The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-2 - Megonigal Residence EIRRESOLUTION NO. 2010-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH NO. 2009051043) FOR THE MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007- 133) LOCATED AT 2333 PACIFIC DRIVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND STATE AND LOCAL GUIDELINES, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS THERETO, AND APPROVING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM WHEREAS, an application was filed by David R. Olson on behalf of Kim and Carolyne Megonigal, property owners, with respect to property located at 2333 Pacific Drive, requesting a modification permit to exceed the 3 -foot height limitation in the front yard setback to allow for planter walls and a water feature; and WHEREAS, it was determined pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. ( "CEQA ") and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.) that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR "); and WHEREAS, on May 11, 2009, the City of Newport Beach, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation ( "NOP ") of the EIR and mailed that NOP to public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report ( "DEIR ") in accordance with the CEQA, which, taking into account the comments it received on the NOP, described the Project and discussed the environmental impacts resulting there from, and on August 24, 2009, circulated the DEIR for public and agency comments; and WHEREAS, the 45 -day public comment period closed on October 7, 2009; and WHEREAS, on November 19, 2009, the City of Newport Beach completed a Final Environmental Impact Report ( "FEIR "), for the project, consisting of the DEIR, comments on the DEIR, responses to comments on the DEIR, and minor revisions to the DEIR; WHEREAS, staff of the City of Newport Beach has reviewed the comments received on the DEIR, has prepared full and complete responses thereto, and on December 23, 2009, distributed the responses in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21092.5; and WHEREAS, on a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on November 19, 2009, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the aforesaid hearing was given. The application, plans, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting and at the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution No. 1795 recommending certification of the EIR and project approval; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2010, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider: (1) the certification of the FEIR, (2) the adoption of certain findings and determinations. (3) approval of the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council has read and considered all environmental documentation comprising the FEIR, including the comments and the responses to comments, and has found that the FEIR considers all potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project and is complete and adequate, and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and of the State and local CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, on the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the incorporation of mitigation measures. Additionally, there are no long -term environmental goals that would be compromised by the project, nor cumulative impacts anticipated in connection with the project. The mitigation measures identified are feasible and reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures are applied to the project and are incorporated as conditions of approval. WHEREAS, 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. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: SECTION 1. Based on its review and consideration of the FEIR, all written communications and oral testimony regarding the Project which have been submitted to and received by the City Council, the City Council hereby certifies that the FEIR, consisting of the Draft EIR (Exhibit A), Responses to Comments (Exhibit B) and Errata (Exhibit C) for the Project has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State and local CEQA Guidelines. The City Council, having final approval authority over the Project, adopts and certifies as complete and adequate the FEIR, which reflects the City Council's independent judgment and analysis. The City Council further certifies that the FEIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in it prior to approving the Project. SECTION 2. CEQA Finding and Statement of Facts. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, the City Council has reviewed and hereby adopts the CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts as shown on the attached Exhibit D entitled "CEQA Findings and Statement of Facts," which exhibit is incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15097, the City Council has reviewed and hereby adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program" which is included as Exhibit E, which exhibit is incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 4. Location and Custodian of Record of Proceedings. The Planning Department of the City of Newport Beach, located at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92263, is hereby designated as the custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's decision is based, which documents and materials shall be available for public inspection and copying in accordance with the provisions of the California Public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.). SECTION 5. Notice of Determination. The Planning Director shall cause the filing of a notice of determination with the County Clerk of the County of Orange and with the State Office of Planning and Research within five working days of this approval. SECTION 6. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant and property owner shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of this Project including, but not limited to, the approval of the Modification Permit No. MD2007 -080 and /or the City's related California Environmental Quality Act determinations, the certification of the Environmental Impact Report, the adoption of a Mitigation Program. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by the applicant or property owner, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant and property owner shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this finding. SECTION 7. Certification. Posting and Filing. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, and the City Clerk shall certify to the vote adopting this resolution and shall cause a certified copy of this resolution to be filed. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January 2010. Keith D. Curry, Mayor ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE 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; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution No. 2010 -2 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 12th day of January, 2010, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit: Ayes: Selich, Rosansky, Henn, Webb, Gardner, Daigle, Mayor Curry Noes: None Absent: None Abstain: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of said City this 13th day of January, 2010. City Clerk Newport Beach, California (Seal) Draft Environmental Impact Report SCH No. 2009041010 MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE PA 2007 -133 City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 Prepared by: Keeton Kreitzer Consulting 17291 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 305 Tustin, CA 92780 August 2009 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH NO. 2009041010 MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE PA 2007 -133 Prepared for. City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 Contact: James Campbell, Principal Planner (949) 644 -3210 Prepared by. Keeton Kreitzer Consulting 17291 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 305 Tustin, CA 92680 Contact: Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal (714) 665 -8509 AUGUST 2009 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report EGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 2007 -133) NEWPORT BEACH, CA TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... ............................1 -1 1.1 Description of the Proposed Project ......................................................... ............................... 1 -1 1.2 Alternatives ................................................................................................... ............................1 -2 1.3 Areas of Controversy ................................................................................ ............................... 1 -2 1.4 Issues to be Resolved ............................................................................... ............................... 1 -3 1.5 Impact Summary Table ............................................................................. ............................... 1 -3 1.5 Summary of Standard Conditions ............................................................ ............................... 1 -3 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .................................................................. ............................2 -1 2.1 Purpose of the Draft EIR ........................................................................... ............................... 2 -1 2.2 Methodology ................................................................................................. ............................2 -4 2.3 Format of the Draft EIR ............................................................................. ............................... 2 -6 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................ ............................3.1 Potential Impacts ........................................................................... 3.1 Project Location ......................................................................................... ............................... 3 -1 3.2 Environmental Setting ............................................................................... ............................... 3 -1 3.3 History and Evolution of the Existing Development ................................. ............................... 3 -9 3.4 Description of the Proposed Project ....................................................... ............................... 3 -12 3.5 Project Phasing ....................................................................................... ............................... 3 -12 3.6 Project Objectives .................................................................................... ............................... 3 -12 3.7 Project Processing Requirements and Requested Entitlements .......... ............................... 3 -15 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 4.1 -1 4.1 Land Use and Planning ............................................................................... ..........................4.1 -1 4.1.1 Existing Conditions ................................................................... ............................... 4.1 -1 4.1.2 Significance Criteria ....................................................................... ..........................4.1 -7 4.1.3 Standard Conditions ................................................................. ............................... 4.1 -7 4.1.4 Potential Impacts ........................................................................... ..........................4.1 -7 4.1.5 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................... .........................4.1 -28 4.1.6 Level of Significance after Mitigation ........................................... .........................4.1 -28 4.2 Biological Resources .............................................................................. ............................... 4.2 -1 4.2.1 Existing Conditions ................................................................... ............................... 4.2 -1 4.2.2 Significance Criteria ....................................................................... ..........................4.2 -7 4.2.3 Standard Conditions ................................................................. ............................... 4.2 -7 4.2.4 Potential Impacts ........................................................................... ..........................4.2 -8 4.2.5 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................... .........................4.2 -10 4.2.6 Level of Significance after Mitigation ........................................... .........................4.2 -10 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 5.0 Cdr; `fir: Table of Contents Page 4.3 Aesthetics ............................................................................................... ............................... 4.3-1 4.3.1 Existing Conditions ................................................................... ............................... 4.3 -1 4.3.2 Significance Criteria .................................................................. ............................... 4.3-2 4.3.3 Standard Conditions ................................................................. ............................... 4.3 -2 4.3.4 Potential Impacts ............................................ ............................... ..........................4.3 -3 4.3.5 Mitigation Measures ..................................................................... .........................4.3 -10 4.3.6 Level of Significance after Mitigation ........................................... .........................4.3 -10 IMPACTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT 5 -1 5.1 Agriculture ..................................................................................................... ............................5 -1 5.2 Air Quality .................................................................................................. ............................... 5 -1 5.3 Cultural Resources .................................................................................... ............................... 5 -2 5.4 Geologic and Soils .................................................................................... ............................... 5 -3 5.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ........................................................... ............................... 5-4 5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality .................................................................... ............................... 5-4 5.7 Mineral Resources .................................................................................... ............................... 5 -5 5.8 Noise ............................................................................................................. ............................5 -5 5.9 Population and Housing ............................................................................ ............................... 5-5 5.10 Public Services ............................................................................................. ............................5 -6 5.11 Recreation ..................................................................................................... ............................5 -7 5.12 Traffic and Circulation ............................................................................... ............................... 5 -7 5.13 Utilities ........................................................................................................... ............................5 -8 69[ C] ZIIa[ N_1 1!Ilg0 /_V111111IU_1- 31111:F_111P1:1:49:8MAI WIT91 161 IIN0:4111N119_1-IN W_12 oil IVN:k1r1:I:611:i1111 *KiL4 IT, Il IIril:1Z 1111115910 V:Rlo111:10 6 -1 7.1 8.0 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS ........................................................................... ............................... 8.1 8.1 Definition of Growth- Inducing Impacts ..................................................... ............................... 8-1 8.2 Analysis of Growth- Inducing Impacts ....................................................... ............................... 8-1 8.3 Conclusion .................................................................................................... ............................8 -2 9.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ................................. ............................9 -1 9.1 Definition of Cumulative Impacts .............................................................. ............................... 9-1 9.2 Cumulative Projects .................................................................................. ............................... 9 -1 9.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ...................................................................... ............................... 9-4 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 ii Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Table of Contents Page 10.0 ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................... ...........................10 -1 10.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. ............................... 10 -1 10.2 Alternatives Rejected from Further Consideration ................................ ............................... 10 -2 10.3 Analysis of Alternatives ........................................................................... ............................... 10 -3 10.4 Summary of Alternatives ......................................................................... ............................... 10 -7 10.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative ......................................................... ...........................10 -8 11.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONSULTED 12.0 REFERENCES ................ 13.0 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS APPENDICES A. Initial Study /Notice of Preparation B. NOP Comment Letters C. Biological Resources Assessment 11 -1 ..................................... ...........................12 -1 ......................................................... ...........................13 -1 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 iii Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 20007 -133) NEWPORT BEACH, CA LIST OF EXHIBITS Table of Contents Paqe 3 -1 Regional Map .......................................................................................................... ............................... 3-2 3 -2 Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................. ............................... 3 -3 3 -3 Aerial Photograph ....................................................................................................... ............................3 -4 3 -4 Existing General Plan .............................................................................................. ............................... 3-6 3 -5 Existing Zoning ........................................................................................................ ............................... 3 -7 3 -6 Site Plan ................................................................................................................. ............................... 3 -11 3 -7 Front Elevation ...................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -13 3 -8 Rear Elevation ........................................................................................................... ...........................3 -14 4.2 -1 Vegetation Map .................................................................................................... ............................... 4.2 -2 4.3 -1 Visual Simulation from Begonia Park — Lower Bench ........................................ ............................... 4.3-4 4.3 -2 Visual Simulation from Begonia Park — Upper Bench ........................................ ............................... 4.3 -6 4.3 -3 View from Pacific Drive /Begonia Avenue ............................................................ ............................... 4.3 -7 4.3 -4 Visual Simulations — Views 1 — 4 ......................................................................... ............................... 4.3 -8 4.3 -5 Visual Simulations — Views 5 — 8 ......................................................................... ............................... 4.3 -9 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 IV Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 2007 -133) NEWPORT BEACH, CA LIST OF TABLES Table of Contents Page 1 -1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Level of Significance After Mitigation ...................... 1 -5 2 -1 List of Potential Responsible Agencies .................................................................. ............................... 2 -3 4.1 -1 General Plan Policy Analysis .................................................................................... ..........................4.1 -8 4.1 -2 Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Policy Analysis ..................................................... .........................4.1 -15 4.1 -3 Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) Consistency Analysis ........... .........................4.1 -24 5 -1 Project - Related Pollutant Emissions .................................................................... ............................... 5 -2 9 -1 Related Projects List ................................................................................................. ............................9 -2 10 -1 Summary of Project Alternatives ......................................................................... ............................... 10 -8 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 2007 -133) NEWPORT BEACH, CA LIST OF TABLES Table of Page 1 -1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Level of Significance After Mitigation ......................1 -5 2 -1 List of Potential Responsible Agencies ................................................................... ............................2 -3 4.1 -1 General Plan Policy Analysis .................................................................................. ..........................4.1 -8 4.1 -2 Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Policy Analysis ................................................... .........................4.1 -15 4.1 -3 Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) Consistency Analysis .......... .........................4.1 -24 5 -1 Project - Related Pollutant Emissions ..................................................................... ............................5 -2 9 -1 Related Projects List ............................................................................................... ............................9 -2 10 -1 Summary of Project Alternatives ........................................................................... ...........................10 -8 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 v Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary CHAPTER 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Description of the Proposed Project 1.1.1 Project Location The City of Newport Beach is an urbanized coastal community located in western Orange County. Newport Beach is bordered by the Cities of Irvine on the north and northeast and by Costa Mesa on the north and northwest. Crystal Cove State Park, in unincorporated Orange County, is located southeast of the City's corporate boundaries. On the west, the incorporated limits of the City extend to the Santa Ana River; the City of Huntington Beach is located west of the Santa Ana River. The Pacific Ocean comprises the southern boundary of the City. The site is located at 2333 Pacific Avenue in the City of Newport Beach. The subject property currently consists of a single parcel encompassing 4,412 square feet (i.e., 0.1 acre). The site is current vacant but has been altered by some grading and vegetation clearance. The site supports a variety of native and non - native landscape species. 1.1.2 Project Description The project applicants, Kim and Caroline Megonigal, are proposing to construct a 3,566 square -foot, single - family residence. The proposed residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the first floor; 934 square feet on the second floor; and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (includes a 428 - square foot, 2 -car garage). Vehicular access is from Pacific Drive at the intersection of Begonia Avenue and Pacific Drive. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space on the three levels is provided. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 to allow planter walls and a water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. In addition, because the proposed planter walls and water feature would also encroach up to 13 feet into the Begonia Avenue right -of -way, an encroachment permit from the City's Public works Department will also be required. The following discretionary approvals are requested or required by the City in order to implement the project: Modification Permit (MD2007 -080) 1.1.3 Project Phasing The applicant is proposing to construct the entire project in a single construction phase over a period of approximately 20 months. 1.1.4 Project Objectives Implementation of the proposed project will achieve the following intended specific objectives, which have been identified by the project applicant: Construction of a custom, single - family residence consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations adopted for the project that: Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -1 Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 1.0 — Executive (1) provides adequate floor area within a personalized floor plan to accommodate the applicant's living needs; (2) provides views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean to the south and west from each level; (3) provides outdoor living areas that are directly accessible from indoor spaces on each level; (4) provides access from Pacific Drive to an enclosed garage; and (5) minimizes impacts on public views from Begonia Park. 1.2 Alternatives 1.2.1 Summary of Alternatives CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Chapter 10 sets forth potential alternatives to the proposed project and evaluates them as required by CEQA. Several alternative development scenarios have been identified as a means of reducing potentially significant impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. These alternatives include: Alternative Site No Project/No Development Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level) Alternative Access (Bayside Drive) 1.2.2 Environmentally Superior Alternative Chapter 10 describes the criteria that were used to select those alternatives for detailed analysis and to screen others from further detailed consideration. CEQA also requires that the EIR identify the environmentally superior alternative among all of the alternatives considered. The No Development alternative identified and analyzed in Chapter 10.0 will eliminate all of the project - related effects (which are identified as less than significant). However, CEQA requires that if the "no project" alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives shall be identified. Based on the comparative analysis of alternatives provided in Chapter 10, the Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level) project alternative would be considered to be environmentally superior in that its implementation would result in a reduction of impacts to public views, which were determined to be less than significant. 1.3 Areas of Controversy The areas of controversy identified during the scoping process and at public hearings conducted prior to the preparation of the EIR, are addressed in the EIR and include: Public Views Sensitive Habitat/Species Consistency with General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan Policies Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -2 Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 1.4 Issues to be Resolved 1.0 — Executive The environmental analysis presented in an initial study prepared for the proposed project and in Chapter 4.0 and Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR identify potentially significant project - related impacts; however, in those instances, specific mitigation measures have been included to reduce the potential significant adverse effects to a less than significant level. No significant unavoidable adverse impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. 1.5 Impact Summary Table Table 1 -1 summarizes the significant adverse impacts of the proposed project. The table also provides a summary of the potential impacts found to be less than significant, and which do not require mitigation. Each environmental resource area covered in the main text is summarized. Also, impacts found to be significant are listed along with the proposed mitigation measures. The residual impacts after application of mitigation measures are also indicated for each significant impact. 1.6 Summary of Standard Conditions The proposed project will incorporate, where necessary or required, standard conditions as imposed by the City and /or other responsible agencies. The standard conditions that will be implemented are presented below. Air Quality SC -1 Since the South Coast Air Basin is in non - attainment with respect to ozone and PM10, and the construction emissions would add to the regional burden of these pollutants, a vigorous set of air pollution control measures is recommended during the construction phases. The measures include: During grading activities, any exposed soil areas shall be watered at least four times per day. Stockpiles of crushed cement, debris, dirt or other dusty materials shall be covered or watered twice daily. On windy days or when fugitive dust can be observed leaving the proposed project site, additional applications of water shall be applied to maintain a minimum 12 percent moisture content as defined by SCAQMD Rule 403. Soil disturbance shall be terminated whenever windy conditions exceed 25 miles per hour. Truck loads carrying soil and debris material shall be wetted or covered prior to leaving the site. Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets shall be swept daily. All diesel - powered machinery exceeding 100 horsepower shall be equipped with soot traps, unless the Contractor demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City Building Official that it is infeasible. The construction contractor shall time the construction activities, including the transportation of construction equipment vehicles and equipment to the site, and delivery of materials, so as not to interfere with peak hour traffic. To minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site, a flag person shall be Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -3 Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Land Use 1.0 — Executive retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways, if deemed necessary by the City. The construction contractor shall encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction workers. To the extent feasible, pre-coated/natural colored building materials shall be used. Water -based or low VOC coatings shall be used that comply with SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits. Spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, or manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, etc. shall be used to reduce VOC emissions, where practical. Paint application shall use lower volatility paint not exceeding 100 grams of ROG per liter. SC 4.1 -1 All development proposed for the proposed single - family residence shall be reviewed for consistency with applicable provisions of the California Building Code, Noise Ordinance, Uniform Fire Code, and other applicable codes and ordinances prior to issuance of building permits. Biological Resources SC 4.2 -1 Bluff landscaping shall consist of native, drought tolerant plant species determined to be consistent with the California coastal buff environment. Invasive and non - native species shall be removed. Irrigation of bluff faces to establish re- vegetated areas shall be temporary and used only to establish the plants. Upon establishment of the plantings, the temporary irrigation system shall be removed. Aesthetics SC 4.3.1 Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of the Zoning Code. Exterior on -site lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No direct rays or glare are permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or create a public nuisance. "Walpak" type fixtures are not permitted. SC 4.3 -2 Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final of building permits, the applicant shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm control of light and glare. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -4 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Table 1 -1 Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Level of Significance After Mitigation 1.0 — Executive Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -5 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measures After Mitigation Aesthetics Although no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation, the following measure will be implemented to ensure that views through the site are maintained. MM 4.3 -1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall dedicate in perpetuity a view easement over the "Outdoor Room" identified on the approved plans and all The project has been redesigned to conform to the building and open space areas on the project site that shall restrict development standards prescribed in the R -1 zoning district and to avoid the maximum height of landscaping and accessory significant visual impacts. Project implementation will not result in structures to that of the top of the guardrails of the "Outdoor No Significant Impact significant impacts from an important vantage point identified in the Room" The view easement shall be a three - Natural Resources Element of the General Plan. As a result, no dimensional space projected vertically from a horizontal significant visual or aesthetic impacts are anticipated. plane at the elevation of the top of the guardrails of the "Outdoor Room" and horizontally to all property lines. The restrictions of the view easement shall not apply to the building and structures depicted on the approved project plans or to patio furniture. The form and legal description of the view easement shall be prepared by the applicant and reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Agriculture No Prime Farmland, Farmland of State or Local Importance, or Unique Farmland occurs within or in the vicinity of the site. The site and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built -up Land" and No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures "Other Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map. are required. No Significant Impact Furthermore, neither the site nor the adjacent areas are designated as prime, unique or important farmlands by the State Resources Agency or by the Newport Beach General Plan. Air Quality Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single - family residence include vehicular exhaust from daily traffic (i.e., based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures Less than Significant and landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a are required. variety of household cleaning and hair care products. Neither short- term (i.e., construction) nor long -term (i.e., operational ) emissions Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -5 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0— Executive Summary Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -6 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measures After Mitigation associated with the proposed project would exceed SCAQMD recommended significance thresholds. These thresholds were developed to provide a method of assessing a project's individual impact significance, and also to determine whether the project's impacts could be cumulatively considerable. The proposed project would not, therefore, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. Although the project would increase the resident population on the project site, the proposed project includes only one single - family residence. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures No Significant Impact associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be are required. significant in the context of the contribution of worldwide GHG impacts. Biological Resources Although project implementation will result in the loss of 261 square feet (0.006 acre) of degraded coastal bluff scrub, its elimination will not result in a significant impact because it is of low quality and it has been substantially compromised by fragmentation and influences from human No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are No Significant Impact activities. As a result, it is not recognized as an ESHA. Its value as a required. long -term habitat is not considered to be important and no significant impacts to important biological resources would occur as a result of project implementation. Cultural Resources No historic resources are identified either on the site or in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is not identified by No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures the City as possessing potentially important historic resources. are required. No Significant Impact Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant impacts to historic resources. Although no significant impacts to cultural resources are anticipated, an archaeological monitor will be present during No archaeological resources are known to be present in the project grading to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered, area. Project implementation includes excavation of the property to appropriate measures will be implemented in accordance with accommodate the proposed single - family residence. It is unlikely that existing City policies as reflected below. the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in significant MM -1 A qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be Less than Significant impacts to cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with retained by the project applicant who will be present during the existing development in the area and the nature of the bedrock the grading and landform alteration phase. In the event materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine). that cultural resources and /or fossils are encountered during construction activities, ground - disturbing excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -6 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 1.0 — Executive Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -7 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation. Measures After Mitigation redirected or halted by the monitor until the find has been salvaged. Any artifacts and /or fossils discovered during project construction shall be prepared to a point of identification and stabilized for long -term storage. Any discovery, along with supporting documentation and an itemized catalogue, shall be accessioned into the collections of a suitable repository. Curation costs to accession any collections shall be the responsibility of the ro'ect applicant. The site contains the Monterey Formation deposits, which are known to contain abundant fossilized marine invertebrates and vertebrates. The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project areas exists. Like other sites in the City that are underlain by the Monterey Refer to MM -1, above. Less than Significant Formation, the site should be considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during grading and excavation. Soils and Geology There are no known local or regional active earthquake faults on the site, and the site is not within an Alquist- Priolo Zone. The Newport- Inglewood Fault -Rose Canyon Fault is located less than two miles to the south of and off -shore from the site. Another active fault that - could generate seismic activity that affects the subject property and No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures surrounding area is the Elsinore Fault. The Newport- Inglewood and are required. Less than Significant Elsinore Fault Zones could produce earthquakes of magnitude 6 — 7 on the Richter Scale, with local strong ground motion equivalent to at least VIII — Non the modified Mercali Scale. Although episodes on those faults could cause ground shaking at the project site, It is highly unlikely that the site would experience surface rupture. Implementation of the proposed project will necessitate grading and excavation necessary to accommodate the proposed single - family MM -2 Prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, an residence that will temporarily expose on -site soils to potential erosion control plan shall be submitted to and approved by Less than Significant erosion. In that interim period, it is possible that some erosion may the City's Chief Building Official. occur, resulting in some sedimentation. The orientation of the bedrock on the site is dipping into the slope, MM -3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall which is the preferred orientation for maintaining slope integrity. submit a soils engineering report and final geotechnical However, surFCially, the cliff portions of the subject property are report to the City's Building Department for approval. The unstable as evidenced by the talus deposits that are present at the project shall be designed to incorporate the Less than Significant base of the steep slopes. However, all slopes on the site were recommendations included in those reports that address determined to be grossly stable. The maximum slope height is 47 site grading, site Gearing, compaction, caissons, bearing feet and slope angle ranges from 10 degrees to 90 degrees. capacity and settlement, lateral pressures, footing design, Calculated factors of safety are in excess of 1.5 static and 1.1 seismic design, slabs on grade, retaining wall design, Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -7 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -8 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measures After Mitigation (Pseudo- static) of factors of safety required by the City of Newport subdrain design, concrete, surface drainage, setback Beach. distance, excavations, cut -fill transitional zones, planters and slope maintenance, and driveways. Hazards and Hazardous Materials There is no indication that the subject site has been contaminated that would adversely affect site development. Although grading and site preparation activities will expose subsurface soils and result in No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures No Significant Impact the generation of fugitive dust, no hazardous emissions will occur as are required. a result of project implementation. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur. With the exception of commonly used household hazardous materials (e.g., insecticides, herbicides, cleaning agents, etc.), the single - family residence proposed for the site will not utilize hazardous or acutely No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures No Significant Impact hazardous materials that would be emitted into the environment. are required. Therefore, no significant impacts to existing schools will occur as a result of the proposed project. A search of various databases concerning hazardous wastes and substances sites was conducted through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) as part of the environmental analysis. This search, which is on file with the City of Newport Beach, determined No significant Impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures No Significant Impact that the subject property is not included on any lists of hazardous are required. materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, project implementation will not create a significant hazard either to the public or the environment. Hydrology and Water Quality This small -scale project would not result in a significant increase in water demand and all of the project's potable and non - potable water needs will be met through a connection to the City's domestic water No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures system. The proposed single - family residence represents an are required. No Significant Impact insignificant increase in the demand for domestic water, which has been anticipated by the City in its long -range plans. No water wells are proposed or required to meet the water demands of this project. Existing surface runoff generated on the subject property occurs as sheet flow and drains in a southerly direction over the bluff where it enters the City's storm drain system before discharging into Newport Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality Bay, which has been identified as containing "environmentally codes and policies, which are performed during the plan check No Significant Impact sensitive areas" as defined by the 2003 Orange County Drainage stage, will ensure that surface flows can be accommodated and Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the Water Quality Control Plans water quality protected. for the Santa Ana Basin. The actual amount of stormwater runoff generated from the building footprint and paved areas (totaling Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -8 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Potential In approximately 2,300 square feet) wou no significant impacts are anticipated. The subject property is not located within the 100 -year flood plain as delineated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of Newport Beach. No homes would be placed within the 100 -year flood plain and no significant impacts would occur. Although some temporary impacts associated with construction of the proposed residential structure may occur, no long -term outdoor storage, maintenance, fueling or work areas are proposed. Vehicle parking areas are to be fully enclosed. The project will be designed to comply with all requisite codes and policies prescribed by the City of Newport Beach to ensure that stomiwater impacts during or after construction are minimized or eliminated to the maximum extent The proposed project, which includes the construction of one single - family detached residential dwelling unit on a 4,412- square foot lot in Corona del Mar, is consistent with the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan and with the Coastal Land Use Plan. The proposed project is also compatible with the existing land uses in the area. As a result, no significant long -term land use impacts are Neither the Newport Beach General Plan (Recreation and Open Space Element) nor the State of California has identified the project site or environs as a potential mineral resource of Statewide or regional significance. No mineral resources are known to exist and, therefore, project implementation will not result in anv sianificant impacts. The proposed residence is similar in nature as other single - family residences in the immediate project vicinity. Although on -site noise levels associated with residential activities (where none currently exist) would increase, it is anticipated that any such increase in long- term noise associated with the residential use would be those occurring as a result of outdoor activities and would be typical of noise levels in sjmjlar residential neighborhoods. If future residents Measures No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. - Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality codes and policies, which are performed during the plan check stage, will ensure that surface flows can be accommodated and water quality protected. Land Use and Although no significant land use impacts are anticipated and the project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies articulated in the City's General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan, MM 4.3-1 (Le., dedication of a view easement) has been prescribed to ensure that future views from Begonia Park are preserved and protected. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 1.0 — Executive After No Significant Impact No Significant Impact Less than Significant No Significant Impact No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures ( No Significant Impact are required. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -9 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -10 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measures After Mitigation loud noise levels that exceed the limits set forth in Chapter 10.26 of the City's Municipal Code, the City is empowered to take actions to abate that activity. This project would not result in exposure of neighboring residents or future residents on site to noise levels that exceed City standards. Therefore, no significant long -term noise impacts are anticipated. MM -4 All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling devices. All construction equipment shall be located or Short-tens (construction) noise level increases will occurfrom the use of operated as far as possible away from nearby residential construction equipment associated with grading and excavation, and units. building and construction activities. Earthmoving equipment includes MM -5 A construction schedule shall be developed that minimizes excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, and front the duration of potential project - related and cumulative loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes construction noise levels. Less than Significant compactors, scrapers, and graders. Potential noise impacts vary markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges MM -6 The construction contractor shall notify the residents of the widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. The construction schedule for the proposed project, and shall exposure of persons to the periodic increase in noise levels will be short- keep them informed on any changes to the schedule. The term and will cease after construction is completed. notification shall also identify the name and phone number of a contact person in case of complaints. The contact person shall take all reasonable steps to resolve the complaint. Population and Housing The proposed project is consistent with the adopted land use designation and zoning applicable to the subject property. Development of the site with one single - family residence in accordance with the adopted long -range plans for the subject property would not result in significant growth and, furthermore, would not result in the potential for unanticipated growth because the project is located in an area that is virtually built out. As `in -fill" development, construction of the proposed project would not No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures necessitate the implementation of new infrastructure such as major are required. No Significant Impact roadway improvements and/or the extension of infrastructure that could induce unanticipated growth and development. All of the infrastructure, including sewer and water facilities, storm drains, roadways, etc., exist in the immediate vicinity of the project site and have adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore, no significant growth- inducing impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -10 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -11 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measures After Mitigation Project implementation will not result in the displacement of any No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures existing residential dwelling units that would necessitate replacement are required. No Significant Impact elsewhere in the City; no significant impacts will occur. Public Services The project includes all necessary fire protection devices, including fire sprinklers. The project must comply with the current Building and Fire Codes adopted by the City. A code compliance analysis will be conducted by City staff to ensure that adequate water pressure and No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures related features required by the City are provided to ensure that the are required. No Significant Impact project complies with the CFC and related City codes. Adequate water supplies and infrastructure, including fire hydrants, exist in the vicinity of the project, and there is no requirement for other new facilities or emergency services. Development of the subject site with one single - family would not require an expansion to local law enforcement resources and No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures therefore would not result in any environmental impacts involving are required. No Significant Impact construction of new law enforcement facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated. The proposed project would not generate a significant number of new students in the District. New or expanded school facilities would not be required to provide classroom and support space for these low numbers of school age children. However, as indicated above, the No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures project applicant must pay the applicable school fee to the school are required. No Significant Impact district, pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, in order to offset the incremental cost impact of expanding school resources to accommodate the increased student enrollment associated with one new residence. No increased demand for other public services is anticipated and No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures there would be no need to construct any new public facilities. No are required. No Significant Impact significant impacts are anticipated. Recreation Although residents of the proposed project would occasionally visit local and regional parks and beaches, use of those public facilities by the future residents would not represent a substantial change in the intensity of usage and the impact would not result in substantial No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures physical deterioration of those park areas. Development of the site are required. No Significant Impact with one single - family residence will not require the construction of new or the expansion of existing recreational facilities in the City of Newport Beach given the small increase in population. No significant impacts to recreational facilities are anticipated. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -11 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 1.0 — Executive Potential Impact Mitigation Measures Level of Significance After Mitigation Transportation/Traffic The following mitigation measure is proposed to minimize the level of impact associated with temporary construction traffic: MM -7 Prior to commencement of each major phase of construction, the Contractor shall submit a construction staging, parking and traffic control plan for approval by the Public Works Department, which shall address issues pertaining to potential traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods, potential displacement of on- street parking, and safety. • This plan shall identify the proposed construction staging area(s), construction crew parking area(s), During the construction phase, there will be periods of time when a estimated number and types of vehicles that will occur heavy truck traffic would occur that could result in some congestion during that phase, the proposed arrival /departure on Pacific Drive and nearby locallresidential street system. It is routes and operational safeguards (e.g. flagmen, estimated that a total of 52 heavy trucks would be generated as a barricades, shuttle services, etc.) and hourly result of the grading that would be necessary to haul the estimated restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic conflicts 630 cubic yards of soil export from the site. However, once grading during peak traffic periods, displacement of on- street has been completed, the number of heavy trucks entering and parking and to ensure safety. leaving the project area would be limited to those transporting Less than Significant equipment and materials to the site. Other construction- related traffic If necessary, the construction staging, parking and impacts are associated with vehicles carrying workers to and from the traffic control plan shall provide for an off -site parking site and medium and heavy trucks carrying construction materials to lot for construction crews which will be shuttled to and the project site, which may result in some minor traffic delays; from the project site at the beginning and end of each however, potential traffic interference caused by construction vehicles day until such time that the project site can would create a temporary/short-term impact to vehicles using accommodate off - street construction vehicle parking. neighboring streets in the morning and afternoon hours. Until that time, construction crews shall be prohibited from parking in the adjacent residential neighborhood. • The plan shall identify all construction traffic routes, which shall avoid narrow residential streets unless there is no alternative, and the plan shall not include any streets where some form of construction is underway within or adjacent to the street that would impact the efficacy of the proposed route. • Dirt hauling shall not be scheduled during weekday peak hour traffic periods or during the summer season (Memorial Day holiday weekend through and including the Labor Day holiday weekend). Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -12 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0— Executive Summary Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -13 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measures After Mitigation The approved construction staging, parking traffic control plan shall be implemented throughout each major construction phase. Long -term traffic impacts would not occur as a result of project implementation. The trip generation associated with one home is No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures less than 10 trips per day. The addition of 10 trips on the City's are required. No Significant Impact circulation system would not result in potentially significant impacts to either roadway segments or intersections. During the construction phases, temporary displacement of public on- street parking may be caused by construction crew members utilizing that parking, and possibly while large truck delivery and pick up of machinery and construction materials. This will occur during construction and will cease when constructon concludes. The No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures No Significant Impact project provides parking in accordance with the Zoning Code (two are required. enclosed spaces). No public parking is presently afforded along the curb in front of the project site as it is painted as a "red curb' therefore, construction of the proposed driveway approach will not displace any existing public parking. Utilities & Service Systems Water demand and wastewater generation will not increase significantly as a result of the development of one home on the site. The proposed project is consistent with the zoning and land use designations, which are the basis of future water demand demands No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures No Significant Impact and wastewater generation within the City. The project will connect are required. to existing water and wastewater facilities in Pacific Avenue or other nearby roadways. No expansion of these facilities is necessary as existing capacity is adequate. No significant impacts are anticipated. The project will result in additional impervious surface areas by the new building, walkways and other hardscape. The additional hardscape will result in a slight increase in runoff during storm periods. The site will be designed in accordance with the California No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures Building Code to ensure that stormwater runoff will be directed to are require d. No Significant Impact existing facilities, which have capacity to collect and convey the runoff before its discharge into Newport Bay. Therefore, the slight increase in project - related storm Flows will not result in a potentially significant impact. Although project implementation could result in the generation of some refuse during the construction phase, it would be small and No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures No Significant Impact would not adversely affect existing capacities at the County's sanitary are required. landfills. Furthermore, the project will not result in a significant Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -13 Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -14 Level of Significance Potential Impact Mitigation Measures After Mitigation increase in solid waste production due to the increase on one single - family residence. Existing landfills are expected to have adequate capacity to service the site and use. No significant impacts are anticipated. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 1 -14 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background CHAPTER 2.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 2.1 Purpose of the Draft EIR 2.1.1 Authority This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et,seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.). This EIR assesses the potential impacts associated with the proposed Megonigal Residence. The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for the proposed project and the discretionary actions listed below. An EIR is an informational document prepared pursuant to CEQA. It provides decision - makers, public agencies, and the public in general with detailed information about the potential significant environmental effects of a proposed project. It also lists the ways in which the significant effects of a project might be minimized and identifies several alternatives to the project for consideration. CEQA requires that an EIR contain at a minimum, certain specific information, including but not limited to: a clear, concise project description; environmental setting; discussion of environmental impacts; effects found not to be significant; cumulative impacts; and alternatives. This information is required pursuant to Sections 15120 through 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 2.1.2 Incorporation by Reference As permitted by Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, this Draft EIR includes references to technical studies, analyses, and reports prepared both for the proposed project and for the preparation of the General Plan EIR. Information from the documents that has been incorporated by reference has been briefly summarized in the appropriate section(s) that follow and the relationship between the incorporated part of the referenced document and the Draft EIR has been described. The documents and other sources, which have been used in the preparation of this Draft EIR, are identified in Chapter 12.0 (Bibliography). In accordance with Section 15150(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the location where the public may obtain and review these referenced documents and other sources used in the preparation of the Draft EIR is also identified in Chapter 12.0. Several Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan have been used extensively in the preparation of the Draft EIR. Where appropriate and necessary, one or more of those elements have been incorporated by reference as permitted by CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. In addition, environmental analysis contained in the Final EIR prepared for the General Plan Update has also been incorporated into this Draft EIR. The information and analysis incorporated by reference have been summarized in the appropriate sections of this document. 2.1.3 Intended Uses of the Draft EIR Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the Draft EIR is intended to provide information regarding the environmental consequences of, mitigation measures for, and alternatives to, the proposed Megonigal Residence. It is also meant to facilitate discussions with other agencies regarding implementation of mitigation measures. CEQA is specific about providing disclosure where "[t]he EIR is to demonstrate to an apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its action ... " [Guidelines Section 15300 (d)]. CEQA also requires consideration of the whole or entirety of an action. With these guiding principles in mind, the intended uses of this EIR are to: Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 2 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background Inform the decision - makers, public, and agencies about the project; Analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Megonigal Residence; Provide notice to Responsible /Trustee Agencies regarding the Megonigal Residence; Incorporate analysis related to the requirements of CEQA to allow responsible agencies to make findings pursuant to this EIR. Although this Draft EIR will also be necessarily specific in the depth of analysis (i.e., project -level analysis), this document, along with the supporting existing setting and General Plan and related long - range planning documents, provides environmental documentation for the implementation of the proposed project. 2.1.4 Related Approvals This EIR may be used by the following public agencies in reviewing the proposed Megonigal Residence, related improvements, and implementation of activities thereunder (refer to Table 2 -1); Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach; 2. City Council of the City of Newport Beach; 3. Departments of the City of Newport Beach that must approve implementation activities undertaken in accordance with the Modification Permit, and related discretionary actions (encroachment permit); A discretionary approval is an action taken by a government agency that calls for the exercise of judgment in deciding whether to approve or how to carry out a project. For this project, the government agency is the Newport Beach City Council. To approve and implement the construction of the proposed Megonigal residence, the following specific approvals by the Newport Beach City Council are needed: Certification of the EIR (DEIR and FEIR together) /Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Approval of a Modification Permit (2007 -080) Approval of a Encroachment Permit Two discretionary actions are requested to implement the proposed Megonigal Residence (i.e., Modification Permit and Encroachment Permit). The analysis contained in this document will focus on the changes in the environment that will result from the development of the proposed improvements identified by the applicant. 2.1.5 Agencies Having Jurisdiction The principal agency having jurisdiction over the proposed project is the City of Newport Beach because the project site is located in the City. Nonetheless, the proposed project includes a series of possible actions over which a number of agencies may have authority. Table 2 -1 lists potential state, regional, and Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 2 -2 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background local approvals that may occur during the course of implementation of the proposed project and identifies the agencies with potential jurisdiction over these permits and /or approvals. Table 2 -1 List of Potential Responsible Agencies /Project Approvals Agency Permit/Approval Local Agencies Modification Permit Encroachment Permit City of Newport Beach Building, Grading and Ancillary Permits Water Supply and Distribution Sewer Facilities Drainage/Flood Control Facilities Regional Agencies Sewage Collection and Treatment Orange County Sanitation District Connection Permit 2.1.6 Notice of Preparation The City of Newport Beach has complied with Sections 15063 and 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines by preparing and issuing a Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR. Based on the preparation of a comprehensive initial study (refer to Appendix A), the City of Newport Beach determined that the Megonigal Residence required the preparation of the EIR. The City distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR for the proposed Megonigal Residence on May 8, 2009, for a 30 -day review period. The NOP was distributed to the State Clearinghouse Office of Planning and Research, public agencies, utility and service providers, interested persons who requested notice, Orange County Clerk /Recorder, and homeowners' associations in the project area. Copies of the NOP and the distribution list are provided in Appendix A of this EIR. The City received five (5) written responses to the NOP (refer to Appendix B). The initial NOP comments were used to establish the scope of the issues addressed in this Draft EIR. Appendix B contains a copy of the NOP comment letters that were received during each NOP comment period. 