HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-2 - Megonigal Residence EIRRESOLUTION NO. 2010-2
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT
BEACH CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(SCH NO. 2009051043) FOR THE MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007-
133) LOCATED AT 2333 PACIFIC DRIVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT AND STATE AND
LOCAL GUIDELINES, MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND
DETERMINATIONS THERETO, AND APPROVING A MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
WHEREAS, an application was filed by David R. Olson on behalf of Kim and
Carolyne Megonigal, property owners, with respect to property located at 2333 Pacific
Drive, requesting a modification permit to exceed the 3 -foot height limitation in the front
yard setback to allow for planter walls and a water feature; and
WHEREAS, it was determined pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. ( "CEQA ") and the CEQA Guidelines
(14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.) that the Project could have a
significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR "); and
WHEREAS, on May 11, 2009, the City of Newport Beach, as lead agency under
CEQA, prepared a Notice of Preparation ( "NOP ") of the EIR and mailed that NOP to
public agencies, organizations and persons likely to be interested in the potential
impacts of the proposed Project; and
WHEREAS, the City thereafter caused to be prepared a Draft Environmental
Impact Report ( "DEIR ") in accordance with the CEQA, which, taking into account the
comments it received on the NOP, described the Project and discussed the
environmental impacts resulting there from, and on August 24, 2009, circulated the
DEIR for public and agency comments; and
WHEREAS, the 45 -day public comment period closed on October 7, 2009; and
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2009, the City of Newport Beach completed a
Final Environmental Impact Report ( "FEIR "), for the project, consisting of the DEIR,
comments on the DEIR, responses to comments on the DEIR, and minor revisions to
the DEIR;
WHEREAS, staff of the City of Newport Beach has reviewed the comments
received on the DEIR, has prepared full and complete responses thereto, and on
December 23, 2009, distributed the responses in accordance with Public Resources
Code Section 21092.5; and
WHEREAS, on a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on
November 19, 2009, in the City Hall Council Chambers, at 3300 Newport Boulevard,
Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place, and purpose of the aforesaid hearing
was given. The application, plans, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were
presented to and considered by the Planning Commission at this meeting and at the
conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution No. 1795
recommending certification of the EIR and project approval; and
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2010, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach,
California, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider: (1) the certification of the
FEIR, (2) the adoption of certain findings and determinations. (3) approval of the project;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has read and considered all environmental
documentation comprising the FEIR, including the comments and the responses to
comments, and has found that the FEIR considers all potentially significant
environmental impacts of the proposed project and is complete and adequate, and fully
complies with all requirements of CEQA and of the State and local CEQA Guidelines;
and
WHEREAS, on the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed
project will have a less than significant impact upon the environment with the
incorporation of mitigation measures. Additionally, there are no long -term environmental
goals that would be compromised by the project, nor cumulative impacts anticipated in
connection with the project. The mitigation measures identified are feasible and reduce
potential environmental impacts to a less than significant level. The mitigation measures
are applied to the project and are incorporated as conditions of approval.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA
determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In
addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges.
As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate
that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial
challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which
may be awarded to a successful challenger.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
SECTION 1. Based on its review and consideration of the FEIR, all written
communications and oral testimony regarding the Project which have been submitted to
and received by the City Council, the City Council hereby certifies that the FEIR,
consisting of the Draft EIR (Exhibit A), Responses to Comments (Exhibit B) and Errata
(Exhibit C) for the Project has been completed in compliance with CEQA and the State
and local CEQA Guidelines. The City Council, having final approval authority over the
Project, adopts and certifies as complete and adequate the FEIR, which reflects the City
Council's independent judgment and analysis. The City Council further certifies that the
FEIR was presented to the City Council and that the City Council reviewed and
considered the information contained in it prior to approving the Project.
SECTION 2. CEQA Finding and Statement of Facts. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15091, the City Council has reviewed and hereby adopts the CEQA
Findings and Statement of Facts as shown on the attached Exhibit D entitled "CEQA
Findings and Statement of Facts," which exhibit is incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 3. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15097, the City Council has reviewed and hereby adopts the
"Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program" which is included as Exhibit E, which exhibit
is incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 4. Location and Custodian of Record of Proceedings. The Planning
Department of the City of Newport Beach, located at 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport
Beach, California 92263, is hereby designated as the custodian of the documents and
other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council's
decision is based, which documents and materials shall be available for public
inspection and copying in accordance with the provisions of the California Public
Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.).
SECTION 5. Notice of Determination. The Planning Director shall cause the filing
of a notice of determination with the County Clerk of the County of Orange and with the
State Office of Planning and Research within five working days of this approval.
SECTION 6. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant and
property owner shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, its
boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against
any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits,
losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including without
limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature
whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's
approval of this Project including, but not limited to, the approval of the Modification
Permit No. MD2007 -080 and /or the City's related California Environmental Quality Act
determinations, the certification of the Environmental Impact Report, the adoption of a
Mitigation Program. This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages
awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses
incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding
whether incurred by the applicant or property owner, City, and /or the parties initiating or
bringing such proceeding. The applicant and property owner shall indemnify the City for
all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the
indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City
upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification
requirements prescribed in this finding.
SECTION 7. Certification. Posting and Filing. This resolution shall take effect
immediately upon its adoption by the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, and the
City Clerk shall certify to the vote adopting this resolution and shall cause a certified
copy of this resolution to be filed.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 12th day of January 2010.
Keith D. Curry, Mayor
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH }
I, Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby
certify that the whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution,
being Resolution No. 2010 -2 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City
Council of said City at a regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 12th day of
January, 2010, and that the same was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit:
Ayes: Selich, Rosansky, Henn, Webb, Gardner, Daigle, Mayor Curry
Noes: None
Absent: None
Abstain: None
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the
official seal of said City this 13th day of January, 2010.
City Clerk
Newport Beach, California
(Seal)
Draft
Environmental Impact Report
SCH No. 2009041010
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE
PA 2007 -133
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Prepared by:
Keeton Kreitzer Consulting
17291 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 305
Tustin, CA 92780
August 2009
DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
SCH NO. 2009041010
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE
PA 2007 -133
Prepared for.
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Contact: James Campbell, Principal Planner (949) 644 -3210
Prepared by.
Keeton Kreitzer Consulting
17291 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 305
Tustin, CA 92680
Contact: Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal (714) 665 -8509
AUGUST 2009
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
EGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 2007 -133)
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................... ............................1
-1
1.1
Description of the Proposed Project ......................................................... ...............................
1 -1
1.2
Alternatives ................................................................................................... ............................1
-2
1.3
Areas of Controversy ................................................................................ ...............................
1 -2
1.4
Issues to be Resolved ............................................................................... ...............................
1 -3
1.5
Impact Summary Table ............................................................................. ...............................
1 -3
1.5
Summary of Standard Conditions ............................................................ ...............................
1 -3
2.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND .................................................................. ............................2
-1
2.1
Purpose of the Draft EIR ........................................................................... ...............................
2 -1
2.2
Methodology ................................................................................................. ............................2
-4
2.3
Format of the Draft EIR ............................................................................. ...............................
2 -6
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................ ............................3.1
Potential Impacts ...........................................................................
3.1
Project Location ......................................................................................... ...............................
3 -1
3.2
Environmental Setting ............................................................................... ...............................
3 -1
3.3
History and Evolution of the Existing Development ................................. ...............................
3 -9
3.4
Description of the Proposed Project ....................................................... ...............................
3 -12
3.5
Project Phasing ....................................................................................... ...............................
3 -12
3.6
Project Objectives .................................................................................... ...............................
3 -12
3.7
Project Processing Requirements and Requested Entitlements .......... ...............................
3 -15
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4.1 -1
4.1 Land Use and Planning ...............................................................................
..........................4.1 -1
4.1.1
Existing Conditions ...................................................................
............................... 4.1 -1
4.1.2
Significance Criteria .......................................................................
..........................4.1 -7
4.1.3
Standard Conditions .................................................................
............................... 4.1 -7
4.1.4
Potential Impacts ...........................................................................
..........................4.1 -7
4.1.5
Mitigation Measures .....................................................................
.........................4.1 -28
4.1.6
Level of Significance after Mitigation ...........................................
.........................4.1 -28
4.2 Biological Resources ..............................................................................
............................... 4.2 -1
4.2.1
Existing Conditions ...................................................................
............................... 4.2 -1
4.2.2
Significance Criteria .......................................................................
..........................4.2 -7
4.2.3
Standard Conditions .................................................................
............................... 4.2 -7
4.2.4
Potential Impacts ...........................................................................
..........................4.2 -8
4.2.5
Mitigation Measures .....................................................................
.........................4.2 -10
4.2.6
Level of Significance after Mitigation ...........................................
.........................4.2 -10
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
5.0
Cdr;
`fir:
Table of Contents
Page
4.3 Aesthetics ...............................................................................................
............................... 4.3-1
4.3.1
Existing Conditions ...................................................................
............................... 4.3 -1
4.3.2
Significance Criteria ..................................................................
............................... 4.3-2
4.3.3
Standard Conditions .................................................................
............................... 4.3 -2
4.3.4
Potential Impacts ............................................ ...............................
..........................4.3 -3
4.3.5
Mitigation Measures .....................................................................
.........................4.3 -10
4.3.6
Level of Significance after Mitigation ...........................................
.........................4.3 -10
IMPACTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
5 -1
5.1
Agriculture .....................................................................................................
............................5 -1
5.2
Air Quality ..................................................................................................
............................... 5 -1
5.3
Cultural Resources ....................................................................................
............................... 5 -2
5.4
Geologic and Soils ....................................................................................
............................... 5 -3
5.5
Hazards and Hazardous Materials ...........................................................
............................... 5-4
5.6
Hydrology and Water Quality ....................................................................
............................... 5-4
5.7
Mineral Resources ....................................................................................
............................... 5 -5
5.8
Noise .............................................................................................................
............................5 -5
5.9
Population and Housing ............................................................................
............................... 5-5
5.10
Public Services .............................................................................................
............................5 -6
5.11
Recreation .....................................................................................................
............................5 -7
5.12
Traffic and Circulation ...............................................................................
............................... 5 -7
5.13
Utilities ...........................................................................................................
............................5 -8
69[ C] ZIIa[ N_1 1!Ilg0 /_V111111IU_1- 31111:F_111P1:1:49:8MAI WIT91 161
IIN0:4111N119_1-IN W_12 oil IVN:k1r1:I:611:i1111 *KiL4 IT, Il IIril:1Z 1111115910 V:Rlo111:10
6 -1
7.1
8.0 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS ...........................................................................
............................... 8.1
8.1 Definition of Growth- Inducing Impacts .....................................................
............................... 8-1
8.2 Analysis of Growth- Inducing Impacts .......................................................
............................... 8-1
8.3 Conclusion ....................................................................................................
............................8 -2
9.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ................................. ............................9 -1
9.1 Definition of Cumulative Impacts .............................................................. ............................... 9-1
9.2 Cumulative Projects .................................................................................. ............................... 9 -1
9.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis ...................................................................... ............................... 9-4
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
ii
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Table of Contents
Page
10.0 ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................................................
...........................10 -1
10.1
Introduction ..............................................................................................
............................... 10 -1
10.2
Alternatives Rejected from Further Consideration ................................
............................... 10 -2
10.3
Analysis of Alternatives ...........................................................................
............................... 10 -3
10.4
Summary of Alternatives .........................................................................
............................... 10 -7
10.4
Environmentally Superior Alternative .........................................................
...........................10 -8
11.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
12.0 REFERENCES ................
13.0 GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS
APPENDICES
A. Initial Study /Notice of Preparation
B. NOP Comment Letters
C. Biological Resources Assessment
11 -1
..................................... ...........................12 -1
......................................................... ...........................13 -1
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
iii
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 20007 -133)
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Table of Contents
Paqe
3 -1
Regional Map ..........................................................................................................
............................... 3-2
3 -2
Vicinity Map .............................................................................................................
............................... 3 -3
3 -3
Aerial Photograph .......................................................................................................
............................3 -4
3 -4
Existing General Plan ..............................................................................................
............................... 3-6
3 -5
Existing Zoning ........................................................................................................
............................... 3 -7
3 -6
Site Plan .................................................................................................................
............................... 3 -11
3 -7
Front Elevation ......................................................................................................
............................... 3 -13
3 -8
Rear Elevation ...........................................................................................................
...........................3 -14
4.2 -1
Vegetation Map ....................................................................................................
............................... 4.2 -2
4.3 -1
Visual Simulation from Begonia Park — Lower Bench ........................................
............................... 4.3-4
4.3 -2
Visual Simulation from Begonia Park — Upper Bench ........................................
............................... 4.3 -6
4.3 -3
View from Pacific Drive /Begonia Avenue ............................................................
............................... 4.3 -7
4.3 -4
Visual Simulations — Views 1 — 4 .........................................................................
............................... 4.3 -8
4.3 -5
Visual Simulations — Views 5 — 8 .........................................................................
............................... 4.3 -9
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
IV
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 2007 -133)
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
LIST OF TABLES
Table of Contents
Page
1 -1
Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Level of Significance After Mitigation ......................
1 -5
2 -1
List of Potential Responsible Agencies .................................................................. ...............................
2 -3
4.1 -1
General Plan Policy Analysis .................................................................................... ..........................4.1
-8
4.1 -2
Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Policy Analysis ..................................................... .........................4.1
-15
4.1 -3
Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) Consistency Analysis ........... .........................4.1
-24
5 -1
Project - Related Pollutant Emissions .................................................................... ...............................
5 -2
9 -1
Related Projects List ................................................................................................. ............................9
-2
10 -1
Summary of Project Alternatives ......................................................................... ...............................
10 -8
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA 2007 -133)
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
LIST OF TABLES
Table of
Page
1 -1
Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Level of Significance After Mitigation ......................1
-5
2 -1
List of Potential Responsible Agencies ................................................................... ............................2
-3
4.1 -1
General Plan Policy Analysis .................................................................................. ..........................4.1
-8
4.1 -2
Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Policy Analysis ................................................... .........................4.1
-15
4.1 -3
Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) Consistency Analysis .......... .........................4.1
-24
5 -1
Project - Related Pollutant Emissions ..................................................................... ............................5
-2
9 -1
Related Projects List ............................................................................................... ............................9
-2
10 -1
Summary of Project Alternatives ........................................................................... ...........................10
-8
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
v
Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary
CHAPTER 1.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1 Description of the Proposed Project
1.1.1 Project Location
The City of Newport Beach is an urbanized coastal community located in western Orange County.
Newport Beach is bordered by the Cities of Irvine on the north and northeast and by Costa Mesa on the
north and northwest. Crystal Cove State Park, in unincorporated Orange County, is located southeast of
the City's corporate boundaries. On the west, the incorporated limits of the City extend to the Santa Ana
River; the City of Huntington Beach is located west of the Santa Ana River. The Pacific Ocean comprises
the southern boundary of the City.
The site is located at 2333 Pacific Avenue in the City of Newport Beach. The subject property currently
consists of a single parcel encompassing 4,412 square feet (i.e., 0.1 acre). The site is current vacant but
has been altered by some grading and vegetation clearance. The site supports a variety of native and
non - native landscape species.
1.1.2 Project Description
The project applicants, Kim and Caroline Megonigal, are proposing to construct a 3,566 square -foot,
single - family residence. The proposed residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the
first floor; 934 square feet on the second floor; and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (includes a
428 - square foot, 2 -car garage). Vehicular access is from Pacific Drive at the intersection of Begonia
Avenue and Pacific Drive. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space
on the three levels is provided. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080
to allow planter walls and a water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front
yard setback. In addition, because the proposed planter walls and water feature would also encroach up
to 13 feet into the Begonia Avenue right -of -way, an encroachment permit from the City's Public works
Department will also be required.
The following discretionary approvals are requested or required by the City in order to implement the
project:
Modification Permit (MD2007 -080)
1.1.3 Project Phasing
The applicant is proposing to construct the entire project in a single construction phase over a period of
approximately 20 months.
1.1.4 Project Objectives
Implementation of the proposed project will achieve the following intended specific objectives, which have
been identified by the project applicant:
Construction of a custom, single - family residence consistent with the General Plan and
Zoning designations adopted for the project that:
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -1
Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
1.0 — Executive
(1) provides adequate floor area within a personalized floor plan to accommodate
the applicant's living needs;
(2) provides views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean to the south and west from each
level;
(3) provides outdoor living areas that are directly accessible from indoor spaces on
each level;
(4) provides access from Pacific Drive to an enclosed garage; and
(5) minimizes impacts on public views from Begonia Park.
1.2 Alternatives
1.2.1 Summary of Alternatives
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of
the project, which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or
substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and to evaluate the comparative merits of
the alternatives. Chapter 10 sets forth potential alternatives to the proposed project and evaluates them
as required by CEQA. Several alternative development scenarios have been identified as a means of
reducing potentially significant impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. These
alternatives include:
Alternative Site
No Project/No Development
Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level)
Alternative Access (Bayside Drive)
1.2.2 Environmentally Superior Alternative
Chapter 10 describes the criteria that were used to select those alternatives for detailed analysis and to
screen others from further detailed consideration. CEQA also requires that the EIR identify the
environmentally superior alternative among all of the alternatives considered. The No Development
alternative identified and analyzed in Chapter 10.0 will eliminate all of the project - related effects (which
are identified as less than significant). However, CEQA requires that if the "no project" alternative is the
environmentally superior alternative, an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives
shall be identified. Based on the comparative analysis of alternatives provided in Chapter 10, the
Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level) project alternative would be considered to be environmentally
superior in that its implementation would result in a reduction of impacts to public views, which were
determined to be less than significant.
1.3 Areas of Controversy
The areas of controversy identified during the scoping process and at public hearings conducted prior to
the preparation of the EIR, are addressed in the EIR and include:
Public Views
Sensitive Habitat/Species
Consistency with General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan Policies
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -2
Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
1.4 Issues to be Resolved
1.0 — Executive
The environmental analysis presented in an initial study prepared for the proposed project and in Chapter
4.0 and Chapter 5.0 of the Draft EIR identify potentially significant project - related impacts; however, in
those instances, specific mitigation measures have been included to reduce the potential significant
adverse effects to a less than significant level. No significant unavoidable adverse impacts will occur as a
result of project implementation.
1.5 Impact Summary Table
Table 1 -1 summarizes the significant adverse impacts of the proposed project. The table also provides a
summary of the potential impacts found to be less than significant, and which do not require mitigation.
Each environmental resource area covered in the main text is summarized. Also, impacts found to be
significant are listed along with the proposed mitigation measures. The residual impacts after application
of mitigation measures are also indicated for each significant impact.
1.6 Summary of Standard Conditions
The proposed project will incorporate, where necessary or required, standard conditions as imposed by
the City and /or other responsible agencies. The standard conditions that will be implemented are
presented below.
Air Quality
SC -1 Since the South Coast Air Basin is in non - attainment with respect to ozone and PM10, and
the construction emissions would add to the regional burden of these pollutants, a
vigorous set of air pollution control measures is recommended during the construction
phases. The measures include:
During grading activities, any exposed soil areas shall be watered at least four
times per day. Stockpiles of crushed cement, debris, dirt or other dusty materials
shall be covered or watered twice daily. On windy days or when fugitive dust can
be observed leaving the proposed project site, additional applications of water
shall be applied to maintain a minimum 12 percent moisture content as defined
by SCAQMD Rule 403. Soil disturbance shall be terminated whenever windy
conditions exceed 25 miles per hour.
Truck loads carrying soil and debris material shall be wetted or covered prior to
leaving the site. Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent
public streets, the streets shall be swept daily.
All diesel - powered machinery exceeding 100 horsepower shall be equipped with
soot traps, unless the Contractor demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City
Building Official that it is infeasible.
The construction contractor shall time the construction activities, including the
transportation of construction equipment vehicles and equipment to the site, and
delivery of materials, so as not to interfere with peak hour traffic. To minimize
obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site, a flag person shall be
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -3
Megonigal Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Land Use
1.0 — Executive
retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways, if deemed necessary
by the City.
The construction contractor shall encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for
the construction workers.
To the extent feasible, pre-coated/natural colored building materials shall be
used. Water -based or low VOC coatings shall be used that comply with
SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits. Spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, or
manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, etc. shall be
used to reduce VOC emissions, where practical. Paint application shall use
lower volatility paint not exceeding 100 grams of ROG per liter.
SC 4.1 -1 All development proposed for the proposed single - family residence shall be
reviewed for consistency with applicable provisions of the California Building
Code, Noise Ordinance, Uniform Fire Code, and other applicable codes and
ordinances prior to issuance of building permits.
Biological Resources
SC 4.2 -1 Bluff landscaping shall consist of native, drought tolerant plant species
determined to be consistent with the California coastal buff environment. Invasive
and non - native species shall be removed. Irrigation of bluff faces to establish re-
vegetated areas shall be temporary and used only to establish the plants. Upon
establishment of the plantings, the temporary irrigation system shall be removed.
Aesthetics
SC 4.3.1 Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of the Zoning Code.
Exterior on -site lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No
direct rays or glare are permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or
create a public nuisance. "Walpak" type fixtures are not permitted.
SC 4.3 -2 Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final of building permits, the
applicant shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code and Water Quality
Enforcement Division to confirm control of light and glare.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -4
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Table 1 -1
Summary of Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Level of Significance After Mitigation
1.0 — Executive
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -5
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
After Mitigation
Aesthetics
Although no significant impacts will occur as a result of project
implementation, the following measure will be implemented
to ensure that views through the site are maintained.
MM 4.3 -1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant
shall dedicate in perpetuity a view easement over the
"Outdoor Room" identified on the approved plans and all
The project has been redesigned to conform to the building and
open space areas on the project site that shall restrict
development standards prescribed in the R -1 zoning district and to avoid
the maximum height of landscaping and accessory
significant visual impacts. Project implementation will not result in
structures to that of the top of the guardrails of the
"Outdoor
No Significant Impact
significant impacts from an important vantage point identified in the
Room" The view easement shall be a three -
Natural Resources Element of the General Plan. As a result, no
dimensional space projected vertically from a horizontal
significant visual or aesthetic impacts are anticipated.
plane at the elevation of the top of the guardrails of the
"Outdoor Room" and horizontally to all property lines.
The restrictions of the view easement shall not apply to
the building and structures depicted on the approved
project plans or to patio furniture. The form and legal
description of the view easement shall be prepared by
the applicant and reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director.
Agriculture
No Prime Farmland, Farmland of State or Local Importance, or
Unique Farmland occurs within or in the vicinity of the site. The site
and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built -up Land" and
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
"Other Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map.
are required.
No Significant Impact
Furthermore, neither the site nor the adjacent areas are designated
as prime, unique or important farmlands by the State Resources
Agency or by the Newport Beach General Plan.
Air Quality
Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single -
family residence include vehicular exhaust from daily traffic (i.e.,
based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
Less than Significant
and landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a
are required.
variety of household cleaning and hair care products. Neither short-
term (i.e., construction) nor long -term (i.e., operational ) emissions
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -5
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0— Executive Summary
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -6
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
After Mitigation
associated with the proposed project would exceed SCAQMD
recommended significance thresholds. These thresholds were
developed to provide a method of assessing a project's individual
impact significance, and also to determine whether the project's
impacts could be cumulatively considerable. The proposed project
would not, therefore, result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant.
Although the project would increase the resident population on the
project site, the proposed project includes only one single - family
residence. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
No Significant Impact
associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be
are required.
significant in the context of the contribution of worldwide GHG
impacts.
Biological Resources
Although project implementation will result in the loss of 261 square feet
(0.006 acre) of degraded coastal bluff scrub, its elimination will not result
in a significant impact because it is of low quality and it has been
substantially compromised by fragmentation and influences from human
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
No Significant Impact
activities. As a result, it is not recognized as an ESHA. Its value as a
required.
long -term habitat is not considered to be important and no significant
impacts to important biological resources would occur as a result of
project implementation.
Cultural Resources
No historic resources are identified either on the site or in the
immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is not identified by
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
the City as possessing potentially important historic resources.
are required.
No Significant Impact
Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially
significant impacts to historic resources.
Although no significant impacts to cultural resources are
anticipated, an archaeological monitor will be present during
No archaeological resources are known to be present in the project
grading to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered,
area. Project implementation includes excavation of the property to
appropriate measures will be implemented in accordance with
accommodate the proposed single - family residence. It is unlikely that
existing City policies as reflected below.
the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in significant
MM -1 A qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be
Less than Significant
impacts to cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with
retained by the project applicant who will be present during
the existing development in the area and the nature of the bedrock
the grading and landform alteration phase. In the event
materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine).
that cultural resources and /or fossils are encountered
during construction activities, ground - disturbing
excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -6
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
1.0 — Executive
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -7
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation. Measures
After Mitigation
redirected or halted by the monitor until the find has been
salvaged. Any artifacts and /or fossils discovered during
project construction shall be prepared to a point of
identification and stabilized for long -term storage. Any
discovery, along with supporting documentation and an
itemized catalogue, shall be accessioned into the
collections of a suitable repository. Curation costs to
accession any collections shall be the responsibility of the
ro'ect applicant.
The site contains the Monterey Formation deposits, which are known
to contain abundant fossilized marine invertebrates and vertebrates.
The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project areas
exists. Like other sites in the City that are underlain by the Monterey
Refer to MM -1, above.
Less than Significant
Formation, the site should be considered to have a high
paleontological sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during
grading and excavation.
Soils and Geology
There are no known local or regional active earthquake faults on the
site, and the site is not within an Alquist- Priolo Zone. The Newport-
Inglewood Fault -Rose Canyon Fault is located less than two miles to
the south of and off -shore from the site. Another active fault that
-
could generate seismic activity that affects the subject property and
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
surrounding area is the Elsinore Fault. The Newport- Inglewood and
are required.
Less than Significant
Elsinore Fault Zones could produce earthquakes of magnitude 6 — 7
on the Richter Scale, with local strong ground motion equivalent to at
least VIII — Non the modified Mercali Scale. Although episodes on
those faults could cause ground shaking at the project site, It is highly
unlikely that the site would experience surface rupture.
Implementation of the proposed project will necessitate grading and
excavation necessary to accommodate the proposed single - family
MM -2 Prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, an
residence that will temporarily expose on -site soils to potential
erosion control plan shall be submitted to and approved by
Less than Significant
erosion. In that interim period, it is possible that some erosion may
the City's Chief Building Official.
occur, resulting in some sedimentation.
The orientation of the bedrock on the site is dipping into the slope,
MM -3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
which is the preferred orientation for maintaining slope integrity.
submit a soils engineering report and final geotechnical
However, surFCially, the cliff portions of the subject property are
report to the City's Building Department for approval. The
unstable as evidenced by the talus deposits that are present at the
project shall be designed to incorporate the
Less than Significant
base of the steep slopes. However, all slopes on the site were
recommendations included in those reports that address
determined to be grossly stable. The maximum slope height is 47
site grading, site Gearing, compaction, caissons, bearing
feet and slope angle ranges from 10 degrees to 90 degrees.
capacity and settlement, lateral pressures, footing design,
Calculated factors of safety are in excess of 1.5 static and 1.1
seismic design, slabs on grade, retaining wall design,
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -7
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Chapter 1.0 — Executive
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -8
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
After Mitigation
(Pseudo- static) of factors of safety required by the City of Newport
subdrain design, concrete, surface drainage, setback
Beach.
distance, excavations, cut -fill transitional zones, planters
and slope maintenance, and driveways.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
There is no indication that the subject site has been contaminated
that would adversely affect site development. Although grading and
site preparation activities will expose subsurface soils and result in
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
No Significant Impact
the generation of fugitive dust, no hazardous emissions will occur as
are required.
a result of project implementation. Therefore, no significant impacts
will occur.
With the exception of commonly used household hazardous materials
(e.g., insecticides, herbicides, cleaning agents, etc.), the single - family
residence proposed for the site will not utilize hazardous or acutely
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
No Significant Impact
hazardous materials that would be emitted into the environment.
are required.
Therefore, no significant impacts to existing schools will occur as a
result of the proposed project.
A search of various databases concerning hazardous wastes and
substances sites was conducted through Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. (EDR) as part of the environmental analysis. This
search, which is on file with the City of Newport Beach, determined
No significant Impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
No Significant Impact
that the subject property is not included on any lists of hazardous
are required.
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5. Therefore, project implementation will not create a
significant hazard either to the public or the environment.
Hydrology and Water Quality
This small -scale project would not result in a significant increase in
water demand and all of the project's potable and non - potable water
needs will be met through a connection to the City's domestic water
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
system. The proposed single - family residence represents an
are required.
No Significant Impact
insignificant increase in the demand for domestic water, which has
been anticipated by the City in its long -range plans. No water wells
are proposed or required to meet the water demands of this project.
Existing surface runoff generated on the subject property occurs as
sheet flow and drains in a southerly direction over the bluff where it
enters the City's storm drain system before discharging into Newport
Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality
Bay, which has been identified as containing "environmentally
codes and policies, which are performed during the plan check
No Significant Impact
sensitive areas" as defined by the 2003 Orange County Drainage
stage, will ensure that surface flows can be accommodated and
Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the Water Quality Control Plans
water quality protected.
for the Santa Ana Basin. The actual amount of stormwater runoff
generated from the building footprint and paved areas (totaling
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -8
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Potential In
approximately 2,300 square feet) wou
no significant impacts are anticipated.
The subject property is not located within the 100 -year flood plain as
delineated on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of Newport
Beach. No homes would be placed within the 100 -year flood plain
and no significant impacts would occur.
Although some temporary impacts associated with construction of the
proposed residential structure may occur, no long -term outdoor
storage, maintenance, fueling or work areas are proposed. Vehicle
parking areas are to be fully enclosed. The project will be designed
to comply with all requisite codes and policies prescribed by the City
of Newport Beach to ensure that stomiwater impacts during or after
construction are minimized or eliminated to the maximum extent
The proposed project, which includes the construction of one single -
family detached residential dwelling unit on a 4,412- square foot lot in
Corona del Mar, is consistent with the Land Use Element of the Newport
Beach General Plan and with the Coastal Land Use Plan. The
proposed project is also compatible with the existing land uses in the
area. As a result, no significant long -term land use impacts are
Neither the Newport Beach General Plan (Recreation and Open Space
Element) nor the State of California has identified the project site or
environs as a potential mineral resource of Statewide or regional
significance. No mineral resources are known to exist and, therefore,
project implementation will not result in anv sianificant impacts.
The proposed residence is similar in nature as other single - family
residences in the immediate project vicinity. Although on -site noise
levels associated with residential activities (where none currently
exist) would increase, it is anticipated that any such increase in long-
term noise associated with the residential use would be those
occurring as a result of outdoor activities and would be typical of
noise levels in sjmjlar residential neighborhoods. If future residents
Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
are required. -
Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality
codes and policies, which are performed during the plan check
stage, will ensure that surface flows can be accommodated and
water quality protected.
Land Use and
Although no significant land use impacts are anticipated and the
project is consistent with the adopted goals and policies articulated in
the City's General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan, MM 4.3-1 (Le.,
dedication of a view easement) has been prescribed to ensure that
future views from Begonia Park are preserved and protected.
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
are required.
1.0 — Executive
After
No Significant Impact
No Significant Impact
Less than Significant
No Significant Impact
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures ( No Significant Impact
are required.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -9
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -10
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
After Mitigation
loud noise levels that exceed the limits set forth in Chapter 10.26 of
the City's Municipal Code, the City is empowered to take actions to
abate that activity. This project would not result in exposure of
neighboring residents or future residents on site to noise levels that
exceed City standards. Therefore, no significant long -term noise
impacts are anticipated.
MM -4 All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be
equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling
devices. All construction equipment shall be located or
Short-tens (construction) noise level increases will occurfrom the use of
operated as far as possible away from nearby residential
construction equipment associated with grading and excavation, and
units.
building and construction activities. Earthmoving equipment includes
MM -5 A construction schedule shall be developed that minimizes
excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, and front
the duration of potential project - related and cumulative
loaders. Earthmoving and compacting equipment includes
construction noise levels.
Less than Significant
compactors, scrapers, and graders. Potential noise impacts vary
markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges
MM -6 The construction contractor shall notify the residents of the
widely as a function of the equipment used and its activity level. The
construction schedule for the proposed project, and shall
exposure of persons to the periodic increase in noise levels will be short-
keep them informed on any changes to the schedule. The
term and will cease after construction is completed.
notification shall also identify the name and phone number
of a contact person in case of complaints. The contact
person shall take all reasonable steps to resolve the
complaint.
Population and Housing
The proposed project is consistent with the adopted land use
designation and zoning applicable to the subject property.
Development of the site with one single - family residence in
accordance with the adopted long -range plans for the subject
property would not result in significant growth and, furthermore,
would not result in the potential for unanticipated growth because the
project is located in an area that is virtually built out. As `in -fill"
development, construction of the proposed project would not
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
necessitate the implementation of new infrastructure such as major
are required.
No Significant Impact
roadway improvements and/or the extension of infrastructure that
could induce unanticipated growth and development. All of the
infrastructure, including sewer and water facilities, storm drains,
roadways, etc., exist in the immediate vicinity of the project site and
have adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore, no
significant growth- inducing impacts will occur as a result of project
implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -10
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -11
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
After Mitigation
Project implementation will not result in the displacement of any
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
existing residential dwelling units that would necessitate replacement
are required.
No Significant Impact
elsewhere in the City; no significant impacts will occur.
Public Services
The project includes all necessary fire protection devices, including
fire sprinklers. The project must comply with the current Building and
Fire Codes adopted by the City. A code compliance analysis will be
conducted by City staff to ensure that adequate water pressure and
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
related features required by the City are provided to ensure that the
are required.
No Significant Impact
project complies with the CFC and related City codes. Adequate
water supplies and infrastructure, including fire hydrants, exist in the
vicinity of the project, and there is no requirement for other new
facilities or emergency services.
Development of the subject site with one single - family would not
require an expansion to local law enforcement resources and
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
therefore would not result in any environmental impacts involving
are required.
No Significant Impact
construction of new law enforcement facilities. No significant impacts
are anticipated.
The proposed project would not generate a significant number of new
students in the District. New or expanded school facilities would not
be required to provide classroom and support space for these low
numbers of school age children. However, as indicated above, the
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
project applicant must pay the applicable school fee to the school
are required.
No Significant Impact
district, pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government
Code, in order to offset the incremental cost impact of expanding
school resources to accommodate the increased student enrollment
associated with one new residence.
No increased demand for other public services is anticipated and
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
there would be no need to construct any new public facilities. No
are required.
No Significant Impact
significant impacts are anticipated.
Recreation
Although residents of the proposed project would occasionally visit
local and regional parks and beaches, use of those public facilities by
the future residents would not represent a substantial change in the
intensity of usage and the impact would not result in substantial
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
physical deterioration of those park areas. Development of the site
are required.
No Significant Impact
with one single - family residence will not require the construction of
new or the expansion of existing recreational facilities in the City of
Newport Beach given the small increase in population. No
significant impacts to recreational facilities are anticipated.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -11
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
1.0 — Executive
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
Level of Significance
After Mitigation
Transportation/Traffic
The following mitigation measure is proposed to minimize the level
of impact associated with temporary construction traffic:
MM -7 Prior to commencement of each major phase of
construction, the Contractor shall submit a construction
staging, parking and traffic control plan for approval by the
Public Works Department, which shall address issues
pertaining to potential traffic conflicts during peak traffic
periods, potential displacement of on- street parking, and
safety.
• This plan shall identify the proposed construction
staging area(s), construction crew parking area(s),
During the construction phase, there will be periods of time when a
estimated number and types of vehicles that will occur
heavy truck traffic would occur that could result in some congestion
during that phase, the proposed arrival /departure
on Pacific Drive and nearby locallresidential street system. It is
routes and operational safeguards (e.g. flagmen,
estimated that a total of 52 heavy trucks would be generated as a
barricades, shuttle services, etc.) and hourly
result of the grading that would be necessary to haul the estimated
restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic conflicts
630 cubic yards of soil export from the site. However, once grading
during peak traffic periods, displacement of on- street
has been completed, the number of heavy trucks entering and
parking and to ensure safety.
leaving the project area would be limited to those transporting
Less than Significant
equipment and materials to the site. Other construction- related traffic
If necessary, the construction staging, parking and
impacts are associated with vehicles carrying workers to and from the
traffic control plan shall provide for an off -site parking
site and medium and heavy trucks carrying construction materials to
lot for construction crews which will be shuttled to and
the project site, which may result in some minor traffic delays;
from the project site at the beginning and end of each
however, potential traffic interference caused by construction vehicles
day until such time that the project site can
would create a temporary/short-term impact to vehicles using
accommodate off - street construction vehicle parking.
neighboring streets in the morning and afternoon hours.
Until that time, construction crews shall be prohibited
from parking in the adjacent residential neighborhood.
• The plan shall identify all construction traffic routes,
which shall avoid narrow residential streets unless
there is no alternative, and the plan shall not include
any streets where some form of construction is
underway within or adjacent to the street that would
impact the efficacy of the proposed route.
• Dirt hauling shall not be scheduled during weekday
peak hour traffic periods or during the summer season
(Memorial Day holiday weekend through and including
the Labor Day holiday weekend).
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -12
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 1.0— Executive Summary
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -13
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
After Mitigation
The approved construction staging, parking traffic
control plan shall be implemented throughout each
major construction phase.
Long -term traffic impacts would not occur as a result of project
implementation. The trip generation associated with one home is
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
less than 10 trips per day. The addition of 10 trips on the City's
are required.
No Significant Impact
circulation system would not result in potentially significant impacts to
either roadway segments or intersections.
During the construction phases, temporary displacement of public on-
street parking may be caused by construction crew members utilizing
that parking, and possibly while large truck delivery and pick up of
machinery and construction materials. This will occur during
construction and will cease when constructon concludes. The
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
No Significant Impact
project provides parking in accordance with the Zoning Code (two
are required.
enclosed spaces). No public parking is presently afforded along the
curb in front of the project site as it is painted as a "red curb'
therefore, construction of the proposed driveway approach will not
displace any existing public parking.
Utilities & Service Systems
Water demand and wastewater generation will not increase
significantly as a result of the development of one home on the site.
The proposed project is consistent with the zoning and land use
designations, which are the basis of future water demand demands
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
No Significant Impact
and wastewater generation within the City. The project will connect
are required.
to existing water and wastewater facilities in Pacific Avenue or other
nearby roadways. No expansion of these facilities is necessary as
existing capacity is adequate. No significant impacts are anticipated.
The project will result in additional impervious surface areas by the
new building, walkways and other hardscape. The additional
hardscape will result in a slight increase in runoff during storm
periods. The site will be designed in accordance with the California
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
Building Code to ensure that stormwater runoff will be directed to
are require d.
No Significant Impact
existing facilities, which have capacity to collect and convey the
runoff before its discharge into Newport Bay. Therefore, the slight
increase in project - related storm Flows will not result in a potentially
significant impact.
Although project implementation could result in the generation of
some refuse during the construction phase, it would be small and
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
No Significant Impact
would not adversely affect existing capacities at the County's sanitary
are required.
landfills. Furthermore, the project will not result in a significant
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -13
Megonical Residence — PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Chapter 1.0 — Executive Summary
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -14
Level of Significance
Potential Impact
Mitigation Measures
After Mitigation
increase in solid waste production due to the increase on one single -
family residence. Existing landfills are expected to have adequate
capacity to service the site and use. No significant impacts are
anticipated.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 1 -14
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background
CHAPTER 2.0
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
2.1 Purpose of the Draft EIR
2.1.1 Authority
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et,seq.) and
the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.). This EIR assesses the
potential impacts associated with the proposed Megonigal Residence. The City of Newport Beach is the
Lead Agency for the proposed project and the discretionary actions listed below.
An EIR is an informational document prepared pursuant to CEQA. It provides decision - makers, public
agencies, and the public in general with detailed information about the potential significant environmental
effects of a proposed project. It also lists the ways in which the significant effects of a project might be
minimized and identifies several alternatives to the project for consideration. CEQA requires that an EIR
contain at a minimum, certain specific information, including but not limited to: a clear, concise project
description; environmental setting; discussion of environmental impacts; effects found not to be
significant; cumulative impacts; and alternatives. This information is required pursuant to Sections 15120
through 15132 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
2.1.2 Incorporation by Reference
As permitted by Section 15150 of the CEQA Guidelines, this Draft EIR includes references to technical
studies, analyses, and reports prepared both for the proposed project and for the preparation of the
General Plan EIR. Information from the documents that has been incorporated by reference has been
briefly summarized in the appropriate section(s) that follow and the relationship between the incorporated
part of the referenced document and the Draft EIR has been described. The documents and other
sources, which have been used in the preparation of this Draft EIR, are identified in Chapter 12.0
(Bibliography). In accordance with Section 15150(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the location where
the public may obtain and review these referenced documents and other sources used in the preparation
of the Draft EIR is also identified in Chapter 12.0. Several Elements of the Newport Beach General Plan
have been used extensively in the preparation of the Draft EIR. Where appropriate and necessary, one
or more of those elements have been incorporated by reference as permitted by CEQA and the State
CEQA Guidelines. In addition, environmental analysis contained in the Final EIR prepared for the
General Plan Update has also been incorporated into this Draft EIR. The information and analysis
incorporated by reference have been summarized in the appropriate sections of this document.
2.1.3 Intended Uses of the Draft EIR
Pursuant to the requirements of CEQA, the Draft EIR is intended to provide information regarding the
environmental consequences of, mitigation measures for, and alternatives to, the proposed Megonigal
Residence. It is also meant to facilitate discussions with other agencies regarding implementation of
mitigation measures. CEQA is specific about providing disclosure where "[t]he EIR is to demonstrate to an
apprehensive citizenry that the agency has, in fact, analyzed and considered the ecological implications of its
action ... " [Guidelines Section 15300 (d)]. CEQA also requires consideration of the whole or entirety of an
action. With these guiding principles in mind, the intended uses of this EIR are to:
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 2 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background
Inform the decision - makers, public, and agencies about the project;
Analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed Megonigal Residence;
Provide notice to Responsible /Trustee Agencies regarding the Megonigal Residence;
Incorporate analysis related to the requirements of CEQA to allow responsible agencies to
make findings pursuant to this EIR.
Although this Draft EIR will also be necessarily specific in the depth of analysis (i.e., project -level
analysis), this document, along with the supporting existing setting and General Plan and related long -
range planning documents, provides environmental documentation for the implementation of the
proposed project.
2.1.4 Related Approvals
This EIR may be used by the following public agencies in reviewing the proposed Megonigal Residence,
related improvements, and implementation of activities thereunder (refer to Table 2 -1);
Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach;
2. City Council of the City of Newport Beach;
3. Departments of the City of Newport Beach that must approve implementation activities
undertaken in accordance with the Modification Permit, and related discretionary actions
(encroachment permit);
A discretionary approval is an action taken by a government agency that calls for the exercise of
judgment in deciding whether to approve or how to carry out a project. For this project, the government
agency is the Newport Beach City Council. To approve and implement the construction of the proposed
Megonigal residence, the following specific approvals by the Newport Beach City Council are needed:
Certification of the EIR (DEIR and FEIR together) /Approval of the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program
Approval of a Modification Permit (2007 -080)
Approval of a Encroachment Permit
Two discretionary actions are requested to implement the proposed Megonigal Residence (i.e.,
Modification Permit and Encroachment Permit). The analysis contained in this document will focus on the
changes in the environment that will result from the development of the proposed improvements identified
by the applicant.
2.1.5 Agencies Having Jurisdiction
The principal agency having jurisdiction over the proposed project is the City of Newport Beach because
the project site is located in the City. Nonetheless, the proposed project includes a series of possible
actions over which a number of agencies may have authority. Table 2 -1 lists potential state, regional, and
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 2 -2
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background
local approvals that may occur during the course of implementation of the proposed project and identifies
the agencies with potential jurisdiction over these permits and /or approvals.
Table 2 -1
List of Potential Responsible Agencies /Project Approvals
Agency
Permit/Approval
Local Agencies
Modification Permit
Encroachment Permit
City of Newport Beach
Building, Grading and Ancillary Permits
Water Supply and Distribution
Sewer Facilities
Drainage/Flood Control Facilities
Regional Agencies
Sewage Collection and Treatment
Orange County Sanitation District
Connection Permit
2.1.6 Notice of Preparation
The City of Newport Beach has complied with Sections 15063 and 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines by
preparing and issuing a Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR. Based on the preparation of a
comprehensive initial study (refer to Appendix A), the City of Newport Beach determined that the
Megonigal Residence required the preparation of the EIR. The City distributed a Notice of Preparation
(NOP) of an EIR for the proposed Megonigal Residence on May 8, 2009, for a 30 -day review period. The
NOP was distributed to the State Clearinghouse Office of Planning and Research, public agencies, utility and
service providers, interested persons who requested notice, Orange County Clerk /Recorder, and
homeowners' associations in the project area. Copies of the NOP and the distribution list are provided in
Appendix A of this EIR.
The City received five (5) written responses to the NOP (refer to Appendix B). The initial NOP comments
were used to establish the scope of the issues addressed in this Draft EIR. Appendix B contains a copy
of the NOP comment letters that were received during each NOP comment period.
2.1.7 Availability of the Draft EIR
The Draft EIR has been distributed directly to numerous public agencies and to interested organizations
for review and comment. The Draft EIR and all related technical studies are also available for review and
copying at the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department. These documents and materials are also
available for inspection at the Newport Beach Public Library located at 1000 Avocado in the City of
Newport Beach. In addition, copies of the Draft EIR are also available for review at the branch libraries
listed below.
Balboa Branch Corona del Mar Branch
100 East Balboa Boulevard 420 Marigold Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92660 Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 2 -3
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background
Central Library Mariners Branch
1000 Avocado Avenue 1300 Irvine Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92625 Newport Beach, CA 92660
In addition to the locations identified above, copies of the Draft EIR for the Megonigal Residence are also
available for review at:
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
Contact Person: James Campbell, Principal Planner (949) 644 -3210
2.1.8 Opportunities for Public Input and the EIR Process
Agencies, organizations and individuals are invited to comment on the information presented in the Draft
EIR during the public review period. Specifically, comments are requested on the scope and adequacy of
the environmental analysis. Respondents are also asked to provide or identify additional environmental
information that is germane but which they feel may not have been used in the analysis. If comments on
the Draft EIR are submitted, they will be addressed in the Responses to Comments Report. The
Responses to Comment Report will be part of the Final EIR and will be presented to the Newport Beach
Planning Commission for their consideration of the EIR and the proposed Megonigal Residence. The
Response to Comments Appendix will be available for public review at the City of Newport Beach
Planning Department located at 3300 Newport Boulevard.
2.1.9 Certification of the EIR
Upon completion of the response to comments and preparation of the Final EIR, the Newport Beach
Planning Commission will review the Final EIR and will consider the information and analysis contained in
that document prior to its certification. The Planning Commission will be required to certify the EIR as being
adequate under CEQA prior to approving the discretionary actions that constitute project approval (i.e.,
Modification Permit and Encroachment Permit).
2.2 Methodology
2.2.1 Existing Conditions
This introductory section describes the existing environmental conditions related to each issue analyzed
in the Draft EIR. In accordance with Section 15125 of the State CEQA Guidelines, both the local and
regional settings are discussed as they existed at the time the NOP was published.
2.2.2 Significance Criteria
Section 15126 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR "identify and focus on the significant
environmental effects" of a proposed project. "Effects" and "impacts" mean the same under CEQA and
are used interchangeably within this Draft EIR. A "significant effect" or "significant impact' on the
environment means "a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical
conditions within the area affected by the project' (Section 15382 of the CEQA Guidelines).
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 2 -4
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0— Introduction and Background
In determining whether an impact is "significant" within CEQA's definition, emphasis has been given to
the basic policies of CEQA with respect to a particular subject matter, as well as to specific criteria for
significance found in the CEQA Guidelines (refer to Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines). An effort has
been made to avoid overly subjective significance criteria that are not based in specific CEQA policies
and /or generally accepted thresholds upon which significance can be determined. For each subject area
addressed within this Draft EIR, significance criteria are identified that have been applied in analyzing the
potential effects of the Proposed Project.
2.2.3 Standard Conditions
The Proposed Project will incorporate, where necessary or required, standard conditions and uniform
codes as required by the City and /or other responsible agencies. For analytical purposes, compliance
with these regulatory requirements is not considered mitigation. Where an otherwise significant impact is
avoided, in whole or in part, due to the application of standard regulatory requirements or project features,
the text will note that an issue of environmental concern exists and that it is addressed by a standard
regulatory requirement. The requirement has been identified and the manner in which it addresses the
environmental issue is also identified. This precludes the use of mitigation measures that are mere
repetitions of common practice, City planning /approval procedures, or laws that are applicable to the
Proposed Project.
2.2.4 Impact Analysis
The impact analysis presented in the Draft EIR identifies specific project - related impacts. As described
above, the significance criteria provide the basis for distinguishing between impacts that are determined
to be significant (i.e., impact exceeds the threshold of significance) and those that are less than
significant. The existing environmental setting (i.e., existing conditions) is the baseline for documenting
the nature and extent of impacts anticipated to result from project implementation. Potential impacts
presented in the Draft EIR are based on the level and intensity of development of the site (i.e., one single -
family residential dwelling unit) proposed by the project applicant.
In assessing the impacts of the Proposed Project and the various CEQA alternatives, the City of Newport
Beach has conducted the following analysis:
"Potential effects" of the project have been identified. Initially, these potential effects are
identified on a cursory level. No determination is made that they truly are "significant," "adverse,"
or "substantial." This process merely identifies issues and impacts, which, on a cursory level,
may seem possible. "Potential effects" include issues identified in the environmental analysis as
well as those raised by the public, the City, and other public agencies.
With respect to each potential effect, an analysis has been conducted to determine if, in fact:
The project produces the identified "effect "; and
The effect produces a substantial, or potentially substantial, change in the physical
conditions within the area affected by the project (i.e., "significant "); and
The changed conditions are "adverse."
Where the investigation of a potential effect concludes the effect is too speculative for evaluation,
that conclusion is noted and the discussion of that effect is ended. Where the investigation
demonstrates a potential effect does or may (without undue speculation) occur, but is beneficial,
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 2 -5
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background
that conclusion is noted. Where the investigation demonstrates a potential effect is not significant
or not adverse, that conclusion is noted.
2.2.5 Mitigation Measures
Where the analysis described in Section 2.2.4 above demonstrates that a potential effect does or may
(without undue speculation) occur and is found to have a substantial or potentially substantial and
adverse impact on physical conditions within the area affected by the project, that conclusion is noted
and:
Mitigation measures are provided which will minimize or avoid the significant effects and,
in most cases, reduce them to less than significant levels; and/or
Where feasible mitigation measures are not identified which can reduce or avoid the
significant effect(s) to less than significant levels, the significant effect will be identified as
one that will result in "significant unavoidable adverse impacts ".
