of the overall construction schedule and there will be some breaks between the construction activities listed.
• Fabricate building and treatment system as a unit in Minnesota — 7 months • Prepare treatment system area including removal of vegetation and paving — 3 days • Pour concrete pad on which building will sit — 1 day
• Curing of the pad — 4 days
• Place prefabricated building on the pad — 1 day
• Treatment system connection and commissioning — 5 days • Architectural enhancements — 10 days
• Landscaping — 5 days
A work notice will be distributed via US mail to all Bayridge owners/occupants no less than 7 days in advance of system installation. Emails, phone calls, and door-to-door canvassing will be implemented, as needed, to keep community members informed of the progress and upcoming work. A dedicated community relations advocate will be present during installation to quickly respond and support finding resolution to concerns.
Noise associations with the SVE System: Noise from the system, which will operate 24/7, will be at — and likely a bit lower — than noise levels allowed under the City of Newport Beach noise ordinance requirements. To lessen noise, the system will operate within an enclosed structure that includes sound attenuation insulation covering all four walls and the roof. An Acoustical Engineering Analysis prepared in October 2022 calculated that the noise level at the exterior of the system building will be 48.8 decibels, which is similar to the noise from a common household refrigerator (50 decibels) and consistent with the City of Newport Beach noise limits of 55 decibels from 7:00 am to 10:00 pm and 50 decibels from 10:00 pm to 7:00 am (see Newport Beach Municipal Code [NBMC]). Furthermore, it is calculated that the presence of the treatment system will increase the existing ambient noise level adjacent to these residences by less than 1 decibel — a difference which is undetectable to the human ear.
Ford has contacted the person(s) who made these comments in an attempt to address this concern including accommodating specific needs due to their proximity to the system during construction and operation. To date, the person(s) has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 1.2: 1 am a two-time survivor of cancer. / am greatly concerned regarding the exhaust fumes and safety of the SVE system. Since there are not going to be real time results as to air quality how can those directly affected be guaranteed all is operating safely.
What if there is some type of natural disaster. Fires, earthquakes etc. could mean disastrous damage to the system, causing grave consequences.
Response 1.2: Soil vapor extraction systems are a common way to treat organic chemical vapors found in soil and operate safely, efficiently, and quietly at locations throughout the United States. The system planned for Bayridge Park is a state-of-the-art system designed to meet South Coast Air Quality Management District (Air District) permit requirements, which are set at levels protective of the health of even the most sensitive individuals (immunocompromised individuals, seniors, children, etc.).
10-196
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
A robust failure analysis has been conducted to evaluate the system's safety. The pipes are under vacuum so there is no risk of explosion or over -pressurization. The system will be set up with an uninterrupted power source to maintain operation in the event of a loss of power. The building itself is designed to meet all local and state building and fire code requirements. The wall closest to the adjacent building has a two-hour fire rating to protect from both the inside out, and outside in. The building will be secured to a concrete pad, which has been designed and reviewed by California professional structural engineers, using anchors chosen based on specific earthquake risk parameters of the Newport Beach area.
The system will be remotely monitored 24/7 and set up with alarms that will immediately call the Operations Manager if the system is not operating properly. The treatment system includes built-in controls which will safely shut the system down in response to an unforeseen disturbance, such as an earthquake or other natural disaster. The built-in controls will notify a designated Operations Manager, electronically alerting this individual of a shutdown or other operational issues, which will trigger emergency response measures. Once the system is shut down, no vapors will be extracted from the ground and the system will not be under any vacuum or pressure that would force the movement or release of vapors. The system will be inspected for any damage or issues that could compromise the system or interior or exterior of the building. Once it is safe to turn the system back on, the Operations Manager will perform a series of tests throughout the piping network and treatment system to check for any cracked pipes or seal leaks that need to be repaired or replaced.
Comment 1.3: This project is going to adversely affect all the community's property values.
How can you justify only four properties taking the brunt of this and probably being unable to sell or rent during this project. There is no guarantee as to when someone might have to sell nor to the timing of this project.
Response 1.3: The Water Board, Ford and WSP have been conducting community outreach since the beginning of this project in 2018 and have provided a variety of information on environmental investigation and future remediation. During this time, several individuals expressed concern about declining home sale prices. To date, there has not been a decline in home sales or sale prices.
Ford has contacted the person who made these comments in an attempt to address this concern, including accommodating specific needs due to their proximity to the system during construction and operation. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation. If requested, Ford will work directly with any Bayridge Park resident to fairly address any real property diminution resulting from the operation of this system should they decide to put their home on the market during the time the soil vapor treatment system is actively operating.
Comment 1.4: Why were the residents not consulted or included in the discussion as to where this system belongs. The original plans were scratched due to concern over visitor parking, Instead, they have decided to place the system 3 feet away from a resident's window with and infant and within feet of two other residences.
Response 1 A The Water Board, Ford and WSP have conducted a comprehensive outreach program since 2018 which includes outreach to 11 residential communities and 8 commercial properties within the project study area. During this time, they have distributed 10 Water Board 10-197
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
project fact sheets via US mail and email to over 1,800 addresses; over 100 notices of work to support groundwater monitoring, soil vapor and indoor air investigation activities, and SVE pilot test and pre -construction activities; and held over 25 community meetings to support community understanding and input in the investigation and cleanup process. In addition, there is a project - specific webpage at www.fordnbfacts.com , a project YouTube page at https://tinvurl.com/FordNBYouTube , an electronic repository at the State Water Board's GeoTracker website at: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile report?qlobal id=SL188023848, and a toll -free information line (833-949-3673) that community members can call 24/7 and receive a call back the same or next business day.
Specific to Bayridge Park, the Water Board held a 30-day public comment period from June 7 to July 9, 2021 to accept comments on the draft cleanup plan, known as the draft Feasibility Study/Remedial Action Plan (FS/RAP). The draft FS/RAP describes site conditions and identifies soil vapor extraction as the most appropriate technology to remove vapors in soil below the community. The Water Board also held a virtual public meeting to discuss the draft FS/RAP and accept comments from residents on June 10, 2021. The comment period and public meeting were advertised by a save -the -date postcard sent to all residents in Bayridge Park and a Water Board fact sheet distributed prior to the start of the comment period. During the public meeting, the FS/RAP, was discussed in detail. Residents at the meeting and in comments emailed to the Water Board made it clear that they did not approve of the original plan of the 5 smaller soil vapor treatment systems in their community because it would cause increased construction activities, a reduction in parking spaces, and visual impacts. As a result, and in coordination with the Bayridge Park HOA acting as the residents' representative, it was decided to have one treatment system outside of the common area. This decision was documented in the final FS/RAP as well as in a Response to Comments document, which was provided to all those who commented. Two additional meetings were held with Bayridge Park residents in November 2021 and January 2023. The November 2021 meeting was held poolside in their community and the January 2023 meeting was held at the nearby Bonita Creek Community Room, due to concerns of possible rain. During both meetings, the soil vapor treatment system location outside of the community was shared with residents (the resident at 96 Hartford attended both meetings and the resident at 92 Hartford attended the January 2023 meeting). While residents still had concerns about construction impacts and the overall design of the system, the revised location of the system was not questioned.
A detailed overview of all outreach conducted in support of the project as well as specific outreach in the Bayridge Park community is included in Attachment B.
Ford has contacted the person who made these comments in an attempt to address this concern, including accommodating specific needs due to their proximity to the system during construction and operation. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 1.5: The original unit included 5+ systems. Please provide information on the efficiency and safety of using 1 large system 3 feet away from residences.
Response 1.5: The draft FS/RAP proposed an SVE system with 27 wells and 5 treatment systems. The public was notified of this proposed SVE system through a public comment period held from June 7 — July 9, 2021, a fact sheet announcing the comment period, which was 10-198
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
distributed prior to the start of the comment period, and a public meeting held on June 10, 2021.
Public comments received during the meeting and in subsequent emails did not support the proposed plan of 5 SVE system treatment buildings.
The Water Board and Ford take public comment seriously, and where possible given the parameters of the project, will make adjustments to work. Based on these concerns the system design was re-evaluated to determine if accommodations could be made while still meeting the remedial objectives of removing volatile chemicals from the soil beneath the community. Various design considerations were evaluated including reducing the number of soil vapor extraction wells, consolidation of the five treatment systems into one, adjusting operational parameters, and selecting equipment to minimize noise, among others. The revised design was further evaluated using software called MODFLOW which is widely used in the industry to evaluate soil vapor extraction performance. The model confirmed the revised design with 13 wells and one treatment system would meet remediation performance metrics. Based on the revised design and in close coordination with the Bayridge Park HOA and Bayridge Park residents, the location outside of the community and adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive was selected.
