HomeMy WebLinkAboutCarnation Village (PA2002-067)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH EAppeal ring Date: July 18, 2002
PLANNING DEPARTMENT enda Item: 3
3300 NEWPORT BOULEVARD aff Person: Bill Cunningham
NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658 (949) 644 -3200
(949) 6443200; FAX (949) 644 -3229 Period: 14 days after final action
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
PROJECT: Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
308 & 312 Carnation Avenue
SUMMARY: Request for a Tentative Tract Map, Modification Permit and Coastal
Residential Development Permit to allow construction of six condominium
units located in Corona del Mar. The condominium units will replace two
apartment complexes consisting of fifteen units.
ACTION: Approve Newport Tract No.. 2002-001, Modification Permit No. 2002 -041,
and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2002 -001 (PA2002 -067)
by adopting resolution entitled: "A Resolution of the Planning Commission
of the City of Newport Beach Approving Newport Tract No. 2002 -001,
Modification Permit No. 2002 -041, and Coastal Residential Development
Permit No. 2002 -001 (PA2002 -067) for Property Located at 308 & 312
Carnation Avenue."
APPLICANT: Andrew Goetz
250 Newport Center Drive, Suite 102
Newport Beach, CA 92660
PROPERTY
OWNER: Richard Duggan
P.O. Box 3187
Newport Beach, CA 92659
LOCATION: On the east side of Carnation Avenue and approximately 100 feet north of
Seaview Avenue in Corona del Mar.
LEGAL
DESCRIPTION: Lots 8, 10, 12 and 14 in Block 231 of Corona del Mar Tract.
GENERAL PLAN: Multi- Family Residential
ZONING
DISTRICT: Multiple Family Residential (MFR) District - (2,140 sq. ft. per unit).
0 2600 400 Filet
VI I I`1 TY ICIiP
Tract Map No. 2002- 001(m2oo2 -ov)
308 & 312 Carnation Avenue
[=7e�lol ment:
Multiple - family residential (15 apartment units)
To the north:
Single-family residence
To the east
Multiple-family residential (apartments) across a private alley
To the south
Multi le -fami] residential (condominiums)
To the west:
Single-farnily Single-family residences and condominiums across Carnation Avenue
Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
July 18, 2002
Page 2 of 9
Introduction & Background
The applicant, Andrew Goetz, authorized agent for the property owner Richard Duggan, is
seeking approval of a tentative tract map to allow the consolidation of two lots into a single lot in
order to construct six new condominium units. The application includes a request for a
Modification Permit to allow a reduced side yard setback from the required 7.84 feet to 4 feet,
and a Coastal Residential Development Permit to allow the demolition of 15 apartment units
within the Coastal Zone.
The site currently consists of two parcels that are developed with two apartment buildings on
each parcel, consisting respectively of five units and ten units (total of 15 units). The property is
located on a private street (Carnation Avenue), and backs onto a private alley.
Proiect Overview
The applicant proposes six condominium units in four buildings that will be constructed to
appear as four individual townhouses. The two end buildings, will consist of a single three -story
unit. The two center buildings will consist of two three -story units each that are configured with
the second unit behind a front unit. Access to the off -street parking will be from the private alley
to the rear of the proposed structures. Access is provided from Carnation Avenue, which is a
private street.
The following table summarizes each unit within the complex:
Analysis
General Plan
The City's General Plan designates the site as Multi - Family Residential. Multiple - family
residential, with a density of one unit per 2,140 square feet of lot area, is a permitted use within
this land use designation. The density of the proposed project is 2,416 sq. ft. per unit. Therefore,
the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan.
Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
July 18, 2002
Page 3 of 9
Development Standards
The following table summarizes the project and Zoning Code development standards:
Site Area
2,140 sq. ft. /unit
2,416 sq. ft. /unit
Min. Lot Area
5,000 sq. ft.
14,496 sq. ft.
Min. Lot Width
50 ft.
105 ft.
Setbacks:
Front
10 ft.
10 ft.
Side(s)
7.84 ft.
4 ft.
Rear
10 ft.
10 ft.
Building Height
28(33 ft. max ridge)
28(33 ft. max ridge)
Max. Floor Area
12,478 sq. ft.
12,294 sq. ft.
Open Space
37,467 cu. ft.
42,672 cu. ft.
Parking
15 spaces
15 spaces
As noted by the above Table, the project meets or exceeds the development standards of the
MFR District with the exception of the side yard setbacks.
Side Yard Setbacks:
The applicant originally intended to maintain the project on two separate parcels, which would
have resulted in a side yard setback requirement of four feet. However, at the request of staff,
applicant is processing a new tract map to consolidate the two parcels into a single parcel for
condominium purposes. Therefore, the new single parcel with an average lot width of 98 feet,
requires side yard setbacks of eight percent of the average lot width, or 7.84 feet. The project has
been designed to appear as four townhouses and is similar and complimentary to surrounding
residential development.
The reduction in the setback must not be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and
general welfare of persons residing or working in the area or detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the City. Further, the reduction in the
setback must be consistent with the legislative intent of the Zoning Code. Given the design of the
Carnation Village (PA2002-067)
July 18, 2002
Page 4 of 9
Project, staff is supportive to the modification request to allow a four -foot setback along the north
and south property lines, since 4 feet sideyards are common in the area and buildings have no
more floor area than if the 7.84 -foot sideyards were maintained. Staff does not believe the
setback reduction will prove detrimental to abutting properties as the existing buildings are
similarly sited.
Building Height:
The project site is located within the 28/32 Foot Height Limitation Zone. The propose buildings
are three - stories in height. In computing maximum building height in the case of buildings with
sloped roofs, Zoning Code Section 20.65.030 provides that the height is measured from the mid-
point of the roof plain and the natural grade below, with no portion of the roof structure
exceeding thirty -three feet. The plan cross sections (Sheets A -6 through A -10) show the roof
mid -point lines and maximum 33 -foot lines. In all cases, the various roof elements throughout
the project do not exceed the 28 -foot roof mid -point or the 33 -foot maximum roof height
limitations.
