HomeMy WebLinkAbout1936 - Code Amendment Zone Change - 191 Riverside AveRESOLUTION NO. 1936
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECOMMENDING CITY
COUNCIL ADOPTION OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION
ND2013-003 (SCH NO. 2014011028) AND APPROVAL
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. GP2013-002,
COASTAL LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. LC2013-
003, AND CODE AMENDMENT NO. CA2013-007 FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 191 RIVERSIDE AVENUE
(PA2013-210)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. An application was filed by Gensler, with respect to property located at 191 Riverside
Avenue, and legally described as Lot F of Tract 919, requesting approval of a
amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan to change the land use
category from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use Horizontal (MU-H1) and an amendment
to the Zoning Code to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use
Mariners Mile (MU-MM).
2. A public hearing was held on March 6, 2014, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic
Center Drive, Newport Beach. A notice of time, place and purpose of the meeting was
given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence, both written
and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this
meeting.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section
21000, et seq. ("CEQA"), the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections
15000 et seq.), and City Council Policy K-3, the proposed amendments ("Project") are
defined as a project and as such as subject to environmental review.
2. The City thereafter caused to be prepared an Initial Study/Negative Declaration (SCH
No. 2014011028) ("ND") in compliance with CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and
City Council Policy K-3.
3. Notice of the availability of the draft ND was given in accordance with CEQA, the State
CEQA Guidelines and City Council Policy K-3. The draft ND was made available for
public review for a 30-day comment period beginning on January 6, 2014, and ending
February 5, 2014, and extended to February 14, 2014. The City received three
comments letters during the public review period and the comments were considered
by the Planning Commission during its consideration of the proposed project.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1936
Page 2 of 4
4. On the basis of the entire environmental review record, the proposed project will have
a less than significant impact upon the environment.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS.
1. The General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan vision for the Mariners Mile Commercial
District calls for a pedestrian-oriented mixed-use "village" containing retail businesses,
offices, services, and housing parcels on the inland side of Coast Highway.
2. The proposed land use and zoning changes are consistent with the mixed-use village
vision for this area of Mariners Mile by providing the opportunity for commercial and
residential development.
3. The proposed change to mixed-use would be a continuation of the mixed land uses
designated on the properties abutting and adjacent to the project site.
4. The proposed change from public facilities to mixed-use is consistent with Policy LU
6.19.15, which calls for investigating the relocation of the postal distribution center to
reduce parking impacts in the immediate area.
5. The Coastal Land Use Plan will be carried out fully in conformity with the California
Coastal Act.
6. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003 shall not become effective until
approval by the California Coastal Commission.
7. Pursuant to Section 423 of the City of Newport Beach Charter and Council Policy A-18,
proposed General Plan amendments were reviewed to determine if a vote of the
electorate would be required if a project (separately or cumulatively with other projects in
the same Statistical Area over the prior 10 years) exceeds certain thresholds. This is the
fourth General Plan Amendment that affects Statistical Area H-4 since the General Plan
update in 2006. The amendment would result in a 13 units being added to the Statistical
Area and when this is added to 80% of the increase in units of the three prior
amendments, the total does not exceed 100 units. The amendment would result in a net
increase of 1 ,426 square feet and when this is added to 80% of the increase in floor area
of the three prior amendments, the total does not exceed 40,000 square feet. The
amendment is projected to increase AM Peak trips by 39.68 trips and PM Peak Trips by
52.85 trips and when this is added to the 80% of the of the increase in trips of the three
prior amendments, the total does not exceed 100 trips for either the AM or PM Peak. As
none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the
electorate is required.
8. Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, the City provided notice
regarding the proposed General Plan amendment to appropriate tribes identified by the
Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) each time it considers a proposal to
adopt or amend the General Plan.
(
SECTION 4 . DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
r
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1936
Page 3 of 4
The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby:
1. Recommends City Council adoption of Negative Declaration ND2013-003 for the 191
Riverside Land Use and Zoning Amendments Project (SCH No. 2014011028)
attached as Exhibit A.
2. Recommends City Council approval of the following applications:
a. General Plan Amendment No. GP2013-002 by amending Amend Figure LU1
(General Plan Overview Map), Figure LU2 (Index Map), and Figure LU 9
(Statistical Areas H1 -H4) to depict 191 Riverside as within the MU-H1 (Mixed-
Use Horizontal) Land Use Plan Category; and
b. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003 by amending Map 1 and
Figure 2.1.4-1 to depict 191 Riverside as with MU-H1 (Mixed-Use Horizontal)
Land Use Plan Category; and
c. Code Amendment No. CA2013-007 by amending the Zoning Map for the City of
Newport Beach, California to depict 191 Riverside as within the MU-MM (Mixed-
Use Mariners Mile) Zoning District.
3. Recommends City Council authorization for the Community Development Director to
submit Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003 to the Executive Director of
the California Coastal Commission for certification.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2014.
AYES: BROWN, HILLGREN, KRAMER, LAWLER, MYERS, AND TUCKER
NOES: NONE
ABSTAIN: NONE
ABSENT: AMERI
Planning Commission Resolution No. 1936
Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
for
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments
General Plan Amendment No. GP2013-002
Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003
Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2013-007
(PA2013-210)
Lead Agency
Contact: Patrick J. Alford
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
Planning Division
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
DECEMBER 23, 2013
Negative Declaration 1.0 Introduction
1191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1-1
1.0 Introduction
The City of Newport Beach (hereafter “City”) received applications from Gensler (hereafter
“Project Applicant”) for amendments to the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan to change
the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use Horizontal (MU-H1) and an
amendment to the Zoning Code to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use
Mariners Mile (MU-MM) for a 0.52-acre site located at 191 Riverside Avenue (hereafter “Project”
or “proposed Project”). The proposed Project is the subject of analysis in this document
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
This Negative Declaration (ND) was compiled by the City of Newport Beach, serving as the
Lead Agency for the proposed Project pursuant to CEQA §21067 and CEQA Guidelines Article
4 and §15367. “Lead Agency” refers to the public agency that has the principal responsibility for
carrying out or approving a project.
This introduction is included to provide the reader with general information regarding: 1) the
location of the proposed Project and a summary of the Project’s proposed discr etionary actions;
2) standards of adequacy for a ND under CEQA; 3) a summary of Initial Study findings
supporting the Lead Agency’s decision to prepare a ND for the proposed Project; 4) a
description of the format and content of this ND; and 5) the governmental processing
requirements to consider the proposed Project for approval.
1.1 Document Purpose
This document is a Negative Declaration (ND) prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), including all criteria, standards, and procedures of CEQA
(California Public Resource Code Section 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California
Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000 et seq.). This ND is an
informational document intended for use by the City of Newport Beach, Trustee and
Responsible agencies, and members of the general public in evaluating the physical
environmental effects of the proposed Project.
1.2 Project Location
The subject property (hereafter, “proposed Project Site” or “Project Site”) is located on the
southwest corner of the intersection of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street.
The proposed Project Site comprises approximately 0.52 acres, located in the City of Newport
Beach, Orange County, California in the Mariners Mile commercial district. Newport Bay is
located approximately 650 feet to the southwest. Specifically, the subject property is bounded
by Avon Street to the north, Mariners Center to the south and west, and Riverside Avenue to the
east. The current addresses of the proposed Project Site are 149 and 191 Riverside Avenue,
Newport Beach, California 92660. The assessor’s parcel numbers (APNs) are 049-110-17 and
049-110-27.
1.3 Project Summary
The proposed Project consists of applications for a General Plan Amendment (GP2013-002)
and Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment (LC2013-003) to change the land use category from
Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use Horizontal (MU-H1) and a Zoning Code Amendment
(CA2013-007) to change the zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use Mariners Mile (MU-
Negative Declaration 1.0 Introduction
2191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1-2
MM) for a 0.52-acre site located at 191 Riverside Avenue. No demolition or new construction is
proposed at this time.
If the Project is approved by the City Council, the Project’s Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment
would then require review by the California Coastal Commission (CCC).
1.4 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
1.4.1 CEQA Objectives
CEQA is a statewide environmental law contained in Public Resources Code §§ 21000-21177
that applies to most public agency decisions to carry out, authorize, or approve actions that
have the potential to adversely affect the environment. The overarching goal of CEQA is to
protect the physical environment. To achieve that goal, CEQA requires that public agencies
inform themselves of the environmental consequences of their discretionary actions and
consider alternatives and mitigation measures that could avoid or reduce significant adverse
impacts when avoidance or reduction is feasible. It also gives other public agencies and the
general public an opportunity to comment on the information. If significant adverse impacts
cannot be avoided, reduced, or mitigated to below a level of significance, the public agency is
required to prepare an EIR and balance the project’s environmental concerns with other goals
and benefits in a statement of overriding considerations.
The principal objectives of CEQA are to: 1) inform governmental decision makers and the public
about the potential, significant environmental effects of proposed activities; 2) identify the ways
that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced; 3) prevent significant,
avoidable damage to the environment by requiring changes in projects through the use of
alternatives or mitigation measures when the governmental agency finds the changes to be
feasible; and 4) disclose to the public the reasons why a governmental agency approved the
project in the manner the agency chose if significant environmental effects are involved.
1.4.2 CEQA Requirements for Negative Declarations (NDs)
A ND is a written statement by the Lead Agency briefly describing the reasons a proposed
project, which is not exempt from the requirements of CEQA, will not have a significant effect on
the environment and therefore does not require preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR). (CEQA Guidelines § 15371) The CEQA Guidelines require the preparation of a ND if the
Initial Study prepared for a project identifies no potentially significant effects.
1.4.3 Initial Study Findings
Section 5.0 contains a copy of the Initial Study that was prepared for the proposed Project
pursuant to CEQA and City of Newport Beach requirements. The Initial Study determined that
implementation of the proposed Project would result in no impacts or less than significant
environmental effects. Therefore, and based on the findings of the Initial Study, the City of
Newport Beach determined that a ND shall be prepared for the proposed Project pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines § 15070(b).
1.4.4 CEQA Requirements for Environmental Setting and Baseline Conditions
CEQA Guidelines § 15125 establishes requirements for defining the environmental setting to
which the environmental effects of a proposed project must be compared. The environmental
setting is defined as “…the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the project, as
Negative Declaration 1.0 Introduction
3191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1-3
they exist at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is
published, at the time the environmental analysis is commenced…” (CEQA Guidelines §
15125[a]) In the case of the proposed Project, the Initial Study determined that a ND is the
appropriate form of CEQA compliance document, which does not require a Notice of
Preparation (NOP). Thus, the environmental setting for the proposed Project is the approximate
date that the Project’s environmental analysis commenced.
The City of Newport Beach commenced environmental review of the proposed Project in
December 2013. Accordingly, the environmental setting for the proposed Project is defined as
the physical environmental conditions on the proposed Project Site and in the vicinity of the
proposed Project as they existed in December 2013. Section 2.0 provides a summary of the
existing physical environmental conditions of the proposed Project Site and surrounding areas
as they existed in December 2013.
1.4.5 Format and Content of this Negative Declaration
This document, including all Sections. Section 5.0 contains the completed Environmental
Checklist/Initial Study and its associated analyses which document the reasons to support the
findings and conclusions of the Initial Study.
1.4.6 Preparation and Processing of this Negative Declaration
The City of Newport Beach Planning Division directed and supervised the preparation of this
ND. The content contained within and the conclusions drawn by this ND reflect the sole
independent judgment of the City. Following completion of this ND, A Notice of Intent (NOI) to
adopt the ND will be distributed to the following entities: 1) organizations and individuals who
have previously requested such notice in writing; 2) direct mailing to the owners of property
contiguous to the Project and property owners within a 300-foot radius as shown on the latest
equalized assessment roll; 3) the Orange County Clerk; and 4) Office of Planning and
Research, State Clearinghouse for review by state agencies. The NOI will identify the
location(s) where the ND, Initial Study is available for public review. In addition, notice of the
public review period also will occur via posting of a notice on- and off-site (at City Hall, 100 Civic
Center Drive) in the area where the Project is to be located and publication in a newspaper of
general circulation in the Project area. The NOI also establishes a 30-day public review period
during which comments on the adequacy of the ND document may be provided to the City of
Newport Beach Planning Division.
Following the 30-day public review period, the City of Newport Beach will review any comment
letters received and will determine whether any substantive comments were provided that may
warrant revisions to the ND document. If substantial revisions are not necessary (as defined by
CEQA Guidelines §15073.5[b]), then the ND and Initial Study would be finalized and forwarded
to the Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council for review as part of their
deliberations concerning the proposed Project.
The City of Newport Beach Planning Commission has the authority to recommend or not
recommend the Project for approval by the City Council. The Newport Beach City Council has
the authority to approve or deny the Project. Accordingly, public hearings will be held before the
Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council to consider the proposed Project and
the adequacy of this ND. Public comments will be heard and considered at the hearings. At the
conclusion of the public hearing process, the City Council will take action to approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the proposed Project. If approved, the City Council will adopt
findings relative to the Project’s environmental effects as disclosed in the ND and a Notice of
Negative Declaration 1.0 Introduction
4191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 1-4
Determination (NOD) will be filed with the Orange County Clerk. If the Project is approved by
the City Council, the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) amendment would then be considered by
the California Coastal Commission.
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-1
2.0 Environmental Setting
2.1 Project Location
As shown on Figure 2-1, Regional Location Map, and Figure 2-2, Vicinity Map, the proposed
Project Site is located within the southwestern portion of the City of Newport Beach, in the
Mariners Mile commercial district. Newport Bay is located approximately 650 feet to the
southwest. Specifically, the subject property is bounded by Avon Street to the north, Mariners
Center to the south and west, and Riverside Avenue to the east. The current addresses of the
proposed Project Site are 149 and 191 Riverside Avenue, Newport Beach, California 92660.
The assessor’s parcel numbers (APNs) are 049-110-17 and 049-110-27 and is located in the
southeast quadrant of Section 28 of Township 6 South, Range 10 West, San Bernardino
Baseline and Meridian.
2.2 Existing Site and Area Characteristics
2.2.1 Site Access
The proposed Project Site is accessible by Riverside Avenue, a four-lane Local Road, and Avon
Street, a two-lane Local Road. Riverside Avenue provides access to West Coast Highway
(State Highway 1), a six-lane Major Road, located approximately 315 feet southwest of the
proposed Project Site. Newport Boulevard (State Route 55) is located approximately 0.30 miles
west of the proposed Project Site.
2.2.2 Existing Site Conditions
Under existing conditions, the proposed Project Site is developed with an existing, one-story
institutional building, currently used as a United States Post Office distribution facility. The
institutional building is constructed of concrete block and has a footprint of 9,242 square feet. A
surface parking lot containing 20 spaces surrounds the building to the south and west.
Landscaping consists of trees and shrubs dispersed in the parking lot. The proposed Project
Site’s frontage at Riverside Avenue and Avon Street contains curb-adjacent sidewalks with
parking meters and street lights. Figure 5-1, depicts the site’s existing conditions as seen from
above, while Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3 depict views of the site.