2.1.7 Availability of the Draft EIR The Draft EIR has been distributed directly to numerous public agencies and to interested organizations for review and comment. The Draft EIR and all related technical studies are also available for review and copying at the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department. These documents and materials are also available for inspection at the Newport Beach Public Library located at 1000 Avocado in the City of Newport Beach. In addition, copies of the Draft EIR are also available for review at the branch libraries listed below. Balboa Branch Corona del Mar Branch 100 East Balboa Boulevard 420 Marigold Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92660 Corona del Mar, CA 92625 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 2 -3 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background Central Library Mariners Branch 1000 Avocado Avenue 1300 Irvine Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92625 Newport Beach, CA 92660 In addition to the locations identified above, copies of the Draft EIR for the Megonigal Residence are also available for review at: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Contact Person: James Campbell, Principal Planner (949) 644 -3210 2.1.8 Opportunities for Public Input and the EIR Process Agencies, organizations and individuals are invited to comment on the information presented in the Draft EIR during the public review period. Specifically, comments are requested on the scope and adequacy of the environmental analysis. Respondents are also asked to provide or identify additional environmental information that is germane but which they feel may not have been used in the analysis. If comments on the Draft EIR are submitted, they will be addressed in the Responses to Comments Report. The Responses to Comment Report will be part of the Final EIR and will be presented to the Newport Beach Planning Commission for their consideration of the EIR and the proposed Megonigal Residence. The Response to Comments Appendix will be available for public review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Department located at 3300 Newport Boulevard. 2.1.9 Certification of the EIR Upon completion of the response to comments and preparation of the Final EIR, the Newport Beach Planning Commission will review the Final EIR and will consider the information and analysis contained in that document prior to its certification. The Planning Commission will be required to certify the EIR as being adequate under CEQA prior to approving the discretionary actions that constitute project approval (i.e., Modification Permit and Encroachment Permit). 2.2 Methodology 2.2.1 Existing Conditions This introductory section describes the existing environmental conditions related to each issue analyzed in the Draft EIR. In accordance with Section 15125 of the State CEQA Guidelines, both the local and regional settings are discussed as they existed at the time the NOP was published. 2.2.2 Significance Criteria Section 15126 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR "identify and focus on the significant environmental effects" of a proposed project. "Effects" and "impacts" mean the same under CEQA and are used interchangeably within this Draft EIR. A "significant effect" or "significant impact' on the environment means "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project' (Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines). Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 2 -4 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0— Introduction and Background In determining whether an impact is "significant" within CEQA's definition, emphasis has been given to the basic policies of CEQA with respect to a particular subject matter, as well as to specific criteria for significance found in the CEQA Guidelines (refer to Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines). An effort has been made to avoid overly subjective significance criteria that are not based in specific CEQA policies and /or generally accepted thresholds upon which significance can be determined. For each subject area addressed within this Draft EIR, significance criteria are identified that have been applied in analyzing the potential effects of the Proposed Project. 2.2.3 Standard Conditions The Proposed Project will incorporate, where necessary or required, standard conditions and uniform codes as required by the City and /or other responsible agencies. For analytical purposes, compliance with these regulatory requirements is not considered mitigation. Where an otherwise significant impact is avoided, in whole or in part, due to the application of standard regulatory requirements or project features, the text will note that an issue of environmental concern exists and that it is addressed by a standard regulatory requirement. The requirement has been identified and the manner in which it addresses the environmental issue is also identified. This precludes the use of mitigation measures that are mere repetitions of common practice, City planning /approval procedures, or laws that are applicable to the Proposed Project. 2.2.4 Impact Analysis The impact analysis presented in the Draft EIR identifies specific project - related impacts. As described above, the significance criteria provide the basis for distinguishing between impacts that are determined to be significant (i.e., impact exceeds the threshold of significance) and those that are less than significant. The existing environmental setting (i.e., existing conditions) is the baseline for documenting the nature and extent of impacts anticipated to result from project implementation. Potential impacts presented in the Draft EIR are based on the level and intensity of development of the site (i.e., one single - family residential dwelling unit) proposed by the project applicant. In assessing the impacts of the Proposed Project and the various CEQA alternatives, the City of Newport Beach has conducted the following analysis: "Potential effects" of the project have been identified. Initially, these potential effects are identified on a cursory level. No determination is made that they truly are "significant," "adverse," or "substantial." This process merely identifies issues and impacts, which, on a cursory level, may seem possible. "Potential effects" include issues identified in the environmental analysis as well as those raised by the public, the City, and other public agencies. With respect to each potential effect, an analysis has been conducted to determine if, in fact: The project produces the identified "effect "; and The effect produces a substantial, or potentially substantial, change in the physical conditions within the area affected by the project (i.e., "significant "); and The changed conditions are "adverse." Where the investigation of a potential effect concludes the effect is too speculative for evaluation, that conclusion is noted and the discussion of that effect is ended. Where the investigation demonstrates a potential effect does or may (without undue speculation) occur, but is beneficial, Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 2 -5 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background that conclusion is noted. Where the investigation demonstrates a potential effect is not significant or not adverse, that conclusion is noted. 2.2.5 Mitigation Measures Where the analysis described in Section 2.2.4 above demonstrates that a potential effect does or may (without undue speculation) occur and is found to have a substantial or potentially substantial and adverse impact on physical conditions within the area affected by the project, that conclusion is noted and: Mitigation measures are provided which will minimize or avoid the significant effects and, in most cases, reduce them to less than significant levels; and/or Where feasible mitigation measures are not identified which can reduce or avoid the significant effect(s) to less than significant levels, the significant effect will be identified as one that will result in "significant unavoidable adverse impacts ". 2.2.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation This section of the Draft EIR will identify the level of impact that would remain after implementation of the mitigation measures, including significant unavoidable adverse impacts (i.e., those effects that either cannot be mitigated or that remain significant even after mitigation) or if the mitigation measures prescribed cannot reduce the significant impacts to a less than significant level (or the mitigation measures are infeasible, or their implementation cannot be guaranteed because they are the responsibility of another public agency). 2.3 Format of the Draft EIR As noted above, this EIR focuses on the analysis of those environmental parameters that may experience significant adverse impacts as a result of the proposed Megonigal Residence. This analysis is documented in this Draft EIR as follows: Section 1.0 — Executive Summary. This section includes the executive summary, which summarizes the proposed project and the project alternatives. In addition, a table is included in this section that summarizes the potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures and level of significance after mitigation related to the proposed project. Section 2.0 — Introduction and Background. This section provides relevant information, context and background on the CEQA process and the proposed project. Section 3.0 — Project Description. This section includes a brief description of the environmental setting, provides a detailed project description, enumerates the project objectives, and identifies implementation /phasing associated with the proposed project. Section 4.0 — Environmental Analysis. This section describes the existing conditions, the thresholds of significance, the analytical methodology, the impacts of the proposed project, mitigation to reduce or avoid any significant adverse impacts, and the level of significance of the impacts after mitigation. Section 5.0 — Impacts Determined Not to be Significant. This section summarizes the environmental impacts determined not to be significant. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 2 -6 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background Section 6.0 — Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. This section summarizes the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed project, if any, after mitigation, based on the analysis documented in Section 4.0. Section 7.0 — Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources. This section addresses the potential for irretrievable and irreversible commitment of resources associated with the proposed project. Section 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts. This section addresses the potential for the proposed project to serve as a catalyst for unanticipated growth. Section 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts. This section addresses the potential for impacts associated with the proposed project in consideration of other related planned, approved and pending projects in the environs. Section 10.0 — Proiect Alternatives. This section provides a qualitative analysis of the potential environmental impacts associated with potentially feasible Alternatives to the Project, including the No Project Alternative, as required by the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 11.0 — Organizations and Persons Consulted. This section lists the City of Newport Beach staff and /or departments consulted during the preparation of the Draft EIR as well as technical specialists who were consulted during or responsible for the preparation of this Draft EIR. Section 12.0 — References. This section lists the references, including the City's General Plan and other technical documents and bibliographic sources used in the preparation of this Draft EIR. Section 13.0 — Glossary of Acronyms. This section provides a comprehensive glossary of terms and acronyms used in the EIR. Appendices. The Appendices to this EIR include the NOP, the responses to the NOP and technical reports prepared to analyze the potential impacts of the project. Technical studies prepared for the proposed project include the biological assessments conducted for the proposed project. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 2 -7 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Descriplion CHAPTER 3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Project Location The City of Newport Beach is an urbanized coastal community located in western Orange County (refer to Exhibit 3 -1). Newport Beach is bordered by the Cities of Irvine on the north and northeast and by Costa Mesa on the north and northwest. Crystal Cove State Park, which is located in unincorporated Orange County, is located southeast of the City's corporate boundaries. On the west, the incorporated limits of the City extend to the Santa Ana River; the City of Huntington Beach is located west of the Santa Ana River. The Pacific Ocean comprises the southwestern boundary of the City. The relationship of the City of Newport Beach with the region is illustrated in Exhibit 3 -1 (Regional Location). The City of Newport Beach has developed as a grouping of small communities or "villages," primarily due to the natural geographic form of the Newport Bay. Many of the newer developments, located inland from the bay, have been based on a "Planned Community" concept, resulting in an extension of the village form, even where no major geographic division exists. The various villages provide for a wide variety of types and styles of development, both residential and commercial. The City includes lower density, single - family residential areas, as well as more intensively developed residential beach areas. Commercial areas range from master planned employment centers to marine industrial, neighborhood shopping centers, a regional shopping center, and visitor commercial areas. The subject property consists of a single parcel (APN 052- 011 -01), encompassing a total area of 4,412 square feet, or approximately 0.1 acre. The site, which is located at 2333 Pacific Avenue within the Corona del Mar neighborhood in the City of Newport Beach (refer to Exhibit 3 -2, Vicinity Map), is currently undeveloped. 3.2 Environmental Setting 3.2.1 Existing Land Use As previously indicated, the subject property, which encompasses the undeveloped portion of an existing coastal bluff, is vacant. Elevations on the site range from approximately 25 feet above mean sea level (msl) at the base of the coastal bluff along the westerly property boundary, to approximately 72 feet above msl in the northwesterly corner of the site. A variety of native and non - native plants are supported on the site. The vegetation on the subject property has been classified in three categories: disturbed; disturbed /ornamental; and coastal bluff scrub. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009. Page 3 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Protect Description HUnlington Beach - o ..mnmw. awr 'YeslnTnSNi C.w.w -n , _ o" 4.Ew Cry earl wo. ,. .r •. siach' �O��ran�ge ('T-- t F".r 7e a Newport Beach 4M�, E�MC�yw, sw bua • -,9W E + +n -� � "� WA 6eaG1T . r.m .. .. b D,nr "A' W, St Santa Me T.su :, r:wun . Lub, C M6a r Ey —t.,Y• w =r.: M, ^ } D.I M., R. Daiu Foie .aw Project C �ADD � IaM.a:r ^urn -r ftirM ,�� E.T.r.r,E�E ® w»« -» In9.... a. ECU..v •n (�• tll r-1 fJDTM30T \'alto, - _ w:rounua .. _ 0.w - ED. h. ® 4f o..n. 4'. HS�i.mrArr�M3„a •,' •err9 p— i ' V ia3,/ � a n, lJ = t a /_1 hJ'b f sr 4yF Ew I—, Irvine HUnlington Beach Costa Mesa _ o" earl wo. ,. .r •. i t F".r 7e a Newport Beach 4M�, J€ o s,a J' or s +on f JuEDm enarv.. . r.m rf Nanrrn . D.I M., R. Project C �Skn � 3min IM. SOURCE City OF Newport Beach c'"A c.v, e •.�kri Ew.aM day Draft Emdronmental Impact Report Megongal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3 -2 `mi S ,M1n Q a. 01Va:) Top 01R 1 2? .t,, T&AIW Exhibit 3 -1 Regional Map Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0— Project Description 9n180A 91V0 E a srryA /� Oy i O`E"'Ro" qq file GY g QP F♦ fq k P \. 9r� f4 OG e 'yO Y s A n OCEArr91YO So WYYI Jo11y V10w Pork SOURCE'. City of Newport Beach Pa IY9 /E� pP y0.Y/py UO 0" O� Q�p 'Yf /F ou School flack Oq Y YL ar Oq Jk r� Chi Fk a r qOQ � 1P �'Pq. y \ ,r .l� o R 0�808fl ' vi ,O Jy G� n 0 Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3 -3 Exhibit 3 -2 Vicinity Map Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Description a 3 1. 4 Exhibit 3 -3 Aerial Photograph SOURCE.- City of Newport Beach Draft Environmental Impact Report Megongal Residence PA 2007-133 - Newport Beach. CA August 2009 Page 3 -4 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Dian Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0- Project Description Surrounding Land Uses The area in the vicinity where the Property is located is nearly completely developed with single - family residences (refer to Exhibit 3 -3). A variety of architectural styles characterize the area. As indicated below, the subject property is currently undeveloped and is surrounded by development on three sides, including single - family residences on the north, south and west, Begonia Park is located east of the site. The aerial photograph illustrates the undeveloped site and the existing land uses surrounding the site. 3.2.2 Existing General Plan The subject property is located within Statistical Area F2, which encompasses single- family and two - family residential development in Corona del Mar generally east of Avocado Avenue, north of Bayside Drive and south of the commercial properties on the south side of Coast Highway. As illustrated in Exhibit 3 -4, the site is designated RS -D (Single -Unit Residential — Detached). Property to the west is also designated RS -D. Properties to the north, south and east are designated RT (Two -Unit Residential), RM (Multiple -Unit Residential), and PR (Parks and Recreation), respectively. 3.2.3 Coastal Land Use Plan The City's Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) was derived from the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and is intended to identify the distribution of land uses in the coastal zone. The subject property is currently designated RL (Low Density Residential). As prescribed in the CLUP, development within the coastal zone shall not exceed a development limit established by the General Plan or its implementing ordinances. 3.2.4 Existing Zoning The subject property is zoned R -1 (Single - Family Residential). R -1 zoned properties are also located east, west and south of the site. R -2 (Two - Family Residential) zoned property is located to the north. MFR (Multiple - Family Residential) zoning exists on property located south of Bayside Drive. Existing zoning for the subject property and surrounding area is illustrated on Exhibit 3-5. 3.2.5 Physical Environment Climate and Air Quality The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), a 6,600 square mile area encompassing all of Orange County and the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. A persistent high - pressure area that commonly resides over the eastern Pacific Ocean largely dominates regional meteorology. The distinctive climate of this area is determined primarily by its terrain and geographic location. Local climate is characterized by warm summers, mild winters, infrequent rainfall, moderate daytime onshore breezes, and moderate humidity. Ozone and pollutant concentrations tend to be lower along the coast, where the constant onshore breeze disperses pollutants toward the inland valley of the SCAB and adjacent deserts. However, as a whole, the SCAB fails to meet national standards for several criteria pollutants, including ozone, carbon monoxide and PM1e, and is classified as a "non- attainment° area for those pollutants. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3.5 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 — Project Description M1� �O M1 M1�M1 M1�T M ry M14 M1ry M1 M1�M1 N M1M1 i)�M1 M1a M1M1 M1))S M1a 1 M1A �O M1 M1�T M1 ry M14 M1 N M1M1 i)�M1 M1a M1M1 M1))S PIS M1�O RT V7 SOURCE: Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3 -6 b 11 Exhibit 3 -4 Existing General Plan Megomgal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report w M 4 v/L M14� LQ ♦ L1 w LS r� L4 �. b • 9s o M1 y` /L M1S /M1Bt L� tt`L L SOURCE City of Newport Beach Draft Environmental Impact Report Megon,gal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 20X9 Page 3 -7 Chapter 3.0 - Project Description qp B M1 M1� Exhibit 3 -5 Existing Zoning Megonigal Residence PA 2007433 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter3.0— Project Description Geoloav and Seismici The project site is located in the seismically active southern California region. There are no active faults or fault systems known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. In addition, the project site is not within an earthquake fault zone as illustrated on the maps issued by the State Geologist for the area pursuant to the Alquist- Priclo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Although there are no active faults or fault systems known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site, it is subject to seismic shaking resulting from earthquakes occurring on one or more of the regional faults. The closest active faults within 50 miles of the project site are the Newport- Inglewood, Norwalk, and Elsinore Faults. The Newport- Inglewood fault, which is the only active fault within or immediately adjacent to the City of Newport Beach, could generate a 7.0 magnitude or greater maximum credible earthquake. The topography of the subject site slopes toward Newport Bay. As previously indicated, site elevation ranges from approximately 72 feet above msl at the top of the bluff to about 25 fee above msl at the base of the bluff at the southern property boundary. The geologic units underlying the subject property and environs include artificial fill, slopewash, unconsolidated talus deposits (i.e., eroded fragments of the Monterey formation), and bedrock of the Monterey formation, which underlies the surficial materials. Drainage and Hydrology As previously indicated, the entire site is undeveloped and is generally devoid of impervious surfaces. At the present time, surface runoff generated on the site drains in a southeasterly direction over the bluff. The subject property is not located within the 100- or 500 -year flood plain as delineated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of Newport Beach. Further, neither the subject property nor the surrounding residential development is located in an area of the City that is subject to Flooding resulting from the failure of a levee or dam. Transportation and Circulation The subject property is bounded by Pacific Avenue, which turns northerly into Begonia Avenue at the easterly limits of the site. Bayside Drive provides access to single - family residential properties below the bluff south of the site. No access is provided from Bayside Drive to the project site. Regional access to the project area is available from West Coast Highway (California State Route 1) via the Corona del Mar Freeway (California State Route 73), MacArthur Boulevard, and Jamboree Road and also from the Costa Mesa Freeway (California State Route 55) and Newport Boulevard. The area in which the subject property is located is served by a "grid" of residential streets that extends to the north and south from West Coast Highway. Vehicular access to the project area is available from West Coast Highway via Begonia Avenue. The area in which the subject property is located is primarily residential in nature. Public Services and Utilities Fire protection facilities and service to the subject property are provided by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD). The NBFD operates and maintains eight fire stations to respond to emergency calls throughout the City. Fire Station No. 5 is located at 410 Marigold in Corona del Mar, less than one mile east of the site. This fire station is supported by one fire engine and one paramedic van. Fire Station No. 3 in Fashion Island is located less than two miles from the site. In addition to the City's resources, the NBFD also maintains a formal mutual aid agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) and all neighboring municipal fire departments to facilitate fire protection in the City should the need arise. The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) is responsible for providing police and law enforcement services within the corporate limits of the City. The Police Department headquarters is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, at the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara, less than two miles Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3-8 Megonigal Residence PA 2007.133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Description northwest of the subject property. Police and law enforcement service in the City is provided by patrols with designated "beats." The City of Newport Beach owns and maintains several sewer and water mains in the vicinity of the subject property, including those in Pacific Avenue and Begonia Avenue. Sewer collection and wastewater treatment services are provided by the City of Newport Beach (local collection) and the Orange County Sanitation District (conveyance and treatment). In addition, all of the utilities (i.e.. electricity, natural gas, and telephone) are currently available and serve the existing development. The project site receives electrical and natural gas service from Southern California Edison and Southern California Gas Company, respectively. 3.2.6 Surrounding Environment The City of Newport Beach is nearly fully developed with a diverse mixture of residential, institutional, commercial, industrial, and recreational and open space uses. The predominant land use in the City is residential, which is characterized by many distinct neighborhoods. Older communities were first developed along the coastline, including the Peninsula, West Newport, Balboa Island, and Lido Isle. The early housing is characterized by a diversity of multiple - family, single - family, and mixed -use housing located within proximity of commercial and visitor - serving uses. While single - family attached and detached residential development comprise the majority of housing in the City, many multiple - family dwelling units, including condominium, apartments, duplex, triplex, and fourplex units, exist in Newport Beach and, in particular, in the older neighborhoods including West Newport. Between 1980 and 2005, 11,127 housing units were added to the City's inventory of housing stock. Although the rate of increase in housing within the City has slowed since 1990, the City averaged approximately 200 to 300 dwelling units per year between 2001 and 2005 (with the exception of 2003, which included the annexation of Newport Coast). The total number of housing units as of January 1, 2005, was estimated to be 42,143, including approximately 26,000 units (62 percent) that are single - family attached and detached homes. Thirteen percent of the units (5,475 homes) were duplex, triplex, and fourplex units. Other multiple - family dwelling units in the City in 2005 totaled 9,721 (23 percent). The remainder of the dwelling units in the City were mobile homes (863 or two percent). The overall vacancy rate of housing in the City of Newport Beach ranged from 10.1 and 11.3 percent between 1980 and 2000, respectively; however, there are a significant number of homes in the City that are classified as seasonal units and second homes. The vacancy rate in all units in the City in 2005 was reported to be 10.91 percent. A variety of retail uses are located throughout the City and include those in neighborhood shopping centers, commercial strips and villages, and shopping centers, with the largest being Fashion Island, a regional center that is framed by a mixture of office, entertainment, and residential uses. Other neighborhood retail centers are located throughout the City. In addition to the retail uses, the City also supports a variety of professional office uses, which are located mostly within Newport Center and the Airport Area. Industrial uses are primarily located within the West Newport Mesa area, east of Banning Ranch, and include a variety of industrial, manufacturing, and supporting retail uses. Research and development uses are clustered in the Airport Area while government, educational, and institutional uses are scattered throughout the City. One of the primary locations for medical uses in the City is near Hoag Hospital, which is located at the intersection of West Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard. 3.3 History and Evolution of the Proposed Development On April 3, 2008, the Newport Beach Planning Commission reviewed an application for a proposed 3,717 square foot single -unit dwelling on the subject property. The application included a variance to allow a Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3 -9 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133. Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Description proposed single- family dwelling unit to exceed the 24 -foot height limit (by approximately 4.5 feet to 10.5 feet) and a modification permit to allow the dwelling unit to encroach five feet into the required 5 -foot front yard setback. Based on testimony provided at the hearing, the Planning Commission concluded that the project was inconsistent with policies relating to public view protection and neighborhood compatibility and directed City staff and the applicant to revise the project to, among other things, protect the Begonia Park view corridor by reducing the height, scale and massing of the residence. The Commission considered the visual quality of the site itself a lesser priority than protecting public views from Begonia Park or the street, knowing that by rejecting the requested Variance to building height there would be more building below the viewshed from Begonia Park on the face of the bluff. The applicant submitted a revised application (i.e., proposed project) on July 24, 2008, that included a 3,566 square foot residence that conformed to all Zoning code property development regulations, with the exception of the planter walls that exceed the 3 -foot front yard setback height limit, which requires approval of a modification permit. The prior variance proposed requesting exceedance of the height limits was withdrawn. Key changes from the previous design included: Designed below the maximum height limit Single story at street level compared to two stories in the prior plan submittal Finished floor of the ground level (i.e., third floor) is approximately 12 feet lower than prior design. Floor area reduced to 3,566 square feet (151 square foot reduction) Conformance with the 5 -foot front yard setback Clearstory windows added to front elevation The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on August 21, 2008 on the revised project, focusing on the project's consistency with General Plan policies relating to public view protection, neighborhood compatibility, and landform protection. The Planning Commission determined that the revised project was consistent with their prior direction and in substantial conformance with the policies of the General Plan as well as with Criterion No. 7 of Ordinance No. 2007 -3 (Residential Design Criteria), which is used to determine a project's consistency with General Plan policies related to site planning and resource protection. The Planning Commission approved the Modification Permit. The Planning Commission also required that the applicant dedicate a view easement that would restrict the heights of the principal structure and of landscaping and accessory structures on the proposed terraces and in open areas. On August 28, 2008, an appeal of the Planning Commission's project approval was filed. Pursuant to Section 29.95,060C, a public hearing on the appeal was conducted "de novo," (i.e., a new hearing by another decision- making body that is not bound by the prior decision, which has no force or effect as of the date the appeal was filed). Subsequent to the appeal, the City Council and the applicant agreed that a Draft Environmental Impact Report should be prepared for the revised project. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3 -10 LP 1[IVnu • W tP I[vur - v, — [.P 111w. - •0.0 site plan (`L�9 (Exhibit 3 -6 Site Dien Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 — Project Description 3.4 Description of the Proposed Project The project applicants, Kim and Caroline Megonigal, are proposing to construct a single - family residence on the subject property, as illustrated in the Conceptual Site Plan (refer to Exhibit 3 -6) and as described below. The applicants propose to construct a 3,566 square -foot, single - family residence (including the garage floor area). The proposed residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the first floor; 934 square feet on the second floor; and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (including a 428 - square foot, 2 -car garage). Total floor area, not including the garage, is 3,138 square feet. Vehicular access is from Pacific Drive at the intersection of Begonia Avenue and Pacific Drive. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space on the three levels is provided. The front and rear elevations are illustrated in Exhibits 3 -7 and 3 -8, respectively. The applicants are requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 to allow planter walls to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. In addition, because the proposed planter walls would also encroach into the Begonia Avenue right -of -way, an encroachment permit from the City's Public Works Department will also be required. Lastly, grading of approximately 630 cubic yards of export, landscaping, and utility connections necessary for construction of the proposed residence are also included. 3.5 Project Phasing The applicant is proposing to construct the project in a single phase over a period of approximately 20 months. 3.6 Project Objectives Implementation of the proposed project will achieve the following intended specific objectives, which have been identified by the project applicant: Construction of a custom, single - family residence consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations adopted for the project that: (1) provides adequate floor area within a personalized floor plan to accommodate the applicant's living needs; (2) provides views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean to the south and west from each level; (3) provides outdoor living areas that are directly accessible from indoor spaces on each level; (4) provides access from Pacific Drive to an enclosed garage; and (5) minimizes impacts on public views from Begonia Park. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3 -12 ti c ' O M . t � X W W +� C O L LL 00 C C„ j O r+ IQ > 1 y. W � I �I j'•I � j j 17 1 �I� - m Vol , ' { I I,. I I II II , �II 1 I 1 f I 1 I 4B I 1 1 Til. Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0- Project Description 3.7 Project Processing Requirements and Requested Entitlements Project implementation will necessitate the approval of the following discretionary actions by the Newport Beach Planning Commission: Modification Permit (MD2005 -087) The Modification Permit is required to allow planter walls to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. The proposed planter walls exceed the 3 -foot height limit by up to 6 feet 7 inches, as measured from the natural grade. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence. PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 3.15 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 4.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING 4.1.1 Existing Conditions Existing Land Use Section 4.1 — Land Use and As previously described (refer to Chapter 3.0), the subject property is currently vacant. The irregularly shaped property is situated on the northern slope (i.e., south - facing) of a natural drainage canyon that has been altered by residential and park development. The fenced property is characterized by a steeply sloping, south - facing bluff. Portions of the subject property in the upper elevations located along Pacific Drive have been altered by past grading or vegetation clearance; this area is generally devoid of vegetation. Ornamental landscaping, including some trees and shrubs, exists in the lower elevations. The central portion of the site contains a small area that supports coastal bluff scrub vegetation. A large retaining wall, ranging from four feet to 15 feet in height, has been constructed along the southern property boundary on the two abutting down slope lots. The site is located in an area of Corona del Mar that is virtually built out. Single- family residential development on Bayside Drive exists immediately adjacent to the site along the southern property boundary. Single- family residential development also exists to the west on Pacific Drive and along Bayside Drive, which has resulted in substantial alteration of the existing coastal bluff. Begonia Park is located adjacent to the site along its northeasterly boundary. This public park operated by the City of Newport Beach and it includes both passive and active elements. Residential development also exists south and west of Bayside Drive. Land Use Planning Newport Beach General Plan The City of Newport Beach completed the first comprehensive revision of the City's General Plan in over 30 years in 2006. The General Plan presents a vision for the city's future and a strategy to make that vision a reality. The General Plan recognizes that the City is primarily a residential community with diverse coastal and upland neighborhoods and is nearly fully developed. As a result, the Plan focuses on conserving the existing pattern of land uses and establishes policies for their protection and long -term maintenance. The discussion presented below provides a summary of each of the elements of the Comprehensive General Plan. Land Use Element The Land Use Element provides policy guidance regarding the ultimate pattern of development anticipated for full buildout of the City. It provides the basis for zoning regulations and other municipal code standards. Because the City is nearly fully developed, this element focuses on how population and employment growth can be accommodated yet still preserve its distinguishing and valued qualities. The subject property is located within the residential area of Corona del Mar south of the convergence of Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue. Specifically, the site is located within Statistical Area F2, a triangular- shaped planning area within Corona del Mar that is bounded by Avocado Avenue on the west, Bayside Drive on the south, and the commercial corridor along Coast Highway on the north. The predominant land use designation within this statistical area is Two Unit Residential (RT). In addition, the subject property and three other small areas within Statistical Area F2, are designated Single -Unit Residential — Detached (RS -D). Other land use designations include Private Institutions (PI) and Parks and Recreation (PR), including Begonia Park located north and east of the site. Exhibit 3 -4 illustrates the land use designations adopted for the subject property and the surrounding area. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -1 Megonigat Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning Harbor and Bay Element This element of the General Plan addresses natural resources, community identity, and economic characteristics of the City given the location of Newport Beach on the coast. Some aspects of the Harbor and Bay Element address public access, water quality, and natural environment as well as land use policies relating to the waterfront uses along Newport Harbor. Circulation Element The Circulation Element governs the long -term mobility systems of the City. The goals and policies in this element are closely correlated with the Land Use Element and are intended to provide the best possible balance between the City's future growth and land use development, roadway size, traffic service levels, and community character. Figure CE1 in the Circulation Element reflects the City's Master Plan of Streets and Highways. With the exception of Coast Highway, no Master Plan roadways are located in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The Circulation Element also includes the Bikeways Master Plan (refer to Figure CE4 in the Circulation Element). Although no bikeways are located immediately adjacent to the site, a Class II Bikeway (i.e., on -road striped lane) is identified north of the site that extends along Second Avenue between Fernleaf Avenue and Avocado Avenue. The City has also adopted an Equestrian and Hiking Trails Master Plan (refer to Figure CE5 in the Circulation Element). None of these existing and proposed trails, which are confined to the area north of the Upper Newport Bay and south of San Joaquin Hills Road, exist within the vicinity of the project. Safety Element The primary goal of the Safety Element is to reduce the potential risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from natural and human - induced hazards. The Newport Beach Safety Element provides policy guidance related to coastal hazards (e.g., tsunamis, coastal erosion, etc.), geologic hazards (e.g., slope failures, adverse soils conditions, etc.), seismic hazards (e.g., liquefaction, ground shaking, etc.), flood hazards, wildland and urban fire hazards, hazardous materials (e.g., hazardous waste, leaking underground storage tanks, etc.) aviation hazards, and disaster planning. Coastal Hazards Newport Beach is susceptible to low - probability /high risk events such as tsunamis as well as isolated hazards that include storm surges and coastal erosion. The Safety Element addresses these potential hazards, which are generally limited to the portions of the City located immediately adjacent to the coast, within and adjacent to Newport Harbor and the Upper Newport Bay areas. No portion of the subject property is located within the limits of the 100 -year zone established for tsunami inundation at extreme high tide, which is confined to the areas seaward of Bayside Drive. These areas are identified in Figure S1 (Coastal Hazards) in the Safety Element. Geologic Hazards The geologic diversity of Newport Beach is strongly related to tectonic movement along the San Andreas Fault and its broad zone of subsidiary faults. This, along with sea level fluctuations related to changes in climate, has resulted in a landscape that is also diverse in geologic hazards that have the potential to cause loss or harm to the community and/or the environment. The major geologic constraints identified in the Safety Element include slope failure, compressible soils, and expansive soils. Based on that Figure S2 (Seismic Hazards), the site is not expected to be impacted by these hazards; however, due to the site's slope, the potential for slope failure as indicated on that exhibit in the Safety Element exists. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -2 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental impact Reporl Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning Seismic Hazards The greatest potential for seismic activity to affect the City of Newport Beach is activity occurring along the Newport- Inglewood Fault zone, the Whittier Fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills Fault zone, and the Elysian Park Fault zone, which with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that would result in ground shaking in the City and in nearby communities. Other secondary seismic effects include liquefaction and seismically- induced slope failure. However, no portion of the site is identified in the Safety Element as subject to potential liquefaction associated with seismic activity. Flood Hazards The Safety Element also addresses potential flooding associated with significant storm events. The 100- and 500 -year flood zones within the City of Newport Beach have been mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Based on the FEMA studies, no portion of the subject property is subject to inundation resulting from either a 100- or 500 -year storm event. Fire Hazard The City's Safety Element also addresses wildland fire hazards (refer to Figure S4). The City is distinguished by three classifications of fire susceptibility, including: High, Moderate, and Low /None; the City does not contain 'Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones as defined by Government Code Section 51179. The majority of the City, including the subject site is identified to have a Low /None classification for fire susceptibility potential. The City of Newport Beach has adopted the 2007 California Fire Code with City amendments and some exceptions. These provisions include construction standards in new structures and remodels, road widths and configurations designed to accommodate the passage of fire trucks and engines, and requirements for minimum fire flow rates for water mains. Hazardous Materials The Hazardous Materials component of the Safety Element addresses several areas related to hazardous materials, including toxic release inventory, hazardous waste, leaking underground storage tanks, oil fields, methane gas mitigation districts, and hazards overlay (i.e., areas of mixed residential and commercial land use where potential hazardous materials releases may occur). The Safety Element includes programs for ensuring that the potential for the release of hazardous materials into the environment is minimized. Aviation Hazards The City of Newport Beach borders the southeastern portion of John Wayne Airport (JWA); however, the subject property is located approximately 4.5 miles southwest of JWA, which generates nearly all of the aviation traffic affecting the City of Newport Beach. Although the accident potential zones delineated for JWA are located in the areas adjacent to and surrounding the airport, three areas within the City were found to be subject to increased vulnerability to aviation hazards due to the location and orientation of runways and flight patterns: portions of the Balboa Peninsula, Balboa Island, and Upper Newport Bay. However, no portion of the subject property has been identified as subject to potential aviation hazards. Disaster Planning Any potential hazard occurring in the City of Newport Beach resulting from either man -made or natural disasters may require the evacuation of residents of the City. In order to facilitate such evacuation, the City employs the Standardized Emergency Management System for emergency Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -3 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and response. This system provides for assistance by one or more emergency response agencies as well as the potential implementation of other policies and plans from the County of Orange, State of California and /or federal government. In addition, the City has adopted an Emergency Management Plan that is implemented in the event of any emergency. This plan is prepared and updated by the Newport Beach Fire Department. Housing Element The Housing Element is designed to facilitate attainment of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and to foster the availability of housing to all income levels to the extent possible given the constraints within the City. The Housing Element is a comprehensive statement of the City's housing policies and services as a specific guide for implementation of these policies and is closely correlated with the Land Use Element. The Element examines current housing needs, estimates future housing needs, and establishes goals, policies, and programs pertaining to those needs. According to the updated data presented in the Housing Element, the City had a total of 42,143 housing units in 2005, including approximately 62 percent of the homes that were single - family detached and attached, 17 percent duplex to fourplex units, 23 percent multiple - family homes, and two percent mobile homes. The site is designated as RS -D and, therefore, is intended to contribute to the supply of housing within the City of Newport Beach. Noise Element The Noise Element serves as a tool for including noise control in the planning process, which is intended to ensure land use compatibility. This element identifies noise sensitive land uses as well as the sources of noise, defines areas of noise impacts for the purpose of developing policies intended to protect residents and sensitive receptors from the effects of excessive noise. The most common noise sources in the City of Newport Beach include the existing freeway /highway system and the major arterial roadways extending throughout the City. In addition, aircraft operations associated with John Wayne Airport (JWA) also result in noise excessive noise levels in parts of the City. Other aircraft operations related to helicopter operations at Hoag Hospital are also a source of noise that affects residential uses in the vicinity of the hospital. Newport Beach has the largest small boat harbor in Southern California. The operations of the small motorized boats generate undesirable noise in proximity to residences. Non - transportation related noise sources include restaurant/bar /entertainment establishments, mixed -use structures, mechanical equipment, and recreational facilities. Figures N1 and N4 in the Noise Element indicate that no portion of the property is subject to either existing or future vehicular noise associated with traffic on the surface roadways in the project environs. In addition, the site is located outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour established for aircraft operations at JWA. The Noise Element articulates policies that are intended to ensure that construction noise is minimized to avoid impacts to sensitive land uses through limitations on hours of truck deliveries and enforcement of the Noise Ordinance noise limits and limits on the hours of maintenance and /or construction activity in or adjacent to residential areas. Natural Resources Element The primary objective of the Natural Resources Element is to provide policy direction regarding the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources. It identifies the City's natural resources and policies for their preservation, development and use. The element addresses water supply and water quality, air quality, biological resources, open space, cultural and scientific resources, mineral resources, visual resources, and energy. As indicated in Figure NR1 in the Natural Resources Element, no portion of the site is identified either as a potential resource or included within an environmental study area (refer to Figure NR2). Important biological resources are limited to the coastal areas, Newport Harbor, and Upper Newport Bay. This element of the General Plan also addresses aesthetic resources, with emphasis on coastal views. Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element identifies Begonia Park as a Public View Point. View of Newport Harbor and the coast are within the viewshed of the Begonia Park vantage. Although coastal bluffs are generally regarded as important visual and landform features in the City, the subject bluff has been Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -4 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Imoact Reoort Section 4.1 —Land Use and substantially altered by existing development to the west on Pacific Drive and along Bayside Drive. As a result of the existing development, which has altered the character of the existing bluff, it is not considered a significant natural landform. Consistent with this conclusion, the Newport Beach Planning Commission identified the preservation of views of Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean from vantage points within Begonia Park as the highest priority related to development of the subject property over the preservation of the degraded coastal bluff. Historical Resources Element This Element addresses the protection and sustainability of Newport Beach's cultural, historic and paleontological resources. Goals and policies presented within the element are intended to recognize, maintain, and protect the community's unique historical, cultural, and archaeological sites and structures. Figure HR1 (Historic Resources) in the Historical Resources Element identifies the historic resources included on the National Register of Historic Places, California Historical Landmarks, other historic sites or potentially historic sites in the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) database, and other historic sites in the City's Register. As indicated above, the site is undeveloped and none of the sites identified in Figure HR1 are located on the project site. Recreation Element The primary purpose of the Recreation Element is to ensure that the provision of sufficient parks and recreation facilities is appropriate for the residential and business population of Newport Beach. Specific recreational issues and policies contained in the Recreation Element address parks and recreation facilities (278 acres of developed parks), recreation programs, shared facilities, coastal recreation and support facilities, marine recreation, and public access. The existing recreational facilities are identified on Figure R1 in the Recreation Element. Begonia Park is located immediately north and east of the subject property. The site is located adjacent to this recreational facility. Newport Beach is divided into recreation service areas for the purposes of park planning and to equitably administer parkland dedications and fees provided by residential development. The subject property is located within Service Area 10 (i.e., Corona del Mar). The land dedicated to recreational facilities in this service area is mostly within Corona del Mar State Beach. However, as indicated previously, Begonia Park is located adjacent to the subject property. There is a deficit of 9.1 acres of combined park /beach acreage within this service area. However, it is anticipated that existing and active and passive parks within this service area should be adequate to meet present and future need, p, rovided the facilities are renovated and upgraded to meet demands for sports fields and active recreation. The Service Area 10 Recreation and Open Space Plan (refer to Figure R12 in the Recreation Element) reflects the distribution of beaches and public park facilities. Arts and Cultural Element The goals and policies of the Arts and Cultural Element are intended to serve as a guide for meeting the future cultural needs of the community. The City's Arts Commission acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council on matters including artistic aspects of the City. This commission also participates in the designation of historical landmarks and reviews design elements for public sculpture, fountains, murals, benches, and other fixtures. 'Service Area 10; Newport Beach General Plan, Recreation Element, p. 8 -16; July 25, 2006. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -5 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning Newport Beach Local Coastal Prooram The subject property is located within the Coastal Zone. The City does not have a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) and, therefore, the City does not have coastal development permit jurisdiction. A coastal development permit is not required for the development of this site because the proposed project complies with the terms and conditions of Categorical Exclusion Order E -77 -5. The City has a Certified Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) that is a reflection of the General Plan. The land use intensity or residential density limit is prescribed in the CLUP. Although the Land Use Element may contain more precise development limits for specific properties, the land use intensity or residential density limit that is the most protective of coastal resources takes precedence should a conflict exist with the CLUP. However, in no case shall the policies of the CLUP be interpreted to allow a development to exceed a development limit established by the General Plan or its implementing ordinances. The site is designated RSD (Single Unit Residential, Detached) by the Coastal Land Use Plan. Zoning The subject property is zoned R -1 (Single - Family Residential) as indicated on Exhibit 3 -5. This zoning classification is consistent with the adopted RS -D General Plan land use designation and the RSD designation in the CLUP, which would allow the development of one single - family residential dwelling unit on the site. SCAG Policies and Programs The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Agency (JPA) that was established under the California Government Code. Under federal and state law, SCAG is designated as a Council of Governments (COG), a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), and a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) having the mandated roles and responsibilities described below. As the region's MPO, SCAG is required to maintain a continuing cooperative and comprehensive transportation planning process resulting in a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and a Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG). Further, as the RTPA, SCAG is also responsible for both preparation of the RTP and the (RTIP). SCAG is also responsible for developing the demographic projections and the integrated land use, housing, employment, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies portions of the South Coast Air quality Management Plan and is responsible for determining conformity of projects, plans and programs to the Air Quality Management Plan prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The Growth Management chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) contains several policies that are particularly applicable to the proposed project, including those related to population, housing and employment and the provision of adequate public facilities and infrastructure. The Growth Management chapter contains goals to improve the regional standard of living, quality of life, and to provide social, political, and cultural diversity. The Air Quality chapter of the RCPG contains core actions related to development to ensure that regional air quality goals and objectives are met. In addition, the Water Quality chapter also contains core recommendations and policy options to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation's water and to achieve and maintain water quality objectives that are necessary to protect the beneficial uses of all waters. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -6 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning 4.1.2 Significance Criteria Land use impacts are considered significant if the proposed project will conflict with the adopted plans and goals of the community as expressed in the Newport Beach General Plan and the CLUP. In addition, significant adverse impacts result from the proposed project, as identified in Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, if the project: Conflicts with an applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Conflicts with an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Physically divides an established community. Causes substantial or extreme use incompatibility. Results in incompatible land uses in an aircraft accident potential area as defined in an airport land use plan. • Results in inconsistency or conflict with established recreational, educational, religious our scientific uses of the area. 4.1.3 Standard Conditions SC 41 -1 All development proposed for the proposed single - family residence shall be reviewed for consistency with applicable provisions of the California Building Code, Noise Ordinance, Uniform Fire Code, and other applicable codes and ordinances prior to issuance of building permits. 4.1.4 Potential Impacts 4.1.4.1 Short -Term Construction Impacts Potential land use impacts are associated with the long -term use of the subject property and the compatibility of the proposed land use with existing uses as well as its consistency with adopted long -range plans and policies. No short-term land use impacts (i.e., those related to construction activities) are anticipated as a result of project implementation. 4.1.4.2 Long -Term Operational Impacts Conflict with an applicable land use. plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The proposed project is subject to the applicable General Plan and relevant policies of that plan and those articulated in the Coastal Land Use Plan. As indicated previously, the subject property is designated RS -D (Single -Unit Residential - Detached) and is consistent with the land use designation and zoning adopted for the site. The relationship of the proposed project with the Land Use Element and Coastal Land Use Plan adopted by the City of Newport Beach is presented below. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -7 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning Newport Beach General Plan As indicated above, implementation of the proposed project is consistent with the RS -D land use designation. The Newport Beach General Plan includes several policies that guide development in the City. The consistency analysis presented in Table 4.1 -1 reflects the relationship of the proposed project with the applicable policies contained within the various elements of the Newport Beach General Plan. Table 4.1 -1 General Plan Policy Analysis Policy No. General Plan Policy Relationship to Policy Land Use Element As reflected in the visual simulations (refer to Section 4.3) and project plans, the proposed single - family residence reflects a contemporary architectural style compared to Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique many of the existing homes in the neighborhood. The character of the different neighborhoods, business proposed residence adds to the architectural diversity of LU 1.1 districts, and harbor that together identify Newport the neighborhood. The proposed project attempts to Beach. Locate and design development to reflect preserve the integrity of coastal views from Begonia Park Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, but also recognizes the constraints posed by the coastal and view sheds. topography, which has been degraded. Based upon the analysis of the project's less than significant impact to public views from Begonia Park, the project is consistent with this policy. The subject property is not currently identified as an important open space or biological resource. Project implementation will result in development of the site with a single - family residential dwelling unit. The site is composed of three vegetation communities, including a small area (261 square feet) that supports low quality coastal bluff scrub habitat; however, due to its low quality, it does not quality as an ESHA based on Coastal Act criteria. In addition, the habitat is not occupied by gnatcatchers. Protect the natural setting that contributes to the The subject property is also located within the viewshed of character and identity of Newport Beach and the sense Begonia Park, which is designated as a "public view point." LU 1.3 of place it provides for its residents and visitors. Development of the site as proposed will result in the Preserve open space resources, beaches, harbor, introduction of a residential structure that would be visible parks, bluffs, preserves, and estuaries as visual, from vantage points within Begonia Park. Residential recreational and habitat resources. structures on Carnation Avenue, Pacific Drive, Begonia Avenue and across the harbor entrance on the Balboa Peninsula are currently within the viewshed. Depending on the vantage point, the visibility of the structure within the viewshed will vary; however, from those locations, view of the harbor and ocean would not be significantly affected. The overall character of the view will not be significantly changed with the introduction of one additional residence within the viewshed as the proposed project will not dominate the view given its overall size and distance from vantage points within the park. Implement a conservative growth strategy that The proposed project is consistent with the existing land LU 1.4 enhances the quality of life of residents and balances use designation for the site, which permits one single - the needs of all constituencies with the preservation of family residential dwelling unit. opens ace and natural resources. The project has been redesigned to minimize visual Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic impacts from Begonia Park, a designated Public View LU 1.6 and visual resources that include open space, Point in both the Natural Resources Element of the mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan. Although public vantage points. views of the harbor from Pacific Drive would be blocked by the proposed single-family residence, public views from Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -8 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning LU 3.2 LU 3.7 LU 4.1 LU 5.6.4 H 1.1 HR 2.1 Enhance existing neighborhoods, districts, and corridors, allowing for reuse and inf II with uses that are complementary in type, form, scale, and character. Changes in use and /or density /intensity should be considered only in those areas that are economically underperforming, are necessary to accommodate Newport Beach's share of projected regional population growth, improve the relationship and reduce commuting distance between home and jobs, or enhance the values that distinguish Newport Beach as a special place to live for its residents. The scale of growth and new development shall be coordinated with the provision of adequate infrastructure and public services, including standards for acceptable traffic level of service. Require that new development is located and designed to protect areas with high natural resource value and protect residents and visitors from threats to life or property. Accommodate land use development consistent with the Land Use Plan. Require that sites be planned and buildings designed in consideration of the property's topography, landforms, drainage patterns, natural vegetation, and relationship to the Bay and coastline, maintaining the environmental character that distinguishes Newport Beach. Relationship to Policy that vantage point are not protected as that site has not been designated a Public view point by the Natural neighborhood within Corona del Mar. The applicant is proposing to construct a single - family residential dwelling unit that is permitted by both the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and the existing R -1 zoning. The proposed dwelling conforms to setbacks, is designed to be lower than the maximum height limit and is below the maximum floor area limit. The project represents in -fill development in the residential neighborhood. The addition of one residential dwelling to the City's inventory of housing is in keeping with the long -range goals and objectives of the City because it is in keeping with the scale of new development in the City. Furthermore, all of the required infrastructure, including sewer and water facilities, circulation, public services, etc., exists to provide supports a small area (i.e., approximately 261 square feet) of low quality coastal scrub habitat. However, because the site has been degraded as a result of habitat fragmentation, influenced by surrounding human activities, and because it supports limited long -term habitat, it does not represent a high -value biological resources and does not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act for project is consistent with the adopted Land Use Element designation (i.e., RS -D). With the exception of the applicant's request for a modification permit to allow a wall to extend above the three -foot height limit within the front yard setback, the project complies with the development standards prescribed for the R -1 Zonino District. City considered acquiring the site for park purposes in 1978 when the site was proposed for development. The City chose not to acquire the site at that time. Development of the site minimizes impacts to public views from Begonia Park and adds architectural diversity to the neighborhood. Development of the site for its intended purpose consistent with the General Plan designation and Zoning Ordinance will not change the overall Element Support all reasonable efforts to preserve, maintain, and improve availability and quality of existing housing and residential neighborhoods, and ensure full utilization of existing City housing resources for as long into the future as physically and economically possible. I he proposed project will result In the development of one single - family residential dwelling unit, consistent with the Land Use Element designation and the long -range goals and objectives articulated in the General Plan, including the Housing Element goals and objectives of providing Resources Element Hequlre that, in accordance with UtUA, new development protect and preserve paleontological and archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid and mitigate impacts to such resources. Through planning policies and permit conditions, ensure the preservation of significant archaeological and paleontological resources and require that the impact caused by any development be mitigated in accordance with CEQA. affect paleontological resources that may exist in the Monterey formation underlying the site. Although not anticipated, it is possible that cultural resources may be encountered during the grading operations. However, the project will comply with the City's requirement to provide a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist to monitor grading to ensure that such resources can be preserved and /or protected consisted with this policy. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -9 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. General Plan Policy Relationship to Policy Circulation Element Project implementation includes adequate on -site parking Require that new development provide adequate, that complies with the existing parking code requirements. CE 7.1.1 convenient parking for residents, guest, business Parking for guests cannot be accommodated in the patrons, and visitors. driveway given the limited depth and topography of the lot and no guest parking is required for single-family homes. Site and design new development to avoid use of Parking for the homeowners is provided in a two -car CE 7.1.8 parking configurations or management programs that garage that takes access from Pacific Drive. Because the are difficult to maintain and enforce. project comprises only one single - family residence, there is no need fora parking management plan or program. No public parking exists in Pacific Drive along the frontage of the project site. Project implementation will include a Require new development to minimize curb cuts or single -curb cut in order to allow for vehicular access to the CE 7.1.11 protect on- street parking spaces. Close curb cuts to site from Pacific Drive. The curb that fronts the project site create on street parking spaces wherever feasible. is presently marked "red" prohibiting street parking so the proposed curb cut for the project will not result in the loss of any street parking. Recreation Element The proposed project includes the development of a Require developers of new residential subdivisions to single - family residence on an existing lot. Such projects provide parklands at five acres per 1,000 persons, as are not required to dedicate public parkland nor are they stated in the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance, or required to pay a park in -lieu fee as no subdivision is R 1.1 contribute in -lieu fees for the development of public required that would increase the number of residential recreation facilities meeting demands generated by the units. The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19) of the development's resident population, as required in the Municipal Code only requires parkland dedication or the City's Park Dedication Fees Ordinance. payment of an in -lieu fee for subdivisions that increase housing units. Natural Resources Element Require all development to comply with the regulations The project applicant will be required to comply with all under the City's municipal separate storm drain system applicable NPDES regulations related to development one NR 3.4 permit under the National Pollutant Discharge a single - family residence to ensure that potential water Elimination System ( NPDES). quality impacts are reduced to the maximum extent practicable. The project will be designed to include water quality treatment features (e.g., erosion control, etc.) prescribed by the CBC that ensure that water quality within Newport NR 3.5 Require that development does not degrade natural Harbor will not be adversely affected. Although a WQMP water bodies. is not required for the proposed project, the project will comply with all applicable local and state requirements for discharging runoff into an impaired water body (i.e., Newport Bay). Given that the site is less than 10,000 square feet in size and more than 200 feet from the Bay, a WQMP is not required. The actual amount of storm water runoff generated from the building footprint and paved areas (totaling approximately 2,300 sq. ft.) will be an insignificant Require new development applications to include a amount. Compliance with applicable building, grading and Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to minimize water quality codes and policies (typically performed at the NR 3.9 runoff from rainfall events during construction and post- Plan check stage) will ensure that there will not be an construction. impact to water quality with construction. As part of the final plan check review for the proposed project, the applicant must submit an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that must be found to meet applicable standards. On -site retention and/or filtration or clarifiers would be required to meet water quality standards. Include site design and source control BMPS in all NR 3.11 developments. When the combination of site design Refer to the Response to Policy No. NR 3.9. and source control BMPs are not sufficient to protect water quality as required by the NPDES, structural Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1-10 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning Policy No. General Plan Polic Relationship to Policy _ treatment BMPs will be implemented along with site design and source control measures. Require grading /erosion control plans with structural BMPs that prevent or minimize erosion during and after NR 4.4 construction for development on steep slopes, graded, Refer to the Response to Policy No. NR 3.9. or disturbed area. The proposed project will comply with all applicable City, Require developers to use and operate construction state and federal requirements for operating construction NR 6.1 equipment, use building materials and paints, and equipment and related activities that will occur in order to control dust created by construction activities to implement the proposed project. Fugitive dust emissions minimize air pollutants. will be minimized through compliance with SCAQMD rules that require watering the site, etc. A site - specific biological survey was conducted on the subject property and an assessment of the proposed project was prepared (refer to Appendix C). That Require a site - specific survey and analysis prepared by assessment concluded that the coastal bluff scrub habitat a qualified biologist as a filing requirement for any that encompasses approximately 261 square feet of the NR 10.3 development permit applications where development 4,412 square foot property is low quality habitat that is would occur within or contiguous to areas identifies as characterized by few native species, fragmented, and has ESHAs. been affected by human activities in the area. As such, the small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat does not meet the definitional criteria for an ESHA in the Coastal Act and does not qualify as an ESHA based on the City's General Plan and CLUP criteria. The 261 square feet of coastal bluff scrub habitat that occupies a portion of the site has been evaluated and has been determined to be "low quality" habitat, which does Require that the siting and design of new development, not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act for including landscaping and public access, protect ESHAs. Furthermore, it is not occupied by sensitive NR 10.4 sensitive or rare resources against any significant species (e.g., California gnatcatcher) and no sensitive disruption of habitat values. plant species were observed on the site during the biological assessment conducted for the proposed project. Although project implementation will result in the elimination of the low- quality coastal bluff scrub habitat, no significant loss of valuable habitat will occur. Although the subject property is vacant, it is neither considered "open space" nor designated as open space on the Land Use Element. The site is designated as RS -D (Single -Unit Residential — Detached), similar to all of the adjacent properties located to the northwest, west, south and southeast, which are developed as single - family homes. No properties in the vicinity of the site are designated as open space by the City. Begonia Park, which abuts the site on the north and northeast, is designated as PR (Parks and Recreation). The subject property supports a small area that is Protect, conserve, and maintain designated open classified as coastal bluff scrub habitat; however, it does NR 17.1 space areas that define the City's urban form, serve as not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act or the habitat for many species, and provide recreational City's General Plan for an environmentally sensitive opportunities. habitat area (ESHA). Furthermore, the site does not provide suitable habitat for any sensitive plant or animal species. Implementation of the proposed project would result in the elimination of the low quality coastal bluff scrub habitat; however, this impact is not significant and no mitigation measures are required. Because the property in question is not designated as open space, development of the site with a single - family residence in conformance with the development standards set forth by the R -1 Zoning District regulations, will not result in any direct impacts to designated open spaces in the City. In addition, project implementation will not Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -11 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning Policy No. General Plan Policy Relationship to Policy adversely affect existing or future recreational opportunities that would occur at Begonia Park. As indicated above, the subject property is not designated as open space either by the City's General Plan Land Use Consider conversion of public sites designated for Element or Coastal Land Use Plan. The site is not publicly NR 17.2 open space to other uses only when a conversion will held and, moreover, is designated for residential meet a significant need, and there are not alternative development that is similar in density and character as that sites that could feasibly meet that need. in the immediate area. Therefore, development of the site would not result in the "conversion" of a "... a public site designated for open s ace ..." The project site is located adjacent to Begonia Park to the north and east and Bayside Park, a linear feature along Bayside Drive that extends easterly from Begonia Park, on NR 17.3 Consider opportunities to expand designated open the east. It is possible that Begonia Park could be space areas within the City. expanded by adding the project site to that recreational amenity; however, in order to do so, the City or other entity must acquire the property. At the present time, the City has no plan to expand Begonia Park by acquiring the site. Require new development to protect and preserve paleontological and archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid and minimize impacts to such resources in accordance with the requirements of NR 18.1 CEQA. Through planning policies and permit Refer to the discussion of Policy HR 2.1. conditions, ensure the preservation of significant archaeological and paleontological resources and require that the impact caused by any development be mitigated in accordance with CEQA. Although no archaeological /paleontological resources are known to exist on site, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was distributed, which was directed to the State Clearinghouse, Notify cultural organizations, including Native American which will transmit a copy of the NOP to the Native organizations, of proposed development that have the American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for review and NR 18.3 potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Allow comment. In addition, the City requires qualified representative of such groups to monitor archaeological /paleontological monitoring on -site during grading and /or excavation of development sites. grading. In the event any significant cultural resources are encountered during the grading and site preparation phase, appropriate Native American organizations will be contacted to ensure that the potential effects to those resources would be avoided or minimized. Require new development, where on site preservation and avoidance are not feasible, to donate scientifically As indicated above, the project will be subject to the City's NR 18.4 valuable paleontological or archaeological materials to standard conditions and procedures, including those a responsible public or private institution with a suitable related to cultural /scientific resources that require such repository, located within Newport Beach or Orange donations to an appropriate public or private facility. count whenever possible. Project implementation will result in the construction of one single - family residence on Pacific Drive, which is within the viewshed of Begonia Park, which is identified as a "Public View Point." While views from vantage points within Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic Begonia Park would be altered to include views of the NR 20.1 and visual resources that include open space, proposed home, views from these locations would not mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from result in the elimination of views of Newport Harbor or public vantage points, as shown in Figure NR3. ocean. However, views of the harbor from Pacific Drive /Begonia Avenue adjacent to the site would be virtually blocked by the proposed home. This is not a significant impact because this location is not noted as a "public view point" in the Natural Resources Element. As indicated in the discussion of Policy NR 20.1, although Require new development to restore and enhance the project implementation will result in the loss of the existing visual quality in visually degraded areas, where harbor view from the Pacific Drive/ Begonia Avenue NR 20.2 feasible, and provide view easements or corridors vantage point, that location is not reflected on Natural designed to protect public views or to restore public Resources Element Figure NR3, and therefore, this view is views in developed areas, where appropriate. not considered to be a significant public view that would be otherwise protected. The project has been redesigned to Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -12 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. General Plan Policy Relationship to Policy minimize impacts to public views from vantage points within Begonia Park, which is a designated a "public view point" pursuant to Figure NR3. Lastly, the City can and has proposed to require the dedication of a view easement above the proposed project to ensure that the principal building, accessory structures and landscaping will not impact public views through the site above the proposed building in the future. The proposed project is not located within the viewshed of any of the roadways identified in Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element of the General Plan. To date, neither Begonia Avenue nor Pacific Drive has been identified by the City as a "Public View Corridor" or a "Public View Protect and enhance public view corridors from the Point" Begonia Park is designated as a "Public View NR 20.3 following roadway segments (shown in Figure NR3) Point" on Figure NR3. Direction provided by the Newport and other locations may be identified in the future. Beach Planning Commission intended to guide the design of the subject property placed the highest priority on preservation of views from Begonia Park vantage points. To that end, the site was redesigned to minimize potential visual impacts from vantage points within Begonia Park, as directed by the Planning Commission. The proposed project has been designed to comply with Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of the requisite site development standards prescribed by the NR 22.1 structures consistent with the unique character and R -1 Zoning District regulations, including building height, visual scale of Newport Beach. which is limited to 24 feet, which limits alternative site plan configurations. The project site is designated for residential use and public views from Begonia Park are protected. These competing priorities are also in conflict with implementing this policy. The site is relatively small and is altered and no significant Preserve cliffs, canyons, bluffs, significant rock rock outcroppings or cliffs are present. Therefore, the outcroppings, and site buildings to minimize alteration site's topography and landform is not considered a NR 23.1 it of the site's natural topography and preserve the significant visual resource by the City. The protection of features a visual resource. public views from Begonia Park is considered a higher priority given the degraded nature of the site and that development of the project will not significantly impact public views discussed in Section 4.3. Minimizing the impact to public views from Begonia Park preserves a significant visual quality of the site. As previously indicated, site development as proposed will result in the elimination of the low- quality coastal bluff scrub habitat (i.e., approximately 261 square feet); however, this habitat lacks species diversity and it possesses low value as a habitat. Furthermore, it is not Design and site new development to minimize the occupied by the California gnatcatcher, and no sensitive NR 23.7 removal of native vegetation, preserve rock plant species were observed on the site. Although the outcroppings, and protect coastal resources. vegetation comprising the habitat will be eliminated, its loss is not significant because it is not an ESHA as defined by the Coastal Act and Newport Beach General Plan. Nonetheless, the site will be landscaped with native species to replace the coastal bluff scrub species lost as a result of site development. Safety Element Project implementation will be required to incorporate drainage features that direct surface flows to existing Require new development adjacent to the edge of storm drain collection and conveyance facilities in order to coastal bluffs to incorporate drainage improvements, avoid bluff erosion. In addition, the landscape plan for the S3.12 irrigation systems, and/or native or drought - tolerant proposed project will also include drought tolerant and vegetation into the design to minimize coastal bluff native species that are intended to minimize bluff erosion recession. and recession. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -13 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. General Plan Policy Relationship to Policy Noise Element Based upon the noise contours depicted in Figure N1 and N4 of the Noise Element, the site will not experience noise Require that all proposed projects are compatible with in excess of 60 CNEL from roadways or aircraft traffic from the noise environment through use of Table N2, and John Wayne Airport. Table N2 indicates that the 60 CNEL N 1.1 enforce the interior and exterior noise standards shown or lower for single family residential is within "Zone A," in Table N3. which is defined as "clearly compatible:' Enforcement of the noise standards of Table N3 is accomplished through Chapter 10.26 of the Municipal Code, which is applicable to the site. Project implementation will result in increased noise during construction; however it will be short in duration. Construction is not expected to exceed 20 months, which is typical of construction for a custom home of this size on Require the employment of noise mitigation measures a bluff property. Foundation construction will necessitate for existing sensitive uses when a significant noise the placement of drilled caissons and shoring and N 1.8 impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs excavation of lower levels, which can generate noise when there is an increase in the ambient CNEL levels between 70 and 90 dBA. However, these high noise produced by new development impacting noise levels are periodic throughout the day and week and are sensitive uses. not continuous. This initial construction phase is not anticipated to exceed 4 to 6 months. Project implementation will also not result in the exposure of nearby homes or the park to excessive long -term noise levels given that the project is a single-family home Enforce interior and exterior noise standards outlined in Table N3, and in the City's Municipal Code to ensure The interior and exterior noise levels identified in Table N3 N 4.1 that sensitive noise receptors are not exposed to are enforced by Chapter 10.26 of the Municipal Code, excessive noise levels from stationary noise sources, which is applicable to the site. such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning equipment. Enforce the Noise Ordinance noise limits and limits on Compliance with the existing noise control ordinance and N 4.6 hours of maintenance or construction activity in or hours of construction prescribed in the ordinance will adjacent to residential areas, including noise that minimize the potential noise impacts associated with results from in -home hobby or work - related activities. project implementation. Chapter 10.28 of the Municipal Code limits noise - generating construction activities between 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on N 5.1 Enforce the limits on hours of construction activity. Saturdays with no noise - generating construction activities permitted on Sundays or holidays. These limits are currently enforced by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division and the Police Department. As indicated in the preceding analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the adopted relevant policies in the Newport Beach General Plan. No significant land use and /or policy conflicts will occur as a result of project implementation. Nonetheless, a mitigation measure has been identified to ensure that coastal views from Begonia Park are preserved. Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan The Coastal Land Use Plan contains policies to guide development and the following table, Table 4.1 -2, provides a summary of the project's relationship with relevant CLUP policies. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -14 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning amt 2.1.2 -1 2.2.1 -1 2.2.1 -2 2.7 -1 2.8.1 -1 ;1f 1111Z Table 4.1 -2 CLUP Policy Analysis Land Use Land uses and new development in the coastal zone shall the RSD land use designation and density allocated on be consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan Map and all the adopted Coastal Land Use Plan. The project is applicable LCP policies and regulations. consistent with relevant CLUP policies as indicated in this Continue to allow redevelopment and infill development within and adjacent to the existing developed areas in the coastal zone subject to the density and intensity limits and resource protection policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan. Require new development be located in areas with adequate public services or in areas that are capable of having public services extended or expanded without significant adverse effects on coastal resources. Continue to maintain appropriate setbacks and density, floor area, and height limits for residential development to protect the character of established neighborhoods and to protect coastal access and coastal resources. Review all applications for new development to determine potential threats from coastal and other hazards. i ne proposed project is considerea an "m -mr project in that it is development of an existing vacant parcel. The proposed project is consistent with the residential designation and density prescribed in the CLUP. As described below in this table, the proposed project also addresses the policies related to resource protection and is consistent with those policies. The area within which the project is located is served by the existing infrastructure, including circulation, sewer, water, storm drainage, public services, and utilities. These facilities have adequate capacities and /or supplies building and development standards prescribed in the City's zoning ordinance for R -1 zoned properties, which provides the framework for neighborhood compatibility through a uniform set of development standards. The proposed dwelling conforms to setbacks, is designed to be lower than the maximum height limit and is below the maximum floor area limit. The proposed project does not impact coastal access as none presently exists through the site and it minimizes impacts to coastal resources to the maximum extent by minimizing impacts to public The proposed project will be subject to review by the City's Building Department to ensure that it has been designed to address all relevant conditions that may affect site development. As indicated in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report prepared for the proposed project (Borella Geology, Inc., March 20, 2007), construction of the residence on the subject site is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, provided the recommendations provided in the report are incorporated into the new foundation design and compliance with standard requirements of the California Building Code. According to that report, although the natural erosion process of the cliff face will continue, it will not do so in a manner that would undermine the foundation system. According to that report, although the natural erosion process of the cliff face will continue, it will not do so in a manner that would undermine the foundation system. Uesign and site new development to avoid hazardous 2.8.1 -2 areas and minimize risks to life and property from coastal Refer to the Response to Policy No. 2.8.1 -1 above. and other hazards. Require new development to assure stability and 2.8.1 -4 structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute Refer to the Response to Policy No. 2.8.1 -1 above. significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -15 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Renort 2.8.6 -10 2.8.7 -2 2.8.7 -3 2.9.3 -1 2.9.3 -2 2.9.3 -3 2.9.3 -5 2.9.3 -6 2.9.3 -10 of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms alona bluffs and cliffs. Site and design new structures to avoid the need for shoreline and bluff protective devices during the economic life of the structure (75 years). Require new development to provide adequate drainage and erosion control facilities that convey site drainage in a non - erosive manner in order to minimize hazards resulting from increased runoff, erosion and other hydrologic impacts to streams. Require applications for new development, where applicable (i.e., in areas of known or potential geologic or seismic hazards), to include a geologic /soils /geotechnical study that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the proposed project site, any necessary mitigation measures, and contains a statement that the project site is suitable for the proposed development and that the development will be safe from geologic hazard. Require such reports to be signed by a licensed Certified Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer and subiect to review and aooroval by the Citv. Section 4.1 — Land Use and I he property and coastal bluff are not subject to coastal erosion. Damage from tsunamis does not pose a significant threat to the subject site because it will be located approximately 60 feet above mean sea level. As prescribed in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report for the project, footings on or adjacent to slope surfaces will be founded in competent bedrock with an embedment and setback distance from the slope surface sufficient to provide vertical and lateral support for the footing without detrimental settlement. quality codes and policies (typically performed at the plan check stage) will ensure that there will not be an impact to water quality with construction. As part of the final plan check review for the proposed project, the applicant must submit an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that must be found to meet applicable standards. On -site retention and/or filtration or clarifiers will be required to was prepared for the proposed project. The report addresses the site - specific soils and geologic conditions and identifies recommendations to ensure that project implementation will not result in significant impacts either to the bluff or the proposed structure. If the project is approved, it will be subject to the plan check review process administered by the City Building Department to verify compliance with the California Building Code and to ensure that the structural recommendations of the Site and design new development to avoid use of parking Refer to Response to Policy CE 7.1.8 in Table 4.1 -1 configurations or parking management programs that are above. difficult to maintain and enforce. Continue to require new development to provide off- street parking sufficient to serve the approved use in order to minimize impacts to public on- street and off - street parking available for coastal access. enhance public access to the coast by providing adequate parking pursuant to the off - street parking regulations of Continue to require off - street parking in new development to have adequate dimensions, clearances, and access to insure their use. Prohibit new development that would result in restrictions on public parking that would impede or restrict public access to beaches, trails, or parklands, (including, but not limited to, the posting of "no parking' signs, red curbing, and physical barriers), except where such restrictions are needed to protect public safety and where no other feasible alternative exists to provide public safety. Refer to Response to Policy CE 7.1.8 in Table 4.1 -1 above. The project provides 2 off - street parking spaces within a garage, which meets the Zoning Code parking regulation in effect on October 13, 2005. The off - street parking within the proposed structure has been designed to comply with the City's size, clearance, and access requirements that are contained within the Zoning Code. of the project site. Project implementation will include a single -curb cut in order to allow for vehicular access to the site from Pacific Drive. The curb that fronts the project site is presently marked "red" prohibiting street parking so the proposed curb cut for the project will not result in the loss of any street parking. Require new development to minimize curb cuts to protect on- street parking spaces. Close curb cuts to create new Refer to Response to Policy No. 2.9.3 -6 above. parking wherever feasible. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -16 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 3.2.1 -3 4.1.1 -2 4.1.3 -1 4.3.1 -5 4.3.1 -6 Provide adequate park and recreational facilities to accommodate the needs of new residents when allowing new development. Require a site - specific survey and analysis prepared by a qualified biologist as a filing requirement for coastal development permit applications where development would occur within or adjacent to areas identified as a potential ESHA. Identify ESHA as habitats or natural communities listed in Section 4.1.1 that possess any of the attributes listed in Policy 4.1.1 -1. The ESAs depicted on Map 4 -1 shall represent a preliminary mapping of areas containing potential ESHA. Utilize the following mitigation measures to reduce the potential for adverse impacts to ESA natural habitats from sources including, but not limited to those identified in Table 4.1.1. Require development on steep slopes or steep slopes with erosive soils to implement structural best management practices (BMPS) to prevent or minimize erosion consistent with any load allocation of the TMDLs adopted for Newport Bay. Require grading /erosion control plans to include soil stabilization on graded or disturbed areas. Section 4.1 — Land Relationship to Policy The proposed project includes the development of a single - family residence on an existing lot. Such projects are not required to dedicate public parkland nor are they required to pay a park in -lieu fee as no subdivision is required that would increase the number of residential units. The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19) of the Municipal Code only requires parkland dedication or the payment of an in -lieu fee for subdivisions that increase A biological survey of the site was conducted to evaluate the potential project - related impacts on potentially sensitive biological resources. None of the ESHAs illustrated on Map 4 -1 in the Coastal Land Use Plan are located within the vicinity of the proposed project and, therefore, they would not be adversely affected as a result of project implementation. Nonetheless, the bluff contains approximately 261 square feet of native coastal bluff scrub vegetation. The biological survey evaluated the vegetation based upon Coastal Act criteria and concluded that it not qualify as an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA) due to its low quality, lack of sensitive species, small area and that it is not located adjacent to other similar plant communities. The findings and recommendations of the biological survey /assessment are presented in Section 4.2 (Biological Resources). Because the native habitat on the subject property is low quality, is not occupied by sensitive species of wildlife, is fragmented, and has been affected by human activities, the loss of 261 square feet of coastal bluff scrub habitat is not considered significant. implementation of the proposed project will not result in significant impacts to important and /or sensitive biological resources. The habitat and species that exist on the subject property are degraded and encompass only a small, isolated area that is of low value. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are reouired. The project will be designed to include water quality treatment features (e.g., erosion control, etc.) required by the CBC and the City that ensure that water quality within Newport Bay will not be adversely affected. Although a WQMP is not required for the proposed project due to its small size and location, the project will comply with all applicable local and state requirements (California Building Code) to not only minimize erosion but also treat water discharging runoff into an impaired water body (i.e., Newport Bay). Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality codes and policies (typically performed at the plan check stage) will ensure that there will not be an impact to water quality with construction. As part of the final plan check review for the proposed project, the applicant must submit an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that must be found to meet applicable standards. On -site retention and /or filtration or clarifiers would be required to meet water quality standards. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -17 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental lmoact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. CLUP Policy Relationship to Policy Project implementation will necessitate grading and site alteration to accommodate the proposed single - family residence. Approximately 630 cubic yards of earth material will be exported from the site. Although the Require measures to be taken during construction to limit existing native (three native species within the existing land use disturbance activities such as clearing and coastal bluff scrub habitat) and non - native species on the grading, limiting cut - and -fill to reduce erosion and site will be removed in order to construct the proposed sediment loss, and avoiding steep slopes, unstable areas, home, its value has habitat is very limited. Appropriate 4.3.1 -7 and erosive soils. Require construction to minimize erosion control measures will be implemented both during disturbance of natural vegetation, including significant grading and after construction of the residence. Although trees, native vegetation, root structures, and other the coastal bluff scrub habitat would be removed, its physical or biological features important for preventing habitat value is low due to the fragmentation that has erosion or sedimentation. occurred as a result of human activities, including development along the bluff that has already occurred. Furthermore, it is not recognized as an ESHA and it not considered a significant resource. Therefore, the loss of this habitat is less than significant. Require that development not result in the degradation of 4.3.2 -3 coastal waters (including the ocean, estuaries and lakes) Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.3.1 -5. caused by changes to the hydrologic landsca e. To the maximum extent practicable, runoff should be Consistent with this policy, the City will require the retained on private property to prevent the transport of Preparation of stormwater and erosion control plan at the 4.3.2 -8 bacteria, pesticides, fertilizers, pet waste, oil, engine building plan check stage that identifies the manner in coolant, gasoline, hydrocarbons, brake dust, lire residue, which runoff will be captured, treated and conveyed prior and other pollutants into recreational waters. to its discharge into Newport Bay to ensure protection of water quality. Approximately 22% of the site will be not be developed with impervious surfaces, which is a relatively high Require new development to minimize the creation of and percentage of area compared to typical residential increases in impervious surfaces, especially directly construction in Newport Beach. The front and side yard 4.3.2 -11 connected impervious areas, to be maximum extent setback areas abutting the building are impervious and practicable. Require redevelopment to increase area of provide walkways and stairs necessary to access required pervious surfaces, where feasible. exits from the multi -level building. Reducing impervious surfaces can only be accomplished by reducing the building footprint. Require development to protect the absorption, The project site is presently vacant and runoff currently purification, and retention functions of natural drainage not controlled. The site does not accommodate drainage systems that exist on the site, to the maximum extent from abutting properties and is not a natural drainage practicable. Where feasible, design drainage and project system. The proposed project will result in a small 4.3.2 -12 plans to complement and utilize existing drainage patterns increase in surface runoff associated with the increase in and systems, conveying drainage from the developed impervious surfaces on the site, which will be captured, area of the site in anon- erosive manner. Disturbed or treated and conveyed to existing storm drain facilities prior degraded natural drainage systems should be restored, to its discharge in the bay. where feasible. Consistent with this policy, the proposed single - family residence has been sited to minimize obstructing views from Begonia Park, which was established as a priority by Site development on the most suitable portion of the site the Planning Commission. Although the existing coastal 4.3.2 -13 and design to ensure the protection and preservation of bluff scrub habitat will be eliminated as a result of the natural and sensitive site resources. proposed project, the loss of this low- quality habitat, which does not support a significant number and types of species and has been compromised by fragmentation and human activities in the area, is not significant. The site will be landscaped with nativespecies. Compliance with applicable building, grading and water Require structural BMPs to be inspected, cleaned, and quality codes and policies (typically performed at the plan repaired as necessary to ensure proper functioning for the check stage) will ensure that there will not be an impact to life of the development. Condition coastal development water quality with construction. The features that will be 4.3.2 -16 permits to require ongoing application and maintenance incorporated into the project design will be maintained by as is necessary for effective operation of all BMPs the property owner throughout the life of the project to (including site design, source control, and treatment ensure that they are effective in minimizing water quality control). impacts. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -18 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. CLUP Polic anship to Policy Require new development applications to include a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP's purpose is to minimize to the maximum extent practicable 4.3.2 -23 dry weather runoff, runoff from small storms (less the 3W See Responses to Policies 4.3.2 -11. of rain falling over a 24 -hour period) and the concentration of pollutants in such runoff during construction and post - construction from the property. To further reduce runoff, direct and encourage water conservation via the use of weather- and moisture -based The project includes drought tolerant landscaping 4.3.2 -24 irrigation controls, tiered water consumption rates, and materials and a weather or moisture based controller can native or drought - tolerant plantings in residential, be incorporated to conserve water to the maximum extent. commercial, and municipal properties to the maximum extent practicable . Scenic and Visual Resources The most notable scenic quality of the site is its location within the public viewshed of Begonia Park. Although the site is considered a coastal bluff, it is relatively small, previously disturbed and it does not posses physical characteristics that are considered significant or highly scenic. The site is designated for residential development and the Newport Beach Planning Commission concluded that allowed development of the site must protect public views from Begonia Park to the greatest extent possible. Protect and, where feasible, enhance the scenic and The proposed project has been redesigned to be below visual qualities of the coastal zone, including public views the maximum building height requirement prescribed in 4.4.1 -1 to and along the ocean, bay, and harbor and to coastal the R -1 Zoning District. Additionally, lowering the bluffs and other scenic coastal areas. development further down the bluff, limiting street level development to single story, and pulling back elements of the project that would lessen impacts to the Begonia Park view corridor have been incorporated within the design. As a result, views of Newport bay and the ocean from Begonia Park, a designated "Public View Point" in the Natural Resources Element of the General Plan and the CLUP, would be protected to the maximum extent. The proposed single - family residence would block views to the bay and ocean from Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue; however, as noted previously, this view is not protected as it is not a designated viewpoint. 4.4.1-2 Design and site new development, including landscaping, Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.4.1 -1. so as to minimize impacts to public coastal views. Design and site new development to minimize alterations 4.4.1 -3 to significant natural landforms, including bluffs, cliffs and Refer to Response to Policy NR 23.1 in Table 4 -1 above. canyons. As indicated in the Response to Policy 4.41-1, avoiding Where appropriate, require new development to provide any alteration of the public views is not possible. view easements or corridors designed to protect public Nonetheless, the project has been designed to minimize 4.4.1 -4 coastal views or to restore public coastal views in the effect on views from Begonia Park by reducing the developed areas. height of the structure at the street elevation to one story. The City required a view easement above this structure to reserve the views through the site above the building. The project site, which is currently undeveloped, is characterized by sparse vegetation, including shrubs and Where feasible, require new development to restore and trees. Development of the site will result in the creation of 4.4.1 -5 enhance the visual quality in visually degraded areas. a similar residential character as that which exists in the area the project will incorporate landscaping that is consistent with that in the area and will include native plantspecies. Design and site new development, including landscaping, Public views from Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue are on the edges of public coastal view corridors, including not identified as a protected public view. The proposed 4.4.1 -7 those down public streets, to frame and accent public project has been designed to minimize impacts to harbor coastal views. and ocean views from Begonia Park. The project will incorporate landscaping that is consistent with that in the Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August2009 4.1 -19 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. CLUP Policy Relationship to Policy area and will include native plant species that achieve the desired City objectives of preserving coastal views from important vantage points identified in Map 4 -3 of the CLUP. The view easement that will be dedicated to the City will restrict the maximum height of landscaping and accessory structures to that of the top of the guardrails of the 'outdoor room" proposed for the project in order to reserve views through the site. The proposed project was redesigned to protect or minimize visual impacts. The neighborhood in which the project is located is characterized by single -unit dwellings with one or two stories above street grade and development on the bluff face extending down two or Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of three stories below street grade. Redesign of the project 4.4.2 -2 structures consistent with the unique character and visual lowered the development farther down the bluff and scale of Newport Beach. limited street level development to a single story, making the project more visually compatible with the surrounding development. Furthermore, the addition of clerestory windows on the street elevation and the proposed planters make the proposed single - family residence more in keeping with the character of other street - facing elevations in the neighborhood. As previously indicated in the discussions of related Implement the regulation of the building envelope to policies, the proposed project has been redesigned to preserve public views through the height, setback, floor address issues related to visual impacts, including 4.4.2 -3 area, lot coverage, and building bulk regulation of the building height, setbacks, and bulk. The redesign has Zoning Code in effect as of October 13, 2005 that limit the resulted in a building envelope that achieves the primary building profile and maximize public view opportunities. goal of minimizing potential visual impacts to views from Begonia Park. The project site comprises the easternmost transition from the Pacific Drive coastal bluff to the gully formation that has been developed as Begonia Park. This transitional location between different topographic landforms, the steeper slope of the subject site as compared with the Pacific Drive Coastal bluff, and the existing development at the toe of the bluff face that comprises the project site require that both the horizontal and vertical extent of Prohibit development on bluff faces, except private proposed development be considered in establishing the development on coastal bluff faces along Ocean Predominant Line of Existing Development. The Boulevard, Carnation Avenue and Pacific Drive in Corona maximum permissible horizontal extent of the proposed del Mar determined to be consistent with the predominant structure over the bluff face was based on the minimum line of existing development or public improvements dimension of the building footprint that allows reasonable 4.4.3 -8 providing public access, protecting coastal resources, or floor area on the property for its intended residential providing for public safety. Permit such improvements purpose, while simultaneously complying with the only when no feasible alternative exists and when maximum permissible building height of twenty -four feet, designed and constructed to minimize alteration of the limiting the extent of grading on the bluff face, and bluff face, to not contribute to further erosion of the bluff producing a building profile that "steps down" the slope, face, and to be visually compatible with the surrounding conforming to the topography of the bluff face. The area to the maximum extent feasible. horizontal dimension deemed appropriate to allow reasonable use of the properly consistent with these requirements was projected onto the bluff and resulted in establishment of a Predominant Line of Existing Development at elevation 36.5 feet Mean Sea Level. This line maintains sufficient vertical and horizontal separation from the existing development at the toe of the bluff from that proposed at the top such that the visual resource of the sloping topography in between is preserved. Where principal structures exist on coastal bluff faces along Ocean Boulevard, Carnation Avenue and Pacific Drive in Corona del Mar, require all new development to 4.4.3 -9 be sited in accordance with the predominant line of Please refer to Response to Policy No. 4.4.3 -8. existing development in order to protect public coastal views. Establish a predominant line of development for both principle structures and accessory improvements. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -20 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 4.4.3 -11 necessary to Require applications for new development to include slope stability analyses and erosion rate estimates provided by a licensed Certified Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer. Employ site design and construction techniques to minimize alteration of coastal bluffs to the maximum extent feasible, such as, A. B. C. 4.4.3 -12 D. E. in Siting new development on the flattest area of the site, except when an alternative location is more protective of coastal resources. Utilizing existing driveways and building pads to the maximum extent feasible. Clustering building sites. Shared use of driveways. Designing buildings to conform to the natural contours of the site, and arranging driveways and patio areas to be compatible with the slopes and building design. Utilizing special foundations, such as stepped, split level, or cantilever designs. Detaching parts of the development, such as a garage from a dwelling unit. Requiring any altered slopes to blend into the natural contours of the site. Section 4.1 — Land Use and i ne suolect site is cnaracienzeo oy a 4t-root aescenaing slope with slope angles ranging from 10 degrees to vertical. With respect to the slope, the orientation of the bedrock is dipping into the slope, which is the preferred orientation for maintaining slope stability. A stability analysis was performed which resulted in the factors of safety calculated in excess of 1.5 (i.e., static) and 1.1 (pseudo- static) required by the Citv of Newoort Beach. The coastal bluff in the project environs is degraded to the extent that it is no longer a significant visual resource; however, the proposed structure has been redesigned as to step down from top of the slope as to parallel the topographic profile of the site. The horizontal extent of the proposed structure from the street toward the toe of the slope has been limited to retain the maximum amount of bluff face between the proposed dwelling and the existing dwellings at the toe of the slope. Require new development adjacent to the edge of coastal The proposed project will comply with this policy that 4.4.3 -13 bluffs to incorporate drainage improvements, irrigation requires irrigation systems and the integration of systems, and/or and /or native or drought - tolerant vegetation into tolerant native plant species. Design and site new development to minimize the 4.4.3 -15 removal of native vegetation, preserve rock outcroppings, and protect coastal resources. Require new development to protect and preserve paleontological and archaeological resources from 4.5.1 -1 destruction, and avoid and minimize impacts to such resources. If avoidance of the resources is not feasible, require an in situ or site - capping preservation plan or a recovery plan for mitigating the effect of the development. 4.5.1 -2 Although development of the site as proposed will result in the elimination of the existing 261 square feet of coastal bluff scrub habitat that occupies a small portion of the site, the habitat has been characterized as "low quality' and does not support sensitive wildlife (e.g., California gnatcatcher, etc.). Furthermore, the coastal bluff scrub habitat does not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act for ESHAs and, therefore, is not an ESHA. Finally, no sensitive plant species exist on the site. As a result, loss of the low quality coastal bluff scrub habitat, which has also been fragmented and affected by human activities, is not considered to be significant. As indicated in the initial study prepared for the proposed project (refer to Appendix A), the site is underlain by the Monterey Formation, which is a fossil- bearing formation. Although project implementation will necessitate grading of the site, which could affect paleontological resources if they exist within the Monterey Formation, a monitor will be present during grading who will have the authority to redirect or halt grading in the event cultural or scientific resources are encountered until such time as the resources can be evaluated and a course of action Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.5.1 -1. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -21 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning No. 4.5.1 -3 4.5.1 -4 4.5.1 -5 4.6 -6 4.6 -6 affect cultural or paleontological resources. If grading operations or excavations uncover paleontologicallarchaeological resources, require the paleontologist/archaeologist monitor to suspend all development activity to avoid destruction of resources until a determination can be made as to the significance of the paleontological /archaeological resources. If resources are determined to be significant, require submittal of a mitigation plan. Mitigation measures considered may range from in -situ preservation to recover and /or relocation. Mitigation plans shall include a good faith effort to avoid impacts to cultural resources through methods such as, but not limited to, project redesign, in situ preservation /capping, and placing cultural resources Notify cultural organizations, including Native American organizations, of proposed developments that have the potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Allow qualified representatives of such groups to monitor vvnere in situ preservation ano avoiaance are not feasible, require new development to donate scientifically valuable paleontological or archaeological materials to a responsible public or private institution with a suitable repository, located within Orange County, whenever possible. Where there Is a potential to affect cultural or paleontological resources, require the submittal of an archaeological /cultural resources monitoring plan that identifies monitoring methods and describes the procedures for selecting archaeological and Native American monitors and procedures that will be followed if additional or unexpected archaeological /cultural resources are encountered during development of the site. Procedures may include, but are not limited to, provisions for cessation of all grading and construction activities in the area of the discovery that has any potential to uncover or otherwise disturb cultural deposits in the area of the discovery and all construction that may foreclose mitigation options to allow for significance testing, additional investigation and mitigation. Where development is proposed within or adjacent to ESHA, wetlands or other sensitive resources, require City staff member(s) and /or contracted employee(s) to consider the individual and cumulative impacts of the development, define the least environmentally damaging alternative, and recommend modifications or mitigation measures to avoid or minimize impacts. The City may impose a fee on applicants to recover the cost of review of a proposed project when required by this policy. vvnere aevelopment Is proposea wmmn or adjacent to ESHA, wetlands or other sensitive resources, require the city staff member(s) and /or contracted employee(s) to include the following in any recommendations of approval: an identification of the preferred project alternative, Refer to Response to Policy No. NR 18.3 in Table 4 -1 above. Any scientifically cultural and /or scientific resources determined to be valuable or important will be donated to a responsible public or private institution. Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.5.1 -1 I ne biological site survey and assessment conauctea for the proposed project concluded that the small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat encompasses only approximately 261 square feet and is characterized by few native species, it is fragmented, and has been affected by human activities in the area. In addition, the small area is characterized as "low quality" and having low biological value. Furthermore, the coastal bluff scrub habitat does not meet the criteria prescribed in the Coastal Act and the City's General Plan for an ESHA. Therefore, the elimination of this habitat resulting from implementation of the proposed project does not The small area occurring within the limits of the subject property that has been identified as "coastal bluff scrub" habitat has been characterized as 'low quality' habitat that does not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act for ESHAs. Similarly, the habitat does not meet the Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -22 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. CLUP Policy Relationship to Polic to ensure conformance with the Coastal Land Use Plan. Plan. Furthermore, the site does not support wetlands or The decision making body (Planning Director, Planning other sensitive habitat and no sensitive plant or wildlife Commission, or City Council) shall make findings relative species occupy the subject property. Based on the to the project's conformance to the recommendations of determination of the project biologist, the proposed project the City staff member(s) and /or contracted employee(s). is not located either within or adjacent to an ESHA, wetlands or other sensitive resources. Coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, national Marine Project implementation will not result in potentially Fisheries Service, and other resource management significant impacts to an ESHA or other sensitive or agencies, as applicable, in the review of development important biological resources, including rare, threatened 4.6 -8 applications in order to ensure that impacts to ESHA and or endangered species. As a result, the applicant will not marine resources, including rare, threatened, or be required to obtain a permit from either the U.S. Fish endangered species, are avoided or minimized such that and Wildlife Service (Section 7 or 10A), California ESHA is not significantly degraded, habitat values are not Department of Fish and Game (Section 1602), or Army significantly disrupted, and the biological productivity and Corps of Engineers Section 404). quality of coastal waters is preserved. Require applications for new development, where applicable, to include a geologic /soils /geotechnical study that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the project A Preliminary Geotechnical Report was prepared for the site, any necessary mitigation measures, and contains proposed project Borella Geology, Inc., March 20, 2007 p ro p p 1 ( gy' )' statements that the project site is suitable for the which evaluated the project's suitability for development, proposed development and that the development will be including slope stability, liquefaction, seismicity, tsunamis, safe from geologic hazard for its economic life. For and other geologic and soils characteristics. Based on 4.6 -9 development on coastal bluffs, including bluffs facing that report, construction of the proposed single - family Upper Newport Bay, such reports shall include slope residence is feasible from a geotechnical perspective, stability analyses and estimates of the long -term average provided the recommendations included in the report are bluff retreat rate over the expected life of the implemented. The Preliminary Geotechnical Report is on development. Reports are to be signed by an file at the City of Newport Beach. appropriately licensed professional and subject to review and approval by qualified city staff members) and /or contracted employee(s). As indicated in Table 4.1 -2, the proposed policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan. categorical exclusion zone. Although no dedication of a view easement) has been Begonia Park are protected. Newport Beach Zoning project is consistent with the intent of the adopted relevant As previously indicated, the project is located within the significant impacts are identified, a mitigation measure (i.e., prescribed to ensure that future views through the site from As indicated previously (refer to Chapter 3.0 — Project Description), with the exception of the modification permit requested by the applicant to allow the encroachment of features in excess of 36 inches in height within the front setback, the proposed project is consistent with the development standards prescribed in the R -1 zoning district regulations. SCAG Policies and Programs Table 4.1 -3 provides a discussion of the project's consistency with the applicable goals, objectives, policies and programs reflected in the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. As indicated in that analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the SCAG projections, plans and policies and no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megontgal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -23 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Table 4.1 -3 Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) Consistency Analysis Policy No. RCPGPoIic Consistency Analysis Regional Transport tion Plan Transportation investments shall be based on SCAG's project implementation will not result in the generation of 4.01 adopted Regional Performance indicators (i.e., mobility, significant new traffic that would adversely affect regional accessibility, environment, reliability, safety, livable transportation facilities. communities, equity, and cost - effectiveness). As indicated in the initial study, project implementation 4.02 Transportation investments shall mitigate environmental would result in the generation of about 10 trips per day; impacts to an acceptable level. no significant long -term traffic impacts will result from the proposed project. Although the proposed project would not require the implementation of any mitigation measures to address potential traffic impacts, A Construction Management 4.04 Transportation control measures shall be a priority. Plan will be prepared for the proposed project, which addresses all aspects of the construction phase (e.g., phasing schedule, construction equipment, and the construction process). Improvement of Regional Standard of Living The proposed project includes the construction of one single - family residence, which is consistent with the long -range plans adopted by the City for the project site. Encourage patterns of urban development and land use, The single - family residence is located in an area of the 3.05 which reduce costs on infrastructure construction and City that is served by a full complement of public make better use of existing facilities. services and utilities. All of the infrastructure facilities (e.g., sewer, water, police and fire protection, etc.) have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed project. Support local jurisdictions' efforts to minimize the cost of infrastructure and public service delivery, and efforts to As indicated in Response to Policy 3.05 above, 3.09 seek new sources of funding for development and the adequate infrastructure and public services exist in the provision of services. project area to serve the proposed project. Improvement of Regional Quality of Life The applicant is proposing to develop the subject Encourage existing or proposed local jurisdictions' property, which will result in the development of one programs aimed at designing land uses which single - family residence and would not result in any encourage the use of transit and thus reduce the need significant traffic and /or circulation impacts that would 3.12 for roadway expansion, reduce the number of auto trips necessitate the construction of new or expanded and vehicle miles traveled, and create opportunities for roadways. Public transit opportunities currently exist residents to walk and bike. within the Corona del Mar community and in the City of Newport Beach that would serve the proposed residential project. As previously indicated in Response to Policy 3.12, project implementation includes the infill development Encourage local jurisdictions' plans that maximize the that encompasses only one residential dwelling unit, 3.13 use of existing urbanized areas accessible to transit which will not require the expansion of existing transit through infill and redevelopment. services that currently exist in the community. Existing transit facilities are adequate to serve the proposed residential use. The project has been designed to avoid and /or mitigate Encourage planned development in locations least likely potentially significant visual /aesthetic impacts associated 3.18 to cause adverse environmental impacts. with views from Begonia Park. The elimination of 0.006 acre of low- quality coastal bluff scrub habitat is not significant. Support the protection of vital resources such as The proposed project will not result in potentially 3.20 wetlands, groundwater recharge areas, woodlands, significant impacts to wetlands, groundwater recharge production lands, and land containing unique and areas, woodlands, production lands, and land containing Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -24 Megonigai Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 3.21 3.22 3.23 and Encourage the implementation of measures aimed at the preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded cultural resources and archaeological sites. Discourage development, or encourage the use of special design requirements, in areas will steep slopes, high fire, flood, and seismic hazards. Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of biological and ecological resources, measures that would reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize earthquake damage, and to develop emergency response and recovery plans. Section 4.1 — Land indicated in Section 4.3 (Biological Resources), 0.006 acre of coastal bluff scrub exists on the subject property; however, it is of low quality and has been degraded by fragmentation and human activities. The small area is not an ESHA as defined by the Coastal Act and the As indicated in the initial study prepared for the proposed project, a qualified paleontologist must be retained by the project applicant to monitor grading activities. In the event that fossils are encountered during construction activities, ground- disturbing excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted by the monitor until the find has been salvaged. Any cultural and /or scientific resources discovered during project construction shall be prepared to a point of identification The project site encompasses a south - facing coastal bluff. The proposed project has been designed to minimize visual impacts to views from Begonia Park and the bluff face below the proposed structure would be landscaped and enhanced with native plant materials. In addition, development of the site has been designed to minimize potential seismic impacts. The geotechnical report prepared for the project concluded that the project could be developed on the site with the incorporation of mitigation measures identified in the initial study. Several mitigation measures have been prescribed in the initial study (refer to Appendix A) to ensure that construction impacts are minimized; no long -term noise impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. The elimination of 0.006 acre of low quality coastal bluff scrub that is not inhabited by the California gnatcatcher is not significant; no sensitive plant and /or animal species occupy the site or are expected to occupy the subject property. The project has been designed to withstand potential seismic hazards (e.g., moderate to Encourage efforts of local jurisdictions in the The proposed project will provide one additional market 3.24 implementation of programs that increase the supply and rate dwelling unit in the Corona del Mar area of the City quality of housing and provide affordable housing as of Newport Beach. 3.27 5.11 Provision of Support local jurisdictions and other service providers in their efforts to develop sustainable communities and provide, equally to all members of society, accessible and effective services such as: public education, housing, health care, social services, recreational facilities, law enforcement, and fire protection. and accommodate the proposed single - family residence. The site will be subject to school development fees to address public education and the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance to address public recreation facilities. In addition, adequate law enforcement and fire protection Air Qualitv Chapter Core Actions Through the environmental document review process, ensure that plans at all levels of government (regional, air basin, county, subregional and local) consider air quality, land use, transportation and economic relationships to ensure consistency and minimize conflicts. the proposed project, including air quality, concludes that all of the potential impacts would be less than significant or would be reduced to a less than significant level as required by CEOA. The proposed project is consistent with the long -range land use plans and programs as well as adopted policies in the General Plan and Coastal Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -25 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Policy No. RCPG Policy Consistency Analysis Open Space Ancilla ry Goals The proposed project includes the development of a single - family residence on an existing lot. Such projects are not required to dedicate public parkland nor are they Provide adequate land resources to meet the outdoor required to pay a park in -lieu fee as no subdivision is 9.01 recreation needs of the present and future residents in required that would increase the number of residential the region and to promote tourism in the region. units. The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19) of the Municipal Code only requires parkland dedication or the payment of an in -lieu fee for subdivisions that increase housing units. The proposed single - family dwelling unit is a residential "in- fill" project in an existing residential neighborhood. 