No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0 - Back Bay Landing - PA2011-216CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT December 19, 2013 Agenda Item 3 SUBJECT: Back Bay Landing - (PA2011 -216) 300 E. Coast Highway • General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -011 • Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -007 • Code Amendment No. CA2013 -009 • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2011 -001 • Traffic Study No. TS2012 -003 • Lot Line Adjustment No. LA2011 -003 • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -003 APPLICANT: Bayside Village Marina, LLC PLANNER: Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner (949) 644 -3209, jmurillo @newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY The proposed project involves land use amendments to provide the legislative framework that would allow for future mixed -use development of the site. Amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan are required to change the land use designations to a Mixed -Use Horizontal designation and a Planned Community Development Plan is proposed to establish appropriate zoning regulations and development standards for the site. The requested approvals will allow for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, including recreational and marine commercial retail, marine office, marine services, enclosed dry stack boat storage, and a limited mix of freestanding multi - family residential and mixed -use structures with residential uses above the ground floor. In addition to the land use amendments, other requested approvals are a Lot Line Adjustment and Traffic Study pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Specific project design and site improvement approvals will be sought at a later time. RECOMMENDATION 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Adopt Resolution No. _ (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council take the following actions: a. Certification of Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -003 (SCH #2012101003); and Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 2 b. Approval of General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -011, Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -007, Code Amendment No. CA2013- 009, Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2011 -001, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -003, and Lot Line Adjustment No. LA2011 -003. VICINITY MAP are 4: - .! y� v �A.• p s•.i � r ��4� y r„ •r��• 3- .�.�s. L i -' - Enlarged View of Site mttr, 111 4604�-Pw Legend Lot Una Adlusenanl Area 7 / Bank Bey Lending M&acl Pm Aree �ed ProJwt Area (Parcel 3) r Pwro t 8 2 Boundary Line A j� �1 . PC-9 I .�� •••••••• EdstM9 Pe Boundary ..•••• Ptoposed PC4 Boundary Expansion 3 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 3 Project Setting The subject property is generally located northwest of the intersection of East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive and is legally described as Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111. Surrounding land uses include the adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park (Parcels 2 and 3 of PM 93 -111) to the northeast and east. The Upper Newport Bay and Channel is located to the north and west. The Balboa Marina is located south of East Coast Highway. The property currently consists of approximately 31.1 acres of land area. With the proposed lot line adjustment of approximately 0.3 acres, the total property area would be increased to approximately 31.4 acres. As illustrated in the exhibit below, the draft 4 SURROUNDING LAND USES GENERAL PLAN ZONING LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT USE Recreational and Marine planned Community (PC- Commercial (CM), Open 9) & Commercial ON -SITE Space (OS), and Recreational and Marine See Project Settings Tidelands and (CM) Submerged Lands (TS) NORTH Single Unit Residential Detached (RS -D) and Castaways Planned Single -unit dwellings and public Open Space(OS) Community (PC -43) trail across bay SOUTH CM CM Balboa Marina Recreational and Marine PC -43 and Castaways EAST Commercial (CM) and Marina Planned PC -43: Castaways Park Parks and Recreation Community (PC- 37) PC -37: Construction Staging (PR) Multiple -Unit Residential Bayside Village Mobile WEST (RM) Home Park Planned Mobile Home Community Community (PC -1) Project Setting The subject property is generally located northwest of the intersection of East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive and is legally described as Parcel 3 of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111. Surrounding land uses include the adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park (Parcels 2 and 3 of PM 93 -111) to the northeast and east. The Upper Newport Bay and Channel is located to the north and west. The Balboa Marina is located south of East Coast Highway. The property currently consists of approximately 31.1 acres of land area. With the proposed lot line adjustment of approximately 0.3 acres, the total property area would be increased to approximately 31.4 acres. As illustrated in the exhibit below, the draft 4 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 4 Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) breaks up the property into five distinct planning areas. Future development of the site would be limited to the approximately 7 acre landside portion of the property described as Planning Areas 1, 2, 3, and 4. No land use changes or physical changes to the water side portion described as Planning Area 5 are proposed as part of the subject applications. PIANNING AREAS ' v °- rw�ceti F'Ienn�r�Aran `( +,:•.;. •i.,iR.,r ra.....Y r.� ,Flan rn.n:� Are�:.:3 F.f181 W3 gfTrk ^SCE594'109[+� =N �� Na59w� awn our wuwc ps�m y Existing uses within each planning area are as follows: • Planning Area 1: Outdoor storage of recreational vehicles and small boats on trailers; kayak and paddle board rental facility; parking lot and restrooms for the Bayside Marina, Pearson's Port floating fish market, and guest parking for Bayside Village Mobile Home Park; and adjoining the southwest portion of the site is the Orange County Sanitation District pump station. • Planning Area 2: Marine equipment storage, unpaved parking lot under bridge, and storage and launch area for rowing club on sandy area south of bridge. • Planning Area 3: This area consists of two existing private access walkways that provide lessee access to marina boat slips and docks. Interrupting these two walkways is a non - publicly accessible beach area utilized through an easement by residents of the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park. • Planning Area 4: Paved parking area along eastern boundary of mobile home park and currently improved with 45 commercial storage units and parking spaces available to marina and mobile home park tenants. 5 'FLnrnn.l AIW4 unw5.roio nnwc{vu,+� ��rnwi rr+l9 w.csmaa� ..ey5ery ':.� -wM 41�aN - �tr1.i11Wry .nd Me�y �YMwIHwu !6!r 9w,r ren.A..ru mw;r�m w� �Yr 61II vi4 CN r awn our wuwc ps�m y Existing uses within each planning area are as follows: • Planning Area 1: Outdoor storage of recreational vehicles and small boats on trailers; kayak and paddle board rental facility; parking lot and restrooms for the Bayside Marina, Pearson's Port floating fish market, and guest parking for Bayside Village Mobile Home Park; and adjoining the southwest portion of the site is the Orange County Sanitation District pump station. • Planning Area 2: Marine equipment storage, unpaved parking lot under bridge, and storage and launch area for rowing club on sandy area south of bridge. • Planning Area 3: This area consists of two existing private access walkways that provide lessee access to marina boat slips and docks. Interrupting these two walkways is a non - publicly accessible beach area utilized through an easement by residents of the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park. • Planning Area 4: Paved parking area along eastern boundary of mobile home park and currently improved with 45 commercial storage units and parking spaces available to marina and mobile home park tenants. 5 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 5 • Planning Area 5: Submerged land bordered by the De Anza Bayside Marsh Peninsula, which was originally constructed with dredging spoils and rip -rap as fill to provide a protected harbor and overflow parking. The existing Bayside Village Marina contains 220 slips. Project Description Ultimately, the applicant is proposing to develop the approximately 7 -acre landside portion of the property for mixed -use. However, the existing General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan land use designation of the landside portion is Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM) and does not allow for residential use. Therefore, the applicant is requesting land use amendments and related applications to provide the legislative framework allowing for the future mixed -use development of the site implementing the CM designation, while allowing for limited residential use. Project implementation would allow for the future development of a new enclosed dry-stack boat storage facility for up to 140 boats (32,500 square feet), 61,534 square feet of visitor - serving commercial and marine - related uses, and up to 49 attached residential units. A summary of the current application requests are listed below and explained in more detail within the report: 1. General Plan Amendment (GPA)- To allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site (Planning Areas 1, 3, and 4) from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H1). Planning Area 2 would remain designated CM 0.3 and Planning Area 5 would remain designated Tidelands and Submerged Lands (TS) and Open Space (OS). In addition to the land use changes, the GPA would create two new anomalies to reallocate 49 un -built residential dwelling units from the adjacent mobile home park (Anomaly 81) to the project site (Anomaly 80). 2. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment (CLUPA)- To allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site (Planning Areas 1, 3, and 4) from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -B) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H). The amendment would also establish a site - specific development policy and a height exception to the 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit allowing for a single, 65- foot -tall coastal public view tower. 3. Code Amendment- To amend the Zoning Map of the Zoning Code to expand the current Planned Community District boundaries (PC -9) of the site to include: 1) the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC- 1 /MHP); and, 2) the existing 0.642 -acre portion of the project site (Planning Area 2) currently zoned as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM). C, Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 6 4. Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP)- Adoption of a Development Plan to allow for the classification of land within the Planned Community boundaries, establishment of development standards, design guidelines, and implementation of the future project and long -term operation of all planning areas of the site. 5. Traffic Study- A traffic impact analysis prepared pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. 6. Lot Line Adjustment (LLA)- To adjust the property boundaries between Parcel 3 (subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new driveway. Project Schedule If the subject requested land use amendments and related applications are approved by the City and subsequently the California Coastal Commission, the applicant would then prepare specific project design and site improvement plans. Project implementation would necessitate review and approval of a Site Development Review application by the City and a Coastal Development Permit application by the Coastal Commission. It is anticipated that approval of these applications would be completed by the end of 2015. Construction would then be expected to be completed in one phase lasting approximately 18 months, with occupancy by late 2016 or early 2017. General Plan Land Use Change The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the landside portion of the site, north of the Coast Highway Bridge (Planning Areas 1, 3, and 4), as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM) with a maximum allowable floor area to land area ratio (FAR) of 0.5 FAR (131,290 square feet). The landside portion of the site, south of the Coast Highway Bridge (Planning Area 2), is also designated CM, but limited to a FAR of 0.3 FAR (8,390 square feet). The CM land use designation is intended to provide for commercial development on or near the bay in a manner that will encourage the continuation of coastal- dependent and coastal - related uses, maintain the marine theme and character, encourage mutually supportive businesses, encourage visitor - serving and recreational uses, and encourage physical and visual access to the bay on waterfront commercial and industrial building sites on or near the bay. The proposed project would be consistent with the intent of this designation by allowing for the redevelopment of an under - utilized bayfront site with coastal dependent (i.e., dry stack boat storage, marine service, and marina parking) and coastal - related visitor - serving commercial (i.e., restaurants, retail, and marine office) and recreational uses (i.e., boat rental, kayak and paddleboard launch facilities, and public trails and view points). 7 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 7 The applicant is requesting the ability to develop up to 49 residential units in conjunction with the CM uses, necessitating a GPA to change the land use designation of the CM 0.5 portion of the site (Planning Areas 1, 3,and 4) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H1). The MU -H1 designation is intended to provide for the development of areas for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which may include general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multi - family residential, visitor - serving and marine - related uses, and /or buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses. The proposed GPA would also change the designation of the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM) to MU -H1. The exhibit below illustrates the existing and proposed land use changes. Proposed General Plan Land Use Changes Existing Proposed I4trlR9NJ6 / Mane Lanmr,vi cMOe WDPW IM `% tlMTeI AM ya neaaxunv a y •• , • �.�. d was - MU -M1 CM 0.5 CMOs e -- - MionaN ��+aam Marne CanTMCtlI Eaal CoytlMy Mome Eamercui WnGOr eMy rc—M-0,31 I CM 0.3 Proposed General Plan Anomaly Locations (80 and 81) and Reallocation of Density The project applicant also owns the adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Park (under separate LLC), which is designated RM and limited to a maximum density of 15 units per acre (345 dwellings allowed). The mobile home park currently contains 270 units, resulting in 75 un -built units. The applicant is proposing to reallocate 49 of the un -built units from the mobile home park parcels to the project site. To account for this reallocation of units, Land Use Element Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) and the land use map would be amended to create two new Anomaly Location Numbers 80 and 81. The purpose of anomalies is to identify and set development limits on individual properties by capping residential units (density) and nonresidential floor area (intensity) limits. This reallocation of density would be implemented through the proposed anomalies as follows: 2 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 8 -. - omaly mbe" Statistical Area Land Use Designati "` Development Limit sf) _Development it (Other) Additional Information For mixed -use Non - residential development: development, residential 80 K -1 MU -H1 131,290 SF 49 residential floor area shall units not exceed a Mixed -use development: 1:1 ratio to 171,289 SF non - residential floor area 81 K -1 RM 296 residential units In addition to limiting development of the project site to a maximum of 49 residential dwellings, the proposed General Plan Anomaly Number 80 cap will: • Limit the non - residential development for the MU -H1 designated project area to a maximum of 131,290 square feet, consistent with the current development limit of the site as CM 0.5. • Limit the mixed -use development for the MU -H1 designated project to a maximum of 171,289 square feet, where residential FAR does not exceed a 1:1 ratio to non - residential floor area. The intent of this development limit and ratio is to ensure the site is not developed with residential as the predominant use, but rather a unified mixed -use development that prioritizes commercial development. Based on a 1:1 ratio, residential development would be limited to 85,644 square feet maximum. A complete consistency analysis of each of the applicable General Plan policies could be found in the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The analysis concludes that the project is consistent with each of the adopted goals and policies. General Plan Consistency with Charter Section 423 (Measure S) Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area, or increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips, or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80 percent of the increases resulting from prior amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the preceding ten years. The project site for which the General Plan amendment is proposed is located within Statistical Area K1 of the General Plan Land Use Element. There have been no prior 9 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 9 amendments approved within Statistical Area K1 since the adoption of the 2006 General Plan. Although the amendment would change the land use designation from CM to MU -H1 to allow for the development of 49 residential units, the proposed anomalies would limit the development limits within Statistical Area K1 to what is currently allowed under the General Plan. This is achieved through the reallocation of 49 un -built residential units from Bayside Village Mobile Home Park (Anomaly No. 81) to the project site (Anomaly No. 80). Therefore, the thresholds that require a vote pursuant to Charter Section 423 are not exceeded because the proposed amendment does not create any new dwelling units, does not exceed the non - residential floor area threshold, and does not exceed the a.m. or p.m. peak hour vehicle trips threshold. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment Similar to the General Plan, the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) designates the landside portion of the site, north of the Coast Highway Bridge (Planning Areas 1, 3, and 4), as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -B). The landside portion of the site, south of the Coast Highway Bridge (Planning Area 2), is designated CM -A. To allow the development of residential units, an amendment to the CLUP is also requested to change the CM -B land use designation of portions of the site (Planning Areas 1, 3, and 4) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H). The proposed amendment would also change the designation of the 0.3 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU -H. In addition to the land use change, the amendment would also establish a site - specific development narrative and policy (Policy 2.1.9 -1) that would ensure the site is developed as a unified, mixed -use development and provides certain project amenities 10 Proposed Coastal Land Use Plan Changes Existing Proposed / / HnnwmL a 4anrx Cmmev vwe rt „M .� Mutpu Uri ReWTtlY FP C_ e+ Ow 1 L6 ... ar, Mn�ealn CM-B e tl FnR +s rwv Rw:�.gm,Wa ra�cem.yv — BmmuWa Esu cw., H,,,. M�irrC:mimw <W Mwms Gtm+nercw CM- A7 OSFM CM n OOgR In addition to the land use change, the amendment would also establish a site - specific development narrative and policy (Policy 2.1.9 -1) that would ensure the site is developed as a unified, mixed -use development and provides certain project amenities 10 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 10 (i.e., enclosed boat storage, public access trails and facilities, view opportunities, etc.). The amendment would also include a height exception (Policy 4.4.2 -1) to the 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit allowing for a single, 65 -foot tall, publically accessible, coastal view tower. The proposed amended language is shown in underline below. 2.1.9 -1 Back Bay Landing Located at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive, the Back Bay Landing site is an approximately 7 -acre site adjacent to the Upper Newport Bay. The site is the landside portion of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 93 -111 and is currently improved with existing structures and paved areas utilized for outdoor storage space of RVs and small boats, parking and restrooms facilities for the Bayside Marina, a kayak rental and launch facility, parking and access to Pearson 's Port, and marine service equipment storage under the Coast Highway Bridge. The site would accommodate the development of an integrated, mixed -use waterfront for limited freestanding multifamily residential and mixed -use structures with residential uses above the around floor. Residential development would be contingent upon the concurrent development of the above - referenced marine - related and visitor - serving commercial and recreational facilities, including the enclosed dry stack boat storage facility and completion of a new public bayfront promenade connecting with Bayside Drive and Newport Dunes /County trails. Policy 2.1.9 -1 The Back Bay Landing site shall be developed as a unified site with marine - related and visitor - serving commercial and recreational uses. Limited freestanding multifamily residential and mixed -use structures with residential uses above the ground floor are allowed as integrated uses as described below. • The Mixed -Use Horizontal — MU -H category is applicable to the proiect(s) site; permitted uses include those allowed under the CM, CV, RM, and MU -V categories; however, a minimum of 50 percent of the permitted building square footage shall be devoted to nonresidential uses; • The site shall be limited to a maximum floor area to land area ratio as established in General Plan Land Use Element Anomaly Cap No. 80. A minimum of 50 percent of the residential units shall be developed in mixed -use buildings with nonresidential use on the ground floor. • Development shall incorporate amenities that assure access for coastal visitors, including the development of a public pedestrian promenade along the bayfront, bikeways with connections to existing regional trails and paths, an enclosed dry- stack boat storage facility, and public plazas and open spaces that provide public views, view corridors, and new coastal view opportunities. i2 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 11 • The site shall be developed as a unified site to prevent fragmentation and to assure each use's viability, quality, and compatibility with adjoining uses. Development shall be designed and planned to achieve a high level of architectural quality with pedestrian, non - automobile and vehicular circulation and adequate parkinq provided. Policy 4.4.2 -1 Maintain the 35 -foot height limitation in the Shoreline Height Limitation Zone, as graphically depicted on Map 43, except for Marina Park and the following sites: • Marina Park located at 1600 West Balboa Boulevard: A single, up to maximum 73 -foot- tall faux lighthouse architectural tower, that creates an iconic landmark for the public to identify the site from land and water as a boating safety feature, may be allowed. No further exceptions to the height limit shall be allowed, including but not limited to, exceptions for architectural features, solar equipment or tiag poles. Any architectural tower that exceeds the 35 -foot height limit shall not include floor area above the 35 -foot height limit, but shall house screened communications or emergency equipment, and shall be sited and designed to reduce adverse visual impacts and be compatible with the character of the area by among other things, incorporating a tapered design with a maximum diameter of 34 -feet at the base of the tower. Public viewing opportunities shall be provided above the 35 -feet, as feasible. •_ Back Bay Landing at East Coast Hjghway/Bayside Drive: A single, up to 65- foot -tall coastal public view tower, that will be ADA- compliant and publicly accessible, to provide new coastal and Upper Newport Bay view opportunities where existing views are impacted by the East Coast Hiqhwav Bridge, other existing structures and topography. A complete consistency analysis of each of the applicable Coastal Land Use Plan policies is included in the Draft Environmental Impact Report. The analysis concludes that the project is consistent with each of the applicable policies related to Land Use and Development, Public Access and Recreation, and Coastal Resource Protection. Code Amendment (Zoning Map) A majority of the project site (Planning Areas 1, 3, 4, and 5) is currently zoned Planned Community (PC -9), except for the portion located south of the Coast Highway Bridge (Planning Area 2), which is currently zoned Commercial Recreational and Marine (CM 0.3). Therefore, an amendment to the Zoning Map of the Zoning Code is needed to expand the current PC -9 boundaries to fully include the project site. In addition, the zone change would also rezone the 0.3 -acre lot line adjustment area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC- 1 /MHP) to PC -9. The zone change would ensure consistent zoning and allow for the proposed PCDP to regulate development of the entire site. 12 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 12 Proposed Zonin g Map Changes Existing Proposed 0 0 PYTN GMHP PC -/ AIHP Ac._111 ten ­ xweainnn a wm. �r tr CM Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) Although the project site is currently located within the Planned Community zoning district, a Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) does not currently exist. Therefore, the applicant has prepared and submitted the draft Back Bay Landing PCDP, which is included as Attachment No. PC 3. The attached version dated December 11, 2013, supersedes the September 3, 2013, version previously distributed and includes recommended changes by Planning Commissioner Tucker. The purpose of the PCDP is to establish appropriate zoning regulations governing land use and development of the site that would allow for the future development of the site as a high - quality mixed -use, marine - related, visitor - serving commercial development with integrated residential units and a unified architectural and landscape theme. Specifically, the PCDP sets the development limits, allowed land uses, development standards, design guidelines, and administrative procedures that would serve as the controlling zoning document for the entire 31 acre project site. A summary of draft PCDP is as follows: Section I: Introduction & Purpose Primarily sets forth the purpose and objectives of the PCDP. This section also clarifies the relationship of PCDP to the Municipal Code. Section II: Development Limits and Land Use Plan As illustrated in Exhibit 2 of the PCDP, the project site is broken up into five distinct Planning Areas. Each Planning Area is subject to specific development limits and allowable uses, which are consistent with those allowed under the proposed General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan designations. Development limits are illustrated in the table below: 13 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 13 Development Limits by Planning Area Land Use Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Total Per and boat sales, boat rentals and service, and recreational commercial Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Land Use Commercial 49,144 sf 8,390 sf 0 4,000 sf 0 61,534 sf Residential 0 0 0 0 nonresidential uses. (85,644 sf floor area shall be developed within PA1 and PA4. • A minimum of 50 percent of units shall be developed within mixed - 5,644 s Marina 0 0 0 0 220 wet 220 wet slips public /private marina and pier to the south. Planning Area 3 This area is intended to remain as private open space and no Existing Private slips Marina Access and Dry Stack 32,500 sf 0 0 0 0 32,500 sf Boat StorageL Storage 140 spaces) Park Storage and marina. Guest Parking 140 spaces) TOTALI 179,679 SF Land Use Plan Summary by Planning Area (PA) Planning Area 1 Intended to allow for mixed -use waterfront development integrating Mixed -Use Area marine - related and visitor - serving commercial uses, recreational uses, and limited residential uses. Priority uses include retail, restaurants, marine and boat sales, boat rentals and service, and recreational commercial uses such as kayak and paddle board rentals. Development must incorporate the following amenities: an enclosed dry stack boat storage facility, a minimum 12- foot -wide public pedestrian and bicyclist promenade along the waterfront with connections to existing regional trails and paths, public plazas, open space that provide public views, and the construction of a coastal public view tower. In addition, the following development limitations are included with the intent of ensuring that residential development is not the predominant land use within the mixed -use project: • Minimum 50 percent of floor area within PA1 shall be limited to nonresidential uses. • At minimum, a total of 68,955 square feet of non - residential gross floor area shall be developed within PA1 and PA4. • A minimum of 50 percent of units shall be developed within mixed - use buildings with non - residential use located on ground floor. Planning Area 2 Intended to be developed with recreational and marine - related commercial Recreational and uses. Development shall also incorporate the minimum 12- foot -wide Marine Commercial waterfront promenade with an integrated connection to the planned public /private marina and pier to the south. Planning Area 3 This area is intended to remain as private open space and no Existing Private development is allowed within PA3, with the exception of minor Marina Access and improvements to the walkway and maintenance /replacement of the Beach existing bulkhead. Planning Area 4 This area is intended to be re -used primarily as resident and guest parking Marina and Bayside for the adjacent mobile home park and marina, and the development of Village Mobile Home replacement storage, lockers, restrooms, and laundry facilities for the Park Storage and marina. Guest Parking 1911 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 14 Planning Area 5 This area is intended to allow the continued operation of the existing 220 - Submerged Fee- slip marina. No development is allowed to occur on the De Anza Bayside Owned Lands Marsh Peninsula. Section III: Permitted Uses This section includes a land use matrix to implement the land use plan by identifying permitted uses, conditionally permitted uses, and prohibited uses by Planning Area. Section IV: Development Standards This section establishes the site development standards. The table below summaries the various standards: Summary of Development Standards A. Setbacks Establishes various minimum setbacks from property boundaries abutting the streets, bayfront, and remaining perimeter. Also establishes specific allowed encroachments, and includes additional flexibility through the Site Development Review. B. Permitted Height Generally, structures are permitted up to 35 feet for flat roofs and 40 of Structures feet for sloped roofs (minimum 3:12 pitch), with the following exceptions: • PA1- The easterly 100 feet of PA1 is limited to 26 feet flat /31 feet sloped to maintain lower building profiles at the intersection of Bayside Drive and Coast Highway; any parking structures would be limited in height to 30 feet flat/35 feet sloped; and the public view tower would be allowed up to 65 feet maximum. • PA 4- Limited to 20 feet flat/25 feet sloped to provide compatibility with adjacent residential development. • PA2- Limited to 26 feet flat/31 feet sloped to reduce massing and maintain public views from Coast Highway over this portion of site. Also, see Exhibit 3 of PCDP. C. Residential Units Requires minimum open space, sound mitigation, buffering, and notifications to owners and tenants to address potential land use compatibility issues. D. Parking Establishes minimum parking ratios based on peak parking demands of Requirements the various permitted uses. Also included is a provision allowing for modifications to these standards based upon a demonstrated complementary peak hour parking demand analysis with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. E. Landscaping Requires preparation of landscape plan and the use of water - efficient landscaping, including native and non - invasive drought tolerant plants. F. Seawall /Bulkhead Allows the construction of seawall /bulkheads to protect the existing Standards development and future development from erosion and flooding, subject to specific location requirements for access and preservation of shoreline. G. Diking, Filling, Reaffirms that these activities are permitted in accordance with and Dredging limitations in the Coastal Act and City's CLUP polices. 15 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 15 H. Public Bayfront Establishes specific design and access requirements for the minimum Promenade and 12- foot -wide public bayfront promenade and a requirement that Bayside Trail Drive be improved with a new trail connecting to the existing trail at the Newport Dunes recreational area. This trail connection would include adding a new Class 2 (on- street) bike lane and a new Class 3 (shared - use) bikeway on both sides of the street. On the east side of Bayside Drive, a new Class 1 (off- street) bikeway and pedestrian trail would be provided. Also, see Exhibits 5 & 6 of PCDP. I. Vehicular Addresses vehicular circulation improvements that would need to occur Circulation in conjunction with the development of the site. These include relocating the project driveway approximately 200 feet north of the East Coast Highway intersection to improve access into the site. Improving Bayside Drive with a new southbound shared left- turn /through lane and adding an exclusive left -turn on the northbound approach to the project driveway. Requirements also address provisions for adequate emergency vehicle access. Also, see Exhibits 7 & 8 of PCDP. J. Lighting Requires preparation of a lighting plan and compliance with the Outdoor Lighting requirements of the City's Zoning Code to address unnecessary illumination of adjacent properties, conserve energy, minimize detrimental effects on the adjacent sensitive environmental areas, and limit illumination of the public view tower. K. Signs Requires the preparation of a Comprehensive Sign Program and provides sign flexibility for signage that is only visible to internal drives and walkways. L. Utilities Addresses the realignment of the existing 30 -inch water main that currently runs across the site, and other utility lines. Also, see Exhibits 9 & 10 of PCDP. M. Sustainability Requires the development as a sustainable community and preparation of a sustainability plan addressing water and energy efficiency, indoor environmental air quality, and waste reduction. N. Public Requires the public improvements plan specifying the public Improvements improvements to be constructed in conjunction with the future development and the phasing of such improvements. Section V: Design Guidelines The Design Guidelines are intended to express the desired character of a mixed -use waterfront development. These guidelines set parameters for future design efforts and to help achieve overall consistency and quality of architectural design and landscape features at project build -out. They are structured to allow the City flexibility in review of future project submittals and subsequent approvals. Specifically, the Design Guidelines address Architectural Theme (Coastal Mediterranean), Site Planning, Building Massing, Fagade Treatments, Public Views, Parking and Parking Structure, Public Spaces, Landscape, Hardscape, and Signage. All future development is required to be in conformance with these design guidelines. The conceptual plan below illustrates the type of development that is envisioned through implementation of the development standards and design guidelines. 16 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 16 Section VI: Phasing Anticipates the initial mixed -use development as a single phase and sets forth the general sequencing of construction and public improvements. Section VII: Implementation /Site Development Review Establishes a Site Plan Review process requiring approval by the Planning Commission for new structures to determine compliance with the PCDP development regulations and design guidelines. Site Plan Review submittals require specific content to be submitted and prepared, which are outlined in the PC Development Plan. Site Plan Review requires project review at a noticed public hearing and requires the following findings be met for approval: 1. The development shall be in compliance with the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan, including design guidelines, and any other applicable plan or criteria related to the development; 2. The development shall not be incompatible with the character of the neighboring uses and surrounding sites; 17 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 17 3. The development shall be sited and designed to maximize the aesthetic quality of the project as viewed from surrounding roadways, properties, and waterfront, with special consideration given to providing a variety of building heights, massing, and architectural treatments to provide public views throughout the site; 4. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access ways, landscaping and other site features shall give proper consideration to functional aspects of site development; and 5. The development shall not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed development. Traffic Study- Traffic Phasing Ordinance Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance, or TPO) requires that a traffic study be prepared and findings be made if a proposed project will generate in excess of 300 average daily trips (ADT). Although no specific development project is currently proposed, a Maximum Development Scenario was prepared consistent with the development limits and land uses permitted in the PCDP. Based on the Maximum Development Scenario, the net new trips estimated to be generated by the future proposed development is projected to be approximately 2,721 daily vehicle trips, 127 additional trips of which occur in the morning peak hour and 178 additional trips of which occur during the evening peak hour. Pursuant to Section 15.04.030.A, the Planning Commission must make the following findings in order to approve the project: 1. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and Appendix A; 2. That, based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (8) can be made: 15.40.030.8.1 Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of project approval, and 15.40.030. B. 1(a) The project will neither cause nor make an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted intersection. 3. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all conditions of approval. 12 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 18 A traffic study, entitled "Back Bay Landing Traffic Impact Analysis dated July 3, 2013" was prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer pursuant to the TPO and its implementing guidelines (Attachment No. PC 41). A total of 19 primary intersections in the City were evaluated. The traffic study indicates that the project will increase traffic on 11 of the 19 study intersections by one percent (1 %) or more during peak hour periods one year after the completion of the project and, therefore, these 11 intersections required further Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis. Utilizing the ICU analysis specified by the TPO, the traffic study determined that the 11 primary intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and no mitigation is required. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the traffic study has been prepared in compliance with the TPO, subject to the findings and facts in support of findings provided in Exhibit H of Attachment No. PC 1 Lot Line Adiustment A lot line adjustment is proposed between Parcel 3 (subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new driveway. The proposed lot line adjustment exhibit is included as Attachment No. PC 5. Section 19.76.020 of the Municipal Code establishes findings that must be made in order to approve a lot line adjustment. These findings and facts in support of findings are provided in Exhibit J of Attachment No. PC 1. A condition of approval has been included requiring that the three mobile home units (currently owned by the applicant) affected by the adjustment be demolished and on- site parking to be reconfigured prior to the recordation of the lot line adjustment consistent with Exhibit 8 of the PCDP. A condition has also been included restricting the recordation of the document until after the requested Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment is approved by the California Coastal Commission to ensure that the adjusted parcel boundaries coincide with the approved land uses designations. If the amendment is denied, then the lot line adjustment may not record. Harbor Commission Review On November 13, 2013, staff presented the project to the Harbor Commission for their review and comments. Overall, the Harbor Commission was supportive of the project and spoke favorability of the proposed trail connections and public access components, including public launch for small hand - carried vessels. They were also supportive of the A complete copy of the Traffic Study with Appendices is available for review online at: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/jndex.asr)x?paqe=231 I i9 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 19 proposed enclosed boat storage facility and viewed it as an amenity to the harbor. They requested additional opportunity for input as the project progresses with the next stage of approvals and look forward to a collaborative working relationship as they plan for improvements to the City's Lower Castaways site across the channel from the project project. ENVIORNMENTAL REVIEW The City contracted with PCR Services, Inc., an environmental consulting firm, to prepare an Initial Study and Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the proposed project in accordance with the CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines. The DEIR was routed to the Planning Commission in advance of this staff report to allow additional time to review the report. A copy of the DEIR was also made available on the City's website (hftp://www.newi)ortbeachca.ciov/cegadocuments), at each Newport Beach Public Library, and at the Community Development Department at City Hall. Based upon the analysis of the Initial Study, the issue areas identified to be affected as either a no impact or a less than significant level are: Agricultural Resources and Mineral Resources. These topics were not discussed further in the DEIR. The following environmental topics were identified as potentially affected by the implementation of the proposed project: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation and Circulation, and Utilities and Service Systems. These topics were the subject of the DEIR analysis, and potential impacts were identified. The document recommends the adoption of 47 mitigation measures to reduce the potentially significant adverse effects to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures are identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is included as Section 4 of Attachment No. PC 6. The DEIR was completed and circulated for a mandatory 45 -day review period that began on October 4, 2013, and concluded on November 18, 2013. Comments were received from the following interested parties: members of the Bayside Improvement Association, California Coastal Commission, California Department of Transportation, California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc., the City's Environmental Quality Affairs Committee, City of Irvine, Citizens Advocating Rational Development, County of Orange Public Works Department, Orange County Coast Keeper, Orange County Sanitation District, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, and The Gas Company. The consultant and staff have prepared detailed written responses to each of the comments received on the adequacy of the DEIR, which are included as Section 2 of Attachment No. PC 7. Corrections and additions to the DEIR were also prepared (Section 3 of Attachment No. PC 7), which provide additional or revised information required for the preparation of 20 Back Bay Landing December 19, 2013 Page 20 responses to certain comments, including revised view simulation exhibits. The revisions do not alter any impact significance conclusion disclosed in the DEIR, and therefore, do not warrant recirculation of the DEIR for public review. The revisions to the DEIR will be incorporated into the Final EIR, if certified. PUBLIC NOTICE Notice of this application was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within a minimum of 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways) including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code. In additional, the radius of the mailing was expanded to include all owners within Castaways Community and Linda Isle (north of inlet) and to all surrounding Homeowners Associations. The environmental assessment process has also been noticed consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act. Lastly, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. ALTERNATIVES 1. The Planning Commission may deny the application request if it is concluded that the requested land use changes are not appropriate for the site or are not compatible with the surrounding uses (Attachment No. PC 2- Resolution for Denial). 2. The Planning Commission may suggest specific changes to the requested application, including the draft PCDP, to alleviate any concerns. If any requested changes are substantial, the item could be continued to a future meeting. Should the Planning Commission choose to do so, staff will return with a revised resolution incorporating the changes. Prepared by: Submitted by: Ja a Murillo, Senior Planner , Deputy Director ATTACHMENTS PC 1 Draft Resolution Recommending Approval PC 2 Draft Resolution Recommending Denial PC 3 Draft Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) PC 4 Traffic Study PC 5 Lot Line Adjustment PC 6 FEIR: Response to Comments on DEIR, Corrections /Additions to DEIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FAUsers\PLN \Shared \PA's \PAs- 2011\PA2011- 216 \Planning Commission\PA2011 -216 PC RPT.docx 21 Attachment No. PC 1 Draft Resolution for Approval PC1 23 FCi 24 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. ER2012 -003 AND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2011 -011, COASTAL LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. LC2011 -007, CODE AMENDMENT NO. CA2013- 009, PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION NO. PC2011 -001, TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -003, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA2011 -003 FOR THE APPROXIMATELY 31 ACRE PLANNED COMMUNITY KNOWN AS BACK BAY LANDING LOCATED AT 300 EAST COAST HIGHWAY (PA2011 -216) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: 1. An application was filed by Bayside Village Marina, LLC ( "Applicant') with respect to an approximately 31 -acre parcel generally located on the north of East Coast Highway and northwest of Bayside Drive, legally described on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, (the "Property ") requesting approval of various legislative and related approvals that would allow for the future development of a mixed -use bayfront village comprising of up to 94,035 square feet of marine - related and visitor - serving commercial uses and up to 49 residential units (the 'Project'). The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the Project as proposed: a. General Plan Amendment (GPA)- To allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1-11). The amendment would also change the designation of the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM) to MU -H1. In addition to the land use changes, the amendment would create two new anomalies to reallocate 49 un -built residential dwelling units from the adjacent mobile home park (Anomaly No. 81) to the project site (Anomaly No. 80). b. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment (CLUPA)- To allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM-13) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H). The amendment would also change the designation of the 0.3 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU- H. In addition to the land use changes, the amendment would also establish a site - specific development policy and a height exception to the 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit allowing for a single, 65- foot -tall coastal public view tower. C. Code Amendment- To amend the Zoning Map of the Zoning Code to expand the current Planned Community District boundaries (PC -9) of the site to include: 1) PCi �5 Planning Commission Resolution No. the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC- 1 /MHP); and, 2) the existing 0.642 -acre portion of the project site currently zoned as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM). d. Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP)- Adoption of a Development Plan to allow for the classification of land within the existing Planned Community boundaries and establishment of development standards, design guidelines, and implementation of the future project and long -term operation of all planning areas of the site. e. Lot Line Adjustment (LLA)- To adjust the property boundaries between Parcel 3 (subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new driveway. f. Traffic Study- A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. 2. The Property currently has General Plan designations of Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5 and 0.3), Open Space (OS) and Tidelands and Submerged Lands (TS), and limited to a total maximum development of 139,680 square feet. 3. The Property is currently located within the Coastal Zone and has Coastal Land Use Plan designations of Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -A and CM -B), Open Space (OS) and Tidelands and Submerged Lands (TS). The requested change of the Coastal Land Use Plan designation from CM -B and MU -H will not become effective until the amendment to the Coastal Land Use Plan is approved by the Coastal Commission. 4. The Property is currently located within the Planned Community zoning district (PC -9) and within the Recreational and Marine (CM 0.3) zoning district. 5. Council Policy A -18 requires that proposed General Plan amendments be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a project (separately or cumulatively with other projects over a 10 -year span) exceeds any one of the following thresholds, a vote of the electorate would be required: if the project generates more than 100 peak hour trips (AM or PM); adds 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area; or, adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area. There have been no prior amendments approved within Statistical Area K1 since the adoption of the 2006 General Plan. Although the amendment would change the land use designation from CM to MU -H1 to allow for the development of 49 residential units, the proposed anomalies would limit the development limits within Statistical Area K1 to what is currently allowed under the General Plan. This is achieved through the reallocation of 49 un -built residential units from Bayside Village Mobile Home Park (Anomaly No. 81) to the project site (Anomaly No. 80). Therefore, the thresholds that require a vote pursuant to Charter Section 423 are not exceeded because the proposed amendment does not create any new dwelling units, does not exceed the non - residential floor area threshold, and does not exceed the a.m. or p.m. peak hour vehicle trips threshold. pcz 26 Planning Commission Resolution No. 6. Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the appropriate tribe contacts identified by the Native American Heritage Commission were provided notice of the proposed General Plan Amendment on February 13, 2012. The California Government Code requires 90 days to allow tribe contacts to respond to the request to consult unless the tribe contacts mutually agree to a shorter time period. As documented in Appendix D of the DEIR, follow -up consultation was conducted and Mr. Andy Salas replied to the follow -up letter by e-mail and identified his concerns and requests regarding monitoring during ground disturbing activities. No additional requests for consultation were received. 7. On November 7, 2013, the Planning Commission held a study session for the project in the City Hall Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, on the DEIR and Project. 8. A public hearing was held on December 19, 2013, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was provided in accordance with CEQA and the Newport Beach Municipal Code ( "NBMC "). The Draft Environmental Impact Report, Draft Responses to Comments, Draft Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at the scheduled hearing. 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 Project could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR "). 2. On October 1, 2012, the City, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation ( "NOP ") of the EIR and mailed that NOP to public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed Project. 3. On October 17, 2012, the City held a public scoping meeting to present the proposed Project and to solicit input from interested individuals regarding environmental issues that should be addressed in the EIR. 4. The City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (No. ER2012 -003, SCH No. 2012101003) ('DEIR ") in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and City Council Policy K -3, which, taking into account the comments it received on the NOP, described the Project and discussed the environmental impacts resulting there from. 5. The DEIR was circulated for a 45 -day comment period beginning on October 4, 2013, and ending November 18, 2013. PC1 27 Planning Commission Resolution No. 6. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed Project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the incorporation of mitigation measures. 