Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-24 - Finding the Residences at 1400 Bristol Project is Consistent With the Purposes of the State Aeronautics Act and Overriding the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission's Determination that the Residences at 1400 Bristol is Inconsistent With theRESOLUTION NO. 2024-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, FINDING THE RESIDENCES AT 1400 BRISTOL PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PURPOSES OF THE STATE AERONAUTICS ACT AND OVERRIDING THE ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION'S DETERMINATION THAT THE RESIDENCES AT 1400 BRISTOL IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE 2008 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN (PA2022-0296) WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California; WHEREAS, an application was filed by The Picerne Group ("Applicant"), with respect to the property located at 1400 Bristol Street and legally described in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference ("Property"). WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting approval to demolish two existing office buildings and develop 229 apartment units, including a 422-space parking structure ("Project"), which requires the following approvals: • General Plan Amendment ("GPA") - A request to amend the General Plan land use designation from General Commercial Office (CO-G) to Mixed -Use Horizontal 2 (MU-H2) and add 64 dwelling units above the General Plan allowance to Anomaly 16 of the General Plan Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations); • Planned Community Development Plan Amendment ("PCDP Amendment") - An amendment to the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Development Plan to include the Property within the Residential Overlay; • Major Site Development Review ("SDR") - A site development review in accordance with the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) and Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") to construct the Project; Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 2 of 9 • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan ("AHIP") - A plan specifying how the Project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements, in exchange for a request of 50% increase in density including a request for six development standard waivers related to park land dedication, building setbacks, building height, private open space for each residential unit, common open space along with two development concessions related to the mix of affordable units and partial payment of park in -lieu fees pursuant to Chapter 20.32 (Density Bonus) of the NBMC and Government Code Section 65915 et seq. ("State Density Bonus Law"); • Development Agreement ("DA") — A development agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to Section 15.45.020 (Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, which would provide the Applicant with the vested right to develop the Project for a term of 10 years and provide negotiated public benefits to the City; • Traffic Study - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC; and • Addendum No. 7 to the 2006 General Plan Update Program Environmental Impact Report and the 2008-2014 City of Newport Beach Housing Element Update and Initial Study/Negative Declaration ("Addendum No. 7") — An addendum which addresses reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project; WHEREAS, the Property is designated General Commercial Office (CO-G) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Newport Place Planned Community (PC-11) Zoning District in the Industrial Site 3A sub -area; WHEREAS, the Property is not located within the coastal zone; therefore, amending the Local Coastal Program and obtaining a coastal development permit are not required; WHEREAS, the Property is located in the Airport Area Environs ("Airport Area") and is one of the 62 new housing opportunity sites allocated in the certified 61h Cycle Housing Element; Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 3 of 9 WHEREAS, on November 14, 2023, the City Council approved Resolutions 2023- 72 and 2023-73 and Ordinances 2023-20 and 2023-21, authorizing amendments to the Noise Element and Land Use Element of the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, Newport Place Planned Community Development Plan (PC-11), and Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) ("6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments") to update the noise contours identified by the 2014 John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement Amendment Environmental Impact Report No. 617 EIR No. 617"), allowing residential units identified by the certified 6th Cycle Newport Beach Housing Element to be located within the 65 decibel ("65 dBA") Community Noise Equivalent Level ("CNEL") noise contour maps analyzed in EIR No. 617, and incorporating additional noise attenuation measures for future housing units proximate to John Wayne Airport, WHEREAS, the Property is located within the 60 dBA noise contour as a shown in the updated noise contour maps adopted as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on December 7, 2023 in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements), Chapter 19.20 (Vesting Tentative Map), Chapter 20.56 (Planned Community District Procedures), and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2023-043 by a majority vote (6 ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent) recommending the City Council approve the Project; WHEREAS, California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") Section 21676(b) requires