2.2.3 Site Topography
Under existing conditions, the proposed Project Site is fully developed and relatively flat
exhibiting very little topographic variation. Elevations on the site range from approximately 16 to
14 feet above mean sea level (MSL).
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-2
Figure 2-1 Regional Location Map
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-3
Figure 2-2 Vicinity Map
Figure 2-3 Aerial Photograph
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-4
2.2.4 Surrounding Land Uses and Development
The proposed Project Site is located within a portion of the City of Newport Beach that is fully
developed with a variety of residential, office, and commercial land uses. To the north, at the
northwestern corner of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street, there is an existing three-story
commercial office building currently occupied by a restaurant, offices, and retail sales; single-
unit residences with access off of Cliff Drive are located on the bluffs above; beyond to the
northeast is Cliff Drive Park and other single-unit residences. To the south and west is Mariners
Center, a single-story commercial center, which is occupied with retail sales, restaurants, and
personal services. To the east, across Riverside Avenue, are commercial and office buildings;
beyond, to the southeast is Mariners Mile Square commercial center, which is occupied with
retail sales, restaurants, and personal services. The Mariners Mile commercial corridor is
located to the south along West Coast Highway (State Highway 1), which is developed with
restaurants, automobile and yacht dealerships, retail sales, personal services, and marine-
related retail sales and services. The Newport Heights residential community, which is
predominately single-unit residences, is located on the mesa above the Mariners Mile
commercial district.
2.3 Planning Context
2.3.1 On-Site General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Designations
As shown on Figure 2-4, Existing General Plan Land Use Designations, under existing
conditions the proposed Project Site is designated by the Newport Beach General Plan
(hereafter, “General Plan”) for “Public Facilities (PF)” land uses. The PF land use designation
“…is intended to provide public facilities, including public schools, cultural institutions,
government facilities, libraries, community centers, public hospitals, and public utilities”
(Newport Beach 2006a).
The City of Newport Beach has an adopted Coastal Land Use Plan prepared in accordance with
the California Coast Act of 1976. As shown on Figure 2-5, Existing Coastal Land Use Plan
Designations, the Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan also designates the proposed Project
Site is for “Public Facilities (PF)” land uses. As stated in the Local Coastal Program Coastal
Land Use Plan, the PF land use designation is intended to “…to provide public facilities,
including public schools, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, community centers,
public hospitals, and public utilities (Newport Beach, 2009).
As shown on Figure 2-6, Existing Zoning Designations, under existing conditions, the proposed
Project Site is zoned for “PF (Public Facilities)” (Newport Beach 2010a). The PF Zoning District
“…is intended to provide for areas appropriate for public facilities, including community centers,
cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries, public hospitals, public utilities, and public
schools” (Newport Beach, 2010b).
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-5
Figure 2-4 Existing General Plan Land Use Designations
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-6
Figure 2-5 Existing Coastal Land Use Plan Designations
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-7
Figure 2-6 Existing Zoning Designations
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-8
2.3.2 Surrounding General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Designations
As shown on Figure 2-4 and Figure 2-5, General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan designations
surrounding the proposed Project Site are Mixed-Use Horizontal (MU-H1), General Commercial
(CG), Parks and Recreation (PR) and Single Unit Residential Detached (RS-D). As shown on
Figure 2-6, Existing Zoning Designations, zoning designations surrounding the proposed Project
Site are Mixed-Use Mariners Mile (MU-MM), General Commercial (CG), Parks and Recreation
(PR), and Single-Unit Residential (R-1).
2.3.3 Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport
According to the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for the John Wayne Airport (JWA),
which is the nearest public airport to the proposed Project Site, the proposed Project Site is not
located within the AELUP Notification Area for JWA, nor is the site subject to any impacts
(safety or noise) due to airport operations. Accordingly, the proposed Project would not require
review by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) for Orange County. The proposed Project
Site does, however, occur within the transitional flight path of the JWA Obstruction Imaginary
Surfaces zone established pursuant to Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 77, although
review by the ALUC only would apply if a project is proposed that exceeds the height limits
established by FAR Part 77 (OCALUC, 2008).
2.4 Existing Environmental Characteristics
2.4.1 Geology
The proposed Project Site is located within the Orange County coastal plain and is underlain by
Quaternary alluvial and fluvial sedimentary deposits. As with much of the Southern California
region, the proposed Project Site is located in an area subject to seismic hazards, with the
nearest fault (Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone) occurring approximately 0.5 mile to the southwest
of the proposed Project Site. The proposed Project Site is not located in an Earthquake Fault
Zone per the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Map. The proposed Project Site and the
surrounding area is such to liquefaction (Newport Beach, 2006a).
2.4.2 Hydrology
Under existing conditions, Storm water runoff surface flows off the site to the adjacent streets
(Riverside Avenue and Avon Street), where water is collected in surface gutters and conveyed
to the south. Flows are then conveyed to a catch basin where they empty into the Newport Bay.
According to mapping by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the proposed
Project Site is located outside of the 100-year floodplain (Newport Beach, 2013).
2.4.3 Vegetation & Wildlife
The proposed Project Site is fully developed with an existing building, a surface parking lot,
sidewalks, ornamental landscaping, and hardscape. As indicated in the General Plan EIR, the
Project Site is not identified as containing any sensitive biological resources and is not located
within any Environmental Study Areas that have the potential to support sensitive biological
resources. The Project Site therefore has no potential to contain sensitive vegetation habitats
or sensitive plant or animal species (Newport Beach 2006b).
2.4.4 Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Resources
According to General Plan EIR Figure 4.4-1, the proposed Project Site is not identified as
containing any historical resources. None of the existing buildings are included on the National
Negative Declaration 2.0 Environmental Setting
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 2-9
Register of Historic Places or on the California Register of Historical Resources, nor are they
eligible for listing. As it is fully developed, the proposed Project Site is very unlikely to contain
subsurface archaeological resources. The proposed Project Site also is not located within a
portion of the City that is identified as having the potential to contain fossil-bearing soils or rock
formations (Newport Beach 2006b).
2.4.5 Mineral Resources
According to the City’s General Plan EIR, which relies on mapping conducted by the California
Geological Survey (CGS) for areas known as Mineral Resources Zones (MRZs), the proposed
Project Site is mapped within MRZ-3. Areas mapped MRZ-3 are defined as “areas containing
mineral deposits of undetermined significance” (Newport Beach 2006b).
2.4.6 Agricultural Resources
The proposed Project Site is developed with urban uses and does contain agricultural uses.
According to mapping conducted by the California Department of Conservation (CDC) as part of
the Farmland Mapping & Monitoring Program (FMMP), the proposed Project Site is identified as
containing “Urban and Built-Up Land.” The proposed Project Site and surrounding areas do not
contain any soils mapped by the CDC as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance.
2.4.7 Rare and Unique Resources
As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(c), “Special emphasis should be placed on
resources that are rare or unique to that region and would be affected by the project.” Based on
the site’s existing condition and developed nature, the proposed Project Site does not contain
any resources that are rare or unique to the region.
Negative Declaration 3.0 Project Description
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3-1
3.0 Project Description
The Project evaluated by this ND is located in the City of Newport Beach, within the Mariners
Mile Planning Sub-Area (Statistical Area H4) of the City’s General Plan. The inland properties
of the Mariners Mile Planning Sub-Area are developed predominantly for highway-oriented
retail, neighborhood commercial services. A number of sites contain automobile dealerships and
service facilities and neighborhood-serving commercial uses. The latter includes salons,
restaurants, apparel, and other specialty shops ranging from wine stores to home furnishings
stores. While single use free-standing buildings predominate, there are a significant number of
multi-tenant buildings that combine a number of related or complementary uses in a single
building or buildings that are connected physically or through design.
The proposed Project Site consists of approximately 0.52 acres of developed land bounded by
Avon Street to the north, Mariners Center to the south and west, and Riverside Avenue to the
east. The proposed Project consists of applications for a General Plan Amendment and Coastal
Land Use Plan Amendment to change the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to
Mixed-Use Horizontal (MU-H1) and a Zoning Code Amendment (CA2013-007) to change the
zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use Mariners Mile (MU-MM). No demolition or new
construction is proposed at this time.
The Newport Beach City Council will consider the following actions requested by the Project
Applicant. In advance of the City Council’s consideration, advisory recommendations regarding
the actions listed below will be considered by the City’s Planning Commission.
1. General Plan Amendment No. GP2013-002;
2. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003; and
3. Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2013-007.
Each of the proposed actions is described in more detail below. If the Project is approved by
the City Council, the land use amendment would then be considered by the California Coastal
Commission.
3.1 Proposed Discretionary Approvals
3.1.1 General Plan Amendment No. GP2013-002
The City of Newport Beach General Plan assigns land uses to all areas of the City. Under
existing conditions, the General Plan designates the proposed Project Site for “Public Facilities
Institutions (PF)” land uses.
Proposed General Plan Amendment No. GP2013-002 would change the designation of the
proposed Project Site from “Public Facilities (PF)” to “Mixed-Use Horizontal (MU-H1)”. As
stated in the General Plan. The MU-H1 land use designation “…provides for a horizontal
intermixing of uses”. More specifically applicable to the proposed Project Site, the MU-H1 land
use designation provides that “…portions of properties to the rear of the commercial frontage
may be developed for free-standing neighborhood-serving retail, multi-family residential units,
or mixed-use buildings that integrate residential with retail uses on the ground floor in
accordance with the CN, RM, CV, or MU-V designations respectively” (Newport Beach, 2006a).
Negative Declaration 3.0 Project Description
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3-2
3.1.2 Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003
The City of Newport Beach has an adopted Coastal Land Use Plan, prepared in accordance
with the California Coastal Act of 1976. Under existing conditions, the Newport Beach Coastal
Land Use Plan designates the proposed Project Site for “Public Facilities Institutions (PF)” land
uses. Proposed Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2013-003 would change the
designation of the proposed Project Site from “Public Facilities (PF)” to “Mixed-Use Horizontal
(MU-H)”.
As stated in the Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan, the MU-H land use designation
is intended to “…provide for the development of areas for a horizontally distributed mix of uses,
which may include general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multi-family
residential, visitor-serving and marine-related uses, and/or buildings that vertically integrate
residential with commercial uses” (Newport Beach, 2009).
3.1.3 Zoning Code Amendment No. CA2013-007
The City of Newport Beach Zoning Code is contained as Title 20 “Planning and Zoning” of the
City’s Municipal Code. Under existing conditions, the proposed Project Site is zoned for “PF
(Public Facilities).” The PF Zoning District “…is intended to provide for areas appropriate for
public facilities, including community centers, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries,
public hospitals, public utilities, and public schools.” Proposed Zoning Code Amendment No.
CA2013-007 would change the zoning to the Mixed-Use Mariners Mile (MU-MM) Zoning District.
According to City Municipal Code Section 20.22.010.B, the MU-MM Zoning District “…applies to
properties located on the inland side of Coast Highway in the Mariners’ Mile Corridor.
Properties fronting on Coast Highway may be developed for nonresidential uses only.
Properties to the rear of the commercial frontage may be developed for freestanding
nonresidential uses, multi-unit residential dwelling units, or mixed-use structures that integrate
residential above the ground floor with nonresidential uses on the ground floor.”’
3.1.4 Development Potential
Although no demolition or new construction is proposed at this time, the proposed Project would
allow land uses and property development that are not allowed under the current land use and
zoning designations. Under the current PF (Public Facilities) Zoning, land uses are limited to
public facilities, such as community centers, cultural institutions, government facilities, libraries,
public hospitals, public utilities, and public schools. All land uses, with the exception of minor
utilities, require either a conditional use permit or a minor use permit. Floor area, height, and
parking standards are established also by conditional use permits.
The proposed MU-MM (Mixed-Use Mariners Mile), Zoning would allow retail and service uses.
Some uses, such as commercial recreation and entertainment, eating and drinking
establishments, and vehicle sales require either a minor use permit or a conditional use permit.
Non-residential development would be limited to a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.50, which would
result in a maximum floor area of approximately 11,326 square feet.
The MU-MM designation would also allow residential uses as part of a mixed-use development.
A minimum of 10 and a maximum of 13 dwelling units would be permitted. Site Development
Review approval is required for any mixed-use project. Mixed-use projects are also subject to
the site planning, development, and operational standards of Section 20.48.130 of the Zoning
Code. A mixed-use development would have to provide a minimum FAR of 0.25 (5,663 square
Negative Declaration 3.0 Project Description
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 3-3
feet) and the maximum FAR would be 0.50 (approximately 11,326 square feet). The maximum
residential FAR would be 1.0 (22,651 square feet).
3.1.5 Approvals Required from Other Agencies
Assuming that the City Council approves the Project’s proposed Coastal Land Use Plan
Amendment No. LC2013-003, the Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment would require review and
approval from the California Coastal Commission (CCC) as part of a noticed public hearing.
Negative Declaration 4.0 Project Information
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4-1
4.0 Project Information
1. Project Title
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments
2. Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
Planning Division
100 Civic Center Drive (P.O. Box 1768)
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
3. Contact Person and Phone Number
Patrick Alford, Planning Manager
Planning Division, (949) 644-3235
PAlford@newportbeachca.gov
4. Project Location
The proposed Project Site consists of an approximately 0.52-acre site located at the southwest
corner of the intersection of Riverside Avenue and Avon Street, within the City of Newport
Beach’s Mariners Mile Sub-Area (Statistical Area H4). The site’s existing address is 191
Riverside Avenue, Newport Beach, CA 92663. Figure 2-2 and Figure 2-3 (previously
presented) depict the proposed Project Site’s location.
5. Project Sponsor’s Name and Address
Gensler
4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 100
Newport Beach, CA 92660
6. General Plan Designation
The proposed Project Site is designated by the General Plan for “Public Facilities (PF).”
7. Zoning
The proposed Project Site is zoned as “PF (Public Facilities) Zoning District.”
8. Description of Project:
Please refer to Section 4.0 for a detailed description of the proposed Project.
9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the Project’s surroundings:
As previously discussed and presented, the proposed Project Site is located within a portion of
the City of Newport Beach that is fully developed with a variety of residential, office, and
commercial land uses. To the north, at the northwestern corner of Riverside Avenue and Avon
Negative Declaration 4.0 Project Information
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 4-2
Street, there is an existing three-story commercial office building currently occupied by a
restaurant, offices, and retail sales; single-unit residences with access off of Cliff Drive are
located on the bluffs above; beyond to the northeast is Cliff Drive Park and other single-unit
residences. To the south and west is Mariners Center, a single-story commercial center, which
is occupied with retail sales, restaurants, and personal services. To the east, across Riverside
Avenue, are commercial and office buildings; beyond, to the southeast is Mariners Mile Square
commercial center, which is occupied with retail sales, restaurants, and personal services. The
Mariners Mile commercial corridor is located to the south along West Coast Highway (State
Highway 1), which is developed with restaurants, automobile and yacht dealerships, retail sales,
personal services, and marine-related retail sales and services. The Newport Heights
residential community, which is predominately single-unit residences, is located on the mesa
above the Mariners Mile commercial district.
10. Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required (e.g., permits, financing approval,
or participation agreement)
The Project’s proposed amendment to the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan and subsequent
issuance of a Coastal Development Permit would require discretionary review and approval by
the California Coastal Commission.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-1
5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
5.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving
at least one impact that is "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,” as indicated by
the checklist on the following pages. There were no issues identified as a “Potentially
Significant Impact.”
Aesthetics Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology/ Water Quality
Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise
Population and Housing Public Services Recreation
Transportation/ Traffic Utilities/ Service Systems Mandatory Findings of
Significance
5.2 Determination (To Be Completed By the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
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 an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact 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. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the ef fects
that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
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 or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
12/23/13
Submitted by: Patrick Alford, Planning Manager, Planning Division (Signature) Date
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-2
5.3 City of Newport Beach Environmental Checklist Summary
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS
Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect
on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
Would the Project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined
by Government Code section
51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the
existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-3
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
III. AIR QUALITY
Would the Project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting
a substantial number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-4
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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
impeded the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse
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:
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 other
substantial evidence of a known
fault? Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-5
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
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 result 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 or
property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the Project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
VIII. 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 materials?
b) 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?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-6
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one-quarter 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
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 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 the project
area?
g) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency 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
adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the Project:
a) Violate any water quality standards
or waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the
local groundwater table level (e.g.,
the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-7
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of
the course of a stream or river, in a
manner which would result in
substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off-site?
d) Substantially 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?
e) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade
water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year
flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other
flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood
hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
i) 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?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the Project:
a) Physically divide an established
community?
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, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-8
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the Project:
a) 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?
b) 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?
XII. 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 ordinance, or
applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an
airport land use land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the Project:
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-9
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
XIV. 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?
Police protection?
Schools?
Other public facilities?
XV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use
of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require the
construction of or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Would the Project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation
system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including
mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of
the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets,
highways and freeways, pedestrian
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-10
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable
congestion management program,
including, but not limited to level of
service standard and travel demand
measures, or other standards
established by the county
congestion management 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 substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due
to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency
access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies,
plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities?
XVII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the Project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable
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 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 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 expanded
entitlements needed?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-11
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) 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?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate
the project’s solid waste disposal
needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and
local statutes and regulation related
to solid waste?
XVIII. 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
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major period of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have
environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-12
5.4 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
5.4.1 Aesthetics
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect
on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site
and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project would not affect a scenic vista. Figure 5-
4 (Designated Public View Points) identifies the existing public view points and coastal view
roads identified in the General Plan. The segment of West Coast Highway from the Newport
Boulevard Bridge to Bay Shores is identified as a coastal view road; however, this segment is
so designated for the intermittent views of Newport Bay. As the proposed Project Site is located
on the inland side, the views of the Newport Bay from this segment of West Coast Highway will
not be impacted.
Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park are located on the bluffs above the proposed Project Site.
These parks provide views of Newport Bay, the Pacific Ocean and Santa Catalina Island. As
shown in Photos 1-4 of Figure 5-6, the proposed Project Site is visible from several areas in Cliff
Drive Park and Ensign View Park. However, the building on the proposed Project Site, as well
as those nearby, is not tall enough to block views of the water. Furthermore, any future
development on the proposed Project Site would have to conform to the 26-foot/31-foot Height
Limit Area and 35-foot Shoreline Height Limit Zone. Since any future development would be
restricted to these height limits, there would Be no substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;
impacts would be less than significant.
There are also public view points across Newport Bay at the end of Central Avenue and on the
Lido Isle Bridge. However, as shown in Photos 6-7 of Figure 5-6, the proposed Project Site is
not visible from these viewpoints due to intervening development.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-13
Figure 5-1 Aerial and Site Photos Key Map
Figure 5-2 Site Photos 1-2
Photo 1 Photo 2
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-14
Figure 5-3 Site Photos 3 through 8
Photo 3 Photo 4
Photo 5 Photo 6
Photo 7 Photo 8
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-15
Figure 5-4 Designated Public View Points
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-16
Figure 5-5 Photos from Public View Points
Figure 5-6 Photos 1 through 2
Photo 1 Photo 2
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-17
Figure 5-7 Photos 3 through 5
Photo 3 Photo 4
Photo 5 Photo 6
Photo 7
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-18
b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings along a scenic highway?
No Impact. There are no designated scenic highways in the vicinity of the proposed project
(CalTrans, 2009). The segment of West Coast Highway from the Newport Boulevard Bridge to
Bay Shores is identified as a coastal view road; however, this segment is so designated for the
intermittent views of Newport Bay. As the proposed Project Site is located on the inland side,
the views of the Newport Bay from this segment of West Coast Highway will not be impacted.
Furthermore, the proposed Project Site does not consist of any rock outcroppings that are of
significant visual quality or historic buildings on site. Therefore, the proposed project would not
damage a scenic resource along a scenic highway and no impacts would occur.
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Photos in Figure 5-2 and Figure 5-3 show development in the
immediate area. The proposed Project would not affect the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings because the proposed project is located in a developed
commercial area and would not damage any scenic resources. The proposed Project Site is
located in an area that is primarily developed with commercial buildings zoned for mixed-use
development. The proposed Project Site does not provide scenic qualities. The proposed
Project would include land use changes to either commercial or mixed-use development, which
would be aesthetically consistent with the surrounding commercial per the Zoning Code and the
Mariners Mile Design Framework. These land use changes and subsequent future
development of the Project Site also would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan
and Coastal Land Use Plan designations for the surrounding properties; therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime
or nighttime views in the area?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As mentioned in Response 5.4.1 (c) above, the proposed
Project is located in an area that is primarily developed with commercial buildings. Any lighting
associated with the subsequent future development would not add significant amounts of
lighting to the proposed Project area. All lighting would be developed in accordance to Zoning
Code Section 20.30.070 (Outdoor Lighting), which requires all outdoor lighting fixtures to be
designed, shielded, aimed, located, and maintained to shield adjacent properties and to not
produce glare onto adjacent properties or roadways; therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-19
5.4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined
by Government Code section
51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-
forest use
e) Involve other changes in the
existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not convert any farmland to a non-agricultural use.
The proposed Project Site is not designated as Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide
Importance, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Local Importance (California Department of
Conservation, 2012). The proposed Project Site and the surrounding land are identified as
“urban and built-up land” by the California Department of Conservation’s Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program. Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is located in a developed urban
setting with no agricultural uses on or surrounding the site; therefore, no impacts would occur.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-20
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or conflict with a Williamson Act
contract?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not conflict with existing zoning or agricultural use.
The proposed Project Site is currently zoned PF (Public Facilities), which does not allow
agricultural uses. The Williamson Act applies to parcels consisting of least 20 acres of Prime
Farmland or at least 40 acres of farmland not designated as Prime Farmland. The proposed
Project Site is not located in a Prime Farmland designation, nor does it consist of more than 40
acres of farmland. Therefore, the site is not eligible to be placed under a Williamson Act
Contract, and no impacts would occur.
c. Involve other changes in the existing environment that, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not result in the conversion of farmland to non-
agricultural use. The proposed Project Site is not currently used for agriculture. The proposed
Project Site is not located near or adjacent to any areas that are actively farmed. Therefore, the
proposed Project would not disrupt or damage the operation or productivity of any areas
designated as farmland, and no farmland could be affected by the proposed land use changes.
No impacts would occur.
5.4.3 Air Quality
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment
under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions
which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting
a substantial number of people?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-21
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
No Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the South Coast Air Basin (Basin). The
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is required, pursuant to the Federal
Clean Air Act, to reduce emissions of criteria pollutants for which the Basin is in nonattainment
(i.e., ozone [O3], and particulate matter equal to or less than 10 and less than 2.5 microns in
diameter [PM10 and PM2.5, respectively]). As such, the Project would be subject to the
SCAQMD’s 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The AQMP contains a comprehensive
list of pollution control strategies directed at reducing emissions and achieving ambient air
quality standards. These strategies are developed, in part, based on regional population,
housing, and employment projections prepared by the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG).
SCAG is the regional planning agency for Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San
Bernardino, and Imperial Counties and addresses regional issues relating to transportation,
economy, community development, and environment. With regard to air quality planning, SCAG
has prepared the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP), which includes Growth Management
and Regional Mobility chapters that form the basis for the land use and transportation control
portions of the AQMP. These documents are used in the preparation of the air quality forecasts
and consistency analysis included in the AQMP. Both the RCP and AQMP are based, in part,
on projections originating with County and City General Plans.
Emissions generated by subsequent construction and operation would not exceed thresholds as
described in the analysis below in 5.4.3 (b) and 5.4.3 (c). The thresholds in 5.4.3 (b) and 5.4.3
(c) are based on the AQMP and are designed to bring the Basin into attainment for the criteria
pollutants for which it is in nonattainment. Therefore, because the proposed project does not
exceed any of the thresholds it will not conflict with SCAQMD’s goal of bringing the Basin into
attainment for all criteria pollutants and, as such, is consistent with the AQMP. Impacts would
not occur and no mitigation measures are necessary.
b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected
air quality violation?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed in Response 543 (a), the proposed Project Site is
located in the Basin. State and federal air quality standards often are exceeded in many parts of
the Basin. The proposed project involves amendments to the land use plans, which would not
in themselves result in any construction or operational impacts. However, the proposed land use
and zoning changes could result in the future construction of up to 11,326 square-feet for
commercial floor area and 13 dwelling units. Subsequent construction activities are estimated
to extend over a period of approximately twelve months. For the purpose of estimating
emissions associated with the construction activities, a project time frame of January 2, 2015,
through December 11, 2015 was assumed. Emissions were calculated using the California
Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEEMod) Version 2011.1.1. As shown in Table 5-1 and Table
5-2 below, all criteria pollutant emissions would remain well below their respective SCAQMD
daily significance thresholds; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-22
Table 5-1 Overall Construction Emissions
Activity ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily
Emissions (lbs/day) 3.51 14.03 11.02 0.00 1.21 0.93
SCAQMD Regional
Emissions Threshold
(lbs/day)
75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
ROG = reactive organic gas.
NOX = oxides of nitrogen.
CO = carbon monoxide.
SOX = sulfur oxides.
PM10 = particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter.
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter.
Table 5-2 Overall Operational Emissions
Activity ROG NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily
Emissions (lbs/day) 2.8 4.0 22.36 0.06 4.16 0.33
SCAQMD Regional
Emissions Threshold
(lbs/day)
55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
ROG = reactive organic gas.
NOX = oxides of nitrogen.
CO = carbon monoxide.
SOX = sulfur oxides.
PM10 = particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter.
PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter.
c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is a nonattainment area for an applicable federal or state ambient
air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Less-than-Significant Impact. SCAQMD’s approach for assessing cumulative impacts is
based on the AQMP forecasts of attainment of ambient air quality standards in accordance with
the requirements of the Federal and State Clean Air Acts. As discussed earlier in Response
5.4.3 (a), the proposed project would be consistent with the AQMP, which is intended to bring
the Basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants.2 In addition, the mass regional emissions
calculated for the proposed project (Forecast of Regional Construction Emissions and Forecast
of Regional Operational Emissions) are less than the applicable SCAQMD daily significance
thresholds that are designed to assist the region in attaining the applicable state and national
ambient air quality standards. The regional daily significance thresholds take into account other
activity occurring in the region, and therefore, inherently address a project’s contribution to
cumulative air quality impacts. As such, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As described in Response 5.4.3 (b) above, construction and
operation of the proposed project would not result in any substantial localized or regional air
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-23
pollution impacts and therefore would not expose any nearby sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations.
e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Any subsequent development would not likely result in any land uses typically associated with
emitting objectionable odors. Land uses generally associated with odor complaints include
agricultural uses (livestock and farming), wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants,
chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding
facilities, none of which are permitted under the proposed MU-MM Zoning District. The potential
for odor sources associated with construction resulting from the proposed Project, which would
be limited to construction equipment exhaust and the application of asphalt and architectural
coatings during construction activities.
Construction-related odors would be temporary and intermittent in nature and would cease upon
completion of the respective phases of construction activity. These odors are common in urban
and suburban areas and are generally not objectionable to a large majority of the population.
Additionally, mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules would limit odor emissions from
construction vehicles. For these reasons, temporary and intermittent construction-related odors
would be less than significant.
5.4.4 Biological Resources
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive,
or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect
on any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and
Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect
on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-24
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impeded the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Discussion
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?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not modify or have an adverse effect on existing
habitat. The proposed Project Site is fully developed with an existing, one-story institutional
building and a surface parking lot and is located in a fully urbanized setting. The General Plan
and the Coastal Land Use Plan identify Environmental Study Areas (ESA) that provide an
overview of known and potential biological resources. Figure NR2 of the General Plan Natural
Resources Element and Map 4-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan show that the proposed Project
Site is not located in an ESA (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009a). The proposed Project Site is void
of any native vegetation or wildlife habitat; therefore, the proposed Project would not modify
habitat or adversely affect sensitive biological resources, and no impacts would occur.
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not have an adverse effect on any riparian habitat.
According to Map 4-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan and Figure NR2 of the General Plan Natural
Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not located in an ESA (Newport Beach 2006a,
2009a). The proposed Project Site is fully developed and void of any riparian habitat or other
natural communities. Therefore, the proposed project would not accommodate riparian habitat
or other sensitive natural community, and no impacts would occur.
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marshes, vernal
pools, coastal wetlands, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-25
No Impact. The proposed Project Site is fully developed and does not have federal wetlands
present on site nor are there wetlands in the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site.
Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is completely lacking any jurisdictional waters; therefore,
no impacts would occur.
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?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not interfere with the movement of fish or wildlife. The
proposed Project Site is located in fully urbanized setting and is not connected to other
undeveloped lands. According to Figures NR1 and NR2 of the City of Newport Beach General
Plan Natural Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not identified as a biological
resources area or located in an ESA and is not connected to any wildlife corridors (Newport
Beach 2006a). Therefore, the proposed Project Site does not act as a wildlife corridor that
would facilitate movement of wildlife species. It does not support daily movement of species
from breeding, roosting, and nesting sites nor does it provide stopover habitat for migratory bird
species; therefore, no impacts would occur.
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as
a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The proposed Project Site does not contain any biological resources that are
protected by local policies. The proposed Project Site has several ornamental trees. According
to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Natural Resources Element, the proposed Project
Site is not located in an area where sensitive and rare terrestrial and marine resources occur
(Newport Beach 2006a). Furthermore, according to the County of Orange General Plan
Resources Element, the proposed Project Site is not located within the boundaries of the
Orange County Natural Communities Conservation Plan (County of Orange 2005). For
additional details regarding local policies or ordinances, refer to Section IX, Land Use and
Planning. The project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources; therefore, no impacts would occur.
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?
No Impact. The City of Newport Beach is a signatory to a Natural Resource Community
Conservation Plan agreement. However, per Figure VI-5 of the Resources Element of the
Orange County General Plan, the proposed Project Site is not located within a designated
Natural Communities Conservation Plan area (Newport Beach, 2006a, County of Orange,
2005).. Therefore, it not subject to the provisions of any local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan or Natural Communities Conservation Plan area and no impacts would occur.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-26
5.4.5 Cultural Resources
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource
as defined in Section 15064.5?
