HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 - MND for Newport Blvd & 32nd StCITY OF
F NEWPORT REACH
City Council Staff Report
October 28, 2014
Agenda Item No. 16
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Kimberly Brandt, Community Development Director — (949) 644 -3226,
kbrandt@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: Andy Tran, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer and James Campbell, Principal Planner
PHONE: atran @newportbeachca.gov, (949) 644 -3315; jampbell@newportbeachca.gov,
(949) 644 -3210
TITLE: Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification —Adoption of Mitigated Negative
Declaration (PA2014 -134)
ABSTRACT:
Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the approval of the
conceptual roadway design.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Adopt Resolution No. 2014 -93 (Staff Report Attachment No. 1), A Resolution of the City Council of the
City of Newport Beach adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2014 -001 (SCH No. 2014091008)
for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project (PA2014 -134), pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act; and
b) Approve the conceptual roadway design of the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification
project (Staff Report Attachment No. 2).
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
There is no fiscal impact related to the adoption of the MND.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed project has been developed to improve Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street between Via
Lido and 30th Street in order to increase vehicle and bike capacity and reduce traffic congestion to an
acceptable level of service. The project involves widening Newport Boulevard to accommodate one
additional northbound through lane from 30th Street to 32nd Street and one additional southbound through
lane from Via Lido to 32nd Street terminating as a right -turn only lane at 32nd Street. Bike lanes on both
sides of Newport Boulevard will be extended from Via Lido to 32nd Street. The intersection at 32nd Street
will be modified to improve roadway geometrics.
16 -1
This project also involves the construction of raised landscaped medians, parkway trees and landscaping,
street light modifications with upgrades to LEDs, traffic signal modifications, and signing and pavement
striping. As a result of the roadway widening and the addition of vehicular and bike lanes, on- street
parking along Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 30th Street will be removed and replaced with a
new parking lot. The new public parking lot will be constructed on the former bank property located at the
northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street. In addition to this new public parking lot and
several other existing public parking lots in the vicinity, there are four privately owned parking lots on the
west side of Newport Boulevard that serve the existing businesses between 32nd Street and Short Street.
A roadway conceptual design is contained in Attachment No. 2. The conceptual landscape plan will be
presented to the City Council for review and approval at a later date.
In order to facilitate these improvements, additional right -of -way will be required. On August 12, 2014, City
Council approved a Purchase and Sale Agreement to acquire 3201 Newport Boulevard and 3204 Marcus
Avenue. Grant deeds for these two properties were recorded with the Orange County Recorder's Office
on October 7, 2014. City Council also approved the partial dedication of two City owned parcels located at
3300 Newport Boulevard and 3531 Newport Boulevard to facilitate the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared by Chambers Group, Inc., in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K -3
(Exhibit "A" of Attachment No. 1). The MND was routed to the City Council in advance of this staff report to
allow additional time to review the report. A copy of the MND is available on the City's website, at each
Newport Beach Public Library, and at the Public Works Department at City Hall.
The MND does not identify any component of the project that would result in a significant impact on the
environment per CEQA guidelines that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. Based upon the
analysis of the Initial Study, the environmental categories within which the project would have either no
impact or less than significant impact were: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Agricultural /Forest Resources,
Biological Resources, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hydrology /Water Quality, Land Use /Planning, Mineral
Resources, Population /Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation/Traffic, and Utilities /Service
Systems. The Initial Study further identified the following environmental categories within which the project
would have potentially significant impacts: Cultural Resources, Geology /Soils, Hazards /Hazardous
Materials, and Noise. Specific mitigation measures have been included to reduce the potentially significant
adverse effects to a less than significant level. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
has been prepared for adoption (Exhibit "B" of Attachment No. 1).
The MND was made available for public review for a 30 -day comment period from June 26, 2014, to July
28, 2014. Three comment letters were received for consideration. Notice to the State Clearinghouse was
provided and the MND was made available for a second, 30 -day public comment period from August 29,
2014 through October 1, 2014, in accordance with CEQA. Four additional comment letters were received
for consideration. Although not required pursuant to CEQA, written responses have been prepared for
each of the seven comment letters and they are attached as Attachment No. 3. No new significant
information is presented in the comments and responses to warrant recirculation of the MND, and staff
recommends adoption of the MND and MMRP.
16 -2
NOTICING:
As part of the MND public review process, the City mailed notices with a detailed description of the project
to all residents, businesses and property owners within a 300 -foot radius from the project site. Staff also
published a notice of this meeting in the Daily Pilot. In addition to the public review process of the MND,
Public Works Staff has communicated and presented the project concept to several businesses along
Newport Boulevard. The project was also discussed during recent city council meetings on August 12,
2014, and September 9, 2014, as part of the right -of -way acquisition phase. Staff will also present the
final landscaping concepts at an upcoming City Council Study Session and will also host a community
project outreach meeting to keep residents and businesses informed as the project progresses.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
Attachment 1 - Resolution Adopting MND No. ND2014 -001
Attachment 2 - Concept Plan
Attachment 3 - Comments and Responses
16 -3
Attachment No. 1
Resolution adopting the MND and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
16 -4
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION NO. ND2014 -001 (SCH NO. 2014091008) FOR
THE NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND 32ND STREET
MODIFICATION PROJECT; CONTRACT #4881 (PA2014 -134)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. The Circulation Element of the General Plan designates Newport Boulevard
between 32nd Street and Via Lido as a Major Road to be improved as a 6 -lane
divided highway. Currently this roadway segment does not meet this standard and
Newport Boulevard is one of only two major roadways providing vehicular access to
and from the Balboa Peninsula.
2. The City's Capital Improvement Program calls for the widening of this roadway
segment consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan and the
Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways.
3. Traffic through this roadway has increased over time to where the roadway
segment currently operates above its designed capacity leading to unnecessary
congestion that impedes access to the Balboa Peninsula for residents and visitors.
4. The proposed project will implement the Circulation Element by widening the
roadway to 6 lanes and it will improve the level of service along the affected
roadway segment to a more acceptable level of service. As a result, proposed
improvements enhance vehicle circulation through this critical roadway segment
and will improve access to the area for both residents and visitors.
5. Although the project will remove existing street parking along the west side of the
affected roadway, a new off - street parking lot will be created at the northwest
corner of the intersection of 32nd Street and Newport Boulevard such that there will
be no net loss of public parking. Therefore, there will be no impact to public access
due to changes in available public parking.
6. A public meeting was held by the City Council on October 28, 2014, in the City Hall
Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of
time, place and purpose of the meeting was given in accordance with the
Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented
to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing.
16 -5
City Council Resolution No. 2014-
Page 2
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code
Section 21000, et seq. ( "CEQA "), the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of
Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), and City Council Policy K -3, the proposed
amendments ( "Project') are defined as a project and as such subject to
environmental review.
2. The City thereafter caused to be prepared an Initial Study /Mitigated Negative
Declaration ( "MND ") in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and
City Council Policy K -3.
3. Notice of the availability of the draft MND was given and the draft MND was
made available for public review for a 30 -day comment period beginning on June
26, 2014, and ending July 28, 2014. The City received three comment letters
during this initial public review /comment period. Notice to the State
Clearinghouse was provided and a subsequent Notice of the Availability of the
draft MND was given in accordance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and
City Council Policy K -3. The draft MND was made available for this second public
review period beginning on August 29, 2014 through October 1, 2014, and four
additional comment letters were received.
4. Although not required pursuant to CEQA, written responses to all seven
comment letters received were prepared. The comments and responses were
considered by the City Council while considering the approval of the proposed
project. The comments and responses to comments do not represent significant
new information to warrant recirculation of the MND.
5. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program are attached as Exhibits "A" and "B ", respectively. The documents and
all related materials, which constitute the record upon which this decision was
based, are on file with the Public Works Department, City Hall, 100 Civic Center
Drive, Newport Beach, California.
6. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project,
with mitigation measures, will have a less than significant impact upon the
environment and there are no known substantial adverse affects on human
beings that would be caused. 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 by
the Mitigated Negative Declaration and incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program are feasible and will reduce potential environmental
impacts to a less than significant level.
16 -6
City Council Resolution No. 2014-
SECTION 4. DECISION.
Page 3
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California,
hereby resolves as follows:
1. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby adopts Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2014 -001 (SCH #2014091008) attached as Exhibit "A ", which is
incorporated by reference.
2. The City Council of the City of Newport Beach directs the Public Works Director to
incorporate the mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program attached as Exhibit `B" in the plans and specifications for the
project to be implemented.
Passed and adopted by the City Council of Newport Beach at a regular meeting held on
the 28th day of October, 2014.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
16 -7
Exhibit "A"
Newport Boulevard and 32ND Street Modification Project
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2014 -001
State Clearinghouse Number 2014091008
i[�]
DRAFT
INITIAL STUDY /MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION
NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND
32ND STREET
MODIFICATION PROJECT
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
DEPARTMENTOF PUBLIC WORKS
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Prepared by:
CHAM MRS
GROUP
5 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 750
Santa Ana, California 92707
(949) 261 -5414
June 2014
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2014 -001
State Clearinghouse Number 2014091008
16 -9
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. ............................... 1
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY ................................................................... ............................... 1
SECTION 2.0- PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ................. ............................... 2
2.1
PROJECT PURPOSE .........................................................................................
............................... 2
2.2
PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS .........................................
............................... 2
2.3
PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................................
..............................7
2.4
PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ..................................................................
..............................7
2.5
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................
..............................8
2.6
REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS ...........................................................
............................... 9
SECTION 3.0- ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ............................................. ............................... 11
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: .............................................................. 11
3.2 DETERMINATION ........................................................................................... .............................11
SECTION 4.0 - EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................... ............................... 12
SECTION 5.0 - CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ....................................... ............................... 14
5.1
AESTHETICS ....................................................................................................
.............................14
5.2
AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES .........................................................
............................... 16
5.3
AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................
.............................18
5.4
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...............................................................................
.............................29
5.5
CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................
............................... 31
5.6
GEOLOGY AND SOILS ...................................................................................
............................... 37
5.7
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ....................................................................
............................... 40
5.8
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ....................................................
............................... 42
5.9
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY .............................................................
............................... 46
5.10
LAND USE AND PLANNING ..........................................................................
............................... 49
5.11
MINERAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................
............................... 51
5.12
NOISE .............................................................................................................
.............................52
5.13
POPULATION AND HOUSING .......................................................................
............................... 68
5.14
PUBLIC SERVICES ..........................................................................................
............................... 69
5.15
RECREATION ................................................................................................
............................... 71
5.16
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC .................................................................
............................... 72
5.17
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS ..................................................................
.............................75
5.18
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ..................................................
............................... 77
SECTION 6.0- SOURCE REFERENCES ................................................................... ............................... 80
SECTION 7.0 - REPORT AUTHORS AND CONSULTANTS ........................................ ............................... 82
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -11
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: CALEEMOD MODEL AIR QUALITY OUTPUT FILES
APPENDIX B: CULTURAL RESOURCES LETTER REPORT
APPENDIX C: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
APPENDIX D: CALEEMOD MODEL GREENHOUSE GAS OUTPUT FILES
APPENDIX E: INITIAL SITE ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX F: WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
APPENDIX G: HYDROLOGY REPORT
APPENDIX H: NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS
The appendices may be accessed at the following webpage:
http:// www. newportbeachca .gov /pin /CEQA_DOCS.asp ?path= /Newport Blvd
and 32nd Street Modification
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -12
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure1: Location Map ................................................................................................... ..............................3
Figure 2: Project Feature Map ....................................................................................... ............................... 5
Figure 3: Land Use Compatibility Matrix ...................................................................... ............................... 55
Figure 4: Noise Measurement Locations ...................................................................... ............................... 59
Figure 5: Existing Noise Contours ................................................................................ ............................... 62
Figure 6: Existing With Project Noise Contours ........................................................... ............................... 63
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -13
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1: Right -of -Way Acquisitions ................................................................................ ............................... 9
Table 2: Designations /Classifications for the Project Area .......................................... ............................... 21
Table 3: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary .................................................... ............................... 22
Table 4: Regional Thresholds of Significance ............................................................... ............................... 24
Table 5: Local Thresholds of Significance ..................................................................... ............................... 25
Table 6: Construction - Related Regional Emissions from the Proposed Project ............ .............................26
Table 7: Construction - Related Local Emissions ............................................................. .............................27
Table 8: Historic Property Data File Listings ................................................................ ............................... 34
Table 9: City of Newport Beach Significant Noise Impacts ........................................... .............................56
Table 10: Existing (Ambient) Noise Level Measurements ........................................... ............................... 58
Table 11: Construction Equipment Noise Emissions and Usage Factors ....................... .............................60
Table 12: Proposed Project Noise Impacts at Nearby Homes Prior to Mitigation ........ .............................61
Table 13: Mitigated Proposed Project Noise Impacts at Nearby Homes ...................... .............................64
Table 14: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment .................................. ............................... 65
Table 15: Construction Noise Levels at Nearby Receptors .......................................... ............................... 66
Table 16: Traffic Operations on Newport Boulevard... ............................................................................... 73
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
V
16 -14
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
SECTION 1.0— INTRODUCTION
1.1 PURPOSE OF THE INITIAL STUDY
The City of Newport Beach proposes to widen Newport Boulevard and improve the intersection of
Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street in order to increase vehicular capacity and reduce existing traffic
congestion. The project would also introduce 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport
Boulevard and construct a public parking lot.
Projects within the State of California (State) are required to undergo environmental review to
determine the environmental impacts associated with implementation in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) unless a project is exempt. CEQA was enacted in 1970 by the
California Legislature to disclose to decision makers and the public the significant environmental effects
of a proposed project and identify possible ways to avoid or minimize significant environmental effects
of a project by requiring implementation of mitigation measures or recommending feasible alternatives.
CEQA applies to all California public agencies at all levels, including local, regional, and State, as well as
boards, commissions, and special districts. As such, the City of Newport Beach is required to conduct an
environmental review to analyze the potential environmental effects associated with the proposed
project.
The following Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS /MND) analyzes the potential for the
Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification project (proposed project) to result in environmental
impacts. The environmental analysis conducted for this IS /MND determined that all impacts can be
reduced to a level less than significant; potential impacts and mitigation measures are presented below.
The City of Newport Beach will be the Lead Agency for purposes of CEQA, as it is the agency charged
with carrying out or approving the project.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -15
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
SECTION 2.0— PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
2.1 PROJECT PURPOSE
The proposed project, located in the City of Newport Beach (City), has been developed to improve the
intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street in order to increase vehicular capacity and reduce
existing traffic congestion to an acceptable level of service (LOS) (Figure 1). The proposed project would
add an additional northbound through lane along Newport Boulevard from 30`h Street to 32nd Street and
add an additional southbound through lane along Newport Boulevard from Via Lido to 32nd Street,
terminating as a right -turn only lane at 32nd Street (Figure 2). The proposed project would introduce 6-
foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport Boulevard, between 32nd Street and Via Lido, to
provide a connection to existing bike lanes along 32 "d Street west of Newport Boulevard. The proposed
project would include a public parking lot on the west side of Newport Boulevard between 32nd Street
and Finley Avenue with a minimum of 26 parking spaces. The new public parking lot would replace the
26 curbside public parking spaces on Newport Boulevard, which will be eliminated by the widening of
the roadway. The proposed project would enhance the visual quality of the project area and improve
safety by introducing raised landscape medians on Newport Boulevard.
2.2 PROJECT LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS
2.2.1 Project Site
The proposed project is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach and would
improve a segment of Newport Boulevard that begins at the intersection with 30`h Street and terminates
at the intersection with Via Lido (Figure 1). This segment of Newport Boulevard is classified as a Major
Road (Six Lane Divided) in the City of Newport Beach General Plan Circulation Element (City of Newport
Beach 2006). The proposed project will also include improvements on a segment of 32nd Street that
begins at the alley east of Newport Boulevard and terminates at Marcus Avenue west of Newport
Boulevard. The segment of 32nd Street within the project area west of Newport Boulevard is classified as
a Secondary Road (Four Lane Undivided). A recent City project has reconfigured this roadway segment
into a two -lane road with bike lanes in each direction. The segment of 32 "d Street east of Newport
Boulevard is classified as a Commuter Roadway (Two Lane Undivided) in the circulation element. The
proposed project would remove the westbound free -right turn lane at Newport Boulevard. Bus stops
currently exist on both sides of Newport Boulevard within the proposed project area. The northbound
bus stop is located immediately south of Finley Avenue, while the southbound bus stop is located
immediately south of Short Street. Curbside metered parking spaces exist along Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street within the project area.
Chambers Group, Inc. 2
20514
16 -16
i
,,4
I
,
1,
\. -� r• \19
�•` �.� ,r'` ` s o ,� 'r' ,`�, a �`
Y'�' o �, iql� '�i191i■1
Rr
Jr
40 4
Its
* x
i' N
'-'
r
Oxnard
A Project Location -oieqAmdS
y
•- -
��\ 1 • • 1 �'•q
1 1 ai.
•� y, pyn , 0 J`omTOm ��
■ �• Sourc e. 1 ... �'
•l.
Legend F
•
- Newport • p
Project
1 250 500
Feet kpe4—w
..i
16 -17
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
This page left intentionally blank
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -18
.
r
l
i r
•r I(�
2
ft,29
8
I
N Z
L
�In d
LL
� LL
M
IL
r
a
a3i
Z
f• r ` •
] I�
Ye gyP 5` li `�p�r [�1. y1 eP
It Yl
/ e !?S:
f
1133u oae M - e iiit
v FT-7
7
+ �� f
�! �• .A.�i,:- ^�'. �. � � — fill I � > s6 ii
ng
e�
�Y
�o
m
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
This page left intentionally blank
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -20
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
2.2.2 Adjacent Land Uses and General Plan Designation /Zoning
Land uses surrounding the proposed project predominately consist of commercial and retail businesses
located along Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street. These surrounding parcels have Corridor Commercial,
General Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, and Visitor Serving Commercial General Plan Land Use
and Zoning designations. The proposed project is also adjacent to the former City Hall campus, which is
located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street. The former
City Hall campus parcel has a General Plan Land Use and a Zoning designation of Public Facilities. Parcels
south of 32 "d Street adjacent to the proposed project have a General Plan Land Use Designation of
Mixed -Use Horizontal and a Zoning Designation of Mixed -Use Cannery Village /15`h Street. Parcels north
of the former City Hall complex have a General Plan Land Use and Zoning designation of General
Commercial.
2.3 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The proposed project site is approximately 1,000 feet from the Pacific Ocean. During summer seasons,
many visitors to Newport Beach travel southbound on Newport Boulevard and head west on 32nd Street
to access the beach. Due to this significant increase of vehicles, Newport Boulevard is congested and
currently operates at LOS F. In addition, a significant amount of bicycle traffic is also present due to the
proximity to the beach. This proposed project will increase vehicular capacity and improve the level of
service. In addition, it will also improve the safety and mobility of bicycle traffic.
The design, right -of -way (ROW) and construction phases are funded by the Orange County Measure M
competitive funds as part of the Comprehensive Transportation Funding Program (Measure M CTFP)
and Gas Tax funds.
2.4 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Implementation of the proposed project will improve traffic circulation and reduce existing traffic
congestion to an acceptable level of service. Primary objectives of the proposed project include:
• Introducing an additional northbound through lane along Newport Boulevard from 30`h Street to
32nd Street;
• Introducing an additional southbound through lane along Newport Boulevard from Via Lido to
32nd Street, terminating as a right -turn only lane at 32nd Street;
Modifying the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street to improve traffic operations;
• Introducing raised, landscaped medians to improve safety;
• Introducing 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport Boulevard between 32nd Street
and Via Lido to provide a connection to the existing bike lanes along 32 "d Street west of Newport
Boulevard.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -21
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
2.5 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
2.5.1 Roadway and Signal Modifications
The proposed project would introduce one additional northbound through lane on Newport Boulevard
from 3o`h Street to 32nd Street and one additional southbound through lane on Newport Boulevard from
Via Lido to 32nd Street, terminating as a right -turn only lane at 32nd Street. The proposed project would
require traffic signal modifications at the intersections of 30`h Street, 32nd Street, Finley Avenue and Via
Lido. Introduction of a raised, landscaped median along Newport Boulevard would eliminate the existing
left turning movements from southbound Newport Boulevard onto eastbound 31" Street and from
westbound 31'` Street onto southbound Newport Boulevard. Acquisition of the two existing bank
properties and roadway modifications on 32nd Street would result in the closure of the alley access that
bisects these properties. The alley would be reconfigured to connect to the proposed public parking lot,
which will include an exit /entrance via Marcus Avenue.
The proposed project would also introduce 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport
Boulevard between 32nd Street and Via Lido to provide a connection to existing bike lanes on 32nd Street
west of Newport Boulevard. Project construction would require temporary lane closures on both
Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during
construction to minimize disruptions due to lane closures
Implementation of the proposed project would eliminate approximately 26 existing curbside metered
parking spaces between 30`h Street and Via Lido. These parking spaces will be replaced on properties to
be acquired by the City as a part of the proposed project described below in Section 2.5.3. Both bus
stops along Newport Boulevard would be relocated to a location near each existing bus stop.
2.5.2 Median, Landscaping, and Sidewalk Modifications
The proposed improvements of Newport Boulevard north and south of the 32nd Street intersection
would include construction of raised, landscaped medians that would improve safety and enhance the
visual quality of the proposed project area. Additional visual enhancements associated with the
proposed project include introduction of landscaping at the southeast corner of the intersection of
Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street and northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and
Finley Avenue. The proposed project would also add landscaping to screen the proposed public parking
lot at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and 32 "d Street. Project landscaping must be found
consistent with the Lido Village Design Guidelines prepared by the City of Newport Beach.
Project improvements would also include construction of new curb and gutters, curbs, sidewalks, curb
ramps, driveway approaches, storm drain catch basins, street lights, signs, striping, signals, utility
meters, Southern California Edison (SCE) air vents, and other items within the project area. Parking
meters and several large palm trees will need to be removed and salvaged or disposed as directed by
City staff.
Existing pavement within the proposed project area is generally in fair condition with the exception of a
portion of Newport Boulevard between Finley Avenue and 32nd Street that appears to be in poor
condition in both the northbound and southbound lanes. Pavement treatment for the proposed project
would consist of isolated full -depth reconstruction and cold mill and overlay.
Chambers Group, Inc. 8
20514
16 -22
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
2.5.3 Right -of -Way Acquisitions
Current project design as presented in Figure 2 anticipates that the proposed project would require
ROW acquisitions from three privately -owned parcels and two partial property dedications from two
City -owned parcels. The environmental evaluation presented in this IS /MND includes the ROW
acquisitions and dedications listed below in Table 1 in order to present the most conservative analysis.
Private property ROW acquisitions under current project design would include a full property acquisition
of the vacant Wachovia Bank building located at the northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street intersection and the property west of the vacant Wachovia Bank Building currently
configured as a parking lot for the bank. The existing structure and parking lot on both of these parcels
would be demolished, and the two parcels would be converted to a public parking lot to provide
replacement parking for the loss of on- street curbside parking. Current project design would require a
partial ROW acquisition of the commercial property north of the vacant Wachovia Bank building.
Table 1: Right -of -Way Acquisitions
Address
3201
Private
I Vacant Wachovia Bank Building
8,684 SF (Full Acquisition)
3204
Private
Parking Lot for Vacant Wachovia Bank Building
6,748 SF (Full Acquisition)
3305
Private
Commercial with Parking Lot
48 SF (Partial Acquisition)
3300
City
Former City Hall
10,782 SF (Partial Dedication)
3531
City
Passive Recreation
1,224 SF (Partial Dedication)
Current project design would require dedication of 0.25 acre of land from the former City Hall parcel
located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street (3300 Newport
Boulevard). This segment of the former City Hall parcel would be incorporated into the expanded ROW
of Newport Boulevard. Similarly, current project design would require dedication of 0.03 acre of the
City -owned Gateway Park located at the southwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Short Street (3531
Newport Boulevard) that would be incorporated into the expanded ROW of Newport Boulevard.
2.5.4 Project Schedule
Construction of the proposed project is expected to occur over a six -month period, beginning
September 2015 and ending March 2016. To minimize public inconvenience, the construction phase will
need to be completed prior to the start of Summer 2016. Construction activities will typically take place
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday thru Friday.
2.6 REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS
As required by the CECIA Guidelines, this section provides, to the extent of the information known to the
City, the CEQA Lead Agency, a list of agencies that are expected to use this IS /MND in their decision
making, and a list of permits and other approvals required to implement the proposed project.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16 -23
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
2.6.1 Lead Agency Approval
This IS /MND must be approved by the City Council as to its adequacy in complying with the
requirements of CEQA before any action on the proposed project is taken. The analysis presented in the
IS /MND is intended to provide a full disclosure of the proposed project's environmental impacts and
mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to a level less than significant.
2.6.2 Other Required Permits and Approvals
The proposed project would require a Coastal Development Permit (CDP). The City of Newport Beach
does not have a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) and, therefore, does not have the jurisdiction to
issue CDPs. The City does, however, have a Coastal Land Use Plan that has been certified by the
California Coastal Commission (CCC). Since the City does not have permit jurisdiction, the City reviews
pending development projects for consistency with the City's General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and
Zoning regulations before an applicant can file for a CDP with the CCC. The City would apply for a CDP
with the South Coast District Office of the CCC, located at 200 Oceangate, 101h Floor, Long Beach,
California 90802 -4416.
The proposed project would require preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
that would document best management practices (BMPs) to prevent stormwater pollution during
construction. Operational BMPs to prevent stormwater pollution over the course of the life of the
project would be documented in the water quality management plan (WQMP) to be prepared for the
proposed project.
2.6.3 Reviewing Agencies
Reviewing Agencies include those agencies that do not have discretionary powers but that may review
the IS /MND for adequacy and accuracy. Potential Reviewing Agencies include the following:
State of California
• Office of Planning and Research
• Office of Historic Preservation
Native American Heritage Commission
• California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Regional Agencies
South Coast Air Quality Management District
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
10
16 -24
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
SECTION 3.0— ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would potentially be affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," as indicated by the checklists on the following
pages.
❑
Aesthetics
❑
Agriculture Resources
❑
Air Quality
p
Biological Resources
®
Cultural Resources
®
Geology /Soils
❑
GHG Emissions
®
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
❑
Hydrology/ Water Quality
❑
Land Use /Planning
❑
Mineral Resources
Noise
❑
Population /Housing
❑
Public Services
❑
Recreation
❑
Transportation /Traffic
❑
Utilities /Service Systems
❑
Mandatory Findings of Significance
3.2 DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
1. 1 find that the project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and a ❑
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
2. 1 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.
3. 1 find the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and an ❑
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
4. 1 find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or ❑
"potentially significant unless mitigated impact" on the environment, but at least one
effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
S. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the ❑
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards,
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signaturev Date
Andy Tran, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer, Public Works Department
Name Title
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
11
16 -25
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
SECTION 4.0— EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites. A "No Impact" answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to
projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact'
answer should be explained where it is based on project- specific factors as well as general standards
(e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific
screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including offsite as well as onsite,
cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with
mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is appropriate if substantial
evidence exists that an effect may be significant. If one or more "Potentially Significant Impact'
entries are marked when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact' to
a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from earlier
analyses may be cross - referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an
effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D).
In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site - specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources
for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
12
16 -26
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
*Note: Instructions may be omitted from final document.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
13
16 -27
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
SECTION 5.0 — CHECKLIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
5.1 AESTHETICS
5.1.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project site is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport
Beach and does not offer any scenic views of Newport Bay or other scenic features within
Newport Beach. Furthermore, the proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection
improvements, and construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not
construct new structures that would block any existing views. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, and impacts would be less than
significant.
(b) The proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection surrounded by commercial
and retail businesses within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach. The
proposed project site does not possess any scenic resources such as trees or rock outcroppings
and is typical of an urbanized roadway intersection. Research conducted in support of the
Cultural Resources Letter Report prepared for the proposed project determined that the vacant
Wachovia Bank Building that would be demolished in order to construct a new public parking lot
is not eligible for listing to the California Register of Historical Resources (See Section 5.5 -2(a)
below). No officially designated scenic vistas or scenic highways are located within Newport
Beach. Although State Route 1(SR -1) is identified as Eligible for State Scenic Highway
designation, views of the project site from SR -1 would not be impacted by roadway and
intersection improvements. Therefore, impacts on scenic resources would be less than
significant.