Floor Area:
Zoning Code Section 20.10.040B provides that in areas designated as Old Corona del Mar, the
total gross floor area shall not exceed 1.5 times the buildable area of a site. The buildable area
for the project site (lot area less the required setbacks) is 8,319 square feet. Therefore, the
maximum floor area limit is 12,478 square feet (8,319 sq. ft. X 1.5). The total gross floor area
for the proposed project is 12,294 square feet.
Parking/Access
The Zoning Code requires that multi - family residential provide parking at the rate of two spaces
per unit plus 0.5 space of guest parking per unit. The proposed six -unit condominium project,
therefore, requires a total of 15 spaces (12 unit spaces and three guest spaces) of which six are
required to be covered. Fourteen of the parking spaces are covered, with eight located within
garage; one guest space is uncovered. Also, six of the spaces are arranged in a tandem
configuration -- Zoning Code Section 20.66.040B.2 permits tandem parking up to a maximum of
two cars in depth within residential districts. The project meets the off - street parking
requirements of the Zoning Code, including the minimum parking space dimensions.
The project is located on a private street (Carnation Avenue). Access to the parking spaces is
proposed to be from a private 14 -foot wide alley. The applicant has set the garage door entrances
and parking spaces back ten feet from the centerline of the alley. The apartment building on the
west side of the alley is setback three feet from the alley, thereby resulting in a twenty -foot drive
aisle access to the garages. City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the plans and he feels the turning
radius for the parking access is sufficient.
Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
July 18, 2002
Page 5 of 9
Coastal Residential Development Permit
Zoning Code Section 20.86.030A provides that a Coastal Residential Development Permit
(CRDP) is required when a project proposes to demolish or convert into condominiums eleven or
more dwelling units in two or more structures. The proposed project will result in the demolition
of fifteen dwelling units located in four structures. Therefore, the CRDP is required for this
project. Section 20.86.070 requires that any affordable units that are demolished be replaced on a
one for one basis. The applicant submitted income data for the tenants of the units occupied at
the time of the application submittal. That income data indicates that the tenants are not low -
income. Therefore, there is no replacement requirement for low- income units. The applicant has
also submitted a signed affidavit stating that at the time of the application submittal, six of the
units were vacant. Of the six units, five statements from the prior tenants are on file that show a
voluntary vacation of the unit, and one unit was an eviction for non - payment of rent. The
applicant, therefore, has demonstrated compliance with the requirements of Chapter 20.86, and
staff recommends approval of the CRDP.
Landscape /Street Improvements
Each of the four buildings are set back from Carnation Avenue a distance of 28 feet from the
existing curb along Carnation Avenue. The applicant proposes to eliminate the existing sidewalk
along Carnation Avenue, and provide a two -foot wide planter, a 27 -inch high landscape wall,
with a combination of hardscape and landscape in front of each townhouse. The Public Works
Department, however, has recommended that the five -foot wide sidewalk located to the south of
the property be extended, which will require that the landscape wall be relocated back an
additional five feet. Condition No. 11 in the Draft Resolution (Exhibit No. 1) requires new curbs
and gutters and new five -foot wide sidewalk.
Tract Map
The application includes a new tentative tract map (Newport Tract No. 2002- 001/I'entative Tract
Map No. 16377) that will consolidate the two existing parcels into a single lot for the purposes of
establishing six condominiums. The applicant originally proposed to process a lot line
adjustment to maintain two parcels with a lot line between two of the center townhouses.
However, staff advised the applicant to process a new tract map for a single parcel. As noted
above, the consolidation of the parcels into a single lot results in an increased side yard
requirement, and hence the request for the Modification Permit (see Side Yard Setback
discussion above).
If the Planning Commission determines that one or more of the findings listed cannot be made,
the tentative tract must be denied.
1. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent
with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with applicable provisions of
the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code. As noted in the previous sections,
Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
July 18, 2002
Page 6 of 9
staff believes that the project can be found consistent with the General Plan. The Public
Works Department has reviewed the proposed tract map believes that it is consistent with
the Subdivision Code. Conditions of approval will be included to ensure compliance.
2. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development. The site is
relatively flat and adequate access is provided. The Zoning Code establishes the
maximum density for this MFR area at 2,140 square feet of lot area per unit. The density
proposed is 2,416 square feet per unit. Staff believes that the site can be found suitable for
a condominium project and the proposed density of development proposed as it complies
with the density standard of the Zoning Code.
3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision- making body may
nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was prepared
for the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the California
Environmental Quality Act that specific economic, social, or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project altenzatives identified in the environmental
impact report. The site is presently developed with residential uses and no significant
environmental resources are present or in the nearby vicinity. Demolition and
construction activities will be limited to the project site and abutting streets. A Initial
Study and Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project for consideration,
which concludes that the project will have no significant impact on the environment.
4. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems. The project consists of the demolition of the existing
structures and the construction of 6 condominium units permitted by local ordinances and
the General Plan. No evidence is known that would indicate that the proposed subdivision
pattern will generate any public health problems.
5. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within
the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision - making body may approve a
map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that
these easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the
public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established
by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to the
City Council to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access
through or use of property within a subdivision. No public easements for access through
or use of the property have been retained for the use by the public at large. Public utility
easements and private access rights within Carnation Avenue and the private alley to the
east of the project site will not be affected as the project avoids construction in these
areas. Needed utility connections that serve the project site are present and will be
modified, if necessary, to serve the new project.
Camation Village (PA2002 -067)
July 18, 2002
Page 7 of 9
6. That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, if
the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a subdivision
of the land would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will
result in residential development incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the
land. The site is not subject to a Williamson Act contract, therefore, this finding does not
apply.
