Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNewport Bay Marina - 2300 Newport Blvd - (PA 2001-210)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT November 16, 2006 Agenda Item No. 3 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Planning Department William Cunningham, Contract Planner (949) 644 -3200, dgbc @verizon.net SUBJECT: Newport Bay Marina (PA2001 -210) Use Permit No. 2001 -038, Site Plan Review No. 2001 -004, & Newport Beach Tract Map No. 2004 -003. 2300 Newport Boulevard (Cannery Village /McFadden Square) APPLICANT: ETCO Investments, LLC :REQUEST • ETCO Investments, LLC requests a use permit, site plan review and vesting tentative tract map to allow the construction of a mixed -use development consisting of approximately 36,000 square feet of commercial uses and 27 dwelling units above the first floor. The :project will consist of eleven three -story buildings over a subterranean parking garage, and the applicant proposes the reconstruction /reconfiguration of the existing seawall and boat docks. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission certify the Environmental Impact Report, adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approve Use Permit No. 2001 -038, Site Plan Review No. 2001 -004, and Newport Beach Tract Map No. 2004 -003 subject to findings and conditions. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission continued this agenda item from the meeting of October 5, and requested the applicant to revise plans and for the staff and applicant to provide additional information. The applicant has revised the plans as follows: • The front setback Modification Permit request has been eliminated and the applicant proposes to maintain the front 5 -foot front yard setback along Newport • Boulevard; • The previously- existing walkways between Buildings F and G, and between Buildings H and, I have been eliminated, resulting in an additional 6 feet of open Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 2 area being provided along the north property line that is shared with Woody's • Wharf, and an additional 2'/2 feet in the Paseo area between Buildings C and D which has allowed a planter area to be installed along the south wall of Building D; • The previously existing residential floor area located on the Deck Level in Buildings E, F, J and K has been eliminated and replaced with commercial space; • An additional 9 parking spaces have been added in the subterranean parking structure, and a total of 30 parking spaces have been added to the project. With the elimination of the Deck Level parking, the total commercial square footage has increased slightly by 250 square feet and the residential floor area has been decreased by 3,730 square feet, resulting in a total decrease in floor area of 3,480 square feet. The following table summarizes the land use floor area changes between the originally - submitted plan and the revised plan: moor Area Summa t' G Retail - Newport Blvd. frontage 9,205 8,273 - Bayside frontage 4,415 7,896 - Subtotal (Retail) 13,721 16,169 Office -Deck Level 5,725 5,266 - Second Level 16,304 14,565 - Subtotal (Office) 22,029 19,831 Total Commercial 35,750 36,000 Residential* 68,430 65,100 Total 104,180 101,100 *Note: Total square footage does not include 12,000 sq. ft. enclosed garage area. Total residential area allowed as computed on plans including enclosed garages is 77,100 sq. ft. The revised overall decrease in floor area does not substantially change the parking calculations as outlined and discussed in the October 5 staff report, and the reconfiguration of the subterranean parking level and the Deck Level results in a total of 30 parking spaces over the minimum code requirement of 226 spaces (256 parking spaces are now provided), In addition, even though the residential floor area previously shown in Buildings E, F, I and J on the Deck Level has been eliminated, a minor reconfiguration of the dwelling units results in the same number of units (27), slight decrease in overall residential square footage, same dwelling unit bedroom /bath mix (refer to the October 5 staff report), and the same total number of bedrooms (77). The following table summarizes the revised dwelling unit mix within the project: 1 Note: Even though the cover page (Page DL -01) of the revised plans indicate that the revised plans have a total of 257 parking spaces, staff have been confirmed that 256 spaces are actually shown on the both the parking deck and parking level. Therefore, staff is using the 256 spaces in the. analysis. • 0 CJ Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 3 Dwellina Unit Summa pi C t. i f{ l b. 3 4 A Townhouse 7 3/3 2,720 19,040 B Flat 4 2/2% 1,955 7,820 D, G, H & K Flat 16 3 /2' /Z 2,390 38,240 Totals 27 77 (bedrms 65,100* "Note: Total square footage does not include enclosed garage area. Total residential area allowed as computed on plans including enclosed garages is 77,700 sq. ft. Analysis In continuing this item to tonight's meeting, the Planning Commission requested the applicant and staff to address various items, each of which are discussed below. Front Setback Mod cation Originally, the applicant proposed that the buildings fronting Newport Boulevard (Buildings A and B) be located at the property line — code requires a five -foot setback along the front (Newport Boulevard) property line. At the last meeting, there was general concurrence by the Planning Commission that the findings to grant a Modification Permit for the front setback could not be met, and therefore, requested the applicant to maintain the five -foot setback. The applicant has revised the plans accordingly and, therefore, the Modification Permit for the reduced front setback is no longer required. The applicant has revised the Newport Beach fronting retail to eliminate some of the retail entrances, which with the additional five feet of setback has allowed the applicant to introduce additional small planter areas in the front of Buildings A and B. The draft Resolution (Exhibit 1) has been revised to eliminate the Modification Permit. Building Height At the October 5 meeting, there was not consensus relative to the issue of the height of the building and the Commission appeared to be divided as to whether or not they supported the Use Permit that would allow the buildings to exceed the 26 -foot height. Nevertheless, the Commission requested staff to survey the area for other projects that were allowed to exceed the 26 -foot height limit. Staff notes that the 28th Street Marina, located at 2700 Newport Boulevard and is within the McFadden Square Specific Plan area, and is similar in that is was developed with office commercial on the first floor with two stories of residential above. That project was also allowed to exceed the 26 -foot height limit with structures that are approximately 35 feet in height. In addition, the • building that houses 21 Oceanfront and the Doryman's Inn is 35 feet in height. Staff is Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 4 surveying surrounding buildings in the area, including buildings adjacent to the site, and • will provide additional information at the meeting. Residential Uses on Deck Level As noted in the October 5, 2006 staff report, it was staffs interpretation of the Specific Plan regulations that, given the commercial parking located in the subterranean level, that the residential portions of Buildings E, F, I and J located on the Deck Level above the subterranean parking met the requirement of residential to be located above a permitted commercial use. However, there appeared to be Planning Commission consensus that residential uses should only be allowed above a commercial use and that the subterranean parking did not constitute 'commercial located on the first floor." Therefore, the applicant revised the plans to eliminate the residential located on the Deck Level within Buildings E, F, I and J, and replaced that space with commercial floor area. As noted above, this revision did not result in a substantial change in the total residential floor area. Delivery/Service Vehicles The Planning Commission. expressed concern that there was not sufficient loading or delivery parking area(s) for Building A, and requested the applicant to provide additional space for delivery/service vehicles in closer proximity to that building. The applicant has . revised the site plan to eliminate the previously- existing walkway areas between Buildings F and G. That change resulted in an additional six feet.of area being added to the north portion of the site between Building K and the north property line, resulting in an approximately 11 -foot wide area within which the applicant has incorporated a vehicle loading space. Therefore, staff has added a condition requiring that the space be reconfigured and /or redesigned to allow large vehicles to access the space without making multiple turning movements. In addition to the loading space issue, there was a question posed as to where the trash areas would be located, and, for the trash areas located in the subterranean garage, how the trash trucks would access the trash bins. The applicant has revised the plans to show the trash .areas on both the Deck Level and the subterranean Parking Level. The trash enclosures located in the Parking Level are located adjacent to or near service elevators. It is the intent to bring the trash bins on that level to the Deck Level on trash pick -up days for disposal, and to return the bins to the lower level after pick -up. Parking and Construction Management The conditions included in the original draft resolution presented at the October 5 Planning Commission meeting requires the applicant to prepare a Construction Traffic Management and Control Plan prior to issuance of an encroachment permit. The Commission requested the applicant to prepared and submit a Parking Management • Plan (PMP) and a Construction Management Plan (CMP) for Planning Commission review at this time. In addition, the Commission requested that the PMP address details Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 5 • for potential driveway gating /control, use of parking attendants and details for pay parking, and that the CMP address potential parking controls for construction employee parking during the construction phase of the project. The applicant has prepared and submitted a conceptual Construction Management Plan, and the City Traffic Engineer has reviewed and commented on the plan. In summary, the City Traffic Engineer's requests additional details be provided, particularly the issue of construction traffic control and hours of operation during the summer months. Staff has retained in the Conditions of Approval a condition requiring a detailed CMP be prepared for the final construction plans and submitted to the City Traffic Engineer for review and approval. The conceptual CMP is included as Exhibit 3. Also included in Exhibit 3 is the City Traffic Engineer's comments on both the CMP and PMP. In addition to the CMP, the applicant has submitted a conceptual PMP and the City Traffic Engineer has reviewed and commented on that document as well. The proposed PMP includes a provision for resident and visitor parking permits for the residential - related parking on the Deck Level and the visitor spaces in the subterranean parking level. A parking management company is proposed to be retained to enforce the permitted resident parking and loading zones. Attendants will be utilized: to monitor the commercial space tenants and patrons, as well as visitor parking in the parking level; and two attendant stations will be provided in the vicinity of the entries into the garage level from Newport Boulevard and The Arcade. The same management • company would manage off -peak paid /valet parking for the use of the garage by adjacent restaurant. In the event of pay parking, the PMP is suggesting two alternatives: valet staffing to manage the parking fees and tandem parking; or entrance/exit gates with card readers and monitoring to enforce the parking. In summary, the City Traffic Engineer has commented that the PMP as submitted is too general and requires more information. In addition, he expresses concerns to the triple tandem parking proposed in the parking level. The .Parking Management Plan is included as Exhibit 4. As noted above, the City Traffic Engineer's evaluation of the PMP is included as part of Exhibit 3 following the applicant's CMP. Marina Parking There was discussion at the October 5 meeting relative to the Zoning Code standards regulating Marina Parking, and the Planning Commission directed staff and/or the applicant to address the matter in more detail. Under the provisions of the Zoning Code (Section 20.66.030), "Marine Sales and Services" require different parking allocations depending on the exact nature of the use. Those parking standards include: • "Boat Charter' — 1 parking space for each 3 occupants of the vessel, including crew members; • "Sport Fishing Vessels" — 1 parking space for each 2 occupants of the vessel, including crew members; and • "Commercial Docking Facilities" — 0.75 parking space for each slip in the marina. • The applicant's plans have been developed to include a reconstruction and reconfiguration of the existing marina, resulting in an 18 -slip marina, and parking has Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 6 been provided at a rate of 0.8 space per slip, for a total of 14 parking spaces. Under the • provisions of the Zoning Code, the marina would be restricted to "commercial docking" uses, e.g., individually -owned boats, and could not be used for commercial boat charter, sport fishing or other similar uses by vessels docked in the marina. If the applicant propose such use in the future, the operator of the use would need to demonstrate the adequacy of parking in conjunction with a Marine Activity Permit. Off -site parking would be necessary given that the project does not provide enough excess parking to serve most charter activities. In addition to the parking - related questions, the Planning Commission requested the applicant to clarify the use of the slipway area. Staff notes that the plans for the Marina portion of the project indicates the slipway as a ,1gt"" slip, however, the parking summary on the face sheet of the plans indicate the parking is based on 18 boat slips. If the Harbor Resources Department considers the slipway a slip, the project provides a few extra parking spaces to account for the docking of a boat in the slipway. Residential Buffer As noted in the October 5 Planning Commission staff report, Building Qr which is devoted exclusively to office uses, and provides an effective buffer between the residential uses and the boat yard uses to the south of the project site. However, the Planning Commission expressed concern over a need to buffer the residential, • particularly the residential uses in Building K, from the existing restaurant use to the immediate north ( Woody's Wharf), and requested the applicant to revise the plans to provide additional buffering along the northerly property line. The applicant has revised the plans to attach Buildings F and G and Buildings H and I, which has resulted in an additional 6 feet for a total of 13 feet of separation between the residential and the existing restaurant to the north. In addition, the applicant is proposing an eight -foot high wall along the northerly property line adjacent to Woody's Wharf restaurant, and windows in the northerly wall of the residential units in Building K have been eliminated. The additional six feet of distance added between the residences in Building K and the restaurant to the north and the eight -foot high wall are not likely to provide sufficient buffering in that the residential units are well above the top of the wall. However, the elimination of window openings could provide some degree of additional sound attenuation and would prevent fumes and odors from entering the residences located in Building K. Nevertheless, if the Planning Commission consensus is that additional buffering is needed along the northerly property boundary, potential plan revisions could include redesign of the north wall of Building K to include additional sound insulation in that wall, or elimination of any residential use in Building K. Buyer Notification The staff - recommended conditions in the draft Resolution includes a "Buyer Notification /Disclosure" program requiring that the developer notify all potential buyers • and subsequent re -sale purchases of the residential units of the potential noxious characteristics of surrounding boat yards and restaurant uses. That program is required Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 7 to be prepared and approved by the City prior to issuance of final certificates of occupancy. However, the Planning Commission requested the applicant to provide additional details relative to the potential contents of the program. The applicant has prepared a draft Buyer Notification Program which is included as Exhibit 5. The draft mentions the two adjacent restaurants and adjacent boat yard to the south. However, staff recommends that the Program be more generic and outline fact that the project is in an area characterized by a number of restaurants (not just the two adjacent restaurants) and boat repair /storage facilities which could have potential for disturbance to residents of the project. Landscaping The Planning Commission requested the applicant to provide a preliminary landscaping plan that identifies, in more detail, the proposed landscaping. As noted above, the project plans have been modified to provide a five -foot setback along Newport Boulevard, store -front entrances eliminated in Buildings A and B, and elimination of areas between Buildings F and G, and H and I. Those plan revisions:have resulted in additional landscaped areas along the Newport Boulevard frontage and in the Paseo area between Buildings C and D. Also, the applicant has submitted a Conceptual Landscape Plan that is included as a portion of the project plans (Exhibit 6). . On -Site Circulation /Access Some Planning Commissioners suggested that it would be more optimal to provide a two -way access ramp to /from parking on the Deck Level, and to encourage the use of 22nd Street for access to and from the site. The applicant's revised plans continue to show the 22nd Street ramp as a one way, exit -only ramp, and staff continues to recommend that that configuration be maintained. In addition, there was concern expressed at the October 5 Planning Commission meeting relative to the sharp turning radius for vehicles entering the subterranean parking level from the Newport Boulevard entry ramp and making a right hand turn to gain access to the ramp leading to the southerly portion of the parking level. The parking level plan has been revised substantially to eliminate the sharp right turn. In addition, the redesign has resulted in an additional 9 spaces being provided in the parking level. However, twelve of the parking spaces located in the parking level are configured as triple tandem spaces. The City has not, in the past, allowed triple tandem parking even for valet parking. Therefore, staff is recommending that four of the spaces be eliminated or used for other purposes in order to reduce the parking to double tandem spaces. The loss of four spaces results in the project being over - parked by a total of 26 spaces. In reviewing the revised site plan, the City Traffic Engineer noted a problem with the stairway and landing area located on The Arcade frontage of Building C. As configured, the bottom (street level) of the stairway is located approximately 3 feet from The Arcade • right -of -way line, resulting in a pedestrian landing area that encroaches into the public right -of -way. Staff recommends that that area be redesigned to pull the stairway back away from the right -of -way to have the pedestrian landing area located on -site and out Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 8 of the public right -of -way. City Traffic Engineer further recommends that the space resulting from that revision be reconfigured as public on- street parking spaces thereby increasing the supply of street parking in The Arcade by three or four spaces. The applicant desires that this area be kept open to provide enhanced visibility and pedestrian access to the waterfront between Buildings C and D. Planning staff supports this position and the Commission can either require parking in this area or approve the design as submitted by the applicant. A condition requiring the stairwayllanding redesign in Building C has been included in the Draft Resolution without requiring the additional parking in the right -of -way. Deck Level Elevation There was discussion at the October 5 Planning Commission meeting relative to the elevation of the deck level in general, and the bridge over the slipway specifically, when viewed from Newport Boulevard frontage. The sidewalk along Newport Boulevard is at an elevation of 8 feet, and the finish floor level of the bridge is 11 feet. Therefore, the bridge is 3 feet higher than the streettsidewalk. The applicant is preparing an exhibit that shows the elevations of the Deck Level, including the bridge, as compared with Newport Boulevard — that exhibit was not available at the time of preparation of this staff report, but will be presented at the meeting. Site Plan Review Findings . The original staff report for the October 5 Planning Commission meeting discussed the various findings. required for the various permits requested by the applicant (Use Permit for height, tract map, etc.). Even though the draft Resolution included findings required for approval of a Site Plan Review, the staff report did not specifically address each of the required findings. Municipal Code Section 20.92.030 outlines twelve standards and requires that site plans comply with each standard: t Sites shall be graded and developed with due. regard for the aesthetic qualities of the natural terrain, harbor and landscape, giving special consideration to waterfront resources and unique landforms ... ; trees and shrubs shall not be indiscriminately destroyed. The site is flat and has been developed with commercial and prior - existing boat yard for a number of years. The project will result in the removal of all structures currently existing on site as well as removal of scattered shrubs and approximately ten existing mature trees. The site will be graded and approximately 34,000 cubic yards of earth removed in order to develop a subterranean parking garage. The finished development will, however, appear to be developed with an at -grade deck level with commercial uses located at that level. The development will include the reconstruction of the waterfront bulkhead, docks and enlargement and enhancement of one of the two slipways (the second, highly deteriorated and covered slipway will be removed). Replacement • landscaping will be provided that has more consistency in terms of overall design theme and placement throughout the project site. C� Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 9 2. Development of the site shall be compatible with the character of the neighborhood and surrounding sites and shall not be detrimental to the orderly and harmonious development of the sun-oundings and the City. The project design has been developed to be consistent with the provisions of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan, and the architecture has incorporated elements of surrounding buildings. The building materials and design elements addressed in the Specific Plan have also been followed in the design of the project. 3. Development shall be sited and designed to maximize protection of public views... The project will result in an increase in the view corridor /easement that exists in the approximate center of the site. 4. Environmentally sensitive areas shall be preserved and protected... The project will result in the reconstruction of the bulkheads and enlargement and enhancement of one of the existing slipways on site to mitigate the removal of the second slipway, which is highly deteriorated and covered. A biological study prepared • for the project in conjunction with preparation of the EIR provides a detailed assessment of the marine - related biota on the site, includes mitigation measures relating to the marine biology (which have been included as conditions in the draft Resolution), and .concludes that the environmentally sensitive areas can be protected and enhanced. 5. No structures shall be permitted in areas of potential geologic hazard... There are no geologic hazards identified on the site, and the project Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval will ensure that the .project is constructed to withstand potential geologic hazards typical of the Newport Beach area. 6. Residential development shall be permitted in areas subject to noise levels greater than sixty (60) CNEL only where specific mitigation measures will reduce noise levels in exterior areas to less than 60 CNEL and reduce noise levels in interior of residences to 45 CNEL or less. A Noise Study prepared for the project in conjunction with the preparation of the EIR has identified noise levels on the site, and Mitigation Measures and Conditions incorporated requiring design of the residential units to maintain exterior noise levels at or below the 60 CNEL and interior noise levels at or below the 45 CNEL. .7. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access • ways and other site features shall give proper consideration to functional aspects of site development. Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 10 The site plan has been evaluated by the City Traffic Engineer and modifications made to ensure that parking, internal vehicular access and circulation, and pedestrian access and circulation are optimal and in accordance with the standards of the Municipal Code. Public access easements along the waterfront and through the property will be provided as a condition of approval. 8. Development shall be consistent with specific General Plan and applicable Specific Plan district policies and objectives... The project has been evaluated with respect to consistency with the General Plan, Specific Plan, Zoning Code and the Coastal Land Use Plan (please refer to the October 5, 2006 Planning Commission staff report for a detailed discussion relative to General Plan and Zoning Consistency). A determination has been made based on that analysis that the proposed project is consistent with the applicable plans, zoning standards and objectives and policies contained within the various plan documents. 9. Development shall be physically compatible with the development site, taking into consideration site characteristics including... submerged areas and sensitive resources. The project is physically compatible with the site in that the site development standards, including lot coverage, setbacks and floor area ratios are either maintained at Code U levels or are below those standards. The enlargement and enhancement of the main • slipway will mitigate the removal of the second slipway and will actually result in a slight increase in surface area within the remaining enhanced slipway. In addition, the project will result in a clean -up in the marine - related water areas immediately adjacent to the project site. 10 When feasible, electrical and similar mechanical equipment and trash and storage areas shall be concealed. All roof - mounted equipment will be concealed behind the roof parapets and will not be visible from surrounding public areas nor from upper levels of surrounding buildings. Enclosed trash areas have been provided on the Deck Level in the project and in the subterranean Parking Level. 