In October 2021, Bayridge Park residents were invited to attend a community meeting held on November 4, 2021, providing information on the planning of the Remedial Design and Implementation Plan (RDIP), which describes the SVE system installation and operation details including the revised location. During this meeting, only comments in support of the proposed treatment building location were received. On December 22, 2021, the RDIP was submitted to the Water Board and included a network of 13 extraction well locations tied into a SVE treatment system building adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive. The Water Board approved the RDIP on January 28, 2022.
On January 18, 2023, Ford/WSP held another community meeting with Bayridge Park residents to discuss implementation of the SVE system and measures that would be taken to reduce construction impacts to the community. Again, no questions about the location of the treatment building system outside the community were asked and instead questions focused on the design of the building as well as construction impacts from the installation of the 13 wells within the community were the focus of comments.
Ford takes community concerns seriously and has contacted the person who made these comments in an attempt to address this concern including, accommodating specific needs due to their proximity to the system during construction and operation. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 1.6: What will Ford do for the 4-6 residences DIRECTLY affected by this SVE? Response 1.6: Ford has contacted the person(s) who made these comments in an attempt to address this concern in a manner that is satisfactory and allows this work to move forward. This may include installation of air conditioning units, temporary relocation, and other concessions.
To date, the person(s) have declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 1.7: After my initial submission I reread the City of Newport Beach Notice of Public Hearing. The notice states that the proposed project requests a 3.2-foot separation distance 10-199
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
where the REQUIRED separation is 8 feet between buildings. Please explain and add this concern to my previous submission.
Response 1.7: This work is mandated by the Water Board to provide long-term protection of public health and the environment, and the system has been designed to operate safely and efficiently. For these reasons and as indicated in the City of Newport Beach January 26, 2023, Zoning Administrator Staff Report, the project's limited duration qualifies it for construction under a Limited Term Permit, which provides relief from the 8-foot setback developmental standard set forth PC-24 (Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community). The PC-24 document provided standards to follow during the development of the community in 1979 but is more stringent than the requirements of local and state building and fire codes. The location and construction of the treatment system complies with all local and state building and fire safety codes.
COMMENTER #2: 10.48, BAYRIDGE PARK RESIDENT, FROM JANUARY 25, 2023, EMAIL Comment 2.1: 1 respectfully and strenuously object to the Bayridge/Ford treatment system building being placed at 94 Hartford Drive. IT IS TOO CLOSE TO HOMES AND NEEDS TO BE RELOCATED.
Response 2.1: The system location was selected, after multiple rounds of design document review and public comment and in consultation with the Bayridge Park HOA, to balance the need to conduct this work to provide long-term protection of public health and the environment while minimizing impacts to the community. The system has been designed to operate safely, efficiently, and quietly in a residential area and will be regularly maintained and monitored to ensure it is operating as planned.
Please refer to the response to Comment 1.4 for additional details.
Comment 2.2: The original plan of Wood/WSP was NOT to have 13 well installations with concentrated vapors converging into one building for treatment. They proposed 5 buildings closer to the hot spots, where the vapor would be diffused in different areas of the Bayridge complex.
Response 2.2: Please refer to the response to Comment 1.5.
Comment 2.3: Objections were raised to the original plan because of the taking up of parking spaces. Let's not make parking convenience a priority over health and safety.
Response 2.3: This system was designed with community safety in mind and carefully balances the need to conduct this work while minimizing impacts to the community. The system includes multiple redundancies to ensure that all air discharged is at or below permit discharge limits, that the system will safely shut down in case of a natural disaster, that there will be no vibrations from the system's operation, and that sound will be below what is required in the City of Newport's noise ordinance in residential areas — in this case it will be no louder than a refrigerator.
10-200
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
The system is housed in a building that will blend with the existing community and once treatment is done and the Water Board determines the system is no longer needed — the building will be removed, and the area will be restored to like condition.
Please refer to the response to Comment 1.5 for additional details.
Comment 2.4: The proposed distance from the building and 94 Hartford is 3.2 feet, where 8 feet is the required separation. What if there is a fire inside the structure? An earthquake? Response 2.4: Please refer to the response to Comment 1.2 and response to Comment 1.7.
Comment 2.5: Removal of toxins cannot be at 100%. All the toxic vapors being expelled within feet of our residences IS NOT ACCEPTABLE to our health and well-being. The problem is exacerbated by the prevailing onshore breezes that will move the vapor to the closest homes on Hartford Drive. The new model with one treatment system building was conceived through computer -generated 3D modeling that we must trust.
Response 2.5: This system has been designed to operate safely in a residential environment and has redundancies to ensure that VOCs are treated and all air that is discharged is at or below the discharge limits in the Air District permit that are set at levels that are protective of the most vulnerable community members. The operation of the SVE system will be overseen by the Water Board and permitted by the Air District.
For this specific system, two granular activated carbon filters will remove VOCs and the air that is discharged will be within the limits set by the Air District and monitored regularly to confirm it is protective of the health.
Comment 2.6: We are being asked to put our faith in technology, with no real time monitoring. It was explained in the meeting that samples have to be taken off -site and analyzed, and there is a minimum of a two -week lag.
Response 2.6: In accordance with the Air District Permit, total VOC concentration will be measured using a real-time monitor (such as a photoionization detector) at least once a day for the first seven days of operation to confirm the system is operating as designed and within permit specifications which are set to be protective of public health. Following the first seven days, monitoring will continue weekly or more frequently if required by the Air District. In addition to the real-time monitoring, analytical sampling will be conducted at least once a month and analyzed by an independent laboratory in accordance with the Air Districts Rule 304. Samples will be analyzed for specific VOCs to verify compliance with the permit and reported to the Air District. All data will also be reported to the Water Board and be available to the public on the State Water Boards document repository geotracker.ca.gov.
Comment 2.7: Pipes can leak. Connectors can leak. There can be failures with the system, and this is occurring a few feet from where we live, sleep and breathe. Living in close proximity to this ongoing process is psychologically disturbing and deprives us of peace of mind.
Response 2.7: This system has been designed to safely operate in a residential area and the operation will be overseen by the Water Board and Air District. Prior to operation, the pipes and 10-201
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
connections will be tested to ensure that they are operating efficiently and with no leaks. The piping underlying the streets is under vacuum meaning if there is a leak, the flow of air will be into the pipe, not out of it. The system will operate within all parameters of a permit issued by the Air District and will be regularly maintained and monitored to ensure it is functioning correctly.
The impacted vapors already exist below ground and by implementing this remediation system the concentrations in the soil vapor will reduce the risk of intrusion (the process of impacted vapors infiltrating into overlying homes). The system is designed to protect human health and the environment.
Ford understands that the location of the unit is distressing to the person who made this comment. Ford has contacted the person who made this comment in an attempt to address this concern, including accommodating specific needs due to their proximity to the system during construction and operation. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 2.8: The noise factor so close to homes is another reason to relocate the building.
Possible electrical humming from the equipment. Possible EMF fields.
Response 2.8: Please refer to the response to Comment 1.1 regarding noise.
The World Health Organization has studied the relationship between electromagnetic fields and human health extensively and concluded: "Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields."' Ford has contacted the person who made this comment in an attempt to address this concern.
This will include covering the cost for the installation of a state-of-the-art air conditioner and having plans in place for temporary relocation, if needed. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 2.9: The project is supposed to last a year. What if the testing at that point does not show results that are satisfactory to the Regional Water Quality Control Board? The timeframe could be extended.
Response 2.9: The treatment system is anticipated to operate for approximately 12 months. At the end of that timeframe, the Water Board will review the data and determine if additional monitoring and/or remediation is needed. The Water Board may request the system continue to operate for some period of time after the first year (either continuously or in a pulsed fashion).
But ultimately, the goal is to remove VOC mass from the subsurface, such that the treatment system can be taken down and the area restored in a timely manner. ' Radiation: Electromagnetic fields (who.int) [ https://www.who.int/news-room/questions-and- answers/item/radiation-electromagnetic-fields#:-:text=Some%20members%20of%20the %20public,fatigue%20and%201oss%20of%201ibido.]
10-202
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
Comment 2.10: What if we want to sell our homes or rent them out over the next 18+ months? Who would buy or rent with this situation? Our homes are NUMBER ONE FINANCIAL ASSET.
