Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 - Newport Island Oloid ProjectCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 16 May 23, 2006 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager's Office Dave Kiff, Assistant City Manager 949/644 -3002 or dkiff @city.newport - beach.ca.us John Kappeler, Acting Division Manager, Code & WQ Enforcement 949/644 -3215 orjkappeler @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Mitigated Negative Declaration relating to a Water Quality Improvement Project ( "Oloid Project ") around Newport Island ISSUE: Should the City Council approve the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for a grant from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for future Council approval? RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Oloid Project. DISCUSSION: Background: This agenda item seeks Council's approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to be submitted to the SWRCB. CEQA approval is a requirement of the SWRCB's grant approval process. The Newport Island Channels (NIC) are at the west end of Lower Newport Bay. The area around The Arches and 33rd Street are the two remaining areas in the Bay that have long term advisories "posted" at the beaches warning that bacterial counts in the waters typically exceed State standards under Assembly Bill 411. The Channels have a limited hydraulic connection with the Bay — as such, the connection hinders tidal flushing. City staff believes this poor circulation plays a major role in the poor water quality in this area. CEQA Documents for Oloid Project May 23, 2006 Page 2 Beginning in 2002, City staff was directed to seek solutions to improve water quality around Newport Island. The following pilot tests and studies have been conducted: • InStreem Units — pilot testing of mechanical flow enhancers (InStreem) to improve water circulation and mixing with the bay. During the 10 day test local residents and stakeholders had the opportunity to observe the InStreem unit and provide comments to the City. In general, folks believed the unit was effective in enhancing water circulation, but expressed concerns relative to noise and potential impacts to boat traffic. • Submerged Pumps -- a study was conducted to evaluate the use of submerged pumps to enhance water circulation. The study concluded that submerged pumps can increase water circulation; however, they are very expensive to purchase and maintain. • Oloids (o -lo -weed) — pilot testing of yet another mechanical flow enhancer. The Oloid is a product designed to increase water circulation and bacterial exposure to UV light. Similar to the InStreem Unit, an Oloid was installed to evaluate its ability to improve water circulation and mixing with the bay. However, unlike the InStreem, the Oloid is much smaller and quieter, alleviating some (but not all) residents concerns relative to noise. CEQA Documents for Oloid Project May 23, 2006 Page 3 What an Oloid Looks Like Last year, your City Council adopted Resolution 2005 -59 authorizing staff to pursue a grant from the State Water Resources Control Board ( SWRCB) under the Proposition 40 Phase II (Watershed, Clean Beaches and Water Quality Act). Based on the Oloid pilot tests and Resolution 2005 -59, City staff applied for and were notified of the conditional award of a $625,000 grant from the SWRCB to purchase and install fifteen Oloids at strategic locations (as suggested by numerical modeling with final locations determined in consultation with NIC property owners) around Newport Island to circulate and improve water quality in this area. M f CEQA Documents for Oloid Project May 23, 2006 Page 4 Proposed Locations for the Oloids Rs+oGR,.. Va a) Alternative 3 ('15 Oloid Units) An appropriate CEQA document (a MND) has been prepared for Council review and approval in order to proceed with negotiations for a SWRCB grant agreement and project implementation. The grant agreement and project will be subject to future Council approval. Project Concerns. They Oloid Project is a challenging project. It involves the long -term use of up to 15 devices that will be subject to weather and salt -water over several years. The devices are guaranteed for 10 years, but there is no guarantee that the business that offers them will be in place to remove or repair them at 5 years or 10 years. And while noise monitoring of the devices has shown minimal noise impacts, City staff heard from about six individuals in the area who do not believe that the Oloids are acceptable in their neighborhood (during the pilot test period, more than 300 flyers were distributed to Newport Island -area neighbors inviting them to see the Oloid and to contact us with comments). Other residents have been asked to offer their comments as well. Coastal /Bay Water Quality Committee member Jim Miller has offered that "100s of residents" oppose the Oloids and have signed petitions to that effect —we have asked for the petitions, but have not seen them as of the date of this report. CEQA Documents for Oloid Project May 23, 2006 Page 5 In addition, findings in the MND (pages 17 and 31 -32) list noise impacts from this proposed project as "less than significant ", without mitigation. Finally, in many grants provided by the State through Proposition 40, grant recipients must pledge to maintain the project(s) constructed with grant funds for 23 years. Clearly, it is unreasonable today to envision these products lasting for 23 years. As such, the City will seek — through the grant agreement negotiations — to have this Oloid project serve as a pilot project for bacterial water quality improvement up and down the state's coastline. If viewed as a research project, the State may be able to suspend the 23 year requirement and align the timing with the products' warrantee period (10 years). The grant agreement will come back to the City Council at a future date, allowing residents, the Council, and staff more time to investigate the value of the Oloid Project. Findings of the MND. The MND found less than significant impacts in the following areas: Air Quality, Biological Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Noise. One impact was found to require mitigation. Construction equipment and traffic could impact emergency access during the construction period. The mitigation measure of a traffic control plan would prevent a significant impact. Committee Action: The Coastal /Bay Water Quality Committee has reviewed this effort, but has not taken a formal position on the Oloids. Environmental Review: A CEQA Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and posted with the State Clearing House and the County of Orange on December 14, 2005. The public review period ended on January 13, 2006 with no comments received. Public Notice: This agenda item may be noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the public meeting at which the City Council considers the item). Funding Availability: Proposition 40 Grant funds are available for this purpose. Submitted by: Dave <iff Assistant City Manager Attachments: A — Draft CEQA Documentation John Kappeler Acting Division Manager, Code & WQ Enforcement NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION RECEIVEL To: From: IAN( 1 d Office of Planning and Research City of Newport Beach 1400 Tenth Street, Room 121 3300 Newport Blvd. Public Works Department Sacramento, CA 95814 Newport Beach, CA gn✓ P *Vewport Beach County Clerk, County of Orange (Orange County) Public Services Division P.O. Box 238 Date received for filing at OPR/County Clerk: Santa Ana, CA 