(c) The proposed project consists of a paved roadway intersection surrounded by commercial and
retail businesses within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach. The visual
character of the proposed project site is typical of an urbanized roadway intersection that does
not possess any unique scenic resources. Widening of Newport Boulevard and improving the
intersection with 32nd Street would not dramatically alter the existing visual character of the
project site. Furthermore, the vacant Wachovia Bank Building that would be demolished in
order to construct a new public parking lot does not possess high visual quality; loss of the
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
14
16 -28
Lessthan
AESTHETICS.
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
1
Would the project:
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑
❑
®
❑
(b)
Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
❑
❑
®
❑
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
(c)
Substantially degrade the existing visual character
El
E]
®
El
quality of the site and its surroundings?
(d)
Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
❑
❑
❑
in the area?
5.1.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project site is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport
Beach and does not offer any scenic views of Newport Bay or other scenic features within
Newport Beach. Furthermore, the proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection
improvements, and construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not
construct new structures that would block any existing views. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, and impacts would be less than
significant.
(b) The proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection surrounded by commercial
and retail businesses within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach. The
proposed project site does not possess any scenic resources such as trees or rock outcroppings
and is typical of an urbanized roadway intersection. Research conducted in support of the
Cultural Resources Letter Report prepared for the proposed project determined that the vacant
Wachovia Bank Building that would be demolished in order to construct a new public parking lot
is not eligible for listing to the California Register of Historical Resources (See Section 5.5 -2(a)
below). No officially designated scenic vistas or scenic highways are located within Newport
Beach. Although State Route 1(SR -1) is identified as Eligible for State Scenic Highway
designation, views of the project site from SR -1 would not be impacted by roadway and
intersection improvements. Therefore, impacts on scenic resources would be less than
significant.
(c) The proposed project consists of a paved roadway intersection surrounded by commercial and
retail businesses within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach. The visual
character of the proposed project site is typical of an urbanized roadway intersection that does
not possess any unique scenic resources. Widening of Newport Boulevard and improving the
intersection with 32nd Street would not dramatically alter the existing visual character of the
project site. Furthermore, the vacant Wachovia Bank Building that would be demolished in
order to construct a new public parking lot does not possess high visual quality; loss of the
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
14
16 -28
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
vacant Wachovia Bank Building would not degrade the existing visual character of the project
site.
The proposed project would introduce landscaping features that would enhance the visual
quality of the proposed project area. Visual enhancements associated with the proposed project
include introduction of raised, landscaped medians and new landscaping to screen the proposed
public parking lot at the northwest corner of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street. Additional
visual enhancements associated with the proposed project include landscaping at the southeast
corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street and northeast corner of the
intersection of Newport Boulevard and Finley Avenue. Project landscaping is intended to be
consistent with the approved plant palette presented in the Lido Village Design Guidelines
prepared by the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, the proposed project would improve the
existing visual character of the proposed project site, and impacts would be less than significant.
(d) Existing light sources within the proposed project site consist of intersection signals and street
lights. The proposed project would relocate existing intersection signals and street lights if
necessary to conform to the improved intersection configuration but would not introduce any
sources of light. The expanded roadway and landscaping features would not be constructed of
reflective materials that could introduce new sources of glare. Additionally, the proposed
project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of a public
parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new structures that would introduce new
sources of light or glare. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
15
16 -29
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.2 AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES
5.2.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach
and does not consist of any active farmland or land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (farmland) by the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Therefore, the proposed project would
not convert any farmland to nonagricultural uses. No impacts would occur.
(b) The proposed project site and surrounding land uses are not zoned for agricultural use. The
proposed project site consists of portions of the existing Newport Boulevard and 32n1 Street
roadways, existing land uses zoned for commercial use, and portions of properties zoned for
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16
16 -30
AGRICULTURE & FOREST RESOURCES.
(In determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant environmental effects,
lead agencies may refer to the California
Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment
Model (1997) prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model
to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and
Less than
farmland.) In determining whether impacts to
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
2.
forest resources, including timberland, are
Significant
With
Significant
No
significant environmental effects, lead agencies
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
may refer to information compiled by the
Incorporated
California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest
land, including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project;
and forest carbon measurement methodology
provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the
California Air Resources Board.)
Would the project:
(a)
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
El
H
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural
use?
(b)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
(c)
Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning
of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(8)), timberland (as defined by Public
El
El
E
Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(8))?
(d)
Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
El
El
El
H
forest land to nonforest use?
(e)
Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result
El
El
El
H
in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or
the conversion of forest land to nonforest use?
5.2.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach
and does not consist of any active farmland or land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (farmland) by the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. Therefore, the proposed project would
not convert any farmland to nonagricultural uses. No impacts would occur.
(b) The proposed project site and surrounding land uses are not zoned for agricultural use. The
proposed project site consists of portions of the existing Newport Boulevard and 32n1 Street
roadways, existing land uses zoned for commercial use, and portions of properties zoned for
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
16
16 -30
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
commercial and public use. Land uses surrounding the proposed project consist of properties
zoned for commercial, public, and mixed use. Therefore, the proposed project would not
conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract. No impacts would
occur.
(c) The proposed project site and surrounding land uses are not zoned for forest land, timberland,
or timberland production. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing
zoning for forest land or timberland. No impacts would occur.
(d) The proposed project is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach
and does not consist of forest land. Therefore, the proposed project would not convert any
forest land to nonforest uses. No impacts would occur.
(e) The proposed project is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach
and does not consist of any active farmland or forest land. Therefore, the proposed project
would not convert any farmland to nonagricultural use or forest land to nonforest use. No
impacts would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
17
16 -31
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.3 AIR QUALITY
The impact evaluation presented in Section 5.3 is based on the air quality impact analysis prepared by
Vista Environmental utilizing the CaIEEMod model. Output files for the CalEEMod Model prepared for
the proposed project are included as Appendix A of this IS /MND.
5.3.1 Environmental Setting
The proposed project site is located in the City of Newport Beach, which is located within the South
Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Air quality regulation within the SCAB is administered by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which implements the programs and regulations required by
the federal and State Clean Air acts.
Atmospheric Setting
The SCAB lies in the semi - permanent high - pressure zone of the eastern Pacific that results in a semi -arid
regional climate characterized by warm summers, mild winters, infrequent seasonal rainfall, moderate
daytime onshore breezes, and moderate humidity. The local climate is primarily influenced by the
proximity of the project site to the Pacific Ocean, which usually provides mild- tempered sea breezes and
a shallow marine layer. This usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of
extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. Average temperatures for Newport Beach,
which is the nearest monitored location, range from a low of 49 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) in December to
highs of 72 °F in August. Rainfall averages approximately 11 inches a year, with almost all annual rainfall
coming from the fringes of mid - latitude storms from late November to early April, with summers being
almost completely dry.
Chambers Group, Inc. 18
20514
16 -32
AIR QUALITY.
(Where available, the significance criteria
Lessthan
established by the applicable air quality
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
3.
management or air pollution control district may
Significant
With
Significant
No
be relied upon to make the following
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
determinations.)
Incorporated
Would the project:
(a)
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
❑
❑
®
❑
applicable air quality plan?
(b)
Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
❑
❑
®
❑
violation?
(c)
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project region
is nonattainment under an applicable federal or
E:1
E]
®
El
ambient air quality standard (including
releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
(d)
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
E]
El
®
E]
concentrations?
(e)
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
E]
El
®
1-1
number of people?
The impact evaluation presented in Section 5.3 is based on the air quality impact analysis prepared by
Vista Environmental utilizing the CaIEEMod model. Output files for the CalEEMod Model prepared for
the proposed project are included as Appendix A of this IS /MND.
5.3.1 Environmental Setting
The proposed project site is located in the City of Newport Beach, which is located within the South
Coast Air Basin (SCAB). Air quality regulation within the SCAB is administered by the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD), which implements the programs and regulations required by
the federal and State Clean Air acts.
Atmospheric Setting
The SCAB lies in the semi - permanent high - pressure zone of the eastern Pacific that results in a semi -arid
regional climate characterized by warm summers, mild winters, infrequent seasonal rainfall, moderate
daytime onshore breezes, and moderate humidity. The local climate is primarily influenced by the
proximity of the project site to the Pacific Ocean, which usually provides mild- tempered sea breezes and
a shallow marine layer. This usually mild climatological pattern is interrupted infrequently by periods of
extremely hot weather, winter storms, or Santa Ana winds. Average temperatures for Newport Beach,
which is the nearest monitored location, range from a low of 49 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) in December to
highs of 72 °F in August. Rainfall averages approximately 11 inches a year, with almost all annual rainfall
coming from the fringes of mid - latitude storms from late November to early April, with summers being
almost completely dry.
Chambers Group, Inc. 18
20514
16 -32
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Regulatory Setting
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards ( CAAQS)
have been established for the following criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, sulfur dioxide
(SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), inhalable particulate matter (PM10), fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and
lead. The CAAQS also set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide, and visibility.
Areas are classified under the Federal Clean Air Act as either "attainment' or "nonattainment" areas for
each criteria pollutant, based on whether the NAAQS have been achieved or not. Attainment relative to
the State standards is determined by CARB. The SCAB has been designated by the Federal
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a nonattainment area for ozone (03) and suspended
particulates (PM10 and PM2.0. Currently, the SCAB is in attainment with the ambient air quality
standards for carbon monoxide (CO), lead, sulfur dioxide (SOA and nitrogen dioxide (NO2).
The EPA has designated SCAB as extreme nonattainment for the 8 -hour average ozone standard. On
March 12, 2008, the EPA strengthened its 8 -hour "primary" and "secondary" ozone standards to 0.075
ppm. The previous standard set in 1997, was 0.08 ppm. The SCAQMD, the agency principally responsible
for comprehensive air pollution control in the SCAB, has developed a plan incorporated in the 2007 Air
Quality Management Plan (AQMP) that shows measures to reduce 8 -hour ozone levels to below the
federal standard by June 15, 2021.
The EPA has designated SCAB as nonattainment for ozone, PM2.5, and PM10. In 1997, the EPA established
standards for PM2.5 (particles less than 2.5 micrometers), which were not implemented until March
2002. PM2.5 is a subset of the PM10 emissions whose standards were developed to complement the PM10
standards that cover a full range of inhalable particle matter. The SCAQMD has developed a plan that
shows measures to reduce PM23 levels to below the federal standard by 2014. For the PM10 health
standards, the annual PM10 standard was revoked by the EPA on October 17, 2006; and the 24 -hour
average PM10 standard was to be achieved by December 31, 2006. The SCAB has met the PM10 standards
at all monitoring stations, and a request for redesignation is pending with the EPA.
PM2.5 concentrations in the SCAB have improved in recent years, with 2010 and 2011 being the cleanest
years on record. In 2011, only one station in the SCAB (Metropolitan Riverside County at Mira Loma)
exceeded the annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 98th percentile form of the 24 -hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as well as
the 3 -year design values for these standards. SCAB -wide, the federal PM2.5 24 -hour standard level was
exceeded in 2011 on 17 sampling days.
The SCAB is currently in attainment for the federal standards for S02, CO, and NO2. While the
concentration level of the new 1 -hour NO2 federal standard (100 ppb) was exceeded in the SCAB at two
stations (Central Los Angeles and Long Beach) on the same day in 2011, the NAAQS NO2 design value has
not been exceeded. Therefore, the SCAB remains in attainment of the NO2 NAAQS.
The SCAB has been designated by CARIB as a nonattainment area for ozone, PM10, and PM2.5. Currently,
the SCAB is in attainment with the ambient air quality standards for CO, lead, S02, NO2, and sulfates and
is unclassified for visibility reducing particles and hydrogen sulfide.
On June 20, 2002, the CARIB revised the PM10 annual average standard to 20 micrograms per cubic
meter (pg /m3) and established an annual average standard for PM2.5 of 12 pg /m3. These standards were
approved by the Office of Administrative Law in June 2003 and are now effective. On September 27,
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
19
16 -33
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
2007, CARB approved the SCAB and the Coachella Valley 2007 Air Quality Management Plan for
Attaining the Federal 8 -hour Ozone and PM2.5 Standards. The plan projects attainment for the 8 -hour
Ozone standard by 2024 and the PM2.5 standard by 2015. A revised draft of the 2012 AQMP was
released in September, 2012, was adopted by the SCAQMD Board on December 7, 2012, and was
adopted by CARB via Resolution 13 -3 on January 25, 2013. The 2012 AQMP was prepared in order to
meet the federal Clean Air Act requirement that all 24 -hour PM2.5 nonattainment areas prepare a State
Implementation Plan (SIP), that was required to be submitted to the U.S. EPA by December 14, 2012,
and demonstrate attainment with the 24 -hour PM2.5 standard by 2014. The 2012 AQMP demonstrates
attainment of the federal 24 -hour PM2_5 standard by 2014 in the SCAB through adoption of all feasible
measures; and therefore, no extension of the attainment date is needed. Table 2 presents the
designations and classifications applicable to the proposed project area.
Monitored Air Quality
The air quality at any site is dependent on the regional air quality and local pollutant sources. Regional
air quality is determined by the release of pollutants throughout the SCAB. Estimates of the existing
emissions in the SCAB provided in the 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, December 2012, indicate that
collectively, mobile sources account for 59 percent of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 88
percent of the NOx emissions, and 40 percent of directly emitted PM2.5, with another 10 percent of
PM2.5 from road dust.
The SCAQMD has divided the SCAB into 38 air - monitoring areas with a designated ambient air
monitoring station representative of each area. The project site is located in air monitoring area 18,
which covers the northern coastal area of Orange County. Since not all air monitoring stations measure
all of the tracked pollutants, the data from the following two monitoring stations, listed in the order of
proximity to the project site, have been used: Costa Mesa -Mesa Verde Monitoring Station (Costa Mesa
Station) and Mission Viejo Monitoring Station (Mission Viejo Station).
The Costa Mesa Station is located approximately 3.7 miles north of the project site at 2850 Mesa Verde
Drive East, Costa Mesa; and the Mission Viejo Station is located approximately 15 miles east of the
project site at 26081 Via Pera, Mission Viejo. Table 3 presents the monitored pollutant levels from these
monitoring stations. Ozone, CO, NO2, and were measured at the Costa Mesa Station; and PMlo and PM2_5
were measured at the Mission Viejo Station. It should be noted, however, that due to the air monitoring
stations' distances from the project site, recorded air pollution levels at the air monitoring stations
reflect local air quality conditions at the project site with varying degrees of accuracy. Table 3 presents
the composite of gaseous pollutants monitored from 2010 through 2012 at the Costa Mesa and Mission
Viejo stations.
Chambers Group, Inc. 20
20514
16 -34
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 2: Designations /Classifications for the Project Area
PollutapW
AveragingTime National Standards
California
Attainment Date'
StanclarcIS2
1979
1 -Hour
Nonattainment (Extreme)
1 -Hour Ozone (03)3
(0.12 ppm)
11/15/2010 (not attained)
1997
8 -Hour
Nonattainment (Extreme)
8 -Hour Ozone (03)°
(0.08 ppm)
6/15/2024
Nonattainment
2008
8 -Hour
Nonattainment (Extreme)
8 -Hour Ozone (03)
(0.075 ppm)
12/31/2032
1 -Hour (35 ppm)
Attainment (Maintenance)
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
8 -Hour (9 ppm)
6/11/2007 (attained)
Maintenance
1 -Hour
Unclassifiable /Attainment
a
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
(100 ppb)
Attained
Nonattainment
Annual
Attainment (Maintenance)
(0.053 ppm)
9/22/1998
1 -Hour (75 ppb)
Designation Pending/ Pending
Sulfur Dioxide (SOz)6
Attainment
24 -Hour (0.14 ppm)
Unclassifiable /Attainment
Annual (0.03 ppm)
3/19/1979 (attained)
Particulate Matter (PMlo)
24 -Hour
(150 µg /ma )
Nonattainment (Serious)
12/31/2006 (redesignation submitted)
Nonattainment
24 -Hour
Nonattainment
(35 µg /m)
12/14/2014
Particulate Matter (PM,,,)
Nonattainment
Annual
Nonattainment
(15.0 µg /m)
4/5/2015
3- Months Rolling
Nonattainment (Partial)8
Lead (Pb)
(0.15 pg /m3)
12/31/2015
Nonattainment
' Obtained from 2012 AQMP, SCAQMD, 2012. A design value below the NAAQS ford ata through the full year or smog season prior to the
attainment date is typically required for attainment demonstration.
2 Obtained from http:// www .arb.ca.gov /desig /adm /adm.htm.
3 1 -hour 03 standard (0.12 ppm) was revoked, effective June 15, 2005; however, the SCAB has not attained this standard based on 2008-
2010 data has some continuing obligations underthe former standard.
° 1997 8 -hour 03 standard (0.08 ppm) was reduced (0.075 ppm), effective May 27, 2008; the 1997 03 standard and most related
implementation rules remain in place until the 1997 standard is revoked by U.S. EPA.
5 New N021 -hour standard, effective August 2, 2010; attainment designations January 20, 2012; annual NO2 standard retained.
s The 1971 annual and 24 -hour 502 standards were revoked, effective August 23, 2010; however, these 1971 standards will remain in
effect until one year after U.S. EPA promulgates area designations for the 2010 SO, 1 -hour standard.
' Annual PM20 standard was revoked, effective December 18, 2006; redesignation request to Attainment of the 24 -hour PM,o standard is
pending with U.S. EPA
e Partial Nonattainment designation— Los Angeles County portion of SCAB only.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
21
16 -35
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 3: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Summary
Ozone (Oa)
Max 1 Hour (ppm)
0.097
0.093
0.090
Days > CAAQS (0.09 ppm)
1
0
0
Max 8 Hour (ppm)
0.076
0.077
0.076
Days > NAAQS (0.08 ppm)
1
1
1
Days > CAAQS (0.070 ppm)
2
2
1
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Max 1 Hour (ppm)
2.4
2.9
2.0
Days > NAAQS (20 ppm)
0
0
0
Max 8 Hour (ppm)
2.09
2.22
1.71
Days > NAAQS (9 ppm)
0
0
0
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO,)
Max 1 Hour (ppb) 70.0 60.5 74.4
Days > NAAQS (100 ppb) 0 0 0
Particulate Matter (PM,.)
Max Daily California Measurement
34
48
37
Days > NAAQS (150 pg /m')
0
0
0
Days > CAAQS (50 pg /m)
0
0
0
State Average (20 llglim)
ND
18.8
17.0
Particulate Matter (PM,_s)
Max Daily National Measurement
19.9
33.4
27.6
Days > NAAQS (35 jig/m')
0
0
0
National Average (15.0 M /m')
7.9
8.5
7.9
State Average (12 pg /m')
ND
ND
7.9
Abbreviations:
> = exceed ppm = parts per million ppb =parts per billion pg/m' = micrograms per cubic meter
CAAQS = California Ambient Air Quality Standard NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality
ND = Insufficient or No Data Bold = exceedance
Source: http: / /www.arb.ca.gov /adam/
5.3.2 Impact Analysis
(a) CEQA requires a discussion of any inconsistencies between a proposed project and applicable
general plans (GPs) and regional plans (CEQA Guidelines Section 15125). The regional plan that
applies to the proposed project includes the SCAQMD Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP).
Therefore, this section discusses any potential inconsistencies of the proposed project with the
AQMP.
The purpose of this discussion is to set forth the issues regarding consistency with the
assumptions and objectives of the AQMP and discuss whether the proposed project would
interfere with the region's ability to comply with federal and State air quality standards. If the
decision - makers determine that the proposed project is inconsistent, the lead agency may
consider project modifications or inclusion of mitigation to eliminate the inconsistency.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
22
16 -36
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that "New or amended GP Elements (including land use
zoning and density amendments), Specific Plans, and significant projects must be analyzed for
consistency with the AQMP" Strict consistency with all aspects of the plan is usually not
required. A proposed project should be considered to be consistent with the AQMP if it furthers
one or more policies and does not obstruct other policies. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook
identifies two key indicators of consistency:
(1) Whether the project will result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air
quality violations or cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of
air quality standards or the interim emission reductions specified in the AQMP (except
as provided for CO in Section 9.4 for relocating CO hot spots).
(2) Whether the project will exceed the assumptions in the 2012 AQMP or increments
based on the year of project buildout and phase.
Both of these criteria are evaluated in the following sections.
Criterion 1- Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations?
Based on the air quality modeling analysis conducted for the proposed project, short -term
construction impacts would not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD's regional
and local thresholds of significance. The air quality impact analysis also found that long -term
operations impacts will not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD regional, local,
and toxic air contaminant thresholds of significance. Therefore, the proposed project is not
projected to contribute to the exceedance of any air pollutant concentration standards and is
found to be consistent with the AQMP for the first criterion.
Criterion 2 - Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP?
Consistency with the AQMP assumptions is determined by performing an analysis of the
proposed project with the assumptions in the AQMP. The emphasis of this criterion is to ensure
that the analyses conducted for the proposed project are based on the same forecasts as the
AQMP. The Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide consists of three sections: Core Chapters,
Ancillary Chapters, and Bridge Chapters. The Growth Management, Regional Mobility, Air
Quality, Water Quality, and Hazardous Waste Management chapters constitute the Core
Chapters of the document. These chapters currently respond directly to federal and State
requirements placed on SCAG. Local governments are required to use these as the basis of their
plans for purposes of consistency with applicable regional plans under CEQA. For this project,
the City of Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Plan defines the assumptions that are
represented in the AQMP.
The proposed project consists of widening Newport Boulevard through adding a northbound
through lane from 30th Street to 32nd Street, adding a southbound through lane from Via Lido to
32nd Street, adding 6- foot -wide bike lanes on both sides of Newport Boulevard between 32nd
Street and Via Lido, and providing a connection to the existing bike lanes on 32nd Street. The
proposed project would also include the construction of a public parking lot on the west side of
Newport Boulevard with a minimum of 26 parking spaces, which would include reconfiguration
of the existing alley. The proposed project would not generate any additional traffic, and the
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
23
16 -37
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
only alteration to traffic patterns would occur from the minor reconfiguration of an existing
alley. The proposed project would not require a General Plan Amendment or zone change.
Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to exceed the AQMP assumptions for the
project site and is found to be consistent with the AQMP for the second criterion.
Based on the above, the proposed project will not result in an inconsistency with the SCAQMD
AQMP. Accordingly, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
(b) As shown above in Table 2, the proposed project area is designated as a federal and State
nonattainment area for ozone, PMto, and PM2.5. To estimate if the proposed project may
adversely affect the air quality in the region, the SCAQMD has prepared the CEQA Air Quality
Handbook to provide guidance to those who analyze the air quality impacts of proposed
projects. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook states that any project in the SCAB with daily emissions
that exceed any of the identified significance thresholds should be considered as having an
individually and cumulatively significant air quality impact. For the purposes to this air quality
impact analysis, a regional air quality impact would be considered significant if emissions exceed
the SCAQMD significance thresholds identified in Table 4.
Table 4: Regional Thresholds of Significance
Source: SCAQMD, htto: / /www.aamd.gov /ceaa /handbook /signthres.odf
Project - related construction air emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and
federal air quality standards in the project vicinity, even though these pollutant emissions may
not be significant enough to create a regional impact to the SCAB. In order to assess local air
quality impacts, the SCAQMD has developed Localized Significant Thresholds (LSTS) to assess the
project - related air emissions in the project vicinity. The SCAQMD has also provided Final
Localized Significant Threshold Methodology, which details the methodology to analyze local air
emission impacts. The Localized Significant Threshold Methodology found that the primary
emissions of concern are NO2, CO, PMto, and PM2.5-
The significance thresholds for the local emissions of NO2 and CO are determined by subtracting
the highest background concentration from the last three years of these pollutants from Table 3
above, from the most restrictive ambient air quality standards for these pollutants that are
outlined in the Localized Significant Thresholds'. Since PMto and PM2.S currently exceed the most
restrictive ambient air quality standards in the SCAB, their thresholds are based on SCAQMD's
Rule 403 allowable fugitive dust emissions limits; and background concentrations of PMlo and
PM2.5 are not factored into the threshold. Table 5 below shows the Localized Significant
Thresholds for NO, CO, and PMto and PM2.5 as well as the background concentrations and
resultant significance concentrations.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
24
16 -38
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 5: Local Thresholds of Significance
POW
. . LSTs Background Level'
Significance
NO3— 1 Hour Average (State)
0.18 ppm (338 pg /m3) 0.074 ppm (140 Vg/M3)
198 pg /m3
CO —1 Hour Average (State)
20 ppm (23,000 pg /m3) 2.9 ppm (3,335 pg /m)
19,665 Vg/M3
CO — 8 Hour Average (State /Federal)
9.0 ppm (10,000 pg /m3) 2.22 ppm (2,467 pg /m)
7,533 jig /m3
PM.— 24 Hour Average3
10.4 pg /m3 -
10.4 Vg/M3
PMzs — 24 Hour Average
10.4 Vg/M3 -
10.4 Vg/M3
Obtained from Table 3 above and based on the highest measured concentrations from the last 3 years at the Santa Clarita
Station.
Represents the maximum offsite concentrations allowed during construction.
3 Ambient air quality threshold based on SCAgMD Rule 403.Source: SCAgMD,
http://www.aqmd.gov/cega/handbook/signthres.pd f
Construction of the proposed project would create air emissions primarily from equipment
exhaust. The air emissions from the proposed project were analyzed through use of the
CalEEMod model (Appendix A).
Current project design would include the acquisition of approximately one acre of area that
includes land that currently includes the Wachovia Bank building, parking lots, and City property
including portions of a passive park and former City Hall property. The roadway area that would
be disturbed consists of approximately 4 acres and includes portions of Newport Boulevard, 32nd
Street, Finley Avenue, and Short Street. This results in a total area of approximately 5 acres that
would be disturbed /improved through development of the proposed project. Demolition
activities would include demolition of the existing vacant Wachovia Bank building, which
consists of approximately 11,700 square feet of building space. Grading and paving activities
have been based on a worst -case analysis of all 5 acres of the project site being graded and
paved.
Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to occur over a six -month period, beginning
September 2015 and ending March 2016. The grading and paving activities would occur over
multiple phases to allow for the continued use of the roadways as much as practical during
construction; however, in order to provide a worst -case scenario, this analysis is based on all
grading and paving occurring in one phase. Furthermore, the air quality analysis provided a
worst -case scenario by utilizing 2014 construction emissions regulations in the CalEEMod Model
prepared for the proposed project. Construction that is scheduled to begin in September 2015
may be subject to more stringent construction emissions regulations than were assumed in the
CalEEMod Model, and therefore, may emit less harmful emissions than under a construction
scenario beginning in 2014. Table 6 shows the estimated worst -case daily emissions that would
be predicted from each phase of the project.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
25
16 -39
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 6: Construction - Related Regional Emissions from the Proposed Project
Pollutant Emissions in pounds /dav
Activity
Demolition
4.73
50.56
37.90
0.04
3.31
2.51
Grading
3.94
41.19
27.75
0.03
9.09
5.60
Paving
2.62
25.26
15.89
0.02
1.58
1.35
SCAQMD Regional Threshold
75.00
100.00
55.000
150.00
150.00
55.00
Exceed Threshold?
No
No
No
No
No
No
Source: CaIEEMod Version 2013.2.2.
As shown in Table 6, construction- related emissions would not exceed SCAQMD regional
thresholds. In addition, construction emissions would be short -term, limited only to the period
when construction activity is taking place. As such, construction - related regional emissions
would be less than significant for the proposed project.
The proposed project's construction - related air emissions from fugitive dust and onsite diesel
emissions may have the potential to exceed the State and federal air quality standards in the
project vicinity even though these pollutant emissions may not be significant enough to create a
regional impact to the SCAB. The nearest sensitive receptors to the proposed project are homes
located adjacent to the parking lot for the vacant Wachovia Banking building, which would be
redesigned as a public parking lot.
The local air quality emissions from construction were analyzed using the SCAQMD's Mass Rate
LST Look -up Tables and the methodology described in Localized Significance Threshold
Methodology, prepared by SCAQMD, revised July 2008. The Look -up Tables were developed by
the SCAQMD in order to readily determine if the daily emissions of CO, NO., PMlo, and PM2.5
from the proposed project could result in a significant impact to the local air quality. The
emission thresholds were calculated based on the North Orange County Coastal source receptor
area, a disturbance of 5 acres, and the allowable emissions thresholds for CO, NO„ PMto, and
PM2.5 at 25 meters (82 feet), which is based on the LST Methodology that recommends using the
25 -meter threshold for any receptor located within 25 meters of construction activities. Table 7
shows the onsite emissions from the CalEEMod model for the different construction phases and
the calculated emissions thresholds.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
26
16 -40
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 7: Construction - Related Local Emissions
I"I
n. lifflllk�`_F
=P-Onsite
N -Ox
Pollutant Emissions
CID
in pounds/day
PIVI,�
PM,.,
Demolition
49.54
36.29
3.08
2.44
Grading
41.10
26.75
8.92
5.55
Paving
25.18
14.98
1.41
1.30
SCAQMD Threshold for 25 meters (82 feet) or less'
197.00
1,711.00
14.00
9.00
Exceed Threshold?