9.02 Increase the accessibility to open space lands for Begonia Park is located adjacent to the subject property; outdoor recreation. however, project implementation will not affect accessibility either to that recreational amenity or to open space lands within the City. The City's Recreation Element is intended to ensure that the provision of sufficient parks and recreation facilities Promote self- sustaining regional recreation resources are appropriate for the residential and business 9.03 and facilities. population in Newport Beach. The City has adopted several policies that establish the framework for achieving the goal of providing adequate recreational facilities. The biological survey was conducted to identify potential sensitive biological resources and to evaluate the Develop well- managed viable ecosystems or known potential adverse effects of the proposed project on 9.08 habitats of rare, threatened and endangered species, important habitat and /or resources. Based on that including wetlands. analysis, it was determined that no significant impacts either to sensitive habitat or species will occur and the project would not impact wetlands. Existing Land Use Conflict with an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. The Newport Beach General Plan identifies the City's open space and conservation areas. However, because the area of the City in which the subject property is located is nearly completely developed, natural open space and habitat are limited in the project environs. The subject property, which encompasses approximately 0.1 acre (4,412 square feet) that is currently undeveloped, is located within the limits of the Central /Coastal NCCP adopted by the County of Orange. The NCCP is intended to ensure the long -term survival of the coastal California gnatcatcher and other special status coastal sage scrub (CSS) dependent plant and wildlife species in accordance with state - sanctioned NCCP program guidelines. The biological surveys conducted on the subject property revealed that although a small area encompassing 0.006 acre (approximately 261 square feet) of coastal bluff scrub exists on the site. However, the area is characterized as having a low overall habitat value as a result of habitat fragmentation, influence of surrounding human activities, and because it supports limited long -term habitat value. Furthermore, no federal- or state - listed or otherwise sensitive species identified as having a potential to occur on the property were observed during the biological surveys conducted for the project. Based on the findings of the project biologist, the habitat does not qualify as an ESHA under the Coastal Act, and therefore, cannot be afforded protection under the Newport Beach LCP /CLUP or the City's General Plan. As a result, the loss of the low quality, fragmented habitat would not conflict with the Central /Coastal NCCP. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -26 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use Physically divide an established community. The project proposes the landform alteration that would accommodate one single - family residence on the 4,412 square foot lot. The site is bounded by Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue. As indicated previously, the area surrounding the subject property is developed with single - family residential development on three sides; Begonia Park abuts the site on the north and east. Although development of the site as proposed would change the character of the site by introducing a single - family home on the vacant property, development of the site as proposed would not adversely affect adjacent properties, which also support single - family homes. In particular, no design component or feature of the project would physically divide or otherwise adversely affect or significantly change an established community. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. Substantial or extreme land use incompatibility. Development of the site, which is currently vacant, would not result in a significant land use conflict. As previously indicated, the proposed single - family residence is consistent with the land use designation and zoning adopted for the site. The introduction of a single - family residence would be consistent and compatible with the existing residential development in the area, which is characterized by single - family and two - family residences. Furthermore, with the exception of the request for a modification permit that would allow a wall to extend above the three -foot height limit in the front yard setback, the proposed structure complies with the development standards (e.g., setbacks, building height, lot coverage, etc.) prescribed for the R -1 zoning district. Extension of the wall above the three -foot height limit would not result in substantial visual impacts (refer to Section 4.3 — Aesthetics). As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Incompatible land uses in an aircraft accident potential area as defined in an airport land use plan. The project area is not located within two miles of any existing public airport. John Wayne Airport, which is located approximately 4.5 miles northwest of the subject property, is the nearest aviation facility. No portion of the project site is located within the accident potential area of such a plan. Further, the subject property is not located within two miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip. Development of the subject property as proposed would neither affect nor be affected by aircraft operations at such a facility that would generate noise in excess of regulatory standards. Therefore, no significant land use impacts would occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are required. 4.1.5 Mitigation Measures As indicated in the preceding analysis, the proposed project, which includes the construction of one single - family detached residential dwelling unit on a 4,412- square foot lot in Corona del Mar, is consistent with the Land Use Element and Coastal Land Use Plan of the Newport Beach General Plan and with the long -range goals, policies and objectives adopted by the City in the General Plan Update. The proposed project is also compatible with the existing land uses in the area. As a result, no significant long -term land use impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -27 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — land Use and 4.1.6 Level of Significance after Mitigation As indicated above, the project is consistent with the long -range plans and programs adopted by the City. Further, implementation of the standard conditions identified for the project (i.e., comply with the zoning district regulations, California Building Code and other regulatory requirements) will ensure that no significant impacts will occur. No significant long -term unavoidable adverse land use impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.1 -2B Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Drat Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2 - Biological Resources 4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES In response to a "biological evaluation" of the Megonigal property prepared by Robert A. Hamilton (September 22, 2008) and submitted to the Newport Beach City Council, a Biological Assessment Survey of the subject 0.1 -acre property was conducted by Chambers Group on October 6, 2008. The findings of that survey are documented in a report dated October 9, 2008. The purpose of that survey was to: (1) assess the quality and quantity of native habitat present on the properly; (2) evaluate the suitability of the habitat to support listed or otherwise sensitive species; (3) survey for sensitive species identifiable at the time of the survey; and (4) map the vegetation communities occurring within the property boundaries. In addition, the City of Newport Beach retained BonTerra Consulting to review the two biological reports for the Megonigal property and to assess the findings of the documents. Chambers Groups also conducted a "Follow -up Survey and Response to Comments Issued by BonTerra Consulting Regarding the Biological Study' (February 27, 2009). The biological assessment (October 9, 2008) and follow -up survey (February 27, 2009) prepared by Chambers Group are the basis of the assessment of biological resources presented in this section; however, the relevant findings of each report are summarized in the section that follows. Each report is included in Appendix C of the Draft EIR. 4.2.1 Existing Conditions Vegetation The subject properly is composed of three plant communities, based on the biological assessment conducted by Chambers Group (refer to Appendix C). These plant communities (i.e., habitats), which include disturbed, disturbed /ornamental, and coastal bluff scrub, are discussed below. Disturbed Habitat This area, which encompasses 0.63 acre (2,744 square feet), is the largest plant community on the site (refer to Exhibit 4.2 -1). These areas are either devoid of vegetation (i.e., cleared or graded) or areas characterized by a high percentage of non - native, weedy plant species. The disturbed habitat is generally located on the upper portion of the site; however, portions of the natural bluff and lower portion of the property also support the disturbed habitat. The upper portion above the natural bluff has been cleared and is relatively devoid of vegetation with the exception of sparse Russian thistle (Salsola tragus). The areas within the central and lower portions of the site include the eroding segment of the natural bluff that supports no vegetation; the lower areas are vegetated largely by exotic grasses, including ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus). Other non - native species identified within the disturbed habitat include fennel (Feoniculum vulgare), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), Russian thistle and Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibacata). Disturbed /Ornamental Habitat Areas mapped as disturbed /ornamental and illustrated in Exhibit 4.2 -1 extend over 0.034 acre (i.e., 1,481 square feel) of the subject properly. These areas are dominated by escaped or planted ornamental species as well as a high presence of non - native, weedy species. Vegetation in this habitat is located on the lower portion of the property and reflects influences from surrounding landscaped areas, particularly Begonia Park located adjacent to the site on the north /northeast. Ice plant (Carpobrotus sp. and Mesembryanthum nodiflorum), myoporum trees (Myoporum laetum), jade plant (Crassula ovata), and a large fig tree (Ficus sp.) dominate the species cover in this area. Non - native, weedy species, including Russian thistle, cheeseweed (Malva parviflorum), and a few black mustard (Brassica nigra) occur within the plant community. Dreg Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.2 -1 Legend Coastal Bluff Scrub (0 006 acres) Disturbed /Ornamental (0.034 acres) Disturbed (0.063 acres) Property Boundary 1.....,J P Y N' ?iK E S 0 20 40 60 m Feet Vegetation Map Exhibit 4.2 -1 `L Chambers Group Inc Mcgonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Enviinmenfal Impact Report Section 4.2- Biological Resouroes The area at the lower portion of the property also supports several cliff aster (Malacothryn saxatilus) individuals and a young lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) less than 12 inches in height. A second lemonade berry individual is located on the lower portion of the slope, just beyond the property boundary and not on the project site. The presence of these native species indicates that, prior to encroachment from ornamental and weedy species; this area was vegetated with species characteristic of the coastal bluff scrub vegetation community. This area was classified as highly disturbed southern coastal bluff scrub in the Hamilton biological evaluation (refer to Appendix C). However, closer examination of the species present and their respective vegetative cover revealed that the overall native cover is very low (i.e., less than 10 percent) in this area because ornamental species have substantially displaced native species over lime. Coaslal Bluff Scrub The smallest plant community identified on the site is the coastal bluff scrub habitat, estimated to encompass approximately 0.006 acre (Le., 261 square feet).' This habitat generally consists of woody and /or succulent species up to seven feet in height occurring on poorly developed rocky soils and exposed to moisture -laden winds with high salt content. Species characteristics of coastal bluff scrub include sallbush (Atriplex sp.), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum var. fasciculatum), California bush sunflower (California encelia), stone crop species (Dudleya sp.) prickly pear cactus (Opuntia littoralis), cliff aster, and lemonade berry. The area mapped as coastal bluff scrub (refer to Exhibit 4.2 -1) is located on the cliff of the natural bluff centrally located within the parcel, which supports a total of 15 native shrubs, including California buckwheat, California bush sunflower, and the prickly pear cactus; however, big saltbush (Atriplex lentiformis), a species typically considered dominant or functional to the bluff scrub community, is absent from the site. Cliff aster and lemonade berry, also associated with this community, are present on -site, although they occur on the lower portion of the property, which has been overtaken by ornamental and weedy species with the exception of these few plants. A lemonade berry plant nearby is rooted underneath an overhanging patio of an adjacent home, next lo, but outside the properly boundary. The remaining portion of the natural bluff is bare of vegetation, and shows signs of significant natural erosion, as is characteristic of coastal bluffs. Soecial Status Plants A survey of six sensitive plant species known to occur within coastal bluff scrub habitat was conducted during the biological survey conducted by Chambers Group. These species include: (1) Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. devidsoni); (2) south coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica); (3) many - stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulisa) (4) cliff spurge (Euphorbia nlisera) (5) Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulteri); and (6) woolly seablite (Sueda taxifolia). Each of these species is discussed below. Davidson's Saliscale This annual herb is listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as a 1B.2 species (i.e., rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere). Blooming between April and October, populations of Davidson's saltbush have been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, and Ventura counties, and on several of the Channel Islands. The plant typically grows in coastal bluff scrub and in alkaline coastal scrub habitats at elevations between 30 and 660 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Although suitable habitat occurs on -site, this species was not observed on the properly at the time of the survey, which was conducted during the typical blooming 'The Robert Hamilton 'biological observation' (September 22, 2008) Indicated that more than half of the site is composed of southern coastal bluff scrub (0.02 acre in a narrow band of native vegetation along the top of the bluff) and highly disturbed southern coastal bluff scrub (0.06 acre) along the propertys lower level). Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.2 -3 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2 - Biological Resources season. This species was also not observed during the follow -up site visit and survey conducted by Chambers Group (refer to the discussion under "Many- Stemmed Dudleya "). Therefore, it is considered to be absent from the site. South Coast Saltscale This annual herb is also identified as a List iB.2 species by the CNPS. Populations of Couth Coast Saltscale, which typically blooms between March and October, have been found in Los Angeles, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Ventura counties as well as on several of the Channel Islands, occurring in coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coast scrub, and on playas, often in alkali soils at elevations up to 460 amsl. Although suitable habitat occurs on -site, south coast saltscale is considered to be absent because the survey was conducted during the blooming period of the species. Many - Stemmed Dudleya Many- stemmed dudleya is a perennial herb listed by the CNPS as a List 16.2 species. The species, which blooms between April and July, has been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties. It typically occurs in coastal scrub, chaparral, and valley and foothill grassland, usually on clay soils or grassy slopes at elevations from 48 to 2,595 feel amsl. Because this species is detectable outside of the blooming period and was not observed on the property at the time of the survey, it is considered to be absent from the site. In addition to the site survey, a "reference" site was also visited by Chambers Group in response to the BonTerra Consulting comment that this species as well as the Laguna Beach dudleya have the potential to occur on the subject property. The purpose of the reference site visit was to assess the phonological development (i.e., phenology is the study of periodic plant and animal life cycle events and how these are influenced by seasonal and interannual variations in climate) of each of the sensive Dudleya species at the time of the survey. Based on the reference site survey, the project biologist determined that had either the many- stemmed dudleya or the Laguna Beach dudleya been present on the subject site, it would be evident and identifiable on the February 12 "' site visit. However, neither of these species was observed on the follow -up site visit. As concluded in the report prepared by Chambers Group documenting the findings of the reference site visit and follow -up site visit, due to the disturbed nature of the project and its low habitat quality, which only supports three native plant species, it is highly unlikely that any sensitive plant species inhabit the project site. Cliff Spurge This perennial CNPS List 2.2 species (i.e., fairly endangered in California but more common elsewhere) occurs in San Diego and Orange counties as a component of coastal bluff or coastal sage scrub vegetation communities at elevations between 33 and 1,640 amsl. Because this species would be detectable at the time of the survey but was not observed, it is considered to be absent from the property. Coulter's Sallbush Coulter's saltbush is a perennial herb that is also included on the CNPS 1 B.2 List. It is known to occur in San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties at elevations ranging from 10 to 1,500 feet amsl. It is typically associated with coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coastal sage scrub, and valley and foothill grassland with clay or alkaline soils. Because this species would be detectable at the time the survey was conducted and was not observed, it is considered to be absent from the property. This species was also not observed during the follow -up site visit and survey conducted by the project biologist. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.2 -4 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2— Biological Resources Woolly Seablite Woolly seablite is an evergreen shrub (hat is currently identified as a 4.2 Listed species by the CLAPS (i.e., limited distribution and fairly endangered in California). The species, which is known to occur in San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties as well as the Channel Islands National Park, typically occurs on the margins of coastal marshes or as a component of coastal bluff scrub or coastal dune habitats at elevations ranging from sea level to 164 feet amsl. The species blooms from January through December but is detectable throughout the year. Therefore, because it was not observed during the survey conducted by Chambers Group, it is considered to be absent form the property. Aphanisma Although not originally evaluated, this species was also identified as potentially occupying the site by BonTerra Consulting. Aphanisma (Aphanisnla blitoides) is an annual herb that flowers as early as March. Known populations of this species growing in Dana Point have been known to flower as early as February. Because flowers appear subsequent to the vegetative structures of a plant, evidence of this species would have been present on the project site during the February site visit. However, no plant resembling an aphanisma was observed on the project site and this species has been confirmed to be absent from the site. Other Sensitive Plant Species Other sensitive plant species identified in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for the Newport Beach 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle map include the salt marsh bird's beak (Corydylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus) and the Estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa); however, these species require estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands, or vernal pool habitats, which are not present on the property. As a result, the Chambers Group biological assessment concluded that these plant species have no potential to occur on the project site. In addition, no habitat was present on -site for the following sensitive plant species. chaparral sand verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita) southern tarplant (Centromedia parryi ssp. australis) San Fernando Valley spineflower (Chroizanthe parryi var. Fernandina) salt marsh bird's beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus) Los Angeles sunflower (Helianthus nullalhi ssp. parishii) Coulter's goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri) mud nama (Nana stenocarpum) Gambel's yellowcress (Nasturtiurn gambelii) prostrate vernal pool navarretia ( Navarretia prostrata) coast woolly -heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata) estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa) Wildlife Due to the disturbance that has occurred to the site as well as urban development that has occurred in the vicinity of the subject property, the numbers and types of wildlife species observed during the biological survey conducted by Chambers Group were limited mainly to common species that adapt well to urbanization, including: Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2000 4.2 -5 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2 — Biological Resources western fence lizard mourning dove Anna's hummingbird black phoebe wrentit northern mockingbird song sparrow Soecial Status Wildlife Although no sensitive species of wildlife were observed during the survey conducted by Chambers Group, wildlife species with habitat on -site include the Cooper's hawk and the coastal California gnatcatcher. These species, which are both special status species, are discussed below. Cooper's hawk The Cooper's hawk is a California Species of Concern (CSC). It occurs as a migrant and/or resident over most of the U.S. from southern Canada to northern Mexico. Favored habitats include open woodlands, mature forests, woodland edges, and river groves. More recently the Cooper's hawk has been known to breed in suburban and urban areas with similar tree structure to native habitats. An individual, which was observed during the initial site visit conducted by Robert Hamilton (refer to Appendix C), was probably using the nearby open space provided by Begonia Park for roosting and hunting! Coastal California gnatcatcher Coastal California gnatcatcher is a federally threatened species and is listed by the State of California as a species of concern. It is a permanent resident of Diegan, Riversidian, and Venturan sage scrub sub - associations found from sea level to 2,500 feet above mean sea level. Within its range, the coastal California gnatcatcher associates strongly with California sagebrush (Ademisia californica) dominant habitats and also occurs in mixed scrub habitats with lesser percentages of this favored shrub. Other plant species important for the nesting and foraging of this species include California buckwheat, white sage (Salvia apiana), black sage (Salvia mellifera), and chaparral broom (Baccharis sarothroides). Chamise (Adenostorna fesciculatum) habitats may also support breeding pairs, especially where coastal sage scrub may occur nearby or form a component. Sufficient foraging or nesting habitat for the California gnatcatcher is not present on the proposed project site or in the surrounding area to support this species. The habitat on the subject property is limited in size (i.e., 261 square feet) and vegetative diversity, including the absence of California sagebrush. Additionally, the project site is located in an area of dense residential development, surrounded by urban ornamental landscaping. Any remaining habitat exists as "islands" within the residential area, which consist of few native species present among substantial exotic and ornamental vegetation, and are insufficient in size and /or vegetative composition to support this species. Therefore, there is no potential for coastal California gnatcatcher to occur on the subject properly. Other Species Other sensitive animal species identified in the CNDDB for the Newport Beach 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle map include the California black rail, Belding's savannah sparrow, light- footed clapper rail (marsh), California least tern, and SC fairy shrimp; however, as indicated for the other plant species, these animal species also require estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands, or vernal pool habitats, which are 0 Observation by Jenny .McGee, Staff Biologist (Chambers Group); "Biological Assessment Survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California following initial Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton Consulting;' October 9, 2008. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.2 -6 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Duff Environmental Impact Report Seclion 4.2— Biological Resowces not present on the property. As a result, the Chambers Group biological assessment concluded that these species of animals have no potential to occur on the project site. Migration Corridors The project site and surrounding areas are developed and no migratory wildlife corridors occur on site or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. 4.2.2 Significance Criteria Appendix G of the State CEQA guidelines indicates that a project may be deemed to have a significant effect on the environment if the project is likely to: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in focal or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (including protections provided pursuant to Section 1600 et seq.). 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. 4.2.3 Standard Conditions SC 4.2 -1 Bluff landscaping shall consist of native, drought tolerant plant species determined to be consistent with the California coastal buff environment. Invasive and non - native species shall be removed. Irrigation of bluff faces to establish re- vegetated areas shall be temporary and used only to establish the plants. Upon establishment of the plantings, the temporary irrigation system shall be removed. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newpoil Beach, CA August 2009 4.2 -7 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Repod Section 4.2— Biological Resources 4.2.4 Potential Impacts 4.2.4.1 Short -Term Construction Impacts Terrestrial Habitat /Species Noise levels at the project site due to construction activities would increase temporarily over existing ambient levels during the construction of the proposed project. During construction, noise may affect foraging and roosting activities, specifically for avian species. Although this is a temporary impact to such species, it is considered to be less than significant since noise levels would return to pre - construction levels at the completion of the proposed project. In addition, dust generated during the grading and site preparation phase would also be emitted onto the native and non - native vegetation on the bluff below the building pad; however, mandatory dust suppression (i.e., spraying the exposed areas with water) in accordance with SCAQMD rules will minimize the adverse effects of the dust emissions. Similar to the construction noise identified above, these impacts would also be temporary and cease upon completion of the site preparation phase. Avian species potentially affected by the construction noise are not limited to the site or immediate vicinity and could fly farther away to other locations, including Begonia Park, during construction. As a result, potential construction impacts would be less than significant. 4.2.4.2 Long -Term Operational Impacts Vegetation Project implementation will result in the elimination of the predominantly non - native species that exist on the site. In addition, it is possible that site grading and development would result in impacts to up to 261 square feet of the low quality coastal bluff scrub, including up to three native species previously identified That occupy the site. However, because the habitat mapped on the subject property does not quality as an ESHA, based on Coastal Act parameters, no impacts to an ESHA would occur. Furthermore, no sensitive plant species were observed on the site and none are anticipated to inhabit the subject property. Therefore, no significant impacts to sensitive plant species would occur. Wildlife Although site disturbance associated with the grading and site preparation will temporarily displace the small rodents, reptiles and amphibians and birds that inhabit and /or utilize the site, it is anticipated that many of these common species, which are most adaptable to development, would return to the site after the construction is completed. The temporary displacement of these non- sensitive species is not significant and does not require mitigation. Implementation of the landscape concept plan for the proposed single - family residence would replace existing albeit sparse vegetation on the site and would provide suitable replacement habitat for these non- sensitive animal species. Therefore, no significant impacts are identified and no mitigation measures are required. As previously indicated, a Cooper's hawk was observed during the initial sit visit conducted by Robert Hamilton in September 2008. This species is likely using the nearby open space provided by Begonia Park for roosting and hunting. The total area to be impacted by the proposed project is small in size, providing limited, if any, suitable habitat for this raptor species independent of the surrounding areas. The overall spatial loss of the project area will not result in a significant impact to the Cooper's hawk. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2000 4.2 -8 Megonigal Residence fPA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Raped Section 4.2— Biological Resources Migration Corridors The project site and surrounding areas are developed and no migratory wildlife corridors occur on site or in the vicinity of the project site, and therefore, the project will not interfere with resident, migratory or wildlife species. Habitat Fragmentation The project site is located in a densely developed residential neighborhood with urban landscaping throughout the area. No coastal bluff scrub habitat of moderate or high value is present within the vicinity of the project site. These conditions create habitat fragmentation, resulting overall low habitat value of the remaining patches. Although the property is contiguous with Begonia Part<, which does not support native wildlife species, there is no evidence that listed or otherwise sensitive species are dependent on the biological resources existing on the subject property. Begonia Park and the remaining open space in the project environs have been landscaped with urban ornamental landscaping. The areas of coastal bluff scrub located west of the site identified in the Hamilton biological evaluation (September 22, 2008) are also fragmented remnants of native habitat, consisting of few native species, surrounded by ornamental urban landscaping. The nearest habitat fragment is separated from the Megonigal property by the retaining wall of a nearby home. Ecological restoration, were it to be undertaken; could not restore full habitat value and function to this area. Influence of Surrounding Human Activities Due to the surrounding dense residential development, the subject property has been influenced directly and indirectly by various human activities, including the development of Begonia Park and subsequent ornamental landscaping, construction of the retaining wall at the property below the subject property as well as the construction of retaining walls and homes adjacent to the property, and the construction and terracing of streets and neighborhood lots. The remaining portions of coastal bluff scrub, both on the site and on other nearby fragments, reflect compromised habitat quality resulting from "edge effect' (i.e., disturbance to an area that borders or is a component of a natural habitat that results in negative impacts to some distance from the edge of the remaining intact natural habitat). Because it is of low quality, the southern coastal bluff scrub present within the project boundary does not provide valuable habitat because natural functions have been compromised by the surrounding human influences. Therefore, it does not support the species diversity, composition and connectivity necessary for an ecosystsem to be of significant habitat value. Limited Long -Term Habitat Value The substantial soil erosion of coastal bluffs and terraces is a natural component of these environments. The function of disturbance in these habitats is a component of the ecology, and habitat is ultimately restored through the re- colonization of surrounding native vegetative species. Without surrounding vegetation to re- colonize, the habitat value may be lost entirely once the existing habitats are destabilized by soil erosion. The natural disturbance will continue to create conditions favorable to invasive, weedy species and encroaching ornamentals. Therefore, this habitat segment is not likely to provide significant long -term habitat value to native plants or wildlife species. As a result, elimination of the low value coastal bluff scrub habitat will not result in significant impacts to biological resources on the site. Regional Habitat Conservation Plans and Programs The City of Newport Beach, through execution of the Natural Community Conservation Plan /Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP /HCP) Implementing Agreement (IA) and the receipt of a 10(a) Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is a participating land use jurisdiction in the Central- Coastal Subregional NCCP /HCP program. All impacts (permanent or temporary) to coastal sage scrub resources, including bluff Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach. CA August 2009 4.2 -9 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2- Biological Resources scrub habitat, must be reported as annual take report to the Executive Director, Nature Reserve of Orange County. Consistency with Coastal Land Use Plan and Natural Resources Element The biological survey conducted by Chambers Group evaluated the applicability of the California Coastal Act as it relates to the City's Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (LCP /CLUP) as well as the policies articulated in the Natural Resources Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. The function of the CLUP is the interpretation of the Coastal Act within the City, through policies that mandate the protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) as defined by Section 30107.5 of the Coastal Act. ESHA are defined as "... any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystsem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments." Furthermore, the Natural Resources Element of the City's General Plan states that the overall goal of the element is the protection of sensitive and rare terrestrial and marine resources from urban development. Based on the biological survey conducted by Chambers Group, the composition of the vegetation supported on the subject property is dominated by disturbed non - vegetated areas, ornamental species and weedy exotic species. Approximately five percent of the site (261 square feet) supports low quality coastal bluff scrub habitat. As indicated in the Robert Hamilton "biological observation," this habitat is recognized by the California Department of Fish and Game as a rare plant community. However, as documented in the biological survey conducted on the subject property, overall habitat value of the coastal bluff scrub occurring on the site is low due to habitat fragmentation, the influence of surrounding human activities, and because natural functions have been compromised by the surrounding human influences. Furthermore, no federal - or state - listed or other sensitive species were identified as having a potential to occur on the property. Therefore, the coastal bluff scrub habitat occupying the site does not qualify as an ESHA under the Coastal Act and, therefore, cannot be afforded protection under the Newport Beach LCP /CLUP or the Natural Resources Element of the City's General Plan as suggested in the Hamilton "biological observation." No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 4.2.5 Mitigation Measures Although project implementation will result in the loss of 261 square feet (0.006 acre) of degraded coastal bluff scrub, its elimination will not result in a significant impact because it has been substantially compromised by fragmentation and influences from human activities. As a result, its value as a long -term habitat is very limited. No mitigation measures are required. 4.2.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation As indicated above, no significant impacts to biological resources will occur as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.2 -10 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Drag F_hvi onmenlal Impact Report Section 4.3 - Aesthetics 4.3 AESTHETICS The aesthetic quality of the Megonigal property is determined by its visual character, consisting of elements such as natural and man -made features, vegetation and topography, and prominent views of and from the site. In addition, surrounding urban and natural features comprise the visual setting within which the project site takes on a given degree of importance. Both natural and artificial features contribute to perceived visual images and the aesthetic value of a view. The aesthetic value of a site or feature may be Influenced by geologic, hydrologic, botanical, wildlife, recreational, and urban features associated with it. Visual images and their perceived visual quality can vary substantially by season and even hourly as weather, light, shadow, and elements that comprise the viewscape change. Judgments of visual quality must also be made based on a regional frame of reference, since the same landform or visual resource in different geographic areas could have different visual resource quality and sensitivity in each setting. For example, a small hill may be a significant visual element on a flat landscape but may have very little significance in mountainous terrain. Evaluating changes to the project's visual setting and its effects on visual quality is often seen as a highly subjective matter, open to many interpretations and personal preferences. However, a widely diverse body of knowledge and study of the subject of natural and urban aesthetics has led to coherent and systematic methods of visual impact analysis. In the absence of a methodology prescribed by the City of Newport Beach, this analysis utilizes a series of visual simulations constructed for the proposed project that illustrate the post - development characteristics of the proposed project. A qualitative, descriptive approach is employed to describe and evaluate the visual resources of the subject site and proposed development. The existing visual setting in and around the subject property is defined by on -site and off -site features and the various views from particular vantage points (i.e., "viewsheds ") that encompass Those features. The on -site and off -site aesthetic character consists of urban and natural elements, and all occur within the context of a variety of urban land uses, including single - family attached and detached residential development located within the immediate vicinity of the subject property and adjacent roadways. A series of visual simulations has been prepared and serve as the basis for determining the potential impacts of the proposed project on the aesthetic character of the area. 4.3.1 Existing Conditions Existing Setting The subject property is currently undeveloped. The fenced property is characterized by a steeply sloping south - facing bluff. Portions of the subject property in the upper elevations located along Pacific Drive have been altered by grading or other clearance that has occurred on the site; this area is generally devoid of vegetation. Ornamental landscaping, including some trees and shrubs, exists in the lower elevations. The central portion of the site contains a small area that supports coastal bluff scrub vegetation. A large retaining wall, ranging from four feet to 15 feet in height, has been constructed along the southern property boundary. With the exception of the coastal bluff feature, which like virtually all coastal bluffs within the City, is acknowledged as an important visual element that defines the coastal portions of Newport Beach, neither the site nor the adjacent properties have been identified by the City as a visual or aesthetic resource. Furthermore, although the site supports a small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat, that area is not an environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA) as defined by both the City's General Plan /CLUP and the Coastal Act. Therefore, it does not represent a significant or important visual amenity due to its lack of integrity, limited variety and number of species, and its fragmented condition and degraded condition. Dian Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August. 2009 4.3 -1 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.3 - Aesthetics Natural Resources Element of the General Plan Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element identifies Begonia Park as a "Public View Point." The City has adopted several goals and policies intended to preserve and /or enhance the visual resources within Newport Beach (refer to Section 4.1). As a result, future development that may affect the Public View Point must adhere to the adopted applicable policies and programs. Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue are not designated as "Public View Corridor" on Figure NR3 and as such, public views from these streets are not protected. Coastal Land Use Plan The certified Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) also designates Begonia Park as a "public view point' on Map 4 -3. Westerly views exist from the park to Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean beyond. Several policies are included in the CLUP that address the preservation of important views within the City, including those from Begonia Park (refer to Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning). Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue are not designated as "Public View Corridor' on Map 4 -3 and as such, public views from these streets are not protected. Light and Glare Light sources in the project environs include those typical of a residential neighborhood such as security lighting for the homes and street lighting. No other substantial source of lighting exists within the residential neighborhood. 4.3.2 Significance Criteria The proposed project will be considered to have a significant aesthetic impact if the project: Has a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista Substantially damages scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Substantially degrades the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Creates a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. 4.3.3 Standard Conditions SC 4.3.1 Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of the Zoning Code. Exterior on- site lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No direct rays or glare are permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or create a public nuisance. "Walpak" type fixtures are not permitted. SC 4.3 -2 Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final of building permits, the applicant shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division to confirm control of light and glare. Draft Environmental Impact Report . Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.3 -2 Mcgonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.3 - Aesthetics 4.3.4 Potential Impacts 4.3.4.1 Short -Term Construction Impacts Implementation of the proposed project will result in site preparation (e.g., grading, etc.) and construction activities that could have some short -term effects, which would temporarily change the chaiacter of the area; however, it is important to note that these potential effects are similar to those which are typical of similar in -fill development projects in the City. The effects of construction will be visible during the anticipated 20 -month construction phase. Other effects during [he initial phase of development include dust generation associated with site grading and construction of the new structures that are proposed for the subject properly. Construction staging areas, storage of equipment and supplies, and related activities will contribute to a generally "disturbed" condition, which may be perceived as a potential visual impact. However, while these activities may be unsightly, they are not considered significant impacts because they are temporary in nature and will cease upon completion of the proposed construction program. 4.3.4.2 Long -Term Operational Impacts Visual Simulations Although the proposed single- family residence has been designed to be below the maximum allowable height limit imposed by the Newport Beach Zoning Code, project implementation will result in the construction of a single - family residential structure within the viewshed of Begonia Park, a "public view point' as identified on Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element and on Map 4.3 of the CLUP. The proposed structure, which is consistent with existing homes along Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue, will not obstruct public views of the bay and coastline from vantage points within the park due to the location of the proposed structure relative to the park. Although the proposed project will be visible from vantage points within Begonia Park, the overall character of the view will not be significantly be altered. Public views of Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean beyond exist from Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue. The proposed structure will obstruct these views, depending upon the specific vantage point, but these views are not protected by policy with the omission of these streets from Figure NR3 and Map 4 -3 and are therefore not considered significant. Several General Plan policies require new development to protect and, where feasible, enhance public views. Even though the project conforms to the existing building height limit, setback standards, and related development standards (except the planter in the required front yard setback area), potential public view impacts from the "public view point' at Begonia Park and /or Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue may occur. Begonia Pan< Visual Simulations As indicated previously, several policies in the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan address views from "public view points" and "public view corridors." Because Begonia Park is identified as a 'public view point," two visual simulations were created to illustrate the potential visual impacts that would be anticipated with the development of the single - family residence on the subject property. Exhibit 4.3 -1 illustrates the view from the lower bench situated on Begonia Park north of the site. As can be seen from this vantage point, the harbor and ocean to the west are clearly visible from this location. Although the proposed single - family residential structure will extend above Pacific Drive, views of the harbor and ocean from the lower bench would not be substantially altered even though a small portion of the ocean view above the roof will be reduced; no portion of the harbor visible from this location would be significantly affected by the proposed project. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.3 -3 r t M v � N «� m L W 0 J Y L a m .E 0 a� m m E 0 L LL 0 75 E Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Drat Environmental hnpacl Report Section 4.3 - Aesllhelics The view of the site from the upper bench of Begonia Park (refer to Exhibit 4.3 -2) reveals a similar view as that illustrated in Exhibit 4.3 -1. However, from this location within the park, it is apparent that site development would not extend high enough into the viewshed to block any portion of either the harbor or ocean view; no loss of the view of either feature would occur. Similar to the project impact from the lower bench, no portion of the harbor view would be affected. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated. In addition to the two visual simulations from Begonia Park, a third simulation was generated to illustrate the potential visual impacts associated with the project when viewed from Pacific Drive /Begonia Avenue intersection adjacent to the site. Exhibit 4.3 -3 illustrates the southerly view from this vantage point. The story poles that have been erected are intended to reflect the building envelope of the proposed single - family residence. As can be seen in this visual simulation, construction of the proposed home would virtually eliminate the entire harbor view and more distant ocean view from this vantage point. Although views to the southwest from this vantage point would be entirely blocked by development of the site, the potential impact is less than significant because this location is not recognized by either the General Plan (Natural Resources Element) or CLUP as an important view point (or view corridor). Because any development of the site would result in impacts to views from the adjacent streets, the Newport Beach Planning Commission stressed the importance of protecting the view from Begonia Park. Therefore, the proposed project was redesigned by lowering the development further down the bluff face, limiting street level development to single story, and pulling back elements of the project to lessen impacts to the Begonia Park view corridor (refer to Chapter 10.0 — Alternatives). Other Visual Simulations Additional visual simulations were also created to illustrate the aesthetic character of the proposed single - family residence as well as its relationship to views from several vantage points, in addition to those from Begonia Park. For example, Exhibit 4.3 -4 reflects views of the proposed project from not only the upper elevation within Begonia Park looking south through the site (View 1) but also from the lower elevation of the park east of the site looking west (View 3) and from Bayview Drive east of the site, also looking west (View 2). As indicated in View 2 in Exhibit 4.3 -4, neither the harbor nor ocean is visible from this vantage point. The simulation illustrates the character of the proposed residence and the landscaping that is proposed on the bluff face. No important view is blocked by the proposed structure. In View 3, the harbor is visible; however, the post- development simulation reveals that no portion of the proposed structure would encroach into the harbor view from this vantage point. Finally, this exhibit also provides a comparison of the proposed elevation with the maximum allowable building envelope (View 4). As indicated in the view, the proposed residence is contained within that envelope and it does not dominate the viewshed. Exhibit 4.3 -5 provides four additional visual simulations that clarify the visual context of the proposed project. Similar to Exhibit 4.3 -3, View 5 in this exhibit shows that the third floor, which includes the garage, of the proposed structure would completely block views from the Begonia Avenue /Pacific Drive vantage point. View 8 is similar to View 2 in Exhibit 4.3 -4; however, it was taken from a more distant location and, like View 2, reveals that no important views are blocked or otherwise affected from this vantage point. View 7, also taken from Begonia Park north of the site confirms that no portion of the view of the harbor would be affected by development of the site as proposed from this location. Finally, View 8 in Exhibit 4.3 -5 illustrates the pre- and post - construction views from Bayside Drive looking north. As can be seen in that visual simulation, the portion of the bluff visible between the two existing residential dwelling units would be covered by the proposed residence. However, as previously indicated, the site has been designed to preserve the existing view from Begonia Park, consistent with direction from the Newport Beach Planning Commission. As a result, no significant visual impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newpor7 Beach, CA August 2009 4.3-5 It • A � A • • s L``. • . � ii • • I � ' i, • l , � r M d V } ch ., In CL V V L i 4 ; llo- i k. 11` ti 1 1 ,i ® 1 1' "Ti r, AI 1 d' d' M r ,a. N r t � K � W N C O 7 E cn N FM LO 00 cII) in r to 3 s ®1 w y f Y a 1 ety � N 1' ✓ 1 1„ E�q WW III .a M I i , S 1 3 Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133 Drall Environmental Impact Report Seclion 4.3- Aesthetics Light and Glare As previously indicated, the existing residential development on Pacific Drive is characterized by lighting along the street and other interior and exterior lighting associated with residential uses. This illumination occurs along the frontage of the street and the rear portions of the residential properties. Lighting for the proposed project will also be provided for the same purpose as that which currently exists in the area (i.e., security and structure illumination). It is anticipated that the lighting will be energy efficient and will also be shielded or recessed as required by existing code, so that direct glare and reflections are contained within the boundaries of the property. As a result, implementation of the City's standard conditions (refer to Section 4.5.2) require compliance with the lighting standards and requirements, which will ensure that no significant lighting impacts occur; no mitigation measures are required. 4.3.5 Mitigation Measures As previously indicated, the project has been redesigned to conform to the building and development standards prescribed in the R -1 zoning district and to avoid significant visual impacts. No important view or aesthetic amenity would be destroyed or permanently affected by project implementation. Although no mitigation measures are required, the following measure, which requires the dedication of a view easement, will ensure that views through the site would be preserved. MM 43-1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall dedicate in perpetuity a view easement over the "Outdoor Room" identified on the approved plans and all open space areas on the project site that shall restrict the maximum height of landscaping and accessory structures to that of the top of the guardrails of the "Outdoor Room." The view easement shall be a three - dimensional space projected vertically from a horizontal plane at the elevation of the top of the guardrails of the "Outdoor Room" and horizontally to all property lines. The restrictions of the view easement shall not apply to the building and structures depicted on the approved project plans or to patio furniture. The form and legal description of the view easement shall be prepared by the applicant and reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. 4.3.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation Incorporation of the standard conditions will effectively address the visual and aesthetic character of the area. In addition, the proposed project will be designed to be consistent with the goals and objectives articulated in the Natural Resources Element (Visual Resources) of the Newport Beach General Plan. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. Drall Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA August 2009 4.3 -10 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be CHAPTER 5.0 IMPACTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT The environmental process requires the Lead Agency for a proposed project, in this case the City of Newport Beach, to prepare a Notice of Preparation (NOP) which describes the proposed project and summarizes the potential environmental impacts which could result from the implementation of a proposed project. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared to assess certain potential impacts associated with this project. The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the supporting documentation for the proposed Megonigal Residence are provided in Appendix A of this EIR. This section summarizes those potential impacts of the proposed Aerie project that were determined to be below a level of significance. 5.1 Agriculture No Prime Farmland, Farmland of State or Local Importance, or Unique Farmland occurs within or in the vicinity of the site. The site and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built -up Land" and "Other Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map. Further, neither the site nor the adjacent areas are designated as prime, unique or important farmlands by the State Resources Agency or by the Newport Beach General Plan. The Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element designates the site as "Single -Unit Residential — Detached (RS -D) "; the zone designation for the site is "R -1 (Single - Family Residential." Therefore, there is no conflict with zoning for agricultural use, and the property and surrounding properties are not under a Williamson Act contract. The site is not being used for agricultural purposes and, as indicated previously, is not designated as agricultural land. Although the subject property is undeveloped, the areas surrounding the site are developed with residential uses. Therefore, no agricultural uses on the site or within the site's vicinity would be converted to non - agricultural use. No significant impacts to agricultural resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 5.2 Air Quality Project implementation would result in temporary construction emissions that may affect local and regional air quality. Temporary construction activity emissions will occur during the construction stage of the proposed single - family residential dwelling unit, including the on -site generation of dust and equipment exhaust, and off -site emissions from construction workers commuting to the site and trucks hauling excavated earth materials from the site and delivering building materials to the subject property. The short-term construction emission levels would be below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds for each type of pollutant, with or without best available control measures (refer to Table 5 -1). Construction -phase emissions would not, therefore, violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Given the limited size of the project (i.e., one single - family residential dwelling unit), construction emissions for carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrous oxide (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx) and particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM1e) from equipment use and truck trips would be below SCAQMD thresholds. In addition, volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from paints and coatings would create ROG emissions during construction. Dust emissions on site would be generated by excavation and initial construction activities. However, as indicated previously, such emissions would be less than the current thresholds as indicated below and would, therefore, not be significant. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be Table 5 -1 Project - Related Pollutant Emissions Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single - family residence include vehicular exhaust from daily traffic (i.e., based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site and landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a variety of household cleaning and hair care products. Estimated long -term project - related emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds for all categories of pollutants. The project's long -term emissions would not violate any air quality standard established by the AQMD or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. Although the project would increase the resident population on the project site, the proposed project includes only one single - family residence. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be significant in the context of the contribution of worldwide GHG impacts. Construction activities would result in the generation of approximately 250 tonnes /year of CO2e; operational CO2e emissions are estimated to be less than 20 tonnes /year. These emissions are below the City's threshold of 6,000 tonnes /year. 5.3 Cultural Resources The project site is currently undeveloped. No historic resources are identified either on the site or in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is not identified by the City as possessing potentially important historic resources. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant impacts to historic resources and no mitigation measures are required. Project implementation includes excavation of the property to accommodate the proposed single - family residence. It is unlikely that the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in significant impacts to cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with the existing development in the area and the nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine). Although no significant impacts to cultural resources are anticipated, the City of Newport Beach requires that an archaeological monitor be present during grading to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered, appropriate measures will be implemented in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, no significant impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are recommended. The site contains the Monterey Formation deposits, which are known to contain abundant fossilized marine invertebrates and vertebrates. The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project area exists. Like other sites in the City that are underlain by the Monterey Formation, the site should be considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during grading and Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -2 ROG Ibs /da NOx Ibs /day) CO (Ibs /day) SO2 (Ibs /day) PM10 (Ibs /day) PM2.5 (Ibs /day) CO2 (Ibs /da Construction Emissions 1.64 12.99 7.12 0.00 0.82 0.55 1,335.23 Significance Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55 __1 Exceeds Threshold No No No No No No No Operational Emissions 0.11 0.05 0.82 0.00 0.11 0.00 97.92 Significance Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55 __1 Exceeds Threshold No No No No No No No 'City employs a threshold of 6,000 tonnes /year. SOURCE: City of Newport Beach (August 2009) Keeton Kreitzer Consulting Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single - family residence include vehicular exhaust from daily traffic (i.e., based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site and landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a variety of household cleaning and hair care products. Estimated long -term project - related emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds for all categories of pollutants. The project's long -term emissions would not violate any air quality standard established by the AQMD or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. Although the project would increase the resident population on the project site, the proposed project includes only one single - family residence. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be significant in the context of the contribution of worldwide GHG impacts. Construction activities would result in the generation of approximately 250 tonnes /year of CO2e; operational CO2e emissions are estimated to be less than 20 tonnes /year. These emissions are below the City's threshold of 6,000 tonnes /year. 5.3 Cultural Resources The project site is currently undeveloped. No historic resources are identified either on the site or in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is not identified by the City as possessing potentially important historic resources. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant impacts to historic resources and no mitigation measures are required. Project implementation includes excavation of the property to accommodate the proposed single - family residence. It is unlikely that the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in significant impacts to cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with the existing development in the area and the nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine). Although no significant impacts to cultural resources are anticipated, the City of Newport Beach requires that an archaeological monitor be present during grading to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered, appropriate measures will be implemented in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, no significant impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are recommended. The site contains the Monterey Formation deposits, which are known to contain abundant fossilized marine invertebrates and vertebrates. The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project area exists. Like other sites in the City that are underlain by the Monterey Formation, the site should be considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during grading and Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -2 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be excavation. A mitigation measure has been included in accordance with existing City policy to ensure that such resources can be avoided during grading /excavation activities and no significant impacts will occur. MM -1 A qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be retained by the project applicant who will be present during the grading and landform alteration phase. In the event that cultural resources and /or fossils are encountered during construction activities, ground- disturbing excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted by the monitor until the find has been salvaged. Any artifacts and /or fossils discovered during project construction shall be prepared to a point of identification and stabilized for long -term storage. Any discovery, along with supporting documentation and an itemized catalogue, shall be accessioned into the collections of a suitable repository. Curation costs to accession any collections shall be the responsibility of the project applicant. 5.4 Geology and Soils The subject property is located in the seismically active southern California region; several active faults are responsible for generating moderate to strong earthquakes throughout the region. Due to the proximity of the site to the Newport - Inglewood Fault zone, the subject property has a moderate to high probability to be subjected to seismic and associated hazards. The maximum credible earthquake on the NIFZ is estimated to be 7.6 with a probable magnitude of 6.6 on the Richter scale. Estimated peak ground acceleration for the subject site from an earthquake with a 10 percent probability of exceedance in a 50 -year period is 0.39g. Similarly, the maximum credible earthquake on the Elsinore - Whittier Fault is 8.0, with a probable (Richter) magnitude of 7.2. Other faults capable of producing seismic activity that could affect the subject property include the San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults and the Whittier Fault, which is a northern branch of the Elsinore Fault. In addition to these faults, the San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust Fault is located less than 1.5 to 2.5 miles below the area. This fault and the Newport Inglewood fault (concealed segment), located approximately 750 to 1,000 feet from the subject site, are considered the potential causative faults in the area. Even though the project site and surrounding areas could be subject to strong ground movements, incorporation of the recommendations included in the preliminary geotechnical report and adherence to current building standards of the City of Newport Beach would reduce the potential adverse effects of ground movement hazards to a less than significant level. Based on the geologic exploration undertaken on the subject property, the site is underlain by sedimentary rocks of the Monterey Formation. These rocks do not have the potential for liquefaction. Furthermore, no groundwater is present to the depths and no loose sands or coarse silt is present. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction is less than significant. Proper design of the proposed residence will ensure that ground failure, including that associated with liquefaction, will not pose a significant hazard to the development. The initial study prepared for the proposed project included mitigation measures to address the site's geologic and seismic characteristics, including: MM -2 Prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, an erosion control plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City's Chief Building Official. MM -3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a soils engineering report and final geotechnical report to the City's Building Department for approval. The project shall be designed to incorporate the recommendations included in those reports that which address site grading, site clearing, compaction, caissons, bearing capacity and settlement, lateral pressures, footing design, seismic design, slabs on grade, retaining wall design, subdrain design, concrete, surface drainage, setback distance, excavations, cut -fill transitional zones, planters and slope maintenance, and driveways. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -3 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be 5.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials A search of various databases concerning hazardous wastes and substances sites was conducted through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) as part of the environmental analysis. The results of the search, which is on file with the City of Newport Beach, determined that the subject property is not included on any lists of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, project implementation will not create a significant hazard either to the public or the environment. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Project implementation is the construction of one single - family residence on the 4,400 square foot lot. As indicated above, the proposed project does not involve any activities and /or uses that would utilize hazardous materials or other substances that would, if released into the environment, create a safety or health hazard. There is no indication that the subject site has been contaminated that would adversely affect site development. Although grading and site preparation activities will expose subsurface soils and result in the generation of fugitive dust, no hazardous emissions will occur as a result of project implementation. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur. 5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality No stream or river exists on site. Existing surface runoff generated on the subject property occurs as sheet flow and drains in a southerly direction over the bluff where it enters the City's storm drain system before discharging into Newport Bay, which has been identified as containing "environmentally sensitive areas" as defined by the 2003 Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the Water Quality Control Plans for the Santa Ana Basin. The actual amount of stormwater runoff generated from the building footprint and paved areas (totaling approximately 2,300 square feet) would be insignificant. Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality codes and policies, which are performed during the plan check stage, will ensure that surface flows can be accommodate and water quality protected. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. This small -scale project would not result in a significant increase in water demand and all of the project's potable and non - potable water needs will be met through a connection to the City's domestic water system. The proposed single - family residence represents an insignificant increase in the demand for domestic water, which has been anticipated by the City in its long -range plans. No water wells are proposed or required to meet the water demands of this project. There are no water wells located on or near the site, and since this project would not affect any existing or require any new water wells, the project will not result in the lowering of the water table. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Newport Bay is listed as an "impaired" water body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with respect to metals, pesticides and priority organics. Changes in surface runoff are anticipated as a result of the development of the subject property with one residence that could result in potential impacts to water quality. However, the project will be designed to comply with all relevant building, grading and water quality codes and policies to ensure that there will not be an adverse effect on water quality, either during construction or during the operational life of the project. Final plan check includes the preparation of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that must be found to meet applicable standards. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5-4 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 5.7 Mineral Resources Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be The project site is vacant. However, neither the Newport Beach General Plan (Recreation and Open Space Element) nor the State of California has identified the project site or environs as a potential mineral resource of Statewide or regional significance. No mineral resources are known to exist and, therefore, project implementation will not result in any significant impacts to regional or statewide resources. Furthermore, the Newport Beach General Plan does not identify the project environs as having potential value as a locally important mineral resource site. Project implementation (i.e., construction of a single - family residence) as proposed will not result in the loss of any locally important mineral resource site and, therefore, no significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. 5.8 Noise A variety of noise sources and noise levels would occur on and in the immediate vicinity of the project site over the site preparation and construction phase anticipated for the proposed project. Noise levels would vary, depending upon the type and number of construction machinery and vehicles in use and their location within the project site. Not all equipment is generally operated continuously or used simultaneously. The number, type, distribution, and usage of construction equipment will differ from phase to phase. The noise generated is both temporary in nature and limited in hours by the City's Noise Ordinance (Section 10.28.040). Compliance with the existing noise control ordinance and hours of construction prescribed in the ordinance will minimize the potential noise impacts associated with project implementation. Other measures have been identified to ensure that construction noise is minimized. Typically, construction of single - family residential dwelling units on an individual basis in the City of Newport Beach, including on bluffs in the City, does not result in significant noise impacts because of their small size and the duration of construction is not anticipated to occur over a long period of time e.g., less than two years for custom home construction. Furthermore, the highest noise levels occur from excavation and caisson drilling associated with bluff development, which take place during the initial stage of development and do not last more than 2 to 3 months. Therefore, because the project encompasses only one single - family residence, which would employ typical construction techniques and be constructed in approximately 20 months like most single- family residential construction in the City, potential construction noise impacts will be less than significant with the incorporation of the prescribed mitigation measures identified below. MM -4 All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling devices. All construction equipment shall be located or operated as far as possible away from nearby residential units. MM -5 A construction schedule shall be developed that minimizes the duration of potential project - related and cumulative construction noise levels. MM -6 The construction contractor shall notify the residents of the construction schedule for the proposed project, and shall keep them informed on any changes to the schedule. The notification shall also identify the name and phone number of a contact person in case of complaints. The contact person shall take all reasonable steps to resolve the complaint. 5.9 Population and Housing The project will result in a small increase in the number of residents in the City; however, this increase in population is consistent with the City's long -range projections and, furthermore, would not result in a Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -5 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be substantial increase in population based on the population per household recognized by the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, project implementation would not result in a loss of housing and /or impacts to existing or project population. No replacement housing would be required as a result of project implementation. 5. 10 Public Services Fire Protection Fire protection facilities and service to the subject property are provided by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD). In addition to the City's resources, the NBFD also maintains a formal mutual automatic aid agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) and all neighboring municipal fire departments to facilitate fire protection in the City should the need arise. The project will result in an increase of one residential dwelling unit in the City. There will not be a significant increase in structures and persons requiring emergency services. The project will be required to include all necessary fire protection devices as determined by the Newport Beach Fire Department. The project must comply with the current Building and Fire Codes adopted by the City. A code compliance analysis will be conducted by City staff to ensure that the project complies with the requirements established by the City. A final compliance determination will be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. The project will be designed to facilitate and enhance the provision of adequate fire protection. Adequate water supplies and infrastructure, including fire hydrants, exist in the vicinity of the project, and there is no requirement for other new facilities or emergency services. Police Protection The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) is responsible for providing police and law enforcement services within the corporate limits of the City. The Police Department headquarters is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, at the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara, approximately two miles northeast of the subject property. The NBPD currently has a ratio of 1.91 sworn officers for each 1,000 residents in the City. This ratio is adequate for the current population. Police and law enforcement service in the City is provided by patrols with designated "beats." Project implementation will result in the construction of one single - family residence consistent with existing City plans and programs and, therefore, would not require an expansion to local law enforcement resources. Project implementation would not result in any environmental impacts involving construction of new law enforcement facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Schools The provision of educational facilities and services in the City of Newport Beach is the responsibility of the Newport-Mesa Unified School District. Residential and non - residential development is subject to the imposition of school fees. Payment of the State - mandated statutory school fees is the manner by which potential impacts to the District's educational facilities are mitigated. At the present time, the subject property has no impact on the Newport Mesa Unified School District. When this project is completed, the development and occupancy of the single - family residence might result in the generation of school age children. It is estimated that only one school -age student would be generated by the proposed project. New or expanded school facilities would not be required to provide classroom and support space for such a low number of children. However, as indicated below, the project applicant must pay the applicable school fee to the school district, pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, in order to offset the incremental cost impact of expanding school resources to accommodate the increased student enrollment associated with new residential development. With the payment of the mandatory school fee, no significant impact would occur as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -6 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Other Public Facilities Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be Due to the minor increase in residential density in the area associated with the construction of a single residential dwelling unit, no significant increased demand for other public services is anticipated and there would be no need to construct any new public facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 5.11 Recreation The project will result in the development of one single - family home on the subject site. Although residents of the proposed home would occasionally visit local and regional parks and beaches, use of those public facilities by the future residents would not represent a substantial change in the intensity of usage and the impact would not result in substantial physical deterioration of those park areas. 5.12 Traffic and Circulation Short-term traffic impacts are those resulting from site preparation (i.e., grading and site preparation) and construction activities. With the exception of heavy trucks traveling to and from the site in the morning and afternoon to be used during site preparation and construction that occurs on -site, the proposed project would not generate a significant number of vehicular trips on a daily basis. The proposed single - family dwelling unit would generate approximately 10 trips per day that would be added to the local street system when the single - family home is occupied. The addition of those trips would not significantly affect circulation within the neighborhood or along arterials in the City of Newport Beach. However, during the construction phase, there will be periods of time when heavy trucks associated with hauling and equipment and material transport would travel to and from the site that could result in congestion on Pacific Drive and nearby local /residential street system. It is estimated that a total of 52 heavy trucks would be generated as a result of the grading that would be necessary to haul the estimated 630 cubic yards of soil export that must be hauled from the site (based on based on a haul truck capacity of 12 cubic yards). It is anticipated that the dirt hauling would last less than one week and would contribute about 15 heavy truck trips per day during the site grading phase. However, once grading has been completed, the number of heavy trucks entering and leaving the project area would be limited to those transporting equipment and materials to the site. Other construction - related traffic impacts are associated with vehicles carrying workers to and from the site and medium and heavy trucks carrying construction materials to the project site, which may result in some minor traffic delays; however, potential traffic interference caused by construction vehicles would create a temporary/short-term impact to vehicles using neighboring streets in the morning and afternoon hours. Therefore, aside from potentially minor impacts resulting from the increase in traffic that will occur as a result of construction - related traffic (e.g., construction materials, construction workers, etc.), no significant short-term impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. Nonetheless, the construction traffic impacts would be adequately addressed through the implementation of a Construction Traffic Control Plan as indicated below. MM -7 Prior to commencement of each major phase of construction, the Contractor shall submit a construction staging, parking and traffic control plan for approval by the Public Works Department, which shall address issues pertaining to potential traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods, potential displacement of on- street parking, and safety. This plan shall identify the proposed construction staging area(s), construction crew parking area(s), estimated number and types of vehicles that will occur during that phase, the proposed arrival /departure routes and operational Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -7 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be safeguards (e.g. flagmen, barricades, shuttle services, etc.) and hourly restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods, displacement of on- street parking and to ensure safety. If necessary, the construction staging, parking and traffic control plan shall provide for an off -site parking lot for construction crews which will be shuttled to and from the project site at the beginning and end of each day until such time that the project site can accommodate off - street construction vehicle parking. Until that time, construction crews shall be prohibited from parking in the adjacent residential neighborhood. The plan shall identify all construction traffic routes, which shall avoid narrow residential streets unless there is no alternative, and the plan shall not include any streets where some form of construction is underway within or adjacent to the street that would impact the efficacy of the proposed route. Dirt hauling shall not be scheduled during weekday peak hour traffic periods or during the summer season (Memorial Day holiday weekend through and including the Labor Day holiday weekend). The approved construction staging, parking traffic control plan shall be implemented throughout each major construction phase. Long -term traffic impacts would not occur as a result of project implementation. The trip generation associated with one home is less than 10 trips per day. The addition of 10 trips on the City's circulation system would not result in potentially significant impacts to either roadway segments or intersections. Adequate emergency access is available and no parking impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. No mitigation measures are required. 5.13 Utilities Wastewater generated by the proposed new residence would be disposed into the existing sewer system and would not exceed wastewater treatment standards of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Water demand and wastewater generation will not increase significantly over existing uses due to the increase in the number of occupants who will reside on the site. The project will connect to existing water and wastewater facilities that currently serve existing development in the area. No expansion of these facilities is necessary due to availability of existing capacity and adequate infrastructure. Future water demand based on the General Plan projections would not be increased significantly by one home. The project will not result in a significant increase in solid waste production due to the limited size of the project (i.e., one single - family home). Existing landfills are expected to have adequate capacity to service the site and use. Solid waste production will be picked up by either the City of Newport Beach or a commercial provider licensed by the City of Newport Beach. All federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste will be adhered to through this process. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 5 -8 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 6.0 — Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts CHAPTER 6.0 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS 6.1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(b) This Section summarizes the unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the approval of the proposed Megonigal Residence. Specifically, Section 15126(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR): "Describe any significant impacts, including those which can be mitigated, but not reduced to a level of insignificance. Where there are impacts that cannot be alleviated without imposing an alternative design, their implications and the reasons why the project is being proposed, notwithstanding their effect, should be described." 6.2 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Project implementation will not result in any potentially significant unavoidable adverse impacts. All of the potential project - related effects are less than significant as indicated in Chapter 4.0 (Environmental Analysis) of the Draft EIR. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megoningal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 6 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 7.0 — Irretreivable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources CHAPTER 7.0 IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES Approval and implementation of the proposed Megonigal Residence would allow for the construction of a single - family residence on the 0.1 -acre site will require the commitment of a relatively small amount of additional energy resources (e.g., oil, gas, diesel and related petroleum products) on a daily basis. In addition, the project does encompass construction activities that result in the commitment of building supplies; however, the building supplies (e.g., wood, concrete steel, etc.) would not be greater than other projects of similar size. Further, no development is proposed that would significantly affect biological, cultural/scientific, mineral, or other valuable resources. Therefore, there would only be a small irretrievable commitment of energy resources such as gasoline and diesel fuel for the operation of landfill equipment. Because these types of resources are available in sufficient quantities in this region and the proposed projects encompass a very limited scope, these impacts are not considered significant. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -1336 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 7 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts CHAPTER 8.0 GROWTH- INDUCING IMPACTS 8.1 Definition of Growth - Inducing Impacts Section 15126.2(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describe the potential growth inducing impacts of a proposed project. Specifically, Section 15126.2(d) states: "Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic development or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment ... . Also discuss the characteristics of some projects that may encourage and facilitate other activities that could substantially affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental or of little significance to the environment." To assess whether the proposed project may foster spatial, economic or population growth, several questions are considered: Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in the removal of an impediment to growth such as the establishment of an essential public service or the provision of new access to an area? Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in economic expansion or growth such as changes in the revenue base or employment expansion? Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in the establishment of a precedent setting action such as an innovation, a radical change in zoning or a General Plan amendment approval? Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in development or encroachment in an isolated or adjacent area of open space, as opposed to an infill type of project in an area that is already largely developed? 8.2 Analysis of Growth- Inducing Impacts Potential project - related growth- inducing impacts related to each of the questions cited above are discussed below. Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in the removal of an impediment to growth such as the establishment of an essential public service or the provision of new access to an area? As indicated previously, the proposed project is located in an area of the City where all of the essential public services and/or utilities and other features exist. Further, the existing public facilities and services, including police and fire protection services, sewer, water, and storm drainage, and parks and recreational facilities, are adequate to serve the proposed Megonigal Residence. As a result, there would not be any significant new demands that would result in the necessity to expand an existing service or create a new service, which would eliminate an existing impediment to growth. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 8 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in economic expansion or growth such as changes in the revenue base or employment expansion? Implementation of the proposed project will not result in any significant economic growth or expansion in either the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange or larger southern California region. Although a number of short -term, construction - related jobs would be created by the construction of the proposed single - family residence, the construction - related jobs would be extremely limited and would cease with completion of the construction. Furthermore, project implementation would not result in the creation of any long -term employment opportunities. The proposed project constitutes "in fill" development of a site that is currently vacant but on which development has been anticipated, as indicated by the Land Use Element designation and zoning classification adopted for the site. The proposed residential development would result in an increase of one dwelling unit within the City of Newport Beach, consistent with the adopted land use plans and policies of the City. Therefore, no significant growth - inducing impacts of the proposed project are anticipated. Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in the establishment of a precedent setting action such as an innovation, a radical change in zoning or a General Plan amendment approval? The subject property is designated RS -D (Single -Unit Residential — Detached) and is zoned R -1 (Single - Family Residential). The applicant does not propose an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan or to the Coastal Land Use Plan land use designation. The City's General Plan was updated in 2006. The proposed project is, therefore, consistent with the land use and intensity of development permitted by the long -range plans adopted for the project by the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, approval of the proposed Modification Permit and Encroachment Permit that comprise project approval would not set a precedent in the use of the site. Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in development or encroachment in an isolated or adjacent area of open space, as opposed to an infill type of project in an area that is already largely developed? Generally, growth- inducing projects possess such characteristics as being located in isolated, undeveloped or under developed areas, necessitating the extension of major infrastructure (e.g., sewer and water facilities, roadways, etc.) or those that could encourage the "premature" or unplanned growth in an area not planned for development (i.e., "leap frog" development). The subject property is a vacant site that is designated residential by both the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan and zoning. The site is located within an urbanized area in the City of Newport Beach (Corona del Mar). As such, it is important to note that the proposed development will not remove an obstacle to population growth since the project site is located in an area that is urbanized and all of the essential infrastructure, including sewer and water facilities, storm drainage facilities, electricity and natural gas, and related utilities have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed single - family dwelling unit. Project implementation will not result in significant increases in demands on the infrastructure. Therefore, no significant growth- inducing impacts are anticipated 8.3 Conclusion The answer to each of the questions cited above as they relate to the proposed Megonigal Residence is "no." The proposed project includes the development of one single - family residential dwelling unit that is consistent with the long -range plans adopted by the City of Newport Beach. The proposed project is not characterized by features that attract or facilitate new, unanticipated development, which would ordinarily be considered growth inducing. Conventionally, growth inducement is measured by the potential of a project or a project's secondary effects (i.e. provision of new infrastructure which supports housing or creation of jobs) to facilitate Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 8 -2 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts development of housing. Since the proposed single - family residence is limited in scope and ultimately, its effect on the environment, the standard variables associated with the development of housing, commercial or industrial land uses do not apply. Further, all of the infrastructure and public facilities that exist in the project area are adequate to provide an adequate level of service, including sewer, and water. Project implementation will not result in any significant direct or indirect addition of residential development that would generate new residents or employment that would be an "attractor" of residents to the area that are not already anticipated in the General Plan. The site is not located in an isolated area that is constrained by the absence of infrastructure where the provision of infrastructure would promote further development. None of the accepted standards that distinguish growth- inducing projects characterize the proposed project; therefore, no growth- inducing impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 8 -3 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts CHAPTER 9.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT 9.1 Definition of Cumulative Impacts Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines defines cumulative impacts as: "...two or more individual effects which when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts." Section 15355 further describes potential cumulative impacts as: "(a) The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects. (b) The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time." Cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual impacts which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or from a number of projects. A cumulative impact refers to the degree of change in the environment resulting from a particular project, plus the incremental impacts created by other closely related past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Cumulative impacts may reveal that relatively minor impacts associated with a particular project may contribute to more significant impacts when considered collectively with other projects taking place over a period of time. 9.2 Cumulative Projects Section 15130(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines provides two options for considering potentially significant cumulative adverse impacts. This analysis can be based on either: "(A) A list of past, present and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or (B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or areawide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency." For the cumulative analysis presented below, with the exception of air quality impacts, which are based upon development occurring within the South Coast Air Basin, the potential environmental effects of the proposed Aerie project were considered in conjunction with the potential environmental effects of the development of other closely related past, present, and probable future projects in the City, which are listed in Table 9 -1. Although there may be other projects occurring within the City, those identified in Table 9 -1 reflect the projects with similar potential impacts as the proposed project. This geographic limitation is appropriate Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts because the proposed project is small in size and is not likely to have significant regional environmental consequences. Furthermore, the project site is located in the center of the Newport Beach and not near the border of a neighboring jurisdiction. Therefore, Table 9 -1 reflects a geographic limitation to projects located within the City of Newport Beach. Finally, the related projects list is not limited to single - family residential projects like the proposed project; it includes a variety of approved and proposed land uses, including institutional, commercial, municipal, and mixed -use projects that vary in size. Table 9 -1 Related Projects List 'A second potential project has also been proposed for the Newport Beach Country Club. That proposal (PA2008 -152), includes the demolition of the existing golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures and replacement of the clubhouse with a 54,819 square foot facility, including dining and related elements. No changes to the existing tennis club are proposed in this development application. PA2005 -140 represent a'worst case" development scenario and is included in the list of related projects. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megoniga/ Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -2 Potential Cumulative Name /Address Permit No. status Description Impacts Ap ved Projects w /Environmental Clearance General Plan Amendment, Planned Community Development Plan lMay Amendment, Development Agreement Hoag Hospital Master Plan PA2007 -073 2008 Approved Amendment to reallocate up to Air Quality 225,000 gross square feet of unbuilt, permitted floor area from the Lower Campus to the Upper Campus Use permit for a full - service, high - Panini Cafe PA2007 -063 MND turnover eating and drinking Traffic 2421 Coast highway Approved June 2008 establishment, including a 160 square Air Quality foot outdoor dining area. Installation of 37 new square, concrete piles to provide 33 slips of various Lido Anchorage PA 2007 -121 Approved September sizes. The floating docks, fingers, and Biological 151 Shipyard Way 2008 gangways will result in approximately Resources 24,043 square feet of overwater coverage. Construction of a new 42,230 square Oasis Senior Center PA2008 -109 Under Construction feet Oasis Senior Center facility on the Traffic 800 Marguerite Avenue current site located on the corner of Air Quality Marguerite Avenue and Fifth Avenue. Pending Projects that Require Review Planned Community Text Adoption for PC-47 (Newport Country Club), Development Agreement, Vesting Tentative Tract Map for the Newport Beach Country development of 5 semi - custom single - CIub1 PA2005 -140 Applied 2005 family residential units, 27 hotel units Traffic 1600 East Coast Highway Pending with a 2,048- square foot concierge and Air Quality guest center, a new 3,523 square foot tennis club with a 6,718 square foot spa, a 41,086 square foot golf club with accessory facilities, 8 tennis courts, and a swimming pool. Expansion of the existing Hyatt Regency Hotel by adding 88 new Hyatt Regency timeshare units, a timeshare Traffic 1107 Jamboree Road PA2005 -212 Approved clubhouse, a new 800 -seat ballroom, a Air Quality new spa facility, a new housekeeping and engineering buildings, and a new two -level parking garage. Project 'A second potential project has also been proposed for the Newport Beach Country Club. That proposal (PA2008 -152), includes the demolition of the existing golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures and replacement of the clubhouse with a 54,819 square foot facility, including dining and related elements. No changes to the existing tennis club are proposed in this development application. PA2005 -140 represent a'worst case" development scenario and is included in the list of related projects. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megoniga/ Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -2 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -3 Potential Cumulative Name /Address Permit No. Status Description Impacts implementation requires a Use Permit, Development Agreement, parcel Map, and Modification Permit. Demolition of an existing 14 -unit Aerie Multiple - Family PA 2005 -196 Approved apartment building and one single- Aesthetics family residence. Construction of an 8- unit condominium with 8 -boat dock. Proposed Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Conexant Conceptual Plan Plan which would include a total of up Applied 2007 to 974 new residential units, 714 on 4311/4321 Jamboree Road PA2007 -170 CC Hearing February the Conexant site and the remaining Air Quality Kell Conceptual Plan 2009 260 on the Kell property. The City has 4343 Von Kerman Avenue not yet approved the Airport Business Area Integrated Conceptual Development Plan. Proposed 1.9 -acre subdivision to create a large lot for one residential Big Canyon PA2007 -210 Approved dwelling unit. Parcel Map, General None 1 Big Canyon Drive Plan Amendment, and Big Canyon Planned Community text amendment. A public park and beach with recreation facilities, restrooms and a new Girl Scout House, a public short- Marina Park PA2008 -040 Pending term visiting vessel marina with a Biological 1700 W. Balboa Boulevard public dock and a sailing center and a Resources new community center with classrooms, boat storage space and ancillary offices ace. A 402.3 -acre planned community development plan consisting of a maximum of 1,375 dwelling units, Newport Banning Ranch PA2008 -114 Pending 75,000 square feet of commercial "bed- Traffic 5200 West Coast Highway retail, 75 room boutique hotell Air Quality and - breakfast' or other overnight accommodation, parks and open space. Use Permit and Modification Permit to Silk Residence Remodel PA2008 -180 Pending allow 50 % -70% structural alterations to None 1800 Bay Front Street a non - conforming structure and multiple setback encroachments. Projects Submitted for Plan Check Common addition and remodel Traffic 2300 West Coast Highway 1580 -2008 Approved (29,199 square feet existing, 10,390 Air Quality square feet new) Holiday Inn. 606 Man gold Avenue 1731 -2008 Approved New duplex (2,946 square feet with None attached 309 square foot garage). 901 Newport Center Drive 1733 -2008 Approved New Retail (140,745 square feet Traffic Nordstrom shell). Air Quality New single - family residence (2,941 1506 South Bay Front 1773 -2008 Pending square feet with 407 square foot None attached garage). New single - family residence (2,679 1708 South Bay Front 1981 -2008 Approved square feet with 400 square foot None garage and 671 square foot deck). New single - family residence (2,864 824 West Bay Avenue 2114 -2008 Approved square feet with 499 square foot None garage). SOURCE: City of Newport Beach Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -3 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 9.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis 9.0 — Cumulative The impact analysis that follows provides a discussion of the potential cumulative impacts that might occur as a result of project implementation. Potential cumulative impacts associated with some environmental issues are evaluated based on a particular geographic area or other appropriate level. For example, unlike the other impact areas discussed in Chapter 9.0 that are based on Table 9 -1, cumulative air quality impacts are assessed based on development within the South Coast Air Basin, a geographic area that spans several counties. Conversely, cumulative noise impacts are evaluated within the context of a smaller geographic area. Construction noise and some operational noise impacts are limited to the project site and adjacent and nearby areas; however, depending on the contribution of project - related traffic, mobile- source noise impacts may occur beyond the immediate limits of the subject site along heavily traveled arterials. Similarly, cumulative biological impacts are evaluated based on similar habitat and species within a particular geographic area. It is also important to note that cumulative impact analyses are guided by standards of reasonableness and practicality. 9.3.1 Land Use and Planning The project proposes to develop the 4,412 square -foot site with one single - family residence. The area surrounding the subject property is entirely developed with single- and multiple - family residential development; Begonia Park, a passive recreational facility is located north and east of the site. As a result, no design component or feature of the project would physically divide or otherwise adversely affect or significantly change an established community. In addition, the subject property is located within the limits of the Central /Coastal NCCP adopted by the County of Orange. The proposed project site is currently vacant but is identified for development in the adopted long -range plans for the property. As indicated in Section 4.1 of the Draft EIR, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable goals, policies and objectives articulated in the Newport Beach Land Use Element and other elements as well as the CLUP. Therefore, no significant cumulative impacts to land use will occur as a result of project implementation. 9.3.2 Population and Housing Although implementation of the proposed project will result in an increase in population, neither the addition of one dwelling unit nor the two to three residents likely to live there would not contribute to a cumulative loss of homes and /or displacement of occupants. Together with the approved and planned development identified in Table 9 -1, an increase in residential development is anticipated in the City, including 974 dwelling units on the Conexant and Koll properties in the Airport area. Other smaller residential developments are also proposed in the City, including the 8 -unit Aerie project and other single - family and duplex dwelling units in the area. Therefore, a potentially significant cumulative reduction of housing within the City would not occur as a result of project implementation. The existing residential development is not included in the City's inventory of affordable housing; no low- and /or moderate - income households occupy the site and, therefore, none would be displaced as a result of project implementation. Further, addition of the single - family residence on the site will not adversely affect the jobs /housing balance because the project will be consistent with the City's long -range plans, which are the basis of the jobs /housing projections. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant cumulative impacts to population and housing. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -4 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 9.3.3 Geology and Soils 9.0 — Cumulative The 0.1 -acre site is currently undeveloped. The site and existing development in the project environs are currently exposed to potential groundshaking associated with seismic activities occurring on one of the active regional faults. Unlike any of the projects identified in Table 9 -1, the subject property is located on a bluff in Corona del Mar, which requires the consideration of geologic and seismic characteristics. Although the proposed project will consist of residential development, the potential exposure to the effects of seismic activity, slope failure, bluff erosion, and /or soil conditions will not increase and project implementation will not result in potential cumulative impacts because the new single - family residence will be required to meet applicable structural design requirements prescribed in the geotechnical report and related City codes and ordinances that address structural integrity. Furthermore, none of the projects identified in Table 9 -1 would contribute cumulatively to bluff instability and /or erosion because they are not located on the same bluff as the subject property. In addition, these other developments must also comply with the specific building design parameters prescribed in the California Building Code to ensure that potential loss of life and structural damage is minimized. The project site and the surrounding area are not known to be located within an unstable geologic area and, therefore, are not expected to be exposed to adverse soils conditions, including lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse hazards. Finally, the site does not support "prime" and /or "important" agricultural soils. Therefore, no potentially significant cumulative seismic, slope failure, bluff erosion, and /or soil condition impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. 9.3.4 Hydrology and Water Quality As described in the initial study, although project implementation would result in a small increase in impervious area, the post - development peak flow would be reduced when compared to the existing surface runoff conditions. Specifically, the runoff emanating from the site will be treated prior to its discharge into Newport Harbor. Potential cumulative impacts would be those resulting from other development within the watershed sub -area; however, no other projects are proposed within the area affected by the proposed project. In addition, the applicant will be required to implement Best Management Practices and related measures in accordance with the City's requirements to ensure that both storm water runoff and quality meet the requisite criteria. All of the other projects identified in this section are located outside the immediate project area. Each of the approved or proposed projects, should they be implemented, will be required to implement similar stormwater collection and conveyance facilities and water quality structural and non- structural measures (i.e., BMPs) to reduce and avoid water quality impacts. Implementation of these measures, which would be prescribed in the WQMP prepared for the other projects in the City and watershed, must comply with the requirements established by the City and County of Orange in the Drainage Area Master Plan, which have been developed to address the cumulative impacts of development in the watershed. These measures are intended to ensure that water quality objectives are achieved and /or maintained. Therefore, project implementation will result in an overall improvement to hydrology and water quality by upgrading the stormwater collection facilities that serve the drainage area. As a result, the proposed project will not result in potentially significant cumulative impacts to either hydrology or water quality. 9.3.5 Air Quality As indicated above, cumulative air quality impacts are those associated with development occurring within the South Coast Air Basin, a five - county region in southern California. As a result, it is anticipated that a significant number of development projects throughout the City and the five- county region would contribute to the cumulative degradation of the air basin. Although the proposed project will result in the generation of both short-term (i.e., those occurring during the 20 -month construction phase) and long -term operational emissions (i.e., those resulting from the operation of automobiles and stationary sources), which will be emitted into the air basin, the vast majority of those emissions would be short -term and temporary in nature. Although the project's contribution of construction emissions (primarily fugitive dust) is short-term and because the project must comply with all applicable rules prescribed by the SCAQMD, these impacts will not Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -5 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts be significant on a cumulative basis when considered with the other projects in the City and in the air basin. Once construction is completed, an insignificant fraction of the total mobile- source emissions within the basin would be attributed to the proposed project. The long -term (i.e., operational) emissions associated with the proposed project are the result of the incremental increase in vehicular traffic generated by the project and on demands for natural gas and electricity. Because these incremental operational emissions would not exceed significance thresholds recommended by the SCAQMD and identified in the initial study prepared for the project, the incremental addition of the project's mobile- source emissions, when combined with other emissions resulting from the development of the other projects within the City and larger air basin, will be less than significant on a cumulative basis. 9.3.6 Traffic and Circulation Cumulative traffic impacts are those occurring within the immediate vicinity of the project site and beyond the Corona del Mar area along Coast Highway and other arterials in the City based on the distribution of construction traffic associated with the proposed project. As indicated in Table 9 -1, the proposed project and several of the projects within the City would contribute traffic, both during construction and as a result of their development, which could affect the existing circulation system, including Coast Highway, Jamboree Road and Newport Boulevard. As indicated in the initial study, project implementation will result in the generation of construction traffic (i.e., short-term) as well as an increase in the number of daily and peak hour vehicle trips when compared to the existing baseline (i.e., undeveloped site). The short-term vehicle trips are those associated with heavy trucks (i.e., dirt hauling, equipment and materials deliveries, etc.) and construction workers commuting to the site. However, these will be short-term in nature and would be minimized through the implementation of a Construction Management Plan that must be prepared for the project which, among other things, prescribes a haul route and other elements intended to ensure safety and minimize circulation conflicts. Although other projects in the City could also contribute construction traffic that could affect roadway and intersection operations, the contribution of these short-term trips would not represent a potentially significant cumulative impact because potential impacts would be avoided through specific provisions prescribed in the Construction Management Plan, including the identification of a haul route plan, adherence to a traffic control plan, use of flag persons during the construction, etc. Implementation of these measures will ensure that potential cumulative construction impacts would be minimized. Although post - development project - related vehicle trips would increase because the site is currently undeveloped and does not generate vehicular trips, they would not result in any potentially significant cumulative impacts in the Corona del Mar community or outlying areas because when added to the local circulation system, they would constitute a very small fraction of the total trips generated by the cumulative projects identified in Table 9 -1. When added to the City's arterial roadway system, the small increase in both construction - related and operational vehicle trips would, therefore, not result in potentially significant cumulative traffic and circulation impacts. 9.3.7 Biological Resources Project implementation will not result in potential impacts to biological resources, as indicated in Section 4.2. Although a small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat exists on the subject property (i.e., 261 square feet), the habitat has been characterized as "low quality /low value" habitat and does not support any sensitive species. Furthermore, no sensitive plant or animal species occur on the site that would be adversely affected by the proposed project. Due to the low value of the coastal bluff scrub habitat, its degraded condition associated with human activities and disturbance, and lack of species diversity, it does not meet the criteria established in the Coastal Act and the City's General Plan for ESHAs. Therefore, the elimination of this habitat, when considered with other projects listed in Table 9 -1, is not significant. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -6 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 9.3.8 Mineral Resources 9.0 — Cumulative As indicated above, the site and surrounding areas have been developed. No mineral resources exist on the subject property that would be adversely impacted by development of the site as proposed. Further, project implementation would not directly impact any existing mineral resource areas either in the City of Newport Beach, region, or State of California. Similarly, the other approved and /or proposed projects in the City of Newport Beach listed in Table 9 -1 would not adversely affect mineral resources. With the exception of the Newport Banning Ranch, which has been a producing oil field for several years, many of the sites on which development is proposed are either already developed (e.g., Conexant/Koll, Newport Beach Country Club, Aerie, etc.) or are located in areas of the City that do not encompass mineral resources. Because project implementation would not result in any impacts to mineral resources, it would not contribute to the cumulative loss of such resources in either the City, region, or State of California. Although the proposed project would require the use of mineral resources (e.g., sand and gravel, wood, etc.), many are renewable and /or sustainable. Therefore, when compared to other projects in the area, no potentially significant cumulative impacts to mineral resources will occur. 9.3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials As indicated in the analysis prepared for the project, the site has no history of contamination. As a result, site development would not result in any release of toxic or hazardous materials. Similar to other existing residential development, the proposed project would only use household variety hazardous materials such as fertilizers, herbicides, cleaning solvents, paints, and /or pesticides. These materials would be used, stored and disposed of in accordance with local, state and federal regulations. Therefore, no potentially significant cumulative impacts would occur when compared to other projects that have been approved or proposed in the City of Newport Beach or surrounding areas. 9.3.10 Noise Cumulative noise impacts are those that would occur within the immediate project environs, particularly during the construction phase. The greatest increase in ambient noise would occur during the 20 -month construction phase; however, no other development is proposed in the immediate vicinity of the project (refer to Table 9 -1) that would contribute to the cumulative increase in noise in the area. As indicated in the initial study, the construction activities resulting from project implementation will result in increased noise levels in the neighborhood. Once construction ceases and the project is completed and occupied, the cumulative noise environment could also extend beyond the immediate area to outlying areas, depending on the nature and extent of project - related traffic. However, the traffic resulting from a single dwelling unit would contribute only a very small increase in the ambient noise levels in the nearby residential area within Corona del Mar and along arterial roadways in the City. As a result, project - related long -term noise associated with vehicle trips generated by future residents would be minimal and would not contribute significantly to the cumulative increase in long -term noise levels because the project would add only about 10 vehicles per day onto the existing circulation network. While project - related traffic, when added to existing traffic utilizing the neighborhood streets could contribute to an increase in ambient noise levels along the streets, the increase would not result in significant cumulative long -term noise impacts because none of the local streets within the project area are characterized by noise levels that currently exceed, or are forecast to exceed, 65 dBA CNEL as indicated in the City's Noise Element, which evaluated future noise levels based on buildout of the General Plan. It is anticipated that the resulting gradual incremental increase in project - related traffic onto the neighborhood circulation system would generally not be audible. Therefore, no significant long -term cumulative noise impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -7 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report 9.3.11 Public Services 9.0 — Cumulative The project site is located in an area of the City of Newport Beach that is adequately served by public services and facilities, including police and fire protection. The construction of one single - family residence on the subject property will not significantly affect the existing public service levels of service. Specifically, the potential (less than significant) impacts associated with the proposed project would not alter the ability of either the Newport Beach Police Department or Fire Department to provide an adequate level of service to the site, even when considering the potential development listed in Table 9 -1, because the site is currently provided police and fire service. The potential development of the projects listed in Table 9 -1 would also be evaluated by the Newport Beach Police and Fire Departments to ensure that adequate levels of service can be provided. These projects are within the long -range projections identified in the City's General Plan and, therefore, would not adversely affect the City's ability to provide an adequate level of protection. Because the proposed project and the Aerie property, which are located in Corona del Mar and are residential in nature, project implementation would result in the potential to generate some school -age children, which would necessitate the payment of the requisite developer fees that offset potential impacts to schools. In addition, the potential increase in residents generated by these projects could also result in an increased demand for recreational facilities; however, the relatively small number of residents generated by these projects would not create a significant demand for recreational facilities. Therefore, no significant cumulative impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. 9.3.12 Utilities and Service Systems The site and surrounding area are adequately served by utilities (i.e., sewer and water facilities, solid waste disposal, electricity and natural gas). The incremental increase in the demand for utilities as a result of constructing one single - family residence on the site is minimal. The proposed project will be required to comply with all applicable regulations requiring energy efficiency. Therefore, no potentially significant cumulative utilities impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. 9.3.13 Aesthetics As discussed in Section 4.3 (Aesthetics), the project site is located in an area of Corona del Mar that is characterized by important visual resources and/or amenities. In addition, Begonia Park has been identified as a "Public View Point' because of views from that location of Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean. Potential aesthetic impacts of the proposed project were evaluated based on views from both public vantage points on or near the site. Of the cumulative projects identified in Table 9 -1, only one project, the proposed Aerie multiple - family residential project would also potentially affect the aesthetic character of the proposed project area. The visual simulations prepared for the proposed project revealed that no significant project - related impacts would be anticipated from the Public View Point within the Begonia Park Public View Point vantage points as a result of site development as proposed. The potential visual impacts of the proposed project were also evaluated from those vantage points with the proposed Aerie multiple - family residential project to determine the extent of project - related cumulative visual impacts. As indicated in Section 4.3, construction of the Megonigal residence would not contribute to the cumulative visual impact from this public view location because views of the harbor and ocean would be preserved, even with the addition of the Aerie project. Therefore, no potentially significant cumulative visual impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. 9.3.14 Cultural /Scientific Resources The site is currently undeveloped and no significant cultural, historic or scientific resources are known to be located on the subject property. Although it is possible that other proposed and approved development could result in impacts to cultural, historical or scientific resources, appropriate mitigation (in the form of standard Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -8 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative City conditions) will be required to ensure that such impacts are less than significant. While grading and excavation are required to prepare portions of the site for construction, no cultural or historical resources would be affected and no impacts would occur to such resources. Although paleontological resources (i.e., fossils) may be encountered during construction of the proposed project based on the geologic formation underlying the site, monitoring will ensure that any such potential resources that may exist on the property would be identified during the grading phase by the paleontological monitor. Adequate measures would be implemented to ensure that potentially significant impacts would be avoided. This would also be true for other projects where encountering such resources is possible or likely, as prescribed in environmental analysis undertaken for such projects listed in Table 9 -1. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant impacts, either individually or on a cumulative basis. 9.3.15 Recreation As indicated previously, the proposed project includes the development of a single - family residence on a vacant property. Although the generation of additional residents associated with the projects listed in Table 9 -1 could result in a demand for recreational amenities, project implementation would not contribute significantly to the cumulative demands crated by those projects due to the small -scale nature of the project. No additional significant demands for recreational facilities would be generated by the project that would be added to the cumulative impacts that may occur as a result of other projects proposed and approved in the City. Other cumulative projects identified in Table 9 -1 (e.g., Banning Ranch, Conexant/Koll, etc.) that would result in significant numbers of new residential dwelling units would be required by the City to provide public park dedications and/or payment of park dedication fees to offset any potential demands for recreational facilities in the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, no potentially significant project - related or cumulative impacts to recreational facilities would occur. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 9 -9 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report SECTION 10.0 PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 10.1 Introduction 10.1.1 Purpose and Scope Section 10.0— CEQA requires that an EIR describe a `reasonable" range of alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, and to evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. This chapter sets forth potential alternatives to the proposed project and evaluates them as required by CEQA. Section 15126.6(c) directs that an EIR should focus on alternatives capable of: (1) eliminating or reducing significant adverse environmental effects of a proposed project and (2) feasibly accomplishing most of the basic project objectives. The discussion of alternatives in this Draft EIR reviews a range of alternatives, including the "No Project' alternative as prescribed by the State CEQA Guidelines, which satisfies this requirement. 10.1.2 Selection of Alternatives As indicated above, alternatives must be selected, primarily, based upon their ability to avoid or reduce significant environment impacts of the project. However, in the case of the proposed project (i.e., single - family residence on a coastal bluff), no potentially significant environmental impacts were identified in the environmental analysis presented in Chapter 4.0. Therefore, alternatives include only those deemed to be potentially feasible in order to provide a comparison of potential environmental consequences based on their ability to further reduce potential effects of the proposed project, even though the effects were determined to be less than significant. With the exception of the No Project/No Development alternative, which is required to be included in the evaluated by the State CEQA Guidelines, each of the alternatives discussed in this Chapter was selected based on its ability achieve the project objectives identified in Chapter 3.0. Alternatives were identified by the City in consultation with the City's environmental consultant, including: Alternative Site No Project /No Development • Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level) • Alternative Access (Bayside Drive) 10.1.3 Evaluation of Project Alternatives According to the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[a]), an EIR must "... describe a range of reasonable alternatives for the project, or to the location of the project which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." The Guidelines go on to indicate that alternatives that are capable of substantially lessening any significant effects of the Project must be examined, "... even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives or would be more costly." The Guidelines further indicate "... that the EIR need examine in detail only the alternatives that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project' (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[c]). Thus the ability of an alternative to attain most of the basic oroiect obiectives is central to the consideration of alternatives to the proposed project. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Imnact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives For each alternative, the analysis presented in this section: Describes the alternative; Discusses the impacts of the alternative and evaluates the significance of those impacts; and, Evaluates the alternative relative to the proposed project, specifically addressing project objectives and the elimination or reduction of potentially significant impacts. 10.1.4 Identification of Impacts After describing the alternative, this Draft EIR evaluates the impacts of the alternative. The major resource areas included in the detailed impact analysis in Section 4.0 are included in this section. The potential environmental consequences are identified and described in the analysis for each of the alternatives identified in Section 10.1.1. 10.2 Alternatives Rejected from Further Consideration 10.2.1 Alternative Site As required by the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6(f)(2)(A), only alternative locations that would substantially reduce the potentially significant impacts resulting from project implementation must be included in the analysis of alternatives. Because the subject project proposes a single - family residence on a coastal bluff overlooking Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean, a similarly designated site located on a bluff would be required to accommodate such a project. However, a review of the City's General Plan revealed that no other similarly situated site that is designated for single - family residential development exists in the City of Newport Beach. Although there are several vacant properties in Newport Beach that are designated for single - family residential development, their inland location would prevent them from achieving the overriding objective identified by the applicant (i.e., provide west and south views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean from all levels of the proposed residence). Furthermore, while the applicant owns the subject property, it would be necessary for him to acquire a vacant parcel elsewhere in the City, which could affect the feasibility of the proposed project. As a result, this alternative has been rejected from further consideration. 10.2.2 No Development The "No Development" alternative was also considered but rejected because implementation would necessitate either acquisition of the subject property or denial of development of the property to ensure that development does not occur on the site. Because the site is designated for residential development in accordance with the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, development in accordance with the RS -D land use designation (and R -1 zoning) is anticipated. The City recently reaffirmed the intended use of this lot by designating it for residential purposes within the 2006 Update of the Newport Beach General Plan. Furthermore, to date, neither the City of Newport Beach nor other entity has expressed an interest to acquire the property in order to protect the site from development. If not acquired by the City (or other entity), denial of any site development would constitute a "taking." Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -2 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives 10.3 Analysis of Alternatives 10.3.1 No Project The No Project Alternative evaluates the potential environmental effects resulting from the continuation of the existing conditions on the site at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published, "... as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services" Therefore, this alternative assumes that in the short -term, the site would remain vacant. As a result, no adverse environmental effects would occur until such time as development was proposed in accordance with the adopted land use and zoning designations. The site would remain undeveloped and would not be affected by grading and development. Specifically, without any landform alteration, the small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat would not be removed as a result of development in the near future; however, as indicated in Section 4.2, this habitat does not meet the criteria established for ESHAs by both the Coastal Act and the City in the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. Furthermore, without development of the site in the short -term, views from both Begonia Park and Pacific Drive /Begonia Avenue would not be affected by the introduction of structures that would be added into the viewshed from those vantage points. Without development of the site, no conflicts with the plans, programs and policies adopted by the City of Newport Beach would occur. Although none of the project - related effects identified in Chapter 4.0 would occur in the short term as a result of the "no project' (i.e., no development) alternative in the short term, it is anticipated that future development of the site would occur based on the adopted land use and zoning designations, which allow the construction of one single - family residence on the site. The potential effects on land use and planning, biological resources and aesthetics based on development of the site in accordance with the adopted land use designation are identified and described below. 