92702 Public review period. • December 142005 through January 13, 2006 Name of Project: Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project Project Location: The Rialto Channel, Lower Newport Bay Newport Beach (see attached Initial Study) Project Description: Please see attached Initial Study Public Meetings: No public meetings have been scheduled at this time. Hazardous Waste List: The site is not on a list of hazardous waste sites as defined in Government Code Section 65962.5(f) DQchtt�vailability: Copies of the Initial Study and supporting materials are available 4 OCJ ` y for public review at the following locations: f 4 1op5 Newport Beach City Hall Newport Beach Public Library Q4C' P��pP°EP °,,,5CPublic Works Department 1000 Avocado Ave 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA toM °� Newport Beach, CA copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting the adoption of a Negative Declaration is attached. Additional plans, studies and /or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public review. If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document, your comments should be submitted in writing prior to the close of the public review period. Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project, why they are significant, and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. Written comments should be submitted to: Questions on the Initial Study should be directed to: City of Newport Beach John Douglas, AICP Public Works Department 714- 628 -0464 Attn: Bob Stein, P.E. 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 IQ /vf d Date Bob Stein, P.E. Principal Engineer Form A Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal Mail lo: State Clearinghouse, PO Box 3044, Sacramento, CA 95812 - /3044 9161445 -0613 SCH # i Proe tTtle• NAJP"` ` j c y /,. Lead A¢ency: '( `y Y- O 1-3 a1)p t�eaC.�` Contact Person: Mailing Address: �f%�p N eGU af'f �.'A n Phone: 11� - (9 �'b - U 1+roOr City: N'+-U� UPS Zip: qa. 5�_ b County: D — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Project Location: YY \\ 1 / County: rG e- City/Nearest Community: lv P-GJ 10 Bellh Cross Streets: Ip ^35 s Zip Code: �o Total Acres: �A Assessor's Parcel No. A' Section: Twpp. � Range: Base: Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: Waterways: Newf&CIr Airports: Railways: — /Schools: Document Type: CEQA: ❑ NOP ❑ Supplement/Subsequent EIR NEPA: ❑ NOI Other: ❑ Joint Document ❑ Early Cons (Prior SCH No.) ❑ EA ❑ Final Document JRNeg Dec ❑ Other ❑ Draft EIS ❑ Other ❑ Draft EIR ❑ Commercial: ❑ FONSI Acres ----------------------------------------- Local Action Type: ❑ Mining: Mineral ❑ Industrial: ❑ General Plan Update ❑ Specific Plan ❑ Rezone ❑ Annexation ❑ General Plan Amendment ❑ Master Plan ❑ Prezone ❑ Redevelopment ❑ General Plan Element ❑ Planned Unit Development ❑ Use Permit t2<ccastal Permit ❑ Community Plan ❑ Site Plan ❑ Land Division (Subdivision. etc.) ❑ Other Development Type: ❑ Residential: Units_ Acres ❑ Water Facilities: Type MGD ❑ Office: Sq %r. Acres Employees ❑ Transportation: Ttpe ❑ Commercial: Sq %r. Acres £mplovees ❑ Mining: Mineral ❑ Industrial: Sgfi. Acres Emplovees ❑ Power: Tvpe Wails ❑ Educational ❑ Waste Treatment: Type ❑ Recreational ❑ Hazardous Wa te: Tvpe Other: fj)Gt-W gsUC, t tni� ewxaht ------------------------------UL---------- Funding (approx.): — — — — — — — Federal S — — — — — State S — — — — — — — — Total S — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Project Issues Discussed in Document: ❑ AestheticfVisual ❑ Agricultural Land ❑ Air Quality ❑ Archeological/Historical 19coastal Zone Drainage/Absorption ❑ Economic/Jobs ❑ Fiscal ❑ Flood Plain/Flooding ❑ Forest Land/Fire Hazard ❑ Geologic /Seismic ❑ Minerals oise Population/Housing Balance ❑ Public Services/Facilities ❑ Recreation/Parks ❑ Schools/Universities ❑ Septic Systems ❑ Sewer Capacity ❑ Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading ❑ Solid Waste ❑ Toxic/Hazardous ❑ Traffic/Circulation ❑ Vegetation Water Quality ❑ Water Supply /Groundwater ❑ Wetland/Riparian ❑ Wildlife ❑ Growth Inducing ❑ Landuse ❑ Cumulative Effimis ❑ Other — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — Present Land Use/Zoning/General P an De Ignat_ion: ----------------------------------------- 5aGe�w�� Project Description: ((11 Q r (( e y �nS�G�IF�IBri 0t DIOt) U.;PrTP� GirTGUCA(&o- GiE�ItG2S lv j�Ew�or 1 ( e t I -6 t tM V fD V�P v iAe -c $ U G l t �,(, January 2004 u 23 Reviewing Agencies Checklist `Resources Agency Boating & Waterways 5 Coastal Commission - (_ar,5 6ea411 —Coastal Conservancy Colorado River Board _Conservation $ Fish & Game _Forestry & Fire Protection —Office of Historic Preservation Parks & Recreation _Reclamation Board —S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission Water Resources (DWR) Business, Transportation 8 Housing _Aeronautics —California Highway Patrol _CALTRANS District # _ —Department of Transportation Planning (headquarters) _Housing & Community Development —Food & Agriculture Health & Welfare Health Services —Health & Consumer Services _General Services iOLA (Schools) Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency) Starting Date Signature Lead Agency (Complete if applicable): Consulting Firm: COtnexu5 Address: ( 3 ( 6c,7�- ZO I,A-' [ t UJ City/State/Zip: _<,q� Fes, CA (J-70S Contact: L"'w Dd-, <<'s Phone: 2 6 2.8 4 64 Applicant: 56t -e_ rt 5 ( ex t &Ae o � Address: City/State /Zip: Phone:( Form A, continued FKE Y Documen:distrnibution d agency DocumeH Suggeste Environmental Protection Agency _Air Resources Board _California Waste Management Board _SWRCB: Clean Water Grants _SWRCB: Delta Unit _SWRCB: Water Quality SWRCB: Water Rights A S Regional WQCB # Youth 8 Adult Corrections Corrections Independent Commissions 8 Offices _Energy Commission _Native American Heritage Commission _Public Utilities Commission _Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy _State Lands Commission Tahoe Regional Planning Agency 5 Other % %r.` C-B'r <' UT tvvee-Ts Ending Date Date (�_(I V OS- For SCH Use Only: Date Received at SCH Date Review Starts Date to Agencies Date to SCH Clearance Date Notes: DRAFT INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NEWPORT ISLAND CHANNEL CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT State Clearinghouse #2005 Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA. 92658 -8915 Contact: Bob Stein, P.E. 949 -644 -3322 Prepared by: CONEXUS Contact: John Douglas, AICP 714- 628 -0464 December 13, 2005 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project This page intentionally left blank CONEXUS Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Page A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY 7 AFFECTED AND DETERMINATION C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 9 D. REFERENCES 39 E. LIST OF PREPARERS 39 City of ewport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page i z Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement This page intentionally left blank CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page ii I� Newport Island Channel Cimulation Improvement Project CONEXUS FIGURES Page 1 Oloid Device 2 2 Location Map 5 3 Photo - Oloid Devices on Floating Platforms 21 City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page iii .LL Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS This page intentionally left blank City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page iv Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. PROJECT TITLE; . NEWPORT ISLAND CHANNEL CIRCULATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Newport Beach Public Works Department 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA. 92658 -8915 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Bob Stein, P.E., Principal Civil Engineer Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 949 - 644 -3322 4. PROJECT LOCATION: The Rialto Channel in Lower Newport Bay City of Newport Beach, CA. (See Figure 2, Location Map) 5. PROJECT SPONSOR: The project is sponsored by the City of Newport Beach, Public Works Department (see address above) 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: City of Newport Beach General Plan -Land Use Element: Open Space (water) Local Coastal Plan: Open Space (water) 7. ZONING: Open Space (water) City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 1 i i r, Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement 8. