HomeMy WebLinkAbout1883 - RECOMMEND APPROVAL- ADDENDUM NO. 2 NORTH NEWPORT CENTER EIR FOR GP 2006 UPDATE AND WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT FOR NNCPC AMENDMENT PROJECTRESOLUTION NO. 1883
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THE SECOND
NORTH NEWPORT CENTER ADDENDUM (ADDENDUM NO. 2) TO
THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE
(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2006011119) AND WATER SUPPLY
ASSESSMENT FOR NORTH NEWPORT CENTER PLANNED
COMMUNITY AMENDMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Irvine Company wishes to implement the General Plan 2006
Update with the implementation of the North Newport Center Planned Community,
which consists of seven sub -areas that include Fashion Island, Block 600, Block 800
and portions of Blocks 100, 400, 500, and San Joaquin Plaza of the Newport Center
Statistical Area.
WHEREAS, in that regard, the Irvine Company has applied to the City of
Newport Beach for approval of the following project (the "Project "):
1. Transfer of Development Intensity (TD2012 -002)- Conversion of un -built non-
residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms assigned to General Plan
Anomaly Site No. 43) to multi - family residential development intensity (79 multi-
family units) and transfer of the converted development intensity into the North
Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC);
2. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment (PD2012 -001)- Amendment
to the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential
development intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the
430 residential units currently allocated to Blocks 500, 600, and San Joaquin
Plaza of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza. Of the 94 units, 79 units result
from the conversion and transfer of development intensity, and the remaining 15
units are currently unassigned by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of
the Newport Center Statistical Area L1;
3. Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2007 -002- Amending the Zoning
Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the Irvine
Company to vest the revised development intensities and allocations within
NNCPC and to establish public benefit contributions to the City;
4. Traffic Study (TS2012 -004)- Traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's
Traffic Phasing Ordinance;
5. Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP)- Amendment to an AHIP
specifying how the Project will meet the City's affordable housing goal; and
6. Water Supply Assessment (WSA)- Evaluation of water supply availability for the
Project.
SD \847681.1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1883
Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2006, the City Council certified the adequacy and
completeness of the EIR for the General Plan 2006 Update (EIR No. 2006011119) by
adopting Resolution No 2006 -75. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines section 15168,
the City prepared the EIR for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update as a
program EIR (the "Program EIR ").
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2007, the City Council certified the adequacy and
completeness of the Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of
Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update ( "Addendum No. 1 ") by adopting Resolution
No. 2007 -79.
WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach has prepared a second Addendum to the
Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update
( "Addendum No. 2 ").
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has determined that the
Addendum No. 2 complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act ( "CEQA ").
WHEREAS, consistent with the requirements of California Senate Bill 610,
adopted in 2011, the City of Newport Beach has prepared a Water Supply Assessment
( "WSA") for the Project.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 5, 2012, in
the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California,
at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project, the Program EIR,
Addendum No. 1, and Addendum No. 2, and the WSA. A notice of time, place, and
purpose of the meeting was duly given in accordance with the Municipal Code.
Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning
Commission at this meeting, including the evidence and arguments submitted by the
City staff, the Irvine Company, and all interested parties.
WHEREAS, after thoroughly considering the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1,
Addendum No. 2, the WSA, and the public testimony and written submissions, if any, of
all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission finds the following
facts, findings, and reasons to support certifying the Addendum No. 2:
1. The Project is consistent with and implements the General Plan Update.
2. The Program EIR, which is conclusively presumed to be valid pursuant to Public
Resources Code section 21167.2, reviews the existing conditions of the City and
Newport Center; analyzes potential environmental impacts from implementation
of the General Plan Update in Newport Center; identifies policies from the
General Plan Update that serve to reduce and minimize impacts from
implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center; and identifies
additional mitigations measures, if necessary to reduce potentially significant
impacts from implementation of the General Plan Update in Newport Center.
SD \847681.1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1883
Page 3 of 7
3. The Project does not increase development intensities or associated impacts
beyond the levels considered in the Program EIR.
4. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes have
occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the General Plan Update
has been implemented for the Project.
5. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no substantial changes to the
environmental setting of the General Plan Update have occurred.
6. Since the Program EIR's certification in 2006, no new information of substantial
importance has become available that was not known and that could not have
been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at that time of certification.
Thus, no new information indicates that:
(A) The Project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
Program EIR;
(B) Significant effects from the Project will be substantially more severe than
identified in the Program EIR;
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible
would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects of the Project, but the City declines to adopt the
mitigation measures or alternatives; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from
those analyzed in the Program EIR would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects on the environment, but the City declines to adopt
the mitigation measures or alternative.
7. Since no substantial changes to the circumstances or environmental setting have
occurred, and since no new information relating to significant effects, mitigation
measures, or alternatives has become available, the Project does not require
additional environmental review, consistent with CEQA Guidelines sections
15162 and 15168.
8. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and the Addendum
No. 2, the Planning Commission has determined that the Project falls within the
scope of the Program EIR, and that the Program EIR therefore applies to the
Project, consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15168.
9. Based on these findings, the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, and the Addendum
No. 2, the Planning Commission has determined that no subsequent EIR or
supplemental EIR is required or appropriate under Public Resources Code
section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162; 15163, and 15164. The
SD \847681.1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1883
Page 4 of 7
Addendum No.2 therefore satisfies CEQA's environmental review requirements
for the Project.
10. The Addendum No. 2, which the City prepared to evaluate whether the Project
would cause any new or potentially more severe significant adverse effects on
the environment, specifically analyzed, in addition to several other potential
impacts, potential impacts related to aesthetics, climate change, and traffic. The
analysis and conclusions for potential traffic impacts were based on, and relied
upon, the traffic study entitled North Newport Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO
Traffic Analysis, which, together with the Addendum No. 2, provide the
substantial evidence upon which the Planning Commission has based its
findings.
11. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the Addendum No. 2, the Planning
Commission finds that the Project will not have, when compared to the Program
EIR, any new or more severe adverse environmental impacts, including, without
limitation, no new or more severe significant adverse impacts related to
aesthetics, climate change, or traffic.
12. The Planning Commission also makes the following, more specific finding:
The Addendum No.2 specifically analyzes the Project's potential impacts
on traffic and circulation, based on the traffic study entitled North Newport
Center San Joaquin Plaza TPO Traffic Analysis, attached to the
Addendum No. 2. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the
Addendum and the traffic study, the Planning Commission finds that the
Project will not have any new or more severe significant traffic or
circulation impacts.
13. The Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants
or animals, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory.
14. The Project does not have the potential to disadvantage long -term environmental
goals in order to achieve short-term environmental goals, as documented in the
Addendum No. 2, which identified no new or more severe significant adverse
effects on the environment.
15. The Project will not result in any new or more severe significant impacts which
are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, when viewed in connection
with planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity.
16. The Project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the
human population, either directly or indirectly, in that no new or more severe
SD \847681.1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1883
Page 5 of 7
significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health or
public services.
17. These factual findings are based on the Program EIR, Addendum No. 1, the
Addendum No. 2, and all documents referred in or attached to it, including
without limitation the traffic studies, the submissions of the applicant, the records
and files of the City's Community Development Department related to the
Project, and any other documents referred to or relied upon by the Planning
Commission during its consideration of the Project on July 5, 2012.
18. The Planning Commission has considered the Program EIR and the Addendum
No.2, and has concluded that the Addendum No. 2 reflects the independent
judgment of the City.
19. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of
adverse effect set forth in California Code Regulations, Title 14, Section 753.5(d).
20. The WSA evaluates whether the total projected water supplies, determined to be
available by the city or county for the project during normal, single dry, and
multiple dry water years during a 20 -year projection, will meet the projected water
demand associated with the Project, in addition to existing and planned future
uses, including agricultural and manufacturing uses.
21. The WSA identifies all existing water supply entitlements, water rights, or water
service contracts relevant to the water supply for the Project and describes the
quantities of water received in prior years by the existing water supply
entitlements, water rights, or water service contracts.
22. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the WSA, the Planning Commission
finds that adequate and reliable water supplies are and will be available to serve
the proposed project for the next 20 years.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds that
the preceding recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission for the Addendum No.2 and WSA.
2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends certification of the
Addendum No. 2 to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this
resolution and as stated in the Addendum No. 2 on file in the Community
Development Department.
3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends approval of the WSA to
the City Council for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in
the WSA on file in the Community Development Department.
SD \847681.1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1883
Page 6 of 7
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 5 °i DAY OF JULY, 2012.
AYES: Ameri, Brown, Hillgren, Kramer, Myers, Toerge, and Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Fred
SD1847681.1
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1883
Page 7 of 7
Addendum No. 2
(To be attached upon approval)
SD \847681.1
ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN 2006 UPDATE
FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR)
SCH No. 2006011119
��wroR�
04 e�
F ;n
v m
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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2
LIST OF FIGURES
Fiaure 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
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 1 9) 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 Protect 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 -113 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 -113) 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
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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
d. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a Subsequent EIR pursuant to Section
15162 should be included in an Addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the
project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial
evidence.
As noted above, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a) allows for the preparation of an Addendum if none
of the conditions described in Section 15162 are met CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 describes the
conditions under which a Subsequent EIR must be prepared, as follows:
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR due to the involvement of environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects;
b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement
of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects; or
c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified
as complete, shows any of the following:
I. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
2. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in
the previous EIR;
3. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project,
but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternatives; or
4. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed
in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative.
If none of these circumstances are present, and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary
to update the previously certified EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines § 15164.
As described in detail herein, none of the above circumstances that warrant the preparation of a
Subsequent EIR are present.
