmiane Distance 52 feel Veftxds pe Day Evening Nghl Dsly Silly III Auea: 7.511, 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Height 0.0 M1 Bamer1ype(0 -Wall, I- Berm): 0) Heavy Tmdts: 86.5% 27% 198% 074% Cedeaine Dirt ro Seeer CanRalne Dl M, a Observer I.. fide 100.0 feel GYVebbpepn Tap Autos, 2000 gamer DUlanue to OLtrerver 0.0 feel Well Tracks: 4600 Dbeerver stal(An.. Pent: 59 fed Hal TNA3: 6006' G /ade Adfudment 90 Pad Elevatlon: o0 fall WMtlgnfetl Naa LeVW (wIPOUf TOpn andheMx: albnYMknf Lan¢EquhahnlDkbnced free Roetl Etawassn: ..heel Al 98607 Roetl Grade: 00% Left Yraw.- -910 aegree3 Madmm TVnks: 9.596 Right Vrew: 90.. magma HeavyTwts.' 96608 FIWA NWU MOdd L11Oaatias leq Evening Le, Nigh Vehicle Type I S. I TmPm Fbw I Disease I Flnile Road that d Usii -Man Be/m A. Alaos: fal -6.15 4,39 -120 4,87 Oo00 of Alaos: 68.46 -0.34 4,39 -120 4,87 Oo00 O.M Mammon Tnmke: 7945 1339 AS9 -129 -097 9009 9124 Mealum Tnmke: 7945 -1153 -439 -129 -097 9009 0. Heavy Tn2ks: 84.25 1735 -439 -120 -516 00W of Heavy Tresi 84.25 -2153 -4.39 -120 -516 t,)W of WMtlgnfetl Naa LeVW (wIPOUf TOpn andheMx: albnYMknf UnMtlgnfetl Naa LeVed (wMOUf TOpn endhaMa alLMYetlonf VealdeType Leq Peek H,ui Leq Day leq Evening Le, Nigh LM CNEL VealdeType Leq Peek HOC Lam Oey Iasi Evening I Led Nigh I LM I CNEL Autos; 56.7 US 530 470. 55.5 552 Aumm 62.5 WS 519 520 61A 630 Medium Tmcks: 505 490 428 41.1 49.5 497 Medium Tmcks: 583 fill 454 469 55.3 556 Heavy Trucks' 513 499 40.9 42.1 60.5 60.6 How, Trucks' 57.1 5517 417 479 WS 564 VehkJe Nose: 585 55.8 537 49.0 57.6 58.0 fool Nose: I 626 595 54A 0.3 63.8 CenhHim Distance ro Nase COnrour Cn M(1 CenhHim Wrtann ro Nase COnrour pn Mp IO di 65 egA I Na@4 1 55IWA 1 70 di 1 0eggs 50 aBA 55 tlBA Idn: 15 32 33 147 ICn: 36 77 137 330 CNEL: 16 34 73 158 CNEL: 39 83 in 386 TumPty lay121 Sl2 6.1 -25 TumCry. MCVtB. Al2 SCereIro: Eodng Wifthmoled Pared Name• NNCPC Road Name: Santa ROSa 420 4,87 Job NUm0er 8211 Rated Segment, Nam W N loyal CTR 8000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBhwey Oala 4,39 SSx Cmdgeons (Hans 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Teaffin all 12200 veMdes Auras: 15 Pa.kHwr Pammustim 1091 MWIUm TruMS(2 Axill 15 Peak Hour Volurrre.' 1,220 -hid.. Heavy im. P, Axles): 15 Vehicle Sunni: 45 mph VahkleI I.../Fill Distance: S2 feet SahkbTyps I Day Eviedd Nghl I Dstly Sid Del Sth Oats Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Naught 0.0 les, Senior Than (gi I Berm): 89 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 21 %. 188% 0.74% Camehim eDelto Bendel Ild..1 Nd9a SOama Elevatbns(In/eefj ConMllne Dist to Donal IWZ fed ANDS, 2000 Banter Damon, m obsred, 90 red Mamum Trucks: 4.000 Gdserrer HSgdl (Above Pull : 5o reel HearyTocka e006 Grade AHudment 9a Fad Ekvdion: 0.0 feel 80 Nd Lane E ullvalent Drs a-greFeel Road Elevated: 90 led ANDS: 98607 Rood Grade: 0.0% Let View: -90.0 degrees Mddlum Pucks 99598 Rghl fill W 0 dogmas Heavy Tmcks: 95606 Phat. Model Cekubtans Lag logs! Vioul ype I REkIEL Vanilla Type I REM¢ I TmT Flew I OtsGnne I FO. Road I Fmsnd I. A. I Ream Allan Samemax: Existlng Wit Pmatt mi sal Name•NNCPC Road Nam.: Santa ROSa 420 4,87 Job Annual 8211 Roodyl,ra f SouNdNexpon GTR 8000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway IMIa 4,39 Sal CmEMOna (Hard =10, a- =15) Average Daily Tre ?c (Add 8.800 mall Auras' 15 ImA.- rPeiddial a' 10% MaNUm Truaks(2 Aside. 15 I HO Ur V.I 600 vehii Heavy Tomas Pk Antes): 15 V.hicl. Speed: 45 mph yehkleI I ... h ar Len. Distance: S2 feet SahkbTyps I Day Evening Night Dally fife WU Sth Oats Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medium Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 lad, Senior Typa l0.Waq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27%. 188% 0.74% CenRnind Did, la Semel 1.. feel No.. Somme EMVatbne(iexafj Confidential Dust to Obalmom fill fed ANUS, 2000 Banter Damon, ro oGrered, go ad M.mum Trucks: 4.000 Gdservar Heydl (Above Ped): 50 feel Hum, Trvcka 8.008 Grade Atimanent 9a Pad Ekvdion: 0.0 feel 80 Nd Lane Equivalent DManre(in Fail Road Elevated. LO lset ANOS: 98607 Rood Gmde: Oo% Let View: 90.0 dextrose McNUmTye. isild Right Vial: 900 dogmas Heavy Trvcke.' III HIWA NOIx Medal Calculation. Lag logs! Vioul ype I REkIEL Venda Type T REM¢ I Tmlhc Fbw I Otslends I FgNle Road I Faml I RarlierAtten Reim Agin Admix 6646 -1o9 4,39 420 4,87 Job NUmhr 8211 0.000 8000 ANOS; 6646 -363 4,39 -120 4,87 Aveage Odly Tedis b: o.OW 0.000 Medum These: 7945 -1993 -439 -1211 lL7 420 eMdes . W 9003 Mil Trunk.: 7945 -299e -439 -12a lL7 Sth Oats 9990 9000 Heavy Tmckm 64.25 -22'18 439 -120 -516 Commide Dirt. Bedlef. 0,000 0.003 Heavy ➢asks' 64.25 1482 439 -120 -516 MaNUm Tmcks: 4000 0,000 0.003 WmMgeNd NOhe LevMa(wllAmrf TOpo end dmdw elemental Pad Eknded. 80 Nd Lane EgmNalent Cadmium 0n N.4 Rosa Elsveted: WmMgeNd NO he ands hil Tel end bents, afNn musing Roetl GNdk 00% Let Via-- -90.0 de.. Mamun Tmcks: 91 VenideType Lazl Ponk imsel L, Gay I Ieg Lindid ig I Laq Lag logs! Vioul ype I REkIEL I Tm5 Fbw I Disance I Fnkl Road I Fem. I. Men I Berm A. I Lim Peak Imm I Lai Gay I Ieg EVwtcg Leg Nighf I Len I I Ad(nc' 618 591 53.1 52.1 51.9 111 613 Al ' 592 573 65.6 495 58S 681 567 Merlon Trucks: 555' 548 47.7 46.1 496 1 54.8 548 Mealum Trucks; 530 51.5 45.1 436 53.0 520 523 Heavy TUks: 564 55.0 45.9 472 509 495 55.5 557 Heavy Toom.: 53.8 524 0.34 44.6 54.4 53.0 53.1 Venda Nose: 636 6119. 51 54.0 576 559. 62.6 63.0 Vehtde Ndrse: 61.1 59.3 562 515 WB 600 60.5 Canlwllm olebnn ro NOisa COnroar pre /ee0 61.5 620 Canhdim O4Nnn as NOise Onal for Mp Coding" olsbnn to Nei"Consul (in real Canhdim MU roNOiau Onal for Al Mugs I BSal I Will I Wd64 Wells I I Mugs Sill I fill I sage W aB4 Led, 32 fig 009 13 329 59 Ltln: 22 47 191 27 217 129 CNEL 34 74 100 14 344 63 CNEL 23 50 100 29 233 lial A, A. p1z Scenario: Existing Will Pmjaal Rjed Name NNCPC Read Name: AVrcade -120 4,87 Job NUmhr 8211 Road Segment I of Ban Miguel of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9hwiy Dafa 4,51 SM COndltloru (H0) =10, SoH =13j Aveage Odly Tedis b: 4.200 veMdes Autos 15 Peak Hoar Pomsionel 10% McNUm TmCks(2 Al 15 Peak H., Volurrre.' 420 eMdes Heavy Tandy p + Atlas): 15 vehlde speed 49 mph All We Ademi' r.m. Diesries 36 feel VehkKTyad I Day Evereall Nlghf I Oily Sth Oats 9099 model 7.534, 12.9% 96% 9742% Mellon Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Hid'an 0.0 feet BamerType(0WalL I Berm): 80 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% Commide Dirt. Bedlef. I.. had Noss. Somme GY-e .Pn Nap CanNdlne Did to Do. 100.0 fed Ands, 2 Mg Semen Delonce to Obaervel 0.0 feel MaNUm Tmcks: 4000 Observer ,dl (An.. thing 5d rod Heal TNAS: BW6 Gmes'hadful 90 Pad Eknded. 80 Nd Lane EgmNalent Cadmium 0n N.4 Rosa Elsveted: 9o.1 Autos: 98412 Roetl GNdk 00% Let Via-- -90.0 de.. Mamun Tmcks: 91 Rghf Vrew: aO.O d.1d_ Heavy Trolls' 98413 F1wa Al Model eda lith na Lag logs! Vioul ype I REkIEL I Tm5 Fbw I Disance I Fnkl Road I Fem. I. Men I Berm A. Tumew.se lz Somario: Existing With Plead Rj6ctiums. NNCPC Read Name: A-ado -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment' Sued of San Miguel of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dda 4,51 SNa COnd loon (H0) =f0, Soff =13j Aveage Odly Thishis tlU: 13.10) veMdes Autos 15 Peek Hou'.dege: 10% MoOmTrvoks(2Aika).- 15 Peak HOUr Vduma 1,310 veMdes Heavy Trial 0, Atlas): 15 vehkle speed' 49 mph vel MM Naadiartane Dian dries 36 het VehkKType I Day Evereng Night Daily Sth Oats 9099 Am. 7.534, 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Tmcks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Bander Hel96t 0.0 Mt BamerType(0 -alLI Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% CeM6elne Dirt ro Surreal I.. find Nols. swma GYVeEbpe pre fxp ConNis Did, m Obrerva: 100.0 fed Adds ti died Same, Oman. to Observer 0.0 reel Madend Tmcks: 4000 dox- ,He ,at (An.. Pedf: ..Nd Hal TNAS: BW8 Gmde Adfudrdn190 Pad Ekvaton: 00 ad Lana EquhalenlDkbna(Il Road Examined: 9d he1 Aides: 98412 Roetl Gmde: 00% List Via-- -90.0 dagmss Mamun lions: 91 Rghf Vrew: 90.. dogmas HeavyTwts' 99.413 F1WA Ndu Model eddoe3wa Lag logs! Vehlde Type I REM¢ I TmPm Fbw I Dlsfende I Finge Read Fns. I.Maa Bem A. Audi: 6651 -5.21 4,51 -120 4,87 alwo of Autos: 66.51 -0.27 4,51 -120 4,87 alwo 0.000 Museum Tronke: n72. 1245 AS1 -129 -0g7 9099 9993 Museum Tronke: n72. -1751 -451 -129 /rig] 9099 9003 Heavy Teel Eli 26.40 -451 -120 -5,16 OOW 6000 HeavyTroul Eli -21A6 -451 -120 -5,16 .COW 6000 [mil Mtl fisINOlau LeVds(wllhouI TOpn and Is.aNMUdbnf UnMtlgaNtl Ndae L.. (..of TOpn end henlxaNMWtlonj Vanilla Type Luq PUdr Himx Lai Day Ieg6Aning. Lag logs! Led CNEL Vanilla Type Ld-110-1 Lad DUy legidame, Lag MEN LM CNEL Autos; 556 53.T 51.9 459 54.5 55.1 Auras; 60.5 58S 50.9 Di 594 III Mal Tmcks: 496 1 11.7 40.1 465 48:8 Medium Tmcks: 54.5 53.0 456 45.1 SIDE 538 Heavy Tuks' 509 495 40.4 412 flog 002 Had, Tmcks' 55.8 54.4 45.4 466 mg 55.1 VshkJe Ndse: 576 559. RE 48.0 56.6 570 VehkJe NOS.: 62.5 WB 575 53.0 61.5 620 Canhdim O4Nnn as NOise Onal for Mp Canhdim MU roNOiau Onal for Al 70 afl4 01 1 Wells I 55aBA 1 701 W 1 W aB4 55 tlBA tin: 13 27 59 121 Intl¢ 27 59 129 272 CNEL: 14 29 63 136 CNEL: 29 63 135 291 1mP1 nx, ta. ]diz 6.1 -26 Tumery.MeVtB.Ai] SCerelro: Eaistlng WiBh Prolad Pared Nems• NNCPC Read Name: Avowtlo -130 4,87 Job Miami 8211 Ral Segment, Nol of Coast Highway o0W SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1way Oala 4.11 Sla CmtlMOns (HaM=10. Sol 15) Average Daily Traa2(AEQ: 9.20 venides Al 15 PeakHwr Pemenlsga 10% MWlum Thai (2 ksial 15 Peak HO.. VOlurrre.' 920 venides Heavy im. P, Axles): 15 Van. Speed: 4o rape Venkla W. I.../arlane Cideme: 36 het Sandal I Day EvaMrq Nghl I Deily SiTai Dada 9099 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Aledlum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Balder Height. 9.0 leas Samar Typa l0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Heavy TVaks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% Cameras Dill 10 Sarver 1CO.O het Nasa SOUWa dowariord (In /eaff CanMllne Dist b Observer 100,0 fed ANae, I.I. Sartler Deda- to obmrven go had Medium Tracks: 4.W0 observer Hegnf(A.. Ped): 50 eel Hemy Trvcka aM6 Grade A�udment 90 Pad Ehvdio¢ 0.0 feel OO led Lane EquivalentDHhnreQn /aeQ Road Ebval 90 led Auras: 98412 Road Grade: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 de9aes hledum 1. 93372 RI Viaw.- an. aegrees HaaryTmGs: 98.413 PHNS. Mandl DeanaNWs I Fails Rana I Famme I. Men I Bed Afar Vafine Tyae I Swain I Treibc Fbw I Oislenea I Fail Rmtl I Fond I oenur Attain Bed Anen Scenario: Existing WiN Praatt Pioiecl Neme• NNCPC Roan Nam.: Mdem -, -130 4,87 Job Numher, 8211 Real Signal Im. of bond Canyon o0W SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nwey ONe 4.11 SIB Cmdiall (H --10, SON =Is) Average Daily Tinaft faidd, 72.900 venides Ames' 15 PeakHwr Pesedina a' 10% assay. Thaws (2 Ax %s): 15 I HO.. V.I.-... 7,29) venides Haavy Times, k hadsf: 15 hankie Speed: 45 man Venkle W. I.../a /Lam federal 76 het Sandal I Dry Exeshill Night Dedy Iffe WU 9099 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% AledWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 101 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 leas Samar Typa tIawl I Berm): o0 Heavy TVaks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.74% Cameras Did. Bader 109.0 het No.. SOUFe EMVafbns(meeeff Carawllne Died b Observer III fed Anne, 2099 Samar Deda -ro oGmeen, go had M.mum Tracks: 4.W0 Emeervar Ilegal(A.. Ped): 50 eel Henry Trvcka 8W6 Gradexamanem, 90 Pad Ehvdio¢ 0.0 real OO led Lane Equivalent Chse -(in fial Road Ebval 901set Aoros: 92547 Road Gaae: Oo% Left View: 900 deames McNumi cke 92504 Right Viaw: Edo a.,- Heary Trvcke 92547 Hlwa all .1.1 calculated I Fails Rana I Famme I. Men I Bed Afar V&rine Type I RFMEL I Tram[Fbw I Deadma I Fail Radf I Frdrrel I BenierAtten I Red AOan Ames; 66.51 -ISO 4,51 -130 4,87 Joe Numeic 8211 0.000 o0W Aube; 6846 EN 4.11 -150 4,87 Avenge Dally TraWcll 61,500 cal ooW 0.000 Anymm Tiumm 1T2 -1904 -451 -1311 -09y Heavy Times, p + Axles): 15 9909 9003 Mnaum Trunk.: 7945 -1956 -411 -120 -09y sit. OaM 9099 9000 He., Tracks' ELSE 1300 451 -120 -516 1Lb.91ad 100.0 fad 0,000 0.003 Hasty Trucks' 6425 -1452 -4.11 -120 -516 HwvyT ded 8n6 Laade"I'manme, 00 0,000 01 (NmHgefen Nnhn LevNa(wllAmuf ix,mendderad edia onf Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in heat) Roes Elente, OO led Ades: 92547 (NmHgefed Nn.. Levees hil Tel and beral deamdibnf -W.o aagraea N:dbm Trans: 92.5.4 Rgbf Vrew: g0.. ae9rem VenaJeType Lcl Ponk Hall Led Day I Inq EVCiirig I JMNIgM Ldn I Fails Rana I Famme I. Men I Bed Afar CNEL Veninallnee Lwitwilklmantil Led Gay I 1nq Evmmg Lee Nigh I Lan LM CNEL Au(nc' 590 57d 55.3 493 DI 6T9 58.5 Amem 698 679 651 WA SEA 66.7 613 Mealum Trucks: 530 515 45.1 435 55.0 520 522 Mealum Trucks; 636 82d 55.7 542 55.0 826 629 Heavy TUks: 543 529 43.8 481 531 534 53.6 HeavyT ak.: 61.4 630 1 S12 531 63.6 637 VehMa Nose: 610 59.3 560 51A Ill Who 604 Vehicle Name: 717 SEE 666 62.1 Ill 706 711 Ca im DkbnnroNOiaeC Ww(inT tl 703 CanhHid Chance as Nall Deal pn MQ Candrim okbnse as NOiae Deal (in Ted) CanhHid Wahnn as Nall Deal pn MQ TO tlSA I WdW I fill I Will I El tlBA I nags Wages I WdSA 65 dBA Well 1 21 49 iW 212 215 993 Ltln 110 237 511 212 1,101 CNEL 23 50 107 227 230 1.055 CNEL 118 255 518 227 1,181 N ®eey'six aiO4 Srenario: Existing Who mall Rjecl Name NNCPC Roan Name: MacaMur -120 4,87 Joe Numeic 8211 Road SagmenL S.am of Sol Coal 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data 4,11 SNe COnalHOd (HW =10, SoH=15) Avenge Dally TraWcll 61,500 cal Auas: 15 Peak Harr Porearel: 10% Meaum TruckeRAxkd,- 15 Peak HOUr Vdume.' SAW vender Heavy Times, p + Axles): 15 vehicle spema 45 rape vaddis We Naa i'mr.ne andries 76 feel Vignati Oe I Day Elismattl Nigh I Daly sit. OaM sit. OaM Auba: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Mealum Trucks: 94.9% 49% 103% 194% Sarver Hel 0.0 leas Sexhimlype(DWall 1 -Bed): 00 Heavy Tracks: 815% 27% 108% 074% Cammind Dirt roamer cenremrre Did a observe/: 1Lb.91ad 100.0 fad Nede. SOUme 6evseand an Cep Auas, 2W0 Sarver oisrence m observer 0.e led Manew Tamm: 4,000 observer ,at (An.. wed): 50 red HwvyT ded 8n6 Laade"I'manme, 00 Pad Ekvawas. ogled ogled Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in heat) Roes Elente, OO led Ades: 92547 Read Greek 00% Left YraW.- -W.o aagraea N:dbm Trans: 92.5.4 Rgbf Vrew: g0.. ae9rem Haary Tmds.' 92547 (i1WA All MOdel CalauhOwd (i1WA All MOWI L1bae0wd dexal Type I S. I TmPWFbW I prams I Fails Rana I Famme I. Men I Bed Afar N®ew.lXV2aiO4 Sineil Eaisting Willi lies. Pi jecl NUme NNCPC Road Name: MawiNUr -120 4,87 Joe Numeir 8211 Roaa3agment III of Ban Joaquin Hills 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data 4,11 .0 Cxn dv d (HW =f0, Soft =15) Average Ddly T/aSe(A4. 61,500 wal Auas 15 Peek Hwr Poewds,: 10% Mealnn Trvoks Pyl d,- 15 Peak HOU/Vduma' SAW venides Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles): 15 Vehicle speed' 45 rape VBhicre We NaaidFmiane Dienries 76 eel Vehssel I Day Evening legal Daily sit. OaM 9000 Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Badle/Height 0.0 M1 Semen (0.Wall, 1 -Bed): BO Heaey TVaks: WLS% 27% 108% 074% Ce/aenld Dirt. Bader cenreat Did in obmrva/: Ild. and 100.0 fed NObesw alwaetbndpn Gxp Auae' It W0 Gamer Oman. a Deal, 0.e red Medium Tamm: 4,000 Deserver ,at (An.. Pad): 59 red had, Tailed EMS G/ede Agudmm290 Pad Ekvalbn: ogled fan¢EquhdenlDkrma(Infre) Roes Edwina, ..heel Adel: 92547 Real Grebe: 00% Left Yraw.- -00.0 aeghee Madam. 925.4 legal Vrew: 9n.. degrees Heavy Trtmks.' 92547 (i1WA All MOWI L1bae0wd Leg Nigh Varaw Type I S. I TmPWFbw, I Ob:hnce I FnIa Road F/eame Der -Addn Bed A. Autos: MAE 504 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO 0:000 Autos: 68.46 504 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO 0.000 Madam Tnmks: 7945 - 1130 -4,11 -120 197 ofel OW3 Madam Tnmks: 7945 - 1130 -4,11 -120 117 9000 0. Heavy Tn2ka: 8435 -1326 -4.11 -150 -516 .0000 o003 Heavy Trail 8435 -1326 -4.11 -150 -516 0.000 o003 UnMtlgnfdd Naae LeVNd(wllhduI TOpO andhaldednudbdf UnMtlgnfed Naae Lmwasa MOuf TOmanddmhd N Van) Venice¢Type LWPnnk Hbm Lad Day Leq EVemng Leg Nigh Las CNEL Venice¢Typn Leq Pnnk Hbm Lad Day Leq Evening Lad Nigh LM CNEL Aube; Of 673 65.4 DI 686 68.6 Aubs; 00,1 672 SEA 594 580 006 Modfum Tracks: 628 603 55.0 53A 61,9 82.1 Medium Tucks: 828. 61.3 55.0 53A 61,9 621 Henry Trucks' 637 62.3 531 54.5 626 630 Hasty Thiel 637 623 531 545 626 630 Vdi Nose: 709 183 Ill 813 69.9 703 Vdi Nose: 709 692 Ill 613 f@,9 703 CanhHid Chance as Nall Deal pn MQ CanhHid Wahnn as Nall Deal pn MQ IO aB4 1 0 dBA I Naga I El tlBA 1 70 di 65 dBA 50 tlBA 55 tlBA Ldn: 99 212 459 993 1Cn: 99 212 459 993 CNEL: 105 227 493 1.055 CNEL: 105 227 493 1.055 Ismaynal..yea 6.1 -27 Tuedwis 2seli Scenario: Existing Wll P101ect Pmiecl Name• NNCPC Road Name: MaaMUr -120 4,87 Jon NUmher 8211 Roadbegmenb Somm a San Joaquin Hills 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HI9M1way Gala 4.11 SIB Cmtlltlons (l 10. Sol 15) Average Deily Tra ?c (Ad!): 38.800 -hid.. Auras: 15 PaakHwr Pemenmga 10% MWWm Trucks (2 i1mill 15 Peak HO Ur VOlurrre.' 3,560 -hides Heavy'make p, Axlns): 15 vehicle Speed: 45 mph Vehkle We N ... /Farlane Ohancum 76 het yetakel a I Dey Eval I I Deily Sil Data I to WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% El Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMel Helgnt 0.0 RM Senior Typa mWall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% Cerrito Di5L In Barter 100.0 .1 Naga$ -me Elevalbne(In Read Conhdkre Dist In Obara r IDED fed ANDS, 2000 Samsroumme, b obamess, 0o lad Marcum Thasts: 4.W0 Gdserver Hagdf (Above Ped): 50 had HaryTrvcka .008 Grade Adudment 90 Fed Elevation, 0.0 Ied 0.0 feel Leal Equivalent Eastanre(n head Road Eastman. 00 Ielf ANDS: 92.54] Road Gade: 90% Left View: -90.0 degrees Madlum uncles 92504 Rghf View: W 0 aegreea Havy Trucks: 92547 NiwA xolae MOdd cakulenons Hlwa xolw Model C d c ataNOns Venda Type I REM¢ I Thal Flnw I OieGnw I F.. ROatl Fmncen I. A. I Berm A!!en Scnario: Existng WiNPmlatl Pmiecl Name• NNCPC Roan Nam.: MaaMUr -120 4,87 Jon Number 8211 Rand Segment mach of San Miguel 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway IMIa 4.11 SIB CmEItloN (Hunt =10, a- =15) Avsraga Deily Tre ?c (Atl!): 34.800 -hid.. Autos' 15 PeakHwr Pemenmga' 10% MWlum Trusts (2 Assam. 15 Peak HO Ur Vemirm..' 3,480 -hides Heavy Tmnke(3k Axles): 15 Ventral. Speed: 45 mph Venkls We N ... AT, Lane Dlexame: 76 feet yetakel s I Dry Evening Nlaht Defy I to WU 9090 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 AledWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Bartel Haight 0.0 kM Senior Typa mWaq I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CenRni. Dist in Barter 100.0.1 No.. Swan. EMVatbns an/.efj Conferees Dlat b Obse r 10I fed ANUS, it.. Bahr oumme, to observer: 0o fad Momum Trucks: 4.W9 Gdservar real (Above Ped): 50 had Heavy Trucks 8,006 Grsdexeduckrent 90 Fed Elevation, 0.0 feel Road Elevation: Lane Equivalent DManre(in Feel Road Eastman. L lset Auras: 92 547 Rued Grebe: 90% Left View: 9O0 degrees McNUmTrucks 92504 Right View: 900 aegreee Heavy Trucks 9250 Hlwa xolw Model C d c ataNOns Tangs Fbw I Drefenda V&lide Type T REM¢ I Tmlhc Fbw I Olstnnet I True RYed I Fmmrel I Somersault I Reim Attain Arms; 6646 3.94 4.11 -120 4,87 Job NUmae: 8211 0,wo 0000 Arms; 6846 346 4.11 -120 4,87 Aveage Ddly Traim(AtlO: 28.800 tal o.OW 0.000 bdBaum Trucks: 7945 -1399 -411 -1211 1i Heavy Thrcks(S +Axles): 15 . W O. Mal Truck.: 7945 -1317 -411 -120 1W Sih OaM 9090 I. Heavy Trucks 8425 -1726 -4.11 -120 -516 I.. rBd 0,000 0.003 Heavy Trucks' fil -1773 -4.11 -120 -516 obearvar ,at (An.. Pod): 0,000 0.003 (InmMgeNd Nphe Levda legal Tape end derdr, tlfMYdpl HO rant Lane Equivalent Dhtrnre(in heQ Road Elevation: 9o.1 (IamMgeNd Nph. Lm. heral TOxx end Mentor atakedua nj Left Via -90.0 degrees Nadium Trucks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: VenrcJeType Laq Pink imerl real dey I feq EVwivig I Is, NIgM Ldn Tangs Fbw I Drefenda CN¢ VenrcJeTypn I Lam Peak Haur I Lai Gay I faq,likeg Lee Night I Lan Leq Might I CN¢ Au(nc' 67,1 612 63.4 574 62.1 66.0 666 Aracks 666 FIT 629 589 689 65.5 SEA Mai lam Trucks: 608 59.3 53.0 51A 59.5 580 59.0 50:1 Medium Trucks: ill 589 525 51.0 58.0 594 596 Heavy Trucks : I O'S 51.2 525 604 599 60.8 61.0 Heavy Truck.: 61.2 598 50.8 520 59.0 684 WE Val Ndse: 680 67.2 61 0.3' 676 659. 67.9 66.3 Vehide Same: 68A SET 636 ME 55.9 67.4 67.9 Canlwlim Distance he Noiur general (in fed) 66.6 670 Cenhrlixs O4bnce h Nase COnrour On MQ Canlwgm olemnce as Nan Cdntour(in TeeN Cenhrlixs Wrtenn h Nase COnrour fin Mlj TO aBA 1 0EtA I SO S14 1 55 dB4 Widul I I TO dBA 0EtA I 60 JSA 70 use 1 SS SEW 50 dB4 Ltln: 72 150 336 59 723 274 Ltln: 97 145 312 S9 673 275 CMEL 76 167 360 63 776 294 CNEL 72 155 335 63 722 Tueew.lxR . ml2 Saenario: Existing Wih Pmjed Reed Nama :NNCPC Rant Name: MacaMUr -120 4,87 Job NUmae: 8211 Road Segment Soul of San Mii 0:800 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlgMwey Ddb 4,11 SNa COndiewme(HW= 10,sesel j Aveage Ddly Traim(AtlO: 28.800 tal Autos 15 Peek Hwr Posurcul: 10% Medum Truck$(2 Axkd.- 15 Peak H., Volurrre,' 2,860 vehldes Heavy Thrcks(S +Axles): 15 Vehkle speed' 45 mpn venicre W. Naar/F.I.m. arcades 76 feel VahkleTyOe I Day Evenirq Nlghf I Deily Sih OaM Sih OaM Auras: 7.594, 12.9% 96% g/.42% Medium Trucks: 1 49% 103% 194% Barter Hdi 0.0 Ill BamerType(DWal I- Berm): 00 Heavy Trudts: SEE% 27% 108% 074% Ceraealm Dirt h Berner I.. rBd NpMeSnumr Fievelbn. an fxp caudeal Dist in observer: 100.0 fed All I Wif Berner Dream. m observer 0.0 red Maintain rucks: 4.000 obearvar ,at (An.. Pod): 50 red Harry Trade: 8006 Gorda Aa%udmed, 90 Pad Etersel HO rant Lane Equivalent Dhtrnre(in heQ Road Elevation: 9o.1 Aubs: 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left Via -90.0 degrees Nadium Trucks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: ad. augrear Heavy Trucks' 9250 F1WA Ndu Model Lllcuhhmas FIWA NWU Model edudahmas Ve enliType I REM¢ I Tangs Fbw I Drefenda I Fkde Rand I Farm R.rrer Me, Reran A. Tu®ew, call sal Sronario: Existing WiN mould Reed NUme NNCPC Road Name: MaaiNUr -120 4,87 Job NUmer 8211 Rind Segment' mount Of COast Highway 0:800 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlgMwey Deta 4,11 .0 Candal (HW =f0, Soft = lag Aveage Ddly Takim(Aid. 28.700 ral Auras 15 Peek Hors'. nge: 19% Medum Tmoks(2Aikd,- 15 Peak HOm Vduma 2,870 MM1Ides Heavy Thecks 0, Axles): 15 Vehkle speed' 45 mpn vial MM Naar/Farians arcades 76 feet VahkleType I Day Evening Nghf Daly Sih OaM 0000 Am. 71.594, 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height O.5 M1 BamerTypa(DWalL 1- Berm): 00 Heavy Tmenel SEE% 27% 108% 074% CeMealne Dirt la Berner I.. ud Nob.Swm..whasspapnfxp cenhh, Dist. a observer: 100.0 fed AWOa' 2000 Barter cultures Is observer 0.0 red Madman rucks: 4.000 DMServer hial(An.. Pod): 59 red H., Trades : 8006 Grade Agudmar[90 Pad Ekvatlrn: 80 red face EquhalentDkhnre(InfreQ Roetl Elevation: 99 reel Stuck 92547 Rind Grade: 00% Left Via -90.0 deghea Madman Thanks 92504 Ill Vm 90O aegrees HmVTwts 92547 FIWA NWU Model edudahmas LW Audi Venld.Type I REM¢ I TmPWFbw I Orefanae I Fklfe Road Fresse I.Man Reim A. Rubs: 1 2.61 4,11 -120 4,87 Oo0) 0:800 Aufur 6846 2.63 4,11 -120 4,87 Oo00 0.0(0 Museum Trucks: 7945 - 1499 -4,11 -120 -097 0000 O. Mail Trucks: 7945 - 1491 -4,11 -120 /r.97 0000 0. Heavy TUks 8435 -1858 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOW 0003 Heavy Truman, 8435 -1857 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOfN 0003 WMtlgnfetl Nasn LeVW (wlPauf TYpn andherneraCMYMbnf UnMtlgnfetl Nasn LeVeh (wMauf TYpn endhanlxalLMYetlonj made Type Les Peakinmr Laq Thy Leq EVendg LW Audi Les CNEL VenldeType Les Peak HOm Leq Dny (aq EVaning I Leq Might I LM I CNEL Aubs; 658 ME 62.1 550. 647 65.3 Arms; 658 689 62.1 56.1 U7 03 Medium Trucks: 59.5 580 51.6 .50.1 58.5 58.8 Medium Trucks: 595 58.0 51.7 50.1 58.6 CEO Heavy Trucks' 604 599 49.9 51.1 59.5 596 Hum, Trucks' 60.4 59.0 49.9 512 59.5 596 Vill Norel 676 659. 627 FILL 656 670 Vill NOS.: 676 55.9 627 Silk 66.6 670 Cenhrlixs O4bnce h Nase COnrour On MQ Cenhrlixs Wrtenn h Nase COnrour fin Mlj IO di 1 0tlus I Widul I Mal 1 70 use 1 0dfA 50 dB4 55 tlBA Idn 59 127 274 590 ftln' S9 127 275 592 CNEL: 63 136 294 633 CNEL: 63 137 2% 635 Termllia A.]M12 6.1 -28 Tuedimlia Vte.Al2 SCenah, ESistlng With"Olef PmJecl Nams• NNCPC Read Name: EaditufflFortllBonila Cyn Job Nurem, 8211 RmadBelmenl: W.&Jamboree 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBal Oala Sib Cnndemu (HW =10, Sol =15) Saa Cmtlltlons (Hari 10. Sl 15) Average Daily Tral All 14.400 vehides Auras: 15 PaakHwrlhmenlsga 10% Undue Tmeks(2 Axkaf. 15 I HO.. VOlmrre.' 1440 vehides Hal Tnke(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Speed: B mph White. War I ... e'arLane Dislanca: 52 het Vablia ry. I Dry Evalma Night I Deily Site Dea, -I life IB7 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Aledlum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BaMey Height. 0.0 hM Samar Tym A0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Hal Tmcks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% C rmyhiM DI5t 10 Same, 1C9.o het Ndsa Soama Elays Onne(In Read Committee Dist ko Deal 1LU61e0 Alms, 2000 Border Dlsrenre to obmrv.r: Oo red Uslime Trurke: 4.000 Gdsarver HSgd!(A.. Pee): 5o had Hayy Tril 8,006 Grade AHudmene 90 Pad Ehvation: 0.0 r.a WmMgeNd NOhe LevNa(wllimn Lane Equivalent OHled -alh Q Road Ebvation: 90 met Ave, : 98607 Road Grade: 0.0% Left View. -90.0 deal hledlum 1. 98598 Rghl View: WO fed- Heavy Tmcks: 96606 RiWA. Moesl Cakuletions Laq Pork ime V&lide Type T REMEL Vanilla Type I REMF1 I Thal Flew I Dial I F.. Foe I Formal 2erriar A. Reim A!!en Brenario: Esiatlng WiNPhism Pmimi Name• NNCPC Road Name: EadbNfflFomlBortia Dyn Job Numhec 8211 Roads.'emm, Eaatol Jamtone 0.000 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9h✓ey NNe -1M Sib Cnndemu (HW =10, Sol =15) Avoraga Daily T ?c (Add: 11.590 veM1idea Aulas' 15 ImIlibur Pemenlega' 10% MWWm Truaka(2 Ax %af: 15 IHe., Volume: 1.150 vehides Hal Tnke(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Limed: B mph Vehkle War I ... e at Lane Dishcce: 52 het Vablia ypa I Day Eve log NON Dally Bile WU -I life IB7 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91 AledWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 led Samar Tym l0.Wal {1- Benny: 00 Hal Tmcks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.74% C realliya Dial . Sal, 1CO.o het No.. Somme EMV done art .1) Committee DW to Obleal IDW fed Amoe, 2000 Bomar Ledae li Deserver: 90 red Medum Trea:e: 4.000 Gdsarver Heydl(A.. Pad): B. reel Heavy Trill 8,006 Grade Arluslment 90 Pad Ehvation: 0.0 feel WmMgeNd NOhe LevNa(wllimn Lane Equivalent Cammem dr,fil Road Ebvation. e0 feel Auree 98607 Road Grade: Op% Left View. Fed call McNUmT cke 98598 Film View: 990 a.,- Heavy Trl 98608 fHWA NOIx.1.I ma dmatlmns Laq Pork ime V&lide Type T REMEL I Tmlhc Fbw I Oismnca I Flail Rmd Fmmea I RarliarAtten I Rmrm Amy Amos; 6646 -037 4,39 410 4,87 0.000 0.000 000) Al 6646 -1M 4,39 -120 4,87 Am. 15 .0600 0.000 Leame Trucks: 7945 _i761 -439 -1211 IB7 m mph . W 9003 Mil Tyemm 7945 -1858 -439 -I life IB7 Barter Halow, 0.0 led 9990 .. Heavy Trial 8W25 1156 439 -120 -516 Bemer Demarme m observer, 0,000 0.003 He,Themiil 84.25 12.54 439 -120 -516 Pad Ekvadon: 0,000 0.003 WmMgeNd NOhe LevNa(wllimn TOpo and demlm eleamatlonj Roetl Gredk 00% Lail Via-- -90.0 degrees Nomura Timely: 98588 Wmfgated NO.. L.. hi al Tope end dealer tleramalnj Heavy Trolls: %608 (i1WA Nmu Medial LlkuleMnna (i1WA Nmu MoWI L1mmaMnns Venime Type I R. I VenrcJeType Laq Pork ime Lmq lay I Ieq Leemeg I VenideType Leq Pe&t Hbui Leq GOy leq Evening I VanrcJeTypn I LM Peak Hmur I Lai Gay I Ieq EVeliing Lee Nigh I Ldn I Ofal Amoy' 625 BOB 53.8 529 667 61.4 620 Al ' 61S 594 57.9 516 54,7 53.2 60A 610 Medium Tema 531 541 LOA 468 BOA 553 55.5 Medium Trucks, 55.3 53.8 47A 459 45.1 543 546 Heavy TUks: 57.1 55.7 456 47.8 BOB 562 564 Heavy Track.: 511 541 45] 46.9 532 553 554 Vehkle Nose: 64.3 626 584 548' BB.B 63:3 63.8 Vehide Ndse: 63A 6116 565 531 62.3 62,0 CanlMito Dlall to M ia. Cdnrour (in Teel Ca dhal olebnn at Mara. Cdnrour (in Few 70 tlfl4 651 1 QOdBA I 55dBA 1 TOdBA 1 651 1 BO dBA I WOSA Life: I ndBA 651 1 60 dBA I WOSA ICn: Ltln: Be 77 188 F. 358 CNEL: 30 Ltln: 31 Be 003 308 CNEL: 73 CNEL: 38 83 176 384 CNEL 33 71 153 330 ll., .. M1z Smal Eyding Will Pitted Pi meal Name: NNCPC Rmad Name: EaaWIefflloNlSOniW Ch Job NUmmu: 8211 Road Bagmen West of Benda Canyon 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Data 181 SM COndltloru (HW =f0, SoH= f5) A,hage Odly TraXc LAdl: 10.000 veMdea Am. 15 Peek HUrr PomsMaga: to% McNUmT elts(2 Axka).- 15 Peak HOm Volume.' 1,WO Vehil Heavy Trvdry p, Axles): 15 Vehkle speed m mph Vehiare MM NaaeF.I.m. Ddearem, 52 feel VehkKTyOe I Day Evereall WgM I Deily Sih De. All 7.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Memum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Halow, 0.0 led SamerType(OWall, I Berm): Oo Heavy Tmcks: 81 27% 108% 074% Cddedim BiSL m Same, cenreMm Dim m obaarva: Ity. rW 100.0 fed Imes. sou me Faevelmne Pn lxl Amid I DOU Bemer Demarme m observer, 0.0 red Waal retake: 4.000 oesime-He,at (AD.. Pod): 50 had Hoary Trade: 8,006 Gorda 11mdmenB Pad Ekvadon: 00 red Pad Ekvadon: Lan.EgandenlDlehna /nfreQ Road Elevetert: 90 het Auks: 98607 Roetl Gredk 00% Lail Via-- -90.0 degrees Nomura Timely: 98588 Rem, Vrew: ad. al.l. Heavy Trolls: %608 (i1WA Nmu Medial LlkuleMnna (i1WA Nmu MoWI L1mmaMnns Venime Type I R. I Tmex Fbw I Gkfende I Fkile Read I Feem. R.r,er Me, Reim A. Th.mV.NSV2..IIm@ Still: Existing it PmIeN Pilled Name: NNCPC Rnae Name: EasWluff /FOrtllBOniW Cyn Job Numbs, 8211 Road Segment' East of Bonne Canyon 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBhwey Data 181 .0 COndammi, (HW =f0, Ill= fall Avenge Ddly TaWe(Add. 37.700 veMdea Auks: 15 Peek HourPomsmsge: to% McNUm Trveka(2Aiill 15 Peak HOm Vmuma' 3,710 vehIl Heavy Trvcke (3 +gxles): 15 Vehkle speee' 45 mpg Vehicre W. NaaeFarlane Dieemem,' 52 hail Ve edsT a I Day Evenirq Nghl Daily Sih Data At. 7.5% 12.9% 96% ill MemumToyt 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BaMm Height 0.0 M1 Emno ype(0.Wall, f- Berm): Bo Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27% 108% 074% Cemedlne DI. Same, IGO. had Badial famvetbne(m.1) cenremlre Did,, a ohmrva: 101 hM Amua' ii M. Bomar Dealt olmil, 0.0 red Medum Tres- 4.000 Ddserver ,ft (AD.. Pod): 59 red Hoary Trade: eW6 Grsde Ae)uemenc 90 Pad Ekvadon: 00 real Lane E9uhalentDkbna BnfreQ Roetl Elayal: 90 reel Al : 98607 Roetl Grade: 00% Lore Via-- -90.0 feel Msdlam Tmmy: 98598 Rghl Vrew: 9o.o Degrees HmVTwts: 96608 (i1WA Nmu MoWI L1mmaMnns Leq NIgM Vem1 Type I R. I TmR Fbw I Dlelende I Fklla Road Fmsrrel Rorie Atlan Reim A. Auras: 58.46 - 185 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 Aums: 68.46 181 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 O.WO Mai Tnks: 7945 -1919 -439 -129 -09T 9009 9003 Mai Tnks: 7945 -1343 -439 -129 /r.9T 9009 9003 Heavy Tmcks 5435 -23.15 -439 -120 -516 0'000 0003 Heavy Tmcks: 5435 -17,38 -439 -120 -516 O.OM 0003 UnMtlgnmd Nmsn Le. Buff) OuI Topo an I.I aMnudbef UnMtlgnmd Nmsn Le.els(.id Tapoendfmd -a u.V..) VenideType Leq Peek Hba Leq Gay Leq EVanmg. Leq NIgM LM CNEL VenideType Leq Pe&t Hbui Leq GOy leq Evening I Led NIgM I LM I CNEL Amos; 699 590 573 512 59.8 60A Amos; 667 BAB 63.0 570 65.6 662 Medium Tmcks: 54,7 53.2 45:8 45.3 537 539 Madium Tmcks: 60.4 BOA 52.8 51.0 BOB 597 Heavy Tmcks' 555 54A 45.1 463 541 548 H., Tmcks' 61.3 59.9 BOB 52.1 BOA BOB Vehkle Noise: 627 618 579 532 61.7 622 Vehkle Noise: 685 66.6 636 BB.B 67.5 67.9 COnhNthe Dull h Noise Conkm Cn hell COnhNme Didarl h Nois. Conkm In Ml 70 tlfl4 651 1 QOdBA I 55dBA 1 701 1 651 1 50 dBA I 55dBA Life: li. .0 130 281 ICn: OF 148 316 F. CNEL: 30 65 1M 301 CNEL: 73 157 339 729 liellail2i.reiz 6.1 -29 TumCry.MeVf.,Ai] Samers, ESistlngilinih roled Palled Nams• NNCPC Rand Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Number 8211 Sees Segment, West of Jamboree OOW Aurae; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oily -120 4,87 Saa CmtlMOns Hall 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tra?2(Add, 4.600 veM1idea Am. In PeakHwr Pemealega 10% MWWm Tmam(2 Al 15 I HO.. VOlurrre.' 480 veaiGes Heavy im. P, Axles): 15 Venicln speee: is alga Vital W. I ... /F.1Lme Diesel 76 hest Vanda rya I Day Evedi Nghl I Daily Sid DeU Site WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Beeler Height 0.0 RM Samar Typa l0.Wal(1- Sol 89 Heavy Tmcks: 36.5% 2T %. 188% 0.74% Cadem. Diet to Seller Idd. teal MI.. Soul Eleve gnne(In/eeff Camwllne Dist to observer 1006 fed ANOs, 2000 Si Deda- la obmrven go task Moment Tmcks: 4.W0 observer mial(A.. Pal 5o knd Hemy Tmaka BW6 G/ede AHudment 90 Fad Emission: 0.0 Ied 0.0 feel Lane Egdedlent Didenre(nFeel Road Ebvidem. 90 met Amos: 92.54] Roetl omdn: 80% Left View: -900 all Metllum Tmcks Ws04 Fad Van. W 0 degmes Heary Tmcks: 92547 Riwa Nolae Made, caandetand shwa xolw Model calculation. CNEL Vatide Type I REMEL I image Fmw I Demnw I Fidi Roetl I Fmerrel I 2enier Atten men Aden Samemio: Endflij Wisimand Pin sad Name• NNCPC Road Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Number, 8211 RoadSegmenf: East W Jamboree OOW Aurae; SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9awey ONe -120 4,87 S. CmEltl.. (Hard =10, SAN =Is) Average Daily Tre?c(Add 9,900 vol Aides' 15 P -114 -r Pemenluga' 10% Unce. Timid, (2 Ax %s): 15 IHelm Volume: 1.790 veaiGes Heavy Tmnka(3k Axll 15 Vehicle Speed: 4s alga iserykle W. I.../F., Lane Distance: 76 feel Vanda yps I Day Evaning Night Dedy Site WU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Medium Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Barter Height 0.0 IoM Samar Type (0.Waq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Tmcks: 36.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% Cademid DI5t 1a Barter tame. feel No.. Somme EMVatbne al. sel) Camwllne Dist to observer 10I fed ANOs, 2000 Bemaf oisrense In observer: 0o fad Medum Tmtlrs: 4.000 Gdseerer Heyal(A.. Pal So feel Hilary Tmaka BWB Grades Salaams, 90 Pad Emission: 0.0 feel 90.1 Lane Equivalent Ohhnre(in Feel Road EbvaNOrt 001set Adam: 92547 Roetl Grade: 00% Left View: 910 dogmas McNUmi eese' 92504 Right Van. 900 de9mee Heary Trucks 9250 shwa xolw Model calculation. CNEL V&ride Type T RE1,1F1 I Tmlge, Fmw I Demnse I Fall Road I Fmcrel I Bam-Aden I Ream A9an Acme; 6646 -5.14 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Numnr 8211 0.000 OOW Aurae; 6646 0.50 4.11 -120 4,87 Average Ddly TneWc(Adel: o.OW 0.000 Andamn Tucks: 7945 -2239 -411 -1 211 -097 2200 ami 9009 9003 Uyemm Timis. 7945 -1655 -411 -1211 -097 Sid Dee 9090 9000 Heary Tmckc' 04.25 1633 -4.11 -120 -516 Cement. Dal ro Small cenremrm Did in obaarve/: 0,000 0.003 Heary Tmcks' 64.25 -2662 -4.11 -120 -516 50 red 0,000 0.003 WmM9eNd NOhe LevNa(wIIAOUf TOpo andbe//IeretfMUadonf Pad Ed..n: Lane Equivalent Dhmna(in IreQ Raised Edvdion 90.1 WmM9eNd NOhe Le.(wHaout Time end banter etNressis f Lift V,lw.- -W.o de.. Women Tama: 92.504 light Vrew: VenicmType Leq Palk Ham Laq usy I feq EVCivig I e, Nigh Ldn I Tm5 Fmw I Llsmnle CNEL mameaTypn I LM Peak lmur I LM Lay I f ,,Evmlirg Lee Nigh I Lan Lae Nigh! CNEL Au(nc' 680 56.1 54.3 483 61J1 66.9 575 Autos' 637 61.6 60.1 540 54.9 626 633 Medium Trucks: 518 50.3 43.9 423 50:5 500 51.0 Medium Trucks: 57.5' A.0 49,6 48.1 465 565 50.0 Heavy TUks: 526 51.2 42.1 43.4 48.8 ES 51.9 Has, Tmcks: 56.3 56.9 47.9 49.1 461 57.5 576 Vel N.: 598 off 350 50.3 616 56:6 SB.3 Vehicle fill 656 61 567 S(o 595 64.5 650 c ntwlim Ddmnn he Wass COnrour (in ner) 63.9 Cenmdim Odd me as Wall Centel Cn I c magma odmnn ro Han Call (in Heel Cenmdim Wdenn ro Nasn Centel CHI T dW I 65dBA 61 0 d Wth I Si I McBA WagA I III 0dBA Walla Ltln 16 39 63. 107 100 499 Ltln 43 93 200 70 432 Call 19 42 W 115 193 532 CNEL 46 100 215 84 463 1.1m..,.. m12 I all, Sronano: ESil Mi Pn am mjecl Nams: Ni Road Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Numnr 8211 Read Segment West of Sane Cruz O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway 0ae 4,11 S00Ondllem- (HW =f9, SoH=15J Average Ddly TneWc(Adel: 22.000 veMdea Auras 15 PeeklywrPomsMaga: to% Medgma TmaksRAxka).- 15 Peak Helm V.I.-..' 2200 ami H.a, Trustee (3 +Axles): 15 vehicle speed 45 m1 vahicre Mel Naar/FazLane nian e, 76 feel SahkdTyOe I Day Eveniuq Night I Deily Sid Dee 9009 Am- 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 94.9% 49% 103% 194% SaMer Hdown 0.0 fed Been,lype(OWall 1 -Bend: 8o Hesavy Tmam. fill 27% 188% 074% Cement. Dal ro Small cenremrm Did in obaarve/: 1Lb.o ad 100.0 kart ,hoses. . SOame 6evelmn. Pn(xp Same, I W0 Selmer Ddlerse Is oba , 0.e red Well rmakz: 4000 oba.rv.r H.gm(An.. Pad): 50 red Hwvy Tail BW6 Grade Aryudm.n[90 Pea Emiadom oil red Pad Ed..n: Lane Equivalent Dhmna(in IreQ Raised Edvdion 90.1 Aube: 92547 Read.. oe% Lift V,lw.- -W.o de.. Women Tama: 92.504 light Vrew: 9o.o de9nfm Heary Tmcks' 9250 (i1WA Ndu MOsid Calddlial as (i1WA Ndu Model sides dhws didelt Type I S. I Tm5 Fmw I Llsmnle I Finks Rand I F/esnel J ./l Men I Berm Aden Tu®em.utiR9.m12 Scenario: Existing Wm Pmleal Rjed Name NNCPC Rand Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Numnr 8211 Rena Secipal End of Semen Cams O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Cal 4,11 .0 Canada- (HW= f0,..R =15J Aveage Ddly T/aWc(AtlU: 13.W0 veMdea Autos 15 Peek HwrPomsdsge: to% Mecum Tmoka(2Aika).- 15 Peak Helm Vdumn' 1,380 vehidee Heavy Trial 0, yes.) 15 Vehcle speed 45 m1 vahicre W. Naar/Fazlane Distarlde, 76 feel Veftsde ge I Day Evening Mail Daily Sid Oad 9009 Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Tmcks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 M1 SamerType(0.00.11, I Berm): Bo Heavy Tmcks: fill 27% 188% 074% Ce/Realne Dirt ro Small iLb.9 reed shades agavednn.(mal cenrem/re Did, Is On. 100.0 feel Amoy' 2Wo Bonier Oman. In oball, 0.e red deal rmaka: 4000 ohamin, ,at (An.. sell: 59 red Heavy TrvAS: 6006 Grade Agudment 90 Pad Ed..n: o0 fad Lane EqundanlDmrana(In Ire) Rand Edvdia, J. teal Al 9250 Roetl Grade: 80% fad V,aw.- - 00.0 .agree. Madmen. 92504 III Vrew: 9o.o ae9mea Heavy Tmdt 92547 (i1WA Ndu Model sides dhws Leg Nigh Vehld.Type I S. I TmPWFmw I Imandde I Finile Road Framen Use -Atld Be/m Aden Aubs: 66.46 IA7 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO O:WO Aubs: 6846 0.55 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO 0.000 ALI Tnmka: 7945 -1577 -4.11 -120 -097 9009 9003 Meador Tnmka: 7945 - 1779 -0.11 -120 /r.97 9009 9003 Heavy Tn2ka III -1921 -4.11 -120 -516 (101* 8003 Heavy Tweka 111 -2115 -4.11 -120 -516 0.000 8003 UnMtlg0mtl NOisn LeVNe(..uI TOpn and Is.aNMUdbnf UnMtlgemd Nolan LeVed(wMOUt Tapnendhanlxa .U.n) Vealde Type Leg Peek Hbur Lam Lay leg Ewnmg. Leg Nigh Lee CNEL Veente Type Leg Peak Hbc Lsq Ley leg Evening Lae Nigh! LM CNEL Aube 646 627 61J1 US 63.5 64.1 Aubs; 626 00.7 54.9 52.9 61.5 62.1 Medium Tmcks: 584 fill 50:5 49.0 574 577 Mal Tmcks: III 54.8 465 46:4 554 5515 Heary Tmcks' 592 576 48.8 SOX 684 68.5 Haay Tmcks' 572 65.3 461 480 WS 56.5 Inside Ndse: 665 64.7 616 1 MA 65.9 Inside Ndse: WA 621 595 64.9 00.4 63.9 Cenmdim Odd me as Wall Centel Cn I Cenmdim Wdenn ro Nasn Centel CHI 70 tlfl4 0 d fe aBA I Si 1 70 dB4 0dBA 50 tlBA 55 tlBA Lim 50 107 239 499 fan: 38 70 199 383 CNEL: bi 115 247 532 CNEL: 39 84 181 380 led, hill 7a.212 6.1 -30 7sial MeV 20. Al2 SCanark, Existlng With Pmlect mr act Name•NNCPC Rcaa Name: San Juaguin Hills Job Num0ec 8211 Read Segment, West of Santa Rom 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oala 4.11 SIb Cmtl ns sal 10. Sol 15) Average Gaily Traffic (1 15.600 -hid.. Auras: 15 PankHwr Percenl to% MWlum Trader (2 kuhal 15 Peak HO.. VOlurrre, 1,560 vehides Hnavy'nage, 3k Axlns): 15 Vahicln Speed: a mpa Vankla All Naar/Farlam 0islance: 76 het yemaggia a I Day Evarl Nag I Daily &'I. MU &Ie WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% ammmTrucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 hM Samar Type (0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.749. Cmhgmie Disc to gamer ILL. het Naga Somme gairsebne(In Read Comwllne Dist In Obaral 1LU61e0 Arms, 2000 gamer Dlsrenre to obcornr: Oo reel Mamum Trucks: 4.000 Gd-r Hal (A.. Pnd): 5o had HvaryTrucka 8006 Grade AHummene o0 Pad summer, 0.0 real 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent DHhnre(nAided Road EbvaNOn: 90 IeN Agrees : 92.54] Ronl Gredn: 90% Left View: -91 degrees hhtlium Tmcks 92504 Rghl Vial: W 0 regrew Heavy Tmcks: 92547 Niwa Al Model Cetcrafions Hlwa Al .1.1 cmunmtre. VeMdeType I S. Venire Type I REMF1 I TmT Fbw I am- I Fes. Roatl Finanel I. A. I Rerm A!!an Srenario: Existlng Wi h Palled Pioiecl till NNCPC Road Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Numhe, 8211 Send Segment, East of St. Roma 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hgaivey ONe 4.11 SIB CmEltlmu (HW =10, a- =15) Average, Use, Trial (Add : 21.700 -hid.. Auras' 15 Peak HOUr Pemenluga' to% MWlum Trucks (2 Assam. 15 Peak HO.. V.Iu 2,170 vehides Heavy Tmnka(3k exchat, 15 Vehicle Small: a mpa yenkle ANY N ... ace, Lane Dishnca: 76 het yemaggia a I Dry Eve,ning NOW Dalty &Ie WU 9090 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97,12)g ammun Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 101 194% BdMeI He19At 0.0 IeM Samar Type (0.Waq I Berm): o0 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 108% 0.74% CBnRnie Deal in Sarver 1.. het No.. Somme EMVatbnm(I .1) Comwllne Dart to observer fill fed Anne, 2000 Sarver Dlsrenre In observer: Oo lae,l Mamum Trucks: 4.000 Glarm- mul(A.. Pell: 5o at Hoary Trucks 8008 Grade Arlualment 90 Pad summer, 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent statement (in Sees Lane Equivalent Dhhnce (in hal Road EbvaNOrt L3 teal Auras: 92 547 Roll Gade: 06% Left View: 900 degrees A1eNUmTrucks 92504 Right Vial: 900 a.,- Heavy Trl 92547 Hlwa Al .1.1 cmunmtre. VeMdeType I S. vieftecalf REMEL I That Fbw I Oislence I FmM RYmI I Finand I Benle/Age Reim Attan Aube; 6846 (IN 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Numac 8211 gwo 0,000 Arms; 6646 1A1 4.11 -150 4,87 Average Ddly TraWe(Add. .0600 0.000 Andiumn Trucks : 7945 -1120 -411 -1211 ILI 2,13) vehldee 9009 9003 Andmi Truck.: 7.a -1582 -411 -In 1W Site OaM 9090 9000 Heavy Track¢' 8425 11.16 -4.11 -130 -516 Ommmne DI fa gamer 0,000 0.003 Her, Trucks' fil -ISIS -4.11 -130 -516 AgNUm retake: 4 i) 0,000 0.003 (NmHgefel Nphe LevNa (wIIAOUf TOpo anlOerHwettenuatllnf Pad Ekvatlun: o0 real Lane Equivalent statement (in Sees Roes Execution: UnmHgehl Nphe Lev.H(wllnout Topo and bal astainmd" Roetl.. oe% Left V,aw,- -91 aagran N:ebm Tmcks: 92.504 VenrcJeType Leg Penk HOm Leg de, I feq EVwivig Leg Leg Might VeMdeType I S. I TmPw Fbw I draence I Final Rgaa I Freer Ben Me, Berm A. I Lam Peak HOUr I Lai Lay I feq,ageg Lee NIgM I Lan I (cal Au(ns' 632 61.3' 59.5 535 608 621 627 Auloc' 146 62.7 619 546 62A 53.5 64.1 Medium Trucks: 51 55:4 49.1 475 58.2 SET Mg 582 Medium Trucks: 563 SEE WA as ME 574 576 Heavy Trucks : 578 SSA 47.3 48.6 59.1 57.7 56.9 5).1 Heavy Trucks: 593 ST] 46.7 49.9 ST5 Si 58.4 Val Nakem 650 63S 80.1 55.4 663 646 84.0 644 Vehicle NOS.: SEA BAT 61.5 56.6 LIA F£.4 65,6 cenredim I ie al he Han Cdntow (in neQ SEI 656 Cnttdim O4ban as Nase COnbur Cn MQ Canters" oiemnn la Han Cdnbur (in ne4 Cnttdim Welenn as Nave COnbur Cn MQ TO aBA I 65tl6A I WS14 I Waof W eB4 I 1 10 dSa Out 1 60 d9a I Wa A W tlB4 Ltln: 40 88 161 4e 397 225 Ldn: e,9 109 279 W 491 220 Clill 43 92 198 52 426 241 CNEL 53 113 244 51 527 Tu ®ew. seRa:e12 Snnario: Existing With Pre l Rjed Name, :NNCPC Road Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Numac 8211 Road Sa9m ral Wesl of Maranbm 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlghwmy Data 4,11 SNe COnaiessa(Here-a aesel ) Average Ddly TraWe(Add. 21,300 veMdea Autos 15 Palk HUrrPomsMaga: to% MedumTeirs(2AxIal 15 Peak HOm Vrunre,' 2,13) vehldee Heavy Trader p + Axles): 15 Vehcle speed' as mpn vanicre MM Naaeligar ane armuses 76 feet VehkhTyn I Day Ethereal Wf I Deily Site OaM 9000 Aube,: TT5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 1 49% 193% 194% @.char Hdod, 0.0 seal BamerType(DWml, I Berm): 00 Heavy Tmdts: WLS% 27% 108% 074% Ommmne DI fa gamer 100.5 rW Nnls. Sal Fdenlbne an. 1) cenreMre Did an ob. 100.0 fend Anne, I MI Sarver giver. m oberver 0.0 rem AgNUm retake: 4 i) ohsarm, ,at (An.. Pell: 50 rer Hal Trvdis: BWB Gmeaaefuarmenc 90 Pad Ekvatlun: o0 real Lane Equivalent statement (in Sees Roes Execution: 95.1 Ades: 92547 Roetl.. oe% Left V,aw,- -91 aagran N:ebm Tmcks: 92.504 Rush, Vrew: 9o.o ae9rem Heavy Tmeks' 92547 (1100,1 al MOn11.ainahahons Leg Might VeMdeType I S. I TmPw Fbw I draence I Final Rgaa I Freer Ben Me, Berm A. Trusew. sam 2. 2g@ Saari: Existing WiN Priced Rjed14gre Ni Rnad Name: San Joaguin Hills Job Numar 8211 Road Sagnmal Eastol Macanhur 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey 0etm 4,11 Sea COnallemse (HW =f0, Soft =15) Avaregelmay TraKs(An. SGSW veMdea Ats. 15 Peek HwrPomsMage: to% Medum Tmoks(2AiIal 15 Peak HOm Vduma 2,060 vehidea Heavy Trvcke (3 +Axles): 15 Vehcle speed' as mpn vanicre W. Naaccar'Lane armses.' 76 hel VehkKType I Day Evening Night Daly Site OaM 9000 Aube,: TT5)g 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tmcks: 9a.9% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0 Net Bame,lf,m(0 -Wall, 1- Berm): BO Heavy Tmdts: WLS% 2.7% 108% 074% Cer.;mmx Dirt fe Server Ign. rW Nols.soum.whabmpn.') cenreIs Did, b ohnrvar: 1006 hM Acted It W. Sarver Oman. m observer 0.0 real Madura retake: 4 i) Dhsmv, Heghl(An.. Peal: 59 rn1 Hill Trucks: BWB Grade AajYdmeM'90 Pad Ekvatlun: 00 real Lane EquhalenlDktma(In leeQ Roetl survival J. heel Ades: 92547 Roetl.. 00% Left V,sm- -91 aagren Malbm Tmeka 92504 Rghl Vrew: 9o.o ae9rees HII&VTwts' 92547 (1100,1 NWU Mon, Lllaaahons Leg Might Vehld.Tyme I S. I Tmq Fbw I Llslenle I Flnile Road Finan& I.Mam Bermaker Assets : MAE 1.33 4,11 -130 4,87 111 0:000 Assets : 68.46 Lt9 4,11 -130 4,87 111 0.000 Maalum Tmnka: 7945 - 1591 -4,11 -129 -097 9009 9003 Mealum Tmnks: 7945 - 1895 -4,11 -129 Ish' 9000 9003 Heavy TUka 8425 -1186 -4.11 -130 -516 (1000 5003 Heavy TUka 8425 -Sul -4.11 -130 -516 .0.000 5003 UnMNgMed NO,n LeVW(wIPOUt Team and III.albnYagal UnMNgMed NO,n Levels(.xATapoendhanlxall .fttl ) Ventre Type Leg Park real Lag Thy Leq ESenmg. Leg Might Les CNEL Ventre Type Leg Paak Hlur Lag Lay leg Evaning. Lam Night LM CNEL Aube; 64.5 62.6 608 Si 63.4 840 Arms; 64.3 62A W.] 54fi 63.2 006 Medfum Tmcks: 58.2 SET 51 a's 57.3 57.5 Medium Trucks, 58.1 ME 51 48.7 51 574 Heavy Trucks' 59.1 57.7 48.6 499 683 584 Hal Trucks' 56.9 ST5 48.5 491 56.1 583 Vel Ndn: 663 646 61.4 SET 653 657 Vel Ndn: 663 LIA 61.3 56A SEI 656 Cnttdim O4ban as Nase COnbur Cn MQ Cnttdim Welenn as Nave COnbur Cn MQ 70 tlBA W Sim I W eB4 I 55dM 1 70 dfl4 W Sim W tlB4 55 tlBA ten: 4e 100 225 495 ten: W 102 220 474 CNEL: 52 112 241 520 CNEL: 51 110 233 5('9 Tueel MCV9s. 2012 6.1 -31 Tweeds. Meru 26. 2012 Sawashe Existlng Wilkie latt Pied Nams• NNCPC Read Name: San Clemenle Job Nemhec 8211 Road Segment: East d Same BaNa2 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oala -373 SIb CmtlMOns (Hard=10. Sol 15) Average Daily Traffinfa : 5.700 tamales Autos: 15 PaakHwr Pemeranxim 10% MWlum Thai (2 Axksf: 15 Peak Ho u/ Volunre. S/9 -hid.. Had, im. P, essed): 15 Vanicle Speed: 4o mall Wheat MR. I ... /Fa/Lemi Oiaddem. 36 het Vanda yps I Day Evedil Nght I Daily &Te De, SihI Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Ahdlum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 163% 104% Beemer Height 0.0 hM Samar Typa l0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Heavy TVaks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% CanRniM Del 10 Sal 1.. het Nams Saidem vatbns(In/eaff Comellne Dist to Observes IWIG fed Assam, 2000 Settler Did a- la observe, go fad helium Thinks: 4.W0 observer mixed (A.. Pal 5o heel Hemy Tmaka e005 Grade Adudmene o0 I Ehvation: 0.0 Ied Rated Edystim, Lane Egolvalent DlstanreQn rest) Road Ebval 60 lad Auras: 96412 Roetl oredm: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degmes washm 1. ill Rghl Via-- an. eighties Heavy TmGe: 96413 N4WA. Modal Cakedewh d Ldn Venide Type I REFILL I Trelbc Fbw I Did ends I Flats Roetl I Fresad I 2enier Aem fame Ala Samerse Existlng Wibmased Pied Name• NNCPC Read Nam.: San Clemenle Job Number, 8211 ROZd Segment West at Sid. Gm 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBnwy Ds to -373 SIB CmEMaN (Huey -10. a- I: Is) Average Daily Tre?a(1 5,900 vv idea Auras' 15 P -11aur Pressed ga,' 10% MWWm Thalls(2 loses. 15 IHO.. Volume: 590 vehii Haavy Tames Pk Axles): 15 Venicl. ill 40 mien Val W. I ... h a/ Lane fishnet: 36 het Vanda yps I Day Einereal Nlahl Dally &'Ie WU SihI Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Ahdlum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 163% 194% BaMeIHa9ht. 0.0 led Samar Typa (0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy TVaks: 66.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% CanRnie DI5t la Seiner 1.. het No.. SwFe EMVatbns an/eaff Comellae DW to Obsarv.r III tad Assay, 2000 Sill Did a -ro oGrerne, go ad Used Thinks: 4.W0 Gdserrer Hel(A.. isal 5o het Heavy Trvaka 8,006 Grade Arlumiment 60 I Ehvation: 0.0 feel Rated Edystim, Lane Equivalent Dhlanre(in Feel Road Ebval L O lset ANDS: 96412 Roetl Gred.: Oo% Left View: Fill dessert Witemi rke' 98.72 Right Vial: W 0 e.gmem Heavy Tymdn MA13 HIWA all.1.1 Calculations Ldn V&ride Type I REMEL I Thine Fbw I Oismnca I Flats Red I Fmcrel I BanierAtten I Ream Aean Aube; 61 -366 4,51 -130 4,87 Road3agment Videol Jamboree 0.000 0000 Almis 66.51 -373 4,51 -150 4,87 2.100 vel O.OW 0.000 Maaum These: 17. -2112 -451 -1211 ILI Heavy Trehas p + Axles): 15 . W 6003 Assamm Tiumm 172 -2697 -451 -1311 IL7 SihI 6090 6000 Heavy Tmcks' UN 1307 451 -120 -516 too.o had 100.0 fad 0,000 0.003 Heavy ➢asks' Ell 1493 451 -120 -516 HWry TNAS: Il.WS Grade Adjudexama 0,000 0.003 WmM9eNd Nnha LevNa(wghout TOpo and barrier themuegaid Lane Equitalent Dhtrnce 0n fret) Rated Edystim, 6o and Auks: 98412 WmM9eNd Nn ha LeveH(.t TOpn and beam/ atNnueaonf -90.0 degrees N:mYm Tmcks: 95.72 Right Vrew: .. eagrere VenicleType Lazl Peak imur I Lee, Gay teq Evening Laq Nigh I Ldn I CN¢ Venisallyat I Lam PeakI I Lai Gay I Ieq EVmmmg Lem Nigh I Ldn I CN¢ Amr(nm' 569 530 53.3 471 419 55.8 564 Ades, 57,1 532 MA 478 58.3 56.) SE Medium Tmcks: 509 49.4 43.0 41.5 45.5 45.0 49.9 502 Medium Tmcks: 510 49.5 433 416 527 501 503 Heavy TUka: 522 50.8 417 430 479 all EA 51.5 Heavy Trucks: 52.4 ME 41.9 43.1 54.1 515 516 Vehcle Nose: 589 Wd 539 49.4 546 52.9. 57.9 58.3 Vehicle Narem 59.1 57.3 54.1 49.5 WE 58.1 58.5 unredim Dmanae he Mile Cantow an heap 61.2 617 Centtdine O4mnn as Nasu Deal Cn MU c mat Omanae le Han canroYr an real Centtdine Didame as Naeu COnrour pn Mp M dEs 651 1 WlegA I WIWA East I M11 01 1 WdRI I WdB4 W dBA Ltln: 18 34 72 0 155 3y Ltln: 18 34 74 28 189 1. ONEL: 17 36 78 9 167 40 Clil 17 37 79 26 171 Tueew. sm..:wz Sealed: Existing wo mdad Rjed Name NNCPC Road Ni Janie Bell Job Number 8211 Road3agment Videol Jamboree ONO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Dam Highway De. SNa COnd hors (HW =10, SoH=15) Avenge Odly TraWs(Al 2.100 vel Autos 15 Peek Hear Poremall: to% Mealnn TUaks(2 Al 15 Peak H., Volurrre.' 210 amil Heavy Trehas p + Axles): 15 Vehicle speed 40 mall vial We NaaniarLane Diesries Wiest VehkmTyge I Day Examaill Night I Deily Sih OaM SihI Aubs: 77.5)4, 12.9% 9.6% 9742% Medium Trucks: 1 49% 163% 104% Bartertaleon 0.0 led Bame,lype(OWall, 1 -Beral Oo Heavy Tmcks: B6.5% 27% 188% 074% Cemmind Dirt. Berner Canmdlne Dim in Observer too.o had 100.0 fad ante. . SOsed. EMaaDOna he Leap Alas, 2000 Seiner Distance to 06urver; 0.0 feet Mal Tmcks: x030 observer Hegnf(An.. Podf: 59 Ia. HWry TNAS: Il.WS Grade Adjudexama Pad Ed.h s.: 00 rad 00 ad Lane Equitalent Dhtrnce 0n fret) Rated Edystim, 6o and Auks: 98412 Roetl.. o0% Left Via-- -90.0 degrees N:mYm Tmcks: 95.72 Right Vrew: .. eagrere Heavy Tmds' 98413 F1wa Nau MOe.I eda lithe ns (i1WA Ndu MoWI ed-hatiwa Venda Type I REM¢ I Tm5 Fbw I olsfenxs I Finite Read I Fred. Ha/ce/Men I Berm A. laeemselm.tgle Samism. Existing WiN Petted mjed Name NNCPC Rnad Name: Hanle Bata. Job Number 8211 Rnad6egment Eastd Jamberee ONO 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway De. 4,51 Sae Cmm1v ru (HW =f0, Soft =15) Average Daily The Xc(A4. 12.200 yel Rubs: 15 Paek Hon'.Mege: to% Meaurn Tmoka(2Aik).- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 1,220 MM1I4es Heavy Tracks 0, exal i5 Vehcle speed 40 main vial We Naaniarlane 0istaries 36 het VahkeT . I Day Evening Night Daily SihI 9009 Am. 77.5)4, 12.9% 86% 9742% Medium Tmcks 84.8% 49% 193% 104% BaMe/He196L 0.0 led Bame,lype(0.Wall, i -Be-): Oo Heavy TVaks: WL5% 27% 188% 074% CeMe/Ilne ClSL ro Hemel. Canmis Led, In Obmrvar Ild. fi ed 100.0 fad Nola. sou/d 6'ea.anne pn fxp Assns, ti M. Seiner Oman. to OLtmsever, 0.0 rest Madlum Tmcks: aW0 Dbaerver ,at (An.. thing 59 hey Hal TNAS: 8,W8 tirade Adfudmem, 90 Pae Ekvaaon: 00 ad Lane EquhalenlDkbncohn(ret) Roetl Ekvdie, 6o heel Auks: 98412 Roetl.. 00% Left Via-- -90.0 deethda N:mnm Tnuuks: 95.72 Fight Vrew: 9o.o degrees HeavyTwts 98413 (i1WA Ndu MoWI ed-hatiwa leq Ewnbg. Ve ..Type I R. I TmPre Fbw I Dlehnde I Finge Read Frecrel Exim -Atlen Be/m A. Aubs: 111 -8.22 4,51 -120 4,87 ONO 0:000 Aubs: 66.51 L.50 4,51 -120 4,87 ONO 0.00 Medium Tmnke: TI.7l' -2548 -451 -129 -0g7 9009 6003 deal Tmnke: TI.72. -1781 -451 -129 /rgT 9009 6003 Heavy Trv2ks: 8200 19.41 -451 -120 -516 IlOW o003 HedySnmks: Eli -2177 -451 -120 -516 0.000 0003 [1"wrimit Nolen L,V (without Tons and beMxalbnYdbn) UnMN9emd NOlmn L.V angirmt Type end banlxmNMYeaonf listed Type Leq Pa&e Hbm Le, Day leq Ewnbg. Lag Nigh LM CNEL VenlmeType Leq Pa&e Hnm Leq oey laq Evening. Laq Nigh LM CNEL Auras; 526 W.7 419 42.0 51.5 52.1 Aubs; 682 58.3 W.6 Di 59d 597 Medium Tmcks: 45.5 45.0 367 37.1 45.6 45.8 islial mTmcks: 54.2 527 4B3 "A 53.2 535 Heavy Trucks' 479 all 37.4 387 20 47.1 Heay Trucks' 55.5 54.1 45.1 463 547 549 Vehice NOS, 546 52.9. 49.6 45.0 ME 54.0 Liddell NOSe: 622 WE 572 527 61.2 617 Centtdine O4mnn as Nasu Deal Cn MU Centtdine Didame as Naeu COnrour pn Mp 70 al 1 01 1 East 55dBA 1 70 al W 1 W dBA 55 tlBA Lim 0 17 3y 89 Inn: 28 56 1. 259 CNEL: 9 10 40 86 CNEL 26 60 IN 278 led, sel tai. 21 6.1 -32 Tsel sm 20. Ail SCeamme Bell tell Intel Pmiecl Name• NNCPC Road Name: Santa Barba. Job Number 8211 Sties Segment, Norm W San Clemente Owo SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HI@M1way Dale -261 SIb Cmtl ns(Hard =10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tra?c(Ad!): 12.10 vydea Auras: 15 PeakHwr Pemenlaga, 10% MWlum TmMS(2 Axks). 15 Peak HOm VOlurrre.' 1,210 -hid.. Had, Tmnka(3k Axle): 15 Van. Speed: 4a .0 Val We N ... hiarLarre Disrance: 36 het yaddia a I Day Eviddil Nghl I Daily Site Deal Bid WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% k @dam Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% BdMeIHel9ht 0.0 het Samar Typa OAA ILI Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 2T %. 188% 0.74% CBnRniM Di5L to Hamer 1CO.o het Ness$ -me Elevafbns(In exef) Cemwlae Dist In Obarver 1LU61e0 Amma 2000 Berner Disrenre to obamen, 00 ad Memum Trvcke: 4.000 Gdseeor Hege (Alm. Pen): 5o last HeryTrvcka e005 Grade Aalmanx t0a Fad Ematio¢ 0.0 feel 0.0 feel Lane EqulvalealOHhnreQnhef) Road EbvaNOn: 00 set Auras: 98412 Road Grade: 0.0% Left View: -NO degrees k1etlam 1. 93.72 Rgbf Viaw.- N.. deimee He,Tmets 98413 PANS And- Sandal CekrJadWa HIWA All Medal Calculations Ldn Velde Type I SLAIDL Tmlbc Fbw I Oidends I Finite Roetl I Fmenel I Femur Aen I Ream Allan Scenario: Existlng WiN Prafact Pmiecl Neme• NNCPC Road Nam.: Santa Bazaars Job Number 8211 Ral Segment, SouN M San Clemente Owo SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwcy ONe -261 Slay CmdldoN(Hartl a 10, a- I: a) Average Deily Theft Ad!): 7,300 veaiGea Auras' 15 P -114- rPemenlega.' 10 %e MWLm Trucks (2 Ax %a): 15 Peak HOm Veams: 730 veaides Hal Tmnks(3k Assam, 15 V.nicl. Speed: 4. m9n Vehkle We NeadFar Lane Diseardi 36 het yaddia a I Dry JEh)h91 Nlahl Dally Bid WU Sih OaM Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97,C% k @dam Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 18396 194% BaMeIHeight. 0.0 led Samar Type OAVI I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% (dnRnind Did,. Berner 100.. het Nese Somme EMVatbns an exed) CemwNy DW to Obsever 10U.o fed ANOe, 20.0 Semar Damenre In oGrerver: 00 ad Memum Trvcke: 4.000 Gdsarvar mal (Alm. Pen): 5. had Heavy Thinks, 8.008 Grade Aammanent 0a Fad Ematio¢ 0.0 feel Lane Egahalent Dhhnc¢ On lre) Lane Equivalent Ohfanre(in Feel Road EbvaNOrt .O feel ANDS: 96412 Road Gmds: Op% Left View: NO deame MaNUmi rke 98.12 Right Viaw: W O dsgmee Hery Tmmk MA13 HIWA All Medal Calculations Ldn Velde Type I REMFl I Tminc FUw I Oishnds I FVNh Red I Fmmrel I BamerAen I Reim Afton Aides ; 66.51 gal 4,51 -130 4,87 Road Segment West of Neel CTR Owo OOOO Auae; 66.51 -261 4,51 -150 4,87 5.4)0 veMdes .0.000 O.WO seem Tmcks: 17. -11.85 -451 -1211 IB7 Heavy Trvcss p, Axles): 15 00.. OOW seal Tnuake: 172 -20.4 -451 -12a IB7 Sih OaM 00.. OOld Henry Tmcks' 82.9 1161 161 -120 -516 1Lb.o had 0,000 0.003 Henry Tmcks' Ell 1400 451 -120 -516 Oneerver li(AD.. Frog 0,000 0.003 WmHgefed Nnhu Levea(wllAOrrf TOpoandtedrad lexa n) 80 red Lane Egahalent Dhhnc¢ On lre) Road Elevder, 0o.1 WmHgandy Nn.. L.. hisal Tel and dente, a.uetlon) fall Yraw.- -90.0 dagres Nomam Thanks: 98.72 Rgbf vrew: VenideType Laq Pek Imerl LM Gay I fag EVenag I IMNigh Ldn I The Fuw I Okfence CNEL VenaJeTypu Limill'affielmai'l Led Gay I tog EVand, Lee MEN I Lan I CNEL Adds' 602 58.3 BOB 585 538 69.1 597 Admit, 560 SEA 54.3 463 52.6 111 57.5 Medlum Trucks: ME 52.5 46.3 447 514 49.9 512 534 Medlum Tmcks: 520 WE 44.1 42.5 47.0 51.0 512 Heavy Thanks : 555 54d 45.0 463 527 51.3 54.6 547 Heavy Thanks : 53.3 OF 428 44.1 ASIA 524 526 VeMe Name: 622 WE 572 526 594 57.7 612 61.6 Val Name: 600 5113 550 SOA U's 590 59A CenlMbh Ohlorice he @an conromr @n read 51 560 Cenfeline Chlorin ro NOiae Diameter Cn M(1 cenda lm Ohlorice la HOhe conromr (in rear) Cenfeline Wrtenn ro NOiae Diameter Car MO TO dBA I 65dBA I &I I WSSA WOBA I I TOdBA Well I WdBA I WSSA 50 dBA Lan: 28 58 1. 17 258 78 Ldn: 18 40 95 11 184 SO CNEL 28 59 128 18 276 84 CNEL 20 42 91 12 197 Tumew..,xi.m1z I all, Srenario: Existing wo minded Pi jed Nems: NNCPC Road Name: Ends Barbara Job Numer 8211 Road Segment West of Neel CTR Road Segment' East d Newport CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlgnwey Dale Hlgnwey Smis SRa COnaffiewu (Head=10, SoH=15) Avenge Odly TraWc(Al 5.4)0 veMdes Autos: 15 Peek Hoar Podemel: 1.% McNUm Telet(2 Axed).: 15 Peak H., Volmrre.' 640 vehil Heavy Trvcss p, Axles): 15 Vehkle speed' 40 mpg vahicre W. NeanTiml.n¢ Disame, 36 feel VehkhTys. I Day Extrargil Nlghf I Oily Sih OaM Sih OaM Amos: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 1 49% 103% 194% @aM¢r HeIBXL' 0.0 lest Sase,lype(0VllL I Berm): Oo Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27% 188% 074% O4mamm Di5L. Santa, 1Lb.o had Ilnls. 5oume Fievebn¢ Pn txp Canhdlns Did in Oberver 100.0 fed Aetna, IWO Samar Demand, to Observer, 0.0 feel deal Tracks: 4000 Oneerver li(AD.. Frog S. Ia. Hery Tral 6X6 Gmda Adjessel 00 Pad Edindon: 80 red Lane Egahalent Dhhnc¢ On lre) Road Elevder, 0o.1 Albs: 98412 Roetl Gredk 00% fall Yraw.- -90.0 dagres Nomam Thanks: 98.72 Rgbf vrew: .o.o degree Heavy Trimm, 9B413 F1wa al M deal Odauldxon¢ F1WA Ndu MoWI L11nu7ahona mansiTypa I S. I The Fuw I Okfence I Fkke Rand I Fred. R¢n Me, Ream A. Theadm tiRS.m1z Sronario: Existing WiN Pmlacl mi ed Nama: NNCPC Red Name: Banta Bal -120 4,87 Job Numer 8211 Road Segment' East d Newport CTR O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlgnwey Smis 4,51 Sea COndlE'oru (HW =f0, SoH =lag Avenge Daly Thishim tlU: 3.300 veMdes Amed 15 Peek Hon'.dage: 1.% McNUm Tmoke(2Aitel 15 Peak Hmur Vdumn' 330 hidea Heavy Trvcke 0, had) 15 Vehkle speed' 40 mpg vahicre W. NaadFarLane Dmeme,.' 36 feet VehkNT . I DAY Evening fall Daly Sih OaM 0000 Auaa: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @emir Height 0.0 lest Bame,lype (0.WaIL1- Berm): OZ Heavy Tmcks: WLSys 27% 188% 074% Cerdenlne Cliff It Hamer 1Lm.9 had Hold. soumerievebne pre fxp Conlodlne Led, a Obervar 100.0 fed Aetna, 2W. Semen DUlance to Observer, 0.0 real Modium Tracks: 4000 Oderver ll(AD.. Pod): 5. lad Hery TNAS: BW8 Gradeximpamix, 90 Pad Eminal: 00 fed Lane EquhalenlDkbna (In (reff Roetl Eadden: Of had Autos: 98412 Roetl Grade: 00% Left Yraw.- -90.0 dagreas Nomam Thanks: 98.72 Rgbf I 9o.o degrees Heavy Tmmd, 9B 413 F1WA Ndu MoWI L11nu7ahona Le, NIgM Vekl.Type I S. I TmR Fbw I Distance Fklte Road Frenel I.Mah Ream A. Aides : 111 -3.38 4,51 -120 4,87 06011 O:WO Aides : 66.51 -625 4,51 -120 4,87 06011 0.000 Madam Tmnka: TI.12. 1.00 -451 -12. 10, 0000 ..003 Madam Tmnka: TI.12. 1349 -400 -12. 10, 0000 O. Heavy Trucks; USA -2457 -451 -120 -516 .000) 0003 Heal Trul 829 -2745 -451 -120 -516 .0000 0003 Unndtlgnfetl Nean LeeW (wIPOUf TOpo andherNeraCMYebnf Unndtlgnfed Nolan Levels (werout Typo and hanlx ebndial Vedethem Lm Peak Hhm Le, Gay loq EVankg Le, NIgM Le CNEL VZ Type Leq Peak HOm Leq Gay (oq EVaning I Laq NIgM I Le I CNEL Auks; 574 55.5 538 477 56.3 56.9 Aides ; 54.5 52.6 00.9 440 53A 51 soul Timeke, 514 49.9 43.5 42.0 BOA 507 Metlium Tmcks: 48.5 47.0 LOS 39.1 476 47.8 Henry Tracks' 527 51.3 423 435 EA 620 Henry Treks' 49.8 ASIA 39.4 486 48.0 49:1 Vehkls NOS, 594 57.7 54.9 OF SEA 58.8 Vehkls NOSe: 565 U's 515 470 51 560 Cenfeline Chlorin ro NOiae Diameter Cn M(1 Cenfeline Wrtenn ro NOiae Diameter Car MO 70 tlfl4 65 ABA 1 WOBA I 55ABA 1 70 tlfl4 65 SEA 50 dBA 55 tlBA Inn: 17 36 78 189 Idn: 11 23 SO 1.8 CNEL: 18 39 84 181 CNEL: 12 25 54 116 Tum lls,1ts.2i 6.1 -33 Tum4ry. MCVtB. A1] Scegang Eell Wit Prolatt Pioiecl Nama• NNCPC Read Name: sae Mlguel 410 4,87 Job Number 8211 Ruma Sagmenf: Wesloiginal rtCTR 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlgM1wey Oala 4,39 $Ib Cmtlltlons (Marl 10. goal 15) Average Oast, Traft gi ): 7,600 vehides A.. 15 PaakHwr Pemenlsga 10% MWIUm Thiin Axks): 15 Peak Hour Imimre.' 780 -hid.. Heavy Tmnka(3k Axle): 15 Vans Speed: 45 mph Val Man N ... ni' rGarre Vismance: 52 het Vandal I Oey Evemmill Nghl I Vasty SoTel DaU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% fill Medium Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BMhr Height. 0.0 hM Sal Typa onelL I Berm): O8 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 21%. 10,8% 0.749. Centel Deal In Sal 100.. het Net.. Surma Elevegnne (In /eeff Demanding Dist to Observer fail fed ANee, 20.0 SWtler Oidexe 1. Obmrven Do feel Mail Tmcks: 4.000 observer Hal hum. Pee): 5o feel HeryTrvcka 8,006 Grade AHudmene 90 Pad Ehvatiou' 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent Damon. (in Feel Lane Equivalent Dtionnm(nFelt Road EbvaNOn: 90 IeN Asee 98607 Road omde: 0.0% Left View: -No degrees 6ledlum Tra. 99506 Run' View. W 0 dogmas Hevy Tmcks: 96608 Phal N.lu M.dal Cak'ulatlms Vafide Type I It. I mmeeType T REMF1 I mme Type I REMF1 I Thal Fbw I Olseenat I Fee. ROatl Fmnrel I. A. I A. Bcerelro: Existlng WiN Prafact Pminua Nelms• NNCPC Read Name: sal Mlguel 410 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Read Segment East W Newpart GTR 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe 4,39 Sib Cmentem. (HW =10, a- =15) Average Ded, Tre?c(Atl!): 12.700 -hid.. Asset, 15 Peak HOUr Pemeonal 10% MWWm Tmcks(2 Ax %s): 15 Peak HOUr Volume: 1,270 vehides Heavy Tmnks(3k goal 15 Venicla Speed: 45 mpn Val Man N ... ni'r Len. Dishnce: 52 het Vanda ps I Dry Enerenjill Nlahf Oslty Sol WU -439 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% fill Medium Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMel Helgllt 0.0 IoM Sal Typo onel I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CanRnias Dist in Barter i00.. het No.. Somme EMVMbne on/eeff Demanding DW to Obs.rv.r fail fed Aides , 2000 Bahr Disrenre In observer: 0o red Mangum Thmate: 4.000 Gdemor Fall (Above Pam 5. het Hoary Trucker 8,006 Gramaximuslment 90 Pad Ehvatiou' 0.0 reel Lane Equvalent Dhtrna 0n fre4 Lane Equivalent Damon. (in Feel Road EbvaNOrt 001set Asee 98607 Road Gmde: 00% Left View. No degrees MaNUmT cd, 99599 Right View: 900 a.,- Hevy Trucks.' 96609 Phs. N.Ix M.1.1 LMmbtlm. Ldn Vafide Type I It. I mmeeType T REMF1 I Tmdnc Fbw I Olsmnca I FVNh Read I Fmseen I RenierAtten I Rem Amen Aubs; 6846 -3 03 4,39 410 4,87 0.000 0000 Aube; 6646 -0 91 4,39 -120 4,87 Average Odly TraWe(Al 16.400 veMdes 0.000 am mum Tmnke: 7945 -2927 -439 -1 to 1i Heavy Tonke(a, Axles): 15 900. 9.00 Mum Trunk.: 7.m -19 t5 -439 -1 to I7 -439 90.. 9000 Heavy Tmcks 8425 1412 439 -120 -516 I.. and 0,000 0.003 Hass,Theaks' 84.25 - 22.11 439 -120 -516 observer Naga (Above Pod): 0,000 0.003 (NmMgefed Nnhu LevMa(wool T.pn end baniereHenuatl.nf 8o red Lane Equvalent Dhtrna 0n fre4 Road Elsvetirn: 9th met WmMgafed Nnhu Levess (wllnmrf Time end ba ler eMnuadmng Leff Via -No degrees Nedbm Texas: 89599 Rdhf Vrew: VenaJeType LagPonk lore Leg they I deq Lmageig I Laq NIgM Ldn Vafide Type I It. I CNEL moseType I LM Poak noun I Leg they I Ieq Limng Lae gain I Ldn I III Al(ns' 598 579 %1 1 LM 687 59.3 Autos' 620 60.1 582 522 ill 61.5 Metllum Trucks: 538 5Y] 45.7 44,2 61.1 528 529 Medium Trucks; %] 54.2 47.8 46.3 40:9 54.9 55.0 Heavy TUke: 544 530 44.0 son 57.0 53.6 537 Heavy Thank. : FEE %d 46.1 473 all 551 55.8 VehMe NWe: 617 598. 568 52.1 59A 60:6 61.1 Vel Neal 638 620 589 54.2 649 62.8 632 CanlMim Dlamnn la Naas Centel (in Ted) 639 all Vill Notes; 666 C Ihgfim Dlamnn as Nan Daughter (in Ted) 61.7 570 65.6 660 Donations Ommnn as Nase COnbur on hand TO dBA 1 65 dBA I %dSA I SS d94 I MdBA 0IMP I 60 dSA I SS WRA I0dB4 L. 24 51 110 233 1 70 al Ltln: 3A 71 153 329 Lon: CNEL 26 55 118 390 255 Ldn: CNEL 85 76 IN 5.7 353 lexi Glen R N4 Srenario: Existing Wih Pmjed Pi jed Nama: NNCPC Road Name: San Miguel 4,39 Job Number 8211 Road Segment West of AVacado 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hi@hwey DMa 121 SN¢C.ndem-(Herd= 10,agail ) Average Odly TraWe(Al 16.400 veMdes Am. 15 Paek HUrr Poment,or t.% Medum TUCk4(2 Axka).- 15 Peak H., Volurrre.' 1,640 vehides Heavy Tonke(a, Axles): 15 ma le speed' 45.1 Vahicre Mm Ngar/Fal astarem 52 feel VehkmT se. I Day Evedrq Nlghf I Deily Sin, Oam -439 Auba: 7.5% 12.9% 96% ill immum Trucks: 1 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r HdpXG' 0.0 feel Bamer7ype(0.WalL 1 -Bumf: ob Heavy Tmdts: 81 27% 168% 074% Cansenine Dart f. Same, I.. and fame. smme6-v .Pre map cmremng Dist to obsarvn: look fed Ades, 2 p00 Selmer Disrenre m observer 0.0 red Madam Tradul 4. 000 observer Naga (Above Pod): 50 red Heavy Trade: 8,006 Lmed AryudmmanD Pad Eknadoe: 8o red Lane Equvalent Dhtrna 0n fre4 Road Elsvetirn: 9th met Autos: 98607 Roetl.. LO% Leff Via -No degrees Nedbm Texas: 89599 Rdhf Vrew: No degmm Heavy Trails 96608 (i1WA Ndu M.d¢I L11nuL¢hms Vafide Type I It. I Tom Fbw I Distance I Fbga Read I Fmsn& R¢rner Me, Rem A. Tewdev. Nen m. malt Sensome: Existing With Purled Pi jail NUme NNCPC lial Name: San Miguel 4,39 Job Number 8211 RmdSagment Eastol AVacado 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HiBhwey Defy 121 .0 Condltlom gal =f0, SoH =15) Aveage Ddly The Xc(A4. 24.36) veMdes Aufm: 15 Pmkime' sM.ge: t.% Medum Trvok4(2Aika).- 15 Peak HOm VWUmn 2,430 vehides Heavy Trucks 0, Axles): 15 Vehble speed' 45 mpg Vahicre W. Ngar/Fardmne Didarrce.' 52 feel VehkKType I Day Everting Night Daly Sin, Oam -439 An. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 91 immum Tmcks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Sartre Height 0.5 M1 BamerType(0.WalL 1- Berm): no Heavy TmLAs: 81 27% 168% 074% CnRenlm Dirt ax Same, iLb.9 and N.le. smme6'evMbn. pre fxp ,e:,..; Dld. b obngrvn: took fed Aund 2000 Bander DUrence In Dimenter 0.0 red Marcum Tracks: 4.000 Dherver Hegnf (Above I 5th red Haavy Trade: 6006 Grade Ad)udmeM' 90 Pad Ekn exon: 8o red Lane Equhalera Dkbna(Inlrep Roetl Entodun: J. reel Ades: 98607 Real.. LO% Left Via -No degrees Madam Tmnke: 99599 Fight Vrew: 9th.. degme HeavyTwts' 96608 (i1WA Ndu M.WI nadh dehma Ve,I.Type I It. I Tom Fbw I Dlsfenda I Finge Road Fmeml I.Man Rem A. Aube: 1 0.20 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 O:WO Aubs: 6646 121 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 am Maxem Tmnke: 7945 -1704 -439 -12. -0gT 900. 9003 Medium Tmnke: 7945 -1533 -439 -12. /rgT 900. 9003 Heavy Tnmka: 3435 -2100 -439 -120 -516 .9000 6003 Heavy Trv2ks 3435 -1929 -439 -120 -516 0.000 6003 UnMNgnfed N.l.n Lend.(wagonuf Feel and hnMx ansnudbn) UnMtlgnfed Naan Lenel.(wM.uf Tapnandhvera mtl.nf VatldeType Leq Peek Hbw Lem they (eq EVanmg Let NIgM LM CNEL VenldeType Leq Peck Hbw Leq they leq Ewning. Led NIgM LM CNEL Autos; 63.1 611 59.4 533 52.0 62.6 Aubs; 111 62,9 61.1 55.1 63.7 111 Medium Trucks, WE 55:3 40:9 47A 55.9 58.1 Medium Tmcks: 50.5 57.0 %:7 49.1 WE 57.8 Heavy Trucks 577 all 472 465 56.0 %.9 Him, Trucks' 59A 579 48.9 502 MILE 586 Vill NWSe: 649 633 6oA WA 639 all Vill Notes; 666 64.9. 61.7 570 65.6 660 Donations Ommnn as Nase COnbur on hand Donations Wamnn of Nasu Counter Can Mp I0dB4 65 SEA I 6xdB4 I 55dBA 1 70 al 65 cSA 60 dB4 55 tlBA Lon: 39 94 161 390 Ldn: 51 109 235 5.7 CNEL: 42 90 IN 419 CNEL: X 117 253 544 TueePlgilst.al 6.1 -34 Tsxds,.MeV2aah2 SCename Exist, Wih Project me eel Name• NNCPC Road Name: San Will 410 4,87 Job Nmdec 8211 Read Segment, West of Mammmur 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Day -1211 IL7 Saa Cmtlldons hat 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tia?2(Ad), 22.100 hides Auras: 15 PaakHwrthmoralm 10% MWIUm TmMs(2 Awill 15 Peak Hour Volurrre, 2,210 -hid.. Heavy'ne. Pk Axle): 15 vesicle Speed: V5 mph Sail I I ... hiarGarre Ddence: ID fal Vemade pa I Day Evwdrdj Nghl I Daily SiTel Dal, LazI Pek How I Lag Day Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 8742% dammm Trucks: 94.6% 48% 193% 194% BenderHeight. 0.0 jad Sal Type h0 lLI Berm): 88 Heavy TVcks: III 2] %. 188% 0.74% Idmeamme Dial In Bartel 1.. reel fill SwWa Elevafbne(In Real Camellne Dist b Onal 1006 fed ANDS, 2000 Hamer D mane m ohaarver: Bored Mamum Thad,, 4.080 Gdserver Hal (A.. Ped): 5o had Heryrrvcka eM6 Grade Aetwena e90 I Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel Heavy TUka: Lane E9ulvaleal DHhnre(n h Q Road EbvaNOn: 90 led Alves: 98607 Roetl Gretle: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degnea Awammim 1. he I RI Vial: W 0 degree Hevy Tmcks: 95608 Fif NMae Madll Cemenefions 65.6 CnlMirh Dhhnn he Nan Conrour (in had) Vend¢Type I SISHI I TaT Fbw I Deadline I Finno Roatl I Feemin I Zanier Agen I Berm A!!e Aides ; 6646 1.49 4,39 410 4,87 Job Numeic 8211 0.000 0,000 Mndum Tmcks: 7945 -15]5 -439 -1211 IL7 SMCenday.-(Herdills,ahme f . W 9003 Heavy Tmcks 8425 -1910 439 -110 -616 Peak HOm Volunre,' 0,000 0.003 WmHgefed Nohe LneNa(inalwa f Tope and darer whanuatlonj 45 .1 vahicre W. NaadFar.h. Ddemen' 76 feel VenideType LazI Pek How I Lag Day Ioq EUwivig Laq Nigh Ldn BamarTypa(DWml, I Berm): CNEL Adam i44 62.5 60.7 546 Aide, 2000 63.3 638 Deal Tmcks: 581 51 003 487 Pad Ekwhich. 572 574 Heavy TUka: 590 57.5 41 411 Read Gredk oe% 58.1 562 Vel Ndse: I US 51.3 56.6 (i1WA Ndu Moral Lllehhom 65.2 65.6 CnlMirh Dhhnn he Nan Conrour (in had) I Finn Read I Fees& Han Men I Berm A. V&lide Type T RFMEL I Trelhc Fbw I Oismene I Finite Rend I Fwal I Ram-Atten I Reim Agar 53.9 CIA 70 tleA 65 Will I 50 tleA I WtleA Ltln: 49 103 221 TO tleA 41. tleA 61 CNEL 51 110 237 Ltln: 511 1m1m..,...1z Sronano: Existng Wi, Pmjem Pi jeer Name NNCPC Road Name: Coaal Highway -120 4,87 Job Numeic 8211 Road Segment Weslol Jambcree 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dam -120 -0gT SMCenday.-(Herdills,ahme f Average Ddly TraWell 69.000 ni ldea Autos 15 Peak hour Poweardi: to% Mecum Tweks(2 Axel 15 Peak HOm Volunre,' 6,000 rehide. Heavy Thiel p + Axles): 15 malde spee, 45 .1 vahicre W. NaadFar.h. Ddemen' 76 feel VehkmT ea. I Day Evening Nlghf I Deily sit. Dal laq Evening Amol 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks 1 49% 103% 194% Barter Hiet 0.0 fed BamarTypa(DWml, I Berm): oo Heavy Trudim. Still 27% 188% 074% Cddedine Dirt ro Senhf cenreMreI mobnrvd: I.. had 100.0 feel lanes.. Seam 6'eagam. he fide) Aide, 2000 Helmer Death. m obnrver 0.0 red Madura Timel 4000 obearvar ,at (AD.. Pad): 59 red Hadq Than 8006 Gredeadjudmem 99 Pad Ekwhich. o0 red 82.0 Lane Equindenl Dhtrna(in hint) Roed Elevation: 9o.1 Aube: 92547 Read Gredk oe% I Yraw.- -90.0 diagram Nimmin Tmcka: 92.504 Fell Vrew: 9o.o de9rem Heavy Tmds 92547 (i1WA Ndu Moral Lllehhom 69.8 Vesicle Type I S. I TmPw Fbw I Demanne I Finn Read I Fees& Han Men I Berm A. Anum 68,46 5.83 4,11 -120 4,87 Job Numhe, 8211 Oo00 0:000 Medium TCks: 7945 -11"1 -4,11 -120 -0gT SIB CmEl6oN (Hard =10, a- =15) o000 9003 Heavy Tmcks 8435 -1536 -4.11 -120 -516 IHOm Volume: IlOW .0003 UnMNgdeIf Noln LeVW eagnouf Town and banialbnudbnj 45 raps VieNlsleI N ... hill Lane Didemil 52 het VenideTyhe Lnq Paek HOW I Lag Day laq Evening Lnq light LM Sal Time h0l I Berm): BNEL Autos; 690 67.1 65.3 593 Camellne I to observer 57,9 68.5 Matlium Tmcks: 82,7 812 549 .ISIS So reel 81,8 82.0 Heavy Tmcks' 636 622 53.1 54A L0 met 623 626 Vande, Ndn: 706 88.1 659 61.2 900 degrees 69.8 70.2 CnhHim Chloride he Nasn Centel (in MQ Vehicle Ndse: V&lide Type T RFMEL I Trelhc Fbw I Oismene I Finite Rend I Fwal I Ram-Atten I Reim Agar 53.9 CIA 70 tlfl4 65 tl8A Q0dB4 Mail Ids: 97 20B 449 TO tleA 99] tleA 61 CNEL: 104 224 did Ltln: 1.038 led1wil..2l 6.1 -35 SCellro: ExieBng WiNPholed me mi Name•NNCPC Road Name: San Kill 4,39 Job Numhe, 8211 Road SSgmenf: Enand MacaMur 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway. -164] SIB CmEl6oN (Hard =10, a- =15) Avomaga Daily Thafti Q: 11.800 vmimas Auras' 15 Peak HOUr Percentage' 10% Ul Trucks(2 Awl 15 IHOm Volume: 1.180 -hide. Heavy Tnka(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 raps VieNlsleI N ... hill Lane Didemil 52 het Vemade a I Day Eneehl Night Defy fife WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% dammm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Bander Height. 0.0 feet Sal Time h0l I Berm): o0 Heavy TVcks: 81 27%. 188% 0.74% Idnamie Dial in Barter 1...1 No.. SwFe Fewhicne an/eafj Camellne I to observer 10I fed ANUS, 2000 Hamer o'name to observer: 0o red Mediam Thad;; 4.000 Gdsarvar HeyM(A.. Ped): So reel Hwi Trvcka 8008 Grade Sead iment 90 I Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel 569 Lane Egulvaleal Dhhnre(in /ee) Road EbvaNOrt L0 met Amos: 98607 Roetl Gretle: 00% Left View: Fill degraes WhimaT cks 99599 Right Viaw: 900 degrees Heavy Thenal 98605 HIWA Al Medal Caddleford 555 Vehicle Ndse: V&lide Type T RFMEL I Trelhc Fbw I Oismene I Finite Rend I Fwal I Ram-Atten I Reim Agar Ames; 6646 -113 4,39 -120 4,87 Road5a9ment EwAdJam00ree 0.000 0.000 Uamum Teke: 7945 -164] -439 -1211 IL7 47.000 nal fill 9000 Heavy Thmm 81 1243 439 -120 -516 Vehicle speed' 0,000 0.003 f4defta al NOha Le.(wHdmrf TOho end benmr ettemedonj Vehkls y . I Day Evening Nqhl Daily SihI Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Madura Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% minefillme Lmi Peak HOUr Lai hey I Ieq EUwtirg Lee Ni9M Lan Nola. sours 6'enlbne pn fxp CNEL Auloc' 616 51 53.0 FA Had, Thand 6006' Gnan Agudment 90 605 61.1 Medium Tmcks: 55.4 569 47.5 46.0 Roatl.. oe% 544 51 Heavy Truck.: 563 54.8 LISS 470 554 555 Vehicle Ndse: 63.5 61.7 586 53.9 CIA 62.9 Gn1Mim Ohhnn ro Nan Conrour (in he4 TO tleA BS tleA tleA 61 Wage Ltln: 31 fig 145 Ilif 313 CNEL 34 72 1X 336 Tumnm.al lz Sronano: Existing With Project mmad Name NNCPC Road Name: Coast Highway 4,11 Job Numeic 8211 Road5a9ment EwAdJam00ree Oo00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data - 1247 SNa COndayins (HW =f0, Soft = Ill Awhi Ddly The Sc(A4. 47.000 nal Autos: 15 Paak Homwene age: to% Mecum Tmoks(2Ailel 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 4,700 vehil Heavy Tweem 0, Axles): 15 Vehicle speed' 45 .1 vahicre W. immeFarLime Diammen 76 het Vehkls y . I Day Evening Nqhl Daily SihI Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Madura Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 M1 BamgrTyme(DWiletI Berm): oo Heavy Trucks: Still 2.7% 188% 074% Cerdenine Dirt ro Send, cenremrre Did ta. ohnrvar: Ild. had 100.0 fed Nola. sours 6'enlbne pn fxp AWOa' 2000 Hamer Oman. In obrerver 0.0 red Medium Timel 4000 Dh4erver Heghl(AD.. Pad): 59 red Had, Thand 6006' Gnan Agudment 90 Pad Ekwhich. o0 ad Matlium Tmcks: Lane E9uhalenlDkrma(Inho Roetl Ekvdion: 90 reel Amaa: 92547 Roatl.. oe% Led Yraw.- -90.0 di igam Madmen TmERa 92504 Rent Vrew: 9o.o degrees Heavy Trtmts' 92547 (i1WA al Moral Llmaahwa Vends Type I S. I Tmftl w I Diadem I Finite Road Frmel I.Mah Berm A. Anum 6646 4,77 4,11 -120 4,87 Oo00 6000 Mal TCka: 7945 - 1247 -4,11 -120 IL7 9000 9003 Heavy Tmcks 8435 -16A2 -4.11 -120 -516 o.OW .0003 UnMtlgefed Nan Lmds(wEmuf Tedenddm1daN Eon) VdrideType Ldimankfemi'l Led Day Leg Evening Laq NIgM LM BNEL Alms; 679 660 US 562 65.8 674 Matlium Tmcks: 617 111 538 111 60.7 609 Heay Thmm 62.5 611 521 533 611 616 Verde Ndn: 696 660 649 602 68.7 692 CnhHim Wemnnro Nase Cenrolifte MQ IO el 65 tleA 50 tl8A 55 tleA Ldn: 92 177 392 922 CNEL: W 190 469 882 71mcm.MeVta.Ai] SCstahe Eliding Wilh Intel Pmiee Nama• NNCPC Rcad Name: Coast Highway Job Nurl 8211 Road Segmenb Weslof Newport CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS H+Bnwey Oala Sale Cmtlldons Hal 10. SON=15) Avarega Cash, Trafti !): 43.600 -hid.. A.. 15 PaakHwr Percenlsga to% MWlum TruMS(2 Awil 15 Peak Hour Vast—.' 4,360 -hid.. Heavy Tmnks(Sr Axles): 15 Wayside Speed: 45 ml Val We N ... 4'arLans Oisrance: 76 he1 yattea s I Day Eviel I I Daily &Ta DSU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 64.8% 48% 193% 194% Barter Haight. 9.0 RM Baiter Typa l0.Wal(1- Sol 69 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 21%. 118% 0.74% CanRniM idel In Sal 109.. reel Net.. South. EMVatbns(In wed Contents Dist In obstal IWL fee ANee, 20.0 Beret Disrenre to ofs ---: 90 red Marcum Tucks: 4.000 observer heads (A.. Pad): 5o reel HvaryTrvcka 6886 Grade AHudmene 99 Pad Eknate, 0.0 rest 81 -1675 Lane Equivalent Dlstanre(n Food Road Elevation: 90 led ANOs: 92.54] Road Gaae: 60% Left View: -900 degisas hletllum Tmcks 92504 RI View: W 0 aegmes Heavy Tmcke: 92547 Phal. Mone+cekdet+ons -120 - 516 Venda Type I REMF1 I Thal Flew I ..nce I Famas Road I Fees. I. A. I Reim A!!en SCSreIro: Existlng WiNPeet Praise Nel NNCPC Il Name: Con. Highway Job Nurl 8211 Read Stigmata, East of Newport GTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe Sib Candltlmu (HW =10, SON =15) Average Deily T?c(Add 35,800 -hid.. Aufas' 15 Paak HOUr Pemenlsga' to% McNUm Trucks (2 these. 15 Peak HO.. Vswrre.' 3,56) vehides Heavy Tmnks(3k Axlesf: 15 Vanicle Speed: 45 .0 Isar We N ... 4'r Lane Distance: 76 feet Vattea yps I Dry Evarenjil Nlshf Deity, &'is WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% BeMel Height. 0.0 Is. Barret Typo (0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27 %. 118% 0.74% CBnRniM Dial 1a Sal, 109.. reel Nose Sourne EMVatbns an/eeff Contents Dist b Odell IWL fed Ades, 2000 Senlsl Disrenre to observer: Oo red Maalum Tmrka: 4.000 Gdsarvar hal(A.. Pad): 5. reel Hoary Trvcka 8008 GradeAeahhl 90 Pad Eknate, 0.0 rest 81 -1675 Lane Equivalent Dhlanre(in Feel Road Elevation. L 0 fast Aoros: 92 5L7 Road Gaae: 06% Left View: 900 deames WO- T cks, 92504 Right View: 900 aegmee Heavy Trvcks 9250 Hlwa xolw Mold cmurbtlons -120 - 516 V&ride Type T REMEL I Trefac Fbw I Oislenes I Fees Rood I Fraud I BeniarAtten I Ran, Altar Aubs; 6646 4A4 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.090 0.000 Aube; 6646 3.59 4.11 -120 4,87 Avare9a Ddly TraWc(Add. .0.000 0.000 MBMum Tmcke: 7945 -1279 -411 -1.211 -09y 3,450 rehide. 99.9 9003 gall Trunk.: 7943 -1355 -411 -1211 1W Sih OaM 99.9 9.00 Heavy Track¢' 81 -1675 -4.11 -120 - 616 Canalm Dirt b Hemet 0.000 01 Heavy Tmcks' 0425 -1761 -4.11 -120 - 516 MoNUm Tmcke: 4000 0.000 01 WmMgeNd Nnhu LevMa (wINOUITOpo.ndb.nlwtlfMUatldnf Pea Ekvadon: 00 real Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in flal Rood Eleval 1 WmMgel dNnhu es. hinal Tope and benMr.INnuetlon) Road.. 00% Left Via -90.0 aa.. Asia- Tinsel 92.5.4 VenrcJeType Laq Peak Hour I Leq day feq Entsmg IMind I Ldn I CNEL VenrcJeTyp. Laq Peak Hear I LM nay I feq EVanmg Lag Nigh I Ldn I CNEL Ades' 676 65.7 63:9 579 569 66.5 6)1 Ado..' 66.7 64.0 [3.1 1 57.1 65.6 663 Medium Tmcks: 813 59.8 53.5 51.9 .509. 004 506 Medium Tmcks; 81 59.0 52.8 51.1 51.1 59.5 59.0 Heavy TUka: 622 1 SV 530 520 613 615 Haavy Thal 613 599 1 1 522 60.5 OF VahMe Nose: 69A 67,7 1 59.9' 1 66:4 68.9 Vehicle News: 666 WA 637 580 59.1 67.5 680 c retina Odmnew to Has. Visual (in rear) Canhrlim DMl he Noise COnrod Cn MU candartne odmnn te Hasa canbur(in wed Canhrlim Wrtenn as Noise COn our Cn Mrj M saga 0 c I IdSA I SS dSI 55 tlBA I MdBA 0ISA I BOdSA I SS dB4 55 tlBA Ltln: 78 16B 3&i 310 792 111 Ltln: B9 14B 318 322 606 893 Cl 04 181 369 333 639 718 CNEL 74 156 341 30.5 735 I all, Swal Existng WO Pmjed Pljead Nama: NNCPC Road Nama: Coast Highway SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA Job Number 8211 Rosa Sagmont West of Avacaao .0 Cimana ru(HW =f0, SoH =15) SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data McNUm TrvCks(2Aill 15 SNa COnday.-(HaN= fe,side ) Avare9a Ddly TraWc(Add. 34.500 tal As. 15 Peek HUrrPomsmaga: 1.% McNUm TwentRAell 15 Peak HOm Volurrre.' 3,450 rehide. Heavy Trvuke(3 +Axles) 15 vehicle speed' 45 mpn vahicre We NaahFarLane Distance.' 76 feel VehkKT se, I Day Even+rq all I Odly Sih OaM dan-r Han (As.. Pod): 59 red All 7.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 1 49% 193% 194% Barger Hagod, 0.0 feet BamerType(0.Wall, 1 -Sal OZ Heavy Tmdts: 815% 27% 168% 074% Canalm Dirt b Hemet In. de, NO+seSwasheElewddgh. an Oep cenremrre Dial in obaarvd: Ink had AWOa, 2000 BOmer Disrenre m observer 0.0 red MoNUm Tmcke: 4000 01whaw.r ,at (As.. Pod): 50 red Hwvy T.AS: any GredallawasenG 90 Pea Ekvadon: 00 real Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in flal Rood Eleval 90 reel Ades: 92547 Road.. 00% Left Via -90.0 aa.. Asia- Tinsel 92.5.4 Right Vrew: 9o.. alight- Haavy Tmww: 9250 FHWA Ndu handed gesu +atione Lite denid.Type I It. I Thadall I )stand. I Finite Read I Famed I. Men I Berm A. Tu®tia'al a.o12 Sronario: Existing Writ Pmleci wcadlis. :NNCPC Read Nama: Coast Highway Job Numdec 8211 RmdSaghwal East of Avacaao SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Deta .0 Cimana ru(HW =f0, SoH =15) Avarege Ddly TraKc (AtlU: 36.400 nal As. 15 Paak Houreanwas e: 1.% McNUm TrvCks(2Aill 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 3,640 vehides Heavy Thick, 0, Axles) 15 vehicle speed' 45 m1 vahicre MM Naar7Fariane De lce.' 76 hat Vahksa y . I Day Eval Nghf Daly Sih OaM At. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tmcks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 MI SamerType(0.Wall, I Berm): Bo Heavy Tmon. 66.5% 27% 168% 074% Ceraenlne Dirt b Hemet In. he Nn+s. soume6'evelbn. pre fxp cenremlre Dial. b obcervw: Ink hd Aube' 2900 BOmer ourenua In olusrve, 0.0 red Medium Tmcke: 4000 dan-r Han (As.. Pod): 59 red Hwvy TrvAs: any Grade AdjYdmed' 90 Pad Ekvadon: 00 red Lane EquhalentDkrana(InfeeQ Rally Ekvslion: 99 reel ANba: 92547 Roan.. 00% Left Via -90.0 diagr0ea Madbm. 925.4 Fghf Vrew: 9o.o alight- Heavy TmAS' 92547 FHWA NWU MoWI Lllnuhhws -4.11 Vied.Type I It. I Thadal I Distend. I Flags Ri)ad Fresrrel I.Man Berm A. Aubs: 66,46 343 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 of Aubs: 6646 366 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0.050 MaSYm Tmcke: 7945 -1381 -4,11 -129 1L7 9009 9003 MaSYm Tmcke: 7945 -1359 -4,11 -129 /r.97 9009 0. Heavy Tmcks 9425 -1777 -4.11 -120 -516 (10 0) 0053 Heavy Tmcks 9425 -1753 -4.11 -120 -516 .0.000 of UnMNgdetl NOlsn L.I W (w11110ut Fail and heMxalbnYdbnf UnMtlgefed NOlsn Leads (wMOut III andhmdxallMYetlonf Vestalitpe Leq Paak HO Lam, Day Leq EArmg Leq Nigh Lite CNEL VenldeTyl:e Leq Paak HOUi Laq Day -gEvening Lad Nigh Lite CNEL Aul-; 666 64,7 629 569 65.5 66.1 Aubs; 668 84.9 631 57.1 65.7 66.3 Medium Tmcks: 80.3 5&8 Ill .509. 50A 51 Madfum Tmcks: 60.6 591 52] 51.1 111 59.8 Heavy Tmcks' 612 517 M.7 520 603 694 H., Tmcks' 61.4 Fill 50.9 522 606 697 Val Nose: 1 667 635 1 67.4 67.8 Veteds Nose: 686. 669. 637 59.1 67.6 68.1 Canhrlim DMl he Noise COnrod Cn MU Canhrlim Wrtenn as Noise COn our Cn Mrj IQdB4 1 0dBA 1 6 dB9 1 55 tlBA 1 70 tlfl4 0dBA 60 dB4 55 tlBA Inn: 67 140 310 111 Idn: IF 149 322 893 CNEL m 155 333 718 CNEL: 74 160 30.5 744 led, will 2L dil 6.1 -36 7sail Mel 20. Al2 Someone: Esistlng With Project Pmiecl Name• NNCPC RLad Name: Doa5111i91I Job Namhec 8211 Read Segment, Wed ofMthimmor SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Oready Oala $Ile CmdMOns (HVd =10, Sol 15) Average Daily Tha ?2(1 36.500 vehides Auras: 15 PaakHmr Pemenmga 10% McNUm TmMS(2 Scroll 15 PeaF Him V.I.-... $650 -hid.. Had, im. P, Axle): 15 voiden Speed: 45 mph Val le W. I ... ParLarre Dominic: 76 het Sanda ype I Dry Evenng Nghl I Daily Site Deal Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Tucks: 94.6% 48% 193% 194% BeMeIHelBht 0.0 het Bonier Type lO-WaIL I Berm): 86 Haavy Tmcks: 665% 2] %. 188% 0.74% Caeam me Did 10 SeMef Ird. het Nasa Swrch, atbns(In Real Camwllne Dist to Daniel 1006 fed ANOS, 2000 Barn« Diarenre m ohamerm 90 red Usell Trvtlrs: 4.W9 Gdsarver Hal (A.. Pal 5o had HeryTrvcka e005 Grade AHudmene o0 Pad Elevation: 0.0 feel oo Lane Equlvaleal Dlstanre(n h t) Road Elevation: 90 led Area 92.54] Road Gredn: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degas hhtllum im. 92504 Rgbl Viaw: W 0 degrees Hery Tmcks: 92547 NiWA No le Mona)Ce rchatlmw WA 59.1 Venda Type 1 REMF1 I Tame Fnw I OisGnce I Far. Read I Fraser I. A. I Remr A!!e Aubs; 6646 367 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 O.o00 000) MBaum Trucks : 7945 -13 ST -411 -1211 197 SM Londltloru (HW =10, SoH =15) 9909 9003 He., Tmcks 81 -1752 411 -120 -516 5220 veMdea 0,000 0.003 (NmHgefen Nnhn LevNa hiria n Tapa and definer eHen imam) vahicre We NaanFarLane Didaade 76 feel VehkKTye I Day Eyandill Add I Deily VenlrJeType Laq Pek Ham I Lag Gay leg Evening Laq Nigh Len oo CNEL Au(nc' 668 1 632 57.1 Hamer Decade to observer 652 66.3 Medium Trucks: WA 59.1 51 512 00 rad 59.8 59.9 Heavy Toronto : 614 6`10 51.0 522 Left Via-- 606 617 VehMe N.: 61 666. 638 Ski 53.6 67.6 66.1 Central Dlamne I Hoe Cdnbm (in n.0 Vehide Norse: 700 OBS 652 80.5 (1 70 Ida 65I 1 60 dl I WSEA L. 69 159 3II TO W F. 60 dBA CNEL: 74 161 346 Ltln: 745 Tu ®eal om.. m12 Sronanu: Year 2016 Wi1herl Project Rjad Norma: NNCPC Rudd Norma: Jamboree -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment Norm of Easlbluff 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlghwey Data -120 -09T SM Londltloru (HW =10, SoH =15) Aveage Ddly TmWs(Ad). 52.200 veMdea Aube: 15 Park HoorPomrMage: to% Mecum Truoka(2 Al 15 Peak HOm Vdurrre.' 5220 veMdea Heavy Trader p + aisles): 15 Vehlde speed 45 .1 vahicre We NaanFarLane Didaade 76 feel VehkKTye I Day Eyandill Add I Deily Sih Oar. Leg Palk Hbur I Lag Day Aul 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 103% 194% Barter H."an 0.0 led S.amerType(DVl ltI Berm): oo Heavy Trucks: Still 27% 108% 074% Determine DaL ce Bamef. Cartier Did in Dbaarvd: 1Lb.o am 100.0 feel NolSourne GYaetlmne he hap AWOa, IWd Hamer Decade to observer 0.0 red Merpum rocker 4000 observer ,or (An.. Peet): 5o red Hwvy TrvAS: 8008 Gade AnjudmenL O0 Pad Eloval 00 rad 612 Lane Equhalenl Distance (in feel Road Elsvatiho: Oo feel Actia 92547 Roatl.. oe% Left Via-- -90.0 de.. Wit, -Tommy 92.504 Rghf Vrew: 9o.. eegrem Heary TOds' 92547 (i1WA Ndu MOWI eadcula3ona 53.6 VerceiType I S. I Thergel I Denende I Hale Road I Fen& Bern Me, Berm A. Arrom fill 5.23 4,11 -120 4,87 NOISE MODEL INPUTS Oo00 0:000 Madlum Tm. 7945 -1201 -4,11 -120 -09T Peak HOm V.I.-... 5030 -hide. 9009 9003 Heavy Tmcks: 5435 -1597 -4.11 -120 -516 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% k@dWm Tucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% 0,01)0 0003 UnVZanted Nolan LerNe(wNhouf Fil and banter. see due f CanRniM DIaL 1a SamBC 1.. het No.. $-. EMVatbns an Real Comwllne Drat to Decal 10I fed ANas, 2000 Venede Type Leg Palk Hbur I Lag Day aeq Evening Leq Night LM Lithi'mailmml BNEL Autos; 6B4 66.5 64.7 SB] McNUmi fire' 92504 573 67.9 Medium Tmcks: 62.1 (1 US ,52.7 671 612 514 He., Tmcks' 630 61.5 525 539 Roatl.. 00% 52.1 622 mmodo Nita: 702 685 653 61 53.6 69.2 696 Cenfmlim Chance h Naae Conbm On M(1 Vehide Norse: 700 OBS 652 80.5 (1 70dEA 01 Wit 55dM Idn' P6 190 409 TO W 682 60 dBA CNEL: 95 204 439 Ltln: 9" rimer, Wy2e, M12 6.1 -37 Someone: Esistlng Withmajled Premarital NNCPC Read Nam.: Doasl Highway Job Normal 8211 Read Segment, Eastor Mara dur SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9dway ONe Sib Credltlmor (HW= 10,a -I: a) Average Daily Thal fa !): 50,500 -hid.. Aulcs' 15 PeakHmr Pemenal 10% McNUm Trucks (2 Aylem. 15 Peak HOm V.I.-... 5030 -hide. Heavy Tmnke(3k Axles): 15 venicle Speed: 45 .0 Veryicha W. I ... P., Lane Distal: 76 het Sanda yps I Dry Evaning Nlahl Dslty Site WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% k@dWm Tucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMeIlNl9ht 0.0 kM Bonier Type lDWaq I Berm): 00 Haavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27%. 188% 0.74% CanRniM DIaL 1a SamBC 1.. het No.. $-. EMVatbns an Real Comwllne Drat to Decal 10I fed ANas, 2000 Semler Dlslea -In oGrerva.: go tad Madam Trurom 4.W0 Gdsarvar ilegal(A.. Pad): So of Harry Trvcka 8,006 Grade Samerarm, 90 Pad Elevation: 0.0 reel Lithi'mailmml Lane Egalvaenl Dhhnre (in i Road ElevaNOrt L hall Artifice 92 547 Road Gade: Oo% Left View: Fill ee9me McNUmi fire' 92504 Right Viaw: Soo eagreee HeryTrucke III Fig. all Mold cmcumffmrs 64.5 Vdlide Type T REMEL I Therm Fbw I Olsmnea I FONh Reed I Fmsrrel I Senre /Aen I Rerm Altar Aube; 6846 506 4.11 -120 4,87 Road Segment' Eaalbluff b San Joaquin Hilk 0.000 0.000 Mdum hook. 7945 -1217 -411 -1311 -097 63.000 vehldea 9999 If. Hoary Trucks' 81 -1613 -4.11 -120 -516 ..speed 0,000 0.003 (InmM9efed Naha Levees (.1 Tope end denier etNnue" VehkKType I Day Evening Nghf Daly Sih Oar. Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Venicle Type Lithi'mailmml Lail only I feq EVmlirg Leg Nigh I Len Nmh. sourw rdevdbna pn fxp CNEL Aube' 662 66.3 64.5 565 Had, TrvAS: SGOB' Grade Agudmed' 90 671 677 Medium Trucks: 620 865 541 52.5 Roatl.. 00% 61,0 612 Harry Truck.: 62.8 614 11 53.6 520 (D I Vehide Norse: 700 OBS 652 80.5 (1 69.5 CanlMie Dlamne I Meet, Cartel (in ferN TO W 01 1 60 dBA W SEA Ltln: PFS 135 399 990 CNEL 92 199 428 923 Treadmita m12 Scenario: Year 2016 Without Project mjand Nione NNCPC Rudd Norma: Jamboree 4,11 Job Number 8211 Road Segment' Eaalbluff b San Joaquin Hilk Oo00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data -1120 .0 Limitations gland =f0, SoH =Ill Aveage Ddly TmWelAtlU: 63.000 vehldea Autos: 15 Peek HmrPomsMage: to% Mearlm Trvoke(2Aid): 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 6,300 veMdea H.a, TnrcAS 0, areas): 15 ..speed 45 .1 vahicre We NaanFarlane Direarde 76 het VehkKType I Day Evening Nghf Daly Sih Oar. Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% BaMar Height O.0 led Bemi,lype(0.Wdt 1- Benny: Oo Heavy Trucks: Still 2.7% 108% 074% Cere6nie DISL ce Hamer cenhmere DIM. In Dhcervar: 1Lb.9 fitted 100.0 feet Nmh. sourw rdevdbna pn fxp Amos' ti M. Hamer Duane to obodrver 0.0 red Moaum rocks: 4000 Observer ,at (An.. Pon): 5o tad Had, TrvAS: SGOB' Grade Agudmed' 90 Pad Emorl 00 fed Medium Tmcks: Lana EquhaledDkhna(Infrel Road gated, 90 fieel ANas: 92547 Roatl.. 00% Left Via-- -90.0 aeghea Madman IDreke 92504 Fghf Vrew: 90.0 eegrees HeavyTwts 92547 (i1WA Ndu Mmnel Llbaahwa Vafide Type I S. I TmPWFbw I Didanme I Finlla ROad Fromel I.Maa Bence A. Arrom 68.46 Pu 4,11 -120 4,87 Oo00 0.000 Madlum Tmcks: 7945 -1120 -4,11 -120 Ifil, 9009 9003 Heavy Tmcks: 5435 -15.15 -4.11 -120 -516 0.000 0003 UnMtlgeted NOlau Lards(w ut TapnandbaMmaa Oon) Vdrede Type Leg PaaKmW Lag Day teq EVamng far, NIgM LM BNEL Areas ; 6g2 67,3 65.5 595 68d 68.] Medium Tmcks: 829 61A 55.1 53.5 Ill 622 Henry Tmcks' 63.8 624 53.3 546 629 63.1 VehkJn Nda: ]1.0 69.3 Off 616 70.0 70.5 Cenfmlie Wefance h Naeu COnbm(ir Al 70 tlfl4 W 1 W dBA 55 tlBA ftln: 1W 215 4. 999 CNEL: 107 231 498 1,072 Tmety. WvaeA4 disease Year 2016 WMOU1 Project Pigod Name• NNCPC Road Name: Jam6mee -130 4,87 Job NUmhec 8211 Recollections, SouN od San Joaquin Hills of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Oreway Oala 4:11 Sib Cmdltlons (hard= 10. SI 15) Averana Daily Tre ?c(Al 43.100 veM1ides Auras: 15 PaskHoorlharcenlaga, 10% MWlum TmMS(2 irsial 15 Peak HOm View-.' 4,300 veM1ides Haavy Tmnka(3k Axlns): 15 vicacle Spned: 45 mpe Waller. We Near/Fariche Dialects. 76 het yebkbTypa I Day EveMn9 Niger I Dsily Site Cab &'Ie WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Bdndel Height 9.9 bM Sanity Typo l0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% CBnRniM idel In Sal Ifid. bet Nousa$ -a. eu&Wd s(In/eeff Cements Dist to obscal 10I feO aNCn, 2000 Sealer Disrenre m obmrvar: 0o real Wasum Trucks: 4.W0 Gesarver Harselusove Paul): BG fast HeavyTrvcka e006 Grede AHudment 90 Patl Ehvdion: 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane Equlvalenl Daniel (n Rol Road Ebvffiion: 90 a. Art 92.54] Road Gredu: 00% Left View: -90O degas hledum Tmcks 92504 RI View: W 0 degrees Harry Tmcke: 92547 Niwe. Modal ckJr.tk w HewA. Model cmurleDwv Vault Type I REMF1 I TmT Frew I DisGnca I FIN. Roetl I Freerrel I. A. I Berm A!!an disease Teer2016WI01ool Project Pined Name• NNCPC Read Name: Jam6mee -130 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Road Salerno, NI of Banta Barbara of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9ewey DNB 4:11 SIB CmEMON (Haul =10, a- =15) Actions Daily Tre?c(Al 45.10 veM1ides Auras' 15 Paak.cor Parcrroul 10% MWWm Trucks (2 these. 15 Peak Hour iskince..' 4,510 veM1ides Heavy Tmoka(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Liked: 45.0 Vedrode We Near/Far Lane Dikhnce: 76 het yehkbTyps I Dry Evanlnn Nghl Deity &'Ie WU 9000 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97AP6 k @dWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Bander HNght. 0.0 In. Sanity Typa l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% Canjrl Dlst la SanlBC 1CO.O bet Nolsk Source Ebu&Wd a art el Cements DlM to obsarver, IDI fed ANDS, 2000 Saki Disrenre to DGrerver: Oo real Mamum Trucks: 4.W0 Gdkarrec riculusve Ped): 50 at Harry Trucks, 8,006 Grade Arlukiment 90 Patl Ehvdion: 0.0 reel Road Errol n: Lane Equivalent Dhfanre (in fil Road Ebvffiion. L O last Area 92 547 Road Grede: 06% Left View: Pill still McNUmi rke 91 ful III View: 900 degrees Heary Trucke 9250 HewA. Model cmurleDwv I contractors T REMEL I Trelac Fbw I frecnea I FINIe Road I Freares I BaniarAtten I Berm A!!kn Aubs; 6646 4.38 4.11 -130 4,87 Job NUm.c 8211 0.090 of Aubs; 6046 4.59 4:11 -120 4,87 Average Ddly TraWc(Al dLC00 vebldea O.OW O.WO ouncers Trucks: 7945 -1295 -411 -1211 -097 Heavy Trader p +Axles): 15 9000 9003 M um Trucks: 7945 -1265 -411 -1 ton -097 Si. Da. 9000 9000 Henry Tmcks 0425 -1681 -4.11 -120 -516 1Lb.O red 0,000 01 Hurry Tracks' ill -1660 411 -120 -516 Deserver ,at (AD.. Pad): 0,000 01 (InmM9ebd NOha LevNa (wINOUf Tom and be. eifearsen of 00 red Lane Equhalenl D.bna(in le) Road Errol n: 9o.e1 UnmM9ebd NOha Levab(wlleonf TOpo and earner et framer of Lift Via-- -90.0 degrees Nelms TVCke: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: VenrcJeType Leq Peek mur I Leq Day leq Every, Leq Nigh I Last I CNEL Vahkdklsea I Lee Peek rbur I Leg only I feq EVaoirg Lee Nigh Lan I I Artery 675 65.6 63:9 67.8 611 670 Aube' 67.7 65.0 64.1 580 Medium Tmcks: 66.6 672 Medium Trucks: 613 59.8 53A 51.9 Medium Trucks, 111 506 Medium Thermal 61.5' 890 53.6 52.1 619 60.5 60.5 600 Heavy TUke: 62.1 60] 51.7 52e FIT Writ 613 614 Henry Tmcku: 623 0.9 51.9 531 643 61.5 616 Vehl Nock: 69A 67.6 001 59.8 660 [9:3 66.8 Vehicle NOSe: 696 Ill 6f.7 G9.0 69.5 680 ContMim DMNnn. Noter Centel (in TUet CanlMim Dlsbnn. Naea Cdn.ur(in eal IOdB4 01 1 QOdB4 I Odd TO dl A 01 1 W dSA I SS dB4 55 tlBA I TO dSA 01 60 dSA I SS dI Lan: TI 167 300 775 CNEL: Lan: 9D 172 371 805 e00 CNEL: DNEL: Of 179. 36fi 113 631 CNEL 06 185 398 II ,cl day. on, aa.a la I all, Sronado: Year 2016 Without Project Pi jest Nama: NNCPC Road Name: Jamboree -120 4,87 Job NUm.c 8211 Road Segment Borth of Sane Ba2aa O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9ewey Data -120 4,87 SM COndltloru (HVd =f0, SoH =15f Average Ddly TraWc(Al dLC00 vebldea Autos 15 Peek Hour Pomersel 10% Minel Trader (2 Ansel 15 Peak Hour Polunre.' 