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CCNEXUS In its ongoing efforts to improve water quality in the portion of Newport Bay surrounding Newport Island and adjacent to Balboa Coves, the City of Newport Beach proposes to install an OLOID system of circulation devices. The OLOID system produces unidirectional, horizontal water flow. The design of the OLOID (see Figure l) is unique and when rotating, has the effect of two "fish tails" working in conjunction with one another. The design was originally conceived to be used as a boat propeller: however, its effectiveness in water circulation and aeration proved to be a more significant application. The OLOID was first used in the horticultural and agricultural applications to keep otherwise stagnant water circulating in irrigation run -off basins. The flowing water eliminates algal growth and increases oxygenation. Several areas in the Newport Island Channels are regularly posted with warnings for high concentrations of fecal indicator bacteria. Stagnant water conditions aggravate this problem by creating low oxygen conditions in the sediments that can be fertile grounds for bacterial growth. The Oloid devices can help reduce fecal indicator bacteria levels by eliminating the stagnant condition within the channels by inducing horizontal circulation and vertical mixing. Since the system is powered by a Y:- horsepower motor, it generates very little .noise. Also, because the motor is so small, there is minimal power consumption, less than 800 watts. A standard 1 1 OV outlet is sufficient to operate the system. The units would be mounted under floating platforms that have a surface dimension of 5 feet by 4.9 feet, with the propeller blade extending about one foot into the water. The platforms are proposed to be tethered to existing docks, bulkheads or pilings and would not interfere with navigation through the channels. The units would be prepared for saltwater installation, including the motor, sealed gearbox, paddle mechanism and control panels. Safety cages would surround each device to protect marine life and the public from all moving parts. The project includes the following components: Install approximately 15 Oloid units in accordance with the " Oloid Circulation Unit Alternative Evaluation" dated March 2005, prepared by Everest International Consultants Inc. Install interpretive signage. City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 2 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXVS • Conduct pre- and post - construction photo monitoring according to SWRCB standards. • Implement a program of guided field trips (for educational purposes) to the project area. • Develop a web page for the project that will include general project information, flow and water quality monitoring data and photo monitoring. Conduct two workshops to educate stakeholders on the project. • Install control panels, electrical conduit /conductors and telemetry systems utilizing Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC) for communication between the control panels and central office. Conduct pre- and post- construction photo monitoring according to SWRCB standards. 9. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING: The surrounding area includes residential single - family homes and the Lower Newport Bay. The channel is lined with residential piers and docks and moored with small vessels. 10. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): The actions and approvals required to implement the project, which are part of this analysis, include the following: • Section 401 Water Quality Certification from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region • Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission • Section 10 Letter of Permission from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Other agencies having review or permit authority over the project may be identified during the environmental review process. City Of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 3 4 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS This page intentionally left blank City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 4 CL a 0 a V ai 0 tf 0 r 0 � � d eat s Ila, NI zik j ---------- c Lf) .0 Q) U 0- Q) 0 CL P 3: - Q) Q) Z.0 , E 0 Q) >, UD 1. 1 910 Newport island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS This page intentionally left blank City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13.2005 Page 6 >1 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS B. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," as indicated by the checklist on the following r)aaes. DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable, standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. c /Os Signature Date City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 7 n2 Aesthefics Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biob ical Resources Cultural Resources Geology Soils Hazards & Hazardous Materials Hydrology Water Quali ty Land Use I Manning Mineral Resources Noise Po ulalion Houstn Public Services R, I Transportation I Traffic Utilities Service Systems Mandatory Findings of significance DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable, standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. c /Os Signature Date City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 7 n2 ....... ... I..., .... . . .. . ...... Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS This page intentionally left blank City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mifigated.Negaiive Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 8 i Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS C. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact' answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. 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 would not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project- specific screening analysis). All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project - level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 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 there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. "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 as discussed below). 