1.6 Type of CEQA Compliance Document and Level of Analysis
This document is Addendum No. 2 to the previously - certified City of Newport Beach General Plan EIR
(SCH No. 2006011119). As such, this Addendum analyzes the potential differences between the
impacts in the General Plan EIR and those that would be associated with the proposed Project described
in Section 2.0, Project Description.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(a) states that a Program EIR is appropriate for a series of actions that
can be characterized as one large project and are related either:
1) Geographically,
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1 -4
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
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 Page 1 -6
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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2
2.0 Project Description
The Project evaluated by this EIR Addendum is located in the City of Newport Beach, within the City's
Newport Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI). This area is commonly known as Newport
Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district that includes major retail, professional office,
entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master - planned development. The Newport Center
Statistical Area consists of several sub -areas with separate and distinct zoning designations, including
multiple planned communities. The sub -areas involved in this Project include: 1) the NNCPC, which is
the largest planned community and includes Fashion Island (located in the central portion of Statistical
Area LI), as well as Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800, and San Joaquin Plaza (located northerly, southerly,
and easterly of Fashion Island); and 2) the Newport Beach Marriott Hotel (a 532 -room resort hotel
located immediately west of Fashion Island). Other sub -areas within Newport Center include the
Newport Beach Country Club and golf course (located westerly of Fashion Island), existing single - family
neighborhoods (located westerly and southwesterly of the golf course), other professional office
complexes (located northerly and southerly of Fashion Island), and the Corona del Mar Shopping Center
and future Civic Center (located along the eastern edge of the Newport Center boundary).
In February 2012, the Project Applicant submitted an application to the City's Planning Division
requesting to assign un -built development intensity permitted by the City's General Plan in the Newport
Center Statistical Area to the NNCPC, and to vest the resulting additional development intensities
through an amendment to an existing Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement. That
application is the subject of analysis in this document pursuant to CEQA.
The Newport Beach City Council will consider the following actions requested by the Project Applicant.
In advance of the City Council's consideration, advisory recommendations regarding the actions listed
below will be considered by the City's Planning Commission.
I. Convert un -built non - residential development intensity (79 hotel rooms) to multi - family
residential development intensity (79 multi - family units) and transfer the converted development
intensity into the NNCPC;
2. Assign 15 residential units currently allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of
the Newport Center to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC;
3. Amend the NNCPC Development Plan to increase the allowable residential development
intensity by a total of 94 units and to allocate the 94 units plus the 430 residential units currently
allocated to the MU -H3 portions of the NNCPC solely to San Joaquin Plaza;
4. Amend the Zoning Implementation and Public Benefit Agreement between the City and the
Irvine Company concerning North Newport Center to vest the revised development intensities
and allocations;
5. Approve a traffic study for 94 units pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance; and
6. Amend the Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP).
Each of the proposed actions is described in more detail below.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -1
No
O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
♦ Convert Un -built Non - Residential Development Intensity (79 Hotel Rooms) to Multi -
Family Residential Development Intensity (79 Multi- Family Units) and Transfer the
Converted Development Intensity to the NNCPC
The Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element describes the City's existing and planned
development pattern. It includes maps and tables that specify where certain land uses can occur and
allocates maximum development limits (also called development "intensity ") to specific locations.
Certain areas of the City are identified on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Anomaly Locations,"
where a maximum development intensity is allowed pursuant to General Plan Tables LU I and LU2. The
General Plan recognizes that although Newport Beach is mostly built -out, growth and change will
continue to occur; therefore, to allow flexibility, the City Council may allow transfers of un -built
development intensity.
Anomaly Location 43 in Statistical Area LI is developed with a 532 room resort hotel presently
operated by Marriott Hotels and Resorts. General Plan Table LU2 allows a maximum of 611 hotel
rooms in Anomaly Location 43; therefore, 79 hotel rooms allowed by the General Plan are un- built.
The Project Applicant requests to convert the 79 un -built hotel rooms to 79 multi - family residential
units and then transfer them to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC.
Pursuant to General Plan Policy LU 4.3(d), transfers of development rights or development intensity in
Newport Center are governed solely by General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3. General Plan Policy LU 6.14.3
allows development rights or development intensity to be transferred within Newport Center, subject
to a finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and that the transfer will
not result in adverse traffic impacts.
A General Plan Amendment is not required to accomplish the proposed conversion and transfer of
development intensity, but the conversion and transfer must be approved by the City Council. Refer to
Figure I for a graphic depiction of the proposed development intensity transfer.
♦ Assign 15 Residential Units Currently Allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3
Portions of Newport Center to San Joaquin Plaza
In addition to the land use and development intensity designations assigned to certain locations of the
City by the 2006 General Plan, several areas of the City are regulated by planned community
development plans. The NNCPC Development Plan, which is applicable in the case of the proposed
Project, specifies more detail than the General Plan and includes development standards, design
guidelines, and administration procedures that must be adhered to when development actions occur
within the NNCPC boundaries. The NNCPC serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for activities
within its boundaries.
The NNCPC Development Plan currently allows for 430 multi - family residential units to be developed
in areas of the NNCPC designated MU -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
No
0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR:Addendum No 2
LEGEND
LEGEND rf Center/ Fashion Island (Statistical Area 1.1)
Xj
0 North Newport Center Planned Community ( NNCPC)
1
F
0 Marroitt Hotel Block 900
San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNCPC
Donor Sites / Receiver Site
Development Limit Before Transfer or Vesting
Development Limit After Transfer or Vesting
Marriott Hotel Block 900 (General Plan Anomaly
611 Hotel Units
532 Hotel Units
Location 43
Un -Built and Un- Vested Mutti- Family Units
15 Multi - Family Units
0 Multi - Family Units
Allocated Statistical Area Ll By General Plan
San Joaquin Plaza (General Plan Anomaly
430 Residential Units
524 Multi - Family Units
Location 48
Figure 1
HE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY TRANSFER
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2 -3
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 -H3 Portions of the NNCPC Solely to San Joaquin
Plaza
As described above, the Project Applicant proposes to increase the residential development intensity
allowed in the NNCPC by transferring 79 converted hotel units and assigningl5 un -built multi - family
units from outside the NNCPC to inside the NNCPC. In addition, the Project Applicant seeks to
modify NNCPC Table 2, Development Limits, to specifically allocate 524 residential units to the San
Joaquin Plaza. These 524 units consist of the 430 residential units already allocated to the NNCPC's
MU -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 18/11 via Resolution 2011-102, the maximum permitted officeicommercial 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
Fashion
San Joaquin
Land Use
Island
Block 100
Block 400
Block S00
Block 600
Block 800
Plaza
Total
Regional
1,619,525 sq.
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,619,525 sq. ft.
Commercial
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
439(C)0
(CA_
245
524(0
673769
Office/
0
-0- sq. ft.
91,727 sq. ft
599,659 sq.
1,340,609 sq.
286,166
95,550 sq. ft
2,413,711 sq. ft.
Commercial
(94LCCI
ft Q
ft. M
LD)
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 18/11 via Resolution 2011-102, the maximum permitted officeicommercial 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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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 I S% 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
3.0 Project Information
1. Project Title
North Newport Center Planned Community Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions
2. Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
Planning Division
3300 Newport Boulevard, Building C
Newport Beach, CA 92663
3. Contact Person and Phone Number
Mr. Jaime Murillo, Associate Planner
(949) 644 -3209
4. Project Location
The proposed Project involves the transfer of development intensity for 79 multi - family units (which
would be converted from hotel units as part of the Project) from Anomaly Location 43 in the Newport
Center Statistical Area (Statistical Area LI) to the NNCPC and specifically to the San Joaquin Plaza
portion of the NNCPC. The Project also involves the assignment of 15 residential units currently
allowed by the General Plan within the MU -H3 portions of Statistical Area LI to San Joaquin Plaza.
Statistical Area LI is commonly known as Newport Center /Fashion Island, which is a mixed use district
that includes major retail, professional office, entertainment, recreation, and residential uses in a master -
planned development. The Newport Center Statistical Area is bounded on the southwest by Coast
Highway, on the southeast by MacArthur Boulevard, on the northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and on
the northwest by Jamboree Road. The Newport Center Statistical Area consists of several sub -areas
with separate and distinct zoning designations, including multiple planned communities. The sub -areas
involved in this Project include: 1) the NNCPC, which is the largest planned community and includes
Fashion Island (located in the central portion of Statistical Area LI) and Blocks 100, 400, 500, 600, 800
and San Joaquin Plaza (located northerly, southerly, and easterly of Fashion Island); and 2) the Newport
Beach Marriott Hotel (a 532 -room resort hotel located immediately west of Fashion Island). Other sub-
areas within Newport Center include the Newport Beach Country Club and golf course (located
westerly of Fashion Island), existing single - family neighborhoods (located westerly and southwesterly of
the golf course), other professional office complexes (located northerly and southerly of Fashion Island),
and the Corona del Mar Shopping Center and future Civic Center (located along the eastern edge of the
Newport Center boundary).
The NNCPC comprises the northern portions of the Newport Center Statistical Area, including Block
100, Block 400, Block 500, Block 600, Block 800, Fashion Island Regional Center, and San Joaquin Plaza.
San Joaquin Plaza, which is the proposed Project site evaluated in this Initial Study and EIR Addendum, is
generally bounded on the south by San Clemente Drive, on the east by Santa Cruz Drive, on the
northeast by San Joaquin Hills Road, and is located just southeasterly of jamboree Road. The Newport
Beach Marriott Hotel (also referred to herein as General Plan Anomaly 43) is located at the
southwestern corner of Santa Barbara Drive and Newport Center Drive, and abuts the Newport Beach
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -1
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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 Page 3 -2
No
0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR:Addenduim No. 2
rl
'^ Marriott Hotel Black 990
(General Plan Anomaly 43)
V
San Jo,mpun
PI'161 /SANTA CRUZ DR.
Block
800
[G
G
i>
LEGEND
C3 Newport Center/ Fashion Island (Statistical Area Ll )
0 North Newport Center Planned Community
= Marroitt Hotel Block 900
C3 Proposed Project Site (San Joaquin Plaza Portion of NNCPC)
Block
600
Fashion Island
Regional Center
Bixk
100
P
Block
500
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 Page 3 -3
No
0171 Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR:Addenduim No. 2
Figure 3
HE EXISTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3 -4
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
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based
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
❑ Transportation/ Traffic
❑
Utilities/ Service Systems
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
4.2 Determination (To Be Completed By the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although all potentially significant effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable legal standards, some changes or additions are necessary but
none of the conditions described in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15162 exist. An
ADDENDUM to a previously - certified EIR or Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the
project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to
that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Signature Date
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -1
■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:
z General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -16.
3 Ibid, Page 4.1 -9.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -2
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
General Plan EIR, Page 4.1 -13.
