Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.0_Newport Banning Ranch_PA2008-114CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT March 22, 2012 Meeting Agenda Item 4 SUBJECT: Newport Banning Ranch - (PA2008 -114) 5200 West Coast Highway • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2009 -002 • General Plan Amendment No. GP2008 -008 • Code Amendment No. CA2008 -004 • Planned Community Development Plan No, PC2008 -002 • Master Development Plan No. MP2008 -001 • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2008 -003 • Development Agreement No. DA2008 -003 • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O08 -001 • Traffic Study No. TS2008 -002 APPLICANT: Newport Banning Ranch, LLC PLANNER: Patrick J. Alford, Planning Manager palford(@newportbeachca.gov PROJECT SUMMARY A proposed planned community on a 401.1 acre project site for development of 1,375 residential dwelling units, a 75 -room resort inn and ancillary resort uses, 75,000 square feet of commercial uses, approximately 51.4 acres of parklands, and approximately 252.3 acres of permanent open space. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH No. 2009031061 to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project. The EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). RECOMMENDATION 1) Receive staff report focused in Environmental Impact Report; 2) Conduct a public hearing; and 3) Continue public hearing to April 5, 2012. j 1] IQ Z City of Hunlington Beach VICINITY MAP AllaNa Ammo iy N *n Hamillm Amnue 0 C A A N Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 2 4UGSOn ShCB1 f City of - - kriN� - -> 1 Costa Mesa i ewpQq'- �; Be77ch . lath Steal Counryof.` 's - - =? 16IhSwot Orange • \� NEWPORTBANNlNG1 1711, SIlCCI _ RANCH mhSlreo/l., City Of [ ` PraOuclion�._Jd `, / Ne -.\ wpoq �\ Race .\ _ Beach i `� 151h SbMl, — y`✓ �� ! City of Newport Beach Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 3 i EXISTING GENERAL PLAN EXISTING ZONING ON -SITE Open Space /Residential p Village (OS (RV)) Multi -unit Residential (RM), Parks and NORTH Recreation (PR); Costa Mesa General Plan SOUTH Single-Unit Residential Parks and Recreation (PR), Multi -Unit Residential (RM), General Industrial (IG), EAST Private Institutions (PI), and Public Facilities (PF); Costa Mesa General Plan Light Industry and Medium Density Residential Open Space (OS) and WEST Single -Unit Residential 25); County Zoning Suburban Multi- family Residential (R -4), Local Business Commercial (C- 1), Light Industrial (M -1) with Oil Production (0), Sign Restriction (SR), and Floodplain Zone (FP- Planned Community (PC- 16), Costa Mesa Zoning Institutional and Recreational Single -Unit Residential Parks and Recreation (PR), Planned Community (PC -14), Multi -Unit Residential (RM), Industrial (IG), Private Institutions (PI), Public Facilities (PF); Costa Mesa Zoning General Industrial and Multiple Family Open Space (OS) and Single -Unit Residential Open space, oil production Open space, multi -unit residential Single -unit residential detached Single -unit detached residential, light industrial, educational facilities, multi -unit residential and vacant Open space and single -unit residential detached Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 4 INTRODUCTION Proiect Settin The project site consists of approximately 401.1 acres. Approximately 40 acres are located within the incorporated boundary of the City and the remainder is located within unincorporated Orange County, in the City's adopted Sphere of Influence, as approved by the Local Agency Formation Commission of Orange County (LAFCO). The site's topography is characterized by two primary topographic areas: the lowland area in the northwestern portion and the upland area, located on the southwest edge of Newport Mesa, in the southern and eastern portions. The upland area has been incised to form three arroyos, with the largest being the Southern Arroyo and the second largest being the Northern Arroyo. A very small arroyo feature (Minor Arroyo) is located in the northeastern -most portion of the project site. Although the project site has experienced disturbance associated with oil production operations, the site contains 45 vegetation types, including 20 types of coastal sage scrub and disturbed coastal sage scrub; vernal and ephemeral pools, marshes and mudflats; 8 types of undisturbed and disturbed riparian resources; and non - native grassland and ruderal, and disturbed /developed areas. The project site is currently a producing oilfield with approximately 489 oil well sites and buildings and oil facility infrastructure, including oil processing facilities, pipelines, storage tanks, utility poles, and machinery. Related facilities include graded roads and equipment areas surfaced with gravel, asphalt, crude oil, or crude oil tank sediments, as well as old sumps which held produced oil and fluids in in- ground surface impoundments. The project site is generally bound on the north by Talbert Nature Preserve /Regional Park in the City of Costa Mesa and Newport Terrace residential community; on the south by West Coast Highway and Lido Sands residential community south of the highway; on the east by a mix of land uses, including the California Seabreeze residential community and light industrial uses in the City of Costa Mesa, a vacant Newport-Mesa Unified School District -owned parcel, the City of Newport Beach Utilities Yard, Carden Hall day school, Coast Community College Newport Beach Learning Center (under construction), office and light industrial uses, the Newport Crest residential community, and the Sunset Ridge Park site; and on the west by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers- restored salt marsh basin and the Santa Ana River. Project Description The project is a proposed 401.1 -acre planned community for development of up to 1,375 residential dwelling units, a 75 -room resort inn and ancillary resort uses, 75,000 Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 5 square feet of commercial uses, approximately 51.4 acres of parklands, and approximately 252.3 acres of permanent open space. The application consists of the following components: • General Plan Amendment No. GP2008 -008. An amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to delete the planned segment of 15th Street west of Bluff Road. • Code Amendment No. CA2008 -004. A code amendment to rezone the portion of the project site currently within the incorporated boundary of the City from Planned Community (PC -25)1 to Planned Community (PC -57). • Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2008 -002. A planned community development plan that would establish the allowable land uses, general development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures, which would serve as zoning for the project site. • Master Development Plan No. MP2008 -001. A plan to establish detailed design criteria for each land use component to guide the review of subsequent development approvals. • Tentative Tract Map No. NT2008 -003. A tentative tract map to establish lots for public dedication or conveyance, lots for residential development and conveyance to homebuyers, and lots for financing and conveyance. • Development Agreement No. DA2008 -003. A pre- annexation and Development Agreement between the applicant and the City of Newport Beach describing development rights and public benefits. • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan No. AH2O08 -001. A program specifying how the proposed project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements. • Traffic Study No. TS2008 -002. A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance). • Environmental Impact Report No. ER2009 -002. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH No. 2009031061 to evaluate the environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project. PC -25 is the Banning Newport Ranch Planned Community. This 75.5 -acre planned community development plan was adopted in 1995 and provided for the development of 406 dwelling units and 400,000 square feet of office /industrial uses. The land uses and development policies of PC -25 were made inconsistent with the adoption of the General Plan in 2006. As part of the comprehensive Zoning Code Update approved by the City in 2010, approximately 13.06 acres of PC -25 were rezoned to Public Facilities (PF) leaving approximately 62.44 acres zoned PC -25. Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 6 EIR Review Process The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency under CEQA for preparation, review and certification of the Final EIR for the Newport Banning Ranch project. As the Lead Agency, the City is responsible for determining the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action and which of those impacts are significant, and which can be mitigated to a level of less than significant. The Planning Commission's role is to formulate a recommendation regarding the adequacy of the EIR and the merits of the proposed project for City Council consideration. The City Council is the final decision - making body. The adequacy of the EIR in identifying and mitigating environmental impacts of the project, as required by CEQA, is the first step in the decision - making process. Following a determination on the EIR, the Planning Commission will review the project as a separate action. A determination that an environmental document satisfies the requirements of CEQA does not indicate approval of a project. Development of the Newport Banning Ranch EIR has included the following milestones: • 09/03/08 Application filed • 03/16/09 Notice of Preparation (NOP) distributed • 03/18/09 30 -day NOP public review and comment period begins • 04/02/09 Scoping Meetings held to solicit additional suggestions on the content of the Draft EIR from government agencies and public • 04/17/09 NOP public review comment period closed • 09/09/11 Notice of Availability and Notice of Completion distributed • 09/09/11 60 -day public comment and review period begins • 09/19/11 Environmental Quality Affairs Committee (EQAC) meeting on the review of the Draft EIR • 10/17/11 EQAC meeting on comments on the Draft EIR • 11/03/11 Planning Commission study session on the EIR process • 11/08/11 Public comment and review period ends • 03/08/12 Planning Commission study session on the Draft EIR • 03/22/12 Planning Commission Public Hearing • 04/05/12 Planning Commission Public Hearing (additional public hearings may be required) • TBD City Council Public Hearing(s) Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 7 DISCUSSION A minimum of two public hearings are warranted to allow the Planning Commission to review the EIR and project and receive public testimony. The March 22 "d meeting and this report focuses on the EIR (Attachment PC 2), including the environmental review process and the findings of the environmental analysis. The second public hearing is tentatively scheduled for April 5, 2012 which will focus on the details of the project. The Commission is tasked with making a recommendation to the City Council on the certification of the Final EIR and the proposed project. The City Council, which will have final authority over the proposed project, will consider whether or not to certify that the EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA and the State and local CEQA guidelines. The Commission must make their recommendation on the certification of the Final EIR prior to consideration of the proposed project application. The Planning Commission's recommendations will be two separate actions (i.e., vote) that may be made at separate public hearings. A detailed staff report will be prepared on the proposed proje ct application for the April 5, 2012 Planning Commission. Analysis Pursuant to CEQA, the purpose of an EIR is to: • Identify the significant effects on the environment of a project; • Identify alternatives to the proposed project; and • Indicate the manner in which significant environmental effects can be mitigated or avoided. An EIR is the most comprehensive form of environmental documentation identified in CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and provides the information needed to assess the environmental consequences of a proposed project to the extent feasible. EIRs are intended to provide an objective, factually supported, full - disclosure analysis of the environmental consequences associated with a project that may have the potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts. In the end, the environmental analysis needs to be comprehensive enough to allow informed decisions on a project. State CEQA Guidelines state: An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information that enables them to make a decision that intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 8 EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have not looked for perfection but for adequacy, and a good faith effort at full disclosure. The City is the "lead agency" for the proposed project. CEQA defines the lead agency as the "public agency which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving the project." As the lead agency, the City is required to review and consider the EIR prior to any decision to approve, revise, or deny the proposed project. Other public agencies with direct interest in the project (e.g., responsible and trustee agencies including the California Coastal Commission), may use the EIR in their decision- making or permitting processes. Environmental Impact Analysis The EIR provides an impact analysis for those environmental impact categories where it was determined that the proposed project could result in "potentially significant impacts." This analysis included every environmental impact category in the City's Environmental Checklist, with the exception of agricultural and timberland resource. The significance of impacts is determined by thresholds derived from the City's Environmental Checklist, CEQA, and the State CEQA Guidelines. Significance thresholds define the quantitative, qualitative, or performance limits of a particular environmental effect. If these thresholds are exceeded, the impact is considered it to be significant. Most of the potentially significant environmental impacts were determined to have either "no impact" or "No Significant Impact" through the implementation of the Mitigation Program comprised of Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions (SCs), and Mitigation Measures (MMs). EIR Table 1 -2 (Attachment PC 3) provides a summary of significant impacts and the Mitigation Program. However, the impact analysis did identify significant and unavoidable impacts; impacts that remain significant after including all feasible mitigation measures are considered. These impacts are discussed below. Significant Unavoidable Impacts Land Use and Related Planning Programs. There would be land use incompatibility with respect to long -term noise and night illumination predominately from the Community Park on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the project site. • Mitigation Measures MM 4.12 -6 and MM 4.12 -7 would provide mitigation • No authority to mandate the implementation of mitigation on private property Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 9 • Noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels • This impact would be significant and unavoidable. It should be noted that the 2006 General Plan Final EIR recognized that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the Banning Ranch property, including a community park, would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan, the City approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits that outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts associated with the adoption of the General Plan. These benefits included the development of a new park, whether Banning Ranch was acquired as open space or partially developed, that will provide playfields and passive recreational opportunities for the underserved western portion of the City. Aesthetic and Visual Resources. The proposed project would introduce nighttime lighting into a currently unlit area. • Project would include "dark sky" lighting concept • Night lighting impacts are considered significant and unavoidable It should again be noted that the 2006 General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of Banning Ranch would be considered significant and unavoidable and that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits which outweigh these impacts. Transportation and Traffic. The proposed project would have impacts on intersections in the City of Costa Mesa. • Mitigation Measure MM 4.9 -2 would mitigate impact to a level considered less than significant • City cannot impose mitigation on another jurisdiction • If the applicant is unable to implement mitigation within the City of Costa Mesa, the impacts would remain significant and unavoidable The specific impacts to the City of Costa Mesa intersections are identified in Section 1.6.2 and Section 4.9 of the EIR. Air Quality. Without mitigation, regional (mass) emissions of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are forecasted to exceed applicable thresholds in some construction years. Long -term Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 10 operational emissions of criteria pollutants would not exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) mass emissions thresholds from initial occupancy through 2020. However, as project development continues beyond 2020, emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and carbon monoxide (CO) would exceed the significance thresholds, principally due to vehicle operations. Therefore, the impacts remain significant and unavoidable. The proposed project would have cumulatively considerable contributions to regional pollutant concentrations of ozone (03). • Mitigation Measure MM 4.10 -1 would reduce the NOx emissions to less than significant levels • The availability of sufficient Tier 4 diesel engine construction equipment cannot be assured • Therefore, the air quality impacts are found to be significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The proposed project would emit quantities of green house gases (GHGs) that would exceed the City's 6,000 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year significance threshold. The proposed project would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the global GHG inventory affecting global climate change. Noise. The increased traffic volumes on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue in Costa Mesa would expose sensitive receptors (i.e., residential dwellings, hotels, hospitals, day care centers, and educational facilities) to noise levels that would exceed City of Costa Mesa significance thresholds. Mitigation Measure MM 4.12 -5 requires the applicant to provide funds to the City of Costa Mesa to resurface the street with rubberized asphalt; however, the City has no ability to assure that the mitigation would be implemented. Therefore, the forecasted impact to residents of 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue is considered significant and unavoidable. For portions of the Newport Crest development, there would be a significant increase in the ambient noise level due to the projected traffic volumes in the build -out condition. Although Mitigation Measures MM 4.12 -6 and MM 4.12 -7 would provide mitigation, noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels. The City does not have the authority to mandate the implementation of mitigation on private property that is not on the project site; therefore, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. The use of construction equipment would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels to nearby noise - sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the project construction activities. The temporary noise increases would be significant and Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 11 unavoidable due to the low existing ambient noise levels, the proximity of the noise - sensitive receptors, and duration of construction activities. Significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level through the adoption of mitigation measures or project alternatives, the City Council, (and responsible agencies using this CEQA document for their respective permits or approvals) must decide whether the benefits of the proposed project outweigh any identified significant environmental effects that cannot be mitigated to below a threshold of significance. If the City decides that the overriding considerations, including project benefits, outweigh the unavoidable impacts, then the City is required to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which states the reasons that support its actions. The City Council would also consider adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations as part of their review of the Final EIR and the proposed project. Alternatives State CEQA Guidelines requires that "an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives ". It should be noted that State CEQA Guidelines state that "an EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives, which are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason." The EIR compares the following six (6) alternatives to the proposed project: Alternative A: No Action /No Development Alternative (Continuation of Existing Land Uses) - "No project' alternative required by the State CEQA Guidelines and assumes existing conditions on the project site and the continuation and possible expansion of oil exploration and oil production operations. • Greater impacts in terms of consistency with applicable plans and policies • No significant and unavoidable impacts Alternative B: Newport Beach General Plan /Open Space Designation - Assumes the General Plan Primary Use open space acquisition option, including consolidation of oil operations, wetlands restoration, construction of roadways, and provision of nature Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 12 education, interpretative facilities, and an active park that contains lighted playfields and other facilities. • Would eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts associated with traffic, air quality, greenhouse gases, and certain noise impacts • Impacts could still not be reduced to a level considered less than significant • Environmentally superior alternative, feasibility issues, does not meet project objectives Alternative C: Proposed Project with Bluff Road Extending to 17th Street - assumes the same land uses and development plan as the proposed project with a North Bluff Road /Bluff Road connection from West Coast Highway only to 17th Street. • Would minimize significant impacts to sensitive habitat areas and landform alteration associated with the extension of North Bluff Road from just north of 17th Street to 19th Street • Would not eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts associated with traffic, air quality, greenhouse gases, and certain noise impacts Alternative D: Reduced Development and Development Area - assumes the same number of residential units within a reduced footprint. • Substantially lessens, but does not eliminate, the impacts as a result of a smaller footprint (less grading and less development) Alternative E: Reduced Development Area - assumes the same number of residential units within a reduced footprint. Residential units would be provided at a higher density and on smaller lots than assumed for the proposed project. • Incremental reduction in impacts due to the reduction in development and the area being developed • Would not eliminate any of the unavoidable significant impacts Alternative F: Increased Open Space /Reduced Development Area - assumes the same number of residential units within a reduced footprint. Residential units would be provided at a higher density and on smaller lots than assumed for the proposed project. • Incremental reduction in impacts due to the reduction in development and the area being developed • Would not eliminate any of the unavoidable significant impacts • Environmentally superior development alternative Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 13 The features and characteristics of each Alternative are summarized in the Table 1 below. TABLE 1 Proposed Project ALTERNATIVES A B C D E F Development Area AC 97.4 N/A 0 97.2 92.9 92.9 84.0 Open Space AC 252.3 NIA 369.8 252.0 269.1 269.1 282.4 Parkland AC 51.4 0 31.3 51.9 39.1 39.1 34.7 Residential DU 1375 0 0 1375 1200 1375 1375 Commercial SF 75,000 0 0 75,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 Visitor-Serving Comm. SF 0 0 15,000 15,000 0 Resort Inn Rooms 75 1 0 0 1 75 0 0 0 Oil Operations Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Community Park (Lighted) Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Habitat Restoration Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Nature Center Yes No Yes Yes No No No Interpretative Trails Yes No Yes Yes No No No General Plan Roadways Yes Possible Yes Yes YesYes Yes WCH Pedestrian Bride Yes No No Yes No No No Notes: 1. Included in Resort Inn 2. No 15 Street extension to West Coast Highway 3. Oil roduclion only 4. No extension of North Bluff Road north of 17m Street; no 1r Street extension to West Coast Highway CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally superior alternative. The State CEQA Guidelines state that if the No Project Alternative (Alternative A) is the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. Based on the evaluation contained in the EIR, Alternative B (General Plan Open Space Designation) would be the environmentally superior alternative because it provides for restoration of the Project site and maintains the greatest amount of open space. While this alternative would have greater impacts than the No Project Alternative in the near -term, the long -term benefits associated with site restoration would be environmentally superior to maintaining the site as an oilfield. Although Alternative B is the environmentally superior alternative, there are significant challenges affecting its feasibility. The financial feasibility of this alternative is dependent upon the ability of a responsible party to obtain sufficient funds to acquire the site and fund clean -up, restoration, and long -term maintenance of the site. Feasibility is also dependent on the City's ability to construct roadways, infrastructure, and recreation improvements. In addition, since no mechanism exists to impose consolidation and clean -up of the oilfield, agreements would have to be negotiated for this to occur .2 Additionally, Alternative B does not meet a number of the project objectives. Therefore, an environmentally superior development alternative is also being identified. Alternative 2 Acquisition of the property does not include acquisition of the underlying mineral rights, which are owned by a Third party. Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 14 F would provide development that is generally consistent with the General Plan Residential Village designation and would be able to meet most of the project objectives. Although this Alternative does not eliminate any of the significant impacts of the project, it does substantially lessen the impacts by reducing the amount of land that would be subject to development, and increasing the amount of undeveloped open space by almost 30 acres, it provides greater protection of the environment. This alternative provides greater protection of the environment by reducing the area of non - open spaces uses by approximately 20 percent. Response to Comments The Draft EIR was released for public review and comment by the City on September 9, 2011. The 60 -day public review period ended on November 8, 2011. During that period the City received 28 comment letters from governmental agencies, regional organizations, and committees and 129 comment letters from local groups and individuals. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, the City has evaluated all substantive comments received on the Draft EIR, and has prepared written responses to these comments (Attachment PC 4). The Response to Comments will be a component of the Final EIR, which will be considered for certification by the City Council. Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program CEQA requires that all public agencies establish monitoring and /or reporting procedures for mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant project impacts. The reporting or monitoring program must be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The City is the lead agency for the project and is therefore responsible for implementing the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The MMRP (Attachment PC 5) provides a timeframe for performance of the Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions (SCs), and Mitigation Measures (MMs) or review of evidence that mitigation has taken place, is provided. The MMRP also identifies the responsible party for implementing the mitigation measures. Finally, the MMRP provides the criteria for mitigation, either in the form of adherence to certain adopted regulations or identification of the steps to be taken in mitigation. Public Notice Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to approximately 6,500 property owners within 1000 feet of the property (300 feet is required by the Zoning Code) and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website. Newport Banning Ranch March 22, 2012 Page 15 Prepared by: fitted by: Patrick J. Alford, P anning Manager Br nd isneski I Deputy Director ATTACHMENTS PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings PC 2 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH No. 2009031061 (under separate cover) PC 3 EIR Table 1 -2 Summary of Significant Impacts and Mitigation Program PC 4 Draft Response to Comments and Errata (under separate cover) PC 5 Draft Mitigation, Monitoring and Report Program (under separate cover) PC 6 Correspondence Attachment No. PC I Draft Resolution with Findings RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NEWPORT BANNING RANCH PROJECT WHEREAS, an application was filed by Newport Banning Ranch, LLC with respect to a 401 -acre planned community for development of 1,375 residential dwelling units, a 75 -room resort inn and ancillary resort uses, 75,000 square feet of commercial uses, and approximately 51.4 acres of parklands generally located north of West Coast Highway, south of 19th Street, and east of the Santa Ana River. The Project site is adjacent to the City of Costa Mesa on the east, unincorporated County on the north and west, and the existing developed areas of the City of Newport Beach on the south and southeast. The Santa Ana River and the City of Huntington Beach are located west of the Project site; and WHEREAS, The application consists of the following components: a Development Agreement between the applicant and the City of Newport Beach describing development rights and public benefits; General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element of the General Plan to delete the planned segment of 15th Street west of Bluff Road; Code Amendment to rezone the project site from Planned Community (PC -25) to Planned Community (PC -57); a Pre - Annexation Agreement for a zone change that is proposed for those portions of the project site located within the City's Sphere of Influence from County zoning to PC -57; Planned Community Development Plan and would establish the allowable land uses, general development regulations, and implementation and administrative procedures; Master Development Plan to establish detailed design criteria for each land use component to guide the review of subsequent development approvals; Tentative Tract Map to establish lots for public dedication or conveyance, lots for residential development and conveyance to homebuyers, and lots for financing and conveyance; Affordable Housing Implementation Plan specifying how the project would meet the City's affordable housing requirements; and Traffic Study Approval pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance); and WHEREAS, it was determined 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, that the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR "); and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2009, the City of Newport Beach, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation ( "NOP ") of the EIR and mailed that NOP to public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed Project; and WHEREAS, on April 2, 2009, the City held two public scoping meetings, on for government agencies and one for the general public, to present the proposed project and to solicit input from interested individuals regarding environmental issues that should be addressed in the EIR; and Planning Commission Resolution No. Facie 2 of 23 WHEREAS, the City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report ( "DEIR "), which, taking into account the comments it received on the NOP, described the Project and discussed the environmental impacts resulting there from, and on September 9, 2011, circulated the Draft EIR for public and agency comments; and WHEREAS, on September 19, 2011 and October 17, 2011, the Environmental Quality Affairs Committee of the City of Newport Beach held a meetings on to review and comment on the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, on November 3, 2011, the Planning Commission held a study session on the Draft EIR process; WHEREAS, a 60 -day public review and comment period closed on November 8, 2011; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2012, February 9, 2012, and February 23, 2012, the Planning Commission held study sessions on the Newport Banning Ranch project; and WHEREAS, on March 8, 2012, the Planning Commission held a study session on the Draft EIR; and WHEREAS, staff of the City of Newport Beach reviewed the comments received on the Draft EIR d uring the public comment and review period, and prepared full and complete responses thereto, and on March 16, 2012 distributed the responses in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21092.5; and WHEREAS, public hearings were held on March 22 and , 2012, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the aforesaid meeting was given. The Draft EIR, draft Responses to Comments, and draft Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting; and WHEREAS, 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. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach recommends to the City Council of the City of Newport Beach certification of the Newport Banning Ranch Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH# SCH No. 2009031061) attached as Exhibit A based upon the draft findings of fact attached as Exhibit B. Planning Commission Resolution No. Pape 3 of 23 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY MARCH, 2012. AYES: NOES: BY: Michael Toerge, Chairman BY: Fred Ameri, Secretary Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 4 of 23 Exhibit "A" Environmental Impact Report (SCH #2009031061) Consists of: 1. Volume I: Draft Environmental Impact Report dated September 9, 2011 2. Volume II: Exhibits dated September 9, 2011 3. Volume III: Appendices A Through F dated September 9, 2011 4. Volume IV: Appendices G Through Z dated September 9, 2011 5. Responses to Comments and Errata dated March 2012 6. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program dated March 2012 Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 5 of 23 Exhibit "B" BACKGROUND The environmental impact report (EIR) process, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), requires the preparation of an objective, full - disclosure document in order to (1) inform agency decision makers and the general public of the direct and indirect potentially significant environmental effects of a proposed action; (2) identify feasible or potentially feasible mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate potential significant adverse impacts; and (3) identify and evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed project. In accordance with Section 15161 of the State CEQA Guidelines (Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]), this is a Project EIR that addresses the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project, known as "Newport Banning Ranch ". PROJECT LOCATION The Newport Banning Ranch Project site (Project site) encompasses approximately 401 acres. Approximately 40 acres of the Project site are located in the incorporated boundary of the City of Newport Beach (City), and approximately 361 acres are in unincorporated Orange County (County) within the City's Sphere of Influence, as determined by the Local Agency Formation Com mission (LAFCO) of Orange County. The entire Project site is within the boundary of the Coastal Zone, as established by the California Coastal Act. The Project site is generally bound on the north by the County of Orange Talbert Nature Preserve /Regional Park in the City of Costa Mesa and residential development in the City of Newport Beach; on the south by West Coast Highway and residential development in the City of Newport Beach; on the east by residential, light industrial, institutional, and office development in the Cities of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach; and on the west by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) restored salt marsh basin and the Santa Ana River. The City of Huntington Beach is west of the Santa Ana River. At its nearest point, the Project site is less than 0.25 mile inland from the Pacific Ocean. Because the property is an active oilfield, there is no public access to the Project site. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION SUMMARY The proposed Project would allow for the development of the site with residential, commercial, resort inn, and park and recreational uses, and would provide open space uses that would permit the designation of oil use retention and consolidation on a portion of the open space area of the Project site. The proposed Project includes infrastructure to support the proposed land uses; including public parks and open space to serve future Project residents and the community at large. The 401 -acre Project site is proposed for development with 1,375 residential dwelling units (du); 75,000 square feet (sf) of commercial uses, and a 75 -room resort inn. Approximately 51.4 gross acres are proposed for active and passive park uses including a 26.8- gross -acre public Community Park. Approximately 252.3 gross acres (approximately 63 percent) of the 401 -acre site are proposed for natural resources protection in the form of open space. Of the 252.3 gross acres, approximately 16.5 gross acres would be used for interim oil operations. Upon the future cessation of oil operations, these oil consolidation sites would be abandoned and remediated, and the consolidation sites would be restored as open space. The proposed Project includes the development of a vehicular and a non - vehicular circulation system for automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians, including a proposed pedestrian and bicycle bridge from the Project site across West Coast Highway. Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 6 of 23 The City of Newport Beach General Plan (General Plan) was adopted by the City Council on July 25, 2006, and approved by the voters on November 6, 2006. The General Plan (1) establishes criteria and standards for land use development and (2) provides policy and land use guidance for the City and its Sphere of Influence. A majority of the Project site is located in the unincorporated Orange County area within the City's Sphere of Influence with a County General Plan designation of "Open Space ". As a part of the Project, the unincorporated area within the City's Sphere of Influence is proposed to be annexed to the City. The Project site has a Newport Beach General Plan land use designation of OS (RV), Open Space /Residential Village. The OS(RV) land use designation establishes a Primary Use of Open Space and an Alternative Use of Residential Village for the Project site, as described below: Primary Use: Open Space, including significant active community parklands that serve adjoining residential neighborhoods if the site is acquired through public funding. Alternative Use: If not acquired for open space within a time period and pursuant to terms agreed to by the City and property owner, the site may be developed as a residential village containing a mix of housing types, limited supporting retail, visitor accommodations, school, and active community parklands, with a majority of the property preserved as open space. The property owner may pursue entitlement and permits for a residential village during the time allowed for acquisition as open space. The City of Newport Beach General Plan's Land Use Element prioritizes the retention of the Project site for open space. As described in the General Plan, the open space acquisition option could include consolidation of oilfield operations; restoration of wetlands; and the provision of nature education and interpretative facilities and an active park containing playfields and other facilities to serve residents of adjoining neighborhoods. The General Plan also specifies that, if the property is not acquired for open space within a time period and pursuant to terms agreed to by both the City and property owner, the Project site could be developed as a Residential Village (RV) containing a mix of housing types, limited supporting retail, visitor accommodations, a school, and active community parklands with a majority of the property preserved as open space. The General Plan identifies the maximum intensity of development allowed on the property to include up to 1,375 du, 75,000 sf of retail commercial uses oriented to serve the needs of local and nearby residents, and 75 hotel rooms in a small boutique hotel or other type of overnight visitor accommodation. Under both the Primary Use and Alternative Use, roadways would be constructed through the Project site. Both the Master Plan of Streets and Highways in the City of Newport Beach General Plan's Circulation Element and the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH) depict roadways through the Project site. Roadways to be constructed as part of the proposed Project include: (a) Bluff Road, a north - south, four -lane divided road extending from West Coast Highway to 15th Street; (b) North Bluff Road, which would transition from a four -lane divided road to a two -lane undivided road extending between 15th Street and 19th Street; (c) an extension of 15th Street, a four -lane divided road, from its existing western terminus at the boundary of the Project site and connecting with North Bluff Road; (d) the extension of 16th Street, a two -lane collector roadway, from its existing terminus at the Project site's eastern boundary to North Bluff Road; and (e) the extension of 17th Street, a four -lane divided primary roadway from its existing terminus at the Project site's eastern boundary and connecting with North Bluff Road. As proposed, the Project requires an amendment to the General Plan Circulation Element to delete a second road connection to West Coast Highway through the Project site from 15th Street. The traffic analysis done for the Project demonstrates that this roadway is not needed to serve the traffic demand associated with the proposed Project and subregional development. Therefore, construction of this second road to West Coast Highway has not been identified as a component of the Project. An amendment to the Orange County MPAH is also required to delete a second connection to West Coast Highway and to redesignate North Bluff Road. The Orange County MPAH designates North Bluff Road as a Primary (four -lane divided) to 17th Street and a Major (six -lane divided) between 17th Street and 19th Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 7 of 23 Street. An amendment to the Orange County MPAH is required to change the designation from a Major to a Secondary (four -lane undivided) between 17th Street and 19th Street. Half -width roadway improvements on North Bluff Road north of 16th Street for approximately 800 feet are proposed on property owned by the Newport-Mesa Unified School District (School District). The construction of this segment of North Bluff Road would require acquisition by Newport Banning Ranch, LLC (Applicant) or the authorization for use of right -of -way from the School District. A Zone Change is being requested to pre -zone the portion of the Project site located within the City's Sphere of Influence as Planned Community 57 (PC -57), and to amend the boundaries of PC -25 (located within the City) to remove that portion of the Project site currently located within PC -25 and change the zoning for this area to PC -57. The boundaries of PC -25 would be revised to include only the remaining properties owned by the School District and the City. A Zoning Code Amendment is proposed to adopt the "Newport Banning Ranch Planned Community" (NBR -PC). The NBR -PC would serve as the zoning regulations for PC -57, including both the portion of the Project site located within the City of Newport Beach and the portion of the Project site located within the County of Orange, but within the City's Sphere of Influence. Following annexation of the areas located within the Sphere of Influence, the NBR -PC would become effective. The NBR -PC establishes allowable land uses within each land use district; development regulations for each land use district; general development regulations applicable to all development within the Project site; and procedures for implementing and administering the NBR -PC. The proposed Project includes a request for approval of the Newport Banning Ranch Master Development Plan (Master Development Plan). Approval of the Master Development Plan implements the NBR -PC zoning requirements for the Project site by establishing design criteria for each proposed land use and providing a sufficient level of detail, as determined by the City, to guide the review of subsequent development approvals. The Master Development Plan contains Project development plans and preliminary layouts for streets and lotting, pedestrian and vehicular accessways, open spaces, parks, and other site features for the Project site area. City approval of the Master Development Plan is required for Project implementation. The Applicant is also requesting the approval of Tentative Tract Map (TTM) No. 17308, which (1) establishes lots for public dedication or conveyance; (2) easements for trails and public utilities; (3) lots for residential development and conveyance to homebuyers; and (4) lots for financing and conveyance that may be either developed on a residential condominium basis or wh ich can be further subdivided for purposes of development and conveyance to homebuyers. Approval of TTM No. 17308 would permit grading, site remediation, habitat restoration, construction of drainage and water quality improvements, backbone infrastructure, and dry and wet utilities throughout the Project site. Development of all other proposed facilities and land uses would require recordation of a final tract map. A Pre - Annexation and Development Agreement between the Applicant and the City would also be processed concurrent with other approvals associated with this Project. Project implementation requires multiple approvals, permits, and /or actions as listed below. Federal • USACE: Section 404 permit for impacts to areas determined to be "Waters of the U.S. ". • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Section 7 Consultation for potential impacts to federally listed species. State G Regional Water Quality Control Board: Water Quality Certification under Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act; approval related to oil well /facility abandonment and site remediation. Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 8 of 23 • California Department of Fish and Game: Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement. • California Coastal Commission: Master Coastal Development Permit, including approval of the Newport Banning Ranch Master Development Plan and Pre - Annexation and Development Agreement. • California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans): Encroachment Permit for activities in Caltrans' rights -of -way, including modification of the reinforced concrete box under West Coast Highway and construction of the pedestrian and bicycle bridge. • California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources: Site remediation activities. Regional and Special Districts • Local Agency Formation Commission: Annexation approval. • South Coast Air Quality Management District ( SCAQMD): SCAQMD permits for the oilfield soil remediation. • County Orange County Transportation Authority: Amendment to the Orange County MPAH. • Orange County Health Care Agency: Approval related to oil well /facility abandonment and site remediation. City of Newport Beach • Certification of the Final EIR • General Plan Circulation Amendment • Zoning Code Amendment • Zone Change • Newport Banning Ranch Planned Community Development Plan • Newport Banning Ranch Master Development Plan • Tentative Tract Map No. 17308 • Affordable Housing Implementation Plan (AHIP) • Pre - Annexation and Development Agreement • Traffic Phasing Ordinance Approval In addition to the approvals identified above, the Project is subject to other discretionary and ministerial actions by the City as part of Project implementation. Subsequent activities would be examined in light of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) to determine whether additional CEQA documentation would be required pursuant to the requirements of Section 21166 of CEQA (Public Resources Code §21166) and Sections 15162 and 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR) for subsequent approvals. Subsequent City approvals include but are not limited to the following: Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 9 of 23 • Tentative and Final Tract Maps to further subdivide lots approved as part of the approval of TTM No. 17308; • Site Development Review Permits; • Use Permits; • Model Home Permits; • Grading Permits; • Street Improvement and Pedestrian and Bicycle Bridge Plans; • Storm Drainage, Sewer, Water, and Dry Utility Plans; • Landscaping and Park Plans; • Building Permits; • Encroachment Permits; • Acquisition of rights of entry easements and rights -of -way for off -site Project improvements, as necessary; • Construction of Public Facilities. IV. PROJECT OBJECTIVES The Applicant has identified the following objectives for the proposed Project. 1. Provide a Project that implements the goals and policies that the Newport Beach General Plan has established for the Banning Ranch area. 2. Preservation of a minimum of 50 percent of the Project site as open space without the use of public funds to be used for habitat conservation, interpretive trails, and development of public parks to meet the recreational needs of the community. 3. Development of a residential village of up to 1,375 residential units, offering a variety of housing types in a range of housing prices, including the provision of affordable housing to help meet the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). 4. Development of up to 75 overnight accommodations in a small resort inn including ancillary facilities and services such as a spa, meeting rooms, shops, bars, and restaurants that would be open to the public. 5. Development of up to 75,000 square feet of retail commercial uses oriented to serve the needs of local residents and visitors utilizing the resort inn and the coastal recreational opportunities provided as part of the Project. 6. Development of a land use plan that (1) provides a comprehensive design for the community that creates cohesive neighborhoods promoting a sense of identity with a simple and understandable pattern of streets, a system of pedestrian walkways and bikeways that connect residential neighborhoods, commercial uses, parks, open space and resort uses; (2) reduces overall vehicle miles travelled; (3) integrates landscaping that is compatible with the surrounding open space /habitat areas and that enhances the pedestrian experience within residential areas; and (4) applies architectural design criteria to orient residential buildings to the streets and walkways in a manner that enhances the streetscape scene. Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 10 of 23 7. Provide for roadway improvements to improve and enhance regional circulation, minimize impacts of Project development on the existing circulation system, and enhance public access while not developing more roadways than are needed for adequate regional circulation and coastal access. 8. Provide enhanced public access in the Coastal Zone through a system of pedestrian walkways, multi- use trails, and on- street bikeways designed to encourage walking and biking as an alternative to the use of automobiles by providing connectivity among residential, commercial, park, open space, and resort uses within the Project site and to existing adjacent open space, hiking and biking trails, the beach, and the Pacific Ocean. 9. Provide for the consolidation of oil resource extraction and related recovery operations in locations that minimize impacts to sensitive habitat areas and promote compatibility with development of the remainder of the property for residential, resort, commercial, park, and open space uses. 10. Provide for the restoration and permanent preservation of habitat areas through implementation of a Habitat Restoration Plan (HRP) for the habitat conservation, restoration, and mitigation areas ( "Habitat Areas') as depicted on the Master Development Plan. 11. Provide for long -term preservation and management of the Habitat Areas through the establishment of a conservation easement or deed restriction and the creation of an endowment or other funding program. 12. 12. Expand public recreational opportunities within the Coastal Zone through development of a public community park and associated parking, and through development of publicly accessible bluff parks, interpretive parks, and trails as part of the Project. 13. Improve the existing arroyo drainage courses located within the Project site to provide for higher quality habitat conditions than exist prior to the time of Project implementation. 14. Implement a Water Quality Management Program within the Project site that will utilize existing natural treatment systems and that will improve the quality of urban runoff from off -site and on -site sources prior to discharging into the Santa Ana River and the Semeniuk Slough. 15. Implement fire protection management solutions designed to protect development areas from fire hazards, to preserve sensitive habitat areas, and to create fire- resistant habitat restoration areas within currently denuded, invasive - species laden, and /or otherwise degraded areas. 16. Provide compatibility between the Project and existing adjacent land uses. V. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Section 15126.6(a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that "an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives ". Six alternatives were evaluated. In addition, to the six alternatives that were carried forward for evaluation in this EIR, three alternatives were considered but not carried forward. The alternatives were developed to avoid or minimize impacts associated with implementation of the proposed Project. Given the nature and scale of the Project, complete avoidance of significant impacts was not feasible for any alternative other than the No Project Alternative. Alternatives Considered But Not Carried Forward Various alternatives were evaluated as part of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Update process. Since the City of Newport Beach City Council already took action on the General Plan and provided Planning Commission Resolution No. Pape 11 of 23 direction on the development concept for the site, these alternatives were not carried forward. In addition, as part of this EIR process, three alternatives were considered but not carried forward. Development of the Project Site Consistent with the County of Orange General Plan and Zoning Designations The zoning for the 361 acres of the Project site within the County jurisdiction would allow for development of up to 2,510 multi - family dwelling units, 225 single - family dwelling units, 50,000 sf of general commercial use, 235,600 sf of general office use, and 164,400 sf of industrial uses. Overlay zones, including Oil Production, Sign Restriction, and Floodplain Zone 2 apply to portions of the property. Development of property pursuant to the County zoning would generate approximately 22,075 average daily trips on the circulation network (Newport Beach 2006a, 2006b). This alternative was not retained for detailed evaluation in the EIR because it would not reduce identified impacts of the project and would not achieve several important project objectives. Alternative Site Development of the Project on an alternative site has been reviewed and eliminated from detailed consideration due to the lack of available alternate sites meeting the majority of the objectives established for the proposed Project. Newport Beach is almost fully developed with no other unentitled property that is suitable for supporting a mixed -use project such as Newport Banning Ranch. Construction of General Plan Roads Both the City of Newport Beach General Plan Master Plan of Streets and Highways and the Orange County MPAH depict two connections to West Coast Highway through the Project site. One connection is depicted as extending south from 19th Street to West Coast Highway and the second roadway would extend from 15th Street past Bluff Road and connect with West Coast Highway on the western edge of the Project site. The need for these two primary roads was based on the environmental baseline that the 2006 General Plan Update used, which assumed more intense development on the Project site. Based on the reduced density being proposed, only one roadway is needed to serve the travel demand. This alternative would have had more impacts due to the need for the construction of an additional roadway. VI. ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED Alternatives analyzed in this EIR are listed and summarized below. • Alternative A: No Action /No Development Alternative (Continuation of Existing Land Uses). • Alternative B: Newport Beach General Plan /Open Space Designation. • Alternative C: Proposed Project with Bluff Road Extending to 17th Street. • Alternative D: Reduced Development and Development Area. • Alternative E: Reduced Development Area. • Alternative F: Increased Open Space /Reduced Development Area. Alternative A: No Action /No Development Alternative (Continuation of Existing Land Uses) Alternative A is the "no project" alternative required by the State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e) which allows the decisionmakers to compare the potential impacts of the proposed Project with the potential impacts of not approving the proposed Project. Alternative A assumes existing conditions on the Project site and the continuation and possible expansion of oil exploration and oil production operations within the constraints of the Project site's existing California Coastal Act regulatory exemption for petroleum production. No uses other than oil operations would occur on the Project site. Oil consolidation, clean -up, and remediation would not occur for the foreseeable future, and public access would not be provided. At the eventual cessation of oil production operations, well abandonment and removal of certain surface equipment and pipelines would occur in accordance with applicable State and local regulations. This alternative would not require an amendment to the City of Newport Beach General Plan or Orange County Planning Commission Resolution No. Pace 12 of 23 MPAH, a zone change, a Coastal Development Permit, or any of the other actions associated with the Newport Banning Ranch Project. The approximate 361 acres of the 401 -acre site within the City's Sphere of Influence would not be annexed into the City of Newport Beach. Alternative A would have greater impacts than the proposed Project when evaluating consistency with applicable plans and policies. However, since with this alternative the site would not be annexed into the City of Newport Beach, the City planning programs would not be applicable to the majority of the site. This alternative would not have any impacts that are significant and unavoidable, whereas the proposed project would have significant unavoidable impacts associated with land use compatibility (due to noise, and night lighting), aesthetics, transportation, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and noise. Alternative B: Newport Beach General Plan /Open Space Designation The Project site is designated as OS(RV) in the City of Newport Beach General Plan's Land Use Element. The OS(RV) land use designation allows for both a Primary Use (Open Space) and an Alternative Use (Residential Village) on the Project site. The Land Use Element prioritizes the retention of the Project site for open space. The Project site would have to be acquired through public or private funding by an entity capable of restoring and maintaining the Project site and with the approval of the property owner(s), including the surface rights owners. As described in the General Plan, the open space acquisition option includes consolidation of oil operations; wetlands restoration; construction of roadways; and provision of nature education, interpretative facilities, and an active park that contains lighted playfields and other facilities. Alternative B would include park and open space uses, including an approximately 31.3 -gross acre community park in the central portion of the site. Alternative B also assumes consolidation of the oilfields, remediation of the property, and restoration of habitat including wetlands. Additionally, the following roadways would be constructed consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan's Circulation Element: (1) a north -south road with a southern terminus at West Coast Highway and extending to a northern terminus at 19th Street (Bluff Road and North Bluff Road); (2) the extension of 15th Street from its existing terminus to Bluff Road within the Project site; (3) the extension of 16th Street from its existing terminus to Bluff Road within the Project site; and (4) the extension of 17th Street from its existing terminus to Bluff Road within the Project site. As with the proposed Project, Alternative B also assumes the deletion of the future extension of a second road through the Project site and its connection to West Coast Highway; this action would require the approval of a General Plan Amendment to the City's Circulation Element and an amendment to the Orange County MPAH. Consistent with the roadway assumptions for the proposed Project, North Bluff Road (extending from 17th Street to 19th Street) would transition from a four -lane divided to a two -lane undivided road to 19th Street. In addition to, or included in, the costs associated with site acquisition, funds would be required to initiate the consolidation of oil operations and to address oilfield abandonment and clean -up of the Project site. Additional funding would be required to implement restoration and long -term management of sensitive habitats and to construct public infrastructure; park and open space uses; and roadways. As with the proposed Project, a Coastal Development Permit would be required to initiate restoration activities and to allow for the future construction of permitted land uses and roadways through the Project site. Alternative B would eliminate significant and unavoidable impacts associated with traffic, air quality, greenhouse gases, and certain noise impacts when compared to the proposed Project; however, there would still be impacts that could not be reduced to a level considered less than significant. The following areas would have significant, unavoidable impacts: There would be land use incompatibility with respect to night illumination associated with the Community Park and long -term noise impacts on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the Project site. In addition, there would be a potential long -range noise impacts for residents on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue. For noise, tho ugh mitigation is proposed, noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels and if the City of Costa Mesa does not implement the recommended measure of resurfacing the street with rubberized asphalt (Threshold 4.1 -1). Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 13 of 23 Alternative B would introduce nighttime lighting into a currently unlit area. The Community Park is anticipated to have night lighting of active sports fields, which could result in light spillover onto adjacent properties. The night lighting impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan project, the City approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits that outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan project (Threshold 4.2 -3). Construction of the roadways and park would cause a substantial temporary increase in noise levels at residences and schools within 500 feet of the roadway and park construction because of existing relatively low ambient noise levels. Due to the low existing ambient noise levels, the proximity of the noise - sensitive receptors, and duration of construction activities, the temporary noise increases would be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -2). This alternative is deemed to be potentially feasible. The financial feasibility of this alternative is dependent upon the ability of a responsible party to obtain sufficient funds to acquire the site and fund clean -up, restoration, and long -term maintenance of the site. Therefore, the ultimate determination of feasibility is a consideration for decision makers. Alternative C: Proposed Project with Bluff Road Extending to 17th Street Alternative C assumes the same land uses and same development plan as the proposed Newport Banning Ranch Project and would require the same approvals from local and regional agencies. The City of Newport Beach General Plan's Circulation Element and the Orange County MPAH depict a north -south roadway connection from West Coast Highway to 19th Street through the Project site. Alternative C would provide the development of a north -south connection (North Bluff Road /Bluff Road) from West Coast Highway only to 17th Street. As with the proposed Project, Alternative C assumes an amendment to the Circulation Element to delete a second road through the Project site and its connection to West Coast Highway. An amendment to the Orange County MPAH is required for this deletion as well as to downgrade North Bluff Road from a Major to a Primary. Alternative C is proposed to minimize significant impacts to sensitive habitat areas and landform alteration associated with the extension of North Bluff Road from just north of 17th Street to 19th Street. The following is a summary of the significant, unavoidable impacts associated with Alternative C: There would be land use incompatibility with respect to night illumination associated with the Community Park and long -term noise impacts on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the Project site. In addition, there would be a potential long -range noise impacts for residents on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue. For noise, though mitigation is proposed, noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels and if the City of Costa Mesa does not implement the recommended measure of resurfacing the street with rubberized asphalt (Threshold 4.1 -1). Alternative C would include a "dark sky" lighting regulations in the NBR -PC that would apply to businesses (e.g., resort inn and neighborhood commercial uses) and Homeowners Association -owned and operated land uses within 100 feet of the Open Space Preserve. However, Alternative C would introduce nighttime lighting into acurrently unlit area. The Community Park is anticipated to have night lighting of active sports fields, which could result in light spillover onto adjacent properties. The night lighting impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan project, the City approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits that outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan project (Threshold 4.2 -3). Planning Commission Resolution No. Paqe 14 of 23 Alternative C would have impacts on intersections in the City of Costa Mesa. Implementation of MM 4.9 -2 would mitigate the impacts to a level considered less than significant. However, the City of Newport Beach cannot impose mitigation on another jurisdiction. Therefore, if the Applicant is unable to reach an agreement with the City of Costa Mesa that would ensure that Project impacts occurring in Costa Mesa would be mitigated concurrent with or preceding the impact, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts to be mitigated by the improvements would remain significant and unavoidable. Pursuant to Threshold 4.9 -2, the following impacts were identified with the various traffic scenarios evaluated: Existing Plus Alternative C. Alternative C would significantly impact four intersections in Costa Mesa, whereas the proposed Project would significantly impact three intersections in Costa Mesa. Year 2016 With Alternative C Transportation Phasing Ordinance (TPO). Alternative C would significantly impact five intersections, compared to seven for the proposed Project. Year 2016 Cumulative With Alternative C. Alternative C would significantly impact six intersections; the proposed Project would significantly impact seven intersections. General Plan Build -out with Alternative C. Alternative C would significantly impact four intersections compared to the proposed Project would significantly impact two intersections. • Without mitigation, regional (mass) emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) are forecasted to exceed applicable thresholds in some construction years. Though MM 4.10 -1 would reduce the emissions to a less than significant level, the availability of sufficient Tier 4 diesel engine construction equipment cannot be assured. Therefore, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts are found to be significant and unavoidable impact (Threshold 4.10 -2). • Long -term operational emissions of criteria pollutants would not exceed the SCAQMD mass emissions thresholds from initial occupancy through 2020. However, as Alternative C development continues beyond 2020, emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and carbon monoxide (CO) would exceed the significance thresholds, principally due to vehicle operations. Therefore, the impacts remain significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.10 -2). • Alternative C would have cumulatively considerable contributions to regional pollutant concentrations of ozone (03) (Threshold 4.10 -3). • Alternative C would emit quantities of greenhouse gases (GHGs) that would exceed the City's 6,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year (MTCO2e /yr) significance threshold. Development associated with Alternative C would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the global GHG inventory affecting global climate change (Threshold 4.11 -1). • For the Existing Plus Project, 2016 with Project, and General Plan Build -out scenarios, the increased traffic volumes on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue would expose sensitive receptors to noise level increases in excess of the City of Newport Beach's standards for changes to the ambient noise levels. At build -out, noise levels would also exceed significance thresholds in the City of Costa Mesa. MM 4.12 -5 requires the Applicant to provide funds to the City of Costa Mesa to resurface the street with rubberized asphalt; however, the City of Newport Beach has no ability to ensuring that the mitigation would be implemented. Therefore, the forecasted impact to residents of 17th Street west of Monrovia is considered significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -2). For portions of the Newport Crest development, there would be a significant increase in the ambient noise level due to the projected traffic volumes in the buildout condition of Alternative C. MM 4.12 -6 would reduce impacts to levels within the "Clearly Compatible" or "Normally Compatible' classifications but would remain above the 5 dBA significance criterion in the General Plan. MM 4.12 -7 would provide interior noise attenuation but because the City of Newport Beach does not have the authority to mandate the implementation of mitigation on private property that is not on the Project site, the impact would be significant and unavoidable (Thresholds 4.12 -4). Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 15 of 23 Use of construction equipment would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels to nearby noise - sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project. Due to the low existing ambient noise levels, the proximity of the noise - sensitive receptors, and duration of construction activities, the temporary noise increases would be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -2). Alternative D: Reduced Development and Development Area Alternative D assumes both a reduction in the amount of development that would occur on the Project site and a reduction in the acreage associated with that development. The roadway system would be the same as that included in the proposed Project. When compared to the proposed Project, Alternative D would allow for up to 1,200 du (compared to 1,375 du), 60,000 sf of neighborhood commercial uses (compared to 75,000 so; 15,000 sf of visitor - serving commercial uses (compared to a 75 -room resort inn); approximately 39.1 acres of parks including a 24.8- gross -acre Community Park (compared to approximately 51.4 total acres of parklands associated with the proposed Project). Alternative D does not include a Nature Center or interpretive trails. Open space uses would increase from 251.7 gross acres to 269.1 gross acres. The development area (residential, commercial, and visitor - serving uses) would decrease from 98 gross acres to 92.9 gross acres. This alternative does not assume a pedestrian and bicycle bridge spanning West Coast Highway. Alternative D would require the same discretionary actions as noted for the proposed Project. Alternative D is proposed to reduce impacts associated with the intensity of development (e.g., vehicle trips, vehicle miles travelled, noise and air quality impacts) and the footprint of development (e.g., biological resources). This Alternative does not eliminate any of the significant impacts of the proposed project, but would substantially lessen the impacts because Alternative D would have a smaller footprint (approximately 11 percent less acres of developed with urban uses and parkland), involve less grading, and have less development (no resort inn and a reduction of approximately 13 percent in the number of units). Construction air emissions would remain significant and unavoidable, but would be lessened. The following is a summary of the significant, unavoidable impacts associated with Alternative D: There would be land use incompatibility with respect to night illumination associated with the Community Park and long -term noise impacts on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the Project site. In addition, there would be a potential long -range noise impacts for residents on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue. For noise, though mitigation is proposed, noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels and if the City of Costa Mesa does not implement the recommended measure of resurfacing the street with rubberized asphalt (Threshold 4.1 -1). Alternative D would include a "dark sky" lighting regulations in the NBR -PC that would apply to businesses (e.g., visitor - serving commercial and neighborhood commercial uses) and Homeowners Association -owned and operated land uses within 100 feet of the Open Space Preserve. However, Alternative D would introduce nighttime lighting into a currently unlit area. The Community Park is anticipated to have night lighting of active sports fields, which could result in light spillover onto adjacent properties. The night lighting impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan project, the City Council approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits that outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan project (Threshold 4.2 -3). When compared to the proposed Project, Alternative D would have a reduction of average daily trips (ADT) and PM peak hour trips, but an increase in AM peak hour trips. Based on the lower volume of ADT and PM peak hour volumes, Alternative D would not create additional roadway or intersection deficiencies. Both Alternative D and the proposed Project would be expected to result in a significant impact at one intersection in the City of Newport Beach and seven intersections in the City of Costa Mesa. Impacts to the intersection of Newport Boulevard at West Coast Highway in the City of Newport Beach can be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Alternative D would impact the following Costa Mesa intersections: Newport Boulevard at 19th Street, Newport Boulevard at Harbor Boulevard, Newport Boulevard at 18th Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 16 of 23 Street/Rochester, Newport Boulevard at 17th Street, Monrovia at 19th Street, Pomona Avenue at 171" Street, and Superior Avenue at 17th Street. Implementation of MM 4.9 -2 would mitigate the impact to a level considered less than significant. However, the City of Newport Beach cannot impose mitigation on another jurisdiction. Therefore, if the Applicant is unable to reach an agreement with the City of Costa Mesa that would ensure that Alternative D impacts occurring in Costa Mesa would be mitigated concurrent with or preceding the impact, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts to be would remain significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.9 -2). • Alternative D would have construction - related air quality impacts. During grading, large and fine particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5, respectively) concentrations may exceed the SCAQMD CEQA significance thresholds at the property lines, but would not be likely to exceed ambient air quality standards (Threshold 4.10 -2). • Long -term operational emissions of criteria pollutants would not exceed the SCAQMD mass emissions thresholds from initial occupancy through 2020. However, as development continues beyond 2020, emissions of VOCs, CO, and PM10 would exceed the significance thresholds, principally due to vehicle operations (Threshold 4.10 -2). • Alternative D would have a significant cumulative air quality impact because its contribution to regional pollutant concentrations would be cumulatively considerable (Threshold 4.10 -3). • Alternative D would emit quantities of GHGs that would exceed the City's 6,000 MTCO2e /yr significance threshold. Similar to the Project, Alternative D would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the global GHG inventory affecting global climate change (Threshold 4.11 -1). • The increased traffic volumes on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue would expose sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of the City of Newport Beach's standards for changes to the ambient noise levels. At build -out, noise levels would also exceed significance thresholds in the City of Costa Mesa (Threshold 4.12- 2). • For portions of the Newport Crest development, there would be a significant increase in the ambient noise level due to the projected traffic volumes in the buildout condition. MM 4.12 -6 would reduce impacts to levels within the "Clearly Compatible" or "Normally Compatible" classifications but would remain above the 5 dBA significance criterion in the General Plan. MM 4.12 -7 would provide interior noise attenuation but because the City of Newport Beach does not have the authority to mandate the implementation of mitigation on private property that is not on the Project site, the impact would be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -4). • Use of construction equipment would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels to nearby noise - sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project. Due to the low existing ambient noise levels, the proximity of the noise - sensitive receptors, and duration of construction activities, the temporary noise increases would be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -2). Alternative E: Reduced Development Area Alternative E assumes the same number of residential units (1,375 du) as proposed by the Project within a reduced footprint. The development area (residential, commercial, and visitor - serving uses) would decrease from 98 gross acres to 92.9 gross acres. Residential units would be provided at a higher density and on smaller lots than, assumed for the proposed Project. The same roadway system is proposed. As with Alternative D, this alternative does not include a Nature Center or interpretive trails; it provides 60,000 sf of neighborhood commercial uses (compared to 75,000 so; provides 15,000 sf of visitor - serving commercial uses instead of the resort inn; and provides approximately 39.1 acres of parks, including a 24.8- gross -acre Community Park (compared to approximately 51.4 total acres of parklands with the Project). This alternative does not assume a pedestrian and bicycle Planning Commission Resolution No. Paqe 17 of 23 bridge spanning West Coast Highway. Alternative E would require the same discretionary actions as noted for the proposed Project. Although with Alternative E there would be incremental reduction in impacts due to the reduction in development and the area being developed, this alternative would not eliminate any of the unavoidable significant impacts identified with the proposed Project. This Alternative would increase the overall VMT; therefore, there would be slightly greater long -term air emissions, noise, and traffic. The following significant unavoidable impacts would occur with Alternative E: O There would be land use incompatibility with respect to night illumination associated with the Community Park and long -term noise impacts on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the Project site. In addition, there would be a potential long -range noise impacts for residents on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue. For noise, though mitigation is proposed, noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels and if the City of Costa Mesa does not implement the recommended measure of resurfacing the street with rubberized asphalt (Threshold 4.1 -1). Alternative E would include a "dark sky" lighting regulations in the NBR -PC that would apply to businesses (e.g., visitor - serving commercial and neighborhood commercial uses) and Homeowners Association -owned and operated land uses within 100 feet of the Open Space Preserve. However, Alternative E would introduce nighttime lighting into a currently unlit area. The Community Park is anticipated to have night lighting of active sports fields, which could result in light spillover onto adjacent properties. The night lighting impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan project, the City approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits that outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan project (Threshold 4.2 -3). Alternative E is expected to have an increase in ADT and peak hour traffic volumes when compared to the proposed Project. However, this increase in peak hour volumes is not anticipated to cause any of the intersections operating at an acceptable level of service with the Project to operate at an unacceptable level of service this alternative. Both Alternative E and the proposed Project would be expected to result in deficiencies at the intersection of Newport Boulevard at West Coast Highway in the City Newport Beach which can be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Both Alternative E and the proposed Project would be expected to significantly impact seven intersections in Costa Mesa: Newport Boulevard at 19th Street, Newport Boulevard at Harbor Boulevard, Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester, Newport Boulevard at 17th Street, Monrovia at 19th Street, Pomona Avenue at 17th Street, and Superior Avenue at 17th Street. Implementation of MM 4.9 -2 would mitigate the impacts to a level considered less than significant. However, the City of Newport Beach cannot impose mitigation on another jurisdiction. Therefore, if the Applicant is unable to reach an agreement with the City of Costa Mesa that would ensure that Alternative E impacts occurring in Costa Mesa would be mitigated concurrent with or preceding the impact, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts to be mitigated by the improvements would remain significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.9 -2). Without mitigation, regional (mass) emissions of NOx are forecasted to exceed applicable thresholds in some construction years. Though MM 4.10 -1 would reduce the emissions to less than significant levels, the availability of sufficient Tier 4 diesel engine construction equipment Planning Commission Resolution No. Pace 18 of 23 cannot be assured. Therefore, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts are found to be significant and unavoidable impact (Threshold 4.10 -2). • Long -term operational emissions of criteria pollutants would not exceed the SCAQMD mass emissions thresholds from initial occupancy through 2020. However, as Project development continues beyond 2020, emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and carbon monoxide (CO) would exceed the significance thresholds, principally due to vehicle operations. Therefore, the impacts remain significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.10 -2). • Alternative E would have cumulatively considerable contributions to regional pollutant concentrations of 03 (Threshold 4.10 -3). • Alternative E would emit quantities of GHGs that would exceed the City's 6,000 MTCO2e /yr significance threshold. Similar to the Project, Alternative E would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the global GHG inventory affecting global climate change (Threshold 4.11 -1). • For portions of the Newport Crest development, there would be a significant increase in the ambient noise level due to the projected traffic volumes in the buildout condition. MM 4.12 -6 would reduce impacts to levels within the "Clearly Compatible" or "Normally Compatible" classifications but would remain above the 5 dBA significance criterion in the General Plan, MM 4.12 -7 would provide interior noise attenuation but because the City of Newport Beach does not have the authority to mandate the implementation of mitigation on private property that is not on the Project site, the impact would be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -2). o The increased traffic volumes on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue would expose sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of the City of Costa Mesa's standards. MM 4.12 -5 requires the Applicant to provide funds to the City of Costa Mesa to resurface the street with rubberized asphalt; however, the City of Newport Beach has no ability to assure that the mitigation would be implemented. Therefore, the forecasted impact to residents of 17th Street west of Monrovia is considered significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -4). 4 Use of construction equipment would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels to nearby noise - sensitive receptors in the Project vicinity. The temporary noise increases would be significant and unavoidable due to the low existing ambient noise levels, the proximity of the noise - sensitive receptors, and duration of construction activities (Threshold 4.12 -2). Alternative F: Increased Open Space /Reduced Development Area Alternative F assumes the same number of residential units (1,375 du) as proposed by the Project within a reduced footprint. The development area (residential and commercial) would decrease from 97.4 gross acres to 84.0 gross acres. This alterative does not include a resort inn or visitor - serving commercial uses. Residential units would be provided at a higher density and on smaller lots than assumed for the proposed Project. The same roadway system is proposed. Open space uses would increase from 252.3 gross acres to 282.4 gross acres. This alternative does not include a Nature Center or interpretive trails; it provides 60,000 sf of neighborhood commercial uses (compared to 75,000 so; and includes approximately 34.7 acres of parks, including a 21.8- gross -acre Community Park (compared to approximately 51.4 total acres of parklands).2 This alternative does not assume a pedestrian and bicycle bridge spanning West Coast Highway. Alternative F would require the same discretionary actions as noted for the proposed Project. Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 19 of 23 The following is a summary of the significant, unavoidable impacts associated with Alternative F: There would be land use incompatibility with respect to night illumination associated with the Community Park and long -term noise impacts on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the Project site. In addition, there would be a potential long -range noise impacts for residents on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue. For noise, though mitigation is proposed, noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels and if the City of Costa Mesa does not implement the recommended measure of resurfacing the street with rubberized asphalt (Threshold 4.1 -1). O Alternative F would include a "dark sky" lighting regulations in the NBR -PC that would apply to businesses (e.g., neighborhood commercial uses) and Homeowners Association -owned and operated land uses within 100 feet of the Open Space Preserve. However, Alternative F would introduce nighttime lighting into a currently unlit area. The Community Park is anticipated to have night lighting of active sports fields, which could result in light spillover onto adjacent properties. The night lighting impacts are considered significant and unavoidable. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan project, the City approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations, which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits that outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan project (Threshold 4.2 -3). Alternative F would be projected to result in a decrease in ADT and peak hour traffic volumes when compared to the proposed Project. This decrease in peak hour volumes would not cause any of the intersections operating at an acceptable level of service with the Project to operate at an unacceptable level of service. Both Alternative F and the proposed Project would be expected to result in deficiencies at the intersection of Newport Boulevard at West Coast Highway in the City of Newport Beach which can be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. Alternative F and the proposed Project would significantly impact seven intersections in Costa Mesa: Newport Boulevard at 19th Street, Newport Boulevard at Harbor Boulevard, Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester, Newport Boulevard at 17th Street, Monrovia at 19th Street, Pomona Avenue at 17th Street, and Superior Avenue at 17th Street. Implementation of MM 4.9 -2 would mitigate the impact to a level considered less than significant. However, the City of Newport Beach cannot impose mitigation on another jurisdiction. Therefore, if the Applicant is unable to reach an agreement with the City of Costa Mesa that would ensure that Alternative F impacts occurring in Costa Mesa would be mitigated concurrent with or preceding the impact, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts to be mitigated by the improvements would remain significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.9 -2). • Without mitigation, regional (mass) emissions of NOx are forecasted to exceed applicable thresholds in some construction years. Though MM 4.10 -1 would reduce the emissions to less than significant levels, the availability of sufficient Tier 4 diesel engine construction equipment cannot be assured. Therefore, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts are found to be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.10 -2). • Long -term operational emissions of criteria pollutants would not exceed the SCAQMD mass emissions thresholds from initial occupancy through 2020. However, as development continues beyond 2020, emissions of VOCs and CO would exceed the significance thresholds, principally due to vehicle operations (Threshold 4.10 -2). Planning Commission Resolution No. Pace 20 of 23 Alternative F would have a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional pollutant concentrations of 03 (Threshold 4.10 -3). o Alternative F would emit quantities of GHGs that would exceed the City's 6,000 MTCO2e /yr significance threshold. Similar to the Project, Alternative F would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the global GHG inventory affecting global climate change (Threshold 4.11 -1). The increased traffic volumes on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue would expose sensitive receptors to noise levels in excess of the City of Newport Beach's standards for changes to the ambient noise levels. At buildout, noise levels would also exceed significance thresholds in the City of Costa Mesa. MM 4.12 -5 requires the Applicant to provide funds to the City of Costa Mesa to resurface the street with rubberized asphalt; however, the City of Newport Beach has no ability to ensuring that the mitigation would be implemented. Therefore, the forecasted impact to residents of 17th Street west of Monrovia is considered significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -2). For portions of the Newport Crest development, there would be a significant increase in the ambient noise level due to the projected traffic volumes in the buildout condition. MM 4.12 -6 would reduce impacts to levels within the "Clearly Compatible" or "Normally Compatible" classifications but would remain above the 5 dBA significance criterion in the General Plan. MM 4.12 -7 would provide interior noise attenuation but because the City of Newport Beach does not have the authority to mandate the implementation of mitigation on private property that is not on the Project site, the impact would be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -4). Use of construction equipment would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels to nearby noise - sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project. Due to the low existing ambient noise levels, the proximity of the noise - sensitive receptors, and duration of construction activities, the temporary noise increases would be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.12 -2). Environmentally Superior Alternative CEQA requires the identification of an environmentally superior alternative. Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines states that if the No Project Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, then the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. Based on the evaluation contained in this EIR, Alternative B— General Plan Open Space Designation —would be the environmentally superior alternative because it provides for restoration of the Project site and maintains the greatest amount of open space. While this alternative would have greater impacts than the No Project Alternative in the near -term, the long -term benefits associated with site restoration would be environmentally superior to maintaining the site as an oilfield. Although Alternative B is the environmentally superior alternative, there are significant challenges affecting its feasibility. Additionally, Alternative B does not meet a number of the project objectives. Therefore, an environmentally superior development alternative is also being identified. Alternative F would provide development that is generally consistent with the General Plan Residential Village designation and would be able to meet almost of the project objectives. Although this Alternative does not eliminate any of the significant impacts of the Project, it does substantially lessen the impacts by reducing the amount of land that would be subject to development, and increasing the amount of undeveloped open space by almost 30 acres, it provides greater protection of the environment. This alternative provides greater protection of the environment by reducing the area of non -open spaces uses by approximately 20 percent. VII. SUMMARY OF PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION PROGRAM Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 21 of 23 SUMMARY OF EFFECTS WITH NO IMPACT Throughout preparation of the EIR, the City of Newport Beach Environmental Checklist was used to determine the impact categories to evaluate the potentially significant environmental effects of the proposed Project. The following includes a discussion of the impact categories where the proposed Project would have "no impact' and a summary discussion of why this determination was reached. There is no further evaluation of these Environmental Checklist questions in the EIR. 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. For these reasons, no significant impacts would occur and these topics are not addressed in the EIR. Aesthetics and Visual Resources The State CEQA Guidelines ask for an evaluation of the following: "Would the Project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway?' The Project area is not adjacent to, nor can it be viewed from a designated State scenic highway. For this reason, no impact would occur and this topic is not addressed in the EIR. Geology and Soils The State CEQA Guidelines ask for an evaluation of the following: "Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water ?" The proposed Project would not use septic systems or alternative waste water disposal systems. For this reason, no impact would occur and this topic is not addressed in the EIR. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The State CEQA Guidelines ask for an evaluation of the following: "For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?' The Newport Banning Ranch Project site is not located within an adopted Airport Land Use Plan. The nearest airporUairstrip is the John Wayne Airport, which is located approximately four miles northeast of the Project site. The State CEQA Guidelines ask for an evaluation of the following: "For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?' A discussion of this topic is not necessary because there is no private airstrip in proximity to the Project site. For these reasons, no impacts would occur and these topics are not addressed in the EIR. Population, Housing, and Employment The State CEQA Guidelines asks for an evaluation of the following two issues: (1) "Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere." and (2) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the constriction of replacement housing elsewhere ?" There are no existing residential units on the Project site. The Project proposes the development of up to 1,375 du on the Project site. Therefore, the Project would not displace existing residential units or residents and the Project would not necessitate the need for replacement housing. For these reasons, this topic is not addressed in the EIR. Planning Commission Resolution No. Paae 22 of 23 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS An impact that remains significant after including all feasible mitigation measures is considered a significant and unavoidable impact. The impacts discussed below have been identified as significant and unavoidable for the Project. Land Use and Related Planning Programs There would be land use incompatibility with respect to long -term noise and night illumination predominately from the Community Park on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the Project site. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan project, the City approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits that outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts associate ed with the General Plan project. Though mitigation is proposed, noise impacts would remain significant if the residents of Newport Crest elect not to implement the mitigation measures to reduce the increased interior noise levels (Threshold 4.1 -1). Aesthetic and Visual Resources The proposed Project would include "dark sky" lighting concept for development areas adjacent to the Open Space Preserve. However, the Project would introduce nighttime lighting into a currently unlit area. The Project would result in night lighting impacts that are considered significant and unavoidable. The City of Newport Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the introduction of new sources of lighting associated with development of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certifying the General Plan Final EIR and approving the General Plan project, the City approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations which notes that there are specific economic, social, and other public benefits which outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan project (Threshold 4.2 -3). Transportation and Traffic The Project would have impacts on intersections in the City of Costa Mesa. Implementation of MM 4.9 -2 would mitigate the Project's impact to a level considered less than significant. However, the City of Newport Beach cannot impose mitigation on another jurisdiction. Therefore, if the Applicant is unable to reach an agreement with the City of Costa Mesa that would ensure that Project impacts occurring in Costa Mesa would be mitigated concurrent with or preceding the impact, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts to be mitigated by the improvements would remain significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.9- 2). The following impacts were identified with the various traffic scenarios evaluated: o Existing Plus Project Scenario — Intersections identified as deficient are (1) Newport Boulevard at Harbor Boulevard; (2) Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester Street; and (3) Superior Ave /17th Street. (This scenario assumes all development occurs at once, which is not an accurate reflection the timing for development of the proposed Project.) o Year 2016 With Project Transportation Phasing Ordinance (TPO) Analysis — Intersections identified as deficient are (1) Monrovia Avenue and 19th Street; (2) Newport Boulevard and 19th Street; (3) Newport Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard; (4) Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester Street; (5) Pomona Avenue and 17th Street; (6) Newport Boulevard at 17th Street; and (7) Superior Avenue and 17th Street. o Year 2016 With Phase 1 Project TPO Analysis — Intersections identified as deficient are (1) Newport Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard and (2) Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester Street. Planning Commission Resolution No. Page 23 of 23 o Year 2016 Cumulative With Project — Intersections identified as deficient are (1) Monrovia Avenue and 19th Street, (2) Newport Boulevard and 19th Street, (3) Newport Boulevard and Harbor Boulevard; (4) Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester Street; (5) Pomona Avenue and 17th Street; (6) Newport Boulevard at 17th Street3; and (7) Superior Avenue and 17th Street. o Year 2016 Cumulative With Phase 1 Project — Intersections identified as deficient are (1) Newport Boulevard at Harbor Boulevard and (2) Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester Street. o General Plan Buildout with Project — Intersections identified as deficient are (1) Newport Boulevard at Harbor Boulevard and (2) Newport Boulevard at 18th Street/Rochester Street. Air Quality Without mitigation, regional (mass) emissions of NOx are forecasted to exceed applicable thresholds in some construction years. Though MM 4.10 -1 would reduce the emissions to less than significant levels, the availability of sufficient Tier 4 diesel engine construction equipment cannot be assured. Therefore, for purposes of this EIR, the impacts are found to be significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.10 -2). Long -term operational emissions of criteria pollutants would not exceed the SCAQMD mass emissions thresholds from initial occupancy through 2020. However, as Project development continues beyond 2020, emissions of VOC and CO would exceed the significance thresholds, principally due to vehicle operations. Therefore, the impacts remain significant and unavoidable (Threshold 4.10 -2). G The Project would have cumulatively considerable contributions to regional pollutant concentrations of 03 (Threshold 4.10 -3). Greenhouse Gas Emissions O The Project would emit quantities of GHGs that would exceed the City's 6,000 MTCO2e /yr significance threshold. The Project would make a cumulatively considerable contribution to the global GHG inventory affecting global climate change (Threshold 4.11 -1). Noise The increased traffic volumes on 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue in Costa Mesa would expose sensitive receptors to noise levels that would exceed City of Costa Mesa significance thresholds. MM 4.12 -5 requires the Applicant to provide funds to the City of Costa Mesa to resurface the street with rubberized asphalt; however, the City of Newport Beach has no ability to assure that the mitigation would be implemented. Therefore, the forecasted impact to residents of 17th Street west of Monrovia Avenue is considered significant and unavoidable (Thresholds 4.12 -1 and 4.12 -2). For portions of the Newport Crest development, there would be a significant increase in the ambient noise level due to the projected traffic volumes in the buildout condition. MM 4.12 -6 would reduce impacts to levels within the "Clearly Compatible" or "Normally Compatible' classifications but would remain above the 5 dBA significance criterion in the General Plan. MM 4.12 -7 would provide interior noise attenuation but because the City of Newport Beach does not have the authority to mandate the implementation of mitigation on private property that is not on the Project site, the impact would be significant and unavoidable (Thresholds 4.12 -1 and 4.12 -4). Use of construction equipment would result in a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels to nearby noise - sensitive receptors in the vicinity of the Project. The temporary noise increases would be significant and unavoidable due to the low existing ambient noise levels, the proximity of the noise - sensitive receptors, and duration of construction activities (Threshold 4.12 -2). Attachment No. PC 2 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) SCH No. 2009031061 (under separate cover) Attachment No. PC 3 EIR Table 1 -2 Summary of Significant Impacts and Mitigation Program - 0 U h i A 0 O Ix n. z 0 Q z N Q P U) LLI J Q ma z Q U LL z i� N LL. O Q N O o c m v >m m 0 E 4 E >m m n N Q z° n� E z O 3 wzr c N w m 0 u m;° d v E m ✓+�= m D v m a E D n N UI L m Y— Z' n L' N •> N L '4� O M.- o c CYO N O w E> 3 d O M 0 C 'N N J ,� 0— D Z .E E'v <c° y> o0moo o�� mw �p O v@ c o c nc a'= a 00 E ._ 6 o m 0 a mm m 0 @ a EMZ' v o m aC N 0@ L0,0_> 0 010 c M C M N W U 01 E 05 E�0,m > a m c0mc �N m w EC O Q o N o N •p_ 0 av � J co m � ov O 0.2 N m LL w O .O m N Y O N O YO E pad� N m O m N m m m 0'41 �u `0N -c mN U N Ern J N LL aD ? gn« 2 0 m'c 0 v 0 m m,c 0 �a omao o m 0a g m Fwa ~mow ~om ~mD CL0 ,coy °o. ai •O O) Oa ^' O �- N 0 .0 0. .E OI 0 w '- a «• 0 ^' E '- 0 0 O LL N'� LL LL LL C0�Nc {Lr- C a °a m w z° a` a. a° m .=_ 0. ao 0 $ 0. m o. 8 73 0 T3 w0 O O N O T O« m oc C m z m� C N mcU 1] N N J C c �00� mx Jy E Dm.3m00c a U E > •m CO m u a� n a a.0 (� v Ei °'a o S o N N y a2i v 0 C7 0 Lm u ""Z 3wUc - mmc0w°-w a0 00 o.o K mm3 ja3 >,v �« cn0.� NNO>.'DO Et 0 U 0 ME «�mmLm D0 me �o0a3 � 0C)Np O M 0=-cm 5w I-E 0. mwYao cu ? D. >_._ v °3w EN ow3�> � aLi^-�'3o .'?m m.= «mace E 2 o D Z c E'y w � c m E w O 2 d H ax o O's ✓ m � o! g oT� 0 T oo..EoNU o c maO Jm mmm 0.«'ocuaom0 d ND,c.N o.OL �c >mp a c $�J� 0J v 30= �.o N•-om0' -• Dm o�'cmaci coo L'J mm aL CEO a W N v T E a UI L L L. m n. J o-'oo am--, Ti 0_ --wDm D U C N a >� iq .O D. N (n ` 'Y >, C E Q L L O E L" Ol m Vl v I- 3 c a w« L C 10 m O v l0 C O w O N O w O O 1- !� �' m� a z 2 m E a s U c J E a N z LU sp Q Z O y - .O m w« D 0 0 O Q a s a m C N •- N J O) D W m OaooEO n,c U! j fL• N m « a 01 m L D D 7 o c 0 0 Q 2 oc 0 oau��i '�...0 oE�. 9 > > >o N _ N E N m m 404- MO N V a'O O — V =0 J O' 2N CC (` T « « 0 m 0 3 ~ 0 J N C— O E h (6 N@ E L Tv N a U TJ N m w O U F- a U F- U l0 a« U O O m � U C p, c CO t� o v 3 E 2Q w E U W F 0 0 U 0 c O N h r 0 O w IL z O Q _H W� >O Z Z F Q Z F OV UQ Na W 2 J Z ~ LL_ I� V N LL, O Q D pn c w o U Y O m ni '5 c C {� u m w U> E E Nn c a ¢ o z n E C C c 0 a Emo (a n Amo c d" N O E5 v 6 'a a N as a> z N ac Nip N waGo N «U .E N a C N .p c N twn 'c E'v L°c '�J�E a 'NJ c L oo m O r ow D�Lco w 0) E m O o Do a ° C (L ma! w E Lm N 0 a w _ O y a .L3 cm '= wv vw w n cO 3 °w °) N J c Z C m N ° O m = o mi N n p ' 2! ,p J 3 ^' D r a0 v rnoJM C j N 3 N C w N N m (O O W :� m p C m w V O C ✓� m _C a m> w U- ECG oc�c°ivi ° ° .v °'a a°' °am uam�3 Ern o a o w'o a? v w.. ;i c m N J N �0 ;•a w avL c LL (n (n a EE 0 E E � ) 2 ¢ C U m m c U E ° E w ` E « g 0. rJ p E O O N a it U > > '0 LL LL LL N LL E LL m LL >L J ry 'x a w i° 0 0 0 o 0 0 ,� V) N m Z a 3 a LL a a. n. w 0. — n. O m 6. O m c m w E m u 0 a m c O C c L C O O O > 0 = > 0 � m Z _ m O OT( U O N v Epp W w E trop N u tmc v�v���oa ~v«+ U Q: O D Z ... C D D N L m woi° w� w u c o u u wC - oC a c 0 m N°Nm (ry _ n ocw w W v w _Em o w°U w�w �� i m �c LL (? c aJomc3m3o�aciLw"c�woo.15�a�c coc Lc m mJ5�W ul �H' w >W3'uo°owaa rn S 2 �°n Ym�c vui O,. tn Q.- a°i ai vC Q O'er O N (O a F a O UI U w N W m h o c O ¢ C N N 0 O a an V Tf6 N ~ O L U L C° D ~ m N Y N m m w w VI H L O H N> N �C 0 � U C Q c m E 33 °E z S N W Ri O o co O Q.' IL Z O Q is W D0 Z, Z H Q Z N O V F) U Q 04 w m Z Q H Z C7 !A LL. O Q c� C N C y O o C m N U 0) C � o J b F U E N tll� C m a mC E O ¢ u> > z a n d C N N N N N C N Qj d U L 0 0 C 0 d L D L 0 0 C .° Ua... �an —'� —� uOa LEt°omma c m .° p_ D a m m a O N m m L k Ul U p�j d 3 L m U N U c o 0 n - Ern c � •otny 0' E'6 «�- mco 5m° c 0U N N " n E p Em 0 > O a o m U.O�� >oalc C m J 0 010 N mS° o va°c m3ac «L m rn.N� o Ti° � >a oO1NC cEo �`;a m --:oc E�0 a8 cm cmE60 oJm <o EN�EaN mo a acEau�i m,� M 3 OI U « C U « 0 LL Ec j CO .c ..N.. O N rn—:..mcLEc� mdZ0101cLEc N U L O O ° .r - `• - ''� Q JVI 0 t « OI 'k C d N •.... O `��- LL YO U) N m a m N V L L � �- � N m Q O"" E C o 0a > O O > O Uai t/1 .o u y m O if .'C O a w a Q N I C a— - p v>m Oco m LL UmZ n C O) m C O J N w C N 4- 1 N N N mL ML `O N 0.6 N LL N. «. c Y 0 4 a E mo- 0, 0 m 0 2,50n w o m° z m N N N N C m N V O O Z N Z 0 0« >u c 3 01— w.a no v m.- J .2) +� 000=0 ca cE :2 0 m p U m U T a 0 U 3 C N Em inaJ 0lawmc� «c v.> C.0> cv n'`maame •yc 0.� v c a w o03c mac 3c a0Ea om cC a oo amN • rn o> W o @ IL n u C ,C y N m L 0m u ry m r O L O m m G O N E I -°n O Zoa U C9$N m 16 70 2, N N C mmcw«`0c0 C N C O C n n N> n N n 0 N a mn'O3 Y.acmam m'� mtr, m n�L Ol CL CL 0 _ 0E� ¢N 0 �m3E ° madam a C 0 m O M O t m N C C `� O. m v 4 m O'_' 010 0 N p C1 C 0�— c° c L L N F oO1m `m L O O '= C N OO C hUa3'— MU`000 C O � U c a mE O C m Z 10 W ,O v O w d z 0 Q _ h w W Z o Z I- Q Z o N OV UQ N 0- W Co Q QU H LL _ N LL O Q 7 0 U > t U W c C NQ N D) n �iA E O N Y 0.> @ O@ O O O L U m N D Y U N C m E�nY c c� -Dpam co DoE G o�vvro wo�oo wN @Y@ m> w 0 .N a s O v .- rn d a�p '-' O E •a° aM_ vQa o ui m o E v Ya °o vma.o@ av L UJcn m._ c rE J'c o= ' aD �DU l O)o D « °Eoc� @30E`0 0-5 awui gm 000 oa @vyf0- o «o�° m�v rn v a3UC @m 3 rnv $ s @@ .o 'v (Jn vM mErno. -, 5Eav" c -NVL D�Ev O) 0 O Q @@ D N O m � _ C L N D "3 >ocvc � U L m@ >0J.°o � w N �� N .@ li C4 N �@ T 0 ° @ a aON) N E O Y N@ N a .o U L N N ro L v c E ` �E 0 m@ .5 c om o8UC a aU o °C . L N 7 LVN LL o ° � v ,, o ¢a , oSN'o U rnr . v aEcr qv rn U y .4 o f D a v y U E - O@ d ` � c N ° c v N Qa a - 3 c N C �°pj (0 Q N 0 U _O ) C M NU IN - O W M O N M M m m v N ro M �, O L o o U Z, c m'o °' U .c v 0 ? 2 o d> o m t o m> m c 4. aco3 0 U) ENS' rnnE3 � am :2 �E @N@ 2E -0: o E O N ro N _ N r N U N __ N @@ Y N N N N@ 3 ro L @ D N3�v�.oEwNCCODca_`v. �rn a E @ C J U n ro w E @.v OI Oc) Nro ° E ` c E m N N o w N_ o � •p, � d o m 3 v o@ L ao.N ur a o o c c u 0« N o v m mN c m aEc « 0c@ '@E oownoD@ o° ow E '@ c,a ovDo wv vv N mD � 'T $ Em c ° coa= :U c c m � ,_ U °u3J3w °�J c �°m a n 30 Z D N.> O O wli�� ��0 0 N? 0 0 f; N d D N L )„ 0 O) N J @° J J w N L D U r� @ Y N W L N@ O Q O E O N> O N .@ _ >> O C L O NN 0mC> L NW V" m f ooa�oY a oN�-voo F Z - ` °o � o va�wya O U o ro mIrn v,a c t `o i wo =H N W 0c ° 0' X c Z � v xx 4 LLl v°mav-�o. Eo N QN0 o v° D N h 4M V O w 0. Z O Q H W D Z Z H Q Z N O~ U U Q cm CL r2 m Z Q ~ LL_ _V U) LL O Q 7 c y O O m U y C C N C FK U HK iJ 0I � NQ N'C f0 N m a N'C 10 N m a min E min E wcv °' >3 Dc�Y ° 0 m m C c m ,�- c'�o.o 'ma= N a N V 0 0 C N N` O U 'm C C m N (0 N O N O `X > ++ ea O ado Ul J O/ d �NO -@v L° ° co N C 2M'__ 3 c'« N N C p U N pOj N C O C m J C� .O N Y N UJ U N a C 0 M- p 0 0,0 rnU) 2 m c w j 'a '3 rnDC c 'o ° m :.. c m 3« O. a y ND100 0 0°rn E `,o tm J N o °D 3 Q U NIL N .� C d O N N C O L C N M L D p. N N �0 D C E O o O N N ii O L 'A d c> �'C O N N N C a 7 N� 0 LL 16 m LL 0y�o v om.' =' o� m G a Cw ° VN p� w`_5 m C .L-• CO C N° M 0 4. N d N •N d U 9 a 0 N LL G d b) N cG N N N LL 0 D LL p d 00 0 0 0 0 U a... - O w U � a Vi (n Gc � 0'p J@ a O. WE 1] n. N N D N N D N N C C N >" w O L K Y N a N L - N @ E 0O 1 1- .rnmT am i 2 E ro t0 C O O O N C C N C N C « N U O � (D f0 E D. � O C N- J E v ° N N D O c U« 3 0 N N a r 3 N O N N a m w o N�3«J. o o oc Nip cJEc c 3 �' m m °° °' u o ocEcE N m 0, cu o co- D �E`Gm a o N w N« N N N d 0 0) > OI Ol U,p7_ m ry C N O U f0 « mO 0m �r U N WN O jD O�•C 7'O .m N.O «TND U.O-•a H t m N N C7 E w m a E G 0 y N U,mG y N U'0 L C N O d O -0 3 0 0 N D 0_ y Ym° 'c 5 w o Q O N O N O- O N 0 N t0 o 0 o N 3: � tom «E OO 9N m LN m 0) Ul U UUd C uM 1 C 'O L M M LC@ «0 O a0 N a d ° N N N D = D 2 C 0 D °' C D L D J j d d O D N L ~ 0 m N N N m O O L N D N L 0 O L N O L N W � c N 2 ` 0- O y N W O U v E a XO6� ° jNC O/ LH LN Ul a Q w o aa ma o N_ LN H �« a N E N `m E 0 c W 0 C ii U' w d Z O ¢ F W O Z Z H ¢ Z H OV U¢ N d LU mZ LL Z C7 N LL O C Gl O O @ N4 N Ora N ma min E z° min E C @ « L LLD L @ v ,3o_m Na O 2r @ L NL• D NFL ND 3 Q a °� ° E L0 C 0 U OI D O O' o C 0 @ 00 E D �o (L ar �D3 @0- OvNO a3 c @O °C9vc a Da 0 v L 3� 0 3 v rn� mL �^ 0 C N m@ € d @ 3 N US m N�NV °aO+OIa t0 D N a UlC @ .- c v P E c @ p 0 @ L E E ' Na � G ° 6o r N D U C �0 m H °c° ' =v c m v o r � H 2 Q ¢o 0 U o v @'E Uv vc0 U c M N J TD a 'cp d.L.. E 4.- mjc a a a ro a E v v «a v c o v a` b g a "t Fu v N c 0 U) z a (L 0- a 3 3 a ... J N@ V) (n m E >. UI N 0-7, 0 d Z @ N O N W c N o- D 01 N D N O m�@ E N_ " O1 « � C U r C .° C .L.. ..L. L a(D< ° >3�0°°.o°N m c3ZUm� >a° �rnop°• 3wD�« 0- csmC-c„ IEv =. °o3 °vvDo.00 o a «g 3 ° @@ N Nvo D a> 2 c aD v:o y ui'o o'r.a io'75 w ovED V �' c L' m DVa �a v o°' m' omt N� o >'w E >.v mE a o'�Y°awE m �@ m vo.. avaDi3o aia@iMaiL —E CNm°• -��v N a� v N o@ LaE '� @@ ?U 01 ''O N@ N a C N U l0 O- �_ 'L"' E E O @3�OS'E ._oGc '3rn�dD acic co'o 0 j - c'^aQ? " rnOr oao -OOV@� 3 o`_°v 2c°,�m" ' -c�NC c° OE •» Nom Oo o'er aN D.uD_c .o. ^« c •- «Nk C .p NUNU W 2y� �C>N @DO/c N °N'�L'BWC O C m L' .-v OD a Ea= 0 =Dz° o «m°03 6cyi D'.' w @g ° E ' o 0w oE 2wv� 0 a Ua 00 m y @° U « U 0 � N@ N -'O d@ Ul 0 O .r..- d « nM .t =ho � «E j Co D o E c > mN 0 �3D ai D 0@ ° @ - No Um - E , aaOa ; .hc@ oc cmU @00"0 DEuw N @3mav:co xvrn.r, rr v.aoE ovEv 0m °��'« N a vD 4va@T v'� '�N° o uaC a O O ?U � .°t - u a�°N a (a O p @ V ow-, .U`v.. 4v Oi N a �' � 3 N D@ O 0 ° N •U N3 y Cl. oo �o L N� om v pN °C , E .+c' .D.° _ @ N 0S DC 3 @ rn@N 22C N N '� ) v ° ° o > ci c3CCOci'D v v .v , uO c E :N C v N ° H S D U d O O 0 O U a 'OU O W E N > @ '� L D @ D a D w> C 0 v N E W E w` Q! 0 M V w a Z O F W 70 Z Z P Q ZF OV UQ Na 2 W f� Q � LL Z C7 N LL O Q U) c u0 o w u m > c L U cp L U ° c .0� wED in =c 0Eu% mo3m 3v� Qyv M-S z03 @ow @_-- Nom] o.MMCE Nv N O> D N U° L@ ro v N@ E` U O ro� 2 N O UI ° N a D N v E o� E° 0 E E rn "O m o- Ev wvo a ° E'�av coom 0-v o- a a Ec o� mc., m]�m aou ) m E a ci Cl EroaD Qa @ 0 0 -°'mom v' >o >@ o awsw .0 E m2) >as @ a Ldpp @ S V N N (, � N W ° E U o @ C U D CO — C d N@ C O C �Ea N G C O aLr, ya €o,=' .O- @5uoi� m ain o °@ acio0 cyoa D Em` NcLD @-oam Ov0_ , -� o�?o�oE� vv d o a N N 0« 0@ L C v � >+ 8 0 \ L 4 @ LL `L. C 'm N w 0 .'c.. L-. N .L-' �. =� `1 « v O_ N C� 7 p N O c N M m O 7 V @« Ec woE ova Om o °v av; a- m Ew - 8 Ern 7 N D o a Lsga N N w a s >. M m y v N ,0 -« d c� s =ov v Nova ll 'a d; c M a v p LL a @ N u�0 O Lc- caa a m 3� o. E- I L S e a -c°%�v m 0 � e D .c^-'G c H° v u F- o Q .0 °E5 t�00 DEv`� ,°� @ o@ m �E �D m a M �'o c°�.c 0 N N 2 @ 1° D C U +N- .0 @@ N` ] Q d. N on- p`, Zi 4._m as «0: a� a v °o2`2 P d ° v voM�'°v a.I V a 0 ° v oLV.. V F 'i 0 'Q = c° 4 E•" = N LL LL 3] ?i 'V LL LL v UE UMZ Ua!°a UcDo ° U 0°acMw 0 cl 00 U)rn_ U7��..¢ mQO.@ m.S'NO'c4 a LLv @via R a aD: vc E-m Zc o v 0 d EN c �v �N v; pU c o EOw0 0 v 0 M22 m 0 0 y m ]N 3 vN U N x N D 3 ° N N " O C pa U w N Ea@0D z 0 OM 8 N E D D @ Fo J cE c 9 O O n L 0 U 0-6 a ro a� d C vo C 30 0 .m oN ° C Ev].@ E c cD c a D mcDc o O �� O 0o ao o CO 0- 0 NC m °CNE� ao. Ts C CN'OC�Cd 0 0° c u E'% 2a> mcmEro « w «m c0D aN cm0 00 o `v BE 4L a ocamo c ro p_cDN ro Ma_ mO] C� N« , ° ' N C C�6E y D�:C U) U w �ma�� o.@v'OM ° t Tc w - �oao D0 cE v N m N T= S OI mw O (� 'o a@ O@ C_ C X X M O v C N U1 '@O O) j N N y@ c v N O m >@ 0— °o C O L N a Q N 6 0 v 3 o U 3 N a 45 0 0 ro o o a c v D 5 ' Y E o N o D N « E N � v �w v v @va w m L N N �0 «M 3 D @ Ol V .c O N .acv N@ ] «a> N Q d« D O O @ L« M t6 E Ol OI �DwCN 3wO« m 0 v v o 0. Dw 0 :2=0c o N 6 ao 3 o � s°m°o3 ° 5 p J p C Ili O U U N N L C L d N C] U z] U 41 @ m F -a'ow3 HNN3i: mac 3'-°3 hND GCE c n � U C q C m o Q 2 0 W 0 c 0 N i A f7 a Z O Q O F W 70 Z Z I- Q ZF OV UQ N LUr _ mZ Q ~ LL _ Z () N LL O Q N c m o w c •� L 5E L n OI N C m E -I w NQ N N E n N N m¢ E min � min z° O ~ (d�p L a U O m m a N a d m 9 ¢ o L m C OOC o v mmo U 00 N a T E m T m `n my m •� ,� ,a o ':3 y '� tr 0. m LL a «'rn o c.E ° mU. Ern o a rm v N E o , LL C N LL 0 Cm a .F o a" o" a N 4 a v o am ° v 9 •E LL LL ` 0 3 CZ -T v o LL t: N ro in ja a s `m w 4` a 0 z 4 • uVi U) I m o M� c 0 0 � Z c d w w ° o `u E O 0 3c0 OD j' O +oN •� 0 � '10 v o o m`°y. ma . D c .° c E °° '°v> ° ED a« O om`oz o2 cm0 0 a_ EaJ m cdW mN F-- ° N O O N m3EU ° U O' Ul tO N d m Y [ iJ N d N N« O j al9 we E C m L U O« '���� =cd�av C y a�wL xm N 0 d m om�0 0 cop°-__ c 60 Ecc3E� C U ¢ O N N I` O N N Da 0 m N d L N d L Dc «0 N° v D E C W m O C O L U 0 ° � E 0 0 T E O O N 0 0 «n O L .N N > > c N D U J � m m 3 o p 0 0 0 m C Y O 0 0 0 0, 0 O « N m w O m Y C 'o w m c v °' ,c 3 v '0 3 .� m .o d N C° L 'o T o Z o c O D N a.X - >m N -°mm E v a m ao o�npE a°o�m �. ^'�¢c °m D w �c .m. '- TJ wOOm•t JCLEC « N W p L C N" O 2 5 « c U O ¢ O N E >0 >0 0 Q O O D d 0.- N N 'm O O E m L I ? " C ^ O m J J 3 o w « ° m ^ o o d > N x(0 = m0 m dc a o o o c� o N U > ?O V U N O D 'O O m D L m N C C N O O O 2 'm J w O 0 N ~ O U 0 C N L« N N O O L CJ O L .0 .• 0 0 0 N f• L O m C D 0 0 N N L L L° 1I0O — L O N0 N . O :[ O m C _ '�+ (`. C p E N d L>i m « R N v 16 1 j N m .0 p 0 C m N O O C N > O L ° N 0 ¢N � L n O / FD I- U =0 o � U G Q Nro� o 3 E z Q W N 0 E F v O w 7 0 0 d h i A O O Ix CL z O Q _0 W ]O Z F Q ZF Ov UQ N d n m Z Q LL Z C7 LL O Q C CD O u .Y N u '4 L > W C y_ U U F' K U a E U �- k U J O10 inx N =6 N C O. o N= O. ° m.° E o.mE J(n- Z v E J(n- � p N N N N O N ( c a O m a 'FDc Ev L°= rno v m o 0 U N o c00 o m �m °cm m ¢ m wa m v K o v 0- N L N m O ILL E C N N O N O O M •N m v a `o (1) LL e N N bf o 4. m u m o - 0 - o - v •` U o 4O 2 E E E o w'a c v y w w � z° z° z° n` a° m° h a E L = N O O ° Z O O O U O C O C O J C , « a 41 a m 0 ° O W N E E O ON N OI O O U "cO ' JEOp _ Em a «' r o$Na°�ZU m oM E� E ° C oc o 'E c o « 0ovcm CL N° LU 0 d C N l0 3> aNi N C Ul r N N 'O N �= C p. ry ~ Q ° w> j 'O Ol N N A E0 O J U c.° L O C u o' CrcO w N 3 l0 N 0 ro U r` N m ° °N.w --, ow doom 'o E c co�cw.�v'E o m ._ c 0) o">.c ul � c m c cm .o a oc °u _> DccwEyrnN m m C a =�oNdu m 0 c °Ln c ui cdN >o. cE ac O= 0o wc'`0m3a O 0a�m0ww Nm r a>>aw ° EM COIO N�'i/1W IL-ut rn2E �'M = EvoZa° W° J 5 N °� O L � L d N L � UM N f0 N« 0I ° N C C E m N aO rN _ L v O 0 c ° o m o a a m N ma 0 �@ m c ! .p -5 cs -°o°cw °'"� �- 00 0 ,l 2 O O O E E Q 0 N `O `0 O U >>°mErE C 0 N O v o U� �0 me m a °y worm w v cinv atov a ay c' -E c > vaE v �m 100'°p m �o_u w u0 °a°ac i0 v N'E a CO.. w c` L L v 0 «3�Num1�0� > �°ma o -0 vNc 00 v o 5.O h -p N oN �N p U 0'o�o > U O o - N 0 O L ,C N N N N NM 0 u O O.vaar N =F `O- rO>v a 0w O N ON @9Nmt5 m CW LN�w0 a E X.M 0 N O C N L F- O O Om O« u O N CO f U L 'O C O �q � U C O G 41 o � 3E Z 41 0 N 0 N U 0 a S E 0 O 0 U M i A O O w CL Z O Q 0 W Z. O Z. Z _ Q Z N Z F OV U Q N LL W LL FU Z LL O Q C v o O C m U •p C �C�pp iJ v c M E E J W N m 'C @ w n o - 0 ¢ JE 5 z z L E N M L y m O D N av O C 3 u O c. = N @ L v y in'- @ N :F O- r va @ Ecvi zm c C) Ti D a0 ; =w 22 N C @ C C OL , v UN MU N « w O' Nl9 «07 C C C N N me @ n 0CD of «vU 'o rnj E m @ w m m 1 N 2 E M. n E Mi « C O U ~ N° D w O d N S U > �O @ @ m C O - N« J O' D N N oy@ as '�.zov:o wCL.- 00 w Z`w @ LL .�m @Ea O dE oQE u?K @ NE 0 @ - O m v 0 m D O v(o O3 v c t -Fu b T N 'N '3 a U m > u 0j O 0 @ C N E c -v � @S � N w y U DL o 0 a U= V a ` N O LWew m O m@��° �D O n v n E E En LL E $m U'oU4 a3 N NL-M0 z z C@ TJ U L U C°2 O) r O C l0 U O L C O O CVO L Lp E a E O O CL a nm O �0 O N ynU U 00 > C.-m.• in.- o v a o D � � m 4 EN �E O0 ° O ° 0 m ° 0 'r v C ae n , O w E w o o- � u °3SoD v-a,6 Em o 0Lo n y O oL u N w O 0 p O z C E v c a a ca =o 0) D@ 00 y nU 0 _— N a O .9) - v � �axioy] cLt`0 @- 0? wwC awV ON w wE m M �0 � oy wE 000 E ¢ 0 O C .O L n@ N p N O rnm T'C -O O w WN L nv v.` ovoa�ov« 'v� soNO tEmo^� I- E E'a @ 0 «a o@ u H U «z i- 3 2 U L L O C O 0 y w J @ C O 'O a rw ° O �� O a C N c> m mEo O O O U 0 �oO °i °� 0- O N ° -vc��. D va"n> 0 amt v3�n 3.o va o>E C .O N N >@ mi. O N C mEvcE E D O 0y o t U o ain O w>>C� O C 0 J� O EC O @ p @ >>D w n C N O D p j 0 ° O M 0 wQ > O O E imE o ovErnC amN m vc rn °c L o :3 wTU 'o N= V. wLD'°.0 DNOL wN C N . 3O w« O U@ N @ x w`« O D @ W U in d ` n ` N @ v LHdu�n N 3c LE m ru °o w 0rn 0o E F- v L L o@ H a S E« 0 u a H u o@ n U 0 c a Kcc � U C Q c @ E 4l O W Z o ti 41 a E U 9 W O 9 U O h O Q' CL z O P 0 I- IL :)O Z Z F Q Z F OV UQ N CL r G J LU Z H LL /Z V U) LL O Q C w O C N 0 u a �cp w Q J (n- roDD N'�w CDN - D DD C C « w O Y OIC ro m O O m C J DD C C L J w ro ro c m a c = c m D D c e o m L« o c m O m mN' roa 0 m c o .� o N.N D.� o m y CO ro o t J E N N > w ro C N N w C E c t c- m u v ~ € m d D m a ° m m` w a o N J m o a .0 c� ] 200 CL C a a O 0 02 w ovoi Z ro O N ELL N> w e' C D m« o E o w;_°- c �o o. ro ro - oroc m ro ° ro= w CO w N N w w p L N �:'� J ❑gym 0 71 6C N �`Lw'a 002' Lo �?a E �a O o.? m M 0 E O Ca 'N w N O OL Eck CL w �MU6 maw v Ern is �=aM w LJ «an darn N. U) w. wL N O m w C L w 0m w N OI a N m 2 O. C N U N ro -w ma ❑ c L04 Lro'J...> -, 01 FNm = ha Lwe I-ad m w E0 w m w u ELI-e EL to 8 m ro c m E.00 0 �'�100 �r o 0. (b mom U J N (0 'y CG �qo w O m 'a° m m«2) w ., m Z^ N w E o o ° ._ w 5 :_ rn v E N_ O .0 N N N O X O 1 30 0« v d« a n. E 22 CL awa. o. 2M, � �aNU° >a2 �w C N« N N E O C ro 0 rna ado v a5 m j U 0 ro 'C > N J O w 'Om C L DM @ rocs.° D A w"L w 4 .e E m J C ry 0 «w o 0 a `o. m O1 3 v and c w N° L N N ro U N w U) p k w N N a «rod ro m T ` C E m" 0._ N E 0 o ro N ro o- ro '> rn W a 'G m E v U v C7 m 0 0 2 w 'c W N V v'U 016 w._ w N w IVV L W L D Q 0 0 0 N ro ro 0 0 O d U.�Nw N�row 00 O.-0 O' c a .o � n'0 ;« @ o w C N a m ¢ a w L y' C O N'� @ N w O. w m U Y NL uwi C.0U C9 Q o ms. _l oo roL D w tw N w D N E w w Q> M- C C 0 >. ro N -15M D O c 2 0. 0 N m �p LL ._ C 0 O U N C L 0 ro 0 0 °' 0 m� 7 , t0. « T m« M 0 0 . a.N❑ ii c N_ H 2E Z ro 1l �E 606' C - c ro� L m ma lNc _ L O Gm 70 w w- a ` aw L... U o 0 w CO H L w E a O v 0 7 G � � U C q C Nm� o n 2 0 i t u 4 N a O 0 3 J O W i 0 O CL z O I.- h W D 0 Z F- Q Z H OV UQ N a rm W I- h U z N LL O Q Cl) C N O � G N C � J m N fn Q w�� o� �� .:L�"a) EaE.o Eo.2 mm v m m L N N C «° J= m Q E C O 3 N K C a - o N� N N@ O J @ yl y N 0 C> N N N L T v y M� N U m m O M N °-' O b O m N,,, C m tO N N W O.'U U m 0 m m M J m W @ i1 E L6 a- a liC Oc�vI mo� N Nulw < C- o � . oNmo 0 0 - �NN o.2@ E 'L CC o 5 o E o 2F Oa o @ ryp z@ 0 a« y�L py a O D y N @ C D E O m Q o C m m 0 E y. O c @N o E m m° c - 0 w � ' � o °o ° E L m d ct FmmT- «i`N 2 NO � a oOy ' ` 2 E o o a 'c o E °E -o wm u @a a m LL H o m d 0 Z Z o o E E'5 N o 1 c 0 E � mJ o « N LL . a EcEm y . m E o m v o E mT ,0 p v N do am� = c vJi w w c mt 0 ° o- yU�E a ° ,° U @a E a o p U c — c _ a E @ m N C C 0 E 3 C . O C o 15.c° -om Y2.o E_m �c0m :A� ��E °m 9�v0 �� a a d min Q m 'E a E ° o,'g aNi N in m a`Ni ao N wE ayi .mc '^ ayi ° a� ai ,' o C 0 v m J yf m v o p E w =m C U c E E 0 o= C > rn w V al a Q y O r v L F C O 0-, C� � U C p, c m E CO Cam° o � 3 E 2Q S m s fi v U O a n w E 7 U O ° 41 C y A 0 O a z O Q 0 F W :m0 Z Z Q Z Z F Ov UQ wa ,�L� W F mZ Q H z 0 N LL O Q C y O o�m J p�� Q d O' �' °9 a o N ui U NLaL J!-'J N 3 N mmt YO .O t0 :o a�aNN-Ti° @ E E a 2' @° o EL a. O U =i O m C O N E .m U (0 a m o E C ? ro Y U U �CQ VI' [ �O N OI p,C «!C p w v «a uvi >.a 0)Um @ @p @m C@ -_ a ¢ C N@ J ro a« ° N0 w C N C J a L m O N@ O a O m d` N, c m @ooJ�E @ O O@ I-Eu� Na �J p� ono- a�i °OLEN�UE ovm,U '� 2_`Lm�u UJaNd OUN av H ud � O um'ov OIO .vo°'oE�m.cofC M'C 9m °owE OD0 c aoa3 _ `�'oNS0�vE Mo -L Y crnc°w`o oLV,x 0cca00OuEu`v' M, 85 � ° -mac rnU1 '43 a N � mE N Np @ @mayy `ovoo aNE o �wo o' m a� °@ mED�t,@.caEv�p omm� �a2 o, ohm v NvvaNi °a aJCtn at v +-j v2m a O_ @:p.oc� 3 �' N c N CU l0 C 'C 'O '@° M C Ec q !�' U) Eat N._c°'cLLYJ' -- a01 «j° 4L@, N" Em ° oucc[��L°3v�0o d3maa «w'�m U) Q NI OI ~ y N U 0 O t v m O N .> N N C ° E L O °. N 9 U! O o« N Q 6 6 w JN r N U N Y°1 a� � '_ ° U «Lm, U N O b NvON 0.0 IOLO NNCNNa �Npp «UL -a-.2 J U OP OQ U ro C C m a tD C- O y N« W U tD m a [ 'p lD O) a •- N lodd C C d O. N Q a U) O «; € �. 0. 7 O L N L@ ONj d y O Q 4-s V j .� o.� �a..E.M c8. o c > v ro J ro 0 CL p .946 m c u v c E c o !c c > _rn w U) a v a Q D 6 L d r H C O r4 Ir � U C q c m p c 33 °E Z O W 0 0 u i A 0 O Ix a Z O V F W =�0 Z Z �a Z N O~ UV off. N r W F J Z m Q ~ LL _ N LL O } Q V 00 O G V Y_ N c � J m � Q 'O c m N C O V L D C 0 0 oU w CL EW c @ a °cw mN m 0a n m m IL rC E c E rn fn N O 41 'o a` w 0 0 > m 0.2) m m 0 CL O E w �m c u v c E u c ow c > m w n L C J O N m N v m E N C m N o_ U O N c c m O E C) 8-0-1 � O. d o a w c c E v •- w a - a'c m u N E v C @ @ y N N « > m u U .0 l0 C N N y T U O @ - N U 0 N E c Q' - m- M d o ro w N d 3 U U N c O� m N mamN��mm O L m m0 l0 O. 10/) E m N M m c N O « a mo mM -Z M @ 0 U r U 2 j N d 0 o E t y c v C-e O C c C �G O. I m 1.0- E O > (, , m 2 y CL w m m E 0 0 o N CL �2 m « C U C � m � C6 .2 c >° 2 m u m 2 g >L�rn °mv E N c N 0 o N > >i.2 C T W N D y L 0 O E a) 0 r m O C a w ..-- C o 3 m ° Ow V o 0 o m O y y N O y N'U m O c'0 m 0- Oin o� N Y N N F C O O O m N N 0 m C `iii >L ro c .o H 3 am 3a mmcci NE_cooc.c-yi N w o m N N 30 D E O c c- m w o m N w m0 L C t C L 0.1 « a O c N > N N N N T._ Z m ot 1* c fir( C D m.y0 E N N m N, O._ m N -6 m y. a N m-O m 0 W..0 0.2 D C N m f0 `0 N C @ N @ a c t c a Q N N C O v E °�`o oO0mw N N m L N« C« m -a > m Ems co =c Om O C N c O 0 m O U> O o o'O m E C rn �- O 0 C U C m> �-- C L O.t .> G O T'- J N y'._• N a N -tf ZY Ema' m�� ow�E v .__Z N o.� O >c mayim« �mE wmo -o'�'O L N c c C C C 0 N m v' _Nm��v °wo @ c @ m O.N U h aaN CO N 9 Q N N C Q ` c m F m U w U 0 @ m a N O O u c w @ @ o a o c m C N U N 0 @ Y m O oo - mm' O W 0 w m o vaw'a� >wa�@ N C « y > m mN G J CJ O@ O c_ EEO N av�m v y w j D @ a K� � U C a � E Rl m o � m C Z Q r 41 O c O w 0 w d z 0 ,Q V F W =) 0 Z Z Fa zN O UV Q Nd P� J Z CO h LL Z N LL. O Q I� V/ C y O 0 C A voa m� m� U) r o,E Q m n J _ N 5E J _ n O)0 OD rD N 0 l0 O N C D D w N~ 0 c .mcvm°1m c `O mLm.. o o mo o m a Up E o @c mE oi3D �? c`4 ED�(6 am m i4 O)o 0 IL 'o� o EEL uL aum m a�c'3 ms co m ava ���r= m30cL.. coav 0C a '° C V N L p U m( a N 3 C C d D m a N v �C p D L m T+ C N N m .m N W- v« E E `G C e J.X C N y N E O N T a m= 0 L O N Z pm� Oy�E 0.co Q amcdm p w M�I tU : c v m�N �T m `� ELL 6 U C Y U L w, N .- L 3 M to M (D E 2) 'w ma° a m S w Ul w 3 o o r w a o c= m e o m p a ao =IEn o E �� c � r r NNN N 0 w .o C c 7U C CO M — Z a V Q (O �• V O N� O L L N N L C= N OI D V N N OI p L_ L r O j O Y IL N Y N �aU�m i o.S a � .oa a a _0- N.L..D- i �a a ro�w m m M. o vz O N i7 N J U N C C m �rn �E° cmc to m Nvm° Yid Eoa 0- c'- m EEE m: E :p °� a a Ems. O. O D C N V U w c E v m E y,� w v I�m N.. 4' W C ^ pJ C U E M N O C E m C O a > (n TJ T o D 1� (/1 �¢ a v� 0 m T am E E� C �.O C W N N C +' IO O 0 N Q N LL N N aN+ U N Ul LC C,., N C L _ vOEaTL mMao N Qo-NO E_ L c D N y 0 E lO LL N y E w O N - O o .m o `o 3 0 v a O. D> m JD:- O M.6 d C D> 5 o 0 JDD V L_ O m a Q N L > f6 Vi L Ip C N N 0 w o -o MOT ` 2 U C D N c C (0 N 0 «- N v LL m> N C a t.. C p.0 7 N (6 - C_ L lD C U c L m O N ILL U L , ~ L > v N C N A m O D a L O P' j O c N E "O m H L O N (/7 a h L 0D3 > —. E L.. L E G O c a dl o � 3 E z Q W 9 E N U O Q a w f D 0 0 0 w h A a Ix IL Z O H Q (7 H W 0 Z Z P Q Z F Ov UQ N m Q h Z (7 N LL O Q 7 N c �O c W vu _0) N m= me c NQ min E min E min � z o ° n J C n N N O m W W W O J U C 0.- 'A Ev =L o � c o m «o c - a o 0 0 0 N o w «° 0 ° O c m J 0-0 0 w N m o o m v m mN� a >o c 0 a > m o p o m O rn m Y N v N V Eu C N co '� mpo`,vm 'N d V m d m O C n LL m o (n0 J0 N ~ o y D.- :� = 2 N C O C o c m O '-EvEa p a° m a _m ^a= E m o v_ ow N a E w •� u. m w u— pvma�'c o Z a IL E E m N N .�.N 0= 'o m N> 6 N !- m U J m N L ~ a W 2 m a C O . m p O ° U N OZ U a C o 'r C J N d U Jm aEom c�0 To`�S°sa�i M�Lww rG O CL 0 O m Z J N O 2 M m d o ow J a `u• N N E 0v 3:M0 0UNa 3w30�a°i E� m" N mm CU°3wcm n > C° J'oc o m o 3> U m!E w- m a'G m.. omt *�p_o00u O J �'-w r o.. w 0DaO0 we �� ~QC) `�Ua�E �a`000x «0.E m Eu vo�m e ZN C) c� o m ACV '30 W m��vo°. ma C > m O r- O C T= m U H O O O C E m N 0 U O n D O m O ° O L I- 3 ua U N aU F3nmaua ZO j 0 O I �a 0?:a - N 0 O N N LM 0 O C C O w N m 2 3 0 0 m N o N a0 ° o Z J m o 0 0 c U a « Na -3 a T C MN a v Nna am d N o m m —m .2 ° O O v o `o `N o . > 0 O Ol E nm ° oE 4 y oca3 o cm.z' n a o m _mo a c aa a oR °0 mN m v�= O N f ��c a Em vOw O o v T c� N c U.0 ON m oa .- O a_ « M O n a 0 a 0 =U O ° « V w O 0 O C O V p 6 a a m L N Z E C T ~ L d N U Z« O m d U C - E a m m O O % O N 0 N C N W > C. Cm > EJ m H C E n >v U U a n U U O Vi m -- M O o N LLI U) C N C O 0 c O U h i A (7 O w IL Z O Q h W 70 Z Z ha Z(1) O h UV a Na LLI r 4U F- LL_ Z N LL O w a D N vo U i+ O U_ U G U J rn y E E q x Q o z o° E a t cc > r t E m aD o m O L N a N N N e' N N 0 > n d v o. rn z c E c n7 aDi m u c x o a v= `o 0- O U .. 5� EG 0 3 m °�aDi°p c>w c° E c a m a m Z w N oU a E oa 3c a`E� my a0aE¢> a'm v°o =� w cDa d E� 0 Eo=n �' �O ac `o3aM 10 v rn� v °�° E d> a aN 0 N � O \ C L f0 o n N E a ON n O !V K S l0 O n'5 N N UI B 1% N LL „. L N .0. C rG V� j �>O O UC .TOLL E c oa�'S NO~OJ NO m 10 n� °o3 me °- o ao �'c Ern o N o Q L v Ol w 2 a NL) °' - a Q 8 J Vi (Q O .'43 C C 10 N N wm E C L O �j N L OI c U C L N w 0 u M V D a C 3 y N O m 'o N 0 o ° N N M 0 oo oo a °ooh 0& CLL E du a�NN a c LL a 2 LLa D E o U �.NU Z a d� nU .- a o a mw U) U)m U O U N C 0 N v O o �Np m E U� O M C p N 0 O O U U m d - U m U d Eao.v 10mu Ewc UU3?N 3ai N-' m .-c NO8c ,6 3Ec oZ O U 0o 0L C U °MWC—a T m m —o U °o> o m a d E m oUa LE �°`a O' mmdo� a`>- °.• �`o EL >m we O U «z° .°'c�a Y 0gym � D U p !. O O L d a O O C U =O O N a C Oa C p. E, l0 O E N E 'C U .L...S'J U E N yj d Ol N C W 0 L3Q H_aO 0 aY aN C m a > m 2HE «« i CC 0 2 UND wmcw «��o� �oov�� vy._ �0� «�TNiDo N O ° a- •C v •a L N mrE °� o. W c = ° °c 2 ;._E C a a o y v voo� N . ..v a °m> oE U om m3 uo tEYs. �. N m C N m Q O � U C ° m C M 0 mN C C N N OI m `_ y vs m m Em 0 om o rn �o L DL 6a d N .r3 E o H ° = C U a m m N 0 C N° � Iq Ca @ O r U N V N UI f6 N L u °`v H �coo x c ° �00 H. E2E . U) c Ea O O U N P1 A a O w (L Z O Q 0 _h W =) 0 Z Z Fa Z N Ua Na 2 W OJO Z Q LL Z 0 N LL O Q c �- U" ocm N _ > UC M N J Q M N C,5 E ro o z CL D a = O D p y) O a ro p U c N 0 p r U m�3'0ro .w c W N E d N N p� C �G�pp c C O f- O Z O p p UI 3 0 .N m '« N � o O Cn J ° m0 L � U m 'c i E = Z v E E v ro? H n �N 3 L p L ro m N« C L >' N« o u d l :t y w v «N.o ..a ro'> O-- cwo C D Iwo "o 02 m- O -Opn« roUU a0= c m m ro o ♦- >. ti >. c .N.a vi a ai a U c o" o o o w o c o 3 °•�'0 °'U E'OCpE �c�ro °i¢8ro m o E$ ro gym" E'v 8 o N c.O a.y C � nd2'm o'3YY .E m 0 t O. L o U L ro L O) o 00 ro W O O '6 b o . JC F U m E.4 N U _N O N C M O.= m o'�.� a= I 10 7 O G N �rn O d 3 C O1 C L« OZ Try a 2 -5 C N ro c m .-oo o wM ='d c E L m c m 3 o m D° E o 0 M q� d °' >cro'Ca oEmroo 0 =ao Ada ¢Ear3a° a�� >oc 3ro o�m o E Erowo,c « roo o.-oroc10 o'acnm Qc m �+ m ro V' M 04- V� c D D '"' d N E 22 O« U a 10 LL °p O d O N` ro 'c U> « EEw rota romro Ern a v v o• r oo� w v$ava� ��� M w aroi LL m a U E ro >10nN LL ro a m E a 0 3 d' E m o o UI G I G = N E N C C a C.- L O D - L L- N C =M o Q p IO O `« E E a m v a �� m o o IL v 'p LL ? .O v� w O:E LLL •O O LL L- m N> LL m °a D O N D Qa am a` z a aa`QmE'm $w•E m M o o c o o y T3- �'0 - c =oD $'> ro vU oD m y 3 m N a m 0 Ew > = U > m '3w a�wu w e D° o `"-0 v ` E Co 10/N C L N V N- o p. ro c N� c m >rn naEiv��c'�� -p. W co D= N W j L N'U U O M U OI avid o 0` N N O T3 n •O. D.L.. c r a '- O U - 'U CO ��'-rom Q o o N 'o E MAD =a�� S 00 ro = O U i d L p U c N 0 o p o w ro .� H N n o 0 L U L N « U !L- c o « mm o O O w O c2 U o w 6 o c m m c L 0 v 6 D Od E =o m i z ¢ 0 (D 76v on2 a y U o N d N m U O Olm C ° o E a n O N d L 3 � 3zC) N ro U Ul L U .0 N (0 O n N O« CO n n n- -N a M Yn c w D m U m `'EUo j n O .- >o a o -w oE o. > ro O O p U/ 'O YJ i 10 ao - W ro= O j M O VL amincoo m«a ro a '0 -`yea cv 6 o E 0'c c _ _ c' L = D @ ro m �>p 0 `'rte U � L o o > c m o O ^ H U n 3 '- M U O O 0 N W N L j G ) CL D a = O U 3 'cc �N 3 E y o u d l :t y w v ro w Iwo "o hE a0= c m m ro o ♦- >. ti >. c �- 0. N C a w- U c yO-M- �c�ro °i¢8ro m o E$ ° m)O a U m�0 CL m o N c.O a.y C d.N C t O. L .p m W.2 O O '6 b o . JC N «'W c (3)- O G N �rn O d N y : i wM ='d roaC Mm o o O E L ~ C _ aL X O N O N o3m «L >��. L E C 0 'U v fop. C >o W O « D C C D w -> C m ro T ro O o N N« « N ro N p.- and °-'(gi(pp n`k a EL�c H U N E N w N c 0 0 E 0 0 w U ro > L N o Um>roo E n n O M T O o D 0 c C ro D c ro D E o 0 �c w E E �L m v w d? c m.-o =a° N C O ro in ro m . w E C C N O D 3 .n= , E oU Z g m p a c c p Z E ro o H U U.0 N "00 in0 U O �U C 4 C m E o w 3E Z O w ro v° v D t U O n E 0 i A (D w (L Z O Q (7 F W =) a Z Z P a Z F OV �a Na r� Wh OJO Z a ~ LL_ Z (7 (A LL O Q 7 N C v O N O C N p n @ N Q v .0 O O (6 N E > Nx E rn �U v � ¢ W m N n 7 C N O D C O w C� M N U 0 Y C (p N N O C N U_ M M0 0_ N A C M L C « U 3 v N N 10 T N E. •p _ .� D O T ._j I- H 2 N 2 O C m N 0 0 CO O L O .E 0ox >cv o E � ? C lN 0 . c va�i ;.° ' d v U O O O m m v N v O Z N w Ev Z = — wU2m o O p p � C O p0 W 0 ❑ d Q N N v o o oNO •d- N Y Lo ' oN v O O 0 wva.cc E TZ�NaiN � V YmU � : u o .0 aN y Na�Y� 01 dL O�p�N2 pp 0 E B `OVjNya mL I rnLm aL c M = p, m avw@cL p aEEN(D 2 vo�'« 0 m „a�oi E> maoimrn10�v ma ZE`m c c aN c."2L - Nc�-owd _ m Vic« vE c •- vk m w vov vvv ov � � E cc cNaa a E E m o v�= �°u' a ,c Epo0 u3- N-o o O ¢ E a cL = amo'oo o E aE E ° a ¢ m° ~co'2E�cWiZ 3rn O �v« a.- '°c >a d.'v�'vZm v �c ~0 IL-cH O N O a O p O E v L v .- N- d 3 d N N E M C d v O" N 'O N I- L' C p 'Ul CO N w,2 F E O� 7r N O N 01 00 a` N ..O� -Y E` �� v o�L> m�cmm o.EE`3LV ov„2 m � o.a2vL �c o.� Ica c v;aa vn'rnc �.iNCa� -Lm 0 c°-'c 0'o vacc0 ai¢w��maOCnNxmLv.mac°�$`o 2 uvio.E ���uoE o c m a m o 0 wa > Q'Ey aEy CL T ry d Y N v v l{{Uppp 10 N ryU (p 1- U F rnCOJ d rnU E CL v j Ew �'w c _ v wm m -_ T N oDO 0 ocU Eo._ vDO m� maw Ecco uvi U3w mcN CL E :E w N rzo 'o.2 c C 6.2 - 0 c N 'U W ) 0 O N N w c >IL -uvi c°v IL-O Uv 3.� O a o d � CL CL v v ¢ m N L C � O ry N � T cL v � m._ l0 L C O K� � U c a m o m 2 0 w 0 N F E r O a a w E 0 0 U i A (9 w LL Z O Q 0 F W� =) 0 Z Z 1- Q Z F Ov U Q N LL W m Z Q ~ LL Z LL O Q N c v o u . yu•m {cp (cp J M N�a - m @ N � @ OL_L_ L OS].�= r•lE CL O'C Y .0 ° aciU °E �E� 4Ev m E v o o v N >o '" v� a E vYa ma.vp E mu>: UE 0 C Iv L_ O. N N O > N Ea E v mo 0J «LLV O)L - @OLEE 00 N'9m ao "Jo' a E"p, oirc.5« .# aui@ Oyy cuo7 «3x oN vo ,avL .oc aw o n °-cm @ a� Ycmw€ N N �' E cma@i mm �'n0 \ 0 L O m O V E w EE-6m 0� > N UI t0 O)(q +-00 1]O O O O. @ , E T1 C ° O. @ c C N @ O S] O 'O ooM-E o v w a�a rw ° @E E naca E "P o? rn� 0 015. c d 0, V a O E m.c E M "P a�vi cvi o � N C m U. coE.ov @ �; yvo Ey.810ED E3voo E c 0- Q c vz w 0 E.A 0 3w m.� y o.o� m� a7a .-o v v 3 LL 0 (n 01 «TLNN U Ol� O. @ OrN _C «a @�C LO O.0 Da~NN c0 mV O. 01 d'yE O-�C� N O dQ,C O o�EvEm a .-3 M o Mv'pv er.�c°'L >° • W p 'n @c�pEa; -° IL N .� m> 'O 3 > 'EC �'. C .'? W N U U Ot 2` N 01 N U U m a �aaE vE v a �vaa gE°x'v `o"'UEE yc°, uUi �Emo �'omm�aJ �aQ "aa U C N N L 0 p T' w L N 10 @ C C �`Q N J� a �N N r I a 0 @@ J" L E@= c 3 o m 'C @ p Ol C O U 0 O ` 3 O N J xp { ° N n T O @ « O m , @ n p y M, c T p E o ho oaCc a vNrnv v 0 y E °« c fn 0 m o .•`E �$3�c�mEL.v �v�3aa cu v c cN.° fp OU C'o m n.