4,100 veruldre Heavy Trader p +Axles): 15 Vehcle speed' 45 .1 Vehicre We Naeraloa ne Dinearrick 76 feel VehkhTyin I Day Estractill NgM I Deily Si. Da. Si. Da. Auras: TT. 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 103% 194% Banderral 0.0 111 Sam9rType(OWall, 1- Bernd: 00 Heavy Tmcks: 86.5% 27% 108% 074% Cerdaalrre Dirt as Berne, 1Lb.O red flnlse3ourne 6evalbna an fxp Cartelre Did to obaarvN: Im.0 fed AWUk, IWif Sal Disrenre Is observer, 0.0 red Morpum Tmcks: x000 Deserver ,at (AD.. Pad): 5o red Harry Trucks: 8008 Gmda Adwdmen[90 Pad Ekvatlon: 00 red Lane Equhalenl D.bna(in le) Road Errol n: 9o.e1 All 92547 Roetl Giedk 00% Lift Via-- -90.0 degrees Nelms TVCke: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: ard. de9rem Henry Tmds 9250 F1WA Ndu Model Llleura3wa F1WA Ndu Model Llbelahon t decide Type I R. I TmPW lbw I Diefende I Fuels Ruled I Fiesid Bercer Me, Berm A. Tuneay.se'..mt2 Sronano: Year 2016%doul Project Rona NUma: NNCPC Road Name: Jamboree -120 4,87 Job NUm.c 8211 Road Segment' I Of COast Highway O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9ewey Data -120 4,87 Sea Crand honk (N. -I Soff =15) Avarege Ddly TraWc(Al 38.600 vebldea All. 15 Peek HwrPomsMnge: 19% Meaum Thooka(2Aiks),- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 3,M-0veM1ldea Heavy Tmcks 0, Axles): 15 Vehicle speed' 45 .1 Vehicre We Near7Farlane Dicarrick 76 feet VehkKType I Day Evenirq fall Daily Si. Da. Heavy Trv2ka At. TT. 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trucks 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0 Mf Sam9rType(0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Tricks: WiSre 27% 108% 074% Cerdenlne Dirt as Bemef 199.9 deal Nora. sourw 6'ea.lbna pn fxp cenreis Dld, b obmrver: 1W.0 fed AWOa' 2009 Sal DUrence In Dbrerver, 0.0 real Medium rmcka: a 000 oe4erver real(AD.. Peal): So foal Heavy Trucks: 8008 Grede Aajudmen[ 99 Pad Ekvetlon: 00 real fare EquhalenlDktma(In leeQ Road Ekvdal 99 reel Area 92547 Roetl Grede: 00% Left Via-- -90.0 dag.ea Mamvs. 92594 Pistol Vrew: 90O degrees Haary Torte 92547 F1WA Ndu Model Llbelahon t Verde Type I R. I TmR Fbw I Dldenee Fini.ROad Frearrel I.Man Berm A. Autos: (1 4.18 4,11 -120 4,87 060) O:WO Autos: 68.46 391 4,11 -120 4,87 0600 0.000 Mealnm Tmcks: 7945 -1306 -4,11 -120 -097 9000 9003 Mealnm Tmcks: 7945 - 1332 -4,11 -120 Ithr 9000 0. Heavy Trv2ka 8435 -1762 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOW Om Heavy Trul 8435 -1228 -4.11 -120 -516 C.,= 0900 WMtlgnfetl Naan LeVW (wlllrauf TOpn andhenleraNmuatlonf UnMtlgnfed Naan LeVeb (wMauf Tapn endhaMx alLMYetlonf decide Type Leq Paaklear Lan Day Legtcaning Le, fight Lon GNEL decide Type Leq Paakfo Laq Day Leq EVadng I Lad Nlgr I Los I CNEL Aube; 67.3 MA W.T STfi 66.2 668 Ares; 67.1 651 634 523 96.0 696 Medium Tmcks: 61.1 598 53.2 51.7 001 5174 Medium Trucks, 608 51 US 51A 59.9 601 Henry Trucks' 619 60.5 51.5 521 61.1 612 H., Trucks' FIT Writ 511 52.5 90.9 60.9 Vehkus NOSe: 693 61.4 643 596 68.1 686 VehkJS NOSe: 699 61.2 660 593 67.9 603 Cannanore Channel fie Nase Condor Cn MQ Cannanore M. fie Nase COnbur fir MQ IOdB4 01 1 QOdB4 I Odd 1 70 el 1 01 50 dBA 55 tlBA Ldn: 75 162 346 700 first: 72 155 335 T21 CNEL: 81 173 374 805 CNEL: 77 167 359 113 time,, ouvae, Dili 6.1 -38 Nady.Mava6.D1a duration, veer2016WMwIProjecl Pmied Neme• NNCPC Read Name: Jam6mae -120 4,87 Job NUmhec 8211 RoadSSgmenb SouNMCOasI HigM1way 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Oeway Gala 4,39 Sha CmtlMons nal 10. Sl 15) Average Daily Trial (Al 12.900 -hid. A.. 15 paakHwr Pe/cenleya,' 10% MWWch TmMs D Axks): 15 Peak Hou/V.I. -... 1,290 -hides Heavy'cords ar euary): 15 Vernon speed: 45 rape Writ le W. Nea//cirlic eOisfacce: 76 Met yehkbTypa I !My Evercul Nghl I Deily Site DaU &'te WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 84.8% 48% 103% 194% BdMeIHelBht 0.0 RM Bonier Typa l0.WalL I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% CanRniM Dist In Broul 100.0 reel Nora Sall EMVafens (In /eeff CamwlOre Dist to obw/vec 1LU.O fed ANUS, 2000 Becher Disrenre m abmrvar: 09 red Mnmum Tucks: 4.000 Geserver Hegdl(A.. Par 5o reel HearyTrucka 8,006 Grade AHudmene 00 Pad Effects, 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane Equilateral Dlstanre(n h t) Road EreveNon: 00 nor ANDS: 92.54] Rued Gredn: 00% Left View: -900 degrees Marion 1. 92504 III View: W 0 dogmas Heavy Tracks: 92547 NiWA Nolan Model CearaleNmw HIWA NOIx Model LelnuleHmrs Veeida Type I R. I Venda Type I REMF1 I TmT Fbw I OisGnea I Fin. Rend I Forecor I. A. I A. duration, veer 2016 WItlbol Project Pmied Name• NNCPC Read Name: Santa Cruz -120 4,87 Job Numbec 8211 Road Segment: N.qh W San Joaquin Hills 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwy Dsta 4,39 Sat CmEMnN (Hand -10. a- =15) Average Daily Tre?c(Add 1.700 vehicles Aulas' 15 PeaRHour. Pemenluga, 10% MWIUm Tol Dthose. 15 Peak HOU /Volume: 170 vehicles Heavy Tnks(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 mph Vehkre W. Near/Fa /Lane Distance: 52 feel yebkbTypa I Dry Evaning NON Deity &'te WU 0990 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% k@dlum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMel Height. 0.0 led Bonier Typa l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.74% Cenral. Dial 1a Serdar 109.0 reel Ndsa SwFe EMVafens an el Camwllns Dist to observer, 1LU.O fed Aces, 2000 Becher oisrence to observer: 09 red Mechem Thadis: 4.000 Gdsarrer nal(A.. Per 50 of Henry Trucks, 8,006 Grsde Arloelment 90 Pad Effects, 0.0 reel Road Emvdion: Lane Equilateral Dhhnce (in Feel Road EreveNon. L lset ANas: 98607 Rued Grede: Op% Left View: Pill degrees McNUmT cion 96598 Right View: 900 dogmas Heavy Tucks.' 966118 HIWA NOIx Model LelnuleHmrs Veeida Type I R. I CNF1 V&lide Type T REMF1 I Tml F w I Oiandem I FONIeRend Fmsrts I San Att Reim AOan Aubs; 6646 -065 4,11 -120 4,87 Joe Number 8211 0.000 0000 AJd%a 6646 -965 4,39 -120 4,87 Avenge Dally TraWs(AtlO: 12000 strides .0.000 0.030 Mecum Trucks: 7945 -1808 -411 -120 -097 Heavy Theory (3 + And) : 15 0909 OOW Mecum Trucks: 7945 -2898 -439 -120 -097 Sit. Dam 0990 9900 Heavy Trucks 64.25 12.04 -4.11 -120 -516 1Lb.9 reel 0,000 01 Heavy Trucks' ill - 3064 439 -120 -516 Deserver Heght lAbove Pad): 0,000 of (InmM9eNd NOhe LevNa (wllhoul Farm andb rcray etfMuntldnf 00 red Lan.EquivetenlDmmna0n1re11 Road Emvdion: 0o reel (InmMgared NOhe Le. (wlleout TOpn end aerator etNnu nal Ltft Via-- -50.0 aagrees Madivm Trucks: 95588 Right Vrew: VenaJeType LagPonk or Lag dr, req Liersrg Leg Nigh Ldn Veeida Type I R. I CNF1 reconstitute I LM PoCk reur I LIM Gay I leq Evwtirg Lag Nigh I Lon I rtl Au(nc' 623 60.4 53.6 52.6 Auks; 61.2 618 Al ' 532 51.3' 49.6 436 556 54.1 lil 52.7 Medium Trucks: 55,1 54.5 453 466 55.6 54.1 551 553 Medium Tull 410 1 39.1 376 46.0 J60 483 Heavy TUke: 569 55.5 46.4 477 46.0 56.0 562 Haavy, TUCks: 47.8 464 37.4 306 54.1 47.0 47.1 Vessel Nose: 00.1 CIA 592 54.6 54.1 00.1 63.6 Vehicle Nose: 55.1 513 502 Jul 54.0 565 CoatMtro fKNnnt to Han confow (in end) cnrentm Dmmnn la Nan centoer (in real 70 01 1 W dB4 1 55 tlBA 1 M dBA 01 1 SO dil 1 01 rain: 1 MdBA 01 1 WIII I WJI rain: Ltln: 35 75 131 322 347 CNEL: 35 Ltln: 9 19 40 86 35 CNEL: 37 80 173 372 CNEL 9 20 AS 92 'ider, say ..IDR Sronadu: Year 2016 Wi1houl Project Fojed Nanne NNCPC Road Name: Santa Cruz -120 4,87 Joe Number 8211 Road Segment Soon of San Joaquin Hills Clamenle SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Dale MBhwey Deal. SNe COndltloru(HW= f0,SdrI Avenge Dally TraWs(AtlO: 12000 strides Autos 15 Peek HU/r Pomerecul 10% Medum Toodur 2Axks).- 15 Peak HOm Polurrs..' 1,200sehil Heavy Theory (3 + And) : 15 vehicle fggl 45 .1 Vehicre W. NeadFarLane Disairse 52 feel VehkKTyge I City Evenirq NIgM I Deily Sit. Dar Sit. Dam Anfor 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% Barter Helow, 0.0 led EamerType gnVi 1- Bermf: 00 Healy Trucks: NiSle 27% 108% 074% flashesre Dirt m Banter 1Lb.9 reel Nola. levers 6eatlmna as txp serrates Dint to observe/: IM.0 feel Aden, IWif Sal Disrenca to observer, 0.5 red Mtrsum Trucks: 4.000 Deserver Heght lAbove Pad): 50 red Heavy TrvAS: BWfi Greoe Ady/dmen[J Pea Emvatlon: 00 red Lan.EquivetenlDmmna0n1re11 Road Emvdion: 0o reel All 9f1607 Rood Giedk 00% Ltft Via-- -50.0 aagrees Madivm Trucks: 95588 Right Vrew: 90.0 degem Hath,Trosks' 96608 (i1WA Ndu Model Lllcuta5wa (i1WA NWU Model Llmurahws Veeida Type I R. I TmPWFbw I Gistence I Finite Rgad I F/esn& I. Men I Reim A. Tunnry. NY as. mn Scenario: Year 2015irilhoul Project Pi jest Nunne NNCPC Road Name: Santa Cruz -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment' Nodh of Ban Clamenle Auras: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBhwey Deal. Sea COnd1Vo (N. -I Soff =13) Avenge Daily T/aWc(Add. 12.300 serious Autos 15 Peak Hon/ Pomsmsge: 19% Muaum Pul(2 Aiks).- 15 Peak H., Vdumn' 1,230 vehida. Heavy Tucks 0, Axles): 15 vehcle speed' 45 .1 witida W. NsadcorLane Dicarse 52 feel Vehklsy. I Day Eval Nght Daily Sit. Dam Heavy Trv2ka An. 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Tucks 84.8% 49% 103% 194% BaMe/Height 0.0111 Soria pe(0.Wall, I Berm): (co Heavy Trucks: WiSle 27% 108% 074% Cerdenlne Dirt m Bonier Itch.. ford hadial.farreatericaralawl cenrem/re Did, m ohcerva/: 1006 mM Ausid 2909 Bonier DUrenca In observer 0.5 red Mecum Trucks: 4.000 dar-, real lAbovu Pad): 59 red Harq TrvAs: eW6 G /ade Adfudment 09 Pad Emva son: 00 real fans EquhamntDmmna(Infref) Road Several 09 reel Art 98607 Russ Grede: 00% Left Via-- -80.0 aagrees Madmen Tnrcvrs: 935ea Rigor Vrew: 900 degrees HeavyTwts' 96608 (i1WA NWU Model Llmurahws real Type Vehicle Type I R. I Tmq Fbw I Glsfende I Finka Road Fors. Rs/ire/Atlan Re/m A. Autos: 61 4).88 439 -120 4,87 0900 O:WO Auras: 6646 -L05 4,39 -120 4,87 0900 0.000 McSUm Tnks: 7945 -1622 -439 -129 -0gT 0000 9003 joist Tnks: 7945 -1629 -439 -129 -0gT 0000 0. Heavy Trv2ka 54.25 12.18 -439 -120 -516 IlOW 0003 Heavy Trucks 54.25 1225 -439 -120 -516 9.000 OOW UnMNgnfed Nolan LeVNa(wllhauf Pont, and ItanlnroCMYMkn) UnMtlgnmd Nolan LaV (w of TOpnandhmlxa uo0on) VntidaType Leq Pank HOU Lag Gay req Evening. Lot, fight LM CNEL real Type Leq Paak HOUr Lag Gay Leg Evening I Lad Might I LM I CNEL Autos; 619 WO 59.2 522 60.6 61A Auks; 616 599 MA 52.1 60.7 613 Modfum Trucks: 556 54.1 476 452 54.) 549 Maifum Tricks: 55.6 54.1 47.7 482 54.5 54.8 Heavy Trucks' 565 55.1 46.0 476 HS fill Heay Trucks' 564 51 46.0 472 65.6 557 Vehkors Nose: 637 626 58.8 54.1 62.7 63.1 Vehkna Nose: 636 61.9. 58.8 54.1 62.6 63.1 Course a Clarence roNase COnmur on M(1 Control Wrtenn mNase Counter Can Mrj 70 01 1 W dB4 1 55 tlBA 1 70 dfl4 1 W tlBA 60 dB4 55 tlBA rain: 33 70 151 323 rain: 32 39 150 322 CNEL: 35 75 162 349 CNEL: 35 74 100 345 nrmen, PoYae, rata 6.1 -39 Nadlcour e.mta SCarme, Year 2016 WMOol Project Pioied Name• NNCPC Reap Name: Santa Cruz 410 4,87 Job Number 8211 Rand Segment, Seem M San Clemente 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "'greayOala 4,39 SIb Cmtl ns(Hard= 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Trial (Add, 9.900 -hid.. Aulas: 15 PaakHoor Pamenlsga 10% MWIUa TmMs D Axles): 15 Peak HO.. loikinre.' 990 vehides Han, Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 Van. Speed: 45 .0 Whkle W. N ... ojo rLane Distance: 52 het yearldia a I Day Evernial Night I Daily Site DaU 9999 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Aledlum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Barter( Haight. 0.0 kM Banter Typa l0.Wall, 1- Benny: 00 Heavy Thirty: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% CBnRniM Diet IO Baader 1CO.o het Mg. Somme Eleve Onns(In eeeff Camwllne Dist to Observer 1LU6 fed Area 2000 Bartley Ded here to Obmrven 00 feel MPpium Tucks: 4.000 observer Hagn!(Above Par 5o had HearyTrvcka 8,006 Grade AHudmene 90 Patl Emahm, 0.0 feel Rosa Eammen: Lane Equivalent OHhnre(n h Q Road EbveNon: 90 him ANOS: 9f1607 Road Grapy: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 deal War - Pucka' WON RI View: W 0 degrees Hoary Tmcke 95605 Ph. St Mons, Cakubfhns I CNEL year Type I REMF1 I The Fie. I am- I F.. Rmtl Fmsrrel I. A. I Rerm A!!en SCarme, Year 2016 Wdrait Project Prated Name• NNCPC Road Name: Santa Cruz 410 4,87 Job Number 8211 Send Segment, Imam W crieva (LTR 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nwey Dart 4,39 Sib Caddgem. (Herd =10, Sot =It) Average Deily Tol(Aded 9.590 vehides Aulas' 15 Paak.cor PPmealega' gio, MWWm Trader (2 Aerem. 15 Peak HO.. V.I— 950 vehides Her Trader P-, Axles): 15 my. Speed: 45 mpn Vehkle W. I...P., Lane Dishnca: 52 het yearldia a I Dry Evaning Idght Deity Site WU 9999 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Aledlum Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMeIHeIBht. 0.0 111 Banter Typo l0.Waq 1- Benn): 00 Heavy Thirty, 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CBnRniM DIeL Or Banter 1.. het No.. Somme EMVefbne le. eaff Dictionary Dart to Deserver 101 fed Arm, , 2000 Battler Oistenre to Oromen, 00 red Mamum Trucka: 4.000 observer rm ol(Above Per 5o hat Hoary Trial 8,006 Grader Sommmeat 90 Patl Emahm, 0.0 reel Rosa Eammen: Lane Equivalent Ohrac.(in /eeQ Road Ebvation. L tact ANOS: 9f1607 Road.. Op% Left View: NO deeiae4 McNUmT eke' 96599 Right View: 900 degrees Hoary Thacker 96606 PIWA Al. 1.1 Celnulerlwa I CNEL earacenTyPel REMEL I Tminc Fbw I Dryads I Farm Rmd I Fmerrel I SanrerAtten I Reim Atran Arabs; 6646 -199 4,39 410 4,87 Job NUmhr 8211 0.000 0000 Arms; 6646 -29 4,39 -120 4,87 Aveage Daily Traloldr): .0.000 O.WO Agerandern Trucks : 7945 -1923 -439 -1211 -097 400 Mull 9909 9003 Unal Truck.: 7945 -1941 -439 -1 tid -097 Sit. DaM 9999 of. He., Tracks 64.25 13.19 439 -120 -516 (lerdanim Dirt . Sal Canadian Dld ch Ob. 0,000 0.003 Hasty Trucks' 81 1337 439 -120 -516 591ed 0,000 0.003 (hmHgehn NOhu LevNa(wNhoul TOpo end be. alien..) Pad Elevation: Lan.E9uNelent Dlahna OnheQ Rosa Eammen: 9o.1 (hmHgehd NO.. Leveb(agal TOpn and be.,rattenuetlonf I Via-- -NO degrees N:mYm Toney: 09593 Rgbf Vrew: VenaJeType Leq Peak HCur I Leq Gay rnq Evening LM Nigh I Lpn I CNEL VanaJeTyp. I Lam Peak leer I Leg Gay I Inq EVaing Leq Nigh I Len I I Au(nc' 669 590 571 511 53.9 69.8 664 Autos' 607 59.6 57.0 510 5]9 NO 662 Medium Trucks: SIS 51 45.8 452 51.3 49.8 53] 53.9 Medium Trucks: 54A 520 48.6 45.0 52.1 53.5 537 Heavy TUko: 555 540 45.0 463 52.1 51 US Sit Heavy Tuck.: 55.3 53.8 44.8 46.1 530 MA 516 VehMe N.: 627 6110 578 53.1 594 WO 61.7 62.1 Verde NOS.: 625 60.8 57.6 NO 59.9. 61.5 620 CanlMim Ideal he HOiae COnhur (in Tee4 60.6 61.1 Cenhzlim Clarence he NOiae COnhur Cn M(1 Can enum Dlebnn Or Hoiae COnhur (in Tee4 Cenhzlim Wrtann he NOiae Carl pn Al MdP 651 1 Wail I SS dB4 W I S4 I I MdBA 01 1 60 dBA I SS dB4 W pB4 Ltln: 26 fig NO 17 279 76 Lon : 27 56 1. N 271 119 CNEL: 30 64 139 18 All 83 CNEL' 29 63 135 25 291 Somado: Year 2016 Scohwl Project Fijed Name NNCPC Sol Name: Santa Cruz -120 4,87 Job NUmhr 8211 Road Segment South of Oche rt CTR 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS H,Bhwey Dare 4,11 SM COndltlom (HVn =f0, SoH =13f Aveage Daily Traloldr): 4.600 vehldea Autos: 15 Peek HUrrPoctical: to% McNUm Their (2 Al 15 Peak H., Vramore.' 400 Mull Heavy Tmrany p, Axles): 15 vehkle speed 45 .1 vahich We Ncaeloor ne Dindaram 52 het Vehkill I Day Eirmaill ANN I Deily Sit. DaM 9000 Amor 7.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Heat 0.0 111 Scontel Ol ll,I Berm): Bo lhaay Tracks: 815% 27% 108% 074% (lerdanim Dirt . Sal Canadian Dld ch Ob. 1Lg.o and 100.0 fed lima. . Skal e-e .Pn tap Autos, 2000 gamer Delenae to 06eervet 0.0 feel Marpum Tmcke: 4.000 Observer Frel(AD.. Pan): 591ed Hmry TNA3: 5008 Gran Adfracral0 Pad Elevation: 00 red Pad Elevation: Lan.E9uNelent Dlahna OnheQ Rosa Eammen: 9o.1 All SO 607 Real Gredk LO% I Via-- -NO degrees N:mYm Toney: 09593 Rgbf Vrew: So.. degree Heavy Trolls' 96608 F1WA All Mmlel Lllaula3as F1WA Ndu.., eli a dlahas Lear Night Veblde Type I S. I Tm5 Fbw I Okfenae I Facie Road I Form. Berner Me, Bent A. Tunnry. va, 7a. mn Scenario: Year 2016 Scohwl Plead irjed NUme NNCPC Sol Name: Napped CTR -120 4,87 Job NUmhr 8211 Road Segment' West of NewpoR CTR 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9hwey Dale 4,11 .0 Condltlom (Harp =10, SoH =15) Average Daily TreWe(AtlQ: 7.300 vehldea Auks: 15 Peek HOUr Po- rear,: to% McNUrn Trvok4(2Aial 15 Peak HOUr Vduma' 730 Yniall Heavy Thacker 0, Axles): 15 vehkle speed' in .1 vehich We NaadFarome Dimaram 76 hsl Stencil I Day Evening Nghf Daly Sit. DaM 9000 Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Tomem 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Baader Helpht 0.0 M1 Samal grill 1 -Bem): OZ Heavy Tracks: 86.5% 27% 108% 074% CeMBnlm Dirt me fa gar Lg 1.9 and NoIall.GYaetloespn Tap CenRhe Did. in Obcervar 100.0 tad Autos, it M. gamer, Oman. to observet 0.0 reel Women Tmcke: 4.000 Ob6erver HegM(AD.. Pen): 591ed Hmry, TNAe: 5008 Grade AdjYdmerd' 99 Pad Elevation: 00 real Lane EquhalentDkrana(InheQ Road Ekvdion: J. reel ANba: 92547 Real Grade: Lfl% Led Via-- -90.0 dagreaa Wer. 92504 Right Vrew: 9o.o de9rea HeavyTwts' 92547 F1WA Ndu.., eli a dlahas Lear Night m areelType I S. I TmR Fbw 1 Glsfende I Fkge Road Finaml I.Man Bem A. Adds: 66.46 - 5.32 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 Adds: 6546 -332 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 O.WO MaSYm Tmnka: 7945 -2259 -439 -129 -097 0 00 9003 MaSYm Tmnka: 7945 1.56 -0.11 -129 '07 9000 9003 Heavy Thal 81 -2652 -439 -120 -516 .0000 POGO Heavy Tn2kr: 81 2451 -4.11 -120 -516 .0.000 POGO UnMtlgefetl Nda LeVW (wllnouf TOpo antlheMxaCenudbnf UnMtlgefed Nda Levels (wIMOUITaps endhaMxallBnWtlonf VaNrPTyine Leq Paak HOUr Le, Gay Leq Ewmng Lear Night LM CNEL VenlrPType Leq Paak Hpur Leq Gay Leg Evening Led Might LM CNEL Auks; 57.5 NO 53.9 476 56.4 57.1 Areas ; 598 5]9 56.2 50.1 58] 593 feaium Tmcke: 51.3 49.8 LOA 41.9 50.3 505 Uldium Tracks: 53.6 52.1 45] 44.2 NO 529 He., Tracks' 52.1 51 41.7 429 57.3 514 Heay Times, 51.4 530 44.0 451 NO 537 Vdiden Nowl 594 WO 545 496 FOS 58.8 Vehicle NOa: 617 59.9. NA 52.1 60.6 61.1 Cenhzlim Clarence he NOiae COnhur Cn M(1 Cenhzlim Wrtann he NOiae Carl pn Al IO all W 1 1 W I S4 I 55 tlBA 1 701 W 1 W pB4 55 tlBA lain: 17 36 76 167 Lim N 51 119 236 CNEL: 18 39 83 179 CNEL 25 55 118 265 nimen yze, Dili A Il HER Thaney.Maya6.D12 Sommorre Tear2016WMOUtorojecl Pmiecl Name• NNCPC RoaO Name: Named CTR -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment, BouN of Bane. Barbara 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Orrin yOala 4:11 SIb Cnndabons fXVd =10, Sol 15) Aveaga Daily Trial (Al 7,900 veM1ides Aufas: 15 PeakHwr Pemrecial 10% MWlum TmMs(2 Atka): 15 Peak HOm VOlurrre.' 790 veM1ides Heavy Tmnka(3k Seal: 15 Vacation Steel 4s mph Wall We Near/Pelicans Distance: 76 Met garical s I Day Evarall Night I Deey Site DaU 9990 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: fill 49% 193% 194% BerdeIHelBht. 0.9 MM Bonier Typo l0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% CBnnnire D'al to Seller Ifid. Mel Ndss$ -me Elevatbns(In/eeff Concrete Dist to Decal VOL fed Alves, 2000 Barrel Disnnre to Dbmrven go net Usheum Tmcks: 4.000 Gdservnr Imci(Abovs Peor 5o had Hemy Trvcka 8,006 Grade AHudmene 9a Pad Eternal 0.0 feel Rosa Erroll: Lane Equivalent OHhnre(n h ) Road Ebvffiion: .3 him Areas : 92.547 Roetl Gredn: 00% Left View: -900 degrees Wd, -im. 92504 Rgho View: W 0 degrees Haary Trvcke: 92547 Phial A lu Modal cakubgwm I crel Type I REMF1 I TraT Fbw I ence I FIN. Roetl I Forerel I. A. I Allen Sommoio: Year 2016 WIYbol Project mired Name• NNCPC Road Name: NawpmI CTR -120 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Road Segment, trial W Banta Balboa 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mgheray NNe 4:11 Slay Candltlore (HW =10, a- =15) Anyone Deily Tyl(Add: 6.900 veM1ides Aulcs' 15 Packtmer Pemrecial' 10 %e MWlum Trucke(2 Aram. 15 Peak HOm Volume: 690 veM1ides Hal Tmnke(3k forea: 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 mph Vehcle We Near/Far Lane Didear 76 Met garical y I Dry Enamil Night Dally I to WU 9990 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: fill 4.9% 19396 194% BaMeIHel9ht. 0.0 bed Bonier Typa l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks, 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% Carer, lyal in Bander 1CO.O MCI NoLS¢ SouFe EMVatbne an/eeff Comwdles Dear to Observer tlg6 fed Act 2000 Berner Olsnnre to OGrerver: 0o nd Worem Trvcke: 4.000 Gdservar Heynl(Above Per 50 at Henry Trvcka 8,006 Grade Slandiment 9a Pad Eternal 0.0 feel Rosa Erroll: Lane Equivalent Ohhnce (in fed) Road Eacation. L O teal All 92 547 Roetl Grade: Oo% Left View: Fill deal McNUmi l 92504 Right View: Soo degrees ineWTomen 92547 shwaA lw Model cmurmfimrs I VenidPType T REMEL I Trelhc Fbw I Oismnot I FINM Road Famrel I RanierAtten I Reim Afhn Arms; 6846 -297 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Number: 8211 0.000 0000 Arms; 6546 -356 4:11 -120 4,87 Avenge Ddly TOWc(AtlQ: o.OW 0.000 McSUm Tmcks: 7945 -2921 -411 -12a -097 630 MM1Ider. 9909 9000 MoSUm Trucks: 7945 -2990 -411 -12a -097 Si. De. 9990 9000 Henry Tmcks 04.25 21 -4.11 -120 -516 CeMarir. Dirt. Berner Can.Mre I.Obmrver 0,000 0.003 Heary, Tmcks' 81 21 411 -120 -516 59 Ind 0,000 0.003 WmHgefed NOh¢LevNa(wNhoul Tapo std be. ettenuatldnf Lane Equvalent D..na fin fee) Rosa Erroll: on .1 unmHgeted NOhe Longer (wMrmn Topo and barrier a enuerMQ Left Via-- -990 aeemes Nbroat Tromy 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: VenrcJeType Laq Peak Hour I Lea, Gay Ieq Evial LM Nigh I Lon I CNEL req Etral I I Lam Peak lour I LM OSy I req EVmlirg Leg Night Lan I CNEL Arcery 602 58.3 I 50.5 Acres ; 59A 597 Armic 596 57.7 55.9 499 529 51.4 50.5 59.1 Medium Tmcks: 539 524 451 44.5 52.5 51.1 530 53.2 Medium Trucksr 533 51.8 45.5 439 43.3 524 526 Heavy TUke: 548 533 44.3 45.6 4310 53.9 54.0 Heavy Trucks: fill 528 0.3] 450 515 53.3 53.5 VehMl Nose: 620 60.3 57.1 52A 51.1 610 614 Vel Noise: 61A 59.7 585 51.8 WA 60.8 Candlelight Dlemnn. Noise Cdncur(in fee4 Can inn" Dlemnn. Nana Cancur(in rl 70 afl4 W 1 1 W aBA I WdBA 1 M aBA 01 1 WWSA 1 55 dB4 Len: I MdRI 01 60 dBA 1 55 dl lea Lear 25 54 116 2. 259 CNEL: 23 Ltln: 23 49 199 229 22 CNEL 27 Be 125 269 CNEL 25 53 114 245 ]unary al.. dI Sronado: Year 2016 Without Project RjelName NNCPC Road Name: recall CTR -120 487 Job Number: 8211 Road Segment Soat9 of Sane Crue O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data -120 487 SM COndltloru (HW =f0, SoH =13) Avenge Ddly TOWc(AtlQ: 8.300 veMdea Autos 15 Park inner Pomarmil 10% Mecum TUCka(2 Al 15 Peak HOm VrAmm' 630 MM1Ider. Heavy Tremor p, Ayers): 15 vehkee speed 45 .1 Vehich W. Nrahrote one Dimmer, 76 feel VehkKTyoe I Day Ecareal ANSI I Deily Si. De. Heavy Tmcks Amor 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% BaM¢r Helped, 0.0 lest S.amorType(0.Walt 1- Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CeMarir. Dirt. Berner Can.Mre I.Obmrver 1Lg.9 red 100.0 fed NOISeSal6¢ -e .an.ep Autur, 2Wit Bemm Distance to Observer 0.6 feel Mrrpum Tmckr: 4.000 Obrrrverl. ,at (AD.. Prdf: 59 Ind HWry Trade : BWfi Grade Adjudment 90 Pad E.ndrom 00.d Lane Equvalent D..na fin fee) Rosa Erroll: on .1 Au.e: 92547 Road Gredk 00% Left Via-- -990 aeemes Nbroat Tromy 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: 90.0. call Hrary Tmds' 92547 (i1WA Ndu Mrd¢I Cdcule3ms CNEL dynode Type I S. I TaPw FbW I ps.nde I Fi red Read I Formed R¢rcer Men I Renta A. Tunery. al.. aI Scenario, Year 201fi WiNwl Project Rjed NUma: NNCPC Rnad Name: Neal CTR -120 487 Job Number: 8211 Road Segment' Noll of Banta Oruz O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Der. -120 487 SNa COndl bins (HW =f0, Soff =13) Avenge Ddly TOWc(Add. 5.500 veMdea So. 15 Peek HOUr PomsMsge: 19% MedlmTrvolorPAreal 15 Peak Hour Vduma.' SBO veMdea Heavy Trvcke 0, bolas): 15 vehkee speed 45.1 Vehich W. Naar/Farlane Dimmer, 76 Mel Vaftxds pe I Day Everang Night Daily Si. Da. Heavy Tmcks Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Tmcks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% BaM¢r Heigh, 0.0 Mt BamarType g-Walt 1- Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cerrerine DRL. Berner Con.rine Old. c Obmrvar I.. red 100.0 fed Nois. sourw 6'evM.ns pn fxp Aurte, 2000 Bremer Duane to Observer 0.6 feel Wagon Tmcks: 4.000 dreary -, He,cl(AD.. fail 59 hd HWry Trade : BWfi Grade AdjYdment 90 Pad E.vation: 00 .d Lane EquhdentD.tmmbrifri Roetl E.vdion: 90 heel All 92547 Rom.. 00% Left Via-- -990 degrees Maalvm TVGS' 92504 Right Vrew: 90.0 ae9reea Haavy Trtmts' 92547 (i1WA Ndu.., eldlcule3ms CNEL decode Type I S. I TaPWFbw I Distance I FkIle Road Frrecd I.Man Rerm A. AufOs: fill -396 4,11 -120 487 O.WO O:WO Aaw: 68.46 4.32 4,11 -120 487 O.WO 0.00 Mnamon Tanks: 7945 1120 -4,11 -129 -0g7 0 hh 9003 MaSYm Tanks: 7945 -2159 -4,11 -129 'g' 9000 9003 Heavy Tmcks 8435 -2515 -4.11 -120 -516 0,040 0003 Heavy Tmcks 8435 -2551 -4.11 -120 -516 01 0003 UnMNgemd NO ILends(wlPaut TOGO add heMxaMnYdbnf UnMtlgemd Ndsn Lenels(wlMaut TOpo and haMxdlMYatlonf reMdPType Leg Peek HOU Lag Day Leq Evan.g Leg All Lne CNEL VehldPType Leg Peak Hnur Lag Day req Etral I Lad NIgM I Lon I CNEL Autos; 592 57,3 555 495 SEA 587 Acres ; 508 569 55.2 49.1 577 582 Medium Tmcks: 529 51.4 45.1 43.5 Ill 522 Medium Tmcks: 52.5 51.1 DLIF 432 51,5 519 Henry Tmcks' 538 52.4 43.3 446 529 53.1 H., Tmcks' 53.4 520 4310 442 526 627 VehkJe Ndae: 619 59.3 55.1 515 610 60.5 V.I Ndae: 607 W.9. 550 51.1 53.6 60.1 Cm.dinu Ch.nn. Nasu COm.ur(in M(1 Cm.dinu Ml M Nasu COm.ur im MQ 70 afl4 W 1 1 W aBA I WdBA 1 70 afl4 01 W aBA 55 tlBA Len: as 46 100 215 lea m 44 95 2. CNEL: 23 50 107 231 CNEL 22 47 101 219 9,ry yae, mtx 6.1 -41 Thaartioir ae.ml2 SCarssion Tem2016WOmi Proocl Pmiticl Name• NNCPC Roan Name: NewpmI CTR -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment, North W Sanm Rosa 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBbway Gala 4.11 $Ian Cmtl ns(HV =10. Sol 15) Averring. Dist, The?c Mee: L300 veM1idsa Auras: 15 PaakHwr Persenmga 10% MWIUm Prefer (2 Astal 15 Peak Hour Demrre.' 730 various Heavy Tmckk P, Axles): 15 smal la Speed: ni mpb Whi We I ... ParGarre Oisfance: 76 Met gersdia s I Day IEVbVl NCk I Daily &'M DaU 0090 Acres: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 94.6% 48% 103% 194% Bearden HelglR 0.9 MM Banker Typa l0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.749. CBnRniM Dml10 Becker 1.. Mel Ndsa$ -me EMVatbns(In Rand Columbia Dist to Observer VOL fed ANOs, 2000 Bartley Distance to Obmrven go teal Monium Trucks: 4.000 observer rental (Abovo Ped): 5e, feel Hemy Trvcka 8,005 Grade �dme 00 I glories, 0.0 feel Road Eastmn, Lane Equivalent Christmas (nRed Road Ebvallon: 00 him Areas : 92.547 Roe, Grens: 00% Left View: -900 degrees bletlium 1. 92504 ll View: W 0 degrees Haavy Trucks: 92547 NiwA. Mrced cakulstlmw I TmPwll psfende seel ype I REMF1 I TmT Fbw I am- I Fures Roatl I Fmsnel I. A. I Allen Simmons : Year 2016 WWbol Project mired Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Nevryorl CTR -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment: Sourn W Sarim Rosa 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS High"y ONa 4.11 Sib CmdltloN (Hard =10, SON =It) Average Deily The ?c (A@): 10,000 veriGea Autos' 15 PeakHwr Pemrearl 10% Undo. Trucks (2 Saba. 15 Peak HO.. Velarre.' 1,000 -hid.. Hal Thinks P- , Axles): 15 my. liked 45 man yebkre We I ... P., Lane Distance: 76 Met gersdia a I Dry Evening MOO Deity &'M WU 0090 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% AmdWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMer HOIgIR 9.91.. Banker Typo l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Hal TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.74% CanRniM DI5t on Backer 1.. met No.. $Oame EMVatbns im Real Corrosion DW to Observer IDI fed ANOs, 2000 Battler Oi tare M OGrerver: 0o tad Usher- Trunks: 4.Wo observer Heydt(Abov. Peel): 501ee1 Heary Tricks, 8,006 Grade Arlusiment 90 I glories, 0.0 lest Road Eastmn, Lane Equivalent Clarence (in feel Road Ebvallon. L O lset Auras: 92547 Re,., Gred.: 00% Left View: Fill degrees McNUmi rcks' 92504 Right View: 900 degrees Heavy Trucks 92547 shwaA lw Model cmcumtlmrs I TmPwll psfende somake Type T REMEL I Tmlhc Fbw I Oismnces I Fares Road Finares I San Att Bean AOan Aubs; 6846 -332 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Normal 8211 0.000 0000 Aube; 6046 -195 4.11 -120 4,87 Avenge Dilly Tr Xic(Ad4. o.OW O.WO Miami Trucks : 7945 -2059 -411 -1211 -097 70 veM1ll 0009 .. MBNUi Truck.: 7945 -1919 -411 -1211 -097 Sih Dart 0090 .. Heavy Trucks 11 2 1 -4.11 -120 -516 C ncrsfiy Dist. Bamef Danielne I bob. 0,000 01 Heresy Trucks' 34,25 13.15 -4.11 -120 -516 S. IOd 0,000 01 WmMgeN, NOha LevNa(wNlwut TOpo and deader elemental Lane Equvalent Dlatrnce(in feel Road Eastmn, 0e, met Unmitigated NOha noting (soogh t Tope, and darner adNnus" Left Via-- -990 aagnea N:dium Tacky: 92.504 Right Vrew: VenrcJeType Leg Pak HO or Leq Gay req EVmvrg I Laq Nigh Ldn I TmPwll psfende CNEL VenrcJ 1 Lam PoCk fancy I LM Gay I Ieq,noirg Lee Night Lan I (ail Au(nc' 598 579 %2 50.1 553 687 59.3 Autos' 612 51 57.5 515 I 60d 601 Medium Trucks: 536 St 45.7 ill 45.9 528 529 Medium Tracks Sol 534 47.1 435 47.5 540 542 Heavy TUks: 544 530 44.0 452 "A 53.6 537 Heavy Tacks: 55.8 64.0 45,3 465 45.7 54.9 55.1 VehMn N.: ant? 598. 503 52.1 559 WA 61.1 Vehide NOS.: 630 61.3 fill 5].5 5B5 62.0 625 Conduction Ddmnew to Moil Centel (in net 62.8 Combustion Channel An Maine Comber On MQ canlanim Ddmnn to Hasa Centel (in net Combustion Ma An Maine Comber jury A l TO dBA I BSI 1 60 d 1 55 dSA 1 Odd I TO dBA 01 %dBA 1 55 dSA Ltln: 24 51 110 53 239 244 Ltln: R9 93 139 67 293 Cl 25 55 118 56 255 262 CNEL' 31 66 1st 72 314 ,dam on, aa. sn Sronadu: Year 2016 it lProject Pi jed Nama: NNCPC Road Name: Newgod CTR -120 4,87 Job Normal 8211 Send Segment Norm of Ban Miguel O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hughes, Data 4,11 SM COndltloru (Had =f0, SoH =13f Avenge Dilly Tr Xic(Ad4. L %O VeMdea As. 15 Peek HwrPomsMa 10% Mecum TaCka(2sithal- 15 Peak HOUn Pohers, 70 veM1ll Heavy Theions p, Axles): 15 Venble speed' 45 mpb Vahicn W. Naar/FaaLane Dinamen 76 fact VehknTyoe I Day Evenirq MCI I Daly Sih Dart 9009 Amor 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 103% 194% Barter Hel96G' 0.0 lest S.ame,lype l0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: fill 27% 108% 074% C ncrsfiy Dist. Bamef Danielne I bob. too.. lw 100.0 feel rlols.s .ELe -e .Pn Leap Autoa, IWif Sarver Distance to Observer, 0.0 feel Modern Trento: 4. %0 observer ,at (AD.. Pent: S. IOd HWry TNAS: BLDB Gm,a Adjudmen[ h. Pad Ekvadon: 00 task Lane Equvalent Dlatrnce(in feel Road Eastmn, 0e, met All 92547 Roatl Gie,k 00% Left Via-- -990 aagnea N:dium Tacky: 92.504 Right Vrew: .O.. dolor- Heavy Trails' 92547 (i1WA Ndu Mmlel Lllaula3ms leg EVanbg Veblde Type I S. I TmPwll psfende Flnile Road I Formal I. Men I Berm A. Tunery. NV ta. mt2 Screal: Year 2016 Withei Pail Pro ject NUma: NNCPC Road Name: frocal CTR -120 4,87 Job Normal 8211 Send Segment' South N Ban Mii O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hughes, Data 4,11 Sea COndltla-(HW =f0, Soff =13) Avenge Orly Talk Ks(A4. 10.%0 Vehldea As. 15 Peek HOUr Ponkner,: 10% Mecum Trveka(2Aika).- 15 Peak HOUn Velum.' 1,090 VeM1ll Heavy Theory 0, Axles): 15 Venble speed' 45 app Vahicn stn Naanciaalane Dinackson 76 Mead VerdsType I Cry Evening Nil Duly Sih Dan 9009 Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Tauckm 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 Mt Becol grill I Berm): 00 Heavy Tacks: fill 27% 108% 074% Colemoss Dirt ro Server Cenhas Old. is Obcervar iLb.91Be1 100.0 fast Nods. soume6'ea.DOey pn fxp Aaoy, ti M. Same, Duane to OLtrerver 0.0 reel Madmka Trento: 4. %0 Dbeerve, ,at (AD.. Pent: 5.hd HWry TNAs: BlDB Gny,e Adjudmenl' 90 Pad Ekvedon: 00 task Lane EquhalenlDlatmce(In feel Read Ekoline,; OO reel ANbs: 92547 From,.. 00% Left Via-- -990 aegraes Madbm Toome' 92504 Rigor Vrew: 90.0 de9re- HaavyTwts' 92547 (i1WA NWU.., Llbula3ms leg EVanbg VepiseType I S. I TmPWFbw I Do.- Flnlle HOad Fm. I.Maa Bem A. Arms: (1 -3.14 4,11 -120 4,87 0800 O:WO Arms: 6546 -150 4,11 -120 4,87 0800 0.000 MySUm Tmcke: 7945 1.S. -4,11 -120 1 gT 0009 9003 Mmmm Trucks: 7945 -1852 -4,11 -120 /rgr 9009 0003 Heavy Tacks: Sol -2434 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 8003 Heavy Tacks Sol 1277 -4.11 -120 -516 01 of UnMtlgeletl NOlsn LeVW (wIPOUf TOpo antlheMx: albnYMbnf UnMtlgeled NOlsn Levels(w ul TOpn and baMxa Oon) Vade Ties Leq Peak Hbm Lm Day leg EVanbg Le, Nigh LM CNEL ValldeType Leq Peok Hbm Lm Gey Lm Evening Lord Nigh LM CNEL Aubs; 600 581 553 %.3 58.9 59.5 Arms; 616 597 I 510 %.5 61.1 Medium Tracks: 538 522 45.9 44.3 528 53.0 Medium Tracks: 553 538 47.5 45.0 544 546 Heavy Trucks' 546 3312 "A 45A 631 63.9 H., Trucks' 562 Sel 45.7 478 65.3 554 Deal Noise: 618 601 559 52.3 FDA 613 Values Noise: 634 61.7 5B5 MA 62.4 62.8 Combustion Channel An Maine Comber On MQ Combustion Ma An Maine Comber jury A l 70 tlfl4 55 dBA 1 01 1 Odd 1 70 tlfl4 65 tl6A %dBA 55 tlBA ldn: N 53 113 244 for, 31 67 144 310 CNEL 26 56 121 262 CNEL: 33 72 15`1 333 mcids, WY2e,M12 6.1 -42 Nadactur emtx Stealth, Teer2016WOmi Proocl Prince Name• NNCPC Read Name: Newport CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA Job Numher 8211 Road Salmons, East of Haiti GTR 9tb CmEItloN (H --10, a- =1a) SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oala MWlum Theater (2 thee. 15 91b Cmtl ns(Heri 10. Sol 15) Arenas. Daily Tra?c ll 9.100 -hid. Auras: is PaokHwr Parcenlaga 10% MWlum Thrifts (2 social 15 Peak Helm VObrrre.' 910 venues Heavy Tmnka(3kproles): 15 Von. Sped: 4s rape Vank1. We I ... noarLane Oisfaoce: 76 het sensorial I D.y Evenng Nghl I Daily SIte MU Gdsarvar reeynl(A.. Ped): on of Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Turks: 94.6% 48% 193% 194% BaMeIHNBht. 0.9 hM Sal Type rLWal(1- Sol 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% CBnRnire Dial In Sender 1C9.0 het Ndn. Sayst (In .1) Comwllrre Dist b Observor 1WL feel ANOS, 2000 Serer Dah hear to Obmrven 00 feel Medium Tracks: 4.W0 observer real (A.. P.d): on first H.aryTnlcka ILM6 Grade AHudmene 90 lead Ehvaiion: 0.0 feel Road Elsvetion: Lane Equivalent DHhnre(n h tf Road EssveNon: 90 IeN ANOs: 92.54] Road .redo: 00% Left View: -900 degrees hhtllum im. 92504 RI View: W 0 degrees Heavy Tmcke: 92547 NiwA. Model ca c.trd e TmPrn Fbw I psknde Valise Type 1 REMF1 I TraT Fbw I DiaGnea I FIN. RO.tl I FreenN 2erriar A. Reim A!!an Scenario: Teer2016WItlbol Project Pitere Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Hotel CTR Job Number, 8211 Roadle,sel f: SouNOlNmvnnCTIl ICIrcle SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nway DNB 9tb CmEItloN (H --10, a- =1a) Avaraga Daily Tre?a(Add 14.200 veM1idea Auras 15 PeakHwr Paralactil' 10% MWlum Theater (2 thee. 15 Peak Helm V.I.-... 1,420 vehil Hill Tmnk.(3k proles): 15 Venicle Speed: 45.0 Vddil We I ... no, Lane Dishnce: 76 het sensoria a I Dry Everesill Nlghf Deity fide WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medum Trall 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% B.MeIH.19ht. 0.91e. Sal Type l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27%. 198% 0.74% CBnRnire foal in Bender 1.. het Ndna SwFe EMVatbne an. 1) Connotations Dist b Obsarv.r IWL fed ANUS, 2000 Belnar Dl ere An OGrerva.: 0,0 real M.mum Trvrke: 4.W0 Gdsarvar reeynl(A.. Ped): on of Haary Trvcka 8,W6 Grade Arlusiment 90 lead Ehvaiion: 0.0 reel art 1355 Lane Equivalent Daniel (in Feel Road Essvation. L lset Area 92 54] Road.. 06% Left View: 900 degrees McNUmi rks' 92504 Right View: 900 do,- Heavy Trucks 92547 Hlwa xolw Model calurletiwre -120 -516 VNlide Type T REMEL I Trelnc Fbw I Diamnea I FINK Reed I Forered I Ra Att Bran Altar Aubs; 6646 -236 4,11 -130 4,87 J.6 NUmdr 8211 0.000 0000 Austere ; 6646 -043 4.11 -120 4,87 Averege Daily TaWs(Al 00W firm M¢TUm Those: 7945 -19 fie -411 -1211 19] 1,640 veM1ldes . W .. All Truck. 7945 -1767 -411 -1 Sit 1W Si. Da. 9990 90W Heavy Tmckc' art 1355 -4.11 -120 -516 C rfjein Dirt to Selmer cenremlre Did to Do. 0,000 01 Heavy Tracks' 6425 -2162 -4.11 -120 -516 50 red 0,000 01 (NmHgefed NOha LevNa(wllhout Tapn end banter attenuaioon) Oo .al Lane Equivalent D..nce (in el Road Elsvetion: of .1 (NmHgehd NO.. Lo. hat Topo end benler jd1oomacl Lift Via-- -W.o deeirns N:dinm TVCks: 92.504 Rdhf Vrew: VenaNeType Lazl Pork Hosel Last day I leq Evening I IMNigh Ldn TmPrn Fbw I psknde CNEL Tmstill I Dkfende I Laze Peek four I Last pay I leq Lnerng Len Nigh I Las CNEL Au(nc' 608 Si 57d FA LM Iii 60:3 Auloc' 627 6,18 59.1 Si 61.9 622 Mea'lum Trucks: 545' 53.0 457 451 530 538 538 Medium Tool 565 5S0 4810 47.1 49.2 Si 55.0 Heavy TUke: 554 54.0 44.9 462 490 54.5 54.] Heavy Took.: 573 0.9 46.9 481 Ill 555 566 Vehke Nose: 626 fill 577 53.0 51.3 61.6 62.0 Vehicle Ndse: 16 US 51 550 652 63.5 645 Can esim Dkbnn at Hein Centow(in Assist 643 646 Vehkle Noise: 585 CanlMim Dkbnn ne Hein contour (in Tee4 537 49.0 0.5 580 CO ftdine O4.nn. Niles Clon.ur en /w8 701 1 651 1 WdI I WdB4 1 10 d9a 01 1 Bo di WdW 70 tlfl4 Ltln 29 59 119 275 1 70 tlfl4 Ltln: 37 99 172 379 Los Cl 30 64 137 497 295 Ldn: CNEL 40 86 1M 11 397 'res, se, as.IDla I all, Sronada: Year 2016 WiNwl Project P jOCINama: NNCPC Read Name: Nexpod CTR 4,11 J.6 NUmdr 8211 Road Segment North of Dead 1-fl96way Joaquin Hills SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey Data HiMs ey Data SM COndltloru (HW =f0, SoH= fall Averege Daily TaWs(Al 16.400 yal Al : 15 Peek Hour PomsMage: 10% Mc NUmTeeka(2Aoned): 15 Peak Helm Vdurrso 1,640 veM1ldes Heavy There (3 +proles): 15 Vehkle speed 45.1 Isal We liewhicie ne Didarice, 76 feel Ve rds7ye. I Day Evening All I Deily Si. Da. Si. Da. Aufos: 7.534, 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tiunke: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% SaMerrai 0.0 led Berso pe(OWall, f- Berme: 00 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% C rfjein Dirt to Selmer cenremlre Did to Do. 1Lb.9 red 1m.0 find Nosse3wree GYVNbne Ps.ep Asses IWit Selmer Disrenn to Observer, 0.0 red Marpum Tracks: 4.0(30 ohserv.r ,at (AD.. Ped): 50 red Heary TrvAs: BW6 Gres Adredment 90 Pad Elevens. Oo red Oo .al Lane Equivalent D..nce (in el Road Elsvetion: of .1 All 92547 Roetl Gredk 00% Lift Via-- -W.o deeirns N:dinm TVCks: 92.504 Rdhf Vrew: ard. degree Heavy TVds' 92547 F1WA Ndu Model Llle thaMws PH. Ndu MoWI LlrndaMOna VehkeType I Jo. I TmPrn Fbw I psknde I Fkge Read I Freen& I. Men I Reim A. Tunes, NY as. mn Scenario, Year 2015WiNoul Project Reed NUma :NNCPC Read Name: Santa Ral 4,11 J.6 Neither 8211 Road Sagherst Kohn of Ban Joaquin Hills of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HiMs ey Data 4,39 .0 COndoorne (B. -fee Sof= fall Averege Daily Taft (Al 3.8W veMder A.. f5 Peek Hour Poms., 19% Mellon Trvoka(2 Ardell 15 Peak He, Volume' 360 MM1Idea Heavy Tracks 0, proles): 15 Vehkle speed 45.1 Isal We Naadosel Dicarion 52 feel Ve resT a I Day Evening I'll Daily Si. Da. At. 7.534, 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trunks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0 NA BamerType(0.Wall, f- Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 2.7% 108% 074% CeMBnln Dirt. Selmer cenremlre Did. b Obnrvar: iLb.9 fied 1W6 find Nola. sours GYVebbpa pn frog Area 2W9 Belmar DUrenn In Deal, 0.0 real Medium Tracks: 4.0(30 observer ,or (AD.. Pod): 59 red Harry TrvAs: BW6 Grade AdfuNment 99 Pad Elevens. Oo .al BW3 fare EquhalenlDk.nUe Nnfed Roetl Ekveter, 99 reel All 913607 Real Grade: 00% Lee Via-- -W.o dagrese Madmen TVeles: 99593 Rghr Vrew: 900 degrees HeavyTwte' 96608 PH. Ndu MoWI LlrndaMOna Venide Type Venlde Type I Jo. I Tmstill I Dkfende I FkNe Road Fres. I.Man Reim A. Auros: 641,46 0.20 4,11 -120 4,87 (two of Autos: 6846 $15 4,39 -120 4,87 (two firm Medum Trunks: 7945 - 1704 -4,11 -129 -09T 9W9 .. Medum Trunks: 7945 1339 -439 -129 -09T 9009 if. Heavy Trv2ka 5435 -21.00 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOOO BW3 Heavy Toil 5435 -2735 -439 -120 -516 .0.000 BW3 On' 0tetlMlan Le.W(wNMut Fil and heMx: aMnudbal OnMtlgeted NOlan La. (w ut TOpnendba Nbnuo0on) Venide Type Leq Peek Hbur La, day (eq Evan.g Les, Nigh LM CNEL Vebide Type Leq Peek Helm Let day Leq EVaning Led Night LM CNEL Aside 63.3 61.4 59.7 538 52.2 62.9 Aubs; 587 51 530 470 55.5 592 Medium Trucks: 57.1 556 49.2 47.7 Ill 554 Medium Tricks: 50.5 490 428 41.1 495 497 Heavy Trucks' 579 Ill 47.5 411 5]] 572 H., Trucks' 51.3 49.9 40,9 42.1 605 606 Vehkle Noise: 652 MA 603 Si 643 646 Vehkle Noise: 585 56.9 537 49.0 0.5 580 CO ftdine O4.nn. Niles Clon.ur en /w8 CO ftdie WMenn. Niles Clon.ur for Mrj 70 tlfl4 65 tlSA I d(I I MED4 1 70 tlfl4 65 tlSA W d8A 55 tlBA Los 41 99 199 497 Ldn: 15 32 99 11 CNEL 44 94 203 437 CNEL: 16 34 73 iW semen, Poyae, mis 6.1-43 Nadry.Alaya6.mla Several: Year 2016 WMa1 Project Pored Name• NNCPC Read Name: Santa Rmad 410 4,87 Job Number 8211 Rand Segment, Seem of San JOaquln Hills 9000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HI9M1wey Oats 4,39 SIb CmdgA sea hadd=10. SON = 15) Average Daily Treat all 10..81 yarded Autos: 15 peakHwr Percenlaya,' 10% MWWm TmMs(2 Axles): 15 Peak Hour Volurom 1,680 -hides Heavy im. P, Axlns): 15 oration Speed: 15 mph Sant W. N...PitrLame 0idence: 52 Ret VenkbTypa I Day Evernial feel I Daily Sid Clear sit. Dale Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9L42% Madman Trucks: 34.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9nt 0.0 lar, Seater Typa l0.Wal(1- Berm): 90 Hal TVcks: 86.5% 21 %. 198% 0.74% CBnRniM Dml10 Seller 1..reel Mg.$ -me Elevafbns(In ear Coddler Dist to Obwrver, 10U6 fed Area 2000 Seale, Daniel m obereer: 0o red Watch Trurka: 4.000 Gdserver Hngdt(Aid. Por 5o had HearyTrvcka eM6 Grade AHudmene 913 Patl Elevation: 0.0 feel Lan.Eq.&ae IDNhna Oaf Q Lane Equivalent Dlstanre(n h ) Road EreveNon: 90 IeN ANDS: 9f1607 Road Gretln: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degrees Medium 1. 96506 RI View: W 0 degrees Hary Tracks 95605 NiWA al drand CakubNnns Ldn Vaide Type I S. I ValdPType I REMFl I Tor Few I am- I Fate Rmtl Fmmm I. A. I Bnrm Annn Several: Tee, 2016 WIYlal Project monarchal NNCPC Read Name: Section 410 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Send Segment Narm W decimal UP 9000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey. 4,39 sal CandltlON (Hard =10. SON =It) Average Daily Trial (Al 14.500 -hides Armas' 15 PaaRHwr Pandardya 109% Udecm Thad, (2 Seem. 15 Peak HO Ur V.I.-.. 1.430 -hide. Her Trader P- , Axles): 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 mph yenkle W. NeadFa, Lane Distance: 52 feet yehkbTyps I Day Evening Night Deity Site WU sit. Dale Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% Madman Trucks: 34.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMeIHeight. 0.0 led Bearer Typa hLyal 1- Berm): 90 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 27%. 198% 0.74% Careamea Dist la Banter 1...1 No.. SOUme EMVatbne le. ear Container Dist to Deserver 10I fed Area 2000 Berne, Oisfaa -m observaa: go red Memam Tharom 4.096 ..server Heynf(Aid. Per 50 feet Heavy T,ucka 8006 Grade ArWment 913 Patl Elevation: 0.0 reel Lan.Eq.&ae IDNhna Oaf Q Lane Equivalent Dhhnre (in feeQ Road Erevffiion. L last ANDS: 9f1607 Road Gretle: Op% Left View: Poll dearead McNUmT cks' 96593 Right View: 900 degrees Heary Tracker 99608 fHWA al MOdel CMnubf ens Ldn Vaide Type I S. I VadenType T RErUt I Tmlec Fbw I Oismna I File Snarl I Fmmrel I SanlerAan I Ream Aan Arms; 6646 0.30 4,39 410 4,87 Job Normal 8211 0.000 9000 Ara; 6646 -OAO 4,39 -120 4,87 Aveage Odly Trakc (AtlQ: O.OW O.WO Maum Trade: 7945 -IF ol -439 -1211 197 990 MM1Idea. 9900 9003 Maum Tracer; 7945 -1154 -439 -1213 197 sit. Dale 9000 9000 Heary Tracks 64.25 1689 439 -120 -516 Cenhdin Dirt m Bearer CaNdla Did m Do. 0,000 01 Hal Trucks' 64.25 1169 439 -120 -516 501ed 0,000 0.003 WmM9efed NOhe LevMa (wIIAOnf Than and dental reemerged) Lan.Eq.&ae IDNhna Oaf Q Road grayed, 90.1 mgM pd d NOhe Le. (wl1 Time and be., elementa of Lim Via-- -90.0 degha Nemnm TVcks: 93593 Rghf Vrew: ValrJeType Laq Peak Ham Lag Gay leg Lilian, Laq NIgM Ldn Vaide Type I S. I CNEL ameraiTypn I Lam PoCk Haut I Leq Day I leg Endeng Leg Nigh Ldn I ril Addy ' 632 61.3' 59.5 53A 58.2 621 627 Aube' 625 LOS 53.8 521 54.4 614 620 Medium Tracks: 51 MA 49.1 475 536 52.1 Mg 582 Medium Tracks: 562 54] 48:4 468 48.8 553 55.5 Hal Tike: 578 55.3 47.3 48.6 546 3311 56.9 57.0 Henry Trucks: 57.1 0.6 466 47.9 51 562 563 Valle N.: 650 61 60.1 55.4 617 mg 84.0 644 Vehicle Ndse: 64.3 62.9 594 54.7 56.5 1 637 CanlMim Daebnn he Neal Cartel (in fang 0.3 57.8 Caroline D4Nnn he NO7au COnmur On MQ Cande ime Daebnn le NOiaa Cartel (in Tee4 Caroline Walunn he NOiae COnmur Cn MQ M dBA 01 1 WdBA I WIWA Q0l I I MdBA 01 60 dBA I Wd84 50 tlBA Ltln: 40 85 161 24 397 111 Lon : 33 77 135 14 355 39 CNEL 43 92 100 26 425 119 CNEL BB 82 in 15 382 Tanury. day ..IDR Sronano: Year 2016 Without Project Rand Nama :NNCPC Road Name: Santa Bean -120 4,87 Job Normal 8211 Rend Segment South of NEwal CTR O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Dafa 4,51 SM COndltloru (HVd =f0, SOH =13f Aveage Odly Trakc (AtlQ: 7.900 veMdea Autos 15 Pak Hwr Percentage 10% McNUm Trucks (2 Al 15 Peak HOm Polurrre.' 990 MM1Idea. Heavy Tarrant' p, And) 15 Vehkle trial in .1 vertical We NadFarLane Doman de, 52 fuel VehkKTyoe I Day Eyandal Peace I Deily sit. Dale 9000 Auras: 7.5916 12.9% 96% 9742% Malum Trucks 34.3% 49% 103% 194% Barterrail 0.0 lest B.ama,lype(OWall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: fell 27% 111 074% Cenhdin Dirt m Bearer CaNdla Did m Do. 1Lg.O had 100.0 fed LAOIS. . SOUme GY-e .(m Nap Aran, 2 p00 Seiner DisNnn to Observer, 0.6 feel Meal Tracks: 4000 OdewarH ,at (An.. Feel 501ed Hary TNAS: 8006 Gana AdfudmenL' 90 Pad Elevation: 90 red Lan.Eq.&ae IDNhna Oaf Q Road grayed, 90.1 All 9f1607 Roetl.. 90% Lim Via-- -90.0 degha Nemnm TVcks: 93593 Rghf Vrew: 90.O degree Havy Tmds' 96608 F1wa Al MOdel L11nle3Oms leg Ewnmg. Vakk Type I S. Vaide Type I S. I Tm5 Fbw I Ocdmnrd I Fall Road I Fred. Remar Me, Ream A. Tanury. day.. mR Sronano: Year 2015WiNwl Project Rand Nama: NNCPC Read Name: AVCcado -120 4,87 Job Normal 8211 Road Segment' Norm of Ban Miguel O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey DMa 4,51 Sea COndltloru (HaN =f0, Soff =13) Aveage Odly Trams (AtlQ: 5.000 veMdea Are. 15 Pak HOUrner -mr e: 19% McNUm Trvoka(2Aihal 15 Peak Hour Vdumn' 500 vehldec Heavy Tracks (3 + Axles): 15 Vehkle speed 49 man vertical MM Nadal rome Daman e, 36 fall dehrail I Day Every, Night Dsly sit. Dale 9000 Am. 17.5916 12.9% 96% 9742% Mediumihomem 34.3% 49% 193% 194% BaMar Height 0.0 land BarrerType(0.Waft 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: fell 27% 188% 074% CeMedln Dirt m Berner CaNr, Led, In Obarvar ard. had 100.0 tad NOls. souma GYa.DOea pro fxp Art it M. Berner Oman. to Observer, 0.6 feel Medium Tracks: 4000 Dbeary -, ,at (An.. Pa): 59 rod Hary TNAe: 8006 Grade Adfudment 90 Pad Elevetkn: 90 red Lana EquhalenlDkbna(InfreQ Road loommn: 99 reel Auks: 98412 Roue Grade: 90% Lare Via-- -90.0 degree Nemnm Tmcks: 931372 Fred Vrew: 90.. degrees HavyTwts' 99413 F1WA Ndu MOW, ed-ha tams leg Ewnmg. Vakk Type I S. I The Fbw I OcdmnW I Fratricidal FinaWl I.Maa Ream A. Auras: (I - 297 4,39 -120 4,87 0900 O:WO Arms: 66.51 J45 4,51 -120 4,87 0900 0.00) Mamm Tnke: 7945 1.tri ASR -129 1V 0ild 9003 Mamm Tnke: 77.72. 1199 ASS -129 1V 9000 9003 Heavy Trail 81 14.17 -439 -120 -516 .9000 6003 Hal Truck, 8200 -2664 -451 -120 -516 01 0003 WMlgoad MO ILeadd (wl4lrauf Face and deMx:ONMUdkn) UnMtlgnNtl Ndsn LeveN (wlMauf TOpn endhanlxalLenWtlmn) i aler fhad Leq Peak HOUr Lag Day leg Ewnmg. Leq Night LW CNEL VZ Type Liel-lon-1 Lag Day Leq Evening I ran NIgM LW CNEL Autos; 599 58.0 58.2 50.2 58.8 594 Arms; 55.3 54.4 52.7 468 55.2 55.9 harem Tracks: 536 52.1 459 44.2 52.7 529 Madwar Tracks: 503 48.8 424 499 49A 4915 Heary ➢arks' 546 3311 44.0 all 53.9 53.8 Had, Tracks' 51.6 51 412 42A 50.8 60.9 Vehkon Nda: 617 mg 56.8 522 607 612 VehkJO Nda: 584 56.5 533 48.8 0.3 57.8 Caroline D4Nnn he NO7au COnmur On MQ Caroline Walunn he NOiae COnmur Cn MQ 70 tlfl4 01 1 Q0l I Magri 1 70 LEA 1 651 50 tlBA 55 tlBA ldm 24 52 111 240 Lim 14 31 39 143 CNEL 26 55 119 257 CNEL: 15 33 71 155 ,,, Poyae, m1x 6.1 -44 Naury.MayDiN12 SCerralro: Year 2016 WMe1 Project Purled Name• NNCPC Read Name: Awcetlo -130 4,87 Job Name -8211 Rand Segment, Seem of San Miguel 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oala 4,51 $Ib Cmtlldons hems = 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Ta?2(Ad), 15.500 vehidea Auras: 15 Frank Hour Percenreya,' 10% MWrum ThrMS(2 Sales). 15 Peak Hour Vdurrre. 1,550 -hid.. Heavy Trunka(Sr Axlns): 15 Vacancy Speed: 40 mph VehkleI N ... hiarLarre Orsfenal 36 het Vanda ypa I Day Evideral Nghl I Derry Sid Cds fife WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Tracks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BMhlHeight. 9.9 het Samar Typa l0.Wal(1- Benny: go Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% CanRnrM DISC IO Symm 100.0 het NnLe.$ -me EMenanced(In eard) Camwrine Dist In Ddwrvam III fed Art 2000 Benner Drsrenre m Obereer: 0o red Marcum Trucks: 4.000 Gdserver ml (Above Pee): 5o hi HearyTrvcka eM6 Grade Ad)udmene 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 feel 0.0 reel LaneEaided- DHhnreQnfee) Road general 90 IeN Auras: 99412 Road Grade: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degrees War-1. 93372 Rgbf Viaw.- N.0 degrees Heavy TmGe: 98413 Ph. Nolae Medal Cakm eaNWa F re. No lx Mader CMUrbflws Ticiall I Dlyfeader Venda Type I RFMFi I Tota Fbw I Orslenea I Feel Rmtl I Former I Fearer Atten Bemm Allen SCerralro: Ted2016WIYbol Project Pigod Name• NNCPC Read Nam.: Awcado -130 4,87 Job Numhec 8211 Road Seganal NaMa(COaet Nighway 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey. 4,51 SIb Cmdgemme (HUd= 10,.. =It) Average Daily Trench t): 11.100 vehidea Auras' 15 PaakHour Parriedga' 10% MWIUm Troke D Aerem. 15 Peak H-1 Vdumn: 1.100 -hide. Her Trader Pk A hone, 15 V.hrcl. Speed: 40 order yyrkleI N ... hor Lane Dishace: 36 het Vanda ypa I Day Everectil MCI Ddy fife WU 9090 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97,12% Medum Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMel Height. 0.0 led Samar Type OrWaq 1- Benny: 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CanRnrM DISC an Sand, 1.. het No.. SwFe EMenanced le. earg Camwllne Dad to Decal 101 fed Art 2000 Bahr Drsrenre to Dromen, 0o red Mamam Throom 4.000 Gdserver mel(Ahove Per 50 of Henry Trvcka 8,W6 Grade Sehamer, 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 reel Road Eadmiarr: Lane Eguedicht Dhfanre(in feel Road Ebvffiort L O last Area 96412 Road Gade: 90% Left View: 90.0 deame4 McNom T ake 99372 Right Viaw: W 0 degrees Heavy Torman MA13 F re. No lx Mader CMUrbflws Ticiall I Dlyfeader reties Type I RFMEL I Tregmc Fbw I Orsmnea I Farm Rind I Fmsrrel I Barnyard- I Reim Amen Aubs; 661 OA6 4,51 -130 4,87 Job NUmeim 8211 0.000 0000 Arms; 66.51 -to3 4,51 -150 4,87 Average Dally TraWs(Atll: III vehidea o.OW BWO earearm TUnks: 17. -If, -451 -1211 -097 Heavy Tremor p, Aced) 15 9909 9003 ateral Truck. 17. -1929 -451 -120 -097 VehkKTyge I Day Every, Night Dsly 9090 9.000 Heavy Tracks' 8299 1073 161 -120 -516 1Lb.9 and 11.000 01 Heavy Tucks' 8299 -2272 451 -120 -516 obeervyr Hegm(An.. Pad): 11.000 01 (InmM9efed Nnhu LeWla(wX tTOpoandbor aH uatl.n) go red Lane Equivalent Dhhna(in feel Road Eadmiarr: 90 het (InmM9efed Nn.. L.. hadamuf TOpn and be//hr thermal Left Yraw.- -90o dearaes N:drum Tricky: 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: VenideType Laq Pork Imaill Leg Gay I leq EVwrvrg I IMNight Ldn Ticiall I Dlyfeader CNEL VenrrJeTypu Lithioncell Lag only I Ld EVmrmg Lam NrgM I Lan I it Au(nc' 613 594 57.6 516 1 603 60.8 Arline 598 579 %.1 50.1 BOB 68.7 51 Medium Trucks: 552 55] 47.4 430 561 513 545 Medium Tracks: 53.7 523 45.9 44.3 55.5 526 530 Heavy TUke: 566 55.1 461 473 61 Si 55.8 Heavy Trucks: 55.1 SOS 446 45.9 6317 54.2 513 VahMe Name: 63.3 6115 583 531 672 62.2 627 Vehrde Name: 618 111 568 52.2 66.5 1 612 Cenhdim DMe nmroN C Ww(inht) 70.9 Counteroffer Chiral he Nase Carl Of Ml cnlwiind D/emnn ro Nan 6bnrour(in het Counteroffer Mme (Nase Carl pn Ml Militia I Oil I &dBA I SSd84 1 55 tlBA I MtlBA Oil I WdI I SSd84 Ltln: 39 96 141 253 394 1176 Ltln: 24 52 112 rom 242 Cli 33 70 151 272 326 1,261 CNEL 26 56 120 246 259 Taedam aeo..IDn Sidereal Year 2016 WiNool Project Road Name: NNCPC Rudd Name: MacaiNUr -120 4,87 Job NUmeim 8211 Read Segment NoM of SOMh Canyon Centel SM SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9nwey Dda Hl9nwey Defy SSe Ceara im a teder- 0, l drilli Average Dally TraWs(Atll: III vehidea Auks 15 Peek Hour Pomsdaga: 10% Mecum Truck4(2Aiha).- 15 Peak HOm Voters, 8,010 reMdes Heavy Tremor p, Aced) 15 Vehkle speed 45 .1 Vahicre We Neaartior any andrace.' 76 feel Vehrell I Day Evanrrq fill I Deily Sit. Dart VehkKTyge I Day Every, Night Dsly Auhs: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barterreat 0.0 Oil BamerType(DWall, I Berm): Bo Heavy Tracks: S6.5% 27% 108% 074% Cemmmy Dart ro Bantam 1Lb.9 and NadeSel GYaatlond he hap ( enremrre Did to observe: 100.0 fart Army, I Wd Balmer Drsrenre to obeervem 0.0 red Written rucks: 400) obeervyr Hegm(An.. Pad): 50 red Hwvy, Today 8008 -man Adjudmen[00 Pad Ekvaflon: go red Lane Equivalent Dhhna(in feel Road Eadmiarr: 90 het Aube: 92547 Roetl Greek 00% Left Yraw.- -90o dearaes N:drum Tricky: 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: 90.0 regime Heavy mesa' 92547 (i1WA All NoWI eandila6ws (i1WA NWU MOWI ed-la3oas Vealde Type I S. I Ticiall I Dlyfeader I Finally Read I F/esn& I. Men I Berm A. Theadmaro.'a n Smarm, Year 2015 W ithoul Project tr j6cf Nume: NNCPC Road Name: Macaithur -120 4,87 Joh Numeim 8211 Road Segment' South d Bonita Centel Arms: SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9nwey Defy -120 4,87 .0 COndaimme(adeff- I Soff =13) AvedWDeily TraWs(Atll: 89.100 vehldea Auks 15 Peek HOUrPomsdsge: 10% Mecum Trvok4(2Aikd.- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 6,910 veMde4 Heavy Theory 0, Pales): 15 Vehkle speed 45 .1 Vahicre We Nadvocirlane Drdaacce, 76 het VehkKTyge I Day Every, Night Dsly Sit. Dart 0. Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Toment 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter HelpllL 0.0 M1 Bilmr,lype Orri, I Berm): 00 Heavy Tucks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CerRenine Dirt ro Bemem cenrehe Led, in ohcervar: iLb.9 and 100.0 feet Nade3ourm LYeaelbnyfln Gxp Anne' 0 M. Barnet Oman. In Druarvem 0.0 red Medium rvrky: 4000 Deserver Heghf(An.. Pee): 59 red Had, Thane 8,005 Grydeaqudmeml[ 90 Pad Emoccn: Oo real Lane E9uhalenlDktma(In feel Road Sander, 99 reel Said, 92547 Roetl.. 00% L.8 Yraw.- -90o degrees Madlum. 92504 Fred Vrew: 90.0 degrees HmVTmmmo 92547 (i1WA NWU MOWI ed-la3oas Leg Nrgm Vealde Type I S. I TmR Few I Dlsfendd I Fkke ROad Freerrel I.Mah Berm A. Arms: (1 7.10 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 0:000 Arms: 68.46 P" 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 OOD Maalum Tmnks: 7945 -1914 -4,11 -120 1L7 0Lid 9003 deal Tmnks: 7945 - 1979 -4,11 -120 Ithr 9099 0. Heavy Treal KOS -1409 -4.11 -150 -516 IlOW 0OD3 Heavy Tradi KOS -1475 -4.11 -150 -516 01 POI Unndtlgdied Nmdn L., N (wllhouf TOpn and bmaw. dlNnueilod) Unndtlgnfed Nm.n Leader (wMouf Total andhaMxaILMWDOn) VaNde Type Leq Peek HOm Lear Day laq EVenmg Leg Nrgm LM BNEL V�Nde Type Lei Park oma Led Day lag Eyeal. Leq Nrgm LM BNEL Aubs; 702 683 1 695 61 69.8 Arms; 696 67.7 BOB 599 61f.5 69.1 Metlium Tracks: 610 US 561 54H 63.0 83.3 Mecum Tracks: 833 61.8 55.5 539 624 828 Heavy Trucks' 648 634 61 566 fell 61.1 H., Trucks' 61.2 626 6317 560 53.3 635 Vehkle Nose: 724 70.3 672 US 71.1 71.5 Vehkle Nose: 714 69.7 66.5 61.9 70.4 70.9 Counteroffer Chiral he Nase Carl Of Ml Counteroffer Mme (Nase Carl pn Ml IO tlBA 1 65 d8A I W I S4 1 55 tlBA 1 70 dfl4 65 d8A 00 tlB4 55 tlBA Inn: 119 253 S4fi 1176 Irm 108 rom 493 I'M CNEL: 126 272 1,261 CNEL: 114 246 SR 1.140 nrmen yae, m1s 6.1 -45 Traery.MayD.m12 SCernme, Year 2016 Withal Project Panted Name• NNCPC Road Name: Moral -130 4,87 Job Namhec 8211 Round Segment, North W San Joaquin Hills 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1Way Oala 4.11 91b Cmtl ns foll 10. Soft= 15) Avernga Dart Ta ?c (Al 68.100 veM1ides An. 15 PaakHwr Pa/senmge, 10% MWWm TmMS a Sales). 15 Peak I V.I.-... 6,810 veM1ides Heavy Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 Van. Saint 45 mpn Whkle We Near/Fa/lane 0isfance: 76 het yencia a I Day Everniall Night I Deily Site Care Sale WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Madman Trunks: 34.6% 48% 103% 194% BadayNatant 0.0 hM Banter Type l0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% CenRniM Del 10 Bamal 100.0 het Nd9a Somme Elavatbne (In /eeff Confnce Dist to Obw/vec 10U6 fed ANDS, 2000 Berner Disrenre m Obmrver: go red Marcum rrvrka: 4.000 Gdsarver Hagnf(Above Ped): 5o had HaryTrvcka 8008 Grade �dm 00 Patl Emichen: 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane Equivalent DHhnre(nFired Road Elevation. Oo arm ANUS: 92.547 Road Gade: 00% Left View: -900 deal Menium 1. 92504 Rghl View: W 0 dogmas Havy Trvcke: 92547 NiwA St Monet cehuletiwrs HlwaA lw Model Cdcouetimrs Valle Type I REMFl I TmT Fbw I am- I FIN. ROatl Fmsrrel I. A. I Allen actual : Year 2016 WItlh lProject maturational NNCPC Road Name: Moral -130 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Roadlegmenf: SouNnd Stu JOaquln Hllle 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nway ONe 4.11 a- CmEltloN (HUd =10, a- =15) Average Daily Tre ?s (Add: 43.400 veM1ides Ammo 15 Peak.chr Pamenlega' 10% MWlum Trucks a Steam. 15 Pal HOU. Volume: 4,340 veM1ides Her Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 Venicle fared: 45 man yehkle We Near/Far Lane Deareco: 76 het yencia a I Dry Everecall Nghl Daly Sale WU 0000 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97,12% Madman Trunks: 34.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMeIHel9ht. 0.0 IoM Banter Type rLit I Berm): 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27%. 108% 0.74% Cecamme lyel an Banter, 1CO.O het No.. Somme EMVatbne le. /eaff Comwllce DW to Dual 10I fed ANUS, 2000 Bomar Disrenre An observer: go red Marcum T.ucka: 4.000 Gcromer Veydf(Above Ped): 50 of Hemy Trvcke 8008 Grade Atlueime 90 Patl Emichen: 0.0 reel 0o.1 Lane Equivalent Clarence (in had) Road Elevation. L O tact Area 92547 Road Gade: Oo% Left View: W.O Weama MaromTyr. all al Right View: 900 dogmas HmW7ymks 92547 HlwaA lw Model Cdcouetimrs I Valle Type T REMFl I Tminc Fbw I Oismna I Feel RYad I Fmmrel I San Aan I Ream Agar ANOs; 6646 6.36 4.11 -130 4,87 JY6 Number 8211 0.000 0000 Areas ; 6646 4A2 4.11 -120 4,87 Avere9e Dally TraWc(AWQ: W.WO yeal oom OWO Merrill Trader 7945 -1.. -411 -1211 -097 Heavy Trvcks(3 + And) : 15 0000 .. Marcum Track.: 7945 -1291 -411 -1211 -097 Si. Da. 0000 OoW Heavy Track¢' 6425 -1461 -4.11 -120 -616 too.O red 100.0 fad 0,000 01 Hal Trucks' farm -1617 -4.11 -120 -516 Harry Trade: Sme GmaadIwdmenL 00 0,000 01 (InmMgefen Nnh¢LevMa(wlNrut Tapr end beniwelfMUatldnf Lane Equivalent Dla.na(in Idea Road amount, 0o.1 All 92547 (ImaMag. Nnhe LevNS(wlMmn Time and be., atNnue" -ii Wearea N:mYm Tracks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: 90.O agree VenrcJeType La Peek HYur I Leq Gay feq Evwimg LM Night I Ldn I CNEL VanrcJeTypa I Lam Peek four I LM only I feq Eneeng Leg Nigh I Lon I I Army 695 676 65.9 596 00.4 66A 690 Auloc' 67.6 all 63.0 519 ma WS 61.1 Medlum Trucks: 633 61.8 55A ill 53.0 all 526 Medium Trooll 613 59.8 53.5 519 52.2 604 606 Havy TUke: (A1 621 53.7 all 512 63.3 634 Henry Trucks: 623 60] 51.7 Si 00,4 61.3 61A VahMe Norse: 71A S96 all 618 (1 703 10.8 Vehicle Nowdo 69A 61,7 US 596 632 CIA 68,6 ceMedim federal . Noise Cartel (in fal all Cerement Clarence le Norse Carl Cr MQ camenim Diamnn. Haar Centel (in eel Cerement Me fie Naee Carl im MQ MdP 85 d8A I Or all 1 55 dam I al tlBA I TO dI 01 1 WSO 1 55 Wait Lon: 105 227 459 156 1053 723 Ltln: i6 106 332 136 770 CNEL 113 243 524 167 1,129 776 CNEL 64 180 3439 148 am ,damar, le, al Sronanu: Year 2016 WiNwl Project mject Norma :NNCPC Raid Name: Moral -120 4,87 JY6 Number 8211 Rao Segment NoM of Ban Miguel O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HaPeal Data 4,11 SM Crndltlrru (HVn =10, SrH =15f Avere9e Dally TraWc(AWQ: W.WO yeal An. 15 Pak Hour Poromel: 10% Marcum Trucka(2Ardial 15 Peak HOm Vrame..' 3,800 reMdea Heavy Trvcks(3 + And) : 15 vehicle speed' in .1 Vahicre We Nararoar ne Dimance, 76 fat VehkKTya I Day Earemnal Nghf I Deily Si. Da. Si. Da. Amor 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium TUnka: 34.3% 49% 103% 194% BaM¢r Hed'ad, 0.0 Ied S.am,lype grWall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Tracks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cemmimy Dirt. Bemer December Did to oberver: too.O red 100.0 fad haler. rume Fi¢¢alwn¢ Pn fial AWOa, IW0 Becom Disrena to obarver 0.0 red Marpum Tratal 4WO onarvar hi l(AD.. Pa): 50 red Harry Trade: Sme GmaadIwdmenL 00 Pad Ekve kin: 00 red 00.d Lane Equivalent Dla.na(in Idea Road amount, 0o.1 All 92547 Roar Gredk 00% Loft Via-- -ii Wearea N:mYm Tracks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: 90.O agree Hevy Tmds' 92547 F1WA al Model Llleula3rns FIWA NWU Model Lllnulahws dead. Tyra I S. I Thecall I Disfende I Field Rued I France I. Men I Reran A. Tunem. NY le. mn Scenario: Year 2015WiNwl Project Karacumne NNCPC Raid Name: filmemor -120 4,87 JY6 NUmnec 8211 Rao Segment' Scam N Ban Migud O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Ht9nwey DMS 4,11 SNa Conch­ (Ha/n =fa Soff =15) Ateagl Daily The Kc(A4. 32.4W veMldea Autos 15 Pak Hw/Pomsmsge: 10% Marcum TrvCka(2Aial 15 Peak HOU /Volumes' 3,240 imiall Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles): 15 vehicle speed' 45 .1 Vehicle We Neckar one Dimance, 76 tat VehkKTya I Day Evening Niger Daily Si. Da. OOW Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trunks: 34.3% 49% 103% 194% BaM¢r Height 0.0 MI Small grill I Be-): 00 Heavy Tracks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CeNenine Dirt fa Sal cenrema Did. to oharva/: Lg i.9 dad 100.0 fed Nrls. soumerdevelbne pn fxp Adoa' 2000 Belmar Oman. to obrerver 0.0 red Marcum Tratal 4000 rea l(AD.. Pa): 59 red Hwvy, Trade: BWB G/aaaqudmerr[00 Pad Ekvarch. 00.d face EquhalentDlarena(Infa) Road Emommn: OO heel Admit 92547 Romd Grade: 00% Left Via-- -00,0 meshes Madman. 92504 Right Vrew: Sohn degree HevyTwts' 92547 FIWA NWU Model Lllnulahws Leg Evening maid. Tyra I S. I TmPWFbw I Dislena I Flnile Road Fina/rel De/re/Atlen Re/m A. ANw: 68,46 304 4,11 -120 4,87 am) O:WO Arms 6646 3.15 4,11 -120 4,87 am) 0.000 Mamm TYmke: 7945 - 1330 -4,11 -120 1 gT 0000 9003 Mamm TYmke: 7945 - 1403 -4,11 -120 /ray OOW 0003 Heavy Thal 8435 -1726 -4.11 -120 -516 .0000 O003 Heavy TY2ka: 8435 -1804 -4.11 -120 -516 01 O003 UnMtlgneetl NOlae LeeNe (wlPauf Trpr add..rd9aYMbnf UnMtlgefed NOlae Linaugemord Tapsendhmrearl etlrn) mmarlype Leg Paa HOU La Gay Leg Evening Leg Nigh! La CNEL VaideType Leg Park HO. Leq Gey feq Evening Led Night La CNEL Arrom 61.1 652 00.4 57A 00.0 666 Arms; 66.3 64.4 ma 565 652 me Metlium Tracks: 006 593 53.0 51A 599 m Metlium Tracks: 60.1 58.5 52.2 all 591 59.3 Heavy Trucks' 617 LOS 512 525 mB 61 Her, Tracks' 00.9 59.5 00,4 511 mo 003 Vatican Nola: 689 67.2 (1 593 67.9 663 VehkJa Nola: 68.1 all 632 all 67.1 all Cerement Clarence le Norse Carl Cr MQ Cerement Me fie Naee Carl im MQ 701 01 1 W tl89 I al tlBA 1 70Wfl4 01 W da4 55 tlBA Ldn: 72 156 mar 723 Ldn: 64 136 299 341 CNEL: 78 167 300 776 CNEL: 69 148 319 am crane,, ceyae, m1a 4� Naeey.May2em1a SCerralro: Year 2016 Without Project mired Name• NNCPC Rural Name: MaaMur Job Number 8211 Job NUmhec 8211 Round Segment, Nol of Coast Highway 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oala 4,39 $Ire CmdMOns (lland=l0. Soft= 15) Average Daily Tra ?2 (ai 32590 -hid.. Ammar 15 PaakHwrtsmsklsga 10% MWIom Tral(2 Astal 15 PeaF Hour Volurrre.' $250 -hid.. Heavy TCka(3k Seard): 15 Vehicle garkd: 45 mpd Vanishe W. I ... ocilLsom Downturn 76 het yebkbTypa I Day IEVbVl loghl I Defy N. MU I to WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 AledWm Trucks: 94.6% 48% 193% 194% Barter Haight 9.0 rd, Ranier Typa l0.Wall, I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 2] %. 108% 0.74% Cmchkmaa Carl 10 Sams, 1.. het Nalsa Somme Eleve gnns(In seeff Comwlkre Dist to Gbwrvec 1LU6 fed ANDS 2000 Realer D;Man -m Obmrvar: go red Marcum Trucks: 4.000 Gesumar real (A.. Pee): 5o fast HearyTrvcka 8,005 Grade AHudment 90 Patl Ehvdion: 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane Equhvahnt Dlstanre(n Rat) Road Ebverma. 901eN ANOs: 92.59] Rued.. 0.0% Left View: -900 degrees Metlium Tda 92504 ligbl Viaw: W 0 degrees Heavy Tracks: 92547 NiWA. Sander Cekuletamer fHWA All .1.1 LaludeHmm Vend.Type I REMF1 I TmT Frew I am- I FINIe Road I Fmsnel I. A. I Allen SCerralro: Teer2016WItlbol Project monasticism, NNCPC Road Name: Fa5161uffIFor6lBOnM Gin Job Number 8211 Roads.'sua f: WearliNimomes 0.000 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dal 4,39 Na CmEltloN (Hard =10, sing =It) Average Deily Tre ?c (aridd 15,300 vehides Aulas' 15 Paak HOUr Pemenlal 10% Name. Trucks (2 Assam. 15 Peak Hour Vaimas: 1.530 vehides Heavy Trucks, thermal 15 Vehicle Speed: as area yerykre W. I ... o ar Lane Dishnce: 52 het yehkbTyps I Dry Evarkn9l loghf Deity I to WU 9090 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9TA2% eadWm Trucks: 99.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMer Height 0.9 fed, Ranier Typa l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 111.8% 0.74% C.". Call. Sams, 1.. het Nd.. Somme EMVatbns le. seeff Consider I to Observer hal fed ANDS, 2000 Realer Oi a- to OGrerver: 0o red Marcum Trucks: 4.000 Gdamer Hemhf(A.. Ped): 5o fuel Henry Trvcka 8,006 Grade AtWment 90 Fatl Ehvdion: 0.0 reel Road Estacado,: Lana Equlvalent Dhted.(in All Road Ebvffiiort L O last ANOs: 911607 Rued Grade: Oo% Left View: 910 degrees McNursT cks 96566 Right Viaw: 900 degrees Heavy Turman III fHWA All .1.1 LaludeHmm TmPW Frew I Damoce Venide Type T REMEL I TmlhcF w I Diwddm I FONh Rind I Fmsrrel I BarlierAtten I Ream AOan Aubs; 6646 3.1] 4.11 -120 4,87 Roao Sagmont East of JamMm 0.000 0.000 Au 6646 -0.10 4,39 -120 4,87 12.200 serious o.OW P.M MBruum Trucks: 7945 -140] -411 -1211 -097 Heavy Trades (3 +Ashes): 15 . W 9000 MBruum Trans. : 7945 -1134 -439 -1 tis -097 9090 9000 Heavy Tracks 81 -1603 -4.11 -120 -516 I.. red 11.000 01 Henry Trucks' 81 1130 439 -120 -516 oeservdr ,at (AD.. Pod): 11.000 01 WmM9efed Nnhu LeWla (wlNmul TOPa and broker attenuation) 0.0 red Lan.Eq.&al ID&.-Oaf5e4 Road Estacado,: 9o.1 WmM9efed Nn.. L.v.b (wllhmrt TOpn and be., Left Viaw.- -90.0 aegRes rectum Times: 09 sea Rgbf Vrew: VenlrJeType Laq Pork Hall L.q Gay I Leq EVwrvrg I IMNlgM Ldn TmPW Frew I Damoce CNEL creaskillas I Lam Peak moo I Leq O.y I Ieq EVwtirng Leq Asi9M I Lon I CNEL Au(nc' 663 "A 626 WA 59.1 612 65.8 Auloc' 628 60.9 59.1 Si 59.3 61.] 13 Metllum Trucks: 861 full 522 W.7 55.5 51 59] 59.3 Medlum Trucks: 56.5 5:0 4816 47.1 v3.4 NA 55.0 Hoary Tmake: 609 51 50.5 512 564 510 60.1 612 How,Tmor 57.4 0.9 419 462 54.3 565 566 Vanda N.: 68.1 w'4 633 50.6 636 61.9. 67.1 67.6 Vehide Nose: GA6 629 597 560 61.3 63.6 Ill Cmdkgus Ideal ro Musa COnrour(in Ted) 520 III Ca ftdi u Clarence as NOiau Cartel Cn MU CanlMim DM. nn ro Noiaa Cancer (in Tee4 Ca ftdi u Wdhnn as NOiau Cartel Cn Mtj 70 dBA I 65 dRA I WSEA I SS dB4 dVdS4 I I 70 dI 0dRA I WSM I SS dB4 50 tlBA Ltln: 63 139 299 32 643 149 Ltln: 37 60 173 29 373 135 CNEL: fig 149 320 34 690 150 CNEL 40 86 IN 31 400 'rear. NY ta, IDn I all, Scenario, Year 2016 Without Project mjOd Name :NNCPC Road Name: EastrafffloadficntW Cyn Jam Number 8211 Roao Sagmont East of JamMm Oo00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Uata -1]0 SM COndltloru (HW =f0, SoH= f5) Average Daily TraWs(Add. 12.200 serious Autos 15 Peak Hour Historical to% McNUm Trucks (2 Aided: 15 Peak Him, loans, 1,220 rerldeu Heavy Trades (3 +Ashes): 15 .law speed' a5.1 Vahicre W. Naskoccu ane Dimmuse, 52 feel VehkKTyOe I Day Essal We I Deily Site Dean Autos: 77.594 12.9% 96% g/.42% fularmm Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Sederrdon 0.0 feet Beme,lypa(OWdl, f- Bermf: 6o tear,Trucks: fell 27% 168% 074% Cerdadim Dirt. BOmer I.. red (Iola. soume(9e -e .Pn.1) cenremare I m obsarvd: 100.0 fad AWnd, 2000 BOmer Diaccal Is observer, 0.0 red Morpum rvaks: 4.000 oeservdr ,at (AD.. Pod): 50 red Heavy Trucks: 6008' Gorda 'Intermark a Pad Ekra con: 0.0 red Lan.Eq.&al ID&.-Oaf5e4 Road Estacado,: 9o.1 Auks: 911607 Road Greek 60% Left Viaw.- -90.0 aegRes rectum Times: 09 sea Rgbf Vrew: 0o .o degrem Heavy Tends 96608 (i1WA All Mandel Llkufa3wd Ieq Evening. drumn.Type I S. I TmPW Frew I Damoce I Finds Rued I Fmdn& Rerner Me, Berm A. Tunes, NY or. mt2 Scenario, Year NEWiNoul Project Rosa NUma :NNCPC Road Name: EastrafffloadficntW Clio Jam Number 8211 Road Segment' West of Ronda Canyon Oo00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Us. -1]0 .0 COndltloru gland =f0, SoH= f5) Aveage Daily Tire Ks(A4. 10.600 rer1oea Autos: 15 Peak HwrPomsMOge: to% McNUm TrvCk4(2Ausill 15 Peak HOUr Vdumn' 1,060 vehides Heavy Trades 0, Ashes): 15 Vehlde speed' an .1 Vahicre W. NaadFariane Dimmuse, 52 het VehkKType I Day Evenirq Night Daily Site Dana Autos: 77.594 12.9% 86% ill sucarmm Trucks 99.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.01 SamarType (0.Wa1L I Be-): Bo Hic uy Trucks: fell 2.7% 168% 074% Cerdenlne Dirt ro Samar I.. red Void. soumardevdbn. pun fxp cenremare Did,, to ohmrvaa: 1006 tort Amok' 2000 Bonier Oman. to Obrervar 0.3 red Medium Taks: 4.000 UBServer ,at (AD.. km) 59 fad Hal Trucks: 6006' Grade Adfudmeat 90 Pad Ekvatlon: oo red Lane EquhalenlDkbnnedn(ref) Road Estacado, 90 heel Amts: 98607 Ross Grade: 60% Left Vraw.- -90.0 degrees Madmen T.a: 9.563 Right Vrew: ast degrees HeavyTwts' 96608 (i1WA NWU Model L1Rulahona Ieq Evening. Vehld.Type I S. I TmPWFbw I D..- I Fiirilu Road Fmkard I.Mea Beam A. Arms: 6SA6 -1.09 439 -120 4,87 Oo00 0:000 Arms: 6646 -1]0 4,39 -120 4,87 Oo00 0.000 MaSUm TCks: 7945 -1633 -439 -129 -097 9009 9003 MaSUm TCks: 7945 -1694 -439 -129 -0g7 9009 0. Heavy Trul Kill 1228 -439 -120 -516 OLOGG 603 Heavy Trv2ka Kill 1288 -439 -120 -516 0.000 603 UnMtlg0tetl Nolan LerW ces.ut TOpn and Is.aNMUdbn) UnMtlgnted Nolan Lernld(wMaut TapnandhaMxa .U.n) VenideTyne Leq Paak Hour La, Gay Ieq Evening. Leq fight Low CNEL VenideType Leq Paakloar LM Gay Ieq Evening Laq NlgM LM CNEL Auks; 616 59,9 59.1 52.1 602 61.3 Auks; 612 59.3 525 51A 601 60) Medium Trucks: 55.5 51 47.7 46.1 546 54.8 Msdium Trucks: SIP v3.4 47.1 45.5 1 542 Heavy Trucks' 564 510 45.9 472 INS 66] H., Trcks' 55.8 54.3 45.3 466 54.9 55.0 VehkJS Noise: 636 61.9. ful 51 62.6 63.0 VehkJS Noise: 1 61.3 56.1 53.4 520 III Ca ftdi u Clarence as NOiau Cartel Cn MU Ca ftdi u Wdhnn as NOiau Cartel Cn Mtj TO all 0dBA I dVdS4 I 55dBA 1 70 di 65tlO 50 tlBA 55 tlBA Ids: 32 99 149 320 Iran: 29 e3 135 292 CNEL: 34 74 150 344 CNEL: 31 67 10.5 313 marks, Wri M12 6.1 -47 Naeey.Mayaemis SCarkerso: Teer2016WMOOl Project Pikno Name• NNCPC RoaOName: East61ufflFOr6lBOnira Cyn Job NUmnec 8211 Rood Silliness, East of Bonita Car Rh P5e9menf: WesloTJamoores SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HI9M1way Gala NOISE MODEL INPUTS SIb Cmtl ns(Hard=10. Soft= 15) Avernga Daily Traffic (l 39.300 veoidea A.. is PeekHwr Percenlaga, 10% MWWm TOldrs(2 rusill 15 Peak HO.. Vdssurso 3,930 veoides Heavy To. P, Axles): 15 vanish Speed: 4s mpn Venkle We Ne..ocer Lane Distance: 52 feet yebkbTypa I Day EveMrq Nghl I Deily &Ts, MU &te WU Auks: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Turks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9llt 0.0 kM Sandier Typa rLIVI I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% C hualha DISL In Sal 1.. het Naga Sumads, valbns(In saeff Carder Dist k Obreal IWL fed Aides, 2000 Berner Disrenre m oberve.: 09 red k4amum Trurks: 4.Wo observer hegn!(A.. Ped): on reel HesryTrvcka 8,006 GradeA krearnt 90 Pad Ehvation: 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane Equivalent Clarenre(n feel Road Elevation: 90 IeN ANDS: 98607 Road Gretle: 0.0% Left View: -980 degrees War -Tucks 56596 RI View: W 0 degrees Heavy Trucks 96606 Niwe . Model Cakuletiww Hlwa xrlw Model Calculations. Venue Type I REMF1 I TmT Flew I OisGnra I FONh Road I Fresnd oerrer Attend Remr A!!en Statement Tear 2016 WIYbol Project Pigod Name• NNCPC Read Name:@al Joaquin Hills Job Number, 8211 Rh P5e9menf: WesloTJamoores 0.000 Areas SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBnway Ds to -120 4,87 Sib Cmreful (HUdv 10. a- =15) Assets Daily Total (Add): 5.000 veoidea Aulas' 15 Peek HOUr Percenlaga,' 10% MWlum Trucks (2 Ax %sf: 15 Peak HO.. VOlurrre.' 500 veoides Heavy Tmnks(3k Axles): 15 vesicle Speed: 4s mpn yehkle We NeadFar Lane Distanm.' 76 het yebkbTyps I Dry Encenti Nlanf Deity &te WU 9099 Auks: 77.5% 12.9% 96% fill Medum Tucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BandeIHa91R 0.9 kM Sandier Typa rLIVI I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 188% 0.74% CanRniha Dul la Sandler, 1.. het No.. SwFe EMVatbns an sal Carder Dias to Observer IWL fed Ades, 2000 Settler Disrenre to observe.: 09 red Mamoru Trurks: 4.Wo Gdsarvar hall (A.. Ped): on reel Hel Trvcka 8,006 Grade AtWment 90 Pad Ehvation: 0.0 reel Road Encrust,: Lads Equlaent Clarence (in feel Road Elevation. L lset Assets: 92 5L7 Road Gretle: 09% Left View: Poll degrees McNUmi de 91 ful Right View: 900 degrees Heavy Trucks, 9254] Hlwa xrlw Model Calculations. I TmPW Flew I pefente CNEL V&lide Type T REMEL I Trains Fbw I Oishnca I FONIe RY.d I Fresrrel I BanrerAtten I Lan, AOan Aubs; 6646 3.99 4,39 420 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.000 0.000 Areas 6646 J96 4:11 -120 4,87 Average Dally Takes oll O.OW 0.033 dearderm Trucks: 7945 -1325 -439 -1211 -097 2020 veoides . W 9003 deal Trucks: 7945 -2220 -411 - 120 -097 Bih Due 9099 of. Heavy Truck¢' fil -1720 439 -120 -516 Cerdanlrre Dirt to Broker cendal Did on obaarvd: 11.000 01 Heavy Trucks' fil -26.16 4.11 -120 -516 50 red 11.000 01 WmHgefed Nphe LevMa (wllbruf Tape end border teachelbn) D.OW Lane Equivalent Dhtrnce(in feel Road Encrust,: 9o.1 WmHgefed Nph. Le. (wlldm 1Til end benler ettenuetlon) Left Vraw,- -90.0 degrees N:dnum Trucks: 112.504 Rgbf Vrew: VenlrJeType Leq Peek Haul Last say I Ieq Evening I IMNigN Ldn I TmPW Flew I pefente CNEL Laq Thy I Lae Peak tsar I Leg say I Leq EVmlirg Lee Nigh I Lost I CNEL Au(nc' 6G.9 65.0 632 51 LM 61 664 Auloc' 562 56.3 54.5 465 511 5]] deal Trucks: 686 59.1 52] 512 55.2 597 59.9 Medium Trucks: 519 WA 441 425 a5 51,0 512 Heavy TUke: 616 (1 51.0 522 Win 606 601 Heavy Tracks: 52.8 514 423 4d6 "A EA 52.1 VehMe Nrde: 1 67,0 636 00.1 5811 67.7 66.1 Venide NOSe: 600 00.3 55.1 WA LIA 59D 59A Central Ideal is Noire Conte r (in Ted) ( 1 65.5 Val NUSe: 668 65.0 Can ear olebnn at Noire COnkur (in Tee4 572 (1 66.2 Ce ftdine Diesel ro Nase COnkur Cn MU TO III 1 65 tl6A I SO dSA I WdB4 I TO 111 0dSA I WdBor I WdB4 65 oW I Lou : 10 151 320 F. 70 di 65 tlBA Ltln: 19 40 as Ids 47 CNEL 75 162 348 ]W 1dn: 52 CNEL 30 43 92 198 ,k ed. Her ..IDs Sronado: Year 2016 WiNwl Project Pi jest Nama: NNCPC Road Name: Ban Juseuin Hills Job Number 8211 Road Sagmeat East W JamMree 090) SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mahoney DMa 1.80 SN¢COenalkeu(reed-n SoH=15) Average Dally Takes oll 20.300 strides Auks: 15 Peek HOUrPonsMaga: to% Meel Trucks (2 Axka).: 15 Peak He, Vast 2020 veoides Heavy Threats p, Axles): 15 Venkle speed' 45 mpd Which, We NeadFarLane Dincessen 76 feel VahkisTyOe I Day Eveniag We I Deily Bih Due -120 /r.97 Auros: TT. 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trunks: 94.9% 49% 103% 194% @aM¢r He1pXG' 0.0 feel BamerType(OWai 1- Berm): ob Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% Cerdanlrre Dirt to Broker cendal Did on obaarvd: I.. red Im.0 feel Glelsesourne Fi -v .On fell Act 2000 Samar Death e Is Obas er 0.0 red Medium rucks: 4.000 observer Heat horove Pad): 50 red Heavy Trucks 8000 GredeaC.udmenc 90 Pad Ekvedon: 00 red D.OW Lane Equivalent Dhtrnce(in feel Road Encrust,: 9o.1 All 92547 Roetl.. L0% Left Vraw,- -90.0 degrees N:dnum Trucks: 112.504 Rgbf Vrew: an. de9rem Heavy Toads' 92547 (i1WA Ndu Model Caleaahons Venlde Type I fe. I TmPW Flew I pefente I Finks Rued I Finance Berner Me, Berm A. Tunery. NY ts. mn Sronado: Year 2015 W iNwl Project Pi jest Numa: NNCPC Read Name: Ban Joaquin Hills Job Number 8211 Road Sagmeal West of Sank Cma 090) SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mahoney Dress 1.80 .0 COndler-(N. -I SoH =15) Average Ddiy ThsXk(A4. 23.700 VeMdea Auks: 15 Peek HwrPonsMSge: to% Meaum Trvoka(2slosel- 15 Peak HOm Volume' 2,370 scroll Heavy Threats 0, Assts): 15 Venkh speed' 45 mpd Which, MM NoadFariane Dinance.' 76 feel VehkisType I Day Evenihe real Daly Sih Desk -120 /r.97 At. TT. 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trunks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Height 0.0 M1 Sam9r7ype(0.WdL I Berm): Oo Heavy Traaks: 66.5% 2.7% 108% 074% Cddenlne Dirt. Sarl cenreh, Did. b obcervar: I.. had 1W.G hM Nromeal a farreurcer a Gxp A tad 2000 Belmar Duress In observer, 0.0 red handful rucks: 4.000 Observer Hral horove Pod): 59 tad Hwvy Trucks: ItmG Grsdeagudment 90 Pad Ekvadon: 00 red D.OW fare EquhalenlDktmce(InfeeQ Road Earthen, of reel Aube: 92547 Ross Grade: L0% Left Vram- -90.0 discover Madmm. .1504 Rghl Vrew: 9o.o degrees HeactTwts' 92547 (i1WA NWU Model G11nu79hona Venid.Type I fe. I TmR Fbw I Dldende I Finds Road Frasrlel I.Man Berm A. Aufus: ill 1.12 4,11 -120 4,87 090) O:WO Aube: 68.46 1.80 4,11 -120 4,87 0900 0.000 MsSYm Trucks: 7945 - 1611 -4,11 -120 -097 9009 9003 McSYm Trucks: 7945 - 1544 -4,11 -120 /r.97 9000 0. Heavy Trv2ka 81 -209] -4.11 -120 -516 0,000 Pm Heavy Truk, 81 -19-40 -4.11 -120 -516 D.OW 0900 WMtlgnfetl Nasn LeVW (wlPauf TYpn andheMxaMnYdbnf UnMtlgnfetl Nasn LeVef. (wMauf Tapn endhaMx alLMYetl.nf VatldeType Leq Parkiese Laq Thy Ieq LAring. Lean Night Lon CNEL rue slype Leq Peak HOUr Laq Ony Ieq Evening Led Mind LM CNEL Areas ; 64.3 62A S16 54fi 63.2 63.8 Auks; 649 11 &0 613 55.2 53.8 64.5 Medium Trucks: 580 58.5 W.2 a5 57.1 57.3 Medium Trucks: 587 57.2 Win 49.3 5].] 51 Heavy Trucks' 569 514 "A 497 68.0 fill Heay Trucks' 59.5 5811 49.1 503 68.7 58.8 Val Notes; 66.1 LIA 61.2 Ts,S ( 1 65.5 Val NUSe: 668 65.0 61.9 572 (1 66.2 Ce ftdine Diesel ro Nase COnkur Cn MU Committees Wdrnn ro Nase COnkur Cn MO 70 di 1 65 oW I Will I 55of 1 70 di 65 tlBA 60 dBA 55 tlBA Ide: 47 101 216 470 1dn: 52 112 242 521 CNEL: W 109 234 504 CNEL: % 120 259 559 nimen, Wyse, m1s i5 .l Tmeey. Wy eir1li Scwrark, Tesr2016WMOUtorojecl mired Namy NNCPC Freshmen San Joaquin Hills Joe NUmher 8211 Read Segment, East of Santa Can, 0.090 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9eway Gala CAC SIb Cmtl ns(Hard= 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Trial (Atl!): 14.900 veM1idea Auras: is PaekHwr Persarrial to% MWlum Prool D Axial 15 Peak Hour Vaume.. 1.490 veM1idea Heavy'hades Sr trains): is vehicle Steel 4s moral Vankle We N ... ocarLarre Oiausers: 76 het yahkbTypa I Day Evenng Ni I Daily &Ten Car -411 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Si AledWm Tmcks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BMIeIHalght 0.0 hM Ranier Types lOWall, f- Benny: 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% CanRniM Die In Sal ILL. het Net.. Somme Eleven gnns(In seed Comer Dist b Deal 1006 fed ANOS, 2000 Beret Damosa m obmrvar: 09 real Marcum Trvrka: 4m0 deserver hegd!(Aeove Ped): 5e, fast HeavyTrvcka e005 Grade AdlUNment 90 Pas Ehvaiion: 0.0 reel 0.003 Lane Equlvalenl DHhnre(n lsat) Road EbveNOn: 90 IeN ANOS: 92.54] Road Grade: 60% Left View: -900 degrees Mdtllum Tmcks 92504 Rgbl View: W 0 degrees Hary Tmcks: 92547 Phase A lee Model cak'metimw VenlrJeType Laq Peak tour I VatldPType I REM¢ I TmT Few I am- I Fern. ROatl Forman .surer A. Remr A!!en Scwrark, year 2016 WWbul Project mired Name• NNCPC onetime, San Jwquin Hills Joe Number 8211 Read Segment, West of Santa Rena 0.090 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9lial Ds to CAC Sib CmdldnN (Hard -10. a- =15) Assuager Daily Tre?s(Atl!): 17,200 veM1idea Aides' 15 PreliksrPeessoca a' to% MsOlum Trucke D Ax %s): 15 Peak Hour Vs.— 1.720 veM1idea Heavy Times Pk Axles): 15 -ankle Small: 4s moral Vprykls We N...ol Lane Dishncm 76 het yabkbTyps I Dry JEh)c91 Nlahf Deity &Ie WU -411 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% AledWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% Brander Height. 0.911. Ranier Typa (OWaq I Berm): 60 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% Caemse Dal 1a SaMer 1.. het No.. Somme EMVatbne an seeff Comer Dart to Dorsal 100.0 fed ANOS, 2000 Samar Disrenre on oGrerver: 09 real Marcum Trvrks: 4m0 ..server enter holove Pell: 5e, at Henry Trvcka 8,006 Grails Arlusiment 90 Pas Ehvaiion: 0.0 reel 0.003 Lass Equivalent Clarence (in fiscal Road gravel L last Auras: 92547 Road Grade: 06% Left View: 9O0 degrees McNUm Trustee ' 91 ful Right View: Soo de,- Henry Trvcke 9250 HIwa Al lw Model cmudatimv VenlrJeType Laq Peak tour I V&IIdPTyme T REM¢ I Tmlhc Fbw I Oismnve I Term Road I Francis I Senn Att Bean A!!an Arabs; 6646 -0.32 4.11 -130 4,87 Road Segment East of Senn Rom 0.090 0000 Arabs; 6346 CAC 4:11 -120 4,87 22.800 yeal .0.300 O.WO Maum Trucks : 7945 -1148 -411 -1211 -097 vehlde speed . W 9003 Maum Tmcks: 7945 -1893 -411 - 120 -097 moral 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% 9990 OOW Henry Tmck¢' all 21AI -4.11 -120 -516 AWna, 2000 0,000 01 Hay, Trucks' 8425 -2379 411 -120 -516 00 reel 0,000 0.003 WmM9efed NOha LevNa(wgarm, Tape, and be. tlents n) All 92547 Rostl.. OD% Lift Vrew,- -90.0 aeghes (InmMgated NOha Larae hundred Tope, and barker Named" 90 .o danfea Hary Tmons' 9250 F1WA Ndu Model Llbulathas La Lvamng. VenlrJeType Laq Peak tour I Les, Day feq EVwrvrg Leq Night I Lost I CN¢ steteJ@1she I Lae Peak rear I LM Lry I fegtcarag Lee Nigh I Lan I CN¢ Au(nc' 629 61.0 59.3 532 649 INS 62A Auloc' 636 61.7 59.9 538 58.5 57.0 III 63a deal Trucks : 567 Si 48:8 473 57,2 557 58.0 Medium Tmcks; 57,3 558 49A 4T9 48.9 IF $86 Heavy TUke: 57.5 W.1 47.1 433 49.0 567 55.8 Heavy Tmcks: 58.1 N.7 47.7 48.9 57.0 57.3 574 Venture Nose: I 63.8 599 55.2 572 0.7 642 Vehide NOSe: 85A IDS SOS 55.8 &.4 1 Can sal Ideal la NOia Centel (in feet) Can ding" olebnn at Nan COnbur (in TeeN 70 tlfl4 0dBA 1 60 d89 1 55 tlBA 1 TO aBa 65 dSA 1 60 d@A I WdB4 Ile: I TO dBA 65dSA 1 6e, ISO I WdB4 Inn: Ltln 38 82 ITT 518 382 CNEL: 54 L. A2 S1 195 421 CNEL: 56 ONEL: 41 88 193 410 CNEL 45 97 209 451 ,k ery. MY ts.IDn I all, Scenario: Year 2016 WiNwl Project Rjed Names: NNCPC Road Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Normal 8211 Road Segment East of Senn Rom 0:00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9ewey Uses 4,11 SMlsomater-(reed-gal -ii ) Average Drily Tracks of 22.800 yeal Autos 15 Peek HurPomsMaga: to% Museum Trucks (2 Asset): 15 Peak He, Polumn' 2,280 veM1ldes Heavy Threats p, Asks): its vehlde speed 4s rcpt vahicre We NaniarLane Di,Vmork 76 hurt VahkKTys. I Day Everal Nlghf I Deily Sih DaM 0000 moral 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r HdpXG' 0.01ee1 Beme,lype(OWall, I Berm): 0e, Heady Tmcks: Still 27% 108% 074% Cerdaaim Dirt to Bement cenremlre Dist as obmrvar: I.. rare) 100.0 fed Mmes. me 6everbna Pn txp AWna, 2000 Samar Death a Is Observer, 0.e, reM tgrpum rucks: 4000 Deserver ,at (An.. Pell: 50 ra. Hmvy Trvnis: 6508 Gmeeaquarmenc 90 Paid Elevation: 00 reel Lane Equivalent Civil (in Staff Road Eleveticrr: of rat All 92547 Rostl.. OD% Lift Vrew,- -90.0 aeghes N:mam TVCks: 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: 90 .o danfea Hary Tmons' 9250 F1WA Ndu Model Llbulathas La Lvamng. dereda Type I REM¢ I Tough Few I psknde I Fuels Ruled I Foam Harcer Me, Bea A. Thees, NS ter. mn Scenario: Year 2015WiNwl Project Pi jed NUma: NNCPC Fund Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Normal 8211 R,kd SagmenL' Wesl of Moarilur 0:00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey Us. 4,11 .0 COndltloru (HW =f0, Soff =13) Average Drily TraKsol 23.500 yahldea Autos: 15 Peek HwrPomsMage: to% Medum Thooka(2Aika),- 15 Peak Hey,Volary, 2,350 imoldes Heavy Threats 0, Axon): its -shots speed 4s rcpt vahicre We NadFarlane Demarom.' 76 feel VahkKType I Day Evenihe Ni Daily Sih DaM 0000 Am. 77.5)t 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trunks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Hel9hG 0.0 M1 SamerType(OWall, I Berm): 0e, Heavy Tmaks: Still 27% 108% 074% CeMemor Dirt. Seiner cenremm Chair b Obarvar: I.. hares 1009 hM Nideal gessie.bnapn Gxp Area 2900 Bernier Oman. to observer, 0.e, real Madam frocks: 4000 Deserver HegM(An.. Ped) : 59 rat Harry TrvAS: 6508' Gradeaquermer2'99 Paid gamester. 00 real Lens EquhalenlDlahna(Infreg) Road Emhart, of fees ANbs: 9250 Rostl.. 00% Left Vram- -90.0 degrees Madam. 92504 Rghl Vrew: 9o.o darees Hary17mks' 92547 PH. NWU MoWI Lllnulathas La Lvamng. Veeida Type I REM¢ I TmPw Fkw I .lahn.e I Finger Road Finarrel I.Man Bea A. Aterm (I I'M 4,11 -120 4,87 0900 0:00 Autos: 6646 176 4,11 -120 4,87 0900 9000 Meakm Tnmke: 7945 - 1561 -4,11 -129 -097 0009 9003 Meakm Tracks: 7945 - 1548 -4,11 -129 Ifor 0000 9003 Heavy Trv2ks: 81 -1857 -4.11 -120 -516 0,00 6003 Heavy TU2ks: 81 -19 1 -4.11 -120 -516 .0.00 6003 UnMtlgnted Nola LeVW (wlPaut TOpn and ears aNauNbnf UnMtlgnfed Nola Levels (w Maul Tapn andeaMxal Oon) Vesconlype Leq Parkins Leq day La Lvamng. Leg Night Lon CNEL Vetienlype Leq Park HOUr Leq.ay La Evening Led Might LM CNEL Arabs; 1 62,9 61.1 561 61 64.3 Arabs; 649 630 61.2 55.2 53.8 64A Metlium Tmcks: 58.5 57.0 50:7 49.1 575 57.8 Metlium Trucks, 567 57,2 50:8 49,2 577 579 Henry Trucks' 594 58.0 48.9 502 58.5 fill Hmy, Trucks' 59.5 581 49.0 503 687 58.8 VehkJa Neia: 666 64.9. 61.7 57.0 (1 66.0 VehkJa Neia: 667 mg 61.8 572 fS] 662 Ca ftdim Dhbn h Ni Comber Cn M(1 Ca ftdim MMus h Ali Comber im Mrj 70 tlfl4 0dBA 1 60 d89 1 55 tlBA 1 70 di 0dBA 60 d6A 55 tlBA Ile: 51 109 23fi Sol Inn: 52 112 240 518 CNEL: 54 117 253 544 CNEL: 56 120 258 555 nrmen, ceyte, m1t S S Nady.Mmckir1t Sommor, Year 2016 WMOOl Project mi act Name• NNCPC Rcad Name: San Joaquin Hills Job NUmhe, 8211 Road Segment, Easlot MacaMUr SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBbway 0ele Sat CmEltlnN (Hand -10. a- =15) SHr CmdMOns fill 10. Sl 15) Avernga Daily Than(AdQ: 21.300 veM1idee Auras: 15 Parse Hour Parcenlaya,' 10% MWlum TmMS(2 Al 15 Peak Hour V.Akhm. 2,130 -hides Heavy To. P, Sears): 15 Vehicle Bpeird: 45 mph Sent War Near/FarLeme Oiourcho: 76 het yenkbTypa I Day Eversergil Near I Daily Site Carl Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97,12% k@dWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9L42% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BeMel Height. 9.9 hM Ranier Typa l0.Was I Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 2] %. 188% 0.74% Cenemse, Disc to Sal 1CO.o het Mes¢$ -me Elava@ons (In /eeff Comwlkre Dist to Obwrvec III fed ANCS, 2000 Buller Dislenre m Obmrver: 0o red Marcum Trucks: 4.000 observer tender (A.. Ped): 5o reel HearyTrvcka e005 Grade Ad)udmene 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 feel Lane Equivalent Ohhnce (in feeQ Lane Equivalent Dlstanre(n h Q Road EbvaNOn: 90 him ANDS: 92.54] Road Grade: 80% Left View: -90.0 degieas hhtlium trucks' 92504 RI View: W 0 degrees Heavy Trvcke: 92547 NiWA Al Scan, Cakubnons VctionType T REMEL seer Type I REMF1 I TmT Fbw I OisGnca I FIN. Roatl Fmsrrel I. A. I Berm A!!en Sommor, Year2016WiNoul Project multiracial NNCPC Seashell San Clemente Job Number, 8211 Round Segment, East of Santa BaNara 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS NlBhwey Ds to -396 Sat CmEltlnN (Hand -10. a- =15) Average Daily Than (Add 5.600 veM1idea Ammo 15 PaaRHour Pemecarts, 10% MWlum Trucke D Asism. 15 Peak HO Ur VOlmhm 560 -hide. Hal Tmoke(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Speed: 40 mph Vankle Mix Near/Far Lane Dishnce: 36 het yehkbTypa I Dry Evaning Nlshl Deity Site WU Si. Da. Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97,12% k@dWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% Bartel Height. 9.9 kM Ranier Typa l0.Waq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 188% 0.74% CanRniM DI5t la Samar, 1C9.o het Nds¢ Somme EMVetbns an earl Considine Dias to Obsarver, III fed ANDS, 2000 Samar Disrenre to DGrerver: 0o red Marcum Trucks: 4.000 observer Fluor (A.. Ped): So feel Heary Trucks, 8,006 Grade ArWment 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 reel Rosa Elevation: Lane Equivalent Ohhnce (in feeQ Road EbveNOrt L O last ANOa: 96412 Road Grade: 90% Left View: 90.0 deal MaNenT cke' 95.72 Right View: W 0 degrees Heavy T.uckm MA13 HIWA Al Model C d c aletlws Ldn VctionType T REMEL I Tmlac Fbw I Oismnea I FINK Rmd Fmsres I Ban Att Berm Arian Aubs; 6646 1.33 4.11 -130 4,87 Road Segment Ward of Santa Grua 0.000 8000 Au 66.51 -396 4,51 -150 4,87 5.800 vehldea o.OW O.WO MaNUm Trucks: 7945 -1591 -411 -1211 -09] Heavy Theack p, And) 15 9000 9003 mum Trucks: Iloi -2120 -451 -1 tis -09] Si. Da. 9000 9000 Heavy Trucks 81 -1986 -4.11 -130 -516 1Lb.o red 100.0 fed 0,000 01 Heavy Trucks' 6299 15.15 451 -130 -516 HWry TNAS: SW6 Gran AdjudmenL' 90 0,000 0.003 WmHgefen NOha LevNa(wllhoul TnpoandbeMwattenuatldn) Lan.Equ.alenlO..nce OnfreQ Rosa Elevation: on .1 All 98412 Wmege ted NOha LeveH(wMmn TOpn end be., ahenuetlonf -90.0 aagrns N:dlom Toady 98.72 Rghf Vrew: 9o.o de9ren VenrcJeType Lazl Penk or Lag dr, feq Loacvig I Leg Nigh Ldn I Fuels Rued I Fmsn& I. Men I Berm A. CNEL VanicleTypa Lihi'liffilmal Leq Larry I Ieq EVmicg Last Nigh I Lou I I Army U'S 62.6 (1 54.8 533 614 641 Auloc' 568 Sig 533 47A 493 SST 56:3 Medium Trucks: 512 58.7 504 48.0 43.1 573 57.5 Medium Tracks: WE 49.3 42.9 41A 39.1 49.9 501 Heavy TUke: 59.1 57] 48.6 49.8 41.8 58.2 564 Heavy Tracks: 52.1 51 41.7 42.8 378 51.3 51A Vehkle Nose: 66.3 US 61.4 561 540 old 65.7 Verde Ndse: 588 5).1 538 49.3 500 Si 583 CanrMlm Dfall to Nan Vessel (in Teel 544 Cen.dfne Clarence ro Nase COnrour Cn MQ Can eng" Didemn ro Nan Danroar (in eal Cen.dfne Clarence ro Nase COnrour fir MQ TOdBA 1 01 1 Wail I Still 1 55 tlBA I MdBA Sol I WdBA I Still Ltln: A8 104 225 34 485 156 Ltln: 15 33 72 16 154 CNEL 62 113 241 S6 520 169 CNEL 17 36 Tl 20 US ,dam es'..IDn Sronado: Year 2016 Without Project mjed Nama :NNCPC Shod Name: San Clemente Job Normal 8211 Road Segment Ward of Santa Grua Road Segment' Weslof Jambcree SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hgnwey 0nce Hghwey Dale SM COndltloru (Hann =f0, Soft = f5f Average Daily TaWs(AtlQ: 5.800 vehldea Autos: 15 Peek Hwrkd smL,a: to% Marcum Trucks(2sional- 15 Peak HOUr Polurre..' SBO MM1Idea. Heavy Theack p, And) 15 Vehkle speed' 40 mph vanic. W. Neanlcul.me Didac s, 35 het VahkKTyge I Day Evenirq false I Deily Si. Da. Si. Da. Auras: 7.5% 12.9% 9.6% 9742% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% @aM¢r HeIOXG' 0.0 111 ScmarType(OWall, f- Berm): Bo Heauy Trucks: 56.5% 27% 111 074% (laccoin Dirt to Bamef. Consu lne Did ch Do. 1Lb.o red 100.0 fed forded. . Source 6evebboe an taep Aaoa, 2 p00 Ramer Distant. to Observer, 0.0 feel Morpum Trucks: aW) observer ,at (An.. Pad): 50 red HWry TNAS: SW6 Gran AdjudmenL' 90 Pad Ekvalion: 80 red 80 .1 Lan.Equ.alenlO..nce OnfreQ Rosa Elevation: on .1 All 98412 Rosd Grade: 80% Left Via-- -90.0 aagrns N:dlom Toady 98.72 Rghf Vrew: 9o.o de9ren Heavy Tmds 98413 F1wa al Model L11n793ons (i1WA Ndu MoWI Lllnule0wa VebldeType I S. I TmSWFbw I okfende I Fuels Rued I Fmsn& I. Men I Berm A. Tunniter'a.mt2 Scenario: Year 2016 Scoh lPsad mjkso Nama: NNCPC Shod Name: Santa Batas -130 4,87 Job Normal 8211 Road Segment' Weslof Jambcree O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hghwey Dale 4,51 .0 COndlamme (HW =i Soft = f5) Average Daily TaSs(A4. 2.300 yell Auks: 15 Peek HOUrPomsMSga: to% Mmmun Trvoka(2Aika).- 15 Peak HOUr Vdumo' 230 MM1Ides Heavy Trvcke 0, Parks) 15 Vehkle speed' 40 soon vanic. W. Neaccouriane Dimmuck 35 het Ve rsaType I Cry Eveuing Night Daily Si. Da. 0000 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 86% 9742% Medium Trucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r HelpllL 0.01¢1 Samer7yee(0 -11I 1- Berm): Bo Heavy Trudts: 56.5% 2.7% 188% 074% CeMerlln Dirt ro Semef. C¢n.is Did, ta. Obnrvar: 109.9 rBe1 100.0 tad formal goarebbe[pnfxp Auks, it M. Gamer Oman to Observer, 0.0 reel Medium Trucks: aW0 Db6erver real(An.. Pod): 591ed Hal TNAS: 8,W6 Grade Adfudment 99 Pad Ekvatlon: 80 .1 Lan¢EquhalentDk.na(In1eed Road Ekvdmor: 90 reel Auks: 98412 Rosd Grade: 80% Left Via-- -90.0 aeareea Nellom Tmuka: 98.72 Front Vrew: 9o.o degrees HeavyTwts 98413 (i1WA Ndu MoWI Lllnule0wa leg EVankg Vehkle Type I S. I TmPWFbw I Dkhnae I Fkae Road Fmsrrel I.Man Dorm A. Aubs: 6651 -331 4,51 -130 4,87 0.000 O:WO Auks: 66.51 -T82 4,51 -130 4,87 0.000 0.000 Madlum Trucks: TI.]2. -2104 AS1 -120 'g' 9000 9003 Adamson Trucks: TI.]2. -2505 -4.51 -120 /rgT 0000 9003 Heavy Trucks 821 1100 -451 -130 -516 IlOW 8003 Heal Tracks: 8200 -29.02 -451 -130 -516 01 8003 UnMtlgded Nolen LeeW (wNnoul TOpo and bmotoraCMUdknf UnMtlge.tl Nden Leask (wlMOUl Typo andbaMxalfMWtlonf rehldeT sin Leq Paak HOUr Lag Day leg EVankg Long Night LM CNEL ValldeType Leq Paak Hnur Lag Day leg Evening Led Night LM CNEL Auks; 570 551 533 473 55.9 55.5 Auks; 530 51.1 493 433 51.9 52.5 Medium Trucks: 510 485 43.1 41.5 500 502 Medium Trucks: 45.9 1 39.1 37.5 46.0 462 Heavy Trucks' 523 501 41.8 43.1 SiA 516 H., Trucks' 48.3 0118 378 39.1 474 47.5 VehkJS Nowill 591 57.3 540 09.4 58.0 584 VehkJS Nowise: 550 513 500 450 510 544 Cen.dfne Clarence ro Nase COnrour Cn MQ Cen.dfne Clarence ro Nase COnrour fir MQ 70 dfl4 WSBA I Wl 1 55 tlBA 1 70 dfl4 WSol WdB4 55 tlBA Ldn: 16 34 ]3 156 lain: 9 16 40 65 CNEL: 17 S6 78 169 CNEL: 9 20 42 91 lime,, ouvae, m1a 6.1 -50 Naeey.Mava6.mla SCWralro: Teer2016WOmi Project Piped Name• NNCPC Read Name: Santa BaAaa Job NUmhec 8211 RDadSagmenf: Eastol JamWree 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1way Oala Slay Cmdltloru (I- - 10. a- =15) SIb CmtlMOns (lsard= 10. Sol =15) Average Daily Tra ?2(Al 12.800 veM1idee Auras: 15 PaakHwr Pamenlaga 10% MWWm TmMS(2 Aylial 15 Peak Hour Vofunre.' 1,2BO -hid.. Heavy To. P,! ales): 15 steady Speed: L. .0 Wallcr. Mrs Near /cotta eVissel 36 het yabkbTypa I Day Evaroul Nghl I Deily Site DaU sit. Dare Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 k@dWm Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height. 9.9 hM Banter Typo l0.Wall, I Berm): 80 Hal Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% CanRnine Dlel to SeMef 1.. het Ndss S- WSEMVatbne (In .1) Caroni Dist to Obal 1LU.o fed ANOS, I.I. Benner Dialers m Obmrvar: 00 red Marcum Trucks: 4.W0 Gbsarver real (A.. Peal): 5o fast Hea,vTrvcka ILM6 GradeA ukhrone 90 lead Elevation: 0.0 feel Road Elevation: Lane EgolvalentDHhnreQn/ eel) Road EbveNOn: 90 art Auras: 98412 Road Grede: 9.0% Left View: -9110 degrees War -im. 93.72 Rgbl Via-- N.O Oegees Haavy TmGS: 98413 NiWA. Mold CakrdaNWa Ldn V&lideType I REti shourneType I lothei Traffic Fbw I Dishnea I FONh ROSd I Freerrel I 2eniar Att Remr Ai SCWrelro: Teer2016WItlIwl Pmjecl PmLed Nemy NNCPC Read Name: Santa BaAaa Job Number, 8211 Road SSgmenf: Nunn W San Clemente 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9trweY DNe -844 Slay Cmdltloru (I- - 10. a- =15) Average Deily Trial (Add 12.600 veM1idea Auras' 15 PaaRHOUr Pamenlsga' 10% Medium Trucks (2 total 15 Peak HO Ur iskine..' 1.260 -nor. Heavy Tmnke(3k Axles): 15 Vahicla Liked: 40 mph yyrkle W. N ... yor Lane Dishnce: 36 het yahkbTypa I Dry Evaning IsChf Dally &'fe WU sit. Dare Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% k@dWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% Brander Height. 