No Impact. According to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Historical Resources
Element, the proposed Project Site does not have any structures listed on local, state, or federal
historic resource lists or structures that are eligible for such lists. There are no such historical
structures adjacent to or in the general vicinity of the proposed Project Site. Furthermore,
according to HR1 in the General Plan Historic Resources Element and Map 4-4 in the Coastal
Land Use Plan there are no historical resources or structures located onsite or within the
general vicinity of the proposed Project Site (Newport Beach 2006a, 2009); therefore, no
impacts would occur.
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in an urbanized area and
is currently developed. Ground disturbances from the previous development in the last century
likely would have uncovered or inadvertently destroyed any unknown archeological resources.
No known recorded archeological resources are located in the proposed Project Site. The
proposed project would involve minimal surface soil disturbance and grading. Therefore, it is
highly unlikely the proposed project would disturb any unknown archaeological resources, and
impacts would be less than significant.
c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed above in 5.4.5 (b), the proposed Project Site is
currently developed. There are no unique geological features currently on site. Ground
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-27
disturbances from previous development likely would have either uncovered or inadvertently
destroyed any unknown buried paleontological resources. Furthermore, the proposed Project
Site is not listed as an area that has yielded archaeological and paleontological resources
(Newport Beach 2006a). Any subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project
would involve minimal surface soil disturbance and grading. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the
proposed Project would disturb any unknown paleontological resources, and impacts would be
less than significant.
d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is not a formal cemetery and it is
not adjacent to a formal cemetery. The proposed Project Site is not known to contain human
remains interred outside formal cemeteries. The proposed Project Site is not known to be
located on a burial ground. The proposed Project Site is currently developed and has been
disturbed in the past. Any subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project would
likely involve grading and shallow soil disturbance. Discovery of human remains is governed by
state law, which requires stopping work and reporting to authorities. Disturbance of human
remains, including those of Native Americans, is possible. Should human remains be
uncovered during construction, as specified by State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5,
no further disturbance will occur until the County Coroner has made the necessary findings as
to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery
occurs, excavation or construction will halt in the area of the discovery, the area will be
protected, and consultation and treatment will occur as prescribed by law. If the Coroner
recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she will contact the Native American
Heritage Commission, who will appoint the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). Additionally, if the
bones are determined to be Native American, a plan will be developed regarding the treatment
of human remains and associated burial objects, and the plan will be implemented under the
direction of the MLD.
5.4.6 Geology and Soils
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving:
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 other substantial
evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground
shaking?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-28
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
iii) Seismic-related ground
failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil?
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 result 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 or
property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
Discussion
Would the project:
Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
a1. 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? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
No Impact. There are no Alquist-Priolo zones in the City of Newport Beach; therefore, no
impacts would occur (Newport Beach, 2006b). Fault rupture impacts generally occur near the
fault line where the fault shears or slips and the ground is offset in some way; therefore, no
impact would occur.
a2. Strong seismic groundshaking?
Less-than-Significant Impact. All of Southern California, including the City of Newport Beach,
is located in a seismically active area and is subject to strong seismic groundshaking. The City
of Newport Beach is located in the northern part of the Peninsular Ranges Province, an area
that is exposed to risk from multiple earthquake fault zones. The highest risks originate from the
Newport-Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the
Elysian Park fault zone, each with the potential to cause moderate to large earthquakes that
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-29
would cause ground shaking in Newport Beach and nearby communities. Policies contained in
the Newport Beach General Plan (Newport Beach, 2006a) would ensure that adverse effects
caused by seismic and geologic hazards such as strong seismic ground shaking are minimized.
For example, Policy S4.1 requires regular update to building and fire codes to provide for
seismic safety and design, and Policies S4.4 and S4.5 ensure that new development is not
located in areas that would be affected by seismic hazards. Additionally, new development
would be required to comply with the building design standards of the California Building Code
Chapter 33 for construction of new buildings and/or structures, and specific engineering design
and construction measures would be implemented to anticipate and avoid the potential for
adverse impacts (Newport Beach, 2006b). All proposed demolition and building would occur in
accordance with building and safety standards as specific by the City Building Division. All
buildings would be constructed in compliance with the latest earthquake-resistant design
available and relevant codes. All project components would be in compliance with the most up-
to-date building codes and plans would be reviewed and approved by City Building Division
prior to construction. Furthermore, the dwelling units would be inspected by a trained and
qualified building inspector under the supervision of the Building Official prior to occupation;
therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
a3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Figure 5-8 (Existing Liquefaction and Seismic Hazard Areas)
identifies areas of potential liquefaction in the City of Newport Beach. The proposed Project Site
is located in an area identified as having a potential for soil liquefaction when subject to a
seismic event (Newport Beach 2006a). Liquefaction is a geologic process that causes ground
failure and typically occurs in loose, saturated sediments primarily of sandy composition
(Newport Beach 2006a). It is likely that a nearby moderate to strong earthquake would cause
extensive damage to buildings and infrastructure in the area. However, compliance with the
standards set forth in the current California Building Code and City policies in its General Plan
Safety Element would minimize risk of injury, loss of life, and property damage caused by
earthquake hazards or geologic disturbances. Specifically, Policies S4.1 through S4.6 include
requiring new development to be in compliance with the most recent seismic and other geologic
hazard safety standards (Newport Beach 2006b). All proposed project components would occur
in accordance with building and safety standards; furthermore, the foundations would be
engineered to address liquefaction potential. Therefore, impacts on people or structures as a
result of seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, are less than significant.
a4. Landslides?
No Impact. The proposed Project would have no impact related to landslides. Figure 5-8
(Existing Liquefaction and Seismic Hazard Areas) identifies areas with landslide potential and
the proposed Project Site is not located within any area with landslide potential. The proposed
Project Site is generally flat and implementation of the Project would not require slope cuts that
could result in landslides; therefore, no impacts associated with landslides would occur.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-30
Figure 5-8 Existing Liquefaction and Seismic Hazard Areas
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-31
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site does not contain substantial
amounts of topsoil. The proposed Project Site is currently developed and consists of mostly
impermeable surfaces (building and surface parking). Small amounts of exposed on-site soils
would be prone to soil erosion during the construction phase of any subsequent development.
However, any such development would likely involved minimal cut and fill and therefore loss of
topsoil is greatly minimized. As required by the City’s Municipal Code, grading activities will
obtain a grading permit from the City’s Building Official (Newport Beach 2006b). Chapter 15.10
contains grading, fill, drainage, and erosion control standards that will be applied to the
corresponding construction activity (Newport Beach 2006b). Any subsequent development will
implement standard erosion control measures and construction Best Management Practices
(BMPs) that would minimize impacts; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
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 result in an on-site or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site has been developed and is located
in an area identified by the City of Newport Beach General Plan as having a potential for soil
liquefaction when subjected to a seismic event. As discussed above in 5.4.6 VI (a3), it is likely
that a nearby moderate to strong earthquake would cause extensive damage to buildings and
infrastructure in the area. However, compliance with the standards set forth in the current
California Building Code and City policies in its General Plan Safety Element (Newport Beach
2006a) would minimize risk of injury, loss of life, and property damage caused by earthquake
hazards or geologic disturbances. All proposed Project components would occur in accordance
with building and safety standards. Furthermore, as discussed in Response 5.4.6 VI(a4), no
impacts would occur on people or structures as a result of landslide. Impacts on people or
structures as a result of seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction (as discussed in
Response 5.4.6 VI (a3), lateral spreading, subsidence or collapse are less than significant.
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Fine-grained soils, such as silts and clays, may contain
variable amounts of expansive clay minerals. These minerals can undergo significant volumetric
changes as a result of changes in moisture content. The upward pressures induced by the
swelling of expansive soils can have significant harmful effects upon structures and other
surface improvements (Earth Consultants International, 2003). Most of the Newport Mesa area
are underlain by marine terrace deposits and young alluvial/alluvial fan sediments that are
compressed primarily of granular soils (silty sand, sand, and gravel) (Earth Consultants
International, 2003 and USGS, 1965). Such units are typically in the low to moderately low
range for expansion potential. However, thick soil profiles developed on the older marine
deposits exposed west of Newport Bay are typically clay-rich and will probably fall in the
moderately expansive range. Areas underlain by beach and dune sands have very little
expansion potential (Earth Consultants International 2003). Any subsequent development
would likely involve a minimal amount of cut and fill. As discussed in Response 5.4.6 V(b), the
proposed Project Site is primarily underlain by nonnative soil and/or artificial fill with identified
alluvial sediments (USGS 1965). Typically fill is made to have low expansive potential because
it is designed to support the structures which are built upon it. Therefore, it is assumed that the
proposed Project Site is located in an area with low expansive soil potential. Any subsequent
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-32
development would occur in accordance with building and safety standards, and impacts would
be less than significant.
e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems in areas where sewers are not
available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems are included as part of
the proposed project. The proposed Project Site would tie into the existing sewer line; therefore,
no impacts would occur.
5.4.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas
emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan,
policy or regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions
of greenhouse gases?
Discussion
Would the Project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
The City of Newport Beach considers projects emitting 3,000 metric tons of CO2e per year or
less to be a less-than-significant contribution to greenhouse gasses, thereby not requiring
further analysis. As discussed earlier in Response 5.4.3 (b), the amounts of GHG emissions
that would result from development and operations of the proposed project are less than the
applicable screening level threshold set by the City of Newport Beach. As such, any
subsequent development would be consistent with the state’s goals of reducing GHG emissions
to 1990 levels by 2020; therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative climate
change GHG emissions would be less than significant.
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
No Impact. The proposed Project would comply with all applicable plans, policies, and
regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions; accordingly, no impact due to
a conflict with any plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG
emissions would occur.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-33
5.4.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
b) 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?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances,
or waste within one-quarter 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
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 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 the project
area?
g) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency 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
adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed
with wildlands?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-34
Discussion
Would the Project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact. Any subsequent development may involve remodeling or
demolition of the existing building. Asbestos-containing building materials or lead-based paint
may be present. However, the City of Newport Beach requires building permit applications to
include a declaration of compliance with Code of Federal Regulations Part 61 of Title 40 and
AQMD Rule 1403 to ensure proper disposal of any hazardous materials, if discovered. Impacts
therefore are considered less than significant.
b. 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. Any subsequent development or operation resulting from the
proposed Project would not result in the reasonably foreseeable upset or release of any
hazardous materials. The Newport Beach Fire Department is an all risk Fire Department. This
means it has the resources to respond and provide services to all types of emergencies
including: fires, medical emergencies, hazardous materials problems, beach rescues, traffic
accidents, high rise incidents, wildland fires, major flooding and disaster (Newport Beach 2009).
Furthermore, the Fire Department enforces city, state, and federal hazardous materials
regulations for Newport Beach. City regulations include Unified Hazardous Waste and
Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program, Chapter 9.04 of the City’s Municipal
Code, and implementation of the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (Newport
Beach 2006b). Elements of these programs include spill mitigation and containment and
securing of hazardous materials containers to prevent spills. Compliance with these
requirements is mandatory as standard permitting conditions and would minimize the potential
for the accidental release or upset of hazardous materials, helping to ensure public safety.
Construction equipment that would be used in any development resulting from the proposed
Project has the potential to release oils, greases, solvents, and other finishing materials through
accidental spills. Spill or upset of these materials would have the potential to affect surrounding
land uses. However, the consequences of construction-related spills are generally reduced in
comparison to other accidental spills and releases because the amount of hazardous material
released during a construction-related spill is small as the volume in any single piece of
construction equipment is generally less than 50 gallons. Construction-related spills of
hazardous materials are not uncommon, but the enforcement of construction and demolition
standards, including BMPs by appropriate local and state agencies (e.g., Newport Beach Fire
Department), would minimize the potential for an accidental release of petroleum products
and/or hazardous materials or explosions during construction. Federal, state, and local controls
have been enacted to reduce the effects of potential hazardous materials spills.
Any construction and operation resulting from the proposed Project would not create significant
hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-35
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or require handling
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. The closest school to the
proposed Project Site is Horace Ensign Intermediate School, located 0.40 miles northeast of the
proposed Project Site at 2000 Cliff Drive. Therefore, the proposed project would not emit
hazardous emissions within one-quarter mile of a school, and no impacts would occur.
d. Be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites that
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. The proposed Project Site is not included on any list of hazardous materials sites
that complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. (Newport Beach 2006b).
Furthermore, the proposed Project Site is not identified in any of the California hazardous
materials databases. A search of 191 Riverside Avenue in the California Environmental
Protection Agency (CalEPA) Cortese List as a Department of Toxic Substances and Control
Hazardous Waste site did not yield any results, and the proposed Project Site address is not in
the EnviroStor database of hazardous substances release sites (CalEPA 2009a, 2009b).
Geotracker, the California database of leaking underground storage tanks, does not report any
leaking underground storage tanks at the proposed Project Site or in the vicinity of the proposed
Project Site (Geotracker 2009). Finally, there are no active Cease and Desist Orders or Clean
Up and Abatement Orders for hazardous materials/facilities in the Project vicinity or at the
proposed Project Site (CalEPA 2009c). Therefore, the proposed Project would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment, and no impacts would occur.
e. For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within 2 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 closest airport is John Wayne Airport, which is approximately 3.7 miles
northeast of the proposed Project Site. The proposed Project Site is not located within the
boundaries of the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport.
Furthermore, according to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Safety Element (Newport
Beach, 2006a), the proposed Project Site is not located in the John Wayne Airport Accident
Potential Zone. Therefore, no impacts would occur.
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. As described above in 5.4.8 (e) the John Wayne Airport is located approximately
3.7 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site. There is no private airstrip in the vicinity of the
proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard for people
residing the project area; no impacts would occur, and impacts would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-36
g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No Impact. The proposed Project would not impair or physically affect any adopted emergency
response plan or evacuation plan. The proposed Project would not require the closure of any
public or private streets or roadways and would not impede access of emergency vehicles to the
Project Site or any surrounding areas during construction or operation. In the event of any
temporary closures of the private streets adequate access would be maintained for the
residents and emergency vehicles. Further, the proposed Project would provide all required
emergency access in accordance with the requirements of the Newport Beach Fire Department
during plan review by the Fire Department. For additional information regarding the tsunami
evacuation plan please refer to Section 5.4.9 (j), Hydrology and Water Quality. No impacts on
emergency response would occur.
h. 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. The proposed Project Site is not located in an area adjacent to or intermixed with
wildlands. Furthermore, the City of Newport Beach General Plan Safety Element (Newport
Beach, 2006b) identifies the proposed Project Site as Low/None Fire Susceptibility. Therefore,
people or structures would not be exposed to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires as a result of the proposed Project. No impacts would occur.
5.4.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Would the Project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of
the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would
not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been
granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on-
or off-site?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-37
Would the Project: Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
d) 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?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
i) 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?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
No Impact. The City of Newport Beach is included in four watersheds: Newport Bay, Newport
Coast, Talbert, and San Diego Creek (Newport Beach 2006a). Each of these watershed areas
is under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB)
and subject to the objectives, water quality standards, and BMPs requirements established in
the Sana Ana River Basin Plan and Orange County Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP).