No
No
No
No
Notes:
' The nearest sensitive receptors are homes located adjacent to the project site. According to LST methodology any receptor
closer than 25 meters should be based on the 25 meter threshold.
Source: CalEEMod Version 2013.2.2, SCAQMD, 2010
The data provided in Table 7 shows that none of the criteria pollutants would exceed the
SCAQMD local emissions thresholds at the nearest sensitive receptors. Therefore, impacts
associated with construction - related local emissions would be less than significant.
(b) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not generate any additional traffic; the only
alteration to traffic patterns would occur from the minor reconfiguration of an existing alley,
which has minimal traffic volumes. Since the proposed project would not introduce any new
sources of emissions, the proposed project is not anticipated to create a net increase in
operational emissions. Accordingly, the proposed project would not violate an air quality
standard or contribute substantially to an existing or project air quality violation; and impacts
would be less than significant.
(c) Cumulative projects include local development as well as general growth within the SCAB;
however, the greatest source of emissions in the SCAB is from mobile sources. Therefore, from
an air quality standpoint, the cumulative analysis would extend beyond any local projects and,
when wind patterns are considered, would cover an even larger area. Accordingly, the
cumulative analysis for the project's air quality must be generic by nature. The project area is
out of attainment for ozone, PMto, and PMZ.S.
As discussed above in Section 5.3 -2(a), construction emissions from the proposed project would
not exceed the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance for criteria pollutants. Operation of
the proposed project would not generate any additional traffic, would only minimally alter
traffic patterns, and is not anticipated to create a net increase in operational emissions.
Therefore, cumulative net increases of nonattainment criteria pollutants would be less than
significant.
(d) As discussed above in Section 5.3 -2(a), local concentrations of construction emissions from the
proposed project would not exceed the SCAQMD local thresholds of significance for criteria
pollutants. The proposed project consists of a roadway widening project that includes the
relocation of public parking spaces and would not generate any additional traffic; the only
alteration to traffic patterns would occur from the minor reconfiguration of an existing alley,
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
27
16 -41
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
which has minimal traffic volumes. The proposed project would result in improving the LOS on
Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 32nd Street from LOS F to LOS D and between 32nd
Street and 30`h Street from LOS D to LOS B. The improvements to LOS would reduce the amount
of engine idling in the vicinity of the project site, which would reduce local concentrations of
carbon monoxide and toxic air contaminants. Accordingly, the proposed project would not
expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and impacts would be less
than significant.
(e) Minor sources of odors associated with the proposed project would primarily be associated with
the diesel equipment and application of asphalt pavement. Exhaust odors from diesel engines,
as well as emissions, may be considered offensive to some individuals. The diesel equipment
used during demolition and construction activities would be mobile equipment that would
constantly be changing locations, which would allow for the odors to disperse rapidly and not
impact any nearby receptors. The odors emissions from the application of asphalt pavement
would cease within a few hours upon the drying and hardening of the asphalt pavement.
Furthermore, the CEQA threshold of significance is set at a "substantial number of people' and,
due to the limited number of homes immediately adjacent to the proposed improvements, it is
unlikely that substantial number of people would be within an effective range of construction
activities. Therefore, impacts associated with odor during construction would be less than
significant.
The proposed project would consist of roadway improvements, would not generate any
additional traffic, and would only minimally alter traffic patterns. Therefore, a less than
significant odor impact would occur from operation of the proposed project. Accordingly,
impacts associated with odor during operation of the proposed project would be less than
significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
28
16 -42
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
5.4.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection within a fully urbanized
section of the City of Newport Beach and does not possess any habitat that would support
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Similarly, land surrounding
the proposed project site is also fully urbanized and does not possess any habitat that would
support species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Potential natural
habitat is limited to the aquatic environment within the Rivo Alto channel adjacent to the
western segment of 32nd Street. Construction of the proposed project would implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion from entering the waters of the Rivo Alto
channel adjacent to the proposed project that could impact aquatic species. No impacts would
occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
29
16 -43
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
4'
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(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 Wildlife 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 Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
(c)
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
❑
❑
11
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
E]
❑
1:1
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
5.4.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection within a fully urbanized
section of the City of Newport Beach and does not possess any habitat that would support
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Similarly, land surrounding
the proposed project site is also fully urbanized and does not possess any habitat that would
support species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Potential natural
habitat is limited to the aquatic environment within the Rivo Alto channel adjacent to the
western segment of 32nd Street. Construction of the proposed project would implement Best
Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion from entering the waters of the Rivo Alto
channel adjacent to the proposed project that could impact aquatic species. No impacts would
occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
29
16 -43
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
(b) The proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection within a fully urbanized
section of the City of Newport Beach and does not possess any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural communities. No impacts would occur.
(c) The proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection within a fully urbanized
section of the City of Newport Beach and does not possess any federally protected wetlands. No
impacts would occur.
(d) The proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection surrounded by commercial
and retail businesses within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach and does not
possess any wildlife corridors. No impacts would occur.
(e) The proposed project would not impact any mature trees or other biological resources
protected by the Newport Beach General Plan or Municipal Code. No impacts would occur.
(f) The City of Newport Beach is a signatory to the County of Orange Central & Coastal Subregion
Natural Community Conservation Plan & Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP /HCP), which provides
guidance for the creation of a multispecies /multihabitat preserve system and implementation of
a long -term management program. The primary goal of the NCCP /HCP is to preserve coastal
sage scrub and the species that utilize that habitat. The proposed project is located within a fully
urbanized area that does not possess any sensitive habitat and does not support any vegetation
or wildlife species subject to the provisions of the NCCP /HCP. Existing vegetation on the project
site consists of introduced landscaping that does not qualify as sensitive habitat. Additionally,
the proposed project site is not located within the boundaries of any of the biological resource
preserves or environmental study areas documented in the Natural Resource Element of the
City of Newport Beach General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with
the NCCP /HCP or Newport Beach General Plan. No impacts would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
30
16 -44
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Chambers Group prepared a Cultural Resources Letter Report documenting potential impacts to
historical and archaeological resources, which is included as Appendix B of this IS /MND.
5.5.1 Environmental Setting;
Regulatory Framework
The Cultural Resources Letter Report was prepared consistent with the provisions of CEQA, including
CEQA Statutes (Public Resources Code [PRC] §§ 21083.2 and 21084.1), CEQA Guidelines (Title 14
California Code of Regulations [CCR], § 15064.5), and PRC § 5024.1 (Title 14 CCR § 4850 et seq.). These
statutes and regulations, as amended, are summarized in an annually updated handbook (Association of
Environmental Professionals 2012). Properties expected to be directly or indirectly affected by a
proposed project must be evaluated for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility (PRC
§ 5024.1). The purpose of the CRHR is to maintain listings of the state's historical resources and to
indicate which properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from material
impairment and substantial adverse change.
The term historical resources includes a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in, the
CRHR; a resource included in a local register of historical resources; and any object, building, structure,
site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (CCR §
15064.5[a]). The criteria for listing properties in the CRHR were expressly developed in accordance with
previously established criteria developed for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP 1995:2) regards "any physical evidence of human
activities over 45 years old" as meriting recordation and evaluation. According to PRC § 5024.1(c) (1-4),
a resource may be considered historically significant if it retains integrity and meets at least one of the
following criteria. A property may be listed in the CRHR if the resource:
• is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of
California's history and cultural heritage;
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
31
16 -45
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
S'
CULTURAL RESOURCES.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(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
❑
®
El
El
outside of formal cemeteries?
Chambers Group prepared a Cultural Resources Letter Report documenting potential impacts to
historical and archaeological resources, which is included as Appendix B of this IS /MND.
5.5.1 Environmental Setting;
Regulatory Framework
The Cultural Resources Letter Report was prepared consistent with the provisions of CEQA, including
CEQA Statutes (Public Resources Code [PRC] §§ 21083.2 and 21084.1), CEQA Guidelines (Title 14
California Code of Regulations [CCR], § 15064.5), and PRC § 5024.1 (Title 14 CCR § 4850 et seq.). These
statutes and regulations, as amended, are summarized in an annually updated handbook (Association of
Environmental Professionals 2012). Properties expected to be directly or indirectly affected by a
proposed project must be evaluated for California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligibility (PRC
§ 5024.1). The purpose of the CRHR is to maintain listings of the state's historical resources and to
indicate which properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from material
impairment and substantial adverse change.
The term historical resources includes a resource listed in, or determined to be eligible for listing in, the
CRHR; a resource included in a local register of historical resources; and any object, building, structure,
site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant (CCR §
15064.5[a]). The criteria for listing properties in the CRHR were expressly developed in accordance with
previously established criteria developed for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP 1995:2) regards "any physical evidence of human
activities over 45 years old" as meriting recordation and evaluation. According to PRC § 5024.1(c) (1-4),
a resource may be considered historically significant if it retains integrity and meets at least one of the
following criteria. A property may be listed in the CRHR if the resource:
• is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of
California's history and cultural heritage;
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
31
16 -45
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
• is associated with the lives of persons important in our past;
• embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of installation, or
represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values; or
• has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
Under CEQA, if an archeological site is not a historical resource but meets the definition of a "unique
archeological resource" as defined in PRC § 21083.2, then it should be treated in accordance with the
provisions of that section. A unique archaeological resource is defined as follows:
• An archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that,
without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, it has a high probability of meeting
any of the following criteria:
o Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that
the public has a demonstrable interest in that information
o Has a special and particular quality, such as being the oldest of its type or the best
available example of its type
o Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic
event or person
Resources that neither meet any of these criteria for listing in the CRHR nor qualify as a "unique
archaeological resource" under CEQA PRC § 21083.2 are viewed as not significant. Under CEQA, "A non -
unique archaeological resource need be given no further consideration, other than the simple recording
of its existence by the lead agency if it so elects" (PRC § 21083.2[h]).
Impacts that adversely alter the significance of a resource listed in or eligible for listing in the CRHR are
considered a significant effect on the environment. Impacts to historical resources from a proposed
project are thus considered significant if the project (1) physically destroys or damages all or part of a
resource; (2) changes the character of the use of the resource or physical feature within the setting of
the resource, which contributes to its significance; or (3) introduces visual, atmospheric, or audible
elements that diminish the integrity of significant features of the resource.
Field Survey
Chambers Group established the Area of Potential Effect (APE) for the project by examining the project
footprint and the potential for impacts to cultural resources, including archaeological and built
environment resources, within and adjacent to the proposed project area. Based on these criteria, the
APE encompasses the project footprint, including the extent of construction activities such as staging or
laydown areas.
In accordance with regulations put forth by the State Office of Historic Preservation, any properties
within or near the project APE were subject to an intensive field investigation. Chambers Group
conducted an intensive cultural resources survey of the APE on November 11, 2013. During the field
Chambers Group, Inc. 32
20514
16 -46
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
survey, each of the properties within or adjacent to the project area was analyzed, photographed, and
recorded.
Records Search
In addition to the field survey, investigators executed general contextual and site - specific research for
the relevant properties and the project area. Sources used to conduct this research effort include the
City of Newport Beach Planning Department, the Newport Beach Historical Society, the Newport Beach
Public Library, and Los Angeles Public Library databases. Investigators also consulted the Caltrans
Historic Bridge Survey, California Historic Resources Inventory, and NPS Focus to determine if any
properties had been previously surveyed or evaluated.
A cultural resources records search for the project area and a 0.5 -mile search radius around the project
area was also performed at the South Central Coastal Information Center (SCCIC), at California State
University, Fullerton on October 30, 2013 (SCCIC# 13463.0150). The SCCIC search included a review of all
recorded sites and cultural resources reports on file for that specific area. The results from the
information center indicated eight previously- conducted investigations (OR643, OR644, OR666, OR1907,
OR2622, OR3709, OR4160, and OR4269) within the 0.5 -mile search radius. Of the eight previous
investigations, the SCCIC indicated that none of the studies overlapped with the project area.
The SCCIC identified two archaeological sites (30- 000059, 30- 000060) located within the 0.5 -mile search
radius. The site form for 30- 000059 describes the resource as traces of a camp site. Similarly, the site
form for 30- 000060 describes the resource as a camp site with "[c]lam, oyster, and a small univalve shell
form[ing] the bulk of the material." No archaeological sites are located within the project area.
In addition, the SCCIC search identified two aboveground historic resources (30- 177134, 30- 179867)
within the 0.5 -mile search radius. The site form for 30- 177134 describes the property as the Newport
Beach Harbor Tower, located at 3333 Pacific Coast Highway. The building was evaluated in 2011 and was
recommended for Status Code 6Y, indicating the property was determined ineligible for the National
Register of Historic Places (NRHP) by consensus through the Section 106 process, but it was not
evaluated for the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) or for local listing. The site form for
30- 179867 describes the property as the South Coast Shipyard, located at 2300 Newport Boulevard. The
building was evaluated in 2005 and was recommended for Status Code 3CD, indicating the property
appears eligible for the CRHR as a contributor to a CRHR - eligible historic district through a survey
evaluation. According to the SCCIC search, no aboveground historic resources were mapped within the
proposed project area.
The California Historic Resources Inventory (HRI) also lists 14 historic resources in the Historic Property
Data File (HPDF) that are located in Newport Beach. Of these resources, it appears that only one, Bridge
#55 -01, is located within the 0.5 -mile search radius. The bridge is listed in the HPDF under status code
711 as a property identified in a survey but not evaluated. None of the remaining 13 properties appear to
be located in the project area or the 0.5 -mile search radius. A list of the 14 historic resources identified
in the HPDF is provided in Table 8 below.
Chambers Group, Inc. 33
20514
16 -47
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 8: Historic Property Data File Listings
30- 162284
1953 National Boy
NA
7L —State Historical Landmark, Needs to be reevaluated
Scout Jamboree Site
using current standards.
30- 158591
Bank of Balboa /Bank of
611 East
1S— Individual Property Listed in the NR by Keeper. Listed
America
Balboa Blvd.
in the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR).
NA
NA
4302 Ford
6Y— Determined ineligible for National Register of Historic
Street
Places (NRHP) by consensus through Section 106 process —
Not evaluated for CRHR or Local Listing.
30- 162257
First Water -to -Water
Main St.
1CL— Automatically listed in the CRHR.
Flight Site
30- 158590
Balboa Inn
105 Main St.
1S— Individual Property listed in the NRHP by Keeper.
Listed in the CRHR.
NA
Balboa Island Fire
323 Marine
2CS— Individual Property determined eligible for listing in
House #4
Ave.
the CRHR by the SHRC.
30- 162261
Old Landing Site
State Route
7L —State Historical Landmark, Needs to be reevaluated
1
using current standards.
NA
Our Lady of Mount
1441 West
6Y— Determined ineligible for NRHP by consensus through
Carmel Church
Balboa Blvd.
Section 106 process — Not evaluated for CRHR or Local
Listing.
NA
Wild Goose Historic
2431 West
1S— Individual Property listed in the NRHP by Keeper.
Vessel
Coast Dr.
Listed in the CRHR.
30- 162258
McFadden Wharf
West Ocean
1CL— Automatically listed in the CRHR.
Front
30- 158585
Lovell Beach House
1242 West
IS— Individual Property listed in the NRHP by Keeper.
Ocean Front
Listed in the CRHR.
30- 158589
B.K. Stone Building,
2100 West
5S2— Individual Property that is eligible for Local Listing or
McFadden Building
Ocean Front
designation.
30- 158587
Bridge #55 -21
State Route
711 — Individual Property that is eligible for Local Listing or
1
designation.
30- 158586
Bridge #55 -01
State Route
713 — Individual Property that is eligible for Local Listing or
1
1 designation.
According to the California Points of Historical Interest (CPHI), the CRHR, the NRHP and other records
available for this proposed project, no eligible or listed historical resources appear to be located within
or immediately adjacent to the project area.
5.5.2 Impact Analysis
(a) Review of site survey data and background research determined that the properties located
within the proposed project area do not appear to meet the criteria of eligibility for inclusion in
the CRHR or to be considered historical resources for purposes of CEQA. Initial research has
yielded no information indicating an association with significant historic events or people
instrumental to the development of Balboa Peninsula, the City of Newport Beach, Orange
County, or the State of California (Criteria 1 and 2). While Newport Boulevard currently extends
in a manner roughly similar to the historic Pacific Electric Railroad alignment, all track features
have been removed, and the surrounding area has undergone extensive nonhistoric - period
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
34
EMU
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
development that has significantly undermined any potential historic integrity of the project
area.
The proposed project site does not significantly embody the distinctive characteristics of a style,
type, or period or represent the work of a master (Criterion 3). Instead, the present streetscape
appears to have numerous and significant alterations, including nonhistoric - period changes to
its form and massing as well as the addition of modern streetlights and adjacent commercial
construction. Additionally, the proposed project site lacks the character - defining features, such
as large signage or the generous use of concrete masonry exteriors and glass - enclosed
showrooms to be considered a distinctive example of a historic automotive corridor or route.
The proposed project would require a full property acquisition of the vacant Wachovia Bank
building located at 3201 Newport Boulevard and the adjacent property currently configured as a
parking lot. The vacant Wachovia Bank building would be demolished, and both properties
would be converted to a public parking lot. The vacant Wachovia Bank building was constructed
in 1974 and does not appear to be eligible for listing to the CRHR.
The proposed project site has neither yielded, nor appears likely to yield, information important
in prehistory or history (Criterion 4). Finally, the project area does not appear to contribute to
the significance of a larger historic district. While portions of the project area were once part of
the land used for the Pacific Electric Railway, the alignment was converted into a roadway in the
mid - twentieth century and has since been modified through the introduction of nonhistoric-
period elements, including commercial construction and streetscape improvements. As a result
of these significant alterations and loss of integrity, the project area does not appear to meet
the criteria of eligibility for inclusion in the CRHR as an individual property or as a contributor to
a potentially eligible historic district. Accordingly, the project is not expected to directly or
indirectly affect any CRHR - eligible properties or historical resources for purposes of CECA, and
impacts would be less than significant.
(b) The SCCIC identified two archaeological sites (30- 000059, 30- 000060) within 0.5 -mile of the
proposed project; however, these archaeological resources are outside the APE and would not
be impacted by project construction. Additionally, the field survey conducted for the proposed
project site did not identify any archaeological resources. Pursuant to the revised implementing
regulations of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) found at 36 CFR 800.4(a) (4),
Chambers Group contacted the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on
November 20, 2013, to request a review of their Sacred Lands Files. The NAHC responded on
November 21, 2013, stating that the Sacred Lands File search failed to identify Native American
cultural resources at the specified site.
As an additional measure in the tribal consultation process, the NAHC provided a list of tribal
governments and individuals to determine if any cultural places might be impacted by the
proposed action. Chambers Group sent an informational letter to the groups and /or individuals
identified by the NAHC and received two responses from the informational letter recipients,
both of which are presented in Exhibit 3 of Appendix B of this IS /MND. Chambers Group
received an email from the Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation, expressing concern over
the presence of archaeological and cultural resources on the project site. However, the email
did not specify the locations of any known archaeological or cultural resources, nor did the email
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
35
16 -49
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
identify any specific measures to address potential impacts to archaeological and cultural
resources.
Chambers Group also received a letter from the United Coalition to Protect Panhe, stating that
undisturbed areas of the project area were considered culturally sensitive. However, the letter
did not identify any known archaeological or cultural resources within the APE. The letter
requested that a literature review, SCCIC record search, and an archaeological survey be
conducted. As described above, Chambers Group completed the requested cultural resources
investigations and did not identify any significant cultural resources that would be impacted by
the proposed project.
Although no archaeological resources were identified within the project APE, construction of the
proposed project would have the potential to unearth unknown archaeological resources, which
may result in a significant impact. Implementation of CUL -1 would reduce impacts to
archaeological resources to a level less than significant. Implementation of CUL -1 would also
address the concerns expressed by tribal representatives regarding unknown archaeological
resources.
CUL -1: In the event that a cultural or paleontological resource is exposed during ground -
disturbing activities, construction activities (e.g., grading, grubbing, or vegetation
clearing) should be halted immediately near the discovery. A cultural resource specialist
and /or paleontological resource specialist who meet the Secretary of the Interior's
Professional Qualifications Standards (United States National Park Service 1983) should
then be retained to evaluate the find's significance under CEQA. If the discovery proves
to be significant, additional work, such as data recovery excavation, may be warranted
and should be discussed in consultation with the lead agency.
(c) Construction of the proposed project would have the potential to unearth unknown
paleontological resources, which may result in a significant impact. Implementation of CUL -1
would reduce impacts to paleontological resources to a level less than significant.
(d) Construction of the proposed project would have the potential to unearth human remains,
which may result in a significant impact. Implementation of CUL -2 would reduce impacts to
archaeological resources to a level less than significant.
CUL -2: The discovery of human remains is always a possibility during ground disturbances;
State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 addresses these findings. This
code section states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Orange County
Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section
5097.98. The Coroner must be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains
are determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the NAHC, which will
determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the
inspection of the site within 48 hours of notification and may recommend scientific
removal and nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated with
Native American burials.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
36
16 -50
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
5.6.1 Impact Analysis
(a)
(i) through (iii) Because southern California is a seismically active region, it is highly likely
that regional earthquakes would occur in the vicinity of the proposed project site. The
southern segment of the proposed project is identified as being located on the
Newport - Inglewood Fault Zone in the Safety Element of the Newport Beach General
Plan. Therefore, the proposed project site has the potential to be exposed to rupture of
a known earthquake fault and strong ground shaking during a seismic event associated
with the Newport - Inglewood Fault Zone or other faults in southern California. The
proposed project site is also identified as being susceptible to liquefaction in the Safety
Element of the Newport Beach General Plan.
The proposed project is limited, however, to roadway and intersection improvements,
and construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
37
16 -51
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
6'
GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
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 other
❑
❑
®
❑
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
®
❑
iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including
El
E-1
®
E-1
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑
❑
(b)
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
❑
❑
®
E]
topsoil?
(c)
Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or offsite
❑
®
❑
❑
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
(d)
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-
1-6 of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
❑
®
❑
❑
substantial risks to life or property?
(e)
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
El
E]
El
ystems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
5.6.1 Impact Analysis
(a)
(i) through (iii) Because southern California is a seismically active region, it is highly likely
that regional earthquakes would occur in the vicinity of the proposed project site. The
southern segment of the proposed project is identified as being located on the
Newport - Inglewood Fault Zone in the Safety Element of the Newport Beach General
Plan. Therefore, the proposed project site has the potential to be exposed to rupture of
a known earthquake fault and strong ground shaking during a seismic event associated
with the Newport - Inglewood Fault Zone or other faults in southern California. The
proposed project site is also identified as being susceptible to liquefaction in the Safety
Element of the Newport Beach General Plan.
The proposed project is limited, however, to roadway and intersection improvements,
and construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
37
16 -51
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
structures that could expose people to danger associated with seismic ground shaking
or liquefaction during a seismic event. Therefore, impacts would remain unchanged
from the existing condition.
iv) Topography of the proposed project site is relatively flat, with ground surface elevations
ranging from approximately 4 to 8 feet above mean sea level, and does not have the
potential for landslides. No impact would occur.
(b) The proposed project is located within a fully urbanized area that does not possess any exposed
soil. Construction of the proposed project would incorporate best management practices
(BMPs) to prevent erosion during excavation activities. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, and impacts
would be less than significant.
(c) Topography of the proposed project site is relatively flat, with ground surface elevations ranging
from approximately 4 to 8 feet above mean sea level, and does not have the potential for
landslides. Ninyo & Moore prepared a geotechnical investigation which determined that the
proposed project site is underlain by fill and alluvium generally consisting of very loose to
medium dense, silty sand with minor amounts of clayey sand and sandy to clayey silt (Appendix
C). Granular soils at the project site were found to be generally suitable for use as structural
backfill, provided deleterious materials were removed. Groundwater was encountered at depths
ranging from approximately 3 to 5 feet below the existing ground surface during the
geotechnical investigation, and it should be anticipated that groundwater would be
encountered at depths of approximately 3 feet or less. Soils beneath groundwater levels would
be wet and could potentially be unstable. Additionally, the proposed project site is identified as
being susceptible to liquefaction in the Safety Element of the Newport Beach General Plan.
Consequently, the proposed project would be constructed on soils that may be unstable,
resulting in the potential for lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. The
proposed project is limited, however, to roadway and intersection improvements, and
construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not introduce new structures
that could be susceptible to lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Potential
impacts would be based on whether soils beneath the improved roadway could be stabilized
during construction to provide a stable foundation. Providing a stable roadway foundation
would ensure that the potential for lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse
during seismic events did not increase over the potential in the existing condition.
Implementation of mitigation measures GEO -1 through GEO -4 would reduce impacts to a level
less than significant.
GEC -1: Project construction should incorporate the recommendations presented in the
geotechnical investigation prepared by Ninyo & Moore for the proposed project.
GEC -2: Soil excavated from below groundwater levels would be wet and would require drying in
order to be suitable for compaction. Similarly, trench excavations that extend below
groundwater would require dewatering in order to construct the proposed
improvements under a dry condition. Dewatering may include pumping groundwater
from well points within or outside the shored excavation. Dewatering should be limited
to no more than approximately 2 feet below the bottom of excavations. It is
recommended that the dewatering system design should be performed by a specialty
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
38
16 -52
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
dewatering contractor. Disposal of groundwater should be performed in accordance
with guidelines of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Wet soils should be
processed to near - optimum moisture content prior to their placement as trench backfill.
Fill material imported to the site (if any) should be granular, nonexpansive soil and free
of trash, debris, roots, vegetation, or other deleterious materials. " Nonexpansive" soils
can be defined as having a "very low" expansion potential in accordance with the
California Building Code (CBC) (an expansion index ranging from 0 to 20). Fill should
generally be free of rocks or hard lumps of material in excess of 4 inches in diameter.
Rocks or hard lumps larger than approximately 4 inches in diameter should be broken
into smaller pieces or should be removed from the site. Materials for use as imported
structural fill should be evaluated by a qualified and experienced engineer prior to
importing.
GEC -3: Trenches or other excavations that extend below groundwater and /or deeper than
approximately 4 feet should be shored. Shoring systems should be installed prior to
excavating below groundwater to avoid caving and undermining of adjacent
improvements. The contractor should retain a qualified and experienced engineer to
design the shoring system consistent with the parameters presented in the geotechnical
investigation prepared by Ninyo & Moore.
GEC -4: A qualified and experienced engineer should observe and test fill placement and
compaction. The frequency of testing and the time of observation will vary depending
on the contractor's method of operation and quality of work, as well as the
requirements of the governing agency.
(d) As described in section 5.6.1(c) above, it should be anticipated that groundwater would be
encountered at depths of approximately 3 feet or less. Soils beneath groundwater levels would
be wet and have the potential for expansion; however, implementation of mitigation measures
GEO -1 through GEC -4 would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
(e) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new structures that would
require septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. No impacts would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
39
16 -53
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
The impact evaluation presented in Section 5.7 is based on the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) impact analysis
prepared by Vista Environmental utilizing the CalEEMod model. Output files for the CaIEEMod Model
prepared for the proposed project are included as Appendix D of this IS /MND.
5.7.1 Impact Analysis
(a) A large amount of legislative and regulatory activities directly and indirectly affect climate
change and GHGs in California. The primary climate change legislation in California is AB 32, the
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 focuses on reducing GHG emissions in
California and requires that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year
2020.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the State agency charged with monitoring and
regulating sources of emissions of GHGs in California that contribute to global warming in order
to reduce emissions of GHGs. The CARB Governing Board approved the 1990 GHG emissions
level of 427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MMTCO2e) on December 6, 2007. Therefore,
in 2020, annual emissions in California are required to be at or below 427 MMTCO2e. The CARB
Board approved the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) in December 2008. The Scoping
Plan defines a range of programs and activities that will be implemented primarily by State
agencies but also include actions by local government agencies. Primary strategies addressed in
the Scoping Plan include new industrial and emission control technologies; alternative energy
generation technologies; advanced energy conservation in lighting, heating, cooling, and
ventilation; reduced - carbon fuels; hybrid and electric vehicles; and other methods of improving
vehicle mileage. Local government will have a part in implementing some of these strategies.
