HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-01_EQUAC_AgendaV,,,,.�kr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
AGENDA
Location: Police Department Auditorium
870 Santa Barbara Drive
Date /Time: Monday, October 1, 2012 - 7:00 p.m.
Committee Members:
Debbie Steven, Chair
Kimberly Jameson
Nick Roussos
Laura Curran
Sandra Haskell
Nancy Gardner, Mayor
Merritt Van Sant
Joan Penfil
Vince J. LePore III
Bruce Asper
Staff Members:
Patrick Alford, Planning Manager
Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner
1) CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2) ROLL CALL
3) PUBLIC COMMENTS
Kevin Nolen
Charles McKenna
Kevin Kelly
Michael Alti
Public comments are invited on agenda and non - agenda items generally considered to be within the subject matter
jurisdiction of the Committee. Speakers must limit comments to three (3) minutes. Before speaking, we invite, but do
not require, you to state your name for the record. The Committee has the discretion to extend or shorten the
speakers' time limit on agenda or non - agenda items, provided the time limit adjustment is applied equally to all
speakers. As a courtesy, please turn cell phones off or set them in the silent mode.
4) CURRENT BUSINESS
A. Draft comments on the Uptown Newport Draft Environmental Impact Report (attachment)
B. Review of upcoming environmental impact reports
5) COMMITTEE ANNOUNCEMENTS OR MATTERS WHICH MEMBERS WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A
FUTURE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. ACTION OR REPORT (NON- DISCUSSION ITEM)
6) ADJOURNMENT
1
The agenda, attachments, and minutes are available on the City's website htto:llwww.newportbeachca.gov. Once there, click
on Agendas and Minutes then scroll to and click on Environmental Quality Affairs. These items are also available in the City
of Newport Beach Community Development Department, Planning Division, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Building C, 2nd Floor.
This Committee is subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act. Among other things, the Brown Act requires that the Committee's
agenda be posted at least seventy -two (72) hours in advance of each regular meeting and that the public be allowed to
comment on agenda items before the Committee and items not on the agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of
the Committee. The Committee may limit public comments to a reasonable amount of time, generally three (3) minutes per
person.
It is the intention of the City of Newport Beach to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act ( "ADA ") in all respects. If, as
an attendee or a participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, the City of
Newport Beach will attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable manner. If requested, this agenda will be made available
in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Please contact
the City Clerk's Office at least forty -eight (48) hours prior to the meeting to inform us of your particular needs and to determine
if accommodation is feasible at (949) 644 -3005 or citvclerk(a)newoortbeachca.eov.
This page intentionally left blank.
Memorandum
To: Patrick J. Alford, Planning Manager
From: Debra Stevens, EQAC Chair
Date: October 1, 2012
Re: Comments on the Uptown Newport Draft EIR
The Environmental Quality Citizens Advisory Committee (EQAC) is pleased to have this
opportunity to comment on the draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 2010051094)
for the proposed Uptown Newport project. It is our hope that these comments will lead to
the best possible project for the City of Newport Beach, the neighbors and the applicant.
Our comments are summarized below and follow in the order of appearance in the DEIR as
far as possible.
GENERAL COMMENTS
There are a number of references used in the Draft EIR that are not defined or included in
Chapter 13 (Bibliography).
CHAPTER 3 (PROJECT DESCRIPTION)
Page 3 -2: The terms "additive," "replacement," and "density bonus" in Table 3 -1 should be
defined and explained how they apply to the project.
CHAPTER 5.2 (AIR QUALITY)
There are a number of references used in the air quality section; however, none of them
are defined or included in Chapter 13 - Bibliography. Examples include: WRCC 2012,
SCAQMD 2005; Caltrans 1997, CARB 2011, BAAQMD 2011, and SCAQMD 2012.
Although included in the environmental analysis, the existing facility emissions should also
be included as part of the environmental setting discussion.
The reference to SCAQMD, 2005 appears to be an old reference; the source needs to be
identified in the Final EIR to verify the information.
Page 5.2 -2, last paragraph. The statement is made that "Adverse effects on human health
are not caused directly by VOCs ..." This statement is n^'ue misleading as some VOCs
are toxic air contaminants. The statement should be revised clarified in the Final EIR.