2.2.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
This section of the Draft EIR will identify the level of impact that would remain after implementation of the
mitigation measures, including significant unavoidable adverse impacts (i.e., those effects that either
cannot be mitigated or that remain significant even after mitigation) or if the mitigation measures
prescribed cannot reduce the significant impacts to a less than significant level (or the mitigation
measures are infeasible, or their implementation cannot be guaranteed because they are the
responsibility of another public agency).
2.3 Format of the Draft EIR
As noted above, this EIR focuses on the analysis of those environmental parameters that may experience
significant adverse impacts as a result of the proposed Megonigal Residence. This analysis is documented
in this Draft EIR as follows:
Section 1.0 — Executive Summary. This section includes the executive summary, which summarizes
the proposed project and the project alternatives. In addition, a table is included in this section that
summarizes the potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures and level of significance after
mitigation related to the proposed project.
Section 2.0 — Introduction and Background. This section provides relevant information, context and
background on the CEQA process and the proposed project.
Section 3.0 — Project Description. This section includes a brief description of the environmental
setting, provides a detailed project description, enumerates the project objectives, and identifies
implementation /phasing associated with the proposed project.
Section 4.0 — Environmental Analysis. This section describes the existing conditions, the
thresholds of significance, the analytical methodology, the impacts of the proposed project,
mitigation to reduce or avoid any significant adverse impacts, and the level of significance of the
impacts after mitigation.
Section 5.0 — Impacts Determined Not to be Significant. This section summarizes the environmental
impacts determined not to be significant.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 2 -6
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 2.0 — Introduction and Background
Section 6.0 — Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. This section summarizes the potential
significant unavoidable adverse impacts of the proposed project, if any, after mitigation, based on the
analysis documented in Section 4.0.
Section 7.0 — Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources. This section addresses the
potential for irretrievable and irreversible commitment of resources associated with the proposed
project.
Section 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts. This section addresses the potential for the proposed
project to serve as a catalyst for unanticipated growth.
Section 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts. This section addresses the potential for impacts associated with
the proposed project in consideration of other related planned, approved and pending projects in the
environs.
Section 10.0 — Proiect Alternatives. This section provides a qualitative analysis of the potential
environmental impacts associated with potentially feasible Alternatives to the Project, including the
No Project Alternative, as required by the State CEQA Guidelines.
Section 11.0 — Organizations and Persons Consulted. This section lists the City of Newport Beach
staff and /or departments consulted during the preparation of the Draft EIR as well as technical
specialists who were consulted during or responsible for the preparation of this Draft EIR.
Section 12.0 — References. This section lists the references, including the City's General Plan and
other technical documents and bibliographic sources used in the preparation of this Draft EIR.
Section 13.0 — Glossary of Acronyms. This section provides a comprehensive glossary of terms and
acronyms used in the EIR.
Appendices. The Appendices to this EIR include the NOP, the responses to the NOP and
technical reports prepared to analyze the potential impacts of the project. Technical studies
prepared for the proposed project include the biological assessments conducted for the proposed
project.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 2 -7
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Descriplion
CHAPTER 3.0
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
3.1 Project Location
The City of Newport Beach is an urbanized coastal community located in western Orange County (refer to
Exhibit 3 -1). Newport Beach is bordered by the Cities of Irvine on the north and northeast and by Costa
Mesa on the north and northwest. Crystal Cove State Park, which is located in unincorporated Orange
County, is located southeast of the City's corporate boundaries. On the west, the incorporated limits of
the City extend to the Santa Ana River; the City of Huntington Beach is located west of the Santa Ana
River. The Pacific Ocean comprises the southwestern boundary of the City. The relationship of the City
of Newport Beach with the region is illustrated in Exhibit 3 -1 (Regional Location).
The City of Newport Beach has developed as a grouping of small communities or "villages," primarily due
to the natural geographic form of the Newport Bay. Many of the newer developments, located inland from
the bay, have been based on a "Planned Community" concept, resulting in an extension of the village
form, even where no major geographic division exists. The various villages provide for a wide variety of
types and styles of development, both residential and commercial. The City includes lower density,
single - family residential areas, as well as more intensively developed residential beach areas.
Commercial areas range from master planned employment centers to marine industrial, neighborhood
shopping centers, a regional shopping center, and visitor commercial areas.
The subject property consists of a single parcel (APN 052- 011 -01), encompassing a total area of 4,412
square feet, or approximately 0.1 acre. The site, which is located at 2333 Pacific Avenue within the
Corona del Mar neighborhood in the City of Newport Beach (refer to Exhibit 3 -2, Vicinity Map), is currently
undeveloped.
3.2 Environmental Setting
3.2.1 Existing Land Use
As previously indicated, the subject property, which encompasses the undeveloped portion of an existing
coastal bluff, is vacant. Elevations on the site range from approximately 25 feet above mean sea level
(msl) at the base of the coastal bluff along the westerly property boundary, to approximately 72 feet
above msl in the northwesterly corner of the site. A variety of native and non - native plants are supported
on the site. The vegetation on the subject property has been classified in three categories: disturbed;
disturbed /ornamental; and coastal bluff scrub.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009.
Page 3 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Chapter 3.0 - Protect Description
HUnlington Beach
-
o
..mnmw. awr
'YeslnTnSNi
C.w.w -n , _
o"
4.Ew Cry
earl wo. ,.
.r •.
siach'
�O��ran�ge
('T--
t
F".r
7e a
Newport Beach
4M�,
E�MC�yw, sw bua • -,9W
E + +n -�
�
"� WA 6eaG1T
. r.m
.. ..
b D,nr "A' W, St Santa Me
T.su
:, r:wun
.
Lub, C M6a
r Ey
—t.,Y•
w =r.: M,
^
}
D.I M., R.
Daiu Foie
.aw
Project
C
�ADD
�
IaM.a:r ^urn -r
ftirM
,��
E.T.r.r,E�E ®
w»« -» In9.... a. ECU..v •n
(�•
tll
r-1
fJDTM30T \'alto,
-
_
w:rounua .. _ 0.w
-
ED. h.
® 4f o..n. 4'. HS�i.mrArr�M3„a
•,'
•err9
p—
i
'
V ia3,/
�
a
n,
lJ =
t a /_1 hJ'b
f sr
4yF
Ew I—,
Irvine
HUnlington Beach
Costa Mesa
_
o"
earl wo. ,.
.r •.
i
t
F".r
7e a
Newport Beach
4M�,
J€ o s,a
J'
or s +on
f JuEDm
enarv..
. r.m
rf
Nanrrn
.
D.I M., R.
Project
C
�Skn
� 3min
IM.
SOURCE City OF Newport Beach
c'"A c.v,
e
•.�kri
Ew.aM day
Draft Emdronmental Impact Report
Megongal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3 -2
`mi
S
,M1n
Q a.
01Va:)
Top 01R
1 2? .t,, T&AIW
Exhibit 3 -1
Regional Map
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0— Project Description
9n180A 91V0 E
a
srryA /�
Oy
i
O`E"'Ro"
qq file
GY g QP
F♦ fq
k P \.
9r� f4 OG
e 'yO
Y
s
A
n
OCEArr91YO So
WYYI Jo11y V10w Pork
SOURCE'. City of Newport Beach
Pa
IY9 /E� pP
y0.Y/py UO
0"
O�
Q�p 'Yf
/F
ou School flack
Oq Y
YL
ar
Oq
Jk
r� Chi
Fk a
r qOQ � 1P �'Pq.
y \ ,r .l�
o R
0�808fl
'
vi
,O
Jy
G�
n
0
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3 -3
Exhibit 3 -2
Vicinity Map
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Description
a
3
1. 4
Exhibit 3 -3
Aerial Photograph
SOURCE.- City of Newport Beach
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megongal Residence PA 2007-133 - Newport Beach. CA
August 2009
Page 3 -4
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Dian Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0- Project Description
Surrounding Land Uses
The area in the vicinity where the Property is located is nearly completely developed with single - family
residences (refer to Exhibit 3 -3). A variety of architectural styles characterize the area. As indicated
below, the subject property is currently undeveloped and is surrounded by development on three sides,
including single - family residences on the north, south and west, Begonia Park is located east of the site.
The aerial photograph illustrates the undeveloped site and the existing land uses surrounding the site.
3.2.2 Existing General Plan
The subject property is located within Statistical Area F2, which encompasses single- family and two -
family residential development in Corona del Mar generally east of Avocado Avenue, north of Bayside
Drive and south of the commercial properties on the south side of Coast Highway. As illustrated in
Exhibit 3 -4, the site is designated RS -D (Single -Unit Residential — Detached). Property to the west is also
designated RS -D. Properties to the north, south and east are designated RT (Two -Unit Residential), RM
(Multiple -Unit Residential), and PR (Parks and Recreation), respectively.
3.2.3 Coastal Land Use Plan
The City's Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) was derived from the Land Use Element of the City's General
Plan and is intended to identify the distribution of land uses in the coastal zone. The subject property is
currently designated RL (Low Density Residential). As prescribed in the CLUP, development within the
coastal zone shall not exceed a development limit established by the General Plan or its implementing
ordinances.
3.2.4 Existing Zoning
The subject property is zoned R -1 (Single - Family Residential). R -1 zoned properties are also located
east, west and south of the site. R -2 (Two - Family Residential) zoned property is located to the north.
MFR (Multiple - Family Residential) zoning exists on property located south of Bayside Drive. Existing
zoning for the subject property and surrounding area is illustrated on Exhibit 3-5.
3.2.5 Physical Environment
Climate and Air Quality
The project site is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), a 6,600 square mile area
encompassing all of Orange County and the non -desert portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San
Bernardino Counties. A persistent high - pressure area that commonly resides over the eastern Pacific
Ocean largely dominates regional meteorology. The distinctive climate of this area is determined
primarily by its terrain and geographic location. Local climate is characterized by warm summers, mild
winters, infrequent rainfall, moderate daytime onshore breezes, and moderate humidity. Ozone and
pollutant concentrations tend to be lower along the coast, where the constant onshore breeze disperses
pollutants toward the inland valley of the SCAB and adjacent deserts. However, as a whole, the SCAB
fails to meet national standards for several criteria pollutants, including ozone, carbon monoxide and
PM1e, and is classified as a "non- attainment° area for those pollutants.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3.5
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 — Project Description
M1�
�O
M1
M1�M1
M1�T
M
ry
M14
M1ry
M1
M1�M1
N
M1M1
i)�M1
M1a
M1M1
M1))S
M1a
1
M1A
�O
M1
M1�T
M1
ry
M14
M1
N
M1M1
i)�M1
M1a
M1M1
M1))S
PIS
M1�O
RT
V7
SOURCE: Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3 -6
b
11
Exhibit 3 -4
Existing General Plan
Megomgal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
w M 4
v/L
M14�
LQ
♦ L1
w LS r�
L4 �.
b • 9s o
M1
y` /L
M1S
/M1Bt
L�
tt`L
L
SOURCE City of Newport Beach
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megon,gal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 20X9
Page 3 -7
Chapter 3.0 - Project Description
qp B
M1
M1�
Exhibit 3 -5
Existing Zoning
Megonigal Residence PA 2007433
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter3.0— Project Description
Geoloav and Seismici
The project site is located in the seismically active southern California region. There are no active faults
or fault systems known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. In addition, the project
site is not within an earthquake fault zone as illustrated on the maps issued by the State Geologist for the
area pursuant to the Alquist- Priclo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. Although there are no active faults or
fault systems known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the project site, it is subject to seismic
shaking resulting from earthquakes occurring on one or more of the regional faults. The closest active
faults within 50 miles of the project site are the Newport- Inglewood, Norwalk, and Elsinore Faults. The
Newport- Inglewood fault, which is the only active fault within or immediately adjacent to the City of
Newport Beach, could generate a 7.0 magnitude or greater maximum credible earthquake.
The topography of the subject site slopes toward Newport Bay. As previously indicated, site elevation ranges
from approximately 72 feet above msl at the top of the bluff to about 25 fee above msl at the base of the bluff
at the southern property boundary. The geologic units underlying the subject property and environs include
artificial fill, slopewash, unconsolidated talus deposits (i.e., eroded fragments of the Monterey formation), and
bedrock of the Monterey formation, which underlies the surficial materials.
Drainage and Hydrology
As previously indicated, the entire site is undeveloped and is generally devoid of impervious surfaces. At
the present time, surface runoff generated on the site drains in a southeasterly direction over the bluff.
The subject property is not located within the 100- or 500 -year flood plain as delineated on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of
Newport Beach. Further, neither the subject property nor the surrounding residential development is
located in an area of the City that is subject to Flooding resulting from the failure of a levee or dam.
Transportation and Circulation
The subject property is bounded by Pacific Avenue, which turns northerly into Begonia Avenue at the easterly
limits of the site. Bayside Drive provides access to single - family residential properties below the bluff south of
the site. No access is provided from Bayside Drive to the project site. Regional access to the project area
is available from West Coast Highway (California State Route 1) via the Corona del Mar Freeway
(California State Route 73), MacArthur Boulevard, and Jamboree Road and also from the Costa Mesa
Freeway (California State Route 55) and Newport Boulevard. The area in which the subject property is
located is served by a "grid" of residential streets that extends to the north and south from West Coast
Highway. Vehicular access to the project area is available from West Coast Highway via Begonia Avenue.
The area in which the subject property is located is primarily residential in nature.
Public Services and Utilities
Fire protection facilities and service to the subject property are provided by the Newport Beach Fire
Department (NBFD). The NBFD operates and maintains eight fire stations to respond to emergency calls
throughout the City. Fire Station No. 5 is located at 410 Marigold in Corona del Mar, less than one mile
east of the site. This fire station is supported by one fire engine and one paramedic van. Fire Station No.
3 in Fashion Island is located less than two miles from the site. In addition to the City's resources, the
NBFD also maintains a formal mutual aid agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) and
all neighboring municipal fire departments to facilitate fire protection in the City should the need arise.
The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) is responsible for providing police and law enforcement
services within the corporate limits of the City. The Police Department headquarters is located at 870
Santa Barbara Drive, at the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara, less than two miles
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3-8
Megonigal Residence PA 2007.133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Description
northwest of the subject property. Police and law enforcement service in the City is provided by patrols
with designated "beats."
The City of Newport Beach owns and maintains several sewer and water mains in the vicinity of the
subject property, including those in Pacific Avenue and Begonia Avenue. Sewer collection and
wastewater treatment services are provided by the City of Newport Beach (local collection) and the
Orange County Sanitation District (conveyance and treatment). In addition, all of the utilities (i.e..
electricity, natural gas, and telephone) are currently available and serve the existing development. The
project site receives electrical and natural gas service from Southern California Edison and Southern
California Gas Company, respectively.
3.2.6 Surrounding Environment
The City of Newport Beach is nearly fully developed with a diverse mixture of residential, institutional,
commercial, industrial, and recreational and open space uses. The predominant land use in the City is
residential, which is characterized by many distinct neighborhoods. Older communities were first
developed along the coastline, including the Peninsula, West Newport, Balboa Island, and Lido Isle. The
early housing is characterized by a diversity of multiple - family, single - family, and mixed -use housing
located within proximity of commercial and visitor - serving uses. While single - family attached and
detached residential development comprise the majority of housing in the City, many multiple - family
dwelling units, including condominium, apartments, duplex, triplex, and fourplex units, exist in Newport
Beach and, in particular, in the older neighborhoods including West Newport.
Between 1980 and 2005, 11,127 housing units were added to the City's inventory of housing stock.
Although the rate of increase in housing within the City has slowed since 1990, the City averaged
approximately 200 to 300 dwelling units per year between 2001 and 2005 (with the exception of 2003,
which included the annexation of Newport Coast). The total number of housing units as of January 1,
2005, was estimated to be 42,143, including approximately 26,000 units (62 percent) that are single -
family attached and detached homes. Thirteen percent of the units (5,475 homes) were duplex, triplex,
and fourplex units. Other multiple - family dwelling units in the City in 2005 totaled 9,721 (23 percent). The
remainder of the dwelling units in the City were mobile homes (863 or two percent). The overall vacancy
rate of housing in the City of Newport Beach ranged from 10.1 and 11.3 percent between 1980 and 2000,
respectively; however, there are a significant number of homes in the City that are classified as seasonal
units and second homes. The vacancy rate in all units in the City in 2005 was reported to be 10.91
percent.
A variety of retail uses are located throughout the City and include those in neighborhood shopping
centers, commercial strips and villages, and shopping centers, with the largest being Fashion Island, a
regional center that is framed by a mixture of office, entertainment, and residential uses. Other
neighborhood retail centers are located throughout the City. In addition to the retail uses, the City also
supports a variety of professional office uses, which are located mostly within Newport Center and the
Airport Area. Industrial uses are primarily located within the West Newport Mesa area, east of Banning
Ranch, and include a variety of industrial, manufacturing, and supporting retail uses. Research and
development uses are clustered in the Airport Area while government, educational, and institutional uses
are scattered throughout the City. One of the primary locations for medical uses in the City is near Hoag
Hospital, which is located at the intersection of West Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard.
3.3 History and Evolution of the Proposed Development
On April 3, 2008, the Newport Beach Planning Commission reviewed an application for a proposed 3,717
square foot single -unit dwelling on the subject property. The application included a variance to allow a
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3 -9
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133.
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 - Project Description
proposed single- family dwelling unit to exceed the 24 -foot height limit (by approximately 4.5 feet to 10.5
feet) and a modification permit to allow the dwelling unit to encroach five feet into the required 5 -foot front
yard setback. Based on testimony provided at the hearing, the Planning Commission concluded that the
project was inconsistent with policies relating to public view protection and neighborhood compatibility
and directed City staff and the applicant to revise the project to, among other things, protect the Begonia
Park view corridor by reducing the height, scale and massing of the residence. The Commission
considered the visual quality of the site itself a lesser priority than protecting public views from Begonia
Park or the street, knowing that by rejecting the requested Variance to building height there would be
more building below the viewshed from Begonia Park on the face of the bluff.
The applicant submitted a revised application (i.e., proposed project) on July 24, 2008, that included a
3,566 square foot residence that conformed to all Zoning code property development regulations, with the
exception of the planter walls that exceed the 3 -foot front yard setback height limit, which requires
approval of a modification permit. The prior variance proposed requesting exceedance of the height limits
was withdrawn. Key changes from the previous design included:
Designed below the maximum height limit
Single story at street level compared to two stories in the prior plan submittal
Finished floor of the ground level (i.e., third floor) is approximately 12 feet lower than prior
design.
Floor area reduced to 3,566 square feet (151 square foot reduction)
Conformance with the 5 -foot front yard setback
Clearstory windows added to front elevation
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on August 21, 2008 on the revised project,
focusing on the project's consistency with General Plan policies relating to public view protection,
neighborhood compatibility, and landform protection. The Planning Commission determined that the
revised project was consistent with their prior direction and in substantial conformance with the policies of
the General Plan as well as with Criterion No. 7 of Ordinance No. 2007 -3 (Residential Design Criteria),
which is used to determine a project's consistency with General Plan policies related to site planning and
resource protection. The Planning Commission approved the Modification Permit. The Planning
Commission also required that the applicant dedicate a view easement that would restrict the heights of
the principal structure and of landscaping and accessory structures on the proposed terraces and in open
areas.
On August 28, 2008, an appeal of the Planning Commission's project approval was filed. Pursuant to
Section 29.95,060C, a public hearing on the appeal was conducted "de novo," (i.e., a new hearing by
another decision- making body that is not bound by the prior decision, which has no force or effect as of
the date the appeal was filed). Subsequent to the appeal, the City Council and the applicant agreed that
a Draft Environmental Impact Report should be prepared for the revised project.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3 -10
LP 1[IVnu • W
tP I[vur - v,
— [.P 111w. - •0.0
site plan
(`L�9
(Exhibit 3 -6
Site Dien
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0 — Project Description
3.4 Description of the Proposed Project
The project applicants, Kim and Caroline Megonigal, are proposing to construct a single - family residence
on the subject property, as illustrated in the Conceptual Site Plan (refer to Exhibit 3 -6) and as described
below.
The applicants propose to construct a 3,566 square -foot, single - family residence (including the garage
floor area). The proposed residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the first floor; 934
square feet on the second floor; and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (including a 428 - square foot,
2 -car garage). Total floor area, not including the garage, is 3,138 square feet. Vehicular access is from
Pacific Drive at the intersection of Begonia Avenue and Pacific Drive. In addition to the indoor living area,
1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space on the three levels is provided. The front and rear elevations
are illustrated in Exhibits 3 -7 and 3 -8, respectively.
The applicants are requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 to allow planter walls to
exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. In addition, because the
proposed planter walls would also encroach into the Begonia Avenue right -of -way, an encroachment
permit from the City's Public Works Department will also be required. Lastly, grading of approximately
630 cubic yards of export, landscaping, and utility connections necessary for construction of the proposed
residence are also included.
3.5 Project Phasing
The applicant is proposing to construct the project in a single phase over a period of approximately 20
months.
3.6 Project Objectives
Implementation of the proposed project will achieve the following intended specific objectives, which have
been identified by the project applicant:
Construction of a custom, single - family residence consistent with the General Plan and
Zoning designations adopted for the project that:
(1) provides adequate floor area within a personalized floor plan to accommodate
the applicant's living needs;
(2) provides views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean to the south and west from each
level;
(3) provides outdoor living areas that are directly accessible from indoor spaces on
each level;
(4) provides access from Pacific Drive to an enclosed garage; and
(5) minimizes impacts on public views from Begonia Park.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3 -12
ti c
' O
M .
t �
X W
W +�
C
O
L
LL
00 C
C„ j O
r+
IQ >
1 y.
W �
I �I
j'•I � j j 17 1 �I� - m
Vol
, ' {
I I,.
I I II II ,
�II
1 I
1 f
I
1
I
4B I
1 1 Til.
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 3.0- Project Description
3.7 Project Processing Requirements and Requested Entitlements
Project implementation will necessitate the approval of the following discretionary actions by the Newport
Beach Planning Commission:
Modification Permit (MD2005 -087)
The Modification Permit is required to allow planter walls to exceed the three -foot height limit
requirement in the front yard setback. The proposed planter walls exceed the 3 -foot height limit
by up to 6 feet 7 inches, as measured from the natural grade.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence. PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 3.15
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
4.1 LAND USE AND PLANNING
4.1.1 Existing Conditions
Existing Land Use
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
As previously described (refer to Chapter 3.0), the subject property is currently vacant. The irregularly
shaped property is situated on the northern slope (i.e., south - facing) of a natural drainage canyon that has
been altered by residential and park development. The fenced property is characterized by a steeply sloping,
south - facing bluff. Portions of the subject property in the upper elevations located along Pacific Drive have
been altered by past grading or vegetation clearance; this area is generally devoid of vegetation. Ornamental
landscaping, including some trees and shrubs, exists in the lower elevations. The central portion of the site
contains a small area that supports coastal bluff scrub vegetation. A large retaining wall, ranging from four
feet to 15 feet in height, has been constructed along the southern property boundary on the two abutting
down slope lots.
The site is located in an area of Corona del Mar that is virtually built out. Single- family residential
development on Bayside Drive exists immediately adjacent to the site along the southern property boundary.
Single- family residential development also exists to the west on Pacific Drive and along Bayside Drive, which
has resulted in substantial alteration of the existing coastal bluff. Begonia Park is located adjacent to the site
along its northeasterly boundary. This public park operated by the City of Newport Beach and it includes both
passive and active elements. Residential development also exists south and west of Bayside Drive.
Land Use Planning
Newport Beach General Plan
The City of Newport Beach completed the first comprehensive revision of the City's General Plan in over 30
years in 2006. The General Plan presents a vision for the city's future and a strategy to make that vision a
reality. The General Plan recognizes that the City is primarily a residential community with diverse coastal
and upland neighborhoods and is nearly fully developed. As a result, the Plan focuses on conserving the
existing pattern of land uses and establishes policies for their protection and long -term maintenance. The
discussion presented below provides a summary of each of the elements of the Comprehensive General
Plan.
Land Use Element
The Land Use Element provides policy guidance regarding the ultimate pattern of development anticipated
for full buildout of the City. It provides the basis for zoning regulations and other municipal code standards.
Because the City is nearly fully developed, this element focuses on how population and employment growth
can be accommodated yet still preserve its distinguishing and valued qualities. The subject property is
located within the residential area of Corona del Mar south of the convergence of Pacific Drive and Begonia
Avenue. Specifically, the site is located within Statistical Area F2, a triangular- shaped planning area within
Corona del Mar that is bounded by Avocado Avenue on the west, Bayside Drive on the south, and the
commercial corridor along Coast Highway on the north. The predominant land use designation within this
statistical area is Two Unit Residential (RT). In addition, the subject property and three other small areas
within Statistical Area F2, are designated Single -Unit Residential — Detached (RS -D). Other land use
designations include Private Institutions (PI) and Parks and Recreation (PR), including Begonia Park located
north and east of the site. Exhibit 3 -4 illustrates the land use designations adopted for the subject property
and the surrounding area.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -1
Megonigat Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
Harbor and Bay Element
This element of the General Plan addresses natural resources, community identity, and economic
characteristics of the City given the location of Newport Beach on the coast. Some aspects of the Harbor
and Bay Element address public access, water quality, and natural environment as well as land use
policies relating to the waterfront uses along Newport Harbor.
Circulation Element
The Circulation Element governs the long -term mobility systems of the City. The goals and policies in this
element are closely correlated with the Land Use Element and are intended to provide the best possible
balance between the City's future growth and land use development, roadway size, traffic service levels, and
community character. Figure CE1 in the Circulation Element reflects the City's Master Plan of Streets and
Highways. With the exception of Coast Highway, no Master Plan roadways are located in the immediate
vicinity of the subject property. The Circulation Element also includes the Bikeways Master Plan (refer to
Figure CE4 in the Circulation Element). Although no bikeways are located immediately adjacent to the site, a
Class II Bikeway (i.e., on -road striped lane) is identified north of the site that extends along Second Avenue
between Fernleaf Avenue and Avocado Avenue. The City has also adopted an Equestrian and Hiking Trails
Master Plan (refer to Figure CE5 in the Circulation Element). None of these existing and proposed trails,
which are confined to the area north of the Upper Newport Bay and south of San Joaquin Hills Road, exist
within the vicinity of the project.
Safety Element
The primary goal of the Safety Element is to reduce the potential risk of death, injuries, property damage, and
economic and social dislocation resulting from natural and human - induced hazards. The Newport Beach
Safety Element provides policy guidance related to coastal hazards (e.g., tsunamis, coastal erosion, etc.),
geologic hazards (e.g., slope failures, adverse soils conditions, etc.), seismic hazards (e.g., liquefaction,
ground shaking, etc.), flood hazards, wildland and urban fire hazards, hazardous materials (e.g., hazardous
waste, leaking underground storage tanks, etc.) aviation hazards, and disaster planning.
Coastal Hazards
Newport Beach is susceptible to low - probability /high risk events such as tsunamis as well as isolated
hazards that include storm surges and coastal erosion. The Safety Element addresses these
potential hazards, which are generally limited to the portions of the City located immediately adjacent
to the coast, within and adjacent to Newport Harbor and the Upper Newport Bay areas. No portion
of the subject property is located within the limits of the 100 -year zone established for tsunami
inundation at extreme high tide, which is confined to the areas seaward of Bayside Drive. These
areas are identified in Figure S1 (Coastal Hazards) in the Safety Element.
Geologic Hazards
The geologic diversity of Newport Beach is strongly related to tectonic movement along the San
Andreas Fault and its broad zone of subsidiary faults. This, along with sea level fluctuations related
to changes in climate, has resulted in a landscape that is also diverse in geologic hazards that have
the potential to cause loss or harm to the community and/or the environment. The major geologic
constraints identified in the Safety Element include slope failure, compressible soils, and expansive
soils. Based on that Figure S2 (Seismic Hazards), the site is not expected to be impacted by these
hazards; however, due to the site's slope, the potential for slope failure as indicated on that exhibit in
the Safety Element exists.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -2
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental impact Reporl Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
Seismic Hazards
The greatest potential for seismic activity to affect the City of Newport Beach is activity occurring
along the Newport- Inglewood Fault zone, the Whittier Fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills Fault zone,
and the Elysian Park Fault zone, which with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes
that would result in ground shaking in the City and in nearby communities. Other secondary seismic
effects include liquefaction and seismically- induced slope failure. However, no portion of the site is
identified in the Safety Element as subject to potential liquefaction associated with seismic activity.
Flood Hazards
The Safety Element also addresses potential flooding associated with significant storm events. The
100- and 500 -year flood zones within the City of Newport Beach have been mapped by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Based on the FEMA studies, no portion of the subject
property is subject to inundation resulting from either a 100- or 500 -year storm event.
Fire Hazard
The City's Safety Element also addresses wildland fire hazards (refer to Figure S4). The City is
distinguished by three classifications of fire susceptibility, including: High, Moderate, and Low /None;
the City does not contain 'Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones as defined by Government Code
Section 51179. The majority of the City, including the subject site is identified to have a Low /None
classification for fire susceptibility potential. The City of Newport Beach has adopted the 2007
California Fire Code with City amendments and some exceptions. These provisions include
construction standards in new structures and remodels, road widths and configurations designed to
accommodate the passage of fire trucks and engines, and requirements for minimum fire flow rates
for water mains.
Hazardous Materials
The Hazardous Materials component of the Safety Element addresses several areas related to
hazardous materials, including toxic release inventory, hazardous waste, leaking underground
storage tanks, oil fields, methane gas mitigation districts, and hazards overlay (i.e., areas of mixed
residential and commercial land use where potential hazardous materials releases may occur). The
Safety Element includes programs for ensuring that the potential for the release of hazardous
materials into the environment is minimized.
Aviation Hazards
The City of Newport Beach borders the southeastern portion of John Wayne Airport (JWA); however,
the subject property is located approximately 4.5 miles southwest of JWA, which generates nearly all
of the aviation traffic affecting the City of Newport Beach. Although the accident potential zones
delineated for JWA are located in the areas adjacent to and surrounding the airport, three areas
within the City were found to be subject to increased vulnerability to aviation hazards due to the
location and orientation of runways and flight patterns: portions of the Balboa Peninsula, Balboa
Island, and Upper Newport Bay. However, no portion of the subject property has been identified as
subject to potential aviation hazards.
Disaster Planning
Any potential hazard occurring in the City of Newport Beach resulting from either man -made or
natural disasters may require the evacuation of residents of the City. In order to facilitate such
evacuation, the City employs the Standardized Emergency Management System for emergency
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -3
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
response. This system provides for assistance by one or more emergency response agencies as
well as the potential implementation of other policies and plans from the County of Orange, State of
California and /or federal government. In addition, the City has adopted an Emergency Management
Plan that is implemented in the event of any emergency. This plan is prepared and updated by the
Newport Beach Fire Department.
Housing Element
The Housing Element is designed to facilitate attainment of the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation
(RHNA) and to foster the availability of housing to all income levels to the extent possible given the
constraints within the City. The Housing Element is a comprehensive statement of the City's housing policies
and services as a specific guide for implementation of these policies and is closely correlated with the Land
Use Element. The Element examines current housing needs, estimates future housing needs, and
establishes goals, policies, and programs pertaining to those needs. According to the updated data
presented in the Housing Element, the City had a total of 42,143 housing units in 2005, including
approximately 62 percent of the homes that were single - family detached and attached, 17 percent duplex to
fourplex units, 23 percent multiple - family homes, and two percent mobile homes. The site is designated as
RS -D and, therefore, is intended to contribute to the supply of housing within the City of Newport Beach.
Noise Element
The Noise Element serves as a tool for including noise control in the planning process, which is intended to
ensure land use compatibility. This element identifies noise sensitive land uses as well as the sources of
noise, defines areas of noise impacts for the purpose of developing policies intended to protect residents and
sensitive receptors from the effects of excessive noise. The most common noise sources in the City of
Newport Beach include the existing freeway /highway system and the major arterial roadways extending
throughout the City. In addition, aircraft operations associated with John Wayne Airport (JWA) also result in
noise excessive noise levels in parts of the City. Other aircraft operations related to helicopter operations at
Hoag Hospital are also a source of noise that affects residential uses in the vicinity of the hospital. Newport
Beach has the largest small boat harbor in Southern California. The operations of the small motorized boats
generate undesirable noise in proximity to residences. Non - transportation related noise sources include
restaurant/bar /entertainment establishments, mixed -use structures, mechanical equipment, and recreational
facilities. Figures N1 and N4 in the Noise Element indicate that no portion of the property is subject to either
existing or future vehicular noise associated with traffic on the surface roadways in the project environs. In
addition, the site is located outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour established for aircraft operations at
JWA. The Noise Element articulates policies that are intended to ensure that construction noise is minimized
to avoid impacts to sensitive land uses through limitations on hours of truck deliveries and enforcement of the
Noise Ordinance noise limits and limits on the hours of maintenance and /or construction activity in or
adjacent to residential areas.
Natural Resources Element
The primary objective of the Natural Resources Element is to provide policy direction regarding the
conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources. It identifies the City's natural resources and
policies for their preservation, development and use. The element addresses water supply and water quality,
air quality, biological resources, open space, cultural and scientific resources, mineral resources, visual
resources, and energy. As indicated in Figure NR1 in the Natural Resources Element, no portion of the site
is identified either as a potential resource or included within an environmental study area (refer to Figure
NR2). Important biological resources are limited to the coastal areas, Newport Harbor, and Upper Newport
Bay. This element of the General Plan also addresses aesthetic resources, with emphasis on coastal views.
Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element identifies Begonia Park as a Public View Point. View of
Newport Harbor and the coast are within the viewshed of the Begonia Park vantage. Although coastal bluffs
are generally regarded as important visual and landform features in the City, the subject bluff has been
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -4
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Imoact Reoort Section 4.1 —Land Use and
substantially altered by existing development to the west on Pacific Drive and along Bayside Drive. As a
result of the existing development, which has altered the character of the existing bluff, it is not considered a
significant natural landform. Consistent with this conclusion, the Newport Beach Planning Commission
identified the preservation of views of Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean from vantage points within
Begonia Park as the highest priority related to development of the subject property over the preservation of
the degraded coastal bluff.
Historical Resources Element
This Element addresses the protection and sustainability of Newport Beach's cultural, historic and
paleontological resources. Goals and policies presented within the element are intended to recognize,
maintain, and protect the community's unique historical, cultural, and archaeological sites and structures.
Figure HR1 (Historic Resources) in the Historical Resources Element identifies the historic resources
included on the National Register of Historic Places, California Historical Landmarks, other historic sites or
potentially historic sites in the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) database, and other
historic sites in the City's Register. As indicated above, the site is undeveloped and none of the sites
identified in Figure HR1 are located on the project site.
Recreation Element
The primary purpose of the Recreation Element is to ensure that the provision of sufficient parks and
recreation facilities is appropriate for the residential and business population of Newport Beach. Specific
recreational issues and policies contained in the Recreation Element address parks and recreation facilities
(278 acres of developed parks), recreation programs, shared facilities, coastal recreation and support
facilities, marine recreation, and public access. The existing recreational facilities are identified on Figure R1
in the Recreation Element. Begonia Park is located immediately north and east of the subject property. The
site is located adjacent to this recreational facility.
Newport Beach is divided into recreation service areas for the purposes of park planning and to equitably
administer parkland dedications and fees provided by residential development. The subject property is
located within Service Area 10 (i.e., Corona del Mar). The land dedicated to recreational facilities in this
service area is mostly within Corona del Mar State Beach. However, as indicated previously, Begonia Park is
located adjacent to the subject property. There is a deficit of 9.1 acres of combined park /beach acreage
within this service area. However, it is anticipated that existing and active and passive parks within this
service area should be adequate to meet present and future need, p, rovided the facilities are renovated and
upgraded to meet demands for sports fields and active recreation. The Service Area 10 Recreation and
Open Space Plan (refer to Figure R12 in the Recreation Element) reflects the distribution of beaches and
public park facilities.
Arts and Cultural Element
The goals and policies of the Arts and Cultural Element are intended to serve as a guide for meeting the
future cultural needs of the community. The City's Arts Commission acts in an advisory capacity to the City
Council on matters including artistic aspects of the City. This commission also participates in the designation
of historical landmarks and reviews design elements for public sculpture, fountains, murals, benches, and
other fixtures.
'Service Area 10; Newport Beach General Plan, Recreation Element, p. 8 -16; July 25, 2006.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -5
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
Newport Beach Local Coastal Prooram
The subject property is located within the Coastal Zone. The City does not have a certified Local Coastal
Program (LCP) and, therefore, the City does not have coastal development permit jurisdiction. A coastal
development permit is not required for the development of this site because the proposed project complies
with the terms and conditions of Categorical Exclusion Order E -77 -5.
The City has a Certified Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) that is a reflection of the General Plan. The land use
intensity or residential density limit is prescribed in the CLUP. Although the Land Use Element may contain
more precise development limits for specific properties, the land use intensity or residential density limit that is
the most protective of coastal resources takes precedence should a conflict exist with the CLUP. However, in
no case shall the policies of the CLUP be interpreted to allow a development to exceed a development limit
established by the General Plan or its implementing ordinances. The site is designated RSD (Single Unit
Residential, Detached) by the Coastal Land Use Plan.
Zoning
The subject property is zoned R -1 (Single - Family Residential) as indicated on Exhibit 3 -5. This zoning
classification is consistent with the adopted RS -D General Plan land use designation and the RSD
designation in the CLUP, which would allow the development of one single - family residential dwelling unit on
the site.
SCAG Policies and Programs
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Agency (JPA) that was
established under the California Government Code. Under federal and state law, SCAG is designated as
a Council of Governments (COG), a Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), and a
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) having the mandated roles and responsibilities described
below.
As the region's MPO, SCAG is required to maintain a continuing cooperative and comprehensive
transportation planning process resulting in a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and a Regional
Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG).
Further, as the RTPA, SCAG is also responsible for both preparation of the RTP and the (RTIP).
SCAG is also responsible for developing the demographic projections and the integrated land use,
housing, employment, and transportation programs, measures, and strategies portions of the South
Coast Air quality Management Plan and is responsible for determining conformity of projects, plans and
programs to the Air Quality Management Plan prepared by the South Coast Air Quality Management
District.
The Growth Management chapter of the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) contains several
policies that are particularly applicable to the proposed project, including those related to population, housing
and employment and the provision of adequate public facilities and infrastructure. The Growth Management
chapter contains goals to improve the regional standard of living, quality of life, and to provide social, political,
and cultural diversity. The Air Quality chapter of the RCPG contains core actions related to development to
ensure that regional air quality goals and objectives are met. In addition, the Water Quality chapter also
contains core recommendations and policy options to restore and maintain the chemical, physical and
biological integrity of the nation's water and to achieve and maintain water quality objectives that are
necessary to protect the beneficial uses of all waters.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -6
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
4.1.2 Significance Criteria
Land use impacts are considered significant if the proposed project will conflict with the adopted plans and
goals of the community as expressed in the Newport Beach General Plan and the CLUP. In addition,
significant adverse impacts result from the proposed project, as identified in Appendix G of the State CEQA
Guidelines, if the project:
Conflicts with an applicable land use plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Conflicts with an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
Physically divides an established community.
Causes substantial or extreme use incompatibility.
Results in incompatible land uses in an aircraft accident potential area as defined in an
airport land use plan.
• Results in inconsistency or conflict with established recreational, educational, religious our
scientific uses of the area.
4.1.3 Standard Conditions
SC 41 -1 All development proposed for the proposed single - family residence shall be reviewed for
consistency with applicable provisions of the California Building Code, Noise Ordinance,
Uniform Fire Code, and other applicable codes and ordinances prior to issuance of building
permits.
4.1.4 Potential Impacts
4.1.4.1 Short -Term Construction Impacts
Potential land use impacts are associated with the long -term use of the subject property and the compatibility
of the proposed land use with existing uses as well as its consistency with adopted long -range plans and
policies. No short-term land use impacts (i.e., those related to construction activities) are anticipated as a
result of project implementation.
4.1.4.2 Long -Term Operational Impacts
Conflict with an applicable land use. plan, policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
The proposed project is subject to the applicable General Plan and relevant policies of that plan and
those articulated in the Coastal Land Use Plan. As indicated previously, the subject property is
designated RS -D (Single -Unit Residential - Detached) and is consistent with the land use designation and
zoning adopted for the site. The relationship of the proposed project with the Land Use Element and
Coastal Land Use Plan adopted by the City of Newport Beach is presented below.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -7
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
Newport Beach General Plan
As indicated above, implementation of the proposed project is consistent with the RS -D land use
designation. The Newport Beach General Plan includes several policies that guide development in the
City. The consistency analysis presented in Table 4.1 -1 reflects the relationship of the proposed project
with the applicable policies contained within the various elements of the Newport Beach General Plan.
Table 4.1 -1
General Plan Policy Analysis
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy
Relationship to Policy
Land Use Element
As reflected in the visual simulations (refer to Section 4.3)
and project plans, the proposed single - family residence
reflects a contemporary architectural style compared to
Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique
many of the existing homes in the neighborhood. The
character of the different neighborhoods, business
proposed residence adds to the architectural diversity of
LU 1.1
districts, and harbor that together identify Newport
the neighborhood. The proposed project attempts to
Beach. Locate and design development to reflect
preserve the integrity of coastal views from Begonia Park
Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity,
but also recognizes the constraints posed by the coastal
and view sheds.
topography, which has been degraded. Based upon the
analysis of the project's less than significant impact to
public views from Begonia Park, the project is consistent
with this policy.
The subject property is not currently identified as an
important open space or biological resource. Project
implementation will result in development of the site with a
single - family residential dwelling unit. The site is
composed of three vegetation communities, including a
small area (261 square feet) that supports low quality
coastal bluff scrub habitat; however, due to its low quality,
it does not quality as an ESHA based on Coastal Act
criteria. In addition, the habitat is not occupied by
gnatcatchers.
Protect the natural setting that contributes to the
The subject property is also located within the viewshed of
character and identity of Newport Beach and the sense
Begonia Park, which is designated as a "public view point."
LU 1.3
of place it provides for its residents and visitors.
Development of the site as proposed will result in the
Preserve open space resources, beaches, harbor,
introduction of a residential structure that would be visible
parks, bluffs, preserves, and estuaries as visual,
from vantage points within Begonia Park. Residential
recreational and habitat resources.
structures on Carnation Avenue, Pacific Drive, Begonia
Avenue and across the harbor entrance on the Balboa
Peninsula are currently within the viewshed. Depending on
the vantage point, the visibility of the structure within the
viewshed will vary; however, from those locations, view of
the harbor and ocean would not be significantly affected.
The overall character of the view will not be significantly
changed with the introduction of one additional residence
within the viewshed as the proposed project will not
dominate the view given its overall size and distance from
vantage points within the park.
Implement a conservative growth strategy that
The proposed project is consistent with the existing land
LU 1.4
enhances the quality of life of residents and balances
use designation for the site, which permits one single -
the needs of all constituencies with the preservation of
family residential dwelling unit.
opens ace and natural resources.
The project has been redesigned to minimize visual
Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic
impacts from Begonia Park, a designated Public View
LU 1.6
and visual resources that include open space,
Point in both the Natural Resources Element of the
mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from
General Plan and the Coastal Land Use Plan. Although
public vantage points.
views of the harbor from Pacific Drive would be blocked by
the proposed single-family residence, public views from
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -8
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
LU 3.2
LU 3.7
LU 4.1
LU 5.6.4
H 1.1
HR 2.1
Enhance existing neighborhoods, districts, and
corridors, allowing for reuse and inf II with uses that are
complementary in type, form, scale, and character.
Changes in use and /or density /intensity should be
considered only in those areas that are economically
underperforming, are necessary to accommodate
Newport Beach's share of projected regional
population growth, improve the relationship and reduce
commuting distance between home and jobs, or
enhance the values that distinguish Newport Beach as
a special place to live for its residents. The scale of
growth and new development shall be coordinated with
the provision of adequate infrastructure and public
services, including standards for acceptable traffic level
of service.
Require that new development is located and designed
to protect areas with high natural resource value and
protect residents and visitors from threats to life or
property.
Accommodate land use development consistent with
the Land Use Plan.
Require that sites be planned and buildings designed
in consideration of the property's topography,
landforms, drainage patterns, natural vegetation, and
relationship to the Bay and coastline, maintaining the
environmental character that distinguishes Newport
Beach.
Relationship to Policy
that vantage point are not protected as that site has not
been designated a Public view point by the Natural
neighborhood within Corona del Mar. The applicant is
proposing to construct a single - family residential dwelling
unit that is permitted by both the Land Use Element of the
City's General Plan and the existing R -1 zoning. The
proposed dwelling conforms to setbacks, is designed to be
lower than the maximum height limit and is below the
maximum floor area limit. The project represents in -fill
development in the residential neighborhood. The addition
of one residential dwelling to the City's inventory of
housing is in keeping with the long -range goals and
objectives of the City because it is in keeping with the
scale of new development in the City. Furthermore, all of
the required infrastructure, including sewer and water
facilities, circulation, public services, etc., exists to provide
supports a small area (i.e., approximately 261 square feet)
of low quality coastal scrub habitat. However, because the
site has been degraded as a result of habitat
fragmentation, influenced by surrounding human activities,
and because it supports limited long -term habitat, it does
not represent a high -value biological resources and does
not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act for
project is consistent with the adopted Land Use Element
designation (i.e., RS -D). With the exception of the
applicant's request for a modification permit to allow a wall
to extend above the three -foot height limit within the front
yard setback, the project complies with the development
standards prescribed for the R -1 Zonino District.
City considered acquiring the site for park purposes in
1978 when the site was proposed for development. The
City chose not to acquire the site at that time.
Development of the site minimizes impacts to public views
from Begonia Park and adds architectural diversity to the
neighborhood. Development of the site for its intended
purpose consistent with the General Plan designation and
Zoning Ordinance will not change the overall
Element
Support all reasonable efforts to preserve, maintain,
and improve availability and quality of existing housing
and residential neighborhoods, and ensure full
utilization of existing City housing resources for as long
into the future as physically and economically possible.
I he proposed project will result In the development of one
single - family residential dwelling unit, consistent with the
Land Use Element designation and the long -range goals
and objectives articulated in the General Plan, including
the Housing Element goals and objectives of providing
Resources Element
Hequlre that, in accordance with UtUA, new
development protect and preserve paleontological and
archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid
and mitigate impacts to such resources. Through
planning policies and permit conditions, ensure the
preservation of significant archaeological and
paleontological resources and require that the impact
caused by any development be mitigated in
accordance with CEQA.
affect paleontological resources that may exist in the
Monterey formation underlying the site. Although not
anticipated, it is possible that cultural resources may be
encountered during the grading operations. However, the
project will comply with the City's requirement to provide a
qualified archaeologist/paleontologist to monitor grading to
ensure that such resources can be preserved and /or
protected consisted with this policy.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -9
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy
Relationship to Policy
Circulation Element
Project implementation includes adequate on -site parking
Require that new development provide adequate,
that complies with the existing parking code requirements.
CE 7.1.1
convenient parking for residents, guest, business
Parking for guests cannot be accommodated in the
patrons, and visitors.
driveway given the limited depth and topography of the lot
and no guest parking is required for single-family homes.
Site and design new development to avoid use of
Parking for the homeowners is provided in a two -car
CE 7.1.8
parking configurations or management programs that
garage that takes access from Pacific Drive. Because the
are difficult to maintain and enforce.
project comprises only one single - family residence, there
is no need fora parking management plan or program.
No public parking exists in Pacific Drive along the frontage
of the project site. Project implementation will include a
Require new development to minimize curb cuts or
single -curb cut in order to allow for vehicular access to the
CE 7.1.11
protect on- street parking spaces. Close curb cuts to
site from Pacific Drive. The curb that fronts the project site
create on street parking spaces wherever feasible.
is presently marked "red" prohibiting street parking so the
proposed curb cut for the project will not result in the loss
of any street parking.
Recreation Element
The proposed project includes the development of a
Require developers of new residential subdivisions to
single - family residence on an existing lot. Such projects
provide parklands at five acres per 1,000 persons, as
are not required to dedicate public parkland nor are they
stated in the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance, or
required to pay a park in -lieu fee as no subdivision is
R 1.1
contribute in -lieu fees for the development of public
required that would increase the number of residential
recreation facilities meeting demands generated by the
units. The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19) of the
development's resident population, as required in the
Municipal Code only requires parkland dedication or the
City's Park Dedication Fees Ordinance.
payment of an in -lieu fee for subdivisions that increase
housing units.
Natural Resources Element
Require all development to comply with the regulations
The project applicant will be required to comply with all
under the City's municipal separate storm drain system
applicable NPDES regulations related to development one
NR 3.4
permit under the National Pollutant Discharge
a single - family residence to ensure that potential water
Elimination System ( NPDES).
quality impacts are reduced to the maximum extent
practicable.
The project will be designed to include water quality
treatment features (e.g., erosion control, etc.) prescribed
by the CBC that ensure that water quality within Newport
NR 3.5
Require that development does not degrade natural
Harbor will not be adversely affected. Although a WQMP
water bodies.
is not required for the proposed project, the project will
comply with all applicable local and state requirements for
discharging runoff into an impaired water body (i.e.,
Newport Bay).
Given that the site is less than 10,000 square feet in size
and more than 200 feet from the Bay, a WQMP is not
required. The actual amount of storm water runoff
generated from the building footprint and paved areas
(totaling approximately 2,300 sq. ft.) will be an insignificant
Require new development applications to include a
amount. Compliance with applicable building, grading and
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to minimize
water quality codes and policies (typically performed at the
NR 3.9
runoff from rainfall events during construction and post-
Plan check stage) will ensure that there will not be an
construction.
impact to water quality with construction. As part of the
final plan check review for the proposed project, the
applicant must submit an adequate drainage and erosion
control plan that must be found to meet applicable
standards. On -site retention and/or filtration or clarifiers
would be required to meet water quality standards.
Include site design and source control BMPS in all
NR 3.11
developments. When the combination of site design
Refer to the Response to Policy No. NR 3.9.
and source control BMPs are not sufficient to protect
water quality as required by the NPDES, structural
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1-10
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
Policy
No.
General Plan Polic
Relationship to Policy
_
treatment BMPs will be implemented along with site
design and source control measures.
Require grading /erosion control plans with structural
BMPs that prevent or minimize erosion during and after
NR 4.4
construction for development on steep slopes, graded,
Refer to the Response to Policy No. NR 3.9.
or disturbed area.
The proposed project will comply with all applicable City,
Require developers to use and operate construction
state and federal requirements for operating construction
NR 6.1
equipment, use building materials and paints, and
equipment and related activities that will occur in order to
control dust created by construction activities to
implement the proposed project. Fugitive dust emissions
minimize air pollutants.
will be minimized through compliance with SCAQMD rules
that require watering the site, etc.
