Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJWA Settlement Agreement Extension GPAt (PA2001-222)CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Hearing Date: June 6, 2002 PLANNING DEPARTMENT Agenda Item: 6 A S' ZZ NEWPORT BOULEVARD Staff Person: Patrick J. Alford c"�4rowP�f- NEWPORT BEACH, CA 97658 (949) 644 -3235 (949) 644 -3200; EAX (949) 644-5729 REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PROJECT: JWA Settlement Agreement Extension General Plan Amendment (PA 2001- 222/GPA 2002 -001) SUMMARY: An amendment to the Land Use Element and Noise Element of the General Plan relating to the extension of the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement. ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. 2002- recommending adoption of General Plan Amendment GPA 2002 -001 to the City Council. Background In 1985, the County of Orange, the City of Newport Beach, Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON), and The Airport Working Group (AWG) reached a settlement concerning the development and operation of John Wayne Airport (JWA). The Settlement Agreement allows for the expansion of JWA in exchange for operational and capacity limits. The Settlement Agreement is set to expire on December 31, 2005. The City is currently in negotiations with the County to extend the term of the Settlement Agreement. The extension of the Settlement Agreement will likely involve a limited expansion of airport facilities and aircraft operations. Acting as the lead agency, the County of Orange prepared Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) 582 to address the potential environmental impacts associated with an amendment to the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement. DEIR 582 is also intended to support any City General Plan amendment that would be required to ensure conformity between the General Plan and the Settlement Agreement. The City is a responsible agency and worked closely with County staff and the environmental consultant during the preparation of this document. On February 26, 2002, the County Board of Supervisors approved a set of restrictions and constraints known as Scenario 1 and directed JWA staff to negotiate with the City within that framework. Under Scenario 1, the term of the Settlement Agreement would be extended to December 31, 2015. The number of noise - regulated flights would be permitted to increase from 73 to 85 as of January 1, 2005 and the annual passenger limit would be permitted to increase from 8.4 million annual passengers (MAP) to 9.8 MAP. The number of passenger loading gates would be permitted to increase from 14 to 18 as of January 1, 2005. Additional information on Scenario 1 is provided in the Executive Summary of DEIR 582, which is attached as Exhibit 1. Since some policies of the General Plan directly relate to the Settlement Agreement, some revisions to these policies are necessary in order to extend the term of the Settlement Agreement. Analysis The proposed General Plan amendment revises certain narratives, policies, and programs that contain references to the Settlement Agreement. Land Use Element Policy K links the land use designations and density/intensity to the JWA facilities and operational limits imposed by the Settlement Agreement. The language has been updated to reflect the extension of the Settlement Agreement. There are no substantive changes to the policy. The discussion has also been updated and promotes alternatives to JWA to assist in meeting Orange County's air transportation demands. Finally, the implementation section has been expanded to include cooperation with JWA flight corridor cities, residents, federal agencies, and air carriers to protect the Settlement Agreement. Section 3.1.1 (Transportation Noise Sources) of the Noise Element identifies common noise sources in the City, including aircraft operations. This section has been revised to update references to the Settlement Agreement. Section 3.6 (Community Noise Contours) of the Noise Element describes noise contours for all of the major noise sources. The fourth paragraph has been deleted to remove references to earlier environmental analyses. The fifth paragraph has been revised to update references to the Settlement Agreement and to identity the new Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contours for JWA from DEIR 582. It should be noted that the new CNEL noise contours are smaller than currently depicted in the Noise Element. The Noise Element currently uses CNEL noise contours based on the 1985 Master Plan for JWA, which contemplated a 10.2 MAP airport with a noisier fleet mix. Figure 5 has been updated to illustrate Year 2000 CNEL noise contours. Also, Figure 6 has been updated to illustrate the CNEL noise contours estimated for JWA under the terms of the amended Settlement Agreement. Finally, staff is adding a new illustration (Figure 6A), which will depict Year 2000 85 dB Single Event Noise Equivalent Level ( SENEL) noise contours. Goal 4.4 of the Noise Element directly addresses noise impacts from JWA. This goal and Related Policy 4.4.1 has been revised to update references to the Settlement Agreement and implementation strategies. Related Policy 4.4.2 (Possible Extension of the Settlement Agreement) has been deleted, as it is no longer applicable. Related Policy 4.4.3 (now renumbered to 4.4.2) has been revised to reflect the Year 2000 CNEL and SENEL noise contours. Related Policy 4.4.3 (now renumbered to 4.4.2) has been revised to reflect the new CNEL and SENEL noise contours. Finally, Related Policy 4.4.4 (now renumbered to 4.4.3) has been revised to remove Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approvals as a prerequisite to City Council approval to amendments to the Settlement Agreement. Should the City and the County approve the Settlement JWA GPA (GPA 2002 -001) June 6, 2002 Page 2 of 3 Agreement amendment, the County will revise the access plan for JWA, which may require FAA approval. Given this sequence of events, it may be problematic to obtain FAA approval in advance of local approvals. Environmental Review The County of Orange, acting as the lead agency, prepared Draft Environmental Impact Report 582 (SCH# 2001 1 1 1 1 35) to address the potential environmental impacts associated with an amendment to the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement. The environmental analysis includes any General Plan amendment that would be required to ensure conformity between the General Plan and the Settlement Agreement. The environmental analysis concluded that Scenario 1 presented no significant land use or noise impacts. The County Board of Supervisors certified the EIR on February 26, 2002. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending adoption of the General Plan amendment (GPA 2002 -001) to the City Council. Submitted by: PATRICIA L. TEMPLE Planning Director Exhibits Prepared by: PATRICK J. ALFORD Senior Planner .✓r 1. Orange County DEIR 582 Executive Summary. 2. Resolution recommending adoption of the General Plan amendment to the City Council. 3. Exhibit A (proposed revisions to the land Use Element and the Noise Element). JWA GPA (GPA 2002 -001) June 6, 2002 Page 3 of 3 John Wayne Airport EIR No. 582 SECTION 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 _GENERAL INTRODUCTION The environmental impact report (EIR) process, as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA) (Public Resources Code 21000 et seq.) as amended, requires the preparation of an objective, full - disclosure document to: a) inform agency decision makers and the general public of the direct and indirect environmental effects of a proposed action; b) identify, where feasible, mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate any identified significant adverse impacts; and, c) identify and evaluate alternatives to the proposed project which might lessen or avoid some or all of the identified significant impacts of the project. This EIR has been prepared to address the potential environmental impacts associated with an amendment of the term and conditions of the Stipulation of Settling Parties that was approved by the Honorable Terry J. Hatter and that resolved the litigation entitled County of Orange vs. Air Cat (USDC Case No. CV85 -1542 TJH (MCX) (Settlement Agreement 1985). In conformance with CEQA, this EIR identifies and assesses the potential individual and cumulative impacts of the proposed project. The County of Orange has decided to prepare a Program EIR prepared pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines states that a Program EIR "...may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project." The County of Orange is the project proponent and lead agency. The County of Orange is the proprietor of John Wayne Airport (JWA) and a party to the Settlement Agreement.' The City of Newport Beach is a responsible agency and would also be required to take action on the extension of the Settlement Agreement. This Program EIR is intended to evaluate the potential impacts that could result from an amendment to the Settlement Agreement assuming three different scenarios which are referred to in the document as Scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Each scenario proposes different levels of air operations, passenger levels, and facilities improvements. The Program EIR evaluates the reasonably foreseeable impacts associated with each scenario, but is not intended to be a construction level document. 