10.3.1.1 Land Use and Planning The potential effects on land use and planning resulting from development of the site with one single - family residence would be similar to the project - related effects. Assuming the building envelope for such a development complied with the zoning district regulations that apply to the site (e.g., building height, setback, etc.), it is anticipated that the project - related effects identified in Section 4.1 would result. Like the proposed project, the future single - family residence would be compatible with the existing residential development in the area and would not conflict with either the scale or intensity that characterizes the Corona del Mar neighborhood. Similarly, it is likely that such an alternative would also be designed to be consistent with the relevant policies of both the General Plan and CLUP that address views and bluff protection. Based on the current direction provided by the Newport Beach Planning Commission related to development of the site, priority has been afforded to views from Begonia Park rather than complete protection of the coastal bluff feature, which has been substantially altered by development along Bayside Drive. Therefore, the potential impacts associated with a future single - family residence on the site would be the same as or similar to those effects identified for the proposed project, which were determined to be less than significant. 10.3.1.2 Biological Resources Potential biological impacts that would be expected to occur as a result of the "no project' alternative would be virtually the same as those identified in Section 4.2, which include the elimination of the existing albeit low quality /value coastal bluff scrub habitat. It is anticipated that site alteration in order to accommodate future development of the site with a single - family residence would also result in the elimination of the 261 square feet of coastal bluff scrub habitat, similar to the proposed project. Because the existing habitat is limited in area, variety, and quality and, furthermore, is not occupied by sensitive species and because it does not meet the criteria established for ESHAs by the Coastal Act and City's General Plan and CLUP, the loss of this low Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -3 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives value habitat is not significant. Therefore, potential impacts of this alternative would be the same as identified for the proposed project (i.e,, less than significant). 10.3.1.3 Aesthetics Assuming that future development of the site complies with the development standards prescribed in the R -1 zoning district, a single - family residence could be constructed that would result in less than significant impacts, similar to the proposed project. Summary of No Project Alternative Ability to Achieve Project Objectives The "no project' alternative would not result in the realization of any of the project objectives in the short -term. However, in the long -term, it would be possible to achieve each of the objectives identified by the project applicant with the construction of a single - family residence that is similar to the proposed project. Elimination /Reduction of Significant Impacts Implementation of this alternative would defer project - related effects, including less than significant visual impacts associated with the development of the site (assuming that the residence complies with the maximum building height standard. In addition, biological impacts would also be the same as the proposed project (i.e., loss of 261 square feet of coastal bluff scrub habitat) as a result of site preparation. Similarly, if designed properly, this alternative would also be consistent with the long -range plans and policies adopted by the City of Newport Beach. Comparative Merits The "no project' alternative is similar to the proposed project, both in terms of achieving all of the project objectives and avoiding potential environmental effects. Both the proposed project and the ,.no project' alternative would result in similar impacts, which are less than significant; however, all of the effects of this alternative would be deferred until such time as another project is proposed in the future. 10.3.2 Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level) This alternative includes development of the site as proposed with a single - family residence with access from Pacific Drive; however, the third upper level above the average elevation of Pacific Drive would be eliminated. This possible alternative would result in the elimination of the garage and residential floor area (i.e., foyer and office area) comprising approximately 805 square feet. As a result, the total floor area of the residence would be reduced to 2,761 square feet. In addition, in order to accommodate on -site parking, the second floor roof structure would be designed to support automobile parking. 10.3.2.1 Land Use and Planning This alternative would generally be consistent with the relevant long -range plans, programs and policies of the Newport Beach General Plan. It would also be consistent with the intensity of development in the residential neighborhood and will also be compatible with that development. As suggested by the Newport Beach Planning Commission, preserving the views from Begonia Park, as articulated in both the Natural Resources Element and the CLUP should have priority over preservation of the bluff, which has been substantially altered by development along Bayside Drive and Pacific Drive. However, by eliminating the third floor from the plan, the garage and foyer would be eliminated and direct access to the home from the Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 f0 -4 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0— Alternatives street level could not occur, necessitating an alternative design to accommodate access to the home. As prescribed by the City's Municipal Code, covered parking is required. Therefore, the "deck" parking provided with the alternative design that eliminates the upper level would require a variance from the parking code requirements. 10.3.2.2 Biological Resources Implementation of this alternative would result in the elimination of the existing coastal bluff scrub habitat (i.e., 261 square feet). However, as indicated in Section 4.2, the elimination of this small area composed of only three species characteristic of that habitat would not be significant because the habitat has been fragmented and affected by human activities. This low quality /value habitat does not meet the criteria for ESHAs and is not considered important; therefore, no significant impacts would occur and the effect of this alternative would be the same as identified for the proposed project. 10.3.2.3 Aesthetics Elimination of the project's third floor, which is located at the street elevation of Pacific Drive, would reduce the effects associated with introducing a dwelling unit on the site. Because vehicular access to the site would remain at Pacific Drive, it would be necessary to provide parking for the home on the roof of the proposed structure; however, the parking would be uncovered to avoid erecting a structure that rises above the street. Although automobiles parked on the roof would be visible, the proposed structure would not be visible from Begonia Park. In addition, although not identified as a "public view corridor' in the Natural Resources Element of the General Plan or the CLUP, views through the site to the bay and ocean would continue to be available from both Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue in the vicinity of the subject property. Although project - related visual impacts from Begonia Park were determined to be less than significant, this alternative would eliminate any effects on views with the minor exception of the uncovered parking that would be provided on the roof of the proposed residence. Summary of the Alternative Design Ability to Achieve Project Objectives Implementation of this project would achieve all project objectives except for allowing a larger residence on the property, unless the project is redesigned to relocate the living space (i.e., foyer and study) lost with the elimination of the third floor within the floor plan. This alternative would provide views from all levels (although one level that included a foyer and study would be eliminated). It would provide vehicular access from Pacific Drive (to uncovered roof parking), it minimizes the visual effects of the residence on views from Begonia Park, and outdoor living areas would be directly accessible from each level. Elimination /Reduction of Significant Impacts Although the proposed single - family residence would not result in significant impacts based on the significance criteria established for the project, the effects of the project could be reduced through the implementation of this alternative. Specifically, the residence would not extend into the viewshed of Begonia Park. • Comparative Merits Because this alternative would virtually eliminate any visual impacts from Begonia Park (and the adjacent public streets) and does achieve most of the project objectives, it is considered to be the "environmentally superior" alternative. However, as indicated above, the City does require that Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -5 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives parking for single - family detached residential dwelling units be covered. Therefore, this alternative would require the approval of a variance to allow uncovered parking. 10.3.3 Alternative Access (Bayside Drive) Vehicular access to the subject property in this design alternative would be provided from Bayside Drive, below the bluff, rather than from Pacific Drive where direct vehicular access is currently available. In addition, the third floor of the proposed residence (i.e., ground level floor at Pacific Drive that includes the garage, study and foyer) would be relocated as the first floor in order to remove that portion of the structure from the Begonia Park viewshed. As a result, the total floor area would be the same as the proposed project (i.e., 3,138 square feet, not including the garage). 10.3.3.1 Land Use and Planning Implementation of this alternative would be consistent with the relevant long -range plans, programs, and policies adopted by the City of Newport Beach that affect site development as well as the direction provided by the Newport Beach Planning Commission, which concluded that the preservation of harbor and ocean views from Begonia Park, a designated "public view point,' should take precedence over complete preservation of the bluff in this location. As a result, relocating the project access to Bayview Drive and relocating the third floor to become the first floor would be consistent with the direction provided by the Planning Commission. However, this alternative would require the provision of an access easement through the southerly limits of Begonia Park and would also necessitate potentially greater excavation and grading as a result of the redesign of the project to accommodate the relocated third floor component of the proposed project. Therefore, while this alternative would result in the preservation of the bay and ocean views from vantage points within Begonia Park, it would result in substantially greater impacts to the bluff. In addition, the extension of the vehicular access through the park would conflict with the park use in the lowest elevation of the park along Bayview Drive. The Public Works Department has evaluated this alternative access and finds it undesirable and possibly a hazard given limited vehicular sight distances along Bayside Drive that is relatively narrow and curving. 10.3.3.2 Biological Resources Similar to the proposed project and the Alternative Design, this alternative, too, would result in the elimination of the existing coastal bluff scrub habitat (i.e., 261 square feet). However, the elimination of the low quality /value habitat, which is not an ESHA and, therefore, is not considered important is not significant. Therefore, no significant impacts to biological resources would occur and the effect of this alternative would be the same as identified for the proposed project. 10.3.3.3 Aesthetics As indicated in Section 10.3.3.1, this alternative would result in the preservation of the harbor and ocean views from the Begonia Park vantage points as desired by the Newport Beach Planning Commission. Relocation of the third floor of the project to the lower elevations of the site would eliminate the encroachment of the structure into the Begonia Park viewshed. Although the potential project - related visual impacts to bay and ocean views are less than significant, the elimination of the projection of the structure into the viewshed represents an improvement to the aesthetic character of the area. In addition, views through the site to the west and south from both Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue would not be affected with provision of the alternative access and relocation of the third floor as identified in this alternative. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -6 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives Summary of the Alternative Access Ability to Achieve Project Objectives Implementation of this alternative would achieve most of the project objectives except it would not allow for vehicular access from Pacific Drive as desired by the project applicant. In addition, if this alternative is implemented, views from all of the levels of the home would not be provided because the living spaces in the third floor (i.e., foyer and study) would be relocated with the garage element as a result of the Bayview Drive access, unless the plan is redesigned to accommodate these living areas higher above the bluff to create harbor and ocean views. Elimination /Reduction of Significant Impacts Although the Alternative Access would improve views from Begonia Park and from Begonia Drive and Pacific Drive, additional adverse effects would occur. For example, it would be necessary to extend a private drive or roadway from Bayview Drive through the southern limits of Begonia Park and up the lower elevation of the bluff to accommodate vehicular access. The extension of the road through the park would alter the park setting and would conflict with policies related to the preservation of the character of that facility. Furthermore, the applicant must be granted an access easement through the park. Finally, it is anticipated that in order to extend the roadway to the site from Bayview Drive, additional landform alteration would also be required. As a result, nearly the entire bluff face would be altered. Comparative Merits Because of the potential adverse impacts to the park that would result from extending the roadway from Bayview Drive to the site and, further, due to the more extensive landform alteration that would also be required to replace the enclosed garage and living space, this alternative would not be environmentally superior when compared to other alternatives evaluated. 10.4 Summary of Alternatives An EIR is required to identify the "environmentally superior' alternative among those evaluated from the reasonable range of alternative analyzed. Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines mandates that in the event "... the environmentally superior alternative is the 'no project' alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. In addition, alternatives identified and evaluated are also intended to achieve the project objective, which includes: Construction of a custom, single - family residence consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations adopted for the project that: (1) provides adequate floor area within a personalized floor plan to accommodate the applicant's living needs; (2) provides views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean to the south and west from each level; (3) provides outdoor living areas that are directly accessible from indoor spaces on each level; (4) provides access from Pacific Drive to an enclosed garage; (5) minimizes impacts on public views from Begonia Park. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -7 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental lmoact Reoort Section 10.0— Alternatives Table 10 -1 provides a summary of the three project alternatives. As indicated in that table, while the alternatives can achieve most or all of the project objectives, potential land use impacts and /or conflicts would occur in the form of uncovered parking (Alternative Design) or impacts to Begonia Park and more extensive landform alteration (Alternative Access). Table 10 -1 Summary of Project Alternatives Megonigal Residence 10.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that "... the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives" if the No Project alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative. As previously indicated, project implementation will not result in any potentially significant impacts. The No Project alternative identified and analyzed will eliminate the potential project - related effects in the short -term, because the site would remain undeveloped until some future time when development is proposed in accordance with the adopted General Plan. However, with development of the site, the same or similar effects as those identified for the proposed project would occur once development consistent with the adopted plans and programs occurs. Therefore, the environmentally superior alternative is the Alternative Design (elimination of the third floor of the proposed home), which would eliminate the penetration of the structure into the viewshed, even though the project - related visual impact is less than significant; however, the elimination of this visual effect would come at the expense of not achieving some of the objectives (e.g., enclosed garage, larger living area, etc.). Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of a "reasonable range of alternatives" to the project that would not only reduce potentially significant effects of the project but also achieve most of the project objectives. It is important to note that the analysis presented in Chapter 4.0 of the Draft EIR concludes that project implementation will not result in any potentially significant environmental impacts (i.e., no mitigation is required). Therefore, the analysis of alternatives does not have the same implications when considering alternatives and, in particular, identifying the "environmentally superior" alternative as compared to other projects that result in potentially significant impacts. The analysis of alternatives for the proposed Megonigal residence is intended only to provide additional information related to other alternatives, including the "no project" alternative, for consideration by the City's decision- making body. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -8 Reduced Impacts Avoided or Meets Project Substantially Environmentally Project Alternative Effects Reduced' Additional Effects Superior? Objectives Biological Resources a None No Project Yes Land Use' None No < 1 -5 (Potentially) Aesthetics Alternative Design No Aesthetics Land Use (Unenclosed Yes 2, 3, 4, 5 (Remove Upper Level ) Parking) Alternative Design s Bluff Alteration (Bayside Drive Access) No Aesthetics Land Use (Begonia No 1, 3, 5 Park Impacts) 'No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation. 'The "no project' alternative would eliminate all of the project's effects in the short-term; however, future development of the site in accordance with the adopted long -range plans for the site would result in the same or similar effects that would also be less than significant, if developed in the same manner as the proposed project. 'Short-term scenario. "Long -term scenario. If the third floor (i.e., ground floor ) is also eliminated. 10.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that "... the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives" if the No Project alternative is identified as the environmentally superior alternative. As previously indicated, project implementation will not result in any potentially significant impacts. The No Project alternative identified and analyzed will eliminate the potential project - related effects in the short -term, because the site would remain undeveloped until some future time when development is proposed in accordance with the adopted General Plan. However, with development of the site, the same or similar effects as those identified for the proposed project would occur once development consistent with the adopted plans and programs occurs. Therefore, the environmentally superior alternative is the Alternative Design (elimination of the third floor of the proposed home), which would eliminate the penetration of the structure into the viewshed, even though the project - related visual impact is less than significant; however, the elimination of this visual effect would come at the expense of not achieving some of the objectives (e.g., enclosed garage, larger living area, etc.). Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of a "reasonable range of alternatives" to the project that would not only reduce potentially significant effects of the project but also achieve most of the project objectives. It is important to note that the analysis presented in Chapter 4.0 of the Draft EIR concludes that project implementation will not result in any potentially significant environmental impacts (i.e., no mitigation is required). Therefore, the analysis of alternatives does not have the same implications when considering alternatives and, in particular, identifying the "environmentally superior" alternative as compared to other projects that result in potentially significant impacts. The analysis of alternatives for the proposed Megonigal residence is intended only to provide additional information related to other alternatives, including the "no project" alternative, for consideration by the City's decision- making body. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 10 -8 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 11.0 — Organizations and Persons Consulted CHAPTER 11.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Planning Department David Lepo, Director Patrick Alford, Planning Manager James Campbell, Principal Planner KEETON KREITZER CONSULTING Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal CHAMBERS GROUP Jenny McGee, Staff Biologist DAVID R. OLSON ARCHITETS David R. Olson DraffEnvironmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 11 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report CHAPTER 12.0 REFERENCES 12.0 — References The following documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658. 1. Newport Beach General Plan, including all elements; City of Newport Beach (Adopted July 25, 2006). 2. Local Coastal Program — Coastal Land Use Plan; City of Newport Beach (Adopted December 13, 2005). 3. Final Program EIR — City of Newport Beach General Plan; City of Newport Beach. 4. Title 20, Zoning Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 5. Excavation and Grading Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code. 6. Chapters 10.26 and 10.28, Community Noise Ordinance of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 7. Aerie PA 2005 -196 Draft Environmental Impact Report; Keeton Kreitzer Consulting; March 2009. 8. Resolution No. 9190 (A Resolution of the City County of the City of Newport Beach Accepting and Agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of the Categorical Exclusion for Single - Family and Duplex Residential Developments in the Coastal Zone in the City of Newport Beach); September 12, 2007. The following documents have been prepared to evaluate the proposed project and are the basis of the analysis presented in specific sections of the Draft EIR. 1. The EDR Radius Map Report with GeoCheck (Megonigal Residence); Environmental Data Resources, Inc. March 4, 2009. 2. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for New Residence (2333 Pacific Drive, Corona del Mar, CA 92625); Borella Geology, Inc.; March 20, 2007 1 "Biological Assessment Survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California following initial Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton Consulting;" Chambers Group; October 9, 2008. 4. "Follow -Up Survey and Results in Response to Comments Issued by BonTerra Consulting Regarding the Biological Study of 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, Orange County, California;" Chambers Group; February 27, 2009. 5. 'September 23 Appeal Hearing on the Megonigal Property Biological Evaluation, 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, CA;" Robert A. Hamilton; September 22, 2008. 6. Review of Biological Documents for 2333 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach, California;" BonTerra Consulting; October 21, 2009. Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 12 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 13.0— Glossary of Acronyms CHAPTER 13.0 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AAQS Ambient Air Quality Standard /Standards ADT Average Daily Traffic ANSI American National Standards Institute AQMD Air Quality Management District AQMP Air Quality Management Plan BACT Best Available Control Technology BMP Best Management Practices CAA Federal Clean Air Act CARB California Air Resources Board CCAA California Clean Air Act CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CESA California Endangered Species Act CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level CO Carbon Monoxide COZ Carbon Dioxide COZE Carbon Dioxide Equivalent CWA Federal Clean Water Act DAMP Drainage Area Management Plan dB Decibel dBA A- weighted decibel EA Environmental Assessment EIR Environmental Impact Report EPA Environmental Protection Agency F Fahrenheit ft Feet FTA Federal Transit Administration HCM Highway Capacity Manual ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization IS Initial Study Leq Equivalent noise level Lmax Maximum noise level Lmin Minimum noise level LOS Level of service MCLs Maximum content levels MMRP Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program MND Mitigated Negative Declaration MPAH Master Plan of Arterial Highways MSL Mean Sea Level Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 13 -1 Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 13.0 — Glossary of Acronyms NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum 1988 NO2 Nitrogen dioxide NOP Notice of Preparation NOx Nitrogen oxides NPDES Nation Pollution Discharge and Elimination System 03 Ozone PA Planning Application PRC Public Resources Code PM2.5 Particulates 2.5 microns or less in diameter PM1e Particulates ten microns or less in diameter ppm parts per million PPV Peak Particle Velocity RAP Remedial Action Plan ROC Reactive Organic Compounds ROG Reactive Organic Gases RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SAMP Special Area Management Plan SCAG Southern California Association of Governments SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District sf Square feet S02 Sulfur Dioxide SWPPP Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Program Sox Sulfur oxides TDM Transportation Demand Management TDS Total Dissolved Solids Tonnes Metric Tons/Year TPD Trips per Day USGS United State Geological Survey V/C Volume /Capacity VdB Velocity decibels VOC Volatile Organic Compounds VPD Vehicles per Day WQMP Water Quality Management Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA August 2009 Page 13 -2 Appendix A Initial Study /Notice of Preparation Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal Mail to.' State Clearinghouse, P. O. Box 3044, Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 (916) 445 -0613 SCH # For Hand Delivery/Street Address: 1400 Tenth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 Project Title: Megonigal Residence (P.A2007 -133) Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Contact Person: James Campbell, Principal Planner Mailing Address: 3300 Newport Boulevard Phone: (949) 644 -3210 City: Newport Beach Zip: 926585 County: Orange — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Project Location: County: Orange City/Nearest Community: Newport Beach Cross Streets: Pacific Avenue/ Zip Code: 92658 Litt. / Long.: 33° 37' 00" NI 117' 53' 51" W Total Acres: 0,10 Assessor's Parcel No.: Section: Twp,: Range: Base: Within 2 Miles: Document Type State Hwy #: SR -1 Airports: Waterways: Pacific Ocean Railways: Schools: CEQA: ® NOR ❑ Draft EIR NEPA: ❑ NOI Other: ❑ Joint Document Acres Employees ❑ Power: Type MW ❑ Early Cons ❑ Supplement/Subsequent EIR ❑ Hazardous Waste: Type ❑ EA ❑ Final Document ❑ Neg Dec (Prior SCH No.) ❑ Draft EIS ❑ Other ❑ MitNeg Dec Other ❑ FONSI — — — — — — — — — — — — Local Action Type: — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ❑ General Plan Update ❑ Specific Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Annexation ❑ General Plan Amendment ❑ Master Plan ❑ Prezone ❑ Redevelopment ❑ General Plan Element ❑ Planned Unit Development ❑ Use Permit ❑ Coastal Permit ❑ Community Plan ❑ Site Plan ❑ Land Division (Subdivision, etc.) ® Other Mod. Permit Development Type: ® Residential: Units I Acres 0.10 ❑ Water Facilities: Type MGD ❑ Office: Sq.ft. Acres Employees ❑ Transportation: Type ❑ Commercial: Sq.ft Acres Employees ❑ Mining: Mineral ❑ Industrial: Sq.ft. Acres Employees ❑ Power: Type MW ❑ Educational ❑ WasteTreatment:Type MGD ❑ Recreational ❑ Hazardous Waste: Type ❑ Other: Project Issues Discussed in Document: ® Aesthetic/Visual ❑ Fiscal ❑ Recreation /Parks ® Vegetation ❑ Agricultural Land ® Flood Plain /Flooding ❑ Schools /Universities ® Water Quality ® Air Quality ❑ Forest Land /Fire Hazard ❑ Septic Systems ❑ Water Supply /Groundwater ❑ Archeological /Historical ® Geologic /Seismic ❑ Sewer Capacity ® Wetland/Riparian ® Biological Resources ❑ Minerals ® Soil Erosion /Compaction /Grading ® Wildlife ® Coastal Zone ® Noise ❑ Solid Waste ® Growth Inducing ® Drainage/Absorption ❑ Population /Housing Balance ® Toxic/Hazardous ® Land Use ❑ Economic /Jobs ❑ Public Services /Facilities ® Traffic /Circulation ® Cumulative Effects ❑ Other — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Present Land Use /Zoning /General Plan Designation: Existing Land Use: Undeveloped /Vacant;_ Existing Zoning: "R -1" (Single - Family Residential); General Plan: "RS -DT (Single -Unit Residential — Detached) — Project Description: (please use a separate page if necess— ary) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — The project applicant is proposing the construction of a single - family residential dwelling unit on the property, which will have vehicular access to the ground floor from Pacific Drive. The proposed residence will have a total floor area of 3,138 square feet, including 377 square feet on the ground floor, 934 square feet on the second floor and 1,827 square feet on the first floor. The ground floor level supports an additional 428 square foot garage. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space, including 129 square feel on the ground floor, 714 square feet on the second floor, and 161 square feet on the first, is provided. The proposed three-story, 3,566 square -foot residence conforms to all Zoning Code property development regulations, with the exception of the proposed planter walls and a water feature that are located within the three -foot front yard setback height limit. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007.080 to allow planter walls and a water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. Note: The state Clearinghouse will assign identification numbers ror all new projects. If a SCH number already exists for a January 2008 project (e.g. Notice of Preparation or previous draft document) please fill in. Reviewing Agencies Checklist Lead Agencies may recommend State Clearinghouse distribution by marking agencies below with and X'. If you have already sent your document to the agency please denote that with an "S ". Air Resources Board _ Boating & Waterways, Department of California Highway Patrol CalFire Caltrans District # 12 Caltrans Division of Aeronautics Caltrans Plarming (headquarters) Central Valley Flood Protection Board _ Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy _ Coastal Commission _ Colorado River Board Conservation, Department of Corrections, Department of Delta Protection Commission _ Education, Department of _ Energy Commission Fish & Game Region # _ _ Food & Agriculture, Department of General Services, Department of Health Services, Department of Housing & Community Development Integrated Waste Management Board Native American Heritage Commission Local Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency) Office of Emergency Services Office of Historic Preservation _ Office of Public School Construction Parks & Recreation _ Pesticide Regulation, Department of Public Utilities Commission _ Regional WQCB # Resources Agency S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission San Gabriel & Lower L.A. Rivers and Mms Conservancy San Joaquin River Conservancy Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Lands Commission _ SWRCB: Clean Water Grants SWRCB: Water Quality _ SWRCB: Water Rights Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Toxic Substances Control, Department of Water Resources, Department of Other Other Starting Date May 11, 2009 Ending Date June 9, 2009 Lead Agency (Complete if applicable): Consulting Firm: Keeton Kreitzer Consulting Applicant: Kim and Canine Megonigal Address: 17291 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 305 Address: 17871 Cowan Avenue City /State /Zip: Tustin, CA 92780 City/State /Zip: Irvine, CA 92614 Contact: Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal Phone: (949) 752 -6996 Phone: (714) 665 -8509 Signature of Lead Agency Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21161,rPublic Resources Code. Date: May 8, 2009 Date: Project: Project Location Lead Agency: NOTICE OF PREPARATION CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA May 8, 2009 Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133) 2333 Pacific Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA City of Newport Beach TOM DALY, CLERK-RECORDER gy DEPUTY Pursuant to Section 15082(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach will be the lead agency and will prepare an environmental impact report for the project described below. The City needs to know your agency's views as to the scope and content of the environmental information related to your agency's statutory authority with respect to the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering any applicable permits for the project. Based on the initial study that was prepared for the proposed project, the City of San Newport Beach has determined that an environmental impact report (EIR). The initial study concluded that project implementation could result in potentially significant environmental effects to: • Aesthetics • Biological Resources • Land Use and Planning Unless specific comments are received during the NOP public comment period that indicates a potential for the project to result in significant impacts, the following issues will not be addressed in the Draft EIR: • Agricultural Resources • Recreation • Utilities • Geology and Soils • Hydrology /Water Quality • Noise • Cultural Resources • Mineral Resources • Public Services and Facilities • Population and Housing • Hazards and Hazardous Materials Air Quality • Transportation /Traffic Pursuant to Section 15103 of the CEQA Guidelines, your response must be sent at the earliest date but received by our agency no later than thirty (30) days after receipt of this notice. Should you have any questions regarding the project or notice of preparation, please call Mr. James Campbell, Principal Planner, at (949) 644 -3210. Please mail your written response including any comments you may have on this James Campbell, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Center Drive P. O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 Applicant: Kim and Caroline Megonigal. Description: The subject property currently consists of a single parcel situated on a bluff that extends below Pacific Drive. The project site is located at 2333 Pacific Drive in Corona del Mar and encompasses 4,412 square feet (0.10 acre); the site is currently undeveloped. The applicant is proposing the construction of a single - family residential dwelling unit on the property, which will have vehicular access to the ground floor from Pacific Drive. The proposed residence will have a total floor area of 3,138 square feet, including 377 square feet on the ground floor, 934 square feet on the second floor and 1,827 square feet on the first floor. The ground floor level supports an additional 428 square foot garage. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space, including 129 square feet on the ground floor, 714 square feet on the second floor, and 161 square feet on the first, is provided. The proposed three -story, 3,566 square -foot residence conforms to all Zoning Code property development regulations, with the exception of the proposed planter walls and a water feature that are located within the three -foot front yard setback height limit. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 to allow planter walls and a water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. Because the project conforms to the height limits of the Zoning Code, it meets all of the terms and conditions of Categorical Exclusion Order E -77 -5. Therefore, a Coastal Development Permit is not required. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting The subject property is currently undeveloped and is surrounding by development on three sides, including single - family residences on the north, south and west; Begonia Park is located east of the site. The aerial photograph illustrates the undeveloped site and the existing land uses surrounding the site. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: James Campbell, Planning Department (949) 644 -3210 4. Project Location: 2333 Pacific Drive Newport Beach, CA 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Kim Megonigal 17872 Cowan Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 6. General Plan Designation: Single Unit Residential — Detached (RS -D) 7. Zoning: Single - Family Residential (R -1) 8. Introduction: None 9. Project Description: Project Location The subject property currently consists of a single parcel situated on a steeply sloping bluff that extends below Pacific Drive. The bluff is above two single - family residences constructed at the base of the bluff adjacent to Bayside Drive. The subject site is located at 2333 Pacific Drive in the Corona del Mar are of Newport Beach and encompasses 4,412 square feet (0.10 acre); the site is currently undeveloped. The site is located west of and abuts Begonia Park. Project Description The applicant proposes to construct a 3,566 square foot single - family residence. The proposed residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the first floor, 934 square feet on the second floor, and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (includes a 428 - square foot, 2 -car garage). Vehicular access is from Pacific Drive at the intersection of Begonia Avenue and Pacific Drive. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space on the three levels is provided. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 to allow planter walls and a water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. Grading, landscaping and utility connections necessary for construction of the proposed residence MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 2 are included. Lastly, the applicant is proposing non - standard improvements within the public right -of- way consisting of enhanced paving for pedestrian and vehicular access from Pacific Drive. 10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: As indicated below, the subject property is currently undeveloped and is surrounding by development on three sides, including single - family residences on the north, south and west; Begonia Park is located east of the site. The aerial photograph illustrates the undeveloped site and the existing land uses surrounding the site. A summary of the general Plan designations, zoning, and current uses for the subject property and adjacent properties. LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE ON -SITE Single Unit Residential — Single - Family Residential Vacant, undeveloped land Detached(RS -D) R -1 NORTH Two -Unit Residential (RT) Two Famillyy Residential Residential SOUTH Multiple -Unit Residential Multiple - Family Residential RM Residential MFR Parks and Recreation EAST PR R -1 Begonia Park WEST RS -D R -1 Residential 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Q Aesthetics ❑ Agricultural Resources ❑ Air Quality Elf Biological Resources ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology & Soils DETERMINATION ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials Q Land Use & Planning ❑ Hydrology & Water Quality ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population & Housing On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ Public Services ❑ Recreation ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Utilities & Service Systems Q Mandatory Findings of Significance 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 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 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. H 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 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, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ❑ Submitted by: James Campbell, Pril Planning Department Planner MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 5 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within LEI ❑ ❑ ❑ a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of 0 El El 13 the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Act contract? C) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 to non - agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ projected air quality violation? C) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? G) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated Less than No Significant Impact Impact 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ D ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 7 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially El 10 11 11 in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions El El 0 11 Involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter ❑ ❑ D ❑ mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code ❑ El 11 0 Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport 171 El El 0 or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the project area? Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated i) 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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 iv) Landslides? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially El 10 11 11 in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions El El 0 11 Involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter ❑ ❑ D ❑ mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code ❑ El 11 0 Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport 171 El El 0 or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the project area? MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 8 Potentially Less Than Significant Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated U.uss Ulan Nu Significant Impact Impact g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted El L1 0 El response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are El ❑ El 0 adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Vlll. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ El El requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such.that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream ❑ ❑ El river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ 2 ❑ k) Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or El El 0 El construction? MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 9 Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated 1) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle b) or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, ❑ ❑ D ❑ hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 docks or other outdoor work areas? IT) Result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ a) beneficial uses of the receiving waters? n) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity ❑ ❑ D ❑ or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? o) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ surrounding areas? IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 specific plan, or other land use plan? XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ❑ ❑ D ❑ ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ project vicinity above levels existing without the project? MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 10 ruienuauy mess roan Lessman No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ❑ 21 ❑ ❑ project? e) For a project located within an airport land use or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport 13 El El or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to ❑ ❑ ❑ Q excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating El ❑ ❑ 0 the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ El El Q construction of replacement housing elsewhere? XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ El ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Schools? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that El El 0 El physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 11 t otentiany Less man Significant Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated Less than No Significant Impact Impact b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities which El ❑ El 0 might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Opportunities? XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle ❑ Q ❑ ❑ trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in ❑ ❑ El Q substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses ❑ ❑ ❑ D (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting El ❑ El Q alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable El ❑ ❑ 9 Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ❑ Q construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or ❑ ❑ ❑ avnanriart anfiflamanfe naarfarf7 MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 12 Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate ❑ ❑ ❑ Q capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ❑ Q accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal Q ❑ ❑ ❑ community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable Q ❑ ❑ ❑ when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) G) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ XVII. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This section of the Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project and provides explanations of the responses to the Environmental Checklist. The environmental analysis in this section is patterned after the questions in the Environmental Checklist. Under each issue area, a general discussion of the existing conditions is provided according to the environmental analysis of the proposed Project's impacts. To each question, there are four possible responses: No Impact. The proposed project will not have any measurable environmental impact on the environment. • Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will have the potential for impacting the environment, although this impact will be below thresholds that may be considered significant. Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project will have potentially significant adverse impacts which may exceed established thresholds; however, mitigation measures or changes to the proposed project's physical or operational characteristics will reduce these impacts to levels that are less than significant. Those mitigation measures are specified in the following sections. Each recommended mitigation measure has been agreed to by the applicant. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 13 • Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project will have impacts that are considered significant and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to insignificant levels. When an impact is determined to be potentially significant in the preliminary analysis, the environmental issue will be subject to detailed analysis in an environmental impact report (EIR). The references and sources used for the analysis are also identified with each response. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 14 I. AESTHETICS a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Potentially Significant Impact. The certified Coastal Land Use Plan ( "CLUP ") and the Natural Resources Element of the City's General Plan (Figure NR3) designate Begonia Park as a "public view point." Westerly views exist from the park to Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean beyond. Although the proposed single - family residence has been designed to conform to the height limit imposed by the Newport Beach Zoning Code, project implementation will result in the construction of a residential structure within these views. The proposed structure, which would be compatible with the existing homes along Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue because it is designed in conformance with most development standards of the Zoning Code, will not obstruct public views of the bay and coastline due to the location of the proposed structure. Public views of Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean beyond exist from Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue. The proposed structure will obstruct some of these views, depending upon the specific vantage point. Several General Plan policies require new development to protect and, where feasible, enhance public views. Even though the project conforms to the existing building height limit, setback standards, and related development standards (except the planter and water feature in the required front yard setback area), potential public view impacts from the "public view point" at Begonia Park and /or Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue may occur. The Draft EIR will evaluate the potential visual impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings with a state scenic highway? Potentially Significant Impact. The subject property is located on Pacific Drive, at the top of a bluff overlooking Newport Harbor, and is surrounded by single - family residences on the northwest, west and south. As indicated above, Begonia Park is located to the east. The site is not located along a state scenic highway and no historic buildings or other significant features exist on the property. Although some trees are present on the site, they are not considered to be important scenic resources within the aesthetic character of the site or project environs. A portion of the site has been extensively disturbed and is devoid of vegetation. A small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat exists on the property. With the exception of the bluff feature itself, no other scenic resources exist on the site. The upper limits of the bluff would be graded to accommodate the proposed development, resulting in the alteration of the existing bluff feature. Two single - family homes are located directly below the subject property, which were permitted to cut into the toe of the slope to permit sufficient area to construct the buildings. The potential visual impacts of project implementation on the bluff will be evaluated in the Draft EIR. C) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Potentially Significant Impact. As indicated above, project implementation includes the development of the site with a single - family residence. Access to the proposed home would be via Pacific Drive. The structure will be single story at the street level (i.e., from Pacific Drive) and conform to the 24 -foot height limit prescribed by the R -1 zoning district regulations. Nonetheless, potential visual impacts may occur from locations within Begonia Park where views of the harbor and coast exist. Encroachment into the viewshed by the proposed home would affect views from various vantages within the park and from Pacific Drive. The potential effect on the existing visual character of the site and environs will be evaluated in the Draft EIR. d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less than Significant Impact. The existing residential development on Pacific Avenue is characterized by lighting along the street and other interior and exterior lighting associated with residential uses. This illumination occurs along the frontage of the street and the rear portions of the residential properties. Lighting for the proposed project will also be provided for the same purpose as that which currently exists in the area (i.e., security and structure illumination). It is anticipated that the lighting will be energy efficient MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 15 and will also be shielded or recessed as required by existing code, so that direct glare and reflections are contained within the boundaries of the property. As a result, compliance with the lighting standards and requirements will ensure that no significant lighting impacts occur; no mitigation measures are required. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? No Impact. No Prime Farmland, Farmland of State or Local Importance, or Unique Farmland occurs within or in the vicinity of the site. The site and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built -up Land" and "Other Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map. Further, neither the site nor the adjacent areas are designated as prime, unique or important farmlands by the State Resources Agency or by the Newport Beach General Plan. Therefore, no impact on significant farmlands would occur with the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element designates the site as "Single Family Attached" and the zone designation for the site is "Single Family Residential." Therefore, there is no conflict with zoning for agricultural use, and the property and surrounding properties are not under a Williamson Act contract. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? No Impact. The site is not being used for agricultural purposes and, as indicated previously, is not designated as agricultural land. The subject property and the area surrounding the site are developed with residential uses. Therefore, no agricultural uses on the site or within the site's vicinity would be converted to non - agricultural use. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. III. AIR QUALITY a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impact. Development of the subject property with one single - family residence will have no effect upon the key strategies of the regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which focus on emissions reductions through controls on business, industry and paints, and through stricter federal and state regulatory controls to improve fuel efficiency, reduce transportation - related exhaust emissions, and reduce emissions from a variety of consumer products. The subject site is currently undeveloped. Construction of one residence on the site represents an insignificant increase in potential mobile- and stationary source pollutant emissions when compared to the existing occupied units and an insignificant potential decrease if all of the existing dwelling units were occupied. Therefore, based on the small incremental increase in pollutant emissions anticipated as a result of project implementation, the proposed project would not affect the long -term projections related to land use planning and growth forecasts. As discussed in the responses to Ill.b through Ill.e, no significant air quality impacts are anticipated as a result of this project; therefore, it would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. This conclusion is further supported by the goals articulated in the Natural Resources Element of the General Plan that is intended to reduce mobile source emissions as well as those from stationary sources. Consistent with those policies, project implementation will result in only a small number of vehicle trips. The project will also incorporate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) to minimize pollution and reduce source MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 16 emissions. Finally, the project sponsor will also be required as part of compliance with standard building and grading ordinances to operate construction equipment and use building materials and paints that minimize air pollutant emissions and to control dust created during construction. I Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less Than Significant Impact. There are no air pollution sources on site or in the immediate vicinity and the proposed project would not introduce any sources of air pollution or hazardous air emissions that could contribute to or worsen an existing air quality violation. Project implementation would result in temporary construction emissions that may affect local and regional air quality. Temporary construction activity emissions will occur during the construction stage of the proposed single - family residential dwelling unit, including the on -site generation of dust and equipment exhaust, and off -site emissions from construction workers commuting to the site and trucks hauling excavated earth materials from the site and delivering building materials to the subject property. Heavy -duty trucks, earthmovers, air compressors, and power generators would be used during the grading and construction phase. Operation of these vehicles, equipment, and machines would temporarily increase air pollutant levels in the vicinity of the proposed project. In addition, emissions from delivery and haul trucks (i.e., approximately 53 haul trucks to transport export soils), construction crew vehicles, concrete mixers, and other off -site vehicle trips would add to local pollutant levels. The short -term construction emission levels would be expected to remain below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds for each type of pollutant, with or without best available control measures. Construction -phase emissions would not, therefore, violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Given the limited size of the project (i.e., one single - family residential dwelling unit), construction emissions for carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), sulfur oxides (SOx) and particulate matter (PMio) would generally be low from equipment use and truck trips. In addition, volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from paints and coatings would create ROG emissions during construction. Dust emissions on site would be generated by excavation and initial construction activities. However, as indicated previously, such emissions would be less than the current thresholds and would, therefore, not be significant. Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single - family residence include vehicular exhaust from daily traffic (i.e., based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site and landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a variety of household cleaning and hair care products. Estimated long -term project - related emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds for all categories of pollutants. The project's long -term emissions would not violate any air quality standard established by the AQMD or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well- being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snow pack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health - related problems. The State Legislature has directed the California Air Resources Board to consult with the Public Utilities Commission in the development of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduction measures, including limits on emissions of greenhouse gases applied to electricity and natural gas providers regulated by the Public Utilities Commission. The Legislature has also directed the California Air Resources Board to assure that such measures meet the statewide emissions limits for greenhouse gases (GHG) to be established pursuant to Assembly Bill 32. Although the project would increase the resident population on the project site, the proposed project includes only one single - family residence. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be significant in the context of the contribution of worldwide GHG impacts. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 17 C) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, neither short -term (i.e., construction) nor long -term (i.e., operational) emissions associated with the proposed project would exceed SCAQMD recommended significance thresholds. These thresholds were developed to provide a method of assessing a project's individual impact significance, and also to determine whether the project's impacts could be cumulatively considerable. The proposed project would not, therefore, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant. Since the South Coast Air Basin is in non- attainment with respect to ozone and PM10, and the construction emissions would add to the regional burden of these pollutants, a vigorous set of air pollution control measures is recommended during the construction phases (refer to MM -1 through MM -6, at the end of this section). d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? No Impact. The area in which the subject property is located is dominated by single - family residential development; there are no senior housing facilities, hospitals, schools or other sensitive receptors located near the proposed project site. A blufftop passive park /public view point is located adjacent to the project site. Moreover, as discussed in the preceding assessment of potential air quality impacts, the proposed project would not generate substantial pollutant emissions, either during the temporary construction phases or over the long -term operating life of the proposed homes when occupied. Although no significant impacts are anticipated, several conditions are prescribed to further reduce dust and construction equipment exhaust emissions during the construction phase. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? No Impact. A variety of odors would be associated with construction equipment exhaust emissions and application of paints and other architectural coatings. The odors would be minor and temporary in nature and would not significantly affect people residing or occupying areas beyond the immediate construction zones. Subsequent to the completion of construction activities, development of the site with a single - family residence would not result in any significant change in the kinds of odors that could be experienced in the project environs, which is composed of similar single - family residential dwelling units. Occasional, less than significant odors may occur in conjunction with trash pick up and outdoor food preparation (e.g., barbeques), and possibly with outdoor maintenance activities. Trash containers would be equipped with lids and would be stored inside the dwelling units and garages. The proposed project will not generate unusual or large quantities of solid waste materials, or utilize chemicals, food products, or other materials that emit strong odors that would adversely affect the ambient air quality in the project environs. Therefore, the project does not have the potential to create objectionable odors; and no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measures Although no significant air quality impacts will occur as a result of the proposed project, the following mitigation measures highlight specific aspects of SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 that are considered effective construction control measures to minimize this project's construction phase air quality impacts: All applicable measures set forth in those rules shall be implemented by the Contractor. During grading activities, any exposed soil areas shall be watered at least four times per day. Stockpiles of crushed cement, debris, dirt or other dusty materials shall be covered or watered twice daily. On windy days or when fugitive dust can be observed leaving the proposed project site, additional applications of water shall be applied to maintain a minimum 12 percent moisture content as defined by SCAQMD Rule 403. Soil disturbance shall be terminated whenever windy conditions exceed 25 miles per hour. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 18 Truck loads carrying soil and debris material shall be wetted or covered prior to leaving the site. Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the streets shall be swept daily. All diesel - powered machinery exceeding 100 horsepower shall be equipped with soot traps, unless the Contractor demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City Building Official that it is infeasible. The construction contractor shall time the construction activities, including the transportation of construction equipment vehicles and equipment to the site, and delivery of materials, so as not to interfere with peak hour traffic. To minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site, a flag person shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways, if deemed necessary by the City. The construction contractor shall encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction workers. To the extent feasible, pre- coated /natural colored building materials shall be used. Water -based or low VOC coatings shall be used that comply with SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits. Spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, or manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, etc. shall be used to reduce VOC emissions, where practical. Paint application shall use lower volatility paint not exceeding 100 grams of ROG per liter. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Potentially Significant Impact. Potential wildlife species that may occur in the project area (i.e., Newport Beach 7.5- minute U.S.G.S. topographic map) include the California black rail, Belding's savannah sparrow, Light- footed clapper rail, California least tern, and fairy shrimp; however, these species require estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands or vernal pool habitats, which do not exist on the site. Therefore, no significant impacts to these sensitive species would occur as a result of project implementation. Other sensitive species that may occur on the site or utilize the site for foraging include the Cooper's hawk and coastal California gnatcatcher. Because the area to be impacted by the proposed project is small in size, providing limited, if any, suitable habitat for the Cooper's hawk, the overall spatial loss of the site will not result in significant impacts to this species. Similarly, sufficient foraging and /or nesting habitat for the California gnatcatcher is not present on the proposed project site or in the surrounding area to support this species. The habitat on the site is limited in size and vegetative diversity, including the absence of California sagebrush. Additionally, the project site is located in an area of dense residential development, surrounded by urban ornamental landscaping. Any remaining habitat exists as "islands" within the residential area, which are of insufficient size and /or vegetative composition to support the gnatcatcher. Therefore, no significant impacts would occur to the California gnatcatcher. Although the subject property encompasses only 4,400 square feet, southern coastal bluff scrub, a plant community identified as rare by the California Department of Fish and Game, exists on the site and is approximately 216 square feet in area. In addition, the subject property could also support other sensitive plant species, including Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonL), south coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica), many- stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), cliff spurge (Euphorbia misera), Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulten), and woolly seablite (Sueda taxifolia). The Draft EIR will address potential impacts associated to the sensitive habitat and species that may exist on the subject property. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 19 b) Would the project 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 California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. A survey conducted on the subject property revealed that only three habitat types occupy portions of the site, including disturbed (i.e., areas that are either devoid of vegetation such as dirt roads or those areas that have a high percentage of non - native weedy species), disturbed /ornamental (i.e., areas dominated by escaped or planted ornamental species with a high presence of non - native weedy species), and coastal bluff scrub (i.e., areas that support approximately 15 total native shrubs). No riparian habitat was identified on the site. No significant impacts to riparian habitat and /or species are anticipated as a result of project implementation; no mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project 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? No Impact. As indicated above, no riparian habitat exists on the subject property and no wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act occur on the site. Project implementation will not result in any potential adverse affects to either wetlands or riparian species d) Would the project 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? No Impact. See the discussion of potential impacts to sensitive species in the previous responses. Although the project site is currently vacant, the surrounding areas are developed and no migratory wildlife corridors occur on site or in the immediate vicinity of the project site that would be affected by development of the subject property. As a result, the proposed project will not interfere with resident, migratory or wildlife species. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Potentially Significant Impact. No native trees exist on the subject property that would be protected, either as a result of adopted policies or other resources agency requirements. Although the subject property and environs are not identified on Figures NR1 and NR2 in the Natural Resources Element, which identify important biological resources and environmental study areas, respectively, in the City, several policies articulated in the Newport Beach General Plan address biological resources, including NR 10.1 (resource protection, NR 10.4 (new development siting and design), NR 10.5 (significant or rare biological resources, etc. The Draft EIR will evaluate the relationship of the applicable policies to the proposed development of the site. f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less than Significant Impact. There are no local, regional or state habitat conservation plans that would regulate or guide development of the project site. The subject property is located on a coastal bluff, which is not included in either a Habitat Conservation Plan or a Natural Community Conservation Plan. Although coastal bluff scrub habitat has been identified on the subject property, that habitat encompasses only 216 square feet, which is considered to be of low value and it is not connected or associated with any larger area of similar habitat and would not likely support any California coastal gnatcatchers due to its size and location. Nonetheless, potential project - related to this habitat will be evaluated in the Draft EIR. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 20 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined §15604.5? No Impact. The project site is currently undeveloped. No historic resources are identified either on the site or in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is no identified by the City as possessing potentially important historic resources. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant impacts to historic resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15604.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As previously indicated, the subject site is undeveloped; however, the area surrounding the site (with the exception of Begonia Park) has been significantly altered by grading to accommodate the existing development located on the bluff and elsewhere in the vicinity of the subject site. No known archaeological resources are know to be present in the project area. Project implementation includes excavation of the property to accommodate the proposed single - family residence. It is unlikely that the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in significant impacts to cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with the existing development in the area and the nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine). Although no significant impacts to cultural resources are anticipated, an archaeological monitor will be present during grading (refer to MM V -1) to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered, appropriate measures will be implemented in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, no significant impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are recommended. C) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Although the project site is currently vacant, the surrounding areas, including the bluff on which the existing homes are located, have been altered to accommodate development that includes predominantly residential uses. The site contains the Monterey Formation deposits, which are known to contain abundant fossilized marine invertebrates and vertebrates. The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project areas exists. Like other sites in the City that are underlain by the Monterey Formation, the site should be considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during grading and excavation. A mitigation measure in accordance with existing City policy has been included in the event that such resources are encountered during grading /excavation activities (refer to MM -6 below). d) Would the project disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. The project site and surrounding areas are highly disturbed due to past urban development and there is no evidence of human remains or sites of Native American burials. Based on the degree of disturbance that has already occurred on the site and in the vicinity of the project site, project implementation will not result in potentially significant impacts to human remains; no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measures The following mitigation measure is proposed to mitigate the potential impacts associated with cultural and /or scientific resources to a less than significant level. MM -1 A qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be retained by the project applicant who will be present during the grading and landform alteration phase. In the event that cultural resources and /or fossils are encountered during construction activities, ground- disturbing excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted by the monitor until the find MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 21 has been salvaged. Any artifacts and /or fossils discovered during project construction shall be prepared to a point of identification and stabilized for long -term storage. Any discovery, along with supporting documentation and an itemized catalogue, shall be accessioned into the collections of a suitable repository. Curation costs to accession any collections shall be the responsibility of the project applicant. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS a) Would the project 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? Less than Significant Impact. The site is located in the Corona del Mar area of the City, which is near the intersection of the Southwestern Block and the Central Block of the Los Angeles Basin. The Southwestern Block is the westerly seaward portion of the Los Angeles Basin, which includes Palos Verdes Peninsula 'and Long Beach, and is bounded on the east by the Newport - Inglewood Fault Zone (NIFZ). The landward part of the NIFZ is a northwesterly- trending zone that extends from Beverly Hills on the north to Newport Bay on the south, where it continues offshore to the south; however, it eventually returns ashore again near La Jolla, where it is expressed by the Rose Canyon Fault. The NIFZ within the project environs is not included on the State - published Alquist - Priolo Special Studies zonation map. The subject property is located within a seismically active area. There are no known local or regional active earthquake faults on the site, and the site is not within an Alquist - Priolo Zone. The Newport - Inglewood Fault -Rose Canyon Fault is located less than two miles to the south of and off -shore from the site. Another active fault that could generate seismic activity that affects the subject property and surrounding area is the Elsinore Fault, The Newport - Inglewood and Elsinore Fault Zones could produced earthquakes of magnitude 6 — 7 on the Richter Scale, with local strong ground motion equivalent to at least VIII — IX on the modified Mercali Scale. Although episodes on those faults could cause ground shaking at the project site, it is highly unlikely that the site would experience surface rupture. Potential impacts would be less than significant with construction consistent with building and grading ordinances. No significant ground rupture impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than Significant Impact. See response to Vl.a (i) above. As indicated above, the subject property is located in the seismically active southern California region; several active faults are responsible for generating moderate to strong earthquakes throughout the region. Due to the proximity of the site to the Newport - Inglewood Fault zone, the subject property has a moderate to high probability to be subjected to seismic and associated hazards. The maximum credible earthquake on the NIFZ is estimated to be 7.6 with a probable magnitude of 6.6 on the Richter Scale. Estimated peak ground acceleration for the subject site from an earthquake with a 10 percent probability of exceedance in a 50 -year period is 0.39g. Similarly, the maximum credible earthquake on the Elsinore - Whittier Fault is 8.0, with a probable (Richter) magnitude of 7.2. Other faults capable of producing seismic activity that could affect the subject property include the San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults and the Whittier Fault, which is a northern branch of the Elsinore Fault. In addition to these faults, the San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust Fault is located less than 1.5 to 2.5 miles below the area. This fault and the Newport Inglewood fault (concealed segment), located approximately 750 to 1,000 feet from the subject site, are considered the potential causative faults in the area. Even though the project site and surrounding areas could be subject to strong ground movements, incorporation of the recommendations included in the preliminary geotechnical report and adherence to current building standards of the City of Newport Beach would reduce the potential adverse effects of ground movement hazards to a less than significant level. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 22 iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? No Impact. Based on the geologic exploration undertaken on the subject property, the site is underlain by sedimentary rocks of the Monterey Formation. These rocks do not have the potential for liquefaction. Furthermore, no groundwater is present to the depths and no loose sands or coarse silt is present. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction is less than significant. Proper design of the proposed residence will ensure that ground failure, including that associated with liquefaction, will not pose a significant hazard to the development. iv) Landslides? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A stability analysis was performed on the subject property by Borella Geology, Inc., as reflected in the preliminary geotechnical report ( Borella Geology, March 20, 2007). Based on that analysis, it was determined that the orientation of the bedrock on the site is dipping into the slope, which is the preferred orientation for maintaining slope integrity. However, surficially, the cliff portions of the subject property are unstable as evidenced by the talus deposits that are present at the base of the steep slopes. However, all slopes on the site were determined to be grossly stable. The maximum slope height is 47 feet and slope angle ranges from 10 degrees to 90 degrees. Calculated factors of safety are in excess of 1.5 (static) and 1.1 (Pseudo- static) of factors of safety required by the City of Newport Beach. The preliminary geotechnical report indicated that temporary shoring or a "shotcrete" combination shoring /retaining wall must be placed on all vertical cuts exceeding five (5) feet if a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) layback cannot be achieved. However, temporary shoring is only anticipated in areas where retaining walls will be constructed to accommodate the lower floor level of the proposed residence. In addition, incorporation of the recommendations presented in the preliminary geotechnical evaluation and adherence to standard building code requirements will ensure that site development will not be subject to landslides. With the incorporation of those recommendations, potential landslide impacts will be less than significant. b) Would the project result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the proposed project will necessitate grading and excavation necessary to accommodate the proposed single - family residence that will temporarily expose on -site soils to potential erosion. In that interim period, it is possible that some erosion may occur, resulting in some sedimentation; however, in order to ensure that erosion and sedimentation are minimized, the applicant will be required to prepare and submit an adequate drainage and erosion control plan, which complies with current City standards prescribed by the Building and Grading Ordinances. Implementation of the mandatory appropriate erosion controls will avoid potential erosion impacts associated with site grading and development. Further, the proposed site will be engineered to ensure that surface /subsurface drainage does not contribute to erosion or adversely affect the stability of project improvements. Other efforts required to ensure that potential erosion is minimized include slope protection devices, plastic sheeting, inspection for signs of surface erosion, and corrective measures to maintain, repair or add structures required for effective erosion control. As a result, potential impacts occurring from project implementation, including those anticipated during grading and after development of the site, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level. C) Would the project 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? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Section VI.a.iv, above. As previously indicated, potential slope failure /landslide potential would be avoided through proper design. Therefore, site preparation and design of the proposed residence in accordance with the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical report and compliance with the California Building Code will ensure that potential impacts will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 23 d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the California Building Code (2007)), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. Base don the analysis conducted for the proposed project, the on -site surface materials have a very low expansion index and a negligible sulfate content. As a result, no significant impacts related to expansive soils would occur. The subject site is underlain by artificial fill, slopewash and talus deposits overlying bedrock assigned to the Monterey Formation. The fill material, slopewash, and talus deposits are considered incompetent and must be removed or penetrated with the proposed caisson -grade beam foundation system to ensure that no significant impacts occur e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The project will be connected to existing sewer lines. No septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems are proposed. Therefore, no significant impacts related to the implementation of an alternative waste disposal system are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measures As indicated in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report for New Residence (Borella Geology, Inc., March 20, 2007), construction of the proposed single - family residence is feasible from a geotechnical perspective. The geotechnical impact of construction "... is nil if proper care is taken ..." in the development of the site in accordance with the recommendations set forth in that report. The following measures shall be implemented to ensure that no potentially significant geotechnical impacts identified in the preceding analysis occur. MM -2 Prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, an erosion control plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City's Chief Building Official. MM -3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a soils engineering report and final geotechnical report to the City's Building Department for approval. The project shall be designed to incorporate the recommendations included in those reports that which address site grading, site clearing, compaction, caissons, bearing capacity and settlement, lateral pressures, footing design, seismic design, slabs on grade, retaining wall design, subdrain design, concrete, surface drainage, setback distance, excavations, cut -fill transitional zones, planters and slope maintenance, and driveways. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would involve the use of materials associated with the construction of a residential building, including oil, gas, tar, construction materials and adhesives, cleaning solvents and paint. Transport of these materials to the site and use on the site would only create a localized hazard in the event of an accident or spills. Hazardous materials use, transport, storage and handling would be subject to federal, state and local regulations to reduce the risk of accidents. Equipment maintenance and disposal of vehicular fluids is subject to existing regulations, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Given the nature of the project in terms of scope and size (i.e., single - family residence on a 4,400 square foot lot), it is anticipated that normal storage, use and transport of hazardous materials will not result in undue risk to construction workers on the site or to persons on surrounding areas. The use and disposal of any hazardous materials on the site and in conjunction with the project will be in accordance with existing regulations. With the exception of small quantities of pesticides, fertilizers, cleaning solvents, paints, etc., that are typically used to maintain MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 24 residential properties, on -going operation of the site for residential use will not result in the storage or use of hazardous materials. b) Would the project 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? Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation includes only the construction of one single - family residence on the 4,400 square foot lot. As indicated above, the proposed project does not involve any activities and /or uses that would utilize hazardous materials or other substances that would, if released into the environment, create a safety or health hazard. There is no indication that the subject site has been contaminated that would adversely affect site development (refer to Section VITA, below). Although grading and site preparation activities will expose subsurface soils and result in the generation of fugitive dust, no hazardous emissions will occur as a result of project implementation. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur. C) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous material, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is currently undeveloped; the applicant is proposing one single - family on a 4,400 square foot lot in an existing residential area within Corona del Mar. It is important to note that no schools are located within one - quarter mile of the subject site. As indicated previously, project implementation will result in the generation of a minor amount of fugitive dust and particulate matter during grading and site preparation activities, which will not result in any hazardous emissions that would affect any school in the area. With the exception of commonly used household hazardous materials (e.g., insecticides, herbicides, cleaning agents, etc.), the single - family residence proposed for the site will not utilize hazardous or acutely hazardous materials that would be emitted into the environment. Therefore, no significant impacts to existing schools will occur as a result of the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? No Impact. A search of various databases concerning hazardous wastes and substances sites was conducted through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) as part of the environmental analysis. This search, which is on file with the City of Newport Beach, determined that the subject property is not included on any lists of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, project implementation will not create a significant hazard either to the public or the environment. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is located approximately 4.5 miles south of John Wayne Airport (JWA) and is not located within or subject to the airport land use plan for JWA or any other aviation facility. Operations at JWA will not pose a safety hazard for future residents due to the proximity of the project to the airport. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 25 f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The subject property is not located within proximity to a private airstrip. Development of the site as proposed will not result in potential adverse impacts, including safety hazards, to people residing or working in the project area. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are necessary. g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact. The City of Newport Beach has prepared an Emergency Operations Plan that designates procedures to be followed in case of a major emergency. Pacific Coast Highway is designated as an evacuation route in the City. The project site is not designated for emergency use within the Emergency Operations Plan. The primary concern of the Public Safety Element and the City of Newport Beach is in terms of risks to persons and personal property. Although the site is subject to seismic shaking, development pursuant to building and fire code requirements will ensure that the potential impacts are minimized or reduced to an acceptable level. The site is not located within a flood hazard area or subject to such potential disasters. Development of the subject property as proposed will not adversely affect either the evacuation routes or the adopted emergency operations planning program(s) being implemented by the City of Newport Beach. Potential circulation impacts associated with construction will be temporary in nature and will be addressed through the Construction Staging Plan that will be implemented (refer to Section XV.f. In addition, any construction vehicles within the public right of way are prohibited from completely blocking vehicular and emergency access by the Vehicle Code. As a result, potential short -term circulation impacts associated with construction would not be significant. h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. Neither the project site nor the surrounding areas are located within a "Potential Fire Hazard Area" as identified by the Newport General Plan Public Safety Element. The subject property is located within an urbanized area of the City of Newport Beach. Although some natural vegetation and /or habitat exists on the site, the proposed project would not be directly affected by the potential for wildland fires. There are no major urban or wildland fire hazards that pose a significant threat to the development. Therefore, the site is not subject to a potential risk of wildland fires. No significant impacts as a result of wildland fires will occur if the project is implemented and no mitigation measures are necessary. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Significant impact. Waste discharges associated with this project that could affect water quality would be limited to non -point source discharges, including potential storm water runoff of construction materials and wastes and storm water runoff from the developed site. This project would not generate any point sources of water pollution; all wastewater generated by the residential plumbing system would discharge directly to the City's sanitary sewer system, which would not affect the present permit to operate the affected wastewater treatment plant. Further, the proposed project would result in the construction of only one dwelling unit that would occupy the site. Therefore, the raw sewage that would be generated by the proposed project would be similar in nature to the adjacent properties and would not significantly affect wastewater treatment. Potentially adverse water quality impacts during the construction phases would be avoided through compliance with existing regulatory programs administered by the City of Newport Beach and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). While it is impossible to anticipate all potential environmental issues that could arise on a daily basis during the course of the project, the site will be MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 26 designed to provide address sediment and erosion control for both temporary (i.e., construction) and long- term (i.e., operational) activities occurring on the subject property. In addition, site design will also address pollutants other than sediment, including those intended to control spills for hazardous materials, solid waste management, hazardous waste management, etc. A On -site retention and /or filtration or clarifiers would be required to meet water quality standards. The water quality features incorporated into the project will be selected to address the main pollutants of concern for a residential project, and for the impacted water body, i.e. Newport Bay. Newport Bay is listed as an "impaired" water body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with respect to metals, pesticides and priority organics. Implementation of the water quality features by the City prior to issuance of the grading permit will ensure that this project does not violate any water quality standards during construction or over the long -term operating life of the developed site. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project 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)? No Impact. This small -scale project would not result in a significant increase in water demand and all of the project's potable and non - potable water needs will be met through a connection to the City's domestic water system. The proposed single - family residence represents an insignificant increase in the demand for domestic water, which has been anticipated by the City in its long -range plans. No water wells are proposed or required to meet the water demands of this project. There are no water wells located on or near the site, and since this project would not affect any existing or require any new water wells, the project will not result in the lowering of the water table. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project 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? Less Than Significant Impact. No stream or river exists on site. Existing surface runoff generated on the subject property occurs as sheet flow and drains in a southerly direction over the bluff where it enters the City's storm drain system before discharging into Newport Bay, which has been identified as containing "environmentally sensitive areas" as defined by the 2003 Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the Water Quality Control Plans for the Santa Ana Basin. The actual amount of stormwater runoff generated from the building footprint and paved areas (totaling approximately 2,300 square feet) would be insignificant. Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality codes and policies, which are performed during the plan check stage, will ensure that surface flows can, be accommodate and water quality protected. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a 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? Less than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion in Section Vlll.c. As indicated above, project implementation will alter the existing drainage conditions on the site. However, the minor increase in impervious surfaces (i.e., approximately 2,300 square feet) will not be significant. The site will be graded and designed to facilitate post - development storm flows and may include on -site retention or other features, which would ensure that the increase in surface runoff can be accommodated by existing facilities in the project area. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 27 e) Would the project 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? Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in an increase in impervious surfaces on the site, which would generate additional surface runoff. However, the post- development impervious surfaces would be limited to approximately 2,300 square feet, which would not generate a significant amount of stormwater runoff. As previously indicated, the project will be designed to incorporate on -site retention or similar features. As a result, the existing storm drainage collection and conveyance facilities in the project area have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed project. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less than Significant Impact. As indicated previously, Newport Bay is listed as an "impaired" water body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with respect to metals, pesticides and priority organics. Changes in surface runoff are anticipated as a result of the development of the subject property with one residence that could result in potential impacts to water quality. However, the project will be designed to comply with all relevant building, grading and water quality codes and policies to ensure that there will not be an adverse effect on water quality, either during construction or during the operational life of the project. Final plan check include the preparation of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that must be found to meet applicable standards. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. g) Would the project 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? No Impact. The subject property is not located within the 100 -year flood plain as delineated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of Newport Beach. No homes would be placed within the 100 -year flood plain and no significant impacts are would occur. h) Would the project place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. Refer to the response to Section Vlll.g. i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact. As indicated above, the project site is not within a flood hazard area or within an area subject to flooding due to dam or levee failure. Therefore, project implementation will not result in a potentially significant impact; no mitigation measures are required. j) Would the project be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is located near the coastal margin of the Pacific Ocean, at the southern end of Newport Beach, within the Newport Harbor area. While this area is protected by jetty emplacement at the harbor mouth, long water waves generated by offshore mechanisms such as tectonic displacement present a potential for tsunamis, which could pose a danger to life and /or property. Tsunamis (i.e., seismic sea waves) are generated on offshore faults by movement that is primarily vertical in nature. The area located below the subject property is within a Tsunami hazard Zone. In the event of a tsunami, surge waves would focus in this area and could threaten the lower elevations of the property. The likelihood of a tsunami large enough to threaten the proposed home is extremely low and, therefore, is considered to be less than significant; however, the future residents should be made aware of the potential threat. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 28 Seiche is defined as a standing wave oscillation effect generated in a closed or semi - closed body of water caused by wind, tidal current, and earthquake. Seiche potential is highest in large, deep, steep -sided reservoirs or water bodies. Newport Bay lacks significant potential for damaging seiche because it is very shallow. Considering the proposed finish floor elevation of the lowest floor (i.e., approximately 35 feet above mean sea level), the potential for seiche effects to the project site is considered remote; no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. k) Would the project result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction? Less than Significant Impact. Refer to responses to Section Vlll.a and Section Vlll.f. Would the project result in potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas? Less than Significant Impact. Stormwater discharge from the site will be that typically associated with residential use. Although some temporary impacts associated with construction of the proposed residential structure may occur (refer to Sections Vlll.a through f.), no long -term outdoor storage, maintenance, fueling or work areas are proposed. Vehicle parking areas are to be fully enclosed. The project will be designed to comply with all requisite codes and policies prescribed by the City of Newport Beach to ensure that stormwater impacts during or after construction are minimized or eliminated to the maximum extent possible. For example, the City's standard practice is to require street sweeping as a construction control measure, rather than washing down the street surface, to avoid runoff of construction wastes, sediment and debris into the storm drain system or the bay. With the project's compliance with the requirements imposed by the City, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. M) Would the project result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial uses of the receiving waters? Less than Significant Impact. Refer to responses to Section Vlll.a and Section Vll.f. n) Would the project create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in the addition of impervious surfaces on the site, which would increase the volume and velocity of storm flows generated on the subject property. However, the site would be graded in order to ensure that post - development runoff is minimized and, further, is directed to existing storm drain facilities that have adequate capacity to accommodate the increase flows. As a result, this project would not result in adverse impacts due to changes in the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff. o) Would the project create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding areas? Less than Significant Impact. See responses to Vlll.a through Vlll.f. As previously indicated, part of the final plan check review includes the preparation of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that must be found to meet applicable City standards. Implementation of this plan will ensure that potentially significant increases in erosion resulting from the proposed project will not occur. No mitigation measures are required. NIEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 29 IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING a) Would the project divide an established community? No Impact. The project proposes the development of a single family residence on the 4,400 square foot lot. The site is bounded by Pacific Avenue on the north. As indicated previously, the area surrounding the subject property is entirely developed with residential development. Development of the site as proposed would not directly affect adjacent properties because it is consistent with the applicable development standards and requirements for site development. In particular, project implementation does not include features (e.g., roadways, flood control channels, etc.) that would physically divide or otherwise adversely affect or change and established community. The proposed residential dwelling unit is in keeping with the intensity of development and existing character in the project environs. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency and 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? Potentially Significant Impact. The Newport Beach General Plan, the Coastal Land Use Plan and the Newport Beach Zoning Code contain land use goals, policies and regulations of concern with respect to avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Consistency of the proposed project with applicable provisions and /or policies of each the long -range plans adopted by the City of Newport Beach will be evaluated in the Draft EIR. C) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact. Although the project site is not subject to a habitat conservation plan area or natural community conservation plan area, cursory biological surveys of the site revealed that a portion of the site supports coastal bluff scrub habitat, a plant community identified as rare by the California Department of Fish and Game. The property could also support listed or otherwise sensitive plant species. As a result, potential conflicts with adopted General Plan policies could occur. The relevant General Plan policies related to habitat conservation will be evaluated in the Draft EIR. X. MINERAL RESOURCES a) Would the project 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? No Impact. The project site is currently undeveloped. Neither the Newport Beach General Plan (Recreation and Open Space Element) nor the State of California has identified the project site or environs as a potential mineral resource of Statewide or regional significance. No mineral resources are known to exist and, therefore, project implementation will not result in any significant impacts. b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? No Impact. As indicated above, the Newport Beach General Plan does not identify the project environs as having potential value as a locally important mineral resource site. Project implementation (i.e., construction of a single - family residence) as proposed will not result in the loss of any locally important mineral resource site and, therefore, no significant impacts will occur. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 30 XI. NOISE a) Would the project result in 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? Less than Significant Impact. Noise sources in the study area include traffic on the local streets, aircraft operations at John Wayne Airport, and general residential activities in the area. Ambient noise levels in the project area would be the same as other similar single - family residential neighborhoods in Corona del Mar. Residents of the proposed single - family residence, therefore, would not be exposed to significant long -term noise sources, either resulting from the increase in vehicular trips (estimated to be approximately 10 trips /day) or from on -site activities that would occur on the site. The proposed residence is similar in nature as other single - family residences in the immediate project vicinity. Although on -site noise levels associated with residential activities (where none currently exist) would increase, it is anticipated that any such increase in long -term noise associated with the residential use would be those occurring as a result of outdoor activities and would be typical of noise levels in similar residential neighborhoods. If future residents and their guests should engage in activities that result in temporary, loud noise levels that exceed the limits set forth in Chapter 10.26 of the City's Municipal Code, the City is empowered to take actions to abate that activity. This project would not result in exposure of neighboring residents or future residents on site to noise levels that exceed City standards. Therefore, no significant long -term noise impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities can generate varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the construction procedures, construction equipment used, and proximity to vibration - sensitive uses. The effect of vibration on buildings near a construction site varies depending on the magnitude of vibration, geology, and receptor building construction. The generation of vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, to minor cosmetic damage at the highest levels. Ground vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that can damage structures, but can achieve the audible and perceptible ranges in buildings close to a construction site. It is anticipated that vibration levels generated by construction vehicles and during such activities as caisson drilling and excavation may exceed the Federal Transportation Agency annoyance threshold (i.e., 78 VdB) for residential uses. Therefore, potential short - term impacts from vibration - induced annoyance may occur at residences within 50 feet of the most vibration intensive construction equipment. However, these temporary annoyances will be less than significant and would cease upon completion of the grading /excavation and foundation. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above in Xl.a, development of this property with a single - family residential dwelling unit would not result in any changes in land use that include significant new noise sources. Long -term noise associated with outdoor recreation activities and vehicular traffic generated by one home would be minor and compatible with adjacent and nearby residential uses. Long- term noise levels would not be expected to increase as a result of the additional vehicular trips when compared to existing conditions. Therefore, no significant long -term noise impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing with the project? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Typically, the estimated construction noise levels are governed primarily by the piece of equipment that produces the highest noise levels. The character of the noise levels surrounding the construction site will change as work progresses, depending on the noise MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 31 levels of the loudest piece of construction equipment in use. A combination of construction vehicles, power tools, and handheld tools would be used depending on the construction phase. Construction noise levels are based on those reported by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) using the Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM version 1.1, 2008). Noise levels for construction equipment from the RCNM are identified below, which indicated that typical noise levels range up to 83.3 dBA Leq at 50 feet during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation phase, which includes excavation and grading of the site, caisson drilling, and concrete pouring tends to generate the highest noise levels, because the noisiest construction equipment is typically associated with these activities. Most importantly, all of the significant noise generating construction activities are limited to the normal working hours by the municipal code, which minimizes the effect of those activities. Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Type of Equipment Average Sound Levels dBA Lem at 50 feet Backhoe 73.6 Concrete Mixer Truck 74.8 Concrete Pump Truck 74.4 Excavator 76.7 Front End Loader 75.1 Jackhammer 81.7 Drill Rig Truck 72.2 Hydra Break Ram 80.0 Tractor 80.0 Vibratory Concrete Mixer 73.0 Flat Bed Truck 70.3 Auger Drill Rig 77.4 Mounted Impact Hammer Hoe Ram 83.3 Dozer 77.7 SOURCE: Roadway Construction Noise Model (version 1.1) Short-term (construction) noise level increases will occur from the use of construction equipment associated with grading and excavation, and building and construction activities. Earthmoving equipment includes excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Potential noise impacts vary markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. The exposure of persons to the periodic increase in noise levels will be short -term and will cease after construction is completed. Short-term construction noise impacts tend to occur in discrete phases dominated initially by earhmoving sources, then by foundation construction, and, finally, for building construction. Heavy equipment noise can average about 80 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source when the equipment is operating at typical loads. A variety of noise sources and noise levels would occur on and in the immediate vicinity of the project site over the site preparation and construction phase anticipated for the proposed project. Noise levels would vary, depending upon the type and number of construction machinery and vehicles in use and their location within the project site. The types of machinery to be active will vary with the construction phases, which would include: Drill shoring caissons Excavation and installation of lagging Shotcrete shoring walls Install foundations Build structure Install plumbing, electrical, mechanical, finish exterior /interior, etc. Hardscape and landscape MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 32 It is important to note that all equipment is not generally operated continuously or used simultaneously. The number, type, distribution, and usage of construction equipment will differ from phase to phase. The noise generated is both temporary in nature and limited in hours by the City's Noise Ordinance (Section 10.28.040). Compliance with the existing noise control ordinance and hours of construction prescribed in the ordinance will minimize the potential noise impacts associated with project implementation. Other measures have been identified to ensure that construction noise is minimized. Typically, construction of single - family residential dwelling units on an individual basis in the City of Newport Beach, including on bluffs in the City, does not result in significant noise impacts because of their small size and the duration of construction is not anticipated to occur over a long period of time (e.g., less than two years for custom home construction). Furthermore, the highest noise levels occur from excavation and caisson drilling associated with bluff development, which takes place during the initial stage of development and does not last more than 5 to 6 months). Therefore, because the project encompasses only one single - family residence, which would employ typical construction techniques and be constructed in approximately 20 months like most single - family residential construction in the City, potential construction noise impacts will be less than significant with the incorporation of the prescribed mitigation measures. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. John Wayne Airport is located approximately 4.5 miles north of the subject property. The project site is not within an airport land use plan nor is the site within two miles of an airport. Noise in the vicinity of the project site associated with aircraft operations occurring at John Wane Airport is below 60 dBA CNEL and therefore, future residents will not be subjected to excessive noise levels. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip or other aviation facility that generates noise in the vicinity of the subject property. Development of the site as proposed will not result in potential adverse impacts, including safety hazards, to people residing or working in the project area. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation Measures As indicated in the preceding analysis, potentially significant short -tem, construction noise impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation. The following measures are recommended to ensure that potential construction noise impacts are minimized. MM -4 All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling devices. All construction equipment shall be located or operated as far as possible away from nearby residential units. MM -5 A construction schedule shall be developed that minimizes the duration of potential project - related and cumulative construction noise levels. MM -6 The construction contractor shall notify the residents of the construction schedule for the proposed project, and shall keep them informed on any changes to the schedule. The notification shall also identify the name and phone number of a contact person in case of complaints. The contact person shall take all reasonable steps to resolve the complaint. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 33 XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING a) Would the project 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? No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted land use designation and zoning applicable to the subject property. Development of the site with one single - family residence in accordance with the adopted long -range plans for the subject property would not result in significant growth and, furthermore, would not result in the potential for unanticipated growth because the project is located in an area that is virtually built out. As "in- fill" development, construction of the proposed project would not necessitate the implementation of new infrastructure such as major roadway improvements and /or the extension of infrastructure that could induce unanticipated growth and development. All of the infrastructure, including sewer and water facilities, storm drains, roadways, etc., exist in the immediate vicinity of the project site and have adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore, no significant growth- inducing impacts will occur as a result of project implementation. b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. As previously indicated, the project site is vacant. Project implementation, therefore, will not result in the displacement of any existing residential dwelling units that would necessitate replacement elsewhere in the City. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing? No Impact. As indicated above, the subject property is vacant; therefore, no displacement of occupants will occur and no mitigation measures are required. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? Less than Significant Impact. Fire protection facilities and service to the subject property are provided by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD). In addition to the City's resources, the NBFD also maintains a formal automatic aid agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) and all neighboring municipal fire departments to facilitate fire protection in the City should the need arise. The project includes all necessary fire protection devices, including fire sprinklers. The project must comply with the current Building and Fire Codes adopted by the City. A code compliance analysis will be conducted by City staff to ensure that adequate water pressure and related features required by the City are provided to ensure that the project complies with the CFC and related City codes. Adequate water supplies and infrastructure, including fire hydrants, exist in the vicinity of the project, and there is no requirement for other new facilities or emergency services. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 34 Police protection? Less than Significant Impact. The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) is responsible for providing police and law enforcement services within the corporate limits of the City. The Police Department headquarters is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, at the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara, approximately two miles northeast of the subject property. The NBPD currently has a ratio of 1.91 sworn officers for each 1,000 residents in the City. This ratio is adequate for the current population. Police and law enforcement service in the City is provided by patrols with designated "beats." Development of the subject site with one single - family would not require an expansion to local law enforcement resources and therefore would not result in any environmental impacts involving construction of new law enforcement facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Schools? Less than Significant Impact. The provision of educational facilities and services in the City of Newport Beach is the responsibility of the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. Residential and non - residential development is subject to the imposition of school fees. Payment of the State - mandated statutory School fees is the manner by which potential impacts to the District's educational facilities are mitigated. The proposed project would not generate a significant number of new students in the District. New or expanded school facilities would not be required to provide classroom and support space for these low numbers of school age children. However, as indicated above, the project applicant must pay the applicable school fee to the school district, pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, in order to offset the incremental cost impact of expanding school resources to accommodate the increased student enrollment associated with one new residence. With the payment of the mandatory school fees, no significant impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. Other public facilities? No Impact. No increased demand for other public services is anticipated and there would be no need to construct any new public facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less Than Significant Impact. The project will result in the construction of only one single - family residence on the site on the 4,400 square foot lot. Although residents of the proposed project would occasionally visit local and regional parks and beaches, use of those public facilities by the future residents would not represent a substantial change in the intensity of usage and the impact would not result in substantial physical deterioration of those park areas. No significant impact to recreational facilities are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The proposed project does not include any recreational facilities. Development of the site with one single - family residence will not require the construction of new or the expansion of existing recreational facilities in the City of Newport Beach given the small increase in population. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 35 a) Would the project 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)? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Short -term traffic impacts are those resulting from site preparation (i.e., grading and site preparation) and construction activities. With the exception of heavy trucks traveling to and from the site in the morning and afternoon to be used during site preparation and construction that occurs on -site. During the construction phase, there will be periods of time when a heavy truck traffic would occur that could result in some congestion on Pacific Drive and nearby local /residential street system. It is estimated that a total of 52 heavy trucks would be generated as a result of the grading that would be necessary to haul the estimated 630 cubic yards of soil export from the site. However, once grading has been completed, the number of heavy trucks entering and leaving the project area would be limited to those transporting equipment and materials to the site. Other construction - related traffic impacts are associated with vehicles carrying workers to and from the site and medium and heavy trucks carrying construction materials to the project site, which may result in some minor traffic delays; however, potential traffic interference caused by construction vehicles would create a temporary /short -term impact to vehicles using neighboring streets in the morning and afternoon hours. Therefore, aside from potentially minor impacts resulting from the increase in traffic that will occur as a result of construction - related traffic (e.g., construction materials, construction workers, etc.), no significant short -term impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. Nonetheless, the construction traffic impacts would be adequately addressed through the implementation of a Construction Traffic Control Plan. Long -term traffic impacts would not occur as a result of project implementation. The trip generation associated with one home is less than 10 trips per day. The addition of 10 trips on the City's circulation system would not result in potentially significant impacts to either roadway segments or intersections. No mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact. There are no CMP roadways in the project vicinity and, as noted above, project - related traffic would have a negligible effect (i.e., 10 trips /day) on traffic conditions. No significant individual or cumulative traffic impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. C) Would the project result in a change in air traffic pattern, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The proposed residential structure is under the 24 -foot height limit and would not encroach into any aviation - related air space. The proposed project is located approximately 4.5 miles from John Wayne Airport and is not located within an area that is affected by aircraft operations. This project would have no effect on the volumes of air traffic occurring at John Wayne Airport or any other airports in the region. d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? No Impact. During the construction phases, a variety of construction vehicles, including large delivery trucks, concrete pumpers, dump trucks, and a variety of passenger vehicles, will travel to and from the subject property. On some occasions, there will be a number of medium and heavy trucks that could add to local congestion levels and possibly affect through- traffic for short periods of time. Vehicular sight distance of vehicles entering and exiting the site must be found consistent at the time of building permit issuance with Standard Drawing 110 -L prescribed in the Public Works Design Manual to ensure safe MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 36 vehicular access. Compliance with this standard will ensure that the project driveway will be designed safely. Traffic associated with the proposed single - family residence would include the same automobile trip characteristics typically associated with similar residential development in the project area and would be compatible with the existing mixture of vehicular traffic. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. The Newport Beach Fire Department will review the site plan and will conducted a code compliance analysis with the City's Building Department to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided to the residence. During construction, portions of Pacific Avenue fronting the project site will be disrupted by construction activities including construction vehicles. However, the use of flagmen would be required to facilitate circulation in the area. Pacific Avenue will remain open to vehicular and emergency traffic. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. f) Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity? Less Than Significant Impact. During the construction phases, temporary displacement of public on- street parking may occur caused by construction crew members and possibly while large truck delivery and pick up of machinery and construction materials. This will occur during construction and will cease when construction concludes. The project provides parking in accordance with the Zoning Code (two enclosed spaces). No public parking is presently afforded along the curb in front of the project site as it is painted as a "red curb;" therefore, construction of the proposed driveway approach will not displace any existing public parking. g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The proposed residential project will be constructed on a vacant parcel that is zoned for residential development. Although there are no transit facilities or service on or along the frontage of this site (i.e., Pacific Avenue), public transit provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is available throughout the City, including the Corona del Mar area, which can serve future residents of the proposed home. This project will not necessitate the realignment of any existing streets or the construction of new public transportation facilities in the vicinity. Project implementation would not create a significant demand for public transit. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measure is proposed to minimize the level of impact associated with temporary construction traffic: MM -7 Prior to commencement of each major phase of construction, the Contractor shall submit a construction staging, parking and traffic control plan for approval by the Public Works Department, which shall address issues pertaining to potential traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods, potential displacement of on- street parking, and safety. This plan shall identify the proposed construction staging area(s), construction crew parking area(s), estimated number and types of vehicles that will occur during that phase, the proposed arrival /departure routes and operational safeguards (e.g. flagmen, barricades, shuttle services, etc.) and hourly restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods, displacement of on- street parking and to ensure safety. If necessary, the construction staging, parking and traffic control plan shall provide for an off -site parking lot for construction crews which will be shuttled to and from the project site at the beginning and end of each day until such time that the project site can MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 37 accommodate off - street construction vehicle parking. Until that time, construction crews shall be prohibited from parking in the adjacent residential neighborhood. The plan shall identify all construction traffic routes, which shall avoid narrow residential streets unless there is no alternative, and the plan shall not include any streets where some form of construction is underway within or adjacent to the street that would impact the efficacy of the proposed route. Dirt hauling shall not be scheduled during weekday peak hour traffic periods or during the summer season (Memorial Day holiday weekend through and including the Labor Day holiday weekend). The approved construction staging, parking traffic control plan shall be implemented throughout each major construction phase. XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact. Wastewater generated by the proposed new residence would be disposed into the existing sewer system and would not exceed wastewater treatment standards of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. Water demand and wastewater generation will not increase significantly as a result of the development of one home on the site. The proposed project is consistent with the zoning and land use designations, which are the basis of future water demand demands and wastewater generation within the City. The project will connect to existing water and wastewater facilities in Pacific Avenue or other nearby roadways. No expansion of these facilities is necessary due to existing capacity. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is vacant; however, it is zoned for single - family residential. The project will result in additional impervious surface areas by the new building, walkways and other hardscape. The additional hardscape will result in a slight increase in runoff during storm periods. The site will be designed in accordance with the California Building Code to ensure that stormwater runoff will be directed to existing facilities, which have capacity to collect and convey the runoff before its discharge into Newport Bay. Therefore, the slight increase in project - related storm flows will not result in a potentially significant impact and no mitigation measures are required. d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less than Significant Impact. See response to XVI.b above. Future water demand based on the General Plan projections would not be increased with the addition of one single - family residence. The demand created by the proposed project is consistent with the City's long -range projections for development that are the basis of water demands in Newport Beach. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 38 e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No Impact. See response to XVI.b above. As indicated in that response, adequate sewer collection, conveyance and treatment facilities exist to accommodate the slight incremental increase in raw sewage resulting from the development of one single - family residence. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? No Impact. Although project implementation could result in the generation of some refuse during the construction phase, it would be small and would not adversely affect existing capacities at the County's sanitary landfills. The project will not result in a significant increase in solid waste production due to the increase on one single - family residence. Existing landfills are expected to have adequate capacity to service the site and use. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. Solid waste production will be picked up by either the City of Newport Beach or a commercial provider licensed by the City of Newport Beach. All federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste will be adhered to through this process. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The environmental analysis conducted for the proposed project indicates that the proposed single - family residence could have the potential for significant adverse environmental impacts: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or prehistory? Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project could have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. Coastal bluff scrub habitat exists on the subject property that could support one or more sensitive plant species. As a result, the proposed project could reduce the habitat of a wildlife species and /or threaten to eliminate one or more sensitive plant species. No historic structures or sites are present in the project area, which may be affected by the proposed project. The proposed project would not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The Draft EIR will evaluate the potential effect of the proposed project on the existing biological resources that may occur on the subject property. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 39 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Potentially Significant Impact. Development of the site with one single - family residence would result in a negligible difference in long -term environmental effects associated with occupancy of that home. Although most all of the effects related to energy consumption, traffic, water consumption, utility demand, solid waste disposal, use of public facilities, etc. would be less than significant and the proposed project would not generate new environmental impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable, potentially cumulatively significant aesthetics may occur and will be evaluated in the Draft EIR. C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant Impact. The preceding analysis conducted for the proposed project indicated that project implementation would not result in significant environmental impacts on humans, either directly or indirectly. However, other potentially significant environmental effects (e.g., biological resources, aesthetics, and potential land use policy conflicts) may potentially significant. MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133) INITIAL STUDY PAGE 40 SOURCE LIST The following enumerated documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660. 1. General Plan, including all its elements, City of Newport Beach. 2. Final Program EIR — City of Newport Beach General Plan 3. Title 20, Zoning Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 4. City Excavation and Grading Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code. 5. Chapters 10.26 and 10.28, Community Noise Ordinance of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, 6. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan 1997. 7. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan EIR, 1997. The following documents have been prepared specifically for this project, and are incorporated by reference within this initial study. The documents are available at the office of the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department. 1. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for New Residence; Borella Geology, Inc.; March 20, 2007. 2. Biological Assessment survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California; Chambers Group; October 9, 2008. 3. Megonigal Residence Design Package; David R. Olson Architects; August 112, 2008. 4. Planning Commission Staff Report; City of Newport Beach; August 21, 2008 5. City Council Staff Report; City of Newport Beach, September 23, 20080. 6. The EDR Radius Map Report with GeoCheck — Megonigal Residence; Environmental Data Resources, Inc.; March 4, 2009. Appendix B NOP Comment Letters S 11'P21 fAi001f IJiIA Is ,J- J.:SS„ f<ANSPf_]_IYS_)IUA.A_IA lit)t,,,SiN(1 -t �S. Y;_ ,, ,,,,,,,,,,, „ -_- V�`J �I U,y�'1Il LV, 'Jl'G�;jJ it (i S:r1p� DI PA12 rMEN l OF TRANSPORI'ATION Disum 12 s khchdkml smic_80 .- hmli, :. CA 92612 -8891 RECEfWD BY Iet (9-19) 724 -2267 1'os: (�) °19) 724 -2193 PLANNING DEPARTMENT energy , l aviem, Be enargy elf�Cie�t1! June 3, 2009 .lames Campbell CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH file: lGR /CE',QA City of Newport Beach SC'I-lh ": 2009041010 3 300 Newport Blvd. I. -o- 4: 2292 Newport Beach, CA 92685-8915 SR -1 Subject: Mcgonigal Residential (PA2007 -133) l car Mr. Campbell, Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Preparation for the Nlegonigal Residential (PA2007- .1.33) Project. The proposed project is composed of a single family residential dwelling unit on the property which will have vehicular access to the ground floor from Pacific Drive. The proposed residence will have three stories and total 3,566 total square feet. The neatest State route to the project site is SR. -1. The Cali fornia Department of Transportation (Department), District t? is a commenting agency on this project and we have no comment at this time. 1- fowever, in the event of any activity within the Department's right -of -wary, an encroachment permit will be required. Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments, which could potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please do not hesitate to call Damon Davis at (949) 440 -3487. Sincerely:, f i diristopher Terre, Branch Chief Local L)evelopmentlhntergovecntnentaI Review C: Terry Roberts, Office of Planning and Research _C nArw..v i.LJA'SaY} moGii!l1' afro.,, (,'a1 yomm, . NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 (916)653.6251 Fax (916) 657 -5390 Web Site ,gpuz.nv,; -;a�Y small: ds_nnha@pacbell,net May 28, 2009 Mr. James Campbell CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92685 -8915 RECEWED We PLANNING ]DEPARTMENT JUN 0 2 2009 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Re: SCH#20090510437 CEQA Notice of Preoaration (NOP): draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Meaoniaal Residential (PA2007 -1331 Project: located in the City of Newport Beach Orange County California Dear Mr. Campbell: The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) is the state'trustee agency' pursuant to Public Resources Code §21070 designated to protect California's Native American Cultural Resources. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that any project that causes a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource, that includes archaeological resources, is a'significant effect requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) per the California Code of Regulations §15064.5(b)(C )(f) CEQA guidelines). Section 15382 of the 2007 CEQA Guidelines defines a significant impact on the environment as "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of physical conditions within an area affected by the proposed project, including ... objects of historic or aesthetic significance." In order to comply with this provision, the lead agency is required to assess whether the project will have an adverse impact on these resources within the 'area of potential effect (APE)', and if so, to mitigate that effect. To adequately assess the project- related impacts on historical resources, the Commission recommends the following action: J Contact the appropriate California Historic Resources Information Center (CHRIS) for possible 'recorded sites' in locations where the development will or might occur.. Contact information for the Information Center nearest you is available from the State Office of Historic Preservation (916/653 - 7278)1 tPtpatwe.otap,,faarks ca prv__ The record search will determine: • If a part or the entire APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. • If any known cultural resources have already been recorded in or adjacent to the APE. + If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE. If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present. J If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey. • The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for pubic disclosure. • The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate regional archaeological Information Center. J The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) performed: " A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project'area of potential effect (APE)': The results: No known Native American Cultural Resources were identied within one -half mile of the "area of potential effect' (APE1.: However, there are Native American cultural resources in close proximity to the APE. The NAHC urges caution with any ground - breaking activity. Also, the NAHC SLF is not exhaustive and local tribal contacts should be consulted from the attached list and the there are Native American cultural resources in close proximity.. • The NAHC advises the use of Native American Monitors, also, when professional archaeologists or the equivalent are employed by project proponents, in order to ensure proper identification and care given cultural resources that maybe discovered. The NAHC, FURTHER, recommends that contact be made with Native American Contacts on the attached It to get their input on potential IMPACT of the project (APE) on cultural resources.. In some cases, the existence of a Native American cultural resources maybe known only to a local tribe(s) or Native American individuals or elders. • V Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence. • Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeological resources, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.5 (f). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all ground - disturbing activities. • Again, a culturally - affiliated Native American tribe maybe the only source of information about a Sacred Site/Native American cultural resource. • Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans. v Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains or unmarked cemeteries in their mitigation plans. " CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(d) requires the lead agency to work with the Native Americans identified by this Commission if the initial Study identifies the presence or likely presence of Native American human remains within the APE. CEQA Guidelines provide for agreements with Native American, identified by the NAHC, to assure the appropriate and dignified treatment of Native American human remains and any associated grave liens. v' Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Sec. §15064.5 (d) of the California Code of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) mandate procedures to be followed, including that construction or excava5on be stopped in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location otherthan a dedicated cemetery until the county coroner or medical examiner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. . Note that §7052 of the Health & Safety Code states that disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony. implementation free to contact me at (916) 653 -6251 if you have any questions. Program Attachment: List of Native American Contacts Cc: State Clearinghouse Ti'At Society Cindi Alvitre 6515 E. Seaside Walk, #C Long Beach , CA 90803 calvitre @yahoo.com (714) 504 -2468 Cell Native American Contacts Orange County May 28, 2009 Gabrielino Tongva Nation Sam Dunlap, Tribal Secretary Gabrielino P.O. Box 86908 Gabrielino Tongva Los Angeles CA 90086 samdunlap@earthlink.net Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation David Beiardes, Chairperson 32161 Avenida Los Amigos Juaneno San Juan Capistrano , CA 92675 DavidBelardes@ hotmail.com (949) 493 -0959 (949) 493 -1601 Fax Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation John Tommy Rosas, Tribal Admin. Gabrielino Tongva tattnlaw@gmail.com 310- 570 -6567 Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Anthony Morales, Chairperson PO Box 693 Gabrielino Tongva San Gabriel CA 91778 (828) 286 -1262 -FAX (626) 286 -1632 (626) 286 -1758 - Home (626) 286 -1262 Fax (909) 262 -9351 - cell Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation Anthony Rivera, Chairman 31411 -A La Matanza Street Juaneno San Juan Capistrano , CA 92675 -2674 arivera @juaneno.com 949 -488 -3484 949 -488 -3294 Fax Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council Robert Dorame, Tribal Chair /Cultural Resources P.O. Box 490 Gabrielino Tongva Bellflower CA 90707 gtongva @verizon.net 562- 761 -6417 - voice 562- 925 - 7989 -fax Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Alfred Cruz, Culural Resources Coordinator P.O. Box 25628 Juaneno Santa Ana , CA 92799 alfredgcruz @sbcglobal. net 714- 998 -0721 slfredgcruz @sbcglobal. net This list is current only as of the date of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. and the federal NEPA ((42 USC 4321.43351) and Sections 106 and 4(f) of NHPA (16 USC 470(f) at seq. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed SCH#200 9051 0 43; CEOA Notice of Preparation (NOP); draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Megonigal Residential (PA2007 -133) Project; located In the City of Newport Beach; Orange County, California. Native American Contacts Orange County May 28, 2009 Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Adolph 'Bud' Sepulveda, Vice Chairperson P.O. Box 25828 Juaneno Santa Ana , CA 92799 bssepui @yahoo.net 714 - 838 -3270 714 - 914 -1812 - CELL bsepul @yahoo.net Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Sonia Johnston, Tribal Chairperson P.O. Box 25628 Juaneno Santa Ana , CA 92799 sonia.johnston @ sbcglobai. net (714) 323 -8312 Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Anita Espinoza 1740 Concerto Drive Juaneno Anaheim , CA 92807 (714) 779 -8832 This list Is current only as of the data of this document. Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. and the federal NEPA ((42 USC 4321 - 43351) and Sections 106 and 4(f) of NHPA (16 USC 470(f) at seq. This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed SCHH2O09051043; CEOA Notice of Preparation (NOP); draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Megonigal Residential (PA2007.133) Project located in the City of Newport Beach; Orange County, California. r 0 .10 Air Quality Management District 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 -4178 (909) 396 -2000 - www.agmci.gov Mr. James Campbell, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach Planting Department PO Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 Dear Mr. Campbell: R`3CFTV-fat3 BY pLANNiNti DEPARTMkNI' MAY 2 6 7009 C1TY OF NEWPORT BEACH May 19, 2009 Notice of Preparation of it Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the Mcgonigal Residence Project The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above - mentioned document. The SCAQMD's comments are recommendations regarding the analysis of potential air quality impacts from the proposed project that should be included in the draft environmental impact report (EIR). Please send the SCAQMD a copy of the Draft EIR upon its completion. In addition, please send with the draft EIR all appendices or technical documents related to the air quality analysis and electronic versions of all air quality modeling and health risk assessment files. Electronic files include spreadsheets, database files, input files, output files, etc., and does not mean Adobe PDF files. Without all files and supporting air quality documentation, the SCAQMD will be unable to complete its review of the air quality analysis in a timely manner. Any delays in providing all supporting air quality documentation will require additional time for review beyond the end of the comment period. Air Quality Analysis The SCAQMD adopted its California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality 1-landbook in 1993 to assist other public agencies with the preparation of air quality analyses. The SCAQMD recommends that the Lead Agency use this handbook as guidance when preparing its air quality analysis. Copies of the Handbook are available from the SCAQMD's Subscription Services Department by calling (909) 396 -3720. Alternatively, the tend agency may wish to consider using the California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved URBEMIS 2007 Model. This model is mailable on the SCAQMD Website at: www.urbemis.cont. The Lead Agency should identify any potential adverse air quality impacts that could occur from all phases of the project and all air pollutant sources related to the project. Air quality impacts from both construction (including demolition, if any) and operations should be calculated. Constraction- related air quality impacts typically include, but are not limited to, emissions from the use of heavy -duty equipment from grading, earth - loading /unloading, paving, architectural coatings, orf -road mobile sources (e.g., heavy -duty construction equipment) and on -road mobile sources (e.g., conduction worker vehicle trips, material transport trips). Operation - related air quality impacts may include, but are not limited to, emissions from stationary sources (e.g., boilers), area sources (e.g., solvents and coatings), and vehicular trips (e.&, on- and off' road tailpipe emissions and entrained dust). Air quality impacts from indirect sources, that is, sources that generate or attract vehicular trips should be included in the analysis. The SCAQMD has developed a methodology for calculating PM2.5 emissions from construction and operational activities and processes. In connection with developing PM2.5 calculation methodologies, the SCAQMD has also developed both regional and localized significance thresholds. The SCAQMD requests that the lead agency quantity PM2.5 emissions and compare the results to the recommended PM2.5 significance thresholds. Guidance for calculating PM2.5 emissions and PM2.5 significance thresholds can be found atthe following internet address: Ilttp:// wvvw .agmd,�ovlcogalhandbookll'M2 5 /PM2 5.1nnil. Mr. James Campbell -2- May 19, 2009 In addition to analyzing regional air quality impacts the SCAQMD recommends calculating localized air quality impacts and comparing the results to localized significance thresholds (LSTs). LST's can be used in addition to the recommended regional significance thresholds as a second indication of air quality impacts when preparing a CEQA document. Therefore, when preparing the air quality analysis for the proposed project, it is recommended that the lead agency perform a localized significance analysis by either using the LS'fs developed by the SCAQMD or performing dispersion modeling as necessary. Guidance for performing a localized air quality analysis can be found at ht tD: / /www.agmd.Lov /ce ng /liagdbook/LS9 " /LS'f html. It is recommended that lead agencies l'or projects generating or attracting vehicular trips, especially heavy -duty diesel - fueled vehicles, perform a mobile source health risk assessment. Guidance for performing a mobile source health risk assessment ( "I lealth Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risk from Mobile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis ") can be found on the SCAQMD's CEQA web pages at the following internet address: htt : / /www.a md. og v /eega /handbook/inobile toxic /mobile toxic.html. An analysis of all toxic air contaminant impacts due to the decommissioning or use of equipment potentially generating such air pollutants should also be included. Mitigation Measures In the event that the project generates significant adverse air quality impacts, CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation measures that go beyond what is required by law be utilized during project construction and operation to minimize or eliminate significant adverse air quality impacts. To assist the Lead Agency with identifying possible mitigation measures for the project, please refer to Chapter I I of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook for sample air quality mitigation measures. Additional mitigation measures can be found on the SCAQMD's CEQA web pages at the following internet address: www.agmd.gov /eega /hanclbookhnitigationJMM intro.ht al Additionally, SCAQMD's Rule 403 — Fugitive Dust, and the Implementation Handbook contain numerous measures for Controlling eonsbvction- related emissions that should be considered for use as CEQA mitigation if not otherwise required. Other measures to reduce air quality impacts from land use projects can be found in the SCAQMD's Guidance Document for Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Pluming. This document can be found at the following internet address: littD://www.aqind.LIOV/Drdas &uidohtml. In addition, guidance on sitting incompatible land uses can be found in the California Air Resources Board's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Perspective, which can be found at the following internet address: http: // wvw,arb.ca.«ov /cl /handbook.pdf, Pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (a)(1)(D), any impacts resulting from mitigation measures must also be discussed, Data Sources SCAQMD rules and relevant air quality reports and data are available by calling the SCAQMD's Public Information Center at (909) 396 -2039. Much of the information available through the Public Information Center is also available via the SCAQMD's World Wide Web Homepage (http: / /www.acimd.gov). The SCAQMD is willing to work with the Lead Agency to ensure that project - related emissions are accurately identified, categorized, and evaluated. Please call Daniel Garcia, Air Quality Specialist, CEQA Section, at (909) 396- 3304 ifyou have any questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, Steve Smith, Ph.D. Program Supervisor, CEQA Section Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources SS:DG:AK ORC090512 -14AK Control Number Mark D. Simon 2420 First Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA 92625 RECEIVED BY May 27, 2009 Mr. James Campbell Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Mr. Campbell: PLANNING I"aEPAwrMENT JUN 01 2009 CITE' OF NEWPORT BEACH We are in receipt of the Notice of Preparation regarding PA2OO7 -133 and while we agree with the majority of your findings on the Environmental Checklist, we do take exception with a couple. Section V a and b indicates that a unique geologic and archeologic resource will be 'less than significantly impacted with mitigation incorporated ". However, once construction is complete these resources will be completely altered and built upon, which we feel constitutes a potential significant impact which can not be mitigated. Similarly, Section VI b indicates that substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil will be "less than significantly impacted with mitigation incorporated ". However, we submit that once construction is complete these resources will be completely altered and built upon, which we feel constitutes a potential significant impact which can not be mitigated. For these reasons we feel the Environmental Checklist prepared for PA2OO7 -133 should be modified. Than You, 4lul° Mark D. Simon Campbell, James From: JonV3 @aol.com Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 2:10 AM To: Campbell, James Subject: NOP Megonigal Residence, Begonia Park June 8, 2009 James Campbell, Principal Planner City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Blvd P.D. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658$915 Re: NOP Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133) Dear Mr. Campbell, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the NOP and Initial Study for the Megonigal Residence. The EIR should include sections on cultural resources and recreation. This project is on a bluff overlooking the harbor, so it may very well have been used by native Americans similar to other coastal blufftops in Newport Beach. Therefore there should be a cultural resource analysis. Part of this analysis would be a literature search documenting the bluffs in Newport Beach and cultural resources found on other similar bluffs. As this project will impact the recreational use of Begonia Park, with significant adverse impacts on the views of the harbor from Begonia Park, recreation should be analyzed in the El R, It is my understanding that the categorical exemption disappeared with the 2005 Coastal Commission approval of the certified LUP and that a new categorical exemption has yet to be approved. A coastal development permit should be required for this project, with an appeal possible to the Coastal Commission due to the coastal bluff development. The scenic resource of the bluff face from Bayside Drive should be considered as well as the scenic resource from Begonia Pak to the water. Sincerely, Jan D. Vandersloot, MD 2221 E 16th Street Newport Beach, CA 92663 9949) 548 -6326 A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. aeae ours in `u t 2 eas sYe l Appendix C Biological Resources Assessments Q'Chambers Group .,...Ynly� F. iIYJIYI�LYtO /tic`1 G1'AIJ4 N(["!G 17671 Cowan Av,3vluo, Sldte 100 Irvine, California 92614 1949 ^ 2fi'I -5414 let 949 - 261-5150 fax October 9, 2008 (08 -278) Mr. Kim Megonigal 17872 Cowan Avenue Irvine, California 92614 Subject: Biological Assessment survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California following initial Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton Consulting. Mr. Megonigal This letter report discusses the methods, findings and discussion relevant to the biological assessment conducted at 2333 Pacific Drive pursuant of your request on October 6, 2008. Chambers Group, Inc. (Chambers Group) was retained by Kim Megonigal to conduct a biological survey of his property at 2333 Pacific Drive in Newport Beach, as recommended in the initial Biological Evaluation by Hamilton Consulting (Hamilton report) submitted September 22, 2008 to Newport City Council. The purpose of this survey was to assess the quality and quantity of native habitat present on the property, to evaluate the suitability of the habitat to support listed or otherwise sensitive species, to survey for sensitive species identifiable at this time, and to map the vegetation communities occurring within the property boundaries. 1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The property is located at the intersection of Pacific Drive and Begonia, adjacent to Begonia City Park located in Corona del Mar, of Newport Beach (see Project Location Map). The property is 4,400 square feet with the planned project footprint of 3,500 square feet. The Megonigal property is on a natural coastal bluff enclosed by private homes to the northwest, west and south, by Begonia City Park to the east, and Pacific Drive to the north. 2.0 METHODS Chambers Group staff biologist, Jenny McGee, conducted a biological assessment at 2333 Pacific Drive on October 6, 2008 from 09:09 to 10:50 am. The weather was clear, approximately 74 degrees at arrival rising to 85 degrees at departure. The property is fenced, but full access was provided by the property owner. Vegetation on the property was mapped and evaluated for habitat value, all plant and animal species observed or detected were recorded, and representative photos were taken. Site photographs are presented in appendix A. Spatial data of vegetation communities was recorded onto an aerial photograph in the field and transferred to a GIS layer presented in the Vegetation Map attached. The area identified as Coastal Bluff Scrub was also measured using a meter tape measure. The measurements were taken to ground -truth the area identified as Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub. Wildlife and plant species lists are attached as appendices B and C, respectively. 3.0 FINDINGS OF THE BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT The vegetation on the Megonigal property has been classified into three categories, disturbed, disturbed/ Ornamental, and Coastal Bluff Scrub. IRVINE a REDI -ANDS e SAN DIEGO « DAKERSFIELD o REND vtW W.CYtACY9f98rYt } rOUISin C. COttt Certifier) Disabled Veteran Busixss8s EI'IterErise (DVBE) Mr. Kim Megonigal October 9, 2008 Page 2 of 16 3.1 Disturbed Disturbed areas are those areas that are either devoid of vegetation (cleared or graded) such as dirt roads or those areas that have a high percentage of non- native weedy species. Areas mapped as disturbed are present primarily on the upper portion of the property but incorporate part of the natural bluff and patches within the lower portion of the property as well. The upper portion above the natural bluff has been cleared and is relatively void of vegetation with exception of sparse Russian thistle (Salsola tragus). Disturbed areas mapped on the central and lower portions of the property include the eroding segment of the natural bluff that supports no vegetation, and the lower areas vegetated largely by exotic grasses, primarily ripgut grass (Bromus diandrus). Other non - native species in this category found on the project site include: fennel (Feoniculum vulgare), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), Russian thistle and Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibacata). There are 0.063 acres (2,744 square feet) of disturbed area on the project site. 3.2 Disturbed/ Ornamental Areas mapped as disturbed/ Ornamental are those dominated by escaped or planted ornamental species, with a high presence of non - native weedy species. Disturbed/ Ornamental vegetation is located on the lower portion of the property and reflects influences from surrounding landscaped areas, particularly Begonia Park. Ice Plant (Carpobrotus sp. and Mesembryanthum nodiflorum), myoporum trees ( Myoporum laetum), jade plant (Crassula ovata), and a large fig tree (Ficus sp.) dominate the species cover in this area. Non - native weedy species, such as Russian thistle, cheeseweed (Malva parviflorum), and a few black mustard (Brassica nigra) occur within this area as well. This area at the lower portion of the property also supports several cliff aster (Malacothryx saxatilus) individuals and a young lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) less than 12 inches. A second lemonade berry individual, presented on pg 4 of he Hamilton report, is located just outside the property line on the lower portion of the slope. The presence of these native species indicates that, prior to encroachment from ornamental and weedy species this area was vegetated with species characteristic of the Coastal Bluff Scrub vegetation community. This area was classified as highly disturbed Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub in the Hamilton report, however in closer examination of the species present and their respective vegetative cover, the overall native cover in this area is very low (less than 10 %), as ornamental species have substantially displaced native species over time. Disturbed/ Ornamental encompasses approximately 0.034 acres (1,481 square feet) within the property boundary. 3.3 Coastal Bluff Scrub Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub as described by B.F. Holland (1986) consists of woody and/ or succulent species up to 7 feet in height occurring on poorly developed rocky soils and moisture -laden winds with high salt content. Species characteristic of Coastal Bluff Scrub include saltbush (Atriplex sp.), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum var. fasciculatum), California bush sunflower (California encelia), stone crop species (Dudleya sp.), prickly pear cactus (Opuntia littoralis), cliff aster, and lemonade berry. The area mapped as Coastal Bluff Scrub is located on the cliff of the natural bluff centrally located within the parcel. This cliff supports approximately 15 total native shrubs. The species located here include California buckwheat, California bush sunflower, and the prickly pear cactus. These species are characteristic of Coastal Bluff Scrub as described above, although big saltbush (Atriplex lentiformis) a species typically considered dominant or functional to the bluff scrub community is absent from the site. Cliff aster and lemonade berry, also associated with this community, are present on site although they occur on the lower portion of the property which has been overtaken by ornamental and weedy species, with exception of these few plants. A lemonade berry plant nearby is rooted underneath an overhanging patio of an adjacent home, next to, but outside the property boundary. The remaining portion of the natural bluff is bare of vegetation, and shows signs of significant natural erosion, as is characteristic of coastal bluffs. Coastal Bluff Scrub encompasses approximately 0.006 acres (261.36 square feet). Mr. Kim Megonigal October 9, 2008 Page 3 of 16 4.0 FINDINGS OF SENSITIVE SPECIES SURVEY Prior to conducting the survey, the most current reports of the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB, last update September 2008) for the Newport Beach 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle were referenced. This database contains records of reported occurrences of federal- and state - listed, proposed endangered or threatened species, California Species of Special Concern (CSC), or otherwise sensitive species or habitats that may occur in the project area. Many of the species identified in the literature review require estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands or vernal pool habitats. Because these habitats are not present on the property, these species are determined to have no potential to occur on the project site. These plant and animal species and their associated listed status are as follows: Animals o California black rail - California threatened species o Belding's savannah sparrow - California endangered species o Light footed clapper rail (marsh) - Federal and state endangered o California least tern - Federal and state endangered o SC fairy shrimp - Federal endangered Plants o Salt marsh bird's beak (Corydylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus) - Federal and state endangered o Estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa) - CNPS 1 B.2 4.1 Wildlife Wildlife species with habitat onsite include the Cooper's hawk, and the coastal California gnatcatcher. These species are discussed in further detail below. 4.1.1 Cooper's Hawk (Accipitercooperii) The Cooper's hawk is a California Species of Concern. This species occurs as a migrant and /or resident over most of the U.S. from southern Canada to northern Mexico. Favored habitats include open woodlands, mature forests, woodland edges, and river groves (Sibley 2003). More recently, the Cooper's hawk has been known to breed in suburban and urban areas with similar tree structure to native habitats. A Cooper's hawk was observed during the initial site visit conducted by Robert Hamilton on September 20, 2008. This species is likely using the nearby open space provided by Begonia Park for roosting and hunting. The total area to be impacted by the proposed project is small in size, providing limited suitable habitat for this raptor species independent of the surrounding areas. The overall spatial loss of the project area will not have a significant impact on this species. 4.1.2 Coastal California gnatcatcher (Pofioptila californica californica) Coastal California gnatcatcher is a federally threatened species and state listed as a California species of concern. It is a permanent resident of Diegan, Riversidian, and Venturan sage scrub sub - associations found from sea level to 2,500 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Within its range, the coastal California gnatcatcher associates strongly with California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) dominant habitats and also occurs in mixed scrub habitats with lesser percentages of this favored shrub. Other plant species important for the nesting and foraging of this species include California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculutam), white sage (Salvia apiana), black sage (Salvia mellifera), and chaparral broom (Baccharis sarothroides). Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) habitats may also support breeding pairs, especially where coastal sage scrub may occur nearby or form a component (Bontrager 1991). Mr. Kim Megonigal October 9, 2008 Page 4 of 16 Sufficient foraging or nesting habitat for the California gnatcatcher is not present on the proposed project site or in the surrounding area to support this species. The habitat on the Megonigal property is limited in size and vegetative diversity including the absence of California sagebrush. Additionally, the project site is located in an area of dense residential development, surrounded by urban ornamental landscaping. Any remaining habitat exists as "islands" within the residential area. These "islands" consist of few native species present among substantial exotic and ornamental vegetation, and are insufficient in size and /or vegetative composition to support this species. Therefore, there is no potential for coastal California gnatcatcher to occur on the property. 4.2 Plants In addition to conducting an assessment of habitat and classification of vegetation associations, the survey also incorporated a survey for six sensitive plant species known to occur within Coastal Bluff Scrub. These species, include Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var davidsonil), south coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica), many stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulisa), cliff spurge (Euphorbia misera), Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulteri), and woolly seablite (Sueda taxitolia). 4.2.1 Davidson's Saltscale Davidson's saltbush is an annual herb listed by CNPS as a List 1B.2 species, indicating that this species is rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere. This species blooms between April and October. Populations of Davidson's saltbush have been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, and Ventura counties, and on several of the Channel Islands. Davidson's saltbush typically grows in Coastal Bluff Scrub and in alkaline Coastal Scrub habitats at elevations between 30 and 660 feet amsl. Although suitable habitat occurs onsite, this species was not observed on the property at the time of the survey. Because the survey was conducted during the blooming period of this species and not observed it is considered to be absent from the property. 4.2.2 South Coast Saltscale South Coast saltscale is an annual herb listed by CNPS as a List 18.2 species. The species blooms between March and October. Populations of South Coast saltscale have been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Ventura, on several of the Channel Islands. The species typically occurs in Coastal Bluff Scrub, Coastal Dunes, Coastal Scrub, and on Playas, often in alkali soils and at elevations up to 460 feet amsl. Although suitable habitat occurs onsite, south coast saltscale was not observed on the property at the time of the survey. Because the survey was conducted during the blooming period for this species, the south coast saltscale is considered to be absent from the property. 4.2.3 Many- Stemmed Dudleya Many- stemmed dudleya is a perennial herb listed by CNPS as a List 1 B.2 species. The species blooms between April and July. Populations of many- stemmed dudleya have been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties. The species typically occurs in Coastal Scrub, Chaparral, and Valley and Foothill Grassland, usually on clay soils or grassy slopes at elevations from 48 to 2,595 feet. This species was not observed on the property at the time of the survey, and is detectable outside of the blooming period. Therefore, the many- stemmed dudleya is considered to be absent from the property. 4.2.4 Cliff Spurge Cliff spurge is a perennial shrub listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as a List 2.2 species, classifying it as fairly endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. This perennial shrub occurs in San Diego and Orange counties as a component of Coastal Bluff or Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation communities at elevations 33 to 1,640 amsl. This species was not observed on the property at the time of the survey. Because this species is a perennial shrub and would be detectable at the time the survey was Mr. Kim Megonigal October 9, 2008 Page 5 of 16 conducted, it is considered to be absent from the property 4.2.5 Coulter's Saltbush Coulter's saltbush is a perennial herb categorized by CNPS as a 113.2 plant, classifying it as fairly endangered in California and elsewhere. This perennial herb is known to occur in San Diego, Orange, and Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties at elevations ranging from 10 to 1,500 feet amsl. This coastal species is associated with Coastal Bluff Scrub, Coastal Dunes, Coastal Sage Scrub, and valley and foothill grassland with clay or alkaline soils. Coulter's saltbush blooms from March through October and was not observed on the property at the time of the survey. Because this species would be detectable at the time the survey was conducted and was not observed, it is considered to be absent from the property. 4.2.6 Woolly Seablite Woolly seablite is an evergreen shrub categorized by the CNPS as a 4.2 species, classifying it as having limited distribution and fairly endangered in California. This species occurs on the margins of coastal marshes, or as a component of Coastal Bluff scrub or Coastal Dune habitats at elevations ranging from 0 to 164 feet amsl. This species is known to occur in San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, San Louis Obispo Counties, as well as the Chanel Islands National Park. Woolly seablite blooms from January through December, but it detectable year- around. This species was not observed at the time of the survey. Because this species would be detectable at the time the survey was conducted and was not observed, it is considered to be absent from the property. The limited distribution of the Coastal Bluff Scrub on the property, confined to the cliff portion of the natural bluff provides little suitable habitat the above stated sensitive plant species. Therefore, Davidson's saltbush, south coast saltscale, many- stemmed dudleya, cliff spurge, Coulter's saltbush and woolly seablite are considered absent within the project boundary. No further surveys are recommended. 5.0 DISCUSSION The intent of this survey conducted on behalf of the project proponent is to evaluate the applicability of the California Coastal Act as it relates to the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (LCP /CLUP), and the Newport Beach City policies in the Natural Resources Element of the General Plan, as discussed in the Hamilton report submitted to Newport City Council on September 23, 2008, on behalf of Friends of Begonia Park. As pointed out in the Hamilton report, the City of Newport Beach LCP /CLUP, with the function of interpreting the Coastal Act within the City, includes policies that mandate the protection of environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) as defined by Section 30107.5 of the Coastal Act. ESHA areas are defined as "...any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments." Furthermore, the Natural Resources Element of the Newport City General Plan states the overall goal of this portion of the General Plan is to protect sensitive and rare terrestrial and marine resources from urban development. The vegetation composition supported on the proposed project site predominately consists of disturbed non - vegetated areas, ornamental species and weedy exotic species. Approximately 5% (261 square feet) of the property supports low quality Coastal Bluff Scrub. The Coastal Bluff Scrub is recognized by the California Department of Fish and Game as a rare plant community. In evaluation of habitat quality of the Coastal Bluff Scrub recognized on the Megonigal property, we find the overall habitat value to be low as a Mr. Kim Megonigal October 9, 2008 Page 6 of 16 result of habitat fragmentation, influence of surrounding human activities, and because it supports limited long term habitat value. Habitat fragmentation The project site is located in a densely developed residential neighborhood with urban landscaping throughout the area. No Coastal Bluff Scrub habitat of moderate or high value is present within the vicinity of the project site. These conditions create habitat fragmentation, resulting in overall low habitat value of the remaining patches. Although the property is contiguous with Begonia Park which does support native wildlife species, there is no evidence that listed or otherwise sensitive species are dependent upon the biological resources identified on the Megonigal property. Begonia Park has been landscaped with urban ornamental landscaping, as is the remaining open space surrounding the residential development. The areas of Coastal Bluff Scrub located west of the property identified in the Hamilton report are also fragmented remnants of native habitat, consisting of few native species, surrounded by ornamental urban landscaping. The nearest habitat fragment is separated from the Megonigal property by the retaining wall of a nearby home. Ecological restoration, were it undertaken, could not restore full habitat value and function to this area. Influence of surrounding human activities As a result, of the surrounding dense residential development, the property has been influenced directly and indirectly by various human activities. These activities include the development of Begonia Park and subsequent ornamental landscaping, construction of retaining wall to the property below 2333 Pacific Drive, construction of retaining walls and homes adjacent to the property, and the construction and terracing of streets and neighborhood lots. The remaining portions of Coastal Bluff Scrub both on the Megonigal property and other nearby fragments reflect compromised habitat quality resulting from edge effect. The edge effect, as it pertains to an ecological system, is when disturbance to an area that borders or is a component of a natural habitat, the edge of the remaining intact natural habitat is negatively affected to some distance from the edge. The Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub present within the project boundary is of low quality and does not provide valuable habitat because natural functions have been compromised by the surrounding human influences. Therefore, it does not support the species diversity, composition and connectivity necessary for an ecosystem to be of significant habitat value. Limited long term habitat value The substantial soil erosion of coastal bluffs and terraces is a natural component of these environments. The function of disturbance in these habitats is a component of the ecology, and habitat is ultimately restored through the re- colonization of surrounding native vegetative species. Without surrounding vegetation to re- colonize, the habitat value may be lost entirely once the existing habitats are destabilized by soil erosion. The natural disturbance will continue to create conditions favorable of invasive, weedy species and encroaching ornamentals. Therefore, this habitat segment is not likely to provide significant long term habitat value to native plants or wildlife species. 6.0 CONCLUSION Analysis of the identified Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub on the Megonigal property located at 2333 Pacific Drive, concludes that although representative species of the community are present, the habitat value of this vegetation association has been significantly compromised by fragmentation and influences from human activities and that it provides very limited long term habitat value. The identified habitat is not especially valuable as it has already been substantially compromised by human activities and developments. Furthermore, no federal- or state - listed or otherwise sensitive species identified as having potential to occur on the property were observed during the survey. The result of this biological assessment and subsequent analysis should serve as site - specific evidence that the identified Coastal Mr. Kim Megonigal October 9, 2008 Page 7 of 16 Bluff Scrub, does not qualify as an ESHA under the Coastal Act, and therefore cannot be afforded protection under the Newport Beach LCP /CLUP or the Newport Beach General Plan, and mitigation should not be required. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (949) 261 -5414. Sincerely, CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. Jenny aMcGee Staff Biologist Mr. Kim Megonigal October 9, 2008 Page 8 of 16 References Cited Bontrager, D. R. 1991 Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) - Western Riverside County Species Accounts, Habitat requirements, home range and breeding biology of the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) in South Orange County, California. Prepared for Santa Margarita Company, Rancho Santa Margarita, California. California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB). 2008 Newport Beach, California, 7.5- minute USGS quadrangle. Accessed October 6, 2008. Hamilton, Robert A. 2008 September 23 Appeal Hearing on the Megonigal Property Biological Evaluation, 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California Holland, R.F 1986,1986 Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Unpublished report available from California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California. Sibley, David A. 2003 The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Western North America. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York (distributed by Random House, New York). APPENDIX A SITE PHOTOS OF 2333 PACIFIC DRIVE Site Photos of 2333 Pacific Drive Photo 1. This photo was taken facing northwest from Bayside Drive. It shows disturbed areas (top of bluff), Coastal Bluff Scrub (natural cliff), and disturbed / ornamental vegetation communities (in foreground). Photo 2. This photo was taken facing southwest of Bayside Drive. It shows the barren/ disturbed portion at the top of property. "= � � .�. -z APPENDIX B 2333 PACIFIC DRIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED Wildlife Species Observed at 2333 Pacific Drive Project Site Scientific Name Common Name CLASS REPTILIA REPTILES PHRYNOSOMATIDAE LIZARDS Sceloporus occidentatis western fence lizard CLASS AVES BIRDS COLUMBIDAE PIGEONS & DOVES Zenaida macroura mourning dove TROCHILIDAE HUMMINGBIRDS Calypte anna Anna's hummingbird TYRANNIDAE TYRANTFLYCATCHERS Sayornis nigricans black phoebe TIMALI I DAE BABBLERS Chamaea fasciata wrentit MI MI DAE MOCKINGBIRDS, THRASHERS Mimus of lottos northern mockingbird EMBERIZIDAE EMBERIZIDS Melospiza melodia Song Sparrow APPENDIX C PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED AT 2333 PACIFIC DRIVE PROJECT SITE Plant Species Observed at 2333 Pacific Drive Project Site Scientific Name Common Name ANGIOSPERMS (DICOTYLEDONS) AIZOACEAE FIG - MARIGOLD FAMILY Carpobrotus edulis* hottentot -fig slender - leaved Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum* iceplant ANACARDIACEAE SUMAC OR CASHEW FAMILY Rhus integrifolia lemonadeberry APIACEAE CARROT FAMILY Foeniculum vulgare* fennel ASTERACEAE SUNFLOWER FAMILY Encelia californica California bush sunflower Malacothrix saxatilis cliff malacothrix BRASSICACEAE MUSTARD FAMILY Brassica nigra* black mustard radish Raphanussativus* CACTACEAE CACTUS FAMILY Opuntia littoralis coastal prickly pear CHENOPODIACEAE GOOSEFOOT FAMILY Atriplex semibaccata* Australian saltbush Chenopodium album* Iamb's quarters Russian Salsola tragus* thistle CRASSULACEAE STONECROP FAMILY Crassula ovata* jade plant GOURD CUCURBITACEAE FAMILY Marah macrocar us wild cucumber MALVACEAE MALLOW FAMILY Malva parviflora* cheeseweed MORACEAE MULBERRY FAMILY Ficus sp.* fig MYOPORACEAE MYOPORUM FAMILY Myoporum laetum* myoporum POLYGONACEAE BUCKWHEAT FAMILY Eriogonum fasciculatum California buckwheat ANGIOSPERMS (MONOCOTYLEDONS) POACEAE GRASS FAMILY Bromus diandrus* ripgut grass * Denotes Non - native Species % WON + .?«._w M1 a t a f t �C i. �.,. i M1 a t a t �C 4 ' { w i 1P t� ✓ 4r. t� Xry 'lp' rati�`tu> R�� `� � a "�'� .., r� .S �`• i } ;g- :q ��E f� d( ♦ as y... �i � a pa lot. J�a^ fi Y { FN Y ^ - IJ �' f:r @Chambers Group Soivino 8bvfmnrnen(�r i:halrnnG »s 17671 Cowan Avenue, Suite '160 Irvine. California 92614 949 261 -5414 [el 949 - 261 -3950 fax February 27, 2009 (20009) Kim Megonigal 17872 Cowan Avenue Irvine. CA 92614 Subject: Follow -Up Survey and Results in Response to Comments Issued by BonTerra Consulting Regarding the Biological Study of 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, Orange County, California. Dear Mr. Megonigal: Chambers Group, Inc. (Chambers Group) conducted a biological survey of the property at 2333 Pacific Drive in Newport Beach (project site), as recommended in the initial Biological Evaluation by Hamilton Consulting submitted September 22, 2008 to the Newport City Council. The purpose of this survey, conducted on October 6, 2008, was to accurately assess the quality and amount of native habitat present on the project site, to map the vegetation occurring within the property boundaries, to evaluate the suitability of the habitat to support listed or otherwise sensitive species, and to survey for sensitive species identifiable at this time. The project site property is located at the intersection of Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue, adjacent to Begonia City Park located in Corona del Mar, of Newport Beach. The site is 4,400 square feet with the planned project footprint of 3,500 square feet. The project site is on a natural coastal bluff enclosed by private homes to the northwest, west, and south, by Begonia City Park to the east, and by Pacific Drive to the north. The portion of the property identified as Coastal Bluff Scrub is approximately 0.006 acre (216.36 square feet) and supports a total of 15 plants consisting of three native species. These species include: California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California bush sunflower (Encelia calitornica), and prickly pear cactus (Opuntia prolifera). The remaining portion of the natural bluff on the project site is bare, and shows signs of significant natural erosion, which is characteristic of coastal bluffs. Chambers Group received a request from the City of Newport Beach (City) to respond to comments issued by BonTerra Consulting (BonTerra) on October 21, 2008. The comments referenced the determinations made by Chambers Group in the Biological Assessment dated October 9, 2008, stating that two sensitive plant species, many- stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis) and the Laguna Beach dudleya (Dudleya stolonifera), are absent from the project site. This memo addresses those comments. Rare Plant Reference Populations The purpose of visiting a reference site for a species is to confirm the species is both evident and identifiable at the time of the survey conducted on a given project site. To satisfy the inquiry regarding the potential for the many- stemmed dudleya and the Laguna Beach dudleya to occur on the project site property, Chambers Group botanist, Jenny McGee, visited two known reference populations in Orange County (within 20 miles of the project site) to assess the phenological development of each of the sensitive Dudleya species at the time of the survey. Both reference site visits and the re -visit to the project site were completed following recent rain events when plants would have responded positively to the increased soil moisture content. IRVINE • RFOLANDS m SAN DIEGO • BAKF.RSFIEl.D > RF N D www.rhambersgrour >inc.com Certified Disablfld Veteran Business Enterprise (DVBE) Many- Stemmed Dudleya One of BonTerra's comments stated that the many- stemmed dudleya may not have been apparent in October when the Biological Assessment was conducted. To resolve any question as to the presence of this species on the project site, Ms. McGee visited a known reference site on February 10, 2009 where the many- stemmed dudleya is known to occur. The reference population is within the Santiago Oaks Regional Park located at the end of Glen Albyn Lane in the City of Orange. The many- stemmed dudleya was observed growing on an exposed rock outcrop in vegetative form (G PS coordinates: UTM, Zone 11S 426299mE; 3740586mN). No flowers were present on the plants at the time of the site visit; however the species was confirmed to be both evident and identifiable through vegetative characteristics in February. Laguna Beach Dudleva BonTerra also stated the Laguna Beach dudleya would be "virtually undetectable" during the time of the original survey conducted in October 2008. To resolve any question as to the presence of this species on the project site, Ms. McGee, visited a known reference site on February 17, 2009 where the Laguna Beach dudleya is known to occur. The reference site is the Laguna Coast Wilderness Park located off of Highway 133 in Laguna Beach. Upon arrival, Ms. McGee spoke with Orange County Park staff who confirmed the species is present within the park, and provided location information of the population. The species was observed using binoculars off of a trail originating at the main parking lot (Gate 1) for the wilderness park. Ms. McGee went to the identified location (GPS coordinates: UTM, Zone 11 S 429158mE; 3716328mN) and the Laguna Beach dudleya was observed in vegetative form growing on a rock outcrop. This observation confirmed the Laguna Beach dudleya would be evident and identifiable on February 12 had it been present at the project site. Additional Evidence In addition, the known locations of this species recognized in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) are in close proximity, if not directly within, the Laguna Beach area. The nearest occurrence is approximately 7 miles from the project site (see attached map). The California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) shows a historical occurrence of this species recorded in Newport Beach, however little documentation is provided regarding this occurrence. Furthermore, due to the disturbed nature of the project site and its low habitat quality which only supports three native plant species, it is highly unlikely that any sensitive plant species inhabit the project site. Other Sensitive Species Coulter's Saltbush At the time of the site visits (either in October 2008 or in February 2009), Chambers Group did not observe any plants within the genus Atriplex growing onsite. Because Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulten) is a perennial herb and can have flowers persist into October or begin as early as March, this species would have been observed in some vegetative state during one of the site visits. Chambers Group can confirm this species absent from the project site. Davidson's Saltscale Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii) is an annual herb that flowers between April and October. This species would have been conspicuous in October, even if it was in a desiccated form. There were no plants onsite resembling this species. Davidson's saltscale is considered absent from the project site. Anhanisma Aphanisma ( Aphanisma blitoides) is an annual herb that flowers as early as March. Known populations of this species growing in Dana Point have been known to flower as early as February. Because flowers appear subsequent to the vegetative structures of a plant, Ms. McGee would have seen evidence of this species on the project site during her site visit in February. No plant resembling an aphanisma was observed on the project site and this species can therefore be confirmed absent from the site. The remaining sensitive species that were determined to have a potential to occur on the project site based on the literature review (CNDDB and CNPSEI database searches) have all been confirmed absent because they were not observed growing onsite at the appropriate flowering time when these plants would be conspicuous and identifiable or due to a lack of suitable habitat on the project site. As stated in the October 9, 2009 Biological Assessment by Chambers Group, the following species were not observed growing onsite during the flowering period when these species would have been in bloom: Y south coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica); ➢ Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulten); Y Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii); ➢ cliff spurge (Euphorbia misera); and ➢ woolly seablite (Sueda taxifolia). In addition, no habitat was present on site for the following species: ➢ chaparral sand - verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita); ➢ southern tarplant (Centromedia parryi ssp. australis); ➢ San Fernando Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. Fernandina); ➢ salt marsh bird's beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus); ➢ Los Angeles sunflower (Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii); ➢ Coulter's goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulter); ➢ mud nama (Nama stenocarpum); ➢ Gambel's yellowcress (Nasturtium gambeli); ➢ prostrate vernal pool navarretia ( Navarretia prostrata); ➢ coast woolly -heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata); and ➢ estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa); Therefore, these species are confirmed absent from the project site Conclusions Although not in bloom in February, the many- stemmed dudleya and the Laguna Beach dudleya were both evident and identifiable as a Oudleya species when the project site was re- visited in February 2009. Chambers Group botanist Ms. McGee did not observe evidence of any sensitive plant on the property during surveys conducted in October or February. Furthermore, had any vegetative characteristics indicative of sensitive plant species having potential to occur on the property been observed (such as a basal nodes, desiccated leaves, or other morphologic characters), it would have warranted recommendation for further surveys to be conducted during an active blooming period. In summary, results of the follow -up site visits requested by the City and discussed herein are consistent with the original findings of the Biological Assessment. Although representative species of the Coastal Bluff Scrub vegetation community are present on the project site, the overall habitat quality is low, and no evidence of sensitive species was observed. No further surveys are recommended. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (949) 261 -5414. Sincerely, CHAMBERS GROUP, INC. Jenny McGee Staff Biologist cc: Jim Campbell Principal Planner City of Newport Beach 's � � �� , �� `h�n oa f To: Patrick Alford, AICP City of Newport Beach MEMORANDUM October 21, 2008 From: Sandra Leatherman, Senior Botanist and Dana C. Privitt, AICP, Principal Subject: Review of Biological Documents for 2333 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach, California The City of Newport Beach has requested BonTerra Consulting to review the two biological reports for the Megonigal Property located on 2333 Pacific View Drive in the City of Newport Beach California. The purpose of our firm's review was to assess the findings of the documents. BonTerra Consulting did not conduct any field work associated with the review of these documents. The reports are "Re: September 23 Appeal Hearing on the Megonigal Property Biological Evaluation 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach" dated September 22, 2008 prepared by Robert Hamilton of Hamilton Consulting; and "Biological Assessment Survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California Following Initial Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton Consulting" dated October 9, 2008 prepared by the Chambers Group. The review was prepared by Sandy Leatherman, Senior Botanist and Senior Project Manager at BonTerra Consulting. Ms. Leatherman has over 17 years of experience in plant biology; mitigation monitoring; and the performance of biological surveys, restoration studies, and habitat evaluations. Ms. Leatherman's professional experience has focused on plant ecology and taxonomy, and she has conducted and /or managed both general and directed surveys for biological resources, which includes plants listed as special status or Threatened or Endangered under State and federal laws and regulations. She has developed habitat restoration programs and evaluated restoration site conditions on a quantitative and qualitative basis for public- sector and private- sector clients throughout Southern California. Ms. Leatherman has also authored the biological resources sections of numerous Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) and separate biological reports, including Biological Assessments (pursuant to Section 7 consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]); Natural Environmental Studies (NESS) (pursuant to California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] guidelines); reports in accordance with Natural Community Conservation Plan; focused surveys for special status species; tree reports; and general biological assessments and Constraints Analyses. Robert Hamilton's report "evaluated the biological resources at the property and includes his opinion regarding whether the property supports any biological resources that could be subject to local, state, or federal regulation due to their ecological sensitivity." Chambers' report "assesses the quality and quantity of native habitat present on the property, to evaluate the suitability of the habitat to support listed or otherwise sensitive species, to survey for sensitive species identifiable at this time, to map the vegetation communities occurring within 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E -200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (714) 444 -9199 (714) 444 -9599 FAX Patrick Alford, AICP October 21, 2008 Page 2 the property boundaries." It is our understanding that the Chambers Group report was prepared at the request of the property owner to address recommendations in Hamilton's report. Hamilton's report concludes that southern coastal bluff scrub, a plant community identified as rare by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is present on the property and that the property could also support listed or otherwise sensitive plant species (special status). Mr. Hamilton lists one special status plant species, Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulteri), as having the potential to occur on the property. Hamilton's report is a general overview and was not presented to the City to provide the analysis of all special status plant species. Therefore, it is not known if Hamilton has determined if there is potentially suitable habitat for all of the species listed in the California Natural Diversity Database ( CNDDB) and California Native Plant Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI). Chambers' report concurs with the Hamilton report that southern coastal bluff scrub is present on the property but determines that the habitat value of the vegetation association has been significantly compromised by fragmentation and influences of human activities and it provides very limited long term habitat value. The report also concludes that no federal, State, or otherwise sensitive species as having potential to occur on the property were observed during the survey. As stated above, BonTerra Consulting was not directed to by the City and therefore did not conduct any field work on this property and has not assessed the habitat on the property. Neither the quality of the habitat nor can the potential to support special status plant and wildlife species has been determined by BonTerra Consulting. However, in an analysis of the above stated reports the following comments can be made: 1. A biological assessment should address all special status species known to occur in the area with the use of the CNDDB and the CNPSEI. The Hamilton report was not considered a biological assessment therefore it did not assess these databases. The Chambers' report did not address the federally and State listed plant species from the CNPSEI, such as Laguna Beach dudleya (Dudleya stolonifera). All listed species need to be addressed because they are a potential constraint to development. However, a verbal message was given to BonTerra Consulting that Chamber's provided a paragraph stating that Laguna Beach dudleya was not present during the October 2008 survey and not expected because it is detectable outside the blooming period. This is addressed below. 2. A focused survey for special status plant species should follow the "Guidelines for Assessing the Effects of Proposed Projects on Rare, Threatened and Endangered Plants and Natural Communities' (CDFG May 2000). These guidelines state that "nearby reference sites should be observed to determine that the species are identifiable at the time of the survey." Hamilton did not conduct special status plant surveys. Chamber's states that surveys were conducted at the appropriate blooming period. The methods section of their report does not identify that any reference populations were visited. This information needs to be added to the report if the surveys are valid for the annual species. Many annual species during the 2008 season bloomed much earlier because of early rainfall and the following drought conditions, and October is the end (of the blooming) period for two of the special status plant species, Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii) and South Coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica), addressed in Chamber's report. 3. The Chamber's report states that many- stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis) is visible outside its blooming period. While many- stemmed dudleya is a perennial species, it is a Patrick Alford, AICP October 21, 2008 Page 3 perennial species from a corm (bulb -like structure). This means that this species dies completely back following the blooming period which is typically April through July. Dried flowering stocks can sometimes be visible following the flowering period. However, this is not a reliable trait unless you are looking at a known population since wind, wildlife, and human disturbance can destroy the flowering stocks. Therefore, the conclusion stating that this species is visible during October is not considered valid. 4. Chamber's also stated that Laguna Beach dudleya would be visible during this time of year. Laguna Beach dudleya is a perennial species, but the succulent leaves of the dudleya shrivel and desiccate during the summer months. Therefore this federally and State listed species would be virtually undetectable during this time, and most botanists would not conduct conclusive presence /absence surveys during this time of year without at least visiting a reference site. The City, through execution of the NCCP /HCP Implementing Agreement (IA) and the receipt of a 10(a) Permit, is a participating land use jurisdiction in the Central - Coastal Subregional NCCP /HCP program. As a participating land use jurisdiction, the City receives specific regulatory authorizations pursuant to the provisions of the IA and the 10(a) Permit including full regulatory coverage for 32 species and three habitat types, and conditional regulatory coverage for 7 species. As such, the City would receive full regulatory coverage for impacts to the Laguna Beach dudleya (Dudleya stolonifera), an "Identified Species" pursuant to Section 1.29 of the IA. Also, all impacts (permanent or temporary) to coastal sage scrub resources must be reported as annual take report to the Executive Director, Nature Reserve of Orange County. If you have any questions regarding the findings presented in this memo, please feel free to contact us. RSPmjecls \NmponU010Wemo- 102108 ,doc a�W�Rr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH p� A 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 c,�"oaN (949) 644 -3200 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT The City of Newport Beach has completed the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Megonigal Single - Family Residential Project located at 2333 Pacific Drive in the City of Newport Beach. The DEIR has been prepared to evaluate potential environmental impacts associated with the following discretionary approvals are requested or required by the City in order to implement the project: Modification Permit (MD2007 -080) The project applicants, Kim and Caroline Megonigal, are proposing to construction a single - family residence on the subject property.The applicant proposes to construct a 3,566 square -foot, single- family residence (including the garage floor area). The proposed residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the first floor; 934 square feet on the second floor; and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (including a 428 - square foot, 2- car garage). Total floor area, not including the garage, is 3,138 square feet. Vehicular access is from Pacific Drive at the intersection of Begonia Avenue and Pacific Drive. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space on the three levels is provided. The front and rear elevations are illustrated in Exhibits 3 -7 and 3 -8, respectively. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. MD2007 -080 to allow planter walls to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. In addition, because the proposed planter walls and water feature would also encroach into the Begonia Avenue right -of -way, an encroachment permit from the City's Public works Department will also be required. The encroachment permit also includes non - standard improvements within the public right -of -way consisting of enhanced paving for pedestrian and vehicular access from Pacific Drive. Lastly, grading of approximately 630 cubic yards of export, landscaping, and utility connections necessary for construction of the proposed residence are also included. The City of Newport Beach determined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment on Land Use, Aesthetics, and Biological Resources. The City determined that an EIR would be required to more fully evaluate potential adverse environmental impacts that may result from development of the project. All other environmental effects were determined to be less than significant (with mitigation) or have no impact and were addressed in the Initial Study prepared for the project. As a result, the DEIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). This DEIR also complies with the City of Newport Beach's procedures for implementation of CEQA. The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the Environmental Impact Report and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection at the following locations: Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915 Balboa Branch 100 East Balboa Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92660 Mariners Branch 1300 Irvine Ave. Newport Beach, CA 92660 Central Library 1000 Avocado Avenue Newport Beach, CA 92625 Corona del Mar Branch 420 Marigold Avenue Corona del Mar, CA 92625 The DEIR is available at the City's website http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov /planning. Comments on the adequacy of the DEIR will be accepted by the City between August 24, 2009 and October 8, 2009. Comments on the Draft EIR should be sent to the attention of James Campbell, Principal Planner, Newport Beach Planning Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915. Notice of said hearing will be separately provided in accordance with applicable law when the hearing dates are known. James Campbell, Principal Planner (949) 644 -3200