11. Archaeological and historical resources shall be protected to the extent feasible. The EIR included preparation of a Cultural Resources Report which concluded that the site is not likely to include paleontological or archaeological resources. The site has been identified as having a limited level of historical significance due to its past use as a shipyard, particularly during the World War II era, and due to the age of some of the structures on the site. However, the report concludes that those resources are not identified on any federal, state or local list of historic places /buildings. Therefore, the EIR has included a Statement of Overriding Considerations and mitigation measures • that will mitigate the removal of the existing structures on the site. Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 11 • 12. Commercial development shall not have significant adverse effect on residences in an abutting residential district. There are no abutting residential uses or structures to the project site. General Plan Consistency The October 5 Planning Commission Staff Report included a detailed analysis relative to the projects consistency with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Since at the time of the preparation of that staff report the new General Plan was pending adoption, the analysis included a summary of how the (previous) Land Use Element compared with the proposed new Land Use Element. As noted, the 2006 General Plan designation for the property is "Mixed Use Water 2 (MU -W2). However, that revised designation is similar to the old designation of "Recreation and Marine Commercial" in that the new designation allows marine - related commercial uses with residential permitted on upper floors. Therefore;: the proposed project remains consistent with the new General Plan Land. Use. designation. The new General Plan became effective upon approval by the electorate on November 7, 2006. The draft Resolution approving the project has been amended to reflect the new General Plan land use designation for the site. • Environmental Review As noted in the October 5, 2006 staff report, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared and processed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. The Draft EIR concludes, based on the technical studies and analyses contained within the document, that all issues, with the exception of historical (cultural) resources could be reduced to an acceptable level if the Mitigation Measures, as outlined in the document, are adopted and enforced both as interim and on -going measures. Those Mitigation Measures have been included in a "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program" (MMRP) and have been incorporated in the Conditions of Approval attached to the draft Resolution (Exhibit 2). Both the MMRP and Conditions will be adopted as part of the Planning Commission Resolutions certifying the EIR and approving the project. With respect to historical resources, the Draft EIR concludes that sufficient Mitigation Measure(s) cannot mitigate the adverse impacts, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared and is included in the draft Resolution. The revised site plan results in a slight increase in the size of the subterranean parking level, which, in turn, results in additional grading and soil removal. The total increase, however, is slightly less than 4,000 cubic yards that will be graded and removed from the site. The City's CEQA consultant has evaluated this revision against the original analysis, particularly with respect to increase in truck traffic and resultant short -term noise and air pollution impacts. She concludes that the increased impact is minor and, given the short- term nature, will not change the overall analysis and conclusions of the Draft EIR. However, she also concluded that the change needs to be addressed in the EIR Errata. The revised Errata is included as an Exhibit to the EIR Resolution (Exhibit 1). Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 12 In addition, a letter dated November 11, 2006 was received from the Central Newport Beach Community Association. That letter and an amended Responses to Comments is included as Exhibit 6. The Draft Environmental Impact Report (Volume 1), Technical Appendices (Volume 11), comments on the EIR and the Responses to Comments were previously distributed with the October 5, 2006 Planning Commission staff report. CONCLUSION In staffs opinion, the plans as revised by the applicant address most of the Planning Commission concems, have resulted in an overall improvement of the project design, and staff continues to recommend that the project be approved in that the proposed mixed -use project can be found consistent with the General Plan, has no adverse environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated or for which a finding of overriding consideration cannot be made,, and; .is. consistent with the zoning code, including Specific Plan District #6. Further, staff believes that. the Use Permit allowing the height limit to be established at 35 feet is acceptable and that the mandatory findings can be made. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission certify the Environmental Impact, and approve the requested applications. However, the Planning Commission may not agree that the redesigned portion of the project along the northerly property boundary provides sufficient mitigation to effectively buffer the residential uses from the adjacent restaurant use. If it is the Planning Commission consensus that additional buffering is required, it would be appropriate to continue the pubic hearing and request the applicant to redesign the project to provide additional buffering from adjacent uses. In addition, staff notes that the City Traffic Engineer has commented on the Construction Management Plan and the Parking Management Plan, and in both cases, feels that additional level of detail is required. If the Planning Commission feels that they need additional detail on those plans prior to making a decision on the project, staff requests the Commission to nevertheless discuss the project to determine if additional modifications to the plans are desired. Prepared by: dt/iv � 3e�w William Cunningham, Contract Planner Submitted by: David Lepo, Planni irector • • L J Newport Bay Marina November 16, 2006 Page 13 • Exhibits: 1. Draft Resolution No. 2006 -; EIR Certification, Statement of Facts, Statement of Overriding Considerations_, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and EIR Errata. 2. Draft Resolution No. 2006- _; findings and conditions of approval 3. Conceptual Construction Traffic Management Plan 4. Parking Management Plan and City Traffic Engineer's Comments on the CMP and PMP 5. Draft Buyer Protection Notification 6. Central Newport Beach Community Association Letter, November 11, 2006 and amended Responses to Comments 7. Revised Project Plans t:. • E EXHIBIT 1 Draft Resolution - EIR Certification 0 0 0 0 • RESOLUTION NO. 2006 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH. NO. 2003071144) FOR NEWPORT BAY MARINA LOCATED AT 2300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND STATE AND LOCAL GUIDELINES, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS THERETO, APPROVING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, California, did on the 5t'' day of October, 2006 and 0d 16th -day of November, 2006, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider: (1) the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), (2) the adoption of certain findings and determinations and adopt statement of overriding considerations; and WHEREAS, the EIR has been prepared and circulated for public review in accordance with.the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq. ("CEQA:'); and WHEREAS, it was determined pursuant to CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regs. Sections 15000 et seq.) that the Project could have a significant effect on the • environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR'); and WHEREAS, on February 23, 2005, the City of Newport Beach, as lead agency under CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation ( "NOP ") of the EIR; mailed that NOP to public agencies, organizations, and persons likely to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed Project; and n LJ 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 therefrom, and on July 19, 2006, circulated the DEIR for public and agency comments; and WHEREAS, the public comment period closed on September 2, 2006; and WHEREAS, staff of the City of Newport Beach has reviewed the comments received on the draft EIR, has prepared full and complete responses thereto, and on September 22, 2006 distributed the responses in accordance with Public Resources Code section 21092.5; and WHEREAS, a combined Final Environmental Impact Report (collectively, "FEIR ") for the Project was presented to the Planning Commission, as the decision making body of the lead agency, for certification as having been completed in compliance with the provisions of CEQA and State and local guidelines implementing CEQA; and 15 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information angft the comments pertaining to the DEIR and FEIR at a -duly noticed meetings held on the 5th day October, 2006 and on the 2"d 16th day of November, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered all environmental documentation comprising the FEIR, including the comments and the responses to comments, and has found that the FEIR considers all potentially significant environmental impacts of the proposed project and is complete and adequate, and. fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and of the State and local CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, prior to action on this Project, the Planning Commission has considered all significant impacts and Project alternatives identified in the FEIR and has found that all potentially significant impacts of the Project have been lessened or avoided to the extent feasible; and WHEREAS, CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines provide that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed and which identifies one or more significant effects of the project unless the public agency makes written findings for each of the significant effects, accompanied by a statement of facts supporting each finding; and WHEREAS, CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines require, where the decision of the Planning Commission allows the occurrence of significant environmental effects which are identified in the EIR, but are not mitigated, the Planning Commission must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the FEIR and /or other information in the record; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the Project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Regulations of the City of Newport Beach. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: SECTION 1. Certification. Based on its review and consideration of the FEIR, all written communications and oral testimony regarding the Project which have been submitted to and received by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission certifies that the FEIR for the Project has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State and local CEQA Guidelines. The Planning Commission, having final approval authority over the Project, adopts and certifies as complete and adequate the FEIR, which reflects the Planning Commission's independent judgment and analysis. The Planning Commission further certifies that the FEIR was presented to the Planning Commission and that the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in it prior to approving the Project. SECTION 2. CEQA Finding and Statement of Facts. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15091, the Planning Commission has reviewed and hereby adopts the CEQA Finding and Statement of Facts as shown on the attached Exhibit "A" entitled "CEQA Finding and Statement of Facts," which exhibit is incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. Statement of Overriding Considerations. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the Planning Commission has reviewed and hereby makes the Statement of Overriding Considerations to adverse environmental impacts, attached also as Exhibit "B" entitle "Statement of Overriding Considerations," which exhibit is incorporated herein by reference. po • SECTION 4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Guidelines section 15097, the Planning Commission has reviewed and "Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program" which is included as Exhibit incorporated herein by reference. • r1 U Pursuant to. CEQ4 hereby adopts the "C ", which exhibit is SECTION 5. Location and Custodian of Record of Proceedings. The Planning Department of the City of Newport Beach, located at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92263, is hereby designated as the custodian of the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based, which documents and materials shall be available for public inspection and copying in accordance with the provisions of the California Public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.). SECTION 6. Notice of Determination. The Community Development Director shall cause the filing of a notice of determination with the County Clerk of the County of Orange and with the state Office of Planning and Research within five working days of this approval. SECTION 7. Certification. Posting and Filing. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach, and the Secretary to the Planning Commission shall certify to the vote adopting this resolution and shall cause a certified copy of this resolution to be filed. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 2"4 a 16n'-day of GoteberNovember 2006 MM BY: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Jeffrey Cole, Chairman Robert Hawkins, Secretary I EXHIBIT A • CEQA STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACTS Newport Bay Marina Project ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 1. Introduction The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) provide that: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a Project for which an Environmental Impact Report has been completed and which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the Project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the. rationale for each finding." (CEQA Guidelines §15091) Because the EIR identified significant effects which may occur as a result of the Project, and in accordance with the provisions of the - Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach, Planning Commission ( "Planning Commission ") hereby adopts these findings as part of the approval of the Project. • The City of Newport Beach has prepared an EIR for the proposed Project in accordance with CEQA and CEQA Guidelines requirements. It is not considered reasonable, required or feasible for this Planning Commission to recite every single detail forming the basis for its findings herein, since the voluminous record, incorporated herein by reference and made publicly available, contains the substantial evidence explaining the facts in support. The Planning Commission considers this incorporation approach justified, especially in light of the fact that the Planning Commission has responded in writing to each oral and written comment raising environmental issues and has made this information widely available through staff reports and mailings. Where appropriate and helpful to understanding the basis of the Planning Commission's findings herein, the Commission has mentioned certain aspects of the record arising from public input. 2. Description of the Approved Project 2.4 acre project site is located at 2300 Newport Boulevard and is currently developed with commercial, office and marine uses, including a commercial marina, two boat slipways, office buildings, retail shops, and associated parking. The proposed project consists of a mixed -use development with approximately 36;000 square feet of commercial uses and 27 residential units. The project will require the demolition of all existing buildings on the site. The project proposal includes a partial subterranean garage. The construction of the garage will require excavation of earth material. • 11 • The project includes site remediation in relation to contaminants (located in sediment near and within the boat slipways) associated with the previous ship building /repair use of the property. The remediation includes removal of sediment that has accumulated to form a shoal in front of the smaller of the two boat slipways. The sediment is contaminated with metals that are considered a hazardous waste. This material (200 square foot area) will be excavated using shore based equipment (i.e. long reach backhoe) and then disposed of at a licensed facility. The project also includes replacement of the existing bulkhead (along approximately 485 feet of waterfront). The existing sheet pile and concrete bulkhead will be demolished and removed using shore based construction equipment. Once the new bulkhead is constructed to tie in the property lines along the subject site, the former bulkhead will be demolished. The project also proposes reconfiguration of the existing 21 -boat slip marina located on the bayward side of the project site, and closure of one existing boat slipway (one slipway will be widen and remain open) used for boat berthing. The boat slipway to remain open and improved will also include a vehicular /pedestrian bridge crossing. The reconfiguration of the boat slips will involve removal of the existing docks and associated pierheads (existing pilings) and replacement of the boat slips and pierheads in the reconfigured layout:' The reconfigured layout will facilitate an improved marina use. The number of boat slips will not be increased. The length of each boat slip ranges from 56 feet to 65 feet with the exception of Slip No. 19 (the large slipway with proposed vehicular /pedestrian bridge) which is approximately 150 feet in slip length. • This large slipway will accommodate a variety of boat sizes. 3. Alternatives The EIR addressed the proposed Project and several alternatives to this Project. The alternatives examined in the EIR include: (1) No Project alternative (2) Reduced Development Alternative (3) Commercial Development Alternative (4) Residential Development Alternative Three Project alternatives were presented in the EIR. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered such alternatives in light of the adverse environmental effects which may result from the Project and the reduction or elimination of such effects which might be accomplished by • selection of one of the alternatives. (9 Each alternative is summarized below and the specific economic social or • other considerations that are considered to render such alternatives infeasible are set forth. The discussions below are intended to summarize and not fully restate the evidence contained in the Draft EIR, Response to Comments, and the administrative records as a whole. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES: No Project Alternative Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed mixed -use project would not be constructed. This project alternative also assumes that the site would not be developed with residential and /or commercial retail uses. The no project alternative would result in less environmental impacts for several topic areas compared to the proposed project (i.e. air quality, cultural resources, noise, utilities /services etc.). For example, the No Project would not involve the development of 27 residential units and 36,000 square feet of commercial /retail uses at the subject property. The No Project Alternative would not provide for improved and enhanced view corridor to The Rhine Channel and pedestrian access along the waterfront. This alternative also would not provide for the remedial "cleanup, of the contaminants present within the site (i.e. boat bays — the two inlets) and improvements related to water quality (filter all surface runoff before entering bay). The alternative would not improve the aesthetic appearance of the site nor ;provide a development that meets current seismic standards and uniform building code (UBC) requirements. All of the environmental impacts associated with the development of the proposed project can be mitigated to a less than significant level with the exception of Cultural Resources (Historical). The No Project would result in reduced environmental impacts than the proposed project (for Historical resources by retaining the existing structures); however, this project alternative does not meet the immediate and long -term project objectives and goals providing housing opportunities to meet the current and future demand of the community and region. Therefore, this alternative has been rejected. Reduced Development Alternative This project alternative would involve development of the site with a reduced development in size from that of the proposed project. This alternative assumes development of approximately twelve (12) residential units and 18,000 square feet of commercial retail uses. Although a few environmental impacts may be lessened in comparison to the proposed project (air quality, noise, traffic, utilities and services), overall, the impacts would be roughly the same and not significant reduced from that of the project. The Reduced Development Alternative also would still require demolishing the existing structures on -site; therefore, significant impacts relative to cultural resources (historical) would not be lessened from that of the proposed project. This development. alternative would not significant reduce environmental impacts and would not provide the needed housing and commercial development proposed by the project. • Therefore, for these reasons, this alternative has been rejected. 3 A0 • Commercial Development Alternative This project alternative includes evaluating potential the developing the site with only commercial uses. The City's current development regulations would allow for up 51,400 square feet of commercial uses at the site. This alternative would not significantly lessen any environmental impacts from that of the proposed project. Many of the environmental impacts would be the same including those associated with air quality, biology, cultural resources (historical), noise, traffic /parking, utilities and services. Development of this alternative would have the same beneficial impacts as that of the project in regards to aesthetics (attractive new buildings, view corridor, provision of pedestrian access along waterfront) , hydrology /water (improved drainage and filtration of runoff before entering bay), and hazardous materials (remedial cleanup). Since the environmental impacts would not be lessened and the project does not provide needed housing (a project objective) this alternative has been rejected. Residential Development Alternative This alternative involves development of all residential uses on the property. This alternative assumes that no commercial /retail /office uses would be constructed. The City's current development regulations would allow for the development of up: to' 4'5 ; residential units: However, .an all residential component would not be found consistent. with the City's Land Use Element (LUP) and applicable Specific Plan. As with the all commercial development alternative, none of the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project would be significantly lessened with implementation of this • alternative. This alternative would still require demolishing the existing structures on the site to accommodate the construction of 45 residential units. Therefore, adverse significant impacts to cultural resources (historical) would be reduced with this development alternative. Additionally, impacts associated with aesthetics, air quality, biology, traffic, utilities and services would not be lessened with this development alternative. Development of this alternative does not reduce environmental impacts nor provide an economic benefit; therefore, this alternative has been rejected. 4. findings of Fact The Planning Commission has reviewed the final EIR prepared to evaluate the proposed Project and has considered the public record on the Project as earlier described in these findings. These findings summarize the data and conclusions contained in the Draft EIR, the various response to comments and the administrative record. The Draft EIR, the various responses to comments and the administrative record are incorporated into these findings as set forth in full. Consistent with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR for the Newport Bav Marina Project discusses environmental effects in proportion to their severity and • probability of occurrence. To that end, the EIR recognizes that certain areas of impact from the Project are unlikely to occur, or if potentially occurring can be mitigated to a R level of less than significant by imposition of conditions to the Project. It is not • reasonably anticipated that potential additional impacts will be discovered as a result of future studies (as identified per the mitigation measures) because of the substantial evidence in the administrative record (including the EIR presently). Therefore, these studies are incorporated into the mitigation measures to further assure protection and recognize responsible agency involvement occurring in the normal course of affairs after the lead agency acts. The Planning Commission therefore finds, based on all the data currently available, that while no significant adverse impacts are expected to be discovered as a result of any of these subsequent studies, the requirements of such studies in connection with the Project and the reservation of the power to incorporate any mitigation measures required to mitigate any previously unknown impacts to less than significant levels, is itself adequate mitigation for any impacts disclosed by such subsequent surveys and studies, however, unlikely. The EIR identifies a number of potentially significant adverse environmental effects of the Project. The EIR also identifies mitigation measures which would reduce or eliminate' potential adverse effects. These effects and the mitigation -measures: are summarized beimw. All mitigation measures have been written as monitoring programs pursuant to Public Resources Code §21081.6. The drafting of these measures have been designed to • ensure compliance during Project implementation as explained further in the EIR. These findings merely summarize data in the EIR administrative record for purposes of identifying the significant impacts and mitigation measures for the Project. The EIR is incorporated by reference into these findings as substantial evidence therefore as if set forth fully in the findings. U • Significant Effects Development of the proposed mixed -use project will be visible from locations on -site as well as surrounding areas (residences, open space and roadways). The project will also include landscaping which will further soften the aesthetic appearance of the buildings. The mixed -use project will be visible to travelers on Newport Boulevard, from areas across the Rhine Channel and the immediate surrounding area. Additionally, lighting will also be visible but is not considered significant since the project is located in a developed urbanized area: The project is not considered visually offensive to viewers. Project construction activities will also be visible to viewers. Construction activities are short-term impacts and not considered a significant impact to aesthetics. The project site is not a designated scenic vista nor located near a designated scenic vista. Additionally, the project would not substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings. The project will have an impact structures which are considered significant historical resources. This topic is addressed in the Cultural Resources Section. Findings. x": Finding 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects • as identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures MM 4.1.4 -1: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the project for review and approval by the Planning Director. Said landscape plan shall enhance the property and provide visual softening of the proposed three -story buildings and site lighting. The landscaping shall be installed in recognition of vehicular and pedestrian circulation (site distance considerations etc.) and safety. MM 4.1.4 -2: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a site lighting plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. Building and parking lot lighting shall be designed and installed so that all direct lighting rays are confined to the site and adjacent properties and roadways are protected from glare. Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included • None. C 2) Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. AIR QUALITY Significant Effects The Pollutant (Nox & PM10) emissions associated with the grading and demolition activities on the project site are projected to be greater than the Significance Thresholds established by the SCAQMD in the CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Therefore, grading and demolition of the proposed project will result in a significant air quality impact. Long term emissions are below the significant threshold levels defined by the SCAQMD, and therefore, project will not have an adverse impact upon the regional emissions. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations have Project which avoid or substantially lessen as identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures been required in, or" incorporated into, the many of the significant environmental effects MM 4.3.4 -1: During construction activities, the applicant shall ensure that the following measures are complied with to reduce short -term (construction) air quality impacts associated with the project: a) controlling fugitive dust by regular watering, or other dust palliative measures to meet South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust); b) maintaining equipment engines in proper tune; and c) phasing and scheduling construction activities to minimize project - related emissions. MM 4.3.4 -2: During demolition and excavation, daily total haul trucks shall travel no more than cumulative 2,600 miles hauling materials from the project site to the dumping site and back again. Prior to commencement of demolition and grading, the project applicant shall submit to the City calculations showing the proposed travel route for haul trucks, the distance traveled, and how many daily truck trips that can be accommodated while keeping the cumulative miles traveled to bellowed 2,600 miles each day. The daily haul truck trips shall not exceed this amount during the demolition and excavation. MM 4.3.4 -3: During construction activities, the applicant shall ensure that the project will comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), to reduce odors from construction activities. rIL • • A4 • Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Significant Effects Impacts of this project to the marine environment appear to result in a positive effect on the marine environment by replacement of most of the existing habitat with habitat of equal or greater value than that disturbed during the course of the project. The existing 3. boat slipways were surveyed and found to be depauperate =in species probably due to their location in a dead end channel and the contaminants that are known to reside there. The impacts to the biota from the project are expected to be short term as most of the biota of the intertidal community are species such as compound ascidians, • barnacles, mussels, limpets, and oysters with swimming larval forms that will readily colonize new substrate. Intertidal and subtidal algae such as Ulva and Enteromorpha are very fast growing and will readily attach to the new substrate. Other species such as nudibranchs and fish will swim free of the construction area and recolonize the habitat once construction is complete. Disturbances to the substrate in areas outside of the construction areas will have minor effects on polychaete worms, but they too will readily recolonize disturbed areas, so the loss to the infauna will be relatively small, short term in duration, and the impacts are, therefore, considered less than significant. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures MM 4.3.4 -1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a survey will be conducted for the presence of eelgrass and Caulerpa. The biological assessments conducted by CRM and MBC indicate that neither species is present in the project locations, but it is required that not more than 90 days nor less than 30 days prior to initiation of actual • construction that both eelgrass and Caulerpa surveys be conducted in September or A5 October, in which case the results are relevant until the following growth period • beginning in March. In no case, will an eelgrass or Caulerpa survey conducted from November to February (non - growth period) be acceptable. MM 4.3.4 -2: Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, the project applicant shall implement the recommended mitigation pertaining to the replacement and restoration Pickleweed and the mudflat area presented in the biological resources report prepared by MBC Applied Environmental Sciences. Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Incorporated None. Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. CULTURAL RESOURCES Significant Effects • As a result of the records and literature search and the field walkover surveys, no significant cultural resources were found to be present on or immediately adjacent to the project area. Therefore, no further archaeological investigations are recommended by ARMC. Paleontological resources, including fossil remains and associated scientific data, fossil sites, and fossiliferous rocks, could be adversely affected by the direct and indirect environmental impacts accompanying the grading and excavation activities needed for the development of the Newport Bay Marina Mixed -Use Project Area in Newport Beach. Direct impacts would result from the ground - disturbing activities associated with the clearing of the vegetation and soil, excavation of aggregate and increased development of the proposed processing facility. If a significant paleontological resource is identified within the boundaries of the proposed project ground disturbance could result in the loss of paleontological resources, including scientifically important fossil remains, associated geologic data, fossil sites, and fossiliferous rocks, by disturbing fossil - bearing and potentially fossiliferous rocks. Although construction would be a short-term activity, the loss of some fossil remains and the fossil- bearing rocks would be a permanent adverse environmental impact. On this particular parcel the project - related construction activities may have an affect any fossil - bearing formations. The South Coast Shipyard appears to be eligible for listing in the California Register as a historical resource at the local level of significance under Criteria 1 and 3. Under • Criterion 1, the South Coast Shipyard is associated with the development of the E 2L • maritime economy of Newport Beach and with World War II, as a local contributor to the war effort. Under Criterion 3, the South Coast shipyard represents an excellent example of maritime architecture in the City of Newport Beach, particularly on Balboa Peninsula. The buildings are in good condition and retain integrity of location, design, feeling, association, workmanship, materials, and setting. The South Coast Shipyard buildings exhibit a collective distinction as a historic district. All of the buildings located within the South Coast Shipyard are contributors to this district. None of the buildings appear to be .individually eligible for listing in the California Register, as the shipyard represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. None of the buildings appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register. The South Coast Shipyard does not appear to be eligible for listing in the California Register under Criteria 2 or 4. Although the shipyard was connected to several prominent business people and noted residents of Newport Beach, none of these individuals were associated with any activities that were demonstrably important to the history of Newport Beach, California, or the nation (Criterion 2). The South Coast Shipyard does not appear to be able to answer questions important in history (Criterion 4). In 1974, the South Coast .Shipyard was identified as a historical landmark by the Newport Beach Historical Society. In 1992;:; the Ad Hoc Historic Preservation Advisory Committee conducted a Historic Resources Inventory for the City of Newport Beach. The South Coast Shipyard was identified as a local historic site, representing historic /architectural themes of local importance. While the South Coast Shipyard was • recognized as a locally significant property, the City of Newport Beach does not have a Historic Preservation ordinance, and only encourages the adaptive reuse and preservation of buildings, recognized by the City to be Landmark Buildings. The South Coast Shipyard is not recognized by the City of Newport .Beach to be a Landmark Building. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations- have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. Finding 2 - Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures MM 4.4.4 -1: During construction activities, if archaeological and /or paleontological resources are encountered, the contractor shall be responsible for temporary halting construction activities in the area of the encountered resources and is responsible for the immediate notification and securing of the site area. A qualified archaeologist • and/or paleontologist approved by the City of Newport Beach, Planning Director shall be 10 a"' retained to establish, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit • sampling, identification, and evaluation of cultural resource finds. If major archaeological and /or paleontological resources are discovered which require long -term halting or redirecting of grading, a report shall be prepared identifying such findings to ,the City and to the County of Orange. Discovered cultural resources shall be offered to the County of Orange or its designee or a first- refusal basis. MM 4.4.4 -2: The historical study prepared by LSA dated October 2005 recommends the mitigation to reduce the significant impacts to historical resources through the following methods: • Documentation of the South Coast Boatyard shall be provided by the developer prior to issuance of demolition permits by the City of Newport Beach. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the Planning Director shall be provided an historic narrative, photographs, and architectural drawings of all on -site buildings in accordance with Historic American Building Survey (NABS) Level 1 documentation requirements. The Planning Director shall ensure that the HABS documentation is deposited with the Newport Beach Historical Society, the City .of Newport Beach Public Library, the Newport Harbor Nautical Museum, and the J ` SCCIC located'at California State University, Fullerton, prior to issuance of demolition permits. • Prior to issuance of building permits, the Planning Director shall review project • building plans and permits to ensure incorporation of design features referencing and memorializing the character- defining features of the South Coast Boatyard into design of the project, including, but not limited to, incorporation of a commemorative plaque depicting the buildings and their context to the historical importance of the structures on site. Such plaque shall be oriented to a public right -of -way (i.e. facing Newport Boulevard), so as to be visible and accessible to the public from such right -of -way. • If previously undocumented cultural resources are found during construction activities within the current project area, a qualified professional archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find in order to recommend appropriate mitigation measures, halting construction activity in the vicinity of the find, if necessary. Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. •- 11 a�g . �...-Vw • -V\ 2••wwwaVV a w rV V• V• rVVV • P•• V•Y••P•VP••a The Project will result in an unavoidable significant impact to Cultural Resources (historical). GEOLOGY AND SOILS Significant Effects The topography of the site is relatively flat. The site is not located in an area of unique geologic or physical features. There are no evident faults on the site itself. Field observation during the geotechnical investigation (Petra) did not reveal the existence of any active or ancient landslide in the vicinity of the project site. The closest slope in the area of the site is the bluff north of the site on West Coast Highway. The closest known active or potentially active fault is the Newport- Inglewood Fault. Strong ground shaking is the principle cause of most damage sustained during an earthquake. The most severe ground shaking at the site is expected to originate from an earthquake along the Newport- Inglewood fault zone, which the site lies within (Petra). Groundwater at the project site is relatively shallow. Evaluation and analysis during the geotechnical field explorations conducted by Petr6 indicate fill materials and marine deposit soils located from a depth of ! s 4 to 30 feet below the grouncksurface are susceptible to liquefaction. Significant total and , differential settlement of the foundation may occur due to seismically induced settlement. I °z All potential impacts associated with geology and soils are mitigated to a level of less • than significant per the project design and compliance with the City Excavation and Grading Code (NBMC Sec.15.10.140) will reduce any potential impacts to an insignificant level. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures MM 4.5.4 -1: The project shall implement the recommendations presented in the geotechnical reports prepared by Petra presented in Appendix D, Volume 11 of the EIR. MM 4.5.4 -2: Prior to the commencement of construction, design criteria and project specifications that include ground improvement techniques such as stone columns, use of deep foundations which penetrate below the liquefiable zone, pressure grouting, or appropriate combinations of these measures shall be incorporated into the plans for the project. MM 4.5.4 -3: Develop design criteria and project specifications that recognize groundwater may be encountered at the proposed depth of the partially subterranean • parking area. Construction of mat foundations or structural slabs may be required. 12 Design of utility lines and surface drainage in the subterranean parking should also • consider the presence of a shallow groundwater table. MM 4.5.4 -4: Use appropriate type of cement and concrete specification according to Table 19 -A -4 of the Uniform Building Code to mitigate contract with corrosive soils and sea water that may come in contact with footings in the area. Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Significant.imgacts . 1 • During construction activities, the potential exists for localized spills of petroleum -based products, concrete, or other chemicals. These spills could expose workers and the public to hazardous materials either directly, at the site of the spill, or indirectly, by introducing these substances into the .watershed. Such impacts are potentially significant; therefore, mitigation measures are provided to reduce the likelihood of a spill and prevent surface water contamination in the event of a spill. Based on compliance with existing regulations regarding hazardous materials, no increase in risk of upset related to hazardous materials is anticipated with the proposed project. The proposed project does involve the transport and disposal of some hazardous materials from waste located in sediment near the slipways. The geological assessments (October 11, 2002, Petra Geotechnical, Inc.) consisted of drilling and sampling four borings to assess the environmental condition of sediments which form a shoal near the slipways. The geologic and chemical data obtained during this assessment indicates that local contamination of the sediments in the shoal (near the slipways) has occurred. Concentrations above the Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC) for copper and lead are present in the upper three feet below the mudline in the shoal area. The detected concentrations of copper and lead (above the STLC) require that these specific sediments be handled as a hazardous waste if they are excavated and removed. The project is not located within an airport land use plan or close vicinity of a private airstrip (or public airport) that would result in a safety hazard for people residing or • 13 50 • working in the project area. The closest airport to the project site is the John Wayne Airport. This airport is approximately 5 miles from the project site. The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. However, during construction activities, the project will need to be coordinated with the City (i.e. construction traffic control plan) especially during summer months when the Newport Beach area is very congested with tourist and beachgoers. To ensure that the project does not interfere with any potential emergency response vehicles, a mitigation measure is presented in (Transportation/Traffic). The site itself does not pose any unusual significant risk of wildland fires. The project construction will be required to comply with applicable safety regulations including fire prevention and an emergency operations plan. Additionally, the project will not interfere with any emergency plan and /or access for emergency operations. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in.-the EIR. Finding 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other •agency., • Mitigation Measures MM 4.6.4 -1: If during grading and/or construction activities a potential contaminated area is encountered, construction shall cease in the vicinity of the contaminated area. An assessment shall be performed by a qualified hazardous materials specialist to determine the extent and type of contamination. if the site investigation reveals that contamination with pollutant concentrations in excess of Action Levels, as defined by the California Department of Health Services and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, the site shag be remediate during the project construction phase in compliance with the State of Califomia Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.5) standards established the California Department of Health Services, Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and the requirements of California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22 and applicable Federal regulations. MM 4.6.4 -2: The proper use and maintenance of construction equipment, along with the use of general common sense, greatly reduces the potential for contamination. All grading and building plans will include the following construction related measures and that the measures shall be followed by the construction contractor and crew. 14 -3j a. The storage of hazardous materials, chemicals, fuels, and oils and fueling of • construction equipment shall be a minimum of 45 meters (150 feet) from any drainage, water supply, or other water feature. b. Hazardous materials stored onsite shall be stored in a neat, orderly manner in the appropriate containers and, if possible, under a roof or other enclosure. c. Whenever possible, all of a product shall be used up before disposal of its container. d. If surplus product must be disposed of, the manufacturers or the local and state recommended methods for disposal shall be followed. e. Spills shall be contained and cleaned up immediately after discovery. Manufacturer's methods for spill cleanup of a material shall be followed as described on the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for each product. MM 4.6.4 -3: Prior to the issuance of any certificate of use and occupancy permit(s), the project applicant shall submit written evidence from the Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region that no further action is needed and all remediation is completed and construction can proceed. Mitigation Measures Added ;,.- MM 4.6.4 -4: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide. evidence that a Final Work Plan (for remediation) has been approved by the RWQCB . and that said plan provides for protective measures for contaminated material removal including measures such as use of silt curtains and a watertight clamshell bucket for minimizing the dispersion of containments. Said Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the RWQCB. MM 4.6.4 -5: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall submit to the Fire Chief a hazardous material disposal plan which identifies the procedures and method of removing and disposing of lead and asbestos in relation to the existing buildings on the site. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. 15 • 3X U HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Significant Impacts The proposed project wilt have a beneficial impact to water quality. The existing shipyard is proposed to be removed and remediation (contaminants in the sediments of the boat bays) of the site will be conducted in compliance with the requirements of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region. Water quality implementation of the project will include compliance with the adopted Drainage Area Management Plan and adoption of Best Management Practices for handling any runoff from the proposed housing buildings or hardscape. Therefore, impacts to water quality are not anticipated. The proposed project would not substantially increase water runoff. The site is already developed with existing buildings and is located in an urbanized area of the City. The site is largely covered with impervious surface (e.g. asphalt, concrete, etc.) at the present time. The proposed expansion will include demolition of three corrugated metal structures and the asphalt parking lot to accommodate the new buildings. Since the- site is presently covered with impervious surface and will continue to be after,project implementation, the project will result in an insignificant increase in runoff. The project is located in close proximity to the beach and ocean front. All on -site • surface water will be conveyed to a drainage system that includes catch basin filters and that eventually flows toward the bay. The project will result in short-term and long- term impacts to water quality. Short-term impacts will occur as a result of construction and grading activities. Long -term impacts will occur as a result of increased usage of the site by vehicles and people. These impacts can be reduced by procedures that protect the quality of stormwater. runoff, such as: site construction, erosion and sediment control programs, sweeping streets, managing solid waste, recycling programs, storm drain and catch basin maintenance, enforcing prohibitions on illegal discharges, controlling spills, supervising waste discharges through permitting, and enforcing the prohibition on certain discharges. Water quality implementation of the project will include compliance with the adopted Drainage Area Management Plan and adoption of Best Management Practices for handling any runoff from the proposed project. The project site is located within a 500 -year flood hazard area. Due to close proximity of the project site to the Pacific Ocean (and the Rhine Channel), the site could potentially experience impacts associated with inundation by tsunami (but unlikely a seiche or mudflow due to the location and topography). The project itself does not expose people or structures to a significant risk involving flooding, or flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. The City of Newport Beach has emergency procedures in the event of a major event (i.e. flooding, earthquake, evacuation plans etc.) • Findings 16 3 c� Finding 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the • Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. Finding 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. Mitigation Measures MM 4.7.4 -1: Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) and provide evidence that a NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. Such evidence shall consist of a copy of the NOI stamped by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWPPP shall be developed to reduce the risk of the transport of sediment and pollutant from site. The SWPPP shall implement measures to minimize risks from material delivery and storage, spilt: prevention and control, vehicle and equipment fueling and maintenance, material use, structure construction. and painting, paving operations, solid waste management, sanitary waste management, and hazardous waste management. • MM 4.7.4 -2: During construction and following completion of development, the recommendations presented in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by SP Consulting Group dated February 20, 2006 shall be implemented and complied with to. ensure that all potential project impacts to water quality will be reduced to a less than significant level and all applicable local and state water quality requirements complied with by the project applicant (property owner). MM 4.7.43`. During construction activities the following shall to be implemented: a. During construction and maintenance activities, equipment shall be in proper working condition and inspected for leaks and drips on a daily basis. The project contractor or representative thereof shall develop and implement a spill prevention and remediation plan and workers shall be instructed as to its requirements. Construction supervisors and workers and maintenance personnel shall be instructed to (1) be alert for indications of equipment - related contamination such as stains and odors, and (2) respond immediately with appropriate actions as detailed in the spill prevention and remediation plan if indications of equipment - related contamination are noted. b. During construction and maintenance activities, fuels, solvents, and lubricants shall be stored in, a bermed area so that potential spills and /or leaks shall be contained. Soil contamination resulting from spills and/or leaks shall be remediated as required by Federal and/or state law. Storage areas shall be constructed so that containers shall not be subjected to damage by construction and maintenance equipment. 17 34 • C. Stockpiles of bulk granular building materials shall be covered and secured. d. Any areas of exposed soil, such as dirt stockpiles, dirt berms, and temporary dirt roads, shall be stabilized with controlled amounts of sprinkled water. e. At the close ofeach working day, any materials tracked onto the street or laying uncontained in the construction areas shall be swept up, and any trash accumulated in construction areas shall be disposed. f. Concrete, asphalt, and masonry wastes shall be contained and these wastes shall be disposed away from project construction sites. g. Spill kits containing absorbent materials will be kept at the construction site. h. Fuels and other hazardous materials will be stored away from project drainage. MM 4.7.4 -4: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape plan, which includes a maintenance program to control the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and an irrigation system designed to minimize surface runoff and over watering. This plan shall be reviewed by, the City, of Newport Beach Planning Department. The landscaping shag be installed and maintained in conformance with the approved plan and maintenance program. • Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. LAND USE AND PLANNING Significant Impacts The proposed project does not result in any significant impacts relative to land use and planning. The project is consistent with applicable regulation plans and development regulations (i.e. General Plan, Specific Plan, & LCP). • The project does not impact any applicable habitat conservation plan (HCP) or natural community conservation plan (NCCP). The project site is not part of a HCP or NCCP. 18 The proposed project will not result in any significant impacts to land use and planning. • Mitigation related to other topical areas such as biological resources, cultural resources etc. are presented in the appropriate EIR Sections addressing those areas. Findings Finding 1 - Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or Project alternatives identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures None. Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. • Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. NOISE Significant Impacts Construction noise represents a short-term impact on ambient noise levels. Noise generated by construction equipment, including trucks, graders, bulldozers, concrete mixers and portable generators can reach high levels. Typical noise construction levels are shown in Exhibit 4.9 -3. Construction of the project includes demolition of all existing buildings, grading and excavation associated with the construction of the parking garage and site remediation. However, the project does not propose construction outside of the hours permitted in the Noise Ordinance. The proposed residences are required to meet an outdoor noise standard of 65 CNEL and an indoor noise standard of 45 CNEL. Residences along Newport Boulevard may be exposed to noise levels in excess of 70 CNEL. A few second and third floor balcony units are planned along Newport Boulevard. Noise barrier heights were calculated for sample outside balcony locations facing along • 19 3(° • Newport Boulevard. Balcony barriers of 5 feet high may be required. In general, noise barrier heights may be reduced considerably through site design, such as setbacks from the roadway, grade separations, and exterior living area orientation. The residential buildings facing Newport Boulevard will experience traffic noise levels of 70 CNEL or greater, and will require outdoor -to- indoor noise reduction of at least a 25 dB. In some cases standard construction will achieve this level of reduction, however, these residences will likely require upgraded windows to achieve the required outdoor to indoor noise reduction. With typical residential construction, a minimum of 20 dB of outdoor -to- indoor noise reduction is achieved with windows closed. With windows open outdoor -to- indoor, noise reduction falls to 12 dBA. Therefore, units requiring more than 12 dB of noise reduction require adequate ventilation per the Uniform Building Code to allow windows to remain closed. Typically this is provided through mechanical ventilation. Mechanical ventilation may be required for all homes in the project. The commercial buildings must comply with an interior noise standard of 50 CNEL. The commercial buildings along Newport Boulevard could experience noise levels in excess of 70 CNEL. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations -had been required in or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. • Mitigation Measures MM 4.9.4 -1: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, detailed engineering construction plans will be submitted to the City for .review and approval. The engineering plans shall provide details such as roof and wall elements, room dimensions, window and door dimensions, attic configuration and building insulation. Said plans shall demonstrate and ensure that the City's noise standards are met for proposed mixed -use project (residential and commercial). Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included 1 Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant • None. 20 3� PUBLIC SERVICES • Fire The proposed project may potentially increase the number of calls for service to the location; however, it is anticipated that the project will not require any new facilities /staff or affect emergency response times. all proposed structures will be required to be fully fire sprinklered. At this time, the Newport Beach Fire Department has indicated that the project will not result in any significant impacts to facilities, staff and /or services. All fire protection project features must be designed as an integral part of the construction process with all improvements and /or modernization of equipment systems or devices identified and agreed upon by the City of Newport Beach Fire and Marine Department prior to any, construction approval. Police There are no plans for additional facilities or expansion of current facilities and /or additional staff. The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) indicated that the construction of the project may have an impact on the area, especially. if. the , construction is done in. the; summer months. The area becomes very busy with traffic and parking issues because of the beachgoers and tourist business that occurs 3; between May and September. Schools • The proposed project consists of a mixed -use development that includes 27 new residential units. The project will generate new students, however, the project is consistent with the land use designation of the City's General Plan and zoning and therefore included in the student generation. projections for buildout of the City. Based on the current student generation rates, the project could result in the generation of approximately 7 K -12 students (27 units x 0.259 K -12 student/dwelling unit). While the development is not expected to generate significant numbers of students, the District's facilities are overcrowded. Therefore, in compliance with state law the project applicant will be required to pay applicable development impact fees adopted by school district. Parks The proposed project is not anticipated to significantly increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks and recreational facilities. The project will .provide additional marine recreation opportunities to the public. Existing parks in the area and beaches are available to the public. Due to the limited population expected in relation to the 27 residential units the increase will be limited in regards to the potential use of parks and recreational facilities in the area. The project applicant will be required to pay applicable park impact fees. Findings • 21 3 Finding 1 - Changes or alterations had been required in or incorporated into the Project • which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. Finding 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. Mitigation Measures MM 4.10.4 -1: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, project construction plans shall be submitted to the City Fire Chief for review to verify that all fire protection is designed in compliance with the requirements of the City of Newport Beach Fire and Marine Department. MM 4.10.4 -2: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the project applicant shall pay any applicable development school impact fees as required by State law. MM y.10.4 -3: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the project app licant!shall pay, any applicable park impact fees as required by City of Newport Beach and State law. • Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. 'Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. TRANSPORTATION Significant Impacts The proposed development is projected to generate approximately 682 trip -ends (net increase) per day with -2 (net) vehicles per hour during the AM peak hour and 28 vehicles per hour during the PM peak hour. Six intersections were evaluated per the traffic study conducted for the project. Additionally analysis for one intersection was warranted. The ICU analysis for the intersection of Newport Boulevard and Via Lido assumes existing land configurations and a capacity of 1,600 vehicles per hour per lane with no clearances factor. The traffic study concluded that the project will have no impact on the intersection of Newport Boulevard and Via Lido during the peak hours, which will 22 39 operate at LOS (Level of Service) "A ". The project has no significant impact on the study • intersections. Parking for the project will be provided by a underground parking structure, an upper deck parking lot, and on- street parking. No on- street parking will be lost on Newport Boulevard along the project frontage, and two new on- street parking spaces on Newport Boulevard are�roposed by relocating an existing fire hydrant. No on- street parking will be lost on 22" Street. Five on- street parking spaces on The Arcade will be relocated on The Arcade along the project frontage. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations had been required in or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. Mitigation Measures None. Mitigation Measures Added None. • Mitigation Measures Not Included None. Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Significant Impacts Water and Sewer Services Based on water consumption factors, development of the project will result in a water consumption of 32,618 gallons of water daily (102,800 sq.ft. of residential uses and 36,000 sq.ft. of commercial uses, 235 gallons /1,000 sq.ft.). The total of 32,618 does not take into account the deduction of the consumption by the existing use to be demolished to accommodate the new development. Based on sewer flow generation factors (5,429 gallons per day (gpd) /acre), development of the project is anticipated to • generate 282,308 gallons of wastewater annually. 23 f W� • The project will generate an estimated 6,902 gallons of sewage each day (based on OCSD use flow coefficients of 3,451 gpd /acre for medium density residential, 8 -16 du /ac); however, no significant discharges that would exceed wastewater treatment requirements will occur as a result of the development. • • The project does not include uses that would necessitate treatment beyond that provided by the OCSD and raw sewage generated by the project will not exceed wastewater treatment requirements established by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Electrical Services The project will require extension of existing electrical facilities to serve the new school buildings and parking area. Based on consumption factors from the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook it is projected that the project will have a consumption rate of 1,221,440 kWh (based on computing square footage by 8.8 KWh /sq.ft. per year). The project is not anticipated to have any significant impacts on electrical services. Natural Gas Services The project will require expansion of gas services to significant adverse impacts associated with providing anticipated as a result of the proposed project. tl serve the school buildings. No gas service to the project are Solid Waste Services The demolition of the existing structures and surfaces on the project site will result in the generation of solid waste. The majority of the demolition waste can be diverted through a recycle process of wood, metal, concrete, and other building materials. It is estimated that the project will generate approximately 292 pounds of solid waste per day (based on IWMD generation rate of 4 Ibs /unit and 0.005 /sq.ft. for commercial /retail). The project will comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. It is not anticipated that there are any significant impacts relative to providing solid waste pick up and disposal generated by the project. Telephone Services The proposed project will require extension of existing telephone facilities to serve the new buildings. No significant adverse impacts associated with providing telephone service to the project are anticipated as a result of the project. Findings Finding 1 - Changes or alterations had been required in or incorporated into the Project which avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant environmental effects as identified in the EIR. 24 LU Finding _2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of • another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. Mitigation Measures MM 4.13.4 -1: Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the project applicant shall coordinate with utility and service organizations regarding any construction activities to ensure existing facilities are protected and any necessary expansion or relocation of facilities are planned and scheduled in consultation with the appropriate public agencies. MM 4.13.4 -1: Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the project applicant shall coordinate with utility and service organizations regarding any construction activities to ensure existing facilities are protected and any necessary expansion or relocation of facilities are planned and scheduled in consultation with the appropriate public agencies. Mitigation Measures Added None. Mitigation Measures Not Included None. Effects Not Mitigated to a Level of Less Than Significant None. n U 25 "t� • EXHIBIT B STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS A. UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE EIR The City of Newport Beach finds that the mitigation measures discussed in Exhibit (Findings of Facts) will, when implemented, mitigate or substantially reduce most of the environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. Nonetheless, certain significant environmental impacts of the project are unavoidable. For such effects, the City of Newport Beach has balanced the benefits of the project against such unavoidable impacts in its approval. The unavoidable impacts associated with the Newport Bay Marina Project are in the following areas: Cultural Resources The project site buildings appear to be eligible for listing in the California Register as a historical resource at the local level of significance under Criteria 1 and 3. Under Criterion 1, the property (aka the South Coast Shipyard) is associated with the • development of the maritime economy of Newport Beach and with World War II, as a local contributor to the war effort. Under Criterion 3, the South Coast shipyard represents an excellent example of maritime architecture in the City of Newport Beach, particularly on Balboa Peninsula. The buildings are in good condition and retain integrity of location, design, feeling, association, workmanship, materials, and setting. The site (aka South Coast Shipyard) buildings exhibit a collective distinction as a historic district. All of the buildings located within the subject property are contributors to this district. None of the buildings appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register, as the shipyard represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction. None of the buildings appear to be individually eligible for listing in the California Register. To approve the project the City of Newport Beach, Planning Commission, must make a statement of overriding considerations pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15043 and 15093. This statement allows a lead agency to cite a project =s general economic, social or other benefits as a justification for choosing to allow the occurrence of specified significant environmental effects that have not been avoided. The statement explains why, in the agency =s judgment, the project =s benefits outweigh • the unavoidable significant effects. CEQA does not require lead agencies to analyze 43 beneficial impacts in an EIR. Rather, EIRs are to focus on potential significant effects on the environment, defined to be adverse (Public Resources Code, Section 21068). However, these benefits can be cited, if necessary, in a statement of overriding considerations (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093). B. IDENTIFIED PUBLIC BENEFITS The City of Newport Beach, Planning Commission, in its review and consideration of the proposed Newport Bay Marina project, and in consideration of the unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the project on Cultural Resources, makes the following determinations and finding regarding the Unavoidable Adverse Impacts for the overriding reasons listed below: The project will contribute housing in the City of Newport Beach by the provision of additional residential units (27 dwelling units). The provision of additional housing is a public benefit of the project. The project would provide housing opportunities that assist in meeting the objectives and policies the City =s Housing Element and SCAG =s Regional Housing'Needs Assessment. 2. The project provides for the remediation of hazardous materials (contaminated sediment) located within the project boundary. The remediation will clean up the site • and assure a healthy environment for future residents and businesses. Therefore, there is a public benefit of the remediation of hazardous materials that will occur as a result of the implementation of the project. 3. The project will provide an attractive and viable mixed use (residential /commercial) development that optimizes the project site's prime location adjacent to the marina. Additionally, the marina will continue to be provided as well as an enhanced and larger boat slipway. The project will also improve water quality (post- construction) by the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and treatment of water prior to entering the bay. Currently, the site does not have a treatment system. Therefore, the project will provide an economic and public benefit of providing mixed -use of the property (residential, commercial, and marine uses) as well as improving the water quality from that which currently exists on site. 4. The project will provide for public access along the waterfront by implementing planned pedestrian walkways as well as a pedestrian/vehicular bridge crossing. The provisions of pedestrian walkways and the bridge crossing is a public benefit of the project. • • 3. Alternatives to the Project were evaluated and considered by the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission, the alternatives included the following; No Project Alternative, Reduced Development Alternative, Commercial Development Alternative, and the Residential Development Alternative. Based on the analysis, it was determined that the Project is the alternative that best meets the City's objectives and goals in providing educational facilities and opportunities to the public in accordance with State law. The Planning Commission hereby finds that all feasible mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR have been and will be implemented with the project, and that any significant unavoidable effects remaining are acceptable due to the above stated specific economic, social and other considerations, based upon the facts set forth above, in the Final EIR and in the public record of the consideration of this project. • • 4,5 / \ e § � U \_§ \)/ PL4 E§. 3k * § \� \�\ o§f z \ 2 § q � _ r B � U 0 E � � a � #y° -a / � t % 2 |k\� 7$ ! '® \ y: ) J�� g . :F -t3 T3 _� D� e - {2E[42 \)2\ §a§ . - ) 2 \]7 / {oQL �mee a CCU -\ ¥ ,ako�£2o co t\[\ .CL \(b £ - '0 /k)t 7 a \ \ ƒ� Z7](� \<f a 10 (ob ) > z c A\ \ u /f) � C'- (D Ea Re, —MN § 7 . ■ ca !R $ ■m2e#ae 9 @a . � U 0 E 0 r L 4 � ql � \ . \{ \`§f, }o . k _ {§ 11=2 \ \ ! {. E \ \#\ {t ))) ®) . »cx { «K$ ƒI \ \3 t7#)a¥§k 2 »3»&`2 ®� E«�2 &e!, ®■: ate] $§\< :22Q�S&k � §]ft@ ,lzn� )\w +■ =¥ -_ {aa =(§ a <e «]2f) ® s \ \((tfit )) � k ' `� \ ƒ k ))ƒ \$$ «$#£Cy 2�{ [& % *- (f)d&% �k�toc ¥ e \{ \ ) « -�,- #k m2w`k \*a %3 .■esA«£�> `a §tAk,k � ql � U m 0 � LJ 0 >.: R4 \k§\ \K\ ) \\ \\ ) \ ƒ/ : \2�222)eaI " ±2 //£ - ?�> E "b : / } ) m ']]]f= e °$, �) \®) kfi22 « « '0 §t@ / \�\ ca :§ \)fa2;a`m \$! \ §2k' {� { /i§ft��`2 \ /2'oCi {22� \$ / \ {k2 \ / }�2\ j \\ \I /(D (a (a �2��� Q . ■° }e�@3�$ Em��Ea�2 ,of o \ s ) ( -4Cf Z / ILI,IT co � U m 0 � LJ 0 � 4 F- L . y \ . �. 00 \§ ~ / ^� )2 m - ° ®\ % \'PC ® %. \ \\ i \ \ \§ \a � \ CL to Gt)`/) « ° ce,[ «\\� i\\ 5# ; ea 0a aq) 2ata`£ a(k! ®a«\% o0_ �* ` \ Ecoco a\a,E ;)\m ` ' °� {[§- ]x- % —a E° { \)\ƒ \ \)Z� « f«= aZ)�rag� e2�a /a#aG( [� - -o � {$ \)«Rao . . \' {0 ®\ �°- l) % =«m+§/ f((�E± k \fk�%��fco2 )[#�(� LC) #z0 CD -Z30) t© 2 . � B,` e q. co °� `Z� ° `� ol'ag ®e\a'!7' \\% /2k $)(w uumEg��;� # «a §k\# \$2RR2 §)t§f�7k(\ M Ml 0 U') 0 0 \� �- � LZ < == f66 -22/.� - cd §) §k7kf =oA ,- - 2 K £e ® ®ma /` _ (2( ■et_772G �) o - \&2 =§2eo \( L [o ;= c�( =ocl) {;E\� /,Z±2 §)2a §§ / : 7q)�faEL a \ (24 0c E_§- %a�&e) / « % §)�§]§oq�0 `, «-0 ®£§2 § �#))§#f2 /S)t; u 2_z�2mG2f3 -2«o> »< \ §�-0, 0 2k§0§)km�0 $ °ez -0c2 E»)2« #2�.e,■laf� -, °= ®�k %2$�e y ;¥o_(�q,»©& {a50 -00 ��&Sef °) &3 =a[M,E Za > —a .y \ § 2§§E4)E , 0 So ` cr-0 § c5 Z! ] # ' <\ Q � = « 0 U') 0 0 \� 0 4 a 0 u m � O L d .y � O L a4 a E ; d F> o j a O o .az � V c U L Q (fl a 3 � � c c e .E, o U °OOOarno�N5�Emo LcocSm @�0�c�m $t °: o_ m c'� � N O Oa $ y � Q) U) o c� c mw (D 3 46 N"mp0 R-C vmtn @O C. V E L 1T O E N N 7@ C .+-N' L a O O@ y a W ,a .° m rvN�_QE��2sLi�E� m E} o wmmnC out �d NcES a1Q"w t @��mmL�moy m °'m.�wa�Lm,$6". >rn m3@@ac a m @o>o�a o EU �. U L m 0 O .O >@ m' aooEo E >m >- U .4. O fT- @ L L w U - C O U U c N j 0= p m .0 @ U O Q C C. 0 C c t.ar C' O N U c@ y m o1 .� �'0E ='o= Li9OrnZm —°_m »m 0,oa�0oNE ao2�_w' c y cm m c U 2 Q) M J 7 ry N c@ N m N fq L@ O` L— i U@ y o E t 15 4. Q Z @ m Q y C p c C N m m c a N m y •c 1011 U m N [� o U lfi •( c ov cm 2202 0 � -O�o oQO oL$ � co'E Uw:=- -n @oNOan � OAL ai c yo w a<o m 0 N' Q. 0 F N mN�.d?'cc_ d d UUQ@ oc M CL .5 ,a0+. d N 0= Y« ;Z' U .'N-' c O •� .O O d X O j m 'c a ❑ ❑ ❑� c0 m L L U U N L U m U LL 7 d m@ c> •m.. N@ j ... J •� @ 01 f4 •.. _ +� O .� •; [1 O m 3 C Ll U N y1 p 8 f�l •p fi .L.+ @ c m fn CO L -- Y C O .0 O O co m "O @ O N c f 'p c U aN. V y fA m V Y m m m r •0 0 1p E d mU O O1 cw cum 01E.`- L V'Cd p m O c 3 0@ f E . eE 90 L U pQ .- m f6 °1 - m m 2` y`. -0 :O N m m 0 c@ c L C m m m p N c N U y E ati- N •� 7 U m f w E @ . O O N N O c 'j ✓T C C C p1 j O N N O p C d U i Ll N O` 7N w+ El pECj 0.0 L j Q N!i1Z aO. @am �' m-0(nJ @D"O cLa O.'8 U.- U @ OZ @ Y y @ N O.0 21 Y 0) O U Ou 'in W of A. O" d y' ;d w. O h a V 'm O U .cam .x b Q O. bi Q b in a'. h C � a Q Qm® �a Q u, ohm r � 4w '7 a O �wc�i3h «o V O cmj Q m .moo EUfibcoo°' $Pa3'QmmE c Q . Q fi m�aeia4i -°_pa m ym Q`o mm o. 4 y v-� m fi Q V 4 y 3 W mo m�vio ZID c o h vm oa- to t;5 u U C .� Q�E Q fi ;d w. O h a V 'm O U .cam .x b Q O. bi Q b in a'. h C � a Q Qm® �a Q u, ohm r � 4w '7 a O O y m C O, q m m C m CO 0 �� U m O E U 10 m rnmb m ya 3 aco`°mat= m � Q C � m •� � !0 p 2 N M C b W y 3 W w N"'mm =OpCm ,Q 0Q 0 • • 50. �wc�i3h «o V O cmj Q m .moo EUfibcoo°' $Pa3'QmmE c Q . Q fi m�aeia4i -°_pa m ym Q`o mm o. 4 y v-� m fi Q V 4 y 3 W mo m�vio ZID c o h vm oa- to t;5 i C 'Q,) 3 U C .� Q�E Q O y m C O, q m m C m CO 0 �� U m O E U 10 m rnmb m ya 3 aco`°mat= m � Q C � m •� � !0 p 2 N M C b W y 3 W w N"'mm =OpCm ,Q 0Q 0 • • 50. 0 o, a w Y L c o 0 le q o fi 0 E v � o c.' F a o C h tl '1 O Z v c IS cri O a O� ,�` ba N •° n '� C o� 4 V `'� C 'it o fi o E izz o lb j c0i t3) Yam'O�rn F °po �cght3 O N C h C m° Ct D y Sv N o d « z 13 0 o 0 3 v a s °��U C 5�) a o c o 0 le 0 0 C h tl '1 O Z v c IS cri O a O� ,�` ba N •° n '� C o� 4 V `'� C 'it o fi o E izz o lb j c0i t3) Yam'O�rn F °po �cght3 O N C h C m° Ct D y Sv N o d « z 13 0 o 0 3 v a s °��U C 5�) � _ � 0 5 `« / <� w} .zw.:a. :y \\AA � a] « /§v )k% ±)f \3 2 y( )tƒt $ ! } /eti la�ka%!§ & ^ s 2■e )a kk \\§%-r4 /))]» ;Et)$±(\ {\ \ ® /�2 - § (gem 4&E- kax�!k3 ■_22�~ §a , =lsa « %!%,��«a)a = ;«A��e! .a \ \ \(k |i)� \ \ {j()4 w �ela;�° w °,a : § �[,����66 t « {�)}f= . /7j)) § \ / } §k /f)k\ % � _ � 0 5 0 4 G -o A �L G1. . x m� m4 iov •L a c t3 � o 0 0 0 0 0 fi C S r�i U U U a y d N D (6 A. (~gyp U O poffp o y N d . .y � -[ C h U ec a U n ti t3 n m O O v C "� o O C o�i ^Yy O „C O d o N U 4, O ti E 1 d� F e U�� CO j iT y .tl A' N U� y iii Q ;� 'r +. p S Y N g m 3 N°° •s vim° C O 0 r 0 r • • 5(v d ad _ U Q[;rV.. c .. A; ° a ° a All U ° U �-- " o esV a a °�jj ow opEp as bo o o t3 .Y o f @ OO (a O U C bi ,b h w R :. a vody5 NZ ec y _Ug�aNico 3 m o@ c @ . _ 4 y �.� �L @ N U) .Q ® O U t3 �j ; ° e rno m� m 00 Z3 e � � •ate 5 � � � � � a � � m � @ m eoo a, �_ ebb a>O Q. 0 0. S a t �' „ w ro o w �_ p N �j V 4 tl C� o O Cn v y` N e m i h C on ��U�Fgc °d'�Fa vw' @ac�d3�E' -ci a ea c m g 3 `o .8 m 'Y •r .�' fi � � l y p��' y 5 .� om m°IS# 3aro�a 0 r • • 5(v 0 o: �A. a: d Y U 4 u:Pr c F O O DO, U y O b:O O r 4 4 0 0 o U Ll y u O O tl ym p N O� v o a v o ti b O v C 5 O O v y to tl_ ro �13 r 'Z3 p O st b C a 'C 4 ;Y "� y Ci O t3 •' C N '°'` �" � of •� � C3' 'r G -a'O `� � v y ti 'C � � � � pa � �' � 'C) @`y� ,: O oai 4 tl .�_ r.. tl M, Z U N tl O O h C y p ° b q tl C -�q o yct cs fto i, Q otli k y X Co �5e U +N U a ae p otli a N v o-0 y tl C p r OC y S O w p `y" ^yam d b y 0Q 'ti. Q V O Ct :. N V S .,.b V o C4 C OV tl '.' \lb �l�O Q tl Q p tl tl S C p y - f m tl y Q C .. � v 4 C4 c s m u o> l r. c.r Ts .., v� tl � o> "' .R at' i. S ,yt •-• 4 b a p �. b C Q y V tl fY ti0 d h cpi Cam' .p V � t •o v 'v of 51 E Q � 0 I 7 4 :� a ? 2\ §f? £»© \) ® ƒƒ« § k ® k� \\ / }�\ 77 \e ■ ®\\ «} i /§ »f�75 t \ {) �f2 \�zzcoz ( 27 \af}) -0 @ .v�)/ \: \ k ƒ� 2k§)j\k\ Izu ± / 41 )). -Z $; .«2rs 2a3$ §) ;2]! {\f3 = a) ° ) \\\ ] \k © °c \�# »3at ¥4 «r «e�M �*2 *i \ ¥ab @ . �_tq ®# °gam CD o s ca z E Q � 0 I n U G O' A L y CNM a o a a O ° es `cs a cc d `C 0 0 0 0 U �Lelk R' .5.^ d O •� m b o o ?. QC h o 40. e y N W " o o h ^• y �d y o ti o V ,�, . A O a � a ` 0 4, o W Go-� •s � y Y O � p •� � U C�ai •��' E3 1�'a7 a ,moo ,� W o d d 0. a 4 N o c•- a o V �. o a 0. •� � d o a �' W " v oai tF d C h a a W y U 4 a N? fi fi Q N p O y �q G d Gam N R d d E c Q "o aa�st IL a V' r 59 � $ � 0 p >. 7 //� � �) � \ \ \\ \ \ \?a ¥ <\� /§\\ » <u , k() . co )k .� \§k(2{% 7 Eico /> « »E 2 aw 28\\22 »4 %@22 2 CCoz ®�]c% . R�2[ \\\3 0 ±.. � \$§j \))A . \ \{% ' . ��% 72 \| /) . »��� co � $ � 0 p EXHIBIT 2 Draft Resolution - Project Approval Including Conditions of Approval 0 to t RESOLUTION NO. _ • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 2001 -004, USE PERMIT NO. 2001 -038, AND NEWPORT TRACT MAP NO. 2004 -003 (VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP. NO. 16594), AND MODIFICATION PERMIT NO 2001; 075 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD (PA2001 -210). The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach does hereby find, resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application was filed by ETCO Development, Inc. with respect to property located at 2300 Newport Boulevard (PA2001 -210) and legally described as Lot 1 of Parcel Map P.M.B. 68/48. The applicant seeks approval of a Site Plan Review, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, and Use Permit, and MedifiGation Permit for the construction of a mixed use development consisting of 27 residential units; 36,000 square feet of commercial floor area, and the reconstruction of bulk heads and boat slips on approximately 2.36 acres in the Cannery Village /McFadden Square area. Section 2. A public hearing was held on October 5, 2006 and continued to ,November 2. 2006 and November 16. 2006 in the City Hall Council Chambers, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meetings was given. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at the meeting. • Section 3. The Planning Commission finds as follows: Consistent with the General Plan 1. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the project site as Rerareational and Mixed Use Water 2 (MU -W2) which allows retail and office commercial uses and residential uses above the first floor provided that development does not exceed established floor area limits. The proposed project includes a mix of commercial and residential development that will replace the existing commercial development occupying the site. The project will provide a range of coastal - related and visitor - serving commercial uses and will provide residential uses above the first floor, as prescribed by the Land Use Element and zoning regulations that regulate development. Public access to the marina area is provided along the frontage of the project from Newport Boulevard. No significant natural landforms, including coastal bluffs and cliffs, are located on the site or in the immediate area. Public views of the marina area will be maintained through the public walk located along the frontage of the development and from Newport Boulevard via a view and access corridors through the development. The existing boat slips will be reconstructed and will continue to accommodate marine uses and a new 10 -foot wide public walkway will provide public access to the waterfront. The proposed project is designed to complement the nautical and historical maritime character of the area. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 2. The Coastal Land Use Plan designates the project site as Recreational and Marine Commercial and permits retail and commercial uses and residential uses above the first • floor. Further, the CLUP outlines a number of policies that require new developments to ra Resolution No. _ Page 2 of 19 provide lateral public access along the bayfront and access from public streets. The project • proposes to establish commercial uses with residential uses above, and to provide both vertical and lateral access to and along the waterfront. Due to these factors, the project is I deemed consistent with the the -Local Coastal Plan Land Use Plan. Consistent with the Cannery Village0cFadden Square Specific Plan The Cannery Village Specific Plan is intended to provide an active pedestrian- oriented, specialty retail area with a wide range of uses including retail, professional offices that provide service directly to the public, residential uses above the first floor, commercial and marine - related uses. The project provides commercial retail and office uses with residences above the first floor, and incorporates publicly accessible plaza and walkway along the waterfront to promote pedestrian- orientation. 2. The proposed architecture of the project incorporates building materials that reflect an image of permanence, stability and strength, and quality, including the use of ceramic file, stone, brick and brass consistent with the McFadden Square design theme. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan. Use Permit for Building Height 1. The project incorporates open terraces and balconies on upper floors, undulating wall planes along the Newport Boulevard that result in visual relief, and an open corridor has been provided within the center of the project. In addition, the roof lines have been varied in order to give visual relief that results in an appearance that is in scale with the overall design • of the project. These features increase open space that is visible by the public. The open aspects of the terraces and balconies and location of the portions of the buildings that exceed the basic 26 -foot height limit will provide a slightly greater view of the sky for someone on the street and result in building design that is balanced and in more in scale with the overall building bulk than could be constructed within the basic height limit. 2. The building height above 26 feet creates the ability to construct two levels of residential use above first floor commercial. The increase by 9 feet also allows more open space and less building arealbulk at the Plaza Level, thereby decreasing overall building bulk on the site and increasing the view corridor through the project fonn the public streets. The increase height allows greater flexibility in design, which is exhibited in the project, and is, architecturally superior to that achievable within the 26 -foot height limit. 3. Consistent with the eclectic nature of McFadden Square, there is a variety of building heights in the area. Surrounding buildings are generally one and two story at or near the 26- foot height limit. Some projects include adjacent restaurants, and other projects in the vicinity that exceed the 26 -foot height limit. A variety of roof planes, vertical wall setbacks and balcony areas are incorporated into the design of the buildings as well as interior open space, plaza and pedestrian corridors within the interior of the project, which helps lessen the bulk of the buildings as perceived from Newport Boulevard and the Arcade. As a result of the presence of other buildings of comparable height in the area and the location, design and bulk of features of the project that exceed 26 feet, and the setback of upper floors on the buildings fronting Newport Boulevard, the increased height to accommodate these specific features is not an abrupt change in scale. Restricting the buildings to 26 feet in height would not improve views of the bay through the property. In addition, the project has :IN Resolution No. _ Page 3 of 19 been designed to be consistent with the design theme, building materials and design • features included in the Specific Plan #6. 4. The commercial floor area ratio of the .project is 0.35, which is below the maximum of 0.50 FAR and the maximum residential floor area ratio of 0.75 has not been exceeded. In addition, the proposed number of dwelling units is 27, which is less than the permitted maximum of 43 dwelling units; therefore the project does not achieve any additional floor area due to the additional height. Site Plan Review 1. The site is flat, developed with older buildings and paved with concrete and asphalt with limited landscaping. There are no unique natural landforms or coastal bluffs or other environmental resources. No. known archaeological and paleontological resources are known to exist and are unlikely to exist due to the disturbed nature of the site. The site will be graded to maintain the top of bulkhead elevation at 9 feet above mean low water (8.67 NAVD 88). This results in a grade level that approximates the current grade level and does not constitute significant alteration of the site as the grade will be similar to abutting properties. The development of the lots provides a 10 -foot bulkhead setback, within which a 10 -foot easement will be dedicated for public access to the waterfront, which does not exist today. 2. The proposed eleven buildings are consistent with the development standards of the Cannery Village /McFadden Square Specific Plan with the exception of building height. Their height and bulk is comparable to other structures located in the vicinity. 3. The development proposes to increase and enhance the view from Newport Boulevard through • the ce nter of the property by providing a plaza area in front of and on either side of the slipway that is proposed to be maintained. No public parks are in the vicinity where views would be impacted. The project provides a 10 -foot public access easement within the 10 -foot bulkhead setback along the channel and access will be provided from Newport Boulevard via the Plaza area and from Arcade122ntl Street via a Paseo. From these easements and access /view corridors, that presently do not exist, public views will be enhanced. the marine environment of the site. 4-Z,The project site is not subject to any increased potential of geologic hazard due to its location over that of other properties in the area. All applicable City and State building codes and seismic design recommendations contained within the Preliminary Geotechnical investigation Will be applied through the issuance of a building permit, which will minimize possible risks of liquefaction damage during an earthquake. 5-.6.A noise analysis was completed for the project and it indicates that noise levels will be maintained at levels consistent with the Noise Element of the General Plan and the Community Noise Ordinance through appropriate noise mitigation measures that have been included in the Environmental Impact Report, and incorporated as conditions of approval, therefore, it is not anticipated that the project will be subject to excessive noise. The residential portions of the project will need to be sound insulated sufficiently to ensure compliance with interior and . exterior noise standards of the Community Noise Ordinance. U4 • • r�L Resolution No. _ Page 4 of 19 7. The Planning, Public Works and.Building Departments have reviewed the site plan for proper pedestrian and vehicle function, and a traffic study has been completed in conjunction with the preparation of the Environmental Impact Report. The Public Works Department is satisfied with access and circulation on Newport Boulevard and area intersections are not expected to be impacted. Public access to the water front along the Rhine Channel is provided in accordance with the Zoning Code. A 10 -foot wide horizontal easement that is parallel to the water front will be dedicated to the public and will be improved with a walkway by the applicant. The easement and walkway will be directly accessible by the public from Newport Boulevard and Arcade/22od Street via two access easements. The project has been conditioned to require the dedication and recordation of vertical access easements from Newport Boulevard and Arcade /22ntl Street. 7-.10. The air conditioning units will be located on the roofs of the buildings behind roof parapets and will not be visible from the ground, Trash storage areas will be accommodated within the subterranean parking level and within enclosed trash areas on the deck level, and will only be visible for trash - pickup. There are no known archaeological resources on the project site and the historic significance )) of the site and structures on the site has been evaluated and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the prolect apiaroval to mitigate the loss of older buildin s on the site and to dn-4 otherwise document the vast use of the site as a shipyard. Ja r` el"L, &.12. There are no residences adjacent to or in close proximity to the project Are f9v and nFe site. Due to the small size of the commercial uses and the fact that that they are within a mixed use project, land use conflicts or other negative impacts to nearby residences are not anticipated. om - am I Resolution No. _ Page 5 of 19 Ww Tract Map 1. The subdivision is consistent with the General Plan and the Cannery Village /McFadden Specific Plan. Additionally, the:;;- proposed subdivision is consistent with the Newport Beach Subdivision Code and Subdivision Map Act and conditions of approval have been included to ensure compliance. 2. The site to be subdivided is flat and developed with urban uses. No other physical constraints to construction are known. The proposed subdivision will result in a single lot subdivision for • condominium purposes in order to sell individual residential units. Applicable planning policies and codes permit mixed use development where one residential unit is permitted above a commercial space with a maximum number of dwelling units not exceeding one dwelling unit for every 2,375 square feet of net lot area. That standard results in a maximum of 43 dwelling units permitted, and the project proposes 27 dwelling units. Therefore, the site is suitable for the type and density of development proposed. . 3. An Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for the project. It concludes that the environmental impacts of the project can be mitigated to a less than significant level with the exception of historical resources, in which case mitigation measures have been included and a Statement of Overriding Considerations prepared in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. The site is developed in a highly urbanized area and no significant natural resources exist in the area of the project site except for Newport Bay. The project includes a system of filtering storm runoff on site before it is discharged into the storm water system. The project also includes improvements to the local stone water system where a fossil type filter will be installed to treat the first or low flow discharge prior to discharge to Newport Bay. In addition, the loss of marine habitat area resulting from the closure of an existing slipway will be mitigated through the expansion and enhancement of the second slipway. These features will mitigate and improve water quality thereby avoiding impacts to fish or wildlife. 4. The project consists of a mixed use commercial and residential that includes 27 condominium dwelling units permitted by local ordinances and the General Plan. No evidence is known to exist that would indicate that the proposed subdivision pattern would generate any serious public health problems. • tv It) Resolution No. _ Page 6 of 19 • 5. An existing view easement through the approximate center of the project site will be maintained and enlarged. Public utility easements for utility connections that serve the project site are present and will be modified, if necessary, to serve the new project. The project will result in the creation of public access easements through the property and along the waterfront that do not currently exist. Therefore the proposed subdivision will not adversely impact public easements. Public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 19 of the Municipal Code and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act and public improvements may be required of a developer per Section 20.91.040 of the Municipal Code. 6. The project site does not include any lands subject to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act). 7. The project is consistent with the Cannery Village/McFadden Square Speck Plan and the provisions of the Recreational and Marine Commercial (RMC) District regulations of the Specific Plan. 8. The design of the proposed project provides each lot with direct southern exposure to the maximum extent feasible, therefore, solar access and passive energy conservation goals are met. 9. The proposed subdivision facilitates the creation of 27 new residential units that likely would hot ; be developed due to current housing trends although they could be developed under existing x zoning provisions without the subdivision. These 27 new units will assist the city in meeting its housing needs. Public services are available to serve the proposed development of the site and the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project indicates that the project's • potential environmental impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significance with the exception of historical resources, in which case mitigation measures have been incorporated and a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been included. 10. Waste discharge into the existing sewer will be consistent with retail commercial, office and residential use due to the design and limitations of the use property established by existing zoning regulations. It is not anticipated that waste discharge into the sewer from these uses would violate any Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements or Orange County Sanitation District standards. 11. The proposed project is entirely within the coastal zone and the site is presently developed or occupied with both coastal- related and non - coastal related uses, coastal- dependent uses or water- oriented recreational uses. Although the City of Newport Beach does not have a certified Local Coastal Program, the project is consistent with the city's certified Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. Coastal access, both visually and physically, is improved by the project through proposed public walkway /access easements and by an increase in the view corridor through the property. The Recreation policies of the Coastal Act require that sites suitable for water - oriented recreational activities that cannot be supplied inland must be protected. These policies prioritize water- oriented recreational activities over other land uses and encourage aquaculture and water - oriented recreational support facilities. The portion of the project site proposed to be subdivided is not suitable for water - oriented recreational activities due to its size and location, however, the existing marina is being upgraded and a slipway is being enlarged and enhanced to allow for increased boating activity. Further, the project preserves and enhances the primary marine dependent use by reconstructing the marina consistent with the California Department of Boating and Waterways standards. 0 Resolution No. _ Page 7 of 19 Section 4. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission hereby • approves Site Plan Review No. 2001 - 001.4, Use Permit No. 2001 - 022 -38, and Newport Tract Map No. 20044 -0023 estin Tentative Tract Map. No. 162925 , Geastal Reside , subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A" attached. Section 5. This action shall become final and effective fourteen (14) days after the adoption of this Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk or this action is call for review by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 20, Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. J PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS le -e -DAY OF 9GT08€RNOVEMBER, 2006. • M3 Jeffrey Cole, Chairman Robert Hawkins, Secretary AYES: NOES: Gl RFAM 0 N Resolution No. _ Page 8 of 19 Exhibit' A" • Conditions of Approval The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plans dated September 11, 2006, except as modified below. 2. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval. 3. Project approvals, with the exception of the Vesting Tentative Tract Map, shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the effective date of approval as specified in Section 20.91.050A of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Reasonable extensions may be granted by the Planning Director in accordance with applicable regulations. 4. The applicant shall obtain a Coastal Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit for the project. 5. In lieu of the requirement for 4-020% of the proposed dwelling units to be affordable as defined by the City's Housing Element, a fee of $25,000 per unit built for a total of $675,000 shall be paid to the City to satisfy the project's affordable housing requirement.:.., 6. The developer shall pay a parkland dedication in -lieu fee pursuant to Chapter19.92 of the Municipal Code prior to the issuance of a building permit for each unit or recordation of the final tract map. If the project is recorded in phases, the fee attributable to each phase is due • prior to the recordation of each phase. 7. Exterior decks, exterior balconies, exterior terraces, setback areas, breezeways for vehicular parking areas, open vehicular parking areas or exterior walkways shall not be covered or enclosed without the prior approval of the Building and Fire Departments and the Planning Commission. 8. The proposed project shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, any local amendments to the UBC, and State Disabled Access requirements, unless otherwise approved by the Building Department. 9. All trash receptacles shall be stored within approved enclosed spaces or shall otherwise be screened from public view as determined by the Planning Director. 10. The commercial spaces within the project shall not be converted or used for residential purposes. Residential spaces shall be used for residential purposes and shall not be converted or used for exclusive commercial purposes. Commercial activity within the residential portions of all buildings shall comply with Section 20.60.100 (Home Occupations in Residential Districts). 11. The applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect or licensed architect for on -site and adjacent off -site planting areas. These plans shall incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of a building permit. All planting areas shall be provided with a. permanent underground automatic sprinkler • irrigation system of a design suitable for the type and arrangement of the plant materials ON Resolution No. _ Page 9 of 19 selected. Planting areas adjacent to vehicular activity shall be protected by a continuous concrete curb or similar permanent barrier. Landscaping shall be located so as not to impede vehicular sight distance to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer. 12. All landscape materials and landscaped areas shall be maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained. in a healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance. 13. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall dedicate a 10 -foot wide public access easement along the entire water frontage of the property to the City of Newport Beach. The access easement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Newport Beach City Attorney and Coastal Commission prior to recordation. The easement shall be improved with a hard paved surface and railings as approved by the Public Works Department. In addition, minimum, 6 -foot wide lateral easements shall be provided within the plaza area from Newport Boulevard and the paseo area from the Arcade to connect to the 10 -foot waterfront easement: The easements shall be directly accessible by the public from Newport Boulevard and not be gated, enclosed or otherwise blocked by present or future property owners or occupants of the property. Present or future property owners or occupants shall not place or store any objects including but not limited to boats, tables, chairs, umbrellas and shade canopies within the easement area. 'All of the foregoing easements shall be delineated on the final parcel map prior to recordation of said map and on the building plans prior to issuance of building permits. If the applicant proposes to pull building permits prior to the recordation of the easements, a separated instrument shall be • prepared and recorded to the approval of the Planning Director and the City Attorney prior to issuance of the building permits. 14. The project must comply with the interior and exterior noise standards for residential uses of the Noise OrdinanA The interior noise standard is 45dBA between the hours of 7:OOAM and 10:OOPM ano.aWdBA between the hours of 10:OOPM and 7:OOAM. The exterior noise level standard is!.5dBA between the hours of 7:OOAM and 10:OOPM and 50dBA between the hours of 10:OOPM and 7:OOAM. An acoustic study shall be performed by a qualified professional that demonstrates compliance with these standards of the Noise Ordinance. This acoustic study shall be performed and submitted to the City Planning Department prior to occupancy of the project. If the exterior noise levels exceed applicable standards, additional mitigation shall be required which may include the installation of additional sound attenuation devices as recommended by the acoustic study and subject to the approval of the Planning Director. 15. Each residential unit and each commercial building shall be separately served with an individual water service and sewer lateral connection to the public water and sewer systems unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department and the Building Department. 16. All improvements within the public right of way shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works Department. 17. Disruption caused by construction work along roadways and by movement of construction vehicles shall be minimized by proper use of traffic control equipment and flagmen. Traffic . control and transportation of equipment and materials shall be conducted in accordance with I Resolution No. _ Page 10 of 19 • state and local requirements. Large construction vehicles shall not be permitted to travel narrow streets and alleys as determined by the Public Works Department. 18. Arrangements shall be made with the Public Works Department in order to guarantee satisfactory completion of the public improvements, if it is desired to obtain a building permit prior to completion of the public improvements. 19. A hydrology and hydraulic study shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department, along with a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain facilities for the on -site improvements and public improvements prior to recording of the tract map. Any modifications or extensions to the existing storm drain, water and sewer systems shown to be required by the study shall be the responsibility of the developer. 20. The applicant shall provide wheel stops or other approved protective barrier methods as necessary within the parking areas. The parking spaces shall be marked with approved traffic markers subject to the approval of the Public Works Department or painted white lines not less than 4 inches wide. 21. Fair Share traffic mitigation fees shall be paid to the City prior to. the issuance of any building or grading permit for new construction on the project site. 22. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from view of adjacent properties and adjacent public streets within the limits authorized by this permit, and shall be sound attenuated in accordance with Chapter 10.26 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, Community Noise Control. • 23. Overhead utilities serving the site to be subdivided shall be undergrounded to the nearest appropriate pole in accordance with Section 19.24.140 of the Municipal Code unless it is determined by the City Engineer that such undergrounding is physically infeasible. 24. The final tract map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD88). Prior to recordation of the final map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the map shall submit to the County Surveyor and to the City of Newport Beach a digital - graphic file of said map in a manner described in Section 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. That prior to recordation of the final map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the map shall tie the boundary of the map into the Horizontal Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Section s 7 -9 -330 and 7 -9 -337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. The map to be submitted to the City shall comply with the City's CADD Standards — scanned images will not be accepted. Monuments (one inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set on each lot comer unless otherwise approved by the Subdivision Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project. 25. Easements for public emergency and security ingress /egress, weekly refuse service, and public utility purposes shall be dedicated to the City and shall be made part of the tract map. 26. Construction surety in a form acceptable to the City, guaranteeing the completion of the various required public improvements, shall be submitted to the Public Works Department • prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map. J� Resolution No. _ Page 11 of 19 27. -The existing curb drain located under the Newport Boulevard sidewalk near the northerly • property line that discharges onto Newport Boulevard shall be removed and reconstructed with a minimum 5 -foot section of the existing concrete curb and gutter at said location. 28. The entire length of the existing Newport Boulevard concrete sidewalk fronting the development shall be reconstructed. The existing curb access ramp that serves the existing Newport Boulevard crosswalk shall be reconstructed to comply with current ADA requirements. Provide full width cold mill and reconstruct the top 2 -inch of the existing Arcade roadway pavement fronting the development. 29. The applicant shall reimburse the Public Works Department for the cost of curb repainting /stencil along Newport Boulevard in the vicinity of the project. 30. The applicant shall adjust the existing and /or instjall new water valve boxes and sanitary sewer manhole frames and covers within the existing Newport Boulevard sidewalk fronting the development. 31. The applicant shall replace all existing street light pull boxes within the Newport Boulevard sidewalk fronting the development with Eisel Enterprises No. 3-1/2F pull boxes and covers per City Standard Plan No. STD- 204-L. Any damage done to the existing electrical wiring will require full length wiring replacement between. pull boxes. No splices between pull boxes shall be allowed. 32. Construction of waterway improvements shall be to the approval of the Public Works Department, including the requirement for installation of water agitator(s) if deemed necessary by the Department. Construction of the bulkhead and gangways shall be . • performed only during periods of low tide. Plastic sheeting shall be placed below the work location to collect the fallen construction debris. The collected debris shall be removed and disposed of at the end of each workday. 