1.2 HISTORY AND BACKGROUND JWA is owned and operated by the County of Orange and is currently the only commercial service airport in Orange County. It is located immediately adjacent to and south of Interstate 405 (1 -405) and east of State Route 55 (SR -55). The property currently encompasses approximately 504 acres of land including the airfield, terminal, surface level and parking structures, administrative building, and a portion of the Newport Beach Golf Course. Airport services in Orange County started in the early 1920s at a small airfield known as Martin's Airport. The airfield was situated on 60 acres of Irvine Ranch land approximately one mile north of where John Wayne Airport is located today. In 1939, the County Board of Supervisors made plans to extend South Main to Corona del Mar across the Irvine Ranch and Martin's Airport. To accommodate the roadway, the airport needed to be relocated. The Irvine Company donated the land to the County for the road extension and a new airport in exchange for an exclusive long -term lease for Martin Aviation at the new airport location. The new Orange County Airport was completed in September 1941 at which time the airport consisted of a 2,500 -foot paved runway with lights and a federal airways beacon. The I John Wayne Airport is also known as Orange County Airport. The call letters for the airport are SNA. C: xuments end Se ngsl Nn%=l SetbngstTs Wrary Intemet nlee\OLKF 044e on 1.1111MIAm W John Wayne Airport E!R Na 562 County provided an administration building and one hangar. Martin Aviation provided a second hangar for their use. In December 1941, during World War II, the U.S. Army Air Corps took over operation of the airport. The airfield was enlarged and improved for use as a fighter base. When the Army's improvements were completed, the airport had a 4,800 -foot runway, full runway lighting, and a control tower atop its existing administration building. Three years following the end of hostilities (1948), the federal government returned the airfield to the County under the condition that the property be operated as a public airport and that it be available to all types and classes of aeronautical uses. Because of this condition, the County was forced to cancel Martin Aviation's exclusive lease. By 1948, new fixed base operators (FBOs) had begun moving into the airport. These FBOs included the Martin School of Aviation; Ben Sprague's Repair Service and Sales Agency; the Don Hillman Air Taxi Service; and the Aerodusters cropdusting firm, as well as a few other rental, repair service and sales agencies. In 1952, Bonanza Airlines began the first regular scheduled commercial air service from Orange County to points in Southern California and Arizona. The airport underwent a period of slow expansion for the next few years during which civil air traffic was sufficiently infrequent that an unused taxiway on the field's west side became a weekend drag strip. The use of the taxiway as a drag strip was discontinued in 1958 when additional aircraft tie -down space was needed. In 1963, the Orange County Board of Supervisors adopted the first master plan for the development of JWA. Major recommendations of this plan were the reorientation of the runway to reduce flights over the Costa Mesa area, and the addition of a shorter runway for smaller aircraft. The implementation of these recommendations resulted in the runway configuration that exists today. In addition to the runway modifications, the old administration /control tower was demolished and replaced with a new Federal Aviation Administration tower located at the west end of the airfield. The revamped airport opened its runways to traffic in 1965, serving more than 45,000 passengers annually. It was soon apparent that the airfield would need a new terminal building to accommodate the growing number of passengers. In 1967, a new terminal building was constructed that could handle 400,000 annual passengers. By 1968, the new terminal building was handling nearly 750,000 annual passengers, almost double its design capacity. In 1985, over 12 million passengers were served at JWA. In a response to the need for additional airline service in the County, the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved a Master Plan for facility improvements (February 1985), an airline access plan, and an associated Land Use Compatibility Plan. The 1985 Master Plan allowed for the construction of the existing terminal facilities. In 1990, the new 337,900- square foot Thomas F. Riley Terminal opened to the public. The terminal is served by a two -level circulating roadway system, three parking structures, and off- airport parking lots. As part of its ongoing effort to operate JWA in a manner sensitive to the residents who live under the approach and departure corridors, the County of Orange has, developed one of the most stringent access and noise abatement programs in the country. The Airport monitors all aircraft operations, both commercial and private, for compliance with the program. Some of the more significant noise abatement and access restrictions are embodied in the Settlement Agreement, as well as ordinances, resolutions (including Resolutions No. 85 -255, 85 -256, 85- C:Zwumer is and SaWngs'Aain%a l Se rigs%Temporary Intemat Fil%s OLKF 06T %action 1- 111701.4. h� John Wayne Airport EIR No. W2 259, 85 -1231, 85 -1232 and 85- 1233), plans (including the Phase 2 Access Plan) and policies of the County. Additional detail on the regulatory history of JWA is provided in Section 2.2. Previous Environmental Documents JWA, and the appropriate level of commercial air at the airport, has been the subject of several environmental documents over the past 20 years. The following provides an .overview of the most recent documents that evaluated JWA air service. Environmental Impact Report 508 and Environmental Impact Statement In 1985 the Orange County Board of Supervisors certified EIR 508 for the JWA Master Plan and Santa Ana Heights Land Use Compatibility Program. The document addressed the environmental impacts associated with an increase in air carrier operations at JWA. The project evaluated an increase from 41 Average Daily Departures (ADD) to 73 ADD, serving an estimated 10.2 Million Annual Passengers (MAP) .2 The Master Plan provided for new facilities to accommodate the increased number of ADD and MAP. The facilities in the Master Plan included, but was not limited to, a new terminal building, parking structures, circulation improvements, and fuel farms. The Settlement Agreement resolved litigation associated with the implementation of the Master Plan. It was based on this documentation that the improvements at JWA were constructed. The new terminal and facilities opened in 1990. Environmental Impact Report 546 This EIR was prepared to evaluate various modifications to previously adopted maximum permitted noise levels at JWA to accommodate FAA actions affecting the use of noise abatement departure procedures at JWA. Eventually FAA incorporated its regulatory actions into FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 91 -53A. Environmental Impact Report 552 EIR 552 was prepared in 1994 to address the introduction of air cargo operations at JWA. United Parcel Service (UPS) and Federal Express had requested authorization to fly regularly scheduled commercial cargo service at JWA. Using the type of aircraft proposed (a Boeing 