7. That, in the case of a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California
Business and Professions Code: (a) there is an adopted specific plan for the area to be
included within the land project; and (b) the decision- making body finds that the
proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area. The project site is
not subject to a Specific Plan and therefore this finding does not apply.
8. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been
satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act.
The design of the proposed project must comply with applicable energy conservation
provision of the Uniform Building Code; therefore, staff believes this finding can be
made.
9. That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and
Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City's share of the
regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the
public service needs of the City's residents and available fiscal and environmental
resources. The proposed subdivision replaces 15 units that are nonconforming with
respect to applicable local density standards with 6 units. This reduction in density
complies with current density standards and the loss of 9 units will does not significantly
impact regional housing needs.
10. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system
will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board. With the reduction in units, waste discharge into the existing
sewer will be less than current levels. The project is residential and staff is not aware of
that residential sewage discharge would violate Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) requirements.
11. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision
conforms to the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public
access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act. The proposed
subdivision is entirely within the coastal zone and the site is not presently developed with
coastal - related uses, coastal- dependent uses or water - oriented recreational uses. The site
does not provide public access to coastal or recreational resources.
In summary, staff believes that each of the required findings for the proposed subdivision either
can be made or are inapplicable to the project.
Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
July 18, 2002
Page 8 of 9
Environmental Review
Staff has conducted an environmental analysis of the project and the Enviommental Checklist has
been completed in accordance with the requirements of the California Envrionmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Staff concluded that the project could not have a significant effect on the enviroment,
and a Negative Declaration was. prepared, circulated, and necessary notices distributed in
accordance with CEQA. The Negative Declaration is included as Exhibit No. 3 to this staff report.
Conclusion
Staff believes the project is well designed and is complimentary to surrounding residential
development. The project will result in a decrease in the total number of dwelling units by
replacing fifteen rental units with six condominium units. All of the development standards have
been met, with the exception of the side yard setback, which results from a staff request to
consolidate the two existing parcels into a single parcel. Also, the demolition of the 15 existing
apartments will not result in the removal of low and moderate income housing. Therefore, staff
recommends approval of the Tract Map, Modification Permit and Coastal Residential
Development Permit. If the Commission concurs, the draft resolution for project approval
should be considered (Exhibit No. 1).
The Commission has the option to approve a modified project with respect to the Modification
Permit request relative to the sideyard setbacks if it is determined that the setback reduction will
be detrimental to abutting properties. In this case, it would be appropriate continue the project for
project redesign.
The Commission also has the option to deny the project based on evidence and testimony
submitted at the public hearing related to the tract map findings. Staff has not prepared findings
for denial based upon the design of the subdivision, as staff has not uncovered information or
facts to support this conclusion.
Submitted by:
PATRICIA L. TEMPLE
Planning Director
Exhibits
Prepared by:
WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM
Contract Planner
1. Resolution No. 2002 -_; findings and conditions of approval
2. Letter and project description from applicant
3. Environmental Checklist and Negative Declaration
4. Project plans
Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
July 18, 2002
Page 9 of 9
EXHIBIT 1
RESOLUTION NO. _
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH APPROVING NEWPORT TRACT
NO. 2002 -001, MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. 2002 -041, AND
COASTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2002-
001 (PA2002 -067) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 308 & 312
CARNATION AVENUE
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS,
RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was filed by Andrew Goetz, authorized agent for the property
owner, Richard Duggan, with respect to property located at 308 & 312 Carnation Avenue and described as
Lots 8, 10, 12 and 14 in Block 231 of Corona del Mar Tract, requesting approval of Newport Tract No.
2001 -001, Modification Permit No.2002 -041, and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2002 -001,
to allow construction six condominium units located in Corona del Mar. Included within the request is a
modification of the required 7.84 -foot side yard setback to allow 4 -foot side yard setbacks.
Section 2. A public hearing was held on July 18, 2002 in the City Hall Council Chambers,
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting
was given in accordance with the Municipal Code. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and
considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed six -unit condominium project is consistent with the General Plan and the purpose
of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the
neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the
vicinity or to the general welfare of the City.
2. The proposed Tract Map for the purposes of construction of six condominium units and the
proposed design and improvements of the property are consistent with the General Plan, the
Subdivision Map Act and the provisions of the Newport Beach Subdivision Code for the
following reasons:
a. The site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development;
b. The consolidation of the two parcels will not create a parcel that is substandard and that
does not meet the requirements of the Newport Beach Zoning Code;
C. The design of the six-unit condominium project is not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or cause serious public injury;
d. The design of the six-unit condominium project is not likely to conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large.
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Pace 2 of 6
3. The modification of the 7.84 -foot side yard setback to allow 4 -foot setbacks on both side of the
property will not, under the circumstances of this case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peach,
comfort and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood, or will it be
detrimental or injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare
of the City, and further the proposed modification is consistent with the legislative intent of the
Zoning Code.
4. The six -unit condominium development and the resultant demolition of the existing 15 -unit
apartment buildings will not result in the removal of low and moderate income housing units
within the Coastal Zone, will not result in the relocation of individuals who reside in below - market
rate housing, and is otherwise consistent with the requirements of the Zoning Code regulations as
they pertain to Low and Moderate Income Housing within the Coastal Zone.
An Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) have been prepared in compliance with the
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K -3.
The Draft ND was circulated for public comment between June 28, 2002 and July 18, 2002. No
comments were received from any responsible agency, member of the community, or other
interested party and no responses were prepared.
6. The contents of the environmental document have been considered in the various decisions on this
project. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project will have a
less than significant impact upon the environment and there are no known substantial adverse
affects on human beings that would be caused. Additionally, there are no long -term
environmental goals that would be compromised by the project. There are no cumulative impacts
that are anticipated in connection with the project. The project has been conditioned to mitigate
any adverse conditions. The prepared Negative Declaration is hereby approved,
Section 4. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves
Newport Tract No. 2002 -001, Modification Permit No. 2002 -041, and Coastal Residential Development
Permit No. 2002 -001, subject to the Conditions set forth in Exhibit "A."