0
Page 5.2 -7, first paragraph. The section on Air Quality Management Planning should be
updated in Final EIR to reflect that the SCAQMD has prepared and published the 2012
AQMP after the publication date of the Draft EIR.
Pages 5.2 -13 through 5.2 -23. The emission calculations for the proposed project were
developed using CALEEMod. Please confirm that this model is based on EMFAC2007
emission factors �^s:seth^p latest instead of the EMFAC2011 emission factors.
Further, although the information is provided in the appendix, it virtually impossible to verify
the model input assumptions and output data with the information provided in the impact
tables.
Page 5.2 -22 and 5.2 -23, Tables 5.2 -13 and 5.2 -14. The units of the numbers in the tables
should be provided and the LST significance thresholds should be identified.
Page 5.2 -24, CO Hotspot Analysis. It appears that a BAAQMD screening threshold has
been used, although hard to verify because the reference is not identified ( BAAQMD 2011).
Justification for the use of a BAAQMD screening threshold in Newport Beach should be
provided.
Page 5.2 -24, Impact 5.2 -6. It does not appear that diesel particulate matter was included in
the HRA summarized in Table 5.2 -15.
Page 5.2 -25, Table 5.2 -15. it appears that Please explain why the ISCST3 model was
used to estimate health risks
instead of the AERMOD model.
Page 5.2 -31, Table 5.2 -17. The SCAQMD significance thresholds should be more clearly
identified in the table.
CHAPTER 5.4 (CULTURAL RESOURCES)
Page 5.4 -3. What effort has been made to insure there are no remaining fossils or
paleontological artifacts remaining on the site?
Note: Mitigation Measure No. 4 -1 and No. 4 -2 require that monitors be retained to insure
that historic, archaeological, or paleontological resources are protected during ground -
disturbing activities. Therefore the comment should be revised as to the adequacy of these
mitigation measures.
Page 5.4 -6, last paragraph. In the Impact Analysis Phase I In section, it is stated that
"no archeological or paleontological resources are known to occur within the site
boundaries ". This SeRMS +^ ^^^+r.,diGt 6-8^+,^^ 4_2 o^I^^^+^ egoGal o^G ^„r^^c; ,.,h ^ti
states Please clarify that this conclusion is based on the record searches referenced on
Page 5.4 -3. The Paleontological Resources section on that page states: "Fossils
recovered at nearby sites include large mammals such as sabertoothed cats and
mammoths, as well as small mammals, birds,and reptiles." Therefore, it is reasonable to
2
conclude that although there is no record of archeological or paleontological resources
recovered within the project boundaries, this does not preclude the likelihood that there are
vet to be discovered resources.
CHAPTER 5.7 (HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS)
Page 5.7 -15, Thresholds of Significance. Please clarity as to why the CEQA Guidelines
thresholds identified in this section were not used to evaluate hazard impacts. Other, more
quantitative, thresholds were used, including a risk threshold of 1.0E -06 (see Table 5.7 -3),
and ERPG -2 toxic endpoints (see page 5.7 -25).
Page 5.7 -13, page 5.7 -18. A number of the conclusions in Table 5.7 -3 are incorrect.
Vapor intrusion cancer risk identified as "Slab - Maximum," "Garage - 95% UCL," and
"Garage - Maximum," range from 1.42E -06 to 8.78E -06, all of which exceed the threshold
of 1.0E -06. Therefore, development and occupancy of Phase 1 of the project would
expose future residents to substantial hazards from soil vapors originating from soil and
groundwater contamination under the Phase 2 portion of the project site. These impaGts
should be eens* eFed signifieant The table needs to be corrected in the Final EIR and the
threshold sources and applicability clearly cited.
Page 5.7 -33, Section 5.7.7 - Mitigation Measures. The mitigation measures for extremely
hazardous materials should not be limited to anhydrous ammonia but should also include
boron trichloride, chlorine, hydrofluoric acid, and sulfuric acid.
Residents of Phase I should be informed of the presence of extremely hazardous materials
in the TowerJazz facility.