Response 2.10: Should this commentor decide to put this property on the market during the 12 months this system is anticipated to operate, Ford will work with this owner to address this concern.
Comment 2.11 and 2.12: A relocation of the treatment system building is imperative. Either go back to the original plan of 5 structures or find a better location, such as the corner of Bison & Country Club Drive, which is closer to garages, not homes, or the 7 parking spaces that border Jamboree that were fenced in and used as a construction yard for a past project.
This is not acceptable, and we expect it to be changed. Thank you.
Response 2.11 and 2.12: While we recognize that the person who made this comment feels this location is unacceptable, we are confident the system — as designed — can operate safely and effectively for a temporary period. This location was selected following 6 years of community engagement that included a 30-day comment period on the location, public meetings to discuss the location and impacts, and information available through fact sheets, websites and live video recordings of meetings.
This location was selected in consultation with the Bayridge Park HOA and Bayridge residents that participated in the public outreach as described above in the response to Comment 1.5.
COMMENTER #3: 10.50, BAYRIDGE PARK RESIDENT, FROM JANUARY 25, 2023, EMAIL Comment 3.1: As the primary residence impacted, we did not approve this system location and are requesting an alternate location due to the health and safety concerns listed below. We never received any certified mail regarding the project being directly adjacent to our home.
Response 3.1: The Water Board, Ford and WSP have engaged in a 6-year public outreach process that included over 25 meetings, 10 fact sheets, recordings of meetings uploaded to YouTube, a project specific website, and toll -free information hotline. Fact sheets and meeting announcements were emailed and sent to owners/occupants via US mail as well as distributed by the Bayridge HOA, which maintains an email list of owners and occupants.
Please refer to the response to Comment 1.4 for additional information.
The person who made this comment moved into the community in 2020 and the listing of outreach conducted and contact log (Attachment B through D) demonstrates the extensive outreach conducted including conversations with the person who made this comment. Ford has contacted the person who made these comments in an attempt to address this concern including, accommodating specific needs due to their proximity to the system during construction and operation. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 3.2: We understand the necessity of the remediation, however 94 Hartford was not the first proposed site. There are multiple sites available in the community that do not violate the building separation requirement.
10-203
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
Response 3.2: The location was selected in coordination with the Bayridge Park HOA and Bayridge Park residents after an extensive public outreach process. Extensive discussions with the City of Newport Beach during the design process were also conducted in order to understand the basis of the separation requirement and whether a temporary structure closer to this would still be safe. This location was selected because it balances the need to do the work while minimizing impacts to the community to the greatest extent possible.
Please refer to the response to Comment 1.5 and Comment 1.7 for additional information.
Ford has contacted the person who made these comments in an attempt to address and resolve this concern. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 3.3: The system is proposed to be 3 feet away from our home, including the exhaust that will be adjacent to windows. The project summary states that the required building separation is 8 feet.
a. Data must be provided to show the proposed system, violating the required separation distance:
i. is deemed safe to be within 3 feet of a residential unit for the proposed length of time
ii. the proximity does not adversely affect human health and child development iii. Please include information on the electromagnetic field and/or radiation from the unit and air quality standards from the exhaust
b. What are the impacts on fire safety code and potential impacts of an earthquake or other natural disaster since the required separation distance is 8 feet? Response 3.3: Please refer to the response to Comment 1.7. a. There is one discharge point on the top of the building, and that discharge point is located approximately 20 feet away from the window of the 94 Hartford Drive residence.
The system planned for Bayridge Park is designed to meet Air District permit requirements, which are set at levels protective of the health including sensitive populations (e.g., infants and children). Please refer to the response to Comment 2.6 for additional information on real-time and analytical monitoring and response to Comment
2.8 regarding electromagnetic fields.
b. Please refer to the response to Comment 1.2 and Comment 2.7.
Comment 3.4: It was stated at the pre -construction meeting that there are no "real time" results of the air samples taken from the exhaust. These samples must be analyzed at the lab. The system is proposed to be 3 feet away from a residence where an infant resides (the required separation is 8 feet).
a. How can we be assured that the air quality is safe with an infant inside 24 hours a day? b. If there is a failure in the system, how long can the failure go undetected and what are the consequences?
c. Will the residences directly impacted receive air purifiers, new windows, and enhanced monitoring?
10-204
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
i. Currently, our home has the original windows, installed 35+ years ago; these windows have the glass separated from the metal frame and do not properly seal out wind, dust, or noise. Having the treatment system 3 feet away from the home with this condition of windows will greatly impact quality of life inside the home, including sleep disruptions due to noise impact.
Response 3.4: Please refer to the response to Comment 1.7 regarding building separation and the response to Comment 2.6 for additional information on real-time and analytical monitoring. a. The residence of the person who made this comment had their indoor air sampled one time in 2020. Concentrations of chemicals of concern from samples collected within the residence did not exceed regulatory screening levels. WSP has contacted the resident multiple times to request additional sampling as part of the Indoor Air sampling program being conducted for this project. It is recommended to have at least two rounds of sampling in two different seasons (6 months apart) in order to conduct a human -health risk assessment. Once the initial two or more rounds are conducted and the risk assessment is complete, the residence will be placed in a long-term monitoring program at a frequency determined by sampling results but expected to be annually. As with all properties within our Indoor Air Program, if concentrations in indoor air exceed regulatory screening levels as a result of vapor intrusion, air purifiers will be offered and sampling frequency will increase.
b. The system will be monitored remotely 24/7 and will be set up with alarms to notify the Operations Manager immediately if the system is not operating properly. The system can be stopped remotely if needed. Please refer to Comment 1.2 for more details. c. Please refer to the response to Comment 1.1.
Ford has attempted to contact the person who made this comment to discuss additional measures that can be taken to mitigate noise and monitor indoor air quality. To date, this person has declined to engage in conversation.
Comment 3.5: The original proposal included 5-6 extraction units; please provide information on the safety of using 1 larger unit that is 3 feet away from a residence, where the required separation is 8 feet. It was stated that the efficacy of using 1 larger unit was determined by computer modeling.
a. Please provide data on potential failures among these treatment systems and the impact of residential safety (for example, pipes, electrical failures, fire risk).
Response 3.5: Please refer to the response to Comment 1.2 regarding safety and Comment 1.5 regarding design.
Comment 3.6: The system unit will affect home values and quality of life. We did not buy our home with plans to have a treatment system directly outside of our main living area window.
We will not be able to sell or rent out our home with this treatment system 3 feet away. As stated in the Zoning Administrator Staff Report: "the treatment system will be located adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive as it has been identified as the most feasible location to reduce visual impact from surrounding residents." 10-205
Responses to Comments
Bayridge Park Community Objections
February 10, 2023
a. This location does not reduce visual impact from our residence. This location directly impacts our quality of life and home. Per the renderings, a large pine tree will be removed that is currently in front of our living area window and the system will be directly visible from our main living area window. We have not received notification of this tree being removed.
b. Our home was never entered to see the visual impact the system will have from our main living area and the sightlines from 94 Hartford Drive. c. The project summary also states our air conditioning unit "shall be relocated" prior to issuance of the building permits. We did not agree to this relocation of the air conditioning unit. We did not receive notification via certified mail of moving this air conditioning unit.
d. The main concerns at the pre -construction meeting were related to construction inconveniences, parking, and aesthetics, instead of health and safety of residents with the system being adjacent to a home that violates the required separation distance.
Response 3.6: Please see the following responses to your comments:
a. Ford/WSP are attempting to work individually with these residents to resolve their concerns prior to the construction of the system. The system is temporary, and conditions will be restored upon completion of remediation and approval from the Water Board. To date, this person has declined to engage in conversation. b. See Response A above.
c. Ford/WSP are attempting to work individually with these residents to resolve their concerns prior to the construction of the system. WSP has called or emailed the resident six times since May of 2022 to attempt to discuss the relocation of the AC Unit. d. Ford/WSP have designed a system that is safe to operate, protects the health of nearby residences and reduces construction impacts to the greatest extent possible. The location of the treatment system has been designed in a manner that will allow it to operate safely and not affect the health of the residents because all vapors will be treated with granulated active carbon prior to being released into the atmosphere. The carbon will effectively treat the vapor and remove the VOC contamination to levels allowed under the permit to operate by the Air District which are set at levels that are protective of sensitive populations. The system will be regularly maintained and monitored weekly to ensure it is operating as designed and overseen by Water Board and Air District staff. Please refer to the Response to Comment 1.7 regarding separation distance.