757 -200 and a Airbus 320) would require the allocation of a Class A ADD. The EIR evaluated the potential environmental impacts associated with modification of the JWA Phase 2 Access Plan to allow air cargo operations. The project evaluated a range of alternatives. Based on EIR 552, the Phase 2 Access Plan and the Settlement Agreement were amended to allow commercial cargo operators and provide two additional ADD for air cargo operations and modifications to the provisions. Environmental Impact Report 573 The County of Orange prepared EIR 573 for the Airport System Master Plan for John Wayne Airport and Proposed Orange County intemational Airport. The document addresses the potential impacts associated with the development of an airport system in Orange County. The Airport System Master Plan (ASMP) would include commercial air service at both JWA and a ` The ADDs at JWA are divided into three "classes" based on the noise characteristics of the aircraft on departure. The Class A flights are the noisiest. The next quietest class of ADDs is designated as Class AA. The quietest class is the Class E. The Class E flights do not have a maximum number of flights allowed because they are below the regulatory noise levels established in the EIR 508 (86.0 dB SENEQ. However, the number of passengers on Class E flights does count toward the maximum 8.4 MAP allowed by the Settlement Agreement at the JWA prior to December 31, 2005. More detailed information on the allowed noise level at each noise monitoring station for the various classes of aircraft is provided in Appendix A- C 10 umenb aM SetdngsW inlLa l SedngslTemporwy Intemet nleMOLKFV0111 %action 1- 111701AM V` John Wavne Almort EIR No 582 proposed international airport at the decommissioned Marine Corps Air Station EI Toro. EIR 573 analyzes a series of alternatives to the proposed ASMP, including two alternatives which assume that JWA would be further developed and that the El Toro site would be devoted to some use other than aviation (Alternatives "F' and eG "). The ASMP is a project distinct from this project (i.e., extension of the existing Settlement Agreement). The project being analyzed pursuant to this EIR is not inconsistent with the ASMP, EIR 573 or any of the EIR 573 alternatives, nor does the ASMP or any analysis in EIR 573 depend upon or preclude consideration of the Settlement Agreement extension project for JWA. On October 23, 2001, the Board of Supervisors certified Final EIR 573 and approved the ASMP for El Toro and JWA. 1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION In the summer of 1985, the County of Orange, the City of Newport Beach, Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON), and Airport Working Group (AWG) entered into the Settlement Agreement settling all pending actions and claims related to the 1985 Master Plan and EIR 508 and the pending appeal in the 1981 Master Plan /EIR 232 litigation. The Settlement Agreement required certain modifications to various mitigation measures originally adopted by the County at the time it certified EIR 508. The principal terms of the existing Settlement Agreement relate to restrictions and limitations on aircraft operations and commercial passenger facilities. One key component of the Settlement Agreement pertains to the number of regulated flights allowed to fly from JWA. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the County may not permit or allocate to commercial air carriers more than 39 annual ADDs by Class A aircraft and not more than 73 ADD of Class A and Class AA aircraft, from JWA through December 31, 2005. Additionally, the annual number of passengers served at JWA may not exceed 8.4 MAP prior to December 31, 2005. The restrictions and limitations of the Settlement Agreement are more fully discussed in Section 2.2, while the entire Settlement Agreement is reproduced in Appendix B of this EIR. The settling parties have executed various stipulations making minor modifications to the Settlement Agreement subsequent to 1985, and copies of those stipulations are contained in Appendix C. The Project proposes modifications of some of the provisions, including an extension of the term, of the Settlement Agreement. This EIR evaluates three "project" scenarios, each with different levels of air service and facilities improvements. The three scenarios reflect negotiations that the County and the City have conducted regarding a possible extension of the Settlement Agreement, and, in that respect, define the terms of any extension of the agreement proposed or acceptable to at least one of the parties. In order to permit the elected officials of the County and the City to determine the final terms of any extension agreement, the three project scenarios are evaluated to an equivalent level detailed in this EIR. With each of the three scenarios, modifications to the terms of the Settlement Agreement are proposed prior to December 31, 2005. Prior to implementation of these modifications, agreement by the County and the City of Newport Beach, AWG, and SPON would be required. A more detailed description of each of the three scenarios is presented in Section 2.4. Table 1- 1 below provides a brief summary of the key elements of each scenario. 1.4 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED In accordance with Section 15126(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, Section 4.0 of the EIR includes an alternatives discussion. In addition to the three project scenarios analyzed in Section 3.0 of the EIR, three additional alternatives are evaluated. These alternatives are the No Project Alternative, Alternative D, and Alternative E. CEQA requires that the definition of the No Project Alternative include the existing conditions, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future, if the project C:Dmumems and SetUnp MalnLLa l Se ngsW mp q InWrnet Fdes10LNFUdt*KUw 1- 111701.doc L John Wayne Airport E1R No. 582 were not approved. Specifically, Section 15126(e)(3)(A) addresses the definition of the No Project Alternative for land use or regulatory plans. It states: `When a project is the revision of an existing land use or regulatory plan, policy or ongoing operation, the no project' alternative will be the continuation of the existing plan, policy or operation into the future. Typically this is a situation where other projects initiated under the existing plan will continue while the new plan is developed. Thus the projected impacts of the proposed plan or alternative plans would be compared to the impacts that would occur under the existing plan." Based on this guidance, the No Project Alternative assumes the continued implementation of all existing terms of the Settlement Agreement beyond December 31, 2005. TABLE 1 -1 OVERVIEW OF PROJECT SCENARIOS AND ALTERNATIVES Principal .•: ".Restrictions: and : No Project Constraints Akemative Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Alternative D Alternative E' Curfew No change No change No change No change No change No change Noise 85 as of Regulated 73 85 as of 85 as of 4/1/2002 and No restrictions 79 as of Passenger 1/1/2005 4/1/2002 100 as of as of 1/12006 1/1/2005 Fli hts 1/1/2006 Annual Passenger 8.4 MAP 9.8 MAP 10.8 MAP as of No restrictions No restrictions 8.8 MAP Limit 4/1/2002 as of 4/12002 as of 4/12006 Cargo 2 2 4 as of 4 as of No restrictions 2 Flights 1/12006 1112006 as of 1/1/2006 Passenger 18 as of Loading 14 18 as of 18 as of 4/1/2002 and No restrictions 16 Bridge 1112005 4/1/2002 24 as of as of 1/1/2006 Gate Limits 1112006 Settlement Agreement NIA 12/31/2015 12131/2010 12/31/2015 Not applicable 12/312015 Extended to GA Facilities No No change No No restrictions No restrictions No change restrictions until 1/112021 restrictions until 1/1/2021 GANO No change No change No change No change No change No change Master No Not permitted No No restrictions No restrictions Not permitted Planning restrictions until 1/1/2016 restrictions until 1/1/2016 The following is a brief summary of the three alternatives. No Project Alternative -- The No Project Alternative assumes the continuation of the provisions in Final EIR 508 and the Settlement Agreement. The Access Plan adopted for JWA provides for the 73 regulated ADD. It is assumed that the number of passengers served at JWA would increase from the 7.8 MAP served in the year 2000 to the 8.4 MAP permitted in the Settlement Agreement. The increase in the number of passengers is accomplished