Section 5. This action shall become final and effective fourteen days after the adoption of this
Resolution unless within such time an appeal is filed with the City Clerk or this action is called for review
by the City Council in accordance with the provisions of Title 20, Planning and Zoning, of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code.
Ja
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paee 3 of 6
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF JULY, 2002.
m
W
Larry Tucker, Chairman
Earl McDaniel, Secretary
I1
NOES:
13
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No.
Page 4 of 6
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
NEWPORT TRACT NO. 2002-001, MODIFICATION PERMIT NO. 2002-041,
AND COASTAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. 2002-001
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved plot plan, floor plan, and
elevations dated April 27, 2002.
2. Modification Permit No. 2002 -041 and Coastal Residential Development Permit No. 2002 -001
shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section
20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted.
3. The Planning Commission may add to or modify conditions of approval to this use permit, or
revoke this permit upon a determination that the implementation of the project which is the subject
of this approval causes injury, or is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or
general welfare of the community.
4. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City Building and Fire
Departments. The construction plans must comply with the most recent City- adopted version of
the Uniform Building Code. The construction plans must meet all applicable State Disabilities
Access requirements. Adequate access and exiting must be approved by the Building Department.
5. A final map shall be recorded. The final map shall be prepared so that the Bearings relate to
the State Plane Coordinate System, and shall be prepared on the California coordinate system
(NAD83) and that prior to recordation of the final map, the surveyor /engineer preparing the
map shall submit to the County Surveyor 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. 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. 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.
6. All improvements Shall be constructed as required by Ordinance and the Public Works
Department.
7. In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code or
other applicable section or chapter, additional street trees shall be provided and existing street
trees shall be protected in place during construction of the subject project, unless otherwise
approved by the General Services Department and the Public Works Department.
,a
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Page 5 of 6
8. A standard use permit agreement and accompanying surety shall be provided 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.
9. Each dwelling unit/building shall be 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.
10. The on -site parking, vehicular circulation and pedestrian circulation systems shall be subject to
further review by the Traffic Engineer.
11. Curb and gutter shall be constructed along the Carnation Avenue frontage where missing or if
the Public Works Department. determines replace is necessary. A five -foot wide sidewalk shall
be constructed along the Carnation Avenue frontage. A half width section of alley shall be
reconstructed along the project frontage, including the concrete ribbon gutter.
12. The applicant shall stripe and sign any fire lane as may be established by the Newport Beach
Fire Department.
13. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be shown of standard improvement plans
prepared by a licensed civil engineer.
14. A drainage 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 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. The private sewer laterals connecting to the City main must be
designed to prevent the sewer gases in the City main from backing up into the private sewer
laterals.
15. A non - exclusive easement for ingress and egress be dedicated over the Carnation Avenue
frontage and that an easement for public emergency and security ingress, egress and public
utility purposes over Carnation Avenue be dedicated to the City and that all easements be
shown on the tract map.
16. A non - exclusive easement for ingress and egress be dedicated over the alley frontage.
17. All vehicular access to the property shall be from the adjacent alley unless otherwise approved
by the City Council.
18. All Public Works Department plan check and inspection fees shall be paid by the applicant.
19. 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
state and local requirements.
�5
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission Resolution No. _
Paee 6 of 6
20. Overhead utilities serving the site 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 unreasonable or impractical.
21. Any Southern California Edison transformers serving the site shall be located outside the sight
distance planes in accordance with City Standard 110 -L.
22. Smoke detectors within the units shall be interconnected to waterflow switches on the fire
sprinkler systems where determined by the Fire Department.
23. All on -site exterior lighting shall be provided in a manner so as to restrict any light and glare to the
property. Exterior wall- mounted light fixtures shall be equipped with cut -off shields in order to
prevent light spillage to surrounding properties and private streets and alleys.
Ui
G. --TZ & ASSOCIATES
kchltectso Engineerse consultants
National
Tentative Map Application
LICENSES
Modification Request
Arc it
Registration
308 -312 Carnation
Alaska
,four
Arizona
Corona del Mar, California
Calitomie
At the request of Planning, in lieu of a Lot Line Adjustment and construction of three
Colorado
units on each lot, it was suggested the entitlement be processed via a Tentative
Nevada
Map application. In preparation of the Tentative Map, all existing lot lines will be
Oregon
Utah
ACCOMPANYING WRITTEN STATEMENT
National
This project consists of a six unit development located in Corona del Mar. The
aural
current land consists of two lots which, based on their street frontage in this zone,
Arc it
Registration
have, by definition, foot sideyard setbacks.
Boards
,four
NCARB
At the request of Planning, in lieu of a Lot Line Adjustment and construction of three
units on each lot, it was suggested the entitlement be processed via a Tentative
Map application. In preparation of the Tentative Map, all existing lot lines will be
SOCIETIES
abandoned, thus the requirement for 7.84 foot sideyard setbacks.
American
Institute
Of
The project has been designed to appear as row housing which is consistent with
Architects
all Flower Street developments in Corona del Mar. The spirit of the setbacks has
been maintained in the creative design of the proposed project. The alternatives
Building
we explored without this request for a modification would have been two buildings
Industry
Association
of greater mass. It is our sincere belief this proposal is far superior than any
BIA
alternatives we have evaluated.
American
Society of
Respectfully,
Interior
Designers
ASID
Construction
Specification
Andrew Goetz, Architect
Institute
CSI
National
Trusttor
Historical
Preservation
American
National
Standards
Institute
250 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 102 • NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 926W • (949) 6449319 • FAX (H49)644 -9317 `�
EXHIBIT 3
ENVIRONMNETAL CHECKLIST
AND NEGATVIE DECLARATION
l'A
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
>, 3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768
u Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
c�roa (949) 644 -3200
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
To:
F1office of Planning and Research .