33. Where deemed applicable by the Public Works Department, ADA compliant curb access ramps shall be constructed along the length of the on- site.pedestrian path. 34. All storm drain and sanitary sewer mains shall be installed with MacWrap to minimize the potential of seawater contamination from potential main leakage. 35. Garages and carports shall have a minimum clear interior width of 9 ft. -3 inches and depth of 18 ft.-6 inches, and all garage doors shall be a minimum of 8 feet wide. Columns located 36. The on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to further review by the Traffic Engineer. 37. All work within the public right of way roust shall be completed under an encroachment permit issued by the Public Works Department. 38. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be shown of standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer. All non - standard improvements shall be shown on standard improvement plans prepared by a licensed civil • engineer and approved by the City Engineer and the City Council. 1�- Resolution No. _ Page 12 of 19 • 39. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code or other applicable section or chapter, street trees shall be required and shall be subject to the review and approval of the General Services and Public Works Departments. 40. An encroachment agreement is required for all non - standard improvements within the public right -of -way. Prior to the issuance of an encroachment permit for the construction of non- standard improvements, an association or maintenance assessment district shall be formed that will be responsible for the maintenance of the non - standard improvements. This association or assessment district must be formed and approved by the City prior to recordation of the tract map or issuance of any Grading or Building Permits unless otherwise approved by the Public Works Department. 41. A site plan shall be provided prior to recordation of any tract map or issuance of a building permit for new construction showing the location of all proposed street lights, fire hydrants, trees, landscape, vents and other obstructions. 42. The applicant shall be responsible for the payment of all applicable City plan check and inspection fees. 43. Exterior on -site lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No direct rays or glare are permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or create a public nuisance. "Walpak° type fixtures are not permitted. Parking area lighting shall have zero cut- off fixtures. 44. All access drives into the parking area shall be designed with ramp widths and gradients to the requirements and approval of the City Fire Department, shall be capable of supporting • I fire apparatus with a total weight of 72,000 pounds, and shall be marked as fire lanes. 45. Fire. hydrants shall be spaced at a maximum of 300 apart to the approval of the Fire Department. . 46. All elevators shall be gumey accommodating in accordance with Chapter 30 of the California Building Code, 2001 Edition or as otherwise approved by the Fire Department. 47. Automatic fire sprinkler system (NFPA13) shall be required for all buildings including the underground parking area. 48. Class I Standpipes shall be provided in the underground parking area, on the fire access road on the deck, and in stairwells of Buildings B and C. 49. A fire alarm system shall be provided to the approval of the Fire Department, including provisions for occupant alerting in the retail and office suites. Residential units shall be provided with smoke detectors located in accordance with the California Building Code and powered through the fire alarm control panel. The residential system shall be two phases: first smoke detector activated shall alarm in the unit only; second smoke detector or activation of waterflow switch shall put all buildings into alarm. • 50. The docks shall be provided with a Class III Standpipe System in accordance with City of Newport Beach guideline "Fire Protection for Marinas, Wharves and Piers.' J3 Resolution No. _ Page 13 of 19 51. Prior to the issuance of a Public Works Encroachment Permit or the first grading permit, • whichever occurs first, the applicant shall prepare to the approval of the City Engineer a Construction Traffic Management and Control Plan that shall include phasing details, construction timing /hours, all construction- related traffic including timing, haul routes, signage, detours, and location(s) that debris will be trucked to for disposal. The plan shall include provisions for a traffic staging area to be located off -site and in a location outside of Balboa Peninsula; shall provide that all construction related vehicles including the vehicles used by workers to commute to the site, be parked either on site or in an off -site staging area; and shall include provisions for construction- related activities and traffic during summer months (beginning the Friday preceding Memorial day and ending on Labor Day) be restricted in a manner so as not to impact normal vehicle and pedestrian traffic along a Newport Boulevard, Seashore Drive and Balboa Boulevard between 32nd Street and "A" Street. In addition. the Plan shall include those additional component parts and revisions as recommended by City Traffic Engineer in his November 9. 2006 memo. 52. All noise generating construction activities shall be limited to the hours of between 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. weekdays and between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction activities are prohibited on Sundays and Federal holidays. The provisions of Municipal Code Section 10.28.040, Construction Activity — Noise, shall be met at all times. 53. Mitigation Measures Aesthetics: a. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a landscape plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the project for review and approval by the Planning Director. Said landscape plan shall enhance the property and provide visual softening of the proposed three -story buildings and site lighting. The landscaping shall be installed in recognition of vehicular and pedestrian circulation (sight distance considerations, etc.) and safety. b. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a site lighting plan shall be prepared and submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. Building and parking lot lighting shall be designed and installed so that all direct lighting rays are confined to the site and adjacent properties and roadways are protected from glare. 54. Mitigation Measures —Air Quality: a. During construction activities, the applicant shall ensure that the following measures are complied with to reduce short-term (construction) air quality impacts associated with the project: a) controlling fugitive dust by regular watering, or other dust palliative measures to meet South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 403. (Fugitive Dust); b) maintaining equipment engines in proper tune; and c) phasing the scheduling construction activities to minimize project- related emissions. b. During demolition and -excavation, daily total haul trucks shall travel no more than a cumulative 2,600 miles hauling materials from the project site to the dumping site and back again. Prior to commencement of demolition and grading, the project applicant shall submit to the City calculations showing the proposed travel route for haul trucks, the distance traveled, and how many daily truck trips that can be accommodated while keeping the cumulative miles traveled to below 2,400 miles each day. The daily truck trips shall not exceed this amount during demolition and excavation. • 1l Resolution No. _ Page 14 of 19 • c. During construction activities, the applicant shall ensure that the project will comply with SCAQMD Rule 402 (Nuisance), to reduce odors from construction activities. 55. Mitigation Measures — Biological Resources: a. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a survey will be conducted for the presence of eelgrass and Caulerpa. The biological assessments conducted by CRM and MBC indicate that neither species is present in the project locations, but it is required that nor more than 90 days nor less than 30 days prior to initiation of actual construction that both eelgrass and Caulerpa surveys be conducted in September or October, in which case the results are relevant until the following growth period beginning in March. In no case, will an eelgrass or Caulerpa survey be conducted from November to February (non- growth period) be acceptable. b. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Use and Occupancy, the project applicant shall implement the recommended mitigation pertaining to the replacement and restoration Pickleweed and the mudflat area presented in the mudflat area presented in the biological resources report prepared by MBC Applied Environmental Sciences. 56. Mitigation Measures — Cultural Resources: a. During construction activities, if archaeological and /or paleontological resources are r' encountered, the contractor shall be responsible for immediate notification and securing of the site area immediately. A qualified archaeologist and/or paleontologist approved by the City of Newport Beach Planning Director shall be retained to establish procedures • for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit sampling, identification, and evaluation of cultural resource finds. If major archaeological and/or paleontological resources are discovered which require long -term halting or redirecting of grading, a report shall be prepared identifying such findings to the City and to the County of Orange. Discovered cultural resources shall be offered to the County of Orange or its designee on a first refusal basis. b. The historical study prepared by LSA dated October 2005 recommends the mitigation to reduce the significant impacts to historical resources through the following methods: Documentation of the South Coast Boatyard shall be provided by the developer prior to issuance of demolition permits by the City of Newport Beach. Prior to issuance of demolition permits, the Planning Director shall be provided an historic narrative, photographs, and architectural drawings of all on -site buildings in accordance with Historic American Building Survey (HABS) Level 1 documentation requirements. The Planning Director shall ensure that the HABS documentation is deposited with the Newport Beach Historical Society, the City of Newport Beach Public Library, the Newport Harbor Nautical Museum, and the SCCIC located at California State University, Fullerton, prior to the issuance of demolition permits. ii. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Planning Director shall review project building plans and permits to ensure incorporation of design features referencing and memorializing the character - defining features of the South Coast Boatyard into design of the project, including, but not limited to, incorporation of a commemorative • plaque depicting the buildings and their context to the historical importance of the 1,5 Resolution No. _ Page 15 of 19 structures on site. Such plaque shall be oriented to a public right -of -way, so as to be • visible and accessible to the public form such right -of -way. iii. If previously undocumented cultural resources are found during construction activities within the current project area, a qualified professional archaeologist shall assess the nature and significance of the find in order to recommend appropriate mitigation measures, halting construction activity in the vicinity of the find, if necessary. 57. Mitigation Measures– Geology and Soils: a. The project shall implement the recommendations presented in the geotechnical reports prepared by Petra presented in Appendix D, Volume I1.of the EIR. b. Prior to the commencement of construction, design criteria and project specifications that include ground improvement techniques such as stone columns, use of deep foundations which penetrate below the liquefiable zone, pressure grouting, or appropriate combinations of these measures shall be incorporated into the plans for the project. c. . Develop design, criteria and project specifications that recognize groundwater may be encountered at.,: the proposed depth of the partialy—subterranean parking area.,,_. Construction of mat foundations or structural slabs may be required. Design of utility lines% and surface drainage in the subterranean parking should also consider the presence of a -;+ shallow groundwater table. d. Use appropriate type of cement and concrete specification according to Table 19=A -4 of the • Uniform Building Code to mitigate contact with corrosive soils and sea water that may come in contact with footings in the area. 59. Mitigation Measures– Hazards and Hazardous Materials: a. If during grading and/or construction activities a potential contaminated area is encountered, construction shall cease in the vicinity of the contaminated area. An assessment shall be performed by a qualified hazardous materials specialist to determine the extent and type of contamination. If the site investigation reveals that contamination with pollutant concentrations in excess of Action Levels, as defined by the California Department of Health Services and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, the site shall be remediated during the project construction phase in compliance with the State of California Hazardous Substances Control Law (Health and Safety Code Division 20, Chapter 6.5) standards established the California Department of Health Services, Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and the requirements of California Administrative Code, Title 30, Chapter 22 and applicable Federal regulations. b. The proper use and maintenance of construction equipment, along with the use of general common sense, greatly reduces the potential for contamination. All grading and building plans will include the following construction related measures and that the measure shall be followed by the construction contractor and crew: The storage of hazardous materials, chemicals, fuels, and oils and fueling of construction equipment shall be a minimum of 45 meters (150 feet) from any drainage, water supply, or other water feature. • J& Resolution No. _ Page 16 of 19 • ii. Hazardous materials stored onsite shall be stored in a neat, orderly manner in the appropriate containers and, if possible, under a roof or other enclosure. • • iii. Whenever possible, all of a product shall be used up before disposal of its container. iv. If surplus product must be disposed of, the manufactures or the local and state recommended methods for disposal shall be followed. v. Spills shall be contained and cleaned up immediately after discovery. Manufacturer's methods for spill cleanup of a material shall be followed as described on the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for each product. c. Prior to the issuance of any certificate of use and occupancy permit(s), the project applicant shall submit written evidence from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region that no further action is needed and all remediation is completed and occupancy can proceed. 60. Mitigation Measures — Hydrology and Water Quality: a. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit, the applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution prevention Plan ( SWPPP) and provide evidence that a NPDES Notice of Intent (NOI) has been filed with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. Such evidence shall consist of a copy of the NOI stamped by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SWPPP shall be developed to reduce the risk of the transport of sediment and pollutant from the site. The SWPPP shall implement measures to minimize risks from material delivery and storage, spill prevention and control, vehicle and equipment fueling and maintenance, material use, structure construction and painting, paving operations, solid waste management, and hazardous waste management. b. During construction and following completion of development, the recommendations presented in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared by SP Consulting Group dated February 20, 2006 shall be implemented and complied with to ensure that all potential project impacts to water quality will be reduced to a less than significant level and all applicable local and state water quality requirements complied with by the project applicant. c. During construction activities the following shall be implemented 1.1 Resolution No. _ Page 17 of 19 During construction and maintenance activities, equipment shall be in proper working • condition and inspected for leaks and drips on a daily basis. The project contractor or representative thereof shall develop and implement a spill prevention and remediation plan and workers shall be instructed as to its requirements. Construction supervisors and workers and maintenance personnel shall be instructed to (1) be alert for indications of equipment - related contamination such as stains and odors, and (2) respond immediately with appropriate actions as detailed in the spill prevention and remediation plan if indications of equipment - related contamination are noted. ii. During construction and maintenance activities, fuels, solvents, and lubricants shall be stored in a bermed area so that potential spills and/or leaks shall be contained. Soil contamination resulting from spills and /or leaks shall be remediated as required by Federal and /or state law. Storage areas shall be constructed so that containers shall not be subjected to damage by construction and maintenance equipment. iii. Stockpiles of bulk granular building materials shall be covered and secured. iv. Any areas of exposed soil, such as dirt stockpiles, dirt berms, and temporary dirt roads, shall be stabilized with controlled amounts of sprinkled water. v: At the close of each working day, any materials tracked? 'onto the street or laying unoontained in the construction areas shall be swept Up, and any trash accumulated in construction areas shall be disposed. vi. Concrete, asphalt, and masonry wastes shall be contained and these wastes shall be disposed away from project construction sites. • vii. Spill kits containing absorbent materials will be kept as the construction site. viii. Fuels and other hazardous materials will be stored away from project drainage. d. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape plan, which includes a maintenance program to control the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and an irrigation system designed to minimize surface runoff and over watering. This plan shall be reviewed by the City of Newport Beach Planning Department. The landscaping shall be installed and maintained in conformance with the approved plan and maintenance program. 61. Mitigation Measure — Noise: Prior to the issuance of any building permits, detailed engineering construction plans will be submitted to the City for review and approval. The engineering plans shall provide details such as roof and wall elements; room dimensions, window and door dimensions, attic configuration, ventilation systems and building insulation. Said plans shall demonstrate and ensure that the City's noise standards are met for proposed n ssedmixed -use project (residential and commercial). 62. Mitigation Measures — Public Services: CI ■Y • • Resolution No. _ Page 18 of 19 a. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, project construction plans shall be submitted to the City Fire Chief for review to verify that all fire .protection is designed in compliance with the requirements of the City of Newport Beach Fire and Marine Department. b. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the project applicant shall pay any applicable development school impact fees as required by State law. c. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the project applicant shall pay any applicable park impact fees as required by City of Newport Beach and State law. 63. Mitigation Measures — Public Utilities and Service Systems: a. Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the project applicant shall coordinate with utility and service organizations regarding any construction activities to ensure existing facilities are protected and any necessary expansion or relocation of facilities are planned and scheduled in consultation with the appropriate public agencies. b. Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the project applicant shall coordinate with utility and service organizations regarding any construction.activities to ensure existing facilities are protected and any necessary expansion or relocation of facilities are planned and scheduled in consultation with the appropriate public agencies. pLA/ cv is provided to each prospective purchaser of one of the 27 residential units on the site advising of adversely affect the prospective owner's enjoyment of the property. The disclosure statement shall be included. and recorded with the Conditions Covenants and Restrictions (CC &R's) at the County Recorder's Office and each purchaser shall be required to acknowledge receipt of the disclosure statement, in writing, prior to executing a lease and the written acknowledgement shall be recorded' together with the lease agreement with the County Recorder. 65. Left turns into the project site at the north driveway along Newport Boulevard shall be issues for providing left -turn access to the site and improvement plans shall be prepared for parking and any proposed night time or week end use of the parking structure for other off -site -JA Resolution No. _ Page 19 of 19 and/or preparation of a parkins allocation plan and/or shared parking plan as determined. necessary by the Planning director. 68. The proposed loading zone located adjacent to the northerly property boundary shall be 71. The stairway and landing area located on the westerly side of Building C shall be setback so as to be out of The Arcade right -of -wax �yY 65�i.� 0 u is E n U EXHIBIT 3 Construction Traffic Management Plan and City Traffic Engineer's Evaluation of CMPIPMP 0 0 'i�t etCO HOMES LOS ANGELES - ORANGE COUNTY - INLAND EMPIRE October 17, 2006 Mr. William Cunningham Planning Department City of Newport Beach Newport Beach, CA 92660 Re: Construction Traffic and Parking Management Plan for the construction of Newport Bay Manna Dear Mr. Cunningham, Based upon city discussion and at the request of the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission, we have prepared this brief summary of our plan to manage construction traffic and parking during the construction of our project. We have prepared this guideline with the general public in mind as well as our immediate • neighbors and we welcome any recommendations you may have in order to better address these issues Construction Traffic Management Plan: Traffic Measures 1. All construction activity at the project site, including the hauling of materials both to and from the site, will be limited to those hours as required by and in accordance with the City of Newport Beach. 2. The most realistic and practical hauling route for this project is Newport Blvd. to the 55 Freeway. When feasible, materials being delivered to or removed from the project site during the construction and/or demolition period will be scheduled during those hours which cause the least inconvenience to the general public. According to the City's Traffic Engineering Department, the project will be required to obtain a Haul Route Permit prior to commencing any construction activities. The specific haul route(s) will be identified prior to the issuance of permits as required by the City. 3. During the excavation and hauling stage, a truck staging area will be established (to the extent that all trucks cannot be staged on site). Trucks will not be permitted to stage along Newport Blvd. (in the Newport • Peninsula area) during peak summer months. Beverly Hills 9952 S. Santa Monica Blvd. Ste Z60 Beverly Hills, CA 9021 z ph 310.691.5500 fax 319-282 5193 Newport Beach 2222 Newport Blvd, 2nd Floor Newport. California 9z663 ph 949.200.7220 fax 949.200.7240 C a U 4. All material deliveries and storage of these materials will occur on -site. 5. The City of Newport Beach will be notified prior to beginning any haul period. If hauling is suspended, the City will be notified when hauling will resume. 6. All construction related traffic will enter and exit the site using the existing driveways along Newport Blvd. or existing driveway off of Arcade St. If needed, flagmen will be provided. All truck traffic . will be coordinated at times which will cause the least inconvenience to the general public. 7. All trucks and construction - related vehicles exiting the project site should yield at all times to public traffic. 8. Flagmen will be used to guide and control traffic in an effort to minimize inconvenience to the public and enhance vehicle and pedestrian safety. When appropriate, flagmen will be used when trucks entering or leaving the project site may briefly impede the flow of traffic along Newport Blvd. • 9. The contractor will prepare a truck haul route plan, which would include the approximate number of truck trips (also.described under the mitigation measure(s) in the EIR), the hours during which transport activities are expected to occur and measures to keep all haul routes clean and free of debris /gravel/dirt attributable to the hauling operation. Such plan shall be approved by the Public Works Department of the City of Newport Beach. 10. The staging of all trucks and construction- related vehicles will occur on site, except as staged off the Balboa Peninsula and brought on through radio /cell phone dispatch.. 11. As a pedestrian safety precaution, the contractor will install a fence along the project site perimeter before excavation begins. 