through additional Class E flights and a projected increase in the average load factor at JWA from recent historical levels of 0.63 to 0.66.3 The increase in the load factor is reflective of the historic trend. This alternative would have less of an impact than any of the scenarios addressed as part of this project. Significant unavoidable adverse impacts would include traffic and air quality impacts. s The load factor is a ratio computed by determining the number of passengers actually on the aircraft at the time of departure divided by the number of seats available on the aircraft. The load factor cited for JWA is an average of all commercial flights departing JWA in the Access Plan year. The Access Plan year starts on April 1� and continues to March 31a` CloawmerXs and Seltlnpa NrALa lSetenpslTemporary Imemet FiWOLKFU0443 on1- 111MUm John Wayne Airport EIR Ab 582 Alternative D -- This alternative would not extend the Settlement Agreement. The restrictions and limitations outlined in the Settlement Agreement would remain in place until December 31, 2005, but would then be eliminated and operations at JWA would be unconstrained by the Settlement Agreement limitations. There would be no restrictions on the number of regulated flights, the MAP served at JWA, or on the size or development of facilities. As with all the scenarios and alternatives, it is assumed that the County of Orange would not change the curfew, in place since 1969, or the maximum permitted single noise event ( "Class A ") and curfew provisions of the General Aviation Noise Ordinance (GANG) because these are adopted by ordinance and the County is not presently contemplating any modifications to those restrictions. The number of flights and passengers served at the airport reflects JWA operating at runway capacity during peak hours .4 This alternative would allow approximately 181 ADD of Class A aircraft and accommodate 13.9 MAP. This alternative would have greater environmental impacts than any of the scenarios addressed in the EIR. This alternative would have significant unavoidable land use, traffic, noise, and air quality impacts. Alternative E -- This alternative would extend the Settlement Agreement and would permit the construction of two additional gates, an increase in noise regulated ADD from 73 to 79, and an increase in passenger service level to 8.8 MAP. This alternative assumes no change to the curfew, the single event noise limit, or the GANG. This alternative assumes that all noise - regulated departures would be operated by Class A aircraft. This alternative would provide only a small increase in the number of ADD and MAP compared to either existing conditions or the No Project Alternative. 1.5 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE CEQA requires that the EIR identify the environmentally superior alternative. The No Project Alternative is the environmental superior, alternative. Section 15126.6 states "if the environmentally superior alternative is the 'no project' alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives." Taking that into consideration and based on a review of the scenarios and alternatives addressed in the EIR, Alternative E is the environmentally superior alternative. Scenario 1 most effectively meets the project objectives, with only minor incremental increases in project impacts. This is discussed more fully in Section 4.5. 1.6 AREAS OF CONTROVERSY JWA, and air travel in general, has historically been an area of controversy in Orange County. Litigation and community discourse over the noise and traffic associated with commercial air service at JWA has been an issue since the 1970s. The Settlement Agreement reduced the intensity of this controversy because it established operational parameters at the airport that safeguarded the concerns of the community and allowed for needed improvements to be implemented without fear of litigation or political opposition. Having been in place for 16 years, the Settlement Agreement removed from discussion what level of air service should be provided at JWA and the appropriate restrictions at the airport, at least until the end of 2005. The consideration of extending the Settlement Agreement involves balancing competing interests - the same interests that were addressed through the Settlement Agreement. There is a need to balance the overall demand for air travel in Orange County with the potential impacts on the surrounding areas. Many communities that are within close proximity to the airport would like to 4 Based on control tower counts and videotapes, the operations at JWA are currently at 64 percent of capacity during the peak period from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. The theoretical capacity of the runways is 55 operations per hour. C1D0 MMS and SeWngsWusn1Lacal Setlings%Tempamry IMemM FilesQWFU0614% c n 1- 111701.doc L John Wayne Ahporf EIR No 582 see no increase in the number of regulated flights or passengers being served at JWA. Others, many not directly affected by airport operations, would like to see the amount of service at the airport increased so that a larger percentage of Orange County's air demand may be served at the existing facility. Because of physical constraints and limited area within its current boundaries, JWA is not able to serve all of the Orange County air travel demand. There is controversy regarding the appropriate amount of air travel that needs to be accommodated within Orange County. The excess demand not being served in Orange County is required to use other regional airports. 1.7 ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED The principal issue to be resolved by the County in connection with the selection and adoption of a project under this EIR is the determination of the appropriate point of balance between the need of the County for adequate air transportation services to support its economy, and the environmental interests and concerns of local residents. This has been the basic policy issue inherent in consideration of any and all access or operational limits at JWA; and it remains the basic policy issue in respect of the decision presented by the proposed project to the Orange County Board of Supervisors. It is, of course, also an issue for the City of Newport Beach and other interested parties, although the principal objective of the City, understandably, is protection of what the City believes to be the environmental interests of its residents. 1.8 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The study area is generally urban in character. Extensively developed industrial and commercial land uses abut the airport to the north, east, and west and lower density residential and open space land uses are located to the south and southwest. An extensive arterial highway and freeway system surrounds the airport providing access from several locations to the airport. In contrast to the urban development surrounding the airport, the Upper Newport Bay, located approximately 3,600 feet south of the airport, is an important natural area, providing habitat to many wildlife species. 1.9 EIR FOCUS AND EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT In accordance with Section 15063 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the County of Orange prepared an Initial Study /Environmental Checklist for the proposed project and distributed it along with the Notice of Preparation (NOP) to responsible and interested agencies, and key interest groups. The NOP was distributed to 252 individuals or agencies for a 30-day review period beginning on August 14, 2001. A total of 18 comment letters were received. The primary concerns outlined in the letters are as follows: • Governor's Office of Planning and Research --,The State Clearinghouse distributed the document to 12 state agencies and commissions, including: The Resource Agency, Department of Conservation, California Coastal Commission, Department of Fish and Game, Native American Heritage Commission, State Lands Commission, California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans)— District 12, Caltrans -- Division of Aeronautics, California Highway Patrol, Air Resources Board - Airport Projects, and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. • City of La Palma -- The City expressed no immediate concerns associated with the project. CO meMs end SeMgs inLLO l SeWngMTempmq InWmW FHWOLKFV061,6 e w 1- 111Tmum /6 John Wayne Airport