���oN 'Em «aci E@ _ o vE>, UQauimc c u o --2 M c� a c a v 60 a`o '> NL N O LF m U-OL « Ol E «.t0 E @ w m C E CL o a w E E c E >° _3._ @._vEE0 @J r m c° TiOawEv Ti O1 'a 0. V j - N a O J @ J Q N 0 O N d N 0« > J N J (` J O O O@ O E d N w mZ C L C O N L O' C D @Vl D ~ ° C ° O O UT 0 L « O N@ N C a N~ N N U N@ d@ H O o � U C @ Q C m O C 3 F z W 0 c 0 W r_. i 0 O ix a. z O F Q 0 F w =) 0 Z Z H Q Z F Ov UQ Na r m Z Q h LL Z C9 N LL O a c W O 0 c O m m m V y i U � my E E Q z z° LL C_ M a m v m m n � LL ✓i c n O m o '6 ca m O N E v E L° mo mg @ 0 N mm uj O V N C N - N W Q N mN� vo E a C N p N v W 0 V N O O N 0 N m W Cr C M L d E E. m M c c v v 7 to U) CD N LL. N N N N a 0 v v O N C v m m o _m a m y LL o E ) d °avU o z 0) C m N N m NC m w10o�� -wvm'E N L U v'O� o m m mo o am o U O O n C rna y a 0 3 E 2 ao U N u«mi J.O1 « N 3 Q �O l H yu 'N C L m� « N N m m F--.c- C O C j ar` t0 w 0 0 3 m u ° c m E'O '50-0 ,00Cm N100N E '�`m a :2.2 v 1� m cu o m a N (J o.E=5ox��' �o > '"" m .L.. acw E w 3 a 3 c w a c o LV a� N m� a T a 0 c c Q� nod wa c m Q o :2 ° d .5 > m m L O ,L O Q m W N 0 m (0 'O C C U) N O L O N O O C N o O .3 O U f O C C 0 C umi m L m N ' C a O a 0 00 N 0 Njm N «= a '3 €C �J =•T1] a tea« C OD� a O L 0 CC O@ a CL 9 U �. C@ N C C N N a E N C m C L ._,�_ of vw o m v" m 'm > >oao m « U N ` U L.o w N N 0 Oo T o C N> N =m _ v E v N - v « 'm_ C - ° O d Q O O O� L N a 'U O o c > w M J o m o a m O O N 2 � Z c m N .- cc EE « CLE u v° O 'O d m ° ll� Z 0.2 C N ma -y o'] C �L Lm N NO l m ^'t 76 > 0 m J O a 02 N m N @ U U c o 8 � o2.0�@ v N .- L W 3m �mSE� : 3mN m U o o v m as o a, ao w araE - c ° �U c n m o 3 E Z j LLl v° F m N U 0 a U 0 U O U N W O a Z O Q O F W =) a Z Z F Q Z O UV Q N LL �W F U z 0 N LL O Q' Q c� G M U) c N O ONOI �plO -d v u a wc� ° c 0 c c. 3�0 C« m e ��u c m `w� tm.� -ot'i J N c N m °. m m a m x Q E m m V N _ N v'- fn E J_ E (q� _ m T D � C v Q'O Y LL m L 5 N 2m°0N `o c cc ui c >-3mv cE 0 o °a�NYp o m v ° v c t ° m o ° ° N om «_10d N-O rn�m w� aovv .°pQ E w 0 a > vog mw _v 'm v .°uEN E vV N v c �c vaciTNitica a:o 'c a rn� a oa E N 3 o 0U N o N NL 6 m =� 9 [U V c,- m� v m ar�.2 v w- 'o 0 5�o,m-c o.w v'ov ca '� vc `m n.c ovvoi E0NCV SvDa`.a 6o F °a`o t E aci m'�v o»mL Euyww 22 � °mp°� Nv � v.- 0 0 �0� m o v '- .6E K O'vQo� pprn ° 7 ° '.m-. p co m U C N O C w C d ^' C. 0 N m U C d' m �_ N N Y 'O ° N N y U U m O�d m N CO 1000 a t0 t0 C j ° mLL ,a m e '° O N N C a w 'f, r OZ U L V D N U E rn zN W a) 2 «O a 2 C C° C .- °vacs v lnaa ° :� m Y w N �m'o�w :� L (n my vm�aN c LN�i vpmj vaNi LO ToE ELm U �otn�o �w o E p o1I -°aim ~aa.010 omm o p� a Q0 o N r v,_ O� •U LL' O m N U C m O U C m C N m M U r .N O N C O P a U V m C C N N EZc V J C i� m@ V N O ij 2'O U d'a LL j 00 LL. ao.a� -o °c LL�-a 0-E c dm v0aQ N_ L) vU� UO.- U0. 13 NNm a O. u w a p„-v LL O a D o m LL W V1 (n O. U. v U1 >- f7 m O C C ,N m E N N J N C N N O '04 6 C T p1 .�°� N C v O N v ° 2 L 2 N m m �m aoQ cNOLL E CL .0,2-3 o�a°x�oEwNo'vomm.S vo c L N W pj m N N v N C O v U d p w m O ° 6 . N O "O - N U N ] N T 0 m` c E c0 o � o 0 E o° 3 C p O v N Q C v a N m ? N Z c°ua v .. O O E Em cvi`00 rn0- 3Ww °�EomaU. -, c u x u ~E°' E 0.o" mw .5rn 5 °a '0ai �t° vmaNi'Oin �7 .5 > > d.c mu fn W u N o m rrN v N C c CQ v� m 3: C U cc °d _ vx° �ammH �„ o°°$0c� g C 'c ' o n f x " m - � C � amm O Yv V N 0 O a Q a c5 N N m O O 'O O O - C C V am c U .m N 0.2 o 5 'c M ,m m r m H a N v i O iy n� to i 1 � L� �O W O C O C U O w O p C m w C H K U C aN.mE rte° Li N U 12 Ol O) ` a O°uCy R c Oi .? C Ouc ° Ow N N ° N N C N .m c na .m C ° L v 0 u ° d % E E2 m M C a °Nm m 0 mao E ° e ua u u oo0 mom 00 c p� UCx E cw c F O m O - wydO . m N.O OO Z 0E0«E G u E N 2 E °..� « o 0 E U w C - N Oa > d ° uV uuv �c >L c cc c w C c . � O. , m u m cc CD 7 >v_ a v; w o ,O w e w N w L w °' N .w.. 0 N O O w �'E =ow °o£n�'w c° N EO y u w 'S 0. � E j N 0 i C = ° m 2 N EL N O O3 Q QO Om ONN um m Qc w m ) o m a w w 0 u CL 0 C t .� O C 0 0 U ECG N amv'a am(DE amva amy amm am> amp �u womcm mm.w _ �C° E OI j E 6 E@ O E w O. N D N E N O N w N O J w N C D m w J c m 0 C U) w t E` L w° L w D L` N L L N D w D w m w .,, w u HcN 1-cN HEm I-u ~ma I-D F" mm Fdwa�ov F"mw H b < I w wn o u� °° ° �c v o ENL vn vc �¢t °CwU Lw�D E'a 0 a N UQ �oHO Gov �o:� �$ °u °? o �o> c°o2'o« m aE r c m 5 o y m W h O C R Q m i Z. a E U a m Q C N FU J U) 03 L W N C7 a° O ° °L m 0. E 0 w C O c v Q OE t mw m'2)m > m w U N N D U) W > m _ rn N d C 0. of °uNUIS- N v° r D w c CL ' 6 a D U O O L N w d L w H � 0 U O ° U 0 c 0 h r 0 O Ix (L Z O Q (7 F W =) 0 Z Z Q Z F OV UQ N LL r2 W F m Z Q ~ LL_ U' V5 LL O Q C 4).2 w C N p v u «� c m > C F O U J N E N m me a E Q v« Lr-mC C OI m m 0N C «L OC CO Y D v c N m D N N N m N N C �a r � D ~ o 0 o > > C 0 L O p w 0 _ � C m NC a° vau p �ao 6E0 o a" E L m a m N E N O C « 0 O N a O O N C C L O 0 N m y U C .0 m C— n _� W � a m m o aY D y Z �ND Nn °i C.i U t. m U > N m j c w 0 O a >E v « c c 'o n � o a 0 N o o o E o O + v > a O N m ym j u° @ ; � ° o Eco oto _ o • 0 Am LL W 0LO « oo K 'T 0) '6 °° o0c'v N d LL a O Y - m N E "N m a 1K 0 m U N o m LL E O N o o L• C v J a oL .c mmC .Nj° �vN c3 ?0l °C ov aO T '- 14 o .�td v v E.2) Gof - v v vm Em = mym v v a n W0 Em O� o 0 ° c c o '' E N « m L c O o N ..O C O C DN ~ C - N�> ^ E _ N r N L ,O 01 I 1 w ' N �a - V •a O m U 0 O 0 « . v OoM= om L _ N O ° O m M d U m `p �p « ~c ° E° W �0U pp1 L ° C y E Qg J N a LL LL LL N m d V O J 0 0 a 0 o 0 2 L D N E � O � mcu m m w v «D u vuZm a a'rn a N o_ M V > C > p O O C 'p > J O J a J u > c c E° s ca w w e o o c a 3° U o E U N C O w D C 0 m C •> a� mw _rn C (A W N C L o O 0 -U a(n m T T m L v C L N° rn v C> n. D ° u d c w J m L v J ��03cZ J o'd CL v o o o c v w a 0c c.(p� O C � 0 D O C N U 6 J x o 0 d C m O N o m — L O N L N O D E a y C 6 N N D m L m d N O O d y W NT 0) an .O C m.O D rN/i Q O) F d U U a J C) N :C �o iv nU ;Q ,E 1 � rz iE W 0 U h i A (9 O w LL Z O Q f7 F W :) a Z Z p Q Z H Ov UQ N o- Co Q F z U) LL O CQ C D N C y O u y o c W v u0) E 7'FO N U -logy inx N'cm v°E N'cm m°E E0VLE pmcEE J(q- o Z U(D7W- C O ..N O O E 'v Lo C Nvd o o JS 3 v E MO y v 0.1 L Yi p N wL..• C a N O ,—Up N .°-� p c f0 Nab �UN 0 `m v�?� q av �m do ;m muv. vl v.E E c N v d. o '6 T Ern g ° a o C � d (� '-i O C UI G O a Ni' 0) v E E LLcw° z° a (L Q C L N o .L-• 60 E n N � O u ° O N U 0 0 O CO %D a @ O >m `.p�F 0m MmuNi oa�o��vN+. 1Em wp1 vv vv �= o�, DO mO' o v o0 o o ct�Ec 4 iv 7 LD r3 , 'N �Cv p U l0 J O N J c N v o > w .- O.- Op D m a p vr o m n D 0 -v ° ° . cm °woo «Lya vcu3i 0 vcv'�Ua � �p a`0waOi op �Oac ° 3W 3N 0 c E NvvOE o E C. a -• tq 1-tF T o p V p� 0 « U 0 N C . L _ @ — N .y • O Q > m L E` L U k N Y 0 0 vi L W C v Ol N O 'O C v v v °� L :E °- a W L 2 0 .O-' 2 U'a�vwi� p p N Ova!��a gWvl O 1-3a -� y O I-C7 co$u L o N N C N O —m N c w S" C NN « D D O O C W « g °O O. Dv a°- >Em a� p N-m O v O N C 00 N O °— °' L m Z >O L d L O a > Y > O— m C— O C w p W N @ Q Vic- m .� «'b o f �. W W E EU N v m N aim m ° a ap N N E w v 3 0 0 L y o o o m c rn 0 - a m 'E tj 0 N mu �- N U p Z ° N U N N-6'- N '0 016 -6 cm O - N' N ` i.c .. v v U 0 N a N C v M C N d N L 0 N m U NI-a a O OU)H a N C'-0 G ° � U C � G Q Q1 o � 3 E 2� wG 0 F H 0 s n E O 0 0 N i A O w CL Z O Q C7 F W =) 0 Z. Z P Q Z F Ov U Q N a rm LU J Z U LLLL. L C7 N LL. O Q 7 c 0 0 o J G � mm N O� O Y N A N iy o_ 0 0 Y m N m L mvtm''cv� Ewa i4 0 00m = c-mocJ H z C y JO N N E�0v- LA C N �: LIJ O)my m a°mp N ` m C O E Up E y O C N D yN am �n w E « a aa 0 m 0vc -'o N m v a d m m o Z � 0 Fm tg E 15 wm .w a mEc�E �0o o _c o orc `��°0 o W O0 U"S a o 00 _5U °- o0 m a V LLrnpa N � o` a a rnC c 0J Gmom 0N EO °c ' �N G N L O m :m p C 0 O 0 vp c O 0 m ° E 2 E 0 0 MU) X i E W m 0 L_ m o N N o C V L J O E 3 onJ U v N J m = 3;° 3 d' o J N U v•° c' 3'E E D0030E m ac' a mL ammo @acid o w K wr�aLo 0 0 _ aci a a u = o c � Z' v� 0 >. 0 W. 0 a'o > 0 o� N a, v o _ m `m o T c0 mc0 Eo 0 a : Z mM0 E a a C Eu a mv • va 00 E c L a C d 0 m° . w W U w E c U C O O m O .0 - w E p 5 ° O rn0, c o a p C o o E c m cU d- Y C E > U m LL O LL d U L a0 0L U 50 am a0c QaL ° ao :E 3:,2 D E0 av2 oc am am sE (A 0) m Wmwm o c o c > J m 'E c m a E C m 0 C m 0- E°° •c = m 75.2) c 0 0 E m '&Z' U O W > w E O J «U 'O 0 c. a a N 7 O t � C P 0 E G O C m �C 0 �U C Q C m E m Cam° o� 3E Z O u f E r a U O 0 a i J U O W 0 U co 1 O w (L z O Q f7 F W =) a Z Z F Q Z F OV UQ N a w i- J Z m Q H Z iD FO LL O } Q.' Q 7 to v o o c m @ o N U N C g J p� � Q O �NI °� O m C — v v@ E E EUy I`O mN o a o= a N oa E b E — � a a u os i o E.:_ °OO rn O 9 E �° v Oy o N L o Ea O E v a a �N w ° ' O a w a N J O N'O b. C N L @N m - C w a N C N °v ° YO o C N@ c N '0 O > ' E ° O @ _U @ O C m V ° O w N M O O d U « ] O@ N N HN O L � > N N M Lo N J @ m V, a ° L °° E Q N D E 3 0 N L N Nc U M N E ° ° ; E v o o n v @ E oN 0o.c 0a ' M.c M v «w E L o� C H ° C C o o W B— @ q l Uv > E U) v 0 W C U O a 0 a a N TN o at E @ @a i � ao a o O °o E oc E ° o o E c c o fa"@ cl^ v 6 NN � IL _ a c 6) E° a �y E a E> > > p v 7 v io@ L rn vQ. «ac j m MC m 2 Eo v Eo9 3 E "I Yw°.� O O U A C9 O x d Z 0 Q f7 F.. LLI 7 0 Z Z Fa Z O~ U U a N2 W I- CO Q ~ LL Z N LL O Q D N c N C via m� iim azc o °Ea°i J m F- N-E N pItN N 0.M.L., tOx 0 O1E C E C 3° y d 0 0 on`- °'o Z'v E" °c 'fit �Y O N c Y 0 C O 0 u c- 0 L_ O N J O$ E u L_ 0 N N N 0 J w cTc nm C (iM `D N 10 3 O tU oc v 3 v 0 Z C a 0 z m Ev v;6a �a «a _�� m� 0U Z 0- r °Q °.. °w m° °` O L mN t0 N co N L O O O ND o« N.O y U m Y O D d U D O N y n �0 N J O 'vo�ma 0-0 y Ern onWc c w m ° vm_ =m v mcvi au o L Lam oD :? c m�wv A N o• 010 -v w «30 �0•a0 m> °c vmv�3 or m N E u a �O a caw10c m oon u° m°�m C d t6 O N N E M LL E v Z n v o D c O v D z U- 0 N_ 0 > N J' NO D 76� C� d Q ON 0 co n, 23 Qcc �?J�E ° m -° 3LN W T t0 E 0 a w0 N N m r O '«°- ✓� N V 1.2 JE PL J j U C a 3 N U N C V D N C n D D . O N u U U 00 00 O` ti O o, U C t0 v. �EnS z O �nzo mw to v: tp00 a N D N m C_ O N T N C N v N C L i7 J Q N N 10 N D (0 U/ C D C N C E vrn oUn EUa O y m � - °aWv O o Y! > 0 n z E E 0 E cc 000L 0 x 310 OU -NOS auo .o c�C7m °3C� W, 0 v c u 0 6 v m =O'.mM v ac Q m.c°'3D m m n c o N mO oc of OE ` c a „lO p O O ry ?i N O > N E N O ,N u J 0 ` 4C W 0 0 70 NC N m z o zEc ' > J V C DO > N N C 0vW s 0 o U w Q v F o- �v tEO v �uov�w v ooJ 0 v v :� U U 3 m i v - L O N L O ,C N C � L O p O N O « N u U .O N C D rq E >° W O 10 C J OI O 0 N O w N CL c°wv W > O w w m N ":s m O .0 Z a> N O M C L r o vTioam `v NN`o� D C a U N C N L N a 4 p j> N yi U 0 0 ti N U U U N75 N N U D O L 0 0 E W m O UI r N n m L E 0 O M O f-66w0 0Famm mmm HaaC wa C O �a � V C Q m o � 3 E Z O W O O h p� N 0 O Of CL Z O IQ V LU =) 0 Z Z F Q Z F O� UQ N d LU P mZ Q ~ LL _ Z _U LL O cQ G 7 C O O O Y •� C C` O O. o w o E Q ' cp � o « > o p C = w C N O w C J « N w p a V d - d J O O E U0 1 C N _ > @ 07 Z23. w U O Z O w r L U� : « 3_maUmLmE E m 5 ' L L oa «i.w.0 w U N w w «O «O D m.0 L L c S) N 'L-• @@ @ C w T C N U O1 .O .� CO (n C d 0_' N m «O O N U @ 0@ N J q ❑I O O .-. C 1 ' — C U OI > S] @ Q N O E O N a a° N of; m ° w °0 > 0 U w na O > J m D ° UDoO p m D N w LB E U - W C °O ) - w C @ z ° o c Eo w L ° > , w o- 0 U w « o o4- c o w3 w wo o L -0 U 7 m .- x m L. O ._ E O O . - cc N - w O C A �1 N O O N N C O O N O m 0« O N •�- '.C- -. Q O N °t .O..L -• =�w� ornin� cwiwOEN c mE wmo'�3�Ucw ww0 �w" B OOa o�N m�a� @axi C a w p a - m Z aE w p v m $ a o w w ° m LL Ec L w C 0 ` .O OL 0 9 m c� y O w C w C a N C a���3�° D m C C w y @ D @ Do�u�o� N N Ol Ern p9wwN °'uF= oo'�E° o.pYJ u =o w z�10 X:-.wp xwQ D o aN mw O w 3a�Lw rw�w w Q N OLC�`C @� Uw.3 °o OJON am'�ma �dONJ �- v yU g. c c @rwC @c LL3 ELY 6 N N ��p @ @ c°� N u m O m CQ N N @max N m .pc c O d O Q w � Cp D O N J C d N N' m � n O E2 O m w X 'p v w r C w w d N V �/ f0 �- 0 J L d r @ U p� p 0 V _ UZ a 't Q- °'w °'C� OO. V U� CD V Et w� 3 w •'� Q@ y 2 m D w w N 3 N 0 CO j w 2 'D@^ O C O p w C p C w g 2Q� m o 2 w T Z 0 n w O m aui U.L.. @ m ti �.� o r w v H w m Ln E a w a c °p O O a O C w c3 c�0cc�� U.wo�• O (`0 -:p .o myE j m ° j O Z w j C M Y ° w .O O (0 o X C m C J m :t w a E O D A v N m Q O p Z O 5 3 o w V Ow xom a° ui amm pCo s 'o « Cp O w> O o U 2 ° L N L p w e «gip' we aDO:Nm�� @wE �uw. -•E '�a «c E$ cxm_��— ccc Ewww NCOwC Ow' w -C N °«Ow pw c wp3 cw «3 °u oam'JOw� C N a «w' DH�p 0 w LL U C n m w w L N O L E m w O C w U L `w a w a v w a v v N rn o L .-• x> w E> o > c ro> m a n v .m > o- x n E > tq .� w m D v .a a Q N 'O O t w L F U C O � U G a G Rl O � 0 v c Z W S a E F i a U O 9 a i w J U O O M O U' O w (L z O Q 0 H W =) 0 Z Z Q Z O~ U U Q N 0- J Z m Q ~ LL Z 0 N LL O Q C� C C 0.2 N L c N O vm m Ui ivcm EAU) csN m� m�'� >�c a�c�° m0to IT J m m 'rq 'E J C> U/ > L O N N a N C a _ �v,o1E mC L m a mCE N C a «o c0 5 vrnE Vyl '.c ° L C V> O N o m" o as m w -f6o E c v m m a cL�m 2� 0 m m N .N N a Ul 0 m LL G M E a O C 0 CO5 0 a _° .o t N O r U m 0 ' v 1 C 0 m o 3 00 c Y N c a a m° o` V y a N €a;Cp N t0 a 0 my v00n'° N o L 0 L U O E mL ~° °mov 010 0 ? v O O o .?m m E mw e a 16 ° o°° I p ao N U o 'C C O O N E mU >0 u 5 >m as �0c c a+ C 0 9 N� 3 c YV 0 0 G 'Fo Y d N y U U� p5 8 ~LL C m y yav Ji w2L y N O? m m O vo ° «� �ovo E m o >u mE > o L) U 0 m w co inw y ° 0 � S vm 0 mw E «mm m �m a ° v ac«D Q m O m ° C L$ C O m ° y Q y C c m N a oQ � N m U 1 > li ON C �nz y 'Qom « v y a E:2 o a 2 o v m m E � a C C N= y o C O j T 5.2 O CO UO N N C O E o V G C O a!� 2 � X c w� Uv J O o 3 2:,O o'x �C L_. 1] N CO O.O a0 cE`�3Emv° ojwow E46 v va —i'c3x vo E c0 «ac _ op v O a E> y v a o> 3 u o c a g- vc c w o c o o f E a T -6 O C z � Y o 0> m a m p . > � >�'? «, E > W m C d ` m L m L C) m m N a C N U (n % L O 0> o C N c O @ p c O a a a ov am a v v 0 °: c °vo 0E E 0 a Q v > 0 a y N m .0 rl O _ M a> j a N L r C V5 O 'v 0 m t O U X0 O O` U.S X O 0 C y a y y y -6 m y L O N >> O > L N L> a rn -W F > o G a 41 o � 3 E Z O wG COi � � } § § LU a 2\ Z/ c,j EL \k }} j § k j /cc { § ) }{ / E F-E 2 + ){E �) .wE \ =B5§ E{ 0L) mm IL W {J){ - f =#/ §f; { 222 { « 7« \ § §wE \ \ \ \ \/M iL 0 7 # &�a��:= =m \ , ,ml. n & 2 > o ,o"o -_ •@ -, oa ze ;§ � \� /� uj Et ° / ® �� - ° /£'! §ff'5 )n� % »(/ f ' - ©:a)! ƒ)) §{ ®7 - -5 \ #�E>u . k \k ■! \ \�j- 0. %§)§)\ �r ^�� {{2 mow- }!/ ) \M // {)a, /.&Ll k ��6 §\ u -_®" - °° / }»\ g.�,�! ± \f{ ?i a!@ �( ; &:CL { kk \ {{ ®{\ k !) /0) \�$ \z:� ) #« -amo5 )` § -: °° »2 \0. § \ \\� )��( ))(�k§ {�\e {(\{ § \ /\\[E) \ { }ajft]#- \ ®&Gz2 \; �] a! »47 ° ®:`� ;±lA7t®f §�J{f �)Ca( \0 -3 :w °Ikea, #\� =,�,Gw27: §\ {)%0{G�§`?2 _ k { §7 }) k { {} \{ {§ §f \ \ /E222 {k))]\ 7ft: -0 E / { { \§ / {7o —a a {(5P"a0 /cc { § 0 h i A 0 O w CL Z O Q LU :D0 Z Z I— Q Z N O~ UV Q 04 O P FU Z 0 U. O Q c� G D N c v o u ;r o c v u a >�� L , C Z ��( , (C N C a N C w E E N C a in m w w N c O w U O p 0 N v o A N c L � ui «r 0 03m 0 0 J y 0 O C m 0�J!« ¢ O o2 pU IM v a E O o .- m,O��O �d"o T UZ N mN w w O O C Jm N 'w m D w U C mL ¢L �' N N m« w ¢ L N O - O C N Y 2 _ O U M.- ~D E E'v O a O O > O O N w y.«.. 0 w O O D c O« J E 0 0 0 3 0 o L C N 9 0— w W a NL¢ C N O ~ @ 0 C U FC C °D N `6 m` N U m '0O NC m O 0 0 C cw O £ N ry E M m S 0 mom E c 0 a $aui EM o o D J 0 ° Y0O« 0)0)2 q� 0U Ca A C y vn •- m N w O a m .O ° w O m L > 0 0 m O p UE _D C YC I L 'D .J_ D d fN 10 N N J N w O. a E N° C 2'w ^ i m LL q U a aC NE O0 o w j m L V N0 Dw — VO �0 T ENC U imN U O w 0 o 00 m C c D O E oa >J 0 0 u o owo m JUo .amN w m O - ' ° C O w' w a w N D 2,cp in m N J a m v C C L N y w O > w Q a U w C O ° ♦w + 0 m c c o w S UC m�8 � o C C >C , m v a N r C N N S N -.5 p m O« O O O m N 75 a 'ro - a O D w N o ow _ N 2OOa o = a 43 > 0 v E m a v 0 �a Sc r « mO 75 0 c mm 4 3 o .= x v v N m o°00'UmE=oc3m r C D U N .Emc�'mw C N N 0LD �. p U rn q O _ m U D t o 0 O N E N(pp m m m ¢N o EOo J > 0. ( p ppJ E E CL EE N N E T _ N m Y p t O _ L O C C E D 0 N U— 2_ °N c m 0 a° Nov ° d o u m ° « D ° ''U' �p gy m« °cZ E 0' D O a' o w wcwg.wc ii N y != vm O ma w$ma'm0i cc �'GJrn c1.2 C° O� w., m Z U O O O m w 0 N r'� c L T 0 w m U7 p o 0 A T > C•- W N N U O' N mm ,-Jm NJO w;pwN NL-°w L w w C U N L m w m To L C O O ma- 2E F-$a L0'w n. F-o0a fL L N m N L 2 U L N 0 N .- N 0 ` .E D V m w J v m � O O J w 0 O �p C N �' O w '0 O C O a NEB �_oo ry N 0 C O o w m v. M ° N E w N U m w �o vwcL �O) vu�cr_• L p E O H d U m C H n O m F- a C o � U G � 4 m o � 3 E Z LLI v a F U O n E a U 0 O h A CD O x (L Z O 'Q V F W =) 0 Z Z h Q Z O� UV Q N LL aW m Z Q ~ LL Z 0 V5 LL O Q N c v o U a+ o m a T m e E i J 0 v N d NQ z° J65E OI > O .O >Z m °m 0O'u3i aC� C V 2 '= Z J « C .rc-J a 01 a f.Op o._ 04- u > v Iq N °.O v� N o a n mcm o'mUL 5iT Ec o� oQ v c� tp cm C U o > 0)p U vO 0 ) a L C m c v 4) d m o N Z r E ° N° N a O m c olo C OO EaY a 0)2 0) O Z O 0) p 0Ym mp� o N a C.- O= Qv 0)•a IOLL v N ao m e �U:? 0 2'w� 6 aip m '_ C) v - v __c� « N`.c a vE ° h E c Ec E 0LwQ v' 2 9 m avmvao m v M c L o - ii v Q .- , r o w> ai c E :°_� oN c s Q- a�i 0 a LL vp>Cm vpcma o.o 00 a 0)(U inv Z N C s.N.oc L aaa ~ awmv �'co o •� �DD� U °�Z v DE',° -�Ec Q N �qp .� O v.vo '�a b �I-Evo N`•v$ r v LL Z` m O CL c> E« .0 m E 4 v 4,2 v a N �G y V N O U L% O N N N O .« E v omovE o C •� LL .6 C ._ °E•� Uxx°Farm °c Umvp UZ0m< Z R actin h V1 W._m 0) N a., m O L U 10 T C m Cp y C C U C �_' p'0) L 0)C •@ N V °U °:co ommi C O O a Z O Q 0 O wo Z i �_ Q ~ N Z F 0 U U< N A. r a LLJ CO F V Z 0 fA U. 0 Q 7 N C v O �O C N Jg a m - v E - � Z Q aa w' -� @.� U •'- OY may O Ca Ut00 . C w `1 N y N C L J O C �'ivi U v J TJi O j G.L- N J C v m N C m C:C @.0 c� 7 ;) aU 0 O. m>@ m U N m-O @ a J C mo ° N m ° m c 0 3 d C c - Em ° wva owEm> LL.- Ew E — Am o-Vc2 waof .. ,U)2mp0 L�Qv ad� mo Eo°oc v v m OU N Z Y J '- N N UO `i N N U N c O .0 T O m r O) tU O C E w U C O. 9 C. 10 7 O d E T z T C- C U v .L-• w U m E� m p w v �" r- C C 0 ° G m U C m a ° U w E T N N E fj C a� N c° m a C m'�v ° _ a °cmvvv a'= Co °2c °O -vo'c c�a Jo mu) E w m o a r m w v o m m N o D c N u0 m 0 3 N —LL N ° a 0-'- O N v O v Z'w vv �0 N�o•c ai� cE v �`=c ` v «Ei a E o Y o m 1L a z a) J z L E « E° N U O c C '7 O ° N j `_ �.'-' N a a . . V a O m m . m C C E 'C C j T C r L L O O a a N.�n E a (J/�. � R U N m N w s T d C wN U + jN a U p g C ..w C _ �N L 0 '..• _ O Co. N U > y .., •O o 0 ° �m � �I �s0 Nm a a ELL E a Y° a c o o •3 a 'E � N ma n ws °a Z C O L O m N 0 w U w N 3 > m Y3 o N v ° L U C) m« Z CL 0U)icoui - m v ° (7 v 'Z o U O N U N N v m 3 m- c E ° p !� o v o_ v ° CO Ti¢ Ti m ° ° o o c m ° N a 6 a W L o d 0 m F mz U vvcv o -o�.vc t a m= -- c N m wo «.O o.ca v- o a o E m a c v v c 0 m o a v m C -� 'o °c Q c - ._ �,°- -Ow° m W U j E o f �. N •-o N `E •-3 �cc. 100.0 N aEc rn� L 0 0 0 cwaouPOE N C N m� d C m y C O m w 0 U w 'O C z , I- O a m a r U O O m O � U C D, m� o 3 E Z� W O N h AI V O ly (L Z O Q H W =) 0 Z Z P Q Z H OV UQ N �- W FU Z N LL O Q N c y O .O C N �1Cp� N �a N m �tnE �inE E '- " O N C U/ L UI N ° ac m r° E °:N u 10 N 'O = UI T'O Q E w ° m N?N m �@ao rn`ocr T2iL na > o m Um �` o (Da v� vi ON @Na a W 'OC L0 N � a - Z o � u A m o o E c x °) ° a °' N a ''°NN `_ :N 2, N 5 = � 0)i 0)i CL u N OVN c a`i Ol -�Q mC O �n 1n O)TZw 0OZC U)0O 'O O` 0 'O O a N o E ,.. w H E L O O 0)fq Y T) .p.. E r N C_ 'O C C U 1.2 O U ° CC ° o .0Nm S@ L a N >> m O E I� L p w 0 p m a y C m LL P 0 N 2 N d a N 0 C0N N Uv3/ E as 0.3 o ° . > c, c CL 4 E m1 o a. m vN 2 o aEp Ea 0 o LEN ' a atc v' NoL a zIm o U m oa w @ `C c 0 o o m m t c 0 o O O 3 ' 0E . 0 v ; a cN . r v r o m.v m ,5 -° - 3Yma C =c o m c °c0 d�mc� d rat UJa° Udd U-Q w p cao Up N NZa U) <CL0m0 o Z U0Euc U) N(D wU)m U) Nmin ° m U O .p o ° O ,.- L C C ._ 0 O v L > U 3 CI:Fw UU4 aN o N J OI :? y 3 u c °In L° 0 Z `J 2 c N= a o ' Z N N O N .4 2N 0 w c` v °C .- o ` t ` a o xE a'w m8 ommo E a °N N CO a� ) O N Eu o°>,w�c 3 NOa @ ac aa°, u oc v a'O` •cam -oLL oT2m•° -I �E «u W m��c3~ am`o (j ac vpEp �w O O Olm C 0 L'= @ L N- N @L m° 0 ° 2 0-5 N @ -0 0 U m Vm- N amo F ON N '«O C uv N y 3 � E v E? O c O N y i I 0 O w IL Z O Q 0 H W =)O Z Z F Q Z N O~ UQ N C° P 2 FU Z CD fA LL O Q. cQ cC G 7 N C d O O C N V U C�pp _0) _j 0, E E Nam tq Q O Z O Z 0 °' E J n_ m C a C a N @ N A E 'v O c 0 0 oU N a > a. om p S7 CO @O N N d @ O N mN N j N N O 0 a 0 0• m o- UJ N N N v U c o U o - (L o o @ E U m z U) zp U L O «— N 0 p C O µ' C M C . + C as s uL) am °. cvU E 60 a� O `O C� Z a o C- O 0 0 OZ a @CJ N O OZ t Om N c°N i p O @ 0 c 0 0 X .3 C i N C U 0a U N O d O O m Z O m > V p C o 01 @ cis @ miJ« @ N C a(0 OU J H3Uw0 �a`EaLu. tL -3U�0 O U C N T - O O = L y er CN o > {p wm O N a O CNa OE >_K _ p E @a O@ W > w O@ O O N w O _ @ a T N s t O__ 0@ O a N >: � c �_U� pU « @ @ ON a >" 00a > moopr N 0 0 �O O E O 3: 'Fu O 0 U N O :5 V W N w 0 U C C? N m E ry O N N •N m d iO p .? . a 15 C > N tT O O O � T ! U 0 « O C . D 'O > . L>, ? Cp V 3 c N d. > L a ( U N E @ O ` UC N �U - T .N C— C O` ' N . N C O O C OI N G 0 @ 'O @ O' N Ow m C aa@a =flood •O O as «@cau C p 0 aa@as0O ` U O �K � U C Q mE o � 3 E 2 0 w` u N 0 F 0 F N U s 9 w J 0 c O N h A 0 O w a Z O Q c� F W 7� Z h Q ZF Ov UQ N (L P 2 mZ Q H LL Z 0 75 LL O Q 7 c w.2 U a Z C C C > CD J Q stn E stn min E N @ N O a o E `°- E`!3 E c E ' a v@i 'E 0 Ufa c w -om= m- '.°� N ca a cn.c E v m° 00 N 0 w n' E c c a E N La90 LaE IL 0 c -6 0 c�N CO V N N@ j N N C d OIQ C 0) 0) C O O C Y m �L N ° ro @ @ m a? @ @ .0 m m 4 o@ tf o E @c z z ��v LL E 0m @O 0m0 (0 CD C o '!' OI IL- a o N H n- 0 Q) o v wwE a c o. U) -E u 4900 490 LL 4 u-> 0E w>0 °m °ao� °u °ao, a as z° a` oc c"N c�?Z @ L > E° 0(J m >> 30 0 00 0 _j} oN rn vec �E'� 0. -NC N w rn a o v9 Ew J D O y O N O- w N M.- L- o = 3 us-° N 2 .� 3 3 •J`c Em Nw 0a N 3: 0 0 Co c 0 x w a E w m Q °a- y 4 Qv° .rO ,cJ E o � rn N o .@ ° woo EO @ j c (6 3: my cC N a r y 0c >w n00E0E uo'u00m m 0 « d N O C m w C Y @ Y " @ C N @ N N C m L C {I/l a U° 3 w rn ' m N N F U a a E w d .J N m rn c X N f0 N m N r° O jp @ O-'U =@@ @ 0 O N@ W 0 N O U C o 0� v N 6 C O w 9 c O E� °� Q E@a oLa`rni'anN�oE� v 0 o ° c0a 0 L cC O m 0 � o :30C 0 yUc O N c. 0 ° j O .C.a a N O O° N Xc @ E N co 0 OO O @ p 0 @ y N p y o c � U p°C p N « O v > yyO p 2 U O D C` U N °U v U C > O U) z « N N c @ a w O N N ` O N N ° @ ~N 1 O N i' C O N O O y L L ° O@ C O O L m a aS O LU U o C d ° O O N U F a a« @ c m U N C N o N 1- a@ U U 0 C �o iy 9� Q E 1� �v `E is 0 w` C O w d Z 0 a F- O� W� Z. Z. Z a F- N Z F- Ov Ua N — r2 ui J Z Co Fa- LL Z 0 h U. 0 a 7 N C 0 O C y0 0 w m 7E 16 v w a r @ @ w C� H w .6 E J O N'C @ a �cn_ O z O vl i' @ O O @ O 'O 0 d C N c E E EcvU @ C) .0 ; .@ 0 ._ @ N U L Q C Q N N o @� .. m Y @0 m m m N a N a c E a c c m° c c m U o �o n.EQ"' EL Ea ° O V VI O 'O C- L O N 3 N T y a. L O 1n c�0 mvmE mvEo ' .4 0 me Cl) 000 Kp�o CLp «.U3 v rn�g c v° v c d m •�_ c 00 'c in E= C@vu c cm cgCc o 0« OI O) L N` C L 3@ v U O O O C C C 0— 0 y 0— W@ r�q Z' N 0 'O D E 3 3: c y@ U @O C E° U a v@ E Zcyc Ul @ C Zc'oE0 a¢¢ G a U m U N E J m yw m LaaOi« a 0_ TL 'O@ 0 LE LM. y ~ .0c F @@ 0 ~ N ~° d @ N C O C 0 T N N N N O O O d N E@ 3 N E~ C CO C b N N N 10 E u. > c LL> c J; LL ._ r @ @ o o E E 0 p¢ ' p¢ v z p E a w ti o N° m 0 z O z ° n a a ° @° 0 U o O N CO C p N Q U w u 3 m U) O U 3 w `u 76 N @ o O @ my a3�L du ym Em �nL°N ay a3 @ 0 @ N D N WC 0m0 NL.mZN @ c ¢" cu E @0E ° ` ° v rn O ¢N>Uz >_m ENayu W EXOwE tL- °u uJiwd N N N L d L c 0 c 0 0 C 0 O{ —p W L D@ L U C n 3v03-0 0 .- .O C 3— v O —0 Ul U N C a D. > r C N O c d~ N N C O N O O¢ > U/ C> > C O U T lV P 6 U @ C— O C !r caT E 0 O N N -'o��E O .?, C` OI > ° ` > ` C t@ o L J ¢ ,3 v 0� v o c F O w` N Ul D O U O- N U U U C QI N¢ N @ Mt W N c d Ot N ° @ F -¢N¢0 F-a¢m ¢$ u G ° � U C p, c m � o � 33 °E Z� W v° E U 0 a w D 0 �O N h I A 0 O a z O Q C7 _ H W Q Z Z Z Q ZN Z � OV UQ NLL W F U LL Z N LL O Q D U) c y O C y0 0 E E J �¢ m O O �nE N LL O� C p @ @ U C m (n O ` E 'v a o 0 (L O @ O LL O rn Y) ° a - _0 Ewa ma Como 0 7 m V c a o COQ m U_rC N N N '- E c 'Q E rn o• w U) LL. LLJ O C4 (D N O O o Yvn Z6 a U sr r c E E o LL �m z° z° w cm «.L-• r Ul '^`/ @ d 7L-' N —a°� O 3 v 0 w N 0 N Gy -O C� 0 C« N N n m o@ 0 mm °m(0 "``'.n a°imwX°'3">ttu cmau°i�E c o o v ao�o''cEOTE o °acoma « qa�" E m c m v C@ o oc LL — Q c c - cjE E � m _ « ° m °to �m° v ai cio o' 3 w° F c a o E v m «.- a@ i m C N d @ 4 «_ @'U N N N N N NmO. m W C N W E C L a V- L9 @ L 0.0 m @ U L°Nj!L3_'TmOuwE3 j 'QV O ooZvo v — oa Oa a m a'3 « 7 m o nE o mo >- c N E „ c - °m a v o o O.- - ° =a 0 o —ma c 'C w o cw ° ° •- c. Q o 'E a v 3 v E m m m E vm EL o. rnU5 ai m w° co vi o io G @ N N- C V1 @ .� O) N t0 « O O N N N m c N L ° mcc LL X N d C« N N m N V Fj O@ OI O V C@ O d U@ o �ci toaEO i0 E E o c o oo v E 'o o m° yw @ N v « E > om c 0 0 o N C O y N n a ` • a a v > 0 m mR_0E 2 @U Lomo°toa ` c a@nUoov v@oNwY?mm c m w ' oU w n o . —> C a cr N E `m E 'c W } } k / w }\ /( /§ uj F— d cn b k k m )f \{ \( } \� \ u£/ 0 {) \\ \zc \ \\ .\ /0 \\ \/� )\ | {\ ££\ /§\ _k;§ \k)! `0 `\) 2 =r k00 / )) ` � o -- e: ) ) - § \; } - �0 }k ) §\ \ �k� \ ! 7 c §{(� \ 60 � t ;/« ;�\ 2 A (n (nCO § # ) f 2 0 _ LU 0c C ) k�- )) \} �k�{ l0 f) {{ 7!o if( a2 §« � �� to W \ o c- \/0 co 2\ /0 »a#a)f0 a) wo / } :2§; 32# { f })c0u ƒ t! o )Em \w(R �7 ° #� %{E2Mm mEw - )f \{ \( Attachment No. PCB 4 Draft Response to Comments and Errata Attachment N ®o PC 5 Draft Mitigation, Monitoring and Report Program i Flo, !''C 6 Correspondence Alford, Patrick From: Dorothy Kraus (medjkraus @yahoo.com) Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 3:07 PM To: Alford, Patrick Subject: Newport Banning Ranch DEIR - Comments and Questions Dear Patrick, We object to the Newport Banning Ranch project as proposed. Please include our comments and questions below in the records of any and all proceedings relating to this project and its successors. Regarding SECTION 6.0, LONG -TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT, Sub - Section 6.1 ANY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE MITIGATED, 1st paragraph under Land Use which states starting with the fourth sentence as follows: 'The proposed Project would result in a land use incompatibility with respect to long -term noise and night illumination on those Newport Crest residences immediately contiguous to the Project site. The City of Newoort Beach General Plan Final EIR found that the: introduction of new sources of lie lLg associated with clevelopnient of the site would be considered significant and unavoidable. In certlfyVill I the General Plan Final 1 =1R and al2p ovincl the General Plan project, the City Council approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations which notes In the first sentence, please specify what Newport Crest residents are assumed to be 'immediately contiguous' to the project site including street number and street name e.g., 3 Wild Goose Court. Regarding the underlined sentences above starting with the second sentence, the Banning Ranch DER does not provide a cross - reference to the General Plan Final EIR where the City has approved a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Please provide this cross - reference to the City's General Plan Final EIR for clarity. Also, please provide specific examples of 'other public benefits that outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan' including specific benefits that would outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts related to long -term noise and night illumination to those Newport Crest residents contiguous to the Project site. Thank you. Mike and Dorothy Kraus 10 Wild Goose Court Newport Beach, CA 92663 Alford, Patrick From: DORENE CHRISTENSEN [dorene_3 @yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 11:45 AM To: Alford, Patrick Subject: Bruce Bartram of Newport Banning Ranch, DEIR comment III This is unbelievable that anyone here at Newport Crest Homeowners Association would agree to allow the City of Newport Beach to invade our private property (Ticonderoga Street) and actually have this agreement recorded with the Orange Coun(y Recorder as " The Agreement for Ticonderoga Street ". This was apparently done Sept. 19, 1984. 1 have lived here in Newport Crest since July of 1976. This so- called Agreement was never discussed or brought to a vote for the members of the Association. Newport Crest has 460 homes - and with this many families involved - how could an agreement such as this be accomplished without anyone's knowledge? This sounds very tiaudulent to me. How could the city even consider making this small 2 lane street into a commuter roachvay ?? Ticonderoga is our own only way to enter or exit our small neighborhood. Taking our private property & making it into a commuter road would be a disaster beyond words to describe it. PLEASE do not let this disaster occur. Thank you for your consideration. Dorene M. Christensen 19 Baruna Coourt Newport Beach 92663 October 14, 2011 Mr, Patrick Alford City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Patrick, �ty.CliIV19U X11 COMMUNITY OCT 1.!92.011 I. DFVE1,01 "MEN'i �2, 1 -� 0L1,. NliWl�Oltit On behalf of the Newport Crest individuals whose signatures and December 2010 letter to the owners and developers of Banning Ranch are enclosed, we hereby object to the current proposed development plan for Banning Ranch. As stated in the December 2010 letter, the location of the proposed Bluff Road is of grave concern. Arterial roadways should not be in such close proximity to residential communities. Additionally, the planned development will have significant and unavoidable impacts on the Crest community such as lighting, air quality, and noise, Please include these materials into the official Newport Banning Ranch clEIR record and any of its successors. Respectfully submitted, I,- Mike and Dorothy Kraus 10 Wild Goose Court Newport Beach, CA 92663 949- 337 -665'1 medjkraus @yahoo.COm Enclosures December 21, 2010 To: Mr. George Basye, Aera Energy LLC, Newport Banning Ranch Mr. Philip Bettencowt, Newport Banning Ranch Mr. Mike Mohler, Brooks Street, Newport Banning Ranch Mr. Chris Yelich, Brooks Street, Newport Banning Ranch From: Concerned Newport Crest Residents Subj: Banning Ranch Gentlemen: Thank you for taking the time to meet with Newport Crest residents at the August 2010 Newport Crest Board meeting, and again in late October at the home of a Newport Crest resident. We also appreciate your taking us on the walking tour of Banning Ranch in early November. We have been most impressed with your professionalism and your willingness to meet with us. However, we are compelled to tell you that the current plan for Banning Ranch is unacceptable to us. The location of the proposed Bluff Road is of grave concern. Arterial roadways should not be designed In such close proximity to residential communities. Additionally, the planned Newport Banning Ranch development will have significant impact on us including pollution, noise, lights, safety, security, water use, and lost views as well as the destruction of Banning Ranch habitat. Our preferred option for Banning Ranch is in keeping with the Newport Beach General Plan which is to preserve the entire area as open space. A core group of concerned Newport Crest residents has formed with the goal to organize all of Newport Crest to preserve Banning Ranch as open space. It Is our understanding that Measure M money is available for open space acquisitions such as Banning Ranch. Such money could cover your expenses to date and still provide you with a profit. We hope that you will consider this 'win -win' approach for all concerned parties and we can continue to work with you and the Banning Ranch owners to attain this goal. Please let us know how we can help. For further information please contact us at tC;il +:ei ��: • ilftEilrla, t�_: hrl�l °n;!iVl'Y�f_�f(i)•.�,J��rt�i. Cr:n 1. Sincerely, Signatures on following pages cc: Mr. John Mazzarino, Managing Director, Cherokee Investments Honorable Mayor and Members of the Newport Beach City Council Newport Crest Homeowners Association Board of Directors Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers froth Nevimort Crest Residents . -• December 2010 Signature: ��- Print Name:S�/)M 1/e Address:. /% J (i0-t wr ei- w,'►�a/ 61 Signature) Print Name:1 1�t - j��•4�Cy� Address: •����rS ��Q '� Signature: J_L__= PrintName:� -L�z Address: _?1 Signature:1 /� -;7 Print Name: 04- \ Address: t /7 /r Signature: "' / Print Name -� N 7-- Address: /5 Gj��TC� Gj i Signature: Print Name: Address:._. 1pd4A Cr Signatur l /��� Print Name: ri�12L — Address: pp CAC Signature: ' Print Name: K�(i �aft,•J 0.• Address: C -'- Signature: Print Nana Address: _ Signature: Print Name:_��C�l /GDIGiGU/� Address:, l `l��l /_- �7- AM6 n Signature; Print Name: Address; I Z aCUY ✓n�fi.c. %1� ri% Signature:_ Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: LKICOWTO MeWPOUt [Dill OARRHAle, "RALAR mvvRAv& a/ "" v — " .. —... N4,-ijvo6"'A Crest I'lesAdents -, December 7,010 Signature: Print Narne: I Address: Print Narne: Address: SlgnatureQ,}l"j,v 4 L Print Name:. Address: e C, I" Signature: Print Name: Address: SignatUre: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name:,.- Address: Signature: POIA Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name:-- Address: Signature: Print Narne: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Narne: Address: — Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Letter to Newport lBannllnnR ]Raskin Owners/Developers from Newport Crest lResldetnts - Decem -ber 2010 Signature: )(I'I'l� /'n'�)�r��'� Signahu'es / Print Name 4U A U Address: Address.- rJl L/ � ?1c'fi 61-- � ;= frn ":; •� 1 %A'11 ,? Signature: t i . rl ' -d, ( Signature: Print Name: II! i:Lt.l •1-, v rvl i Print Name:, l,i/l CAI e dl /,tt%':5'1Sr ,0 _ C t,16 CA Address: ! �r� /I'L�l jr'c;sr t_•I �1 }.(,Al' Address: r, I v v.� Signature: _ Q , r.2 _ �lGc,c..c1!1 Signature: 1�� f Kc L,� (I 1. 11 Print Name: L U /y t2_a Print Narne: Address: AEI ;' (JGCi, ) Address. Signatur Signature: %:.,�� �6/ n�' '(, -7v. u �.. Print Name:E 1 Yt CL S Print Name:(`- / 'z'1` r 1 ( r- Address: —°l' L ICJ, c ._ Address: 7_0 „” J i L-r) �L ow, signature: { � _ i'u %�-� Signature,/ ` ' / /•' C ,. ( (�ij �( J Print Name: 4,Z' \l -� i�O J�� Print Name'! Address: Address: i IC' C' Signature; Signature: Z,'zt-!: - -/ Print Nani <'� �f Lz�• Print Name: Address: _hi uil.:'_ Address: Signature':. Signatcn'e: Print Name: AA/e/ /l,) YL(.CL� �-� Print Name:���hp .S �- n_'tlt Address: Cl(-Address: > J ✓( {- ) elt Si g nature: Print Name:_D _. > d f6 O u- Print Name: Address: c.i_ 1A __iGl_61.rA1 (, fin Address: 12/11./2010 10:16 FAX 9496506661 6AROER Letter to Newport Banning Mulch Owners /Developerg fi-om Residents - December 2010 Signature: � % Print Name: 0r `n- C? Address: R ' °/ r2 // ze u,- Print NornVI 4/IJi9.G_C— &A,eL «= Address:�,L� ` •l����1 Signature: - Print Name: Address; Signature: Print Nam( Address: Signature: G�- Print Nome: f-V1 h jl-�1 Address: A de� C Slgnature: �r'�Ny�-= >Ld` =�`iJ @1001 /001 Signature; Lv Y d A�r(rl YVr -v — PrintNome �, IGi� /'lo1/Y Chtr�1ay�r� Address: _ .,SCr_? (A C. Signature:, Print Name: 4,r/'ril J J0 /G�1 Addr Sign( Print Addr Signature: _ Print Name: Address: Sig nall �e(_ Prini Nsrrzf/eg: Address: L Signature: _ Print le f-. /"/ll Print Nor Address: e-5 PG Address: Signature: Print Name: Signaturt Print Nor Address: 1r SCu u ( 1JbC&9- 663Address. Signature: �/ � � �..G signature: Print Nam '%- v NG�Gf�M- Print Name: Address: Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers from Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Signature: Signature: Print Name/: I Ll 4 �O Print Name:— Address: %.