the City to refer the Project to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") to review for consistency with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP"); Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 4 of 9 WHEREAS, on January 18, 2024, the ALUC determined the Project is inconsistent with the following provisions of the AELUP: • Section 2.1.1 (Aircraft Noise), which provides that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport"; • Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones), which provides "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWX; and • Section 3.2.1 (General Policy), which provides that "[w]ithin the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP [if it] ... (1) [p]laces people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise [or] (2) concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents ... " WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 21670 and 21676 of CPUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule the ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Project is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on February 13, 2024, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with CPUC Section 21676(b) and the Ralph M. Brown Act. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing; WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-9 by unanimous vote (7 ayes, 0 nays) to notify the ALUC and State Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program ("Aeronautics Program") of the City's intent to override ALUC's inconsistency finding; Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 5of9 WHEREAS, notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination, along with Resolution No. 2024-9 was sent via certified mail and emailed to the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program on February 14, 20241 WHEREAS, the City received timely comments in response to the notice of the City's intent to override the ALUC inconsistency determination from the ALUC and the Aeronautics Program in accordance with CPUC Section 21676 which are attached hereto as Exhibits "C" and "D" respectively, and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on April 9, 2024, in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, Chapter 15.45 (Development Agreements), Chapter 19.20 (Vesting Tentative Maps), Chapter 20.56 (Planned Community District Procedures), and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC, and CPUC Section 21676(b). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows: Section 1: The City Council finds the Project consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 of the CPUC and the AELUP of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses and hereby overrides ALUC' s determination that the Project is inconsistent with the AELUP. Findings and Facts in Support of Findings A. The Project is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP. The AELUP guides development proposals to provide for the orderly development of John Wayne Airport and the surrounding area through implementation of the standards in Section 2 (Planning Guidelines) and Section 3 (Land Use Policies). Implementation of these standards are intended to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 6 of 9 Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP sets forth the CNEL standards, and Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 of the AELUP define the noise exposure in the 60 dBA to 65 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 2) as "Moderate Noise Impact" and in the 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 1) as "High Impact." Section 3, Table 1 (Limitations on Land Use Due to Noise) of the AELUP identifies residential uses as "conditionally consistent" with the 60 dBA to 65 dBA CNEL noise contour and "normally inconsistent" with the 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour. However, residential uses are not outright prohibited. Instead, Section 3.2.3 of the AELUP requires the residential uses be developed with advanced insulation systems to bring the sound attenuation to no more than 45 dBA within the interior of the building. In addition, residential uses within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour area are required to be "indoor -oriented" to preclude noise impingement on outdoor living areas. The Project is located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL noise contour, consistent with the approved 6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments. Additionally, the Project has been conditioned to provide an acoustical report which describes the best design features of the structure that will satisfy noise standards, be attenuated to provide a maximum interior noise level of 45 dBA and provide advanced air filtration systems to promote cleaner air without the opening of windows. These conditions of approval mitigate noise to the Project and are consistent with the 45 dBA interior noise standards of the AELUP. B. The Project is consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP. Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones) of the AELUP sets forth zones depicting which land uses are acceptable in various portions of JWA environs. Allowed uses in Safety Zone 6 include residential and most nonresidential uses, excepting outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities. Uses that should be avoided include children's schools, large day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. Risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence. The Project is located within Safety Zone 6 and residential uses are allowed in that zone. The City's General Plan Safety Element Policy S 8.6 demonstrates that the City acknowledges the importance of the JWA Safety Zones in providing, "S 8.6 John Wayne Airport Traffic Pattern Zone - Use the most currently available John Wayne Airport (JWA) Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluation of land use compatibility and land use intensity in areas affected by JWA operations. In particular, future land use decisions within the existing JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone (Figure S5) should be evaluated to minimize the risk to life and property associated with aircraft operations." Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 7 of 9 The Project complies with the policies and regulations within the JWA Airport Planning Area and follows the safety standards of the AELUP as it is located within Safety Zone 6 and is not within the JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone. C. The Project is consistent with the height standards of the AELUP. Section 2.1.3 (Building Height Restrictions) of the AELUP sets forth building height restrictions. Section 2.1.3 provides that ALUC consider only one standard as provided in 14 Code of Federal Regulations ("C.F.R.") Part 77 (also referred to as the Federal Aviation Regulations). Section 2.1.3 provides that the Federal Aviation Regulations are the only definitive standards available and the standards most generally used. Section 2.1.3 identifies the FAA as the single authority for analyzing project impacts on airports or aeronautical operations, or navigational -aid siting, including interference with navigational aids or published flight paths and procedures along with reporting results of such studies and project analyses. The FAA conducted an aeronautical study for the Project consistent with the Federal Aviation Regulations. The FAA issued a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation on January 17, 2023, thereby finding the development does not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. The FAA reviewed the proposed height of the Project assuming an existing site elevation of 54 feet, with a proposed building that is 85 feet above ground level ("AGL"), and 139 feet above mean sea level ("AMSL"). The FAA further found that marking and lighting of the Project is not necessary for aviation safety. Any increase in height of the structure above the proposed 85-foot building height would require a revised Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation from the FAA. Additionally, there are other buildings in the vicinity of the Project that are taller than the Project including the building at 1500 Quail Street that is approximately 144 feet AMSL. Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 8 of 9 Section 2: Environmental Impact Report Addendum No. 7 was prepared for the Project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.; CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in Title 14, Division 6 Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations ("CCR") ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental Quality Act) to ensure that the Project will not result in new or increased environmental impacts. On the basis of the entire environmental record, the Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the Program Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR") for the General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119) and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in the PEIR and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the PEIR and the City of Newport Beach Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration, nor has any new information regarding potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Resolution No. 2024-24 Page 9 of 9 Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 9th day of April, 2024. ATTEST: c r Leilani I. Brown City Clerk 0 R � APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE C', Aaron C. Harp City Attorney Will O'Neill Mayor Attachments: Exhibit "A" — Legal Description Exhibit "B" — Orange County Airport Land Use Commission Inconsistency Determination dated January 23, 2024 Exhibit "C" — Comment Letter from Orange County Airport Land Use Commission dated March 12, 2024 Exhibit "D" — Comment Letter from California Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program dated March 12, 2024 Exhibit "A" Legal Description THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, IN THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF BLOCK 50 OF IRVINE'S SUBDIVISION, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 1, PAGE 88 OF MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 706, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 21, PAGE 25 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 2 IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 54, PAGE 11 OF PARCEL MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. EXCEPT THE FULL RIGHTS TO ALL MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES EXISTING BELOW FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET FROM THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED ABOVE, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT GRANTOR HEREBY EXPRESSLY WAIVES THE RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID REAL PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF EXPLORING FOR, OR PRODUCING THE MINERALS, PETROLEUM, GAS AND OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES SO RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED JULY 1, 1977. Exhibit "B" Orange County Airport Land Use Commission Inconsistency Determination