A site - specific biological survey was conducted on the
subject property and an assessment of the proposed
project was prepared (refer to Appendix C). That
Require a site - specific survey and analysis prepared by
assessment concluded that the coastal bluff scrub habitat
a qualified biologist as a filing requirement for any
that encompasses approximately 261 square feet of the
NR 10.3
development permit applications where development
4,412 square foot property is low quality habitat that is
would occur within or contiguous to areas identifies as
characterized by few native species, fragmented, and has
ESHAs.
been affected by human activities in the area. As such,
the small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat does not meet
the definitional criteria for an ESHA in the Coastal Act and
does not qualify as an ESHA based on the City's General
Plan and CLUP criteria.
The 261 square feet of coastal bluff scrub habitat that
occupies a portion of the site has been evaluated and has
been determined to be "low quality" habitat, which does
Require that the siting and design of new development,
not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act for
including landscaping and public access, protect
ESHAs. Furthermore, it is not occupied by sensitive
NR 10.4
sensitive or rare resources against any significant
species (e.g., California gnatcatcher) and no sensitive
disruption of habitat values.
plant species were observed on the site during the
biological assessment conducted for the proposed project.
Although project implementation will result in the
elimination of the low- quality coastal bluff scrub habitat, no
significant loss of valuable habitat will occur.
Although the subject property is vacant, it is neither
considered "open space" nor designated as open space
on the Land Use Element. The site is designated as RS -D
(Single -Unit Residential — Detached), similar to all of the
adjacent properties located to the northwest, west, south
and southeast, which are developed as single - family
homes. No properties in the vicinity of the site are
designated as open space by the City. Begonia Park,
which abuts the site on the north and northeast, is
designated as PR (Parks and Recreation).
The subject property supports a small area that is
Protect, conserve, and maintain designated open
classified as coastal bluff scrub habitat; however, it does
NR 17.1
space areas that define the City's urban form, serve as
not meet the criteria established by the Coastal Act or the
habitat for many species, and provide recreational
City's General Plan for an environmentally sensitive
opportunities.
habitat area (ESHA). Furthermore, the site does not
provide suitable habitat for any sensitive plant or animal
species. Implementation of the proposed project would
result in the elimination of the low quality coastal bluff
scrub habitat; however, this impact is not significant and
no mitigation measures are required.
Because the property in question is not designated as
open space, development of the site with a single - family
residence in conformance with the development standards
set forth by the R -1 Zoning District regulations, will not
result in any direct impacts to designated open spaces in
the City. In addition, project implementation will not
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -11
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy
Relationship to Policy
adversely affect existing or future recreational
opportunities that would occur at Begonia Park.
As indicated above, the subject property is not designated
as open space either by the City's General Plan Land Use
Consider conversion of public sites designated for
Element or Coastal Land Use Plan. The site is not publicly
NR 17.2
open space to other uses only when a conversion will
held and, moreover, is designated for residential
meet a significant need, and there are not alternative
development that is similar in density and character as that
sites that could feasibly meet that need.
in the immediate area. Therefore, development of the site
would not result in the "conversion" of a "... a public site
designated for open s ace ..."
The project site is located adjacent to Begonia Park to the
north and east and Bayside Park, a linear feature along
Bayside Drive that extends easterly from Begonia Park, on
NR 17.3
Consider opportunities to expand designated open
the east. It is possible that Begonia Park could be
space areas within the City.
expanded by adding the project site to that recreational
amenity; however, in order to do so, the City or other entity
must acquire the property. At the present time, the City
has no plan to expand Begonia Park by acquiring the site.
Require new development to protect and preserve
paleontological and archaeological resources from
destruction, and avoid and minimize impacts to such
resources in accordance with the requirements of
NR 18.1
CEQA. Through planning policies and permit
Refer to the discussion of Policy HR 2.1.
conditions, ensure the preservation of significant
archaeological and paleontological resources and
require that the impact caused by any development be
mitigated in accordance with CEQA.
Although no archaeological /paleontological resources are
known to exist on site, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was
distributed, which was directed to the State Clearinghouse,
Notify cultural organizations, including Native American
which will transmit a copy of the NOP to the Native
organizations, of proposed development that have the
American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for review and
NR 18.3
potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Allow
comment. In addition, the City requires
qualified representative of such groups to monitor
archaeological /paleontological monitoring on -site during
grading and /or excavation of development sites.
grading. In the event any significant cultural resources are
encountered during the grading and site preparation
phase, appropriate Native American organizations will be
contacted to ensure that the potential effects to those
resources would be avoided or minimized.
Require new development, where on site preservation
and avoidance are not feasible, to donate scientifically
As indicated above, the project will be subject to the City's
NR 18.4
valuable paleontological or archaeological materials to
standard conditions and procedures, including those
a responsible public or private institution with a suitable
related to cultural /scientific resources that require such
repository, located within Newport Beach or Orange
donations to an appropriate public or private facility.
count whenever possible.
Project implementation will result in the construction of one
single - family residence on Pacific Drive, which is within the
viewshed of Begonia Park, which is identified as a "Public
View Point." While views from vantage points within
Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic
Begonia Park would be altered to include views of the
NR 20.1
and visual resources that include open space,
proposed home, views from these locations would not
mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from
result in the elimination of views of Newport Harbor or
public vantage points, as shown in Figure NR3.
ocean. However, views of the harbor from Pacific
Drive /Begonia Avenue adjacent to the site would be
virtually blocked by the proposed home. This is not a
significant impact because this location is not noted as a
"public view point" in the Natural Resources Element.
As indicated in the discussion of Policy NR 20.1, although
Require new development to restore and enhance the
project implementation will result in the loss of the existing
visual quality in visually degraded areas, where
harbor view from the Pacific Drive/ Begonia Avenue
NR 20.2
feasible, and provide view easements or corridors
vantage point, that location is not reflected on Natural
designed to protect public views or to restore public
Resources Element Figure NR3, and therefore, this view is
views in developed areas, where appropriate.
not considered to be a significant public view that would be
otherwise protected. The project has been redesigned to
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -12
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy
Relationship to Policy
minimize impacts to public views from vantage points
within Begonia Park, which is a designated a "public view
point" pursuant to Figure NR3. Lastly, the City can and
has proposed to require the dedication of a view
easement above the proposed project to ensure that the
principal building, accessory structures and landscaping
will not impact public views through the site above the
proposed building in the future.
The proposed project is not located within the viewshed of
any of the roadways identified in Figure NR3 in the Natural
Resources Element of the General Plan. To date, neither
Begonia Avenue nor Pacific Drive has been identified by
the City as a "Public View Corridor" or a "Public View
Protect and enhance public view corridors from the
Point" Begonia Park is designated as a "Public View
NR 20.3
following roadway segments (shown in Figure NR3)
Point" on Figure NR3. Direction provided by the Newport
and other locations may be identified in the future.
Beach Planning Commission intended to guide the design
of the subject property placed the highest priority on
preservation of views from Begonia Park vantage points.
To that end, the site was redesigned to minimize potential
visual impacts from vantage points within Begonia Park,
as directed by the Planning Commission.
The proposed project has been designed to comply with
Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of
the requisite site development standards prescribed by the
NR 22.1
structures consistent with the unique character and
R -1 Zoning District regulations, including building height,
visual scale of Newport Beach.
which is limited to 24 feet, which limits alternative site plan
configurations.
The project site is designated for residential use and public
views from Begonia Park are protected. These competing
priorities are also in conflict with implementing this policy.
The site is relatively small and is altered and no significant
Preserve cliffs, canyons, bluffs, significant rock
rock outcroppings or cliffs are present. Therefore, the
outcroppings, and site buildings to minimize alteration
site's topography and landform is not considered a
NR 23.1
it
of the site's natural topography and preserve the
significant visual resource by the City. The protection of
features a visual resource.
public views from Begonia Park is considered a higher
priority given the degraded nature of the site and that
development of the project will not significantly impact
public views discussed in Section 4.3. Minimizing the
impact to public views from Begonia Park preserves a
significant visual quality of the site.
As previously indicated, site development as proposed will
result in the elimination of the low- quality coastal bluff
scrub habitat (i.e., approximately 261 square feet);
however, this habitat lacks species diversity and it
possesses low value as a habitat. Furthermore, it is not
Design and site new development to minimize the
occupied by the California gnatcatcher, and no sensitive
NR 23.7
removal of native vegetation, preserve rock
plant species were observed on the site. Although the
outcroppings, and protect coastal resources.
vegetation comprising the habitat will be eliminated, its
loss is not significant because it is not an ESHA as defined
by the Coastal Act and Newport Beach General Plan.
Nonetheless, the site will be landscaped with native
species to replace the coastal bluff scrub species lost as a
result of site development.
Safety Element
Project implementation will be required to incorporate
drainage features that direct surface flows to existing
Require new development adjacent to the edge of
storm drain collection and conveyance facilities in order to
coastal bluffs to incorporate drainage improvements,
avoid bluff erosion. In addition, the landscape plan for the
S3.12
irrigation systems, and/or native or drought - tolerant
proposed project will also include drought tolerant and
vegetation into the design to minimize coastal bluff
native species that are intended to minimize bluff erosion
recession.
and recession.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -13
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy
Relationship to Policy
Noise Element
Based upon the noise contours depicted in Figure N1 and
N4 of the Noise Element, the site will not experience noise
Require that all proposed projects are compatible with
in excess of 60 CNEL from roadways or aircraft traffic from
the noise environment through use of Table N2, and
John Wayne Airport. Table N2 indicates that the 60 CNEL
N 1.1
enforce the interior and exterior noise standards shown
or lower for single family residential is within "Zone A,"
in Table N3.
which is defined as "clearly compatible:' Enforcement of
the noise standards of Table N3 is accomplished through
Chapter 10.26 of the Municipal Code, which is applicable
to the site.
Project implementation will result in increased noise during
construction; however it will be short in duration.
Construction is not expected to exceed 20 months, which
is typical of construction for a custom home of this size on
Require the employment of noise mitigation measures
a bluff property. Foundation construction will necessitate
for existing sensitive uses when a significant noise
the placement of drilled caissons and shoring and
N 1.8
impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs
excavation of lower levels, which can generate noise
when there is an increase in the ambient CNEL
levels between 70 and 90 dBA. However, these high noise
produced by new development impacting noise
levels are periodic throughout the day and week and are
sensitive uses.
not continuous. This initial construction phase is not
anticipated to exceed 4 to 6 months. Project
implementation will also not result in the exposure of
nearby homes or the park to excessive long -term noise
levels given that the project is a single-family home
Enforce interior and exterior noise standards outlined in
Table N3, and in the City's Municipal Code to ensure
The interior and exterior noise levels identified in Table N3
N 4.1
that sensitive noise receptors are not exposed to
are enforced by Chapter 10.26 of the Municipal Code,
excessive noise levels from stationary noise sources,
which is applicable to the site.
such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
equipment.
Enforce the Noise Ordinance noise limits and limits on
Compliance with the existing noise control ordinance and
N 4.6
hours of maintenance or construction activity in or
hours of construction prescribed in the ordinance will
adjacent to residential areas, including noise that
minimize the potential noise impacts associated with
results from in -home hobby or work - related activities.
project implementation.
Chapter 10.28 of the Municipal Code limits noise -
generating construction activities between 7:00 a.m. to
6:30 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on
N 5.1
Enforce the limits on hours of construction activity.
Saturdays with no noise - generating construction activities
permitted on Sundays or holidays. These limits are
currently enforced by the Code and Water Quality
Enforcement Division and the Police Department.
As indicated in the preceding analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the adopted relevant
policies in the Newport Beach General Plan. No significant land use and /or policy conflicts will occur as a
result of project implementation. Nonetheless, a mitigation measure has been identified to ensure that
coastal views from Begonia Park are preserved.
Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan
The Coastal Land Use Plan contains policies to guide development and the following table, Table 4.1 -2,
provides a summary of the project's relationship with relevant CLUP policies.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -14
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
amt
2.1.2 -1
2.2.1 -1
2.2.1 -2
2.7 -1
2.8.1 -1
;1f 1111Z
Table 4.1 -2
CLUP Policy Analysis
Land Use
Land uses and new development in the coastal zone shall the RSD land use designation and density allocated on
be consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan Map and all the adopted Coastal Land Use Plan. The project is
applicable LCP policies and regulations. consistent with relevant CLUP policies as indicated in this
Continue to allow redevelopment and infill development
within and adjacent to the existing developed areas in the
coastal zone subject to the density and intensity limits and
resource protection policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan.
Require new development be located in areas with
adequate public services or in areas that are capable of
having public services extended or expanded without
significant adverse effects on coastal resources.
Continue to maintain appropriate setbacks and density,
floor area, and height limits for residential development to
protect the character of established neighborhoods and to
protect coastal access and coastal resources.
Review all applications for new development to determine
potential threats from coastal and other hazards.
i ne proposed project is considerea an "m -mr project in
that it is development of an existing vacant parcel. The
proposed project is consistent with the residential
designation and density prescribed in the CLUP. As
described below in this table, the proposed project also
addresses the policies related to resource protection and
is consistent with those policies.
The area within which the project is located is served by
the existing infrastructure, including circulation, sewer,
water, storm drainage, public services, and utilities.
These facilities have adequate capacities and /or supplies
building and development standards prescribed in the
City's zoning ordinance for R -1 zoned properties, which
provides the framework for neighborhood compatibility
through a uniform set of development standards. The
proposed dwelling conforms to setbacks, is designed to
be lower than the maximum height limit and is below the
maximum floor area limit. The proposed project does not
impact coastal access as none presently exists through
the site and it minimizes impacts to coastal resources to
the maximum extent by minimizing impacts to public
The proposed project will be subject to review by the
City's Building Department to ensure that it has been
designed to address all relevant conditions that may affect
site development. As indicated in the Preliminary
Geotechnical Report prepared for the proposed project
(Borella Geology, Inc., March 20, 2007), construction of
the residence on the subject site is feasible from a
geotechnical perspective, provided the recommendations
provided in the report are incorporated into the new
foundation design and compliance with standard
requirements of the California Building Code. According
to that report, although the natural erosion process of the
cliff face will continue, it will not do so in a manner that
would undermine the foundation system. According to that
report, although the natural erosion process of the cliff
face will continue, it will not do so in a manner that would
undermine the foundation system.
Uesign and site new development to avoid hazardous
2.8.1 -2 areas and minimize risks to life and property from coastal Refer to the Response to Policy No. 2.8.1 -1 above.
and other hazards.
Require new development to assure stability and
2.8.1 -4 structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute Refer to the Response to Policy No. 2.8.1 -1 above.
significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -15
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Renort
2.8.6 -10
2.8.7 -2
2.8.7 -3
2.9.3 -1
2.9.3 -2
2.9.3 -3
2.9.3 -5
2.9.3 -6
2.9.3 -10
of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the
construction of protective devices that would substantially
alter natural landforms alona bluffs and cliffs.
Site and design new structures to avoid the need for
shoreline and bluff protective devices during the economic
life of the structure (75 years).
Require new development to provide adequate drainage
and erosion control facilities that convey site drainage in a
non - erosive manner in order to minimize hazards
resulting from increased runoff, erosion and other
hydrologic impacts to streams.
Require applications for new development, where
applicable (i.e., in areas of known or potential geologic or
seismic hazards), to include a geologic /soils /geotechnical
study that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the
proposed project site, any necessary mitigation
measures, and contains a statement that the project site
is suitable for the proposed development and that the
development will be safe from geologic hazard. Require
such reports to be signed by a licensed Certified
Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer and
subiect to review and aooroval by the Citv.
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
I he property and coastal bluff are not subject to coastal
erosion. Damage from tsunamis does not pose a
significant threat to the subject site because it will be
located approximately 60 feet above mean sea level. As
prescribed in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report for the
project, footings on or adjacent to slope surfaces will be
founded in competent bedrock with an embedment and
setback distance from the slope surface sufficient to
provide vertical and lateral support for the footing without
detrimental settlement.
quality codes and policies (typically performed at the plan
check stage) will ensure that there will not be an impact to
water quality with construction. As part of the final plan
check review for the proposed project, the applicant must
submit an adequate drainage and erosion control plan
that must be found to meet applicable standards. On -site
retention and/or filtration or clarifiers will be required to
was prepared for the proposed project. The report
addresses the site - specific soils and geologic conditions
and identifies recommendations to ensure that project
implementation will not result in significant impacts either
to the bluff or the proposed structure. If the project is
approved, it will be subject to the plan check review
process administered by the City Building Department to
verify compliance with the California Building Code and to
ensure that the structural recommendations of the
Site and design new development to avoid use of parking Refer to Response to Policy CE 7.1.8 in Table 4.1 -1
configurations or parking management programs that are above.
difficult to maintain and enforce.
Continue to require new development to provide off- street
parking sufficient to serve the approved use in order to
minimize impacts to public on- street and off - street parking
available for coastal access.
enhance public access to the coast by providing adequate
parking pursuant to the off - street parking regulations of
Continue to require off - street parking in new development
to have adequate dimensions, clearances, and access to
insure their use.
Prohibit new development that would result in restrictions
on public parking that would impede or restrict public
access to beaches, trails, or parklands, (including, but not
limited to, the posting of "no parking' signs, red curbing,
and physical barriers), except where such restrictions are
needed to protect public safety and where no other
feasible alternative exists to provide public safety.
Refer to Response to Policy CE 7.1.8 in Table 4.1 -1
above.
The project provides 2 off - street parking spaces within a
garage, which meets the Zoning Code parking regulation
in effect on October 13, 2005.
The off - street parking within the proposed structure has
been designed to comply with the City's size, clearance,
and access requirements that are contained within the
Zoning Code.
of the project site. Project implementation will include a
single -curb cut in order to allow for vehicular access to the
site from Pacific Drive. The curb that fronts the project site
is presently marked "red" prohibiting street parking so the
proposed curb cut for the project will not result in the loss
of any street parking.
Require new development to minimize curb cuts to protect
on- street parking spaces. Close curb cuts to create new Refer to Response to Policy No. 2.9.3 -6 above.
parking wherever feasible.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -16
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
3.2.1 -3
4.1.1 -2
4.1.3 -1
4.3.1 -5
4.3.1 -6
Provide adequate park and recreational facilities to
accommodate the needs of new residents when allowing
new development.
Require a site - specific survey and analysis prepared by a
qualified biologist as a filing requirement for coastal
development permit applications where development
would occur within or adjacent to areas identified as a
potential ESHA. Identify ESHA as habitats or natural
communities listed in Section 4.1.1 that possess any of
the attributes listed in Policy 4.1.1 -1. The ESAs depicted
on Map 4 -1 shall represent a preliminary mapping of
areas containing potential ESHA.
Utilize the following mitigation measures to reduce the
potential for adverse impacts to ESA natural habitats from
sources including, but not limited to those identified in
Table 4.1.1.
Require development on steep slopes or steep slopes
with erosive soils to implement structural best
management practices (BMPS) to prevent or minimize
erosion consistent with any load allocation of the TMDLs
adopted for Newport Bay.
Require grading /erosion control plans to include soil
stabilization on graded or disturbed areas.
Section 4.1 — Land
Relationship to Policy
The proposed project includes the development of a
single - family residence on an existing lot. Such projects
are not required to dedicate public parkland nor are they
required to pay a park in -lieu fee as no subdivision is
required that would increase the number of residential
units. The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19) of the
Municipal Code only requires parkland dedication or the
payment of an in -lieu fee for subdivisions that increase
A biological survey of the site was conducted to evaluate
the potential project - related impacts on potentially
sensitive biological resources. None of the ESHAs
illustrated on Map 4 -1 in the Coastal Land Use Plan are
located within the vicinity of the proposed project and,
therefore, they would not be adversely affected as a result
of project implementation. Nonetheless, the bluff contains
approximately 261 square feet of native coastal bluff
scrub vegetation. The biological survey evaluated the
vegetation based upon Coastal Act criteria and concluded
that it not qualify as an Environmentally Sensitive Habitat
Area (ESHA) due to its low quality, lack of sensitive
species, small area and that it is not located adjacent to
other similar plant communities.
The findings and recommendations of the biological
survey /assessment are presented in Section 4.2
(Biological Resources). Because the native habitat on the
subject property is low quality, is not occupied by sensitive
species of wildlife, is fragmented, and has been affected
by human activities, the loss of 261 square feet of coastal
bluff scrub habitat is not considered significant.
implementation of the proposed project will not result in
significant impacts to important and /or sensitive biological
resources. The habitat and species that exist on the
subject property are degraded and encompass only a
small, isolated area that is of low value. Therefore, no
significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation
measures are reouired.
The project will be designed to include water quality
treatment features (e.g., erosion control, etc.) required by
the CBC and the City that ensure that water quality within
Newport Bay will not be adversely affected. Although a
WQMP is not required for the proposed project due to its
small size and location, the project will comply with all
applicable local and state requirements (California
Building Code) to not only minimize erosion but also treat
water discharging runoff into an impaired water body (i.e.,
Newport Bay).
Compliance with applicable building, grading and water
quality codes and policies (typically performed at the plan
check stage) will ensure that there will not be an impact to
water quality with construction. As part of the final plan
check review for the proposed project, the applicant must
submit an adequate drainage and erosion control plan
that must be found to meet applicable standards. On -site
retention and /or filtration or clarifiers would be required to
meet water quality standards.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -17
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental lmoact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
CLUP Policy
Relationship to Policy
Project implementation will necessitate grading and site
alteration to accommodate the proposed single - family
residence. Approximately 630 cubic yards of earth
material will be exported from the site. Although the
Require measures to be taken during construction to limit
existing native (three native species within the existing
land use disturbance activities such as clearing and
coastal bluff scrub habitat) and non - native species on the
grading, limiting cut - and -fill to reduce erosion and
site will be removed in order to construct the proposed
sediment loss, and avoiding steep slopes, unstable areas,
home, its value has habitat is very limited. Appropriate
4.3.1 -7
and erosive soils. Require construction to minimize
erosion control measures will be implemented both during
disturbance of natural vegetation, including significant
grading and after construction of the residence. Although
trees, native vegetation, root structures, and other
the coastal bluff scrub habitat would be removed, its
physical or biological features important for preventing
habitat value is low due to the fragmentation that has
erosion or sedimentation.
occurred as a result of human activities, including
development along the bluff that has already occurred.
Furthermore, it is not recognized as an ESHA and it not
considered a significant resource. Therefore, the loss of
this habitat is less than significant.
Require that development not result in the degradation of
4.3.2 -3
coastal waters (including the ocean, estuaries and lakes)
Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.3.1 -5.
caused by changes to the hydrologic landsca e.
To the maximum extent practicable, runoff should be
Consistent with this policy, the City will require the
retained on private property to prevent the transport of
Preparation of stormwater and erosion control plan at the
4.3.2 -8
bacteria, pesticides, fertilizers, pet waste, oil, engine
building plan check stage that identifies the manner in
coolant, gasoline, hydrocarbons, brake dust, lire residue,
which runoff will be captured, treated and conveyed prior
and other pollutants into recreational waters.
to its discharge into Newport Bay to ensure protection of
water quality.
Approximately 22% of the site will be not be developed
with impervious surfaces, which is a relatively high
Require new development to minimize the creation of and
percentage of area compared to typical residential
increases in impervious surfaces, especially directly
construction in Newport Beach. The front and side yard
4.3.2 -11
connected impervious areas, to be maximum extent
setback areas abutting the building are impervious and
practicable. Require redevelopment to increase area of
provide walkways and stairs necessary to access required
pervious surfaces, where feasible.
exits from the multi -level building. Reducing impervious
surfaces can only be accomplished by reducing the
building footprint.
Require development to protect the absorption,
The project site is presently vacant and runoff currently
purification, and retention functions of natural drainage
not controlled. The site does not accommodate drainage
systems that exist on the site, to the maximum extent
from abutting properties and is not a natural drainage
practicable. Where feasible, design drainage and project
system. The proposed project will result in a small
4.3.2 -12
plans to complement and utilize existing drainage patterns
increase in surface runoff associated with the increase in
and systems, conveying drainage from the developed
impervious surfaces on the site, which will be captured,
area of the site in anon- erosive manner. Disturbed or
treated and conveyed to existing storm drain facilities prior
degraded natural drainage systems should be restored,
to its discharge in the bay.
where feasible.
Consistent with this policy, the proposed single - family
residence has been sited to minimize obstructing views
from Begonia Park, which was established as a priority by
Site development on the most suitable portion of the site
the Planning Commission. Although the existing coastal
4.3.2 -13
and design to ensure the protection and preservation of
bluff scrub habitat will be eliminated as a result of the
natural and sensitive site resources.
proposed project, the loss of this low- quality habitat, which
does not support a significant number and types of
species and has been compromised by fragmentation and
human activities in the area, is not significant. The site
will be landscaped with nativespecies.
Compliance with applicable building, grading and water
Require structural BMPs to be inspected, cleaned, and
quality codes and policies (typically performed at the plan
repaired as necessary to ensure proper functioning for the
check stage) will ensure that there will not be an impact to
life of the development. Condition coastal development
water quality with construction. The features that will be
4.3.2 -16
permits to require ongoing application and maintenance
incorporated into the project design will be maintained by
as is necessary for effective operation of all BMPs
the property owner throughout the life of the project to
(including site design, source control, and treatment
ensure that they are effective in minimizing water quality
control).
impacts.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -18
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
CLUP Polic
anship to Policy
Require new development applications to include a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP's
purpose is to minimize to the maximum extent practicable
4.3.2 -23
dry weather runoff, runoff from small storms (less the 3W
See Responses to Policies 4.3.2 -11.
of rain falling over a 24 -hour period) and the concentration
of pollutants in such runoff during construction and post -
construction from the property.
To further reduce runoff, direct and encourage water
conservation via the use of weather- and moisture -based
The project includes drought tolerant landscaping
4.3.2 -24
irrigation controls, tiered water consumption rates, and
materials and a weather or moisture based controller can
native or drought - tolerant plantings in residential,
be incorporated to conserve water to the maximum extent.
commercial, and municipal properties to the maximum
extent practicable .
Scenic and Visual Resources
The most notable scenic quality of the site is its location
within the public viewshed of Begonia Park. Although the
site is considered a coastal bluff, it is relatively small,
previously disturbed and it does not posses physical
characteristics that are considered significant or highly
scenic. The site is designated for residential development
and the Newport Beach Planning Commission concluded
that allowed development of the site must protect public
views from Begonia Park to the greatest extent possible.
Protect and, where feasible, enhance the scenic and
The proposed project has been redesigned to be below
visual qualities of the coastal zone, including public views
the maximum building height requirement prescribed in
4.4.1 -1
to and along the ocean, bay, and harbor and to coastal
the R -1 Zoning District. Additionally, lowering the
bluffs and other scenic coastal areas.
development further down the bluff, limiting street level
development to single story, and pulling back elements of
the project that would lessen impacts to the Begonia Park
view corridor have been incorporated within the design.
As a result, views of Newport bay and the ocean from
Begonia Park, a designated "Public View Point" in the
Natural Resources Element of the General Plan and the
CLUP, would be protected to the maximum extent. The
proposed single - family residence would block views to the
bay and ocean from Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue;
however, as noted previously, this view is not protected as
it is not a designated viewpoint.
4.4.1-2
Design and site new development, including landscaping,
Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.4.1 -1.
so as to minimize impacts to public coastal views.
Design and site new development to minimize alterations
4.4.1 -3
to significant natural landforms, including bluffs, cliffs and
Refer to Response to Policy NR 23.1 in Table 4 -1 above.
canyons.
As indicated in the Response to Policy 4.41-1, avoiding
Where appropriate, require new development to provide
any alteration of the public views is not possible.
view easements or corridors designed to protect public
Nonetheless, the project has been designed to minimize
4.4.1 -4
coastal views or to restore public coastal views in
the effect on views from Begonia Park by reducing the
developed areas.
height of the structure at the street elevation to one story.
The City required a view easement above this structure to
reserve the views through the site above the building.
The project site, which is currently undeveloped, is
characterized by sparse vegetation, including shrubs and
Where feasible, require new development to restore and
trees. Development of the site will result in the creation of
4.4.1 -5
enhance the visual quality in visually degraded areas.
a similar residential character as that which exists in the
area the project will incorporate landscaping that is
consistent with that in the area and will include native
plantspecies.
Design and site new development, including landscaping,
Public views from Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue are
on the edges of public coastal view corridors, including
not identified as a protected public view. The proposed
4.4.1 -7
those down public streets, to frame and accent public
project has been designed to minimize impacts to harbor
coastal views.
and ocean views from Begonia Park. The project will
incorporate landscaping that is consistent with that in the
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August2009
4.1 -19
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
CLUP Policy
Relationship to Policy
area and will include native plant species that achieve the
desired City objectives of preserving coastal views from
important vantage points identified in Map 4 -3 of the
CLUP. The view easement that will be dedicated to the
City will restrict the maximum height of landscaping and
accessory structures to that of the top of the guardrails of
the 'outdoor room" proposed for the project in order to
reserve views through the site.
The proposed project was redesigned to protect or
minimize visual impacts. The neighborhood in which the
project is located is characterized by single -unit dwellings
with one or two stories above street grade and
development on the bluff face extending down two or
Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of
three stories below street grade. Redesign of the project
4.4.2 -2
structures consistent with the unique character and visual
lowered the development farther down the bluff and
scale of Newport Beach.
limited street level development to a single story, making
the project more visually compatible with the surrounding
development. Furthermore, the addition of clerestory
windows on the street elevation and the proposed
planters make the proposed single - family residence more
in keeping with the character of other street - facing
elevations in the neighborhood.
As previously indicated in the discussions of related
Implement the regulation of the building envelope to
policies, the proposed project has been redesigned to
preserve public views through the height, setback, floor
address issues related to visual impacts, including
4.4.2 -3
area, lot coverage, and building bulk regulation of the
building height, setbacks, and bulk. The redesign has
Zoning Code in effect as of October 13, 2005 that limit the
resulted in a building envelope that achieves the primary
building profile and maximize public view opportunities.
goal of minimizing potential visual impacts to views from
Begonia Park.
The project site comprises the easternmost transition from
the Pacific Drive coastal bluff to the gully formation that
has been developed as Begonia Park. This transitional
location between different topographic landforms, the
steeper slope of the subject site as compared with the
Pacific Drive Coastal bluff, and the existing development
at the toe of the bluff face that comprises the project site
require that both the horizontal and vertical extent of
Prohibit development on bluff faces, except private
proposed development be considered in establishing the
development on coastal bluff faces along Ocean
Predominant Line of Existing Development. The
Boulevard, Carnation Avenue and Pacific Drive in Corona
maximum permissible horizontal extent of the proposed
del Mar determined to be consistent with the predominant
structure over the bluff face was based on the minimum
line of existing development or public improvements
dimension of the building footprint that allows reasonable
4.4.3 -8
providing public access, protecting coastal resources, or
floor area on the property for its intended residential
providing for public safety. Permit such improvements
purpose, while simultaneously complying with the
only when no feasible alternative exists and when
maximum permissible building height of twenty -four feet,
designed and constructed to minimize alteration of the
limiting the extent of grading on the bluff face, and
bluff face, to not contribute to further erosion of the bluff
producing a building profile that "steps down" the slope,
face, and to be visually compatible with the surrounding
conforming to the topography of the bluff face. The
area to the maximum extent feasible.
horizontal dimension deemed appropriate to allow
reasonable use of the properly consistent with these
requirements was projected onto the bluff and resulted in
establishment of a Predominant Line of Existing
Development at elevation 36.5 feet Mean Sea Level. This
line maintains sufficient vertical and horizontal separation
from the existing development at the toe of the bluff from
that proposed at the top such that the visual resource of
the sloping topography in between is preserved.
Where principal structures exist on coastal bluff faces
along Ocean Boulevard, Carnation Avenue and Pacific
Drive in Corona del Mar, require all new development to
4.4.3 -9
be sited in accordance with the predominant line of
Please refer to Response to Policy No. 4.4.3 -8.
existing development in order to protect public coastal
views. Establish a predominant line of development for
both principle structures and accessory improvements.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -20
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
No.
4.4.3 -11
necessary to
Require applications for new development to include
slope stability analyses and erosion rate estimates
provided by a licensed Certified Engineering Geologist or
Geotechnical Engineer.
Employ site design and construction techniques to
minimize alteration of coastal bluffs to the maximum
extent feasible, such as,
A.
B.
C.
4.4.3 -12 D.
E.
in
Siting new development on the flattest area of the
site, except when an alternative location is more
protective of coastal resources.
Utilizing existing driveways and building pads to the
maximum extent feasible.
Clustering building sites.
Shared use of driveways.
Designing buildings to conform to the natural
contours of the site, and arranging driveways and
patio areas to be compatible with the slopes and
building design.
Utilizing special foundations, such as stepped, split
level, or cantilever designs.
Detaching parts of the development, such as a
garage from a dwelling unit.
Requiring any altered slopes to blend into the
natural contours of the site.
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
i ne suolect site is cnaracienzeo oy a 4t-root aescenaing
slope with slope angles ranging from 10 degrees to
vertical. With respect to the slope, the orientation of the
bedrock is dipping into the slope, which is the preferred
orientation for maintaining slope stability. A stability
analysis was performed which resulted in the factors of
safety calculated in excess of 1.5 (i.e., static) and 1.1
(pseudo- static) required by the Citv of Newoort Beach.
The coastal bluff in the project environs is degraded to the
extent that it is no longer a significant visual resource;
however, the proposed structure has been redesigned as
to step down from top of the slope as to parallel the
topographic profile of the site. The horizontal extent of the
proposed structure from the street toward the toe of the
slope has been limited to retain the maximum amount of
bluff face between the proposed dwelling and the existing
dwellings at the toe of the slope.
Require new development adjacent to the edge of coastal The proposed project will comply with this policy that
4.4.3 -13 bluffs to incorporate drainage improvements, irrigation requires irrigation systems and the integration of systems, and/or and /or native or drought - tolerant vegetation into tolerant native plant species.
Design and site new development to minimize the
4.4.3 -15 removal of native vegetation, preserve rock outcroppings,
and protect coastal resources.
Require new development to protect and preserve
paleontological and archaeological resources from
4.5.1 -1 destruction, and avoid and minimize impacts to such
resources. If avoidance of the resources is not feasible,
require an in situ or site - capping preservation plan or a
recovery plan for mitigating the effect of the development.
4.5.1 -2
Although development of the site as proposed will result in
the elimination of the existing 261 square feet of coastal
bluff scrub habitat that occupies a small portion of the site,
the habitat has been characterized as "low quality' and
does not support sensitive wildlife (e.g., California
gnatcatcher, etc.). Furthermore, the coastal bluff scrub
habitat does not meet the criteria established by the
Coastal Act for ESHAs and, therefore, is not an ESHA.
Finally, no sensitive plant species exist on the site. As a
result, loss of the low quality coastal bluff scrub habitat,
which has also been fragmented and affected by human
activities, is not considered to be significant.
As indicated in the initial study prepared for the proposed
project (refer to Appendix A), the site is underlain by the
Monterey Formation, which is a fossil- bearing formation.
Although project implementation will necessitate grading
of the site, which could affect paleontological resources if
they exist within the Monterey Formation, a monitor will be
present during grading who will have the authority to
redirect or halt grading in the event cultural or scientific
resources are encountered until such time as the
resources can be evaluated and a course of action
Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.5.1 -1.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -21
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning
No.
4.5.1 -3
4.5.1 -4
4.5.1 -5
4.6 -6
4.6 -6
affect cultural or paleontological resources. If grading
operations or excavations uncover
paleontologicallarchaeological resources, require the
paleontologist/archaeologist monitor to suspend all
development activity to avoid destruction of resources
until a determination can be made as to the significance
of the paleontological /archaeological resources. If
resources are determined to be significant, require
submittal of a mitigation plan. Mitigation measures
considered may range from in -situ preservation to recover
and /or relocation. Mitigation plans shall include a good
faith effort to avoid impacts to cultural resources through
methods such as, but not limited to, project redesign, in
situ preservation /capping, and placing cultural resources
Notify cultural organizations, including Native American
organizations, of proposed developments that have the
potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Allow
qualified representatives of such groups to monitor
vvnere in situ preservation ano avoiaance are not
feasible, require new development to donate scientifically
valuable paleontological or archaeological materials to a
responsible public or private institution with a suitable
repository, located within Orange County, whenever
possible.
Where there Is a potential to affect cultural or
paleontological resources, require the submittal of an
archaeological /cultural resources monitoring plan that
identifies monitoring methods and describes the
procedures for selecting archaeological and Native
American monitors and procedures that will be followed if
additional or unexpected archaeological /cultural
resources are encountered during development of the
site. Procedures may include, but are not limited to,
provisions for cessation of all grading and construction
activities in the area of the discovery that has any
potential to uncover or otherwise disturb cultural deposits
in the area of the discovery and all construction that may
foreclose mitigation options to allow for significance
testing, additional investigation and mitigation.
Where development is proposed within or adjacent to
ESHA, wetlands or other sensitive resources, require City
staff member(s) and /or contracted employee(s) to
consider the individual and cumulative impacts of the
development, define the least environmentally damaging
alternative, and recommend modifications or mitigation
measures to avoid or minimize impacts. The City may
impose a fee on applicants to recover the cost of review
of a proposed project when required by this policy.
vvnere aevelopment Is proposea wmmn or adjacent to
ESHA, wetlands or other sensitive resources, require the
city staff member(s) and /or contracted employee(s) to
include the following in any recommendations of approval:
an identification of the preferred project alternative,
Refer to Response to Policy No. NR 18.3 in Table 4 -1
above.
Any scientifically cultural and /or scientific resources
determined to be valuable or important will be donated to
a responsible public or private institution.
Refer to Response to Policy No. 4.5.1 -1
I ne biological site survey and assessment conauctea for
the proposed project concluded that the small area of
coastal bluff scrub habitat encompasses only
approximately 261 square feet and is characterized by
few native species, it is fragmented, and has been
affected by human activities in the area. In addition, the
small area is characterized as "low quality" and having low
biological value. Furthermore, the coastal bluff scrub
habitat does not meet the criteria prescribed in the
Coastal Act and the City's General Plan for an ESHA.
Therefore, the elimination of this habitat resulting from
implementation of the proposed project does not
The small area occurring within the limits of the subject
property that has been identified as "coastal bluff scrub"
habitat has been characterized as 'low quality' habitat
that does not meet the criteria established by the Coastal
Act for ESHAs. Similarly, the habitat does not meet the
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -22
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
CLUP Policy
Relationship to Polic
to ensure conformance with the Coastal Land Use Plan.
Plan. Furthermore, the site does not support wetlands or
The decision making body (Planning Director, Planning
other sensitive habitat and no sensitive plant or wildlife
Commission, or City Council) shall make findings relative
species occupy the subject property. Based on the
to the project's conformance to the recommendations of
determination of the project biologist, the proposed project
the City staff member(s) and /or contracted employee(s).
is not located either within or adjacent to an ESHA,
wetlands or other sensitive resources.
Coordinate with the California Department of Fish and
Game, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, national Marine
Project implementation will not result in potentially
Fisheries Service, and other resource management
significant impacts to an ESHA or other sensitive or
agencies, as applicable, in the review of development
important biological resources, including rare, threatened
4.6 -8
applications in order to ensure that impacts to ESHA and
or endangered species. As a result, the applicant will not
marine resources, including rare, threatened, or
be required to obtain a permit from either the U.S. Fish
endangered species, are avoided or minimized such that
and Wildlife Service (Section 7 or 10A), California
ESHA is not significantly degraded, habitat values are not
Department of Fish and Game (Section 1602), or Army
significantly disrupted, and the biological productivity and
Corps of Engineers Section 404).
quality of coastal waters is preserved.
Require applications for new development, where
applicable, to include a geologic /soils /geotechnical study
that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the project
A Preliminary Geotechnical Report was prepared for the
site, any necessary mitigation measures, and contains
proposed project Borella Geology, Inc., March 20, 2007
p ro p p 1 ( gy' )'
statements that the project site is suitable for the
which evaluated the project's suitability for development,
proposed development and that the development will be
including slope stability, liquefaction, seismicity, tsunamis,
safe from geologic hazard for its economic life. For
and other geologic and soils characteristics. Based on
4.6 -9
development on coastal bluffs, including bluffs facing
that report, construction of the proposed single - family
Upper Newport Bay, such reports shall include slope
residence is feasible from a geotechnical perspective,
stability analyses and estimates of the long -term average
provided the recommendations included in the report are
bluff retreat rate over the expected life of the
implemented. The Preliminary Geotechnical Report is on
development. Reports are to be signed by an
file at the City of Newport Beach.
appropriately licensed professional and subject to review
and approval by qualified city staff members) and /or
contracted employee(s).
As indicated in Table 4.1 -2, the proposed
policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan.
categorical exclusion zone. Although no
dedication of a view easement) has been
Begonia Park are protected.
Newport Beach Zoning
project is consistent with the intent of the adopted relevant
As previously indicated, the project is located within the
significant impacts are identified, a mitigation measure (i.e.,
prescribed to ensure that future views through the site from
As indicated previously (refer to Chapter 3.0 — Project Description), with the exception of the modification
permit requested by the applicant to allow the encroachment of features in excess of 36 inches in height
within the front setback, the proposed project is consistent with the development standards prescribed in
the R -1 zoning district regulations.
SCAG Policies and Programs
Table 4.1 -3 provides a discussion of the project's consistency with the applicable goals, objectives,
policies and programs reflected in the Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide. As indicated in that
analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the SCAG projections, plans and policies and no
significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megontgal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -23
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Table 4.1 -3
Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) Consistency Analysis
Policy
No.
RCPGPoIic
Consistency Analysis
Regional Transport tion Plan
Transportation investments shall be based on SCAG's
project implementation will not result in the generation of
4.01
adopted Regional Performance indicators (i.e., mobility,
significant new traffic that would adversely affect regional
accessibility, environment, reliability, safety, livable
transportation facilities.
communities, equity, and cost - effectiveness).
As indicated in the initial study, project implementation
4.02
Transportation investments shall mitigate environmental
would result in the generation of about 10 trips per day;
impacts to an acceptable level.
no significant long -term traffic impacts will result from the
proposed project.
Although the proposed project would not require the
implementation of any mitigation measures to address
potential traffic impacts, A Construction Management
4.04
Transportation control measures shall be a priority.
Plan will be prepared for the proposed project, which
addresses all aspects of the construction phase (e.g.,
phasing schedule, construction equipment, and the
construction process).
Improvement of Regional Standard of Living
The proposed project includes the construction of one
single - family residence, which is consistent with the
long -range plans adopted by the City for the project site.
Encourage patterns of urban development and land use,
The single - family residence is located in an area of the
3.05
which reduce costs on infrastructure construction and
City that is served by a full complement of public
make better use of existing facilities.
services and utilities. All of the infrastructure facilities
(e.g., sewer, water, police and fire protection, etc.) have
adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed
project.
Support local jurisdictions' efforts to minimize the cost of
infrastructure and public service delivery, and efforts to
As indicated in Response to Policy 3.05 above,
3.09
seek new sources of funding for development and the
adequate infrastructure and public services exist in the
provision of services.
project area to serve the proposed project.
Improvement of Regional Quality of Life
The applicant is proposing to develop the subject
Encourage existing or proposed local jurisdictions'
property, which will result in the development of one
programs aimed at designing land uses which
single - family residence and would not result in any
encourage the use of transit and thus reduce the need
significant traffic and /or circulation impacts that would
3.12
for roadway expansion, reduce the number of auto trips
necessitate the construction of new or expanded
and vehicle miles traveled, and create opportunities for
roadways. Public transit opportunities currently exist
residents to walk and bike.
within the Corona del Mar community and in the City of
Newport Beach that would serve the proposed
residential project.
As previously indicated in Response to Policy 3.12,
project implementation includes the infill development
Encourage local jurisdictions' plans that maximize the
that encompasses only one residential dwelling unit,
3.13
use of existing urbanized areas accessible to transit
which will not require the expansion of existing transit
through infill and redevelopment.
services that currently exist in the community. Existing
transit facilities are adequate to serve the proposed
residential use.
The project has been designed to avoid and /or mitigate
Encourage planned development in locations least likely
potentially significant visual /aesthetic impacts associated
3.18
to cause adverse environmental impacts.
with views from Begonia Park. The elimination of 0.006
acre of low- quality coastal bluff scrub habitat is not
significant.
Support the protection of vital resources such as
The proposed project will not result in potentially
3.20
wetlands, groundwater recharge areas, woodlands,
significant impacts to wetlands, groundwater recharge
production lands, and land containing unique and
areas, woodlands, production lands, and land containing
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -24
Megonigai Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
No.
3.21
3.22
3.23
and
Encourage the implementation of measures aimed at the
preservation and protection of recorded and unrecorded
cultural resources and archaeological sites.
Discourage development, or encourage the use of
special design requirements, in areas will steep slopes,
high fire, flood, and seismic hazards.
Encourage mitigation measures that reduce noise in
certain locations, measures aimed at preservation of
biological and ecological resources, measures that
would reduce exposure to seismic hazards, minimize
earthquake damage, and to develop emergency
response and recovery plans.
Section 4.1 — Land
indicated in Section 4.3 (Biological Resources), 0.006
acre of coastal bluff scrub exists on the subject property;
however, it is of low quality and has been degraded by
fragmentation and human activities. The small area is
not an ESHA as defined by the Coastal Act and the
As indicated in the initial study prepared for the proposed
project, a qualified paleontologist must be retained by
the project applicant to monitor grading activities. In the
event that fossils are encountered during construction
activities, ground- disturbing excavations in the vicinity of
the discovery shall be redirected or halted by the monitor
until the find has been salvaged. Any cultural and /or
scientific resources discovered during project
construction shall be prepared to a point of identification
The project site encompasses a south - facing coastal
bluff. The proposed project has been designed to
minimize visual impacts to views from Begonia Park and
the bluff face below the proposed structure would be
landscaped and enhanced with native plant materials. In
addition, development of the site has been designed to
minimize potential seismic impacts. The geotechnical
report prepared for the project concluded that the project
could be developed on the site with the incorporation of
mitigation measures identified in the initial study.
Several mitigation measures have been prescribed in the
initial study (refer to Appendix A) to ensure that
construction impacts are minimized; no long -term noise
impacts will occur as a result of project implementation.
The elimination of 0.006 acre of low quality coastal bluff
scrub that is not inhabited by the California gnatcatcher
is not significant; no sensitive plant and /or animal
species occupy the site or are expected to occupy the
subject property. The project has been designed to
withstand potential seismic hazards (e.g., moderate to
Encourage efforts of local jurisdictions in the The proposed project will provide one additional market
3.24 implementation of programs that increase the supply and rate dwelling unit in the Corona del Mar area of the City
quality of housing and provide affordable housing as of Newport Beach.
3.27
5.11
Provision of
Support local jurisdictions and other service providers in
their efforts to develop sustainable communities and
provide, equally to all members of society, accessible
and effective services such as: public education,
housing, health care, social services, recreational
facilities, law enforcement, and fire protection.
and
accommodate the proposed single - family residence.
The site will be subject to school development fees to
address public education and the City's Park Dedication
Fee Ordinance to address public recreation facilities. In
addition, adequate law enforcement and fire protection
Air Qualitv Chapter Core Actions
Through the environmental document review process,
ensure that plans at all levels of government (regional,
air basin, county, subregional and local) consider air
quality, land use, transportation and economic
relationships to ensure consistency and minimize
conflicts.
the proposed project, including air quality, concludes that
all of the potential impacts would be less than significant
or would be reduced to a less than significant level as
required by CEOA. The proposed project is consistent
with the long -range land use plans and programs as well
as adopted policies in the General Plan and Coastal
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -25
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Section 4.1 — Land Use and
Policy
No.
RCPG Policy
Consistency Analysis
Open Space Ancilla
ry Goals
The proposed project includes the development of a
single - family residence on an existing lot. Such projects
are not required to dedicate public parkland nor are they
Provide adequate land resources to meet the outdoor
required to pay a park in -lieu fee as no subdivision is
9.01
recreation needs of the present and future residents in
required that would increase the number of residential
the region and to promote tourism in the region.
units. The Subdivision Ordinance (Title 19) of the
Municipal Code only requires parkland dedication or the
payment of an in -lieu fee for subdivisions that increase
housing units.
The proposed single - family dwelling unit is a residential
"in- fill" project in an existing residential neighborhood.
9.02
Increase the accessibility to open space lands for
Begonia Park is located adjacent to the subject property;
outdoor recreation.
however, project implementation will not affect
accessibility either to that recreational amenity or to open
space lands within the City.
The City's Recreation Element is intended to ensure that
the provision of sufficient parks and recreation facilities
Promote self- sustaining regional recreation resources
are appropriate for the residential and business
9.03
and facilities.
population in Newport Beach. The City has adopted
several policies that establish the framework for
achieving the goal of providing adequate recreational
facilities.
The biological survey was conducted to identify potential
sensitive biological resources and to evaluate the
Develop well- managed viable ecosystems or known
potential adverse effects of the proposed project on
9.08
habitats of rare, threatened and endangered species,
important habitat and /or resources. Based on that
including wetlands.
analysis, it was determined that no significant impacts
either to sensitive habitat or species will occur and the
project would not impact wetlands.
Existing Land Use
Conflict with an adopted habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
The Newport Beach General Plan identifies the City's open space and conservation areas. However,
because the area of the City in which the subject property is located is nearly completely developed,
natural open space and habitat are limited in the project environs. The subject property, which
encompasses approximately 0.1 acre (4,412 square feet) that is currently undeveloped, is located within
the limits of the Central /Coastal NCCP adopted by the County of Orange. The NCCP is intended to
ensure the long -term survival of the coastal California gnatcatcher and other special status coastal sage
scrub (CSS) dependent plant and wildlife species in accordance with state - sanctioned NCCP program
guidelines. The biological surveys conducted on the subject property revealed that although a small area
encompassing 0.006 acre (approximately 261 square feet) of coastal bluff scrub exists on the site.
However, the area is characterized as having a low overall habitat value as a result of habitat
fragmentation, influence of surrounding human activities, and because it supports limited long -term
habitat value. Furthermore, no federal- or state - listed or otherwise sensitive species identified as having
a potential to occur on the property were observed during the biological surveys conducted for the project.
Based on the findings of the project biologist, the habitat does not qualify as an ESHA under the Coastal
Act, and therefore, cannot be afforded protection under the Newport Beach LCP /CLUP or the City's
General Plan. As a result, the loss of the low quality, fragmented habitat would not conflict with the
Central /Coastal NCCP.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -26
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — Land Use
Physically divide an established community.