7. The mitigation measures identified in the DEIR are feasible and reduce potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures would be applied to the Project through the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program. 8. The FEIR, consisting of the DEIR, Responses to Comments, Corrections and Additions to the DEIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program attached as Exhibit B, was considered by the Planning Commission in its review of the proposed Project. 9. The Planning Commission finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees and damages which may be awarded to a successful challenger. yx�1[�7►K��1�1�11►[e�� 1. Amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan are legislative acts. Neither the City nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. 2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Newport Beach General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. The Planning Commission concurs with the conclusion of the consistency analysis of the proposed project with these goals and policies provided in the DEIR. 3. Code Amendments are legislative acts. Neither the City Municipal Code nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments, unless they are determined not to be required for the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 4. Findings of Fact for the DEIR are provided in Exhibit C. 5. Findings and facts in support of such findings for the approval of the Traffic Study in accordance with NBMC Section 15.40.030 are provided in Exhibit H. 6. Findings and facts in support of such findings for the approval of the Lot Line Adjustment in accordance with NBMC Section 19.76.020 are provided in Exhibit J. PC-J- 2e Planning Commission Resolution No. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach determines that, based on all information, both oral and written, provided to date, that there has not been any new significant information, data, or changes to the Project which either result in the creation of a new significant environmental impact, or the need to adopt a new mitigation measure, or a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, or in a finding that the draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends to the City Council certification of the Back Bay Landing Final Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -003 (SCH No. 2012101003), attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit B, based upon the draft Findings of Fact attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference. 3. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends to the City Council approval and adoption of: a. General Plan Amendment No GP2011 -011, attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein by reference. b. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -007, attached hereto as Exhibit E and incorporated herein by reference. C. Code Amendment No. CA2013 -009, attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein by reference. d. Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2011 -001, attached hereto as Exhibit G and incorporated herein by reference; e. Traffic Study No. TS2012 -003, attached hereto as Exhibit I and incorporated herein by reference. f. Lot Line Adjustment No. LA2011 -003, attached hereto as Exhibit K and incorporated herein by reference, and subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit L, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. PCi 29 Planning Commission Resolution No. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN ABSENT: BY: Bradley Hillgren, Chairman BY: Kory Kramer, Secretary -pc so Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 278, PAGES 40 TO 45M INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED JUNE 6, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 94- 380365 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 OF TRACT NO. 7953, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 310, PAGES 7 TO 11 INCLUSIVE, OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDED OF SAID COUNTY. PC! As PC1 4 32 Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT B BACK BAY LANDING FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ER2012 -003 (SCH No. 20121010034) Consists of: 1. Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) dated October 2013 2. Appendices A through L dated October 2013 K =9Ii .1:11Z a. Introduction to Final EIR b. Response to Comments c. Corrections and Additions to the Draft EIR 4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program The Final Environmental Impact Report is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?paqe=231 1. PC1 Tb 33 PCi g 34 EXHIBIT C FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS FOR THE BACK BAY LANDING PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2012101003) 1. INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21081, and the State CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations, Section 15091 (collectively, CEQA) require that a public agency consider the environmental impacts of a project before a project is approved and make specific findings. The State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 provides: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can or should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (b) The findings required by subdivision (a) shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) The finding in subdivision (a)(2) shall not be made if the agency making the finding has concurrent jurisdiction with another agency to deal with identified feasible mitigation measures or alternatives. The finding in subsection (a)(3) shall describe the specific reasons for rejecting identified mitigation measures and project alternatives. (d) When making the findings required in subdivision (a)(1), the agency shall also adopt a program for reporting on or monitoring the changes which it has either required in the project or made a condition of approval to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects. These measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other measures. FC1 C 35 (e) The public agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of the proceedings upon which its decision is based. (f) A statement made pursuant to Section 15093 does not substitute for the findings required by this section. State CEQA Guidelines Section 15093 further provides: (a) CEQA requires the decision - making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable." (b) Where the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the final EIR and /or other information in the record. This statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination. This statement does not substitute for, and shall be in addition to, findings required pursuant to Section 15091. Having received, reviewed, and considered the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) and the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the Back Bay Landing project, SCH No. 2012101003 (collectively, the EIR), as well as all other information in the record of proceedings on this matter, the following Findings and Facts in Support of Findings (Findings) are hereby adopted by the City of Newport Beach (City) in its capacity as the CEQA Lead Agency. These Findings set forth the environmental basis for the discretionary actions to be undertaken by the City for the development of the project. These actions include the certification and /or approval of the following for Back Bay Landing: • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -001 (SCH #2012101003). • General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -011 • Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -007. • Code Amendment No. CA2013 -009. • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2011 -001. • Traffic Study No. TS2012 -003. PC1 C 36 • Lot Line Adjustment No. LA2011 -003. These actions are collectively referred to herein as the project. A. Document Format These Findings have been organized into the following sections: (1) Section 1 provides an introduction to these Findings. (2) Section 2 provides a summary of the project, overview of the discretionary actions required for approval of the project, and a statement of the project's objectives. (3) Section 3 provides a summary of previous environmental reviews related to the project area that took place prior to the environmental review done specifically for the project, and a summary of public participation in the environmental review for the project. (4) Section 4 sets forth findings regarding the environmental impacts that were determined to be —as a result of the Initial Study, Notice of Preparation (NOP), and consideration of comments received during the NOP comment period — either not relevant to the project or clearly not at levels that were deemed significant for consideration at the project- specific level. (5) Section 5 sets forth findings regarding significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the EIR that the City has determined are either not significant or can feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level through the imposition of Project Design Features, standard conditions, and /or mitigation measures. In order to ensure compliance and implementation, all of these measures will be included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the project and adopted as conditions of the project by the Lead Agency. Where potentially significant impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels through adherence to Project Design Features and standard conditions, these findings specify how those impacts were reduced to an acceptable level. Section 5 also includes findings regarding those significant or potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the EIR that will or may result from the project and which the City has determined cannot feasibly be mitigated to a less than significant level. (6) Section 6 sets forth findings regarding alternatives to the proposed project. B. Custodian and Location of Records The documents and other materials that constitute the administrative record for the City's actions related to the project are at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660. The City of Newport Beach is the custodian of the Administrative Record for the project. PCi C 37 2. PROJECT SUMMARY A. Project Location Regionally, the project site is located near the Pacific Ocean in the west - central portion of Orange County, within the City of Newport Beach. The project site is generally bounded by the Upper Newport Bay Channel to the west and north, by Jamboree Road to the east, and by East Coast Highway to the south. Regional access to the site is from East Coast Highway (SR -1) via Jamboree Road or the Costa Mesa Freeway (SR -55). Vehicular access to the site is from East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive. B. Project Description The proposed project consists of the requested legislative approvals (Amendments to General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code, and Adoption of a Planned Community Development Plan) for the project site, as well as related for approvals of a Lot Line Adjustment and Traffic Study. Project- specific administrative approvals (e.g., Site Development Review, Coastal Development Permit, and Harbor Permit) will be processed at a future date. In order to allow for future mixed -use development of the site, amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan are required to change portions of the project site land use designations to a "Mixed -Use Horizontal' designation which allows the CM uses currently allowed on the site with limited residential. The Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) included within the project applications is proposed to establish appropriate zoning regulations governing land use and development of the site consistent with the proposed General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan designations. Subsequent entitlements will involve a Site Development Review from the City of Newport Beach and a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission for the specific project -level design of the future mixed -use development. If residential units are developed as condominiums, a Tentative Tract Map will also be required to be processed. Resource agency permits may also be needed in the future related to placement of a bulkhead wall, which will be determined at the time a specific development project is proposed. C. Discretionary Actions Implementation of the project will require several actions by the City, including • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012 -003 (SCH #2012101003). An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.). • General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -011: To allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1-11). FC1 C se The amendment would also change the designation of the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM) to MU -H1. In addition to the land use changes, the amendment would create two new anomalies to reallocate 49 un -built residential dwelling units from the adjacent mobile home park (Anomaly 81) to the project site (Anomaly 80). • Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -007: allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -B) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H). The amendment would also change the designation of the 0.3 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU -H. In addition to the land use changes, the amendment would also establish a site - specific development policy and a height exception to the 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit allowing for a single, 65 -foot tall coastal public view tower. • Code Amendment No. CA2013 -009: To amend the Zoning Map of the Zoning Code to expand the current Planned Community District boundaries (PC -9) of the site to include: 1) the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC- 1 /MHP); and, 2) the existing 0.642 -acre portion of the project site currently zoned as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM). • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2011 -001: Adoption of a Development Plan to allow for the classification of land within the existing Planned Community boundaries and establishment of development standards, design guidelines, and implementation of the future project and long -term operation of all planning areas of the site. The PCDP has six (6) components: 1) Development Limits and Land Use Plan; 2) Permitted Uses; 3) Development Standards; 4) Design Guidelines; 5) Phasing Plan; and 6) Back Bay Landing PCDP Implementation /Site Development Review. • Traffic Study No. TS2012 -003: A project- specific Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) has been prepared for the potential future development pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Lot Line Adjustment No. LA2011 -003: To adjust the property boundaries between Parcel 3 (subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new driveway. The Final EIR would also provide environmental information to responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and other public agencies that may be required to grant approvals and permits or coordinate with the City of Newport Beach as a part of project implementation. These agencies include, but are not limited to: • Airport Land Use Commission of Orange County (ALUC). The project is within the boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP). The overseeing AC1 C 39 agency, ALUC, must review the proposed project and determine its consistency with the AELUP. • Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB). The Santa Ana RWQCB would approve the project's compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Statewide General Construction Activity permit (2009- 0009 -DWQ) and Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer System (MS4) permit. In addition, the RWQCB is the agency with lead oversight of the remediation for the 550 - gallon Underground Storage Tank and is responsible for clearing the site for residential development. • South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD). Future construction of the project would require permitting by SCAQMD for Rules 201 (permit to construct), 402 (nuisance odors), 403 (fugitive dust), 1113 (architectural coatings), 1403 (asbestos emissions from demolition), and for future operation of the project, 1186 (street sweeping). D. Statement of Project Objectives The statement of objectives sought by the project and set forth in the Final EIR is provided as follows: 1. Provide a high quality mixed -use, marine - related, visitor - serving commercial development with integrated residential units and a unified architectural and landscape theme. 2. Implement the MU -H1 (Mixed -Use Horizontal 1) General Plan and MU -H (Mixed - Use Horizontal) Coastal Land Use Plan categories on an underutilized bayfront location in a manner that provides for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which includes general or neighborhood commercial, offices, multi - family residential, visitor - serving and marine - related uses, as well as buildings that vertically integrate residential with non - residential uses, adjacent to Coast Highway, and on a bayfront location. 3. Maintain and expand core coastal dependent and coastal - related land uses, including continuation and expansion of existing marina parking, and the development of significant new enclosed bayfront dry stack boat storage and launching facility. 4. Provide new housing opportunities in response to the continued demand for housing, reduce vehicle trips and encourage active lifestyles by increasing the opportunity for residents to live in proximity to jobs, services, coastal recreation and entertainment. 5. Protect and enhance significant visual resources from City- designated Coastal View Points and Coastal View Roads, [such as Coast Highway, Castaways Park, and Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, to the bay and the cliffs of upper Newport Beach] Pell G 40 through view corridors designed into the project. Create new public view opportunities on -site. 6. Expand bayfront public access to and along the bay where none exists at the present time, in a manner that protects environmental study areas (ESA) and /or environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and does not adversely impact existing private residences adjacent to the site, consistent with Coastal Act section 30214. This new coastal access will be accomplished through a new 12- foot -wide bayfront walkway traversing Planning Areas 1 and 2 of the future project. This new, public bayfront promenade will link the public docks and marina property south of the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, to the existing Newport Dunes pedestrian /bicycle trail off of Bayside Drive, and ultimately to the Newport Dunes recreational areas, as well as to an existing County Class 1 Regional Trail. 3. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The Final EIR includes the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) dated October 2013, written comments on the Draft EIR that were received during the 45 -day public review period, written responses to those comments, clarifications /changes to the Final EIR, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. In conformance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, the City conducted an extensive environmental review of the Back Bay Landing project: • Completion of the Notice of Preparation (NOP), which was released for a 30 -day public review period from October 1, 2012 through October 30, 2012. The NOP was sent to all responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and the Office of Planning Research and posted at the Orange County Clerk- Recorder's office and on the City's website on October 1, 2012. • During the NOP review period, a Scoping Meeting was held to solicit additional suggestions on the content of the Back Bay Landing EIR. Attendees were provided an opportunity to identify verbally or in writing the issues they felt should be addressed in the EIR. The scoping meeting was held on Wednesday, October 17, 2012, at the Friends Room, Newport Beach Public Library, 1000 Avocado Avenue, Newport Beach, California 92660. The notice of the public scoping meeting was included in the NOP. • Preparation of a Draft EIR by the City that was made available for a 45 -day public review period (October 4, 2013 to November 18, 2013). The Draft EIR consisted of analysis of the Back Bay Landing project and the technical appendices. The Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft EIR was published in the October 4, 2013, edition of the Daily Pilot, a newspaper of general circulation. The NOA was sent to all interested persons, agencies and organizations. The Notice of Completion (NOC) was sent to the State Clearinghouse in Sacramento for distribution to public agencies. The NOA was posted at the Orange County Clerk- Recorder's office on October 4, 2013. Copies of the Draft EIR were made available for public review at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department, Newport Beach Central Branch Library, Newport Beach Balboa Branch Library, Newport Beach Mariners Branch Library, and Newport Beach Corona del Mar Branch Library. The Draft EIR was available for download via the City's website: http:// www. newportbeachca .gov /cegadocuments. Pcz C 41 • The Environmental Quality Affairs Committee (EQAC) scheduled a meeting on November 14, 2013, and included on the meeting agenda was an item to review and approve EQAC comments on the Back Bay Landing Draft Environmental Report. However, a quorum of the EQAC members was not present and, therefore, there was no action taken to review and finalize comments. Unedited EQAC comments from individual members were included in the responses to comments received on the Draft EIR. • Preparation of a Draft Final EIR including Draft EIR, comments on the Draft EIR, responses to those comments, clarifications /revisions to the Draft EIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and appended documents. The preliminary Response to Comments were provided to the City Planning Commissioners on December 13, 2013, and posted on the City's website. • The Planning Commission held a study session on November 7, 2013 and public hearings for the Project on December 19, 2013, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. Notices of time, place, and purpose of the public hearing were provided in accordance with CEQA and NBMC. The Draft Final EIR, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this hearing. Notice for this public hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all property owners within a minimum of 300 feet of the project site and to all interested persons, agencies and organizations, and posted at the project site a minimum of 10 days in advance of the hearing, consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for the meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. For purposes of CEQA and these Findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project consists of the following documents and other evidence, at a minimum: • All project application materials submitted to the City by the Applicant and its representatives; • NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project; • The Scoping Meeting notes held during the 30 -day NOP period; • The Final EIR, including the Draft EIR and all appendices, the Responses to Comments, Corrections and Additions to the Draft EIR, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and all supporting materials referenced therein. All documents, studies, EIRs, or other materials incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR and Final EIR; • Written comments submitted by agencies and members of the public during the 45- day public review comment period on the Draft EIR; • All responses to the written comments submitted by agencies and members of the public provided at the December 10, 2013, Planning Commission Public Hearing; • All final City Staff Reports relating to the Draft EIR, Final EIR, and the project; PC1 G 42 • All other public reports, documents, studies, memoranda, maps, or other planning documents relating to the project, the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or Responsible or Trustee Agencies. • The MMRP adopted by the City for the project; the Ordinances and Resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the proposed project; and all documents incorporated by reference therein; • These Findings of Fact adopted by the City for the project, any documents expressly cited in these Findings of Fact; and • Any other relevant materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code Section 21167.6(e). The documents and other material that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department. The custodian for these documents is the City of Newport Beach. This information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and 14 California Code Regulations Section 15091(e). 4. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT WERE DETERMINED NOT TO BE POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT Impacts Determined Less than Significant in the Initial Study As a result of the Notice of Preparation circulated by the City on October 1, 2012, in connection with preparation of the EIR, the City determined, based upon the threshold criteria for significance, that the project would have no impact or a less than significant impact on the following potential environmental issues, and therefore, determined that these potential environmental issues would not be addressed in the Draft EIR. Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the EIR, and the comments received by the public on the Draft EIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City which indicated that the project would have an impact on the following environmental areas: (a) Aesthetics. The project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcropping, and historic buildings within a scenic highway. (b) Agriculture and Forest Resources: The project site does not contain Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. No portion of the project site is covered by a Williamson Act Contract. Additionally, the project site does not include forest resources, including timberlands, and is not zoned for agriculture. (c) Air Quality: The proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. (d) Biological Resources. The project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. PGi C 43 (e) Geology and Soils. The project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Zoning Map or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault, or expose people or structures to landslides. The proposed project would not be located on expansive soils or require the use of septic systems or alternative waste water disposal systems. (f) Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The proposed project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials, substances or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the area associated with proximity to a private airstrip; or 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. (g) Hydrology and Water Quality. The proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The proposed project site is not within a 100 -year flood hazard area and therefore not would impede or redirect flood flows or expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. (h) Land Use and Planning. The project would not physically divide an established community or conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. (i) Mineral Resources: The project would not impact mineral resources of local, regional, or statewide importance. Q) Noise: The project site is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and therefore the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels related to private aircraft. (k) Population or Housing. The project would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere or displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. (1) Transportation/Traffic. The project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns or result in increased traffic levels or involve design features that would result in substantial safety risks. (m) Utilities and Services Systems. The project would comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. PCi 0 44 Impacts Determined to be Less Than Siqnificant in the DEIR The following impacts were evaluated in the DEIR and determined to be less than significant solely through adherence to the project design and adherence to the provisions of the Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) and standard conditions of the City of Newport Beach. Based upon the environmental analysis presented in the EIR, and the comments received by the public on the Draft EIR, no substantial evidence was submitted to or identified by the City indicating that the project would have an impact on the following environmental areas: (a) Aesthetics and Visual Resources: The project would not have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas, adversely affect the visual character or quality of the site, or generate additional light or glare in the project area. (b) Air Quality. The project would not conflict with the applicable air quality plan, violate air quality standards, result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. (c) Biological Resources: The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. (d) Cultural Resources: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. (e) Geology and Soils: The project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. (f) Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The project would not conflict with the plans adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. (g) Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The project would not create a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area as a result on being within an airport land use plan. (h) Hydrology and Water Quality. The project would comply with all applicable regulatory requirements regarding water quality, would maintain existing drainage patterns of the site and area, would be consistent with applicable regulatory requirements, and the post - project site would not result in significant hydrology impacts downstream such that flooding or erosion would occur on- or off -site. Furthermore, the project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage facilities. Additionally, the project would expose people or structures to flood hazards from dam failure, seiches, or tsunamis given compliance with applicable policies and regulations. (i) Land Use and Planning: The project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the City's General Plan and Local Coastal Program CLUP, SCAG regional plans, Airport Environs Land Use Plan, the California Coastal Act, or the City's Municipal Code) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Pct C 45 Q) Noise and Vibration: Construction noise and vibration would not exceed established thresholds and as such would not violate noise standards or result in excessive periodic noise increases or vibration. Project implementation would not generate excessive vibration levels to nearby sensitive receptors. Operation of proposed uses, including stationary and mobile sources, would not exceed established noise thresholds at nearby off -site sensitive receptors. (k) Population and Housing: The project would not result in substantial increase in population or housing. (1) Public Services: The project would not create significant impacts related to fire protection, police protection, parks /recreation, schools, or library services. (m) Recreation: The project would meet the City's parkland dedication requirements, and physical impacts to recreational and park spaces would not be significant. (n) Transportation and Traffic: The project - generated traffic would not conflict with applicable City plans governing the performance of the area -wide circulation system; cause significant impacts to the Congestion Management Plan facilities or state highways intersections; or conflict with adopted policies, plan, or programs for alternative transportation. (o) Utilities and Service Systems: Project - generated stormwater flow would be slightly increased in comparison with existing conditions, but within the existing capacity of storm drains serving the area. 5. FINDINGS REGARDING POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The following potentially significant environmental impacts were analyzed in the EIR, and the effects of the project were considered. As a result of environmental analysis of the project and the identification of project design features; compliance with existing laws, codes, and statutes; and the identification of feasible mitigation measures (together referred herein as the Mitigation Program), some potentially significant impacts have been determined by the City to be reduced to a level of less than significant, and the City has found —in accordance with CEQA Section 21081(a)(1) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a) (1) —that "Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. This is referred to herein as "Finding 1." Where the City has determined — pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(a)(2) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(2) —that "Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency," the City's finding is referred to herein as "Finding 2." A. Biological Resources (1) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the CDFW or USFWS. pcz c 4& Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce impacts to special- status species and habitats to less than significant levels. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact less than significant. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measure C -1 requires one or more actions to be taken prior to and during future construction activities in order to avoid adverse effects to least terns in the area, from monitoring to cessation of construction activities. Mitigation Measure C -2 requires one or more options including conducting vegetation removal outside the nesting season for raptor and songbird species, surveying for nesting raptors or other migratory bird species in order to confirm absence prior to vegetation removal during the nesting season, and /or avoidance of active nests. In order to minimize impacts to marine mammals in the area during any shoreline or in -water work, daily monitoring for marine mammals is required by Mitigation Measure C -3, which also requires that such work cease if marine mammals are observed nearby. Mitigation C -4 requires that in -water vessels do not exceed the ambient speed in the area in order to prevent harm to marine mammals in the area. Therefore, impacts to sensitive species and habitats would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure C -1: At the time of Site Development Review, the City shall require actions to prevent impacts to least terns if the construction schedule overlaps with the least tern breeding season of April 1 — September 15. The specific actions will be determined at the time of Site Development Review and will be based on conditions at that time, including least tern foraging. The actions will meet a standard of mitigating impacts to the least tern to a less than significant level, and may include the following types of actions. • Daily monitoring by a qualified biologist within 500 feet of construction activities once terns have arrived in the nesting colony (typically early April). • Contractor delay in commencing work if terns are present and actively foraging (e.g. searching and diving) within the work area. • Alternative distances and actions if it can be demonstrated that continuing construction within less than 500 feet and implementation of other construction period methods will not cause an adverse impact to the least tern. • Should adverse impacts to terns occur (e.g. agitation or startling during foraging activities), construction shall cease until least terns have left the project site. Pcz c 47 Mitigation Measure C -2: The developer or a designated representative shall ensure that impacts to migratory raptor and songbird species are avoided through one or more of the following methods: (1) vegetation removal activities shall be scheduled outside the nesting season for raptor and songbird species (nesting season typically occurs from February 15 to August 31) to avoid potential impacts to nesting species (this will ensure that no active nests will be disturbed and that habitat removal could proceed rapidly); and /or (2) Any construction activities that occur during the raptor and songbird nesting season shall require that all suitable habitat be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting raptor and songbird species by a qualified biologist before commencement of clearing. If any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) shall be delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete as determined by the qualified biologist to minimize impacts. The developer or designated representative shall submit proof of compliance with this measure to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department prior to tree removal activities on -site. Mitigation Measure C -3: During construction activities when dredging or other in- water work is occurring, a qualified biologist shall conduct daily monitoring within 500 feet of construction activities. The contractor shall halt work if any observations of marine mammals are made. Work shall not re- commence until a qualified biologist determines that the mammal(s) have left the area. Mitigation Measure C -4: If in -water construction vessel traffic is needed, the vessels shall not exceed existing ambient speed for the area. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. (2) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in the City or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the CDFW or USFWS. Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. Thereby, the City makes Finding 1 and impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels. PC1 C 42 Facts in Support of Finding Future construction activities would have the potential to affect sensitive natural communities, including eelgrass beds in Upper Newport Bay. However, Mitigation Measures C -5 through C -7 would require as part of any near -shore or in -water work that eelgrass beds be staked and marked so they can be avoided, that methods be employed to protect eelgrass when work occurs within 15 feet, and that surveys of eelgrass beds be taken prior to construction and that any eelgrass impacts be mitigated according to specific measures to be required by the City at the Site Development Review stage. Mitigation Measure C -8 would require surveys for the invasive seaweed species Caulerpa. Mitigation Measures C -9 through C -11 require implementation of various BMPs intended to prevent indirect adverse impacts to near - shore and subtidal habitats related to water quality, which would be implemented as part of a future project- specific SWPPP. With implementation of these measures, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure C -5: Prior to construction, the boundaries of the eelgrass beds, located nearshore of the Back Bay Landing site, shall be staked with ridged PVC markers or self- centering buoys visible at all tide heights. The contractor shall protect, replace and maintain the markers /buoys as needed to ensure that they remain in place and properly stake the boundaries of the eelgrass beds until the City certifies that all construction activities are complete. Mitigation Measure C -6: During shoreline work within 15 feet of eelgrass, which may involve construction of a bulkhead, dredging activities, or other in -water work, eelgrass shall be protected by specific techniques to be determined by the City prior to construction. Techniques may include, but are not limited to, silt curtains deployed above the eelgrass and below the shoreline work area as determined to be necessary and appropriate to the impacts at the next level of approval by the City. Mitigation Measure C -7: Any impacts to eelgrass shall be mitigated through specific measures to be required by the City at the Site Development Review stage. Examples of eelgrass mitigation include conformance to the City of Newport Beach Eelgrass Plan and to the requirements of the SCEMP, which mandates a minimum replacement ratio of 1.2:1 for eelgrass impacts (NMFS 1991, revision 11), to the extent those plans are in effect and relevant and applicable to the site conditions at such time as construction of the bulkhead is proposed. In accordance with the requirements of the SCEMP, a pre- construction eelgrass survey shall be completed by a qualified biologist within 60 days prior to initiation of demolition or construction activities at the site. -pci c 49 This survey shall include both area and density characterization of the beds. A post- construction survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist within 30 days following project completion to quantify any unanticipated losses to eelgrass habitat. Impacts shall then be determined from a comparison of pre- and post- construction survey results. Impacts to eelgrass, if any, would require mitigation as defined in the SCEMP. If required following the post- construction survey, a mitigation planting plan shall be developed, approved by the City and NMFS, and implemented to offset losses to eelgrass. Mitigation Measure C -8: Not more than 90 days prior to the initiation of construction activities near the shoreline, a survey for the invasive seaweed Caulerpa taxifolia shall be conducted by a certified Caulerpa surveyor to determine the presence or absence of the species in the area affected by future construction and /or dredging activities. Mitigation Measure C -9: The project shall conform to the approved storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and shall incorporate construction - related erosion /sediment control Best Management Practices as detailed in project plans for a future development on -site. These include, but are not limited to: installation and maintenance of an erosion /sediment barrier, covering stockpiled material prior to rain events, maintenance of equipment to prevent runoff of grease and oil into adjacent waters, and providing equipment and staff as required to repair and /or implement erosion /sediment control measures. Mitigation Measure C -10: The project shall conform to the approved storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and shall incorporate construction - related erosion /sediment control Best Management Practices as detailed in the project plans for a future development on -site. These include, but are not limited to: installation and maintenance of an erosion /sediment barrier, covering stockpiled material prior to rain events, maintenance of equipment to prevent runoff of grease and oil into adjacent waters, and providing equipment and staff as required to repair and /or implement erosion /sediment control measures. Mitigation Measure C -11: During shoreline work, a turbidity curtain shall be deployed above the water line and below the shoreline work area in order to minimize adverse water quality - related impacts to jurisdictional waters. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to biological resources that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the future project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. Pct C 6o (3) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (possibly including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. Thereby, the City makes Finding 1 and impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels. Facts in Support of Finding A jurisdictional delineation was completed and is provided in the Draft EIR. Due to the current requested legislative approvals and the lack of a project specific design a this time, additional details will be developed at the future Site Development Review stage to confirm or refine the information in the legislative approval EIR. Mitigation Measure C -12 would require that the nature and extent of future impacts to wetlands or other jurisdictional features be identified in a subsequent jurisdictional delineation based on a specific project design and the conditions at the time such a development project is proposed. The jurisdictional delineation would specify the extent of impacts such that effective mitigation, to the satisfaction of affected resource agencies, can be determined. With implementation of applicable mitigation measures, impacts to wetlands would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure C -12: A project- specific jurisdictional delineation shall be conducted for future on -site development as part of the Site Development Review process once a development application is submitted. The jurisdictional delineation shall determine the nature and extent of impacts to jurisdictional features resulting from future development, including impacts related to dredging required for the construction of a new water inlet for the proposed dry stack boat storage facility in Planning Area 1. Based on the nature and extent of impacts identified, mitigation shall be provided that includes, but is not limited to, on- or off -site creation, restoration, or enhancement of wetland habitat, subject to review and approval by affected resource agencies. (4) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could interfere substantially with the movement of 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. Finding: 1. Mitigation measures would reduce impacts to less than significant. Thereby, the City makes Finding 1 and impacts are mitigated to less than significant levels. FG1 C 51 Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measure C -2 requires one or more options including conducting vegetation removal outside the nesting season for raptor and songbird species, surveying for nesting raptors or other migratory bird species in order to confirm absence prior to vegetation removal during the nesting season, and /or avoidance of active nests. As such, potential impacts to nesting birds would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure C -2: The developer or a designated representative shall ensure that impacts to migratory raptor and songbird species are avoided through one or more of the following methods: (1) vegetation removal activities shall be scheduled outside the nesting season for raptor and songbird species (nesting season typically occurs from February 15 to August 31) to avoid potential impacts to nesting species (this will ensure that no active nests will be disturbed and that habitat removal could proceed rapidly); and /or (2) Any construction activities that occur during the raptor and songbird nesting season shall require that all suitable habitat be thoroughly surveyed for the presence of nesting raptor and songbird species by a qualified biologist before commencement of clearing. If any active nests are detected, a buffer of at least 300 feet (500 feet for raptors) shall be delineated, flagged, and avoided until the nesting cycle is complete as determined by the qualified biologist to minimize impacts. The developer or designated representative shall submit proof of compliance with this measure to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department prior to tree removal activities on -site. B. Cultural Resources (1) Potential Impact: There are no known cultural resources on the site. Implementation of the proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 if such a resource is discovered during grading. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measure D -1 requires a professional archaeologist to be retained to monitor ground- disturbing activities, determine potential to disturb cultural resources, and halt construction activities if necessary. The requirements set forth in Mitigation Measures D -1 would reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to less than significant. PO-1 G 62 Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure D -1: A qualified archaeologist shall be retained by the applicant to review grading plans and geotechnical information and prepare a monitoring plan for all ground- disturbing activities in previously undisturbed soils and sediments. A qualified archaeologist is defined as an archaeologist meeting the Secretary of the Interior Professional Qualification Standards for Archaeology. Ground - disturbing activities include primary construction - related activities and any associated secondary activities for support services such as utilities. In the event that archaeological resources are identified during monitoring or unexpectedly during excavations in fill sediments, all work proximal to the discovery shall halt until the qualified archaeologist has evaluated the find. If the archaeologist determines that the find is significant or may qualify as significant, the archaeologist shall prepare a treatment plan. If the find is prehistoric or includes Native American materials, affiliated Native American groups shall be invited to contribute to the treatment plan. Results of monitoring and any archaeological treatment shall be reported in an appropriate technical report to be filed with the applicant, the City of Newport Beach, and the CHRIS- SCCIC. The applicant, in consultation with the lead agency and archaeologist, shall designate repositories (e.g. museums) in the event that resources are recovered. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions The following City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval would apply to the proposed project: • The City of Newport Beach has standard conditions requiring a qualified archaeologist and a paleontologist to observe construction activities and to establish procedures for redirecting work, evaluating resources, and recommending appropriate actions. More specific requirements have been prepared for this project by the cultural resources consultant, and in lieu of the standard conditions, are included in the mitigation measures above. (2) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measure D -2 requires an qualified professional paleontologist to be retained during ground- disturbing activities to assess potential impacts to paleontological resources, cease or relocate construction work, recover fossils, and prepare a PCi C 53 paleontological report if required. The requirements set forth in Mitigation Measures D- 2 would reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure D -2: A qualified paleontologist shall be retained by the applicant to perform periodic inspections of excavation and grading activities on the project site where excavations into the older Quaternary Alluvium, Capistrano Formation, and /or Monterey Formation may occur. The frequency of inspections shall be based on consultation with the paleontologist and shall depend on the rate of excavation and grading activities, the materials being excavated, and if found, the abundance and type of fossils encountered. Monitoring shall consist of visually inspecting fresh exposures of sediment for larger fossil remains and, where appropriate, collecting wet or dry screened sediment samples of promising horizons for smaller fossil remains. If a potential fossil is found, the paleontologist shall be allowed to temporarily divert or redirect grading and other excavation activities in the area of the exposed fossil to facilitate evaluation and, if necessary, salvage. At the paleontologist's discretion and to reduce any construction delay, the grading and excavation contractor shall assist in removing rock samples for initial processing. Any fossils encountered and recovered shall be prepared to the point of identification and catalogued before they are donated to their final repository. Accompanying notes, maps, and photographs shall also be filed at the repository. Following the completion of the above tasks, the paleontologist shall prepare a report summarizing the results of the monitoring and fossil finds, if any, the methods used in these efforts, as well as a description of the fossils collected and their significance, if any. The report shall be submitted by the applicant, the City of Newport Beach, the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, and representatives of other appropriate or concerned agencies. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions The following City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval would apply to the proposed project: • The City of Newport Beach has standard conditions requiring a qualified archaeologist and a paleontologist to observe construction activities and to establish procedures for redirecting work, evaluating resources, and recommending appropriate actions. More specific requirements have been prepared for this project by the cultural resources consultant, and in lieu of the standard conditions, are included in the mitigation measures above. (3) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. PC1 C 54 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measure D -3 requires that no further disturbance to discovered human remains, that the County Coroner be contacted, and if necessary as determined by the Coroner, that Native American Heritage Commission be notified if the remains are found to be of Native American descent. As such, impact would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure D -3: If human remains are unearthed during construction activities, State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 requires that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the County Coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC shall then identify the person(s) thought to be the Most Likely Descendent of the deceased Native American, who shall then help determine what course of action shall be taken in dealing with the remains. The Applicant shall then take additional steps as necessary in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(e) and Assembly Bill 2641. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions The following City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval would apply to the proposed project: • The City of Newport Beach has standard conditions requiring a qualified archaeologist and a paleontologist to observe construction activities and to establish procedures for redirecting work, evaluating resources, and recommending appropriate actions. More specific requirements have been prepared for this project by the cultural resources consultant, and in lieu of the standard conditions, are included in the mitigation measures above. C. Geology and Soils (1) Potential Impact: Implementation of the project could expose people or structures to fault rupture, strong seismic ground shaking, strong seismic - related ground failure, liquefaction, landslides and other ground failure hazards. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact is less than significant with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. PCiC55 Facts in Support of Finding Given the soil types at the project site and high groundwater levels, as well as the relatively high levels of seismic activity in the region, there is the potential for future development to be adversely affected by ground shaking and other related seismic hazards. However, Mitigation Measure E -1 would require the preparation of a design - specific geotechnical report that identifies the specific measures to be incorporated into the project design and construction to ensure that risks associated with the identified seismic hazards are reduced to acceptable levels. As such, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure E -1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall submit to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department, Building Division Manager or his /her designee for review and approval, a site - specific, design -level geotechnical investigation prepared for each development parcel by a registered geotechnical engineer. The investigation shall comply with all applicable State and local code requirements and: a) Include an analysis of the expected ground motions at the site from known active faults using accepted methodologies; b) In consideration of the subterranean construction planned for the parking structure, include an evaluation of the groundwater table and its fluctuations through the installation of shallow observation wells. c) Determine structural design requirements as prescribed by the most current version of the California Building Code, including applicable City amendments, to ensure that structures can withstand ground accelerations expected from known active faults; d) Determine the final design parameters for walls, foundations, foundation slabs, utilities, roadways, parking lots, sidewalks, and other surrounding related improvements. Project plans for foundation design, earthwork, and site preparation shall incorporate all of the mitigations in the site - specific investigations. The structural engineer shall review the site - specific investigations, provide any additional necessary measures to meet Building Code requirements, and incorporate all applicable recommendations from the investigation in the structural design plans and shall ensure that all structural plans for the project meet current Building Code requirements. pci c s& The City's registered geotechnical engineer or third -party registered engineer retained to review the geotechnical reports shall review each site- specific geotechnical investigation, approve the final report, and require compliance with all geotechnical requirements contained in the investigation in the plans submitted for the grading, foundation, structural, infrastructure and all other relevant construction permits. The City shall review all project plans for grading, foundations, structural, infrastructure and all other relevant construction permits to ensure compliance with the applicable geotechnical investigation and other applicable Code requirements. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to geology and soils that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. D. Greenhouse Gas Emissions (1) Potential Impact: Project construction and operation would result in the increased generation of greenhouse gases and would exceed the screening level resulting in a significant impact with regard to GHG emissions. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Construction and operation of future uses on -site would result in increased generation of GHGs which could contribute to global climate change. However, Mitigation Measures F -1 through F -14 would require that a range of GHG emission - reducing design features and programs be implemented in order to minimize energy and water use, reduce overall vehicle miles traveled, and maximize efficiency. With implementation of applicable mitigation measures, project - related GHG emissions would not exceed established thresholds. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure F -1: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate that the design of the proposed buildings or structures would exceed the Title 24 California Building Standards energy code requirements, based on the 2008 Energy Efficiency Standards, by 15 percent. pct c 57 Mitigation Measure F -2: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate that the design of the proposed buildings or structures incorporates ENERGY STAR®- rated, energy efficient T -8 high- output fixtures, and /or compact fluorescent light (CFL), light- emitting diode (LED) and /or other comparable lighting fixtures. This measure shall apply to all exterior and publicly accessible interior lighting fixtures at the project site, including those outside the building envelope (e.g., on -site parking areas and walkway lighting). Documentation of compliance with this measure shall be provided by the project engineer to the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, for review and approval. Installation of the identified design features or equipment will be confirmed by the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Mitigation Measure F -3: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate that the operation of outdoor lighting is limited by the use of time - controlled exterior lighting. Documentation of compliance with this measure shall be provided by the project engineer to the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, for review and approval. Installation of the identified design features or equipment will be confirmed by the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Mitigation Measure F -4: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate that the design of the proposed buildings or structures incorporates heating, cooling, and lighting devices and appliances that meet or exceed ENERGY STAR® rated standards. Documentation of compliance with this measure shall be provided by the project engineer to the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, for review and approval. Installation of the identified design features or equipment will be confirmed by the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Mitigation Measure F -5: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate that the design of the proposed buildings or structures incorporates enhanced insulation such that heat transfer and thermal bridging is minimized in structures that will be mechanically heated and /or cooled. Documentation of compliance with this measure shall be provided to the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, for review and approval. Installation of the identified design features or equipment will be conducted by the contractor and confirmed by the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. FC1 C 52 Mitigation Measure F -6: Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, and the Project Applicant will document and verify, installation of the identified design features or equipment designed to limit air leakage through the structure or within the heating and cooling distribution system to minimize energy consumption in structures that will be mechanically heated and /or cooled. Mitigation Measure F -7: Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall demonstrate that the design of the proposed buildings or structures incorporates water- efficient products (bathroom sink faucets, low -flush urinals, dual -flush toilets, etc.) that meets or exceeds the CALGreen requirements. Documentation of compliance with this measure shall be provided to the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, for review and approval. Installation of the identified design features or equipment will be confirmed by the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. Mitigation Measure F -8: The project applicant shall provide designated parking for alternative fueled, hybrid, or electric vehicles. City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, will verify compliance and confirm implementation during construction. Mitigation Measure F -9: The Project Applicant shall provide designated on -site bicycle parking areas and bicycle racks accessible to residents, employees, and commercial uses. City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, will verify compliance and confirm implementation during construction. Mitigation Measure F -10: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the project plans and specifications shall include a statement that delivery of construction equipment and materials will be scheduled such that queuing of trucks on and off site shall be minimized. The requirement will be implemented by the contractor and verified by the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee. Mitigation Measure F -11: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, shall verify that project plans and specifications include a statement that construction equipment shall be shut off when not in use, shall not idle for more than 15 minutes, and that vehicles greater than 10,000 pounds shall be shut off when not in use and shall not idle for more than 5 minutes. Mitigation Measure F -12: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, shall verify that project plans and specifications include a statement that the T'Ci C s9 Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low- emission factors and high- energy efficiency and that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. Mitigation Measure F -13: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, shall verify that project plans and specifications include a statement that the Construction Contractor shall utilize electric or alternative -fuel powered equipment in lieu of gasoline or diesel powered engines where feasible. Mitigation Measure F -14: Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development, or designee, shall verify that project plans and specifications include a statement that the Construction Contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to greenhouse gas emissions that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. E. Hazards and Hazardous Materials (1) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment. Also, while the site is not a listed hazardous materials site, there is the potential for hazardous materials to be encountered during construction activities that could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measures G -1 through G -5 address known and potential hazardous materials conditions on the project site, and would require future characterization and remediation of hazardous materials that may exist on the property. Implementation of applicable mitigation measures would reduce risks associated with on -site hazardous materials to an acceptable level. Impacts, therefore, would be less than significant. pCZ C CID Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure G -1: A removal and treatment/remediation plan for the existing on -site 550 - gallon UST shall be prepared by the Project Applicant for submittal to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) and other appropriate agencies determined appropriate in consultation with the SARWQCB for review and approval. The plan shall include but not be limited to monitoring of excavation by a certified environmental consultant to identify and sample groundwater and soils that may be contaminated; and excavation, treatment and disposal of contaminated groundwater /soil in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. Written verification from the SARWQCB of approval of a dewatering plan /management plan completion shall be submitted to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading permit. Mitigation Measure G -2: If dredging of the bay occurs, disposal requirements for the dredged materials, which may contain elevated levels of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane and dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDT and DDE) pesticide contamination, shall be confirmed with the appropriate regulatory agencies during the 404 permit process (i.e., Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Department of Fish and Game). Mitigation Measure G -3: If dewatering activities occur on -site during future redevelopment, samples shall be obtained from the water and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxygenates to ensure that they do not exceed applicable discharge requirements. Should the samples exceed VOC, oxygenates or any other applicable discharge requirement, a dewatering plan shall be prepared by the Project Applicant for submittal to the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB) and other appropriate agencies determined appropriate in consultation with the SARWQCB for review and approval. The plan shall include but not be limited to sampling of groundwater that may be contaminated; and treatment and disposal of contaminated groundwater in compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. Written verification from the SARWQCB of approval of a dewatering plan completion shall be submitted to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department prior to issuance of grading permit. Mitigation Measure G-4: Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the Project Applicant shall conduct an asbestos survey of the of all on -site structures and submit verification to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department prior that a certified asbestos abatement contractor has properly removed asbestos in accordance with procedural AC1C11 requirements and regulations of South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1403. Mitigation Measure G -5: Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the Project Applicant shall submit verification to the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department prior that a lead -based paint survey has been conducted at all existing structures located on the project site. If lead -based paint is found, the Project Applicant shall follow all procedural requirements and regulations for proper removal and disposal of the lead -based paint. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to existing hazardous materials contamination that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. (2) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Construction and operation of a future development on -site could result in adverse impacts related to emergency access. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures G -6 to G -8 would ensure that vehicular access is provided to the project site throughout construction and operation of a future project. Impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure G -6: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Project Applicant shall prepare a Construction Management Plan for implementation during construction of the project. The plan shall be subject to final approval by the City of Newport Beach Director of Community Development. Mitigation Measure G -7: The Project Applicant shall prepare a Traffic Control Plan that identifies all traffic control measures, signs, and delineators to be implemented by the construction contractor throughout the duration of construction activities associated with the project. The plan shall identify any temporary lane closures and identify alternative travel routes. The PC1 C 02 plan shall be subject to final approval and issuance of a Temporary Street and Sidewalk Closure Permit by the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department. Mitigation Measure G -8: Prior to construction, the Project Applicant shall consult with the City of Newport Beach Police and Fire Departments to disclose and identify temporary closures and alternative travel routes, in order to ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles when construction activities would result in temporary lane or roadway closures. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to emergency response and evacuation plans that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the future project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. F. Noise (1) Potential Impact: Impacts related to future operation of on -site residential uses would be potentially significant due to existing traffic - related noise levels along East Coast Highway. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Proposed future on -site residential uses would be considered noise - sensitive once constructed and would be exposed to noise levels from traffic on East Coast Highway that exceed thresholds stated in the City's Municipal Code for residential uses. Mitigation Measure J -2 would require preparation of a design- specific acoustical study that identifies the necessary insulation or other noise - reducing features to meet the City's indoor noise standards. With implementation of applicable mitigation, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure J -2: As required by City of Newport Beach Noise Element, an acoustical analysis of the architectural plans of the proposed residential building shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, prior to issuance of building permits, to ensure that the building construction (i.e., exterior wall, window, and door) would provide adequate sound insulation to meet the acceptable interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. PC1 C 6s City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions The following City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval would apply to the proposed project: • The project must comply with the exterior noise standards for residential uses of the Noise Ordinance. The exterior noise level standard is 65 dBA between the hours of 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM and 60 dBA between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM. An acoustic study shall be performed by a qualified professional that demonstrates compliance with these standards of the Noise Ordinance. This acoustic study shall be performed and submitted to the Community Development Department as part of the Site Development Review permit application for each residential structure. If the exterior noise levels exceed applicable standards, additional mitigation shall be required, which may include the installation of additional sound attenuation devices as recommended by the acoustic study and subject to the approval of the Community Development Director. • The operator of the proposed commercial uses shall be responsible for the control of noise generated by the subject facility including, but not limited to, noise generated by patrons, food service operations, and mechanical equipment. All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than noise limits specified in Table 5.10 -3 for the specified time periods unless the ambient noise level is higher. • All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and adjacent public streets for each residential structure, as authorized by a Site Development Review permit, and shall be sound - attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control. • The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 10.32, Sound - Amplifying Equipment requires a permit for use of any sound - amplifying equipment and regulates the volume so sound - amplifying equipment is not a nuisance to persons. The use of sound - amplifying equipment is prohibited outdoors between the hours of 8 PM and 8 AM. G. Transportation /Traffic (1) Potential Impact: The proposed project could substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). Pal C 04 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measures M -1 through M -3 require that future site access be designed in a manner that maintains functional access to and from the site, but also minimizes safety hazards to vehicles. With implementation of these design requirements, impacts would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure M -1: Sight distance at the project accesses shall be reviewed with respect to City of Newport Beach standards in conjunction with the preparation of final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans. Mitigation Measure M -2: On -site traffic signing and striping shall be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project and as approved by the City of Newport Beach. Mitigation Measure M -3: Final design of the optional secondary access ('right turn in" only lane on East Coast Highway) shall accommodate bicycle use along the corridor and shall require coordination with and the approval of the California Department of Transportation, the Orange County Transportation Authority, and the Orange County Sanitation District. The driveway for the Orange County Sanitation District shall be relocated so as not to interfere with the proposed 'right turn in" only lane. Based on the posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour, and assuming partial deceleration of 10 miles per hour in the through lane, the recommended length of the deceleration lane is 315 feet. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to site access and vehicle safety that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project - specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. H. Utilities and Service Systems (1) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project would require or result in the construction of new on -site and off -site water facilities or the expansion of existing on -site and off -site facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects. Pct C 65 Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measure N -1 requires payment of requisite connection fees to the City of Newport Beach for water service at the project site. Payment of connection fees would reduce impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure N -1: Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy, the project Applicant shall pay the required City water connection fees as set forth in the Municipal Code (Section 14.12). City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to water infrastructure that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. (2) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could (1) exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board; (2) require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects; and (3) result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the proposed project, that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measure N -2 requires payment of requisite connection fees to OCSD for sewer service at the project site. Payment of connection fees would reduce impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure N -2: Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy, the project Applicant shall pay the required OCSD sewer connection fees as set forth in the Municipal Code (Section 14.24.050) which are utilized to PO-1 C 66 fund wastewater treatment and regional wastewater conveyance improvements associated with new development. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to wastewater infrastructure that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. (3) Potential Impact: Implementation of the proposed project could exceed the capacity of the landfill serving the project area. Finding: 1. The City hereby makes Finding 1 and determines that this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels with the incorporation of the proposed mitigation measures. Facts in Support of Finding Mitigation Measures N -3 and N -4 require recycling of demolition and construction materials and provision of temporary recycling bins for construction workers in order to reduce landfill disposal. Construction - related recycling requirements would reduce impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure N -3: Prior to the issuance of any demolition or construction permit, the project Applicant shall provide a copy of the receipt or contract indicating that the construction contractor shall only contract for waste disposal services with a company that recycles demolition and construction - related wastes. The contract specifying recycled waste service shall be presented to the Municipal Operations Department prior to approval of certificate of occupancy. Mitigation Measure N -4: In order to facilitate on -site separation and recycling of construction related wastes, the construction contractor shall provide temporary waste separation bins on -site during demolition and construction activities. City of Newport Beach Standard Conditions There are no specific City- adopted standard operating conditions of approval related to soil waste generation that are applicable to the proposed project at this time; however, future project- specific conditions of approval may be applied to the project by the City during the discretionary approval (site development review, tentative tract map, etc.), subsequent design, and /or construction process. T>CS c 67 6. FINDINGS REGARDING ALTERNATIVES A. Alternatives Considered and Rejected During the Scoping /Project Planning Process In addition to the guidance cited above regarding purpose and contents of an analysis of alternatives to a proposed project, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) states that an EIR should identify alternatives that were considered for analysis but rejected as infeasible and briefly explain the reasons for their rejection. According to the CEQA Guidelines, the following factors may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration: the alternative's failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, the alternative's infeasibility, or the alternative's inability to avoid significant environmental impacts. Alternatives that have been considered and rejected as infeasible include the following discussed below. It should be noted that an alternative public bayfront access alignment was considered by the project applicant that would have provided an enhanced pedestrian and bicycle access path along the entirety of the project site waterfront on Upper Newport Bay, extending from Planning Area 2 through Planning Areas 1 and 3. However, this alternate access alignment was determined to be infeasible, as discussed in further detail in Table 4.I -2, Coastal Land Use Plan Consistency Analysis, and Table 4.I -5, California Coastal Act Consistency Analysis, in Section 4.1, Land Use, of the Draft EIR. a. Off -Site Location Alternative CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(f)(2) describes the requirement, in some circumstances, for analysis of alternative locations. No significant unavoidable impacts were identified for the proposed project; therefore, no significant effects would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location. Nevertheless, the City evaluated an alternative location to address whether any feasible alternative locations exist, even though not required to avoid or substantially lessen a significant effect. The Off -Site Location Alternative would be similar to the proposed project but at a different location than the project site; specifically, the undeveloped parcel within the adjacent Newport Dunes Waterfront Resort that is currently planned for a Family Inn hotel. The location of the site is the same property identified as Approved Project D, Newport Dunes, discussed in Chapter 3, Basis for Cumulative Analysis, of the Draft EIR. Refer to Figure 3 -1, Approved Project Map, in Chapter 3 for an illustration of the off -site location relative to the project site. This Alternative would include legislative and administrative approvals similar to the proposed project, which would hypothetically allow for a comparable mix of land uses as the proposed project, as well as project - related amenities (e.g., bayfront promenade, public coastal view tower, boating and water recreation facilities, etc.). However, the property is Tidelands Trust and is subject to restrictions on use. The specific site is subject to the terms of a long -term lease with the County of Orange and residential uses are prohibited within the Newport Dunes property, which would preclude future development of proposed land uses at this location. As such, the off -site location alternative, in addition to being unneccesary to reduce or avoid a significant impact, would be infeasible and this Alternative was eliminated from further evaluation. PCi O 02 B. Alternatives Selected for Analysis Based on the criteria listed above, the following three alternatives have been determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives that could potentially attain most of the basic objectives of the project and have the potential to avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects of the project. These alternatives are analyzed in detail in the following sections. • No Project/No Build Alternative • No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative • Increased Residential /Reduced Commercial Alternative An EIR must identify an "environmentally superior" alternative, and where the No Project Alternative is identified as environmentally superior, the EIR is required to identify as environmentally superior an alternative from among the others evaluated. Each alternative's environmental impacts are compared to the proposed project and determined to be environmentally superior, neutral, or inferior. However, only significant and unavoidable impacts are used in making the final determination of whether an alternative is environmentally superior or inferior to the proposed project. However, no impacts analyzed in the Draft EIR were found to be significant and unavoidable. Subsection 5.D in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR identifies the environmentally superior alternative. The proposed project is analyzed in detail in Chapter 5 of the DEIR. 1. Alternatives Comparison Table 1, Comparison of Impacts Associated with the Alternatives and Impacts of the Proposed Project, below, provides a summary matrix that compares the impacts associated with the project with the impacts of each of the proposed alternatives. Table 1 Comparison of Impacts Associated with the Alternatives and Impacts of the Proposed Project PCiCC9 Alternative 3: Increased Alternative 2: Residential /Reduce Alternative 1: No Project /Existing d Commercial Project Impact No Project/No Build General Plan Alternative A. Aesthetics/Visual Resources Less Less Views /Scenic Vistas Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Aesthetics/Visual Similar Similar Character Less Than Significant Greater (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) PCiCC9 PCi C 70 Alternative 3: Increased Alternative 2: Residential /Reduce Alternative 1: No Project/Existing d Commercial Project Impact No Project /No Build General Plan Alternative Similar Less Light and Glare Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) B. Air Quality Air Quality Plan Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Construction - Related Emissions Regional Less Less Emissions Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Localized Less Less Emissions Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (S Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Operational Emissions Regional Less Less Emissions Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Localized Less Less Emissions Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less than (Less than Significant) Significant) Toxic Air Less Less Contaminants Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Less Less Odors Less than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less than (Less than Significant) Significant) C. Biological Resources Similar Similar Sensitive Species Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Riparian Similar Similar Habitat/Sensitive Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Natural Communities w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Similar Similar Wetlands Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) PCi C 70 PCiaj1 Alternative 3: Increased Alternative 2: Residential /Reduce Alternative 1: No Project/Existing d Commercial Project Impact No Project /No Build General Plan Alternative Similar Similar Wildlife Movement Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) D. Cultural Resources Similar Similar Historic Resources Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Similar Similar Archaeological Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Resources w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Similar Similar Paleontological Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Resources w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Similar Similar Human Remains Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation Less ) ( p No Impact) (Less Than Significant w/ (Less Than Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Similar Similar Regulatory Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Consistency Significant) Significant) E. Geology and Soils Surface Fault Less Greater Rupture Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Groundshaking, Less Greater Liquefaction, Ground Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Failure, and w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Landslides Mitigation) Mitigation) Similar Similar Soil Erosion Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) F. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Greenhouse Gas Less Than Si Significant g Less (No Impact) Greater (Significant and Less (Less Than Emissions w/ Mitigation Unavoidable) Significant w/ g Mitigation) PCiaj1 PC1Cj2 Alternative 3: Increased Alternative 2: Residential /Reduce Alternative 1: No Project/Existing d Commercial Project Impact No Project /No Build General Plan Alternative Consistency with Similar Similar GHG Reduction Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Plans Significant) Significant) G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Similar Similar Hazardous Materials Less Than Significant Greater (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Releases w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Similar Similar Hazardous Emissions Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Near Schools w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Similar Similar Listed Hazardous Less Than Significant Greater (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Materials Sites w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Emergency Similar Similar Response and Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Evacuation Plans `w'/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) H. Hydrology and Water Quality Violation of Discharge Less Less Requirements/ Water Less Than Significant Similar (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Quality Degradation Significant) Significant) Site Drainage Similar Similar Patterns /Storm Drain Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Capacity Significant) Significant) Similar Similar Levee or Dam Failure Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Similar Similar Erosion and Siltation Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Seiche/Tsunami/ Similar Similar Mudflow Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) I. Land Use Consistency with Less Greater Plans, Policies, and Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (No Impact) (Less Than Regulations Significant) PC1Cj2 PCl C 73 Alternative 3: Increased Alternative 2: Residential /Reduce Alternative 1: No Project/Existing d Commercial Project Impact No Project /No Build General Plan Alternative J. Noise Violation Noise Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) Similar (Less Than Less (Less Than Standards s ficant) Significant) Similar Less Groundborne Noise Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than and Vibration Significant) Significant) Permanent Noise Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) Similar (Less Than Less (Less Than Increases Significant) Significant) Less Less Temporary Noise Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Increases w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Regulatory Similar Less Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) K. Population and Housing Less Greater Population Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Greater Less Housing Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Less Greater Employment Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) L. Public Services Less Greater Fire Protection Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Less Greater Police Protection Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Less Greater Parks and Recreation Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Less Greater Schools Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) PCl C 73 PC1 3 74 Alternative 3: Increased Alternative 2: Residential /Reduce Alternative 1: No Project/Existing d Commercial Project Impact No Project /No Build General Plan Alternative Less Greater Libraries Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) M. Transportation /Traffic Greater Less Traffic System Level of Service Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than Significant w/ (Less Than Mitigation) Significant) Congestion Greater (Less Than Less Management Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) Significant w/ (Less Than Program Facilities Mitigation) Significant) Similar Similar Site Access and Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Traffic Safety w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Alternative Greater Similar Transportation Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) Regulatory Less Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Significant) Significant) N. Utilities Similar Similar Water Infrastructure Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Wastewater Less Greater Conveyance and Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Treatment w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Stormwater Drainage Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) Similar (Less Than Similar (Less Than Facilities Significant) Significant) Greater Less Landfill Disposal Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less Than (Less Than Capacity w/ Mitigation Significant w/ Significant w/ Mitigation) Mitigation) Regulatory Similar Similar Consistency Less Than Significant Less (No Impact) (Less than (Less than Significant) Significant) Source: PCR Services Corporation, 2013. PC1 3 74 a) No Project/No Build Alternative Description: In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the No Project/No Build Alternative for a development project on an identifiable property consists of the circumstance under which the project does not proceed. Section 15126.6(e)(3)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines states that, "in certain instances, the No Project/No Build Alternative means `no build' wherein the existing environmental setting is maintained." Accordingly, for purposes of this analysis, the No Project /No Build Alternative (Alternative 1) assumes that no new development would occur within the project site. Thus, the future development of up to 49 residential units and 94,034 square feet of commercial uses would not occur on -site, and other project - related improvements such as the new public bayfront promenade, multi -use trail, and coastal view tower would not be implemented. Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the No Project /No Build Alternative's environmental impacts as compared to the proposed project is set forth in Subsection 5.A in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, as shown above in Table 1, the No Project /No Build Alternative would reduce impacts to aesthetics (views /scenic vistas and light and glare), air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials (hazardous emissions near schools and emergency response /evacuation plans), levee or dam failure, erosion and siltation, and seiche /tsunami /mudflow), land use, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation /traffic, and utilities. Water quality impacts (violation of waste discharge requirements /water quality degradation) under this Alternative would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts related to aesthetics /visual resources (aesthetics /visual character), hydrology and water quality (site drainage patterns /storm drain capacity, and hazards and hazardous materials (hazardous materials releases and listed hazardous materials sites) would be greater for the No Project/No Build Alternative. Overall, the No Project /No Build Alternative would have less environmental impacts than the proposed project. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The No Project /No Build Alternative would not improve the project site from its current, mostly undeveloped condition, and as such would not fully meet any of the project objectives, and would only partially meet one objective. This Alternative would not provide a high quality mixed -use, marine - related, visitor - serving commercial development with integrated residential units and a unified architectural and landscape theme (Project Objective #1); implement the MU -H1 (Mixed -Use Horizontal 1) General Plan and MU -H (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Coastal Land Use Plan categories on an underutilized bayfront location in a manner that provides for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which includes general or neighborhood commercial, offices, multi - family residential, visitor - serving and marine - related uses, as well as buildings that vertically integrate residential with non - residential uses, adjacent to Coast Highway, and on a bayfront location (Project Objective #2); maintain and expand core coastal dependent and coastal - related land uses, including continuation and expansion of existing marina parking, and the development of significant new enclosed bayfront dry stack boat storage and launching facility (Project Objective #3); provide new housing opportunities in response to the continued demand for housing, reduce vehicle trips and encourage active lifestyles by increasing the opportunity for pCZ C 75 residents to live in proximity to jobs, services, coastal recreation and entertainment (Project Objective #4); enhance significant visual resources from City- designated Coastal View Points and Coastal View Roads or create new public view opportunities on -site (Project Objective #5); or expand bayfront public access to and along the bay where none exists at the present time, in a manner that protects environmental study areas (ESA) and /or environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and does not adversely impact existing private residences adjacent to the site, consistent with Coastal Act section 30214. However, this Alternative would protect significant visual resources from City- designated Coastal View Points and Coastal View Roads, [such as Coast Highway, Castaways Park, and Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, to the bay and the cliffs of upper Newport Beach], given the lack of development intensification and associated physical obstructions to existing views (Project Objective #6).. Feasibility: Since the No Project/No Build Alternative would allow the existing land uses (RV and boat storage, kayak and SUP rentals, and marina parking) to continue operating on the project site, the feasibility of this Alternative would rely on the economic feasibility of indefinite operation of these uses. No changes to the existing conditions would occur, and all operations would continue indefinitely. Finding: In comparison to the proposed project, the No Project /No Build Alternative would reduce impacts to aesthetics (views /scenic vistas and light and glare), air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials (hazardous emissions near schools and emergency response /evacuation plans), hydrology and water quality (site drainage patterns /storm drain capacity, levee or dam failure, erosion and siltation, and seiche /tsunami /mudflow), land use, noise, population and housing, public services, transportation /traffic, and utilities. Water quality impacts (violation of waste discharge requirements /water quality degradation) under this Alternative would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts related to aesthetics /visual resources (aesthetics /visual character) and hazards and hazardous materials (hazardous materials releases and listed hazardous materials sites) would be greater for the No Project/No Build Alternative. This alternative would fail to fully meet any of the project objectives and would only partially meet one objective. Overall, the No Project /No Build Alternative would have fewer environmental impacts than the proposed project, making it the environmentally superior alternative. However, since the No Project /No Build Alternative fails to meet all but one of the project objectives (and only partially meets that objective), it has been rejected by the City in favor of the proposed project. b) No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative Description: The No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would reduce the overall allowable square footage of development relative to the proposed project by implementing the existing adopted General Plan and zoning designations for the site. As such, this Alternative would allow for the development of up to 139,680 square feet of recreational and marine commercial uses on the project site, of which 32,500 square feet would be dry stack boat storage, with no residential uses allowed. Assuming a similar proportion of commercial land uses as under the proposed project, this CM (recreational and marine commercial) only Alternative would include 63,380 square feet of retail /marine sales and repair uses, 7,910 square feet of quality restaurant uses, 6,750 square feet of high- turnover restaurant uses, 16,750 square feet of office uses, and 32,500 square feet of dry stack boat storage in -PC2 c 76 Planning Area 1; 8,390 square feet of marine services and office in Planning Area 2; and 4,000 square feet of resident storage and boat lockers in Planning Area 4. No amendments to the City's General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, or zoning (PCDP) would be necessary. This Alternative would include a minimum six - foot -wide bayfront promenade along the coastal portions of Planning Areas 1 and 2, as well as a water inlet to allow for dry stack boat storage operations, but would not include other project - related amenities such as the new public multi -use trail, bike lanes, and coastal view tower. It is also assumed that this Alternative would require relocation of the existing access driveway off of Bayside Drive to a location similar to the proposed project, and therefore a lot line adjustment would be required to accommodate the new access configuration. Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative's environmental impacts compared to those of the proposed project is set forth in Subsection 5.B in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, as shown above in Table 1, the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would reduce impacts to aesthetics /visual resources (views /scenic vistas), air quality (construction and operational emissions), geology and soils (surface fault rupture and groundshaking, liquefaction, ground failure, and landslides), hydrology and water quality (violation of waste discharge requirements /water quality degradation), land use, noise (temporary noise increases), population and housing, public services, and utilities (wastewater conveyance and treatment). Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions), transportation /traffic (traffic system level of service, congestion management program facilities, and alternative transportation), and utilities (landfill disposal capacity) impacts for this Alternative would be greater than for the proposed project. Aesthetics /visual resources (aesthetics /visual character and light and glare), air quality (AQMP consistency), biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils (soil erosion), greenhouse gas emissions (consistency with GHG reduction plans), hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology /water quality (site drainage patterns /storm drain capacity, levee or dam failure, erosion and siltation, and seiche /tsunami /mudflow), noise (violation of noise standards, groundborne noise and vibration, and permanent noise increases), transportation /traffic (site access and traffic safety), and utilities (water infrastructure, stormwater drainage facilities) impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would at least partially meet all but two of the project objectives, and would fully meet two of them. Specifically, this Alternative would fully meet Project Objective #3, as it would maintain and expand core coastal dependent and coastal - related land uses, including continuation and expansion of existing marina parking, and the development of significant new enclosed bayfront dry stack boat storage and launching facility. This Alternative also would protect and enhance significant visual resources from City- designated Coastal View Points and Coastal View Roads, [such as Coast Highway, Castaways Park, and Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, to the bay and the cliffs of upper Newport Beach] through view corridors designed into the project, and would create new view opportunities on -site, and as such would fully meet Project Objective #5. Additionally, the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would partially meet Project Objective #1 since it would provide a high quality marine - related, visitor - serving commercial development with a unified architectural and landscape theme, but would not provide a mixed -use development that includes residential uses. This Alternative would partially meet Project Objective #6, as it would expand bayfront public access to and Pcr c 77 along the bay where none exists at the present time, in a manner that protects environmental study areas (ESA) and /or environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and does not adversely impact existing private residences adjacent to the site, consistent with Coastal Act section 30214. The new coastal access will be accomplished through a minimum Code - required six - foot -wide bayfront walkway traversing Planning Areas 1 and 2 of the future project, in contrast to the 12 -foot width under the proposed project. However, this new, public bayfront promenade would not be required to link to the existing Newport Dunes pedestrian /bicycle trail off of Bayside Drive, and ultimately to the Newport Dunes recreational areas, via new bicycle lane and trail improvements on Bayside Drive. The No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative would not implement the MU -H1 (Mixed -Use Horizontal 1) General Plan and MU -H (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Coastal Land Use Plan categories on an underutilized bayfront location in a manner that provides for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which includes general or neighborhood commercial, offices, multi- family residential, visitor - serving and marine - related uses, as well as buildings that vertically integrate residential with non - residential uses, adjacent to Coast Highway, and on a bayfront location, and therefore would not meet Project Objective #2. Finally, this Alternative would also not meet Project Objective #4, as it would not provide new housing opportunities in response to the continued demand for housing, reduce vehicle trips and encourage active lifestyles by increasing the opportunity for residents to live in proximity to jobs, services, coastal recreation and entertainment. Feasibility. Although the No Project /Existing General Plan Alternative would be physically feasible, it may not be economically feasible. It is uncertain whether this Alternative would yield a reasonable return on investment. Finding: Of the six project objectives, this Alternative would fully meet two, partially meet two, and would not meet two. It would reduce environmental impacts to aesthetics /visual resources (views /scenic vistas), air quality (construction and operational emissions), geology and soils (surface fault rupture and groundshaking, liquefaction, ground failure, and landslides), hydrology and water quality (violation of waste discharge requirements /water quality degradation), land use, noise (temporary noise increases), population and housing, public services, and utilities (wastewater conveyance and treatment). However, it would increase impacts to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions), transportation /traffic (traffic system level of service, congestion management program facilities, and alternative transportation), and utilities (landfill disposal capacity). Also, because it does not include the development of residential land uses, it would not require a General Plan Amendment, CLUP Amendment, PC Text Amendment, or Lot Line Adjustment. Moreover, it would not provide additional housing in support of the City's Housing Element and SCAG RHNA allocation, and it may be economically infeasible. For these reasons, the City finds that the proposed project is preferred over this Alternative. c) Increased Residential /Reduced Commercial Alternative Description: The Increased Residential /Reduced Commercial Alternative would allow for a future development pattern and footprint nearly identical to the proposed project, but would include more residential units and reduced commercial square footage. As such, the Increased Residential /Reduced Commercial Alternative would include the same Planning Area boundaries, land use categories, development standards, and design guidelines as the proposed project, as well as all project - related improvements and amenities (e.g., bayfront PCi C 72 promenade, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, public coastal view tower, and water inlet for dry stack boat storage). In terms of development intensity, this Alternative would result in the potential future on -site construction of up to 75 residential units totaling 113,000 square feet and up to 58,400 square feet of recreational and marine commercial uses within a mixed -use development. Commercial uses under Alternative 3 are assumed to include 6,400 square feet of retail /marine sales and repair uses, 4,300 square feet of quality restaurant uses, 1,600 square feet of high- turnover restaurant uses, 4,800 square feet of office uses, and 32,500 square feet of dry stack boat storage in Planning Area 1; 4,800 square feet of marine services and office in Planning Area 2; and 4,000 square feet of resident storage and boat lockers in Planning Area 4. It is assumed for the purposes of this analysis that all project - related legislative approvals, including amendments to the City's General Plan, CLUP, and Zoning Code (PC text), and administrative approvals such as the LLA to allow for relocated site access, would be required under this Alternative. This alternative is not required to avoid or substantially reduce a significant impact. There are different policies relative to providing additional housing on the site. Regional planning and City policies, and state law such as SIB 375, encourage the provision of additional housing on sites such as this one (infill sites with access to utilities, etc.). The California Coastal Commission would typically require that no more than 50- percent of a mixed -use waterfront development be residential in relation to commercial use. The City has included this Alternative for informational purposes, and to allow the public and decision - makers to evaluate this Alternative in light of these differing housing policies. Environmental Effects: A full discussion of the Increased Residential /Reduced Commercial Alternative's environmental impacts compared to those of the proposed project is set forth in Subsection 5.13 in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of the Draft EIR, which is hereby incorporated by reference. In comparison to the proposed project, as shown above in Table 1, the Increased Residential /Reduced Commercial Alternative would reduce impacts to aesthetics /visual resources (views /scenic vistas and light and glare), air quality (construction and operational emissions), greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions), hydrology and water quality (violation of waste discharge requirements /water quality degradation), noise, population and housing (housing), transportation /traffic (traffic system level of service and congestion management program facilities), and utilities (landfill disposal capacity). Geology and soils (surface fault rupture and groundshaking, liquefaction, ground failure, and landslides), land use, population and housing (population and employment), public services, and utilities (wastewater conveyance and treatment and landfill disposal capacity) impacts for this Alternative would be greater than for the proposed project. Aesthetics /visual resources (aesthetics /visual character), air quality (AQMP consistency), biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils (soil erosion), greenhouse gas emissions (consistency with GHG reduction plans), hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology /water quality (site drainage patterns /storm drain capacity, levee or dam failure, erosion and siltation, and seiche /tsunami /mudflow), transportation /traffic (site access and traffic safety and alternative transportation), and utilities (water infrastructure, stormwater drainage facilities) impacts would be similar to the proposed project. Ability to Achieve Project Objectives: The Increased Residential /Reduced Commercial Alternative would at least partially meet all of the project objectives, and would fully meet all but one of them. Specifically, this Alternative would provide a high quality mixed -use, pcz c 79 marine - related, visitor - serving commercial development with integrated residential units and a unified architectural and landscape theme (Project Objective #1); implement the MU -H1 (Mixed -Use Horizontal 1) General Plan and MU -H (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Coastal Land Use Plan categories on an underutilized bayfront location in a manner that provides for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which includes general or neighborhood commercial, offices, multi - family residential, visitor - serving and marine - related uses, as well as buildings that vertically integrate residential with non - residential uses, adjacent to Coast Highway, and on a bayfront location (Project Objective #2); maintain and expand core coastal dependent and coastal - related land uses, including continuation and expansion of existing marina parking, and the development of significant new enclosed bayfront dry stack boat storage and launching facility, but at a lesser degree than the proposed project due to the reduced intensity (Project Objective #3); provide new housing opportunities in response to the continued demand for housing and reduce vehicle trips to a greater extent than the proposed project would, and would also encourage active lifestyles by increasing the opportunity for residents to live in proximity to jobs, services, coastal recreation and entertainment (Project Objective #4); protect and enhance significant visual resources from City- designated Coastal View Points and Coastal View Roads, [such as Coast Highway, Castaways Park, and Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, to the bay and the cliffs of upper Newport Beach] through view corridors designed into the project, and would also create new public view opportunities on- site (Project Objective #5); and expand bayfront public access to and along the bay where none exists at the present time, in a manner that protects environmental study areas (ESA) and /or environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and does not adversely impact existing private residences adjacent to the site, consistent with Coastal Act section 30214. As under the proposed project this new coastal access would be accomplished through a new 12- foot -wide bayfront walkway traversing Planning Areas 1 and 2 of the future project that links the public docks and marina property south of the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, to the existing Newport Dunes pedestrian /bicycle trail off of Bayside Drive, and ultimately to the Newport Dunes recreational areas, as well as to an existing County Class 1 Regional Trail (Project Objective #6). Feasibility: As with the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative, the Increased Residential /Decreased Commercial Alternative would be physically feasible but it may not be economically feasible. It is uncertain whether this Alternative would be a viable project that could yield a reasonable return on investment. Finding: The Office /Commercial /Residential Alternative would reduce impacts to to aesthetics /visual resources (views /scenic vistas and light and glare), air quality (construction and operational emissions), greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions), hydrology and water quality (violation of waste discharge requirements /water quality degradation), noise, population and housing (housing), transportation /traffic (traffic system level of service and congestion management program facilities), and utilities (landfill disposal capacity). However, this Alternative would increase impacts to geology and soils (surface fault rupture and groundshaking, liquefaction, ground failure, and landslides), land use, population and housing (population and employment), public services, and utilities (wastewater conveyance and treatment and landfill disposal capacity) when compared to the proposed project. While this Alternative would provide additional housing opportunities on -site, in support of the City's Housing Element policies and SCAG RHNA allocation, the reduction of commercial uses on- 7>0_1 C 80 site could render this Alternative economically infeasible. For these reasons, the City finds that the proposed project is preferred over this Alternative. PO-1 C 21 Pal G 82 Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT D GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO GP2011 -011 Consists of: Amending Table LU2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan to include the following two new anomalies: Table LU2 Anomaly Anomaly Statistical Number Area Locations Land Use Desi nation Development Limit (so Development Limit Other Additional Information 80 K -1 MU -H1 Nonresidential For mixed -use development: development, 131,290 sf residential floor area shall not exceed a Mixed -use 49 residential units 1:1 ratio to development: nonresidential floor 171,288 sf area 81 K -1 RM 296 residential units 2. Amending the Land Use Map of the Land Use Element to identify the locations of Anomaly Nos. 80 and 81 and to change the designation of the existing 6.028 -acre portion of the project site designated as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H1) and the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM) to MU -H1. PC1 D 83 ti �p RM PR MU -H1' 0 200 400 "off, GP2011 -011 (PA2011 -216) Feet =� General Plan Amendment 300 Coast Hwy E NIAA V, Document Name: PA2011 -216 GP2011 -011 Reso Exhibit Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT E COASTAL LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. LC2011 -007 Consists of: Amending Chapter 2.0 (Land Use and Development) of the Coastal Land Use Plan to include the following sections and policies (deletions illustrated in strikeauts additions illustrated in underline) : 2.1.9 Back Bav Landin Located at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive, the Back Bay Landing site is an approximately 7 -acre site adiacent to the Upper Newport Bay, The site is the landside portion of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 93 -111 and is currently improved with existing structures and paved areas utilized for outdoor storage space of RVs and small boats, parking and restrooms facilities for the Bayside Marina, a kayak rental and launch facility, parking and access to Pearson's Port, and marine service equipment storage under the Coast Highway Bridge. The site would accommodate the development of an integrated, mixed -use waterfront project consisting of coastal dependent and coastal related visitor - serving commercial and recreational uses allowed in the current CLUP CM -A and CM -B designation, while allowing for limited freestanding multifamily residential and mixed -use structures with residential uses above the ground floor. Residential development would be contingent upon the concurrent development of the above - referenced marine - related and visitor - serving commercial and recreational facilities, including the enclosed dry stack boat storage facility and completion of a new public bayfront promenade connecting with Bayside Drive and Newport DuneslCounty trails. Policy 2.1.9 -1 The Back Bay Landing site shall be developed as a unified site with marine - related and visitor- serving commercial and recreational uses. Limited freestanding multifamily residential and mixed - use structures with residential uses above the ground floor are allowed as integrated uses as described below. • The Mixed -Use Horizontal — MU -H category is applicable to the proiect(s) site; permitted uses include those allowed under the CM, CV, RM, and MU -V categories; however, a minimum of 50 percent of the permitted building square footage shall be devoted to nonresidential uses; • The site shall be limited to a maximum floor area to land area ratio as established in General Plan Land Use Element Anomaly Cap No. 80. A minimum of 50 percent of the residential units shall be developed in mixed -use buildings with nonresidential use on the -ground floor. • Development shall incorporate amenities that assure access for coastal visitors, including the development of a public pedestrian promenade along the bayfront, bikeways with Pal E 25 Planning Commission Resolution No. connections to existing regional trails and paths, an enclosed dry -stack boat storage facility, and public plazas and open spaces that provide public views, view corridors, and new coastal view opportunities. • The site shall be developed as a unified site to prevent fragmentation and to assure each use's viability, quality, and compatibility with adioininq uses. Development shall be designed and planned to achieve a high level of architectural quality with pedestrian, non - automobile and vehicular circulation and adequate parking provided. 2.1.8 10 Coastal Land Use Plan Map The Coastal Land Use Plan Map depicts the land use category for each property and is intended to provide a graphic representation of policies relating to the location, type, density, and intensity of all land uses in the coastal zone. Policy 2.1.9 -10 -1 Land use and new development in the coastal zone shall be consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan Map and all applicable LCP policies and regulations. Policy 4.4.2 -1 Maintain the 35 -foot height limitation in the Shoreline Height Limitation Zone, as graphically depicted on Map 43, except for Marina Park and the following sites: •_ Marina Park located at 1600 West Balboa Boulevard: A single, up to maximum 73 -foot- tall faux lighthouse architectural tower, that creates an iconic landmark for the public to identify the site from land and water as a boating safety feature, may be allowed. No further exceptions to the height limit shall be allowed, including but not limited to, exceptions for architectural features, solar equipment or flag poles. Any architectural tower that exceeds the 35 -foot height limit shall not include floor area above the 35 -foot height limit, but shall house screened communications or emergency equipment, and shall be sited and designed to reduce adverse visual impacts and be compatible with the character of the area by among other things, incorporating a tapered design with a maximum diameter of 34 -feet at the base of the tower. Public viewing opportunities shall be provided above the 35 -feet, as feasible. •_ Back Bay Landing at East Coast Highway/Bayside Drive: A single, up to 65- foot -tall coastal public view tower, that will be ADA- compliant and publicly accessible, to provide new coastal and Upper Newport Bay view opportunities where existing views are impacted by the East Coast Highway Bridge, other existing structures and topography. 2. Amending Figure 2.1.7 -1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan to change the designation of the existing 6.028 -acre portion of the project site designated as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM-13) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H) and the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU -H. pci E g& L ^ MU -H UL LC2011 -007 (PA2011 -216) =� Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment 300 Coast Hwy E Document Name: PA2011- 216_LC2011- 007_Reso_Exhibit 0 200 N r 400 = Feet e acs -� PG2 E 88 Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT F CODE AMENDMENT NO. CA2013 -009 Consists of: Amending the Zoning Map of the Newport Beach Zoning Code (Title 20) to expand the boundaries of PC -9 to include: 1) the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC- 1 /MHP); and, 2) the existing 0.642 -acre portion of the project site currently zoned as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM). pct F gy CM PC S LYM N 'Awp')*., CA2013 -009 (PA2011 -216) Zoning Code Amendment w a 300 Coast Hw y E Name: PA2011- 216_CA2013- 009_Ord_Exhibit Po� 0 200 400 Feet e N Pay9. Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT G PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION PC2011 -001 Consists of: 1. Draft Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan dated September 3, 2013, which consists of the following sections: • Introduction and Purpose • Development Limits and Land Use Plan • Permitted Uses • Development Standards • Design Guidelines • Phasing • Implementation /Site Development Review • Definitions 2. Superseding Use Permit Nos. UP1481, UP1667, and UP1943, which currently comprise PC -9. Exhibit G is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2311 -pc c g1 ?CI- c92 Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT H REQUIRED FINDINGS TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -003 In accordance with NBMC Section 15.40.030 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance), the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Finding: A. That a traffic study for the project has been prepared in compliance with this chapter and Appendix A [NBMC Chapter 15.30], Facts in Support of Finding: A -1. A traffic study, entitled 'Back Bay Landing Traffic Impact Analysis ", dated July 3, 2013, was prepared by Kunzman Associates, Inc. under the supervision of the City Traffic Engineer for the Project in compliance with Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance and Appendix A). Finding: B. That, based on the eight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, one of the findings for approval in subsection (B) can be made: 15.40.030.8.1 Construction of the project will be completed within 60 months of project approval; and 15.40.030.B. 1(a) The project will neither cause nor make an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted intersection. Facts in Support of Findin B -1. Construction of the project is anticipated to be completed in 2016/2017. If the project is not completed within sixty (60) months of this approval, preparation of a new traffic study will be required. B -2. The traffic study indicates that the project will increase traffic on 11 of the 19 study intersections by one percent or more during peak hour periods one year after the completion of the project and, therefore, these 11 intersections require further Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) analysis. B -3. Utilizing the ICU analysis specified by the TPO, the traffic study determined that the 11 primary intersections identified will continue to operate at satisfactory levels of service as defined by the Traffic Phasing Ordinance, and no mitigation is required. B -4. Based on the weight of the evidence in the administrative record, including the traffic study, the implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse pcz H_93 Planning Commission Resolution No. an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach. Finding: C. That the project proponent has agreed to make or fund the improvements, or make the contributions, that are necessary to make the findings for approval and to comply with all conditions of approval. Facts in Support of Finding: C -1. Since implementation of the proposed project will neither cause nor make worse an unsatisfactory level of traffic service at any impacted primary intersection within the City of Newport Beach, no improvements or mitigation are necessary. PCS FfJ4 Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT I TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -003 Exhibit I is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2311. -Pc2195 L Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT J REQUIRED FINDINGS LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA2011 -003 In accordance with Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 19.76.020 (Required Findings for Action on Lot Line Adjustments), the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth: Findincr A. Approval of the lot line adjustment will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use or be detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City, and further that the proposed lot line adjustment is consistent with the legislative intent of this title. Facts in Support of Finding: A -1. The lot line adjustment will improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new driveway, which is consistent with the purpose and intent of Title 19 (Subdivisions). A -2. The new driveway location will ensure that the project provides adequate access for traffic and circulation, and will protect land owners and surrounding residents, and will preserve the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City. A -3. The adjusted lot lines of the subject parcels will not result in a development pattern which is inconsistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Finding: B. The number of parcels resulting from the lot line adjustment remains the same as before the lot line adjustment. Facts in Support of Finding: B -1. The lot line adjustment between the Parcel 3 (subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111 will not result in the creation of additional parcels. Only the common property lines between these two parcels will be affected by the proposed lot line adjustment. B -2. The proposal does not increase or reduce the number of parcels. -PczJ y7 Planning Commission Resolution No. Finding: C. The lot line adjustment is consistent with applicable zoning regulations except that nothing herein shall prohibit the approval of a lot line adjustment as long as none of the resultant parcels is more nonconforming as to lot width, depth and area than the parcels that existed prior to the lot line adjustment. Facts in Support of Finding: C -1. The adjusted lot line will not render either of the resulting parcels nonconforming as to lot width, depth and area. C -2. The donor parcel (Parcel 2) will be reduced from 12.732 acres to 12.429 acres, which well exceeds the 5,000- square -foot minimum parcel size of Section 20.10.030 of the Municipal Code. Finding: D. Neither the lots as adjusted nor adjoining parcels will be deprived of legal access as a result of the lot line adjustment. Facts in Support of Finding: D -1. The parcels as adjusted will not be deprived of legal access as both parcels will continue to maintain access from Bayside Drive. D -2. Vehicular access and parking within Parcel 2 (mobile home park) will be reconfigured as a condition of approval to ensure residents maintain adequate circulation through the mobile home park. Finding: E. That the final configuration of the parcels involved will not result in the loss of direct vehicular access from an adjacent alley for any of the parcels that are included in the lot line adjustment. Facts in Support of Finding: E -1. The final configuration of the parcels involved will not result in the loss of direct vehicular access from an adjacent alley as there are no alleys in the vicinity. Finding: F. That the final configuration of a reoriented lot does not result in any reduction of the street side setbacks as currently exist adjacent to a front yard of any adjacent key, unless such reduction is accomplished through a zone change to establish appropriate pciJ J Planning Commission Resolution No. street side setbacks for the reoriented lot. The Planning Commission and City Council in approving the zone change application shall determine that the street side setbacks are appropriate, and are consistent and compatible with the surrounding pattern of development and existing adjacent setbacks. Facts in Support of Finding: F -1. The lot line adjustment does not result in a reoriented lot configuration. T>C1J59 PciJ 200 Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT K LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA2011 -003 Exhibit K is available for review at the Planning Division of Community Development Department or at http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =2311. PC1 K 102 PC1 K, 102 Planning Commission Resolution No. EXHIBIT L CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA2011 -003 1. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 2. Prior to the release for recordation, approval from the California Coastal Commission shall be required. 3. Prior to the release for recordation of the lot line adjustment, the applicant shall apply for a building permit to demolish the three mobile home units currently addressed as 76 Yorktown, 102 Yorktown, and 125 Liberty, the internal drive aisles and parking spaces within the mobile home park shall be reconfigured in conformance with Exhibit 8 of the Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan, and all work fulfilling this requirement shall be completed and finaled by the Building Division. 4. This approval shall expire and become void unless exercised within 24 months from the effective date of this approval, except where an extension of time is approved in compliance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 5. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of the Back Bay Landing including, but not limited to LA2011 -003 (PA2011 -216). This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and /or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition. PC1 L103 Pal L f04 Attachment No. PC 2 Draft Resolution for Denial PC2 106 PCC2 10C� RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2011 -011, COASTAL LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. LC2011 -007, CODE AMENDMENT NO. CA2013 -009, PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION NO. PC2011 -001, TRAFFIC STUDY NO. TS2012 -003, AND LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA2011 -003 FOR THE APPROXIMATELY 31 ACRE PLANNED COMMUNITY KNOWN AS BACK BAY LANDING LOCATED AT 300 EAST COAST HIGHWAY (PA2011 -216) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. An application was filed by Bayside Village Marina, LLC ( "Applicant') with respect to an approximately 31 -acre parcel generally located on the north of East Coast Highway and northwest of Bayside Drive, legally described on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, (the "Property ") requesting approval of various legislative and related approvals that would allow for the future development of a mixed -use bayfront village comprising of up to 94,035 square feet of marine - related and visitor - serving commercial uses and up to 49 residential units (the "Project'). The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the Project as proposed: a. General Plan Amendment (GPA)- To allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1-11). The amendment would also change the designation of the 0.304 - acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM) to MU -H1. In addition to the land use changes, the amendment would create two new anomalies to reallocate 49 un -built residential dwelling units from the adjacent mobile home park (Anomaly No. 81) to the project site (Anomaly No. 80). b. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment (CLUPA)- To allow the development of residential units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -B) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H). The amendment would also change the designation of the 0.3 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU -H. In addition to the land use changes, the amendment would also establish a site - specific development policy and a height exception to the 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit allowing for a single, 65- foot -tall coastal public view tower. Pct 2O7 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 2 of 5 C. Code Amendment- To amend the Zoning Map of the Zoning Code to expand the current Planned Community District boundaries (PC -9) of the site to include: 1) the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC- 1 /MHP); and, 2) the existing 0.642 -acre portion of the project site currently zoned as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM). d. Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP)- Adoption of a Development Plan to allow for the classification of land within the existing Planned Community boundaries and establishment of development standards, design guidelines, and implementation of the future project and long -term operation of all planning areas of the site. e. Lot Line Adjustment (LLA)- To adjust the property boundaries between Parcel 3 (subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93 -111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new driveway. f. Traffic Study- A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. 2. The Property currently has General Plan designations of Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5 and 0.3), Open Space (OS) and Tidelands and Submerged Lands (TS), and limited to a total maximum development of 139,680 square feet. 3. The Property is currently located within the Coastal Zone and has Coastal Land Use Plan designations of Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -A and CM- B), Open Space (OS) and Tidelands and Submerged Lands (TS). 4. The Property is currently located within the Planned Community zoning district (PC -9) and within the Recreational and Marine (CM 0.3) zoning district. 5. Council Policy A -18 requires that proposed General Plan amendments be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate would be required. If a project (separately or cumulatively with other projects over a 10 -year span) exceeds any one of the following thresholds, a vote of the electorate would be required: if the project generates more than 100 peak hour trips (AM or PM); adds 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area; or, adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area. There have been no prior amendments approved within Statistical Area K1 since the adoption of the 2006 General Plan. Although the amendment would change the land use designation from CM to MU -H1 to allow for the development of 49 residential units, the proposed anomalies would limit the development limits within Statistical Area K1 to what is currently allowed under the General Plan. This is achieved through the reallocation of 49 un -built residential units from Bayside Village Mobile Home Park (Anomaly No. 81) to the project site (Anomaly No. 80). Therefore, the thresholds that require a vote PC2 102 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 3 of 5 pursuant to Charter Section 423 are not exceeded because the proposed amendment does not create any new dwelling units, does not exceed the non- residential floor area threshold, and does not exceed the a.m. or p.m. peak hour vehicle trips threshold. 6. Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the appropriate tribe contacts identified by the Native American Heritage Commission were provided notice of the proposed General Plan Amendment on February 13, 2012. The California Government Code requires 90 days to allow tribe contacts to respond to the request to consult unless the tribe contacts mutually agree to a shorter time period. As documented in Appendix D of the DEIR, follow -up consultation was conducted and Mr. Andy Salas replied to the follow -up letter by e -mail and identified his concerns and requests regarding monitoring during ground disturbing activities. No additional requests for consultation were received. 7. On November 7, 2013, the Planning Commission held a study session for the project in the City Hall Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, on the DEIR and Project. 8. A public hearing was held on December 19, 2013, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was provided in accordance with CEQA and the Newport Beach Municipal Code ( "NBMC "). The Draft Environmental Impact Report, Draft Responses to Comments, Draft Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at the scheduled hearing. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. Pursuant to Section 15270 of the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA ") Guidelines, projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves are not subject to CEQA review. SECTION 3. FINDINGS OF DENIAL. Amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan are legislative acts. Neither the City nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. The Planning Commission has determined that in this particular case that the proposed General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan land use changes are not appropriate for the following reasons: a. ... 2. Zoning Code amendments are legislative acts. Neither the City Municipal Code nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or PC2 209 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 4 of 5 denial of such amendments, unless they are determined not to be required for the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. The Planning Commission has determined that in this particular case, that the proposed Zoning Code amendment and Planned Community Development Plan are not appropriate for the following reasons: a. _.. SECTION 4. DECISION. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby deny without prejudice General Plan Amendment No. GP2011 -011, Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011 -007, Code Amendment No. CA2013 -009, Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2011 -001, Traffic Study No. TS2012 -003, And Lot Line Adjustment No. LA2011 -003. 2. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk in accordance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2013. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BY: Bradley Hillgren, Chairman BY: Kory Kramer, Secretary PC2 110 Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 278, PAGES 40 TO 45M INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED JUNE 6, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 94- 380365 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 1 AND 2 OF TRACT NO. 7953, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 310, PAGES 7 TO 11 INCLUSIVE, OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDED OF SAID COUNTY. pct ii2 PC2 112 Attachment No. PC 3 Draft Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan acs Back Bay Landing PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PC -9) Prepared December 11, 2013 Adopted , 2013, Ordinance No. 2013 - (PA2011 -216) PC3 115 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Page Number 1. Introduction and Purpose of the Planned Community Development Plan ( PCDP) .............................................. ............................... 1 2. Development Limits and Land Use Plan .......................... ............................... 4 3. Permitted Uses ................................................................ ............................... 7 4. Development Standards .................................................. ............................... 8 5. Design Guidelines ........................................................... ............................... 20 6. Phasing ........................................................................... ............................... 29 7. Back Bay Landing PCDP Implementation /Site Development Review ............ 30 8. Definitions ........................................................................ ............................... 34 TABLE Page Number 1. Development Limits by Planning Area ............................. ............................... 4 2. Permitted Uses ................................................................ ............................... 7 3. Parking Requirements ..................................................... ............................... 13 EXHIBIT (See Appendix) Page Number Reference 1. Location Map ................................................................... ............................... 1 2. Planning Areas ................................................................ ............................... 1 3. Building Heights ............................................................... ............................... 10 !�Yx 1..7111 0111511=9[. 5. Public Spaces .................................................................. ............................... 16 6. Coastal Access and Regional Trail Connections ............. ............................... 16 7. Vehicular Circulation ........................................................ ............................... 16 Back Bay Landing PCDP ii PCs 116 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) EXHIBIT (See Appendix) Page Number Reference 8. Revised Vehicular Circulation and Parking ...................... ............................... 17 9. Utilities Plan ..................................................................... ............................... 19 10. Drainage Plan .................................................................. ............................... 19 11. Architectural Theme ........................................................ ............................... 21 12. Conceptual Site and Landscape Plan .............................. ............................... 21 13. East Coast Highway View Corridors ................................ ............................... 21 14. Parking Plan .................................................................... ............................... 25 Back Bay Landing PCDP iii T'C3 - -7 LIST OF ACRONYMS ABC California State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control CDP Coastal Development Permit CLUP Coastal Land Use Plan CM Recreational and Marine Commercial CUP Conditional Use Permit ESA Environmental Study Area ESHA Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area LID Low Impact Development HHW Highest High Water MLLW Mean Lower Low Water MU -H1 Mixed -Use Horizontal 1 1► /_V /�I:I: ►GTii7:1iLai[FTiVL 1 Wl197t911 SililliF!Y.I:3 OCSD Orange County Sanitation District OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority PC -9 Back Bay Landing Planned Community PCDP Planned Community Development Plan WQMP Water Quality Management Plan Back Bay Landing PCDP iv PCs I f 2 I. Introduction and Purpose of the Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) A. Introduction The Back Bay Landing site is envisioned to be developed as an integrated, mixed -use waterfront on an approximately 7 -acre portion of a 31.4 -acre parcel located adjacent to the Upper Newport Bay in the City of Newport Beach. The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code allows a Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) to address land use designations and regulations in Planned Communities. The Back Bay Landing PCDP serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for the site and is authorized and intended to implement the provisions of the Newport Beach General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. The Back Bay Landing Design Guidelines provide a comprehensive vision of the physical implementation of the project and have been drafted to assist the City and community to visualize the architectural theme and desired character of the development. B. Project Location The Back Bay Landing Planned Community (PC -9) is located within the City of Newport Beach, in Orange County, California. The approximately 7 -acre primary project area is generally located north of East Coast Highway and northwest of Bayside Drive in the western portion of the City, as shown on Exhibit 1, Location Map. The project area is bounded by the Upper Newport Back Bay to the north and west, the Newport Dunes Waterfront Resort and the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park to the east, East Coast Highway and various marina commercial and restaurant uses south of the Highway to the southeast. As shown on Exhibit 2, Planning Areas, the Back Bay Landing Planned Community is comprised of five distinct Planning Areas: Mixed -Use Area (PA 1), Recreational and Marine Commercial (PA 2), Existing Private Marina Access and Beach (PA 3), Marina and Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Storage and Guest Parking (PA 4), and Submerged Fee -Owned Lands (PA 5). C. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of the PCDP is to establish appropriate zoning regulations governing land use and development of the site consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. The PCDP provides a vision for the land uses on the site, sets the development standards and design guidelines for specific project approvals at the Site Development Review and Coastal Development Permit (CDP) approval stage, and regulates the long term operation of the developed site. Back Bay Landing PCDP 1 PC3 119 Implementation of the PCDP will: - Provide a high quality mixed -use, marine - related, visitor - serving commercial development with integrated residential units and a unified architectural and landscape theme. - Implement the MU -H1 (Mixed -Use Horizontal 1) General Plan and MU -H (Mixed -Use Horizontal) Coastal Land Use Plan categories on an underutilized bayfront location in a manner that provides for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, which includes general or neighborhood commercial, offices, multi - family residential, visitor - serving and marine - related uses, and buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses, adjacent to Coast Highway, and on or near the waterfront locations. - Maintain and expand core coastal dependent and coastal - related land uses, including the development of marina parking and an enclosed dry stack boat storage and launching facility. - Provide new housing opportunities in response to demand for housing, reduce vehicle trips and encourage active lifestyles by increasing the opportunity for residents to live in proximity to jobs, services, entertainment, and recreation. - Protect and enhance significant visual resources from identified public vantage points, such as Coast Highway, Castaways Park, and Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, to the bay and the cliffs of upper Newport Beach through view corridors designed into the project. New public view opportunities will be created on -site. - Expand bayfront access to and along the bay where it does not exist at the present time, in a manner that protects environmental study areas (ESA) and /or environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and does not adversely impact existing private residences adjacent to the site. - Provide public coastal access with a new 12- foot -wide bayfront access promenade along the bayfront edge of Planning Areas 1 and 2. This new, public bayfront promenade will link the public docks and marina property south of the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge along the bayfront, to the existing Newport Dunes pedestrian /bicycle trail off of Bayside Drive, and ultimately to the Newport Dunes recreational areas, as well as to an existing Class 1 Regional Trail. D. Relationship to the Newport Beach Municipal Code Whenever the development regulations contained in this PCDP conflict with the regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained in this PCDP shall take precedence. The Municipal Code shall regulate all Back Bay Landing PCDP 2 PCs 120 development within the PCDP when such regulations are not provided within the PCDP. All construction within the Back Bay Landing PCDP (PC -9) shall be in compliance with the California Building Code, California Fire Code, and all other ordinances adopted by the City pertaining to construction and safety features. All words and phrases used in this Back Bay Landing PCDP shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code unless defined differently in Section VIII, Definitions. E. Relationship to Design Guidelines Development within the site shall be regulated by both the Development Plan and the Design Guidelines. Back Bay Landing PCDP 3 Pas i21 II. Development Limits and Land Use Plan The development limits in this Development Plan are consistent with those established by the General Plan and are identified in the following Table 1, Development Limits by Planning Area. Parking structures, carts, kiosks, temporary and support uses are permitted and are not counted towards square footage development limits. In addition, the OCSD wastewater pump station shall not be counted towards square footage development limits. Table 1 Development Limits by Planning Area "2 Land Use Planning Planning Planning Planning Planning Total Per Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Land Use Commercial 49,144 sf 8,390 sf 0 4,000 sf 0 61,534 sf Residential 9 du 0 0 0 0 (85 644 sf) (85,644 sf) Marina 0 0 0 0 220 wet 220 wet slips slips D Bosa�ck 32,500 sf 32,500 sf (140 spaces) 0 0 0 0 (140 spaces) Storage TOTAL 179,679 SF Notes: (1) All limits expressed as "sf are gross square feet as defined in the Newport Beach Zoning Code. (2) Development limits are subject to General Plan Land Use Plan and Table LU2, Anomaly Caps. A. Planning Area 1 — Mixed -Use Area The primary land -side parcel immediately north of East Coast Highway to the northwest is intended to allow for integration of a mixed -use waterfront project with marine - related and visitor - serving commercial and recreational uses, while allowing for residential uses. Priority uses include retail, restaurants, marine and boat sales, boat rentals, boat service /repair, and recreational commercial uses such as kayak and paddle board rentals. The total gross floor area of Planning Area 1 shall be limited to 49,144 square feet of marine - related and visitor - serving commercial and recreational uses; a new 32,500- square foot full - service and fully enclosed dry stack boat storage (up Back Bay Landing PCDP 4 PC3 122 to a maximum of 140 boat spaces) and launching facility; and a maximum of 49 residential units within a maximum of 85,644 square feet of residential floor area. Development shall incorporate amenities that assure bayfront access for coastal visitors, including the development of a 12- foot -wide public pedestrian and bicyclist promenade along the waterfront with connections to existing regional trails and paths, an enclosed dry stack boat storage facility, public plazas and open spaces that provide public views and view corridors, and construction of a coastal public view tower. Any mixed -use development that includes integration of residential units shall be subject to the following additional development limitations: 1. A minimum of 50 percent of the total proposed gross floor area located within Planning Area 1 shall be limited to non - residential uses. This non - residential use may consist of any combination of visitor - serving retail, restaurants, marine boat sales, office, and /or enclosed dry stack boat storage. 2. At minimum, a total of 68,955 square feet of non - residential gross floor area shall be developed within Planning Area 1 and 4. 3. A minimum of 50 percent of the total proposed residential units shall be developed within mixed -use buildings with non - residential use located on the ground floor level. B. Planning Area 2 - Recreational and Marine Commercial Planning Area 2 is located immediately south of the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge and is intended to be developed with recreational and marine - related commercial uses. The total gross floor area of Planning Area 2 shall be limited to 8,390 square feet. Development shall incorporate a 12- foot -wide public pedestrian and bicyclist promenade along the waterfront with connections to existing and /or planned regional trails and paths, and open spaces that provide public views and view corridors. An integrated connection to the planned public /private marina, pier, and trail to the south shall be developed. C. Planning Area 3 — Existing Private Marina Access and Beach Planning Area 3 consists of an existing narrow strip of private marina access walkway and non - publicly accessible beach area located between the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park and Bayside Marina, which provides marina lessee access to private boat slips and docks. Allowed improvements shall be limited to access walkways, guardrails, bulkhead replacement, landscaping, and lighting. Back Bay Landing PCDP 5 PC3 123 The non - publicly accessible beach area is currently utilized by the existing Bayside Village Mobile Home Park. No other development shall occur within this walkway and the beach area, which shall remain as private open space. D. Planning Area 4 — Marina and Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Storage and Guest Parking Planning Area 4 is a narrow strip of land located on the eastern project boundary and development shall be limited to a gross floor area of 4,000 square feet. This area is intended to be re -used primarily as standard sized parking for residents and guests of the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park. Additional standard sized parking will be provided for the Bayside Village Marina tenants. New replacement storage, replacement restrooms, laundry facilities and lockers will be built for the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park and Marina tenants. A new replacement gate entry for this area is allowed. No other uses shall be allowed in this storage /parking /facilities area. E. Planning Area 5 - Submerged Fee -Owned Lands This fee -owned submerged land area consists of an existing 220 -slip marina and is boarded by the earthen De Anza Bayside Marsh Peninsula. The De Anza Bayside Marsh Peninsula was originally constructed with dredging spoils and rip - rap as fill to provide a protected harbor and overflow parking for the Bayside Marina. No new development shall occur within the De Anza Bayside Marsh Peninsula. A small gravel parking and access road currently exists on the eastern portion of the peninsula and is used for overflow parking for the marina. The existing gravel parking lot shall not be expanded in area or paved; however, maintenance activities shall be permitted. The marina shall be regulated by Title 17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Back Bay Landing PCDP 6 PCs 124 III. Permitted Uses Permitted uses are those uses set forth in this Section for each Planning Area as shown on Table 2, Permitted Uses. The uses identified within the table are not comprehensive but rather major use categories. Specific uses are permitted consistent with the definitions provided in Section VIII of this PCDP. Uses determined to be accessory or ancillary to permitted uses, or uses that support permitted uses are also permitted. The Community Development Director may determine other uses not specifically listed herein are allowed, provided they are consistent with the purpose of this PCDP, Planning Areas, and are compatible with surrounding uses. The initial construction of any new structure, or the significant reconstruction or major addition, shall be subject to Site Development Review pursuant to Section VII of this PCDP. Table 2 Permitted Uses Uses Planning Areas Planning Area 1 Planning Area 2 Planning Area 3 Planning Area 4 Planning Area 5 Commercial Recreation and Entertainment CUP Cultural Institution P P Eating and Drinking Establishments Bar, Lounge, and Nightclubs CUP - - - - Fast Food No Drive Thru P. - - - - Food Service, No Late Hours P* - - - - Food Service, Late Hours CUP - - - - Take -Out Service, Limited P P - Take -Out Service, Only P P - - - Marina - - MC Title 17 Marina Support Facilities P P P Marine Rentals and Sales Marine Retail Sales P P Boat Rentals and Sales MUP MUP Marine Services MUP MUP Office P P Personal Services General P Restricted MUP Residential P "—i—tor-serving Retail P. P. Utilities Wastewater Pump Station P P= Permitted CUP = Conditional Use Permit MUP =Minor Use Permit * =A Minor Use Permit is required for the sale of alcohol -= Not Permitted Back Bay Landing PCDP 7 PCs 125 IV. Development Standards The following site development standards shall apply: A. Setback Requirements Setbacks are the minimum distance from the property line to building or structure, unless otherwise specified. 1. Street Setback a) East Coast Highway - 0 feet (provided a minimum 10 -foot landscape buffer is provided to the back of sidewalk) b) Coast Highway-Bay Bridge - 20 feet to edge of bridge (kayak /paddleboard rentals, storage, and launch uses may be permitted within this setback and beneath the bridge, subject to Site Development Review). c) Bayside Drive - 5 feet 2. Perimeter Setback a) Abutting Non - residential - 0 feet b) Abutting Existing Residential - 25 feet, except: In Planning Area 1, public restrooms and marina lockers may provide a minimum 5 -foot setback. ii. In Planning Area 4, a minimum 5 -foot setback may be provided. 3. Bayfront Setback a) Bulkhead - 15 feet from constructed bulkhead wall to allow for a minimum 12- foot -wide public bayfront promenade and a minimum 3- foot -wide landscape area. b) No Bulkhead In Planning Area 1, 15 feet from the Highest High Water contour elevation noted as 7.86' above Mean Lower low Water (0.0') or 7.48' /NAVD 88 to allow for a minimum 12- foot -wide public bayfront promenade and a minimum 3 -foot- wide landscape area. Back Bay Landing PCDP 8 hC3 126 ii. In Planning Area 2, 15 feet from contour elevation 10 (NAVD 88) to allow for a minimum 12- foot -wide public bayfront promenade and a minimum 3- foot -wide landscape area. 4. Setback Encroachments a) Fences, Walls, and Hedges i. Permitted within the Perimeter Setback Abutting Existing Residential up to a maximum height of 8 feet. ii. Within Bayfront Setback, see subsection c. below. iii. Permitted in all other setback areas up to a maximum height of 42 inches. b) Architectural Features i. Roof overhangs, brackets, cornices and eaves may encroach 30 inches into a required Street or Perimeter Setback area, provided a minimum vertical clearance above grade of 8 feet is maintained. ii. Decorative architectural features (e.g., belt courses, ornamental moldings, pilasters, and similar features) may encroach up to 6 inches into any required Street or Perimeter Setback. c) Bayfront Setback i. Benches, sculptures, light standards, hedges, open guardrails and safety features, and other similar features that enhance the public bayfront promenade may encroach into the bayfront setback, provided a 12 -foot- wide clear path is maintained. d) Other- Other encroachments may be permitted through the Site Development Review. B. Permitted Height of Structures 1. Building Height The maximum allowable building height shall be 35 feet for structures with flat roofs and 40 feet for structures with sloped roofs (minimum 3:12 pitch), except as follows: Back Bay Landing PCDP 9 PCS 127 a) As illustrated on Exhibit 3, Building Heights, 100 feet from back of curb along Bayside Drive within the eastern portion of Planning Area 1, maximum allowable building height shall not exceed 26 feet for flat roofs and 31 feet for sloped roofs. b) Within Planning Area 1, a single coastal public view tower, or similar structure, that includes public access to a functioning public viewing platform may be developed at a maximum height of 65 feet. c) Within Planning Area 1, maximum allowable height for any parking structure shall not exceed 30 feet for flat roofs and 35 feet for sloped roofs. d) Maximum allowable building height within Planning Area 2 shall not exceed 26 feet for flat roofs and 31 feet for sloped roofs. e) Within Planning Area 4, maximum allowable building height shall not exceed 20 feet for flat roofs and 25 feet for sloped roofs. f) All other exceptions to height shall be regulated pursuant to Section 20.30.060.D of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2. Grade for the Purposes of Measuring Height a) Within Planning Area 1, height shall be measured from the established baseline elevation of either 11 feet or 14 feet (NAVD 88) as illustrated on Exhibit 3, Building Heights. b) Within Planning Area 2, height shall be measured from the established baseline elevation of 12 feet (NAVD 88) c) Within Planning Area 4, height shall be measured from the established baseline elevation of 12 feet (NAVD 88) C. Residential Units 1. Open Space a) Common Open Space - A minimum of 75 square feet per dwelling shall be provided for common open space (e.g., pool, patio, decking, and barbecue areas, common meeting rooms, etc.). The minimum dimension (length and width) shall be 15 feet. The common open space areas shall be separated from non - residential uses on the site and shall be sited and designed to limit intrusion by non - residents and customers of non - residential uses. However, sharing of common open space may be allowed, subject to Site Development Back Bay Landing PCDP 10 PC3 122 Review, when it is clear that the open space will provide a direct benefit to project residents. Common open space uses may be provided on rooftops for use only by project residents. b) Private Open Space - Five percent of the gross floor area for each unit. The minimum dimension (length and width) shall be 6 feet. The private open space shall be designed and located to be used by individual units (e.g., patios, balconies, etc.). 