0.0 led ranter Typo(fril 1- Berm): 80 Hal Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% C rjjclM Dial in Barker, 1.. het No.. SwF EMVatbnk an. 1) Caroni DW to Obsual IDI fed ANCS, 2000 Benlar Dl are th CGrervar: 00 red Mkolum Trucks: 4.W0 Gamajor Heydl(A.. Pura): 5o het Haar Trucks, 8006 Grails AClusime 90 lead Elevation: 0.0 reel Road Elevation: Lane Equivalent Daniel (in LeeQ Road Ebvffiion. GO last ANDS: 98412 Road Grkoe: 90% Left View: Pill degm re MaNUm Trucks 98.72 Right View: WO degrees Heavy Trucks.' MA13 HIWA NOIx.1.1 Cklculetlws Ldn V&lideType I REti I Trelfic Fbw I Dismncer I FONh Rmd I Fmmrel I fonicrAtten I Reim Aran Aube; 66.51 -037 4,51 -130 4,87 Road 5a9monG BouN N San Ble rdar, 0.000 firm Aube; 66.51 -844 4,51 -150 4,87 7.9o0 traldea O.OW 0.0W M¢rkum Trucks: Ill -1761 -451 -1211 1i Heavy Trader p + Axles): 15 . W 9W3 MBNUj Throur Ill -17.1 -451 -120 1W sit. Dare 9990 90W Heavy Tmcks' UN 1156 161 -120 -516 1Lb.o red Im.0 fed 0,000 01 Haavy, Trucks' Sl 2163 161 -120 -516 HWry TNAS: B %8' ration Adfudmerd' 90 0,000 01 N (eventual Traps and barrlw elfMUatlonf (VM d u LIa Lan.E9ukdenl Dlahnce0o N.4 Road Elevation: 9o.1 All 98412 Unmentioned ideal LevNS(wPorouf TOpn and broker eMnueyonf -90.o laghes N:dkum Trucks: 98.72 Rgbl Vrew: 90.0 oegrem Heavy Trolls' 98413 form Leq Day I lnq EUw'rvrg Leq Nigh Ldn I Fbge RUao I Fteen& Henet Me, Berm A. CNF1 Vandklspe I LM Pork lour I Leq Day I lnq EUmrbg Lan Nigh I Lon I orl Au(nc' 684 51 %.8 501 Autos; hill 59 B Al loc' 684 111 %] III 52.3 518 69.3 59.9 Medlum Trucks: 111 51 415 45.0 517 50.2 53A 537 Medlum Trucks: fill 52.8 46.5 A4.9 433 534 536 Heavy TUke: 557 54.3 All 485 426 1 55.0 Heavy Ticks: 55.6 64.2 All 46A %.S 54.8 51.9 VehMe N.: 62A 111 57.4 529' 502 61.4 61.9 Vehide Ndse: 62A 111 57.4 52B 61.3 610 Continental DMNnn at NOiar Cdnlow (in Ted) Cements, Dkrbnn ne mil Nosh ur (in Tee4 701 65 d8A I %lBA I 111 1 TO dBA Mdil I fiO dI I SS list Ldn: I TO dBA 0else I SO dBA I SS list Ldn: Ltln: 27 58 124 117 298 CNEL: 21 Ltln: 2. 67 iT3 265 19 CNEL 39 62 133 267 CNEL' 38 61 in 284 Tunnry. on, ..IDR I all, Sronado: Year 2016 Without Project Pi sect Nama: NNCPC Read Name: Banta Barba2 Job NUM %r 8211 Road 5a9monG BouN N San Ble rdar, Roao Segment' Westof Newport CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey Date Hvhwey Data SNr COndlower(Ha d -lit t -III Aral Daily Xic(Add. 7.9o0 traldea Al : 15 Peek HUrr Pomereal to% McNUm Truck$(2 Axka).- 15 Peak HOm Vclurrre.' ➢90 MM1I4ec. Heavy Trader p + Axles): 15 Vehble speed' 40 mpp voduaI Naar/FacLane assarrock 36 fault VehkKTys. I Day Evening Nlghf I Daily sit. Dar. sit. Dare Aubs: 77.59i, 12.9% 96% 9742% Menhir Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander H."id, 0.0 111 Seou ype(OWalt I Berm): 8o Heauy Trucks: B6.5% 27% 188% 074% C rjefine Di5L. 8emef. Carte lne Did b Obmrvd: 1Lb.o red Im.0 fed Ness. . 3wme GYaetlooe an Nei auNS, 2 Wit Sal Dislanca to Observer, 0.0 feel Morpum Tucks: 0.900 abrde., ,at (AD.. Pad): 501ed HWry TNAS: B %8' ration Adfudmerd' 90 Pad Ekvadon: Bored Boreal Lan.E9ukdenl Dlahnce0o N.4 Road Elevation: 9o.1 All 98412 Roetl.. BO% fah Via-- -90.o laghes N:dkum Trucks: 98.72 Rgbl Vrew: 90.0 oegrem Heavy Trolls' 98413 F1 wa xdu Model Cdcaiehws F1wa xdre Mrdd Llmulrhons Verns.Type I Jo. I Tm5 Tbw I Distends I Fbge RUao I Fteen& Henet Me, Berm A. Tunery. NY..mIs Sronado: Year 2015WiNOUI Project Pij6cl NUma: NNCPC Road Name: Baha Bata. -120 4,87 Job NUM %r 8211 Roao Segment' Westof Newport CTR fill SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey Data -120 4,87 .0 COndltloru (HW =f0, Soff =13) Average Ddly TaWs(AtlU: 5.900 vebldea Al : 15 Peek HOUrPomsMrge: to% McNUm Trvoka(2Aiks).- 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 690 veM1l4es Heavy Tucks 0, Axles): 15 Vehlde speed' 49 mpp which, Mh inimicaclane Distarrock 36 test, VehkKTyge I Day Evening fail Daily sit. Dare Heavy Trv2ke: At. 77.59i, 12.9% 86% ill Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Bander Helpht 0.0 M1 Bame,lype(0.Walt 1- Berm): 8o Heavy Trucks: B6.5% 27% 188% 074% CBMBnIrre Dirt mef. . Be CenNhe Did. b Obmrvar: I.. fist IW.0 fed Nols. sours GYVeEbrr pr fxp Autry , ii M. Samar DUlenca to Ottrerver, 0.0 feel Modlum Tucks: 0. %0 forerver, ,or (AD.. I 59 fad HWry TNAS: 8,W6 hoode AdfudmenL 99 Pad Ekvadon: Boreal Lane E9uhalenlDkbna(In(ref) Roetl Ekvetiur 90 !eel Aubs: 98412 Roetl.. 80% Left Via-- -90.0 lagreea Madlam Trueke: 95.72 Fight Vrew: al degrees HaavyTwts' 98413 F1wa xdre Mrdd Llmulrhons CNEL Venble Type I jr. I TmR Fbw I Dldrnde I Tessellated Frontal I.Man Berm A. Aubs: 6651 -2A6 4,51 -120 4,87 0000 fill Autos: 6651 -305 4,51 -120 4,87 0000 firm Medium Tmcks: TI.72. -1970 -451 -129 -09T 6099 .IN Mkobm Tmcks: TI.72 1.29 -451 -129 /r.9T 9099 0. Heavy Trv2ke: Sl -2366 -451 -150 -516 IlOW Ql Heavy Tmcks; UN -2425 -451 -150 -516 O.OW Ql Unno Ndsn LeeW (wlllrouf TOpo rntlheMxaCrrrudbn) Unmjdhh dNalse Levels(wIMOUf TOpo and henlxrlLenuetlonf Tj VessiaType Leq Part HOUr I Laq Day leg6Aning. Lear Nigh I LM I CNEL Vdrlole Type Leq -HOUr Leq Day Leq EVaning Led Nigh LM CNEL Aubs; 58.3 MA III 48fi 57,2 57.8 Autos; 577 558 IDA 480 56.5 57.3 Medium Tmcks: 52.3 518 44A 428 513 516 Medium Trucks, 517 50.2 43rf 423 50.8 510 Heavy Trucks' 536 522 433 44A fill 52.9 H., Trucks' 53.0 516 426 430 623 623 Local Ndse: 60.3 58:6 553 %.S 111 59.8 VehkJe Ndse: 596 50.0 547 502 SB.T 592 Canhrlfm DMMj h Notes COnbur Cn M(1 Canhrlfm Wrtnnn h Notes COnbur On JI 701 65 d8A I %lBA I 111 1 TO lfl4 65 d8A 60 dBA 55 tlBA Ldn: 19 42 90 194 Ldn: 18 30 62 117 CNEL: 21 45 % 2(18 CNEL: 19 41 m 180 nrmen, Poyae, m1x 6.1 -51 Naeey.Alayas.mlx Screamor, Tear2016WMOO1Projecl Pmiecl Nems• NNCPC Read Name: Sonia BarSaa Job Namhec 8211 Road Segment, East W Newport CTR Road Segral Wesloddera rtCTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBhwey Oala MBlrw'ey Dda Sib Cmtlldons (HVd =10. Sol 15) Avenge Daily Ta?2all 3.700 vehicles Auras: 15 PeokHwr Perrone a to% MWWm TmMS(2 Axks): 15 Peak Hour Vofurrre.' 370 vehiels Heavy im. P, Sciasf: 15 creation Speed: L. .0 Sellcr. W. Near/FarGarre Oiamnce: 36 het yrreare ps I Day Eveedgl Night I Dsily &'te Cal Site WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% AhdWm Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Berner Haight. 0.0 het Sel Typa l0.Wal(1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 2T %. 188% 0.74% Caeamina Ditto Sand, 1CO.o het Ndsa$ -me Elevatlons(In/eeff Crammer Dist to Observgc VOL fed ANOS, 2000 Barrel Leda -to Obmrven go had illegal Tracks: 4.W0 Dbsnrver Hngd!(Abovo Par 5o al HenryTrvcka 8,M6 Grade Aalrhment 90 Patl Edenton, 0.0 feel 0.0 heel Lane Equivalent DloanreginheQ Road Ebverfon: 90 him Auras: 99412 Road Garin: 0.0% Left View: -900 degrees War -im. fel RI Via -- N.O degrees Heavy TmGe: 98413 N4WA. Made, Ceameduana HIWA NOIx MOdel Calculates Vatide Type I REMery I Tre,bc Fbw I Oishnea I FONT Roetl I Former I Fenner Aerm Bnrm A!!an Screamor, Year 2016 WItlIool Project monarchal NNCPC Rcad Name: San Mlguel -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segral Wesloddera rtCTR OOW SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBlrw'ey Dda 4,39 SIb CmEItlON (Hand -10. -mg =It) Aveaea Daily Ta ?c(AOQ: 9.100 -hide. Aufcs' 15 Peek HOUr Perrone a' to% MWWm Third, (2 Se%m. 15 Peak HO Ur VOlurrre.' 910 -hide. Her Themay P-, Aroal 15 Vehicle Speed: 45.0 VOh4.le W. Near/Far Lane Disacce: 52 het y rreare pa I Dry Evening Night Deity Site WU 9990 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% WAY% dedWm Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMer Height. 0.0 le. Sel Typa lDWaq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% Caemid Did, 1a Sand, 1CO.o het No.. SouFe EMVatbne le. ear Creamer Dart to Daredevil IDI fed ANOS, 2000 Semler Or a- in oGrerver: go had Untran Trucks: 4.Wo Gdsarvar Faced (Above Per 5o of Heary Trvcka 8,W6 Grade Same gnat 90 Patl Edenton, 0.0 heel 9o.1 Lane Equivalent Dhanre (in aeQ Road Ebverfort L O tart Arece 9f1607 Road Gads: 00% Left View: W.O degrees McNUmT cks' 96598 Right View: 900 dogmas Heavy Thmdo 90608 HIWA NOIx MOdel Calculates I Call criminal I REMEL I Tregrc Fbw I Oisanca I Farm Rmd I Fireman I FamarAtten I FeOp Atari Aunts; 61 -576 4,51 -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.000 OOW Aunts; 6846 -236 4,39 -120 4,87 Averege Drily TraWs(Al 14.400 veMdea o.0)0 0.000 WeMUm Tacks: 1ir2 -2390 -451 -1211 -097 Heavy Thecke(3 + And) : 15 9909 9003 Left Truck.: 7945 -19 an -439 -120 -097 9003 9990 9000 Heavy Tracks' 62.89 1895 451 -120 -516 1Lb.o am 100.0 fart 0,000 01 Heavy Tracks' 81 1355 439 -120 -516 Heavy Trend 9X6 Greda Anyrerala 0,000 0.003 (InmMgeNd Nnha LevNa (wNAOUI TOpo and barrierregenerated Lan. E9udalentDhana On heQ Road Edvelfon: 9o.1 All 98607 (InmfgeNd Nnha Levde hear ran TOpn and be.,a Reuel onf -00.0 dreaea W eymn Tnrnks: 98593 Rghf Vrew: 9o.o negrese VenrcJeType Leg Peak HCur I Leq Gay Iraq Evening LM At I Lear I Call LM I Lam Peak Imer I LM Gay I lmq Lnim ll Lee Nigh I Len I I Arache 550 53d 514 453 590 531 54.5 Auloc' 685 516 %.8 586 480 594 680 Mai lum Trucks: 490 47.5 41.1 39.0 470 40] 48.3 Medlum Trucks, 54.3 US "A 44.0 53.3 535 Heavy Trial 503 489 399 41.1 495 49.6 Heavy Total 55.1 53] 446 45.8 003 543 544 VehMe Nal 570 55.3 520 4Z5 &.3 56.0 56.5 Vehica Nose: 62.3 111 57.4 528 Cannier Wrtenn a NOiad Creaser pn MQ 61.3 61,6 Clnredim Ddann he Were Diameter (in al 70 tlfl4 cenrenime Ddann to NOiae Ddnaur(in Few Wl 1 55 tlBA 701 1 651 701 651 1 WdBA I Wd84 38 77 1 10 dRI 01 1 BO dBA I Wd84 so Lan: 12 25 54 CNEL: 117 83 178 Ltln: 28 57 122 45 264 200 Cl 13 27 58 125 CNEL 38 61 131 283 'ider, ve,.. of Sronariu: Year 2016 Vi lProject trjed Name NNCPC Read Name: San Mlguel -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Sued Segment East of Newport CTR 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Did -120 4,87 SNe COndlEbru (ears =f0, SoN=15) Averege Drily TraWs(Al 14.400 veMdea So. 15 Peek Hann Pomerearl to% Memum TruckorRAial 15 Peak HOm Volume.' 1,440 veh14es. Heavy Thecke(3 + And) : 15 Vehcle speed 45 .1 Vehicre We Nepoloar Lane Di.nceree' 52 hs1 VehkdTyad I Day Eyeal We I Deily Sid Dad 9003 Amor 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Memum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 led SamerType(OWall, I Berm): (co Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% CeMaefM Di5L a 8emef. cenremlre Dist in 06aarvar: 1Lb.o am 100.0 fart NOla. 3wrde GYaemone(e asp AWda, 2W0 Berner Disrence to Observer, 0.0 I.M Meal Tradit x000 obeervar HegM(An.. Peel: 30 ra. Heavy Trend 9X6 Greda Anyrerala Pad Ekvalam: 00 had Lan. E9udalentDhana On heQ Road Edvelfon: 9o.1 All 98607 Roetl Greek 80% Left Via-- -00.0 dreaea W eymn Tnrnks: 98593 Rghf Vrew: 9o.o negrese Heavy Trolls: 96608 F1WA Al MoWI Llaulandas CNEL VenldeType Venlde Type I S. I Tay Faw I D.Dyce I Finite Roan I Form. I. Men I Berm A. Thmi NY.. mn Seenado: Teer2016%doolmoul Reedleme: NNCPC Road Name: San Mlguel -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Sagnmor West of Avocado 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS MBhwey Dsa -120 4,87 SNa COnddiumme (Han =f0, Soff =15) Averege Daily TraWc(A4. 18.100 veMdea So. 15 Peek HOUrPomsmrge: to% Memum TrvrkhrPAiks).- 15 Peak HOm Vduma.' 1,810 veh14es Heavy Thence 0, Ayes): 15 Vehcle speed 45 .1 vahicre We NeadFariane Dormaree.' 52 het VehkdType I Day Evening Night Dsly Sid Dad 9003 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Memum Trucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 M1 BamerType(0.Wafl, I Berm): (co Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CeM6elM Dirt a Bemef. cenrehe Did, to Observer: Idd. fi ell 1006 feet Nols. sours GYa.tlooe pn fxp Amoy 2Wo Barrier Oman. to Observer, 0.0 red Marcum Traaks: aW0 Dhaerver ,at (An.. Peel: 39 ra. Heavy TrvAS: eW6 Grime Aefmandel 90 Pad Ekvaliom: 0o had Land EquhaledDkana(In1reQ Road Edmithor: 90 reel ANbs: 98607 Real.. OD% Left Via-- -00.0 daeaea war. T.a: 985ea Filed Vrew: do. m,rdee HeavyTwts: 96608 FIWA NWU MoWI Llaulahnas CNEL VenldeType Vehicle Type I S. I TraPWFew I Odmnde I Fiirea Road Form. I.Maa Ferm A. Aunts: (I -0037 4,39 -120 4,87 O.WO 0:000 Arabs: 6846 0.63 4,39 -120 4,87 O.WO 0.000 Meeem Tmnke: 7945 -1791 ASR -120 1g7 9009 9003 deal Tmnke: 7945 -1851 ASR -120 1g7 9009 9003 Heavy Trecka 81 -2156 -439 -120 -516 .800) 8003 Heavy Treat 81 -2857 -439 -120 -516 0000 8003 [jawerult NOlsn L.I Nt wNMut TopO end hem-dlanYMbd) Unndhgead NOlsn Levels(wMnut TOpnendhaMxOlbnudil hehlfma Leq Peek Hbur Lag Day leg Evening Leq Night LM CNEL VenldeType Leq Peak Hbur Lag Dry Leq Evening I fad NIgM I LM I CNEL Autos; 62.5 W4 58.8 ME 61.4 62.0 Aunts; 63.5 61fi 590 530 62A 63 Abell Tracks: 55.3 54] 1 480 553 55.5 Moral Tracks: 572 55.7 494 470 503 58.5 Heavy Trucks' 57.1 517 416 ITS 502 SA Had, Trcks' 53d 56.7 47.6 489 572 574 Vehide Noise: 003 626 594 54A 003 63.8 Vehide Noise: I IDS 604 556 &.3 64.8 Cannier Clarence a NOiad Creaser Cn MQ Cannier Wrtenn a NOiad Creaser pn MQ 70 tlfl4 01 1 Wl 1 55 tlBA 701 1 651 60 dB4 55 tlBA lain: 38 77 1. 358 ICn: 42 so 193 41T CNEL: 38 83 178 384 CNEL: 45 96 200 447 marry Wya9,M12 6.1 -52 Nadictoir eml2 Sawarre, Year 2016 WMOol Project Protect Name• NNCPC Road Name: San Mlguel 410 4,87 Job Numhec 8211 Road Se9menb Eastot Arum. of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Orway Oala -1211 -097 Sib Cmtlldons Hal 10. Sl 15) Average Daily Ta?2(Add, 26.600 -hid. A.. 15 paakHwr Percenleya,' to% MWWm TmMsD irwill 15 Peak Hour V.I—... 2,680 -hides Heavy Trunka(Sr dred): t5 Vehicle spew: 15 mph. Whiche War Near/FarLarre Distance: 52 feet Vehadial I Day Everrecill Night I Daily Site DaU Howl Laq Pmk H65 Lag oay Al ]].5% 12.9% 96% Ill Aledlum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BMhyrelight. 0.6 kM Banter Typa lOWalL I Berm): 00 Hal Trucks: 665% 21%. 108% 0.74% CanRrIiM DI5L 10 Barter 1.. reel Mere. SLAWS EMVatrone (In /eeff Concertina Dist to obwrver 1LU6 fed ANUS, 2000 Hamer Disrenre m Obawthr: 09 red Ural Trutl:a: 4.000 observer HSgd!(A.. Por 5o hard HeavyTrvcka 8,006 Grade Adludchwl 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 reel Heavy TUks: Lane Equivalent Charter- al RaQ Road Elevation: 90 art ANDS: 98607 Road Gade: 0.0% Left View: -900 degrees War- 96596 Fight View: W 0 dogmas Heavy Tmcks: 96606 NiWA. Model CahubNOns 66.5 C enlwllm Ideal at Noire Carl (in Ted) VatidPType I REMF1 I TWT Flew I OisGnca I F.. Roatl I FWSrreI oerrler A. Reim A!!an Aubs; 6646 2.33 4,39 410 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.000 of mum Trucks: 7945 -1491 -439 -1211 -097 SM Condltlorur (Hertl =f0, SoN =13) 9909 9003 Heavy Tmcks 0425 -1866 439 -110 -516 Idly)vcoll 0,000 01 Nohe LavNa( lath) Tope andbattleroq !m= vahicre W. Noothrow the Dicarria, 52 feat VehkhTyge I Day Everal care I Deily -.hd VenrcJeTyAr Howl Laq Pmk H65 Lag oay Eva teq Evening Laq Nigh Ldn ob CNEL Au(nc' 651 633 615 565 10I fed 64.1 '04.] Metllum Trucks: 590 514 Sti 495 H., Triche 8,006 Gallo lowetmrM' 90 50.0 582 Heavy TUks: 598 58.4 493 50,6 Road Gredk 00% 569 59.1 VehMe Nose: 610 65.3 521 57.5 F1WA Ndu Modal Lllnulalwas E6.0 66.5 C enlwllm Ideal at Noire Carl (in Ted) Theft Flew I Daloyee I Fkke Hired I FWSn. Resler Me, Rerm A. I FONIe Rmd I FWSrreI I BetwrAtten I Rwm A!!an 61.8 572 70.5 65.7 701 651 1 00 all I 55 dirt Ltln 53 117 251 ]O tlSA 541 6yord CNEL: 56 125 no Ldn 581 Tanury. MY ta.IDn Sorer Year 2016 y lProject Frjed Nama: NNCPC Road Name: Ban Mlguel -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Sagmant Eastol Maarchur 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mgial Dale -120 -09T SM Condltlorur (Hertl =f0, SoN =13) Average Dally TaWcoidd. 12.500 wal Al : 15 Peek Hour PomsMaga: to% McNUm TUcka(2Axaa),- 15 Peak HOm Vdunre, Idly)vcoll Heavy Trvcke(3 +Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 vahicre W. Noothrow the Dicarria, 52 feat VehkhTyge I Day Everal care I Deily Sit. Dart Leq PeekI I Lag Day Aufor 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 103% 194% SaMerragod, QO Ill BamerType(OWalL 1- Bermf: ob Heavy Tricks: 86.591 21% 108% 074% Cerdedirre Died, to Hamel 1Lb.o reel No1d. Swale 6eaaDene Pn faep cenremlre I to obsarvm: 10I fed Aded 2000 Hamer Disrenree to observer, 0.0 red Marpum Trial 4.000 obeervar, He,at(Abova wed): 50 red H., Triche 8,006 Gallo lowetmrM' 90 Pad Ekvelkn: 00 red Lar.EgahelenlDhtreartal 4 Road Elevation: of reel Al 9860] Road Gredk 00% I Via-- -90.0 degrees N:dium Tnrcka: 995ea Right free: 90.0 de9reM Heavy Trolls 96608 F1WA Ndu Modal Lllnulalwas 62.7 63.1 Vearra Type I Jr. I Theft Flew I Daloyee I Fkke Hired I FWSn. Resler Me, Rerm A. Autos: (i LAa 439 -120 4,87 Job Numher, 8211 0.000 0:000 Medium Treks: 7945 -16 P2 -439 -120 -09T SIb CmEl6ON (Huai -10. a- =15) 0000 9003 Heavy Trucks: Sol 1218 -439 -120 -516 2,50) -oides 0,000 0003 UnVZagftd Nolr.LLVA S(wNMul Topn and hanlerrCMYMbh) Verykle War Near/F., Lane Distance: 52 het yehadial I Dry Evening Al Deity VatldeTyde Leq PeekI I Lag Day leq Ewnkg. Leq Night LM 00 CNEL Autos; 619 600 56.2 522 IWL fed 60.6 61A Modem Tmcks: 556 54.1 478 462 Heery Tnlcka 8,006 Grade Atlualment 90 54.) 549 Heavy Trucks' 565 %.1 410 478 ANOs: 98607 55.6 65.8 Verdict Nose: 637 529 58.0 54.1 Heavy intake.' 96606 62.7 63.1 CenttNim Clarence ro Noise Cotter On M(1 V&IIdPType T REMF1 I TWlhc Fbw I Distance I FONIe Rmd I FWSrreI I BetwrAtten I Rwm A!!an 61.8 572 70.5 65.7 701 65 dSA 1 01 55 tlBA Ida: 33 70 151 ]O tlSA 329 6yord CNEL: 35 76 162 Ldn 349 9 Jrw WY2e,M12 6.1 -53 Sawarre, Year 2016 WWbol Project whucl Name• NNCPC RLad Name: San Mlguel 4,39 Job Numher, 8211 Road Segment: Weslof NacanM1ur .0.0(0 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9lrway Deta -1521 SIb CmEl6ON (Huai -10. a- =15) Average Daily Tre?c(Add 25.000 veM1ides Aulas' 15 Park HOUr Percenluge,' to% Metllum Trader D the : 15 Peak HO Ur VOlunre,' 2,50) -oides Her TCka P-t Axles): 15 Vah. Spaed: 45 mph. Verykle War Near/F., Lane Distance: 52 het yehadial I Dry Evening Al Deity &Te WU Sit. Date Al ]].5% 12.9% 96% Ill AledWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9ht. 0.0 led Banter Typa lOWaq I Berm): 00 Hal Trucks: 665% 27%. 108% 0.74% CanRrIine Dral 1a Barter 1CO.o reel No.. Swale EMVarone art .ff Concertina Dead to obsarver IWL fed ANDS, 2000 Samar Disrenre to orbital 09 red k{Pmum Trurka: 4.000 Gdsarrer Hall (A.. Por 5o reel Heery Tnlcka 8,006 Grade Atlualment 90 Patl Elevation: 0.0 reel MA Lade Equivalent Ohranre dif JI Road Elevation. LO tart ANOs: 98607 Road Gade: Op% Left View: Poll deeiaea McNUmT cks 96599 Right View: 900 dogmas Heavy intake.' 96606 HIWA Nolae Mader, CMUnallona 58.6 58.8 V&IIdPType T REMF1 I TWlhc Fbw I Distance I FONIe Rmd I FWSrreI I BetwrAtten I Rwm A!!an Al 6646 203 4,39 -120 4,87 Roadilegment Westof Jamboree .0.0(0 0.000 mum Teks: 7945 -1521 -439 -1 Pit -097 71,500 rebldea 9999 9000 Heavy Tucks' 84,25 -19.17 439 -120 -516 vehkle speed' 0,000 0.003 .amM9ated Nora Le. (wPowuf Topo end bender aMnuaUon) Vehkls y . I Day EveMrq Nghf Daily Sit. Date At. 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Tmcks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% orrow Typo 11, Peak Ham I Leg I I Ieq EVwikg Lag Nigh I Ldn I I Al ' iA:9 630 612 552 Haavy Trade 8,006 Grade Agudment 90 Ill 644 Medium Tmcks: MA 57.1 1 492 Roatl.. 00% 577 579 Heavy Tmaks: 59.5 58.1 49.0 503 Ill 58.6 58.8 Vel Notes: 1 65.0 61.8 572 70.5 65.7 662 CanlMim Dlebnn ro Noise Conrour (in /ee4 70 tlfl4 ]O tlSA BIll 6yord 55 tlBA Sr17 Ida: Ldn 52 Ill 240 1.1157 SP CNEL: CNEL 5$ 119. 257 1,166 555 Tanury. NV or. mn Sronario: Year 2016 Without Project Pject Nama :NNCPC Road Name: coast Highway 4,11 Job Plunder: 8211 Roadilegment Westof Jamboree 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9ial Dora - 1965 .0 Coaxia u(Hal =f0, SoN =15) Aveage Daily The Ks(A4. 71,500 rebldea Al : 15 Park Hich'.mage: to% McNUm Porka(2Aika).- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 7,15) veoll Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 vahicre MM NradFartane Dirtarria, 76 feet Vehkls y . I Day EveMrq Nghf Daily Sit. Date At. 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Tmcks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.5 fal SamerType(OWidi I Berm): 0o Heavy Tricks: fill 2.7% 108% 074% Cerdenlne Dirt to Sal cenremlre Did, b observer iLb.o red to09 tart Nrl. fewhtbnr. pre Gxp Artery ' 2000 Hamer DUrence to observer, 0.0 red Mrdlum rural 4.000 observer real fabova Pad): 59 red Haavy Trade 8,006 Grade Agudment 90 Pad Ekvelkn 00 red 835 Tana EquhalenlDktma(In leeQ Road Ekvell ..reel All 92547 Roatl.. 00% Led Via-- -90.0 degrees Madmm Tubk. 92504 Rghf Vrew: 9o.o degrees Heavy Trtmts' 92547 FIWA NWU Modal Lllrrlahrna Ill Vehicle Type I R. I Try Fbw I Dldende I Fkgr Road Free. Banat Areart Dorm A. Autos: 68.46 6.59 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 OWO Medium TCks: 7945 - 1965 -4,11 -121 Ifor 0000 9003 Heavy Trucks Sol -1460 -4.11 -120 -516 9.000 0003 Unndtlgefed Le. h el Tp end.t. aNMYetl r.) VaNdPpe Ty a Leg Pak Hm Lag a g Led Might LM CNEL Auks; 69.] 67.8 661 600 Ill 692 Medfum Tmcks: 835 62.0 55.6 54.1 Ill 62.8 H., Trcks' 64.3 629 53.9 55.1 Ill fill VehkJa Nose: 716. 69.6 61 62.0 70.5 710 CanttNim Wrtaan ro NOiae Catheter Cn Mrj 70 tlfl4 651 50 dB4 55 tlBA Ida: 199 234 WS 1.1157 CNEL: 117 251 541 1,166 Thaw,.Mayas.mis Business, Year 2016 Workout Project PiOiecl Name• NNCPC Feed Name: Coast Highway Job Nation, 8211 Road SSgmenl: Eastot JamWree SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9eway Oala SIb Cmtl ns(Hard=10. SON = 15) Average Daily Thel (Al Bedell veM1ides A.. 15 PaakHwr Pemenlsga to% MWIum Thai twide. 15 Peak HO Ur V.anro' 5,830 veM1ides Heavy To. P, Aided) 15 vick. Spsnd: 45 mpM1 Vehkle We Near/Farlane Distance: 76 het ygokbTypa I Dry EvwAVJ Near I Daily Site Dane Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BdMel Height 0.0 fall Banker Type l0.Wall, I Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% CanRniM DISC 10 Belle, 160.0 het Nas¢$ -a. EMVande. (In /eaff Cakenthe Dist to Obscal 1LU61e0 ANCS, 2000 Base, Disrenre to Obmrvar: 00 real k4amum Trucks: 4.000 deserver HSl(A.. Pnd): 5o reel HearyTrvcka 8,006 90 Patl Bureau, 0.0 reel 8425 -15.49 Lane Egalvaleal Dhhnre(n Aide Road Elevation: 90 Im. ANDS: 92.54] Road .reds: 80% Left View: -90.0 degieas k'Iddys Tracks 92504 Right View: W 0 degrees Heavy Tmcke: 92547 NiwAA lee Model cak'metlwm -120 -516 Vatlde Type I REMF1 I TmT Flew I OisGnce I FIN. Roatl I Fresark Barrier A. Berm A!!an Business, Tear2016WINwI Project Pmiro Name• NNCPC Fcad Name: Coast Highway Job Numhe, 8211 Roa(Segarl Weslof Newport CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mgtrway Data SIB CmEMOne (HUdv 10. a- =1a) Average Daily Theft (Add 54.100 veM1idea Aides' 15 Peek.cor Perursoca a' to% MWlum Trucks (2 Ad s. 15 Peak Hour VOlmrre.' 5,410 veM1ides Heavy Tmcke(3k theses): 15 Va .Space: 45.0 Vehkle We Near/F., Lane sweet 76 fart yehkbTyps I Day Evaressil Nsahl Deity See WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91 Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMel Haght. 0.91e. Banker Type(0411- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% Canal. Deal 10 Backe, 160.0 het No.. Sourne EMVatbne (In/eaff Carater Dart to Observe, fell fed ANCS, 2000 Banlaf Disrenre on OGrerver: 00 real Marcum Trucks: 4.000 Gdsarvar Fluor (A.. Ped): 5o at Haary Trucks, 8,006 Grade ACWment 90 Patl Bureau, 0.0 reel 8425 -15.49 Lahr Equlalent Dhrance (in /eel Road Elevation. B lent Arock 92 5A7 Ross Gade: 06% Left View: NO deal kledumTrucks 92504 Right View: 900 degrees Heavy Trucks 9250 Hlwa xolw Model C d wu1atlmra -120 -516 Vrhory Type T REMEL I Trelac Fbw I Oishnce I FINIr Rand I Frrsres I Banie/Atten I Berm AOan Areas ; 6646 571 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Nutia, 8211 OWO 8000 Aeus; 6846 5.30 4.11 -120 4,87 Average Ddly TraWs(Atl6: .6.000 BWO MaNUm Trucks: 7945 -1153 -411 -1211 -097 4,520 veM1ides 9009 9003 M um Trucks: 7945 -1198 -411 -1 tin -097 Sid Dad 9090 9000 Heavy Tracks 8425 -15.49 -4.11 -120 -516 Cerdeairre Dirt is Stan, ,harem. Dist O Obal 0,000 0.003 Heavy Trucks' 84.25 -1581 -4.11 -120 -516 Be reel 0,000 0.003 WmM9efed NOha LeWlahundred TOpo end beater aNen..) Lane Equivalent Dh.na(in fill Rona Elevation: 90.1 UnmMgaed NOha Leveb(werhant TOpn and barker tankers" Left Via-- -990 aalowes Nedium TVCks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: VenicJeType Laq Peek lour I real day ieq Evwivig Les Nigh I Last I CNEL Veeirallsoa I Las Peek lour I Leq day I feq EVwiirg I Leg Nigh Lan I CNEL Au(nc' 689 670 653 591 See FDA 684 Auloc' 1 664 649 580 FOS 524 68.0 Metllum Trucks: 828 61.1 54.7 532 53.6 81.7 51.9 Metllur, Tracks: US 988 544 529 53.5 613 616 Haar, Take: 634 620 53.0 542 51.9 626 627 Haavy, Tmcke: 611 61,7 529 53.9 OF 623 624 VeeMe N.: 787 SAS 658 61.1 647 69.7 70.1 Vehide skkwo 70A 68.6 655 We 646 III BOB canredine Ddmnn. Nana COn.ur (in .e4 68.9 Cln.dine entrance as Norse COn.ur Cn Ml Canlenim rdmnn. Nan COn.ur (in real Cen.dine Ma as Norse COn.ur Cn Mrj TO sell 01 1 WseA I Be seen 1 0ABA I TO sell 1 01 60 dBA I Be seen Ltln: 95 291 400 173 B. Bo1 Ltln: 90 195 n19 169 993 CNEL 102 219. 03 105 1,018 859 CNEL 97 209 nW 181 900 li ke..1.. al I all, Sorer Year 2016 WitM1wl Project Pject Nama :NNCPC Brad Nama: Coast Highway -120 4,87 Job Nutia, 8211 Road Segment East of Near CTR 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS inglrwey Data 4,11 SM COndltloru (HW =f0, SoN =15J Average Ddly TraWs(Atl6: All veMdea Autos: 15 Peek Harr Powersel: to% Meaurn Trucka(2Aonall 15 Peak HOml/rderre.' 4,520 veM1ides Heavy Threats p, Antos): 15 vehole speed' 45 rape vehicre We NeadFarLane Diuress, 76 fault Verecil a I Day Estrassil NIgM I Deily Sid Dad 9000 Autos: 7.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r HdpXG' 0.01e¢l Bame,lype(DWalL I Berm): @o Heavy Tricks: 66.5% 27% 180% 074% Cerdeairre Dirt is Stan, ,harem. Dist O Obal I.. ded 100.0 feel larder. 3wme 6e-e .Pn fdp Adery IMe Samar Disrenre Is observe, 0.0 tell Marpum rucks: 4000 oedrvar Heghl(aoove Pad): Be reel Heavy Trucks: 8008 00 Pad Ekvatlon: 80 reel Lane Equivalent Dh.na(in fill Rona Elevation: 90.1 Autos: 92547 Road.iedl, 80% Left Via-- -990 aalowes Nedium TVCks: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: 0o.. oe9red Heavy Tmurs' 9250 F1WA Ndu Model gen eut¢Sd¢ Lear Nigh Veelde Type I Jr. I TmPw Flew I INefenae I F(ge Rued I Fiesid I. Men I Berm A. TunMy. say ..king Sronario: Year 2016 iscoh lPmjed Rona Nama: NNCPC Fund Noma: coast Highway -120 4,87 Job Nutia, 8211 Rosa Segment' Ward of Avocado 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS inglrwey De. 4,11 Sea COnd awk(N. -I Soff =SO Average Daily The Kc(A4. 43.800 veMdea Autos 15 Peek HwrPomsMSge: to% Marcum Thooka(2Aiall 15 Peak HOm Vrostal Alegi MM1Idea Heavy Threats 0, Pads): 15 ve .speed' As .1 vahicre We NeadFariane Diuress, 76 seal Vaedil a I Day Evenirq Niger Daily Sid Dad 9000 Autos: 7.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trucks Bass, 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Helpht 0.0 MI Bamar7ype(0.WalL 1- Berm): Bo Heavy Tricks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% CBMBnIne Dirt 108ame, ,hare m. Dan, o Obdrvsr: I.. teens 1006 fall Noss. sound 6'evsebpa pn fxp Action ' it Me Sal DUrease In Decker, 0.0 real Moaium rucks: 4000 deserver Hegt hignse faces Be ra. Heavy Trucks: BLOB Grade AajuMmeM' 90 Pad Esevetlon: 80 real Lane EquhalenlDktma(In feel Road Edveticn; of reel Acres : 92547 Roea.reae: 80% Left Via-- -990 aearaes Madmm. 92504 ROM Vrew: 9o.. degrees HaavyTwts' 92547 FIWA NWU Moaea L110alanda Lear Nigh veersu Type I R. I TmPWFbw I .radon Finite Road Flats. I.Man Berm A. Autos: 68,46 4.60 4,11 -120 4,87 8000 0:000 Autos: 6846 4A6 4,11 -120 4,87 8000 O.WO Medum Tracks: 7945 - 1284 -4,11 -129 1 B 9009 9003 Medum Tracks: 7945 -1277 -4,11 -129 Ish' 9000 9003 Heavy Trucl 84.25 -1659 -4.11 -120 -516 OOM 8003 Heavy Trul 84.25 -1873 -4.11 -120 -516 6.000 8003 UnMtlgneetl Nad L.IW(wlPOut Til and haste uadon) UnMtlgnfed Nad Leel(w ut Tape and bmkxallduetlon) VeoideType Lee Peek Hhur Lan day Ieq Ewmng Lear Nigh Lon CNEL rue alype Leq POak HO. Lagdny teq Evening Lad sti9M Ias CNEL Autos; 677 65.8 641 See 66.6 67.3 Autos; 676 LOT FOS 570 BOB 67.1 Motlium Trucks: 61.5 NO 53.6 .52.1 60.5 80:8 Makium Trucks: 61.4 599 53.5 51.9 BOA 608 Heavy Trucks' 623 619 51.9 53.1 VS 616 Heay Trucks' 622 LOS OF 530 61A Me VehkJS NW; 696 67.6 647 60.0 OFF 690 VehkoS NW; 694 573 646 599 68.4 68.9 Cln.dine entrance as Norse COn.ur Cn Ml Cen.dine Ma as Norse COn.ur Cn Mrj 701 0tl0A 1 601 1 0ABA 1 70 Age 0tl8A 50 seen 55 tlBA Ids: Ed 173 3]2 Bo1 Ids T8 169 381 784 CNEL: 86 105 399 859 CNEL: 84 181 393 841 nimen, Hiyae, m1a 6.1 -54 Nady.Mava6.mla SCarrarre Year 2016 WMOol Project Pored Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Coast Highway Jon Nicoll 8211 Road S.,yl EastWAvaiceo SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS H+9eway Gala Sib Cmtl ns Hdal 10. SON= 15) Average Daily Torafti Q: 45.000 veM1idea Arm. 15 Pa.kHwr Pefc.nlsga to% MWWm TmMS(2 Awhad. 15 Peak HO.. V once..' 4,500 veM1ides Heavy Tmcka(3k Arwad): 15 Vehicle Senior 45 mgh Vankla We N ... ocafLarre Distance: 76 het yanntial I Day Everm Nghl I Daily Site Dean Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 103% 194% BdMeIHel9nt 0.9 hM Samar Typo rrc lLI Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: 665% 21%. 108% 0.74% C hdwlM Di5L 10 Sal iCO.o het Nd9a$- meEMValbns (In /eeff ComwNre Dist to Steel iLU6 fed Ades, 2000 Barrel Distance m obarrvem SO red Mamum Trucks: 4.000 deserver hegd!(Anove Pee): on had HvaryTmen, eM6 Grade AHudmene 00 Patl Eleven, 0.0 feel I Lane Equlvalenl DHhnre(n h Q Road Elevation: 00 IeN Area 92.54] Ro.d Gretls: 00% Left View: -900 degrees t'hdum im. 92504 Fight View: W 0 degrees Hoary Tmcks: 92547 NiwA. Mods+cekdel+mw 615 60.0 Vafide Type I REM¢ I TmT Flew I foomma I FINIe Roatl I Ford. .efrlef A. Befm A!!en Aubs; 6646 4.50 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.008 OOOII 44BNUm Tmcks: 7945 -12. -411 - 120 -097 SM Chndltloru (Hand =f0, SoH =151 0000 ..003 He., Track¢' all -1661 -4.11 -120 -616 Peak Hhmlmher, 0,000 01 WmHgefed NOha LevNa(argarm raPOandemderattenuatldnf 45 .1 Vehich We N eActe and Disarms 76 feel VenaJeType Laq Peak Hour I Let, Dry feq EVwivig LM Nigh I Ldn I CN¢ Aml 677 6,18 64.1 560 Amoral 2000 ill 67@ deal Trucks: 615 60.0 53.6 52] Pad Ekve mom 003 508 Heavy Tanks: 623 LOS 51.8 CIA Roatl.. 00% 61.5 61.6 Vicel N.: 686 III Wei ago F1WA al Mhdel L11nu+a3wa 68.5 69.0 CenfMirre Ideal he Nowe Conrour (in Tea) I Fkge owed I Formal I. Men I Berm A. 692 67,5 64A 59.7 68.2 Mdi 0dill 1 60 dBA 1 55111 Ltln 0. 172 3]1 TO 790 60 dBA CNEL IF 105 3% Ltln: 857 Tabery. M, Soond Swe riu: Year 2016 WiNwl Project wjed Nama: NNCPC Road Name: Chad Highway -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Read Segment EaslWMaarMur 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9ewey Data -120 -09T SM Chndltloru (Hand =f0, SoH =151 Average Dally TraWs(Atl): 61,700 vehldea Are. 15 Peek HUfr PomsMaga: to% McNUm Tione(2Aakal 15 Peak Hhmlmher, 6,170 WM1ll Heavy Try and p, Axles): t5 Vehkle speed 45 .1 Vehich We N eActe and Disarms 76 feel Ve rcialf t, I Day Evan+rq Nlghf I Deily Sit. Dam legtwemng Auras: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 1 49% 103% 194% @ablerifel 0.0 lest SamerType(OWalL 1 -Bend: 00 Heavy Tmcks: Still 27% 108% 074% Cement. Dirt. Bamer crecal Did to ohsarvef: I.. morel 100.0 filing hadersource 6'evelrne an fxp Amoral 2000 Hamer Death. to Observer 0.0 red Arecor rv.ke: 4.000 Centerver Heat doemer Pad): 50 mad Harry TrvAS: 8000 Greda Ad�wdmdm 00 Pad Ekve mom 00 red 82.1 Lane Equivalent Dhhna(in fire) Road graced, 00.1 All 92547 Roatl.. 00% Left Via-- -90.0 degree ha dihm Tmcke: 112.5.4 RI Vrew: 9o.. de9rere Hoary Tmds.' 92547 F1WA al Mhdel L11nu+a3wa 69.9 derail I REM¢ I Tm5 Fbw I Okfenea I Fkge owed I Formal I. Men I Berm A. Auras: fill 595 4,11 -120 4,87 NOISE MODEL INPUTS 0.000 0:000 Medum Tmnks: 7945 - 1129 -4,11 -120 -09T Peak HO.. Volume: 4,180 veM1ides 0009 9003 Heavy Tool idoz -1524 -4.11 -120 -616 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% UndWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% COW 0003 UnVZanted NO+ae Lea, (wllnout Tand and enMw:ONMu, n) CBnRniM Dist laS , 109.. het Nora sam. EMValbnr in. laeff Camwiine Seat to Observer IWL fed Ades, 20.0 VenldeType Leq POek Hhui I La, Day legtwemng Leq Nigh LM I Lee Peak HOUr I BNEL Auks; 69,1 672 fS.4 59A McNUmi cks' 91 fel 68.0 68.6 Medium Tmcks: 629 61.3 55.0 53A 66.3 81,9 82.1 He., Trucks' 637 62.3 632 54.5 Roatl.. 00% 62.8 630 Wil NOisr: 709 692 660 61.4 528 69.9 704 Canhrlioe Distance, ro NOiau Diadem Cn M) Val News: 692 67,5 64A 59.7 68.2 70 dEA 65 tl8A 60 di Mel Ldn: 59 212 457 TO 995 60 dBA CNEL: 105 228 491 Ltln: 1.057 n: men, wive, M12 6.1 -55 SCarrarre Year 2016 WItlIool Project Pmiecl Name• NNCPC Road Name: Ged. Highway Jon Number, 8211 Roadtlegannal Wheof Namolhor SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mglrway Data Sal COndI60N (Hand -10. they =15) Average Deily Tre?c (Add : 41.800 veM1idea Auras' 15 Park Hoof Pefcenmga' to% Metllum Tfucks(2 Agram. 15 Peak HO.. Volume: 4,180 veM1ides Heavy Tmnka P-t threm: 15 Vaniclr Speed: 45 mfr Venkle We Near/Faf Lane Disance: 76 het yenntial I Dry Evening Nlahf Deity, &'fie WU Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% UndWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeI Hel9nt 0.0 Id. Samar Typo(Orni I Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: 665% 27%. 108% 0.74% CBnRniM Dist laS , 109.. het Nora sam. EMValbnr in. laeff Camwiine Seat to Observer IWL fed Ades, 20.0 Sal Di now on oGrerver: 0o red Mamum Trucks: 4.000 ..server Heyef(Above Por on met Hoary Trvcka 6006 GradedeSearment 90 Patl Eleven, 0.0 reel I Lee Peak HOUr I Lane Equivalent Dhhnre (in fide) Road Elevation. L 0 act Auras: 92 5L7 Road Gretle: 06% Left View: 900 deareee McNUmi cks' 91 fel Right View: 990 degrees incWTorace 91 Hlwa xolw Mode+ cmudat+mv 6317 V&lde Type T REM¢ I Trelbc Fbw I Olsmnca I FONIe Reed I Fireman I BeentrAtten I Rwm And, Adds; 6646 426 4:11 -120 4,87 Road Segment North of EaslmuR .0.000 0.000 LmNUm Imam 7945 -1299 -411 - 120 -097 52.400 nal .mU of. Heory➢ucks' fil -1693 411 -120 -516 Vehkle speed 0,000 0.003 W mMgated Nora Le. hel Toyed end benmr attenue" Va dkls y . I Day Eval MCI Daly Sit. Dam Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% Veniclal I Lee Peak HOUr I Lmimay I feq EVwt+rg Lee Nigh I Lon I Lit Araloc' 6],4 65.5 6317 1 Heal Thmar 8,006 Grade Agudmerd' 90 66.3 1 Medium Trucks: 612 fill 53.3 51.7 Roatl.. 00% 602 80:4 Heavy TUCke: 620 (1 516 528 612 613 Val News: 692 67,5 64A 59.7 68.2 1 GnlMine art.nn ro H,n chnrour (in /ea4 TO 6 60 dBA SS Ltln: ]6 . 1. 194 353 ]99 . CNEL 02 176 378 815 Tabery. NY or. and Scenario: Year 2015 With Protect Pmjad Name: NNCPC Road Name: Jamboree 4,11 Jon Number 8211 Road Segment North of EaslmuR 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS H+9nwey Data -1200 .0 Leader -(Haf -I Soff =I Aveage Dally The Kc(A4. 52.400 nal Auks: 15 Peek HOUrPommherge: 1.% McNUm Porka(2Aika),- 15 Peak He,e Vdumn' 5,240 veM1ldec Heavy Theme 0, mars): 15 Vehkle speed 45 .1 Vehicr We NaadFariane Disarom 76 facet Va dkls y . I Day Eval MCI Daly Sit. Dam Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.3% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Hel9hG 0.0 Mt Sam.rType(DWalL 1- Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: Still 2.7% 108% 074% Cerdenine DiSL. Ham er cenmr, She a ohcervm: 99 io ford 1006 hM No+s. sourw 6'ea.M1bna pn fxp Area 2000 Hamer DUhnce In Dnrerver, 0.0 red Madium rv.ke: 4.000 .eoerver mall doemer Pad): 59 red Heal Thmar 8,006 Grade Agudmerd' 90 Pad Ekvatlon: 00 real Mal Tmcks: Lane EquhdenlDktma(Infeeff Road forward, of feel ANbs: 92547 Roatl.. 00% Left Via-- -90.0 degrees Madman TVGa' .15.4 RCM Vrew: 9o.o a.,r ea Heary Twts.' 92547 FIWA NWU Mod, L11nu+a3ons Verde Type I REM¢ I TmPm Fbw I .sfenae I Fkge Road Free. I.Man Berm A. Ared 6646 EN 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 OWO Medum Tmcks: 7945 -1200 -4,11 -120 Ifor 0000 9003 Heavy Tn2ka idoz -1595 -4.11 -120 -516 .0.000 0003 UnMNgafta NO+su LeVets(wMout Tend and eaMx Wtlon) V,rldrType Leq Parer Hhm Leq Day leg6Arar, Led Nigh LM BNEL Auks; 664 665 00.7 56] 67,3 67.9 Mal Tmcks: 62.1 608 541 52.7 812 614 Heay Trucks' 63.0 614 525 518 111 623 VehkJa Noise: 702 68.5 653 My 69.2 697 Canferlinu Ma ro NOiau Conceal Cn M) 70 tlfl4 0 dBA 60 tlB4 55 tlBA fret 98 190 410 884 CNEL: 0 204 410 948 made. Mn 49.'.12. es. sly-s- HCerlant Teer2016WMPmlecl Pmjecl Name• Ni Rcad Name: JamOmas -130 4,87 Jon Number 8211 Resettlements, EssWUff m San Joaquin Hills 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oates 4.11 SIb Chnddl (Hard = 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tra ?2(Al (A200 -hid. Auras: 15 PaakHwr Pemenlaga, 10% MWWm Tmch,D talua: 15 Peak HO Ur VObnre.' SnO Vehicles Heavy Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 Vanities Spend: 45 all WhIshe We N ... aTtrLane Distance: 76 feel yenkbTrya I Day Evesuall Niger I Dsily Sal Dal me WO Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: S18% 49% 193% 194% Bander Haight. 0.0 bel Bearer Type III I Berm): 90 Haavy Trucks: S65% 27 %. 118% 0.74% CBnRnie Dlat lO Berner 109.0 bet Nd9a Suards, ves Onne(In laefd CanMIlne Dist to onwrver till fed ANUS, 2099 Bander Disfenre b onmrvis, 0o bd Mission Trucks: 4mo Gdserver headerhus. Pee): 5o had HaaryTrvcka ¢006 Grade AHudmene 90 Pad Stakes, 0.0 reel 0.0 reel Lane Equivalent Channel an Fort) Road Ebval 90 art ANDS: 92.54] Road Grade: 60% Left View: -90.0 stagnant Idedium 1. 92504 Rgl View: W 0 degees Heavy Trucks: 92547 NiwA Nobs, Modal cabubtions shwa NMw.1.1 cmudetlona Vafide Type I REMF1 I TaT Few I OisGnce I Fes. Hand I Farrack I. A. I Berm A!!en deanalio: Ter,2016WMPraind Pmjecl Name• Ni Road Nacre Jam6mee -130 4,87 Jon Number 8211 Resistan t Southrusis Joaquin Hills 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nwey ONes 4.11 Sib CandltloN Hand =10. ... I:I IN Average Daily Tre ?c(Add, 43.100 vaM1idea Auras: 15 Peak HOUr thermal ' 10% MWlum Trucks ke%s. 15 Peak HOm VOlunre.' 4,310 -ail Heavy Tmcka(3k Axlesf: 15 vanities Speed: 45.0 Vehkle We N...mar Lane Dencena: 76 feet yehrichil I Dry Ekeing I Deity me WO 9999 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% Medum Trucks: S18% 4.9% 193% 194% Bander Height. 0.0 jes, bearer Type III I Berm): 00 Haavy Trucks: S65% 27 %. 118% 0.74% CanRnine Dlat an Banker 1.. bet No.. SwFe Ebvatbns n. best) CarrtwlOre Drat b observer IDI fed ANDS, 2000 Barrier Dlslenre b ofare'lls, 0o bd Mamum Trucks: 4mo Gdaarver real hurs. Ped): c. at Heay Trucks, 8096 Grade AtWment 90 Pad Stakes, 0.0 reel 90 bet Lass Equlvalent DManre(in Feel Road Ebval L reel Auras: 92 54] Road Grade: 06% Left View: 990 Segreas McNUmi rke 91 ful Rigel View: 900 degeee Heavy Trucke 9250 shwa NMw.1.1 cmudetlona I Frnea Rand I Fenn& Ren Me, Bera A. V&lde Type T First I Trelnc Fbw I Oislence I Fuel ROOd Reated I Ben rAmrr I Reim Altan Aubs; 6646 am 4,11 -130 4,87 Job Narms, 8211 0.000 0000 AWOS; 6646 4.39 4.11 -120 4,87 Average Daily TraWc(Aid. 45.200 veM1ldea O.OW 6W) MBNUm Trucks: 7945 -11 i8 -411 -1211 197 Heavy Ticass p + atlas): 15 9909 9073 Ural Trucks: 7945 -1284 -411 -1211 197 Sih Darn 9999 9007 Heavy Trucks 8425 -15.14 -4.11 -120 -516 too.. and Imo lad 0,000 O.W3 Heavy Trucks' 81 -1680 -4.11 -120 -516 Harry Trucks: BWB Gredearyudmenc 90 0,000 of WmMgebd NOha LevNa hentrert TOpoendbradread nuatldnf Lane Equivaent Dhbna(in hra Fred Elscanks,: 90 bet Ader 92547 UrkdMgebd NOha Levab(wndand Trope and berner estbnue" -91 degrees N:eiam Tacks: 92.504 Right Vrew: .O.. fearear venrcJeType 1! P1 Hall Lear Gay I leq EVwnvng Lee Nigh Ldn I Frnea Rand I Fenn& Ren Me, Bera A. CNEL venrcJ 1 Linfilauffittescril Leq Gay I feq EVmlirg Las Nigh I Ldn I CNEL Au(nc' 692 67.3 65.5 59.5 "A 68.1 667 Auloc' u's Fall 0.9 576 65.4 664 670 deal Trucks: all 61A 55.1 53.5 61.5 1510 all 522 Medium Tracks; 613 Bill 53A SS 596 603 606 Heavy Taken 638 624 53.3 54.6 623 WS 62'.9 63.1 Haavy Tmcke: 62.1 W] 51.7 52.9 W.5 61.3 61A Val N.: 710 Si 56.1 61.5 696 67.5 70.0 70.5 Vehids Ndse: 69A 67.6 US 588 57.4 Fad 68,6 CanlMim olebnnroNOiae Cdnrour (in /ee9 65.1 all Cameral Dhbnse ro NOias COnrour Cn MU CenlMim olabnn le Mines Cents -(in Tee4 Cameral Wehnse ro NOias COnrour Cn Mp 70daM 0d8A I all 1 55 dB4 W dBA I 1 70dBA Wall I 60 dBA 1 55 dB4 50 dBA Ltln: 190 219 465 W 1,071 3]2 Ltln: 78 197 380 75 77. 34a CNEL: 107 231 4% S6 1,074 399 CNEL IS 179 386 81 632 actual: Year 2016 With Pmjecl Pmjed Name: Ni Roes Name: Jamboree -120 4,87 Job Narms, 8211 Road Segment I of Banta Baru 0:070 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hl9hwey seta 4,11 son COnelaoru (Hartl =f0, soft =15J Average Daily TraWc(Aid. 45.200 veM1ldea Autos: 15 Peek HOUr PomsMage: 10% McNUm Trucka(2Aiks).- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 4,520 nall Heavy Ticass p + atlas): 15 venkle speed 45 .1 Vehicre We /Arem.l.a. annerce.' 76 feet VehkKTyOe I Day Estrucal WgM I Deily Sih Darn Sih Darn Aufos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% Barter Herod, 0.01¢¢1 BamerType(DWdl, 1- Bermf: 90 Heavy Tmdts: 86.5% 27% 100% 074% C ahsim Dist ro Basest canreMre Did m ohsarvm: too.. and Imo lad rlpMesours. Fdeaelbne an Gasp AWOS, 2007 Berner Death a Is observer, 0.0 red Merpum Trsid- 4070 observer Heat ( above Pod): ..red Harry Trucks: BWB Gredearyudmenc 90 Pad Ekvadon: 00 hd 00 rall Lane Equivaent Dhbna(in hra Fred Elscanks,: 90 bet Ader 92547 Roed Greek 00% Left V,aw,- -91 degrees N:eiam Tacks: 92.504 Right Vrew: .O.. fearear Harry Tracks: 9250 (i1WA Ndu MOWI L11au7ahone (i1WA Ndu MOdd L11nu7ahwe Venida Type I It. I TmPWFbw I Diefende I Frnea Rand I Fenn& Ren Me, Bera A. Saauarke Year 2016 With Pmjecl ist ud Name: Ni Road Name: Jamboree -120 4,87 Jun Number 8211 Road 6egkkl South of Sane attacks 0:070 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Data 4,11 .Xis COndltloru (HW =f0, Soft =13) Average Daily TraKa(A0. 41,100 all Autos: 15 Peek HwrPomsmage: 10% McNUm Trvoka(2Aiks).- 15 Peak HOUr Vdumn' 4,110 veM1ldea Heavy Tracks (3 +aalos): 15 venkle speed' 45 .1 Vahicre We NaaniarLane Diserack 76 fort VehkaTyge I Day Evening Ngnf City Sih Darn 9000 An. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium TUCks: 84.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 NO BamerType(S-Wal(1- Berm): BO Heavy TVdts: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cerdenlne DSL. Beset cenreas Dld, In obmrvm: iLl.9 rBd iW6 fad Nolsesourw T9evetbnepnlxp Asks' 2000 Berner Dirac¢ In onrervar 0.0 red Medum rmdra: 4070 Dbarrver Hegnl(abovn Poe): ..cad H., Trucks: 6078 Grade AdjudmeM'90 Pad Ekvadon: 00 rall Lane EquhdentDkrma(Inbo Roetl Snick r, 9. reel Area: 92547 Rose.. f1ON fad V,aw,- -WO aagnal Maemm Tate 92504 Rghl Vrew: 90.0 degrees Haavy Trtmks' 92547 (i1WA Ndu MOdd L11nu7ahwe Ieg6Aning Venlda Type I It. I Tmq Fbw I Dandshe I FinIIe ROad Fresnel I.Mrs Berm A. Aufus: 66,46 4m 4,11 -120 4,87 amo 0:070 Aufus: 6646 4.19 4,11 -120 4,87 amo 0.000 Maintain Trunks: 7945 - 1284 -4,11 -129 -097 9000 9073 Maintain Trunks: 7945 - 1305 -4,11 -129 /r.97 9000 0. Heavy Tn2ka a4.25 -1659 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOW 0073 Heavy Tn2ka a4.25 -1761 -4.11 -120 -516 .0.007 0073 UnMtlgrted No 1L.1 W(wdal TOpn and hartlera urn of UnMtlgnfed Ndae LeVeb (wMOUt Tapn endhartlx alLMWtlonf Varese Type Lee Peak Hhm Lae Day Ieg6Aning Lear Nigh Lan CNEL Vans¢Type Lee Park Hass Lae Day Ieq Evening Led Night LM CNEL Aubs; 677 65.5 "A SIX 66.6 673 Aubs; 67.3 65.4 63] 570 66.2 668 Modfum Tracks: 61.5 1510 53.6 ,52.1 50.5 60:8 Medium Trucks: 61,1 596 53.2 51.7 60.1 604 Heavy Trucks' 623 WS 51.9 53.1 61.5 616 Heay Tracks' 61.9 W.5 515 521 fi 612 Vehknts NSSe: 696 67.5 647 60.0 07.6 690 VehkJS NSSe: 692 57.4 64 3 596 65.1 all Cameral Dhbnse ro NOias COnrour Cn MU Cameral Wehnse ro NOias COnrour Cn Mp 70 dE4 0dais I W dBA I 55 tlBA 1 70 at 0 a 50 dBA 55 tlBA ids: W 173 3]2 0.1 itln: 75 182 34a 752 CNEL: S6 105 399 859 CNEL: 81 174 374 SW !henry, sky 49,.12. 6.1 -56 chest. say 29.'.12. Scenario: Tear2016WItr Pmlecl Pmjecl Nerve• NNCPC Road Name: jeaddee -130 4,87 Job NUmher 8211 Road Segment Noah of Coast Highway 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hughes, Gala 4:11 SIb Cmeleons Hal 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tral (AOQ: 38.700 -hide. All. 15 PaakHwr Pemenlsga 10% MWWm TmMS(2 Axks): 15 I Hour Volmrs..' 3,870 -hides Heavy imck .Axles): 15 Vahicln Spend: 45 mph Vahkla We Near/Fariugq 0isfance: 76 Met yehkbTyga I Day Eval Nghl I Deily &Te Dart &'Ie WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 94.8% 48% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 RM Samar Typa l0.WalL I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% CBnRniM Carl gamer 1CO.O reel Mass Somme EfevMbm(In leefj Camwlme Dist m Oberver IDOL fed Arms, I.I. Bern« orates m Observer: 0o red Mecum Tand:e: 4.Wo observer Hegd!(Abovs Pee): sO fast HaaryTrvcka e006 Grade AHudmene 90 Patl Ekvalion: 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane Equivalent OHhnre(n h Q Road Ebvnal 90 led ANDS: 92.547 Rand.. 00% Left View: -900 deal hletllum Tmcks 92504 Stan Viaw: W 0 angmes Henry Tmcks: 92547 Niwa Nolu Modsf cakmdfms shwa al lw Moed cmmmflma Venda Type I REM¢ I TmT Fiuw I OisGnw I Firs. Road I From. I. A. I Berm A!!en SCenalro: Teer2016WMProed maqual Name• NNCPC Rcaa Name: Jam6mee -130 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Road Segment: SouNa Coast Higaway 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlghw ry ONe 4:11 Sib CmeleoN (Hare= 10,.. =If) Average Daily Tiel (aidd 12.900 vehidea Aulas' 15 Paul later Faremaga' 10% Metllum Trader (2 Ax %s): 15 I HOm Wkwas..' 1,290 -hide. Heavy Trader ksummit tb Venetia Lased: 45 mph Isignaa We Near/Far Lane Distance: 761ed yebkbTyga I Dry Eversholl NON Deity &'Ie WU 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %9TA2% Madman Trucks: 94.8% 4.9% 193% 194% Bartel Height. 0.0 led, Samar Typo rIal I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 18.8% 0.74% (tennis, Cash. Barter 100.0 reel Not.. Somme EMVMbrm q.eeefj Camwlkre I to Observer IDOL fed ANUS, 2000 Sal Disrenre to DGrervar: 0o red Agamum Trucker 4.Wo observer might (Above Pull SO reel Heavy Trvcka 8,006 Grade A(lustment 90 Patl Ekvalion: 0.0 reel 00 tell Lane Equivalent Chinese- (in feeQ Road Ebvnal L last ANDS: 92 547 Rand.. Oo% Left View: 00.0 degmea McNUmi. ferI Right Viaw: 900 aegmm Hurry Turman 92547 shwa al lw Moed cmmmflma Venda Type I REM¢ I V&Ilde Type T REM¢ I TmIOCFbw I Oismnca I FONIe Rand I Fmmrel I Gan Att Reran Aftan Armor 6646 3.93 4,11 -130 4,87 Job NUmar 8211 0.000 0000 Amorm 6646 -C65 4:11 -150 4,87 sm COnelaom (HW =f0, soft= f5j 0.000 0.000 Msmum Tmcks: 7945 -1331 -411 -1211 1W Peak HOUr Volumn' 9009 9873 laterat Theake: 7945 -1909 -411 - 120 1W Vaffisil a I Day Evenirq fasts I Orly 9000 9087 Henry Tmcks 81 -1727 -4.11 -130 -516 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% 0,000 0.003 Hasty Trucks' Balm 1284 411 -130 -516 0.0 feel 0,000 0.003 WmM9eNd NOhe Lewla (wllAOnf Tapo aneberewelfMUdpnj H., Tral SnB Gorda Adjudearat 90 Pee Ekvetlon: 00 tell Lan.Eq.&al IDlahna Onh Q (InmMgered NOhe LnvNa(want Tops and all atNnmHon) Auks: 9f1607 Roetl.. 00% Daft Viaw.- -910 ae9hea VenrcJeType Laq Pork Ha or L,dey I re' Lowers, Is, NIgM Ldn Venda Type I REM¢ I CN¢ sessawType Limlossuretsawil Leq Lary I 1egEwen, Lee Night Lean I CN¢ Astral 67,1 65.2 6314 574 496 6,10 69.6 Auloc' 623 60.4 58.6 52.6 58.3 613 1 Medium Trucks: 608 59.3 53.0 11A 39.1 59.0 50:1 Medium Tmcks: 56d 54.5 433 4515 478 51 553 Heavy Tommy 61 (1 51.2 525 37.4 60.8 60.9 Heavy Trans. : 51 0.5 46.4 477 46.1 56.0 562 Venme N.: 660 67.2 1 59.3' 592 67.9 66.3 vestal Nestle: (AI CIA 512 54.6 58.9 CIA 636 Ca im DMbnnfa NOisaC Ww(inT t) 633 Cl ftdia Chiral fly Nasu Carl fur MQ CanlMim DMbnnro Meiaa Cdnrour(in Tee4 Cl ftdia MNmhe by fill Carl Cn Al TO tlBA 55 eager 1 61 1 SS dB4 1 55 111 I TO tlBA 55dBA Wage I Sl Lean: 72 159 335 19 722 Bfi Ltln: 35 75 191 71 347 CNEL: TI 167 350 20 775 92 CNEL 37 80 173 76 372 I all, Sronado: Year 2016 With Purled Pmjed Name: NNCPC Ruae Name: Santa Crux -130 4,87 Job NUmar 8211 Road Segment North of San Joaquin Hills SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data .0 Coneltlom (HW =f0, soft= S sm COnelaom (HW =f0, soft= f5j Avenge Orly Trial (An. 1,700 sell Autos 15 Peek Hour Porderel: 10% Mecum TmaksRAikd.- 15 Peak HOUr Volumn' 170 Wall Heavy Tluake(3 +Axles): IS .law fame m, an .1 val W. MushiarLan9 Didarrms, 52 feel Vaffisil a I Day Evenirq fasts I Orly Sih Data Barter Height 0.0 1 Autos: hill 12.9% 9.6% Ill Medium Trucks 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barterift 0.0 led BemerType(0Wall, 1- Berme: BO Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cemenlm Dist. Sal 199.9 fad aloes. stoma Fieaallons an reap Canledlne Led his Ob. 1006 fad Autos, 2000 Berner Distance to Oberver, 0.0 feel Wei Tucks: 4000 fdamer ,or (AD.. Pod): 59Igd H., Tral SnB Gorda Adjudearat 90 Pee Ekvetlon: 00 tell Lan.Eq.&al IDlahna Onh Q Road Eleventh: 90.1 Auks: 9f1607 Roetl.. 00% Daft Viaw.- -910 ae9hea Neemm Tonal 98 We Rgbf view: 90.0 aagrea Havy Trolls 96608 FHWA All Model fassulelas Venda Type I REM¢ I Tough Fmw I Dldrnne Venda Type I S. I Tm5 Fmw I Gisfenne I Hale Fund I Fran& I. Men I Berm A. Schal: Yasr20lfi WiNPmjed fajed Noma :NNCPC Road Name: Banta Crux -130 4,87 Job NUmeir 8211 Road Segment' Sam of Ban Joaquin Hills of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data 4,39 .0 Coneltlom (HW =f0, soft= S Avenge Daily The Wa(A4. 12.700 sell So. 15 Peekilon'.., 10% Mecum TrvCka(2Aiks).- 15 Peak HOUr Vduma' 1,270 vehldes Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles): IS Vehkle speed' an mpg vahl MM NaaeFarlane Dismrrms, 52 tell VehkKTyge I Day Evenirq legal Daily Sih Date Am. hill 12.9% 86% 9742% Medium Trucks: 9a.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 1 BamerType(DWaI( I- Berm): 00 Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CeNedlne Dial as Sal 190.9 fad anss.sm awasselbmpn Tap Canter, Did. as Obarvar Ink fed Autoe, 2000 Barter Dolmas to Otal, 0.0 reel Medium Tucks: 4600 Dbarver sial(AD.. well 591ed Henry TNAS: 6n8 Grade Adfudment 90 Pee Ekvetion: 00 red Lan.EqukeientDkbna(ln( t) Roetl Ekvdis, 90 reel ANbs: 98607 Rose Grade: 00% Left V,sw.- -910 aegrea Madman T.a: ad We fight Vrew: 90.0 aagrea HavyTwts' 96608 (i1WA NWU Modal Llkulehms leq EVaning. Lag Nigh Venda Type I REM¢ I Tough Fmw I Dldrnne I Finlle Road Fmeal I.Man Derm A. Areas: May - 865 4,39 -130 4,87 al of Aubs: 6646 LAh 4,39 -130 4,87 al 0.000 Madman TU. 7945 IF -439 -129 -097 9009 9873 Madman TU. 7945 -IF a -439 -129 1,37 9009 0. Heavy Took, 54.25 -3984 -439 -130 -516 Il000 0003 Heavy Trv2ka 54.25 12.11 -439 -130 -516 0.000 (I003 UnMtlg0hed NOfa LeVN far.uI TOm and banter nilenudbnf UnMtlgnfed Naa LssaughwMaul Tapnendhanlaa ...Va.) Venidethem La PeeN Hbur La Day leq EVaning. Lag Nigh LM CNEL Venidetype Leq Park .11 La Day La EVadng Led Nigh LM CNEL Autos; 532 513 496 435 52.1 527 Assm; 620 Bill 58.3 522 60.9 61.5 Medium Tmcks: 470 45:5 39.1 37.6 48.0 48.3 Medium Tmcks: 557 542 478 46.3 54.8 55.0 Henry Trucks' 478 ill 37.4 38.6 47.0 47.1 Hasty Tmcks' 56.6 5511 46.1 473 55.1 55.8 Vehkle fill 55.1 51 592 45.5 540 54.5 VehkJS fill 638 S2o 58.9 51 62.8 633 Cl ftdia Chiral fly Nasu Carl fur MQ Cl ftdia MNmhe by fill Carl Cn Al 70 tlfl4 55 dBA I Will 1 55 111 1 70 tlfl4 55 dBA 50 dB4 55 tlBA Idn: 9 19 40 Bfi ran: 33 71 153 329 CNEL: 9 20 43 92 CNEL: 35 76 164 353 Iwal Fbv 49..12. 6.1 -57 Wool was us. .12 Staniar,: Year2016WMProind P Peal Name• NNCPC Rcad Name: Sanlacrvz 420 4,87 Job NUmhec 8211 R,ad Segl Ni to San Olememe 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Stil yOala 4,39 Sib Cmtlld,ns(Hard =10. Sol 15) Average Daily Taa?2(Ad, 12400 vehid. A.. 15 Paakllwr Percenmga 10% MWWm TmMs in Axks). 15 Peak Hour Volmrre.' 1,240 -hid.. Heavy'hal p, Axles): 15 vehicle Speed: 45 rapt, filial Ifir Ne../ llr Carre Ciafance: 52 feet Vahkill I Day Evarbol Ni I Daily Site Dot Soh Da. Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% RdMeIHal9llt 0.01eM Banker T hr, orWall, 1- Serra): 00 Heavy Trucks: Si 21 %. 118% 0.749. (Darla MDI5t 10 Seller 1C0.01ee1 Nasa SOUWa EMVMbns (In .1) Camwllna Dist to Obrral III fed AN,s, 2000 Baader Oil b Obmrvea: Do bd Mall Trucka: 4.000 observer heal hortve Pee): 5o fael Haaryrrvcka 8,006 credo Ad)udmene 90 Pad Ebvaiion: 0.0 had 0o rata Lane Equivalent OHhnrefair Fall Road Salvation. 90 IeN Arras: 9f1607 Rand.. 0.0% Left View: -No degral War- did RI Vital. W 0 degrees Hoary Tracks: 95605 NiWA. M,dsl Cakuleti,ns Ldn Vebld.Type I It. I lands Type I REMF1 I Thal Fbw I ..nw I FNle Roatl I Fors. I. A. I Berm A!!en Staniar, Year2016WMPmjecl ft, a Nahrl NNCPC Road Ni Santa crvz 420 4,87 Job Number 8211 R,ad Segmanf: South of San Cathode 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hignal ONe 4,39 Sol COndIdON (hand =10, th. =15) Average Deily Tre?c(Al 10.000 -hid.. Aulas' 15 PaakHwr Perrial' 10% MWWm Trucks (n Ax %sf: 15 Peak HO.. VOlmrre.' 1,000 -hid.. Heavy Torda(3k Axlesf: 15 vanicla Spied: 45 rapt. Itaki 06Y N...F., Lane Dishnce: 52 het Vabkill I Dry Evaning Nlshf Deity I to WU Soh Da. Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 UndWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% RdMeI H01911t 0.91eM Banker Typa orWaq 1- Serra): 00 Heavy Trucks: Si 27%. 118% 0.74% CBnRni. DI5t 10 Pallor 100.0 .1 No.. SOUFe EMVMbns Doha fj Camwllne Dart b Observer fall fed Arras, 2000 Banta Dlslenre to OGrervar: 0o bd Madlum Trucka: 4.000 Obserer halhbove Pal 50 and Hoary Trvcka 8,006 Grade Arlusihhl 90 Pad Ebvaiion: 0.0 had 0o rata Lane Equivalent Dhaanre (in feeQ Road Ebvation. 001ad All 9f1607 Rand.. Oo% Left View: No normal McNUmT ad, 99599 Right Vital. 900 degrees Heal, Trucker 98605 HIWA NOIx Model falauletrans Ldn Vebld.Type I It. I lhandh,Ty_,r oll I TreI6c Fbw I Ovartara I iRmd Fmmrel I BanrerAtten I Berm Allan Aubs; 6846 -io2 4,39 420 4,87 Job Numbs 8211 0.000 0000 Aubs; 6546 -195 4,39 -120 4,87 Average Ddly TraWc(Add. 0.000 am mum Trunks: 7945 -IF IF -439 -1211 1L7 950 Mhil 9909 9003 Aura Torah; 7945 -1919 -439 -120 1L7 Soh Da. 9090 9000 Hoary Tracks 61 -2221 439 -120 -516 Certal Dirt ro Sal 0,000 am Hoary Tracks' fil 2115 439 -120 -516 Mal Tmcks: 4000 0,000 0.003 (NmM9eNd NOhe Lewla onfil nTnl and all elfMuatl,nj Pad Ekvatlun: 0o rata Lan.6i rvdenlDhhna OnlreQ Rood Elevation: (NmM9eNd NO he Lin. wllhmn Irl and Curl an.any,nj Roan.. LO% I Via -No daghea N:niam Tmcks: 99 sea VenrcJeType Leq PI Ham real day Iaq EUwivig Leq NIgM Ldn Vebld.Type I It. I CNEL Tm5 Fbw I Otional I Leal Peeki I LM oay I Ieq EVaing Leg NI9M I Ldn Lnq Mi CNEL All 618 wo 532 52.1 57.0 ill 61A Autos: 689 59.0 57.3 512 55.8 69.8 684 Madi TUCks: fill 54.1 47.7 462 544 52.9 54.a 549 Mot Tracks 54] 53.2 41 45.3 498 51 539 Heavy Tol 564 55.0 0.6.0 4i2 553 539 556 557 Heavy Thanks: 55.5 &1 45.1 483 50.7 542 51.8 Val N.: 61 6119. 586 54.1 625 60.8 62.7 63.1 Vehide fill 1 6110 57.9 00.2 wo 61.7 622 CantMia OhtancebNOiaeCarour (in heQ 58.3 58.8 Canhrlil Distance of Nasr COnrou1 On MQ Ca1Mla Dlabnce at NOfae COnrour (in I Canhrlil Wrbnn of Nasr COnrou1 fin i M oSo III I 60 d6A I SSd64 60 tl89 1 I MdBA ini I fall 70 tlfl4 SSdSA 50 tlHA Ltln: 32 79 159 27 320 129 Ltln: 26 no 130 17 261 AS Cl 35 75 161 29 347 135 CNEL' SO 65 140 18 301 Sall Year 2016 With Pmlecl Pi jed Name: NNCPC Read Name: Santa Cruz -120 4,87 Job Numbs 8211 Road Segment Iof Newyn CTR O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhmy Dora 4,39 SNa COndlDOras(HW =f0,tiral j Average Ddly TraWc(Add. 9.500 vehidea Autos: 15 Peak Hwr Pomsdage: 10% Meaum TUCks(2 Aika).- 15 Peak HOm Vdunre.' 950 Mhil Heavy Trvcke(n, Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 vad da W. NaadFirl ant orde 52 feel Ve ddiT th, I Day Eiral Nlghf I Deily Soh Da. 9009 Aufos: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 103% 194% Barter HelBXL' 0.0 led BamarTypa(OWall, 1 -Sal 00 Heavy Trucks: S6.5% 27% 188% 074% Certal Dirt ro Sal Ion. and bole. Snal 6eaelbns Pn tap Canhdlna Did to On. 100.0 fed Andd 2000 BalD Will a Ob rannat 0.0 and Mal Tmcks: 4000 Observer He,or hive Fall 59 rqd H., Tri 8,005 Grads An%udm.M' 90 Pad Ekvatlun: 0o rata Lan.6i rvdenlDhhna OnlreQ Rood Elevation: 90.1 Auks: 9f1607 Roan.. LO% I Via -No daghea N:niam Tmcks: 99 sea Rghf Vrew: 90.0 agar- Heavy Tmds 96608 F1WA Nda MOWI aeon dart as Lei flats Vebld.Type I It. I Vebld.Type I It. I Tm5 Fbw I Otional I Fkile Ran I Fesn& Berner Mrn I Berm A. Sronario: Year2016WiNPmled Pi jed NUma: NNCPC Rand Name: Santa Cruz -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road SagmenL' South of Nanpon CTR O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvh-y DMa 4,39 .0 Contro u(HW =f0, Soft =15) Ahol Ddly The Kc(A4. 4.500 val Autos: 15 Peak Hon'. age: 10% Meaum Thoka(2Aika).- 15 Peak HOm Vdunl 460 Mhil Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 vehicre W. N aollrj iane Drat­ 52 feet Vehddi I Day Evaning Ni Dsly Soh Cal 9009 At. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Tmcks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Bander-Height 0.0 M1 BamarTypa oral I Sal BO Heavy TVaAs: Sol 27% 10.8% 074% Cerdenlne DiSL ro Hamer Genhdlne Did. b Obrervar 199.9 and look fed Ndamil farralcnspn Tap Add 2000 Samar DUlanca to Observe" 0.0 and Madoum Tmcks: 4000 Db6erver He,or hive fal 591ad HWry TNAS: 8006 tirade Adfudment 90 Pad Ekvatlon: 0o rota Lane EqukalentDkbnrtanlrep Road Ekvarion: 90 and ANbs: 98607 Rood tired.: LO% Lire Via -Nodal Manmm Tmeka: ad Wat Rohl Vrew: 90.0 degree Heavy Tnl 96608 F1WA Ndu M.WI nadhadaha. Iaq LArang. Lei flats Vebld.Type I It. I TmR Fbw I Dldenrt I Fkg.ROad FRSaI I.Mart Berm A. Aufos: 61 -2.17 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 O:WO Aufos: 68.46 - 532 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 am Manlnm Thanks: 7945 -1941 ASR -129 1L7 0 an 9003 Madlum Thanks: 7945 1256 -439 -129 /r.97 9009 9003 Heavy Torsi 84.25 -2337 -439 -120 -516 .0,000 0,003 Healy Torsi 84.25 2652 -439 -120 -516 0.000 0003 UnMtlgOretl NOIL.I d (wNMur Total antlhanleraNaudknj UnMtlgOfed Naa LeVels(wMOur TOPnandbmla0 uaVal VaNde Type Leq Park Hbm Lag Day Iaq LArang. Lei flats Ldh CNEL VaNde Type Leq Paak HOUr Lag Day Leg EVaning Lnq Mi LM CNEL Aulrs; 697 58.6 57.0 510. WS 692 Aufrs; 57.5 55.8 539 476 55b 57.1 Medium Tmcks: 544 52.9 458 45.0 53.5 537 Maflum TWks: 513 498 434 419 50.3 595 Hilary Tmcks 553 539 ".a 46.1 644 516 Heay Trcks 52.1 50.7 417 429 51.3 514 Val Nda: 625 60.8 576 S3.o 61.5 62.0 Wil Nara: 594 wo 54.5 0.96 58.3 58.8 Canhrlil Distance of Nasr COnrou1 On MQ Canhrlil Wrbnn of Nasr COnrou1 fin i 70 tlfl4 65 tl8A 1 60 tl89 1 55 tlBA 1 70 tlfl4 65 SO 50 tlHA 55 tlBA idn' 27 56 129 271 fdn: 17 36 AS 187 CNEL 29 63 135 291 CNEL: 18 39 m 179 oralia tbv49.A1s. 6.1 -58 hrat.,M ..rdh Science : Ter,2016WMPmled ricierl Name• NNCPC Roap Name: Natural UR Job Number 8211 Road S,na l: West of Newgon CTR 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Onarty Gala 4:11 Sib Cme ns Dual 10. soN =15) Avernga Daily Tia ?2(Al 7,300 veM1idea Auras: 15 PaakHwr Pkoiciaga, 10% MWlum Thalia, (2 itiol 15 Peak Hour Whisre.' 730 venues Hat, Tmcka(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Beard: B rued Vehkle We Near/Falince Direct 76 fail yetskaB s I Dry EveMng Night I Deily Site Data 9990 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9ht 0.0 RM Sumer Typa(0.Wdl, 1- Bent). Be Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% C.nRniM Del 10 Seller 1.. reel Ndk. $-a. Eleveude.(In Famed Constantin Dist a Observer 1LU6fed ANDS, 2000 Bartle/ Bud ree to obmrven Be reel lirpium Trucks: 4.000 observer Iscu l(A.. Pee): 5o fast He,v Tri 8,006 Grade AHummene Be I Elevation: 0.0 reel Fred Elevation: Lane Equlvaleal Dhill Be hard Road Ebvffiirs. .3 a. ANOs: 92.547 Road.. 90% Left View: -900 deg.e9 Wd,- Tmcke' 92504 Rghl Vhaw: W 0 degrees Heavy Tmcke: 92547 .ewe NMU Mods, cakuleNOns I TmPWFbW I Gfeareat Venide Type I REMF1 I Thal Fbw I Oidance I FIN. Rind I Fiscal I. A. I Allen Sucker, Tear2016WMPmjecl facere Name• NNCPC Roap Name: Natural CTR -120 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Road Segment Bouh ed Santa. Baleam 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONe 4:11 Sib CmeleoN (Bland =10, a- =15) Average Daily Tre?c(Add TWO veM1idea Auras' 15 Paak.- rPerstarea a' 10% MWWm Thader(2 thee. 15 Peak I.. VOlumn: 790 vahides Hal Trial pk Axles): 15 Vadreta Beard: 45 mph Vehkle We I ... fiat Lane Distance: 76 fait yetskaB a I Day Evaning Beef Bally See WU 9990 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% BandeIHel9ht. 0.0 Is. Sumer Typa l0.Waq I Berm): Be Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% CanRniM Dral 10 Seller 1.. reel No.. SwFe EMVatbns an Fame) Camwllne Dist a Observer 1LU6fed Assay, 2000 Bechar Dl nee to observer: Be real Usks. Trucks 4.000 observer rial(A.. Ped): 50 reel Henry Trvcka 8,006 GradeAukhrent Be I Elevation: 0.0 reel Fred Elevation: Lane Equlvaleat Chief -(in hall Road EbvaNOrt L3 reel Area 92547 Road.. 06% Left View: FBI degmea McNUmi eke' 92504 Right Vhaw: 900 degrees Heavy Trucks 92547 Hlwa All.1.1 cmurleHOns I TmPWFbW I Gfeareat V&ride Type T REMF1 I Trel6c Fbw I Oiikent I Then Rood I Friend I Banie/Atten I Berm Arran Aubs; 6846 -332 4.11 -120 4,87 Job Blunder: 8211 Bwo 0000 Areas 68.46 -297 4:11 -120 4,87 Ancent Dilly TraWc(Ad6: .0.0(0 0.000 Mum Trucks: 7945 -2958 -411 - 120 -097 690 veM1ldes 9909 9000 Muruum Trucks: 7945 -2921 -411 - 120 -097 Si. Da. 9990 9000 Heavy Trucks 8425 1451 -4.11 -120 -516 o nhrdina Dist. Samar Can.dlneI in Ob. 0,000 0.003 Hen, Trucks' 84.25 NAT 411 -120 -516 Be led 0,000 0.003 (InmMgefed NOhu LevNa(wllhout Thor and border at us ) Lane Equhalent Dh.nre(in half) Fred Elevation: 9..e1 UnmMgered all LevNa(wMwut Tope and barren/ rdhemHonf fall Via-- -980 degrees Naelam Tmcke: 92.5.4 Rgbf Vrew: VenrcJeType Leq Pmk HC cul Leq Gay I raq Luarksg I Leq VickieType I R. I TmPWFbW I Gfeareat I Fkee Read I Franc I. Men I Berm A. VdrideType I Lee Pork roar I LM Gay Last Nigh I Len I CNEL Au(nc' 598 579 562 WA 687 59.3 Autos' 602 581 See BOB 59d 591 Dist Trucks: 538 5Y] 45.7 ill 528 529 Medium Trucks; 539 52A 46] 44.5 530 532 Has, Tanks: 514 530 44D 462 53.6 537 Heavy Tmcke: 54.8 53.3 44.3 45.6 53.9 510 VehMe N.: 617 598. 5610 52.1 We 61.1 Ventiure Ndse: 620 60.3 57.1 524 6t0 61:A cnlwliue Dkmnn. HOin COn.a.(in Fare c duarim Dkmnn. Noire Centel (in Band TO dBA 1 651 1 Be III 1 55 dB4 I MdBA 1 B.1 1 Be tlBA 1 55 di Ltln: 24 51 110 238 Ltln: 25 54 118 259 CNEL 25 55 118 255 CNEL 27 Be 125 269 I all, Sronadu: Year 2016 With Pmjecl Pi fad Name: Ni Road Nick: Nevpod UR Job Blunder: 8211 Roae5a9monG Noll of Banta Bartam 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway D•La 4,11 sm COneeaoru (HW =f0, soH =15) Ancent Dilly TraWc(Ad6: 8.900 veM1idea Autos: 15 Peek HOUrkshere e: 10% McNUm TmCkif2Aika),- 15 Peak HOm Vclurrre.' 690 veM1ldes Heavy Three (3 +Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 which, We Naas Far Lane a,ermake 76 test VahkkTys. I Day Eyersal NgM I Dilly Si. Da. 9000 Aufos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% Backer H."ad, 0.0 tee{ BamarType(DWalL I Berm): Be Heavy Tmdts: 86.591 27% 188% 074% o nhrdina Dist. Samar Can.dlneI in Ob. too.. fad 100.0 fed Nolsw Somers. Adeaar.ns an Taef) Auloa, IMe Berner Distance to Observer, 0.0 fed Morpum Tricks: 4.000 Ob6erver He,nl(AD.. Face Be led HWry, TNAs: 81008 Grade Adfudmen[ he Pad Ekvatlor: Beal Lane Equhalent Dh.nre(in half) Fred Elevation: 9..e1 Area 92547 Rose Gredk BO% fall Via-- -980 degrees Naelam Tmcke: 92.5.4 Rgbf Vrew: .O.. de9rem Heavy Tmds' 92547 F1WA Nal MOdel G11etha6we Len Nigh VickieType I R. I TmPWFbW I Gfeareat I Fkee Read I Franc I. Men I Berm A. Sronadu: Year 2016 With Fluted Pi jed is- Ni Rnap Name: Neapad CTR -120 4,87 Job Blunder: 8211 Road 5egkkkr South of Sane Oruz 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data 4,11 .0 Loniana-(HW =f0, soH= le Averege Ddly TraWs(Al B,3W vel Al : 15 Peek HourPomsMrge: 10% McNUm TrvCk4(2Aika),- 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 630 YeM1ldes H.a, Three 0, Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 Vahic. MM Naaniariane Diestake' 76 fast VeresType I Day EveMrlg Ni Daily Si. Da. 9000 At. 77.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Hel96t 0.0 ease, SamarType efil lL 1- Berm): Be Heavy Tmdts: Bill 27% 10.8% 074% Cerdenlrre Dirt as Semen Cun.is Dan, a Obrervar 199.9 had 100.0 fed Ne d. sourw 6'ea.lbnr pre fxp Anne, ii Me Samar Danish. l00Ltrervat 0.0 Beef hgdlum Tricks: x000 Dble- rul(AD.. Prdf: Bea. HWVy TNAs: 8,008 Grade AdjYetmenL'90 Pad Ekvatlon: Beal Iane E9uhalenlDavermenleeQ Roetl Ekvetar, 9. Beef Al 92547 Rord.. BO% Left Via-- -990 degrees Mak.. 925.4 Rghl Vrew: 90.0 degrees Heavy Trtmks' 92547 FIWA. Mrdrl Lllnule6ws Len Nigh Vehlde Type I R. I Thadil I Dlafrnde I FkIlr Road Frasrlel I.Mac Berm A. Aubs: 68,46 -356 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0:000 Aubs: 68.46 -396 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0.000 Meelum Tmcke: 7945 1.80 -4,11 -129 1s7 0 fah 9003 Mseorm Trucks: 7945 112. -4,11 -129 /r.9T 9000 9003 Heavy Tmcke Kier -2476 -4.11 -120 -516 0,000 8003 Heavy Tmcke Kier -2515 -4.11 -120 -516 0.000 8003 UnMNgded NolanL.IW(wNnout T.- antlhenlx: aCanudbnf UnMtlgefed Nl Leeds(w ut Tri and benMa Oon) VenideType Lee Peak Hbur Laq Gay Leg6An.g. Len Nigh LM CNEL VdrideType Lee Pa&r Hbw Lan Gay Leg EVantng Led Night LM CNEL Aide; 596 57.7 55.9 498 58.5 59.1 Areas ; 592 57,3 555 495 58d 587 Medium Trucks: 53.3 51.8 45.5 43:9 524 525 Medium Trucks: 529 51A 45.1 43.5 520 522 Heavy Thick.' 542 me 43] 45D 53.3 53.5 Heay Trucks' Me MA 43.3 446 529 53.1 Deal Ndse: 614 59.7 565 516 60.4 60.8 Vessel Ndse: 6110 59.3 55.1 516 We 60.5 Cen.Him Interco .Maine COn.ur On MQ Cen.Him Mn Re Mane COn.u1 fair /wt) 701 65 di I dBdB4 I 55dBA 1 701 0 d 50 tlBA 55 tlBA Ldn: 23 49 169 229 Let 22 46 1(A 215 CNEL: 25 53 114 245 CNEL: 23 50 107 231 lual Way ke.12. 6.1 -59 IualWay 29.'.12. Streator Teer2016WMPmlecl P/oiecl Name• NNCPC Roap Name: Intel CTR -130 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Rand Sagmenb NOnM1 W Sang Cruz 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1way Gala 4:11 SIb Cme ns(lard= 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Tra ?c (Al 5.600 -hid. Auras: 15 PaakHwr Percenal 10% MWIUm Trucks (2 Axks). 15 Peak HOm Whyral Sun vehides Heavy Tmcka(3k Axles): 15 vehicle 3paed: b mph Warthe We I ... /FarLane Distance: 76 her yebkall I Dry Evarl Nghl I Deily &I CaU 9090 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 111 Medium Tucks: 91 49% 193% 194% Bander Haight. 0.0 Rai Samar Typa (0.Wal(1- Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: Still 21%. 108% 0.74% CBnall Dl5t 10 Seller 100.0 Ref fill $-a. EIavatbns(In Read Centauri Dist to Observer 1LU6 fed ANUa 2000 Serial Dahe- to 05mrven OO feel Mapium Tracks: 4.W0 observer Hagn!(A.. Par): 5o reel HvavyTril 8,006 Grade AHudmene 90 Fad Senate, 0.0 feel Lane Equaralent Dh.na(in III Lane Equivalent DH.nre(nAnd) Road Elevation: .3 a. All 92.54] Rued.. 90% Left View: -900 degrees Madam im. 92504 Fight View: W 0 pegmes Heavy Tmcke: 92547 NiwA Al Modal Cakubth ors dead.Type I R. I Venda Type I REMF1 I TaT Flew I Oidiame I FIN. Road I Freenel Barrier A. I Berm A!!en Scenario: Teer2016WMPmjWt Pared Name• NNCPC Roap Name: NewpmI CTR -130 4,87 Job Number 8211 Rl Sa9menf: Nall W San. Rosa 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway ONa 4:11 Sib CmeleON (HUd =10, SON =15) Avarrg, Daily Theft (Add: 7,300 vell Aulns' 15 Paak Hour Perelearl 10% MWlum Thiele (2 there. 15 IHOm Volume: 730 vehides Heavy Tmnke(3k Axles): 15 Vadicle Speed: 45 mph Verykle We I.../F., Lane Daniel 76 led yebkall I Day Evi leg Nghl Dally Site WU 9090 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91 Medum Trucks: 91 4.9% 193% 194% Bander Height. 0.01ed Samar Type (0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy TVcks: Still 27 %. 118% 0.74% Canaan DI5t 10 Barter 1...e1 No.. SOaFe Eleve Onne an/eeff Centauri Drat to Dural 10I fed ANOe, 2000 Beeler Died e -to observer: 0,0 real Marcum Trial 4.Wo Gdservar HeyM(A.. Par): 50 at Hal Trucker 8,006 Grade Arluaurrdl 90 Pad Senate, 0.0 feel Lane Equaralent Dh.na(in III Lane Equivalent Dh.nre (in feeQ Road Elevation. L reel All 92547 Rued.. OB% Left View: 990 deal McNUmi rre' 92504 Right View: 900 degrade Heavy Thuel 925Q7 shwa xolw.1.1 Cdcnether. dead.Type I R. I v&llde Type T REMEL I Trel6c Fbw I Ois.nce I F9N. Rood I Friend I BarlierAtten I Berm At.n Al 6846 4,32 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Plunder: 8211 0.000 0000 Aube; 6546 -332 4:11 -120 4,87 Average Ddly TraKe(Al O.OW 0.000 Leyearim Tucks: 7945 -2155 -411 -1 z0 -097 I.".Mdea . W .. Myl Trucker 7945 -2. ad -411 -1 z0 1W Sir. Dar, 9090 90W Heavy Tmckc' 8425 1551 -4.11 -120 -516 Cnbudlrre Dirt. Berner 0,000 01 Hae,Theeks' 84.id -2451 411 -120 -516 Madura Trucks: 4.900 0,000 01 WmHgefed NOhu LevNa (wllAmn Typo and barrel ae6nuall Pea Elevation. 96 red Lane Equaralent Dh.na(in III Rosa Elevdiorr: unmHgated NOhu i eveH (wMrmn Tope and barrier attenue" Roetl Gredk 90% Left Via-- -90.0 signal Neeium Tender: 92.5.4 VenrcJeType Laq Pmk flow LM day I 1eq Evwivig I IMNigh Lpn dead.Type I R. I CNEL I Finis Rued I Fern& Berner Men I Berm A. I LM Peek Haur I LM Lay I feq EVmling Lear Nigh I Lan I CNEL Au(nc' 688 S6.9 553 41 575 51 58.3 Al ' 598 579 %2 BOA 58] 68.7 513 Malum Trucks: 1 51.1 44.7 432 549 53.4 51.8 51.9 Malum Trucks; 536 52d 45.7 14Z Si 528 529 Heavy TUka: 534 520 43.0 442 558 Si 52.6 527 Heavy Trucks: 54A 53.) 44.0 452 531 53.6 537 VehMa Nose: 60.7 58.8. 558 FA 638 61.3 596 60.1 Vehida NOSe: 617 59.9 586 52.1 601 wk 61.1 California Daniel. Nona. Dbntow (in r Q 60.8 613 Cenadine Distance Nose COnbur Cn MQ Lr,nlMlrw Danindr, la Naar, Cartel (in r Q Cenadine Mlle fir Noes COnbur Cn MQ TO d9a I MI I 50 JBA I SS dB4 50eBA 1 I MaBA 01 1 So dBA I SS di WdBA L. 20 44 95 TJ 2W 139 Lan: za 51 110 N 235 113 DNEt 22 47 101 31 219 146 CNEL 25 55 118 26 255 Sbal Year 2016 With Pmlecl Pi jad Name: NNCPC enter Need: Nreall CTR -120 4,87 Job Plunder: 8211 Read Still South N San. Rosa of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghway De. 4,11 sm COnelaoru (Hartl =f0, soH =15) Average Ddly TraKe(Al 10.000 veMdea Al 15 Peek Hour Pomsmage: 10% Medum Thinks (2 Al 15 Peak He, Volurrre.' I.".Mdea Heavy Tender p +Axles): 15 vehcle Gpeed' 45 .1 Vekicre M. liaadF.I.e. Didarral 76 feel VehkaTyle I Day Evening Nl I Deily Sir. Dar, 9009 Auks: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 103% 194% Sander HdpXG' 0.0 lent BamarType(DWalt 1- Bermf: 90 Heavy Trucks: bill 27% 198% 074% Cnbudlrre Dirt. Berner 1Lb.O red NOlswsomer. 6eaerbna an fxp cenremlre Did k obsarvd: Im.0 feel Andes 2000 Seller Dinner. m observer 0.0 red Madura Trucks: 4.900 observer ,at (AD.. Pas): 50 red Hear, Thal 8005 Gade Adyrdmene 90 Pea Elevation. 96 red Lane Equaralent Dh.na(in III Rosa Elevdiorr: .0.e1 Auks: 92547 Roetl Gredk 90% Left Via-- -90.0 signal Neeium Tender: 92.5.4 Right Vrew: 90.. pet. Heavy Truss.' 92547 (i1WA Ndu Model Llkufal Leg Night dead.Type I R. I Tmq lbw I Dldknde I Finis Rued I Fern& Berner Men I Berm A. Sronario: Tear2016trith Pmjed Pi jecl Nunee NNCPC Reap Neutral Newpad CTR -120 4,87 Job Plunder: 8211 Reap Segment' Noll of Ban Miguel of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghway 9a. 4,11 .0 Cane lime (HW =f0, lal= f5) Aveage Ddly Thad6 Q: 7.600 veMdea Al 15 Peek Hour Pomsmage: 10% Medum Trveka(2Aihill 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 760 vehides Heavy Tucks 0, Axles): 15 vehcle Gpeed' 45 .1 Vekicre We Naar/Farlane Diatanal 76 feel Vaftxds pe I Day Evenirq Ali Daily Sir. Dine 9009 At. 7.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 MI BamarType(0.Walt 1- Berm): BO Heavy Trucks: bell 27% 198% 074% CerRenine Cliff . Berner 199.9 red Nolaeso bleverbnapn Gxp cenremlre Did, k obmrvar: IM.0 Rd Anne 2900 Berner outer. In Dbrerver 0.0 red Madura Trucks: 4.900 ohserver ,el (AD.. Pas): 59 red H., Trade: 8,006 Gradeldwenene 90 Pad ERval 80 .d Lene EquhdenlDk.nabrifee) Roetl Ekvdicn: ..heel All 92547 Roetl.. 90% Left Via-- -90.0 sigmas Med. Teneke 925.4 Rghl Vrew: 90.. degrees Heavy Thy,s 92547 (i1WA Ndu Model Gllcufahws Leg Night Wand.Type I R. I TmPW Fbw I Gis.nde I Finale Road Free. I.Mae Berm A. Aubs: 61 -185 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 of Aides : 68.46 -3.14 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0.m Msalum Trunks: 7945 - 1919 -4,11 -12. 1ST 0fil .. Murl Trunks: 7945 1.39 -4,11 -12. /rgT 9009 0. Heavy Thiel 8435 -2315 -4.11 -120 -516 .9000 of Heavy Truel 8435 -2434 -4.11 -120 -516 B.OW of UnMtlgbRd NOIL.IdtwNMut Topo add banter udn) UnMNgORd NOIau Levels handed Trot and baMx uo0on) VebldeType Luq POek Hbw Law, Day 1eq Evening Leg Night LM CNEL VenldeType Leq Paok Hbw Laq Ley 1eq Evening Lad Meet I LM I CNEL Auros; 612 Sig 575 515 60.1 607 Al 690 58] 553 Di 58.9 59.5 Medium Tracks: 549 53.4 47.1 455 54.0 542 Medium Tracks: 538. Si 45.9 443 51 530 Heavy Trucks' 558 Si 45.3 466 54.9 55.1 H., Tracks' 54.6 531 "A 45A 637 539 Vdarde Ndse: 638 61.3 56.1 53.5 62.0 62.5 VdIdde Ndse: 618 601 569 52.3 60.8 613 Cenadine Distance Nose COnbur Cn MQ Cenadine Mlle fir Noes COnbur Cn MQ 70 tlfl4 55 dBA I 50eBA 1 55 tlBA 1 70 dfl4 55 SBA I WdBA 1 51 !do' TJ 63 139 2e3 left' N 53 113 244 CNEL: 31 68 146 314 CNEL 26 56 121 262 luueev.Mev49,'N.. SCenthe Tear2016WMPmlecl P /pied Name• NNCPC Road Name: Newpoa CTR -130 4,87 JOb Niel 8211 Read bsgmenf: SOUK O15an Mguel 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Ofeety Dele 4:11 SIb Cnnd a ns (fill 10. Soft= 15) Average Gaily Tiel(l 1I veM1ides Autos: 15 PeakHwr Percenmya 10% Ual TmMS(2 Anill 15 Peak HO Ur VOlmrre,' 1,090 veM1ides Hat, Tmnka(3k rail: 15 Van. Speed: 45 rape filial We N ... ni'rLane Oisfance: 76 het yerkatil a I Day Eviel Ni I Deily Sil Del &'fe WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMeIHeIBIIt 0.0 hM Banter Typo lO-Wal(1- Benny: 00 Heavy TVCks: 111 21%. 10.8% 0.74% Cereal idel 10 Seller 1.. het Net.. SOUW.EMVarbne(In lead Camwllne Dist In Odell till fed Area 2000 Beeler oaf b obmrvar: 0o led Mold Trurka: 4.W0 odserver evil (A.. Pad): 5o het HearyTntel 8,006 GradeA hahhrne 90 Pad Elenater, 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane E9ulvalenl Chafed- anFiled Road Elevation: 90 art Art 92.54] Roetl Gade: 90% Left View: -900 deeiaee Madam im. 92504 RI View: W 0 aegrees Harry Tmcka: 92547 Phal. Men, cehulefions Hlwa x.Iw M.1.1 cMUn.aan. I Venlde Type I REMF1 I Thal Fiuw I fine, a I FIN. Rmtl I Fresrrel I. A. I Allen Stealio: Tear2016WMPmjecl Pigod Name• NNCPC Rcaa Nam.: Nel CTR -130 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Road bsgmanf: East ul Newpan GTR 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9her, Data 4:11 Sib Cidenal u(I- 10,a - =15) An-da, Daily T ?c(Atl!): 9.100 veM1ides Autas' 15 Peak HOUr Pemenmya' 10% Ual Trucks (2 these. 15 Net HO Ur VOlmrre.' 919 veM1ides Hat, Thada(3k Axles): 15 V.nlcle 5pa.d: 45 rape Ital We N ... 4i't Lane Distance: 76 hel yerkatil s I Dry Eneing Nlaht Defy &'fe WU 9990 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91 UndWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeI He1911t 0.9 kM 6anier Type, (i 1- Benn): 00 Heavy TVCks: 111 27%. 198% 0.74% CenRni. DI5t 10 Seller 1.. het No.. SOUFe EMVatbns an/eeff Camwlln. Did b obs.rv.r fill fed Area 2000 Senlar Olsrenre In oGrerv.r: 0o red Mamum Trurka: 4.W0 odservar hal(A.. Pad): 50 reel Harry Trvcka 8,006 GradeAlerment 90 Pad Elenater, 0.0 reel Fred Elavdnrr: Lane E9ulvaenl Dhtanre(in Feel Road Elevation. L feel Auras: 92 5L7 Roed Grebe: 06% Left View: 980 deal McNUmi rate' 92504 Right View: 900 aegreee Heary Trvcke irl Hlwa x.Iw M.1.1 cMUn.aan. I V&llde Type T REMEL I Thant Fbw I Dlslenna I FINK R..d I Fre nd I BanlerAtten I Bean AOan Aubs; 6646 -i S0 4.11 -130 4,87 Jul Num.r 8211 0.090 0000 Aubs; 6646 -236 4:11 -120 4,87 Aveage Ddly TraWa(Aid. O.OW 0.033 MBNum Trucks: 7945 -1992 -411 -1211 19] 1,420.-Idee . W 90W All Trunks: 7945 -1950 -411 -1211 1W Si. Da. 9990 I. Heary Tmcka 8425 1217 -4.11 -120 -516 Ceraenlm Dirt. Banter cenremlre Did in obaarvm: 0,000 01 Heary Theke' fil -2355 411 -120 - 516 50 red 0.000 01 (InmMgeNd Nnh. LevNa(wINOUt Tri end be. elfMUial Pad Ekvadon: Lane E9uhalenl D..na(in fill Fred Elavdnrr: 90 .e1 (InmMgardNn.. L. .(wPowut TOpn end benler el rear of Left Via -90.0 dial N: thin TVCNS: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: VenldeType Laq Peak Hour I Leg Gay lnq Ltha y Leq Night I Lan I Lil I Fkile Road Feel I.Man Berm A. I LM Peak Ham I Leg Gay I lnq Evwilg Lag Nigh I Lan I CNEL Arnoc' 616 59.7 57.9 516 III 611 Arno&' 608 59.9 57.1 1 59.] 60.3 deal ThWks: 55.3 53.8 47.5 459 544 ME Meelum Tracks, 54.5' S3,0 46.7 45.1 538 530 Heavy Thi 562 54] 45.7 20 553 55.4 Heavy Thi 55.4 fill 44.9 462 54.5 51.] VehMe Nose: 63A 61.7 565 ml 62.4 626 Val Nal 626 60.9 57.7 A.o 61.6 620 CanrMim Dlebnn to HOin Centel (in Ted) CanlMim Dlebnn ne Haea Centel (in Tea4 70 dBA 65 dSA I Wd6A I WdSA I M111 0c0A I WdSA I WdR4 Ltln: 31 91 WO 310 Ltln: 26 59 129 275 Cl m 72 164 333 CNEL W 64 137 295 Seal Year 2016 With Pmjed Pi jed Name: NNCPC Road Name: Nexpoa CTR -120 4,87 Jul Num.r 8211 Road Segment Fit N Neil GTR ICirde O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhmy Dsta 4,11 SN.COndfic rar (HW =fa, SoN=15) Aveage Ddly TraWa(Aid. 14.200 veMdea A.. 15 Peek HmrPomsMage: 10% McNUmTteksRAiAI 15 Peak HOm Vdurre..' 1,420.-Idee Heavy Trvaire p, Axles): 15 vehkle speed 45 rape vad mMh Naar/Firl Delon a 76 fear Ve ddiT le. I Day Evening Nlghf I Daly Si. Da. 9000 Aufos: 77.5% 12.9% 9.6% 91 Medium Trucks: 1 49% 193% 194% Banter HdpXG' 0.0 legit BamerType(DWalt 1 -Sal 00 Heavy Tracks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Ceraenlm Dirt. Banter cenremlre Did in obaarvm: 1W.9 rW Im.0 fell fal Seartrne leaders P. txp Attire , IWif Seller Death. m observer, 0.e red Watent rucks: 4W0 onservar He,at(Above Ped): 50 red Heavy Thai 6W8 Gade Adyrdment 90 Paid Ekvadon: I ral Pad Ekvadon: Lane E9uhalenl D..na(in fill Fred Elavdnrr: 90 .e1 Aube: 92547 Roed Gredk L0% Left Via -90.0 dial N: thin TVCNS: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: 90.O ae9rem Heary Tmde 92547 F1WA Ndu Model Cdeulahwe FIWA NWU Model L11nu1ahwe Ward.Type I It. I TmPWFbw I Lathne I Fkae Rmd I Fear I. Men I Berm A. Scenario: Tear2016WiNPmjed Pjrid Numa: NNCPC Read Name: Neal CTR -120 4,87 Jul Number 8211 Rma Segment' Noll of Coast HIperay O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvh-y De. 4,11 .0 COndal (HW =f0, Ill =15) Average Ddly TraWc(AtlU: 16.400 veMdea A.. 15 Peek Hoh'..ge: 10% McNUm Trvoks(2Aika),- 15 Peak HOm Virl 1,640 veM1ides Heavy Tlucke 0, Axles): 15 vehkle speed 45 rape vad mWx N dFlrl Ditan a 76 feat Vehddi I Day Evening Ni Dsly Si. Da. 9000 At. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tmcka: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Bander-Height 0.0 Mt Samo,tine(0.Wel, I Berm): BO Heavy TVCks: 66.5% 2.7% 108% 074% Ceraenine Dirt. Banter IW.9 find Nnb.Swrw6eeenter lnfxp center, Did, b ohcervm: IM.0 fell Aurd 2000 Banter DUrence In oluarer 0.e real Medium rucks: 4W0 dar- rHe,nl(All Pod): 59 red H., T'Ll 6W6 Gram Agudmmd'90 Pad Ekvadon: o0.d Lane E9uhdenlDkrma(Infel Roetl Eathrinn: .. fird ANba: 92547 Roan.. L0% Left Via -90.0 aa9rssa Mamam. 92504 Rghf Vrew: 90.O ae9rees HeavyTwts: 92547 FIWA NWU Model L11nu1ahwe Lne Venid.Type I It. I Thadirl I orehnde I Fkile Road Feel I.Man Berm A. Areas : ill L.43 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO O:WO Areas : 6846 0.20 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO BWO MaSYm TUCks: 7945 -1757 -4,11 -129 1L7 9009 .. Maalum TUCks: 7945 -1704 -4,11 -129 ILL 9000 0. Heavy Thril 8435 -2162 -4.11 -120 -516 O't BOW Heavy TY2ka 8435 1100 -4.11 -120 -516 O.OW 0003 an'Zgr ed NOIL.I dtfwNMUf TOpO end hn rate nYdbn) UnMNgnted Noar L. . hinal Tapn end honlxOlLMYetl.nf Verde Type Leq Pedrer La, Day teq LArang Let, Nigh Lne CNEL Vnnlde Type Lee Peak HOm Lai bey teg6Aning. Led Night LM CNEL Aufm; 627 608 59.1 530 61.6 622 Aubs; 63.3 61.4 59.7 :aF 622 62.9 Medium Tracks: W.5 550 46:8 47.1 55.5 55.8 Mal Tracks: 571 586 49.2 47.7 561 584 Heary Tmcka 573 55.9 469 111 56.5 W6 Heary Tri 57.9 56.5 47.5 411 571 572 Wifede Nose: 16 Ms 597 55.0 835 64.0 Witede Nose: 652 MA 603 mk &.2 646 Can.aline Oh,.nn. Noise Cbn.ul Cn MU Can.aline We.nn. Noise Cbn.ul Cn M!) 70 dB/1 1 W ISM I W tl89 I WOMA 1 70 tlfl4 W SM W tl84 55 tlBA Inn: 37 00 172 310 1dn: 41 89 189 407 CNEL: 40 86 184 397 CNEL 44 94 203 437 Inal Fbv 49..12. 6.1 -61 trati hev 29.2.12. SCenarre Year2016WMPmjecl Purred Name• NNCPC R.,Name: Senegal 1139 Job NUmner 8211 Rozd Segment, North W San Joaquin Hills Joaquln Hllls SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HI9M1wey Oala Highway Dent SIb CmeMOns oftel =l0. Sol 15) Average Daily Tieffini it 3.600 -hid. An. 15 PaakHwr Pemeratil 10% fall That (2 Axksf: 15 Peak HO.. Wlmrre. 360 vehides Heathy Tmnka(3k Sided): 15 Vanilla Speed: 45 rape Whilsre We N ... li'rLane Oiefance: 52 feel yehkill I Day Evall Nghl I Daily Si Cal -120 -097 Aube: 77.5% 12.9% 96% O1 AlemmTrucks: 34.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9llt O.6 kM Banish Typa of Wal(1- Berm): Ill Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 211 %. 198% 0.74% CenlniM DI5t 10 Seller 100.0 feel Ndea Somme Elevalbns(In Reef) Camwllne Dist b observer till fed ANOS, 2000 Settler Ded ma, to Obmrven go fad Undium Tracks: 4.800 observer Hegn!(Above Pee): 5o hat Hvaryrrvcka .006 Grade AHudmene 90 Fed Ebvalion: 0.0 let (NmMgefed Nple LevNa(wlNmuf Lane Equivalent Dlslnre(n hard Road Elevation: 90 led Art 98607 Road .reps: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degnas War -Tmcke 93596 Fight View: W 0 migrees Heary Tracks: 95608 Phal Ant Model Cakuletlns Lazl Pork Rehm L.q dey Vatide Type I REMF1 I TmT Fbw I OisGnce I F.. Red I Flemen I. A. I Berm A!!en SCenarre Ymm2016WMPmlWt Preiecl Name• NNCPC R.,Name: Senegal 1139 Job Number, 8211 Roadoegmanf: SouNOf San Joaquln Hllls of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dent 1139 Sib Cnndltlorm (HW =10, Sod =15) Average Daily Thl (Atl!): 16.800 -hid.. Aulas' 15 Parliber Pemenluga,' 10% Uma. Trucks (2 Ax %sf: 15 Peak HOm Volume: 1.61 vehides Heavy Tmnke (3k Axles): 15 Vanilla Speed: 45 mph Vent We Near/Far Lane Distance: 52 feet yebkill I Day Eraning Nlahl Defy SIfe WU -120 -097 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %9TA2% Aledlum Trucks: 34.6% 4.9% 101 194% BdMeI Hal9llt 0.0 IoM Banish Typa of Waq 1- Berm): IJ6 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.74% CenlniM DI5t 10 Barter Ion. feel No.. Somme gavel imeaeff Camernew Deal b observer till fed ANDS, 2000 Beeler Later -to Observe.: 0o Red Mamum Thelma: 4XI ..seater halhbove Pal 50 feel Heavy Trvcka 8,006 Grade Sdamement 90 Fed Ebvalion: 0.0 fed (NmMgefed Nple LevNa(wlNmuf Lane Equivalent Dllnre(in Feel Road Elevation. Lo fad Ades: 98607 Road.. Oo% Left View: 910 deal HlNUmT . 93593 Right View: 900 degrees Hearylimmen 96605 HIWA Nolx Model Cduhlflws Lazl Pork Rehm L.q dey Venlde Type T REMEL I Trea Fbw I Olsmnce I FeNl Read I Fmmrel I flumarAtten I Rwm Atln Aubs; 6846 -6.15 1139 420 4,87 Rome Segment Iof Newyn CTR 0.000 of Aube; 6646 0.30 1139 -120 4,87 Autos: 15 o.OW 0.000 MBNUm Tmcke: 7945 -2339 -439 -1211 -097 45 .1 9009 9803 MBNUm Trunk.: 7945 -1394 -439 -120 -097 Barter HaDden 0.0 feet 9999 9080 Heary Tracks 8425 1735 439 -120 -516 Bonier Wei m obeerve, 0,000 0.003 Henry Tracks' fil 1689 439 -120 -516 80 red 0,000 trot (NmMgefed Nple LevNa(wlNmuf TOpo and b.rder.NMua ) Rind Greek 60% fall V,ow.- -90.0 degrees N:eirm Tmcke: 93593 (NmMgdad Npin L..(erat TOpn end benlr imemmVon) Heavy Tmds 96608 (i1WA al MoWI Lllnulehme (i1WA al Model Llbulahme Reel Ewnbg VenaJeType Lazl Pork Rehm L.q dey feq Lneerig LazI NIgM Ldn Leq Peak Hpur CNEL Van lfhh4a I Lim Peaki I Lai o.y I Reel EVwteg Lae NIgM I Ldn I (Al Au(nc' 567 ILI 6310 470 Aubs; 65.6 562 Aube' 632 61.3' 59.5 53A Medium Tracks: Ill 627 Medium TUCks: 505' 49.0 42.6 41.1 53.6 49.5 497 Medium Trucks: 569 55A 49.1 475 57.1 5516 No 582 Heavy TUke: 513 499 46q 42A 531 505 50.6 Heavy Thumm 57.8 56.3 47.3 48.6 58.4 56.9 570 Venda Nal 58.5 Si 537 490 56.0 57.5 58.0 Val Name: 650 61 80.1 Sol 80.0 1 c n au im Dllnre he All Camel (in net) c nredim 011nee al oll cdnbur (in leit 101114 1 0d8A I QO dSA I Wei 70 d5A 65 dBA I WdSA I SS SEA 55 tlBA I M111 0 c 1 60 age 1 55 di Ltln: 15 32 66 147 CNEL: Ltln: 40 35 1. 382 397 CNEL ONEL: 16 34 IS 257 155 CNEL 43 92 197 425 graham, Year 2016 With Purled Reed Name :NNCPC Reap Name: Santa Rana -120 4,87 Job Numnr 8211 Rome Segment Iof Newyn CTR 0:800 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Del 4,39 Sm COnelgoruothrtl= f0,tere ) AinhaWOdly TmWc(Aci: 14.300 veMdea Autos: 15 Peak HwrPomsM.ge: 10% Modern TUCka(2 Aild.- 15 Peak H., Vidmem' 1,430 vehides Heathy Trvcke(3 +g reed) : 15 venial epees' 45 .1 vahicre NM NeemFirl Dideade 52 feel VehknTyge I Day Ethereal Nlghf I Deily oil Dal oil Dal Amme 7.5% 12.9% 96% 97.42% Medium Trucks 34.3% 49% 103% 194% Barter HaDden 0.0 feet Bammlf,m(OWall, I Beam): ob Heavy Tracks: 56.5% 211% 168% 074% Cereenim DiSL b Same, cenreMre Did in obamrva: Ion. rod 100.0 fell lnlsw5oame 6mthelbn. an fix/ Amee, 2000 Bonier Wei m obeerve, 0.0 red Well reek.: 4030 observer ,at (An.. Pod): 50 red Heary Trade: 6006' Gorda Anyrdmih Yea Emi ndmn: 80 rad 80 red Lana E9unale Cgedina0nla4 Reed Eammiten: 9o.1 Auke: 98607 Rind Greek 60% fall V,ow.- -90.0 degrees N:eirm Tmcke: 93593 Right Vrew: 90.O a.,m- Heavy Tmds 96608 (i1WA al MoWI Lllnulehme (i1WA al Model Llbulahme Reel Ewnbg Venld.Type I S. I The Fbw I Dlremhaa I Faile Small I Fmen& Her,ea Me, Bem A. Sronario: Year2016Wi1h Purled Reed Nama :NNCPC Reap Name: Still Rana -120 4,87 Job Numeral 8211 Rose Segment' SouN d Nanpon CTR 0:800 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hvhwey Data 4,39 .0 Charged- (HW =f0, Soft =Ill Aveage Ddly The Kc(A4. 7.996 veMdea Aubs: 15 Peektme'.M.ge: 10% Medum Trvoke(2Aikd.- 15 Peak H.ur Varmen' 790 hidea Heathy Tmcke 0, galas): 15 vehble epees' 4i .1 vahicre W. NaadFarlane Dma de 52 fart VehknType I Day Evening Ni Daly oil Dal 9009 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9L42% Medium Tracks 34.3% 49% 193% 194% Barter Helght 0.5 M1 Beme,Type(0.Walt 1- Berm): 60 Heavy Tmdts: 56.5% 22% 168% 074% oedemas Dirt b Bemef cenremlre Dim. b obearva: Ion. fird tool feel Noose SOUm.6eevebbn.11n Reel Amue' 2900 Barter Oman. or otuerve, 0.O red Modem Treat 4800 Dbserver Hegnf(An.. Pon): 59 red Hwvy Trade: 6006' Grade Adpethent 90 Pee Elvndon: 80 red Lane EqunmentDllna(Infedo Roetl Ekvdah, 90 reel Al 0607 Rind Grade: 60% Led V,sw.- -90.0 digress Maebm Tmnka: ord W. Rghf Vrew: al degrees Heml,Twts 0608 (i1WA al Model Llbulahme Reel Ewnbg Leq NIgM Venld.Type I S. I TmPm Fbw I Damhrda I I'mer Road Fmeand I.Man Bem A. Arms: III L.40 4,39 -120 4,87 0900 0:800 Arms: 6646 -297 4,39 -120 4,87 0900 0.00 Mamum Tmnka: 7945 -1794 ASR -120 IL7 9009 9803 Manlum Tmnka: 7945 1.9l ASR -120 IL7 9009 0. Heavy TUks 0435 -2159 -439 -120 -516 .000 6003 Heavy TUks 0435 14.17 -439 -120 -516 0.00 6003 UnMtlgeltl Nolan LeVNS (wllnauf TOpn andheMx: allnYMbn) UnMtlgeld Nolan Level (wMauf Tmpn endhaMxaNMWtlmn) Wader Type Leq Peek Hpur La, day Reel Ewnbg Leq NIgM LM CNEL VZ Type Leq Peak Hpur Leq oey (eq Ewning Led NIgM LM CNEL Autos; 62.5 604 59.8 52] 61.4 62.0 Aubs; 599 580 55.2 50.2 508 594 Medium Tracks: 58.2 54] 404 460 553 55.5 Medium Tmcke: 53.6 52.1 459 44.2 51 529 Heary Tuks' 57.1 5516 46.6 ITS 562 51 Harry Tracks' 54.5 531 44.0 453 53.6 539 VehkJe Ndse: 13 626 58.4 51 613 637 VehkJe Ndse: 617 Sol 56.0 522 60.7 612 Cenldfne Dllnre of ANSI COnbm of MU Cenldine Wdean of NOiae COnbm In Al 101114 1 0d8A I QO dSA I Wei 1 70 di 0d8A 601184 55 tlBA Inn: 33 77 185 356 Inn: N 52 111 240 CNEL: w 82 1117 382 CNEL 26 55 119 257 lugery.flet..Al2. 6.1 -62 lugeev.Mev49.'N12. SCenelro: Tear2016WOM1Ptuind Pmmal Name hill Road Name: Avocado -130 4,87 Job NUmhec 8211 Rand Segment: North of San Miguel 0,000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HI9M1way Oala -1. -09] $Ib Cmtlgand (Hard=10. Sol 15) Average Daily Trial (Al 5.000 veM1iGi Autos: 15 PeakHaur Pemeal 10% MWWm Tmers(2 Axks): 15 I HOm VOlmrre. 500 . veM1iGes Heavy Tmnka(h, Axles): 15 Van. 3psnd: 40 all Seat Mix Near/Ftilane Distance: 36 het Sandal I Day Everniall Nght I Dsily SUe Carl Ieq Evwivig Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 49% 163% 194% BdMel Helgnt 0.9 hM Samar Typo l0.WalL I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 36.5% 2] %. 188% 0.74% CanRniM Del 10 Sandal 100.0 het Ndea SwWa EMVafbns (In /eaff CanKrllne Dist to 0danni c 10U6 fed ANOS, 2000 Settler Led me la obeareen go had Medium Tracks: 4.000 Gdserver Hagnt(Anove Ped): 5o hat HearyTrvcka 8,006 Grande Adudmene o0 Fad Elevdio¢ 0.0 feel 516 512 Lane Equivalent DlshnreQn/eef) Road Ebval 60 led Auras: 98412 Road Gretle: 0.0% Left View: -906 deemed War -Tm. 91 I View.- N.O degrees Heavy TmGS: 98413 Ffh.. Model Catamarans CanlMlm Dlebnn he Nan Centel (in Tee) Venlde Type I Fall I Trelbc Fmv I Oiaderne I FONh Rmtl I Fesrre I 2enier Agen I Ream AL Awns; 61 4-d 451 -130 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.000 0,000 Medum Tiucke: 172 -2199 -451 -1. -09] set COnelgoru (Hal =f0, soft =15) 6009 6000 Heavy Tracks' Ll 1564 451 -120 -516 Peak HOm Viamrem 0,000 0.003 (hmHgehd None Leval3(wllAmrf From and dmder ae uatlon) -,P 40 .1 Vehicre MM N emT'dr and andirde 35 feet VenaJn LegP Ham Leq Gay Ieq Evwivig Leq Nigh Ldn BemerType(0i 1 -Bend: CNEL Adoc' 563 53.4 527 466 Anne, 2000 652 558 Mail Trucks: 50.3 "La 42A 409 Pad genial 49A 496 Heavy Take: 516 512 41.2 424 Roetl Gredk 00% of whit Verde N.: SBA 565 533 468 (i1WA Ndu.., Lllaulehwa III 5],B CanlMlm Dlebnn he Nan Centel (in Tee) I Finale Rued I From& Ren Men I germ A. I Tannehill I Olsmnca I FONh Rmd I Fmmrel I Ran Att germ AOan 583 WJ 62.2 M 111 0 c I SO di I SS d84 Ltln 14 31 IF M IEW 143 60SRA Call 15 33 71 Ltln: 153 Sinal Year 2016 With Purled mj6d Name: NNCPC Rase Name: Amleado -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 RoadBagment Norhof Coast Hlghway 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlgnway Defy -120 497 set COnelgoru (Hal =f0, soft =15) Aned,a Ddly TraiSc Lil : 11,000 all Autos: 15 Peek Hour numeral 10% Mecum TUeka(2 Al 15 Peak HOm Viamrem 1,100 .-Ill Heavy Trial (3yed): 15 vehicle speed' 40 .1 Vehicre MM N emT'dr and andirde 35 feet Vehk lTyoe I City Earandal Nlghf I Deily Sit. DaM leq EVanmg Autos: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 81 49% 103% 194% Baaderifel 0.0 had BemerType(0i 1 -Bend: 00 Heavy Trucks: fill 27% 188% 074% Cedenind Dirt fO Bemef. cenreMre Did an abaarva/: 1LYI.01Be1 100.0 fad Nal Swree GYVefbne Pn hap Anne, 2000 Hamer Drum. m aburver, 0.0 fed Madam rmeal a 030 observer re l(An.. Pod): 50 red H., Trial 6006' Green Ae%udmad 60 Pad genial o0 had 53.0 Lane E9leadealDhhnae0nfre4 Roetl Eisveral 66.1 Autbe: 98412 Roetl Gredk 00% Laft Via-- -90.0 dae. Waiiam Traday BBa72 I Vrew: 90.0 degreoa Heavy Trods.' 9B 413 (i1WA Ndu.., Lllaulehwa 61 Vebin.7,de I S. I Tm5 Fbw I Diamrae I Finale Rued I From& Ren Men I germ A. Arms: III -t03 4,51 -120 4,87 Jon Number, 8211 OLDS] 0:000 Maerm Tmaks: n]2. -1826 AS1 -120 497 Sib CandleoN (Hard =10, - - I :It) 6000 6000 Heavy Trade, 8200 -2222 -451 -110 -5,16 II Volume: .001* 0003 OnM agltad No Is Leval(wlllmuI TOpo de If x: aMnudbad 40 all Vall St. Near/Far Lane Diehnce: 36 het VenimeType Leq Peak HOW I Led Day I leq EVanmg LW Mgn! LM Samar Typa thi I Berm): CNEL Auras; 598 579 55.1 50.1 Camwllne Dist to Deserver 51 59.3 Mariam Tracks: 537 522 45.8 44.3 50 het 52.8 53.0 Heavy Trucks' 55.1 536 44.6 458 L lad Si 51.3 VehkJe Ndse: 618 608 56.8 522 000 degrade 61 61.2 CsnhHim DMdl ro Noes Cartel On I V&rlde Type I R9,11 I Tannehill I Olsmnca I FONh Rmd I Fmmrel I Ran Att germ AOan 583 WJ 62.2 ]O tlfl4 65 al 60489 55dM let¢ N 52 112 M IEW 242 60SRA CNEL 26 56 40 Ltln: 259 lugeev.daye Al2. 6.1 -63 SCenalro: Ted2016WMPmjind mired Nam,hil PC RLad Name: Avowdo 451 Jon Number, 8211 Rand Segment SauN M San Miguel 6.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwY Date -IF 1 Sib CandleoN (Hard =10, - - I :It) Average Daily Tal (A @): 15.500 veM1iGes Auras' 15 Peal.a-Paindinga' 10% Msdlum Trued, (2 Aylem. 15 II Volume: 1.550 veM1iGes Rule, Traderp, earea : 15 vanicle Speed: 40 all Vall St. Near/Far Lane Diehnce: 36 het Sandal I Day Eneretal Might Deity Site WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% dammm Trucks: 84.6% 4.9% 163% 194% Emmental 9.9 het Samar Typa thi I Berm): o0 Heavy Trucks: 36.5% 27%. 188% 0.74% Canamid Did. an Semer 100.0 het Nd.a SwFe gandfunted (I eeaff Camwllne Dist to Deserver 10I fed ANau, 2000 Sual Ol ere an observer: go had Medum rrvtl:a: 4.000 Gdearvar mal(Anove Ped): 50 het Hamry Tail 8,006 Grade Adandran 60 Pad Elevdio¢ 0.0 real 53.] Lane Equivalent Channel (in Feel Road Ebval L lad Art 96412 Road Gretle: 90% Left View: 906 degrade Adamant ? cka 98372 Right fill 000 degrade Heavy Tucks.' MA13 HIWA Aft Medal CdurbHnna 55.8 V&rlde Type I R9,11 I Tannehill I Olsmnca I FONh Rmd I Fmmrel I Ran Att germ AOan Arms; 66.51 OAS 451 -150 4,87 Road Segment: NoM d Bonita Cali 6.000 0.000 Meadmi Trueke: 17. -IF 1 -451 -1211 -097 80.500 all 6099 6000 Heavy Trucks' Ll 1013 451 -120 -516 vehcle speed 0,000 0.003 fhmM9efed Nona L.. havel Topn end be//hr alhn.." Vehrds y . I Day Evening MI Daily Sit. DaM Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Venn Ifyd I'll'anClayll Lad Gay I Ieq EVw7lrg Lee Nigh I Ldn Ndint.GYvdtled g Txp CNEL Ad al 613 59.4 57.6 515 Heavy Trend 6006' Grande"hummed 99 60 3 609 Minlum Trucks: 55.2 53.] 47A 45.8 Roetl Grde: 00% 543 51 Harry TUCks: 1 Set 46.1 473 55] 55.8 Vehicle Name: 63.3 6115 583 WJ 62.2 Ill CanlMim Dlebnn he Nan Cartel (in Tee) M IEW 65,04 1 60SRA SSd84 Ltln: 39 6H 001 394 CNEL 33 70 151 326 Sronerm Year 2016 With Project mj6d Name NNCPC Read Name: Miami 4,11 Jon Number 8211 Road Segment: NoM d Bonita Cali 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlghady One -1613 .0 COndltloru (Hal =f0, soft I: S Ave /age Ddly TadSc(Al 80.500 all Autos: 15 Peek Hour Pornead,: 19% Meamn Tmoks(2Aikd.- 15 Peak HOm Vduma' 8,050 VehIl Heavy Trvcke (3 + Axles): 15 vehcle speed 45 .1 vahicre MM Naar/Farl andirde 76 feel Vehrds y . I Day Evening MI Daily Sit. DaM Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Tucks 84.8% 49% 193% 194% BaMe/Helght 0.0 had Bem,lime(0 -1411- Berm): 00 Heavy Truces: fill 2.7% 108% 074% Cedeni/re Dirt fO Suard, center, Dim an ahoarva/: Idt. IW 100.0 feet Ndint.GYvdtled g Txp Anne' it W. Bill Oman. In Detai , 0.0 red Madura rmeal a 030 Obaerver Hegnl(An.. Pad): 59 red Heavy Trend 6006' Grande"hummed 99 Pad Ekvadon: o0 had Madfum Tracks: Lane Equiadead Dktma(Infre) Road Ekvetion: J. and Albs: 92547 Roetl Grde: 00% Laft Via-- -90.0 degrade Madam Tanks 92594 I Vrew: 90.0 degrees Heavy Tmear, 92547 (i1WA Ndu Model Lllaulahwa Venide Type I S. I Tmq Fbw I Oim rae I Finale Road Framer Ra/ce/Atlan ge/m A. Adds: 68.46 7.11 4,11 -120 4,87 0.000 0.000 Maemm Tmaks: 7945 -1613 -4.11 -120 497 0000 6003 Heavy Trade, 64.25 -1469 -4.11 -110 -5,16 .0.01* 0000 OnMNgefed Nma. Leval (w Mnue7apn.nabaolaraNMU.BOn) Venime Type Leq Peekmar La, Gey leg Evening Lad Nigh LM CNEL Adds; 70.3 68A 66.6 60.5 III 69H Madfum Tracks: 840 62.5 561 Ill 63.1 633 Heay Trucks' 64.9 CIA 54.4 556 Sell 61:1 Wande Ndse: 72,1 70.3 672 US 71.1 71.5 Ca ftdim Wrtennro fill COnhur pn Al 101184 65 al 60484 55 tlBA lee: 118 254 546 11P CNEL: 126 272 585 1.262 lugery.daye'N12. Steal : Ter,2016WId Prated Pmjed Name• NNCPC Road Name: IILI -120 4,87 Jon Nitrate, 8211 Road sit'na f: SOUK of Branila Cani 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Orelay 001e 4.11 Sale CnndMOns(Hard =10. Sol 15) AW,aaga Carly Tia ?2(A@): 69.20 -hid. ALI 15 PeakHwr Percenlsga 10% MWWm TmMs(2knial 15 Peak HOm VOlunre.' 6,920 -hides Han, Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 vane Speed: 45 mpn Vvnlae We Near/Farlane IXdarrce: 76 feel yenkial I Day Evenng Ni I Deily Sil Cal &'fe WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 64.8% 48% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9nt 0.9 RM Samar Typo III I Benny: 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 21 %. 118% 0.74% Carroll Del 10 Sable, 100.0 reel Nasa$ -a. EaahrOnne (In .1) Comwll. Dist boded till fed Art 2000 Seder, olsrenee m obnee 0,0 red Modlum Trurka: 4.W0 odserver Hagnf(A.. Pad): 5o had HearyTntel ILM6 Grade AnParra e90 Ped Elevation: 0.0 eel 0.0 feel Lane Egavaent Dial re Amid Road Elevation: .3 art Art 92.54] Roetl Gade: 60% Left View: -900 degleas Wd, -Tmcks 92504 fight View: W 0 aegees Harry Tmcke: 92547 Fin.. Monad cak'ubnons Hlwa NMw Modal C d c canons Venda Type I REMFl I Thal Few I find a I FIN. Rmtl I Free.l I. A. I A. Seel : Teer2016WMPreWt Preied Nerl NNCPC Rcaa Name: IILI -120 4,87 Job Number, 8211 Read Safari NOnr of San Joaquin Hills 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dare 4.11 Sale CmdltlON (HUd =10, SON =15) Avoraga Carly T?s(Add 138.100 -hide. Aulas' 15 PoW.- rPercenlsga' 10% MWWm Trucks(2 Aside. 