The project proposes the landform alteration that would accommodate one single - family residence on the
4,412 square foot lot. The site is bounded by Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue. As indicated previously,
the area surrounding the subject property is developed with single - family residential development on
three sides; Begonia Park abuts the site on the north and east. Although development of the site as
proposed would change the character of the site by introducing a single - family home on the vacant
property, development of the site as proposed would not adversely affect adjacent properties, which also
support single - family homes. In particular, no design component or feature of the project would physically
divide or otherwise adversely affect or significantly change an established community. No significant
impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required.
Substantial or extreme land use incompatibility.
Development of the site, which is currently vacant, would not result in a significant land use conflict. As
previously indicated, the proposed single - family residence is consistent with the land use designation and
zoning adopted for the site. The introduction of a single - family residence would be consistent and
compatible with the existing residential development in the area, which is characterized by single - family
and two - family residences. Furthermore, with the exception of the request for a modification permit that
would allow a wall to extend above the three -foot height limit in the front yard setback, the proposed
structure complies with the development standards (e.g., setbacks, building height, lot coverage, etc.)
prescribed for the R -1 zoning district. Extension of the wall above the three -foot height limit would not
result in substantial visual impacts (refer to Section 4.3 — Aesthetics). As a result, no significant impacts
are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Incompatible land uses in an aircraft accident potential area as defined in an airport land use plan.
The project area is not located within two miles of any existing public airport. John Wayne Airport, which
is located approximately 4.5 miles northwest of the subject property, is the nearest aviation facility. No
portion of the project site is located within the accident potential area of such a plan. Further, the subject
property is not located within two miles of a public airport, public use airport, or private airstrip.
Development of the subject property as proposed would neither affect nor be affected by aircraft
operations at such a facility that would generate noise in excess of regulatory standards. Therefore, no
significant land use impacts would occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures
are required.
4.1.5 Mitigation Measures
As indicated in the preceding analysis, the proposed project, which includes the construction of one single -
family detached residential dwelling unit on a 4,412- square foot lot in Corona del Mar, is consistent with the
Land Use Element and Coastal Land Use Plan of the Newport Beach General Plan and with the long -range
goals, policies and objectives adopted by the City in the General Plan Update. The proposed project is also
compatible with the existing land uses in the area. As a result, no significant long -term land use impacts are
anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -27
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.1 — land Use and
4.1.6 Level of Significance after Mitigation
As indicated above, the project is consistent with the long -range plans and programs adopted by the City.
Further, implementation of the standard conditions identified for the project (i.e., comply with the zoning
district regulations, California Building Code and other regulatory requirements) will ensure that no significant
impacts will occur. No significant long -term unavoidable adverse land use impacts will occur as a result of
project implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.1 -2B
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Drat Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2 - Biological Resources
4.2 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
In response to a "biological evaluation" of the Megonigal property prepared by Robert A. Hamilton
(September 22, 2008) and submitted to the Newport Beach City Council, a Biological Assessment Survey of
the subject 0.1 -acre property was conducted by Chambers Group on October 6, 2008. The findings of that
survey are documented in a report dated October 9, 2008. The purpose of that survey was to: (1) assess
the quality and quantity of native habitat present on the properly; (2) evaluate the suitability of the habitat to
support listed or otherwise sensitive species; (3) survey for sensitive species identifiable at the time of the
survey; and (4) map the vegetation communities occurring within the property boundaries. In addition, the
City of Newport Beach retained BonTerra Consulting to review the two biological reports for the Megonigal
property and to assess the findings of the documents. Chambers Groups also conducted a "Follow -up
Survey and Response to Comments Issued by BonTerra Consulting Regarding the Biological Study'
(February 27, 2009). The biological assessment (October 9, 2008) and follow -up survey (February 27, 2009)
prepared by Chambers Group are the basis of the assessment of biological resources presented in this
section; however, the relevant findings of each report are summarized in the section that follows. Each report
is included in Appendix C of the Draft EIR.
4.2.1 Existing Conditions
Vegetation
The subject properly is composed of three plant communities, based on the biological assessment
conducted by Chambers Group (refer to Appendix C). These plant communities (i.e., habitats), which
include disturbed, disturbed /ornamental, and coastal bluff scrub, are discussed below.
Disturbed Habitat
This area, which encompasses 0.63 acre (2,744 square feet), is the largest plant community on the site
(refer to Exhibit 4.2 -1). These areas are either devoid of vegetation (i.e., cleared or graded) or areas
characterized by a high percentage of non - native, weedy plant species. The disturbed habitat is
generally located on the upper portion of the site; however, portions of the natural bluff and lower portion
of the property also support the disturbed habitat. The upper portion above the natural bluff has been
cleared and is relatively devoid of vegetation with the exception of sparse Russian thistle (Salsola tragus).
The areas within the central and lower portions of the site include the eroding segment of the natural bluff
that supports no vegetation; the lower areas are vegetated largely by exotic grasses, including ripgut
grass (Bromus diandrus). Other non - native species identified within the disturbed habitat include fennel
(Feoniculum vulgare), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), Russian thistle and Australian saltbush (Atriplex
semibacata).
Disturbed /Ornamental Habitat
Areas mapped as disturbed /ornamental and illustrated in Exhibit 4.2 -1 extend over 0.034 acre (i.e., 1,481
square feel) of the subject properly. These areas are dominated by escaped or planted ornamental
species as well as a high presence of non - native, weedy species. Vegetation in this habitat is located on
the lower portion of the property and reflects influences from surrounding landscaped areas, particularly
Begonia Park located adjacent to the site on the north /northeast. Ice plant (Carpobrotus sp. and
Mesembryanthum nodiflorum), myoporum trees (Myoporum laetum), jade plant (Crassula ovata), and a
large fig tree (Ficus sp.) dominate the species cover in this area. Non - native, weedy species, including
Russian thistle, cheeseweed (Malva parviflorum), and a few black mustard (Brassica nigra) occur within
the plant community.
Dreg Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.2 -1
Legend
Coastal Bluff Scrub (0 006 acres)
Disturbed /Ornamental (0.034 acres)
Disturbed (0.063 acres)
Property Boundary
1.....,J P Y
N' ?iK E
S
0 20 40 60
m Feet
Vegetation Map
Exhibit 4.2 -1
`L Chambers Group Inc
Mcgonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Enviinmenfal Impact Report Section 4.2- Biological Resouroes
The area at the lower portion of the property also supports several cliff aster (Malacothryn saxatilus)
individuals and a young lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) less than 12 inches in height. A second
lemonade berry individual is located on the lower portion of the slope, just beyond the property boundary
and not on the project site. The presence of these native species indicates that, prior to encroachment
from ornamental and weedy species; this area was vegetated with species characteristic of the coastal
bluff scrub vegetation community. This area was classified as highly disturbed southern coastal bluff
scrub in the Hamilton biological evaluation (refer to Appendix C). However, closer examination of the
species present and their respective vegetative cover revealed that the overall native cover is very low
(i.e., less than 10 percent) in this area because ornamental species have substantially displaced native
species over lime.
Coaslal Bluff Scrub
The smallest plant community identified on the site is the coastal bluff scrub habitat, estimated to
encompass approximately 0.006 acre (Le., 261 square feet).' This habitat generally consists of woody
and /or succulent species up to seven feet in height occurring on poorly developed rocky soils and
exposed to moisture -laden winds with high salt content. Species characteristics of coastal bluff scrub
include sallbush (Atriplex sp.), California buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum var. fasciculatum),
California bush sunflower (California encelia), stone crop species (Dudleya sp.) prickly pear cactus
(Opuntia littoralis), cliff aster, and lemonade berry.
The area mapped as coastal bluff scrub (refer to Exhibit 4.2 -1) is located on the cliff of the natural bluff
centrally located within the parcel, which supports a total of 15 native shrubs, including California
buckwheat, California bush sunflower, and the prickly pear cactus; however, big saltbush (Atriplex
lentiformis), a species typically considered dominant or functional to the bluff scrub community, is absent
from the site. Cliff aster and lemonade berry, also associated with this community, are present on -site,
although they occur on the lower portion of the property, which has been overtaken by ornamental and
weedy species with the exception of these few plants. A lemonade berry plant nearby is rooted
underneath an overhanging patio of an adjacent home, next lo, but outside the properly boundary. The
remaining portion of the natural bluff is bare of vegetation, and shows signs of significant natural erosion,
as is characteristic of coastal bluffs.
Soecial Status Plants
A survey of six sensitive plant species known to occur within coastal bluff scrub habitat was conducted
during the biological survey conducted by Chambers Group. These species include: (1) Davidson's
saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. devidsoni); (2) south coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica); (3) many -
stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulisa) (4) cliff spurge (Euphorbia nlisera) (5) Coulter's saltbush
(Atriplex coulteri); and (6) woolly seablite (Sueda taxifolia). Each of these species is discussed below.
Davidson's Saliscale
This annual herb is listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as a 1B.2 species (i.e., rare,
threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere). Blooming between April and October,
populations of Davidson's saltbush have been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara,
San Diego, San Luis Obispo, and Ventura counties, and on several of the Channel Islands. The plant
typically grows in coastal bluff scrub and in alkaline coastal scrub habitats at elevations between 30 and
660 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Although suitable habitat occurs on -site, this species was not
observed on the properly at the time of the survey, which was conducted during the typical blooming
'The Robert Hamilton 'biological observation' (September 22, 2008) Indicated that more than half of the site is composed of
southern coastal bluff scrub (0.02 acre in a narrow band of native vegetation along the top of the bluff) and highly disturbed southern
coastal bluff scrub (0.06 acre) along the propertys lower level).
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.2 -3
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2 - Biological Resources
season. This species was also not observed during the follow -up site visit and survey conducted by
Chambers Group (refer to the discussion under "Many- Stemmed Dudleya "). Therefore, it is considered to
be absent from the site.
South Coast Saltscale
This annual herb is also identified as a List iB.2 species by the CNPS. Populations of Couth Coast
Saltscale, which typically blooms between March and October, have been found in Los Angeles,
Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Ventura counties as well as on several of the Channel Islands,
occurring in coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes, coast scrub, and on playas, often in alkali soils at
elevations up to 460 amsl. Although suitable habitat occurs on -site, south coast saltscale is considered to
be absent because the survey was conducted during the blooming period of the species.
Many - Stemmed Dudleya
Many- stemmed dudleya is a perennial herb listed by the CNPS as a List 16.2 species. The species,
which blooms between April and July, has been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San
Bernardino, and San Diego counties. It typically occurs in coastal scrub, chaparral, and valley and foothill
grassland, usually on clay soils or grassy slopes at elevations from 48 to 2,595 feel amsl. Because this
species is detectable outside of the blooming period and was not observed on the property at the time of
the survey, it is considered to be absent from the site.
In addition to the site survey, a "reference" site was also visited by Chambers Group in response to the
BonTerra Consulting comment that this species as well as the Laguna Beach dudleya have the potential
to occur on the subject property. The purpose of the reference site visit was to assess the phonological
development (i.e., phenology is the study of periodic plant and animal life cycle events and how these are
influenced by seasonal and interannual variations in climate) of each of the sensive Dudleya species at
the time of the survey. Based on the reference site survey, the project biologist determined that had
either the many- stemmed dudleya or the Laguna Beach dudleya been present on the subject site, it
would be evident and identifiable on the February 12 "' site visit. However, neither of these species was
observed on the follow -up site visit. As concluded in the report prepared by Chambers Group
documenting the findings of the reference site visit and follow -up site visit, due to the disturbed nature of
the project and its low habitat quality, which only supports three native plant species, it is highly unlikely
that any sensitive plant species inhabit the project site.
Cliff Spurge
This perennial CNPS List 2.2 species (i.e., fairly endangered in California but more common elsewhere)
occurs in San Diego and Orange counties as a component of coastal bluff or coastal sage scrub
vegetation communities at elevations between 33 and 1,640 amsl. Because this species would be
detectable at the time of the survey but was not observed, it is considered to be absent from the property.
Coulter's Sallbush
Coulter's saltbush is a perennial herb that is also included on the CNPS 1 B.2 List. It is known to occur in
San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties at elevations
ranging from 10 to 1,500 feet amsl. It is typically associated with coastal bluff scrub, coastal dunes,
coastal sage scrub, and valley and foothill grassland with clay or alkaline soils. Because this species
would be detectable at the time the survey was conducted and was not observed, it is considered to be
absent from the property. This species was also not observed during the follow -up site visit and survey
conducted by the project biologist.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.2 -4
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2— Biological Resources
Woolly Seablite
Woolly seablite is an evergreen shrub (hat is currently identified as a 4.2 Listed species by the CLAPS (i.e.,
limited distribution and fairly endangered in California). The species, which is known to occur in San
Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties as well as the Channel
Islands National Park, typically occurs on the margins of coastal marshes or as a component of coastal
bluff scrub or coastal dune habitats at elevations ranging from sea level to 164 feet amsl. The species
blooms from January through December but is detectable throughout the year. Therefore, because it was
not observed during the survey conducted by Chambers Group, it is considered to be absent form the
property.
Aphanisma
Although not originally evaluated, this species was also identified as potentially occupying the site by
BonTerra Consulting. Aphanisma (Aphanisnla blitoides) is an annual herb that flowers as early as March.
Known populations of this species growing in Dana Point have been known to flower as early as
February. Because flowers appear subsequent to the vegetative structures of a plant, evidence of this
species would have been present on the project site during the February site visit. However, no plant
resembling an aphanisma was observed on the project site and this species has been confirmed to be
absent from the site.
Other Sensitive Plant Species
Other sensitive plant species identified in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) for the
Newport Beach 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle map include the salt marsh bird's beak
(Corydylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus) and the Estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa); however, these
species require estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands, or vernal pool habitats, which are not present on the
property. As a result, the Chambers Group biological assessment concluded that these plant species
have no potential to occur on the project site.
In addition, no habitat was present on -site for the following sensitive plant species.
chaparral sand verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita)
southern tarplant (Centromedia parryi ssp. australis)
San Fernando Valley spineflower (Chroizanthe parryi var. Fernandina)
salt marsh bird's beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus)
Los Angeles sunflower (Helianthus nullalhi ssp. parishii)
Coulter's goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri)
mud nama (Nana stenocarpum)
Gambel's yellowcress (Nasturtiurn gambelii)
prostrate vernal pool navarretia ( Navarretia prostrata)
coast woolly -heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata)
estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa)
Wildlife
Due to the disturbance that has occurred to the site as well as urban development that has occurred in
the vicinity of the subject property, the numbers and types of wildlife species observed during the
biological survey conducted by Chambers Group were limited mainly to common species that adapt well
to urbanization, including:
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2000
4.2 -5
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2 — Biological Resources
western fence lizard
mourning dove
Anna's hummingbird
black phoebe
wrentit
northern mockingbird
song sparrow
Soecial Status Wildlife
Although no sensitive species of wildlife were observed during the survey conducted by Chambers
Group, wildlife species with habitat on -site include the Cooper's hawk and the coastal California
gnatcatcher. These species, which are both special status species, are discussed below.
Cooper's hawk
The Cooper's hawk is a California Species of Concern (CSC). It occurs as a migrant and/or resident over
most of the U.S. from southern Canada to northern Mexico. Favored habitats include open woodlands,
mature forests, woodland edges, and river groves. More recently the Cooper's hawk has been known to
breed in suburban and urban areas with similar tree structure to native habitats. An individual, which was
observed during the initial site visit conducted by Robert Hamilton (refer to Appendix C), was probably
using the nearby open space provided by Begonia Park for roosting and hunting!
Coastal California gnatcatcher
Coastal California gnatcatcher is a federally threatened species and is listed by the State of California as
a species of concern. It is a permanent resident of Diegan, Riversidian, and Venturan sage scrub sub -
associations found from sea level to 2,500 feet above mean sea level. Within its range, the coastal
California gnatcatcher associates strongly with California sagebrush (Ademisia californica) dominant
habitats and also occurs in mixed scrub habitats with lesser percentages of this favored shrub. Other
plant species important for the nesting and foraging of this species include California buckwheat, white
sage (Salvia apiana), black sage (Salvia mellifera), and chaparral broom (Baccharis sarothroides).
Chamise (Adenostorna fesciculatum) habitats may also support breeding pairs, especially where coastal
sage scrub may occur nearby or form a component.
Sufficient foraging or nesting habitat for the California gnatcatcher is not present on the proposed project
site or in the surrounding area to support this species. The habitat on the subject property is limited in
size (i.e., 261 square feet) and vegetative diversity, including the absence of California sagebrush.
Additionally, the project site is located in an area of dense residential development, surrounded by urban
ornamental landscaping. Any remaining habitat exists as "islands" within the residential area, which
consist of few native species present among substantial exotic and ornamental vegetation, and are
insufficient in size and /or vegetative composition to support this species. Therefore, there is no potential
for coastal California gnatcatcher to occur on the subject properly.
Other Species
Other sensitive animal species identified in the CNDDB for the Newport Beach 7.5- minute topographic
quadrangle map include the California black rail, Belding's savannah sparrow, light- footed clapper rail
(marsh), California least tern, and SC fairy shrimp; however, as indicated for the other plant species,
these animal species also require estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands, or vernal pool habitats, which are
0 Observation by Jenny .McGee, Staff Biologist (Chambers Group); "Biological Assessment Survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport
Beach, California following initial Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton Consulting;' October 9, 2008.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.2 -6
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Duff Environmental Impact Report Seclion 4.2— Biological Resowces
not present on the property. As a result, the Chambers Group biological assessment concluded that
these species of animals have no potential to occur on the project site.
Migration Corridors
The project site and surrounding areas are developed and no migratory wildlife corridors occur on site or
in the immediate vicinity of the project site.
4.2.2 Significance Criteria
Appendix G of the State CEQA guidelines indicates that a project may be deemed to have a significant effect
on the environment if the project is likely to:
Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in focal or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (including
protections provided pursuant to Section 1600 et seq.).
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance.
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
4.2.3 Standard Conditions
SC 4.2 -1 Bluff landscaping shall consist of native, drought tolerant plant species determined to be
consistent with the California coastal buff environment. Invasive and non - native species
shall be removed. Irrigation of bluff faces to establish re- vegetated areas shall be
temporary and used only to establish the plants. Upon establishment of the plantings, the
temporary irrigation system shall be removed.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newpoil Beach, CA
August 2009
4.2 -7
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Repod Section 4.2— Biological Resources
4.2.4 Potential Impacts
4.2.4.1 Short -Term Construction Impacts
Terrestrial Habitat /Species
Noise levels at the project site due to construction activities would increase temporarily over existing ambient
levels during the construction of the proposed project. During construction, noise may affect foraging and
roosting activities, specifically for avian species. Although this is a temporary impact to such species, it is
considered to be less than significant since noise levels would return to pre - construction levels at the
completion of the proposed project. In addition, dust generated during the grading and site preparation
phase would also be emitted onto the native and non - native vegetation on the bluff below the building pad;
however, mandatory dust suppression (i.e., spraying the exposed areas with water) in accordance with
SCAQMD rules will minimize the adverse effects of the dust emissions. Similar to the construction noise
identified above, these impacts would also be temporary and cease upon completion of the site preparation
phase. Avian species potentially affected by the construction noise are not limited to the site or immediate
vicinity and could fly farther away to other locations, including Begonia Park, during construction. As a result,
potential construction impacts would be less than significant.
4.2.4.2 Long -Term Operational Impacts
Vegetation
Project implementation will result in the elimination of the predominantly non - native species that exist on
the site. In addition, it is possible that site grading and development would result in impacts to up to 261
square feet of the low quality coastal bluff scrub, including up to three native species previously identified
That occupy the site. However, because the habitat mapped on the subject property does not quality as
an ESHA, based on Coastal Act parameters, no impacts to an ESHA would occur. Furthermore, no
sensitive plant species were observed on the site and none are anticipated to inhabit the subject property.
Therefore, no significant impacts to sensitive plant species would occur.
Wildlife
Although site disturbance associated with the grading and site preparation will temporarily displace the
small rodents, reptiles and amphibians and birds that inhabit and /or utilize the site, it is anticipated that
many of these common species, which are most adaptable to development, would return to the site after
the construction is completed. The temporary displacement of these non- sensitive species is not
significant and does not require mitigation. Implementation of the landscape concept plan for the
proposed single - family residence would replace existing albeit sparse vegetation on the site and would
provide suitable replacement habitat for these non- sensitive animal species. Therefore, no significant
impacts are identified and no mitigation measures are required.
As previously indicated, a Cooper's hawk was observed during the initial sit visit conducted by Robert
Hamilton in September 2008. This species is likely using the nearby open space provided by Begonia
Park for roosting and hunting. The total area to be impacted by the proposed project is small in size,
providing limited, if any, suitable habitat for this raptor species independent of the surrounding areas. The
overall spatial loss of the project area will not result in a significant impact to the Cooper's hawk. No
significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2000
4.2 -8
Megonigal Residence fPA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Raped Section 4.2— Biological Resources
Migration Corridors
The project site and surrounding areas are developed and no migratory wildlife corridors occur on site or
in the vicinity of the project site, and therefore, the project will not interfere with resident, migratory or
wildlife species.
Habitat Fragmentation
The project site is located in a densely developed residential neighborhood with urban landscaping
throughout the area. No coastal bluff scrub habitat of moderate or high value is present within the vicinity
of the project site. These conditions create habitat fragmentation, resulting overall low habitat value of
the remaining patches. Although the property is contiguous with Begonia Part<, which does not support
native wildlife species, there is no evidence that listed or otherwise sensitive species are dependent on
the biological resources existing on the subject property. Begonia Park and the remaining open space in
the project environs have been landscaped with urban ornamental landscaping. The areas of coastal bluff
scrub located west of the site identified in the Hamilton biological evaluation (September 22, 2008) are
also fragmented remnants of native habitat, consisting of few native species, surrounded by ornamental
urban landscaping. The nearest habitat fragment is separated from the Megonigal property by the
retaining wall of a nearby home. Ecological restoration, were it to be undertaken; could not restore full
habitat value and function to this area.
Influence of Surrounding Human Activities
Due to the surrounding dense residential development, the subject property has been influenced directly
and indirectly by various human activities, including the development of Begonia Park and subsequent
ornamental landscaping, construction of the retaining wall at the property below the subject property as
well as the construction of retaining walls and homes adjacent to the property, and the construction and
terracing of streets and neighborhood lots. The remaining portions of coastal bluff scrub, both on the site
and on other nearby fragments, reflect compromised habitat quality resulting from "edge effect' (i.e.,
disturbance to an area that borders or is a component of a natural habitat that results in negative impacts
to some distance from the edge of the remaining intact natural habitat). Because it is of low quality, the
southern coastal bluff scrub present within the project boundary does not provide valuable habitat
because natural functions have been compromised by the surrounding human influences. Therefore, it
does not support the species diversity, composition and connectivity necessary for an ecosystsem to be
of significant habitat value.
Limited Long -Term Habitat Value
The substantial soil erosion of coastal bluffs and terraces is a natural component of these environments.
The function of disturbance in these habitats is a component of the ecology, and habitat is ultimately
restored through the re- colonization of surrounding native vegetative species. Without surrounding
vegetation to re- colonize, the habitat value may be lost entirely once the existing habitats are destabilized
by soil erosion. The natural disturbance will continue to create conditions favorable to invasive, weedy
species and encroaching ornamentals. Therefore, this habitat segment is not likely to provide significant
long -term habitat value to native plants or wildlife species. As a result, elimination of the low value
coastal bluff scrub habitat will not result in significant impacts to biological resources on the site.
Regional Habitat Conservation Plans and Programs
The City of Newport Beach, through execution of the Natural Community Conservation Plan /Habitat
Conservation Plan (NCCP /HCP) Implementing Agreement (IA) and the receipt of a 10(a) Permit from the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is a participating land use jurisdiction in the Central- Coastal Subregional
NCCP /HCP program. All impacts (permanent or temporary) to coastal sage scrub resources, including bluff
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach. CA
August 2009
4.2 -9
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.2- Biological Resources
scrub habitat, must be reported as annual take report to the Executive Director, Nature Reserve of Orange
County.
Consistency with Coastal Land Use Plan and Natural Resources Element
The biological survey conducted by Chambers Group evaluated the applicability of the California Coastal Act
as it relates to the City's Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (LCP /CLUP) as well as the policies
articulated in the Natural Resources Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. The function of the CLUP
is the interpretation of the Coastal Act within the City, through policies that mandate the protection of
environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) as defined by Section 30107.5 of the Coastal Act. ESHA are
defined as "... any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable
because of their special nature or role in an ecosystsem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by
human activities and developments." Furthermore, the Natural Resources Element of the City's General Plan
states that the overall goal of the element is the protection of sensitive and rare terrestrial and marine
resources from urban development.
Based on the biological survey conducted by Chambers Group, the composition of the vegetation supported
on the subject property is dominated by disturbed non - vegetated areas, ornamental species and weedy
exotic species. Approximately five percent of the site (261 square feet) supports low quality coastal bluff
scrub habitat. As indicated in the Robert Hamilton "biological observation," this habitat is recognized by the
California Department of Fish and Game as a rare plant community. However, as documented in the
biological survey conducted on the subject property, overall habitat value of the coastal bluff scrub occurring
on the site is low due to habitat fragmentation, the influence of surrounding human activities, and because
natural functions have been compromised by the surrounding human influences. Furthermore, no federal -
or state - listed or other sensitive species were identified as having a potential to occur on the property.
Therefore, the coastal bluff scrub habitat occupying the site does not qualify as an ESHA under the Coastal
Act and, therefore, cannot be afforded protection under the Newport Beach LCP /CLUP or the Natural
Resources Element of the City's General Plan as suggested in the Hamilton "biological observation." No
significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
4.2.5 Mitigation Measures
Although project implementation will result in the loss of 261 square feet (0.006 acre) of degraded coastal
bluff scrub, its elimination will not result in a significant impact because it has been substantially compromised
by fragmentation and influences from human activities. As a result, its value as a long -term habitat is very
limited. No mitigation measures are required.
4.2.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
As indicated above, no significant impacts to biological resources will occur as a result of project
implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.2 -10
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Drag F_hvi onmenlal Impact Report Section 4.3 - Aesthetics
4.3 AESTHETICS
The aesthetic quality of the Megonigal property is determined by its visual character, consisting of
elements such as natural and man -made features, vegetation and topography, and prominent views of
and from the site. In addition, surrounding urban and natural features comprise the visual setting within
which the project site takes on a given degree of importance.
Both natural and artificial features contribute to perceived visual images and the aesthetic value of a view.
The aesthetic value of a site or feature may be Influenced by geologic, hydrologic, botanical, wildlife,
recreational, and urban features associated with it. Visual images and their perceived visual quality can
vary substantially by season and even hourly as weather, light, shadow, and elements that comprise the
viewscape change. Judgments of visual quality must also be made based on a regional frame of
reference, since the same landform or visual resource in different geographic areas could have different
visual resource quality and sensitivity in each setting. For example, a small hill may be a significant visual
element on a flat landscape but may have very little significance in mountainous terrain.
Evaluating changes to the project's visual setting and its effects on visual quality is often seen as a highly
subjective matter, open to many interpretations and personal preferences. However, a widely diverse
body of knowledge and study of the subject of natural and urban aesthetics has led to coherent and
systematic methods of visual impact analysis. In the absence of a methodology prescribed by the City of
Newport Beach, this analysis utilizes a series of visual simulations constructed for the proposed project that
illustrate the post - development characteristics of the proposed project. A qualitative, descriptive approach is
employed to describe and evaluate the visual resources of the subject site and proposed development. The
existing visual setting in and around the subject property is defined by on -site and off -site features and the
various views from particular vantage points (i.e., "viewsheds ") that encompass Those features. The on -site
and off -site aesthetic character consists of urban and natural elements, and all occur within the context of a
variety of urban land uses, including single - family attached and detached residential development located
within the immediate vicinity of the subject property and adjacent roadways. A series of visual simulations
has been prepared and serve as the basis for determining the potential impacts of the proposed project on
the aesthetic character of the area.
4.3.1 Existing Conditions
Existing Setting
The subject property is currently undeveloped. The fenced property is characterized by a steeply sloping
south - facing bluff. Portions of the subject property in the upper elevations located along Pacific Drive have
been altered by grading or other clearance that has occurred on the site; this area is generally devoid of
vegetation. Ornamental landscaping, including some trees and shrubs, exists in the lower elevations. The
central portion of the site contains a small area that supports coastal bluff scrub vegetation. A large retaining
wall, ranging from four feet to 15 feet in height, has been constructed along the southern property boundary.
With the exception of the coastal bluff feature, which like virtually all coastal bluffs within the City, is
acknowledged as an important visual element that defines the coastal portions of Newport Beach, neither the
site nor the adjacent properties have been identified by the City as a visual or aesthetic resource.
Furthermore, although the site supports a small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat, that area is not an
environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA) as defined by both the City's General Plan /CLUP and the
Coastal Act. Therefore, it does not represent a significant or important visual amenity due to its lack of
integrity, limited variety and number of species, and its fragmented condition and degraded condition.
Dian Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August. 2009
4.3 -1
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.3 - Aesthetics
Natural Resources Element of the General Plan
Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element identifies Begonia Park as a "Public View Point." The City
has adopted several goals and policies intended to preserve and /or enhance the visual resources within
Newport Beach (refer to Section 4.1). As a result, future development that may affect the Public View
Point must adhere to the adopted applicable policies and programs. Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue
are not designated as "Public View Corridor" on Figure NR3 and as such, public views from these streets
are not protected.
Coastal Land Use Plan
The certified Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) also designates Begonia Park as a "public view point' on
Map 4 -3. Westerly views exist from the park to Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean beyond. Several
policies are included in the CLUP that address the preservation of important views within the City,
including those from Begonia Park (refer to Section 4.1 — Land Use and Planning). Pacific Drive and
Begonia Avenue are not designated as "Public View Corridor' on Map 4 -3 and as such, public views from
these streets are not protected.
Light and Glare
Light sources in the project environs include those typical of a residential neighborhood such as security
lighting for the homes and street lighting. No other substantial source of lighting exists within the
residential neighborhood.
4.3.2 Significance Criteria
The proposed project will be considered to have a significant aesthetic impact if the project:
Has a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista
Substantially damages scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.
Substantially degrades the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings.
Creates a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area.
4.3.3 Standard Conditions
SC 4.3.1 Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of the Zoning Code. Exterior on-
site lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No direct rays or glare are
permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or create a public nuisance. "Walpak"
type fixtures are not permitted.
SC 4.3 -2 Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy or final of building permits, the applicant
shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division
to confirm control of light and glare.
Draft Environmental Impact Report .
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.3 -2
Mcgonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 4.3 - Aesthetics
4.3.4 Potential Impacts
4.3.4.1 Short -Term Construction Impacts
Implementation of the proposed project will result in site preparation (e.g., grading, etc.) and construction
activities that could have some short -term effects, which would temporarily change the chaiacter of the
area; however, it is important to note that these potential effects are similar to those which are typical of
similar in -fill development projects in the City. The effects of construction will be visible during the
anticipated 20 -month construction phase. Other effects during [he initial phase of development include
dust generation associated with site grading and construction of the new structures that are proposed for
the subject properly. Construction staging areas, storage of equipment and supplies, and related
activities will contribute to a generally "disturbed" condition, which may be perceived as a potential visual
impact. However, while these activities may be unsightly, they are not considered significant impacts
because they are temporary in nature and will cease upon completion of the proposed construction
program.
4.3.4.2 Long -Term Operational Impacts
Visual Simulations
Although the proposed single- family residence has been designed to be below the maximum allowable
height limit imposed by the Newport Beach Zoning Code, project implementation will result in the
construction of a single - family residential structure within the viewshed of Begonia Park, a "public view
point' as identified on Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element and on Map 4.3 of the CLUP. The
proposed structure, which is consistent with existing homes along Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue, will
not obstruct public views of the bay and coastline from vantage points within the park due to the location
of the proposed structure relative to the park. Although the proposed project will be visible from vantage
points within Begonia Park, the overall character of the view will not be significantly be altered. Public
views of Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean beyond exist from Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue. The
proposed structure will obstruct these views, depending upon the specific vantage point, but these views
are not protected by policy with the omission of these streets from Figure NR3 and Map 4 -3 and are
therefore not considered significant. Several General Plan policies require new development to protect
and, where feasible, enhance public views. Even though the project conforms to the existing building
height limit, setback standards, and related development standards (except the planter in the required
front yard setback area), potential public view impacts from the "public view point' at Begonia Park and /or
Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue may occur.
Begonia Pan< Visual Simulations
As indicated previously, several policies in the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan address views from
"public view points" and "public view corridors." Because Begonia Park is identified as a 'public view point,"
two visual simulations were created to illustrate the potential visual impacts that would be anticipated with the
development of the single - family residence on the subject property. Exhibit 4.3 -1 illustrates the view from the
lower bench situated on Begonia Park north of the site. As can be seen from this vantage point, the harbor
and ocean to the west are clearly visible from this location. Although the proposed single - family residential
structure will extend above Pacific Drive, views of the harbor and ocean from the lower bench would not be
substantially altered even though a small portion of the ocean view above the roof will be reduced; no portion
of the harbor visible from this location would be significantly affected by the proposed project.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.3 -3
r t
M v
� N
«� m
L
W 0
J
Y
L
a
m
.E
0
a�
m
m
E
0
L
LL
0
75
E
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Drat Environmental hnpacl Report Section 4.3 - Aesllhelics
The view of the site from the upper bench of Begonia Park (refer to Exhibit 4.3 -2) reveals a similar view as
that illustrated in Exhibit 4.3 -1. However, from this location within the park, it is apparent that site
development would not extend high enough into the viewshed to block any portion of either the harbor or
ocean view; no loss of the view of either feature would occur. Similar to the project impact from the lower
bench, no portion of the harbor view would be affected. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated.
In addition to the two visual simulations from Begonia Park, a third simulation was generated to illustrate
the potential visual impacts associated with the project when viewed from Pacific Drive /Begonia Avenue
intersection adjacent to the site. Exhibit 4.3 -3 illustrates the southerly view from this vantage point.
The story poles that have been erected are intended to reflect the building envelope of the proposed
single - family residence. As can be seen in this visual simulation, construction of the proposed home
would virtually eliminate the entire harbor view and more distant ocean view from this vantage point.
Although views to the southwest from this vantage point would be entirely blocked by development of the
site, the potential impact is less than significant because this location is not recognized by either the
General Plan (Natural Resources Element) or CLUP as an important view point (or view corridor).
Because any development of the site would result in impacts to views from the adjacent streets, the
Newport Beach Planning Commission stressed the importance of protecting the view from Begonia Park.
Therefore, the proposed project was redesigned by lowering the development further down the bluff face,
limiting street level development to single story, and pulling back elements of the project to lessen impacts to
the Begonia Park view corridor (refer to Chapter 10.0 — Alternatives).
Other Visual Simulations
Additional visual simulations were also created to illustrate the aesthetic character of the proposed single -
family residence as well as its relationship to views from several vantage points, in addition to those from
Begonia Park. For example, Exhibit 4.3 -4 reflects views of the proposed project from not only the upper
elevation within Begonia Park looking south through the site (View 1) but also from the lower elevation of the
park east of the site looking west (View 3) and from Bayview Drive east of the site, also looking west (View 2).
As indicated in View 2 in Exhibit 4.3 -4, neither the harbor nor ocean is visible from this vantage point. The
simulation illustrates the character of the proposed residence and the landscaping that is proposed on the
bluff face. No important view is blocked by the proposed structure. In View 3, the harbor is visible; however,
the post- development simulation reveals that no portion of the proposed structure would encroach into the
harbor view from this vantage point. Finally, this exhibit also provides a comparison of the proposed
elevation with the maximum allowable building envelope (View 4). As indicated in the view, the proposed
residence is contained within that envelope and it does not dominate the viewshed.
Exhibit 4.3 -5 provides four additional visual simulations that clarify the visual context of the proposed project.
Similar to Exhibit 4.3 -3, View 5 in this exhibit shows that the third floor, which includes the garage, of the
proposed structure would completely block views from the Begonia Avenue /Pacific Drive vantage point. View
8 is similar to View 2 in Exhibit 4.3 -4; however, it was taken from a more distant location and, like View 2,
reveals that no important views are blocked or otherwise affected from this vantage point. View 7, also taken
from Begonia Park north of the site confirms that no portion of the view of the harbor would be affected by
development of the site as proposed from this location. Finally, View 8 in Exhibit 4.3 -5 illustrates the pre- and
post - construction views from Bayside Drive looking north. As can be seen in that visual simulation, the
portion of the bluff visible between the two existing residential dwelling units would be covered by the
proposed residence. However, as previously indicated, the site has been designed to preserve the existing
view from Begonia Park, consistent with direction from the Newport Beach Planning Commission. As a
result, no significant visual impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newpor7 Beach, CA
August 2009
4.3-5
It
•
A � A •
•
s L``. •
. � ii •
•
I � '
i,
•
l ,
� r
M d
V } ch
.,
In
CL
V
V
L
i
4 ;
llo-
i k. 11` ti 1
1
,i
® 1
1' "Ti
r,
AI
1
d' d'
M r
,a. N
r
t �
K �
W N
C
O
7
E
cn
N
FM
LO
00
cII)
in
r
to
3
s
®1
w
y
f
Y
a 1
ety
�
N
1'
✓ 1
1„
E�q
WW
III .a M
I i ,
S
1 3
Megonigal Residence (PA 2007 -133
Drall Environmental Impact Report Seclion 4.3- Aesthetics
Light and Glare
As previously indicated, the existing residential development on Pacific Drive is characterized by lighting
along the street and other interior and exterior lighting associated with residential uses. This illumination
occurs along the frontage of the street and the rear portions of the residential properties. Lighting for the
proposed project will also be provided for the same purpose as that which currently exists in the area (i.e.,
security and structure illumination). It is anticipated that the lighting will be energy efficient and will also
be shielded or recessed as required by existing code, so that direct glare and reflections are contained
within the boundaries of the property. As a result, implementation of the City's standard conditions (refer
to Section 4.5.2) require compliance with the lighting standards and requirements, which will ensure that
no significant lighting impacts occur; no mitigation measures are required.
4.3.5 Mitigation Measures
As previously indicated, the project has been redesigned to conform to the building and development
standards prescribed in the R -1 zoning district and to avoid significant visual impacts. No important view or
aesthetic amenity would be destroyed or permanently affected by project implementation. Although no
mitigation measures are required, the following measure, which requires the dedication of a view easement,
will ensure that views through the site would be preserved.
MM 43-1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall dedicate in perpetuity a view
easement over the "Outdoor Room" identified on the approved plans and all open space
areas on the project site that shall restrict the maximum height of landscaping and
accessory structures to that of the top of the guardrails of the "Outdoor Room." The view
easement shall be a three - dimensional space projected vertically from a horizontal plane
at the elevation of the top of the guardrails of the "Outdoor Room" and horizontally to all
property lines. The restrictions of the view easement shall not apply to the building and
structures depicted on the approved project plans or to patio furniture. The form and
legal description of the view easement shall be prepared by the applicant and reviewed
and approved by the Planning Director.
4.3.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation
Incorporation of the standard conditions will effectively address the visual and aesthetic character of the area.
In addition, the proposed project will be designed to be consistent with the goals and objectives articulated in
the Natural Resources Element (Visual Resources) of the Newport Beach General Plan. Therefore, no
potentially significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation.
Drall Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 - Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
4.3 -10
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
CHAPTER 5.0
IMPACTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
The environmental process requires the Lead Agency for a proposed project, in this case the City of Newport
Beach, to prepare a Notice of Preparation (NOP) which describes the proposed project and summarizes the
potential environmental impacts which could result from the implementation of a proposed project. An
Environmental Impact Report has been prepared to assess certain potential impacts associated with this
project. The Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the supporting documentation for the proposed Megonigal
Residence are provided in Appendix A of this EIR. This section summarizes those potential impacts of the
proposed Aerie project that were determined to be below a level of significance.
5.1 Agriculture
No Prime Farmland, Farmland of State or Local Importance, or Unique Farmland occurs within or in the
vicinity of the site. The site and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built -up Land" and "Other
Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map. Further, neither the site nor the adjacent areas
are designated as prime, unique or important farmlands by the State Resources Agency or by the
Newport Beach General Plan. The Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element designates the site
as "Single -Unit Residential — Detached (RS -D) "; the zone designation for the site is "R -1 (Single - Family
Residential." Therefore, there is no conflict with zoning for agricultural use, and the property and
surrounding properties are not under a Williamson Act contract. The site is not being used for agricultural
purposes and, as indicated previously, is not designated as agricultural land. Although the subject
property is undeveloped, the areas surrounding the site are developed with residential uses. Therefore,
no agricultural uses on the site or within the site's vicinity would be converted to non - agricultural use. No
significant impacts to agricultural resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
5.2 Air Quality
Project implementation would result in temporary construction emissions that may affect local and
regional air quality. Temporary construction activity emissions will occur during the construction stage of
the proposed single - family residential dwelling unit, including the on -site generation of dust and
equipment exhaust, and off -site emissions from construction workers commuting to the site and trucks
hauling excavated earth materials from the site and delivering building materials to the subject property.
The short-term construction emission levels would be below the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds for each type of pollutant, with or without best available control
measures (refer to Table 5 -1). Construction -phase emissions would not, therefore, violate any air quality
standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Given the limited size
of the project (i.e., one single - family residential dwelling unit), construction emissions for carbon
monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), nitrous oxide (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx) and particulate
matter (PM2.5 and PM1e) from equipment use and truck trips would be below SCAQMD thresholds. In
addition, volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from paints and coatings would create ROG
emissions during construction. Dust emissions on site would be generated by excavation and initial
construction activities. However, as indicated previously, such emissions would be less than the current
thresholds as indicated below and would, therefore, not be significant.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
Table 5 -1
Project - Related Pollutant Emissions
Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single - family residence include vehicular
exhaust from daily traffic (i.e., based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site and
landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a variety of household cleaning and hair
care products. Estimated long -term project - related emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD daily
thresholds for all categories of pollutants. The project's long -term emissions would not violate any air
quality standard established by the AQMD or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Although the project would increase the resident population on the project site, the proposed project
includes only one single - family residence. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases
associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be significant in the context of the
contribution of worldwide GHG impacts. Construction activities would result in the generation of
approximately 250 tonnes /year of CO2e; operational CO2e emissions are estimated to be less than 20
tonnes /year. These emissions are below the City's threshold of 6,000 tonnes /year.
5.3 Cultural Resources
The project site is currently undeveloped. No historic resources are identified either on the site or in the
immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is not identified by the City as possessing potentially
important historic resources. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant
impacts to historic resources and no mitigation measures are required.
Project implementation includes excavation of the property to accommodate the proposed single - family
residence. It is unlikely that the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in significant impacts to
cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with the existing development in the area and the
nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine). Although no significant impacts to
cultural resources are anticipated, the City of Newport Beach requires that an archaeological monitor be
present during grading to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered, appropriate measures will
be implemented in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, no significant impacts to
archaeological resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are recommended.
The site contains the Monterey Formation deposits, which are known to contain abundant fossilized
marine invertebrates and vertebrates. The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project area
exists. Like other sites in the City that are underlain by the Monterey Formation, the site should be
considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during grading and
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -2
ROG
Ibs /da
NOx
Ibs /day)
CO
(Ibs /day)
SO2
(Ibs /day)
PM10
(Ibs /day)
PM2.5
(Ibs /day)
CO2
(Ibs /da
Construction Emissions
1.64
12.99
7.12
0.00
0.82
0.55
1,335.23
Significance Thresholds
75
100
550
150
150
55
__1
Exceeds Threshold
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Operational Emissions
0.11
0.05
0.82
0.00
0.11
0.00
97.92
Significance Thresholds
55
55
550
150
150
55
__1
Exceeds Threshold
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
'City employs a threshold of 6,000 tonnes /year.
SOURCE: City of Newport Beach (August 2009)
Keeton Kreitzer Consulting
Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single - family residence include vehicular
exhaust from daily traffic (i.e., based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site and
landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a variety of household cleaning and hair
care products. Estimated long -term project - related emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD daily
thresholds for all categories of pollutants. The project's long -term emissions would not violate any air
quality standard established by the AQMD or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Although the project would increase the resident population on the project site, the proposed project
includes only one single - family residence. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases
associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be significant in the context of the
contribution of worldwide GHG impacts. Construction activities would result in the generation of
approximately 250 tonnes /year of CO2e; operational CO2e emissions are estimated to be less than 20
tonnes /year. These emissions are below the City's threshold of 6,000 tonnes /year.
5.3 Cultural Resources
The project site is currently undeveloped. No historic resources are identified either on the site or in the
immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is not identified by the City as possessing potentially
important historic resources. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially significant
impacts to historic resources and no mitigation measures are required.
Project implementation includes excavation of the property to accommodate the proposed single - family
residence. It is unlikely that the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in significant impacts to
cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with the existing development in the area and the
nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine). Although no significant impacts to
cultural resources are anticipated, the City of Newport Beach requires that an archaeological monitor be
present during grading to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered, appropriate measures will
be implemented in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, no significant impacts to
archaeological resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are recommended.
The site contains the Monterey Formation deposits, which are known to contain abundant fossilized
marine invertebrates and vertebrates. The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project area
exists. Like other sites in the City that are underlain by the Monterey Formation, the site should be
considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during grading and
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -2
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
excavation. A mitigation measure has been included in accordance with existing City policy to ensure that
such resources can be avoided during grading /excavation activities and no significant impacts will occur.
MM -1 A qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be retained by the project
applicant who will be present during the grading and landform alteration phase. In the
event that cultural resources and /or fossils are encountered during construction activities,
ground- disturbing excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted
by the monitor until the find has been salvaged. Any artifacts and /or fossils discovered
during project construction shall be prepared to a point of identification and stabilized for
long -term storage. Any discovery, along with supporting documentation and an itemized
catalogue, shall be accessioned into the collections of a suitable repository. Curation
costs to accession any collections shall be the responsibility of the project applicant.
5.4 Geology and Soils
The subject property is located in the seismically active southern California region; several active faults
are responsible for generating moderate to strong earthquakes throughout the region. Due to the
proximity of the site to the Newport - Inglewood Fault zone, the subject property has a moderate to high
probability to be subjected to seismic and associated hazards. The maximum credible earthquake on the
NIFZ is estimated to be 7.6 with a probable magnitude of 6.6 on the Richter scale. Estimated peak
ground acceleration for the subject site from an earthquake with a 10 percent probability of exceedance in
a 50 -year period is 0.39g. Similarly, the maximum credible earthquake on the Elsinore - Whittier Fault is
8.0, with a probable (Richter) magnitude of 7.2. Other faults capable of producing seismic activity that
could affect the subject property include the San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults and the Whittier Fault,
which is a northern branch of the Elsinore Fault. In addition to these faults, the San Joaquin Hills Blind
Thrust Fault is located less than 1.5 to 2.5 miles below the area. This fault and the Newport Inglewood
fault (concealed segment), located approximately 750 to 1,000 feet from the subject site, are considered
the potential causative faults in the area. Even though the project site and surrounding areas could be
subject to strong ground movements, incorporation of the recommendations included in the preliminary
geotechnical report and adherence to current building standards of the City of Newport Beach would
reduce the potential adverse effects of ground movement hazards to a less than significant level.
Based on the geologic exploration undertaken on the subject property, the site is underlain by
sedimentary rocks of the Monterey Formation. These rocks do not have the potential for liquefaction.
Furthermore, no groundwater is present to the depths and no loose sands or coarse silt is present.
Therefore, the potential for liquefaction is less than significant. Proper design of the proposed residence
will ensure that ground failure, including that associated with liquefaction, will not pose a significant
hazard to the development. The initial study prepared for the proposed project included mitigation
measures to address the site's geologic and seismic characteristics, including:
MM -2 Prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, an erosion control plan shall be submitted to
and approved by the City's Chief Building Official.
MM -3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a soils engineering report and
final geotechnical report to the City's Building Department for approval. The project shall be
designed to incorporate the recommendations included in those reports that which address site
grading, site clearing, compaction, caissons, bearing capacity and settlement, lateral pressures,
footing design, seismic design, slabs on grade, retaining wall design, subdrain design, concrete,
surface drainage, setback distance, excavations, cut -fill transitional zones, planters and slope
maintenance, and driveways.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -3
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
5.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
A search of various databases concerning hazardous wastes and substances sites was conducted
through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) as part of the environmental analysis. The results of
the search, which is on file with the City of Newport Beach, determined that the subject property is not
included on any lists of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5. Therefore, project implementation will not create a significant hazard either to the public or the
environment. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Project implementation is the construction of one single - family residence on the 4,400 square foot lot. As
indicated above, the proposed project does not involve any activities and /or uses that would utilize
hazardous materials or other substances that would, if released into the environment, create a safety or
health hazard. There is no indication that the subject site has been contaminated that would adversely
affect site development. Although grading and site preparation activities will expose subsurface soils and
result in the generation of fugitive dust, no hazardous emissions will occur as a result of project
implementation. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur.
5.6 Hydrology and Water Quality
No stream or river exists on site. Existing surface runoff generated on the subject property occurs as
sheet flow and drains in a southerly direction over the bluff where it enters the City's storm drain system
before discharging into Newport Bay, which has been identified as containing "environmentally sensitive
areas" as defined by the 2003 Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the Water
Quality Control Plans for the Santa Ana Basin. The actual amount of stormwater runoff generated from
the building footprint and paved areas (totaling approximately 2,300 square feet) would be insignificant.
Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality codes and policies, which are performed
during the plan check stage, will ensure that surface flows can be accommodate and water quality
protected. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
This small -scale project would not result in a significant increase in water demand and all of the project's
potable and non - potable water needs will be met through a connection to the City's domestic water
system. The proposed single - family residence represents an insignificant increase in the demand for
domestic water, which has been anticipated by the City in its long -range plans. No water wells are
proposed or required to meet the water demands of this project. There are no water wells located on or
near the site, and since this project would not affect any existing or require any new water wells, the
project will not result in the lowering of the water table. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
Newport Bay is listed as an "impaired" water body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with
respect to metals, pesticides and priority organics. Changes in surface runoff are anticipated as a result
of the development of the subject property with one residence that could result in potential impacts to
water quality. However, the project will be designed to comply with all relevant building, grading and
water quality codes and policies to ensure that there will not be an adverse effect on water quality, either
during construction or during the operational life of the project. Final plan check includes the preparation
of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that must be found to meet applicable standards.
Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5-4
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
5.7 Mineral Resources
Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
The project site is vacant. However, neither the Newport Beach General Plan (Recreation and Open
Space Element) nor the State of California has identified the project site or environs as a potential mineral
resource of Statewide or regional significance. No mineral resources are known to exist and, therefore,
project implementation will not result in any significant impacts to regional or statewide resources.