10-206
ATTACHMENT A
PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR FORD SOIL VAPOR REMEDIATION
Remediation Project File No: PA2022-0180
10-207
From:
Sent: January 24, 2023 6:53 PM
To: CDD
Cc: Tran, Jenny
Subject: Objections for hearing
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
RE: City of Newport Beach Notice of Public Hearing
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation at 94 Hartford Drive Project File No: PA2022-0180
1. The proposed SVE system is in very close proximity to my windows. I do not have air conditioning and thus have always needed
to have my windows open during the summer and fall months for ventillation. The noise levels during construction and the running
of the system will cause a very disquieting and stressful atmosphere. It is jeopardizing mine and my immediate neighbors quality of life.
2. 1 am a two time survivor of cancer. I am greatly concerned regarding the exhaust fumes and safety of the SVE system. Since there are not going to be real time results as to air quality how can those directly affected be guaranteed all is operating safely. What if their is some type of natural
disaster. Fires, earthquakes etc. could mean disastrous damage to the system, causing grave consequences.
3. This project is going to adversely effect all the communities property values. How can you justify only four properties taking the brunt of this and probably being unable to sell or rent during this project. There is no guarantee as to when someone might have to sell nor to to the timing of this project.
4. Why were the residents not consulted or included in the discussion as to where this system belongs. The original plans were scratched due to
concern over visitor parking, Instead, they have decided to place the system 3 feet away from a residents window with and infant and within feet
of two other residences.
5. The original unit included 5+ systems. Please provide information on the efficiency and safety of using 1 large system 3 feet away from residences.
10-208
6. What will Ford do for the 4-6 residences DIRECTLY affected by this SVE system. 10-209
From:
Sent: January 25, 2023 6:15 AM
To: CDD
Cc: Tran, Jenny
Subject: Objections for hearing
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
RE: 94 Hartford
Ford Aeronutronic Soil Vapor Remediation
Project File No: PA2022-0180
After my initial submission I reread the City of Newport Beach Notice of Public Hearing. THe notice states that the proposed
project requests a 3.2 foot separation distance where the REQUIRED separation is 8 feet between buildings. Please
explain and add this concern to my previous submission. 10-210
From:
Sent: January 25, 2023 10:12 AM
To: CDD Zoom
Cc: Tran, Jenny
Subject: Time Sensitive: Public Hearing 1/26 Issues on Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Good morning.
My name is- and I am a resident and original owner ate Hartford Dr. Newport Beach in Bayridge.
Below please find issues that I am raising with regard to the Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation project at Bayridge (94 Hartford) in Newport Beach.
Project file No: PA2022-0180
Thank you for your review of these points prior to the public hearing on January 26. • I respectfully and strenuously object to the Bayridge/Ford treatment system building being placed at 94 Hartford Drive. IT IS TOO CLOSE TO HOMES AND NEEDS TO BE RELOCATED.
• The original plan of Wood/WSP was NOT to have 13 well installations with concentrated vapors converging into one building for treatment. They proposed 5 buildings closer to the hot spots, where the vapor would be diffused in different areas of the Bayridge complex.
• Objections were raised to the original plan because of the taking up of parking spaces. Let's not make parking convenience a priority over health and safety. The proposed distance from the building and 94 Hartford is 3.2 feet, where 8 feet is the required separation. What if there is a fire inside the structure? An earthquake? • Removal of toxins cannot be at 100%. All the toxic vapor being expelled within feet of our residences IS NOT ACCEPTABLE to our health and well-being. The problem is exacerbated by the prevailing onshore breezes that will move the vapor to the closest homes on Hartford Drive. The new model with one treatment system building was conceived through computer -generated 3D modeling that we must trust. • We are being asked to put our faith in technology, with no real time monitoring. It was explained in the meeting that samples have to be taken off -site and analyzed, and there is a minimum of a two -week lag.
10-211
• Pipes can leak. Connectors can leak. There can be failures with the system, and this is occurring a few feet from where we live, sleep and breathe. Living in close proximity to this ongoing process is psychologically disturbing and deprives us of peace of mind.
The noise factor so close to homes is another reason to relocate the building.
Possible electrical humming from the equipment. Possible EMF fields. • The project is supposed to last a year. What if the testing at that point does not show results that are satisfactory to the Regional Water Quality Control Board? The timeframe could be extended.
• What if we want to sell our homes or rent them out over the next 18+ months? Who would buy or rent with this situation? Our homes are NUMBER ONE FINANCIAL ASSET.
• A relocation of the treatment system building is imperative. Either go back to the original plan of 5 structures or find a better location, such as the corner of Bison & Country Club Drive, which is closer to garages, not homes, or the 7 parking spaces that border Jamboree that were fenced in and used as a construction yard for a past project.
This is not acceptable and we expect it to be changed. Thank you. 10-212
From:
Sent: January 25, 2023 10:46 AM
To: CDD
Cc: Tran, Jenny
Subject: Notice of Public Hearing Comments for review 1/26/23: 94 Hartford Drive Project File No.: PA2022-0180
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Good morning,
My name is- and I live ato Hartford Drive. Please see below for review prior to the public hearing on 1/26/23 for Project File No.: PA2022-0180. Please confirm receipt of this email.
Thank you very much.
Respectfully,
Regarding the City of Newport Beach: Notice of Public Hearing -- Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation at 94 Hartford Drive on Thursday, January 26, 2023:
Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Location: 94 Harford Drive
To Whom It May Concern:
We live ato Hartford Drive with our infant son. We have the following concerns regarding the soil vapor remediation treatment system that is proposed to be built directly next to our residence, violating the required separation of 8 feet between buildings.
As the primary residence impacted, we did not approve this system location and are requesting an alternate location due to the health and safety concerns listed below. We never received any certified mail regarding the project being directly adjacent to our home.
We understand the necessity of the remediation, however 94 Hartford was not the first proposed site. There are multiple sites available in the community that do not violate the building separation requirement.
1. The system is proposed to be 3 feet away from our home, including the exhaust that will be adjacent to windows. The project summary states that the required building separation is 8 feet. 10-213
a. Data must be provided to show the proposed system, violating the required separation distance:
i. is deemed safe to be within 3 feet of a residential unit for the proposed length of time ii. the proximity does not adversely affect human health and child development iii. Please include information on the electromagnetic field and/or radiation from the unit and air quality standards from the exhaust
b. What are the impacts on fire safety code and potential impacts of an earthquake or other natural disaster since the required separation distance is 8 feet?
2. It was stated at the pre -construction meeting that there are no "real time" results of the air samples taken from the exhaust. These samples must be analyzed at the lab. The system is proposed to be 3 feet away from a residence where an infant resides (the required separation is 8 feet).
a. How can we be assured that the air quality is safe with an infant inside 24 hours a day? b. If there is a failure in the system, how long can the failure go undetected and what are the consequences? c. Will the residences directly impacted receive air purifiers, new windows, and enhanced monitoring? i. Currently, our home has the original windows, installed 35+years ago; these windows have the glass separated from the metal frame and do not properly seal out wind, dust, or noise. Having the treatment system 3 feet away from the home with this condition of windows will greatly impact quality of life inside the home, including sleep disruptions due to noise impact.
3. The original proposal included 5-6 extraction units; please provide information on the safety of using 1 larger unit that is 3 feet away from a residence, where the required separation is 8 feet. It was stated that the efficacy of using 1 larger unit was determined by computer modeling.
a. Please provide data on potential failures among these treatment systems and the impact of residential safety (for example, pipes, electrical failures, fire risk).
4. The system unit will affect home values and quality of life. We did not buy our home with plans to have a treatment system directly outside of our main living area window. We will not be able to sell or rent out our home with this treatment system 3 feet away. As stated in the Zoning Administrator Staff Report: "the treatment system will be located adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive as it has been identified as the most feasible location to reduce visual impact from surrounding residents." a. This location does not reduce visual impact from our residence. This location directly impacts our quality of life and home. Per the renderings, a large pine tree will be removed that is currently in front of our living area window and the system will be directly visible from our main living area window. We have not received notification of this tree being removed.
b. Our home was never entered to seethe visual impact the system will have from our main living area and the sightlines from 94 Hartford Drive.
10-214
c. The project summary also states our air conditioning unit "shall be relocated" prior to issuance of the building permits. We did not agree to this relocation of the air conditioning unit. We did not receive notification via certified mail of moving this air conditioning unit. d. The main concerns at the pre -construction meeting were related to construction inconveniences, parking, and aesthetics, instead of health and safety of residents with the system being adjacent to a home that violates the required separation distance.