P.O. BOX 3044
Sacramento, CA 95812 -3044
County Clerk, County of Orange
Public Services Division
P.O. Box 238
Santa Ana, CA 92702
Public review period:
Name of Project: Carnation Village
From: City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
(orange County)
Date received for filing at OPR/County Clerk:
June 28, 2002 — July 18, 2002
Project Location: 308 & 312 Carnation Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Project Description: The project consists of resubdivision of two lots into a single lot in order to
construct six condominium units. The project includes a request for a reduction in the required side
yard setbacks from 7.84 feet to 4 feet, and demolition of 15 existing apartments within the Coastal
Zone.
Finding: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council K -3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the
California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Newport Beach has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the
proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment.
A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting this finding is attached. The Initial Study may include
mitigation measures that would eliminate or reduce potential environmental impacts. This document will be considered by the
decision- maker(s) prior to final action on the proposed project A public hearing will be held to consider this project, held on the
18th day of July 2002, at the hour of 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Newport Beach City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard,
Newport Beach, California
Additional plans, studies and/or exhibits relating to the proposed project are be available for public review. If you
would like to examine these materials, you are invited to contact the undersigned.
If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document, your comments should be submitted in writing
prior to the close of the public review period. Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you
believe would result from the project, why they are significant, and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be
adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. There is no fee for this appeal. If a public hearing will be held, you are also invited
to attend and testify as to the appropriateness of this document.
If you have any questions or would like further information, please contact the undersigned at (949) 644 -3200.
Date
Senior Planner
at
1
04
3.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
Project Title: Carnation Village (PA2002 -067)
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard,
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
Contact Person and Phone Number: Bill Cunningham, Planning Department
(949) 644 -3200
4. Project Location: 308 & 312 Carnation Avenue
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Andrew Goetz
250 Newport Center Drive, Suite 102
Newport Beach, CA 92660 .
6. General Plan Designation: Multi - Family Residential (2,140 sq. ft. per unit)
7. Zoning: Multiple Family Residential (1VIFR) District
8. Description of Project:
The project consists of resubdivision of two lots into a single lot for the purposes of
constructing six condominium units. The project includes a request for a reduction in the
required side yard setbacks from 7.84 feet to 4 feet, and demolition of 15 apartments within
the Coastal Zone.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
Current
Development:
Two apartment buildings consisting of 10 and 5 units respectively.
To the north:
Single family residence.
To the east:
Multiple family residential (apartments) across a private alley.
To the south:
Multiple family residential (condominiums),
To the west:
Attached and detached single family residential across Carnation
Avenue (private street).
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
California Coastal Commission
CHEC trBT
Page,'
h1
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
0 Land Use Planning
0 Population & Housing
❑ Geological Problems
❑ Water
❑ Air Quality
DETERMINATION
0 Transportation/
Circulation
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Energy & Mineral
Resources
❑ Hazards
❑ Noise
❑ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
0 Public Services
0 Utilities & Service
Systems
❑ Aesthetics
❑ Cultural Resources
❑ Recreation
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions
in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent.
A NMGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the
environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact"
or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain
to be addressed. ❑
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
CHEMIST
Page 2 a
on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EiR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothing further is required.
Submitted by: James Campbell, Senior Planner Signature
Planning Department
Prepared by: William Cunningham, Contract Planner Signature
A
0
Date
G - / ?-0.-2-
Date
F.NUSERSTLNVSHARED \iFDRMSMC DECi0 KLIST.DOC
CHECKLIST
Page 3 of
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
I. AESTHETICS.
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect
on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
C) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings?
c) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
11. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES.
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
C) Involve other changes in the
existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use?
Ill. AIR QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
endally potentially Lesa than no
niflcant Significant Significant Impact
npact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
Ej
❑ ❑ ' ❑ 0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
CHECMJST
Page 4 ��
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation? -
C) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non - attainment
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting
a substantial number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations
or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
FS
0
A
0
X
0
0
0
■ J
❑
0
entially
Potentially
Les$ than No
nificant
Significant
significant ' Impact
npact
Unless
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
FS
0
A
0
X
0
0
0
■ J
❑
0
LEI
Lam'
Q
JJ
J
J
CHECKLIST
Page 5 �r
CFECtCLMT
Page 6
a
Potentially
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Less than
Significant '
No
Impact
Impact
Unless
Impact ,
Mitigation
d)
Interfere substantially with the
❑
Incorporated
❑
❑
H
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impeded the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e)
Conflict with any local policies or
❑
❑
❑
❑
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f)
Conflict with the provisions of an
❑
❑
❑
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
V.
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would
the project:
a)
Cause a substantial adverse
❑
❑
❑
0
change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in
§15064.5?
b)
Cause a substantial adverse
❑
❑
❑
0
change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
C)
Directly or indirectly destroy a
❑
❑
❑
0
unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature?
d)
Disturb any human remains,
❑
❑
❑
0
including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
VI.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS.
Would the project:
a)
Expose people or structures to
❑
❑
❑
0
potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
CFECtCLMT
Page 6
a
CHECKLIST
Page 7 a
Potentially
Significant
Potentially
Significant
Lesa than
Significant "
Flu
Impact
Impact
Unless
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
❑
❑
❑
H
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist - Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist
for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground
❑
❑
❑
shaking?
iii) Seismic - related ground failure,
❑
❑
❑
including liquefaction?
0
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑
❑
b)
Result in substantial soil erosion or
❑
❑
❑
B
the loss of topsoil?
C)
Be located on a geologic unit or soil
❑
❑
❑
0
that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the
project and potentially result in on-
or off -she landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
d)
Be located on expansive soil, as
❑
❑
❑
0
defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or
property?
e)
Have soils incapable of adequately
❑
❑
❑
0
supporting the use septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
VII.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS.