12. The contractor will assign a designated employee to control the logistics of all deliveries. No unscheduled deliveries will be accepted and all materials requiring assembly will be accommodated on -site. • �3 We believe that all construction- related parking, including construction personnel parking could be accommodated on -site during each construction phase until we have excavated the entire site. Once the site is fully excavated and prior to pouring concrete, all construction personnel will be parked at locations such as the Lido Marina Village (LMV) Parking Structure (during off peak months) or at alternate sites in Costa Mesa (during summer peak months) as approved by the Department of Public Works. During the implementation of the off -site parking, the contractor shall use a shuttle service to and from the project site. Upon completion of the new parking structure, all construction personnel will park inside the parking structure. It should also be noted that all large trucks will park on the upper deck of the parking structure (once complete). If I can be of any assistance, please don't hesitate to. contact me for any further clarifications. Sincerely, Afs 'n Ete ar, President ETC Development, Ine. n U • ,�q. 0 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD P.O. BOX 1768, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92659 -1768 (949) 644 -3311 MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Campbell /Bill Campbell Planning Department FROM: . Traffic Engineering DATE: November 9, 2006 SUBJECT: Newport Bay Marina 2300 Newport Boulevard — Construction Traffic/ Parking Management Plan (dated October 17, 2006) and Parking Management Plan (dated October 27, 2006) The following are comments pertaining to the Construction Traffic and Parking Management Plan, dated October 17, 2006, and Parking Management Plan, dated October 27, 2006, for the • Newport Bay Marina project located at 2300 Newport Boulevard. Construction Traffic and Parking Management Plan Comments • Overall the Construction Traffic and Parking Management Plan does not adequately address the issue of construction traffic summer peak times. This shall be describe in greater detail, regarding forecast number of trucks per day, staging, parking, work hours, etc. • Item 41: The applicant shall propose hours of operation for both summer peak time and off peak time. For informational purposes, typical peak hours for traffic are 7:00 a.m to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:0.0 p.m. • Item #2: Revise City's Traffic Engineering Department to City's Public Works Department, Traffic Engineering Division. • Item #3: Staging of construction vehicles shall be accommodated on -site to the extent possible, all other staging areas within the City's right -of -way shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and shall be kept to a minimum. • Item #6: Left -tum access into the site from Newport Boulevard has some safety issues. Other more suitable access points should be used for construction activity. Provide more information regarding construction access into the site without disruption to vehicular traffic on Newport Boulevard. I %5 • Item #g: Provide information regarding the maximum number of trucks expected during peak summertime and off -peak non - summer. • Item #10: Provide information regarding where trucks and construction vehicles will be • staged if not on -site. How will concrete pours be accommodated? • Item #13: Any staging of construction vehicles on public right -of -way shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department and shall be kept to a minimum. The potential location indicated in the plan requires Caltrans approval and potentially City of Costa Mesa approval. • Parking Measures: It is unlikely that the City will approve the use of 20 to 30 public spaces for construction vehicle parking. Parking vehicles off -site would be necessary, as indicated. An issue with construction personnel vehicles parking off -site, is construction workers will have limited access to tools normally kept in vehicles. How will this be addressed? The study indicates that an alternative parking site may be in Costa Mesa, if approved by the Public Works Department. The City of Newport Beach can not approve parking in another City. The jurisdiction where the alternative site is located may require approval. • Any Temporary Street, sidewalk, parking or lane closures requires a traffic control plan prepared, signed and stamped by a California Registered Traffic Engineer. A Temporary Street and Sidewalk Closure permit obtained for the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department is required for the above mentioned closures. Closures will • be prohibited during summer peak periods and typical peak hours. Parking Management Plan Comments Provide detailed operational characteristics of the parking facility. Do not include optional features or potential future valet plans if not proposed at this time. Include only proposed items that will be in place at the time of opening. Scope of Operations: How will the attendants meet and greet the vehicles entering the facility without disrupting vehicular circulation or creating a stacking or delay issue on ramps, public right -of -way or internal drive aisles? Provide detailed operations characteristics. How will the attendants collect fees without disrupting vehicular circulation or creating a stacking or delay issue on ramps, public right -of -way or internal drive aisles? Provide detailed operations characteristics. • Peak Period Management: The plan indicates the attendants. would monitor the traffic flow, what will the attendant do to improve the flow of traffic during peak times? Off Peak Hour Management: The plan indicates that during off peak hour person will self park with attendant services, how will attendant provide tickets and acquire fees without disruption of circulation? This also implies that during peak hours a valet service • will be in operation. Is this the case? How will this occur without disrupting traffic circulation, stacking, etc? 2 - �� • Attendant Stations: The design of the parking structure and the proposed locations of the Attendant Stations .do not appear to accommodate ticket dispensing, paying, valet • service, etc. without cause back up, impeding vehicular circulation, etc. Describe in detail the operational characteristics of the attendant parking. The plan indicates that the attendants will monitor retail tenants, how will this be accomplished and what mechanisms will be in place? The "Triple Tandem ", parking area requires a modification permit from the Planning Department. This type of parking is very difficult to manage to ensure that other vehicles are not blocked from exiting. What is being done to accommodate this type of tandem parking? How will parking be enforced in the structure? Will areas be designated for particular uses (i.e. retail parking, office parking, boat slip parking, etc.)? What occurs if vehicles entering the parking structures tum left at the terminus of the ramps? • Valet Service: Is valet service being proposed? If not, remove reference to valet service. Only items being proposed should be included. Option Two: Include items that are being proposed as part of the plan. Gates will not be permitted as part of the project, since it does not provide turn around areas on -site prior to gates. • • The plan provided lacks detailed information and appears to be more of a presentation rather than a detailed report/plan. The applicant shall provide a report/plan that describes fully the operational characteristics of the proposed parking area. • F :WSERSMP8W\DKeely%dkeely,Ttaffic Phasing Ordinance1TPMouffmast Shipyardgo-1 14MM em.dac -3- 0 C� • a c mm IN ch 'L to 0m � N Q i V CL 0 Z ooa �N Z 94� m r 0 O MB V �m v L �. CL m � zg o m a 0 D cm b r e E C G a c. S m 0 a E A U� 0 EN 00 go c E 3� L -Q CL 0 t a- c co r c r c 0 m C X C 0 CL a CL u C E m c m m m n. °w J Q.E r- s 3� ? C 0� CL C CL ocn c. �e 0� of C 0 a a m z W E JS C 10 35; co c V a� c CL 8 LM �QQ ii c m cr3 Q m a c ®E 8� t a U: a V 0 m C m tB� of O 3 so 40 .140 V's al �we 9.1 m 0 co 8 p�p a 0 a J �y a F m c a c E E v .E O C C Q m LD a c 8 E1 J NA 0 u E � L-A M k . L . to CL ■ CL Ce 2 k k §2 22 k.k ©® 3: 0 g e ■. 2 © a Co & c COB co , cc O E C E E� $ k � . �.k . � to e cc d to O'D Aq k k CL § § 2 $ $ ®� k CL L $ k§ . a �2r Ce 13L CL 2 -.— § CL . co 2 � � k�� & J© 0 ■ a ■ C ��■ $ §k_0 �� e m $ 5 IL (L§O%m r- � � §$ .c� »_■ � �k c � 2.>,# e� e k ��f A 2 & ■.0 o o e J. -0 .0 F� 2 ear c # r2�2�a . � � U N m N n.+ .0 07 fl' Q Q 10- f y s . a N N N 1+ Q U a WE t�> d N y d N Q U a N y d N Q U a r� L� � L w dJ w O co rS Y m ?� '0 O C Qy o mcmi � c -� .. O o a L c m� ?� �. V. C; l? � o o o 0 � cLS Q co —' °m m cb Q cWil o L so a �"IL- c m � ?� � � � m o J5 E�� oWA s °' �cc�3 �ZS n m 0 0 0 w 1 G � CL 0 c 0 O Colo s ..m9cm lo CDO 0 LD CD mC � ti �� oNr° o O�O to -O O m 2 �e a o.cDr- r- 10 coo OV ,,pO p W L 0 co c C c vDEsa m p°.0 a O =W.E 5 c o _am wem i Q!6 UZ aCU22a2FE r1 LJ N �5 6 m Z-1 0 • 7(D 11 J F- -I L -.A c c m C- c m E CD �CL we 0° a � o 3 �8 U 3 y c ON ag Em E. O w a. g E� $L: m at m co L * 03 v . 0 a m m Cat o VCLO @c hoc �. m 3 ��E g9 cc 03 32c 42 c Es c 3'I w 5m c I � mCl CO CL ii a - cc r a� � f I W as ¢.°c G� 3 � � C Colo CD a c N fi CL m E so- CL mC m� L (A :6 Q � � 00 � o CC C nm �, o �., g- o= cs n cE o cc. Se o w CL ; a w m-0 E Q W oa �. E m E Le mm �° �0, F- -I L -.A c c m C- c m E CD �CL we 0° a � o 3 �8 U 3 y c ON ag Em E. O w a. g E� $L: m at m co L * 03 v . 0 a m m Cat o VCLO @c hoc �. m 3 ��E g9 cc 03 32c 42 c Es c 3'I w 5m c I � mCl CO CL ii a - cc r a� � f I W as ¢.°c G� • NEWPORT MARINA DISCLOSURE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT Buyer has entered into a contract to purchase Unit of Newport Marina Condominiums ( "Buyer's Unit') in the Newport Marina Condominiums community in Newport Beach, California ( "Community's. By signing below, Buyer acknowledges having read and understood all of the following: 1. SURROUNDING USES. The Community is located in an urban area with a diverse mix of residential and commercial uses which pre -date the completion of the Community. 'Buyer should expect that ambient noise and traffic levels in the surrounding area will be higher than it is in a typical residential neighborhood throughout the day and night; this is it normal incident of living in an urban area. Immediately adjacent to the Community are the following uses: (a) Restaurants. There are two (2) restaurants immediately adjacent to the Community. The restaurants attract vehicular and pedestrian traffic to the surrounding area. Buyer will notice noise throughout the day and evening, including noise from regular visits by delivery trucks, trash disposal vehicles. During business hours, there will be noise in the Community from arriving and departing employees and patrons. Buyer will also notice odors and smoke from the kitchen exhaust fans in both restaurants, and depending on weather • conditions, smoke and odors from the restaurants may enter Buyer's Unit through open windows and doors. i. Woody's, Wharf. Woody's Wharf is a restaurant/bar to the immediate north of the Community. Woody's Wharf operates daily from the.hours of 1 I am. to 2 a.m. According to their Permit to conduct live entertainment (3/06), Woody's Wharf may have live music performances, and Buyer may notice noise and vibration from live music, even inside Buyer's Unit. ii. Crab Cooker. Crab Cooker is a seafood restaurant lying to the immediate south of the Community. Crab Cooker is open daily around mid -day and it may be open as late as 10 p.m. on.some nights. (b) Shipyards. South Coast Shipyard lies to the immediate south of the Community. The Community is on the edge of Newport Harbor, which is a very busy private yacht harbor. In addition to South Coast Shipyard, there are other shipyards, boat storage facilities as well as boat maintenance facilities around the harbor. Shipyards operate throughout the week. Buyer may notice noise and vibration caused by operation of heavy machinery used to move boats and equipment as well as odors from resins and paints. By signing below,.Buyer acknowledges, that noise, vibration and odors are normal incidents . of shipyard operations. 2. USES IN THE COMMUNITY. The Community is a mixed -use project, • meaning that it includes both residential units and. commercial units. The commercial units Ti (collectively, the "Commercial Project') are located in the lower level of the building housing • the residential units. (a) Commercial Uses. The Commercial Project may include a variety of commercial or retail tenants, including stores and restaurants; however, the final mix of uses has not yet been determined. Buyer acknowledges that some or all of the eventual commercial uses in the Commercial Project will generate noise and traffic as part of normal operations, and that Buyer and Buyer's family and guests may experience noise and traffic in excess of that normally experienced in a residential community. (b) Parking. The Commercial users and their customers will have the right to use the commercial parking spaces in the Community, and Buyer acknowledges that Buyer and Buyer's family and guests will be required to accommodate the commercial traffic entering and leaving the parking area. (c) Control While the Commercial Project is located in the same structure as the residential units, it will not be part of the residential Community or the homeowner's association formed to operate the residential Community. Neither Buyer nor the homeowner's association will have any control over the operation of the Commercial Project PRIOR TO ENTERING INTO A BINDING SALES CONTRACT TO PURCHASE A UNIT IN NEWPORT BAY MARINA CONDOMINIUMS, BUYER SHOULD DETERMINE THAT THE MATTER DISCLOSED IN THIS DISCLOSURE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT IS SATISFACTORY TO BUYER. • Buyer acknowledges that Buyer has read and fully understands this Disclosure and Acknowledgment. Buyer acknowledges and agrees that Buyer is solely responsible to make certain that Buyer understands the contents of this Disclosure and Acknowledgment. Buyer will take whatever steps are necessary to do so,. including without limitation, consulting an attorney, interpreter, engineer, or any other person whose advice or assistance may be necessary to fully understand the matters set forth herein. ACKNOWLEDGED: Date: Date: Print Name: Print Name: Buyer • tab r- -I L EXHIBIT 6 Central Newport Beach Community Association Letter Amended Responses to Comments 0 0 161 Central Newport Teach C P.Q. Box 884 • Newport Beach, Califomia 92661 November 2, 2006 Mr. James Campbell, Senior Planner Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Re: Newport Bay Marina — EIR Response to Comments Dear Mr. Campbell: .association HOd39 IOM3N 30 A110 9002 Z 0 AON 1NWNLt 80 0NIl*4 W All avao38 At the Planning Commission meeting of October 5, 2006 the Chair requested a letter listing our concerns with the consultant responses given to the Central Newport Beach Response to Comments letter dated 8/31/06 aka Comment Letter No. 4. Following are our concerns with those responses: 4 -1 Response to comment 3-3 is referenced. Response 3-3 does not address the CNBCA concern for loss of view from the street and mitigation for the loss. 4 -3 The response does not address the impact of the pedestrian bridge on the view of the bay from the view corridor. This view corridor is, in part, an existing view easement that has been obstructed over time and is already an encumbrance on the property, not additional mitigation. 4-4 Responses 3-15 and 3 -16 are cited as the response. The comments in letter 3 were primarily editorial and not relevant to 4-4 and responses indicate the editorial corrections will be made. 3-16 addresses the historic existence and activities of the boatyard but does not address the concern for mitigation of contamination from the boat yard and marina that may have occurred outside of the project's marina permit area into the Rhine Channel, the remediation for which could become a substantial public financial burden. 4-6 Again, responses 3 -15 and 3-16 are editorial (3 -16 references cultural resources and is not relevant to the response). The WQMP included as Appendix F does not address the waterside uses in the completed project. While it states there is no car washing, it does not address boat washing and it also says there is no dock area. A more complete recognition of 0 • • 10, waterside issues, especially BMP's, seems appropriate inasmuch as this • area is used by permit from the City, currently at a minimal cost. 4 -7 The response references response 3-5 which addresses only construction traffic management. CNBCA's major concern is with the completed project and it's impact on the delivery of emergency services to the Peninsula as a whole, not just the project, especially during the summer. No response was given to the identification of marine recreation opportunities and their potential impact. 4 -8 The response given to this comment regarding traffic and parking, the one most important to CNBCA, is inadequate. It references comment 3 -25 which is to add an "a" to a sentence and comment 3 -31 which cites MM 4.10 -4 -2 and 4.10 -4 -3 which respectively are payment of school and park impact fees. Please provide an appropriate response. 4 -9 The response does not address the potential impact of vessels carrying large numbers of passengers and mitigation should they be allowed nor does it discuss pedestrian safety. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these responses. • Very truly yours, Louise Fundenberg, President 2 163 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No. Introduction.............................................................................................. ............................... 1 Response to Comments State of California, Department of Fish & Game — August 9, 2006 ............................. 3 State of California, Department of Transportation, District 12 — August 14, 2006 ...... 4 Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Advisory Committee — August 21, 2006......... 5 Central Newport Beach Community Association — August 31, 2006 ........................ 16 Orange County Sanitation District— September 1, 2006 ........... ............................... 17 California Coastal Commission — August 31, 2006 (Received on 9/7/06) ...................18 0 Appendices • A Comment Letters • G6A • Introduction This document has been prepared to respond to public comments received on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Newport Bay Marina Project. The DEIR was subject to a 45 -day public review period from July 18, 2006 to September 1, 2006. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15105(a) identifies that when a Draft EIR is submitted to the State Clearinghouse for review by state agencies, the public review period shall not be less than 45 -days, unless a shorter period (not less than 30- days) is approved by the State Clearinghouse. The Draft EIR (both volumes) was made available for public review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Department and the Public Library in Newport Beach. The City of Newport Beach ("City") received 5 comment letters on the Draft EIR during the 45-day public review period. Pursuant to CEQA, the District is under no obligation to respond to comments submitted after the conclusion of the Draft EIR public review. At the time of preparation of this document, 1 written public comment letter was received by the City following conclusion of the review period on September 1, 2006. Pursuant to Section 15132(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the District has provided responses to "significant environmental points raised • in the review and consultation process." CEQA Guidelines Section 15204 provides that in reviewing draft EIRs, persons and public agencies should focus on the sufficiency of the document in identifying and analyzing the possible impacts on the environment and ways in which the significant effect of the project might be avoided or mitigated. The CEQA Guidelines (15204(a)) also note that reviewers should be aware that the adequacy of an EIR is determined in terms of what is reasonably feasible, in light of factors such as the magnitude of the project at issue, the severity of its likely environmental impacts, and the geographic scope of the project. CEQA does not require a lead agency to conduct every test or perform all research, study, and experimentation recommended or demanded by commentors. When responding to comments, lead agencies need only respond to significant environmental issues and do not need to provide all information requests by reviewers, as long as a good faith effort at full disclosure is made in the EIR. CEQA Section 15204(c) further advises, "Reviewers should explain the basis for their comments, and should submit data or references offering facts, reasonable assumptions based on facts, or expert opinion supported by facts in support of the comments. Pursuant to Section 15064, an effect shall not be considered significant in the absence of substantial evidence." Section 15204 (d) also states, "Each responsible agency and trustee agency shall focus its comments on environmental information germane to that agency's statutory responsibility." Section 15204 (e) states, "this section shall not be used to restrict the ability of reviewers to comment on the general adequacy of a document or the lead agency to reject comments not focused as recommended by this section." • 16, Each comment letter received during and after the public review period is included in its • entirety in the Appendix of this document. In order to organize responses and avoid verbatim reiteration of each comment, a number has been given to each comment and is shown in the right margin of the comment letter. Comments and Responses are identified in accordance with this numbering system. For example, the response to Letter Number 1's second comment is labeled as "1 -2 ". • • {b(P n U Response to Comment: Comment Letter No. 1 State of California, Dept. of Fish & Game August 9, 2006 1 -1 The comment does not require a reply since it primarily describes the project as identified in the DEIR and defines the role of the Department of Fish & Game in relation to the proposed project. 1 -2 The project applicant will be required to obtain approval of all applicable permits including a remediation plan from the California Regional Water Quality Control, Board ( RWCQB). The applicant as well as the City of Newport Beach has been closely coordinating with the RWQCB in regards to the project's remediation. The remediation will include protective measures such as the use of silt curtains etc. The • removal and disposal of the containments will be subject to compliance with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. The Draft EIR, Volume II, Appendix F presented a Work Plan (for site remediation) that has been prepared for the project by Anchor Environmental CA L.P. dated July 7, 2006. The document addresses the work plan for implementing a water quality monitoring program to ensure field construction activities at the project site do not result in the redistribution of contaminated sediments known to be present in the adjacent waters of the Rhine Channel. This draft Work Plan was submitted to the RWQCB. A final Work Plan in conjunction with a planned application for a 401 Water Quality Certification under the Clean Water Act. The Work Plan presented in Volume II of the Draft EIR is detailed in addressing contaminated sediment dredging and monitoring. The activities will be closely monitored, for example, water column turbidity will be monitored on an hourly basis at several locations for the first four hours of construction and then once per day thereafter within 10 feet of the outside of the silt curtain. The recommendation by CDFG regarding the use of the watertight clamshell bucket for minimizing the dispersion of containments will be considered and evaluated as part of the Final Work Plan. The Work Plan is subject to review and approval by the RWQCB and must meet their requirements. The following mitigation measure will be included in the Final EIR (Section 4.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) to ensure implementation and compliance of a Work Plan for site remediation. U J61 MM 4.6.4 -3: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall • provide evidence that a Final Work Plan (for remediation) has been approved by the RWQCB and that said plan provides for protective measures for contaminated material removal including measures such as use of silt curtains and a watertight clamshell bucket for minimizing the dispersion of containments. Said Plan shall be subject to review and approval by the RWQCB. 1 -3 The project description (Section 3) of the Final EIR will be revised to include the approximate amount (i.e. 200 square feet of area) of contaminated sediment to be removed. A work plan (remediation plan) has been prepared and was presented in Appendix F of the Draft EIR. The work plan addressed measures that would be implemented during the contamination clean up, including methods to minimize the dispersion of contaminated sediment and on -site monitoring. Additionally, the final work plan is subject to review and approval by the RWQCB who is charged with the authority over this aspect of the project. 1-4 This comment does not require a response since it acknowledges that the;.project would not have an adverse effect on existing marine resources and habitats within the area when considered with the Department's comments in this letter, and that previous agency comments have been adequate addressed in this EIR. U Cl 4 f� n U Comment Letter No. 2 State of California, Dept. of Transportation — District 12 August 18, 2006 Response to Comment: 2 -1 The comment does not require a response since it does not raise any CEQA related concerns and /or issues. n f� n U 161 n U Comment Letter No. 3 City of Newport Beach — Environmental Quality Affairs Citizens Committee August 21, 2006 Response to Comment: 3 -1 The FEIR will be revised to identify the existing number of boat slips as the "existing 21- boat slip marina," and the proposed, reconfigured marina as the "proposed 19- boat slip marina." Upon implementation of the project, the marina will have two less slips than currently exist. 3 -2 Section 15381 of CEQA defines a "Responsible Agency" as a public agency which proposes to carry out or approve a project, for which lead agency is preparing or has prepared an EIR or negative declaration. For the purposes of CEQA, the term Responsible Agency" includes all public agencies other thari the lead agency which have discretionary approval power of the project. There are only two responsible , agencies that have been identified for the project: the California Coastal • Commission and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The SCAQMD does not have a "responsible agency' role but rather a consulting (or reviewing) interest in the project since an EIR was required and air quality was evaluated as part of the EIR scope of analysis. 3 -3 Detailed project building plans showing components such as stairwells and elevators are on file with the Planning Department. The Final EIR will include a corrected Exhibit 3 -7 that removes references to the City of Corona and that defines RCP, CCP. CP and V. 34 In regards to the project construction schedule, Appendix A is the Air Quality Study which includes a projected construction schedule for the purposes of evaluating potential air quality impacts that could occur as a result of project construction activities including site preparation (remediation etc.) and building construction. The schedule presented in Section 3.2, page 3 -24 of the Draft EIR describes the construction timing the applicant is anticipating could occur. The construction of the project will occur in phases since the site contains existing structures and also requires remediation. The first phase will include demolition of existing structures on site, remediation of contaminated material, and construction of the new seawall. The second phase of the project will involve construction of the proposed structures. To provide further clarification each phase could take up to 24 months. • 11,0 • 3 -5 The reconfiguration the marina (and construction of new sea wall) is part of the overall project. This aspect of the project is included in the construction phasing estimates and will be included in Phase 1. The project's conditions of approval (COA) include a requirement for a detailed construction traffic management and control plan that will include phasing details (i.e., dates and times), traffic control measures and so forth. 3 -6 Section 3.5 listing of project alternatives will include identification of the alternative presented in Section 8.0. The Final EIR Table of Contents and Section 3 will be revised in response to the comment relative to listing the project alternatives evaluated in the Draft EIR 3 -7 The existing 21 -boat slip marina will be reconfigured. The existing marina as well as the future reconfigured marina has the right to operate per that allowed by the Specific Plan. Allowable uses include commercial uses such as charter boats. The project itself does not propose any marine use different than that which is already allowed at the site. The project is required to comply with all City applicable regulations pertaining to parking, noise and traffic. This includes all uses (i.e. commercial /retail, residential, and charter boats etc,). 