Under the provisions of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.36 (Water Quality),
any discharge that would result in or contribute to degradation of water quality via stormwater
runoff is prohibited. New development or redevelopment projects are required to comply with
provisions set forth in the DAMP, including the implementation of appropriate BMPs identified in
the DAMP, to control stormwater runoff so as to prevent any deterioration of water quality that
would impair subsequent or competing beneficial uses of water (Newport Beach 2006a).
Newport Bay is designated as “water quality-limited” for four impairments under the Federal
Clean Water Act’s Section 303(d) List. Under Section 303(d), states, territories, and authorized
tribes are required to develop lists of impaired waters, establish priority rankings for waters on
the lists, and develop total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) for these waters. For these water
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-38
quality limited bodies, the SARWQCB and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
have developed TMDLs for the following substances in Newport Beach: sediment, nutrients,
fecal coliform, and toxic pollutants (Newport Beach 2009). Furthermore, a municipal separate
storm sewer system (MS4) permit is provided to the City by the SARWQCB under the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to regulate the amount of stormwater
contaminants that are delivered into the City’s waterways (Newport Beach 2009). MS4 permits
require an aggressive water quality ordinance, specific municipal practices to maintain City
facilities, and the use of BMPs in development activities to further reduce the amount of
contaminants in urban runoff (City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006b).
b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge, resulting in 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 that would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)?
No Impact. The proposed Project Site is currently developed and is not considered a source
for groundwater recharge (Newport Beach 2006b). The proposed Project would not increase the
impervious area on the site. The proposed Project also would not directly withdraw groundwater
from beneath the site. No impacts would occur.
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on site or off site?
Less-than-Significant Impact. No streams or rivers are located on site, and therefore, the
proposed Project would not directly affect the flow of a river or stream. Any subsequent
development may involve some minor grading for construction. These activities would minimally
alter the existing drainage pattern of the site. The proposed Project would not increase the
impervious area on the site as the existing site fully developed with a building and pavement,
save for a small 225-square-foot landscaped area near the southeast corner of the Project Site.
Therefore, impacts from erosion, either on site or off site would be less than significant.
d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding on
site or off site?
Less-than-Significant Impact. No streams or rivers are located on site, and therefore, the
proposed Project would not directly affect the flow course of a river or stream. Because of the
urban character of the area and the the proposed Project Site is almost fully-developed,
substantial amounts of stormwater are not readily absorbed into the soil. Any subsequent
development would minimally alter the existing drainage pattern of the site but would not
increase the impervious area.
e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources
of polluted runoff?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Any subsequent development would minimally alter the
existing drainage pattern of the Project Site and would not increase the impervious area.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-39
Therefore, there would not be a substantial increase in runoff water that would exceed the
capacity of the existing or planned stormwater drainage system. Therefore, increased runoff
would not exceed the capacity of existing storm drain systems or generate polluted runoff.
Impacts on stormwater, therefore, would be less than significant.
f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not substantially degrade water
quality. See Response 5.4.9 (e). Impacts on water quality would be less than significant.
g. Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area, as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
No Impact. Figure 5-9 (Flood Hazards) identifies the flooding hazards in the City of Newport
Beach. The proposed Project Site is not located in an area of a 500-year flood or a 100-year
flood according to the City of Newport Beach General Plan (Newport Beach 2006a). Therefore,
there would be no impact.
h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect
flood flows?
No Impact. As discussed in Section 5.4.9 (g), the proposed Project Site is not located in an
area of a 100-year flood (Newport Beach 2006a). Therefore, the proposed project would not
impede or redirect 100-year floodflows, and there would be no impacts.
i. 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 5.4.9 (g), the proposed Project Site is
not flood area. Implementation of the flood protection policies contained in the General Plan and
City Municipal Code would reduce impacts from flooding as a result of levee failure, and impacts
would be less than significant.
j. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in a 100-year zone for
tsunami inundation at extreme high tide (City of Newport Beach 2006a). Figure 5-10 (Coastal
Hazards) identifies the City of Newport Beach evacuation routes in the event of a tsunami. The
City also has a tsunami contingency plan and evacuation routes in place (Newport Beach
2006a). Implementation of the land uses of the proposed Project could result in a maximum of
13 additional dwelling units within the identified tsunami inundation zone. This would not
substantially increase exposure to existing hazards, or substantially affect evacuation of the
Mariners Mile area in the event of a tsunami; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-40
Figure 5-9 Flood Hazards
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-41
Figure 5-10 Coastal Hazards
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-42
5.4.10 Land Use and Planning
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community?
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, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose
of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established community?
No Impact. The proposed Project involves an amendment to the General Plan, Coastal Land
Use Plan and Zoning Code to change the land use category from Public Facilities (PF) to
Mixed-Use Horizontal (MU-H1) and a Zoning Code Amendment (CA2013-007) to change the
zoning from Public Facilities (PF) to Mixed-Use Mariners Mile (MU-MM). These amendments
would be compatible with the adjacent commercial uses, all of which are designated for mixed-
use development. Any subsequent development allowed under the proposed Project would not
divide the existing community; therefore, no impacts would occur.
b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed project involves amendments to the General
Plan Land Use Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code to change the land use and
zoning categories of the proposed Project Site from institutional to mixed-use land use. This is
consistent with the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan vision for the Mariners Mile
Commercial District, which calls for parcels on the inland side of Coast Highway to “evolve as a
pedestrian-oriented mixed-use ‘village’ containing retail businesses, offices, services, and
housing.” Therefore, the proposed Project would not result in a conflict with any 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; impacts would be less than
significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-43
c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
No Impact. The proposed project is located in an urbanized setting, and no locally designated
species or natural communities are known to exist in the project area. The site is not part of any
habitat conservation plan or natural community preservation plan. No impacts would occur.
5.4.11 Mineral Resources
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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?
b) 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?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. 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. According to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Natural Resources Element,
the Mineral Resource Zones (MRZ) in the City either are classified as containing no significant
mineral deposits (MRZ-1), or the significance of mineral deposits has not been determined
(MRZ-3). The proposed Project Site is located in an area designated as MRZ-3 (USGS, 2013).
The proposed Project Site is surrounded by land uses that are not compatible with pit mining
(residential and roads), all of which would preclude it from being developed as a mine, even if
there is indeed an extractable mineral resource present. Therefore, no impacts associated with
the loss of a mineral resource would occur.
b. 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. The site is not delineated in the City of Newport Beach General Plan as containing
a locally important mineral resource (Newport Beach 2006a); therefore, no impacts would occur.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-44
5.4.12 Noise
Would the Project result in:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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?
b) Exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without
the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport
land use land use plan or, where
such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or
working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive
noise levels?
Discussion
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 ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Subsequent development of the proposed Project Site would
expose sensitive receptors (i.e., schools, hospitals, residential) in the area. The nearest
sensitive receptors are nearby single-unit residences in Newport Heights that would be subject
to a temporary increase in noise from construction activities. However, the City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code limits construction activities during specific hours. Operational noise
would be regulated by the noise control ordinances of City of Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-45
b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Future construction activities associated with grading and
excavation may result in minor ground vibration. Construction of the project would not involve
special construction methods such as pile driving or blasting. Vibration from conventional
construction activity is typically below a level of human perception and well under levels that
would cause damage to existing buildings, when the activity is more than approximately 50 feet
from the receiver. Conventional construction activities from future development could take place
at distances greater than 50 feet from sensitive receptors.
c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Noise associated with any subsequent development would be
generated primarily by traffic.
The City of Newport Beach General Plan Noise Element presents future noise conditions for
roadways derived from projected traffic levels for the complete build-out of the General Plan.
Primary site access is provided by Riverside Avenue, a four-lane Local Road. Riverside
Avenue has a daily capacity ranging from 7,000 to 11,000 vehicles per day (VPD) with a typical
daily capacity of 10,000 VPD. Currently, Riverside Avenue has a traffic count of 9,000 VPD
(Newport Beach, 2006b). As described in the analysis below in 5.4.6 (a), subsequent
development resulting from the proposed land use and zoning changes could generate between
233 and 313 additional average daily trips. Therefore, subsequent development would not
cause Riverside Avenue to go over the anticipated capacity and it can be expected that future
noise conditions will not change; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As stated above, the construction of the proposed Project
would result in a temporary increase in noise levels. These levels could be audible at the closest
sensitive receptors. However, the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code limits construction
activities during specific hours; therefore, impacts from construction would be less than
significant.
e. For a project located within an airport land use land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within 2 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. The proposed Project Site is not located within a 2-mile radius of an airport or
within an airport land use plan. The closest airport is John Wayne Airport located approximately
3.7 miles to the northeast (OCALUC, 2008). The proposed Project Site is located outside the
noise contours of the airport, but may experience some distance airplane noise; therefore, no
impacts would occur.
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?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-46
No Impact. The proposed Project Site is not located within the vicinity of an airstrip, private or
public; therefore, no impacts would occur.
5.4.13 Population and Housing
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) 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)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or
other infrastructure?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed land use and zoning amendments to the City of
Newport Beach General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Code would allow up to 13
dwelling units in a mixed-use development. This could increase the total housing units available
in the City of Newport Beach from 44,219 to 44,232. This is less than 1% (approximately
0.003%) of the current total housing available (California Department of Finance 2012). There
are approximately 86,000 people in the City of Newport Beach and 2.2 persons per household
in the City of Newport Beach; therefore, the proposed project would increase the local
population by approximately 29 people (California Department of Finance, 2012). A less than
1% 0.003%) increase in population and housing is negligible to the overall growth of the City
and is not considered substantially growth inducing. In addition, the proposed Project Site is
surrounded by existing commercial development and would not result in growth inducing efforts
caused by the extension of utilities, roads, or other infrastructure into undeveloped area.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. The proposed project would amend the existing land use and zoning designations,
which could allow for the construction and operation of a mixed-use development. The proposed
Project Site is currently a post office facility and does not consist of housing. Therefore, the
proposed project would not displace any housing and would not necessitate the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere; no impacts would occur.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-47
c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. As discussed in 5.4.13 (b) above, the proposed Project Site is currently developed
with a post office facility and no people currently live on the proposed Project Site. Therefore,
the proposed Project would not displace any housing or people, and no impacts would occur.
5.4.14 Public Services
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 accep table service
ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection?
b) Police protection?
c) Schools?
d) Other public facilities?
Discussion
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with:
a1. Fire protection?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the City of Newport
Beach Fire Department service area. The City of Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD) is
considered an “all risk” Fire Department. This means it has the resources to respond and
provide services to all types of emergencies including: fires, medical emergencies, hazardous
materials problems, beach rescues, traffic accidents, high rise incidents, wildland fires, major
flooding and disaster operations (Newport Beach, 2009). The proposed Project Site is served by
Lido Fire Station #2, which is located at 475 32nd Street at the intersection of 32nd Street and Via
Oporto, approximately 0.44 miles to the southwest of the proposed Project Site. The existing
post office facility generates minimal demand on fire and emergency services. It is currently
open only for post office boxes and only has one employee for half a day, six days a week.
Should an emergency or fire occur at the existing post office facility, the NBFD would be first
responders. As discussed above, future development could add up to 11,326 square feet of
commercial floor area with a potential employee population of approximately 25 people (SCAG,
2001) and 13 dwelling units with approximately 29 people (California Department of Finance,
2012). NBFD has determined that the City’s existing fire protection services are adequate to
serve the potential future population of the proposed Project Site. Additionally, any subsequent
development would be constructed in accordance with current Fire Codes, and would replace
an older building that was constructed prior to the enactment of current standards. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
a2. Police protection?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project Site is located in the City of Newport
Beach Police Department (NBPD) service area. The NBPD is located at 870 Santa Barbara
Drive, approximately 2.5 miles northeast of the proposed Project Site. As discussed above, the
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-48
existing post office facility generates minimal demand for police services. However, the NBPD
has determined that the City’s existing police facilities are adequate to serve the future
development and population at the proposed Project Site; therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
a3. Schools?
Less-than-Significant Impact. School services in the City are provided by the Newport-Mesa
Unified School District (NMUSD). The demand for new schools is generally associated with
population increases or impacts on existing schools. Future development could increase the
number of children housed at the proposed Project Site, and therefore would increase the
number of students attending schools. The 2006–2008 American Community Survey indicates
there are 13,249 children between the ages of 5 and 19 living in Newport Beach; therefore,
approximately 16% of the City population is school age children (USCB, 2008). In the City of
Newport Beach, the average household size is 2.19 and approximately 19% of the households
have an individual living in the household under 18 years of age (i.e., school-age child)
(California Department of Finance 2012). The proposed Project could potentially result in up to
13 households and approximately 29 people (2.19 persons per household). Therefore, based on
U.S. Census data, it is reasonable to assume the proposed project would generate
approximately five school-age children (18% of the 29 persons in the 13 potential households
would have school-age children). Although the proposed Project may increase the number of
school age children in the City by five, this would not place a significant added burden to the
Newport-Mesa Unified School District; therefore impacts would be less than significant.
Furthermore, any future residential development would be required to contribute school fees in
accordance with Public Education Code § 17072.10-18.
a4. Parks?
Less-than-Significant Impact. As discussed in 5.4.14 (a3) above, the proposed Project could
result in the construction of 13 dwelling units. As such, the proposed Project could increase the
number of people by 29, including five children. According to the Newport Beach General Plan
Recreation Element, there are two parks in the vicinity of the proposed Project Site: Cliff Drive
Park and Ensign View Park (Figure 5-11 Service Area 3 Recreation and Open Space Plan). It
is expected that these two parks would be able to handle the increased demand, and the project
would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts on parks requiring the need for new
facilities in order to maintain acceptable performance standards. See Section 5.4.15 (a) and (b)
Recreation for additional discussion on parks and recreation. Impacts would be less than
significant.
a5. Other public facilities?
Less-Than-Significant Impact. Other public facilities located in the City of Newport Beach
include libraries and senior centers. The City of Newport has four libraries and one senior
center. The closest library and senior center to the proposed Project Site are the Mariners
Branch at 1000 Irvine Avenue and OASIS Senior Center at 800 Marguerite Avenue,
approximately 1.4 miles northeast and 3.6 miles east from the proposed Project Site,
respectively. Subsequent development would negligibly increase the local permanent population
by 29 people (see Response 5.4.14 (a1) above). Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in substantial adverse impacts on other public facilities or require new facilities to maintain
acceptable performance standards. Finally, library services receive funding from property tax, a
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-49
portion of which from the tax assessment of improvements on the proposed Project Site would
be dedicated to the City’s Library Fund. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
5.4.15 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Would the project increase the use
of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include
recreational facilities or require the
construction of or expansion of
recreational facilities which might
have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Discussion
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. Subsequent development would not significantly affect
neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. The proposed Project Site is
located in Service Area 3 (Newport Heights/Upper Newport Bay), which currently supports a
total of 50.2 acres of combined park area, which is below the 64.3 acres of parkland “needs”
based on the City’s current requirements in the Recreational Element of the General Plan. An
increase in the use of parks is generally associated with an increase of housing or population in
an area. A potential increase in housing as a result of the proposed Project would increase the
local population by up to 29 people, based on an average of 2.19 persons per household in
Newport Beach. It is not known at this time that if any residential development resulting from
the proposed Project will be subdivided or offered as rentals. Pursuit to Chapter 19.52 of the
Subdivision Code, only residential subdivisions are be required to pay the requisite Quimby Act
fees, which are used by the City to provide new parks and/or recreation facilities.