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.. City of Newport Beach initial Study/mitigated Nega ive Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 9 ill, Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to d previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 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. City of Newport Beach initial Study/mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 10 ZS Island Channel Circulation Improvement CONEXUS City at Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 11 I ;' Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No ISSUE'S Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETiCS..Yl(OUId their' ro ostil' ; a) Have a substantial adverse effect an a scenic vista? X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rack autcrappings, and histaric X buildings within a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality at the site and X its surroundings? d) Create a new source at substantial light or glare, which would adversely X affect day or nighttime views in the area? `iII AGRICllLTURE RESOURCES In;d(etermirnhg whether trnp�cts f� "'�ufftirq�; }a resources are signficant enutronmental eif�cts, lead'ag }ertcies��iay,Pe`�� fife; Cahfbmia AgncOlt" 1:1,1 Lgnd Evaltia1lon and Sde Assesst en# Mo eal 1 £ prepared by theiCallfornia Dept bf Conservbffbn as 'art�opotlaningt�rt�sri assesstn clefs Dora WoL�(d the Ilii rteultu're and.farml'd'nd ro`'ecix a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown an the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland X Mapping and Monitoring Program at the California Resources Agency, to nan- o ricultural use? b) Cantlict with existing zoning tar agricultural use, or a Williamson Act X contract? C) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion at Farmland, to nan- X agricultural use? 111 A1R QllALl — Where available the slgrnffean e n xe iali 1 f4, bpp6catile an quz�lity ma•riagement or an po�fut%� c�Spfii�l-di� �x �``�tra� 11 `�p�� UPbn :make I determinations 'WotSld the tK. > -to etollowing foe .; . a) Cantlict with or obstruct implementation at the applicable air X quality Ian? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or X ro jetted air quality violation? City at Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 11 I ;' Newport Island Channel Circulation CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 12 i tiI Less Than Potential/ Significant Less Than No Issues Significant With Significant Impact j Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable X federal or state ambient air quality standard )including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to X substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of X people? ItZ, BkO(OGICA1110s, d CES 4lrtkufdthe .Lt ect. a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special X status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or X regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game 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, X 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 X established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 12 i tiI Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration . December 13, 2005 Page 13 .,`b Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Issues Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation X policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or X other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan? V. CCiITIIRAL ,RES'OUREES,'Wo�ldtti`� ro �ct.� „ a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical X resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an X archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or X unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal X cemeteries? ,GE'OLOGY ANp SOILS ...;1Nbuld`ft ra ec .. 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 -Pdolo Earthquake Fault Zoning map, issued by the State Geologist for the X 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? X iii) Seismic - related ground failure, X including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? I X b) Result in substantial soil erosion or X the loss of topsoil? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration . December 13, 2005 Page 13 .,`b Newport Island Channel Circulation CONEA City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 14 �y Less Than - Potentially Significant less Than No Issues Significant With Stgnfrmant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 ott- X site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Unitorm X Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or roe ? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal X systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Vlh H<ZARRS 1kND H�? �RBGi�I�NF�RTANS .�1y�u1�.t}"1:e. Co�ecf.�, �_ _ , a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the X routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and X 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 within X 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 X code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would if 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 has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use X airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 14 �y Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 15 3; Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Issues significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in X a safety hazard for people residing or workinq in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted X emergency response plan or emergency evacuation Ian? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized X areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII, `•IiY4RQ1Q4 " "," WWA 3�R Q[1ALITY , NCould fhe Xo ecl , _ , , a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficitrn aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater X table level (e.g., the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the X course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially X increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? City of Newport Beach Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 15 3; Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 16 2! Lew Than Potentially Significant feu Than No Issues Significant With Significant Impart Impact Mitigation Impact Inco orated e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage X systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? t) Otherwise substantially degrade X water quality? g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood hazard Boundary of Flood X Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or X redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death X involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? D Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or X mudtlow? u IX CANQ U,SE PtANMIWG "ec ADD Woti�l•�` #h�� To• #` .. ;..1 ,,. a) Physically divide an established X 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 X 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 plan or natural X community conservation plan? >.X ,MiN €RAURESQ.URGES :!al/olildth raaci;.,, rs, a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a X value to the region and the residents of the state? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 16 2! Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 17 sv Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No Issues Signiticant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incolpolated b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local X general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? ;XL NOISE.:, W_ovid"th ep a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general X plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne X vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project X vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels X 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 has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use X airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project X area to excessive noise levels? ;'Z a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and X businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the I X I construction of replacement housing elsewhere? City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 17 sv Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 18 Less Than Potentially significant Less Than No Issues significant With significant impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated c Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? E Vtctt�;;* d;J6*,1P W 9j,p 0-dill WeFnrnewall,.4,00 nieni could cause,signitcanT"envire i A p, ma�htal� accepYdble service ratios response E y= 'iffhe ".pponc. J b services. : a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? C) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? I'M . . . . . . . . . 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 recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 18 I Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 19 I Less Than Potentially significant less Than No Issues signiticant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated X�L. TRANR61itt TION/TRAFAZ iNould the: 'ro a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e.. result in a substantial increase X in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio an roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion X management agency for designated roads or highways? C) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in X traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to 0 design feature (e.g., sharp curves or X dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equip rnent ? e) Result in inadequate emergency X access? f) Result in inadequate parking X capacity? g) Conflict with adapted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative X transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle rocks)? X�1 tLTIktTJ�S �FNiD SERVICE S1FST�MS, WaulCl hg _ ra rift � „ a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional X Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, X the construction of which could cause si nificant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 19 I Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project trom X 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 X adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? t) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to X accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with tederal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to X solid waste? X1/II „MANDaT91tl fIN©IN6S,OF,SIGAUFEAK,E, ' a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a tish or wildlite species, cause a fish or wildlite population to drop below selt- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate X 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 Calitornia 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 X considerable when viewed in connection with the ettects of past projects, the ettects of other current projects, and the effects of probable tuture projects.) C) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse ettects on human X beings, either directly or indirectly? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 20 2 �. Less Than Potentially s significant L Less Than N No ISSUE'S S Significant W With S Significant I Impact City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 20 2 �. Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This section provides the explanations and supporting analysis for the impact categories and questions contained in the previous checklist, and identifies mitigation measures where applicable. I. AESTHETICS Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. Policies contained in the City's General Plan and the Coastal Act address impacts on public views. Public views are those from public streets and property, as opposed to private views from homes and other private property. There are no Coastal Act or City policies addressing private views. The Oloid devices are relatively small (approximately 5 feet by 4.9 feet) and would be visually compatible with existing docks and other marine infrastructure, and would not interfere with any designated scenic vista, consequently no adverse effects would be anticipated (see Figure 3). No mitigation measures are necessary. Figure 3. Photo - Oloid Devices on Floating Platforms b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 21 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXOS No Impact. There are no rock outcroppings or historic buildings in the affected area. The project would not affect any public views as noted in Response I,a above, and will not be visible from Coast Highway. No mitigation measures are necessary. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? No Impact. See discussion under Responses I.a and I.b, above. No mitigation measures are necessary. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. The proposed Oloids would not be lighted and would not create a new source of light or glare. No nighttime construction would be allowed. No impacts from light and glare are anticipated. No mitigation measures are necessary. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? No Impact. No agricultural activities occur in the project vicinity. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The affected sites are not zoned for agriculture and there are no Williamson Act contracts in the vicinity. No mitigation measures are necessary. c) Involve other changes In the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non - agricultural use? No Impact. The project would not involve any changes that could result in the conversion of farmland. No mitigation measures are necessary. III. AIR QUALITY Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 22 ,/? Newport Island Channel Cimulation Improvement Project CONEXUS a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? No Impoct. The Oloid devices ore electricolly powered and generote no emissions, therefore no conflict with the AQMP would occur. No mitigotion meosures ore required. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air qualify violation? Less Thon Sionific:ont Impoct. The only emissions ossocioted with project would result from short-term vehicle exhoust during delivery and instollotion of opproximotely 15 Oloid units, which would be minimoi. No long -term emissions ore onticipoted due to the electric motors used. No mitigotion meosures ore required. C) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- affainmenf under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less Thon Sianificont Impoct. See Section Ill.o, obove. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less Thon Significont Impoct. See Section lil.o, obove. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less Thon Significont Impoct. Diesel- powered vehicles used for Oloid delivery could couse odors and emissions thot moy be offensive to sensitive receptors, but the number and durotion of this impoct would be minimoi, therefore substantial numbers of people would not be offected. No mitigotion meosures ore necessory. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impoct. Eelgross hobitot is found in some sections of Newport Boy, but surveys hove confirmed thot no eelgross occurs within the Newport Chonnel oreo where the Oloid City of Newport Beoch Initiol Study/Mitigoted Negotive DecEr fion December 13, 2005 Poge 23 I 3t Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS Resources Management, 2005; NOAA, 2004 - available on the City website at vrww .citv.newport- beoch.co.us /HBR). b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No Impact. See Section IV.o. above. No mitigation is necessary. 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, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological Interruption, or other means? No Impact. See Section IV.o. above. No mitigation is necessary. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. See Section IV.o. above. The Oloid devices would extend approximately one foot into the water and would have minimal effect an fish movements. No mitigation is necessary. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a free preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. There are no applicable local biological ordinances or policies. No mitigation measures are necessary. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. The site is not incorporated in a Natural Community Conservation Planning /Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP /HCP). No mitigation measures are necessary. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change In the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? City of Newport Beac Initial Study /Mitigate egative Declara ion December 13, 2005 Page 24 9,5 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS No Impact. There are no historically sensitive resources that would be affected by the project. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? No Impact. Since no subsurface work would occur, no archaeological resources would be affected by the proposed project. No mitigation measures are necessary. C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact. See Section V.b, above. No mitigation measures are necessary. d) Disturb any human remains, including those inferred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. See Section V.b, above. No mitigation measures are necessary. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1) 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. No Impact. Since the proposed Oloid units would be placed on floating platforms tethered to existing structures and do not involve habitable structures, no people would be exposed to seismic or geologic hazards as a result. No mitigation measures are necessary. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? No Impact. See item VI.a.i, above. iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? No Impact. See item VI.a.i, above. IV) Landslides? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 25 U0 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS No Impact. See item VI.a.i, above. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? No-Impact. See item VI.a.i, above. 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 off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? No Impact. See item VI.o.i, above. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? No Impact. See item Vl.o.i, above. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No Impact. The project would not involve the use of septic tanks. No mitigation measures ore necessary. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? No Impact. No routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials is proposed in connection with the construction or operation of the project. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonable foreseeable upset and accident conditions Involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. During installation, gasoline- and diesel - powered equipment would be used. In the event of an accident, gasoline or diesel fuel could be spilled. Standard construction contract provisions would require that the contractor follow site maintenance and spill cleanup procedures as described in the Standard City of Newport Beach initial Study/Mitigated Nega ive Declara ion December 13, 2005 Page 26 U( Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS Specifications for Public Works Construction (the "Greenbook "). No additional mitigation measures are necessary. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The project.is not located within 1/4 mile of a school. No mitigation measures are necessary. 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? No Impact. Neither the project site nor any adjacent property is included on the Cortese list of hazardous materials sites. No mitigation measures are necessary. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles or a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The project site is not located within 2 miles of an airport. The nearest airport (John Wayne) is approximately 5 miles north of the site. No mitigation measures are necessary. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. There are no private airstrips within the project vicinity. No mitigation measures are necessary. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation. During construction, equipment and construction traffic could hinder emergency access. The following mitigation measure would ensure ihot impacts to emergency access are reduced to a level that is less than significant. MM VII -I 'Traffic Control Plan. Prior to award of a construction contract, a traffic control plan meeting the approval of the City Traffic Engineer shall be prepared. The plan shall specify what measures shall be taken to minimize travel disruptions and safety hazards, including safety of boaters, swimmers, pedestrians and bicyclists, minimize inconveniences to residents and businesses, minimize the loss of parking, and ensure adequate City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 27 U2 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEMS emergency access at all times. The traffic control plan shall be incorporated into the contract specifications and shall be enforced by the construction inspector. h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wiidlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact. The project site is not located in on area subject to wildlond fire hazards. No mitigation measures ore necessary. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? No Impact. The purpose of the project is to improve water quality in the channel by increasing circulation. This would result in a beneficial impact. No mitigation measures ore considered necessary. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge, such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? No Impact. The project would hove no effect on groundwater supplies or recharge. No mitigation measures ore necessary. 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 substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? No Impact. The project would hove no effect on drainage patterns. No mitigation measures are necessary. 