The Scoping Plan also calls for reductions in vehicle- associated GHG emissions through smart
growth that will result in reductions in vehicle miles traveled (CARB 2008).
The CalEEMod model used to calculate the criteria pollutant emissions presented in Section 5.3
Air quality was also utilized to calculate the GHG emissions associated with construction of the
proposed project (Appendix D). The CalEEMod model calculated that construction activities
would generate 154.14 metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MTCOZe). The proposed project consists
of a roadway widening project that includes the relocation of public parking spaces and would
not generate any additional traffic; the only alteration to traffic patterns would occur from the
minor reconfiguration of an existing alley, which has minimal traffic volumes. The proposed
project would result in improving the LOS on Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 32nd
Street from LOS F to LOS D and between 32nd Street and 301h Street from LOS D to LOS B. The
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
40
16 -54
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
7.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on
❑
❑
®
❑
the environment?
(b)
Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
❑
❑
®
❑
emissions of greenhouse gases?
The impact evaluation presented in Section 5.7 is based on the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) impact analysis
prepared by Vista Environmental utilizing the CalEEMod model. Output files for the CaIEEMod Model
prepared for the proposed project are included as Appendix D of this IS /MND.
5.7.1 Impact Analysis
(a) A large amount of legislative and regulatory activities directly and indirectly affect climate
change and GHGs in California. The primary climate change legislation in California is AB 32, the
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 focuses on reducing GHG emissions in
California and requires that GHGs emitted in California be reduced to 1990 levels by the year
2020.
The California Air Resources Board (CARB) is the State agency charged with monitoring and
regulating sources of emissions of GHGs in California that contribute to global warming in order
to reduce emissions of GHGs. The CARB Governing Board approved the 1990 GHG emissions
level of 427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MMTCO2e) on December 6, 2007. Therefore,
in 2020, annual emissions in California are required to be at or below 427 MMTCO2e. The CARB
Board approved the Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan) in December 2008. The Scoping
Plan defines a range of programs and activities that will be implemented primarily by State
agencies but also include actions by local government agencies. Primary strategies addressed in
the Scoping Plan include new industrial and emission control technologies; alternative energy
generation technologies; advanced energy conservation in lighting, heating, cooling, and
ventilation; reduced - carbon fuels; hybrid and electric vehicles; and other methods of improving
vehicle mileage. Local government will have a part in implementing some of these strategies.
The Scoping Plan also calls for reductions in vehicle- associated GHG emissions through smart
growth that will result in reductions in vehicle miles traveled (CARB 2008).
The CalEEMod model used to calculate the criteria pollutant emissions presented in Section 5.3
Air quality was also utilized to calculate the GHG emissions associated with construction of the
proposed project (Appendix D). The CalEEMod model calculated that construction activities
would generate 154.14 metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MTCOZe). The proposed project consists
of a roadway widening project that includes the relocation of public parking spaces and would
not generate any additional traffic; the only alteration to traffic patterns would occur from the
minor reconfiguration of an existing alley, which has minimal traffic volumes. The proposed
project would result in improving the LOS on Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 32nd
Street from LOS F to LOS D and between 32nd Street and 301h Street from LOS D to LOS B. The
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
40
16 -54
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
improvements to LOS would reduce the amount of engine idling on Newport Boulevard and
reduce vehicle trip travel times, which would result in a net reduction in GHG emissions from
operation of the proposed project. Even though the City of Newport Beach does not have an
established threshold for GHGs, this analysis proposes to use the "Tier 3" quantitative threshold
for residential and commercial projects as recommended by the SCAQMD (SCAQMD 2010). The
SCAQMD proposes that if a project generates GHG emissions below 3,000 MTCOZe, it could be
concluded that the project's GHG contribution is not "cumulatively considerable" and is
therefore less than significant under CEQA. Therefore, the proposed project's GHG contribution
is not "cumulatively considerable" and impacts would be less than significant.
(b) Neither the City of Newport Beach nor SCAQMD have any specific plans, policies, or regulations
adopted for reducing the emissions of GHGs. Construction emissions would be short -term and
within the SCAQMD's draft thresholds, and operation of the proposed project would not create
an increase in GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any
applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for reducing the emissions of GHGs; and impacts
would be less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
41
16 -55
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
5.8.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not introduce new land uses that would
require the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Construction of the
proposed project would be short -term and would involve the limited transport, use, disposal,
and storage of hazardous materials. Some examples of the hazardous materials that may be
handled include fuels, lubricating fluids, and solvents. These types of materials, however, are
not acutely hazardous. Adherence to regulations set forth by county, State, and federal agencies
regarding storage, handling, and disposal of these materials would reduce the potential for
hazardous materials impacts during construction to a level less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
42
16 -56
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
$
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
❑
❑
®
❑
disposal of hazardous materials?
(b)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonable foreseeable upset
E]
❑
®
El
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
(c)
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
El
El
E]
within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
(d)
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
❑
®
❑
❑
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment?
(e)
For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan had not been adopted, within
2 miles of a public airport or public use airport,
❑
❑
❑
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
(f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
❑
❑
❑
people residing or working in the project area?
(g)
Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
❑
❑
®
❑
emergency evacuation plan?
(h)
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
❑
❑
❑
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
5.8.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not introduce new land uses that would
require the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Construction of the
proposed project would be short -term and would involve the limited transport, use, disposal,
and storage of hazardous materials. Some examples of the hazardous materials that may be
handled include fuels, lubricating fluids, and solvents. These types of materials, however, are
not acutely hazardous. Adherence to regulations set forth by county, State, and federal agencies
regarding storage, handling, and disposal of these materials would reduce the potential for
hazardous materials impacts during construction to a level less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
42
16 -56
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
(b) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not introduce new structures that could create
an accident condition involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. The
existing roadway configuration within the proposed project site does not possess any identified
safety deficiencies. The proposed project would widen the existing Newport Boulevard roadway
and would not introduce any new curves that could create an accident condition. Furthermore,
the proposed project has been designed consistent with existing safety standards and would not
create unsafe conditions that could increase the risk of an accident. Therefore, the proposed
project would not create accident conditions that could result in the release of hazardous
materials. Adherence to regulations set forth by county, State, and federal agencies regarding
storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous materials would reduce the potential for impacts
associated with accident conditions during construction to a level less than significant.
(c) The proposed project site is not located within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school. Ensign Middle School is located approximately 0.80 mile northeast of the proposed
project site, while Newport Elementary School is located approximately 0.85 mile southeast of
the proposed project site. No impact would occur.
(d) Ninyo & Moore prepared an Initial Site Assessment (ISA) to identify recognized environmental
conditions (RECs), which are defined by ASTM as "the presence or likely presence of any
hazardous substances or petroleum products on a property under conditions that indicate an
existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or
petroleum products into structures on the property or into the ground, ground water, or surface
water of the property' (Appendix E). The ISA identified the following RECs within the project site
and surrounding area:
Newport Boulevard: The segment of Newport Boulevard within the proposed project site
has been a paved roadway since at least 1929 to the present. The road was identified as
Central Avenue from at least 1929 until 1945. From 1945 to the present the roadway was
identified as Newport Boulevard. The long -term use of the site as a roadway prior to the ban
on leaded gasoline in 1992 represents a REC based on the potential presence of aerially
deposited lead (ADL). In addition, lead is suspected to be present in the street paint striping.
3201 Newport Boulevard (Vacant Wachovia Bank Building): The property located at 3201
Newport Boulevard was occupied by a Southern Pacific Railroad ROW from at least 1929 to
1945. From approximately 1945 to at least 1966 this portion of the site was occupied by a
gasoline station. From approximately 1966 to at least 2008 this portion of the site was
occupied by a commercial building used as offices, a video rental store, and most recently,
as a bank. At the time of the site reconnaissance, the site building was unoccupied. The
presence of the Southern Pacific Railroad adjacent to the west of the site and crossing the
3201 Newport Boulevard portion of the site represents a REC based on the common
applications of pesticides, petroleum hydrocarbons, and metals in railroad ROWS. The
presence of a gasoline service station from approximately 1945 to at least 1966 also
represents a REC. Additionally, this building is suspected to contain asbestos - containing
materials (ACMs), lead -based paint (LBP), and universal waste based on the age of
construction.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
43
16 -57
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
3305 Newport Boulevard: The property located at 3305 Newport Boulevard was occupied
by a Southern Pacific railroad ROW from at least 1929 to 1945. From approximately 1945 to
the present, this property was occupied by commercial businesses including hair dressers
and restaurants. During the period from at least 1993 to 2002, Suite M of this property was
occupied by a dry cleaner. The presence of the Southern Pacific Railroad ROW and the dry
cleaner represent RECs.
2920 Newport Boulevard: The property located at 2920 Newport Boulevard was occupied
by a gasoline station, which represents a REC.
3020 Newport Boulevard: The property located at 3020 Newport Boulevard was occupied
by a gasoline station, which represents a REC.
3201 Newport Boulevard: The property located at 3201 Newport Boulevard was occupied
by a gasoline station, which represents a REC.
3010 Newport Boulevard: The property located at 3010 Newport Boulevard was occupied
by a printing business, which represents a REC.
3011 Newport Boulevard: The property located at 3011 Newport Boulevard was occupied
by an auto repair shop, which represents a REC.
3001 Newport Boulevard: The upgradient former UNOCAL #5301 facility located at 3001
Newport Boulevard was listed on the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) database.
Multiple monitoring wells were observed on the facility, and one monitoring well was
located in Newport Boulevard on the site. The facility is associated with a LUST case with the
status "Open — Eligible for Closure" as of 2013. The most recent maximum reported
concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) (3,700 micrograms per
liter [mg /1]) and benzene (780 mg /1) exceed the cleanup goals for the site and pose a
potential vapor encroachment condition (VEC). Based on the reported concentrations of
TPHg and benzene in groundwater, the shallow depth to groundwater in the vicinity, and
the location of the facility adjacent to the west and upgradient of the site, this facility
represents a REC.
Each of the RECs described above may contain hazardous materials that could be exposed
during project construction, potentially resulting in a significant impact. Implementation of
mitigation measures HAZ -1 through HAZ -3 would reduce these impacts to a level less than
significant.
HAZ -1: Perform a subsurface investigation and human health risk assessment at the site to
determine if hazardous materials are present due to past land uses. The subsurface
investigation and human health risk assessment shall be performed by a hazardous
materials specialist prior to construction. If the subsurface investigation identifies
hazardous materials that pose a significant risk to the environment or human health, the
project site would need to be remediated consistent with appropriate regulatory
standards.
HAZ -2: Conduct ADL and traffic paint stripe surveys for the site.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
44
16 -58
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
HAZ -3: Survey for ACMs, LBP, and universal waste should be conducted for the building at 3201
Newport Boulevard, prior to demolition.
(e) The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public
airport or public use airport. Furthermore, the proposed project is limited to roadway and
intersection improvements, and construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project
would not construct new structures that could that could disrupt air traffic patterns or place
people at risk in the event of an aircraft mishap. Therefore, implementation of the proposed
project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the proposed
project area. No impact would occur.
(f) No private airstrips are located within the City of Newport Beach. No impact would occur.
(g) Newport Boulevard is identified as a tsunami evacuation route in the City of Newport Beach
Emergency Management Plan (City of Newport Beach 2004). Project construction would require
temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street; however, a traffic control
plan would be implemented during construction to minimize disruptions due to lane closures
and maintain access for emergency response and evacuation. Once constructed, the increased
vehicular capacity and reduced traffic congestion on Newport Boulevard could potentially
improve emergency response and evacuation. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
(h) The proposed project site is located within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport
Beach near Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean and is not located near any wildlands. The
proposed project site is identified as having a fire susceptibility of "Low /None" in the Safety
Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. Furthermore, the proposed project is limited to
roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of a public parking lot. The proposed
project would not construct new structures that could expose people to a significant risk of loss,
injury, or death involving wildland fires. No impact would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
45
16 -59
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
5.9.1 Impact Analysis
(a) Implementation of BMPs during project construction would limit erosion and siltation to the
maximum extent practicable. Furthermore, the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
prepared for the proposed project identified operational BMPs that would prevent impacts to
water quality in the post - project condition. These operational BMPs include, but are not limited
to, common area litter control, common area catch basin inspection, street sweeping, storm
drainage system stenciling and signage, and use of efficient irrigation system and landscape
design. Additional operational BMPs are documented in the WQMP included as Appendix F of
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
46
16 -60
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
B
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Violate any water quality standards or waste
E]
❑
®
❑
discharge requirements?
(b)
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that a net deficit would occur in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
1:1
El
level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
(c)
Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
❑
❑
®
❑
river, in a manner which would result in a
substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site.
(d)
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, or substantially
E]
E]
El
increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or
offsite?
(e)
Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
L1
E]
El
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
(f)
Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
❑
❑
®
❑
(g)
Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
El
El
El
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
(h)
Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures
E]
❑
❑
which 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 failure of a levee or dam?
(j)
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
❑
❑
®
❑
5.9.1 Impact Analysis
(a) Implementation of BMPs during project construction would limit erosion and siltation to the
maximum extent practicable. Furthermore, the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
prepared for the proposed project identified operational BMPs that would prevent impacts to
water quality in the post - project condition. These operational BMPs include, but are not limited
to, common area litter control, common area catch basin inspection, street sweeping, storm
drainage system stenciling and signage, and use of efficient irrigation system and landscape
design. Additional operational BMPs are documented in the WQMP included as Appendix F of
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
46
16 -60
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
the IS /MND. Implementation of construction and operational BMPS would prevent impacts to
water quality standards and waste discharge requirements, and impacts would be less than
significant.
(b) Current project design would reduce the amount of impervious surfaces within the proposed
project site from 4.03 acres to 3.81 acres. This reduction of impervious surfaces would increase
the amount of stormwater percolating into the ground and improve groundwater recharge.
Furthermore, the proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and
construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct any new
structures that would use groundwater supplies. No impact would occur.
(c) The proposed project site is not located within, or near, the course of a stream or river. The
Hydrology Report prepared for the proposed project determined that runoff generated by
surrounding development mostly sheet flows onto the street, where it is conveyed by the street
gutters into the existing storm drain system (Appendix G). Some runoff from the surrounding
residential areas and commercial lots is conveyed by v- gutters located in the surrounding alleys
and is collected by the existing catch basins. The existing drainage pattern within the project site
is divided into two subareas. The southerly portion of the proposed project site generally flows
southeasterly towards Newport Boulevard and enters existing catch basins located in Newport
Boulevard. The existing storm drain located in 30`" Street conveys the flow easterly in an existing
36 -inch Reinforced Concrete Pipe (RCP) and ultimately discharges into Lower Newport Bay. The
runoff generated from the northerly portion of the proposed project site flows onto Newport
Boulevard and enters existing catch basins. The flow is conveyed by an existing 36 -inch storm
drain system located at the intersection with 32 "d Street and is discharged into the boat channel
that is a part of the Lower Newport Bay.
Implementation of the proposed project would not alter the general flow pattern and major
drainage boundary of the proposed project site. The existing catch basins will be relocated to
align with the new proposed curb and gutters to convey runoff to the existing storm drain
system in the post - project condition. Furthermore, implementation of BMPS during project
construction would limit erosion and siltation to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore,
the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the proposed
project site and would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite, and impacts
would be less than significant.
(d) As described in Section 5.9.1(c) above, the proposed project would not substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of the proposed project site. As described in Section 5.9.1(b) above,
the proposed project would reduce the amount of impervious surfaces within the proposed
project site and reduce the amount of stormwater sheet flow traveling to stormwater catch
basins. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite. No impacts would occur.
(e) As described in Section 5.9.1(b) above, the proposed project would reduce the amount of
impervious surfaces within the proposed project site and reduce the amount of stormwater
sheet flow traveling to stormwater catch basins. Additionally, the proposed project is limited to
roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of a public parking lot. The proposed
project would not construct any new structures that could generate runoff. Therefore, the
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
47
16 -61
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
proposed project would not 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. No impact would occur.
(f) As described in Section 5.9.1(a) above, implementation of construction and operational BMPs
would prevent impacts to water quality, and impacts would be less than significant.
(g) The proposed project would not construct any new housing. No impacts would occur.
(h) The proposed project would not construct any new structures that could impede or redirect
flood flows. No impacts would occur.
(i) The proposed project is not located within a dam or levee inundation area. No impacts would
occur.
(j) Topography of the proposed project site is relatively flat, with ground surface elevations ranging
from approximately 4 to 8 feet above mean sea level, and does not have the potential to be
subject to mudflow from landslides. The proposed project site is located within the 100 -year
flood zone and could be subject to a tsunami. Additionally, the proposed project could be
subject to a seismically induced seiche due to its location near the West Lido Channel. The
proposed project, however, would not introduce new structures that could expose people to a
tsunami or seiche. Therefore, impacts would remain unchanged from the existing condition.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
48
16 -62
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
5.10.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements and construction of
a public parking lot. Implementation of the proposed project would not permanently sever an
existing road or construct any new structures that could divide an established community. The
proposed project would improve connectivity within Newport Beach by introducing 6- foot -wide
bike lanes along both sides of Newport Boulevard between 32nd Street and Via Lido that would
provide a connection to existing bike lanes along 32nd Street west of Newport Boulevard. Project
construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and 32 "d
Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during construction to minimize
disruptions due to lane closures. Once constructed, the increased vehicular capacity and
reduced traffic congestion on Newport Boulevard could potentially improve access and
connectivity to the proposed project site and surrounding land uses.
Implementation of the proposed project would eliminate 26 existing curbside public parking
spaces on Newport Boulevard due to the roadway widening and introduction of bike lanes.
However, the proposed project would construct a new public parking lot with a minimum of 26
parking spaces at the northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and 32 "d Street intersection
to replace curbside public parking spaces eliminated on Newport Boulevard. Current project
design of the new public parking lot would require full property acquisitions of the vacant
Wachovia Bank building located at the northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and 32 "d
Street intersection and the adjacent property currently configured as a parking lot. Acquisition
and conversion of these two parcels to a public parking lot would not significantly impact
existing land uses since the Wachovia Bank building is currently unoccupied and for sale.
Furthermore, conversion of these properties would not significantly alter the existing land use
pattern due to the large number of commercial properties surrounding the proposed project
site. Current project design would also require a partial ROW acquisition of the commercial
property north of the vacant Wachovia Bank building. However, this partial ROW acquisition
would not impact the existing structure or any parking spaces currently located on the property.
Current project design would require dedication of 0.25 acre of land from the former City Hall
parcel located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
49
16 -63
Less than
LAND USE /PLANNING
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
10.
Would the project:
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Physically divide an established community?
❑
❑
®
❑
(b)
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
E]
E]
®
E]
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
(c)
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
❑
El
1:1
plan or natural community conservation plan?
5.10.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements and construction of
a public parking lot. Implementation of the proposed project would not permanently sever an
existing road or construct any new structures that could divide an established community. The
proposed project would improve connectivity within Newport Beach by introducing 6- foot -wide
bike lanes along both sides of Newport Boulevard between 32nd Street and Via Lido that would
provide a connection to existing bike lanes along 32nd Street west of Newport Boulevard. Project
construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and 32 "d
Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during construction to minimize
disruptions due to lane closures. Once constructed, the increased vehicular capacity and
reduced traffic congestion on Newport Boulevard could potentially improve access and
connectivity to the proposed project site and surrounding land uses.
Implementation of the proposed project would eliminate 26 existing curbside public parking
spaces on Newport Boulevard due to the roadway widening and introduction of bike lanes.
However, the proposed project would construct a new public parking lot with a minimum of 26
parking spaces at the northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and 32 "d Street intersection
to replace curbside public parking spaces eliminated on Newport Boulevard. Current project
design of the new public parking lot would require full property acquisitions of the vacant
Wachovia Bank building located at the northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and 32 "d
Street intersection and the adjacent property currently configured as a parking lot. Acquisition
and conversion of these two parcels to a public parking lot would not significantly impact
existing land uses since the Wachovia Bank building is currently unoccupied and for sale.
Furthermore, conversion of these properties would not significantly alter the existing land use
pattern due to the large number of commercial properties surrounding the proposed project
site. Current project design would also require a partial ROW acquisition of the commercial
property north of the vacant Wachovia Bank building. However, this partial ROW acquisition
would not impact the existing structure or any parking spaces currently located on the property.
Current project design would require dedication of 0.25 acre of land from the former City Hall
parcel located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
49
16 -63
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
(3300 Newport Blvd). This partial property dedication would not impact use of the property
since it is currently unoccupied, and dedication of 0.25 acre at the edge of property would not
affect future conversion of the former City Hall parcel to a new use. Similarly, current project
design would require dedication of 0.03 acre of the City -owned Gateway Park located at the
southwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Short Street (3531 Newport Boulevard).This partial
dedication would not negatively impact Gateway Park since the park has no existing recreational
amenities that could be affected, and the parcel would continue to offer opportunities for
passive recreation. Therefore, the proposed project would not dramatically change the
surrounding land use pattern or reduce parking, and impacts would be less than significant.
Implementation of the proposed project would result in some minor changes to access to the
existing circulation system. Acquisition of the two existing bank properties and roadway
modifications on 32nd Street would result in the closure of the alley access that bisects these
properties. However, the proposed project would preserve access to 32nd Street by
reconfiguring the alley to connect to the proposed public parking lot, which will include an
exit /entrance via Marcus Avenue. Additionally, the proposed project would remove the
westbound free -right turn lane on 32nd Street at Newport Boulevard. However, right turns onto
Newport Boulevard from westbound 32nd Street would be preserved on the modified
intersection. Construction of the proposed project may require relocation of the existing bus
stops on the segment of Newport Boulevard within the proposed project site; however, these
would be relocated within the proposed project site in close proximity to the existing bus stops
if is determined that an alternative location(s) would be necessary. Furthermore, bus stops
would be preserved on both sides of Newport Boulevard within the proposed project site.
Therefore, project design would preserve access to the existing circulation system, and impacts
would be less than significant.
(b) The proposed project would be consistent with the applicable policies of the City of Newport
Beach General Plan. The intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street has been identified
in the Circulation Element in Figure CE3 as an intersection to be improved to meet the
Circulation Element LOS Standards found in CE 2.1.1. The addition of one northbound and
southbound through lane to Newport Boulevard would be consistent with the existing
designation for this segment of Newport Boulevard as a Major Road (Six Lane Divided) in the
circulation element. Similarly, improvements and modifications to 32nd Street would be
consistent with the existing designation in the circulation element as a Commuter Roadway
(Two Lane Undivided) east of Newport Boulevard and a Secondary Road (Four Lane Undivided)
west of Newport Boulevard. The proposed project would be consistent with parking
requirements in the General Plan by constructing a new public parking lot to mitigate for loss of
the 26 existing curbside public parking spaces on Newport Boulevard. Furthermore, introduction
of 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport Boulevard would be consistent with
Circulation Element Policy CE 5.1.6 pertaining to alternative transportation. Additionally, the
proposed project would improve access to coastal resources and would not impact any
resources that qualify for protection in the Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan. Therefore, the
proposed project would be consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Coastal
Land Use Plan, and impacts would be less than significant.
(c) As described in Section 5.4.1(f) above, the City of Newport Beach is a signatory to the County of
Orange Central & Coastal Subregion NCCP /HCP, which provides guidance for the creation of a
multi- species /multi- habitat preserve system and implementation of a long -term management
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
50
16 -64
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
program. The proposed project is located within a fully urbanized area that does not possess any
sensitive habitat and does not support any vegetation or wildlife species subject to the
provisions of the NCCP /HCP. Existing vegetation on the project site consists of introduced
landscaping that does not qualify as sensitive habitat. Additionally, the proposed project is not
located within the boundaries of any of the biological resource preserves or environmental
study areas documented in the Natural Resource Element of the City of Newport Beach General
Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. No impacts would occur.
5.11 MINERAL RESOURCES
5.11.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project site is located on land identified as the Newport oil Field on the City of
Newport Beach General Plan EIR (City of Newport Beach 2006b); however, the proposed project
site and surrounding land uses do not include an oil well extracting oil from the Newport Oil
Field. Furthermore, construction of the proposed project would not affect the Newport Oil Field
due to the existing oil's presence well below the ground surface. Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. No impacts
would occur.
(b) The proposed project site and surrounding land uses are not delineated for mineral resource
recovery. The proposed project site consists of portions of the existing Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street roadways, a vacant bank and parking lot, and portions of commercial and public use
properties. Land uses surrounding the proposed project consist predominantly of commercial
and retail businesses. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability
of a designated locally important mineral resource recovery site. No impacts would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
51
16 -65
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
11
MINERAL RESOURCES
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and
❑
❑
❑
the residents of the state?
(b)
Result in the loss of availability of a locally -
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
❑
❑
El
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
5.11.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project site is located on land identified as the Newport oil Field on the City of
Newport Beach General Plan EIR (City of Newport Beach 2006b); however, the proposed project
site and surrounding land uses do not include an oil well extracting oil from the Newport Oil
Field. Furthermore, construction of the proposed project would not affect the Newport Oil Field
due to the existing oil's presence well below the ground surface. Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource. No impacts
would occur.
(b) The proposed project site and surrounding land uses are not delineated for mineral resource
recovery. The proposed project site consists of portions of the existing Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street roadways, a vacant bank and parking lot, and portions of commercial and public use
properties. Land uses surrounding the proposed project consist predominantly of commercial
and retail businesses. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability
of a designated locally important mineral resource recovery site. No impacts would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
51
16 -65
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.12 NOISE
The impact evaluation presented in Section 5.12 is based on the noise impact analysis prepared by Vista
Environmental, which is included as Appendix H of this IS /MND.
5.12.1 Environmental Setting
Noise and Groundbourne Vibration Fundamentals
Noise
Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal
activities, when it causes actual physical harm, or when it has adverse effects on health. The vibration of
sound pressure waves in the air produces sound. Sound pressure levels are used to measure the
intensity of sound and are described in terms of decibels. The decibel (dB) is a logarithmic unit that
expresses the ratio of the sound pressure level being measured to a standard reference level. A-
weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to a broad frequency
noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They
are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies that are audible to the human ear.
Noise Equivalent sound levels are not measured directly but are calculated from sound pressure levels
typically measured in dBA. The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level
containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. The peak traffic
hour Leq is the noise metric used by the Caltrans for all traffic noise impact analyses.
Chambers Group, Inc. 52
20514
16 -66
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
12.
Significant
With
Significant
Would the prof ct result in:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local
El
®
E]
El
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
(b)
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
El
11
®
El
vibration or groundborne noise levels?
(c)
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
❑
®
❑
❑
without the project?
(d)
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
❑
❑
®
❑
levels existing without the project?
(e)
For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan had not been adopted, within
2 miles of a public airport or public use airport ,
❑
El
❑
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
❑
E)
❑
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
The impact evaluation presented in Section 5.12 is based on the noise impact analysis prepared by Vista
Environmental, which is included as Appendix H of this IS /MND.
5.12.1 Environmental Setting
Noise and Groundbourne Vibration Fundamentals
Noise
Noise is defined as unwanted sound. Sound becomes unwanted when it interferes with normal
activities, when it causes actual physical harm, or when it has adverse effects on health. The vibration of
sound pressure waves in the air produces sound. Sound pressure levels are used to measure the
intensity of sound and are described in terms of decibels. The decibel (dB) is a logarithmic unit that
expresses the ratio of the sound pressure level being measured to a standard reference level. A-
weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to a broad frequency
noise source by discriminating against very low and very high frequencies of the audible spectrum. They
are adjusted to reflect only those frequencies that are audible to the human ear.
Noise Equivalent sound levels are not measured directly but are calculated from sound pressure levels
typically measured in dBA. The equivalent sound level (Leq) represents a steady state sound level
containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period. The peak traffic
hour Leq is the noise metric used by the Caltrans for all traffic noise impact analyses.
Chambers Group, Inc. 52
20514
16 -66
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
The Day -Night Average Level (Ldn) is the weighted average of the intensity of a sound, with corrections
for time of day, and averaged over 24 hours. The time of day corrections require the addition of 10
decibels to sound levels at night between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. The Community Noise Equivalent
Level (CNEL) is similar to the Ldn except that it has adds another 4.77 dB to sound levels during the
evening hours between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. These additions are made to the sound levels at these
time periods because during the evening and nighttime hours, when compared to daytime hours,
ambient noise levels decrease, creating an increased sensitivity to sounds in the receptors. For this
reason the sound seems louder in the evening and nighttime hours and is weighted accordingly. The City
of Newport Beach relies on the CNEL noise standard to assess transportation - related impacts on noise
sensitive land uses.