dated January 23, 2024 AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION ORANGE I COUNTY FOR ORANGE COUNTY �zu 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 January 23, 2024 Liz Westmoreland, Senior Planner City of Newport Beach Community Development 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: ALUC Determination for 1400 Bristol Street Residences, General Plan (Land Use) Amendment and Newport Place Planned Community Amendment Dear Ms. Westmoreland: During the public meeting held on January 18, 2024, the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County considered the subject item. The matter was duly discussed, and with a 6-0 vote, the Commission found the 1400 Bristol Street Residences, General Plan (Land Use) Amendment and Newport Place Planned Community Amendment to be Inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan.for John Wayne Airport (AELUP for JWA) per: 1. Section 2.1.1 Aircraft Noise that the "aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport." 2. Section 2.1.2 Safety Compatibility Zones in which "the purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA." 3. 3.2.1 General Policy (in pertinent part): "Within the boundaries of the AELUP, any land use may be found to be Inconsistent with the AELUP which: (1) Places people so that they are affected adversely by aircraft noise, [or] (2) Concentrates people in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents..." You may contact us at (949) 252-5170 or at alucinfogocair.com if you have any questions regarding this proceeding. Sincerely, Lea U. Choum Executive Officer cc: ALUC Exhibit "C" Comment Letter from Orange County Airport Land Use Commission dated March 12, 2024 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1 EAF590A-C39C-4868-9172-7D7F41 DC83C4 ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION FOR ORANGE COUNTY ,4LUG 3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 - 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012 March 12, 2024 Liz. Westmoreland, Senior Plainer Community Development Department City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: Response to Notice of Intent to Overrule the Airport Land Use Commission Determination Regarding 1400 Bristol Street Residences Dear Ms. Westmoreland, We are in receipt of the City of Newport Beach (City) letter dated February 14, 2024, and City Council Resolution No. 2024-9 notifying the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County of the City's intent to overrule the ALUC's inconsistency determination on the proposed 1400 Bristol Street Residences. In accordance with Section 21676 of the Public Utilities Code, the ALUC submits the following continents addressing the proposed overrule findings for the above -referenced project. These comments shall be included in the public record of a final decision to overrule the ALUC. Please.be advised that California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21678 states: "With respect to a publicly owned airport that a public agency does not operate, if the public agency Pursuant to'Section 21676, 21676.5, or 21677 overrules a commission's action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability for damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the public agency's decision to overrule the commission's action or recommendation." Background On January 18, 2024, the ALUC for Orange County found the proposed 1400 Bristol Street Residences to be inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (A EL UP) for John 1,Vayne Airport (JWA) on a 6-0 vote. The inconsistent finding was based on AELUP Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and ; .2.1. Pursuant to Section 1.2 of the AELUP for JWA, the purpose of the AELUP is to safeguard the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and to ensure the continued operation of the airport. Specifically, the AELUP seeks to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise to ensure that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas DocuSign Envelope ID: 1EAF590A-C39C-4868-9172-7D7F41DC83C4 1400 Bristol Street Residences March 12. 2024 Page 2 susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace. Additionally, Section 2.1.4 of the AELUP for JWA and PUC Section 21674 charge the Commission to coordinate at the local level to ensure compatible land use planning. The City's proposed project would place residential uses within the 65 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) and Safety Zones 4 and 6, which would result in exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the City's proposed actions are inconsistent with the AELUP. ALUC has the following additional comments regarding the findings and facts of support included in Resolution No. 2024-9. Response to Finding and Fact in Support A - Regarding Noise Standards: Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.1, "... aircraft noise emanating from airports may be incompatible with the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of an airport..." As noted in the City's discussion, the CNEL standards are set forth in the AELUP. As part of the review of the proposed Residences at 1401 Quail Street, it was noted that the project site is within the JWA 65 dBA noise contour. The ALUC believes that the proposed residential uses would be highly affected by airport noise due to the close proximity to the airport and that the past and current land use designation of General Commercial Office (CO-G) is the appropriate designation for this site. Finding of Fact A states that "the project is located within the updated 60 dBA CNEL contour consistent with the approved 6"' Cycle