2. Non - residential Use Required on Ground Floor - All of the ground floor frontage of a mixed -use structure shall be occupied by retail and other compatible non - residential uses, with the exception of common /shared building entrances for residences on upper floors. 3. Sound Mitigation - An acoustical analysis report, prepared by an acoustical engineer, shall be submitted describing the acoustical design features of the structure that will satisfy the exterior and interior noise standards. The residential units shall be attenuated in compliance with the report. 4. Buffering and screening - Buffering and screening shall be provided in compliance with Municipal Code Section 20.30.020 (Buffering and Screening). Mixed -use projects shall locate loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential portion of the development to the greatest extent feasible. 5. Notification to owners and tenants - A written disclosure statement shall be prepared prior to sale, lease, or rental of a residential unit within the development. The disclosure statement shall indicate that the occupants will be living in an urban type of environment and that the noise, odor, and outdoor activity levels may be higher than a typical suburban residential area. The disclosure statement shall include a written description of the potential impacts to residents of both the existing environment (e.g., noise from boats, planes, commercial activity on the site and vehicles on Coast Highway) and potential nuisances based upon the allowed uses in the zoning district. Each and every buyer, lessee, or renter shall sign the statement acknowledging that they have received, read, and understand the disclosure statement. A covenant shall also be included within all deeds, leases or contracts conveying any interest in a residential unit within the development that requires: (1) the disclosure and notification requirement stated herein; (2) an acknowledgment by all grantees or lessees that the property is located within an urban type of environment and that the noise, odor, and outdoor activity levels may be higher than a typical suburban residential area; and (3) acknowledgment that the Back Bay Landing PCDP 11 FOa 129 covenant is binding for the benefit and in favor of the City of Newport Beach. 6. Deed notification - A deed notification shall be recorded with the County Recorder's Office, the form and content of which shall be satisfactory to the City Attorney. The deed notification document shall state that the residential unit is located in a mixed -use development and that an owner may be subject to impacts, including inconvenience and discomfort, from lawful activities occurring in the project or zoning district (e.g., noise, lighting, odors, high pedestrian activity levels, etc.). D. Parking Requirements 1. General Standards Parking requirements are shown in the following Table 3, Parking Requirements, per land use. Kiosks for retail sales shall not be included in the calculation of parking. Back Bay Landing PCDP 12 PC3 i3o Table 3 Parking Requirements Land Use Parking Ratio Boat Rentals and Sales As established per MUP Eating and Drinking Establishments 1 space per 30 to 50 SF of Net Public Area' Take -Out Service, Limited 1 space per 250 square feet Marina Support Facilities 0.5 spaces per 1,000 SF Marina Wet Slips 0.6 spaces per slip Marine Services Enclosed Dry Stack Boat Storage 0.33 spaces per slip Entertainment and Excursion Services 1 per each 3 passengers and crew members or as required by MUP Other As established per MUP Office 1 space per 250 square feet Medical Office 1 space per 200 square feet Residential Units (Attached) 2 spaces per unit, plus 0.5 resident guest spaces per unit Retail Sales 1 space per 250 square feet Other Municipal Code Including outdoor dining, but excluding first 25% or 1, 000 SF of outdoor dining per restaurant, whichever is less. 2. Parking Management Plan Off - street parking requirements may be reduced with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit based upon complementary peak hour parking demand of uses within the development. The Planning Commission may grant a joint -use of parking spaces between uses that result in a reduction in the total number of required parking spaces in compliance with the following conditions: a) The most remote space is located within a convenient distance to the use it is intended to serve. b) The probable long -term occupancy of the structures, based on their design, will not generate additional parking demand. Back Bay Landing PCDP 13 PC3 131 c) The applicant has provided sufficient data, including a parking study if required by the Director, to indicate that there is no conflict in peak parking demand for the uses proposing to make joint -use of parking facilities. d) The property owners, if more than one, involved in the joint -use of parking facilities shall record a parking agreement approved by the Director and City Attorney. The agreement shall be recorded with the County Recorder, and a copy shall be filed with the Department. e) A parking management plan shall be prepared to address potential impacts associated with a reduction in the number of required parking spaces. 3. Access, location, and improvements. Access, location, parking space and lot dimensions, and parking lot improvements shall be in compliance with the Development Standards for Parking Areas Section of the Municipal Code. E. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted with the Site Development Review application. All landscaping shall comply with the applicable landscaping requirements specified in the Municipal Code, including the Landscaping Standards and Water- Efficient Landscaping Sections. In addition, vegetated landscaped areas shall only consist of native plants or non - native drought tolerant plants, which are non - invasive. No plant species listed as problematic and /or invasive by the California Native Plant Society, the California Invasive Plant Council, or as may be identified from time to time by the State of California shall be employed or allowed to naturalize or persist on the site. No plant species listed as a "noxious weed" by the State of California or the U.S. Federal Government shall be utilized within the property. All plants shall be low water use plants as identified by California Department of Water Resources. F. Seawall /Bulkhead Standards As shown on Exhibit 4, Seawall /Bulkhead Section, a new bayfront seawall /bulkhead may be constructed along the bayfront to protect existing and future development, subject to the following: Back Bay Landing PCDP 14 PCs 132 1. Planning Area 1 a) Any new bulkhead structure shall not extend bayward beyond the Highest High Water contour elevation of 7.86' relative to MLLW (0.0') or 7.487NAVD 88 (see also applicable General Requirements below) to preserve the shoreline profile. 2. Planning Area 2 a) Any new bulkhead structure shall not extend bayward beyond the 10' contour elevation (NAVD 88) to preserve the shoreline profile. 3. Planning Area 3 a) Maintenance, repair, and replacement of the existing bulkhead wall shall be permitted to protect existing development. 4. Planning Area 4 and 5 a) No bulkheads shall be permitted. 5. General Requirements a) The minimum top of bulkhead elevation shall be 10 feet (NAVD 88). b) Seawalls, bulkheads, revetments and other such construction that alters the existing shoreline processes shall be permitted when required to serve coastal- dependent uses or to protect existing principal structures or public beaches in danger from erosion and when designed to eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on local shoreline sand supply. In addition, such improvements shall only be permitted when found consistent with applicable sections of the Coastal Act and City's Coastal Land Use Plan policies. c) Bulkheads shall be designed to provide access points to the shoreline. G. Diking, Filling, and Dredging Standards The diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands and estuaries shall be permitted in accordance with applicable provisions of the Coastal Act and City's Coastal Land Use Plan policies. Back Bay Landing PCDP 15 PCs 133 H. Public Bayfront Promenade and Trail A 12- foot -wide public bayfront promenade shall be constructed, as illustrated in Exhibit 5, Public Spaces, along the length of the seawall /bulkhead to the boundary with the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park, and continuing along the project entrance to Bayside Drive. The design details of the public bayfront promenade shall be submitted with Site Development Review. The public bayfront promenade shall comply with the following requirements: 1. An easement for public access shall be provided to the City along the entire length of the proposed public bayfront promenade. The easement area shall be maintained in good condition and repaired at no cost to the City. 2. The public bayfront promenade shall be accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists, and shall extend along the waterfront under the Coast Highway - Bay Bridge and shall connect to an existing trail system on the south side of East Coast Highway. 3. The bayfront promenade shall interface with restaurants and outdoor dining areas, the coastal public view tower, the enclosed dry stack boat storage, residential and marine boat service areas to the maximum extent feasible. Amenities such as seating, trash enclosures, lighting, and other pedestrian - oriented improvements shall be provided along its length where appropriate, provided a 12- foot -wide clear path is maintained. 4. Bayside Drive shall be improved on both sides with a new Class 2 (on- street) bike lane up to Bayside Way and a new Class 3 (shared -use) bikeway east of Bayside Way. A Class 1 (off- street) bikeway and pedestrian trail will also be provided on the east side of Bayside Drive that originates at the Bayside Drive / East Coast Highway intersection and runs northerly to the terminus of Bayside Drive, as shown on Exhibit 6, Coastal Access and Regional Trail Connections, to accommodate both cyclists and pedestrians. This improvement shall serve as an enhanced link between the new public bayfront promenade and the existing City and County trail systems and the Newport Dunes recreation area. 5. Trails shall be located and designed consistent with Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Policy 3.1.1 -1 and the Coastal Act, with appropriate routing to protect the privacy of existing Bayside Village Mobile Home Park residents, consistent with Public Resources Code section 30214 (Coastal Act). I. Vehicular Circulation 1. Primary vehicular and pedestrian access to the site shall be set back from its current location on Bayside Drive to approximately 200 feet north of the East Coast Highway intersection, as shown on Exhibit 7, Vehicular Circulation, and Back Bay Landing PCDP 16 PC3134 Exhibit 8, Revised Vehicular Circulation and Parking. This project driveway will service both inbound and outbound movements, improve the existing driveway connection further into the site, and will be relocated approximately 45 feet north of its current location. Any guest parking that is displaced in the adjacent mobile home park complex as a result of this new driveway alignment shall be replaced within the mobile home park complex or within Planning Area 4 on the east side of Bayside Village Mobile Home Park. 2. Intersection improvements at Bayside Drive shall maintain the existing left - turn lane, add a shared left- turn /through lane, and add an exclusive right -turn lane on the southbound approach of the signalized intersection with East Coast Highway. Project access enhancements shall include an exclusive left - turn lane on the northbound approach of the Bayside Drive and project driveway intersection. 3. Primary circulation within the development shall accommodate adequate fire truck turn - around. Emergency vehicle access to and from Bayside Village Mobile Home Park to the site shall be provided consistent with Exhibit 8, Revised Vehicular Circulation and Parking. 4. An optional secondary access may be constructed, subject to the review and approval of the Public Works Department, California Department of Transportation, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) that would add an exclusive right - turn lane along westbound East Coast Highway, as shown on Exhibit 7, Vehicular Circulation. This connection would be located approximately 430 feet west of the Bayside Drive intersection with East Coast Highway, and would allow for inbound right -turn movements only. Outbound movements at this connection point would be prohibited. J. Lighting A detailed lighting plan with lighting fixtures and standard designs shall be submitted with the Site Development Review application. The lighting plan shall illustrate how all exterior lighting is designed to reduce unnecessary illumination of adjacent properties, conserve energy, minimize detrimental effects on sensitive environmental areas, and provide minimum standards for safety. At minimum, exterior lighting shall comply with the following: 1. Protection from glare. a. Shielding required. Exterior lighting shall be shielded and light rays confined within boundaries of the site. b. Light spill prohibited. Direct rays or glare shall not create a public nuisance by shining onto public streets, adjacent sites, or beyond the perimeter of the bayfront promenade. Back Bay Landing PCDP 17 PC3 135 C. Maximum light at property line. No more than one candlefoot of illumination shall be present at the property line. d. Maximum light beyond bayfront. No more than 0.25 candlefoot of illumination shall be present beyond the perimeter of the bayfront promenade. 2. Photometric study. A photometric study plan shall be incorporated into the lighting plan to ensure lighting will not negatively impact surrounding land uses and adjacent sensitive coastal resource areas. 3. Lighting fixtures. Exterior lights shall consist of a light source, reflector, and shielding devices so that, acting together, the light beam is controlled and not directed across a property line or beyond the bayfront promenade. 4. Parking lot light standards. Light standards within parking lots shall be the minimum height required to effectively illuminate the parking area and eliminate spillover of light and glare onto adjoining properties. To accomplish this, a greater number of shorter light standards may be required as opposed to a lesser number of taller standards. 5. Tower illumination. Illumination of the public view tower shall consist of soft accent lighting so as not to become a visual disturbance to the nighttime view in the area. K. Signs A comprehensive sign program with sign materials and lighting details shall be submitted with the Site Development Review application. All signage shall comply with the Sign Standards Section of the Municipal Code, with the following exceptions: 1. Temporary Signs- Temporary signs that are visible from public right -of -ways and identify new construction or remodeling may be displayed for the duration of the construction period beyond the 60 -day limit. Signs mounted on construction fences are allowed during construction and may be rigid or fabric. 2. Directional signs oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic within internal drives or walkways, such as electronic display signs, kiosk signs, internal banners, and three - dimensional sculptural advertising associated with individual businesses are allowed, or similar, and are not regulated as to size, content, or color; however, signs shall require permits and shall be subject to the review of the City Traffic Engineer to ensure adequate sight distance in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Back Bay Landing PCDP 18 PCs lsG L. Utilities Existing and proposed water and sewer locations are shown on Exhibit 9, Utilities Plan, and existing and proposed storm drain locations are shown on Exhibit 10, Drainage Plan. A Final Utilities Plan shall be submitted with the Site Development Review application. The final alignment and location of utilities shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Adequate access for maintenance vehicles shall be provided. A 30- foot -wide accessible easement shall be provided for the relocated water transmission line. Buildings shall maintain a minimum distance of 15 feet from the water line, unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. M. Sustainability The development shall be designed as a sustainable community which will allow residents, tenants and visitors to enjoy a high quality of life while minimizing their impact on the environment. A Sustainability Plan that addresses topics such as water and energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality and waste reduction shall be submitted with the Site Development Review application. Sustainable programming shall be used to maximize efficiency by conserving water, minimizing construction impacts, minimizing energy use and reducing construction and post- construction waste. California - friendly landscaping shall be utilized in public areas and reclaimed water use (if available) on -site or off -site will further reduce water demand. Appropriate best management practices shall be incorporated into landscape design. Energy reduction, recycling, and the smart use of existing resources shall be implemented. The development shall incorporate a walkable community design to promote walking and bicycling, and thus reduce reliance on automotive transport. The development shall include Low Impact Development (LID) features for storm water quality improvement where none exist today. Potential LID features may include storm water planters, permeable pavement and proprietary bioretention systems. Through the development of a project- specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the appropriate site design, source control and LID control features shall be implemented to improve water quality in the Bay. N. Public Improvements A public improvements plan shall be submitted with the Site Development Review application specifying the public improvements to be constructed in conjunction with the development of the site and phasing of such improvements. At minimum, the plan shall discuss and illustrate utility improvements, the bayfront promenade, Bayside Drive street and bikeway improvements, and improvements to the OCSD facility. Back Bay Landing PCDP 19 PC'S 13 j V. Design Guidelines The Back Bay Landing Design Guidelines are intended to express the desired character of the future mixed -use waterfront village. These guidelines set parameters for future design efforts and help achieve overall consistency and quality of architectural design and landscape features at build -out. They also explore the aesthetic quality and functionality of the upper limit of acceptable development intensity, and are structured to allow the City considerable flexibility in review of future project submittals and subsequent approvals. All development within the Planned Community shall be in conformance with these Design Guidelines. The purpose of the Design Guidelines is: • To provide the City of Newport Beach, the California Coastal Commission, and future residents and visitors with the necessary assurances that, when completed, the development will be built in accordance with the design character proposed herein; • To provide guidance to developers, builders, engineers, architects, landscape architects and other professionals in order to maintain the desired design character and appearance of the project, as well as expand upon these concepts in order to maximize the success of the development consistent with market needs, aesthetic satisfaction, and community goals; • To provide guidance to the City Staff, Planning Commission, City Council members and the California Coastal Commission in the review of future development submissions; and • To encourage building plans that allow flexibility for innovative and creative design solutions that respond to contemporary market trends. A. Architectural Theme The development shall be designed with a Coastal Mediterranean architectural theme. This architectural theme is influenced by the climate of the countries it comes from, emulating palettes of the landscape and architecture in the North Mediterranean Sea. The project will follow principles of quality design and be constructed with quality materials and applications. Thick and textured walls, bull -nose borders, terracotta colors with rustic metal and stone details produce the style that has been adopted worldwide. The style is marked by the use of smooth plaster, low- pitched clay tile, and cast concrete or stone ornaments. Other characteristics typically include small porches or balconies, arcades, wood casement windows and doors, canvas awnings, and decorative iron trim. The Back Bay Landing PCDP 20 PC3 138 intent is not to select a historically specific or rigid architectural style for the project, but to help shape the character of the area and reflect its setting within the City. The project should be configured as a village, which accommodates marine - oriented and visitor - serving retail, restaurants, enclosed dry stack boat storage, residential units, public space and a coastal public view tower. The "village look" may be expressed through several techniques. Visual interest may be created by multiple one -, two- and three -level buildings, with varied roof heights and planes. Light and shadows may be created through the use of trellises, decks, and canopies. The planes of the buildings should include recesses and vertical elements to create the village feeling. Varied roof heights should communicate the break -up of architectural forms. The parking structure shall be designed to add to the public and visitor - serving retail experience and be easily accessible. The project's architectural style, with the recommended use of stone, tile and glass materials, should blend in color and form with existing similarly themed facilities within Newport Beach, and provide a high standard of quality for future neighboring development. Sample imagery is provided on Exhibit 11, Architectural Theme. B. Site Planning 1. As illustrated in Exhibit 12, Conceptual Site and Landscape Plan, the development shall be designed as an integrated, mixed -use waterfront village that encourages public access to and along the bayfront. 2. A public bayfront promenade shall be developed between the Balboa Marina development to the south and the Newport Dunes and the regional trail system to the east. Special features of this public bayfront promenade shall include coastal plazas, vista points and connections with City /County trails and Newport Dunes as shown on Exhibit 5, Public Spaces. 3. Back Bay Landing restaurants, visitor - serving commercial and plaza areas shall be accessible to the community by public and private vehicular transportation, pedestrian and bike paths, and public dock space. 4. Scenic view corridors should be incorporated throughout the project to maintain existing coastal views from East Coast Highway as shown on Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View Corridors. 5. Outdoor dining and plaza areas shall be designed to interface with the street and bayfront. Siting of outdoor dining facilities shall minimize potential impacts on occupants of adjacent residential units. 6. The development shall include a coastal public view tower that serves to identify the entry location and promote the activity of the site. The coastal Back Bay Landing PCDP 21 PCs 139 public view tower shall be public and ADA- accessible and designed to provide expansive coastal view opportunities. 7. The development shall create a strong pedestrian interface with the waterfront, maximizing accessibility and providing visual corridors enhancing the public /visitor experience. 8. Buildings should be arranged to create opportunities for public gathering spaces, encourage outdoor living and invite patronage. Mixed -use areas should emphasize pedestrian orientation by utilizing features such as plazas, courtyards, interior walkways, trellises, seating, fountains, and other similar elements. 9. The development shall promote connectivity throughout the village and to adjacent developments and trails systems through the use of shared facilities such as driveways, parking areas, pedestrian plazas and walkways. 10. Ground level equipment, refuse collection areas, storage tanks, infrastructure equipment and utility vaults should be screened from public right -of -way views with dense landscaping and /or walls of materials and finishes compatible with adjacent buildings. 11. Site-specific analyses (wind patterns, noise assessments, etc.) and special design features shall be incorporated into the proposed buildings surrounding the OCSD pump station facility to offset potential noise and odor control issues associated with the existing operations of the facility. Indoor air conditioned spaces within the development shall include the installation of odor filters, such as activated carbon filters or similar, to filter indoor air. C. Building Massing 1. Avoid long, continuous blank walls, by incorporating a variety of materials, design treatments and /or modulating and articulating elevations to promote visual interest and reduce massing. 2. Layering of wall planes and volumes are encouraged to provide rhythm, dynamic building forms, and shadows. 3. Building massing should consist of a mix of heights to add visual interest and enhance views to the bay above or between buildings. 4. Taller buildings should use articulation to create visual interest. Articulation should include vertical and horizontal offsets, use of multiple materials and finishes, and the entry /corner elements. Back Bay Landing PCDP 22 PCs 140 5. Towers or other vertical /prominent building features should be used to accentuate key elements such as building entries, pedestrian nodes, plazas, and courtyards. 6. To maintain a low profile at the corner of East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive, the development should consist of reduced height commercial retail buildings closest to the intersection and may step up in height further away from the intersection, as shown on Exhibit 3, Building Heights. D. Facade Treatments 1. Ground floors of commercial buildings should have storefront design with large windows and entries encouraging indoor and outdoor retailing. 2. Architectural elements that create sheltered pedestrian areas are encouraged. 3. The quality of the pedestrian environment should be activated by architecturally vibrant storefronts with features such as planter walls, outdoor seating and dining spaces, enhanced trellises, accent or festive lighting, awnings or canopies, large transparent windows, recessed openings and entry ways. 4. Create a unified and consistent alignment of building facades that define and address the street and waterfront. 5. Horizontal definition between uses, generally between the first and second floor is strongly encouraged. 6. For residential uses, balconies and sill treatments are encouraged on upper stories to articulate the facade. 7. Building facades should respect the public realm edge by controlling and limiting encroachments that could impede pedestrian connectivity and retail exposure. Building designs will be encouraged to support and activate the public realm and plazas, and encourage accessibility. 8. 'Back of House Areas" and service corridors shall be avoided along primary street and waterfront elevations. 9. Roof - mounted mechanical equipment shall not be visible in any direction from a public right -of -way, as may be seen from a point 6 feet above ground level, including from the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge curb elevation. In addition, screening of the top of the roof - mounted mechanical equipment may be required if necessary to protect views. Back Bay Landing PCDP 23 Pas 141 10.Subject to the approval of the OCSD, the existing building exterior of the OCSD facility located adjacent to East Coast Highway and at the property's southwestern boundary shall undergo aesthetic improvements (refacing, reroofing, etc.) to reflect the architectural design standards contained in this PCDP. Should the OCSD facility be reconstructed, the architectural design of the structure shall be compatible with the architectural design of the Back Bay Landing development and design standards contained in this PCDP. E. Public Views 1. As illustrated on Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View Corridors, buildings should be oriented to maximize view opportunities while minimizing the visual impact of the building on existing view sheds. 2. Buildings proposed adjacent to the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge shall preserve coastal views that are afforded due to the differential in height between the elevation of the bridge and the elevation of the site. Buildings located within View Corridors 5, 6, and 7, as shown in Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View Corridors, shall maintain a low profile against East Coast Highway, allowing coastal views over the development. The public coastal views shall be consistent with Section 4.4.1 -8 of the Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan policies. 3. A pedestrian view corridor shall be designed at the southeast corner of Bayside Drive and East Coast Highway, shown as View Corridor 2 on Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View Corridors, allowing northbound pedestrians and motorists to see into the project and the coastal view beyond. 4. The enclosed dry stack boat storage building shall be designed with multiple heights to create a distinct view corridor from East Coast Highway to the Bay, illustrated as View Corridor 4 on Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View Corridors. This corridor shall be visible to north and south bound pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. 5. The development shall be designed to frame existing bay views and should create new bay views where they are currently blocked by fencing and outdoor vehicle /boat storage. 6. The coastal public view tower shall be publicly accessible and designed to provide panoramic coastal views and include interpretive elements. F. Parking and Parking Structure 1. Parking areas and structures shall promote efficient circulation for vehicles and pedestrians. Back Bay Landing PCDP 24 PC3 142 2. Convenient, well- marked and attractive pedestrian access shall be provided from parking areas and structures to buildings. 3. Parking facilities should be physically separated for non - residential uses and residential uses, except for residential guest parking. If enclosed parking is provided for an entire mixed -use complex, separate areas /levels shall be provided for non - residential and residential uses with separate building entrances, whenever possible. 4. A semi - subterranean level should be incorporated, if feasible, to minimize height and bulk of parking structure. 5. Parking structures shall be screened from the public right —of -way to the maximum extent feasible. Portions of the structure that cannot be screened shall incorporate decorative screening, landscape walls, artistic murals, or application of stylized facades. 6. Commercial retail and residential uses should wrap and mask the parking structure. 7. The parking structure shall complement the design vocabulary of the attached or adjacent buildings, and incorporate form, materials, color, and details from the attached or adjacent buildings. 8. Adequate parking that is located within a convenient distance from the use it is intended to serve shall be provided for all uses proposed on -site, as well as marina users, displaced Bayside Village Mobile Home Park guest parking, and for public access. General parking locations are shown on Exhibit 14, Parking Plan. 9. The upper level of the parking structure shall be designed to minimize vehicle headlight and rooftop lighting spill -over. 10.To encourage alternative means of transportation, the parking structure shall incorporate bicycle parking storage accommodations, and electric vehicle charging stations. G. Public Spaces The development shall provide extensive outdoor public spaces, as shown on Exhibit 5, Public Spaces, and described below. 1. A coastal public view tower that includes public access to a functioning public viewing platform at the top is strongly encouraged. This elevated platform can provide exceptional public coastal view opportunities of Newport Harbor and Upper Newport Bay. In the evening business hours, it may be lit from within and may have exterior up- lighting. Back Bay Landing PCDP 25 PC3 143 2. A richly paved pedestrian and automobile plaza should be incorporated into the design that seamlessly and safely blends pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular movement. This plaza may provide an opportunity for valet parking, provided a valet operation plan is reviewed and approved by the City. Bollards and potted plants should define the plaza edge in a park -like setting and should visually connect the east and west ends of the mixed -use project area as the center point of the project, while still allowing unhindered pedestrian movement to the retail areas and public bayfront promenade. 3. Restaurants shall be designed to be accessible from the public bayfront promenade and should provide both indoor and outdoor dining areas with scenic coastal views of the bay and coastal public view tower. 4. Vendor carts selling specialty items are encouraged in the outside plazas and along retail walkways to enhance the shopping or dining experience by activating the plaza areas. However, vendor carts shall not be permitted within the 12- foot -wide public bayfront promenade. 5. Passive recreation opportunities and waterfront viewing shall be provided along the public bayfront promenade. 6. A public launching area and parking for kayak and paddleboard users shall be incorporated into the development. 7. New marina boat -slip tenant lockers shall be provided near the entry to the Bayside Village Marina. 8. Public restrooms for visitors to the site shall be provided along the public bayfront promenade. H. Landscaping 1. The landscaping should reflect the project's coastal marine location and provide visual ties to the coastal bluffs, sand beaches, tidelands and wetlands, tide pools, local marinas and sea life. 2. Creativity in combining plant materials to emulate natural features is encouraged. Some examples of possible design strategies are using swaying grasses to emulate water movement, using water fountains to emulate the sound and rhythm of waves, and emulating sea colors in plant selection. 3. The use of water fountains, waterfalls, water sculptures, or water features are encouraged. 4. Marine murals and other forms of public art are encouraged throughout the project. Back Bay Landing PCDP 26 7>C3 144 5. Landscaping should include tree plantings around buildings to enhance architectural character and provide shade in the summer and sun in the winter. 6. California - friendly plant species with low watering requirements and characteristics that are compatible with the climate, soils, and setting should compose the majority of the plant palate. 7. The irrigation system shall be designed, constructed, managed, and maintained to achieve a high level of water efficiency. 8. Landscaping in the view corridors should not block these views but rather frame and enhance them. 9. Green walls, water features and selective placement of potted plants and trees can improve and soften the appearance of the buildings while preserving and enhancing desired views. I. Hardscaping 1. An enhanced permeable paving should be used at the project entry to create rich texture and color while also helping to mitigate urban runoff. 2. Pedestrian spaces should be developed with specialty paving to provide interest and definition and compliment architectural and landscape features. 3. Selection of hardscape material should reflect the coastal marine theme of the project, for example: sand stone, sea glass, pebbles, drift wood, ocean /beach inspired colors or textures, etc. 4. Private streets, driveways, and drive aisles should be multi - purpose and accommodate pedestrian, bike, emergency vehicles, and slow automobile movements. Generous use of planters, large pots and bollards are encouraged with raised curbs only where necessary. J. Signs 1. The preferred approach to signing is through creating a strong architectural statement that announces development, rather than large distracting signs. 2. Monument signs identifying the development may be permitted at the primary entrance off Bayside Drive and possibly the optional secondary entrance off East Coast Highway, if approved. Back Bay Landing PCDP 27 PC3 145 3. Signage should be appropriately scaled to the building or surface onto which it is placed, should not obscure important architectural features, and should be readable by both pedestrians and drivers approaching the site. 4. Signage shall be integrated with the design and scale of the architecture. 5. A coordinated approach to signage throughout the development is particularly important due to the multiple storefronts that are envisioned. Signs of similar size, proportion, and materials should be used on each store. Back Bay Landing PCDP 28 PC3 140 VI. Phasing The Back Bay Landing mixed -use development is anticipated to be developed as one phase during an 18- to 24 -month construction period. The integrated mixed -use and parking structure combined with the relatively small site necessitates construction in a single phase. The Back Bay Landing development will necessitate the construction of a seawall /bulkhead, but does not include reconstruction of the existing Bayside Village Marina. The general sequence of construction is provided below although certain activities will overlap thereby reducing the total duration of the project. • Demolition — 1 month • Excavation and De- watering — 2 months • Infrastructure / Foundations — 6 months • Vertical Construction — 15 months • Final Landscaping — 3 months • Bayside Drive Roadway Improvements and Trail — 4 months • Reconfiguration of Bayside Village Mobile Home Park — 6 months Back Bay Landing PCDP 29 PC3 147 VII. Back Bay Landing PCDP Implementation/ Site Development Review A. Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Site Development Review process is to ensure the development of the Back Bay Landing PCDP (PC -9) is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, provisions of this PCDP, and the findings set forth below in Section VII.C. It is the intent of the Site Development Review process that all aspects of the design of the project will be reviewed and approved at one time. Conceptual architectural theme, site plan, landscape plan and other conceptual Exhibits attached to this PCDP are preliminary and may be modified through the Site Development Review process. B. Application 1. Approval of the Site Development Review application by the Planning Commission shall be required prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for the construction of any new structure at the project. The Planning Commission's decision is final, unless appealed in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 2. The following items are exempt from the Site Development Review Process and are subject to the City's applicable permits: a) Tenant (interior) improvements to any existing buildings, kiosks, and temporary structures. b) Repair and maintenance activities. c) Replacement of existing structures found in substantial conformance with previously approved plans and /or permits. C. Findings In addition to the general purposes set forth in Section VII.A and in order to carry out the purposes of the Back Bay Landing PCDP, the following findings must be made to approve or conditionally approve a Site Development Review application: 1. The development shall be in compliance with the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan, including design guidelines, and any other applicable plan or criteria related to the development; Back Bay Landing PCDP 30 PC's 148 2. The development shall not be incompatible with the character of the neighboring uses and surrounding sites; 3. The development shall be sited and designed to maximize the aesthetic quality of the project as viewed from surrounding roadways, properties, and waterfront, with special consideration given to providing a variety of building heights, massing, and architectural treatments to provide public views through the site; 4. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access ways, landscaping and other site features shall give proper consideration to functional aspects of site development; and 5. The development shall not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed development. D. Submittal Contents The Site Development Review application shall include all of the information and materials specified by the Community Development Director and any additional information requested by the Planning Commission in order to conduct a thorough review of the application. The following plans /exhibits may include, but are not limited to the following: 1. Existing conditions including adjacent structures and proposed improvements. 2. Comprehensive site and grading plan. 3. Comprehensive elevation drawings, material boards and floor plans for new structures with coordinated and complementary architecture, design, materials and colors. The elevation drawings shall indicate the colors and materials that will be used on the exterior surfaces of the buildings, walls, fences and other visible structures. 4. Permitted and proposed floor area, and residential units. 5. A parking and circulation plan showing pedestrian paths, streets and fire lanes. 6. Landscaping, lighting, signage, utilities, sustainability, and public improvements plans as required by Section IV. 7. Parking management plan (if applicable). Back Bay Landing PCDP 31 AC314J 8. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated preliminary landscape plan, illustrating general location of all plant materials, by common and botanical names (with pictures), size of plant materials, and irrigation concept. 9. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated lighting plan of exterior and parking structure lighting, including locations, fixture height, fixture product type and technical specifications. 10. Comprehensive text and graphics describing the design philosophy for the architecture, landscape architecture, material and textures, color palette, lighting, and signage. 11. Location and text describing drainage and water quality mitigation measures. 12. Open Space Plans (indoor and /or outdoor) for residential units. 13.A statement that the proposed new structure is consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan and Planned Community Development Plan. 14.Any additional background and supporting information, studies, or materials that the Community Development Director deems necessary for a clear representation of the project. E. Public Hearing A Planning Commission public hearing shall be held on all Site Development Review applications. Notice of the hearing shall be provided and the hearing shall be conducted in compliance with the Municipal Code Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings). F. Expiration and Revocation of Site Development Review Approvals 1. Expiration. Any Site Development Review approved in accordance with the terms of this Planned Community Development Plan shall expire within twenty -four (24) months from the effective date of final approval as specified in the Time Limits and Extensions Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless at the time of approval the Planning Commission has specified a different period of time or an extension is otherwise granted. 2. Violation of Terms. Any Site Development Review approved in accordance with the terms of this Planned Community Development Plan may be modified or revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such Site Development Review are violated or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith. Back Bay Landing PCDP 32 PC-111150 3. Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on any proposed modification or revocation after giving written notice to the permittee at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing, and shall submit its recommendations to the City Council. The City Council shall act thereon within sixty (60) days after receipt of the recommendation of the Planning Commission. G. Parcel or Tract Maps No parcel or tract map shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Site Development Review for the entire project. Covenant, Conditions and Restrictions shall be required in connection with any subdivisions at the project so that the responsibility for performance of, and payment for, maintenance are clear. Such CC &R's shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney. H. Fees The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution of the Newport Beach City Council to the City with each application for Site Development Review under this planned community development plan. I. Minor Changes by the Director 1. The following minor changes to an approved site plan may be approved by the Director in compliance with Section 20.54.070 (Changes to an approved project) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code: a) Minor relocation of any proposed structure. b) Reconfiguration of the parking lot, including drive aisles and /or parking spaces, subject to review and approval of the City Traffic Engineer. c) Reconfiguration of landscaping. d) Any other minor change to the site plan provided it does not increase any structure area, height, number of units, and /or intensity of uses. 2. Any proposed changes that are not deemed minor shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. Back Bay Landing PCDP 33 Pc3 i51 VIII. Definitions All words, phrases, and terms used in this Back Bay Landing PCDP (PC -9) shall have the same meaning and definition as provided in the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code unless defined differently in this section. Architectural Features: A visually prominent or formally significant element of a building which expresses its architectural language and style in a complementary fashion. Architectural features should be logical extensions of the massing, details, materials, and color of the building which complement and celebrate its overall aesthetic character. Backfill: Material used to fill or refill an excavated or natural slope area. Building Elevation: The drawing of the exterior wall surface formed by one (1) side of the building. Bulkhead: A retaining wall /structural wall constructed along shorelines for the purpose of controlling beach erosion, supporting buildings and protecting areas of human habitation, conservation and leisure activities. Also referred to as a seawall. The depth of the bulkhead will be determined by a licensed structural engineer. Carts and Kiosks: Carts and kiosks are small, freestanding structures used for retail sales and services. Generally mobile in terms of ease or relocation, the structures can be seasonal, temporary or for a more permanent use. Commercial Recreation and Entertainment: Establishments providing participant or spectator recreation or entertainment, either indoors or outdoors, for a fee or admission charge. Illustrative examples of commercial recreation and entertainment uses include arcades or electronic games centers, billiard parlors, cinemas, and theaters. Cultural Institution: A public or private institution that displays or preserves objects of community or cultural interest in one or more of the arts or sciences. Illustrative examples of these uses include libraries and museums. Eating and Drinking Establishments: Bar, Lounge, and Nightclub. An establishment that sells or serves alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises and is holding or applying for a public premise license from the California State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) (i.e., ABC License Type 42 [On Sale Beer & Wine - Public Premises], ABC License Type 48 [On Sale General - Public Premises], and ABC License Type 61 [On Sale Beer - Public Premises]). Persons under 21 years of age are not allowed to enter and Back Bay Landing PCDP 34 PGs 152 remain on the premises. The establishment shall include any immediately adjacent area that is owned, leased, rented, or controlled by the licensee. Fast Food. An establishment whose design or principal method of operation typically includes the following characteristics: 1. A permanent menu board is provided from which to select and orderfood; 2. A chain or franchise restaurant; 3. Customers pay for food before consuming it; 4. A self- service condiment bar and /or drink service is /are provided; 5. Trash receptacles are provided for self- service bussing; and 6. Furnishing plan indicates stationary seating arrangements. A fast food establishment may or may not have late hour operations. Alcoholic beverages are not sold, served, or given away on the premises. If alcoholic beverages are sold, served, or given away on the premises, the use shall be considered a food service use. See "Food Service." Drive thru service shall not be allowed. Food Service, No Late Hours. An establishment that sells food and beverages, including alcoholic beverages, prepared for primarily on -site consumption, and typically has the following characteristics: 1. Establishment does not have late hour operations; 2. Customers order food and beverages from individual menus; 3. Food and beverages are served to the customer at a fixed location (i.e., booth, counter, or table); and 4. Customers pay for food and beverages after service and /or consumption. Food Service, Late Hours. An establishment that sells food and beverages, including alcoholic beverages, prepared for primarily on -site consumption, and typically has the following characteristics: 1. Establishment does have late hours; 2. Customers order food and beverages from individual menus; Back Bay Landing PCDP 35 ?CCS 153 3. Food and beverages are served to the customer at a fixed location (i.e., booth, counter, or table); and 4. Customers pay for food and beverages after service and /or consumption. Late Hour Operations. Facilities that provide service after 11:00 p.m. Outdoor Dining, Accessory. An outdoor dining area contiguous and accessory to a food service establishment. Take -Out Service, Limited. An establishment that sells food or beverages and typically has the following characteristics: 1. Sales are primarily for off -site consumption; 2. Customers order and pay for food at either a counter or service window; 3. Incidental seating up to 6 seats may be provided for on -site consumption of food or beverages; and 4. Alcoholic beverages are not sold, served, or given away on the premises. Typical uses include bakeries, candy, coffee, nut and confectionery stores, ice cream and frozen dessert stores, small delicatessens, and similar establishments. Take -Out Service Only. An establishment that offers a limited variety of food or beverages and has all of the following characteristics: 1. Sales are for off -site consumption; 2. Seating is not provided for on -site consumption of food or beverages; and 3. Alcoholic beverages are not sold, served, or given away on the premises. Green Building: The practice of increasing the efficiency of buildings and their use of energy, water, and materials, and reducing building impacts on human health and the environment through better siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, and removal. High Tide: The tide at its fullest, when the water reaches its highest level. Back Bay Landing PCDP 36 PC3 154 Marina: A commercial berthing facility (other than moorings or anchorage) in which five or more vessels are continuously wet - stored (in water) for more than 30 days. Marinas are regulated by Title 17. See Marina Support Facilities. Marina Support Facilities: An on -shore facility (e.g., administrative offices, bathrooms, laundry facilities, storage lockers, picnic areas, snack bar, etc.) that directly supports a marina. Marine Rentals and Sales: Establishments engaged in renting, selling or providing supplies and equipment for commercial fishing, pleasure boating, or related activities. Boat Rentals and Sales. An establishment that rents or sells vessels, including storage and incidental maintenance. See "Vessel." Does not include "Marine Services." Marine Retail Sales. An establishment that provides supplies and equipment for commercial fishing, pleasure boating, or related activities. Examples of goods sold include navigational instruments, marine hardware and paints, nautical publications, nautical clothing (e.g., foul - weather gear), and marine engines. Does not include uses in which fuel for boats and ships is the primary good sold (see "Marine Services. "). Marine Services: Boat Storage. Storage of operative or inoperative boats or ships on land or racks for more than 30 days. Unenclosed boat storage on racks are not permitted. Boat Yard. Construction, maintenance, or repair of boats or ships, including the sale, installation, and servicing of related equipment and parts. Entertainment and Excursion Vessels. A vessel engaged in carrying passengers for hire for the purposes of entertainment or excursions (e.g., fishing, whale watching, diving, educational activities, harbor and coastal tours, dining /drinking, business or social special events and entertainment, etc.). See "Vessel." Marine Service Station. A retail establishment that sells gasoline, diesel, and alternative fuels, lubricants, parts, and accessories for vessels and other convenience items. No fuel docks shall be allowed. See "Vessel." Water Transportation Service. An establishment that provides vessels to carry passengers for hire who are traveling to destinations within and outside of Newport Harbor. See "Vessel." Back Bay Landing PCDP 37 PCs 155 Highest High Water (HHW) Line: The average of all the highest high tides occurring over a certain period of time, usually 18.6 years (one lunar epoch). Based on the 2004 Tide Planes & Tidal Datum Relationships for City of Newport Beach, HHW elevation is 7.86' relative to Mean Lower Low Water (0.00'). Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) Line: The average of the lower low tides occurring over a certain period of time, usually 18.6 years (one lunar epoch). Based on the 2004 Tide Planes & Tidal Datum Relationships for City of Newport Beach, Mean Lower Low Water is elevation 0.00'. Multi - Family Residential Flat: A condominium on a single level. North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88): The vertical control datum of orthometric height established for vertical control surveying in the United States. Parking Structure: Structures containing more than one story principally dedicated to parking. Parking structures may contain accessory, ancillary, and resident support uses such as solar panels and trellis structures. Perimeter Setback: An established distance between a building /structure and the perimeter of the project site other than along East Coast Highway, Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, Bayside Drive, and the bayfront. Personal Services (Land Use): General. Establishments that provide recurrently needed services of a personal nature. Illustrative examples of these uses include: • Barber and beauty shops • Clothing rental shops • Dry cleaning pick up stores with limited equipment • Locksmiths • Shoe repair shops • Tailors and seamstresses • Laundromats These uses may also include accessory retail sales of products related to the services provided. Restricted. Personal service establishments that may tend to have a blighting and /or deteriorating effect upon surrounding areas and that may need to be dispersed from other similar uses to minimize adverse impacts, including: • Day spas • Healing arts (acupuncture, aromatherapy, etc.) with no services qualifying under "Massage Establishments" Back Bay Landing PCDP 38 PC3 156 • Tanning salons • Tattoo services and body piercing studios These uses may also include accessory retail sales of products related to the services provided. Public Bayfront Promenade: A pedestrian walkway that extends along the waterfront length of the Back Bay Landing project. Seawall: See previous definition of "bulkhead" above. Setback: Shall mean the space between an object, such as the face of a building or fence, and the perimeter property line. Sign: Any media, including their structure and component parts which are used or intended to be used outdoor to communicate information to the public. Temporary Sign: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance, or advertising display constructed of cloth, canvas, plywood, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials, with or without frames, intended to be displayed for a limited period of time. Vehicle Entry: Any intersection points along the public right -of -way that provide access for automobiles. Vessel: Every type of watercraft that is used or capable of being used as a means of transportation on water. This includes all vessels of any size home - ported, launched /retrieved, or visiting in Newport Harbor, arriving by water or land, and registered or unregistered under State or Federal requirements, except a seaplane on the water. Visitor- Serving Retail: Retail establishments engaged in selling goods or merchandise to tourists and visitors. Examples of these establishments and lines of merchandise include: Back Bay Landing PCDP 39 PCs i57 • Antiques • Appliances • Art galleries • Artists' supplies • Bakeries (retail only) • Bicycle sales and rentals • Books • Cameras and photographic supplies • Clothing and accessories • Convenience market • Drug and discount stores • Gift shops • Handcrafted items • Hobby materials • Jewelry • Luggage and leather goods • Newsstands • Pharmacies • Specialty food and beverage • Specialty shops • Sporting goods and equipment • Tobacco • Toys and games • Travel services Back Bay Landing PCDP 40 pCS :L58 Appendix Back Bay Landing Exhibits Back Bay Landing PCDP 41 PCs 159 PCs f0o a U 5 mr m m a m m -o 03a .o °mti x0 sUoYNYE I 1 I W m C m W o = J - 9 a A c➢� 6a %o h� T N � as _ � 3 m J Z 3� LO ui ways .i w m 5 �a l� W t o Q C7 Cl) Q ca m Z ? H m (1) mr' (� Z w w o Z ° Q Q X_ m J 0 z Ir d n z A � cf ro C CO IL Fs 3 d; V Q Zz Qo p J U Q w W � O Q Z W ql DIf Z 2 O Q U O a d d r d O c 4 4 dm� E N C V Q Q o o of a a T N y a a ? ? U r N D m An N C C m m N= T 3 N d T y p p Z w - 9 a A c➢� 6a %o h� T N � as _ � 3 m J Z 3� LO ui ways .i w m 5 �a l� W t o Q C7 Cl) Q ca m Z ? H m (1) mr' (� Z w w o Z ° Q Q X_ m J 0 z Ir d n z A � cf ro C CO IL Fs 3 d; V Q Zz Qo p J U Q w W � O Q Z W ql DIf Z 2 O Q U O a d; V Q Zz Qo p J U Q w W � O Q Z W ql DIf Z 2 O Q U O a N N a h c Loll � C m C Z z w s U as C13 H U dy,P d mU_ Q h'BAB w An Z A E co C] m 2 a Q cj O O O `m w M (� E O m Nz U V a� N D Z E E2 z C O N c o � m Q ra N m D ro U N o N m m c c5 AL � Q N C U p a 0 Ds [O a° m C r O f a d m lL m r m � co m ` mQ2 co � O a c m m N 5 O N c Yn o Q C �� ¢y W Q 2�(7 a CL m W Cl) z _ ¢ U M Cl) Q Q Q a W m rom >zm � ¢ Q N am �O C m C Z z w s U as C13 H U dy,P d mU_ Q h'BAB w An Z A E co C] m 2 a Q cj O O O r in N w M N V D ry E N o mm Q Q N m D ro U N o N m m c c5 AL � Q N C Ds [O K u m C O m m d m lL m �� co m ` mQ2 U m O a c m m N 5 O N c Yn N m E a m �� ¢y W Q 2�(7 a ma m y 5 o mx a p °o m� c � rdm 330 m z Q U VfNy� Ki C C d CD C7 Q 0, W (n ¢ <n¢am Qar� mwW� ZO Cry 2 Qwz z = Q ¢ m 22 �J/ 3 t _o) N U w J Q °3 U Q¢ Z w O 0 Q W Os U z wF, ¢Q ZZ m O gu Q W m m �z0 Q z m m u `o �o zm d w Q z z z f ^� 1� �Fy V W Vy M 4 m aF-I T � W CO E �N aE� �o m o .v m i d m w `-m c �m N m � N � 0Q Ur` O 5 m E m Ec o E c m o n o m OJ N N "�O V CN c o 000� d Y '' E 3 w 0 'm -L 2L t6 a = d r r= m 3 E z .6; M E E m d y m �7 of aao w o „- Um0 0U Ol -9t A N N N N L 0 X N 0 W Na'a W ra 6L 3 0 0 m Ta OWN E n E Ka w t o - O 6 N a ;� r m a'r'w m t m 3 m N r °o o s N m � Q r = o °ay a `0 0 Q) L W v y m J W a m C) m W m M 3 0 0 m Ta OWN E n E Ka w En - °m'm CD a ;� r m a'r'w 0 t m 3 m N .. m s N ova U p Q = ca a a `0 0 Q) W y m J W a En CD 0 N m ca p N Q) W y m W a m C) m W Z_Z 00 gu Q W M m W � O o_ aMz W H x w x z �n 1� M� of r z 0 3 a d t m° m vr° m m m 3 m a m c Is' `O trn n° x ma O LL I m IL S N W ❑ R I C O 1 a` 1 (V O I �S m m V a \ I O I 11 I r 1 I W 1 r ^ 1 v J 1 1 I� 1 d 1 c I m 1 a I � 1 � ' a I I. t I � n° l d �1 5 0 U J m ° -❑ ° ZZ 4 ❑ w rm C U C Ci N S] m U � LL W O N D Q nTi > N Q d N m •. �, U M «� a N Q J U aim O Q 0 ❑ `/ O >G W W L Q d V O 0 D d Q Z wunV1 m Z m of r z 0 3 a d t m° m vr° m m m 3 m a m c Is' `O trn n° x ma O LL I m IL S N W ❑ R I C O 1 a` 1 (V O I �S m m V a \ I O I 11 I r 1 I W 1 r ^ 1 v J 1 1 I� 1 d 1 c I m 1 a I � 1 � ' a I I. t I � n° l d �1 5 0 U J m W) W V H V m a T � :7 w C. J 0 C7 Z O 0 U a Nm oa H 'y m oa -o aQ am od U d a y N C t0 y d .N o`v 3ol'm Nm .�roa �mE �c N� m>, dcm c� rim �3aaia m2 O N d yl 0 N A N U O N N d 00 oC m ` U0 He N o-,T um N 0 Ow o C m a a a o o 0,- N N o O N N U N a N O tC6 A 0 N 0. __o tO Or O. ONU'dU OO)L OON OIN rOQm s m °o C o rn A a 5> -m > a m t m is s« m n ma ¢a`�U mwo¢amr m¢vi¢3aa 9$�. m O � pr OOQ °O VAAAAAAAAAAA o^ °p ° °O °o❑oo❑❑❑ CIO* anu a is/e8 m ti a a m E E N � ffi a y° c 9 O L = O ar LL EE A& m o V O m �-g °o LLI • •1 L J N •' 8 0 3 • em vm0 _ V�V • a'on • s mo x9 a - e�., a c m e P¢` �O m m � a m a m N L Ol oft _a Na E Lj tpTCdd�p d YyDQJ(7 a N m i 0 Zz Es O gu Q w W � O 0_ az m w U c� U a pO C O U F v o A Y J I, C N ,) o3z N N � N y _ U Z m log Y � Q U Z rm3 z O W z o m p��8 iJ0 MdN U W N m y > N U yN Q au m N O U C m t 0 i it N O N C C O O O« F o 662 t7 D N U U U O D F U �^ O �i CQ Z O O. N N O C« O C ti m N N N N Q n CC F 0_N UN U`� C C U a OYU O U U �- - 3 Q W J ZQ z z W W r4 z U w YH f /W� �` Q A� m .� O d N U W � • • • X o z o N O N I I w U Q U m m d v v J • pO C O U F v o A Y J I, C N ,) o3z 3 U m tll C 0 .0 N C C O U .ro H m C O m O U J � N N N N N Q O W m > C (p U U U W J > m m I I T th N N N N N N N m Lo U Z m log Y � Q U Z rm3 z O W z o m p��8 iJ0 MdN Q 3 U m tll C 0 .0 N C C O U .ro H m C O m O U J � N N N N N Q O W m > C (p U U U W J > m m I I T th N N N N N N N m Lo Y C N C N m.N. Q z O W z o m mac,' Q y > :i ...;y.... _.... C O m 0 0 U ca F U U v N p *er o a �9'/�/J� a W. ZZ C) 0 U Qw M m Y O Z m N y o Z � n V J O I-�-d U w z �U U UH �1 O �ld N N O F Q U Q y > N N p *er o a �9'/�/J� a W. ZZ C) 0 U Qw M m Y O Z m N y o Z � n V J O I-�-d U w z �U U UH �1 O �ld E _ O c o O O O N C L m« N 0 X m :2 C F Np 3 C « N m m o m a T 2 z .m.cmmtE to m T N C� X ux3�E ^'o F i-d V > o o m V rte% z o U:a n rm= T .� CC �n �ywmpmaE Ea m V N L L L i T m « « m m c o 3 d O ? U > > « O N C m m E m a t c d o c L C C= C C - m m —_ d m c p 0 z Y �' °o N� E m O N d -a i N > _ O d U s °md 3 v m > O � c C d n y O p o E 2 O waa ` c m U Q m T N d C Ea Ta a � C d) Q O T L m OI C O m Olm c T ^m'mi m:ca E U V m r c m dd o« mEi. 'o 0 E a N o UO« m n E _ C o a N N N U m o co, 9mcvUVO A U d' O m rVii O m O. m E y> T U B C N m O C O C S] O d a O O ;am C y > J N > O d c m c n'c O m p o m mdm ¢d033m E.m m m 5 m!? E =w Z> n m maP E m Y o mC7Q ain¢ T C O E E yN C U r Q L OI 8 c 1.0 c m o-6 U 00 a � C U O q > m Q H E E c LL F J V Q z 00 Q W m D_ Q m m ®No F� Z r O U U U x w C� h - -1 000 ♦ N�m.. E m O N d -a i N > _ O d U s °md 3 v m > O � c C d n y O p o E 2 O waa ` c m U Q m T N d C Ea Ta a � C d) Q O T L m OI C O m Olm c T ^m'mi m:ca E U V m r c m dd o« mEi. 'o 0 E a N o UO« m n E _ C o a N N N U m o co, 9mcvUVO A U d' O m rVii O m O. m E y> T U B C N m O C O C S] O d a O O ;am C y > J N > O d c m c n'c O m p o m mdm ¢d033m E.m m m 5 m!? E =w Z> n m maP E m Y o mC7Q ain¢ T C O E E yN C U r Q L OI 8 c 1.0 c m o-6 U 00 a � C U O q > m Q H E E c LL F J V Q z 00 Q W m D_ Q m m ®No F� Z r O U U U x w C� h O ep ft�R m m o 's �a m o m m � � O sa m � I � m � m U' T d CL 0 O a` d O J N J 'O Q C R O 0 m a m Of O1 O C C J N C W J C W 7+ m m c @ o c m 01 j OV c O O CI m O) O N N T O m W c W ya � o rQ IL F w O m m IL p O N ea-, c C ms � W o 0 1 � c c 0 O U O Q v c J T O m O m c 0 O O m T Q m m O o. d ZZ 0 J U 2 Qw m m � O Q Z W Ml IAN U H� MFJ""1 I W V) ) H� I�""1 o m WE 9` L� s a. m 0- 00 vmi Y1 E_ «° c a.ma D D R OD_'U M. C C N m E m 0 .O g nomm°"o mE N 3 Er Lm w-1 G- m o L > C VI O 6 ao m-- > Z o ra. m C C z c S cwo c r- O om 0 S ti -mm m« nN v r n:a E DS ='E o d 3 W a E N B E.g '; « N D Y_ a 3 E b m °o $ N % 00 a z Q O V � O N D m aC " «m ! 0 am c2`i°m a ~E ig ui F , 0 L O O V m N O L m m N W cL U f� Q Z 0 0 F E m E .S P R z a a m< O ep ft�R m m o 's �a m o m m � � O sa m � I � m � m U' T d CL 0 O a` d O J N J 'O Q C R O 0 m a m Of O1 O C C J N C W J C W 7+ m m c @ o c m 01 j OV c O O CI m O) O N N T O m W c W ya � o rQ IL F w O m m IL p O N ea-, c C ms � W o 0 1 � c c 0 O U O Q v c J T O m O m c 0 O O m T Q m m O o. d ZZ 0 J U 2 Qw m m � O Q Z W Ml IAN U H� MFJ""1 I W V) ) H� I�""1 Lo C. G� W m � x � W p « a -3oNp m'o o.o m L o O M y N a n o y o rn a O — N 00 0 d w 3 J Y p T p L O T D � \p N m C T L x m 3 E U m C y a A h° d U m¢ S 0 3 am m m N�\ O ah o E 6N 'L N Y U C «_ U S o U- p N N N O 3 O p O N N n v o m 3 Y c 3 0 3 m d o ma>va at oa TL N oPm o °-E oya m m O'gm�ma 3 M_ c M y D c r yN $ O Np Z O 0 p p D E > C c a tl p m W ° L N 4 C 00.s O N N d d « D — NC w O tp N C 3 0 x o A a N 3 t0 d c 3 m a m r N O d N !? c D C 0 N 6 tE a C w i.m3wOy ° >> 0 p N N C y a N O O D U= m q r a°- mmm3cy Ni a d'x s c d c c m �J N 0 W O O �ro N a a v d 3 m m 3 E `o m w m m a y y a o o - - a \°n \°n a a 9 I I I c l I I w J Z_Z 5 O U S Q W co m Y O O_ /Q z W L 0 f ^� 1� V) w / I 0 O�► ► f 1. li 1 1 1� v 9 h L -a 0 1 a N 1 � a N � • N O O / D ' I a a J r N AU // G N I No 1• I. If 1 ' I• n •� N C . � A N d C E Z Z SNt .3 rn o = r € E s O 2 co) q N N y J Z W O �3mcmmw z mEC.D`cooDO Q no °= € Mo m dip U 0€ y� d c W C.NO NULOTDAT 3 3 O E Ed w O] D N C 3 C L y TL y >i 'C N 6 W W O W~ Co Q D mmcv UL m�LO F" Z o3itl Ti �O�oi�cm o l Y l am. —ma I I� Z w Q mo�n`� H o u «« 0 a U S o a°. m / I 0 O�► ► f 1. li 1 1 1� v 9 h L -a 0 1 a N 1 � a N � • N O O / D ' I a a J r N AU // G N I No 1• I. If W C_ C n �o w€ N OI C 9 D w E 60 m 4 C j �O WN ® QN N N W C� 1 � W � C T, C W pN . y � LL N 1 ' I• n •� N 1 W C_ C n �o w€ N OI C 9 D w E 60 m 4 C j �O WN ® QN N N W C� 1 � W � C T, C W pN . y � LL N a v E 0 n` e 0 X m V 1 U T m a s m x 0 u 3 r a a a' 0 V E E V m N O 3 _rn O N m N O 9 E v ZZ 00 g� Qw m m se Q Z m R w w x H H U w H x U �G W WOO Wo m -NSZ o amn =0 .a °y�ovoN� W °'?rte amacZ aro-� mw,°t,c CG Z ndc o �w��E W y N N O O N V >+ Y L O N y 3 O 0 (� O Cmcti jai tom ca>i 1: of W 7 E9 c o.a�rm.r c�oiAa m c°-t> ammow my.a aoEom arms D mummmMa wQ rm$t maven r_aam$ a v E 0 n` e 0 X m V 1 U T m a s m x 0 u 3 r a a a' 0 V E E V m N O 3 _rn O N m N O 9 E v ZZ 00 g� Qw m m se Q Z m R w w x H H U w H x U �G W WOO Wo T C O U E � o c n`m g¢ v y} n'y �a g c OF a n� ai U _ C 0 l• � - O anu p apis/eg t' r r � I rn m Ul $¢ �n } °a f s� i 14,E �' sa t 50� - a wa'9 I ' 8� f m � m � U 6 N a ¢ p ] O o m E m� n Q Z z Do Z S Q W m m � O az m z w H ruD 1l ^� !� 4 W U z O U O m W T t6 m C m$m`0a m m O _ m O �n °1•o�m ma °m'$ a� Q 0 0 w oE-0 >oc cwt `-0 c0 r`omc °o �- cuw aai y m m U Z m_ 0 Ty 2Z o, XOQ "r sccEdy 0 a =y yoN c wU.-1 Q 8 mENO_3 ma Zara T C O U E � o c n`m g¢ v y} n'y �a g c OF a n� ai U _ C 0 l• � - O anu p apis/eg t' r r � I rn m Ul $¢ �n } °a f s� i 14,E �' sa t 50� - a wa'9 I ' 8� f m � m � U 6 N a ¢ p ] O o m E m� n Q Z z Do Z S Q W m m � O az m z w H ruD 1l ^� !� 4 W U z O U `mom oN mum a VQ �_ aQ dm m= U � 9 O O U 3 a O o U 3 o 0 O U C d 0 0 O C U d O� as cU O Ua� im u� >.4 0 a O U d 0 a O U 3 W T O 3 OD W N �a U V Q m N z \ \1 C o m 9 O a O O ¢ O U w > `0 m 9NaN° m 3 �O c Ix� �NmO� ¢wa �r Z aN�mO _m O O N N N .M+ U rm U omam 0 m C' m F„ V a N N X `mom oN mum a VQ �_ aQ dm m= U � 9 O O U 3 a O o U 3 o 0 O U C d 0 0 O C U d O� as cU O Ua� im u� >.4 0 a O U d 0 a O U 3 W T O 3 OD W N �a U M U a V Q z \ \1 Q J O m a a U w > `0 m Q m ca w �O Q wz m M U a N ®No �o Zm `m o m dwm o mm E E ¢wa m 3 r _m m 0 U w o � ° LU z �� O a E2 c h-+ Q C ° a Q m A m W J Z OU O ° `U as Um O a U n 0 C W W ' 0 ¢ w M U a z F, z m � cL W .^r d Y ? O rd+ y OI C N E -5 E u� d q �c� � d d a != m o d 4iJ U C O 0 m 2 N C d N �0 02 d d Y C d 3 N M zd 3 c d J m m a 1 3 i 1 m i m U m v � w � ZZ 00 Q w m m se O Q z W 2 Q a C7 2 Attachment No. PC 4 Traffic Study -Pc+1-7s Pc4 i7C, I K KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. BACK BAY LANDING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS July 1, 2013 Prepared by: Giancarlo Ganddini, P.E., Carl Ballard, LEED GA, and William Kunzman, P.E. QPpF K(j ESS /O,V ( A. FZ c CO _ v z Ix��\ 3 No. TF0056 Z -o or * THAFF� 9�OF CA1 1111 Town & Country Road, Suite 34 Orange, California 92868 (714) 973 -8383 www.traffic- engineer.com 51881 -Pc4 177 Table of Contents 1. Findings .................................................................................................. ..............................2 Existing Traffic Conditions ........................................................................ ..............................2 TrafficSummary ...................................................................................... ............................... 3 RecommendedImprovements ................................................................. ..............................5 Required Improvements ........................................................................... ..............................6 OtherConsiderations .............................................................................. ............................... 6 2. Project Description ................................................................................. ..............................8 Location.................................................................................................... ..............................8 Proposed Development ............................................................................ ..............................8 3. Existing Traffic Conditions ...................................................................... .............................11 Study Area Intersections ......................................................................... .............................11 Existing Travel Lanes and Intersection Controls ...................................... .............................12 Existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways ............................................... .............................12 ExistingTraffic Volumes .......................................................................... .............................12 Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization ................................................ .............................12 4. Project Traffic ...................................................................................... ............................... 20 TripGeneration ....................................................................................... .............................20 Trip Distribution and Assignment ............................................................ .............................21 Project - Related Traffic ............................................................................. .............................21 S. Existing (Year 2012) + Project Analysis ................................................. ............................... 27 Intersection Capacity Utilization ............................................................. .............................27 SignificanceCriteria ................................................................................. .............................27 6. TPO Analysis .......................................................................................... .............................31 ApprovedProjects ................................................................................... .............................31 RegionalGrowth ...................................................................................... .............................31 One - Percent Methodology ...................................................................... .............................32 Intersection Capacity Utilization ............................................................. .............................33 SignificanceCriteria ................................................................................. .............................33 7. CEQA Analysis ........................................................................................ .............................43 CumulativeProjects ................................................................................. .............................43 Intersection Capacity Utilization ............................................................. .............................43 SignificanceCriteria ................................................................................. .............................44 8. Delay Analysis ...................................................................................... ............................... 53 DelayMethodology ................................................................................. .............................53 DelayCalculations ................................................................................... .............................53 9. Orange County Congestion Management Program ............................... ............................... 55 County Congestion Management Program ( CMP) .................................. .............................55 SignificanceCriteria ................................................................................. .............................55 10. Other Considerations ............................................................................. .............................57 Site Access Evaluation ........................................................................... ............................... 57 QueueAnalysis ........................................................................................ .............................57 Relationship to General Plan ................................................................... .............................58 11. Recommendations ................................................................................. .............................63 RecommendedImprovements ................................................................ .............................63 PC,4 178 Required Improvements .......................................................................... .............................63 OtherConsiderations .............................................................................. .............................64 Appendices Appendix A Glossary of Transportation Terms Appendix B Year 2011/2012 Traffic Count Worksheets Appendix C Explanation and Calculation of Intersection Capacity Utilization Appendix D Trip Generation - Existing Project Site and Additional Sources Appendix E Approved Project Data Appendix F Regional Traffic Annual Growth Rate Appendix G TPO One - Percent Analysis Calculation Worksheets Appendix H Cumulative Project Data Appendix I Explanation and Calculation of Intersection Delay Appendix J Site Access Evaluations Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheets Appendix K Queue Analysis Worksheets PO4 z_-79 List of Tables Table 1. Existing (Year 2012) Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels of Service ................13 Table 2. Project Trip Generation ................................................................. ............................... 22 Table 3. Existing (Year 2012) + Project Analysis Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels ofService ........................................................................................ ............................... 28 Table 4. Approved Project List ....................................................................... .............................34 Table 5. TPO Analysis One- Percent Threshold .............................................. .............................35 Table 6. TPO Analysis Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels of Service ...........................36 Table 7. Cumulative Project List .................................................................... .............................45 Table 8. CEQA Analysis Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels of Service ........................46 Table 9. Intersection Delay and Level of Service Summary ........................... .............................54 Table 10. Site Access Evaluations Intersection Capacity Utilization and Level of Service ............ 59 Table 11. Queue Analysis Summary ................................................................ .............................60 PC/+ 180 List of Figures Figure 1. Project Location Map ........................................................................ ..............................9 Figure2. Site Plan ........................................................................................... .............................10 Figure 3. Existing Intersection Controls .......................................................... .............................14 Figure 4. Existing Travel Lanes ........................................................................ .............................15 Figure 5. City of Newport Beach General Plan Circulation Element ............... .............................16 Figure 6. City of Newport Beach General Plan Roadway Cross - Sections ....... .............................17 Figure 7. Existing (Year 2012) Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes... 18 Figure 8. Existing (Year 2012) Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes.... 19 Figure 9. Project Trip Distribution - Commercial .......................................... ............................... 23 Figure 10. Project Trip Distribution — Residential ........................................... ............................... 24 Figure 11. Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ....................... 25 Figure 12. Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ........................ 26 Figure 13. Existing (Year 2012) + Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes......................................................................................... ............................... 29 Figure 14. Existing (Year 2012) + Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes......................................................................................... ............................... 30 Figure 15. Approved Projects Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes.....37 Figure 16. Approved Projects Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes...... 38 Figure 17. Existing+ Growth (Year 2017) +Approved Projects Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ....................................... .............................39 Figure 18. Existing+ Growth (Year 2017) +Approved Projects Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ........................................................... .............................40 Figure 19. Existing+ Growth (Year 2017) +Approved Projects + Project Morning Peak Hour FC/+ 121 Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ....................................... .............................41 Figure 20. Existing+ Growth (Year 2017) +Approved Projects + Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ....................................... .............................42 Figure 21. Cumulative Projects Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..47 Figure 22. Cumulative Projects Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ...48 Figure 23. Existing+ Growth (Year 2017) +Approved Projects + Cumulative Projects Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..................... .............................49 Figure 24. Existing + Growth (Year 2017) + Approved Projects+ Cumulative Projects Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ..................... .............................50 Figure 25. Existing+ Growth (Year 2017) +Approved Projects + Cumulative Projects + Project Morning Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ...... .............................51 Figure 26. Existing + Growth (Year 2017) + Approved Projects+ Cumulative Projects + Project Evening Peak Hour Intersection Turning Movement Volumes ........ .............................52 Figure 27. Proposed Project - Related Improvement ......................................... .............................61 Figure 28. Circulation Recommendations ......................................................... .............................65 FC/+ 121 Back Bay Landing Traffic Impact Analysis This report contains the traffic impact analysis for the Back Bay Landing project in the City of Newport Beach. The traffic report contains documentation of existing traffic conditions, traffic generated by the project, distribution of the project generated traffic to the surrounding roadway network, and an analysis of future traffic conditions. Each of these topics are contained in separate sections of the report. The first section is "Findings ", and subsequent sections expand upon the findings. In this way, information on any particular aspect of the study can be easily located by the reader. The project site is currently developed as a recreation vehicle /boat storage facility and is located at 300 East Coast Highway, on the northwest corner of the Bayside Drive and East Coast Highway intersection. The proposed project is the redevelopment of an approximately 7 -acre site. The existing project site is currently developed with storage space for recreational vehicles and small boats on trailers, a marina, Pearson's Port, and overflow parking for adjacent residential uses. The proposed project design includes constructing a mixed -use development including retail, restaurant, office, dry stack storage, residential, and marina land uses. At this stage, the proposed design is conceptual, but includes the maximum likely quantity of land uses to be developed at the project site. Although this is a technical report, every effort has been made to write the report clearly and concisely. To assist the reader with those terms unique to transportation engineering, a glossary of terms is provided in Appendix A. PCB 122 1. Findings This section summarizes the existing traffic conditions, project traffic impacts, and the proposed mitigation measures. Existing Traffic Conditions The proposed project is the redevelopment of an approximately 7 -acre site. The existing project site is currently developed as a storage space for recreational vehicles and small boats on trailers. The proposed project design includes constructing a mixed -use development including retail, restaurant, office, dry stack storage, residential, and marina land uses. b. The project site currently has access to Bayside Drive. C. Pursuant to discussions with the City of Newport Beach staff, the study area includes the following study area intersections: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) Riverside Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) Tustin Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) Irvine Avenue (NS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive (EW) 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) Dover Drive (NS) at: Westcliff Drive (EW) 16th Street (EW) West Coast Highway (EW) Bayside Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) Santa Barbara Drive (EW) East Coast Highway (EW) Santa Cruz Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) PC4 183 Santa Rosa Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) Newport Center Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) Avocado Avenue (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) San Miguel Drive (EW) East Coast Highway (EW) d. For existing (Year 2012) traffic conditions, the study area intersections currently operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours. Traffic Summary a. The proposed project design includes constructing a mixed -use development including retail, restaurant, office, dry stack storage, residential, and marina land uses. The project also proposes construction of a southbound right turn lane and conversion of the existing southbound through lane to a shared through /left turn lane at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection. A westbound "right turn in" only access from East Coast Highwayjust west of Bayside Drive is proposed as an optional secondary access. b. The net new trips generated by the proposed development is projected to be approximately 2,721 daily vehicle trips, 127 additional trips of which occur in the morning peak hour and 178 additional trips of which occur during the evening peak hour. C. For existing (Year 2012) + project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours. d. As shown in Table 3 for the existing (Year 2012) + project analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. e. The City of Newport Beach staff provided the list of approved and cumulative projects within the study area. The approved projects consist of development that has been approved but are not fully completed. Cumulative projects are known, but not approved project developments that are reasonably expected to be completed or nearly completed at the same time as the proposed project. f. The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) analysis resulted in the following study area intersections exceeding the one - percent threshold and requiring additional analysis: 3 PC4 i24 Riverside Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Tustin Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Irvine Avenue (NS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive (EW) — Evening Peak Hour 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Dover Drive (NS) at: Westcliff Drive (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour 16th Street (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour West Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Bayside Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Santa Barbara Drive (EW) — Evening Peak Hour East Coast Highway (EW) — Evening Peak Hour g. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) h. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) As shown in Table 6 for the TPO analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the PC4 125 morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. j. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that are projected to operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) k. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects + project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that are projected to operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) I. As shown in Table 8 for the CEQA analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. M. Based upon the delay methodology required by the California Department of Transportation, the delay and Level of Service summary for the study area intersections are shown in Table 9. As previously noted, the project generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections. n. Based upon the CMP thresholds, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. Recommended Improvements a. Site - specific circulation and access recommendations are depicted on Figure 29. b. On -site parking shall be provided to meet City of Newport Beach parking code requirements. 5 PC4 18r� C. Sight distance at the project accesses shall be reviewed with respect to City of Newport Beach standards in conjunction with the preparation of final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans. d. On -site traffic signing and striping shall be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project and as approved by the City of Newport Beach. Required Improvements a. As shown in Table 3 for the existing (Year 2012) + project analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. b. As shown in Table 6 for the TPO analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. C. As shown in Table 8 for the CEQA analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. d. Based upon the delay methodology required by the California Department of Transportation, the delay and Level of Service summary for the study area intersections are shown in Table 9. As previously noted, the project is projected to not have a significant impact at the study area intersections. e. Based upon the CMP thresholds, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. Other Considerations a. Final design of the optional secondary access ( "right turn in" only lane on East Coast Highway) will need to accommodate bicycle use along the corridor and will require coordination with and the approval of the California Department of Transportation, the Orange County Transportation Authority, and the Orange County Sanitation District. The driveway for the Orange County Sanitation District will need to be relocated so as not to interfere with the proposed "right turn in" only lane. Based on the posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour, and assuming partial deceleration of 10 miles per hour in the through lane, the recommended length of the deceleration lane is 315 feet (see California Department of Transportation, Highway Design Manual, May 7, 2012, Table 405.2B). 6 PC, 187 b. Queue analysis of CEQA traffic conditions of the northbound left from Bayside Drive into the project driveway resulted in nominal queues (less than one vehicle). The California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual recommends a minimum storage length of two vehicles, or 50 feet. C. A minimum of 200 feet of southbound left turn storage length should be provided at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection under the Existing Geometry evaluation (see Table 11). d. A minimum of 120 feet of southbound left turn storage length should be provided at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection under the Project - Related Improvements and Project - Related Improvements Plus Optional Secondary Access evaluations. The project is proposing 135 feet of southbound storage to prevent the overflow of queued southbound left vehicles from blocking the northbound left turn into the project site (see Figure 27). e. Appropriate "KEEP CLEAR" signing and pavement markings should be provided at the Bayside Drive /Project Driveway intersection. With the proposed storage lengths, if the 95th- percentile queue is exceeded, there is an additional 35 feet of storage to the "KEEP CLEAR" limit line that could store approximately one more vehicle before the northbound left turn lane is blocked. Therefore, the southbound left turn queue is not expected to reach the "KEEP CLEAR" zone, but it is recommended as a precautionary measure. 7 PC,4 188 2. Project Description This section discusses the project's location, proposed development, and traffic characteristics of such a development. Figure 1 shows the project location map. Figure 2 illustrates the site plan. Location The project site is located at 300 East Coast Highway in the City of Newport Beach. The project site currently has access to Bayside Drive. Proposed Development The proposed project is the redevelopment of an approximately 7 -acre site. The existing project site is currently developed as a storage space for recreational vehicles and small boats on trailers. The proposed project design includes constructing a mixed -use development including retail, restaurant, office, dry stack storage, residential, and marina land uses. This traffic analysis evaluates the maximum likely quantity of land uses to be developed at the project site. The project proposes to improve the southbound approach of Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway. The project - related improvements include widening the roadway to accommodate left turn, shared through /left turn, and exclusive right turn southbound lanes. In addition, the project also proposes an optional secondary access consisting of "right turn in" only access from East Coast Highway. [These evaluations are analyzed and discussed in the section titled Other Considerations (Section 10)]. 8 PC-4 189 V v. z U x u 0 r7 O 0 v 0 v a '^ c o flap�a S 'O4t�b enOB o�O�`\ aQ W �O pC S ap � w opaOo aOb �b o` e a O 0J c Santa Barba« r a� m ti 3 ° p z V P °�aa ° 9 P Q (o 0 A u a 0aQi U txo 0 i- a�oo 3 � t 3n3m3 �� • ee a7 �� � 3z ' �3 Z.' e� > ^� s ti m 2 � N U N C � 7 N F Q a E m ' _U � C W U C K Q N N W I— pJena�nog o 4 Uotlro�ON �' 0 U O N Ul C Q J n ® Z e N L J z V v. z U x u 0 r7 O 0 v 0 ƒ0 ^ ~ oapiym - ! � | y\ - � i7i � ! � � \ § z }� ! . & !?�\ \ •`� _ \ |§ —\\ / }\ ,2 0 \ 3. Existing Traffic Conditions The traffic conditions as they exist today are discussed below and illustrated on Figures 3 to B. Study Area Intersections Pursuant to discussions with the City of Newport Beach staff, the study area includes the following study area intersections: Newport Boulevard (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) Riverside Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) Tustin Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) Irvine Avenue (NS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive (EW) 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) Dover Drive (NS) at: Westcliff Drive (EW) 16th Street (EW) West Coast Highway (EW) Bayside Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) Santa Barbara Drive (EW) East Coast Highway (EW) Santa Cruz Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) Santa Rosa Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) Newport Center Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) Avocado Avenue (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) 11 PC4 192 MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) San Miguel Drive (EW) East Coast Highway (EW) Existing Travel Lanes and Intersection Controls Figure 3 identifies the existing intersection controls and Figure 4 illustrates the existing number of through lanes for the study area intersections. Existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways Figure 5 exhibits the current City of Newport Beach General Plan Circulation Element. Both existing and future roadways are included in the Circulation Element of the General Plan and are graphically depicted on Figure 5. This figure shows the nature and extent of arterial highways that are needed to serve adequately the ultimate development depicted by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Figure 6 shows the City of Newport Beach General Plan roadway cross - sections. Existing Traffic Volumes The City of Newport Beach staff provided Year 2011/2012 morning and evening peak hour approach volumes at each study area intersection (see Appendix B). Existing (Year 2012) morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figures 7 and 8, respectively. Existing Intersection Capacity Utilization Consistent with the City of Newport Beach approved methodology, the technique used to assess the operation of a signalized intersection is known as Intersection Capacity Utilization. To calculate an Intersection Capacity Utilization value, the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. An Intersection Capacity Utilization value is usually expressed as a decimal. The decimal represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity. The Levels of Service for existing (Year 2012) traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 1. Existing (Year 2012) Intersection Capacity Utilization worksheets and the Level of Service description are provided in Appendix C. For existing (Year 2012) traffic conditions, the study area intersections currently operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours. 12 PC4 i93 Table 1 Existing (Year 2012) Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels of Service i L= Left; T = Through; R = Right; >> = Free Right Turn; > = Right Turn Overlap; d = De Facto Right Turn Lane ICU -LOS = Intersection Capacity Utilization - Level of Service (see Appendix Q. s TS= Traffic Signal 13 TC4 i94 Intersection Approach Lanes' Peak Hour Traffic Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound ICU -LOS 2 Intersection Contro13 L T R L T R L T R L T R Morning Evening Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 1>> 0.84 -D 0.72 -C Riverside Avenue INS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 1 0 0.5 0.5 1> 1 1.5 0.5 1 3 1 0.66 -13 0.76 -C Tustin Avenue INS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1.5 0.5 0 2.5 0.5 0.63 -13 1 0.57 -A Irvine Avenue (NS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive (EW) TS 1 2 d 1 2 d 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 0.52 -A 0.61 -B 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) TS 2 2 d 2 2 d 2 1.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 0.45 -A 0.70 -B Dover Drive (NS) at: Westcliff Drive (EW) TS 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 1>> 0 0 0 0.43 -A 0.44 -A 16th Street (EW) TS 1 2 d 1 2 d 0.5 0.5 d 1 1 1 0.50 -A 0.50 -A West Coast Highway (EW) TS 1 1.5 0.5 3 1 1 2 2.5 0.5 1 3 1>> 0.61 -B 0.67 -13 Bayside Drive INS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) TS 2.3 0.3 0.3 1 0.5 0.5 1 3 1 1 3.5 0.5 0.64 -B 0.61 -B Jamboree Road INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 1 3 1>> 2 3 1>> 1.5 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 0.60 -A 0.81 -D Santa Barbara Drive (EW) TS 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 0.48 -A 0.61 -B East Coast Highway (EW) TS 1 1.5 0.5 1 2 1>> 3 3.5 O.S 2 4 1 0.56 -A 0.65 -B Santa Cruz Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 2 0.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 0.31 -A 0.34 -A Santa Rosa Drive INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 1 1 1> 1 1 1 1 2.5 0.5 2 2.5 0.5 0.33 -A 0.47 -A Newport Center Drive INS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1>> 2 3 0 0 3 1>> 0.36 -A 0.44 -A Avocado Avenue INS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1>> 1 3 d 1 3 1 0.44 -A 0.50 -A MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1>> 3 2.5 0.5 1 2 1>> 0.63 -13 0.72 -C San Miguel Drive (EW) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1> 3 1.5 0.5 2 1.5 0.5 0.52 -A 0.47 -A East Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1>> 2 3 0 0 3 1>> 0.67 -B 0.64 -B i L= Left; T = Through; R = Right; >> = Free Right Turn; > = Right Turn Overlap; d = De Facto Right Turn Lane ICU -LOS = Intersection Capacity Utilization - Level of Service (see Appendix Q. s TS= Traffic Signal 13 TC4 i94 V v. F i U u 0 r r7 O v a m o v to 2 O �' pap c O'er N tllJyop 8 Jc1` O \oaQ o v O ' a p � O a° °pP 4a'b Santa Barba« c r Lo 3 m p z v0 Pod a D m D rn @,o w m 94ipr O L O o O O U O a m 4J 4-j 0aQi i U � o � ,b.0 anua o a= o 0 3 l (3�3m3 3� LU � m a m ti 2 � N N U C � 7 N F Q a N N Q Z U N C U > > U a 0 N K N J W N u, CC > 4 PdenaInog o ,� Lod A40 w m a a aN \ O TS 0 C N U > ° Q N o Z n n n n n Z N z J z V v. F i U u 0 r r7 O v a v c J v � bjO X w c m � c - O s —I _ m TT L C _ 0 N L w N N IL K I \ II II II J A A O v a c � � w ti 4 o` Santa Ba�bata c Vai O p` 3 _mv c a in A 3 d b b �o a3 a�bbso - os°�YP re �bbsi -- c��Y� r dbbso sow so��YP �«l 'a' 3 v a c � � w ti 4 o` Santa Ba�bata c Vai O p` 3 _mv c a in v ;o o� s ti c N � v O A 3 d b b s! -- o�°I`�P re �bbsi -- c��Y� r �«l Eo «!3 ^ro �bba —co �rz v3 db4si Q= S0� «lam DSO 3 � dbbso N�o 03 l3 °IYP H 3 CCl� �p dbbsZ v ;o o� s ti c N � v O E d i O N c v `w C C N `w v t= 0 v c U w I- 4 U O E _ I - �bb�o - dbb�l Qo dbb�z a3 dbb�z -- dbb�a = J z u u 0 r m O v A 3 dbb�o -- o�°I`�P re �bbsi -- c��Y� r �0 db4si Q= «lam w dbbso - a °IYP H 3 CCl� E d i O N c v `w C C N `w v t= 0 v c U w I- 4 U O E _ I - �bb�o - dbb�l Qo dbb�z a3 dbb�z -- dbb�a = J z u u 0 r m O v Figure 5 City of Newport Beach General Plan Circulation Element r _ Legend * ADOPTED INTERCHANGE 10 PROPOSEDINTERCHANGE ROUT E5 REQUIRINQ FURTHER COORDINATI ON D.75 Miles COMMUTER ROADWAY CfWO LANE UNDIVIDED) 324 Miles SECONDARY ROAD (FOUR LANE UNDIVIDED) 16.98 Miles SECONDARY (NOT SUI LT) 029 Miles PRIMARY ROAD (FOUR LANE DIVIDED) 79.62 Miles PRI MARY ROA 0 ��• (NOT BUILT) 3.0s Miles NW OR ROAD (SIX LANE DIVIDED) 30.64 Miles EIGHT LANE ROAD — (DIVIDED) 7.81 Miles SAN JOAQUIN HILLS TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR 5.34 Miles ADOPTED FREEWAY ROUTES 4A8 Mlles FUTURE FREEWAY EXTENSION 0.75 Miles NTS KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Source: City of Newport Beach 5188/5 OVER 35 VEARS or EXCELLENT ]ERVICE 16 TIC,4 19Y Figure 6 City of Newport Beach General Plan Roadway Cross - Sections PRINCIPAL-1411V (8 LANES DIVIDED) RZ 4 MAJOR • 928' (8 LANES DIVIDED) I yI PRIMARY . 184' (4 LANES DIVIDED) i SECONDARY • 84' . (4 LANES UNDIVIDED) Y• ( COMMUTER • SW (2 LANES UNDIVIDED) 1901-MRS 2m, M�M_ KUNZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. Source: City of Newport Beach 5188/6 OVER 35 PEARS or EXCELLENT SeR VICc 17 PC4 1J° 8 (A W O Cu C N cO G N N � L lV txo 7 } O W U V) w U C L 7 O Y (O N CL ao C .E O 4fZl - ° z 9s � m V bZ3 OZ61 C911 dbbs£ aa= 0 19ZZ v a v � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata c Vai O p` 3 m; m � 660 Z6ls 16 66 1 �bbs°ti£ a a- ° 0 53 _ 0 69£Z R=� Hbl �Obl r �011! r _ 9z 4 9E FC - M o IM 9061 b - s �Sb f ��bs4Z 4.0= ZHl3 a o 3 0661 Ell �£b �H1C a�bbsLH a - ° 69Z co o� s ti c N E v 0 9002 0 �lbbso am- ° f6L� L §o3 ° LS§ ba—£z!! sfZ! 4 m 608 0 60£ 2901 �zz I I�I �9ZZl b W �Izl 4 ° zuL 1593 0 694 F 6S£l o a 9z! _ �b4s961Q= ° 69-D I T os3 0 09Z! IZZI a-6 °03 dbbso a �- ° 61� 3fl 693 ffOZ S00! o ESL dbbszf a °= ° zl3 P _ zl-D 6£3 0 664 E v 0 V v d `w E v c v `w v c 0 V v c U z vi w 4 U O n ZZZ1 E fS£ v O66 v _ 0 LHf �A ooz � �90S �ll4 '°o a dbb ° firs I Y I ° z£1N 779 :D �Z u z i u u 0 r m O v ro N ri N 00 r fd Z } b� bio W C: V) X W W O E v cO G W c .E 7 c 0 U to v s= 7 O Y a W c .E N W a v c � � w ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 m� � a c m 99oZ v ^a06Z° �bbsl§ a Llb� UH 90L v �9Lll ` ° LZl� P C6Z� §L� 0 8L 96L v �l£l �69Z1 `^ _ ° zglS 491 0 8£I EDE �6Z ff o E 0 8142 LZf v dbbm �N �91 ao= ° ovv P 9£l3 0 3 8191 911 v �Sb m a—uol ° S m 9118 2 - £Z� ` 0 olZ FIR 0 s a „ 9LS1 at v �ZIZ �ICC o - �s16 9 - ° lls�i'P rE mum 9211 ZZC v ZS �f! �lfiCl —` �Sf 4 m _ LLOI 69Z1 v sZll `Loll ; 3 I o ACC `V 60l-D I Y P lo K - w 0 6S£I 44S! v dbbso a F79-71 pP ZBSI V ffCizz v �f44 m ��SZ d a ° = ° fL3' l!� _ o oSC o� s ti c N v E v 0 E N O V v v `w d c `w v c 0 v c U vi w 4 U O n SCZZ v E 964 v yyL v _ 0 60S �A �0 �!b - X94 4-0 m 3 ,°-� m o �H59 °°. _ X654 m S 4-fbS - abb�o a dbb�L6 aQO abb�ylf aa3 dbb�oss ao dbb�9os a ° otl�' o�' a ^ SHIM m _ bBS� m .z " 69C� s 6543 = ` ° 3 69�, a `-J £ZS�. `J ° m £Olt "' 4Z� °' N 991 z o OZy HC6 bZ9 _ —Z-9—£t „ -;z z u 7 u u 0 r m O 0 V m so F �- ~3 14SI SS£Z v dbbsol aa= o L691 a v c � � w ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 m� � a c m 99oZ v ^a06Z° �bbsl§ a Llb� UH 90L v �9Lll ` ° LZl� P C6Z� §L� 0 8L 96L v �l£l �69Z1 `^ _ ° zglS 491 0 8£I EDE �6Z ff o E 0 8142 LZf v dbbm �N �91 ao= ° ovv P 9£l3 0 3 8191 911 v �Sb m a—uol ° S m 9118 2 - £Z� ` 0 olZ FIR 0 s a „ 9LS1 at v �ZIZ �ICC o - �s16 9 - ° lls�i'P rE mum 9211 ZZC v ZS �f! �lfiCl —` �Sf 4 m _ LLOI 69Z1 v sZll `Loll ; 3 I o ACC `V 60l-D I Y P lo K - w 0 6S£I 44S! v dbbso a F79-71 pP ZBSI V ffCizz v �f44 m ��SZ d a ° = ° fL3' l!� _ o oSC o� s ti c N v E v 0 E N O V v v `w d c `w v c 0 v c U vi w 4 U O n SCZZ v E 964 v yyL v _ 0 60S �A �0 �!b - X94 4-0 m 3 ,°-� m o �H59 °°. _ X654 m S 4-fbS - abb�o a dbb�L6 aQO abb�ylf aa3 dbb�oss ao dbb�9os a ° otl�' o�' a ^ SHIM m _ bBS� m .z " 69C� s 6543 = ` ° 3 69�, a `-J £ZS�. `J ° m £Olt "' 4Z� °' N 991 z o OZy HC6 bZ9 _ —Z-9—£t „ -;z z u 7 u u 0 r m O 0 V m 4. Project Traffic The proposed project is the redevelopment of an approximately 7 -acre site. The existing project site is currently developed as a storage space for recreational vehicles and small boats on trailers. The proposed project design includes constructing a mixed -use development including retail, restaurant, office, dry stack storage, residential, and marina land uses. This traffic analysis evaluates the maximum likely quantity of land uses to be developed at the project site. Trip Generation Trips generated by the existing project were determined by collecting traffic volumes over a two day period at the project driveway (see Appendix D). The "other uses" shown in Table D -1 (see Appendix D) include trips from the existing marina, Pearson's Port, and some parking from the adjacent residential uses, which will remain after the proposed project is constructed. Only the RV /boat storage and kayak launch land uses would be displaced by the proposed project. As shown in Table 2, the displaced land uses generate approximately 39 daily vehicle trips, 3 of which occur during the morning peak hour and 8 of which occur during the evening peak hour. The trips generated by the proposed project are determined by multiplying an appropriate trip generation rate by the quantity of land use. Trip generation rates were determined for daily traffic, morning peak hour inbound and outbound traffic, and evening peak hour inbound and outbound traffic for the proposed land uses. By multiplying the traffic generation rates by the land use quantities, the project - generated traffic volumes are determined. Table 2 exhibits the trip generation rates, project peak hour volumes, and project daily traffic volumes. The trip generation rates are derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation. 8th Edition, 2008 and from Linscott, Law, and Greenspan, Dry Stack Boat Storage: Appendix D —Trip Generation Study Data, 2007 (see Appendix D). The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 2,760 daily vehicle trips, 130 of which occur during the morning peak hour and 186 of which occur during the evening peak hour. It should be noted that a 43% pass -by trip reduction was applied to the restaurant land uses based upon the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition, 2004. Diversion of the pass -by trips was accounted for at the intersection of Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway. Because the proposed project would replace the existing storage space, the trip generation of the proposed project is equal to the net new trips between the proposed project and the existing development. The net new trips generated by the proposed development is projected to be approximately 2,721 daily vehicle trips, 127 additional trips of which occur in the morning peak hour and 178 additional trips of which occur during the evening peak hour. 20 T>C14 201 Trip Distribution and Assignment Trip distribution is the determination of the directional orientation of traffic. It is based on the geographical location of employment centers, commercial centers, recreational areas, or residential area concentrations. The TPO requires the trip distribution percentages to be in increments of 5 %. Trip assignment is the determination of which specific route development traffic will use, once the generalized trip distribution is determined. The basic factors affecting route selection are minimum time path and minimum distance path. Figures 9 and 10 contain the directional distributions and assignment of the project trips for the proposed land uses. Proiect - Related Traffic Based on the identified trip generation and distributions, project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes are shown on Figures 11 and 12, respectively. 21 PC4 202 Table 2 Project Trip Generation' I Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008, Land Use Categories 230, 710, 814, 820, 931, and 932. r TSF =Thousand Square Feet; DU =Dwelling Units ] Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation does not provide morning peak hour trip generation rates for the Specialty Retail land use. Therefore, the trip generation rates for Shopping Center (Land Use Category 820) were used to estimate the morning peak hour trips. ° Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trio Generation, does not provide inbaund /outbound splits for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic lone hour between 7:00 AM 9:00 AM) for the Quality Restaurant land use. Therefore, the inbound /outbound splits for the AM peak hour of generator were used. s Source: Lirerott, Law, and Greenspan, Dry Stack Boat Storage: Appendix D -Trip Generation Study Data 2007. 6 Based on trip generation count data for the existing site (see Appendix D). The "other uses" shown in Table D-1 (see Appendix D) include trips from the existing marina, Pearson's Port, and some parking from the adjacent residential uses, which will remain after the proposed project is constructed. 7 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition, 2004. 