Another noise descriptor that is used primarily for the assessment of aircraft noise impacts is the Sound
Exposure Level, which is also called the Single Event Level (SEL). The SEL descriptor represents the
acoustic energy of a single event (i.e., an aircraft overflight) normalized to one - second event duration.
This is useful for comparing the acoustical energy of different events involving different durations of the
noise sources. The SEL is based on an integration of the noise during the period when the noise first
rises within 10 dBA of its maximum value and last falls below 10 dBA of its maximum value. The SEL is
often greater than 10 dBA or more than the Maximum noise level (LMAX) since the SEL logarithmetically
adds the Leq for each second of the duration of the noise.
Vibration
Groundborne vibrations consist of rapidly fluctuating motions within the ground that have an average
motion of zero. The effects of groundborne vibrations typically only cause a nuisance to people, but at
extreme vibration levels damage to buildings may occur. Although groundborne vibration can be felt
outdoors, it is typically only an annoyance to people indoors although the associated effects of the
shaking of a building can be notable. Groundborne noise is an effect of groundborne vibration and exists
only indoors, since it is produced from noise radiated from the motion of the walls and floors of a room
and may also consist of the rattling of windows or dishes on shelves.
Sseveral different methods are used to quantify vibration amplitude such as the maximum
instantaneous peak in the vibrations velocity, which is known as the peak particle velocity (PPV) or the
root mean square (rms) amplitude of the vibration velocity. Due to the typically small amplitudes of
vibrations, vibration velocity is often expressed in decibels and is denoted as (LJ and is based on the rms
velocity amplitude. A commonly used abbreviation is "VdB," when Lv is based on the reference quantity
of 1 micro inch per second.
Typically, developed areas are continuously affected by vibration velocities of 50 VdB or lower. These
continuous vibrations are not noticeable to humans, whose threshold of perception is around 65 VdB.
Offsite sources that may produce perceptible vibrations are usually caused by construction equipment,
steel - wheeled trains, and traffic on rough roads, while smooth roads rarely produce perceptible
groundborne noise or vibration.
Additional details regarding the fundamentals of noise and vibration can be found in Appendix H.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
53
16 -67
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Regulatory Setting
State Regulations
Noise
California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control
Established in 1973, the California Department of Health Services Office of Noise Control (ONC) was
instrumental in developing regularity tools to control and abate noise for use by local agencies. One
significant model is the "Land Use Compatibility for Community Noise Environments Matrix," which
allows the local jurisdiction to clearly delineate compatibility of sensitive uses with various incremental
levels of noise and which is shown below in Figure 3.
California Administrative Code
Title 24, Chapter 1, Article 4 of the California Administrative Code (California Noise Insulation Standards)
requires noise insulation in new hotels, motels, apartment houses, and dwellings (other than single -
family detached housing) that provides an annual average noise level of no more than 45 dBA CNEL.
When such structures are located within a 60 -dBA CNEL (or greater) noise contour, an acoustical
analysis is required to ensure that interior levels do not exceed the 45 -dBA CNEL annual threshold. In
addition, Title 21, Chapter 6, Article 1 of the California Administrative Code requires that all habitable
rooms, hospitals, convalescent homes, and places of worship shall have an interior CNEL of 45 dB or less
due to aircraft noise.
Vibration
Title 14 of the California Administrative Code Section 15000 requires that all state and local agencies
implement CEQA Guidelines, which requires the analysis of exposure of persons to excessive
groundborne vibration; however, no statute has been adopted by the state that quantifies the level at
which excessive groundborne vibration occurs.
Caltrans issued the Transportation- and Construction - Induced Vibration Guidance Manual in 2004. The
manual provides practical guidance to Caltrans engineers, planners, and consultants who must address
vibration issues associated with the construction, operation, and maintenance of Caltrans projects. This
manual is also used as a reference point by many lead agencies and CEQA practitioners throughout
California, as it provides numeric thresholds for vibration impacts. Thresholds are established for
continuous (construction - related) and transient (transportation - related) sources of vibration, which
found that the human response becomes distinctly perceptible at 0.25- inch -per- second PPV for
transient sources and 0.04- inch -per- second PPV for continuous sources.
Chambers Group, Inc. 54
20514
..:
Table o s Use
Noise Compallibilify Mairix
Larid'Use Cara offer
Co>irmurVl Noise E uivatent Levei' CNEL
uses
Residential
Single Family, Two Family, Multiple Family
I A
A
B
:C
C
D
D
Residential
Mixed Use
A
A
A
C
C
C
D
Residential
Mobile Home
A
A,
I B
G
G
D
D
Commercial
Hotel, Motel, Transient Lodging
A
A
B
B
C
C
D
Regional,
_District
Commercial e
Regional, Village
Commercial Retail, Bank, Restaurant, Movie Theatre
A
A
A
A
B
B
C
Districl, Special
Commercial Industrial
Office Budding, Research and Development,
I A
A
A
B
1' B i�
C
D.
Institutional
Professional Offices, City Office Building
!_
I
_
Commercial V
tional
Recreational
Amphitheatre, Concert Hall Auditorium, Meeting Hall
B
B
C
C
D
D
D
Institutio nal
Civic Center
Commercial
Children's Amusement Park, Miniature Golf Course,
A
A
A
B?
B
D
D
Recreation
lGo-earl Track, Equestrian Center, Sports pub
I
_
Commercial c _
General, Special
Automobile Service Station, Auto Dealership,
_[
A
A
A
s
A
B
B
B
Manufacturing. Warehousing, Wholesale, Utilities
Industrial, Institutional
Institutional
Hospital, Church,llGxary, Schools' c�assrdom
A
A
B
C
C
D
D
Open Space
jparks
A
A
A
B
ry C
D
D
_
Oper1'Space
Golf Course, Cemeteries, Nature Centers Wildlife
Reserves, Wildife Habitat
A
A
A
Ay
B
C
C'
`
Agriculture
,Agriculture
A
A
A
I A
A
I A
A
SOURCE: Newport Beach,
2000
Zone A Clearly Compatible - Specified land'use,is satisfactory, based uponthe assumption thatany buildings involved are of normal conventional
construction wtihout any 'special
noise insulation requirements:
Zone B. Normally Compalible"—Flew construction or development should.he undertaken only after detailed andos of the noise reduction
requirements and are made and
needed noise insulation features in the design are.detemdned Convenfiaial:construction. Wth closed virindows and
fresh air supply systems or airconditioning, will normally suffice.
Zone C: Normally lncompatibl"ewcondruction or development chould generally be discouraged. If new construction ordevelopmerd does proceed,
a detailed analysis of noise' reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
Zone D; Clearly lnwrnpalible�—New construction or development should generally not be undertaken.
S011RCe'Citykb& =Beach tier-
PIan.24L8.
Figure 3
Newport Ave /32nd
Street IS /MND
Land Use Compatibility Matrix
Name: 20514 Fig 3 Land DseMatri Mxd �,uA1a
Date Saved: Author:
11/22/2013,
msimx. mons
16 -69
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Local Regulations
The City of Newport Beach
The Noise Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan establishes acceptable noise levels within
the proposed project area. Relevant goals and policies from the noise element are presented below.
Goal N1 Noise Compatibility — Minimize land use conflicts between various noise sources and
other human activities.
Policy N1.8 Significant Noise Impacts
Require the employment of noise mitigation measures for existing sensitive uses when a
significant noise impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs when an increase
in the ambient CNEL is produced by new development impacting existing sensitive uses.
The CNEL increase is shown in Table 9 below
Table 9: City of Newport Beach Significant Noise Impacts
55
3
60
2
65
1
70
1
Over 75
Any increase is considered significant
Source: City of Newport Beach.
Goal N2 Minimize motor vehicle traffic and boat noise impacts on sensitive noise receptors.
Policy 2.6 Barrier Construction Funding
Establish a program to secure funding for the construction of noise barriers to protect
private outdoor yard areas along arterial roadways where existing homes are exposed
to noise levels above the City noise standards and develop a priority program for the
construction of such barriers. A potential source of such funding may be a fee for new
projects which generate new traffic within the City as well as road improvement funds
where road improvements are made. The amount of these fees should be proportional
to the amount of the new traffic that is caused by the new project. It should be
recognized that noise barriers will not always be feasible mitigation to roadway noise.
Noise barriers are most feasible for single - family homes where the rear yards are
adjacent to the roadway. The feasibility of other situations should be evaluated on a
case -by -case basis.
Goal NS Minimize excessive construction - related noise.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
56
16 -70
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Policy N5.1 Limiting Hours of Activity
Enforce the limits on hours of construction activity.
City of Newport Beach Municipal Code
The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code establishes the following applicable standards related to
noise.
Section 10.28.040 Construction Activity— Noise Regulations.
A. Weekdays and Saturdays. No person shall, while engaged in construction, remodeling,
digging, grading, demolition, painting, plastering or any other related building activity,
operate any tool, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud noise that
disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the
vicinity, on any weekday except between the hours of seven a.m. and six - thirty p.m., nor
on any Saturday except between the hours of eight a.m. and six p.m.
B. Sundays and Holidays. No person shall, while engaged in construction, remodeling,
digging, grading, demolition, painting, plastering or any other related building activity,
operate any tool, equipment or machine in a manner which produces loud noise that
disturbs, or could disturb, a person of normal sensitivity who works or resides in the
vicinity, on any Sunday or any federal holiday.
C. No landowner, construction company owner, contractor, subcontractor, or employer
shall permit or allow any person or persons working under their direction and control to
operate any tool, equipment or machine in violation of the provisions of this section.
D. Exceptions.
1. The provisions of this section shall not apply to emergency construction work
performed by a private party when authorized by the Building Director or designee.
2. The maintenance, repair or improvement of any public work or facility by public
employees, by any person or persons acting pursuant to a public works contract, or
by any person or persons performing such work or pursuant to the direction of, or
on behalf of, any public agency; provided, however, this exception shall not apply to
the City of Newport Beach, or its employees, contractors or agents, unless:
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
a.The City Manager or department director determines that the maintenance,
repair or improvement is immediately necessary to maintain public services;
b.The maintenance, repair or improvement is of nature that cannot feasibly
be conducted during normal business hours;
c. The City Council has approved project specifications, contract provisions, or
an environmental document that specifically authorizes construction during
hours of the day which would otherwise be prohibited pursuant to this
section.
57
16 -71
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Existing Noise Conditions
Noise measurements were taken in the vicinity of the proposed project site to determine the existing
noise level environment. The field survey noted that noise within the proposed project area is generally
characterized by vehicular traffic on the nearby roadways as well as from activities at the nearby
commercial uses. Three noise monitoring locations were selected in order to obtain noise
measurements of the current noise levels in the proposed project area and to provide a baseline for any
potential noise impacts that may be created by development of the proposed project. The noise
measurement sites were selected to provide a representative sampling of the noise levels created by
nearby noise sources as well as experienced by nearby sensitive receptors. Descriptions of the noise
monitoring sites are provided below in Table 10, and Figure 4 shows the noise monitoring site locations.
Appendix H includes a photo index of the proposed project area and noise level measurement locations.
The results of the noise level measurements are presented in Table 10. The measured sound pressure
levels in dBA have been used to calculate the minimum and maximum Leq averaged over 1 -hour
intervals. Table 10 also shows the Leq, Lora„ and CNEL, based on the entire measurement time. Noise
monitoring data printouts are included in Appendix H.
Table 10: Existing (Ambient) Noise Level Measurements
Source: Noise measurements taken with three Extech Model 407780 Type 2 integrating sound level meters between Thursday
November 7, 2013, and Friday November 8, 2013.
Table 10 shows that all noise measurements currently exceed the City of Newport Beach's normally
acceptable residential and hotel noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
58
16 -72
Located on a tree across the alley
from the home at 522 '/: Clubhouse
Avenue, approximately 75 feet
56.0
69.8
A
south of Short Street centerline and
66.4
96.3
3:15 a.m.
2 :49 p.m.
71.3
90 feet west of Newport Boulevard
centerline.
Located on a power pole near the
proposed public parking lot,
approximately 15 feet southwest of
48.8
72.4
B
63.6
94.2
67.6
Marcus Avenue centerline and 60
3:16 a.m.
1:22 p.m.
feet northwest of 32nd Street
centerline.
Located on a tree in front of the
former City Hall approximately 140
55.2
71.4
C
feet east of Newport Boulevard
66.6
97.6
3:28 a.m.
1:16 p.m.
71.0
centerline.
Source: Noise measurements taken with three Extech Model 407780 Type 2 integrating sound level meters between Thursday
November 7, 2013, and Friday November 8, 2013.
Table 10 shows that all noise measurements currently exceed the City of Newport Beach's normally
acceptable residential and hotel noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
58
16 -72
�A n r �■ - -` •_ + ' � ' fin:. '•
fj
I �
1 Y.
` I' 'fir I, u.. �� .- • `t
y �/► � may\,!,/- t ; I �
owl
G -
i
_ w
{� LEGEND
aA Noise Measurement Location
LRGE, r00.f. tam.
Figure 4
Newport Ave /32nd Street IS /MND
Noise Measurement Locations
Name'. 20514 Fig 4 N.,seMemtLO.t,.ns Mxtl
Date Saved: 11122/2013, Author: maimmona'sn+ a-.•
1 Fi -7.4
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.12.2 Impact Analysis
(a) Construction Noise
Impacts associated with project construction were calculated with the Federal Highway
Administration's (FHWA) Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), which is based on
compiled noise measurement data regarding the noise - generating characteristics of several
different types of construction equipment. Table 11 below provides a list of the construction
equipment anticipated to be used for each phase of construction.
Table 11: Construction Equipment Noise Emissions and Usage Factors
Demolition
Number
of
Acoustical
Use
Spec 721.560
Lmax at
Actual
Measured
3
Lmax
Equipment
Description
bulldozer
2
40
85
82
Grading
excavator
1
40
85
Equipment
grader
Factorl
(percent)
50 feet2
(dBA, slow3)
at 50
feet4
(dBA, slow3)
85
Demolition
concrete /industrial saw
1
20
90
90
excavator
3
40
85
81
bulldozer
2
40
85
82
Grading
excavator
1
40
85
81
grader
1
40
85
N/A
bulldozer
1
40
85
82
tractor, loader orbackhoes
3
40
84
N/A
Paving
paver
2
50
85
77
paving equipment
2
50
85
77
roller
2
20
85
80
Notes:
' Acoustical use factor is the percentage of time each piece of equipment is operational during a typical workday.
1 Spec 721.560 is the equipment noise level utilized by the RCNM program.
3 The "slow" response averages sound levels over 1- second increments. A "fast" response averages sound levels over 0.125 -
second increments.
° Actual Measured is the average noise level measured of each piece of equipment during the Central Artery/Tunnel project
in Boston, Massachusetts, primarily during the 1990s.
s For the tractor /loader /backhoe, the tractor noise level was utilized, since it is the loudest of the three types of equipment.
Source: Federal Highway Administration 2006 and Vista Environmental 2013.
Construction noise impacts to the nearby sensitive receptors have been calculated according to
the equipment noise levels and usage factors listed in Table 11 and through use of the RCNM.
For each phase of construction, the nearest piece of equipment was placed at the shortest
distance of the proposed activity to the nearest home; and each subsequent piece of equipment
was placed an additional 50 feet away.
Construction of the proposed project would include demolition of an existing structure and
roadway areas; partial regrading of roads; and paving of roads, parking lots, and sidewalks. The
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
I
16 -74
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
nearest sensitive receptor to the proposed improvements is a home located adjacent to the
proposed public parking lot on Marcus Avenue. Section 10.28.040 of the City's Municipal Code
exempts from the City's noise standards construction activities that occur between 7:00 a.m.
and 6:30 p.m. on weekdays and between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and no
construction is allowed on Sundays and holidays. Section 10.28.040 provides an exception for
public work projects, provided the City Manager or department director determines that the
construction activity cannot be feasibly conducted during normal business hours. Through
adherence to the limitation of allowable construction times provided in Section 10.28.040, the
construction noise levels would not exceed any standards; and impacts would be less than
significant.
Operations - Related Noise
The proposed project would result in additional vehicular lanes and off - street parking spaces,
which may result in an increase in operational noise in excess of City standards for nearby
residential uses. Policy N1.8 of the General Plan details the noise increases allowed from a
project before a significant impact would occur, which consists of a 3 -dBA increase where the
ambient noise is 55 dBA CNEL or less, a 2 -dBA CNEL increase where the ambient noise is
between 55 and 60 dBA CNEL, a 1 -dBA CNEL increase where the ambient noise is between 60
and 70 dBA CNEL, and any increase where the ambient noise exceeds 75 dBA CNEL.
In order to quantify operational noise impacts at the nearby homes, the noise levels were
calculated through use of the SoundPlan noise prediction model. The Sound Plan model analyzed
the exterior noise levels at representative homes in the vicinity of the proposed project. The
results are provided below in Table 12. The Sound Plan model printouts are provided in Appendix
H. Figure 5 shows the existing noise contours, and Figure 6 shows the existing with project noise
contours.
Table 12: Proposed Project Noise Impacts at Nearby Homes Prior to Mitigation
:isting (dBA
With Project
Increase City
1
On Clubhouse Drive north of Short Street
68.6
69.4
0.8
+1 dBA
2
On Clubhouse Drive south of Short Street
68.3
68.8
0.5
+1 dBA
3
On Clubhouse Drive south of parking lot
65.1
65.3
0.2
+1 dBA
4
On Clubhouse Drive north of Finley Ave
66.0
66.5
0.5
+1 dBA
5
On Clubhouse Drive south of Finley Ave
60.9
61.5
0.6
+1 dBA
6
On Alley west of Las Fajitas
53.4
53.8
0.4
+3 dBA
7
On Marcus Ave north of parking lot
61.3
63.9
2.6
+1 dBA
8
On 32nd Street and Marcus Avenue
65.1
65.8
0.7
+1 dBA
9
On 30th Street
59.9
60.2
0.3
+2 dBA
10
On 31't Street
63.9
63.9
0.0
+1 dBA
Source: Sound Plan Version 7.2.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
61
16 -75
Noise level
dBA CNEL
V = <=45
Signs and symbols
Line
Area
Road axis
Emission line
Surface
Wall
inside tunnels
Parking lot
= Main building
--I Base line
Point receiver
Figure 5
Newport Ave /32nd Street IS /MND
Existing Noise Contours
Name'. 20514 Fl0 5 E.StN.odG.ntOu,,MXd
Date Saved: 1112212013, Author: msimmons
45 <
<= 50
50 <
<= 55
55 <
<= 60
60 <
<= 65
65 <
<= 70
�I
70 <
75 <
<= 75
Signs and symbols
Line
Area
Road axis
Emission line
Surface
Wall
inside tunnels
Parking lot
= Main building
--I Base line
Point receiver
Figure 5
Newport Ave /32nd Street IS /MND
Existing Noise Contours
Name'. 20514 Fl0 5 E.StN.odG.ntOu,,MXd
Date Saved: 1112212013, Author: msimmons
T110
Noise level
dBA CNEL
Signs and symbols
f(
<= 45
45 <
<= 50
50 <
<= 55
55 <
<= 60
60 <
<= 65
65 <
< <= 70
70 <
<= 75
75 <
Parking lot
Signs and symbols
f(
Line
fJ I�
Area
Road axis
Emission line
Surface
Wall
inside tunnels
Parking lot
Main building
Base line
Point receiver
Figure 6
Newport Ave /32nd Street IS /MND
Existing with Project Noise Contours
Name: 20514 Fig 6 ExstwithPmjm,INmaeC toum.Mxd 'tl� �H�rweeu
Date Saved: 11/22/2013, Author. msimmons �•' uwx
16 -77
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 12 shows that the noise level contributions from the proposed project would range from
0.0 to 2.6 dBA. Table 12 also shows that the project noise contribution to Receiver 7 would
exceed the noise contribution standard of plus one dBA detailed in Policy N1.8 of the General
Plan. This would be considered a significant impact.
Mitigation measure N01 -1 would require the project applicant to raise the existing wall along
the shared property line of the proposed public parking lot and the home at 3206 Marcus
Avenue to a minimum of 6 feet high. The proposed project's noise impacts have been
recalculated, based on the 6- foot -high sound wall, and the results are shown below in Table 13.
Table 13: Mitigated Proposed Project Noise Impacts at Nearby Homes
Receiver Location of Home Existing (dBA
With Project
Increase City
1
On Clubhouse Drive north of Short Street
68.6
69.4
0.8
+1 dBA
2
On Clubhouse Drive south of Short Street
68.3
68.8
0.5
+1 dBA
3
On Clubhouse Drive south of parking lot
65.1
65.3
0.2
+1 dBA
4
On Clubhouse Drive north of Finley Ave
66.0
66.5
0.5
+1 dBA
5
On Clubhouse Drive south of Finley Ave
60.9
61.5
0.6
+1 dBA
6
On Alley west of Las Fajitas
53.4
53.8
0.4
+3 dBA
7
On Marcus Ave north of parking lot
61.3
61.4
0.1
+1 dBA
8
On 32nd Street and Marcus Avenue
65.1
65.7
0.6
+1 dBA
9
On 30`h Street
59.9
60.2
0.3
+2 dBA
10
On 31" Street
63.9
63.8
0.0
+1 dBA
Source: FHWA RD -77 -108 Model.
Table 13 shows that implementation of NOI -1 would reduce the project contribution to Receiver
7 to a less than significant level.
N01 -1: The project applicant shall either raise the existing wall along the shared property line of
the proposed public parking lot and the home at 3206 Marcus Avenue to a minimum of
6 feet high or construct a new 6 -foot high wall immediately south of the existing wall
and located entirely on City property. The sound wall shall be constructed prior to the
start of any demolition or construction activities.
(b) Construction Vibration
Construction activities can produce vibration that may be felt by adjacent uses. Construction
activities associated with the proposed project would include demolition of an existing structure
and roadway areas; partial regrading of roads; and paving of roads, parking lots, and sidewalks.
The primary source of vibration during construction would be from the operation of a bulldozer,
which may operate as near as 15 feet to existing homes. Table 14 provides approximate
vibration levels which have been used to calculate construction - related vibration impacts for
particular construction activities.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
M
16 -78
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 14: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Equi me
Peak Particle Velocity
(Inche
Approximate Vibration
Level
(Lv)at 25 feet
pile driver (impact)
Upper range
typical
1.518
0.644
112
104
pile driver (sonic)
Upper range
typical
0.734
0.170
105
93
clam shovel drop (slurry wall)
0.202
94
vibratory roller
0.210
94
hoe ram
0.089
87
large bulldozer
0.089
87
caisson drill
0.089
87
loaded trucks
0.076
86
jackhammer
0.035
79
small bulldozer
0.003
58
Source: Federal Transit Administration, May 2006.
Based on the approximate vibration levels presented in Table 14 above, a large bulldozer would
create a vibration level of 0.089- inch -per- second PPV at 25 feet. Based on typical propagation
rates, the vibration level at 15 feet, which is the distance to the nearest home, would be 0.16 -
inch -per- second PPV. Consequently, the vibration level at the nearest home receptor is below
the 0.25- inch -per- second PPV threshold of perception for transient sources presented in Section
5.12.1 above. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would not expose people to
excessive groundborne vibration; and impacts would be less than significant.
Operation - Related Vibration
Operation of the proposed project would not introduce any new sources of vibration, and
impacts would be less than significant.
(c) Operation of the proposed project may result in a potential substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels for the area surrounding the proposed project site. Potential noise impacts
associated with the operations of the proposed project would be from the widening and
realignment of Newport Boulevard and 32"' Street and the addition of off - street public parking.
Policy N1.8 of the General Plan details the noise increases allowed from a project before a
significant impact would occur, which consists of a 3 -dBA increase where the ambient noise is
55 dBA CNEL or less, a 2 -dBA CNEL increase where the ambient noise is between 55 and 60 dBA
CNEL, a 1 -dBA CNEL increase where the ambient noise is between 60 and 70 dBA CNEL, and any
increase where the ambient noise exceeds 75 dBA CNEL.
The proposed project's operational noise impacts to the nearby homes has been analyzed above
in Section 5.12.2(a), which found that the noise level contributions from the proposed project
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
65
16 -79
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
would range from 0.0 to 2.6 dBA. The analysis in Section 5.12.2(a) also found that the project
noise contribution to Receiver 7 would exceed the noise contribution standard of plus one dBA
detailed in Policy N1.8 of the General Plan. This would be considered a significant impact.
Implementation of mitigation measure NOI -1 would require the applicant to raise the existing
wall along the shared property line of the proposed public parking lot and the home at 3206
Marcus Avenue to a minimum of 6 feet high. The analysis presented in Section 5.12.2(a) found
that implementation of mitigation measure NOI -1 would reduce the proposed project's noise
contribution to Receiver 7 to a level less than significant.
(d) The proposed project would not create a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient
noise levels in the proposed project area above existing noise levels. Construction activities
associated with the proposed project would include demolition of an existing structure and
roadway areas; partial regrading of roads; and paving of roads, parking lots, and sidewalks. The
nearest sensitive receptor to the proposed improvements is a home located adjacent to the
proposed public parking lot on Marcus Avenue.
Section 10.28.040 of the City's Municipal Code exempts from the City's noise standards
construction activities that occur between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on weekdays and between
8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and no construction is allowed on Sundays and holidays.
Section 10.28.040 provides an exception for public work projects, provided the City Manager or
department director determines that the construction activity cannot be feasibly conducted
during normal business hours. The City construction noise standards, however, do not provide
any limits to the noise levels that may be created during construction activities at the nearby
sensitive receptors; and even with adherence to the City standards, the resultant construction
noise levels may result in a significant substantial temporary noise increase at the nearby
sensitive receptors.
In order to determine if the proposed construction activities would create a significant
substantial temporary noise increase, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) agency limits for noise exposure have been utilized. The use of a significance threshold
using an OSHA standard is considered conservative. The OSHA standard limits noise exposure of
workers to 90 dB or less over 8 continuous hours, and this standard has been utilized to analyze
the construction noise impacts to the sensitive receptors located at the nearby offsite
residences. Construction noise impacts to the nearby sensitive receptors were calculated using
the FHWA RCNM and are presented below in Table 15. RCNM printouts are provided in
Appendix H.
Table 15: Construction Noise Levels at Nearby Receptors
Construction Phase I
Distance to Nearest Home (feet)
I
Construction Noise Level (dBA Leq)
r
Source: RCNM, Federal Highway Administration 2006
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
W
• :I
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Table 15 shows that greatest noise impacts would occur during the grading and paving phases of
construction, with noise levels as high as 89 dBA Leq at the nearest home. Table 15 shows that
the noise levels from each phase of construction activities would be within the 90 -dB threshold
detailed above. Therefore, construction of the proposed project would not result in substantial
temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the proposed project vicinity above
levels existing without the project; and impacts would be less than significant.
(e) The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within 2 miles of a public
airport or public use airport. No impact would occur.
(f) No private airstrips are located within the City of Newport Beach. No impact would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
67
16 -81
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING
5.13.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing or new roads that
could induce future growth. No impact would occur.
(b) As described in Section 5.10.1(a), full property acquisitions associated with current project
design would be limited to the vacant Wachovia Bank building located at the northwest corner
of the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street intersection and the adjacent property currently
configured as a parking lot. The proposed project would not displace any housing. No impact
would occur.
(c) As described in Section 5.10.1(a), full property acquisitions associated with current project
design would be limited to the vacant Wachovia Bank building located at the northwest corner
of the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street intersection and the adjacent property currently
configured as a parking lot. The proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would
occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
M.
16 -82
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
13.
POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (for example, by proposing new
El
El
E]
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
(b)
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
❑
❑
❑
housing elsewhere?
(c)
Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
❑
❑
❑
housing elsewhere?
5.13.1 Impact Analysis
(a) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing or new roads that
could induce future growth. No impact would occur.
(b) As described in Section 5.10.1(a), full property acquisitions associated with current project
design would be limited to the vacant Wachovia Bank building located at the northwest corner
of the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street intersection and the adjacent property currently
configured as a parking lot. The proposed project would not displace any housing. No impact
would occur.
(c) As described in Section 5.10.1(a), full property acquisitions associated with current project
design would be limited to the vacant Wachovia Bank building located at the northwest corner
of the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street intersection and the adjacent property currently
configured as a parking lot. The proposed project would not displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would
occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
M.
16 -82
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
5.14.1 Impact Analysis
(a) Fire protection services are provided by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD), which
operates Fire Station #2 — Lido Beach, located approximately 300 feet east of the proposed
project site at 475 32nd Street. Implementation of the proposed project would not physically
impact Fire Station #2 — Lido Beach. Furthermore, the proposed project would not introduce
new structures requiring fire protection services.