Housing Element Implementation Noise -Related Amendments." This "updated 60 dBA CNEL contour" was included as part of the Housing Element Implementation/Noise Related Amendments which was found inconsistent by the ALUC on August 17, 2023 and overruled by the City on November 14, 2023. With the 2023 Noise Amendments, the City replaced the existing noise contours which are currently consistent with the adopted AELUP.for JWA, with more narrow noise contours which were included in 2014 Settlement Agreement EIR 617, which did not provide an analysis of the potentially significant impacts of placing future residential uses within the 65 dB CNEL contour. As stated in our December 5, 2023 letter to you, and in the August 17, 2023 ALUC Staff Report for Item 1: Housing Implementation/Noise-Related Amendments, "the .AELUP continues to reflect the EIR 508 noise contours.for purposes of determining whether a project is consistent with the AELUP noise policies and provisions. Therefore, for purposes of the AELUP consistency analysis, the City and ALUC are required to utilize the noise contours that are provided in the AELUP. Neither the City nor the ALUC can provide a consistency analysis based on different and updated noise contours unless and until those noise contours have been included in the AELUP. Rather, any submittal must be based on the policies and contours currently in the existing AEL UP. " The proposed Housing Element Implementation - Noise Related Amendments would allow residential uses which are not suitable and would subject the future residents to excessive DocuSign Envelope ID: 1 EAF590A-C39C-4868-9172-7D7F41 DC83C4 1400 Bristol Street Residences March 12, 2024 Page 3 noise regardless of which noise contours are utilized. The ALUC has historically found residential uses in the vicinity of JWA to be inconsistent with the AELUP.for JW.A. IZesDonse to Fact in SLIDnort B - Reizardina Safet Pursuant to AELUP Section 2.1.2, "[s]afety and compatibility zones depict which land uses are acceptable and which are unacceptable in various portions of airport environs. The purpose of these zones is to support the continued use and operation of an airport by establishing compatibility and safety standards to promote air navigational safety and to reduce potential safety hazards for persons living, working or recreating near JWA." The proposed project is located in Safety Zone 6 — Traffic Pattern Zone. According to the California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook, noise and overflight should be considered in Safety Zone 6. Flight tracks for the property were included in the ALUC staff report which show a high number of flights over the proposed project site. Considering the proposed density, proximity to JWA and the number of flights over the property, this project is an inappropriate use for the site. Response to Fact in Support C - Regarding "Intent of the AELUP": By virtue of being clearly stated in AEL UP for JWA Sections 1.2 "Purpose and Scope" and 2.0 "Planning Guidelines," the ALUC understands the complex legal charge to protect public airports from encroachment by incompatible land use development, while simultaneously protecting the health, safety and welfare of citizens who work and live in the airport's environs. To this end, and as also statutorily required, ALUC proceedings are benefited by several members having expertise in aviation. Based upon careful consideration of all information provided, and input from ALUC members with expertise in aviation, the ALUC unanimously found the proposed 1400 Bristol Street Residences to be inconsistent with the ;1EL UP for JWA. We urge the City Council to take ALUC's concerns into consideration in its deliberations prior to deciding whether to oven -tile ALUC. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Sincerely, DocuSigned by: Auwk 09C77A2D7F24488— Mark Monin Vice-Chainnan cc: Airport Land Use Commission for Orange County Jonathan Huff, Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics Exhibit "D" Comment Letter from California Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program dated March 12, 2024 STATE OF CALIFORNIA--CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY Gavin Newsom Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AERONAUTICS Program- M.S. #40 1120 N STREET P. O. BOX 942874 SACRAMENTO, CA 94274-0001 PHONE (916) 654-4959 FAX (916) 653-9531 TTY 711 www.dot.ca.gov March 12, 2024 Liz Westmoreland, AICP, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach Community Development Department 100 Civic Center Drive Newport, CA 92660-3267 Dear Ms. Westmoreland: w Making Conservation a California Way of Life. Electronically Sent Iwestmoreland@newportbeachca.gov The Aeronautics Program (Program) at the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) appreciates receiving the Notice of Intent dated February 14, 2024, from the City of Newport Beach (City), to overrule a determination of the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC). The ALUC has reported that the 1400 Bristol Project (Project) is inconsistent with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Notice of Intent concerns the City's Resolution (No.) 2024-9 (Resolution), and specific "Facts in Support" related to the AELUP. In advance of a public hearing on the Resolution to consider overruling the ALUC's determination, the Program is providing the following comments pursuant to California Public Utilities Code (PUC) section 21676. The Program strongly recommends that the City modify the Project to address the issues raised by the ALUC. Facts in Suiport #1 -The Project is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP. Citing