Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout92-15 - Final Environmental Impact Report 138• RESOLUTION NO. 92 -15 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CERTIFYING AS COMPLETE AND ADEQUATE THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO. 138 FOR THE CASTAWAYS MARINA PROJECT WHEREAS, the Draft Environmental Impact Report No. 138 provided environmental impact assessment for the proposed Castaways Marina Project; and WHEREAS, the DEIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and Council Policy K -3; and and WHEREAS, the DEIR was circulated to the public for comment and review; WHEREAS, written comments were received from the public during and after the review period; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach conducted a public hearing to receive public testimony with respect to the DEIR; and WHEREAS, such comments and testimony were responded to through Response to Comments and staff reports submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council; and WHEREAS, such comments and testimony were fully and adequately responded to in the manner set forth in California Administrative Code Section 15088 (b); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach has reviewed all environmental documents comprising the EIR and has found that the EIR considers all environmental impacts of the proposed Castaways Marina Project completely • and adequately and fully complies with all requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the certified final EIR in making its decision on the proposed Castaways Marina Project; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to approve the project; and WHEREAS, the City Council by this Resolution adopts the Statement of Facts and Statement of Overriding Considerations as required by Sections 15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, Section 21002.1 of CEQA and Section 15091 of the State CEQA • Guidelines require that the City Council make one or more of the following Findings prior to the approval of a project for which an EIR has been completed, identifying one or more significant effects of the project, along with Statements of Facts supporting each Finding: FINDING 1 - Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects thereof as identified in the EIR. FINDING 2 - Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the Finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. FINDING 3 - Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the EIR; and WHEREAS, Section 15092 provides that the City shall not decide to approve or carry out a project for which an EIR was prepared unless it has (A) Eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible as shown in the findings under Section 15091, and (B) Determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable under Section 15091 are acceptable due to overriding concerns as described in Section 15093; and WHEREAS, Section 15093 (a) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires the • City Council to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project; and WHEREAS, Section 15903 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires, where the decision of the City Council allows, the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the EIR but are not mitigated, the City must state in writing the reasons to support its action based on the EIR or other information in the record. iJ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach that: 1. The City Council makes the Findings contained in the Statement of Facts with respect to significant impacts identified in the Final EIR, together with the Finding that each fact in support of the Finding is true and based upon substantial evidence ® in the record, including the Final EIR. The Statement of Facts is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. 2. The City Council finds that the Facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations are true and supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the Final EIR. The Statement of Overriding Considerations is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth. 3. The City Council finds that the Final EIR has identified all significant environmental effects of the project and that there are no known potential environmental impacts not addressed in the Final EIR. 4. The City Council finds that all significant effects of the project are set forth in the Statement of Facts. 5. The City Council finds that although the Final EIR identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects that can be feasibly avoided or mitigated have been avoided or mitigated by the imposition of Conditions on the approved project and the imposition of mitigation measures as set forth in the Statement of Facts and the Final EIR and enforced by the mitigation monitoring program. 6. The City Council finds that potential mitigation measures and project alternatives not incorporated into the project were rejected as infeasible, based upon specific economic, social and other considerations as set forth in the Statement of Facts and the Final EIR. • 7. The City Council finds that the unavoidable significant impact of the project, as identified in the Statement of Facts, that has not been reduced to a level of insignificance has been substantially reduced in impact by the imposition of Conditions on the approved project and the imposition of mitigation measures. The City Council finds that 3 the remaining unavoidable significant impact is clearly outweighed by the economic, social and other benefits of the project, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 8. The City Council finds that the Final EIR has described all reasonable alternatives to the project that could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, even when those alternatives might impede the attainment of other project objectives and might • be more costly. Further, the City Council finds that a good faith effort was made to incorporate alternatives in the preparation of the draft EIR and all reasonable alternatives were considered in the review process of the Final EIR and ultimate decisions on the project. 9. The City Council finds that the project should be approved as modified by the design alternative described in the Statement of Facts and Findings, and that any alternative to this action should not be approved for the project based on the information contained in the Final EIR, the data contained in the Statement of Facts and for the reasons stated in the public record and those contained in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 10. The City Council finds that a good faith effort has been made to seek out and incorporate all points of view in the preparation of the Draft and Final EIR as indicated in the public record on the project, including the Final EIR. 11. The City Council finds that during the public hearing process on the Castaways Marina Project, the Environmental Impact Report evaluated a range of alternatives. The project, as approved by this action, is included in that range of alternatives, and incorporates two of the design alternatives into the approved project. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission in its decision on the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby certify the Final Environmental Impact Report No. 138 for the Castaways Marina Project • as complete and adequate in that it addresses all environmental effects of the proposed project and fully complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the State CEQA Guidelines. Said Final Environmental Impact Report is comprised of the following elements: tl 1. Draft EIR and Technical Appendices 2. Responses to Comments 3. Planning Commission Staff Reports 4. Planning Commission Minutes 5. Planning Commission Resolution, Findings and Conditions for Recommended Approval 6. City Council Staff Reports 7. City Council Minutes 8. City Council Ordinance, Resolution and Findings and Conditions for • Approval 9. Comments and Responses received prior to final action and not contained in 1 through 8 above. All of the above information has been and will be on file with the Planning Department, City of Newport Beach, City Hall, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92659 -1768, (714) 644 -3225. ATTEST: ADOPTED T 41S 10th day of February , 1992. • /I Attachments: Exhibits 1 & 2 PLT.. \ED \EIR \EIR138.RS1 • l YOR 5 • EXHIBIT 1 STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND FACTS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 138 CASTAWAYS MARINA I. BACKGROUND The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines (Guidelines) promulgated pursuant thereto provide: "No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been completed which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmen- tal effect as identified in the Final EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdic- tion of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the Final EIR (Section 15091 of the Guidelines)." The City of Newport Beach has determined that the proposed project should be approved. A description of the project to be approved is provided below. Because the proposed actions constitute a project under CEQA, and the Initial Study determined that the project could have significant effects on the environment, the City of Newport Beach has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This EIR indicates that there will be significant impacts as a direct result of the project in the area of construction noise and marine biological resources, and that significant effects to air and water quality will occur on a cumulative basis as a result of the project in conjunction with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. The Findings and Facts set forth below explain the City's reasons for determining that the project should be approved as proposed. II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 1. The objective of The Irvine Company is to provide economically viable commercial marina facilities within Newport Bay. The project is a 71 slip marina. • B. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS TO BE APPROVED AS PART OF THE PROJECT 1. Amendment No. 743 Request to establish Planned Community District regulations and adopt a Planned Community Development Plan for Castaways Marina. A -1 2. Traffic Study No. 80 Request to approve a traffic study so as to permit the construction of a 71 slip marina with support parking and accessory facilities in the Castaways Marina Planned Community. 3. Resubdivision No. 972 Request to create one parcel of land for marina development in the Castaways Marina Planned Community. III. FINDINGS AND FACTS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROJECT A. EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE INSIGNIFICANT Earth Unique geological or physical features will not be affected since they do not occur on the marina site. No increases in exposure of people to geologic hazards are expected since no onshore facilities for occupation are included in the project. Proposed grading and building construction will be required to meet the City's grading standards and building code requirements, respec- tively. Air • Due to the nature of the proposed uses at the marina, the proposed project will not alter existing air movement, moisture, temperature, or local or regional climatic conditions. Water Due to the groundwater conditions in the area, the direction or rate of groundwater flow is not expected to be significantly altered by proposed marina construction. • No significant change in the quality of groundwater, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, is expected to result due to the project. The project would require excavation of land infiltrated by salt water from the bay. However, increased salt water intrusion into the adjacent groundwater table is not expected to result due to the increased area of the bay. Fresh water sources of groundwater are distant from the proposed marina. Water for boat wash down and drinking supplies will be available at the marina. However, due to the relatively small size of the marina, no substantial reduction of available public water supplies would be expected due to the proposed uses. • Plant • No reduction in acreage of agricultural crop land would result due to the project; no agricultural use occurs at the site and the site is not suitable for such a use. A-2 I Animal Life * No new animal species are expected to be introduced into the project area as a result of the project. An increase in water area could provide additional habitat for bay fishes. Light and Glare * The possible increase in light around the marina is expected to be • relatively minor and localized. Land Use * The marina site is currently unoccupied and is designated for marine recreational and commercial uses. Thus, no conflicts with existing or planned land uses are expected. Natural Resources * No significant increase in the use of natural resources is expected from the proposed project. Fuel and water usage due to increased number of boat slips and resulting boat usage is expected to be negligible. Risk of Upset * No interference with evacuation /response plans is expected. Due to the nature of the marina and its location in Upper Newport Bay, the marina is not expected to affect the orderly evacuation of the area. Population * No increase in population would be expected since no residential facilities are proposed by the project. Mooring facilities will be limited to small vessels and no food, fuel, or service facilities are planned for the marina. Construction crews are expected to be from local areas. Also, live - aboards are prohibited in accordance with lease provisions. Housing * No additional housing is required for construction or operation personnel. Transportation * Due to the location of the proposed marina within a large marina- oriented area, no long -term, significant alteration of patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods would be expected. * Due to the nature of the marina project, no changes to rail or air traffic would be expected. Public Services • * Due to the nature of the proposed uses, the proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: schools, parks or recreational facilities, other governmental services. Energy * No substantial increase in energy usage (boat fuel or electricity) is expected due to the relatively small size of the project. A -3 ) 3 Utilities Due to the nature of the proposed uses at the site, the project would not result in new utility systems or alterations to existing utility systems other than those needed to connect to existing adjacent utilities. Aesthetics ` Other than potential short term view impacts during the dredging or • construction phases, no aesthetically offensive views should result due to the project. Recreation Recreational opportunities provided by the proposed project are expected to be beneficial. Although many impacts have been identified which are not significant, a complete set of mitigation measures and conditions of approval have been applied to the project to assure a minimal effect on the environment, as listed below: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit, signage and exterior lighting shall be approved by the Planning and Public Works departments. 2. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a landscape and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. This plan shall be approved by the directors of the Planning, Public Works and Parks, Beaches and Recreation departments. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit, a licensed landscape architect shall certify to the Planning Department that the landscaping has been installed in accordance with the approved plan. 3. Development of the site shall be subject to a grading permit to be approved by the Building and Planning departments. The application for a grading permit is to be accompanied by the grading plan and specifications, and supporting data consisting of soil engineering and engineering geology reports or other reports required by the building official. 4. Grading operations and drainage requirements shall meet the standards set forth in the City's Building Code (Appendix Chapter 70 - Excavation and Grading, Sections 7001 -7019) and the Building Department's General Grading Specifications. 5. The grading permit shall include a description of haul routes, access points to the site, and a watering program designed to minimize impacts of haul operations. 6. An erosion, siltation, and dust control plan shall be submitted and be subject to the approval of the Building Department (prior to approval of the grading permit). A copy shall be forwarded to the California Environmental Protection Agency /Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 7. Grading shall be conducted in accordance with plans prepared by a civil engineer incorporating the recommendations of a soil engineer and an engineering geologist subsequent to the completion of a comprehensive soil and geologic investigation of the site. Permanent reproducible copies of the "Approved as Built" grading plans • shall be furnished to the Building Department prior to issuance of building permits. 