Would the project:
a)
Create a significant hazard to the
❑
❑
❑
0
public or the environment through
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
CHECKLIST
Page 7 a
b)
C)
R
e)
f)
I g)
h)
Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one - quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
Be located on a site which is
included on a list of hazardous
materials sites which complied
pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment?
For a project within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project
area?
Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
Potentially
Potentially
Less than No
Significant
Significant
Significant ' Impact
Impact
unless
Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
❑
❑
❑ 0
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
CKC =T
Page 8 a�
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER
QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards
'or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g.,
the production rate of pre- existing
nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off -site?
d) Substantially after the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of a
course of a stream or river, or
substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in
flooding on or off -site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade
water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100 -year
flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard
area structures which would impede
or redirect flood flows?
.
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑ p ❑ 0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
Page 9 as
i)
Expose people or structures to a
❑
❑
❑
0
significant risk of loss, injury or
death Involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of
a levee or dam?
D
Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
❑
❑
❑
0
- mudflow?
IX.
LAND USE AND PLANNING.
Would the proposal:
a)
Physically divide an established
❑
❑
❑
0
community?
b)
Conflict with any applicable land use
❑
❑
0
❑
plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to
the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
C)
Conflict with any applicable habitat
❑
❑
❑
0
conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
X.
MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the project:
a)
Result in the loss of availability of a
❑
❑
❑
0
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b)
Result in the loss of availability of a
❑
❑
❑
0
locally- important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan, or other
land use plan?
C)
Displace substantial numbers of
❑
❑
❑
0
people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
XI.
NOISE.
Would the project result in:
a)
Exposure of persons to or
❑
❑
❑
0
generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
agencies?
0MCIQ.IST
Page 10
3
b)
Exposure of persons to or
❑
❑
❑ 0
generation of excessive
groundbome vibration or
groundbore noise levels?
C)
A substantial permanent increase in
❑
❑
❑
ambient noise levels in the project
- vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
d)
A substantial temporary or periodic
❑
❑
0 ❑
increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
e)
For a project located within an
❑
❑
❑ 0
airport land use land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a
❑
❑
❑ 0
private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
XII.
POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the project:
a)
Induce substantial population
❑
❑
❑ 0
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes
and businesses) or indirectly (tor
example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure)?
b)
Displace substantial numbers of
❑
❑
0 ❑
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
C)
Displace substantial numbers of
❑
❑
0 ❑
people, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
CHECKLIST
Page 11'
a)
Would the project result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered government facilities, need
-for new or physically altered
government facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of
the public services:
Fire protection?
❑
❑
❑
0
Police protection?
❑
❑
❑
0
Schools?
❑
❑
❑
Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑
XIV.
RECREATION
a)
Would the project increase the use
❑
❑
❑
of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b)
Does the project include
❑
❑
❑
0
recreational facilities or require the
construction of or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment? opportunities?
XV.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC .
Would the project:
a)
Cause an increase in traffic which is
❑
❑
❑
substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street
system (i.e., result in a substantial
=
increase in either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume to capacity
ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b)
Exceed either individually or
❑
❑
❑
cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county
congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
CHECKUSr
Page 12
`� c
C)
Result in a change in air traffic
❑
❑
❑
0
patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change
in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d)
Substantially increase hazards due
❑
❑
❑
0
to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e)
Result in inadequate emergency
❑
❑
❑
0
access?
f)
Result in inadequate parking
❑
❑
❑
0
capacity?
g)
Conflict with adopted policies, plans,
❑
❑
❑
0
or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
XVI.
UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project.
a)
Exceed wastewater treatment
❑
❑
❑
0
requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control
Board?
b)
Require or result in the construction
❑
❑
❑
0
of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant
environmental effects?
C)
Require or result in the construction
❑
❑
❑
0
of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant
environmental effects?
=
d)
Have sufficient water supplies
❑
❑
❑
0
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources,
or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e)
Result in a determination by the
❑
❑
❑
0
wastewater treatment provider,
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity
to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's
existing commitments?
ctEcta W
Page 13
3
f)
Be served by a landfill with sufficient
❑
❑
❑ 0
permitted capacity to accommodate
the project's solid waste disposal
needs?
g)
Comply with federal, state, andlocal
❑
❑
❑ 0
- statutes and regulations related to
solid waste?
XVII.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
a)
Does the project have the potential
❑
❑
❑ 0
to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self -
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major period of California history or
prehistory?
b)
Does the project have impacts that
❑
❑
❑
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
( "Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
C)
Does the project have
❑
❑
❑ 0
environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such
effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
CHBCKUST
Page 14
3
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the
mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which
they address site- specific conditions for the project.
SOURCE LIST
The following enumerated documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning
Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660.
1. Final Program EIR — City of Newport Beach General Plan
2. General Plan, including all its elements, City of Newport Beach.
3. Title 20, Zoning Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code,
4. Title 15, Building and Construction Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
5. City Excavation and Grading Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code.
6. Newport Tract Map No. 2002 -001, Modification Permit No. 2002 -041 and Coastal Residential
Development Permit No. 2002 -001 (PA2002 -034) Application and Plans.
7. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Map No. 06059C0062E, September 15; 1989.
8. Seismic Hazard Zones Map, Laguna Beach Quadrangle, April 15, 1998.
9. Title 10, Offenses and Nuisances of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
CHECKLIST
Page 15 5
3
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The following is a discussion of potential project impacts as identified in the Initial Study /Environmental Checklist.
Explanations are provided for each Rem.
i. Aesthetics: '
a. No Impact.
The site is not within a scenic vista area and does not impede views of the bay or coast. The project will modify
the views of the site in that two existing older apartment buildings will be replaced by six new condominium units.