Furthermore, the Newport Beach General Plan does not identify the project environs as having potential
value as a locally important mineral resource site. Project implementation (i.e., construction of a single -
family residence) as proposed will not result in the loss of any locally important mineral resource site and,
therefore, no significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required.
5.8 Noise
A variety of noise sources and noise levels would occur on and in the immediate vicinity of the project site
over the site preparation and construction phase anticipated for the proposed project. Noise levels would
vary, depending upon the type and number of construction machinery and vehicles in use and their
location within the project site. Not all equipment is generally operated continuously or used
simultaneously. The number, type, distribution, and usage of construction equipment will differ from
phase to phase. The noise generated is both temporary in nature and limited in hours by the City's Noise
Ordinance (Section 10.28.040). Compliance with the existing noise control ordinance and hours of
construction prescribed in the ordinance will minimize the potential noise impacts associated with project
implementation. Other measures have been identified to ensure that construction noise is minimized.
Typically, construction of single - family residential dwelling units on an individual basis in the City of
Newport Beach, including on bluffs in the City, does not result in significant noise impacts because of
their small size and the duration of construction is not anticipated to occur over a long period of time e.g.,
less than two years for custom home construction. Furthermore, the highest noise levels occur from
excavation and caisson drilling associated with bluff development, which take place during the initial
stage of development and do not last more than 2 to 3 months. Therefore, because the project
encompasses only one single - family residence, which would employ typical construction techniques and
be constructed in approximately 20 months like most single- family residential construction in the City,
potential construction noise impacts will be less than significant with the incorporation of the prescribed
mitigation measures identified below.
MM -4 All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly
operating and maintained muffling devices. All construction equipment shall be located
or operated as far as possible away from nearby residential units.
MM -5 A construction schedule shall be developed that minimizes the duration of potential
project - related and cumulative construction noise levels.
MM -6 The construction contractor shall notify the residents of the construction schedule for the
proposed project, and shall keep them informed on any changes to the schedule. The
notification shall also identify the name and phone number of a contact person in case of
complaints. The contact person shall take all reasonable steps to resolve the complaint.
5.9 Population and Housing
The project will result in a small increase in the number of residents in the City; however, this increase in
population is consistent with the City's long -range projections and, furthermore, would not result in a
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -5
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
substantial increase in population based on the population per household recognized by the City of
Newport Beach. Therefore, project implementation would not result in a loss of housing and /or impacts to
existing or project population. No replacement housing would be required as a result of project
implementation.
5. 10 Public Services
Fire Protection
Fire protection facilities and service to the subject property are provided by the Newport Beach Fire
Department (NBFD). In addition to the City's resources, the NBFD also maintains a formal mutual
automatic aid agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA) and all neighboring municipal fire
departments to facilitate fire protection in the City should the need arise. The project will result in an
increase of one residential dwelling unit in the City. There will not be a significant increase in structures
and persons requiring emergency services. The project will be required to include all necessary fire
protection devices as determined by the Newport Beach Fire Department. The project must comply with
the current Building and Fire Codes adopted by the City. A code compliance analysis will be conducted
by City staff to ensure that the project complies with the requirements established by the City. A final
compliance determination will be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. The project will be
designed to facilitate and enhance the provision of adequate fire protection. Adequate water supplies and
infrastructure, including fire hydrants, exist in the vicinity of the project, and there is no requirement for
other new facilities or emergency services.
Police Protection
The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) is responsible for providing police and law enforcement
services within the corporate limits of the City. The Police Department headquarters is located at 870
Santa Barbara Drive, at the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara, approximately two miles
northeast of the subject property. The NBPD currently has a ratio of 1.91 sworn officers for each 1,000
residents in the City. This ratio is adequate for the current population. Police and law enforcement
service in the City is provided by patrols with designated "beats." Project implementation will result in the
construction of one single - family residence consistent with existing City plans and programs and,
therefore, would not require an expansion to local law enforcement resources. Project implementation
would not result in any environmental impacts involving construction of new law enforcement facilities.
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Schools
The provision of educational facilities and services in the City of Newport Beach is the responsibility of the
Newport-Mesa Unified School District. Residential and non - residential development is subject to the
imposition of school fees. Payment of the State - mandated statutory school fees is the manner by which
potential impacts to the District's educational facilities are mitigated. At the present time, the subject
property has no impact on the Newport Mesa Unified School District. When this project is completed, the
development and occupancy of the single - family residence might result in the generation of school age
children. It is estimated that only one school -age student would be generated by the proposed project.
New or expanded school facilities would not be required to provide classroom and support space for such
a low number of children. However, as indicated below, the project applicant must pay the applicable
school fee to the school district, pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, in order to
offset the incremental cost impact of expanding school resources to accommodate the increased student
enrollment associated with new residential development. With the payment of the mandatory school fee,
no significant impact would occur as a result of project implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -6
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Other Public Facilities
Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
Due to the minor increase in residential density in the area associated with the construction of a single
residential dwelling unit, no significant increased demand for other public services is anticipated and there
would be no need to construct any new public facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
5.11 Recreation
The project will result in the development of one single - family home on the subject site. Although
residents of the proposed home would occasionally visit local and regional parks and beaches, use of
those public facilities by the future residents would not represent a substantial change in the intensity of
usage and the impact would not result in substantial physical deterioration of those park areas.
5.12 Traffic and Circulation
Short-term traffic impacts are those resulting from site preparation (i.e., grading and site preparation) and
construction activities. With the exception of heavy trucks traveling to and from the site in the morning
and afternoon to be used during site preparation and construction that occurs on -site, the proposed
project would not generate a significant number of vehicular trips on a daily basis. The proposed single -
family dwelling unit would generate approximately 10 trips per day that would be added to the local street
system when the single - family home is occupied. The addition of those trips would not significantly affect
circulation within the neighborhood or along arterials in the City of Newport Beach. However, during the
construction phase, there will be periods of time when heavy trucks associated with hauling and
equipment and material transport would travel to and from the site that could result in congestion on
Pacific Drive and nearby local /residential street system. It is estimated that a total of 52 heavy trucks
would be generated as a result of the grading that would be necessary to haul the estimated 630 cubic
yards of soil export that must be hauled from the site (based on based on a haul truck capacity of 12
cubic yards). It is anticipated that the dirt hauling would last less than one week and would contribute
about 15 heavy truck trips per day during the site grading phase. However, once grading has been
completed, the number of heavy trucks entering and leaving the project area would be limited to those
transporting equipment and materials to the site. Other construction - related traffic impacts are associated
with vehicles carrying workers to and from the site and medium and heavy trucks carrying construction
materials to the project site, which may result in some minor traffic delays; however, potential traffic
interference caused by construction vehicles would create a temporary/short-term impact to vehicles
using neighboring streets in the morning and afternoon hours. Therefore, aside from potentially minor
impacts resulting from the increase in traffic that will occur as a result of construction - related traffic (e.g.,
construction materials, construction workers, etc.), no significant short-term impacts are anticipated to
occur as a result of project implementation. Nonetheless, the construction traffic impacts would be
adequately addressed through the implementation of a Construction Traffic Control Plan as indicated
below.
MM -7 Prior to commencement of each major phase of construction, the Contractor shall submit
a construction staging, parking and traffic control plan for approval by the Public Works
Department, which shall address issues pertaining to potential traffic conflicts during peak
traffic periods, potential displacement of on- street parking, and safety.
This plan shall identify the proposed construction staging area(s), construction
crew parking area(s), estimated number and types of vehicles that will occur
during that phase, the proposed arrival /departure routes and operational
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -7
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Chapter 5.0 — Impacts Found Not to be
safeguards (e.g. flagmen, barricades, shuttle services, etc.) and hourly
restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods,
displacement of on- street parking and to ensure safety.
If necessary, the construction staging, parking and traffic control plan shall
provide for an off -site parking lot for construction crews which will be shuttled to
and from the project site at the beginning and end of each day until such time
that the project site can accommodate off - street construction vehicle parking.
Until that time, construction crews shall be prohibited from parking in the adjacent
residential neighborhood.
The plan shall identify all construction traffic routes, which shall avoid narrow
residential streets unless there is no alternative, and the plan shall not include
any streets where some form of construction is underway within or adjacent to
the street that would impact the efficacy of the proposed route.
Dirt hauling shall not be scheduled during weekday peak hour traffic periods or
during the summer season (Memorial Day holiday weekend through and
including the Labor Day holiday weekend).
The approved construction staging, parking traffic control plan shall be
implemented throughout each major construction phase.
Long -term traffic impacts would not occur as a result of project implementation. The trip generation
associated with one home is less than 10 trips per day. The addition of 10 trips on the City's circulation
system would not result in potentially significant impacts to either roadway segments or intersections.
Adequate emergency access is available and no parking impacts will occur as a result of project
implementation. No mitigation measures are required.
5.13 Utilities
Wastewater generated by the proposed new residence would be disposed into the existing sewer system
and would not exceed wastewater treatment standards of the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Water demand and wastewater generation will not increase significantly over existing uses due to the
increase in the number of occupants who will reside on the site. The project will connect to existing water
and wastewater facilities that currently serve existing development in the area. No expansion of these
facilities is necessary due to availability of existing capacity and adequate infrastructure. Future water
demand based on the General Plan projections would not be increased significantly by one home.
The project will not result in a significant increase in solid waste production due to the limited size of the
project (i.e., one single - family home). Existing landfills are expected to have adequate capacity to service
the site and use. Solid waste production will be picked up by either the City of Newport Beach or a
commercial provider licensed by the City of Newport Beach. All federal, state and local regulations
related to solid waste will be adhered to through this process.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133— Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 5 -8
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 6.0 — Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
CHAPTER 6.0
SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS
6.1 CEQA Guidelines Section 15126(b)
This Section summarizes the unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the approval of the proposed
Megonigal Residence. Specifically, Section 15126(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR):
"Describe any significant impacts, including those which can be mitigated, but not reduced to a
level of insignificance. Where there are impacts that cannot be alleviated without imposing an
alternative design, their implications and the reasons why the project is being proposed,
notwithstanding their effect, should be described."
6.2 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
Project implementation will not result in any potentially significant unavoidable adverse impacts. All of the
potential project - related effects are less than significant as indicated in Chapter 4.0 (Environmental
Analysis) of the Draft EIR.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megoningal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 6 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 7.0 — Irretreivable and Irreversible Commitment of Resources
CHAPTER 7.0
IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENT OF
RESOURCES
Approval and implementation of the proposed Megonigal Residence would allow for the construction of a
single - family residence on the 0.1 -acre site will require the commitment of a relatively small amount of
additional energy resources (e.g., oil, gas, diesel and related petroleum products) on a daily basis. In
addition, the project does encompass construction activities that result in the commitment of building
supplies; however, the building supplies (e.g., wood, concrete steel, etc.) would not be greater than other
projects of similar size. Further, no development is proposed that would significantly affect biological,
cultural/scientific, mineral, or other valuable resources. Therefore, there would only be a small irretrievable
commitment of energy resources such as gasoline and diesel fuel for the operation of landfill equipment.
Because these types of resources are available in sufficient quantities in this region and the proposed
projects encompass a very limited scope, these impacts are not considered significant.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -1336 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 7 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts
CHAPTER 8.0
GROWTH- INDUCING IMPACTS
8.1 Definition of Growth - Inducing Impacts
Section 15126.2(d) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires that an
Environmental Impact Report (EIR) describe the potential growth inducing impacts of a proposed project.
Specifically, Section 15126.2(d) states:
"Discuss the ways in which the proposed project could foster economic development or
population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the
surrounding environment ... . Also discuss the characteristics of some projects that may
encourage and facilitate other activities that could substantially affect the environment, either
individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that growth in any area is necessarily
beneficial, detrimental or of little significance to the environment."
To assess whether the proposed project may foster spatial, economic or population growth, several
questions are considered:
Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in the removal of
an impediment to growth such as the establishment of an essential public service or the
provision of new access to an area?
Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in economic
expansion or growth such as changes in the revenue base or employment expansion?
Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in the
establishment of a precedent setting action such as an innovation, a radical change in
zoning or a General Plan amendment approval?
Would the construction of the proposed single - family residence result in development or
encroachment in an isolated or adjacent area of open space, as opposed to an infill type
of project in an area that is already largely developed?
8.2 Analysis of Growth- Inducing Impacts
Potential project - related growth- inducing impacts related to each of the questions cited above are
discussed below.
Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in the removal of an
impediment to growth such as the establishment of an essential public service or the provision of
new access to an area?
As indicated previously, the proposed project is located in an area of the City where all of the essential
public services and/or utilities and other features exist. Further, the existing public facilities and services,
including police and fire protection services, sewer, water, and storm drainage, and parks and
recreational facilities, are adequate to serve the proposed Megonigal Residence. As a result, there would
not be any significant new demands that would result in the necessity to expand an existing service or
create a new service, which would eliminate an existing impediment to growth.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 8 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts
Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in economic expansion or
growth such as changes in the revenue base or employment expansion?
Implementation of the proposed project will not result in any significant economic growth or expansion in
either the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange or larger southern California region. Although a
number of short -term, construction - related jobs would be created by the construction of the proposed
single - family residence, the construction - related jobs would be extremely limited and would cease with
completion of the construction. Furthermore, project implementation would not result in the creation of
any long -term employment opportunities. The proposed project constitutes "in fill" development of a site
that is currently vacant but on which development has been anticipated, as indicated by the Land Use
Element designation and zoning classification adopted for the site. The proposed residential
development would result in an increase of one dwelling unit within the City of Newport Beach, consistent
with the adopted land use plans and policies of the City. Therefore, no significant growth - inducing
impacts of the proposed project are anticipated.
Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in the establishment of a
precedent setting action such as an innovation, a radical change in zoning or a General Plan
amendment approval?
The subject property is designated RS -D (Single -Unit Residential — Detached) and is zoned R -1 (Single -
Family Residential). The applicant does not propose an amendment to the Land Use Element of the
Newport Beach General Plan or to the Coastal Land Use Plan land use designation. The City's General
Plan was updated in 2006. The proposed project is, therefore, consistent with the land use and intensity
of development permitted by the long -range plans adopted for the project by the City of Newport Beach.
Therefore, approval of the proposed Modification Permit and Encroachment Permit that comprise project
approval would not set a precedent in the use of the site.
Would the construction of the proposed single- family residence result in development or
encroachment in an isolated or adjacent area of open space, as opposed to an infill type of
project in an area that is already largely developed?
Generally, growth- inducing projects possess such characteristics as being located in isolated,
undeveloped or under developed areas, necessitating the extension of major infrastructure (e.g., sewer
and water facilities, roadways, etc.) or those that could encourage the "premature" or unplanned growth in
an area not planned for development (i.e., "leap frog" development). The subject property is a vacant site
that is designated residential by both the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan and
zoning. The site is located within an urbanized area in the City of Newport Beach (Corona del Mar). As
such, it is important to note that the proposed development will not remove an obstacle to population
growth since the project site is located in an area that is urbanized and all of the essential infrastructure,
including sewer and water facilities, storm drainage facilities, electricity and natural gas, and related
utilities have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed single - family dwelling unit. Project
implementation will not result in significant increases in demands on the infrastructure. Therefore, no
significant growth- inducing impacts are anticipated
8.3 Conclusion
The answer to each of the questions cited above as they relate to the proposed Megonigal Residence is "no."
The proposed project includes the development of one single - family residential dwelling unit that is consistent
with the long -range plans adopted by the City of Newport Beach. The proposed project is not characterized
by features that attract or facilitate new, unanticipated development, which would ordinarily be considered
growth inducing. Conventionally, growth inducement is measured by the potential of a project or a project's
secondary effects (i.e. provision of new infrastructure which supports housing or creation of jobs) to facilitate
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 8 -2
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 8.0 — Growth - Inducing Impacts
development of housing. Since the proposed single - family residence is limited in scope and ultimately, its
effect on the environment, the standard variables associated with the development of housing, commercial or
industrial land uses do not apply. Further, all of the infrastructure and public facilities that exist in the project
area are adequate to provide an adequate level of service, including sewer, and water. Project
implementation will not result in any significant direct or indirect addition of residential development that would
generate new residents or employment that would be an "attractor" of residents to the area that are not
already anticipated in the General Plan. The site is not located in an isolated area that is constrained by the
absence of infrastructure where the provision of infrastructure would promote further development. None of
the accepted standards that distinguish growth- inducing projects characterize the proposed project; therefore,
no growth- inducing impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 8 -3
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts
CHAPTER 9.0
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
9.1 Definition of Cumulative Impacts
Section 15355 of the CEQA Guidelines defines cumulative impacts as:
"...two or more individual effects which when considered together, are considerable or which
compound or increase other environmental impacts."
Section 15355 further describes potential cumulative impacts as:
"(a) The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of
separate projects.
(b) The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results
from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present
and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from
individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time."
Cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual impacts which, when considered together, are
considerable or which compound or increase other impacts. The individual effects may be changes resulting
from a single project or from a number of projects. A cumulative impact refers to the degree of change in the
environment resulting from a particular project, plus the incremental impacts created by other closely related
past, present and reasonably foreseeable future projects. Cumulative impacts may reveal that relatively
minor impacts associated with a particular project may contribute to more significant impacts when
considered collectively with other projects taking place over a period of time.
9.2 Cumulative Projects
Section 15130(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines provides two options for considering potentially significant
cumulative adverse impacts. This analysis can be based on either:
"(A) A list of past, present and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts,
including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or
(B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning
document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified, which
described or evaluated regional or areawide conditions contributing to the cumulative
impact. Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available to the public
at a location specified by the lead agency."
For the cumulative analysis presented below, with the exception of air quality impacts, which are based upon
development occurring within the South Coast Air Basin, the potential environmental effects of the proposed
Aerie project were considered in conjunction with the potential environmental effects of the development of
other closely related past, present, and probable future projects in the City, which are listed in Table 9 -1.
Although there may be other projects occurring within the City, those identified in Table 9 -1 reflect the
projects with similar potential impacts as the proposed project. This geographic limitation is appropriate
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts
because the proposed project is small in size and is not likely to have significant regional environmental
consequences. Furthermore, the project site is located in the center of the Newport Beach and not near the
border of a neighboring jurisdiction. Therefore, Table 9 -1 reflects a geographic limitation to projects located
within the City of Newport Beach. Finally, the related projects list is not limited to single - family residential
projects like the proposed project; it includes a variety of approved and proposed land uses, including
institutional, commercial, municipal, and mixed -use projects that vary in size.
Table 9 -1
Related Projects List
'A second potential project has also been proposed for the Newport Beach Country Club. That proposal (PA2008 -152), includes the
demolition of the existing golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures and replacement of the clubhouse with a 54,819 square foot
facility, including dining and related elements. No changes to the existing tennis club are proposed in this development application.
PA2005 -140 represent a'worst case" development scenario and is included in the list of related projects.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megoniga/ Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -2
Potential
Cumulative
Name /Address
Permit No.
status
Description
Impacts
Ap ved Projects w /Environmental Clearance
General Plan Amendment, Planned
Community Development Plan
lMay
Amendment, Development Agreement
Hoag Hospital Master Plan
PA2007 -073
2008
Approved
Amendment to reallocate up to
Air Quality
225,000 gross square feet of unbuilt,
permitted floor area from the Lower
Campus to the Upper Campus
Use permit for a full - service, high -
Panini Cafe
PA2007 -063
MND
turnover eating and drinking
Traffic
2421 Coast highway
Approved June 2008
establishment, including a 160 square
Air Quality
foot outdoor dining area.
Installation of 37 new square, concrete
piles to provide 33 slips of various
Lido Anchorage
PA 2007 -121
Approved September
sizes. The floating docks, fingers, and
Biological
151 Shipyard Way
2008
gangways will result in approximately
Resources
24,043 square feet of overwater
coverage.
Construction of a new 42,230 square
Oasis Senior Center
PA2008 -109
Under Construction
feet Oasis Senior Center facility on the
Traffic
800 Marguerite Avenue
current site located on the corner of
Air Quality
Marguerite Avenue and Fifth Avenue.
Pending Projects that Require Review
Planned Community Text Adoption for
PC-47 (Newport Country Club),
Development Agreement, Vesting
Tentative Tract Map for the
Newport Beach Country
development of 5 semi - custom single -
CIub1
PA2005 -140
Applied 2005
family residential units, 27 hotel units
Traffic
1600 East Coast Highway
Pending
with a 2,048- square foot concierge and
Air Quality
guest center, a new 3,523 square foot
tennis club with a 6,718 square foot
spa, a 41,086 square foot golf club
with accessory facilities, 8 tennis
courts, and a swimming pool.
Expansion of the existing Hyatt
Regency Hotel by adding 88 new
Hyatt Regency
timeshare units, a timeshare
Traffic
1107 Jamboree Road
PA2005 -212
Approved
clubhouse, a new 800 -seat ballroom, a
Air Quality
new spa facility, a new housekeeping
and engineering buildings, and a new
two -level parking garage. Project
'A second potential project has also been proposed for the Newport Beach Country Club. That proposal (PA2008 -152), includes the
demolition of the existing golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures and replacement of the clubhouse with a 54,819 square foot
facility, including dining and related elements. No changes to the existing tennis club are proposed in this development application.
PA2005 -140 represent a'worst case" development scenario and is included in the list of related projects.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megoniga/ Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -2
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -3
Potential
Cumulative
Name /Address
Permit No.
Status
Description
Impacts
implementation requires a Use Permit,
Development Agreement, parcel Map,
and Modification Permit.
Demolition of an existing 14 -unit
Aerie Multiple - Family
PA 2005 -196
Approved
apartment building and one single-
Aesthetics
family residence. Construction of an 8-
unit condominium with 8 -boat dock.
Proposed Airport Business Area
Integrated Conceptual Development
Conexant Conceptual Plan
Plan which would include a total of up
Applied 2007
to 974 new residential units, 714 on
4311/4321 Jamboree Road
PA2007 -170
CC Hearing February
the Conexant site and the remaining
Air Quality
Kell Conceptual Plan
2009
260 on the Kell property. The City has
4343 Von Kerman Avenue
not yet approved the Airport Business
Area Integrated Conceptual
Development Plan.
Proposed 1.9 -acre subdivision to
create a large lot for one residential
Big Canyon
PA2007 -210
Approved
dwelling unit. Parcel Map, General
None
1 Big Canyon Drive
Plan Amendment, and Big Canyon
Planned Community text amendment.
A public park and beach with
recreation facilities, restrooms and a
new Girl Scout House, a public short-
Marina Park
PA2008 -040
Pending
term visiting vessel marina with a
Biological
1700 W. Balboa Boulevard
public dock and a sailing center and a
Resources
new community center with
classrooms, boat storage space and
ancillary offices ace.
A 402.3 -acre planned community
development plan consisting of a
maximum of 1,375 dwelling units,
Newport Banning Ranch
PA2008 -114
Pending
75,000 square feet of commercial
"bed-
Traffic
5200 West Coast Highway
retail, 75 room boutique hotell
Air Quality
and - breakfast' or other overnight
accommodation, parks and open
space.
Use Permit and Modification Permit to
Silk Residence Remodel
PA2008 -180
Pending
allow 50 % -70% structural alterations to
None
1800 Bay Front Street
a non - conforming structure and
multiple setback encroachments.
Projects Submitted for Plan Check
Common addition and remodel
Traffic
2300 West Coast Highway
1580 -2008
Approved
(29,199 square feet existing, 10,390
Air Quality
square feet new) Holiday Inn.
606 Man gold Avenue
1731 -2008
Approved
New duplex (2,946 square feet with
None
attached 309 square foot garage).
901 Newport Center Drive
1733 -2008
Approved
New Retail (140,745 square feet
Traffic
Nordstrom shell).
Air Quality
New single - family residence (2,941
1506 South Bay Front
1773 -2008
Pending
square feet with 407 square foot
None
attached garage).
New single - family residence (2,679
1708 South Bay Front
1981 -2008
Approved
square feet with 400 square foot
None
garage and 671 square foot deck).
New single - family residence (2,864
824 West Bay Avenue
2114 -2008
Approved
square feet with 499 square foot
None
garage).
SOURCE: City of Newport Beach
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -3
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
9.3 Cumulative Impact Analysis
9.0 — Cumulative
The impact analysis that follows provides a discussion of the potential cumulative impacts that might occur as
a result of project implementation. Potential cumulative impacts associated with some environmental issues
are evaluated based on a particular geographic area or other appropriate level. For example, unlike the other
impact areas discussed in Chapter 9.0 that are based on Table 9 -1, cumulative air quality impacts are
assessed based on development within the South Coast Air Basin, a geographic area that spans several
counties. Conversely, cumulative noise impacts are evaluated within the context of a smaller geographic
area. Construction noise and some operational noise impacts are limited to the project site and adjacent and
nearby areas; however, depending on the contribution of project - related traffic, mobile- source noise impacts
may occur beyond the immediate limits of the subject site along heavily traveled arterials. Similarly,
cumulative biological impacts are evaluated based on similar habitat and species within a particular
geographic area. It is also important to note that cumulative impact analyses are guided by standards of
reasonableness and practicality.
9.3.1 Land Use and Planning
The project proposes to develop the 4,412 square -foot site with one single - family residence. The area
surrounding the subject property is entirely developed with single- and multiple - family residential
development; Begonia Park, a passive recreational facility is located north and east of the site. As a result,
no design component or feature of the project would physically divide or otherwise adversely affect or
significantly change an established community. In addition, the subject property is located within the limits of
the Central /Coastal NCCP adopted by the County of Orange.
The proposed project site is currently vacant but is identified for development in the adopted long -range plans
for the property. As indicated in Section 4.1 of the Draft EIR, the proposed project is consistent with the
applicable goals, policies and objectives articulated in the Newport Beach Land Use Element and other
elements as well as the CLUP. Therefore, no significant cumulative impacts to land use will occur as a result
of project implementation.
9.3.2 Population and Housing
Although implementation of the proposed project will result in an increase in population, neither the addition
of one dwelling unit nor the two to three residents likely to live there would not contribute to a cumulative loss
of homes and /or displacement of occupants. Together with the approved and planned development
identified in Table 9 -1, an increase in residential development is anticipated in the City, including 974 dwelling
units on the Conexant and Koll properties in the Airport area. Other smaller residential developments are
also proposed in the City, including the 8 -unit Aerie project and other single - family and duplex dwelling units
in the area. Therefore, a potentially significant cumulative reduction of housing within the City would not
occur as a result of project implementation. The existing residential development is not included in the City's
inventory of affordable housing; no low- and /or moderate - income households occupy the site and, therefore,
none would be displaced as a result of project implementation. Further, addition of the single - family
residence on the site will not adversely affect the jobs /housing balance because the project will be consistent
with the City's long -range plans, which are the basis of the jobs /housing projections. Therefore, project
implementation will not result in potentially significant cumulative impacts to population and housing.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -4
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
9.3.3 Geology and Soils
9.0 — Cumulative
The 0.1 -acre site is currently undeveloped. The site and existing development in the project environs are
currently exposed to potential groundshaking associated with seismic activities occurring on one of the active
regional faults. Unlike any of the projects identified in Table 9 -1, the subject property is located on a bluff in
Corona del Mar, which requires the consideration of geologic and seismic characteristics. Although the
proposed project will consist of residential development, the potential exposure to the effects of seismic
activity, slope failure, bluff erosion, and /or soil conditions will not increase and project implementation will not
result in potential cumulative impacts because the new single - family residence will be required to meet
applicable structural design requirements prescribed in the geotechnical report and related City codes and
ordinances that address structural integrity. Furthermore, none of the projects identified in Table 9 -1 would
contribute cumulatively to bluff instability and /or erosion because they are not located on the same bluff as
the subject property. In addition, these other developments must also comply with the specific building
design parameters prescribed in the California Building Code to ensure that potential loss of life and structural
damage is minimized. The project site and the surrounding area are not known to be located within an
unstable geologic area and, therefore, are not expected to be exposed to adverse soils conditions,
including lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse hazards. Finally, the site does not support
"prime" and /or "important" agricultural soils. Therefore, no potentially significant cumulative seismic, slope
failure, bluff erosion, and /or soil condition impacts would occur as a result of project implementation.
9.3.4 Hydrology and Water Quality
As described in the initial study, although project implementation would result in a small increase in
impervious area, the post - development peak flow would be reduced when compared to the existing surface
runoff conditions. Specifically, the runoff emanating from the site will be treated prior to its discharge into
Newport Harbor. Potential cumulative impacts would be those resulting from other development within the
watershed sub -area; however, no other projects are proposed within the area affected by the proposed
project. In addition, the applicant will be required to implement Best Management Practices and related
measures in accordance with the City's requirements to ensure that both storm water runoff and quality meet
the requisite criteria. All of the other projects identified in this section are located outside the immediate
project area. Each of the approved or proposed projects, should they be implemented, will be required to
implement similar stormwater collection and conveyance facilities and water quality structural and non-
structural measures (i.e., BMPs) to reduce and avoid water quality impacts. Implementation of these
measures, which would be prescribed in the WQMP prepared for the other projects in the City and
watershed, must comply with the requirements established by the City and County of Orange in the Drainage
Area Master Plan, which have been developed to address the cumulative impacts of development in the
watershed. These measures are intended to ensure that water quality objectives are achieved and /or
maintained. Therefore, project implementation will result in an overall improvement to hydrology and water
quality by upgrading the stormwater collection facilities that serve the drainage area. As a result, the
proposed project will not result in potentially significant cumulative impacts to either hydrology or water
quality.
9.3.5 Air Quality
As indicated above, cumulative air quality impacts are those associated with development occurring within
the South Coast Air Basin, a five - county region in southern California. As a result, it is anticipated that a
significant number of development projects throughout the City and the five- county region would contribute to
the cumulative degradation of the air basin. Although the proposed project will result in the generation of both
short-term (i.e., those occurring during the 20 -month construction phase) and long -term operational
emissions (i.e., those resulting from the operation of automobiles and stationary sources), which will be
emitted into the air basin, the vast majority of those emissions would be short -term and temporary in nature.
Although the project's contribution of construction emissions (primarily fugitive dust) is short-term and
because the project must comply with all applicable rules prescribed by the SCAQMD, these impacts will not
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -5
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative Impacts
be significant on a cumulative basis when considered with the other projects in the City and in the air basin.
Once construction is completed, an insignificant fraction of the total mobile- source emissions within the basin
would be attributed to the proposed project. The long -term (i.e., operational) emissions associated with the
proposed project are the result of the incremental increase in vehicular traffic generated by the project and on
demands for natural gas and electricity. Because these incremental operational emissions would not exceed
significance thresholds recommended by the SCAQMD and identified in the initial study prepared for the
project, the incremental addition of the project's mobile- source emissions, when combined with other
emissions resulting from the development of the other projects within the City and larger air basin, will be less
than significant on a cumulative basis.
9.3.6 Traffic and Circulation
Cumulative traffic impacts are those occurring within the immediate vicinity of the project site and beyond the
Corona del Mar area along Coast Highway and other arterials in the City based on the distribution of
construction traffic associated with the proposed project. As indicated in Table 9 -1, the proposed project and
several of the projects within the City would contribute traffic, both during construction and as a result of their
development, which could affect the existing circulation system, including Coast Highway, Jamboree Road
and Newport Boulevard. As indicated in the initial study, project implementation will result in the generation
of construction traffic (i.e., short-term) as well as an increase in the number of daily and peak hour vehicle
trips when compared to the existing baseline (i.e., undeveloped site). The short-term vehicle trips are those
associated with heavy trucks (i.e., dirt hauling, equipment and materials deliveries, etc.) and construction
workers commuting to the site. However, these will be short-term in nature and would be minimized through
the implementation of a Construction Management Plan that must be prepared for the project which, among
other things, prescribes a haul route and other elements intended to ensure safety and minimize circulation
conflicts. Although other projects in the City could also contribute construction traffic that could affect
roadway and intersection operations, the contribution of these short-term trips would not represent a
potentially significant cumulative impact because potential impacts would be avoided through specific
provisions prescribed in the Construction Management Plan, including the identification of a haul route plan,
adherence to a traffic control plan, use of flag persons during the construction, etc. Implementation of these
measures will ensure that potential cumulative construction impacts would be minimized. Although post -
development project - related vehicle trips would increase because the site is currently undeveloped and does
not generate vehicular trips, they would not result in any potentially significant cumulative impacts in the
Corona del Mar community or outlying areas because when added to the local circulation system, they would
constitute a very small fraction of the total trips generated by the cumulative projects identified in Table 9 -1.
When added to the City's arterial roadway system, the small increase in both construction - related and
operational vehicle trips would, therefore, not result in potentially significant cumulative traffic and circulation
impacts.
9.3.7 Biological Resources
Project implementation will not result in potential impacts to biological resources, as indicated in Section 4.2.
Although a small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat exists on the subject property (i.e., 261 square feet), the
habitat has been characterized as "low quality /low value" habitat and does not support any sensitive species.
Furthermore, no sensitive plant or animal species occur on the site that would be adversely affected by the
proposed project. Due to the low value of the coastal bluff scrub habitat, its degraded condition associated
with human activities and disturbance, and lack of species diversity, it does not meet the criteria established
in the Coastal Act and the City's General Plan for ESHAs. Therefore, the elimination of this habitat, when
considered with other projects listed in Table 9 -1, is not significant.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -6
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
9.3.8 Mineral Resources
9.0 — Cumulative
As indicated above, the site and surrounding areas have been developed. No mineral resources exist on the
subject property that would be adversely impacted by development of the site as proposed. Further, project
implementation would not directly impact any existing mineral resource areas either in the City of Newport
Beach, region, or State of California. Similarly, the other approved and /or proposed projects in the City of
Newport Beach listed in Table 9 -1 would not adversely affect mineral resources. With the exception of the
Newport Banning Ranch, which has been a producing oil field for several years, many of the sites on which
development is proposed are either already developed (e.g., Conexant/Koll, Newport Beach Country Club,
Aerie, etc.) or are located in areas of the City that do not encompass mineral resources. Because project
implementation would not result in any impacts to mineral resources, it would not contribute to the cumulative
loss of such resources in either the City, region, or State of California. Although the proposed project would
require the use of mineral resources (e.g., sand and gravel, wood, etc.), many are renewable and /or
sustainable. Therefore, when compared to other projects in the area, no potentially significant cumulative
impacts to mineral resources will occur.
9.3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
As indicated in the analysis prepared for the project, the site has no history of contamination. As a result, site
development would not result in any release of toxic or hazardous materials. Similar to other existing
residential development, the proposed project would only use household variety hazardous materials such as
fertilizers, herbicides, cleaning solvents, paints, and /or pesticides. These materials would be used, stored
and disposed of in accordance with local, state and federal regulations. Therefore, no potentially significant
cumulative impacts would occur when compared to other projects that have been approved or proposed in
the City of Newport Beach or surrounding areas.
9.3.10 Noise
Cumulative noise impacts are those that would occur within the immediate project environs, particularly
during the construction phase. The greatest increase in ambient noise would occur during the 20 -month
construction phase; however, no other development is proposed in the immediate vicinity of the project
(refer to Table 9 -1) that would contribute to the cumulative increase in noise in the area. As indicated in
the initial study, the construction activities resulting from project implementation will result in increased
noise levels in the neighborhood. Once construction ceases and the project is completed and occupied,
the cumulative noise environment could also extend beyond the immediate area to outlying areas,
depending on the nature and extent of project - related traffic. However, the traffic resulting from a single
dwelling unit would contribute only a very small increase in the ambient noise levels in the nearby
residential area within Corona del Mar and along arterial roadways in the City. As a result, project - related
long -term noise associated with vehicle trips generated by future residents would be minimal and would
not contribute significantly to the cumulative increase in long -term noise levels because the project would
add only about 10 vehicles per day onto the existing circulation network. While project - related traffic,
when added to existing traffic utilizing the neighborhood streets could contribute to an increase in ambient
noise levels along the streets, the increase would not result in significant cumulative long -term noise
impacts because none of the local streets within the project area are characterized by noise levels that
currently exceed, or are forecast to exceed, 65 dBA CNEL as indicated in the City's Noise Element, which
evaluated future noise levels based on buildout of the General Plan. It is anticipated that the resulting
gradual incremental increase in project - related traffic onto the neighborhood circulation system would
generally not be audible. Therefore, no significant long -term cumulative noise impacts would occur as a
result of project implementation.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -7
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
9.3.11 Public Services
9.0 — Cumulative
The project site is located in an area of the City of Newport Beach that is adequately served by public
services and facilities, including police and fire protection. The construction of one single - family residence on
the subject property will not significantly affect the existing public service levels of service. Specifically, the
potential (less than significant) impacts associated with the proposed project would not alter the ability of
either the Newport Beach Police Department or Fire Department to provide an adequate level of service to
the site, even when considering the potential development listed in Table 9 -1, because the site is currently
provided police and fire service. The potential development of the projects listed in Table 9 -1 would also be
evaluated by the Newport Beach Police and Fire Departments to ensure that adequate levels of service can
be provided. These projects are within the long -range projections identified in the City's General Plan and,
therefore, would not adversely affect the City's ability to provide an adequate level of protection. Because the
proposed project and the Aerie property, which are located in Corona del Mar and are residential in nature,
project implementation would result in the potential to generate some school -age children, which would
necessitate the payment of the requisite developer fees that offset potential impacts to schools. In addition,
the potential increase in residents generated by these projects could also result in an increased demand for
recreational facilities; however, the relatively small number of residents generated by these projects would not
create a significant demand for recreational facilities. Therefore, no significant cumulative impacts would
occur as a result of project implementation.
9.3.12 Utilities and Service Systems
The site and surrounding area are adequately served by utilities (i.e., sewer and water facilities, solid waste
disposal, electricity and natural gas). The incremental increase in the demand for utilities as a result of
constructing one single - family residence on the site is minimal. The proposed project will be required to
comply with all applicable regulations requiring energy efficiency. Therefore, no potentially significant
cumulative utilities impacts will occur as a result of project implementation.
9.3.13 Aesthetics
As discussed in Section 4.3 (Aesthetics), the project site is located in an area of Corona del Mar that is
characterized by important visual resources and/or amenities. In addition, Begonia Park has been identified
as a "Public View Point' because of views from that location of Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean.
Potential aesthetic impacts of the proposed project were evaluated based on views from both public vantage
points on or near the site.
Of the cumulative projects identified in Table 9 -1, only one project, the proposed Aerie multiple - family
residential project would also potentially affect the aesthetic character of the proposed project area. The
visual simulations prepared for the proposed project revealed that no significant project - related impacts would
be anticipated from the Public View Point within the Begonia Park Public View Point vantage points as a
result of site development as proposed. The potential visual impacts of the proposed project were also
evaluated from those vantage points with the proposed Aerie multiple - family residential project to determine
the extent of project - related cumulative visual impacts. As indicated in Section 4.3, construction of the
Megonigal residence would not contribute to the cumulative visual impact from this public view location
because views of the harbor and ocean would be preserved, even with the addition of the Aerie project.
Therefore, no potentially significant cumulative visual impacts would occur as a result of project
implementation.
9.3.14 Cultural /Scientific Resources
The site is currently undeveloped and no significant cultural, historic or scientific resources are known to be
located on the subject property. Although it is possible that other proposed and approved development could
result in impacts to cultural, historical or scientific resources, appropriate mitigation (in the form of standard
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -8
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 9.0 — Cumulative
City conditions) will be required to ensure that such impacts are less than significant. While grading and
excavation are required to prepare portions of the site for construction, no cultural or historical resources
would be affected and no impacts would occur to such resources. Although paleontological resources (i.e.,
fossils) may be encountered during construction of the proposed project based on the geologic formation
underlying the site, monitoring will ensure that any such potential resources that may exist on the property
would be identified during the grading phase by the paleontological monitor. Adequate measures would be
implemented to ensure that potentially significant impacts would be avoided. This would also be true for
other projects where encountering such resources is possible or likely, as prescribed in environmental
analysis undertaken for such projects listed in Table 9 -1. Therefore, project implementation will not result in
potentially significant impacts, either individually or on a cumulative basis.
9.3.15 Recreation
As indicated previously, the proposed project includes the development of a single - family residence on a
vacant property. Although the generation of additional residents associated with the projects listed in Table
9 -1 could result in a demand for recreational amenities, project implementation would not contribute
significantly to the cumulative demands crated by those projects due to the small -scale nature of the project.
No additional significant demands for recreational facilities would be generated by the project that would be
added to the cumulative impacts that may occur as a result of other projects proposed and approved in the
City. Other cumulative projects identified in Table 9 -1 (e.g., Banning Ranch, Conexant/Koll, etc.) that would
result in significant numbers of new residential dwelling units would be required by the City to provide public
park dedications and/or payment of park dedication fees to offset any potential demands for recreational
facilities in the City of Newport Beach. Therefore, no potentially significant project - related or cumulative
impacts to recreational facilities would occur.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 9 -9
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
SECTION 10.0
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
10.1 Introduction
10.1.1 Purpose and Scope
Section 10.0—
CEQA requires that an EIR describe a `reasonable" range of alternatives to the project, or to the location
of the project, which could feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, and to evaluate the
comparative merits of the alternatives. This chapter sets forth potential alternatives to the proposed
project and evaluates them as required by CEQA.
Section 15126.6(c) directs that an EIR should focus on alternatives capable of: (1) eliminating or reducing
significant adverse environmental effects of a proposed project and (2) feasibly accomplishing most of the
basic project objectives. The discussion of alternatives in this Draft EIR reviews a range of alternatives,
including the "No Project' alternative as prescribed by the State CEQA Guidelines, which satisfies this
requirement.
10.1.2 Selection of Alternatives
As indicated above, alternatives must be selected, primarily, based upon their ability to avoid or reduce
significant environment impacts of the project. However, in the case of the proposed project (i.e., single -
family residence on a coastal bluff), no potentially significant environmental impacts were identified in the
environmental analysis presented in Chapter 4.0. Therefore, alternatives include only those deemed to
be potentially feasible in order to provide a comparison of potential environmental consequences based
on their ability to further reduce potential effects of the proposed project, even though the effects were
determined to be less than significant. With the exception of the No Project/No Development alternative,
which is required to be included in the evaluated by the State CEQA Guidelines, each of the alternatives
discussed in this Chapter was selected based on its ability achieve the project objectives identified in
Chapter 3.0. Alternatives were identified by the City in consultation with the City's environmental
consultant, including:
Alternative Site
No Project /No Development
• Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level)
• Alternative Access (Bayside Drive)
10.1.3 Evaluation of Project Alternatives
According to the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[a]), an EIR must "... describe a range of reasonable
alternatives for the project, or to the location of the project which would feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the
project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." The Guidelines go on to indicate that
alternatives that are capable of substantially lessening any significant effects of the Project must be
examined, "... even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project
objectives or would be more costly." The Guidelines further indicate "... that the EIR need examine in
detail only the alternatives that the lead agency determines could feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives of the project' (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[c]). Thus the ability of an alternative to
attain most of the basic oroiect obiectives is central to the consideration of alternatives to the proposed
project.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Imnact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives
For each alternative, the analysis presented in this section:
Describes the alternative;
Discusses the impacts of the alternative and evaluates the significance of those impacts;
and,
Evaluates the alternative relative to the proposed project, specifically addressing project
objectives and the elimination or reduction of potentially significant impacts.
10.1.4 Identification of Impacts
After describing the alternative, this Draft EIR evaluates the impacts of the alternative. The major
resource areas included in the detailed impact analysis in Section 4.0 are included in this section. The
potential environmental consequences are identified and described in the analysis for each of the
alternatives identified in Section 10.1.1.
10.2 Alternatives Rejected from Further Consideration
10.2.1 Alternative Site
As required by the State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6(f)(2)(A), only alternative locations that would
substantially reduce the potentially significant impacts resulting from project implementation must be
included in the analysis of alternatives. Because the subject project proposes a single - family residence
on a coastal bluff overlooking Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean, a similarly designated site located
on a bluff would be required to accommodate such a project. However, a review of the City's General
Plan revealed that no other similarly situated site that is designated for single - family residential
development exists in the City of Newport Beach. Although there are several vacant properties in
Newport Beach that are designated for single - family residential development, their inland location would
prevent them from achieving the overriding objective identified by the applicant (i.e., provide west and
south views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean from all levels of the proposed residence). Furthermore,
while the applicant owns the subject property, it would be necessary for him to acquire a vacant parcel
elsewhere in the City, which could affect the feasibility of the proposed project. As a result, this
alternative has been rejected from further consideration.
10.2.2 No Development
The "No Development" alternative was also considered but rejected because implementation would
necessitate either acquisition of the subject property or denial of development of the property to ensure
that development does not occur on the site. Because the site is designated for residential development
in accordance with the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, development in accordance with the
RS -D land use designation (and R -1 zoning) is anticipated. The City recently reaffirmed the intended use
of this lot by designating it for residential purposes within the 2006 Update of the Newport Beach General
Plan. Furthermore, to date, neither the City of Newport Beach nor other entity has expressed an interest
to acquire the property in order to protect the site from development. If not acquired by the City (or other
entity), denial of any site development would constitute a "taking."
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -2
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives
10.3 Analysis of Alternatives
10.3.1 No Project
The No Project Alternative evaluates the potential environmental effects resulting from the continuation of
the existing conditions on the site at the time the Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published, "... as well
as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved,
based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services" Therefore,
this alternative assumes that in the short -term, the site would remain vacant. As a result, no adverse
environmental effects would occur until such time as development was proposed in accordance with the
adopted land use and zoning designations. The site would remain undeveloped and would not be
affected by grading and development. Specifically, without any landform alteration, the small area of
coastal bluff scrub habitat would not be removed as a result of development in the near future; however,
as indicated in Section 4.2, this habitat does not meet the criteria established for ESHAs by both the
Coastal Act and the City in the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. Furthermore, without
development of the site in the short -term, views from both Begonia Park and Pacific Drive /Begonia
Avenue would not be affected by the introduction of structures that would be added into the viewshed
from those vantage points. Without development of the site, no conflicts with the plans, programs and
policies adopted by the City of Newport Beach would occur.
Although none of the project - related effects identified in Chapter 4.0 would occur in the short term as a
result of the "no project' (i.e., no development) alternative in the short term, it is anticipated that future
development of the site would occur based on the adopted land use and zoning designations, which allow
the construction of one single - family residence on the site. The potential effects on land use and
planning, biological resources and aesthetics based on development of the site in accordance with the
adopted land use designation are identified and described below.
10.3.1.1 Land Use and Planning
The potential effects on land use and planning resulting from development of the site with one single - family
residence would be similar to the project - related effects. Assuming the building envelope for such a
development complied with the zoning district regulations that apply to the site (e.g., building height, setback,
etc.), it is anticipated that the project - related effects identified in Section 4.1 would result. Like the proposed
project, the future single - family residence would be compatible with the existing residential development in
the area and would not conflict with either the scale or intensity that characterizes the Corona del Mar
neighborhood. Similarly, it is likely that such an alternative would also be designed to be consistent with the
relevant policies of both the General Plan and CLUP that address views and bluff protection. Based on the
current direction provided by the Newport Beach Planning Commission related to development of the site,
priority has been afforded to views from Begonia Park rather than complete protection of the coastal bluff
feature, which has been substantially altered by development along Bayside Drive. Therefore, the potential
impacts associated with a future single - family residence on the site would be the same as or similar to those
effects identified for the proposed project, which were determined to be less than significant.
10.3.1.2 Biological Resources
Potential biological impacts that would be expected to occur as a result of the "no project' alternative would
be virtually the same as those identified in Section 4.2, which include the elimination of the existing albeit low
quality /value coastal bluff scrub habitat. It is anticipated that site alteration in order to accommodate future
development of the site with a single - family residence would also result in the elimination of the 261 square
feet of coastal bluff scrub habitat, similar to the proposed project. Because the existing habitat is limited in
area, variety, and quality and, furthermore, is not occupied by sensitive species and because it does not meet
the criteria established for ESHAs by the Coastal Act and City's General Plan and CLUP, the loss of this low
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -3
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives
value habitat is not significant. Therefore, potential impacts of this alternative would be the same as identified
for the proposed project (i.e,, less than significant).
10.3.1.3 Aesthetics
Assuming that future development of the site complies with the development standards prescribed in the R -1
zoning district, a single - family residence could be constructed that would result in less than significant
impacts, similar to the proposed project.
Summary of No Project Alternative
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives
The "no project' alternative would not result in the realization of any of the project objectives in
the short -term. However, in the long -term, it would be possible to achieve each of the objectives
identified by the project applicant with the construction of a single - family residence that is similar
to the proposed project.
Elimination /Reduction of Significant Impacts
Implementation of this alternative would defer project - related effects, including less than
significant visual impacts associated with the development of the site (assuming that the
residence complies with the maximum building height standard. In addition, biological impacts
would also be the same as the proposed project (i.e., loss of 261 square feet of coastal bluff
scrub habitat) as a result of site preparation. Similarly, if designed properly, this alternative would
also be consistent with the long -range plans and policies adopted by the City of Newport Beach.
Comparative Merits
The "no project' alternative is similar to the proposed project, both in terms of achieving all of the
project objectives and avoiding potential environmental effects. Both the proposed project and the
,.no project' alternative would result in similar impacts, which are less than significant; however,
all of the effects of this alternative would be deferred until such time as another project is
proposed in the future.
10.3.2 Alternative Design (Remove Upper Level)
This alternative includes development of the site as proposed with a single - family residence with access from
Pacific Drive; however, the third upper level above the average elevation of Pacific Drive would be eliminated.
This possible alternative would result in the elimination of the garage and residential floor area (i.e., foyer and
office area) comprising approximately 805 square feet. As a result, the total floor area of the residence would
be reduced to 2,761 square feet. In addition, in order to accommodate on -site parking, the second floor roof
structure would be designed to support automobile parking.
10.3.2.1 Land Use and Planning
This alternative would generally be consistent with the relevant long -range plans, programs and policies of
the Newport Beach General Plan. It would also be consistent with the intensity of development in the
residential neighborhood and will also be compatible with that development. As suggested by the Newport
Beach Planning Commission, preserving the views from Begonia Park, as articulated in both the Natural
Resources Element and the CLUP should have priority over preservation of the bluff, which has been
substantially altered by development along Bayside Drive and Pacific Drive. However, by eliminating the
third floor from the plan, the garage and foyer would be eliminated and direct access to the home from the
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
f0 -4
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0— Alternatives
street level could not occur, necessitating an alternative design to accommodate access to the home. As
prescribed by the City's Municipal Code, covered parking is required. Therefore, the "deck" parking provided
with the alternative design that eliminates the upper level would require a variance from the parking code
requirements.