8. Existing onsite drainage facilities shall be improved to the satisfaction of the City of Newport Beach City Engineer. A hydrology and hydraulic study and a master plan of water, sewer, and storm drain for onsite improvements shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the Public Works Department prior to recording of the tract map. Any modifications to the existing storm drain system shall be the responsibility of the developer. A -4 /_r 9. No vessel discharges are allowed within Newport Bay. 10. A landscape plan, prepared by a licensed landscape architect, shall be submitted for approval by the directors of Planning and Parks, Beaches, and Recreation, which includes a maintenance program that controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. 11. Landscaped areas shall be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. • 12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a landscape and irrigation plan for both project sites shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plan shall be subject to approval by the Planning Department and the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department, and shall place emphasis on the use of drought- resistant native vegetation and be irrigated via a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. 13. A qualified archaeologist shall be present during pre -grade meetings to inform the developer and grading contractor of the results of any archaeological surveys and studies completed. In addition, an archaeologist shall be present during grading activities to inspect the underlying soil for cultural resources. If significant cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to stop or temporarily divert construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess the significance of the finds. In the event that significant archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation and /or grading, all work shall stop in that area of the subject property until an appropriate data recovery program can be developed and implemented. The cost of such a program shall be the responsibility of the landowner and /or developer. 14. A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner and /or developer to attend pre -grade meetings and perform inspections during development. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials. 15. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall waive the provisions of Assembly Bill 952 related to City of Newport Beach responsibilities for the mitigation of archaeological impacts in a manner acceptable to the City Attorney. 16. Construction activities shall be conducted in accordance with the City of Newport Beach noise ordinance which limits construction to the following hours and days. • Between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on any weekday • Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays • Prohibited on Sundays and holidays 17. The following Fire Department standards /requirements shall be complied with prior to issuance of an occupancy permit. A. Site Access 1. Minimum Width Required a. 26 feet - -no parking allowed • b. 26 feet + car width- - parking one side (parallel) C. 26 feet + 2 car widths- - parking two sides (parallel) M 2. Turning Radius a. Cul -de -sac Minimum 40 -foot radius Minimum 42 -foot radius if center is planted b. Corners Minimum 15 -foot radius 3. Height Clearance • a. Minimum overhead - -13 feet 6 inches b. Building eaves, trees, etc., are prohibited 4. Roadway Width with Access Control (Knox Key Controlled) a. 13 feet clear on each side of control apparatus or island upon which it is mounted, whichever requires the greatest width B. Hydrant Locations 1. A minimum of two onsite hydrants will be required at locations to be specified on site plans (basically at or near the cul -de -sac turnaround areas) C. Marine Fire Protection 1. Standpipe and hose cabinet requirement a. Class II standpipe with hose cabinets arranged to provide protection to any portions of floats or floating vessels 2. Required Water Supplies a. Class II standpipe 100 GPM at a residual pressure of 65 P.S.I. at the most remote cabinet 3. Extinguishers a. One 2A 20 BC located in each hose cabinet 4. Transmittal of Fire Emergency a. A means of rapidly notifying the fire department in the event of an emergency (telephones used for this purpose shall not require the use of a coin) 18. In the event that hazardous materials /wastes are encountered during development of the site, these materials /wastes shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations. 19. The project applicant shall clean debris from the marina basin and boat slips as part • of a regular maintenance program to be reviewed and approved by the City of Newport Beach. 20. To maintain project depths within the boat basin, dredging of the sand bar that may form at the entrance of the marina basin shall be conducted by the applicant in accordance with an approved dredging permit from the City of Newport Beach and ACOE. l� W 21. To minimize tidal flow interference, the basin design shall use adequately spaced plastic pontoons to support the docks. 22. To reduce the extent and effects of increased turbidity, the applicant shall require the dredging contractor to use filter curtains around dredging operations, when feasible. 23. When feasible, the dump scow shall be loaded only during ebb tide conditions so suspended material will be flushed seaward and not into Upper Newport Bay. 24. Prior to, and upon the completion of, the dredging operation, soundings shall be • taken at each barge marshalling area and the data supplied to the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department to ascertain the need for dredging to return the area to pre - dredging conditions. Such dredging will be the responsibility of the project applicant. 25. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department shall be provided with evidence that all appropriate permits or clearances have been obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Coast Guard, and Regional Water Quality Control Board. 26. Treatment of extracted water shall be conducted in a manner and at a location approved by the City of Newport Beach City Engineer and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. 27. Suspended soils (e.g., sand) shall be separated from extracted water in accordance with applicable water quality standards and disposed of at a location approved by the City of Newport Beach Director of Public Works Department and the Grading Engineer. 28. Provision shall be made, as necessary, for the treatment of hydrogen sulfide to comply with water quality standards and to control odors from the dewatering process. 29. Prior to demolition of existing bulkhead structure, a complete plan for litter and debris control for the demolition, grading, and construction phases to ensure debris is not permitted to enter Newport Bay shall be approved by the Directors of the Planning and Marine departments. 30. Water extracted from dewatering wells and drained from bay materials shall meet current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requirements prior to discharging into the bay. If necessary, the water shall be desilted prior to discharge. 31. The dredging contractor shall conduct dredging activities in accordance with the approved dredging permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 32. For the life of the project, the project applicant shall provide each marina tenant with a copy of all applicable regulations regarding vessel discharges of wastes, anti- fouling paint use, and refuse management (including handling of hazardous wastes) as a part of lease materials. 33. For the life of the project, the project applicant shall provide each marina tenant with information regarding procedures for notifying appropriate authorities regarding spills of hazardous materials, containment measures, and applicable penalties for • violations as a part of lease materials. 34. The applicant shall provide for periodic maintenance of the sanitary pump -out station to ensure its continuous operation. 