HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-43 - Adopting the Addendum to the Back Bay Landing Certified Environmental Impact Report for the Planned Community Known as Back Bay Landing (PA2011-216)RESOLUTION NO. 2016-43
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE
ADDENDUM TO THE BACK BAY LANDING CERTIFIED
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE PLANNED
COMMUNITY KNOWN AS BACK BAY LANDING (PA2011-216)
WHEREAS, on December 16, 2011, an application was filed by Bayside Village Marina,
LLC ("Applicant') with respect to an approximately 31 -acre parcel generally located north of
East Coast Highway and northwest of Bayside Drive, legally described as Parcel 1 of PM 93-
111, ("Property") requesting approval of various legislative and related approvals to allow for
the future development of a mixed-use bayfront village comprising up to 94,035 square feet of
marine -related and visitor -serving commercial uses and up to 49 residential units (`Project').
The following approvals were requested or required to implement the Project as proposed:
a. General Plan Amendment (GPA) - To allow the development of residential units by
changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and Marine
Commercial (CM 0.5) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -1-11). The amendment would also
change the designation of the 0.304 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as
Multiple Unit Residential (RM) to MU -1-11. In addition to the land use changes, the
amendment creates two new anomalies to reallocate 49 un -built residential dwelling units
from the adjacent mobile home park (Anomaly No. 81) to the project site (Anomaly No.
80).
b. Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment (CLUPA) - To allow the development of residential
units by changing the land use designation of portions of the site from Recreational and
Marine Commercial (CM -B) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H). The amendment also
changes the designation of the 0.3 -acre lot line adjustment area currently designated as
Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU -H. In addition to the land use changes, the
amendment establishes a site-specific development policy and a height exception to the
35 -foot Shoreline Height Limit allowing for a single, 65 -foot -tall coastal public view tower.
C. Code Amendment - To amend the Zoning Map of the Zoning Code to expand the current
Planned Community District boundaries (PC -9) of the site to include: 1) the 0.304 -acre lot
line adjustment area zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community
(PC-1/MHP); and, 2) the existing 0.642 -acre portion of the project site zoned as
Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM).
d. Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) - Adoption of a Development Plan to
allow for the classification of land within the existing Planned Community boundaries and
establishment of development standards, design guidelines, and implementation of the
future project and long-term operation of all planning areas of the site.
e. Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) - To adjust the property boundaries between Parcel
(subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel
Map No. PM 93-111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new
driveway.
Resolution No. 2016-43
Page 2 of 8
f. Traffic Stud v - A traffic study pursuant to Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of
the Municipal Code;
WHEREAS, the Property currently has General Plan designations of Recreational and
Marine Commercial (CM 0.5 and 0.3), Open Space (OS) and Tidelands and Submerged
Lands (TS), with a total maximum development of 139,680 square feet allowed in the 2006
General Plan;
WHEREAS, the Property is currently located within the Coastal Zone and has Coastal
Land Use Plan designations of Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -A and CM -B),
Open Space (OS) and Tidelands and Submerged Lands (TS) in the City's Certified Coastal
Land Use Plan;
WHEREAS, the Property is currently located within the Planned Community zoning
district (PC -9) and within the Recreational and Marine (CM 0.3) zoning district for the portion
of Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 93-111 south of East Coast Highway;
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3, the
appropriate California Native American tribe contacts identified by the Native American
Heritage Commission were provided notice of the proposed General Plan amendment on
February 13, 2012. The California Government Code requires 90 days to allow tribe contacts
to respond to the request to consult unless the tribe contacts mutually agree to a shorter time
period. As documented in Appendix D of the DEIR, follow-up consultation was conducted and
Mr. Andy Salas replied to the follow-up letter by e-mail and identified his concerns and
requests regarding monitoring during ground disturbing activities. No additional requests for
consultation were received;
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2013, the Planning Commission held a study session for
the Project in the City Hall Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport
Beach, on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and Project;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 19, 2013, in
the City Hall Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California.
A notice of the time, place and purpose of the public hearing was provided in accordance with
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Newport Beach Municipal Code
(NBMC). The environmental documents for the Project comprising the DEIR, Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) which consists of Responses to Comments, Corrections
and Additions to DEIR (collectively, the EIR), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP), the draft Findings and Facts in Support of Findings (Findings), staff report,
and evidence, both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the Planning
Commission at this hearing;
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2013, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution
No. 1928 by a unanimous vote of 7-0, recommending certification of the Back Bay Landing
FEIR (SCH No. 20121010034) and approval of the Project to the City Council;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on February 11, 2014, in the City Hall
Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of
Resolution No. 2016-43
Page 3 of 8
the time, place and purpose of the public hearing was provided in accordance with CEQA
and the NBMC. The environmental documents for the Project comprising the DEIR, FEIR
which consists of Responses to Comments, Corrections and Additions to DEIR (collectively,
the EIR), and MMRP, the Findings, staff report, and evidence, both written and oral, were
presented to and considered by the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-10
certifying the FEIR No. ER2012-003 (SCH No. 2012101003) to be in compliance with the
CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3 (Certified EIR);
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2014, the City Council adopted: Resolution No. 2014-11
approving General Plan Amendment No. GP2011-011; Resolution No. 2014-12 approving
Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC2011-007; Resolution No. 2014-13 approving
Traffic Study No. TS2011-003; and Resolution No. 2014-14 approving Lot Line Adjustment
No. 2011-003. These resolutions were adopted but not effective until the approval of
LC2011-011 by the California Coastal Commission becomes final;
WHEREAS, on February25, 2014, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2014-3
approving Code Amendment No. CA2013-009 and Ordinance No. 2014-4 approving Planned
Community Development Plan No. PC2011-001. These ordinances were adopted but not
effective until the approval of LC2011-011 by the California Coastal Commission becomes
final;
WHEREAS, on July 11, 2014, the California Coastal Commission received the City's
submittal of Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment No. LC 2012-001 (LCP-5-NPB-14-0820-2);
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2015, the California Coastal Commission certified the
City's application request (LCP-S- NPB-14-0820-2) with the suggested modifications to the
proposed CLUP amendment, including:
a. Modified the proposed CLUP land use category from Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H) to
Mixed Use Water -Related (MU -W). The primary difference between the two
designations is that the MU -H designation allowed free-standing residential while the
MU -W designation allows for the vertical mixed-use structures, where residential uses
are located above the ground floor. Freestanding residential units are prohibited.
b. Eliminated a proposed height exception to the 35 -foot Shoreline Height Limitation
Zone under CLUP Policy 4.4.2-1 for a single, up to 65 -foot tall coastal public view
tower.
C. Included new site specific CLUP Policies 2.1.9-2 and 2.1.9-3 requiring that the
proposed public bayfront pedestrian promenade be continuous along the waterfront
and connect the sidewalks along East Coast Highway at one end, to and along the
shoreline of Back Bay Landing and the waterfront accessway adjacent to the
mobilehome development on Parcel of Parcel Map 93-111, to the waterfront
pedestrian access at the Newport Dunes recreation area at the other (eastern) end.
Resolution No. 2016-43
Page 4 of 8
d. Included a new site specific CLUP Policy 2.1.9-4 requiring that a hazards assessment
of the potential for erosion, flooding, and/or damage from natural forces be prepared
and submitted as part of the future site development review/coastal development
permit application phase of the project.
e. Included a new site specific CLUP Policy 2.1.9-5 requiring the preparation and
implementation of a shoreline management plan for the development and shoreline
areas of the site subject to tidal action, flooding, wave hazards and erosion
f. Required CLUP Coastal Access and Recreation Map 3-1 be revised to illustrate the
proposed bayfront promenade as a future waterfront public access trail and Bikeways
and Trail Map 2 to be revised to illustrate the proposed bike lane and trail
improvements on Bayside Drive;
WHEREAS, as a result of the Coastal Commission's action, the applicant is proposing
General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, Code Amendment, and Planned Community
Development Plan Amendments to modify the 2014 Council -approved land use designations
and zoning regulations to make them consistent with Coastal Commission's approval on
December 10, 2015 of the Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment with Suggested Modifications
and to expand the land use boundaries and amend the land use designations on the site to
include the revised 0.387 -acre lot line adjustment area;
WHEREAS, a revised Lot Line Adjustment is requested adjust the property boundaries
between Parcel 3 (subject property) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home
Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93-111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a
new driveway. The revision increases the lot line adjustment area from 0.304 -acres to 0.387 -
acres;
WHEREAS, City Council Policy A-18 requires proposed General Plan amendments to
be reviewed to determine if a vote of the electorate is required under City Charter Section
423. If a project (separately or cumulatively with other projects over a 10 -year span) exceeds
any one of the following thresholds, a vote of the electorate is required: if the project
generates more than 100 peak hour trips (AM or PM); adds 40,000 square feet of non-
residential floor area; or, adds more than 100 dwelling units in a statistical area. This Project
is located in Statistical Area K1. There have been no prior General Plan amendments
approved within Statistical Area K1 since the adoption of the 2006 General Plan. Although
the proposed General Plan amendment changes the land use designation from CM to MU -
W2 to allow for the development of 49 residential units, the proposed anomalies maintain and
are consistent with the development limits within Statistical Area K1 to what is currently
allowed under the General Plan. This is achieved through the reallocation of 49 un -built
residential units from Bayside Village Mobile Home Park (Anomaly No. 81) to the Project site
(Anomaly No. 80). Therefore, the thresholds that require a vote pursuant to City Charter
Section 423 are not exceeded because the proposed General Plan amendment does not
create any new dwelling units, does not exceed the non-residential floor area threshold, and
does not exceed the a.m. or p.m. peak hour vehicle trips threshold;
Resolution No. 2016-43
Page 5 of 8
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2016, the Planning Commission held a public hearing in the
City Hall Council Chambers, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California, at which time
the Planning Commission considered the modifications of the Amendments as a result of the
Coastal Commission's action, and the applicant's request to revise the LLA and the PCDP, the
Certified EIR, and Addendum. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the public hearing was
provided in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence both written and oral was presented to and
considered by the Planning Commission during the public hearing;
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2016, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
2015 by a unanimous vote of 5-0, recommending adoption of the Addendum to the Back Bay
Landing Certified EIR, modifications to the previously approved Project, and Lot Line
Adjustment No. LA2016-003 to the City Council;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing April 12, 2016, in the City Hall
Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of
the time, place and purpose of the public hearing was provided in accordance with CEQA
and the NBMC. The environmental documents for the Project comprising the FEIR, the
Findings and Facts in Support of Findings (Findings), Addendum, staff report, and evidence,
both written and oral, were presented to and considered by the City Council at the scheduled
hearing;
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., the
CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, Sections 15000 et seq.), and City Council
Policy K-3, the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, and thus warranted
the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR);
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-10
certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report No. ER2012-003 (SCH No. 2012101003) to
be in compliance with the CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3
(Certified EIR);
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, if changes
occur to a project or its circumstances, or if new information becomes available after
certification of an EIR, an addendum to the certified EIR may be prepared when the City is
not required to prepare a subsequent environmental impact report to review the changes or
new information;
WHEREAS, the City has prepared an Addendum to the Certified EIR, consistent with
the requirements of CEQA, for the Back Bay Landing project to analyze the potential
differences between the impacts in the Certified EIR and those that would be associated with
the requested modifications to the Amendments resulting from the Coastal Commission's
action; and
WHEREAS, after thoroughly considering the Certified EIR, and the public testimony
and written submissions, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the City
Council finds the following facts, findings, and reasons to support adopting the Addendum:
Resolution No. 2016-43
Page 6 of 8
a. The certified EIR reviews the existing conditions of the City and project vicinity;
analyzes potential environmental impacts from implementation of the development;
and identifies mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant impacts from
implementation of the development.
b. The modified project does not increase development density or associated impacts
beyond the levels considered in the Certified EIR.
C. Since the certification of the EIR in 2014, no substantial changes have occurred with
respect to the circumstances under which the EIR was certified for the project.
d. Since the certification of the EIR in 2014, no substantial changes to the environmental
setting of the project site have occurred.
e. Since the certification of the EIR in 2014, no new information of substantial importance
has become available that was not known and that could not have been known with
the exercise of reasonable diligence at that time of adoption. Thus, no new
information indicates that:
(i) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
Certified EIR;
(ii) Significant effects from the project will be substantially more severe than
identified in the Certified EIR;
(iii) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in
fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects
of the project, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation measures or
alternatives; or
(iv) Mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those
analyzed in the Certified EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant
effects on the environment, but the City declines to adopt the mitigation
measures or alternative.
f. Since no substantial changes to the circumstances or environmental setting have
occurred, and since no new information relating to significant effects, mitigation
measures, or alternatives has become available, the project does not require
additional environmental review, consistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15162.
g. Based on these findings, the Certified EIR and Addendum, the City Council has
determined that no subsequent environmental impact report is required or appropriate
under CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164. The Addendum therefore satisfies
CEQA's environmental review requirements for the project as proposed by the
applicant.
h. The Addendum, which the City prepared to evaluate whether the modified project
would cause any new or potentially more severe significant adverse effects on the
Resolution No. 2016-43
Page 7 of 8
environment, specifically analyzed, in addition to several other potential impacts,
potential impacts related to aesthetics, air quality, noise and land use.
i. Based on the facts and analysis contained in the Addendum, the City Council finds
that the modified project will not have, when compared to the Certified EIR, any new or
more severe adverse environmental impacts.
j. The modified project will not result in any new or more severe significant impacts
which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable, when viewed in
connection with planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity.
k. These factual findings are based on the Certified EIR, Addendum, and all documents
referred in or attached to it, the submissions of the applicant, the records and files of
the City's Community Development Department related to the project, and any other
documents referred to or relied upon by the City Council during its consideration of the
project on April 12, 2016.
The City Council has considered the Certified EIR and the Addendum, and has
concluded that the Addendum reflects the independent judgment of the City.
M. The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations and
approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project
opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project
applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such
applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge,
and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be
awarded to a successful challenger.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby resolves as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds that the
recitals provided above are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council for
the adoption of the Addendum to the Back Bay Landing Certified EIR, which is attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution
is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the
validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council
hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection,
sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 3: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City
Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 12th day of April, 2016.
ATTEST:
r rP m
t
Leilani I. Bro n
City Clerk
lane B. Dix n
Mayor
Resolution No. 2016-43
Page 8 of 8
EXHIBIT A
Addendum to Back Bay Landing EIR
BACK BAY LANDING PROJECT
PCR
MARCH 2016
BACK BAY LANDING PROJECT
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
STATE CLEARINGHOUSE #2012101003
Prepared For:
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Newport Beach, California 92663
Tel: 949.6443209
Contact: Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner
Prepared By:
PCR Services Corporation
2121 Alton Parkway, Suite 100
Irvine, California 92606
MARCH 2016
Table of Contents
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Project Background and Summary....................................................................................................................................1
1.2 The California Environmental Quality Act......................................................................................................................3
1.3 Approved Back Bay Landing Project and Certified Back Bay Landing EIR.......................................................5
1.4 California Environmental Quality Act Requirements.................................................................................................5
1.5 Type of CEQA Compliance Document and Level of Analysis...................................................................................7
1.6 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum................................................................................................................... 8
1.7 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum...................................................................................................8
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION...........................................................................................................................................9
2.1 CLUP Amendment.....................................................................................................................................................................9
2.2 General Plan Amendment...................................................................................................................................................10
2.3 Amendment (Zoning Map).................................................................................................................................................10
2.4 Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan Changes...............................................................10
2.5 Lot Line Adjustment.............................................................................................................................................................. 16
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION...................................................................................................................................... 21
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.......................................................22
4.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: .............................................................................................................
22
4.2 Determination: (To be completed by the Lead Agency).......................................................................................
22
4.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts........................................................................................................................... 23
4.3.1 Aesthetics........................................................................................................................................................................23
4.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources....................................................................................................................
29
4.3.3 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................................................................32
4.3.4 Biological Resources...................................................................................................................................................
40
4.3.5 Cultural Resources.......................................................................................................................................................
46
4.3.6 Geology and Soils.........................................................................................................................................................
50
4.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions......................................................................................................................................
54
4.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials........................................................................................................................
57
4.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality.................................................................................................................................
62
4.3.10 Land Use and Planning............................................................................................................................................
67
4.3.11 Mineral Resources.....................................................................................................................................................
70
4.3.12 Noise...............................................................................................................................................................................71
4.3.13 Population and Housing.........................................................................................................................................
77
4.3.14 Public Services............................................................................................................................................................
79
4.3.15 Transportation/Traffic...........................................................................................................................................83
4.3.16 Utilities and Service Systems................................................................................................................................
87
APPENDICES
Appendix A: California Coastal Commission Correspondence
Appendix B: Revised Legislative and Administrative Approval Documents
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012301003
List of Figures
Page
Figure1- Project Location Map...........................................................................................................................................................3
Figure2 - Planning Areas........................................................................................................................................................................4
Figure3 - Building Heights..................................................................................................................................................................
11
Figure 4 - Coastal Access and Regional Trail Connections.....................................................................................................12
Figure5 - Public Spaces........................................................................................................................................................................13
Figure6 - Seawall/Bulkhead Section..............................................................................................................................................14
Figure7 - Conceptual Site Plan..........................................................................................................................................................17
Figure8 - Architectural Theme.........................................................................................................................................................18
Figure 9 - Revised Vehicular Circulation and Parking..............................................................................................................19
Figure10 - Vehicular Access Plan....................................................................................................................................................
20
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003
11
1. INTRODUCTION
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code (PRC) section 30512(b), the City of Newport Beach
("Cit/,') is processing the City's required review and acceptance/denial of the California Coastal
Commission's ("Coastal Commission' or "CCC") December 10, 2015, approval of Coastal Land Use Plan
("CLUP") Amendment No. LC2011-007 ("Back Bay Landing") with suggested modifications (see attached
Notice of Approval from the Commission dated December 31, 2015, included in Appendix A of this
Addendum). In addition to necessary revisions to the City Council's original February 11, 2014 legislative
approvals ("Original Project"), to assure consistency with the CLUPA as modified by the Commission, the
applicant has requested two additional limited modifications to the Planned Community Development Plan
("PCDP") and the previously approved Lot Line Adjustment. Consistent with PRC § 30512(b) no changes are
proposed to the CLUPA other than those modifications approved by the Commission on December 10, 2015.
Specifically, the modifications to be analyzed in this environmental document ("Modified Project") are the
following: 1) Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment ("CLUPA") revisions; 2) General Plan Amendment ("GPA")
revisions; 3) Code Amendment/Zoning Map revisions; 4) Planned Community Development Plan ("PCDP")
revisions; and 5) a Lot Line Adjustment ("LLA") revision. The Modified Project is the subject of analysis in
this Addendum, which has been prepared in order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15367, the City is the lead agency with principal responsibility
for considering the Modified Project for approval.
This Introduction to the Back Bay Landing Modified Project Addendum will discuss: 1) the requirements of
CEQA; 2) the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 2012101003) certified on
February 11, 2014 by the Newport Beach City Council ("Certified EIR") in compliance with CEQA; 3) the
primary purpose of an EIR Addendum; 4) the standards for adequacy of an EIR Addendum pursuant to the
State CEQA Guidelines; 5) the format and content of this EIR Addendum; and 6) the City's timeline and
processing requirements to consider the Modified Project for approval.
1.1 Project Background and Summary
In February of 2014, the City Council ("Council") approved land use amendments to provide the legislative
framework for the future development of an integrated, mixed-use waterfront village on an approximately
7 -acre portion of a 31.4 -acre parcel located adjacent to the Upper Newport Bay, including: 1) amendments to
the General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan to change the land use designations from Recreational and
Marine Commercial (CM) to Mixed -Use Horizontal (MU -H); 2) a Planned Community Development Plan to
establish appropriate zoning regulations and development standards for the site, and 3) a Zoning Code
Amendment to expand the Planned Community District boundaries. Please refer to Figure 1, Project
Location Map, and Figure 2, Planning Areas, below, for the location of the project site and an illustration of
the various planning areas provided for within the Planned Community District, respectively. The requested
legislative amendments were intended to provide for a horizontally distributed mix of uses, including
recreational and marine commercial, retail, marine services, enclosed dry stack boat storage, and a limited
mix of freestanding multi -family residential and mixed-use structures with residential uses above the ground
floor commercial. In addition to the land use amendments, other requested approvals included a Lot Line
Adjustment, adjusting the boundaries between the subject property and the adjacent Bayside Village Mobile
Home Park to improve site access, and a Traffic Study pursuant to the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance.
On July 11, 2014 the Council -approved Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment was submitted to the Coastal
Commission and the City's application was deemed complete by the CCC on October 9, 2015.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 1
EIR Addendum March 2016
The other City Council -approved Back Bay Landing legislative actions (GPA, PCDP, ZC) were subject to and
not effective until the final approval of the CLUPA by the CCC. As referenced above, the Coastal Commission
approved the proposed CLUPA with suggested modifications (AppendixA of this Addendum) on
December 10, 2015. City staff and the applicant indicated to the CCC, both in prior written communication
and in oral statements on the record at the Commission hearing, with respect to late modifications proposed
by Commission staff in the days prior to the hearing, that the suggested modifications were acceptable.
However, final certification of City CLUP Amendment No. LC2011-007 is subject to the City Planning
Commission and City Council's adoption of same within six (6) months of the Commission's December 10th
action. As such, in order to respond to the CCC's suggested modifications, the City staff and Project Applicant
are requesting the following revisions to the previously approved legislative and administrative approvals:
CLUP Amendment - The CCC's submitted approval of the CLUP Amendment required several
modifications to the CLUPA submitted by the City, including 1) Coastal Land Use Designation
Change, 2) Elimination of Public View Tower Height Exception, 3) Enhanced Coastal Access, 4)
Hazards Assessment, 5) Shoreline Management Plan preparation, and 6) CLUP Map Revisions.
General Plan Amendment - For consistency with the Mixed Use Water Related Coastal Land Use
Plan Designation, the previously adopted General Plan land use category of Mixed Use Horizontal
(MU -H) is required to be changed to Mixed Use Water -Related (MU -W2).
Code Amendment (Zoning Map) - An amendment to the Zoning Code to revise the Zoning Map is
needed to expand the PC -9 boundaries to include the currently proposed 0.387 -acre lot line
adjustment area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC-
1/MHP). The zone change would ensure consistent zoning and allow for the proposed PCDP to
regulate development of the entire site.
Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan Amendment - In order to achieve
consistency of the Planned Community Development Plan with the Coastal Commission's
modifications of the CLUP land use designation and policies, revisions to the adopted PCDP for the
site are needed. The purpose of the PCDP is to establish appropriate zoning regulations governing
land use, site design and development standards on the site that would assure future development
of the site as a high-quality mixed-use, marine -related, visitor -serving commercial development
with integrated residential units and a unified architectural and landscape theme. Specifically, the
PCDP sets the development limits, permitted land uses, development standards, design guidelines,
and administrative procedures as the controlling zoning document for the entire approximately 31 -
acre project site. The PCDP Amendment also includes site location flexibility for the Orange County
Sanitation District wastewater pump facility to be relocated in either Planning Area 2 or in Planning
Area 1 (as was allowed under the Original Project PCDP).
Lot Line Adjustment - A small, additional revised lot line adjustment proposed between Parcel 3
(mixed-use project site) and Parcel 2 (adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No.
PM 93-111 to improve ingress and egress to the project site with a new driveway. No additional
parcel or development rights are created.
A detailed discussion and associated illustrations of the proposed revisions to the requested approvals are
provided below in Section 2.0, Project Description, of this Addendum.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012103003 9
Newport
Beach
0
3Q
2 uppe1
BACK BAY Newport Bay
LANDING a
MIXED -'USE o��e
PROJECT AREA �aF°
Gast HWY ,
Balboa
Peninsula
Newport Bay
PCR
Back Bay Landing is located immediately
north of East Coast Highway in Newport
Beach, California. The site is bounded by East
Coast Highway and Newport Harbor on the
south and west, Bayside Drive to the south,
the Newport Back Bay channel to the west
and Bayside Village Mobile Home Park to the
southeast.
LEGEND
Pm)ect Area (Parcol3 of PM 93-111)
Hack liay Landing Mixed Use Protect Area
— PG91Sound:u'y
Project Location Map „�oAE
Rr.
aq�
ee�`�Je
3 PARCEL3
8 Plannin Area 3
EXISTING. PRIVATE MARINA—
ACCESS AND BEACH
(0.659 ac)
�
/ J
.-..
De Mze BaYsida Marsh Penins°� ' _
a
i':,an Mal
Pre
lannin Aa 5 °v�0N Lee
_ _Parking
Bayside Village
Mobile Home Park
RECREATIONAL & East Coast Highway
MARINE COMMERCIAL J -------
(0.642 ac)
Nmpan Dunes
Waterfront
Resort a Marina
MARINA AND BAYSIDE VILLAGE
MOBILE HOME PARK STORAGE
AND GUEST PARKING
(0.541 ac)
This Planned Community includes five distinct
planning areas.
Parcel 3 Summary
P.A.
Description
Acres
Mixed -Use Area
5.215 ac
(i of CH canter line)
Recreational & Marine
Commercial
0.642 ac
(South of CH center line)
Existing Private Marina Access
0.659 ac
and Beach
Marina and Bayside Village
Mobile Home Park Storage
0.541 ac
and Guest Parking
Submerged Fee -Owned Lands
(Area includes De Anza Bayside
24.457 ac
Marsh Peninsula)
Parcel 3 Total Area
31.514 ac
Planning Areas I rise
March 2016
1.2 The California Environmental Quality Act
EIR Addendum
CEQA, a statewide environmental law contained in Public Resources Code §§21000-21177, 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.
1.3 Approved Back Bay Landing Project and Certified Back Bay Landing EIR
The City Council certified EIR (SCH No. 2012101003) on February 11, 2014, as adequately addressing the
potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed legislative and administrative approvals and
the future development such approvals could allow on the project site. The location of the project site,
previous approvals granted, and the actions addressed as part of the Modified Project evaluated in this EIR
Addendum are further addressed below in Section 2.0, Project Description.
On February 11, 2014, the Newport Beach City Council adopted Resolution No. 2014-10 certifying the Back
Bay Landing EIR, and adopted associated Findings and Statement of Facts in compliance with CEQA. As the
Original Project was determined not to result in any unavoidable significant effects on the environment, a
Statement of Overriding Considerations was not required. The Certified EIR and Resolution No. 2014-10 are
herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150 and are available for review at
City of Newport Beach Planning Division, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660 and
online at www.newnortbeachca.gov.
1.4 California Environmental Quality Act Requirements
The CEQA Guidelines allow for the updating and use of a previously certified EIR for projects that have
changed or are different from the previous project or conditions analyzed in the Certified EIR. In cases
where changes or additions occur with no new significant environmental impacts, an Addendum to a
previously certified EIR maybe prepared. See CEQA Guidelines §15164.
The following describes the requirements of an Addendum to an EIR, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section
15164:
a. The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an Addendum to a previously certified EIR if
some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162
calling for preparation of a Subsequent EIR have occurred.
b. An Addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the
Final EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 5
EIRAddendum
March 2016
c. The decision-making body shall consider the Addendum with the Final EIR prior to making a
decision on the project.
d. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a Subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162
should be included in an Addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or
elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence.
As noted above, CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(a) allows for the preparation of an Addendum if none of the
conditions described in Section 15162 are met. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 describes the conditions
under which a Subsequent EIR must be prepared, as follows:
1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous
EIR due to the involvement of environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken,
which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects; or
3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known
with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete,
shows any of the following:
A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR;
B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the
previous EIR;
C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternatives; or
D. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the
previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment,
but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
If none of these circumstances are present, and only minor technical changes or additions are necessary to
update the previously certified EIR, an Addendum may be prepared. See CEQA Guidelines §15164. As
described in detail herein, none of the above circumstances that warrant the preparation of a Subsequent
EIR are present.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpoation(SCH No. 2012101003 6
March 2016 EIR Addendum
1.5 Type of CEQA Compliance Document and Level of Analysis
This document is an Addendum to the previously -certified Back Bay Landing Project EIR (SCH No.
2012101003). As such, this Addendum analyzes the potential differences between the impacts in the
Certified EIR and those that would be associated with the Modified Project described in Section 2.0, Project
Description. CEQA Guidelines Section 15161 states that a Project EIR should focus on the changes in the
environment that would result from the development project, and shall examine all phases of the project
including planning, construction, and operation. Although the Original Project only included legislative and
other administrative approvals to allow for a future mixed-use development on the project site and not a
specific development project, the Certified EIR addressed impacts associated with future implementation of
the Back Bay Landing Project to the extent that project -specific details were available. ,. The need for
additional environmental review pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines would be determined by the City as
part of the Site Development Review process at such time a specific development project is brought forth.
This EIR Addendum provides the environmental information necessary for the City to make an informed
decision about the Modified Project, which consists of the actions summarized above in Section 1.1 and more
fully described in Section 2.0, Project Description. The City has determined that an Addendum to the
Certified EIR should be prepared, rather than a Supplemental or Subsequent EIR, based on the following
facts:
a. As demonstrated in the accompanying Environmental Checklist Form and its associated analyses
(refer to Section 4.0), the Modified Project would not require major revisions to the previously -
certified Program EIR because the Project would not result any new potentially significant
impacts to the physical environment nor would it create substantial increases in the severity of the
environmental impacts previously disclosed in the Certified EIR. In summary, the Modified Project
consists of physical reconfiguration of land uses on the project site, with a minor alteration in lot line
boundaries, with the same land use types and intensity as the Original Project and with expanded
public waterfront access, as summarized above in Section 1.1 and described in detail below in
Section 2.0. Although minor physical alterations to the land use plan for the project site are proposed
under the Modified Project, the overall development pattern and intensity would remain unchanged.
b. Although the Project would provide increased continuous public waterfront access for bicyclists and
pedestrians through Planning Area 3, the provision of such access would not result in new or
substantially increased environmental impacts compared to those evaluated in the Certified EIR.
c. The Projects related discretionary actions, including but not limited to changes to the CLUPA, GPA,
and PC Amendment, would not result in any new significant environmental impacts beyond those
disclosed in the Certified EIR.
d. Subsequent to the certification of the Certified EIR, no substantial changes in the circumstances
under which the Project is undertaken have occurred.
e. Subsequent to the certification of the Certified EIR, no new information of substantial importance has
become available which was not known at the time the Certified EIR was prepared.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landini
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 7
EIR Addendum
March 2016
Mitigation measures identified in the Certified EIR would be appropriate and feasible for the
Modified Project.
Based on these facts, the City determined that an Addendum to the Certified EIR is the appropriate type of
CEQA document to prepare for the Modified Project. The purpose of this Addendum is to evaluate the
Modified Project's level of impact on the environment in comparison to the approved Back Bay Landing
Project and its accompanying Certified EIR.
1.6 Format and Content of this EIR Addendum
The following components comprise the EIR Addendum in its totality:
a. This Introduction (Section 1.0) and the Project Description (Section 2.0).
b. The completed Environmental Checklist Form and its associated analyses (Sections 3.0 and 4.0),
which concludes that the Modified Project would not result in any new significant environmental
impacts or substantially increase the severity environmental impacts beyond the levels disclosed in
the Certified EIR.
c. Supporting background and technical information regarding the Modified Project, which are
attached as EIR Addendum Appendices A - C as follows:
• Appendix A: California Coastal Commission Correspondence
• Appendix B: Revised Legislative and Administrative Approval Documents
d. The Certified EIR, accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), Technical
Appendices to the Certified EIR, Findings and Statement of Facts, and City Council Resolution No.
2014-10, which are all herein incorporated by reference pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15150
and are available for review at City of Newport Beach Planning Division, 100 Civic Center Drive,
Newport Beach, California 92660 and online at www.ne=ortbeachca.gov.
1.7 Preparation and Processing of this EIR Addendum
The City of Newport Beach Planning Division directed and supervised the preparation of this EIR Addendum.
Although prepared with assistance of the consulting firm PCR Services Corporation, the content contained
within and the conclusions drawn by this EIR Addendum reflect the sole independent judgment of the City.
This EIR Addendum will be forwarded for review, along with the 2014 Certified EIR, to the Newport Beach
Planning Commission and City Council for review as part of their deliberations concerning the Modified
Project. A public hearing(s) will be held before the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission, which will
provide a recommendation to the City Council as to whether to approve, or deny the Modified Project. A
public hearing(s) will then be held before the City Council to consider the Modified Project and the adequacy
of this EIR Addendum. Public comments will be heard at the hearing(s). At the conclusion of the public
hearing process, the City Council will take action to approve, conditionally approve, or deny approval of the
Modified Project. If approved, the City Council also will adopt findings relative to the Modified Project's
environmental effects.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporztlon/SCH No. 2012101003
2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
March 2016 EIR Addendum
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
As noted above in Section 1.1, the Original Project approved by the City Council and evaluated in the
Certified EIR included a number of legislative and administrative approvals, which have been subsequently
modified in response to the CCC's approval with suggested modifications of the CLUPA dated December 10,
2015 (included in Appendix A of this Addendum). Please refer to Appendix B of this Addendum for copies of
all text and map revisions to the various approval documents. As such, pursuant to the CCC's CLUPA
comments, the Project Applicant is requesting the following revisions to the previously approved legislative
and administrative approvals:
2.1 CLUP Amendment
The CCC's conditional approval of the CLUPA required a number of revisions to the CLUPA text and figures as
previously proposed by the City, which are summarized as follows:
• Land Use Designation Revision - Modified the proposed CLUP land use category from Mixed -Use
Horizontal (MU -H) to Mixed Use Water -Related (MU -W). The primary difference between the two
designations is that the MU -W designation allows for the vertical mixed-use structures, where
residential uses are located above the ground floor. Freestanding residential units are prohibited.
The land use designation of the strip of land (Planning Area 3) seaward of the mobile home
development would remain CM -B.
Eliminated Public View Tower Height Exception - Eliminated a proposed height exception to the
35 -foot Shoreline Height Limitation Zone under CLUP Policy 4.4.2-1 for a single, up to 65 -foot tall
coastal public view tower. The coastal public view tower, therefore, is no longer proposed as part of
future development. Please refer to Figure 3, Building Heights, below, for proposed building height
limits within the project site under the Modified Project.
• Enhanced Coastal Access - Included new site-specific CLUP Policies 2.1.9-2 and 2.1.9-3 with a
requirement that the proposed public bayfront promenade continue within Planning Area 3, adjacent
to the mobile home park, and provide a continuous bayfront link from the mixed-use project area on
the west (Planning Area 1) to the Newport Dunes recreational trail to the east. Please see Figure 4,
Coastal Access and Regional Trail Connections, and Figure 5, Public Spaces, below, for an illustration
of the revised public bayfront access plan and other non -vehicular access opportunities within the
project site.
• Hazards Assessment - Included a new site-specific CLUP Policy 2.1.9-4 requiring that a hazards
assessment of the potential for erosion, flooding, and/or damage from natural forces be prepared
and submitted with the future site development review phase of the project.
Shoreline Management Plan - Included a new site-specific CLUP Policy 2.1.9-5 requiring the
preparation and implementation of a shoreline management plan for the development and shoreline
areas of the site subject to tidal action, flooding, wave hazards and erosion. Please see Figure 6,
Seawall/Bulkhead Section, below, for an illustration of proposed seawall/bulkhead improvements for
the project site, which would be implemented in accordance with the Shoreline Management Plan.
CLUP Map Revisions - Requested that CLUP Coastal Access and Recreation Map 3-1 be revised to
illustrate the proposed bayfront promenade as a future waterfront public access trail, similar to that
depicted in Figure 4, and Bikeways and Trail Map 2 was also requested to be revised to illustrate the
proposed bike lane and trail improvements on Bayside Drive (please see Figure 4).
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012301003 9
EIR Addendum March 2016
2.2 General Plan Amendment
For consistency with the Mixed Use Water Related Coastal Land Use Plan Designation, the previously
adopted General Plan land use category of Mixed Use Horizontal (MU -H) must also be changed to Mixed Use
Water -Related (MU -W2). Other than changes to the Land Use Map, no other changes to the previously
adopted General Plan development limits (density/intensity) are proposed. The specific GPA changes are
included in Appendix B of this Addendum.
2.3 Amendment (Zoning Map)
An amendment to the Zoning Map of the Zoning Code is needed to expand the PC -9 boundaries to include the
currently proposed 0.3 -acre lot line adjustment (LLA) area currently zoned as Bayside Village Mobile Home
Park Planned Community (PC-1/MHP). The zone change would ensure consistent zoning and allow for the
proposed PCDP to regulate development of the entire site. See discussion below regarding the proposed
revisions to the requested LLA area.