OR No 582 • City of Anaheim -- The City had no comment at this time. • Avis — Avis expressed an .interest in growth in airport business balanced with the needs and priorities of the surrounding community. • South Coast Air Quality Management District -- The District stated that air quality analysis should address the impacts associated with all phases of the project and all air pollutant sources. • City of Seal Beach -- The City had no comment at this time. • Grant Younalove — Mr. Younglove expressed concern regarding increased activity at JWA and support for the development of El Toro. • Ed Burlingham — Mr. Burlingham raised concerns pertaining to noise impacts associated with any increase in the number of flights from JWA. • Margaret Morgan — Ms. Morgan raised specific questions pertaining to noise, fuel delivery systems, land use and planning, transportation /circulation, biological resources, and hazards. • Ralph P. Morgan. Jr. — Mr. Morgan provided comments pertaining to noise and pollution impacts associated with JWA. • City of Aliso Vieio — The City requested that cumulative impacts and the impacts associated with the diversion of aircraft to other regional airports be evaluated. • City of Irvine — The City requested that the EIR include a health risk assessment, an analysis of demand for parking, and an alternative for providing bus service to other regional airports for long -range and international flights. • Thomas S. Anderson — Mr. Anderson expressed concern about noise impacts on sensitive land uses that would occur with an increased number of flights from JWA. Safety impacts, specifically regarding schools, were an additional impact identified. Information on the location of schools and daycare facilities was provided. • City of Rancho Santa Margarita — The City does not have specific comments at this time, but would appreciate receiving documents and meeting notices. • City of Orange -- The City requested that any increased noise associated with flights over the City sensitive land uses be evaluated in the EIR. • City Managers for the Cities of Anaheim. Costa Mesa, Newport Beach. Orange. Santa Ana. and Tustin — The managers expressed a commitment to preserving the operational restrictions at JWA. • City of Tustin -- The City may have concerns related to environmental impacts. These concerns will be transmitted as part of the .City's review of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. C:1➢ m ms wd SetfingstMai %LL l SeWngs%Temp mq Intemet Fses%OLKFUAT %e on 1.111701.dw John Wayne Airpo7t EIR No. 582 Caltrans- District 12 — Caltrans requested that a traffic study be prepared that addresses increased traffic volumes, and the impacts on local and regional transportation systems. Copies of the NOP /Initial Study, distribution list, and NOP responses are included in Appendix D. The Initial Study determined that an EIR is required to evaluate the potentially significant environmental effects on the proposed project. The EIR addresses all the potential significant effects identified in the environmental checklist. In addition, the EIR provides a discussion of other issues that were determined not to be significant but will assist the reader in developing a better understanding of the project and the environment in which it would be implemented. In accordance with Section 15128 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the following items were checked "No Impact' or "Less Than Significant Impact," and do not warrant further evaluation in the EIR: Agriculture -- The proposed project would not result in any impacts to farmlands listed as Prime, Unique, or of "Statewide Importance" based on the 1997 Natural Resource Conservation Service Mapping. The study area is completely urbanized and no farmland exists in proximity to the project. No part of the project site or adjacent areas are subject to the Williamson Act. The project would not result in pressures to convert farmlands to other uses. • Population and Housing -- The project study area is located within the highly urbanized portion of Orange County. The project would not result in the local or regional population projections being exceeded. The project does not propose any development that would increase the population in the study area or within Orange County. No housing would be built or removed as a result of the proposed project. Geophysical -- As with development in most of Orange County, geotechnical issues pose a potential constraint to development; however, through standard design and engineering practices the potential impacts can be mitigated. Specific design for a proposed construction project is required to fully address these specific concerns. Because no specific facilities improvements or approvals are part of the proposed project, these issues are more appropriately evaluated at the time a specific construction proposal is made, if ever, and the necessary construction level documentation is prepared. • Hydrology and Drainage -- Improvements constructed at the airport, including a peaking basin has resulted in the removal of the aviation portion of the airport from being flood - prone. The project would not substantially alter the drainage patterns. uan�ci w ucucaulana gnu vicwnsw. nnuaus w tan wafer uvnro v1 au uauw -- 1 ne project would be designed to adopted standards to minimize any design safety hazards. The project design would not inhibit or otherwise impede emergency access that is currently provided on site. Project improvements are predominately onsite; therefore, emergency access to off-site areas would not be affected by the project. Existing pedestrian walkways and bikeways would not be affected by the project. • Light and Glare -- JWA is surrounded by office /commercial uses to the west and east and framed by major arterial highways and freeways. Views of the airport are primarily from the street and freeway system that surrounds the airport. Residential and recreation uses south of the airport do not have direct views of the airport due to C 100cumems and SMngMaiML.1 SeWgmTemp rary mnnat FMMOLKFU06t%e .1- 111701.4. E John Wayne Airport OR No. 582 elevation differences and intervening uses. Lighting for the terminal, parking structure and parking lot provide adequate lighting for operation. To comply with federal rules and regulations pertaining to minimizing glare and shielding lighting from pilots, JWA uses surface materials to reduce glare effects. There is minimal spill over lighting to offsite uses. Additionally, no sensitive uses are immediately adjacent to the airport. Cultural Resources -- A records search determined that there are no recorded prehistoric archaeological sites, historic sites, or California Historical Landmarks within the project study area. The airport site has been heavily disturbed due to construction activities; therefore, no cultural resources would be expected on site. Recreation -- The project would not generate any increase in population or provide development that would result in increased usage of existing neighborhood and regional parks. There would not be any substantial physical deterioration to existing recreation facilities due to the project. Potential impacts associated with increased noise on recreational facilities are addressed as part of the noise evaluation in Section 3.3. Mineral Resources — According to the County of Orange General Plan Resources Element, the project study area does not have significant existing and potential mineral or energy resources within its boundaries. The California Division of Mines and Geology also supports this finding. • Schools -- The project would not result in the development of any residential units; therefore, the project would not generate any additional students. The project would not have any direct impact on school facilities. Potential noise impacts are discussed in Section 3.3. Other Government Services -- The expansion of the airport terminal would result in increased maintenance responsibilities for the County of Orange. These services are generally contracted out and paid for by the airport using airport funds. The cost associated with the increased maintenance would be provided by the increased revenue associated with the higher level of service at the airport. 