15 Net HOm VOlurrre,' 6,810 veM1ldea Han, Thada(3k Axles): 15 vanlcla Shared: 45 mph Ital We N.../ itt Lane Distance: 76 feet yabkial I Dry Eneing MCI Defy &'fe WU 9990 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% Medum Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeI Hel9nt 9.9 kM Samar Typa III 1- Benn): 00 Heavy TVCks: 86.5% 27 %. 118% 0.74% Carrell. Dial 10 Barter 1.. reel Nolsr SOUFe EMValbnr an Faef) Comwll. Dist to obsurvrr 1(16 fed ANrs, 2000 Senlar olsrenee to oGrervar: 0,0 eel Uslown Trurka: 4.W0 Unientr hal(A.. Pad): 50 at Hal Trvcka 8608 Grade Ahalment 90 Ped Elevation: 0.0 feel Roes Elevation: La. Equivalent Chiral (in Feel Road Elevation. L lael Arles 92 547 Rord Gaae: 06% Left View: 900 deal McNUmi alrs 92504 Right View: 900 ae,- Harry Trvcke 9250 Hlwa NMw Modal C d c canons I lhedfhTy_,l REMEL I Threw Fbw I Olslenca I Final ROsd I Fiend I Bar.rA.n I Lan, Affair Aubs; 6646 6.45 4.11 -120 4,87 JOb NUm.r 8211 0.000 0000 Aubs; 6646 6.38 4.11 -120 4,87 Ave ,Daly Thd%,LAtlo: 43.400 veM1ldea O.OW 0.033 deal Tiuldha 7945 -1979 -411 -1211 ILI Heavy That p +Axles): 15 9009 90W Ual Truake: 7945 -1d an -411 -1 Zd ILI Sit. Oa. 9990 90W Heary Tracks 81 -1474 -4.11 -120 -516 I.. find 0,000 0.W3 Hoary Tracks' fil -1461 -4.11 -120 -516 on.rvar He,at(Abova Pad): 0,000 0.W3 WmMgefen NOha LevNa(wINOUt Tri and beniereltMUa.nf 80 .d Lane Equhalenl Dh.na(in f¢eQ Roes Elevation: 90 reel (InmMgerad NOha LavNa(wMmn Tope and dal alarm" Loft Via -90.0 degrees Nenlam Tmnka: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: VenaNe Type Laze Peek Hour I Lear ray Ieq EVwlvlg Le, Midi I Lan I CNEL Leq EVrning I Laze Peak fear I Lear tray I feq EVmlirg Lan Ni I Ldn I Lit Arnoc' 696 67.7 65.9 599 68.5 69.1 Ain- 695 676 SILO 596 Mill Tmcks: 664 699 Medium Trucks: 833 61.8 55.5 53.9 Medium Tmcks: ill 526 Nalum Trucks: 633 61.8 55A 539 622 60.7 ill 625 Heavy Thi 642 628 53.7 560 61] 60.3 63.3 635 Heavy TUCke: "A 627 53.7 St 63.3 634 Val Neall 71A S97 665 619 640 764 7o.9 Val Nal 71A Si FES 61.6 703 70,6 Carvellte, Dlabnn. Hone Centel (in Fell Cannon. Olabnn. Hoiae Centel (in Ferro IOtlBA 0a0A I Wa@4 I Well M 111 05 tl0A I 60 dS 50 aBA SS d@4 55 tlBA I TO dBA 0 c0 1 60 dBA I SS d@4 L. 199 .9 491 i'diff CNEL: Ltln: 105 .7 499 836 1,053 CNEL: Clill 114 246 530 776 1,141 CNEL' 113 243 524 1,129 I all, Seal Year 2016 With Pmjed Pmjed Name: NNCPC Road Name: Macaithur -120 4,87 JOb NUm.r 8211 Road S.,-hl SWth d San Joaquin Hills 0:W0 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hi9nway Data -120 487 SN¢COndlDOru (Hal =fa, SoN=15J Ave ,Daly Thd%,LAtlo: 43.400 veM1ldea Autos: 15 Peek HwrPo h1age: 10% Mender TUCksRAika),- 15 Peak HOm Volurrre.' 4,340 veM1ldea Heavy That p +Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 warkh, MM NaanFirl Didearde 76 feel VehkisT le. I Day Eiral Nlghf I Deily Sit. Da. Sit. Oa. Aufos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 111 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r HdpXG' 0.0 lead EamerType(DWdl,, I- Berm): @0 Heavy Tmdts: 66.5% 27% 118% 074% Cdaeni. Dial. Sal I.. find NOI¢e 5ourne Fdevader. an .1) cenrerll. Did in obaarvd: Im.0 fed Alara, IWif Samar Death. m observer 0.0 red WaSin rmcka: 4000 on.rvar He,at(Abova Pad): 50 find Harry TLl 8005 Gm.Adyrdnrent 00 Paid Standen: 80 .d Lane Equhalenl Dh.na(in f¢eQ Roes Elevation: 90 reel Ader 92547 Road Gredk 60% Loft Via -90.0 degrees Nenlam Tmnka: 92.504 Rghf Vrew: 00.0 fennel Harry Tmds' 9250 F1WA al Model Caleuf¢hws CNEL dinal.Type I It. I TmPWFbw I patella I Fin. Road I Faen& J. Men I Berm A. deal: Year 2016 With Pmjed Pmjed Name: NNCPC Road Name: MacaiNUr -120 4,87 Job Num.r 8211 Road.gmeat I of Ban Miguel 0:W0 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data -120 487 .0 COndl.ru (tal =f0, Ill =15) Average odly Teals (Atlo: 38.800 veMdea Autos: 15 Peek HourPons., 19% Mecum TrvCka(2Aika),- 15 Peak HOm Vdumo' 3,880 veM1ldea Heavy That 0, Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 warkh, We NaadFati Disan a 76 feat Vahrds y . I Day Evening Nil Dsly Sit. Oa. Heauy Tmcks At. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 111 Medium Tmcks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Height 0.0 Ind Bano,tine(0.Wall, I- Berm): 60 Heavy Tmors: 66.5% 27% 168% 074% Ceraenl. Dial. Sal cenrem. Did, a obarrvar: 1Ll.9 find IM.0 fad Notaesourwfv Yeatter an.') Aube' 2909 Barter ouren. In onmrver 0.0 red Mealum rmcka: 4000 Dh.rver Hegnl hil Pod): 59 red H., Till 6m5 Gra.Agudment 99 Paid Standen: 80 .d fate EquhdenlDktma(InfreQ Roetl Either, 99 feel Ada a: 92547 Roan Grde: 60% Left Via -90.0 dileal Manmm. 92594 Rghl Vrew: 90.0 rl,han Hal 92547 F1WA Ndu Shand Ltln dahws CNEL Venlda Type I It. I Thadil I Oremn. I Fkile Road Fea.l I.Man Berm A. Anna 66,46 4.42 4,11 -120 4,87 0600 0:W0 Aufus: 6646 1M 4,11 -120 487 0600 O.m Mal Tmcke: 7945 -1281 -4,11 -129 1L7 9009 9W3 Mal Tmcke: 7945 - 1330 -4,11 -129 IL7 9009 0. Heauy Tmcks 8435 -1677 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOW Qom Heauy Tmcks 8435 -1726 -4.11 -120 -516 ().(1 6m UnMNgded Naan Leads(wN.uf TOGO antl hanlxaMnYdbnf UnMtlgafed Naan Leads(wMOut Tral and haner ONMYal Verde Type Lnq Peekrble Lar ray Laq Ewn.g Lnq fight LM CNEL Verde Type Lee Peak Hbw Legtrey Leq EVrning Led Mder LM CNEL Autos; 676 65.7 619 ST,9 66.5 67.1 Auks; 67.1 651 634 574 96.0 696 Mill Tmcks: 61.3 598 53.5 51.9 504 805 Medium Tmcks: 608 593 53.0 51A 59.9 601 Heary Tmcks' 622 60.7 51.7 530 613 614 Harry Tmcks' 61] 60.3 512 52.5 90.8 610 Wifede Nd.: 694 67.7 665 1 I8.4 68.8 Wil Nose: 699 57.2 640 593 67.9 663 Can.df. Dome, . Norse Contour Cn MU Can.df. Chiral ft Norse Contour Cn Hid IOtlBA 0a0A I Wa@4 I Well 1 70 tlBA Dal 50 aBA 55 tlBA Inn: 70 16B .2 779 fret: 72 158 338 723 CNEL: 84 100 388 836 CNEL: 78 167 330 776 Inal Fbv 49..12. 6.1 -64 Inal hey 29.2x12. Seemetho: Tem2016Wid Pre Wt Pmjacl Name• NNCPC Road Name: Metal -130 4,87 Job Numher 8211 Road Segment SOum of San Miguel Oo00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey OOle 4.11 SIb Coneleons (fill 10. Sol 15) Average Dedy Trial i : 32.400 -hid.. An. 15 PaakHwr Pemenlsga 10% MWWm Timers (2 Amid 15 Peak HOV. VOlmrre.' 3,240 vehides Haavy Tmnka(3k Axle): 15 Van. Shared: 45 mpn Val We N.../.rlae 0ideare: 76 het Vardia yps I Day Evarl Ni I Daily Bile Cal Ne 000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMeIHel9llt 0.9 fend Barrier Typa l0.Wal(1- Sol 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% CBnlnire Diet In Sernef ILL. feel Nasr$ -me Elsysgcns (In Read Caramel Dist In obamrc I0U6 fed ANOS, 2000 Samar olsrenre m obamen, 0o fed Mrmum Terrace: 4mo odserver Hegnf(Above Pre): 5o fael Heryrrvcka 8,006 GradeA hahnne 90 Fed Eminent : 0.0 feel 0.0 feel Lane El dedlenl Dlslnre(n h Q Road general 90 art Area 92.54] Road Greed: 60% Left View: -900 degises Medum 1 . 92504 Fight View: W 0 degree Hery Tmcke: 92547 Phal. Mods/ calultlons Hlwa xolw.1.1 cmurlflone Venlde Type I REMFl I TmT Sm. I fin mmer I Fada Rmd I Fmsrrel 2erner A. Berm A. Scenario: Tear2016WMPmjecl Pmjacl Name• NNCPC Road Nam.: Metal -130 4,87 Job Numher 8211 Red Segment, North of Ooa.t Highway Oo00 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway DNe 4.11 Sib CnneleoN (Need = 10. ... =15) Average Daily Tre ?c (AtlQ: 32.500 -hid.. Auras: 15 PeakHwr Pemenm, 10% MWWm Thader(2 Ax%af: 15 Not HOV. Vemrre.' 3,250 vehides Haavy Tmnke(3k Axlesf: 15 V.nicle Speed: 45 .0 Val We N.../.r Lane Dammam 76 feel Vardia ypa I Day JEh)n91 Nlahf Daiy Ne 000 9000 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medarm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeI He1911t 0.0 It. Barrier Typa ri I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 10.8% 0.74% CenlniM DI5t 10 SamBC 1.. het Note. Source Elvefbne an/eeff Camernew Dist ee observ.r fill fed ANOe, 2000 Saner olsrenre In oGemen, 0o ld k{.mum Terrace: 4mo (deennr halhnove mad): 5o had Haary Trvcka 8,006 Grade Aeludment 90 Fed Eminent : 0.0 feel Road Elavarion: Lane Ell dedenl Dllnre (in /eell Road general L lad Arras: 92 5,17 Road Greee: 00% Left View: 910 deal HlNUm 7m. 92504 Right View: 900 degrade Hery Thral 92547 Hlwa xolw.1.1 cmurlflone The Fbw I akhnne mmenType T REMEL I Threw Fbw I Dlshnce I Fel ROed Fmmrel I BanlarAen I Berm Atren Aubs; 6646 3.15 4.11 -130 4,87 Rome Segment Weslof JamWree 0.000 Oo00 Aubs; 6646 3.1] 4.11 -120 4,87 Anal Ddly TraftL Q: 0.000 O.WO MnNUm Tmcke: 7945 -1409 -411 - 120 1W 1,530 vehides .W9 9000 Adel Trunks: 7945 -140] -411 - 120 1W Site Dal 9000 9000 He., Track. ' 8425 -1804 -4.11 -130 -516 Cere6nlm Dirt. Sel cenremlre Did in obarrver: 0,000 01 Haary➢ucks' Sq.25 -16m -4.11 -130 -516 50 fired 0,000 01 WmM9efed Nnlu LeWla(wlNwuf TOpo end don/w of ud ) Lan.E9uNden1011na OrleQ Road Elavarion: 90.1 (InmMgered Nnlu L..eMdn Irl end be., eflnuetlon) Left Via -916 leghe Nntern Timent 99599 Rgbf Vrew: VenlrJeType Laq Penk Haul Leg day I feq Ltha g I IMNIgM Ldn The Fbw I akhnne CNEL VenlrJeTypo Lam Poal mien I Leg Oay I feq Lnet Lag right I Lan I CNF1 Ammar 663 64A S26 566 00.1 652 65.8 Auloc' 663 64A 626 566 47.1 553 111 Medium Th-ks: 60,1 US 523 WE 482 59.1 59.3 Medium Trucks: 60d Slid US 50.7 59.1 593 Heavy TUke: Mg 59.5 WA 513 60.0 602 Heavy TUCke: 60.9 595 00.5 513 636 NA 80.2 Val Nose: 68.1 614 1 50.6 62.6 67.1 67.6 Vehide Same: 68.1 514 1 50.6 Canleim Wrtannro Nase Carlim MQ 67.1 1 Canlwllm Dllnre he Nan COntow (in Teel IOdBA 1 Cadwllm Dllnre al Nan Centel (in eeQ (I I OdBA 1 701fl4 65 el 70 dBA I 65 tlBA I WdSA I Wd&4 37 90 I Mdt 0 c I WdBA I Wd&4 69 Ltln: 83 139 299 CNEL: III 86 156 Lan: 83 139 299 35 943 100 Cl 69 146 319 600 CNEL 69 149 Sill 600 Seal Year 2016 With Prated Preyed Name: NNCPC Road Name: EmethufffloNlSonilt Chin Job Number 8211 Rome Segment Weslof JamWree O.W) O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Dena -130 4,87 SN.COnel4bru(HW =fa,terel ) Anal Ddly TraftL Q: 15.300 vehidea Autos: 15 Park Hwr Pomsmage: to% Mecum Twitter (2 Aided: 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 1,530 vehides Heavy Trvckr(S + treed) : 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 Vahicre Ml Nrar/Firl Didande, 52 feel VahklT le. I Day Even /al ideal I Daly Site Dal Heavy Threl Auras: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 1 49% 103% 194% Barter HaDden 0.0 Ill BemerType(OWalt 1 -Bend: 6o Heaey Trunks: 66.5% 27% 168% 074% Cere6nlm Dirt. Sel cenremlre Did in obarrver: 100.0 fired 100.0 fed Nees.. SOUme Fie-e .Pn fxp AWOe, 2W0 Small Drum. m observer 0.0 red MaNUm rmdms 4.00) oneervrr ,at (An.. Poe): 50 fired Hevy TrvAS: 6X6 Grade Adfudment 90 Pad Elindrem 00 reel Lan.E9uNden1011na OrleQ Road Elavarion: 90.1 Auks: 98607 Roatl Greek 60% Left Via -916 leghe Nntern Timent 99599 Rgbf Vrew: 90.0 degree Heavy Trod. 96608 (i1WA Ndu Model Llkuihons Ameenlype Venlde Type I S. I The Fbw I akhnne I Fklle Shared I Fmsn& Berner Me, Derm A. Searl: Tear2016WiNP,.t Rjecllime NNCPC Road Name: Emethuffftordlil Gm Job Number 8211 Roae3egreart EastcrJamboree O.W) O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey Dena -130 4,87 .0 Canal (HW =f0, Soft =lag Aveage Ddly TlWs(Adg. 12.300 vehdea Autos: 15 Peektion'.msge: to% Mecum Tmoka(2Aika).- 15 Peak HOm Vdumn' 1,230 vehidea Heavy Trvcke 0, Axis): 15 vehkle speed' 45 .1 Vahicre W. NaadFarlae arcade, 52 feel VehkiType I Day Evening Ni Daly Site Owl Heavy Threl Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% 974256 Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0 Net BamerType ill I Be-): Bo Heaey Trucks: 66.5% 2.7% 168% 074% CeMBnlne Dirt. Bamef. cenremlre fed, b obervar: 100.9 fired 1006 fed Nase Swn- gain.tlonspnfxp Acme' 2000 reamer Deal m obmrver 0.0 red Medium Tucks: 4.000 odesrver He,nl(An.. Poe): 59 reel Hery TrvAS: eW6 hire Adpement 90 Pal Elneirem 00 fad fear E9uhalntDllna(InfeQ Read Ekverion: 90 feel Al : 98607 Roatl Gme: 60% Left Via -W.e lagreea Maemm Tmdm: 99599 Ill f/rem 90.0 agree Him,Twt. 96608 (i1WA Ndu MoWI tlmu/9hws Ameenlype Venld.Type I S. I Tmq Fbw I Imaenne I Fmerfahad Final I.Man Dorm A. Autos: Fill -0.10 4,39 -130 4,87 O.W) O:WO Autos: 6646 -105 4,39 -130 4,87 O.WO O.WO Perform TUnks: 7945 -1734 ASIR -120 1L7 9000 9003 Hirt TUnks: 7945 -1629 ASS -120 1L7 9000 0. Heavy Threl 54.25 -2130 -439 -120 -516 IlOW of Heavy Trrdd: 54.25 1225 -439 -120 -516 0.000 of anMNgnle Nasn L.I dtfwMmuf Topo andheMxaCnnYdmn) UnMtlgnld Nasn Laragat wMOur Tapeandlem xO uatlon) VnNdaltam LugP Hbue Later any feq LAmung Leg Night Le CNEL Ameenlype Lem POnk Hbue Laq day LYq Eraning Led Might Le CNEL Autos; 628 60.9 59.1 530 517 62.3 Auks; 616 599 00.1 52.1 60.7 613 Medium Tracks: 50.5 550 40:8 47.1 55.5 55.8 Medium Tracks: 55.6 Si 47.7 482 54.5 54.8 He., Trucks' 574 55.9 419 402 56.5 Sill Hill Track.' 564 55.0 46.0 472 65.6 551 Wi le Ndse: 006 62.9. 597 W..0 636 64.0 Vehkle Ndse: 636 61.9. 50.0 54.1 62.6 63.1 Canleim Distance ro Nasu Carl Cn MQ Canleim Wrtannro Nase Carlim MQ IOdBA 1 65ISM I (I I OdBA 1 701fl4 65 el 60 tlB4 55 tlBA Inn: 37 90 173 373 fdn: 32 69 159 322 CNEL: 40 86 156 400 CNEL: 35 74 100 345 medial. 6.1 -65 mee.o.Mer49.rel Seanario: Yesr2016WMPot mimel Name• NNCPC RoaONama: Ea5161ufflFOrdiforla Gyre Job Nimher 8211 Road Segment, West of Borier Canyon SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlBbway Gala a- CmEltloN Head = Is. ... =15) Ni CmtlMOns Hal 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Trial (A@): 10,600 -hid.. Auras: 15 PaakHwr Pemenmga 10% MWlum TmMS(2 lormt. 15 Peak HO..VOfmrre.' 1060 vehides Haavy, Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 Von. Speed: 45 mpn Whole, We Near/Fsil Distance: 52 het yehadill I Dry Evardill Nghl I Deily SI/e MU Site Dell Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% Si Aledlum Trucks: 64.6% 49% 103% 194% Brusher HelBht 0.0 kM Samar Typa rIlli I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 108% 0.74% CanRniM Diet to Seller 1.. het Naga Somme EMVatbne(In Read Camwllm Dist to Deal 1LU.01e0 ANOS, 2000 Beeler Disrenre to Oberver: go reel Medum Tmrke: 4.000 observer Hegdr(A.. Pee): 5o reel Hearyrrvcka e006 Grade AHummene O0 I Elevation: 0.0 Ied Lane E9uhalent Dhhna(in heQ Lane Equlvalml OHhnm(n Fort) Road EbvaNOn: OO art ANOS: 98607 Road Gade: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degrees War -Tmcks 9S Rghr Vial: W 0 dogmas Heavy Tmcks: 95608 NiWA Nolae Model Ca endatlma Lon versenType T REMFl Venide Type I REMF1 I Thal Fbw I OiaGnce I FONh ROatl I Fresml I. A. I Bem Ahen Scenario: Yesr2016WMPot Pmjecl Name• NNCPC Road Nama: Ea5161ufflFOrdiforla Cirri Job NUmher 8211 Road Segment, East W Bonita Canyon 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway UNa 4.00 a- CmEltloN Head = Is. ... =15) Average Daily Tre?c(Add 39,400 vehides Auras: 15 Peal HOUr Pemernal 10% MWWm Trucks (2 Asism. 15 Peak HOV. Votmos: 3,940 vehides Haavy, Tmnke(3k trio : 15 Vanicle Speed: 45 mpn yehkle We I.../Far Lane Dominic: 52 het yehadill I Dry Evaning NON Deity Ne 000 Site Dell Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9TA2% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 19396 194% Brusher Haght. 0.0 Ill Samar Typa (0.Waq I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 108% 0.74% C romliM Dlat in Bander 1.. het No/.. Somme EMVatbne an/eeff Camwllm Dist to Observer IDOL fed ANOe, 2000 Beeler Disrenre In Dramen, 0o real Medum Tmrke: 4.000 observer Heydf(A.. Pal 5o hel Hal Tricks, 8,006 Grade Arlusiment 90 I Elevation: 0.0 reel Lane E9uhalent Dhhna(in heQ Lams Eq.1sed lDhhn.(in Feel Road EbvaNOrt L O reel Areas 98607 Road Gade: Oo% Left View: Slid deal McNUmT rld 9fi596 Right Visw: 900 dogmas Heavy Thomen III fHWA NOIx.1.1 LMmbtlma Lon versenType T REMFl I Trelnc Fbw I Oimerse I FONh Rmd I Fmmrel I Banh/Attan I Rem Afhn Aube; 6646 -110 839 420 4,87 Job Number 8211 0.000 0000 Arms; 6046 4.00 839 -120 4,87 Aveage Odly ThWc(Aid. o.O(Q O.WO Mmoum Tmcks: 7945 -1694 -439 -1211 -0g' 5)) M-Ide3. 0000 OW3 M um Trunks: 7945 -1323 -439 -120 -0g' Site Dell 0000 OOW Heavy Tmcks 64.25 1289 439 -120 -516 Cemasine Dirt to Bemef Candles, I to Obinrver 0,000 0.003 Henvy, Tmcks' 81 -1719 439 -120 -516 50 IBd 0,000 0.003 (InmMgefed NOha LevNa(wetrah TOpoandbmpereHe andern) Lane E9uhalent Dhhna(in heQ Road Brothers, of .1 IlnmMgeNd NO ha L..(.1 TOpn end be., elNnuall I Vha -990 deghea samiem Treacle: 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: VenadeType Lazl Peak Hour I Les, day leq Lvar g LM Night I Lon I Dil VenicleType Lim Pecs Hmar Lai oay I leq L/mbg Lag Nigh I Lots I Got Au(nc' 612 59.3 57.5 51A 51.5 601 607 Auloc' 61 610 633 572 6)6 55.8 614 Medlum Tmcks: 549 534 47.1 455 41.1 54.0 542 Medium Tmcks: 606 59,1 U.S 512 00:2 597 599 Heavy TUke: 558 54.3 45.3 465 423 54.9 55.0 Hat, Trucks: 616 Bill 51.0 523 ill 606 1 Venme Name: 630 61.3 58.1 MA 55.1 62.0 624 Vehida Name: 681 67.0 638 59.1 61.2 69.7 1 Cargenim Dlabnn he Han Contour (in Feel 656 Ce ftdim O4dnn ro Nasu COnrour on Al Carving" Dlabnn at HOiae Cdnrour(in TeeN Ce ftdim Wrtunn ro III COnrour for Mp Mega ill I Wdl I 55884 1 55 tlBA I Mri WJBA I WagA I 55dB4 Ltln: 29 93 135 40 ill 1. Ltln: 1. 151 325 102 700 ONEL: 31 67 145 43 313 IN CNEL 75 162 349 109 751 Sronado: Year 2016 With Pmled Pi jed Nama: Ni Rued Name: San Joaquin Hills Job Number 8211 Road Segment Weslol Jam oree O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data 4,11 SM COndltlom (HVd =f0, SoH =13f Aveage Odly ThWc(Aid. 5.000 vel Aulm: 15 Pink HOUr Pomsmaga: 10% Medum Tricks (2 Al 15 Peak Hmeldurrre.' 5)) M-Ide3. Heavy Theory IS, ill: 15 vehdde speed' 45 .1 Vehich W. lieahlowl.ne Dimosse' 76 hail VahkKTyge I Day Eval Nlghl I Daly Site Dell 0000 Amos: 7.5% 12.9% 96% 111 Medium Tiucka: WI 49% 103% 194% Basher HelpX[ 0.0 lee{ Bame,lype(DWall, I Berm): Oo Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cemasine Dirt to Bemef Candles, I to Obinrver too.o dd 100.0 fed Nn/se3mrne E/eaalhn. an reap Autea, 2000 Berner Distance to Observer, 0.0 reel Marpum Tmcks: 4000 Obeerver/le ,or (AD.. Pedf: 50 IBd HWry, TNA3: BW6 Gorda Adjudmrs, 00 Pad Ekvatlon: 00 rad Lane E9uhalent Dhhna(in heQ Road Brothers, of .1 All 92547 Roetl.. 00% I Vha -990 deghea samiem Treacle: 92.504 Rgbf Vrew: 9o.o segrese Heavy Tmds.' 92547 (i1WA Ndu MoWI samadaMme Leg Ewnmg. droad.Type I S. I TmPw FbW I Gsommor I Fdnlla Road I Freoned I. Men I Bem A. Sronanm Yem2016W11h Pmjid Pm)ect Name,- Ni Road Name: San Joaquin HNS Job Number 8211 fill Segment East W Jamboree O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data 4,11 .0 Gonda om (HW =f0, SoH =15) Aveage Ddly ThKs(Aid. ligioN sell Aulm: 15 Pork HwrPomsmsge: to% Medum Trvoka(2AiAI 15 Peak HOm Vdums' 2,040 hidea Heavy Three 0, rears): 15 vs. speed' 45.1 Vehich W. lieaniaclane Diammose' 76 het VehkKType I Dry Evening Night Daily Site DaM 0000 Am. 7.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Tmcks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% Basher Height O.0 NO Same,lype(O.1411- Berm): 0o Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% CeMBnine Dirt ro Berner Cenbdlne Old. b Obrervsr 1Lb.91ad 100.0 fled Nods. amore gama.DOn. an fxp Amos, 2000 Berner Durance to OLtrerver 0.0 real Medium Tmcks: 4000 Dbeerver ,ft (AD.. I 59 hd Her, Tool 5x6 Gmde Adjudmsse, 90 Pad Ekvatlun: 00 fad Lane E9uhalenl Dkhna(in Seel Roetl Easiness, if feel Adba: 92547 Rose.. 00% Led V,am- -990 di graea Madbm Dubka 92504 Fight Vrew: 9o.o degrees Heavy Trimts.' 92547 (i1WA Ndu MoWI L1hu/9Mme Leg Ewnmg. Vehid.Type I S. I Tmq Fbw I Oslsnde I Finil6ROad Frmn& I.Man Bem A. Arrom 68.46 496 4,11 -120 4,87 C.W) O:WO Autos: 6546 1,15 4,11 -120 4,87 C.W) O.WO Mserm Tmcks: 7945 1220 -4,11 -120 IBT 0000 9003 Mst Tmcks: 7945 - 1809 -4,11 -120 IB7 0000 O. Heavy Trmka 84.25 -2516 -4.11 -120 -516 0,000 0003 Heavy Tort 84.25 1(L05 -4.11 -120 -516 o.OW 0003 UnMtlgand NOlsu LeV SufflnuI T.- and hunlx: aCSnudbn) UnMNgand NOlsn Leadarif MOrd T.pnendhanterl uatlon) mi ideType Lug Peak HOUa Laq Day Leg Ewnmg. Lag Nigh Lne CNEL Wasinalype Lm -11011 La, day (eg Evening. Led Might LM CNEL Autos; 502 513 51.5 405 57,1 577 Aube; 64.3 62A 6)6 54fi 63.2 63 Medium Tmcks: 519 514 41.1 425 51,0 512 Medium Tmcks: 58.0 58.5 00:2 48.6 51 57.3 Heavy Tmcks' 528 51.4 423 436 SIB 52.1 H., Treks' 58.9 575 ill 497 50.0 582 Vidgme Note, 60A MS 55.1 WA 590 594 VehkJ. Note, 66.1 LIA 61.2 56A 65.1 656 Ce ftdim O4dnn ro Nasu COnrour on Al Ce ftdim Wrtunn ro III COnrour for Mp I0dB4 0 d 1 6 884 1 55 tlBA 1 70 ON 0 d WdB4 55 tlBA ldn: 16 40 B6 1. ldn: 47 102 219 471 CNEL: SO 43 0 IN CNEL: 51 109 235 05 lugnry.Fbv49.A1s. 6.1 -66 mareev.51ev49.sel SCwlario: Year2015WMPmled Pmjerl Nem,. NNCPC RLadsleme: SanJorquin Hills Job Number 8211 Road Signal Westof Santa G- 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS H+Bbway Oates -819 Sib Coneltlons (Haml 10. Soft= 15) Animals Daily Thers fa OQ: 23.700 veM1idre Ammer 15 PeakHwr Percentage 10% MsNum TmMs(2 Asks): 15 I Hom Volume.' 2,370 -hides Heavy im. p, assid): 15 vanish speed: 45 .0 Vehkls We Neam/Fariens Ddddre: 76 het darnel yps I Day Evideall Night I Deily &Tel Cal darrel ypa I Dry Evaning Nghf Dslty Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medals Trucks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Haight. 9.0 het Ranier This rrai lL I Bean): 00 Heavy TVCks: fill 21 %. 108% 0.749. Carnal Sell 10 Seller Ird. het Ndsa$ -me Eleves Onne(In/eeff Cura nine Dist to odral 1LU6 fed ANUS, 2000 Beale( onlenre b obmrnim So red Mamum Thanks: 4.000 0dsarver HSger(Am. Pee): an had HearyTrvrka Intl Gmede Adudment 90 Fatl Ehvdion: 0.0 feel Patl Ebvdion: Lane Equlalent Dlstanre(n h Q Road Eastman. 90 art ANUS: 92.54] Road arena: 00% Left View: -90.0 deal badum ]racks 92504 III Vile. 000 degmes Heavy Tmcke: 92547 Fg.. drand ekulet+ons Heavy Truake 9250 shwa xolw.1.1 cmmdatft s Vafide Type I REMF1 I TmT fSav I ..nca I FONh Roetl I Fmenel I. A. I AOan Samara, Year2016WMPmjad Pmie[1Nal NNCPC Road Name: San Joaquin Hills Jab Number 8211 Read Se'armat East d St. cie, 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9nwey. -819 Sib CmeltlON (HUd =10, a- =15) Average Daily Tia?2(AOQ: 15.000 veM1idea Auras' 15 Peek HOUr Permare a' 10% MWlum Trader (2 Antem. 15 I HOm VOlurrre,' 1,500 sahides Haavy Tards(3k Axles): 15 Vesicle Speed: 45.0 yehkle We Near/F, Lane Dishace: 76 hest darrel ypa I Dry Evaning Nghf Dslty &'is WU - 120 lam Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %9TA2% damem Trucks: 84.8% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMer Height. 0.0 kM Ranier Typa l0.Waq I Berm): 80 Heavy TVCks: fill 27 %. 10.8% 0.74% CanRnind Dral 10 Seller Idi.1 Ndsa Somme EMVatbns S. hang Sandiest Dist b observer 10I fed ANUS, 2000 Samar Dlslea -b oGrerver: 0o red Masora Tracks: 4.000 Gdsarrer Fail (Am. Pas): 5o he1 Hoary Trvaka 8008 Grater Almardant 30 Patl Ebvdion: 0.0 reel (InmM9edl NCha Laval /(wINOUITopoduldrmHwtlfarm.) Lane Equladcal Dhtanre (in /ee) Road Eastman. 001set Auras: 92 547 Road Grade: 00% Left View: Fill tlegmea McNUmi ake' 91 fal Right Vile. 900 drgmee Heavy Truake 9250 shwa xolw.1.1 cmmdatft s LagPoak Hour I V&lide Type T nitt I Tminc Fbw I Oismads I Feel Reed I Framer I BaniarAtten I Rrrm Afdi Aubs; 6646 1 s 4.11 -130 4,87 Rome Segment West of Santa Ral 0.000 0000 Aube; 6846 -819 4:11 -120 4,87 17.300 veMdea o.OW 0.000 Medum Tmcke: 7945 -1544 -411 -1211 lam vehcle tal 9909 9003 M um Trucks: 7945 -1143 -411 - 120 lam Arms: 7.534 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% 9990 9000 Heavy Tmrks 8425 -Ill -4.11 -120 -516 cenhmrre Did in ohaarvd: 0,000 01 Heavy Tracks' 6425 1138 411 -120 -516 Hwy, TrvAS: 8008 "the aharmer, a 0,000 01 (InmM9edl NCha Laval /(wINOUITopoduldrmHwtlfarm.) Red Elsvelian: 9o.1 Subs: 92 al Roetl Giadk LO% Left Via-- (Inmigns. NC ha ands hal TOpn and be., eslNnds" Rgnf Vrew: ao.o degrem Hal Tends' 9250 (i1WA Ndu MoWI L11nu+a8we VenicleType LagPoak Hour I Lot, Day Iaq Eirral LM Nigh I Ldn I Laf L Vanisailles Las Poak Ham LM say I eaq EVwl+rg Laq Nigh I Liar I CNEL Ideal 6!9 630 61.3 552 63.8 &I Anne 630 61.1 59.3 532 61.9 62.5 Medium Tmrks: IRS 572 51 49.3 all 58.0 Mest Tmrks: 531 552 4318 473 all 58.0 Heavy Trial 59.5 MA 49.1 583 Si 58.8 Heavy Trial 57.6 56d 47.1 483 567 56.8 VahMe Nose: 668 65.0 81.9 572 85.7 662 va le Nose: 1 630 599 55.2 638 b42 CanlMim Dlabnar to We. Crrshm, Sn farg Lamers Dlabnrr ne Han Cartel (in Tee4 TO dBA 01 1 di I WIASA I naBA dil I 60dSA 1 55,494 Ltln: 52 112 Z42 521 Ltln: 39 83 17S 984 Cl 55 120 259 559 CNEL 41 89 191 412 I all, Sronada: Year 2015 With Pmjerl Palestinians. NNCPC Rase Name: San Jmquin Hills Jon Number: 8211 Rome Segment West of Santa Ral 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS inghwey Data I'M sm fbneltloru (HVd =fa, soft= f5f Aveage Daily Tmaim(Al 17.300 veMdea Autos: 15 Peek HwrPomsMSge: to% Meallm TUaka(2Aika),- 15 Peak Hey,Polmne.' 1,73) rehIl Heavy Trade (3 +Axles): 15 vehcle tal an mpd Vehirre MM Naar/Firl.r. Ddarids 76 teal VehkKTys. I Day Everanal Nghf I Deity Sih Dale -129 /ray Arms: 7.534 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 84.8% 49% 103% 194% SaMer Hel 0.01ed BamerType(OWall 1- Bemmf: So Heavy Tenon. all 27% 108% 074% Cdeanine Dist as Bamef 1Lb.o and hater. oume Fi'evelbne(I. tx) cenhmrre Did in ohaarvd: Ink fall Assay , 2000 Selmer Death. m observer 0.0 red Mrcyum Tmcke: ant) onoervar He,nl(Abova Pee): 50 red Hwy, TrvAS: 8008 "the aharmer, a Pad Ekvatlon: 00 red Lane Equivalent Dhtrna(in Sea Red Elsvelian: 9o.1 Subs: 92 al Roetl Giadk LO% Left Via-- -90.0 aaghea Naeenm Tandy 92.504 Rgnf Vrew: ao.o degrem Hal Tends' 9250 (i1WA Ndu MoWI L11nu+a8we Venlde Type Vafidr Type I S. I TmPw Fbw I Shmanne I Fines Road I Fenn& I. Men I Beam A. Saanario: Year 2015 With Pmjerl Pmjed Name: NNCPC Baal Name: San Joaquin Hills Jan Number 8211 Road Segment East id SenA Rasa 0000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS inghady Data I'M .0 COndltloru (Hal =f0, soft= fall Aveage Daily TmKe(A4. 22.900 veMdea Auks: 15 Peek Hom'. age: to% Medum Theka(2Aika).- 15 Peak Hey,Vdumn' 2,390 assides Heavy Trial 0, axles): f5 vehicle speed an mpd Vahiare MM Neaniarime Deans' 76 fire VehkKT),pe I Day EveMrq Nghf Daily Sih Dale -129 /ray Am. 7.534 12.9% 96% 9742% Mndem TUCks: 84.8% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 M1 Bassm,lae(0.Wall, f- Berm): Bo Heavy Tracks: 66.5% 27% 108% 074% Cerdedlne Cliff as Basest Ity. r8.d haddi ums G9eveslbnspn Gxp cenhin She to ohrervar: ICOO fill Aaos' 2000 Ramer ourenae In oberver 0.0 ad Mallum Tmcke: 4000 Dhaerver Heft (Above Pee): 59 red Hwy, TrvAS: 8108 Gmdeagudment 90 Pad Eknndrom 80 red Lane Squhstaid Dkhna Dnfre) Red Ekvdian: 90 had Asset 9250 Roed Grade: LO% Left Via-- -90.0 aeghea Mamnm. 92504 Right Vrew: 9o.o emgrees Heavy Trtmks' 92547 (i1WA NWU An drl Lllaulahws Venlde Type Vehldm Type I S. I The Fbw I liandaae I Fines Read Fmsrrel I.Mea Beam A. Areas : fal OA 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 of Areas : 6846 I'M 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 9000 Msaids Tmnka: 7945 -1881 -4,11 -129 1g7 9009 9003 Mtrawn Tmnka: 7945 - 1559 -4,11 -129 /ray 9000 0. Heavy Tricks 5435 Sli -4.11 -120 -516 IlOW of Heavy Tricks 5435 -1955 -4.11 -120 -516 IlOW of UnMtlgshd NOlae Leval(wNMuf ToM andhenteralbnudbnf UnMtlgefed NOlae Levnls(w of TOpnandbaMxa Oon) Venlde Type Leq Peaktftm Las, Day Iaq Evening Leq Nigh Lan CNEL -s Type Leq Peak Hbum Laid Day Leq Evening Leq Night LM CNEL Areas ; 636 61.7 59.9 539 62.5 63.1 Aubs; (AS 62.9 61.1 55.1 63.7 (AS Marius Tmrks: 57.3 568 49.5 479 all 565 Metlium Tracks: 50.5 57.0 50.7 49.1 576 57.8 Heavy Tmcke' 582 Sag 47.7 all 573 574 Haay Tmcke' 594 510 48.9 502 68.5 58.7 Verde Nose: 654 111 605 556 64.4 64.8 finds Ndee: 666 Lig 61.7 57.1 65.6 66.1 CanhrMe D4bnre h Naas Deal fin M6 Constrains, Mite hNaas Deal fir M6 70 01 1 60l 1 55 tlBA 1 70 dfl4 01 60 eBA 55 tlBA ten: a2 91 1. 4. fen: 51 110 238 ga CNEL: 45 98 210 453 CNEL: 55 118 253 545 hisma.tbv49.A1a. 6.1 -67 hasso.Mev49.'N1s. SCwla(is. Year2016WMPmjecl Pmjecl Name• NNCPC Road Nam,: San Jrequin Hills Job Number 8211 Road B,,hass, Wilard Macenhur 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hrghway Dsta 1.33 SIb CmtlMOns flial 10. Sol 15) Assisi Daily Traffic (I 23.800 -hid.. A.. 15 PaakHwr Pamenlega 10% MWlum Truths D Axka): 15 Peak HOm Whysre.' 2,560 vehidea Hi Tmcks(3k Axles): 15 stay. Liscal 45 mph Vehicle W. I ... /Fazlane 0iafance: 76 het yasside ps I Day Evarl Nghl I Deily She Carl - 120 1W Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMel Height 0.9 RM @artier Typa rLWall, 1- Benny: 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% CanRrIiM Dul 10 Sal 1CO.o reel Na9e SLAWS Erevafbne (In /eeff Cardwllne Dist b Obwrvec IWLfe0 ANDS, 2000 Sucher Dreier to obmrvar: Oo feel M,mum Trucks: 4.W0 observer Halhursv, Ped): 5o reel HsaryTrvcka 8,006 Grade AHummene 90 Fad Ekvaiion: 0.0 Ieel WmM9efed NOh¢ LevMa(wINOtillom¢ndbonlwalfM..) Lane Equlvaenl DHhnre(n A Q Road EbvaNOn: 901°. ANDS: 92.54] Road .redly: 80% Left View: -900 degisea t'lddma 1. 92504 III Vial: W 0 a.,- Harry Tracks: 92547 Phal. Mode, cakubtrons Lazl Peak ii I your ype I REMF1 I The Fow I OisGnca I Fort. Roatl FFSneI I. A. I Rerm A!!en SCanalio: Yesr2016WMPmjecl Pmjecl Name• NNCPC Road Nama: San Joaquin HlllS Job NUmhec 8211 Road B,gmeyf: Easlol Mial 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey UNe 1.33 S. CmEltloN(Harp° 10....I: a) Average Daily Tre ?c(Add : 21.300 vehidea A.. 15 Peal. -r PPmenlsga' 10% MWlum Trucks (2 Ax%al 15 Peak HOU. Volume: 2,120 vehidea Heavy Tmcka(3k Axles): 15 Vehicle Speed: 45 mph V¢didd. War I.../Far Lane Dishnca: 761eet yasside ps I Dry Evening Nghf Dally &illy WO - 120 1W Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% Medum Trucks: 64.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.0 Id. Ranier Typa l0.Waq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27%. 188% 0.74% ClynarliM Dul 10 Secdat 1.. feel No.. SwF° ElevMbne (I..1) Cordiality Dias b Observer IDI fed ANDS, 2000 Sarrlar Disrenre Is oGrerver: 0o feel Urds. Trucks: 4.W0 Observer thrulh rs. Pell): 5o feel Henry Trucks, 8,006 Grsde Arluslment 90 Pad Ekvaiion: 0.0 feel WmM9efed NOh¢ LevMa(wINOtillom¢ndbonlwalfM..) Lade Equivvalenl Dhhbre (is /ee) Road EbvaNOrt 001set Aoros: 92 547 Road Gaae: 06% Left View: 900 degmas MsdumT rats 91 ful Right Vial: 900 a.,- Heary Trvcks 92547 Hlwa xolw.1.1 celupetlons Lazl Peak ii I V&lldPType T REMEL I Traffic Tbw I Oislenca I Fhust ROed FFmrel I BaniarAtten I Reim Attar Asks; 6646 118 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO 0.000 0000 Aubs; 6646 1.33 4.11 -120 4,87 Aube 15 O.OW 0.033 Andurch Trucks: 7945 -1546 -411 -1211 -09] 40 mph 9009 9W3 M um Trucks: 7945 -1591 -411 - 120 1W @aM¢r He1pXG' 0.0 fact 909)1 90W Henry Track¢' 64.25 -19.42 -4.11 -120 -516 Ink had 0,000 O.W3 Harry Trucks' 64.25 -1986 -4.11 -120 -516 Pad Ekvatlon: 0,000 0.W3 WmM9efed NOh¢ LevMa(wINOtillom¢ndbonlwalfM..) 9o.1 Attica 98412 Rostl.. L0% Left Via-- -90.0 aagmea WmM9ered NO.. L..(.1 TOpn end bmn6/ etakirds of 9o.o ae9rem Heavy Trolls' 98413 F1wa Ndu Mod¢I Llbule0wy CNEL VenadeType Lazl Peak ii I Lai day Ieq Ehaturg LM Nigh I Ldn I CNEL VanicleType Luill'affilitarl LM Day I req,tail Las Nigh I Lan I CNEL As(nc' 6!9 630 61.3 552 1 63.8 64A Auloc' (1 626 60.8 540 Medium Trucks: 634 640 Medium Trucks: 58.] 572 W.8 49.3 522 W.6 571 58.0 Mai lum Trucks: 58.2 581 WA 48.0 41.9 573 57.5 Heavy TUks: 59.5 68A 49.1 563 49.4 111 58.8 Heavy Tracks: 59.1 671 406 49.9 58.2 58.4 VehMe N.: 668 65.0 51.9 5T2 65.7 662 Vehicle shade: @6.3 61.6 51.4 561 653 SS) CanlMim Diabnnro Novae C,nlour(i. Teel 1 Odd 1 701 CanlMim Diabnnro NOUa Curtail (in Tee4 WdB4 55 tlBA Ldn: 16 34 32 70 aBA 851 1 Will I SSdB4 34 ]4 I nii Wi I ycl I SSdB4 78 Ltln: 52 112 .1 37 510 171 Ltln: 46 101 225 465 CNEL m 120 458 557 CNEL 52 112 241 520 Scarcul Year 2016 With Pmlecl Pi jell Nama: Ni Road Name: Ban Clemente Job NUmur 8211 Road Segment East of Banta Barbaa O.WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey D¢ra 4,51 SN¢COndlHOru (HW =f0, SoH=15) Anal Daily TraWc(Al 5.700 sell Aube 15 Peek Hwr PomsMSga: to% Medium Trucks (2 Atual 15 Peak H., Vidurs..' 670 MM1Idris Heavy Thadry p + Axles)} 15 vehicle sucks"' 40 mph Vehicre W. NuadFaliane Di.ansuck mhail VerdiTys. I Day Essua NgM I Deily Bih Dale 0. Aufos: TT.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 1 49% 103% 194% @aM¢r He1pXG' 0.0 fact BrmerType(OWdl, 1 -Baru): Bo lkavy Tracks: 111 27% 188% 074% Csaasirre Dirt )D eemer 1LYI.o said lads. SOUFe Fd¢aelbn¢ Pn txl Catia lye Did b obmrvar Ink had Aaus, 2000 @emer Dislaaca to 06servet 0.0 red hall Tracks: 4W0 Observer ii (AD.. Pod): 50 rod HWry TNAS: 8W6 Grade A"fudmcurs 9I Pad Ekvatlon: 80 rah Lan.E9uNdenl Diduar -Onhet) Rill Elsveticn: 9o.1 Attica 98412 Rostl.. L0% Left Via-- -90.0 aagmea N: Chas Typify: Let Rgbf Vrew: 9o.o ae9rem Heavy Trolls' 98413 F1wa Ndu Mod¢I Llbule0wy CNEL VsnldeType I R. I TmSWFbw I Distance I Frans Rhad I Forks. R¢F Mrn I Reim A. Sronario: YSar2016Wi1M1Pmjed Pi jed NUma: Ni Road Ni Ban Clemente Job NUmar 8211 Road Segm,nL' Wass of Same Omz O.WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwey Dar. 4,51 .0fWad1vb (HW =f0, SoH =Ill Avarege Daily TraWs(Adl: 5.WO sel Aube 15 Peak Hous'.MSge: to% Medium Trvoks(2Aius).- 15 Peak HOUNduma 590MM1Idra Heavy Trvcke 0, Axles)} 15 vehicle suck "' 40 mph Vehicre W. Nuar/Farlans Distarks, 26 hail VehkuType I Cry Evenirq Nght Daily Sih Dais 0. At. TT.5% 12.9% 96% ill Medium Truck: 64.6% 49% 193% 194% @aM¢r Height 0.0 Mt SamerTyps(0.WalL 1 -Sal Bo Heavy TFdts: 111 2.7% 188% 074% Ceraenlne Dirt. Bill I.. cad Nas. souF¢rievetbm pn fx) CenRI, Cliff b Obmrvar Ink fed Autos, 2000 Bill Dural to OLtrervat 0.0 fees hgdium Tracks: 4W0 Dbmrver He,sl(AD.. Pod): 591ed HWry TNAS: 6W6 Grade Aaludment 90 Pad Ekvatlon: 80 ud Lane Equivalent DUbna(In le.Q Road Ekvdion: 90 had Aube: 98412 Russ Grads: L0% Last Via-- -90.0 dial Madivm 1.a: Let Rghl Vrew: al If sa,has Heavy )mpks' 98413 F1WA Ndu MoWI L11nul¢MOna CNEL Ve..Type I R. I TmPwlbw I Dldrnde I Flnae Road Fruit. I.Mrs Rerm A. Aubs: 111 -388 4,51 -120 4,87 O.WO O:WO Aubs: 66.51 -333 4,51 -120 4,87 O.WO O.WO Mal Tracks: T7.]2. 1112 -451 -120 IL7 900)1 9W3 Mealum Tracks: T7.]2. -299] -4,51 -120 IL7 900)1 0. Heavy Thishl 82W -2507 -451 -120 -516 .BOW QWm Hady,Tn2ks; 82W -2493 -451 -120 -516 O.OW QWm UnMNget NlNdse LeVW(..isI TOpo asI It.aCenudbn) UnMtlgefed NOS. LeVely(w]MOUI TOpn and heMxalLenuetlon) VatldPType Leq Paek Hbur La, Day Lrq Evening LW fight LM CNEL VatldPType Leq Peek HOUr Laq day frog EVSning La, Aught LM CNEL Aubs; 559 55.0 533 472 55.8 554 Aubs; 57.1 552 53.4 473 56.0 1 Medium Trucks: 509 49.4 430 41.5 499 502 Medium Trucks: 510 49.5 43.2 41.6 50.1 503 Henry Trucks' 522 W.6 41.7 430 EA 51.5 Heay Trucks' 52.4 508 41.9 43.1 6t5 516 Will Nowill 589 57.2 539 49.4 5I.9 583 final Nom: 59,1 5).3 $41 495 58.1 50.5 Canttalim DUdnn ro Nase Coal On Ml Canttalim Wrtenn ro Nase Coal On Ml IO pfl4 W1 1 WdBA 1 Odd 1 701 W1 WdB4 55 tlBA Ldn: 16 34 32 156 ftln: 16 34 ]4 1. CNEL: 17 36 78 167 CNEL: 17 37 78 171 7ugery.Fsissi 1s. 7ugery. his..'N12. Sider , Ter,2016WItr Pmled Pmjecl Name• NNCPC Rcad Name: Santa BaNara Job Number 8211 Read segment. West of laminate. 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HIBM1wey Oala M9h✓ey Dal Sla Cmeldons (HVd=10. Shot 15) Average Daily Trial ailed: 2300 vshidea Auras: 15 PaakHwr Percenmga 10% MWWm TmMs(2 Ayll 15 Peak Hour Volurrre.' MO vend Han, ia. (arluled): 15 Vehicle Speed: 40 mph Vaanlcr. MR. I ... /FarGarre Distance: 36 het Verril a I Dry Evarl Night I Dsily &'te Cal Site WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMerHeight. 9.9 lean Banger Typa l0.Wal(1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% CanRniM Del 10 Banief 1C9.o het Nae. Saidem evatbns(In/eeff Camwllne Dist to Derail VOL fed ANOS, 2000 Sry f Did a-to ob--- go fed illegal Tracks: 4.000 Gd-r HSgdl(Ahove Pee): So reel Hm,v Tml 8,005 Grade Ad)udmene 90 Fad Senate, 0.0 feel 0.0 reel Lane EqulvaleatDhhnreQnfeeQ Road Ebval 90 led Auras: 98412 Road Gade: 0.0% Left View: -900 degrees War- 91 Rgbf Via-- an. degrees HearyTmGS: 98413 N4WA. Made Cameaflnna fHWA NOIx.1.1 Cdcdaffm- Indira.Type I REFILL I Treibc Fbw I Oislunca I Fail Road I F men I Banur Atten Berm Allan Siderm,: Ter,2016WMPojed Pied Name• NNCPC Read Nam.: Same game. Job Numhec 8211 Road Segment: Eastu Jamtane 0.000 8000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9h✓ey Dal 4,51 SIb Centel... (HW =10, a- =15) Average Daily Tre?c(Aded 12.900 inil s Aulcs' 15 Peak Ri- iii- enlaga' 10% MWlum Trader (2 Ax %s): 15 I I Wilurrre.' 1,290 venides Heavy Tmake(3, arded, tb V.dicl. Speed: 40 mph Val le Mi. I.../F., Lane Diehnce: 36 het Verril a I Dry Evaning Night Deity Site WU 9060 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97,C2`36 Medum Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Barter Height. 0.91eM Banger Typa lDWaq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% CanRnie Did. 10 Bandit 109..0 het No.. $-. EMVafbne(Ieal Continental Did to Obsarv.r 10i fed ANUS, 2000 Semler Oi a- he oGrervar: 0o had Manlam Thal 4.000 Gdermar Fail(Ah.ve Ped): So het Han, Trill 8,006 Gradeadmanent 90 Pan Senate, 0.0 reel 9o.1 Lane Equivalent Dhlance (in feel Road Ebval L had Area 96412 Road Gade: 60% Left View: 900 degmea MaNUm7 . 95a72 Right fill 000 negrees HearyTruck" MA13 fHWA NOIx.1.1 Cdcdaffm- I mireenTywe I RFMEL I Trel6c Fbw I Oiirmare I Farm Rind I Faided I BemierAtten I Berm AOan Aubs; 66.51 -782 4,51 -120 4,87 ROae Segment Norm of San Clemente 0.000 8000 AWOS; 66.51 -033 4,51 -120 4,87 12.600 veM1ldea 0.500 0.000 MBMUm Tweet 172 -2509 -451 -1211 -097 Heavy Tandy p + ayes): 15 . W 9003 Let Trunk.: 172 -1757 -451 -120 -097 Sid Dad 9060 9000 He., Tracks' 82.99 1902 451 -120 -516 1Lb.o tree 100.0 feel 0,000 0.003 Hasty Tracks' 8299 1153 451 -120 -516 Harry Trend 8006 Gres Anjadered a0 0,000 01 WmMgefed Nnhu LevNa(wINOUI TOpo and hamlet axenuabn) Lan.E9Yhded Dhamemill Fred Edvetion: 9o.1 Al 98412 (InmMga.Nnhu andar(wl TOpn and be., aMnueeonf -90.0 died. N:eimm Tandy fal Rgbf vrew: 90.o eegrear VenaJeType Laq Peak Hour I Leq Gay Iraq Evening LM Nigh I Lan I CNEL VenaJeTypn I Lam Peak Imer I Led Gay I Iraq Eneeng Lee Ni9M I Latin I I Anal 530 51d 49.3 all 58.7 ES 52.5 Allot' 685 Si %.8 587 54.7 594 600 Medium Trucks: 450 454 39.1 37.5 455 450 482 Medium Trucks: She US "S 45.0 44A 53.5 537 Heavy Trial 483 46.8 378 39.1 452 47A 47.5 Heavy Trucks: 55.8 64.3 45.3 485 432 Fall 550 Indiana Narem 550 513 500 45.4 574 Soo 544 Vehicle Nase: 625 61 57.5 528' 553 61.4 61.8 cedar" Ddmnn he Haaa Cartel (in twl 59.8 Cendni" Clarence he Nase Conroe Cn Ml claiming" cdemn he Han Cartel (in neQ Cendni" Munn he Nase Conroe Cn Ml 701 MI I SO d6A I SS dB4 I 55 tlBA I MdBA 01 1 SO dBA I SS III Ltln: 9 19 40 5y 95 295 Ltln: 27 id 120 42 SW Cl 9 20 42 61 91 284 CNEL 39 62 134 45 268 I all, Seral Year 2016 With Pmjid Rj6cl Name :NNCPC Rnae Name: Santa Bareare Job Number 8211 ROae Segment Norm of San Clemente Road Segment' Sou. of San Clemente SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS highway One Hlghwey Defy sin COnelgo" (HVd =f0, sore =15f Avarege Daily TraWs(Atll: 12.600 veM1ldea Auds: 15 Peek H- IndeaMage: to% Medum TUCkeRAihd.- 15 Peak HOUr VNUnre.' 1,260 W ll Heavy Tandy p + ayes): 15 vehele Sped' 40 into vahicre and NaanT'arLane D ndarde' 36 feel VehkdTyad I Day Evearg Nghf I Deily Sid Dad Sid Dad Ames: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 97A2% Medium TUCks 94.9% 49% 103% 194% Barteriall 0.0 feel BamerType grill I Same: 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27% 188% 074% Dean. Dirt. Bell cenrem "Did sob. 1Lb.o tree 100.0 feel Hold. swine Fi-a .(I. rxQ Adaa, 2000 Bemer ordain m oba , 0.0 red MaNUm Tmed: 4.()W oiarmerr rmi(An.. Poe): 50 tree Harry Trend 8006 Gres Anjadered a0 Pad Ekvetlom: 00 rad 00 had Lan.E9Yhded Dhamemill Fred Edvetion: 9o.1 Al 98412 Roetl Greek 00% Left Via-- -90.0 died. N:eimm Tandy fal Rgbf vrew: 90.o eegrear Heary Tmds' 98413 F1wa xdde Mmeel L11nLexwd (i1WA Ndu Model Lllnulahwa Veed.Type I R. I T.SWFew I Ddmrrre I Hale Roan I Freon& I. Men I Bel A. Searl: Tnr2016WiNPmled Pi jndlier -NNCPC Rnad Name: Santa Bal -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Road Segment' Sou. of San Clemente of SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlghwey Defy 4,51 .0 Canada- (HW =f0, soft = l5) Average Daily Tire Kc(A4. 7.900 vel Auras: 15 Peek Hi-na -mnge: to% Medum Tmoka(2Aikd.- 15 Peak Hour Vdum.' 79) Mhidne Heavy heray 0, ayes): 15 vehele Speed' 40 main vehicre and Naar/Fariane Diran a 36 tart vidd ype I Day Evenirq Nghl Daily Sid Dad 9009 Am. 77.5% 12.9% 86% 9742% Menlum Tnerm 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 MI BamerType(0- 1411 -Be "): 80 Heavy Trucks: 66.5% 27% 188% 074% CeNealne DiSL fO Bemer cenrem "Did in ohnrvar: Iddif fired 100.0 fed Nadesw-agavdbnepn TxQ ANUS' 2900 Bemar Oman. m obrerver 0.0 red Madura rvurs: 4.090 Dbearm, ,at (An.. Poe): 59 red Hall Trend eW6 Grade AdframanL 99 Pad Ekvatlum: 00 had Land EquhalenlDkbna (In (reff Roetl Edvdicn: Oo feel Areas : 98412 Roetl.. 11.0% Land Via-- -90.0 aallaes Medium Tmaka: al Right I 9o.o degrees HeavyTwts' 98413 (i1WA Ndu Model Lllnulahwa leq EVandg Venld.Type I R. I TmSWFew I Diafende I Flnlla Road Fee. I.Affern Be "Alen Aubs: 6851 L.H 4,51 -120 4,87 Oo00 of Arms : 66.51 -2A6 4,51 -120 4,87 Oo00 0.00 Madan Tmcka: TI.T2. -1797 -451 -129 1S7 0hed 9003 Maeem Tmcka: TI.T2. -191 -451 -129 /ray 9009 9003 Heavy Trial UN -2163 -451 -120 -516 0,00 8003 Hat Trial 8200 -2366 -451 -120 -516 01 8003 Unndtlgdee Nadu L.INtwNMuf TOpo antlhenlx: aC.nYdbnf Unndtlgefde NOldu Ladd. ndhoue Tal andhamlxalLMYetlonf iearn fype Leq Peek HOUr Le, Day leq EVandg Leq NIgM LM CNEL VenldeType Leq Paak Hnm Leq Ddy (eq EVadng Led NIgM LM CNEL Arline; 684 58.5 58.7 WE 59.3 59.9 Aube; 5B.3 56.4 54.7 488 57.2 578 Medium Tmcka: 54.3 A9 455 449 534 538 Medium Tracks: 523 518 44A 428 513 516 He., Tracks' 556 542 452 46A 64.8 54.9 Heay Tracks' 53.6 522 432 444 528 62.9 Verde Nola: 620 MIS 574 MA 61.3 61.8 Vdi Nola: 603 58:6 553 50A M.3 59.8 Cendni" Clarence he Nase Conroe Cn Ml Cendni" Munn he Nase Conroe Cn Ml 70" 1 01 1 QOl I 55 tlBA 1 70 tlfl4 01 50 dBA 55 tlBA him 29 5y 123 295 Ldn: 19 42 90 191 CNEL 2B 61 132 284 CNEL: 21 45 96 208 h amid Fbv 49. rehi ml Mev 49.'.12. SCanalro: Year2016WMPmlecl P /cWName•NNCPC Rcad Name: Santa Nitdot Job NUmhec 8211 Road Segment: Weslof Newport CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Ima yOala 66.51 Na Cmtlldons(Hard= 101 all 15) Avarepa Daily Ta?c 11 6.900 vehides Auras: 15 PaokHwr Pemenlsga 10% MWWm Thal in Axks): 15 Peak HOm VOlmrre.' 690 vehides Haavy'hatia 3k Axles): 15 vehicle Speed: 40 ral Vabkle 6Fx Ne../ llr Carre Oiationa: 36 feel yahkill I Day Evarl Ni I Daily Sol Cal -451 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medium Trucks: 54.6% 49% 193% 194% BdMel Height 0.0 RM SanigrT hr, l0.Wal(1- Benny: 80 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 21 %. 188% 0.74% (Dar iM D'al to Sal Ind. feel Nasa SwWaElevegcne (In .1) Candatim Dist b Obstal fail fed Aral 2000 Sorter Oil to Obmrven Do tad Medium Tracks: 4.000 observer hirl(A.. Pad): 5o had Hearyrrvcka 8,006 GradeA hahhene 90 Pad Elevaion: 0.0 had 0.003 Lane Equlvalenl Dlstanreortal Road EbvaNOn: 90 IeN Auras: 98412 Road Gade: 0.0% Left View: -No degmes War- 93.72 Rgbf Via No dogmas Har,TmGa: 96413 RiWA. Shad Ca otoordns VenrcJeType VenidPType I REMFJ- I Tmlbc Fbw I Oislsncra I FONIe Rmtl I Fmenel I 2anlar Atten I Berm Allan SCanalro: Yer,2016WMPmjecl ft, a Name•NNCPC Rcad Name: Santa Bol Job Numbec 8211 RhadSa9l No ul Newnan CTR SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS M9hwoy Dal 66.51 Sib Condldoru (HW =10, th. =15) Average Daily Tre?c(Al 3.700 -hid.. Auras' 15 Paa111 -r PPrcenluga' 10% Load. Trusks(2 Ax %sf: 15 Peak HOm WI­ 370 vehides Heavy Torch fak Axlesf: 15 vadlulP tarsal: 40 ral Ital 6NY N...F., Lane Distanal 36 feel yabkill I Day Evaning Nlshf Deity I to WU -451 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 54.6% 4.9% 193% 194% Bartel Haght. 0.0 Id. Sanigr Typg l0.Waq 1- Berm): 80 Heavy TVcks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% CBnalli. Drat. Seurat 109.. feel No.. sal EMVatbne Doliaff Candatim Dist b Observer fall fed ANUS, 20.0 Sal Oil to OGrervar: Do tad Mall Trvrka: 4.000 U.-r hal(A.. Pad): 5. feel Hoary Trvcka 8,006 Grade Atluslhhl 99 Pad Elevaion: 0.0 had 0.003 Lane Equlvalenl DManre Qn LeeQ Road EbvaNOrt 901ad ANDS: 96412 Road Gade: .o% Left View: No tlegmes McNUmi nd 95.72 Right Vital. NO lagmae Hoary Trucka: MA13 HIWA NOIae Medal CalurbNOns VenrcJeType V&rldPType I REMEL I Tmlhc Fbw I Olslence I iRmd Fmmrel I oamarAtten I Dart, Aflan Aubs; 66.51 -305 4,51 -130 4,87 0.000 8000 Aubs; 66.51 -5 76 4,51 -150 4,87 9.100 vehides 0.000 am Afrat Tiucka: 172 -2929 -451 -1 to 1L7 vehkle speed' 9900 9003 All Torah; 172 -230. -451 -120 1L7 Aufos: 7.5% 12.9% 9.6% 111 Medium Trucks: 54.5% 49% 193% 194% 9900 .. Hoary Tracks' UN 2435 161 -120 -516 Autua, I Wo 0,000 am Hasty Tracks' 6295) 1695 161 -120 -516 Bo ral 0,000 0.003 (NmMBefed Nnhn LevNa(wINOUf Ina- and banlw eNaranda f Auks: N607 Roatl.. 80% Left Via -No diagreea fNmMiddhd Nn.. L.. awal Irl end tur ler ar.-yon) No ae9rem Heavy Tmds.' %608 (i1WA al MoWI Llkularl LNEVankg VenrcJeType Leq Peek mur I Lm Day Iaq EVwivig IN NIgM I Ldn I Lal Lug Elintng I IN Peek lbur I Lai Day I Ieq EVanbxJ Lear Nlghl I Lan I CNEL Auras' 577 55.8 54.1 480 Aubs; Mi 57.3 Autos' 550 511 51.4 453 Madtum Tmcks: Ill 54.5 Madi Tracks: 517 503 43.8 433 58.3 506 51.0 Mot Tracks: 400 47.5 41.1 39.6 55.1 53.7 48.1 483 Heavy Tol 530 5116 42:6 43.8 5517 522 533 Heavy Thanks: 513 48.8 NP 41.1 574 49.5 486 Val N.: 59.8 580 54.7 A.2 59.4 S6a 582 Vehida fill 570 55.3 520 Ai.S 580 56.5 canlaiirw oddi at xan Coti (in reel camera" Odtann at Nan crrroar (in r l TO tlfl4 85 all I III I 55dBA 70 tlBA 55 dSA I WdSA I SS IWA 55 tlBA I 70 dBA 0 d I 6o tlSA I SS IWA Lan: 15 a5 52 177 CNEL Ldn: 12 25 m 263 117 CNEL: Cl 19 41 88 384 IN CNEL 13 27 58 125 Sronano: Year 2016 With Pmlecl Pi jrid Name: NNCPC Road Name: San Miguel -120 4,87 Job NUmtar 8211 Rmd Saghl Wand of Newgon CTR O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghway Defy 4,39 SNa COndlgoru(HW =f0,tiral ) Average Odly TraWc(Aid. 9.100 vehides Autos: 15 Peak Hwr PomsolNir 1.% Mealnn Tati(2 Aika).- 15 Peak H., Voluure.' 910 WWI Heavy Trvcks(3 +Axles): 15 vehkle speed' 4i rand will Md NgahFir rte adarrce.' 52 feel VehkdT th, I Day Evanirq Nlghf I Odly Sid Da. At. 7.5% 12.9% 86% 91 Medium Tmcks: 54.5% 49% 193% 194% Aufos: 7.5% 12.9% 9.6% 111 Medium Trucks: 54.5% 49% 193% 194% Sadder HdpXG' 0.0. led Bama,tri(0.Wall, 1 -Bamf: Bo Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 27% 188% 0.74% Cerallm i ro Hamer Cadial old to Obmrvar 109.0 had, 100.0 feel floe. Slarl 6ea.Dens Pn Del Autua, I Wo Samar Donal a Obssrvst 0.0 feel Mal Tmcks: 4600 O66erver He,or hiove Podf: 5. had H., Tri BWS Gmda Adjudmerd' 90 Pad Ekvatlon: Bo ral Lase EqukalentDkbnneanleel Lane E9uNalenl Dlatrna /nlreQ Roes Elevation: 90 reel Auks: N607 Roatl.. 80% Left Via -No diagreea N:dlum Tmcks: 98 IN Rgbf Vrew: No ae9rem Heavy Tmds.' %608 (i1WA al MoWI Llkularl LNEVankg Vehlde Type I It. I Venlea Type I It. I Tm5 Fbw I Otional I Fkke Road I Fmen& Berner Mr, Dorm A. Sronano: Year2016WiNProjed Pi jridthri -NNCPC lial Name: ban Miguel -120 4,87 Job NUmtar 8211 Rmd Segramor Nor NNal CTR O:WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghway Data 4,39 .0 Contro ru(HW =f0, Soft =15) Average Cady Tat Xc(A4. 14.400 veMdea Autos: 15 Peak Hah'. age: 1.% Mecum TrvokS(2AiAI 15 Peak HOm Virl 1,440 vehil Heavy Trvcke 0, trade): 15 vehkle speed' 4i .1 Vahicd Md N dFarlane arnione 52 teal Vehrcal I Day Eval Ni Daly Sid Dad At. 7.5% 12.9% 86% 91 Medium Tmcks: 54.5% 49% 193% 194% Sadder Helgbt 0.0 M1 SamarTypa(0.Wall, 1 -Sal no Heavy Tmcks: 66.5% 22% 188% 074% CerRenlne DI ro Hamer Canlallne Did. b Ob. 109.9 rBd look hal Ndomil fara Vinspnra l Auad Into Samar Donal to Obrervet 0.0 hill Medium Tmcks: 4600 for-, ,or hioveI 5.a. HWry TNAS: 6006 Grade Alfudmen190 Pad Ekvatlon: fio fad UnMtlgMed Nelou LeVW(wllnouI TOpn andheMx: albn.Mbn) Lase EqukalentDkbnneanleel Roatl Eanotal: J. heel Aube: 98607 Roatl.. 60% Left Via -No diagraea Malcom Tmnka: ad Wat Rohl Vrew: No f,on- HeavyTwts.' 96608 Pat NWae Model L11nu1al Luq Perk HOm La, Day LNEVankg Vehlde Type I It. I TmPWFbw I Okfenae I Fkla ROal Fmsnel I.Mart Dorm A. Aube: (1 - 2.36 4,39 -120 4,87 oO00 O:WO Aube: 6646 -0.37 4,39 -120 4,87 oO00 am Ma9um Thanks: 7945 -1960 -439 -120 -097 9000 9003 Ma9um Thanks: 7945 -1761 -439 -120 /r.97 Doan 9003 Heavy Thral 8435 -2355 -439 -120 -516 .6000 6003 Heavy Toral 8435 2156 -439 -120 -516 0.000 6003 UnMtlgMed Nelou LeVW(wllnouI TOpn andheMx: albn.Mbn) UnMtlgafed Nasn Levelsf rd Tapn.rulb lxalbn..Vil VanldPType Luq Perk HOm La, Day LNEVankg Luq fight Ldh CNEL VenldPTyps Leq Peak HOUr LM Day Lug Elintng Laq Mi Las CNEL Aubs; 60.5 586 Na WE 59.4 60.0 Aubs; 62.5 60.8 58.6 520 614 630 Madtum Tmcks: 543 52R 464 "A 533 53.5 Madium Tmcks: 58.3 54.T 45:4 468 55.3 55.5 Hill Tmcks' 55.1 53.7 44.6 458 54.3 544 Heay Tmcks' 57.1 5517 46.6 47A 562 564 Wil Nase: 633 No 574 52.6 61.3 61.8 Wil Nase: 643 636 59.4 54A 00.3 63.8 Cendrlil Distance of Nase COnrour on Ml CendLlil Wdann of Nase COnroul fair TO tlfl4 85 all I III I 55dBA 1 701184 65 dSA 60 tl8A 55 tlBA Ldn: N 57 1. 284 1Cn: 35 77 1. 355 CNEL 2B 61 131 263 CNEL: 38 83 178 384 oralil Fbv49.A1s. 6.1 -70 hrat.,.M ..'N1s. Small Yer,2016WMPmjecl rimmal Name• NNCPC Read Name: San Mlguel 4,39 Job Number 6211 Rated Segment, West of AVacado 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS HlgM1way Oala 2.33 SIb Cmtlldons hal 10. Sol 15) Average Daily Taffinfa : 16.100 vehicles An. 15 PaakHwr Peredia a to% McNUm Trader (2 Axks): 15 Peak Hour Warm 1,810 -hid.. Had, im. p, Axles): 15 Vesicle gal 15 mph VehkleI Near/FarLare Ignition Ufrall Verade s I Day Evarl Ni I Daily &Te MU -439 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96% 91 Medum Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 194% Barter Haight. 9.O hM Sel Than l0.WalL I Berm): 11.0 Haavy Trucks: 86.5% 21%. 188% 0.74% CanRniM Del 10 Sendai Ird. bet aids. Saidem vafbns(In ead) Centerline Dist to odral Ill fed ANDS, 2000 garner Dameme m obamem, 0o led Used Thatim 4.000 Gdsarver rental (A.. Pal 5o had Hm,v Tml e006 Grade Ad)udmene 90 Fad Emanation, 0.0 feel 0.003 Lane E9ulvalent Oranre(nFeel Road Elevation: 901ed Area 9f1607 Road Gade: 0.0% Left View: -90.0 degrees War -Pucks 99599 Rgbl Viaw: W 0 degrees Heavy Trucks: 95608 NiWA. Monet Cabubgons VenaJeType Leq Pmk Haul Venda Type I REM¢ I Trait Flew I ..nee I F.. Roatl I Frasml I. A. I AOen Steelio: Year2016WMPmjecl Pmjad Name• NNCPC Road Nama: San Mlguel 4,39 Job Numhec 8211 Rmd58gmenf: Eaat W Ammado 0.000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dart 2.33 Sib Cmtllial Pal =10. Sott =15) Average Daily Tylfa ): 26.600 -hide. An. 15 Peak HOUr Percenlsga' to% MWWm Teake(2 Aylem. 15 IHOm Volume: 2,680 -hii Heavy Tmnka (3k Axles): 15 Vesicle Speed: 45 raps Val leI Near/Far Lane Dishoca: 52 het yerade a I Dry Evening Night Deity Site WO -439 Al 77.5% 12.9% 96 %91 Mederm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 19396 194% BdMel Height. 0.0 leat Sel Typg l0.Waq I Berm): 00 Haavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 188% 0.74% CanRnind DI5t 10 Samec 10011 lest Ndsa SwFe Ebvafbns imea j Canbnlne Deal to odual I(I fed ANDS, 2000 Basle(Or., a- in ofamen, 0o led khmum Thad, 4.000 Gdsarrer Fail (A.. Pad): So feel Henry Tricks, 8,036 Grade Samanent 90 Pad Emanation, 0.0 feel 0.003 Lane Ellifewal Canada (in Feel Road Elevation. L 0 hall ANDS: 9f1607 Road Gade: Oo% Left View: Pill degiard McNUmTyr. 99599 Right Viaw: 900 degrees Heavy Tucker 98605 HIWA Nolx Mce91 CMUrbHmrs VenaJeType Leq Pmk Haul Small REM¢ I Trelnc Fbw I Dismnm I Farm Rend I Frmrrel I Renia/Atten I Reim AOan Art 6646 CS3 4,39 420 4,87 Road Segment West of MaarlM1ur 0.000 0000 Ardis ; 6546 2.33 4,39 -120 4,87 Amar 15 o.00) 0.000 Medum Trucks: 7945 -IF .1 -439 -1211 -097 an mph 9909 9003 M um Punks: 7945 -1491 -439 - 120 -097 Barteriall 0.0 led 9999 9000 Heavy Trucks 8425 1057 439 -120 -516 Seiner oisrencem observer, 0,000 0.003 Heavy Tracks' 04.25 - 1666 439 -120 -516 UnMtlg0t dlNOlsu LeVde(..uI TOpn aneheMer: dMnudbn) 0,000 0.003 WmM9ebn Nphe Levda legal TOpn and dealer differential Read Gredk o0% Leh Viaw.- -90.0 degrees N:eiam Threat 99599 Wmfger. Nphn andar hadel TOpn and dealer andemHonj Het,Trolls 96608 (i1WA al M Tad Lllmlahws Leg Paek Himi Laq Day leg Ewnmg. VenaJeType Leq Pmk Haul Laq Day I Inq Eial I Leq Venlde Type Leg Paak.1 Lam Day leg Eraning I Lem Peek lour I Lai Day I Inq Endenit Lee Nigh Lan I I Ideal 635 61.6 59.8 530 619 62A 690 Auloc' 652 633 61.5 555 586 57.1 64] 00.7 Medlum Trucks: 51 Ill 49A 470 54.1 563 50.5 Metllum Trucks; 590 57.4 51.1 49.5 49.0 50.0 582 Heavy TUke: Sit 56.7 4T6 48.9 469 572 574 Heavy Trucks: 59.8 58.4 49.3 50.6 57.2 58.9 59.1 VahMa Narem 653 63.6 504 55.0 54.1 64.3 64.0 Vehicle Narem 670 DES 521 57.5 66:0 66.5 CantMim Dlebnn to Nana Cdntour(in Ted) CanlMim Dlebnn le Nana Cartel (in Tee4 IO SBA 1 01 1 50 SBA I 55SBA 1 TO dBA I Si I Militia I Sidi lain: 1 10 Ili dil 60 SBA I Slagle fain: L. 42 90 193 929 117 CNEL: 55 Ltln: 53 117 251 541 CNEL: 35 CNEL 45 96 .09 447 CNEL 1 125 270 581 Sronario: Year 2016 With Pmjed Prayed Name: NNCPC Road Name: San Miguel -120 4,87 Jon Numal 8211 Road Segment West of MaarlM1ur O:WII SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway One 4,39 sm COnelaoru (Hartl =fa, soft =15j Avenge Ddly TraWs(AtlU: 25.000 vel Amar 15 Peek Hmr Pondeall: to% Mecum TruckaRAial 15 Peak HOm Volume.' 2,500 VeM1ll Heavy Tandy (3 +Axles) 15 Vehide speed' an mph vahicre We imanT'atLane Ddarde, 52 feel VehkKTyad I Day Eyandgj flight I Deily sit. Dade Amos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 103% 194% Barteriall 0.0 led SamerTyms grill I Ill 00 Heavy Trucks: Still 27% 188% 074% Cddenim DiSL fe Bemef cenremm Dist in observer: 1Lb.o had 190.0 fad Ibls. Serena Fieaalbm(I. lxp AWOa, 2090 Seiner oisrencem observer, 0.0 red Meal Timelier 4000 onmrvar He,nl(An.. Pon): 50 red Heavy Trend 5006 Greco Aduatmerma Pad Eknherm 00 rad UnMtlg0t dlNOlsu LeVde(..uI TOpn aneheMer: dMnudbn) Lana Equhal IDhbna0nlre4 Roea Elevation: 9o.1 Aulaa: 9f1607 Read Gredk o0% Leh Viaw.- -90.0 degrees N:eiam Threat 99599 Rgbf freer, 90.o degrese Het,Trolls 96608 (i1WA al M Tad Lllmlahws Leg Paek Himi Laq Day leg Ewnmg. Veatch Type I REM¢ I Tm5 Fbw I linearce I Fall Read I Fed. I. Me, I Ream A. Sronario: Year 2016 With Pmjecl Pi jed NUma :NNCPC Rena Namm San Mlguel -120 4,87 Jon final 8211 RmdSegmant East W MaaMUr O:WII SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Defy 4,39 sea Diameter- (HW =f0, soft = Ill Average Daily The Xc(A4. 12.500 vetildea adds 15 Peek Hmrna-mer e: to% Mecum Tmoka(2oll 15 Peak HOm Vduma 1.250 vehIl Heavy Trvcae (3 + Axles) 15 Vehkle speed' an .1 vahicre We imarliarLane Dirarde, 52 hel Vehrdsyed I Day Evening Nghl Daily sit. Dial Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 9a.9% 49% 193% 194% Bander Height 0.0 led Same,time gra lL 1- Berm): BO Heavy Tmdm. Still 27% 188% 074% Cernenlm Dirt fe Samef cgnremm Led, in Ob. Ird. rBd 1006 fed Nola. swrw rieadbne pit fxp AWOa' 2000 Berner Oman. a observer 0.0 red Madmen TVCke: 4.000 ohaerver ,at (An.. Poe): 59 red Hal TrvAS 5006 Greco Adfudmmit 90 Pad Ekinderm 00 fad UnMtlg0t dlNOlsu LeVde(..uI TOpn aneheMer: dMnudbn) Lana Equhaled Dkbncoh lrer) Road Ekvdier, 90 reel ANae: 98607 Roatl.. 00% fare Via-- -91 dagrde Maemm T.a: add. Right I 9o.o degrees HmVTwts 96608 (i1WA Ndu M Tad ed-lahnns Leg Paek Himi Laq Day leg Ewnmg. Vehlda Type I REM¢ I TmPWFbw I Litemade I FIneBROad Frah. I.Maa Derm A. Aufus: Ft 203 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 O:WII Ardis: 68.46 L.90 4,39 -120 4,87 0.000 OXI MaSUm Trucks: 7945 -1521 -439 -129 1g7 ofed 9003 Maelum Trucks: 7945 -1322 -439 -129 1g7 Ifed 9003 Heavy Trial 54.25 -19.17 -439 -120 -516 (1000 0003 Heavy Trial 54.25 12.18 -439 -120 -516 01 o003 UnMtlg0t dlNOlsu LeVde(..uI TOpn aneheMer: dMnudbn) UnMNgdee NOlsu LeVearf.0Tapnendfir. Bnmtlonj Venlde Type Leg Paek Himi Laq Day leg Ewnmg. Leg Nigh Lan CNEL Venlde Type Leg Paak.1 Lam Day leg Eraning Lam Night LM CNEL Aulm; 619 (1 61.2 55.2 63.0 64A Art 619 606 512 522 6CA 614 Medium Trucks: 586 57.1 51 111 577 579 Medium Tracks: 55.6 54.1 478 482 547 519 Heavy Tracks' 595 58.1 49.0 It 686 VIA Had, Timms, 56.5 5511 469 473 65.6 55.8 Vehkle Nom: 667 65.0 61.0 57.2 [5] 662 Linda Nom: 637 62.0 56.8 54.1 62] 63.1 Cenhdine Chance Nase Cbnrour on MQ Cenhdine WeYennro Nave Cbnrour im Mlj IO SBA 1 01 1 50 SBA I 55SBA 1 70 SEA 01 60 SB4 55 tlBA lain: 52 1fl 240 517 fain: 33 70 151 929 CNEL: 55 119 257 555 CNEL: 35 75 162 349 maid, de, 49. A1s. 6.1 -71 hat Mev 49. m12. se. ww- BCwla(io: Teer2016WfhM1jWt Pmjesl Neme• NNCPC Road Name: Lorain Highway Job NUmner, 8211 Road Sagmenb W.&Jamoares SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS "Oreary Oala Sib Cmeldons Hare =10. birds 15) Avenge Gaily Teaffiei : 71.800 vehides Auras: 15 PaakHwr Peresnlaga, 10% MWIUm Trel (2 Ands): 15 PeaF HO.. VOlmrre.' 7,10 vehides Heavy Tmnka(3k Axles): 15 Van. tiered: 45 mien Winter We Near/FarLane OJSfance: 76 het yebksal I Day Evall Nghl I Deily Site Dal Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.6% 49% 193% 184% Bdndel Height 9.0 hM Samar Type (0.WalL I Berm): D0 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 10.8% 0.74% itsha Moist In Seller 1.. het Ndrr S -a.El waVdm(In seaff Coresident Dist to obral fill fed ANOs, 2000 Berrien olsrenre m of,wr r 09 red Manum Trends: 4.000 observer Hagnl(Above Par): 5o fast Hvaryrrvcka ILM6 GradeA wahhne 90 Ped Elevation: 0.0 feel 9000 Lane Egaterhal DHhnre(nFeel Road Elevation. .3 ar. ANOS: 92.547 Road Gress: 60% Left View: -900 degrees hrddum franks 92504 Rghl View: W 0 aegmes Heavy Tracks: 92547 NiwA. Medal cakditirns 6425 Vends Type I REMF1 I Thal Fkw I OrsGnca I FIN. Rind I Friesse 2ernar A. Reim Allen Swalro: Tear2016WMPh Wt Pitiedtill NNCPC RLad Name: Lomat Highway Job Nunds- 8211 Rtadilegmenf: East of Jambane SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS H"ter, Date Sib CmelenN (Hard -10. snk =15) Average Gerry T?c(Add 56.500 -hid.. Auras' 15 PeakHwr Percenlsga,' 10% MWWm Trucks (2 Anew. 15 Peak HO.. Vdmrre.' 5,820 vehides Heavy Tmnka(3k belles): 15 Vanrcla Speed: 45 mien Vehill We N.../.r Len. Graham.' 76 het yehksal I Day JEh)h91 MCI Ddty Site WU Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% UndWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 184% Bander Height. 0.0 kM Samar Type (0.Waq I Berm): ob Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 10,8% 0.74% itsha MDial 10 Barter 1.. het Nod.. SwFa EMVatbns an. 1) Coresident Dist to Obsea.r 1(al fed Ades, 2000 Sal olsrenre to obal 09 red Hid. Trends: 4.000 (gaerrar hisi(Above Par): 5o at Hoary Trvcka 8,W6 orsde Arlsdment 90 Ped Elevation: 0.0 reel 9000 Lana Egateral Chinese (in Feel Road Elevation. L3 reel Auras: 92547 Road Great: 06% Left View: 900 deemes McNUmi . 92504 Right View: 900 a.,- Heavy Trucks 9250 shwa Andes .1.1 cmud.DOn. 6425 V&lide Type T REME1 I Trelnc Fbw I Olsr.nca I real Rastf I rental Rar/le /Atten berm Akan Auks; 6646 6.60 4.11 -130 4,87 Road Segment West of Newport CTR 0.000 0000 Auks; 6646 5]i 4.11 -120 4,87 ill veMdea 9.OW 0.000 Mum Tiucke: 7945 -1054 -411 -1211 -097 Venkle speed' 9000 9000 Mum Truake: 7945 -1153 -411 -1211 -097 All 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 103% 184% 9000 9000 Heavy Track¢' 8425 -1460 -4.11 -120 -516 Asian, IWif 0,000 0.003 Heavy Trucks' 6425 -15.49 -4.11 -120 - 516 00 red 0.000 0.003 WmM9efed NOha Levda(wINOUt Fl ens be. etlMUall Auks: 92547 Roetl oredk 00% I V,tw,- -90.0 degrees UsmMgdad been Lowest (answer Topo and barrier etNnuaHon) 0o .o ae9.es Heavy Tmds' 9250 (i1WA al Moral L11eu.honl CNEL VenkleType Leq Peek Hour I Leq tiny Leq EVwivig Leq Nigh I Len I Gill Autos; I Lag Peak Haar I Late Lay I feq EVmlirg Lee Night I Lan I CNEL Aerl 697 578 66.1 680 66.7 68.6 69.3 Aides' 68.9 670 652 591 616 5]8 664 deal Tracks: 63.5 82.0 55.6 54.1 Heavy Trucks' 31 528 des lum Tracks: 62,8 61.1 54.7 51 62.4 60.9 61,7 619 Heavy TUkr: 643 629 53.9 581 655 63.5 63.6 Heavy Thinks: 634 62.0 53.0 542 60.0 636 82.7 Val Nal 716 NA 667 620 786 71.0 Vehicle Ndse: 707 86.9 656 61.1 69] 701 CantMin Dieasnn. began Dbntow(in Aimed fa d89 I 55dBA 1 W Ibbbw Dle.ace an began Dbn.ur (in .e4 0tl8A 60 dB4 55 tlBA ten: ed 195 M dit 0sSA I 60 dBA I SS dB4 ad 173 I nbt 0cSA I Bo dill I SS di 209 450 Ltln: 100 231 S35 86 1,090 359 Ltln: % 204 400 949 CNEL 117 252 642 1,167 CNEL 102 219. 472 1,018 deal: Year 2016 With Purled Prayed Name: NNCPC Rase Name: Coast Highway -120 4,87 Job NUmaer 8211 Road Segment West of Newport CTR 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data -120 4,87 sm COneraoru (Hartl =fe, soN= f5J Averageodly TraWe(Atl6: ill veMdea A.. 15 Peek Hour Pomsmsge: to% McNUm TUCks(2 Anal 15 Peak H., Volunre,' 5,410 vehides Heavy Trvdes p, belled: 15 Venkle speed' 45 .1 Vehicre We NaadF.I.e. artmessa 76 feel VehkKTyoe I Day Evenirq all I Deily Si. Da. Heavy Tnbka All 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 103% 184% Bander H."id, 0.0 lee{ SamerType(DWalL I Berm): Bo Heavy Tracks: 86.531, 27% 108% 074% Dwitairre Dirt. Bill cenreMre Dist in obnrvd: I.. red Im.0 fell Nolswswrs.. -bone an .1) Asian, IWif Bemeroisrenn Is obsel, 0.0 red Mangum Trel 4000 Gerd-., ,at (Are. Pee): 50 red Hal TrvAs: e0" cwda Adfudmrnt 00 Pad Ekvatlon: 00 red Lane Equhatent D..na(in heQ Road Entrants,: O0.1 Auks: 92547 Roetl oredk 00% I V,tw,- -90.0 degrees N:eium Tracks: 92.504 Right Vrew: 0o .o ae9.es Heavy Tmds' 9250 (i1WA al Moral L11eu.honl CNEL didel.Type I it. I Tm5 Fbw I Llnknew I Finilr Rand I Fenn& Reiner Men I Berm A. deal: Tert2016WiNPmjed Pmjed Name: NNCPC Rase Name: Chad Highway -120 4,87 Job Number 8211 Read Steel East N Newport CTR 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Data -120 4,87 .0 Lo erect- (Hsi =f0, shH =le) Avaregeodly Theal (AtlU: 45.300 veMdea A.. 15 Peek HhurPomsmsge: to% McNUm Trveka(2Aiks),- 15 Peak Hhm Vdumn' 4,530 nahigec Heavy Trvcke 0, belled: 15 Venkle speed' 45 mpg Waricre MM NaadFariane asarest, 76 hel VehkKTyn I Day Evening Ngnt Dsly Si.I Heavy Tnbka Auks: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 111 Medium Trucks 94.9% 49% 193% 184% Bander Height 0.5 M1 SamerTiess ill I Berm): OZ Heavy Trucks: bill 27% 108% 074% CeMBnlne Dirt Is Berner cenremlre Did, k obnrvar: I.. red IM.0 filed Nhlseso bleantlhnepr Gxp Asiaa' 2000 Bander ourehn In obsrrver, 0.0 red Madium Trel 4000 dar-, Hai (Are. Pod): 59 red Hwvy TrvAs: BLO6 crate Agudment 90 Pad Ekndiss. 00 .d Lane EquhalentDkrma(Infiee) Rhetl Ekvanton: ..reel All 92547 Real.. L0% Left V,am- -90.0 degrees Maemm. 92504 Rghl Vrew: 9o.o ae9rees HeavyTwts' 92547 (i1WA NWU Mhnl L1ku.hw. CNEL Venld.Type I it. I TmPw Fbw I Lslann I FIiVe Road Fracas I.Man Berm A. Aube: 111 5.38 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 0:000 Autos: 68.46 4.61 4,11 -120 4,87 0000 0.00 Maabm Thinks: 7945 - 1189 -4,11 -120 1 L Dist 9003 Meat Thinks: 7945 - 1263 -4,11 -120 /r.9T 9000 0. Heavy Tnbka 84.25 -1591 -4.11 -120 -516 Il00 003 Heavy Trvbka 84.25 -1650 -4.11 -120 -516 ().(0 003 UnMtlgetetl NOln Lev beenout Tope an d heMx: ar.nudkn) UnMNgeted Nons L.wdsb MOrd TapeenddaMxar .V..) Varderlype Leq Peak Hbur La, Lay raq Ewnmg Leq Nigh Les CNEL VatldeType Leq Paak Hbui Lwf Ley teq Evening Led Night Lon CNEL Autos; 6B.5 1 64.9 580 67.4 68.0 Auks; 678 1 64.1 580 66.7 673 Mall Tracks: 62.3 1518 S4A 529 813 616 Matltum Tracks: 615 890 53.6 51 60.6 608 Heavy Trucks' 63.1 61.7 527 539 623 624 H., Treks' 62.4 60.9 519 531 6t5 616 Wil Noire: 704 68:6 655 BOB 69.3 69.8 VehkJe Noire: 696 67.6 U7 60.0 68.6 690 Cn.eim O4.nn.Manse COn.ur fir MU Cn.eim WMUnn. Neiae COn.ur fir Md 70 sit 1 0age I fa d89 I 55dBA 1 70 LOW 0tl8A 60 dB4 55 tlBA ten: ed 195 4f9 903 fdn: ad 173 3]2 802 CNEL: 97 209 450 III CNEL: 86 105 359 860 lugery.tbv49.ssil 6.1 -72 Iugeev.waseasel SCarla(io: Tesr2016WMPmjeed Pmjecl Name• NNCPC Road Name: Coast Highway Job Nurmec 8211 Road Segment, West of AVacado SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Highway Dart SIb Cme ns Hall 10. Sol =15) Average Daily Tre ?c (A@): 43.800 -hid.. Auras: 15 PeakHwr Pemenlsga, 10% MWWm Thanks D Awill 15 PeaF HOm VOlurrre.' 4,360 vehides Heavy Trunks ph, Axles): 15 war. Shared : 45 mph yank,. We Near/FarLane Distance: 76 het Vandal ypa I Day Evarl Nghl I Daily &Te Cal Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96% 8742% Medum Trucks: 94.6% 48% 193% 194% BdMel Helgllt 0.0 bet Samar Type, l0WalL I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 2T %. 108% 0.74% Caeamene ids, 10 Sal 1CO.o bet Nase,$ -me Elavagons(In seat) CanMllne Dist to Denial Hill fed ANOS, 2000 Hanle, olsrerre to obmrvar: 0o led Marcum Trucker 4.(300 Gdserver mal (Above Pee): 5o had HearyTrvcka e006 Grade AHudmene o0 Patl Ekvalior, 0.0 seal Beem,lype(DWalL I Berm): Lane Equivalent Dlstanre(n Feel Road Elevation: 90 art Arras 92.54] Rued Gade: 00% Left View: -90.0 degieas hlddum 1. 92504 Flight View: W 0 magmas Heavy Trucks: 92547 Fif Nobe Mode, cabuleflons 61.4 59.9 Venda Type I REMF1 I Tan Flew I OlsGnca I FINIe Roatl I Fennel I. A. I Berm A!!en Allies ; 6646 4A6 4.11 -130 4,87 Job Numar 8211 0.000 0,000 MBNUm Trucks: 7945 -1217 -411 - 120 -097 sin COnelaoru (Hand =f0, soft =15) 9009 9003 Heavy Trucks 8425 -1673 -4.11 -120 -616 Peak H., Volumes' 0,000 0.003 (bmHgefed Nohe LevNa(wllAmrt Topeandbod att uatldn) 45 mph vahicre MM NeadFirl D renews,' 76 teal VenrcJeType Lazl Penk Hower I Laq Gay Ieg EVwivig Laq Nigh Lmn Beem,lype(DWalL I Berm): CNEL Au(oc' 67.6 65.7 0.9 579 cenreMas DlA in obaarvd: 111 671 Medium Trucks: 61.4 59.9 53.5 519 50 red 604 506 Heavy TUks: 622 618 61.8 530 Areas: 92547 614 615 VehMe N.: 69A 67,7 00.6 59.9 Heavy Tmws 9250 66:4 68.9 c rlwflm Odmnn I Hasa Cdntow fan reel I TmPm Flew I pafenda I Freed Road I Fhsne Rsn Men I Berm A. 111 641 Wk 00,9 60,5 M 111 0 di I SO all 1 55 SEA Ltln 79 199 361 ]O 111 794 WdSA CNEL: Set 181 393 Lan 841 1,11 all, Sronano: Year 2016 With Pmjecl Pmjecl Name: NNCPC Road Name: COaat Highway -120 4,87 Job Numar 8211 Roatl3aghwat Wed of Maarlpur 0:000 SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlgial Derr -120 -097 sin COnelaoru (Hand =f0, soft =15) Average Ddly TraWc(Al 45.300 veMdea Autos: 15 Peek Hour Hammel 10% Marcum Tmika(2 Aileen 15 Peak H., Volumes' 4,530 rehldec Heavy Trvcke(3 + treed) : 15 vehide speed' 45 mph vahicre MM NeadFirl D renews,' 76 teal VehkKTsh, I Day Evening W! I Orly Sih Dart Ieq Ewmng Auras: 77.5% 12.9% 96% Ill Medium Trucks: 11 49% 103% 194% Barter He(BXL' 0.01ed Beem,lype(DWalL I Berm): oo Heavy Trucks: Still 21% io0% 074% cemanlrre Dist. Samar to9.o deed rlosesrume Fdeaelbns an rasp cenreMas DlA in obaarvd: 100.0 feel Anne, 2 W0 Barter Oieames Is observer 0.0 red Hall Timal x000 Usearm, ,at (An.. Pae): 50 red Heavy Trade: BW6 Gmda Aryudmed, 90 Yea Ekwersh. 00 ram Lane Equvalenl Dhbna(in he) Roes Elsvaliorr, 9o.1 Areas: 92547 Roatl Greek o0% Left V,aw,- -0010 aeghea N:etem Trucks: 92.504 Fell Vrew: 9o.o degrem Heavy Tmws 9250 F1WA al MOdsl Lllsuleal 690 Vasen Type I S. I TmPm Flew I pafenda I Freed Road I Fhsne Rsn Men I Berm A. Arms: 111 4.61 4,11 -120 4,87 NOISE MODEL INPUTS O.WO 0:000 Maelum Trunks: 7945 - 1263 -4,11 -120 -097 Not He., VOwhea..' 4,510 ehides 0009 9003 Heavy Trucks 54.25 -1650 -4.11 -120 -516 Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% k @dWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% 0,000 o003 UnVZag aetl NoIsaf (wNlmut Town and heMe: aMrsaal l Caeamme Dmi, 10 Seiner 1CO.o bet NoL9a SwF: Ebvafbnr an swag CanMllne Dlat b Observer 1LU.o fed ANOS, 2000 VatldeTyas Leq Peak Hhur I Leq Day Ieq Ewmng LW fight LM I Lam Peak Haur I CNEL Amom 678 6519 641 zi McNUmi rks 92504 667 673 Matlium Tracks: 61.5 610 53.6 .52.1 111 60.6 80:8 Heavy Trucks' 624 60.9 51.9 53.1 Ris, Grade: 00% 61.5 616 Vehkys News; 696 67.6 gets 60.0 531 61 690 Cartel Clarence h Naas COnrour fair Mp Vehide Name: 696 111 641 Wk 00,9 60,5 IOdB4 Del WdBA 0dBA Ids: W 173 Ty ]O 111 002 WdSA CNEL: 86 105 399 Lan 800 h asse.twerse Al2. 6.1 -73 Sameno: Tesr2016WMPmjird Pmjecl Name• NNCPC Road Name: Cetat Highway Job Numhec 8211 Roaeig,mi t Eactol Awmado SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Mghwey. Sib CmeleoN (Hare =10. soft =15) Average, Daily Tre ?c (Atl!): 45.100 vehidea Auras: 15 powthh- Pemenlsga' 10% MWlum TrWid, D Awasm. 15 Not He., VOwhea..' 4,510 ehides Heavy Tmnka(3, testes): 15 Vehicle Shared: 45.0 Valente We Near/Far Lane Distance: 76 led Vandal ypa I Day Eramenj MCI Delty &'fe WO Autos: 77.5% 12.9% 96 %97A2% k @dWm Trucks: 94.6% 4.9% 193% 194% BdMeI He1911t 0.0 Is. Samar Type, ri I Berm): 00 Heavy Trucks: 86.5% 27 %. 198% 0.74% Caeamme Dmi, 10 Seiner 1CO.o bet NoL9a SwF: Ebvafbnr an swag CanMllne Dlat b Observer 1LU.o fed ANOS, 2000 Basler Oi., me As oGrervar: go led Marcum Trucker 4.(300 Gdeervar mil (Above Pad): 5o feel Heavy Trvcka 11.006 Grade Arludment 90 Patl Ekvalior, 0.0 seal I Lam Peak Haur I Lane Equivalent DMance (in /eeQ Road Elevation. 001as, Auras: 92547 Rued Gade: 00% Left View: 90,0 deal McNUmi rks 92504 Right View: 900 dagmee Heavy Trvcks 9250 Hlwa Al Moe91 C d cametbna 64.1 V&ride Type T REMEL I Them Fbw I Oirnmer I FONb ROed I Finand I Banie/Atten I Reim Agee Aubs; 6646 4.59 4:11 -120 4,87 Roatlbaghwat East cr MaarMUr o.000 O.WO M um Truam 7945 -1255 -411 - 120 -097 61,8W veMdea 9990 OOW Heavy Tracks' 84,25 -ISM 411 -120 -516 vets. speed' 0,000 0.003 fIamMgebd No ha L.. heal t Topn end denier at ewers of Vehrel I Dry Evening Night Daly Sih Dart Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% sherese pr I Lam Peak Haur I LM Gay I feq Lvering Lee Nigh I Len Nos. soumers§vehbns pre fxp CNEL Amlm 6T.7 65.8 64.1 580 Heavy Trade: 6x6 Grade Agudmerr[ 90 111 672 Mai lum Trucks; 61.5' 900 53.6 52.1 Ris, Grade: 00% 60.5 600 Heavy Trucks: 623 60.9 51.9 531 III 61.5 616 Vehide Name: 696 111 641 Wk 00,9 60,5 680 cenredirb odmnew I Han contour (in /es4 70 dI ]O 111 0 d I WdSA 55 dBA 55 SEA Ids: Lan 99 172 371 991 e99 CNEL: CNEL 86 185 398 1.058 656 Sronano: Year 2016 With Pmjecl Pjen Numa: NNCPC Road Name,: Crash Highway 4,11 Job Nummm 8211 Roatlbaghwat East cr MaarMUr O.WO SITE SPECIFIC INPUT DATA NOISE MODEL INPUTS Hlgial Derr - 1129 sea COndIO.- gland =f0, soft =fall Aveage Orly The Sc(A4. 61,8W veMdea Autos: 15 Peek Hon'.., to% Marcum Tmoka(2AiAsell 15 Peak HOm Vduma' SAW vehldec Heavy Theme 0, Axles): 15 vets. speed' 45 mpg vahicre MM /Wad ss ire Diends, 76 teal Vehrel I Dry Evening Night Daly Sih Dart Am. 77.5% 12.9% 96% 9742% Medium Trucks: 94.9% 49% 193% 194% Barter Height 0.0 Net Bamm,time(014hri I Berm): Oo Heavy Tnecks. Still 27% 108% 074% ceCreemere Dirt 08amer eed, a Ob. 1b.9 red 100.0 feet Nos. soumers§vehbns pre fxp Aurd 2Wo Barter Omance is olusmer 0.0 red Hal lum anal a 00) Deserver mai(An.. well 59 red Heavy Trade: 6x6 Grade Agudmerr[ 90 Pee Ekvatlom 00 tae III Lane EquhalentDkrma(Inbe) Read Sawasth, Oo reel Anba: 92547 Ris, Grade: 00% Left V,am- -910 aagraea Maemm. 92504 Fill Vrew: 9o.o m,hres Hers,)mmts' 92547 FIWA NWU MoWI eakwhahwa III man Type I S. I Than Fbw I Disfanne I Finite Road Fmsrnl I.Man Berm A. Arms 6646 5.96 4,11 -120 4,87 O.WO 0.000 Maelum Trunks: 7945 - 1129 -4,11 -127 /r.97 0000 9003 Heavy Trucks 34.25 -1524 -4.11 -120 -516 01 0003 UnMNgeed Nase LeVeb Tapir endhaMxelEverm, VatldeType Leq Perk Hhm rmerl Leq Deg leq Evening Led NIgM LM CNEL Amos; 691 673 654 594 680 686 Umium Tracks: III 1 55.0 53A 81,9 621 H., Trucks' 637 623 533 545 III 630 Vehkys News; 709 692 111 61.4 00,9 704 Cartel Weans h Nase Contour pre Al 70 dI 0dBA WdBA 55 dBA Ids: 4J 213 459 991 CNEL: 1 W 228 491 1.058 has eev.Mev49.'N12. Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix D North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. May 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach v" North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis Stantec May 2012 Prepared For: City of Newport Beach 2073006780 North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis City of Newport Beach May 16, 2012 Prepared for: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Submitted by: Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 19 Technology Drive, Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92618 Prepared by: Cathy Lawrence, PE JA Transportation Engineer Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Joe Foust, PE Reviewed by: A. NO.TROO1635 V # EXP. q-3b'lZ #, Princ' al, Transportation Planning and Traffic Engineering Stc6tec Consulting Services Inc. Stantec NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... ..............................1 2.0 TRAFFIC PHASING ORDINANCE ANALYSIS ...................................... ..............................1 3.0 CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS ANALYSIS ............................................... ..............................6 4.0 GENERAL PLAN ANALYSIS ................................................................ .............................17 5.0 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ .............................17 City of Newport Beach CAL, Ipo \report \rpt_sonjoaquinplam ipo_051672 docx S` + ntec NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table of Contents List of Figures Figure 1 San Joaquin Plaza Project Description ...................................... ............................... 2 Figure 2 TPO Analysis Study Intersections ............................................. ............................... 3 Figure 3 General Project Trip Distribution and Project ADT ...................... ............................... 8 Figure 4 AM Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips .................................... ............................... 9 Figure 5 PM Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips ................................... ............................... 10 Figure 6 Peak Hour Project- Generated Trips ........................................ ............................... 11 List of Tables Table 1 Existing ICU Summary .............................................................. ..............................4 Table 2 Approved Projects Summary ..................................................... ..............................5 Table 3 Trip Generation Summary ........................................................ ............................... 7 Table 4 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary ........................................... ............................... 12 Table 5 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary .................................... ............................... 13 Table 6 Year 2016 ICU Summary ...................................................... ............................... 15 Table 7 Cumulative Projects Summary ................................................. ............................... 16 Table 8 Cumulative ICU Summary ...................................................... ............................... 18 Appendices Appendix A: ICU Analysis Calculations Appendix B: One Percent Analysis Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL, \ 2073\ active\ 2073006780 \san_joaquin_plazo_tpo \report \rpt_ son loaquinplaza 1po_051612 doox Stantec NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 1.0 Introduction This report summarizes an analysis performed for the proposed development of 524 residential units in the San Joaquin Plaza area of North Newport Center in the City of Newport Beach. A portion of the units (430 dwelling units) is currently entitled on the proposed site, a portion (79 units) is a conversion from unbuilt hotel rooms on a site within Newport Center to dwelling units, and the remainder (15 units) is unbuilt within Newport Center area (project location shown in Figure 1). The units which are not currently entitled on the site (94 units) are being analyzed in this report based on the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) methodology. In addition, this report summarizes the results of an analysis of cumulative conditions in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements. 2.0 Traffic Phasing Ordinance Analysis The City of Newport Beach identified 20 intersections for analysis to determine the impact of the proposed residential project. These intersections are illustrated in Figure 2. Existing peak hour intersection volumes for the study locations were counted in March 2012 by Traffic Data Services, Inc., consistent with the TPO requirements. Existing intersection levels of service are based on intersection capacity utilization (ICU) values. The ICU values are a means of presenting the volume to capacity ratios, with a V/C ratio of .90 representing the upper threshold for an acceptable level of service (LOS D) in the City of Newport Beach. Existing lane configurations were assumed, and a capacity of 1,600 vph per lane with no clearance factor was utilized. The City methodology calculates the ICU value to three decimal places, and then reports the resulting ICU value rounded to two decimal places. Existing ICU values for the study intersections assuming existing lane configurations are summarized in Table 1 (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As this table shows, the study intersections are currently operating at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. An ambient growth rate of 1.0 percent per year was added to the existing volumes along Jamboree Road, MacArthur Boulevard, and Coast Highway. The project is assumed to be complete in 2015; therefore, the study year is 2016 consistent with the TPO guidelines. Traffic generated by approved projects in the study area (including the entitled 430 DU in San Joaquin Plaza), obtained from City Staff, were added to the existing -plus- growth peak hour volumes to obtain year 2016 background peak hour volumes for the intersections prior to the addition of project - generated traffic. Table 2 summarizes the approved projects included in this analysis. City of Newport Beach CAL. v.\ 2073\ active\ 2073006760 \san_jonquin_plazo_tpo\ report \rpt sonjooquinplam_tpo_051612.docz JWiftc 2 3 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 1 Existing ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff Existing AM PM .74/C .6178 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .70/13 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .44/A .57/A 4. Jamboree & Coast H .56/A .65/13 5. Newport Center & Coast H .36/A .44/A 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .50 /A 7. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Canyon .73/C .82/D 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65/13 .80 /C 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .53/A .44/A 10. MacArthur & Coast H .66/13 .64/B 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26/A .36 /A 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .25/A 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .49/A 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .12/A .34/A 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14/A .32/A 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31/A .49/A 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .36/A 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A .33/A 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .12/A .21/A Level of service ranges: .00 - .60 A .61 - .70 B .71 - .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ repotl\ rpt_ sonjoaquinplaza_tpo_051612.docz JWllftc NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 2 Approved Projects Summary City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JWiIIR Project Fashion Island Expansion . . - 40 Temple Bat Yahm Expansion 65 CIOSA — Irvine Project 91 Newport Dunes 0 Hoag Hospital Phase III 0 St. Mark Presbyterian Church 77 OLQA Church Expansion 0 2300 Newport Blvd 0 Newport Executive Court 0 Hoag Health Center 75 North Newport Center 0 Santa Barbara Condo 0 Newport Beach City Hall 0 328 Old Newport Medical Office 0 Coastline Community College 0 Bayview Medical Office 0 Mariner's Pointe 0 4221 Dol hin Striker 0 City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JWiIIR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Trip rates and the resulting trip generation for the proposed project are summarized in Table 3. These trips were distributed to the surrounding circulation system according to the general distribution shown in Figure 3. Figures 4 through 6 illustrate the peak hour project - generated trips at the study intersections. Existing - plus - project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the existing peak hour volumes. The ICU values for existing - plus- project conditions are summarized in Table 4. Similarly, background - plus - project peak hour volumes were obtained by adding the project - generated peak hour trips to the 2016 background peak hour volumes presented above. The TPO analysis consists of a one percent analysis and an ICU analysis at each study intersection. The one percent analysis compares the proposed project traffic with projected background peak hour volumes. To pass the one percent analysis, peak hour traffic from the proposed project must be less than one percent of the projected background peak hour traffic on each leg of the intersection. If the proposed project passes the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis is not required for that intersection and no further analysis is necessary. If the proposed project does not pass the one percent analysis, then the ICU analysis must be performed for each intersection which fails to pass the one percent test. Table 5 summarizes the results of the one percent analysis for the proposed project (the one percent analysis sheets are included in Appendix B). As this table indicates, the proposed project does not pass the one percent analysis at 12 study intersections during the AM or PM peak hour; therefore, an ICU analysis is required for these 12 intersections. An ICU analysis was performed for the 12 intersections which did not pass the one percent test. Table 6 summarizes the existing, 2016 background, and 2016 background - plus - project ICU values during the AM and PM peak hours (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As the ICU summary table indicates, each of the intersections will operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours. The project has no significant impact on the study intersections, and no mitigation is required. 3.0 Cumulative Conditions Analysis City Staff provided a list of six known but not approved projects for use in a cumulative conditions analysis. These cumulative projects are summarized in Table 7. Trip generation and distribution for each cumulative project was also provided by City Staff. The peak hour cumulative intersection volumes were added to the 2016 background peak hour volumes presented earlier, and the project peak hour trips were added to the resulting 2016 background - plus - cumulative City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_jonquin_plam tpo\ repor l\r pt _sonjooquinplaza_tpo_051612A... RanW NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 3 Trip Generation Summary City of Newport Beach CAL.¢\ 2073 \.dive \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JW.IIR I Amount AM Peak Hour PM Peak Ho r In Out .. • "Total ■ Trip Rates Residential ITE 232 DU .06 .28 .34 .24 .14 .38 4.18 Trip Generation Residential 94 DU 6 26 32 23 13 36 393 Source: Trip Generation Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers City of Newport Beach CAL.¢\ 2073 \.dive \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JW.IIR 1.1 E 10 11 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 4 Existing -Plus- Project ICU Summary Intersection 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff 74/C .61 /B • . - .74/C .61/B Project Increase AM .00 PM .00 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .60 /A .70/B .60 /A .70/13 .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .44/A .57/A .44/A .57/A .00 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy .56 /A .65/B .56/A .65/13 .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .36/A .44/A .37/A .45/A .01 .01 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .44/A .50 /A .44/A .50 /A .00 .00 7. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita Canyon .73/C .82/D .73/C .82/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .65 /B .80 /C .65 /B .80 /C .00 .00 9. MacArthur& San Miguel .53/A .44/A .53/A .44/A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy .66/B .64/B .66/13 .64/B .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .26/A .36/A I .27/A .37/A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .25/A .14/A .26/A .00 .01 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .49 /A .29/A .50 /A .00 .01 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .12/A .34/A .12/A .34/A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .14/A .32/A .14/A .32/A .00 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel .31/A .49/A .31/A .49/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center 181A .36/A .18/A 36/A .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente .27/A 33/A .27/A 33/A 00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .12/A 21IA 12/A 21/A 00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006780 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JW.IIR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 5 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary Less Than 1 % AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Of . - -. Intersection M��Ezzx Peak Hour Volumes? 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 1,892 2,207 865 697 2,766 1,891 614 386 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 10 2 0 1 5 1 7 0 1 2 Yes 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,406 2,549 395 199 1,644 2,250 143 912 Project Peak Hour Tri s 8 2 0 3 6 9 0 1 No 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,528 1,819 60 181 1,481 1,687 81 726 Project Peak Hour Tri s 2 0 0 14 6 1 0 7 No 4. Jamboree & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 465 1,243 2,596 1,194 432 1,599 2,623 2,284 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 0 7 1 1 0 3 4 2 Yes 5. Newport Ctr & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 0 113 2,188 1,292 0 849 1,704 1,690 Project Peak Hour Trip 1 0 2 2 2 0 1 1 3 No 6. Avocado & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1 361 191 1,374 1,455 295 603 1,456 1,548 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 0 0 4 2 0 0 2 3 Yes 7. MacArthur & Ford /Bonita C n 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 2,133 3,156 415 2,080 2,773 3,744 425 1,165 Project Peak Hour Tri s 4 1 1 2 0 2 5 2 1 Yes 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,493 3,203 509 1,071 1,613 2,811 1,172 728 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 1 5 0 0 1 4 3 1 No 9. MacArthur & San Miguel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 1,554 1,536 330 470 1,125 1,513 1,225 455 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 Yes 10. MacArthur & Coast Hw 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 0 1,092 1,653 2,092 0 1,359 1,680 2,028 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 4 2 0 0 2 4 Yes Continued City of Newport Beach CAL v: \2073 \active\ 2073006780 \san_joaquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_Ipo 05I 612.docx N NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 5 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary (Continued) Less Than 1 % AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Of . - -. Intersection Peak Hour Volumes? 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 118 82 932 399 781 39 783 584 Project Peak Hour Tri s 4 0 5 1 2 0 7 5 No 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 144 360 95 35 577 315 336 102 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 3 5 0 2 6 3 0 No 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 60 269 140 178 254 255 280 317 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 No 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 169 132 583 1,015 797 143 789 767 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 0 5 1 0 0 3 5 Yes 15. Newport Ctr & Santa Rosa 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 204 107 84 400 509 320 270 508 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 No 16. Newport Ctr & San Mi uel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 255 106 39 288 423 298 347 609 Project Peak Hour Trips 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 No 17. Avocado & San Miguel 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 381 120 218 1,212 720 321 734 893 Project Peak Hour Tri s 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Yes 18. Newport Ctr & Newport Ctr 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 461 24 128 191 428 192 361 472 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 No 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 100 724 0 65 404 278 0 406 Project Peak Hour Trips 1 0 0 6 1 2 0 4 No 20. Newport Ctr & Santa Barbara 2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume 256 146 204 40 281 334 280 148 Project Peak Hour Tri s 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 No Note: 2016 Projected peak hour volume consists of existing volume, regional growth, and approved projects volume. City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073 \.Dive\ 2073006780 \san_jooquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt_sonjoaquinplazo_Ipo 051612.do x d.O.pR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 6 Year 2016 ICU Summary Intersection 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .65/B .80 /C .65/B .80 /C .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .48/A .61/B .48/A .61/B .00 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .39/A .48/A .39/A .49/A .00 .01 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .69/B .86/D .69/B .87/D .00 .01 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .38/A .30 /A .38/A .01 .00 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .14/A .26 /A .14/A .26/A .00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .15/A .31/A .15/A .31/A .00 .00 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .15 /A .40 /A .15/A .40 /A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel A 5/A .34/A .15/A .34/A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center .18/A .38/A .18/A .38/A .00 .00 19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente 28/A 333 28/A .33/A 00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara 13/A 22/A 13/A 22/A 00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JW.IIR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 7 Cumulative Projects Summary •.- . Mariner's Medical Arts Medical Office 12.25 TSF Banning Ranch Single Family Detached 423 DU Condominium/Townhouse 952 DU Retail 75.00 TSF Hotel 75 Rm Sunset Ridge Park Park 13.67 Acre Marina Park Marina /Park 10.45 Acre Koll - Conexant Apartment 974 DU Newport Coast TAZ 1 — 4 Single Family Detached 954 DU Condominium/Townhouse 389 DU Multi-Family Attached 175 DU City of Newport Beach CAL.¢\ 2073 \.dive \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanioaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz Stall R m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS peak hour volumes. The previous one percent analysis without cumulative volumes represents the worst -case one percent analysis since the addition of cumulative traffic to the background volumes increases the chances of a project passing the one percent analysis. If an intersection passes the one percent analysis prior to the addition of cumulative traffic, then the intersection will pass the one percent analysis with the addition of cumulative traffic and no further analysis is required at that location. The results of the cumulative ICU analysis are summarized in Table 8 (actual ICU calculation sheets are included in Appendix A). As the cumulative ICU table indicates, the proposed project will have no significant impact on the study intersections, each of which will operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours, and no mitigation is required. 