6 Ibid, Page 4.1 -17.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -3
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
setting. [General Plan] Policy LU 1.1 requires that new development 'maintain and enhance' existing
development. "r
New development within the San Joaquin Plaza would be required to demonstrate consistency with
General Plan Policy LU 1. 1.
Additionally, all development within the NNCPC would be subject to the NNCPC Development Plan
and North Newport Center Design Regulations, which establish design regulations related to building
location, building massing, landscape design, streetscapes, and orientation /identity (gateways, view
corridors, signage, etc.). Mandatory compliance with the North Newport Center Design Regulations
would ensure that any future residential development resulting from approval of the proposed Project
would be compatible with, and of similar quality to, existing development within the NNCPC.
Furthermore, the NNCPC Development Plan restricts buildings within San Joaquin Plaza to 65 feet in
height. Accordingly, buildings constructed within San Joaquin Plaza would not have a potential to create
shade or shadow impacts on the existing residential uses north of San Joaquin Hills Road.
As concluded in the General Plan EIR:
"in general, the proposed General Plan Update would provide development opportunities which would
complement and enhance the City's existing visual character. Development would be required to
conform to '[a] development pattern that retains and complements the City's residential neighborhood,
commercial and industrial districts, open spaces, and natural environment' (Proposed General Plan
Update, Goal 3 of the Land Use Element). Therefore the proposed General Plan Update would have a
less- than - significant impact on the visual character of developed urban areas." 8
With mandatory adherence to the requirements given in the General Plan and the NNCPC
Development Plan, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Therefore, the proposed Project would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
Glare Impacts
General Plan Policy LU 5.6.2 requires "...that new and renovated buildings be designed to avoid ... the
use of surface materials that raise local temperatures [or] result in glare and excessive illumination of
adjoining properties and open spaces..." In addition, the North Newport Center Design Regulations
Policy D.S.c. requires that "Light fixtures should not cast off -site glare." 9
Future residential development on the proposed Project site would be required to demonstrate
compliance with General Plan Policy LU 5.6.2 and would be reviewed for conformance with the Design
Regulations of the NNCPC Development Plan. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project
would not have the potential to create any new sources of substantial glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views. Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or
Ibid, Page 4.1 -18.
9 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
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
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:
"in determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) 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:
"in 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
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
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 51 104(g))
City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Title 20, Planning and Zoning, Part 2, Zoning Districts, Allowable
Land Uses, and Zoning District Standards, sets forth the zoning districts throughout the City and does not
include any zoning for forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Additionally, the NNCPC
Development Plan does not designate any forest areas or timberlands within its boundaries.
Accordingly, the proposed Project would have no potential to conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of
a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non - forest use
The proposed Project site comprises a fully developed site that contains no forest land resources.
Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would
not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of forest land to non - forest use
No forest land exists in the vicinity of the proposed Project site that could be converted to non - forest
use, and no lands in the Project vicinity are designated for forest land production16. Accordingly, the
proposed Project would not involve changes to the existing environment which, due to its location or
nature, could result in conversion of forest land to non - forest use. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
As indicated above, an analysis of impacts to Agricultural Resources were focused out of the General
Plan EIR based on substantial evidence that no farmlands or agriculturally zoned properties are located
in the City of Newport Beach; accordingly, no mitigation measures related to Agricultural Resources
were included in the General Plan EIR. In addition, the issue of forestry resources was not previously
evaluated in the General Plan EIR; as such, no mitigation related to forestry resources was identified in
the General Plan EIR.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the Initial Study to the 2006 General Plan EIR,
which states, "The City of Newport Beach does not contain any significant agricultural resources as the
City is almost entirely built out. No impact would occur on agricultural resources and this issue area will
not be analyzed in the EIR."
161bid.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -8
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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 (PMio), Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), and Nitrogen Dioxide (NOx). In response, the SCAQMD
adopted a series of Air Quality Management Plans (AQMPs) to meet the state and federal ambient air
quality standards. The AQMPs are updated regularly in order to more effectively reduce emissions,
accommodate growth, and to minimize any negative fiscal impacts of air pollution control on the
economy.
The SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the Draft Final 2007 AQMP for the SCAB on June I, 2007. In
September 2007, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted the SCAQMD's 2007 AQMP as
part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP). On September 27, 2007, the CARB Board adopted the State
Strategy for the 2007 State Implementation Plan and the 2007 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan
as part of the (SIP). On November 22, 2010, U.S. EPA published its notice of proposed partial approval
and partial disapproval of the 2007 AQMP PM2.5 Plan. The proposed disapproval is primarily due to the
fact that the attainment demonstration relies heavily on emissions reductions from several State rules
that have not been finalized or submitted to U.S. EPA for approval. No timetable for full adoption of the
2007 AQMP is available at this time. The SCAQMD is currently working on a 2012 AQMP but it is not
yet adopted so the SCAQMD 2007 AQMP remains the applicable air quality plan for the proposed
Project.
Table 1 Attainment Status of Criteria Pollutants in the SCAB
Criteria Pollutant
State Designation
Federal Designation
Ozone - 1 hour standard
Nonattainment
No Standard
Ozone - 8 hour standard
Nonattainment
Extreme Nonattainment
PM"
Nonattainment
Serious Nonattainment
PM2,6
Nonattainment
Nonattainment
Carbon Monoxide
Attainment
Attainment/Maintenance
Nitrogen Dioxide
Nonattainment
Attainment/Maintenance
Sulfur Dioxide
Attainment
Attainment
Lead
Attainment/Nonattainmenta
Attainment/Nonattainment`
All others
Attainment/Unclassified
A Attainment/Unclassified
Source: California Air Resources Board 2010 ( htto : / /www.arb.ca.eov /reeact/2010 /area l0 /area l O.htm, hap; //w w .arb.ca.gov /desig /feddesie.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 nonattainment; the remainder of the SCAB is in attainment of the State
Standard.
The 2007 AQMP is based on assumptions on motor vehicles provided by CARB and on demographics
information provided by SCAG. These assumptions are reflected in the most recent EMFAC2007
computer model. The air quality levels projected in the 2007 AQMP are based on several assumptions.
For example, the 2007 AQMP assumed that development associated with general plans, specific plans,
residential projects, and wastewater facilities would be constructed in accordance with population
growth projections identified by SCAG in its 2004 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The 2007 AQMP
also assumed that such development projects would implement applicable regulatory requirements to
reduce air emissions generated during the construction and operational phases of development.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -10
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
substantially increase the severity of the significant and unavoidable construction - related air quality
impact previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR.18
Operational Emissions Analysis
Although the General Plan EIR identified a significant and unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the
applicable AQMP, the conflict was related only to the increase in population that would be associated
with buildout of the General Plan (and is discussed below under the analysis of Consistency Criterion
No. 2). As indicated in the General Plan EIR:
"Another measurement tool in determining consistency with the AQMP is to determine how a project
accommodates the expected increase in population or employment. Generally, if a project is planned in
a way that results in the minimization of vehicle miles traveled (VMT), both within the project area and
the surrounding area in which it is located, and consequently the minimization of air pollutant emissions,
that aspect of the project is consistent with the AQMP." 19
The General Plan EIR determined that VMTs would be reduced through compliance with the General
Plan goals and policies, and that the reduction in VMTs would be consistent with the AQMP. For
example, the General Plan would "...promote a mixed -use pedestrian - friendly district for Balboa
Peninsula, Airport Area, Newport Center /Fashion Island, Mainers Mile, and which would contribute to
decreases in vehicle miles traveled." 20 Additionally, the General Plan EIR identifies several other
policies, including Policies LU 3.3 (Opportunities for Change), LU 6.15.9 (Subsequent Phase
Development Location and Density), 6.14.5 (Urban Form), NR 6.1 (Walkable Neighborhoods), NR 6.2
(Mixed -Use Development), NR 6.3 (Vehicle -Trip Reduction Measures), NR 6.4 (Transportation Demand
Management Ordinance), and NR 6.5 (Local Transit Agency Collaboration), that would serve to reduce
VMTs within the City.
The proposed Project would contribute to the mixed -use nature of Newport Center /Fashion Island by
locating multi - family residential uses within the San Joaquin Plaza where commercial and office land uses
exist. The Project also would be required to comply with all applicable General Plan goals and policies.
Furthermore, the proposed Project would not increase the amount of daily trips as compared to what
was assumed under the General Plan EIR21. Accordingly, VMTs associated with the proposed Project
would be within the scope of analysis as presented in the General Plan EIR, and would not contribute to
a substantial increase in the severity of the General Plan's significant and unavoidable impact due to a
conflict with the applicable AQMP.
Project - related air quality emissions were calculated to determine whether the proposed Project could
result in a direct increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause or
contribute to new violations, or delay the timely attainment of air quality standards or the interim
emissions reductions specified in the AQMP. To provide consistency with the Project's traffic study
(Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), the air
quality analysis (Appendix A) assumes that the Project would result in a net increase of 94 multi - family
units in San Joaquin Plaza. This represents a "worst case" (conservative) assumption of potential
operational air quality impacts associated with allowed development in Newport Center as previously
analyzed in the General Plan EIR because no credit is taken in the Project - specific analysis for reducing
by 79 the number of hotel units allowed within Statistical Area LI, nor credit for the 15 MU -H3 units
8Ibid.
" 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
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, MID,
PM23). Because Project emissions would not substantially contribute to a cumulative exceedance of a
pollutant for which the Air Basin is in nonattainment, operation of the proposed Project would not
result in any new impacts due to a conflict with the AQMP, nor would the Project's operational
emissions create a substantially more severe impact due to conflict with the AQMP than previously
disclosed in the General Plan EIR.
Table 1 Summary of Peak Operational Emissions
Summer Months
Operational Activities
VOC
NO,
CO
SO,
PM2.5
Area Source Emissions a
12.32
0.55
39.07
0.08
5.01
Ener Source Emissions°
0.07
0.61
0.26
0.00
0.05
Mobile Emissions `
1.92
3.47
18.87
0.04
E4.64
0.33
Maximum Dail Emissions
14.31
4.63
58.20
0.12
5.38
SCAQMD Re ional Threshold
55
55
550
150
55
Si nificant?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
Winter Months
Operational Activities
VOC
NO,
CO
SO,
PM10
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 `
2.03
3.84
18.37
0.04
4.64
0.33
Maximum Daily Emissions
14.42
5.00
57.70
0.12
8.70
5.39
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
55
55
550
150
150
55
Significant?