AELUP section 3.2.3 for "residential uses to be developed with advanced insulation systems to bring the sound after attenuation to no more than 45 dB inside" overlooks a key provision of the section that is seen prior to quoting the conclusion of the section that says, "residential uses within the 65- 70 dBA CNEL noise contour are required to be 'indoor - oriented' to preclude noise impingement on outdoor living areas." The provision in between states, "All residential units are inconsistent in this area unless it can be shown conclusively that such units are sufficiently sound attenuated for present and projected noise exposures, which shall be the energy sum of all noise impacting the project, so as not to exceed an interior standard of 45 dB CNEL." In addition, though the city notes that it intends to require noise attenuation to be addressed during design, the city, as the permitting authority, can, as a provision of final occupancy permit issuance, require the developer to demonstrate interior noise attenuation below 45 dB. As flight tracks demonstrate, it will not be difficult to find a representative time of day to test noise with multiple flights over the project. This will ensure that the end user, be it homeowner or renter, is not left with the arduous task of perusing legal action against all the relevant parties to have their new home rebuilt with proper noise attenuation. Furthermore, though the city intends to require disclosures related to aircraft noise, pollution and odors, again, as a condition of the permit, should require avigation easements that will protect the airport from litigation related to noise, nuisance, and pollution. "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" Ms. Liz Westmoreland March 12, 2024 Page 3 Facts in Support #2 - The proposed Project is consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP. This Fact in Support is deficient for not adequately citing the reference to Safety Zone 6 (Traffic Pattern Zone) of the AELUP. As used in the Notice of Intent, the statement that states, "risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence," is drawn from the AELUP, but it overlooks the AELUP's reference to the 2002 California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook (Handbook; published by the Program). It is Table 9B in the 2002 Handbook that refers to "a low likelihood of accident occurrence." Unfortunately, the AELUP does not account for the current Handbook of 2011. The City also does not account for it. The 2011 Handbook allows for low risk of accidents in the zone for an airport traffic pattern, but it goes further to quantify accident risk (Chapter 4, page 4-25). Owing to a relatively large area, the Handbook indicates 18-29 percent of accidents near a runway could occur in the traffic pattern zone (attributable also to lower and slower flight profiles for less time and altitude to recover from distress). The 2011 Handbook also allows for residential land use in the traffic pattern zone, but with the condition that says, "where ambient noise levels are low." By accounting for this discrepancy, the Program recommends that the City evaluate ambient noise levels in the JWA Safety Zone 6 before taking further action on the proposed ALUC overrule. It would be a prudent means for abiding by PUC section 21670 "to prevent new noise and safety problems." Facts in Support #3-The proposed Project is consistent with the purpose and intent of the AELUP and will not result in incompatible land uses adjacent to JWA. Citing the City's intention related to the Project that states, "any development on the proposed housing opportunity sites will comply with the noise criteria and safety standards," contained in Sections 2 and 3 of the AELUP, is appreciated by the Program. Sections 2 and 3 of AELUP provide overall policies for planning and land use around JWA, including certain specific criteria. The points made in this letter concerning specific criteria should be considered for their value to ensure accurate compliance with PUC section 21670. Otherwise, the Program contends that any less effort compromises both the City's declared position in the Notice of Intent and the public's welfare. As noted, the Program strongly recommends that the City modify the Project to address the issues raised by the ALUC, but in the event that the City overrules the ALUC determination of inconsistency, please include these comments in the public record for this agenda item. If you have further questions, or we can assist in any way, please reach out at the phone number or email below. Sincerely, Originally signed by Jonathan Huff Associate Transportation Planner "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" Ms. Liz Westmoreland March 12, 2024 Page 3 c: Lea U. Choum, Executive Officer, Orange County Airport Land Use Commission; ALUCinfo@ocair.com bc: Lan Zhou, Deputy District Director, District 12; lan.zhou@dot.ca.aov "Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient transportation system to enhance California's economy and livability" STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH } I, Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2024-24 was duly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council held on the g1h day of April, 2024; and the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Mayor Will O'Neill, Mayor Pro Tern Joe Stapleton, Councilmember Brad Avery, Councilmember Noah Blom, Councilmember Robyn Grant, Councilmember Lauren Kleiman NAYS: None ABSENT: Councilmember Erik Weigand IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 101h day of April, 2024. e Leilani I. Brown City Clerk Newport Beach, California �aL3F:0V"