2.4 Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan Amendment
For consistency with the Coastal Commission modifications with the CLUP land use designation and policies,
revisions to the adopted PCDP for the project site are needed. Planning Area uses are also revised within the
PCDP to allow for wastewater pump facilities in either Planning Area 2 or in Planning Area 1 (as was allowed
under the Original Project PCDP). The proposed amendment to the PCDP under the Modified Project does
not authorize or preclude an increase of total existing pumping capacity or permit the placement of any
other component of a pumping facility, and is intended only to revise the PCDP to indicate that a pumping
facility is an allowable use within Planning Area 2. The development of pumping facilities, if and when
proposed, will be subject to all of the land use review requirements under the Modified Project PCDP and
separate CEQA compliance and processing of regulatory approvals by OCSD. The purpose of the PCDP is to
establish appropriate zoning regulations governing land use and development of the site that would allow
for the future development of the site as a high-quality mixed-use, marine -related, visitor -serving
commercial development with integrated residential units and a unified architectural and landscape theme.
Specifically, the PCDP sets the development limits, allowed land uses, development standards, design
guidelines, and administrative procedures that would serve as the controlling zoning document for the
entire 31 -acre project site.
A redline/strikeout version of the PCDP text illustrating the text changes is included in Appendix B of this
Addendum. In summary, the text changes to the PCDP include:
Section I. Introduction & Purpose
Updated references from MU -H land use designations to MU -W per CCC suggested modifications.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpormon/SCH No. 2012101003 10
PA 2
26 ft Building
Height Zone
(Grade for Measurement
of Height, 11';
Limned l0 23 fl flat roof
or 31 It sloped motf
East Coast Highway is approximately 22 feet
above the Back Bay Landing development site
limiting the development's impact on views
from East Coast Highway.
There are three finished grade baseline
elevations indicated on the exhibit from which
the building heights are measured: 11 and 14
feet, or as determined by Sea Level Rise and
the Shoreline Management Plan.
W Building Heights llo—
PCR :e..a.: e.aur u.ams 3
Grade Baseline Elevations
i to Measure Building Height
PA 4 (not shown)
(Grade for MB mmeM
of Height! 12)
1ldingonet:
1,V; 14';ed26
L
raof
r
etl roof
PA 1
�-•—•
'"_ '�
35 it Building
PA 1
I♦
Height Zone
I ft Building
- hwal'
East Coast Hlg
IGretlffor Met:14)neM
of Haight: 14')
1' He Zone
T
100 ft
for MeaeummeM
1 f Height 11') _
AGorox. 560 it _
PA 2
26 ft Building
Height Zone
(Grade for Measurement
of Height, 11';
Limned l0 23 fl flat roof
or 31 It sloped motf
East Coast Highway is approximately 22 feet
above the Back Bay Landing development site
limiting the development's impact on views
from East Coast Highway.
There are three finished grade baseline
elevations indicated on the exhibit from which
the building heights are measured: 11 and 14
feet, or as determined by Sea Level Rise and
the Shoreline Management Plan.
W Building Heights llo—
PCR :e..a.: e.aur u.ams 3
ro NNNe,
k po
o Newpoc e aNy
Beach
BACK BAY
LANDING
I'd
1. Regional Trail Connections
y��Oc
2. Proposed Coastal Access
f
n
a�ato5a x
N
er4 Bays
f�'14 y NF!
P�
3. Current Lack of Trail Connection
New Public
`- Bayfront Access
N
y��ata9a O
�&
4. Critical Trail Connections
Bikeway,
[an Trail
New Class 1 & 2
Off -Street Bikeway
& Pedestrian Trail
LEGEND
— Existing Class 1 Trail
MOMMOMMOM Existing Class 2 Trail
Existing Class 3 Trail
MOMMOMMOM Existing Newport Dunes
Recreational Trail
Lateral Access
onsonsoni Vertical Access
Proposed Class 1 & 3 Trail
mammon Proposed Class 1 & 2 Trail
• • • • Proposed Public Bayfront
Promenade
KFv AAA P
Coastal Access. and Regional Trail Connections FIGUM
PCR u.�� xa wu•ama 4
.�m.
View Location
Bridge Up
Work Area
(Boat House)
Elevator / Stair
ti & Be,
!�' \ Boal
House
Veno
P...'S
Port
Pedestrian Access
to ECH Bridge
Elevator
Public Pedestrian Bayfront Promenade
Pedestrian Auto Plaza.
�•, Public Marine Lockers & Restmoms
• 12'-0" wide Pedestrian Wal�A�
•��„ ••� j' Retail PJ
laza •••
• y))
Retell ?y)l Canaacate
Gbw
Retail w/ 1� ReslderHlsi Retail
Above
Reeidenbal
Abeve Parking Structure T •w
Residential Paid wlRestarnna
EPaing Resrdentia -
�_ _ • i" Abet/
Public Use of Enclosed Plan at Highway Level
Dry Stack Boat Storage
(Privately Owned)
Be
rvce r f
°s
Bridge
,. i Down j••'••
Work Area
12'-0" wide Pedestrian Walk (BoatHouse)
Elevator / Stair •' r Boat
House
Kayak & SUP Rentals
Pe
Port Pert C s ... r"• � . e��
i
0' 40' 90' 120' 190' 200'
Perkin -
stop
—
Pedestrian
rye..
t N(ghW ey
- -_._— - EaetpOas
Elevator/ Escalator
L Public Parking for Retail, Marina &
Bayside Village Mobile Home Park
Upper Parking Deck Provides Views
to the North and South
Plan Below Highway Bridge Level
Public Parking for Kayak Launch
• Be
12'-0" wide Pedestrian Walk: ,e
Public Spaces naaat
1J
PCR so�..m,o.,a w•,.n�na.a"r
Public Bayfront
Promenade
Water Line (Approx.)
at Lower Tide Condition
I
-------1--------- = �------- �\
Intertidal Mud or Intertidal Sand
Subtidal Sand Zone Zone
Finished Grade at Top of Seawall +10'
Designed for Future Sea Level Rise Compliance
Front of Seawall
Highest High Water Line (+7.86')
above Mean Lower Low Water (0')
Existing Grade
BULKHEAD
The project bulkhead may be built to the
Highest High Water elevation of 7.86' relative
to Mean Lower Low Water (0.0') or 7.48'/NAVD
88 to preserve the natural profile along the
shoreline adjacent to the County Tidelands,
subject to consistency findings in the Coastal
Act and City of Newport Beach Coastal Land
Use Policies.
Seawall/Bulkhead Cross -Section
rwuu
6
March 2016
Section LL Development Limits and Land Use Plan
EIR Addendum
Revisions to the public bayfront promenade requirement to include the continuous water trail
connection along Planning Area 3, per CCC.
Revisions to the Land Use Plan for Planning Area 1 consistent with the MU -W land use designation
and to eliminate freestanding residential, per CCC.
Revisions to the Land Use Plan for Planning Area 1 to require that the enclosed boat storage, public
promenade and public plazas shall be sited adjacent to the bayfront, with public launch area and boat
storage on the western/northwestern bayfront edge of the site, adjacent to the existing Pearson's
Port seafood market, per CCC. Please refer to Figure 7, Conceptual Site Plan, below, for an
illustration of the proposed site plan under the Modified Project.
Section III. • Permitted Uses
Revised the Land Use Plan for Planning Area 2 to allow for the potential relocation of the OCSD pump
station facilities within this area. OCSD is currently studying reconstruction/relocation options,
including reconstructing in place of relocating elsewhere in Planning Area 1 or 2 (the Original Project
PCDP allowed any potential relocated Bay Bridge pump station as a permitted use, only within
Planning Area 1). It should be noted that this proposed amendment to the PCDP would not authorize
or preclude either an increase of existing pumping capacity or relocation of any other component of
the existing pump station. It is intended only to revise the PCDP to indicate that a "wastewater pump
station' is an allowable use within Planning Area 2. Any relocation of the existing ECH pump station,
if and when proposed, will be subject to all of the land use review requirements under the Modified
Project PCDP and future CEQA review by OCSD.
Section IV. Development Standards
• Added public access connections as a permitted encroachment within the 20 -foot development
setback from the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge, subject to Site Development Review.
• Added a requirement for the preparation of Hazards Assessment, and Sea Level Rise and Shoreline
Management Plan, per CCC.
• Included a provision that allows height to be measured from an elevation required by the Sea Level
Rise and Shoreline Management Plan if it exceeds the established grades of the PCDP (Grade for the
Purposes of Measuring Height), per CCC..
• Included a provision that requires the minimum height of the bulkhead wall to an elevation
necessary to address sea level rise based on the required Sea Level Rise and Shoreline Management
Plan, per CCC. Please refer to Figure 6 above.
City of Newport Beach
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012101003
Back Bay Landing
1s
EIRAddendum March 2016
Section V. Design Guidelines
• Eliminated all references to the public view tower and associated design guidelines, per CCC.
• Revised the Architectural Theme requirements from Coastal Mediterranean style to a Coastal
influenced style that allows more design flexibility. Please refer to Figure 8, Architectural Theme,
below, for an illustration of the proposed architectural theme under the Modified Project, per CCC.
Appendix. Back Bay Landing Exhibits
For reference, the 2013 adopted PCDP exhibits, as well as the proposed revisions to those exhibits, are
included Appendix B of this Addendum. In summary, the revisions to the exhibits include:
• Exhibit 2 (Planning Areas) - Revised Planning Area 1 acreage to reflect revised lot line adjustment
area.
• Exhibit 3 (Building Heights) - Eliminated conceptual profile from exhibit and included a reference to
the Sea Level Rise and Shoreline Management Plan.
• Exhibit 4 (Seawall/Bulkhead Section) - Included clarifying details to exhibit.
• Exhibit 5 (Public Spaces) - Revised conceptual site illustrating increased public spaces.
• Exhibit 6 (Coastal Access & Regional Trail Connections) - Revised to include the new continuous
bayfront promenade connection along Planning Area 3 and connection to adjacent Newport Dunes
trail.
• Exhibit 7 (Vehicular Circulation) - Revised for consistency with revised conceptual site plan.
• Exhibit 8 (Revised Vehicular Circulation & Parking) - Revised to reflect revised project boundaries
and proposed driveway alignment based on revised lot line adjustment.
• Exhibit 11 (Architectural Theme) - Revised to eliminate rendering of freestanding residential.
• Exhibit 12 (Conceptual Site Plan) - Revised for consistency with Coastal Commission modifications.
• Exhibit 13 (East Coast Highway View Corridors) - Revised for consistency with revised conceptual
site plan.
• Exhibit 14 (Parking Plan) - Revised for consistency with revised conceptual site plan.
2.5 Lot Line Adjustment
A revised lot line adjustment proposed between Parcel 3 (mixed-use project site) and Parcel 2 (adjacent
Bayside Village Mobile Home Park) of Parcel Map No. PM 93-111 to improve ingress and egress to the
project site with a new driveway. The revision increases the lot line adjustment area from 0.304 -acres to
0.387 -acres, and results in the need to demolish an additional mobile home (for a revised total of four mobile
homes). The revised lot line adjustment area is illustrated below in Figure 9, Revised Vehicular Circulation
and Parking, while the overall vehicular circulation plan for the project site (reflecting the revised lot line
adjustment area) is shown in Figure 10, VehicularAccess Plan.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 16
Public —
Bayfront
Access
Pearson's
Port -
0 40' a0' 120' 100' 200'
O"StH 9hwaY
East
Plan at Level below Bridge
Conceptual Site Plan FIGURE
PCR buP.:mutr eacnU.emE 7
East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive
Coastal Access with Ground Floor
Commercial and Residences Above
Public Bayfront Promenade
Visitor Serving Commercial
View Plaza Seating
Architectural Theme 11—
PCRIF 4d MVYMIni
wme. im�wrtowtl� M., artnnenr a hmm� mu.
Mobile Home
Guest Parking
Adjusted Property Original
Line Circulation
Existing Bayside Village Circulation
Mobile Home
% - Guest Parkino
i
Public Pedestrian Promednade i
& Marine AccessCd,
- Revis
Circulation
e
Fire T
r
u
c
kGated - -
destrlan j
Turn Around\ a bi Accea
Emergency
1 a
Vehicle
gen
Existing Back
Bay Landing Property --------
Entry Location
I
Access Privacy Wall
-, Adjusted
Property Line r i
Revised Project Entry Location II
Proposed Bayside Village & Back Bay Landing Auto Circulation (Moved approximately 45 It north of existing entry)
At Revised Circulation and Parking IIIII
' 000 a` Nm Public Pedestrian
44%&
Cycht Bayk.t Ames,
/ o , IN �
i
CLASS 5 ,
BIKE LANE
P '
' C
(ON -STREET)
e
BIKE LONE
CL4551
IKEWAR
BEEf)
`
BIKEWAYS '
` 1 PEDESTRIAN `
TRAIL
— ► aI
Fire Truck
Turn -Around
9
r_� /; c
2�i r
/ FaSrcoaStNrehlq'ay \
/ Fire Truck
LLL___--------- Tum -Around
Under Bridge
'/Bayside Village _ j B
Mobile Home -Park
'+ Primary Vehicular
` Access
CTA B))`St p� ' ,
Optional Secondary Access
Deceleration and right -turn movements only
Newport Dunes
Waterfront
Resort & Marine
Secondary Gate
Guarded Vehicular
Access for Marina
Parking, Public
Storage and Existing
Restrooms
Vehicular Access Plan ".— 10
PCR b.,��� ....,.w�.
P.�,.�.:o<s.
3. PROJECT INFORMATION
March 2016
3.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
1. Project title: Back Bay Landing
2. Lead agency name and address: City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
3. Contact person and phone number: Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner (949) 644-3209
EIR Addendum
4. Project location: Regionally, the project site is located near the Pacific Ocean in the west -central
portion of Orange County, within the City of Newport Beach. The project site is generally bounded by
the Upper Newport Bay Channel to the west and north, by Jamboree Road to the east, and by East
Coast Highway to the south.
5. Project sponsor's name and address: Bayside Village Marina, LLC
300 East Coast Highway
Newport Beach, CA 92660
6. General plan designation: General Plan: Recreational and Marine Commercial CM 0.5 and CM 0.3
Coastal Land Use Plan: CM -B (north of PCH); CM -A (south of East Coast
highway)
7. Zoning: PC -9 (north of East Coast Highway and proposed to be expanded south of East Coast Highway
[currently CM])
8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The proposed project involves various legislative approvals for the future development of the Back Bay
Landing Project (the "proposed project"), which is proposed to be an integrated, mixed-use waterfront
village on approximately 7 acres in the City of Newport Beach. Refer to Section 1, Project Description,
of this Initial Study for a detailed description of the proposed project.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:
North: Existing mobile homes within the adjacent Bayside Village Mobile Home Park, the Bayside
Marina, and Newport Back Bay.
East: Existing mobile homes located across Bayside Drive and the Newport Dunes Waterfront
Resort.
West: Castaways Park located across Newport Back Bay Channel with single-family residential uses
on the blufftops further west.
South: Restaurants and marina south of East Coast Highway, as well as waterfront single-family
residential uses within Newport Harbor further south. Additionally, a sewer pump station owned and
operated by the Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) is located along the project site's southern
boundary adjacent to East Coast Highway.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
• Orange County Sanitation District;
• Orange County Airport Land Use Commission;
• California Department of Transportation; and
• California Coastal Commission.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 21
4. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
EIR Addendum March 2016
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
4.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
®Aesthetics
® Biological Resources
® Greenhouse Gas Emissions
® Land Use/Planning
® Population/Housing
® Transportation/Traffic
❑Agriculture Resources
® Cultural Resources
® Hazards/Hazardous Materials
❑ Mineral Resources
® Public Services
®Utilities and Service Systems
® Air Quality
® Geology/Soils
® Hydrology/Water Quality
®Noise
® Recreation
® Mandatory Findings of
Significance
4.2 Determination: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ 1 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 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 effects that remain to be addressed.
0 1 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.
Sig tore
3 AZI
Date
Jaime Murillo Senior Planner
Printed Name Title
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 22
March 2016 EIRAddendum
4.3 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
4.3.1 Aesthetics
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
"For purposes of this EIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse
impact on aesthetics/visual quality if it would result in any of the following:
Threshold 1: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista;
Threshold 2: Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees; rock outcroppings,
and historic buildings or other locally recognized desirable aesthetic natural feature within a
city -designated scenic highway;
Threshold 3: Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings;
Threshold 4: Create a new source of substantial light orglare which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area; or
Threshold S: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Aesthetic and visual resources impacts have been previously
analyzed as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA
Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to
cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to
the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista
As discussed in the Certified EIR regarding the Original Project, future development of urban uses on the
project site under the Original Project would have the potential to obstruct existing views of scenic resources
in the project area, including views from City -designated Public View Points and Coastal View Roads. As
illustrated in Figures 4.A-6, 4.A-7, 4.A-8, and 4.A-12, in Section 4.A, Aesthetics/Visual Resources, of the
Certified EIR, while some foreground views from areas adjacent to the project site, particularly along East
Coast Highway just west of Bayside Drive and along Bayside Drive, views of scenic resources would not be
substantially altered relative to current conditions due to existing intervening topography, urban
development, and landscaping. Further, foreground views of Upper Newport Bay and adjacent bluffs would
generally be preserved from designated Coastal Land Use Plan Public View Points including Castaways Park,
the bluff -top trail north of Castaways Park, and Westcliff Park, as well as from the East Coast Highway Bridge.
Mid-range views of Upper Newport Bay, the Upper Newport Bay bluffs, the Fashion Island shopping center,
Newport Dunes resort, and Newport Harbor could be partially obstructed from designated Public View
Points such as Castaways Park and adjacent bluff tops (see Figures 4.A-9 and 4.A-10 in Certified EIR Section
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 23
EIR Addendum March 2016
4.A) and a Coastal View Road (East Coast Highway, see Figure 4.A-8), views of these features would primarily
be preserved with little adverse effect. Additionally, long-range views of the San Joaquin Hills, Santa Ana
Mountains, San Gabriel Mountains, Pacific Ocean, Palos Verdes Peninsula, Santa Monica Mountains, and
Santa Catalina and San Clemente Islands would remain unaffected by future site development, with the
exception of a limited number of viewpoints at lower elevations relative to the project site, as illustrated in
Figure 4.A-9 in Certified EIR Section 4.A. Although future development on-site could obstruct short-, mid-,
and long-range views of scenic resources from some locations in the project area, such obstructions would
not represent a significant portion of the overall panoramic views currently available from public
viewpoints. This is because the most substantial view obstructions would occur along a limited segment of
East Coast Highway immediately adjacent to the project site, such that views northward from the roadway
would only be obscured for a limited time as one travels along the roadway. Furthermore, project design
features such as open space areas and plazas, and the associated view corridors they create, would preserve
views through the site at various locations along the affected portion of East Coast Highway, while proposed
landscaping and architectural design features would improve the quality of available views across the site
relative to the poor visual quality of the property under existing conditions. As such, the proposed project
would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista, and impacts in this regard would be less than
significant.
Similar to the Original Project, the Modified Project would allow for a very similar pattern of development
and range of building heights on the project site, with comparable landscaping, architectural features, and
other amenities and improvements. Although the Modified Project would relocate some uses, such as
residential uses, and other related building massing previously proposed along the project bayfront, to the
project areas setback from the bayfront as shown in the Modified Project conceptual site plan (See Figure 7
above). The structural massing of building features would not notably vary from that of the Original Project.
Thus the potential for view obstruction from the various publicly available viewpoints discussed above,
would not be increased under the Modified Project. Specifically, as related to the potential relocation of the
OCSD pump station from its current location adjacent to Planning Area 1 to another location within Planning
Area 1 or to an alternative location within Planning Area 2, selection of the latter location would not
measurably change the overall massing on the project site or potential for view obstructions since the
location of the facility within Planning Area 2 would be adjacent to the raised East Coast Highway right-of-
way (immediately contiguous to and behind the East Coast Highway Bridge) on the applicant's Planning
Area 2 parcel previously identified in the Certified EIR as "Marine Services.". Despite the lack of detailed
plans for the relocated pump station, which would be undertaken by OCSD as a separate project, it is
understood, based on indications from OCSD that structures and improvements would not be greater than
20 feet in height, consistent with the development standards contained in the Modified Project PCDP, and
thus would not extend above the East Coast Highway bridge or street level or other surrounding structures,
and would have no potential to further obstruct view of and across the site as viewed from surrounding
locations. With regard to the proposed reconfiguration of land uses within the project site under the
Modified Project, the integration of stand-alone residential uses into mixed-use commercial/residential
buildings would not represent a material change in the height, bulk or overall massing of proposed
structures on the project site, which must be designed in accordance with the development standards
provided in the Modified Project PCDP (as under the Original Project). This change in the development
pattern on the site is therefore not considered substantial. Accordingly, impacts to views or scenic vistas
associated with the provision of residential uses only in mixed-use buildings (versus stand-alone residential
buildings) would be less than significant and similar to those evaluated in the Certified EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012301003 24
March 2016 EIRAddendum
Similarly, the required Coastal Commission bayfront extension of the public promenade along the existing
private waterfront marina access way within Planning Area 3 would not include any structural elements that
could impact any views from the referenced public view points. The promenade improvements would be
limited to enhanced paving materials, benches, ornamental landscaping and screening materials (which
would provide privacy for adjacent residents in the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park). In addition the
Coastal Commission required the elimination of the coastal public view tower feature that would
incrementally reduce already less than significant impacts to views and scenic vistas as compared to the
original project. In addition, the potential construction of a new seawall/bulkhead to allow construction of
the CCC required continuous bayfront promenade through the existing Bayside Village Mobile Home Park
beach area within Planning Area 3, if determined necessary, would be carried out in accordance with the
requirements of the Modified Project PCDP and the proposed CCC -required Shoreline Management Plan. As
such, if a seawall/bulkhead were constructed in this area, it would appear, aesthetically, very similar to the
remainder of the project site bayfront and would not represent a notable visual change as viewed from
surrounding locations. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase in the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
Threshold 2. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway
There are no rock outcroppings or any other scenic resources on-site. There are some ornamental trees in
on-site landscaped areas and throughout the parking areas, but the trees are not considered scenic
resources. The trees are typical of landscaped ornamental trees in urban areas of southern California, and
the Original Project landscape plan includes additional ornamental trees. Therefore, the removal of some of
the trees on-site would not substantially damage scenic resources, and impacts would be less than significant
under the Original Project.
The State of California Department of Transportation designates scenic highway corridors. The project site
is not within a state scenic highway, nor is the project site visible from any (officially designated or eligible)
scenic highway, and there are no state scenic highways adjacent to or near the project site. State Route 1
(SR -1), also known as Pacific Coast Highway (or as East or West Coast Highway within the City of Newport
Beach), is located adjacent to and south of the project site. Although SR -1 is deemed eligible for state scenic
highway designation, it is currently not officially designated. It should be noted that although East Coast
Highway is not a designated state scenic highway, the City of Newport Beach General Plan and CLUP
designate it as a Coastal View Road. Nonetheless, the Original Project would not damage scenic resources in
a state scenic highway, and therefore impacts would be less than significant.
Similarly, given the proposed development pattern, associated potential for tree removal, comparable
landscaping and other design features, the Modified Project would not increase the potential for adverse
impacts to scenic resources in a state scenic highway and impacts would be less than significant. It should be
noted that although the Modified Project would potentially result in minor changes to the development
pattern on the project site, including possible provision of both a new seawall/bulkhead across the beach
area within Planning Area 3 and the relocated OCSD pump station within Planning Area 2, such
improvements would be subject to the development standards and design guidelines contained in the
Modified Project PCDP. These design guidelines and standards would ensure that such improvements are
visually consistent with the remainder of future on-site development. Accordingly, a significant impact to
scenic resources that may be visible from a state scenic highway would not occur with implementation of the
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomtion/SCH No. 2012101003 25
EIRAddendum March 2016
Modified Project thus it would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously
identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3: Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings
As discussed in Section 4.A of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would represent a substantial aesthetic
improvement relative to the existing appearance of the site. The Original Project would not remove or
demolish valued features or elements that contribute positively to the visual character of the vicinity.
Additionally, the Original Project would not degrade or detract from the existing visual quality of the site and
its surroundings. As such, the design of the Original Project would improve and enhance the visual character
of the site and generally improve the identity of the area. The Original Project would also provide a new
landscaped bayfront promenade along Upper Newport Bay, along with other landscaped interior pedestrian
walkways and open-air plazas that are intended to provide a pedestrian -friendly environment as well as
create a development acknowledged for its landmark design. Accordingly, the Original Project would not
substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings, and therefore
visual quality impacts due to the Original Project would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures
are required.
The Modified Project would improve the project site with new structures in a unified architectural theme, as
well as landscaping and other amenities in a similar fashion as the Original Project. As noted above, the
Modified Project includes amending the PCDP to identify wastewater pumping facilities as an allowable use
within Planning Area 2. However, if this facility were ultimately constructed in this area, its design and
construction would be subject to the requirements of the Modified Project PCDP which would ensure that
the facility is visually consistent and integrated with other development on-site. In addition, the Modified
Project would extend the proposed public bayfront promenade improvements from Planning Areas 1 and 2
to the existing marina accessway in Planning Area 3. This accessory is currently not landscaped and is
characterized by black asphalt paving, fencing along the waterfront (including unpainted steel chain-link
fencing and white painted wood fencing with vertical bars), and several small storage/refuse collection
containers. As discussed, previously, the provision of public access through or across the existing Bayside
Village Mobile Home Park private beach may entail construction of a new section of seawall/bulkhead in this
area. Should such improvements be determined necessary, construction and operation of the
seawall/bulkhead would be carried out in accordance with both the Modified Project PCDP and the proposed
Shoreline Management Plan, as applicable. As such, the promenade -related improvements within Planning
Area 3 under the Modified Project would be considered an improvement in terms of visual character relative
to existing conditions. Given the similarity in allowable development under the Modified Project compared
to the Original Project, which would be subject to the development standards and design guidelines of the
Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP), impacts would be comparable to those evaluated in the
Certified EIR. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of
a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views
Glare Impacts
Glare generation within the project vicinity is limited, as surrounding development consists predominately
of low-rise residential and commercial buildings that generally lack large expanses of glass or other
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 26
March 2016 EIR Addendum
reflective materials. Glare -sensitive uses in the project area include adjacent mobile homes and nearby
single-family residential uses located to the north, south, and east of the project site. Construction activities
under the Original Project are not anticipated to result in large expanses of flat, shiny surfaces that would
reflect sunlight or cause other natural glare. Therefore, less than significant construction -related impacts
with respect to reflected sunlight and natural glare are anticipated in the Certified EIR. With regard to
operational glare effects, future development under the Original Project would be subject to the PCDP
development standards and design guidelines, which include provisions for architectural design, types of
building materials, and landscape screening, and would therefore minimize glare impacts to adjacent or
other off-site land uses. Given the nature of future uses and associated design requirements, operational
glare impacts are anticipated to be less than significant.
As is the case for the Original Project, the Modified Project's construction activities would not include large
expanses of flat, shiny surfaces that would reflect sunlight or cause other natural glare and thus construction
glare impacts would be similar to under the Original Project and less than significant. Likewise, future
development under the Modified Project would be very similar to that under the Original Project and would
also be regulated by PCDP requirements, which would preclude any substantial sources of glare to occur
during long-term operations.
As such, the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously
identified significant impact regarding glare as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Lighting Impacts
Future implementation of the proposed project would increase the relatively low levels of ambient light that
exist on-site under existing conditions. Light-sensitive land uses in the area include adjacent residential uses
within the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park, bluff -top residential uses across Upper Newport Bay to the
northwest, waterfront residences on the north side of Linda Isle to the south across East Coast Highway, and
waterfront residences to the west within the Bayshore Apartments and single-family neighborhood across
Newport Bay. Lighting needed during construction under the Original Project could generate light spillover
in the vicinity of the project including residential uses to the south and east. However, construction activities
would occur primarily during daylight hours and any construction -related illumination would be used for
safety and security purposes only, in compliance with the requirements of Section 20.30.070, Outdoor
Lighting, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). Construction lighting also would last only as long as
needed in the finite construction process. Thus, given compliance with existing NBMC regulations, artificial
light associated with construction activities under the Original Project would not significantly impact
residential uses, substantially alter the character of off-site areas surrounding the construction area, or
interfere with the performance of an off-site activity. Therefore, artificial light impacts associated with
construction would be less than significant.
Once constructed, new light sources within the project area under the Original Project would include light
from windows of residential structures and retail uses (and to a lesser extent office uses given typical
business hours), outdoor architectural lighting, parking lot lighting, and sign -related lighting, as well as light
from street lights, vehicles traveling along on-site and adjacent roadways, and security lighting. Exterior
lighting would include lighting provided at vehicle entry points and areas of circulation; points of entry into
buildings; along the exterior facades of buildings; and other outdoor areas (e.g., public bayfront promenade,
sidewalks/trails, common open space areas) for both architectural highlighting and security purposes.
Lighting for security purposes would occur from dusk to dawn to ensure the safety of residents, employees,
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 27
EIR Addendum March 2016
and visitors. Lighting would primarily consist of a mix of standard incandescent light fixtures, as well as
various types of efficient/low energy fixtures. Lighting would be designed and strategically placed to
minimize glare and light spill onto adjacent properties and marine environment. The project -related
increase in ambient lighting is not expected to interfere with activities within adjacent residential areas, as
they already are subject to similar lighting conditions within their own neighborhoods and overall light
levels in these adjacent areas would not be measurably increased. Similarly, future on-site residential uses
under the Original Project would not be significantly affected by proposed lighting, as it would be typical of
residential and mixed-use development and would be designed to minimize impacts to light-sensitive uses.
Overall, as concluded in the Certified EIR, with adherence to the PCDP lighting requirements and any other
applicable NBMC regulations, lighting associated with the Original Project would not substantially alter the
character of the off-site areas surrounding the project site and would not interfere with the performance of
an off-site activity. Impacts attributable to project -induced artificial lighting would be less than significant.
With regard to the Modified Project, although building massing and land use locations would be
reconfigured, the overall construction process, duration, and intensity would not be measurably changed
relative to the Original Project. Thus, impacts would be less than significant and would be similar to those
evaluated in the Certified EIR. In addition, despite the minor modifications to the building layout within
Planning Area 1, the potential relocation of the OCSD pump station within Planning Area 2, and the extension
of the public bayfront promenade through Planning Area 3 (including possible construction of a new
seawall/bulkhead section at the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park beach), the Modified Project would not
substantially alter operational lighting conditions compared to the Original Project. Specifically,
development within Planning Areas 1 and 2 under the Modified Project would be substantially consistent
with development within these areas under the Original Project, with comparable lighting requirements and
anticipated intensity, and thus no notable changes to project -related lighting effects in these areas are
anticipated. With regard to the extension of the public bayfront promenade in Planning Area 3, while only
limited outdoor lighting currently occurs along the existing waterfront marina accessway, the introduction of
new light sources along the improved public promenade under the Modified Project would not represent a
substantial increase in lighting effects for nearby light-sensitive uses. This is because lighting for the
bayfront promenade within Planning Area 3 (as is the case for Planning Areas 1 and 2) would be limited to
that necessary to allow for adequate public safety and security, and all lighting would be required to be
shielded and directed onto the project site as required by the NBMC, such that overall light intensity in
Planning Area 3 would not be substantially increase. Furthermore, new landscaping features would provide
visual relief and light shielding for waterfront -adjacent homes within the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park,
and as discussed in the Certified EIR, the existing mobile home park currently includes numerous indoor and
outdoor light sources which contribute to ambient light levels in the area under existing conditions.
Therefore, the introduction of limited new light sources along the public bayfront promenade in Planning
Area 3 would not create a source of substantial new light and impacts in this regard would be less than
significant.
Accordingly, the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact regarding light as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
Implementation of the Original Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an
agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the General Plan, Local Coastal
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 28
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Program Coastal Land Use Plan, California Coastal Act, and Municipal Code) as relates to aesthetics and
visual resources. This impact is considered less than significant.
Likewise, given the limited nature of the proposed changes to future development under the Modified
Project and the similarity in physical impacts related to aesthetics and visual resources compared to the
Original Project, the Modified Project would also not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of
an agency with jurisdiction over the project. Therefore, the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact regarding light as previously
analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
Impacts related to aesthetics and visual resources would be less than significant; therefore, no mitigation
measures are required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which states, "[a]ll impacts related to
views, aesthetics/visual character, and light and glare would be less than significant given compliance with
the project's PCDP development standards and design guidelines, or NBMC requirements, as applicable.
Additionally, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable policies contained in the City's General
Plan, CLUP, and the California Coastal Act, and also would not result in conflicts with the NBMC. Therefore,
impacts related to policy and regulatory compliance would be less than significant"
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to aesthetics. Additionally, there
are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new
information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the
Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project does not meet the
standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to aesthetics, as provided pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Initial Study to the Certified EIR (Certified EIR
Appendix A), which states:
"In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997)
prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing
impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including
timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by
the California Department of Forestry and Fire protection regarding the state's inventory of forest
land, including the Forest and Range Assessment of and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project; and
forest carbon measurements methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air
Resources Board. Would the project:
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporstion/SCH No. 2012101003 29
EIR Addendum
March 2016
Threshold 1: 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;
Threshold 2: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract;
Threshold 3: Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources
Code Section 122O(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(8));
Threshold4: Result in the loss offorestland orconversion offorestland tonon-forest use; or
Threshold 5: 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."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. A detailed analysis of potential impacts to Agricultural
Resources was not included in the Certified EIR because a) the City of Newport Beach contains no designated
farmland by the California Department of Conservation (CDC), Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
(FMMP), b) no designated Farmland would be converted to non-agricultural use as a result of implementing
the Original Project, c) no sites in the City are zoned for agricultural use, and d) no sites would be affected by
a Williamson Act contract. Although impacts to forest resources were not evaluated as part of the 2006
Certified EIR, the City of Newport Beach similarly does not have any lands zoned for forest land, timberland,
or Timberland Production, and implementing the General Plan would not directly or indirectly result in the
loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non- forest use.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: 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
The project site is mapped as Urban and Built -Up Land on the Orange County Important Farmland 2010 map
issued by the Division of Land Resource Protection. The site is in an urbanized area of the City and is
developed with a vehicle storage lot and marine -related recreation uses. The Modified Project, like the
Original Project, would not convert farmland to nonagricultural use, and no impact would occur. Therefore,
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract
The project site and surrounding development are not zoned for agricultural purposes. The project site is
currently zoned PC -9 and CM. Under Williamson Act contracts, private landowners voluntarily restrict their
land to agricultural land and compatible open -space uses; in return, their land is taxed based on actual use
rather than potential market value. There are no Williamson Act contracts in effect on or adjacent to the site,
and thus neither the Original Project, nor the Modified Project, would have the potential to conflict with such
a contract. No impact would occur and therefore implementation of the Modified Project would not result in
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomtion/SCH No. 2012101003 30
March 2016 EIR Addendum
any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed
in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3: Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 1220(8)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code Section 51104(8))
Forest land is defined as "land that can support 10 -percent native tree cover of any species, including
hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources,
including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public
benefits" (California Public Resources Code Section 12220[g]). Timberland is defined as "land ... which is
available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of any commercial species used to produce lumber and
other forest products, including Christmas trees" (California Public Resources Code Section 4526). The site
is zoned Planned Community (PC -9) and Marine Commercial (CM), and there is no zoning on the site for
forest land, timberland, or timberland production. Further, no forest land exists within or near the project
boundaries. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project, similar to the Original Project, would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously
analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non forest use
The site is developed with asphalt -paved parking lots, storage garages, and recreational vehicle, boat, and
marine equipment storage areas. There is no forest land located on-site. The Original Project, as well as the
Modified Project, would not convert forest land to non -forest use, and no impact would occur. Therefore,
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5: 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
No Farmland exists in the vicinity of the project site that could be converted to non-agricultural use as
a result of either the Original Project or the Modified Project. All lands within the project vicinity already are
designated by the General Plan for non-agricultural use. Accordingly, the Modified Project would not involve
changes to the existing environment which, due to its location or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland to nonagricultural use. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any
new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in
the Certified EIR.