The two neighborhood parks (Cliff Drive Park and Ensign View Park) in the general vicinity of
the proposed Project Site as identified by Figure 5-11 could absorb the slight demand placed on
them by as much as 29 new residents. Additionally, Service Area 3 has substantial school
recreation facilities, including Newport Harbor High School, Ensign Junior High, Mariners
Elementary, and Newport Heights Elementary that compensate for the deficiency in total park
area. Finally, the 13.67-acre Sunset Ridge Park is currently under construction and is
scheduled to open in early 2015. While Sunset Ridge Park is in Service Area 1 (West Newport),
it is located less than a mile from the proposed Project Site. Impacts would be less than
significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-50
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or
expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project does not include recreational facilities or
require the construction of or expansion of recreation facilities that might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment. Impacts would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-51
Figure 5-11 Service Area 3 Recreation and Open Space Plan
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-52
5.4.16 Transportation/Traffic
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the
performance of the circulation
system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including
mass transit and non-motorized
travel and relevant components of
the circulation system, including but
not limited to intersections, streets,
highways and freeways, pedestrian
and bicycle paths, and mass
transit?
b) Conflict with an applicable
congestion management program,
including, but not limited to level of
service standard and travel demand
measures, or other standards
established by the county
congestion management 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 substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due
to a design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency
access.
f) Conflict with adopted policies,
plans, or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
facilities?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Would the Project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation
system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit
and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-53
Less-than-Significant Impact. As shown in Table 5-3, Comparison of Existing versus
Proposed Daily Traffic, subsequent development would result in a net increase of 233 total daily
trips if developed with commercial uses only or a net increase of 313 total daily trips if
developed as a mixed-use project. Primary site access is provided by Riverside Avenue, a four-
lane Local Road. Riverside Avenue has a daily capacity ranging from 7,000 to 11,000 vehicles
per day (VPD) with a typical daily capacity of 10,000 VPD. Currently, Riverside Avenue has a
traffic count of 9,000 VPD (XXX). Subsequent development resulting from the proposed land
use and zoning changes would not cause Riverside Avenue to go over capacity. In addition, the
City’s Traffic Phasing Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 15.40) requires mitigation for any
traffic effects caused by new development; Section 15.40.030.C (Exemptions) exempts projects
that generate no more than 300 ADT. Impacts would be less than significant.
Table 5-3 Comparison of Existing versus Proposed Daily Traffic
Land Use Size Unit AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily
Total
Existing
Post Office 9.242 TSF 14 5 19 7 12 19 200
Proposed
Apartment 13 DU 2 6 8 5 3 7 80
General
Commercial 11.33 TSF 20 9 29 17 23 40 433
TOTAL: 22 15 37 22 25 47 513
NET CHANGE (Proposed –
Existing) Commercial Only 6 4 10 10 11 21 233
NET CHANGE (Proposed –
Existing) Mixed-Use 8 10 18 15 14 28 313
TSF = Thousand Square Feet
DU = Dwelling Unit
Note: AM Peak Hour, PM Peak Hour, and Daily Total reflect the number of trips.
The Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code,
was established by the City Council to ensure that the effects of new development projects are
mitigated by developers as they occur. Specifically, the ordinance was established to provide a
uniform method of analyzing and evaluating the traffic impacts of projects that generate a
substantial number of average daily trips and/or trips during the morning or evening peak hour
period; to identify the specific and near-term impacts of project traffic as well as circulation
system improvements that will accommodate project traffic and ensure that development is
phased with identified circulation system improvements; to ensure that project proponents, as
conditions of approval, make or fund circulation system improvements that mitigate the specific
impacts of project traffic on primary intersections at or near the time the project is ready for
occupancy; and to provide a mechanism for ensuring that a project proponent’s cost of
complying with traffic related conditions of project approval is roughly proportional to project
impacts. Section 15.40.030 (Standards for Approval – Findings – Exemptions) specifically
exempts the following project types from compliance with the Traffic Phasing Ordinance: a)
projects that generate three hundred (300) or fewer average daily trips; b) projects that do not
increase trips by one percent or more on any leg of any primary intersection during any evening
or morning peak hour; and c) any project that meets certain other criteria as specified in the
Ordinance. A commercial-only project would be exempt from the TPO and mixed-use project
would be required to conduct a traffic analysis to evaluate traffic impacts, identify circulation
system improvements and condition the project to make or fund circulation system
improvements.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-54
The Circulation Element of the General Plan identifies a Class II Bikeway on Riverside Avenue,
which is a striped and stenciled lane for bicycle travel on a street or highway. Any subsequent
development may involve relocating driveway access points; however, bicycles would continue
to have access along the abutting roadway.
No existing or planned mass transit facilities are located on or near the proposed Project Site or
surrounding area. The nearest mass transit route is the Orange County Transportation
Authority (OCTA) Route 1 on West Coast Highway.
Less Than Significant Impact.
b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standard and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
No Impact. The proposed Project is not subject to the Orange County Congestion
Management Plan (OCCMP). The OCCMP CMP requires that a traffic impact analysis be
conducted for any project generating 2,400 or more daily trips, or 1,600 or more daily trips for
projects that directly access the OCCMP highway System. The OCCMP system in Newport
Beach consists of the following roadways:
• MacArthur Boulevard (Jamboree Road to Coast Highway)
• Jamboree Road (between city limit and MacArthur Boulevard)
• Coast Highway (throughout)
• Newport Boulevard (from north city limit to Coast Highway)
As subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project would generate a maximum of
313 daily trips. No Impact.
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic
levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. The closest airport is John Wayne Airport (JWA), which is approximately 3.7 miles
northeast of the proposed Project Site. According to the AELUP for the JWA, the proposed
Project Site is not located within the Airport Planning Area, the Airport Impact Zones, the
AELUP Notification Area for JWA, or the Airport Safety Zones (OCALUC, 2008, Figure 1 and
Appendix D). Accordingly, and based on the AELUP, the Project would not occur in a location
that results in a substantial safety risk for future Project residents.
d. Substantially increase hazards because of a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not alter the shape of any of the
adjacent roads. The City of Newport Beach Public Works Department would review and
approve all driveway plans prior to any subsequent construction, and impacts would be less
than significant.
e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-55
Less-than-Significant Impact. Any subsequent construction or operation would not affect
streets or otherwise affect emergency access routes. The proposed Project would be designed
to incorporate all required City of Newport Beach Fire Department standards to ensure that its
implementation would not result in hazardous design features or inadequate emergency access
to the site or areas surrounding the site; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
No Impact. The General Plan Circulation Element includes a number of goals and policies that
support public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. However, these policies do not provide
any guidance that directly applicable to the proposed Project. Therefore, the proposed Project
would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, and no impact would occur.
5.4.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable
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 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 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 expanded
entitlements needed?
e) 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?
f) Be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid
waste disposal needs?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-56
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
g) Comply with federal, state, and
local statutes and regulation related
to solid waste?
Discussion
Would the project:
a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The proposed Project would not exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The City of Newport
Beach requires National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, as
administered by the RWQCB according to Federal regulations, for both point source discharges
and nonpoint source discharges to surface waters of the United States. In addition, wastewater
service in the project vicinity is provided by the City of Newport Beach (Newport Beach 2006b).
Wastewater from the City’s sewer system is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District
(OCSD). The majority of the City’s wastewater flow is pumped to the OCSD Plant No. 2, which
has a design capacity of 276 million gallons per day (mgd) and operates at under capacity
(Newport Beach General 2006b). The existing post office land use currently generates
wastewater and has existing sewer ties into OCSD sewer lines. Future land uses resulting from
the proposed Project would increase wastewater generation above the current wastewater
generation, but would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB and
would comply with all provisions of the NPDES program and applicable wastewater discharge
requirements issued by the State Water Resources Control Board as discussed in Section
5.4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality.
Finally, since OCSD Plant No. 2 operates under capacity, the additional wastewater generated
by the proposed project would be accommodated by OCSD. Therefore, the proposed Project
would not cause any violation of standards set forth by OCSD, and impacts would be less than
significant.
b. 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Water service for the proposed Project Site is provided by the
City of Newport Beach. Domestic water for the City is supplied by imported water, groundwater
and recycled water. No new or expanded water or wastewater treatment facilities would be
required to accommodate the proposed Project. The proposed Project would connect to the
existing OCSD sewer system. OCSD, as stated above, manages and oversees all wastewater
in Orange County and is expected to be able to accommodate the wastewater generated by the
proposed Project; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c. Require or result in the construction of new stormwater drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-57
Less-than-Significant Impact. The existing site is mostly impermeable to stormwater because
of the impermeable surfaces on site. Any subsequent development would not increase the
impervious area. Any subsequent development will implement Best Management Practices
(BMPs) that would minimize impacts; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resources, or would new or expanded entitlements be needed?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Land uses resulting from the proposed Project would increase
water demand over the current water use. The Urban Water Management Plan for the City
identifies that the demand for water can be met; and therefore, the increase in the water
demand by the proposed project would not result in a significant impact. Based on the City’s
evaluation and planning for reliability of water supplies and the anticipated proposed project
water demand, no new or expanded entitlements would be required to serve the proposed
Project Site, and impacts would be less than significant.
e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that 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?
Less-than-Significant Impact. See Response 5.4.17 (b) above.
f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project’s solid waste disposal needs?
Less-than-Significant Impact. The City of Newport Beach is under contract with Waste
Management of Orange County for solid waste hauling and disposal. The Frank R. Bowerman
Sanitary Landfill, located at 11002 Bee Canyon Access Road in Irvine, is the closest facility for
solid waste disposal. The Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, which is owned and operated
by the Orange County Integrated Waste Management Department (IWMD), opened in 1990 and
is scheduled to operate until approximately 2053. The current average disposal rate at the
landfill is roughly 5,000 tons per day, and the maximum permitted disposal rate is 8,500 tons per
day. The landfill’s remaining capacity is approximately 200 million cubic yards or 107 million
tons of solid waste.
As shown in Table 5-4, Land uses resulting from the proposed project would generate an
increase in solid waste production as a result of additional and more intense non-residential
uses and potential dwelling units. An additional 151 pounds (0.0755 tons) per day of solid
waste would be disposed of at the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, representing
approximately 0.0009 percent of the amount of solid waste the landfill is allowed to accept daily.
With the remaining capacity of approximately 107 million tons, as well as a 39-year lifespan at
the Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, the increase in solid waste generated by the proposed
development would not exceed the capacity of the landfill. No deficiencies currently exist at the
Frank R. Bowerman Sanitary Landfill, as there is adequate daily surplus capacity to accept the
additional solid waste generated from the proposed project. Therefore, impact will be less than
significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-58
Table 5-4 Solid Waste Generation
Land Use Density/Intensity Generation Rate Total Generation
Existing
Institutional 9,242 sq ft .007 lbs/sq ft/day 64.7 lbs/day
Proposed
Commercial 11,326 sq ft 5 lbs/1000 sqft/day 56.6 lbs/day
Residential MFR 13 DUs 12.23 lbs/unit/day 159 lbs/day
Net Change in Solid Waste Generation 150.9 lbs/day
g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
No Impact. Solid waste produced by the proposed project would be picked up by a commercial
provider licensed by the City of Newport Beach The proposed Project would comply with all
federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste, such as the California
Integrated Waste Management Act and city recycling programs; therefore, no impacts would
occur.
5.4.18 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Would the Project:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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?
b) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have
environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-59
Discussion
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 periods
of California history or prehistory?
No Impact. The proposed Project Site is urban in character and does not contain biological
resources that would be affected by subsequent development. Additionally, no cultural
resources, either historic or prehistoric, are expected to be affected by any future construction or
operation of the project; therefore, no impact would occur.
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.)
In order to evaluate the proposed Project’s potential to result in cumulatively significant impacts,
the City of Newport Beach Planning Division compiled a list of other closely related past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. The list of cumulative projects,
along with a description of the proposed land uses, location of the projects, a description of the
status of each project, and a list of discretionary actions associated with each, is provided in
Appendix A. A total of 31 past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects were identified
within the City.
A discussion and analysis of the proposed Project’s potential to result in cumulatively
considerable effects to the various issue areas identified in this ND is provided below.
Aesthetics
Based on the list of projects included in Appendix A, no cumulative development projects are
located within the Project’s viewshed. Therefore, the proposed Project has no potential to
contribute to cumulatively significant impacts.
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Agriculture and Forestry Resources in Section
5.4.2, the proposed Project would have no impact on agricultural or forestry resources;
accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant
impacts.
Air Quality
As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Air Quality in Section 5.4.3, the proposed
Project would be consistent with the SCAQMD 2012 AQMP, would not result in near- or long-
term emissions that violate the SCAQMD thresholds, would not subject sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations, and would not create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-60
Biological Resources
As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Biological Resources in Section 5.4.4, the
proposed Project would have no impact on biological resources. Accordingly, the proposed
Project would have no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to biological
resources.
Cultural Resources
As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Cultural Resources in Section 5.4.5, the
proposed Project would have no impact to historical resources. Accordingly, the proposed
Project would have no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact to historical
resources.
During any subsequent development, there is a remote possibility of uncovering archaeological
or paleontological resources. Any subsequent development resulting from the proposed Project
would involve minimal surface soil disturbance and grading. Therefore, it is highly unlikely the
proposed Project would disturb any unknown cultural or paleontological resources, and impacts
would be less than significant. Other developments within the City subject to CEQA and that
have the potential for uncovering subsurface resources would similarly be required to
incorporate measures to address the potential for uncovering such resources during ground
disturbing activities. Accordingly, and assuming incorporation of the Project-specific mitigation,
potential cumulative impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources would be reduced
to less-than-significant levels.
The Project and all cumulative developments would be required to comply with the provisions of
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code
Section 5097.98(b), which would preclude cumulatively significant impacts to human remains.
Geology and Soils
Due to the site-specific nature of potential impacts associated with geology and soils, there is no
potential for the proposed Project to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated
with the site’s geology and soil conditions. All development in the City is required to comply with
the California Building Standards Code and follow the recommendations of project-specific
geotechnical reports, adherence to which preclude cumulatively significant impacts.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Section 5.4.7, the
amounts of GHG emissions that would result from development and operations of the proposed
Project are less than the applicable screening level threshold set by the City of Newport Beach
and would comply with all applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of
reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to a
cumulatively significant impact due to greenhouse gas emissions.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The proposed Project Site does not contain any recognized environmental conditions under
existing conditions, and therefore has no potential for cumulatively significant impacts to people
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-61
or the environment associated with such conditions. Although construction of the proposed
Project has the potential to expose nearby sensitive receptors and construction workers to
hazards associated with asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paints, the City of
Newport Beach requires building permit applications to include a declaration of compliance with
Code of Federal Regulations Part 61 of Title 40 and AQMD Rule 1403 to ensure proper disposal
of any hazardous materials, if discovered. Other cumulative developments that contain
asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paints would similarly be required to dispose
of such materials in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations.