35. The applicant shall provide regular cleaning of the marina docks and vacuum sweeping of the parking lot. I-7 A -7 36. The dredging contractor shall be required as part of the dredging contract to ensure that dredging activities shall be conducted so as not to disturb sensitive biological habitats and resources in the vicinity of Bayside Marsh Peninsula. 37. In accordance with ACOE requirements, the loss of mudflat habitat shall be mitigated by the in -kind replacement of mudflat habitat at a replacement ratio of 1.5:1 and at an ACOE- approved site, preferably in Upper Newport Bay. This habitat shall be replaced prior to any project- related dredging of the channel. Mudflat will be created at depths between -1.5 and +2.5 ft MLLW. A detailed conceptual mitigation plan will be developed and implemented by the applicant in consultation • with the National Marine Fisheries Service, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the ACOE. The plan will include the following elements. 1. Pre - construction Analysis of Preferred and Alternative Mitigation Sites. This study will assess the types and locations of sites that could serve as mitigation sites. Both ofsite and offsite areas will be analyzed. 2. Pre - construction Conceptual Site Plans. Conceptual designs will be presented that indicate elevations and contours to be achieved for the mitigation program, appropriate methods for habitat construction, and criteria to measure the success of the habitat replacement program. 3. Shorebird Construction and Post - Construction Monitoring Program. A 5 -year monitoring program will be designed that includes both construction and post - construction monitoring surveys. Shorebird surveys will be conducted prior to and during construction; quarterly during the first year following the creation of the mudflat area; and annually for the remaining 4 years. The purpose of these surveys will be to measure the success of the mitigation project, comparing the shorebird diversity of the newly created mudflats with existing mudflats nearby. The results of each survey will be presented in a post -survey report prepare for the City of Newport Beach and responsible agencies. 4. Option for Remedial Measures. If the newly created mudflat does not meet pre - determined criteria, then remedial actions, including a second mudflat restoration attempt in another area, will be undertaken. Specific remedial measures will be determined upon consultation with responsible resource agencies. 38. In accordance with ACOE requirements, the loss of subtidal halibut nursery area shall be mitigated by the in -kind replacement of halibut nursery habitat at a replacement ratio of 1.5:1, at depths between 1.5 and 3.21 feet below MLLW. This habitat shall be restored at an ACOE- approved site, preferably in Upper Newport Bay, prior to project - related dredging. A conceptual mitigation program shall be developed and implemented by the applicant in consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service, California Department of Fish and Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the ACOE. The plan will include the following elements. 1. Pre - Construction Analysis of Preferred and Alternative Mitigation Sites. This study will assess the types and locations of sites that could serve as mitigation sites. Both ofsite and offsite areas will be analyzed. 2. Pre - Construction Conceptual Site Plans. Conceptual designs will be presented • that indicate elevations and contours to be achieved for the mitigation program, appropriate methods for habitat construction, and criteria to measure the success of the habitat replacement program. 3. Construction and Post - Construction Monitoring Program. A 5 -year monitor- ing program will be designed that includes both pre - construction and post - construction surveys. Halibut surveys will be conducted at the selected mitigation area prior to construction; quarterly for the first year following the .creation of the subtidal habitat; and annually for the remaining 4 years. The A -8 10 purpose of these surveys will be to measure the success of the mitigation project and compare the use of the newly created habitat by halibut with other areas in the Upper Bay. The results of each survey will be presented in post -survey monitoring reports prepared for the City of Newport Beach and responsible agencies. 4. Options for Remedial Measures. If the newly created subtidal habitat does not meet pre - determined criteria, then remedial actions, including a second restoration attempt in another area, will be undertaken. However, specific • remedial measures will be determined upon consultation with responsible resource agencies. 39. To avoid potential misuse of smaller recreational vessels in the Upper Bay and to reduce potential impacts on wildlife, Castaways Marina tenants shall, as part of their leases, be provided with educational materials regarding local and federal boating regulations and the importance of reducing disturbances to the wildlife of the Upper Bay. 40. All appropriate BMPs shall be used to prohibit erosion and runoff during construc- tion and from disturbed and paved areas into Newport Bay and the cattail marsh. Measures should also include revegetation immediately after construction ceases and placement of runoff - retaining barriers. 41. Dredging and construction activity will be terminated between April 1 and September 30, the breeding season of California least terns, to minimize adverse impacts on their foraging habitat due to increased turbidity. 42. The areas affected by construction shall be limited to the project site and proposed haul road; no material shall be deposited in the cattail marsh or coastal sage scrub habitats. 43. The landscape plan shall be altered to eliminate the use of periwinkle ground cover. 44. Prior to issuance of a grading permit by the city, the applicant shall present a traffic management program to manage construction- related traffic access to the project site and to ensure safe turning movements from Pacific Coast Highway onto Dover Drive. Such a plan should describe the use of signage and flag people and include any requirements of the City of Newport Beach Police and Public Works Departments. 45. Prior to issuance of a grading permit by the city, the applicant shall coordinate with Caltrans, Orange County, and the cities of Newport Beach and Irvine regarding their plans for improvements along MacArthur Boulevard, Bonita Canyon Road, and Pelican Hill Road (Newport Coast Drive). To the degree feasible, the hauling operation will avoid the period of construction along MacArthur Boulevard between Bison Avenue and University Avenue, and will avoid hauling during morning and afternoon peak traffic periods. 46. Prior to leaving the construction staging area and delivering dredged material to the Coyote Canyon Landfill (assuming this disposal method is selected), haul trucks shall be inspected to ensure that (1) no water leaks from the trucks and (2) dirt has been placed to avoid spillage onto roadways. 47. The applicant shall redesign the proposed site access point to be via a new road from • the marina parking lot to the Dover Drive /Cliff Drive intersection to form a 4 -way, signalized intersection. This signal shall be designed and timed to discourage bypass traffic from using Cliff Drive, to the extent possible. 48. During the dredging and ocean disposal operations, a guideboat, or a lookout on the barge bow, will be used and equipped with a megaphone and 2 -way radio to minimize potential accidents. 161 M, 49. Prior to issuance of the dredging permit, the contractor will meet with the ferry operator to develop an acceptable communications system, and shall provide the City of Newport Beach with verification of said meeting. 50. Prior to the issuance of a dredging permit, the contractor will submit a plan for the dredging operation and movement of dredged material to the Orange County Harbor Patrol and U.S. Coast Guard, and shall receive approval of the plan from said agencies. In addition, the contractor shall provide evidence to the City of Newport Beach that said plan has been approved and that the Notice to Mariners has been issued by the U.S. Coast Guard. 51. Dredging operations shall be limited to non - holiday weekdays, and shall be prohibited during the period of the annual Christmas boat parade and holiday period (from approximately December 15 through January 1). In addition, said activity shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. for acceptable weekdays. 