Project construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during construction to
minimize disruptions due to lane closures and maintain emergency access for fire protection
services. The traffic control plan would include provisions to maintain adequate access for Fire
Station #2 — Lido Beach to 32nd Street for the entire duration of project construction. Once
constructed, the increased vehicular capacity and reduced traffic congestion on Newport
Boulevard could potentially reduce response times for fire and emergency service responders
traveling from Station #2 — Lido Beach. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
(b) The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) provides police protection services for the City of
Newport Beach. The NBPD station is located approximately 3 miles east of the proposed project
site in the central portion of the City of Newport Beach at 870 Santa Barbara Drive.
Implementation of the proposed project would not physically impact the NBPD station.
Furthermore, the proposed project would not introduce new structures requiring police
protection services.
Project construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during construction to
minimize disruptions due to lane closures and maintain emergency access for police protection
services. Once constructed, the increased vehicular capacity and reduced traffic congestion on
Newport Boulevard could potentially reduce response times for police responders traveling on
these roadways. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
W
16 -83
PUBLIC SERVICES.
Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
Less than
or need for new or physically altered
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
14.
governmental facilities, the construction of which
Significant
With
Significant
No
could cause significant environmental impacts, in
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Impact
order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
Incorporated
response times or other performance objectives
for any of the public services::
(a)
Fire Protection?
❑
❑
®
❑
(b)
Police Protection?
❑
❑
®
❑
(c)
Schools?
❑
❑
❑
(d)
Parks?
❑
❑
®
❑
(e)
Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑
5.14.1 Impact Analysis
(a) Fire protection services are provided by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD), which
operates Fire Station #2 — Lido Beach, located approximately 300 feet east of the proposed
project site at 475 32nd Street. Implementation of the proposed project would not physically
impact Fire Station #2 — Lido Beach. Furthermore, the proposed project would not introduce
new structures requiring fire protection services.
Project construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during construction to
minimize disruptions due to lane closures and maintain emergency access for fire protection
services. The traffic control plan would include provisions to maintain adequate access for Fire
Station #2 — Lido Beach to 32nd Street for the entire duration of project construction. Once
constructed, the increased vehicular capacity and reduced traffic congestion on Newport
Boulevard could potentially reduce response times for fire and emergency service responders
traveling from Station #2 — Lido Beach. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
(b) The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) provides police protection services for the City of
Newport Beach. The NBPD station is located approximately 3 miles east of the proposed project
site in the central portion of the City of Newport Beach at 870 Santa Barbara Drive.
Implementation of the proposed project would not physically impact the NBPD station.
Furthermore, the proposed project would not introduce new structures requiring police
protection services.
Project construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during construction to
minimize disruptions due to lane closures and maintain emergency access for police protection
services. Once constructed, the increased vehicular capacity and reduced traffic congestion on
Newport Boulevard could potentially reduce response times for police responders traveling on
these roadways. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
W
16 -83
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
(c) The Newport -Mesa Unified School District provides educational services for the City of Newport
Beach. Ensign Middle School is located approximately 0.80 mile northeast of the proposed
project site, while Newport Elementary School is located approximately 0.85 mile southeast of
the proposed project site. Implementation of the proposed project would not physically impact
either Newport Elementary School or Ensign Middle School. Furthermore, the proposed project
would not introduce new housing that would increase demand for school services within
Newport Beach. No impact would occur.
(d) The proposed project is located adjacent to Gateway Park, which consists of two separate
parcels of open space offering passive recreational opportunities. One parcel is located at the
southwest corner of Newport Boulevard and Short Street; the other parcel is located at the
northeast corner of Newport Boulevard and Via Lido. No recreational amenities exist on either
Gateway Park parcel. Current project design would require dedication of approximately 0.03
acre of the Gateway Park parcel located at the southwest corner of Newport Boulevard and
Short Street; however, this partial dedication would not negatively impact Gateway Park since
no recreational amenities exist that could be affected, and the parcel would continue to offer
opportunities for passive recreation. Furthermore, the proposed project would not introduce
new residential uses that would increase demand for recreational facilities within Newport
Beach. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
(e) The proposed project would not introduce new residential or commercial uses that would
increase demand for other public services. No impact would occur.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
70
��
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.15 RECREATION
5.15.1 Impact Analysis
(a) As described in Section 5.14.1(d) above, the proposed project is located adjacent to Gateway
Park. Additionally, Lido Park, 38th Street Park, and Newport Island Park are all located within
0.25 mile of the proposed project. Lido Park is a passive recreation park located at the southeast
corner of the intersection of Via Lido and Lafayette Avenue that offers views of West Lido
Channel and Newport Bay. 38th Street Park is bounded by 38th Street, Balboa Boulevard, Park
Lane, and 36th Street and includes a basketball court, picnic tables, and children's playground
equipment. Newport Island Park is located at the intersection of Marcus Avenue and 39th Street
and includes a basketball court, picnic tables, children's playground equipment, and barbeque
facilities and offers views of Rivo Alto. The proposed project is also located adjacent to Rivo Alto,
which includes numerous boat slips adjacent to residences on the land side of the small channel.
Additional boat slips adjacent to residences are located on West Lido Channel and throughout
Newport Bay further from the proposed project site.
The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not introduce new residential development
that would increase use of existing recreational facilities. The proposed project has been
designed to reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth that has already occurred,
is planned, or is projected to occur. Additional physical deterioration at Gateway Park, Lido Park,
38th Street Park, Newport Island Park, or within Newport Bay would be the result of future
population growth within the City of Newport Beach that would occur independently of the
proposed project. No impact would occur.
(b) The proposed project would introduce 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport
Boulevard between 32nd Street and Via Lido to provide a connection to the existing bike lanes
along 32nd Street west of Newport Boulevard. Potential environmental impacts associated with
introduction of these bike lanes has been included in the analysis presented in this IS /MND.
Furthermore, the proposed project would not introduce new residential uses that would
necessitate the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
71
16 -85
Less than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
15
RECREATION.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(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?
(b)
Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
❑
El
®
El
facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
5.15.1 Impact Analysis
(a) As described in Section 5.14.1(d) above, the proposed project is located adjacent to Gateway
Park. Additionally, Lido Park, 38th Street Park, and Newport Island Park are all located within
0.25 mile of the proposed project. Lido Park is a passive recreation park located at the southeast
corner of the intersection of Via Lido and Lafayette Avenue that offers views of West Lido
Channel and Newport Bay. 38th Street Park is bounded by 38th Street, Balboa Boulevard, Park
Lane, and 36th Street and includes a basketball court, picnic tables, and children's playground
equipment. Newport Island Park is located at the intersection of Marcus Avenue and 39th Street
and includes a basketball court, picnic tables, children's playground equipment, and barbeque
facilities and offers views of Rivo Alto. The proposed project is also located adjacent to Rivo Alto,
which includes numerous boat slips adjacent to residences on the land side of the small channel.
Additional boat slips adjacent to residences are located on West Lido Channel and throughout
Newport Bay further from the proposed project site.
The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not introduce new residential development
that would increase use of existing recreational facilities. The proposed project has been
designed to reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth that has already occurred,
is planned, or is projected to occur. Additional physical deterioration at Gateway Park, Lido Park,
38th Street Park, Newport Island Park, or within Newport Bay would be the result of future
population growth within the City of Newport Beach that would occur independently of the
proposed project. No impact would occur.
(b) The proposed project would introduce 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport
Boulevard between 32nd Street and Via Lido to provide a connection to the existing bike lanes
along 32nd Street west of Newport Boulevard. Potential environmental impacts associated with
introduction of these bike lanes has been included in the analysis presented in this IS /MND.
Furthermore, the proposed project would not introduce new residential uses that would
necessitate the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
71
16 -85
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.16 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16.1 Impact AnalVsIs
(a) and (b) As described in Section 5.10.1 (a), implementation of the proposed project would
eliminate 26 existing curbside public parking spaces on Newport Boulevard due to the roadway
widening and introduction of bike lanes. However, the proposed project would construct a new
public parking lot with a minimum of 26 parking spaces at the northwest corner of the Newport
Boulevard and 32nd Street intersection to replace curbside public parking spaces eliminated on
Newport Boulevard. Policy CE 2.1.1 of the Circulation Element of the City of Newport Beach
General Plan has established LOS D as the goal for all traffic operations. The circulation element
has established LOS E for acceptable operations at several locations in the City of Newport
Beach, including intersections near John Wayne Airport, Coast Highway through Mariners' Mile,
and Corona Del Mar. The proposed project is not located within any of these locations, and LOS
D serves as the established standard.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
72
.:.
Less than
TRANSPORTATION /TRAFFIC.
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
16.
Significant
With
Significant
Would the project:
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation including mass
transit and nonmotorized travel and relevant
❑
❑
®
❑
components of the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
(b)
Conflict with an applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to, level of
service standards and travel demand measures or
❑
❑
®
❑
other standards established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads or highways?
(c)
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
❑
❑
❑
location that results in substantial safety risks?
(d)
Substantially increase hazards due to a design
feature (e. g., sharp curves or dangerous
E]
El
El
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
(e)
Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑
❑
®
❑
(f)
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or
❑
❑
®
❑
safety of such facilities supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
5.16.1 Impact AnalVsIs
(a) and (b) As described in Section 5.10.1 (a), implementation of the proposed project would
eliminate 26 existing curbside public parking spaces on Newport Boulevard due to the roadway
widening and introduction of bike lanes. However, the proposed project would construct a new
public parking lot with a minimum of 26 parking spaces at the northwest corner of the Newport
Boulevard and 32nd Street intersection to replace curbside public parking spaces eliminated on
Newport Boulevard. Policy CE 2.1.1 of the Circulation Element of the City of Newport Beach
General Plan has established LOS D as the goal for all traffic operations. The circulation element
has established LOS E for acceptable operations at several locations in the City of Newport
Beach, including intersections near John Wayne Airport, Coast Highway through Mariners' Mile,
and Corona Del Mar. The proposed project is not located within any of these locations, and LOS
D serves as the established standard.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
72
.:.
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Project construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street; however, a traffic control plan would be implemented during construction to
minimize disruptions due to lane closures and maintain circulation. Upon completion, the
proposed project would improve traffic level of service on Newport Boulevard by increasing
vehicular capacity and reducing existing traffic congestion. As shown in Table 16 below, the
segment of Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 32nd Street currently operates at LOS F,
while the segment between 32nd Street and 30`h Street currently operates at LOS D.
Implementation of the proposed project would improve segment operations between Via Lido
and 32nd Street to LOS D and operations between 32nd Street and 30`h Street to LOS B (Table 16).
Additionally, the proposed project would improve the volume to capacity (V /C) ratio between
Via Lido and 32 "d Street from 1.055 to 0.879 and improve the V/C ratio between 32nd Street and
30`h Street from 0.853 to 0.682. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would
improve traffic operations on Newport Boulevard to be consistent with the established LOS
standards identified in the Circulation Element of the City of Newport Beach General Plan, and
impacts would be less than significant.
Table 16: Traffic Operations on Newport Boulevard
Roadway Segment
Existing V/C
LOS wM V/C Ratio with
Newport Boulevard
between Via Lido and 32 "d
F
1.055
D
0.879
Newport Boulevard
between 32 n1 Street and W"
L
Street
D
0.853
B
0.682
(c) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct any new structures that could
disrupt air traffic patterns. Furthermore, the proposed project would not construct housing that
could increase travel demand. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not
result in a change in air traffic patterns. No impact would occur.
(d) The existing roadway configuration within the proposed project site does not possess any
identified safety deficiencies. The proposed project would widen the existing Newport
Boulevard roadway and would not introduce any new curves that could introduce a safety
hazard. Furthermore, the proposed project has been designed to be consistent with existing
safety standards and would not create unsafe conditions that could increase the risk of car
accidents. Therefore, the proposed project would not increase hazards due to a design feature.
No impact would occur.
(e) Newport Boulevard is identified as a tsunami evacuation route in the City of Newport Beach
Emergency Management Plan (City of Newport Beach 2004). Project construction would require
temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street; however, a traffic control
plan would be implemented during construction to minimize disruptions due to lane closures
and maintain access for emergency response and evacuation. Once constructed, the increased
vehicular capacity and reduced traffic congestion on Newport Boulevard could potentially
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
73
16 -87
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
improve access for emergency response and evacuation. Therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
(f) The proposed project would improve access to alternative transportation within Newport Beach
by introducing 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport Boulevard between 32 "d
Street and Via Lido, implementing Circulation Element Policy CE 5.1.6. These new bike lanes
would provide a connection to existing bike lanes along 32nd Street west of Newport Boulevard.
Construction of the proposed project may require relocation of the existing bus stops on the
segment of Newport Boulevard within the proposed project site; however, these would be
relocated within the proposed project site in close proximity to the existing bus stops if it is
determined that an alternative location would be necessary. Furthermore, bus stops would be
preserved on both sides of Newport Boulevard within the proposed project site. Therefore, the
proposed project would be consistent with the goals of the Newport Beach General Plan
Circulation Element pertaining to alternative transportation, and impacts would be less than
significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
74
6
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17.1 Impact Analysis
(a) and (b) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and
construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing,
commercial businesses, offices, or other structures that would require water services or
generate wastewater requiring treatment. No impact would occur.
(c) Current project design would reduce the amount of impervious surfaces within the proposed
project site from 4.03 acres to 3.81 acres. This reduction of impervious surfaces would increase
the amount of stormwater percolating into the ground and reduce the amount of stormwater
sheet flow traveling to stormwater catch basins. Therefore, the proposed project would not
require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities. No impacts would occur.
(d) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing, commercial
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
75
.:•
Less than
UTILITIES SYSTEMS.
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
No
17
Would d the project:
Significant
With
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(a)
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
E]
❑
❑
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
(b)
Require or result in the construction of new water
or wastewater treatment facilities (including sewer
(waste water) collection facilities) or expansion of
❑
❑
❑
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
(c)
Require or result in the construction of new
stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
❑
El
El
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
(d)
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project (including large -scale developments as
defined by Public Resources Code Section 21151.9
and described in Question No. 20 of the
❑
❑
®
❑
Environmental Information Form) from existing
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
(e)
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?
(f)
Be served by a landfill with insufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
❑
❑
®
❑
disposal needs?
(g)
Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and
❑
❑
®
E]
regulations related to solid wastes?
5.17.1 Impact Analysis
(a) and (b) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and
construction of a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing,
commercial businesses, offices, or other structures that would require water services or
generate wastewater requiring treatment. No impact would occur.
(c) Current project design would reduce the amount of impervious surfaces within the proposed
project site from 4.03 acres to 3.81 acres. This reduction of impervious surfaces would increase
the amount of stormwater percolating into the ground and reduce the amount of stormwater
sheet flow traveling to stormwater catch basins. Therefore, the proposed project would not
require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities. No impacts would occur.
(d) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing, commercial
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
75
.:•
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
businesses, offices, or other structures that would require water services. Project landscaping is
intended to be consistent with the approved plant palette presented in the Lido Village Design
Guidelines, which consists of "California friendly' plant species the City selected based partially
on their durability and low water use requirements. Therefore, water required for irrigation of
project landscaping would result in a negligible impact to existing water supplies, and impacts
would be less than significant.
(e) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing, commercial
businesses, offices, or other structures that would generate wastewater requiring treatment. No
impact would occur.
(f) The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, and construction of
a public parking lot. The proposed project would not construct new housing, commercial
businesses, offices, or other structures that would generate solid waste. Existing roadway
materials removed during construction would be recycled when feasible; materials that could
not be recycled would be disposed of at Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, located at 11002
Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine, which currently serves the City of Newport Beach. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
(g) Disposal of existing roadway materials removed during construction would be required to
comply with all federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
Compliance with these existing regulations would reduce impacts to a level less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
76
16 -90
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
5.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
5.18.1 Impact Analysis
(a) As described in Section 5.4, the proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection
within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach and does not possess any riparian
habitat, sensitive natural communities, wetlands, or habitat that supports species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Potential natural habitat is limited to the aquatic
environment within the Rivo Alto channel adjacent to the western segment of 32nd Street.
Construction of the proposed project would implement BMPs to prevent erosion from entering
the waters of the Rivo Alto channel adjacent to the proposed project that could impact aquatic
species. As described in Section 5.5, the vacant Wachovia Bank building, located at the
northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and 32 "d Street intersection, does not qualify as an
historic resource. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
(b) The proposed project is located adjacent to the former City Hall campus, which has been
proposed for redevelopment as the Lido House Hotel. The Lido House Hotel project would
consist of a 130 -room luxury hotel and a landscaped public plaza along Newport Boulevard. The
Lido House Hotel project Draft EIR released for public review on April 29th, 2014, determined
that all impacts associated with the Lido House Hotel project would be mitigated to a level less
than significant (Newport Beach 2014a). Similarly, all impacts associated with the proposed
project would be reduced to a level of less than significant through implementation of
mitigation measures described throughout this IS /MND. Furthermore, widening of Newport
Boulevard and improving the intersection at 32nd Street is needed to reduce traffic congestion
independent of the proposed Lido House Hotel project, and would improve segment operations
between Via Lido and 32nd Street to LOS D and operations between 32nd Street and 30`h Street to
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
77
16 -91
Lessthan
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
18.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Significant
With
Significant
No
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
(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 periods
of California history or prehistory?
(b)
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
❑
❑
®
❑
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects ?)
(c)
Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
❑
®
❑
❑
beings, either directly or indirectly?
5.18.1 Impact Analysis
(a) As described in Section 5.4, the proposed project site consists of a paved roadway intersection
within a fully urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach and does not possess any riparian
habitat, sensitive natural communities, wetlands, or habitat that supports species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special status species. Potential natural habitat is limited to the aquatic
environment within the Rivo Alto channel adjacent to the western segment of 32nd Street.
Construction of the proposed project would implement BMPs to prevent erosion from entering
the waters of the Rivo Alto channel adjacent to the proposed project that could impact aquatic
species. As described in Section 5.5, the vacant Wachovia Bank building, located at the
northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and 32 "d Street intersection, does not qualify as an
historic resource. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
(b) The proposed project is located adjacent to the former City Hall campus, which has been
proposed for redevelopment as the Lido House Hotel. The Lido House Hotel project would
consist of a 130 -room luxury hotel and a landscaped public plaza along Newport Boulevard. The
Lido House Hotel project Draft EIR released for public review on April 29th, 2014, determined
that all impacts associated with the Lido House Hotel project would be mitigated to a level less
than significant (Newport Beach 2014a). Similarly, all impacts associated with the proposed
project would be reduced to a level of less than significant through implementation of
mitigation measures described throughout this IS /MND. Furthermore, widening of Newport
Boulevard and improving the intersection at 32nd Street is needed to reduce traffic congestion
independent of the proposed Lido House Hotel project, and would improve segment operations
between Via Lido and 32nd Street to LOS D and operations between 32nd Street and 30`h Street to
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
77
16 -91
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
LOS B. Construction of the Lido House Hotel project is not anticipated to begin until construction
of the proposed project is completed.
The Lido Villas project proposes to construct a 23 townhouse - style, multi - family development
on a 1.2 -acre site. The Lido Villas project is located on the northwestern corner of the
intersection of Via Lido and Via Malaga, approximately 0.1 mile east of the proposed project.
The IS /MND prepared for the Lido Villas project determined that all impacts would be mitigated
to a level less than significant (Newport Beach 2013a). The City of Newport Beach adopted the
Lido Villas project IS /MND on November 13`h 2013, and the project is currently under Coastal
Commission review. If approved, construction of the Lido Villas project would not begin until
summer 2016, after the completion of the proposed project.
The Orange County Sanitation District Balboa Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation project, completed in
May 2014, rehabilitated the existing Balboa trunk sewer along Newport Boulevard and Balboa
Boulevard between A Street and Finley Avenue. The Balboa Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation project
also included installation of a new protective lining of approximately 12,600 feet of the existing
sewer pipeline (OCSD 2014). A portion of the Balboa Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation project was
located within the boundaries of the proposed project. The Balboa Trunk Sewer Rehabilitation
project was approved under a CEQA Categorical Exemption because it would repair an existing
facility and it was determined that it would not result in any significant impacts on the
environment (Newport Beach 2014b).
The City of Newport Beach Water Transmission Main Replacement project would replace an
aging city water transmission main on the northbound side of Newport Boulevard between Via
Oporto and 19th Street. The Water Transmission Main Replacement project would also replace
various cast iron mains between Finley Avenue and 32nd Street. A portion of the Water
Transmission Main Replacement project would be located within the boundaries of the
proposed project. Construction is scheduled to begin in October 2014, and be completed in
summer 2015, prior to construction of the proposed project. The Water Transmission Main
Replacement project was approved under a CEQA Categorical Exemption because it was
determined that it would not result in any significant impacts on the environment (Newport
Beach 2013b).
Based on the results of the environmental analyses of the proposed project presented in this
IS /MND and the findings of the CEQA documentation for the projects described above,
implementation of the proposed project would not incrementally contribute to cumulative
environmental impacts. Implementation of mitigation measures presented in this IS /MND would
reduce all impacts associated with the proposed project to a level less than significant.
Furthermore, none of the past, present, or future projects located adjacent to the proposed
project would result in any significant environmental impacts, and construction of all projects
would occur prior to, or after construction of the proposed project. Therefore, the proposed
project would not result in any significant impacts that could contribute to cumulative impacts
resulting from past, present, or future projects.
(c) Implementation of the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly. The proposed project would not have significant
impacts on air quality and would not displace any homes or divide an established community.
Implementation of mitigation measures described in Section 5.8 would reduce impacts
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
78
16 -92
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
associated with hazards and hazardous materials to a level less than significant. Implementation
of mitigation measure NOI -1 described in Section 5.12 would reduce impacts associated with
noise to a level less than significant. Therefore, the proposed project would not have
environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings; and
impacts would be less than significant.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
79
16 -93
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
SECTION 6.0— SOURCE REFERENCES
The following is a list of references used in the preparation of this document.
Association of Environmental Professionals
2012 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Statutes and Guidelines. AEP, Palm Desert,
California.
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
2008
Chambers Group, Inc. (Chambers Group)
2013 Cultural Resources CEQA Review for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street
Modification Project — City of Newport Beach. November.
City of Newport Beach
2004 City of Newport Beach Emergency Management Plan
2006a Newport Beach General Plan. July 25.
2006b Newport Beach General Plan EIR. July 25.
2011 Lido Village Design Guidelines
2013a Lido Villas Project IS /MND Notice of Determination. Available Online:
http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov /pin /CEQA REVIEW /Lido %20Villas /NOD Filed Record
ed 11- 13- 2013.pdf
2013b City Council Staff Report, November 26, 2013. Agenda Item 13. Available Online:
http://ecms.newportbeachca.gov/Web/o/doc/549661/Pagel.asp x
2014a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Lido House Hotel. April. Available Online:
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?page=1347
2014b Zoning Administrator resolution No. ZA2014 -003. Available Online:
http://ecms.newportbeachca.gov/Web/O/doc/566302/Pagel.aspx
Ninyo & Moore
2013a Geotechnical Evaluation — Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modifications — Newport
Beach, California. October 23.
2013b Initial Site Assessment — Newport Boulevard /32nd Street Modification Project Between
Via Lido and 30th Street— Newport Beach, California. October 30.
Office of Historic Preservation
1995 Instructions on Recording Historical Resources. California Office of Historic Preservation.
Sacramento, CA.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
E'Ll
16 -94
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
Orange County Sanitation District
2014 Newport Beach Program. Available Online:
http://www.ocsd.com/home/showdocument?id=15297
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
2010 Greenhouse Gas CEQA Significance Threshold Stakeholder Working Group Meeting # 15.
September.
United States National Park Service (National Park Service)
1983 Secretary of the Interior Professional Qualifications Standards. United States
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
VA Consulting
2013a Water Quality Management Plan for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street
Modification Project from 30`h Street to Via Lido. October.
2013b Hydrology Report for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project.
October.
Vista Environmental
2013a CalEEMod Model Air Quality Output Files for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street
Modification Project. November.
2013b CaIEEMod Model Greenhouse Gas Output Files for the Newport Boulevard and 32 "d
Street Modification Project. November.
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
81
16 -95
Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
City of Newport Beach, California
SECTION 7.0 — REPORT AUTHORS AND CONSULTANTS
CEQA Consultant: Chambers Group, Inc.
Nick Larkin
Project Manager
Joel Levanetz
Cultural Resources
Michael Simmons
GIS Analyst
Greg Tonkovich, Vista Environmental
Noise Studies
Greg Tonkovich, Vista Environmental
Air studies
Chambers Group, Inc.
20514
82
16 -96
Exhibit "B"
Newport Boulevard and 32ND Street Modification Project
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2014 -001
State Clearinghouse Number 2014091008
16 -97
NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND 32ND STREET MODIFICATION PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2014 -001 (SCH #2014091008)
Date: November 20, 2014
CEQA Action: Certification of Final Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration
Project Applicant: City of Newport Beach
Proiect Location and Descriotion:
The Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project (proposed project) is located within a fully
urbanized section of the City of Newport Beach and would improve a segment of Newport Boulevard
that begins at the intersection with 30`h Street and terminates at the intersection with Via Lido. The
proposed project will also include improvements on a segment of 32nd Street that begins at the alley
east of Newport Boulevard and terminates at Marcus Avenue west of Newport Boulevard. Land uses
surrounding the proposed project predominately consist of commercial and retail businesses located
along Newport Boulevard and 32 "d Street. The proposed project is also adjacent to the former City Hall
campus, which is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd
Street.
The proposed project has been developed to improve the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32nd
Street in order to increase vehicular capacity and reduce existing traffic congestion to an acceptable
level of service. The proposed project would add an additional northbound through lane along Newport
Boulevard from 30th Street to 32nd Street and add an additional southbound through lane along
Newport Boulevard from Via Lido to 32nd Street, terminating as a right -turn only lane at 32nd Street.
The proposed project would remove the westbound free -right turn lane at Newport Boulevard. Bus
stops currently exist on both sides of Newport Boulevard within the proposed project area. The
northbound bus stop is located immediately south of Finley Avenue, while the southbound bus stop is
located immediately south of Short Street. Both bus stops along Newport Boulevard would be relocated
to a location near each existing bus stop.
Proposed modifications to Newport Boulevard would also include introduction of a raised, landscaped
median and 6- foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of the roadway. Introduction of the 6- foot -wide bike
lanes and widening of the roadway would result in the loss of 26 curbside public parking spaces on
Newport Boulevard. However, the proposed project would acquire the vacant Wachovia Bank building
and adjacent parking lot located at the northwest corner of the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street for
conversion to a public parking lot. The existing structure and parking lot on both of these parcels would
be demolished, and the two parcels would be converted to a public parking lot with a minimum of 26
parking spaces to provide replacement parking for the loss of on- street parking. The proposed project
may also require a partial ROW acquisition of the commercial property north of the vacant Wachovia
Bank building and partial land dedications from two City -owned parcels. Additional details of the
project description can be found in Section 2.0 of the Final IS /MND.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all public agencies establish monitoring
and /or reporting procedures for mitigation measures (MMs) adopted as conditions of approval in order
to mitigate or avoid significant project impacts. Specifically, Section 21081.6(a)(1) states:
. •:
NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND 32ND STREET MODIFICATION PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2014 -001 (SCH #2014091008)
The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made
to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid
significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be
designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.
CECA Guidelines Section 15097 provides clarification of mitigation monitoring and reporting
requirements and guidance to local lead agencies on implementing strategies. The reporting or
monitoring program must be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The City of
Newport Beach is the lead agency for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project and is
therefore responsible for implementing the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
The Mitigation Program in the MMRP is comprised of Mitigation Measures (MMs) that were developed
to avoid, reduce, and /or fully mitigate potential environmental impacts. The MMRP contains the
Mitigation Program that has been drafted to meet the requirements of Public Resources Code Section
21081.6 as fully enforceable monitoring programs. The MMRP defines the following for each mitigation
measure:
1. Timeframe. In each case, a timeframe for performance of the mitigation measure (mitigation),
or review of evidence that mitigation has taken place, is provided. The performance points
selected are designed to ensure that impact - related components of Project implementation do
not proceed without establishing that the mitigation is implemented or assured.
2. Responsible Party. In each case, unless where otherwise indicated, the Applicant is the
Responsible Party for implementing the mitigation. The City will also monitor the performance
and implementation of the mitigation measures. To guarantee that the mitigation measure will
not be inadvertently overlooked, the supervising public official is the official who grants the
permit or authorization called for in the performance.
3. Definition of Mitigation. In each case the mitigation measure contains the criteria for
mitigation, either in the form of adherence to certain adopted regulations or identification of
the steps to be taken in mitigation.