I appreciate the level of detail in the description of the ongoing and long -term remediation
of the solvent tanks shown in Figure 5.7 -1 of the DEIR, however, although I read the entire
document and Appendices H and C, I could not get an overall summary sense of how
hazardous the risks are that the solvent tank remediation problem presents. Did I miss this
somewhere in the DEIR? And if not, can it be included?
Note: Page 5.7 -18 provides an the assessment results and conclusions of the carcinogenic
risks and noncarcinogenic hazards, which are summarized Table 5.7 -3. The conclusion is
that all cancer risks and noncarcinogenic hazards identified were below the respective
thresholds of acceptable versus unacceptable risks or hazards using CaIEPA standards.
CHAPTER 5.10 (NOISE)
What provisions and safe guards are planned for minimizing the sensitive receptors present
at the UCI Child Care Development Center (approximately 875 feet southeast of Jamboree
Road) are also located east of the project site across Jamboree Road? Please describe
plans transportation, fencing, sound buffering plans aimed at minimizing Noise, Fugitive
Dust, Construction traffic, Emissions, impacts and other hazards away from this location
during Phase 1 & 2 development.
3
Note: Mitigation Measures Nos. 10 -5 through 10 -12 provide the noise and vibration control
measures that will be applied to the construction phase of the project.
Note: Section 5.10.6 identifies measures intended to mitigation the construction noise
impacts to adjacent residential and office buildings and the level of significance after
mitigation is provided in Section 5.10.7. The above comment is more of a consideration of
the project and not the EIR. Therefore, it is recommended that it not be included.
The report does a very thorough and analytical job on the technicalities of vibration noises,
various types of sound and the City of Newport Beach's Conditions of Approval (the latter
on p.5.10 -51). Arguably, the approach of the report is too analytical and lacks human
concern or empathy, especially for those who live and work in the area. As but one small
but important example, one of the most impacted sites nearby is the UCI Child Care
Development Center, across the street from the project and less than 300 feet away.
Note: The Draft EIR identifies the UCI Child Care Development Center as a noise- and
vibration - sensitive area and analyzes the noise impacts accordingly. The comment should
be revised so as to relate to the adequacy of this analysis and conclusion.
If there is a regular theme to this DER noise section, it is, by implication, that the whole
area is already very noisy, given airplanes flying overhead at approach and take -off level
altitudes, heavy traffic on major traffic arteries such as Jamboree road and its associated
noise levels and other ongoing construction project noises. The assumption implicitly is "
what's a little more noise for a while ".
Note: The Draft EIR determines the significance of the noise impacts based on the
thresholds listed in Section 5.10.2, which are derived from the Noise Element of the
General Plan. The comment should be revised so as to relate to the adequacy of the
proposed thresholds of significance.
0
■
... ,_ ...
IN I I
■
..
0
phase. c„, �RGI o G they hirodl W aRaIY,o Please confirm that during the excavation
hp ase• the incremental noise due to the project iRdiGated that the iR „ level
would only be "less than 0.2 dBA "( PEIR . 5,n_22 IN4PAQT 5,n_, 14!FnId..,_WeFR +
Assee., 2012). 1 fiRd this te; he .,P-.Fy haFd te believe, _hut I'm RG sARL;l
Note: This impact is identified in the Draft EIR; the comment is more of a consideration of
the project and not the EIR. Therefore, it is recommended that it not be included.
At minimum, it seems a reasonable requirement that the affected people in Phase 1
residences be assured of some serious evaluation of sound barriers, sound walls or some
protection for them and their hearing.
Note: Mitigation Measure No. 10 -5 and No. 10 -6 require detailed acoustical study to
demonstrate that all residential units will meet applicable noise standards. The comment
should be revised so as to relate to the adequacy of these mitigation measures.
Note: This comment is more of a consideration of the project and not the EIR. Therefore,
it is recommended that it not be included.
CHAPTER 5.15 (UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This is one Af the fool geed arts of the DFIR OR that The Draft EIR states that the
consumption of all the utility sources will dramatically decrease when both Phases, 1 & 2,
are completed. Most notably, the water consumption is estimated to drop by a wheppiag
considerable 85% ep rcent, from the Tower -Jazz and Half Dome buildings current rate of
1,400,000 gallons of water F="rm each day to a predicted consumption of just over
200,000 gallons each day upon project completion and occupancy. What ;° gGiRg ^^ °f
fh„so f,.,,, h „{LVinns that I1686 69 FR61Gh wafer „Ro well asp Please confirm the current
levels of water consumption.