4.0 General Plan Analysis The TPO analysis evaluates a project's potential short -term impacts. The project's consistency with the General Plan was also evaluated. San Joaquin Plaza has 430 DU currently entitled on the project site. Newport Center has 79 hotel rooms and 15 DU that are currently unbuilt but are identified in the General Plan. The proposed project consists of converting the 79 hotel rooms to 79 dwelling units, and developing 94 DU (79 DU + 15 DU) not currently entitled in San Joaquin Plaza. The peak hour and daily trips generated by 79 DU are less than the trips generated by 79 hotel rooms; therefore, the impact of residential units in Newport Center is less than the impact of an equivalent amount of hotel rooms. The proposed project will have less impact than the uses identified in the General Plan; hence the project is consistent with the General Plan. 5.0 Conclusion The proposed 94 DU will generate 32 AM peak hour trips, 36 PM peak hour trips, and 393 daily trips. The marginal impact of project traffic on the street system was determined at 20 intersections in the vicinity. Of the 20 intersections, 12 did not pass the City's one percent analysis; however, the project had no marginal impact on the ICU values at these 12 intersections, which will continue to operate at LOS D or better during the AM and PM peak hours under 2016 conditions. Consequently, the proposed project has no significant impact on the study intersections, and no additional intersection improvements are required. The impact of traffic from known but not approved projects was included in a cumulative conditions analysis. Under cumulative conditions, the project had no marginal impact during the City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz Ralftc m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Table 8 Cumulative ICU Summary Existing + Growth Approved + Cumulative Intersection AM � PM 1. Jamboree & Ford /Eastbluff .82/D .70/6 + Approved '. .82/D I .70 /B Project Increase 00 .00 2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .68/B .83/D .68/B .83/D .00 .00 3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara .50 /A .63/B .51/A .63/B .01 .00 4. Jamboree & Coast H .66/B .83/D .67/B .83/D .01 .00 5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy .42/A .53/A .42/A .53 /A .00 .00 6. Avocado & Coast Hwy .56/A .59/A .56/A .59/A .00 .00 7. MacArthur& Ford /Bonita Canyon .78/C .89/D .78/C .89/D .00 .00 8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills .71/C .89/D .71/C .89/D .00 .00 9. MacArthur & San Miguel .60 /A .50 /A .60 /A .50 /A .00 .00 10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy .78/C .75 /C .78/C .75/C .00 .00 11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills .29/A .38/A .30 /A .39/A .01 .01 12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente .15 /A .26 /A .15/A .26/A .00 .00 13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center .16 /A .32/A .16 /A .32 /A .00 .00 14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills .35 1A .54 /A .35 /A .54 /A .00 .00 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa .16 /A .40 /A .16/A .40 /A .00 .00 16. Newport Center & San Miguel .16/A I .35/A 1 .16 /A .35/A .00 1 .00 17. Avocado & San Miguel .34/A .55/A .34/A .55 /A .00 .00 18. Newport Center & Newport Center 19/A 3WA .19/A .39/A .00 .01 19. Santa Barbara &San Clemente 28 /A 33/A 28/A 33/A 00 .00 20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara .13 /A .23/A 13/A 23/A .00 .00 Level of service ranges: .00- .60 A .61- .70 B .71- .80 C .81- .90 D .91 - 1.00 E Above 1.00 F City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sonjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz Stamm NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AM or PM peak hour on the ICU values at all of the study intersections. Therefore the proposed project has no significant impact on the study intersections under cumulative conditions, and no intersection mitigation measures are required. The proposed project will generate less peak hour and daily traffic than the land uses identified in the General Plan; therefore the project is consistent with the General Plan. City of Newport Beach CAL. v_ \2073\ active \2073006760 \san_joaquin_plam tpo\ report \rpt_sanjoaquinplaza_ tpo_051612.docz JWiIl0. m NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX A ICU Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073 \active\ 2073006760 \san_joaquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt sonjoaquinplam_tpo_051612.docx suntK '® 1. Jamboree 6 Ford /Eastbluff Existing AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 419 .131* 328 .103 NET 3 4800 1196 .269 1817 .444* NBR 0 0 93 314 SBL 1 1600 73 .046 31 .019* SET 3 4800 1730 .360* 1570 .327 SER 1 1600 143 .089 75 .047 EEL 1.5 182 103 .064 EST 1.5 4800 284 .097* 234 .073* EBR f 390 272 WBL 1.5 160 .100 164 WET 1.5 4600 485 .152* 189 .074* WEN 1 1600 40 .025 27 .017 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .740 .610 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 439 .137* .346 .108 NET 3 4600 1354 .303 2089 .504* NBR 0 0 100 332 SBL 1 1600 76 .048 33 .021* SBT 3 4806 1981 .413* 1780 .371 SBR 1 1600 150 .094 78 .049 EEL 1.5 183 103 .064 EST 1.5 4800 289 .098* 234 .073* EBR f 393 277 WBL 1.5 161 .101 170 WET 1.5 4800 495 .155* 189 .075* WBR 1 1600 41 .026 27 .017 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .803 .673 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .741 .611 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 439 .137* 346 .108 NET 3 4800 1362 .305 2093 .505* NEB. 0 0 102 333 SBL 1 1600 76 .048 33 .021* SET 3 4800 1983 .413* 1787 .372 SBR 1 1600 150 .094 78 .049 EEL 1.5 183 103 .064 EST 1.5 4800 289 .09B* 234 .073* EBR f 393 277 WBL 1.5 162 .101 172 WET 1.5 4800 495 .155* 189 .075* WBR 1 1600 41 .026 27 .017 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .803 .674 Stantec A -2 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 419 .131* 328 .103 NET 3 4800 1204 .271 1821 .445* NBR 0 0 95 315 SBL 1 1600 73 .046 31 .019* SET 3 4800 1732 .361* 1577 .329 SBR 1 1600 143 .089 75 .047 EBL 1.5 182 103 .064 EST 1.5 4800 2B4 .097* 234 .073* EBR f 390 272 WBL 1.5 161 .101 166 WBT 1.5 4B00 4B5 .152* 189 .074* WBR 1 1600 40 .025 27 .017 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .741 .611 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 439 .137* 346 .108 NET 3 4800 1362 .305 2093 .505* NEB. 0 0 102 333 SBL 1 1600 76 .048 33 .021* SET 3 4800 1983 .413* 1787 .372 SBR 1 1600 150 .094 78 .049 EEL 1.5 183 103 .064 EST 1.5 4800 289 .09B* 234 .073* EBR f 393 277 WBL 1.5 162 .101 172 WET 1.5 4800 495 .155* 189 .075* WBR 1 1600 41 .026 27 .017 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .803 .674 Stantec A -2 1. Jamboree 6 Ford /Eastbluff Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 448 .140* 351 .110 NET 3 4B00 1515 .336 2170 .521* NBR 0 0 100 332 SBL 1 1600 76 .04B 33 .021* SET 3 4800 2020 .421* 1943 .405 SER 1 1600 150 .094 78 .049 EEL 1.5 163 103 .064 EST 1.5 4800 296 .100* 255 .OBO* EBR f 395 286 WBL 1.5 161 .101 170 WET 1.5 4800 516 .161* 203 .078* WBR 1 1600 41 .026 27 .017 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .822 .700 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 448 .140* 351 .110 NET 3 4800 1523 .339 2174 .522* NBR 0 0 102 333 SBL 1 1600 76 .048 33 .021* SBT 3 4800 2022 .421* 1950 .406 SBR 1 1600 150 .094 78 .049 EBL 1.5 163 103 .064 EST 1.5 4800 296 .100* 255 .080* EBR f 395 286 WBL 1.5 162 .101 172 WBT 1.5 4800 516 .161* 203 .078* WBR 1 1600 41 .026 27 .017 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .822 .701 Stantec A -3 2. Jamboree 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016 55 .034 NET 3 4B00 1110 .231* 1289 .269* NBR f 140 131 SBL 2 3200 744 .233* 514 .161* SET 3 4800 1450 .302 1330 .277 SBR f 78 164 EBL 1.5 299 .093* 89 .028* EDT 1.5 4BOD 38 .D24 36 .023 EBR f 58 13 WBL 1.5 123 .D38* 178 .056* WBT 1.5 4800 8 .D05 46 .029 WBR 1 160D 17 ,011 572 .358 Right Turn Adjustment WBR, .181* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .595 .695 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 27 .017 58 .036 NET 3 480D 1229 .256* 1442 ,300* NBR f 150 144 SBL 2 3206 319 .256* 581 .182* SET 3 4800 1649 .344 1499 .312 SBR f 81 171 EEL 1.5 299 .093* 90 .028* EDT 1.5 4800 38 .024 40 .025 EBR f 58 13 WBL 1.5 133 .D42* 186 .058* WBT 1.5 4800 8 ,DD5 46 .029 WBR 1 1600 58 .036 680 .425 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .230* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .647 .798 Existing + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016 55 .034 NET 3 4800 1117 .233* 1293 .269* NBR f 141 133 SBL 2 3200 746 .233* 522 .163* SET 3 4300 1450 .302 1331 .277 SBR f 78 164 EBL 1.5 299 .D93* 89 .028* EST 1.5 4800 38 .D24 36 .023 EBR f 58 13 WBL 1.5 123 .D3B* 178 .056* WBT 1.5 4800 8 .005 46 .029 WBR 1 1600 20 .013 573 .358 Right Turn Adjustment WER .180* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .597 .696 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 27 .017 5B .036 NET 3 4800 1236 .258* 1446 .301* NBR f 151 146 SBL 2 3200 B21 .257* 589 .184* SET 3 4800 1649 .344 1500 .313 SBR f 81 171 EEL 1.5 299 .093* 90 .028* EDT 1.5 4800 38 .024 40 .025 EBR f 58 13 WBL 1.5 133 .042* 186 .058* WBT 1.5 4800 8 .005 46 .029 WBR 1 1600 61 .038 681 .426 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .230* Ncte: Assumes E /W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .650 .801 Stantec A -4 2. Jamboree 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 27 .017 58 .036 NET 3 4800 1365 .284* 1544 .322* NBR f 150 144 SBL 2 3200 836 .261* 581 .182* SET 3 4800 1707 .356 1639 .341 SBR f 81 171 EBL 1.5 299 .093* 90 .028* EDT 1.5 4BOD 38 .D24 4D .025 EBR f 58 13 WBL 1.5 133 .042* 186 .058* WET 1.5 4800 8 .005 46 .029 WBR 1 1600 58 .036 696 .435 Right Turn Adjustment WBR. .240* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .680 .830 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 27 .017 58 .036 NET 3 4800 1372 .2B6* 154B .323* NBR f 151 146 SBL 2 3200 838 .262* 589 .164* SET 3 4600 1707 .356 1640 .342 SBR f 81 171 EBL 1.5 299 .093* 90 .028* EST 1.5 4800 38 .D24 40 .025 EBR f 58 13 WBL 1.5 133 .042* 186 .058* WET 1.5 4B00 8 .005 46 .029 WBR 1 1600 61 .038 697 .436 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .240* Vote: Assumes E/W Solit Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .683 .833 Stantec A -5 3. Jamboree 6 Santa Barbara Existing AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 10 .006 17 .011 NBT 3 4B00 1115 .232* 1176 .245* NBR 1 1600 2B9 .181 128 .080 SBL 2 3200 543 .170* 157 .049* SBT 3 4800 1067 .222 1297 .270 SBR 1 1600 29 .018 74 .046 EEL 1 1600 33 .027* 45 .028* EDT 1 1600 5 .003 17 .011 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 16 .010 WBL 1.5 39 243 WET 0.5 3200 6 .014* 5 .078* WBR 1 1600 99 .062 458 .286 Right Turn Adjustment WER. .171* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .437 .571 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 10 .006 18 .011 NET 3 4800 1214 .253* 1319 .275* NBR 1 1600 304 .190 144 .090 SBL 2 3206 570 .178* 178 .056* SBT 3 4800 1218 .254 1426 .297 SBR 1 1600 31 .019 83 .052 EBL 1 1600 39 .024* 47 .029* EBT 1 1600 5 .003 18 .011 PER 1 1600 16 .010 16 .010 WBL 1.5 60 253 WBT 0.5 3200 6 .021* 6 .081* WBR 1 1600 115 .072 467 .292 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .169* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .476 .610 Existing + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 10 .006 17 .011 NBT 3 4800 1116 .233* 1178 .245* NBR 1 1600 290 .181 132 .OB3 SBL 2 3200 543 .170* 158 .049* SBT 3 4800 1067 .222 1297 .270 SBR 1 1600 29 .018 74 .046 EBL 1 1600 33 .021* 45 .028* EBT 1 1600 5 .003 17 .011 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 16 .010 WBL 1.5 46 246 WBT 0.5 3200 6 .016* 5 .078* WBR 1 1600 106 .066 462 .289 Right Turn Adjustment WER .174* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .440 .574 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 10 .006 1B .011 NET 3 4800 1215 .253* 1321 .275* NBR 1 1600 305 .191 148 .093 SBL 2 3200 570 .178* 179 .056* SBT 3 4800 1218 .254 1426 .297 SBR 1 1600 31 .019 83 .052 EBL 1 1600 39 .024* 47 .029* EBT 1 1600 5 .003 18 .011 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 16 .010 WBL 1.5 67 256 WBT 0.5 3200 6 .023* 6 .082* WBR 1 1600 122 .076 471 .294 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .170* Nete: Assumes E /W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .478 .612 Stantec A -6 3. Jamboree 6 Santa Barbara Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 10 .006 18 .011 NET 3 4800 1350 .281* 1421 .296* NBR 1 1600 304 .190 144 .090 SBL 2 3200 570 .17B* 17B .056* SET 3 4800 1276 .266 1566 .326 SER 1 1600 31 .019 83 .052 EEL 1 1600 39 .024* 47 .029* EDT 1 1600 5 .003 18 .011 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 16 .010 WBL 1.5 60 253 WET 0.5 3200 6 .021* 6 .OB1* WBR 1 1600 115 .072 467 .292 Right Turn Adjustment WER .169* Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .504 .631 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 10 .006 18 .011 NET 3 4800 1351 .2B1* 1423 .296* NBR 1 1600 305 .191 148 .093 SBL 2 3200 570 .178* 179 .056* SET 3 4600 1276 .266 1566 .326 SEE, 1 1600 31 .019 83 .052 EBL 1 1600 39 .024* 47 .029* EST 1 1600 5 .003 18 .011 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 16 .010 WBL 1.5 67 256 WET 0.5 3200 6 .023* 6 .0B2* WBR 1 1600 122 .076 471 .294 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .170* Vote: Assumes E/W Solit Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .506 .633 Stantec A -7 4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .562 .648 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 17 .Dll 41 .026 NET 2 3200 340 .134* 290 .115* NBR 0 0 BB NBR 75 0 SBL 1 1600 192 .120* 179 .112* SET 2 3200 291 .091 417 .130 SBR f 437 594 SBR 856 739 EEL 3 4800 788 .164* 723 .151* EST 4 640D 1557 .246 1589 .258 EBR 0 0 19 EBR 60 0 WBL 2 3200 76 .D24 132 .041 WET 4 6400 921 .144* 1729 .270* WBR f 1918 102 WBR 205 108 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .562 .648 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 18 .011 44 .028 NET 2 3200 355 .140* 303 .122* NBR 0 0 93 1 86 194 SBL 1 1600 206 .129* 194 .121* SET 2 3200 304 .095 437 .137 SBR f 739 734 3 968 789 EEL 3 4800 872 .182* 846 .176* EST 4 6400 1703 .269 1715 .278 EBR 0 0 21 2 62 76 WBL 2 3200 . 80 .025 142 .044 WET 4 640.0 1007 .157* 1918 .300* WBR f 108 107 225 223 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .608 .719 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .563 .649 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 17 .011 41 .026 NET 2 3200 340 .134* 290 .115* NBR 0 0 88 0 79 93 SBL 1 1600 194 .121* 180 .113* SDI 2 3200 291 .091 417 .130 SEE, f .137 599 f 858 739 EEL 3 4800 789 .164* 727 .151* EST 4 6400 1557 .246 1589 .258 EBR 0 0 19 0 60 21 WBL 2 3200 76 .024 132 .041 WET 4 6400 921 .144* 1729 .270* WBR f .300* 103 f 207 108 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .563 .649 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 18 .011 44 .028 NBT 2 3200 355 .140* 303 .122* NBR 0 0 93 86 SBL 1 1600 208 .130* 195 .122* SET 2 3200 304 .095 437 .137 SBR f 739 970 EEL 3 4800 873 .182* 850 .177* EST 4 6400 1703 .269 1715 .278 EBR 0 0 21 62 WBL 2 3200 80 .025 142 .044 WET 4 6400 1007 .157* 1918 .300* WBR f 108 225 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .609 .721 Stantec A -8 4. Jamboree 6 Coast Hwy Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 18 .D11 44 .028 NET 2 3200 355 .140* 303 .122* NBR 0 0 93 86 86 SBL SBL 1 1600 243 .152* 323 .2D2* SET 2 3200 304 .095 437 .137 SBR f 760 755 981 979 EBL EEL 3 4800 878 .183* 871 .lBl* EBT 4 640D 1784 .282 1933 .312 EBR 0 0 21 62 62 WBL WBL 2 3200 80 .025 142 .044 WET 4 6400 1210 .189* 2072 .324* WBR f 238 237 302 300 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .664 .829 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 18 .011 44 .028 NET 2 3200 355 .140* 303 .122* NBR 0 0 93 86 SBL 1 1600 245 .153* 324 .203* SET 2 3200 304 .095 437 .137 SEE, f 760 981 EBL 3 4800 879 .783* 875 .182* EST 4 6400 17B4 .282 1933 .312 EBR 0 0 21 62 WBL 2 3200 BO .025 142 .044 WET 4 6400 1210 .189* 2072 .324* WBR f 238 302 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .665 .831 Stantec A -9 5. Newport Center 6 Coast Hwy Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .364 .444 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 O NET 0 0 0 NET p 0 NBR 0 0 0 NBR p 0 SBL 2 3200 19 .006* 164 .051* SET O 0 0 SBT 0 0 SBR f 0 69 SBR 635 89 EEL 2 3200 315 .098 314 .098* EDT 3 4B00 1718 .358* 1268 .264 DER 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 WET 3 4BOp 1051 .219 1416 .295* WBR f 1547 170 WBR 128 179 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .364 .444 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 O 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 2 0 21 SBL 2 3200 24 .008* 170 .053* SBT 0 0 0 f 0 69 SBR f 89 89 2 679 315 EEL 2 3200 343 .107 348 .109* EST 3 4800 1646 .385* 1357 .283 EBR 0 0 0 0 0 1 {.001)* WBL 0 0 0 3 0 1052 WET 3 4800 1113 .232 1547 .322* WBR f 179 179 144 143 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .393 .484 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .366 .445 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 NET 0 P 0 0 P 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 21 .007* 165 .052* SDI 0 0 0 0 0 0 SBR f 69 f 635 89 EBL 2 3200 315 .098 314 .098* EST 3 4800 1720 .35B* 1269 .264 EBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 1 {.001)* 0 0 1 WET 3 4600 1052 .219 1416 .295* WBR f .323* 170 f 129 179 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .366 .445 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 26 .008* 171 .053* SBT 0 0 0 0 SBR f 89 679 EEL 2 3200 343 .107 348 .109* EDT 3 4800 1646 .385* 1358 .283 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 O 1 {.001 }* 0 WET 3 4800 1114 .232 1549 .323* WBR f 179 144 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .394 .485 Stantec A -10 5. Newport Centex 6 Coast Hwy Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 DEL 2 3200 24 .DOB* 170 .053* SET 0 0 0 0 SEP. f 94 696 EEL 2 3200 356 .117* 359 .112* EDT 3 4BOD 1951 .406 1693 .353 EBR O 0 O 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 3 4800 1441 .300* 1761 .367* WBR f 179 143 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .419 .532 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 P 0 P NBR 0 0 0 0 DEL 2 3200 26 .008* 171 .053* SET 0 D 0 0 SBR f 94 696 EBL 2 3200 356 .111* 359 .112* EST 3 4800 1953 .407 1694 .353 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 1 0 WET 3 4BOO 1442 .301* 1763 .367* WBR f 179 144 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .420 .532 Stantec A -77 6. Avocado 6 Coast Hwy Existing AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 98 .061 112 .070* NET 1 1600 128 .080* 73 .046 NBR 1 1600 135 .084 110 .069 SBL 1.5 57 .036 253 SET 0.5 3200 69 .043* 109 .113* SEP. f 50 139 EEL 1 1600 140 .088* 89 .056* EST 3 4800 1071 .223 1199 .250 EBR d 1600 49 .031 71 .044 WBL 1 1600 93 .058 100 .063 WET 3 4800 1101 .229* 1260 .263* WBR 1 1600 165 .103 104 .065 Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .440 .502 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NET, 1 1600 98 .061 112 .070* NET 1 1600 128 .080* 73 .046 NBR 1 1600 135 .DB4 110 .069 SBL 1.5 62 .039 286 SBT 0.5 3200 . 69 .043* 109 .123* SBR f 60 208 EEL 1 1600 200 .125* 123 .077* EST 3 4800 1124 .234 1259 .262 EBR d 1600 51 .032 75 .047 WBL 1 1600 97 .061 104 .065 WET 3 4800 1157 .241* 1322 .275* WBR 1 1600 202 .126 121 .076 Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .489 .545 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .441 .502 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 98 .061 112 .070* NET 1 1600 128 .080* 73 .046 NBR 1 1600 135 .084 110 .069 SBL 1.5 .069 57 .036 253 62 SET 0.5 3200 69 .043* 109 .113* SBR f .123* 50 f 139 60 EBL 1 1600 140 .088* 89 .056* EST 3 4800 1075 .224 1201 .250 EBR d 1600 49 .031 71 .044 WBL 1 1600 93 .058 100 .063 WBT 3 4800 1103 .230* 1263 .263* WBR 1 1600 165 .103 104 .065 Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .441 .502 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL VIC VOL VIC NBL 1 1600 98 .061 112 .070* NET 1 1600 128 .080* 73 .046 NBR 1 1600 135 .084 110 .069 SBL 1.5 62 .039 286 SET 0.5 3200 69 .043* 109 .123* SBR f 60 208 EEL 1 1600 200 .125* 123 .077* EST 3 4800 1128 .235 1261 .263 EBR d 1600 51 .032 75 .047 WBL 1 1600 97 .061 104 .065 WET 3 4800 1159 .241* 1325 .276* WBR 1 1600 202 .126 121 ,076 Note: Assumes NIS Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .489 .546 Stantec A -12 6. Avocado 6 Coast Hwy Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 98 .D61 112 .070* NBC 1 1600 12B .080* 73 .046 NBR 1 1600 135 .084 110 .069 SBL 1.5 62 .039 286 SBT 0.5 3200 69 .043* 109 .123* SBR f 60 208 EEL 1 1600 200 .125* 123 .077* EDT 3 4BOD 1229 .256 1595 .332 EBR d 1600 51 .032 75 .047 WBL 1 1600 97 .D62 104 .065 WBT 3 4B00 1485 .309* 1536 .320* WBR 1 16CD 202 .126 121 .076 Vote: Assumes N/S Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .557 .590 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LAVES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL i 1600 98 .061 112 .070* NET 1 1600 128 .DBD* 73 .046 NBR 1 1600 135 .DB4 110 .069 SBL 1.5 62 .039 286 SBT 0.5 3200 69 .043* 109 .123* SBR f 60 208 EBL 1 1600 200 .125* 123 .077* EDT 3 4800 1233 .257 1597 .333 EBR d 1600 51 .032 75 .047 WBL 1 1600 97 .061 104 .065 WBT 3 4800 1487 .310* 1539 .321* WBR 1 1600 202 .126 121 .076 Note: Assumes N/S Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .558 .591 Stantec A -73 7. MacArthur 6 Ford /Bonita Cyn Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .725 .818 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 131 .041 88 .028 NET 4 6400 1750 .273* 1870 .292* NBR f 2110 119 NBR 529 132 SBL 2 3200 574 .179* 1116 .349* SET 4 6400 2300 .359 2360 .369 SEP. f 2534 18 SBR 46 19 EEL 2 3200 45 .014 30 .009 EDT 2 3200 287 .D9D* 343 .1D7* EBR 1 1600 78 .049 46 .029 WEL 2 3200 585 .183* 224 .070* WET 2 3200 563 .176 276 .OB6 WBR f 280 918 WBR 649 919 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .725 .818 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 137 ,043 94 .029 NET 4 6400 1864 .291* 2110 .330* NBR f 132 132 2 570 574 SBL 2 3200 597 .187* 1162 .363* SBT 4 6400 2540 .397 2534 .396 SBR f 19 19 2 48 46 EEL 2 3200 45 .014 30 .009 EST 2 3200 291 .091* 347 .108* EBR 1 1600 79 .049 48 .030 WBL 2 3200 . 596 .186* 236 .074* WBT 2 3200 . 565 .177 280 .088 WBR f 919 919 649 649 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .755 .875 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .726 .820 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 131 .041 88 .028 NET 4 6400 1754 .274* 1872 .293* NBR f .330* 119 f 529 132 SBL 2 3200 574 .179* 1116 .349* SET 4 6400 2301 .360 2364 .369 SBR f .397 18 f 47 19 EBL 2 3200 46 .014 31 .010 EST 2 3200 2B8 .090* 344 .108* EBR 1 1600 78 .049 46 .029 WBL 2 3200 565 .183* 224 .070* WBT 2 3200 563 .176 277 .OB7 WBR f .088 918 f 649 919 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .726 .820 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 137 .043 94 .029 NBT 4 6400 1868 .292* 2112 .330* NBR f 132 570 SBL 2 3200 597 .187* 1162 .363* SBT 4 6400 2541 .397 2538 .397 SBR f 19 49 EEL 2 3200 46 .014 31 .010 SET 2 3200 292 .091* 348 .109* EBR 1 1600 79 .049 48 .030 WBL 2 3200 596 .186* 236 .074* WBT 2 3200 565 .177 281 .088 WBR f 919 649 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .756 .876 Stantec A -14 7. MacArthur 6 Ford /Bonita Cyn Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 137 .043 94 .029 NET 4 6400 1976 .309* 2162 .338* NBR f 132 132 570 570 SBL SBL 2 3200 597 .187* 1162 .363* SET 4 6400 2565 .401 2649 .414 SEP. f 19 19 49 48 EBL EEL 2 3200 45 .014 30 .009 EDT 2 3200 298 .093* 368 .115* EBR 1 1600 79 .049 48 .030 WBL 2 3200 596 .186* 236 .074* WET 2 3200 5B6 .183 294 .092 watt f 919 919 649 649 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .775 .890 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 137 .043 94 .029 NET 4 6400 1980 .309* 2164 .33B* NBR f 132 570 SBL 2 3200 597 .187* 1162 .363* SBT 4 6400 2566 .401 2653 .415 SEE, f 19 49 EBL 2 3200 46 .014 31 .010 EST 2 3200 299 .093* 369 .115* EBR 1 1600 79 .049 48 .030 WBL 2 3200 596 .186* 236 .074* WBT 2 3200 5B6 .183 295 .092 WBR f 919 649 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .775 1890 Stantec A -15 8. MacArthur 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .652 .801 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 121 .D38 35 .011 NBC 3 4BOD 1280 .267* 1440 .300* NBR 1 160D 22 .014 13 .008 SBL 2 3200 792 .24B* 666 .2D8* SET 3 4BOD 1320 .275 1600 .333 SBR f 1699 851 SDR 366 953 EEL 2 3200 76 .024* 647 .202* EDT 3 4BOD 347 .D82 313 .090 DER D 0 46 EBR 117 0 WBL 1 1600 51 .032 31 .019 WET 2 3200 36C .113* 292 .091* WBR f 295 651 WDR 399 651 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .652 .801 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 128 .040 3B .012 NET 3 4800 1341 .279* 1555 .324* NBR 1 1600 24 .015 20 .013 SBL 2 3200 825 .258* 694 .217* SET 3 4800 1426 .297 1699 .354 SDR f 953 952 2 419 80 EEL 2 3200 113 .035* 739 .231* EST 3 4800 350 .DB3 316 .090 EBR 0 0 46 1 117 51 WBL 1 1600 57 .036 34 .021 WET 2 3200 363 .113* 295 .092* WDR f 651 651 399 399 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .685 .864 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .653 .803 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LAVES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 121 .038 35 .011 NET 3 4800 1280 .267* 1440 .300* NBR 1 1600 22 .D14 13 .OD8 SBL 2 3200 792 .248* 666 .208* SET 3 4800 1320 .275 1600 .333 SBR f .354 B52 f 370 953 EBL 2 3200 80 .025* 649 .203* EDT 3 4800 348 .D82 314 .090 EBR 0 0 46 0 117 46 WBL 1 1600 51 .032 31 .019 WET 2 3200 360 .113* 293 .092* WBR f .093* 651 f 399 651 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .653 .803 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 128 .040 3B .012 NBT 3 4800 1341 .279* 1555 .324* NBR 1 1600 24 .015 20 .013 SBL 2 3200 825 .258* 694 .217* SET 3 4800 1426 .297 1699 .354 SBR f 953 423 EEL 2 3200 117 .037* 741 .232* EDT 3 4800 351 .083 317 .090 EBR 0 0 46 117 WBL 1 1600 57 .036 34 .021 WET 2 3200 363 .1133* 296 .093* WBR f 651 399 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .687 .866 Stantec A -16 8. MacArthur 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LAVES LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 128 .040 38 .012 NBC 3 4BOD 1419 .296* 1623 .338* NBR 1 160D 24 .015 20 .013 SBL 2 3200 825 .25B* 694 .217* SBT 3 4BOD 146B .306 17B2 .371 SBR f 970 969 423 419 EBL EEL 2 3200 113 .035* 755 .236* EDT 3 4BOD 353 .D83 325 .092 EBR D 0 46 117 117 WBL WBL 1 1600 57 .036 34 .021 WBT 2 3200 372 .116* 301 .094* WBR f 651 651 399 399 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .705 .885 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LAVES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 128 .040 38 .012 NBT 3 4B00 1419 .296* 1623 .338* NBR 1 1600 24 .D15 20 .013 SBL 2 3200 825 .258* 694 .217* SBT 3 4800 1468 .306 1762 .371 SBR f 970 423 EBL 2 3200 117 .037* 757 .237* EDT 3 4800 354 .D83 326 .092 DER 0 0 46 117 WBL 1 1600 57 .036 34 .021 WBT 2 3200 372 .116* 302 .094* WBR f 651 399 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .707 .886 Stantec A -17 9. MacArthur 6 San Miguel Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .529 .441 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 123 .D38 91 .028* NET 3 4800 1220 .254* 771 .16I NBR 1 1600 147 .092 212 .133 SBL 2 3200 3 .001* 11 .003 SET 3 4800 780 .163 960 .200* SBR 1 1600 637 .398 451 .282 EBL 3 4800 192 .040* 668 .139 EDT 2 3200 79 .D37 331 .143* EBR 0 0 38 EBR 126 0 WBL 2 3200 190 .059 225 .070* WET 2 3200 261 .083* 173 .065 WBR 0 D 6 WBR 35 0 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .151* Right Turn Adjustment TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .529 .441 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PR HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 130 .041 101 .032* NET 3 4800 1271 .265* B04 .168 NBR 1 1600 153 .096 22D .138 SBL 2 3200 4 .001* 12 .004 SBT 3 480.0 812 .169 999 .208* SBR 1 1600 719 .449 501 .313 EEL 3 4800 200 .042* 731 .152 EST 2 3200 83 .041 356 .154* EBR 0 0 47 2 138 190 WBL 2 3200 190 .059 225 .070* WET 2 3200 274 .088* 195 .072 WBR 0 0 6 Turn Adjustment 35 .151* Right Turn Adjustment SBR .192* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .588 .464 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .529 .442 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PR HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 123 .038 92 .029* NET 3 4800 1220 .254* 771 .161 NBR 1 1600 147 .092 212 .133 SBL 2 3200 3 .001* 11 .003 SET 3 4600 780 .163 960 .200* SBR 1 1600 637 .398 451 .282 EBL 3 4800 192 .040* 668 .139 EST 2 3200 79 .D37 331 .143* EBR 0 0 39 0 126 48 WBL 2 3200 190 .059 225 .070* WBT 2 3200 261 .083* 173 .065 WBR 0 0 6 0 35 6 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .151* Turn Adjustment TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .529 .442 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 130 .041 102 .032* NBT 3 4800 1271 .265* B04 .168 NBR 1 1600 153 .096 220 .138 SBL 2 3200 4 .001* 12 .004 SET 3 4800 B12 .169 999 .208* SBR 1 1600 719 .449 501 .313 EEL 3 4800 200 .042* 731 .152 EST 2 3200 83 .041 356 .154* EBR 0 0 48 138 WBL 2 3200 190 .059 225 .070* WET 2 3200 274 .08B* 195 .072 WBR 0 0 6 35 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .192* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .588 .464 Stantec A -18 9. MacArthur 6 San Miguel Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 167 .052 123 .038* NET 3 4B00 1349 .281* 872 .1.B2 NBR 1 1600 153 .096 220 .138 SBL 2 3200 4 .001* 12 .004 SET 3 4800 854 .178 1082 .225* SBR 1 1600 719 .449 501 .313 EBL 3 4800 200 .042* 731 .152 EDT 2 3200 83 .D44 356 .166* EBR 0 0 59 175 175 WBL WBL 2 3200 190 .059 225 .070* WET 2 3200 274 .D8B* 195 .072 WBR 0 D 6 35 35 Right Right Turn Adjustment SBR .187* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .599 .499 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 167 .052 124 .039* NET 3 4800 1349 .2B1* 872 .1B2 NBR 1 1600 153 .096 220 .13B SBL 2 3200 4 .001* 12 .004 SET 3 4600 854 .17B 1082 .225* SBR 1 1600 719 .449 501 .313 EBL 3 4800 200 .042* 731 .152 EST 2 3200 B3 .D45 356 .166* EBR 0 0 60 175 WBL 2 3200 190 .059 225 .070* WBT 2 3200 274 .08B* 195 .072 WBR 0 0 6 35 Right Turn Adjustment SBR .187* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .599 .500 Stantec A -19 10. MacArthur 6 Coast Hwy Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .659 .637 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 0 0 NET 0 0 0 NET p 0 NBR 0 0 0 NBR p 0 SBL 2 3200 793 .248* 981 .307* SET 0 0 0 SBT 0 0 SBR f 0 247 SBR 323 257 EEL 2 3200 575 .180* 298 .093* EST 3 4800 1000 .208 1277 .266 DER 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 WET 3 4800 1110 .231* 1136 .237* WBR f 1202 862 WBR 789 898 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .659 .637 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 2 0 794 SBL 2 3200 834 .261* 1023 .320* SBT O 0 1 f 0 247 SBR f 257 257 2 336 575 EEL 2 3200 599 .187* 311 .097* EST 3 4800 1054 .220 1369 .285 EBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 WBL O 0 0 3 0 1112 WET 3 480.0 1193 .249* 1202 .250* WBR f 898 898 827 B26 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .697 .667 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .660 .637 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 794 .248* 981 .307* SDI 0 0 0 0 0 1 SBR f 247 f 323 257 EBL 2 3200 575 .180* 298 .093* EST 3 4800 1004 .209 1279 .266 EBR 0 0 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 0 0 WET 3 4600 1112 .232* 1139 .237* WBR f .251* 862 f 790 898 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .660 .637 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 835 .267* 1023 .320* SBT 0 0 1 0 SBR f 257 336 EEL 2 3200 599 .187* 311 .097* EDT 3 4800 1056 .220 1371 .286 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 3 4800 1195 .249* 1205 .251* WBR f 898 827 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .697 .668 Stantec A -20 10. MacArthur 6 Coast Hwy Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 0 NET 0 0 0 p NBR 0 0 0 O SBL 2 3200 884 .276* 1132 .354* SET O 0 1 0 SEP. f 261 347 EEL 2 3200 605 .189* 320 .100* EDT 3 4BOD 1153 .24D 1696 .353 EBR O 0 O O WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 3 4BOD 1516 .316* 1405 .293* WBR f 1007 907 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .781 .747 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 D NET 0 0 0 0 NBR 0 0 0 0 SBL 2 3200 885 .277* 1132 .354* SET 0 D 1 D SEE, f 261 347 EBL 2 3200 605 .189* 320 .100* EST 3 4800 1157 .241 1698 .354 EBR 0 0 O 0 WBL 0 0 0 0 WET 3 4BOD 1518 .316* 1406 .293* WBR f 1007 908 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .782 .747 Stantec A -21 11. Santa Cruz 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .264 .363 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 70 .022* 620 .194* NET 1 1600 4 .011 14 .093 NBR 0 0 13 NBR 135 0 SBL 1 1600 10 .006 9 .006 SET 2 3200 7 .004* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 64 .040 24 .015 EBL 1 1600 49 .031 72 .045 EDT 3 4BOD 512 .16D* 486 .138* EBR 0 0 292 .183 178 0 WBL 1 1600 115 .072* 45 .028* WET 3 4800 265 .057 444 .097 WBR 0 O 7 WBR 20 0 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .006* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .264 .363 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 . 99 .D32* 631 .197* NET 1 1600 4 .012 14 .094 NBR 0 0 15 1 136 10 SBL 1 1600 10 .006 10 .006 SBT 2 3200 . B .005* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 64 .040 24 .015 EEL 1 1600 49 .031 72 .045 EST 3 4800 587 .183* 515 .148* EBR 0 0 296 .185 196 116 WBL 1 1600 117 .073* 47 .029* WET 3 4800 275 .D59 517 .112 WBR 0 0 7 Turn Adjustment 20 .005* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .292 .377 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .266 .368 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 73 .023* 621 .194* NET 1 1600 4 .011 14 .094 NBR 0 0 14 0 136 16 SBL 1 1600 10 .006 9 .006 SET 2 3200 7 .004* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 64 .040 24 .015 EBL 1 1600 49 .031 72 .045 EST 3 4800 516 .161* 488 .140* EBR 0 0 293 .183 183 297 WBL 1 1600 116 .073* 50 .031* WET 3 4B00 265 .057 444 .097 WBR 0 0 7 0 20 7 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .005* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .266 .368 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 102 .032* 632 .198* NET 1 1600 4 .013 14 .094 NBR 0 0 16 137 SBL 1 1600 10 .006 10 .006 SET 2 3200 8 .LO5* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 64 .040 24 .015 EEL 1 1600 49 .031 72 .045 EST 3 4800 591 .185* 517 .150* EBR 0 0 297 .186 201 WBL 1 1600 118 .074* 52 .033* BAST 3 4800 275 .059 517 .112 WBR 0 O 7 20 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .296 .384 Stantec A -22 11. Santa Cruz 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 99 .D31* 647 .202* NET 1 1600 4 .012 14 .094 NBR 0 0 15 136 1 SBL 1 1600 10 .006 10 .006 SET 2 3200 8 .005* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 64 .040 24 .015 EBL 1 1600 49 .031 72 .045 EDT 3 4BOD 587 .183* 515 .148* EBR 0 0 313 .196 196 1 WBL 1 1600 117 .D73* 47 .029* WBT 3 4BOD 275 .059 517 .112 WBR 0 D 7 2D TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .292 .382 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 2 3200 102 .032* 648 .203* NET 1 1600 4 .013 14 .094 NBR 0 0 16 137 SBL 1 1600 10 .006 10 .006 SET 2 3200 8 .005* 5 .003* SBR 0 0 64 .040 24 .015 EBL 1 1600 49 .031 72 .045 EST 3 4800 591 .185* 517 .150* EBR 0 0 314 .196 201 WBL 1 1600 118 .074* 52 .033* WBT 3 4B00 275 .059 517 .112 WBR 0 0 7 20 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .296 .389 Stantec A -23 12. Santa Cruz 6 San Clemente Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .135 .253 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR AM PE LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016* 98 .061* NET 3 4B00 52 .016 432 .097 NBR 0 0 35 .022 35 0 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 30 .019 SET 2 3200 140 .OBB* 204 .OB3- SBR 0 0 161 .101 61 0 EBL 0 0 19 EEL 280 0 EDT 2 3200 30 .025* 11 .094* EBR 0 0 46 .029 45 .028 WBL 1.5 45 10 WBL 28 WBT 0.5 3200 9 .006* 20 .015* WEN 1 1600 16 .010 54 .034 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing Note: Assumes E/W Split TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .135 .253 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR AM PE HOUR PM RE HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016* 98 .061* NET 3 4600 83 .D25 444 .100 NBR 0 0 35 1 35 52 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 30 .019 SBT 2 3206 147 .092* 224 .089* SBR 0 0 161 .101 61 23 EEL 0 0 19 2 280 30 EST 2 3200 30 .025* 11 .094* EBR D 0 46 .029 45 .028 WBL 1.5 10 0.5 28 9 WBT 0.5 3200 9 .006* 20 .015* WBR 1 1600 16 .010 54 .034 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .139 .259 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .137 .255 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PR HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016* 100 .063* NET 3 4800 B3 .025 444 .100 NBR 0 0 35 35 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 30 .019 SET 2 3200 149 .,093* 225 .091* SBR 0 0 162 .101 66 EEL 0 0 23 282 EST 2 3200 30 .026* 11 .095* EBR 0 0 47 .029 46 .029 WBL 1.5 10 28 WBT 0.5 3200 9 .006* 20 .015* WBR 1 1600 16 .010 54 .034 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .141 .264 Stantec A -24 AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016* i00 .063* NET 3 4800 52 .016 432 .097 NBA 0 0 35 .022 35 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 30 .019 SET 2 3200 142 .089* 205 .085* SBR 0 0 162 .101 66 EBL 0 0 23 282 EST 2 3200 30 .026* 11 .095* EBR 0 0 47 .029 46 .029 WBL 1.5 10 28 WBT 0.5 3200 9 .006* 20 .015* WBR 1 1600 16 .010 54 .034 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .137 .255 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PR HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016* 100 .063* NET 3 4800 B3 .025 444 .100 NBR 0 0 35 35 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 30 .019 SET 2 3200 149 .,093* 225 .091* SBR 0 0 162 .101 66 EEL 0 0 23 282 EST 2 3200 30 .026* 11 .095* EBR 0 0 47 .029 46 .029 WBL 1.5 10 28 WBT 0.5 3200 9 .006* 20 .015* WBR 1 1600 16 .010 54 .034 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .141 .264 Stantec A -24 12. Santa Cruz 6 San Clemente Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016* 98 .061* NET 3 4B00 B3 .025 460 .103 NBR 0 0 35 35 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 30 .019 SET 2 3200 164 .102* 224 .OB9* SBR 0 0 161 61 EBL 0 0 19 280 EDT 2 3200 30 .025* 11 .094* EBR 0 0 46 .029 45 .028 WBL 1.5 10 28 WBT 0.5 3200 9 .006* 20 .015* WBR 1 1600 16 .010 54 .034 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .149 .259 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 26 .016* 100 .063* NET 3 4800 H3 .025 460 .103 NBR 0 0 35 35 SBL 1 1600 52 .033 30 .019 SET 2 3200 166 .103* 225 .091* SBR 0 0 162 66 EBL 0 0 23 282 EST 2 3200 30 .026* 11 .095* EBR 0 0 47 .029 46 .029 WBL 1.5 10 28 WBT 0.5 3200 9 .006* 20 .015* WBR 1 1600 16 .010 54 .034 Note: Assumes E/W Split Phasing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .151 .264 Stantec A -25 13. Santa Cruz 6 Newport Center Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .146 .306 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 19 {.0121* NBL 50 0 NET 2 3200 19 .014 159 .078* NBR 0 0 6 NBR 39 0 SBL 1 1600 B4 .053 59 .037* SET 1 1600 123 .077* 96 .060 SBR 1 1600 55 .034 80 .050 EBL 1 1600 46 .029* 157 .098* EDT 2 3200 70 .022 93 .029 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 27 .017 WEL 1 1600 8 .005 29 .018 WET 2 3200 B8 .02B* 92 .029* WBR 1 1600 75 .047 193 .121 Right Turn Adjustment 196 .123 WER .064* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .146 .306 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 19 {.012)* 2 50 19 NET 2 3200 35 .019 165 .079* NBR 0 0 6 1 39 85 SBL 1 1600 86 .054 64 .040* SBT 1 160.0 126 .079* 106 .066 SBR 1 1600 57 .036 85 .053 EEL 1 1600 54 .034* 160 .100* EST 2 3200 70 .022 93 .029 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 27 .017 WBL 1 1600 8 .005 29 .018 WET 2 3200 88 .028* 92 .029* WBR 1 1600 82 ,051 196 .123 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .064* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .153 .312 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .147 .306 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 19 {.012)* 0 50 19 NET 2 3200 19 .014 160 .07B* NBR 0 0 6 0 39 6 SBL 1 1600 85 .053 59 .037* SET 1 1600 124 .078* 96 .060 SBR 1 1600 56 .035 80 .050 EBL 1 1600 46 .029* 157 .098* EST 2 3200 70 .022 93 .029 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 27 .017 WBL 1 1600 8 .005 29 .018 WET 2 3200 B8 .02B* 92 .029* WBR 1 1600 75 .047 194 .121 Right Turn Adjustment .123 Right WBR .064* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .147 .306 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 19 {.012)* 50 NET 2 3200 35 .019 166 .080* NBR 0 0 6 39 SBL 1 1600 87 .054 64 .040* SET 1 1600 127 .079* 106 .066 SBR 1 1600 58 .036 85 .053 EEL 1 1600 54 .034* 160 .100* EST 2 3200 70 .022 93 .029 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 27 .017 WBL 1 1600 8 .005 29 .018 WET 2 3200 88 .02B* 92 .029* WBR 1 1600 82 .051 197 .123 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .064* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .153 .313 Stantec A -26 13. Santa Cruz 6 Newport Centex Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 19 {.0121* 50 2 NET 2 3200 35 .019 173 .0.B2* NBR 0 0 6 39 1 SBL 1 1600 B6 .054 64 .040* SET 1 1600 135 .084* 106 .066 SBR 1 1600 65 .041 85 .053 EBL 1 1600 54 .034* 168 .105* EDT 2 3200 73 .023 95 .030 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 27 .017 WBL 1 1600 8 .005 29 .018 WET 2 3200 B9 .02B* 96 .030* WBR 1 1600 82 .051 196 .123 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .063* WER .063* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .158 .320 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 19 {.012)* 50 NET 2 3200 35 .019 174 .082* NBR 0 P 6 39 SBL 1 1600 87 .054 64 .040* SET 1 1600 136 .085* 106 .066 SBR 1 1600 66 .041 85 .053 EBL 1 1600 54 .034* 168 .105* EST 2 3200 73 .023 95 .030 EBR 1 1600 16 .010 27 .017 WBL 1 1600 8 .005 29 .018 WET 2 3200 B9 .026* 96 .030* WBR 1 1600 82 .051 197 ,123 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .063* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .159 .320 Stantec A -27 14. Santa Rosa 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .290 .494 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR AN PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 32 .020 221 .138* NBT 1 1600 16 .010* 25 .016 NBR 1 1600 75 .047 443 .277 SBL 1 1600 81 .051* 73 .046 SET 1 1600 12 .008 11 .007* SBR 1 1600 39 .024 59 .037 EBL 1 1600 27 .017 67 .042 EDT 3 4B00 265 .083* 55D .142* EBR 0 0 207 .129 133 0 WBL 2 3200 447 .140* 374 .117* WET 3 4600 457 .116 280 .075 WBR 0 D 101 WBR 79 0 Right Turn Adjustment PER .006* NER .090* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .290 .494 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AN PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 51 .D32 299 .167* NBT 1 1600 16 .010* 25 .016 NBR 1 160D 102 .064 473 .296 SBL 1 1600 81 .051* 73 .046 SBT 1 1606 12 .DOB 11 .007* SBR 1 1600 39 .024 59 .037 EBL 1 1600 28 .DIB 67 .042 EST 3 4800 271 .085* 559 .150* EBR 0 0 284 .178 163 447 WBL 2 3200 . 452 .141* 401 .125* WBT 3 4800 462 .117 287 .076 WBR 0 0 101 Turn Adjustment 79 .005* Right Turn Adjustment EBR .053* NBR .054* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .340 .523 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .290 .495 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 32 .020 221 .138* NET 1 1600 16 .010* 25 .016 NBR 1 1600 75 .047 443 .277 SBL 1 1600 81 .051* 73 .046 SET 1 1600 12 .008 11 .007* SBR 1 1600 39 .024 59 .037 EBL 1 1600 27 .017 67 .042 EST 3 4800 270 .084* 553 .143* EBR 0 0 207 .129 133 284 WBL 2 3200 447 .140* 374 .117* WBT 3 4BO0 458 .116 285 .076 WBR 0 0 101 0 79 101 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .005* HER .090* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .290 .495 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 51 .032 299 .187* NET 1 1600 16 .010* 25 .016 NBR 1 1600 102 ,D64 473 .296 SBL 1 1600 81 .051* 73 .046 SET 1 1600 12 .,008 11 .007* SBR 1 1600 39 .024 59 .037 EBL 1 1600 28 .01B 67 .042 EST 3 4800 276 .086* 562 .151* EBR 0 0 284 .178 163 WBL 2 3200 452 .141* 401 .125* WBT 3 4800 463 .118 292 .077 WBR 0 0 101 79 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .052* NBR .054* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .340 .524 Stantec A -28 14. Santa Rosa 6 San Joaquin Hills Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 51 .032 299 .167* NBC 1 1600 16 .010* 25 .016 NBR 1 1600 105 .066 498 .311 SBL 1 1600 B1 .051* 73 .046 SET 1 1600 12 .008 11 .007* SBR 1 1600 39 .024 59 .037 EBL 1 1600 28 .DIB 67 .042 EDT 3 4800 271 .085* 559 .150* EBR 0 0 284 .178 163 2 WBL 2 3200 478 .149* 407 .127* WET 3 4800 462 .117 287 .076 WBR 0 0 101 79 Turn Adjustment Right Turn Adjustment EBR .053* NBR .06P TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .348 .539 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 51 .032 299 .167* NET 1 1600 16 .010* 25 .016 NBR 1 1600 105 .066 49B .311 SBL 1 1600 81 .051* 73 .046 SET 1 1600 12 .00B 11 .007* SBR 1 1600 39 .024 59 .037 EBL 1 1600 28 .016 67 .042 EST 3 4800 276 .086* 562 .151* EBR 0 0 284 .178 163 WBL 2 3200 478 .149* 407 .127* WBT 3 4B00 463 .11B 292 .077 WBR 0 0 101 79 Right Turn Adjustment EBR .052* HER .068* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .348 .540 Stantec A -29 15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .124 .343 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 38 .024 83 .052 NET 2 3200 61 .019* 126 .039* NBR 1 1600 94 .059 273 .171 SBL 1 1600 54 .034* 141 .OB8* SET 2 3200 37 .012 121 .038 SEP. 1 1600 4 .003 31 .019 EEL 0 0 6 {.004)* EEL 12 0 EST 2 3200 37 .019 147 .068* EBR 0 0 18 EBR 57 0 WEI, 0 0 67 WBL 102 J.064)* 0 WET 2 3200 140 .065* 23B .106 WBR 1 1600 111 .069 112 .070 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .002* NBR .084* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .124 .343 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 38 .024 63 .052 NET 2 3200 61 .019* 126 .039* NBR 1 1600 105 .066 300 .lB8 SBL 1 1600 66 .041* 166 .105* SBT 2 3206 37 .012 121 .038 SBR 1 1600 4 .003 31 .019 EEL 0 0 6 {.004)* 2 12 37 EST 2 3200 60 .026 201 .084* EBR 0 0 18 0 57 67 WBL 0 0 87 2 116 ).072)* 140 WET 2 3200 181 .084* 266 .119 WBR 1 1600 132 .083 126 .079 Right Turn Adjustment HER HER .095* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .148 .395 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .124 .343 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 38 .024 63 .052 NET 2 3200 61 .019* 127 .040* NBR 1 1600 94 .059 273 .171 SBL 1 1600 54 .034* 141 .OB8* SET 2 3200 38 .012 121 .038 SBR 1 1600 4 .003 31 .019 EBL 0 0 6 {.004)* 0 12 6 EST 2 3200 37 .019 147 .068* EBR 0 0 18 0 57 18 WBL 0 0 67 O 102 {.0641* 87 WET 2 3200 140 .065* 23B .106 WBR 1 1600 111 .069 112 .070 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .002* NBR .083* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .124 .343 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 38 .024 83 .052 NET 2 3200 61 .019* 127 .040* NEB. 1 1600 105 .066 300 .188 SBL 1 1600 66 .041* 166 .105* SET 2 3200 38 .,012 121 .03B SBR 1 1600 4 .003 31 .019 EEL 0 0 6 {.004)* 12 EST 2 3200 60 .026 201 .084* EBR 0 0 18 57 WBL O 0 87 116 j.072)* WET 2 3200 181 .084* 266 .119 WBR 1 1600 132 .083 126 ,079 Right Turn Adjustment HER .094* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .148 .395 Stantec A -30 15. Newport Centex 6 Santa Rosa Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 38 .024 83 .052 NET 2 3200 67 .021* 138 .043* NBR 1 1600 105 .066 308 .193 SBL 1 1600 66 .041* 168 .1D5* SET 2 3200 47 .015 131 .041 SEP. 1 1600 4 .003 31 .019 EEL 0 0 6 {.004)* 12 2 EST 2 3200 60 .D26 209 .OB7* EBR 0 0 18 57 0 WBL 0 0 95 116 J.D72)* 2 WET 2 3200 190 .DB9* 266 .119 watt 1 1600 132 .DB3 126 .079 Right Turn Adjustment HER .096* NER .096* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .155 .403 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 38 .024 83 .052 NET 2 3200 67 .021* 139 .043* NBR 1 1600 105 .066 308 .193 SBL 1 1600 66 .041* 168 .105* SET 2 3200 48 .015 131 .041 SEE, 1 1600 4 .003 31 .019 EBL 0 0 6 {.004}* 12 EST 2 3200 60 .026 209 .087* EBR 0 0 18 57 WBL 0 0 95 116 J.D721* WET 2 3200 190 .089* 266 .119 WBR 1 1600 132 .083 126 .079 Right Turn Adjustment HER .096* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .155 .403 Stantec A -31 16. Newport Center & San Miguel Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .137 .323 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 25 .D16 77 .048* NET 2 3200 139 .043* 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 81 .051 213 .133 SBL 1 1600 41 .026* 78 .049 SET 2 3200 49 .D15 171 .053* SBR 1 1600 6 .004 41 .026 EEL 0 D 0 EEL 16 0 EST 2 3200 17 .006* 204 .103* EBR 0 0 2 EBR 109 0 WBL 1 1600 99 .D62* 190 .119* WET 2 3200 57 .036 201 .116 WBR 0 0 128 .DBD 17D 0 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .137 .323 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 25 .016 77 .048* NET 2 3200 139 .043* 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 91 .057 222 .139 SBL 1 1600 51 .D32* 86 .054 SBT 2 3200 49 .D15 171 .053* SBR 1 160.0 6 .004 41 .026 EEL 0 0 0 2 16 17 EST 2 3200 37 .D12* 222 .108* EBR 0 0 2 1 109 99 WBL 1 160.0 100 .063* 202 .126* WET 2 3200 . 59 .037 225 .127 WBR 0 0 129 .D81 182 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .150 .335 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .137 .323 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 25 .016 77 .048* NET 2 3200 139 .043* 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 81 .051 213 .133 SBL 1 1600 42 .026* 78 .049 SET 2 3200 49 .015 171 .053* SBR 1 1600 6 .004 41 .026 EBL 0 0 0 0 16 0 EST 2 3200 17 .006* 204 .1D3* EBR 0 0 2 0 109 2 WBL 1 1600 99 .062* 190 .119* WET 2 3200 57 .036 201 .116 WBR D 0 128 .080 171 129 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .137 .323 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 25 .016 77 .048* NBT 2 3200 139 .043* 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 91 .057 222 .139 SBL 1 1600 52 .033* 86 .054 SBT 2 3200 49 .015 171 .053* SBR 1 1600 6 .,004 41 .026 EEL 0 0 0 16 EDT 2 3200 37 .012* 222 .108* EBR 0 0 2 109 WBL 1 1600 100 .063* 202 .126* WET 2 3200 59 .037 225 .128 WBR 0 0 129 .081 183 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .151 .335 Stantec A -32 16. Newport Centex 6 San Miguel Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 25 .016 77 .048* NET 2 3200 142 .094* 127 .040 NBR 1 1600 91 .057 222 .139 SBL 1 1600 51 .032* 86 .054 SET 2 3200 50 .016 175 .055* SEP. 1 1600 14 .009 41 .026 EEL 0 0 0 24 2 EST 2 3200 49 .016* 259 .123* EBR 0 0 2 109 1 WBL 1 1600 100 .063* 202 .126* WET 2 3200 96 .060 247 .134 WBR 0 0 129 .081 182 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .155 .352 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 25 .016 77 .048* NET 2 3200 142 .044* 127 .040 NBR 1 1600 91 .057 222 .139 SBL 1 1600 52 .033* 86 .054 SET 2 3200 50 .016 175 .055* SEE, 1 1600 14 .009 41 .026 EBL 0 0 0 24 EST 2 3200 49 .016* 259 .123* EBR 0 0 2 109 WBL 1 1600 100 .063* 202 .126* WET 2 3200 96 .060 247 .134 WBR 0 0 129 .081 183 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .156 .352 Stantec A -33 17. Avocado 6 San Miguel Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .306 .485 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR AM PR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 107 .067* 137 .086* NET 1 1600 73 .046 33 .021 NBR 1 1600 145 .091 440 .270 SBL 2 3200 48 .015 139 .043 SET 1 1600 44 .038* 110 .079* SBR 0 0 16 SBR 17 0 EEL 1 1600 4 .003* 3 .002 EDT 3 4800 138 .036 605 .145* EBR 0 0 36 EBR 91 0 WEI 2 3200 512 .160 277 .087* WET 2 3200 471 .19B* 514 .175 WBR 0 0 162 WBR 46 0 Right Turn Adjustment 51 Right NBR .DBP TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .306 .485 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR AM PR HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 111 .069* 170 .106* NET 1 1600 116 .073 44 .028 NBR 1 1600 154 .096 506 .316 SBL 2 3200 50 .016 148 .046 SBT 1 160.0 54 .044* 156 .108* SBR 0 0 16 1 17 4 EEL 1 1600 4 .003 3 .002 EST 3 4800 146 .045* 626 .152* EBR 0 0 68 2 105 512 WBL 2 3200 567 .177* 313 .098* WET 2 3200 471 .202 529 .1B1 WBR 0 0 174 Turn Adjustment 51 Right Right Turn Adjustment NBR .074* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .335 .538 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .306 .485 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR AM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 107 .067* 137 .086* NET 1 1600 73 .046 33 .021 NBR 1 1600 145 .091 440 .275 SBL 2 3200 48 .015 139 .043 SET 1 1600 44 .03B* 110 .079* SBR 0 0 16 0 17 16 EBL 1 1600 4 .003* 3 .002 EST 3 4800 139 .036 605 .145* EBR 0 0 36 0 91 68 WBL 2 3200 512 .160 277 .087* WBT 2 3200 471 .19B* 515 .175 WBR 0 0 162 0 46 174 Right Turn Adjustment Right HER .088* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .306 .485 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PR HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 111 .069* 170 .106* NET 1 1600 116 .073 44 .028 NBR 1 1600 154. .096 506 .316 SBL 2 3200 50 .016 148 .046 SET 1 1600 54 .044* 156 .108* SBR 0 0 16 17 EEL 1 1600 4 .003 3 .002 EST 3 4800 147 .045* 626 .152* EBR 0 0 68 105 WBL 2 3200 567 .177* 3133 .098* WET 2 3200 471 .202 530 .182 WBR 0 0 174 51 Right Turn Adjustment NBR .074* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .335 .538 Stantec A -34 17. Avocado 6 San Miguel Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 111 .D69* 170 .106* NET 1 1600 116 .073 44 .028 NBR 1 1600 154 .096 506 .316 SBL 2 3200 50 .016 148 .046 SET 1 1600 54 .044* 156 .10B* SBR 0 0 16 17 1 EBL 1 1600 4 .003 3 .002 EDT 3 4800 158 .047* 663 .160* EBR 0 0 68 105 2 WEI 2 3200 567 .177* 313 .098* WET 2 3200 508 .213 551 .1B8 WBR 0 0 174 51 Turn Adjustment Right Turn Adjustment HER .074* NER .074* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .337 .546 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 111 .069* 170 .106* NET 1 1600 116 .073 44 .02B NBR 1 1600 154 .096 506 .316 SBL 2 3200 50 .016 148 .046 SET 1 1600 54 .044* 156 .108* SBR 0 0 16 17 EBL 1 1600 4 .003 3 .002 EST 3 4800 159 .047* 663 .160* EBR 0 0 68 105 WBL 2 3200 567 .177* 313 .098* WBT 2 3200 508 .213 552 .1B8 WBR 0 0 174 51 Right Turn Adjustment HER .074* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .337 .546 Stantec A -35 18. Newport Center & Newport Center (Circle) Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .176 .357 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 162 .101* 127 .079* NET 2 3200 40 .013 137 .043 NBR f 153 242 NBR 133 246 SBL 1 1600 5 .003 25 .016 SET 2 3200 6 .002* 137 .044* SBR 0 0 0 SBR 5 0 EBL 1 1600 72 .045* 13 .008 EDT 2 3200 42 .013 114 .036* EBR f 114 8 EBR 221 16. WBL 1 1600 6 .004 .317 .198* WBT 2 3200 B8 .02B* 100 .031 WBR 1 1600 91 .057 43 .027 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .176 .357 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 166 .104* 134 .084* NET 2 3200 49 .015 153 .048 NBR f 246 246 1 141 5 SBL 1 1600 5 .003 25 .016 SBT 2 3200 19 .006* 162 .052* SBR 0 0 0 1 5 72 EBL 1 1600 72 .045* 13 .008 EST 2 3200 42 .013 114 .036* EBR f 16. 14 1 234 6 WBL 1 1600 12 .008 329 .206* WBT 2 3200 88 .028* 100 .031 WBR 1 1600 91 .057 43 .027 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .183 .378 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .177 .358 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 163 .102* 128 .080* NET 2 3200 40 .013 137 .043 NBR f .048 242 f 133 246 SBL 1 1600 5 .003 25 .016 SDI 2 3200 6 .002* 137 .044* SBR 0 0 0 A 5 0 EBL 1 1600 72 .045* 13 .008 EST 2 3200 42 .013 114 .036* EBR f .036* 10 f 222 16. WBL 1 1600 6 .004 317 .198* WBT 2 3200 B8 .02B* 100 .031 WBR 1 1600 91 .057 43 .027 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .177 .358 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 167 .104* 135 .OB4* NBT 2 3200 49 .015 153 .048 NBR f 246 141 SBL 1 1600 5 .003 25 .016 SBT 2 3200 19 .006* 162 .052* SBR A 0 0 5 EBL 1 1600 72 .045* 13 .008 EST 2 3200 42 .013 114 .036* EBR f 16. 235 WBL 1 1600 12 .008 329 .206* WBT 2 3200 88 .028* 100 .031 WBR 1 1600 91 .057 43 .027 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .183 .378 Stantec A -36 18. Newport Centex 6 Newport Centex (Circle) Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 169 .106* 136 .OB5* NET 2 3200 56 .018 159 .050 NBR f 249 144 1 SBL 1 1600 5 .003 25 .016 SET 2 3200 22 .007* 171 .055* SBR 0 0 0 5 1 EBL 1 1600 72 .045* 13 .008 EDT 2 3200 42 .D13 114 .036* EBR f 15 238 1 WBL 1 1600 13 .008 333 .208* WBT 2 3200 B8 .D2B* 100 .031 WBR 1 160D 91 .057 43 .027 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .186 .384 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 170 .106* 137 .066* NET 2 3200 56 .D1B 159 .050 NBR f 249 144 SBL 1 1600 5 .003 25 .016 SET 2 3200 22 .007* 171 .055* SBR 0 0 0 5 EBL 1 1600 72 .045* 13 .008 EST 2 3200 42 .D13 114 .036* EHR f 17 239 WBL 1 1600 13 .DOB 333 .208* WBT 2 3200 B8 .02B* 100 .031 WBR 1 1600 91 .057 43 .027 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .186 .385 Stantec A -37 19. Santa Barbara 6 San Clemente Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .274 .326 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR. PM PR HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 NBL 1 0 NET 3 4800 57 .013* 369 .O.BO* NBR 0 0 6 NBR 14 0 SBL 1 1600 404 .253* 49 .031* SET 2 3200 312 .098 202 .063 SEP. 0 0 0 SBR 0 0 EEL 0 0 0 EEL 0 0 EST 0 0 0 EST 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 WBL 1 1600 12 .008* 25 .016* WET D 0 0 WET 0 0 WBR 1 1600 53 .033 381 .238 Right Turn Adjustment 381 .238 WER .199* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .274 .326 Existing + Growth + Approved AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 3 1 57 NET 3 4BOD 94 .D21* 389 .OB4* NBR 0 0 6 1 14 404 SBL 1 1600 404 .253* 49 .031* SBT 2 3200 320 .100 229 .072 SBR O 0 0 O 0 0 EEL O 0 0 0 0 0 EST O 0 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 1 0 13 WBL 1 1600 12 .008* 25 .016* WET 0 0 0 1 0 58 WBR 1 1600 53 ,033 381 .238 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .199* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .282 .330 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .274 .328 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 NET 3 4800 94 .021* 389 .0$4* NBR 0 0 7 15 SBL 1 1600 404 .253* 51 .032* SET 2 3200 320 .100 229 .072 SBR 0 0 0 0 EEL 0 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 O 0 0 WBL 1 1600 13 .006* 26 .016* WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 1 1600 58 .036 384 .240 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .200* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .282 .332 Stantec A -38 AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 NET 3 4800 57 .013* 369 .080* NBR 0 0 7 15 SBL 1 1600 404 .253* 51 .032* SET 2 3200 312 .09B 202 .063 SBR 0 0 0 0 EEL O 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 1 1600 13 .DOB* 26 .016* WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 1 1600 58 .036 384 .240 Right Turn Adjustment WER .200* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .274 .328 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 NET 3 4800 94 .021* 389 .0$4* NBR 0 0 7 15 SBL 1 1600 404 .253* 51 .032* SET 2 3200 320 .100 229 .072 SBR 0 0 0 0 EEL 0 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 O 0 0 WBL 1 1600 13 .006* 26 .016* WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 1 1600 58 .036 384 .240 Right Turn Adjustment WBR .200* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .282 .332 Stantec A -38 19. Santa Barbara 6 San Clemente Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 NET 3 4800 94 .021* 389 .OB4* NBR 0 0 6 14 SBL 1 1600 404 .253* 49 .031* SET 2 3200 320 .100 229 .072 SER 0 0 0 0 EEL 0 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 1 1600 12 .008* 25 .016* WET 0 0 0 0 WHR 1 1600 53 .033 381 .238 Right Turn Adjustment WER .199* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .282 .330 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 0 0 0 1 NET 3 4800 94 .021* 3B9 .0B4* NBR 0 0 7 15 SBL 1 1600 404 .253* 51 .032* SET 2 3200 320 .100 229 .072 SEE, 0 0 0 0 EEL 0 0 0 0 EST 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 0 0 0 WBL 1 1600 13 .00B* 26 .016* WET 0 0 0 0 WBR 1 1600 58 .036 384 .240 Right Turn Adjustment WER .200* TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .282 .332 Stantec A -39 20. Newport Center 6 Santa Barbara Existing TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .116 .210 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR. PM PK HOUR AM PK LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 88 .055* 122 .076* NET 2 3200 139 .043 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 20 .013 30 .019 SBL 1 1600 24 .015 37 .023 SET 2 3200 65 .020* 201 .063* SBR 1 1600 48 .030 91 .057 EBL 1 1600 55 .034* 45 .028* EDT 2 3200 28 .018 71 .044 EBR 0 0 113 .071 137 .086 WBL 0 0 8 WBL 29 0 WBT 2 3200 8 .007* 62 .043* WBR 0 0 5 WBR 47 0 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .116 .210 Existing + Growth + Approved Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR V/C LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 97 .061* 127 .079* NET 2 3200 139 .043 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 20 .013 30 .019 SBL 1 1600 24 .015 37 .023 SBT 2 3200 65 .020* 201 .063* SBR 1 160,0 57 .036 96 .060 EEL 1 1600 57 .036* 52 .033* EST 2 3200 32 .020 85 .053 EBR 0 0 115 .072 143 .089 WBL 0 0 8 2 29 8 WBT 2 3200 27 .013* 72 .046* WBR 0 0 5 47 47 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .130 .221 Existing + Project TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .118 .211 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR AM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 89 .056* 123 .077* NET 2 3200 139 .043 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 20 .013 30 .019 SBL 1 1600 24 .015 37 .023 SDI 2 3200 66 .021* 201 .063* SBR 1 1600 48 .030 91 .057 EBL 1 1600 55 .034* 45 .026* EST 2 3200 28 .01B 71 .044 EBR 0 0 114 .071 138 .086 WBL 0 0 8 0 29 8 WBT 2 3200 8 .007* 62 .043* WBR 0 0 5 0 47 5 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .118 .211 Existing + Growth + Approved + Project AM PK HOUR PM PK HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 98 .061* 128 .080* NBT 2 3200 139 .043 124 .039 NBR 1 1600 20 .013 30 .019 SBL 1 1600 24 .015 37 .023 SBT 2 3200 66 .027* 201 .063* SBR 1 1600 57 .,036 96 .060 EEL 1 1600 57 .036* 52 .033* EDT 2 3200 32 .020 85 .053 EBR 0 0 116 .073 144 .090 WBL 0 0 8 29 WBT 2 3200 27 .013* 72 .046* WBR 0 0 5 47 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .131 .222 Stantec A-40 20. Newport Centex 6 Santa Barbara Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative AM PR HOUR PM PR AM PR HOUR. PM PR HOUR CAPACITY LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 97 .061* 127 .079* NBC 2 3200 142 .044 126 .039 NBR 1 1600 20 .013 30 .019 SBL 1 1600 32 .D20 37 .023 SET 2 3200 66 .D21* 205 .064* SBR 1 1600 57 .036 96 .060 EBL 1 1600 57 .036* 52 .033* EDT 2 3200 32 .D2D 85 .053 EBR 0 0 115 .072 143 .OB9 WBL 0 0 8 29 2 WBT 2 3200 27 .013* 72 .049* WBR 0 0 5 55 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .131 .225 Existing + Growth + Approved + Cumulative + Project AM PR HOUR PM PR HOUR LANES CAPACITY VOL V/C VOL V/C NBL 1 1600 98 .061* 128 .080* NET 2 3200 142 .044 126 .039 NBR 1 1600 20 .013 30 .019 SBL 1 1600 32 .D2D 37 .023 SET 2 3200 67 .021* 205 .064* SBR 1 1600 57 .036 96 .060 EBL 1 1600 57 .036* 52 .033* EST 2 3200 32 .020 85 .053 EBR 0 0 116 .073 144 .090 WBL 0 D 8 29 WBT 2 3200 27 .013* 72 .049* WBR 0 0 5 55 TOTAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION .131 .226 Stantec A41 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER SAN JOAQUIN PLAZA TPO TRAFFIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX 6 1% Analysis Worksheets City of Newport Beach CAL v:\ 2073 \active\ 2073006760 \san_jooquin_plaza_tpo \report \rpt sonjoaquinplam_tpo_051612.docx Stantec 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -2 Intersection: 1. Jamboree Rd & Ford Rd /Eastbluff Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1708 68 116 0 1892 19 10 Southbound 1946 78 183 0 2207 22 2 Eastbound 856 0 9 0 865 9 0 Westbound 685 0 12 0 697 7 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2459 98 209 0 2766 28 5 Southbound 1676 67 148 0 1891 19 7 Eastbound 609 0 5 0 614 6 0 Westbound 380 0 6 0 386 4 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -2 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -3 Intersection: 2. Jamboree Rd & San Joaquin Hills Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1276 51 79 0 1406 14 8 Southbound 2272 91 186 0 2549 25 2 Eastbound 395 0 0 0 395 4 0 Westbound 148 0 51 0 199 2 3 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1475 59 110 0 1644 16 6 Southbound 2008 80 162 0 2250 23 9 Eastbound 138 0 5 0 143 1 0 Westbound 796 0 116 0 912 9 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -3 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B-4 Intersection: 3. Jamboree Rd & Santa Barbara Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1414 57 57 0 1528 15 2 Southbound 1639 66 114 0 1819 18 0 Eastbound 54 0 6 0 60 1 0 Westbound 144 0 37 0 181 2 14 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1321 53 107 0 1481 15 6 Southbound 1528 61 98 0 1687 17 1 Eastbound 78 0 3 0 81 1 0 Westbound 706 0 20 0 726 7 7 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B-4 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -5 Intersection: 4. Jamboree Rd & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 445 18 2 0 465 5 0 Southbound 1077 43 123 0 1243 12 7 Eastbound 2364 95 137 0 2596 26 1 Westbound 1099 44 51 0 1194 12 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 410 16 6 0 432 4 0 Southbound 1452 58 89 0 1599 16 3 Eastbound 2372 95 156 0 2623 26 4 Westbound 2066 83 135 0 2284 23 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -5 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -6 Intersection: 5. Newport Center Or & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 88 0 25 0 113 1 2 Eastbound 2033 81 74 0 2188 22 2 Westbound 1221 49 22 0 1292 13 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 799 0 50 0 849 8 1 Eastbound 1582 63 59 0 1704 17 1 Westbound 1544 62 84 0 1690 17 3 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -6 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -7 Intersection: 6. Avocado Ave & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 361 0 0 0 361 4 0 Southbound 176 0 15 0 191 2 0 Eastbound 1260 50 64 0 1374 14 4 Westbound 1359 54 42 0 1455 15 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 295 0 0 0 295 3 0 Southbound 501 0 102 0 603 6 0 Eastbound 1359 54 43 0 1456 15 2 Westbound 1464 59 25 0 1548 15 3 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -7 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -8 Intersection: 7. MacArthur Blvd & Ford Rd /Bonita Cyn Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2000 80 53 0 2133 21 4 Southbound 2892 116 148 0 3156 32 1 Eastbound 410 0 5 0 415 4 2 Westbound 2066 0 14 0 2080 21 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2487 99 187 0 2773 28 2 Southbound 3522 141 81 0 3744 37 5 Eastbound 419 0 6 0 425 4 2 Westbound 1149 0 16 0 1165 12 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -8 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -9 Intersection: 8. MacArthur Blvd & San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1423 57 13 0 1493 15 0 Southbound 2963 119 121 0 3203 32 1 Eastbound 469 0 40 0 509 5 5 Westbound 1062 0 9 0 1071 11 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1488 60 65 0 1613 16 0 Southbound 2632 105 74 0 2811 28 4 Eastbound 1077 0 95 0 1172 12 3 Westbound 722 0 6 0 728 7 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -9 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -10 Intersection: 9. MacArthur Blvd & San Miguel Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1490 60 4 0 1554 16 0 Southbound 1420 57 59 0 1536 15 0 Eastbound 309 0 21 0 330 3 1 Westbound 457 0 13 0 470 5 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1074 43 8 0 1125 11 1 Southbound 1422 57 34 0 1513 15 0 Eastbound 1125 0 100 0 1225 12 0 Westbound 433 0 22 0 455 5 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -10 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 8 -11 Intersection: 10. MacArthur Blvd & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 1040 42 10 0 1092 11 1 Eastbound 1575 63 15 0 1653 17 4 Westbound 1972 79 41 0 2092 21 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 1304 52 3 0 1359 14 0 Eastbound 1575 63 42 0 1680 17 2 Westbound 1925 77 26 0 2028 20 4 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 8 -11 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -12 Intersection: 11. Santa Cruz Dr & San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 87 0 31 0 118 1 4 Southbound 81 0 1 0 82 1 0 Eastbound 853 0 79 0 932 9 5 Westbound 387 0 12 0 399 4 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 769 0 12 0 781 8 2 Southbound 38 0 1 0 39 0 0 Eastbound 736 0 47 0 783 8 7 Westbound 509 0 75 0 584 6 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -12 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -13 Intersection: 12. Santa Cruz Dr & San Clemente Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 113 0 31 0 144 1 0 Southbound 353 0 7 0 360 4 3 Eastbound 95 0 0 0 95 1 5 Westbound 35 0 0 0 35 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 565 0 12 0 577 6 2 Southbound 295 0 20 0 315 3 6 Eastbound 336 0 0 0 336 3 3 Westbound 102 0 0 0 102 1 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -13 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -14 Intersection: 13. Santa Cruz Dr & Newport Center Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 44 0 16 0 60 1 0 Southbound 262 0 7 0 269 3 3 Eastbound 132 0 8 0 140 1 0 Westbound 171 0 7 0 178 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 248 0 6 0 254 3 1 Southbound 235 0 20 0 255 3 0 Eastbound 277 0 3 0 280 3 0 Westbound 314 0 3 0 317 3 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -14 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -15 Intersection: 14. Santa Rosa Dr & San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 123 0 46 0 169 2 0 Southbound 132 0 0 0 132 1 0 Eastbound 499 0 84 0 583 6 5 Westbound 1005 0 10 0 1015 10 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 689 0 108 0 797 8 0 Southbound 143 0 0 0 143 1 0 Eastbound 750 0 39 0 789 8 3 Westbound 733 0 34 0 767 8 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -15 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -16 Intersection: 15. Newport Center Dr & Santa Rosa Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 193 0 11 0 204 2 0 Southbound 95 0 12 0 107 1 1 Eastbound 61 0 23 0 84 1 0 Westbound 318 0 82 0 400 4 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 482 0 27 0 509 5 1 Southbound 293 0 27 0 320 3 0 Eastbound 216 0 54 0 270 3 0 Westbound 452 0 56 0 508 5 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -16 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -17 Intersection: 16. Newport Center Dr & San Miguel Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 245 0 10 0 255 3 0 Southbound 96 0 10 0 106 1 1 Eastbound 19 0 20 0 39 0 0 Westbound 284 0 4 0 288 3 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 414 0 9 0 423 4 0 Southbound 290 0 8 0 298 3 0 Eastbound 329 0 18 0 347 3 0 Westbound 561 0 48 0 609 6 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -17 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -18 Intersection: 17. Avocado Ave & San Miguel Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 325 0 56 0 381 4 0 Southbound 108 0 12 0 120 1 0 Eastbound 178 0 40 0 218 2 1 Westbound 1145 0 67 0 1212 12 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 610 0 110 0 720 7 0 Southbound 266 0 55 0 321 3 0 Eastbound 699 0 35 0 734 7 0 Westbound 837 0 56 0 893 9 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -18 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -19 Intersection: 18. Newport Center Dr & Newport Center Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 444 0 17 0 461 5 1 Southbound 11 0 13 0 24 0 0 Eastbound 122 0 6 0 128 1 2 Westbound 1B5 0 6 0 191 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 397 0 31 0 428 4 1 Southbound 167 0 25 0 192 2 0 Eastbound 348 0 13 0 361 4 1 Westbound 460 0 12 0 472 5 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -19 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 8 -20 Intersection: 19. Santa Barbara Dr & San Clemente Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 63 0 37 0 100 1 1 Southbound 716 0 8 0 724 7 0 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 65 0 0 0 65 1 6 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 384 0 20 0 404 4 1 Southbound 251 0 27 0 278 3 2 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 406 0 0 0 406 4 4 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 8 -20 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 8 -21 Intersection: 20. Newport Center Dr & Santa Barbara Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 247 0 9 0 256 3 1 Southbound 137 0 9 0 146 1 1 Eastbound 196 0 8 0 204 2 1 Westbound 21 0 19 0 40 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 276 0 5 0 281 3 1 Southbound 329 0 5 0 334 3 0 Eastbound 253 0 27 0 280 3 1 Westbound 138 0 10 0 148 1 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 8 -21 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -22 Intersection: 1. Jamboree Rd & Ford Rd /Eastbluff Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1708 68 116 170 2062 21 10 Southbound 1946 78 183 39 2246 22 2 Eastbound 856 0 9 9 874 9 0 Westbound 685 0 12 21 718 7 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2459 98 209 86 2852 29 5 Southbound 1676 67 148 163 2054 21 7 Eastbound 609 0 5 30 644 6 0 Westbound 380 0 6 14 400 4 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -22 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -23 Intersection: 2. Jamboree Rd & San Joaquin Hills Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1276 51 79 136 1542 15 8 Southbound 2272 91 186 75 2624 26 2 Eastbound 395 0 0 0 395 4 0 Westbound 148 0 51 0 199 2 3 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1475 59 110 102 1746 17 6 Southbound 2008 80 162 140 2390 24 9 Eastbound 138 0 5 0 143 1 0 Westbound 796 0 116 16 928 9 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -23 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 8 -24 Intersection: 3. Jamboree Rd & Santa Barbara Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1414 57 57 136 1664 17 2 Southbound 1639 66 114 58 1877 19 0 Eastbound 54 0 6 0 60 1 0 Westbound 144 0 37 0 181 2 14 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1321 53 107 102 1583 16 6 Southbound 1528 61 98 140 1827 18 1 Eastbound 78 0 3 0 81 1 0 Westbound 706 0 20 0 726 7 7 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 8 -24 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -25 Intersection: 4. Jamboree Rd & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 445 18 2 0 465 5 0 Southbound 1077 43 123 58 1301 13 7 Eastbound 2364 95 137 87 2683 27 1 Westbound 1099 44 51 333 1527 15 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 410 16 6 0 432 4 0 Southbound 1452 58 89 140 1739 17 3 Eastbound 2372 95 156 243 2866 29 4 Westbound 2066 83 135 231 2515 25 2 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -25 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -26 Intersection: 5. Newport Center Or & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 88 0 25 5 118 1 2 Eastbound 2033 81 74 118 2306 23 2 Westbound 1221 49 22 328 1620 16 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 799 0 50 17 866 9 1 Eastbound 1582 63 59 347 2051 21 1 Westbound 1544 62 84 214 1904 19 3 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -26 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -27 Intersection: 6. Avocado Ave & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 361 0 0 0 361 4 0 Southbound 176 0 15 0 191 2 0 Eastbound 1260 50 64 105 1479 15 4 Westbound 1359 54 42 328 1783 18 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 295 0 0 0 295 3 0 Southbound 501 0 102 0 603 6 0 Eastbound 1359 54 43 336 1792 18 2 Westbound 1464 59 25 214 1762 18 3 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -27 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 8 -28 Intersection: 7. MacArthur Blvd & Ford Rd /Bonita Cyn Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2000 80 53 112 2245 22 4 Southbound 2892 116 148 25 3181 32 1 Eastbound 410 0 5 7 422 4 2 Westbound 2066 0 14 21 2101 21 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 2487 99 187 52 2825 28 2 Southbound 3522 141 81 115 3859 39 5 Eastbound 419 0 6 21 446 4 2 Westbound 1149 0 16 14 1179 12 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 8 -28 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -29 Intersection: 8. MacArthur Blvd & San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1423 57 13 78 1571 16 0 Southbound 2963 119 121 59 3262 33 1 Eastbound 469 0 40 3 512 5 5 Westbound 1062 0 9 9 1080 11 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1488 60 65 68 1681 17 0 Southbound 2632 105 74 83 2894 29 4 Eastbound 1077 0 95 25 1197 12 3 Westbound 722 0 6 6 734 7 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -29 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -30 Intersection: 9. MacArthur Blvd & San Miguel Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1490 60 4 115 1669 17 0 Southbound 1420 57 59 42 1578 16 0 Eastbound 309 0 21 12 342 3 1 Westbound 457 0 13 0 470 5 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 1074 43 8 90 1215 12 1 Southbound 1422 57 34 83 1596 16 0 Eastbound 1125 0 100 37 1262 13 0 Westbound 433 0 22 0 455 5 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -30 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 8 -31 Intersection: 10. MacArthur Blvd & Coast Hwy Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 1040 42 10 54 1146 11 1 Eastbound 1575 63 15 105 1758 18 4 Westbound 1972 79 41 432 2524 25 2 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Southbound 1304 52 3 120 1479 15 0 Eastbound 1575 63 42 336 2016 20 2 Westbound 1925 77 26 284 2312 23 4 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 8 -31 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -32 Intersection: 11. Santa Cruz Dr & San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 87 0 31 0 118 1 4 Southbound 81 0 1 0 82 1 0 Eastbound 853 0 79 17 949 9 5 Westbound 387 0 12 0 399 4 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 769 0 12 16 797 8 2 Southbound 38 0 1 0 39 0 0 Eastbound 736 0 47 0 783 8 7 Westbound 509 0 75 0 584 6 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -32 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -33 Intersection: 12. Santa Cruz Dr & San Clemente Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 113 0 31 0 144 1 0 Southbound 353 0 7 17 377 4 3 Eastbound 95 0 0 0 95 1 5 Westbound 35 0 0 0 35 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 565 0 12 16 593 6 2 Southbound 295 0 20 0 315 3 6 Eastbound 336 0 0 0 336 3 3 Westbound 102 0 0 0 102 1 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -33 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -34 Intersection: 13. Santa Cruz Dr & Newport Center Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 44 0 16 0 60 1 0 Southbound 262 0 7 17 286 3 3 Eastbound 132 0 8 3 143 1 0 Westbound 171 0 7 1 179 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 248 0 6 8 262 3 1 Southbound 235 0 20 0 255 3 0 Eastbound 277 0 3 10 290 3 0 Westbound 314 0 3 4 321 3 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -34 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -35 Intersection: 14. Santa Rosa Dr & San Joaquin Hills Rd Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 123 0 46 3 172 2 0 Southbound 132 0 0 0 132 1 0 Eastbound 499 0 84 0 583 6 5 Westbound 1005 0 10 26 1041 10 1 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 689 0 108 25 822 8 0 Southbound 143 0 0 0 143 1 0 Eastbound 750 0 39 0 789 8 3 Westbound 733 0 34 6 773 8 5 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -35 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -36 Intersection: 15. Newport Center Dr & Santa Rosa Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 193 0 11 6 210 2 0 Southbound 95 0 12 10 117 1 1 Eastbound 61 0 23 0 84 1 0 Westbound 318 0 82 17 417 4 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 482 0 27 20 529 5 1 Southbound 293 0 27 10 330 3 0 Eastbound 216 0 54 8 278 3 0 Westbound 452 0 56 0 508 5 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -36 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -37 Intersection: 16. Newport Center Dr & San Miguel Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 245 0 10 3 258 3 0 Southbound 96 0 10 9 115 1 1 Eastbound 19 0 20 12 51 1 0 Westbound 284 0 4 37 325 3 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 414 0 9 3 426 4 0 Southbound 290 0 8 4 302 3 0 Eastbound 329 0 18 45 392 4 0 Westbound 561 0 48 22 631 6 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -37 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -38 Intersection: 17. Avocado Ave & San Miguel Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1% of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 325 0 56 0 381 4 0 Southbound 108 0 12 0 120 1 0 Eastbound 178 0 40 12 230 2 1 Westbound 1145 0 67 37 1249 12 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 610 0 110 0 720 7 0 Southbound 266 0 55 0 321 3 0 Eastbound 699 0 35 37 771 8 0 Westbound 837 0 56 22 915 9 1 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -38 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec B -39 Intersection: 18. Newport Center Dr & Newport Center Or Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 444 0 17 13 474 5 1 Southbound 11 0 13 3 27 0 0 Eastbound 122 0 6 1 129 1 2 Westbound 1B5 0 6 1 192 2 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 397 0 31 11 439 4 1 Southbound 167 0 25 9 201 2 0 Eastbound 348 0 13 4 365 4 1 Westbound 460 0 12 4 476 5 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec B -39 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 840 Intersection: 19. Santa Barbara Dr & San Clemente Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 63 0 37 0 100 1 1 Southbound 716 0 8 0 724 7 0 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 65 0 0 0 65 1 6 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 384 0 20 0 404 4 1 Southbound 251 0 27 0 278 3 2 Eastbound 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Westbound 406 0 0 0 406 4 4 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 840 1 % Traffic Volume Analysis Stantec 841 Intersection: 20. Newport Center Dr & Santa Barbara Dr Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average Winter /Spring 2012 Peak 1 Hour Approved Cumulative Existing Regional Projects Projects Projected 1 %of Projected Project Approach Peak 1 Hour Growth Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Peak 1 Hour Direction Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume Volume AM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 247 0 9 3 259 3 1 Southbound 137 0 9 9 155 2 1 Eastbound 196 0 8 0 204 2 1 Westbound 21 0 19 0 40 0 0 Project AM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project AM Traffic is estimated to be 1% or greater of Projected AM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PM PEAK PERIOD Northbound 276 0 5 2 283 3 1 Southbound 329 0 5 4 338 3 0 Eastbound 253 0 27 0 280 3 1 Westbound 138 0 10 8 156 2 0 Project PM Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Project PM Traffic is estimated to be 1 % or greater of Projected PM Peak 1 Hour Traffic Volume. Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) Analysis is required. PROJECT: San Joaquin Plaza FULL OCCUPANCY YEAR: 2016 Stantec 841 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix E Water Supply Assessment T &B Planning, Inc. June 13, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915 June 13, 2012 H n r Prepared by: T &B Planning, Inc. Submitted By: :e e� - Geor Murd ch General Manager, Municipal Operations Department City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table of Contents 10 Section 11 Preface........................................................................................................................................... ............................... 2 ProjectDescription ..................................................................................................................... ............................... 2 Purpose of this Water Supply Assessment ........................................................................ ............................... 3 CEQACompliance Background ............................................................................................. ............................... 8 Findings........................................................................................................................................... ............................... 8 Summary of Existing and Projected Demand ................................................................... ............................... 10 WaterSupply Sources ............................................................................................................... ............................... 10 Imported Water from Metropolitan via the MWDOC .................................... ............................... 12 Groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin ......... ............................... 16 RecycledWater ............................................................................................................. ............................... 17 Reliabilityand Supply ................................................................................................................ ............................... 18 Water Conservation Programs and Requirements ......................................................... ............................... 19 Analysisand Conclusions ........................................................................................................ ............................... 21 Figures Figure1, Location Map ............................................................................................................. ............................... 6 Figure 2, Aerial Photograph of Existing Urban Setting ................................................. ............................... 7 Tables Table 1, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Projections ...................................... ............................... 10 Table 2, City of Newport Beach Water Demand by Source ........................................ ............................... 11 Table 3, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Percentage by Source ................ ............................... 11 Table 4, Metropolitan's Water Supply Capacity .............................................................. ............................... 13 Table 5, Historic Groundwater Supplies 2005- 2009 ...................................................... ............................... 15 Table 6, City of Newport Beach Projected Normal Year Water Supply and Demand ...................... 18 Table 7, City of Newport Beach Projected Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand ................ 19 Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Years Water Supply and Demand.......... 19 Table 9, Water Demand for 79 Multi - Family Residential Units ................................. ............................... 22 Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units ............................... ............................... 22 Table 11, Water Demand for430 Multi - Family Residential Units .............................. ............................... 22 Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand in San Joaquin Plaza ............................. ............................... 22 Table 13, Anticipated Water Demand Eliminated from Hotel Rooms .................... ............................... 23 Appendices City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Pagel City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Preface California Senate Bill 610 (Costa) and Senate Bill 221 (Kuehl) amended California State law effective January 1, 2002, to improve the link between information on water supply availability and certain land use decisions made by cities and counties. SB 610 and SB 221 are companion measures that promote more collaborative planning between local water suppliers and cities and counties. Both statutes require detailed information regarding water availability to be provided to the city and county decision - makers prior to approval of specified large development projects. Both statutes also require that this detailed information be included in the administrative record that serves as the evidentiary basis for an approval action by the city or county on such projects. The City of Newport Beach provides water service to the Project site evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment. Therefore, the Newport Beach City Council serves as the lead agency with authority to approve this Water Supply Assessment as well as the lead agency that will consider approval of the proposed Project described below.' Project Description The proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment is located in the City of Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Specifically, the subject property is located in the Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area 1-1), commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element describes the City's existing and planned development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and assigns maximum development limits (also called development "intensity') to specific locations. Specific areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations," where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU1 and LU2. The General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built development intensity. In February 2012, Irvine Company (hereafter "Project Applicant ") submitted an application to the City's Planning Division requesting that the development intensity allowed by the General Plan for 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll, Anomaly Location 43, be converted from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC). The Project Applicant also requests that 15 un -built multi - family residential units allowed by the General Plan in MU -H3 designated portions of Statistical Area Ll be specifically assigned to the NNCPC in San Joaquin Plaza. If the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment are approved by the City, a total of 94 additional residential units would be allowed in San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 2 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Under existing conditions, there is no residential development in San Joaquin Plaza, but 430 multi - family residential units are allowed there pursuant to the City's General Plan and the NNCPC Development Plan. With the addition of 94 units, the maximum number of multi - family residential units allowed in San Joaquin Plaza would increase from 430 to 524 units. No specific subdivision map or development project is proposed at this time. The proposed Project is limited to the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment and, in total, the vesting of 94 units of residential development intensity to San Joaquin Plaza (79 converted and transferred units and 15 units previously unassigned) and the reallocation of 430 multi - family residential units already allowed within the NNCPC's Block 500, Block 600, and the San Joaquin Plaza solely to the San Joaquin Plaza. In order for the Project Applicant's application to be approved, the City of Newport Beach would need to approve the following: 1) Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development intensity into the NNCPC; 2) Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of the Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza; 3) Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza; 4) Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities and allocations; 5) Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and 6) Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP). An exhibit showing the location of San Joaquin Plaza (outlined in red) in relation to the NNCPC (highlighted in yellow) is shown on Figure 1. Purpose of this Water Supply Assessment The purpose of this Water Supply Assessment (Assessment) is to satisfy the requirements under Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9 and Water Code Section 10910 et seq.) and Senate Bill 221 (Kuehl) (California Government Code Section 66473.7), which require that an assessment be conducted to demonstrate that adequate water supplies are or will be available to meet the water demand associated with proposed projects. SB 610 focuses on the content of a water supply agency's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). It also stipulates that, when an environmental impact report (EIR) is required in connection with a project, the appropriate water supply agency must provide an assessment of whether its total projected water supplies will meet projected water demand associated with the proposed project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 3 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Senate Bill 221 requires a water supply verification when a tentative map, parcel map, or development agreement for a project is submitted to a land use agency for approval. Senate Bill 221 applies to proposed residential developments of more than 500 dwelling units with some exceptions. Section 66473.7(1) exempts residential projects proposed on a site located within an urbanized area that has been previously developed for urban uses, or where the immediate contiguous properties surrounding the residential project site are, or previously have been, developed for urban uses. The San Joaquin Plaza is currently developed with multi- tenant commercial office land uses, surface parking lots, a parking structure, and ornamental landscaping. As shown on Figure 2, abutting the site on the Northwest is the Newport Beach Police Department, the Newport Beach Fire Department Station 3, and an automotive dealership. To the South is a commercial office building and the Orange County Museum of Art, beyond which and further to the South is the Fashion Island shopping mall. To the Southwest is a commercial office building and a rental apartment complex. To the Northeast, across San Joaquin Hills Road, is a single - family residential neighborhood. To the Southeast, across Santa Cruz Drive are multi- tenant office /commercial land uses, a hotel with 295 rooms presently operated as the Island Hotel, and several parking structures. As such, the City of Newport Beach is not required to issue a written water supply verification pursuant to Senate Bill 221 because the proposed Project site is in an urbanized area, is currently developed with urbanized uses, and is surrounded by urbanized uses. The City can still opt to issue a written verification, but the verification is not required because the Project site is currently developed with urban uses, is surrounded by developed urban uses, and the proposed Project is clearly an infill project. Senate Bill 610 applies to a proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units, or large commercial, industrial or mixed -use development. The need for a water supply assessment is determined by the lead agency for the project. For the proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment, the City of Newport Beach serves as the lead agency, which required that this Water Supply Assessment be prepared. In accordance with Water Code Section 10910(d) — (f), the Water Supply Assessment shall: 1) Identify any existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts relevant to the identified water supply for the proposed Project, and a description of the quantities of water received in prior years by the public water system, under existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts; 2) If no water has been received in prior years by the public water system, identify the other public water systems or water service contract holders that receive a water supply or have existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts to the same source of water as the public water system. 3) If groundwater is included in the proposed supply, identify the groundwater basin or basins from which the Proposed Project will be supplied; any applicable documentation of adjudicated rights to pump; if the basin is not adjudicated, whether the basin has been identified as over - drafted; a detailed description and analysis of the amount and NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 4 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT location of groundwater pumped by the public water system for the past five (5) years from any groundwater basin from which the proposed Project will be supplied; a detailed description and analysis of the amount and location of groundwater from the basin or basins from which the proposed Project will be supped to meet the projected water demand associated with the Proposed Project. Under existing conditions, the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC contains no residential units. However, the City's General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan currently allow for 430 multi - family residential units. Should the development intensity transfers requested by the Project Applicant be approved by the City of Newport Beach, 94 additional residential units would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza, bringing the maximum number of permitted multi- family residential dwelling units allowed in this area to 524 units. Although no specific development project to build these units is proposed at this time, because: 1) the number of permitted residential units in San Joaquin Plaza would exceed 500, 2) approval of the Project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and 3) San Joaquin Plaza is located in the NNCPC, which is the subject of a development agreement titled "Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and the Irvine Company Concerning North Newport Center," the City of Newport Beach, serving as lead agency, is required to conduct a Water Supply Assessment in compliance with Senate Bill 610 (Costa) (California Public Resources Code Section 21151.9). In addition to meeting the requirements of Senate Bill 610, this Water Supply Assessment also will be used by the City of Newport Beach as part of the proposed Project's environmental review process under CEQA. This Assessment evaluates water supplies that are or will be available during normal year, dry year, and multiple dry -year conditions over a 20 -year projection period, considering existing demands, expected demands from the proposed Project, and reasonably foreseeable future demands in geographic areas that are supplied water by the City of Newport Beach. This Assessment is a technical, informational, advisory opinion only. The information included is based on information available at the time this Assessment was prepared and changing circumstances could affect the water supply evaluation presented in this document. This Water Supply Assessment does not explicitly entitle the San Joaquin Plaza to receive additional water rights, water service, or any water rights or service priorities and allocations. It also does not affect the City's obligation to provide services to its existing water customers and future customers. City Council approval of this Water Supply Assessment is not an entitlement to water rights or service to San Joaquin Plaza, nor is it a commitment to serve the area with increased water service capacities and /or supplies. Because the proposed Project that is the subject of this Water Supply Assessment is limited to a request to vest permitted development intensity to San Joaquin Plaza and because no specific development project is proposed at this time, this Assessment is a general evaluation of water supply and is not an engineered analysis related to any particular or specific residential development project. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 5 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Figure 1, Location Map f Jo p U t•1� SMTACRUZI)R QO Q LE' '(y n frbvl /y C tl J 600 m 9 / •.NTAR08A00. fnoh.nn W.n� 9e,. YrfioO Nalel &a* 900 Ra�AewNy6t) Illn.M IGV Q S yE� �v 11^x` f uu V C/R N 0 Ca JQ LEGEND \ 0 Newport Center / Fashion Island (Statistical Area L7) C3 North Newport Center Planned Community =Manolti Hotel Block 900 C3 Proposed Project Site (San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNC PC) NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 6 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Figure 2, Aerial Photograph of Existing Urban Setting NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 7 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT CEQA Compliance Background In 2006, the City of Newport Beach approved an update to its General Plan and certified the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR (SCH No. 2006011119) as adequately addressing the potential environmental impacts associated with planned buildout of the City of Newport Beach, inclusive of the property encompassing the NNCPC and San Joaquin Plaza. Section 4.14 of the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR addressed "Utilities and Service Systems," including the topic of water supply. The Final Program EIR concluded, based on substantial evidence cited in the EIR and the City's Administrative Record for the EIR, that with the implementation of mandatory regulatory requirements applicable General Plan goals and policies, impacts associated with water supplies would be less than significant. Similarly, Addendum No. 1 to the General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR, which addressed City adoption of the NNCPC Development Plan and related actions, concluded that water supply impacts would be less than significant with adherence to regulatory requirements and the General Plan. The General Plan 2006 Update Final Program EIR relied on the City of Newport Beach's 2005 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). UWMPs are required by Senate Bill 610 and serve as important source documents for cities and counties as they update their General Plans. Conversely, General Plans are used as source documents as water suppliers update their UWMPs. The City of Newport Beach General Plan and UWMP are linked and their accuracy and usefulness are interdependent. As discussed later in this document, the City of Newport Beach published an updated UWMP in 2010, which is currently pending final approval by the California Department of Water Resources. Because the proposed Project involves a request to transfer development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan from one location to another location, the City's General Plan and 2010 UWMP are used as a primary reference documents in this Water Supply Assessment. Findi The Project involves the proposed conversion of permitted development intensity for 79 un- built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential units and the transfer of those 79 units and the assignment of an additional 15 un -built units of residential development intensity permitted by the General Plan to the San Joaquin Plaza area of the NNCPC. If the Project is approved, the Project Applicant would have entitlement to construct up to 524 multi - family residential units in San Joaquin Plaza (the 79 transferred units, 15 assigned units, plus 430 units already allocated to the NNCPC). Future residential development in San Joaquin Plaza, if and when it is proposed, would be subject to the development standards, design guidelines, and administration procedures required by the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for activities within its boundaries, including San Joaquin Plaza. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 8 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Water demand for the City of Newport Beach, including anticipated demand associated with buildout of the City's General Plan (inclusive of the NNCPC), is included in the water demand forecasts identified in the City's 2010 UWMP and within the planning documents of water districts, authorities, and agencies that directly or indirectly supply and /or manage the City's water supplies. These include the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (hereafter, "Metropolitan "), the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). As such, water demand and supply evaluations conducted by Metropolitan, MWDOC, OCWD, as well as the City of Newport Beach itself are directly applicable to the proposed Project. Given the characteristics of the Project (the proposed conversion and transfer of development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan from one location to another location (79 units) and the assignment of previously unassigned development intensity (15 units) to a specific property in Newport Center, the primary subject of this Water Supply Assessment is to determine if the City has adequate water supplies to serve 79 multi - family residential units instead of 79 hotel rooms, and to confirm that water supplies are available to serve 524 residential units in San Joaquin Plaza (94 additional residential units (79 +15) and the 430 units already permitted). As set forth in this Water Supply Assessment, the City's water supply comes from three sources: 1) imported water from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC, 2) local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin by wells owned and operated by the City and managed by the OCWD, and 3) recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project (GAP). As such, the analysis and conclusions reached herein rely exclusively on the water supply projections and reliability information contained in the following documents: a) Newport Beach, 2011. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. May 2011. b) Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Regional Urban Water Management Plan. November 2010. c) Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan. June 2011. d) Orange County Water District, 2009. Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. July 9, 2010. In the four documents listed above, the City of Newport Beach, Metropolitan, MWDOC, and OCWD all conclude that there are sufficient water supply capacities to serve their respective service areas through year 2035, including projected water demand in the City of Newport Beach associated with buildout of the city's General Plan. As discussed in more detail in the "Analysis and Conclusions" section of this document, this Water Supply Assessment concludes NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 9 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve the proposed Project (the addition of 94 units of development intensity and a maximum overall development intensity of 524 units in San Joaquin Plaza) for the next 20 years. Summary of Existing and Projected Demand The City of Newport Beach provides water service to a population of approximately 67,000 throughout its 35.77 square mile service area. Based on data available in the City of Newport Beach's 2010 UWMP, the total 2010 water demand for retail customers served by the City was approximately 16,645 acre -feet per year (AFY) .2 Between 2005 and 2010, the City's water demand decreased by about 5 percent while population increased by 1.5 percent. This illustrates the City's proactive efforts in promoting water use efficiency. In addition to documenting existing demand, the UWMP also calculates the City's future water demand, using population and land use buildout assumptions from the City's General Plan. Water demand projections for years 2005 to 2035 by land use type are given in the table below. Table 1, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Projections Fiscal Water Demand by Water Use Sectors (AFY) Year Ending Single Multi- Family Commercial /Industrial Institutional is. LandseW is Total Demand 2005 7,482 2,597 3,300 734 3,719 17,831 2010 7,297 2,308 2,960 370 3,710 16,645 2015 7,258 2,300 2,947 378 4,140 17,023 2020 7,411 2,348 3,009 386 4,268 17,422 2025 7,565 2,397 3,072 394 4,346 17,774 2030 7,718 2,446 3,134 402 4,424 18,124 2035 7,872 2,494 3,196 410 4,502 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 2 -4. Water Supply Sources The City of Newport Beach receives its water from three sources: 1) Imported water from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC, 2) Local groundwater stored in the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater basin, which is managed by the OCWD and based on basin pumping percentages (BPP) drawn from four (4) active wells owned and operated by the City of Newport Beach, and 3) Recycled water from the OCWD's Green Acres Project (GAP).3 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 10 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT The City's UWMP projects that water demand in the City of Newport Beach will increase by 11% over the 25 period of 2010 — 2035, to 18,474 acre -feet by 2035 as shown on the following table and listed by the source of supply." Table 2, City of Newport Beach Water Demand by Source Water Supply Sources Fiscal Year Ending 2010 2015 2020 2025 MWDOC (Imported Treated Full Service (non- int.)) 6,161 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 BPP Groundwater 10,052 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 432 450 500 500 500 500 Total 16,645 1 17,023 1 17,422 1 17,774 18,124 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 2 -9. As shown in the graph below, in 2010 the City's total water demand of 16,645 acre -feet was supplied by approximately 37% imported water, 60% local groundwater, and 3% recycled water.' These percentages are expected to remain relatively the same though 2035. Table 3, City of Newport Beach Water Demand Percentage by Source 100% sox sou Yox sox sox .on lox lox 10% 0x 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 P Y.. En , ■M IXX S PPG,..ndw ■AII9a dWtler NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 11 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT The City's three (3) main sources of water supply are described below. 1. Imported Water from Metropolitan via the MWDOC Overview The City of Newport Beach relies on imported water wholesaled by Metropolitan through the MWDOC. Metropolitan's principal sources of water originate from two sources - the Colorado River via the Colorado Aqueduct and the Lake Oroville watershed in Northern California through the State Water Project (SWP). This imported water is treated at the Robert B. Diemer Filtration Plant located north of Yorba Linda. Typically, the Diemer Filtration Plant receives a blend of Colorado River water from Lake Mathews through the Metropolitan Lower Feeder and SWP water through the Yorba Linda Feeder. The City of Newport Beach has six (6) connections to the imported water system along the Orange County Feeder and the East Orange County Feeder No. 2. The total available capacity is 104 cubic feet per second (cfs). Supply Capacity and Reliability — Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) reports on water supply reliability and identifies projected supplies to meet the long -term demand within its service area. It presents Metropolitan's demand and supply capacities from 2015 through 2035 under three hydrologic conditions: average year, single dry-year, and multiple dry- years. Additionally, Metropolitan completed an updated Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) in 2010 that reports on water use efficiency measures and local resource developments that are projected to meet future water needs. Metropolitan also publishes annual reports that provide information about water supplies, water initiatives, and resource management and operations in addition to other topics. The most recent annual report available is for 2011. Metropolitan receives its water supplies from three (3) primary sources: the Colorado River Aqueduct, the State Water Project, and Storage. Colorado River Supplies A number of water agencies within California have rights to divert water from the Colorado River. Metropolitan is one of those agencies. The water is delivered to Metropolitan's service area by way of the Colorado River Aqueduct, which has a capacity of nearly 1.3 million AFY. The Aqueduct conveys water 242 miles from its Lake Havasu intake to its terminal reservoir, Lake Mathews, near the city of Riverside. Metropolitan is appropriated 550,000 AFY of Colorado River Water per an agreement with the federal Bureau of Reclamation. Up to an additional 842,000 AFY are available to Metropolitan when there is surplus water or when water remains unused by Arizona, Nevada, and higher priority users in California. Metropolitan is party to several agreements regarding the supply, delivery, transfer, and conservation of water from the Aqueduct.6 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 12 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Fiscal year 2010111 began with concerns of prolonged drought conditions in the Colorado Basin. However, the winter of 2010111 saw record - breaking snowfall in much of the Colorado River Basin which substantially raised water levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead. The increased storage has postponed the risk of shortage for several years and increased the chance that surplus water could be made available to Metropolitan in the near future .7 State Water Project The State Water Project (SWP), which is owned by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), is the second source of Metropolitan's imported water supplies. The SWP conveys water from Northern California to the north and south of the San Francisco Bay Area and areas south of the Bay Delta region. That water, along with all additional unused water from the watershed, flows into the Sacramento /San Joaquin Delta. Water from the Delta is then either pumped to water users in the San Francisco Bay area or transported through the California Aqueduct to water users in Central and Southern California. The amount of entitlement DWR approves for delivery varies annually with contractor demands and projected water supplies from tributary sources to the Delta, based on snowpack in the Sierra Nevada, reservoir storage, operational constraints, and demands of other water users. Historically, the SWP has been able to meet all of its contractors' requests for entitlement water except in a few years when there was a shortage. The most recent shortage occurred in 2007 -09, requiring Metropolitan to draft water from its storage supplies; but, a combination of improved SWP supplies and continued investments in water conservation and recycling have allowed Metropolitan to meet demands while also reducing its requirements for SWP water in recent years. Going forward, a primary factor affecting the future reliability and supply of SWP water is the listing of several fish species in the Sacramento /San Joaquin Delta (Delta) under both state and federal Endangered Species Acts. Future SWP deliveries will continue to be impacted by restrictions placed on SWP and Central Valley Project (CVP) Delta pumping required by the biological opinions issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (December 2008) and National Marine Fisheries Service (June 2009).8 SBx7 -7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), "The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 ", was signed into law on February 3, 2010, as part of a comprehensive statewide water legislation package to reduce pumping out of the San Francisco Bay Delta. The bill sets a goal of achieving a 20% statewide reduction in urban per capita water use, which is being complied with in Newport Beach through local water conservation efforts discussed below under "Water Conservation Programs and Requirements." NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 13 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Storage A key component of Metropolitan's water supply capability is the amount of water in Metropolitan's storage facilities. Storage is a major component of Metropolitan's dry- year resource management strategy. Metropolitan is party to numerous voluntary Central Valley storage and transfer programs, aiming to develop additional dry-year water supplies. To date, Metropolitan's Central Valley /SWP storage programs consist of partnerships with Central Valley agricultural districts. These partnerships allow Metropolitan to store its SWP supplies during wetter years for return in future drier years. Metropolitan's Central Valley transfer programs include partnerships with Sacramento Valley Central Valley Project (CVP) and SWP settlement contractors. They allow Metropolitan to purchase water in drier years for delivery via the California Aqueduct to Metropolitan's service area .9 The end -of -year storage for calendar year 2011 was approximately 2.5 million AF, the highest level of dry -year storage reserves in Metropolitan's history. These increases improve Metropolitan's supply and demand outlook for future years.io Metropolitan's RUWMP concludes that Metropolitan has supply capabilities that are sufficient to meet expected water demands from 2015 through 2035 under the single dry-year and multiple dry-year conditions, as charted below in Table 4. As shown, imported water supplies from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City of Newport Beach by the MWDOC, is a reliable source of water through at least 2035. In the event of a water shortage, Metropolitan has comprehensive plans for stages of actions it would undertake to address up to a 50 percent reduction in its water supplies and a catastrophic interruption in water supplies through its Water Surplus and Drought Management and Water Supply Allocation Plans. Metropolitan also developed an Emergency Storage Requirement to mitigate against potential interruption in water supplies resulting from catastrophic occurrences within the Southern California region, including seismic events along the San Andreas fault. In addition, Metropolitan is working with the State of California to implement a comprehensive improvement plan to address catastrophic occurrences that could occur outside of the Southern California region, such as a maximum probable seismic event in the Delta that would cause levee failure and disruption of SWP deliveries." NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 14 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 4, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California's Projected Water Supply Capacity 45 4.0 3.5 3.0 Million 2.5 Acre -Feet per Year 2,0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 mimasss Supply Capability Single DrpYeor ss_ Supply Capability Muhiple Dry Years — Total Demands on Metropolitan Single Dry-Year Told Dentonds on Metropolitan Multiple Dry -Years Source: Metropolitan Water District of Southern California 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan, Figure ES -1 Supply Capacity and Reliability — Municipal Water District of Orange County MWDOC is a member agency of Metropolitan and a regional water wholesaler and resource planning agency. It receives imported water from Metropolitan and then wholesales that water to its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach. MWDOC's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan ( RUWMP) addresses the water demand and supplies for all of Orange County, except for the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana, which are not MWDOC member agencies. The regional approach to urban water management planning via the RUWMP allows MWDOC to provide a comprehensive assessment of water resource needs in its service area, but also coordinate the implementation of water conservation programs and determine how to maximize the beneficial use of recycled water and local groundwater supplies, providing the region with new sources of local water to reduce the need for imported supplies from the Metropolitan. As a wholesaler, MWDOC develops and implements regional water use efficiency and water conservation programs on behalf of its retail water agencies and their customers, including the City of Newport Beach. The RUWMP concludes that the MWDOC service area will have sufficient existing and planned supplies from Metropolitan, groundwater, surface water, and recycled water to meet full service demands under average year, dry year, and multi dry year scenarios from 2015 through 203512 During water shortages, MWDOC works with its member agencies to manage the water supply in the region to ensure it meets the demands of its member agencies. During a severe water NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 15 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT shortage (Stage 7 supply reduction as defined in Metropolitan's Water Surplus and Drought Management [WSDM] Plan), the MWDOC Board is responsible for allocating imported water from Metropolitan according to a specific formula.13 2. Groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin The City of Newport Beach uses approximately 10,000 acre -feet of groundwater annually, drawn from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin (Orange County Basin). As of 2010, this local source of supply met approximately 60% of the City's total annual demand. The Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin underlies the north half of Orange County, covering an area of approximately 350 square miles, and is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). The OCWD manages the Basin's water supplies pursuant to a Groundwater Management Plan, the most recent update of which was published in 2009. The 2009 OCWD Groundwater Management Plan addresses several topics, including but not limited to: 1) Basin hydrogeology; 2) groundwater monitoring; 3) groundwater recharge; 4) groundwater quality management; and 5) efforts to protect water supplies and water quality.14 OCWD reports that although the amount of recharge and total pumping from the Basin may not be the same each year, over the long -term the amount of recharge needs to be similar to total pumping.15 The Basin is assured an adequate supply of water by a managed recharge system fed by natural recharge (rainfall and infiltration), water from the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek, water released into the Santa Ana River at Prado Dam by the Western Municipal Water District, and imported and supplemental water released into recharge basins by Metropolitan, San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, and from the Arlington Desalter.16 The Santa Ana River is the largest coastal stream in southern California with a length of 80 miles and a drainage area of 2,470 square miles. OCWD has legal rights to and permits from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to collect and store water from the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek. OCWD operates 1,067 acres of recharge facilities located in and adjacent to the Santa Ana River and Santiago Creek .17 The City of Newport Beach obtains groundwater pumped from four (4) wells owned and operated by the City and managed by OCWD. Groundwater production from these wells from 2005 to 2009 is shown below. During certain seasons of 2005, 2006, and 2007, OCWD operated an In -lieu program with Metropolitan by purchasing water from Metropolitan to meet demands of member agencies rather than pumping water from the groundwater basin. In 2008 and 2009, OCWD did not utilize in -lieu water because such water was not available to purchase from Metropolitan.l8 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 16 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 5, Historic Groundwater Supplies 2005 -2009 Basin Name(s) Fiscal Year Ending 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 BPP GW 4,984 3,446 3,605 14,338 11,309 10,047 9,574 In -Lieu for OCWS 6,652 7,682 8,553 -- -- -- -- Subtotal OCWD Basin GW 11,636 11,228 12,158 14,338 11,309 10,047 9,574 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -6 for years 2005 -2009; City of Newport Beach Water Production Division for years 2010 -2011. The City's wells are located in the City of Fountain Valley, approximately five (5) miles north of the City. The only constraints affecting groundwater supply to the City of Newport Beach are the pumping capacity of the wells and pumping limitations established by OCWD to maintain the groundwater basin.19 Each year the OCWD determines the optimum level of water storage for the following year. The primary mechanism used by OCWD to manage pumping is the Basin Production Percentage (BPP), defined as "the ratio that all water to be produced from groundwater supplies with the district bears to all water to be produced by persons and operators within the District from supplemental sources as well as from groundwater within the District." In other words, the BPP is a percentage of each producer's water supply that comes from groundwater pumped from the basin. The BPP is set uniformly for all producers 20 OCWD uses a pricing approach that serves to discourage, but not eliminate, production above the BPP. Raising or lowering the BPP allows the District to manage the amount of pumping from the basin. The BPP is lowered when basin conditions necessitate a decrease in pumping. A lower BPP results in the need for Producers to purchase additional, more expensive imported water from Metropolitan 21 In summary, Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin serves as a safe, reliable buffer, sufficient source of groundwater for the City of Newport Beach. OCWD manages recharge of the Basin and implements measures that encourage withdraw amounts that secure the Basin's water supply.22 Additionally, the Groundwater Replenishment System jointly implemented by the OCWD and the Orange County Sanitation District secures stability of the groundwater basin by taking highly treated wastewater otherwise released into the ocean and purifies it to augment groundwater supplies. 3. Recycled Water The City of Newport Beach participates in a reclaimed /recycled water program and uses recycled water supplies available to irrigate greenbelts, parkways, golf courses, and other landscape areas that may otherwise use potable water. This reclaimed /recycled water is wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project (GAP). In 2009/10, usage of recycled water within the City's Water Utility service area was about 400 acre feet. Recycled water usage meets approximately 3% of the City's water demand. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 17 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT As reported by the OCWD, the region collects nearly 313,000 AF of wastewater per year and 35% of that wastewater is used for recycled water supply. That the amount of recycled water supply will increase in the future. The amount of wastewater is expected to grow to approximately 440,000 AFY in 2035, with 37% expected to be treated for recycled use. As stated by the MWDOC, recycled water is a significant, reliable source of supply.23 Reliability of Supply in Normal Year, Single Dry Year and Multiple Dry Year Conditions Every urban water supplier is required to assess the reliability to provide water service to its customers under normal, dry, and multiple dry years. As stated above, the City is assured a reliability of supply from Metropolitan as wholesaled to the City by the MWDOC (Imported), local groundwater pumped from the Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin managed by the OCWD (BPP Groundwater), and recycled water wholesaled by OCWD through its GAP (Recycled Water). The RUWMPs of Metropolitan and MWDOC document a reliable supply through year 2035. Additionally OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan documents a reliable supply of groundwater through 2035. The tables below show supply and demand for the City of Newport Beach under normal year, dry year, and multiple dry year conditions. Because water supplies are projected to be available from all sources (Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD), supply and demand numbers are identica1.24 Table 6, City of Newport Beach Projected Normal Water Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 18 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 Total Supply 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -16. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 18 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 7, City of Newport Beach Projected Single Dry Year Water Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -17. Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -17. Table 8, City of Newport Beach Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -18. Water Conservation Proqrams and Requirements MWDOC Water Conservation Programs MWDOC works with its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, on water use efficiency programs. In terms of water management, MWDOC became a signatory to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1991, monitored by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), which outlines 14 Best Management Practices (BMP) for urban NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 19 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 First Year Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Supply Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Second Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Third Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Source: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Table 3 -18. Water Conservation Proqrams and Requirements MWDOC Water Conservation Programs MWDOC works with its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, on water use efficiency programs. In terms of water management, MWDOC became a signatory to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1991, monitored by the California Urban Water Conservation Council (CUWCC), which outlines 14 Best Management Practices (BMP) for urban NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 19 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT water use efficiency. The urban water use efficiency practices are intended to reduce long -term urban demands from what they would have been without implementation of these practices, and are in addition to programs that may be instituted during occasional water supply shortages 25 City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance A Water Conservation Ordinance was adopted by the Newport Beach City Council in 2009 and is included in the City's municipal code as Chapter 14.16, "Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations." The Ordinance creates a Water Conservation and Supply Shortage Program that established four levels of water supply shortage response actions to be implemented during times of declared water shortage. Additionally, the City of Newport Beach has been a signatory to the California Urban Water Conservation Council's (CUWCC) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) since August 2005 and implements Demand Management Measures (DMMs) to satisfy the requirements of MOU Section 10631 (f) & 0). Many DMMs also are administered by the MWDOC on behalf of its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach. SBx7 -7 (Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session), "The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 ", was signed into law on February 3, 2010, as part of a comprehensive statewide water legislation package in response to legal action brought by the National Resources Defense Council to reduce pumping out of the San Francisco Bay Delta. The bill sets a goal of achieving a 20% statewide reduction in urban per capita water use, and directs urban retail water suppliers to develop targets to meet a 20% reduction in per capita water use by 2020, and an interim 10% reduction by 2015. As the wholesale water supplier to the City of Newport Beach and other member agencies, MWDOC is not required to establish and meet these reduction targets. MWDOC's role in implementing the legislation is to assist each retail water supplier in analyzing the requirements and establishing their baseline and target water use, as guided by the California Department of Water Resources.26 The retail agency may choose to comply with SBx7 -7 as an individual or as a region in collaboration with other water suppliers. MWDOC and 26 of its member agencies, including the City of Newport Beach, as well as the cities of Anaheim, Fullerton, and Santa Ana have created the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance in an effort to help these agencies meet the water use reduction targets required by SBx7 -7. With MWDOC's assistance, the City of Newport Beach selected to comply with Option 1 of the SBx7 -7 compliance options, which requires a 20% reduction from baseline water usage by 2020 and 10% by 2015. The City's baseline, calculated from the ten year period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2005, is 253 gallons per capita per day (GPCD). Thus, the City's 2015 interim water use target is 228.1 GPCD and the 2020 final water use target is 202.8 GPCD .27 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 20 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT and Conclusions The proposed Project evaluated in this Water Supply Assessment is a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in the City of Newport Beach's Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units' and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. The proposed Project also involves assigning previously unassigned development intensity for 15 un -built multi - family residential units permitted by the General Plan in MU -H3 designated areas to the NNCPC in San Joaquin Plaza. If the requested development intensity conversion, transfer, and assignment is approved by the City of Newport Beach, a total of 524 units would be permitted in San Joaquin Plaza (94 additional residential units and 430 units already permitted by the General Plan and NNCPC Development Plan). Buildout of the City of Newport Beach's General Plan was considered in the water demand projections calculated by Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD. Therefore, Metropolitan's Regional Urban Water Management Plan. (2010), MWDOC's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2011), and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update evaluate the supply that would be required to service the 430 residential units already permitted in San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un -built units allowed by the General Plan that are proposed to be assigned to San Joaquin Plaza. Metropolitan, MWDOC and OCWD all conclude that there will be adequate supplies in the average year, dry year, and multiple dry year scenarios through 2035. Therefore, Metropolitan's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2010), MWDOC's Regional Urban Water Management Plan (2011), and OCWD's Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update evaluate the supply that would be required to service the 430 residential units already permitted in San Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un -built units allowed by the General Plan that are proposed to be assigned to San Joaquin Plaza. Thus, the focus of this Assessment primarily involves the proposed conversion of 79 hotel units to 79 multi - family residential units, and whether supplies are sufficient to service 524 units of multi - family residential development that would be vested to the location of San Joaquin Plaza. The water demand for this Project is calculated below for planning purposes only. This estimate is for planning purposes and shall not be construed as guaranteed water rights for the project. Actual water use would likely be reduced through water conservation programs being implemented in the City of Newport Beach and the continued use of recycled water where possible. The demand calculation is based on 228.1 GPCD, which is the City's target goal for year 2015. Because no specific development project is proposed as part of the Project, this Assessment assumes that the number of persons expected to reside in each multi - family residential is 2.19 persons per household, which is the average number of persons per household cited in the General Plan EIR. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 21 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 9, Water Demand for 79 Multi - Family Residential Units (not considered by the General Plan) Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Units /Population Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi- Family 524/1,148 Residential 79 units /173 228.1 39,463 44.20 Units persons Table 10, Water Demand for 15 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Table 11, Water Demand for 430 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Units /Population I Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential 15 units /33 228.1 7,527 8.43 Units persons Table 11, Water Demand for 430 Multi - Family Residential Units (considered by the General Plan) Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand Proiected in San Joaquin Plaza Units /Population Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi- Family 524/1,148 Residential 430 units /942 228.1 214,870 240.58 Units persons Table 12, Total Residential Water Demand Proiected in San Joaquin Plaza As mentioned above, the proposed Project involves a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Therefore, this analysis also calculates the projected demand reduction associated with the elimination of 79 hotel rooms. Water use in hotels is highly dependent on occupancy rate, the number of persons occupying each room, the water conservation features incorporated into the hotel building, the water conservation operational practices of the hotel's management and the amount of water conservation practiced by hotel guests. In the City of Newport Beach, the MWDOC encourages water use reduction conservation programs for hotels in its service area, which has some effect on water use reduction. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the water demand of a hotel room equates to the same demand as a residential unit housing one (1) person. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 22 Units Gallons /Day /Capita Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Multi - Family 524/1,148 Residential Units persons 2281 261,858 293.2 As mentioned above, the proposed Project involves a request to convert permitted development intensity associated with 79 un -built hotel rooms in Statistical Area Ll from "hotel rooms" to "multi- family residential units" and transfer those units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC. Therefore, this analysis also calculates the projected demand reduction associated with the elimination of 79 hotel rooms. Water use in hotels is highly dependent on occupancy rate, the number of persons occupying each room, the water conservation features incorporated into the hotel building, the water conservation operational practices of the hotel's management and the amount of water conservation practiced by hotel guests. In the City of Newport Beach, the MWDOC encourages water use reduction conservation programs for hotels in its service area, which has some effect on water use reduction. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that the water demand of a hotel room equates to the same demand as a residential unit housing one (1) person. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 22 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Table 13, Anticipated Water Demand Eliminated from Hotel Rooms (considered by the General Plan) Comparing Table 9 and Table 13, the proposed Project would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY. Based on the information contained in this Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (2011) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. These further reductions are not reflected in the calculated water demands above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 23 Rooms Gallons /Day /Unit Gallons /Day Acre- Feet/Year Hotel Rooms - 79/ -79 persons 228.1 - 18,019 -20.18 Comparing Table 9 and Table 13, the proposed Project would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY. Based on the information contained in this Water Supply Assessment regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (2011) and the City of Newport Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year, single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. These further reductions are not reflected in the calculated water demands above. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 23 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT Consultant Tracy Zinn, AICP, Principal T &B Planning, Inc. 17542 East 17`h Street, Suite 100 Tustin, CA 92780 City of Newport Beach George Murdoch; General Manager, Municipal Operations Department Kathryne Cho; Junior Engineer, Public Works Department ENDNOTES 1 California Department of Water Resources, 2003. Guidebook for Implementation of Senate Bill 610 and Senate Bill 221 of 200. Page iii. October 8, 2003. 2 Ibid. 3 Newport Beach, 2011. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov/ Modules /ShowDocument.aspx ?documentid= 10182. Pagel. May 2011. 4 Ibid. Page 2 -10 and Table 2 -9. 5 Ibid. Page 2 -10. 6 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http: / /www.mwdh2o.com /mwdh2o /pages /yourwater /RUWMP /RUWMP 2010.Pddf. Pages A.2 -12 to 13. November 2010. 7 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2011. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Annual Report 2011. Available online at htto: / /www.mwdh2o.com /mwdh2o /oaoes /about /ar /arll.htmi. Pages 27 -29. 8 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2010. Page 2 -15. 9 Ibid. Section 3.3 10 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, 2011. Pages 7 -10. 11 Ibid. Page ES -5. 12 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. 2010 Final Regional Urban Water Management Plan. Available online at http:// www .mwdoc.com /filesgallery /MWDOC Final 2010 RUWMP.pddf. Page 2. April 2011. 13 Ibid. Page 6. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 24 City of Newport Beach WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT 14 Orange County Water District, 2009. Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update. Available online at http: / /www.ocwd.com/ Publications - -- Reports /ca- 43.aspx. Pgs. ES -1 to ES -17. July 9, 2010. 15 Ibid. Page 4 -1. 16 Ibid. Page 4 -11. Table 4 -2. 17 Ibid. Page 4 -1. 18 Ibid. 19 Newport Beach, 2011. Page 3 -13. 20 Orange County Water District, 2009. Section 6.7 21 Ibid. 22 Ibid. Section 6. 23 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. Page ES -5. 24 Newport Beach, 2011. Pages 3 -18 to 3 -19. 25 Municipal Water District of Orange County, 2011. Page 1 -6. 26 Ibid. Pages 3 to 4. 27 Newport Beach, 2011. Pages 2 -6 to 2 -8. NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 13, 2012 Page 25 APPENDIX A— City of Newport Beach Water Conservation Ordinance NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE Chapter 14.16 WATER CONSERVATION AND SUPPLY LEVEL REGULATIONS* Sections: 14.16.010 Findings and Purpose. 14.16.020 Definitions. 14.16.030 Applicability. 14.16.040 Permanent Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. 14.16.050 Procedure for Declaration of Water Supply Shortage — Continued Monitoring of Conditions. 14.16.060 Level One Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. 14.16.070 Level Two Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. 14.16.080 Level Three Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. 14.16.090 Level Four Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. 14.16.100 Exemptions. 14.16.110 Relief from Compliance. 14.16.120 Enforcement. * Prior ordinance history Ords. 794, 1755, 91 -17, 92 -31 and 96 -22. 14.16.010 Findings and Purpose. A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish a water conservation and supply shortage program that, to the greatest extent possible, will reduce water consumption within the City of Newport Beach, enable effective water supply planning, assure reasonable and beneficial use of water, prevent waste of water, maximize the efficient use of water and minimize the effect and hardship of water shortage. B. The water conservation and supply shortage program created by this chapter establishes permanent water conservation requirements intended to alter behavior related to water use efficiency for non - shortage conditions and further establishes four levels of water supply shortage response actions to be implemented during times of declared water shortage. C. The City Council finds as follows: 1. A reliable minimum supply of water is essential to the public health, safety and welfare of the people and economy of the Southern California region. 2. Southern California is a semi -arid region and is largely dependent upon imported water supplies. A growing population, climate change, environmental concerns and other factors in other parts of the state and western United States make the region highly susceptible to water supply reliability issues. 3. Careful water management that includes active water conservation measures, not only in times of drought but at all times, is essential to ensure a reliable minimum supply of water to meet current and future supply needs. 4. Article X, Section 2, of the California Constitution declares that the general welfare requires that water resources be put to beneficial use, that waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable method of use of water is prevented and that conservation of water be fully exercised with a view to the reasonable and beneficial use thereof. 5. Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution declares that a city or county may make and enforce within its limits all local, police, sanitary and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws. 6. California Water Code Section 375 authorizes a water supplier to adopt and enforce a comprehensive water conservation program to reduce water consumption and conserve supplies. 7. The adoption and enforcement of the water conservation and supply shortage program is necessary to manage the City's water supply in the short and long term and to avoid or minimize the effects of a supply shortage within the City's service area. Such a program is essential to ensure a reliable and sustainable minimum supply of water for public health, safety and welfare. 8. Recycled water is supplied in various areas throughout the City to conserve potable water. Recycled water, like potable water, must be used efficiently and is therefore included in this program. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.020 Definitions. In this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the following meanings: "Base amount" means a base amount of water usage per billing period to be determined for each customer. For any particular billing period, the base amount shall be as indicated on the customer's municipal services statement for the prior billing cycle. For customers occupying premises for which the City's water billing history is more than three years, the base amount shall be the three -year moving average, which is calculated by the City for each water customer. For customers occupying premises for which the City's water billing history is less than three years, the base amount shall be the estimate of the water usage per billing period of similar premises and users. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in calculating the base amount, the base amount shall exclude any billing periods during which water consumption restrictions were in effect. "Billing period" means the period of time for which the City calculates monthly water service rates for a particular customer under Section 14.12.020. "City" shall mean the City of Newport Beach. "City Council" shall mean the City Council of the City of Newport Beach. "Commercial kitchen" means a facility containing a kitchen in which food is prepared for sale, such as a restaurant, cafe, hotel, catering establishment, or other food preparation establishment. "Customer' shall mean any person using or receiving water service from the City. The term "customer" shall not include a person receiving water service within the City from the Irvine Ranch Water District or from the Mesa Consolidated Water District. "Department of Public Health" shall mean the Orange County Department of Health. "Excessive flow or runoff" shall mean frequent and /or large amounts of runoff from irrigation and /or other outdoor water use. "Fire Marshall" shall mean the City of Newport Beach's Fire Marshall or his or her designee. "Fuel modification zone" shall mean combustible native or ornamental vegetation that has been modified and partially or totally replaced with drought - tolerant, fire- retardant plants and maintained per Fire Code guidelines. "Implementation plan" shall mean the plan developed by the Utilities Director that provides the resources (staffing and equipment) required to ensure the fair and timely execution of these requirements, as well as a detailed execution strategy. "Irrigate" means any exterior application of water, other than for firefighting purposes, including but not limited to the watering of any vegetation whether it be natural or planted. "Landscape irrigation system" means an irrigation system with pipes, hoses, spray heads, or sprinkling devices that are operated by and /or through an automated system. "MET" shall mean the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. "Person" shall have the meaning ascribed to it by Section 1.08.120. "Potable water" means water that is suitable for drinking and excludes recycled water from any source. "Premises" means a parcel of land, or portion of a parcel, including any improvements located there, that are served by a City water meter. "Recirculating" means the reuse of existing water, by means of capturing /containing water used, then circulating back to point of origin. "Recycled water" means the reclamation and reuse of nonpotable water and /or wastewater for beneficial use, such as irrigation. "Safety /sanitary hazards" means the condition that may cause or threaten to cause injury to any person or persons. "Single -pass cooling system" means equipment where water is circulated only once to cool equipment before being disposed. "Utilities Director" shall mean the Director of the City of Newport Beach's Utilities Department or his or her designee. "Water" shall mean potable water and recycled water. "Water- conserving kitchen spray valve" means a dishwashing spray valve that uses 1.6 gallons of water or less per minute of use. "Water conservation plan" means a plan submitted by a customer for the approval of the Utilities Director, in conjunction with a request for an exemption or partial exemption, that proposes the maximum feasible reduction in consumption. "Water consumption restrictions" shall mean those provisions in this chapter that require customers to reduce the amount of water consumed during a water supply shortage in relation to the base amount. "Water supply shortage" means the effective period of time during which the City Council, by resolution adopted under Section 14.16.050, has declared the existence of a water supply shortage or threatened shortage. The City Council, depending on the severity of conditions, may declare a Level One, Level Two, Level Three, or Level Four water supply shortage. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.030 Applicability. A. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all persons using water in the City. B. For the purposes of this chapter, the use of water by a tenant, employee, agent, contractor, representative or person acting on behalf of a customer, may, at the City's election, be imputed to the customer. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.040 Permanent Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. The following prohibitions and mandatory water conservation requirements are effective at all times, including during a water supply shortage. Violations of this section will be considered waste and an unreasonable use of water. A. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate any lawn and /or ornamental landscape area using a landscape irrigation system or a watering device that is not continuously attended unless such irrigation is limited to no more than fifteen (15) minutes' watering per day per station. 1. This restriction does not apply to the following unless the City has determined that recycled water is available and may be lawfully applied to the use. a. Landscape irrigation systems that exclusively use very low flow drip type irrigation systems in which no emitter produces more than two gallons of water per hour or weather - based controllers or stream rotor sprinklers that meet a seventy (70) percent efficiency standard. B. No person shall use water to irrigate any lawn and /or ornamental landscape area in a manner that causes or allows excessive flow or runoff onto an adjoining sidewalk, driveway, street, alley, gutter or ditch. C. No person shall use water to wash down hard or paved surfaces, including, but not limited to, sidewalks, walkways, driveways, parking areas, tennis courts, patios or alleys, except when necessary to alleviate safety or sanitary hazards, and then only by use of a hand -held bucket or similar container, a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut -off device, or a low- volume, high - pressure cleaning machine (e.g., "water broom ") equipped to recycle any water used. D. No person shall permit excessive use, loss or escape of water through breaks, leaks or other malfunctions in the person's plumbing or distribution system for any period of time after such escape of water should have reasonably been discovered and corrected and in no event more than seven days after receiving notice of the condition from the City. E. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate lawns, groundcover, shrubbery or other ornamental landscape material during a rainfall event. F. By July 1, 2012, all landscape irrigation systems connected to dedicated landscape meters shall include rain sensors that automatically shut off such systems during periods of rain or include evapotranspiration systems that schedule irrigation based on climatic conditions. G. No customer shall operate a water fountain or other decorative water feature that does not use a recirculating water system. H. No customer shall use water to clean a vehicle, including but not limited to any automobile, truck, van, bus, motorcycle, boat or trailer, whether motorized or not, except by use of a hand -held bucket or similar container or a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut -off nozzle or device. 1. This subsection does not apply to any commercial car washing facility. I. Effective January 1, 2010, all new commercial conveyor car wash systems in commercial car washing facilities shall be operational recirculating water systems. J. By January 1, 2013, all commercial conveyor car wash systems in commercial car washing facilities shall be operational recirculating water systems, or the customer must have secured an exemption from this requirement pursuant to Section 14.16.100. K. Customers operating eating or drinking establishments, including but not limited to restaurants, hotels, cafes, cafeterias, bars, or other public places where food or drinks are sold, served, or offered for sale, shall not provide drinking water to any person unless expressly requested by the person. L. Customers operating hotel, motel, and other commercial lodging establishments shall provide persons the option of not having towels and linen laundered daily. Commercial lodging establishments must prominently display notice of this option. M. No customer shall install a new single pass cooling system in a building or premises requesting new water service. This provision shall not prevent the replacement or repair of single pass cooling systems that were installed prior to December 31, 2009. N. Effective January 1, 2010, all new washing machines installed in commercial and /or coin- operated laundries shall be ENERGY STAR® and CEE Tier III qualified. By January 1, 2014, all washing machines installed in commercial and /or coin - operated laundries shall be ENERGY STAR@ and GEE Tier III qualified. O. No customer shall use water from any fire hydrant for any purpose other than fire suppression or emergency aid without first: (1) requesting and posting the appropriate fees at the City, and (2) obtaining a hydrant meter to record all water consumption for a specified project. Absent a meter, water theft and meter tampering fees will be applied as appropriate. P. Construction Site Requirements. The requirements of this subsection apply to persons engaged in construction activities. A permittee's refusal or failure to comply with these requirements shall constitute grounds for revocation of a construction or grading permit. In addition, the City may withhold occupancy and inspections until such time as the permit holder has complied. 1. No person shall use potable water for soil compaction or dust control in a construction site where there is an available and feasible source of recycled water or nonpotable water approved by the Department of Public Health and appropriate for such use. 2. No person shall operate a hose within a construction site that is not equipped with an automatic shut -off nozzle; provided, that such devices are available for the size and type of hose in use. Q. Commercial Kitchen Requirements. No customer may operate a commercial kitchen that does not comply with the following requirements. 1. Water - Conserving Pre -Rinse Kitchen Spray Valves. New or remodeled commercial kitchens shall be equipped with water - conserving kitchen spray valves. By January 1, 2010, all commercial kitchens shall either remove all existing kitchen spray valves or retrofit kitchen spray valves with water - conserving kitchen spray valves. 2. Best - Available Water - Conserving Technology. New or remodeled commercial kitchens shall ensure that all water -using equipment in new or remodeled commercial kitchens uses the best - available, water - conserving technology. 3. No customer operating a commercial kitchen shall defrost food or allow food to be defrosted with running water. 4. Scoop sinks shall be set at minimum water flow at all times of use and shut off during non- working hours. 5. When hosing or washing kitchen or garbage areas or other areas for sanitary reasons as required by the Department of Health, hoses shall be equipped with positive self - closing nozzles. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.050 Procedure for Declaration of Water Supply Shortage — Continued Monitoring of Conditions. A. From time to time, the City Council may declare by resolution the existence of a Level One, a Level Two, a Level Three, or a Level Four water supply shortage. In so doing, the Council shall determine that a water supply shortage or threatened shortage exists, due to drought or other water supply conditions, and that it is necessary to impose the mandatory conservation requirements applicable to the particular level of water supply shortage. It will be necessary to make more efficient use of water and appropriately respond to conditions created by the water supply shortage. Prior to adopting a resolution declaring the existence of a water supply shortage, the City Council shall enact a resolution indicating its intention to do so, the conditions necessitating the declaration, the nature of the mandatory conservation restrictions proposed to be imposed, including the specifics of any proposed water consumption restrictions, and the day, hour and place when and where persons may appear before the City Council and be heard on whether a resolution declaring the water supply shortage should be enacted. The resolution of intention shall direct the City Clerk to publish said resolution at least once, within fifteen (15) days of the passage thereof, in a newspaper of general circulation in the City. Said notice shall be published at least ten days prior to the date of hearing. Within ten (10) days of the adoption of a resolution declaring a water supply shortage, the City Clerk shall cause the resolution to be published or posted in the manner required by California Water Code Section 376. B. The mandatory conservation requirements that become effective following the adoption of a resolution declaring the existence of a particular level of water supply shortage shall remain in full force and effect until the resolution is repealed or until new mandatory conservation requirements become effective following the adoption of a subsequent resolution declaring the existence of a water supply shortage. C. During the existence of a water supply shortage, the Utilities Director shall provide periodic reports to the City Council regarding compliance with the mandatory conservation requirements of the level of water supply shortage, current and anticipated allocations of water from MET, and any change in circumstances that could warrant a position of more stringent measures or relaxation of measures then in effect. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.060 Level One Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. On the tenth day after a resolution declaring the existence of a Level One water supply shortage becomes effective, the following mandatory water conservation requirements shall take effect. A. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate any lawn, landscape or other vegetated area except on the scheduled irrigation days established for each customer by the Utilities Director. During a Level One water supply shortage, the schedule established by the Utilities Director shall specify for each customer (a) four irrigation days per week during the months of April, May, June, July, August, September, and October, and (b) two irrigation days per week during the months of November, December, January, February, and March. Prior to the foregoing restriction becoming effective, the Utilities Director shall have notified the customer of the scheduled irrigation days by mail, which may be done by an indication on the customer's municipal services statement. This restriction does not apply to the following unless the City has determined that recycled water is available and may be lawfully applied to the use: 1. Maintenance of vegetation, including trees and shrubs, that is watered using a hand -held bucket or similar container, a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut -off nozzle or device, or a very low flow drip type irrigation system when no emitter produces more than two gallons of water per hour. 2. Irrigation of food crops (including fruit trees and vegetable gardens). 3. Short periods of irrigation for the exclusive purpose of adjusting or repairing an irrigation system. B. No customer shall use more water during any billing period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level One water supply shortage, which percentage shall be in the range from one hundred (100) percent and ninety (90) percent of the base amount. C. No person shall permit excessive use, loss or escape of water through breaks, leaks or other malfunctions in the user's plumbing or distribution system for more than seventy -two (72) hours after receiving notice of the condition from the City. D. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill an ornamental lake, pond, or fountain more than once per week, except to the extent needed to sustain aquatic life; provided, that such animals were being actively managed within the water feature at the time of the City's initial declaration of a then - continuing water supply shortage. E. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill by more than one foot a residential swimming pool or outdoor spa more than once a week. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.070 Level Two Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. On the tenth day after a resolution declaring the existence of a Level Two water supply shortage becomes effective, the following mandatory water conservation requirements shall take effect. A. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate any lawn, landscape or other vegetated area between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time on any day, except by use of a hand -held bucket or similar container, a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut -off nozzle or device, or for short periods of irrigation for the exclusive purpose of adjusting or repairing an irrigation system. B. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate any lawn, landscape or other vegetated area except on the scheduled irrigation days established by City Council resolution. During a Level Two water supply shortage, the schedule established by City Council resolution shall specify for each customer (a) three irrigation days per week during the months of April, May, June, July, August, September, and October, and (b) one irrigation day per week during the months of November, December, January, February, and March. Prior to the foregoing restriction becoming effective, the City shall notify the customer of the scheduled irrigation days by mail, which may be done by an indication on the customers municipal services statement. This restriction does not apply to the following unless the City has determined that recycled water is available and may be lawfully applied to the use: 1. Maintenance of vegetation, including trees and shrubs, that is watered using a hand -held bucket or similar container, a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut -off nozzle or device, or a very low flow drip type irrigation system when no emitter produces more than two gallons of water per hour. 2. Irrigation of food crops (including fruit trees and vegetable gardens); provided, that such irrigation does not exceed five times per week on a schedule established and posted by the City's Utilities Department. 3. Short periods of irrigation for the exclusive purpose of adjusting or repairing an irrigation system. C. No customer shall use more water during any billing period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level Two water supply shortage, which percentage shall be in the range from ninety (90) percent to seventy -five (75) percent of the base amount. D. No person shall permit excessive use, loss or escape of water through breaks, leaks or other malfunctions in the user's plumbing or distribution system for more than forty-eight (48) hours after receiving notice of the condition from the City. E. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill an ornamental lake, pond, or fountain more than once every other week, except to the extent needed to sustain aquatic life; provided, that such animals were being actively managed within the water feature at the time of the City's declaration of the water supply shortage under this chapter. F. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill by more than one foot a residential swimming pool or outdoor spa more than once every other week. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.080 Level Three Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. On the tenth day after a resolution declaring the existence of a Level Three water supply shortage becomes effective, the following mandatory water conservation requirements shall take effect. A. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate any lawn, landscape or other vegetated area between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Pacific Standard Time on any day, except by use of a hand -held bucket or similar container, a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut -off nozzle or device, or for short periods of irrigation for the exclusive purpose of adjusting or repairing an irrigation system. B. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate any lawn, landscape or other vegetated area except on the scheduled irrigation days established by City Council resolution. During a Level Three water supply shortage, the schedule established by City Council resolution shall specify for each customer (a) two irrigation days per week during the months of April, May, June, July, August, September, and October, and (b) one irrigation day per week during the months of November, December, January, February, and March. Prior to the foregoing restriction becoming effective, the City shall notify the customer of the scheduled irrigation days by mail, which may be done by an indication on the customers municipal services statement. This restriction does not apply to the following unless the City has determined that recycled water is available and may be lawfully applied to the use: 1. Maintenance of vegetation, including trees and shrubs, that is watered using a hand -held bucket or similar container, a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut -off nozzle or device, or a very low flow drip type irrigation system when no emitter produces more than two gallons of water per hour. 2. Irrigation of food crops (including fruit trees and vegetable gardens); provided, that such irrigation does not exceed three days per week on a schedule established and posted by the City's Utilities Department. 3. Short periods of irrigation for the exclusive purpose of adjusting or repairing an irrigation system. C. No customer shall use more water during any billing period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level Three water shortage, which percentage shall be in the range from seventy -five (75) percent and sixty (60) percent of the base amount. D. No person shall permit excessive use, loss or escape of water through breaks, leaks or other malfunctions in the user's plumbing or distribution system for more than twenty -four (24) hours after receiving notice from the City. E. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill an ornamental lake, pond, or fountain, except to the extent needed to sustain aquatic life; provided, that such animals were being actively managed within the water feature at the time of the City's declaration of the water supply shortage under this chapter. F. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill a residential swimming pool or outdoor spa. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.090 Level Four Mandatory Water Conservation Requirements. On the tenth day after a resolution declaring the existence of a Level Four water supply shortage becomes effective, the following mandatory water conservation requirements shall take effect. A. No customer shall use potable water to irrigate any lawn, landscape or other vegetated area. This restriction does not apply to the following categories of use unless the City has determined that recycled water is available and may be lawfully applied to the use: 1. Maintenance of vegetation, including trees and shrubs, that are watered using a hand -held bucket or similar container or a hand -held hose equipped with a positive self - closing water shut- off nozzle or device; 2. Maintenance of existing landscape to the extent necessary for fire protection; 3. Maintenance of existing landscape to the extent necessary for soil erosion control; 4. Maintenance of plant materials identified to be rare or essential to the well -being of rare animals; 5. Maintenance of landscape within active public parks and playing fields, day care centers, school grounds, cemeteries, and golf course greens; provided, that such irrigation does not exceed two times per week on a schedule established by resolution of the City Council and posted by the Utilities Director; 6. Public works projects and actively irrigated environmental mitigation projects; 7. Food crops (including fruit trees and vegetable gardens); provided, that such irrigation does not exceed two times per week on a schedule established and posted by the City's Utilities Department. B. The City will not (a) provide new potable water service, new temporary meters, or new permanent meters, or (b) issue statements of immediate ability to serve or to provide potable water service, except under the following circumstances: 1. A valid, unexpired building permit has been issued for the project; or 2. The project is necessary to protect public health, safety, and welfare; or 3. The applicant provides substantial evidence of an enforceable commitment that, ensures, to the satisfaction of the Utilities Director, the water demands for the project will be offset prior to the provision of a new water meter(s). This restriction does not preclude the resetting or turn -on of meters to provide continuation of water service or the restoration of service that has been interrupted for a period of one year or less. C. No customer shall use more water during any billing period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level Four water shortage, which percentage shall be less than sixty (60) percent of the base amount. D. No person shall permit excessive use, loss or escape of water through breaks, leaks or other malfunctions in the user's plumbing or distribution system for more than twenty -four (24) hours after receiving notice from the City. E. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill an ornamental lake, pond, or fountain, except to the extent needed to sustain aquatic life; provided, that such animals were being actively managed within the water feature at the time of the City's declaration of the water supply shortage under this chapter. F. No customer may use potable water to fill or refill a residential swimming pool or outdoor spa. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.100 Exemptions. A. The provisions of this chapter do not apply to any of the following. 1. Uses of water necessary to protect public health and safety or for essential government services, such as police, fire and other similar emergency services. 2. The filling, operation, and maintenance of a swimming pool that is open to the public at rates of charge deemed reasonable by the City Council. 3. The washing of refuse, sanitation and service vehicles owned and operated by a public entity to the extent necessary to ensure public health, safety and welfare; provided, that recycled water or a recirculating water system will be used where feasible. B. Any restrictions imposed by this chapter that require the reduction of consumption shall not be applicable to any of the following. 1. Customers who have participated in a fuel load modification program and have received an exemption from the Utilities Director and Fire Marshall. The Utilities Director and Fire Marshall shall only grant exemptions necessary to mitigate the impacts of participation in the fuel modification zone program, such as the need to irrigate replacement vegetation. 2. Customers that operate hospitals, medical care facilities, nurseries or other businesses whose main stock and trade consists of the sale or cultivation of plants and vegetation, and businesses in which water consumption is an integral part of production or manufacturing; provided, that such customers shall first submit a water conservation plan to, and obtain the approval of, the Utilities Director. This exemption does not extend to the use of potable water for the irrigation of landscape areas. C. The Utilities Director shall approve a water conservation plan only if the plan proposes the maximum feasible reduction in consumption. As a condition of approving the water conservation plan, the Utilities Director may require the use of water conservation devices or practices as he or she deems appropriate to result in the maximum feasible reduction in consumption. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.110 Relief from Compliance. A. Intent and Purpose. The City Council recognizes that water consumption can increase or decrease because of factors unrelated to wasteful water use practices. Many customers have installed water - saving devices and adopted water conservation practices that make it difficult to satisfy the water consumption restrictions required by this chapter. This section recognizes that adjustments to the base amount may be necessary to ensure that application of this chapter to any particular customer does not produce unjust or inequitable results. In addition, the section recognizes unique circumstances may result in undue or disproportionate hardship as to a person using water which is different from the impacts to water users generally. As a general rule, the Utilities Director should not grant relief to any person or customer for any reason in the absence of showing that the person or customer has achieved the maximum feasible reduction in water consumption other than in the specific area or areas for which relief is requested. B. Procedures. A person or customer may file an application for relief from the provisions of this chapter with the Utilities Director. The application shall be submitted in writing to the Utilities Department. The application must be filed within ninety (90) days after the effective date of this chapter or ninety (90) days after implementation of the then - current water supply shortage level, whichever shall occur last. The Utilities Director may require the submission of additional supporting documentation that he or she deems necessary to grant the application for relief. The Utilities Director shall approve or disapprove the application for relief within thirty (30) days after it is filed and deemed complete. C. Factors to Be Considered. 1. Relief from Water Consumption Restrictions. In determining whether relief should be granted from water consumption restrictions, the Utilities Director shall consider all relevant factors including, but not limited to, the following: a. Whether compliance with the water conservation requirements then in effect would result in unemployment or layoff of workers; b. Whether additional persons are now living or working in the customer's premises that were not living or working in the premises during all or a portion of the billing periods used to calculate the base amount; c. Whether the customer had, during all or a portion of the billing periods used to calculate the base amount, begun using water conservation practices that remain in use and that reduced the customer's water usage by an amount equivalent to the reduction required by the water supply shortage; d. Whether any current or anticipated increase in production or manufacturing will require the use of additional water; e. The extent to which irrigation or watering of landscaping has been made necessary by compliance with fuel load modification programs; and f. The extent to which the customer needs to use water to mitigate any emergency health or safety hazards. 2. Relief from All Other Requirements. In determining whether relief should be granted from all requirements other than water consumption restrictions, the Utilities Director must find, based on the application and supporting documentation, that: a. The relief does not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations imposed by this chapter on other persons and customers; b. Because of special circumstances applicable to the customer's or person's property or its use, the strict application of this chapter would have an impact on the person or customer that is disproportionate to the impact on other similarly situated persons or customers; c. The condition or situation of the person's or customer's premises for which the relief is sought is not common or general in nature; and d. The person or customer has achieved or will achieve the maximum feasible reduction in water consumption other than in the specific area or areas from which relief is requested. D. Agreement. The Utilities Director is empowered to enter into an agreement with any person or customer to resolve the application for relief. The agreement shall be memorialized in writing signed by the person or customer. The agreement shall fix the rights of the person or customer and the City. During the effectiveness of the agreement, the person or customer shall have no further right to seek relief pursuant to the provisions of this section. E. Final Decision. The Utilities Director shall notify the person or customer of the decision on the application for relief by mailing a notice of the decision to the person or customer by means of first class, postage prepaid, to the address specified on the application. F. Appeal of Final Decision. A person or customer may appeal the decision of the Utilities Director by submitting a written request within (90) days of the date of the Utilities Director's written decision. A written appeal request shall be submitted to the City Manager and include the reasons for the request and signature of the person or customer submitting the request. The City Manager may approve or disapprove the appeal within (30) days from receipt of a request. The decision of the City Manager shall be final. G. Willful Misrepresentation. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall make any willful misrepresentation of a material fact with respect to any application for relief submitted pursuant to this section. Any violation of the provisions of this subsection shall be considered a misdemeanor, punishable as otherwise provided in this Code. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) 14.16.120 Enforcement. A. Responsibility — Implementation Plan. The Utilities Director shall be responsible for the enforcement of this chapter. The Utilities Director shall develop an implementation plan to be used as a guideline for enforcing the provisions of this chapter. The implementation plan shall provide the resources (staffing and equipment) required to ensure the fair and timely execution of these requirements, as well as a detailed execution strategy. In addition, the implementation plan shall ensure, so far as is reasonable under the circumstances, that persons are notified of violations and are provided an opportunity to cure the violation prior to being cited. B. Additional Enforcement Options. In addition to the means of ensuring compliance set forth in Section 1.04.010, the City may elect to impose the following requirements on a customer in the event of a continuing violation: 1. Water Flow Restrictors. The City may install a water flow restrictor of approximately one gallon per minute for services up to one and one -half inches in size and comparatively sized restrictors for larger services. Prior to doing so, the City shall first provide a minimum of forty -eight (48) hours' notice of its intent to install a water flow restrictor. In the event that a customer refuses to permit the installation of a water flow restrictor following the City's election to do so, the City may terminate the customer's water service. 2. Termination of Service. The City may disconnect a customer's water service for willful violations of mandatory restrictions in this chapter. (Ord. 2009 -24 § 1 (part), 2009) APPENDIX B — City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan .SEW P1. City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. • Newport Beach, CA 92663 Cq�IFORN,P 2010 Urban Water Management Plan May 2011 11 "AAAA, All 4 Report Prepared By: Malcolm Pill Inc. 8001 Irvine Center Drive Suite 1100 • Irvine, CA 92618 949 - 450 -9901 T, Table of Contents Contents Executive Summary 1 1. Introduction 1 -1 1.1. Urban Water Management Plan Requirements ............................. ............................... 1 -1 1.2. Agency Overview ........................................................................... ............................... 1-4 1.3. Service Area and Facilities ............................................................ ............................... 1-4 1.3.1. Newport Beach's Service Area ...................................... ............................... 1-4 1.3.2. Newport Beach's Water Facilities .................................. ............................... 1 -5 2. Water Demand 2 -1 2.1. Overview ........................................................................................ ............................... 2 -1 2.2. Factors Affecting Demand ............................................................. ............................... 2 -1 2.2.1. Climate Characteristics .................................................. ............................... 2 -1 2.2.2. Demographics ................................................................... ............................2 -2 2.2.3. Land Use ........................................................................... ............................2 -3 2.3. Water Use by Customer Type ........................................................ ............................... 2 -4 2.3.1. Overview ........................................................................ ............................... 2-4 2.3.2. Residential ......................................................................... ............................2 -5 2.3.3. Non - Residential ................................................................. ............................2 -5 2.3.4. Other Water Uses ........................................................... ............................... 2 -6 2.3.4.1. Sales to Other Agencies ...................................... ............................... 2 -6 2.3.4.2. Non - Revenue Water ............................................ ............................... 2 -6 2.4. SBx7 -7 Requirements .................................................................... ............................... 2 -6 2.4.1. Overview ........................................................................ ............................... 2 -6 2.4.2. SBx7 -7 Compliance Options .......................................... ............................... 2 -7 2.4.3. Regional Alliance ............................................................ ............................... 2 -7 2.4.4. Baseline Water Use ........................................................ ............................... 2 -8 2.4.5. SBx7 -7 Water Use Targets ............................................ ............................... 2 -9 2.5. Demand Projections ..................................................................... ............................... 2 -10 2.5.1. 25 -Year Projections ...................................................... ............................... 2 -10 2.5.2. Low Income Household Projections ............................. ............................... 2 -10 3. Water Sources and Supply Reliability 3 -1 3.1. Overview ........................................................................................ ............................... 3 -1 3.2. Imported Water ................................................................................. ............................3 -2 3.2.1. Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan .................... 3 -3 3.2.2. Newport Beach's Imported Water Supply Projections ... ............................... 3 -8 3.3. Groundwater ..................................................................................... ............................3 -8 3.3.1. Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin .................. ............................... 3 -9 3.3.2. Basin Production Percentage ....................................... ............................... 3 -10 3.3.3. Recharge Facilities ....................................................... ............................... 3 -11 3.3.4. Metropolitan Groundwater Replenishment Program .... ............................... 3 -12 3.3.5. Metropolitan Conjunctive Use Program ....................... ............................... 3 -12 3.3.6. Historical Groundwater Production .............................. ............................... 3 -12 3.3.7. Projections of Groundwater Production ....................... ............................... 3 -13 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1 Table of Contents 3.4. Recycled Water ............................................................................ ............................... 3 -14 3.5. Supply Reliability .......................................................................... ............................... 3 -14 3.5.1. Overview ...................................................................... ............................... 3 -14 3.5.2. Factors Impacting Reliability ........................................ ............................... 3 -15 3.5.2.1. Water Quality ..................................................... ............................... 3 -16 3.5.3. Normal -Year Reliability Comparison ............................ ............................... 3 -18 3.5.4. Single Dry-year Reliability Comparison ........................ ............................... 3 -18 3.5.5. Multiple Dry-Year Reliability Comparison ..................... ............................... 3 -19 4. Demand Management Measures 4 -1 4.1. Overview ........................................................................................ ............................... 4 -1 4.2. Water Use Efficiency Programs ..................................................... ............................... 4 -1 4.2.1. DMM 1: Water Survey Programs for Single - Family Residential and Multi - Family Residential Customers ....................................... ............................... 4 -3 4.2.2. DMM 2: Residential Plumbing Retrofit ........................... ............................... 4 -3 4.2.3. DMM 3: System Water Audits, Leak Detection and Repair ..........................4 -4 4.2.4. DMM 4: Metering with Commodity Rates ....................... ............................... 4-4 4.2.5. DMM 5: Large Landscape Conservation Programs and Incentives ............. 4-4 4.2.6. DMM 6: High - Efficiency Washing Machine Rebate Programs ...................... 4 -5 4.2.7. DMM 7: Public Information Programs ............................ ............................... 4 -5 4.2.8. DMM 8: School Education Programs ................................ ............................4 -6 4.2.9. DMM 9: Conservation Programs for Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Accounts......................................................................... ............................... 4 -6 4.2.10. DMM 10: Wholesale Agency Programs ......................... ............................... 4 -8 4.2.11. DMM 11: Conservation Pricing ...................................... ............................... 4 -8 4.2.12. DMM 12: Water Conservation Coordinator .................... ............................... 4 -8 4.2.13. DMM 13: Water Waste Prohibition ................................. ............................... 4 -8 4.2.14. DMM 14: Residential Ultra- Low -Flush Toilet Replacement Programs ......... 4 -8 5. Water Supplies Contingency Plan 5 -1 5.1. Shortage Actions ............................................................................ ............................... 5-1 5.2. Three -Year Minimum Water Supply .............................................. ............................... 5 -5 5.3. Catastrophic Supply Interruption ................................................... ............................... 5 -8 5.4. Prohibitions, Penalties and Consumption Reduction Methods .... ............................... 5 -11 5.5. Impacts to Revenue ..................................................................... ............................... 5 -16 5.6. Reduction Measuring Mechanism ............................................... ............................... 5 -17 6. Recycled Water 6 -1 6.1. Agency Coordination ...................................................................... ............................... 6 -1 6.2. Wastewater Description and Disposal ........................................... ............................... 6 -1 6.3. Current Recycled Water Uses ....................................................... ............................... 6 -2 6.4. Potential Recycled Water Uses ..................................................... ............................... 6 -3 6.4.1. Direct Non - Potable Reuse .............................................. ............................... 6-4 6.4.2. Indirect Potable Reuse ................................................... ............................... 64 6.5. Optimization Plan ........................................................................... ............................... 6 -5 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 7c, Table of Contents 7. Future Water Supply Projects and Programs 7 -1 7.1. Water Management Tools 7 -1 7.2. Transfer or Exchange Opportunities .............................................. ............................... 7 -1 7.3. Planned Water Supply Projects and Programs ............................. ............................... 7 -1 7.4. Desalination Opportunities ............................................................. ............................... 7 -1 7.4.1. Groundwater ...................................................................... ............................7 -2 7.4.2. Ocean Water ..................................................................... ............................7 -2 8. UWMP Adoption Process 8 -1 8.1. Overview ........................................................................................ ............................... 8 -1 8.2. Public Participation ........................................................................ ............................... 8 -2 8.3. Agency Coordination ...................................................................... ............................... 8 -2 8.4. UWMP Submittal ............................................................................ ............................... 8 -3 Table 2 -5: 8.4.1. Review of Implementation of 2005 UWMP .................... ............................... 8 -3 Table 2 -6: 8.4.2. Filing of 2010 UWMP ..................................................... ............................... 8-3 List of Tables Table 2 -1: Climate Characteristics ................................................................ ............................... 2 -2 Table 2 -2: Population — Current and Projected ............................................. ............................... 2 -3 Table 2 -3: Past, Current and Projected Service Accounts by Water Use Sector ....................... 2 -5 Table 2 -4: Past, Current and Projected Water Demand by Water Use Sector ............................ 2 -5 Table 2 -5: Additional Water Uses and Losses ( AFY) .................................... ............................... 2 -6 Table 2 -6: Base Daily per Capita Water Use — 10 -year range ..................... ............................... 2 -9 Table 2 -7: Base Daily per Capita Water Use — 5 -year range ....................... ............................... 2 -9 Table 2 -8: Preferred Compliance Option and Water Use Targets ............. ............................... 2 -10 Table 2 -9: Current and Projected Water Demands (AFY) .......................... ............................... 