NO
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
The General Plan EIR identified a significant unavoidable impact due to a conflict with the applicable
AQMP because buildout of the General Plan "...would result in population levels above those uses in
the 2003 AQMP" 22
Assumptions of the AQMP used in projecting future emissions levels are based in part on land use data
provided by lead agency general plan documentation. Projects that propose general plan amendments
and changes of zone may increase the intensity of use and /or result in higher traffic volumes, thereby
resulting in increased stationary area source emissions and /or vehicle source emissions when compared
to the AQMP assumptions. If however, a project does not exceed the growth projections in the
applicable local General Plan, then the project is considered to be consistent with the growth
assumptions in the AQMP.
As discussed under the analysis of Consistency Criterion No. I, construction - related emissions that may
be associated with future development at the proposed Project site would be consistent with the
assumptions previously evaluated and disclosed in the General Plan EIR. Therefore, the proposed
Project would not exceed growth assumptions for construction - related activities.
The proposed Project does not involve a General Plan Amendment, but it does involve a zoning
amendment associated with a proposed amendment to the NNCPC Development Plan, which serves as
the controlling zoning ordinance for properties within its geographic boundaries. The amendment
proposes to allocate a total of 524 multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of NNCPC,
including 430 units already allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, the assignment of 15 un -built units to
the San Joaquin Plaza, and through the conversion of 79 hotel units to multi - family units and the transfer
of those units to the San Joaquin Plaza.
Population growth associated with the 430 multi - family residential units already allowed within the San
Joaquin Plaza and the 15 un- assigned and un -built multi- family units within Statistical Area LI are
consistent with the growth projections assumed in the General Plan EIR, and are therefore accounted
for as part of the significant and unavoidable conflict with the 2003 AQMP as disclosed by the General
Plan EIR. By contrast, the conversion of 79 un -built hotel units to residential units would result in an
estimated increase in the City's permanent population by 173 persons (based on a person per
household [pph] value of 2.19 cited in the General Plan EIR) 23 It should be noted that the increase in
the permanent population would be somewhat off -set by the reduction in transient population (i.e.,
hotel patrons) due to the reduction in the number of hotel units allowed within the City (79 units).
The 79 residential units proposed by the Project to be converted from hotel room units would not
result in a net increase in daily trips24, and therefore would not result in increased operational air
emissions beyond emissions that would be associated with the 79 hotel rooms that already were
assumed in the General Plan EIR. Accordingly, because the 2007 AQMP relied on land use and
demographic data from the General Plan and the proposed Project would generate fewer emissions than
assumed for General Plan buildout, the Project would not exceed the growth assumptions in the AQMP.
Based on the discussion presented above, the proposed Project is in compliance with Consistency
Criterion No. 2 and would not result in greater emissions than what is already assumed in the General
Plan or evaluated in the General Plan EIR.
22 General Plan EIR, Page 4.2 -13.
21 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5
' Stantec Consulting Services, 2012b
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -14
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.
25 General Plan EIR, Page 4.10 -5.
26 Ibid, Page 4.2 -I5.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -15
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
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
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.
Miti ation 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
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
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 -I 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
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
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
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
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 OR 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 15 162.
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 off-site 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
Summary Analysis
Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving.
♦ Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault
♦ Strong seismic ground shaking
♦ Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction
♦ Landslides
There are no Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones within the City of Newport Beach.36 Accordingly,
and consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would not result in any
significant impacts due to the rupture of an Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.
However, and as also noted in the General Plan EIR, the City of Newport Beach is located in the
northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province, an area that is exposed to risk from multiple
earthquake fault zones. The highest risks originate from the Newport - Inglewood fault zone, the
Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone, each with the
potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that would cause ground shaking in Newport Beach,
including the proposed Project site.37
As concluded in the General Plan EIR, policies contained in the General Plan's Safety Element would
attenuate impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking. Specifically, Policy S 4.1 requires the
City to conduct regular updates to the building and fire codes to address fire safety and design. Policy S
4.7 requires further seismic studies for new development in areas where potentially active faults may
occur. In addition, the construction of new residential buildings in San Joaquin Plaza that could occur to
implement the residential development intensity proposed by the Project would be required to comply
with the seismic safety standards of the California Building Code, which requires compliance with special
structural design standards to attenuate hazards associated with credible seismic ground shaking events
that are anticipated in the Project area. Accordingly, with mandatory compliance with General Plan
Goal S4 and the California Building Code, impacts associated with strong seismic ground shaking would
not be significant.
Areas within the City of Newport Beach subject to strong seismic ground shaking associated with
liquefaction hazards are limited to West Newport, Balboa Peninsula, the harbor islands, and lands
adjacent to these areas. The proposed Project site is located in the Newport Center portion of the
General Plan, and is not identified as being subject to liquefaction hazards.38 Accordingly, a significant
impact associated with seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction, would not occur.
The proposed Project site consists of a fully developed parcel that does not contain significant areas of
slopes. The General Plan EIR notes that landslide conditions are possible in the area between Los
Trancos Canyon and the Crystal Cove State Park boundary, the sedimentary bedrock that crops out in
the San Joaquin Hills, along stream banks and coastal bluffs (e.g., Big Canyon), around San Joaquin
36 General Plan EIR, Page 4.5 -13.
37 Ibid, Page 4.5 -3.
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
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
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 184-8 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
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 Feld.
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
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
44 See Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development Y. City of San Diego, 196 Cal. App. 4t' 515 (2011).
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -29
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
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 /noncw2fecon- invftable,html)
Note: Nrl = NYaroilaoroaaraon; rrl = 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
traffic study (Appendix D) that was prepared in accordance with the City's TPO, the greenhouse gas
analysis (Appendix B) assumes that the Project would result in a net increase of 94 multi - family units,
which represents a "worst case" (conservative) assumption of potential impacts to the environment
because no credit is taken for the reduction of 79 hotel rooms or for the IS units already allowed by
the General Plan.
No specific residential development project is proposed in San Joaquin Plaza at this time; therefore, it is
not possible to calculate GHG emissions that may be associated with future construction activities.
However, construction - related emissions associated with the assignment of 524 multi - family residential
units to San Joaquin Plaza clearly fall within the scope of the analysis provided in the General Plan EIR
because the General Plan EIR assumed 430 multi - family units within the NNCPC, 15 multi - family units
within the Newport Center Statistical Area, and 79 hotel units at General Plan Anomaly Location 43.
There would be no substantial difference in GHG emissions when comparing buildout of the General
Plan with and without the proposed Project. The types of construction equipment, material use, and
duration of construction activities for hotel units and multi - family units are similar. Also, GHG
contributions to GCC are cumulative in nature and thus the specific location of the emissions source,
whether it be Newport Center generally or San Joaquin Plaza specifically, has no material bearing.
Accordingly, construction - related emissions of GHGs would not represent new information of
substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known at the time that the
General Plan EIR was certified. There would be no new or more severe construction related GHG
emissions impact than would otherwise occur with implementation of the City's General Plan, as
analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
GHG emissions generated by long -term operation of the Project would be associated with area sources
(natural gas use, landscape equipment, etc.) to serve residential units, transportation emissions
associated with vehicles traveling to and from the Project site, and indirect emissions associated with
purchased energy, energy associated with water (conveyance, treatment, distribution, and treatment of
wastewater), and waste disposal. GHG emissions from Project - related operational activities are
summarized in Table 4, Total Annual Project GHG Emissions. As noted above, Table 4 reflects a
conservative analysis and depicts future GHG emissions associated with the implementation of 94 multi-
family units. As shown in Table 4, the proposed Project would generate approximately 935.04
MMTCO2e per year. Because the GHG emissions associated with the Project would be below the
SCAQMD's proposed screening threshold of 3,000 MMTCO2e, the proposed Project's cumulative
contribution to GHG emissions would be less than significant and would not comprise a new significant
environmental effect. Additionally, because the Project's GHG emissions would be below SCAQMD's
screening threshold, the Project's GHG emissions would not represent a significant increase as
compared to the level of GHG emissions that would otherwise occur from implementation of the City's
General Plan.
In conclusion, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase
the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases ?"
CARB adopted a Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008, which is California's GHG reduction strategy to
achieve the state's GHG emissions reduction target established by AB 32 (i.e., 1990 levels of GHG
emission by year 2020). Statewide strategies to reduce GHG emissions include the Low Carbon Fuel
Standard (LCFS), California Appliance Energy Efficiency regulations, California Renewable Energy
Portfolio standard, changes in the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards, and other early
action measures that would ensure the state is on target to achieve the GHG emissions reduction goals
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -32
No
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
coo
Emissions (metric tons per year)
CHo N,O
Total CO2E
Area Source Emissions
69.88
0.03 --
71.00
Energy
244.28
0.01 —
245.79
Mobile Sources
556.77
0.02 —
557.25
Waste
8.78
0.52 —
19.67
Water Usage
35.74
0.19 0.01
41.33
Total CO2E (All Sources)
935.04
Threshold MT 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
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 I, 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
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 I S 162.
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
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
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
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.
4' 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
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.
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands
The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes a "Wildfire Susceptibility Map" that
indicates areas of the City that are subject to wildland fires. According to this map, the proposed
Project site is identified as having a "Low /None" susceptibility to wildfires.53 Accordingly, the proposed
Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires, and a significant impact would not occur.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts
associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future
development in San Joaquin Plaza.
49 General Plan EIR, Page 4.6 -1.
50 City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan (2011), Page 3
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.