There are no other components of the proposed Project with a potential to create significant
public health hazards; accordingly, the proposed Project’s potential contribution toward
cumulative impacts associated with asbestos and lead based paint abatement would be less
than cumulatively considerable following the incorporation of mitigation.
Future construction and operation resulting from the proposed Project would not emit hazardous
emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school, and the proposed Project Site is not included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5; accordingly, the
proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated
with these thresholds.
The proposed Project would replace an older building on the proposed Project Site with new
construction, which would reduce the cumulative fire risk associated with the concentration of
older structures in the Mariners Mile area that were not built to current fire codes. Similarly,
other cumulative projects that replace older buildings with new construction would also assist in
lowering cumulative fire risk. As such, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to
cumulatively significant fire risk associated with a potential aircraft accident that poses fire risk in
Mariners Mile. Furthermore, the City’s Emergency Management Plan incorporates an
emergency evacuation plan that addresses cumulative effects associated with public airport
operations to a level below significant.
The proposed Project Site would have no impacts due to private airport-related hazards or
interference with any emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans; accordingly,
the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts
associated with private airports or emergency evacuation plans.
Although the proposed Project and other cumulative developments located in the Mariners Mile
area could be exposed to fire hazards due to the generally older buildings that predominate the
area (and their lack of fire resistant construction), the proposed Project and all cumulative
development projects would be constructed in accordance with modern building codes,
including fire protection measures that would attenuate the risk of fire hazards. As such, the
proposed Project and cumulative projects in the Mariners Mile area would result in an
incrementally reduced risk of fire hazards; accordingly, the proposed Project would result in a
less-than-significant cumulative impact due to fire hazards.
Hydrology and Water Quality
The proposed Project would have no impacts to groundwater supplies, groundwater recharge
areas, flood hazards, or flooding associated with the failure of a levee or dam; accordingly, the
proposed Project has no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated
with these issues.
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-62
Similar to the proposed Project, all cumulative developments in the City would be required to
prepare and implement site-specific SWPPPs and WQMPs, which would ensure that any
cumulatively considerable impacts to water quality are reduced to less-than-significant levels.
Additionally, and as with the proposed Project, all cumulative developments would be required
to prepare hydrology studies to demonstrate that any changes to runoff does not result in on- or
off-site flooding; accordingly, any cumulative impacts associated with drainage would be less
than significant.
The proposed Project Site would not be subject to inundation by seiches or mudflow. Although
the proposed Project Site and other areas of Mariners Mile are located within the City’s tsunami
inundation zone, the likelihood of a catastrophic-level tsunami impacting the City is considered
remote. Additionally, the City has prepared an Emergency Management Plan, which identifies
tsunami evacuation routes, tsunami evacuation sites, and response plans, and utilizes an
outdoor emergency siren system to provide residents with advance warnings of potential
tsunami emergencies. The proposed Project and cumulative development projects have no
potential to adversely affect the implementation of the City’s Emergency Management Plan,
which would ensure that cumulatively considerable impacts due to tsunamis are reduced to
less-than-significant levels.
Land Use and Planning
The proposed Project would have no impacts due to the physical division of an established
community or a conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to a
cumulatively significant impact associated with these issues.
As indicated in the analysis presented under Land Use and Planning in Section 5.4.10, the
proposed Project would be consistent with, or otherwise would not conflict with, any applicable
land use plan, policies, or regulation of any agency that was adopted for the purpose of avoiding
or mitigating an environmental effect. Other cumulative development projects similarly have
been shown to be consistent with all applicable plans, policies, and regulations, or would be
required to demonstrate such consistency prior to approval. Accordingly, cumulatively significant
impacts would be less than significant.
Mineral Resources
As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Mineral Resources in Section 5.4.11, the
proposed Project would not result in any impacts to mineral resources. Accordingly, the
proposed Project has no potential to contribute to a cumulatively significant mineral resource
impact.
Noise
During construction of the proposed Project, there is a potential for exposing nearby sensitive
receptors to loud noise levels. Project construction activities have the potential to occur
simultaneous with off-site nearby construction activities, which would further increase the
construction-related noise level. Construction noise is exempt from Municipal Code Section
10.26 (Community Noise Control), provided such activities adhere to the timing restrictions
specified in Section 10.28 (Loud and Unreasonable Noise). As with the proposed Project,
construction activities associated with cumulative developments would be required to comply
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-63
with the timing restrictions of Section 10.28, thereby ensuring that cumulatively significant
impacts do not occur.
Future land uses resulting from the proposed Project have the potential substantial noise levels
under long-term operational conditions. As with the proposed Project, operational noise
associated with cumulative developments would be regulated by the noise control ordinances of
City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, thereby ensuring that cumulatively significant impacts
do not occur.
The proposed Project would result in a net increase in vehicular traffic from the site as
compared to existing conditions, which would thereby result in an increase in off-site noise
impacts due to traffic. However, the additional traffic would not cause Riverside Avenue to go
over capacity and it can be expected that future noise conditions will not change; Accordingly,
under long-term operating conditions, the proposed Project’s contribution of noise to the
cumulative noise environment would not be cumulatively considerable.
There would be no cumulatively significant impacts due to airport-related noise, as the proposed
Project Site is not exposed to substantial airport-related noise and would have no effect on the
level of exposure of other off-site properties.
Population and Housing
As indicated in the discussion and analysis of impacts to Population and Housing in Section
5.4.13, the proposed Project would have no impacts due to the displacement of substantial
numbers of existing housing or people; accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to
contribute to cumulatively significant impacts associated with housing displacement.
The Project could result in the construction and operation of up to 13 new multiple family
dwelling units on-site, which would result in a projected population increase of approximately 29
persons. As indicated in the list of cumulative development projects provided in Appendix A, a
number of other cumulative development projects also could result in the construction of new
housing units and/or new or expanded housing units within the City, which, collectively, could
result in a substantial increase in the City’s population. However, as indicated in the analysis
provided throughout this section, the proposed Project would not result in any cumulatively
significant impacts, including cumulatively significant impacts that would result from the
proposed Project’s projected population increase. Accordingly, the approximately 29 new
residents that would be generated by the proposed Project would not be cumulatively
considerable in relation to associated environmental effects.
Public Services
As indicated in the discussion and analysis of proposed Project impacts to Public Services in
Section 5.4.14, implementation of the proposed Project would not result in an increase in
demand for fire protection or police protection services; accordingly, the proposed Project has
no potential to contribute to cumulatively significant impacts to fire and police protection
services. Other cumulative development projects proposing residential development would
similarly be required to contribute school fees.
Although the proposed Project could result in approximately five school-age children, any future
residential development would be required to contribute school fees in accordance with Public
Negative Declaration 5.0 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Analysis
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 5-64
Education Code § 17072.10-18. Furthermore, the NMUSD determined that its existing student
capacity is adequate to serve the projected student population, and the District had no plans for
expansion of its school facilities to accommodate projected population growth. Accordingly,
cumulatively significant impacts to schools would be less than significant and the Project’s
contribution would be less than cumulatively considerable.
The proposed Project’s could increase in the City’s population by approximately 29 residents,
when considered in the context of population increases that would result from build-out of other
cumulative developments, would result in an increased demand for library services. However,
the growth of the City’s population associated with the proposed Project’s potential 29 residents
and other cumulative projects would not create the need to construct a new future library or
physically expand an existing library facility. Library services receive funding from property tax,
a portion of which from the Project’s tax assessment would be dedicated to the City’s Library
Fund.
Recreation
Subsequent development would not significantly affect neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities. As indicated in the list of cumulative development projects provided in
Appendix A, there are no development projects within Service Area 3 that would result in
impacts on existing recreational facilities. Accordingly, the proposed Project would result in a
less than cumulatively considerable impact to recreational resources.
Transportation/Traffic
As indicated in the discussion and analysis of Transportation/Traffic in Section 5.4.16, the
proposed Project would not cause Riverside Avenue to go over capacity and, the City’s Traffic
Phasing Ordinance requires mitigation for any traffic effects caused by any subsequent
development. Cumulative development projects provided in Appendix A have been accounted
for in traffic forecasts. Accordingly, the proposed Project has no potential to contribute to
cumulatively significant impacts associated with transportation/traffic.
Utilities and Service Systems
As indicated under the discussion and analysis of Utilities and Service Systems in Section
5.4.17, the proposed Project’s impacts associated with wastewater, solid waste, and water
supply would be less than cumulatively considerable.
c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Any subsequent development would have no impact or less-
than-significant impacts on human beings, both directly and indirectly. Accordingly, impacts
would be less than significant.
Negative Declaration 6.0 References
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 6-1
6.0 References
Cited As Reference
CalEPA, 2009a
California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2009a. DTSC’s Hazardous
Waste and Substances Site List—Site Cleanup (Cortese List). Available on-line at:
http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?cmd=search&reporttype
=CORTESE&site_type=CSITES%2COPEN%2CFUDS%2CCLOSE&status
=ACT%2CBKLG%2CCOM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS%20WASTE%20A
ND%20SUBSTANCES%20SITE%20LIST.
CalEPA, 2009b
California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2009b. Find Cleanup Sites and
Hazardous Waste Permitted Facilities.
Available on-line at:
http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search.asp?cmd=search&city=New
port%20Beach&zip=&county=Orange&federal_superfund=True&state_resp
onse=True&voluntary_cleanup=True&school_cleanup=True&permitted=Tru
e&pc_permitted=True&hist_nonoperating=&corrective_action=True&displa
y_results=Report&pub=True.
CalEPA, 2009c
California Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2009c. List of “active” CDO and
CAO from Water Board. Available on-line at:
http://www.calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/
.
California
Department of
Finance, 2012
California Department Finance, 2012. City/County Population and
Housing Estimate, 1/1/2012.
CalTrans, 2009
California Department of Transportation. List of Eligible and Officially Designated
Scenic Highways, 2013. Available on-line at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic/cahisys.htm
CDC, 2012
California Department of Conservation, 2012. State of California Williamson Act
Contract Land. 2012. Available on-line at:
ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/WA/2012%20Statewide%20Map/WA_2012_8x11.pdf
County of Orange,
2005
County of Orange. 2005. County of Orange General Plan. Available on-line at:
http://ocplanning.net/planning/generalplan2005
Earth Consultants
International, 2003
Earth Consultants International. 2003. Hazards Assessment Study City of
Newport Beach, California.
Geotracker, 2009
Geotracker. 2009. GeoTracker. Available:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?CMD=runreport&myaddress=20
00+east+balboa+blvd.
Newport Beach,
2006a
Newport Beach, 2006. City of Newport Beach General Plan. July 25, 2006.
Negative Declaration 6.0 References
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 6-2
Cited As Reference
Available online
at:
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?page=173
Newport Beach,
2006b
Newport Beach, 2006. City of Newport Beach Draft Environmental Impact Report,
General Plan 2006 Update (SCH No. 2006011119). July 25, 2006. Available on-line
at:
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?page=196
Newport Beach,
2009
Newport Beach, 2009. City of Newport Beach Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use
Plan. July 14, 2009. Available on-line at:
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?page=1317
Newport Beach,
2010a
Newport Beach, 2010a Newport Beach, 2010. Newport Beach Zoning Map.
November 25, 2010. Available
on-line at:
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?page=1689
Newport Beach,
2010b
Newport Beach, 2010a Newport Beach, 2010. Newport Beach Zoning Code.
November 25, 2010. Available
on-line at:
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?page=1689
Newport Beach,
2013a
Newport Beach, 2013a, Newport Beach Geographic Information System
(OCALUC, 2008)
Orange County Airport Land Use Commission, 2008. Airport Land Use Commission
Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. April 17, 2008. Available
on-line
at: http://www.ocair.com/commissions/aluc/docs/JWA_AELUP-April-17-2008.pdf
SCAG, 2001
Southern California Association of Governments, 2001. Employment Density Study
Summary Report. October 31, 2001. Available on-line at:
http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee-
documents/bl5aX1pa20091008155406.pdf
USCB, 2008
United States Census Bureau, 2008. Newport Beach City, California—ACS
Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2006–2008. 2006–2008 American
Community Survey 3-Year Estimates. Available on-line at:
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/
ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=16000US0651182&-
qr_name=ACS_2008_3YR_G00_DP3YR5&-
ds_name=ACS_2008_3YR_G00_&-_lang=en&-_sse=on.
USGS, 1965
United States Geological Survey, 1965. National Geologic Map Database Rogers,
T.H., 1965 Geologic map
Negative Declaration 6.0 References
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 6-3
Cited As Reference
of California: Santa Ana sheet: California Division of Mines and Geology, scale
1:250000.
USGS, 2013
United States Geological Survey, 2013. Mineral Resources On Line Spatial Data
Orange County. Available on-line at:
http://tin.er.usgs.gov/mrds/select.php?place=f06059&div=fips .
Negative Declaration 7.0 Persons Contributing to IS/ND Preparation
191 Riverside Avenue Land Use and Zoning Amendments December 23, 2013
Lead Agency: City of Newport Beach Page 7-1
7.0 Persons Contributing to the IS/ND Preparation
City of Newport Beach
Patrick Alford, Planning Manager
Tony Brine, City Traffic Engineer
Laura Detweiler, Recreation and Senior Services Director
Kevin Kitch, Fire Assistant Chief
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
Back Bay Landing
Request for legislative approvals to
accommodate the future redevelopment
of a portion of the property with a
mixed-use waterfront project. The
Planned Community Development Plan
would allow for the development of a
new enclosed dry stack boat storage
facility for 140 boats, 61,534 square
feet of visitor-serving retail and
recreational marine facilities, and up to
49 attached residential units.
300 E. Coast Highway
Generally located at the
northwesterly corner of east
Coast Highway and Bayside
Drive
Application submitted. EIR is
underway
General Plan
Amendment
Coastal Land Use Plan
Amendment
Planned Community
Development Plan
Lot Line Adjustment
Balboa Marina
Expansion
City of Newport Beach Public Access
and Transient Docks and Expansion of
Balboa Marina
25 boat slips
20,000 SF restaurant
15,000 SF marine commercial
201 E. Coast Highway Application has not yet been
submitted.
Old City Hall
Complex
Redevelopment
General Plan Amendment, Coastal
Land Use Plan Amendment, and
Zoning Amendment to change site from
Public Facilities to Mixed Use and
increase height limit from the 26/35
height limitation area to 55 feet with 65
feet for architectural projections. Fire
Station #2 to remain at current location.
3300 Newport Boulevard and
475 32nd Street
April 2012: amendments initiated by
the City Council.
Mitigated Negative Declaration
prepared.
January 2013: Planning Commission
recommendation for approval.
City Council consideration pending.
General Plan
Amendment
Coastal Land Use Plan
Amendment
Zoning Code
Amendment
Newport Harbor
Yacht Club
Demolition of the approximately 20,500
square foot yacht club facility and
construction of a new 23,163 square
foot facility. The yacht club use will
remain on the subject property.