We respectfully request the system to be moved to an alternate location that does not violate the required building separation distance. There are multiple sites in the community that do not violate this.
Respectfully,
10-215
ATTACHMENT B
OUTREACH OVERVIEW
10-216
ATTACHMENT B
OUTREACH OVERVIEW
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board), Ford and WSP have conducted a robust outreach program since 2018 that encompasses specific outreach activities for the entire project, which spans an area of 11 residential communities and 8 commercial properties, along with targeted outreach to specific communities within the project area, like Bayridge Park. Project -wide outreach has included:
• 10 Water Board project fact sheets distributed via US mail to over 1,800 addresses within the project area and distributed via email to a project email list with over 300 emails.
• 4 work notices notifying specific communities of upcoming work in their area, including groundwater monitoring well installation and sampling, soil vapor probe installation and sampling, soil vapor extraction (SVE) pilot test activities, and other activities as directed by the Water Board.
• Signed access agreements and ongoing communications with over 350 homes and three commercial properties to test indoor air. Of the homes sampled, 29 have been offered air -purifying units as a short-term mitigation measure to reduce contaminants found in indoor air.
2 Water Board community surveys to determine appropriate outreach methods in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.
A project -specific website at www.fordnbfacts.com that includes an overview of the project, investigations/findings, community outreach activities, FAQs and a repository for project documents.
• A project YouTube page at https://tinvud.com/FordNBYouTube hosting recordings of all community meetings held since November 2020.
A toll -free information line (833-949-3673) that community members can call 2417.
Hotline calls are returned the same or next business day and generally all questions are addressed within 1-2 business days.
An electronic repository containing all key technical and community outreach documents on the State Water Board's GeoTracker website at:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile report?global id=SL188023848. • Over 25 community meetings broken down as follows:
o 9 information sessions hosted by the Water Board that are open to all communities impacted by the project. Generally, these are held 1-2 times per year.
0 3 community -specific meetings to discuss a pilot test to determine if SVE was an appropriate remedial technology to address contaminants. 0 8 community -specific meetings to discuss health risk assessments, their results and next steps.
0 5 community -specific meetings to discuss draft remediation plans and provide opportunities for public comment.
0 3 community -specific meetings to discuss the implementation of the SVE system and accept input from residents.
o Each of these meetings was noticed via a meeting save the date or invite postcard distributed via US mail and at least 2 email reminders distributed to HOA representatives and residents on the project email list. 125 10-217
As part of this larger outreach program, specific activities were conducted with Bayridge Park residents to ensure they were aware and able to comment on the proposed cleanup plan and the design of the SVE system. This outreach included:
A 30-day public comment period held by the Water Board from June 7 to July 9, 2021, on the draft cleanup plan, known as a draft Feasibility Study/Remedial Action Plan (FSIRAP). The FSIRAP describes the site and environmental conditions, possible remedial technologies to address environmental conditions, and the selection of SVE as the preferred remedial alternative.
o A public meeting on the draft FS/RAP was first announced via a save the date postcard mailed on May 12, 2021, and the comment period was noticed via a Water Board fact sheet that was distributed via US mail and email on June 3, 2021.
o The virtual public meeting was held on June 10, 2021. At this meeting and in subsequent emailed public comments, the community voiced concerns about having five smaller SVE treatment systems and their overall impact to the community, including increased construction activities, reduction in parking spaces and visual impacts.
The Water Board takes public input seriously and as a result of input received on the SVE system location it was decided, in coordination with the Bayridge Park HOA and residents to have one treatment system outside of the common area. In August 2021, the Water Board distributed a Response to Comments to all those who provided comments and finalized the FSIRAP. In both the Response to Comments and the FSIRAP it was noted that the original design of five smaller SVE treatment systems would be readjusted to one large SVE treatment system outside of the community in coordination with the Bayridge Park HOA.
On November 4, 2021, Ford and WSP held a poolside meeting with community residents to provide more information on the design of the SVE system and take community feedback. Residents were notified of this meeting via a postcard that was mailed via US Mail and emailed to HOA representatives in October 2021. Two meeting email reminders were distributed prior to the meeting date. 13 residents attended the meeting, including the resident at 96 Hartford, and as part of that meeting the current proposed location of the SVE treatment system was shown. The community expressed concerns around the design of the treatment system and the overall level of impact to the community during the construction and their feedback was taken into consideration.
In response to comments from Bayridge Park residents during the July 2022 project - wide Water Board community meeting, Ford and WSP began sending monthly email updates to residents of Bayridge Park to proactively inform them of the work recently completed in their community, upcoming work, anticipated impacts, and upcoming community meetings. These emails have been distributed monthly since August 2022 to over 170 residents in the community.
On January 18, 2023, Ford and WSP held a pre -construction meeting with community residents to provide more information on the construction of the SVE system. Residents were notified of this meeting via a postcard that was mailed via US Mail and emailed to residents in November 2022. This meeting was originally intended to be poolside in the community, but due to the possibility of heavy rains in January 2023, was re -located to the Bonita Creek Community Room. Residents were notified of this change via US Mail and email in early January 2023. An additional email reminder was sent the day before the meeting. 16 residents attended the meeting expressing similar concerns about construction inconveniences including a concern about the location and design of the SVE treatment system.
120 10-218
In addition to this outreach, FordMSP has been in communication with the residents of 92, 94 and 96 Hartford regarding indoor air sampling and the project's proposed SVE system in an attempt to ensure they had a good understanding of the proposed work and an opportunity to ask questions. To date, these residents have declined to engage in conversation. 127 10-219
ATTACHMENT C
INFORMATION LINE CONTACT LOG
122 10-220
ATTACHMENT C
INFORMATION LINE CONTACT LOG
Resident at Property ID 10.52
• 1/18 — texted resident my contact information
• 1/19 — received text with picture of Notice of Public Hearing. • 1/19 — called to explain that this was City's notice and she could provide comments but this was not a notice from WSP; discussed concerns; 2-time cancer survivor, too close, noise, emissions, causing her stress which is not good for her health
• 1/20 — called and discussed possibility of meeting and indicated would be willing to meet; told her I would call once I had dates
• 1/23 — left message
• 2/5 — left message
• 2/6 — received message stating not interested, this is a complex issue and along with two neighbors I am not open to discussing this system located within 3 feet when it is close to our residences.
Resident at Property ID 10.50
• 1/27 — left message
• 1/28—emailed
• 1/30—emailed and called
• 2/1- discussed concerns on a high level; told her wanted to meet and would call to firm up dates
• 2/5 — emailed about meeting; left messages
• 2/6 - received email not interesting in meeting because location has not changed • 2/6 — sent email asking her to reconsider
• 2/9 — received email stating did not want to meet
Resident at Property ID 10.48
• 1/27 — left message
• 1/28 - emailed
• 1/30—emailed
• 2/6 — left message
• 2/9—email stating not interested in meeting
1g9 10-221
ATTACHMENT D
WSP HARTFORD RESIDENTS CONTACT LOG
20 0 10-222
ATTACHMENT D
WSP HARTFORD RESIDENTS CONTACT LOG
IA_Property_ID
CommunicatiorL.Date
Communication Time
Communiration_Medium
WSPStaff
Communication_tog_Entry
10.48 10/12/2020
9:25
Phone
MLR
Called and spoke with resident to remind her of IA sampling appt this week. She provided updated email address:
10.48 11/20/2020
2:12
Phone
MLR
Resident left VM asking about the work that is going on outside her home.
10.48 11/20/2020
3:05
Phone
MLR
Returned call and left VM for resident asking to let her know what questions she has and I will have someone from our team call her back.
10.48 8/26/2022
14:10
Email
MLR
Sent Resident an email re: scheduling annual resample.
10.48 10/13/2022
10:17
Phone/email
MLR
Left VIVI for Resident re: scheduling 1 year resample, and sent followup email.
10.48 11/8/2022
13:34
Phone
MLR
Called and spoke with Resident. She requested that I call back first week of December as they are in the middle of a big home story e/movin ro ect.
10.48 12/1/2022
16:25
Phone
MLR
Left VM on both #'s re: scheduling annual resample.
10.48 12/1/2022
16:29
Text
MLR
Resident sent me a text that they are still not ready to schedule the sampling and requested that I call back after Christmas.
10.48 1/5/2023
14:58
Text
MLR
Sent Resident a text re: scheduling annual resample.
10.48 1/10/2023
15:41
Phone/email
MLR
Left VM and sent followup email to schedule annual resample.
10.48 1/23/2023
11:50
Email
MLR
Resident replied to email and scheduled annual resample for 2/2 & 2/3 at 11am.