The numbering system corresponds with the numbering system used in the Draft IS /MND. The second
and third last column of the MMRP table will be used by the Compliance Monitor to document when
implementation of the measure has been completed. The ongoing documentation and monitoring of
mitigation compliance will be completed by the City of Newport Beach. The completed MMRP and
supplemental documents will be kept on file at the City of Newport Beach Planning Department.
16 -99
NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND 32ND STREET MODIFICATION PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2014- 001(SCH #2014091008)
16 -100
Project Design Features /Conditions of Approval/
Responsible for
Completion
Response
Date
Initials
Timing
Mitigation Measures
Monitoring /Implementation
Number
Cultural Resources
During construction activities.
CUL -1: In the event that a cultural or paleontological resource is
Public Works Director and /or
exposed during ground- disturbing activities, construction activities
Planning Director, or designated
(e.g., grading, grubbing, or vegetation clearing) should be halted
representatives
immediately near the discovery. A cultural resource specialist
and /or paleontological resource specialist who meet the Secretary
Qualified Archaeologist or
of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards (United
Paleontologist
1
States National Park Service 1983) should then be retained to
evaluate the find's significance under CEQA. If the discovery proves
to be significant, additional work, such as data recovery
excavation, may be warranted and should be discussed in
consultation with the lead agency.
During construction activities.
CUL -2: The discovery of human remains is always a possibility
Public Works Director and /or
during ground disturbances; State of California Health and Safety
Planning Director, or designated
Code Section 7050.5 addresses these findings. This code section
representatives
states that no further disturbance shall occur until the Orange
County Coroner has made a determination of origin and
Qualified Archaeologist
disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The Coroner must be
notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are
2
determined to be prehistoric, the Coroner will notify the NAHC,
which will determine and notify a Most Likely Descendant (MILD).
The MILD shall complete the inspection of the site within 48 hours
of notification and may recommend scientific removal and
nondestructive analysis of human remains and items associated
with Native American burials.
Geology and Soils
Identify in approved grading
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans;
GEO -1: Project construction should incorporate the
Planning Director, or designated
implement during grading and
recommendations presented in the geotechnical investigation
representatives.
3
construction
prepared by Ninyo & Moore for the proposed project.
Contractor
16 -100
NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND 32ND STREET MODIFICATION PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2014- OO1(SCH#2014091008)
Identify in approved grading
GEO -2: Soil excavated from below groundwater levels would be
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans;
wet and would require drying in order to be suitable for
Planning Director, or designated
implement during grading and
compaction. Similarly, trench excavations that extend below
representatives.
construction
groundwater would require dewatering in order to construct the
proposed improvements under a dry condition. Dewatering may
Contractor (Specialty Dewatering
include pumping groundwater from well points within or outside
Contractor is Recommended).
the shored excavation. Dewatering should be limited to no more
than approximately 2 feet below the bottom of excavations. It is
recommended that the dewatering system design should be
performed by a specialty dewatering contractor. Disposal of
groundwater should be performed in accordance with guidelines
of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Wet soils should be
processed to near - optimum moisture content prior to their
4
placement as trench backfill. Fill material imported to the site (if
any) should be granular, nonexpansive soil and free of trash,
debris, roots, vegetation, or other deleterious materials.
" Nonexpansive" soils can be defined as having a "very low"
expansion potential in accordance with the California Building
Code (CBC) (an expansion index ranging from 0 to 20). Fill should
generally be free of rocks or hard lumps of material in excess of 4
inches in diameter. Rocks or hard lumps larger than approximately
4 inches in diameter should be broken into smaller pieces or
should be removed from the site. Materials for use as imported
structural fill should be evaluated by a qualified and experienced
engineer prior to importing.
Identify in approved grading
GEO -3: Trenches or other excavations that extend below
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans;
groundwater and /or deeper than approximately 4 feet should be
Planning Director, or designated
implement during grading and
shored. Shoring systems should be installed prior to excavating
representatives.
construction
below groundwater to avoid caving and undermining of adjacent
improvements. The contractor should retain a qualified and
Contractor (with Qualified and
S
experienced engineer to design the shoring system consistent with
Experienced Engineer
the parameters presented in the geotechnical investigation
Recommended).
prepared by Ninyo & Moore.
Identify in approved grading
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans;
GEO -4: A qualified and experienced engineer should observe and
Planning Director, or designated
implement during grading and
test fill placement and compaction. The frequency of testing and
representatives.
construction
the time of observation will vary depending on the contractor's
6
method of operation and quality of work, as well as the
Contractor (with Qualified and
requirements of the governing agency.
Experienced Engineer
Recommended).
16 -101
NEWPORT BOULEVARD AND 32ND STREET MODIFICATION PROJECT
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2014- OO1(SCH #2014091008)
Hazards /Hazardous Materials
Prior to approval of grading
HAZ -1: Perform a subsurface investigation and human health risk
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans
assessment at the site to determine if hazardous materials are
Planning Director, or designated
present due to past land uses. The subsurface investigation and
representatives
human health risk assessment shall be performed by a hazardous
materials specialist prior to construction. If the subsurface
Hazardous Materials Specialist
7
investigation identifies hazardous materials that pose a significant
risk to the environment or human health, the project site would
need to be remediated consistent with appropriate regulatory
standards.
Prior to approval of grading
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans
Planning Director, or designated
HAZ -2: Conduct ADL and traffic paint stripe surveys for the site.
representatives
8
Hazardous Materials Specialist
Prior to approval of grading
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans
HAZ -3: Survey for ACMs, LBP, and universal waste should be
Planning Director, or designated
conducted for the building at 3201 Newport Boulevard, prior to
representatives
9
demolition.
Hazardous Materials Specialist
Noise
Identify in approved grading
N0I -1: The project applicant shall either raise the existing wall
Public Works Director and /or
and construction plans;
along the shared property line of the proposed public parking lot
Planning Director, or designated
implement during grading and
and the home at 3206 Marcus Avenue to a minimum of 6 feet high
representatives.
construction
or construct a new 6 -foot high wall immediately south of the
10
existing wall and located entirely on City property. The sound wall
Contractor
shall be constructed prior to the start of any demolition or
construction activities.
16 -102
Attachment No. 2
Roadway Conceptual Design
16 -103
"'
LEGEND
K5d
uRo
xXX
S w. Go.
M, TO-CS, ",
112I BAno
uedwcrz
EpSPxC
dorce® 81l uxe
®A
it
�d
17
m,d, I .I eR L,
1
I
�w� T.50 Ss I-
Go
0
1. 0a
,oso so a s .. lol
---- d0P0SfD xry W3-50 M, Wa -40
MINIMUM HORIZONTAL CURVE RADII
K5d
uRo
-Ix
-
M, TO-CS, ",
112I BAno
M
EpSPxC
5 -LANE MIMEO
x6.900
L055
f
PROP E0
S -LLE WORD
%.No
Oan
0
FX lkL11.11. N1 GOMM ...TI E
®.dx WTIL W11E5'i
SU -30
e.00 TW
wt.
C�
pia
ORAPHIC SCALE
1.
G�
T
�Q a.
ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS)
NEWPORT BOULEVARD: 32ND STREET TO VIA LIDO
cMwLICN
CONHCURAiION
DNLI ..PACT,
."LESMAn
M, TO-CS, ",
112I BAno
los
EpSPxC
5 -LANE MIMEO
x6.900
L055
f
PROP E0
S -LLE WORD
%.No
Oan
0
Attachment No. 3
Comment Letters and Responses
16 -105
Erik M. Block
409 Clubhouse Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92663
9N /A A tS -4 123
July 10, 2014
Mr. Andy Tran, PE
City of Newport Beach
Public Works Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915
Dear Mr. Tran,
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed modifications in and around Newport IC �1-1 e1
t
Boulevard and 32nd Street. I am the owner of the residence located at 409 Clubhouse Avenue within the
Finley tract.
The existence of the building at 3201 Newport Blvd provides a substantial amount of protection to
residences on Clubhouse Avenue, Marcus Avenue, and 36th Street from light and.noise pollution.that Comment
emanates from vehicle and pedestrian traffic near the intersection of Newport Boulevard and 32 "d 1 -2
Street and particularly loud music from Rudy's Bar on weekend nights.
The issue appears to be that the Peninsula is already impacted by a volume of visitors that exceeds its
capacity to accommodate them. I would also suggest the City consider how the increased inbound flow
of traffic on Newport Boulevard with the additional lane will be accommodated without any substantial
increase in parking. In my opinion, expanding the inbound traffic will only serve to shorten the time it
takes for the roadway to be impacted... since the ultimate problem is the lack of adequate parking for Comment
this much traffic. So instead of 2 lanes of backed up traffic, we'll have 3 ... along with the attending noise 1-3
and emissions. Without substantially increasing the parking on the Peninsula, which appears to be
capped out, I don't see how this will achieve the desired effect of improving traffic on the peninsula.
Instead of 5,000 cars per hour (or whatever the volume is) trying to find parking, we'll have 8,000 cars
per hour trying to find the same number of parking spaces.
Currently the streets in the Finley tract are impacted on weekends and evenings by parking of guests —
and workers for the neighboring strip center, bars and restaurants. Removing the 26 parking spaces
Comment
along the west side of Newport Blvd and replacing them with an equal number (no net gain) in a parking 4
lot at 32nd street will not likely relieve this problem, but exacerbate it. As the additional visitors continue
to pile up on Newport Blvd, more will seek to find parking on the residential streets within the Finley
tract. This will be even further exacerbated when construction begins on the Lido House Hotel and the
de facto public parking on the old City Hall property is removed. Successful redevelopment of the Lido
Comment
Village may also add further pressure for visitors to use nearby residential streets for parking. Use of -5
residential streets for commercial /retail /restaurant parking will likely lead to much more foot traffic
M-1 lfil
back and forth to /from this area. Even now, we frequently have to put up with loud, obnoxious, cursing
and often drunk bar patrons who walk our streets, without any regard to the residents during the
comment
evening hours ..even as late as tam. To a degree we accept some of this behavior as "youthful
1 -5 cont.
exuberance ". However, I believe that the proposed improvements will have the unintended
consequence of negatively impacting the residents of this neighborhood by substantially increasing the
number of visitors seeking to park in the Finley tract ... and making a barely tolerable situation,
intolerable. I am supportive of the redevelopment of the Lido Village and the old City Hall, as well as
beautifying Newport Boulevard. I believe that these will all be successful projects ... so much so that it is
Comment
going to provide a desirable destination for numerous additional visitors that cannot be accommodated
1-6
without substantial negative consequences to nearby residents.
I concur that expanding the outbound traffic will significantly improve traffic since, unlike the Peninsula,
the destinations of vehicles leaving are virtually unlimited.
omment
IC
s
Proposed Mitigation Measures
I propose the City consider these mitigation measures to address these concerns:
Comment
• Construct a solid decorative wall of significant height (12' -15') along the west boundary of the
1 -8
former Wachovia Bank building site. This wall should be sufficient to replace the light and noise
protection that the existing building currently provides.
Implement a Residential Parking Permit (RPP) program for the streets within the Finley Tract
similar to that proposed for Balboa Village
(http: / /www.newportbeachco.govI Modules IShowDocument.aspx ?documentid = 17385). This will Comment
mitigate some of the parking problems created by local restaurant, bar, and retail t -q
patrons /worker using the residential area to park.
• While this is slightly off topic, I suggested to the Lido Village redevelopment group that they
seek a lease option to utilize the parking lot on the east side of West Marine (which is Ico1- -io
underutilized) to accommodate potential overflow traffic from Lido Village.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the planning process for improving our City. I hope the Imoment
City will receive this as constructive input for the betterment of our community.
Sincerely,„
Erik Block
Homeowner
Fr-1FL J
* RPp A
NELSON
NYGAARD
MEMORANDUM
To: Brenda Wisneski
From: Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates
Date: September 6, 2013
Subject: Balboa Village Residential Parking Permit Implementation — DRAFT
RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT OVERVIEW
A residential permit program (RPP) operates by exempting permitted vehicles from the parking
restrictions and time limits for non- metered, on- street parking spaces within a geographic area. A
conventional RPP is one that allows those without a permit to park for a limited period during a
specified time frame (e.g. 8 AM — 6 PM, Monday to Friday). Permit holders are exempt from
these regulations and able to essentially store their vehicle on- street. Ownership of a permit,
however, does not guarantee the availability of a parking space and for this reason, it is important
not to sell too many permits far in excess of available curb spaces.
The primary goal of an RPP programs is to manage parking "spillover" into residential
neighborhoods. RPPs work best in neighborhoods that are impacted by high parking demand
from other uses. By managing parking spillover, RPPs can ensure that residential neighborhoods
are not overwhelmed by commuters, employees, or visitors, thereby enabling local residents to
park their vehicles on- street more easily and conveniently. RPPs are especially important in older,
historic neighborhoods where many residences were built with limited or no off - street parking.
All of these conditions apply in Balboa Village. Popular tourist and recreational destinations cause
non - resident spillover parking into adjacent residential districts. Many homes in these same areas
have limited or no off- street parking. An RPP is a necessary parking management strategy that
will significantly improve parking conditions in residential neighborhoods as it has done in other
communities. A key consideration for Balboa Village, however, will be ongoing public access to
the beach and coast, as is required by the California Coastal Commission.
BALBOA VILLAGE RPP
Goals and Principles
In Newport Beach, the primary rationale for parking management is to make parking more
convenient and accessible for residents, visitors, and employees. An RPP program complements
these larger goals by accommodating residential parking demand, without compromising public
access to the coastline or the access needs of other visitors and residents.
The Balboa Village RPP Program should adhere to the following, key principles in order to
successfully meet the goals articulated above. These principles include:
116 NEW MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 500 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105 415- 284 -1544 FAX 415- 284 -1554
www.nelsonnygocard.mm
Comment
1 -9
Attachment
16 -108
Response to Comment Letter #1: Eric M. Block
Comment 1 -1: Thank you for your comments on the proposed project. We have provided responses to
your specific comments on the proposed project below.
Comment 1 -2: The noise impact analysis prepared for the proposed project analyzed the noise impacts
through use of the SounclPlan model. All nearby structures, including the existing Wachovia Bank
building, were entered into the SounclPlan model and analyzed to determine existing noise conditions.
The noise impact analysis then removed the existing Wachovia Bank building and generated a new noise
model that included proposed project conditions. The SounclPlan model included all anticipated noise
sources anticipated with the proposed project, including road noise as well as parking lot noise from the
reconfigured parking lot.
The residence at 409 Clubhouse Avenue is located on the west side of Clubhouse Avenue. There is a
row of residences on the east side of Clubhouse Avenue and a commercial building on Newport
Boulevard that provide noise shielding for this property from the roadway noise associated with
Newport Boulevard. The noise impact analysis found that the noise impacts to the analyzed homes on
Clubhouse Drive from the proposed project would range between 0.2 and 0.8 dB (see Table 13 of the
Draft IS /MND), which is below the City's noise increase threshold of 1.0 dB and more importantly well
below the threshold of perception of 3.0 dB, which is the minimum increase required before the average
person recognizes a change in noise levels.
Although, the residence at 409 Clubhouse Avenue was not specifically modeled in the SounclPlan model,
the area surrounding this property was modeled. Existing noise conditions are shown in Figures 5 of the
Draft IS /MND, while future noise conditions with the proposed project are shown on Figure 6. Figure 5
shows that the existing noise level at 409 Clubhouse Ave falls within a range of 50 to 55 dBA CNEL, and
Figure 6 shows that future noise levels with project conditions would remain within a range of 50 to 55
dBA CNEL. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Policy N1.8 states that a project would have to
increase the noise level by 3 dBA CNEL where the existing noise level is 55 dBA CNEL before it is
considered a significant impact. Although, this property may experience a slight quantitative increase in
noise levels from the proposed project, the noise modeling does not show that the proposed project
would not increase the noise level above the City standard of 3 dB at this property. Therefore, no
additional mitigation is required and no perceptible increase in noise level would occur at 409
Clubhouse Drive would occur due to the proposed project.
Regarding noise associated with loud music from Rudy's bar, observations during site visits conducted
by the noise consultant during the day and the evening determined that roadway noise is louder than
noise from local bars and other commercial centers. Furthermore, the 24 hour noise measurements
shown in Figure 5 of the Noise Impact Analysis (Appendix H of the Draft IS /MND) do not show any spikes
in measured noise at the bars closing times, which is usually when the City receives the most noise
complaints. In fact the 24 -hour graph shows that between 2:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m. is the quietest time
in the study area. Therefore, the noise modeling analysis described in the paragraph above addresses
the greatest level of potential impact associated with the proposed project, and the residence at 409
Clubhouse Drive would not be impacted by noise from local bars and other commercial centers.
16 -109
As described in Section 5.1.1(d), the proposed project would not construct new structures that would
introduce new sources of light or glare. Furthermore, the residence located 409 Clubhouse Drive is
located approximately 0.5 mile from the former Wachovia Bank building site and would not be impacted
by light sources currently shielded by the existing structure due to distance.
Comment 1 -3: The proposed project is limited to roadway and intersection improvements, demolition
of an existing commercial building, and construction of a public parking lot to off -set the street parking
displaced by the added traffic lanes. The proposed project would not construct new housing or other
structures that could generate additional vehicle trips. The proposed project has been designed to
reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth that has already occurred, is planned, or is
projected to occur. As described in Section 5.16.1 (a) and (b) of the Draft IS /MND, the segment of
Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 32nd Street currently operates at LOS F, while the segment
between 32nd Street and 30th Street currently operates at LOS D. Implementation of the proposed
project would improve segment operations between Via Lido and 32nd Street to LOS D and operations
between 32nd Street and 30th Street to LOS B. Additionally, the proposed project would improve the
volume to capacity (V /C) ratio between Via Lido and 32nd Street from 1.055 to 0.879 and improve the
V/C ratio between 32nd Street and 30th Street from 0.853 to 0.682. Therefore, implementation of the
proposed project would improve future traffic operations on Newport Boulevard by increasing capacity
to accommodate vehicle trips from growth that has already occurred, is planned, or is projected to
occur.
Similarly, the proposed project would not constrict parking availability in the surrounding area because
it would not generate any new vehicle trips. As stated above, the proposed project has been designed
to reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth that has already occurred, is planned, or is
projected to occur. Consequently, parking availability in the surrounding area would not be affected
because the proposed project would not construct any residential, commercial or other structures that
would generate additional vehicle trips requiring parking. Furthermore, construction of the proposed
public parking lot would off -set all street parking displaced by the added traffic lanes.
Additionally, operation of the proposed project would not result in noise increases that violate the City's
noise standards. As shown in table 13 of Section 5.12.2(a), implementation of mitigation measure NOI -1
would ensure that noise increases associated with the proposed project would be less than 1 dBA, which
would not exceed the City's noise standards. Similarly, as described in Section 5.3.2(a), long -term
operation of the proposed project would not result in significant impacts based on the SCAQMD
regional, local, and toxic air contaminant thresholds of significance.
Comment 1 -4: As described above in response to comment 1 -3, the proposed project would not
construct new housing or other structures that could generate additional vehicle trips. The proposed
project has been designed to reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth that has already
occurred, is planned, or is projected to occur, and would not impact parking availability in the
surrounding area as no net loss of parking would occur.
Comment 1 -5: Impacts on parking associated with conversion of the former City Hall Campus to the
Lido House Hotel were analyzed in that project's Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and are not within
16 -110
the scope of the proposed project. The proposed project would not construct new housing or other
structures that could generate additional vehicle trips. The proposed project has been designed to
reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth that has already occurred, is planned, or is
projected to occur. Therefore, the proposed project would not impact parking availability in the
surrounding area or generate additional trips to local establishments that could increase noise
associated with business patrons.
Comment 1 -6: Thank you for expressing your support for redevelopment of the Lido Village and the
former City Hall property. However, as described in response to comment 1 -3 above, the proposed
project would not construct new housing or other structures that could generate additional vehicle trips.
The proposed project has been designed to reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth
that has already occurred, is planned, or is projected to occur. Traffic projections presented in Section
5.16.1 (a) and (b) of the Draft IS /MND determined that implementation of the proposed project would
improve local roadway segment and V/C ratio operations within the proposed project area.
Comment 1 -7: Your comment is noted. Expansion of outbound operations associated with the
proposed project would improve local roadway segment and V/C ratio operations within the proposed
project area and better facilitate outbound traffic from the Balboa Peninsula.
Comment 1 -8: As described in response to comments 1 -2 and 1 -3 above, implementation of the
proposed project would not result in operational noise increases that would exceed the City's noise
standards. Therefore, construction of a solid decorative wall 12 to 15 feet in height along the western
boundary of the former Wachovia Bank building site is not necessary to mitigate noise impacts of the
project.
Comment 1 -9: As described in response to comment 1 -4 above, the proposed project has been
designed to reduce existing and future traffic congestion from growth that has already occurred, is
planned, or is projected to occur, and would not significantly impact parking availability in the
surrounding area as no net loss of parking spaces would occur. Therefore, implementation of residential
parking permit program for the streets within the Finley Tract due to the proposed project is not
necessary.
Comment 1 -10: The suggestion that the Lido Village redevelopment group seek a lease option to utilize
the parking lot on the east site of West Marine is beyond the scope of the proposed project. Therefore,
this comment does not address the adequacy of the Draft IS /MND and does not warrant further
response.
Comment 1 -11: Thank you for your comments on the proposed project.
16 -111
From: Donna Pursell [mailto:donna pursell(&yahoo.coml
Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2014 12:57 PM
To: Tran, Andy
Subject: Modification Project Contract #4881
Hello Mr. Tran:
We object to opening of the existing parking lot onto Marcus Avenue.
Marcus is a one -way street and that will force all cars exiting to go to 33rd Street or beyond. Marcus
and 33rd,and 34th are all narrow; so the extra traffic will be difficult for all property owners.
Comment
2 -1
Otherwise, I like the plan. Buying the long empty bank and turning it into a parking lot is a great ideal
But we do believe that a 32nd Street exit is better. comment
z2
Donjac Properties #4 LLC, John "Jack' Pursell, Manager, 3212 Marcus Ave. Newport Beach, CA
>
16 -112
Response to Comment Letter ##2: Donna Pursell
Comment 2 -1: Thank you for providing your comments on the proposed project. Under current project
design, Marcus Avenue from 32nd Street to the proposed parking lot will be reconfigured as a two -way
street that will allow traffic exiting the proposed parking lot to turn both left and right onto 32nd Street.
This reconfiguration of Marcus Avenue will encourage traffic exiting the proposed parking lot to head to
32 "d Street and traffic would not be forced to make a right turn while exiting the parking lot to
potentially use 33d or 34`h Street. It is anticipated that the vast majority of users of the proposed
parking lot will exist toward 32nd Street.
Comment 2 -2: Thank you for expressing your support for the remainder of the proposed project design.
As described in response to comment 2 -1 above, a portion of Marcus Avenue will be reconfigured as a
two -way street that will allow traffic exiting the proposed parking lot to turn both left and right onto
32nd Street.
16 -113
Real Estate Investment Builders • Developers
July 28, 2014
VIA EMAIL AND HAND DELIVERY
Andy Tran, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Public Works Department
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
atrangnewportbeachca. gov
Re: Comments of Lido Partners on the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
Dear Mr. Tran:
I write on behalf of Lido Partners, the owner of Via Lido Plaza located on the east side of CO111e °r
Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and Finley Avenue. Thank you for the opportunity to 3 "1
comment on the City of Newport Beach's ( "City ") draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative
Declaration ( "MND ") for the Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
( "Project ").
Lido Partners generally supports the City's efforts to improve traffic and circulation in the Lido
Village area, particularly where the Project aims to reduce the increased demands on City streets
due to summer beach traffic. With that said, the draft MND does not include any traffic study to
support its conclusions that all of the Project's impacts will be less than significant or mitigated C °mment
to a level of less than significant. Our primary concern is ensuring that the City has considered 3 -2
all current and future traffic and circulation issues to confirm that no significant impacts will
result from Project construction and implementation, particularly when the Project will influence
traffic patterns around the proposed Lido House Hotel to be constructed on the former City Hall
property south of Via Lido Plaza. In addition, there are several other issues that the MND should
clarify or further analyze.
Our concerns include but are not limited to the following:
• There will be an increased volume of vehicle traffic stacked in the southbound comment
Newport Boulevard left turn lane and entering eastbound Finley Avenue. The 3 -3
present configuration of southbound Newport Boulevard has a dedicated left turn lane at
the Finley Avenue intersection that can accommodate about three cars. Although not
mentioned in the Project Characteristics, MND Figure 2 suggests that the Project will
5950 Berkshire Lane • Suite 800 • Dallas, TX 75225 • 972.616.8777 • Fax 972.991.5184
3425 Via Lido • Suite 250 • Newport Beach, CA 92663 -3929 • 949.723.7100 • Fax 949.723.1141
212 West Kinzie Street • 5th Floor • Chicago, IL 60654 • 312.222.0085 • Fax 312.222.0552
4785 Caughlin Parkway • Reno, NV 89519 • 775.332.8251 • Fax 775.827.2185
www.fritzduda.com 16 -114
lengthen this left turn lane to accommodate about seven or eight cars. This dedicated left
turn lane will feed traffic into Finley Avenue, which currently has only one inbound lane
and two outbound lanes to service a significant amount of customer traffic between Via
Lido Plaza and Newport Boulevard. Finley Avenue will also soon service traffic to the
proposed Lido House Hotel being planned adjacent to Via Lido Plaza. We are concerned
because the MND fails to discuss or analyze the potentially significant impacts of
lengthening the dedicated southbound left turn lane on Newport Blvd. in light of present
and future traffic conditions. A greater number of left - turning vehicles from southbound
Newport Boulevard could overwhelm the existing single inbound lane on eastbound
Finley Avenue and potentially clog the Newport/Finley intersection, particularly where a
vehicle on eastbound Finley is waiting to clear two lanes of westbound (outbound) traffic
to turn left into Via Lido Plaza. Traffic impacts could be particularly acute during hotel
banquet events and concurrent theater performances at Via Lido Plaza. The MND should
consider evaluating the traffic signal at Newport Blvd. and Finley Avenue and/or
implementing additional mitigation measures to control the flow of traffic into eastbound
Finley Avenue from Newport Blvd., such as widening Finley Avenue to include a second
eastbound (inbound) lane, or lengthening Finley Avenue to accommodate traffic into both
the Hotel Project and Via Lido Plaza.
Eliminating the westbound free -right turn lane on 32nd Street at Newport
Boulevard will increase traffic delays. The Project proposes to eliminate the free right
turn lane on westbound 32nd Street that directs traffic onto northbound Newport
Boulevard. The MND fails to provide any supporting traffic analysis or quantification
regarding the volume of traffic presently making right -hand turns, delays associated with
eliminating the free right, or the queuing that could result from traffic stacking up on
westbound 32nd Street in the right -hand lane. Drivers frustrated with delays on
westbound 32nd Street could seek to access Newport Boulevard from numerous other
public right -of -way connection points, such as Via Lido, leading to further congestion on
those streets. The MND also fails to quantify the delay that fire trucks will experience
after exiting Fire Station No. 2, turning west on 32nd Street, and waiting to turn north on
Newport Boulevard, potentially causing a public hazard. The MND should further
analyze the extent of delays caused by the elimination of the free -right turn lane on 32nd
Street.
Increasing the number of lanes and adding a bike lane on northbound Newport
Boulevard may impact existing road features. The Project proposes to "introduce 6-
foot -wide bike lanes along both sides of Newport Boulevard between 32nd Street and Via
Lido." MND at 8. To accommodate that effort, it is unclear whether the dedicated right
turn lane on northbound Newport Boulevard to Via Lido will require modifications. For
instance, there is no indication, of what changes (if any) will be made to the dedicated
right turn lane and associated concrete island on northbound Newport Boulevard heading
into Via Lido. The City should clarify what changes will be made to this intersection,
and whether these changes will impact traffic patterns. Additionally, there are currently
three metered parking stalls on the east side of Newport Boulevard adjacent to the
dedicated right turn lane. The MND is unclear as to whether these stalls are being
Comment
3 -3 cons.
Comment
3 -4
Comment
3 -5
Comment'
3 -6
16 -115
removed, and if so, if they are among the 26 parking stalls referenced in the MND to be
removed along Newport Boulevard in the Project area.
The City must mitigate the risk of concurrent construction of the Project and the
nearby Lido House Hotel. The Project is expected to be constructed over a six -month
period, beginning September 2015 and ending March 2016. MND at 9. At the same
time, the nearby Lido House Hotel is expected to undergo final design and construction
starting early 2016 and through summer 2017. Lido House Hotel Draft EIR at 3 -18.