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 increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off - site? No Impact. See Section Vlll.c, above. City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 28 '4 �� Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS e) Create or contribute runoff wafer which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned sformwafer drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? No Impact. See Sections Vlll.o and Vlll.d, above. No mitigation measures are necessary. f) Otherwise substantially degrade wafer quality? No Impact. See Sections Vlll.o and Vlll.d, above. There are no other known impacts to water quality. No mitigation measures are necessary. g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary of Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact. No new housing is proposed as part of the project. No mitigation measures are necessary. h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. The proposed Oloid devices would be attached to floating platforms and would have no effect on sformwafer flows. No mitigation measures are necessary. i) Expose people or structures to a signiffcanf risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, Including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact. The proposed project is not near a levee or dam and would not expose additional people or structures to flood hazards. No mitigation measures are necessary. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact. In the event of seiche or tsunami the Oloid devices could be damaged, but would pose no hazard to people or structures. No mitigation measures are necessary. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 29 Wl Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS No Impact. The project would have no effect on the established community. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. The proposed project would have no effect on the existing General Plan land use designation, zoning, and Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. Section 30600(a) of the Coastal Act requires that, in addition to obtaining any other permit required by law from any local government or from any state, regional, or local agency, any person, as defined in Section 21066, wishing to perform or undertake any development in the coastal zone shall obtain a coastal development permit (CDP). The proposed project is located within the City of Newport Beach, which presently has a certified Land Use Plan, but does not have a certified Local Coastal Program (LCP). In the absence of a certified LCP, the Coastal Commission will process the coastal development permit application for the project. The Commission's standard of review for the CDP is compliance with Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act. The City has determined that the proposed project is consistent will applicable sections of the Local Coastal Plan. No mitigation measures are necessary. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact. The site is not located within an NCCP area. No mitigation measures are necessary. X. MINERAL RESOURCES Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be a value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. There are no mineral resources that would be affected by the project. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 30 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS No Impact. There are no locally important mineral resource recovery areas that would be affected by the project. No mitigation measures are necessary. XI. NOISE Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less Than Siqnificant Impact. Potential sources of noise include injstallation activities and operation of the Oloid units. A short-term and minor noise increase could occur during delivery, unloading and installation of the units, but this is not considered significant. In addition, the City's Noise Ordinance prohibits construction during evening and nighttime hours and on Sundays and holidays. Standard Conditions SC X1-1 Pursuant to the City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance Section 10.28.040, construction adjacent to existing residential development shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction shall not be allowed outside of these hours Monday through Saturday and at any time on Sundays and federal holidays. Permanent noise levels would not be significant since the Oloid units are powered by'' /z- horsepower electric motors. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? No Impact. No increase in groundborne vibration and noise would be expected to occur during installation due to the nature of the project. The Oloid units would be assembled off -site, delivered to the sites by truck and lifted into place by small cranes. Limitations on allowable hours of construction found in Standard Condition XI -1 would reduce this impact to a level that is less than significant. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? No Impact. See Section XI.a, above. The project would not result in long -term noise impacts. No mitigation is necessary. City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 31 U( . Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONExUS d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. See Section XI.o, above. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The affected sites are not located within an airport land use plan, and are not within the flight path of an airport. No mitigation measures are necessary. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the affected sites. No mitigation measures are necessary. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No impact. The proposed water circulation improvements would induce no increase in population. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. There is no existing housing that would be displaced by the proposed improvements. No mitigation measures are necessary. C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. No people or existing housing would be displaced by the proposed improvements. No mitigation measures are necessary. City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December i 3, 2005 Page 32 4�) Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of these public services: a) Fire protection? No Impact. The proposed project would not alter demand for fire protection and paramedic service. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Police protection? No Impact. The proposed project would not alter demand for police protection. No mitigation measures are necessary. c) Schools? No Impact. The proposed project would have no effect on student generation or school operations. No mitigation measures are necessary. d) Parks? No Impact. The proposed project would have no effect on the demand or usage of parks or recreation facilities. No mitigation measures are necessary. e) Other public facilities? No Impact. The proposed project would have no effect on any other public facilities. No mitigation measures are necessary. XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The project is intended to improve water quality in the bay, which could encourage more people to use the bay for swimming or boating, but this impact would not be considered significant or adverse. No mitigation measures are necessary. City of Newport Beach initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declara ion December 13, 2005 Page 33 Lit Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. See Section XIV.a above. No mitigation measures are necessary. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle hips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Less Than Significant Impact. Long -term traffic would not be affected by the proposed project. No mitigation is required for long -term traffic impacts. A minor short - term impact would occur due to construction traffic, but this increase would be insignificant. No mitigation measures are necessary. .b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact. Please see Section XV.a. The project would not generate a permanent increase in traffic and would not exceed any level of service standard. No mitigation is necessary. 