720 West Bay Avenue, 800
West Bay Avenue, 711-721
West Bay Avenue, and 710-
720 Balboa Boulevard
Application submitted and under
review.
General Plan
Amendment
Coastal Land Use Plan
Amendment
Zoning Code
Amendment
Planned Development
Permit
Conditional Use Permit
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
Banning Ranch
Development of 1,375 residential
dwelling units, a 75-room resort inn and
ancillary resort uses, 75,000 square
feet of commercial uses, approximately
51.4 gross acres of parklands, and
approximately 252.3 gross acres of
permanent open space.
Generally located north of
West Coast Highway, south of
19th Street, and east of the
Santa Ana River
The FEIR was certified and the
project approved by the City on July
23, 2012. A coastal development
permit from the California Coastal
Commission is required.
Development Agreement
General Plan
Amendment to the
Circulation Element
Code Amendment
Pre-annexation Zone
Change
Planned Community
Development Plan
Master Development
Plan
Tentative Tract Map
Affordable Housing
Implementation Plan
Traffic Phasing
Ordinance Traffic Study
North Newport
Center Planned
Community
The North Newport Center
PC Development Plan serves as the
controlling zoning ordinance for the
sub-areas identified in the
Planned Community Development Plan
and is authorized and intended to
implement the provisions
of the Newport Beach General Plan.
The North Newport Center
Planned Community District is
comprised of seven sub-areas
that include
Fashion Island and Block 600
and portions of Block 100,
Block 400, Block 500, Block
800, and San
Joaquin Plaza.
As of September 5, 2012, the
remaining entitlement consists of
31,233 square feet (includes SF
associated with 1,020 unbuilt theater
seats) of retail in Fashion Island; 524
dwelling units in San Joaquin Plaza;
and 288,975 square feet of office in
Block 500.
Addendum to the
General Plan Program
EIR
919 Bayside Dr
Project
Development of 17 individual residential
lots; 1 common recreational lot with
possible pool and trellis structure; 2
landscape/open space lots; waterfront
and dock lots.
919 Bayside Dr; southwest of
Bayside Dr and Jamboree Rd
IS/MND and project approved in
2008. The CDP has been approved
by the Coastal Commission. Project
has not been constructed.
IS/MND
Code Amendment
Use Permit
TTM
CDP (CCC)
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
AERIE Project
Residential development including the
following: (a) the demolition of the
existing residential structures on the
1.4-acre site; (b) the development of 8
residential condominium units; and (c)
the replacement, reconfiguration, and
expansion of the existing gangway
platform, pier walkway, and dock
facilities on the site.
201–207 Carnation Ave and
101 Bayside Pl; southwest of
Bayside Dr between Bayside
Pl and Carnation Ave, Corona
del Mar
Final EIR was certified and project
approved by the City on July 14,
2009. Project currently in litigation.
The CDP has been approved by the
Coastal Commission. Project has not
been constructed.
EIR
GP Amendment
Coastal Land Use Plan
(CLUP) Amendment
Zone Change
Tract Map
Modification Permit
CDP (CCC)
Coast Community
College District-
Newport Beach
Learning Center
Project
3-story, 67,000-sf learning facility
505–1533 Monrovia Ave; west
of Monrovia Ave and north of
the terminus of 15th St
IS/MND and project approved August
2009. Pursuant to the City’s Traffic
Phasing Ordinance, a traffic study is
required. The traffic study and parcel
map were approved by the City on
April 22, 2010. The project has been
constructed and is complete.
IS/MND
Parcel Map
Traffic Study
Hoag Memorial
Hospital
Presbyterian Master
Plan Update Project
Reallocation of up to 225,000 sf of
previously approved (but not
constructed) square footage from the
Lower Campus to the Upper Campus.
1 Hoag Dr; northwest of West
Coast Hwy and Newport Blvd
Final EIR certified and project
approved on May 13, 2008. No new
development has been constructed.
EIR
GP Amendment
Planned Community
Development Plan (PC)
Text Amendment
Development Agreement
Amendment
CDP (CCC)
Hyatt Regency
Newport Beach
Expansion Project
Improvements to the existing hotel
which include the addition of 88 new
timeshare units; a 24,387-sf, 800-seat
ballroom/meeting building; a 10,072-sf
spa and new pool; and a 2-level parking
garage.
1107 Jamboree Rd; northwest
of Back Bay Dr and Jamboree
Rd
Final EIR certified and project
approved on February 24, 2009. The
project has not obtained a CDP;
therefore, the City’s entitlements
cannot be implemented.
EIR
Use Permit
Parcel Map
Modification Permit
Development Agreement
CDP (CCC)
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
Newport Beach City
Hall and Park
Development
Project
Relocation of City Hall (except for the
Fire Department). Construction and
operation of the following: (a) an
approximate 98,000-sf City Hall
building, Community Room, and
Council Chambers; (b) a 450-space
parking structure; (c) an approximate
17,000-sf expansion of the Newport
Beach Central Library; and (d)
construction of a public park.
1100 Avocado Ave; between
Avocado Ave and MacArthur
Blvd
Final EIR certified and project
approved on November 24, 2009.
Project construction began in May
2010. Construction complete, with
exception of park improvements.
Park improvements estimated to be
complete in May 2013.
EIR
Design plans
Exemption from Zoning
Code and PC 27
Santa Barbara
Condominiums
Project
79 condominium units totaling
approximately 205,232 net sf;
approximately 97,231 gross sf of
subterranean parking structures for a
total of 201 parking spaces on site;
approximately 79,140 sf of open space
and approximately 21,300 sf of
recreational area.
Santa Barbara Drive west of
Fashion Island
IS/MND and project approved in
January 2006. The CDP has been
approved by the Coastal
Commission. Plan check has been
submitted for building permits.
IS/MND
GP Amendment
CLUP Amendment
Code Amendment
Parcel Map
TTM
Modification Permit
CDP (CCC)
Beauchamp Project 5 unit residential development
2000-2016 East Balboa Blvd ;
east of East Balboa Street and
L Street
Draft IS/MND was released for public
review on January 12, 2010.
Planning Commission recommended
approval on March 4, 2010. The
IS/MND and the project were
approved by the City Council on May
25, 2010. The CDP has been
approved by the Coastal
Commission. Project has not been
constructed.
GP Amendment
CLUP Amendment
CDP (CCC)
Newport Business
Plaza Project
Demolition of 2 existing connected
buildings to construct a new 46,044
gross square foot business plaza.
4699 Jamboree Road and
5190 Campus Drive
The City Council approved the
project on January 25, 2011.
GP Amendment
PC text amendment
Tentative Parcel Map
Newport Marina –
ETCO Development
A mixed use development consisting of
27 residential units and approximately
36,000 square feet of retail and office
uses
2300 Newport Boulevard
FEIR certified in February 2006.
Tentative Tract Map extended in
October 2010. Building permits
issued Feb 2012.
Site Plan Review
Use Permit
Tentative Tract Map
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
Marina Park Project
Development includes a public park
and beach with recreational facilities;
restrooms; a new Girl Scout House; a
public short-term visiting vessel marina
and sailing center; and a new
community center with classrooms, and
ancillary office space.
1600 Balboa Blvd; west of 15th
St and east of 19th St
The Final EIR was certified and the
project approved by the City on May
11, 2010. The CDP application has
been approved. Construction is
proposed to start mid-year 2013
EIR
General Construction
Activity Storm Water
(NPDES) Permit
(RWQCB)
CDP (CCC)
Section 401 Certification
(RWQCB)
404 Permit (ACOE)
Mariner’s Medical
Arts Project
A 12,763 sq. ft. addition to an existing
17,500 sq. ft. medical office complex.
The existing medical office complex
was designed by Master architect
Richard Neutra and is considered to be
significant historical resource.
1901 Westcliff Dr Application was withdrawn 1/22/13.
Planned Development
Permit
Conditional Use Permit
Megonigal
Residence Project 3,566 sf, single-family residence. 2333 Pacific Dr, Corona del
Mar
Final EIR and project approved on
January 12, 2010. The CDP has
been approved. Building permits
have been issued for this project.
EIR
Modification Permit
Golf Realty Tennis
Club
Demolition of existing tennis and golf
clubhouses to construct a new 3,735 sf
tennis clubhouse and 35,000 sf golf
clubhouse. Included in the project are
27 short-term visitor-serving units
(bungalows); a bungalow spa/fitness
area and concierge and guest meeting
facilities; and five single-family
residential dwelling units (villas).
1600 East Coast Hwy
The City Council approved the
construction of a new 3,735 sf. tennis
clubhouse, 27 hotel units with
spa/fitness area and concierge and
guest meeting facilities; and five
single-family residential dwelling
units. The project was approved by
the City Council on 03/27/2012.
Approved by Coastal Commission
April 2013.
Development Agreement
PC Development Plan
Amendment
TTM
Transfer of Development
Rights
CDP (CCC)
Newport Beach
Country Club Inc
Demolition of existing golf course and
clubhouse to construct of a new 51,213
sf golf clubhouse and ancillary facilities
including a cart barn and bag storage.
1600 -East Coast Highway;
northwest of Pacific Coast
Highway and Newport Center
Drive
This project was approved by the City
Council on 02/28/2012. Approved by
Coastal Commission December
2012.
General Plan
Amendment
Planned Community
(PC) Text Adoption
Temporary Use Permit
Development Agreement
CDP (CCC)
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
PRES Office
Building B Project
Increase the maximum allowable
entitlement by 11,544 gross sf; increase
the maximum allowable entitlement in
office suite B by 9,917 net sf to allow for
development of a new 2-level office
building over a ground-level parking
structure.
4300 Von Karman Ave
An IS/MND was released for public
review on May 19, 2010. The MND
was certified and the project
approved by the City Council on
February 22, 2011.
GP Amendment
PC Text Amendment
Parcel Map
Old Newport GPA
Project
Demolition of 3 existing buildings to
construct a new 25,000-sf medical
office building.
328, 332, and 340 Old
Newport Blvd
IS/MND and project approved on
March 9, 2010. No activity.
Modification Permit
Traffic Study
Use Permit
GP Amendment
Rhine Channel
Contaminated
Sediment Cleanup
Project
Dredging of approximately 150,000
cubic yards of contaminated sediments
within portions of Lower Newport
Harbor, specifically from the Rhine
Channel and nearby areas bayward of
Marina Park, the American Legion Post
and 15th Street. Transport sediment by
ocean barge for disposal and beneficial
reuse within the approved Port of Long
Beach Middle Harbor Redevelopment
Project confined aquatic disposal
facility.
In the vicinity of Marina Park,
the American Legion Post,
and 15th Street
An IS/MND and conceptual project
were approved by City Council on
July 27, 2010. Project complete.
Section 404 Permit
(USACE)
Section 10 Permit
(USACE)
401 Water Quality
Certification (RWQCB)
CDP (CCC)
Dredging Lease
(California State Lands
Commission)
Sunset Ridge Park
Project
Develop the approximate 18.9-acre site
with active and passive recreational
uses and an access road to the park
through Newport Banning Ranch.
Northwest of West Coast Hwy
and Superior Ave
The Final EIR was certified and the
project approved by the City on
March 23, 2010. Coastal Commission
has approved the project in August
2012. Construction is anticipated to
begin in 2013.
EIR
Site Plan
CDP (CCC)
Streambed Alteration
Agreement (CDFG)
Section 7 (USFWS)
Koll Mixed Use
Development Development of 260 residential units 4343 Von Karman Avenue Application submitted. No activity.
PC Development Plan
Amendment
Traffic Study (TPO)
DA
Airport Land Use
Commission
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
Uptown Newport
Mixed Use
Development
Development of 1,244 residential units
and 11,500 sf. of commercial retail 4311 & 4321 Jamboree Rd
EIR, Tentative Tract Map, Traffic
Study, and AHIP were approved by
City Council on 2/26/2013. The PC
Development Plan and Development
Agreement were approved on
3/12/2013. Applicant is currently
processing parcel map application to
allow for future conveyance of
parcels.
PC Development Plan
Amendment and
Adoption
Tentative Tract Map
Traffic Study (TPO)
AHIP
DA
Airport Land Use
Commission
Plaza Corona del
Mar
Development of 1,750 sf new office
space and six (6) detached townhomes.
3900-3928 East Coast
Highway
Application approved by Planning
Commission on 1/03/13. No activity.
Tentative Tract Map
MUP
CUP
Site Development
Review
Zoning Code
Amendment
Mariner’s Pointe
A 19,905-sf, two-story commercial
building and a three-story parking
structure.
200-300 West Coast Highway
An IS/MND was released for public
review on April 11, 2011. The MND
was certified and the project
approved by the City Council on
August 9, 2011. Development under
construction.
GP Amendment
Code Amendment
CUP
Variance
Site Development
Review
Traffic Study
MacArthur at
Dolphin-Striker Way
Demolition of a 7,996-sf restaurant
12,351 sf commercial retail
development.
4221 Dolphin-Striker Way
MND, Transfer of Development
Rights, Traffic Study, CUP, Waiver of
DA, and Modification Permit were
approved by City Council on October
25, 2011. PC Development Plan
Amendment approved on November
22, 2011. Under construction
PC Development Plan
Amendment
Transfer of Development
Rights
Traffic Study (TPO)
CUP
Waiver of DA
Modification Permit
Rev: 05-15-13_m.nova
APPENDIX A – CUMULATIVE PROJECT LIST
Project Proposed Land Uses Location Determination/Status Discretionary Actions
Lido Villas (DART)
Request for the demolition of an
existing church and office building and
legislative approvals for the
development of 23 attached three-story
townhome condominiums. The Planned
Community would allow for site specific
setbacks and an increase in the height
limit up to 35 ft 4 inches and 39 ft for
architectural projections.
3303 and 3355 Via Lido
Generally bounded by Via
Lido, Via Oporto, and Via
Malaga.
Application submitted 10/24/12. MND
is underway
General Plan
Amendment
Coastal Land Use Plan
Amendment
Zoning Code
Amendment
Planned Community
Development Plan
Tentative Tract Map
AELUP: Airport Environs Land Use Plan; CDP: Coastal Development Permit; CUP: Conditional Use Permit; cy: cubic yards; DA: Dev elopment Agreement; DTSP: Downtown Specific
Plan; EIR: Environmental Impact Report; FAA: Federal Aviation Administration; GPA: General Plan Amendment; gsf: gross square feet; HBGS: Huntington Beach Generating Station; I-
405: Interstate 405 freeway; IBC: Irvine Business Complex; IS: Initial Study; ITC: Irvine Technology Center; LAFCO: Local Age ncy Formation Commission; LCP: Local Coastal Program;
MCAS: Marine Corps Air Station; MND: Mitigated Negative Declaration; ND: Negative Declaration; PA: Planning Area; PC: Planned Community; sf: square feet; SP: Specific Plan; SR-73:
State Route 73; TDR: transfer of development rights; TPM: Tentative Parcel Map; TTM: Tentative Tract Map; VTTM: Vesting Tentative Tract Map; ZC: Zone Change