" Ibid, Page 50.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach
Available on -line at:
June 2012
Page 4 -39
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
• Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of new storm drain infrastructure that would
cause significant environmental effects
• Otherwise substantially degrade water quality
• Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map
• Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flows
• Expose people or structures to a significant risk or loss, injury or death involving flooding including
flooding as a result of a levee or dam
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -40
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 mudillow"
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
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." 55
The proposed Project could involve an increase in the City's population should the residential
development intensity proposed by the Project and vested to San Joaquin Plaza be implemented. As
such, the proposed Project could result in an increased demand for potable water (including domestic
water received from local groundwater resources). The City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan
indicates that the projected use of groundwater supplies, combined with imported and recycled
domestic water supplies, will meet projected water demand throughout the City through the Plan's
horizon year of 2035.56 The Water Supply Assessment prepared for the proposed Project (refer to
Appendix E of this document) similarly concludes that sufficient water supplies are available and the
implementation of the proposed Project would not have an adverse effect on local groundwater. In
addition, the General Plan includes several goals and related policies addressing water conservation
(Goal NR 1) and water supplies (Goal NR 2) that will help ensure that future demand for potable water
does not result in a deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level.
Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in
56 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
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 OR with respect to hydrology and water quality impacts. Therefore, implementation of
the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously
identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
57 NNCPC Development Plan, Pages 19 and 24.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -43
No
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General
Plan EIR.
Expose people or structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow
The City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan includes an exhibit entitled, Tsunami Inundation
Map for Newport Beach, which indicates that the proposed Project site is not subject to tsunami hazards,
nor would future residents of the Project be subject to evacuation in the event of a tsunami hazard 60
Seiche hazards are associated only with enclosed bodies of water. The only enclosed bodies of water
located upstream from the proposed Project site is the Big Canyon Reservoir; as noted in the previous
threshold, the proposed Project site is not located within the inundation pathway for the Big Canyon
Reservoir. Furthermore, mudflow hazards are primarily associated with steep slopes, which are not
prevalent in the Project area. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not expose people or
structures to significant risk or loss, injury or death involving inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts
associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future
development in the San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that
impacts to hydrology and water quality could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the
basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not
involve new significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to hydrology and
water quality. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the
Project will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and
could not have been known when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified.
Therefore, the proposed Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR
with regards to hydrology and water quality, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.10 Land Use and Planning
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states:
"For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on
land use and planning if it would result in any of the following.
• Intensify development within the Planning Area that creates incompatibilities with adjacent land uses
• Physically divide an established community
60 Ibid, Page 100.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -45
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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
would allow for the development of 79 more multi - family units than currently anticipated in that
location by the General Plan and 94 multi - family units more than anticipated in the NNCPC
Development Plan, this increase in the number of permitted multi - family units would be consistent with
General Plan allowed intensity, goals and policies, including, but not limited to, the following:
• General Plan Policy LU 3.3, which encourages the provision of residential uses in proximity
to jobs and services.
• General Plan Policy LU 5.3.4, which encourages the provision of appropriate acreage for the
mixture of residential and nonresidential uses.
• General Plan Policy 6.14.2 which encourages provisions for limited residential development
in accordance with General Plan Tables LU I and LU2.
• General Plan Goal H 2.2, which encourages the provision of housing units that assist in
achieving the Regional Housing Needs Assessment construction goals.
• General Plan Goal H 2.3, which encourages mixed residential and commercial use
developments that improve the balance between housing and jobs.
• General Plan Housing Program Policy 3.2.1, which directs the City to make appropriate
provisions for the development of housing within the Newport Center.
Furthermore, and as concluded in Section 4.3.15, no significantly adverse traffic impacts would result
from implementation of the proposed Project.
Additionally, and as indicated under the analysis of Hazards and Hazardous Materials in Section 4.3.8,
mandatory compliance with the development standards included in the NNCPC Development Plan and
Design Regulations and review of the Project by the ALUC would ensure that the proposed Project is
fully consistent with the AELUP for the John Wayne Airport.
Based on the foregoing analysis and the analysis contained in Addendum No. I to the General Plan EIR,
the proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable plans, policies, and /or regulations, and a
significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan
As indicated under the analysis of Biological Resources in Section 4.3.4, the proposed Project would not
conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. Accordingly, a significant
impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any
new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in
the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts
associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future
development in the San Joaquin Plaza.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The proposed Project is consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, which identifies that land
use and planning impacts could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -48
No
O❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
Finding of Consistency with General Plan EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined, on the basis of substantial
evidence in the light of the whole record, that the proposed Project would not involve new significant
impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to land use and planning. Additionally,
there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and
no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known
when the General Plan EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the proposed Project does
not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to land use and planning, as
provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.11 Noise
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states:
"For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse noise
impact if it would result in any of the following.
• Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies
• Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels
• A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project
• A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project
• For a project located within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport, exposure of people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels
• For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, exposure of people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Noise impacts have been previously analyzed as part of
the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.
Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the
actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the
General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
In order to evaluate whether the proposed Project would result in noise impacts that were not
examined in the General Plan EIR, a noise impact analysis was prepared for the proposed Project by
Urban Crossroads, Inc. This study, entitled, North Newport Center Planned Community Noise Impact
Analysis, and dated May 29, 2012, is provided as Appendix C. Refer to Appendix C for a discussion of
noise fundamentals, noise standards, and for a detailed description of the methodology utilized to
calculate the proposed Project's traffic- related noise.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -49
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
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
§ I 5162(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
bource: Municipal Code 6ectlon IU.26.WU.
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
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 L1. Therefore, constructing
79 residential units instead of 79 hotel units and the construction of an additional 94 units in the San
Joaquin Plaza portion of the NNCPC represent the Project's only potential to create construction -
related noise impacts beyond the level previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR.
However, the construction of additional multi - family residential units at the San Joaquin Plaza would not
result in a substantial increase in the amount of construction - related noise as compared to what was
assumed in the General Plan EIR. As noted in the General Plan EIR, construction activities would be
subject to compliance with Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, which regulates the allowable days and
hours of construction. Any construction noise generated during the days and hours permitted by
Municipal Code Section 10.28.040 would otherwise be exempt from the Noise Ordinance
requirements, and thereby has no potential to result in any new or more severe impacts as compared to
what was assumed in the General Plan EIR's analysis. Furthermore, the construction of 94 additional
units at the San Joaquin Plaza would only increase the duration of construction activities and would not
measurably increase the intensity of construction - related noise, as it is reasonable to conclude that
residential units would be constructed using the same types of construction equipment and building
materials. Since the General Plan EIR concludes that mandatory compliance with Municipal Code
Section 10.28.040 would result in less than significant construction - related noise impacts, future Project -
related construction noise would not result in any new noise impacts or substantially increase the
severity of construction - related noise impacts previously disclosed in the General Plan EIR.
Operational noise impacts associated with implementation of the General Plan were previously
evaluated as part of the General Plan EIR, which identified significant and unavoidable impacts due to the
exposure of existing development to future traffic related noise that would exceed the General Plan
noise standards and /or would represent a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels. The
General Plan EIR notes that compliance with General Plan Goal N -2 (Transportation Noise) would
reduce this impact, but not to a level below significant 62
Although the proposed Project would involve the allocation of 94 additional units to the San Joaquin
Plaza, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a net increase in the amount of traffic
beyond what was assumed in the General Plan EIR.63
To substantiate this conclusion, future noise conditions for study area roadway segments were
calculated based on the Project's Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix D) to determine whether traffic
generated by the Project would cause or contribute to transportation- related noise levels that could
exceed the General Plan standards and /or result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the Project vicinity above levels existing without the Project. Under existing entitlements, the
proposed Project site could be developed with up to 430 multi - family residential units. Accordingly, the
analysis presented herein focuses on the Project's proposal to allocate an additional 94 dwelling units to
the San Joaquin Plaza (as was done for the Project's traffic study prepared in accordance with the City's
TPO; see Appendix D).