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? No Impact. The project would have no effect on air traffic patterns. No mitigation measures are necessary. d) Substantially Increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less Than Significant Impact The Oloid units would be placed in the bay adjacent to docks or bulkheads, and due to their small size (approximately 5 feet square) they would not significantly interfere with navigation. No mitigation is necessary. e) Result in Inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact With Mitiaation. See Sections Vll.g and XV.d, above City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 34 �i Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONFXUS f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? Less than Siqnificant Impact. Workers would create a temporary demand for additional parking during installation of the Oloid devices. This would be expected to be one or two vehicles, however, and no significant parking impacts are anticipated. No mitigation measures are necessary. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? No Impact. The proposed project would not affect any adopted transportation policies or plans. No mitigation measures are necessary. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Imp-act. The project would not generate wastewater flows or unusual treatment requirements. No mitigation measures are necessary. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. See Section XVI.a. No mitigation measures are necessary. C) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The proposed project would have no effect on stormwater or drainage facilities. d) Have sufficient wafer supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? No Impact. The project would not result in an increase in demand for water. No mitigation measures are necessary. City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Nega ive Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 35 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS 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? No Impact. See Section XVI.a, above. No mitigation measures are necessary. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? No Impact. The project would generate no solid waste. No mitigation measures are necessary. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? No Impact. See Section XVI.a, above. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal 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? Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The purpose of the project is to improve circulation and water quality in Newport Bay. The Oloid devices are small and would be enclosed in cages to protect marine life and swimmers from injury. Surveys have confirmed that no sensitive marine habitat such as eelgrass is present in the vicinity of the project. Potential impacts due to spills, construction noise and traffic would be minimized by the standard conditions and mitigation measures that have been incorporated, and would reduce these potential impacts to a level that is less than significant. 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 cuff ent projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. There are no other similar projects contemplated in Newport Harbor that could result in cumulative impacts at this time. The project would contribute to short-term impacts in the areas of air quality, noise and traffic during the installation process but its contribution to these cumulative impacts would be reduced by standard conditions and mitigation measures. The City of Newport Beach Initial Study/Mitigated Nega ive Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 36 Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS incremental impacts o1 the project would be so small that they would be less than significant. C) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. Potential impacts to swimmers, boaters, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists would be minimized through project design features (such as protective cages on the propeller units), standard conditions, and mitigation measures. Any remaining impacts would be less than significant. City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 37 S' � Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEWS This page intentionally left blank City of Newport Beach Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration December 13, 2005 Page 38 i i i E k�) Newport Island Channel Circulation Improvement Project CONEXUS D. REFERENCES Building News Publications, Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 1997 (the "Greenbook ") California Coastal Act, (Public Resources Code Division 20, Section 30000 et sea.l California Code of Regulations, Title 14 Natural Resources City of Newport Beach, Newport Beach General Plan. City of Newport Beach, Newport Beach Municipal Code. Coastal Resources Management, Distribution and Abundance of Eelgrass (Zostera marina) in Newport Bay, January 10, 2005 Everest International Consultants, Inc., Oloid Circulation Unit Alternative Evaluation, March, 2005 NOAA, Fisheries Single -Beam Sonar Surveys, Newport Bay, Fall 2004 E. LIST OF PREPARERS Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Environmental Consultants: CONEXUS Everest International Consultants, Inc. CRM Bob Stein, P.E. Tom Rossmiller John Douglas, AICP Ying -Keung Poon Rick Ware Principal Engineer Water Quality Division Principal Project Manager Sr. Marine Biologist City of Newport Beach itgatad Regotiye-e ara on December 13, 2005 Page 39 „u "REEEIV AFTER AGENDA PRINTED," 5 m23-06 President Emeritus: WEST NEWPORT BEACH ASSOCIATION Alan. Sifcock Balboa Coves P.O. BOX 1471 9491722 -6421 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92663 President: www.westnewport.org Paul Watkins - Wes! Oceanfront ' 1141556 -0800 Vice President May 16, 2006 L•lUot. Leonard West Oceanfront 9491515 -4911 :. SeeretarylMembership: Chris Garber. Lida Peninsula Resort Mr. John Kappeler 9491,723-3183 - Water Quality and Watershed Specialist City of Newport Beach Historian: .:Mike Johnson 3300 Newport Blvd. Numbered Streets Newport Beach, CA 92663 -. 9491642 -3125 Treasurer: Re: Oloid Testing .Ann Krueger - - Newport Shores Dear John: 9491642 -2646 - Dneclorsr Thanks for giving West Newport Beach Association an opportunity to weigh in on Ken Bryant the recent Oloid testing Numbered Streets 9491644 -6266 The Association believes that from observations, the test unit appeared to be quiet :nary Bryant and water appeared to be circulating well. We should note that one of our Board Absentee :Owners Contact. 9491644 -6266 members feels that the unit does not result in effective circulation. Nevertheless, the Association would ask the Council to continue with the testing and related analysis in a `Gene Dorney positive vein and draw its own substantiated conclusions as to the effectiveness of tilee. Nu 149treets 9491675- 973 units. The Association full supports the City's efforts to remedy this long-standing g. problem. Joann Larson - Numbered Sheets Sincerely, - ..9491650.5533 Everette Phillips West Newport Beach Association Newport Shores 9491650 -7528 Robert Rush. By5—/ River60eptune ---- Paul K. Watkins, President 9491645 -2977 Jim:.Miller Newport: Island 9491650.3425 - PKlK,'jmw Sharon Sifcock ca WNBA Board of Directors - Balboa Coves:. 9491.22 -6421 iBarbaraZhibault Newport Shores 9491642 -5843