Similarly, no forest land exists in the vicinity of the Modified Project site that could be converted to non -
forest use, and no lands in the Project vicinity are designated for forest land production. Accordingly, the
Modified Project would not involve changes to the existing environment which, due to its location or nature,
could result in conversion of forest land to non -forest use. Therefore, implementation of the Modified
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 31
EIR Addendum March 2016
Mitigation Program
As indicated above, an analysis of impacts to Agriculture and Forestry Resources were focused out of the
Certified EIR based on substantial evidence that no farmlands, forest lands, or agriculturally zoned
properties or properties designated for forest land production are located in the City of Newport Beach;
accordingly, no mitigation measures related to Agricultural Resources were included in the Certified EIR.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Initial Study to the Certified EIR, which states,
"Future development on-site would not indirectly result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or
forest land to non -forest use, and no impact would occur."
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to agriculture and forestry
resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project will
be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to agriculture and forestry
resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.3 Air Quality
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
"Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining
whether a proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues
including air quality. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA
Guidelines, a significant impact to air quality would occur if the project would result in one or more
of the following:
Threshold 1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan,
Threshold 2: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation;
Threshold 3: 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);
Threshold 4: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations,•
Threshold 5. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people; or
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012101003 32
March 2016
EIRAddendum
Threshold 6: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Air quality impacts have been previously analyzed as part of
the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor
additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that
are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan
Although the Original Project would result in an increase in density with the addition of 49 units on the
project site, these units would be reallocated from unbuilt density on the adjacent mobile home property and
which was already assumed in the General Plan growth projections. Therefore, as the Original Project's non-
residential uses would not exceed the allowed intensities for the existing designations and the project's
residential uses would not exceed the growth projections for the City or region, the proposed project would
be consistent with the growth projections incorporated into the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD)'s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). Thus, the Original Project would be consistent with the
General Plan and, therefore, would be consistent with the Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG)'s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide (RCPG) and the AQMP. Furthermore, the Original Project
would not conflict with applicable policies contained in the City's General Plan regarding air quality. Future
development pursuant to the PCDP under the Original Project would co -locate residential and commercial
uses, which may provide a range of job opportunities, services, and entertainment. Future development
would also include a multi -use trail across the property and construction of new Class 1 (off-road) and Class
3 (shared use) bicycle lanes on Bayside Drive, providing a connection to existing regional trails. Future
development would also include provisions for the use of energy efficient lighting, fixtures, appliances, and
other energy efficient equipment. Hence, the Original Project would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the AQMP and impacts would be less than significant.
The Modified Project would allow for the identical type and intensity of land uses on the project site, but
would simply reconfigure them to concentrate priority coastal -dependent uses along the bayfront. In
addition, the Modified Project includes amending the PCDP to identify wastewater pumping facilities as an
allowable use within Planning Area 2; however, the Modified Project (nor the Original Project) would not
contribute to the need to relocate the facility, and the proposed amendment to the PCDP under the Modified
Project does not authorize or preclude an increase of total existing pumping capacity or any other
component of a pumping facility, and is intended only to revise the PCDP to indicate that a pumping facility is
an allowable use within Planning Area 2. The development of pumping facilities, if and when proposed, will
be subject to all of the land use review requirements under the Modified Project PCDP and future CEQA
review by OCSD. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not change the projected air
emissions or conflict with applicable General Plan policies related to air quality, and thus would not result in
any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed
in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpoanon/SCH No. 2012101003 33
EIR Addendum March 2016
The worst-case daily emissions were calculated in Section 4.13, Air Quality, of the Certified EIR for each phase
of construction under the Original Project. As shown therein, construction -related daily (short-term)
emissions for all criteria and precursor pollutants studied (volatile organic compounds [VOCs], oxides of
nitrogen [NOx], carbon monoxide [CO], sulfur oxides [SOx], respirable particulate matter [PM10], and fine
particulate matter [PM2.5]) would not exceed SCAQMD significance thresholds. These calculations assume
that appropriate dust control measures would be implemented during each phase of development, as
required by SCAQMD Rule 403 - Fugitive Dust. Therefore, with respect to regional emissions from
construction activities under the Original Project, this impact would be less than significant. It should be
noted that although the Modified Project includes amending the PCDP to identify wastewater pumping
facilities as an allowable use within Planning Area 2 (whereas the Original Project identified wastewater
pumping facilities as an allowable use in Planning Area 1), the air pollutant emissions associated with the
above modification would not change compared to the Original Project. This is due to the fact that the
proposed amendment to the PCDP under the Modified Project does not authorize or preclude an increase of
total existing pumping capacity or any other component of a pumping facility, and is intended only to revise
the PCDP to indicate that a pumping facility is an allowable use within Planning Area 2. The development of
pumping facilities, if and when proposed, will be subject to all of the land use review requirements under the
Modified Project PCDP and future CEQA review by OCSD. The construction and operation of the pump
station would be undertaken as part of a separate, future project by OCSD as part of its ongoing maintenance
and upgrade of sewage facilities within its service area. The Modified Project, like the Original Project, would
not trigger the need to relocate the pump station, but rather the applicant has included the potential
relocation of the facility within Planning Area 2 of the project site as a concession to OCSD. Nonetheless, the
pump station relocation and associated air quality impacts would be evaluated as part of separate, project -
specific CEQA review by OCSD, as adequate information regarding the future facility is not currently
available. A more in-depth evaluation of potential construction effects is not possible at this time.
In addition, the potential need for a new seawall/bulkhead segment along the private beach area within
Planning Area 3 would nominally increase the level of construction needed in association with the public
bayfront promenade. However, in the context of the overall Bayfront promenade construction efforts,
particularly those related to seawall/bulkhead construction across the waterfront portions of Planning Areas
1 and 2, the additional seawall/bulkhead segment within the Planning Area 3 private beach area (if this
improvement is ultimately required) would not represent a substantial increase in the scope or intensity of
construction activities. The seawall/bulkhead improvements in this area would employ the same
construction materials, equipment, and techniques as would be required for other portions of the
seawall/bulkhead, the air quality impacts of which were comprehensively evaluated in the Certified EIR. As
the Modified Project would result in the construction of the same type and intensity of land uses on the
project site, but with a slightly modified configuration, construction activities would be comparable to those
under the Original Project and impacts would likewise be less than significant.
The Original Project, like the Modified Project, would include retail, restaurant, and marine boat sales, rental
and service repair. It would also include recreation commercial uses, enclosed dry stack boat storage with
racks or bays and launching facilities; as well as a maximum of 49 residential units and parking. The Original
Project includes features that result in fewer vehicular trips than traditional single -use developments. In
addition, by expanding the boat storage, the Original Project would reduce the need for boat owners to tow
their boats to a launching site, which results in fewer vehicle emissions compared with a vehicle towing a
boat due to the increased weight. Operational emissions were assessed for mobile and stationary sources
under the Original Project. Operational criteria pollutant emissions were calculated for the Original Project
for the buildout year. Based on the nature of the mixed-use development and associated residents, users,
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 34
March 2016 EIR Addendum
and patrons, it is expected that the traffic trips would increase in the area. Existing site criteria pollutant
emissions were estimated based on 39 daily trips from the existing RV/Boat Storage and Kayak Launch
facilities, as provided in the Traffic Impact Analysis.' The net change in emissions is based on the operational
criteria pollutant emissions for the Original Project minus the emissions from the existing site. The net
regional emissions resulting from the typical operation of the land uses under the Original Project would not
exceed regional SCAQMD thresholds for all pollutants studied (VOC, NOx, SOS, CO, PMio, or PM2.5). Thus,
regional operations emissions from Original Project operation would not result in a significant long-term
regional air quality impact.
As noted previously, the Modified Project would allow for the identical mix of land types and intensities as
contemplated under the Original Project. Therefore, air pollutant emissions and related impacts would be
the same as those evaluated in the Certified EIR. Thus, implementation of the Modified Project would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously
analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3: 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)
As discussed in Section 4.B, Air Quality, of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would result in the emission
of criteria pollutants for which the region is in non -attainment during both construction and operation. The
Orange County portion of the Basin is designated non -attainment for the state and federal ozone, PM1o, and
PM2.5 ambient air quality standards and NO2 for the state ambient air quality standards. However, as stated
in Section 4.13 of the Certified EIR, worst-case emissions from construction and operation of the Original
Project would not exceed applicable mass emission thresholds for regional or local impacts. In addition, as
noted above, the potential relocation of the OCSD pump station within Planning Area 2 and the potential
construction of an additional section of seawall/bulkhead in Planning Area 3 would not represent a
substantial change in project -related air pollutant emissions relative to those evaluated in the Certified EIR.
This is because the pump station relocation would be undertaken as a separate project irrespective of the
Back Bay Landing Project (and was anticipated as such in the Certified EIR) and the additional
seawall/bulkhead section (if ultimately determined to be necessary at this location) would only require an
incremental increase in the duration of waterfront construction activities relative to the Original Project, and
would not notably change the overall nature and intensity of construction activities. Therefore, construction
and operation of the Original Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the region is non -attainment and therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
As stated above, the Modified Project would result in the same type and intensity of development on the
project site, but with a slightly modified layout on the property. Accordingly, operational emissions under
the Modified Project would not result in a new or more severe impact associated with a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in non -attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Therefore, long-term operation of the Modified
I Kunzman Associates Inc., Back Bay Landing Traffic Impact Analysis, (2013).
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 35
EIR Addendum March 2016
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations
Sensitive receptors can include uses such as long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers,
retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. The closest
sensitive receptors within the project vicinity include existing residential uses located within the adjacent
Bayside Village Mobile Home Park, while additional residential uses are located to the east across Bayside
Drive, to the north and northwest across the Upper Newport Bay Channel, and to the south across East Coast
Highway.
As discussed in Section 4.13 of the Certified EIR, maximum localized construction emissions for sensitive
receptors under the Original Project would not exceed the localized thresholds for NOx CO, PMio and PM2.5.
Therefore, with respect to localized construction emissions, impacts would be less than significant. The
greatest potential for toxic air contaminant (TAC) emissions would be related to diesel particulate emissions
associated with heavy equipment operations during grading and excavation activities. Given the relatively
short-term construction schedule of 18 to 24 months, the Original Project would not result in a long-term
(i.e., 70 years) substantial source of TAC emissions with no residual emissions after construction and
corresponding individual cancer risk. As such, project -related toxic emission impacts during construction
would be less than significant under the Original Project. The SCAQMD has established localized significance
thresholds (LSTs) to analyze the potential for on-site emissions from long-term operation of the proposed
changes to impact nearby sensitive land uses. As shown in Table 4.B-7 in Section 43, on-site emissions
under the Original Project be below the applicable LST thresholds for all pollutants studied. With regard to
CO hotspots, none of the intersections in the project area have peak hour traffic volumes that exceed those at
the intersections modeled in the AQMP nor do the intersections have any geometric qualities, such as
enclosed tunnels, that would result in higher concentrations than the intersections modeled by the SCAQMD.
As a result, CO concentrations under the Original Project are expected to be less than 9.6 ppm (1 -hour
average) and 6.3 ppm (8 -hour average), which would not exceed the thresholds. Therefore, the Original
Project would result in less than significant impacts with respect to CO hotspots.
The SCAQMD recommends that health risk assessments be conducted for substantial sources of diesel
particulates (e.g., truck stops and warehouse distribution facilities) and has provided guidance for analyzing
mobile source diesel emissions? The California Air Resources Board (CARB) siting guidelines, Air Quality
and Land Use Handbook,3 which the SCAQMD cites in its own guidelines, Guidance Document forAddressing
Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning (May 2005), defines a warehouse as having more than
100 truck trips or 40 refrigerated truck trips per day. The Original Project would generate minor amounts of
diesel emissions from the proposed boat lift and incidental maintenance activities. However, the Original
Project would not generate diesel emissions equivalent to 100 or more truck trips (or 40 or more
refrigerated truck trips) per day. Therefore, the Original Project would not be considered a substantial
source of diesel particulates. In addition, typical sources of acutely and chronically hazardous toxic air
contaminants include industrial manufacturing processes, automotive repair facilities, and dry cleaning
facilities. Minimal emissions of air toxics may result from the proposed land uses (e.g., architectural coating).
2 SCAQMD, Health Risk Assessment GuidanceforAnalyzing Cancer Risksfrom Mobile Source Diesel Emissions, December 2002.
3 CARR, Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective, (2005).
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 36
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Toxic or carcinogenic air pollutants are not expected to occur in any meaningful amounts in conjunction with
operation of the proposed land uses within the project site. In addition, most uses of such substances would
occur indoors. Based on the uses expected on the site, potential impacts associated with the release of toxic
air contaminants would be less than significant.
As discussed above, the Original Project would not result in any significant impacts related to exposure of
sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Since the Modified Project would result in the
same type and intensity of development on the project site, but with a slightly different configuration,
impacts related to air pollutant emissions would be comparable to those evaluated in the Certified EIR.
Furthermore, minor modifications to potential construction activities under the Modified Project related to a
possible additional seawall/bulkhead segment in Planning Area 3 and the possible relocation of the OCSD
pump station within Planning Area 2 would not represent a meaningful change in the overall air pollutant
emissions and related impacts of the Original Project. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project
would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5: Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people
As discussed in Section 4.13 of the Certified EIR with regard to the Original Project, potential sources that may
emit odors during construction activities include the use of architectural coatings and solvents and diesel -
powered on- and off-road equipment. SCAQMD Rule 1113 limits the amount of volatile organic compounds
from architectural coatings and solvents. Due to mandatory compliance with SCAQMD Rules, no
construction activities or materials are proposed which would create objectionable odors. Therefore, no
impact would occur during construction of the Original Project and no mitigation measures would be
required. Similarly, given the same type and intensity of allowable development under the Modified Project,
construction -related odor impacts are expected to be less than significant.
According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically
include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting,
refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. Neither the Original Project nor the Modified Project
include any uses identified by the SCAQMD as being associated with odors. None of the uses allowable in the
PCDP under either project would discharge any contaminants in quantities to cause injury or annoyance to
the public or property pursuant to SCAQMD Rule 402. Therefore, the Modified Project, as was the case for
the Original Project, would not create adverse odors as discussed above and would have no impact related to
objectionable odors.
Since the project site is adjacent to the OCSD wastewater pump station, the PCDP for the Original Project
required that the future development project be required to install odor filters, such as activated carbon
filters or similar, to filter the indoor air in air conditioned spaces within the development and alleviate any
potential odors associated with the facility. This requirement would reduce the potential for nuisance odors
in indoor air to a less than significant level under the Original Project and impacts were determined to be
less than significant in the Certified EIR. Under the Modified Project, the OCSD pump station may be
relocated to another location within either Planning Area 1 or Planning Area 2, subject to future site
acquisition, environmental clearance, feasibility analysis and permitting. Nonetheless, as was the case under
the Original Project, the Modified Project would require installation of air filtration to address potential
odors within buildings. Furthermore, the relocated pump station may include, subject to OCSD analysis,
modernized odor control features and/or off-site odor venting to limit the potential emission of odors from
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 37
EIR Addendum March 2016
the facility throughout operation, which would reduce the source of potential odors that may affect proposed
uses on the project site under both the Original Project and the Modified Project.
It should also be noted that the existing pump station does not currently have a dedicated odor control
facility and provides odor control in a limited capacity through chemical injections. The preferred pump
station alternatives may include, subject to OCSD analysis, a dedicated control odor building where more
advanced odor control technology could be applied and maintained as compared to existing conditions.
From an odor control perspective, the Original Project and Modified Project would allow for this public
benefit.
The possible use of Planning Area 2 for potential relocation of the pump station would move odor emissions
that currently occur on the north side of the Coast Highway Bridge to the south side of the bridge. However,
new odor control technology, as noted above, would substantially reduce odor emissions that could
potentially affect nearby sensitive receptors (i.e., residential uses on Linda Isle to the south and Bayshore
Apartments across the Newport Bay Channel to the west). Despite the potential addition of pump station
vent emissions in Planning Area 2 under the Modified Project, odor -related impacts are expected to be
comparable to or less than those of the Original Project based on the relative distances to sensitive receptors
in the area under each scenario. Specifically, under the Original Project, the closest sensitive receptors to the
pump station would be the proposed on-site residential uses, which would require air filtration as a project
design feature to address odors from the existing pump station (which assumes that the pump station has no
odor control implemented). Under the Modified Project, depending on the ultimate location of the pump
station once relocated, on-site residential uses would also include odor filtration in air conditioned spaces,
but if relocated within Planning Area 2, the pump station would be located further from on-site receptors
and would also implement odor control prior to emission of vented air, and thus impacts related to odors for
on-site receptors would be incrementally reduced. Regarding off-site receptors on Linda Isle and the
Bayshore Apartments (i.e., those closest to the potentially relocated pump station in Planning Area 2), the
distance from the relocated pump station to such receptors would be a minimum of over 400 feet, compared
to approximately 200 feet to the closest off-site receptors (i.e., residential uses within the adjacent Bayside
Village Mobile Home Park) under the Original Project.
It is important to note that prevailing winds in the project area are on -shore (typically to the north and
northeast), with only occasional shifts to off -shore winds during "Santa Ana' conditions; as such, sensitive
uses to the north of the pump station (such as the existing mobile home park) would be expected to
experience odor effects from the pump station (if any) much more frequently than uses to the south (such as
those uses on Linda Isle). Therefore, despite the potential relocation of the pump station to Planning Area 2
under the Modified Project, impacts related to odors are expected to be similar to or less than those of the
Original Project based on the following: (1) the distance of the pump station to the previously identified off-
site receptors would be more than twice that of the Original Project; (2) prevailing winds would generally
limit potential odor effects to uses to the south of Planning Area 2 despite the closer proximity compared to
the Original Project; and (3) the relocated/reconstructed pump station may implement, subject to OCSD
analysis, on-site odor control technology that would substantially lessen odor emissions from the facility
compared to existing conditions. Thus, potential relocation of the OCSD pump station under the Modified
Project would not create new sources of odors or substantially increase odors in the project area, and
impacts would be less than significant.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003
38
March 2016 EIR Addendum
In addition, the proposed dry -stack boat storage and service use within Planning Area 1 would be shifted to
the west under the Modified Project, and thus diesel emissions (and associated odors) from operation of the
fork lift and tractor systems would occur in an area further away from the nearest sensitive receptors within
the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park. However, such odors would be located closer to the public view plaza
and public bayfront promenade under the Modified Project. Nonetheless, while the lift and tractor systems
(conservatively assumed to be diesel -powered, but could also be electric or natural gas -powered with
substantially reduced pollutant and odor emissions) would release diesel emissions in proximity to these
public areas, the nature and intensity of such emissions would be no greater than those anticipated for the
Original Project, and would also be incidental (i.e., only generated when a vessel is being retrieved/launched
or being moved within the facility), and therefore odor -related impacts associated with the dry -stack boat
storage and service use in the alternate location within Planning Area 1 would be less than significant and
comparable to those of the Original Project.
Therefore, construction and operation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or
increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 6: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
As discussed in Section 4.13, Air Quality, of the Certified EIR, the Original Project was determined not to
conflict with any applicable plans, policies, or regulations regarding air quality, including the Newport Beach
General Plan, SCAG Regional Plans, and the California Coastal Act and as such impacts were determined to be
less than significant. Given the similarity in proposed development patterns allowable under both the
Original Project and the Modified Project, impacts under the Modified Project would also be considered less
than significant. Thus, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or
increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
No mitigation measures are necessary to reduce impacts for the project, beyond SCAQMD standard
requirements.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
Consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which states "[p]roject impacts are less than significant and
no mitigation measures are required."
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to air quality. Additionally, there
are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new
information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the
Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project does not meet the
standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to air quality, as provided pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PGR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 39
EIR Addendum
4.3.4 Biological Resources
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
March 2016
"Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including
biological resources. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a
significant impact relative to biological resources would occur if the project would result in the following:
Threshold 1: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, orspecial status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations by the CDFW or USFWS,•
Threshold 2: Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in the City or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the CDFW or USFWS,•
Threshold 3: Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act (possibly including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, orother means;
Threshold 4: 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;
Threshold S. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree
preservation policy or ordinance (e.g, oak trees or California walnut woodlands); or
Threshold 6: 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 Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Biological resources impacts have been previously analyzed
as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.
Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the
actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified
EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modification, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations by the CDFW or USFWS
The project site consists of developed land that includes mobile homes (within Lot Line Adjustment area),
parking lots, and limited ornamental landscaping. There were no sensitive species observed within the
project site during prior field surveys. The project site does not feature unique or rare habitats whose
alteration would significantly impact sensitive species in the area. Although not observed, sensitive species
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 40
March 2016 EIR Addendum
that have the potential to exist in the proximate area include sensitive birds such as the California brown
pelican, double -crested cormorant, and California least tern; sensitive reptiles such as Green turtles and
Hawksbill turtles; and sensitive mammals such as Harbor seals and California sea lions. Given the lack of
species and habitats located on-site, the potential for direct impacts to special status species resulting from
implementation of the Original Project is considered low, though indirect impacts resulting from project
implementation could occur. Indirect impacts to candidate, sensitive, or special status species could result
from lighting effects, noise, vehicular collisions, domestic pet predation, water quality degradation, invasive
species proliferation, or the overall increase in human activity on-site. These indirect effects can impact the
species population and result in habitat modifications. However, as concluded in Section 4.C, Biological
Resources, of the Certified EIR, such impacts would be reduced to less than significant with implementation
of applicable mitigation measures, specifically Mitigation Measures C-1 through C-4.
Similarly, given the nature and location of allowable improvements under the Modified Project, such impacts
to special status species would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of Mitigation
Measures C-1 through C-4 included in the Certified EIR. Accordingly, implementation of the Modified Project
would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or indirectly through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or the CDFG or USFWS. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in
any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed
in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2; Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in the City or regional plans, policies, or regulations by the
CDFW or USFWS
Subtidal Unvegetated Habitat
The bulkhead wall, under both the Original Project and Modified Project, is proposed to be placed above the
highest high tideline and would not result in a direct fill or coverage of subtidal unvegetated communities.
However, it is possible that the placement of the bulkhead could increase shading of habitat immediately
adjacent to the wall. Such shading could cause a reduction of primary productivity of planktonic and
scattered benthic algal communities in the shadow of the bulkhead. The degree of shading, if any, cannot be
quantified as the bulkhead design is conceptual at this time and will be subject to additional project level
environmental review associated with required site development review and CDP applications. It is
anticipated, however, that any minor reduction in primary productivity at such time as a new bulkhead or
seawall is constructed (which is not part of the current approvals), could be offset by the increased area of
soft bottom habitat created by dredging of a new water inlet for the dry stack boat storage and service
facility in Planning Area 1. As such, impacts to Subtidal unvegetated habitat would be less than significant
and comparable under both the Original Project and Modified Project.
Subtidal Vegetated Habitat
Several patches of eelgrass occur adjacent to the shoreline within the project area (see Figure 4.0-2 in
Section 4.0 of the Certified EIR). Since the bulkhead wall is proposed to be placed above the highest high tide
under both the Original Project and the Modified Project, there are no direct impacts anticipated to eelgrass
from the proposed future bulkhead wall. However, there is potential risk of eelgrass damage during
construction, either through increased turbidity associated with the construction work (from sediment or
water runoff from adjacent upland construction), from accidental damage by equipment grounding or
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 41
EIR Addendum March 2016
through vessel maneuvering (should water-based equipment be utilized at any time), or from dredging
activities associated with construction of the dry stack boat storage and service facility water inlet.
Appropriate construction measures may include marking eelgrass beds, minimizing turbidity and runoff
through implementation of an approved storm water pollution prevention plan (SPWPP), and restriction of
contractor activities to avoid damage by equipment grounding or propeller wash. Furthermore, direct
impacts to eelgrass habitat would be addressed through permit conditions required by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB), United States Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE), California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California Coastal Commission (CCC) under both the Modified Project and
the Original Project. While project plans are currently in a conceptual design phase, and therefore impacts to
subtidal vegetated habitat (including eelgrass habitat) cannot be determined or quantified at this time,
future surveys and evaluation of project -specific impacts would be required as part of future Site
Development Review. This potentially significant impact would be reduced to less than significant with
implementation of applicable mitigation provided in Section 4.0 of the Certified EIR, which is subject to
additional analysis and revision or confirmation when a specific development project is proposed. Since the
Certified EIR included mitigation measures that require further project -specific delineation and
characterization of subtidal vegetated habitat (including eelgrass beds), assessment of impacts to such
resources based on detailed project design, and replacement of affected resources in accordance with the
City of Newport Beach Eelgrass Plan and the requirements of the Southern California Eelgrass Mitigation
Policy (SCEMP), potential impacts to subtidal vegetated would be similar under both the Original Project and
Modified Project. As such, although the proposed water inlet for the dry stack boat storage and service use
in Planning Area 1 would be moved to the west under the Modified Project, with implementation of
applicable mitigation measures impacts would be comparable to those of the Original Project.
Open Water
The Original Project and the Modified Project would result in no increase in bay surface area coverage over
open water habitat. Therefore, there would be no adverse impact to foraging habitat available for
piscivorous avian species. However, the Original Project and the Modified Project may have temporary
impacts to water quality during construction, including during future dredging activities associated with
creation of a new water inlet for the dry stack boat storage and service facility in Planning Area 1 (though the
inlet under the Modified Project would be located further to the west than under the Original Project due to
the reconfiguration of land uses on the project site). Temporary effects may include localized increases in
turbidity and sedimentation, along with lowered dissolved oxygen levels associated with disturbance of
anoxic sulfidic sediments as part of dredging for the dry stack boat storage inlet. This elevated turbidity
could potentially affect the local foraging success of piscivorous avian species. These impacts are considered
to be potentially significant; however, implementation of applicable water quality BMP's and an approved
SWPPP would be used to control the distribution of elevated turbidity in the water column adjacent to the
work area. Given the similarity in allowable development on-site, the short-term nature of construction, and
containment of turbidity using BMPs, the temporary impacts to open water would be reduced to less than
significant under both the Original Project and the Modified Project.
Intertidal Riprap Revetment
An intertidal riprap revetment is located immediately south of, and adjacent to, Planning Area 2. Although
the future project is currently in the conceptual planning stages, it is not anticipated that the development,
under both the Original Project and the Modified Project, would result in loss of riprap substrate due to
bulkhead construction given its distance from the proposed bulkhead line, above which all physical
improvements would occur under both scenarios. These temporary impacts are not considered to be
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 42
March 2016 EIRAddendum
significant given the continued wide availability of comparable intertidal riprap habitat downshore of the
project site that would serve as a temporary refuge. The riprap revetments consist of loosely placed
concrete blocks with some crevices and structural complexity. However, most of the riprap revetment is
above the Mean High Tide line, and few organisms were observed utilizing the space during previous field
studies. Because of this relatively low quality habitat function of the existing riprap, along with the increase
in open water, subtidal unvegetated bottom, and associated habitat values resulting from removal of riprap
revetments, impacts to intertidal riprap revetments are not considered to be significant under both the
Original Project and the Modified Project as the contemplated improvements would be identical at this
location.
Intertidal Sand
Birds were the primary fauna observed on the intertidal sand area. No permanent impacts to intertidal sand
areas are anticipated under either the Original Project or the Modified Project. Temporary impacts may
include disturbance of loafing or foraging birds and reduced foraging area during future project
construction. However, Newport Bay provides additional intertidal sand and mudflat foraging habitat in
nearby areas and it is anticipated that birds would utilize these alternative locations during project
construction. Other potential impacts include sediment or water runoff from land-based construction; these
would be mitigated through implementation of project BMPs and an approved SWPPP, as noted above.
Additionally, construction of the proposed future bulkhead wall along the Planning Area 1 waterfront under
the Original Project and the Modified Project would not have any direct physical effects on intertidal sand, as
the proposed PCDP requires that the entirety of the wall be constructed above the Highest High Water
contour elevation of 7.86 feet relative to MLLW (0.0 feet). Indirect impacts from bulkhead construction in
proximity to intertidal sand would be addressed through implementation of appropriate BMPs, as would
occur for other construction activities on-site. Furthermore, under the Modified Project, the provision of
public access across the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park beach area within Planning Area 3 would be
addressed through preparation and implementation of the Shoreline Management Plan. The Shoreline
Management Plan would, irrespective of the specific future design of the coastal access in this area of
Planning Area 3, preserve coastal functions and processes to the maximum extent feasible while maintaining
necessary public access through the beach area and the marina accessway to the east. Implementation of the
Shoreline Management Plan, in addition to appropriate stormwater BMPs during construction, would
minimize potential adverse effects to intertidal sand in Planning Area 3 resulting from future project
implementation. As a result, any construction -related impacts to marine avian species are considered to be
less than significant under both the Original Project and the Modified Project.
Pilings
Both the Original Project and the Modified Project would result in no change to existing docks or former
bridge pilings, and no impacts are anticipated. However, BMPs would still be employed to prevent any
adverse construction -related turbidity effects in adjacent waters.
Therefore, with regard to impacts to subtidal vegetated habitat, implementation of the Modified Project
would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (possibly including, but not limited to, marsh,
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomton/SCH No. 2012101003 43
EIR Addendum March 2016
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means
As discussed in Section 4.C, Biological Resources, of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would not result in
direct impacts to wetlands; similarly, since the Modified Project would allow for the future construction of a
seawall/bulkhead in the same location, impacts under the Modified Project would be comparable to those
under the Original Project and therefore no direct wetlands impacts are anticipated. However, the proposed
PCDP under both the Original Project and the Modified Project allows for the potential construction of a
water inlet to the proposed dry stack boat storage and service facility in Planning Area 1 (albeit in different
relative locations along the waterfront), which would require dredging of a small channel from the existing
marina to the interior of the site and removal of pilings. In addition, the CCC revisions to the CLUPA would
allow for a connection of the proposed expanded public bayfront promenade through the private beach
within Planning Area 3, which may require construction of a seawall/bulkhead along this segment of the
promenade. However, while the need for seawall/bulkhead improvements at this location has not yet been
determined, if such improvements are ultimately deemed necessary as part of a future specific development
proposal, the design and construction of this facility would be carried out in accordance with the provisions
of the Modified Project PCDP and proposed Shoreline Management Plan, as applicable. As such, irrespective
of the need for or actual implementation of a seawall/bulkhead across the private beach area in Planning
Area 3, such improvements would occur above the highest high water elevation such that direct impacts to
wetlands would not occur, as was the case for the Original Project as evaluated in the Certified EIR.
Although dredging of the marina is currently allowed when permitted by the City of Newport Beach, this
dredging activity would also require permits from affected resource agencies such as the ACOE, CDFW, CCC,
and RWQCB for dredging or filling in jurisdictional waters. As noted above, the specific design of future
improvements has not been determined, and therefore it is not currently possible to quantify the areal
extent of wetland impacts associated with construction of the proposed water inlet under either the Original
Project or Modified Project. However, further analysis of wetlands impacts, including a project -specific
jurisdictional delineation, would be required as part of future Site Development Review once a development
proposal is brought forth. Nonetheless, the creation of new open water habitat through construction of the
proposed inlet under either the Original Project or the Modified Project could potentially offset the loss of a
limited area of wetland habitat (i.e., small strip of intertidal sand). Although the specific requirements of the
resource agencies cannot be determined at this time, mitigation for wetlands impacts would generally
include on- or off-site creation, restoration, or enhancement of wetland habitat. With implementation of
applicable mitigation measures, impacts to wetlands would be less than significant under the Modified
Project and similar to those of the Original Project. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would
not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4; 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
The study area supports live-in and movement habitat for species on a local scale (i.e., some limited live-in
and at least marginal movement habitat for reptile, bird, and mammal species), but it likely provides little to
no function to facilitate wildlife movement for wildlife species on a regional scale, and the site itself is not
identified as a regionally important dispersal or seasonal migration corridor. Movement on a local scale
likely occurs with species adapted to urban environments due to the high level of development in the vicinity
of the study area. Although implementation of the Modified Project, like the Original Project evaluated in the
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 44
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Certified EIR, would result in disturbances to local wildlife movement within the site, those species adapted
to urban areas would be expected to persist in the study area following future construction. As such, impacts
under both the Original Project and Modified Project would be less than significant and no mitigation
measures would be required. Similarly, since the study area does not function as a regional wildlife corridor
and is not known to support wildlife nursery area(s), no impacts would occur under the Original Project or
the Modified Project and no mitigation measures would be required.
The study area has the potential to support both raptor and songbird nests due to the presence of limited
trees on-site, in addition to limited areas of shrubs and ground cover primarily on the project site perimeter.
Nesting activity typically occurs from February 15 to August 31. Disturbing or destroying active nests is a
violation of the MBTA (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.). In addition, nests and eggs are protected under Fish and Game
Code Section 3503. The removal of vegetation during the breeding season is considered a potentially
significant impact as defined by the thresholds of significance provided in Section 4.0 of the Certified EIR.
Any potential impacts to raptor and songbird nests would be considered potentially significant. Compliance
with the MBTA, as required by Mitigation Measure C-2, would reduce impacts to a less than significant level
under both the Original Project and the Modified Project, as site conditions would be identical under both
scenarios and implementation of future development would be comparable.
Accordingly, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as
tree preservation policy or ordinance (e.g., oak trees or California walnut
woodlands)
The Original Project, as discussed in Section 4.0 of the Certified EIR, would not conflict with applicable
policies contained in the City's General Plan, Local Coastal Program CLUP, and the California Coastal Act
regarding biological resources. As shown in Tables 4.0-2, 4.0-3, and 4.0-4, in Section 4.C, impacts related to
consistency with the Newport Beach General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and the California Coastal Act
regarding biological resources would be less than significant. Given the overall similarity in allowable
development pattern and intensity under both the Original Project and Modified Project, the Modified
Project would also not conflict with the applicable policies of relevant plans and other regulations.
Accordingly, the Modified Project would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 6: Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State Habitat
Conservation Plan
The project site is located within the Coastal Subarea of the Orange County Central -Coastal Natural
Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP). However, the site is designated as "Developed" in the NCCP, and is
not within an area designated as a preserve under the NCCP. The closest designated NCCP preserve is Upper
Newport Bay Ecological Reserve located approximately 1,000 feet northeast of the project site at the closest
point. The project site is not located within the plan areas of any habitat conservation plans other than the
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012101003 45
EIR Addendum March 2016
NCCP. It should be noted that while the De Anza Bayside Marsh Peninsula (within Planning Area 5 of the
project site) is designated as an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) in the City's General Plan and CLUP,
no physical changes to this portion of the site are contemplated under either the Original Project or the
Modified Project. As such, no impact would occur in this regard. Therefore, implementation of the Modified
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures C-1 through C-12), which
would address impacts related to biological resources. Mitigation Measure C-1 requires monitoring,
construction delays, minimum separation distances, and if necessary cessation of construction activities to
avoid impacts to least terns in the area. Similarly, Mitigation Measure C-2 requires surveys for nesting
migratory birds in the project area, and avoidance of nests during the nesting season. Mitigation Measures
C-3 and C-4 require monitoring for marine mammals in the area for in -water work and vehicle speed
limitations for boats operating in the area. Mitigation Measures C-5 through C-7 require monitoring,
avoidance, protection, and if necessary replacement of eelgrass habitat for impacts to eelgrass during in -
water or near -shore construction activities. Mitigation Measure C-8 requires surveys to determine the
presence or absence of the invasive Caulerpa seaweed species. Mitigation Measures C-9 through C-11
require implementation of stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize water quality -
related indirect impacts to wetlands and open water habitat. Mitigation Measure C-12 requires that a
project -specific jurisdictional delineation be prepared for future development on-site to determine the exact
extent of impacts to wetlands. These mitigation measures would be implemented, as appropriate, under the
Modified Project as proposed for the Original Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which identifies that compliance
with existing federal, State, and local regulations along with implementation of applicable mitigation
measures (Mitigation Measures C-1 through C-12) would mitigate biological resources impacts to a level
considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to biological resources.
Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be
undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to biological resources, as
provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.5 Cultural Resources
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 46
March 2016
EIR Addendum
'Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including
cultural resources. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a
significant impact relative to cultural resources would occur if the project would result in the following:
Threshold 1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in
§15064.5
Threshold 2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to §15064.5,•
Threshold 3; Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature; or
Threshold 4: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside offormal cemeteries.
Threshold S. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Cultural resources impacts have been previously analyzed as
part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.
Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed, to make the previous document adequate to cover the
actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified
EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as
defined in §15064.5
As a result of the archival records search and discussed in Section 4.1), Cultural Resources, of the Certified
EIR, it was determined that no known historic resources are located on these parcels. However, the project
site contains the Storage Garages & Marina/Bayside Village Guest Parking constructed in 1961, two
structures comprising the Orange County Sanitation District 5 Bay Bridge Station (pump station) that were
built in 1966, and Bayside Village mobile home park itself was developed in 1961. Current CEQA Guidelines
establish 45 years of age as the threshold at which buildings should be evaluated as historic resources. As
these structures/uses are approximately 52 and 47 years old, respectively, they require evaluation as
potential historical resources. Property research was conducted, a historic context prepared, and the
identified buildings were evaluated for their potential as historical resources. The storage garages, Bayside
Village mobile home park, and the pump station structures do not possess sufficient historical or
architectural importance to reach the threshold of significance as historical resources. In addition, no known
adjacent historic resources or eligible contributors to a historic district are within a quarter -mile of the
subject property. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, the proposed future redevelopment of the project site under
either the Original Project or the Modified Project would result in no impact to historical resources. Also, the
proposed redevelopment of the project site under either the Original Project or the Modified Project would
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012101003 47
EIR Addendum March 2016
not impact any historical resources in the surrounding setting. The project area was developed during the
mid -20th century with a mobile home park, parking lots, and docks; therefore the area has been redeveloped
and lacks integrity for consideration as a potential historical resource or cultural landscape. Furthermore,
Newport Bay has undergone substantial alterations over the years including changes in configuration,
introduction of industrial and commercial activities, as well as construction of transportation, recreational
and residential improvements. As such, no indirect impacts to historic resources would result from future
project implementation, and no further analysis of this issue is necessary. Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to §15064.5
Results of the cultural resources records search revealed that no prehistoric or historic archaeological sites have
been recorded on the project site itself. However, 18 prehistoric and historic archaeological resources have
been recorded within one-half mile of the project site, several of which are less than a quarter -mile from the
project site. The project site is located within an urbanized area, and the entire site has been subject to
disruption by both development and flooding activities over the years. Thus, surficial archaeological resources
that may have existed at one time have likely been previously disturbed or displaced. Nevertheless, both the
Original Project and Modified Project propose a very similar grading plan with excavations that would extend
beyond the six to eight feet of fill material that covers the majority of the project site, thus encountering
previously undisturbed soils and sediments. While discovery of prehistoric archaeological remains in the fill
deposits on the project site are unlikely, excavation occurring below the fill levels could potentially encounter
prehistoric archaeological remains. However, with implementation of applicable mitigation measures, provided
below, impacts to archaeological and Native American resources under both the Original Project and the
Modified Project would be reduced to less than significant As such, implementation of the Modified Project
would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold3: Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature
As discussed in Section 4.D of the Certified EIR, the project site is located on fill material which ranges in
depth due to disturbances from previous on-site development and demolitions. Although the project site has
been previously disturbed through grading and/or development, it is likely that the deeper excavations
under the Original Project would encounter previously undisturbed native soil/sediment that may contain
intact paleontological resources. Therefore, if deeper excavations occur, there may the possibility of
encountering significant vertebrate fossils per the results of the paleontological records search through
NHMLAC. However, mitigation provided in Section 4.D of the Certified EIR would be implemented, as
necessary, to reduce impacts to less than significant. As noted above, based on the similarity in allowable
development on-site under both the Original Project and the Modified Project, grading and excavation activities
are anticipated to be very similar under both scenarios. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project
would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 48
March 2016 EIRAddendum
As discussed in Certified EIR Section 4.D, a Sacred Lands File search revealed that no recorded human
remains have been identified within the project site. The project site is currently developed with multiple
uses and it is likely that resources that may have once existed have now been displaced by disturbances
associated with the current development. As a result, the overall sensitivity of the project site with respect
to buried human remains appears to be low, irrespective of the specific development ultimately constructed.
However, if such resources are accidentally encountered during implementation of the either the Original
Project or the Modified Project, mitigation provided in the Certified EIR would ensure that potential impacts
to the resources are reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, implementation of the Modified
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
As summarized in Section 4.1) of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would comply with all applicable State
and federal regulations regarding cultural resources, including applicable policies of the City's General Plan,
CLUP, and the CCA, and therefore no significant impacts regarding conflicts with such laws would result from
project implementation. Given the similarity in allowable development under both the Original Project and
the Modified Project, impacts under the Modified Project regarding consistency with regulatory framework are
also considered less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in
any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed
in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures D-1 through D-3), which
would address impacts related to cultural resources. Mitigation Measure D-1 requires future site-specific
archaeological surveys and assessments as warranted by sensitivity, and collection and documentation of
recovered resources, if any. Similarly, Mitigation Measure D-2 requires monitoring, recovery, and
documentation of any recovered paleontological resources. Mitigation Measure D-3 requires consultation
with the County Coroner and Native American tribes in the event human remains are encountered during
project implementation. These mitigation measures would be implemented, as appropriate, under the
Modified Project as proposed for the Original Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which identifies that impacts to
archaeological and paleontological resources, and human remains could be mitigated to a level considered
less than significant.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to cultural resources.
Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be
undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012103003 49
EIRAddendum
March 2016
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to cultural resources, as
provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.6 Geology and Soils
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
'Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including
geology and soils. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a
significant impact due to geology and soils would occur if the project would result in one or more of the
following:
Threshold 1: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss,
injury or death, involving:
• Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence ofa known fault,
• Strong seismic ground shaking,
• Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction,. or
• Landslides;
Threshold 2: Result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
Threshold 3: 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.
Threshold 4: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the California Building Code (2010),
creating substantial risks to life or property.
Threshold S. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.
Threshold 6: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Geology and soils impacts have been previously analyzed as
part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.
Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the
actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified
EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003
50
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury or death, involving:
• Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault,
• Strong seismicground shaking,
• Seismic-relatedground failure, including liquefaction, or
• Landslides,
Threshold 3: Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Fault Rupture
The project site is not located within an established Alquist-Priolo Fault zone. The nearest active faults to
the project site are the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone (L.A. Basin and Off -shore segments) located 2.5 and
2.8 miles from the site respectively, and the San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust, located approximately 6.4 miles
from the project site. Active faults with the potential for surface rupture are not known to be located
beneath the project site. Therefore, the potential to expose people to impacts from fault rupture resulting
from seismic activity during the design life of the buildings is considered less than significant under both the
Original Project or the Modified Project, as no fault rupture could occur under either development scenario.
Seismic Ground Shaking
As discussed in Section 4.E, Geology and Soils, of the Certified EIR, the project site is located in a seismically
active region. There is potential for significant ground shaking at the project site during a strong seismic
event on the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone and other active regional faults in the Southern California area.
According to the Geotechnical Feasibility Study, based on the location of the faults in the region, the
maximum credible earthquake (MCE) is 0.743g for the site. Ground shaking at this intensity could result in
significant damage to buildings and improvements associated with project implementation under both the
Original Project and the Modified Project. This is considered to be a potentially significant impact. The City
of Newport Beach requires that all new construction meet or exceed the City ordinances and policies and the
latest standards of the California Building Code (CBC) for construction in seismic hazard zones, which
requires structural design that can accommodate maximum ground accelerations expected from known
faults. While the Original Project and Modified Project would both be required to comply with applicable
seismic -related regulatory requirements, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.E-1 would further ensure
that potentially significant seismic -related groundshaking impacts would be reduced to a less than
significant level. Mitigation Measure 4.E-1 would ensure that the recommendations in the design -level
geotechnical report are included in the future project's site preparation and building design specifications.
As such, seismicity in the region and in the project area would have a less -than -significant impact on the
project with implementation of the prescribed mitigation measures and compliance with applicable
regulatory requirements under both the Original Project and the Modified Project.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomtlon/SCH No. 2012301003 51
EIR Addendum March 2016
Ground Failure
As indicated in the Existing Conditions section above, the project site is located in an area that has been
identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to liquefaction, which can also result in
secondary effects such as lateral spreading and other earthquake -induced ground settlement. However, with
implementation of applicable mitigation measures, impacts to future development pursuant to the Original
Project or the Modified Project would be reduced to less than significant.
Landslides
No slope areas considered susceptible to landslides or other slope failure exist on-site. Although the raised
Coast Highway corridor bisecting the project site is sloped down to ground level on either side of the bridge
approach, the roadway was engineered and constructed to industry standards, and therefore the potential
for slope failure in this area is considered low. Given the distance of natural slope areas from the project site
and relatively flat topography on-site, less than significant impacts related to landslides would occur under
both the Original Project and the Modified Project.
Overall, the recommendations presented in the design -level analysis per Mitigation Measure 4.E-1, along
with the project's compliance to applicable codes and regulations, including the CBC and City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code, would ensure that all potentially significant seismic and geologic stability impacts are
reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result
in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously
analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Result insubstantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.
Although construction activities under either the Original Project or the Modified Project would have the
potential to result in the erosion of soils, this potential would be reduced by implementation of standard
erosion control measures imposed during site preparation and grading activities. For instance, the future
project would be subject to all existing regulations associated with the protection of water quality.
Construction activities would be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Permit issued by the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB) and in accordance with the project's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP). The SWPPP would incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) in accordance with the
applicable local and state regulations to control erosion during the project's construction period. BMPs
could include, but are not limited to, water bars, silt fences, staked straw bales, development of and
adherence to the construction SWPPP, avoidance of water bodies during construction, and development of
and adherence to erosion and sediment control BMPs. Section 4.H, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft
EIR includes a detailed discussion of the applicable regulatory requirements and the projects consistency
with such requirements. Implementation of a SWPPP and associated BMPs consistent with applicable
regulatory requirements would ensure that impacts pertaining to soil erosion or loss of topsoil impacts from
construction activities are less than significant.
During operation of the future project, site design features and BMPs included in the project's WQMP, as
described in detail in Section 4.H of the Certified EIR, would be implemented to ensure that erosion and
runoff impacts remain less than significant. As discussed in Section 4.H, due to the nature of the high
imperviousness associated with the existing conditions, proposed runoff rates would remain consistent or
decrease due to the minor increase in landscaping under the proposed condition. Accordingly, the post -
project site would not result in significant hydrology impacts downstream such that erosion would occur on -
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 52
March 2016 EIRAddendum
or off-site. Implementation of applicable site design features and BMPs in the WQMP, which is required
under both the Original Project and the Modified Project, as well as compliance with applicable regulatory
and permit requirements discussed in Section 4.H, would ensure that impacts related to erosion and topsoil
loss during operation of the project are less than significant.
As such, a significant impact associated with erosion would have no potential to occur, as a SWPPP and
WQMP would be required to be implemented under both the Original Project and the Modified Project.
Therefore, long-term operation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the California Building
Code (2010), creating substantial risks to life or property.
Expansive soils are typically associated with fine-grained clayey soils that have the potential to shrink and
swell with repeated cycles of wetting and drying. The project area is characterized by sandy granular soils
that exhibit low clay content and very low expansion potential. Although not anticipated, expansive soils, if
encountered within the project site, would be removed and/or replaced as part of standard construction
practices pursuant to the City of Newport Beach and/or CBC building requirements, and would be carried
out as needed under either the Original Project or the Modified Project. Therefore, project implementation
under either development scenario would result in less than significant impacts associated with expansive
soils and substantial risks to life or property would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the Modified
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5: Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of
wastewater.
The project site is located in an urbanized area served by existing wastewater infrastructure, and therefore
no septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be required under the Original Project or
the Modified Project. As such, the Modified Project would not result in impacts related to the ability of soils
to support septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified En
Threshold & Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
As discussed in Section 4.E of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would comply with all applicable federal,
state, and local laws and regulations related to geology and soils. The City of Newport Beach General Plan
contains various policies related to geology and soils, including policies from the Harbor and Bay Element,
Public Natural Resources Element, Safety Element. In addition, the City's Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (CLUP) and the California Coastal Act also contain policies relevant geology and soils that are
applicable to the project. Given the similarity in allowable development proposed under both the Original
Project and the Modified Project, the Modified Project would also be consistent with the applicable policies of
the City's General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan and the California Coastal Act, and therefore impacts in this
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 53
EIRAddendum March 2016
regard would be less than significant. Implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included one mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure E-1), which would address impacts
related to geology and soils. Mitigation Measure E-1 requires that a site-specific, design -level geotechnical
investigation be prepared for each development parcel by a registered geotechnical engineer. This
mitigation measure would be implemented, as appropriate, under the Modified Project as proposed for the
Original Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which states "[c]ompliance with
applicable regulatory requirements and implementation of the prescribed mitigation measure would reduce
potentially significant geology and soils impacts to a less than significant level."
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to geology, soils, and mineral
resources. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will
be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to geology, soils, and
mineral resources, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
'Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines defines a threshold of significance as an identifiable quantitative,
qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means
the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means
the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant. CEQA gives wide latitude to lead agencies
in determining what impacts are significant and does not prescribe thresholds of significance, analytical
methodologies, or specific mitigation measures. CEQA leaves the determination of significance to the
reasonable discretion of the lead agency and encourages lead agencies to develop and publish thresholds of
significance to use in determining the significance of environmental effects. However, the SCAQMD, the City
of Newport Beach, and Orange County have notyet established specific quantitative significance thresholds
for GHG emissions. The regulations required to meet the state goals under AB 32 are still under
development. Additionally, OPR released preliminary draft CEQA guideline amendmentsfor GHG emissions
in January2009. OPR does not identify a threshold of significance for GHG emissions, nor has it prescribed
assessment methodologies or specific mitigation measures. The preliminary draft amendments encourage
lead agencies to consider many factors in performing a CEQA analysis, but preserve the discretion granted
by CEQA to lead agencies in making their own determinations based on substantial evidence. Theguideline
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012101003 54
March 2016 EIR Addendum
amendments augmented Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the environmental checklistform, to include a
section on greenhouse gas emissions. The draft guideline amendments suggested thresholds to determine
the significance of greenhouse gas emissions impacts. As such, a project would have a significant impact
relative to greenhouse gas emissions if it would.
Threshold 1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment based on any applicable threshold ofsignificance; and
Threshold 2: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions ofgreenhousegases."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Greenhouse gas emissions impacts have been previously
analyzed as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA
Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to
cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to
the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment, based on any applicable threshold of
significance
As discussed in Section 4.F, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the Certified EIR, construction and operation of the
Original Project would result in the increased generation of greenhouse gases and would exceed the
screening level resulting in a significant impact with regard to GHG emissions. However, with
implementation of applicable mitigation measures, the Original Project was determined to have a less than
significant impact related to GHG emissions. Since the Modified Project would result in an identical mix of
potential land uses on-site as under the Original Project, with comparable traffic and associated emissions,
impacts related to GHG emissions are expected to be similar to those of the Original Project and would be
less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts
or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified
EIR
Threshold 2. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions ofgreenhouse gases
As discussed in Section 4.17 of the Certified EIR, future development pursuant to the Original Project PCDP
would meet the mandatory measures of the CALGreen Code by incorporating strategies such as providing
Energy Star dishwashers, low flow water fixtures, tankless gas water heaters, on -demand hot water
circulation pumps, installation of energy-efficient double -paned windows and high -efficiency irrigation
systems, on-site water catchment and retention, and use of carpets and trims which contain recycled
content. The PCDP under the Modified Project would also include these provisions.
Since AB 32 sets statewide targets for future GHG emissions, the Scoping Plan and other implementing tools
of the law are clear that the reductions are not expected to occur uniformly from all sources or sectors. Table
4.F-4 in Section 4.17 contains a list of numerous GHG-reduction strategies potentially applicable to the
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomtion/SCH No. 2012101003 55
EIR Addendum March 2016
Original Project, the identified related projects, and future development similar in scope and location.
Included are the regulations or guidelines from which the strategies were developed. The Newport Beach
General Plan does not have specific policies that relate to greenhouse gas emissions or global climate change.
However, the General Plan does contain many goals and policies in various Elements that relate to water and
energy conservation, alternative transportation, and sustainability. The Original Project would not conflict
with applicable policies contained in the City s General Plan regarding these issues, which indirectly relate to
greenhouse gas emissions, and thus impacts related to consistency with the Newport Beach General Plan
related to greenhouse gas emissions would be less than significant. The Original Project's consistency with
the applicable policies of the California Coastal Act relative to greenhouse gas emissions was evaluated in
Table 4.17-6 of the Certified EIR. As discussed in Table 4.17-6, the Original Project would not conflict with the
applicable policies of the CCA, and as such impacts in this regard would be less than significant. The Original
Project would not conflict with local policies and ordinances, it is consistent with the overarching regulation
to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, implementation of the Original Project would not conflict with plans for
reducing GHG emissions and impacts relative to this threshold would be less than significant.
Based on the similarity in allowable development under the Original Project and the Modifled Project in
terms of land use type and intensity, and associated potential for GHG emissions, it is anticipated that
impacts related to conflicts with applicable GHG reduction plans and regulations would be less than
significant. Thus, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase
the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included several mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures F-1 through F-14), which
would address impacts related to greenhouse gas emissions. Mitigation Measures F-1 through F-14 require
that a number of energy, water, and traffic reduction measures in order to minimize GHG emissions. Such
measures include requirements for energy- and water -efficient appliances, fixtures, and landscaping during
project operation, and use of high efficiency construction equipment and limitation of construction vehicle
idling times. These mitigation measures would be implemented, as appropriate, under the Modified Project
as proposed for the Original Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which concludes that
implementation of applicable mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures F-1 through F-14) would mitigate
greenhouse gas emissions impacts to a level considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to greenhouse gas emissions.
Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be
undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to greenhouse gas
emissions, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012101003 56
March 2016
4.3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
FIR Addendum
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including
hazards and hazardous materials. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA
Guidelines, a significant impact relative to hazards and hazardous materials would occur if the project
would result in one or more of the following:
Threshold 1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use,
or disposal of hazardous materials;
Threshold 2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the
environment
Threshold 3: Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school,•
Threshold 4: Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment;
Threshold 5: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area;
Threshold 6: 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;
Threshold 7: Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan; or
Threshold 8: Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands.
Threshold 9: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hazards and hazardous materials -related impacts have been
previously analyzed as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpontion/SCH No. 2012101003 57
EIR Addendum March 2016
CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate
to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to
the Certified EIR.
SummaryAnalysis
Threshold 1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials
Hazardous materials may be used during the construction phase of the project's development components
under both the Original Project and the Modified Project. Hazardous materials that may be used include, but
are not limited to, fuels (gasoline and diesel), paints and paint thinners and possibly herbicides and
pesticides. Generally these materials would be used in concentrations that would not pose significant
threats during the transport, use and storage of such materials. Furthermore, it is assumed that potentially
hazardous materials would be contained, stored, and used in accordance with manufacturers' instructions
and handled in compliance with applicable standards and regulations, including California Occupational
Safety and Health Administration requirements, and Title 8 and 22 of the Code of California Regulations.
Accordingly, risks associated with hazards to the public or environment posed by the transport, use or
disposal of hazardous materials during construction are considered less than significant due to compliance
with applicable standards and regulations.
Over the long-term, the future development allowable under either the Original Project or the Modified
Project would not involve facilities that include the storage, use, disposal, or generation of substantial
amounts of hazardous materials or wastes. While ongoing landscape and building maintenance activities
may involve the occasional use of hazardous materials, potentially toxic or hazardous compounds associated
with such maintenance activities typically consist of readily available solvents, cleaning compounds, paint,
herbicides, and pesticides. These hazardous materials are regulated by stringent federal and state laws
mandating the proper transport, use, and storage of hazardous materials in accordance with product
labeling. Similarly, proposed dry -stack boat storage on-site may involve the use and storage of vehicle fuels
such as gasoline and diesel fuel for boats, and possibly propane fuel for forklifts. However, the use and
storage of these substances is not considered to present a health risk when used in accordance with
manufacturer specifications and with compliance to applicable regulations.
Overall, based on the similarity in allowable development under either scenario, construction and operation
of the Original Project or the Modified Project would result in a less than significant impact with regard to
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials relative to the safety of the public or the
environment. As such, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or
increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous
materials into the environment
Threshold 4. Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012101003 58
March 2016 EIR Addendum
As discussed in Section 4.G, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the Certified EIR, hazardous materials site
investigations for the project site identified a number of Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs)
affecting the project site. It was determined that, based on the presence of these RECs, implementation of
the Original Project could create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the
environment. Also, it was determined that while the site is not a listed hazardous materials site, there is the
potential for hazardous materials to be encountered during construction activities that could create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment. These potentially significant impacts, however, would
be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of the prescribed mitigation measures and
compliance to applicable regulatory requirements. Since the Original Project and the Modified Project would
allow for a very similar development pattern on the project site, it is anticipated impacts under the Modified
Project would also be considered less than significant with implementation of the prescribed mitigation
measures and compliance to applicable regulatory requirements. Therefore, implementation of the Modified
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3. Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school
There are no schools within 0.25 -mile of the project site. Newport Harbor High School is the closest school
to the project site; however, it is 1h -mile from the project site at the closest point. Accordingly, the Modified
Project would have no potential to emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school, and a significant
impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
Threshold 5. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area
Since a portion of the project site is located within the southernmost boundary of the AELUP for JWA, the
project applicant is required to demonstrate compliance with the guidelines contained in the AELUP. The
Original Project was evaluated for consistency with the current AELUP for JWA in Section 4.1, Land Use and
Planning, of the Certified EIR. As discussed therein, the Original Project would be consistent with the
applicable policies in the AELUP for JWA, including those related maximum height restrictions based on FAA
requirements. Also, the project site is not located within the Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zones or the
Accident Potential Zone for JWA, as designated in the City's General Plan (and illustrated in Figure SS of the
General Plan Safety Element). As such, the Original Project would not result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area, and impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Based on
the foregoing analysis, and the similarity in allowable development on-site under the Modified Project
relative to the Original Project, implementation of the Modified Project is not expected to result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012101003 59
EIRAddendum March 2016
Threshold 6. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area
As concluded in the Certified EIR, there are no existing private airstrips within the City of Newport Beach or
within the immediate vicinity of the project site. Accordingly, the Modified Project would not expose people
residing or working in the Project area to safety hazards associated with a private airstrip, and a significant
impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
Threshold 7. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan
As discussed in Section 4.G of the Certified EIR, traffic system improvements at the intersection of East Coast
Highway and Bayside Drive, as well as future water pipeline relocation activities within the East Coast
Highway or Bayside Drive right-of-ways, which would be necessary under the Original Project, could
temporarily restrict vehicular access to and from the project site while construction activities are occurring
if a traffic control program is not in place. As such, future development could potentially interfere with
emergency access to, or evacuation from, the project site and surrounding properties during construction
activities. This is considered a potentially significant impact, and thus Mitigation Measures 4.G-6, 4.G-7, and
4.G-8 are required to address this impact. The mitigation measures require implementation of a
Construction Traffic Management Plan, Traffic Control Plan, and proper notification to the police and fire
departments to disclose and identify temporary closures and alternative travel routes. Implementation of
the prescribed mitigation measure would ensure that construction -related activities under the Original
Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan. With implementation of these mitigation measures, potentially
significant construction -related impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Similarly, as the
Modified Project would require nearly identical traffic -related and utility improvements as those under the
Original Project, impacts regarding emergency response and evacuation plans during construction would be
comparable and would be less than significant with mitigation.
Given the comparable type and intensity of development on-site under both the Original Project and the
Modified Project, operational impacts regarding emergency response and evaluation plans are expected to
be similar. Therefore, while the Modified Project, like the Original Project, would involve the addition of
residents, employees, and shoppers to the project area, implementation of the future development would not
have a notable impact on the function of established emergency management and response plans. All future
development projects in the City, including the Modified Project, would be required to provide sufficient
emergency access, as required by the City's Fire Prevention Guidelines. Furthermore, given that future on-
site development would be subject to review and approval by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD),
which is most directly responsible for emergency response in the project vicinity, the systems and facilities
designed to protect public health and safety during emergencies would be adequate to effectively implement
emergency management procedures within the project area. Coordination with the NBFD would preclude
the possibility of inadequate access for emergency vehicles at the project site. As no apparent conflicts with
adopted emergency response or evacuation plans would result from Modified Project implementation,
impacts would be less than significant in this regard. As such, operation of future development within the
project site would not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan and/or the emergency evacuation
plan and impacts would be less than significant.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 60
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 8: 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
There is no native habitat or extensive vegetation susceptible to wildland fires on the project site. As
illustrated in Figure S4 of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Safety Element, the project site is located
in an area designated as "low/none wildfire hazard." Future development under either the Original Project
or the Modified Project, therefore, would not place buildings or structures at any risk from wildland fires,
and no impacts would occur. Accordingly, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any
new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in
the Certified EIR.
Threshold % Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.
Future development of the project site under either the Original Project or the Modified Project would be
required to comply with all applicable rules and regulations related to hazardous materials and emergency
response/access, including federal and State laws, and local policies of the Newport Beach General Plan. An
evaluation of the Original Projects consistency with each of the applicable policies of the General Plan Safety
Element is provided in Table 4.G-2 in Section 4.G of the Certified EIR. As shown in Table 4.G-2, the Original
Project would not conflict with the applicable policies contained in the General Plan Safety Element, and
therefore regulatory consistency impacts regarding hazards and hazardous materials would be less than
significant. Given the similarity in allowable development under the Modified Project, impacts in this regard
would also be less than significant, and thus implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any
new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in
the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures G-1 through G-8), which
would address impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. Mitigation Measure G-1 requires that a
remediation/removal plan be submitted and implemented for the existing on-site 550 -gallon UST.
Mitigation Measures G-2 and G3 require testing and proper disposal of contaminated dredged soils and
dewatering discharges. Mitigation Measures G-4 and G-5 require surveys for lead-based paint and asbestos
in all on-site structures to be demolished. Preparation of a Construction Management Plan to address
construction -related hazards is required by Mitigation Measure G-6, while Mitigation Measures G-7 and G-8
require preparation of a Traffic Control Plan for construction activities and coordination with the police and
fire departments regarding temporary street or lane closures during construction. These mitigation
measures would be implemented, as appropriate, under the Modified Project as proposed for the Original
Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012303003 61
EIRAddendum March 2016
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The proposed project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which identifies that impacts to
hazards and hazardous materials relevant to the Project could be mitigated to a level considered less than
significant. No impacts to hazards and hazardous materials were identified for the Modified Project.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to hazards and hazardous
materials. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will
be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to hazards and hazardous
materials, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
'Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including
hydrology and water quality. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA
Guidelines, a significant impact to hydrology and water quality would occur if the project would result in
one or more of the following:
Threshold 1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements;
Threshold 2: 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;
Threshold 3: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through alteration
of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site,
Threshold 4. 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- or off-site;
Threshold 5: 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;
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 62
March 2016
Threshold 6: Otherwise substantially degrade water quality;
EIRAddendum
Threshold 7: Place housing within a 100 year food plain as mapped on federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Maps or otherfood hazard delineation maps;
Threshold 8: Place within a 100 yearfood plain structures which would impede or redirectfood flows,•
Threshold 9: 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, or
Threshold 10: Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudfow.
Threshold 11: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Hydrology and water quality -related impacts have been
previously analyzed as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City
CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document
adequate to cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an
Addendum to the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements
Threshold 6: Otherwise substantially degrade water quality
As discussed in Section 4.H, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Certified EIR, construction and operation of
the Original Project would comply with all applicable regulatory requirements regarding water quality.
Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements (which require among other things implementation of
a SWPPP to address water quality impacts during construction activities) and implementation of the project
design features, including BMPs as part of the projects WQMP, would ensure that construction and
operational water quality impacts are less than significant. In general, as discussed above, future
development under the Modified Project would not vary substantially from that allowable under the Original
Project, and further, the Modified Project would be subject to the same stormwater regulatory requirements
and would implement a similar suite of Project Design Features (including BMPs as part of a project -specific
WQMP), which would preclude significant adverse impacts to water quality. In addition, as relates to the
provision of public access across the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park private beach area in Planning Area
3, including the potential addition of a new seawall/bulkhead at this location, such access and related
improvements would be carried out in accordance with the proposed Shoreline Management Plan and all
applicable construction -related and operational BMPs required by the future project -specific SWPPP and
WQMP. As such, given implementation of a project -specific SWPPP during construction activities and a
WQMP for long-term operations, impacts under the Modified Project would be comparable to those of the
Original Project and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the Modified
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003
63
EIR Addendum March 2016
Project would not result in any new adverse impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: 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
Implementation of the Original Project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge. The Original Project would incrementally decrease (by approximately 5%) the
amount of impervious surfaces on-site.4 Therefore, the Original Project was determined not to result in a net
increase in impermeable surface area on-site and would not adversely affect groundwater recharge or
increase runoff volumes conveyed from the site during storm events. Additionally, the lack of increase in
impervious surfaces on-site would be consistent with Policy HB 8.20 (Impervious Surfaces) of the Newport
Beach General Plan Harbor and Bay Element, which requires new development to minimize the creation of
new, or increase in existing, impervious surfaces. Furthermore, the project site is not located within a
designated groundwater recharge area and does not serve as a primary source of groundwater recharge. As
such, impacts would be less than significant. Based on the similarity in development patterns allowable on
the project site under the Original Project and the Modified Project, the extent of impervious surfaces is
anticipated to also be comparable, and thus impacts under the Modified Project would be considered less
than significant. Accordingly, implementation of the Modified Project would not 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, and implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including
through alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site
Threshold 4: 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- or
off-site
Threshold 5: 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
As discussed in Section 4.H of the Certified EIR, the entire site currently generally drains into the Upper
Newport Bay at three main locations. As defined in the Existing Hydrology map (see Figure 4.H-2 in Section
4.H), Area Al combines with existing off-site flows emanating from East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive,
which are then conveyed to a local low point just adjacent to the existing sewer pump station. These flows
4 Pascoe Engineering, Inc. 'Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (P-WQMP) Back Bay Landing Redevelopment Project."
August 9, 2012.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003
64
March 2016 EIR Addendum
are tied into an existing 30 -inch storm drain within East Coast Highway that flows westerly through the
project site before discharging into the Upper Newport Bay. Area A2 sheet flows to a low point within this
sub area, which collects flows utilizing two grate inlets that convey the on-site run off into the Back Bay via
an 8 -inch diameter HDPE Pipe. Area A3 is the portion of the project beneath PCH, and currently sheet flows
into the Upper Newport Bay. Based upon field surveys and site inspections, drainage facilities do not appear
to exist within this area.
The proposed condition under the Original Project would be designed to maintain the overall existing
drainage pattern in which the entire site would convey its runoff directly into the Upper Newport Bay. The
off-site flows as described in the existing condition would be routed around the project site and tied into the
existing 30 -inch storm drain within East Coast Highway, approximately 350 feet upstream of the current tie
in location. The Modified Project would not change the proposed drainage plan for the project site, and thus
hydrology and drainage conditions are assumed to be comparable to those under the Original Project.
Generally, the Modified Project (like the Original Project) would be designed to convey storm flows in
general conformance to the existing drainage patterns. However, all on-site flows would be directed to on-
site areas where water quality measures would be provided to encourage filtration and treatment of the low
flows. Curb and gutter, grate inlets, and storm drain pipe would be proposed to help convey flows to areas of
treatment and discharge, as shown in Figure 4.H-4 in section 4.H of the Certified EIR. The Modified Project
would also implement a design to protect against a 100 -year storm event. Figure 4.H-4 conceptually
demonstrates the location for the proposed storm drain facilities and models the post -project condition for a
25- and 100 -year storm event.
Under the proposed conditions for both the Original Project and the Modified Project, the drainage patterns
and discharge rates would be largely preserved. The southeastern portion of the site would continue to
discharge into the existing 30 -inch storm drain system via a new on-site storm drain collection system. The
middle interior portion of the site would be collected in a new on-site system and continue to discharge into
the Bay via a new outlet through the bulkhead in a similar location as the existing 8 -inch HOPE pipe outlet.
The western portion of the site would be picked up in a new storm drain system and either tie into the
existing 30 -inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) under PCH, or discharge via a new outlet into the Bay
through the proposed bulkhead along the western portion of the site. With implementation of the proposed
drainage system, the net change under the proposed conditions compared to existing conditions during a 25 -
and 100 -year storm event would be less than one cfs.
The Preliminary WQMP for the Original Project also included an analysis as to whether any hydrology
conditions of concern (HCOC) would occur on the site with respect to downstream flooding, erosion
potential of natural channels downstream, impacts of increased flows on natural habitat, etc. As specified in
Section 2.3.3 of the 2011 Model WQMP, projects must identify and mitigate any HCOCs. A HCOC is a
combination of upland hydrologic conditions and stream biological and physical conditions that presents a
condition of concern for physical and/or biological degradation of streams. If these conditions do not exist
or streams are not potentially susceptible to hydromodification impacts, an HCOC does not exist and
hydromodification does not need to be considered further. As discussed in the Certified EIR, the project site
does not fall within an area susceptible to hydromodification and thus an HCOC does not exist at the site.
Overall, due to the nature of the high imperviousness associated with the existing conditions, proposed
runoff rates would remain consistent or decrease due to the minor increase in landscaping under the
proposed condition. Accordingly, the post -project site under either the Original Project or the Modified
Project would not result in significant hydrology impacts downstream such that flooding or erosion would
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012101003 65
EIR Addendum March 2016
occur on- or off-site. Furthermore, the Modified Project, like the Original Project, would not create or
contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage. As
such, impacts regarding changes in drainage patterns and stormwater flows would be less than significant.
Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 7. Place housing within a 100 year flood plain as mapped on federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Maps or other flood hazard delineation maps
Threshold 8: Place within a IOOyear flood plain structures which would impede or redirect flood
flows
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maintains and updates the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) maps, which identify community flood hazard zone designations. The project site has been
designated as Zone X, meaning that it is outside of 100 -year and 500 -year flood zones. Therefore, no impacts
related to floodplains would occur and implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
Threshold 9: 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
Threshold 10: Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow
Implementation of the Modified Project, similar to the Original Project, could expose people and structures to
flood hazards from dam failure, seiches and tsunamis. However, with implementation of the policies and
procedures set forth in the City's Emergency Management Plan, Safety Element of the General Plan, and
Municipal Code, risks associated with inundation by dam failure, seiche, and tsunami under the Original
Project were determined to be less than significant in the Certified EIR. As the Modified Project would be
located on the same site with a very similar pattern of development and comparable site conditions, impacts
would be considered less than significant. Furthermore, as required by the CCC in their suggested
modifications to the CLUPA (see Appendix A of this Addendum), the Modified Project's revised CLUPA
requires that a site-specific hazards assessment ("Hazards Assessment") and a sea level rise and shoreline
management plan ("Shoreline Management Plan") be prepared and implemented for any future development
on-site, both of which would be submitted along with the Site Development Review application. The Hazards
Assessment would address the potential for erosion, flooding and/or damage from natural forces including,
but not limited to, tidal action, waves, storm surge, or seiches, prepared by a licensed civil engineer with
expertise in coastal processes. The conditions that are considered in a hazards analysis are: a seasonally
eroded beach/shoreline combined with long-term (75 years) erosion; high tide conditions, combined with
long-term (75 years) projections for sea level rise using the best available science; storm waves from a 100 -
year event or a storm that compares to the 1982/83 EI Nino event. The Shoreline Management Plan would
address shoreline areas of the project site subject to tidal action, flooding, wave hazards and erosion, and
would incorporate measures to adapt to sea level rise over time and provide for the long-term protection
and provision of public improvements, coastal access, public opportunities for coastal recreation, and coastal
resources including beach and shoreline habitat. Given the similarity in allowable future development
between the Original Project and the Modified Project, as well as the implementation of the Hazards
Assessment and Shoreline Management Plan, impacts under the Modified Project are expected to be less
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012303003 66
March 2016 EIR Addendum
than significant. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or
increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR
Threshold 11: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
The Modified Project, like the Original Project, would comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws
and regulations related to hydrology, drainage, flooding, and water quality. The City of Newport Beach
General Plan contains various policies related to hydrology, drainage, flooding, and water quality, including
policies from the Harbor and Bay Element, Public Natural Resources Element, Safety Element. In addition,
the City's Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) and the California Coastal Act also contain
policies relevant to hydrology and water quality that are applicable to the project. As shown in Table 4.H-5,
Table 4.H-6, and Table 4.1-1-7, in Section 4.1-1 of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would be consistent with
the applicable policies of the City's General Plan and CLUP and the California Coastal Act, and therefore
impacts in this regard would be less than significant. Based on the similar pattern of development on the
project site and associated drainage patterns and proposed BMPs, impacts under the Modified Project would
also be considered less than significant. Accordingly, implementation of the Modified Project would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously
analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements, in addition to implementation of project design
features, would ensure that impacts to hydrology and water quality are less than significant. No mitigation
measures are necessary.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which states, "[i]mpacts related to
hydrology and water quality would be less than significant."
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to hydrology and water quality.
Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be
undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to hydrology and water
quality, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162,
4.3.10 Land Use and Planning
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012303003 67
EIR Addendum March 2016
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including land
use and planning. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a
significant impact to land use and planning would occur if the project would result in one or more of the
following:
Threshold 1: Physically divide an established community;
Threshold 2: 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; or
Threshold 3: Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation
plan."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Land use and planning -related impacts have been previously
analyzed as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA
Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to
cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to
the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Physically divide an established community
While there are several developed residential, commercial, and public facility uses within the project vicinity,
no established communities are located within the affected portions of project site that could be physically
divided by future development. Therefore, no impacts related to the physical division of an established
community would result from the Original Project or the Modified Project. Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: 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
As discussed in Section 4.1, Land Use, of the Certified EIR and based on the Cit/,s previously adopted findings,
implementation of the Original Project would not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, the City's General
Plan and Local Coastal Program CLUP, SCAG regional plans, Airport Environs Land Use Plan, the California
Coastal Act, or the City's Municipal Code) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect. This impact is considered less than significant. Given the similarity in allowable future
development under both the Original Project and the Modified Project, as well as the limited nature of
proposed modifications to the PCDP, CLUPA, PC Amendment, and GPA under the Modified Project, impacts
regarding consistency with applicable plans, policies, and regulations are expected to be similar to the
Original Project and less than significant, though based on CCC review and revisions to the CLUPA, the
Modified Projects consistency with various policies would vary from that of the Original Project.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporanon/SCH No. 2012101003 68
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Specifically, with regard to CLUP Policy 3.1.1-9, as discussed on page 4.I-24 of the Certified EIR, the project
applicant explored an expanded bayfront access option that would have increased public coastal access
along the project bayfront by extending the coastal walkway through Planning Areas 3 and 4. This area is
currently developed with a private marina accessway used by marina lessees and mobile home park
residents, as well as a private beach that is for the exclusive use of the mobile home park residents. While
maximizing the provision of public coastal access is a stated objective of the proposed project, this potential
alignment of the project's new bayfront access was determined to be infeasible and rejected by the City
Council for several reasons evaluated in the context of Coastal Act section 30214 and discussed in the
Certified EIR. However, based on its December 10, 2015 approval with modifications of the Back Bay
Landing CLUPA, the Coastal Commission has determined that the extension of the public bayfront
promenade is, in fact, feasible and thus this improvement has been incorporated into future development
under the Modified Project. Since the Modified Project would more thoroughly respond to CLUP Policy 3.1.1-
9 compared to the Original Project, it is also considered consistent with this policy. In addition, the Modified
Project would also be consistent with several Coastal Act policies that are supportive of the extended public
bayfront promenade through Planning Area 3, including Coastal Act Policies 30210, 30212, and 30214.
Coastal Act Policy 30210 requires that "maximum access' to coastal areas be provided, and therefore the
provision of expanded public waterfront access under the Modified Project would implement this policy to a
greater extent than the Original Project, and thus would be considered consistent. Likewise, Coastal Act
Policy 30212 requires that new development projects provide public coastal access where feasible and not
restricted by various factors. As such, based on the CCC's determination that the extension of the public
bayfront promenade through Planning Area 3 is feasible, the Modified Project would implement this
improvement to provide increased public coastal access relative to the Original Project, and thus it would be
considered consistent with this policy. Lastly, Coastal Act Policy 30214 relates to, among other issues,
preservation of private property rights and privacy of nearby residents associated with the provision of
public coastal access. Although the Modified Project requires public coastal access adjacent to private
residences within Planning Area 3, where public access was previously not provided, substantial adverse
effects on residents in this area are not expected to occur given PCDP requirements for landscaping, setbacks
and defensible space along the proposed promenade, which would address such adjacency issues. In
addition, the introduction of public access within Planning Area 3 is not expected to result in any increase in
noise impacts to nearby residences, as discussed below in Section 4.3.12 of this Addendum. The specific
components and design of this public access, along with time, place and manner restrictions are to be
determined during the Coastal Development permit approval process. Accordingly, the provision of
expanded public coastal access under the Modified Project would not result in adverse effects on existing
land uses and thus the Modified Project would be consistent with Coastal Act Policy 30214.
Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3: Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan
Both the Original Project and the Modified Project would have no potential to conflict with a Habitat
Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan, since the project site is not located within or
adjacent to a designated reserve area. As such, no impact would occur, and implementation of the Modified
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 69
EIR Addendum March 2016
Mitigation Program
The proposed project would not conflict with relevant land use plans, policies and regulations, therefore,
impacts related to land use and planning would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are
required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which states, "[t]he proposed project
would not conflict with or substantially impede attainment of relevant goals, policies and regulations
associated with the City's General Plan, CLUP, and Municipal Code, SCAG plans and programs, JWA AELUP,
and the California Coastal Act. As such, impacts would be less than significant"
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined, on the basis of substantial
evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new significant impacts
or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to land use and planning. Additionally, there are no
substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new
information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the
Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project does not meet the
standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to land use and planning, as provided pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.11 Mineral Resources
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Initial Study to the Certified EIR (Certified EIR
Appendix A), which states that a project would result in a significant impact regarding mineral resources if it
would:
"Threshold 1: 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
Threshold 2: 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 Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Noise impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the
Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions
and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are
currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified EIR.
SummaryAnalysis
Threshold 1: 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
Threshold 2: 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
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 70
March 2016 EIR Addendum
There are no known local mineral resources within the project area. No known State -designated mineral
resource areas have been identified within the project site or surrounding area. Neither the Original Project
nor the Modified Project incorporate heavy industrial uses of any type or propose mineral development
activities. Further, implementation of the Original Project or Modified Project would not impede the
potential for direct use or future exploration of mineral resources. Therefore, like the Original Project, the
Modified Project would result in no impact regarding mineral resources, and thus implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
No impacts to mineral resources would result from project implementation; as such, no mitigation measures
are required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which identifies that mineral
resources impacts are considered less than significant.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has determined, on the basis of substantial
evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new significant impacts
or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to mineral resources. Additionally, there are no
substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no new
information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the
Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project does not meet the
standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to mineral resources, as provided pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.12 Noise
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines contains the Initial Study Environmental Checklist form used during
preparation of the project Initial Study, which is contained in Appendix A of this EIR, The Initial Study
Environmental Checklist questions relating to noise have been utilized as the thresholds of significance in
this section. Accordingly, a project may create a significant environmental impact if it would result in one
or more of the following:
Threshold 1: Exposure of persons to orgeneration of noise levels in excess of standards presumed in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
Threshold 2: Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels.
Threshold 3: A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003
71
EIR Addendum March 2016
Threshold 4: A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project.
Threshold S: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the project would expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Threshold 6: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, the project would expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Threshold 7: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for
the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect"
No Substantial Change from Previous Anal. Noise impacts have been previously analyzed as part of the
Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor additions
and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that are
currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards presumed
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies
Threshold 4: A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project
As discussed in Section 4.j, Noise, of the Certified EIR, construction activities under the Original Project,
which are considered comparable in nature and intensity to those under the Modified Project, would
temporarily increase the existing ambient noise in close proximity to the construction site. However,
construction activities would be required to comply with the City's allowable construction hours, as
described in Section 4.j, and would also be temporary in nature. Since temporary construction noise is
exempt from the City's noise ordinance requirements, construction -related noise would result in a less than
significant noise impact under both the Original Project and the Modified Project. Although no significant
impacts are identified related to project construction activities, mitigation measures derived from Policy
N2.6 of the Cily s General Plan Noise Element are required to be implemented as part of any future on-site
development to ensure that the noise impacts associated with construction activities would be reduced to
the maximum extent feasible. Therefore, construction -related noise under the Modified Project would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously
analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels
Both the Original Project and the Modified Project would allow for a similarly designed future mixed-use
development on-site that would be constructed using typical construction techniques. As such, it is
anticipated that the equipment to be used during construction would not cause excessive groundborne noise
or vibration. Post -construction on-site activities would be limited to residential, commercial, and boat
storage operation uses that would not generate excessive groundborne noise or vibration, and thus the focus
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 72
March 2016 EIR Addendum
of project -related impacts is on construction -related vibration. Construction activities that typically
generate the most severe vibrations are blasting and impact pile driving, which would not be utilized for
either the Original Project or the Modified Project. The Modified Project, like the Original Project, would be
expected to utilize typical construction equipment and methods such as the use of bulldozers and excavators,
which would generate limited ground -borne vibration during excavation and foundation activities. Based on
the vibration data by the FTA, the typical vibration velocity from the operation of a large bulldozer would be
approximately 0.089 inches per second PPV at 25 feet from the source of activity. The nearest residential
building (mobile home uses at Location 112), which is approximately 35 feet from the project construction
site, would be exposed to a vibration velocity of 0.05 inches per second PPV. As this value is considerably
lower than the 0.5 inches per second PPV significance threshold regarding potential building damage for
older residential buildings, vibration impacts associated with construction would be less than significant at
the nearest residential building. Although this level of vibration would not result in potential structural
damage to nearby structures, such vibration could cause temporary annoyance effects for residents
occupying the mobile homes closest to Planning Area 1. This is because the anticipated vibration velocity of
0.05 inches per second PPV would slightly exceed the 0.04 inches per second PPV significance threshold for
potential human annoyance. However, this analysis assumes a worst-case scenario where the equipment is
operating at the perimeter of Planning Area 1, as close to the adjacent mobile home uses as could possibly
occur, when in reality this condition would occur for only a few days at any one location during future
demolition and excavation phases. Since vibration -producing equipment moves around the site, any
annoyance caused by vibration generated by construction equipment would be sporadic and short-term in
nature. Therefore, vibration -related annoyance impacts during construction activities under the Modified
Project are considered less than significant and similar to those of the Original Project. Therefore,
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR
Threshold 1: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards presumed
in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies
Threshold 3: A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project
As discussed in Section 4.j of the Certified EIR, the existing noise environment in the project vicinity is
dominated by traffic noise from East Coast Highway, as well as nearby commercial and residential activities.
Long-term operation of the Modified Project, as is the case for the Original Project, would have a minimal
effect on the noise environment in proximity to the project site. Noise generated by future on-site
development under either the Original Project or the Modified Project would result primarily from parking
activities, normal operation of building mechanical equipment, refuse collection area, outdoor dining areas at
restaurants, public promenade activity, boat storage -related activities, and off-site traffic.
As noted previously, the Modified Project would result in the identical type and intensity of land uses within
the project site, and thus operational traffic generation and associated off-site vehicular noise impacts, would
be similar to the Original Project and would be less than significant. However, due to a number of minor
modifications to future development under the Modified Project, noise impacts would vary slightly from
those of the Original Project. Specifically, three changes under the Modified Project that could affect long-
term operational noise include 1) reconfiguration of land uses within Planning Area 1 (including Coastal
Commission required relocation of proposed residential uses, the dry -stack boat storage and service use, and
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 .73
EIR Addendum March 2016
waterfront outdoor dining areas), 2) extension of the public bayfront promenade through Planning Area 3,
and 3) potential relocation of the existing OCSD pump station within Planning Area 2, and 4) modification of
the lot line adjustment area.
First, the reconfiguration of land uses within Planning Area 1 would generally move the dry stack boat
storage and service use and restaurant uses with waterfront outdoor dining areas to the west closer to the
Upper Newport Bay waterfront (and away from existing residential uses within the Bayside Village Mobile
Home Park), and move previously proposed stand-alone residential uses (no longer allowed per the CCC's
CLUPA revisions) to the center of Planning Area 1 and incorporated into mixed-use buildings with ground -
floor commercial uses. Overall, this Coastal Commission modification would not represent a measurable
change in noise generation on the project site given the same type and intensity of land uses within Planning
Area 1 and distances to sensitive receptors, most notably the residential uses within the Bayside Village
Mobile Home Park. Of the proposed changes, the relocation of the dry stack boat storage and service use
under the Modified Project would represent the greatest potential to affect the future noise environment,
since it would produce much higher noise levels than other on-site uses such as restaurants with outdoor
dining areas (i.e., up to 80 dBA at a distance of 50 feet for the boat storage and service use versus up to 64
dBA at a distance of 5 feet for outdoor dining areas) , and thus would be the most noticeable activity in terms
of noise.
As was assumed for the Original Project, a combination lift/tractor system is anticipated to be used to
retrieve and launch boats from the dry stack boat storage inlet (see Figure 5 above). It is likely that most
boats would be moved by the lift or tractor system into and out of both the dry stack storage building in
Planning Area 1. As discussed in the Certified EIR, this analysis assumed that a diesel -powered lift tractor
system would be utilized for the boat retrieval/storage system at the dry -stack storage and service location
in Planning Area 1 (which generates greater noise levels than other types of systems and is therefore
considered conservative). However, new technology to reduce noise levels and energy consumption may be
implemented as available (i.e., natural gas, electric, etc.). The enclosed dry stack boat storage and launching
facilities would be located within a wrap-around structure along the project site's western/northwestern
bayfront. It is assumed, as noted above, that both a diesel -powered fork lift and the diesel lift tractor system
would be utilized for the boat storage system and repair activities at this location. For the dry -stack interior
storage and outdoor service area, the fork lift and tractor would generate noise levels of approximately 75
dBA and 80 dBA at a distance of 50 feet, respectively.
The nearest mobile home uses under the Modified Project (which are the closest sensitive uses and thus
those with the highest sensitivity to noise impacts) are located approximately 450 feet northeast of the boat
storage and launching facilities. The relocated boat inlet area would be obstructed from the mobile home
community by the dry -stack storage structure and public view plaza in the northwest corner of Planning
Area 1, and would be further obstructed by adjacent on-site retail and residential buildings that would be
located between the launching facilities and the nearest mobile home uses. Based on noise level source
strengths of 75 dBA and 80 dBA for the dry -stack interior storage and outdoor service area, respectively, at a
reference distance of 50 feet, and accounting for barrier -insertion loss for project buildings (minimum 10
dBA insertion loss) and distance attenuation (minimum 19 dBA loss for the 450 -foot distance), the noise
associated with long-term operation of the fork lift and tractor under the Modified Project would be reduced
to 46 dBA and 51 dBA at the nearest mobile home uses, represented by Location R2, respectively, which
would be well below than the measured ambient noise level of 60 dBA at the nearest mobile home uses,
Location R2. For comparison, the noise levels for the interior dry -stack storage and outdoor service area
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporsdon/SCH No. 2012101003 74
March 2016 EIR Addendum
under the Original Project were 53 dBA and 58 dBA, respectively, which is due to the previous location of
this use further east within Planning Area 1 and thus closer to the mobile home residences.
It should be noted that moving the dry stack boat storage/service use which may include additional outdoor
waterfront dining areas would reduce noise impacts to the closest sensitive receptors (i.e, at Locations RI
and 112), as the dining areas would be farther away from these locations. However, these noise sources
would be closer to other more distant sensitive receptors, including Location RS to the northwest across
Upper Newport Bay and Location R3 south of Planning Area 2 on Linda Isle. Despite the closer proximity of
the dry -stack boat storage/service use and outdoor dining areas to Locations R3 and RS under the Modified
Project, noise generated by these uses would not result in a notable increase in noise levels at these locations
based on the distance of these receptors to the relocated noise sources. In other words, although relocation
of the boat storage/service use and outdoor dining areas in Planning Area 1 may incrementally increase
noise effects at more distant receptor Locations R3 and R5, such an increase would not be perceptible and
would be less than noise levels at the most proximate Locations R1 and R2, which were determined in the
Certified EIR to be less than significant without the need for mitigation. Therefore, fork lift and tractor noise
levels associated with the boat storage and service use and outdoor dining areas associated with restaurant
uses within Planning Area 1 would be comparable to those presented in the Certified EIR.
As relates to extension of the public bayfront promenade through Planning Area 3, the introduction of
additional pedestrians and bicyclists along this alignment would not represent a substantial increase in noise
sources or noise generation relative to the ambient noise environment at the project site. Although the
proposed promenade alignment in Planning Area 3 is currently a private paved access road for Bayside
Village Marina members and residents of the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park, and the introduction of
groups of pedestrians, joggers, bicyclists, and other visitors would likely increase noise generation in the
immediate area, such an increase would not be perceptible in the context of the existing noise environment,
which currently has ambient noise levels of 60 dBA. Based on the ambient noise levels in the area, and a
reference noise level for typical human conversation of 55 dBA at a distance of three feet, the additional
pedestrian and bicycle traffic within Planning Area 3 would be expected to remain below the ambient noise
level of 60 dBA. Thus, the provision of the extended public bayfront promenade within Planning Area 3
would not result in a significant increase in operational noise at the nearest sensitive receptors and impacts
would be less than significant.
Lastly, the potential relocation of the existing OCSD pump station from its currently location north of East
Coast Highway within Planning Area 1 to the south side of the Coast Highway Bridge within Planning Area 2
could change the future noise environment relative to the Original Project. However, while the possible
relocation of this facility to Planning Area 2 would vary from the proposed land use plan under the Original
Project, the construction of the pump station in this area would not result in a substantial change in noise
generation or related noise effects on nearby sensitive receptors. This is due to the fact that the Original
Project anticipated potential development of a boat service use, which would generate noise levels at similar
or higher levels than the pump station facility (since pumps and other equipment would be enclosed), along
the southern boundary of Planning Area 2, which is most proximate to residential uses to the south of the
project site on Linda Isle. Under the Modified Project, if the relocated OCSD pump station were constructed
within Planning Area 2 it would be located just south of and adjacent to the East Coast Highway right-of-way,
which is farther away from residences on Linda Isle than the boat service use proposed under the Original
Project. Furthermore, regarding future pump station maintenance activities, the operation of vacuum trucks
(e.g., Vactor trucks) for periodic servicing of the pump station could generate noise levels up to 80 dBA at a
reference distance of 50 feet. Assuming the same noise reduction of 10 dBA for insertion loss due to
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 75
EIRAddendum March 2016
intervening structures and a reduction of 18 dBA for the distance to sensitive receptors (over 400 feet),
noise levels at Location R3 on Linda Isle would be reduced to 52 dBA, which is well below the measured
ambient noise level of 60 dBA at this location. As such, the effect of pump station maintenance activities
within Planning Area 2, if they were to occur, would not be noticeable in the context of the existing noise
environment and impacts would be less than significant. Thus, while the Modified Project would allow the
construction of the relocated OCSD pump station within Planning Area 2, this change would not result in a
notable increase in noise generation or associated adverse noise effects on nearby sensitive receptors. Thus,
impacts would be less than significant in this regard.
Therefore, long-term operation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, the project
would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels
As discussed in Section 4.J of the Certified EIR, given the project site's distance from John Wayne Airport, and
the site's location outside of the airport's existing 60-dBA noise contour, adverse aircraft noise impacts are
not expected to occur. Accordingly, the Modified Project, like the Original Project, would not result in the
exposure of people residing or working in the area to excessive airport -related noise levels. Therefore,
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 6: For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, the project would expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels
The project area is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, neither the Original Project nor
the Modified Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels from such uses. No impact would occur. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously
analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 7: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
The Original Project would not conflict with applicable policies contained in the City's General Plan regarding
noise, as discussed below in Table 4.J-10 in Section 4.J of the Certified EIR. As shown in Table 4.J-10, impacts
related to consistency with the Newport Beach General Plan regarding noise would be less than significant.
As such, given the similarity in allowable future development under the Original Project and the Modified
Project, impacts under the Modified Project are also considered less than significant, and therefore
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landinl
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012101003
76
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included two mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures J-1 and J-2), which would address
impacts related to noise and vibration. Mitigation Measure J-1 requires that temporary sound barriers be
employed during construction activities in order to reduce noise effects at nearby sensitive receptor
locations. Mitigation Measure J-1 requires that an acoustical analysis of the architectural plans of the
proposed residential building be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, prior to issuance of building
permits, to ensure that the building construction (i.e., exterior wall, window, and door) would provide
adequate sound insulation to meet the acceptable interior noise level of 45 dBA CNEL. These mitigation
measures would be implemented, as appropriate, under the Modified Project as proposed for the Original
Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which identifies that construction -
related and operational noise impacts would be mitigated to a level considered less than significant, and.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to noise and vibration.
Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be
undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to noise, as provided
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.13 Population and Housing
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
'Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including
population, housing, and employment Based on the fallowing issue areas identified in Appendix G of the
CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact to population, housing, and employment would occur if the proposed
project would result in one or more of the following:
Threshold 1: 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);
Threshold 2: Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere; or
Threshold 3: Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 77
EIR Addendum March 2016
Threshold 4: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect"
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Population and housing impacts have been previously
analyzed as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA
Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to
cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to
the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: 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)
Implementation of the Original Project, as discussed in Section 4.K, Population, Housing, and Employment, of
the Certified EIR, would not induce substantial population, housing, or employment growth in the project
area beyond that anticipated by SCAG projections, and thus this impact is considered less than significant.
Likewise, the Modified Project would result in the same type and intensity of development on-site and thus
development pursuant to the Modified Project would be consistent with SCAG growth projections and
impacts would be less than significant with regard to growth inducement. Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or substantially increase the severity of a previously
identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere
Threshold 3: Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere
The Modified Project, like the Original Project, would generate up to 49 new residential dwelling units.
Although project implementation under the Modified Project would result in the removal of existing
residential units (i.e., four mobile homes within the proposed LLA area, compared to three mobile homes
under the Original Project), it would not displace substantial numbers of existing housing or people, since
such removal would be limited to four housing units that would be offset by the future provision of up to 49
dwelling units on-site. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant and implementation of the Modified
Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant
impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
Implementation of the Modified Project, similar to the Original Project, would not conflict with any
applicable plan, policy, or regulation regarding population, housing, and employment growth including the
California Coastal Act, SCAG RTC/SCS and RHNA, and the City of Newport Beach General Plan. This impact is
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporntion/SCH No. 2012101003 78
March 2016 EIRAddendum
considered less than significant under the Modified Project, and thus its implementation would not result in
any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed
in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
All impacts related to population, housing, and employment would be less than significant; as such, no
mitigation measures are required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which states "[p]roject-related and
cumulative impacts associated with population, housing, and employment growth would be less than
significant."
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to population, housing, and
employment. Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project
will be undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not
have been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified
Project does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to population,
housing, and employment, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.14 Public Services
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
'Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including public
services Based on the fallowing issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant
impact relative to public services would occur if the project would result in the following:
Threshold 1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered government facilities, 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 and Emergency Medical Services,
■ Police Protection and Law Enforcement Services,•
• Parks and Recreational Services;
• Schools,•
• Library Services.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 79
EIR Addendum March 2016
Threshold2: 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; and
Threshold 3: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment and
Threshold 4: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Public service impacts have been previously analyzed as part
of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines. Minor
additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the actions that
are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified EIR.
SummaryAnalysis
Threshold 1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, 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 and Emergency Medical Services
The Modified Project would result in the same type and intensity of future development on-site and would
therefore increase demands for fire protection and emergency medical services at the project site in the
same manner as the Original Project. Accordingly, and consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, the
Modified Project would not result in or require the provision of new or physically altered fire protection and
emergency medical services facilities, the construction of which would result in substantial adverse
environmental impacts. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
Threshold 1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, 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:
■ Police Protection and Law Enforcement Services
The Modified Project would result in the same type and intensity of future development on-site and would
therefore increase demands for police protection and law enforcement services at the project site in the
same manner as the Original Project. Accordingly, the Modified Project would not result in nor require new
or physically altered police protection or law enforcement facilities, the construction of which could cause
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landini
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003
80
March 2016 EIR Addendum
significant environmental impacts. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in
any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed
in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, 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:
■ Parks and Recreational Services
Threshold 2: 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
Threshold 3: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment
The Modified Project would result in the same type and intensity of future development on-site and would
therefore increase demands for parks and recreational services and facilities in the same manner as the
Original Project. As discussed in Section 41, Public Services, of the Certified EIR, implementation of the
Original Project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which would cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives parks and recreational facilities. Further, the Original Project would not 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, and the Original Project does not include
recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the environment. This impact is concluded to be less than significant in the
Certified EIR. Given the comparable demand for parks and recreational services and facilities under both the
Original Project and the Modified Project, impacts under the Modified Project are considered less than
significant and similar to the Original Project. In addition, the Modified Project would include expanded
pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including larger waterfront public view plazas, additional off-site bike lane
and trail improvements, and extension of the proposed public bayfront promenade through Planning Area 3,
which would provide additional recreational opportunities for on-site visitors and residents. Therefore,
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, 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:
• Schools
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
MRServices Corpoadon/SCH No. 2012101003 81
EIR Addendum March 2016
As discussed previously for other public services, the Modified Project would result in the same type and
intensity of future development on-site and would therefore increase demands for school services and
facilities in the same manner as the Original Project. The Modified Project is located within the Newport
Mesa Unified School District (NMUSD), and any future school-age children residing on-site would attend the
Lincoln Elementary School, Corona Del Mar Middle School, or the Corona Del Mar High School should they
attend public schools. Accordingly, demand for school facilities associated with the Modified Project in
conjunction with the cumulative demand throughout the entire school district would be consistent with the
level of impacts identified and disclosed as part of the Certified EIR. Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, 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:
■ Libraries
As discussed previously for other public services, the Modified Project would result in the same type and
intensity of future development on-site and would therefore increase demands for library services and
facilities in the same manner as the Original Project. As under the Original Project, in order to ensure that
the library services are not eroded by future development under the Modified Project, prior to the issuance
of a building permit for the construction of residential and commercial/marine-related uses, the Applicant
shall pay the required Property Excise Tax to the City of Newport Beach, as set forth in its Municipal Code
(Section 3.12) for the public improvements and facilities associated with the Newport Beach Public Library
(NBPL). These fees would be utilized to fund additional services and improvements that may be required to
provide adequate library services to the project area. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project
would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
As discussed in Section 41 of the Certified EIR, implementation of the Original Project would not conflict
with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project including the
Newport Beach General Plan, California Coastal Act, California Fire Code, Quimby Act, California Education
Code, Senate Bill 50, and the Newport Beach Municipal Code with regard to public services. This impact was
determined in the Certified EIR to be less than significant for the Original Project. Given the similarity in
development type and intensity under the Modified Project, impacts are likewise anticipated to be less than
significant. Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or
increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landin,
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 82
March 2016 EIR Addendum
Mitigation Program
All impacts related to public services would be less than significant; as such, no mitigation measures are
required.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR which identifies that impacts to
public services would be less than significant.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to public services. Additionally,
there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be undertaken, and no
new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known when the
Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project does not meet the
standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to public services, as provided pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.15 Transportation/Traffic
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR and/or in the Initial Study for the
Certified EIR (included in Appendix of the Certified EIR), which state:
'Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including traffic
and transportation. Based on the following issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a
significant impact relative to traffic and transportation would occur if the project would result in one or
more of the following:
Threshold 1: 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;
Threshold 2: Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not limited to level
of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads and highways;
Threshold 3: 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;
Threshold 4: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g, sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment),
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landin,
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 83
EIR Addendum March 2016
Threshold 5: Result in inadequate emergency access;
Threshold 6: Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or
pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance orsafety ofsuch facilities, • or
Threshold 7: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Transportation impacts have been previously analyzed as
part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA Guidelines.
Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to cover the
actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to the Certified
EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 1: 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, 84streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit
Construction Traffic
Construction of the Original Project was anticipated in the Certified EIR to take up to 24 months to complete.
The first phase of the construction process would be demolition, site clearing, debris removal, and staging
occurring over approximately one month; followed by excavation and de -watering over approximately two
months; infrastructure installation and foundation construction for approximately six months; vertical
construction for a duration of 15 months; landscaping over approximately three months; Bayside Drive
roadway improvements and multi -use trail construction for approximately four months; and reconfiguration
of Bayside Village Mobile Home Park over approximately six months. The Modified Project would result in a
very similar development pattern on the project site, and thus the construction assumptions for the Original
Project are applicable to the Modified Project. Therefore, construction -related impacts under the Modified
Project as relates to grading and excavation (and associated haul truck trips) and site construction activities
including equipment operation, equipment staging, materials storage, deliveries, and construction worker
vehicle trips and parking would be similar to the Original Project and would be less than significant.
Operational Traffic
As noted previously, the Modified Project would allow the identical type and amount of land uses to be
implemented on the project site, but with a slightly modified configuration to allow for greater public
waterfront access. As such, future development on-site under the Modified Project would result in the same
trip generation and trip distribution as under the Original Project. Despite the minor changes in primary site
access (associated with the revised LLA, see Figure 9 above), and waterfront pedestrian/bicycle access
improvements, the Modified Project would not trigger any significant impacts at any affected facilities within
the study area under Existing Plus Project conditions or any future condition scenarios. Furthermore, no
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing.
PCR Services Corporadon/SCH No. 2012101003 84
March 2016 EIR Addendum
substantial changes to traffic levels or the City's traffic system or other affected facilities have occurred since
certification of the Certified EIR. As such, implementation of the Modified Project under Existing Plus Project
and Future With Project conditions would not 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. This impact is considered less than significant.
Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 2: Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including but not
limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other
standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated
roads and highways
As discussed in Section 4.M, Transportation/Traffic, of the Certified EIR, two of the study area intersections
evaluated as part of the project TIA for the Original Project are CMP intersections: East Coast Highway at
MacArthur Boulevard and West Coast Highway at Newport Boulevard. Based on CMP standards, a
significant impact occurs if the project related traffic increases the intersection capacity utilization (ICU) by
3% or more, causing or worsening Level of Service F. The City's threshold is only a 1% increase in ICU,
causing or worsening Level of Service E or F. Because the City's definition of a significant impact is more
sensitive than the CMP, if the project does not cause a significant impact based on the City's definition, it also
will not trigger a significant impact based on the less sensitive CMP definition. Therefore, based on the lack
of significant impacts per the City's methodology, CMP impacts would be less than significant and no
mitigation is necessary. Because the Modified Project and the Original Project would result in the same
amount of vehicle trips and associated traffic system impacts, CMP impacts under the Modified Project
would also be considered less than significant. Accordingly, implementation of the Modified Project would
not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3: Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in locations that results in substantial safety risks
The Original Project did not allow for any future structures that would interfere with air traffic patterns, as
the maximum height of future project components would be 65 feet above grade (i.e., the proposed public
coastal view tower); and the Original Project would was not anticipated to increase use of any airport in
more than a de minimus way. Thus, the Certified EIR determined that no impact regarding air traffic
patterns would occur with project implementation. Similarly, as the Modified Project would result in a
comparable development pattern with only a de minimus increase in airport traffic, and would also remove
the previously proposed coastal public view tower, no impact in this regard would occur. Therefore,
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a
previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 4: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g, sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,farm equipment)
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012103003
85
EIR Addendum March 2016
The Certified EIR determined that the Original Project, with implementation of applicable mitigation
measures, would result in less than significant impacts regarding vehicular site access/circulation and safety.
The Modified Project would result in a nearly identical circulation/access plan as the Original Project (see
Figure 9 above), and in fact, the primary access would be improved compared to the Original Project in terms
of direct line-of-sight/sight distance along the on-site entry driveway due to the revised LLA proposed under
the Modified Project. The Modified Project, nonetheless, would implement the same mitigation measures as
the Original Project, and thus impacts would be less than significant Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 5: Result in inadequate emergency access
Please see discussion above under Section 4.3.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, regarding emergency
response and evacuation plans (Threshold 7). As discussed therein, impacts related to emergency access
would be less than significant under the Modified Project, as was the case for the Original Project evaluated
in the Certified En Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts
or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified
EIR.
Threshold 6: Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities
Threshold 7: Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
As discussed in Section 4.M of the Certified EIR, implementation of the Original Project would not conflict
with (1) adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or
otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities, or (2) any applicable plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the California Coastal
Act, SCAG RTP/SCS, SCAG Compass Blueprint, Newport Beach General Plan, Newport Beach Coastal Land Use
Plan, and Newport Beach Municipal Code). As such, impacts associated with conflicts with applicable plans,
policies, and regulations related to traffic and transportation (including alternative transportation) were
determined to be less than significant in the Certified EIR. Given the similarity in development patterns
allowable under both the Original Project and the Modified Project, including access to public transit and
proposed public pedestrian and bicycle access improvements, the Modified Project also not expected to
conflict with any such plans, policies, or regulations. In fact, based on the extension of the public bayfront
promenade through Planning Area 3 under the Modified Project, the Modified Project would be even more
supportive of alternative transportation plans and policies than the Original Project, particularly those of the
Coastal Act and CLUP, and thus impacts would be less than significant Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included several mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures M-1 through M-3), which
would address impacts related to traffic and circulation. Mitigation Measures M-1 through M-3 require
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 86
March 2016 EIR Addendum
future City review of project -specific access and circulation plans to verify adequate site distances, signage
and striping, and final design of an optional secondary entrance -only access off of East Coast Highway. These
mitigation measures would be implemented, as appropriate, under the Modified Project as proposed for the
Original Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project would be consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, which identifies that traffic -
and transportation -related impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of [Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to transportation and traffic.
Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be
undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to transportation and traffic,
as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
4.3.16 Utilities and Service Systems
The following thresholds of significance are as set forth in the Certified EIR, which states:
'Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of questions to assist in determining whether a
proposed project would have a significant impact related to various environmental issues including utilities
and service systems. Based on the fallowing issue areas identified in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a
significant impact relative to utilities and service systems would occur if the project would result in one or
more of the following:
Threshold 1: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control
Board;
Threshold 2: 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;
Threshold 3: 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;
Threshold 4: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and
resource, or are new or expanded entitlements needed;
Threshold 5: 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;
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 87
EIR Addendum
March 2016
Threshold 6: Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid
waste disposal needs,•
Threshold 7. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
Threshold 8: Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect."
No Substantial Change from Previous Analysis. Utility and service system impacts have been previously
analyzed as part of the Certified EIR, which was prepared and certified pursuant to State and City CEQA
Guidelines. Minor additions and/or clarifications are needed to make the previous document adequate to
cover the actions that are currently proposed, which are documented below and serve as an Addendum to
the Certified EIR.
Summary Analysis
Threshold 2: Require or result in the construction of new water facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects
Threshold 4: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing
entitlements and resource, or are new or expanded entitlements needed
As discussed in Section 4.N, Utilities and Service Systems, of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would
require a number of on- and off-site water distribution system improvements to serve future uses on-site,
and once operational, would increase demands for domestic water supplies relative to existing conditions.
However, compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and implementation of the prescribed
mitigation measures would reduce potentially significant impacts to infrastructure to a less than significant
level. Further, the site would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the Original Project from
existing entitlements and resources. Thus, impacts regarding water supply would be less than significant.
Likewise, since the Modified Project would require the same suite of on- and off-site improvements given the
similarity in development allowable on-site (with the same landscaping and irrigation requirements,
stormwater BMPs, and water -conserving fixtures and other features), albeit with minor modifications to
address variations in building footprints or other physical constraints, and projected water demands would
be identical to those under the Original Project, impacts related to construction or expansion of water
facilities and impacts to water supply would be comparable to those of the Original Project and would be less
than significant, though mitigation would still be required for infrastructure -related impacts (Le., payment of
City water connection fees). Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new
impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the
Certified EIR.
Threshold 1: Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board
Threshold 2: Require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012101003 88
March 2016 EIRAddendum
Threshold 5. 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
Similar to the discussion above for water -related facilities and impacts, the Certified EIR determined that
implementation of the Original Project would not (1) exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board; (2) require or result in the construction of new wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant
environmental effects; or (3) result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves
or may serve the proposed project, that it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. This impact is considered less than significant
with implementation of applicable mitigation measures under the Original Project.
Given the comparable nature and intensity of construction activities under both the Original Project and the
Modified Project, construction -related impacts under the Modified Project are expected to be roughly the
same as those described in the Certified EIR for the Original Project. Thus, construction -related impacts to
wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities are considered minimal and less than significant. Regarding
long-term operation of future on-site uses under the Modified Project, the proposed improvements
necessary to serve the future project would be nearly the same as those proposed under the Original Project,
which would be sized and located to meet the projected demands of on-site uses, though the specific location
of future facilities on-site would vary slightly between the two scenarios given the reconfiguration of land
uses under the Modified Project. Additionally, under both the Original Project and the Modified Project,
relocation of the existing OCSD pump station would be allowable, though under the Modified Project, any
potential relocated pump station could also potentially be constructed south of East Coast Highway within
Planning Area 2, which was not previously allowable under the Original Project. Nonetheless, while the
placement of the pump station within Planning Area 2 was not specifically addressed in the Certified EIR,
adequate details were not (and currently are not) available to more accurately evaluate potential impacts
associated with the relocation. Thus, future environmental review for the OCSD pump station relocation
would be required to be undertaken by OCSD once additional information is available, though impacts of the
relocation would not vary substantially between the Original Project and the Modified Project. Furthermore,
irrespective of the specific location of the pump station relocation, impacts regarding demands on
wastewater facilities including the existing pump station would not be measurably different between the
Original Project and the Modified Project since the projected wastewater generation under either scenario
would be identical based on the same proposed square footage of development for each land use type. The
potential relocation of the OCSD pump station within Planning Area 2, therefore, would not change the
Certified EIR's conclusions regarding impacts to wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities and impacts
would remain less than significant under the Modified Project with implementation of applicable mitigation
(i.e., payment of OSCD sewer connection fees).
Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts related to
wastewater treatment or facilities, or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact
related to wastewater facilities, as compared to what was previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 3; Require or result in the construction of new storafwater drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 89
EIR Addendum March 2016
As discussed previously, the Modified Project and the Original Project would allow for a very similar
development pattern on the project site, and thus are anticipated to require similar stormwater
improvements on-site in order to address projected stormwater flows. Specifically, as described in detail in
Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Certified EIR, the Original Project would include new on-site
stormwater drainage facilities that would be constructed in accordance with applicable regulatory
requirements, as would also be required under the Modified Project. The Original Project (and the Modified
Project), therefore, would be designed to maintain the overall existing drainage patterns and discharge rates
in which the entire project site would convey its runoff directly into the Upper Newport Bay. The south
eastern portion of the project site would continue to discharge into the existing 30 -inch storm drain system
via a new on-site storm drain collection system. The middle interior portion of the site would be collected in
a new on-site system and continue to discharge into the Bay via a new outlet through the bulkhead in a
similar location as the existing 8 -inch HDPE pipe outlet. The western portion of the site would be picked up
in a new storm drain system and either tie into the existing 30 -inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) under
East Coast Highway, or discharge via a new outlet into the Bay through the proposed bulkhead along the
western portion of the project site. All on-site flows would be directed to on-site areas where water quality
measures would be provided to encourage filtration and treatment of the low flows. Curb and gutter, grate
inlets, and storm drain pipe would be proposed to help convey flows to areas of treatment and discharge.
The off-site flows would be routed around the project site and tied into the existing 30 -inch storm within
East Coast Highway, approximately 350 feet upstream of the current tie in location. Although the Modified
Project would result in the improvement of the existing paved waterfront access road in Planning Area 3 in
association with the extension of the proposed public bayfront promenade, since this access road is currently
paved and composed almost entirely of impervious surfaces, the proposed improvements would not have a
notable effect on the amount of stormwater generated on-site or result in an increase in the rate of volume of
stormwater flows exiting the site during storm events.
Per the Modified Project PCDP, like the Original Project PCDP, future development would include Low Impact
Development (LID) features for storm water quality improvement where none exist today. Potential LID
features may include storm water planters, permeable pavement and proprietary bioretention systems.
Through the development of a project -specific Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), the appropriate
site design, source control and LID control features would be implemented to improve water quality in
Newport Bay. As concluded in the Certified EIR, all potentially significant impacts associated with
development of the Original Project, including on-site stormwater drainage facilities, would be less than
significant after implementation of the project design features. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant
in this regard, and would be substantially the same as those impacts under the Modified Project. Therefore,
implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts related to stormwater
infrastructure, or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact, as compared to what was
previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 6: Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs
As noted above, the duration and intensity of proposed construction activities under the Modified Project
would be essentially the same as those assumed for the Original Project, and thus impacts related to solid
waste generation and disposal are considered similar to those evaluated in the Certified EIR. Thus,
construction -related solid waste impacts would be less than significant with implementation of applicable
mitigation measures, which ensure that construction contractors are required to recycle construction -
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporation/SCH No. 2012101003 90
March 2016 EIR Addendum
related waste and provide temporary waste separation bins on-site during demolition and construction
activities.
As summarized in Table 4.N-10 in Section 4.N of the Certified EIR, operation of the Original Project would
result in a net increase of 683 pounds per day (or approximately 0.34 tons per day) of solid waste. The
Original Project's daily solid waste generation, which is assumed to be the same under the Modified Project,
represents approximately 0.003 percent of the maximum permitted daily capacity at the Frank R. Bowerman
(FRB) Landfill. Based on the remaining capacity of the FRB Landfill and the County's long-term planning
programs required to meet the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB)'s requirements,
there would be adequate waste disposal capacity within the permitted County's landfill system to meet the
needs of the Original Project, and by comparison also the Modified Project. Further, the Modified Project's
PCPD (and the Original Project's PCDP) requires recycling bins to be located at appropriately to promote
recycling of paper, metal, glass, and other recyclable material. As such, project -generated waste would not
exceed the capacity of landfills serving the project area under either the Original Project or the Modified
Project since solid waste generation would be the same under both scenario. In addition, the Original Project
and the Modified Project would not generate solid waste at a level that would generate the need for new or
substantially expanded recycling or disposal facilities. The available capacity of the existing and/or planned
future landfills would not be exceeded, and therefore impacts regarding solid waste generation from project
operations would be less than significant. Accordingly, implementation of the Modified Project would not
result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified significant impact related to
solid waste disposal facilities as compared to what was previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 7. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste
The City of Newport Beach has achieved over 50 -percent waste diversion since 2004 through recycling and
other measures and is in compliance with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989
(AB939) 5 The proposed project would comply with applicable regulations related to solid waste, including
those pertaining to waste reduction and recycling. As all solid waste collection from the project site would
be managed by Waste Management, Inc., which is in compliance with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations, the proposed project would be consistent with respective regulatory measures. Accordingly, the
Modified Project would be fully compliant with all applicable Federal, State, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste, and significant impact would not occur. Therefore, implementation of the
Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the severity of a previously identified
significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Threshold 8. Comply with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan and municipal code)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect
As discussed in Section 4.N of the Certified EIR, the Original Project was determined not to conflict with any
applicable plans, policies, or regulations related to utilities and service systems, and thus impacts would be
less than significant. Based on the similarity in allowable development on the project site under both the
Original Project and the Modified Project, the Modified Project is also not expected to conflict with any such
5 CalRecycle. Jurisdiction Diversion/Disposal Rate Summary (1995 - 2006)". http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentraV
reports/diversionprogram/jurisdiction Diversion.aspx. Accessed September 2012.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corpomdon/SCH No. 2012101003 91
EIRAddendum March 2016
plans, policies, or regulations, including those of the City's General Plan, SCAG regional plans, California
Coastal Act, California Urban Water Management Plan Act, Senate Bills 610, 221, and 7, California Code of
Regulations (Title 20), and Newport Beach Municipal Code. Based on the lack of conflicts with these plans,
policies, and regulations, impacts under the Modified Project would be considered less than significant.
Therefore, implementation of the Modified Project would not result in any new impacts or increase the
severity of a previously identified significant impact as previously analyzed in the Certified EIR.
Mitigation Program
The Certified EIR included a number of mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures N-1 through N-4), which
would address impacts related to utilities and service systems. Mitigation Measures N-1 and N-2 require
payment of water and sewer connection fees prior to occupancy of a future project on-site. Mitigation
Measures N-3 and N-4 require that recycling of construction -related waste is implemented on-site during
future construction activities. These mitigation measures would be implemented, as appropriate, under the
Modified Project as proposed for the Original Project to reduce impacts to less than significant.
Level of Significance After Mitigation
The Modified Project is consistent with the findings of the Certified EIR, the Certified EIR identifies that all
utility and service system impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant.
Finding of Consistency with Certified EIR
Pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Newport Beach has determined, on the basis of
substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, that the Modified Project would not involve new
significant impacts or a substantial increase in previously identified impacts to utilities and service systems.
Additionally, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project will be
undertaken, and no new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have
been known when the Certified EIR was certified has since been identified. Therefore, the Modified Project
does not meet the standards for a subsequent or supplemental EIR with regards to utilities and service
systems, as provided pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.
City of Newport Beach Back Bay Landing
PCR Services Corporanon/SCN No. 2012101003 92
APPENDIX A
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION CORRESPONDENCE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA- THE RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN, JR., GOVERNOR
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
South Coast Area Office -
200 Oceangate, Suite 1060 ®,
Long Beach, CA 90802-0302
(562) 590-5071
December $1, 2015
City of Newport Beach.,
Planning Department
Attn: Jaime Murillo, Senior Planner
100 Civic Centex Drive
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658 .
Re: City of Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Amendment No. 2-14 (LCP-5-NPB-
14-0820-2):,
Dear Mr. Murillo:
You are hereby notified that the California Coastal Commission, at its December 10, 2015 meeting in
Monterey, approved City of Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Amendment No. 2-14 with
suggested modifications. Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP).Amendment No. 244 was submitted pursuant to
City Council Resolution No. 2014-12. Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Amendment No. 2-14 incorporates
changes to the certified LUP to accommodate a future, mixed-use project known as Back Bay Landing and
would change the land -'rise designation of a 6.97 -acre portion. of the 31-acreproperryaocated at 300 East
Coast Highway from Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -B) to Mixed -Use Water Related W -W).
The Commission approved the CLUP Amendment with suggested modifications. Thus, the Amendment
will become final once: 1) the City of Newport Beach City Council adopts the Commission's suggested
modifications, 2) the City of Newport Beach City .Council forwards the adopted suggested modifications to
the Commission.by. Resolution,.and, 3) the Executive Director certifies that the City has complied with the
Commission's Deoember 10, 2015 action. The Coastal Act requires that the City's adoption of the
suggested modifications be completed within six (6) months of the Commission's action.
Pursuant to the Commission's action on December 10, 2015, certification of City of Newport Beach
Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Amendment No. 2-14 is subject to the attached Suggested Modifications
(Attachment "A")..
Please note that, in addition to the suggested modifications to the CLUP Policies, changes to the CLUP
Map 1, Coastal Access Map 3-1 and the Bikeways and Trails: Map 2 will need to be made to be consistent
with the suggested modifications.
Thank you for your cooperation and we look forward to working with you and your staff in the future.
Please call Fernie Sy or myself at (562) 590-5071 if you have any questions regarding the modifications
required for effective Certification of City of Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Amendment
No. 2-14
Sincerely,
Char es Posner
Supervisor of Planning
Attachment: Attachment "A" Suggested Modifications
City of Newport Beach
LCP Amendment Request No. 2-14
ATTACIDAENT "A"
Suggested Modifications
Page 1 of 4
Certification of City of Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) Amendment No. 2-14 is
subject to the following modifications.
Text added by the suggested modification is bold, italicized and underlined, and text suggested
to be deleted is s&ue-k tl3raugk. Only.those subsections of the LUP for which modifications are
being suggested are shown below.
2.1.9 Back Bay Landing
Located at 300 East Coast High way at the northwesterly corner of the intersection of East Coast
Highway and Bayside. Drive, the Back Bay Landing site is an approximately 7 -acre privately -
owned site adjacent to the Upper Newport Bay. The site is the landside portion of Parcel 3 of
Parcel Map 93-111' and is currently improved with existing structures and paved areas utilized
for outdoor storage space of RVs and small boats, parking and restrooms facilities for the
Bayside Marina, a kayak rental and launch facility, parking and access to Pearson's Port sea ood
market and marine service equipment storage under the Coast Highway Bridge.
The site would accommodate the development of an integrated, mixed-use waterfront project
consisting of coastal dependent and coastal related visitor -serving commercial and recreational .
uses allowed in the current.CLUP CM -A and CM -B designation, while allowing for limited
mixed-use structures with residential uses above the
ground floor. Residential development would be contingent upon the eeneouti4 development of
the above -referenced marine -related and visitor -serving commercial and recreational facilities on
the ground floor, including a boat storage facility. ineluding the eaelesed dry stack beat st
. The public bayfront promenade shall be continuous along the
the intersection of Bayside DrivelEast Coast Highway intersection running northerly to the
shall occur prior to or concurrent with any new development at Back Bay Landing.
Policy 2.1.9-1
The Back Bay Landing site shall be developed as a unified site with coastal -dependent, coastal -
:City ofNewport Beach
LCP Amendment Request No. 2-14
ATTACHMENT "A"
Suggesthd Modifications
Page 2 of 4
fig!r,�Ttenfi rrt�n�a7- - - ;m - . -:.
The Mixed -Use Water Related -MU-W category is applicable to the proiect(s) site; it it
The site shall be limited to a maximum floor area to land area ratio as established in General Plan
Land Use Element Anomaly Cap No..80.
application for Parcel (Back Bay Landing) which 13eMepm shall incorporate amenities
that assure access for. the ceastal visiters public, including the development of a public
pedestrian promenade along the bayfront (as described in Policy Z.L9-Z); bikeways with
connections to existing regional trails and paths; an eacinc:.d dry staek boat storage €aeAity a
parking: public restroom s: and public plazas and open spaces that provide public views, view
corridors, and new coastal view opportunities.
the terminus ofBayside Drive at the Newport Dunes recreation area to accommodate both
Dunes recreation area.
City of Newport Beach
LCP Amendment Request No. 2-14
ATTACHMENT "A'
Suggested Modifications
Page 3 of 4.
The site shall be developed as a unified site to prevent fragmentation and to assure each use's
viability, quality; and compatibility with adjoining uses. Development shall be designed and
planned to achieve ahigh level of architectural quality with pedestrian, non -automobile and
vehicular circulation and adequate parking provided.
Policy 2.1.9-2
waterfront Pedestrian access at the Newport Dunes recreation area at the other end (jeast).
These public access improvements shall be provided and made available for public use
concurrent with the development of the Back Bay Landing site. Restrictions on the hours of
Public access, if any, and landscape improvements shall only be established if they are
approved as Part of coastal development Permit for development ofBack Bav Landing: d
Policy 2.1.9-3
mobile home development and also across the private beach/submerged fee owned land
continuous, connected bayfront walkway.
Policy 2.1.9-4
waves from a 100 -year event or a storm that compares to the 1982/83 El Nino event
Policy 2.1.9-5:::..:.
coastal recreation, and coastal resources including beach and shoreline habitat
City of Newport Beach
LCP Amendment Request No. 2-14
ATTACHMENT'W'
Suggested Modifications
Page 4 of 4
2.1.510 Coastal Land Use Plan Map
The Coastal Land, Use Plan Map depicts the land use category for each property and is intended
to provide a graphic.representation of policies relating to the location, type, density, and intensity
of all land uses in the coastal zone.
Policy 2.1810-11 Land uses and new development in the coastal zone shall be consistent with
the Coastal 'Land Use Plan Map and all applicable LCP policies and
regulations.
4.4.2 Bulk and Height Limitation'
Policy 4.4.2-1
Maintain the 35 foot height limitation in the Shoreline Height Limitation Zone, as graphically
depicted on Map 43, except fpr Marina Park and the following sites:
A. Marina Parka'. [no change to existing language]
B. Former City Hall Complex... [no change to existing language]
2: Except for the area seaward ofthe:mobile home park described further below. gAmending
Figure 2.1.7-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan to change the designation of the existing 6.02$=acre
portion of the project site designated as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM -B) to MbEed-
Use 148AZentel (N Mixed -Use Water Related (MU -J" and the 0.304 -acre lot line
adjustment area designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU44W. The land use
*Changes to the Coastal Land Use May 1. Coastal Access Man 3-1 and the Bikeways and
Trails: Man 2 will need to be made to be consistent with the above suggested modifications.
APPENDIX B
REVISED LEGISLATIVE AND
ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL DOCUMENTS
Planning Commission Resolution No.
EXHIBIT B
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO GP2011-011
Consists of:
1. Amending Table LU2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan to revise the project
site land use designation to MU -W2 and to include the following two new anomalies:
Table
Anomaly
Statistical
Land Use
Development
Development
Additional
Number
Area
Designation
Limit (so
Limit LOtheo
Information
80
K-1
MU -W2
Nonresidential
For mixed-use
development:
development,
131,290 sf
residential floor area
shall not exceed a
Mixed-use
49 residential units
1:1 ratio to
development:
nonresidential floor
171,288 sf
area
81
K-1
RM
296 residential
units
2. Amending the Land Use Map of the Land Use Element to identify the locations of
Anomaly Nos. 80 and 81 and to change the designation of a portion of the project site
(except for the area seaward of the mobile home park described further below)
designated as Recreational and Marine Commercial (CM 0.5) to Mixed -Use Water -
Related (MU -W2) and the 0.387 -acre lot line adjustment area designated as Multiple Unit
Residential (RM) to MU -W2. The land use designation over the strip of land seaward
of the mobile home development shall remain Recreation and Marine Commercial
(CM -B) as it is currently designated.
oD
P�
QQ�
pP
• •
V
`^-
V
/
RM
ti
r:
---
MUM2'
COq
sPh
klF
o
yDNPO-,..
Lan•Use Change
Lot Line Adjustment
Area:
Ag
•
•
•
A
Mixed Use Water Refated
(MU -W2)
O
0
200 400
w� HT
GP2011-011
(PA2011-216)
Feet
-
General
Plan Amendment
e
300
Coast Hwy E
Document Name: PA2011-216 GP2011-011 Reso Exhibit
Planning Commission Resolution No.
EXHIBIT C
COASTAL LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT NO. LC2011-007
Consists of:
Amending Chapter 2.0 (Land Use and Development) of the Coastal Land Use Plan to
include the following sections and policies (deletions illustrated in st9keou additions
illustrated in underline) :
2.1.9 Back Bay Landing
Pearson's Port seafood market, and marine service equipment storage under the Coast
Highway Bridge.
to or concurrent with any new development at Back Bay Landing.
Policy 2.1.9-1
Planning Commission Resolution No.
floor area to land area ratio of 0.25 and a maximum of 0.5 shall be used for non-residential
uses. The amount of residential floor area shall not exceed the amount of non-residential floor
area (commercial plus boat storage).
The site shall be limited to a maximum floor area to land area ratio as established in General
Plan Land Use Element Anomaly Cap No. 80.
The boat storage, public promenade and public plazas, shall, as priority uses, be sited
adiacent to the bayfront, with the public launch area and boat storage on the
western/northwestem bayfront edge of the site, adjacent to the existing Pearson's Port
seafood market. A seafood market is planned to be preserved as a priority visitor-
serving/coastal-related commercial use.
A public coastal access proposal shall be submitted with any coastal development permit
public access parking; marina parking, public restrooms: and public plazas and open spaces
that provide public views, view corridors, and new coastal view opportunities.
Bayside Drive shall be improved on both sides with a new Class 2 (on -street) bike lane up to
Bayside Way and a new Class 3 (shared -use) bikeway east of Bayside Way. A Class 1 (off-
street) bikeway and pedestrian trail will also be provided on the east side of Bayside Drive
recreation area.
Policy 2.1.9 -
waterfront pedestrian access at the Newport Dunes recreation area at the other end (east).
These public access improvements shall be provided and made available for public use
Policy 2.1.9 -
Planning Commission Resolution No.
continuous, connected, bayfront walkway,
Policy 2.1.9-4
A site-specific hazards assessment of the potential for erosion, flooding and/or damage from
waves from a 100 -year event or a storm that compares to the 1982183 EI Nina event.
Policy 2.1.9-
coastal recreation, and coastal resources including beach and shoreline habitat.
2.1.9 10 Coastal Land Use Plan Map
The Coastal Land Use Plan Map depicts the land use category for each property and is
intended to provide a graphic representation of policies relating to the location, type, density,
and intensity of all land uses in the coastal zone.
Policy 2.1.8-10-1
Land use and new development in the coastal zone shall be consistent with the Coastal Land
Use Plan Map and all applicable LCP policies and regulations.
2. Except for the area seaward of the mobile home park described further below,
amending Figure 2.1.7-1 of the Coastal Land Use Plan to change the designation of the
existing 6.028 -acre portion of the project site designated as Recreational and Marine
Commercial (CM -B) to Mixed -Use Water Related (MU -W) and the 0.387 -acre lot line
adjustment area designated as Multiple Unit Residential (RM -C) to MU -W. The land use
designation over the strip of land seaward of the mobile home development shall
remain Recreation and Marine Commercial (CM -B) as it is currently designated.
3. Amending CLUP Coastal Access and Recreation Map 3-1 to illustrate the proposed
bayfront promenade as a future waterfront public access trail and Bikeways and Trail
Map 2 to illustrate the proposed bike lane and trail improvements on Bayside Drive.
BASIN
EWPORT
PIER
-64
LITTLE
CORONA
TH
......ter
LINDA
c
♦ ISLE
cyq
Y
i i ♦ �r
HARBOR
LIDO ♦ ISLAND
♦�
NE�POR, ♦ COLLINS `�•'11� ALBOA
♦ LIDO BAY ISLAND
♦ ISLE ISLAND
♦ `i �
fl?
-' B "- LBOA LAND
R
♦ CHq NNEL
FH ♦
CAMEO 0%
SHORE
City of Newport Beach, California (Harbor Area)
Local Coastal Program
Coastal Land Use Plan
NEWPO
3-40
FASHION
ISLAND
q o
$ m
y
PB A
n
THE
n
WEDGE m BIG
CORONA
E
0,
Aq
Coastal Access
and Recreation:
Mar) 3.1
(Map 3 of 3)
LEGEND
OPublic Beach Location
A Public Beach Access Location
0 Potential Access Point
Coastal Zone Boundary
�+ Lateral Access
+� • Potential Lateral Access
Vertical Access
`+.• Potential Vertical Access
Blufftop Access
Potential Blufftop Access
�•+ City Boundary
V3 Proposed Park
Public Beach or Park
omN 2 �
I�
NORTH
OMllei
December 12005
Planning Commission Resolution No.
EXHIBIT D
CODE AMENDMENT NO. CA2013-009
Consists of:
Amending the Zoning Map of the Newport Beach Zoning Code (Title 20) to expand the
boundaries of PC -9 to include: 1) the 0.387 -acre lot line adjustment area currently zoned
as Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Planned Community (PC-1/MHP); and, 2) the
existing 0.642 -acre portion of the project site currently zoned as Recreational and Marine
Commercial (CM).
W
iJ
PC
MHP
CA2013-009 (PA2011-216)
Zoning Code Amendment
300 Coast Hwy E
Name: PA2011-216 CA2013-009 Ord Exhibit
0 200 400
Feet
Back Bay Landing
PLANNED COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PC -9)
Prepared February 11, 2014
Adopted February 25, 2014, Ordinance No. 2014-4 (PA2011-216)
Amended April 12, 2016, Ordinance No. 2016-
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
Page Number
1. Introduction and Purpose of the Planned Community
Development Plan(PCDP).............................................................................
1
2. Development Limits and Land Use Plan .........................................................
4
3. Permitted Uses...............................................................................................
7
4. Development Standards.................................................................................
8
5. Design Guidelines..........................................................................................
21
6. Phasing..........................................................................................................
30
7. Back Bay Landing PCDP Implementation/Site Development
Review ............ 31
8. Definitions.......................................................................................................
36
TABLE
Page Number
1. Development Limits by Planning Area............................................................
4
2. Permitted Uses...............................................................................................
7
3. Parking Requirements....................................................................................
13
EXHIBIT (See Appendix)
Page Number Reference
1. Location Map..................................................................................................
1
2. Planning Areas...............................................................................................
1
3. Building Heights..............................................................................................
10
4. Seawall/Bulkhead Section..............................................................................
14
5. Public Spaces.................................................................................................
16
6. Coastal Access and Regional Trail Connections ............................................
16
7. Vehicular Circulation.......................................................................................
17
Back Bay Landing PCDP ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Continued)
EXHIBIT (See Appendix)
Page Number Reference
8.
Revised Vehicular Circulation and Parking .....................................................
17
9.
Utilities Plan....................................................................................................
19
10.
Drainage Plan.................................................................................................
19
11.
Architectural Theme.......................................................................................
22
12.
Conceptual Site and Landscape Plan.............................................................
22
13.
East Coast Highway View Corridors...............................................................
24
14.
Parking Plan...................................................................................................
26
Back Bay Landing PCDP iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ABC
California State Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control
CDP
Coastal Development Permit
CLUP
Coastal Land Use Plan
CM
Recreational and Marine Commercial
CUP
Conditional Use Permit
ESA
Environmental Study Area
ESHA
Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area
LID
Low Impact Development
HHW
Highest High Water
MLLW
Mean Lower Low Water
MU44W2
Mixed -Use Her4eata4Water-Related 2 (General Plan
Designation) t
MU -W
Mixed -Use Water -Related (CLUP Designation)
NAVD 88
North American Vertical Datum of 1988
OCSD
Orange County Sanitation District
OCTA
Orange County Transportation Authority
PC -9
Back Bay Landing Planned Community
PCDP
Planned Community Development Plan
WQMP
Water Quality Management Plan
Back Bay Landing PCDP iv
I. Introduction and Purpose of the Planned
Community Development Plan (PCDP)
A. Introduction
The Back Bay Landing site is envisioned to be developed as an integrated,
mixed-use waterfront village on an approximately 7 -acre portion of a 31.54 -acre
parcel located adjacent to the Upper Newport Bay in the City of Newport Beach.
The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code allows a Planned Community
Development Plan (PCDP) to address land use designations and regulations in
Planned Communities. The Back Bay Landing PCDP serves as the controlling
zoning ordinance for the site and is authorized and intended to implement the
provisions of the Newport Beach General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan.
The Back Bay Landing PCDP Design Guidelines provide a comprehensive vision
of the physical implementation of the project and have been drafted to assist the
City and community to visualize the architectural theme and desired character of
the development.
B. Project Location
The Back Bay Landing Planned Community (PC -9) is located within the City of
Newport Beach, in Orange County, California. The approximately 7 -acre primary
project area is generally located north of East Coast Highway and northwest of
Bayside Drive in the western portion of the City, as shown on Exhibit 1, Location
Map. The project area is bounded by the Upper Newport Back Bay to the north
and west, the Newport Dunes Waterfront Resort and the Bayside Village Mobile
Home Park to the east, East Coast Highway and various marina commercial and
restaurant uses south of the Highway to the southeast. As shown on Exhibit 2,
Planning Areas, the Back Bay Landing Planned Community is comprised of five
distinct Planning Areas: Mixed -Use Area (PA 1), Recreational and Marine
Commercial (PA 2), Existing Private Marina Access and Beach (PA 3), Marina
and Bayside Village Mobile Home Park Storage and Guest Parking (PA 4), and
Submerged Fee -Owned Lands (PA 5).
C. Purpose and Objectives
The purpose of the PCDP is to establish appropriate zoning regulations
governing land use and development of the site consistent with the City of
Newport Beach General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. The PCDP provides a
vision for the land uses on the site, sets the development standards and design
guidelines for specific project approvals at the Site Development Review and
Coastal Development Permit (CDP) approval stage, and regulates the long term
operation of the developed site.
Back Bay Landing PCDP
Implementation of the PCDP will:
- Provide a high quality mixed-use, marine -related, visitor -serving
commercial development with integrated residential units and a unified
architectural and landscape theme.
Implement the MU444—W2 (Mixed -_Use Horizontal—Water-Related 24)
General Plan and MU -WW (Mixed _Use Her;zonta!Water Related) Coastal
Land Use Plan categories on an underutilized bayfront location in a
manner that provides for commercial development on or near the bay in a
manner that will encourage the continuation of coastal -dependent and
coastal -related land uses and visitor -serving uses, as well as allow for the
development of mixed-use structures with residential uses above the
ground floor. Freestanding residential uses shall be prohibited.a
h O,�, t. distFih ted mix of uses, whimi--iRG!udes geReFa;---v,-
e iQhhr.rhGGd GemmeMial OffiGeS, I4' f@MiiY r oideRtial Visitor SePARq
- Maintain and expand core coastal dependent and coastal -related land
uses, including the development of marina parking and an enclosed dry
stack boat storage and launching facility.
- Provide new housing opportunities in response to demand for housing,
reduce vehicle trips and encourage active lifestyles by increasing the
opportunity for residents to live in proximity to jobs, services,
entertainment, and recreation.
- Protect and enhance significant visual resources from identified public
vantage points, such as Coast Highway, Castaways Park, and Coast
Highway -Bay Bridge, to the bay and the cliffs of upper Newport Beach
through view corridors designed into the project. New public view
opportunities will be created on-site.
- Expand bayfront access to and along the bay where it does not exist at
the present time, in a manner that protects environmental study areas
(ESA) and/or environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) and does
not adversely impact existing private residences adjacent to the site.
- Provide continuous public coastal access with a new minimum 12 -foot -
wide bayfront access promenade along the bayfront edge of Planning
Areas 1.-an4-2, and 3. This new, public bayfront promenade will link the
public docks and marina property south of the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge
along the bayfront, to the existing Newport Dunes recreational area. In
addition bike lanes and pedestrian access will be provided along Bayside
Drive from the intersection of Bayside Drive/East Coast Highway
intersection running northerly to the terminus of Bayside Drive at the
Back Bay Landing PCDP
D. Relationship to the Newport Beach Municipal Code
Whenever the development regulations contained in this PCDP conflict with the
regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained in
this PCDP shall take precedence. The Municipal Code shall regulate all
development within the PCDP when such regulations are not provided within the
PCDP. All construction within the Back Bay Landing PCDP (PC -9) shall be in
compliance with the California Building Code, California Fire Code, and all other
ordinances adopted by the City pertaining to construction and safety features. All
words and phrases used in this Back Bay Landing PCDP shall have the same
meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code unless
defined differently in Section VIII, Definitions.
E. Relationship to Design Guidelines
Development within the site shall be regulated by both the Development Plan
and the Design Guidelines.
Back Bay Landing PCDP
II. Development Limits and Land Use Plan
The development limits in this Development Plan are consistent with those established
by the General Plan and are identified in the following Table 1, Development Limits by
Planning Area. Parking structures, carts, kiosks, temporary and support uses are
permitted and are not counted towards square footage development limits. In addition,
the OCSD wastewater pump station shall not be counted towards square footage
development limits.
Table 1
Development Limits by Planning Area"'
Land Use
Planning
Planning
Planning
Planning
Planning
Total Per
Area 1
Area 2
Area 3
Area 4
Area 5
Land Use
Commercial
49,144 sf
8,390 sf
0
4,000 sf
0
61,534 sf
Residential
49 du
0
0
0
0
49 du
(85 644 sf)
(85,644 sf)
Marina
0
0
0
0
220 wet
slips
220 wet slips
Dry
32,500 sf
32,500 sf
SoatStack
(140 spaces)
0
0
0
0
(140 spaces)
Storage
TOTAL
179,679 SF
Notes.,
(1) All limits expressed as "sF are gross square feet as defined in the Newport Beach Zoning Code.
(2) Development limits are subject to General Plan Land Use Plan and Table LUZ Anomaly Caps.
A. Planning Area 1 — Mixed -Use Area
The primary land -side parcel immediately north of East Coast Highway to the
northwest is intended to allow commercial development on or near the bay in a
manner that will encourage the continuation of coastal -dependent and coastal -
related land uses and visitor -serving uses, as well as allow for the development
of mixed-use structures with residential uses above the ground floorfer
fegFat'er of mixed use waterfFORt Prn'e Gt with marine and visitor
al and FeGFeatiORai uses, while allowing fn, , Freestanding
residential uses shall be prohibited. residential Priority uses include --retail,
restaurants, boat storage, marine and boat sales, boat rentals, boat
service/repair, and recreational commercial uses such as kayak and paddle
board rentals.
Back Bay Landing PCDP
The total gross floor area of Planning Area 1 shall be limited to 49,144 square
feet of marine -related and visitor -serving commercial and recreational uses; a
new 32,500 -square foot full-service and fully enclosed dry stack boat storage (up
to a maximum of 140 boat spaces) and launching facility; and a maximum of 49
residential units within a maximum of 85,644 square feet of residential floor area.
Development shall incorporate amenities that assure bayfront access for coastal
visitors, including the development of a minimum 12 -foot -wide public pedestrian
and bicyclist promenade along the waterfront with connections to existing
regional trails and paths, an enclosed dry stack boat storage facility, public
plazas and open spaces that provide public views and view corridors, and
construction of a coastal public view tower.
Any mixed-use development that includes integration of residential units shall be
subject to the following additional development limitations:
1. A minimum of 50 percent of the total proposed gross floor area located
within Planning Area 1 shall be limited to non-residential uses. This
non-residential use may consist of any combination of visitor -serving
retail, restaurants, marine boat sales, office, and/or enclosed dry stack
boat storage.
2. At minimum, a total of 68,955 square feet of non-residential gross floor
area shall be developed within Planning Area 1 and 4.
3. The enclosed boat storage, public promenade and public plazas shall
be sited adiacent to the bayfront, with public launch area and boat
storage on the western/northwestern bayfront edge of the site,
adjacent to the existing Pearson's Port seafood market. A MiRiMUM of
50 Percent of the fetal n sed r c;idpnf'al nits shall be develop
.Thin mixed s buildings with non residential a IOGated n the
gFE)URd flOOr levet.
B. Planning Area 2 - Recreational and Marine Commercial
Planning Area 2 is located immediately south of the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge
and is intended to be developed with recreational and marine -related commercial
uses. The total gross floor area of Planning Area 2 shall be limited to 8,390
square feet.
Development shall incorporate a minimum 12 -foot -wide public pedestrian and
bicyclist promenade along the waterfront with connections to existing and/or
planned regional trails and paths, and open spaces that provide public views and
view corridors. An integrated connection to the planned public/private marina,
pier, and trail to the south shall be developed.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 5
C. Planning Area 3 — Existing Private Marina Access and
Beach
Planning Area 3 consists of an existing narrow strip of private marina access
walkway and non -publicly accessible beach area located between the Bayside
Village Mobile Home Park and Bayside Marina, which provides marina lessee
access to private boat slips and docks. Development shall incorporate a
minimum 12 -foot -wide public pedestrian and bicyclist promenade within the
existing marina access walkway and also across the private beach/submerged
fee owned land with the width necessary to complete a continuous connection to
the existing or planned regional trails and paths, and to the Newport Dunes
recreational area. Allowed improvements shall be limited to access
walkwayspublic promenade, guardrails, seawall/bulkhead replacement,
landscaping, 6444 -screening and lighting. The non publicly onneccibl.-, bo^^h
is GurFentlr�+l+l utilized by theexisting Bayside Village Mobile Herne Park No other
development shall occur within this walkway and the beach area, which shall
^te
D. Planning Area 4 — Marina and Bayside Village Mobile Home
Park Storage and Guest Parking
Planning Area 4 is a narrow strip of land located on the eastern project boundary
and development shall be limited to a gross floor area of 4,000 square feet. This
area is intended to be re -used primarily as standard sized parking for residents
and guests of the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park. Additional standard sized
parking will be provided for the Bayside Village Marina tenants. New
replacement storage, replacement restrooms, laundry facilities and lockers will
be built for the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park and Marina tenants. A new
replacement gate entry for this area is allowed. Development shall incorporate a
minimum 12 -foot -wide public pedestrian and bicyclist promenade with the width
necessary to complete a continuous connection to the existing or planned
regional trails and paths and to the Newport Dunes recreational area. No other
uses shall be allowed in this storage/parking/facilities area.
E. Planning Area 5 - Submerged Fee -Owned Lands
This fee -owned submerged land area consists of an existing 220 -slip marina and
is bordered by the earthen De Anza Bayside Marsh Peninsula. The De Anza
Bayside Marsh Peninsula was originally constructed with dredging spoils and rip -
rap as fill to provide a protected harbor and overflow parking for the Bayside
Marina. No new development shall occur within the De Anza Bayside Marsh
Peninsula. A small gravel parking and access road currently exists on the
Back Bay Landing PCDP 6
eastern portion of the peninsula and is used for overflow parking for the marina.
The existing gravel parking lot shall not be expanded in area or paved; however,
maintenance activities shall be permitted. The marina shall be regulated by Title
17 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
III. Permitted Uses
Permitted uses are those uses set forth in this Section for each Planning Area as shown
on Table 2, Permitted Uses. The uses identified within the table are not comprehensive
but rather major use categories. Specific uses are permitted consistent with the
definitions provided in Section VIII of this PCDP. Uses determined to be accessory or
ancillary to permitted uses, or uses that support permitted uses are also permitted. The
Community Development Director may determine other uses not specifically listed
herein are allowed, provided they are consistent with the purpose of this PCDP,
Planning Areas, and are compatible with surrounding uses. The initial construction of
any new structure, or the significant reconstruction or major addition, shall be subject to
Site Development Review pursuant to Section VII of this PCDP.