1.10 ORGANIZATION OF THE EIR This document has been divided into 12 chapters and is bound in two volumes. The first chapter is a summary chapter that. provides an overview of the project and potential environmental impacts. Chapter 2 provides the project description of the three scenarios being evaluated at an equal level of detail. Chapter 2 also outlines the project objectives and intended uses of the EIR. Chapter 3 provides the environmental setting, impacts, and mitigation measures associated with 11 topical areas. For each topical area, the thresholds for determining the significance of an impact have been identified. Chapter 4 provides .an alternatives analysis. Chapter 5 discusses the potential cumulative impacts associated with the project. Chapter 6 evaluates the long -term implications of the project, including growth- inducing impacts. Chapter 7 summarizes the significant, unavoidable, adverse impacts associated with each project scenario. All the mitigation measures identified in the EIR are compiled in Chapter 8 to facilitate a review of the measures proposed for adoption as part of this project. Chapter 9 lists the persons and organizations consulted, and Chapter 10 lists the preparers and contributors to the document. The references used in preparing the document are contained in Chapter 11. A glossary of terms is provided in Chapter 12. C:10ocunre ana Se ngs4kahlacel SoWngsuemp mry IMem tFiWOLKFU0'111u"n 1- 111701.eoc )3 John Wayne Aimofr EIR No. 582 As previously indicated, the document is presented in two volumes. The second volume contains the technical appendices. The technical appendices include technical studies prepared for the project, the NOP, the Settlement Agreement, and related documents. 1.11 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS, AND AVAILABILITY OF STUDIES AND REPORTS Copies of this Draft EIR, the technical appendices, and cited or referenced studies or reports are available for review at the JWA Administrative Offices. Additionally, copies the EIR and technical appendices are available for review at the main offices of the City of Newport Beach. The appropriate addresses are located below: John Wayne Airport . Administrative Office 3160 Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, California 92626 Contact David Helmreich City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92658 Contact Patrick Alford In addition, the EIR and technical appendices are available at the following libraries: Aliso Viejo Anaheim 1 Journey 500 West Broadway Aliso Viejo CA 92656 Anaheim CA 92805 Brea Costa Mesa 1 Civic Center Circle 1855 Park Avenue Brea CA 92821 Costa Mesa CA 92627 Costa Mesa /Mesa Verde Cypress 2969 Mesa Verde Drive East 5331 Orange Avenue Costa Mesa CA 92626 Cypress CA 90630 Dana Point El Toro 33841 Niguel Road 24672 Raymond Way Dana Point CA 92629 Lake Forest CA 92630 Fountain Valley Westminster 17635 Los Alamos 8180 13°i Street Fountain Valley CA 92708 Westminster CA 92683 Garden Grove/Chapman Garden Grove Regional 9182 Chapman Avenue 11200 Stanford Avenue Garden Grove CA 92841 Garden Grove CA 92840 Garden Grove/West Irvine /Heritage Park Regional 11962 Bailey Avenue 14361 Yale Avenue Garden Grove Ca 92845 Irvine CA 92604 Irvine /University Park La Habra 4512 Sandburg Way 221 East La Habra Boulevard Irvine CA 92612 La Habra CA 90631 La Palma Laguna Beach 7842 Walker 363 Glenneyre La Palma CA 90623 Laguna Beach CA 92651 C:1Ca MMS and SWingsllkeinlWW Se gsU mp mry IMemW FWs0LKF1J (W9ecWn 1- 111701.doc 14 John Wayne Airport E1R Ab 582 Laguna Niguel Los Alamitos/Rossmoor 30341 Crown Valley Parkway 12700 Montecito Laguna Niguel CA 92677 Seal Beach CA 90740 Newport Beach Orange 1000 Avocado Avenue 101 North Center Street Newport Beach CA 92660 Orange CA 92865 Rancho Santa Margarita San Clemente 30902 La Promesa 242 Avenida Del Mar Rancho Santa Margarita CA 92688 San Clemente CA 92672 San Juan Capistrano Regional Seal Beach 31495 El Camino Real 707 Electric Avenue San Juan Capistrano CA 92675 Seal Beach CA 90740 Silverado Stanton 28192 Silverado Canyon Road 7850 Katella Avenue Silverado Stanton CA 90680 Tustin Villa Park 345 East Main Street 17865 Santiago Boulevard Tustin CA 92780 Villa Park CA 92861 1.12 Table 1 -2 presents a summary of the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Project; measures to mitigate project impacts to the extent feasible, and expected status of effects following the implementation of the mitigation measures. The more detailed evaluation of these issues is presented in Section 3. If the text of the mitigation measure is too lengthy to include in tabular format, it is briefly summarized in the table and the mitigation measure number is noted. All mitigation measures are listed in their entirety in the appropriate portion of Section 3 and in Section 8. In Table 1 -2, the significance of each impact is indicated by the following abbreviations that parenthetically follow the summary description of the effect: S= significant impact; LS= impact is less than significant according to the State CEQA Guidelines; and Nl =no impact. C maMs and SMngsV ain%owl Setlings%Tempomry IMemW FileMOLKFWL111l9 .n 1- 111701 :dm 1-5 z a W v w Lo Z.Z � w o a �, w�D`Naas`O -$mr.E 10 of Q' 3 `Cr C `(! +� ° C �- O N L_ ~ UC N �I LU W Q W ZY; ZD V ° m LL1 Z IM MM C g 3 m N Q > OI a his C ° O L F LL J a W rm C coE W a m c D f0 m m D O m hE �- vVid3'w oEm�°�1 c I Ir m 4) ry 0 0 W 1 D D °. W Z m M 5> o m z V Ea �Em c�- m ro WO Co PvE M 0 W m D N Z ° c q o mN o Z N 0 ° a O. c O 6 � N° � N 0 3 0 LL ¢'o 0 0 m E' OE maci aci o'LD a'oia yym LD O z 1 N O N S W 2 U LW 0O d N a16a'a E vaam�8of =m � Cl) E J W 6 a60, Cpe!E .. '=mS''�nm #= co.cm D00M 4) 0 a Z m,°cZ�mc� . =coo =mc NM hmc0mc a may m3fi�m WMca� cw�c E�aiWE: -O E amEt DDS It � o:: c?m'2om 0 ro$� J� 'o �-°r as rn @oc>.O aPL 3 m a V N 3 O f6 J W a N N 9 a ~' r� C m T m D c C d E m c OM WC c am p@ � Z U N m V a N D 00 O O 3 C Z D LI{N D 2 m2 .0 ��� a -'po m_ m W`iJ -� ��aa� D O �' E Yap O cDNrmLoMTM wm�Ow °car -�S€ 0 =aym mv'- �Eo main H�aaiinUE FmwE-0) Q wi 53Eco .op° C S =mm Ip a>i Eoc{pm DW z =Z 2 W C W m� fYI0 me a � ° C O1N �,C p,N �m3t5ryry a E_' C 0 E� mw N N m D mmco '� mr, a .d C: Z O D F- > m -p O m OM C Jr m N V a SO V me a c 0.2 0 m C m a° 0 (D 'Y- ai .O C .OM- LL u.: z T �c m N r .,.gym N. a J o z �a yam °in Q a. '°m2' aFe '5,-:2 O Nm`LO m c o W o N P: F z of m F � y °m° mvm c =ulni vi m'�a0a° Z a vcimE3 c�°3F 3t °'o°'c to.'°.^ 3Eco I-E E� IE E wzcol F J K V U .. W W O W r N- C L O j a c a a LL :: K w -U Z or a aE c N �ma� 'm :W h �m mE cE� d Op Evd -. o:O omro �:?W Z O am o�E0 o.E �y c Z ° E z Q mEc oEz mfrmD a c V° mn ° o c z° 3 > 3 n # c y" t mD r q 0 ^ E y rn: j om� n D��C o'oa3rNoS3c Nl w'o rng to ai 0 3� E9a° z c O a m ° �>.m0 Z a m m m c� ES N mEwW;E�Ec ac v w Lo z a U-5 ro 3 r R s W 0 w , S2 'F, aoo z� 8� z Na _ h c° 0 rL LU 6 1W- rc a It 75 m W WQ.' wN wme 3 E °c wm Q'� y uUi 'y 6.9 2 W F d N V Z t'cwEm � 3t0OpJQ U NN� _rn m m c 6 £ M E m _ E O� E IL .. W ... O a .L. N Z c c Q N N y L a Z C9 o w N y m 3a 4 CN N! O my � co CD O Oca c'OO 3.20 3 !L 6 _O ED 30o K`r, o m Q W Uo' Umm° U0 a10i °'ate£ Ww 2 V1 M.E 2 v1Ua Eu) J O m0"0 c°0.- 00 9! ooi N�aa Z Q «° c z :`� i5 w 0 ?CJ,2 rom atD c3Da NW N!: 0mm Cfi .�2Q c0ETUi N pc L >� mN =m 3 IL W ...�.:: D y N .d+ 5m O£ E O N O N Z f6 O= my .. m.: m 3c`mi a) 4_) s �D 4-a D L Ugoa�Ni C5 4,f w�oto LCacm3 as Mme_ 0D— x o Hg ti: °mmmv 8y ca Eo c'w m� C5 g 2 Z C a m y J o O lyJ O1 N m m Q m 01 0 Z m Cm O O 01 N C M a m. C p UA iNffU N Q .9-58 U c m GmV OUD F. ON(naU 3rs8mN SL.` N a my miff $� O�� h F 5 N 0 m L 2 U xD Q a �c�.. NO T EaU .`c T§ g° 5 0 am. B w£ L NON z U t 'aci: 0 3cm`s `ern o zVmV7 t c3 Oa. .� y.� c R 0�C°4' mcD3 Vj ° CL .02 £ 0 3 � N m c� �d'� c `memo zcom Q c . W �2w'D 02m 0 Q 3 �� C m a ~ 8ppZ A °E ON 0 �z CO DUl UD 3£ �$mN >t55� o' m 0 woo o m D m °OQm OOH �f6 N�La 30;� c 2z xw Mnm¢ a S. c3Do O 0 N � O ,2 c O m N m p N L � O N 3 d -° a t°1 m L 75 °0 .1= E v N O U 'c z� d a 3m�$ LD aNi 4` h. 4J �c LU maw$ mq m03tn. oHmc to r= Z M zcom omwa H ma 0Cc, ��'m m °mum 'c"O1at -yQ mam$ a -`�-' SAN �ND Z N A O- Q ❑ m (n D! U D L O m N L C C U R s W 0 z w 19 uj Zo I a Z91 f-!. E . ~ �O g :.O K ... m cc 0 a� J mW 1 y O Q C o z W v v ro ° U z 1 1 1 1 " C i Q U m a N c o a LL ... Q...: W 'O n F V N C . 3 c N N N 5 LD ma 0 co '£ O m m co y a o E WJ a N r £ Q c O p c E 5$ �o 0 H Z R N l6 C6 y E. U1 O a„ oo O ^ 9 C C L Y_ W W o rn o y o 5 w C W'- p m o L d in aQ c 0 I CS w c U N E fn O L �p £ C N O U) i dye get Q o d £ O O 0 F Q °' E c fWn m 0 o a m u.LQ L G o. J= n Q 'm�N°N'�o EB a£i E vEi > j ^TNO_ ~ V n £ E w vo c c t u Y z°: E J_ c C tll' N pp 3 .0 d 7 N U T OC_4-N U, � N 44 m t`¢0� t a > W m LD f O vi r Q O "O N ° vi ro _ �m 3N vm LL v ° O p Z W t5 o a t o W o o o m W om W a c Q C J m w W ui w a` a U7 w o. p a U a x LU a V a a 0 5 `" m m E r E J E m E y E m E E y Q 3 o O 'm o D o W o :) o o W w m u¢ L z z a z Q z a z x z r? .