-I egf Address: 411P x signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: -S C-. Print Name: Address: lti V-:•VVVLONVA O� Address: Signature: ./, A J Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address:. Signature: "14t fQ "Jef Signature: Print Name: Rilce�l, W14,15 'N" Print Name: Address: v Vio,kv,, A- Address: Signature: ;1' 4:.e �l k SignatUre: Print Name: 1.) 1,0 Print Name: Address- Address: Signature Signature: Print Name!. L( Print Name: Address; _L L —L- SignatUre: 5 Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers fi,o a Newport Crest Residents - December 2 010 ' > Signature > >: Signature: - .. Print Name:L) >7 /a: �, ; r /)/o Print Name Address: i %f— "� 'r C. =l Address: Signature: Print Name: eV 4 f/i CS •ivy %� O Address: Signature: // -e >✓ �i% c l / 1 j Print Name: Vi Address: �s-7 Ire Signature:_ '.; -`g Print Name: S cr r U L ,vkC Address: - 1V7_? • C, -v %a C-6-2 Signature: Print Name: Address: 5 .I !'� 16 <<•1 r -,!I't ; 1 .�I,.ii Signature: 1 Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Nam Address: Signatn e: Print Nano Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature:_ Print Name Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Nam Address: Letter t® Newport BaUlning, t2.allch ®vvners/Deve➢®pers fr®lll Newport Crest Residents - 1December 20 Signahirei�;- -r'1ii , �// Signature:!�� 1 , Print Name:�[_ � 1-, �r 1= i-] ti� LZIr" Print Name: Address l? 7�') L`s�! i',/ Address:_` �Jn ` -.U'( (•U(1!27 Signature: % J r 1' , Signatue: - Print Name: 1-16 �\o I 1 !\Pl /�';� Print Name: Address Signatur Print Na Address Signatur Print Na Address Signaturez kGt_ 1C;ju.tP /cl PrintNaine: Address: Ii)1 CU C,GaVLt(�( /} Signature( A• -. .' Print Name: I Address: Print Nam Address: Signature: Print Nam Address: Address: 11 SignaUffe: (c Print Name: T Address: L)yJS7 -'`/ + Signature: — Print Name' �i'7 -. �•: /' Address: Signature: h'u _ i'v. EEL + Print Name: 6K�Le- (O-�kL - -KZ- IiE ntii4 lT,oV,trr Address: Signature: f�14GY (Z!n/ Print Name: .L i,✓LJA4 Vas Address: 066- •' �!� Signature: Print Name: .j i t .1 11 C- 1 Address: .i (�i!•�� .i'i.� Signature: =/ ✓vs-,r�J Print Name: Address: L Letter to Newport Banning Ranch ®wnea,s /RDeveR®pers f ,oin Newport Crest Residents - December 2 010 Signature: Print Name:_ l Address: / U 0 i> % I.1 %- Sig natu re: °__— _-,1'� C_ ,..,:- /:_._,� Print Name: ! a Address: Signature: .'�r�n. �..•i.+ ;�., - Print Name:�rY tt.l'.i , i ifs. •,,.,,: ,. I ) Address: i ) A -i'l L' . I .1 Signature: '; i 1. i`�L `GZ(.G • J Print Name Address: Signature: Print Nam Address: Signature: _ -1 Print Name: -._.� FJ711 ✓ —r.''' Address- Signature: I' (,% Print Name: N? Letter t® Newport Binning Ranch Owners/Developers i'a•om Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Signature: L_�Gtr'lC:•(_ : .r /1�.� /i /y •��t�/ Signatue:. Print Name:L%Z f 1� l l . J'i�� Print Name Addr, Signa Print Addr( Signature: Print Name: ( > . Address: J Signature!- Print Name Address: J Signature:_ Print Name,Y, i C_ YvQ <�. :o Signature:/ //` �• �'II� -- Print Name: tin _j LL-(' fJc l =— Address: Signature Print Nan Address: Signature:- Print Name: /' Irr_( n/51 A- ;Vl'. /(- Address: 3 2 1 0`9 A, LOA- Cr ' XO Address: 2, `o-A r,f 90 09) Yy:'A6!-J Signature: Print Name: l`-).le- t LU i hl Ja Address: `7 U -CC b rr eU- /.' Signature: . l rr• Print Name: �G'r '(6C L— 0 Address: l •SOljI L' /: e l 1 Signature: ` ,C't ,. Iv Vl f Print Name: /, Cv1( �1iLu„� /v) . Ur;c cJ Address: ifl J110A/ i1aeAI /, L! Print Name: J;j/� /mil! /� /) Address: �ll , SL / %•Ca %�' A1. Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: l.,Vlll.�V" fl C- f'li li'\ Print Name: L C`I I- . -.c._ t— -' Ji Address Signatur Print Na Address Lettert Newport Bamn in grj Ra "ch Omni crs/Developers from Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 A Signature: I'j If print ED BURCHILL I ENCORE CT A NEAT-ORr BEACH CA 92663.2364 Signature: P e i I nt �k im Address: LOCI' Sign'811111'e', Print Narne: Address- SignatUre: Print Name: Acldress:. Signature: Print Narnem Address: Signature: ' ( - Print int Witte: Address: L SignatUre, Print Name: Address: j Sig[ IDW Print Name:'.- e. Address: C, I j Signature: ,il Print Name: u,//) 12D Address: 2 Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Naine:- Address: 0 Signature: rv� Print Name: Address: el- SignatLike:: Print Name: Address: U Signature: Print Name: Yl Address: Signature: Print Name. Address: Sigl)atLll'E Print Nan Address: Y I Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/ D evel op ers fi,oRn Jl� j Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Signature: Signature: (y Print Name: Print Name: Address: I L f -C 'S C-- i_ I Signature: Print Name: Address: 0' Signature: Print Name: 1-1,VACAS' /\A C. I i Adchess:Ij,'), n-0 \ c — SignatUre:(", Print Name: j Address Signature Print Nan Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: -L Signature: Print Name: 1'1i Address: Signature Print Nan Address: Address: % A-G, /P, C Signature; PrintNarne: Address: Signature: Print Name:- 0 ( v Address: —I /\1 I C Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature; I A Print Name:— Address: I Signature(- Print Name Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: fir. Signature: Print Name: Address: ,I,,Qttei, to Nemqiort Banning Ranch 0 wners /Develop erS ft-OM Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Signature: Print Name: ,/// 1'1-"e C ,C ZJ .(:,,C Address: Signature- X - KAP GA-F Print Name: d C Address: c-15 I Signature: -" " %r I ...... Print Name: C t,-. Address: Signature: Print Name: /0 (VO/ P( � lzik Address: Slgnature: j_ZLky'6' 2- * / r -) Z� Print Name: rk i(6, V Address: f1 t e (I'( It Signature: PrIntName: 'k-, -L2� Address; A Signature:, Lk 1-� Print Narn ILA/\ Ad Signature: Print Name: Address: \,A Signature: Print Name:./ Address: —A Signature: Print Name: Address: 11 Signature: 04' Print Name: 1 .0 r) Address: l -A ( i�)/� Signature Print Nan Address: Signature Print Nan Address: Signature: Print Nam i Address: Signature: •\A LQ Print Name: WI kAj Olt f Address: (I Signature: Print Address: � (� (, -1- Letter to Newport Banning ing R aench Om mess /Deve9®pers from Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Signature: ,`:(.Lr(( <: % l"71,Aidl&(Cr Print Name: AI(I da 6(el/(,("JI /I I Address: ( I (1 Signature: (�RCUU�' %!% tJY j +' i�}(/ Print Name: C ],a,, /L1 errd Address: O of fir Print Name: is Address. 4D Slgnahrre: Print Name: iC_ i ^irC) S DS'! 04) `(ii'tr Address: Print Address: Signature:��: i)p..t. �._. --• Print Name,"- Address: �)�..r�,�•.,,�(�`I- (�`I -' Signature: N /-'"- i� Print Name: /%2ll E) Address: % IZ) (O All C T IVS('141 Signature: Signature: O iVe, U U J Print Name: Address: Signature:�'�� /'2 Print Name: Ji.Address: i Signature: / L ✓ /1(�' Print Name: �� r J,, ✓l Address: I &bd Signature: ../ r Print Name: e1--kk �1/L[ U 0 Address: (0 0-o,6LY\, CAF. PiintNameej-� - :V -s- rx,-�v��,� Address: / iC,geLok) C 77- rOl %l(de,3 Signature: Print Name: Address: (�� Print Address: 1cj <�PVZa-);,40 Signature: Print Name: j�si�r'� ((,bl �`� ✓W Il Signa Print Addre Letter t® Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers from Newtiort Crest Rt-.q Weentq _ U)et'etYnhet' 2010 Print Nat Address: Signature: PrintNarne Address!V 1= 16(�V1(PJ,�V %U�e- P9P,t;4;� Signatui Print Na Address Signatur Print Na Address. Signature:. Print Name Address: K sLfoltmvlwrwb Cr i Signature: Print Address: Signature: Print Name: ��C /!/4[d �+ r �1d✓`4 Address: r/ Sl/r+��('h wCitiU Signature: Print Nam Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Slgnature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Nam, Address: Address: Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers from NewToort Crest Residents -• December 2010 Signahu'e: %;i� 1. -, << Signature: I`-�- PI N- m��r 7r U r /l Print Name/ I) / %:L_. Address _,•,Uw(o_G9 -�'_�� Address: SignatUre:`tV Signature: /( %u /mil' Print N/('t /f()Y U Print Name: GI Address: �( L�IJAII Address:, % 5I!!IA T� Signature: Print Name: Address: 1 I iQ bt(5\ I'LCL�/ C r Signature: i��cA.ct�il —i r ".' Print Name:' -�� ne Ian till Ser, Address: I (n I -•4iui Frt I. I Signature: � J / Print Name ) ; Address: '(Li Signa Print Addri Signature: l)✓`� �" mil" `- PrintNante. Address: Print Name: � oa,\ Address: i R 7'd. e -8 Signature:_ Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: _ �� \L Signature: Print Name: - Address: Signature: _�.Y., �5;{, ✓G� Print Narne: / Address: 19 L1 . L)) 6, 1 Signature: l)✓`� �" mil" `- PrintNante. Address: Print Name: � oa,\ Address: i R 7'd. e -8 Signature:_ Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: _ Bnm-Lng pon-th A A, V'aR CFO All vAj'q Memm, ort Crest Residents - Dome-Arabor 2010 Signature:.- Print Name: j yo fjClvi Address: _Z 0 Print ame: Address. Print Narne:ZKL�I (�;w ,mgnaiure:, (7 Print Niml- Ll LI-14" —I-- Aciciress: V"t, ti Print Wame:' Addiess: At Print Address: )d) plint Address: Signature: i , "r Address: Gila I ( Print Marne; 111';4 Address: Print Man Adchres's: Adcifess: — Signature: � Print Named Address: 7 Address. Signature: _ Print Name: Addi ess: Signature: I'laloc: Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers from Newvort Crest Residents - 1December 21920 Signature: Print Name:: 6VI 'Fki Ad Sig Prii Ad( Sigi Prh Ad( Signature:, Print Name: Address: 1\,1`� CiC ) Ci Signature'(F� =� Print Name:- c; Address: n `�l_�(dn _ v !, s�� Ie Signature: Print Nam Address: Slgnatu Address; Signature: PrintName:<_�,�_\)� �•�� Address: 1CC rr0,a� . Signature: Print Address: Z'S Signature: / 4 Print Name: ZMA_ r �• Signature: _Print Nam( Address: CCJ- Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Signature: Print Name: Address: Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers fi,om Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Signahl I P: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: t)? OW O�T- Address: Signature: 0 11 --�---Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address:. OX Signature: 61 r1l, Signature: Print Name:DZW(?;O Print Name: Address:—/ Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Letter to Newport Bamihig Ranch Owners/Developers from NewDort Crest Residents -December 2010 Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Signature: Signature: � No 111�e w Print Name: Ull Print Name: Address: (.' ( 0 �1 iz Address: Signature: , ', V � Address: i 7 P) Oyl,' e'(% lye Address: Address: C. Address: signatUre: Signature: 7-L , Signature: '0 i 11 at Ll re: el L(,. Address: Alf Print Name: Signature: Print Narne:- Print Name:- Address: Address: Address: Signature: signature: Print Name` ' Ili 14- IV Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: 1-3 ki I(/ Address: � Signature: Signature: Print Name: J1 (xckvj eb% Print Name: Address: (.' ( 0 �1 iz Address: Signature: , ', V � Signature: 4�Print Print Name:- Address: C. Address: signatUre: Signature: 7-L , Print Name: Jcd Print Name: el L(,. Address: Alf Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name:- Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: signature: Print Name` ' Ili 14- IV Name: Address: Address: Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers fronnn Newport Crest Residents _ December 2010 %� ''I'�r� Signat Lire: %� "' Signature, Print Name: I'eih ",Vi Ow Print Name: Address: "w(' COWlvt �,� Tl `r �`' Address: `,, ". Signature: �(- 1 _ .` ,� !\_`� %� -- Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: V C�,;f` t' Address: _ Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Address: Address: Letter to Newport. Banning Ranch Owners/Developers i'n•onna Newport Crest Residents December 201.0 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 Ernail: concernedresidentsofnewportcrest!2Vahoo .com USPS: Dorothy Kraus, 10 Wild Goose Court, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Thank you once again Newport Crest Committee for Banning Rarich e: me: Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners /Developers from Newport Crest Residents - Decem bea' 2®x.0 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949- 646 -434£3 Email: concernech- esiclentsofnewportcrest eyahoo.com USPS: Dorothy Kraus, 1.0 Wild Goose Court, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Signature: (', ;I 1 c'::, ' e'r Signature: i _ Print Name:'- ;�� Print Nam Address: i t $ rl'' -- % Address:_ '['hank you once again) Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners /Developers li,om Newport Crest (Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 Email concernec] resiclentsoFnewportcres [@yahoo.com USPS: Dorothy Kraus, 10 Wild Goose COUrt, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Thank you once again] �Pv Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch 1 I Print Name: Address: 1 J�� GJ�C!1_�7�� •�9'LC�� �9L� Letter to Newport Banning lRancl► Owners /Developers from Newport Crest lgesidents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 [mail: concernech' esidentsofnewportcrest @Vahoo.com USPS: Dorothy Kraus, 10 Wild Goose Covet, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Signature: � � C(' t Z�–i–�Sig YGUre: Print Name::,, �/{� � I" , 1,�6h <�i �� b Print Name:— Address S i %(u( O��9�t(,I , %{�l. V) P Address: MO VOT 02Qq-1 (IN Thank you once again I Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners /Developers fi•olu Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Piease sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 Emall: concernedresi (Ientsofnewpoi,tcrest @Vahoo.corn Signature: hO&M (21 Signature: L Print Nam Arldress: Y.r, [ n L l�rr r c Address: _ Thank you once agalnl Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch { } \ \ ( / { J \ § ¥ k ( ( \ / m ) - ) ( / { J \ § ¥ k ( DEC -15 -2010 10 :1 0 HPI HUGUETTE. - WILSON 9-196459,166 P. 02' !Let -ter to Newport Binning Ranch Owners/Developers from Newport Quest Residents - IDecetenbez• Z®1lo Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949 -646 -4348 Email: concernedresiclentsotnewportcrest rayahoo.com 1 Signature: _ I r �` /rte Signature: Print Name: Ad/ / • '•� r Print Nam Address: / % /(r ( /a. {�� Address:_ Thank you once again! Newport Crest Committee for funning Ranch t'd 11 8 IM3 d98:Z0 0[ 9L oat] 11,etten' to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers furom Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 Email: concerneclresic lentsohiewportcrest @vahoo.com J i Print Name;LQ Address: Thank you once again] Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Letter to Newrpon Banning Ranch ®wners /DevelopeTS fi'otn Newport Crest Residents - December 2 010 - - - - -- Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: rAX: 949-646 -4348 Email: co ncernedresiclentsofit ewportcrest 1� hoc, Lom Signature:((A i Print Name: rr r - Address: /2-9 VIFJ--I New p o lF •r— Thank you once agalnl ,i✓r G�crs�= h y C3 nG T'Y> nl E L) 2cg1, 3 Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Signature:✓ � =��L� Print Name: PE %C K I_, ' AJFI N NO Address: /Za V/ff J±ILMTo�F 92-6�6-�3 l'd 400t- U9-6b6 ouuelAlfdB"puealad dn:voOtLlo80 12/15/2010 1,1:17 9,192500070 QUEs rAR PAGE 01 /01 (Letter to Nev7uporet Banning R almd, Ownners /DeVOIOPCrs firOM Newport Crest Reslidents - December 20110 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949 -646 -4340 kmail: concer nedresidentsotirewportcrest 0vahoo com Signauu'e: iiN evJr _ Signature: Print Name: _NdpL � �DlylAdl Print Nam Address: hod �UL+t�7rGh4 nriY� Address:_ Thank you once again Newport Crest Committee for Canning Ranch Letter to Np.wpork paniig ng 9ba�n ch 4Dw nersfflevefl®pmo'S fn'ooro Mewpbrt Crest Residents - Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 999- 696-4398 Pmall: concernedresillentsof newportrrest(roynlnoo:corn Siarlatnre: Print Name: Andress: Thant( you once againl Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Signature: Print Nam Address: 10 39vi OZZIB -IV hSOTS696661 EO :lz OTOZ /bT /Zl Letter to Newport Banns i ng Ranch Owners/Developers b•e8n Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949- 646 -434£3 Email: concernedresi clentsofnewportcrest@yahoo.com Signature: ;_,t_ Print Name2ILLLi l a f pAdddress: I—i ^D- �I Il L U4 "Y Thank you once again) Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch /u Signahn'e: Print Name: G, c •Arrt;. Address: _LLL� ILettter to Newport Banning R"I"cit, Owners/Developers fx•®,xa Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949 -646 -4346 Email; concerne<li'esidentsofnew tortcrest �ioo.com Signature: Signature: Print Name: ��IYY� q Or�.d._.,_ PrintNant Address: J �� 6� 1 �� 1�� 61A ��_. Address: _ Thank you once agahtl Newport Crest Committee for [Banning Ranch Doc 14 2010 9:.97Pt1 Janice Peddie Insurance 949 -646-6045 P.1 Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers fivni Me"ort Crest Residents -• December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949- 646-4349 [mall: concernedresldentsofrtewi)ortcrest @yahoo.com Slgnatur .�%�f��_ • _ Signa PrhttNarn .= �6,h�gxa ((�GGJU�JI� Print Address: tq, /!P'44 hr/f/i �Irefit/(� Acldre Thank you once agalni Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch (Letter to Newport Banning Rillcln Owners/Developers from Newport Crest Residents December 2010 . Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949.646 -4346 !:mail: concemedresidenasofnewnortcrest (� ahoo .cam R Print Name:._ IGAj/ Address:. 97TH r ?y (I! a:� 4,osV2j45, /V•I/ �ci/17 Thank you once again! Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch r 5ignatul !- irAr �,t FG vNLD Print Name: Iq �� Address:���2A�Lr /� r O�ill LA d Oli2999906 « L0 :60 96-2L-OLOZ Lettea' to Newport Banning ljancl, owners/Developers frail a Newport crest (Residents - fDeceunleer 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-6116-4349 Email: concerneclresidenrsofnewgortcresKilyahoo cum Signature %k - r�G GC Lev Signature: y— Print Name: f /lam Print Name: Address: Thank Gyou 0 ceaagalnl Newport Crest Committee for Bantling Ranch e t d 4L98L191ZL simino>l uyor aLb 11 Ol 61 oo(] DEC -16 -2010 12:20 AN Pac Plnr ine 6192750903 - �, .�,.ovhnaao t ®aanflumng NORM aD91m(b'1r1y' /De11/Pflof] pa's &Dgn'tl P"VOIft Uest IROSI eam a DOCember 2010 Please Sian and return by Sunday, DeComher 19 to: rA)t: 949.646 -4340 mall: n�c r) Sbsl dtcafn4wl)Of rr. o- immm Slanature:, '. Print Name: ( IIJAddress: t "'AICI��QlA i- Think you once a0alnl Newport Crest Commlttoe for Banning ranch P.aI ll�T I Signature: �_- ,� (I 4�� =—� Print Name:_ ."AL �L hfd� n Address: A4LIZ& Leiter to Newport BaurAffig Ranch Owners /Developers from Newport Cress: Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949 - 646 -4348 Email: concernedresidentsofnewportcrest @ ahoo .corn Signature:1 ' '•z Signature: _ Print Name: Print Name: Address: Q2(o IRAN Lo(�.�,J22— Address: a-..4h InAA (-Ot�g C.CK-� i Thank you once again) Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Z 96WOd09L Iey4uasoN Bakal deLa 01 LV 004 DEC -16 -20111 02:116 PH DJ SILVERS 0314909974 P -01 Letter to IUeWPOut Ha noniutg Ranch ®w✓netrs /BDeveB ope rs &om Newport Crest Residents G December ZOID Please Man and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949 -646-4990 Crnall: pSLI ?4P 1 h' .s ittP soinoy�r�eLtcrest(ayl__ h�oo cpirl r SIgnature: � Signature; Print Name, I a4e ,n del' Print Namo: aW� Address;. 12 kra LO 0- ar Addrass; d Thank you once again Newport Crest Committee for Dunning Ranch ���� Dec 1G 10 11.:05a Kojima 925 -42G -0199 h•1 Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners /Developers iron) Newport Crest (Residents a )December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 Email: concerneclresielentsofnewportcrest @yalioo .corn Signature: �./U/ _ Signature: Print Name: f /U•�,•� // Ajo) +` /»y Print Nara Address: G j�'`r Zc "' C! Address:_ Thank you once again) Newport Crest Committee for tanning Ranch Dec 16 2010 12:35MI Planner /T.C.S 9497229353 P•1 Letter to Newport Banning Ralich Ov nllen's /ADelvelWerrs fn'OHRA Newport crest Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: rA >(: 949- 646 -4348 Email: cancernedresidentso0lewuo [crest, yahoo.corn Print Name: — Address _42y� Thank you once again Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Signature: Print Name: Address: /23 Sent By: ; 7145007372; Dec -17 -10 11:00AM; U etteir to I` emTox-g 90"BlGu g Ranch tIDvn lien- 5 /iDevelopers ffa om Newport (Crest Refiddents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 16 to: FAX ;5 Wall: 5ignature: Print Nam Address: _ Yhank you Newport C lice aftainl st Committee for Banning Ranch Signature: Print Nam _ Address: _ Pale 2/2 06/24/2002 16:,19 FAX A N I LP ATE 1. ©i 001 /001 lever to Newport Dawning Ranch Owners /Devel®Pers &Ord Newport Crest Residents -- Decembelic Please sign and return lay Sunday, December 19 to: FAK:949.646 -4948 Emall: c. ernedresidentsofnewpertcreseCp yahop;r�rZm �! 6Lr� Slgna u1 P� f— 1, signature; ' _/� _ �--- Print Nam ���r , Cc �'G I Print Name: AA*L�J�.'� p� Address; 2zg I Ifi ° f/ .�. f3•G'RA 1Pk 7`� Address: �'r"°'v 9u drFJ--- nn 'i hank you once agahll �ro�e dl (t&,A Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch ^urn rs er w, �� LI Dec 16 1009:14p Glass Family 949- 679 -7156 P.1 Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners /Developers ffom Newport Cresli Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 [mail: con cernedresidentsofnewporterest (_yahoo .cam Signature: print Name C�CtS� Address:.�(O Thank you once again) Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Signzture: Print Nam Address: 12/15/2010 12:42 7023026019 HARLEY E HARMON INS PAGE 01/01 Letter t® lafewrpon'9 S,I nn il(Ig RBanAc1n owneirs />lDeveRoPers h'OM Newport Crest Residents m December' ?,010 T � Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-43413 rmail: co ernedresiclentsofnew lortcrest Lo) ahoo.corn 'manl<you onre agalnl Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch signature: Print Address: Dec 14 '10 04:31p Dick Pearson (626) 795 -5587 P.I Lettelr to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers O'u•®ren Newport Crest Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX:949- 646 -4348 Email: concerne ch,esiclentsofnewnorterest d@yahoo .corn Signature: (�J,) C j tA/V — Signature: DL PJAIi.e441% Print Name: 1 0– N AAP C. / f—z1 I WON Print Name: y17A;L1 L�6{ f = 0 9 -� p / / i Address: 1 L J, t__ ��f (1"G�v� Address: � ��iP.�f (' (� ,(/'�` Thank you once aga nl Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch o '. l,,CL2o rnl y A: 2A-u S - 7 4 z) �, t- 3 0 = <1 -�•�n `• S�/� � 61_•0 •��.� i��+.�� -�..• /�� —, -,-0 1�Le•�.�2�s�. z`- 3 cam," �-��, �. -,.. r��, zs- �� t r In s'd 969hZOM9Z IBLIIUOS08 /asap dgl:gO 06 Ll 000 12/15/2010 10:15 9492500070 OUESTAR PAGE 01/01 Letter to Newport Banning (Ranch Ow weirs /Developaers firom Newrpowt Crest Residents - December 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-434B email: concern edresid ell tsoinewoor [crest @vahou.corn signaenrE �� . Print Name: Address; �DLGOI�im�Il`�I SiYP�i Thank you once againl Newport Crest Committee for Banning flanrh Signature: Print Name: c4O6,O,^SglOM PM Address: L Y�� G� E�a✓ Letter to Newport Banning )(Ranch Owners /Develoiie"s firom Newport Crest Residents - iDeceinbei• 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 [mall: concerner lresidentsofnewnortcrest @yahoo.com USPS: Dorothy Kraus, 1.0 Wild Goose Court, Newport Beach, CA 92663 Signature: �1 _ II Signature: Print Name: ��1YY� l q O�y�_,_ Print Nam Address: I ��I W 1�� r (�1 ✓� Address: _ Thank YOU once againl Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Letter to Newport Banning Ranch Owners/Developers f 'oln Newport t C rest (Residents - Decembea' 2010 Please sign and return by Sunday, December 19 to: FAX: 949-646-4348 [mail: concernedresiclentsofnewportcrest [O)yahoo.corn i Signature:.rY��A Print Name: )VI a—±4416 Address: /Z`') V( /"f (L4 CnGr6nl /VrW /)o/P r (.' r/—I (' j - -/ , c(-- Thank you once again) 6) 7 (L 4 3 Newport Crest Committee for Banning Ranch Signature: ✓ \I� / /Y� Print Name: PE TE K L • !VJ/l iq MU Address: 12,9 V / E�V� Gtr7 OlG( /V C: vvP o /z rr /3 f--: tv c l , i✓Ff . 92 -Cp�.-3 Newport Beach Planning Commission Study Session January 19, 2012 On behalf of my fellow Westside Costa Mesa residents, I want to ask for your support in getting the 19`h St bridge off the Master Plan. We along with Huntington Beach eastside residents do not want the increased traffic flow in our quiet communities. We do not want our homes demolished so that autos can save a few minutes coming & going to the beach. Let me remind you that there is a bridge already just 2700' away. Mr. Rosansky was quoted in the paper after the January bridge meeting that we would be sorry 20 yrs from now if the bridge is not built. I agree that we will be sorry 20 yrs from now, we will be sorry if Banning Ranch is not set aside for open space. We know that the bridge will enhance the Banning Ranch development. Why else would talks about building the bridge be revived at same time of Banning Ranching development discussions. Why else would Mike Mohler, Banning Ranch developer, be at the bridge meeting? You probably think it is silly or futile to think of Banning Ranch as open space for all to enjoy. That is probably what city official thought back in the mid 60's when Frank & Fran Robinson fought to protect the Back Bay from development. Can you imagine today the Back Bay developed with limited use for citizens? Today it is a gem for school children, hikers, bikers & bird watchers. Think of what Banning Ranch could be connected to the Talbert Nature and Fairview Park. An oasis in Orange County. What about the cost of building a bridge, $150,000,000? 1 asked OCTA if this included the cost of eminent domain and 191h St mitigation. They said no, it is just for the bridge. Add another 30 -50 Mil for home demolition and street mitigation. By the time the bridge is to be built, the cost would probably be higher. Traffic projections call for increased traffic and that is one of the factors per the officials for building the bridge. If future traffic is so horrendous, why build Banning Ranch putting even more traffic on overburdened roads? If is house is on fire, do you throw more gas on the fire to save it? Ron Frankiewicz Costa Mesa, CA Planning Commission hearings From: Terry Welsh [terrymwelshOotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 11:34 PM To: Michael Toerge; Alford, Patrick Subject: Planning Commission hearings Patrick, I spoke with Planning Commission chair Michael Toerge today about the upcoming hearings on Banning Ranch. one of the items we discussed was the idea of each hearing containing a block of time for the Banning Ranch Conservancy to make a presentation, much in the way that NBR has done during the study sessions. The idea is that a block of time would allow a more coherent organized presentation than that which could be delivered by individuals speaking in three minutes bursts. Both the public and the Planning Commission would greatly benefit by information being delivered in an organized manner. There could still be time allotted for individual citizens who aren't board members of the Banning Ranch Conservancy to make public comments. Another option we discussed was allowing people to cede their time to the Banning Ranch Conservancy in order to make an organized presentation. I have seen this method used at other public hearings. Let me know if you have any suggestions. Michael is also giving this issue some further thought. I can be reached at 714 - 719 -2148. Thank you for your consideration, Terry Welsh President, Banning Ranch Conservancy Page 1 Banning Ranch Study Session Feb 23 2012 From: RODGER hageman [evenkeel4 @sbcglobal.net] sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 4:54 PM To: Michael Toerge; Bradley Hillgren; Kory Kramer; Jay Myers; Larry Tucker; Fred Ameri; Alford, Patrick subject: Banning Ranch Study session Feb 23, 2012 From: Rodger Hageman (evenkeel4 @sbcglobal.net) To: Newport Beach Planning Commission Date: February 24, 2012 Subject: Planning Commission Meeting, February 23. 2012 Gentlemen of the Board, please accept my apology for my inarticulate presentation at the 23rd February meeting regarding the Banning Ranch plan!!! You were very tolerant not to cut me off. My vocal cords froze up, or didn't accept my opinions. Here is a quick abbreviation of my intended question: wouldn't the proposed road and highway additions or changes in the west end be highly disproportionate to the volume of traffic created by the development at optimum build out? I used an analogy to Balboa Island which, it ism understanding, has a population of over 2700 ppeople in 2111 living units. This vs. 1375 new homes and a boutique hotel. Balboa's ingress and egress is served by a simple 2- lane access road and bridge. Many tourists also add to the numbers as it is truly a tourist destination. This may be a simplistic comparison of demographics but basic numbers, if correct, hold some truth. I also was comparing Costa Mesa, Laguna Beach and Newport. Costa Mesa becoming the cultural center of Orange County with theater and music, Laguna the art world's enclave - - economic and population growth not appearing to hold an edge over maintaining its traditions - - it is promoting a full green belt perimeter (Jan. 8, 2012, article in D.C. Register.) Then we, Newport, have a very large edge in harbor, waterfront and business. Must we build to the fences? Must we modify city streets, freeway access and upset the flow of Pacific Coast Highway to gain access to a Balboa Island sized development? of course I have many other objections to the entire development and a strong preference for the land to remain in its natural state. But this wasn't the evening for subjective complaints. I had intended to close with a recommendation that we immediately table this application until the sponsor of the development can return us to $2 fuel. Thank you. Rod hageman Page 1 Alford, Patrick From: Sharon Starbuck [sstarbuck @sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 6:03 PM To: Alford, Patrick Subject: Banning Ranch development; pro I am a homeowner in Newport Terrace who is in favor of the community. Alford, Patrick Subject: Planning Commision Meeting 3/8/12 From: Gerard Proccacino fmailto:Gravytrainl ci roadrunner.coml Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 7:38 PM To: Burns, Marlene Subject: Planning Commision Meeting 3/8/12 Dear Ms Burns, I was at tonight's study session but due to time restraints did not speak. I have a couple of questions concerning the proposed Banning development that I hope you can pass on to the members of the planning commission. I thank you in advance. What precisely are the negative effects on the quality of life for the residents of Newport Beach as a whole, West Newport Beach , The Lido Sands Community and ME with my home of 40 years directly in the path of the proposed major Coast hwy Intersection? Why does Newport Beach need this intrusive mega development? Why haven't I seen the City aggressively trying to preserve this final virgin parcel in Orange County for all to enjoy it's God given Natural beauty? I pray that you deliberately drill into this proposal to totally see the negative effects this thing will have on our beautiful Newport Beach. Why would the City even consider to Los Angelize Newport beach? Please do not Los Angelize Newport Beach. Thank you. Respectfully, Gerard Proccacino Lido Sands Newport Beach, CA orange county chapter Correspondence Item No. 4a Newport Banning Ranch PA2008 -114 USGBC Orange County March 19, 2012 Chapter benchmark for the design, construction, and operation of high performance green buildings. LEED for 360 East First street, #401 Members of the City Council of Newport Beach Tustin, CA 92780 The Office of the City Council Newport Beach, CA 92663 P (714) 632 -3616 neighborhood development practices. F (714) 730 -6296 Dear Council Members, www.usubc -ocorg LEED -ND encourages developers to embrace a comprehensive approach in the design, planning, and Jenhrfer Baarley On behalf of the U.S. Green Building Council Orange County Chapter, I write today to express our VICE CHAIR organizational support for the Newport Banning Ranch project, which is registered under the LEED for Justin Wiebe, LEED APBD+C Neighborhood Development program. In addition, we support public access to Banning Ranch, protection EXECUTIVE OFFICERS of sensitive habitat and maximization of open space. DIRECTORS The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system is a nationally accepted EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Lindsey Engels, LEED AP benchmark for the design, construction, and operation of high performance green buildings. LEED for LPA, Inc. In Neighborhood Development is built off LEED's success and is a consensus based approach to land RBF -A Baker Company development of whole neighborhoods that unite the principles of smart growth, new urbanism, and green building to provide a common framework for evaluating and rewarding environmentally - superior CHAIR neighborhood development practices. Ed Kweskin, LEED AP ID+C plans for the project need to be reviewed by USGBC for pre- certification review prior to the first shovel Resolute Consulting LEED -ND encourages developers to embrace a comprehensive approach in the design, planning, and Jenhrfer Baarley building of a neighborhood which promotes using alternative modes of transportation, improved air and VICE CHAIR water quality, and the construction of more sustainable communities for people of all income levels. Some Justin Wiebe, LEED APBD+C highlighted features of building and certifying with LEED -ND include: Concordia University. professionals throughout California as a resource. As an organization, we are more than happy to assist in Fidelity National • Decrease automobile dependence - LEED -ND stresses public and convenient transportation choices such as buses, trains, bicycles, and increased sidewalks for walking. A focus of program TREASURER certification in "smart location" meaning developing locations which produces shorter automobile Pam Wells, LEED AP trips and reduce traffic congestion. Additionally, a 2009 study found that houses with above - Royal R "ood average levels of walkability, a core component of LEED -ND, command a premium of $4,000 to $34,000 over houses more spread out. SECRETARY Protect threatened species - Fragmentation and loss of habitat are major threats to many Amy Creager, LEED AP imperiled species. LEED -ND encourages compact development patterns and the selection of Brion Jeannette Architecture sites that are within or adjacent to existing development to minimize habitat fragmentation and also help preserve areas for recreation. • Lower Costs - Benefits of LEED -ND neighborhoods include reduced infrastructure and operating costs for municipal governments. DIRECTORS The results of building LEED -ND projects are quite clear. Additionally, the process to register and earn LEED -ND certification also has a number of benefits including a whole -site approach to project planning Barbara Eljenholm, LEED AP and development, consensus and input from all stakeholders, and implementing industry best practices to RBF -A Baker Company help achieve maximum results. The Newport Banning Ranch project has already done due diligence in pursing LEED -ND certification, registering under the program on 5/612010 and hosting a number of Robyn Vettaino, LEED AP preliminary meetings with local officials and project stakeholders. However, to ultimately be certified, the verde at Parker Properties plans for the project need to be reviewed by USGBC for pre- certification review prior to the first shovel hitting the ground. Jenhrfer Baarley We hope members of this council work with project developers, residents of Newport Beach, and all Emerging Professional interested parties to advance this LEED -ND project. Please feel free to use USGBC California Orange County, and the whole U.S. Green Building Council network, including over 22,133 LEED certified Jeffrey Howell, LEED AP professionals throughout California as a resource. As an organization, we are more than happy to assist in Fidelity National any form possible. Sincerely, 6e �_ � O_ Lindsey Engels Executive Director, USGBC -OC and Use Element Rank Acraa .1 1 69 2 96 3 118 Total 283 Additionally, Banning Ranch exhibits distinctive topography that is it physical and visual resource for the community. The property is divided into lowland and highland mesa areas. Bluff faces traverse the properry generally in a north -south direction, separating these and forming an important visual backdrop from West Coast Highway. Drainage from upland areas in and adjoining die City of Costa Witt formed a number of arroyos with dparian habitats. The bluff face geology is highly erodible and has experienced sliding over the years. Figure LU17 illustrates these consuraints. During de visioning process, residents were divided in opinion regarding the future of Banning Ranch. Many residents preferred preserving Banning Ranch as open space at the beginning of the public process. However, many participants in the process later indicated their willingness to support some development of the property if it would generate revenue to help fund preservation of die majority of the property as open space. Policy Overview 'Rte General Plan prioridiacs the acquisition of Banning Ranch as an open space amenity Coe the community and region. Oil al eradons would be consolidated, wetlands restored, nature education and interpretative facilities provided, and an active park developed containing playftelds and otter facilities to serve residents of adjoining neighborhoods. Should the property not be fully acquired as open spar, the Plan provides for the development of a concentrated mixed -use residential village that retains the majorry of the property ns open space. This would contain a mix of housing types clustered around a "village renter" of local- serving commercial uses, small boutique hotel, active park, and possibly a school. Buildings would he located and designed and an interconnected street system provided to enhance pedestrian activity and reduce vehicular trips. Development would be concentrated to preserve the majority of the property as open space, while oil operations would be clustered and wetlands restored. An internal trail syseem would be developed to Unit uses within its neighborhoods and districts and provide access to adjoining neighborhoods. While the Plan indicates dte maximum intensity of development that would be allowed on the property, this will ultimmely•by determined through permitting processes that are required to satisfy stare and federal environmental regulatory Gotil: CU 6.3 Preferably a protected open space amenity, with restored wetlands and habitat areas, as well as active community parklands to serve adjoining neighborhoods. Newport Beach General Pion lic Gen.le-Flal Plan Ploll' -y- Statement on Banning Ra,,n,1 ch P I . Oficy Ovenlil! ew "Wbilq- the Planindic.