Table 2
Permitted Uses
Uses lanning Areas
Planning
Area 1
Planning
Area 2
Planning
Area 3
Planning
Area 4
Planning
Area 5
Commercial Recreation and CUP
Entertainment
Cultural Institution P
P
Eating and Drinking Establishments
Bar, Loun e, and Nightclubs
Fast Food No Drive Thru P.
Food Service, No Late Hours P.
Food Service, Late Hours CUP
Take -Out Service, Limited P P
Take -Out Service, Only P P
Marina MC Title 17
Marina Support Facilities P P P
Marine Rentals and Sales
Marine Retail Sales P
P
Boat Rentals and Sales MUP
MUP
Marine Services MUP
MUP
Entertainment and Excursion CUP
Vessels
Office P
P
Personal Services
General P
Restricted MUP
Residential Located above 15floor P
Visitor -Serving Retail P. P.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 7
P=Permitted
CUP=Conditional Use Permit
MUP=Minor Use Permit
`=A Minor Use Permit is required for the sale of alcohol
-= Not Permitted
Back Bay Landing PCDP
IV. Development Standards
The following site development standards shall apply:
A. Setback Requirements
Setbacks are the minimum distance from the property line to building or
structure, unless otherwise specified.
1. Street Setback
a) East Coast Highway - 0 feet (provided a minimum 10 -foot
landscape buffer is provided to the back of sidewalk)
b) Coast Highway -Bay Bridge - 20 feet to edge of bridge (public
access connections kayak/paddleboard rentals, storage, and
launch uses may be permitted within this setback and beneath
the bridge, subject to Site Development Review).
c) Bayside Drive - 5 feet
2. Perimeter Setback
a) Abutting Non-residential - 0 feet
b) Abutting Existing Residential - 25 feet, except:
i. In Planning Area 1, public restrooms and marina lockers
may provide a minimum 5 -foot setback.
ii. In Planning Area 4, a minimum 5 -foot setback may be
provided.
3. Bayfront Setback
a) Bulkhead - 15 feet from constructed bulkhead wall to allow for a
minimum 12 -foot -wide public bayfront promenade and a
minimum 3 -foot -wide landscape area.
b) No Bulkhead
i. In Planning Area 1, 15 feet from the Highest High Water
contour elevation noted as 7.86' above Mean Lower low
Water (0.0') or 7.48'/NAVD 88 to allow for a minimum 12 -
foot -wide public bayfront promenade and a minimum 3 -foot -
wide landscape area.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 9
ii. In Planning Area 2, 15 feet from contour elevation 10 (NAVD
88) to allow for a minimum 12 -foot -wide public bayfront
promenade and a minimum 3 -foot -wide landscape area.
4. Setback Encroachments
a) Fences, Walls, and Hedges
Permitted within the Perimeter Setback Abutting Existing
Residential up to a maximum height of 8 feet.
ii. Within Bayfront Setback, see subsection c. below.
iii. Permitted in all other setback areas up to a maximum
height of 42 inches.
b) Architectural Features
i. Roof overhangs, brackets, cornices and eaves may
encroach 30 inches into a required Perimeter Setback
area, provided a minimum vertical clearance above grade
of 8 feet is maintained.
ii. Decorative architectural features (e.g., belt courses,
ornamental moldings, pilasters, and similar features) may
encroach up to 6 inches into any required Perimeter
Setback.
c) Bayfront Setback
i. Benches, sculptures, light standards, hedges, open
guardrails and safety features, and other similar features
that enhance the public bayfront promenade may
encroach into the bayfront setback, provided a 12 -foot -
wide clear path is maintained.
d) Other- Other encroachments may be permitted through the Site
Development Review.
B. Permitted Height of Structures
1. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height shall be 35 feet for structures with
flat roofs and 40 feet for structures with sloped roofs (minimum 3:12 pitch),
except as follows:
Back Bay Landing PCDP 10
a) As illustrated on Exhibit 3, Building Heights, 100 feet from back of
curb along Bayside Drive within the eastern portion of Planning Area
1, maximum allowable building height shall not exceed 26 feet for
flat roofs and 31 feet for sloped roofs.
e)bIWithin Planning Area 1, maximum allowable height for any parking
structure shall not exceed 30 feet for flat roofs and 35 feet for sloped
roofs.
d)cjMaximum allowable building height within Planning Area 2 shall not
exceed 26 feet for flat roofs and 31 feet for sloped roofs.
e)!LWithin Planning Area 4, maximum allowable building height shall
not exceed 20 feet for flat roofs and 25 feet for sloped roofs.
f)e)All other exceptions to height shall be regulated pursuant to Section
20.30.060.D of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
2. Grade for the Purposes of Measuring Height
a) Within Planning Area 1, height shall be measured from the
established baseline elevation of either 11 feet or 14 feet (NAVD 88)
as illustrated on Exhibit 3, Building Heights, or as determined by the
Sea Level Rise and Shoreline Management Plan.
b) Within Planning Area 2, height shall be measured from the
established baseline elevation of 12 feet (NAVD 88)
c) Within Planning Area 4, height shall be measured from the
established baseline elevation of 12 feet (NAVD 88)
C. Residential Units
Open Space
a) Common Open Space - A minimum of 75 square feet per dwelling
shall be provided for common open space (e.g., pool, patio, decking,
and barbecue areas, common meeting rooms, etc.). The minimum
dimension (length and width) shall be 15 feet. The common open
space areas shall be separated from non-residential uses on the site
and shall be sited and designed to limit intrusion by non-residents
and customers of non-residential uses. However, sharing of
Back Bay Landing PCDP 11
common open space may be allowed, subject to Site Development
Review, when it is clear that the open space will provide a direct
benefit to project residents. Common open space uses may be
provided on rooftops for use only by project residents.
b) Private Open Space - Five percent of the gross floor area for each
unit. The minimum dimension (length and width) shall be 6 feet.
The private open space shall be designed and located to be used by
individual units (e.g., patios, balconies, etc.).
2. Non-residential Use Required on Ground Floor - All of the ground
floor frontage of a mixed-use structure shall be occupied by retail
and other compatible non-residential uses, with the exception of
common/shared building entrances for residences on upper floors.
3. Sound Mitigation - An acoustical analysis report, prepared by an
acoustical engineer, shall be submitted describing the acoustical
design features of the structure that will satisfy the exterior and
interior noise standards. The residential units shall be attenuated in
compliance with the report.
4. Buffering and screening - Buffering and screening shall be
provided in compliance with Municipal Code Section 20.30.020
(Buffering and Screening). Mixed-use projects shall locate loading
areas, parking lots, driveways, trash enclosures, mechanical
equipment, and other noise sources away from the residential
portion of the development to the greatest extent feasible.
5. Notification to owners and tenants - A written disclosure
statement shall be prepared prior to sale, lease, or rental of a
residential unit within the development. The disclosure statement
shall indicate that the occupants will be living in an urban type of
environment and that the noise, odor, and outdoor activity levels
may be higher than a typical suburban residential area. The
disclosure statement shall include a written description of the
potential impacts to residents of both the existing environment (e.g.,
noise from boats, planes, commercial activity on the site and
vehicles on Coast Highway) and potential nuisances based upon the
allowed uses in the zoning district. Each and every buyer, lessee, or
renter shall sign the statement acknowledging that they have
received, read, and understand the disclosure statement. A
covenant shall also be included within all deeds, leases or contracts
conveying any interest in a residential unit within the development
that requires: (1) the disclosure and notification requirement stated
herein; (2) an acknowledgment by all grantees or lessees that the
property is located within an urban type of environment and that the
noise, odor, and outdoor activity levels may be higher than a typical
Back Bay Landing PCDP 12
suburban residential area; and (3) acknowledgment that the
covenant is binding for the benefit and in favor of the City of Newport
Beach.
6. Deed notification - A deed notification shall be recorded with the
County Recorder's Office, the form and content of which shall be
satisfactory to the City Attorney. The deed notification document
shall state that the residential unit is located in a mixed-use
development and that an owner may be subject to impacts, including
inconvenience and discomfort, from lawful activities occurring in the
project or zoning district (e.g., noise, lighting, odors, high pedestrian
activity levels, etc.).
D. Parking Requirements
1. General Standards
Parking requirements are shown in the following Table 3, Parking
Requirements, per land use. Kiosks for retail sales shall not be
included in the calculation of parking.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 13
Table 3
Parking Requirements
Land Use
Parking Ratio
Boat Rentals and Sales
As established per MUP
Eating and Drinking
Establishments
1 space per 30 to 50 SF of Net Public
Area*
Take -Out Service, Limited
1 space per 250 square feet
Marina Support Facilities
0.5 spaces per 1,000 SF
Marina Wet Slips
0.6 spaces per slip
Marine Services
Enclosed Dry Stack Boat
Storage
0.33 spaces per slip
Entertainment and
Excursion Services
1 per each 3 passengers and crew
members or as required by MUP
Other
As established per MUP
Office
1 space per 250 square feet
Medical Office
1 space per 200 square feet
Residential Units (Attached)
2 spaces per unit, plus
0.5 resident guest spaces per unit
Retail Sales
1 space per 250 square feet
Other
Municipal Code
* Including outdoor dining, but excluding first 25% or 1,000 SF of outdoor
dining per restaurant, whichever is less.
2. Parking Management Plan
Off-street parking requirements may be reduced with the approval
of a Conditional Use Permit based upon complementary peak hour
parking demand of uses within the development. The Planning
Commission may grant a joint -use of parking spaces between uses
that result in a reduction in the total number of required parking
spaces in compliance with the following conditions:
a) The most remote space is located within a convenient distance
to the use it is intended to serve.
b) The probable long-term occupancy of the structures, based on
their design, will not generate additional parking demand.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 14
c) The applicant has provided sufficient data, including a parking
study if required by the Director, to indicate that there is no
conflict in peak parking demand for the uses proposing to make
joint -use of parking facilities.
d) The property owners, if more than one, involved in the joint -use
of parking facilities shall record a parking agreement approved
by the Director and City Attorney. The agreement shall be
recorded with the County Recorder, and a copy shall be filed
with the Department.
e) A parking management plan shall be prepared to address
potential impacts associated with a reduction in the number of
required parking spaces.
3. Access, location, and improvements. Access, location, parking
space and lot dimensions, and parking lot improvements shall be in
compliance with the Development Standards for Parking Areas
Section of the Municipal Code.
E. Landscaping
A detailed landscape and irrigation plan shall be prepared by a licensed
landscape architect and submitted with the Site Development Review application.
All landscaping shall comply with the applicable landscaping requirements
specified in the Municipal Code, including the Landscaping Standards and
Water -Efficient Landscaping Sections. In addition, vegetated landscaped areas
shall only consist of native plants or non-native drought tolerant plants, which are
non-invasive. No plant species listed as problematic and/or invasive by the
California Native Plant Society, the California Invasive Plant Council, or as may
be identified from time to time by the State of California shall be employed or
allowed to naturalize or persist on the site. No plant species listed as a "noxious
weed" by the State of California or the U.S. Federal Government shall be utilized
within the property. All plants shall be low water use plants as identified by
California Department of Water Resources.
F. Seawall/Bulkhead Standards
As shown on Exhibit 4, Seawall/Bulkhead Section, a new bayfront
seawall/bulkhead may be constructed along the bayfront to protect existing and
future development, subject to the following:
Back Bay Landing PCDP 15
1. Planning Area 1
a) Any new bulkhead structure shall not extend bayward beyond the
Highest High Water contour elevation of 7.86' relative to MLLW
(0.0') or 7.487NAVD 88 (see also applicable General Requirements
below) to preserve the shoreline profile.
2. Planning Area 2
a) Any new bulkhead structure shall not extend bayward beyond the
10' contour elevation (NAVD 88) to preserve the shoreline profile.
3. Planning Area 3
a)Maintenance, repair, and replacement of the existing bulkhead wall
shall be permitted to protect existing development.
a4b)Improvements are permitted to provide the required public access
connection across, over or around the private beach and intertidal
area and shall take into consideration and be consistent with
measures identified in the Sea Level Rise and Shoreline
Management Plan to adapt to sea level rise and to ensure the long
term protection of public improvements, coastal access and adjacent
existing residential areas.
4. Planning Area 4 and 5
a) No bulkheads shall be permitted.
5. General Requirements
a) The minimum top of bulkhead elevation shall be 10 feet (NAVD 88)
or a higher elevation if the Sea Level Rise and Shoreline
Management Plan requires a higher elevation to address sea level
rise.
b) Seawalls, bulkheads, revetments and other such construction that
alters the existing shoreline processes shall be permitted when
required to serve coastal -dependent uses or to protect existing
principal structures or public beaches in danger from erosion and
when designed to eliminate or mitigate adverse impacts on local
shoreline sand supply. In addition, such improvements shall only be
permitted when found consistent with applicable sections of the
Coastal Act and City's Coastal Land Use Plan policies.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 16
c�Bulkheads shall be designed to provide access points to the
shoreline.
G. Diking, Filling, and Dredging Standards
The diking, filling, or dredging of open coastal waters, wetlands and estuaries
shall be permitted in accordance with applicable provisions of the Coastal Act
and City's Coastal Land Use Plan policies.
H. Public Bayfront Promenade and Trail
A ,-continuous, minimum 12 -foot -wide bayfront access promenade shall be
constructed along the bayfront edge of Planning Areas 1 2 and 3. This new,
public bayfront promenade will link the public docks and marina property south of
the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge along the bayfront and to the Newport Dunes
recreational" feet wide "'i^ ba as
illustrated in Exhibit 5 Public Spaces, and 6, Coastal Access and Regional Trail
Connections,, Public Spaees, alEng the length of the seawa"'h l khead te the
beURdary with the Bayside Village Mobile Home Park, and GGRtiRuing aleRg the
Project entranGe tO Bayside DF ve The construction of the promenade shall
include a connection across the private beach/submerged fee owned land
located within Planning Area 3 necessary to complete a continuous path The
design details of the public bayfront promenade shall be submitted with Site
Development Review. The public bayfront promenade shall comply with the
following requirements:
An easement for public access shall be provided to the City along the entire
length of the proposed public bayfront promenade. The easement area shall
be maintained in good condition and repaired at no cost to the City.
The public bayfront promenade shall be accessible to pedestrians and
bicyclists, and shall extend along the waterfront under the Coast Highway -
Bay Bridge and shall connect to an existing trail system on the south side of
East Coast Highway.
3. The bayfront promenade shall interface with restaurants and outdoor dining
areas, f" ,easta;--pub4G–view–towef, the enclosed dry stack boat storage,
_–public plaza, and marine boat service areas to the maximum
extent feasible. Amenities such as seating, trash enclosures, lighting, and
other pedestrian -oriented improvements shall be provided along its length
where appropriate, provided a 12 -foot -wide clear path is maintained.
3.-4 Bayside Drive shall be improved on both sides with a new Class 2 (on -
street) bike lane up to Bayside Way and a new Class 3 (shared -use) bikeway
Back Bay Landing PCDP 17
east of Bayside Way. A Class 1 (off-street) bikeway and pedestrian trail will
also be provided on the east side of Bayside Drive that originates at the
Bayside Drive / East Coast Highway intersection and runs northerly to the
terminus of Bayside Drive, as shown on Exhibit 6, Coastal Access and
Regional Trail Connections, to accommodate both cyclists and pedestrians.
This improvement shall serve as an enhanced link between the new public
bayfront promenade and the existing City and County trail systems and the
Newport Dunes recreation area.
4-5. Trails shall be located and designed consistent with Coastal Land Use
Plan (CLUP) Policy 3.1.1-1 and the Coastal Act, with appropriate landscaping
and screening where necessary to protect the privacy of adjacent new or
existing Bayside Village Mobile Home Park
residents or residential uses, consistent with Public Resources Code section
30214 (Coastal Act).
I. Vehicular Circulation
1. Primary vehicular and pedestrian access to the site shall be set back from its
current location on Bayside Drive to approximately 200 feet north of the East
Coast Highway intersection, as shown on Exhibit 7, Vehicular Circulation, and
Exhibit 8, Revised Vehicular Circulation and Parking. This project driveway
will service both inbound and outbound movements, improve the existing
driveway connection further into the site, and will be relocated approximately
45 feet north of its current location. Any guest parking that is displaced in the
adjacent mobile home park complex as a result of this new driveway
alignment shall be replaced within the mobile home park complex or within
Planning Area 4 on the east side of Bayside Village Mobile Home Park.
2. Intersection improvements at Bayside Drive shall maintain the existing left -
turn lane, add a shared left-turn/through lane, and add an exclusive right -turn
lane on the southbound approach of the signalized intersection with East
Coast Highway. Project access enhancements shall include an exclusive left -
turn lane on the northbound approach of the Bayside Drive and project
driveway intersection.
3. Primary circulation within the development shall accommodate adequate fire
truck turn -around. Emergency vehicle access to and from Bayside Village
Mobile Home Park to the site shall be provided consistent with Exhibit 8,
Revised Vehicular Circulation and Parking.
4. An optional secondary access may be constructed, subject to the review and
approval of the Public Works Department, California Department of
Transportation, Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), and the
Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD) that would add an exclusive right -
turn lane along westbound East Coast Highway, as shown on Exhibit 7,
Vehicular Circulation. This connection would be located approximately 430
Back Bay Landing PCDP 18
feet west of the Bayside Drive intersection with East Coast Highway, and
would allow for inbound right -turn movements only. Outbound movements at
this connection point would be prohibited.
J. Lighting
A detailed lighting plan with lighting fixtures and standard designs shall be
submitted with the Site Development Review application. The lighting plan shall
illustrate how all exterior lighting is designed to reduce unnecessary illumination
of adjacent properties, conserve energy, minimize detrimental effects on
sensitive environmental areas, and provide minimum standards for safety. At
minimum, exterior lighting shall comply with the following:
1. Protection from glare.
a. Shielding required. Exterior lighting shall be shielded and light
rays confined within boundaries of the site.
b. Light spill prohibited. Direct rays or glare shall not create a public
nuisance by shining onto public streets, adjacent sites, or beyond
the perimeter of the bayfront promenade.
C. Maximum light at property line. No more than one candlefoot of
illumination shall be present at the property line.
d. Maximum light beyond bayfront. No more than 0.25 candlefoot
of illumination shall be present beyond the perimeter of the bayfront
promenade.
2. Photometric study. A photometric study plan shall be incorporated into
the lighting plan to ensure lighting will not negatively impact surrounding
land uses and adjacent sensitive coastal resource areas.
3. Lighting fixtures. Exterior lights shall consist of a light source, reflector,
and shielding devices so that, acting together, the light beam is controlled
and not directed across a property line or beyond the bayfront promenade.
4. Parking lot light standards. Light standards within parking lots shall be
the minimum height required to effectively illuminate the parking area and
eliminate spillover of light and glare onto adjoining properties. To
accomplish this, a greater number of shorter light standards may be
required as opposed to a lesser number of taller standards.
rr+rrai�
K. Signs
Back Bay Landing PCDP 19
A comprehensive sign program with sign materials and lighting details shall be
submitted with the Site Development Review application. All signage shall
comply with the Sign Standards Section of the Municipal Code, with the following
exceptions:
1. Temporary Signs- Temporary signs that are visible from public right-of-ways
and identify new construction or remodeling may be displayed for the duration
of the construction period beyond the 60 -day limit. Signs mounted on
construction fences are allowed during construction and may be rigid or
fabric.
2. Directional signs oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic within internal
drives or walkways, such as electronic display signs, kiosk signs, internal
banners, and three-dimensional sculptural advertising associated with
individual businesses are allowed, or similar, and are not regulated as to size,
content, or color; however, signs shall require permits and shall be subject to
the review of the City Traffic Engineer to ensure adequate sight distance in
accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
L. Utilities
Existing and proposed water and sewer locations are shown on Exhibit 9, Utilities
Plan, and existing and proposed storm drain locations are shown on Exhibit 10,
Drainage Plan. A Final Utilities Plan shall be submitted with the Site
Development Review application. The final alignment and location of utilities
shall be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. Adequate
access for maintenance vehicles shall be provided. A 30 -foot -wide accessible
easement shall be provided for the relocated water transmission line. Buildings
shall maintain a minimum distance of 15 feet from the water line, unless
otherwise approved by the Public Works Department.
M. Sustainability
The development shall be designed as a sustainable community which will allow
residents, tenants and visitors to enjoy a high quality of life while minimizing their
impact on the environment. A Sustainability Plan that addresses topics such as
water and energy efficiency, indoor environmental quality and waste reduction
shall be submitted with the Site Development Review application.
Sustainable programming shall be used to maximize efficiency by conserving
water, minimizing construction impacts, minimizing energy use and reducing
construction and post -construction waste. California -friendly landscaping shall
Back Bay Landing PCDP 20
be utilized in public areas and reclaimed water use (if available) on-site or off-site
will further reduce water demand. Appropriate best management practices shall
be incorporated into landscape design. Energy reduction, recycling, and the
smart use of existing resources shall be implemented. The development shall
incorporate a walkable community design to promote walking and bicycling, and
thus reduce reliance on automotive transport.
The development shall include Low Impact Development (LID) features for storm
water quality improvement where none exist today. Potential LID features may
include storm water planters, permeable pavement and proprietary bioretention
systems. Through the development of a project -specific Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP), the appropriate site design, source control and LID
control features shall be implemented to improve water quality in the Bay,
including weekly street sweeping of all drive aisles and parking areas.
N. Public Improvements
A public improvements plan shall be submitted with the Site Development
Review application specifying the public improvements to be constructed in
conjunction with the development of the site and phasing of such improvements.
At minimum, the plan shall discuss and illustrate utility improvements, the
bayfront promenade, Bayside Drive street and bikeway improvements, and
improvements to the OCSD facility.
O. Hazards Assessment
A site-specific hazards assessment shall be submitted with the Site Development
Review application addressing the potential for erosion flooding and/or damage
from natural forces including, but not limited to tidal action waves storm surge
or seiches, prepared by a licensed civil engineer with expertise in coastal
processes. The conditions that shall be considered in a hazards analysis are: a
seasonally eroded beach/shoreline combined with long-term (75 years) erosion;
high tide conditions, combined with long-term (75 years) projections for sea level
rise using the best available science; storm waves from a 100 -year event or a
storm that compares to the 1982/83 EI Nino event.
P. Sea Level Rise and Shoreline Management
A sea level rise and shoreline management plan shall be prepared for the site
and submitted with the Site Development Review application. The plan shall
address shoreline areas of the site subiect to tidal action, flooding wave hazards
and erosion, and incorporate measures to adapt to sea level rise over time and
provide for the long term protection and provision of public improvements,
coastal access, public opportunities for coastal recreation and coastal resources
including beach and shoreline habitat.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 21
V. Design Guidelines
The Back Bay Landing Design Guidelines are intended to express the desired character
of the future mixed-use waterfront village. These guidelines set parameters for future
design efforts and help achieve overall consistency and quality of architectural design
and landscape features at build -out. They also explore the aesthetic quality and
functionality of the upper limit of acceptable development intensity, and are structured to
allow the City considerable flexibility in review of future project submittals and
subsequent approvals. All development within the Planned Community shall be in
conformance with these Design Guidelines.
The purpose of the Design Guidelines is:
• To provide the City of Newport Beach, the California Coastal Commission, and
future residents and visitors with the necessary assurances that, when
completed, the development will be built in accordance with the design character
proposed herein;
• To provide guidance to developers, builders, engineers, architects, landscape
architects and other professionals in order to maintain the desired design
character and appearance of the project, as well as expand upon these
concepts in order to maximize the success of the development consistent with
market needs, aesthetic satisfaction, and community goals;
• To provide guidance to the City Staff, Planning Commission, City Council
members and the California Coastal Commission in the review of future
development submissions; and
• To encourage building plans that allow flexibility for innovative and creative
design solutions that respond to contemporary market trends.
A. Architectural Theme
The development shall be designed with a Coastal "^e�'9�a,terraneaR architectural
theme. This architectural theme is influenced by the etifflate marine climate of
tho n Rtrion it n n from , l atiRg oo L.tton of the, L,n.dSGapn and ., nh'tont
6^ the North M.e diterranean Sea the California coastline, with varied historical
vernacular and casually elegant palette, with building forms and massing that
define and create unique and often seamless indoor/outdoor spaces. The project
will follow principles of quality design, exhibiting a high level of architectural
standards and shall be compatible with the surrounding area, sensitive to scale,
proportion and identity with a focus on place -making. Massing offsets, variation
of roof lines, varied textures, openings, recesses, and design accents on all
Back Bay Landing PCDP 22
building elevations shall be provided to enhance the architectural design and be
ireatrim The intent is not to select a historically specific or rigid architectural
style for the project, but to create an active, mixed-use village. help shape -the
Gh.,,-..Gter of the area Rd Fef!..,,t its setting ithiR the r„t.,
The project should accommodates marine -
oriented and visitor -serving retail, restaurants, enclosed dry stack boat storage,
and residential unitsresidential uses, while integrating thepublic spaces, bayfront
promenade and plaza in a pedestrian -friendly manner.
tower: The "village look" may be expressed through several techniques. Visual
interest may be created by multiple one-, two- and three-level buildings, with
varied roof heights and planes. Light and shadows may be created through the
use of trellises, decks, and canopies. The planes of the buildings should include
recesses and vertical elements to create the village feeling. Varied roof heights
should communicate the break-up of architectural forms.
The parking structure shall be designed to add to the public and visitor -serving
retail experience and be easily accessible. The project's architectural style, with
the recommended use Of StO„e, tile and-tdlassmodern or traditional sustainable
materials, should blend in color and form with existing similarly themed facilities
within Newport Beach, and provide a high standard of quality for future
neighboring development. Sample imagery is provided on Exhibit 11,
Architectural Theme.
B. Site Planning
1. As illustrated in Exhibit 12, Conceptual Site and -Plan, the
development shall be designed as an integrated, mixed-use waterfront village
that encourages public access to and along the bayfront.
2. A public bayfront promenade shall be developed between the Balboa Marina
development to the south and the Newport Dunes and the regional trail
system to the east. Special features of this public bayfront promenade shall
include coastal plazas, vista points and connections with City/County trails
and Newport Dunes as shown on Exhibit 5, Public Spaces.
3. Back Bay Landing restaurants, visitor -serving commercial and plaza areas
shall be accessible to the community by public and private vehicular
transportation, pedestrian and bike paths, and public dock space.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 23
4. Scenic view corridors should be incorporated throughout the project to
maintain or enhance existing coastal views from East Coast Highway as
shown on Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View Corridors.
5. Outdoor dining and plaza areas shall be designed to interface with the street
and bayfront. Siting of outdoor dining facilities shall minimize potential
impacts on occupants of adjacent residential units.
7--.6. The development shall create a strong pedestrian interface with the
waterfront, maximizing accessibility and providing visual corridors enhancing
the public/visitor experience.
&7. Buildings should be arranged to create opportunities for public gathering
spaces, encourage outdoor living and invite patronage. Mixed-use areas
should emphasize pedestrian orientation by utilizing features such as plazas,
courtyards, interior walkways, trellises, seating, fountains, and other similar
elements.
P-8. The development shall promote connectivity throughout the village and to
adjacent developments and trails systems through the use of shared facilities
such as driveways, parking areas, pedestrian plazas and walkways.
4-0-9. Ground level equipment, refuse collection areas, storage tanks,
infrastructure equipment and utility vaults should be screened from public
right-of-way views with dense landscaping and/or walls of materials and
finishes compatible with adjacent buildings.
44-10. Site-specific analyses (wind patterns, noise assessments, etc.) and
special design features shall be incorporated into the proposed buildings
surrounding the OCSD pump station facility to offset potential noise and odor
control issues associated with the existing operations of the facility. Indoor air
conditioned spaces within the development shall include the installation of
odor filters, such as activated carbon filters or similar, to filter indoor air.
C. Building Massing
Avoid long, continuous blank walls, by incorporating a variety of materials,
design treatments and/or modulating and articulating elevations to promote
visual interest and reduce massing.
Layering of wall planes and volumes are encouraged to provide rhythm,
dynamic building forms, and shadows.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 24
3. Building massing should consist of a mix of heights to add visual interest and
enhance views to the bay above or between buildings.
4. Taller buildings should use articulation to create visual interest. Articulation
should include vertical and horizontal offsets, use of multiple materials and
finishes, and the entry/corner elements.
5. Towers or other vertical/prominent building features should be used to
accentuate key elements such as building entries, pedestrian nodes, plazas,
and courtyards.
6. To maintain a low profile at the corner of East Coast Highway and Bayside
Drive, the development should consist of reduced height commercial retail
buildings closest to the intersection and may step up in height further away
from the intersection, as shown on Exhibit 3, Building Heights.
D. Facade Treatments
1. Ground floors of commercial buildings should have storefront design with
large windows and entries encouraging indoor and outdoor retailing.
2. Architectural elements that create sheltered pedestrian areas are
encouraged.
3. The quality of the pedestrian environment should be activated by
architecturally vibrant storefronts with features such as planter walls, outdoor
seating and dining spaces, enhanced trellises, accent or festive lighting,
awnings or canopies, large transparent windows, recessed openings and
entry ways.
4. Create a unified and consistent alignment of building facades that define and
address the street and waterfront.
5. Horizontal definition between uses, generally between the first and second
floor is strongly encouraged.
6. For residential uses, balconies and sill treatments are encouraged on upper
stories to articulate the facade.
7. Building facades should respect the public realm edge by controlling and
limiting encroachments that could impede pedestrian connectivity and retail
exposure. Building designs will be encouraged to support and activate the
public realm and plazas, and encourage accessibility.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 25
8. "Back of House Areas" and service corridors shall be avoided along primary
street and waterfront elevations.
9. Roof -mounted mechanical equipment shall not be visible in any direction from
a public right-of-way, as may be seen from a point 6 feet above ground level,
including from the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge curb elevation. In addition,
screening of the top of the roof -mounted mechanical equipment may be
required if necessary to protect views.
10.Subject to the approval of the OCSD, the existing building exterior of the
OCSD facility located adjacent to East Coast Highway and at the property's
southwestern boundary shall undergo aesthetic improvements (refacing,
reroofing, etc.) to reflect the architectural design standards contained in this
PCDP. Should the OCSD facility be relocated and/or reconstructed, the
architectural design of the structure shall be compatible with the architectural
design of the Back Bay Landing development and design standards
contained in this PCDP or architectural design of adiacent developments, as
determined appropriate — during the Site Development Review process.
E. Public Views
1. As illustrated on Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View Corridors, buildings
should be oriented to maximize view opportunities while minimizing the visual
impact of the building on existing view sheds.
2. Buildings proposed adjacent to the Coast Highway -Bay Bridge shall preserve
coastal views that are afforded due to the differential in height between the
elevation of the bridge and the elevation of the site. Buildings loGated within
Vi&.Y GOFF. OFS C L.` Rd 7 as ..F..,,.,.. 'n Exhibit 13 East Coast Highway Me
Goastal views over the deve!Gpment, The public coastal views shall be
consistent with Section 4.4.1-8 of the Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan
policies.
3. A pedestrian view corridor shall be designed at the southeast corner of
Bayside Drive and East Coast Highway, shown as View Corridor 2 on Exhibit
13, East Coast Highway View Corridors, allowing northbound pedestrians and
motorists to see into the project and the coastal view beyond.
4. The enclosed dry stack boat storage building shall be designed with multiple
heights to create a distinct view corridor from East Coast Highway to the Bay,
illustrated n Exhibit 13, East Coast Highway View
Corridors. This corridor shall be visible to north and south bound pedestrians,
bicyclists and motorists.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 26
5. The development shall be designed to frame existing bay views and should
create new bay views where they are currently blocked by fencing and
outdoor vehicle/boat storage.
F. Parking and Parking Structure
1. Parking areas and structures shall promote efficient circulation for vehicles
and pedestrians.
2. Convenient, well -marked and attractive pedestrian access shall be provided
from parking areas and structures to buildings.
3. Parking facilities should be physically separated for non-residential uses and
residential uses, except for residential guest parking. If enclosed parking is
provided for an entire mixed-use complex, separate areas/levels shall be
provided for non-residential and residential uses with separate building
entrances, whenever possible.
4. A semi -subterranean level should be incorporated, if feasible, to minimize
height and bulk of parking structure.
5. Parking structures shall be screened from the public right—of-way to the
maximum extent feasible. Portions of the structure that cannot be screened
shall incorporate decorative screening, landscape walls, artistic murals, or
application of stylized facades.
6. Commercial retail and residential uses should wrap and mask the parking
structure.
7. The parking structure shall complement the design vocabulary of the attached
or adjacent buildings, and incorporate form, materials, color, and details from
the attached or adjacent buildings.
8. Adequate parking that is located within a convenient distance from the use it
is intended to serve shall be provided for all uses proposed on-site, as well as
marina users, displaced Bayside Village Mobile Home Park guest parking,
and for public access. General parking locations are shown on Exhibit 14,
Parking Plan.
9. The upper level of the parking structure shall be designed to eliminate vehicle
headlight and rooftop lighting spill-over.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 27
10. To encourage alternative means of transportation, the parking structure shall
incorporate bicycle parking storage accommodations, and electric vehicle
charging stations.
G. Public Spaces
The development shall provide extensive outdoor public spaces, as shown on
Exhibit 5, Public Spaces, and described below.
1. An elevated coastal public view tswe� Ip aza
is strongly encouraged. This
elevated platform—plaza can provide exceptional public coastal view
opportunities of Newport Harbor and Upper Newport Bay. in the
2. A pedestrian and automobile plaza should be incorporated into the design
that seamlessly and safely blends pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular
movement. This plaza may provide an opportunity for valet parking, provided
a valet operation plan is reviewed and approved by the City. Bollards and
potted plants should define the plaza edge in a park -like setting and should
visually connect the east and west ends of the mixed-use project area as the
center point of the project, while still allowing unhindered pedestrian
movement to the retail areas and public bayfront promenade.
3. Restaurants shall be designed to be accessible from the public bayfront
promenade and should provide both indoor and outdoor dining areas with
scenic coastal views of the baytower.
4. Vendor carts selling specialty items are encouraged in the outside plazas and
along retail walkways to enhance the shopping or dining experience by
activating the plaza areas. However, vendor carts shall not be permitted
within the 12 -foot -wide public bayfront promenade.
5. Passive recreation opportunities and waterfront viewing shall be provided
along the public bayfront promenade.
6. A public launching area and parking for kayak and paddleboard users shall be
incorporated into the development.
7. New marina boat -slip tenant lockers shall be provided near the entry to the
Bayside Village Marina.
8. Public restrooms for visitors to the site shall be provided along the public
bayfront promenade.
H. Landscaping
Back Bay Landing PCDP 28
1. The landscaping should reflect the project's coastalmarine location and
provide visual ties to the coastal bluffs, sand beaches, tidelands and
wetlands, tide pools, local marinas and sea life.
2. Creativity in combining plant materials to emulate natural features is
encouraged. Some examples of possible design strategies are using swaying
grasses to emulate water movement, using water fountains to emulate the
sound and rhythm of waves, and emulating sea colors in plant selection.
3. The use of water fountains, waterfalls, water sculptures, or water features are
encouraged.
4. Marine murals and other forms of public art are encouraged throughout the
project.
5. Landscaping should include tree plantings around buildings to enhance
architectural character and provide shade in the summer and sun in the
winter.
6. California -friendly plant species with low watering requirements and
characteristics that are compatible with the climate, soils, and setting should
compose the majority of the plant palate.
7. The irrigation system shall be designed, constructed, managed, and
maintained to achieve a high level of water efficiency.
8. Landscaping in the view corridors should not block these views but rather
frame and enhance them.
9. Green walls, water features and selective placement of potted plants and
trees can improve and soften the appearance of the buildings while
preserving and enhancing desired views.
Hardscaping
1. An enhanced permeable paving should be used at the project entry to create
rich texture and color while also helping to mitigate urban runoff.
2. Pedestrian spaces should be developed with specialty paving to provide
interest and definition and compliment architectural and landscape features.
3. Selection of hardscape material should reflect the coastal marine theme of
the project, for example: sand stone, sea glass, pebbles, drift wood,
ocean/beach inspired colors or textures, etc.
4. Private streets, driveways, and drive aisles should be multi-purpose and
accommodate pedestrian, bike, emergency vehicles, and slow automobile
Back Bay Landing PCDP 29
movements. Generous use of planters, large pots and bollards are
encouraged with raised curbs only where necessary.
J. Signs
1. The preferred approach to signing is through creating a strong architectural
statement that announces development, rather than large distracting signs.
2. Monument signs identifying the development may be permitted at the primary
entrance off Bayside Drive and possibly the optional secondary entrance off
East Coast Highway, if approved.