62 Ibid, Page 4.9 -42.
61 Stantec Consulting Services, 2012. San Joaquin Plaza Trip Generation. May 16, 2012. Available for review at the
City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport Beach CA 92663.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -52
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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 Page 4 -53
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2
Table 7 Existing Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts
Roadway
Segment
CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA)
Signifcance
Threshold
dBA'
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
0 0
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 Barbam
67.8
67.8
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
633
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
63.0
63.4
OA
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
313
613
0,13
1.0
No
Santa Cruz
South of Newport CTR
585
58,5
0,13
2.0
No
Newport CTR
West of Newport CTR
60.9
50.9
0 0
1.0
No
Newport CTR
South of Santa Barbara
61.3
61.3
TO
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
0,0
1.0
No
Newport CTR
North of Santa Cna
59.9
59.9
0.0
2.0
No
Newport CTR
North of Santa Rose
606
60.6
00
10
No
Newport CTR
South of Santa Rosa
62.0
62.1
00
1.0
No
Newport CTR
North of San Miguel
61.0
62.1
1.1
1.0
Yes
Newport CTR
South of San Miguel
627
617
0.0
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
6$,6
00
1 0
No
Newport CTR
North of Coast Highway
64.2
64.2
00
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
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
00
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
130
1.0
No
Macarthur
South of Bonita Canyon
703
70.3
0.0
10
No
Macarthur
North of San Joaquin Hills
70.3
70.3
0,0
1.0
No
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -54
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
dBA'
Potential
Significant
Im act72
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition
Macarthur
South of San Joaquin Hills
68.3
68.3
00
1,0
No
Macerthur
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
Macerthur
North of Coast Highway
67.0
67.0
0.0
1.0
No
Easibluff/Ford/Bonita Cyn
West of Jamboree
638
63.8
0.0
1 1 0
No
Eastbluff/Ford/Bonits Cyn
East of Jamboree
62.8
62.8
00
1.0
No
Eastbluff/FonllBonita Cyn
West of Bonita Canyon
62.1
62.2
0.0
1 0
No
Eastbluff/Ford/Bonita Cyn
East of Bonita Canyon
679
67.9
00
1 0
No
San Joaquin Hills
West of Jamboree
593
59.3
00
20
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
00
1.0
No
San Joaquin Hills
East of Santa Cruz
63.8
63.9
00
1.0
No
San Joaquin Hills
West of Santa Rosa
64.4
64.4
00
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 Macerthur
65.6
65.6
00
1.0
No
San Clemente
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
540
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'o
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
no
to
No
Coast Highway
West of Jamboree
70.2
70.2
00
10
No
Coast Highway
East of Jamboree
69.2
69.2
00
1.0
No
Coast Highway
West of Newport CTR
68.9
1 68.9
00
1.0
No
Coast Highway
East of Newport CTR
63L
68.0
00
1.0
No
Coast Highway
West of Avacado
672
67.8
00
1 0
No
Coast Highway
East of Avacado
681
68.1
10
1 0
No
Coast Highway
lWest of Macarthur
68.1
68.1
00
1,0
No
Coast Highway
lEast of Macarthur
69.5
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
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)
Sigrifcanoe
Threshold
dBA�
Potential
Significant
Im act?`
No
Project
with
Project
Project
Addition
Jamboree
North of Eastblutl
69.6
69.7
00
1.0
No
Jamboree
Eastbluffto San Joaquin Hills
70.5
70.5
0 0
1 0
No
Jamboree
South of San Joaquin Hills
68.8
68.6
00
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 1.0
No
Jamboree
North of Coast Highway
68.3
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
South of San Joaquin Hills
63.1
63.2
0.1
1.0
No
Santa Cn¢
North of San Clemente
63.1
631
00
1.0
No
Santa Cnrz
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
61.1
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
602
60.6
0.0
1.0
No
Newport CTR
South of Santa Cruz
60 5
6o.5
00
1.0
No
Newport CTR
North of Banta Cruz
� _ I
0 0
1 .0
I -_
Newport CTR
North of Santa Rosa
el 1
61.1
00
1 0
No
Newport CTR
South of Santa Rosa
62.5
62.5
00
1.0
No
Newport CTR
North of Son Miguel
61.3
61.3
0.0
1.0
No
Newport CTR
South of San Miguel
62.8
62.8
0.0
1.0
No
Newport CTR
East of Newport CTR
62.0
62.0
00
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 n
No
Santa Rosa
South of San Joaquin Hills
644
64.4
00
I 0
No
Santa Rosa
North of Newport CTR
63.7
63.7
00
1 0
No
Santa Rosa
South of Newport CTR
61.2
61.2
0.0
1.0
No
Avocado
North of San Miguel
57.6
57.8
0.0
2.0
No
Avocado
South of San Miguel
627
623
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
10
No
Macarthur
South of Bonita Canyon
70.9
70.9
0 0
t 0
No
Macarthur
North of San Joaquin Hills
70.6
70.8
00
1.0
No
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -56
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2
Table 8 Year 2016 Off -Site Project - Related Traffic Noise Impacts (Cont'd)
Roadway
Segment
CNEL at 100 Feet (dBA)
Signifcanos
Threshold
OW
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
EastbluftfFordfBonita Cyr
West of Jamboree
64 0
64.0
20
110
No
Eastbl uff/FordfBO nita Cyn
East of Jamboree
63.0
63.1
0.0
1.0
No
EastblufNFord/Bonita Cyn
West of Bonita Canyon
624
624
0.0
1.0
No
Eastbluff/Ford/Bonite 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 Cruz
66.2
66.2
0.0
1.0
No
San Joaquin Hills
East of Santa Cna
64.2
64.2
no
1.0
No
San 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
11.:,
San Joaquin Hills
West of Macarthur
56.2
66.2
0.0
1.0
410
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
58A
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
61,9
61.9
0.0
1.0
No
Santa Barbara
North of San Clemente
51,8
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
00
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
00
1.0
No
San Miguel
East of Macarthur
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
70.1
0.0
1.0
No
Coast Highway
West of Newport CTR
59,8
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
JWest of Macarthur
68.7
69.0
0.3
1:0
No
Coast Highway
lEast of Macarthur
70.4
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
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 Vc1B (which is the vibration level given for large
bulldozers at a distance of 75 feet).
Table 9 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Eq4xnent
xinrAe vds
25 Fed
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.
64 General Plan EIR, Table 4.9 -7.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -58
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.
65 Ibid, Page 4.9 -34.
66 Ibid, Page 4.9 -35.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -59
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 Ievels.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 /]WA_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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
4.3.12 Population and Housing
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states:
"For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on
biological resources [sic] if it would result in any of the following:
• Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)
• Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere
• Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Population and housing impacts have been previously
analyzed as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City
CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document
adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as
an Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
Summary Analysis
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)
The Project's proposal to assign 15 un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza would not result
in an increase in the City's population beyond the projected population for North Newport Center
previously evaluated and disclosed as part of the General Plan EIR. The conversion of 79 un -built hotel
units to residential units would, however, result in an estimated increase in the City's permanent
population by 173 persons (based on a person per household [pph] value of 2.19 cited in the General
Plan EIR).70 It should be noted that the increase in the permanent population would be somewhat off-
set by the reduction in transient population (i.e., hotel patrons) due to the reduction in the number of
hotel units allowed within the City (79 units).
The General Plan EIR disclosed that buildout of the land uses allowed by the General Plan Land Use Plan
would result in a future 2030 population of 103,753 persons, while SCAG projected a future 2030
population of only 94,167 persons, or a difference of approximately 9,586 persons. The General Plan
EIR identified this increase in the City's population as compared to SCAG's 2030 forecast to be a
significant and unavoidable impact of the 2006 General Plan. The future development of residential uses
in San Joaquin Plaza as a result of implementing the proposed Project would result in an estimated
increase in the City's projected population by 173 persons, which would be in addition to the projected
population identified in the General Plan EIR. However, the increase in permanent population
attributable to the proposed Project would not represent a substantial increase in the severity of the
City's unavoidable cumulative impact to population and housing, considering the proposed Project's
population increase of 173 persons would comprise less than two- tenths of one percent (0.17 %) of the
projected and estimated General Plan buildout population. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
Project would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of a previously
identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
J0 Ibid, Page 4.10 -5
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -61
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
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.
72 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 Page 4 -63
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
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.
Miti ation 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
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
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).
s 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
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 Transportation/Traffic
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the General Plan EIR, which states:
"For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact on
transportation or circulation if it would result in any of the following:
• Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)
• Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or highways
• Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
locations that results in substantial safety risks
• Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g, farm equipment)
• Result in inadequate emergency access
• Result in inadequate parking capacity
• Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Transportation impacts have been previously analyzed
as part of the General Plan EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA
Guidelines. Minor additions and /or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate
to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an
Addendum to the General Plan EIR.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -68
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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 Page 4 -69
No
■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR:Addenduim No. 2
Nor stair
ro
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach
Figure 4
TPO ANALYSIS STUDY INTERSECTIONS
June 2012
Page 4 -70
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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 Gen Von
Edition
Institute of Transportation Engineers
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -71
No
■❑ Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR:Addenduim No. 2
Nor scams
ro
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach
Figure b
GENERAL PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND PROJECT ADT
June 2012
Page 4 -72
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
Existing
tiuw AM
1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastbluff .74/C
PM
.61B
2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .601A
Project
Land Use
Arnount
Mariner's Medical Arts
Medical Office
12.25 TSF
Banning Ranch
Single Family Detached
423 DU
AAA
Condominium/Townhouse
952 DU
.50 /A
Retail
75.00 TSF
.82/D
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
.25/A
Condominium/Townhouse
389 DU
.31/A
Multi-Family Attached
175 DU
Source. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (May 2012).
Existing Conditions
Existing ICU values for the study area intersections are summarized below in Table 13, Existing ICU
Summary. As shown in Table 13, all study area intersections operate at an acceptable LOS D or better
during the AM and PM peak hours under existing conditions.