52. The project applicant shall require all applicable contractors to implement the following exhaust emission reduction measures. a. Maintain equipment per manufacturer's specification. b. Install catalytic converters on gasoline- powered equipment. C. Implement engine timing retard. d. Utilize electrical or gasoline - powered instead of diesel- powered equipment whenever possible. 53. The applicant shall implement suppression measures for fugitive dust. Measures shall include wet suppression techniques for dry ground soil, immediate replanting and irrigation of landscaped areas, coverage requirements for loaded trucks, and onsite vehicle speed limits of 15 mph. These measures, as well as others deemed necessary by the City of Newport Beach, shall be incorporated as conditions of preventing offsite fugitive dust nuisances, as required in the SCAQMD Rule 403. 54. Construction activities shall be curtailed during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations. Ambient PM10 concentrations are highest during days with strong winds (greater than 20 mph). 55. On Saturdays, pile driving activity shall be further limited to the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 56. The project proponent shall consult with the City of Newport Beach Water Department to ensure fire flows of 3,000 gpm for the project. 57. Access dimensions shall be consistent with City of Newport Beach standards. 58. Fire protection requirements shall be consistent with the Uniform Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code. 59. Prior to the City's issuance of an occupancy permit, the applicant shall verify that the Newport Beach Fire and Police departments, and the Orange County Sheriffs Harbor patrol are provided with keys to all locked facilities /areas within the site. • 60. Low -flow bathroom fixtures shall be used in the bathroom /storage buildings on the site. 61. The approved landscape palette shall include drought - tolerant plant materials. 62. The project shall be designed to avoid disturbance of the existing onsite 30 -inch water main, or if this cannot be achieved, design for the proposed project shall A -10 0 include provisions for the relocation of the water main in accordance with City of Newport Beach requirements. 63. A conduit system will be required for cable placement and shall be provided by the project proponent. 64. The City shall conduct a baseline traffic study on Cliff Drive, prior to installation of the traffic signal at Dover Drive /Cliff Drive. The City shall monitor traffic along Cliff Drive, and, if a significant amount of traffic results, the City will install new • traffic control devices, such as stop signs, to make Cliff Drive less attractive to use than Coast Highway. 65. The landscape plan for the project will be modified to incorporate landscaping along the cribwall, and will be reviewed and approved by the City of Newport Beach prior to issuance of the grading permit. B. EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO A LEVEL OF INSIGNIFICANCE Water Ouality Significant Effect: Construction Dredging will have short term adverse chemical impacts on water quality related to a reduction in dissolved oxygen levels and an increase in detectable levels of trace metals. These impacts could add to cumulatively significant water quality problems in the Bay during the construction phase, when installation of docks and pilings will add to the cumulative risk of leakages, of contaminants, such as polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), grease, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and other contaminants potentially harmful to marine life. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: This significant effect has been substantially lessened to an acceptable level with respect to seismic risk, and to a level of insignificance with respect to soil conditions by virtue of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the additional mitigation measure listed below: Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department shall be • provided with evidence that all appropriate permits or clearances have been obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Coast Guard, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. A -11 Significant Effect: Behind the bulkhead, material below the groundwater level will be dewatered. This water will be discharged to Upper Newport Bay and if it does not meet U.S. EPA standards, it could contribute to cumulatively significant water quality problems in the bay. Therefore, it will be required to meet or be treated to meet said standards. • Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: Water extracted from dewatering wells and drained from bay materials shall meet current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requirements prior to discharging into the bay. If necessary, the water shall be desilted prior to discharge. Treatment of extracted water shall be conducted in a manner and at a location approved by the City of Newport Beach City Engineer and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. Suspended soils (e.g., sand) shall be separated from extracted water in accordance with applicable water quality standards and disposed of at a location approved by the City of Newport Beach Director of Public Works Department and the Grading Engineer. Provision shall be made, as necessary, for the treatment of hydrogen sulfide to comply with water quality stan- dards and to control odors from the dewatering process. Significant Effect Ocean disposal of dredged material has a low potential to significantly degrade water quality at the LA -3 site. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. • Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: The dredging contractor shall conduct dredging activities in accordance with the approved dredging permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. A -12 2� Marine Bioloev Significant Effect: Accidental oil or fuel spills could potentially occur during the proposed dredging operation or marina construction and could result in significant effects on the wildlife of the Upper Newport Bay. The duration of the construction operation would be relatively short and the potential for the occurrence of petro- leum-product leaks or spills would be low. However, biological effects could be significant depending on the severity of the accident. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: This significant effect has been substantially lessened to an acceptable level with respect to seismic risk, and to a level of insignificance with respect to soil conditions by virtue of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the additional mitigation measure listed below: * Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City of Newport Beach Public Works Department shall be provided with evidence that all appropriate permits or clearances have been obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Coast Guard, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Significant Effect: During operation of the marina, accidental oil or fuel spills could adversely affect wildlife in the Upper Bay; the signifi- cance would depend on the severity of the spill. The project would reduce the potential for accidental oil or fuel spills by not providing a fueling station, and by prohibiting major boat maintenance activities (painting, engine overhauls, etc.). Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level • of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: * For the life of the project, the project applicant shall provide each marina tenant with information regarding procedures for notifying appropriate authorities regard- ing spills of hazardous materials, containment measures, and applicable penalties for violations as a part of lease materials. A -13 �� Significant Effect: The Bayside Marsh Peninsula across the channel from the site is not expected to be affected in the short term by the project if precautions, such as the use of filter curtains, are implement- ed during the dredging operation. However, in the long term, boating activity is expected to increase in the main channel, and the channel width would be narrower because of the proposed pier. This could result in an increase in noise and enhanced • public access to the Bayside Marsh Peninsula mudflat and marsh habitat, thereby reducing the wildlife utilization value of the area. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: The dredging contractor shall be required as part of the dredging contract to ensure that dredging activities shall be conducted so as not to disturb sensitive biological habitats and resources in the vicinity of Bayside Marsh Peninsula. To reduce the extent of increased turbidity, the applicant shall require the dredging contractor to use filter cur- tains around dredging operations, when feasible. Significant Effect The project will result in a net loss of mudflat habitat, which represents a 41 percent decrease in this habitat category within the project's impact area. The mainte- nance of Newport Bay mudflats is important for the continued success of the birds that forage and nest in the Upper Bay. Reduction in mudflat habitat is considered to be a significant, localized impact of the project. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incor- porated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the Final Eir. Facts in Support of Finding: • The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: In accordance with Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) requirements, the loss of mudflat habitat shall be mitigated by the in -kind replacement of mudflat habitat at a replacement ratio of 1.5:1 in an ACOE- approved A -14 '), q site, preferably in Upper Newport Bay. A detailed conceptual mitigation plan will be developed and implemented by the applicant in consultation with the appropriate resource and regulatory agencies. Significant Effect: A permanent deepening of subtidal halibut nursery habitat would result from channel dredging. The deepening of this habitat would reduce the habitat quality and result in a net loss • of habitat for "young of the year" (YOY). The dredging would also recontour habitat at depths preferred by juvenile halibut. The creation of the Castaways Marina basin will fully offset the loss of juvenile halibut habitat since the depth of the marina basin would be within the preferred depth range for juvenile halibut. The reduction and alteration of halibut nursery habitat is considered to be a significant local impact of the project, but is not expected to be a significant regional impact. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: In accordance with ACOE requirements, the loss of subtidal nursery area shall be mitigated by the in -kind replacement of halibut nursery habitat at a replacement ratio of 1.5:1 at depths between 1.5 and 3.21 feet mean lower low water level. The mitigation shall be undertak- en in an ACOE- approved site, preferably in Upper Newport Bay. A detailed conceptual mitigation program shall be developed and implemented by the applicant in consultation with the appropriate resource and regulato- ry agencies. Terrestrial Biological Resources Significant Finding: The proposed landscape plan includes periwinkle ground cover which is potentially invasive to natural plant communities, particularly wetland habitats. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated • into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: �J A -15 The landscape plan shall be altered to eliminate the use of periwinkle ground cover. Cultural Resources Significant Effect: The Monterey and Capistrano formations located on both the Upper and Lower Castaways site have a history of providing • fossil records throughout Southern California. Project imple- mentationwould expose these formations and could significantly affect and possibly destroy any fossil remains. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: A paleontological monitor shall be retained by the landowner and /or developer to attend pregrade meet- ings and perform inspections during development. The paleontologist shall be allowed to divert, direct, or halt grading in a specific area to allow for salvage of exposed fossil materials. Traffic /Circulation Significant Effect: The proposed project will generate additional traffic, primarily on Dover Drive and Coast Highway, during the dredging and construction phase of the project. The additional traffic may cause short -term traffic congestion in the vicinity of the project site. Construction- related traffic impacts can generally be mitigated to a level that is less than significant through the use of standard traffic control practices. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level • of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: Prior to issuance of a grading permit by the City, the applicant shall present a traffic management program to manage construction- related traffic access to the project site and to ensure safe turning movements from Pacific Coast Highway onto Dover Drive. Such a plan should describe the use of signage and flag people and include A -16 ? (, any requirements of the City of Newport Beach Police and Public Works Departments. Significant Effect: If ocean disposal for dredged materials is not approved, all or part of the material will be hauled to the Coyote Canyon Landfill. Assuming a 5 -day work week and a 12 -week dredging • period, an estimated 70 truck trips a day could be generated by the proposed dredged material disposal operation. Due to the potentially high number of truck trips, the dredging operation would contribute to potentially significant short -term traffic congestion in the cities of Newport Beach and Irvine. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: Prior to issuance of a grading permit by the City, the applicant shall coordinate with Caltrans, the County of Orange, and the cities of Newport Beach and Irvine regarding their plans for improvements along MacArthur Boulevard, Bonita Canyon Road, and Pelican Hill Road (Newport Coast Drive). To the degree feasible, the hauling operation will avoid hauling during morning and afternoon peak traffic periods. Significant Effect: Trucks hauling dredged material to the Coyote Canyon Landfill could leak water or spill dirt along the haul route creating unsightly and unsafe road conditions. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: • ' Prior to leaving the construction staging area and delivering dredged material to the Coyote Canyon Landfill (assuming this disposal method is selected), haul trucks shall be inspected to ensure that (1) no water leaks from the trucks and (2) dirt has been placed to avoid spillage onto roadways. a7 A -17 Significant Effect: If the landfill disposal option is not performed, all construction traffic would enter and exit the site via a driveway on the Lower Castaways site. In this case, only right turns into and out of Dover Drive would be possible. Entrance to the site would occur via a right turn from north -bound Dover Drive, immedi- ately after a right turn from Coast Highway. In addition, long- term traffic access to the marina would be limited to a right - turn in and out movement. This will generate additional U -turn movements at the Cliff Drive /Dover Drive intersection and is considered to contribute to potentially unsafe turning move- ments and lane changes. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: * The applicant shall redesign the proposed site access point to be via a new road from the marina parking lot to the Dover Drive /Cliff Drive intersection to form a 4- way, signalized intersection. Harbor Circulation Significant Effect: Should either of the dredged material disposal alternatives be implemented, short-term impacts to harbor circulation are expected. The dredge /construction stage of the project will limit the ability of boats to enter or exit the Upper Bay due to the placement of equip- ment immediately north of the Coast Highway bridge. If the ocean disposal alternative is selected, the dredging activity and transport of the dredged material will potentially interfere with the various recreational boating activities /events, such as boat races, that occur on a regular basis in the harbor. With the scows moving down the middle of the channel, racing boats and pleasure craft will need to adjust their course to avoid the slow - moving scows. The disruption of harbor circulation is considered a short -term significant impact of the proposed project. Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated . into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened to a level of insignificance by virtue of the Standard City Policies identi- fied in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: A- 18 �)_8 During the dredging and ocean disposal operations, a guideboat or lookout on the barge bow will be used and equipped with a megaphone and 2 -way radio to mini- mize potential accidents. * Prior to the issuance of the dredging permit, the contrac- tor will meet with the ferry operator to develop an acceptable communications system, and shall provide the City of Newport Beach with verification of said meeting. • * Dredging operations shall be limited to non - holiday weekdays, and shall be prohibited during the period of the annual Christmas boat parade and holiday period (from approximately December 15 through January 1). In addition, said activity shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. for acceptable weekdays. C. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED Listed below are the significant environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the project is implemented. These effects have been reduced to the extent feasible through the requirements and mitigation measures described below. The remaining unavoidable significant effects have been determined to be acceptable when balanced against the economic, social, or other factors set forth in the attached Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit B). Water Ouality Significant Effect: Marina tenants could potentially discharge wastes from vessel holding tanks illegally, resulting in an increase in bacterial and viral contamination, nutrient loading and turbidity that would contribute a small increment to cumulatively significant water quality problems in the bay. Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Other changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, and not solely the City of Newport Beach. Such changes have been adopted by other agencies or can and should be adopted by such agencies. Facts in Support of Finding: • The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: No vessel discharges are allowed within Newport Bay. The applicant shall provide for periodic maintenance of the sanitary pump out station to ensure its continuous operation. A -19 f Significant Effect: The project will add a small increment to cumulative levels of anti - fouling and paint- related contaminants in the bay due to paint which can leach from the bottom of boats at anchor, and from normal maintenance activities, including hull scraping. In addition, hull cleaning activities could result in the periodic release of marine fouling organisms, increasing the organic • content of local sediments which can then contribute to anoxic bottom conditions. Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Other changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, and not solely the City of Newport Beach. Such changes have been adopted by other agencies or can and should be adopted by such agencies. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: For the life of the project, the project applicant shall provide each marina tenant with a copy of all applicable regulations regarding vessel discharges of wastes, anti- fouling paint use, and refuse management (including handling of hazardous wastes) as a part of lease materi- als. Significant Effect: Runoff from the new marina parking lot and adjacent landscape areas will result in the discharge of contaminants such as oil, grease, fertilizers, pesticides, and trace metals into the bay and thus contribute a small increment to the cumulative water quality problems associated with stormwater discharges through- out the bay's watershed. Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. • Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Other changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, and not solely the City of Newport Beach. Such changes have been adopted by other agencies or can and should be adopted by such agencies. A -20 go Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: * A landscape plan, prepared by a licensed landscape architect, shall be submitted for approval by the Direc- tors of Planning and Parks, Beaches, and Recreation, which includes a maintenance program that controls the use of fertilizers and pesticides. • Landscaped areas shall be irrigated with a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over - watering. * Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a landscape and irrigation plan for both project sites shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plan shall be subject to approval by the Planning Department and the Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department, and shall place emphasis on the use of drought- resistant native vegeta- tion and be irrigated via a system designed to avoid surface runoff and over- watering. * The applicant shall provide regular cleaning of the marina docks and vacuum sweeping of the parking lot. Significant Effect: The presence of additional boats introduced by the project could increase the risk of accidental oil and fuel spills occurring in Newport Bay. Spillage of hazardous materials, such as diesel fuel, gasoline and lubricating oils from vessels, and paint thinner and other organic solvents from maintenance activities, or the improper disposal of these materials associated with operation of the marina would contribute a small increment to cumulatively significant water quality problems in Newport Bay. Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Other changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, and not solely the City of Newport Beach. Such changes have been adopted by other agencies or can and should be adopted by such agencies. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue • of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: * For the life of the project, the project applicant shall provide each marina tenant with a copy of all applicable regulations regarding vessel discharges of wastes, anti- fouling paint use, and refuse management (including handling of hazardous wastes) as a part of lease materi- als. A -21 3 Although the incremental increase in adverse water quality effects as a direct result of the project is considered minor, it is viewed as a cumulative significant impact within the context of on -going regional growth. This unavoidable significant effect is considered acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Other public agencies with jurisdiction to effect regional solutions to cumulative impacts identified in the Final EIR • include the surrounding local cities, the County of Orange, the Southern California Association of Governments, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Air Quality Significant Effect: The combined effect of all phases of construction would contribute to an already existing violation of the ozone stan- dard. Nitrogen oxide emissions from the dredging equipment are estimated to exceed 100 lbs /day and would lead to a short - term significant impact of regional air quality. Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Other changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, and not solely the City of Newport Beach. Such changes have been adopted by other agencies or can and should be adopted by such agencies. Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measures: The project applicant shall require all applicable con- tractors to implement the following exhaust emission reduction measures: a. Maintain equipment per manufacturer's specifica- tion. b. Install catalytic converters on gasoline- powered equipment. 