10.3.2.2 Biological Resources
Implementation of this alternative would result in the elimination of the existing coastal bluff scrub habitat (i.e.,
261 square feet). However, as indicated in Section 4.2, the elimination of this small area composed of only
three species characteristic of that habitat would not be significant because the habitat has been fragmented
and affected by human activities. This low quality /value habitat does not meet the criteria for ESHAs and is
not considered important; therefore, no significant impacts would occur and the effect of this alternative would
be the same as identified for the proposed project.
10.3.2.3 Aesthetics
Elimination of the project's third floor, which is located at the street elevation of Pacific Drive, would reduce
the effects associated with introducing a dwelling unit on the site. Because vehicular access to the site would
remain at Pacific Drive, it would be necessary to provide parking for the home on the roof of the proposed
structure; however, the parking would be uncovered to avoid erecting a structure that rises above the street.
Although automobiles parked on the roof would be visible, the proposed structure would not be visible from
Begonia Park. In addition, although not identified as a "public view corridor' in the Natural Resources
Element of the General Plan or the CLUP, views through the site to the bay and ocean would continue to be
available from both Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue in the vicinity of the subject property. Although project -
related visual impacts from Begonia Park were determined to be less than significant, this alternative would
eliminate any effects on views with the minor exception of the uncovered parking that would be provided on
the roof of the proposed residence.
Summary of the Alternative Design
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives
Implementation of this project would achieve all project objectives except for allowing a larger
residence on the property, unless the project is redesigned to relocate the living space (i.e., foyer
and study) lost with the elimination of the third floor within the floor plan. This alternative would
provide views from all levels (although one level that included a foyer and study would be
eliminated). It would provide vehicular access from Pacific Drive (to uncovered roof parking), it
minimizes the visual effects of the residence on views from Begonia Park, and outdoor living
areas would be directly accessible from each level.
Elimination /Reduction of Significant Impacts
Although the proposed single - family residence would not result in significant impacts based on
the significance criteria established for the project, the effects of the project could be reduced
through the implementation of this alternative. Specifically, the residence would not extend into
the viewshed of Begonia Park.
• Comparative Merits
Because this alternative would virtually eliminate any visual impacts from Begonia Park (and the
adjacent public streets) and does achieve most of the project objectives, it is considered to be the
"environmentally superior" alternative. However, as indicated above, the City does require that
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -5
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives
parking for single - family detached residential dwelling units be covered. Therefore, this
alternative would require the approval of a variance to allow uncovered parking.
10.3.3 Alternative Access (Bayside Drive)
Vehicular access to the subject property in this design alternative would be provided from Bayside Drive,
below the bluff, rather than from Pacific Drive where direct vehicular access is currently available. In addition,
the third floor of the proposed residence (i.e., ground level floor at Pacific Drive that includes the garage,
study and foyer) would be relocated as the first floor in order to remove that portion of the structure from the
Begonia Park viewshed. As a result, the total floor area would be the same as the proposed project (i.e.,
3,138 square feet, not including the garage).
10.3.3.1 Land Use and Planning
Implementation of this alternative would be consistent with the relevant long -range plans, programs, and
policies adopted by the City of Newport Beach that affect site development as well as the direction provided
by the Newport Beach Planning Commission, which concluded that the preservation of harbor and ocean
views from Begonia Park, a designated "public view point,' should take precedence over complete
preservation of the bluff in this location. As a result, relocating the project access to Bayview Drive and
relocating the third floor to become the first floor would be consistent with the direction provided by the
Planning Commission. However, this alternative would require the provision of an access easement through
the southerly limits of Begonia Park and would also necessitate potentially greater excavation and grading as
a result of the redesign of the project to accommodate the relocated third floor component of the proposed
project. Therefore, while this alternative would result in the preservation of the bay and ocean views from
vantage points within Begonia Park, it would result in substantially greater impacts to the bluff. In addition,
the extension of the vehicular access through the park would conflict with the park use in the lowest elevation
of the park along Bayview Drive. The Public Works Department has evaluated this alternative access and
finds it undesirable and possibly a hazard given limited vehicular sight distances along Bayside Drive that is
relatively narrow and curving.
10.3.3.2 Biological Resources
Similar to the proposed project and the Alternative Design, this alternative, too, would result in the elimination
of the existing coastal bluff scrub habitat (i.e., 261 square feet). However, the elimination of the low
quality /value habitat, which is not an ESHA and, therefore, is not considered important is not significant.
Therefore, no significant impacts to biological resources would occur and the effect of this alternative would
be the same as identified for the proposed project.
10.3.3.3 Aesthetics
As indicated in Section 10.3.3.1, this alternative would result in the preservation of the harbor and ocean
views from the Begonia Park vantage points as desired by the Newport Beach Planning Commission.
Relocation of the third floor of the project to the lower elevations of the site would eliminate the encroachment
of the structure into the Begonia Park viewshed. Although the potential project - related visual impacts to bay
and ocean views are less than significant, the elimination of the projection of the structure into the viewshed
represents an improvement to the aesthetic character of the area. In addition, views through the site to the
west and south from both Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue would not be affected with provision of the
alternative access and relocation of the third floor as identified in this alternative.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -6
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Section 10.0 — Alternatives
Summary of the Alternative Access
Ability to Achieve Project Objectives
Implementation of this alternative would achieve most of the project objectives except it would not
allow for vehicular access from Pacific Drive as desired by the project applicant. In addition, if
this alternative is implemented, views from all of the levels of the home would not be provided
because the living spaces in the third floor (i.e., foyer and study) would be relocated with the
garage element as a result of the Bayview Drive access, unless the plan is redesigned to
accommodate these living areas higher above the bluff to create harbor and ocean views.
Elimination /Reduction of Significant Impacts
Although the Alternative Access would improve views from Begonia Park and from Begonia Drive
and Pacific Drive, additional adverse effects would occur. For example, it would be necessary to
extend a private drive or roadway from Bayview Drive through the southern limits of Begonia Park
and up the lower elevation of the bluff to accommodate vehicular access. The extension of the
road through the park would alter the park setting and would conflict with policies related to the
preservation of the character of that facility. Furthermore, the applicant must be granted an
access easement through the park. Finally, it is anticipated that in order to extend the roadway to
the site from Bayview Drive, additional landform alteration would also be required. As a result,
nearly the entire bluff face would be altered.
Comparative Merits
Because of the potential adverse impacts to the park that would result from extending the
roadway from Bayview Drive to the site and, further, due to the more extensive landform
alteration that would also be required to replace the enclosed garage and living space, this
alternative would not be environmentally superior when compared to other alternatives evaluated.
10.4 Summary of Alternatives
An EIR is required to identify the "environmentally superior' alternative among those evaluated from the
reasonable range of alternative analyzed. Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines mandates
that in the event "... the environmentally superior alternative is the 'no project' alternative, the EIR shall also
identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives. In addition, alternatives
identified and evaluated are also intended to achieve the project objective, which includes:
Construction of a custom, single - family residence consistent with the General Plan and
Zoning designations adopted for the project that:
(1) provides adequate floor area within a personalized floor plan to accommodate
the applicant's living needs;
(2) provides views of the harbor and Pacific Ocean to the south and west from each
level;
(3) provides outdoor living areas that are directly accessible from indoor spaces on
each level;
(4) provides access from Pacific Drive to an enclosed garage;
(5) minimizes impacts on public views from Begonia Park.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -7
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental lmoact Reoort Section 10.0— Alternatives
Table 10 -1 provides a summary of the three project alternatives. As indicated in that table, while the
alternatives can achieve most or all of the project objectives, potential land use impacts and /or conflicts would
occur in the form of uncovered parking (Alternative Design) or impacts to Begonia Park and more extensive
landform alteration (Alternative Access).
Table 10 -1
Summary of Project Alternatives
Megonigal Residence
10.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that "... the EIR shall also identify an
environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives" if the No Project alternative is identified as
the environmentally superior alternative. As previously indicated, project implementation will not result in any
potentially significant impacts. The No Project alternative identified and analyzed will eliminate the potential
project - related effects in the short -term, because the site would remain undeveloped until some future time
when development is proposed in accordance with the adopted General Plan. However, with development of
the site, the same or similar effects as those identified for the proposed project would occur once
development consistent with the adopted plans and programs occurs. Therefore, the environmentally
superior alternative is the Alternative Design (elimination of the third floor of the proposed home), which
would eliminate the penetration of the structure into the viewshed, even though the project - related visual
impact is less than significant; however, the elimination of this visual effect would come at the expense of not
achieving some of the objectives (e.g., enclosed garage, larger living area, etc.).
Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of a "reasonable range of alternatives"
to the project that would not only reduce potentially significant effects of the project but also achieve most of
the project objectives. It is important to note that the analysis presented in Chapter 4.0 of the Draft EIR
concludes that project implementation will not result in any potentially significant environmental impacts (i.e.,
no mitigation is required). Therefore, the analysis of alternatives does not have the same implications when
considering alternatives and, in particular, identifying the "environmentally superior" alternative as compared
to other projects that result in potentially significant impacts. The analysis of alternatives for the proposed
Megonigal residence is intended only to provide additional information related to other alternatives, including
the "no project" alternative, for consideration by the City's decision- making body.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -8
Reduced
Impacts Avoided or
Meets
Project
Substantially
Environmentally
Project
Alternative
Effects
Reduced'
Additional Effects
Superior?
Objectives
Biological Resources
a
None
No Project
Yes
Land Use'
None
No
<
1 -5 (Potentially)
Aesthetics
Alternative Design
No
Aesthetics
Land Use (Unenclosed
Yes
2, 3, 4, 5
(Remove Upper Level )
Parking)
Alternative Design
s
Bluff Alteration
(Bayside Drive Access)
No
Aesthetics
Land Use (Begonia
No
1, 3, 5
Park Impacts)
'No significant impacts are anticipated as a result of project implementation.
'The "no project' alternative would eliminate all of the project's effects in the short-term; however, future development of the site in
accordance with the adopted long -range plans for the site would result in the same or similar
effects that would also be less than
significant, if developed in the same manner as the proposed project.
'Short-term scenario.
"Long -term scenario.
If the third floor (i.e., ground floor ) is also eliminated.
10.5 Environmentally Superior Alternative
Section 15126.6(e)(2) of the State CEQA Guidelines requires that "... the EIR shall also identify an
environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives" if the No Project alternative is identified as
the environmentally superior alternative. As previously indicated, project implementation will not result in any
potentially significant impacts. The No Project alternative identified and analyzed will eliminate the potential
project - related effects in the short -term, because the site would remain undeveloped until some future time
when development is proposed in accordance with the adopted General Plan. However, with development of
the site, the same or similar effects as those identified for the proposed project would occur once
development consistent with the adopted plans and programs occurs. Therefore, the environmentally
superior alternative is the Alternative Design (elimination of the third floor of the proposed home), which
would eliminate the penetration of the structure into the viewshed, even though the project - related visual
impact is less than significant; however, the elimination of this visual effect would come at the expense of not
achieving some of the objectives (e.g., enclosed garage, larger living area, etc.).
Section 15126.6 of the State CEQA Guidelines requires consideration of a "reasonable range of alternatives"
to the project that would not only reduce potentially significant effects of the project but also achieve most of
the project objectives. It is important to note that the analysis presented in Chapter 4.0 of the Draft EIR
concludes that project implementation will not result in any potentially significant environmental impacts (i.e.,
no mitigation is required). Therefore, the analysis of alternatives does not have the same implications when
considering alternatives and, in particular, identifying the "environmentally superior" alternative as compared
to other projects that result in potentially significant impacts. The analysis of alternatives for the proposed
Megonigal residence is intended only to provide additional information related to other alternatives, including
the "no project" alternative, for consideration by the City's decision- making body.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
10 -8
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 11.0 — Organizations and Persons Consulted
CHAPTER 11.0
ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Planning Department
David Lepo, Director
Patrick Alford, Planning Manager
James Campbell, Principal Planner
KEETON KREITZER CONSULTING
Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal
CHAMBERS GROUP
Jenny McGee, Staff Biologist
DAVID R. OLSON ARCHITETS
David R. Olson
DraffEnvironmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 11 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report
CHAPTER 12.0
REFERENCES
12.0 — References
The following documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning Department,
3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658.
1. Newport Beach General Plan, including all elements; City of Newport Beach (Adopted July 25,
2006).
2. Local Coastal Program — Coastal Land Use Plan; City of Newport Beach (Adopted December 13,
2005).
3. Final Program EIR — City of Newport Beach General Plan; City of Newport Beach.
4. Title 20, Zoning Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
5. Excavation and Grading Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code.
6. Chapters 10.26 and 10.28, Community Noise Ordinance of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
7. Aerie PA 2005 -196 Draft Environmental Impact Report; Keeton Kreitzer Consulting; March 2009.
8. Resolution No. 9190 (A Resolution of the City County of the City of Newport Beach Accepting and
Agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of the Categorical Exclusion for Single - Family and Duplex
Residential Developments in the Coastal Zone in the City of Newport Beach); September 12,
2007.
The following documents have been prepared to evaluate the proposed project and are the basis of the
analysis presented in specific sections of the Draft EIR.
1. The EDR Radius Map Report with GeoCheck (Megonigal Residence); Environmental Data
Resources, Inc. March 4, 2009.
2. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for New Residence (2333 Pacific Drive, Corona del Mar, CA
92625); Borella Geology, Inc.; March 20, 2007
1 "Biological Assessment Survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California following initial
Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton Consulting;" Chambers Group; October 9, 2008.
4. "Follow -Up Survey and Results in Response to Comments Issued by BonTerra Consulting
Regarding the Biological Study of 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, Orange County,
California;" Chambers Group; February 27, 2009.
5. 'September 23 Appeal Hearing on the Megonigal Property Biological Evaluation, 2333 Pacific
Drive, Newport Beach, CA;" Robert A. Hamilton; September 22, 2008.
6. Review of Biological Documents for 2333 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach, California;"
BonTerra Consulting; October 21, 2009.
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 12 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 13.0— Glossary of Acronyms
CHAPTER 13.0
GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS
AAQS
Ambient Air Quality Standard /Standards
ADT
Average Daily Traffic
ANSI
American National Standards Institute
AQMD
Air Quality Management District
AQMP
Air Quality Management Plan
BACT
Best Available Control Technology
BMP
Best Management Practices
CAA
Federal Clean Air Act
CARB
California Air Resources Board
CCAA
California Clean Air Act
CDFG
California Department of Fish and Game
CEQA
California Environmental Quality Act
CESA
California Endangered Species Act
CNEL
Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO
Carbon Monoxide
COZ
Carbon Dioxide
COZE
Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
CWA
Federal Clean Water Act
DAMP
Drainage Area Management Plan
dB
Decibel
dBA
A- weighted decibel
EA Environmental Assessment
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
F Fahrenheit
ft Feet
FTA Federal Transit Administration
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
ICU Intersection Capacity Utilization
IS Initial Study
Leq
Equivalent noise level
Lmax
Maximum noise level
Lmin
Minimum noise level
LOS
Level of service
MCLs
Maximum content levels
MMRP
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
MND
Mitigated Negative Declaration
MPAH
Master Plan of Arterial Highways
MSL
Mean Sea Level
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 13 -1
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133
Draft Environmental Impact Report Chapter 13.0 — Glossary of Acronyms
NAVD88 North American Vertical Datum 1988
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
NOP Notice of Preparation
NOx Nitrogen oxides
NPDES Nation Pollution Discharge and Elimination System
03 Ozone
PA
Planning Application
PRC
Public Resources Code
PM2.5
Particulates 2.5 microns or less in diameter
PM1e
Particulates ten microns or less in diameter
ppm
parts per million
PPV
Peak Particle Velocity
RAP
Remedial Action Plan
ROC
Reactive Organic Compounds
ROG
Reactive Organic Gases
RWQCB
Regional Water Quality Control Board
SAMP
Special Area Management Plan
SCAG
Southern California Association of Governments
SCAQMD
South Coast Air Quality Management District
sf
Square feet
S02
Sulfur Dioxide
SWPPP
Storm Water Pollution and Prevention Program
Sox
Sulfur oxides
TDM
Transportation Demand Management
TDS
Total Dissolved Solids
Tonnes
Metric Tons/Year
TPD
Trips per Day
USGS United State Geological Survey
V/C
Volume /Capacity
VdB
Velocity decibels
VOC
Volatile Organic Compounds
VPD
Vehicles per Day
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
Draft Environmental Impact Report
Megonigal Residence PA 2007 -133 — Newport Beach, CA
August 2009
Page 13 -2
Appendix A
Initial Study /Notice of Preparation
Notice of Completion & Environmental Document Transmittal
Mail to.' State Clearinghouse, P. O. Box 3044, Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 (916) 445 -0613 SCH #
For Hand Delivery/Street Address: 1400 Tenth Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
Project Title: Megonigal Residence (P.A2007 -133)
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Contact Person: James Campbell, Principal Planner
Mailing Address: 3300 Newport Boulevard Phone: (949) 644 -3210
City: Newport Beach Zip: 926585 County: Orange
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Project Location: County: Orange City/Nearest Community: Newport Beach
Cross Streets: Pacific Avenue/ Zip Code: 92658
Litt. / Long.: 33° 37' 00" NI 117' 53' 51" W Total Acres: 0,10
Assessor's Parcel No.: Section: Twp,: Range: Base:
Within 2 Miles:
Document Type
State Hwy #: SR -1
Airports:
Waterways: Pacific Ocean
Railways: Schools:
CEQA:
® NOR
❑
Draft EIR
NEPA: ❑ NOI Other:
❑
Joint Document
Acres Employees ❑ Power: Type MW
❑ Early Cons
❑
Supplement/Subsequent EIR
❑ Hazardous Waste: Type
❑ EA
❑
Final Document
❑ Neg Dec
(Prior
SCH No.)
❑ Draft EIS
❑
Other
❑ MitNeg Dec
Other
❑ FONSI
— — — — — — — — — — — —
Local Action Type:
— —
— — — — — — — — — —
— —
— — — — — — — — — — —
— —
— — — — — — —
❑
General Plan Update
❑
Specific Plan
❑
Rezone
❑
Annexation
❑
General Plan Amendment
❑
Master Plan
❑
Prezone
❑
Redevelopment
❑
General Plan Element
❑
Planned Unit Development
❑
Use Permit
❑
Coastal Permit
❑
Community Plan
❑
Site Plan
❑
Land Division (Subdivision, etc.)
®
Other Mod. Permit
Development Type:
® Residential: Units I
Acres 0.10 ❑ Water Facilities: Type MGD
❑ Office: Sq.ft.
Acres Employees ❑ Transportation: Type
❑ Commercial: Sq.ft
Acres Employees ❑ Mining: Mineral
❑ Industrial: Sq.ft.
Acres Employees ❑ Power: Type MW
❑ Educational
❑ WasteTreatment:Type MGD
❑ Recreational
❑ Hazardous Waste: Type
❑ Other:
Project Issues Discussed in Document:
® Aesthetic/Visual ❑ Fiscal ❑ Recreation /Parks ® Vegetation
❑ Agricultural Land ® Flood Plain /Flooding ❑ Schools /Universities ® Water Quality
® Air Quality ❑ Forest Land /Fire Hazard ❑ Septic Systems ❑ Water Supply /Groundwater
❑ Archeological /Historical ® Geologic /Seismic ❑ Sewer Capacity ® Wetland/Riparian
® Biological Resources ❑ Minerals ® Soil Erosion /Compaction /Grading ® Wildlife
® Coastal Zone ® Noise ❑ Solid Waste ® Growth Inducing
® Drainage/Absorption ❑ Population /Housing Balance ® Toxic/Hazardous ® Land Use
❑ Economic /Jobs ❑ Public Services /Facilities ® Traffic /Circulation ® Cumulative Effects
❑ Other
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Present Land Use /Zoning /General Plan Designation:
Existing Land Use: Undeveloped /Vacant;_ Existing Zoning: "R -1" (Single - Family Residential); General Plan: "RS -DT (Single -Unit Residential — Detached)
—
Project Description: (please use a separate page if necess— ary) — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
The project applicant is proposing the construction of a single - family residential dwelling unit on the property, which will have vehicular access to the ground floor
from Pacific Drive. The proposed residence will have a total floor area of 3,138 square feet, including 377 square feet on the ground floor, 934 square feet on
the second floor and 1,827 square feet on the first floor. The ground floor level supports an additional 428 square foot garage. In addition to the indoor living
area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space, including 129 square feel on the ground floor, 714 square feet on the second floor, and 161 square feet on the
first, is provided. The proposed three-story, 3,566 square -foot residence conforms to all Zoning Code property development regulations, with the exception of
the proposed planter walls and a water feature that are located within the three -foot front yard setback height limit. The applicant is requesting approval of
Modification Permit No. 2007.080 to allow planter walls and a water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback.
Note: The state Clearinghouse will assign identification numbers ror all new projects. If a SCH number already exists for a January 2008
project (e.g. Notice of Preparation or previous draft document) please fill in.
Reviewing Agencies Checklist
Lead Agencies may recommend State Clearinghouse distribution by marking agencies below with and X'. If you have already
sent your document to the agency please denote that with an "S ".
Air Resources Board
_ Boating & Waterways, Department of
California Highway Patrol
CalFire
Caltrans District # 12
Caltrans Division of Aeronautics
Caltrans Plarming (headquarters)
Central Valley Flood Protection Board
_ Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy
_ Coastal Commission
_ Colorado River Board
Conservation, Department of
Corrections, Department of
Delta Protection Commission
_ Education, Department of
_ Energy Commission
Fish & Game Region # _
_ Food & Agriculture, Department of
General Services, Department of
Health Services, Department of
Housing & Community Development
Integrated Waste Management Board
Native American Heritage Commission
Local Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency)
Office of Emergency Services
Office of Historic Preservation
_ Office of Public School Construction
Parks & Recreation
_ Pesticide Regulation, Department of
Public Utilities Commission
_ Regional WQCB #
Resources Agency
S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission
San Gabriel & Lower L.A. Rivers and Mms Conservancy
San Joaquin River Conservancy
Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
State Lands Commission
_ SWRCB: Clean Water Grants
SWRCB: Water Quality
_ SWRCB: Water Rights
Tahoe Regional Planning Agency
Toxic Substances Control, Department of
Water Resources, Department of
Other
Other
Starting Date May 11, 2009 Ending Date June 9, 2009
Lead Agency (Complete if applicable):
Consulting Firm: Keeton Kreitzer Consulting Applicant: Kim and Canine Megonigal
Address: 17291 Irvine Boulevard, Suite 305 Address: 17871 Cowan Avenue
City /State /Zip: Tustin, CA 92780 City/State /Zip: Irvine, CA 92614
Contact: Keeton K. Kreitzer, Principal Phone: (949) 752 -6996
Phone: (714) 665 -8509
Signature of Lead Agency
Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21161,rPublic Resources Code.
Date: May 8, 2009
Date:
Project:
Project Location
Lead Agency:
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
May 8, 2009
Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133)
2333 Pacific Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA
City of Newport Beach
TOM DALY, CLERK-RECORDER
gy DEPUTY
Pursuant to Section 15082(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach will be the lead agency and will prepare an
environmental impact report for the project described below. The City needs to know
your agency's views as to the scope and content of the environmental information
related to your agency's statutory authority with respect to the proposed project. Your
agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering any
applicable permits for the project.
Based on the initial study that was prepared for the proposed project, the City of San
Newport Beach has determined that an environmental impact report (EIR). The initial
study concluded that project implementation could result in potentially significant
environmental effects to:
• Aesthetics
• Biological Resources
• Land Use and Planning
Unless specific comments are received during the NOP public comment period that
indicates a potential for the project to result in significant impacts, the following issues
will not be addressed in the Draft EIR:
• Agricultural Resources
• Recreation
• Utilities
• Geology and Soils
• Hydrology /Water Quality
• Noise
• Cultural Resources
• Mineral Resources
• Public Services and Facilities
• Population and Housing
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Air Quality
• Transportation /Traffic
Pursuant to Section 15103 of the CEQA Guidelines, your response must be sent at the
earliest date but received by our agency no later than thirty (30) days after receipt of
this notice. Should you have any questions regarding the project or notice of
preparation, please call Mr. James Campbell, Principal Planner, at (949) 644 -3210.
Please mail your written response including any comments you may have on this
James Campbell, Principal Planner
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Center Drive
P. O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
Applicant: Kim and Caroline Megonigal.
Description: The subject property currently consists of a single parcel situated on a
bluff that extends below Pacific Drive. The project site is located at 2333 Pacific Drive
in Corona del Mar and encompasses 4,412 square feet (0.10 acre); the site is currently
undeveloped. The applicant is proposing the construction of a single - family residential
dwelling unit on the property, which will have vehicular access to the ground floor from
Pacific Drive. The proposed residence will have a total floor area of 3,138 square feet,
including 377 square feet on the ground floor, 934 square feet on the second floor and
1,827 square feet on the first floor. The ground floor level supports an additional 428
square foot garage. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor
patio space, including 129 square feet on the ground floor, 714 square feet on the
second floor, and 161 square feet on the first, is provided. The proposed three -story,
3,566 square -foot residence conforms to all Zoning Code property development
regulations, with the exception of the proposed planter walls and a water feature that
are located within the three -foot front yard setback height limit. The applicant is
requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 to allow planter walls and a
water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback.
Because the project conforms to the height limits of the Zoning Code, it meets all of the
terms and conditions of Categorical Exclusion Order E -77 -5. Therefore, a Coastal
Development Permit is not required.
Surrounding Land Uses and Setting
The subject property is currently undeveloped and is surrounding by development on
three sides, including single - family residences on the north, south and west; Begonia
Park is located east of the site. The aerial photograph illustrates the undeveloped site
and the existing land uses surrounding the site.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project Title: Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard,
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
3. Contact Person and Phone Number: James Campbell, Planning Department
(949) 644 -3210
4. Project Location: 2333 Pacific Drive
Newport Beach, CA
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Kim Megonigal
17872 Cowan Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614
6. General Plan Designation: Single Unit Residential — Detached (RS -D)
7. Zoning: Single - Family Residential (R -1)
8. Introduction: None
9. Project Description:
Project Location
The subject property currently consists of a single parcel situated on a steeply sloping bluff that
extends below Pacific Drive. The bluff is above two single - family residences constructed at the base
of the bluff adjacent to Bayside Drive. The subject site is located at 2333 Pacific Drive in the Corona
del Mar are of Newport Beach and encompasses 4,412 square feet (0.10 acre); the site is currently
undeveloped. The site is located west of and abuts Begonia Park.
Project Description
The applicant proposes to construct a 3,566 square foot single - family residence. The proposed
residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the first floor, 934 square feet on the
second floor, and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (includes a 428 - square foot, 2 -car garage).
Vehicular access is from Pacific Drive at the intersection of Begonia Avenue and Pacific Drive. In
addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square feet of outdoor patio space on the three levels is
provided. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. 2007 -080 to allow planter
walls and a water feature to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback.
Grading, landscaping and utility connections necessary for construction of the proposed residence
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 2
are included. Lastly, the applicant is proposing non - standard improvements within the public right -of-
way consisting of enhanced paving for pedestrian and vehicular access from Pacific Drive.
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
As indicated below, the subject property is currently undeveloped and is surrounding by development
on three sides, including single - family residences on the north, south and west; Begonia Park is
located east of the site. The aerial photograph illustrates the undeveloped site and the existing land
uses surrounding the site. A summary of the general Plan designations, zoning, and current uses for
the subject property and adjacent properties.
LOCATION
GENERAL PLAN
ZONING
CURRENT USE
ON -SITE
Single Unit Residential —
Single - Family Residential
Vacant, undeveloped land
Detached(RS -D)
R -1
NORTH
Two -Unit Residential (RT)
Two Famillyy Residential
Residential
SOUTH
Multiple -Unit Residential
Multiple - Family
Residential
RM
Residential MFR
Parks and Recreation
EAST
PR
R -1
Begonia Park
WEST
RS -D
R -1
Residential
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
None
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 4
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by
the checklist on the following pages.
Q Aesthetics
❑ Agricultural Resources
❑ Air Quality
Elf Biological Resources
❑ Cultural Resources
❑ Geology & Soils
DETERMINATION
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Q Land Use & Planning
❑ Hydrology & Water Quality
❑ Mineral Resources
❑ Noise
❑ Population & Housing
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ Public Services
❑ Recreation
❑ Transportation/Traffic
❑ Utilities & Service Systems
Q Mandatory Findings of Significance
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions
in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent.
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the
environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact'
or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. H
find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothing further is required. ❑
Submitted by: James Campbell, Pril
Planning Department
Planner
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 5
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
I.
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
0
❑
❑
❑
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within
LEI
❑
❑
❑
a state scenic highway?
C)
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
0
El
El
13
the site and its surroundings?
d)
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
❑
❑
0
❑
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
II.
AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. Would the project:
a)
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
❑
❑
❑
0
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural
use?
b)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
❑
❑
❑
0
Act contract?
C)
Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
❑
❑
❑
0
to non - agricultural use?
III.
AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a)
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
❑
❑
❑
0
quality plan?
b)
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or
❑
❑
0
❑
projected air quality violation?
C)
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment
under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard
❑
❑
0
❑
(including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
G) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands
as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but
not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE
Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant
Impact With Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than No
Significant Impact
Impact
0 ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ D
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
❑
❑
❑
0
0
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
0
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 7
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially El 10 11 11 in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1 -B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions El El 0 11 Involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter ❑ ❑ D ❑
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code ❑ El 11 0
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport 171 El El 0
or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
the project area?
Significant
Significant
Significant
Impact
Impact
With Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
❑
❑
0
❑
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
0
❑
iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction?
❑
❑
❑
0
iv) Landslides?
❑
0
❑
❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that
would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially El 10 11 11 in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1 -B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions El El 0 11 Involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter ❑ ❑ D ❑
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code ❑ El 11 0
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport 171 El El 0
or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
the project area?
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 8
Potentially Less Than
Significant Significant
Impact With Mitigation
Incorporated
U.uss Ulan Nu
Significant Impact
Impact
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted El L1 0 El
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are El ❑ El 0
adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
Vlll.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a)
Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
❑ El El
requirements?
b)
Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such.that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing
❑ ❑ ❑ 0
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
C)
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
❑ ❑ El
river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off -site?
d)
Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off -site?
e)
Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped
on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ 2 ❑
k) Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or El El 0 El construction?
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 9
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
1)
Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from
❑
❑
❑
0
areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle
b)
or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling,
❑
❑
D
❑
hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading
❑
❑
❑
0
docks or other outdoor work areas?
IT)
Result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the
❑
❑
0
❑
a)
beneficial uses of the receiving waters?
n)
Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity
❑
❑
D
❑
or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm?
o)
Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or
❑
❑
0
❑
surrounding areas?
IX.
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
❑
❑
0
❑
a)
Physically divide an established community?
❑
❑
❑
0
b)
Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program,
0
❑
❑
❑
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
C)
Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
0
❑
❑
❑
community conservation plan?
X.
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
❑
❑
❑
0
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b)
Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
❑
❑
❑
0
specific plan, or other land use plan?
XI.
NOISE. Would the project result in:
a)
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or noise
❑
❑
D
❑
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b)
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground
❑
❑
0
❑
borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
C)
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
❑
❑
0
❑
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 10
ruienuauy mess roan Lessman No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ❑ 21 ❑ ❑
project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport 13 El El or public use airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
excessive noise levels?
XII.
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a)
Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or
❑
❑
❑
0
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b)
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
El
❑
❑
0
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
C)
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
❑
El
El
Q
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIII.
PUBLIC SERVICES
a)
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
government facilities, need for new or physically altered
government facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
❑
❑
El
❑
Police protection?
❑
❑
0
❑
Schools?
❑
❑
Q
❑
Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑
0
XIV.
RECREATION
a)
Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
El
El
0
El
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 11
t otentiany Less man
Significant Significant
Impact With Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than No
Significant Impact
Impact
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction of or expansion of recreational facilities which El ❑ El 0
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Opportunities?
XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC Would the project:
a)
Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to
the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e.,
result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle
❑
Q
❑
❑
trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b)
Exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of service
standard established by the county congestion management
❑
❑
❑
0
agency for designated roads or highways?
C)
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
❑
❑
El
Q
substantial safety risks?
d)
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
❑
❑
❑
D
(e.g., farm equipment)?
e)
Result in inadequate emergency access?
❑
❑
Q
❑
f)
Result in inadequate parking capacity?
❑
❑
0
❑
g)
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
El
❑
El
Q
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
XVI.
UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a)
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
El
❑
❑
9
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b)
Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
❑
❑
❑
Q
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
C)
Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
❑
❑
0
❑
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
d)
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
❑
❑
❑
avnanriart anfiflamanfe naarfarf7
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 12
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant Significant Impact
Impact With Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider,
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to
the provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self -
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal Q ❑ ❑ ❑
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major period of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable Q ❑ ❑ ❑
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects.)
G) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ❑ ❑ Q ❑
XVII. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This section of the Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project
and provides explanations of the responses to the Environmental Checklist. The environmental
analysis in this section is patterned after the questions in the Environmental Checklist. Under each
issue area, a general discussion of the existing conditions is provided according to the environmental
analysis of the proposed Project's impacts. To each question, there are four possible responses:
No Impact. The proposed project will not have any measurable environmental impact on the
environment.
• Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will have the potential for impacting the
environment, although this impact will be below thresholds that may be considered significant.
Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project will have potentially
significant adverse impacts which may exceed established thresholds; however, mitigation measures
or changes to the proposed project's physical or operational characteristics will reduce these impacts
to levels that are less than significant. Those mitigation measures are specified in the following
sections. Each recommended mitigation measure has been agreed to by the applicant.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 13
• Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project will have impacts that are considered
significant and additional analysis is required to identify mitigation measures that could reduce these
impacts to insignificant levels. When an impact is determined to be potentially significant in the
preliminary analysis, the environmental issue will be subject to detailed analysis in an environmental
impact report (EIR).
The references and sources used for the analysis are also identified with each response.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 14
I. AESTHETICS
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Potentially Significant Impact. The certified Coastal Land Use Plan ( "CLUP ") and the Natural
Resources Element of the City's General Plan (Figure NR3) designate Begonia Park as a "public view
point." Westerly views exist from the park to Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean beyond. Although the
proposed single - family residence has been designed to conform to the height limit imposed by the
Newport Beach Zoning Code, project implementation will result in the construction of a residential
structure within these views. The proposed structure, which would be compatible with the existing homes
along Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue because it is designed in conformance with most development
standards of the Zoning Code, will not obstruct public views of the bay and coastline due to the location of
the proposed structure. Public views of Newport Harbor and the Pacific Ocean beyond exist from Pacific
Drive and Begonia Avenue. The proposed structure will obstruct some of these views, depending upon
the specific vantage point. Several General Plan policies require new development to protect and, where
feasible, enhance public views. Even though the project conforms to the existing building height limit,
setback standards, and related development standards (except the planter and water feature in the
required front yard setback area), potential public view impacts from the "public view point" at Begonia
Park and /or Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue may occur. The Draft EIR will evaluate the potential visual
impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings with a state scenic highway?
Potentially Significant Impact. The subject property is located on Pacific Drive, at the top of a bluff
overlooking Newport Harbor, and is surrounded by single - family residences on the northwest, west and
south. As indicated above, Begonia Park is located to the east. The site is not located along a state
scenic highway and no historic buildings or other significant features exist on the property. Although some
trees are present on the site, they are not considered to be important scenic resources within the aesthetic
character of the site or project environs. A portion of the site has been extensively disturbed and is devoid
of vegetation. A small area of coastal bluff scrub habitat exists on the property. With the exception of the
bluff feature itself, no other scenic resources exist on the site. The upper limits of the bluff would be
graded to accommodate the proposed development, resulting in the alteration of the existing bluff feature.
Two single - family homes are located directly below the subject property, which were permitted to cut into
the toe of the slope to permit sufficient area to construct the buildings. The potential visual impacts of
project implementation on the bluff will be evaluated in the Draft EIR.
C) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings?
Potentially Significant Impact. As indicated above, project implementation includes the development of
the site with a single - family residence. Access to the proposed home would be via Pacific Drive. The
structure will be single story at the street level (i.e., from Pacific Drive) and conform to the 24 -foot height
limit prescribed by the R -1 zoning district regulations. Nonetheless, potential visual impacts may occur
from locations within Begonia Park where views of the harbor and coast exist. Encroachment into the
viewshed by the proposed home would affect views from various vantages within the park and from
Pacific Drive. The potential effect on the existing visual character of the site and environs will be
evaluated in the Draft EIR.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. The existing residential development on Pacific Avenue is characterized
by lighting along the street and other interior and exterior lighting associated with residential uses. This
illumination occurs along the frontage of the street and the rear portions of the residential properties.
Lighting for the proposed project will also be provided for the same purpose as that which currently exists
in the area (i.e., security and structure illumination). It is anticipated that the lighting will be energy efficient
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 15
and will also be shielded or recessed as required by existing code, so that direct glare and reflections are
contained within the boundaries of the property. As a result, compliance with the lighting standards and
requirements will ensure that no significant lighting impacts occur; no mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use?
No Impact. No Prime Farmland, Farmland of State or Local Importance, or Unique Farmland occurs
within or in the vicinity of the site. The site and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built -up
Land" and "Other Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map. Further, neither the site nor the
adjacent areas are designated as prime, unique or important farmlands by the State Resources Agency or
by the Newport Beach General Plan. Therefore, no impact on significant farmlands would occur with the
proposed project and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
No Impact. The Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element designates the site as "Single Family
Attached" and the zone designation for the site is "Single Family Residential." Therefore, there is no
conflict with zoning for agricultural use, and the property and surrounding properties are not under a
Williamson Act contract. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
C) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use?
No Impact. The site is not being used for agricultural purposes and, as indicated previously, is not
designated as agricultural land. The subject property and the area surrounding the site are developed
with residential uses. Therefore, no agricultural uses on the site or within the site's vicinity would be
converted to non - agricultural use. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
required.
III. AIR QUALITY
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan?
No Impact. Development of the subject property with one single - family residence will have no effect upon
the key strategies of the regional Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which focus on emissions
reductions through controls on business, industry and paints, and through stricter federal and state
regulatory controls to improve fuel efficiency, reduce transportation - related exhaust emissions, and reduce
emissions from a variety of consumer products. The subject site is currently undeveloped. Construction
of one residence on the site represents an insignificant increase in potential mobile- and stationary source
pollutant emissions when compared to the existing occupied units and an insignificant potential decrease
if all of the existing dwelling units were occupied. Therefore, based on the small incremental increase in
pollutant emissions anticipated as a result of project implementation, the proposed project would not affect
the long -term projections related to land use planning and growth forecasts. As discussed in the
responses to Ill.b through Ill.e, no significant air quality impacts are anticipated as a result of this project;
therefore, it would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the AQMP. This conclusion is further
supported by the goals articulated in the Natural Resources Element of the General Plan that is intended
to reduce mobile source emissions as well as those from stationary sources. Consistent with those
policies, project implementation will result in only a small number of vehicle trips. The project will also
incorporate Best Available Control Technologies (BACT) to minimize pollution and reduce source
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 16
emissions. Finally, the project sponsor will also be required as part of compliance with standard building
and grading ordinances to operate construction equipment and use building materials and paints that
minimize air pollutant emissions and to control dust created during construction.
I Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing
or projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. There are no air pollution sources on site or in the immediate vicinity and
the proposed project would not introduce any sources of air pollution or hazardous air emissions that
could contribute to or worsen an existing air quality violation. Project implementation would result in
temporary construction emissions that may affect local and regional air quality. Temporary construction
activity emissions will occur during the construction stage of the proposed single - family residential dwelling
unit, including the on -site generation of dust and equipment exhaust, and off -site emissions from
construction workers commuting to the site and trucks hauling excavated earth materials from the site and
delivering building materials to the subject property. Heavy -duty trucks, earthmovers, air compressors,
and power generators would be used during the grading and construction phase. Operation of these
vehicles, equipment, and machines would temporarily increase air pollutant levels in the vicinity of the
proposed project. In addition, emissions from delivery and haul trucks (i.e., approximately 53 haul trucks
to transport export soils), construction crew vehicles, concrete mixers, and other off -site vehicle trips
would add to local pollutant levels. The short -term construction emission levels would be expected to
remain below the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) significance thresholds for
each type of pollutant, with or without best available control measures. Construction -phase emissions
would not, therefore, violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected
air quality violation. Given the limited size of the project (i.e., one single - family residential dwelling unit),
construction emissions for carbon monoxide (CO), reactive organic gases (ROG), sulfur oxides (SOx) and
particulate matter (PMio) would generally be low from equipment use and truck trips. In addition, volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions from paints and coatings would create ROG emissions during
construction. Dust emissions on site would be generated by excavation and initial construction activities.
However, as indicated previously, such emissions would be less than the current thresholds and would,
therefore, not be significant.
Long -term emission sources associated with the proposed single - family residence include vehicular
exhaust from daily traffic (i.e., based on about 10 vehicle trips per day), energy consumption, site and
landscape maintenance, and incidental emissions from use of a variety of household cleaning and hair
care products. Estimated long -term project - related emissions would not exceed the SCAQMD daily
thresholds for all categories of pollutants. The project's long -term emissions would not violate any air
quality standard established by the AQMD or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well- being, public health, natural resources, and
the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation
of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snow
pack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and
residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the
incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health - related problems.
The State Legislature has directed the California Air Resources Board to consult with the Public Utilities
Commission in the development of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduction measures, including limits
on emissions of greenhouse gases applied to electricity and natural gas providers regulated by the Public
Utilities Commission. The Legislature has also directed the California Air Resources Board to assure that
such measures meet the statewide emissions limits for greenhouse gases (GHG) to be established
pursuant to Assembly Bill 32. Although the project would increase the resident population on the project
site, the proposed project includes only one single - family residence. The incremental increase in potential
greenhouse gases associated with the proposed single - family residence would not be significant in the
context of the contribution of worldwide GHG impacts.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 17
C) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above, neither short -term (i.e., construction) nor long -term
(i.e., operational) emissions associated with the proposed project would exceed SCAQMD recommended
significance thresholds. These thresholds were developed to provide a method of assessing a project's
individual impact significance, and also to determine whether the project's impacts could be cumulatively
considerable. The proposed project would not, therefore, result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant. Since the South Coast Air Basin is in non- attainment with respect to
ozone and PM10, and the construction emissions would add to the regional burden of these pollutants, a
vigorous set of air pollution control measures is recommended during the construction phases (refer to
MM -1 through MM -6, at the end of this section).
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
No Impact. The area in which the subject property is located is dominated by single - family residential
development; there are no senior housing facilities, hospitals, schools or other sensitive receptors located
near the proposed project site. A blufftop passive park /public view point is located adjacent to the project
site. Moreover, as discussed in the preceding assessment of potential air quality impacts, the proposed
project would not generate substantial pollutant emissions, either during the temporary construction
phases or over the long -term operating life of the proposed homes when occupied. Although no
significant impacts are anticipated, several conditions are prescribed to further reduce dust and
construction equipment exhaust emissions during the construction phase.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. A variety of odors would be associated with construction equipment exhaust emissions and
application of paints and other architectural coatings. The odors would be minor and temporary in nature
and would not significantly affect people residing or occupying areas beyond the immediate construction
zones. Subsequent to the completion of construction activities, development of the site with a single -
family residence would not result in any significant change in the kinds of odors that could be experienced
in the project environs, which is composed of similar single - family residential dwelling units. Occasional,
less than significant odors may occur in conjunction with trash pick up and outdoor food preparation (e.g.,
barbeques), and possibly with outdoor maintenance activities. Trash containers would be equipped with
lids and would be stored inside the dwelling units and garages. The proposed project will not generate
unusual or large quantities of solid waste materials, or utilize chemicals, food products, or other materials
that emit strong odors that would adversely affect the ambient air quality in the project environs.
Therefore, the project does not have the potential to create objectionable odors; and no mitigation
measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
Although no significant air quality impacts will occur as a result of the proposed project, the following
mitigation measures highlight specific aspects of SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 that are considered
effective construction control measures to minimize this project's construction phase air quality impacts:
All applicable measures set forth in those rules shall be implemented by the Contractor.
During grading activities, any exposed soil areas shall be watered at least four times per
day. Stockpiles of crushed cement, debris, dirt or other dusty materials shall be covered
or watered twice daily. On windy days or when fugitive dust can be observed leaving the
proposed project site, additional applications of water shall be applied to maintain a
minimum 12 percent moisture content as defined by SCAQMD Rule 403. Soil
disturbance shall be terminated whenever windy conditions exceed 25 miles per hour.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 18
Truck loads carrying soil and debris material shall be wetted or covered prior to leaving
the site. Where vehicles leave the construction site and enter adjacent public streets, the
streets shall be swept daily.
All diesel - powered machinery exceeding 100 horsepower shall be equipped with soot
traps, unless the Contractor demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City Building Official
that it is infeasible.
The construction contractor shall time the construction activities, including the
transportation of construction equipment vehicles and equipment to the site, and delivery
of materials, so as not to interfere with peak hour traffic. To minimize obstruction of
through traffic lanes adjacent to the site, a flag person shall be retained to maintain safety
adjacent to existing roadways, if deemed necessary by the City.
The construction contractor shall encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the
construction workers.
To the extent feasible, pre- coated /natural colored building materials shall be used.
Water -based or low VOC coatings shall be used that comply with SCAQMD Rule 1113
limits. Spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, or manual coatings application such
as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, etc. shall be used to reduce VOC emissions, where
practical. Paint application shall use lower volatility paint not exceeding 100 grams of
ROG per liter.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species
in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Potentially Significant Impact. Potential wildlife species that may occur in the project area (i.e., Newport
Beach 7.5- minute U.S.G.S. topographic map) include the California black rail, Belding's savannah
sparrow, Light- footed clapper rail, California least tern, and fairy shrimp; however, these species require
estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands or vernal pool habitats, which do not exist on the site. Therefore, no
significant impacts to these sensitive species would occur as a result of project implementation. Other
sensitive species that may occur on the site or utilize the site for foraging include the Cooper's hawk and
coastal California gnatcatcher. Because the area to be impacted by the proposed project is small in size,
providing limited, if any, suitable habitat for the Cooper's hawk, the overall spatial loss of the site will not
result in significant impacts to this species. Similarly, sufficient foraging and /or nesting habitat for the
California gnatcatcher is not present on the proposed project site or in the surrounding area to support this
species. The habitat on the site is limited in size and vegetative diversity, including the absence of
California sagebrush. Additionally, the project site is located in an area of dense residential development,
surrounded by urban ornamental landscaping. Any remaining habitat exists as "islands" within the
residential area, which are of insufficient size and /or vegetative composition to support the gnatcatcher.
Therefore, no significant impacts would occur to the California gnatcatcher.
Although the subject property encompasses only 4,400 square feet, southern coastal bluff scrub, a plant
community identified as rare by the California Department of Fish and Game, exists on the site and is
approximately 216 square feet in area. In addition, the subject property could also support other sensitive
plant species, including Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonL), south coast saltscale
(Atriplex pacifica), many- stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis), cliff spurge (Euphorbia misera),
Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulten), and woolly seablite (Sueda taxifolia). The Draft EIR will address
potential impacts associated to the sensitive habitat and species that may exist on the subject property.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 19
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or
by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. A survey conducted on the subject property revealed that only three habitat types occupy
portions of the site, including disturbed (i.e., areas that are either devoid of vegetation such as dirt roads
or those areas that have a high percentage of non - native weedy species), disturbed /ornamental (i.e.,
areas dominated by escaped or planted ornamental species with a high presence of non - native weedy
species), and coastal bluff scrub (i.e., areas that support approximately 15 total native shrubs). No
riparian habitat was identified on the site. No significant impacts to riparian habitat and /or species are
anticipated as a result of project implementation; no mitigation measures are required.
C) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
No Impact. As indicated above, no riparian habitat exists on the subject property and no wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act occur on the site. Project implementation will not result in
any potential adverse affects to either wetlands or riparian species
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact. See the discussion of potential impacts to sensitive species in the previous responses.
Although the project site is currently vacant, the surrounding areas are developed and no migratory wildlife
corridors occur on site or in the immediate vicinity of the project site that would be affected by
development of the subject property. As a result, the proposed project will not interfere with resident,
migratory or wildlife species. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
required.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Potentially Significant Impact. No native trees exist on the subject property that would be protected,
either as a result of adopted policies or other resources agency requirements. Although the subject
property and environs are not identified on Figures NR1 and NR2 in the Natural Resources Element,
which identify important biological resources and environmental study areas, respectively, in the City,
several policies articulated in the Newport Beach General Plan address biological resources, including NR
10.1 (resource protection, NR 10.4 (new development siting and design), NR 10.5 (significant or rare
biological resources, etc. The Draft EIR will evaluate the relationship of the applicable policies to the
proposed development of the site.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. There are no local, regional or state habitat conservation plans that would
regulate or guide development of the project site. The subject property is located on a coastal bluff, which
is not included in either a Habitat Conservation Plan or a Natural Community Conservation Plan. Although
coastal bluff scrub habitat has been identified on the subject property, that habitat encompasses only 216
square feet, which is considered to be of low value and it is not connected or associated with any larger
area of similar habitat and would not likely support any California coastal gnatcatchers due to its size and
location. Nonetheless, potential project - related to this habitat will be evaluated in the Draft EIR.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 20
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined §15604.5?
No Impact. The project site is currently undeveloped. No historic resources are identified either on the
site or in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The site is no identified by the City as possessing
potentially important historic resources. Therefore, project implementation will not result in potentially
significant impacts to historic resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15604.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. As previously indicated, the subject site is
undeveloped; however, the area surrounding the site (with the exception of Begonia Park) has been
significantly altered by grading to accommodate the existing development located on the bluff and
elsewhere in the vicinity of the subject site. No known archaeological resources are know to be present in
the project area. Project implementation includes excavation of the property to accommodate the
proposed single - family residence. It is unlikely that the disturbance of the subsurface soils would result in
significant impacts to cultural resources due to the site alteration associated with the existing development
in the area and the nature of the bedrock materials that underlie the site (i.e., marine). Although no
significant impacts to cultural resources are anticipated, an archaeological monitor will be present during
grading (refer to MM V -1) to ensure that if any cultural materials are encountered, appropriate measures
will be implemented in accordance with existing City policies. Therefore, no significant impacts to
archaeological resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are recommended.
C) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Although the project site is currently vacant, the
surrounding areas, including the bluff on which the existing homes are located, have been altered to
accommodate development that includes predominantly residential uses. The site contains the Monterey
Formation deposits, which are known to contain abundant fossilized marine invertebrates and vertebrates.