=_St> 19 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING THE ADOPTION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2002- 001(PA 2001 -222) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS, RESOLVES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The proposed General Plan amendment is to Land Use Element and Noise Element narratives and policies relating to the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement. The Planning Commission recommended initiation of the amendment on December 6, 2001 and the City Council initiated the amendment on December 11, 2001. Section 2. A public hearing was held on June 6, 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 City of Newport Beach has negotiated with the County of Orange to extend the term of the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement. 2. The extension of the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement requires amendments to certain policies in the Land Use Element and the Noise Element of the General Plan. The County of Orange, acting as the lead agency, has prepared a draft Environmental Impact Report 582 (DEIR 582) to address the potential environmental impacts associated with an amendment to the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement, including any General Plan amendment that would be required to ensure conformity between the General Plan and the Settlement Agreement. 4. On February 26, 2002, the County Board of Supervisors certified EIR 582 finding that the document was complete and accurate, addressed all environmental effects of the project, and fully complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the County of Orange CEQA procedures. 5. The environmental analysis of DEIR 582 found no significant land use or noise impacts associated with Project Scenario 1, which served as the basis for the General Plan amendment. Exhibit 2 17 City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Resolution No. Paee 2 of 2 Section 4. Based on the aforementioned findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Newport Beach adopt General Plan Amendment GPA No. 2002 -001 to revise the Land Use Element and the Noise Element as provided in Exhibit A. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 6th DAY OF June, 2002. M 1;" Larry Tucker, Chairman Earl McDaniel, Secretary AYES: NOES: Exhibit 2 0 EXHIBIT A Land Use Element Policy K. The land use designations and building intensity standards in this Element reflect the terms and conditions of the Amended John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement (Amended Agreement) and the provisions of that Amended Agreement are an integral part of the land use and planning process of the City of Newport Beach. The City shall take all steps necessary to preserve and protect the Amended Agreement, as well as assist in the identification and implementation of feasible means of satisfying any additional Orange County air transportation demand beyond that served at JWA. DISCUSSION In 1985, the City, County, Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON) and the Airport Working Group (AWG) entered into a comprehensive Settlement Agreement settling all the pending actions and claims relating to the Master Plan for John Wayne Airport and associated environmental documents. The Settlement Agreement authorized increases in aircraft operations and facility improvements while establishing limits on the number of the noisiest commercial aircraft departures and on the number of passengers served at JWA In June 2002, the City and the County entered into an agreement that amended the terms of the Settlement Agreement to increase the number of commercial aircraft departures and passenger service level as well as passenger loading bridges while extending the term through the year 2015 (Amended Agreement). The terms of the Amended Agreement have been fully considered in establishing the land use designation and building intensity standards for all parcels within the City of Newport Beach. The City believes that, due to its size and physical constraints, John Wayne Airport is incapable of meeting all of Orange County's air transportation demand. While the Amended Agreement provides for some increase in capacity and passenger service levels, the City should continue to work with other jurisdictions to identify and implement feasible means of satisfying any Orange County air transportation demand beyond that served at JWA. IMPLEMENTATION 1. Take all feasible steps to preserve and protect the integrity of the Amended Agreement including, without limitation: (a) consistently infomning Newport Beach residents of events relevant to the Amended Agreement and the efforts of the City to protect the integrity of the Amended Agreement; (b) maintaining the I A support of the "Corridor Cities" and residents impacted by JWA through periodic mailings and regular meetings with Corridor City representatives; (c) working to increase the number of public and private entities that support the Amended Agreement; and (d) retaining lobbyists and consultants to develop, among interested parties such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Air Transportation Association (ATA), air carriers and the air cargo carriers, support for, or non - opposition to, the Amended Agreement. 2. Actively participate with other jurisdictions to identify and implement feasible . means of satisfying Orange County's air transportation demand without the increases in flights and passengers beyond those authorized by the Amended Agreement. 3. The City shall oppose, or seek protection from, any Federal legislative or regulatory action that would or could affect or impair the County's ability to operate JWA consistent with the provisions of the Amended Agreement or the City's ability to enforce the Amended Agreement. City staff shall continue to monitor any possible amendment of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 as well as various FAA Regulations and Advisory Circulars that relate to aircraft departure procedures. Noise Element Aircraft Operations - Many residents of Newport Beach are impacted by noise generated by commercial and general aviation aircraft departing John Wayne Airport. Newport Beach is located immediately south of John Wayne Airport and is under the primary departure corridor. The County of Orange is the operator of John Wayne Airport. The air traffic is made up of commercial air carriers, commuter turbo -prop aircraft, business jets, and single and twin engine general aviation aircraft. The City has a long history of disputes with the County regarding aircraft noise from John Wayne Airport. In 1985 the City, County, Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON), and the Airport Working Group (AWG) entered into the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement, (Settlement Agreement) that established, and limited the number of average daily departures (ADD) of three types of aircraft (Class A, Class AA, and Class E). Class A aircraft were limited to 39 average daily departures (ADD) and both Class A and Class AA aircraft were limited to 73 ADD. The Settlement Agreement also established a limit of 8.4 million annual passengers (MAP) served at JWA in recognition of the significant facility constraints such as the limited number of loading bridges, the single air carrier runway and the limited area available for commercial air carrier operations. The Settlement Agreement did not limit the number of Class E ADD except to the extent that facility constraints and the MAP limits were applicable. In 2002, the City and the County entered into an agreement that amended the Settlement Agreement (Amended Agreement). The Amended Agreement authorizes 85 ADD with no distinction between Class A and Class AA flights as well as an increase in passenger service level from 8.4 MAP to 9.8 MAP. 2 dPI CNEL noise contours for the John Wayne Airport for calendar year 2000 are shown in Figure 5. The noise contours shown were generated using a computer noise model and calibrated to match measured noise levels at the permanent noise monitoring sites operated by the airport. Figure 