0 C. Implement engine timing retard. d. Utilize electrical or gasoline- powered instead of diesel- powered equipment whenever possible. Construction activities shall be curtailed during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations. Ambient PM10 concentrations are highest during days with strong winds (greater than 20 mph). A -22 3,Z Significant Effect: Although long -term project - generated air quality impacts are expected to be minimal due to the relatively small number of boats, any increase in emissions of ozone precursors (i.e., nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons) is considered significant since the site is in a non - attainment area for ozone. Findings: • Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Noise Other changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of other public agencies, and not solely the City of Newport Beach. Such changes have been adopted by other agencies or can and should be adopted by such agencies. Facts in Support of Finding: Although the incremental air pollutant emission increase as a direct result of the project is considered minor, it is viewed as a cumulative significant impact within the context of on -going regional growth. This unavoidable significant effect is consid- ered acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Other public agencies with jurisdiction to effect regional solutions to cumulative impacts identified in the Final EIR include the surrounding local cities, the County of Orange, the Southern California Association of Governments, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the California Air Resources Board, and the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. Significant Effect: Construction operations (e.g., dredging and pile driving) will produce noise levels that exceed the City's noise criterion of 65 dBA CNEL in residential areas. Although these increased noise levels are of a relatively short term nature, they may be perceived as significant by nearby residents. Findings: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the signifi- cant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the Final EIR. • Facts in Support of Finding: The significant effect has been substantially lessened by virtue of the Standard City Policies identified in the Final EIR and the following mitigation measure: A -s3 33 Construction activities shall be conducted in accordance with the City of Newport Beach noise ordinance which limits construction to the following hours and days. • Between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on any weekday • Between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays • Prohibited on Sundays and holidays • On Saturdays, pile driving activity shall be further limited to the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Although the incremental noise increase as a direct result of the project is considered minor, it is viewed as a cumulative significant impact within the content of on -going regional growth. This unavoidable significant effect is considered acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. IV. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Analysis Section 15126(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR describe "a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." Six alternatives to the proposed project are evaluated in Section 6 of the Final EIR. These alternatives were developed with the intent of finding ways to avoid or reduce the environmental effects of the proposed project while attaining the basic objectives of the project, even if those alternatives might impede the attainment of other project objectives and might be more costly. The City Council has determined that four of these alternatives are infeasible, in that they would not satisfy the basic project objectives or they would not substantially reduce the environmental effects as compared to the proposed project. A summary of the alternatives considered, along with an explanation of why each alternative was rejected is presented below. The Project Objectives are presented in Section II.A., above. 1. No Project Development According to Existing Entitlements The No Project /No Development alternative would maintain the site involved in its present state, with no change in entitlements and no construction of the new marina. This alternative would avoid all of the environmental effects associated with the proposed project, and therefore is environmentally superior to the proposed project. This alternative would not meet the basic project objectives, however, and is therefore rejected as infeasible. In addition, this alternative would allow for the eventual development of 40,000 sq.ft. of commercial development on the project site. 2. 84 Boat Slims Alternative • This alternative would provide for a marina with 41 fewer boat slips. It would incrementally reduce the dredging impacts of the project, although the project will engender similar impacts to juvenile halibut habitat to the proposed project. Because of the reduced dredging the alternative is considered environmentally superior. This alternative is not considered to be feasible since the design could result in the undermining of the Coast Highway bridge. However, the basic idea of this alterative has provided the basis for the approved project. A -24 311 3 50 Boat Marine without new Marina Basin This alternative would provide for a marina with 75 fewer boat slips. It would incrementally reduce the dredging impacts of the project, although the project will engender similar impacts to juvenile halibut habitat to the proposed project. Because of the reduced dredging the alternative is considered environmentally superior. This alternative would not meet the basic project objectives, however, and is therefore rejected as infeasible. In addition, this • alternative would allow for the eventual development of 40,000 sq.ft. of commercial development on the project site. 4. Alternative Site Locations The potential for alternative project locations was examined in order to reduce or alleviate the potential environmental effects on upper bay resources. the following sites were evaluated: Lower Newport Bay, West Newport /Newport Shores, Dana Point and Huntington /Sunset Harbor. These locations were rejected due to the absence of available sites within the location, the lack of City jurisdiction over the area and /or that similar development on these sites would result in similar environmental effects. In the consideration of the project and the alternatives to the project, the City Council has incorporated one of the design alternatives in order to reduce the significant effects of the proposed project. This is the alternate long term site access design to a signalized access point at Cliff Drive. The alternate site access will eliminate the need to construct a temporary access road on the Upper Castaways site and will provide safer long term access to the proposed project. The approved project will also be altered from the original project proposed to reduce the number of marina slips to 71 and eliminate all slips from County tidelands area. This will result in the approval of an environmentally superior project which has similar environmental benefits to the 84 slip alternative described in the EIR. The benefit is the reduced dredging required to construct the project. Conclusion On the basis of the information presented above, the City Council has determined that the project as modified will accomplish the project objectives while substantially reducing the environmental impacts of the project. The Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit 2) presents the reasons why the City Council has determined that the proposed project should be approved, even though it will contribute to significant project related and cumulative effects that cannot be fully mitigated. • PLT... \cc \amd \EIR138A A -25 3/ Exhibit 2 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, The California Environmental Quality Act requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. The City of Newport Beach has determined that the unavoidable risks of this project are acceptable and are clearly outweighed by specific social and other • benefits of the project. In making this determination, the following factors and public benefits were considered: 1. The proposed project is consistent with other existing uses in the vicinity of the project and the community in general. 2. The proposed project represents infill development located in an urban area where adequate facilities and services exist. 3. The density and intensity of the project is appropriate. 4. The proposed project will contribute to a fair share of local and regional roadway improvements, specifically the City's Fair Share Traffic Contribution Ordinance. 5. The project will provide marina uses in the City of Newport Beach which are in great demand in the area. 6. The project will increase recreational resources and public access to the coastal resources of Newport Bay. 7. The project will preclude the development of 40,000 sq.ft. of retail or visitor serving commercial uses on the property as provided for in the Newport Beach General Plan. 8. The project will incrementally improve the jobs /housing balance in the City due to the minimal commercial intensity of the marina project as compared to the use permitted by the Newport Beach General Plan. PL1`... \ED \MR \EIR138.0RC