22 PG4 203 Peak Hour Morning Evening Inbound Outbound I Total Inbound I Outbound I Total Land Use Quantity Units' Daily Trip Generation Rates Specialty Retail' TSF 0.61 0.39 1.00 1.19 1.52 2.71 44.32 Quality Restaurant° TSF 0.66 0.15 0.81 5.02 2.47 7.49 89.95 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant TSF 5.99 5.53 11.52 6.58 4.57 11.15 127.15 Office TSF 1.36 0.19 1.55 0.25 1.24 1.49 11.01 Enclosed Dry Stack Storages Spaces 0.031 0.017 0.048 0.004 0.044 0.048 0.334 Residential Condominium DU 0.07 0.37 0.44 0.35 0.17 0.52 5.81 Displaced Existing Trips Generated - - 2 1 3 3 5 8 39 RV /Boat Storage and Kayak Launcha Proposed Trips Generated Specialty Retail 32.859 TSF 20 13 33 39 50 89 1,456 Quality Restaurant 4.100 TSF 3 1 4 21 10 31 369 - Pass -By (43% Evening Peak Hour)' 0 0 0 -9 -4 -13 -13 High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant 3.500 TSF 21 19 40 23 16 39 445 - Pass -By (43% Evening Peak Hour) 0 0 0 -10 -7 -17 -17 Office 17.075 TSF 23 3 26 4 21 25 188 Enclosed Dry Stack Storage 140 Spaces 4 2 6 1 6 7 47 Residential Condominium 49 DU 3 18 21 17 8 25 285 Subtotal 74 56 130 86 100 186 2,760 Net New Trios Commercial 69 37 106 66 87 153 2,436 Residential 3 18 21 17 8 25 285 Total 72 55 127 83 95 178 2,721 I Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008, Land Use Categories 230, 710, 814, 820, 931, and 932. r TSF =Thousand Square Feet; DU =Dwelling Units ] Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation does not provide morning peak hour trip generation rates for the Specialty Retail land use. Therefore, the trip generation rates for Shopping Center (Land Use Category 820) were used to estimate the morning peak hour trips. ° Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trio Generation, does not provide inbaund /outbound splits for the peak hour of adjacent street traffic lone hour between 7:00 AM 9:00 AM) for the Quality Restaurant land use. Therefore, the inbound /outbound splits for the AM peak hour of generator were used. s Source: Lirerott, Law, and Greenspan, Dry Stack Boat Storage: Appendix D -Trip Generation Study Data 2007. 6 Based on trip generation count data for the existing site (see Appendix D). The "other uses" shown in Table D-1 (see Appendix D) include trips from the existing marina, Pearson's Port, and some parking from the adjacent residential uses, which will remain after the proposed project is constructed. 7 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Handbook, 2nd Edition, 2004. 22 PG4 203 u v. z u u 0 r7 O 0 v N o v o o a '^ S � � Q o � °a O .pC S ap � opaOo aOb w �b o` O mJ Santa Barba« c r 0 o ao 5 0 m N 3 z V° (6 p N0 L o94 w N E Pi E 0 U o ' N o Ol 0 o y L � c 3 � ° — LIo *L � 3 3° 1dq °a 3 3a3m 0 �4d M 3 3 •L S 1b dw �¢ i N o � L o M o O � C � _ 7 a+ � J � F Q � 3 N > O > m v z a E w 0 o F UodmDN \ U O c N n p U vl Is N o L o J z u v. z u u 0 r7 O 0 v N u v. z u u 0 r7 O V N O O � W ri N N W N 4i Q C a N '^ W a o \ °a M V� N Opp 4 a�b �b o` O aJ Santa Barba« c r 0 l0 O p � PO�ddWO 3 ° z V W 94 Pi v � o i o O p as PaOi ++ dAIJQ 3 3 0 LL JdAOa 3 3n3m3 o 3 30 0, 3 Q ae` d� , 3 3 � 'Y 2� hew U `aaw .O L o M � y C � _ 7 a+ � J � F Q N � _U 3 N O > > a` v z a E w 0 o F -d 4 UOtlMaN \ U N V vl N a Q n Z J ° e N 1 L o J z u v. z u u 0 r7 O V N a1 E1 J \O c ai E cO G ao C .E 7 H ri .0 iJ U txo C L O 2 41 CL bD O 2 4- U v O CL 9l .Zp > o! 9l o 5—p a N �v �Q o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 _mv m � �bbso a a ° o —' Zl3 ZZ 0 a1 b b sot a Zl—D o0o Em n o �£ �bb�o a - E'o 0� fil o �bb�o a v3 - fia� D¢ dbb�o ao= o! 0 v �0 ��bsat 4 o� �v ri X ,o o� s ti c N E v 0 6 �bbsa am- ° 06 0 o �0 - ° oa 6 �6 a �bb�a am- ° » °I Y ° r o 8 �b4sa aQ= °I Y ° 8 o �0 �0 o S3 dbbsa a �- o� 3' 06 6 �0 dbb�a a °= ° o�°IYP o� E v 0 V v d v E d c `w v c 0 v U Vl w 4 U O - abb�o a° dbb�o av� abb�D av dbb�e ao dbb�a a u u 0 m O 0 v N rye L1 J Q v c0 G bA c .F H N rl 0 4J ^U, W bA i LL v C L 0 l6 v CL bA c .E a) i W U v 0 a 8Z ° 0 A 3 ' sp O a E 0 bZ �0 8Z ° D °� Em dbbso aa= b 0� �3 4—Zl 4 o b a N � w ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 _m v m � ZI 0 A 3 ' sp O a E 0 �0 �o D °� Em o� b ^- ���s0 4—Zl 4 a E'o o 0� BZ - _ 69� o B6 69 ° dbb�o ao= D bZ�'�gP bZ 0 D os°IYP 0� N d ri X � O o� s ti c 0 4-0 o i 3 �lbbs1 T o am- D o� sA i3 �w o ll �bbso a -- ro 4—S �bb0.�po am- r o ll �b4so aQ= D o o°IYP ll dbbso ap3 13 0 3fl o l l b dbb�o a °= D °�^4IYP o� E v 0 V v v d E v c v v 0 v U vi w 4 U n 61 E b f! - a�bb�o a °- dbb�o aQO a�bb�o aa3 dbb�£l ao_ dbb�o a °' o B z o f o l l N J u u 0 r m 0 1'\ O N 5. Existing (Year 2012) + Project Analysis The existing (Year 2012) + project analysis has been completed for the study area intersections based upon California Environmental Quality Act (CECIA) requirements (this part of the analysis is consistent with CEQA). Intersection Capacity Utilization The City of Newport Beach methodology used to assess the operation of a signalized intersection is known as Intersection Capacity Utilization. To calculate an Intersection Capacity Utilization value the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. An Intersection Capacity Utilization value is usually expressed as a decimal. The decimal represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity. The Levels of Service for existing (Year 2012) + project traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 3. Existing (Year 2012) + project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been calculated and are shown on Figures 13 and 14, respectively. Existing (Year 2012) + project Intersection Capacity Utilization worksheets and the Level of Service description are provided in Appendix C. For existing (Year 2012) + project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours. Significance Criteria The intersection significance criteria for the City of Newport Beach requires an increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours. As shown in Table 3 for the existing (Year 2012) + project analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. 27 PC/4 202 Table 3 Existing (Year 2012) + Project Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels of Service ' ICU -LOS = Intersection Capacity Utilization - Level of service (see Appendix C). L= Lek; T= Through; R= Right; »= Free Right Turn; >= Right Turn Overlap; d = be Facto Right Turn Lane TS = Traffic Signal 28 ?C,4 209 Peak Hour ICU -LOS' Existing (Year 20121 Intersection Approach Lanes° Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Traffic Existing (Year 2012) +Project ICU Increase L T R L T R L T R L T R Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening Intersection Control' Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 1» 0.843 -D 0.720 -C 0.846 -D 0.723 -C +0.003 +0.003 Riverside Avenue INS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 1 0 0.5 0.5 1> 1 1.5 0.5 1 3 1 0.660 -B 0.763 -C 0.667 -B 0.769 -C +0.007 +0.006 Tustin Avenue INS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) TS 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1.5 0.5 0 2.5 0.5 0.625 -B 0.565 -A 0.631 -B 0.571 -A +0.006 +0.006 Irvine Avenue INS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive (EW) IS 1 2 d 1 2 d 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 0.516 -A 0.607 -B 0.520 -A 0.611 -13 +0.004 +0.004 17th Street/Westcliff Drive (EW) TS 2 2 d 2 2 d 2 1.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 0.453 -A 0.702 -C 0.455 -A 0.706 -C +0.002 +0.004 Dover Drive INS) at: Westcliff Drive (EW) TS 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 1» 0 0 0 0.429 -A 0.440 -A 0.435 -A 0.449 -A +0.006 +0.009 16th Street (EW) TS 1 2 d 1 2 d 0.5 0.5 d 1 1 1 0.496 -A 0.495 -A 0.504 -A 0.504 -A +0.008 +0.009 West Coast Highway (EW) TS 1 1.5 0.5 3 1 1 2 2.5 0.5 1 3 1» 0.611 -B 0.671 -B 0.620 -B 0.682 -B +0.009 +0.011 Bayside Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) TS 2.3 0.3 0.3 1 0.5 0.5 1 3 1 1 3.5 0.5 0.641 -B 0.609 -B 0.663 -B 0.696 -B +0.022 +0.087 Jamboree Road INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 1 3 1» 2 3 1» 1.5 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 0.596 -A 0.814 -D 0.599 -A 0.817 -D +0.003 +0.003 Santa Barbara Drive (EW) TS 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 0.484 -A 0.61 0.481 0.612 -B +0.003 +0.004 East Coast Highway (EW) TS 1 1.5 0.5 1 2 1» 3 3.5 0.5 2 4 1 0.562 -A 0.648 -B 0.566 -A 0.653 -B +0.004 +0.005 Santa Cruz Drive INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road EW TS 1 2 0.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 1 0.309 -A I 0.340 -A 0.309 -A 0.341 -A 0.000 +0.001 Santa Rosa Drive INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 1 1 1> 1 1 1 1 2.5 0.5 2 2.5 0.5 0.330 -A 0.465 -A 0.330 -A 0.466 -A 0.000 +0.001 Newport Center Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) ITS 0 0 0 2 0 1>> 2 3 0 0 3 1>> 0.364 -A 0.444 -A 0.366 -A 0.447 -A +O.OD2 +0.003 Avocado Avenue INS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1>> 1 3 d 1 3 1 0.444 -A 0.495 -A 01 0.498 -A +0.002 +0.003 MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (17W) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1» 3 2.5 0.5 1 2 1>> 0.631 -9 0.724 -C 0.633 -B 0.726 -C +0.002 +0.002 San Miguel Drive (EW) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1> 3 1.5 0.5 2 1.5 0.5 0.520 -A 0.472 -A 0.520 -A 0.473 -A 0.000 +0.001 East Coast Highway (EW) TS 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 b> 1 2 3 0 1 0 3 1>> 1 0.666 -13 1 0.636 -B 0.668 -B 0.639 -B +0.002 +0.003 ' ICU -LOS = Intersection Capacity Utilization - Level of service (see Appendix C). L= Lek; T= Through; R= Right; »= Free Right Turn; >= Right Turn Overlap; d = be Facto Right Turn Lane TS = Traffic Signal 28 ?C,4 209 (A W O Cu C a) Y > U O v > O txo CL C: t i M CV 7 r-i c-I H v o � O bA (D U LL ) N b.0 a) N L w O Y (O v CL txo C C cO G oSZI 'o > b .so `- 0� n ~ vz3 3 o lb6l Et� v a `v �o c � � v ti 4 Santa Barbata c Vai O p` 3 _m v c o in 909 s0s� s � Y a0u e 4 t � °a pE a 0 9H£Z § §! `- a1 b b sol a e 6LOl —D ,M„ E m - sz� o bs ZSI o x£41 � b b °-ozjt _ �9Z 4 - .°, (4S1 0 �SZ v s r 4—OZ - ° 6—D S9� 9f61 �Z4 \ s 4-54 _ ZBl3 o !!o £l! v �£4 �BZL dbbs6H ao FJO�i� M N ri X ,0 o� s ti c �n v E v 0 QlQZ Q—Q i 3 �bbso am- ° a o bHS! (S§ �Cbl_ o 0 6Qe 9901 0 �ZZ b b �IZ1 4 m D Z6CS ' C9£! o �b44 HZl M r sH6 aQ= D 69—D Y oS� o w 6ZZI dbbsa ap3 60� --- 69� " 3" —rtoT-- 6001 0 dbb�zf a °- D IBS" 4 y P Zl—D �m Kt E 0 V v d v d c v `w v t= 0 V v U vi w I- 4 U O n Z£Zl o E SSf R 0 0 905 S abb�o a dbb�at I e §¢ d dbb�e9f dZb0�' - 69� N z SN J —Z u z u u 0 r m O `a U r- N r-I N 7 W T i Y U O v G a °A c + -C �� _ N � c-I � O N (D N } to C N X W C 0 U v to O Y a C .E cu W §o£z `- p� .s S9SI 98£Z X41 � 3 o lZ(l a v c ; � w ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 _m v c o in 9LOZ �U _ A i H 4—O6Z _ D 6us�YP HE 90L �BZI �bb4— Z6u��_ 4L3 0 9L 008 �9£l H "On = _ 69l3 0 9fl l(fiZ � �6Z b � X016 4 0 - D - SZ-D - ZOl3 - 0 9942 l£Cf SOS s d�b�91 do= 66� 9Cl3 -- 03 2491 9U �9b �bbs041 4 0 n £Z3 _ £IZ axx � o o� s m +, ti c N v E v 0 l£6l 4-0 0 "3 a �bs0 d m- D 0� `rte 0 9951 ff§ �Zlz 4 9LL o ��bsl6 4 - D Zulu — 1543 — o SZ1I 9ZC �fl dbb4 96a 'sf dm- D 999s m ZSS!—D -- P r Zs OCZ! o X011 _ 3 �bbsiil4 <= D £ers 4I Y P A lo so!—o m 6Cl3 w SSS! dbbso 4p3 D 690 °I Y P HSI LL o dbb�lzz 4 °- E N O V v 4) `w 3 u v `w v c 0 V H v c U z vi w 4 U O In (6GG � E OSb v Sf( v _ p flS �A � 4-0 0 abb�o 4 dbb�L6 4vz abb�zlf 4v dbb�f9s do dbb�90s D 2 S� N - o £bSl z o OZZ Sf9 �Z u v. u x 0 r m O ri v 0 6. TPO Analysis The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) analysis has been performed for the study area intersections. Approved Projects The City of Newport Beach staff provided the list of approved projects within the study area for the TPO analysis. The approved projects consist of development that has been approved but are not fully completed (see Table 4 and Appendix E). The approved project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been calculated and are shown on Figures 15 and 16, respectively. An approved project is one that has been approved pursuant to the TPO, requires no further discretionary approval by the City of Newport Beach, and has received, or is entitled to receive, a building or grading permit for construction of the project or one or more phases of the project. Trips generated by approved projects shall be included subject to the following: ■ All trips generated by each approved project or that portion or phase of the approved project for which no certificate of occupancy has been issued shall be included in any traffic study conducted prior to the expiration date of that approved project. ■ In the event a final certificate of occupancy has been issued for one or more phases of a approved project, all trips shall be included in subsequent traffic studies until completion of the first field counts required by Subsection 3(d)(i) subsequent to the date on which the final certificate of occupancy was issued. Subsequent to completion of the field counts, those trips generated by phases of the approved project that have received a final certificate of occupancy shall no longer be included in subsequent traffic studies. ■ The City Traffic Engineer and Community Development Director shall maintain a list of approved projects and, at least annually, update the list to reflect new approvals pursuant to the TPO as well as completion of all or a portion of each approved project. An approved project shall not be removed from the approved project list until a final certificate of occupancy has been issued for all phases and the field counts required by Subsection 3(d)(i) have been taken subsequent to issuance of the certificate of occupancy. ■ The total trips generated by approved projects shall be reduced by twenty (20 %) to account for the interaction of approved project trips. Regional Growth To account for regional growth on roadways, Year 2017 traffic volumes have been calculated based on a 1 percent annual growth rate over a five -year period. The regional growth rate has been obtained from the City of Newport Beach (see Appendix F). The project is expected to open in Year 2016; therefore the traffic analysis is one year after opening year. 31 PC/+ 212 One - Percent Methodology One - percent of the projected peak hour volumes of each approach of each study area intersection were compared with the peak hour distributed volumes from the proposed project. The TPO one - percent analysis calculation worksheets are shown within Appendix G. If one - percent of the existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects traffic peak hour volumes of each approach is greater than the peak hour project generated approach volumes, no further analysis is required. If project generated peak hour approach volumes are higher than one - percent of the projected peak hour volumes on any approach of an intersection, the intersection would require analysis utilizing the Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been calculated and are shown on Figures 17 and 18, respectively. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been calculated and are shown on Figures 19 and 20, respectively. Comparison of the one - percent of the existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects traffic peak hour approach volumes with the project generated peak hour approach volumes resulted in the following study area intersections exceeding the one - percent threshold and requiring additional analysis (see Table S and Appendix G): Riverside Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Tustin Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Irvine Avenue (NS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive (EW) — Evening Peak Hour 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Dover Drive (NS) at: Westcliff Drive (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour 16th Street (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour West Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Bayside Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) — Morning Peak Hour & Evening Peak Hour Santa Barbara Drive (EW) — Evening Peak Hour East Coast Highway (EW) — Evening Peak Hour 32 PG4 213 Intersection Capacity Utilization The City of Newport Beach methodology used to assess the operation of a signalized intersection is known as Intersection Capacity Utilization. The Intersection Capacity Utilization methodology (see Appendix C) is not the only method to analyze a signalized intersection, but the preferred method per the City of Newport Beach TPO. To calculate an Intersection Capacity Utilization value the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. An Intersection Capacity Utilization value is usually expressed as a decimal. The decimal represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity. The Levels of Service for existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 6. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects Intersection Capacity Utilization worksheets and the Level of Service description are provided in Appendix C. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) The Levels of Service for existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + project traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 6. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + project Intersection Capacity Utilization worksheets and the Level of Service description are provided in Appendix C. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Significance Criteria The intersection significance criteria for the City of Newport Beach requires an increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours. As shown in Table 6 for the TPO analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. 33 PC,4 214 Table 4 Approved Project List Project Name Fashion Island Expansion Temple Bat Yahm Expansion Ciosa - Irvine Project Newport Dunes Hoag Hospital Phase III St. Mark Presbyterian Church OLQA Church Expansion 2300 Newport Boulevard Newport Executive Court Hoag Health Center North Newport Center Santa Barbara Condo (Marriott) Newport Beach City Hall 328 Old Newport Medical Office Coastline Community College Bayview Medical Office Mariner's Point 4221 Dolphin Striker 34 PCz- 215 Table 5 TPO Analysis One - Percent Threshold ' Project traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1% of projected peak hour traffic. Imsreabuon capacity utilization analysis is required. 35 PG4 210 Peak Approach Direction' Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Intersection Hour Newport Boulevard SB Ramp INS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No No Riverside Avenue INS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) AM No No No YES PM No No YES YES Tustin Avenue INS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) AM No No YES YES PM No No YES YES Irvine Avenue (NS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No YES 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) AM No No No YES PM No No No YES Dover Drive INS) at: Westcliff Drive (EW) AM YES YES YES - PM YES YES YES - 16th Street (EW) AM YES YES YES No PM YES YES YES No West Coast Highway (EW) AM No YES No YES PM No YES YES YES Bayside Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) AM YES YES YES YES PM YES YES YES No Jamboree Road INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) AM No No No YES PM YES No No No Santa Barbara Drive (EW) AM No No No No PM YES YES No No East Coast Highway (EW) AM No No No No PM No YES YES No Santa Cruz Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No No Santa Rosa Drive INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) AM No No No No PM No I No No No Newport Center Drive INS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No No Avocado Avenue INS) at: East Coast Highway (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No No MacArthur Boulevard INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No No San Miguel Drive (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No No East Coast Highway (EW) AM No No No No PM No No No No ' Project traffic is estimated to be equal to or greater than 1% of projected peak hour traffic. Imsreabuon capacity utilization analysis is required. 35 PG4 210 Table 6 TPO Analysis Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels of Service IN-LOS= Intersection Capacity Utilization -level of service (see Appendix L). L =left; T= Through; R - Right;» =Free Right Turnp= Right Turn Overlap; d =De Faro RightTurn Lane. 3 TS -Traffic Signal 36 PC/+ 217 Peak Hour ICU -LOS' Existing + Growth Existing + Growth (Year 2017) + Intersection Approach Lanes' (Year 2017) + Approved Projects Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Traffic Approved Projects +Project ICU Increase L T R L T R L T R L T R Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening Intersection Control' Newport Boulevard SB Ramp INS) at: West Coast Highway(EW) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 1» 0.92 -E 0.80 -C 0.92 -E 0.80 -C 0.00 0.00 Riverside Avenue INS) at West Coast Highway(EW) TS 0 1 0 0.5 0.5 1> 1 1.5 0.5 1 3 1 0.73 -C 0.82 -D 0.74 -C 0:83 -D +0.01 +0.01 Tustin Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway(EW) TS 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1.5 0.5 0 2.5 0.5 0]0 -B 0.62 -B 0 .70 -9 0.63-8 0.00 +0.01 Irvine Avenue (NS) at: 19th Street/Dover Drive (EW) TS 1 2 d 1 2 d 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 0.54 -A 0.63 43 0.54 -A 0.64 -B 0.00 +0.01 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) TS 2 2 d 2 2 d 2 1.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 0.47 -A 0.73 -C 0.47 -A DJ4-C 0.00 +0.01 Dover Drive (NS) at: Westcliff Drive(EW) TS 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 1» 0 0 0 0.43 -A 0.44 -A 0.44 -A 0.45 -A +0.01 +0.01 16th Street(EW) TS 1 2 d 1 2 d 0.5 0.5 d 1 1 1 0.50 -A 0.50 -A 0.51 -A 0.51 -A +0.01 +0.01 West Coast Highway(EW) TS 1 1.5 0.5 3 1 1 2 2.5 0.5 1 3 1» 0.66 -B 0.74 -C 0.67 -B 0.75 -C +0.01 +0.01 Bayside Drive INS) at: East Coast Highway EW ) TS 1 2.3 0.3 0.3 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 3 1 1 3.5 0.5 0.71 -C 0.70 -B 0.72 -C 0.78 -C +0.01 +0.08 Jamboree Road INS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road(EW) TS 1 3 1» 2 3 1>> 1.5 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 0.65 -B 0.94 -E 0.66 -3 0.94 -E +0.01 0.00 Santa Barbara Drive(EW) TS 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 0.53 -A 0.66 -B 0.53 -A 0.66-8 0.00 0.00 East Coast Highway EW ) TS 1 1.5 0.5 1 2 1>> 3 3.5 0.5 2 4 1 0.61 -8 0.72,C 0.61 -B 0J3 -C 0.00 +0.01 Santa Cruz Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 2 0.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 0.32 -A 0.35 -A 0.32 -A 0.36 -A 0.00 +0.01 Santa Rosa Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road JEW) TS 1 1 1> 1 1 1 1 2.5 0.5 2 2.5 0.5 0.38 -A 0.50 -A 0.38 -A 0.50 -A 0.00 0.00 Newport Center Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway EW ) TS 1 0 0 0 2 0 1>> 2 3 0 0 3 1>> 0.40 -A 0.49 -A 0.40 -A 0.49 -A 0.00 0.00 Avocado Avenue (NS) at: East Coast Highway EW ) TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1>> 1 3 d 1 3 1 0.50 -A 0.52 -A 0.50 -A 0.53 -A 0.00 +0.01 MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road(EW) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1>> 3 2.5 0.5 1 2 1>> 0.67 -3 0.78 -C 0.67 -B 0.78 -C 0.00 0.00 San Miguel Drive(EW) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1> 3 1.5 0.5 2 1.5 0.5 0.58 -A 0.50 -A 0.58 -A 0.50 -A 0.00 0.00 East Coast Highway(EW) TS 0 0 0 1 2 0 1>> 2 3 0 0 3 1S> 0.71 -C 0.67 -B 0.71 -C 0.68 -B 0.00 +0.01 IN-LOS= Intersection Capacity Utilization -level of service (see Appendix L). L =left; T= Through; R - Right;» =Free Right Turnp= Right Turn Overlap; d =De Faro RightTurn Lane. 3 TS -Traffic Signal 36 PC/+ 217 u U L.n 0 I L CL v -0 � v a0 > LL 0 Q Q all to W S N E N 0 4q C .E 7 c 0 +1 U Ln N c L 0 06 C) d Wn C b6 II 2to E91 albbso a a- ° 0- 0 0� Lf U� 3` £fl �bbq�po a 20I� eoo Em d2-RZ1 og �7 °'�__ o II b � ESL s0 4¢, R2IS D spa v a C j � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 m v c o in IS II 2to E91 0 Lf f! �bbq�po a 20I� eoo Em 13 og �7 °'�__ o II b � ESL s0 4¢, R2IS D spa -Y � E° IN 0 - 03 ama 0 0 _ i 49 o �l Zb - 0-D o aQ= HIS °I Y P o Of! 96 w `zo o ZZ �o �3 dbb�0 ao= ° 61���P 0 a,o a 03 63 fill o �l o! o �LZ a dbbs6l �p 's a °= 03 QZ �v ri X ,o o� s ti c �n v E v 0 Ib E91 0 f! ulz 6 - ama _ i o Zb �b4so aQ= °I Y P � 0l3 w 0 49 ZZ MVLoz o! o �LZ a dbbs6l �p 's a °= o b E N O V v d `w 3 U c v `w v 0 H v U 7 vi w 4 U O n B6 E £ 9 0 Z! Ui 20 .o �0 o `=0 albb�o a °- dbb�i av� albb�i av� dbb�i ao dbb�ea a °'_ G ° 9ZS° YP p� N 0� �sf� o0 os oZ _ L J -F z u v. F i u i O m O ri v m u U N l0 O d N � 7 � O LL 0 Q Q all W O E O aO C C O u U 41 V) i c 7 O Y d nO C C) W a `v c � � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 m � c o in Sfl � a�bbsl 4 a BC3 9Sl OZ E-� su �q II 4-101 0 \ 911- 03 CZl o �0 4�bb�s 4 v= ° ILA o—n st3 9[l D fly" ° o� 913 0 3 091 s o �Z a�bbsl 4 - 01� o H 03 �v �x m s ti c �n v E v 0 a �o 4-0 0 "3 �o 4°� `� r° w o Z§ ZZ �0 4�bbse 4 -- 9 o �9 �b�z 4 r o B£3 � SZ o d�b4so dQ= 693 o w o£ bB `�0 dbbso 4p3 443 M 3 b6S bf o dbb0C I °¢ E N O V v v m v c v `w v t= 0 v U 7 vi w 4 U O n Z9 E f U _ 0 SC �A no - a�bb�s 4 °- dbb�! 4v� albb�o 4v� dbb�f do dbb�ll 4 °'_ G z�^ 0� oo a Z� N 6!3 0 °3 03 43 m 03 03 _ - J z u 7 u u 0 r m O v m RD� 961 �p o 34—p � r dbbss 4a= D Z�� Y�° a� 03 - `3 Zbl a `v c � � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 m � c o in Sfl � a�bbsl 4 a BC3 9Sl OZ E-� su �q II 4-101 0 \ 911- 03 CZl o �0 4�bb�s 4 v= ° ILA o—n st3 9[l D fly" ° o� 913 0 3 091 s o �Z a�bbsl 4 - 01� o H 03 �v �x m s ti c �n v E v 0 a �o 4-0 0 "3 �o 4°� `� r° w o Z§ ZZ �0 4�bbse 4 -- 9 o �9 �b�z 4 r o B£3 � SZ o d�b4so dQ= 693 o w o£ bB `�0 dbbso 4p3 443 M 3 b6S bf o dbb0C I °¢ E N O V v v m v c v `w v t= 0 v U 7 vi w 4 U O n Z9 E f U _ 0 SC �A no - a�bb�s 4 °- dbb�! 4v� albb�o 4v� dbb�f do dbb�ll 4 °'_ G z�^ 0� oo a Z� N 6!3 0 °3 03 43 m 03 03 _ - J z u 7 u u 0 r m O v m N 4-+ U 41 O a O s_ Q Q Q 4J � i C4 � N txo L LL M v i O to C N X W (A W O cu C a) O bA i 7 C O U N O c L 7 O Y ca N CL txo C .E O 68f! 'zo ' a�bbso a a- D 8Z�' 0� V l3 olz 61£I dbbs£ aa= D Ls� Y O V f 2143 ZOSZ v a v c � � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata c Vai O p` 3 m m c o in S0Z1 0 �6H ' d b b sLl 4 a N 04L3 619Z l8! o �90f a �bb° a—SZa1 �u a d M ezal� � E m m l£3 0 09 661 b slz 4 ¢, D 9ZBS SZ81-D ZB3 m m o S6f 6991 0 b � �p48f 4 1, lo D bL� S-D _ 4S3 e _ 0 610f 9602 �Sb dbb�4z ao= D fZ6�' 613 ° 0 3 81ZZ OZI _ ebb b � sH9 d D 14� p 606 N OS3 H 0 19Z E �0 4-0 0 ° - w 0 6991 OL4 �bSl �b�l9ll e bslfl am- b 9ZL3 N m r 0 09 ILOI � bZ I I�I �LUI `- bW�6Z! 4 1963 609 694! o �b4s261Q= D 69-D 1 T 093 w o L8fl sofl dbbso ap3 D O b� 0 3 683 s9zz E61�1 �- o f8S �v ri X o o� s ti c �n v E v 0 E N O V v d `w d c v `w v 0 0 V N v U z vi w 4 U O n lffl � E 9SL v g64 v _ 0 d fif �K �o 0 0 62Z b0b 8910 s � 3 � b °_ o - N Z3 062 o 669 ON L]-i6� �L N A �;zZ u v. i u u 0 r m O 0 v m N 4- U 41 0 a N 0 i Q Q Q 0 N p N L.L � v t 0 W E v 0 W C .E i 7 C 0 U N L v 7 0 to _�e 59Z v .N X - D =ss C w _ �°YP 0 C BZ�, c lJod, 19LI LLZ£9Z �21 0 4—f "' � r dbbe �bl4a= o sz61 � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 _mv m � 40£Z o �£9 ° 4-162 e _ a b sZb 4 lhb� �+ E `✓ LL6, ° Mz 9ZL �Sb! �b�sHl 4 D OHIO P E m bB� o l8 ZI6 °� X941 CIS IZE o �bbsfa-9 3 lb 4 - D 91--D P P 9� 59p Z19C u, r ^.-0s m \ s o �Zf d � bs9l 4'0— 66� N L ZSI� 6 >81 IZI o (b �bbsLE! 4 - D 9Z8—a d Ear �v ri X ,o o� s m +, ti c N E v 0 (b=Z a �bs0 4 m- D Y� 0 9691 SSb �Z saol 4 m 909 o SZZI 9ZC �OZ �bb�elslN__ D OOLS cc ' m 6991— £° 4sL—OfaC I 9HZS a u I P `4V Q= 3 RUZ OLK S=CI o dbbso 4p3 D Obl ° Y P m 6C9� = 3 OZCI L9C o _ �£Cb dbb�66Z 4 69� — °¢ „ E v 0 V v v `w E v c v `w v c 0 V v c U z vi w I- 4 U O bSbZ E 644 v f£L v _ 0 48S �A �Z69 �ZHb \ - abb�o abb�eaf 4v dbb�fss do dbb�Lls 4 e 0£1D 999 " o ol� - 0—a ° _ M—a S� 8 � N IOS� ° ZL� ESS� o SOLI z o ON b96 -;z z v. u u 0 r m O v °c Y U 41 O a U O L a O Q MUM ranks v + txo LL Q N f6 t O i W c N X W (A W _7 O cu C N O L 7 c O U N N C L 7 O Y (O v CL ao .E O 5061 'o > `- a� bZ3 o OCl S££l o b � D LHS�p� E z1ro3 v a `v � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata c Vai 00 3 m v m � V �6B i m m 0 1492 !9! o �90f d� b b mil! 4 d 0621 —D ,m„ E m 0 09 £OZ o �§Sl 4�bM a-1sZl b�La 4 a- D 9695 - L£8l —D ZB3 8891 0 _ �9Z \ 3 0 4—OZ a 46 6—D M 223 — — 9Z1Z D Ltt — 1613 0 3 o fif E-� �v ri X ,o o� s ti c N E v 0 ISIZ 4—Q i 3 4�bb�Q dm- D a 8L9! aL6 o X651 - � - D 0 0f£ SLO1 0 �bZ r "N = 4� b b �6Z1 d m D ££Bs <t —'o 1963 � LL §1 0 �9£l 3 4�b4m 4-821 M r s96 dQ= D 3 T lo 69—D 0 - 1111 dbbsa 4p3 D bow °I Y P 6B3 — 3 8! 6101 0 dbb�ls 4 °= D zl3 d y P Zl—D m E v 0 V v v v E v c v `w v t= 0 V v c U vi w I- 4 U O lbfl o E HSf f0S _ 0 � 4-0 0 a�bb�0 4 °- dbb�fb dv� a�bb�69Z dv� dbb�fi9f do dbb�LL 4 °= L 01 d p 9913 8 3 613 3 0 106° L J v. u u 0 r m 0 O a Y U 41 O a + U O L a ^O^ CL r of 93 M + 7 W Q N i f6 N t O L W c N X W 7 O i E v O 5 bjO L 7 H C O U N i v 7 O Y a 00 N W Z b �s0 a a= `- D 0s3 m SBL! o99Z 4—C = dbb�bl 4a 0 6461 a v � w ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai 00 3 m j m � F z £9 1sa m = 6L9z 9zL � b � 4—[621 X91 4 D aHl� o 12 9l6 o �lSl �69 a a ZCl� sbzf �6Z � b b a—cib 4 v - SZ—D e 0 669 lC9C as o �Z2 a dbb�sl 40= D LC83' 66� N £L9l lZl �(b e D o—a 6 e f §B� d; £Z� ` O N � O o� s m +, ti c N E v 0 £90z 4-0 ° "3 a �bs0 d m- Y� 3 - o COL{ 994 �fzz e s Z0! 4 m 9os� szz{ �oz D OOLS c m 4991 —D % r o ZV ` F6D I T ry w 9!C! �0 ° S3 dbbso 4 �- D ou3��YN m 099 "0 3 o l2Cl 1C[ o a,g dbb�ssz a °= D fL3'�y P E v 0 V v v `w E v c v `w v c 0 V N N C U z vi w I- 4 U O n £CbZ 94C v _ 0 �0 �£b �9§ X969 � � � `V � � �ZHb - a�bb�o a- dbb�£a! 4 v� a�bb�ez2 4 v� dbb�ss9 4o dbb�us 4 °- Z D 6913' °I ° 3 D 0 3` N o vu ' o a° o use L J �;zz u v. u u 0 r m O l� v a 7. CEQA Analysis The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis (this part of the analysis is consistent with CEQA) included analysis of the study area intersections. Cumulative Proiects The City of Newport Beach staff provided the list of cumulative projects within the study area for the CEQA analysis. Typically, the cumulative projects are known, but not approved project developments that are reasonably expected to be completed or nearly completed at the same time as the proposed project. The cumulative projects utilized were ones that added traffic to the study area intersections. The cumulative project list is shown in Table 7 and the cumulative project traffic generation is included in Appendix H. Appendix H contains the directional distributions of the cumulative project traffic. The cumulative project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been calculated and are shown on Figures 21 and 22, respectively. The CEQA traffic volumes were obtained by adding the cumulative projects traffic volumes to the TPO traffic volumes. Intersection Capacity Utilization Consistent with the City of Newport Beach approved methodology, the technique used to assess the operation of a signalized intersection is known as Intersection Capacity Utilization. To calculate an Intersection Capacity Utilization value the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. An Intersection Capacity Utilization value is usually expressed as a decimal. The decimal represents that portion of the hour required to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate all intersection traffic if all approaches operate at capacity. The Levels of Service for existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 8. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been calculated and are shown on Figures 23 and 24, respectively. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects Intersection Capacity Utilization worksheets and the Level of Service description are provided in Appendix C. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that are projected to operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) 43 PC4 224 Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) The Levels of Service for existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects + project traffic conditions have been calculated and are shown in Table 8. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects + project morning and evening peak hour intersection turning movement volumes have been calculated and are shown on Figures 25 and 26, respectively. Existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects + project Intersection Capacity Utilization worksheets and the Level of Service description are provided in Appendix C. For existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects + project traffic conditions, the study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service D or better during the morning /evening peak hours, except for the following study area intersections that are projected to operate at Level of Service E during the peak hours: Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) (Morning Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Jamboree Road (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) (Evening Peak Hour, Level of Service E) Significance Criteria The intersection significance criteria for the City of Newport Beach requires an increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours. As shown in Table 8 for the CEQA analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. 44 PC4 225 Table 7 Cumulative Project List Project Name Balboa Marina Expansion Mariner's Medical Arts Banning Ranch Sunset Ridge Park Marina Park Koll - Conexant Newport Coast - TAZ 1 Newport Coast - TAZ 2 Newport Coast -TAZ 3 Newport Coast -TAZ 4 45 PC4 22r� Table 8 CEQA Analysis Intersection Capacity Utilization and Levels of Service ' ICU -LOS= Interaction Capacity UpT ation- Level of Service Izee Appendix 01. L =Left T= Through; R= Right» =Free Right TUrn;>= Plan Turn Overlap, d= De Facto Plght Turn Lane TS= Traffic5ignal InRrse¢lan Is located on the City boundary line of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. 46 PC-4 227 Peak Hour ICU -LOS' Existing + Growth Existing + Growth (Year 2017) + (Year 2017) + Approved Projects+ Intersection Approach Lanes° Approved Projects+ Cumulative Projects Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Traffic Cumulative Projects +Project ICU Increase L T R L T R L T R L T R Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening Intersection Control' Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (N5) at: West Coast Highway EW ) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 1» 0.952 -E 0.866 -D 0.955 -E 0.869 -D +0.003 +0.003 Riverside Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway EW ) TS 0 1 0 0.5 0.5 1> 1 1.5 0.5 1 3 1 0.760 -C 0.880 -D 0.767 -C 0.886 -D +0.007 +0.006 Tustin Avenue INS) at: West Coast Highway EW ) TS 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1.5 0.5 0 2.5 0.5 0.724 -C 0.658 -B 0.731 -C 0.664 -B +0.007 +0.006 Irvine Avenue INS) at: 19th Street /Dover Drive(EW) TS 1 2 d 1 2 d 1 0.5 0.5 1 1 1 0.537 -A 0.637 -B 0.541 -A 0.640 -B +0.004 +0.003 17th Street /Westcliff Drive (EW) TS 2 2 d 2 2 d 2 1.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 0.494 -A 0.776 -C 0.496 -A 0.780 -C +0.002 +0.004 Dover Drive (NS) at: Westcliff Drive(EW) TS 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 1» 0 0 0 0.450 -A 0.464 -A 0.457 -A 0.473 -A +0.007 +0.009 16th Street(EW) TS 1 2 d 1 2 d 0.5 0.5 d 1 1 1 0.510 -A 0.524 -A 0.518 -A 0.533 -A +0.008 +0.009 West Coast Highway EW ) TS 1 1.5 0.5 3 1 1 2 2.5 0.5 1 3 1» 0.683 -B 0.790 -C 0.692 -B 0.801 -D +0.009 +0.011 Bayside Drive (NS) at: East Coast Highway EW ) TS 2.3 0.3 0.3 1 0.5 0.5 1 3 1 1 3.5 0.5 0.734 -C 0.734 -C 0.749 -C 0.815 -D +0.015 +0.081 Jamboree Road INS) at San Joaquin Hills Road(EW) TS 1 3 1>> 2 3 1>> 1.5 1.5 1 1.5 1.5 1 0.680 -B 0.961 -E 0.683 -B 0.964 -E +0.003 +0.003 Santa Barbara Drive (EW) TS 1 3 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1 0.558 -A 0.677 -B 0.561 -A 0.681 -13 +0.003 +0.004 East Coast Highway EW ) TS 1 1.5 0.5 1 1 2 1>> 3 3.5 0.5 1 2 4 1 0.661 -B 0.828 -D 0.665 -B 0.833 -D +0.004 +0.005 Santa Cruz Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 2 0.5 0.5 1 1.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 1 2.5 0.5 0.321 -A 0.355 -A 0.322 -A 0.356 -A +0.001 +0.001 Santa Rosa Drive (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road (EW) TS 1 1 1> 1 1 1 1 2.5 0.5 2 2.5 0.5 0.382 -A 0.502 -A 0.382 -A 0.503 -A 1 0.000 +0.001 Newport Center Drive INS) at: East Coast Highway EW ) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1>> 2 3 0 0 3 1>> 0.417 -A 0.530 -A 0.419 -A 0.533 -A +0.002 +0.003 Avocado Avenue (N5) at: East Coast Highway EW ) TS 1 1 1 1.5 0.5 1>> 1 1 3 d 1 3 1 0.564 -A 0.592 -A 0.566 -A 0.594 -A +0.002 +0.002 MacArthur Boulevard (NS) at: San Joaquin Hills Road(EW) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1>> 3 2.5 0.5 1 2 1>> 0.686 -B 0397 -C 0.688 -9 0.799 -C +0.002 +0.002 San Miguel DriveLW) TS 2 3 1 2 3 1> 3 1.5 0.5 2 1.5 0.5 0.594 -A 0.534 -A 0.594 -A 0.535 -A 0.000 +0.001 East Coast Highway(EW) TS 0 0 0 2 0 1>> 2 3 0 0 3 1>> I 0.793 -C 0.751 -C 0.795 -C 0.753 -C +0.002 +0.002 ' ICU -LOS= Interaction Capacity UpT ation- Level of Service Izee Appendix 01. L =Left T= Through; R= Right» =Free Right TUrn;>= Plan Turn Overlap, d= De Facto Plght Turn Lane TS= Traffic5ignal InRrse¢lan Is located on the City boundary line of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach. 46 PC-4 227 U v r I O N d v v bA cu LL 3 C C 7 U to W O N N cO G bA C 7 H c O V N N C >r O cu N a bA .E O i 6S1 M�s b so =V D ps°�YP a 6B gsoc A 6SI £9� o0o Em 03 dbbso aa= �a E'o 0 0 l v a v � w ti 4 o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 _mv m � �v ;o o� s ti c 0 b �p o�> _ p 3 4- �1bbs0 am- D 6V� o _m <„ -b6 0 w sLf 4 m D p= °I Y I° r � B£� o 0� � I l ll �p �£c r �bb0.�po ,pa m D Os _ B£—D t r ° f bZf � 0� �b4asgo D o m o b6 bZf dbbso ap3 D 0�ITr OZ o m 3 fl b6 ll 1 0 a D Os�� P o—D o00 05 0 E v 0 V v v `w E 3 c u c v v v c 0 v U V1 4 U n fLl E 0 9L 4 o o- a�bb�o a °- dbb�o av� a�bb�p av� dbb�bs ao dbb�o a ° -_ G D £s D Zs " o D 9�' 3 D 0�' o D 0�" Oho � g�000 - Zoo 'z" boo �, °3 O�000 N u u u 0 r m 0 v a M�s a gsoc A £9� o0o Em 03 op Z �a E'o 03 op F-000� o £Il ZIZ ° =p o dbb�a ao= D L00D 0 h m o3 Z3 68 0 o �0 N ASS s£ a o D 03'��ID sZ� o °� 03 Z �v ;o o� s ti c 0 b �p o�> _ p 3 4- �1bbs0 am- D 6V� o _m <„ -b6 0 w sLf 4 m D p= °I Y I° r � B£� o 0� � I l ll �p �£c r �bb0.�po ,pa m D Os _ B£—D t r ° f bZf � 0� �b4asgo D o m o b6 bZf dbbso ap3 D 0�ITr OZ o m 3 fl b6 ll 1 0 a D Os�� P o—D o00 05 0 E v 0 V v v `w E 3 c u c v v v c 0 v U V1 4 U n fLl E 0 9L 4 o o- a�bb�o a °- dbb�o av� a�bb�p av� dbb�bs ao dbb�o a ° -_ G D £s D Zs " o D 9�' 3 D 0�' o D 0�" Oho � g�000 - Zoo 'z" boo �, °3 O�000 N u u u 0 r m 0 v a U v N O N d v v • >_ (5 LL C C 7 U W 1 O E cO G C .E c O u U a) V) c 7 O 2 Y d l]Q C N W £s1 'zo ' 4-0 a 3 b so 4 a 0� £lZ 691 �0 4 �3 r dbbso 0 4a= a� 0 8 a `v �v �Q o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 m j m � 40Z a�bbsol a A3 6� u E� oz3 91Z 0 E-O s o �b 4 Sol 0 03 0 161 o �Bl d bb�D 4 v= lo o� ac £lZ ° Z6— 4 q P £lZ 0 o �0 09 a ° os°YP £ate = =m 0� 6LZ 4-0 0 "3 41bb�o am- ° Y� 9� o _RN 9 o 2�f ZL� u 4-65 n d�bb�o dm- ° Z L—° r o 03 �� 40Z o d�b4so dQ= ° o�°IYP lo f rooa =o \ dbbso 4p3 ° os°IYP OZ " 3fl BZL u �6 dbb�o a °= ° o3'4IYP - 0—° oao 0� N N O o� s ti c N E v 0 E v 0 V v c v m E v c `w v c 0 v U 7 vi w 4 U O n L6l E 6 6£! �—o 4-0 0- abb�o 4° dbb�o 4v� abb�a 4v dbb�Zb 4o dbb�o 4 °' G Ili _ 3 0� N s� �3 O� o� e o� o� ' o L11 L _ — J z u z u u 0 m O P v a N u U O W cu E > (D > C� � C 7 C CU U + N aN+ O U > Q) G M L M 7 N > H v O bA Q U LL a + r O >- Y (O t v �a O h0 L E + O bA C X W BbSI �0 ' �o b Aso a a= `- V 0� ° � bZ3 3 B£ZZ BLK dbbsc aa= D 6S� Y � �9 v a v c � � v ti 4 o` Santa Barbata c Vai O p` 3 m j � a c in 6ZSl d b bs(l 4 a- D ((9Z !e! o �90f �bb�u a l£3 0 09 IN � 4—ZLfI u' s(Z a a - o°. 9991—D 83 SHHI o �8Z v s - _ S—D NK 3 BOfZ �Sb D Obb- q (OfZ Ni Q BLSZ o ^I�_I 4t0 ° i3 ME b b s0 d m- D 1690 a Z9Z3 o f9N fLb �SSI a—roszl = - �bbsesl a — D o lbf ZBOI o �bZ �4 OLf! = b 16ZI 4 m S68[—D 1963 f6Ll o �m 4-8ZI ° r b4saes aQ= D fi9—D 093 w 0 1841 6Z9I so o S s dbb a - D 693 3 o f0fZ 9ZOI o �sol dbbsls a °= D l93'�y P Zl—D M N O o� s ti c �n v E v 0 E N O V v v `w 3 u t= v `w v c 0 v U Vl w I- 4 U O 60SI � E 9Sf � ZLS v _ 0 l04 �A �0 �£l - �6£ �0 �Sl 4—O ° m 3 ^'r_, "S d-9!b - abb�o a dbb�f§ av� abb�s9z av dbb�ub ao dbb�LL a °- Z fbl�' o�' - 0� Zbl3 N o OS 3 C §Z £BS L _ — J z u v. u u 0 r m O V a N u U 41 h O a) a E >o C5 C C v U � + O L U W O -E c 7 d c 7 O .0 W i �+ L.L U Q Q L + 4� n � O =3 N O L Y O a WL � W + .c tw c c N > + W In X w OILZ ' 0 i So ' os � o - 3` §L61 96LZ v dbbs §! 4a D tzL� Y P L6t� a v c � � w ti 4 o` /or Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 m m � a c in BTV Z9HZ 9ZL �Obbl = b del 4 tB� o !H F (L6 6S v X051 �6SSl al b � a ° 9HSS 0981 -D LIB £tl EL9-� 4 o £S6Z SZ9f v t;zg;6� 0 st6 !Z! v �Ct `� a-l901 0 �bbsat! a - ° 606 a — o 16Z 9Z£Z v 4-0 0' "3 a16b�o a m- D Z §101 Y Stf� tz o tZOZ 196 v �HZZ "a a b stZl 4 sfzl� 90s� o Z9Zl 6£C v �OZ �bba— ccsl =_= D OOLS a ' g ISSI o ab4sZll4Q= D 9BZS 4I Y P A lo fi0!-D HOZ� — w 6 6061 v dbbso 4 - D o Ds HtOZ HLL v �Z9§ o dbb�66Z a °¢ D £LS�yP - 69� am o o� s m +, ti c N v E v 0 E N O V v d `w 3 u v `w v 0 v U z vi w 4 U O n lS9Z v E fS§ v 0 6BS �A �0 �f§ - L-0 ems °mo �SOL m?o �m^�584 °'mss �9SS Nom_ or��tl ab6�0 a all 201 4QO abb�Of£ I§ dbb�S6s 4o dbb�us 4 °= °I Y P - 0� o a o SSZl� m - t19� .z " S9f� �, m 3" S� _ N LOSS ° 3 ZC3 a o - £SS�v �'^�° - fOl� M tZ3 r I z o OZZ IBOI VU _ „ z u 7 u u 0 r m O V 0 Y U v O a + ^N, L WC U C N 7 0 a 4J C > N }, C ro cu Z) > U tw + V) Y L Ln U N •� H 4J 0 C a- o tw - U LL > O 0— ++ Q � Q L + O r-I Y N � a � en o + oq n H X w 4951 v 'za ° > �0 a 3 `- 0� c, ~ bZ3 3 0 09 4641 v v a v c � � w ti 4 o` Santa Barbata c Vai O p` 3 m; � a c in (£SI v ° �6 A i _ "4£ �bbsu a a =' 09L3 m o fi69Z !9! ° �6K[ 3 0 09 §oz �bb�LZ a a- D 969s o - o §681 —D ZH3 MR o Fez II m 4—OZ s69£ 0 0- 6—D M tH3 (£LZ v �Z4 s 4-56 _ D §§§� 613 0 3 �f oZl v 156 r _ OS3 �v ;o o� s ti c � v E v 0 F z — w o I((I 4L§ v X991 - a Z69 77 K 9901 v � pz b b �6zl 4 m Mel o m 4–HZl M r �b4s96 aQ= D 69–D 1 T 093 o w (t9! v `moo dbbso ap3 6B3 3 !f 6201 v dbb�s a °¢ D zl3 P Zl–D m E v 0 V v v m E d c `w v 0 .t5 v c U Vl F- 4 U O Z1S1 v E HSf v B(S v _ 0 604 v �A �0 �£I �6£ 4-0 ° m 3 o �., 4-4ZH m iz o, 4–filb abb�o a dbb�£b a �62z a ao dbbIL a D LLrosI q� - 9 9613 9 q D D B61� 0� ° HHL- e - o Z96� .z " m °' 99t3 ° 3 613 _ Pi 064 3 0 066 L J —z V u u 0 r m O U r- Y U v O a + ^n Ln W UC C N -3 O O a > > E 7C � C O Z5 5 U + c N t0 U i N - 0) O a O M -0 W U a) (U O Q v Q Q � + O rl = O Y N CU a) a c O C o N > + W c n H X W 9fLZ v a�bbsa a 9�v ~ 3 9661 §Z9Z v o 4—f r dbbs §l as D 1Z1� £ LS16 a v �v �Q o` Santa Barbata Vai O p` 3 _mv m � OZ Z v §1013 0 6SSZ 9s 4 D 091��`�'P m bay � l8 ZZ6 v �bb�6s a D 9HSS `° 9K v �bb�ieb a v= D Lzl� P loo£ §89£ v X95 � 3 dbb�Z£ �9l ao= D H963' P CSl3 �� 03 9HOZ E9M� sZZ �v ;o o� s m +, ti c N E 0 Zf£Z v �1bbs6 am- D Y� o SfOZ l96 v �HZZ 0�9L8 r - o-�bbs §Zl a m- otzI o Z9Zl f §C v �OZ �zssl D OOCS ' 9fLl —D % q P `r o � ZZ4� a •' � 4—fLszu aQ= r c `L6lI � 3 Y s° - - P A — w 6261 W HL v �ZHb o dbbs6sz a °- - ll� E v 0 V v v `w E 3 U c `w v 0 V v U vi w 4 U to 6992 v E CSb v S98 v _ 0 6fiS v �A 4-0 m 3 e W o �60L m ° _o o_ �SB6 S 4—S9S abb�a a dbb�£al av� abb�0cf av dbb�909 ao dbb�LIS a D 9893' P D 6LI3 0� 2 6 ZK o N 6261 z o OZZ 6901 o bIL „ -Z� u v. u u 0 r m O r� r, 8. Delay Analysis Discussed below is the delay methodology required by the California Department of Transportation. The delay and Level of Service summary for the study area intersections are shown in Table 9. Delay Methodology The technique used to assess the capacity needs of an intersection is known as the Intersection Delay Method (see Appendix 1) based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual — Transportation Research Board Special Report 209. Level of Service definitions are included in Appendix 1. To calculate delay, the volume of traffic using the intersection is compared with the capacity of the intersection. Delay Calculations The study area intersections currently operate at Level of Service C or better during the peak hours for existing traffic conditions (see Appendix 1). The study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service C or better during the peak hours for existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects traffic conditions (see Appendix 1). The study area intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service C or better during the peak hours for existing + growth (Year 2017) + approved projects + cumulative projects + project traffic conditions (see Appendix 1). Based upon the delay methodology required by the California Department of Transportation, the delay and Level of Service summary for the study area intersections are shown in Table 9. As previously noted, the project is not projected to have a significant impact at the study area intersections. 53 PC4 234 Table 9 Intersection Delay and Level of Service Summary 54 PC4 235 Peak Hour Delay (Seconds) - Level of Service Existing + Growth Existing + Growth (Year 2017) + (Year 2017) + Approved Projects+ Approved Projects+ Cumulative Projects Delay Existing Cumulative Projects +Project Increase Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening Intersection Newport Boulevard SB Ramp (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) 13.3 -B 16.6 -B 16.1 -B 18.1 -B 16.2 -B 18.2 -B +0.1 +0.1 Riverside Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) 10.8 -B 15.5 -13 11.5 -B 17.3 -B 11.5 -B 17.3 -B 0.0 0.0 Tustin Avenue (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) 15.3 -B 3.6 -A 20.5 -C 3.5 -A 21.1 -C 3.5 -A +0.6 0.0 Dover Drive (NS) at: West Coast Highway (EW) 18.4 -B 17.5 -B 18.2 -B 18.4 -B 18.4 -B 18.6 -B +0.2 +0.2 Bayside Drive (NS) at: 1 East Coast Highway (EW) 9.3 -A 10.4 -B 11.2 -B 14.1 -B 13.5 -B 18.2 -B +2.3 +4.1 54 PC4 235 9. Orange County Congestion Management Program This section discusses the Orange County Congestion Management Program (CMP). The purpose, prescribed methodology, and definition of a significant traffic impact are discussed. County Congestion Management Program (CMP) The CMP is a result of Proposition 111 which was a statewide initiative approved by the voters in June, 1990. The proposition allowed for a nine cent per gallon state gasoline tax increase over a five year period. Proposition 111 explicitly stated that the new gas tax revenues were to be used to fix existing traffic problems and was not to be used to promote future development. For a city to get its share of the Proposition 111 gas tax, it has to follow certain procedures specified by the State Legislature. The legislation requires that a traffic impact analysis be prepared for new development. The traffic impact analysis is prepared to monitor and fix traffic problems caused by new development. The Legislature requires that adjacent jurisdictions use a standard methodology for conducting a traffic impact analysis. Although each county has developed standards for preparing traffic impact analyses, requirements do vary in detail from one county to another, but not in overall intent or concept. The general approach selected by each county for conducting traffic impact analyses has common elements. According to the CMP, those proposed developments which meet the following criteria shall be evaluated: ■ Development projects that generate more than 2,400 daily trips (The threshold is 1,600 or more trips per day for development projects that will directly access a CMP highway system link). ■ Projects with a potential to create an impact of more than three percent of Level of Service E capacity. Significance Criteria To determine whether the addition of project generated trips results in a significant impact at the CMP study facility and thus requires mitigation, the Orange County CMP utilizes the following thresholds of significance: ■ A significant project impact occurs when a proposed project increases traffic demand at a CMP study facility by more than three percent of capacity (V/C>0.03), causing or worsening Level of Service F (V /C > 1.00). 55 PC4 23( Based upon the CMP thresholds above, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. 56 ?C-4 237 10. Other Considerations This section discusses the project access and the queue length analysis at the project driveway. Site Access Evaluation The following site access and lane configurations have been analyzed. Existing Geometry: Move existing driveway 45 feet north (as analyzed in previous sections). Proiect - Related Improvements: Construction of a southbound right turn lane at the Bayside Drive /East Coast highway intersection and conversion of the existing shared through /right turn lane to a shared through /left turn lane. Proiect - Related Improvements Plus Optional Secondary Access: Project - related improvements (above) plus construction of a westbound "right turn in" only access from East Coast Highway. The existing bus stop on the northwest corner of the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection may cause weaving issues that will need to be considered in the design of the "right turn in" only lane. Final design of the optional secondary access ( "right turn in" only lane on East Coast Highway) will need to accommodate bicycle use along the corridor and will require coordination with and the approval of the California Department of Transportation, the Orange County Transportation Authority, and the Orange County Sanitation District. The driveway for the Orange County Sanitation District will need to be relocated so as not to interfere with the proposed "right turn in" only lane. Based on the posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour, and assuming partial deceleration of 10 miles per hour in the through lane, the recommended length of the deceleration lane is 315 feet (see California Department of Transportation, Highway Design Manual May 7, 2012, Table 405.26). Table 10 shows the Levels of Service at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection for each evaluation. As shown in Table 10, the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection operates at Level of Service D or better for all evaluations. The Intersection Capacity Utilization and Level of Service worksheets for the evaluations are provided in Appendix J. Queue Analysis The existing project driveway and the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection provides approximately 145 feet between the intersections for back -to -back left turn lane storage. This provides enough storage for approximately 1 left turning vehicle into the project site and approximately 3 southbound left turning vehicles at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection. The proposed project will move the existing project driveway north by approximately 45 feet, providing storage for a total of 2 left turning vehicles into the project site and 135 feet of storage for the shared through /left turn and dedicated left turn lanes. 57 PC14 232 A queue analysis was performed using the Synchro software, which calculates queue lengths based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology. To arrive at more accurate results, actual signal timing parameters for the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection were provided by the City of Newport Beach staff. Table 11 shows projected queue lengths for the left turns between the project driveway and the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection. Queue analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix K. It should be noted that the northbound left turn into the project site was analyzed independently of the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection. Queue analysis of CEQA traffic conditions of the northbound left from Bayside Drive into the project driveway resulted in nominal queues (less than one vehicle). The California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual recommends a minimum storage length of two vehicles, or 50 feet. A minimum of 200 feet of southbound left turn storage length should be provided at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection under the Existing Geometry evaluation (see Table 11). A minimum of 120 feet of southbound left turn storage length should be provided at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection under the Project - Related Improvements and Project - Related Improvements Plus Optional Secondary Access evaluations. The project is proposing 135 feet of southbound storage to prevent the overflow of queued southbound left vehicles from blocking the northbound left turn into the project site (see Figure 27). Appropriate "KEEP CLEAR" signing and pavement markings should be provided at the Bayside Drive /Project Driveway intersection. The intent of the "KEEP CLEAR" zone is to prevent southbound vehicles at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection from queuing into and blocking the northbound left into the project driveway. If the southbound left turn queue length blocks the project driveway intersection, a ripple effect would cause the northbound left turn queue to overflow into and block the northbound through lane, which could then queue into the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection. With the proposed storage lengths, if the 95th - percentile queue is exceeded, there is an additional 35 feet of storage to the "KEEP CLEAR" limit line that could store approximately one more vehicle before the northbound left turn lane is blocked. Therefore, the southbound left turn queue is not expected to reach the "KEEP CLEAR" zone, but it is recommended as a precautionary measure. Relationship to General Plan The proposed project will reallocate 49 residential units to the proposed project site from adjacent parcels within the same statistical area. This results in the project site having more residential units than had been approved in the City of Newport Beach General Plan. Typically, this would require analysis of General Plan Buildout conditions; however, the residential units were also projected to take access from Bayside Drive on the north side of East Coast Highway under the General Plan Buildout conditions. Therefore, the proposed project does not change the traffic patterns of the roadway network as they were analyzed when the General Plan was approved. 58 PC,4 239 Table 10 Site Access Evaluations Intersection Capacity Utilization and Level of Service ' ICU -LOS = Intersection Capacity Utilization - Level of Service (see Appendix l). 59 PC/ 240 Bayside Drive /Coast East Coast Highway Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway Highway Southbound Exclusive Right Turn In Peak Hour ICU -LOS' Existing TPO Analysis CEQA Lane Configuration Only Into Project Site J L I Peak Plus Without With Analysis Evaluations + r Hour Project Project Project With Project Morning 0.663 -B 0.71 -C 0.72 -C 0.749 -C Existing Geometry X Evening 0.696 -B 0.70 -C 0.78 -C 0.815 -D Project - Related Morning 0.649 -B 0.71 -C 0.723 -C 0.749 -C Improvements X Evening 0.656 -B 0.70 -C 0.757 -C 0.797 -C Project - Related Improvements Plus X X Morning 0.649 -B 0.71 -C 0.72 -C 0.749 -C Optional Secondary Access Evening 0.656 -8 0.71 -C 0.76 -C 0.797 -C ' ICU -LOS = Intersection Capacity Utilization - Level of Service (see Appendix l). 59 PC/ 240 N N y L A N _i A C Q v d 3 J S m C v W c c v m V C N V a h m r4 N F u v a m m ti N V N V Q Y 3 v L v io .WO.. 3 m O N V V v C. bY0 j. C J � � d Q c O o M L O N N N V N V ry = 3 a C Ul U Ul a m m a o a 0o in n � n v v w a 00 ao �0 m °° oq U0 m N O -O C C C C C C O O 0 CO C W CC G W CC C W CC W T C O t0 C yH v m = L O � v o V j T O U C W K W � O O O � N > O a L > m O m X X � O O of w c N O 3 m T L C X � � J m N U1 ` 3 V U 0 v v m v u N Ou Q w u o o n o o .N w _£ o a O c 7 H w c O � H � J a £ 0 L L 0 J W N 2 m C m W O Z CO C Q N N 3 H L 0 T N a u v m v w Tyif T S m C v W c c v m V C N V a h m r4 N F C N N O _ a N 0-0 v a l6 Qj N � U 11 O a N O Q O L a - - .._.. -._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._..