Table 13 Existing ICU Summary
Existing
tiuw AM
1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastbluff .74/C
PM
.61B
2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills .601A
.701
3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
.441A
.57/A
4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
.56/A
.65JB
5. Newport Center & Coast Hwy
.36/A
AAA
6. Avocado & Coast Hwy
.441A
.50 /A
7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonita Canyon
33/C
.82/D
8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
.651
.80 1C
9. MacArthur & San Miguel
.531A
.44/A
10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
.661
.641
11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
.261A
.361A
12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente
141A
.25/A
13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
.15/A
.31/A
14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
.29/A
.491A
15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
721A
.34/A
16. Newport Center & San Miguel
.14/A
.321A
17. Avocado & San Miguel
.311A
.49/A
18. Newport Center & Newport Center
.181A
.WA
19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente
.27/A
.331A
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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
1. Jamboree & Ford/Eastbluff 74/C 61/B
.00 00
74/C .61/B
2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
60 /A
70 /B
.60 /A
.70/B
.00
.00
3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
.44/A
.57/A
44/A
.57 /A
.00
.00
4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
.56/A
651B
.56/A
6513
.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
.658
.801C
.65/13
.80/C
.00
.00
9. MacArthur& San Miguel
.53/A
.441A
.531A
.44/A
.00
.00
10. MacArthur & Coast H
.6618
.648
.668
.64/B
.00
.00
11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
.26/A
.36/A
.27/A
.37/A
.01
.01
12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente
.1 VA
.25/A
.14/A
.26/A
.00
.01
13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
.151A
.31 /A
.15/A
.31/A
.00
.00
14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
.29/A
.491A
.29/A
.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
.16A
.36/A
.00
.00
19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente
.27/A
I .33/A
I .27 /A
.33/A
.00
.00
20.NewportCe nter & Santa Barbara
.12/A
I .21/A
I .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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2
Table 15 One Percent Traffic Analysis Summary
ME 010
1. Jamboree & Ford /EastbluM
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volurne
1 1,692
1 2,207
1 865
1 697
1 2,766
1 1,891
614 386
it
Project Peak Hour Trips
10
1 2
1 0
1 1
1 5
1 7
1 0 2
11 Yes
7 Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume
1 1,1 06
2 549
395
199
1,644
2,250
143
912
Proect Peak Hour Tri
8
2
0
1 3
1 6
1 9
1 0
it 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
Pro ected Peak How
Volume
465
1,243
2,596
1,194
432
1,599
Z623
Z284
Project Peak Hour Trips
0
7
1
1
0
3
4
2
1 Yes
5. Newport Ctr & Coast Hwy
2016 Projected Peak How Volume
0
113
2,188
1 1,292
0
849
1,704
1,690
Project Peak Hour Trips
0
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 0
1 1
ji 1
1 3
1 No
d 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
1 3
1 Yes
7. MacArthur & Ford/Bonito CVn
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume
1 2,133
1 3156
1 415
1 2.080
1 2.T73
1 3.744
1 425
1 1.165
Project Peak Hour Trips
4
1 1
1 2
1 0
1 2
1 5
1 2
1 1
1 Yes
• MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume
1 1493
1 3 203
509
1,071
1,613
2.511
1.172
728
Pro ect Peak Hour Trips
0
1
5
1 0
1 0
1 4
1 3
1 1
1 No
• McArthur & 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
0
1 0
1 1
0
1 1
1 0
1 0
1 0
1 Yes
10. MacArthur & Coast Hwy
2016 Pro ected Peak How Volume
1 0
1 1,092
1 1,653
2,092
1 0
1.359
1 1.650
1 2.028
Project Peak Hour Trips
0
1 1
1 4
2
1 0
if 0
1 2
1 4
1 Yes
11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
2016 Projected Peak How Volume
1 118
82
932
399
781
39
783
684
Pro ect Peak Hour Trips
4
0
5
1 1
1 2
1 0
1 7
1 5
1 No
12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume
1 144
360
95
35
577
315
336
102
Pro ect 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 How Volume
1 60
1 269
140
1 178
1 254
255
1 280
1 317
Project Peak Hour Trips
0
1 3
1 0
1 0
1 1
0
1 0
1 1
1 No
14. Santa Rosa & San J uin Hills
2016 Projected Peak How m
Volue
169
1 132
1 583
1,015
797
143
789
767
Pro ect Peak Hour Trips
0
1 0
1 5
1
0
0
3
5
1 Yes
15. Newport Ctr & Santa Rosa
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume
1 204
1 107
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 Projected 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
1 120
218
1 1,212
1 720
1 321
1 734
1 893
Project Peak Hour Trips;
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
428
192
1 361
1 472
Pro ect Peak Hour Trips
1
0
2
li 0
1 1 1
1 1 0
1 1
1 0
1 No
18. Santa Barbara & San Clerente
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume
1 100
1 724
0
65
404
278
0
406
Pro ect Peak Hour Trips
1
0
0
1 6
1 1
1 2
1 0
1 4
1 No
20. Newport Ctr & Santa Barbara
2016 Projected Peak Hour Volume
1 256
1 146
204
1 40
1 281
1 334
1 280
1 148
Pro ect Peak Hour Trips
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
Table 16 Year 2016 ICU Summary
3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
.48/A
.61/B
48/A
.61/13
.00
.00
5. Newport Center & Coast H
.391A
.48/A
.391A
.49/A
.00
.01
8. MacArthur & San Joaquin Hills
69 /13
86/D
.6913
.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
.1 VA
.26/A
.141A
.26/A
.00
.00
13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
.15/A
.31 /A
.151A
31/A
.00
.00
15. Newport Center & Santa Rosa
11 5/A
.40/A
.15/A
40 /A
.00
.00
16. Newport Center & San Miguel
.151A
.34%
.15/A
.34/A
.00
.00
18. Newport Center &Newport Center
18/A
38/A
18/A
'A
00
.00
19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente
.28/A
.33/A
.28 /A
.33/A
.00
.00
20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
.13/A
I .221A
.13/A
.221A
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).
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
Table 17 Cumulative ICU Summary
ritersection
1. Jamboree &ForwFastbluff
' Existing
+ Approved
Project
1 .82/D
+ Growth
.7018
�.
.00 .00
...
AM
8?/D I .70 /B
2. Jamboree & San Joaquin Hills
.66 /B
.831D
.68B
.83/D
.00
.00
3. Jamboree & Santa Barbara
.511%
.6316
.51/A
.63/B
.01
.00
4. Jamboree & Coast Hwy
.668
.83/D
.67B
.830
.01
.00
5. Newport Center & Coast H
.42/A
.531A
.42/A
.53/A
.00
.00
6. Avocado & Coast Flwy
.56/A
.591A
.56/A
.591A
.00
.00
7. MacArthur& Ford/Bonita Canyon
.78/C
.89/D
.7810
.891)
.00
.00
8. MacArthur& San Joaquin Hills
.7110
.891D
.71/C
.89/D
.00
.00
9. MacArthur& San Miguel
.60/A
.501A
.60 /A
.50 1A
.00
.00
10. MacArthur& Coast Hwy
.78/C
.75/C
.78/C
.751C
.00
.00
11. Santa Cruz & San Joaquin Hills
.29/A
.381A
.30 /A
.39/A
.01
.01
12. Santa Cruz & San Clemente
.15/A
261A
.15/A
.261A
.00
.00
13. Santa Cruz & Newport Center
.16 /A
.321A
.16 /A
.32/A
.00
.00
14. Santa Rosa & San Joaquin Hills
.35/A
.541A
.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
.351A
.16/A
.35 /A
.00
.00
17. Avocado & San Miguel
.34/A
.551A
34/A
55/A
00
.00
18. Newport Center & Newport Center
.19/A
.38/A
.191A
.39/A
.00
.01
19. Santa Barbara & San Clemente
.28/A
.3"A
.28/A
.331A
.00
.00
20. Newport Center & Santa Barbara
.13/A
.23/A
.13/A
I .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 86 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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 S.
Available on -line at htto: / /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
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
future development provides for adequate emergency access routes. Accordingly, a significant impact
would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
General Plan EIR.
Result in inadequate parking capacity
Future plans for development within the San Joaquin Plaza pursuant to the proposed Project would be
subject to the parking requirements of the NNCPC, which establishes requirements for off - street
parking spaces associated with new development. All future development plans would be required to
demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the NNCPC. Accordingly, a significant impact
related to inadequate parking capacity would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)
The General Plan incorporates a number of policies related to alternative transportation modes,
transportation systems management, and transportation demand management, including the following
policies that are applicable to the proposed Project: Policy CE 4.1.4 (Land Use Densities Supporting
Public Transit); Policies CE 5.1.1 through CE 5.1.12 (Trail System, Pedestrian Connectivity, Pedestrian
Improvements in New Development Projects, Linkages to Citywide Trail System and Neighborhoods,
Bikeway System, Bicycle Supporting Facilities, Bicycle Safety, Bicycle Conflicts with Vehicles and
Pedestrians, Integrated Bicycle Improvements, Bicycle Trail Signage, School Access, Pedestrian Street
Crossings); Policy CE 5.1.16 (Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety); Policy CE 6. 1.1 (Traffic Signals); and Policies
CE 6.2.1 through CE 6.2.3 (Alternative Transportation Modes, Support Facilities for Alternative Modes,
Project Site Design Supporting Alternative Modes). The proposed Project consists of a proposal to
assign 15 previously un -built multi - family units to the San Joaquin Plaza, and to convert 79 previously un-
built hotel units to residential units which would be transferred to the San Joaquin Plaza portion of the
NNCPC. As such, although the Project would not conflict with any of these policies, a review for
consistency with alternative transportation policies would be conducted by the City in association with
precise development plans (e.g., site plans, building permits, etc.), if and when a specific development
proposal for residential use in San Joaquin Plaza is submitted to the City Newport Beach for review and
consideration.
The only policy listed above that is directly applicable to the currently proposed Project is Policy CE
4.1.4, which encourages the provision of residential densities that support public transit. The proposed
Project would result in an increase in the residential density allowed within the San Joaquin Plaza, and
would thereby be consistent with Policy CE 4.1.4.
Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation, and a significant impact would not occur. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of
a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Program
Policies of the 2006 General Plan were adopted as a mitigation program that minimized impacts
associated with buildout of the City of Newport Beach, including the implementation of future
development in the San Joaquin Plaza.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -80
No
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
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
Summary Analysis
Require or result in the construction and /or expansion of water supply facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new
or expanded entitlements needed
The water demand for development in the City of Newport Beach, including development within
Newport Center and the NNCPC, is included in the water demand forecasts for the City as identified in
the City's 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and within the planning documents of water
districts, authorities, and agencies that directly or indirectly supply and /or manage the City's water
supplies, including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (Metropolitan), the Municipal
Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), and the Orange County Water District (OCWD). As
such, water demand and supply evaluations conducted by Metropolitan, MWDOC, OCWD, as well as
the City of Newport Beach itself are directly applicable to the proposed Project. The General Plan EIR
relied on water management plans in effect at the time the General Plan EIR was certified (2006), but
because updated information is now available in the form of revised Urban Water Management Plans,
that updated information is used as the basis of analysis in this EIR Addendum.
A Water Supply Assessment was prepared for the proposed Project, which is included as Appendix E.
The Assessment determined that increasing the permitted residential development intensity in San
Joaquin Plaza would result in an increased water demand of 24.02 acre -feet per year (AFY), which is less
than one -tenth of one percent of the City's projected year 2035 total demand of 17,474 AFY (refer to
Technical Appendix E for a detailed discussion of the increased water demand that would result from
Project implementation). Based on the information contained in the Water Supply Assessment
regarding the existing and future availability and reliability of imported water supplies as surmised from
the Urban Water Management Plans of Metropolitan (2010), MWDOC (201 1) and the City of Newport
Beach (2010), and the OCWD Groundwater Management Plan (2009), there is an availability of
sufficient supplies from imported water, local groundwater, and recycled water to service the proposed
Project and other existing and projected development in the City of Newport Beach in normal year,
single dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Additionally, there has been a trend of per capita water
use reduction since 2005 and that trend is expected to continue to reach the City's water usage
reduction goal of 202.8 GPCD by year 2020. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not conflict with
any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation, and a significant impact
would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
General Plan EIR.
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board
Require or result in the construction /expansion of wastewater treatment facilities or recycled water conveyance
systems that could cause significant environmental effects
Wastewater Treatment Facilities
The Project Applicant's engineering consultant, RBF Consulting, conducted an analysis of existing
localized sewer facilities that would serve the proposed Project site with implementation of the
proposed Project. A copy of this analysis is provided as Technical Appendix F. The results of this
analysis conclude that the addition of 94 residential units to the San Joaquin Plaza would equate to
approximately 15 percent of the most constrained pipe segment capacity within the existing sewer
system proximate to the proposed Project. Since the subject segment of the sewer system serves only
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -82
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
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
landfil Is.93
The projected increase of 308.89 pounds per day associated with the proposed Project, which would
represent 0.26% of the City's total daily solid waste generation, would not exceed the planned capacity
of any regional landfill facilities on a direct or cumulative basis. Accordingly, a significant direct impact to
permitted landfill capacity would not occur with implementation of the proposed Project.