CHAPTER 7 (ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT)
Page 7 -5, Optional Phasing Alternative. It does not make sense to assume that residences
would be built and remain vacant. Rather it would make sense to assume that construction
of the residences would be delayed until 2015 or 2016 and could then be occupied in 2017,
after the closure of the TowerJazz operation.
5
.. ._
-.
•.
.
Note: This impact is identified in the Draft EIR; the comment is more of a consideration of
the project and not the EIR. Therefore, it is recommended that it not be included.
At minimum, it seems a reasonable requirement that the affected people in Phase 1
residences be assured of some serious evaluation of sound barriers, sound walls or some
protection for them and their hearing.
Note: Mitigation Measure No. 10 -5 and No. 10 -6 require detailed acoustical study to
demonstrate that all residential units will meet applicable noise standards. The comment
should be revised so as to relate to the adequacy of these mitigation measures.
Note: This comment is more of a consideration of the project and not the EIR. Therefore,
it is recommended that it not be included.
CHAPTER 5.15 (UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This is one Af the fool geed arts of the DFIR OR that The Draft EIR states that the
consumption of all the utility sources will dramatically decrease when both Phases, 1 & 2,
are completed. Most notably, the water consumption is estimated to drop by a wheppiag
considerable 85% ep rcent, from the Tower -Jazz and Half Dome buildings current rate of
1,400,000 gallons of water F="rm each day to a predicted consumption of just over
200,000 gallons each day upon project completion and occupancy. What ;° gGiRg ^^ °f
fh„so f,.,,, h „{LVinns that I1686 69 FR61Gh wafer „Ro well asp Please confirm the current
levels of water consumption.
CHAPTER 7 (ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT)
Page 7 -5, Optional Phasing Alternative. It does not make sense to assume that residences
would be built and remain vacant. Rather it would make sense to assume that construction
of the residences would be delayed until 2015 or 2016 and could then be occupied in 2017,
after the closure of the TowerJazz operation.
5
Page 7 -10, third paragraph, last sentence should be revised as follows: However, since no
significant and unavoidable greenhouse gas impacts occur under the proposed project, no
significant impacts would be avoided.
Page 7 -14, Table 7 -3. Are the utilities /service system uses identified in Table 7 -3 under No
Project Alternative based on the existing (current) use at the site (e.g., existing
water /electricity /natural gas use at the site)?
Page 7 -16, Table 7 -4. There is a typo in the second to last lines of the table (e.g., 9.033
should be 9,033.
General comment. The alternatives analysis evaluates a Reduced Density Alternative (561
dwelling units) and compared it to the proposed project (1,244 dwelling units). It was
concluded that the Reduced Density Alternative would achieve all project objectives, except
providing a reasonable return on investment. It was concluded or implied in the Draft EIR
that the proposed project would provide a reasonable return on investment. Therefore,
there are some alternatives between 561 dwelling units and 1,244 dwelling units that
should be evaluated that would provide a reasonable return on investment and achieve all
project objectives. What defines a "reasonable return on investment' should be defined.
(.
Environmental Quality Affairs Committee
Member Roster
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
Nancy Gardner, Mayor
323 Jasmine
VACANT Corona del Mar, CA 92625
(949) 673 -0706 Res.
(949) 644 -3309 Bus.
gardnerncv(a)aol.com
CHAIRPERSON
Debbie Stevens
1120 Sea Lane
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
(949) 640 -6917 Res.
(714) 632 -8521
dstevens(a)envaudit.com
CITY STAFF MEMBER
Patrick Alford
Planning Manager
(949) 644 -3235 Bus.
(949) 644 -3229 Fax
palford@newportbeachca.gov
CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS
COINCIDE WITH CC MEMBER TERMS
District 1
Michael Henn
Council Member
2006 -2010, 2010 -2014
District 2
Steven Rosansky
Council Member
10/2003 -2004, 2004 -2008, 2008 -2012
Kimberly Jameson
4800 Neptune Avenue
Newport Beach, CA 92663
(949) 650 -4022 Res.