- .Q „I' I Am \ r `e m 9 ' I mR zs //", 1" I�� z -.a, &� y L e / N v L " J z v s n N N —'inTd.3...r.l ice 5 I^ ld k ry ioa W - ios w BtlnO 'ad m eano 'ad 'x3 8dnJ 0 N JUG V) N o ro 'x3 � d v a8n0 bl - o C BanJ 'ad � OanJ 'ad I � MT %3 x✓a %3 M/a %3 i O L Q _ N � � — � c O 6 v N ° +' m l0 � � w N o �N� L V CU N U a %3 IA /H — — — ..— M/a 'x3 LL _ —.._.. _ _ z OA .2) ioe a 302 ioa O .ry w _I 4; o d rvl - ` - eano 'ad - - °- N eano ad -p < z° `° -'e< n eano'aa rvz° Qrvo /J Z Q 7 0 °7 ^OL z V) ry i/} 2 V) 2 m Z z ` (n Z (n 0 ry m V) n U) V) b ° O A. d m ° ry ' F - C 'o U U _ m e- U _ m eano 'ad ,G n+ /a X3 --M/6_ x3.. 'ad M eano 'ad e800 MIWA301a `O ~ N3VM3015 m m 1V3W3aV3 'ad I � u y L ° 2 y e L M J v 11. Recommendations This section summarizes the recommended and required improvements based on the analysis presented in the previous sections. Recommended Improvements a. Site - specific circulation and access recommendations are depicted on Figure 29. b. On -site parking shall be provided to meet City of Newport Beach parking code requirements. C. Sight distance at the project accesses shall be reviewed with respect to City of Newport Beach standards in conjunction with the preparation of final grading, landscaping, and street improvement plans. d. On -site traffic signing and striping shall be implemented in conjunction with detailed construction plans for the project and as approved by the City of Newport Beach. Required Improvements a. As shown in Table 3 for the existing (Year 2012) + project analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. b. As shown in Table 6 for the TPO analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. C. As shown in Table 8 for the CEQA analysis, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections (increase of one - percent or more at a study area intersection operating at worse than Level of Service D during the morning /evening peak hours); therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. d. Based upon the delay methodology required by the California Department of Transportation, the delay and Level of Service summary for the study area intersections are shown in Table 9. As previously noted, the project is projected to not have a significant impact at the study area intersections. 63 PC4 244 e. Based upon the CMP thresholds, the project - generated traffic did not result in a significant impact at the study area intersections; therefore, no improvements are recommended at the study area intersections. Other Considerations a. Final design of the optional secondary access ( "right turn in" only lane on East Coast Highway) will need to accommodate bicycle use along the corridor and will require coordination with and the approval of the California Department of Transportation, the Orange County Transportation Authority, and the Orange County Sanitation District. The driveway for the Orange County Sanitation District will need to be relocated so as not to interfere with the proposed "right turn in" only lane. Based on the posted speed limit of 50 miles per hour, and assuming partial deceleration of 10 miles per hour in the through lane, the recommended length of the deceleration lane is 315 feet (see California Department of Transportation, Highway Design Manual, May 7, 2012, Table 405.2B). b. Queue analysis of CEQA traffic conditions of the northbound left from Bayside Drive into the project driveway resulted in nominal queues (less than one vehicle). The California Department of Transportation Highway Design Manual recommends a minimum storage length of two vehicles, or 50 feet. C. A minimum of 200 feet of southbound left turn storage length should be provided at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection under the Existing Geometry evaluation (see Table 11). d. A minimum of 120 feet of southbound left turn storage length should be provided at the Bayside Drive /East Coast Highway intersection under the Project - Related Improvements and Project - Related Improvements Plus Optional Secondary Access evaluations. The project is proposing 135 feet of southbound storage to prevent the overflow of queued southbound left vehicles from blocking the northbound left turn into the project site (see Figure 27). e. Appropriate "KEEP CLEAR" signing and pavement markings should be provided at the Bayside Drive /Project Driveway intersection. With the proposed storage lengths, if the 95th- percentile queue is exceeded, there is an additional 35 feet of storage to the "KEEP CLEAR" limit line that could store approximately one more vehicle before the northbound left turn lane is blocked. Therefore, the southbound left turn queue is not expected to reach the "KEEP CLEAR" zone, but it is recommended as a precautionary measure. 64 AC4 245 :a 3 c 3� d C LD 8 N S CV O J U F s s � L � 3 > 'I n m 8 m v N L t" d N ] W w p` w m m fG �n E E E O U Q w i p v m c a m c m o n � E 1 ° y'Y o ca v o 1Q emir y > a a a_ > n ` n N N m Op O m � — o LL !n m Y m a II JII J *'IH 2 O y W V m y C La 2 aE I ,cl ePls/eg 0 0 3 O C 6 6 II m N C qC Y ¢ J v 0 S U m m m v m n °1 d N Z -O o? m V S u5 o n V V N d a n C m bB L C Y 3 a m d — 3 1° Ol C � W v O y c � o m S � V a 1p v L m 3 r 0 c 3 ♦y7 U � Z C ? o U Y c V v -V L m d v E N v m a O m c N c � rn Q emir � n � � — o LL !n R II JII J *'IH v 0 S U m m m v m n °1 d N Z -O o? m V S u5 o n V V N d a n C m bB L C Y 3 a m d — 3 1° Ol C � W v O y c � o m S � V a 1p v L m 3 r 0 c 3 ♦y7 U � Z C ? o U Y c V v -V L m v E N v m a �- N c U Y emir m V1 o « Q w a M.2 v 'cN O N «mac - m m o a N-n U1 C y U v a m> m Q p ~ a O O C, C �Z� Appendices Appendix A Glossary of Transportation Terms Appendix B Year 2011/2012 Traffic Count Worksheets Appendix C Explanation and Calculation of Intersection Capacity Utilization Appendix D Trip Generation - Existing Project Site and Additional Sources Appendix E Approved Project Data Appendix F Regional Traffic Annual Growth Rate Appendix G TPO One - Percent Analysis Calculation Worksheets Appendix H Cumulative Project Data Appendix I Explanation and Calculation of Intersection Delay Appendix 1 Site Access Evaluations Intersection Capacity Utilization Worksheets Appendix K Queue Analysis Worksheets Please reference the included CD to view and print the Appendices. For a printed copy of the Appendices, please contact us at: KLINZMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. 1111 Town & Country Road, Suite 34 Orange, CA 92868 -4667 (714) 973 -8383 www.traffic-engineer.com T�C4 147 PG4 242 Attachment No. PC 5 Lot Line Adjustment PC5 24 � PC5 260 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2012 - (LEGAL DESCRIPTION) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER_ Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -60 PARCEL 2 EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCELS 2 AND 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOR 278, PAGES 40 TO 45 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS. RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED JUNE 6, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 94- 380365 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PROPOSED LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL 1 AND PARCEL 2 THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION, DATED THIS 1 DAY OF 2012. UiiIiU�FI, i L RR SELTON, L.S. 6,347 SHEET I OF 1 PC5 251 EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2072 - (MAP OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -61 PARCEL 1 BaySide Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -60 PARCEL 2 ------ -------------------- - - - - -- — -------------- I - - - - -� SEE SHEET 4 s t I I i 1 I � I PARCEL 2 ; I � I PARCEL i ° _ __.- ___ -I-.� DRIVE 1 SHEET 2 - ..... .. .. C I S7 ,N WAY SEE SHEET 3 I INDEX MAP Eti EMS-5NC LOT LINES TO REMAIN 9 1 290 490 840 PROPOSED LOT LINE — — — — EXISTING LOT LINES TO BE ADJUSTED -— - - —- EXISTING EASEMENTS AS NOTED GRAPHIC SCALE SEE SHEET 7 FOR EASEMENT NOTES SCALE. 1" =400' SEE SHEET 6 FOR LINE AND CURVE DATA TABLES l THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. #r DA TS FCY OF 2012. (g1 9lF OF cah Y If USE LW. LS. 5347 SHEET 1 OF 7 V FCS 252 EXHIBIT "B" CITY OF NEWPO RT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2012 e (MAP) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -60 PARCEL 2 S E E S H E E T 4 wry•' i 1p�a \1 X46 P�GRCEL I ,9 a PhInn1m3�. Jt '19 ^9119 Ma p� 12.429 Ac (GROSS) �b ' 12.429 Ac. (NET) ' 8 N79W � 172_.7_ R`" 8.71, N 77_ '49'70"W \ 749:38 �_�,_;_- -._, -C7 L8`` 4z-/ LS n ,' PLr,RCETL ' P\1 N67'27,77j 7g�� O PAC 'me. M-1111 P 6j. ?7AR9 )415 0 0 0 c/ 31.431 Ac. (GROSS) 28.899 Ac. (NET) 3 N w N88'13'14" E v w 60.00' � 01 i z z 0 0 N83'06 ' 0 cl m m n 7 23" o 0.84' i G2 L 2� 6 "W 123.34' 11 87'36'1.L,15 Ls W � L 4 w COAST HIGHWAY �, I _EAST V� 0 20 40 80 160 LEGEND EXISTING LOT LINES TO REMAIN GRAPHIC SCALE PROPOSED LOT LINE .SCALE: 1"=80' - - - - EXISTING LOT LINES TO BE ADJUSTED - - - - - -- EXISTING EASEMENTS AS NOTED SEE SHEET 7 FOR EASEMENT NOTES SEE SHEET 6FOR LINE AND CURVE DATA TABLES. SHEET 2 OF 7 PC5 263 EXHIBIT ° °E°° CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 9A 2012 0 (MAP) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -60 PARCEL 2 S E E S H E E T 4 o 1 L b PAHCEL 01 �), , P P U Vb 511-M _ PSIAI&27Q/0l0 -4J9 31.431 Ac. (GROSS) - W a' 28.899 Ac. (NET) 8 HIGHWAY)) E'AST ° 62424 „w cn & 8 DRAINAGE W ------- L19- 18 - - - - - -- - y /chW W �a 88.13'07” h _ 0 100:00' 6 o Lp' RX1 Ek „. 91411 TUMMirs NOT A PART N88'13'14"E 0 25 50 100 200 146.16 GRAPHIC SCALE LEGEND SCALE:1 ” =100' EXISTING LOT LINES TO REMAIN PROPOSED LOT LINE — — — — EXISTING LOT LINES TO BE ADJUSTED -------EXISTING EASEMENTS AS NOTED SEE SHEET `7 FOR EASEMENT NOTES SEE SHEET 6 FOR LINE AND CURVE DATA TABLES SHEET 3 OF 7 PC5 254 PC5 255 EXHIBOT "Bol CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2012 m (MAP) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside- Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -60 PARCEL 2 +.. N85'5'17 " W 482.62' ` �'` NJ8.5p'47 "W 861.58' Ilya aA P ECIEL 3 Pa. 53.4 ease 'St 9 P.MaM,Wf2 31.431 Ac. (GROSS) 13 28.899 Ac. (NET) - - - -- "E "E -- �!N86'20'55 NB3'46'44 283.56' — Fr. L 9.1�l ,a 253.77' L2. ;/. ti9 SEE ROA1L ?0 .A5 0 Apo ON SHEET 5 ii C, pO 1y PARCELL.I A��L µ II��_op_ n FrzEELG s ti 4/ GJA' vozn sm9-99� /i 151YAB..2TW045 —,,2j, N Cb w 12.429 Ac (GROSS) Rqp r.0 _^� 73 �a �^ 12,429 Ac. (NET) C7 Zs 00 4 W LLJ o` Rqo >>'� Q) \• SyF _ /P p �'U 69Fy 1�9 =999 in 0 150 300 600 GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: 1" =300' LEGEND EXISTING LOT LINES TO REMAIN PROPOSED LOT LINE — — — — EXISTING LOT LINES TO BE ADJUSTED - - - - - -- EXISTING EASEMENTS AS NOTED SEE .SHEET 7 FOR EASEMENT .NOTES SEE SHEET 6 FOR LINE AND CURVE DATA TABLES SHEET 4 OF 7 PC5 255 PC5 250 EXHOBIT "Ble �ro /� CI NEWPORT EWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2012 ° (MAP) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Morino, LLC 440 - 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Boyside Village Marino, LLC 440- 132 -60 PARCEL 2 S E E S H E E T 4 ----------- ----------- r--- -- - - - -- 1 1 I I pp 11 PARCE1� 2 111 I it qt I�CcCzd � G�.fi4,P9r�e`T9es1�19 i 14 p Va. P. �'c 6'Jaflwl 5 11 31.431 Ac. (GROSS) i1 li W H 28.899 Ac. (NET) N7_7,66'3 : - - - - -- _ i6�.W Ld _ -� ---- --- -- 1 Rqp _� �l---Zb- 13. 1 w Lli -- s 1-29_ N L2 N6!;RPp N86'20`55E 253./' _ / L28 GS TL2 5 N _ L24 N�2 v\ RPp W PARCEL9 w W W P.fiz'tl W3v: 014 111 V) G;M.lf4 =WJ�� & -�G�i R 1n 12.429 Ac. (GROSS) 11429 Ac. (NET) 8 S E E S H E E T 4 0 75 30 60 720 GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: 1 " =60' LEGEND EXISTING LOT LINES TO REMAIN PROPOSED LOT LINE — — — — EXISTING LOT LINES TO BE ADJUSTED - - - - - -- EXISTING. EASEMENTS AS NOTED SEE SHEET 7 FOR EASEMENT NOTES SEE SHEET 6 FOR LINE AND CURVE DATA TABLES SHEET S OF J PC5 250 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LINE LOT LINE ADJUS iM ENT NO. LA 2012 m (MAP) CURVE OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS AP NUMBER PROPOSED PARCELS REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -60 PARCEL 2 15'.00 16:03 G3 DATA TABLES .SHEET 6 OF 7 50:80 LINE TABLE 144'29'33" 1.3.85 BEARING LENGTH L1 N56'13'52 "W 67.12 12.. N33'46'OS "1; 27.00 L3 N56'13'52 "W 24.42 L4 N21'24'24 "W 32.42 L5. N7T49'10 "W 38.75 L8 N43'ST10 "E 29.51 L7 N78'O5'57 "W 116.81 18 - N70'53'03 "E 34.83 19 N10'02'29 "E 68.08 L70 N71'15'20 "E 18.19 Lit NO2'23'44 "E. 4.00 L12 N8T36'16 "W 1.2.00 L13 NO6',53'30 "E 6.59 L14 N87 "36'16 "W 24.16 L75 N79'43'50 "W 73500 Lib N73'06'54 "W 43:65 L17 N60'16'43 "E 29.81 L78 N01'46'46 "W 24:00 L19 N8893'34 "E 33.06 L20 N27`40'32 "E 68.42 L21 N22'O8'49 "E 83.80 L22 N76'24'49 "W 9.28 L23 N01.'06'20 "W 7.64 L2.4 N83'52'34 "E 100 :02 L25 N11'23'09 "W 7.51 L26 N83'38'55 "E 9.31 L27 N14'5 CURVE TABLE CURVE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH Cl 8!02'07" 440.00 61.71 C2' 61'12'51° 15'.00 16:03 G3 4'32'53' 640.00 50:80 C4 144'29'33" 1.3.85 34.93 CS 172'48'19° 13.85 41.77 C6 26'25'27" 640 :00 - 295.16 C7 .3058'20" &40.00 345 :96 C8 532740" 440:00 410:55 C10 74'00'00" 440.00 Sfi8.28- 0'20 "W 12.40 L28 N0T30'09 "W 12 -.78 L29 N83'04'52 "E 102.32 L30 N84'02'29 "E 150:00 CURVE TABLE CURVE DELTA RADIUS LENGTH Cl 8!02'07" 440.00 61.71 C2' 61'12'51° 15'.00 16:03 G3 4'32'53' 640.00 50:80 C4 144'29'33" 1.3.85 34.93 CS 172'48'19° 13.85 41.77 C6 26'25'27" 640 :00 - 295.16 C7 .3058'20" &40.00 345 :96 C8 532740" 440:00 410:55 C10 74'00'00" 440.00 Sfi8.28- pC5 25-7 EXHIBIT 11811 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2012 - (MAP) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -60 PARCEL 2 EASFDAENT NOTES: 30 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS OF LAGUNA BEACH COUNTY WATER. DISTRICT HOLDER. OF AN EASEMENT FOR WATER PIPE LINE PURPOSES RECORDED NOVEMBER 30, 1928 IN BOON 221 PAGE 76 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT No.: 5 OF ORANGE COUNTY HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR SEWER PURPOSES RECORDED MARCH 16, 1966 IN BOOK 7870 PAGE 919 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AMENDED SEPTEMBER 15, 1983 AS INSTRUMENT N0. 83- 406733 © SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO., ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO., TELEPROMPTER CABLE T.V. CO., AND PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CO. HOLDERS OF VARIOUS EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES. RESERVED IN THE DOCUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 1, 1983 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 83- 549259 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS 70 THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HOLDER ALL RIGHTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE ADJOINING HIGHWAY, RESERVED IN THE DOCUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 1, 1983 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 83- 549259 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS J. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR HIGHWAY AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES RECORDED MARCH 22, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84- 118950 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS 10 THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOLDER OF EASEMENTS FOR WATERLINE AND STORM DRAIN PURPOSES AS OFFERED FOR DEDICATION PER PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111 11 THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOLDER OF THE IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE TO THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AN EASEMENT FOR STREET PURPOSES AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF SAID TRACT, OVER A POR11ON OF SAID LAND. SAID OFFER WAS NOT ACCEPTED AT THIS TIME. 13 A NON - EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111 OVER THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93-111 DESIGNATED BY NOTE K, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 278, PAGES 40 TO 45 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED JUNE '6, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO, 94- 380365 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CAUFORNIA, AS NOTED IN THE IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000762947 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND AS RESERVED IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000762948 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND RE- RECORDED OCTOBER 22, 2004 AS ,INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000955355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.. 14 A NON - EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR RECREATIONAL USE FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP- NO. 93-11 OF THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93-111 DESIGNATED BY NOTE L IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A'MAP FILED IN BOOK 278, PAGES 40 TO 45 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED JUNE 66 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 94- 380365 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. OF ORANGE COUNTY, .CALIFORNIA, AS NOTED IN THE IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000762947 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND AS RESERVED IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004006762948 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS RE- RECORDED OCTOBER 22, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000955355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, 16 AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES PER THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NOS. 2004 - 762949 AND 2004 - 762950, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. SAID EASEMENT IS BLANKET IN NATURE AND NOT PLOTTABLE, 18 THE' CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOLDER OFEASEMENT(S)` FOR .STORM DRAIN PURPOSE(S) AS DELINEATED OR AS OFFERED FOR DEDICATION, ON THE MAP OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111 SHEET 7OF7 PC5 252 EXHIBIT 1'C11 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2012 - (SITE PLAN) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Sayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -60 PARCEL 2 Q 154 3 it GRAPHIC SCALE SCALE: I"= 300' - n �4, 1 429` -_ +SHEET2 SITE PLAN a r T CY r ,r�l THIS EXHIBIT HAS BEEN PREPARED BY ASE OR UNDER MY DIRECTION. LEGEND Ali— EXISTING LOT LINES TO REMAIN DATED DAY OF tiI 2012. �( PROPOSED LOT LINE `7 1S — — — — EXISTING LOT LINES TO BE ADJUSTED Of G,��iOQ, - - - - - - - EXISTING EASEMENTS AS NOTED SEE SHEET 3 FOR EASEMENT NOTES L. USELTON. L.S. 5347 SHEET I OF 3 FC5 259 EXHIBIT tl oacul Ci9`Y OF NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 9A 2012 - (SITE PLAN) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -60 PARCEL 2 S 'E E S H E E T 1 /vn �.1`�. _ Itj ro 5:1 /12 429 �c 29 SS) \ (i05S) 122 RET} got Vo /111 W W �\'•,`� � O�erhang c f' 659 n is ,NEE `- ' - -° -- - - - - - -- -, - -- - - -- - - - - -- w (n - _ _ - - - -_ -- o � LLJ r � PARCEL 2, W W 1` LJI -- JID W,ELt, - I 1 (n - 0'�– ?.`�7, �$F,V�O e�Jti• .m _ �-` _------'. __ – ----- to 31.431 Ac. (GROSS) –' -- -- - - -_ - _-- - -- __ 3 28.899 An (NET) `- --- ____` –__- Ir – -` -- ' - - --- ---- --- S E E S H E E T 1 SITE PLAN LEGEND EXISTING LOT LINES TO REMAIN 0 20 40 80 160 PROPOSED LOT LINE — — — — EXISTING LOT LINES TO BE ADJUSTED -----EXISTING EASEMENTS AS NOTED GRAPHIC SCALE SEE SHEET 3 FOR EASEMENT NOTES SCALE: 1 " =80' - SHEET 2-OF 3 PC5 2 60 EXHIBIT 'LEoo CITY OFFp NEWPORT BEACH LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. LA 2092 m (SITE PLAN) OWNERS EXISTING PARCELS PROPOSED PARCELS AP NUMBER REFERENCE NUMBER Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440 - 132 -61 PARCEL 1 Bayside Village Marina, LLC 440- 132 -60 PARCEL 2 EASEMENT NOTES: 30 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS OF LAGUNA BEACH COUNTY WATER DISTRICT HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR WATER PIPE LINE PURPOSES RECORDED NOVEMBER 30, 1928 iN BOOK 221 PAGE 76 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS 5� COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT No. 5 OF ORANGE COUNTY HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR SEWER PURPOSES' RECORDED MARCH 16, 1966. IN BOOK 7870 PAGE 919 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AMENDED SEPTEMBER 15, 1983 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 83- 406733 © SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO., ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO., TELEPROMPTER CABLE T.V. CO., AND PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CO. HOLDERS OF VARIOUS EASEMENTS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY PURPOSES RESERVED IN THE DOCUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 1, 1983 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 83- 549259 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS i7� THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HOLDER ALL RIGHTS OF INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE ADJOINING HIGHWAY, fiESERVED IN THE DOCUMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 1, 1983 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 83- 549259 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS 8Q THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HOLDER OF AN EASEMENT FOR HIGHWAY AND DRAINAGE PURPOSES RECORDED MARCH 22, 1984 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 84- 118950 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS 10 THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOLDER OF EASEMENTS FOR WATERLINE AND STORM DRAIN PURPOSES AS OFFERED FOR DEDICATION PER PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111 11 THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOLDER OF THE IRREVOCABLE OFFER TO DEDICATE TO THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AN EASEMENT FOR STREET PURPOSES AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF SAID TRACT, OVER A PORTION OF SAID LAND. SAID OFFER WAS NOT ACCEPTED AT THIS TIME. 13 A NON- EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93-111 _ OVER .THAT - PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93-111 DESIGNATED BY NOTE K, IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 278, PAGES 40 TO 45 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY THAT CERTAIN .CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED JUNE 6, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 94- 380365 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS NOTED IN THE IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO.. 2004000762947 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND AS RESERVED IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000762948 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND RE- RECORDED OCTOBER 22, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000955355 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. 14 A NON- EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR RECREATIONAL USE FOR THE BENEFlT OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93-11. OF THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93-111 DESIGNATED BY NOTE. L'IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 278, PAGES 40 TO 45 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS CORRECTED BY THAT CERTAIN CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED JUNE 6, 1994 AS INSTRUMENT NO: 94- 380365 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AS NOTED IN THE IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000762947 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS AND AS RESERVED IN THE DEED RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000762M OF OFFICIAL RECORDS RE- RECORDED OCTOBER 22, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2004000955355 OF OFFICIAL. RECORDS. 16 AN EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 O FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS PURPOSES PER THE DOCUMENTS RECORDED AUGUST 23, 2004 AS INSTRUMENT NOS. 2004- 762949 AND 2004 - 762950, OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. SAID EASEMENT IS BLANKET IN NATURE AND NOT PLOTTABLE. 18 THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HOLDER OF EASEMENTS) FOR STORM DRAIN PURPOSE(S).ASDELINEATED OR AS OFFERED FOR DEDICATION, ON THE MAP OF PARCEL MAP NO. 93 -111 SHEET 3 OF 3 I'CS 2ro1 PC5 262 Attachment No. PC 6 Response to Comments on DEIR, Corrections /Additions to DEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program FC6 200 PG6 264 BACK BAY LANDING PROJECT PCR DECEMBER 2013 PC 6 2(615 PCl6 2r ( BACK BAY LANDING PROJECT CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2012101003 Prepared For: City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Tel: 949.6443209 Contact: Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner Prepared By: PCR Services Corporation One Venture, Suite 150 Irvine, California 92618 DECEMBER 2013 PC6 2C,7 PC& 202 Table of Contents Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION TO THE FINAL EIR .......................................................................................... ............................1 -1 2.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ......................................................................................................... ............................2 -1 3.0 CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS TO THE DRAFT EIR .......................................................... ............................3 -1 4.0 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ................................................. ............................4 -1 List of Figures Page 4.A -6 Visual Simulation View Locations ................................................................................................ ............................3 -3 4.A -7 View Simulation # 1 ............................................................................................................................ ............................3 -7 4.A -8 View Simulation #2 ............................................................................................................................ ............................3 -8 4.A -9 View Simulation #3 ............................................................................................................................ ............................3 -9 4.A -10 View Simulation # 4 ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -10 4.A -11 View Simulation #S ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -11 4.A -12 View Simulation # 6 ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -12 4.A -13 View Simulation # 7 ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -13 4.A -14 View Simulation # 8 ...................................................................................................................... ............................... 3 -14 List of Tables Page 2 -1 Summary of Comment Letters and Verbal Commenters .................................................... ............................2 -1 4 -1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ...................................................................... ............................4 -2 City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 PC 0 2 19 pc6 2,40 1. INTRODUCTION TO FINAL EIR PC6 271 PC 6 272 1.0 INTRODUCTION TO THE FINAL EIR This Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) and CEQA Guidelines (California Administrative Code Section 15000 et seq.). According to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15132, the FEIR shall consist of: (a) The Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) or a revision of the Draft; (b) Comments and recommendations received on the Draft FIR either verbatim or in summary; (c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; (d) The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; and (e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency. This document, in conjunction with the October 2013 Draft EIR, which is bound separately, constitute the Final EIR for the Back Bay Landing (the "proposed project'). As described in detail in Chapter 2.0, Project Description, of the Draft EIR, Bayside Village Marina, LLC, the project applicant, is seeking various legislative and administrative approvals for the future development of a mixed -use bayfront village, Back Bay Landing. The proposed project would lead to the development of an integrated, mixed -use village comprising of visitor - serving commercial, marine services, and limited residential uses on an improved but underutilized bayfront site on 6.974 acres in the City of Newport Beach. The applicant is seeking General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan Amendments that would allow for limited residential use on the site through reallocation of density within an existing three - parcel subdivision (Parcel Map No. 93 -111). The project applicant has also prepared and is seeking approval of the Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP), which will serve as the controlling zoning ordinance for the project site and provide a regulatory framework for the five Planning Areas that will comprise the 31.431 -acre Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 93 -111 ( "Parcel 3 "). Within the PCDP, the Back Bay Landing Design Guidelines will provide specific guidance for physical implementation of the project and assist the City and community with visualization of the architectural theme and character of the project. The applicant is also requesting approval of a Lot Line Adjustment and Traffic Impact Analysis. Specific project -level applications for a fully integrated, mixed -use development through a Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit (CDP) will be filed in the future. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15063, the City prepared an Initial Study which concluded that the proposed project could result in potentially significant environmental impacts and an EIR would be required. The City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of a Draft EIR for the proposed project to the State Clearinghouse and interested agencies and persons on October 1, 2012 for a 30 -day review period ending on October 30, 2012 with a public scoping meeting held on October 17, 2012. Comments received on the NOP and comments received at the public scoping meeting were both considered in the preparation of the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR was made available to various public agencies, citizen groups, and interested individuals for a 45 -day public review period from October 4, 2013 through November 18, 2013. A Planning Commission PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 1 -1 Pc ( 273 1.0 Introduction to the Final EIR December 2013 Public Hearing was held on December 19, 2013 to gather public comments on the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR was circulated to state agencies for review through the State Clearinghouse of the Governor's Office of Planning and Research. Copies of a Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Draft EIR were also sent to Responsible Agencies, other interested State and local government agencies, utilities, and other interested parties. Copies of the Draft EIR were available for review at the Newport Beach Public Library Central Library, Mariners Branch, Balboa Branch, and Corona del Mar Branch and via the internet at www.newportbeachca.gov/ceqadocuments. Comment letters on the Draft EIR with specific responses are presented in Chapter 2.0, Responses to Comments, of this Final EIR. Any revisions to the Draft EIR based on these comments are contained in Chapter 3.0, Corrections and Additions to the Draft EIR, of this Final EIR in revision mode text (i.e., deletions are shown with strikethrough and additions are shown with double underline. PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 1 -2 Pc6 27 Z. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS I,c6 275 pac, 276 2.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS 2.1 INTRODUCTION Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines states that a Final EIR shall consist of: "(a) the Draft EIR or a revision of the draft; (b) comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary; (c) a list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR; and (d) the responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process." The Draft EIR was made available to various public agencies, citizen groups, and interested individuals for a 45 -day public review period from October 4, 2013 through November 18, 2013. This chapter of the Final EIR presents the 14 comment letters received during the public comment period for the Draft EIR from public agencies, organizations, and /or private individuals. A list of commenters is provided below in Table 2 -1, Summary of Comment Letters. The letters are assigned an alphabetical identifier, as indicated in Table 2 -1. Each comment that requires a response within the letters has been assigned a number. For example, the first comment in Letter A would be Comment A -1, and the fourth comment in Letter B would be Comment B -4. The responses to each comment are then correspondingly numbered (i.e., Response A -1 and Response B -4). 2.2 RESPONSES AND COMMENTS This section includes the nine comment letters received on the Draft EIR and the City's responses. The presentation of the comments and responses follow Table 2 -1. Table 2 -1 Summary of Comment Letters Comment Letter Commenter Scott Morgan Director, State Clearinghouse State of California Governor's Office of Planning and Research A State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit 1400 Tenth Street P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812 -3044 Scott Morgan Director, State Clearinghouse State of California Governor's Office of Planning and Research B State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit 1400 Tenth Street P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812 -3044 Fernie Sy C Coastal Program Analyst II California Coastal Commission South Coast Area Office PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 2 -1 PC6 277 2.0 Responses to Comments Table 2- 1(Continued) Summary of Comment Letters Comment Letter Commenter Name /Address December 2013 PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 2-Z PCG 2j 8 200 Oceangate, Suite 1000 Long Beach, CA 90802 -4302 Maureen El Harake Branch Chief, Regional - Community- Transit Planning Department of Transportation D District 12 3347 Michelson Drive, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92612 -8894 Mark G. Adelson Chief, Regional Planning Programs Section E Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board 3737 Main Street, Suite 500 Riverside, CA 92501 Daisy Covarrubias, MPA Senior Staff Analyst F Orange County Sanitation District 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Polic Modanlou, Manager Strategic Land Planning Division G OC Public Works /OC Planning Services 300 North Flower Street Santa Ana, California 92702 -4048 David R. Law, AICP Senior Planner H City of Irvine One Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 19575 Irvine, California 92623 -9575 Colin Kelly Staff Attorney I Orange County Coastkeeper 3151 Airway Avenue, Suite F -110 Costa Mesa, California 92626 Nick R. Green J President Citizens Advocating Rational Development Patricia Martz, Ph.D. President K California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc. P.O. Box 54132 Irvine, California 92619 -4132 L Lawrence Van Pelt Bayside Improvement Committee Debbie Stevens M 1120 Sea Lane Corona Del Mar, California 92625 N City of Newport Beach Environmental Quality Affairs Committee EQAC PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 2-Z PCG 2j 8 Letter A STATE OF CALIFOR141A Governtu°'s Office of Pla.ltr6i.n.g anti Re4iearch (a State Glearinb.11ousa an.d Plarining Unit :Edmund G. Brown..lr, Governor November 19,2013 Dear Jahne Muri I'to OFF\CC Or\`N*Jd, Y � H S Oprni.IF�P`\`Y. Ke.n Ales Director The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Draft BIR to selected state agencies for review. On the enclosed Document Details Report please note that the Clearinghouse has listed the state agencies that (reviewed your document. The review period closed on November 7.8, 2013, and the cotmments from the responding agency (ies) is .(are) enclosed. If this comment package is noL m order, please notify [lie State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten -digit State Clearinghouse number in funire correspondence so that we may respond promptly. Please note that Section 21104(c) of the Cali fornia. Public .Resources Code states that :, "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency. Those eonnnents shall be supported by specific documentation." These comments are forwarded for use in preparing your final cnviromnental document. Should you need more information or clarification of the enclosed conunents, we:reconnnend that you contact the commenting agency directly. 'Phis letter aclatowledges that you have complied with the,State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the'CalifonuaEinvironmental Quality Act. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916)445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the envirolmiental review process. Sincerely, ott Morgan Director, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX. 304.4. SACRAMENTO, CAI ICOR:NIA 95812-3044 TEL (916) •645 -0613 GA\ (916) 323 - 301:8 wwlv.opnea.gov PC6 27.9 A -1 P ,aOvaIVL "O tjI, r01AMUNITv Jamie 1Vluril to City of Newport Beach r �Jov 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 O OLVEI-OP'MENT �' Subject: Back Bay Landing Project /%, SCI M 201210100 ��e• Op NEINPD,"t Dear Jahne Muri I'to OFF\CC Or\`N*Jd, Y � H S Oprni.IF�P`\`Y. Ke.n Ales Director The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Draft BIR to selected state agencies for review. On the enclosed Document Details Report please note that the Clearinghouse has listed the state agencies that (reviewed your document. The review period closed on November 7.8, 2013, and the cotmments from the responding agency (ies) is .(are) enclosed. If this comment package is noL m order, please notify [lie State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten -digit State Clearinghouse number in funire correspondence so that we may respond promptly. Please note that Section 21104(c) of the Cali fornia. Public .Resources Code states that :, "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency. Those eonnnents shall be supported by specific documentation." These comments are forwarded for use in preparing your final cnviromnental document. Should you need more information or clarification of the enclosed conunents, we:reconnnend that you contact the commenting agency directly. 'Phis letter aclatowledges that you have complied with the,State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the'CalifonuaEinvironmental Quality Act. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916)445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the envirolmiental review process. Sincerely, ott Morgan Director, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX. 304.4. SACRAMENTO, CAI ICOR:NIA 95812-3044 TEL (916) •645 -0613 GA\ (916) 323 - 301:8 wwlv.opnea.gov PC6 27.9 A -1 Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 201210 1003 Project Title Back Bay Landing. Project Lead Agency Newporl. Beach, City of Type EIR Draft EIR Description The pro op sed project involves various legislative approvals for the future development of [he Back Bay Landing Project (the "proposed project'), which is proposed to he an integrated, mixed -use waterfront village on 6.974 acres in the City of Newport Beach. Lead Agency Contact Name Jaime Murillo Agency City of Newport Beach Phone (949) 644 -3209 Fax email Address 100 Civic Center Drive City Newport Beach State CA Zip 92660 Project Location County Orange City Newport Beach Region Lat /Long Cross Streets East Coast Highway at Bayside Drive Parcel No. 440 - 132 -60 Township Range Section Base Proximity to: Highways SR -1 Airports Railways Waterways Upper Newport Bay, Newport Harbor,, Pacific Ocean Schools Land Use General Plan: Recreational and Marine Commercial CIO 0.5 and CM 0.3' Coastal Land Use Plan: CM -B (north of PCH); CM -A (south of East Coast Highway) Zoning: PC -9 (north of East Coast Highway); CM (south of East Coast Highway) Project Issues Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Archaeologic- Historic; Coastal Zone; Drainage /Absorption; Flood Plain /Flooding; Geologic /Seismic; Noise; Public Services; Recreation /Parks; Schools /Universities;; Sewer Capacity; Soil Erosion /Compaction /Grading; Solid Waste; Toxic /Hazardous; Traffic /Circulation; Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Welland /Riparian; Growth Inducing; Landuse; Cumulative Effects; Aesthetic /Visual Reviewing Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics; Department of Boating and Waterways; Department of Fish and Agencies Wildlife, Region 5; Department of Parks and Recreation; Department of Water Resources; California Highway Patrol; Callrans, District 12; Air Resources Board; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Native American Heritage Commission Date Received 10/04/2013 Start of Review 10/04/2013 End of Review 1 111 8/201 3 PC6 220 A -1 (cont.) Nlj— 6.1, O1 :461)111 �roal -cal Willh t.m;W CALIFORNIA COASTAL CCi'tlYMOISSION. Souq, Coact Am,) 01in.:c: 20(I l:)1a AgtlalP., S6110 1000 I Lund E:aad!, CA 901102.,130'2 / C Crlp — •r!Iuc56ilUll6n _ In. I\Invemo%, IL Jaime lvl'urillo, Senior Planner �(;����16'i D City of Newport Beach °° 100 Civic Center Chive Newport Beach, CA 92660 � � 2011 Tie: Back 13fcy Lxndins STATE GLEARiNG HOUSE Environmental Impact 4epairt (59C'H-9 201210.1,003) Dem. Mi.. muriilo, ne Thank You for the opportunity to review the Envirorurtcntal Impact l:.pnrt to 111.: s_t trt E--V Landing Project in the City of NoWpori Beach. According to the Environmental linpatcl kenort, the proposal includes the consiru °lion of an inte orated mixed -use waterfront vil lttgr oil an approximately 7 -acre portion of al 31.4 acre parcel located adiac(nt to 1Jt:)pe 1 tcm',r,17r Ba;,, Ti' -.,i: project also includes an'lendinenrl to the General Plan and Coastal Lani! Lrs' t i;:1n (?. i UP) 1n change the lamd use - designations 'o a Mused -Use Horizontal designarkm and :, Manni:: l Community Development Plall. The proposed protect is located "iithin the Coastal Zone it) the City Of °Pdewport I3r1:u ]1, Th':: proposed development will requite amendments to the City's Coastal Lind Use Plan and r. - Coastal Developmem Permit frost the California Coastal Coinrnii stun. The following comulents address the issue of the proposed ptoj4. I , en isisT(,t y ,vhf h Chapter 3 policies of the Calalonilia t oa�lja! Act of 1976 File cnututc 1, s c.uar „ t .ti 1 tat : -:1. preliminary anti those of Coastal �ouunis6on staff only and should not 'u(, cots rrin.d a: representing rite opinion of the COstat Commission itself. As described belov,+, Lbt.: proplm'Ld project raises issues related to lanld use, hazitrds and visual impact's. The following . are commcuts by (:onr I'll ission Aaffon the Environntcre ttl tin} dci LAND USE ft appears that it free standing residential use is. anticipated for the prone' si'[o. Residential uses are a low r priority use Thus, such an independent use sl1oa1d bi Yoconsidered. AMdomall�y, additional residoatlal uses are. 'tnnetpaled )b(v: tht tr(muld floor of higher priority us s (such as, visitor-se rvirle CommC 1( 111 911d I ,And: S r Vtl it t. e:P I to b(: located adjaccmt io tie bay. While thes: residential uses located above higherprio)ji:ry uses! the location of rht.5e rr�i' s }1:x1 11, S : =tlnul recoltsicicrcd to be locat't d as landward as possible. PC6 221 Nor ° -G-1, 01:1101,111 From-Cslltutrua Coat; tal +56150M64 i -0 ' HIM - Environmental Impact Report Bakke Bay Landing Page 2 of R ZI1 RDS Section 30235 oFthe Coa�tal /pct only allows ehr. consttvction of new l�rtl.L;la;:arl , 6:t proect exisurtg structures! Item, developnienj must be appicrpl r,rt<:It+ ,mil °u' rl kite, . So that no Anwe shorelinel.prouective devices are necessary. 7ho.:>: please C11 it �' ti':'gv Jl;; anticipated prgjcct /bulkhe dis consistent with Section 302.5 of the Coastal Act. Has alta.lysis of the anticipated bulldiead /project taken into account n.irm'e was level _4; O IFnor, such an anaQsN Qdd be conducted. VISQU LIMPACTSI The project site is located within the Shoreline Height Lhmtmion Zone of thr C o s:tal Land Use Plan, which est blishes a maximum height limit of 3 i -fec - A CLUx amendment is anticipated Ithat would allow a single, up to 65- foot'tall towet'61at rdould cumen ley be inconsi.sieni t{✓ith the Shoreline (TeiFlir Limilatiotl one i ytti:rcaurn c. 'l`hn height of Stich a StrUC1t.1rC l ould impact coastal views. Thus. p4ta -sc pioviEi,r .ill itlrp.EV': S! to the proposed tower thal would ilot have such an advms( 1 nj r;:ct on hl' labs; i w . St.j. r as staying witliiit the auct W height lintil, and lustily your choice of di a° maid t .t r..., would be the lc-ast znviroi mentally damaging altcrnativc and C nnsi tr P1 Will' flue rl u' -ci l of St surrounding area: Manic you for the Opportunity to pinment on the 11vi onment'il lntpacl Report fr, Kira Stay Landing; Project. Corn-- AssiG+n staff request notification of Fit y furu'1s; .1 Vi'av ::tSNOCWI vidth this project or related projec.I(8 Please note, the COt 11-nents provi' "' ': h i 111. i7� Il 1'1''?di V in nature. Additional and 1nore specific caturnews avy be appapdoul hs OW I"' (},1M, .1C V. AT: into final font and when an application is submitted for t Coastal Land We t 1 u: and COaStal Development Permit; Please feel free to coticac: nao at. 562-590-507 1 with any cjuesdons. Fer14ie Sy -- - -- - Coastal PI VD- t Analyst I.J. Cc: State Clearinghouse A -2 (cont.) PC6 222 '"r\T @or CAurQRNIA— PfAL1r01u,11/, S "I'ATETRAMSRORUTION AGENCY EDMUND C. NROWNL. Go,ww, WE A tTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DI STRICT 12 11947 NnC1-1ct.SON urt.rac,SUITE Inn IRVINE, CA ri2r,12 -88911 PHONE (9,19) 724-2000 FAX (9,19) 724 -2019 TTY 711 wwe .dotxl.gov g I PM (�Ir�,r�I��Ly., Y� 1a +�, rtarjour� /power' FAX do MAIL STATE CLEARING HOUSE November 7, 2013 Jaime Mturillo File: IGR/CCQA City of Newport Beach �AjAA( SCH4 :2012]01003 3300 Newport Boulevard V` I IGR Log 4: 3089 -C Newport Beach, California 92658 n SR -I C Deai .Mr. Murillo, Thank you for the opportunity to review and cornment on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (E3R) for the Back Bay Landing Project. The proposed project involves various legislative approvals for the future development of the Back Bay Landing Project, which is proposed to be, an integrated, mixed -use waterfront village on 6.974 act es in the City of Newport Beach generally located north of East Coast Highway and northwest of Baysid'e Drive in the western portion of the City. The Nearest State route to the project is SR -1.. The Department of Transportation (Department) is a responsible agency on this project and we have the following comments: The Departue rt's` raft c Operations Branch requests all applicants to use the method outlined to the'tatest version of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) when analyzing traffic impacts on State Transportation Facilities. The use ofHCMis preferred by the Department because it is an operational analysis as opposed' to the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method, which is a planning analysis: In the case of projects that have direct impacts on State Facilities, the Department recommends that the traffic impact analysis he based onHCM method. Shouldthe project require an encroachment permit, Traffic Operations may find the Traffic Impact Study based on ICU methodology inadequate resulting in, possible delay or denial of a permit by the Department. The use of either Synerhro or HCS software is preferred. All input sheets, assumptions and volumes on State, Facilities including ramps and intersection analysis should be sub no itted-to- the - Department for review and`approvat. The- -- FIR should include appropriate mitigation measures to offset -any potential impacts. The traffic impact on the state transportation system should. be evaluated based on the Department's Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies which is available at .littu.`Hwww.doL.ca:uov /hq /traf fops /devel op sere /opera tioiialsystems /reports /tisgui Cie :ndf 2'. The.d'ocuunent should include a discussion and address bicycles and pedestrians during.the Coll structi oil. "Caltrmrs iurp, oyes mobilgj, ocross California " PC6 223 A -3 3. All gennictric and accessibility design discussed on page 9.M -16 Incest meet CA- MUTC.D and Cwtenl. A:DA standards: Please continue to keep Is informed of this prgjccl and any fut uc developments, which could potentially impact the State Transportation Facilities. ]fyoa have any dtiestioris or need to contact us, please do Ito[ hesitate to call Maryamlvolavt at 9-49) 724=2267 Sincerely, MAUREEN LL HARAKE Branch Chief, Regioiial- Coiinmunity- Transit Planning District 1.2 C: Scott Morgan, Office of Planning and Research A -3 (cont.) T>ao 224 December 2013 2.0 Responses to Comments LETTER A Scott Morgan Director, State Clearinghouse State of California Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit 1400 Tenth Street P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812 -3044 Comment A -1 This letter from the Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit (State Clearinghouse) states that the City has complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents. The comment also notes that the State Clearinghouse distributed the Draft EIR to state agencies for review and received comments from two of them: the California Coastal Commission and the Department of Transportation. Comment A -2 This letter from the California Coastal Commission was included as an attachment to Letter A from the State Clearinghouse. This letter was also provided directly to the City and as such is included as Letter C in this Chapter with individual responses to comments raised in the letter provided below. Comment A -3 This letter from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) was included as an attachment to Letter A from the State Clearinghouse. This letter was also provided directly to the City and as such is included as Letter D in this Chapter with individual responses to comments raised in the letter provided below. PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 2 -9 PCG 225 2.0 Responses to Comments This page intentionally left blank. December 2013 PCR Services Corporation /SCH No. 2012101003 2-10 PCc, 2g(� i "mT ° 1 ,o n, om, " EDMUND G. RROIAT .1R: GOVEKNOR Letter B STATE OF CALIFORNIA GOITRNOR'S OFFICE gf'PLANNIK AND RE, ESEAI C i STATE CLEARINGII OUSE AND PLAIVATING UNIT November 26, 2013 Jaime Murillo City of Newport Beach 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Subject: Back Bay Landing Project SCH #: 2012101003 Dear Jaime Murillo: 'gC.EIVE0 NY COMMUNITY 13LC 0 2 2093 r, DEVELOPhArNT u' 0 �1 Qr NEWPOVC� "ff NANO' a rl���UF C�LffOA�?`Y 1f, NA:Er Du=rok The enclosed con rnent (s) on your DraftEIR was (were) received by the State Clearinghouse after the end of the state review period, which closed on November 18; 2013. We are forwarding these comments to you because they provide infornnation or raise issues that should be addressed in your final. environruental document. The California Environmental Quality Act does not require Lead Agencies to respond to late, comments. However, we encourage you to incorporate these additional comments into your final environmental document and to consider them prior to taking final action on the proposed project. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 ifyou have any questions concerning the environmental review process. If you have a question regarding . the above - named project, please refer to the ten- digit State Clearinghouse number (2012101003) when contacting this office. Sincerely, I Cott Morgan Director, Stale Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 140010th Street P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812 -3044 (916) 445 -0613 FAX(916)323-3018 www:opr.ca.gov PCr' 227 MIN T_ Ilri��r, .� ,.;d Emmnn G.R,rmn+Jn. e'..rov "In ,.j <1 Mnrv, ^w Ra...... r. U1 F Water Boards � u,wnonvunu rnmrcooml Banta Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board'. Il� ll 11� -— November 25, 2013 1� �^^ �`'� l� 1 E� 1U(�f y - Jaime> Murillo - - 5 2 &3 City of Newport Beach CLEARING HousE 100 Civic Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR BACON BAY LANDING PROJECT, UPPER NEWPORT BAY, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, SCH #2012101003 Dear Mr. Murillo: Staff of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (Regional Board) has reviewed the October 3, 2013 Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Back Bay Landing Project, a proposed mixed -use waterfront development (including a possible observation tower), in the City of Newport Beach (Project). The Project would develop a 6.974 -acre portion of the 31.431 -acre Parcel 3, located adjacent to the existing Bayside Village Marina along +the -southern shore of Upper Newport Bay (Bay). Of the 6.974 acres: a 6.332 acres are located immediately north of East Coast Highway between the Bayside Village Marina and Bayside Drive, and 0 0.642 acre extends beneath and south of the East Coast Highway Bridge, along the east side of the channel connecting Upper and Lower Newport Bay. We request that the following' comments be incorporated into the Final EIR, in order to-protect water quality standards (i.e_, water quality objectives and beneficial uses) identified in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin, 9995, as amended (Basin Plan): Permanent impacts to waters of the state and water quality standards should be avoided to the maximum'extent possible, and temporary and permanent impacts must be mitigated'forwhere such impacts are unavoidable. Mitigation 'site's must be protected from-other uses-by appropriate restrictive land use instruments. The Final EIR_ should analyze and discuss how the following beneficial uses of Upper Newport Bay, as listed in the Basin Plan, will be protected by the Project's proposed mitigation measures: a Estuarine Habitat (EST), Shellfish Harvesting (SHEL), IF - Commercial and Sportrishing (COMM), ' • Marine Habitat (MAR), • Spawning, Reproduction, and Development (SPWN), • Wildlife Habitat (WILD),- ° Preservation of Biological Habitats of Special Significance (BIOL), • Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species (RARE), • Water Contact Recreation (RECD, and ` • Non- Contact Water Recreation (REC2). CAROLE H. BESWICK, CHAIR 1 KURT V. BERCHTOLO, EXECUTIVE OFFICER 3737 Maln St., Who :500,..RIVersida, CA 9250, 1 www.walmboards.co.gov /santeann