However, buildout under the General Plan, when considered in the context of cumulative development
within the region, would incrementally contribute to the ultimate need for new or expanded landfills,
which the General Plan EIR identifies as a significant and unavoidable impact. Consistent with the finding
of the General Plan EIR, the proposed Project would contribute to this significant and unavoidable
impact. However, the increase in solid waste attributable to the proposed Project would not represent
a substantial increase in the severity of the City's unavoidable cumulative impact to solid waste,
considering the annual increase in solid waste attributable to the proposed Project would represent only
0.00013% of the remaining capacity at the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill.
Public Resources Code §40000 et seq. requires that local jurisdictions divert at least 50 percent of all
solid waste generated. The City of Newport Beach consistently meets the objective of Public Resources
Code §40000 et seq.94 In addition, the proposed Project would be subject to the City's Recycling
Service Fee pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 2.30, which is intended to assist the City in meeting
92 Ibid, Page 4.14 -33
9' Ibid, Page 4.14 -44
941bid.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -84
Initial Study and General Plan Program EIR Addendum No. 2
the 50 percent diversion objective. Commercial waste haulers within the City are subject to Municipal
Code Section 12.63.120 (Recycling Requirement), which states, "No person providing commercial solid
waste handling services or conducting a solid waste enterprise shall deposit fifty (50) percent or more of
the solid waste collected by the person in the City at any landfill." Furthermore, the proposed Project
would be required to comply with Municipal Code Section 20.30.120 (Solid Waste and Recyclable
Materials Storage), which mandates that all multi -unit projects with five or more dwelling units
"...provide enclosed refuse and recyclable material storage areas with solid roofs." Accordingly, the
proposed Project would be fully compliant with all applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste, and significant impact would not occur.
Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Require or result in the construction of new energy production and /or transmission facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects
As indicated previously, implementation of the proposed Project would result in a net increase of 79
multi - family residential dwelling units and a net decrease of 79 hotel units within the City, indicating that
the proposed Project would result in only a slight incremental increase in the amount of electricity
consumed within the City. As indicated in the General Plan EIR, all land uses within the City would be
subject to compliance with Title 24 energy efficiency standards. Development within the City also
would be subject to General Plan Goal NR 24. 1, which requires increased efficiency in private
developments. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan EIR, mandatory compliance with current
Title 24 energy efficiency standards and adherence to General Plan Goal NR 24.1 would ensure that no
impacts related to electricity supply occur with implementation of the proposed Project. Therefore,
implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of
a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR.
Would the project require or result in the construction of new natural gas production or transmission facilities,
the construction of which could cause a significant environmental impact
As noted in the General Plan EIR, the Southern California Gas Company (SCGC):
"...declares itself a "reactive" utility and will provide natural gas as customers request its
services. SCGC has also indicated that an adequate supply of natural gas is currently available to
serve additional development, and that the natural gas level of service provided to the City
would not be impaired by buildout under the proposed General Plan Update. Any expansion of
service necessitated by implementation of the proposed General Plan Update would be in
accordance with SCGC's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities
Commission at the time contractual agreements are made. "95
Accordingly, implementation of the proposed Project would not exceed available or planned supplies of
natural gas, and new or upgraded natural gas infrastructure would not be needed to serve the proposed
Project. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in any new impacts or
increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the General
Plan EIR.
9s lbid, Page 4.14 -50.
NNCPC Development Plan Amendment and Related Actions June 2012
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4 -85
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
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:
http: / /www.ocair.com/ commissions /aluc/ docs /[WA_AELUP- April- 17- 2008.pddf. Accessed May 17,
2012).
Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County (2007). City of Newport Beach: Request for
Consideration of Proposed Planned Community Zoning Amendment. November 15, 2007. (Available
for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division; 3300 Newport Boulevard; Newport
Beach CA 92663).
California Department of Conservation, 2012. Orange County Important Farmland 2010. (Available on-
line at: ftp: / /ftr).consrv.ca.eov /pub /dlrp /FMMP /pdf /2010 /ora 10.pd Accessed May 10, 2012.)
Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. 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.eov /index.aspx ?page =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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? Addendum No. 2
Newport Beach, City of (2006). City of Newport Beach General Plan ( "General Plan'). Adopted July 25,
2006. (Available on -line at: http: / /www.newportbeachca .gov /index.aspx ?pa¢e =173. Accessed
June 5, 2012).
Newport Beach Fire Department (2011). City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan. (Available
On -line at: http: / /www.newportbeachca. gov / Modules /ShowDocument.aspx ?documentid= 11179.
Accessed June 5, 2012).
Orange County Transportation Authority (2011). 2011 Orange County Congestion Management Program.
(Available on -line at http: / /www.octa.netlpdf /201 I- CMP.pdf. 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
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 Ouality. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. and Noise Technical Consultant)
Haseeb Qureshi, Senior Associate (Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Consultant)
Bill Lawson, Principal (Noise Technical Consultant)
Stantec Consulting Services. Inc. (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
I TRACY ZINN, AICP
lI PRINCIPAL
M A N N I N G
Phone: (714) 397 -4224 E -Mail: tzinn(a)tbplanning.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
' I I JERAMEY HARDING, AICP
U ISENIOR PROJECT MANAGER
I I AN N I N
Phone: (760) 452 -2300 E -Mail: Iharding(Dibplanning.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 FIR 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 Quality and 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.
PlanninolEntitlement 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
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. /Environmental
Science /CSUF Source Dispersion Model (CALINE -4), U.S. EPA - approved CAL3QHC, the
I Industrial Source Short Term (ISCST3) Model, and the AMS /EPA Regulatory
Design / UC Irvine BA/Environ rvine Analysis 8 Model (AERMOD).
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 or 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 Risk Environmental Professionals working groups that are collaborating to
Assessment —Lakes 9 9 P 9
Environmental establish guidance on establishing climate change thresholds for CEQA
Certifcation-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
0 Bill Lawson, P.E., AICP, PTP, INCE
URBAN Principal
cnossno,aos
Areas of Expertise
Traffic impact Analyses During his career, Bill Lawson has developed a wide range of expertise that
Parking Analysis includes transportation planning, traffic engineering, neighborhood traffic
Transportation Planning control, and community noise impact analysis. As a founder of Urban
Noise Impact Modeling& Crossroads, Inc. he works with public and private sector clients to provide
Analysis planning and engineering consulting expertise. His work efforts focus on the
GIS larger more complex technical studies or sensitive projects that increasingly
Database Development require coordination with the project legal team, the applicant and the
Education decision makers.
MS11993/Civil &
Environmental Eng. /Cal In his current role, Mr. Lawson serves as the contract City Traffic Engineer for
Poly, San Luis Obispo Rancho Santa Margarita providing guidance on complex traffic issues and
BS /1992/City &Regional presenting policy changes to ensure uniform application of the legal authority
Planning /Cal Poly, San Luis provided by the municipal code and the California Vehicle Code.
Obispo
Prof. Registration Mr. Lawson is a Registered Professional Traffic Engineer ( #2537), a member
PE of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP), a certified Professional
PTP Transportation Planner and an associate member of the Institute of Noise
AICP Control Engineering INCE His educational background includes a Master's
INCE 9� 9 ( )• 9
Degree in Civic and Environmental Engineering and a Bachelor's Degree in
Professional City and Regional Planning from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.
Professional Transportation
Planner (PTP) - Institute of
Transportation Engineers In addition to his transportation expertise, Mr. Lawson is a Certified
(ITE) Acoustical Engineer (INCE) and has worked on hundreds of noise studies
American institute of throughout Southern California for both public and private sector clients. His
Certified Planners (AICP) work as a noise consultant focuses on helping communities identify and
American Planning control noise impacts by developing meaningful solutions to complex noise
Association (APA) issues.
Institute of Noise Control
Engineering(INGE) Mr. Lawson has served as member of the Rancho Santa Margarita Planning
Prof. History Advisory Committee, Cityhood executive committee member, and political
Urban Crossroads. Inc. action committee chairperson for Cityhood 2000. He previously served on
Principal the Ladera Ranch Maintenance Corporation LARMAC from 2000 through
2002 - Present P ( ) 9
Senior Associate 2006, serves today as President of the Santa Margarita Water District
2000 -2002 (SMWD) Board of Directors and the Ladera Ranch Civic Council (LRCC).
RKJK & Associates, Inc.
Senior Planner
1996 -2000
Planner
1993-1996
John Nagle, PE
Senior Associate / Senior Engineer
John Nagle has practiced in the field of civil engineering for over Registration:
20 years, and he has extensive experience in planning, designing,
1991, Civil Engineer, CA, 46972
and providing construction support services for major water and
2001, Civil Engineer, NV, 14762
wastewater facilities. He has been responsible for the preparation of
2009, Civil Engineer, UT,
numerous construction plans, specifications and cost estimates for
7214109 -2202
water and sewer pipelines, water pumping stations, wastewater lift
2009, Civil Engineer, AZ, 49684
stations, wells, and reservoirs. He has also prepared master plans
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
Engineers (ASCE)
improvement programs, condition assessment studies, engineering
Years of Experience: 25
feasibility studies, and connection fee and utility rate studies. The
Association
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
PF
CONSULTING
R�- compaM
B.S., 1987, Civil Engineering,
Loyola Marymount University
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE:
M.S., 1996, Civil Engineering,
Loyola Marymount University
Rio Vista Valve #2 Vault Modifications (Santa Clarita, CA)
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
PF
CONSULTING
R�- compaM
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 NSUITINC
N �_ Company
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
MF
CONSULTING
R =Company
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
MF
CC NSUITING
N �_ Company
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 ft x 50 It 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.
CONSULTING
R�- compaM
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 CV/P. 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
CONSULTING
P =compaTy
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
Irrigation 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);
PF
CONSULTING
R�- compan
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
CONSULTING
P =campaTy
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
N �_ Company
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
CONSULTING
R =Company
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
CONSULTING
R =company
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.
WF
CONSULTING
R�- (nmpan
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
Initial Study and General Plan Program Ell? 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
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