20.48 2/23/2023
13:54
Email
DHN
Resident had reached out via email to Jessica Law on 1/23/23 with questions on the SVE system. Jessica forwarded email to DHN who responded to the list of questions and provided figures (where relevant).
10.48 1/23/2023
16:00
Email
DHN
Resident followed up to the email with one additional question. DHN provided the additional Information requested.
10.50 6/29/2020
NULL
Misc Note
Wood Staff
Resident (to move out by 6/29/2020)
10.50 6/17/2020
3:00
Phone
DHN
DHN-6/17/2020-Prospective buyer returned DHN's call. DHN walked her through the overall investgiation, TCE as it relates to preganant women, and ongoing work in Bayridge park. Realtor Karla Stagman returned DHN's call and we got the IA sampling scheduled for after the tenant has moved out on 6/29/2020. DHN discussed with Realtor the process, what happens if results are over screening levels, and the general scope of the investigation. Property will be vacant for sampling, access via lockbox.
Realtor to send written permission for access while vacant. Realtor mentioned that the tenant (who Is moving out) had candles.
10.50 7/14/2020
NULL
Phone
DHN
DHN-7/14/2020-With the permission of the owner, DHN spoke with prospective buyer to share the results with her (908-370- 7D03). She expects to close on the property on 7/17/2020 and says that will be their primary residence. I let her know we will be sending her an AA for seasonal sampling in winter 2020.
10.50 10/21/2021
14:19
Phone
MLR
Left VM for new owner re: scheduling 6 month seasonal resample.
10.S0
10/21/2021
14:20
Email
MLR
Sent followup email re: scheduling 6 month seasonal resample.
10.50 5/13/2022
11:10
Phone
MLR
Left VM for Resident re: AC Unit relocation as part of the implementation of the treatment system bldg.
10.50 6/10/2022
14:06
Phone
MLR
Left VM for Resident re: AC Unit relocation as part of the Implementation of the treatment system bldg.
10.50 8/3/2022
16:52
Phone
MLR
Left VM for Resident re: AC Unit relocation as part of the implementation of the treatment system bldg.
10.50 8/11/2022
14:47
Email
MLR
Sent email to REsidert re: AC Unit relocation as part of the install of the treatment system bldg.
10.50 8/22/2022
10:48
Phone
MLR
Called to reach Resident re: AC unit relocation and was unable to leave a message as the mailbox was full.
10.50 2/20/2023
12:01
Phone
DHN
Left VM to Resident regarding questions on SVE System and AC Unit.
10.50 1/20/2023
12:04
Email
DHN
Sent Resident email to answer some questions she had asked Jessica Law and requested her to call for further discussion,
20.50 2/26/2023
12:04
Phone
DHN
Left VM again trying to reach out to resident regarding her concerns on the SVE System.
10.52 3/5/2020
10:25
Phone
MLR
MLR-3/5/20-Leslie was at community meeting 3/4/20 and would like her air tested. Called and left VM on 1st # (called 2nd # and it was someone else's #) and explained IA sampling process and asked her to call back to schedule.
10.52 3/9/2020
1A5
Phone
MLR
MLR-3/9/20-resident returned call and scheudled IA sampling for 3/17 & 3/18/20 at 330pm.
10.52 10/22/2021
15:12
lEmail
JIVILR
I Emailed resident re: scheduling 6 month resample.
10.52 11/10/2021
15:43
Email
MLR
Left VM re: scheduling6 month seasonal resample.
10.52 11/29/2022
11:31
Phone/email
JIVILR
I Left VM and sent followup email re: scheduling 6 month resample.
10.52 1/18/2023
14:46
Phone/email
JIVILR
I Left VM and sent email re: scheduling 6 month resample. 10-223
Z q �--' 10-224
Attachment No. PC 9
Outreach to the One Ford Road
Community
Z q 10-225
Zq4 10-226
From: HamannNazaroff, Daniela
To: smaauin(@oox.net
Cc: Jantzen-Marlon. Candace
Subject: Update for Environmental Remediation and One Ford Road Date: Friday, December 9, 2022 1:22:00 PM
Attachments: fia 03 prop sa 221209.ndf
0maae001.ona
Dear Steve,
Thank you again for meeting with us on behalf of One Ford Road to discuss the upcoming construction activities on Country Club Drive. Additional details about the anticipated schedule and impact to the community are provided in this email. Please contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. We appreciate your continued cooperation and understanding.
Construction at Bayridge Park/Belcourt Terrace and potential impact to Country Club Drive The following table lists all the planned activities and approximate timing of when construction vehicles and personnel will likely be on Country Club Drive. All of the dates listed are subject to change, but the HOA will be notified at least one week in advance by email of any of the events listed below or any other activities that may impact access on Country Club Drive. We anticipate that resident access through Country Club Drive will be maintained at all times. Flagmen/cones will be utilized, when needed, to help traffic safely navigate past the work zone.
Approximate Timing
Activity
Country Club Use
(subject to change)
Late January or early
Topographical survey &
2-3 person crew and small equipment in roadway.
February (approx. 2
utility locating
Traffic cones and flagger to manage traffic.
days)
Mid February (approx.
Mobilization of
1 vehicle to transport materials. Traffic cones
3 days)
temporary facilities.
around vehicle, but all work will be on the side of
he road so no other traffic management needed.
Early April (approx. 3
Landscaping removal
One lane blocked to give crew and equipment
Days)
and grading at treatment
adequate space to work. Some truck traffic in and
system site.
out of work zone for material transportation.
raffic flaggers will be stationed on either side of
he work zone to direct traffic.
Early April (approx. 3
Conduit crossing under
One lane at a time closed for potholing and
Days)
Country Club
monitoring of the horizontal drilling process. Traffic
laggers will be stationed on either side of the work
zone to direct traffic.
Mid April (approx. 5
Construction of concrete
1 concrete truck. Traffic cones around vehicle, but
days)
pad at treatment system
all work will be on the side of the road so no other
site
traffic management needed.
Late May (Approx. 2
Delivery of treatment
Large flatbed truck and crane to place building on
days)
system building
concrete pad. One lane blocked to give crew and
equipment adequate space to work. Trafficflaggers
10-227
will be stationed on either side of the work zone to
direct traffic.
1 day, semi-annually Maintenance events on 2 vehicles to perform work and transport materials after construction system equipment Traffic cones around vehicle, but all work will be on he side of the road so no othertraffic
management needed.
We will be able to provide more granularity on both the schedule and the traffic control plan for each activity asthe construction start date approaches. tilde planto maintain full transparency with the communityabout whatto expect and when.
Additional Investigation within One Ford Road
As you know, extensive cleanup/remediation was done within One Ford Road in the 1990s when the formerfacility was decommissioned and redeveloped to residential community. Based on the data collected in the past four years, the Water Board has agreed that no active remediation is needed within One Ford Road, howeverthey have requested 8 additional groundwater monitoring wells and 9 additional soil gas probes be installed within the community to continue to monitorthe below - ground conditions and make sure any residual impacts continue to decrease naturally overtime. This is summarized in a report called the "Remedial Design Implementation Plan" (RDIP) and is available he re:
https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/esi/uploads eo_reportf2825709330f5L1SS023S 4S.PDF.
The document is long, so I have just attached the figure (Figure 3) that shows the proposed work. • The 9 proposed soil gas probes are shown in yellow squares and will be installed within the roads (not on private property)
■ The S proposed groundwater monitoring wells are shown as green circles and will also be installed in the roads (not on private property)
o The proposed locations may be adjusted slightly based on field conditions, underground utilities, or other constraints.
• The Water Board has requested that the work begin no laterthan February 20th, 2023. We will mail out a Notice of Work at least 1 week before the work is to begin to all residents within One Ford Road to describe the work and the schedule. That will provide folks with addition@ I details about what to expect, number of days, etc. • Throughout the rest of the year we will need to come back quarterly or semi-annually to sample from these locations. We will notify you priorto that work later in the year.