The presence of recorded fossils in the vicinity of the project areas exists. Like other sites in the City that
are underlain by the Monterey Formation, the site should be considered to have a high paleontological
sensitivity and fossils may be encountered during grading and excavation. A mitigation measure in
accordance with existing City policy has been included in the event that such resources are encountered
during grading /excavation activities (refer to MM -6 below).
d) Would the project disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
No Impact. The project site and surrounding areas are highly disturbed due to past urban development
and there is no evidence of human remains or sites of Native American burials. Based on the degree of
disturbance that has already occurred on the site and in the vicinity of the project site, project
implementation will not result in potentially significant impacts to human remains; no mitigation measures
are required.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is proposed to mitigate the potential impacts associated with cultural
and /or scientific resources to a less than significant level.
MM -1 A qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be retained by the project applicant who
will be present during the grading and landform alteration phase. In the event that cultural
resources and /or fossils are encountered during construction activities, ground- disturbing
excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted by the monitor until the find
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 21
has been salvaged. Any artifacts and /or fossils discovered during project construction shall be
prepared to a point of identification and stabilized for long -term storage. Any discovery, along with
supporting documentation and an itemized catalogue, shall be accessioned into the collections of
a suitable repository. Curation costs to accession any collections shall be the responsibility of the
project applicant.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Less than Significant Impact. The site is located in the Corona del Mar area of the City, which is near
the intersection of the Southwestern Block and the Central Block of the Los Angeles Basin. The
Southwestern Block is the westerly seaward portion of the Los Angeles Basin, which includes Palos
Verdes Peninsula 'and Long Beach, and is bounded on the east by the Newport - Inglewood Fault Zone
(NIFZ). The landward part of the NIFZ is a northwesterly- trending zone that extends from Beverly Hills on
the north to Newport Bay on the south, where it continues offshore to the south; however, it eventually
returns ashore again near La Jolla, where it is expressed by the Rose Canyon Fault. The NIFZ within the
project environs is not included on the State - published Alquist - Priolo Special Studies zonation map.
The subject property is located within a seismically active area. There are no known local or regional
active earthquake faults on the site, and the site is not within an Alquist - Priolo Zone. The Newport -
Inglewood Fault -Rose Canyon Fault is located less than two miles to the south of and off -shore from the
site. Another active fault that could generate seismic activity that affects the subject property and
surrounding area is the Elsinore Fault, The Newport - Inglewood and Elsinore Fault Zones could produced
earthquakes of magnitude 6 — 7 on the Richter Scale, with local strong ground motion equivalent to at
least VIII — IX on the modified Mercali Scale. Although episodes on those faults could cause ground
shaking at the project site, it is highly unlikely that the site would experience surface rupture. Potential
impacts would be less than significant with construction consistent with building and grading ordinances.
No significant ground rupture impacts would occur as a result of project implementation.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. See response to Vl.a (i) above. As indicated above, the subject property
is located in the seismically active southern California region; several active faults are responsible for
generating moderate to strong earthquakes throughout the region. Due to the proximity of the site to the
Newport - Inglewood Fault zone, the subject property has a moderate to high probability to be subjected to
seismic and associated hazards. The maximum credible earthquake on the NIFZ is estimated to be 7.6
with a probable magnitude of 6.6 on the Richter Scale. Estimated peak ground acceleration for the
subject site from an earthquake with a 10 percent probability of exceedance in a 50 -year period is 0.39g.
Similarly, the maximum credible earthquake on the Elsinore - Whittier Fault is 8.0, with a probable (Richter)
magnitude of 7.2. Other faults capable of producing seismic activity that could affect the subject property
include the San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults and the Whittier Fault, which is a northern branch of the
Elsinore Fault. In addition to these faults, the San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust Fault is located less than 1.5
to 2.5 miles below the area. This fault and the Newport Inglewood fault (concealed segment), located
approximately 750 to 1,000 feet from the subject site, are considered the potential causative faults in the
area. Even though the project site and surrounding areas could be subject to strong ground movements,
incorporation of the recommendations included in the preliminary geotechnical report and adherence to
current building standards of the City of Newport Beach would reduce the potential adverse effects of
ground movement hazards to a less than significant level.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 22
iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction?
No Impact. Based on the geologic exploration undertaken on the subject property, the site is underlain by
sedimentary rocks of the Monterey Formation. These rocks do not have the potential for liquefaction.
Furthermore, no groundwater is present to the depths and no loose sands or coarse silt is present.
Therefore, the potential for liquefaction is less than significant. Proper design of the proposed residence
will ensure that ground failure, including that associated with liquefaction, will not pose a significant hazard
to the development.
iv) Landslides?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. A stability analysis was performed on the
subject property by Borella Geology, Inc., as reflected in the preliminary geotechnical report ( Borella
Geology, March 20, 2007). Based on that analysis, it was determined that the orientation of the bedrock
on the site is dipping into the slope, which is the preferred orientation for maintaining slope integrity.
However, surficially, the cliff portions of the subject property are unstable as evidenced by the talus
deposits that are present at the base of the steep slopes. However, all slopes on the site were determined
to be grossly stable. The maximum slope height is 47 feet and slope angle ranges from 10 degrees to 90
degrees. Calculated factors of safety are in excess of 1.5 (static) and 1.1 (Pseudo- static) of factors of
safety required by the City of Newport Beach. The preliminary geotechnical report indicated that
temporary shoring or a "shotcrete" combination shoring /retaining wall must be placed on all vertical cuts
exceeding five (5) feet if a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) layback cannot be achieved. However, temporary
shoring is only anticipated in areas where retaining walls will be constructed to accommodate the lower
floor level of the proposed residence. In addition, incorporation of the recommendations presented in the
preliminary geotechnical evaluation and adherence to standard building code requirements will ensure that
site development will not be subject to landslides. With the incorporation of those recommendations,
potential landslide impacts will be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the proposed project will
necessitate grading and excavation necessary to accommodate the proposed single - family residence that
will temporarily expose on -site soils to potential erosion. In that interim period, it is possible that some
erosion may occur, resulting in some sedimentation; however, in order to ensure that erosion and
sedimentation are minimized, the applicant will be required to prepare and submit an adequate drainage
and erosion control plan, which complies with current City standards prescribed by the Building and
Grading Ordinances. Implementation of the mandatory appropriate erosion controls will avoid potential
erosion impacts associated with site grading and development. Further, the proposed site will be
engineered to ensure that surface /subsurface drainage does not contribute to erosion or adversely affect
the stability of project improvements. Other efforts required to ensure that potential erosion is minimized
include slope protection devices, plastic sheeting, inspection for signs of surface erosion, and corrective
measures to maintain, repair or add structures required for effective erosion control. As a result, potential
impacts occurring from project implementation, including those anticipated during grading and after
development of the site, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level.
C) Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide,
lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Section VI.a.iv, above. As previously
indicated, potential slope failure /landslide potential would be avoided through proper design. Therefore,
site preparation and design of the proposed residence in accordance with the recommendations contained
in the preliminary geotechnical report and compliance with the California Building Code will ensure that
potential impacts will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 23
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the California
Building Code (2007)), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Less than Significant Impact. Base don the analysis conducted for the proposed project, the on -site
surface materials have a very low expansion index and a negligible sulfate content. As a result, no
significant impacts related to expansive soils would occur. The subject site is underlain by artificial fill,
slopewash and talus deposits overlying bedrock assigned to the Monterey Formation. The fill material,
slopewash, and talus deposits are considered incompetent and must be removed or penetrated with the
proposed caisson -grade beam foundation system to ensure that no significant impacts occur
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
of waste water?
No Impact. The project will be connected to existing sewer lines. No septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems are proposed. Therefore, no significant impacts related to the implementation of
an alternative waste disposal system are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
As indicated in the Preliminary Geotechnical Report for New Residence (Borella Geology, Inc., March 20,
2007), construction of the proposed single - family residence is feasible from a geotechnical perspective.
The geotechnical impact of construction "... is nil if proper care is taken ..." in the development of the
site in accordance with the recommendations set forth in that report. The following measures shall be
implemented to ensure that no potentially significant geotechnical impacts identified in the preceding
analysis occur.
MM -2 Prior to issuance of the grading or building permit, an erosion control plan shall be submitted to
and approved by the City's Chief Building Official.
MM -3 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a soils engineering report and final
geotechnical report to the City's Building Department for approval. The project shall be designed
to incorporate the recommendations included in those reports that which address site grading, site
clearing, compaction, caissons, bearing capacity and settlement, lateral pressures, footing design,
seismic design, slabs on grade, retaining wall design, subdrain design, concrete, surface
drainage, setback distance, excavations, cut -fill transitional zones, planters and slope
maintenance, and driveways.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities would involve the use of materials associated with
the construction of a residential building, including oil, gas, tar, construction materials and adhesives,
cleaning solvents and paint. Transport of these materials to the site and use on the site would only create
a localized hazard in the event of an accident or spills. Hazardous materials use, transport, storage and
handling would be subject to federal, state and local regulations to reduce the risk of accidents.
Equipment maintenance and disposal of vehicular fluids is subject to existing regulations, including the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Given the nature of the project in terms of
scope and size (i.e., single - family residence on a 4,400 square foot lot), it is anticipated that normal
storage, use and transport of hazardous materials will not result in undue risk to construction workers on
the site or to persons on surrounding areas. The use and disposal of any hazardous materials on the site
and in conjunction with the project will be in accordance with existing regulations. With the exception of
small quantities of pesticides, fertilizers, cleaning solvents, paints, etc., that are typically used to maintain
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 24
residential properties, on -going operation of the site for residential use will not result in the storage or use
of hazardous materials.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation includes only the construction of one single - family
residence on the 4,400 square foot lot. As indicated above, the proposed project does not involve any
activities and /or uses that would utilize hazardous materials or other substances that would, if released
into the environment, create a safety or health hazard. There is no indication that the subject site has
been contaminated that would adversely affect site development (refer to Section VITA, below). Although
grading and site preparation activities will expose subsurface soils and result in the generation of fugitive
dust, no hazardous emissions will occur as a result of project implementation. Therefore, no significant
impacts will occur.
C) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
material, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is currently undeveloped; the applicant is proposing
one single - family on a 4,400 square foot lot in an existing residential area within Corona del Mar. It is
important to note that no schools are located within one - quarter mile of the subject site. As indicated
previously, project implementation will result in the generation of a minor amount of fugitive dust and
particulate matter during grading and site preparation activities, which will not result in any hazardous
emissions that would affect any school in the area. With the exception of commonly used household
hazardous materials (e.g., insecticides, herbicides, cleaning agents, etc.), the single - family residence
proposed for the site will not utilize hazardous or acutely hazardous materials that would be emitted into
the environment. Therefore, no significant impacts to existing schools will occur as a result of the
proposed project and no mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
sites which complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. A search of various databases concerning hazardous wastes and substances sites was
conducted through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) as part of the environmental analysis. This
search, which is on file with the City of Newport Beach, determined that the subject property is not
included on any lists of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5. Therefore, project implementation will not create a significant hazard either to the public or the
environment. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
e) For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The project site is located approximately 4.5 miles south of John Wayne Airport (JWA) and is
not located within or subject to the airport land use plan for JWA or any other aviation facility. Operations
at JWA will not pose a safety hazard for future residents due to the proximity of the project to the airport.
Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 25
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The subject property is not located within proximity to a private airstrip. Development of the
site as proposed will not result in potential adverse impacts, including safety hazards, to people residing or
working in the project area. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project
implementation and no mitigation measures are necessary.
g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Newport Beach has prepared an Emergency Operations Plan
that designates procedures to be followed in case of a major emergency. Pacific Coast Highway is
designated as an evacuation route in the City. The project site is not designated for emergency use within
the Emergency Operations Plan. The primary concern of the Public Safety Element and the City of
Newport Beach is in terms of risks to persons and personal property. Although the site is subject to
seismic shaking, development pursuant to building and fire code requirements will ensure that the
potential impacts are minimized or reduced to an acceptable level. The site is not located within a flood
hazard area or subject to such potential disasters. Development of the subject property as proposed will
not adversely affect either the evacuation routes or the adopted emergency operations planning
program(s) being implemented by the City of Newport Beach. Potential circulation impacts associated
with construction will be temporary in nature and will be addressed through the Construction Staging Plan
that will be implemented (refer to Section XV.f. In addition, any construction vehicles within the public right
of way are prohibited from completely blocking vehicular and emergency access by the Vehicle Code. As
a result, potential short -term circulation impacts associated with construction would not be significant.
h) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
No Impact. Neither the project site nor the surrounding areas are located within a "Potential Fire Hazard
Area" as identified by the Newport General Plan Public Safety Element. The subject property is located
within an urbanized area of the City of Newport Beach. Although some natural vegetation and /or habitat
exists on the site, the proposed project would not be directly affected by the potential for wildland fires.
There are no major urban or wildland fire hazards that pose a significant threat to the development.
Therefore, the site is not subject to a potential risk of wildland fires. No significant impacts as a result of
wildland fires will occur if the project is implemented and no mitigation measures are necessary.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Less than Significant impact. Waste discharges associated with this project that could affect water
quality would be limited to non -point source discharges, including potential storm water runoff of
construction materials and wastes and storm water runoff from the developed site. This project would not
generate any point sources of water pollution; all wastewater generated by the residential plumbing
system would discharge directly to the City's sanitary sewer system, which would not affect the present
permit to operate the affected wastewater treatment plant. Further, the proposed project would result in
the construction of only one dwelling unit that would occupy the site. Therefore, the raw sewage that
would be generated by the proposed project would be similar in nature to the adjacent properties and
would not significantly affect wastewater treatment.
Potentially adverse water quality impacts during the construction phases would be avoided through
compliance with existing regulatory programs administered by the City of Newport Beach and the Santa
Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). While it is impossible to anticipate all potential
environmental issues that could arise on a daily basis during the course of the project, the site will be
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 26
designed to provide address sediment and erosion control for both temporary (i.e., construction) and long-
term (i.e., operational) activities occurring on the subject property. In addition, site design will also
address pollutants other than sediment, including those intended to control spills for hazardous materials,
solid waste management, hazardous waste management, etc. A On -site retention and /or filtration or
clarifiers would be required to meet water quality standards. The water quality features incorporated into
the project will be selected to address the main pollutants of concern for a residential project, and for the
impacted water body, i.e. Newport Bay. Newport Bay is listed as an "impaired" water body under Section
303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with respect to metals, pesticides and priority organics. Implementation of
the water quality features by the City prior to issuance of the grading permit will ensure that this project
does not violate any water quality standards during construction or over the long -term operating life of the
developed site. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures
are required.
b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)?
No Impact. This small -scale project would not result in a significant increase in water demand and all of
the project's potable and non - potable water needs will be met through a connection to the City's domestic
water system. The proposed single - family residence represents an insignificant increase in the demand
for domestic water, which has been anticipated by the City in its long -range plans. No water wells are
proposed or required to meet the water demands of this project. There are no water wells located on or
near the site, and since this project would not affect any existing or require any new water wells, the
project will not result in the lowering of the water table. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
C) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
Less Than Significant Impact. No stream or river exists on site. Existing surface runoff generated on
the subject property occurs as sheet flow and drains in a southerly direction over the bluff where it enters
the City's storm drain system before discharging into Newport Bay, which has been identified as
containing "environmentally sensitive areas" as defined by the 2003 Orange County Drainage Area
Management Plan (DAMP) and the Water Quality Control Plans for the Santa Ana Basin. The actual
amount of stormwater runoff generated from the building footprint and paved areas (totaling approximately
2,300 square feet) would be insignificant. Compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality
codes and policies, which are performed during the plan check stage, will ensure that surface flows can,
be accommodate and water quality protected. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off -
site?
Less than Significant Impact. Refer to the discussion in Section Vlll.c. As indicated above, project
implementation will alter the existing drainage conditions on the site. However, the minor increase in
impervious surfaces (i.e., approximately 2,300 square feet) will not be significant. The site will be graded
and designed to facilitate post - development storm flows and may include on -site retention or other
features, which would ensure that the increase in surface runoff can be accommodated by existing
facilities in the project area. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
are required.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 27
e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in an increase in impervious surfaces
on the site, which would generate additional surface runoff. However, the post- development impervious
surfaces would be limited to approximately 2,300 square feet, which would not generate a significant
amount of stormwater runoff. As previously indicated, the project will be designed to incorporate on -site
retention or similar features. As a result, the existing storm drainage collection and conveyance facilities
in the project area have adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed project. No significant impacts
are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. As indicated previously, Newport Bay is listed as an "impaired" water
body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with respect to metals, pesticides and priority organics.
Changes in surface runoff are anticipated as a result of the development of the subject property with one
residence that could result in potential impacts to water quality. However, the project will be designed to
comply with all relevant building, grading and water quality codes and policies to ensure that there will not
be an adverse effect on water quality, either during construction or during the operational life of the
project. Final plan check include the preparation of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that
must be found to meet applicable standards. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
g) Would the project place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
No Impact. The subject property is not located within the 100 -year flood plain as delineated on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of
Newport Beach. No homes would be placed within the 100 -year flood plain and no significant impacts are
would occur.
h) Would the project place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. Refer to the response to Section Vlll.g.
i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
No Impact. As indicated above, the project site is not within a flood hazard area or within an area subject
to flooding due to dam or levee failure. Therefore, project implementation will not result in a potentially
significant impact; no mitigation measures are required.
j) Would the project be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is located near the coastal margin of the Pacific
Ocean, at the southern end of Newport Beach, within the Newport Harbor area. While this area is
protected by jetty emplacement at the harbor mouth, long water waves generated by offshore
mechanisms such as tectonic displacement present a potential for tsunamis, which could pose a danger
to life and /or property. Tsunamis (i.e., seismic sea waves) are generated on offshore faults by movement
that is primarily vertical in nature. The area located below the subject property is within a Tsunami hazard
Zone. In the event of a tsunami, surge waves would focus in this area and could threaten the lower
elevations of the property. The likelihood of a tsunami large enough to threaten the proposed home is
extremely low and, therefore, is considered to be less than significant; however, the future residents
should be made aware of the potential threat.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 28
Seiche is defined as a standing wave oscillation effect generated in a closed or semi - closed body of water
caused by wind, tidal current, and earthquake. Seiche potential is highest in large, deep, steep -sided
reservoirs or water bodies. Newport Bay lacks significant potential for damaging seiche because it is very
shallow. Considering the proposed finish floor elevation of the lowest floor (i.e., approximately 35 feet
above mean sea level), the potential for seiche effects to the project site is considered remote; no
significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
k) Would the project result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or
following construction?
Less than Significant Impact. Refer to responses to Section Vlll.a and Section Vlll.f.
Would the project result in potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of
material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance
(including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery
areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas?
Less than Significant Impact. Stormwater discharge from the site will be that typically associated with
residential use. Although some temporary impacts associated with construction of the proposed
residential structure may occur (refer to Sections Vlll.a through f.), no long -term outdoor storage,
maintenance, fueling or work areas are proposed. Vehicle parking areas are to be fully enclosed. The
project will be designed to comply with all requisite codes and policies prescribed by the City of Newport
Beach to ensure that stormwater impacts during or after construction are minimized or eliminated to the
maximum extent possible. For example, the City's standard practice is to require street sweeping as a
construction control measure, rather than washing down the street surface, to avoid runoff of construction
wastes, sediment and debris into the storm drain system or the bay. With the project's compliance with
the requirements imposed by the City, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
are required.
M) Would the project result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial
uses of the receiving waters?
Less than Significant Impact. Refer to responses to Section Vlll.a and Section Vll.f.
n) Would the project create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or
volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in the addition of impervious surfaces
on the site, which would increase the volume and velocity of storm flows generated on the subject
property. However, the site would be graded in order to ensure that post - development runoff is minimized
and, further, is directed to existing storm drain facilities that have adequate capacity to accommodate the
increase flows. As a result, this project would not result in adverse impacts due to changes in the flow
velocity or volume of storm water runoff.
o) Would the project create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding
areas?
Less than Significant Impact. See responses to Vlll.a through Vlll.f. As previously indicated, part of
the final plan check review includes the preparation of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that
must be found to meet applicable City standards. Implementation of this plan will ensure that potentially
significant increases in erosion resulting from the proposed project will not occur. No mitigation measures
are required.
NIEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 29
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a) Would the project divide an established community?
No Impact. The project proposes the development of a single family residence on the 4,400 square foot
lot. The site is bounded by Pacific Avenue on the north. As indicated previously, the area surrounding the
subject property is entirely developed with residential development. Development of the site as proposed
would not directly affect adjacent properties because it is consistent with the applicable development
standards and requirements for site development. In particular, project implementation does not include
features (e.g., roadways, flood control channels, etc.) that would physically divide or otherwise adversely
affect or change and established community. The proposed residential dwelling unit is in keeping with the
intensity of development and existing character in the project environs. No significant impacts will occur
and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency and
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Potentially Significant Impact. The Newport Beach General Plan, the Coastal Land Use Plan and the
Newport Beach Zoning Code contain land use goals, policies and regulations of concern with respect to
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Consistency of the proposed project with applicable
provisions and /or policies of each the long -range plans adopted by the City of Newport Beach will be
evaluated in the Draft EIR.
C) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
Potentially Significant Impact. Although the project site is not subject to a habitat conservation plan
area or natural community conservation plan area, cursory biological surveys of the site revealed that a
portion of the site supports coastal bluff scrub habitat, a plant community identified as rare by the
California Department of Fish and Game. The property could also support listed or otherwise sensitive
plant species. As a result, potential conflicts with adopted General Plan policies could occur. The
relevant General Plan policies related to habitat conservation will be evaluated in the Draft EIR.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The project site is currently undeveloped. Neither the Newport Beach General Plan
(Recreation and Open Space Element) nor the State of California has identified the project site or environs
as a potential mineral resource of Statewide or regional significance. No mineral resources are known to
exist and, therefore, project implementation will not result in any significant impacts.
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact. As indicated above, the Newport Beach General Plan does not identify the project environs
as having potential value as a locally important mineral resource site. Project implementation (i.e.,
construction of a single - family residence) as proposed will not result in the loss of any locally important
mineral resource site and, therefore, no significant impacts will occur.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 30
XI. NOISE
a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Less than Significant Impact. Noise sources in the study area include traffic on the local streets, aircraft
operations at John Wayne Airport, and general residential activities in the area. Ambient noise levels in
the project area would be the same as other similar single - family residential neighborhoods in Corona del
Mar. Residents of the proposed single - family residence, therefore, would not be exposed to significant
long -term noise sources, either resulting from the increase in vehicular trips (estimated to be
approximately 10 trips /day) or from on -site activities that would occur on the site. The proposed residence
is similar in nature as other single - family residences in the immediate project vicinity. Although on -site
noise levels associated with residential activities (where none currently exist) would increase, it is
anticipated that any such increase in long -term noise associated with the residential use would be those
occurring as a result of outdoor activities and would be typical of noise levels in similar residential
neighborhoods. If future residents and their guests should engage in activities that result in temporary,
loud noise levels that exceed the limits set forth in Chapter 10.26 of the City's Municipal Code, the City is
empowered to take actions to abate that activity. This project would not result in exposure of neighboring
residents or future residents on site to noise levels that exceed City standards. Therefore, no significant
long -term noise impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground
borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities can generate varying degrees of ground vibration,
depending on the construction procedures, construction equipment used, and proximity to vibration -
sensitive uses. The effect of vibration on buildings near a construction site varies depending on the
magnitude of vibration, geology, and receptor building construction. The generation of vibration can range
from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations
at moderate levels, to minor cosmetic damage at the highest levels. Ground vibrations from construction
activities rarely reach levels that can damage structures, but can achieve the audible and perceptible
ranges in buildings close to a construction site. It is anticipated that vibration levels generated by
construction vehicles and during such activities as caisson drilling and excavation may exceed the Federal
Transportation Agency annoyance threshold (i.e., 78 VdB) for residential uses. Therefore, potential short -
term impacts from vibration - induced annoyance may occur at residences within 50 feet of the most
vibration intensive construction equipment. However, these temporary annoyances will be less than
significant and would cease upon completion of the grading /excavation and foundation. No significant
impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
C) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed above in Xl.a, development of this property with a single -
family residential dwelling unit would not result in any changes in land use that include significant new
noise sources. Long -term noise associated with outdoor recreation activities and vehicular traffic
generated by one home would be minor and compatible with adjacent and nearby residential uses. Long-
term noise levels would not be expected to increase as a result of the additional vehicular trips when
compared to existing conditions. Therefore, no significant long -term noise impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing with the project?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Typically, the estimated construction noise levels
are governed primarily by the piece of equipment that produces the highest noise levels. The character of
the noise levels surrounding the construction site will change as work progresses, depending on the noise
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 31
levels of the loudest piece of construction equipment in use. A combination of construction vehicles,
power tools, and handheld tools would be used depending on the construction phase. Construction noise
levels are based on those reported by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) using the Roadway
Construction Noise Model (RCNM version 1.1, 2008). Noise levels for construction equipment from the
RCNM are identified below, which indicated that typical noise levels range up to 83.3 dBA Leq at 50 feet
during the noisiest construction phases. The site preparation phase, which includes excavation and
grading of the site, caisson drilling, and concrete pouring tends to generate the highest noise levels,
because the noisiest construction equipment is typically associated with these activities. Most importantly,
all of the significant noise generating construction activities are limited to the normal working hours by the
municipal code, which minimizes the effect of those activities.
Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Type of Equipment
Average Sound Levels
dBA Lem at 50 feet
Backhoe
73.6
Concrete Mixer Truck
74.8
Concrete Pump Truck
74.4
Excavator
76.7
Front End Loader
75.1
Jackhammer
81.7
Drill Rig Truck
72.2
Hydra Break Ram
80.0
Tractor
80.0
Vibratory Concrete Mixer
73.0
Flat Bed Truck
70.3
Auger Drill Rig
77.4
Mounted Impact Hammer Hoe Ram
83.3
Dozer
77.7
SOURCE: Roadway Construction Noise Model (version 1.1)
Short-term (construction) noise level increases will occur from the use of construction equipment associated
with grading and excavation, and building and construction activities. Earthmoving equipment includes
excavating machinery such as backhoes, bulldozers, and front loaders. Earthmoving and compacting
equipment includes compactors, scrapers, and graders. Potential noise impacts vary markedly because
the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the equipment used and its
activity level. The exposure of persons to the periodic increase in noise levels will be short -term and will
cease after construction is completed. Short-term construction noise impacts tend to occur in discrete
phases dominated initially by earhmoving sources, then by foundation construction, and, finally, for building
construction. Heavy equipment noise can average about 80 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source when the
equipment is operating at typical loads.
A variety of noise sources and noise levels would occur on and in the immediate vicinity of the project site
over the site preparation and construction phase anticipated for the proposed project. Noise levels would
vary, depending upon the type and number of construction machinery and vehicles in use and their
location within the project site. The types of machinery to be active will vary with the construction phases,
which would include:
Drill shoring caissons
Excavation and installation of lagging
Shotcrete shoring walls
Install foundations
Build structure
Install plumbing, electrical, mechanical, finish exterior /interior, etc.
Hardscape and landscape
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 32
It is important to note that all equipment is not generally operated continuously or used simultaneously.
The number, type, distribution, and usage of construction equipment will differ from phase to phase. The
noise generated is both temporary in nature and limited in hours by the City's Noise Ordinance (Section
10.28.040). Compliance with the existing noise control ordinance and hours of construction prescribed in
the ordinance will minimize the potential noise impacts associated with project implementation. Other
measures have been identified to ensure that construction noise is minimized. Typically, construction of
single - family residential dwelling units on an individual basis in the City of Newport Beach, including on
bluffs in the City, does not result in significant noise impacts because of their small size and the duration
of construction is not anticipated to occur over a long period of time (e.g., less than two years for custom
home construction). Furthermore, the highest noise levels occur from excavation and caisson drilling
associated with bluff development, which takes place during the initial stage of development and does not
last more than 5 to 6 months). Therefore, because the project encompasses only one single - family
residence, which would employ typical construction techniques and be constructed in approximately 20
months like most single - family residential construction in the City, potential construction noise impacts will
be less than significant with the incorporation of the prescribed mitigation measures.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. John Wayne Airport is located approximately 4.5 miles north of the subject property. The
project site is not within an airport land use plan nor is the site within two miles of an airport. Noise in the
vicinity of the project site associated with aircraft operations occurring at John Wane Airport is below 60
dBA CNEL and therefore, future residents will not be subjected to excessive noise levels.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip or other aviation facility that
generates noise in the vicinity of the subject property. Development of the site as proposed will not result
in potential adverse impacts, including safety hazards, to people residing or working in the project area.
Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation
measures are necessary.
Mitigation Measures
As indicated in the preceding analysis, potentially significant short -tem, construction noise impacts are
anticipated as a result of project implementation. The following measures are recommended to ensure
that potential construction noise impacts are minimized.
MM -4 All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and
maintained muffling devices. All construction equipment shall be located or operated as far as
possible away from nearby residential units.
MM -5 A construction schedule shall be developed that minimizes the duration of potential project - related
and cumulative construction noise levels.
MM -6 The construction contractor shall notify the residents of the construction schedule for the
proposed project, and shall keep them informed on any changes to the schedule. The notification
shall also identify the name and phone number of a contact person in case of complaints. The
contact person shall take all reasonable steps to resolve the complaint.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 33
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a) Would the project induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure?
No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the adopted land use designation and zoning
applicable to the subject property. Development of the site with one single - family residence in accordance
with the adopted long -range plans for the subject property would not result in significant growth and,
furthermore, would not result in the potential for unanticipated growth because the project is located in an
area that is virtually built out. As "in- fill" development, construction of the proposed project would not
necessitate the implementation of new infrastructure such as major roadway improvements and /or the
extension of infrastructure that could induce unanticipated growth and development. All of the
infrastructure, including sewer and water facilities, storm drains, roadways, etc., exist in the immediate
vicinity of the project site and have adequate capacity to serve the proposed project. Therefore, no
significant growth- inducing impacts will occur as a result of project implementation.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. As previously indicated, the project site is vacant. Project implementation, therefore, will not
result in the displacement of any existing residential dwelling units that would necessitate replacement
elsewhere in the City. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required.
C) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing?
No Impact. As indicated above, the subject property is vacant; therefore, no displacement of occupants
will occur and no mitigation measures are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically
altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. Fire protection facilities and service to the subject property are
provided by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD). In addition to the City's resources, the
NBFD also maintains a formal automatic aid agreement with the Orange County Fire Authority
(OCFA) and all neighboring municipal fire departments to facilitate fire protection in the City
should the need arise. The project includes all necessary fire protection devices, including fire
sprinklers. The project must comply with the current Building and Fire Codes adopted by the City.
A code compliance analysis will be conducted by City staff to ensure that adequate water
pressure and related features required by the City are provided to ensure that the project complies
with the CFC and related City codes. Adequate water supplies and infrastructure, including fire
hydrants, exist in the vicinity of the project, and there is no requirement for other new facilities or
emergency services.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 34
Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD) is responsible for
providing police and law enforcement services within the corporate limits of the City. The Police
Department headquarters is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, at the intersection of Jamboree
Road and Santa Barbara, approximately two miles northeast of the subject property. The NBPD
currently has a ratio of 1.91 sworn officers for each 1,000 residents in the City. This ratio is
adequate for the current population. Police and law enforcement service in the City is provided by
patrols with designated "beats." Development of the subject site with one single - family would not
require an expansion to local law enforcement resources and therefore would not result in any
environmental impacts involving construction of new law enforcement facilities. No significant
impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Schools?
Less than Significant Impact. The provision of educational facilities and services in the City of
Newport Beach is the responsibility of the Newport -Mesa Unified School District. Residential and
non - residential development is subject to the imposition of school fees. Payment of the State -
mandated statutory School fees is the manner by which potential impacts to the District's
educational facilities are mitigated. The proposed project would not generate a significant number
of new students in the District. New or expanded school facilities would not be required to provide
classroom and support space for these low numbers of school age children. However, as
indicated above, the project applicant must pay the applicable school fee to the school district,
pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, in order to offset the incremental
cost impact of expanding school resources to accommodate the increased student enrollment
associated with one new residence. With the payment of the mandatory school fees, no
significant impacts would occur as a result of project implementation.
Other public facilities?
No Impact. No increased demand for other public services is anticipated and there would be no
need to construct any new public facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project will result in the construction of only one single - family
residence on the site on the 4,400 square foot lot. Although residents of the proposed project would
occasionally visit local and regional parks and beaches, use of those public facilities by the future
residents would not represent a substantial change in the intensity of usage and the impact would not
result in substantial physical deterioration of those park areas. No significant impact to recreational
facilities are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion
of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
No Impact. The proposed project does not include any recreational facilities. Development of the site
with one single - family residence will not require the construction of new or the expansion of existing
recreational facilities in the City of Newport Beach given the small increase in population. Therefore, no
significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 35
a) Would the project cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the
existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion
at intersections)?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Short -term traffic impacts are those resulting from
site preparation (i.e., grading and site preparation) and construction activities. With the exception of heavy
trucks traveling to and from the site in the morning and afternoon to be used during site preparation and
construction that occurs on -site. During the construction phase, there will be periods of time when a
heavy truck traffic would occur that could result in some congestion on Pacific Drive and nearby
local /residential street system. It is estimated that a total of 52 heavy trucks would be generated as a
result of the grading that would be necessary to haul the estimated 630 cubic yards of soil export from the
site. However, once grading has been completed, the number of heavy trucks entering and leaving the
project area would be limited to those transporting equipment and materials to the site. Other
construction - related traffic impacts are associated with vehicles carrying workers to and from the site and
medium and heavy trucks carrying construction materials to the project site, which may result in some
minor traffic delays; however, potential traffic interference caused by construction vehicles would create a
temporary /short -term impact to vehicles using neighboring streets in the morning and afternoon hours.
Therefore, aside from potentially minor impacts resulting from the increase in traffic that will occur as a
result of construction - related traffic (e.g., construction materials, construction workers, etc.), no significant
short -term impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. Nonetheless, the
construction traffic impacts would be adequately addressed through the implementation of a Construction
Traffic Control Plan.
Long -term traffic impacts would not occur as a result of project implementation. The trip generation
associated with one home is less than 10 trips per day. The addition of 10 trips on the City's circulation
system would not result in potentially significant impacts to either roadway segments or intersections. No
mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
No Impact. There are no CMP roadways in the project vicinity and, as noted above, project - related traffic
would have a negligible effect (i.e., 10 trips /day) on traffic conditions. No significant individual or
cumulative traffic impacts would occur as a result of project implementation.
C) Would the project result in a change in air traffic pattern, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. The proposed residential structure is under the 24 -foot height limit and would not encroach
into any aviation - related air space. The proposed project is located approximately 4.5 miles from John
Wayne Airport and is not located within an area that is affected by aircraft operations. This project would
have no effect on the volumes of air traffic occurring at John Wayne Airport or any other airports in the
region.
d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
No Impact. During the construction phases, a variety of construction vehicles, including large delivery
trucks, concrete pumpers, dump trucks, and a variety of passenger vehicles, will travel to and from the
subject property. On some occasions, there will be a number of medium and heavy trucks that could add
to local congestion levels and possibly affect through- traffic for short periods of time. Vehicular sight
distance of vehicles entering and exiting the site must be found consistent at the time of building permit
issuance with Standard Drawing 110 -L prescribed in the Public Works Design Manual to ensure safe
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 36
vehicular access. Compliance with this standard will ensure that the project driveway will be designed
safely. Traffic associated with the proposed single - family residence would include the same automobile
trip characteristics typically associated with similar residential development in the project area and would
be compatible with the existing mixture of vehicular traffic. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. The Newport Beach Fire Department will review the site plan and will
conducted a code compliance analysis with the City's Building Department to ensure that adequate
emergency access is provided to the residence. During construction, portions of Pacific Avenue fronting
the project site will be disrupted by construction activities including construction vehicles. However, the
use of flagmen would be required to facilitate circulation in the area. Pacific Avenue will remain open to
vehicular and emergency traffic. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
required.
f) Would the project result in inadequate parking capacity?
Less Than Significant Impact. During the construction phases, temporary displacement of public on-
street parking may occur caused by construction crew members and possibly while large truck delivery
and pick up of machinery and construction materials. This will occur during construction and will cease
when construction concludes. The project provides parking in accordance with the Zoning Code (two
enclosed spaces). No public parking is presently afforded along the curb in front of the project site as it is
painted as a "red curb;" therefore, construction of the proposed driveway approach will not displace any
existing public parking.
g) Would the project conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
No Impact. The proposed residential project will be constructed on a vacant parcel that is zoned for
residential development. Although there are no transit facilities or service on or along the frontage of this
site (i.e., Pacific Avenue), public transit provided by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is
available throughout the City, including the Corona del Mar area, which can serve future residents of the
proposed home. This project will not necessitate the realignment of any existing streets or the
construction of new public transportation facilities in the vicinity. Project implementation would not create
a significant demand for public transit. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
are required.
Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measure is proposed to minimize the level of impact
associated with temporary construction traffic:
MM -7 Prior to commencement of each major phase of construction, the Contractor shall submit a
construction staging, parking and traffic control plan for approval by the Public Works Department,
which shall address issues pertaining to potential traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods,
potential displacement of on- street parking, and safety.
This plan shall identify the proposed construction staging area(s), construction crew
parking area(s), estimated number and types of vehicles that will occur during that phase,
the proposed arrival /departure routes and operational safeguards (e.g. flagmen,
barricades, shuttle services, etc.) and hourly restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic
conflicts during peak traffic periods, displacement of on- street parking and to ensure
safety.
If necessary, the construction staging, parking and traffic control plan shall provide for an
off -site parking lot for construction crews which will be shuttled to and from the project site
at the beginning and end of each day until such time that the project site can
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 37
accommodate off - street construction vehicle parking. Until that time, construction crews
shall be prohibited from parking in the adjacent residential neighborhood.
The plan shall identify all construction traffic routes, which shall avoid narrow residential
streets unless there is no alternative, and the plan shall not include any streets where
some form of construction is underway within or adjacent to the street that would impact
the efficacy of the proposed route.
Dirt hauling shall not be scheduled during weekday peak hour traffic periods or during the
summer season (Memorial Day holiday weekend through and including the Labor Day
holiday weekend).
The approved construction staging, parking traffic control plan shall be implemented
throughout each major construction phase.
XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
No Impact. Wastewater generated by the proposed new residence would be disposed into the existing
sewer system and would not exceed wastewater treatment standards of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. Water demand and wastewater generation will not increase significantly as a result of the
development of one home on the site. The proposed project is consistent with the zoning and land use
designations, which are the basis of future water demand demands and wastewater generation within the
City. The project will connect to existing water and wastewater facilities in Pacific Avenue or other nearby
roadways. No expansion of these facilities is necessary due to existing capacity. No significant impacts
are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
C) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. The project site is vacant; however, it is zoned for single - family
residential. The project will result in additional impervious surface areas by the new building, walkways
and other hardscape. The additional hardscape will result in a slight increase in runoff during storm
periods. The site will be designed in accordance with the California Building Code to ensure that
stormwater runoff will be directed to existing facilities, which have capacity to collect and convey the runoff
before its discharge into Newport Bay. Therefore, the slight increase in project - related storm flows will not
result in a potentially significant impact and no mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less than Significant Impact. See response to XVI.b above. Future water demand based on the
General Plan projections would not be increased with the addition of one single - family residence. The
demand created by the proposed project is consistent with the City's long -range projections for
development that are the basis of water demands in Newport Beach. No significant impacts are
anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 38
e) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which
serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
No Impact. See response to XVI.b above. As indicated in that response, adequate sewer collection,
conveyance and treatment facilities exist to accommodate the slight incremental increase in raw sewage
resulting from the development of one single - family residence. No impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
No Impact. Although project implementation could result in the generation of some refuse during the
construction phase, it would be small and would not adversely affect existing capacities at the County's
sanitary landfills. The project will not result in a significant increase in solid waste production due to the
increase on one single - family residence. Existing landfills are expected to have adequate capacity to
service the site and use. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to
solid waste?
No Impact. Solid waste production will be picked up by either the City of Newport Beach or a commercial
provider licensed by the City of Newport Beach. All federal, state and local regulations related to solid
waste will be adhered to through this process. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation
measures are required.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The environmental analysis conducted for the proposed project indicates that the proposed single - family
residence could have the potential for significant adverse environmental impacts:
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major period of California history or prehistory?
Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project could have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment. Coastal bluff scrub habitat exists on the subject property that could support one or more
sensitive plant species. As a result, the proposed project could reduce the habitat of a wildlife species
and /or threaten to eliminate one or more sensitive plant species. No historic structures or sites are
present in the project area, which may be affected by the proposed project. The proposed project would
not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The Draft EIR
will evaluate the potential effect of the proposed project on the existing biological resources that may
occur on the subject property.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 39
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Potentially Significant Impact. Development of the site with one single - family residence would result in
a negligible difference in long -term environmental effects associated with occupancy of that home.
Although most all of the effects related to energy consumption, traffic, water consumption, utility demand,
solid waste disposal, use of public facilities, etc. would be less than significant and the proposed project
would not generate new environmental impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable,
potentially cumulatively significant aesthetics may occur and will be evaluated in the Draft EIR.
C) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact. The preceding analysis conducted for the proposed project indicated that
project implementation would not result in significant environmental impacts on humans, either directly or
indirectly. However, other potentially significant environmental effects (e.g., biological resources,
aesthetics, and potential land use policy conflicts) may potentially significant.
MEGONIGAL RESIDENCE (PA2007 -133)
INITIAL STUDY
PAGE 40
SOURCE LIST
The following enumerated documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning
Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660.
1. General Plan, including all its elements, City of Newport Beach.
2. Final Program EIR — City of Newport Beach General Plan
3. Title 20, Zoning Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
4. City Excavation and Grading Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code.
5. Chapters 10.26 and 10.28, Community Noise Ordinance of the Newport Beach Municipal Code,
6. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan 1997.
7. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan EIR, 1997.
The following documents have been prepared specifically for this project, and are incorporated by
reference within this initial study. The documents are available at the office of the City of Newport Beach,
Planning Department.
1. Preliminary Geotechnical Report for New Residence; Borella Geology, Inc.; March 20, 2007.
2. Biological Assessment survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California; Chambers Group;
October 9, 2008.
3. Megonigal Residence Design Package; David R. Olson Architects; August 112, 2008.
4. Planning Commission Staff Report; City of Newport Beach; August 21, 2008
5. City Council Staff Report; City of Newport Beach, September 23, 20080.
6. The EDR Radius Map Report with GeoCheck — Megonigal Residence; Environmental Data
Resources, Inc.; March 4, 2009.
Appendix B
NOP Comment Letters
S 11'P21 fAi001f IJiIA Is ,J- J.:SS„ f<ANSPf_]_IYS_)IUA.A_IA lit)t,,,SiN(1 -t �S. Y;_ ,, ,,,,,,,,,,, „ -_- V�`J �I U,y�'1Il LV, 'Jl'G�;jJ it (i S:r1p�
DI PA12 rMEN l OF TRANSPORI'ATION
Disum 12 s
khchdkml smic_80 .-
hmli, :. CA 92612 -8891 RECEfWD BY
Iet (9-19) 724 -2267
1'os: (�) °19) 724 -2193 PLANNING DEPARTMENT energy , l aviem,
Be enargy elf�Cie�t1!
June 3, 2009
.lames Campbell CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH file: lGR /CE',QA
City of Newport Beach SC'I-lh ": 2009041010
3 300 Newport Blvd. I. -o- 4: 2292
Newport Beach, CA 92685-8915 SR -1
Subject: Mcgonigal Residential (PA2007 -133)
l car Mr. Campbell,
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Preparation for the
Nlegonigal Residential (PA2007- .1.33) Project. The proposed project is composed of a single family
residential dwelling unit on the property which will have vehicular access to the ground floor from
Pacific Drive. The proposed residence will have three stories and total 3,566 total square feet. The
neatest State route to the project site is SR. -1.
The Cali fornia Department of Transportation (Department), District t? is a commenting agency on this
project and we have no comment at this time. 1- fowever, in the event of any activity within the
Department's right -of -wary, an encroachment permit will be required.
Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments, which could
potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please
do not hesitate to call Damon Davis at (949) 440 -3487.
Sincerely:, f
i
diristopher Terre, Branch Chief
Local L)evelopmentlhntergovecntnentaI Review
C: Terry Roberts, Office of Planning and Research
_C nArw..v i.LJA'SaY} moGii!l1' afro.,, (,'a1 yomm, .
NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916)653.6251
Fax (916) 657 -5390
Web Site ,gpuz.nv,; -;a�Y
small: ds_nnha@pacbell,net
May 28, 2009
Mr. James Campbell
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92685 -8915
RECEWED
We
PLANNING ]DEPARTMENT
JUN 0 2 2009
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Re: SCH#20090510437 CEQA Notice of Preoaration (NOP): draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the
Meaoniaal Residential (PA2007 -1331 Project: located in the City of Newport Beach Orange County California
Dear Mr. Campbell:
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) is the state'trustee agency' pursuant to Public
Resources Code §21070 designated to protect California's Native American Cultural Resources. The California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that any project that causes a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an historical resource, that includes archaeological resources, is a'significant effect requiring the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) per the California Code of Regulations §15064.5(b)(C )(f) CEQA
guidelines). Section 15382 of the 2007 CEQA Guidelines defines a significant impact on the environment as "a
substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of physical conditions within an area affected by the
proposed project, including ... objects of historic or aesthetic significance." In order to comply with this provision,
the lead agency is required to assess whether the project will have an adverse impact on these resources within the
'area of potential effect (APE)', and if so, to mitigate that effect. To adequately assess the project- related impacts on
historical resources, the Commission recommends the following action:
J Contact the appropriate California Historic Resources Information Center (CHRIS) for possible 'recorded sites' in
locations where the development will or might occur.. Contact information for the Information Center nearest you is
available from the State Office of Historic Preservation (916/653 - 7278)1 tPtpatwe.otap,,faarks ca prv__ The record
search will determine:
• If a part or the entire APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources.
• If any known cultural resources have already been recorded in or adjacent to the APE.
+ If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE.
If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.
J If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing
the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey.
• The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted
immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human
remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made
available for pubic disclosure.
• The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate
regional archaeological Information Center.
J The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) performed:
" A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project'area of potential effect (APE)': The results: No known
Native American Cultural Resources were identied within one -half mile of the "area of potential effect'
(APE1.: However, there are Native American cultural resources in close proximity to the APE. The NAHC
urges caution with any ground - breaking activity. Also, the NAHC SLF is not exhaustive and local tribal
contacts should be consulted from the attached list and the there are Native American cultural resources in
close proximity..
• The NAHC advises the use of Native American Monitors, also, when professional archaeologists or the
equivalent are employed by project proponents, in order to ensure proper identification and care given cultural
resources that maybe discovered. The NAHC, FURTHER, recommends that contact be made with Native
American Contacts on the attached It to get their input on potential IMPACT of the project (APE) on cultural
resources.. In some cases, the existence of a Native American cultural resources maybe known only to a local
tribe(s) or Native American individuals or elders.
• V Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence.
• Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of
accidentally discovered archeological resources, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.5 (f).
In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native
American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all ground - disturbing activities.
• Again, a culturally - affiliated Native American tribe maybe the only source of information about a Sacred
Site/Native American cultural resource.
• Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in
consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans.
v Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains or unmarked cemeteries
in their mitigation plans.
" CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(d) requires the lead agency to work with the Native Americans identified
by this Commission if the initial Study identifies the presence or likely presence of Native American human
remains within the APE. CEQA Guidelines provide for agreements with Native American, identified by the
NAHC, to assure the appropriate and dignified treatment of Native American human remains and any associated
grave liens.
v' Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Sec. §15064.5 (d) of the California Code
of Regulations (CEQA Guidelines) mandate procedures to be followed, including that construction or excava5on be
stopped in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location otherthan a dedicated cemetery
until the county coroner or medical examiner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. .
Note that §7052 of the Health & Safety Code states that disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony.
implementation
free to contact me at (916) 653 -6251 if you have any questions.
Program
Attachment: List of Native American Contacts
Cc: State Clearinghouse
Ti'At Society
Cindi Alvitre
6515 E. Seaside Walk, #C
Long Beach , CA 90803
calvitre @yahoo.com
(714) 504 -2468 Cell
Native American Contacts
Orange County
May 28, 2009
Gabrielino Tongva Nation
Sam Dunlap, Tribal Secretary
Gabrielino P.O. Box 86908 Gabrielino Tongva
Los Angeles CA 90086
samdunlap@earthlink.net
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation
David Beiardes, Chairperson
32161 Avenida Los Amigos Juaneno
San Juan Capistrano , CA 92675
DavidBelardes@ hotmail.com
(949) 493 -0959
(949) 493 -1601 Fax
Tongva Ancestral Territorial Tribal Nation
John Tommy Rosas, Tribal Admin.
Gabrielino Tongva
tattnlaw@gmail.com
310- 570 -6567
Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission
Anthony Morales, Chairperson
PO Box 693 Gabrielino Tongva
San Gabriel CA 91778
(828) 286 -1262 -FAX
(626) 286 -1632
(626) 286 -1758 - Home
(626) 286 -1262 Fax
(909) 262 -9351 - cell
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians Acjachemen Nation
Anthony Rivera, Chairman
31411 -A La Matanza Street Juaneno
San Juan Capistrano , CA 92675 -2674
arivera @juaneno.com
949 -488 -3484
949 -488 -3294 Fax
Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council
Robert Dorame, Tribal Chair /Cultural Resources
P.O. Box 490 Gabrielino Tongva
Bellflower CA 90707
gtongva @verizon.net
562- 761 -6417 - voice
562- 925 - 7989 -fax
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians
Alfred Cruz, Culural Resources Coordinator
P.O. Box 25628 Juaneno
Santa Ana , CA 92799
alfredgcruz @sbcglobal. net
714- 998 -0721
slfredgcruz @sbcglobal. net
This list is current only as of the date of this document.
Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and
Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
and the federal NEPA ((42 USC 4321.43351) and Sections 106 and 4(f) of NHPA (16 USC 470(f) at seq.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
SCH#200 9051 0 43; CEOA Notice of Preparation (NOP); draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Megonigal
Residential (PA2007 -133) Project; located In the City of Newport Beach; Orange County, California.
Native American Contacts
Orange County
May 28, 2009
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians
Adolph 'Bud' Sepulveda, Vice Chairperson
P.O. Box 25828 Juaneno
Santa Ana , CA 92799
bssepui @yahoo.net
714 - 838 -3270
714 - 914 -1812 - CELL
bsepul @yahoo.net
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians
Sonia Johnston, Tribal Chairperson
P.O. Box 25628 Juaneno
Santa Ana , CA 92799
sonia.johnston @ sbcglobai. net
(714) 323 -8312
Juaneno Band of Mission Indians
Anita Espinoza
1740 Concerto Drive Juaneno
Anaheim , CA 92807
(714) 779 -8832
This list Is current only as of the data of this document.