(949) 290 -2010 Bus.
kimberlvaiameson(ame.com
APPOINTED 10/10/06
EXPIRES 12/2014
Merritt Van Sant
15 Baruna Ct.
Newport Beach, CA 92663
949 - 645 -0743 Res.
mvansant50 @gmail.com
Appointed 3/23/04
Re- Appointed 1/13/09
Expires 12/2012
Revised 09/24/12
Environmental Quality Affairs Committee
Member Roster
CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS (CONT.)
District 3
Rush Hill
Council Member
2010 -2014
District 4
Leslie Daigle
Council Member
9/2004 -2006, 2006 -2010, 2010 -2014
District 5
Ed Selich
Council Member
6/2005 -2006, 2006 -2008, 2008 -2012
District 6
Nancy Gardner
Mayor 2006 -2010, 2010 -2014
District 7
Keith Curry
Mayor Pro Tern
2/2006, 2006 -2008, 2008 -2012
Vacant
Vacant
Vacant
Nick Roussos
1613 1/2 E. Balboa Blvd
Newport Beach, CA 92661
(714) 801 -7538
Nroussos(a )arborcapitalgroup.com
Appointed 01/13/09
Expires 12/2014
Joan Penfil
18 Pinehurst Lane
Newport Beach, CA 92660
(949) 644 -8765 Res.
penfi lesg (a)yahoo.com
Appointed 7/22/2008
Expires 12/2012
AT LARGE MEMBERS
COINCIDE WITH CC MEMBER TERMS
District 1
Michael Henn
Council Member
2006 -2010, 2010 -2014
Bruce Asper
1553 Miramar Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92661
(949) 673 -8735 Res.
(949) 293 -4296 Cell
balboabruce2(d-)aol.com
Appointed 10/10/06
Re- appointed
Expires 12/2014
AT LARGE MEMBERS (CONT.)
COINCIDE WITH CC MEMBER TERMS
Environmental Quality Affairs Committee
Member Roster
District 2
Steven Rosansky
Council Member
10/2003 -2004, 2004 -2008, 2008 -2012
District 3
Rush Hill
Council Member
2010 -2014
District 4
Leslie Daigle
Council Member
9/2004 -2006, 2006 -2010, 2010 -2014
District 5
Ed Selich
Council Member
6/2005 -2006, 2006 -2008, 2008 -2012
District 6
Nancy Gardner
Mayor
2006 -2010, 2010 -2014
District 7
Keith Curry
Mayor Pro Tern
2/2006, 2006 -2008, 2008 -2012
Kevin Kelly
116 38`h Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
(714) 329 -2170 Cell
kelconst(o)aol.com
Appointed 4/22/08
Re- Appointed 1/13/09
Expires 12/2012
Debbie Stevens
1120 Sea Lane
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
(949) 640 -6917 Res.
(714) 632 -8521 Bus.
dstevens(a)envaudit.com
Appointed 02/10/09;
Reappointed 08/09/11
Expires 12/2014
Laura Curran
437 Dahlia Avenue
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
(714) 382 -5244 Bus.
lauracurran(aDmac.com
Appointed 8/23/05
Expires 12/2014
Vincent J. LePore III, Esq.
Brown & Streza LLP
8105 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 700
(949) 453 -2900 ext 136 Bus.
(949) 453 -2915 Fax
v.lepore(a)brown andstreza.com
Appointed 1/13/09
Expires 12/2012
Kevin Nolen
2058 Loggia
Newport Beach, CA 92660
kpnolen(a)hotmail.com
Appointed 03/10/2009
Expires 12/2014
Vacant
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS
Two, 4 -YEAR TERMS
VACANT
Environmental Quality Affairs Committee
Member Roster
VACANT
VACANT
VACANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERTISE
TWO, 4 -YEAR TERMS
Charles McKenna
PO Box 5078,
Newport Beach, CA 92262.
(949) 533 -1080 Res.
(949) 752 -2904 Bus.
cmckennana.voat- resnick.com
Appointed 02/10/09; Expires 02/10/2017
VACANT
VACANT
EDC REPRESENTATIVE
VACANT