3 -8 Section 3 (Project Description) of the Final EIR will identify the square footages of the residential units (parking is calculated and shown as part of the parking • structure). The 27 residential units total 77,101 square feet. Parking for the residential portion of the project is provided on the upper deck of the parking structure. On -site parking is provided for approximately 58 vehicles in combination of garages, carports, and open parking spaces. The upper parking deck and underground parking lot provide a total of 226 spaces which complies with the City Code requirement of 226 spaces. The project statistical (data) summary is also provided in Appendix A (Notice of Preparation) in Volume 1 of the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR (page 3 -5) identified that full size project plans are available at the City of Newport Beach Planning Department. The full size plans included detailed legends that show all square footage of uses and parking data 3 -9 The comment raises the concern regarding potential aesthetic impacts specifically those on a "scenic vista" as a result of the implementation of the project. From the bayward view, the vista not only includes the water but also the site itself. The site currently is developed with existing uses and is not considered a "scenic" resource. Therefore, the view from across the bay would continue to experience a view of the water but with project implementation would also have a view of the project site which is proposed to be developed with new structures compared to that which exists on site today (i.e., buildings, boat slipways, outdoor areas containing parking/boats and other storage). Although the view will change from that which currently exists, the view will be aesthetically pleasing. In regards to the view from Newport Boulevard, the view currently is limited. The view from Newport Boulevard consists of site buildings, parking lot, boats and some view of the bay depending on • vehicles /boats parked in the parking area. Exhibit 4.1 -1 through Exhibit 4.1 -3 clearly 7 show that from Newport Boulevard the existing view is limited and defining it as . `scenic" and a substantial loss does not correspond with what's experienced at the location. The EIR concluded that the project does impact the visual character of the area but also determined that this impact is not considered substantial and adverse. The landscaping plan presented in the EIR is a conceptual plan. A detailed landscape plan (including plant species, sizes, locations, irrigation etc.) will be required to be reviewed and approved by the City as part of the project conditions of approval. 3 -10 All project construction (including demolition and site contaminant removal) will comply with applicable Federal, State and local regulations. Due to the age of the existing structures on -site there is the potential that the buildings will require removal of lead and asbestos materials during demolition activities. The Draft EIR, Volume II (Appendices) contained a Work Plan which identified measures that would be implemented in relation to the removal and disposal of contaminated soils. Also see response 1 -2 (page 3 of this document) which addresses the Work Plan for remediation of contaminated soils. The following mitigation measure will be:.,included in the Final EIR (Section 4.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials) to ensure implementation and compliance with the demolition of existing structures 66 site and compliance with applicable regulations pertaining to the proper removal and disposal of containments (i.e. lead, asbestos etc.). • MM 4.6.4 -4: Prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the applicant shall submit to the Fire Chief a hazardous material disposal plan which identifies the procedures and method of removing and disposing of lead and asbestos in relation to the existing buildings on the site. 3 -11 Mestre Greve Associates, Inc. confirmed that several sources were utilized for computing emission factors. These sources include the EMFAC 2002 model (SCAQMD), CEQAAir Quality Handbook (SCAQMD) as well as the URBEMIS 2002 model (SCAQMD). The URBEMIS model was used for computing heavy construction equipment and it was also used for on -site (post construction) emissions. The tables presented in the appendix of the Air Quality Study also list the source utilized to model air quality calculations. 3 -12 The mitigation measures presented on page 4 -25 will be correctly reflected in the Executive Summary Table 1 (page 2-4). 3 -13 A detailed construction traffic management and control plan will be required perthe project's conditions of approval. This plan will include phasing details, staging areas, construction timing/hours, construction traffic controls including; construction timing, haul routes, signage, detours, and location(s) that debris etc. will be trucked to for disposal. The plan will include special attention to the timing (season such as • summer months) of construction traffic conditions. Prior to any commencement of p- • construction activities the plan will be subject to review and approval by the City of Newport Beach. 3 -14 Marine biological resources were evaluated by a qualified marine biologist. The biologist assessed the site on land as well as in the water (underwater). In addition to the 2004 survey, MBC Applied Environmental Sciences conducted surveys on February 9, 2006 and June 27, 2006. The biology report addresses the potential impacts of the project taking into consideration the site location (i.e. low or high tide). MBC Applied Environmental Sciences have confirmed that the site surveys conducted did take into account change in tides (i.e. low and high tide). Since fish are water dependent, high tide would have the most fish present. Fish would move (swim) to other areas during work activities (i.e. during high tide). 3 -15 The Final EIR, pages 4 -37 and 4 -40 will be revised in response to the comment. 3 -16 The Final EIR pages 4-44 and 4 -63 will be revised in response to the comment. 3 -17 The Draft EIR correctly discloses the information that corresponds to that presented in the Paelontolgoical Assessment (page 7) prepared by ARMC. Therefore, no revisions. are necessitated per the comment. 3 -18 The Final EIR will include the recommended revisions to page 4-65, 4 -66 and 4 -68 (mitigation measures will be revised as suggested by the comment) in response to • the comment. 3 -19 The Final EIR page 4-69, 4 -72 and Exhibit 4.5 -3 will be revised in response to the comment. 3 -20 The site lies within the Newport- Inglewood fault zone and the Final EIR will clarify the discrepancy identified by the comment. Page 4 -74, 4t' paragraph will be corrected in the Final EIR to replace the word "top' with "to". 3 -21 Given the location of the site, the property is susceptible to a tsunami which is common to low elevation coastal areas. The Final EIR page 4 -76 will be revised in response to the comment. 3 -22 The Phase 1 (December 3, 2003) identified potential PCBs present in fluorescent light ballasts (based on the age of these transformers) in the existing buildings. The light fixtures will be removed and disposed of in compliance with applicable hazardous materials regulations. The Phase II (January 6, 2004) identified PCBs concentrations in the soil (350 cy) but are below the threshold requiring disposal. 3 -23 The project applicant and City of Newport staff have been coordinating with the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). All site assessments and a work plan have been submitted and reviewed by the RWQCB. • A proposed final remediation plan (work plan) will be subject to the review and �0 approval the RWQCB. The project will be required to comply with all requirements • of the RWQCB. 3 -24. See response 3 -15 above. The remediation plan (work plan) will include stringent safeguards for the removal of the contaminants as required by the RWQCB. The contaminated soils will be removed from the site. Also see response to comment 1 -2 (page 3 of this document) which addresses the Work Plan which will be implemented during remediation of the site. In addition to the Work Plan, a conceptual Water Quality Management Plan was prepared by SP Consulting Group dated February 20, 2006. The Draft EIR (page 4 -96 through 4 -101) identifies BMP's and mitigation in regards to water quality that will be required by the City and the RWQCB. Currently, the site does not provide for treatment of water that enters the bay. During construction and post - construction, the project will implement BMP's that will improve the water quality from that which exists now. 3 -25 The Final EIR page 4 -103 2nd Paragraph, 2nd sentence will be revised to add an "a" before 102,800 sq foot lot. 3-26 The project (including the'residential units) will be required to comply with the City's. noise requirements for indoor and outdoor noise levels (regardless of the season). 3 -27 The noise assessment was conducted by an acoustical engineer who determined the appropriate locations for noise measurement monitoring. These locations were. • based on the potential for the greatest amount of noise levels for a 24 -hour average time period. The locations also have to take into consideration the greatest amount of noise (i.e., the greatest source is associated with vehicular traffic) and the location of proposed uses such as residential. 3 -28. The purpose of this exhibit is to show typical construction equipment noise levels. The construction equipment that will be used on site is comparable to that identified per Exhibit 4.9 -3. With the advancement in technology and upgrades. to construction equipment over the years, there is the likelihood that that these noise levels represents a "worst case" scenario. 3 -29 The development is required to comply with all applicable fire safety regulations. The DER identifies as an example the various aspects of fire safety that will be evaluated by the City's Fire Department. The Fire Department determines what will be implemented and required per fire safety regulations. The Draft EIR (page 4- 130) has identified that all proposed structures will be fully fire sprinklered. Additionally, the Newport Beach Fire Department has reviewed the proposed project design plans and has determined that the project will not result in any significant impacts to facilities, staff and /or services. 3 -30 See response to comment 3 -5 which states that a detailed construction traffic management and control plan is required per project conditions of approval. This • plan will address construction timing and hours (including those during summer io J� • months). No project construction activities can commence until all potential construction details are approved by the City of Newport Beach in consultation with the Fire Department and Police Department. 3 -31 Mitigation measures are stated directly above Draft EIR Section 4.10.5 in Section 4.10.4. The mitigation measures are numbered MM 4.10 -4 -2 and MM 4.10 -4. -3. 3 -32 See response to comment 3 -5 and 3 -22. 3 -33 The traffic analysis was prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. retained and under direction by the City of Newport Beach. The scope of analysis (including timing of counts, location, intersection analysis etc) was determined based on the recommendations of the Public Works Department and consulting traffic engineer. In regards to parking, the project is designed to meet the City parking code requirements. 3 -34 The project includes demolition of all existing structures on -site (44,000 square feet). Therefore, the project involves construction of 27 residential units (trip generation is based,on type of units not square footage) and 36,000 square feet of retail uses. 3 -35 The project alternatives were evaluated in compliance with the requirements of the • California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines. 3 -36 See response to comment 3 -26. The project is eliminating 44,000 square feet and providing 27 residential units and 36,000 square feet of retail (not 94,000 sq.ft.). The traffic study takes into account the vehicular traffic currently being generated by the existing use. The comment also raises the point that page 4 -135 of the Draft EIR assumes that all residential traffic will leave the area. The comment raises the question that people who live at the site will be traveling locally to the grocery store, dinner, hardware store etc. The traffic study analysis identified that all residential traffic will leave the area as a worst case scenario (from a traffic impact calculation) during peak hour distribution only. This assumption actually provides a conservative analysis of the traffic conditions. Since many uses (i.e. restaurants, grocery stores etc.) are within walking distance of the site, the traffic study does not take this into account for peak hour distribution but rather utilizes a calculation based on all residential traffic leaving the area (i.e. this would result in a higher peak hour trip generation). The traffic study evaluated primary intersections. The numbered intersections (22nd 23`a, and 28th etc.) are operating at acceptable levels of service. 3 -37 The project parking meets the City parking code requirement. All uses (commercial, retail and residential uses) will be parked per code on -site. The parking analysis meets the requirements of CEQA. • 11 1► 5 3 -38 The traffic report includes the dates November and December 2005 since that is • when the study was printed and made available for use in the Draft EIR. It is not uncommon that analysis and report preparation for any technical study (including traffic) be conducted prior to the date that the report is printed. Additionally, the traffic study was revised following the initial draft so that the traffic numbers would be updated to reflect the most current City traffic modeling. The contents of the report are clear to disclose when surveys were conducted and so forth. 3 -39 The traffic study refers to a u -turn (since from a traffic engineering perspective this is how it's defined). However, this turn primarily allows vehicles headed south on Newport Boulevard to turn left and then drive in a southerly direction on Newport Boulevard. This turning movement (or u -tum) currently exists within the project vicinity and near the site. 3 -40 See response to comment 3 -25 and 3 -29. The parking is required to meet City code. Initially when the traffic /parking study was prepared on- street parking along Newport Boulevard was calculated for the project's parking total. However, the Draft EIR clarified that all parking for the project will meet code and be provided on- ,tite.'L The .total parking provided is 226 spaces which meet the.: City :Code requirement,lof 226 spaces. 3 -41 The parking structure ramp (down) off Newport Boulevard has a grade of 12.4% and the ramp up is 4.6% (up in the direction of the residential). The ramp grade down.is • 10.6% from the Arcade Street entrance and a 7.2% grade going up (towards the residential). Additionally, a truck delivery area is provided for the project on the deck of the parking structure. 3-42 See response to comment 3 -25 and 3 -29. The parking is required to meet City code. Additionally, commercial spaces are required to comply with City standards (STD- 805 -L -A and STD - 805 -L -B). 3-43 See response to comment 3 -25. Additionally, the traffic analysis evaluates the project's impacts. as well as cumulative traffic impacts per the City's traffic model. Therefore, regardless of the "season" when the traffic counts are done a "worst case" scenario is evaluated on a cumulative analysis basis. Additionally, the TPO analysis conducted studies typical weekdays. In regards to construction traffic please see response to comment 3 -5 and 3 -22. 3-44 A complete traffic analysis has been conducted by an experienced and qualified traffic engineer and in consultation with the City's traffic engineer. Exhibit 3 -3 (Aerial Photo) in Section 3 (Project Description) portion of the Draft EIR is for the purpose to acquaint the EIR reader with the location .of the subject project site in relation to the surrounding developed land uses and nearby roadways. 3-45 The Final EIR will reflect "4.12 Utilities and Service Systems" instead for 4.13. The • project is required to comply with the RWQCB regulations including ground water. 12 `I I • All public service and utility agencies (i.e. phone, electrical water, sewer, solid waste, trash pick up, etc.) were consulted during the Notice of Preparation (dated February 23, 2005), during he preparation of the EIR and also notified of the Draft EIR. No concerns were raised by any of these entities in regards to the proposed project. Additionally, a mitigation measure is presented requiring consultations with utility and service organizations. 3-46 The Draft EIR (page 3 -5) identified that full size project plans are available at the City of Newport Beach Planning Department. The full size plans included detailed legends that show all square footage of uses and parking data. The EIR for the proposed project evaluated the project based on the project design plans and site uses that have been proposed by the project applicant. The applicant will be required to submit for review and approval detailed building plans addressing final location of stairwells, elevations, trash enclosures. In regards to parking, the project meets City code. 3-47 The mitigation measure is included in the Draft EIR to require the applicant to consult with and plan for existing and project relative utilitiesand servicesrelative to the project. Some of these entities are separate from the City of Newport Beach. For example, solid waste service, telephone /cable service, sewer etc. Therefore, the purpose of this mitigation measure is to involve these outside entities and develop the property minimizing any impacts relative to these facilities and services. • Also see response to comment 3-46. Public service and utility agencies were consulted with in relation to the preparation of the Draft EIR. None of these agencies raised any concerns relative to the project. 3-48 Page 5 -1 of the Final EIR will be revised in response to the comment. The reference to a school a will be deleted and the EIR analysis provided in this section does relate directly to the proposed mixed -use project. 3-49 See response to comment 3 -5. 3 -50 The Final EIR (page 6 -2 and pg 4 -141) will be revised in response to the comment for clarification purposes. 3 -51 The Draft EIR analysis in each topical section takes into consideration the cumulative impact of the project. For example, the air quality, noise and transportation analyses include an evaluation of existing conditions, project completion, and build -out of the City (includes all approved /planned projects). The proposed mixed -use project is replacing existing site uses (& structures) with 27 residential units and 36,000 square feet of commercial uses. Although this project involves different components that may not seem typical (i.e. site remediation, demolition of structures etc.) the actual proposed use (27 units and 36,000 sq. ft. of commercial /retail) of the site is limited in size. It should also be recognized that • regardless of the proposed project, the site is currently contributing to environmental 13 I(1 factors such as traffic, air quality, noise, and water quality impacts. The Draft EIR • concluded that no adverse cumulative impacts were identified. The only impact that can not be fully mitigated to a level of less than significant are those in relation to historical resources. 3 -52 The project alternatives evaluated in the Draft EIR comply with the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines identifies that an EIR need not consider every feasible alternative to the project but rather a reasonable range of alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation. Additionally, the alternatives are evaluated not only as a comparison of potential environmental impacts but also in light of the project objectives of the proposed project. Section 8.1.2 (page 8 -2) of the Draft EIR concludes that the environmental impacts of the reduced development alternative would roughly be the same and not significantly reduced from that of the project. Additionally; this alternative reduces the housing that would be provided and does not strive to meet the goals and objectives of the City's housing element. The EIR provides the reasonable array of alternatives and evaluates the project alternatives in compliance with the CEQA Guidelines and for consideration by the decision makers and the public. • • 14 f t�� Comment Letter No. 4 Central Newport Beach Community Association August 31, 2006 Response to Comment: 4 -1 See response to comment 3-3 3 -9 (Comment Letter No. 3) and response 4 -3. Additionally, the project does provide a view corridor area (separation of buildings) from Newport Boulevard as well as pedestrian access to the waterfront. The Draft. EIR determined that the project as designed will not result in a significant impact to aesthetics. Therefore, additional mitigation beyond that provided for by the project design is not required. 4 -2 The project design including architecture complies with the Specific Plan (page 3). The site is technically within the McFadden Square area as the border between the areas is 26th Street as specified in the City's General Plan. Page 4 -110 identifies the area theme including architectural styles and elements. 4 -3 See response to 4 -1 which addresses the conclusion that no additional mitigation is required relative to aesthetics. The project as designed provides . for a view corridor between the buildings (this also breaks up the massing of the structures) and maximizes public access by providing a pedestrian/vehicular bridge and walkways along the waterfront. The current conditions of the area proposed for the pedestrian /vehicular bridge does not provide a "scenic" view corridor. Additionally, the bridge which will be accessible by the public will provide additional bay views that are not currently experienced at the property. The project design provides fora public (i.e. pedestrian) friendly environment (Le. bridge, walkway along the bay side, public parking for the retail uses) that is not greatly utilized currently due to the degraded condition of the overall property. The comment suggesting elimination of Building K has been considered and it has been determined that little would be gained by removing this building from the project design. The existing view in this area primarily consists of a parking area associated with the existing building on the site. This parking area is currently used by vehicles, boats and other storage (marine related) that further limits and minimized the aesthetic quality experienced by motorists and pedestrians passing by the property. With the provision of the view corridor and improved public access to the waterfront, impacts relative to the limited existing view associated with development of the project are not considered substantial or adverse. 4-4 See response to 345 1 -2 and 1-3 346 (Comment Letter No. 13). Mitigation is presented in response 1 -2 which addresses silt curtains and a watertight clamshell bucket to minimize the dispersion of contaminates. Additionally, • Section 4.6 (Hazards & Hazardous Materials) of the Draft EIR addresses this topic. 15 ti 4 -5 The mitigation measure meets the requirements of the CEQA Guidelines as well as • complies with City environmental procedures. The project design and building plans are subject to City of Newport Beach staff review and approval. The Specific Plan also provides additional architectural guidelines to ensure that the project is compatible given the location and surrounding land uses. The project as architecturally designed is consistent with the applicable Specific Plan. In regards to the existing structures on site, the historical resources study prepared by LSA Associates, Inc. noted that the South Coast Shipyard was identified as a local historical site, representing historiclarchitectural themes of local importance. The LSA study also identified that the City of Newport Beach does not have a Historic Preservation ordinance and only encourages the adaptive reuse and preservation of buildings that are recognized by the City to be Landmark Buildings. The shipyard is not recognized by the City to be a Landmark Building. 4-6 See response 3 -25 34-6 (Comment Letter No. 3) and Comment Letter 5. The WQMP is subject to review and approval by the RWQCB and is the governing authority relative to the WQMP. The, project is required to comply with all applicable regulations pertaining to water gpality as required by the RWQCB and the City of Newport Beach. Currently the site drains directly into the bay without any treatment of runoff and /or on -site operations of the property. The proposed project will alter the existing site conditions by implementing applicable water quality measures that are not experienced currently at the • Property. 4 -7 See response to comment 3 -13 3-5 (Comment Letter No. 3) which addresses construction related impacts and mitigation. 4 -8 See response to comment 3 -1.3 325 and -3 34 (Comment Letter No. 3) which addresses traffic and parking. Parking in relation to boat use will be required to comply with applicable City of Newport Beach parking regulations. Boats (vessels) carrying large numbers of passengers are also subject to applicable City regulations as is the case with any vessel use (i.e. commercial vessel use etc.) in Newport Beach. 4 -9 The project is required to comply with all City codes including parking. The marina uses are allowed per the Specific Plan. 4 -10 The project alternatives presented in the Draft EIR included a No Project Alternative. This alternative assumes that the proposed development would not take place and that the site would remain as currently used. Additionally, it should be noted that although the project site will not be used as a shipyard, the site will continue to retain marine uses by the provision of the 19 -boat slips (a coastal depend use), preservation and enhancement of the larger boat slipway, and by providing pedestrian access by means of the bridge and walkway along the • waterfront. is o p • 4 -11 The Draft EIR included an analysis of potential noise impacts. The noise study conducted by an acoustical engineer identified that the most significant noise source would be that from vehicular traffic (i.e. Newport Blvd.). The study also recommended mitigation specifically for residential units to reduce the noise levels to acceptable levels and in compliance with the City's noise regulations. Additionally, in regards to potential noise associated with nearby commercial /retail and restaurant uses, as with all new development projects, the buyers of residential units will be presented with disclosure statements in compliance with applicable state law. n U • 17 Comment Letter No. 5 Orange County Sanitation District Letter dated September 1, 2006 Response to Comment: 5 -1 Comment noted. The project will be required to comply with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements and City of Newport Beach. • • is � a� • Comment Letter No. 6 State of California — California Coastal Commission Letter dated August 31, 2006 (Letter received by City on September 7, 2006) Response to Comment: 6 -1 The comment letter dated August 21, 2003 previously submitted by the Coastal Commission commented on a project design quite different than that proposed by the current property owner (ETCO Development). The previous development proposed filling both boat slipways. In response to the concerns raised by the Coastal Commission in 2003, the current owner completely redesigned the project to retain and enhance the larger of the two boat slipways. Not only will this slipway be retained as an open water area on -site but will also be enlarged and existing containments removed. The proposed project also provides for a pedestrian /vehicle bridge, a view corridor between the buildings, and pedestrian access to the waterfront by providing walkways within the site in addition to along the waterfront. . 6 -2 The project has been designed so that there is a mixed -use of commercial /retail and residential uses within the property. Commercial parking areas are provided on the ground floor of the parking structure located on the bayward side that faces the waterfront in conjunction with commercial /retail uses. At this time there is not a predetermined list of the tenants but it's anticipated that the type of tenants will comply with applicable requirements of the LUP and the Specific Plan which governs the development of the site. n U 19