While the Project MND states that "[c]onstruction of the Lido House Hotel project is not
anticipated to begin until construction of the [Project] is complete," there is no assurance
the this will be the case, and the MND contains no mitigation measure prohibiting the
concurrent construction of both projects. See MND at 78. Concurrent construction could
be devastating for area traffic and emergency access, considering that "[Project]
construction would require temporary lane closures on both Newport Boulevard and 32nd
Street," while the Lido House Hotel would bring into the area "922 total haul truck trips
for soil import over a 21 day period (44 trips per day)." See MND at 49; Lido House
Hotel Draft EIR at 5.5 -20. The Project and the Lido House Hotel both defer undefined
traffic management measures to some future time, leaving the public at great risk of
experiencing significant traffic impacts attributable to the concurrent construction of both
projects. See MND at 49; Lido House Hotel Draft EIR at 5.5 -21. The MND should
further evaluate the risk of concurrent construction and mitigate it if necessary.
Miscellaneous issues requiring clarification. In addition to the issues identified above,
we have noted several instances where the MND requires further clarification or
correction.
o Additional analysis of traffic signal modification is required. The MND states
that the Project "would require traffic signal modifications at the intersections of
30th Street, 32nd Street, Finley Avenue and Via Lido." MND at 8. Please clarify
and explain what these modifications will be and how they will impact area traffic
and circulation, particularly in light of some of the potentially significant traffic
impacts described above.
o Bus stop locations require identification. At various places, the MND notes
that "bus stops along Newport Boulevard would be relocated to a location near
each existing bus stop." See, e.g., MND at 8. Please clarify where these locations
would be placed, as idling busses could have traffic, noise, and other impacts
around the Via Lido Plaza property as well as the proposed Lido House Hotel
project.
T 3 -6 3-6 cont.
Comment
3 -7
Comment
3 -8
Comment
3 -9
o Scope of landscaping improvements on corner of Newport and Finley. MND
Figure 2 indicates "proposed landscaping" on the northwest comer of the cm "meat
Newport Boulevard/Finley Avenue intersection. Please clarify or explain whether 3 -10
or not this proposed landscaping is to be established on the Via Lido Plaza
property, or where this landscaping will be placed.
16 -116
We appreciate your consideration of these comments and requests for clarification and ask that
the City revise the MND and perform additional analyses to ensure that the Project does not
result in any significant environmental impacts. If you have any questions about these comments
or wish to discuss them further, please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 723 -7100, ex. 207,
or dhoward@fritzduda.com.
Sincerely,
4VWVL
Donald J. Howard
Executive Vice President
Comment
3 -11
16 -117
Response to Comment Letter #3: Lido Partners
Comment 3 -1: Thank you for your comments on the proposed project. We have provided responses to
your specific comments on the proposed project below.
Comment 3 -2: The traffic impact analysis presented in the Draft IS /MND utilizes traffic projections
generated by the Traffic Engineer of the City of Newport Beach. As described in Section 5.16.1 (a) and
(b) of the Draft IS /MND, the segment of Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 32nd Street currently
operates at LOS F, while the segment between 32nd Street and 30th Street currently operates at LOS D.
Implementation of the proposed project would improve segment operations between Via Lido and 32nd
Street to LOS D and operations between 32nd Street and 30th Street to LOS B. Additionally, the
proposed project would improve the volume to capacity (V /C) ratio between Via Lido and 32nd Street
from 1.055 to 0.879 and improve the V/C ratio between 32nd Street and 30th Street from 0.853 to
0.682. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would improve future traffic operations on
Newport Boulevard by increasing capacity to accommodate vehicle trips from growth that has already
occurred, is planned, or is projected to occur.
Comment 3 -3: The existing turn pocket for southbound Newport Boulevard at Finley Avenue is 60 feet
in length and can accommodate 3 vehicles based on design length of 20 feet per vehicle. The proposed
left turn pocket at this location will be 140 feet long and can accommodate 7 vehicles based on the 20
feet per vehicle design length. Additionally, Finley Avenue east of Newport Boulevard currently has one
inbound and two outbound lanes. The Lido House Hotel project site plan shows an additional inbound
lane to provide access to the hotel driveway. In regards to the traffic signal, the City practice is to
evaluate signal timing and operations based on existing conditions in the field. It would be conjecture to
establish signal timing based on turn movement projections. The signal timing at this intersection will be
evaluated when the Newport Boulevard project is completed, and would be evaluated again when the
hotel development is completed as part of the ongoing responsibility of the Public Works Department.
Comment 3 -4: Current project design includes a westbound right -turn lane for westbound 32 "' Street
onto northbound Newport Boulevard that varies in width between 20 — 30 feet at the intersection. In
traffic engineering analysis, this is considered a "de facto' lane. A de -facto right turn lane is a curb lane
wide enough to separately serve both through and right turn traffic (typically with width of 19 feet or
more from curb to outside of through lane with parking prohibited). The de facto lane will serve to
address any potential for delay with the elimination of the free -right turn and help facilitate westbound
traffic through the intersection.
Comment 3 -5: The City has equipment at every traffic signal that can be activated by the Fire
Department to change the signal operation to allow a fire truck to immediately cross an intersection.
Consequently, emergency response from fire trucks leaving Fire Station #2 will not be delayed by the
elimination of the free -right turn lane. Should the intersection not clear and if vehicles are stopped in
the right turn position, as could be the case in the current intersection configuration, an emergency
vehicle with lights and sirens will simply use any free lane including opposing traffic lanes to safely make
the turn. This type of emergency vehicle driving technique is routinely used when necessary and does
not significantly reduce response times.
16 -118
Comment 3 -6: The proposed project would not modify the dedicated right turn lane from northbound
Newport Boulevard to Via Lido, except to provide for a new striped bike lane immediately adjacent to
the northbound Newport Boulevard through lanes. Only striping work is proposed. No changes to the
existing concrete island or curb -side parking are proposed.
Comment 3 -7: As stated in Section 5.18.1(b) of the Draft IS /MND, construction of the Lido House Hotel
project is not anticipated to begin until construction of the proposed project is completed. However, if
the final construction phase of the proposed project were to overlap with the initial construction phase
of the Lido House Hotel project, all potential conflicts would be minimized or avoided by the proposed
project's traffic control plan , which will be review and approved by the Public Works Department, and
the Lido House Hotel's construction management plan. Both projects will have to submit their plans to
the City for review prior to implementation, and will need to demonstrate that they will successfully
maintain adequate vehicular access based on anticipated conditions. The Lido House Hotel construction
management plan includes, but is not limited to, measures for the maintenance of traffic control and
identification of construction vehicle routes. If construction of the proposed project is not complete
when construction of the Lido House Hotel begins, the contractor for the Lido House hotel could
implement measures per the construction management plan to avoid Newport Boulevard and route
construction vehicles onto 32nd Street to minimize disruptions to traffic circulation and maintain
adequate vehicular access for abutting properties and the community in general. Implementation of
these measures would avoid any potential concurrent construction conflicts from occurring in the
unlikely event that construction of both projects overlapped.
Comment 3 -8: Traffic signal modifications associated with the proposed project would be limited to
physical installation of new equipment (poles, signal boxes, wiring, etc.) associated with widening of the
roadway. Impacts related to the traffic signal modification /construction work would be short -term, as
lane closures are associated with standing the poles and are typically of very limited duration.
Comment 3 -9: The proposed bus stops are generally consistent with existing locations, and would only
move approximately two feet north or south if there are any changes at all. Additionally, the proposed
bus stops include turnouts that would allow a standing bus to be outside of traffic lanes and improve
roadway operations and reduce potential vehicle conflicts for improved safety.
Comment 3 -10: All project landscaping proposed at the northwest corner of the intersection of
Newport Boulevard and Finley Avenue would occur within public right -of -way and not on the Via Lido
Plaza property.
Comment 3 -11: Thank you for your comments. The comments and responses do not constitute
significant new information as to the severity of impacts identified or new impacts not previously
considered. The comments and responses above do not require additional impact analysis or change any
of the significance conclusions reached in the Draft IS /MND. Therefore, comments and responses do not
warrant revisions to the Draft IS /MND and its recirculation for additional public comment is also not
warranted.
16 -119
POrt Properties, 10C.
303 Broadway St., Suite 204 -1
Laguna Beach, California 92651
(949)280 -4336
Email: russellsingerOgmail.com
September 23, 2014
Mr. Andy Tran
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Phone: (949)644 -3210
Email: ATran@newportbeachca.gov
Re: Proposed Newport Blvd. Widening and Realignment Project
Dear Andy:
The purpose of this letter is to express our opposition to the proposed widening and
realignment of Newport Boulevard that is scheduled for a public hearing in early
October. Our company owns the property on the comer of Finley Ave. and Newport
Blvd. — 3315 -3345 Newport Blvd.. The reasons for our opposition is that we feel there
are substantial impacts to the community that are not addressed in the EIR and do not
feel, in its current form, that the project is justified.
1. An arterial to nowhere:
As we understand it, this project is driven by the desire by Public Works to bring
Newport Blvd. into compliance with some County arterial map that designates Newport
Blvd. as a future arterial from 32nd Street, that is to meet arterial design criteria and the
radius of the curve at 32nd decreased to accommodate 45 MPH vehicular travel speed.
Since the current posted speed in front of our building is 30 MPH, we asked if it is the
City's intent to increase the speed in this section of Newport Blvd. to 45 MPH? The
answer we were given by staff was: "No. The roadway is just being changed to meet the
County's designation criteria and we have no intention of increasing the speed on
Newport Blvd."
In other words, these public funds are being spent to bring Newport Blvd. into
compliance with a county map that was probably drawn by a Traffic Engineer 30 years
Comment
4 -1
Comment
4 -2
16 -120
ago and has never been reevaluated based on today's needs and existing conditions. So,
the arterial is being extended onto the Peninsula, but the City has no intention of ever
utilizing this roadway as an arterial. Why build these improvements if they are
unnecessary and will never be utilized by the public?
Why has the City not requested that the County's arterial map not been modified to show
the arterial stopping at Via Lido, where the transition to a local collector street really
occurs? The whole benefit of this project to the City appears to be to comply with a line
on a map, while there are serious impacts to building and business owners who will be
adversely affected by this project.
2. Significant impact to the community:
As property owners of a commercial building in the project area, we are very concerned
about the removal of on street parking in the area and the impact that this will have on
our tenants, their customers and ultimately our property values. Our concerns are that this
project will foster a "dead zone" at the entry to the Peninsula. Do you really want the
"well- heeled" guests at the new Lido House Hotel, who will likely be paying $500+ a
night to stay in Newport Beach to be looking westward at boarded up shops and vacant
buildings and a potential haven for the homeless? It has been proven many times in other
cities all over southern California that parking convenience is the number three factor,
after pricing and the quality of services and products that fosters retail success.
The proposed removal of on -street parking directly adjacent to our building will have a
disastrous impact on our restaurant, retail and office tenants, who rely on this parking
as a convenience for their customers. Without convenient parking, we fear that their
businesses will fail and our building and others adjacent commercial space will become
vacant.
We understand that the City proposes to replace these on -street parking spaces with the
expansion of parking at the old Block Buster Video building at the corner of 32nd St. and
Newport Blvd.. While this may provide a "one for one" numerical replacement of the
number of on- street parking spaces to be removed, the parking lot does not replace the
convenience of the existing on -street parking. For example, in the case of our property,
this parking will be located over 200 feet away from our tenants businesses. Why hasn't
this issue been considered by staff and addressed in the EIR?
In addition, we are concerned about the proposed reduction in sidewalk width because
we have approved cafe seating (which we pay $1,200.00 per year to the City of Newport
Beach for "in -lieu parking ") on the sidewalk adjacent to our restaurant and are concerned
that a reduction of sidewalk width and removal of adjacent parallel street parking will put
our customers dangerously close to the proposed bike and vehicular travel lanes. We see
this as a potential public hazard and liability for the City.
While we support the construction of the two bike lanes, we feel it is the only positive
benefit of this project. In lieu of the current proposal, we would like to suggest the
Comment
4 -2 cont.
Comment
4 -3
Comment
4 -4
1 Comment
4 -5
16 -121
following alternative approach that mitigates our concerns and the concerns of our
neighbors, improves traffic flow and avoids potentially adverse impacts to adjacent
businesses and property values:
3. Revised Concept:
• Maintain the existing sidewalk widths and on- street parking along Newport Blvd.
• Add the third lane of travel on the southbound side of Newport Blvd.
• Add the bike lanes on both sides of the street.
• Keep the existing curb line on the west side of the street and offset the increased
roadway width to the east.
• Maintain the existing radius on 32 "d St.
• Stop the arterial at Via Lido.
• Add more on- street parking on the east edge of Newport Blvd. and 32 d Street
• Make the new lot short term parking only.
• Add enhanced cross walks.
This is a project that meets the needs of the community, has few impacts to property
owners and tenants, maintains slow vehicular speed limits on the Peninsula and enhances
a pedestrian oriented environment.
Comment
4 -5 cont.
Thank you for your consideration of our request. If you have any questions regarding the comment
above, please do not hesitate to contact me. 4 -6
Very truly yours,
PORT PROPERTIES, INC.
Russell Singer, President
16 -122
Response to Comment Letter ft4: Port Properties, Inc.
Comment 4 -1: Thank you for your comments on the proposed project. We have provided responses to
your specific comments on the proposed project below. It should also be noted that your comment
incorrectly identifies the environmental document as an EIR. The environmental document that was
circulated for the proposed project was a Draft IS /MND.
Comment 4 -2: The proposed project has been designed to reduce existing and future traffic congestion
from growth that has already occurred, is planned, or is projected to occur. While the segment of
Newport Boulevard that would be improved under the proposed project is designated on the County
Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) as a 6 -lane facility, project need is primarily driven by poor
existing level of service (LOS). Existing traffic counts register 49,000 vehicles per day south of the
Newport Boulevard bridge over Coast Highway. Of this total, traffic on Via Lido accounts for 11,000
vehicles per day, while the remaining 38,000 vehicles per day originate from Newport Boulevard south
of Via Lido. This existing volume of 38,000 vehicles per day exceeds the capacity of a four -lane facility,
which is designed to accommodate 20,000 to 30,000 vehicles per day. The capacity of the expanded six -
lane roadway could accommodate 30,000 — 45,000 vehicles per day, which would bring this segment of
Newport Boulevard to an acceptable level of service. As described in Section 5.16.1 (a) and (b) of the
Draft IS /MND, the segment of Newport Boulevard between Via Lido and 32nd Street currently operates
at LOS F, while the segment between 32nd Street and 30th Street currently operates at LOS D.
Implementation of the proposed project would improve roadway segment operations between Via Lido
and 32nd Street to LOS D and operations between 32nd Street and 30th Street to LOS B. It should also
be noted that the current traffic counts described above are for off -peak season. Summer counts are
higher, which would further exacerbate existing traffic deficiencies described above, and provide for
even greater need for the proposed project.
It is not the intent of the City to increase the posted speed limit. The traffic speeds noted on the
conceptual project plan are design speeds and not the posted speed limits. Speed limits are established
pursuant to a specified procedure by state law based upon measured speeds and the City cannot
arbitrarily set a limit. The City is required to follow state law in the process to establish the posted speed
limit and cannot arbitrarily establish a speed limit of 30 MPH, or 35 MPH, or 40 MPH, or 45 MPH without
completing a new speed survey and determining the measured critical speed. Based on existing traffic
volumes and the proposed design, City staff does not believe speeds will increase significantly to
warrant a change in the future posted speed limit. The City will determine the new critical speed for the
proposed project consistent with state law and use it to establish a new legal speed limit. It should also
be noted that the posted speed limit is not necessarily the same as the design speed limit.
Comment 4 -3: There is no evidence that relocation of existing street parking on Newport Boulevard to
the proposed parking lot would reduce business patronage resulting in blight. The proposed parking lot
would be located approximately only 200 feet from the businesses located at 3315 through 3345
Newport Boulevard. This distance is not a significant distance to walk and the proposed parking lot
should be convenient for patrons. Additionally, local businesses surrounding the proposed project are
located in an area characterized by heavy pedestrian activity due to their proximity to the beach.
16 -123
Consequently, the need to walk approximately 200 feet from the proposed parking lot to the property of
concern would be consistent with the existing character of the project area.
Implementation of the proposed project could potentially make the project area a more desirable area
for business patrons. The proposed project has been designed to reduce existing and future traffic
congestion from growth that has already occurred, is planned, or is projected to occur. Without the
proposed project, traffic conditions would continue to deteriorate and may impact the ability of patrons
to reach local businesses surrounding the project area. Furthermore, the proposed project would
increase the desirability of the project area by introducing landscaping features along the edges of the
proposed parking lot and within the improved median along Newport Boulevard that would enhance
local visual quality. Therefore, the proposed project should not reduce patronage to local business on
Newport Boulevard. Finally, redevelopment of the former City Hall site with a hotel as discussed in the
comment letter will bring potential patrons to the area who would likely visit the shops and restaurant
on foot increasing business patronage.
Comment 4 -4: Reduced sidewalk width from 10 feet to 8 feet and elimination of parked cars along
other project design features would not reduce safety for pedestrians using the public sidewalk and
patrons using patio seating. The proposed roadway has been designed to have a relatively straight
alignment and would not include any dangerous turns. Similarly, the proposed sidewalks would include
8 -inch tall curbs that would provide a physical barrier which adequately separates the expanded
roadway and pedestrians and patrons using patio seating. In addition, the introduction of a 6 -foot wide
bike lane between the vehicular travel lane and the sidewalk will further separate the sidewalk and
patio seating area from vehicular travel lanes. As described in response to comment 4 -2 above, City
staff does not believe speeds for the proposed roadway would increase substantially to warrant a
change in the future speed limit. Consequently, it is not anticipated that vehicles would be traveling at
substantially higher speeds that could decrease safety for pedestrians and patrons using patio seating.
The comment letter notes the presence of an outdoor dining patio of an existing restaurant located on
the commenter's property and the payment of an in -lieu parking fee. The restaurant was authorized by
Use Permit No. 1852 in 1978, and the intensification of use required additional parking pursuant to the
parking requirements of the Zoning Code. The City allowed the restaurant to participate in a commercial
in -lieu parking fee program in -lieu of providing 8 additional parking spaces. As a result, the restaurant
operator or property owner must pay $150 per space per year ($1,200 per year) into the in -lieu parking
fund in order to operate the restaurant. Use Permit No. 1852 did not include an outdoor dining patio.
Rather, outdoor dining was later permitted in 2000, pursuant to Outdoor Dining Permit No. 71. Given
the size of the outdoor patio, no additional parking was required by the Municipal Code so it had no
effect on the previous conditions requiring the payment of an in -lieu fee for 8 spaces. Lastly, the
payment of in -lieu parking fees does not guarantee the retention of public parking in any particular
location and funds are used at the discretion of the City to create public parking and these funds may be
used to partially off -set the cost of constructing the proposed parking lot.
Comment 4 -5: Thank you for expressing your support for the bike lane component of the proposed
project. We have reviewed your proposed revisions to the concept plan and determined that they
16 -124
would not allow the City to meet project objectives. Maintaining existing sidewalk widths and on- street
parking would require a greater level of property acquisitions to provide adequate right -of -way to widen
the roadway. Similarly, keeping the existing curb line on the west side of the street and offset the
increased roadway width to the east would require a greater level of property acquisitions to provide
adequate right -of -way to widen the roadway. It would also require the realignment of Newport
Boulevard south of 32nd Street in order or geometrically align with the new lane configuration north of
32 "d Street. As discussed in the response to Comment 4 -3 above, on- street parking will be replaced by
the proposed new public parking lot. In regards to enhanced cross walk, the final design will incorporate
enhanced decorative cross walks. The current project design limits full property acquisitions to the
vacant Wachovia bank building and its adjacent parking lot, which allows the City to meet project
objectives while minimizing right -of -way acquisition requirements. Therefore, revisions to project
design are not warranted.
Comment 4 -6. Thank you for your comments on the proposed project.
16 -125
From: Maureen t Terich [mailto:mtkterich(@Vahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2014 7:06 PM
To: Tran, Andy
Subject: Newport Blvd plan
Mr Tran. September 23, 2014
Re: Contract #4881. Newport Blvd /32nd St Modification
I realize the comment period for the 32nd St improvements has passed. So I am simply
requesting some additional information and to let you know of the impact this project will
have on our property. Comment
5 -1
I own the home and dock located at 3208 Marcus, directly across the channel from the parking
lot used by Las Fajitas and other businesses. We have been out of the country for the last
few months and just now received the Notice of Negative Declaration.
My primary concern for the removal of the vacant ( previous bank) building on the corner of
Newport Blvd and 32nd St is traffic noise abatement. The building currently provides some
buffer from the busy traffic at the intersection. Once removed, increased traffic noise wi
indeed affect our property as well as our neighbors. This will have a major impact on the
value & liveability of our property.
Are there any plans to provide some type of noise abatement and /or sight controls along the
Boulevard intersection to compensate for the noise of the traffic and /or frequent Emergency
Vehicle sirens?
Also is there any noise abatement planned for the area between the planned parking lot and
the channel alley. At least some landscaping between the parking lot and the channel for
noise and sight abatement would be welcomed.
Naturally, we will do what we can on our property to provide whatever sight and noise
abatement we can. We request & would appreciate whatever the city can to do reduce the n
and sight for
1 - the area across the channel from our & our neighbors property and
2- the area where there will be major changes to the intersection of 32nd
When the (bank) building is removed.
As proposed, the changes will definitely have a negative effect on us & our neighbors
property. The unabated noise will definitely have a negative impact on the property values
let alone the right to enjoy our property. The property next door is currently on sale for
$1.8 Million dollars.
If there currently are plans to minimize or for noise abatement in the contract please let us
know. If there are no noise abatement controls, please notify us & perhaps let us know to
whom we should direct our comments to.
1
Comment
16 -126
s -2
I would appreciate hearing from you about our concerns.
Respectfully,
Comment
Thomas Terich
3208 Marcus Ave. ' -j
Newport Beach, Ca
Cell: 360 -319 -1476
Email: mtkterichoavahoo.com
Sent from my iPad
2
16 -127
Response to Comment Letter #5: Thomas Terich
Comment 5 -1: Thank you for your comments on the proposed project. We have provided responses to
your specific comments on the proposed project below.
Comment 5 -2: As shown in Table 12 of the Draft IS /MND, implementation of the proposed project
would increase noise levels on Marcus Avenue north of the proposed parking lot by 2.6 dBA, which
would constitute a significant impact. However, implementation of mitigation measure NOI -1 would
limit the projected noise increase at residential properties on Marcus Avenue north of the proposed
parking lot to 0.1 dBA, which would be imperceptible to the human ear. Mitigation Measure NOI -1
states the following:
"The project applicant shall either raise the existing wall along the shared
property line of the proposed public parking lot and the home at 3206 Marcus
Avenue to a minimum of 6 feet high or construct a new 6 -foot high wall
immediately south of the existing wall and located entirely on City property. The
sound wall shall be constructed prior to the start of any demolition or
construction activities."
Consequently, implementation of mitigation measure NO1 -1 would fully mitigate all noise increases near
3206 and 3208 Marcus Avenue and other properties along Marcus Avenue, and impacts would be less
than significant.
Implementation of Mitigation Measure NO1 -1 would also block views of a portion of the improved
intersection. Although a new wall would not be constructed in the location of the vacant Wachovia
bank building, the proposed project would introduce landscaping features adjacent to the proposed
wall, along the edges of the proposed parking lot and within the planned improved median for Newport
Boulevard that would enhance the visual quality of the project area. This combination of improving the
existing wall between along the shared property line of the proposed public parking lot and the home at
3206 Marcus Avenue and introduction of project landscaping features would reduce visual impacts at
3208 Marcus Avenue to a level less than significant.
Comment 5 -3: Thank you for your comments on the proposed project.
16 -128
From: Rececca Robles [mailto:rebroblesl(alomail.coml
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2014 10:03 PM
To: Tran, Andy
Subject: Mitigated Negative Declaration for Newport Blvd /32nd St Project
September 28, 2014
Andy Tran, P.E. Senior Civil engineer
Public Works Department
City of Newport Beach
Dear Mr. Tran:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Newport Boulevard and
32nd Street Modification Project, Newport Beach. In our letter of December 22, 2013 we expressed concern cOR1111ent
regarding the potential for buried archaeological resources to be impacted by the proposed project. Although 6.1
we would be more comfortable if the mitigation measures addressing this concern include monitoring by a
qualified archaeologist during excavations in areas of previously undisturbed sub surfaces, we concur with the
Negative Declaration based on mitigation measures CUL -1 and CUI -2.
Thank you for your consideration of cultural resources,
Rebecca Robles
United coalition to Protect Panhe (UCPP)
119 Avenida San Fernando
San Clemente, CA 92672
16 -129
16 -130
Response to Comment Letter #6: Rebecca Robles
Comment 6 -1: Thank you for your comments on the proposed project and expressing your support
based on mitigation measures CUL -1 and CUL -2.
16 -131
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE of PLANNING AND RESEARCH
0 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT
EDMUND G. BROWN JR.
GOVP.RNOR
October 2, 2014
Andy Tran
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Subject: Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
SCH #: 2014091008
Dear Andy Tran:
fi� `�EUF PIgMN /y��
T 1 -,,0y9
it m
d.� s
�r��FOFCALIF�p
KEN ALEX
DIRECTOR
CNB Public Works
OCT 062014
The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Mitigated Negative Declaration to selected state
agencies for review. The review period closed on October 1, 2014, and no state agencies submitted
comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse Comment
review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality 7_1
Act.
Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the
environmental review process. If you have a question about the above -named project, please refer to the
ten -digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office.
Sincerely,
Scott Morgan
Director, State Clearinghouse
140010th Street P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812 -3044
(916) 445 -0613 FAX (916) 323 -3018 www.opr.cagov
16 -132
Document Details Report
State Clearinghouse Data Base
SCH# 2014091008 .
Project Title Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project
.Lead Agency Newport Beach, City of
Type MIND Mitigated Negative Declaration
Description The Newport Boulevard and 32nd Street Modification Project has been developed to improve the
intersection of Newport Blvd and 32nd Street in order to increase vehicular capacity and reduce
existing traffic congestion to an acceptable level of service. The proposed project is located within a
fully urbanized section of the City of Newporf Beach and would add an additional northbound through
lane along Newport Blvd from 30th Street to 32nd Street and add an additional southbound through
lane along Newport Bivd from Via Lido to 32nd Street, terminating as a right -turn only lane a'. 32nd
Street.
.Lead Agency Contact
Name
Andy Tran
Agency
City of Newport Beach
Phone
949 644 3315 Fax
email
33° 36'57" N / 117 ° 55'50" W
Address
100 Civic Center Drive
City
Newport Beach State CA Zip 92660
Project .Location
County
Orange
City
Newport Beach
Region
Lat / Long
33° 36'57" N / 117 ° 55'50" W
Cross Streets
Newport Blvd and 32nd Street .
Parcel No.
Township
6S Range 10W Section .28 Base SBB &M
Proximity to:
Highways
SR -1; SR -55
Airports
Railways
Waterways
Newport Bay; Pacific Ocean
Schools
Ensign MS; Newport ES
Land Use
Project Site consists of an existing roadway that does not have land use or zoning designation
Project Issues
Aesthetic/Visual; Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic- Historic; Biological Resources; Coastal
Zone; Drainage /Absorption; Flood Plain /Flooding; Forest Land /Fire Hazard; Geologic /Seismic;
Minerals; Noise; Population /Housing Balance; Public Services; Recreation /Parks; Schools/Universities;
Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion /Compaction /Grading; Solid Waste; Toxic /Hazardous; Traffic /Circulation;
Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Wetland /Riparian; Growth Inducing; Landuse Cumulative
Effects
Reviewing Resources Agency; Department of Conservation; Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 5; Office of
Agencies Historic Preservation; Department of Parks and Recreation; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans,
District 12; Air Resources Board; State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Drinking Water;
State Water Resources Control Board, Divison of Financial Assistance; Regional Water Quality
Control Board, Region 8; Department of Toxic Substances Control; Native American Heritage
Commission; State Lands Commission
Date Received 09/02/2014 Start of Review 09/02/2014 Endot'Review 10/01/2014
16 -133
Response to Comment Letter #7: State Clearinghouse
Comment 7 -1: Thank you for your comment letter documenting that no state agencies submitted
comments on the Draft IS /MND and that we have complied with the State Clearinghouse review
requirements for draft environmental documents.
16 -134