6 shows the CNEL noise contours and Figure 6A shows the Single Event Noise Equivalent Level ( SENEL) noise contours from EIR 582 for the project reflected in the Amended Agreement. The noise contours in Figure 6 and Figure 6A indicate that the 65 CNEL contour and the 85 SENEL contour for the Amended Agreement project are within the noise contours for the 1985 Master Plan project. The modifications to the flight and passenger restrictions resulting from implementation of the project reflected in the Amended Agreement do not have a significant noise impact in Newport Beach or Santa Ana Heights. These contours represent the maximum noise acceptable to the City of Newport Beach and form the basis for land use and land planning decisions. Noise contours represent lines of equal noise exposure, just as the contour lines on a topographic map are lines of equal elevation. The contours shown on the maps are the 60 and 65 dB CNEL noise levels. The noise contours presented should be used as a guide for land use planning. The 60 dB CNEL contour defines the Noise Referral Zone. This is the noise level for which noise considerations should be included when making land use policy decisions. The 65 dB CNEL contour describes the area for which new noise sensitive developments will be permitted only if appropriate mitigation measures are included such that the standards contained in this Element are achieved. Currently, no property designated for residential development is within the 65 CNEL contour area and no new residential development should be permitted. The reason for this restriction inside aircraft- generated 65 CNEL contours is that there is no practical way to mitigate against aircraft noise in an exterior living area, while it is possible and practical to mitigate against ground -based traffic noise. GOAL 4.4 — To protect and preserve the integrity of the Amended Agreement and thereby protect the quality of life for Newport Beach residents. RELATED POLICY 4.4.1 - The City Council and staff shall take all steps necessary to protect the integrity of the Amended Agreement. These steps include, without limitation, the following. 1. The City shall oppose, or seek protection from, any Federal legislative or regulatory action that would or could affect or impair the County's ability to operate JWA consistent with the provisions of the Amended Agreement or the City's ability to enforce the Amended Agreement. City staff shall continue to monitor any possible amendment of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 as well as various FAA Regulations and Advisory Circulars that relate to aircraft departure procedures. 3 a3 2. Take all feasible steps to . preserve and protect the integrity of the Amended Agreement including, without limitation: (a) consistently informing Newport Beach residents of events relevant to the Amended Agreement and the efforts of the City to protect the integrity of the Amended Agreement; (b) maintaining the support of the "Corridor Cities and residents impacted by JWA through periodic mailings and regular meetings with Corridor City representatives; (c) working to increase the number of public and private entities that support the Amended Agreement; and (d) retaining lobbyists and consultants to develop, among interested parties such as the FAA, ATA, air carriers and the air cargo carriers, support for, or non- opposition to, the Amended Agreement. City shall also actively participate with other jurisdictions to identify and implement feasible means of satisfying additional Orange County air transportation demand beyond the increases in flights and passengers authorized by the Amended Agreement 3. The City shall, to the extent permitted by law, assist the County in implementing, improvements to the comprehensive noise control program at JWA, which are consistent with the terms and provisions of the Amended Agreement, and do not adversely impact airport capacity or safety. Such improvements could include, without limitation, the following: (a) Implementation of aircraft flight or departure procedures, which assure the community of the best feasible noise abatement; (b) The preservation of the existing permanent remote monitoring stations and the upgrade of the current noise monitoring system whenever feasible; (c) Continued enforcement of the General Aviation Noise Ordinance. 4.42 The airport noise and transportation source noise assumptions in this Element are based upon provisions of the Amended Agreement The 65 CNEL contours and the 85 SENEL contours, which are based upon the fleet mix and average number of ADD for the last quarter of 2000 and the permitted increases in noise regulated departures and passengers authorized in the Amended Agreement, are the basis for the existing densities and intensities of development authorized in the Land Use Element. 4.4.3 Modifications to the Phase 2 Access Plan and /or John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement that would reduce airport capacity or affect aircraft safety shall not be permitted. The City shall not agree to any modification to the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement or Phase 2 Access Plan that would affect or impair the grandfathered status of the Access Plan or Settlement Agreement pursuant to provision of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990. 4 4 70 -0 65 -0 60 -0 xx f T r' M! i� �u zu CF. �� x�� IF, � /� rF IF IF fl CNEL Contours for Year 2000 2000 0 z000 Feet Figure 5 2� r7 � / UIMN CNEL Contours for Year 2006 2000 2000 Feet EIR 582 Scenario I Figure 6 r7 � / i Jj 737 757 757AA, ./ 737 % 757A.S 737 i _1 MD80 ' �fl�_ pill �\ 31iC i �X ANI qg �y' 1 \�, �S�l - ��� �v Iii Y � \� •�' �� i'r��-�� �}�1'l i ' \ JJJJJJ ?k Y Y stir 2000 0 2000 Feet SENEL 85dB Contours for Various Aircraft Departures Figure 6a A� and 65 dB CNEL noise levels. The noise contours presented should be used as a guide for land use planning. The 60 dB CNEL contour defines the Noise Referral Zone. This is the noise level for which noise considerations should be included when making land use policy decisions. The 65 dB CNEL contour describes the area for which new noise sensitive developments will be permitted only if appropriate mitigation measures are included such that the standards contained in this Element are achieved. Currently, no property designated for residential development is within the 65 CNEL contour area and no new residential' development should be permitted. The reason for this restriction inside aircraft- generated 65 CNEL contours is that there is no practical way to mitigate against aircraft noise in an exterior living area, while it is possible and practical to mitigate against ground -based traffic noise. GOAL 4.4 - To establish a comprehensive program and minimize the impact of noise generated by aircraft departing JWA and the quality of life for Newport Beach residents by prege g- maititaininc operational restrictions at JWA, investigating ways to extend or strengthen those restrictions, and encouraging the development of a second commercial airport in Orange County, RELATED POLICY 4.4.1 - Preservation of the JWA Settlement Agreement. The City Council and staff shall take all steps necessary to protect the validity of the JWA Settlement Agreement. These steps include, without limitation, the following. 1. The City shall oppose, or seek protection from, and Federal legislative or regulatory action that would or could affect or impair the County's ability to operate JWA consistent with the provisions of the JWA Settlement Agreement or the City's ability to enforce the Settlement Agreement. City staff shall continue to monitor possible amendment of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 as well as various FAA Regulations and Advisory Circulars that relate to aircraft departure procedures. 4 ) v ,gar CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1 33� NEWPORT BOULEVARD NEWPORT BEACH, CA 826$8 waR r (949) 644- 3200: FAX (949) 694-3229 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department DATE: May 31, 2002 Memorandum SUBJECT: Agenda Item No. 6 - JWA Settlement Agreement Extension General Plan Amendment (PA 2001 - 222 /GPA 2002 -001) The City Attorney would like the JWA Settlement Extension Ad Hoc Committee to review and approve the proposed changes to the Land Use Element and Noise Element texts. Therefore, the staff report for this item will be distributed on Monday, June 3, 2002.