The new units are designed as townhouses and will be consistent with surrounding residential units. In addition,
landscaping and garden walls are proposed to be installed along the Carnation Avenue frontage and along interior
property lines. Landscaped areas are in excess of the Zoning Code open space requirements. The buildings are
three story in height and comply with applicable height limits, and the architecture is Mediterranean. The building
heights are consistent with the City's height limits, and will not restrict views of the bay from surrounding properties
The architecture is of high quality, complementary to surrounding structures and the overall project aesthetics are
an improvement to the views of the site.
b. No Impact.
See response I -a. above. No significant resources or historic buildings exist on the site.
C. No Impact.
See response I -a. above.
d. No Impact.
The site is in a residential area and is surrounded by existing residential uses. Project lighting will be residential in
nature and therefore there are no anticipated light and glare impacts from the project.
Mitigation Measures:
The building design, orientation and landscaping will provide mitigation relative to aesthetic issues. There are no
significant environmental impacts and no mitigation measures are proposed or required.
II. Agriculture Resources:
a. No Impact.
The project has been developed with two older apartment buildings consisting of a total of 15 units and the
surrounding area is existing residential uses. There are no agricultural resources on or near the site:
b. No Impact.
See response II -a. above.
C. No Impact.
See response II -a. above.
Mitigation Measures:
There are no impacts on agricultural lands. No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
CHECKLIST
Page 16
�l
Ill. Air Quality:
a. No Impact.
The site has consisted of 15 apartment units. The project size is considerably below the thresholds outlined in
Table 6.2, Screening Table for Operation, and Table 6.3, Screening Table for Construction, SCAQMD CEQA Air
Quality Handbook. Short term impacts.associated with construction equipment are not anticipated to be adverse
and will be typical of the types of construction equipment used in the demolition of the existing two buildings and
construction of the six attached single family dwelling units. Short term impacts associated with construction
equipment are mitigated through existing Building Department requirements for dust control and equipment
operating standards.
b. No Impact.
See response III -a. above.
C. No Impact.
See response III -a. above.
d. No Impact.
See response III -a. above.
e. No Impact.
See response III -a above.
Mitigation Measures:
Short term impacts related to construction dust and vehicular fumes will be mitigated through the requirements for
dust control and vehicular emissions required by the City Building Code. There will be no long term impacts
associated with air quality. No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
IV. Biological Resources:
a. No Impact.
The project is located in an existing urbanized area that has been developed for residential purposes and the site
has consisted of 15 apartment units. There are no significant biological resources located on the site or in the
vicinity of the site.
b. No Impact.
See response IV -a. above.
C. No Impact.
The site is not located within a federally- identified wetland and will not impact any such resources.
d. No Impact.
The site is not located within a wildlife migratory corridor, therefore, the project will not interfere with any migratory
wildlife corridors.
e. No Impact.
The project will not result in the removal of any street trees or other significant biological resources. Some older
landscaping will be removed, but will be replaced with new landscaping.
CItECKLIST
Page 17 2
I. No Impact.
The project is not within an area Identified on any natural habitat or conservation plan.
Mitigation Measures:
The project will not adersely impact anybiological resources. No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
V. Cultural Resources:
a. No Impact.
The site and surrounding area are developed and no historical, archaeological or paleontological resources are
known or are likely to exist on the site or within close proximity to the site.
b. No Impact.
See response V -a. above.
C. No Impact.
See response V -a. above.
d. No Impact.
See response V -a. above.
Mitigation Measures:
There will be not impacts to cultural resources. No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
VI. Geology and Soils:
a. No Impact.
The area, as well as the entire central Orange County region, is located in an area subject to seismic activity. The
proposed buildings are proposed to be three stories in height -- up -to -date structural design standards and
conformance with the Uniform Building Code and local amendments to the Code will ensure that any seismic or
other geologic occurrence will not result in severe structural damage or human injury.
b. No Impact.
The site is located on flat terrain and is in an area of relatively stable soils.
C. No Impact.
See response VI -b, above.
d. No Impact.
See response to VI -b. above.
e. No Impact.
Sewers currently serve the site and are available to serve the project.
CHECKLIST
Page 18 y
Mitigation Measures:
Any mitigation associated with geology and soils will be undertaken in conjunction with existing building code
regulations. No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials:
a. No Impact.
The project consists of the demolition of 15 apartment units and replacement with 6 new condominium units.
There are no hazardous conditions or materials associated with the project. if asbestos or lead -based
architectural coatings are discovered during the demolition of the existing buildings, the applicant will be required
to comply with Building Department and SCAQMD rules for proper handling and disposal.
b. No Impact.
See response VII -a. above.
C. No Impact.
The project site is not within one - quarter mile of a school.
d. No Impact.
The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites.
e. No Impact.
The project site is not within an airport land use plan or within two miles of an airport.
No Impact.
See response to.Vli -e. above.
g. No Impact.
The project will not impair emergency facilities or emergency response plans.
h. No Impact.
The project is not in an area impacted by potential %Midland fires.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality:
a. No Impact.
The project consists of construction of 6 new condominium units on a site previously occupied by 15 apartment
units. The project will not adversely'impact water resources or water quality. The project site is not located within
a Flood Hazard area, and there will not be an increase in water runoff over previously existing conditions in that
the proposed site plan provides for reduced pavedfimpervious surface areas.
b. No Impact.
The project will not increase paved areas, and will not interfere with groundwater recharge.
CHECKLIST
Page 19 3�
C. No Impact.
The project will not alter drainage pattens on site or within the area -- storm runoff will continue to drain to the
abutting street and alley. The project will not result in increase stormwater run -off due to the decrease in paved
areas.
d. No Impact. -
See response to VIII -c. above.
e. No Impact.
See response to VIII -c. above.
I. No Impact.
See response to VIII -a. above.
g. No Impact.
See response to VIII -c. above.
h. No Impact.