Distribution of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and
Safety Code, Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code.
and the federal NEPA ((42 USC 4321 - 43351) and Sections 106 and 4(f) of NHPA (16 USC 470(f) at seq.
This list is only applicable for contacting local Native Americans with regard to cultural resources for the proposed
SCHH2O09051043; CEOA Notice of Preparation (NOP); draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Megonigal
Residential (PA2007.133) Project located in the City of Newport Beach; Orange County, California.
r
0 .10
Air Quality Management District
21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 -4178
(909) 396 -2000 - www.agmci.gov
Mr. James Campbell, Principal Planner
City of Newport Beach
Planting Department
PO Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658
Dear Mr. Campbell:
R`3CFTV-fat3 BY
pLANNiNti DEPARTMkNI'
MAY 2 6 7009
C1TY OF NEWPORT BEACH
May 19, 2009
Notice of Preparation of it Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) for the
Mcgonigal Residence Project
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the above -
mentioned document. The SCAQMD's comments are recommendations regarding the analysis of potential air quality
impacts from the proposed project that should be included in the draft environmental impact report (EIR). Please send
the SCAQMD a copy of the Draft EIR upon its completion. In addition, please send with the draft EIR all
appendices or technical documents related to the air quality analysis and electronic versions of all air quality
modeling and health risk assessment files. Electronic files include spreadsheets, database files, input files,
output files, etc., and does not mean Adobe PDF files. Without all files and supporting air quality
documentation, the SCAQMD will be unable to complete its review of the air quality analysis in a timely
manner. Any delays in providing all supporting air quality documentation will require additional time for
review beyond the end of the comment period.
Air Quality Analysis
The SCAQMD adopted its California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality 1-landbook in 1993 to assist
other public agencies with the preparation of air quality analyses. The SCAQMD recommends that the Lead Agency
use this handbook as guidance when preparing its air quality analysis. Copies of the Handbook are available from the
SCAQMD's Subscription Services Department by calling (909) 396 -3720. Alternatively, the tend agency may wish to
consider using the California Air Resources Board (CARB) approved URBEMIS 2007 Model. This model is mailable
on the SCAQMD Website at: www.urbemis.cont.
The Lead Agency should identify any potential adverse air quality impacts that could occur from all phases of the
project and all air pollutant sources related to the project. Air quality impacts from both construction (including
demolition, if any) and operations should be calculated. Constraction- related air quality impacts typically include, but
are not limited to, emissions from the use of heavy -duty equipment from grading, earth - loading /unloading, paving,
architectural coatings, orf -road mobile sources (e.g., heavy -duty construction equipment) and on -road mobile sources
(e.g., conduction worker vehicle trips, material transport trips). Operation - related air quality impacts may include,
but are not limited to, emissions from stationary sources (e.g., boilers), area sources (e.g., solvents and coatings), and
vehicular trips (e.&, on- and off' road tailpipe emissions and entrained dust). Air quality impacts from indirect sources,
that is, sources that generate or attract vehicular trips should be included in the analysis.
The SCAQMD has developed a methodology for calculating PM2.5 emissions from construction and operational
activities and processes. In connection with developing PM2.5 calculation methodologies, the SCAQMD has also
developed both regional and localized significance thresholds. The SCAQMD requests that the lead agency quantity
PM2.5 emissions and compare the results to the recommended PM2.5 significance thresholds. Guidance for
calculating PM2.5 emissions and PM2.5 significance thresholds can be found atthe following internet address:
Ilttp:// wvvw .agmd,�ovlcogalhandbookll'M2 5 /PM2 5.1nnil.
Mr. James Campbell -2- May 19, 2009
In addition to analyzing regional air quality impacts the SCAQMD recommends calculating localized air quality
impacts and comparing the results to localized significance thresholds (LSTs). LST's can be used in addition to the
recommended regional significance thresholds as a second indication of air quality impacts when preparing a CEQA
document. Therefore, when preparing the air quality analysis for the proposed project, it is recommended that the lead
agency perform a localized significance analysis by either using the LS'fs developed by the SCAQMD or performing
dispersion modeling as necessary. Guidance for performing a localized air quality analysis can be found at
ht
tD: / /www.agmd.Lov /ce ng /liagdbook/LS9 " /LS'f html.
It is recommended that lead agencies l'or projects generating or attracting vehicular trips, especially heavy -duty diesel -
fueled vehicles, perform a mobile source health risk assessment. Guidance for performing a mobile source health risk
assessment ( "I lealth Risk Assessment Guidance for Analyzing Cancer Risk from Mobile Source Diesel Idling
Emissions for CEQA Air Quality Analysis ") can be found on the SCAQMD's CEQA web pages at the following
internet address: htt : / /www.a md. og v /eega /handbook/inobile toxic /mobile toxic.html. An analysis of all toxic air
contaminant impacts due to the decommissioning or use of equipment potentially generating such air pollutants should
also be included.
Mitigation Measures
In the event that the project generates significant adverse air quality impacts, CEQA requires that all feasible
mitigation measures that go beyond what is required by law be utilized during project construction and operation to
minimize or eliminate significant adverse air quality impacts. To assist the Lead Agency with identifying possible
mitigation measures for the project, please refer to Chapter I I of the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook for
sample air quality mitigation measures. Additional mitigation measures can be found on the SCAQMD's CEQA web
pages at the following internet address: www.agmd.gov /eega /hanclbookhnitigationJMM intro.ht al Additionally,
SCAQMD's Rule 403 — Fugitive Dust, and the Implementation Handbook contain numerous measures for Controlling
eonsbvction- related emissions that should be considered for use as CEQA mitigation if not otherwise required. Other
measures to reduce air quality impacts from land use projects can be found in the SCAQMD's Guidance Document for
Addressing Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Pluming. This document can be found at the following
internet address: littD://www.aqind.LIOV/Drdas &uidohtml. In addition, guidance on sitting incompatible land
uses can be found in the California Air Resources Board's Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community
Perspective, which can be found at the following internet address: http: // wvw,arb.ca.«ov /cl /handbook.pdf, Pursuant
to state CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (a)(1)(D), any impacts resulting from mitigation measures must also be discussed,
Data Sources
SCAQMD rules and relevant air quality reports and data are available by calling the SCAQMD's Public Information
Center at (909) 396 -2039. Much of the information available through the Public Information Center is also available
via the SCAQMD's World Wide Web Homepage (http: / /www.acimd.gov).
The SCAQMD is willing to work with the Lead Agency to ensure that project - related emissions are accurately
identified, categorized, and evaluated. Please call Daniel Garcia, Air Quality Specialist, CEQA Section, at (909) 396-
3304 ifyou have any questions regarding this letter.
Sincerely,
Steve Smith, Ph.D.
Program Supervisor, CEQA Section
Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources
SS:DG:AK
ORC090512 -14AK
Control Number
Mark D. Simon
2420 First Avenue, Corona del Mar, CA 92625
RECEIVED BY
May 27, 2009
Mr. James Campbell
Planning Department
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Blvd.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Dear Mr. Campbell:
PLANNING I"aEPAwrMENT
JUN 01 2009
CITE' OF NEWPORT BEACH
We are in receipt of the Notice of Preparation regarding PA2OO7 -133 and
while we agree with the majority of your findings on the Environmental
Checklist, we do take exception with a couple.
Section V a and b indicates that a unique geologic and archeologic
resource will be 'less than significantly impacted with mitigation
incorporated ". However, once construction is complete these resources will
be completely altered and built upon, which we feel constitutes a potential
significant impact which can not be mitigated.
Similarly, Section VI b indicates that substantial soil erosion or loss of
topsoil will be "less than significantly impacted with mitigation incorporated ".
However, we submit that once construction is complete these resources
will be completely altered and built upon, which we feel constitutes a
potential significant impact which can not be mitigated.
For these reasons we feel the Environmental Checklist prepared for
PA2OO7 -133 should be modified.
Than You,
4lul°
Mark D. Simon
Campbell, James
From: JonV3 @aol.com
Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 2:10 AM
To: Campbell, James
Subject: NOP Megonigal Residence, Begonia Park
June 8, 2009
James Campbell, Principal Planner
City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Blvd
P.D. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658$915
Re: NOP Megonigal Residence (PA2007 -133)
Dear Mr. Campbell,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the NOP and Initial Study for the Megonigal Residence.
The EIR should include sections on cultural resources and recreation.
This project is on a bluff overlooking the harbor, so it may very well have been used by native Americans similar to other
coastal blufftops in Newport Beach. Therefore there should be a cultural resource analysis. Part of this analysis would be
a literature search documenting the bluffs in Newport Beach and cultural resources found on other similar bluffs.
As this project will impact the recreational use of Begonia Park, with significant adverse impacts on the views of the
harbor from Begonia Park, recreation should be analyzed in the El R,
It is my understanding that the categorical exemption disappeared with the 2005 Coastal Commission approval of the
certified LUP and that a new categorical exemption has yet to be approved. A coastal development permit should be
required for this project, with an appeal possible to the Coastal Commission due to the coastal bluff development.
The scenic resource of the bluff face from Bayside Drive should be considered as well as the scenic resource from
Begonia Pak to the water.
Sincerely,
Jan D. Vandersloot, MD
2221 E 16th Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
9949) 548 -6326
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. aeae ours in `u t 2 eas sYe l
Appendix C
Biological Resources Assessments
Q'Chambers Group
.,...Ynly� F. iIYJIYI�LYtO /tic`1 G1'AIJ4 N(["!G
17671 Cowan Av,3vluo, Sldte 100
Irvine, California 92614
1949 ^ 2fi'I -5414 let
949 - 261-5150 fax
October 9, 2008
(08 -278)
Mr. Kim Megonigal
17872 Cowan Avenue
Irvine, California
92614
Subject: Biological Assessment survey at 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California following
initial Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton Consulting.
Mr. Megonigal
This letter report discusses the methods, findings and discussion relevant to the biological
assessment conducted at 2333 Pacific Drive pursuant of your request on October 6, 2008.
Chambers Group, Inc. (Chambers Group) was retained by Kim Megonigal to conduct a biological
survey of his property at 2333 Pacific Drive in Newport Beach, as recommended in the initial Biological
Evaluation by Hamilton Consulting (Hamilton report) submitted September 22, 2008 to Newport City
Council. The purpose of this survey was to assess the quality and quantity of native habitat present on
the property, to evaluate the suitability of the habitat to support listed or otherwise sensitive species, to
survey for sensitive species identifiable at this time, and to map the vegetation communities occurring
within the property boundaries.
1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The property is located at the intersection of Pacific Drive and Begonia, adjacent to Begonia City
Park located in Corona del Mar, of Newport Beach (see Project Location Map). The property is
4,400 square feet with the planned project footprint of 3,500 square feet. The Megonigal property is on
a natural coastal bluff enclosed by private homes to the northwest, west and south, by Begonia City
Park to the east, and Pacific Drive to the north.
2.0 METHODS
Chambers Group staff biologist, Jenny McGee, conducted a biological assessment at 2333 Pacific
Drive on October 6, 2008 from 09:09 to 10:50 am. The weather was clear, approximately 74 degrees
at arrival rising to 85 degrees at departure. The property is fenced, but full access was provided by
the property owner. Vegetation on the property was mapped and evaluated for habitat value, all
plant and animal species observed or detected were recorded, and representative photos were taken.
Site photographs are presented in appendix A. Spatial data of vegetation communities was recorded
onto an aerial photograph in the field and transferred to a GIS layer presented in the Vegetation Map
attached. The area identified as Coastal Bluff Scrub was also measured using a meter tape measure.
The measurements were taken to ground -truth the area identified as Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub.
Wildlife and plant species lists are attached as appendices B and C, respectively.
3.0 FINDINGS OF THE BIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
The vegetation on the Megonigal property has been classified into three categories, disturbed,
disturbed/ Ornamental, and Coastal Bluff Scrub.
IRVINE a REDI -ANDS e SAN DIEGO « DAKERSFIELD o REND
vtW W.CYtACY9f98rYt } rOUISin C. COttt
Certifier) Disabled Veteran Busixss8s EI'IterErise (DVBE)
Mr. Kim Megonigal
October 9, 2008
Page 2 of 16
3.1 Disturbed
Disturbed areas are those areas that are either devoid of vegetation (cleared or graded) such as dirt roads
or those areas that have a high percentage of non- native weedy species. Areas mapped as disturbed are
present primarily on the upper portion of the property but incorporate part of the natural bluff and patches
within the lower portion of the property as well. The upper portion above the natural bluff has been cleared
and is relatively void of vegetation with exception of sparse Russian thistle (Salsola tragus). Disturbed
areas mapped on the central and lower portions of the property include the eroding segment of the natural
bluff that supports no vegetation, and the lower areas vegetated largely by exotic grasses, primarily ripgut
grass (Bromus diandrus). Other non - native species in this category found on the project site include:
fennel (Feoniculum vulgare), wild radish (Raphanus sativus), Russian thistle and Australian saltbush
(Atriplex semibacata). There are 0.063 acres (2,744 square feet) of disturbed area on the project site.
3.2 Disturbed/ Ornamental
Areas mapped as disturbed/ Ornamental are those dominated by escaped or planted ornamental species,
with a high presence of non - native weedy species. Disturbed/ Ornamental vegetation is located on the
lower portion of the property and reflects influences from surrounding landscaped areas, particularly
Begonia Park. Ice Plant (Carpobrotus sp. and Mesembryanthum nodiflorum), myoporum trees ( Myoporum
laetum), jade plant (Crassula ovata), and a large fig tree (Ficus sp.) dominate the species cover in this
area. Non - native weedy species, such as Russian thistle, cheeseweed (Malva parviflorum), and a few
black mustard (Brassica nigra) occur within this area as well.
This area at the lower portion of the property also supports several cliff aster (Malacothryx saxatilus)
individuals and a young lemonade berry (Rhus integrifolia) less than 12 inches. A second lemonade berry
individual, presented on pg 4 of he Hamilton report, is located just outside the property line on the lower
portion of the slope. The presence of these native species indicates that, prior to encroachment from
ornamental and weedy species this area was vegetated with species characteristic of the Coastal Bluff
Scrub vegetation community. This area was classified as highly disturbed Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub in
the Hamilton report, however in closer examination of the species present and their respective vegetative
cover, the overall native cover in this area is very low (less than 10 %), as ornamental species have
substantially displaced native species over time. Disturbed/ Ornamental encompasses approximately
0.034 acres (1,481 square feet) within the property boundary.
3.3 Coastal Bluff Scrub
Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub as described by B.F. Holland (1986) consists of woody and/ or succulent
species up to 7 feet in height occurring on poorly developed rocky soils and moisture -laden winds with
high salt content. Species characteristic of Coastal Bluff Scrub include saltbush (Atriplex sp.), California
buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum var. fasciculatum), California bush sunflower (California encelia),
stone crop species (Dudleya sp.), prickly pear cactus (Opuntia littoralis), cliff aster, and lemonade berry.
The area mapped as Coastal Bluff Scrub is located on the cliff of the natural bluff centrally located within
the parcel. This cliff supports approximately 15 total native shrubs. The species located here include
California buckwheat, California bush sunflower, and the prickly pear cactus. These species are
characteristic of Coastal Bluff Scrub as described above, although big saltbush (Atriplex lentiformis) a
species typically considered dominant or functional to the bluff scrub community is absent from the site.
Cliff aster and lemonade berry, also associated with this community, are present on site although they
occur on the lower portion of the property which has been overtaken by ornamental and weedy species,
with exception of these few plants. A lemonade berry plant nearby is rooted underneath an overhanging
patio of an adjacent home, next to, but outside the property boundary. The remaining portion of the natural
bluff is bare of vegetation, and shows signs of significant natural erosion, as is characteristic of coastal
bluffs. Coastal Bluff Scrub encompasses approximately 0.006 acres (261.36 square feet).
Mr. Kim Megonigal
October 9, 2008
Page 3 of 16
4.0 FINDINGS OF SENSITIVE SPECIES SURVEY
Prior to conducting the survey, the most current reports of the California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB, last update September 2008) for the Newport Beach 7.5- minute topographic quadrangle were
referenced. This database contains records of reported occurrences of federal- and state - listed, proposed
endangered or threatened species, California Species of Special Concern (CSC), or otherwise sensitive
species or habitats that may occur in the project area.
Many of the species identified in the literature review require estuarine, salt marsh, beach sands or vernal
pool habitats. Because these habitats are not present on the property, these species are determined to
have no potential to occur on the project site. These plant and animal species and their associated listed
status are as follows:
Animals
o California black rail - California threatened species
o Belding's savannah sparrow - California endangered species
o Light footed clapper rail (marsh) - Federal and state endangered
o California least tern - Federal and state endangered
o SC fairy shrimp - Federal endangered
Plants
o Salt marsh bird's beak (Corydylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus) - Federal and state endangered
o Estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa) - CNPS 1 B.2
4.1 Wildlife
Wildlife species with habitat onsite include the Cooper's hawk, and the coastal California gnatcatcher.
These species are discussed in further detail below.
4.1.1 Cooper's Hawk (Accipitercooperii)
The Cooper's hawk is a California Species of Concern. This species occurs as a migrant and /or resident
over most of the U.S. from southern Canada to northern Mexico. Favored habitats include open
woodlands, mature forests, woodland edges, and river groves (Sibley 2003). More recently, the Cooper's
hawk has been known to breed in suburban and urban areas with similar tree structure to native habitats.
A Cooper's hawk was observed during the initial site visit conducted by Robert Hamilton on September 20,
2008. This species is likely using the nearby open space provided by Begonia Park for roosting and
hunting. The total area to be impacted by the proposed project is small in size, providing limited suitable
habitat for this raptor species independent of the surrounding areas. The overall spatial loss of the project
area will not have a significant impact on this species.
4.1.2 Coastal California gnatcatcher (Pofioptila californica californica)
Coastal California gnatcatcher is a federally threatened species and state listed as a California species of
concern. It is a permanent resident of Diegan, Riversidian, and Venturan sage scrub sub - associations
found from sea level to 2,500 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Within its range, the coastal California
gnatcatcher associates strongly with California sagebrush (Artemisia californica) dominant habitats and
also occurs in mixed scrub habitats with lesser percentages of this favored shrub. Other plant species
important for the nesting and foraging of this species include California buckwheat (Eriogonum
fasciculutam), white sage (Salvia apiana), black sage (Salvia mellifera), and chaparral broom (Baccharis
sarothroides). Chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum) habitats may also support breeding pairs, especially
where coastal sage scrub may occur nearby or form a component (Bontrager 1991).
Mr. Kim Megonigal
October 9, 2008
Page 4 of 16
Sufficient foraging or nesting habitat for the California gnatcatcher is not present on the proposed project site
or in the surrounding area to support this species. The habitat on the Megonigal property is limited in size and
vegetative diversity including the absence of California sagebrush. Additionally, the project site is located in
an area of dense residential development, surrounded by urban ornamental landscaping. Any remaining
habitat exists as "islands" within the residential area. These "islands" consist of few native species present
among substantial exotic and ornamental vegetation, and are insufficient in size and /or vegetative
composition to support this species. Therefore, there is no potential for coastal California gnatcatcher to
occur on the property.
4.2 Plants
In addition to conducting an assessment of habitat and classification of vegetation associations, the
survey also incorporated a survey for six sensitive plant species known to occur within Coastal Bluff
Scrub. These species, include Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var davidsonil), south coast
saltscale (Atriplex pacifica), many stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulisa), cliff spurge (Euphorbia
misera), Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulteri), and woolly seablite (Sueda taxitolia).
4.2.1 Davidson's Saltscale
Davidson's saltbush is an annual herb listed by CNPS as a List 1B.2 species, indicating that this species is
rare, threatened or endangered in California and elsewhere. This species blooms between April and
October. Populations of Davidson's saltbush have been found in Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Santa
Barbara, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, and Ventura counties, and on several of the Channel Islands.
Davidson's saltbush typically grows in Coastal Bluff Scrub and in alkaline Coastal Scrub habitats at
elevations between 30 and 660 feet amsl. Although suitable habitat occurs onsite, this species was not
observed on the property at the time of the survey. Because the survey was conducted during the
blooming period of this species and not observed it is considered to be absent from the property.
4.2.2 South Coast Saltscale
South Coast saltscale is an annual herb listed by CNPS as a List 18.2 species. The species blooms
between March and October. Populations of South Coast saltscale have been found in Los Angeles,
Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, Ventura, on several of the Channel Islands. The species
typically occurs in Coastal Bluff Scrub, Coastal Dunes, Coastal Scrub, and on Playas, often in alkali soils
and at elevations up to 460 feet amsl. Although suitable habitat occurs onsite, south coast saltscale was
not observed on the property at the time of the survey. Because the survey was conducted during the
blooming period for this species, the south coast saltscale is considered to be absent from the property.
4.2.3 Many- Stemmed Dudleya
Many- stemmed dudleya is a perennial herb listed by CNPS as a List 1 B.2 species. The species blooms
between April and July. Populations of many- stemmed dudleya have been found in Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego counties. The species typically occurs in Coastal Scrub,
Chaparral, and Valley and Foothill Grassland, usually on clay soils or grassy slopes at elevations from 48
to 2,595 feet. This species was not observed on the property at the time of the survey, and is detectable
outside of the blooming period. Therefore, the many- stemmed dudleya is considered to be absent from
the property.
4.2.4 Cliff Spurge
Cliff spurge is a perennial shrub listed by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as a List 2.2 species,
classifying it as fairly endangered in California, but more common elsewhere. This perennial shrub occurs
in San Diego and Orange counties as a component of Coastal Bluff or Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation
communities at elevations 33 to 1,640 amsl. This species was not observed on the property at the time of
the survey. Because this species is a perennial shrub and would be detectable at the time the survey was
Mr. Kim Megonigal
October 9, 2008
Page 5 of 16
conducted, it is considered to be absent from the property
4.2.5 Coulter's Saltbush
Coulter's saltbush is a perennial herb categorized by CNPS as a 113.2 plant, classifying it as fairly
endangered in California and elsewhere. This perennial herb is known to occur in San Diego, Orange, and
Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties at elevations ranging from 10 to 1,500
feet amsl. This coastal species is associated with Coastal Bluff Scrub, Coastal Dunes, Coastal Sage
Scrub, and valley and foothill grassland with clay or alkaline soils. Coulter's saltbush blooms from March
through October and was not observed on the property at the time of the survey. Because this species
would be detectable at the time the survey was conducted and was not observed, it is considered to be
absent from the property.
4.2.6 Woolly Seablite
Woolly seablite is an evergreen shrub categorized by the CNPS as a 4.2 species, classifying it as having
limited distribution and fairly endangered in California. This species occurs on the margins of coastal
marshes, or as a component of Coastal Bluff scrub or Coastal Dune habitats at elevations ranging from 0
to 164 feet amsl. This species is known to occur in San Diego, Orange, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara, San
Louis Obispo Counties, as well as the Chanel Islands National Park. Woolly seablite blooms from January
through December, but it detectable year- around. This species was not observed at the time of the survey.
Because this species would be detectable at the time the survey was conducted and was not observed, it
is considered to be absent from the property.
The limited distribution of the Coastal Bluff Scrub on the property, confined to the cliff portion of the natural
bluff provides little suitable habitat the above stated sensitive plant species. Therefore, Davidson's
saltbush, south coast saltscale, many- stemmed dudleya, cliff spurge, Coulter's saltbush and woolly
seablite are considered absent within the project boundary. No further surveys are recommended.
5.0 DISCUSSION
The intent of this survey conducted on behalf of the project proponent is to evaluate the applicability of the
California Coastal Act as it relates to the City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use
Plan (LCP /CLUP), and the Newport Beach City policies in the Natural Resources Element of the General
Plan, as discussed in the Hamilton report submitted to Newport City Council on September 23, 2008, on
behalf of Friends of Begonia Park.
As pointed out in the Hamilton report, the City of Newport Beach LCP /CLUP, with the function of
interpreting the Coastal Act within the City, includes policies that mandate the protection of environmentally
sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) as defined by Section 30107.5 of the Coastal Act. ESHA areas are defined
as "...any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because
of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human
activities and developments."
Furthermore, the Natural Resources Element of the Newport City General Plan states the overall goal of
this portion of the General Plan is to protect sensitive and rare terrestrial and marine resources from urban
development.
The vegetation composition supported on the proposed project site predominately consists of disturbed
non - vegetated areas, ornamental species and weedy exotic species. Approximately 5% (261 square feet)
of the property supports low quality Coastal Bluff Scrub. The Coastal Bluff Scrub is recognized by the
California Department of Fish and Game as a rare plant community. In evaluation of habitat quality of the
Coastal Bluff Scrub recognized on the Megonigal property, we find the overall habitat value to be low as a
Mr. Kim Megonigal
October 9, 2008
Page 6 of 16
result of habitat fragmentation, influence of surrounding human activities, and because it supports limited
long term habitat value.
Habitat fragmentation
The project site is located in a densely developed residential neighborhood with urban landscaping
throughout the area. No Coastal Bluff Scrub habitat of moderate or high value is present within the vicinity
of the project site. These conditions create habitat fragmentation, resulting in overall low habitat value of
the remaining patches. Although the property is contiguous with Begonia Park which does support native
wildlife species, there is no evidence that listed or otherwise sensitive species are dependent upon the
biological resources identified on the Megonigal property. Begonia Park has been landscaped with urban
ornamental landscaping, as is the remaining open space surrounding the residential development. The
areas of Coastal Bluff Scrub located west of the property identified in the Hamilton report are also
fragmented remnants of native habitat, consisting of few native species, surrounded by ornamental urban
landscaping. The nearest habitat fragment is separated from the Megonigal property by the retaining wall
of a nearby home. Ecological restoration, were it undertaken, could not restore full habitat value and
function to this area.
Influence of surrounding human activities
As a result, of the surrounding dense residential development, the property has been influenced directly
and indirectly by various human activities. These activities include the development of Begonia Park and
subsequent ornamental landscaping, construction of retaining wall to the property below 2333 Pacific
Drive, construction of retaining walls and homes adjacent to the property, and the construction and
terracing of streets and neighborhood lots. The remaining portions of Coastal Bluff Scrub both on the
Megonigal property and other nearby fragments reflect compromised habitat quality resulting from edge
effect. The edge effect, as it pertains to an ecological system, is when disturbance to an area that borders
or is a component of a natural habitat, the edge of the remaining intact natural habitat is negatively
affected to some distance from the edge. The Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub present within the project
boundary is of low quality and does not provide valuable habitat because natural functions have been
compromised by the surrounding human influences. Therefore, it does not support the species diversity,
composition and connectivity necessary for an ecosystem to be of significant habitat value.
Limited long term habitat value
The substantial soil erosion of coastal bluffs and terraces is a natural component of these environments.
The function of disturbance in these habitats is a component of the ecology, and habitat is ultimately
restored through the re- colonization of surrounding native vegetative species. Without surrounding
vegetation to re- colonize, the habitat value may be lost entirely once the existing habitats are destabilized
by soil erosion. The natural disturbance will continue to create conditions favorable of invasive, weedy
species and encroaching ornamentals. Therefore, this habitat segment is not likely to provide significant
long term habitat value to native plants or wildlife species.
6.0 CONCLUSION
Analysis of the identified Southern Coastal Bluff Scrub on the Megonigal property located at 2333 Pacific
Drive, concludes that although representative species of the community are present, the habitat value of
this vegetation association has been significantly compromised by fragmentation and influences from
human activities and that it provides very limited long term habitat value. The identified habitat is not
especially valuable as it has already been substantially compromised by human activities and
developments. Furthermore, no federal- or state - listed or otherwise sensitive species identified as having
potential to occur on the property were observed during the survey. The result of this biological
assessment and subsequent analysis should serve as site - specific evidence that the identified Coastal
Mr. Kim Megonigal
October 9, 2008
Page 7 of 16
Bluff Scrub, does not qualify as an ESHA under the Coastal Act, and therefore cannot be afforded
protection under the Newport Beach LCP /CLUP or the Newport Beach General Plan, and mitigation
should not be required.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (949) 261 -5414.
Sincerely,
CHAMBERS GROUP, INC.
Jenny aMcGee
Staff Biologist
Mr. Kim Megonigal
October 9, 2008
Page 8 of 16
References Cited
Bontrager, D. R.
1991 Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) - Western Riverside County Species
Accounts, Habitat requirements, home range and breeding biology of the California
gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) in South Orange County, California. Prepared for Santa
Margarita Company, Rancho Santa Margarita, California.
California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB).
2008 Newport Beach, California, 7.5- minute USGS quadrangle. Accessed October 6, 2008.
Hamilton, Robert A.
2008 September 23 Appeal Hearing on the Megonigal Property Biological Evaluation, 2333
Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, California
Holland, R.F
1986,1986
Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. Unpublished
report available from California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California.
Sibley, David A.
2003 The Sibley Field Guide to Birds of Western North America. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New
York (distributed by Random House, New York).
APPENDIX A SITE PHOTOS
OF 2333 PACIFIC DRIVE
Site Photos of 2333 Pacific Drive
Photo 1. This photo was taken facing northwest from Bayside Drive. It shows disturbed areas (top of bluff),
Coastal Bluff Scrub (natural cliff), and disturbed / ornamental vegetation communities (in foreground).
Photo 2. This photo was taken facing southwest of Bayside Drive. It shows the barren/
disturbed portion at the top of property.
"=
� � .�.
-z
APPENDIX B
2333 PACIFIC DRIVE WILDLIFE SPECIES OBSERVED
Wildlife Species Observed at 2333 Pacific Drive Project Site
Scientific Name
Common Name
CLASS REPTILIA
REPTILES
PHRYNOSOMATIDAE
LIZARDS
Sceloporus occidentatis
western fence lizard
CLASS AVES
BIRDS
COLUMBIDAE
PIGEONS & DOVES
Zenaida macroura
mourning dove
TROCHILIDAE
HUMMINGBIRDS
Calypte anna
Anna's hummingbird
TYRANNIDAE
TYRANTFLYCATCHERS
Sayornis nigricans
black phoebe
TIMALI I DAE
BABBLERS
Chamaea fasciata
wrentit
MI MI DAE
MOCKINGBIRDS, THRASHERS
Mimus of lottos
northern mockingbird
EMBERIZIDAE
EMBERIZIDS
Melospiza melodia
Song Sparrow
APPENDIX C
PLANT SPECIES OBSERVED AT 2333 PACIFIC DRIVE
PROJECT SITE
Plant Species Observed at 2333 Pacific Drive Project Site
Scientific Name Common Name
ANGIOSPERMS (DICOTYLEDONS)
AIZOACEAE
FIG - MARIGOLD FAMILY
Carpobrotus edulis*
hottentot -fig slender - leaved
Mesembryanthemum nodiflorum*
iceplant
ANACARDIACEAE
SUMAC OR CASHEW FAMILY
Rhus integrifolia
lemonadeberry
APIACEAE
CARROT FAMILY
Foeniculum vulgare*
fennel
ASTERACEAE
SUNFLOWER FAMILY
Encelia californica
California bush sunflower
Malacothrix saxatilis
cliff malacothrix
BRASSICACEAE
MUSTARD FAMILY
Brassica nigra*
black mustard radish
Raphanussativus*
CACTACEAE
CACTUS FAMILY
Opuntia littoralis
coastal prickly pear
CHENOPODIACEAE
GOOSEFOOT FAMILY
Atriplex semibaccata*
Australian saltbush
Chenopodium album*
Iamb's quarters Russian
Salsola tragus*
thistle
CRASSULACEAE
STONECROP FAMILY
Crassula ovata*
jade plant GOURD
CUCURBITACEAE
FAMILY
Marah macrocar us
wild cucumber
MALVACEAE
MALLOW FAMILY
Malva parviflora*
cheeseweed
MORACEAE
MULBERRY FAMILY
Ficus sp.*
fig
MYOPORACEAE
MYOPORUM FAMILY
Myoporum laetum*
myoporum
POLYGONACEAE
BUCKWHEAT FAMILY
Eriogonum fasciculatum
California buckwheat
ANGIOSPERMS (MONOCOTYLEDONS)
POACEAE
GRASS FAMILY
Bromus diandrus*
ripgut grass
* Denotes Non - native Species
%
WON
+
.?«._w
M1
a t
a
f
t
�C
i. �.,.
i
M1
a t
a
t
�C
4 '
{ w i 1P
t� ✓
4r.
t� Xry 'lp' rati�`tu>
R�� `� � a "�'� .., r� .S �`• i } ;g- :q ��E f� d( ♦ as y... �i � a pa
lot.
J�a^
fi
Y { FN
Y ^ -
IJ �'
f:r
@Chambers Group
Soivino 8bvfmnrnen(�r i:halrnnG »s
17671 Cowan Avenue, Suite '160
Irvine. California 92614
949 261 -5414 [el
949 - 261 -3950 fax
February 27, 2009
(20009)
Kim Megonigal
17872 Cowan Avenue
Irvine. CA 92614
Subject: Follow -Up Survey and Results in Response to Comments Issued by BonTerra
Consulting Regarding the Biological Study of 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach, Orange
County, California.
Dear Mr. Megonigal:
Chambers Group, Inc. (Chambers Group) conducted a biological survey of the property at 2333 Pacific
Drive in Newport Beach (project site), as recommended in the initial Biological Evaluation by Hamilton
Consulting submitted September 22, 2008 to the Newport City Council. The purpose of this survey,
conducted on October 6, 2008, was to accurately assess the quality and amount of native habitat present
on the project site, to map the vegetation occurring within the property boundaries, to evaluate the
suitability of the habitat to support listed or otherwise sensitive species, and to survey for sensitive species
identifiable at this time.
The project site property is located at the intersection of Pacific Drive and Begonia Avenue, adjacent to
Begonia City Park located in Corona del Mar, of Newport Beach. The site is 4,400 square feet with the
planned project footprint of 3,500 square feet. The project site is on a natural coastal bluff enclosed by
private homes to the northwest, west, and south, by Begonia City Park to the east, and by Pacific Drive to
the north.
The portion of the property identified as Coastal Bluff Scrub is approximately 0.006 acre (216.36 square
feet) and supports a total of 15 plants consisting of three native species. These species include: California
buckwheat (Eriogonum fasciculatum), California bush sunflower (Encelia calitornica), and prickly pear
cactus (Opuntia prolifera). The remaining portion of the natural bluff on the project site is bare, and shows
signs of significant natural erosion, which is characteristic of coastal bluffs.
Chambers Group received a request from the City of Newport Beach (City) to respond to comments
issued by BonTerra Consulting (BonTerra) on October 21, 2008. The comments referenced the
determinations made by Chambers Group in the Biological Assessment dated October 9, 2008, stating
that two sensitive plant species, many- stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis) and the Laguna Beach
dudleya (Dudleya stolonifera), are absent from the project site. This memo addresses those comments.
Rare Plant Reference Populations
The purpose of visiting a reference site for a species is to confirm the species is both evident and
identifiable at the time of the survey conducted on a given project site. To satisfy the inquiry regarding the
potential for the many- stemmed dudleya and the Laguna Beach dudleya to occur on the project site
property, Chambers Group botanist, Jenny McGee, visited two known reference populations in Orange
County (within 20 miles of the project site) to assess the phenological development of each of the
sensitive Dudleya species at the time of the survey. Both reference site visits and the re -visit to the project
site were completed following recent rain events when plants would have responded positively to the
increased soil moisture content.
IRVINE • RFOLANDS m SAN DIEGO • BAKF.RSFIEl.D > RF N D
www.rhambersgrour >inc.com
Certified Disablfld Veteran Business Enterprise (DVBE)
Many- Stemmed Dudleya
One of BonTerra's comments stated that the many- stemmed dudleya may not have been apparent in
October when the Biological Assessment was conducted. To resolve any question as to the presence of
this species on the project site, Ms. McGee visited a known reference site on February 10, 2009 where the
many- stemmed dudleya is known to occur. The reference population is within the Santiago Oaks Regional
Park located at the end of Glen Albyn Lane in the City of Orange. The many- stemmed dudleya was
observed growing on an exposed rock outcrop in vegetative form (G PS coordinates: UTM, Zone 11S
426299mE; 3740586mN). No flowers were present on the plants at the time of the site visit; however the
species was confirmed to be both evident and identifiable through vegetative characteristics in February.
Laguna Beach Dudleva
BonTerra also stated the Laguna Beach dudleya would be "virtually undetectable" during the time of the
original survey conducted in October 2008. To resolve any question as to the presence of this species on
the project site, Ms. McGee, visited a known reference site on February 17, 2009 where the Laguna
Beach dudleya is known to occur. The reference site is the Laguna Coast Wilderness Park located off of
Highway 133 in Laguna Beach. Upon arrival, Ms. McGee spoke with Orange County Park staff who
confirmed the species is present within the park, and provided location information of the population. The
species was observed using binoculars off of a trail originating at the main parking lot (Gate 1) for the
wilderness park. Ms. McGee went to the identified location (GPS coordinates: UTM, Zone 11 S 429158mE;
3716328mN) and the Laguna Beach dudleya was observed in vegetative form growing on a rock outcrop.
This observation confirmed the Laguna Beach dudleya would be evident and identifiable on February 12
had it been present at the project site.
Additional Evidence
In addition, the known locations of this species recognized in the California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) are in close proximity, if not directly within, the Laguna Beach area. The nearest occurrence is
approximately 7 miles from the project site (see attached map). The California Native Plant Society
Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI) shows a historical occurrence of this species recorded in Newport Beach,
however little documentation is provided regarding this occurrence.
Furthermore, due to the disturbed nature of the project site and its low habitat quality which only supports
three native plant species, it is highly unlikely that any sensitive plant species inhabit the project site.
Other Sensitive Species
Coulter's Saltbush
At the time of the site visits (either in October 2008 or in February 2009), Chambers Group did not
observe any plants within the genus Atriplex growing onsite. Because Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulten)
is a perennial herb and can have flowers persist into October or begin as early as March, this species
would have been observed in some vegetative state during one of the site visits. Chambers Group can
confirm this species absent from the project site.
Davidson's Saltscale
Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii) is an annual herb that flowers between April and
October. This species would have been conspicuous in October, even if it was in a desiccated form. There
were no plants onsite resembling this species. Davidson's saltscale is considered absent from the project
site.
Anhanisma
Aphanisma ( Aphanisma blitoides) is an annual herb that flowers as early as March. Known populations of
this species growing in Dana Point have been known to flower as early as February. Because flowers
appear subsequent to the vegetative structures of a plant, Ms. McGee would have seen evidence of this
species on the project site during her site visit in February. No plant resembling an aphanisma was
observed on the project site and this species can therefore be confirmed absent from the site.
The remaining sensitive species that were determined to have a potential to occur on the project site
based on the literature review (CNDDB and CNPSEI database searches) have all been confirmed absent
because they were not observed growing onsite at the appropriate flowering time when these plants would
be conspicuous and identifiable or due to a lack of suitable habitat on the project site.
As stated in the October 9, 2009 Biological Assessment by Chambers Group, the following species were
not observed growing onsite during the flowering period when these species would have been in bloom:
Y south coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica);
➢ Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulten);
Y Davidson's saltscale (Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii);
➢ cliff spurge (Euphorbia misera); and
➢ woolly seablite (Sueda taxifolia).
In addition, no habitat was present on site for the following species:
➢ chaparral sand - verbena (Abronia villosa var. aurita);
➢ southern tarplant (Centromedia parryi ssp. australis);
➢ San Fernando Valley spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. Fernandina);
➢ salt marsh bird's beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus);
➢ Los Angeles sunflower (Helianthus nuttallii ssp. parishii);
➢ Coulter's goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulter);
➢ mud nama (Nama stenocarpum);
➢ Gambel's yellowcress (Nasturtium gambeli);
➢ prostrate vernal pool navarretia ( Navarretia prostrata);
➢ coast woolly -heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudata); and
➢ estuary seablite (Sueda esteroa);
Therefore, these species are confirmed absent from the project site
Conclusions
Although not in bloom in February, the many- stemmed dudleya and the Laguna Beach dudleya were both
evident and identifiable as a Oudleya species when the project site was re- visited in February 2009.
Chambers Group botanist Ms. McGee did not observe evidence of any sensitive plant on the property
during surveys conducted in October or February. Furthermore, had any vegetative characteristics
indicative of sensitive plant species having potential to occur on the property been observed (such as a
basal nodes, desiccated leaves, or other morphologic characters), it would have warranted
recommendation for further surveys to be conducted during an active blooming period.
In summary, results of the follow -up site visits requested by the City and discussed herein are consistent
with the original findings of the Biological Assessment. Although representative species of the Coastal
Bluff Scrub vegetation community are present on the project site, the overall habitat quality is low, and no
evidence of sensitive species was observed. No further surveys are recommended.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at (949) 261 -5414.
Sincerely,
CHAMBERS GROUP, INC.
Jenny McGee
Staff Biologist
cc: Jim Campbell
Principal Planner
City of Newport Beach
's
� � �� ��,
���
�`h�n
oa
f
To: Patrick Alford, AICP
City of Newport Beach
MEMORANDUM
October 21, 2008
From: Sandra Leatherman, Senior
Botanist and Dana C. Privitt,
AICP, Principal
Subject: Review of Biological Documents for 2333 Pacific View Drive, Newport Beach,
California
The City of Newport Beach has requested BonTerra Consulting to review the two biological
reports for the Megonigal Property located on 2333 Pacific View Drive in the City of Newport
Beach California. The purpose of our firm's review was to assess the findings of the documents.
BonTerra Consulting did not conduct any field work associated with the review of these
documents. The reports are "Re: September 23 Appeal Hearing on the Megonigal Property
Biological Evaluation 2333 Pacific Drive, Newport Beach" dated September 22, 2008 prepared
by Robert Hamilton of Hamilton Consulting; and "Biological Assessment Survey at 2333 Pacific
Drive, Newport Beach, California Following Initial Biological Evaluation conducted by Hamilton
Consulting" dated October 9, 2008 prepared by the Chambers Group.
The review was prepared by Sandy Leatherman, Senior Botanist and Senior Project Manager at
BonTerra Consulting. Ms. Leatherman has over 17 years of experience in plant biology;
mitigation monitoring; and the performance of biological surveys, restoration studies, and habitat
evaluations. Ms. Leatherman's professional experience has focused on plant ecology and
taxonomy, and she has conducted and /or managed both general and directed surveys for
biological resources, which includes plants listed as special status or Threatened or
Endangered under State and federal laws and regulations. She has developed habitat
restoration programs and evaluated restoration site conditions on a quantitative and qualitative
basis for public- sector and private- sector clients throughout Southern California.
Ms. Leatherman has also authored the biological resources sections of numerous
Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) and separate biological reports, including Biological
Assessments (pursuant to Section 7 consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
[USFWS]); Natural Environmental Studies (NESS) (pursuant to California Department of
Transportation [Caltrans] guidelines); reports in accordance with Natural Community
Conservation Plan; focused surveys for special status species; tree reports; and general
biological assessments and Constraints Analyses.
Robert Hamilton's report "evaluated the biological resources at the property and includes his
opinion regarding whether the property supports any biological resources that could be subject
to local, state, or federal regulation due to their ecological sensitivity."
Chambers' report "assesses the quality and quantity of native habitat present on the property, to
evaluate the suitability of the habitat to support listed or otherwise sensitive species, to survey
for sensitive species identifiable at this time, to map the vegetation communities occurring within
151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E -200 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 (714) 444 -9199 (714) 444 -9599 FAX
Patrick Alford, AICP
October 21, 2008
Page 2
the property boundaries." It is our understanding that the Chambers Group report was prepared
at the request of the property owner to address recommendations in Hamilton's report.
Hamilton's report concludes that southern coastal bluff scrub, a plant community identified as
rare by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) is present on the property and that
the property could also support listed or otherwise sensitive plant species (special status).
Mr. Hamilton lists one special status plant species, Coulter's saltbush (Atriplex coulteri), as
having the potential to occur on the property. Hamilton's report is a general overview and was
not presented to the City to provide the analysis of all special status plant species. Therefore, it
is not known if Hamilton has determined if there is potentially suitable habitat for all of the
species listed in the California Natural Diversity Database ( CNDDB) and California Native Plant
Society Electronic Inventory (CNPSEI).
Chambers' report concurs with the Hamilton report that southern coastal bluff scrub is present
on the property but determines that the habitat value of the vegetation association has been
significantly compromised by fragmentation and influences of human activities and it provides
very limited long term habitat value. The report also concludes that no federal, State, or
otherwise sensitive species as having potential to occur on the property were observed during
the survey.
As stated above, BonTerra Consulting was not directed to by the City and therefore did not
conduct any field work on this property and has not assessed the habitat on the property.
Neither the quality of the habitat nor can the potential to support special status plant and wildlife
species has been determined by BonTerra Consulting. However, in an analysis of the above
stated reports the following comments can be made:
1. A biological assessment should address all special status species known to occur in the
area with the use of the CNDDB and the CNPSEI. The Hamilton report was not
considered a biological assessment therefore it did not assess these databases. The
Chambers' report did not address the federally and State listed plant species from the
CNPSEI, such as Laguna Beach dudleya (Dudleya stolonifera). All listed species need
to be addressed because they are a potential constraint to development. However, a
verbal message was given to BonTerra Consulting that Chamber's provided a paragraph
stating that Laguna Beach dudleya was not present during the October 2008 survey and
not expected because it is detectable outside the blooming period. This is addressed
below.
2. A focused survey for special status plant species should follow the "Guidelines for
Assessing the Effects of Proposed Projects on Rare, Threatened and Endangered
Plants and Natural Communities' (CDFG May 2000). These guidelines state that
"nearby reference sites should be observed to determine that the species are identifiable
at the time of the survey." Hamilton did not conduct special status plant surveys.
Chamber's states that surveys were conducted at the appropriate blooming period. The
methods section of their report does not identify that any reference populations were
visited. This information needs to be added to the report if the surveys are valid for the
annual species. Many annual species during the 2008 season bloomed much earlier
because of early rainfall and the following drought conditions, and October is the end (of
the blooming) period for two of the special status plant species, Davidson's saltscale
(Atriplex serenana var. davidsonii) and South Coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica),
addressed in Chamber's report.
3. The Chamber's report states that many- stemmed dudleya (Dudleya multicaulis) is visible
outside its blooming period. While many- stemmed dudleya is a perennial species, it is a
Patrick Alford, AICP
October 21, 2008
Page 3
perennial species from a corm (bulb -like structure). This means that this species dies
completely back following the blooming period which is typically April through July. Dried
flowering stocks can sometimes be visible following the flowering period. However, this
is not a reliable trait unless you are looking at a known population since wind, wildlife,
and human disturbance can destroy the flowering stocks. Therefore, the conclusion
stating that this species is visible during October is not considered valid.
4. Chamber's also stated that Laguna Beach dudleya would be visible during this time of
year. Laguna Beach dudleya is a perennial species, but the succulent leaves of the
dudleya shrivel and desiccate during the summer months. Therefore this federally and
State listed species would be virtually undetectable during this time, and most botanists
would not conduct conclusive presence /absence surveys during this time of year without
at least visiting a reference site.
The City, through execution of the NCCP /HCP Implementing Agreement (IA) and the
receipt of a 10(a) Permit, is a participating land use jurisdiction in the Central - Coastal
Subregional NCCP /HCP program. As a participating land use jurisdiction, the City
receives specific regulatory authorizations pursuant to the provisions of the IA and the
10(a) Permit including full regulatory coverage for 32 species and three habitat types,
and conditional regulatory coverage for 7 species. As such, the City would receive full
regulatory coverage for impacts to the Laguna Beach dudleya (Dudleya stolonifera), an
"Identified Species" pursuant to Section 1.29 of the IA. Also, all impacts (permanent or
temporary) to coastal sage scrub resources must be reported as annual take report to
the Executive Director, Nature Reserve of Orange County.
If you have any questions regarding the findings presented in this memo, please feel free to
contact us.
RSPmjecls \NmponU010Wemo- 102108 ,doc
a�W�Rr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
p� A
3300 Newport Boulevard - P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915
c,�"oaN (949) 644 -3200
NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY OF A
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
The City of Newport Beach has completed the preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the
Megonigal Single - Family Residential Project located at 2333 Pacific Drive in the City of Newport Beach. The
DEIR has been prepared to evaluate potential environmental impacts associated with the following discretionary
approvals are requested or required by the City in order to implement the project:
Modification Permit (MD2007 -080)
The project applicants, Kim and Caroline Megonigal, are proposing to construction a single - family residence on
the subject property.The applicant proposes to construct a 3,566 square -foot, single- family residence (including
the garage floor area). The proposed residence will consist of three levels: 1,827 square feet on the first floor;
934 square feet on the second floor; and 805 square feet on the uppermost level (including a 428 - square foot, 2-
car garage). Total floor area, not including the garage, is 3,138 square feet. Vehicular access is from Pacific
Drive at the intersection of Begonia Avenue and Pacific Drive. In addition to the indoor living area, 1,004 square
feet of outdoor patio space on the three levels is provided. The front and rear elevations are illustrated in Exhibits
3 -7 and 3 -8, respectively. The applicant is requesting approval of Modification Permit No. MD2007 -080 to allow
planter walls to exceed the three -foot height limit requirement in the front yard setback. In addition, because the
proposed planter walls and water feature would also encroach into the Begonia Avenue right -of -way, an
encroachment permit from the City's Public works Department will also be required. The encroachment permit
also includes non - standard improvements within the public right -of -way consisting of enhanced paving for
pedestrian and vehicular access from Pacific Drive. Lastly, grading of approximately 630 cubic yards of export,
landscaping, and utility connections necessary for construction of the proposed residence are also included.
The City of Newport Beach determined that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the
environment on Land Use, Aesthetics, and Biological Resources. The City determined that an EIR would be
required to more fully evaluate potential adverse environmental impacts that may result from development of the
project. All other environmental effects were determined to be less than significant (with mitigation) or have no
impact and were addressed in the Initial Study prepared for the project. As a result, the DEIR has been prepared
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (CEQA), as amended (Public Resources
Code Section 21000 et seq.), and the State CEQA Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). This DEIR also complies with the City of Newport Beach's
procedures for implementation of CEQA.
The City encourages members of the general public to review and comment on this documentation. Copies of the
Environmental Impact Report and supporting documents are available for public review and inspection at the
following locations:
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915
Balboa Branch
100 East Balboa Boulevard
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Mariners Branch
1300 Irvine Ave.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Central Library
1000 Avocado Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92625
Corona del Mar Branch
420 Marigold Avenue
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
The DEIR is available at the City's website http: / /www.newportbeachca.gov /planning. Comments on the
adequacy of the DEIR will be accepted by the City between August 24, 2009 and October 8, 2009. Comments on
the Draft EIR should be sent to the attention of James Campbell, Principal Planner, Newport Beach Planning
Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915. Notice of said hearing will be
separately provided in accordance with applicable law when the hearing dates are known.
James Campbell, Principal Planner
(949) 644 -3200