-atens itibe imilaxErlicum tindensilty of develloPmuen.19, thiat wmildbe -allowedl oln. the property(O,annin, gr R-anic ms ecerimmunm d. tiburouggh, pennitfing., proices'ses., filet are mqu I i'rc4l -to satist! state and. fbad-le. -gulatog 'repirmuen s: u ti la �AMPr _j * ) MNNIN G fi R A/ICH DEMCPNWW CONSiR/U m a - wsnu ww rw.. V •• titres bcvvtn Arc eWl v Im W ni. �IDwRV �� nan. .wta~thgMYFl • Y ryIll�l err 'Y rrr. :t.• 49 LIP Land Vse Elemenl Policies Pertaining to loth land Use Options (Goals 4.3 and 6.4) PERMMED USES W45.1 Oil Op.rorrrm R, l u ,rr nisi , I ,.,rr .I •.I, , m•.n• .'. , I , I 1 LU 6.5.2 .+1rmr Gsmmanm 1'aa\ NM M,aial• a c,mmunm park ,x :J n, pi sin. rhll UMra1M at-"vv pk.16 4 this mw be hrhwd aryl w of aafticsvra arsral,r k arise salpuranst rslcllti -N -,ah in.f nsdma of Ik Arww Raascluf desrinpsd. ;7w+ t I. 4 h LU 6 5.3 Hablaat and Weilwld. Ilestou and mluate uedwds wW unldhte ha.httan, to acD:anlaotc fault the m }.nrnnrnrs tar state tail ted-rsl aKornes daft 11.4. r. I4'. 14 911 DESIGN AND DEVE(OPMENE LU 6 5.4 Relasiou.lrp of r rvelnpmrrn na F.mtimnmrntal Rr+rrun re lk+agnrrrx •h..eLl Ir Luored alai deuLead n- Inr•rr,c .•,1: a nJrgryor 1. rhr kiss of utcluais wA drwssRr maw habnu. It shall Ix Ilramd to br strul2o..ua anal cs.npolli dr with raavnrrR wall pluund 4mla,pmrnt aknyt as " rn pnapem law. ptrxrcmg dx amaeecviry .If uttiWe coutdoi,. atd +el luck In.n ds blarl tUVS, 411W%ukuch"Ire Lr'.tsd a IJWW1 fah U. pnnala paillk %teas tai dsr oax o. reLnh, alai wanwrldniff -open space I.sunn h6htuiv +IRAN hr li"MI .rid sir qpw al o aiearr led turalus. Inala dntlLgw area ,tnn, rbc hlaffs, npaean hahita6 avinvoi, and kwastaod hahitar arra+ da 1 1, a t, LU 4.61 Prbare View. of its. 1%op.m Ik,vlrq w shad lac L,cttnl and dcswnol t1, pm-era wndrnsa• on th, Im Sons+ Inail akrrnnnrnc r,hlm emu, nl Itr hhdl lac• tees, Cuau Ihchwaiv. thr ,wean. uctUmin, and + oitrllnp open spaces. Irndw -" shill lu urrlrla,ralesl u,.Iltm srus w rhr •Irr sr.l.k tnm puhlels nusn! arch and puhhr suer palms. naps I I. a r. STRANGY LU 63.6 Coodmatiort with Slaw and Federal Agencies 1\ -nL wish q•pn,pnas srnv and ndrral µtor".. w .krnBt ardsvnl• alai 1 -dhrun u, be ivcscn ul ami .n reslvad "rinvckill ahatt dotal44sn1.R-nI will Is prnnrt*n1. tar a ' If n. N.wporl touch Go... at Ilan General Plan Land Use Plolicy Statement on Banning Ranch and 'Use Goals LU 6.5.3 Habitat and Wetlands Re;5tore and enhance wetlands and wildlife habitats, in accordance with the requirements of state and federal agencies. STRATEGY >✓U 6.5.6 Coordination -Mth State and Federal Agencies Work with appropriate state and .federal agencies to identifjf wetlands and habitats to be preserved anchor restored and those: on whichh development, will be permitted. Aphpod GTn91p RahCh EIR RL.'A tl to CMIIRYJI Continuer Lefler Slh COASfAI., COAINISSION November D, 2011 Poluid, J., Alard, Punning Manager Pty of hi w rt Botch, Communpy Devolopmam Depardrerrt Q�'o e,. 3300 Newport Badeyed P.O. B" Wee Couulatm Nowpon.Beach, Catbmla 02855-015 h'OY U B 2DI1 RE COMMENTS ON DRAFT E.V01ROUMENTA1. IN.PACT REPORT p OEytloata• SCR020090310at '}ch wn w Ste,, Newport Banning Ranch lcal Novpon Beach, Orange County Daft N✓ Altad, 'Thus you for Il r oppoMmLy to rminw tha Draft _rrraonmoltal Impact Rap= fa Ire ravc wtol land 00ramafd0l davelop rant at NOCrpan Bam&IB Rends. Aecodmg to the O aft EIR, the PrOPaco0 project Includao 11,375 roeiftnllpl dr0ina utile. 75, W0 cquom fbat at CWTUMC 1ZI cpaw, a 75•room rasa; Ira, oplaroximmcry 51.4 groan actuator acdvo and pa: W park ucco, Prod 252.3 grass acres for nphaal;odourtaa protoclan t the burn at open cpzo. o foCUmm+g comments oddess. In a pre0minary nenrer, the Issue of the proposed propct's uimcrxy with Iha Cma:nl AcL TF.a lobar u ar molv:ow dEho 7;sign sv040 ilargFad o1 ihlp A Wadi on the bac arallONe fm anatrw and the mfalvlian wdve rv^^ laaaamad and is nal axnmr+tivo annlyaa, The Oanmerea cer:utined herein ere pralim r,my and base of Caaatal minfo= Well arty and ulostl net be construed w rept=iftng the ephddn of dw Coasral DEIR stalas that Ora Opel tan] 6denda to request a'Matter coastal dpVelpdmenl cefnnt' bun :eestd Canmlv(On rat the prows It dorCOpmenL The DEER suggeyb that the Commisslon d be asked to provide a plelYllhflty levtew and eppfoal ad land usas, ash delaa3 of some one of the devotapmenL and lcsar details to'aher palm at the dntropntem halo esu the 'Master COP•hdub act up a process far delegating reniw sntl awmat au0 udy la: in 0410119 o the Protect ro the City when d'e Ply h83 40 OUII1Wly tot ultkWO OPrlTal Of pay or the project. There is no surneery or reguletcry ou0e rity lot the lino m coastal deve o0mele IIImvWwpnXM1adMCrIbad In No OFJR. RGJIer,Inapmr tha DEJRdeserO iamoo 10 roituagU Ig apprOVa7 Ot a Local Coastal Prudrult, red a Coastal development pam31. Ards a31 hdub teed 15 more Rom the Clty Otte net Me dOVOIOpo, n the scope and conVlediy d the proposed pn4ecl, Commission staff hoard recommend pro rd thch "t Par•,hartnero,addo out The COP precast, Ic CDP faaurtd dheFevonvrautd domwakiatC The CDPpmcepa i rataprwprt9h proIocro; rottlu it k ottgroo ter coleldorulon at epodfro proteela w9h ?�eA"3'Ae,w'J]LRraP.rPoJitdaa 34, rt?:yagP3 to tffinnnrafftli GOrnadfliS pcec S of 15 S Nrormina•lan or FSHA Ne»pon Sanning Rdnah OR Re:Qenaea h CCranvRrb fguma shown in the Win only utc'udaormteor ofawmydom. tnrovirnofpraviousprpttt r anor No Hmnycvt 6tnaig Ranch an oonv (COav0 and Ocamt Order CCC-11.00.03. amd and Raamm9an Order CCC- 11 -RO-M,, and Can= Oova!oprtem Permit St PISaJ, dq uni-alan elan Iran favlevmd a canianu0u3 survey record of gMltcC.G9f W Wga tacela 1002 to 7. However, only a single year at goad is Shane far One unage of eNrllAe npenes of the f7tY, antl Of tltff year of data, orgy a >5tg>° pOnlls aitdvn m:wficam unage A e5rglu year of Is not sunicisnt to maw conclusions regeNing the usage of haRtal on Ifs aubjetL3Lg by alive speze%es coma sonaHHO fpa"5S such as Wlrmwing C.U. may be ale ore water parent Omrmd. Fudhennme, suneymsdonet atwapdeted rare spends, they am thing for, even when tnllvldualo are present Finer, a palm done not findhodo the range of rat that Was oba n n d be the nurveva, and Ass eat irdleam die mtrmt, d the habllm which ESHA dca grmlen a l atad an aim epeobe caumstances, and, cocoon for the portion of the 1 a Rat b end of the Srmact Ridge PrA peeled Into wan board el tho Comrriacianc Ravcmbar I hwal v. Ns Ocmm'smn staff fna net yet Ito.domoo a formal ESHA dell.... l lot dm sirs. sever, the cse in krmxn to support slgnir�teM nrmbms of wnseivo fpadsa, and dram am llkOy lificant areas ad ESHA On lhs file, MIA dctarminaUdm em band an ieapev..e- anutarces, whidl the Ccnarasstort has hat had the amfldY m wAvaV in rug. Nurrevar, generally, that mhkh supports SzM111z sic "ee world bf rpneld I S ESHA. OISR-aall" W d ar pd enllnt HA inolyda rdrn pnnvrwrdly lypeg, Rush es Caagef 6hdrSema, end non -naara ar degradob agave, COaip1 Am Scenion 30240 rmQmiron tans clantopmam avoid Ilrlp2d0 to ESWi % it is onporlard that Ind OR in an mrmporom aCe101mlNdOn of probe "ESHA d their rerhlha0 buffers bebro land imma eraaa and envelopment moderate am cc=bl W tcgards to Coastal Acs Socnan 30340, Thu MR. 's.ems: Thn urged fa m-crishwd nth min a imt. San! ow 4.&4 of Oh OEfR has ldenhrmd aml moped tae uageraNw, types and npedirl 51clun apaciaa occutncrtcrs lmurn to GGOIr w thefttaffda. Thu Assert 0rid oasncwlnd muyatian frteo0utra mUd INnih re. and cartelea sam for the pla wananf a /devehfatmnf W.MF l rdtea9 arena 10 P OMM a subslom ddgraderadr, at mesa areas Or Jyn4kn hi, fiiel dif AmUlar v.lhJm oho dofprmNpriM of I gives Wbe ropMOl cd as ESHA IMM00=do 0y tno COOt201 COnindaaian as Pohl the COP pnumac br rho Fighter, analysts by the Cummhsan m dean of the provhmd bdmmalion. the in the EIR dean not appear to be cwrpgtF* dill, Coaalnl Art Section pmpaard praed h chxl� a bur Pane allaral from Went Coast Kafway to ececa tae nulled Coasml Canrmtsalon Sign recertify analyzed the habint raaaurces present in the WIPH 01 Imposed mad in procoasing the Coastal Conlopmyd Parma for SLASH Ridge Park by the iYb,CZweSaOGtiFrasva]RC¢[ jAYIr.w Enantat new,' of amraw 5 ." evi Reeaa:ee n (xmmeres 11 a1 1J (3) fn open coastal waives, other Man wodands, Including socams, estuadvs, and Amkse, row or expended coating (acffides and the placement aIt atruetural pilings far public rocvoadunal pfam that pmvfdo public am"s amt mcm donaf oppodmndles. (4) meldMlef pubf e, umfea putpasea, InclurRng but not dmftad to, buying cable: and pupas cr inspocdon olpfers arts melnfenarrce of exfadng Intake and ouffelt ones. (5)191naaf nstmetion, including sand mr maturing bnarhvs, wCapf In enwronmenfarly sennldve area.^. (a) Restoration purposes. (y) hots. study, aquacutum, etefmflar mounter. dopondent activities.., (c) fo uryhli n rn this dnarppv[spny of ads sWbn, dfkhtg, Rtgrg, or &ecWng In t rfadng esbuirms and wetlands shat) mainfvin er anhanro the funedonar capacity of One watland or estuary.... Thu City's Coastal W d Use Nan stesea: 4,2.2.4 Regime hcg4r+uoas amnmd w.O irds'ol a meiic win I'io In ensues the bttfog!4al "Wly Eno pmsenmYon at the media dtear n?9y am designed re pmMcf. wwranda eras AManl.Airman bufferwcUth of lDO (od uncover poss.•'•d.•r.. Smi -A1u wsanued hnr(ora may 23 1,a aYmr ®rl aroy rmoro it can ce damoluhared met 21 a tLelmcf wNe soar is rtalpassi6le due tp aYE- ST1ecNk omsVaid& s•M 211fppria�osvrl rwnw•rtvinilkr wads 1,a nlnnfy themmou ce wi b r litei'caJA and becrlf.6'.•if fientl ph�n ins Y1PaJMM',1F crtemCledSf ps Of the mmutrz aM hr Ua9 type aldiMauayol tlCsfurt:umv, In summary. w_etlaM5 ate weected IntlM the Cmalal Act aid the City of tlawptn Bunch clpit!iod lam Use Ilan, The development allowed In wetbms . fs restricted to certaln alowame uaca, and devcfapmerd acfaccul to wL kinds must bd ailed YAIh approprHle buffers la amore We Continuance of the xeuaod. II appoBm that developmem la propewsdw7hin wcllmnds. A.cmnpmison of cab @ins 4,8Ja. e.g$a and 4.0-61, Aonsthat dcvobpnnm Is bdng pie osod xilhIn inspired wetlands at c"Inege muse A, B, and C, that doveloonenl is proposed %isms apera:maley 30 feel of a mapped wellsnd cordaning cndnrgc=faary;r imp al wcltand point 10, dovoblanpnt Is pmppsdd In areas MTch likely quality a6 xellama, as daecdbed above, end many of the mapped valards are located In dose vicinity to muse-, panned let permanent dovclopmcni, Therefore, the pmpa -d prommi dos not oppnrio be consistent ,,.h Coastal AU Section; 3023t and 30233 ipo so the proposed project would madi In the eliminaflona dognadelion of waaad: on the subject site. The SIR should further evaluato the ImRMte of Iht davolopnlentoil wetland rasoumes. The SIR should also consist, alternatives that avoid wetland Impeeta and result in he estmbllshment of aMompdmte hnbl mt buffer. between development and wallanss. 30244 of theCoal[sl Acl nquiral die pnxnvlon ofuchxatogical bled palecunWitelcal s and stales in past: conk rcry.v,r+vn,oscnmmemluaaz ss: Rrepaaxm r.Nenmen:a ecr..r..crc M1'Nrxvr BvnnVg Rmxn FJa R[SLYA^.ilS b Col T.T[rt6 Because the Banning Ranch property is a DCA in the City's CLUP, the policies in the City's CLUP are not applicable to the Banning Ranch property. Conrespandenoe from the Coastal Commission during its review of the City's CLUP requested that references to the Banning Ranch property be removed. Because the City does not have a certified LCP, and the City's CLUP does not include the Banning Ranch property, the City acknowledges that any consideraton of a Coastal Development Permit for the Pmjea site would require a Finding of consistency with the Chapter 3 pd icier of the Coastal Act. The Draft EIR provides an analysis of the proposed Project with the California Coastal Act as required by the State CEDA Guidefines Section 15125. Please refer to Sections 4.1 through 4.15 of the Draft EIR Responses The City acknowledges the Coastal Commission's comments regarding Section 3024D of the Coastal Act and the importance of buffers for ESHA as well as the fact that both the Coastal Act and the City's CLUP identify the importance of protecting ESHA and avoidance of impacts to ESHA Please refer to the Topical Response: ESHA As noted in the msponse to Comment 4, the Banning Ranch property is not included wthin the Citys CLUP nor is an amendment being proposed at this time to include the Banning Ranch property in the Citys CLUP. Consequently, while the CLUP may provide guidance it is not binding on the Banning Ranch property. The Draft EIR provides an analysis of the proposed Project with the Caiifomia Coastal Act as required by the State CEGA Guidelines Section 15125. Please refer to Sections 4.1 through 4.15 of the Draft EIR The purpose of the Draft EIR is to analyze a proposed projects impact on the physical emnronmenL It is not. in and of itself, a policy consrstenoy analysis, exoept to the extent that such inconsistencies reveal environmental impacts that otherwise are not discussed. Section 4.6, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR analyzes the proposed Project's impact on biological resources, including federal and State listed endangered and threatened species, sensitive plant and animal species, and specific habitats such as wetlands and vernal pods. All impacts b these resources would be mitigated or avoided with the Mitigation Program set forth in Section 4.6 of the Draft EIR, and therefore would be protected as Against disruption of habitat values. The Draft EIR acknowledges that the Coastal Commission makes the determination as b whether any or all of these constitute ESHA under the Coastal Am and applicaucn of the policies of the Coastal Act to the existing conditions on the Project site would be undertaken as pan of the Coastal Commission's Coastal Development Permit process. Response6 The Coastal Commission suggests that the EIR examine historical data on the use of the Project site on sensitive species and be updated to reflect that usage. The Coastal Commission states that ESHA determinations are made on site - specific circumstances- Please refer to the response to Comment '5 and Topical Response: ESHA. Section 4.6, Biological Resources, of the Draft EIR analyzes the Project's impacts on biological resources, including fisted species and sensitive habitat As the Coastal Commission correctly notes, an ESHA designation is based upon site-specific circumstances and is a finding to be made upon application of the policies of the California Coastal Act. The City anticipates that as part of the Coastal Commission's review of the proposed Project it would make a determination of the preserroelabsence of ESHA on the Project site. That said, as noted above, Section 4.6, Biological Resources. of the Draft EIR analyzes the proposed Project's impact on biological resources, including federal and State listed endangered and threatened species, sensitive Pant and animal species, and specific habitats such as wetlands and vernal pods. All impacts to these resources would be mitigated or avoided with the Mitigation Program set forth in n+�.m'+.�.r.cavcw.._�iea� acv rxrxnsesm Emrmmenra cannxria r:ewpw, aanwq rain F_w ResGaaer ah Cumrxrxx Section 4.9 of the Draft EIR, and therefore would be protected against significant disruption of habitat values, as required by Public Resources Code Section 30249. With respect to the suggestion that the EIR should evaluate historic data to determine whether the Project would cause impacar on the environment, this suggestion is not consistent with CEQA The State CEQA Guidelines Sedix n 15125(a) stales, 'An EIR must include a descripfion of the physical environmental wnditions in the vicinity of the project, as they exist at the time the notice of preparation is published'. The Notice of Preparation was published on March 18, 2098. The Notice of Preparation was published on March 18. 20D9. Using data that is over 20 years old would not be relying on the most current and accurate information required by CEQA. The most current information serves as t+e baseline conditions by which the lead agency determines whether an impact is significant CEQA also states that the description of the enmronmental setting shall be no leuiger than is necessary m forth an understanding of the significant effects of the proposed project and its alternatives- If historical data is rot substantally diiferent that the recent data available for conditions on she, it is not necessary m reference old data sources whether this older data provides no new1valuable information that would have a effect on the Project findi ngs. There are reasons where the incorporation of species data from past data would not be needed or appropriate for the proposed Project: • Environmental site conditions have changed over that past 29 years which could result in a slightly different flora and fauna cotnponevt of the Pretject site. This data would therefore not be current. • Nomenclature has changed for many plant and wildlife species in the area and there would be confusion as to which species previous reports may have been referenced. • Many of the previous survey reports do not have species compendia. It is unclear whether the survey compendia data is accessible. Response 7 The Coastal Commission letter questions whether the proposed Pmjeet can be found consistent with Public Resources Code Section W240 because of mcommerided findings in a Staff Report prepared for the Coastal Commission with respect to the separate Sunset Ridge Park project- The Coastal Commission suggests (hat to EIR evaluate ahemative intensities of development and alternative access to the site that is not dependent on access from West Coast Highway. The City is aware of the Coastal Commission's recommendations that were prepared for the Sunset Ridge Park application including trio recommended finding that the proposed arterial road would be inconsistent: with the Coastal Act. However, the Coastal Commission has not yet acted on the City%s CDP application for Sunset Ridge Park, and no findings or determinations have been made by the Coastal Commission as to the Sunset Ridge Park, including the access road that traverses the Newport Banning Ranch property. In addition, and more importantly, the Coastal Commission's suggestion included an acknowledgment that twould approve an access road from West Coast Highway under some ciranmsunces. The proposed Project provides access points from 15°' Street, le Street, 17°' Street, aril 19" Street in addition to entry from West Coast Highway- The Newport Banning Ranch Draft EIR includes a Traffic Impact Analysis for the proposed Project and considers ahemabm intensities of development on the site which would reduce the amount of traffic on Bluff Road and North Bluff Road. Please refer to Section 7.0, Alternatives to the Proposed Project, of the Drat EIR. R'r.Fd+rrwr�ramsarcmimlas 3a =_ �r{gnxsb mrmmenra COQ M1Ya'OaTaLIN'S Rain fJn Responses b fbmxr,9 with the approved Made[ WOMP) would be prepared as part of the Coastal Development Permit application package submitted to the Califbmia Coastal Commission_ Response 21 The comment is noted. The Preliminary W43MP (see Appendix A W this Responses to Comments document) prepared for the proposed Project includes the all of the site design and source control (structural and non- stmctural) BMPs anticipated for the Project based on the level of detail provided and available in the Draft EIR. The Final WOMP prepared in oonjunction with the Coastal Development Pernd application package to confirm which of these speafic site design and source control BMPs would be used in the final plan. Response 22 As discussed in the Draft EIR. the delineation included identification of wetlands and nparian habitat subject to regulation under the Califom is Coastal Act by the Coastal Commissian using the methodology that relies m only one of three characteristics (i_e., a precbminanee of wetland vegetation; a a predominance of hydric soils; or wetland hydrology). As the Coastal Commission has indicated in its comment letter, the 'pools may also qualify' (emphasis added) as defined wetlands under the Coastal Act because of the presence of San Diego fairy shrimp. Of the seven on -site pools that support San Diego fairy shrimp, two were identified as Coastal wetlands in the Draft EIR. The remaining five pools drat support San Diego fairy shrimp on site are not vernal pools. They are artificial pools created by excavation and berning in grasslands W protect oilfield access roads, oil sumps with c€ritamimted soil, and low tying scrapes overtying existing oil pipelines. The City does not consider these areas to be Coastal Act - defined wetlands due to the lack of (1) a predominance of wetland vegetation, (2) predominance of hydric soils, or hydrology. Response 23 The comment sets forth provisions from the Coastal Act and the City's Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) regarding policies pertaining to wetlands resources .The City acknowledges the protection afforded wetlands under the Coastal Act and its CLUP. As noted in the Topical Response: Vernal Pools, a wetlands delineation of the Project site was pertormed using the Coastal Commission's definition of wetlands. The Applicant has sited development uses in recognition of its proximity to Coastal Act "bands. With respect to the development proposed within mapped wetlands at the drainage courses, please refer to the response to Comment 17. This response addresses the water quality features that are proposed in this area and which. in order to maximize their effectiveness and the goal of improving coastal water quality, require the construction of these basins in the areas proposed. With respect to the other areas identified in the comment wetland areas are buffered from adjacent development to protect against the degradation of the wetlands an the Project site It should be noted that under current conditions, these wetlands exist in an operating oilfield and in some instances have been artificially created as a result of oil operations. Implementation of the proposed Project is intended to improve upon these existing conditions and provide habitat benefits in comparison W the current condition or the No Project Alternative. Response 24 The Coastal Commission's question regarding whether all permits were obtained concerns a matter of regulatory process under the jurisdiction of the Coastal Commission and does not present a comment regarding the adequacy cf the environmental impact analysis in the Draft R'aytlxllya.W.A[ICR14mm�xau 3'3 Responses mtinsanmenrat [amneers Patrick From: RODGER hageman [evenkeel4@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 3:08 PM To: Michael Toerge; Alford, Patrick Subject: public hearing March 22, 6:30 p.rn. March 22, 2012 Michael Toerge, Chairman Newport Beach Planning Commission Department Strataland(a,,earthlink. net Palford,i NewportBeachCa.gov Correspondence Item No. 4c Newport Banning Ranch Patrick Alford Manager, Planning Re: Public Hearing / Newport Banning Ranch /March 22, 2012 / 6:30 PM Gentlemen, This letter is written based upon the Vision statement of the Newport Beach General Plan which states "we have a conservative growth strategy that emphasizes resident's quality of life" The writer, a so called NIMBY, (Not In My Backyard) herewith gives notice to the City of Newport Beach that he opposes the Planned Community known as "Newport Banning Ranch Development" on the NW and south border of Newport Beach. Application No:PA2008 -114. Guidelines of objections follow and will be more explicitly described in the future: 1. The Development ge nerally identified as "Banning Ranch" was not included in the ballot measure of 2006 which modified the General Plan of the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, its application must adhere to and fit within the statistical changes prominently mentioned in "V" of the General Election Official Ballot of 2006 2. Undated Notice of Public Hearing regarding this matter is postmarked March 13, 2012 by USPS and was received March 14. We believe that public notice allowing only 9 days of response time violates City of Newport Beach's established legal requirements of 10 days and fails the test of fair and equitable public relations. 3. A required final Environmental Impact Report has not been presented to the public to allow proper study by those who may be affected by some adversity created by implementation of the development. 4. The notice of the public hearing suggests the Planning Commission will be making its recommendations to the City Council immediately. Otherwise why the rush for a public hearing? Can the Commission make recommendations in the absence of a final EIR? 5. The City Council ap proved a "Statement pf Overriding Considerations" which notes that there are specific economic, social and other public benefits that outweigh the significant unavoidable impacts associated with the General Plan. Such impacts will render living standards of NEWPORT CREST and property values of the Crest and adjacent homes and other occupants such as business and schools to be devalued! 6) The multi -year earth moving and construction's negative impact will drive affected parties out of their neighborhoods. Living in dirt and dust, bright night illumination, noise and other noxious exposures will make home life, recreation, sleeping, distress to the bedridden and other physical impacts unbearable. Oh yes, sales will be impossible. It is tantamount to a "taking" by the power of eminent domain. 7) The DEIR and EIR are a product requested by the City of Newport Beach, it's customer. It seems that in the interest of the City's fairness doctrine, the town's population be granted an equal EIR study by a firm of its choosing and a SSIR (Social and Societal Impact Report.). 8. Is the taking or anne xation of another party's 360 acres to join the very small part that Newport has, 40 or so acres, look like a modest "conservative growth strategy"? 2 Especially when it is at the cost of a major disruption to at least 460 homeowners; maybe 1500 residents 9. Certain fee simple rights and duties attach to California property whether a home or business. r.hageman Officers: Terry Welch,M.D. President James Mansfield Vice - President Deborah Okra Secretary Jennifer Frutig, PhD. Treasurer Steve Ray Executive Director Board Members: Patricia Barnes Suzanne Forster Jan Vandersloot, M.D. In Memoriam March 22, 2012 I 1r Conservancy Michael Teorge, Chair Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach, CA Dear Chair Teorge, Correspondence Item No. 4d Newport Banning Ranch PA2008 -114 Via Email Transmission thru Patrick Alford, Planning Manager City of Newport Beach On behalf of the Banning Ranch Conservancy and the thousands of members of our group and affiliated groups, we request a fair and equitable process for the Newport Beach Planning Commission hearings that begin today for the proposed Newport Banning Ranch development project. As was evident from the Planning Commission study sessions, public participants were not satisfied that ample time was provided, nor was there encouragement for any significant participation by the public. We were assured by you that the hearing process would provide that opportunity and that we should more fully participate in the hearings. Further, as a public agency, the City of Newport Beach and its public bodies are required to encourage the fullest and widest public participation in the public hearing process. To that end, we request that the following process be established to assure responsible public participation. Pro forma, following the announcement of the item at the hearing, staff and consultants would provide a review of the project and the proposed FIR for Commissioners and the public, followed by a Q & A session between Commissioners and those presenters. The public hearing would then be opened with a probable opportunity for the applicant to present any comments. Members of the public would then be invited to comment within the normal three- minute timeframe for each. All of this is common and appropriate. Now for the deviation from the pro forma. We request that the recognized, organized public group, the Banning Ranch Conservancy, be permitted to make a comprehensive, coordinated presentation on behalf of all our members. Instead of having potentially hundreds of public comment speakers, one organized group will speak on behalf of all our members. This will be a much more effective and efficient manner in which to conduct the hearing. It will prove beneficial to the Commission, staff and the public. In return, we will reduce the number of public attendees to accommodate and not overwhehn the Commission, the facilities and the process. www.banningranchconservancy.org For our presentation, we request a time grant of four (4) hours. Recognizing that the EIR is over 7300 pages, that there were many comments and responses totaling over 1000 pages and that there are many significant issues to be addressed, we feel this is an entirely reasonable request for time. (In three- minute time periods, this would total only eighty speakers, much less than the potential number of speaker /members of the Banning Ranch Conservancy.) One note, this request for time and our commitment to adhere to its inherent restrictions is applicable only to the Banning Ranch Conservancy and our members. We dare not suggest to represent members of the public who may differ with our opinions or are unfamiliar with or unknown to the Conservancy. Therefore, we recommend that any members of the public in those or similar circumstances be afforded the first opportunity to comment at the hearing. This requested process is reasonable, timely, efficient and not without precedent. As a former planning commission chair, I can certainly understand any reluctance, but I am experienced in the use of the above - requested process from both sides of the dais and I can assure you of its effectiveness and do- ability. The Banning Ranch Conservancy and our members appreciate the opportunity to fully participate in this very important public hearing for the proposed Newport Banning Ranch EIR. Please contact the undersigned at 310/961 -7610 for further clarification and /or to discuss arrangements. Thank you. Sincerely, Steve Ray /5/ Steve Ray Executive Director Banning Ranch Conservancy P. 0. Box 16071 cc: Patrick Alford, Planning Manager, City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, Dr. Terry Welsh, President, Banning Ranch Conservancy CA 92659 -6071 Banning Ranch Conservancy Board Members (310) 961 -7610 File Copy www.banningranchconservancy.org Correspondence Burns, Marlene 1T_PM NO. 4P From Patrick Sent: Pa March 22, 2012 4:06 PM Newport Banning Ranch Ta: Bums, Marlene Subject: FW: ballot 2006 Banning PA2 0 0 8 -114 Please distribute From: RODGER hageman rmailto:evenkeel4(a sbcolobal.netl Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 4:04 PM To: Michael Toerge; Alford, Patrick Subject: ballot 2006 Banning March 22, 2012 Michael Toerge, Chairman, Planning Commission Patrick Alford, Manager, Planning Dept. Stratalanda,earthlink.net Palford(a%NewportBeachCa . zov Gentlemen, Notice is hereby given that the continued reference to the Nov. 7, 2006 general election as the authorization for the development of NEWPORT BANNING RANCH, then, it appears to be inaccurate. The Official Ballot, a one page document, makes no reference to the so- called BANNING RANCH. Neither does its page two, a formal "Impartial Analysis by the City Attorney, Measure V," make any reference to BANNING RANCH. If the authorization is contemplated by reference to esoteric documents such as Land Use Map, Land Use Tables, Land Use Element, "comprehensuve update of the General Plan", etc, it also fails to sufficently notify a ballot reader of the BANNING matter and therefore cannot be authorized by the Nov. 2006 election ballot. It will have to fit the new criteria and stand on its own as any other new development would. Major changes in the land use element surely is entitled to broad public discussion and specific agreement by the public at large. If the Banning Development were to represent a traffic increase of say, 10,000 to 20,000 daily trips and the Land Use Element states there is to be a reduction in trips by 28,920, 1 then? If allowable dwelling units be only increased by 1166 units who has to take their house and move to another community to allow for the increase of 1375? Thank you. r hageman Jan Goerrissen, Ph.D. 883 Arbor St. Costa Mesa, CA 92627 jgoerrissen@sbcglobal.net March 22, 2012 Newport Beach Planning Commission City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Council Members and Planning Commissioners of the City of Newport Beach, I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed development of the Newport Banning Ranch community. I see a number of reasons to oppose the development, including: 1) the loss of additional critical coastal habitat in southern California, 2) the loss of the opportunity to fully maximize the acreage for open space as a recreational attraction for residents and tourists, 3) the inevitable destruction of critical habitat for several animal species with conservation status, 4) lack of access due to the California Coastal Commission's blocking of the access road from PCH and removal of the 19`h street bridge from the county master plan, and 5) subjecting Costa Mesa residents to increased traffic, noise, and air pollution. Due to the now limited extent of public coastal open space and habitat in Orange County and southern California in general, the importance of protecting this area from development cannot be overstated. Of particular importance, the area for proposed development has increased habitat value due to it's connectivity with the Talbert Preserve and the Santa Ana River. More open space is needed not only for California flora and fauna, but for long term quality of life for residents in the form of recreation and living in an aesthetically pleasing area. This is a lot to trade off for shorter term gains in potential profits I would also like to take this opportunity to report hearing the endangered Clapper Rail in January and then I confirmed a sighting in February 2012 on the property from the Santa Ana River trail. I have a doctorate in Ecology from the University of California, Davis with an emphasis in avian ecology, and therefore take such sightings very seriously. Thank you for your time in consideration of my opinions. Sincerely, Jan Goerrissen, Ph.D. Sign In or Sign Up ,..rl-m Spedal4nin ^s b,.iv (':na lgcn:n Rent C -0101!