3. Signage should be appropriately scaled to the building or surface onto which
it is placed, should not obscure important architectural features, and should
be readable by both pedestrians and drivers approaching the site.
4. Signage shall be integrated with the design and scale of the architecture.
5. A coordinated approach to signage throughout the development is particularly
important due to the multiple storefronts that are envisioned. Signs of similar
size, proportion, and materials should be used on each store.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 30
VI. Phasing
The Back Bay Landing mixed-use development is anticipated to be developed as one
phase during an 18- to 24 -month construction period. The integrated mixed-use and
parking structure combined with the relatively small site necessitates construction in a
single phase. The Back Bay Landing development will necessitate the construction of a
seawall/bulkhead, but does not include reconstruction of the existing Bayside Village
Marina.
The general sequence of construction is provided below although certain activities will
overlap thereby reducing the total duration of the project.
• Demolition — 1 month
• Excavation and De -watering — 2 months
• Infrastructure / Foundations — 6 months
• Vertical Construction — 15 months
• Final Landscaping — 3 months
• Bayside Drive Roadway Improvements and Trail — 4 months
• Reconfiguration of Bayside Village Mobile Horne ParkLot Line Adjustment Area —
6 months
Back Bay Landing PCDP 31
VII. Back Bay Landing PCDP Implementation/
Site Development Review
A. Purpose and Intent
The purpose of the Site Development Review process is to ensure the
development of the Back Bay Landing PCDP (PC -9) is consistent with the goals
and policies of the General Plan, provisions of this PCDP, and the findings set
forth below in Section VII.C. It is the intent of the Site Development Review
process that all aspects of the design of the project will be reviewed and
approved at one time. Conceptual architectural theme, site plan, landscape plan
and other conceptual Exhibits attached to this PCDP are preliminary and may be
modified through the Site Development Review process.
B. Application
Approval of the Site Development Review application by the Planning
Commission shall be required prior to the issuance of a grading or building
permit for the construction of any new structure at the project. The Planning
Commission's decision is final, unless appealed in accordance with the
Newport Beach Municipal Code.
2. The following items are exempt from the Site Development Review Process
and are subject to the City's applicable permits:
a) Tenant (interior) improvements to any existing buildings, kiosks, and
temporary structures.
b) Repair and maintenance activities.
c) Replacement of existing structures found in substantial conformance
with previously approved plans and/or permits.
C. Findings
In addition to the general purposes set forth in Section VILA and in order to carry
out the purposes of the Back Bay Landing PCDP, the following findings must be
made to approve or conditionally approve a Site Development Review application:
The development shall be in compliance with the General Plan, Coastal Land
Use Plan, Back Bay Landing Planned Community Development Plan,
including design guidelines, and any other applicable plan or criteria related to
the development;
Back Bay Landing PCDP 32
2. The development shall not be incompatible with the character of the
neighboring uses and surrounding sites;
3. The development shall be sited and designed to maximize the aesthetic
quality of the project as viewed from surrounding roadways, properties, and
waterfront, with special consideration given to providing a variety of building
heights, massing, and architectural treatments to provide public views through
the site;
4. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular
access ways, landscaping and other site features shall give proper
consideration to functional aspects of site development; and
5. The development shall not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly
growth of the City, or endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard
to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed
development.
D. Submittal Contents
The Site Development Review application shall include all of the information and
materials specified by the Community Development Director and any additional
information requested by the Planning Commission in order to conduct a
thorough review of the application. The following plans/exhibits may include, but
are not limited to the following:
1. Existing conditions including adjacent structures and proposed
improvements.
4-2. Comprehensive site and grading plan.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 33
2-3. Comprehensive elevation drawings, material boards and floor plans
for new structures with coordinated and complementary architecture,
design, materials and colors. The elevation drawings shall indicate the
colors and materials that will be used on the exterior surfaces of the
buildings, walls, fences and other visible structures.
�34. Permitted and proposed floor area, and residential units.
4.5. A parking and circulation plan showing pedestrian paths, streets
and fire lanes.
5-.6. Landscaping, lighting, signage, utilities, sustainability, and public
improvements plans as required by Section IV.
63J. Parking management plan (if applicable).
�8. Hazards Assessment, and Sea Level Rise and Shoreline
Management Plan as required by Section IV.
8-9. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated preliminary landscape
plan, illustrating general location of all plant materials, by common and
botanical names (with pictures), size of plant materials, and irrigation
concept.
5:10. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated lighting plan of
exterior and parking structure lighting, including locations, fixture height,
fixture product type and technical specifications.
40:11. Comprehensive text and graphics describing the design philosophy
for the architecture, landscape architecture, material and textures, color
palette, lighting, and signage.
44-.12. Location and text describing drainage and water quality mitigation
measures.
413. Open Space Plans (indoor and/or outdoor) for residential units.
43-14. A statement that the proposed new structure is consistent with the
goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan and Planned Community
Development Plan.
4415. Any additional background and supporting information, studies, or
materials that the Community Development Director deems necessary for
a clear representation of the project.
E. Public Hearing
Back Bay Landing PCDP 34
A Planning Commission public hearing shall be held on all Site Development
Review applications. Notice of the hearing shall be provided and the hearing
shall be conducted in compliance with the Municipal Code Chapter 20.62 (Public
Hearings).
F. Expiration and Revocation of Site Development Review
Approvals
1. Expiration. Any Site Development Review approved in accordance with
the terms of this Planned Community Development Plan shall expire
within twenty-four (24) months from the effective date of final approval as
specified in the Time Limits and Extensions Section of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code, unless at the time of approval the Planning Commission
has specified a different period of time or an extension is otherwise
granted.
2. Violation of Terms. Any Site Development Review approved in
accordance with the terms of this Planned Community Development Plan
may be modified or revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such Site
Development Review are violated or if any law or ordinance is violated in
connection therewith.
3. Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on
any proposed modification or revocation after giving written notice to the
permittee at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing, and shall submit its
recommendations to the City Council. The City Council shall act thereon
within sixty (60) days after receipt of the recommendation of the Planning
Commission.
G. Parcel or Tract Maps
No parcel or tract map shall be recorded prior to the approval of the Site
Development Review for the entire project. Covenant, Conditions and
Restrictions shall be required in connection with any subdivisions at the project
so that the responsibility for performance of, and payment for, maintenance are
clear. Such CC&R's shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney.
H. Fees
The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution of the Newport Beach
City Council to the City with each application for Site Development Review under
this planned community development plan.
I. Minor Changes by the Director
Back Bay Landing PCDP 35
1. The following minor changes to an approved site plan may be approved
by the Director in compliance with Section 20.54.070 (Changes to an
approved project) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code:
a) Minor relocation of any proposed structure.
b) Reconfiguration of the parking lot, including drive aisles and/or
parking spaces, subject to review and approval of the City Traffic
Engineer.
c) Reconfiguration of landscaping.
d) Any other minor change to the site plan provided it does not increase
any structure area, height, number of units, and/or intensity of uses.
2. Any proposed changes that are not deemed minor shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Commission.
VIII. Definitions
All words, phrases, and terms used in this Back Bay Landing PCDP (PC -9) shall
have the same meaning and definition as provided in the City of Newport Beach
Zoning Code unless defined differently in this section.
Architectural Features: A visually prominent or formally significant element of a
building which expresses its architectural language and style in a complementary
fashion. Architectural features should be logical extensions of the massing,
details, materials, and color of the building which complement and celebrate its
overall aesthetic character.
Backfill: Material used to fill or refill an excavated or natural slope area
Building Elevation: The drawing of the exterior wall surface formed by one (1)
side of the building.
Bulkhead: A retaining wall/structural wall constructed along shorelines for the
purpose of controlling beach erosion, supporting buildings and protecting areas
of human habitation, conservation and leisure activities. Also referred to as a
seawall. The depth of the bulkhead will be determined by a licensed structural
engineer.
Carts and Kiosks: Carts and kiosks are small, freestanding structures used for
retail sales and services. Generally mobile in terms of ease or relocation, the
structures can be seasonal, temporary or for a more permanent use.
Commercial Recreation and Entertainment: Establishments providing
participant or spectator recreation or entertainment, either indoors or outdoors,
Back Bay Landing PCDP 36
for a fee or admission charge. Commercial recreation and entertainment uses
shall not include arcades or electronic games centers, billiard parlors, cinemas,
and theaters, except as accessory to a permitted use.
Cultural Institution: A public or private institution that displays or preserves
objects of community or cultural interest in one or more of the arts or sciences.
Illustrative examples of these uses include libraries and museums.
Eating and Drinking Establishments:
Bar, Lounge, and Nightclub. An establishment that sells or serves
alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises and is holding or
applying for a public premise license from the California State Department
of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) (i.e., ABC License Type 42 [On Sale
Beer & Wine -Public Premises], ABC License Type 48 [On Sale General -
Public Premises], and ABC License Type 61 [On Sale Beer -Public
Premises]). Persons under 21 years of age are not allowed to enter and
remain on the premises. The establishment shall include any immediately
adjacent area that is owned, leased, rented, or controlled by the licensee.
Fast Food. An establishment whose design or principal method of
operation typically includes the following characteristics:
1. A permanent menu board is provided from which to select and
order food;
2. A chain or franchise restaurant;
3. Customers pay for food before consuming it;
4. A self-service condiment bar and/or drink service is/are provided;
5. Trash receptacles are provided for self-service bussing; and
6. Furnishing plan indicates stationary seating arrangements.
A fast food establishment may or may not have late hour operations.
Alcoholic beverages are not sold, served, or given away on the premises.
If alcoholic beverages are sold, served, or given away on the premises,
the use shall be considered a food service use. See "Food Service."
Drive thru service shall not be allowed.
Food Service, No Late Hours. An establishment that sells food and
beverages, including alcoholic beverages, prepared for primarily on-site
consumption, and typically has the following characteristics:
1. Establishment does not have late hour operations;
Back Bay Landing PCDP 37
2. Customers order food and beverages from individual menus;
3. Food and beverages are served to the customer at a fixed location
(i.e., booth, counter, or table); and
4. Customers pay for food and beverages after service and/or
consumption.
Food Service, Late Hours. An establishment that sells food and
beverages, including alcoholic beverages, prepared for primarily on-site
consumption, and typically has the following characteristics:
1. Establishment does have late hours;
2. Customers order food and beverages from individual menus;
3. Food and beverages are served to the customer at a fixed location
(i.e., booth, counter, or table); and
4. Customers pay for food and beverages after service and/or
consumption.
Late Hour Operations. Facilities that provide service after 11:00 p.m.
Outdoor Dining, Accessory. An outdoor dining area contiguous and
accessory to a food service establishment.
Take -Out Service, Limited. An establishment that sells food or
beverages and typically has the following characteristics:
1. Sales are primarily for off-site consumption;
2. Customers order and pay for food at either a counter or service
window;
3. Incidental seating up to 6 seats may be provided for on-site
consumption of food or beverages; and
4. Alcoholic beverages are not sold, served, or given away on the
premises.
Typical uses include bakeries, candy, coffee, nut and confectionery stores,
ice cream and frozen dessert stores, small delicatessens, and similar
establishments.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 38
Take -Out Service Only. An establishment that offers a limited variety of
food or beverages and has all of the following characteristics:
1. Sales are for off-site consumption;
2. Seating is not provided for on-site consumption of food or
beverages; and
3. Alcoholic beverages are not sold, served, or given away on the
premises.
Green Building: The practice of increasing the efficiency of buildings and their
use of energy, water, and materials, and reducing building impacts on human
health and the environment through better siting, design, construction, operation,
maintenance, and removal.
High Tide: The tide at its fullest, when the water reaches its highest level.
Marina: A commercial berthing facility (other than moorings or anchorage) in which five
or more vessels are continuously wet -stored (in water) for more than 30 days. Marinas
are regulated by Title 17. See Marina Support Facilities.
Marina Support Facilities: An on -shore facility (e.g., administrative offices, bathrooms,
laundry facilities, storage lockers, picnic areas, snack bar, etc.) that directly supports a
marina.
Marine Rentals and Sales: Establishments engaged in renting, selling or
providing supplies and equipment for commercial fishing, pleasure boating, or
related activities.
Boat Rentals and Sales. An establishment that rents or sells vessels,
including storage and incidental maintenance. See "Vessel." Does not
include "Marine Services."
Marine Retail Sales. An establishment that provides supplies and
equipment for commercial fishing, pleasure boating, or related activities.
Examples of goods sold include navigational instruments, marine
hardware and paints, nautical publications, nautical clothing (e.g., foul -
weather gear), and marine engines. Does not include uses in which fuel
for boats and ships is the primary good sold (see "Marine Services.").
Marine Services:
Boat Storage. Storage of operative or inoperative boats or ships on land
or racks for more than 30 days. Unenclosed boat storage on racks are not
permitted.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 39
Boat Yard. Construction, maintenance, or repair of boats or ships,
including the sale, installation, and servicing of related equipment and
parts.
Entertainment and Excursion Vessels. A vessel engaged in carrying
passengers for hire for the purposes of entertainment or excursions (e.g.,
fishing, whale watching, diving, educational activities, harbor and coastal
tours, dining/drinking, business or social special events and entertainment,
etc.). See "Vessel."
Marine Service Station. A retail establishment that sells gasoline, diesel,
and alternative fuels, lubricants, parts, and accessories for vessels and
other convenience items. No fuel docks shall be allowed. See "Vessel."
Water Transportation Service. An establishment that provides vessels
to carry passengers for hire who are traveling to destinations within and
outside of Newport Harbor. See "Vessel."
Highest High Water (HHW) Line: The average of all the highest high tides
occurring over a certain period of time, usually 18.6 years (one lunar epoch).
Based on the 2004 Tide Planes & Tidal Datum Relationships for City of Newport
Beach, HHW elevation is 7.86' relative to Mean Lower Low Water (0.00').
Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) Line: The average of the lower low tides
occurring over a certain period of time, usually 18.6 years (one lunar epoch).
Based on the 2004 Tide Planes & Tidal Datum Relationships for City of Newport
Beach, Mean Lower Low Water is elevation 0.00'.
Multi -Family Residential Flat: A condominium on a single level.
North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88): The vertical control
datum of orthometric height established for vertical control surveying in the
United States.
Parking Structure: Structures containing more than one story principally
dedicated to parking. Parking structures may contain accessory, ancillary, and
resident support uses such as solar panels and trellis structures.
Back Bay Landing PCDP 40
Perimeter Setback: An established distance between a building/structure and
the perimeter of the project site other than along East Coast Highway, Coast
Highway -Bay Bridge, Bayside Drive, and the bayfront.
Personal Services (Land Use):
General. Establishments that provide recurrently needed services of a
personal nature. Illustrative examples of these uses include:
• Barber and beauty shops
• Clothing rental shops
• Dry cleaning pick up stores with limited equipment
• Locksmiths
• Shoe repair shops
• Tailors and seamstresses
• Laundromats
These uses may also include accessory retail sales of products related to
the services provided.
Restricted. Personal service establishments that may tend to have a
blighting and/or deteriorating effect upon surrounding areas and that may
need to be dispersed from other similar uses to minimize adverse impacts,
including:
• Day spas
• Healing arts (acupuncture, aromatherapy, etc.) with no services
qualifying under "Massage Establishments"
• Tanning salons
• Tattoo services and body piercing studios
These uses may also include accessory retail sales of products related to
the services provided.
Public Bayfront Promenade: A pedestrian walkway that extends along the
waterfront length of the Back Bay Landing project.
Seawall: See previous definition of "bulkhead" above.
Setback: Shall mean the space between an object, such as the face of a
building or fence, and the perimeter property line.
Sign: Any media, including their structure and component parts which are used
or intended to be used outdoor to communicate information to the public.
Temporary Sign: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance, or advertising display
constructed of cloth, canvas, plywood, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other
Back Bay Landing PCDP 41
light materials, with or without frames, intended to be displayed for a limited
period of time.
Vehicle Entry: Any intersection points along the public right-of-way that provide
access for automobiles.
Vessel: Every type of watercraft that is used or capable of being used as a
means of transportation on water. This includes all vessels of any size home -
ported, launched/retrieved, or visiting in Newport Harbor, arriving by water or
land, and registered or unregistered under State or Federal requirements, except
a seaplane on the water.
Visitor -Serving Retail: Retail establishments engaged in selling goods or
merchandise to tourists and visitors. Examples of these establishments and lines
of merchandise include:
• Antiques
• Appliances
• Art galleries
• Artists' supplies
• Bakeries (retail only)
• Bicycle sales and rentals
• Books
• Cameras and photographic supplies
• Clothing and accessories
• Convenience market
• Drug and discount stores
• Gift shops
• Handcrafted items
• Hobby materials
• Jewelry
• Luggage and leather goods
• Newsstands
• Pharmacies
• Specialty food and beverage
• Specialty shops
• Sporting goods and equipment
• Tobacco
• Toys and games
• Travel services
Back Bay Landing PCDP 42
Appendix
Back Bay Landing Exhibits
Back Bay Landing PCDP 43
Balboa
Peninsula
i
Newport
,,,Beach
Wrc�klrllt+bm _
J.oM�M 6n,.i e
4 ,
Upper
BACK BAY Newport Bay
LANDING
MIXED -'USE
PROJECT AREA
Newport Bay
EXHIBIT 1
LOCATION MAP
Back Bay Landing is located immediately
north of East Coast Highway in Newport
Beach, California. The site is bounded by East
Coast Highway and Newport Harbor on the
south and west, Bayside Drive to the south,
the Newport Back Bay channel to the west
and Bayside Village Mobile Home Park to the
southeast.
LEGEND
Project Area (Parcel 3 of PM 93-111)
M Back Bay Landing Mixed -Use Project Area
PC -9 Boundary
LOCATION
MAP
BACK BAY LANDING
oZlb
NTS
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
---.......
--
De Anza f3aYsitle Marsh Pe ____` -
c`C sWq
Q Fxisfirg Marina,
ds PARCEL3 Plannin Area 5 0� wGrevel )
lle�"
�j
Plannin Area 3
EXISTING PRIVATE MARINA —
ACCESS AND BEACH
(0.659 ac) -
MARINA AND BAYSIDE VILLAGE
MOBILE HOME PARK STORAGE
AND GUEST PARKING
(0.541 ac)
EXHIBIT 2
PLANNING AREAS
This Planned Community includes five distinct
planning areas.
Parce 3 Summary
P.A.l
Description
Acres
Mixed -Use Area
5.215 ac
(North of CH center line)
Recreational & Marine
Commercial
0.642 ac
(South of CH center line)
Existing Private Marina Access
0.659 ac
and Beach
Marina and Bayside Village
Mobile Home Park Storage
0.541 ac
and Guest Parking
Submerged Fee -Owned Lands
(Area includes De Anza Bayside
24.457 ac
Marsh Peninsula)
Parcel 3 Total Area
31.514 ac
PLANNING AREAS 0 BACK BAY LANDING
oz.oz.zote NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
Grade Baseline Elevations
to Measure Building Height PA 4 (not shown)
(Grade for Measurement
of Height 12')
/ Elevation 11' ' I o Lde
%• .Z ' ^ v
26 ftlding
one
(Gradesurement
Elevation 14' 1P,flflatroofed roof)
' 1 _
PA 1
�-- 35 ft Building
iPA Height Zone
35 ft Building East Coast Highway
(Grade Hefw ight
IV)
------_-_ _; Height Zone
10oft
of Height 19')
(Grade for Measurement
of Height 11 ')
- Approx. 560 It
26 ft Building
Height Zone
(Grade for Measurement
of Height it ;
Limited to 29 It flet roof
or 31 If sloped roop
EXHIBIT 3
BUILDING HEIGHTS
DESIGN GUIDELINES
East Coast Highway is approximately 22 feet
above the Back Bay Landing development site
limiting the development's impact on views
from East Coast Highway.
There are three finished grade baseline
elevations indicated on the exhibit from which
the building heights are measured: 11 and 14
feet, or as determined by Sea Level Rise and
the Shoreline Management Plan.
BUILDING
HEIGHTS
®
BACK BAY LANDING
02.02.2016
NTS
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
Public Bayfront
Promenade
Water Line (Approx.)
at Lower Tide Condition
Intertidal Mud or Intertidal Sand
Subtidal Sand Zone Zone
Finished Grade at Top of Seawall +10'
Designed for Future Sea Level Rise Compliance
Front of Seawall
Highest High Water Line (+7.86')
above Mean Lower Low Water (0')
Existing Grade
EXHIBIT 4
SEAWALL/BULKHEAD
SECTION
BULKHEAD
The project bulkhead may be built to the
Highest High Water elevation of 7.86' relative
to Mean Lower Low Water (0.0') or 7.48'/NAVD
88 to preserve the natural profile along the
shoreline adjacent to the County Tidelands,
subject to consistency findings in the Coastal
Act and City of Newport Beach Coastal Land
Use Policies.
SEAWALL/BULKHEAD SECTION BACK BAY LANDING
o.o.zote NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
View Location
Bridge Up
Work Area
(Boat House)
Elevator / Stair
Pedestrian Access
to ECH Bridge
Public Use of Enclosed
Dry Stack Boat Storage
Elevator EXHIBIT Jr
Public Pedestrian Bayfront Promenade
y (,) Pedestrian Auto Plaza PUBLIC SPACES
/
r-'-�. •4 i, ,
Public Marina Lockers Restroo •a J.
12'-0" wide Pedestrian Wal 't
•Jrh� At, Plein y-4 � d
esteurant
1u &Par
Psi
R C noel
Rai
.Atiove Reta,l
`
sail
)( House
Above
e2 AJ
N.2
e
Parking Struen
I
/
!~�"-�•j veiw
Pearson's Plain
Ponate,
R dept alb
•
y
yReteil wlj Restaurant's 1
an'.
�Yl EAboveP�snrg �.
lei.e
`- Plan at Highway Level
(Privately Owned) -- ^' -
i(BoatHouse)
ridge
own �a®• ' ♦ �-.�
Area
12'-0" wide Pedestrian Walk res -
Elevator / Stair
Kayak & SUP Rentals
Pearson s
Pon ate, j
0' Q. 90' 120' 160' ~200
Aeccsa
- Elevator/ Escalator
Boat
House
Bus
stop
Coast HlghwaY
C
- Public Parking for Retail, Marina &
Bayside Village Mobile Home Park
Upper Parking Deck Provides Views
to the North and South
• farWa
Plan Below Highway Bridge Level
Public Parking for Kayak Launch
• Ba
12'-0" wide Pedestrian Walk e
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Back Bay Landing contains extensive outdoor
public space, including:
• A linear continuous Public Bayfront
Promenade along the bay and connecting
to regional trails.
• Class 1, 2, and 3 off-street bikeway and
pedestrian trails connecting to East Coast
Highway along Bayside Drive.
• A large retail plaza with enhanced paving
street furniture, water features and shade
trees.
• A Bayside Plaza with enhanced paving,
seating and shade trees.
• A kayak and SUP rental and launch area
with storage lockers and water access.
• Public Restrooms accessed from the
Public Bayfront Promenade.
Additional public spaces are provided within
retail, restaurant and the enclosed dry stack
boat storage buildings.
PUBLIC
SPACES
BACK BAY LANDING
e2 AJ
N.2
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
,a
m
o Newport
Beach
PLia
BACK BAY
LANDING
1. Regional Trail Connections
Lateral Access
2. Proposed Coastal Access
"gyp NuwPo
Back Bey
New Public
Bayfront Access
a
Vertical Access
S3tdt6t� civ*.. oJv
3. Current Lack of Trail Connection
New Public
Bayfront Access _
4. Critical Trail Connections
NPI
Ou—
,gd Off -Street Bikeway'
r
/ & Pedestrian Trail
New Class t & 2
Off -Street Bikeway
& Pedestrian Trail
EXHIBIT 6
COASTAL ACCESS &
REGIONAL TRAIL
CONNECTIONS
Back Bay Landing provides coastal access
and a critical link between existing regional
trails.
1. Regional Trail Connections
2. Proposed Coastal Access
3. Current Lack of Trail Connection
4. Critical Trail Connections
LEGEND
Existing Class 1 Trail
Existing Class 2 Trail
Existing Class 3 Trail
Existing Newport Dunes
Recreational Trail
Lateral Access
Vertical Access
Proposed Class 1 & 3 Trail
summon Proposed Class l&2 Trail
• • Proposed Public Bayfront
Promenade
R, WPM ME
COASTAL ACCESS & REGIONAL TRAIL CONNECTIONS 02.016 BACK BAY LANDING
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
L
Fre Truck
Tum -Around
New Public Pedestrian&
C"Ibt ubfrI, Pteese
I 1
/ cussz '
I (ON-STREET)
UNE
cussr(OFFSTREEiI
BINEWnY6
PEDESLRIpN
`
I 'I
NX
���
� rnna
N
Fast Coast Hi\~
/ Fire Truck \
L-- Turn -Around
Under Bridge
Bayside Village
Mobile Home -Par
j` Access
I I \L
♦�woo�
OCTA Bus Stop
Access
ht -tum movements only
Newport Dunes
Q Waterfront
Resort & Marina
b
I
Secondary Gate
Guarded Vehicular
Access for Marina
Parking, Public
Storage and Existing
Restrooms
EXHIBIT %
VEHICULAR
CIRCULATION
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Primary vehicular access to the site will be from
Bayside Drive approximately 200 feet north
of the East Coast Highway intersection. This
project driveway would service both inbound
and outbound movements, improve the existing
driveway connection further into the site, and will
be relocated approximately 45 feet north of its
current location.
Intersection improvements will maintain the
existing left -turn lane, add a shared left -turn
through lane, and add an exclusive right turn
lane on the southbound approach of the
signalized intersection of Bayside Drive with East
Coast Highway. Project access enhancements
will include an exclusive left -turn lane on the
northbound approach of the Bayside Drive and
project driveway intersection.
Primary circulation includes two fire truck
turnarounds. An Emergency Vehicle Access from
Bayside Village Mobile Home Park provides an
additional layer of safety.
Secondary marina access for marina parking
and public storage is located directly off Bayside
Drive.
An optional secondary access located
approximately 430 feet west of the Bayside Drive
ction
intersewith East Coast Highway, would add
an exclusive right -turn lane along westbound East
Coast Highway. This connection would allow for
inbound right -turn movements only. Outbound
movements would be prohibited.
VEHICULAR
I � '
BACK BAY LANDING
02.02.2016
az.oz.zalc
t,ITs
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
usEn
' BIKE LANE
I
/
I
I
I
L
Fre Truck
Tum -Around
New Public Pedestrian&
C"Ibt ubfrI, Pteese
I 1
/ cussz '
I (ON-STREET)
UNE
cussr(OFFSTREEiI
BINEWnY6
PEDESLRIpN
`
I 'I
NX
���
� rnna
N
Fast Coast Hi\~
/ Fire Truck \
L-- Turn -Around
Under Bridge
Bayside Village
Mobile Home -Par
j` Access
I I \L
♦�woo�
OCTA Bus Stop
Access
ht -tum movements only
Newport Dunes
Q Waterfront
Resort & Marina
b
I
Secondary Gate
Guarded Vehicular
Access for Marina
Parking, Public
Storage and Existing
Restrooms
EXHIBIT %
VEHICULAR
CIRCULATION
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Primary vehicular access to the site will be from
Bayside Drive approximately 200 feet north
of the East Coast Highway intersection. This
project driveway would service both inbound
and outbound movements, improve the existing
driveway connection further into the site, and will
be relocated approximately 45 feet north of its
current location.
Intersection improvements will maintain the
existing left -turn lane, add a shared left -turn
through lane, and add an exclusive right turn
lane on the southbound approach of the
signalized intersection of Bayside Drive with East
Coast Highway. Project access enhancements
will include an exclusive left -turn lane on the
northbound approach of the Bayside Drive and
project driveway intersection.
Primary circulation includes two fire truck
turnarounds. An Emergency Vehicle Access from
Bayside Village Mobile Home Park provides an
additional layer of safety.
Secondary marina access for marina parking
and public storage is located directly off Bayside
Drive.
An optional secondary access located
approximately 430 feet west of the Bayside Drive
ction
intersewith East Coast Highway, would add
an exclusive right -turn lane along westbound East
Coast Highway. This connection would allow for
inbound right -turn movements only. Outbound
movements would be prohibited.
VEHICULAR
CIRCULATION
BACK BAY LANDING
02.02.2016
az.oz.zalc
t,ITs
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
Mobile Home
Guest Parking
Adjusted Property
Line
Existing Bayside Village Circulation
Original
Circulation
Mobile Home
Existing Back
Bay Landing Property -- —�
Entry Location
Public Pedestrian Promednade
& Marina Access
Revised Project Entry Location
Proposed Bayside Village & Back Bay Landing Auto Circulation (Moved approximately 45 k north or existing entry)
EXHIBIT 8
REVISED VEHICULAR
CIRCULATION &
PARKING
DESIGN GUIDELINES
New & Improved Project Access
Revised vehicular circulation will provide a new
and improved access to the proposed project.
The primary entry is located on Bayside Drive
approximately 200 feet north of the East Coast
Highway intersection. The entry is proposed to
be relocated approximately 45 feet north of its
existing location.
The reconfiguration will remove four (4) mobile
homes and relocate thirty one (31) mobile home
guest parking spaces and two trash bins to allow
for the expanded project entry.
New landscaping with decorative walls and
pedestrian gates will separate the mixed use
project from the mobile homes. The mobile home
vehicular circulation will be reconfigured and will
include twelve (12) mobile home guest parking
spaces. An additional nineteen (19) mobile home
guest parking spaces will be relocated in Planning
Area 4. There will be no net loss of guest parking
to the mobile home community.
REVISED VEHICULAR CIRCULATION & PARKING 02.02.200 16 BACK BA NEWPORTBEA H, CA
NTS
Proposed
Proposed Stoop Drain _ b/
Join Existing Stonn Drain
24'Waler Line _`` r'9
:�-
v� Jain
V Erxrs
v - 12'VOeteLine
Exist)p9 30't'1'ater Lme to be I ,
Propos
30" a S Proposed 8" Water i ;
Remo 1/ JoiQ Existing
�etl Steel Water Line
- Alt. 2
Proposed 8" Sewer I 36'-5g r Line
Proposed 8" Water > , �^
Proposed 8° Sewer -
P ' Join Exishn9 - -¢ — 30' Existing
V Existing Sewer 12" Storm Drain " 30" Water Line
v Pump Station .
t r�`, "T-•.,-_ r r Proposed -
-- �. r f—�A--1`r-.tea -•�� - r �Stonn Drain mac.
V
r v ..'►� Join Existing
_��� _.. t� .- 30" Water Line
Proposed 30"
ASteel LL4Water Linea
v —
/ \i\ om Exisfing
1•i 30" Storm Drain
L --
Legend
— v —
Proposed 8" Water
• �
30" Steel Water Line - Alt. 1
—V—
30" Steel Water Line -All. 2
— a --
Proposed Sewer
— a —
Proposed Storm Drain
Exisfing Water
-- - -- - Exisfing Sewer
Existing Storm Drain
EXHIBIT 9
UTILITIES PLAN
Sewer
A new 8" sewer line is proposed to serve the
Back Bay Landing project. It will connect into
the existing 36" sewer line within Bayside
Drive north of the proposed project. Based
on the 2006 Strategic Plan Update for OCSD,
capacity exists within the existing 36" line to
accommodate the proposed project.
Water
The existing 30" water transmission line
traversing the project site will be abandoned
to minimize conflicts with the proposed project
and allow easy access and maintenance
to the proposed lines. Two alternatives are
currently proposed to replace the capacity
of the line and continue to provide reliable
water service in case of an emergency to the
western region of Newport Beach.
Additionally, a new 8" water line will serve the
proposed project and tie into the existing 12"
water line in Bayside Drive. The increased
demand on the existing line will be consistent
with the proposed sewer generation rates.
Water capacity is not anticipated to be
an issue based on the redundant water
transmission lines that surround the project
site.
UTILITIES PLAN 0102.2016 BACK BAY LANDING
02.02.2016 NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
Proposed SD; u0e� Z�`F
r SD .rr�ir.
eauodary
Sub -Watershed Two
2.4 Acres
O
12" Existing _'` • ��
Storm Drain
`— Sub -Watershed One A
0.12 Acre
—30" Existing
Existing •. Storm Drain
• SD Outlet • • ���
Sub -Watershed One
0.94 Acres
O
,' SD
oe •ter
EXHIBIT 10
DRAINAGE PLAN
The proposed drainage plan consists of four
sub -watersheds. Stormwater will be collected
at various inlets throughout the project site
which will connect into the existing 30 -inch
storm drain that discharges south of the East
Coast Highway Bridge or drain directly out an
existing or new outlet through the bulkhead.
DRAINAGE PLANT 02A2�.2016 BACK BAY LANDING
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
/
Sub -Watershed Three
2.4 Acres
i
17
Proposed SD; u0e� Z�`F
r SD .rr�ir.
eauodary
Sub -Watershed Two
2.4 Acres
O
12" Existing _'` • ��
Storm Drain
`— Sub -Watershed One A
0.12 Acre
—30" Existing
Existing •. Storm Drain
• SD Outlet • • ���
Sub -Watershed One
0.94 Acres
O
,' SD
oe •ter
EXHIBIT 10
DRAINAGE PLAN
The proposed drainage plan consists of four
sub -watersheds. Stormwater will be collected
at various inlets throughout the project site
which will connect into the existing 30 -inch
storm drain that discharges south of the East
Coast Highway Bridge or drain directly out an
existing or new outlet through the bulkhead.
DRAINAGE PLANT 02A2�.2016 BACK BAY LANDING
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
East Coast Highway and Bayside Drive
Coastal Access with Ground Floor
Commercial and Residences Above
Public Bayfront Promenade
Visitor Serving Commercial
ARCHITECTURAL THEME
View Plaza Seating
EXH[BIT 11
ARCHITECTURAL
THEME
DESIGN GUIDELINES
The development shall be designed with a
coastal architectural theme. The intent is
not to select a historically specific or rigid
architectural style for the project, but to use
it as the design guidelines to help shape the
character of the area and reflect its setting
within the City.
Back Bay Landing will be designed and
constructed to evoke the experience of a
seaside village, with compatible architecture
and community character to existing
waterfront portions of Newport's Mariner's
Mile, Lido and Newport Peninsulas.
Lij BACK BAY LANDING
02.02.2016 NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
Public —
Bayront
Access
Pon
0' 40' 80' 120' 180' 200'
Illy � 1 I I l i 1
i
/Public Walkway Primary
Entry
—
JL--! Primary Entry
aistiag
Mobile Homes.
del _
seat dl
House I!
it H
Retail
al
eastGoes
i9hw
Plan at Level below Bridge
EXHIBIT 12
CONCEPTUAL SITE
PLAN
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Back Bay Landing is an integrated, mixed-use
waterfront village with visitor- serving retail and
marine service commercial facilities, as well as
a limited amount of attached residential uses.
It is designed to evoke a seaside village
and has a strong focus on the pedestrian
experience.
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLANT . BACK BAY LANDING
oz.oz.zole NEWPORT BEACH, CA
NTS
EXHIBIT 13
EAST COAST HIGHWAY
VIEW CORRIDORS
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Varied roof heights and undulating buildings
add variety to the street scene. Along East
Coast Highway and Bayside Drive six scenic
view corridors are preserved.
BACK BAY LANDING
EAST COAST HIGHWAY VIEW CORRIDORS .2.1002T2S16 NEWPORT BEACH, CA
PCR IRVINE
2121 Alton Parkway, Suite 100
Irvine, California 92606
TEL 949.753.7001
FAx 949.753.7002
PCR SANTA MONICA
201 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 500
Santa Monica, California 90401
TEL 310.451.4488
FAx 310.451.5279
PCR PASADENA
80 South Lake Avenue, Suite 570
Pasadena, California 91101
TEL 626.204.6170
FAx 626.204.6171
perinfo@pernet.com
www.pernet.com
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss.
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH }
I, Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk of the City of Newport Beach, California, do hereby certify that the
whole number of members of the City Council is seven; that the foregoing resolution, being Resolution
No. 2016-43 was duly and regularly introduced before and adopted by the City Council of said City at a
regular meeting of said Council, duly and regularly held on the 12`" day of April, 2016, and that the same
was so passed and adopted by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Member Peotter, Council Member Selich, Council Member Curry,
Council Member Petros, Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, Mayor Dixon
NAYS: None
RECUSED: Council Member Duffield
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the official seal of
said City this 13M day of April, 2016.
L � "�. 60v-"-
Leilani I. Brown, MMC
City Clerk
Newport Beach, California
(Seal)