The project is not located within a 100 -year flood hazard area as identified by the lastest Flood Rate Insurance
Map dated September 9, 1989.
i. No Impact.
See responses to Vill -c. and VIII -h. above.
j. No Impact.
The site is not subject to seiche, tsunami or mudflow hazards due to the location, elevation and flat topography of
the site.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigtion measures are proposed or required.
IX. Land Use and Planning:
a. No Impact.
The proposed project will not result in any barriers or other physical divisions within the Corona del Mai, community
and will not impede or views of or access to the bay, coastline or other public areas in the vicinity due to the size
and location of the project.
b. Less than Significant Impact.
The project site is located within an urban area and has been developed with two apartment buildings consisting of
a total of 15 units. The site and surrounding area are designated for single - family and multiple - family uses by both
the General Plan and the Zoning Code. With the exception of a modification to allow a reduction in side yard
setbacks from 7.84 feet to 4 feet, all of the site development standards of the zone district will be complied with.
The requested modification will be evaluated in terms of the design of the project and consistency with the design
of other surrounding residential properties.
CHECKLIST
Page 20 ��
C. No Impact.
The project site is not located within a habitat area or will it interfere with any habitat or community conservation
plan.
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation to land use and planning issues is addressed by the analysis and conditions imposed by the Tract Map,
Modification and Coastal Residential Development Permits. No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
X. Mineral Resources:
a. No Impact.
The project site is not located in an area of known mineral resources and will not result in the displacement of
people.
b. No Impact.
See response X -a. above.
C. No Impact.
See response X -a above.
XI. Noise:
a. No Impact.
The project will not expose persons to excessive noise levels and will be consistent with noise generation
commonly associated with residential development. All equipment, including heating/ventifation/air conditioning
equipment, will be required to be screened and baffled in a manner to lower noise levels generated by such
equipment to a level consistent with the CiVs Noise Ordinance and regulations. Section 10.28.040 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code restricts construction activities that generate noise to 7:00 am to 6:30 pm weekdays, 7 :00
am to 6:00 pm on Saturdays, and prohibits such activities on Sundays and holidays.
b. No Impact.
See response XI -a. above.
C. No Impact.
The project is located on a site previously used as apartment units, and is surrounded by existing residential uses.
d. Less than Significant Impact.
Short term noise impacts will occur associated with construction equipment in the demolition of the existing two
buildings and the construction of the new six -unit condominium project. Such equipment is characterized by
smaller mechanical devices such as bulldozers, nail guns and drills, and impacts are anticipated to be for a short
period of time of one year or less.
e. No Impact.
The project is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within two miles of a public or private airport.
No Impact.
See response XI -f. above.
CgEoa BT
Page 21 �`
Mitigtion Measures:
The project will be required to comply with the City of Newport Beach noise regulations. No mitigation measures
are proposed or required.
XII. Population and Housing:
a. No Impact.
The project site has 15 dwelling units in the past and the proposed new use proposed 6 units. The project will not
substantially change the character of the use, will not induce population. A total 9 units will be eliminated; at the
time of the permit application 6 of the total 15 apartment units had been voluntarily vacated.
b. Less than Significant Impact.
See response XII -a. above.
C. Less than Significant Impact.
See response XII -a. above.
XIII. Public Services:
a. No Impact.
The proposed use will replace 15 apartment units with 6 condominium units and will not result in an increased
demand for public services over what the site has required in the past.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
XIV. Recreation:
a. No Impact.
The proposed use will not result in new demands on recreational facilities due to the reduction in density.
b. No Impact.
See response XIV -a. above.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
XV. Transportation and Traffic:
a. No Impact.
The site will generate traffic and parking demand; however, the demand is not expected to be an increase over the
generation by the prior apartment use, and there is expect to be a net decrease in both traffic and parking due to
the decrease in total dwellings from the current 15 units to 6 units. The project meets the City requirements for
off - street parking. No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
b. No Impact.
See response XV -a. above,
CHECK=
Page 22 L`,
C. No Impact.
The proposed project will not have an impact on air traffic or air traffic patterns.
d. No Impact.
The project will not increase hazards a" result of design features.
e. No Impact.
The proposed project design has been reviewed by both the Police and Fire Departments with respect to
emergency access. There will be no adverse impacts associated with emergency access.
I. No Impact.
The project complies with the City's off-street parking requirements by providing two parking spaces per unit plus
three guest parking spaces (total of 15 off - street parking spaces).
g. No Impact.
The project will not interfere with trasportation- related or bicycle facilities.
XVI. Utilities & Service Systems:
a. No Impact.
The six -unit project will not increase the demand for water, result in increase in sewage, increase stormwater
runoff, or result in an increase in solid wastes over the previously existing 15 -unit apartment complex. Adequate
supplies and services exist to accommodate the proposed use.
b. No Impact.
See response to XVI -a. above.
c. No Impact.
See response to XVI -a. above.
d. No Impact.
See response to XVI -a. above.
e. No Impact.
See response to XVI -a. above.
f. No Impact
See response to XVI -a. above.
g. No Impact.
See response to XVI -a above.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are proposed or required.
ca"CliST
Page 23 ��
XVII. Mandatory Findings of Significance:
a. No Impact.
The project will not degrade the quality of the environment. Conditions are included within the Tract Map and
Modification and Coastal Residential Development Permit process and approval requiring mitigation of potential
impacts, and construction - related Codes will be required to be met.
b. No Impact.
The project site is in a residential area and has been used for residential purposes in the past. There are no
cumulative impacts associated with the project when considered in conjunction with other surrounding uses and
projects or future projects.
C. No Impact.
The project will not result in substantial adverse impacts to human beings. Conditions and design features have
been incorporated into the project to maintain noise levels at or below City requirements both during short-term
construction and long term occupancy of the six dwelling units.
CHECKLIST
Page 24 `A
L
{ r
I S ar V
i
i 1
� 41 Jp
I
t
H �
ff