+ It,vnals ?Inn. fbn:ilio; Ir DAILY PILOT 2:49 P.m. PDT HOME HOME .FEN'S SPORTS LIFE +ARTS OPINION DEALS O.C. Now Archives For The Record Obituaries Milestones Contact Advertise INTHENEWS: PHOTOOALLERY: TOSHIBA CLASSIC THURSDAY PRO-AM Ilom: OCTA removes 19th Street Bridge from plan Move ends years of studies, controversy about the potential bridge over the Santa Ana River that would connect Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach. too Comments 3 Share 44 By Mike Reicher .March 12, 2012 1: 712 p rn. ORANGE — The Orange County Transportation Authority Board of Directors voted Monday to strike the proposed 19th Street Bridge from the county's master plan. The move effectively ends decades of studies and controversy about the potential bridge that would have linked Costa Mass and Huntington Beach over the Santa Ana River. Environmentalists and 19th Street residents pleaded Monday to eliminate the bridge, as Huntington Beach Mayor and OCTA Director ton Hansen ushered through the unusual vote to change the county's long- standing master plan. TOPICS Newport Beach leaders were the lone holdouts among the three most affected cities; Costa Mesa and Huntington Beach • IiigheoyTnnsixriation opposed d the bridge. Under the coun ty' s typical procedures, all noasd o1 Director's three would have to agree to abandon the bridge idea. dent Nguyvu But OCTA directors agreed that the bridge was unlikely to ever be built because of its forecasted Sr50-million cost, the difficulties in obtaining permits from state and federal regulators, and intense opposition from nearby, residents. The vote was unanimous, except for OCTA Director and County Supervisor.lanet Nguyen, who abstained. "We're feeling very relieved," said Sandie Frankiewicz, who owns two homes on 19th Street, one of which would have likely, been demolished to widen the street for the bridge. Officials from Huntington and Newport said Monday that they would discuss ways to improve the existing roadways to accommodate the anticipated population growth. 'The city of Huntington Beach is very much aware that the elimination of this bridge has consequences;' Hansen said. More traffic on Coast Highway was one of the reasons Newport City Councilman Steve Rosansky revived talks about the bridge last year. Since the early 19gos, residents and officials in Costa Mesa and Huntington have worked to scrap the bridge, but Newport kept protesting, causing the process to stall. Rosansky and Newport Deputy Public Works Director Dave Webb spoke at the meeting in an attempt to keep the bridge talks alive and to obligate the other cities to make traffic fixes. They hoped to Farch 4 •ti��nnt� replicate a process that OCTA undertook up the river with the Gisler-Garfield menus bridge, another proposed Costa Mesa- Huntington connector that faced a similar predicameat. After they-couldn't agree to build or remove that bridge, Huntington, Costa Mesa and Fountain Valley officials decided about five years ago to improve existing streets near Gisler, instead of building the bridge. But the span remains on the county master plan, in case the other measures aren't successful. Without that type of agreement, Webb said he was skeptical that other cities would work to alleviate traffic. "What are the assurances that any mitigations am going to be done?" Webb asked after the vote. Even though the Gisler - Garfield improvements appeared to be helping, County Supervisor and OCTA Director John Moorlach also Idled for that bridge's removal from the master plan Monday. He said that eliminating both should be accomplished in "one fell suwp." That request appeared to take OCTA staff members and directors by surprise, and Moorlach asked for the issue to be brought before the board at a future meeting. One significant reason the county maintains a master plan of highways is to assist cities and developers in planning for future growth. Since the plan was created in the 195os, local agencies have used the proposed 19th Street Bridge in their traffic forecasting, and have required developers to make road improvements accordingly. Developers wi6 now have to adjust. Without the bridge, Newport Banning Ranch would generate congestion at more intersections than with the bridge, according to its environmental impact report. The proposed large -scale residential, resort and commercial development near the border of Carta Mesa and Newport would trigger failing grades at nine additional intersections, including seven intersections on West Coast Highway. rnike.reicher6% :la tYmes.conr Twitter: @, mmicher w r � 0 6 Comments 3 Sha•e 44 Previous Stun Alorethe Daily Pilot is the leading source, in print and Next story online, for ne vs, mtettainment nod sports in Costa Mesa And Nim pan Beach. Code Enforcement tackling South Fair Board votes to Bristol Street. Balboa Village I im& stop elephant rides Comments (3) Add / View comments I Discussion FAQ fattyboup at 7:42 PyI March 12. 2012 Stop the massive development project at Banning Ranch (over twice as large and nearly six times as dense as anything ever built along the OC coast in recent memory). Save Banning Ranch as open space for future generations! Join the Banning Ranch Conservancy w%w.banningranchoonservancy.org 714 - 719 -2148 KctinN22 Al 1:20 PAI March 12, 2012 1 /w2012 The Brown Study: "Open Space" and the Banning Ranch Page 1 of 4 Share Report Abuse Next Blogn Create Blog Sign In The Brown Study The expression "brown study" Is a fourteenth century British term that started out meaning a dark melancholy mood, but later came to mean a state of thinking deeply about sornething. USubScribe in a reader oia:anol To become open space. the property will require extensive mitigation measures will View my complete profile an estimated cost of 30 million dollars or more. That then becomes the most important question in the whole issue. WI10 will pay for that clean -up? Is it feasible.. In ./..mint, hrnwn- stildv.com/2011 /12 /oxen- space- and - banning- ranch.html 3/21/2012 Friday. December. 2011 Suhs'cribe vin cinail "Open Space" and the Banning Ranch Subscribe !o The Sr"n Study by Email yesterday at the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce Governmental Affairs Committee n?eeting. our guests were George Basye of Aera Energy and Rewdy shout: N1c Holstein of Brook Street to provide our committee with an update of the Banning Ranch Development Plan The appearance was timely in that the'Pubiic r:cmmCIA ' Tim Brown * period for the Environmental Impact Report on the plan has closed and the report I recency completed should come before the Newport BP.arn Planning Commission in January and then On two loco., 0.1 d•e Parks. to the city Council. Beaches and ' ' Recreation Commission IO As most citizens of Newport Beach know, t'ne General Plan Update approved in -005 for rhfr ti if Newport Reach. EA tilt l . .0 provided for two uses of the property. One was that the property remains completely l n, I u.n rewp aerie as 'I DO "io open space or the city shall consider a development proposal for Mtr, of the president of the Civics Affairs Council for the Ne'w'port Beach Chamber of . property to remain open space and 30% for development and amenities in order for Commerce 1 alt) also.:he Immediate the project to remain 100% open space it would have to be purchased by a group Past. President cJ the Newport Beach committed to that effort such as the Banning Ranch Conservancy. The Cily of `dnnnse Rotary Club. I hold the rank Newport Beach has no plans to purchase the 400 acre properly of Full Plo'riseor at Ri Crslde (,fly College where I learib, a ceu'se caller TI1P Upon space alternative i5 the impHtus for this post. What exactly is "open spec£ ^ critical Reading as Critical 1'I ?inking. According to the Institute of Natural Resources at Oregon State University Open m addition, I held a Faulty Seat ;-n is area of land that is valued Inc natural processes and wed @fe, tar me Accredsting Comm•sslon rcr Goinn—ity and Junior Colleges I aol space an agncullur31 and sylvan production for active and passive recreation and providing .he Pnn i for Tim Brcnvn Hr0 other public benefits.' This definition works for Ine without knowing anything else. I Associates, Educational COnaultallls would support the Banning Ranch property to be maintained as 100 .open spaCe- 1 am. U1£ auiher of The pre+v,?ti Hall But, you see .-j, do know sometnino else. Ihn on 16e.P.` ,4F er1 1 have seen tnc olubook Reader and curren "y -- 6n.d.tlon of tills properly as II stands today with my own eyes, hrliiltg the Content Area Reado $ - - -- — - i publired As 'we at knoev. !here is nothing natural about oil pr^duction, there have ta£cn over C l Janua ^. Oi 2012. I coached ;;otiegs Jarfus,y of 2012 1 lr.' i9 anCi remain a:? 400 uii wells dlitied on this property since 194 . o look at the ranch it 0111 an aerial oaseball years amd follower of collegii aihletb ;s photograph you see a mosaic of din roads carved in to the terrain for access to these o oa�llaaa.'ly at illy alma crater wells with oil rig debris strewn along the shoulders. The water resaurcee have sago Amore State Uniasraify. I haee polluted with chemicals and other toxins making it uninhibdatne for most forms Of ilavefed etfenswely throughout the vnidlife . ffuch of the native species such as lh? coastal sages. have been driven out world and have set loaf Gil every by invasive species much more tolerant to the IWS11 conditions which exiSt there eantmem except w + Andrei One attlay. The property s loo dannerous to be eniayed by any member the Public for of my nary hobbles is playing passive or active narreahonal use !n short the Banning Ranch property Is not open supem,•mary'06ii :n opera Some producaians in which i have had roles space now. Include Carmen Tosco. and Don oia:anol To become open space. the property will require extensive mitigation measures will View my complete profile an estimated cost of 30 million dollars or more. That then becomes the most important question in the whole issue. WI10 will pay for that clean -up? Is it feasible.. In ./..mint, hrnwn- stildv.com/2011 /12 /oxen- space- and - banning- ranch.html 3/21/2012 fhe Brown Study: "Open Space" and the Banning Ranch flage 2 of=t Jon OW site Gx�y h.W AMMI Tha,e a c nome'uloemyet WWI! Alro�w, a fl�,.Ilnno i, Blog.-krchh he 11 t!5l or,-, 11 Spovi and 11 to f1tani I nei Ranch I Novemoffli the near mint' for s non -prma group to rase sufficient funds to purcilose file prov any ms Men dean A up in our lifetimes? 1 dorm 11=.vP a dysIll that hat I zalspei�f it vskadl , poe be WtMy EnaMe "W Open yn, 1 WMW MQIy 4,1f 11 Ic J a UnK Soon so that I dllghir 1)c able to ON, uri"s open Spend 41 Newport Cash While I am mto hem h4y Fnebool PWc. i M,, I-Ilme, PA-gs t in Me ottmant devaloprent Pan 25% of the pr1,1l1eFiy oCaM WDLIICI Tnn 13mm and Assadves And we BMW lam" hany" sintm Camino do spam Win a SIM11 Wwn WWI nm mmAIV NO ym acres wwA be deaned W nausl memsm mW No"! 1 wwwO whi matimatined as Uve open space if has Hi rbt a will-leill Wr Nl.\ Headlinv's i!loltc Of LIS who enioy ericI appredate ciplet spBco Men! cimi't what is In the coming week 2nd months. we vA6 aa be hearing and reading mom about hit issinn Phase I- Iwowli Sind, y oro I fell for A -Keep. the Banning Rnolas opeampace U we keep A the way 777io—w—Arts f11e agilthegi5 of opon SpaCe bedajse IwIF rental!! a C.i. m Spo"ie an"I the Banntag Band, pUblic haze and felloi—off is o foo, ik,114) went is sein moro, open watt III Nevvpolz 0120011 BeaM. Yez,.*rpay at Ulai4sntoit aend; Pored ; °y Tim Broi-m at 3:11 PIA Ct•alnns, of Cominen"C' Glover1iinantni Affairz. Conit init"M mo.dong. our,, �mstS v,;,,re Gs.,.nqe, "a,,;yPot Act,., 17.norgy. So No nq job has not gonevmV 1 comments: Dianne Russell said... Me NO 0 each year is a be, hme Front bic N."'Veriurt 6aech it s great f-Jore hcui,lvg, and hats! ta% ,oC In*. acolUle I am an 8-Ad Anwina StAA re'venues. From the Point Amew of a Coosa MeSa "vcBside ie sidervt it m mom .duojo is of 1nt0own cam S", Days in August Not a Wh; 0". by any MOO of the imagination PC! N 11 December 2. 261 I 155 PIA -NY low I 2=0 Wondering I.,, Post 9 Comment yelyq:ay name ;am oulswe .11 .... ... .... .. . . .... .. .. .... . . ...... . ... .. . . .. .... ....... ..... ... Voo,jov! I- . in".111j. at. 1 occon1 room Cons, elt Home Older Post Svt,,Scnt* m: Post Comments iNoila Jon OW site Gx�y h.W AMMI Tha,e a c nome'uloemyet WWI! Alro�w, a fl�,.Ilnno i, Blog.-krchh he 11 t!5l or,-, 11 Spovi and 11 to f1tani I nei Ranch I Novemoffli To: Michael Toerge, Chairman, Planning Commission From: Olwen Hageman, 7 Goodwill Court, N.B.92663 evenkeel4 n,sbcglobal.net 949 642 -1998 Under "Existing Conditions" the DEIR states that the SoCAB has the worst air quality in the U.S. 4.10.4, Climate and Meteorology" page 4.10.9 Here are photographs of the air quality in my neck of the woods. 1) Pollution over land. Pollution over the land, another view. 2) Pollution over ocean /obscuring the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The DEIR refers to some impacts from the development as "significant but unavoidable". Given the poor quality of air to begin with, why cannot remediation and construction be limited to the point where impacts would not be significant? We already have pollution from Newport Blvd, Superior, PCH Placentia and, if it were approved, Bluff Road. Children at Carden Hall School and residents from rehab facilities walking on Superior would be subject to this additional pollution. And how is Hoag Hospital affected by this saute polluted air. The City's Vision for the General Plan states "we have a conservative Growth strategy that emphasizes residents' rguality of Iiffe ". To permit any condition to be significant and unavoidable would not emphasize quality of life for its West Newport Beach residents. Quite the opposite. Even if it is within the law, is it morally acceptable to lower the quality of life for existing residents, some having resided for 30+ years? Plus, 1375 homes, a hotel and commercial space on such a small area of land is not considered conservative. When you drive PCH to Laguna, notice the distance between roads such as Dover, Jamboree, McArthur, etc. Drive to H.B. And notice the distance between Superior, Brookhurst, Magnolia, etc. Then consider the very short distance between Newport Blvd. and Superior at Hospital Road, add Placentia, PCH and possibly Bluff Road. The close proximity of all these roads already creates an umbrella of pollution over West Newport With all the emphasis on preventive medicine it seems to me that the first thing we need to do is breathe cleaner air. SoCoast Air Quality Management District has a program called The Right to Breathe and they state that "more than shelter, we need clean air. Particulates inhaled by pregnant women go through the blood stream to the fetus and can cause brain damage ". Almost part of the BRD due to its physical location right on the border, is construction of a 3 -story community college that is near completion at 15th Street. Was a traffic study done on the number of anticipated car rides for the college and have they been added to the 57,000 car rides anticipated for the Banning Ranch Development? Under Project Design Features of the DEIR, PDF 4.11.3, states: "The Master Development Plan and the NB Planned Community Development Plan require the Project to be coordinated with O.C.Transportation Authority (OCTA) to allow for a transit routing through the community..." If Bluff Road is never approved, what route will the buses take? John Wayne's son gave an interview and told how their life "was basically small -town beach life. Newport Beach was a fishing town. no big fences, no checkpoint in the driveway. John shopped at White Front and Sears. At that time, it was much more low- key." Many are nostalgic for that kind of living and those days are gone, but great care must be taken with regard to how we grow so that beautiful Newport Beach can retain some vestige of John Wayne's city of beauty and charm. The community college has already obscured most of the beautiful views of snow- capped mountains. Will there be no beauty left, only buildings and roads. In closing, at the end of the last study session a gentleman asked what has the City done to raise money for the purchase of this land? I don't recall seeing any surveys asking all Newport Beach residents, CDM and everyone, if they would be willing to contribute toward the purchase. Did I miss it? Although the development is not in CDM's back yard, the pollution from this area will eventually end up in their back yard. If real efforts were made, perhaps the purchase of this land would be possible. Please give every consideration to concerns of the people living in this area. They, and not the people who will occasionally visit the proposed parks for short periods of time are here 24/7. Land can be remediated but the health of children, the elderly and people who are sensitive, once damaged, cannot always be remediated., Thank you Respectfully, r I t t� 5 w' 1 N v . Planning Commission Public Hearing March 22, 2012 Newport Banning Ranch Consistency with the Coastal Act Addressed in Section 4.1 Public access Public facilities Lower -cost visitor /recreation facilities Priority uses Location of development Gnatcatcher Habitat Critical habitat # occupied Analyzed in the EIR Gnatcatchers observed 23 acres impacted Impact reduced to less than significant FESA protections ESHA Defined by the Coastal Act Case -by -case determination by CCC Only two identified ESHA areas Section 4.6 address biological resources EIR will be used by CCC Vernal Pools /San Dieao Falry Shrim Not all areas that pond water are vernal pools Reviewed 54 features Aerial surveys, not ground -based None were vernal pools or wetlands Project avoids VPZ a nd VP2 Mowing and Fuel Modification Oil Field mowing On -going maintenance Required by DOGGAR CCC exemption Include environmental protections Fuel modification Oil Field- related Hazards .x Bluff Road Improvement /Alignment Primary Road (4 lanes, divided) Several design factors Earthwork Road geometrics /design speeds Connection to Coast Hwy Impacts to habitat and topography CCC Action on Coast Hwy Connection Sunset Ridge Park access CCC has not acted on the City's CDP No CCC findings /actions OCTA Action on Zgth Bridge .x Health Risks to Residents /Park Users 75% of emissions from vehicles Most emissions occur off -site Little exposure to person on -site, nearby Tier 4 Construction E uipment Short -term regional NOx impact iTrzo Remediation First .x X &A &� Z \ LIR-5 .. "-A Planning Commission Public Hearing March 22, 2012 Newport Banning Ranch Lc�saa Q r� � / 1 e •i U.i 4YRYJ Newport Beach Residential Neighborhoods Newport Shores i " 1 Ir lGEL11 :� OLko Santls 5!E1Lr31!— sa!r!= 17 West Newport Beach /i / I ti 3� ONewport Island Inwiporated Cb& WbT - � O Newport Beach Townhouse RiC O Balboa Coves O Newpon Crest 1 4/ Seawind Ne A, wpod O 9 NewpoN Knolls •• 10 Park Lldo r 1p 11 Versailles ,y� ' Villa Oalbca 17 Newport Terrace Caste Mesa Residential Neighborhwtls California Seabreew 3� N BR Mc Develor _ I, � �A � Urban CYlnm I £ .V a tEGfrO ® w Mmr.0 _ wiae� .._.- CfY589FF �- SYYIM1 Inmilr \ i11JFa' \ J Rcwn Colo n ExMbit 31 Master Development Plar �am�ad� K nu sa o.�.Mwem. — o s. Bowe. a�M�e Fei SVVe .F..' - ©OpWEa�a. Rn.x�a En4rve�yryM +3uW �PwMGtlf.bMSwe O �PpsnFina hwuNWlUaf O Wbry4ntl5eI,MeMb pu�w.E�i�w -Ow �Mo } ®G.YSn eu.m Cam Rnw ®Gmbwsna vue �. 0w,�,wom,e.e o-..+. Raw �uw�M.ewro.4m O OE NYIMW Mbebi ILfsB9 YemY POal lelvprttlre Me Nm Commeein Rk I ms..r.nm nn `� • SpW6H1uBPUk �v. 1 ew oarv� r� xm �•r'V. EO,blt 34 Parklands Project Development Plan s, RTr 'v e mwn a-W North Community Park 1 r' �O Gmnde a Roep /Trap BB &a O -Q O Wk ese O D y � 6Nnl.M lbIGnON Prcnk Area —� � _ _ �' �' SFaIeOOm /PorF j� ApB Syxie W (30Or19Vf Td fN(61y) e Wk Rea°own 'v e mwn a-W North Community Park z f T Picnic Area — Buffer Landscape to Block T, Planting along Headlghtts A'. Property Line for _ 15M-STREET Open Play Turf UD NEWPORT BANNING RANCH AN Joint -Use Putty Private Parking 20 + /- Spaces -- f CENTRAL COMMUNITYPARK - cowe Exhibit &tab Central Community Park Project Development Plan s \ awu \asa_u.�my\�rvm \a+s�•M- vsyisnsW �r_�s sb \�+.'nk�- H -�+aw m r r P OE NY14n05 PmMNb� L_ w/sdun rw L!dyd _ K�.sN a.rw�in _ vru micmwni vn ore `� ` e bi�eMw�Npdv Exhibit 44 I -1 o ',Z eQ I%ri%" f % tw ° 'Ail ° ,Vsd• // % / / / /qU J`/ Master Entitlements and Subsequent Approvals Ma� TA A NA 7R JETTY i NEWPORT i SHORES NOR .N ij i TA A NA 7R JETTY i NEWPORT i SHORES NOR .N POLLUTION OVER THE LAND POLLUTION OVER THE LAND - ANOTHER VIEW PIL W POLLUTION OVER THE OCEAN PALOS VERDES OBSCURED BY POLLUTION COMMUNITY COLLEGE UNDER CONSTRUCTION To: City of Newport Beach Planning Commission From: Norman J. Suker P.E. Re: March 22, 2012 Public Hearing for the Newport Beach Banning Ranch Development DEIR Dated: March 22, 2012 I object to the approval of the Newport Banning Ranch (NBR) project as proposed and request that all my comments be included in the records of any and all proceedings relating to the Newport Banning Ranch project or its successors. 1.1 am a 25 year Newport Crest property owner and my townhouse abuts the Banning Ranch. My property has unobstructed ocean views from east of Catalina Island to Palos Verdes. This view had been protected by the Newport Beach General Plan Amendment 8 1 -1 until the 2006 General Plan Update. I was not noticed or aware of this change. I only learned that the Amendment 8 1 -1 had been omitted by the response to my DEIR comments for the Newport Banning Ranch. The proposed development will significantly impact my view. Please provide documentation that residents of Newport Crest were noticed regarding the elimination of Amendment 81 -1. 2. Although I am currently licensed as a traffic engineer, civil engineer and real estate broker in the State of California and have been for about 40 years with experience in both the public (City Engineer and City Traffic Engineer) an private sectors, my comments are made as a private citizen. 3. OCTA has recently removed the 19' St Bridge from the Master Plan of Arterial Highways (MPAH). The City's General Plan Circulation Element needs to be amended to remove the 19' Street Bridge. Failure to remove the bridge will jeopardize Measure "M" funding. Since the DEIR is so voluminous, about 7,000 pages, the DEIR should be revised to eliminate all traffic analysis based upon the bridge being built. By removing the unnecessary traffic analysis, the DEIR pages will be reduced and made more understandable by the public. 4. In a telephone conversation with the Newport Beach City Traffic Engineer, I was informed that all traffic data collection and analysis in the City, including the NBR DEIR is performed in compliance with the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). In Appendix A of said Ordinance section 3.d.I states "The most current field counts for each Primary Intersection with counts taken on weekdays during the morning and evening Peak Hour Period between February 1 and May 31 ". The requirement for taking traffic counts only between February 1 and May 31 is not the industry standard, in fact it is the only agency that I am aware of that counts only in the said period. To be informative to the public, the DEIR should have a scenario of traffic analysis for the summer months in addition to the TPO months. It is obvious that traffic in the summer months, especially August and September, is much heavier that the TPO months. See Exhibit "A" attached from the Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies, 2nd Edition (latest edition) of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) shows an example of traffic at various times. I am a Life Fellow of ITE. 5. My November 8, 2011 comments regarding the Banning Ranch DEIR and the response to my comments are as follows: Comment Why has the 15'h street Road connection to West Coast Highway been eliminated in the present plan since the impact of removing this road is to increase traffic next to our homes? Response 1 The need for a second connection to West Coast Highway through the Project site (via the extension of 15th Street west of Bluff Road to West Coast Highway) was first studied as part of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Update, and was revisited as part of the Newport Banning Ranch Draft EIR. It was determined that the volume of traffic that would access West Coast Highway through the Project site (consisting of new traffic generated by the Project itself, plus traffic that would shift to Bluff Road from other existing roadways) could be accommodated by a single roadway connection This response is non - responsive because it was based on the existence of the 19" Street bridge. The General Plan and th MPAH shows both roadways, 17`h and Bluff Road connecting to West Pacific Coast highway. An alternative scenario of using only 15`h (17`h) street should be performed if only one roadway is necessary. This alternative roadway would be far west of Newport Crest and would have little impact of noise and lighting. This alternative roadway would provide for a better traffic signal spacing on West Pacific Coast highway (farther away from Superior Blvd). It would also eliminate the environmental issues that are associated with the proposed Bluff Road near West Pacific Coast highway. 6. An alternative scenario should also be conducted with the elimination of Bluff Road between 19" Street and Victoria St.. I had a recent conversation with Costa Mesa traffic staff who indicated that the City plans to request that this section of Bluff Road be removed from the MPAH (this section of roadway would be in the Talbert Park). 7. DEIR Exhibits 4.9 -24 and 4.9 -25 are the only graphics I found with roadway volumes and they assumed that the 19' St. Bridge was built. These exhibits need to be revised without the bridge showing TPO and summer traffic volumes. It is curious that Exhibit 4.9 -24 shows a combined volume of (10,090 + 12,040) of 22,130 and Exhibit 4.9 -25 shows Bluff Road with a volume of only 15,440. What happened to the other almost 7,000 vehicles? 8. The Project Trip Distribution Exhibit 4.9 -7 needs to be revised to show the distribution without the 19" Street Bridge and Bluff Road north of 19`h Street. The existing Exhibit 4.9 -7 doesn't show any traffic from 19'h Street to the SR55. This needs to be corrected. 9. Exhibit 4.9 -21 indicates that the Bluff Road and West Pacific Coast highway intersection without the 19'h Street Bridge would operate at LOS F in both the AM & PM. This would indicate that Bluff Road should not be built. 10. The proposed Bluff Road is planned to be about 20 feet from a Newport Crest home. Any suggestion that double windows and air conditioning is a mitigation action is totally unreasonable. The owners of these homes which have existed for almost 30 years enjoyed the cool ocean breezes without the cost and noise of air - conditioning equipment. With energy costs rising, the electricity bill will only grow higher. It is one thing for a developer to build next to an existing noisy roadway and include the double windows and air - conditioning. The buyers of his homes have a choice to buy or not. In the NBR example, the homes are there first and the builder wants to put a noisy roadway next to these homes. He has no authority to rehab the exiting homes and the only mitigation is to relocate the road away from the existing homes. MANUAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING STUDIES 2nd Edition Bastian J. Schroeder, Ph.D. Christopher M. Cunningham, P.E. Daniel J. Findley, P.E. Joseph E. Hummer, Ph.D., P.E. Robert S. Foyle, P.E. Institute of Transportation Engineers P. IVV. The computation of seasonal or monthly variation factors follows a similar procedure. The ADT for each month is the monthly volume from the permanent -count station divided by the number of days in the month. The AADT is then computed as the average of the 12 monthly ADTs. The monthly adjustment factors are obtained by dividing each monthly ADT by the AADT. Exhibit 4 -9 illustrates the computation of monthly variation factors. Daily and seasonal factors can be computed in a similar way from control -count data. Since control counts are samples rather than continuous counts, the margin for error is greater. However, carefiilly planned control counts will produce reli- able estimates. For further discussion, see Roess, Prassas and McShane (2004). Exhibit 4-9. Illustrative Computation M Month of Monthly Variation Total Traffic (vehicles) Factors ADT for Month (veh. /day) Day Average Yearly Volume for Day (vehJday) Daily Factor Monday 1,332 1,429/1,332 = 1.07 Tuesday 1,275 1,429/1,275 = 1.12 Wednesday 1,289 1,429/1,289 = 1.11 Thursday 1,300 1,429/1,300 = 1.10 Friday 1,406 1,429!1,406 = 1.02 Saturday 1,588 1,429/1,588 = 0.90 Sunday 1,820 1,429/1,820 = 0.80 TOTAL = 10,000 vehicles ADT = 1,429 veh. /day G.,,— hA..C& ------ A n ---- ' P. IVV. The computation of seasonal or monthly variation factors follows a similar procedure. The ADT for each month is the monthly volume from the permanent -count station divided by the number of days in the month. The AADT is then computed as the average of the 12 monthly ADTs. The monthly adjustment factors are obtained by dividing each monthly ADT by the AADT. Exhibit 4 -9 illustrates the computation of monthly variation factors. Daily and seasonal factors can be computed in a similar way from control -count data. Since control counts are samples rather than continuous counts, the margin for error is greater. However, carefiilly planned control counts will produce reli- able estimates. For further discussion, see Roess, Prassas and McShane (2004). Exhibit 4-9. Illustrative Computation M Month of Monthly Variation Total Traffic (vehicles) Factors ADT for Month (veh. /day) Monthly Factors (AADT /ADT) January 19,840 19,840/31 = 640 797/640 = 1.25 February 16,660 16,660/28 = 595 797/595 =1.34 March 21,235 21,235/31 = 685 797/685 =1.16 April 24,300 24,300130 = 810 797/810 =0.98 May 25,855 25,855/31 = 835 797/835 =0.95 June 26,280 26,280/30 = 876 797/876 =0.91 July 27,652 27,652/31 =892 7971892 =0.89 August 30,008 30,008131 =968 797/968 =0.82 September 28,620 28,620/30 =954 797/954 =0.84 October 26,350 26,350/31 =850 797/850 =0.94 November 22,290 22,290/30 =743 7971743 =1.07 December 21,731 21,731/31 =701 797/701 =1.14 TOTAL = 290,851 vehicles AADT = 290,851/365 = 797 vpd o.... .wcw, .7iv, P. ruv. Xi��� A -2 56 • MANUAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING STUDIES, 2ND EDITION