2 -10 Table 2 -10: Newport Beach's Demand Projections Provided to Wholesale Suppliers (AFY) .... 2 -10 Table 2 -11: Projected Water Demands for Housing Needed for Low Income Households (AFY) ........................................................................................................... ............................... 2 -12 Table 3 -1: Metropolitan Average Year Projected Supply Capability and Demands for 2015 to 2035 ............................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -5 Table 3 -2: Metropolitan Single -Dry Year Projected Supply Capability and Demands for 2015 to 2035 ............................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -6 Table 3 -3: Metropolitan Multiple -Dry Year Projected Supply Capability and Demands for 2015 to 2035 ............................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -7 Table 3 -4: Wholesaler Identified & Quantified Existing and Planned Sources of Water (AFY) .. 3 -8 Table 3 -5: Current Basin Production Percentage ....................................... ............................... 3 -10 Table 3 -6: Amount of Groundwater Pumped in the Past 5 Years ( AFY) .... ............................... 3 -13 Table 3 -7: Amount of Groundwater Projected to be Pumped ( AFY) .......... ............................... 3 -14 Table 3 -8: Wholesaler Supply Reliability - % of Normal AFY ..................... ............................... 3 -15 Table 3 -9: Basis of Water Year Data .......................................................... ............................... 3 -15 Table 3 -10: Factors Resulting in Inconsistency of Supply ......................... ............................... 3 -16 Table 3 -11: Water Quality — Current and Projected Water Supply Impacts (AFY) ................... 3 -18 Table 3 -12: Projected Normal Water Supply and Demand ( AFY) .............. ............................... 3 -18 Table 3 -13: Projected Single -Dry Year Water Supply and Demand ( AFY) ............................... 3 -19 Table 3 -14: Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand ( AFY ) ............................ 3 -19 Table 4 -1: Urban Supplier's Demand Management Measures Overview ..... ............................... 4 -2 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan III Table of Contents Table 4 -2: Retrofit Devices and Rebate Amounts Available Under Save Water Save a Buck Program............................................................................................... ............................... Table 5 -1: Water Supply Shortage Stages and Conditions — Rationing Stages ............... Table 5 -2: Metropolitan Shortage Conditions ..................................... ............................... Table 5 -3: Three -Year Estimated Minimum Water Supply ( AFY) ...... ............................... Table 5 -4: Preparation Actions for Catastrophe .................................. ............................... Table 5 -5: Mandatory Prohibitions ...................................................... ............................... Table 5 -6: Consumption Reduction Methods ..................................... ............................... Table 5 -7: Penalties and Charges ...................................................... ............................... Table 5 -8: Revenue Impacts Analysis ................................................. ............................... Table 5 -9: Water Use Monitoring Mechanisms ................................... ............................... Table 6 -1: Participating Agencies ....................................................... ............................... Table 6 -2: Wastewater Collection and Treatment (AFY) ................... ............................... Table 6 -3: Disposal of Wastewater (Non - Recycled) ( AFY) ................. ............................... Table 6 -4: Current Recycled Water Uses (AFY) ................................. ............................... Table 6 -5: Projected Future Use of Recycled Water in Service Area (AFY) ...................... Table 6 -6: Projected Recycled Water Uses ( AFY) ............................. ............................... Table 6 -7: Recycled Water Uses — 2005 Projections compared with 2010 Actual (AFY). Table 7 -1: Opportunities for Desalinated Water .................................. ............................... Table 8 -1: External Coordination and Outreach ................................. ............................... Table 8 -2: Coordination with Appropriate Agencies ........................... ............................... List of Figures Figure 1 -1: Regional Location of Urban Water Supplier... Figure 1 -2: City of Newport Beach's Service Area............ Figure 3 -1: Current and Projected Water Supplies (AFY). Appendices ....... 4 -7 ....... 5 -5 ....... 5 -7 ....... 5 -8 ..... 5 -10 ..... 5 -11 ..... 5 -16 ..... 5 -16 ..... 5 -17 ..... 5 -18 ....... 6 -1 ....... 6-2 ....... 6 -2 ....... 6 -3 ....... 6 -3 ....... 6 -4 ....... 6 -4 ....... 7 -2 ....... 8 -1 ....... 8-2 ......................... ............................... 1 -3 ......................... ............................... 1 -5 ......................... ............................... 3 -2 A. Urban Water Management Plan Checklist B. Orange County Water District Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update C. Bump Calculation Methodology D. Chapter 14.16 Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations, Chapter 14.36 Water Quality E. 60 Day Notification Letters F. Public Hearing Notice G. Copy of Plan Adoption City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 71V Acronyms Used in the Report 20x2020 20% reduction by 2020 Act Urban Water Management Planning Act AF acre -feet AFY acre -feet per year Basin Orange County Groundwater Basin BDCP Bay Delta Conservation Plan BEA Basin Equity Assessment BMP Best Management Practice BPP Basin Production Percentage CDR Center for Demographic Research cfs cubic feet per second CII Commercial /Industrial/Institutional CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System City City of Newport Beach CRA Colorado River Aqueduct CUP Conjunctive Use Program CUWCC California Urban Water Conservation Council DMM Demand Management Measure DWR Department of Water Resources EOCF #2 East Orange County Feeder #2 ETo Evapotranspiration FY Fiscal Year FYE Fiscal Year Ending GAP Green Acres Project GPCD gallons per capita per day gpm gallons per minute GWRS Groundwater Replenishment System HECW High Efficiency Clothes Washer HET high efficiency toilet HOA Homeowners Association IRP Integrated Water Resources Plan IWA International Water Association LOI Letter of Intent MCL Maximum Contaminant Level Metropolitan Metropolitan Water District of Southern California MF Microfiltration MG million gallons MGD million gallons per day MOU Memorandum of Understanding MWDOC Municipal Water District of Orange County NBMC Newport Beach Municipal Code NDMA N- nitrosodimethylamine NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCWD Orange County Water District Poseidon Poseidon Resources LLC City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan v Acronyms PPCP Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Product PSA Public Service Announcements QSA Quantification Settlement Agreement RA Replenishment Assessment RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment RO Reverse Osmosis RUWMP Regional Urban Water Management Plan RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SBx7 -7 Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SDCWA San Diego County Water Authority SOI Sphere of Influence SWP State Water Project TDS Total Dissolved Solids ULFT ultra -low -flush toilet UWMP Urban Water Management Plan WEROC Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County WOCWBF #2 West Orange County Water Board Feeder #2 WSAP Water Supply Allocation Plan WSCP Water Shortage Contingency Plan WSDM Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan Fv, Executive Summary This report serves as the 2010 update of the City of Newport Beach's (City) Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The UWMP has been prepared consistent with the requirements under Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656 of the Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act), which were added by Statute 1983, Chapter 1009, and became effective on January 1, 1984. The Act requires "every urban water supplier providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre -feet of water annually" to prepare, adopt, and file an UWMP with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) every five years. 2010 UWMP updates are due to DWR by August 1, 2011. Since its passage in 1983, several amendments have been added to the Act. The most recent changes affecting the 2010 UWMP include Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBx7 -7) and SB 1087. Water Conservation Act of 2009 or SBx7- 7 enacted in 2009 is the water conservation component of the Delta package. It stemmed from the Governor's goal to achieve a 20% statewide reduction in per capita water use by 2020 (20x2020). SBx7 -7 requires each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets to help meet the 20% goal by 2020 and an interim 10% goal by 2015. Service Area and Facilities The City provides water to a population of approximately 67,000 throughout its 35.77 square mile service area. The City receives its water from two main sources, the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater basin, which is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and imported water from the Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC). Groundwater is pumped from 4 active wells located throughout the City, and imported water is treated at the Diemer Filtration Plant and is delivered to the City through six imported water connections. Water Demand Currently, the total water demand for retail customers served by the City is approximately 16,640 acre -feet annually consisting of 10,052 acre -feet of local groundwater and 432 acre -feet of recycled water. In the last five years, the City's water demand has decreased by about 5 percent while population has increased by 1.5 percent. This illustrates the City's proactive efforts in promoting water use efficiency. With its diligence in the promotion of water conservation as well as financial incentives to customers to retrofit their homes and businesses with water efficient devices and appliances, the City is City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1 Executive Summary projecting a flattening demand trend in the next 25 years despite a projected 11 percent population growth. With MWDOC's assistance, the City has selected to comply with Option 1 of the SBx7- 7 compliance options. The City is a member of the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance formed by MWDOC. This regional alliance consists of 29 retail agencies in Orange County. Under Compliance Option 1, the City's 2015 interim water use target is 228.1 GPCD and the 2020 final water use target is 202.8 GPCD. Water Sources and Supply Reliability The City's main source of water supply is groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin and imported water from Metropolitan through MWDOC. Recycled water was recently added to the City's water supply portfolio. Today, the City relies on 60% groundwater, 37% imported, and 3% recycled water. It is projected that by 2035, the water supply mix will remain roughly the same. The sources of imported water supplies include the Colorado River and the State Water Project (SWP). Metropolitan's 2010 Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) update describes the core water resource strategy that will be used to meet full- service demands (non - interruptible agricultural and replenishment supplies) at the retail level under all foreseeable hydrologic conditions from 2015 through 2035. It is required that every urban water supplier assess the reliability to provide water service to its customers under normal, dry, and multiple dry water years. Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP finds that Metropolitan is able to meet full service demands of its member agencies with existing supplies from 2015 through 2035 during normal years, single dry year, and multiple dry years. The City is therefore capable of meeting the water demands of its customers in normal, single dry, and multiple dry years between 2015 and 2035, as illustrated in Table 3 -12, Table 3 -13, and Table 3 -14, respectively. Future Water Supply Projects Potential recycled water users are locations where recycled water could replace potable water use. These potential users are typically landscape or agricultural irrigation systems, or possibly water users. However, due to the limited access to the project mains and some financial impact on end users, it is not feasible to distribute all of the potential recycled water, and the City does not predict that there will be many other end users in the near future. In Orange County, there are three proposed ocean desalination projects that could serve MWDOC, including one specifically that may benefit the City. On January 20, 2010, the City signed a non - binding LOI for 7.1 MGD (8,000 AFY) of Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Project supplies. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 2 Executive Summary City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 1. Introduction 1.1. Urban Water Management Plan Requirements Water Code Sections 10610 through 10656 of the Urban Water Management Planning Act (Act) requires "every urban water supplier providing water for municipal purposes to more than 3,000 customers or supplying more than 3,000 acre -feet of water annually" to prepare, adopt, and file an UWMP with the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) every five years. 2010 UWMP updates are due to DWR by August 1, 2011. This UWMP provides DWR with information on the present and future water resources and demands and provide an assessment of the City's water resource needs. Specifically, this document will provide water supply planning for a 25 -year planning period in 5 -year increments. The plan will identify water supplies for existing and future demands, quantify water demands during normal year, single -dry year, and multiple -dry years, and identify supply reliability under the three hydrologic conditions. The City's 2010 UWMP update revises the 2005 UWMP. This document has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of the Act as amended in 2009, and includes the following analysis: • Water Service Area and Facilities • Water Sources and Supplies • Water Use by Customer Type • Demand Management Measures • Water Supply Reliability • Planned Water Supply Projects and Programs • Water Shortage Contingency Plan • Recycled Water Since its passage in 1983, several amendments have been added to the Act. The most recent changes affecting the 2010 UWMP include Senate Bill 7 as part of the Seventh Extraordinary Session (SBx7 -7) and SB 1087. Water Conservation Act of 2009 or SBx7 - 7, enacted in 2009, is the water conservation component of the historic Delta package. It stemmed from the Governor's goal to achieve a 20% statewide reduction in per capita water use by 2020 (20x2020). SBx7 -7 requires each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets to help meet the 20% goal by 2020 and an interim 10% goal by 2015. Each urban retail water supplier must include in its 2010 UWMPs the following information from its target- setting process: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1 Section 1 Introduction • Baseline daily per capita water use • 2020 Urban water use target • 2015 Interim water use target • Compliance method being used along with calculation method and support data Wholesale water suppliers are required to include an assessment of present and proposed future measures, programs, and policies that would help achieve the 20 by 2020 goal. The other recent amendment made to the UWMP Act to be included in the 2010 UWMP is set forth by SB 1087, Water and Sewer Service Priority for Housing Affordable to Low - Income Households. SB 1087 requires water and sewer providers to grant priority for service allocations to proposed developments that include low income housing. SB 1087 also requires UWMPs to include projected water use for single- and multi - family housing needed for low- income households. The sections in this Plan correspond to the outline of the Act, specifically Article 2, Contents of Plans, Sections 10631, 10632, and 10633. The sequence used for the required information, however, differs slightly in order to present information in a manner reflecting the unique characteristics of the City's water utility. The UWMP Checklist has been completed, which identifies the location of Act requirements in this Plan and is included as Appendix A. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1 -2 L. Hama 1"l BrH Gi, / arty sav�, Section 1 Introduction Punerson smOa LmCa a Wmm DwV¢t La Palm. G4 WA P.'k � nyrsim 5mano WN Imne imm," ( � enema\ Water D�.m r coen \ m Stitt © y h Wota co. IG. s.w.c.t 'a EOCWO Psi Ga men Grove ZmK W. Seel Westminster PeaeM1 Tustin Santa Ana — VvlleY i WA u.nn<ganeh tinnling'm Mesa Wnl<r Diatn<I "rh COn4olidal¢[I = 4�t, W atet61eL O Newport Beach Li TO Wrier Disatrict ' Emenla ary Service DHakt_ M^npon xb-i Wt aHma LsOaPe Si Comity wemr oieuia sm n.eam� w� �em� smtm.at wD cmPi.n.no v 1 .a el m sillier cmr Water Dlauir t MWDOC Member Agency East Orange County Water District (Wholesale) 0 Orange County Water District Non -MWDOC Service Area Inside MWDOC but Outside Retail Water Agency Boundary Freeway or Tollway - Proposed Freeway or Tollway N W +E SS tL Figure 1 -1: Regional Location of Urban Water Supplier i SAap Lkiatiti, City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1 -3 Section 1 Introduction 1.2. Agency Overview The City is located in Orange County, California. It serves a population of approximately 67,000 within a 35.77 square mile through 26,300 service connections. The City supplies groundwater, imported water, and recycled water to its customers. Groundwater is produced from local groundwater wells managed by OCWD and imported water is purchased from MWDOC, the regional wholesale water supplier of Orange County who in turn purchases imported water from northern California and the Colorado River through Metropolitan. The City purchases recycled water from OCWD. Today, the total water demand for the City is approximately 17,000 acre -feet annually consisting of 16,500 acre -feet of potable water and 450 acre -feet of recycled water. Due to its active efforts in promoting water conservation and water use efficiency to residents, the City is projecting a flattening demand trend in the next 25 years despite a projected 11 percent population growth. The City Council operates under a Council- Manager format of government. Its seven City Council Members are elected by district, but voted on by the population as a whole. The current City Council members are: • Michael F. Henn, Mayor • Steven Rosansky • Rush N. Hill, II • Leslie Daigle • Edward D. Selich • Nancy Gardner, Mayor Pro Tem • Keith D. Curry The City receives its water from two main sources, the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater basin, which is managed by the Orange County Water District (OCWD) and imported water from the Municipal Water District of Orange County ( MWDOC). MWDOC is Orange County's wholesale supplier and is a member agency of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan). 1.3. Service Area and Facilities 1.3.1. Newport Beach's Service Area Located along the Orange County coast of Southern California, the City is bounded to the west by the Pacific Ocean. To the north, south, and east, the City is surrounded by the cities of Huntington Beach, Laguna Beach, Irvine and Costa Mesa. The water service area is entirely within the City's boundaries, and covers approximately 35.77 square miles. A map of the City's service area is shown in Figure 1 -2. The City serves a population of approximately 67,000 through 26,300 service connections. The City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1-4 Section 1 Introduction City supplies groundwater, imported water, and recycled water to its residential and commercial customers. The City does not supply water to any agency customers. Figure 1 -2: City of Newport Beach's Service Area 1.3.2. Newport Beach's Water Facilities Imported Water Supply Facilities MWDOC provides imported water to the City. MWDOC receives its water from Metropolitan. Most of Metropolitan's imported water supply is provided through the State Water Project (SWP) and Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) and is treated at the Diemer and Weymouth plants. A large groundwater supply is also available, as described in Section 3.3. The use of this supply is regulated by the Basin Pumping Percentage (BPP) as set by the Orange County Water District (OCWD). All of the water supplied by the City is sold to its retail customers (residential and commercial). The City maintains its own retail distribution system. The City delivers potable water through its water system which consists of approximately 284 miles of pipelines ranging in size from 4 -inch to 30 -inch with various pipe materials. The City has an extensive distribution system, which includes five pressure zones and six connections City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1 -5 Section 1 Introduction along the Orange County Feeder and the East Orange County Feeder No. 2. The total available capacity is 104 cfs. The City has five pump stations which deliver water to the upper zones, and backup generation facilities ensure that the City can still deliver water to all zones during a rolling blackout. Groundwater Facilities In addition to surface water, the City receives a large percentage of its supply from groundwater. Groundwater is pumped from four wells within the City of Fountain Valley and travels through over 6 miles of the 30 -inch Groundwater Transmission Main in Fountain Valley, Huntington Beach, and Costa Mesa. In addition, a pump station, a treatment facility, and a 3 -MG reservoir assist in the transmission and treatment effort. The City meets up to 62 percent of its demand through groundwater, under regulations of OCWD's BPP. Recycled Water Facilities Through an agreement with the OCWD, the City purchases between 300 and 800 acre - feet per year (AFY) of recycled water for some large irrigation users. The City has no capability of treating water to produce reclaimed water, but OCWD has an elaborate system. The City began serving recycled water in 1999. OCWD provides water through the Green Acres Project, which has the capability to delivery up to 1,000 AFY. The City has investigated future sites or locations for reclaimed water, but there are limitations to the availability of reclaimed connections. The City is looking into the possibility of inter - district reclaimed water transfers to provide reclaimed water to some associations and recreation facilities. Water Transmission System Water is delivered to the City's customers from the Groundwater Transmission Main, and from diversions off of the Orange County Feeder and the East Orange County Feeder No. 2. The transmission system consists of pipelines, booster pump stations, and storage tanks. The current capacity of the City's potable water supply is 104 cfs. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 1 -6 2.1. Overview Currently, the total water demand for retail customers served by the City is approximately 16,640 acre -feet annually consisting of 10,052 acre -feet of local groundwater and 432 acre -feet of recycled water. In the last five years, the City's water demand has decreased by about 5 percent while population has increased by 1.5 percent. This illustrates the City's proactive efforts in promoting water use efficiency. With its diligence in the promotion of water conservation as well as financial incentives to customers to retrofit their homes and businesses with water efficient devices and appliances, the City is projecting a flattening demand trend in the next 25 years despite a projected 11 percent population growth. The passage of SBx7 -7 will increase efforts to reduce the use of potable supplies in the future. This new law requires all of California's retail urban water suppliers serving more than 3,000 AFY or 3,000 service connections to achieve a 20 percent reduction in demands (from a historical baseline) by 2020. Due to great water conservation efforts in the past decade, the City is on its way to meeting this requirement on its own. Moreover, the City has elected to join the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance. The City together with 28 other retail agencies in Orange County are committed to reduce the region's water demand by 2020 through the leadership of MWDOC, the region's wholesale provider. This section will explore in detail the City's current water demands by customer type and the factors which influence those demands as well as providing a perspective of its expected future water demands for the next 25 years. In addition, to satisfy SBx7 -7 requirements, this section will provide details of the City's S130-7 compliance method selection, baseline water use calculation, and its 2015 and 2020 water use targets. 2.2. Factors Affecting Demand Water consumption is influenced by many factors from climate characteristics of that hydrologic region, to demographics, land use characteristics, and economics. The key factors affecting water demand in the City's service area are discussed below. 2.2.1. Climate Characteristics The City is located in Southern California's coastal plain where the climate is characteristically Mediterranean, with mild year -round temperatures, sunny days, and cool evenings. The average summer and winter temperatures are 75 °F and 65 °F, City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-1 Section 2 Water Demand respectively, and the average annual rainfall is just under 12 inches (Table 2 -1). The average Evapotranspiration (ETo) is almost 50 inches per year which is four times the annual average rainfall. This translates to a high demand for landscape irrigation for homes, commercial properties, parks, and golf courses. Moreover, a region with low rainfall like Southern California is also more prone to droughts. Table 2 -1: Climate Characteristics [1 ] CMS Station #75, Irvine, California from October 1987 to Present [2] NOAA, Newport Beach Harbor, California 1971 to 2000, Mean Precipitation Total [3] NOAA, Newport Beach Harbor, California 1971 to 2000, Mean Temperature The source of the City's imported water supplies, the State Water Project and Colorado River Project, is influenced by weather conditions in Northern California and along the Colorado River. Both regions have recently been suffering from multi -year drought conditions and record low rainfalls which directly impact demands and supplies to Southern California. 2.2.2. Demographics The City serves a population of 67,030. The population within the City's service area is expected to increase by 11 percent in the next 25 years, or 0.44 percent annually. Table 2- 2 shows the population projections for the next 25 years based on the California State University at Fullerton, Center for Demographic Research (CDR) projections. Due to proactive water conservation efforts, future water demands are expected to increase at a much lower rate compared to the population growth. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-2 Standard Monthly Average ETo (inches) [1] Annual Rainfall (inches) [2] Average Temperature ( °F) [3] Jan 2.18 2.60 55.9 Feb 2.49 2.54 56.7 Mar 3.67 2.25 57.4 Apr 4.71 0.70 59.5 May 5.18 0.18 61.7 Jun 5.87 0.08 64.3 Jul 6.29 0.02 67.3 Aug 6.17 0.09 68.7 Sep 4.57 0.30 68.1 Oct 3.66 0.28 65.1 Nov 2.59 1.02 60.0 Dec 2.25 1.59 56.1 Annual 49.63 1 11.65 1 61.7 [1 ] CMS Station #75, Irvine, California from October 1987 to Present [2] NOAA, Newport Beach Harbor, California 1971 to 2000, Mean Precipitation Total [3] NOAA, Newport Beach Harbor, California 1971 to 2000, Mean Temperature The source of the City's imported water supplies, the State Water Project and Colorado River Project, is influenced by weather conditions in Northern California and along the Colorado River. Both regions have recently been suffering from multi -year drought conditions and record low rainfalls which directly impact demands and supplies to Southern California. 2.2.2. Demographics The City serves a population of 67,030. The population within the City's service area is expected to increase by 11 percent in the next 25 years, or 0.44 percent annually. Table 2- 2 shows the population projections for the next 25 years based on the California State University at Fullerton, Center for Demographic Research (CDR) projections. Due to proactive water conservation efforts, future water demands are expected to increase at a much lower rate compared to the population growth. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-2 Section 2 Water Demand Table 2 -2: Population — Current and Projected [ 1 ] Center for Demographic Research, California State University, Fullerton 2010 Other demographic factors that also play a role in influencing demands include recreation and tourism which is an important industry in the City. Tourism affects seasonal demands with higher demands in the summer especially at beach facilities as well as hotels and restaurants. Over 50 percent of the City's residents are employed in professional, managerial, and administrative occupations. The median age of City residents is 40 years, and the median household income is estimated at about $110,500 per year'. The average household is 2.8 persons per dwelling unit. 2.2.3. Land Use Land use within the City's service area is characterized as mostly suburban, and the City is almost built -out. The City may consider the approval of a 401 -acre Newport Banning Ranch development project located within the City's Coastal Zone. The development will comprise of approximately 252 acres of open space and development of up to 1,375 residential dwelling units, 75,000 square feet of commercial area, a 75 room resort inn, and approximately 52 acres of parks. Approximately 40 acres of the project site are located within the City limits and approximately 361 acres are located outside the city limits but within the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI). An annexation and a boundary adjustment will be coordinated through the Local Agency Formation Commission to extend the City limits to include portion of the project site currently within the SOI and to extend the City's water service area to provide water to the entire project site. The estimated total average annual water demand from this development is 613.5 acre- feet2. Implementation of this project would be subject to compliance with the water conservation requirements of Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). NBMC requires water efficiency design standards be incorporated into the landscape and irrigation plans as well as other indoor conservation measures including use of low water usage appliances and waterless urinals in public men's restrooms. ' 2007 American community Survey 2 Newport Banning Ranch water Supply Assessment, City of Newport Beach (October 12, 2010) City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-3 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Service Area Population [1] 67,030 68,478 69,926 71,375 72,823 74,271 [ 1 ] Center for Demographic Research, California State University, Fullerton 2010 Other demographic factors that also play a role in influencing demands include recreation and tourism which is an important industry in the City. Tourism affects seasonal demands with higher demands in the summer especially at beach facilities as well as hotels and restaurants. Over 50 percent of the City's residents are employed in professional, managerial, and administrative occupations. The median age of City residents is 40 years, and the median household income is estimated at about $110,500 per year'. The average household is 2.8 persons per dwelling unit. 2.2.3. Land Use Land use within the City's service area is characterized as mostly suburban, and the City is almost built -out. The City may consider the approval of a 401 -acre Newport Banning Ranch development project located within the City's Coastal Zone. The development will comprise of approximately 252 acres of open space and development of up to 1,375 residential dwelling units, 75,000 square feet of commercial area, a 75 room resort inn, and approximately 52 acres of parks. Approximately 40 acres of the project site are located within the City limits and approximately 361 acres are located outside the city limits but within the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI). An annexation and a boundary adjustment will be coordinated through the Local Agency Formation Commission to extend the City limits to include portion of the project site currently within the SOI and to extend the City's water service area to provide water to the entire project site. The estimated total average annual water demand from this development is 613.5 acre- feet2. Implementation of this project would be subject to compliance with the water conservation requirements of Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). NBMC requires water efficiency design standards be incorporated into the landscape and irrigation plans as well as other indoor conservation measures including use of low water usage appliances and waterless urinals in public men's restrooms. ' 2007 American community Survey 2 Newport Banning Ranch water Supply Assessment, City of Newport Beach (October 12, 2010) City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-3 Section 2 Water Demand 2.3. Water Use by Customer Type The knowledge of an agency's water consumption by type of use or by customer class is key to developing that agency's water use profile which identifies when, where, how, and how much water is used, and by whom within the agency's service area. A comprehensive water use profile is critical to the assessment of impacts of prior conservation efforts as well as to the development of future conservation programs. This section provides an overview of the City's water consumption by customer type in 2005 and 2010, as well as projections for 2015 to 2035. The customer classes are categorizes as follows: single- family residential, multi - family residential, commercial /industrial /institutional (CII), dedicated landscape, and agriculture. Other water uses including sales to other agencies and non - revenue water are also discussed in this section. 2.3.1. Overview The City has maintained approximately 26,361 customer connections to its potable water distribution system since 2005. The City is expected to maintain the same numbers of connections through to at least 2015. After that the City is projecting a 5 percent increase by the year 2020 remaining through to 2035. All connections in the City's service area are metered. Approximately 60 percent of the City's water demand is residential. Commercial/industrial and dedicated landscape sectors each consume approximately 20 percent of the City potable water supply. A small portion of the City's demand is from government/institutional establishments such as municipal buildings and hospitals. The City does not provide any sales to agriculture, nor other agencies, saline water intrusion barriers, groundwater recharge, or conjunctive use. A 4 percent increase in water demand between 2010 and 2035 is anticipated for the City's service area while population is projected to increase by 11 percent over the same period. Tables 2 -3 and 2 -4 provide a summary of past, current, and projected water use by customer class and the number of water service customers by sector in five -year increments from 2005 through to 2035. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-4 Section 2 Water Demand Table 2 -3: Past, Current and Projected Service Accounts by Water Use Sector Fiscal Number of Accounts by Water Use Sector Year Ending Single Family Multi- Family Commercial /Industrial Institutional Landscape Total Accounts 2005 18,595 4,065 1,273 571 983 25,487 2010 19,230 4,198 1,319 596 1,018 26,361 2015 19,653 4,292 1,348 609 1,041 26,943 2020 20,068 4,382 1,377 622 1,063 27,512 2025 20,486 4,473 1,405 635 1,085 28,084 2030 20,900 4,564 1,434 648 1,107 28,653 2035 21,316 4,655 1,462 661 1,129 29,223 Table 2 -4: Past, Current and Projected Water Demand by Water Use Sector Fiscal Water Demand by Water Use Sectors (AFY) Year Ending Single Family Multi- Family Commercial /Industrial Institutional Landscape Total Demand 2005 7,482 2,597 3,300 734 3,719 17,831 2010 7,297 2,308 2,960 370 3,710 16,645 2015 7,258 2,300 2,947 378 4,140 17,023 2020 7,411 2,348 3,009 386 4,268 17,422 2025 7,565 2,397 3,072 394 4,346 17,774 2030 7,718 2,446 3,134 402 4,424 18,124 2035 7,872 2,494 3,196 410 4,502 18,474 2.3.2. Residential Residential water use accounts for the majority of the City's water demands. The single family residential sector accounts for approximately 44 percent and multi - family residential accounts for 14 percent of the total water demand. The remaining demands are for the non - residential sector and system losses. Water consumption by the residential sector is projected to remain at about 58 percent through the 25 -year planning horizon. 2.3.3. Non - Residential The City has a mix of commercial uses (markets, restaurants, etc.), public entities (such as schools, fire stations and government offices), office complexes, light industrial, warehouses and facilities serving the public. In 2010 non - residential demand was approximately 42 percent of the overall demand and is expected to remain so through 2035. Commercial, industrial, and institutional (CII) uses (excluding large landscape) represent a combined 20 percent of the City's total demand. Demands from large City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-5 Section 2 Water Demand landscapes such as parks and golf courses are expected to remain at around 22 percent of the City's total water demands for the next 25 years. 2.3.4. Other Water Uses 2.3.4.1. Sales to Other Agencies While the City does sell water outside of its service area, the City does not sell water to other agencies. 2.3.4.2. Non - Revenue Water Non - revenue water is defined by the International Water Association (IWA) as the difference between distribution systems input volume (i.e. production) and billed authorized consumption. Non - revenue water consists of three components: unbilled authorized consumption (e.g. hydrant flushing, fire fighting, and blow -off water from well start-ups), real losses (e.g. leakage in mains and service lines), and apparent losses (unauthorized consumption and metering inaccuracies). The City's non - revenue water accounts for about 6 percent of the City's total demand (Table 2 -5). Table 2 -5: Additional Water Uses and Losses (AFY) Water Use Fiscal Year Ending 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Saline Barriers Groundwater Recharge Conjunctive Use Raw Water Recycled Water Unaccounted -for System Losses 925 990 1,078 1,082 1,085 1,099 1,108 Total 925 990 1,078 1,082 1,085 1,099 1,108 2.4. SBx7 -7 Requirements 2.4.1. Overview SBx7 -7, which became effective on February 3, 2010, is the water conservation component to the Delta legislative package. It seeks to implement Governor Schwarzenegger's 2008 water use reduction goals to achieve a 20% statewide reduction in urban per capita water use by December 31, 2020. As discussed above, the bill requires each urban retail water supplier to develop urban water use targets to help meet the 20% goal by 2020 and an interim 10% goal by 2015. The bill establishes methods for urban retail water suppliers to determine targets to help achieve water reduction targets. The City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-6 Section 2 Water Demand retail water supplier must select one of the four compliance options. The retail agency may choose to comply to SBx7 -7 as an individual or as a region in collaboration with other water suppliers. Under the regional compliance option, the retail water supplier still has to report the water use target for its individual service area. The bill also includes reporting requirements in the 2010, 2015, and 2020 UWMPs. An agency that does not comply with SBx7 -7 requirement will not be eligible for a water grant or loan from the state on and after July 16, 2016. 2.4.2. SBx7 -7 Compliance Options DWR has established four compliance options for urban retail water suppliers to choose from. Each supplier is required to adopt one of the four options to comply with SBx7 -7 requirements. The four options include: • Option I requires a simple 20% reduction from the baseline by 2020 and 10 percent by 2015. • Option 2 employs a budget -based approach by requiring an agency to achieve a performance standard based on three metrics o Residential indoor water use of 55 GPCD o Landscape water use commiserate with Model Landscape Ordinance 0 10 percent reduction in baseline CII water use • Option 3 is to achieve 95% of the applicable state hydrologic region target as set forth in the State's 20x2020 Water Conservation Plan. • Option 4 requires the subtraction of Total Savings from the Base GPCD: o Total Savings includes indoor residential savings, meter savings, CII savings, and landscape and water loss savings. Newport Beach's Compliance Option Selection With MWDOC's assistance in the calculation of the City's base daily per capita use and water use targets, the City has selected to comply with Option 1. While each retail agency is required to choose a compliance option in 2010, DWR allows for the agency to change its compliance option in 2015. This will allow the City to determine its water use targets for Compliance Option 2 and 4 as it anticipates more data to be available for targets calculation in the future. 2.4.3. Regional Alliance Retail agencies can choose to meet the SBx7 -7 targets on its own or several retail agencies may form a regional alliance and meet the water use targets as a region. The benefit for an agency that joins a regional alliance is that it has multiple means of meeting compliance. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-7 Section 2 Water Demand The City is a member of the Orange County 20x2020 Regional Alliance formed by MWDOC. This regional alliance consists of 29 retail agencies in Orange County as described in MWDOC's 2010 RUWMP. The Regional Alliance Weighted 2015 target is 174.1 GPCD and 2020 target is 156.5 GPCD. 2.4.4. Baseline Water Use The first step to calculating an agency's water use targets is to determine its base daily per capita water use (baseline water use). This baseline water use is essentially the agency's gross water use divided by its service area population, reported in gallons per capita per day (GPCD). The baseline water use is calculated as a continuous 10 -year average during a period which ends no earlier than December 31, 2004 and no later than December 31, 2010. Agencies that recycled water made up 10 percent or more of 2008 retail water delivery can use up to a 15 -year average for the calculation. Recycled water use represents less than 10% of the City's retail delivery in 2008; therefore, a 10 -year instead of a 15 -year rolling average was calculated. The City's baseline water use is 253.5 GPCD which was obtained from the 10 -year period July 1, 1995 to June 30, 2005. Tables 2 -6 and 2 -7 provide the base period ranges used to calculate the baseline water use for the City as well as the service area population and annual water use data which the base daily per capita water use was derived. Data provided in Table 2 -6 was used to calculate the continuous 10 -year average baseline GPCD. Moreover, regardless of the compliance method adopted by the City, it will need to meet the minimum water use target of 5% reduction from a five -year baseline as calculated in Table 2 -7. Because the City is an OCWD agency, the City's gross water use includes deductions for indirect potable recycled water use from the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS) and Water Factory 21 managed by OCWD. The calculations for the gross water use are described in MWDOC's 2010 RUWMP. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-8 Section 2 Water Demand Table 2 -6: Base Daily per Capita Water Use — 10 -year range 10 Year Avq I July 1, 1995 1 June 30, 2005 Fiscal Year Ending 1996 Service Area Population 60,709 Gross Water Use 15,967,145 D .. Water 263 1997 61,277 16,814,358 274 1998 61,896 15,921,266 257 1999 62,514 16,976,611 272 2000 64,923 16,865,461 260 2001 66,033 16,197,012 245 2002 66,495 16,062,298 242 2003 66,734 16,083,658 241 2004 65,500 15,985,387 244 2005 65,993 1 15,630,375 1 237 Base Daily Per Capita Water Use: 1 253.5 [1] The most recent year in base period must end no earlier than December 31, 2004, and no later than December 31, 2010. The base period cannot exceed 10 years unless at least 10 percent of 2008 retail deliveries were met with recycled water. Table 2 -7: Base Daily per Capita Water Use — 5 -year range 5 Year Avq I July 1, 2003 1 June 30, 2008 Fiscal Year 1 Service Ending 2004 Area Population Gross Water Use Daily (gallons per day) 65,500 15,985,387 Use 244 2005 65,993 15,630,375 237 2006 65,962 15,616,451 237 2007 66,067 16,677,329 252 2008 66,451 16,038,474 241 Base Daily Per Capita Water Use: 242.3 [2] The base period must end no earlier than December 31, 2007, and no later than December 31, 2010. 2.4.5. SBx7 -7 Water Use Targets Under Compliance Option 1, the simple 20 percent reduction from the baseline, the City's 2015 interim water use target is 228.1 GPCD and the 2020 final water use target is 202.8 GPCD as summarized in Table 2 -8. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F27-9 Section 2 Water Demand Table 2 -8: Preferred Compliance Option and Water Use Targets 20% Reduction 1 253.5 i 228.1 i 202.8 2.5. Demand Projections 2.5.1. 25 -Year Projections One of the main objectives of this i.1WMP is to provide an insight into the City's future water demand outlook. Currently, the City's total water demand is 16,645 acre -feet comprising of 60% local groundwater, 37% imported water, and 3% recycled water. As illustrated in Table 2 -9, the City's water demand is expected to increase by 11% in the next 25 years to 18,474 acre -feet by 2035. Table 2 -9: Current and Projected Water Demands (AFY) Water Supply Sources Fiscal Year Ending 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 035 -0 MWDOC (Imported Treated Full Service (non- int.)) 6,161 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 BPP Groundwater 10,052 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 432 450 500 500 500 500 Total 16,645 17,023 17,422 1 17,774 1 18,124 1 18,474 The City's 25 -year demand projections for imported water shown in Table 2 -10 are based on the projections provided by the City to MWDOC. As the regional wholesale supplier of Orange County, MWDOC works in collaboration with each of its member agencies as well as with Metropolitan, its wholesaler, to develop demand projections for imported water. Table 2 -10: Newport Beach's Demand Projections Provided to Wholesale Suppliers (AFY) Wholesaler Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 -opt MWDOC 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 1 6,830 2.5.2. Low Income Household Projections One significant change to the UWMP Act since 2005 is the requirement for retail water suppliers to include water use projections for single - family and multifamily residential housing needed for lower income and affordable households. This requirement is to assist the retail suppliers in complying with the requirement under Section 65589.7 of the Government Code that suppliers grant a priority for the provision of service to housing City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 2 -10 Section 2 Water Demand units affordable to lower income households. A lower income household is defined as a household earning 80% of the County of Orange's median income or less. In order to identify the planned lower income housing projects within its service area, DWR3 recommends that retail suppliers may rely on Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) or Regional Housing Needs Plan information developed by the local council of governments, the California Department of Housing and Community Development. The RHNA is an assessment process performed periodically as part of Housing Element and General Plan updates at the local level. Regional Council of Governments in California are required by the State Housing Element Law enacted in 1980 to determine the existing and projected regional housing needs for persons at all income levels. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing by income group within each jurisdiction during specific planning periods. The RHNA is used in land use planning, to prioritize local resource allocation and to help decide how to address existing and future housing needs. The RHNA consists of two measurements: 1) existing need for housing, and 2) future need for housing. The current RHNA planning period is January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2014 completed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) in 2007. The next RHNA which will cover the planning period of January 1, 2011 to September 30, 2021 is not expected to be completed until fall of 2012; therefore, the 2007 RHNA will be used for the purpose of this 2010 i.JWMP. Based on the 2007 Final Regional Housing Need Allocation Plano, the projected housing need for low and very low income households (hereafter referred to as low- income) in the City of Newport Beach are 18.0% and 22.0 %, respectively or 40.0% combined. Therefore, from inference, it is estimated that approximately 40.0% of the projected water demands within the City's service area will be for housing needed for low income households. Table 2 -11 provides a breakdown of the projected water needs for low income single family and multifamily units. The projected water demands shown here represent 40.0% of the projected water demand by customer type for single - family and multifamily categories provided in Table 2 -4 above. For example, the total single family residential demand is projected to be 7,258 AFY in 2015 and 7,872 AFY in 2035. The projected water demands for housing needed for single family low income households are 2,903 and 3,149 AFY for 2015 and 2035, respectively. 3 California Departrnent of Water Resources, Guidebook to Assist Urban Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2010 UWMP, Final (March 2011) a Southern California Association Governments, Final Regional Housing Need Allocation Plan for Jurisdictions within the Six County SCAG Region (July 2007) City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 2 -11 Section 2 Water Demand Table 2 -11: Projected Water Demands for Housing Needed for Low Income Households (AFY) Water Use Sector Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 1 2035 -opt Total Retail Demand 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 Total Residential Demand 9,558 9,759 9,962 10,164 10,366 Total Low Income Households Demand 3,823 3,904 3,985 4,066 4,146 SF Residential Demand - Total 7,258 7,411 7,565 7,718 7,872 SF Residential Demand - Law Income Households 2,903 2,964 3,026 3,087 3,149 MF Residential Demand - Total 2,300 2,348 2,397 2,446 2,494 MF Residential Demand - Low Income Households 920 939 959 978 998 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 2 -12 3. Water Sources and Supply Reliability 3.1. Overview The City's main source of water supply is groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin and imported water from Metropolitan through MWDOC. Recycled water was recently added to the City's water supply portfolio. Today, the City relies on 60% groundwater, 37% imported, and 3% recycled water. It is projected that by 2035, the water supply mix will remain roughly the same. The City works together with three primary agencies — Metropolitan, MWDOC, and OCWD to insure a safe and high quality water supply, which will continue to serve the community in periods of drought and shortage. The sources of imported water supplies include the Colorado River and the State Water Project (SWP). Metropolitan's 2010 Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) update describes the core water resource strategy that will be used to meet full- service demands (non - interruptible agricultural and replenishment supplies) at the retail level under all foreseeable hydrologic conditions from 2015 through 2035. The imported water supply numbers shown here represent only the amount of supplies projected to meet demands and not the full supply capacity. Local groundwater pumped from the City's wells is managed by OCWD. The Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin is not adjudicated. In any given year, the amount of water which each City is allowed to pump out of the basin is based on the basin production percentage (BPP) established by OCWD. The OCWD sets the percentage of groundwater that an agency can pump based on their total potable water demand. The BPP fluctuates year by year but it is set uniformly for all Producers. Historically, BPP has ranged between approximately 60% to 80% depending on groundwater conditions, availability of recharge water supplies, and basin management objectives. For 2010/11, the BPP was set at 62 percent .5 As illustrated in Figure 3 -1, the BPP is assumed to remain at the conservative 62% level for the next 25 years. The remaining demand is projected to be met through imported water from Metropolitan/MWDOC and through a small portion of recycled water. 'The BPP was changed by OCWD in late April 2010 and effective July 2010 to 62 percent. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-1 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Figure 3 -1: Current and Projected Water Supplies (AFY) The following sections provide a detailed discussion of the City's three main water sources as well as projections to the City's future water supply portfolio for the next 25 years. Moreover, this compares projected supply and demand under various hydrological conditions to determine the City's supply reliability for the 25 year planning horizon. This section satisfies the requirements of § 10631 (b) and (c), and 10635 of the Water Code. 3.2. Imported Water The City currently relies on 6,161 AFY of imported water wholesaled by Metropolitan through MWDOC to supplement local groundwater. Imported water represents approximately 37% of the City's total water supply. Metropolitan's principal sources of water originate from two sources - the Colorado River via the Colorado Aqueduct and the Lake Oroville watershed in Northern California through the State Water Project (SWP). This water is treated at the Robert B. Diemer Filtration Plant located north of Yorba Linda. Typically, the Diemer Filtration Plant receives a blend of Colorado River water from Lake Mathews through the Metropolitan Lower Feeder and SWP water through the Yorba Linda Feeder. The AGENCY currently maintains six connections to the Metropolitan system along the Orange County Feeder and the East Orange County Feeder No. 2. The total available capacity is 104 cfs. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-2 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability 3.2.1. Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan Metropolitan's 2010 Regional Urban Water Management Plan (RUWMP) reports on its water reliability and identifies projected supplies to meet the long -term demand within its service area. It presents Metropolitan's supply capacities from 2015 through 2035 under the three hydrologic conditions specified in the Act: single dry-year, multiple dry- years, and average year. Colorado River Supplies Colorado River Aqueduct supplies include supplies that would result from existing and committed programs and from implementation of the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) and related agreements to transfer water from agricultural agencies to urban uses. Colorado River transactions are potentially available to supply additional water up to the CRA capacity of 1.25 MAF on an as- needed basis. State Water Project Supplies Metropolitan's State Water Project (SWP) supplies have been impacted in recent years by restrictions on SWP operations in accordance with the biological opinions of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fishery Service issued on December 15, 2008 and June 4, 2009, respectively. In dry, below - normal conditions, Metropolitan has increased the supplies received from the California Aqueduct by developing flexible Central Valley /SWP storage and transfer programs. The goal of the storage /transfer programs is to develop additional dry-year supplies that can be conveyed through the available Banks pumping capacity to maximize deliveries through the California Aqueduct during dry hydrologic conditions and regulatory restrictions. In June 2007, Metropolitan's Board approved a Delta Action Plan that provides a framework for staff to pursue actions with other agencies and stakeholders to build a sustainable Delta and reduce conflicts between water supply conveyance and the environment. The Delta action plan aims to prioritize immediate short-term actions to stabilize the Delta while an ultimate solution is selected, and mid -term steps to maintain the Bay -Delta while the long -term solution is implemented. State and federal resource agencies and various environmental and water user entities are currently engaged in the development of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), which is aimed at addressing the basic elements that include the Delta ecosystem restoration, water supply conveyance, and flood control protection and storage development. In evaluating the supply capabilities for the 2010 RUWMP, Metropolitan assumed a new Delta conveyance is fully operational by 2022 that would return supply reliability similar to 2005 condition, prior to supply restrictions imposed due to the Biological Opinions. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-3 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Storage Storage is a major component of Metropolitan's dry year resource management strategy. Metropolitan's likelihood of having adequate supply capability to meet projected demands, without implementing its Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP), is dependent on its storage resources. In developing the supply capabilities for the 2010 RUWMP, Metropolitan assumed a simulated median storage level going into each of five -year increments based on the balances of supplies and demands. Supply Reliability Metropolitan evaluated supply reliability by projecting supply and demand conditions for the single- and multi -year drought cases based on conditions affecting the SWP (Metropolitan's largest and most variable supply). For this supply source, the single driest -year was 1977 and the three -year dry period was 1990 -1992. Metropolitan's analyses are illustrated in Tables 3 -1, 3 -2, and 3 -3 which correspond to Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP's Tables 2 -11, 2 -9 and 2 -10, respectively. These tables show that the region can provide reliable water supplies not only under normal conditions but also under both the single driest year and the multiple dry year hydrologies. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-4 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Table 3 -1: Metropolitan Average Year Projected Supply Capability and Demands for 2015 to 2035 AverageYear Supply Capability' and Projected Demands Average of 1922 -2004 Hydrologies (acre -feet per year) Forecast Year 2015 2020 r r t 2035 Current Programs 1— In- Region Storage and Programs CaliforniaAqueductz Colorado River Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Supply3 Aqueduct CapacityLimit4 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 685,00D 1,550,000 1,507.000 1,250,000 1,250,000 931,000 1,629,000 1,529,000 1,250.000 1,250,000 1,076,000 1,763,000 1,472,ODO 1,250,000 1,250,000 964,000 1,733,000 1432,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 830,000 1,734,000 1,429,000 1,250,000 1.250,000 Capabli of Current Programs 3,485,000 3,810,000 4,089,000 3,947,000 3,814,000 Demands Firm Demands of Metropolitan IID- SDCWATransfers and Canal Linings 1.826,000 180,000 1.660,000 273.000 1,705,000 280.000 1.769,000 280.000 1,826,000 280.000 Total Demands on Metropolitans 2,006,000 1,933,000 1,985,000 2,049,000 2,106,000 Surplus 1,479,000 1,877,000 2,104,000 1,898,000 1,708,000 Programs Under Development In- Region Storage and Programs California Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Supply3 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 206,000 382,000 187,000 0 0 306,000 383,000 187,000 0 0 336,000 715,000 187,000 0 0 336,000 715,000 182,000 0 0 336,ODO 715,000 182,000 0 0 Capability of Proposed Programs 588,000 689,000 1,051,000 1,051,000 1,051,000 Potential Surplus 2,067,000 2,566,000 3,155,000 2,949,000 2,759,000 r Represents Supply Capability for resource programs under listed year type- = California Aqueduct Includes Central Valley transfers and storage program supplies conveyed by the aqueduct. 3 Colorado River Aqueduct Includes water management programs, [ID-SDCWA transfers and canal linings conveyed by the aqueduct. •MOxlmum CRA deliveries limited to 1.25 MAF Including IID -SDCWA transfers and canal linings. s Firm demands are adjusted to include [ID-SDCWA transfers and canal linings. These supplies are calculated as local supply, but need to be shown for the purposes of CRA capacity limit calculations without double counting. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-5 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Table 3 -2: Metropolitan Single -Dry Year Projected Supply Capability and Demands for 2015 to 2035 Single Dry -Year Supply Capability' and Projected Demands Repeat of 1977 hydrology (arse -feet per year) Represenrs Supply Capabilih, for esource Drograms under listed yecr type. 3 California Aqueduct includes Central Valley transfers and storage progrm supplies conveyed by the cqueduct. 3 Colorado River Aqueduct incil water management programs, IU- SDC;WA transfers and canal linings conveyed by the ocuedud. 4 Maximum CRA deliveries limited to 1.25 MAF Including IID -SDCWA transfers and canal linings. s Firm derril are uqusled Io - nclude IID -SDCWA Irurnfers and cunul rings. These supplies ure culcvluled us Iccul supply, but need to be shown for the purposes of CRA. capacity limit calculations'wrhoui double counting. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-6 Forecast Year 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Current Programs IrrRegion Storage and Programs California Aqueductz Colorado River Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Supply3 Aqueduct Capacity Limit' Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 685,000 .522.000 1,416,000 1,250,000 1.250,000 931,000 601.000 1.824.000 1,250,000 1.25D.000 1,076,000 651.000 1.669,000 1,250,000 1.250.000 964,000 609.000 1.419.000 1,25G,000 1.250.000 8301000 610.000 1.419.000 1,250,000 1.250.000 Capability of Current Programs 2.457.000 2.782.000 2,977,000 2.823.000 2.690,000 Demands Firm Demands of Metropolitan IID -SCCWA Transfers and Carol Linings 1,991,000 180,000 1,889,=0 273, =0 1,921.=0 280,000 1,9/4,0= 280,0= 2.039,000 280,000 Total Demands on Metropolitans 2,171,000 2,162,000 2,201,000 2,254,000 2.319,000 Surplus 286,000 620,000 776,000 569,000 371,000 Programs Under Development In- Region Storage and Programs Culifurniu Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Supply' Aqueduct Capacity Limil`4 Colurudo River Aqueduct Capablily 206,0= 556,000 187,000 0 0 306.000 556,OOD 187,000 0 D 336,0= 700,000 187,000 0 0 336,0= 700,000 182,000 0 0 336,0= 700,000 182,000 0 0 Capability of Proposed Programs 762,000 862,000 1,036,000 1,036,000 1,036,000 Potential Surplus 1.048,000 1,482.000 1,812.000 1.605.000 1.407.000 Represenrs Supply Capabilih, for esource Drograms under listed yecr type. 3 California Aqueduct includes Central Valley transfers and storage progrm supplies conveyed by the cqueduct. 3 Colorado River Aqueduct incil water management programs, IU- SDC;WA transfers and canal linings conveyed by the ocuedud. 4 Maximum CRA deliveries limited to 1.25 MAF Including IID -SDCWA transfers and canal linings. s Firm derril are uqusled Io - nclude IID -SDCWA Irurnfers and cunul rings. These supplies ure culcvluled us Iccul supply, but need to be shown for the purposes of CRA. capacity limit calculations'wrhoui double counting. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-6 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Table 3 -3: Metropolitan Multiple -Dry Year Projected Supply Capability and Demands for 2015 to 2035 Multiple Dry-Year Supply Capability' and Projected Demands Repeat of 1990.1992 Hydrology (acre -feet per year) Foreccisf Year 2015 2020 2025 2030 Current Programs In- Region Storage and Programs California Aqueduct2 Colorado River Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Supply3 Aqueduct Capacity Limit4 Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 246,000 752,000 11318,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 373,000 794,000 1,600,000 1,250,000 1.250,000 435,000 835,000 1,417,000 1,250,000 1,250.000 398,000 811,000 1,416,000 1,250,000 1,250.000 353,000 812,000 1,416,000 1,250,000 1,250,000 Capability of Currenf Programs 2,248,000 2,417,000 2,520,000 2,459,000 2,415,000 Demands Firm Demands of Metropolitan IID -SDCWA transfers and Canal Linings 2,056,000 180.000 1,947,000 241,000 2,003,000 280,000 2,059,000 280,000 2,119,000 280,000 Total Demands on Metropolitans 2,236,000 2,188.000 2.283,000 2,339,000 2,399,000 Surplus 12,000 229,000 237,000 120,000 16,000 Programs Under Development In- Region Storage and Programs California Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Colorado River Aqueduct Supply3 Aqueduct Capacity Limit+ Colorado River Aqueduct Capability 162,000 242,000 187,000 0 0 280,000 273,000 187,000 0 0 314,000 419,010 187,000 0 0 336,000 419,000 182,000 0 0 336,000 419,000 182,000 0 0 Capability of Proposed Programs 404,000 553,000 733,000 755,000 755,000 Potential Surplus 416,000 782,000 970,000 875,000 771,000 I Represents Supply Capability for resource programs under listed year type. 2 California Aqueduct Includes Central Valley transfers and storage program supplies conveyed by the aqueduct. 3 Colorado River Aqueduct Includes water management programs, IID -SDCWA transfers and canal linings conveyed by the aqueduct. 4 Maximum CRA deliveries limited to 1.25 MAF including IID -SDCWA transfers and canal linings. 5 Firm demands are adjusted to include IID -SDCWA transfers and canal finings. These supplies are calculated as local supply, but need to be shown for the purposes of CRA capacity limit calculations without double counting. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-7 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability 3.2.2. Newport Beach's Imported Water Supply Projections Based on Metropolitan's supply projections that it will be able to meet full service demands under all three hydrologic scenarios, MWDOC, Orange county's wholesale supplier projects that it would also be able to meet the demands of its retail agencies under these conditions. California Water Code section 10631 (k) requires the wholesale agency to provide information to the urban retail water supplier for inclusion in its i.IWMP that identifies and quantifies the existing and planned sources of water available from the wholesale agency. Table 3 -4 indicates the wholesaler's water availability projections by source for the next 25 years as provided to the City by MWDOC. The water supply projections shown in Table 3 -4 represent the amount of supplies projected to meet demands. They do not represent the full supply capacity. Table 3 -4: Wholesaler Identified & Quantified Existing and Planned Sources of Water (AFY) Wholesaler Sources Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 -opt MWDOC 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 3.3. Groundwater Local groundwater has been the cheapest and most reliable source of supply for the City. The City relies on approximately 10,000 acre -feet of groundwater from the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin (Orange County Basin) each year. This local source of supply meets approximately 60% of the City's total annual demand. In the effort to maximize local resources, Metropolitan has partnered with OCWD and MWDOC and its member agencies who are groundwater producers in various programs to encourage the development of local resources. Metropolitan's Groundwater Replenishment Program is a program where a groundwater producer may purchase imported water from Metropolitan at areduced rate when "surplus" water is available in lieu of extracting groundwater. This program indirectly replenishes the basin by avoiding pumping. This section provides description of the Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin and the management measures taken by OCWD the basin manager to optimize local supply and minimize overdraft. Moreover, this section provides information on historical groundwater production as well as a 25 -year projection of the City's groundwater supply. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-8 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability 3.3.1. Lower Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin The Lower Santa Ana Groundwater Basin, also known as the Orange County Groundwater Basin (Basin) underlies the north half of Orange County beneath broad lowlands. The Basin covers an area of approximately 350 square miles, bordered by the Coyote and Chino Hills to the north, the Santa Ana Mountains to the northeast, the Pacific Ocean to the southwest, and terminates at the Orange County line to the northwest, where its aquifer systems continue into the Central Basin of Los Angeles County. The aquifers comprising this Basin extend over 2,000 feet deep and form a complex series of interconnected sand and gravel deposits. The Orange County Water District (OCWD) was formed in 1933 by a special legislative act of the State of California Legislature to protect and manage the County's vast, natural, underground water supply with the best available technology and to defend its water rights to the Orange County Groundwater Basin. This legislation is found in the State of California Statutes, Water — Uncodified Acts, Act 5683, as amended .b The Basin is managed by OCWD under the Act, which functions as a statutorily- imposed physical solution. Section 77 of the Act states that, 'nothing in this act contained shall he so construed as to affect or impair the vested right of any person, association or corporation to the use of water.7 The Basin is managed by OCWD for the benefit of municipal, agricultural and private groundwater producers. The Basin meets approximately 60 to 70 percent of the water supply demand within the boundaries of OCWD. There are 19 major producers including cities, water districts, and private water companies, extracting water from the Basin serving a population of approximately 2.55 million.8 Groundwater levels are managed within a safe basin operating range to protect the long- term sustainability of the basin and to protect against land subsidence. In 2007, OCWD established a new methodology for calculating accumulated overdraft and establishing new full -basin benchmarks.9 Based on OCWD's 2009 Groundwater Management Plan, the optimal accumulated overdraft is between 100,000 and 434,000 AF. At the top of the range, OCWD will be able to provide at least three years of drought supply. An accumulated overdraft condition minimizes the localized high groundwater levels and increases ability to recharge storm events from the Santa Ana River. At an accumulated overdraft of 200,000 AF, the Basin is considered 99.7 percent full. OCWD estimates that Orange County Water District Act, Section 77. s MWDOC and Center for Demographics Research (2005) 9 The Report on Evaluation of Orange County Groundwater Basin Storage and Operational Strategy, published in February 2007. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-9 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability the Basin can safely be operated on a short-term emergency basis with a maximum accumulated overdraft of approximately 500,000 AF. In an effort to eliminate long -tetra overdraft conditions, OCWD developed a comprehensive computer -based groundwater flow model to study and better understand the Basin's reaction to pumping and recharge. OCWD manages the Basin by establishing on an annual basis the appropriate level of groundwater production known as the Basin Production Percentage (BPP) as described below. 3.3.2. Basin Production Percentage No pumping right exists for the Orange County Basin. Total pumping from the basin is managed through a process that uses financial incentives to encourage groundwater producers to pump an aggregate amount of water that is sustainable without harming the Basin. The framework for the financial incentives is based on establishing the BPP which is the percentage of each Producer's total water supply that comes from groundwater pumped from the basin. Groundwater production at or below the BPP is assessed the Replenishment Assessment (RA). While there is no legal limit as to how much an agency could pump from the Basin, there is a financial disincentive to pumping above the BPP. Pumping above the BPP is also assessed a Basin Equity Assessment (BEA), which is calculated so that the cost of groundwater production is equal to MWDOC's melded rate. The BPP is set uniformly for all Producers by OCWD on an annual basis. The BPP for the 2008 -2009 water year (July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2009) was established at 69.0. The overall BPP achieved within OCWD for non - irrigation use in the 2008 -09 water year was equal to 72.5 percent. The BPP has recently been set at 62 percent for the 2010 -2011 water year. For the purpose of this UWMP, the BPP is assumed to be 62 percent for the entire 25 -year planning horizon (Table 3 -5). Table 3 -5: Current Basin Production Percentage Basin Name Basin Production Percentage Orange County Groundwater Basin 62% Total 62% The BPP is set based on groundwater conditions, availability of imported water supplies, and Basin management objectives. The BPP is also a major factor in determining the cost of groundwater production from the Basin for that year. When Metropolitan has an abundance of water, they may choose to activate their Groundwater Replenishment Program also known as In -Lieu Program, where imported water is purchased in -lieu of pumping groundwater. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -10 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability In some cases, OCWD encourages the pumping of groundwater that does not meet drinking water standards in order to protect water quality. This is achieved by using a financial incentive called the BEA Exemption. A BEA Exemption is used to encourage pumping of groundwater that does not meet drinking water standards in order to clean up and contain the spread of poor quality water. OCWD uses a partial or total exemption of the BEA to compensate a qualified participating agency or Producer for the costs of treating poor - quality groundwater. When OCWD authorizes a BEA exemption for a project, it is obligated to provide the replenishment water for the production above the BPP and forgoes the BEA revenue that OCWD would otherwise receive from the producer. 3.3.3. Recharge Facilities Recharging water into the basin through natural and artificial means is essential to support pumping from the basin. Active recharge of groundwater began in 1949, in response to increasing drawdown of the basin and consequently the threat of seawater intrusion. In 1949, OCWD began purchasing imported Colorado River water from Metropolitan, which was delivered to Orange County via the Santa Ana River upstream of Prado Dam. The Basin's primary source of recharge is flow from the Santa Ana River. OCWD diverts river flows into recharge basins located in and adjacent to the Santa Ana River and its main Orange County tributary, Santiago Creek. Other sources of recharge water include natural infiltration and recycled water. Today OCWD owns and operates a network of recharge facilities that cover 1,067 acres. The recharge capacity has exceeded 10,000 AFY with the addition of the La Jolla Recharge Basin which came online in 2008. The La Jolla Recharge Basin is a 6 -acre recharge basin. One of OCWD's primary efforts has been the control of seawater intrusion into the Basin, especially via the Talbert and Alamitos seawater intrusion barriers. OCWD began addressing the Alamitos Gap intrusion by entering a partnership in 1965 with the Los Angeles County Flood Control District to operate injection wells in the Alamitos Gap. Operation of the injection wells forms a hydraulic barrier to seawater intrusion. To address seawater intrusion in the Talbert Gap, OCWD constructed Water Factory 21, a plant that treated secondary- treated water from the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) to produce purified water for injection. Water Factory 21 operated for approximately 30 years until it was taken off line in 2004. It was replaced by an advanced water treatment system, the Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS). The GWRS is a cooperative project between OCWD and OCSD that began operating in 2008. Secondary- treated wastewater from OCSD undergoes treatment consisting of microfiltration, reverse osmosis, and advanced oxidation with ultraviolet light and hydrogen peroxide. It is the largest water purification project of its kind, Phase I of the GWRS began operating in 2008 with a capacity of purifying 72,000 AFY of water. The GWRS provides recharge water for the Talbert Injection Barrier as well as to recharge City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -11 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability basins in the City of Anaheim. The Expanded Talbert Injection Barrier included 8 new injection wells which operation began in 2008. The GWRS increased reliable, local water supplies available for barrier injection from 5 MGD to 30 MGD. 3.3.4. Metropolitan Groundwater Replenishment Program OCWD, MWDOC, and Metropolitan have developed a successful and efficient groundwater replenishment program to increase storage in the Orange County Groundwater Basin. The Groundwater Replenishment Program allows Metropolitan to sell groundwater replenishment water to OCWD and make direct deliveries to agency distribution systems in lieu of producing water from the groundwater basin when surplus water is available. This program indirectly replenishes the basin by avoiding pumping. In the in -lieu program, OCWD requests an agency to halt pumping from specified wells. The agency then takes replacement water through its import connections, which is purchased by OCWD from Metropolitan (through MWDOC). OCWD purchases the water at a reduced rate, and then bills the agency for the amount it would have had to pay for energy and the Replenishment Assessment (RA) if it had produced the water from its wells. The deferred local production results in water being left in local storage for future use. In 2008 and 2009, OCWD did not utilize replenishment water because such water was not available to purchase from Metropolitan. 3.3.5. Metropolitan Conjunctive Use Program Since 2004, OCWD, MWDOC, and participating producers have participated in Metropolitan's Conjunctive Use Program (known as the Metropolitan Long -Tenn Groundwater Storage Program). This program allows for the storage of Metropolitan water in the Orange County groundwater basin. The existing Metropolitan storage program provides for Metropolitan to store 66,000 AF of water in the basin in exchange for Metropolitan's contribution to improvements in basin management facilities. These improvements include eight new groundwater production wells, improvements to the seawater intrusion barrier, construction of the Diemer Bypass Pipeline. This water can be withdrawn over a three -year time period.. The preferred means to store water in the Metropolitan storage account has been through the in -lieu deliveries to participating groundwater producers. 3.3.6. Historical Groundwater Production Since its founding, OCWD has grown in size from 162,676 to 229,000 acres. Groundwater pumping from the basin has grown from approximately 150,000 AFY in the City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F37-12 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability mid -1950s to over 300,000 AFY. During the water year July 2008 to June 2009, total basin production for all agencies was approximately 324,147 acre -feet (AF). 10 The City obtains groundwater pumped from four wells owned and operated by the City and managed by OCWD. The City's wells are located in the City of Fountain Valley, approximately five miles north of the City. The only constraints affecting groundwater supply to the City are the pumping capacity of the wells and pumping limitations (BPP) established by OCWD to maintain the groundwater basin. Table 3 -6 shows the City's recent groundwater production from the Basin in the past five years from 2005 to 2009. During certain seasons of 2005, 2006, and 2007, OCWD has operated the In -lieu Program with Metropolitan by purchasing water from Metropolitan to meet demands of member agencies rather than pumping water from the groundwater basin. In 2008 and 2009, OCWD did not utilize in -lieu water because such water was not available to purchase from Metropolitan." Table 3 -6: Amount of Groundwater Pumped in the Past 5 Years (AFY) Basin Name(s) Fiscal Year Ending 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 BPP GW 4,984 3,546 3,605 14,338 11,309 Plus In -Lieu taken for OCWD 6,652 7,682 8,553 - - Subtotal OCWD Basin GW 11,636 11,228 12,158 14,338 11,309 % of Total Water Supply 65% 63% 64% 78% 65% 3.3.7. Projections of Groundwater Production The mission of the OCWD is to provide local water retailers with a reliable, adequate, high quality water supply at the lowest reasonable cost in an environmentally responsible manner. Efforts have been made to develop and secure new supplies. Also in December 2008, OCWD secured the rights to divert and use up to 362,000 AFY of Santa Ana River water through a decision of the State Water Resources Control Board. Description to other recent OCWD projects can be found in OCWD's 2009 GWMP. Based on the annual MWDOC survey completed by each Producer in the spring of 2008, the estimated demand for groundwater in the OCWD boundary will increase from 519,000 AFY in 2015 to 558,000 AFY in 2035 representing a 7.5 percent increase over a 20 year period. OCWD's estimated total annual groundwater production for the water 10 2008 -2009 Engineer's Report on Groundwater conditions, Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the Orange County Water District, February 2010 � � 2008 -2009 Engineer's Report on Groundwater conditions, Water Supply and Basin Utilization in the Orange County Water District, February 2010 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -13 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability year 2010 -2011 is 295,000 AF based on a BPP of 62 percent and includes 22,000 AF of production from water quality improvement projects. Table 3 -7 shows the amount of groundwater projected to be pumped from the Basin in the next 25 years. The BPP is assumed to remain at 62 percent for the entire planning horizon. Table 3 -7: Amount of Groundwater Projected to be Pumped (AFY) Basin Names) Fiscal Year Ending 2010 2015 2020 2025 2035 -opt BPP GW 10,052 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 % of Total Water Supply 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 3.4. Recycled Water The City participates in a reclaimed /recycled water program and uses the water supplies available to water greenbelts, parkways, golf courses, and other landscape areas that may otherwise use valuable potable water for irrigation. This reclaimed /recycled water is wholesaled by OCWD through its Green Acres Project (GAP). In 2009/10, usage of recycled water within the City's Water Utility service area was about 400 acre feet. Recycled water usage meets approximately 3% of the City's water demand. The City's recycled water program is more fully described in Section 6. 3.5. Supply Reliability 3.5.1. Overview It is required that every urban water supplier assess the reliability to provide water service to its customers under normal, dry, and multiple dry water years. The City depends on a combination of imported and local supplies to meet its water demands and has taken numerous steps to insure it has adequate supplies. Development of groundwater, recycled water system, and desalination opportunities augments the reliability of the imported water system. There are various factors that may impact reliability of supplies such as legal, environmental, water quality and climatic which are discussed below. The water supplies are projected to meet full- service demands; Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP finds that Metropolitan is able to meet with existing supplies, full- service demands of its member agencies starting 2015 through 2035 during normal years, single dry year, and multiple dry years. Metropolitan's 2010 Integrated Water Resources Plan (IRP) update describes the core water resource strategy that will be used to meet full- service demands at the retail level under all foreseeable hydrologic conditions from 2015 through 2035. The foundation of City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -f4 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Metropolitan's resource strategy for achieving regional water supply reliability has been to develop and implement water resources programs and activities through its IRP preferred resource mix. This preferred resource mix includes conservation, local resources such as water recycling and groundwater recovery, Colorado River supplies and transfers, SWP supplies and transfers, in- region surface reservoir storage, in- region groundwater storage, out -of- region banking, treatment, conveyance and infrastructure improvements. MWDOC is reliant on Metropolitan for all of its imported water. With the addition of planned supplies under development, Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP finds that Metropolitan will be able to meet full- service demands from 2015 through 2035, even under a repeat of the worst drought. Table 3 -8 shows the reliability of the wholesaler's supply for single dry year and multiple dry year scenarios. Table 3 -8: Wholesaler Supply Reliability - % of Normal AFY In addition to meeting full- service demands from 2015 through 2035, Metropolitan projects reserve and replenishment supplies to refill system storage. MWDOC's 2010 RUWMP states that it will meet full- service demands to its customers from 2015 through 2035. Table 3 -9 shows the basis of water year data used to predict drought supply availability. Table 3 -9: Basis of Water Year Data ater Year Type Normal Water Year Base Year Base Year Base Ye Average 1922 -2004 Multiple Dry Water Years 1977 Single 1990 1991 1992 Wholesaler Sources Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Dry MWDOC 100% 100% 100% 100% In addition to meeting full- service demands from 2015 through 2035, Metropolitan projects reserve and replenishment supplies to refill system storage. MWDOC's 2010 RUWMP states that it will meet full- service demands to its customers from 2015 through 2035. Table 3 -9 shows the basis of water year data used to predict drought supply availability. Table 3 -9: Basis of Water Year Data ater Year Type Normal Water Year Base Year Base Year Base Ye Average 1922 -2004 Single -Dry Water Year 1977 Multiple -Dry Water Years 1990 1991 1992 3.5.2. Factors Impacting Reliability The Act requires a description of the reliability of the water supply and vulnerability to seasonal or climatic shortage. The City relies on import supplies provided by Metropolitan through MWDOC. The following are some of the factors identified by Metropolitan that may have an impact on the reliability of Metropolitan supplies. Environment — Endangered species protection needs in the Sacramento -San Joaquin River Delta have resulted in operational constraints to the SWP system. The Bay - Delta's declining ecosystem caused by agricultural runoff, operation of water pumps and other factors has led to historical restrictions in SWP supply deliveries. SWP delivery City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -15 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability restrictions due to the biological opinions resulted in the loss of about one -third of the available SWP supplies in 2008. Legal — Listings of additional species under the Endangered Species Act and new regulatory requirements could impact SWP operations by requiring additional export reductions, releases of additional water from storage or other operational changes impacting water supply operations. Additionally, the Quantification Settlement Agreement has been challenged in courts and may have impacts on the Imperial Irrigation District and San Diego County Water Authority transfer. If there are negative impacts, San Diego could become more dependent on the Metropolitan supplies. Water Quality —Water imported from the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) contains high level of salts. The operational constraint is that this water needs to be blended with SWP supplies to meet the target salinity of 500 mg/L of total dissolved solids (TDS). Another water quality concern is related to quagga mussel. Controlling the spread and impacts of quagga mussels within the Colorado River Aqueduct require extensive maintenance and results in reduced operational flexibility. Climate Change — Changing climate patterns are expected to shift precipitation patterns and affect water supply. Unpredictable weather patterns will make water supply planning even more challenging. The areas of concern for California include the reduction in Sierra Nevada snowpack, increased intensity and frequency of extreme weather events, and rising sea levels causing increased risk of levee failure. Legal, environmental, and water quality issues may have impacts on Metropolitan supplies. It is felt however climatic factors would have more of an impact than the others. Climatic conditions have been projected based on historical patterns; however severe pattern changes may occur in the future. Table 3 -10 shows the factors resulting in inconsistency of supply. Table 3 -10: Factors Resulting in Inconsistency of Supply Name of Supply Legal Environmental Water Quality Climatic State Water Project X X Colorado River X X These and other factors are addressed in greater detail in Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP. 3.5.2.1. Water Quality Imported Water - Metropolitan is responsible for providing water of a high quality throughout its service area. The water that Metropolitan delivers is tested both for City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -76 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability currently regulated contaminants and for additional contaminants of concern as over 300,000 water quality tests are conducted each year to regulate the safety of its waters. Metropolitan's supplies originate primarily from the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA) and from the State Water Project (SWP). A blend of these two sources, proportional to each year's availability of the source, is then delivered throughout Metropolitan's service area. Metropolitan's primary sources face individual water quality issues of concern. The CRA water source contains a higher level of total dissolved solids (TDS) and a lower level of organic material while the SWP contains a lower TDS level while its level or organic materials is much higher, lending to the formation of disinfection byproducts. To remediate the CRA's high level of salinity and the SWP's high level of organic materials, Metropolitan has been blending CRA water with SWP supplies as well as implementing updated treatment processes to decrease the disinfection byproducts. In addition, Metropolitan has been engaged in efforts to protect its Colorado River supplies from threats of uranium, perchlorate, and chromium VI while also investigating the potential water quality impact of emerging contaminants, N- nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs). Metropolitan has assured its ability to overcome the above mentioned water quality concerns through its protection of source waters, implementation of renovated treatment processes, and blending of its two sources. While unforeseeable water quality issues could alter reliability, Metropolitan's current strategies ensure the deliverability of high quality water. Groundwater - The Orange County Water District (OCWD) is responsible for managing the Orange County Groundwater Basin. To maintain groundwater quality, OCWD conducts an extensive monitoring program that serves to manage the basin's groundwater production, control groundwater contamination, and comply with all necessary laws and regulations. 12 A network of nearly 700 wells provides OCWD a source for samples, which are tested for a variety of purposes. The District collects 600 to 1,700 samples each month to monitor the quality of the basin's water. These samples are collected and tested according to approved federal and state procedures as well as industry- recognized quality assurance and control protocols. OCWD recognizes the importance of maintaining the basin's high water quality. OCWD's 2009 Groundwater Management Plan Update includes a section labeled, "Water Quality Management," which discusses the water quality concerns as well as management programs that OCWD is currently involved with. 12 The information in this section is referenced from the Groundwater Management Plan 2009 Update "Groundwater Monitoring" section (pages 3 -1 through 3 -20) and "Water Quality Managemenf' section (pages 5 -1 through 5 -30). City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -17 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Table 3 -11 shows the amount in acre -feet per year that water quality would have on supply. Table 3 -11: Water Quality — Current and Projected Water Supply Impacts (AFY) ater Fiscal Year Ending W Source 2010 2020 2025 2030 Imported 0 0 0 0 0 0 Local 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.5.3. Normal -Year Reliability Comparison The City has entitlements and/or written contracts to receive imported water from Metropolitan via the regional distribution system. Although pipeline capacity rights do not guarantee the availability of water, per se, they do guarantee the ability to convey water when it is available to the Metropolitan distribution system. All imported water supplies assumed in this section are available to the City from existing water transmission facilities. Table 3 -12 shows supply and demand under normal year conditions. Water supplies are projected to be available from Metropolitan; however, it is not included here since projected supplies meet projected demands. Table 3 -12: Projected Normal Water Supply and Demand (AFY) 3.5.4. Single Dry -year Reliability Comparison The City has documented that it is 100% reliable for single dry year demands from 2015 through 2035 with a demand increase of 4.6% using FY 2006 -07 as the single dry year. Table 3 -13 compiles supply and demand projections for a single dry water year. The available imported supply is greater than shown; however, it is not included because all demands are met. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -18 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 Total Demand 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 6,298 6,430 6,564 6,697 6,830 Total Supply 17,023 17,422 17,774 18,124 18,474 3.5.4. Single Dry -year Reliability Comparison The City has documented that it is 100% reliable for single dry year demands from 2015 through 2035 with a demand increase of 4.6% using FY 2006 -07 as the single dry year. Table 3 -13 compiles supply and demand projections for a single dry water year. The available imported supply is greater than shown; however, it is not included because all demands are met. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -18 Section 3 Water Sources and Supply Reliability Table 3 -13: Projected Single -Dry Year Water Supply and Demand (AFY) 3.5.5. Multiple Dry -Year Reliability Comparison The City is capable of providing their customers all their demands with significant reserves in multiple dry years from 2015 through 2035 with a demand increase of 4.6% using FY 2006 -07 as the multiple dry years. This is true even if the demand projections were to be increased by a large margin. Table 3 -14 shows supply and demand projections under multiple dry year conditions. Table 3 -14: Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 203 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 3.5.5. Multiple Dry -Year Reliability Comparison The City is capable of providing their customers all their demands with significant reserves in multiple dry years from 2015 through 2035 with a demand increase of 4.6% using FY 2006 -07 as the multiple dry years. This is true even if the demand projections were to be increased by a large margin. Table 3 -14 shows supply and demand projections under multiple dry year conditions. Table 3 -14: Projected Multiple Dry Year Period Supply and Demand (AFY) City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -19 Fiscal Year Ending 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 First Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Second Year Supply Recycled Water 450 1 500 500 1 500 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 Total Demand 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 BPP GW 10,275 10,492 10,710 10,927 11,144 Third Year Supply Recycled Water 450 500 500 500 1 500 Imported 7,081 7,232 7,382 7,531 7,680 Total Supply 17,806 18,223 18,592 18,958 19,324 City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 3 -19 4. Demand Management Measures 4.1. Overview Water conservation, often called demand -side management, can be defined as practices, techniques, and technologies that improve the efficiency of water use. Such practices are referred to as demand management measures (DMM). Increased efficiency expands the use of the water resource, freeing up water supplies for other uses, such as population growth, new industry, and environmental conservation. The increasing efforts in water conservation are spurred by a number of factors: growing competition for limited supplies, increasing costs and difficulties in developing new supplies, optimization of existing facilities, delay of capital investments in capacity expansion, and growing public support for the conservation of limited natural resources and adequate water supplies to preserve environmental integrity. The City recognizes the importance of water conservation and has made water use efficiency an integral part of water use planning. The City has been a signatory to the California Urban Water Conservation Council's ( CUWCC) Best Management Practices (BMPs) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) since August 2005. The City completed and submitted its first BMP Activity Report in fiscal year 2006 showing implementation status of each BMP. This section of the UWMP describes the DMMs currently being implemented or scheduled for implementation by the City to satisfy the requirements of § 10631 (f) & 0). Demand Management Measures as defined by the Act corresponds to the CUWCC's BMPs. The Act allows the urban water supplier who is signatory to the CUWCC MOU to submit to DWR copies of its annual reports and other relevant documents to assist DWR in determining whether the urban water supplier is implementing or scheduling the implementation of water demand management activities. 4.2. Water Use Efficiency Programs As Signatory to the Urban MOU, the City has committed to use good -faith efforts to implement the 14 cost - effective BMPs. The City has implemented and is actively participating in many water conservation activities. A Water Conservation Ordinance was adopted by the City Council in 2009 in the City's municipal code as Chapter 14.16 Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-1 Section 4 Demand Management Measures Moreover, as a member agency of MWDOC, the City actively participates in various Metropolitan residential and CII rebate programs, as well as school and public education and outreach programs, and other programs administered by MWDOC. MWDOC implements many of the urban water conservation BMPs on behalf of its member agencies. MWDOC's 2010 RUWMP should be referred to for a detailed discussion of each regional BMP program. The City works cooperatively with MWDOC for technical and financial support needed to facilitate meeting the terms of the MOU. MWDOC's current Water Use Efficiency Program, detailed in their 2010 RUWMP, implemented on behalf of its member agencies following three basic focuses: 1. Regional Program Development — MWDOC develops, obtains funding for, and implements regional BMP programs on behalf of all retail water agencies in Orange County. 2. Local Program Assistance - MWDOC assists retail agencies to develop and implement local programs within their individual service areas. 3. Research and Evaluation — MWDOC conducts research programs which allow an agency to measure the water savings benefits of a specific program and then compare those benefits to the costs of implementing the program in order to evaluate the economic feasibility of the program. Table 4 -1 provides an overview of City's DMM program status. Table 4 -1: Urban Supplier's Demand Management Measures Overview Demand Management Measure (DMM) DMM Status Pas Current Future Residential Water Surveys Residential Plumbing Retrofits System Water Audits, Leak Detection and Repair Metering with Commodity Rates Large Landscape Conservation Programs High- Efficiency Washing Machine Rebates Public Information Programs School Education Programs Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Programs Wholesale Agency Assistance Conservation Pricing Conservation Coordinator Water Waste Prohibition Residential ULFT Replacement Programs City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-2 Section 4 Demand Management Measures 4.2.1. DMM 1: Water Survey Programs for Single - Family Residential and Multi - Family Residential Customers As part of this DMM, an agency targets single- and multi - family homes and sends out a qualified surveyor who checks water using devices within the house and evaluates landscapes and irrigation systems. MWDOC had a formal program that ended in FY 2001/02. Currently, the City has a program to monitor high water users through the billing system. City staff goes out to the high use customer's home to evaluate their indoor use and identify problems and fixes (e.g. leaky toilets). The City also participates in a regional landscape programs through MWDOC as explained below. In FY 2004/05, the City, along with MWDOC, participated in a regional program called the SmarTimer Rebate Program. Under this program, residential and small commercial properties are eligible for a rebate when they purchase and install a new, state -of -the -art, weather -based irrigation controller which can save 41 gallons per day per residence and can reduce runoff and pollution by 49 percent. The City is eligible to receive 1,192 valves over the life of the program. To date, 278 rebates have been given out to residential customers and 249 rebates to small commercial customers which translate to a water savings of approximately 636 acre -feet. The City will continue to provide on -site meetings, literature and incentives related to this program. As part of the MWDOC Grant for the SmarTimers a site audit and inspection is required and provided by contract through MWDOC. In FY 2007/08 the City with the assistance of a Cal Fed grant installed 640 weather -based irrigation controllers with pre and post installation inspections. This program found that the first 100 homes retrofit with smart controllers saved 458,000 gallons in the first comparison billing period. One homeowners association (HOA), who first retrofit with smart controllers and them retrofit for irrigation system uniformity, saved 1.3 million gallons in the first comparison billing period. Moreover, the City is in the process of contracting for a professionaUconsultant that can assist the City in developing a residential and commercial site auditing program. Presently the City pays a contractor for audits as needed. Once the City has developed a program it is the desire of the City to hire a full or part-time professional staff person to do audits for residential and commercial properties as well as site measurements for public properties. 4.2.2. DMM 2: Residential Plumbing Retrofit Between 1994 and 2009, the City, in conjunction with MWDOC, distributed a total of 7,219 ultra low flush toilets (ULFT) to single - family and multi - family homes. In addition, through Metropolitan's mass showerhead distribution, the City installed 4,453 low -flow showerheads between 1991 and 1998, and over 75 percent of the City's single - and multi - family homes constructed prior to 1992 are fitted with low -flow showerheads. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-3 Section 4 Demand Management Measures MWDOC estimated that today low flow showerhead saturation is at nearly 100% for single - family homes and at 94% for multi - family homes. Both the low -flow shower head program and ULFT rebate program have sunset. The City has met the requirement for this DMM. 4.2.3. DMM 3: System Water Audits, Leak Detection and Repair The City records daily production and demand data and reads all meters on a bi- monthly basis. All metered sales and other verifiable uses such as backwash, flushwater, and operation and maintenance, are recorded. The unaccounted water loss varies year to year but is approximately five percent of the total water in the system. The City is meeting the requirement for this DMM. 4.2.4. DMM 4: Metering with Commodity Rates All of the City's water connections are metered and billed based on commodity rates. 4.2.5. DMM 5: Large Landscape Conservation Programs and Incentives The City supports large landscape conservation through MWDOC's regional programs including the Landscape Performance Certification Program and the Smart Timer Rebate Program. The City encourages commercial properties such as golf courses and HOAs to take advantage of these programs. The City continued participation in MWDOC's landscape rebate programs resulted in the installation of 9,428 sq. ft. of synthetic turf (4.3 acre - feet), 5,520 rotating nozzles (51 acre -feet savings), and 278 smart timers for residential customers and 249 smart timers for commercial customers (636 acre - feet). Details of each landscape program are provided below. MWDOC Landscape Performance Certification Program MWDOC has a program titled "Landscape Performance Certification Program ", which provides a water -based budget for dedicated meters. This program involves developing water budgets based off of agency - provided consumption data, site - provided area measurement, local weather data, and contact information for the site owner, the responsible landscape company, and a property manager. On a monthly basis, the site's water budget is developed by water meter and provided back to the three involved entities in an e-mail report card format. Also included is a website where all involved can view their site for budget numbers, which illustrate whether a meter is over, under, or exactly at their budget. Included is a calculation based on individual water rates showing dollars lost. This program does not include a formal landscape survey component. Financial incentives are offered to improve landscape water use efficiency, and regional funding is available from Metropolitan. The City has participated in the Landscape Performance Certification Program since its initiation in FY 2004 -05. The number of participated landscape meters has increased City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-4 Section 4 Demand Management Measures from 32 in FY 2004 -05 to 171 in FY 2010 -11. Through the SmarTimer Grant the City is requiring all Commercial applicants to participate in this program as a condition of funding by the City. Smart Timer Rebate Program As described under DMM 1, the Smart Timer Rebate Program offers residential and small commercial properties a rebate when they purchase and install a new, state- of -the- art, weather -based irrigation controller which can save 41 gallons per day per residence and can reduce runoff and pollution by 49 percent. The City is eligible to receive 1,192 valves over the life of the program. In FY 2004/05, three residential and seventeen small commercial customers participated. As of FY 2010 -11 the total program participation has increased to 278 residential and 249 commercial customers. 4.2.6. DMM 6: High- Efficiency Washing Machine Rebate Programs Orange County residents are eligible to receive an $85 rebate when they purchase of a new High Efficiency Clothes Washer (HECW). This program began in 2001 and is sponsored by MWDOC, Metropolitan, and local retail water agencies. Rebates are available on a first -come, first -served basis, while funds last. Participants must be willing to allow an inspection of the installed machine for verification of program compliance. Machines must have a water factor of 4.0 or less. Depending on use, these machines can save 10,000 gallons of water per year Participants are encouraged to contact their local gas and/or electric utility as additional rebates may be available. Over the past 9 years, 1,918 residences have installed HECWs through this program representing a water savings of approximately 240 acre -feet. The City continues to provide information to residences about these rebate programs. 4.2.7. DMM 7: Public Information Programs The City has an active program to promote and educate its customers about water conservation and other water - related topics. The City participates annually in the Children's Water Education Festival sponsored by OCWD, The Disneyland Resort and various cities and agencies throughout Orange County. Moreover, when requested, the Water Conservation Coordinator goes into the classrooms, interest groups, and homeowner associations to discuss various aspects of conservation. The City has also updated its website to include conservation related materials and information. The City has taken the lead to educating its residents on the importance of using water wisely and caring for their watershed. The City currently provides customers with various tools, programs and incentives that are promoted through outreach marketing campaigns to reach as diverse an audience as possible. The City's Water Conservation Marketing Campaigns comprises of many programs as described below. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-5 Section 4 Demand Management Measures July: Smart Irrigation Month — June 2008, City Council adopted a resolution declaring July as "Smart Irrigation Month" to promote a reminder for residents to repair faulty irrigation systems and install ETo controllers using Metropolitan's region -wide TV, radio and print advertising campaign. WaterSmartNewport.org — This website is the City's water conservation campaign with the goal to create a recognizable brand specific to the City. Interest Group and Public Events — The City uses public events and relationships with nonprofit groups to promote public awareness. City staff presents at clubs and HOA such Kiwanis and Rotary and participate in environmental related events alongside interest groups and nonprofits. Media Outreach: Public Service Announcements (PSAs), NBTV and Magazine Print Articles — The City reaches a broad age demographic through TV and magazine articles. In 2010, PSAs are featured on NBTV, City website, cable TV, pre -movie display in all City movie theaters, and through other media outlets. 4.2.8. DMM 8: School Education Programs Since 1975, MWDOC has offered water education programs to Orange County public and private schools for all grade levels from kindergarten through high school. The City participates in this program, and during FY 2009/10, MWDOC and the City's Water Conservation coordinator made 6 presentations to 1,687 students. 4.2.9. DMM 9: Conservation Programs for Commercial, Industrial and Institutional Accounts Save Water, Save a Buck This program began in 2002 and offers rebates to assist commercial, industrial, and institutional customers in replacing high -flow plumbing fixtures with low -flow fixtures. Facilities where low -flow devices are installed must be located in Orange County. Rebates are available only on those devices listed in Table 4 -2 below and must replace higher water use devices. Installation of devices is the responsibility of each participant. Participants may purchase and install as many of the water saving devices as is applicable to their site. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-6 Section 4 Demand Management Measures Table 4 -2: Retrofit Devices and Rebate Amounts Available Under Save Water Save a Buck Program Retrofit Device Rebate Amount High Efficiency Toilet $50 Ultra- Low -Water or Zero Water Urinal $200 Connectionless Food Steamers $485 per compartment Air - Cooled Ice Machines (Tier III) $300 Cooling Tower Conductivity Controller $625 pH / Conductivity Controller $1,750 Dry Vacuum Pumps $125 per HP Water Pressurized Broom $110 As of FY 2010/11 the City's commercial, industrial, and institutional customers have installed a total 1,231 water - saving fixtures since the program inception in FY 2001/02. This represents a water savings of 540 acre -feet. The City will continue to educate this account category to meet the DMM requirements. The City is also working with the Orange County Sanitation District to target CII customers in the City who could benefit from the reduction or recycling are large water using devices that Metropolitan will help fund to upgrade. Water Smart Hotel Program In 2008 and 2009, MWDOC received grants from the CA Department of Water Resources and the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) to conduct the Water Smart Hotel Program, a program designed to provide Orange County hotels and motels with commercial and landscape water saving surveys, incentives for retrofits and customer follow -up and support. The goal of the program is to implement water use efficiency changes in hotels to achieve an anticipated water savings of 7,078 acre feet over 10 years. The Program is offered to hotels in MWDOC's service area as identified by retail water agencies. It is anticipated that detailed survey of the indoor and outdoor water using aspects of up to 105 participating hotels will be performed. Participating hotels will receive survey reports that recommend indoor and outdoor retrofits, upgrades, and other changes that should, based on the survey, result in significant water savings. Quantities of each device and associated fixture and installation costs, water savings and payback information (based on rebate amount Incentives offered through the Save Water Save A Buck Rebate Program will be augmented using DWR and USBR Water Use Efficiency City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-7 Section 4 Demand Management Measures grant funds to bridge the gap between existing incentives and the actual costs of Hotel Water Survey recommendations. To date, over 24 surveys have been performed county- wide, and over 9,500 water - saving devices have been installed through the program. These devices are saving 351 acre feet per year or 3,510 acre feet over the ten year device life 4.2.10. DMM 10: Wholesale Agency Programs The City is not a wholesale agency, so this DMM does not apply. 4.2.11. DMM 11: Conservation Pricing The City currently has uniform pricing for all water. The City is currently investigating the various tiered rate pricing schemes so it can report to the Council on the efficiency and staffing requirements to convert the current billing system to one that includes tiered pricing. 4.2.12. DMM 12: Water Conservation Coordinator The City has a designated water conservation coordinator, Shane Burckle, and thus meets this DMM. 4.2.13. DMM 13: Water Waste Prohibition Most recently, the City Council has approved NBMC 14.16 Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations which establishes permanent water conservation requirements intended to alter behavior related to water use efficiency for non - shortage conditions and further establishes four levels of water supply shortage response actions to be implemented during times of declared water shortage. Details of this water ordinance are provided in Section 5 of this UWMP. 4.2.14. DMM 14: Residential Ultra- Low -Flush Toilet Replacement Programs Over the past 19 years, MWDOC has continuously implemented a regional ULF Toilet Rebate and/or Distribution Program targeting single- and multi - family homes in Orange County. Since the end of distribution program in 2004, MWDOC's program has focused solely on providing rebate incentives for retrofitting non - efficient devices with either ULFTs or High Efficiency Toilets (HETS) — toilets using 1.28 gallons per flush or less. The ULFT portion of this program concluded in June 2009, and over 360,000 ULFTs were replaced in single family and multi - family homes, with an overall program to date savings of approximately 138,457 acre feet of water. The HET rebate program, which concluded in 2010, has incentivized over 26,000 devices, with an overall program to date savings of approximately 3,419. The City has participated in this program from the beginning. To date 7,219 ULFTs and 254 HETS have been installed representing a combined water savings of 2,719 acre -feet. The City meets the coverage requirements for this DMM. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-8 Section 4 Demand Management Measures City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F47-9 5. Water Supplies Contingency Plan Recent water supply challenges throughout the American Southwest and the State of California have resulted in the development of a number of policy actions that water agencies would implement in the event of a water shortage. In southern California, the development of such policies has occurred at both the wholesale and retail level. This section describes how new and existing policies that Metropolitan, MWDOC and the City have in place to respond to water supply shortages, including a catastrophic interruption and up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply. 5.1. Shortage Actions Metropolitan As an importer of water from multiple sources, including both the Colorado River and Sierra Nevada, a number of water supply challenges have impacted the reliability of Metropolitan's imported supplies. In response to these challenges, Metropolitan has implemented existing policies as well as developed new ones. The first action that Metropolitan implements in the event of a water shortage is the suspension and/or reduction of its interruptible supplies, which are supplies sold at a discount in return for the buyers agreeing to be the first to be cutback in the event of a shortage. Metropolitan currently has two interruptible programs for agricultural users and groundwater replenishment, under which supplies were either suspended or reduced in 2007. In addition, in preparation for the possibility of being unable to the meet "firm demands" (non - interruptible supplies) of its member agencies, in February 2008, the Metropolitan's Board of Directors (Board) adopted the Water Supply Allocation Plan (WSAP), which was subsequently updated in June 2009. Metropolitan's plan includes the specific formula for calculating member agency supply allocations and the key implementation elements needed for administering an allocation. Metropolitan's WSAP is the foundation for the urban water shortage contingency analysis required under Water Code Section 10632 and is part of Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP. Metropolitan's WSAP was developed in consideration of the principles and guidelines described in Metropolitan's 1999 Water Surplus and Drought Management Plan (WSDM), with the objective of creating an equitable needs -based allocation. The plan's City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-1 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan formula seeks to balance the impacts of a shortage at the retail level while maintaining equity on the wholesale level for shortages of Metropolitan supplies of up to 50 percent. The formula takes into account: impact on retail customers and the economy; growth and population; changes in supply conditions; investments in local resources; demand hardening aspects of non - potable recycled water use; implementation of conservation savings program; participation in Metropolitan's interruptible programs; and investments in facilities. The formula is calculated in three steps: based period calculations, allocation year calculations, and supply allocation calculations. The first two steps involve standard computations, while the third section contains specific methodology developed for the WSAP. Step 1: Base Period Calculations — The first step in calculating a water supply allocation is to estimate water supply and demand using a historical based period with established water supply and delivery data. The base period for each of the different categories of demand and supply is calculated using data from the three most recent non - shortage years, 2004 -2006. Step 2: Allocation Year Calculations — The next step in calculating the water supply allocation is estimating water needs in the allocation year. This is done by adjusting the base period estimates of retail demand for population or economic growth and changes in local supplies. Step 3: Supply Allocation Calculations — The final step is calculating the water supply allocation for each member agency based on the allocation year water needs identified in Step 2. Each element and its application in the allocation formula are discussed in detail in Metropolitan's WSAP. In order to implement the WSAP, the Metropolitan Board makes a determination on the level of the regional shortage, based on specific criteria, in April each year. If it is determined allocations are necessary, they go into effect in July for that year and remain for a 12 -month period, although the schedule is at the discretion of Metropolitan's Board. Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP forecasts that Metropolitan will be able to meet projected firm demands throughout the forecast period from 2015 to 2035. However, these projections do not mean that Metropolitan would not implement its WSAP during this period. 71 VA To prepare for the potential allocation of imported water supplies from Metropolitan, MWDOC worked collaboratively with its 28 member agencies to develop its own Water City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-2 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Supply Allocation Plan ( MWDOC WSAP), adopted January 2009, to allocate imported water supplies at the retail level. The MWDOC WSAP lays out the essential components of how MWDOC will determine and implement each member agency's allocation during a time of shortage. The MWDOC WSAP uses a similar method and approach, when reasonable, as that of the Metropolitan's WSAP. However, MWDOC's plan remains flexible to use an alternative approach when Metropolitan's method produces a significant unintended result for the member agencies. The MWDOC WSAP model follows five (5) basic steps to determine a retail agency's imported supply allocation. Step 1: Determine Baseline Information — The first step in calculating a water supply allocation is to estimate water supply and demand using a historical based period with established water supply and delivery data. The base period for each of the different categories of demand and supply is calculated using data from the last three non - shortage years — calendar years, 2004, 2005, and 2006. Step 2: Establish Allocation Year Information — In this step, the model adjusts for each member agency's water need in the allocation year. This is done by adjusting the base period estimates for increased retail water demand based on growth and changes in local supplies. Step 3: Calculate Initial Minimum Allocation Based on Metropolitan's Declared Shortage Level — This step sets the initial water supply allocation for each member agency. After a regional shortage level is established, MWDOC will calculate the initial allocation as a percentage of adjusted Base Period Imported water needs within the model for each member agency. Step 4: Apply Allocation Adjustments and Credits in the Areas of Retail Impacts, Conservation, and the Interim Agriculture Water Program — In this step, the model assigns additional water to address disparate impacts at the retail level caused by an across - the -board cut of imported supplies. It also applies a conservation credit given to those agencies that have achieved additional water savings at the retail level as a result of successful implementation of water conservation devices, programs and rate structures. Step 5: Sum Total Allocations and Determine Retail Reliability — This is the final step in calculating a retail agency's total allocation for imported supplies. The model sums an agency's total imported allocation with all of the adjustments and credits and then calculates each agency's retail reliability compared to its Allocation Year Retail Demand. The MWDOC WSAP includes additional measures for plan implementation, including the following: City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-3 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan • Appeal Process — An appeals process to provide member agencies the opportunity to request a change to their allocation based on new or corrected information. MWDOC anticipates that under most circumstances, a member agency's appeal will be the basis for an appeal to Metropolitan by MWDOC. • Melded Penalty Rate Structure — At the end of the allocation year, MWDOC would only charge a penalty to each member agency that exceeded their allocation if MWDOC exceeds its total allocation and is required to pay a penalty to Metropolitan. Metropolitan enforces allocations to member agencies through a tiered penalty rate structure: penalty rates to a member agency that exceeds its total annual allocation at the end of the twelve -month allocation period, according to a specified rate structure. MWDOC's penalty would be assessed according to the member agency's prorated share (acre -feet over usage) of MWDOC penalty amount with Metropolitan. Penalty funds collected by Metropolitan will be invested in water conservation and local resource development. • Tracking and Reporting Water Usage — MWDOC will provide each member agency with water use monthly reports that will compare each member agency's current cumulative retail usage to their allocation baseline. MWDOC will also provide quarterly reports on it cumulative retail usage versus its allocation baseline. • Timeline and Option to Revisit the Plan — The allocation period will cover 12 consecutive months and the Regional Shortage Level will be set for the entire allocation period. MWDOC only anticipates calling for allocation when Metropolitan declares a shortage; and no later than 30 days from Metropolitan's declaration will MWDOC announce allocation to its member agencies. Due to the complexity of calculating allocations and the potential for unforeseen circumstances that may occur during an allocation year, after one year of implementation, MWDOC staff and member agencies have the opportunity to make recommendations to the MWDOC Board that will improve the method, calculation, and approach of the MWDOC WSAP. City of Newport Beach In 1992, the City adopted its Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) in response to California Assembly Bill Number 11. The WSCP is intended to conservatively manage the City's water resources to provide water to its customers on an equitable and business- sound basis, in the event of a curtailment of deliveries of up to 50 percent. The City adopted Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations Ordinance No. 2010 -16 on September 14, 2010, which establishes a comprehensive staged water conservation program that will encourage reduced water consumption within the City through conservation, enable effective water supply planning, assure reasonable and City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-4 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan beneficial use of water, prevent waste of water, and maximize the efficient use of water within the City. Along with permanent water conservation requirements, the City's Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations consists of the following four stages found in Table 5 -1 to respond to a reduction in potable water available to the City for distribution to its customers with permanent conservation requirements in effect at all times unless a mandatory conservation stage has been implemented by the City. Table 5 -1: Water Supply Shortage Stages and Conditions — Rationing Stages Stage No. Water Supply % Shortage Conditions Level 1 Mandatory Conservation The City Council Requirements determines that a water supply shortage or Level 2 Mandatory Conservation Requirements threatened shortage exists, due to drought or To be Level 3 Mandatory Conservation Requirements other water supply conditions, and it is determined by the City necessary to impose the Council. Level 4 Mandatory Conservation mandatory conservation Requirements requirements applicable to the particular level of water supply shortage. 5.2. Three -Year Minimum Water Supply Metropolitan does not provide annual estimates of the minimum supplies available to its member agencies. As such, Metropolitan member agencies must develop their own estimates for the purposes of meeting the requirements of the Act. Section 135 of the Metropolitan Water District Act declares that a member agency has the right to invoke its "preferential right" to water, which grants each member agency a preferential right to purchase a percentage of Metropolitan's available supplies based on specified, cumulative financial contributions to Metropolitan. Each year, Metropolitan calculates and distributes each member agency's percentage of preferential rights. However, since Metropolitan's creation in 1927, no member agency has ever invoked these rights as a means of acquiring limited supplies from Metropolitan. As an alternative to preferential rights, Metropolitan adopted the Water Shortage Allocation Plan (WSAP) in February 2008. Under the WSAP, member agencies are allowed to purchase a specified level of supplies without the imposition of penalty rates. The WSAP uses a combination of estimated total retail demands and historical local supply production within the member agency service area to estimate the firm demands on Metropolitan from each member agency in a given year. Based on a number of City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-5 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan factors, including storage and supply conditions, Metropolitan then determines whether it has the ability to meet these firm demands or will need to allocate its limited supplies among its member agencies. Thus, implicit in Metropolitan's decision not to implement an allocation of its supplies is that at a minimum Metropolitan will be able to meet the firm demands identified for each of the member agencies. In order to estimate the minimum available supplies from Metropolitan for the period 2011 -2013, an analysis was performed to assess the likelihood that Metropolitan would re- implement mandatory water use restrictions in the event of a 1990 -92 hydrologic conditions over this period. Specific water management actions during times of water shortage are governed by Metropolitan's Water Shortage and Drought Management Plan (WSDM Plan). Adopted by the Metropolitan Board in 1999, the WSDM Plan provides a general framework for potential storage actions during shortages, but recognizes that storage withdrawals are not isolated actions but part of a set of resource management actions along with water transfers and conservation. As such, there is no specific criterion for which water management actions are to be taken at specific levels of storage The implementation of mandatory restrictions is solely at the discretion of the Metropolitan Board and there are no set criteria that require the Board to implement restrictions. Given these conditions, the analysis relies upon a review of recent water operations and transactions that Metropolitan has implemented during recent drought. The first step in the analysis was a review of projected SWP allocations to Metropolitan, based on historical hydrologies. As with the recent drought, potential impacts to SWP supplies from further drought and the recently implemented biological opinions are anticipated to be the biggest challenges facing Metropolitan in the coming three years. A review of projected SWP allocations from the DWR's State Water Project Delivery Reliability Report 2009 (2009 SWP Reliability Report) was made to estimate a range of conservative supply assumptions regarding the availability of SWP supplies. The 2009 SWP Reliability Report provides estimates of the current (2009) and future (2029) SWP delivery reliability and incorporates regulatory requirements for SWP and CVP operations in accordance with USFWS and NMFS biological opinions. Estimates of future reliability also reflect potential impacts of climate change and sea level rise. The analysis assumes a maximum SWP allocation available to Metropolitan of 2,011,500 AF and a Metropolitan storage level of 1,700,000 AF at 2010 year -end. The analysis also assumes a stable water supply from the Colorado River in the amount of 1,150,000 AF through 2015. Although the Colorado River watershed has also experienced drought in recent years, Metropolitan has implemented a number of supply programs that should ensure that supplies from this source are relatively steady for the next three years. Based on estimated "firm" demands on Metropolitan of 2.12 MAF, the annual surplus or deficit was calculated for each year of the three -year period. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-6 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan A review of recent Metropolitan water management actions under shortage conditions was then undertaken to estimate the level of storage withdrawals and water transfers that Metropolitan may exercise under the 1990 -92 hydrologic conditions were identified. For this analysis, it was assumed that, if Metropolitan storage levels were greater than 2 MAF at the beginning of any year, Metropolitan would be willing to take up to 600 TAF out of storage in that year. Where Metropolitan storage supplies were between 1.2 MAF and 2 MAF at the beginning of the year, it was assumed that Metropolitan would be willing to take up to 400 TAF in that year. At storage levels below 1.2 MAF, it was assumed that Metropolitan would take up to 200 TAF in a given year. It was also assumed that Metropolitan would be willing to purchase up to 300 TAF of water transfer in any given year. For years where demands still exceeded supplies after accounting for storage withdrawals, transfer purchases were estimated and compared against the 300 TAF limit. Table 5 -2: Metropolitan Shortage Conditions Study Year Actual Year SWP Allocation SWP (AF) CRA (AF) Total (AF) Demand (AF) Surplus/ Shortage (AF) Storage at YE (AF) Trans (AF 2011 1990 30% 603,450 1,108,000 1,711,450 2,124,000 (400,000) 1,300,000 (12,550) 2012 1991 27% 542,820 1,108,000 1,650,820 2,123,000 (200,000) 1,100,000 (272,180) 2013 1992 26% 522,990 1,108,000 1,630,990 2,123,000 (200,000) 900,000 (292,010) Based on the analysis above, Metropolitan would be able to meet firm demands under the driest three -year hydrologic scenario using the recent water management actions described above without re- implementing mandatory water use restrictions on its member agencies. Given the assumed absence of mandatory restrictions, the estimated minimum imported water supplies available to MWDOC from Metropolitan is assumed to be equal to Metropolitan's estimate of demand for firm supplies for MWDOC, which Metropolitan uses when considering whether to impose mandatory restrictions. Thus, the estimate of the minimum imported supplies available to MWDOC is 261,577 AF13. MWDOC also has also adopted a shortage allocation plan and accompanying allocation model that estimates firm demands on MWDOC. Assuming MWDOC would not be imposing mandatory restrictions if Metropolitan is not, the estimate of firms demands in MWDOC's latest allocation model has been used to estimate the minimum imported supplies available to each of MWDOC's customer agencies for 2011 -13. Thus, the estimate of the minimum imported supplies available to the City is 7,891 AF14. 13 Metropolitan 2010111 Water Shortage Allocation Plan model (March 2011) 14 MWDOC Water Shortage Allocation model (August 20 10) City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-7 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan As captured in its 2010 RUWMP, Metropolitan believes that the water supply and demand management actions it is undertaking will increase its reliability throughout the 25 -year period addressed in its plan. Thus for purposes of this estimate, it is assumed that Metropolitan and MWDOC will be able to maintain the identified supply amounts throughout the three -year period. Metropolitan projects reliability for full service demands through the year 2035. Additionally, through a variety of groundwater reliability programs conducted by OCWD and participated in by the City, local supplies are projected to be maintained at demand levels. Based on the MWDOC Water Supply Allocation Plan, the City is expected to fully meet demands for the next three years assuming Metropolitan and MWDOC are not in shortage, a Basin Production Percentage of 62% for Local Supplies and zero allocations are imposed for Imported Supplies. Normal year supplies are based on the Base Period supply in the MWDOC Water Supply Allocation Plan, which is the average of the last three non - shortage calendar years 2004, 2005, and 2006. The Three Year Estimated Minimum Water Supply is listed in Table 5 -3. Table 5 -3: Three -Year Estimated Minimum Water Supply (AFY) Source Normal Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Base Year 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013 Local Supplies 4,778 10,267 10,267 10,267 Imported Supply 13,126 7,891 7,891 7,891 Total 17,904 18,158 18,158 18,158 5.3. Catastrophic Supply Interruption Given the great distances that imported supplies travel to reach Orange County, the region is vulnerable to interruptions along hundreds of miles aqueducts, pipelines and other facilities associated with delivering the supplies to the region. Additionally, this water is distributed to customers through an intricate network of pipes and water mains that are susceptible to damage from earthquakes and other disasters. Metropolitan Metropolitan has comprehensive plans for stages of actions it would undertake to address a catastrophic interruption in water supplies through its WSDM and WSAP Plans. Metropolitan also developed an Emergency Storage Requirement to mitigate against potential interruption in water supplies resulting from catastrophic occurrences within the southern California region, including seismic events along the San Andreas Fault. In addition, Metropolitan is working with the State to implement a comprehensive City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-8 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan improvement plan to address catastrophic occurrences that could occur outside of the Southern California region, such as a maximum probable seismic event in the Delta that would cause levee failure and disruption of SWP deliveries. For greater detail on Metropolitan's planned responses to catastrophic interruption, please refer to Metropolitan's RUWMP. Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County In 1983, the Orange County water community identified a need to develop a plan on how agencies would respond effectively to disasters impacting the regional water distribution system. The collective efforts of these agencies resulted in the formation of the Water Emergency Response Organization of Orange County ( WEROC) to coordinate emergency response on behalf of all Orange County water and wastewater agencies, develop an emergency plan to respond to disasters, and conduct disaster training exercises for the Orange County water community. WEROC was established with the creation of an indemnification agreement between its member agencies to protect each other against civil liabilities and to facilitate the exchange of resources. WEROC is unique in its ability to provide a single point of contact for representation of all water and wastewater utilities in Orange County during a disaster. This representation is to the county, state, and federal disaster coordination agencies. Within the Orange County Operational Area, WEROC is the recognized contact for emergency response for the water community. City of Newport Beach The City developed its Emergency Preparedness Plan in 1998 to meet emergencies within its service area and has updated the plan as necessary. The plan provides information on City operations, assigns responsibilities, and establishes general policies and procedures associated with operations during natural disasters, technological incidents, and nuclear defense emergencies. Table 5 -4 summaries various possible catastrophes and a summary of the actions that would be taken in response. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-9 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Table 5 -4: Preparation Actions for Catastrophe Possible Catastrophe Preparation Actions Request information from SCE to determine how long outage will be. Pump Stations will automatically utilize back -up power through an auto - transfer Regional Power Outage switch. Utilize Metropolitan connections and emergency supply in Big Canyon Reservoir. Notify customers, media, state and local authorities if service is disrupted or significant demand management is necessary. The City would activate its EOC and each Department would activate their respective DOC's. All City departments are assigned specific functions as Earthquake described in the Functional Responsibility Matrix. Each department will respond to, manage, and request mutual aid resources /personnel to respond to their assigned responsibilities. Issue boil alert of "do not drink" orders as needed. Request information from Metropolitan on length of shutdown. If insignificant, utilize emergency water Diemer Plant Shutdown storage or pump groundwater from wells to supply demand for all customers. Also, potentially implement water use prohibitions, depending on length and severity. Notify Newport Beach Police Department and Department of Health Services. Attempt to isolate affected areas, in known, Supply Contamination preventing spreading to other areas. Issue a "do not drink" or boil order as necessary. Provide alternate water supply to areas affected. Activation of EOC would depend on severity. Request information from other City departments on the severity and location of the flooding, to Flooding determine the potential damage to facilities. Activation of DOC and potentially EOC, based on severity. Utilize portable pumps and generators at locations most affected. Emergency evacuation. Subsequently, possible activation of DOC and Tsunami EOC based on severity. Have not fully addressed this event. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 5-to Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan 5.4. Prohibitions, Penalties and Consumption Reduction Methods Prohibitions The Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations Ordinance No. 2010 -16 lists water conservation requirements which shall take effect upon implementation by the City Council. These prohibitions shall promote the efficient use of water, reduce or eliminate water waste, complement the City's Water Quality regulations and urban runoff reduction efforts, and enable implementation of the City's Water Shortage Contingency Measures. Prohibitions include, but are not limited to, restrictions on outdoor watering, washing of vehicles, food preparation establishments, repairing of leaks and other malfunctions, swimming pools, decorative water features, construction activities, and water service provisions which can be found in Table 5 -5. Table 5 -5: Mandatory Prohibitions Examples of Prohibitions Stage When Prohibition Becomes Mandatory 71or e of potable water to irrigate any lawn ornamental landscape area using a ape irrigation system or watering device that continuously attended is prohibited unless such irrigation is limited to no more than fifteen Year Round (15) minutes per day per station. Systems that lawfully use recycled water or use very low flow drip type irrigation systems, weather based controllers, or stream rotor sprinklers are exempt. Watering of any vegetated area in a manner that causes excessive water flow or runoff onto an Year Round adjoining sidewalk, street, driveway, alley, gutter, or ditch is prohibited. Washing down sidewalks, walkways, drive ways, parking areas, or other paved surfaces is prohibited except as required to alleviate safety or Year Round sanitary hazards by use of a handheld container or hose equipped with an automatic shutoff device. Leaks, breaks, and malfunctions in the water user's plumbing or distribution system must be repaired Year Round within seven (7) days notice by the City, unless other arrangements have been made with the City. The use of potable water for landscape irrigation Year Round during a rainfall event is prohibited. By July 1, 2012, all landscape irrigation systems connected to dedicated landscape meters shall Year Round include rain sensors that automatically shut off City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 5 -11 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Examples of Prohibitions stage When Prohibition Becom Mandatory 7evapotranspi ems during periods of rain or include ration systems that schedule based on climatic conditions . untains and other decorative water Year Round features must use a re- circulating water system The use of water to clean a vehicle is prohibited except by use of a handheld container, hose Year Round equipped with an automatic shut off device, or at a commercial car washing facility. All new commercial conveyor car wash systems in commercial car washing facilities shall be Year Round operational re- circulating water systems. By January 1, 2013, all commercial conveyor car wash systems in commercial car washing facilities shall be operational re- circulating water systems, Year Round or the customer must have secured an exemption from this requirement. No public place where food is sold, served, or offered for sale shall serve drinking waterto Year Round customers unless requested. Commercial lodging establishments must provide customers the option of not having towels and Year Round linen laundered daily. No installation of a single pass cooling system. Year Round All new washing machines installed in commercial and /or coin- operated laundries shall be ENERGY STAR® and CEE Tier III qualified. By January 1, Year Round 2014, all washing machines installed in commercial and /or coin - operated laundries shall be ENERGY STAR® and CEE Tier III qualified. No customer shall use water from any fire hydrant for any purpose other than fire suppression or emergency aid without first: (1) requesting and posting the appropriate fees at the City, and (2) Year Round obtaining a hydrant meter to record all water consumption for a specified project. No person shall use potable water for soil compaction or dust control in a construction site where there is an appropriate source of non - potable water approved by the Department of Year Round Public Health. No person shall operate a hose within a construction site that is not equipped with an automatic shutoff device, provided such devices are available for the size and type of hose in use. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 5 -12 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Examples of Prohibitions Stage When Prohibition Becom Mandatory or remodeled commercial kitchens shall be 7quipped with water conserving kitchen spray Year Round s and best - available water - conserving ology. Defrosting of food with running water is Year Round prohibited. Scoop sinks shall be set at minimum water flow at year Round all times and shut off during non - working hours. Hoses used for commercial kitchen areas must be Year Round equipped with an automatic shut off device. Watering or irrigation of vegetated areas is limited to four (4) days per week from April — October and two (2) days per week from November— March except by use of a hand held device, hose Level 1 equipped with an automatic shutoff device, low flow irrigation systems, irrigation of food crops, for the express purpose of adjusting or repairing an irrigation system, or with approved recycled water. No customer shall use more water during any billing period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level One water supply shortage, whose Level 1 percentage shall be in the range from one hundred (100) percent and ninety (90) percent of the base amount. Leaks, breaks, and malfunctions in the water user's plumbing or distribution system must be repaired Level 1 within three (3) days notice by the City, unless other arrangements have been made with the City. Filling or refilling ornamental lakes and ponds more than once a week is prohibited. Ornamental lakes and ponds that sustain aquatic life of Level 1 significant value and were actively managed prior to the storage declaration are exempt. The use of potable water to fill or refill by more than one foot a residential swimming pool or Level 1 outdoor spa more than once a week is prohibited. Watering or irrigation of vegetated areas is limited to the hours between 5 pm and 9:00 am three (3) days per week from April — October and one (1) day per week from November— March except by Level 2 use of a hand held device, hose equipped with an automatic shutoff device, low flow irrigation systems, irrigation of food crops, for the express City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57- Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Examples of Prohibitions Stage When Prohibition Becom IIIL Mandatory 7billing se of adjusting or repairing an irrigation , or with approved recycled water. tomer shall use more water during any period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level Two water supply shortage, which Level 2 percentage shall be in the range from ninety (90) percent to seventy -five (75) percent of the base amount. Leaks, breaks, and malfunctions in the water user's plumbing or distribution system must be repaired Level 2 within two (2) days notice by the City, unless other arrangements have been made with the City. Filling or refilling ornamental lakes and ponds more than once every other week is prohibited. Ornamental lakes and ponds that sustain aquatic Level 2 life of significant value and were actively managed prior to the storage declaration are exempt. The use of potable water to fill or refill by more than one foot a residential swimming pool or Level 2 outdoor spa more than once a week is prohibited. Watering or irrigation of vegetated areas is limited to the hours between 5 pm and 9:00 am two (2) days per week from April — October and one (1) day per week from November — March except by use of a hand held device, hose equipped with an Level 3 automatic shutoff device, low flow irrigation systems, irrigation of food crops, for the express purpose of adjusting or repairing an irrigation system, or with approved recycled water. No customer shall use more water during any billing period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level 3 Level Three water shortage, whose percentage shall be in the range from seventy -five (75) percent and sixty (60) percent of the base amount. Leaks, breaks, and malfunctions in the water user's plumbing or distribution system must be repaired Level 3 within one (1) day notice by the City, unless other arrangements have been made with the City. Filling or refilling ornamental lakes and ponds is prohibited. Ornamental lakes and ponds that Level 3 sustain aquatic life of significant value and were actively managed prior to the storage declaration City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 5 -14 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Examples of Prohibitions stage When Prohibition Becom Mandatory are exempt. The use of potable water to fill or refill a residential Level 3 swimming pool or outdoor spa is prohibited. Irrigation of any vegetated area with potable water is prohibited except by use of a hand held container or hose equipped with an automatic shut off device. Maintenance of landscape to the extent necessary for fire and /or erosion protection is exempt. Maintenance of plant materials identified to be rare or essential to the well being of rare animals is exempt. Maintenance of landscape Level 4 within active public parks and playing fields, day care centers, school grounds, cemeteries, and golf course greens is exempt provided that such irrigation does not exceed two times per week. Public work projects and actively irrigated environmental projects are exempt. Food crops, provided that such irrigation does not exceed two times per week, are exempt. No new potable water service, meters, or will - serve letters will be provided except under one or more of the following: a. Projects necessary to protect public health, safety, and /or well being. b. Projects with a valid unexpired building Level 4 permit. c. Projects with applicants who can provide substantial evidence of an enforceable commitment that water demands will be offset prior to the provision of new water meters to the satisfaction of the City. No customer shall use more water during any billing period than the percentage of the base amount established in the resolution declaring the Level 4 Level Four water shortage, which percentage shall be less than sixty (60) percent of the base amount. Consumption Reduction Methods Reductions in water consumption by the City during water shortages will reduce MWDOC's overall demands on Metropolitan. Under the ordinance, the City has the City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57-15 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan authority of allocating available supplies as deemed necessary under the water conservation phases. Consumption Reduction Methods are listed in Table 5 -6. Table 5 -6: Consumption Reduction Methods Penalties for Excessive Use Any customer who violates provisions of the Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations by either excess use of water or by specific violation of one or more of the applicable water use restrictions for a particular mandatory conservation stage may be cited by the City and may be subject to written notices, surcharges, fines, flow restrictions, service disconnection, and /or service termination which are detailed in Table 5 -7. Table 5 -7: Penalties and Charges Stage When Penalties or Charges AL Projected Consumption Reduction Methods Method Takes Second and Subsequent Installation of Water Flow Restrictor Reduction (/) Effect Year Round Conservation Measures Termination of Service To be determined Level 1 Conservation Measures 1 Level 2 Conservation Measures 2 by the City Level 3 Conservation Measures 3 Council. Level 4 Conservation Measures 4 Penalties for Excessive Use Any customer who violates provisions of the Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations by either excess use of water or by specific violation of one or more of the applicable water use restrictions for a particular mandatory conservation stage may be cited by the City and may be subject to written notices, surcharges, fines, flow restrictions, service disconnection, and /or service termination which are detailed in Table 5 -7. Table 5 -7: Penalties and Charges 5.5. Impacts to Revenue The actions described above to address a range of water shortage conditions have the potential to impact the City's revenues and expenditures. To assess these impacts, the City calculated the revenue impacts resulting from a 10 %, 20% and 50% reduction in sales as compared to a base year that was based on an estimate of normal year baseline. Other factors incorporated into the analysis included water losses, pricing structure and avoided costs. The results of this analysis are shown below in Table 5 -8. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57- Stage When Penalty Penalties or Charges AL Takes Effect Written Notice First Violation Second and Subsequent Installation of Water Flow Restrictor Violations Willful violations of Termination of Service mandatory restrictions 5.5. Impacts to Revenue The actions described above to address a range of water shortage conditions have the potential to impact the City's revenues and expenditures. To assess these impacts, the City calculated the revenue impacts resulting from a 10 %, 20% and 50% reduction in sales as compared to a base year that was based on an estimate of normal year baseline. Other factors incorporated into the analysis included water losses, pricing structure and avoided costs. The results of this analysis are shown below in Table 5 -8. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57- Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Table 5 -8: Revenue Impacts Analysis Demand Baseline 10% 20% 50% Water Sales (HCF) 6,514,518 5,863,066 5,211,614 3,257,259 Revenue Tier 1 Revenue $16,025,714 $14,423,143 $12,820,571 $11,218,000 Fixed Monthly /Bimonthly Charge Revenue $4,884,770 $4,884,770 $4,884,770 $4,884,770 Total Rate Revenue $20,910,484 $19,307,913 $17,705,341 $12,897,627 Revenue Lost $1,602,571 $3,205,143 ($8,012,857 Variable Costs Water Produced /Purchased $ $8,017,810 $7,216,029 $6,414,248 $4,008,905 Avoided Costs $801,781 $1,603,562 $4,008,905 Net Revenue Change $800,790 $1,601,581 $4,003,952 Anticipated shortfalls in projected revenue due to water supply shortages would need to be covered through increased water rates and/or an advance from funds set aside by the City. The existing rate structure could be adjusted to recapture a portion of the lost revenue, which would affect all water users within the City's service area. The City has a Water Rate Stabilization Fund to be used in times of drought and emergencies to offset the loss of revenue. The City could also advance funds from its General Fund for the loss of essential revenue. 5.6. Reduction Measuring Mechanism In order to quantify actual reductions in water use, several measuring mechanisms must be utilized. Water Use Monitoring Mechanisms ranging from water meter auditing, daily production monitoring, distribution records, and monitoring employees are listed in Table 5 -9. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan 5 -17 Section 5 Water Supplies Contingency Plan Table 5 -9: Water Use Monitoring Mechanisms Mechanisms for Determining Actual Type of Data Expected Reductions Water meter auditing Actual reduction of water used for meters over one -inch Daily production and distribution records would be monitored. The data is Monitor daily production /distribution recorded by zone, which would enable records City staff to determine which zone was using more water than expected. Customers would be alerted to actual water use (increase /decrease). City Code Enforcement Staff employee would monitor all unnecessary domestic Monitoring Employee irrigation use and serve on the "dawn" patrol to verify that residences and irrigation customers are not over - watering in the early hours of the day. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F57- 6. Recycled Water 6.1. Agency Coordination Recycled water is defined as domestic wastewater purified through primary, secondary and tertiary treatment. Recycled water is acceptable for most non - potable water purposes such as irrigation, commercial, and industrial processes. The City maintains an agreement with OCWD to supply Green Acres Project (GAP) water to customers where available. The addition of this supplemental water will reduce the demand on the City's water supply, thereby providing additional reserves for firefighting capacity, preserving potable water for drinking, and ensuring landscape irrigation during period of drought. Use of recycled water is expected to continue an upward trend in the City; throughout the County of Orange and all throughout the state of California. The City continues to support regional efforts to increase the use of recycled water. Because the City produces a majority of its water supply from the Basin, the City benefits from the actions of OCWD using recycled water to protect the Basin through seawater intrusion barriers and groundwater recharge basins. The City, therefore, indirectly benefits from this regional use of recycled water. Table 6 -1: Participating Agencies Participating Agencies Participated Water Agencies Newport Beach Wastewater Agencies OCSD Groundwater Agencies OCWD Planning Agencies 6.2. Wastewater Description and Disposal Within its service area, the City is responsible for wastewater collection and conveyance to the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) sewer treatment plant, located in Huntington Beach. OCSD also treats wastewater from several other municipalities. OCSD discharges treated water into the ocean through a 120 -inch diameter ocean outfall pipe that extends five miles offshore to the discharge point. A standby 78 -inch diameter outfall pipeline stretches one mile from shore. The treatment levels meet all current State and Federal requirements. OCSD also sends up to 10 mgd of treated wastewater every City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F67-1 Section 6 Recycled Water day to the Orange County Water District for further processing for landscape irrigation and for injection into the groundwater seawater intrusion barrier. Within the City's service area, discharge of treated wastewater is regulated by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). In general, the majority of the wastewater generated and treated during the summer months is used for alternative beneficial uses such as wetland habitat and restoration and irrigation for golf courses. The use of the recycled water helps supply part of the water demand during the peak summer months. Table 6 -2 summarizes the past, current, and projected wastewater volumes collected and treated, and the quantity of wastewater treated to recycled water standards for treatment plants within OCSD's service area. Table 6 -3 summarizes the disposal method, and treatment level of discharge volumes. Table 6 -2: Wastewater Collection and Treatment (AFY) Type of Wastewater Fiscal Year Ending 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 -opt Wastewater 2035 - Collected & Treated 273,017 232,348 302,400 312,704 321,104 329,392 333,536 in Service Area opt Ocean Outfall Volume that Meets 157,348 197,400 207,704 216,104 224,392 228,536 Recycled Water 12,156 75,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 105,000 Standards Table 6 -3: Disposal of Wastewater (Non - Recycled) (AFY) Method of Disposal Treatment Level Fiscal Year Ending 2035 - 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 opt Ocean Outfall Secondary 157,348 197,400 207,704 216,104 224,392 228,536 6.3. Current Recycled Water Uses The City has approximately 10 miles of recycled water distribution pipeline, which currently supplies eight recycled use sites. Recycled water is supplied to the City from the Orange County Water District (OCWD) from Fountain Valley as part of OCWD's Green Acres Project. OCWD produces approximately 7.5 MGD of tertiary treated, disinfected recycled water. Some of the sites served by recycled water include the Newport Beach County Club, the Big Canyon City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F67-2 Section 6 Recycled Water Country Club, median strips, and a City owned park. In FY 2009 -10, approximately 400 AF of recycled water was used in the City's service area for landscape irrigation, about 3% of the City's annual water demand. Table 6 -4 below illustrates the current uses for recycled water in the City. The usage is limited to landscape irrigation with a tertiary treatment level. Table 6-4: Current Recycled Water Uses (AFY) User Type Treatment Level Fiscal Year Ending 2010 Agriculture 2025 2030 Landscape Tertiary 432 Wildlife Habitat Wetlands Industrial 450 500 Groundwater Recharge Soo 500 Total 432 6.4. Potential Recycled Water Uses Potential recycled water users are locations where recycled water could replace potable water use. These potential users are typically landscape or agricultural irrigation systems, or possibly water users. However, due to the limited access to the project mains and some financial impact on end users, it is not feasible to distribute all of the potential recycled water, and the City does not predict that there will be many other end users in the near future. Tables 6 -5 and 6 -6 represent projected recycled water use within the City's service area through 2035. Recycled water use will remain constant through the 25 -year period, with landscape irrigation as its sole use. Table 6 -5: Projected Future Use of Recycled Water in Service Area (AFY) User Type Fiscal Year Ending 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 -opt Projected Use of 432 450 500 500 Soo 500 Recycled Water City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F67-3 Section 6 Recycled Water Table 6 -6: Projected Recycled Water Uses (AFY) User Type Treatment Level Fiscal Year Ending Agriculture 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 -opt Agriculture Wetlands Industrial Landscape Tertiary 450 500 500 500 500 Wildlife Habitat Wetlands Industrial Groundwater Recharge Total 450 500 500 500 500 Table 6 -7 compares the recycled water use projections from the City's 2005 UWMP with actual 2010 recycled water use. Table 6 -7: Recycled Water Uses — 2005 Projections compared with 2010 Actual (AFY) User Type 2005 Projection for 2010 2010 Actual Use Agriculture Landscape 444 432 Wildlife Habitat Wetlands Industrial Groundwater Recharge Total 444 432 6.4.1. Direct Non - Potable Reuse The City currently uses recycled water from OCWD's Green Acres Project for direct non - potable reuse such as landscape irrigation. 6.4.2. Indirect Potable Reuse The City benefits indirectly from the replenishment of the Orange County groundwater basin using GWRS water that meets state and federal drinking water standards for potable reuse. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F67-4 Section 6 Recycled Water 6.5. Optimization Plan To promote the use of recycled water, the City provides financial incentives by offering a 20 percent discount off potable water rates. The current rate for recycled users is $1.66 per unit (one unit equals 748 gallons). In Orange County, the majority of recycled water is used for irrigating golf courses, parks, schools, business and communal landscaping. However, future recycled water use can increase by requiring dual piping in new developments, retrofitting existing landscaped areas and constructing recycled water pumping stations and transmission mains to reach areas far from the treatment plants. Gains in implementing some of these projects have been made throughout the county; however, the additional costs, large energy requirements, and facilities make such projects very expensive to pursue. The City will conduct future cost/benefit analyses for recycled water projects, and seek creative solutions and a balance to recycled water use, in coordination with MWDOC, OCWD, Metropolitan and other cooperative agencies. These include solutions for funding, regulatory requirements, institutional arrangements and public acceptance. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F67-5 7. Future Water Supply Projects and Programs 7.1. Water Management Tools Resource optimization such as desalination to minimize the needs for imported water is led by the regional agencies in collaboration with local agencies. With the eventual replacement of older wells with new more efficient wells, increasing the capacity of existing booster stations, and continued efforts in reducing water waste, the City can meet projected demands with existing facilities and distribution system. 7.2. Transfer or Exchange Opportunities MWDOC will continue to help its member agencies in developing Transfer or Exchange opportunities and ensuring their success. In fulfilling this role, MWDOC will look to help its member agencies navigate the operational and administrative issues of wheeling water through the Metropolitan water distribution system. The City relies on the efforts of Metropolitan as well as MWDOC to pursue transfer or exchange opportunities. At this time, the City is not currently involved in any transfer or exchange opportunities. 7.3. Planned Water Supply Projects and Programs At this time, the City does not have any planned water supply projects or programs. 7.4. Desalination Opportunities Desalination is viewed as a way to develop a local, reliable source of water that assists agencies reduce their demand on imported water, reduce groundwater overdraft, and in some cases make unusable groundwater available for municipal uses. Currently, there are no identified projects within the City for desalination of seawater or impaired groundwater. However, from a regional perspective, desalination projects within the region indirectly benefit the City. In Orange County, there are three proposed ocean desalination projects that could serve MWDOC, including one specifically that may benefit the City. These are the Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Project, the South Orange Coastal Desalination Project, and the Camp Pendleton Seawater Desalination Project. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F77-1 Section 7 Future Water Supply Projects and Programs Table 7 -1: Opportunities for Desalinated Water Sources of Water Check if Yes Ocean Water X Brackish Ocean Water X Brackish Groundwater 7.4.1. Groundwater There are currently no brackish groundwater opportunities within the City's service area. 7.4.2. Ocean Water Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Project — Poseidon Resources LLC (Poseidon), a private company, has proposed development of the Huntington Beach Seawater Desalination Project to be located adjacent to the AES Generation Power Plant in the City of Huntington Beach along Pacific Coast Highway and Newland Street. The proposed project would produce up to 50 MGD (56,000 AFY) of drinking water and will distribute water to coastal and south Orange County to provide approximately 8% of Orange County's water supply needs. The project supplies would be distributed to participating agencies through a combination of (1) direct deliveries through facilities including the East Orange County Feeder #2 (EOCF #2), the City of Huntington Beach's distribution system, and the West Orange County Water Board Feeder #2 (WOCWBF #2), and (2) water supply exchanges with agencies with no direct connection to facilities associated with the Project. Poseidon had received non - binding Letters of Intent (LOI) from the Municipal Water District of Orange County and 17 retail water agencies to purchase a total of approximately 72 MGD (88,000 AFY) of Project supplies. On January 20, 2010, the City signed a non - binding LOI for 7.1 MGD (8,000 AFY) of Project supplies. The Project has received specific approvals from the Huntington Beach City Council, including the Coastal Development Permit, Tentative Parcel Map, Subsequent Environmental Impact Report and Conditional Use Permit, which collectively provided for the long -term operation of the desalination facility. In addition to final agreements with the participating agencies, the Project still needs approvals from the State Lands Commission and the California Coastal Commission before Poseidon can continence construction of the desalination facility in Huntington Beach. A public hearing on the Project before the State Lands Commission is expected as early as this October. If project receives all required permits by 2011, it could be producing drinking water for Orange County by as soon as 2013. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F77-2 Section 7 Future Water Supply Projects and Programs South Orange Coastal Desalination Project — MWDOC is proposing a desalination project in joint with Laguna Beach County Water District, Moulton Niguel Water District, City of San Clemente, City of San Juan Capistrano, South Coast Water District, and Metropolitan. The project is to be located adjacent to the San Juan Creek in Dana Point just east of the transition road from PCH to the I -5. The project will provide 15 MGD (16,000 AFY) of drinking water and will provide up to 30% of its potable water supply to the participating agencies. Phase 1 consists of drilling 4 test borings and installing monitoring wells. Phase 2 consists of drilling, constructing and pumping a test slant well. Phase 3 consists of constructing a Pilot Test Facility to collect and assess water quality. Phases 1 and 2 have been completed and Phase 3 commenced in June 2010 and will last 18 months. If pumping results are favorable after testing, a full -scale project description and EIR will be developed. If EIR is adopted and necessary permits are approved, project could be operational by 2016. Camp Pendleton Seawater Desalination Project — San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) is proposing a desalination project in joint with Metropolitan to be located at Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base adjacent to the Santa Margarita River. The initial project would be a 50 or 100 MGD plant with expansions in 50 MGD increments up to a max of 150 MGD making this the largest proposed desalination plant in the US. The project is currently in the study feasibility stage and is conducting geological surveys to study the effect on ocean life and examining routes to bring desalination to SDCWA's delivery system. MWDOC and south Orange County agencies are maintaining a potential interest in the project, but at this time is only doing some limited fact finding and monitoring of the project. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F77-3 8. UWMP Adoption Process 8.1. Overview Recognizing that close coordination among other relevant public agencies is the key to the success of its UWMP, the City worked closely with other entities such as MWDOC to develop and update this planning document. The City also encouraged public involvement through the holding of a public hearing to learn and ask questions about their water supply. This section provides the information required in Article 3 of the Water Code related to adoption and implementation of the UWMP. Table 8 -1 summarizes external coordination and outreach activities carried out by the City and their corresponding dates. The UWMP checklist to confirm compliance with the Water Code is provided in Appendix A. Table 8 -1: External Coordination and Outreach External Coordination and Outreach Date Reference Encouraged public involvement (Public Hearing) May 28, 2011 & Appendix F June 4, 2011 Notified city or county within supplier's service area that water supplier is preparing an updated March 22, 2011 Appendix E UWMP (at least 60 days prior to public hearing) Held public hearing June 14, 2011 Appendix F Adopted UWMP Appendix G Submitted UWMP to DWR (no later than 30 days after adoption) Submitted UWMP to the California State Library and city or county within the supplier's service area (no later than 30 days after adoption) Made UWMP available for public review (no later than 30 days after filing with DWR) This UWMP was adopted by the City Council on MONTH DAY, YEAR. A copy of the adopted resolution is provided in Appendix G. A change from the 2004 legislative session to the 2009 legislative session required the City to notify any city or county within its service area at least 60 days prior to the public City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F87-1 Section 8 UWMP Adoption Process hearing. The City sent a Letter of Notification to the County of Orange on March 22, 2011 that it is in the process of preparing an updated UWMP (Appendix E). 8.2. Public Participation The City encouraged community and public interest involvement in the plan update through public hearings and inspection of the draft document. Public hearing notifications were published in local newspapers. A copy of the published Notice of Public Hearing is included in Appendix E. The hearing provided an opportunity for all residents and employees in the service area to learn and ask questions about their water supply in addition to the City's plans for providing a reliable, safe, high - quality water supply. Copies of the draft plan were made available for public inspection at the City Clerk's and Utilities Department offices. 8.3. Agency Coordination All of the City's water supply planning relates to the policies, rules, and regulations of its regional and local water providers. The City is dependent on imported water from Metropolitan through MWDOC, its regional wholesaler. The City is also dependent on groundwater from OCWD, the agency which manages the Santa Ana River Groundwater Basin as well as provides recycled water in partnership with the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD). As such, the City involved these water providers in the development of its 2010 UWMP at various levels of contribution as summarized in Table 8 -2. Table 8 -2: Coordination with Appropriate Agencies As a member agency of MWDOC, MWDOC provided assistance to the City's 2010 UWMP development by providing much of the data and analysis such as, population projections from the California State University at Fullerton, Center of Demographic City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F87-2 Sent Sent Participated in Attended Contacted Not Plan Commented public for Copy of Notice of Involved /No on Draft Draft Intention Development Meetings Assistance Information Plan to Adopt MWDOC X X Metropolitan X OCWD X County of X Orange As a member agency of MWDOC, MWDOC provided assistance to the City's 2010 UWMP development by providing much of the data and analysis such as, population projections from the California State University at Fullerton, Center of Demographic City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F87-2 Section 8 UWMP Adoption Process Research (CDR) and SBx7 -7 modeling. MWDOC provided information that quantifies water availability to meet their projected demands for the next 25 years, in five -year increments. Based on the projections of retail demand and local supplies completed by the City, and the imported supply availability described in Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP, MWDOC prepared an informational package with data specific to the City, that incorporated additional calculations for the required planning efforts. The City's UWMP was developed in collaboration with MWDOC's 2010 RUWMP to ensure consistency between the two documents as well as Metropolitan's 2010 RUWMP and 2010 Integrated Water Resources Plan. As a groundwater producer who relies on supplies from the OCWD- managed Orange County Groundwater Basin, the City coordinated the preparation of this 2010 UWMP with OCWD. OCWD provided projections of the amount of groundwater, the City is allowed to extract in the 25 -year planning horizon. In addition, information from OCWD's 2009 Groundwater Management Plan and 2008 -2009 Engineer's Report were incorporated in this document where relevant. 8.4. UWMP Submittal 8.4.1. Review of Implementation of 2005 UWMP As required by California Water Code, the City summarizes the implementation of the Water Conservation and Water Recycling Programs to date, and compares the implementation to those as planned in its 2005 UWMP. Comparison of 2005 Planned Water Conservation Programs with 2010 Actual Programs As a signatory to the MOU regarding urban water use efficiency, the City's commitment to implement BMP -based water use efficiency program continues today. For the City's specific achievements in the area of conservation, please see Section 4 of this Plan. Comparison of 2005 Projected Recycled Water Use with 2010 Actual Use Current recycled water projections for the City in 2010 are about 3% less than previously forecasted for 2010 in the 2005 UWMP, as illustrated in Table 6 -7. 8.4.2. Filing of 2010 UWMP The City Council reviewed the Final Draft Plan on DATE. The seven - member City Council approved the 2010 UWMP on DATE. See Appendix G for the resolution approving the Plan. By August 1, 2011, the City's Adopted 2010 UWMP was filed with DWR, California State Library, County of Orange, and cities within the City's service area. City of Newport Beach 2010 Urban Water Management Plan F87-3 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2 Technical Appendix F Assessment of Sewer Capacity Availability Relative to Increase Allocation of Residential Development RBF Consulting May 10, 2012 NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach CONSULTING A Company NORTH NEWPORT CENTER ASSESSMENT OF SEWER CAPACITY AVAILABILITY RELATIVE TO INCREASED ALLOCATION OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (May 10, 2012) Introduction: An application has been filed to incorporate 94 additional residential units to the North Newport Center Planned Community (NNCPC) within the San Joaquin Plaza area adjacent to the corner of San Joaquin Hills Road and Santa Cruz Drive. The subject site is currently occupied by low -rise office buildings. However, the current request to incorporate 94 additional residential units to the previous allocation of 430 residential units established on this site has been anticipated to result in increased demand on the local sewer system when compared to the existing office uses. This assessment has been prepared to assess whether there is adequate capacity within the existing infrastructure within the vicinity to serve the proposed expanded number of residential units proposed to be allocated to the San Joaquin Plaza site. Existing Conditions: The subject site is contained within an area of existing development bounded by San Joaquin Hills Road, Santa Cruz Drive, San Clemente Drive and Santa Barbara Drive. While sewer lines exist within each of these roadways, the primary means of serving the existing office buildings on the site utilizes 8 inch VCP sewer lines extending from the subject site to San Clemente, which connects into the 8 inch VCP in Santa Barbara that connects to the facilities in Jamboree. Examination of the plans for the sewer lines in San Clemente and Santa Barbara indicated that a short segment (approximately 64 feet long) between Manhole 3 and Manhole 4 generally westerly of the art museum had a significantly flatter slope than all other potentially affected segments and, therefore, would be the location within the lowest potential capacity. (See attached excepts from record plans for San Clemente Drive). Capacity Assessment: The previously identified point of lowest capacity along the system serving the project site has been constructed with a slope slightly over one percent, but for purposes of this assessment the calculations utilize a one percent slope to be conservative. On that basis and reflecting standard conditions regarding the peak flows, the capacity for an 8 inch VCP flowing half full was calculated to be 390,100 gallons per day. This capacity is consistent with industry standard criteria and would be the basis of design for installation of a new sewer line. Furthermore, it should be noted that this facility is calculated to have a capacity of 711,900 gallons per day when % full. (See attached worksheets). Page 1 of 2 Demand Assessment: It should be noted that the subject segment of the sewer system currently serves only the art museum and the San Joaquin Plaza office buildings. Therefore, as currently configured, should residential units replace the office uses in San Joaquin Plaza, the only other demand for the capacity in the previously discussed pipe segment would be from the Art Museum. That being said, should the entire San Joaquin Plaza site continue to utilize the subject pipe segment, the demand associated with implementing the residential units would make up virtually all the demand for this segment of the sewer system. The demand associated with the 94 additional units requested for allocation to the subject site was calculated based on an estimate of 200 gallons per day per unit with an assumed peaking factor of 3.0 and resulted in a projected demand of 56,400 gallons per day. When compared to the previously identified capacity range, it can be seen that the projected demand would represent approximately 15 percent of the design capacity at the most capacity constrained segment in the proximate sewer system. Although the application currently under review by the City is specifically limited to the allocation of 94 additional units, the projected demand associated with the combined total of 524 residential units has also been calculated. The projected demand associated with all 524 units, based on the previously stated assumptions would be 314,000 gallons per day. When compared to the previously calculated capacity, the demand would utilize approximately 80 percent of the design capacity. When including an estimated demand of 18,000 gallons per day for the Art Museum, the combined peak flow would with all 524 residential units be estimated to be 334,400 gallons per day. This combined total peak demand would then equate to being 86 percent of the capacity for the pipe flowing half full. Conclusion: The projected demand associated with the 94 additional residential units requested for the San Joaquin Plaza site equates to approximately 15 percent of the most constrained pipe segment capacity within the existing sewer system proximate to the project. Since the subject segment of the sewer system serves only the subject site and the Art Museum, it can be concluded that there is adequate capacity within the most capacity constrained portion of the existing sewer system in the vicinity of the project (above Manhole 3) to serve the proposed allocation of additional units. H: \pdata \10108123 \Correspondences \N Newport Center Assess Sewer Capacity Availability_05.10.2012.docx Page 2 of 2 pp�ggL' �d �4f 9 ' I ¢�r c y zas JCR` I I 1 i p NEWPORT BEACH - PARKING GARAGE 5I SEE SHEET fi FOR SEWER/vJATER BY OTHERS C� MUSEUM i,I ART ' _ 1 i 1 'CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC CONTROL , / MI + 7PD000 2 aP b1v /4,70 -POP. 9'S A / / ��i -%ll —l:/ .. : - -1 + - _ 1457 O.P TOP d5 V 'te B21 irrP) `4_ _ . O \ \\ �\"',�\ '. `��,\ i \$+" �'� —_ � .S� I + .x''.11= azr \, l,^',� 1 A, <5d• / fief 1 �_:, 1 (� - \ _ �_ i SP LINE a5 n SHEET 5 " eo - ; ON ���� ��� " I 11511 a.. Izxl� _ A A rK I <\ \ 4 O5Tn�0.tEl 10 ' 20 �•.'. `\ \ - :� \'.. I &.OWi LU11 4 / 1 11 1 �R' P w lszz PC ' \ ' LILT �.. I auzsL.nH bl \ "\ \ E GRADING AND PAVING CONSTRUCTION NOTES \ _ ]S VOW, .REMOVE AIN DISPOSE OF WSTINC A L PAVENENi \ � - _ was .LN Phll 1{ /n �� D���E 2> SLURRY 9ACNFILL Bf:CN AND REPLACE A. G PER CITY OF k 8 SN- 105 -L -A -. \ / I _ A V x.94' II L� ALRRY SEAL b RESTRIP£ TO LIOrTS SROMI 6 SEWER CONSTRUCTION NOTES CCNSTFUCI 9" V C. R E %IRA STRENGTH SEX£R LLR PER Cl FY CG AT SPECi F/CAII0.Y5 `.. �' O 8l LCnSTRUCi 1B` SiABDMS RANHOLE PER CITY DF N E. 5LD-40H aI CONSTRUCT 6' PVC (SOR 35f SEL22 LATERAL PER CITY OF N 0. STO -406 -L r �1 7 93 CONSTRUCT SEER CL (;,I-, f o ANOUT PER CITY OF N U. STD 406 -L \ — f 53. 00 - n4. CVASLOJCT CITr- MPPLIEO 9' CAST IRON CLEANOUT ASSFIVEY PER CTTr 41 N 6 S Di06-L JOIN LL PAC O a V.C.P. SEVER RE 2LIL PER CITY C7 N. STD -400.1 SS CONSTRUCT B V C P TERMINAL CLEAN^ 1 a6 INSTALL PVC a 2x CRP FOR FUTURE aURDRIO COA'liECTIbI O— as REMOVE AM DISPOSE OF EXISTING a' / C. 9. SCCR PAM AFTER EONSTRJLT141Y, INSPECTION N% ACCEPTANCE OF I:FB RAIN 99 REMOVE ANN DISPOSE OF EXISTING SERER MANHOLE 9D REMOVE AM 015PoiE OF EXISTR$ sENER amour 91 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTIN 6' V.C.P. SFAER LATERAL \ 1 y I GRAPHIC SCALE _— m a rI CORP DRAWING I NOTES TO CONMAC e OR 1. DRY UTILITIES ARE SCHEMATIC AND SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. SEE UTILITY COMPANY PLANS FOR FINAL DESIGN AND SPECIFICATIONS. e e ® JOBNAME `A`kr'- i2\ �}`t'r- 1°.1L•.+y To 450" S ;5e= 'a Ft.kC-":'ifi-L�"9r'w��^i4Ar C.a �� OtA °`e�' -Z. 3 a t OFF i t' e iJ C, ) A- � y "� § i 5 Av ' ADZ -y S6, T M DP-- i Dl i Pi u mi E va 2"00 �t°�:,P`�iaJ �.,.�v' '� __ x''34 c `.�S �. a� ,,i.. � �• 3%� r% i t =d't �.- A�14 pi 0151 e $ °`{-�S� �f�'` k 1 L,!* adt 'J NAME fV t'S/2 -'1 w ® ® Cm��:3� C4a� •„ }; �,�. JOB CONSULTING i 9 '.� fi% ,p.f.� JOB NO. _ PLANNING R DESIGN 0 CONSTRUCTION www.RGP.coM SHEET NO. ----- OFg ='"`" �eoro.ave.aeoe r °'q „.6 *�e°r� Is 'Kle DESIGNED BY DATE 6 iDwcs %` w � '14'ieJ.�- ,°. }'.+�i r'2`�C:.'- �'�'%y CHECKEDBY DATE va 2"00 �t°�:,P`�iaJ �.,.�v' '� __ x''34 c `.�S �. a� ,,i.. � �• 3%� r% i t =d't �.- A�14 pi 0151 e $ °`{-�S� �f�'` k 1 L,!* adt 'J a G"'”- ''6R'� Q;^i -':t .^«i ��; *S. � ^' ���-^ Cm��:3� C4a� •„ }; �,�. 1 i 9 '.� fi% ,p.f.� va 2"00 �t°�:,P`�iaJ �.,.�v' '� __ x''34 c `.�S �. a� ,,i.. � �• 3%� r% i t =d't �.- A�14 pi 0151 s; eni 9 4F: �E+ 1 1 u a" Worksheet for 8" Pipe - @ WD t2 50 sct.:3° ='=. g;, ,NV ,._ .1"Zxv Protk r'rca` - F T r ?- ect Descnpton _ _rr a :a , ` ... „x Friction Method Manning Formula 0.00 in Solve For Discharge Profile Headloss 0.00 it Average End Depth Over Rise Roughness Coefficient 0.013 Normal Depth Over Rise Channel Slope 0.00998 ft/ft Normal Depth 4.00 in Diameter 8.00 in Discharge 390096.82 gal /day Flow Area 0.17 ft' Wetted Perimeter 1.05 ft Hydraulic Radius 2.00 in Top Width 0.67 ft Critical Depth 0.37 it Percent Full 50.0 Critical Slope 0.00736 ft/ft Velocity 3.46 fUs, - Velocity Head 0.19 ft Specific Energy 0.52 it Froude Number 1.19 Maximum Discharge 1.30 W/s Discharge Full 1.21 Wis Slope Full 0.00250 ft/ft Flow Type SuperCritical Downstream Depth 0.00 in Length 0.00 ft - Number Of Steps 0 GUO tput Data M Upstream Depth 0.00 in Profile Description Profile Headloss 0.00 it Average End Depth Over Rise 0.00 % Normal Depth Over Rise 50.00 % Downstream Velocity Infinity ft/s Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center Bentley FlowMaster [08.11.00.031 511012 01 2 11:07:44 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1 -203- 755 -1666 Page 1 of 2 Worksheet for 8" Pipe m @ WD ® 50% Upstream Velocity Infinity ft /s Normal Depth 4.00 in Critical Depth 0.37 If Channel Slope 0.00998 ft/ft Critical Slope 0.00736 ft!ft Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center - Bentley FlowMaster (08.11.00.031 5110/2012 11:07:44 AM 27 Siemons Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA +1- 203 - 755 -1666 Page 2 of 2