Have a great weekend,
Daniela
Daniell Hamann-NaxarofP
Associate Engineer
PE CA C91417
SheEHerlHers
10-228
M+ 1 510-206-6571
WSP USA
555 12th Street, Suite 215
Oakland, CA
94607 USA
Wsp.com
x9 10-229
Igo 10-230
9o10-230
Attachment No. PC 10
Project Plans
10-231
1919
200
10-232
tl
BAYRIDGE PARK (PARCEL 10)
SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM
FORMER FORD AERONUTRONIC PROPERTY
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA
*EUREKA
-REDDING 3
J
i
c
9 3
i
T
SACRAMENTO O
SAN FRANCISCO
OAKLAND
i9
q
•BAKERBFIELD
90 T
0 SAN LUIS OBISPO
p
C SANTA BARBA-
LOS ANGELES
NEWPORT BEACH
SAN DIES O
PROJECT N
SITE
SITE LOCATION MAP
NOT TO SCAUE
SHEET
NUMBER
DRAWING
NUMBER
DRAWING NAME
1 G-1
TITLE SHEET
2 G-2
GENERALNOTES
3 G-3
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS -GUIDA
4 G-0
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS - CALVADA
5 G-5
EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH UTILITIES OVERLAY
6 G-6
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING SITE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
7 CA
OVERALL WELLHEAD AND PIPING LAYOUT
PIPING PLAN AND PROFILE 1 OF6C-3
PIPING PLAN AND PROFILE 2 OF 6
MC-2
Cd
PIPING PLAN AND PROFILE 3 OF 6
C-5
PIPING PLAN AND PROFILE 4 OF 6
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
THE BAYRIDGE PARK (PARCEL 10) COMMUNITY IS LOCATED IN NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA (ZIP CODE 92660) BETWEEN
HARTFORD DRIVE TO THE SOUTH, JAMBOREE ROAD TO THE WEST, BISON AVENUE TO THE NORTH, AND COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE TO THE EAST. PARCEL 10 IS DEVELOPED WITH 28 MULTI -UNIT CONDOMINIUM AND SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES FOR A TOTAL OF 168 RESIDENTIAL UNITS; THE REMAINING AREAS ARE EITHER ROADS OR LANDSCAPE. THE REAL ESTATE AND COMMUNAL
SPACES (INCLUDING THE BUILDING SLABS UNDER THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS) ARE OWNED BY THE BAYRIDGE PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION (HOA), AND THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE OWNED BY INDIVIDUALS. THE PLANNED SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION SYSTEM WILL ENCOMPASS THE ENTIRETY OF PARCEL 10, AND A PLANNED SYSTEM BUILDING WILL BE ADJACENT TO 94 HARTFORD DRIVE, TO THE EAST OF THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AT THAT ADDRESS.
_ -N-
�'��'
t 1
SITE
LOCATION` �.
SITE VICINITY MAP
SHEET
NUMBER
DRAWING
NUMBER
DRAWING NAME
12 C-6
PIPING PLAN AND PROFILE 5 OF 6
13 C-7
PIPING PLAN AND PROFILE 6 OF 6
14 C-8
DETAILS OF TRENCH SECTIONS AND CONDENSATE SUMPS
15 C-9
DETAILS OF WELLHEAD VAULT
16 C-10
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING SITE PREPARATION
17 C-11
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING SITE LAYOUT AND GRADING PLAN
8 C-12
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING ELEVATIONS
9 C-13OVERALL
SITE RESTORATION PLAN
01-1
k
PIPINGAND INSTRUMENTATION DIAGRAM LEGEND AND ABBREVIATIONS 1-2
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
2 1-3
PIPING AND INSTRUMENTATION DIAGRAM
PARCEL10
BOUNDARY
moo �' \ — NI —
/0
/O SrFRF�F40 g�PNV A/gRTFOR \ `
°OR
� w�0
0 \ \ 0 �Qo�eURRF SF,�oROUc / l
00 ` oy l
0 0 ` /f
0 0 `
Vl l 10 I�-
o _-
t2u
aK
Y Op
W y
U O sj 2�
Lo>
d W s3
U < Of
Ou
a `_
O
Z
�c
a o w
Z
oZo
ww �a
pm u
yam
OLL n2
�p<
wwm 3u
npF Ox
JO3 rci
yWz $z
� a3I.
SITE MAP °o
w
h� w
x
o rn
o w
¢w J
SHEET
NUMBER
DRAWING
NUMBER
DRAWING NAME
23 E-004
SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM, LOAD CALCULATIONS, AND PANEL SCHEDULE 24 6011-01
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING - BUILDING LAYOUT
25 6011-03A
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING- BUILDING ELEVATION CROSS SECTIONS 26 6011_04
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING- WELDED STEEL ENCLOSURE ISOMETRIC
CONSTRUCTION DETAIL DRAWING
27 6011-07B
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING -SKID WELDMENT
28 6011-22
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING -ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
29 S-0.1
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING FOUNDATION -GENERAL NOTES
30 5-0.2
TREATMENTSVSTEM BUILDING FOUNDATION -GENERAL NOTES(CONTD.) 31 5-1.0
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING FOUNDATION -FLOOR PLAN AND SECTIONS c
F-
F
Ewd�g
OWN EY
z�}Pe
/
w FnU�
oop
3z�oV
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
0-1'
DATE 12/23/2022
PROJ 86223971O
DWG G-1
SHEET 1 OF 31
20-1
10-233
GENERAL NOTES
REM EDIATION IMPLEMENTATION WILL BE BY THE FOLLOWING PARTIES:
REMEDIAL ACTION OWNER -FORD MOTOR COMPANY
ENGINEER - WSP EARTH & ENVIRONMENT USA (WSP)
CONSTRUCTION MANAGER -WSP
CONTRACTOR -THE INDIVIDUAL, FIRM, PARTNERSHIP, OR CORPORATION DESIGNATED AS
THE CONTRACTOR SELECTED BY THE OWNER TO PERFORM THE WORK HEREIN
THE LEAD AGENCY IS SANTA ANA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD (SARWQCB)
1. ALL MATERIAL AND WORK IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL CONFORM TOTHE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH DESIGN CRITERIA & STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION 2021 EDITION.
2. THE TERM "PROVIDE" MEANS TO FURNISH AND INSTAL, COMPLETE AND READY FOR THE INTENDED USE.
3. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR INFORMATION NOT GIVEN IN THESE GENERAL NOTES OR SHOWN IN THESE PLANS. IF DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS OCCUR, THE PLANS GOVERN. ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WORK.
4. ALL WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES.
SITE CONDITIONS NOTES
1. HORIZONTAL COORDINATES ARE BASED UPON NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD 83).
2. ELEVATIONS ARE BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVE) 88).
3. EXISTING BASEMAP AND INDICATED PROPERTY LINES ARE AS PROVIDED AND CONFIRMED BY CALVADA SURVEYING, INC. AND GUIDA SURVEYING INC.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL VISUALLY INSPECT THE SITE PRIOR TO MOBILIZATION TO
ASCERTAIN THE CONDITION OF EXISTING FEATURES AND FAMILIARIZE WITH PROPOSED WORK.
S. PERFORM ALL WORK NECESSARY TO CLEAR AND GRUB THE SITE AND TO PERMIT INSTALLATION OF THE WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL ONLY CLEAR AND GRUB AREA WHERE WORK IS PLANNED THE FOLLOWING DAY. REMOVAL SHALL INCLUDE DIGGING OUT AND
OFF -SITE DISPOSAL OF RUBBISH, DEBRIS, STUMPS, ROOTS, BRUSH, TREES, AND OTHER PLANT GROWTH, EXCEPT THOSE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS TO REMAIN.
6. PROTECT BENCHMARKS,SURVEY CONTROL POINTS, AND ANY EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS, WHERE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. RESTORE DAMAGED IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR ORIGINAL CONDITION, AS ACCEPTABLE TO OWNER.
PERMITTING NOTES
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SECURING ALL NECESSARY PERMITS AND
PROVIDE A COPY TO THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (SCAQMD) PERMIT.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE COPIES OF THE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND PERMITS FOR THIS PROJECT ON THE SITE AT ALL TIMES. THEY SHALL BE FAMILIAR WITH ALL
APPLICABLE STANDARDS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ANY OTHER CONDITION(S) RELATED TO THE PERMITS AND SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL PROVISIONS OF THE PERMITS.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL PERMIT RELATED INSPECTIONS. THE
CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THE ISSUANCE OF AND PICK UP THE BUILDING PERMIT FROM THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, PERMIT CENTER (100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660, (949) 718-1888) PRIOR TO THE START OF WORK.
STAGING AND MATERIAL MANAGEMENT NOTES
1. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM THE TEMPORARY STAGING AREA AND SCHEDULE OF WORK WITH ENGINEER. REVISION OF THE TEMPORARY STAGING AREA SHALL BE APPROVED IN ADVANCE BY ENGINEER.
2. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLANS WILL BE REQUIRED FOR ANY TRANSPORTATION OF MATERIAL IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY TO AND FROM SITE.
3. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURES SHALL BE USED ON ANY HAUL VEHICLES LEAVING SITE.
4. ALL MANUFACTURED OR IMPORTED MATERIALS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO THEIR USE. ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THOSE APPROVALS SHALL BE FOLLOWED.
SCHEDULING & COMMUNICATION NOTES
1. ALL DATA,DRAWINGS, AND CORRESPONDENCE FROM LOWER -TIER
MANUFACTURERS OR SUPPLIERS SHALL BE ROUTED THROUGH THE CONTRACTOR TO THE ENGINEER.
2. LIMITS OF WORK SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE. CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE LIMITS OF WORK WITH ENGINEER AND THE OWNER.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE WITH ENGINEER AT LEAST 72 HOURS PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK AT THE SITE.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS SHOWN ON THE
PLANS AND COMPARE ALL PLANS FOR CONFORMANCE AS TO THE LAYOUT OF DIMENSIONS AND ELEVATIONS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH WORK.
S. ENGINEER SHALL BE NOTIFIED OF ANY UNANTICIPATED CONDITIONS THAT ARE ENCOUNTERED AND WILL DETERMINE WHETHER DESIGN CHANGES WILL BE REQUIRED.
THIS INCLUDES ANY UNANTICIPATED CONDITIONS THAT HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO IMPACT THE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE.
6. CONTRACTOR IS TO MAINTAIN AND PROVIDE ENGINEER WITH AN AS -BUILT MARKUP
SET OF DRAWINGS AT THE COMPLETION OF ALL WORK, FOR THE ENGINEER TO GENERATE THE RECORD AS -BUILT DRAWINGS.
7. CONTRACTOR SHALL SEQUENCE,COORDINATE, AND CONDUCT DEMOLITION AND
CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS TO MAINTAIN CONTINUOUS PUBLIC SAFETY, DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY SERVICES TO EXISTING FACILITIES REQUIRING THESE SERVICES. NOTIFY ENGINEER AT LEAST FIVE (5) DAYS, WHEN FEASIBLE, UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED, IN ADVANCED OF INTERRUPTION OF ANY OF THESE SERVICES.
8. THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE SHALL BE PRESENTED IN A TIMELINE
FORMAT SHOWING ESTIMATED START DATE, DURATION, AND COMPLETION TIMES FOR CRITICAL PATH ITEMS. THE ENGINEER WILL COMPILE AND MAINTAIN AN OVERALL PROJECT SCHEDULE WITH INPUT FROM THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL
COMMUNICATE ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED SCHEDULE TO THE ENGINEER WITHIN 24 HOURS.
SAFETY NOTES
1. ALL PERSONNEL INVOLVED SHALL FOLLOW THE REQUIREMENTS FOR EXCAVATION
CONTAINED IN THE STATE CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ORDERS ENFORCED BY THE STATE DIVISION OF INDUSTRIAL SAFETY.
2. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALWAYS BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELY RESPONSIBLE FOR
CONDITIONS OF THE JOB SITE WITHIN LIMITS OF WORK INCLUDING SAFETY OF PERSONS
AND PROPERTY, AND FOR ALL NECESSARY INDEPENDENT ENGINEERING REVIEWS OF THESE CONDITIONS. ALTHOUGH THE ENGINEER'S JOB SITE REVIEW DOES INCLUDE REVIEW OF THE
ADEQUACY OF CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY PLAN, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SAFETY MATTERS ON THE JOB SITE.
3. THERE IS POTENTIAL FOR EXPOSURE TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN SOIL AND GROUNDWATER DURING CONSTRUCTION. ALL WORK MUST BE PERFORMED IN COMPLIANCE WITH 29 CFR 1910.120(E).
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PREPARING A HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
TO COVER THEIR ACTIVITIES ONSITE AND SHALL ALSO COMPLY WITH THE SITE -SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN PREPARED BY THE ENGINEER.
5. APPROPRIATE PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE WORN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACTOR'S APPROVED HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN.
6. ALL PERSONNEL WORKING ON SITE SHALL BE REQUIRED TO ATTEND A SITE -SPECIFIC
SAFETY INTRODUCTION BEFORE STARTING ANY WORK AND AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH SUBSEQUENT WORKDAY.
UTILITY NOTES
1. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO LOCATE, PROTECT, AND MAINTAIN EXISTING UTILITIES, WHETHER OR NOT SHOWN ON THE PLANS. CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT (USA; 1-800-422-4133) A MINIMUM OF THREE WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO ANY WORK. CONTRACTOR SHALL RETAIN A PRIVATE
UTILITY -LOCATING CONTRACTOR TO LOCATE UTILITIES WITHIN THE WORK AREA WITH TRAINING PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE 4216 THROUGH 4216.9, WHICH
MEETS THE MINIMUM TRAINING GUIDELINES OF COMMON GROUND ALLOWANCE (CGA) CURRENT BEST PRACTICES.
2. LOCATIONS OF UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS WERE
OBTAINED FROM A SITE SURVEY AND AVAILABLE RECORDS FROM THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND UTILITY OWNERS. ALL EXISTING AND ABANDONED UTILITIES MAY NOT BE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS.
3. CONTRACTOR SHALLVERIFY THE LOCATION AND ELEVATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND
UTILITIES, SHOWN AND NOT SHOWN, AND TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES
NECESSARY TO AVOID CONTACT WITH SUCH WHICH MAY RESULT IN INIURYTO PERSONNEL OR DAMAGE TO FACILITIES. THE FINAL DETERMINATION OF EXACT LOCATIONS AND THE COST OF REPAIR TO DAMAGED FACILITIES IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF CONTRACTOR.
4. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE EXPLORATORY EXCAVATIONS A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 100 FEET IN ADVANCE OF TRENCHING TO DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATION AND DEPTH OF
ALL UTILITIES CROSSING THE SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION (SVE) CONDUITSTO MAKE NECESSARY ADJUSTMENTS IN GRADE TO CLEAR THESE UTILITIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL
LOCATE EXISTING UTILITIES BY POTHOLING OR OTHER METHODS APPROVED IN ADVANCE BY THE ENGINEER.
5. NO CONNECTION SHALL BE MADE TO ANY WATER MAIN, STORM DRAIN, ELECTRICAL
SOURCE OR ANY OTHER UTILITY SYSTEM WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE UTILITY AGENCY AND THE ENGINEER.
6. WHERE INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS OR AS REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT THE WORK,
MODIFICATION OR RELOCATION OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR STRUCTURES SHALL BE CONDUCTED BY THE CONTRACTOR. MODIFICATION OR RELOCATION WORK SHALL
BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRAWINGS AND THE UTILITY OWNER'S REQUIREMENTS.
7. THE SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL NOT COMMENCE MODIFYING OR RELOCATING UTILITY WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE ENGINEER AND UTILITY OWNER.
8. THE SUBCONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM MODIFICATION OR RELOCATION WORK WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED BYTHE UTILITY OWNER.
STORMWATER, EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION NOTES
1. STORMWATER POLLUTION CONTROLS SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED TO MINIMIZE RUNOFF OF SEDIMENT FROM CONSTRUCTION AREAS IN STORM WATER. CONTRACTOR
SHALL COMPLY WITH ANY REQUIREMENTS FROM THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND THE
STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWEEP) PREPARED BY THE ENGINEER (IF
APPLICABLE), AND ANY ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS INCLUDED IN THE STATE WATER RESOURCES BOARD ORDER 2009-009-DWQ (CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT), IF SUCH PERMIT IS REQUIRED AND OBTAINED BY THE ENGINEER.
2. ALL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SWEET AND "CALTRANS STATEWIDE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN." THESE MEASURES WILL BE INSTALLED PRIOR TO ANY MAJOR SOIL
DISTURBANCE OR IN THEIR PROPER SEQUENCE AND MAINTAINED UNTIL PERMANENT PROTECTION IS ESTABLISHED.
3. ALL STORM DRAINAGE INLETS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY ONE OF THE PRACTICES
ACCEPTED IN THE STANDARDS, AND PROTECTION SHALL REMAIN UNTIL PERMANENT STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
4. ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES AND BMPS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND
PERIODICALLY INSPECTED, MAINTAINED AND CORRECTED BY THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION. ANY DAMAGE INCURRED BY EROSION SHALL BE RECTIFIED IMMEDIATELY.
S. PAVED ROADWAYS MUST BE KEPT CLEAN AT ALL TIMES. STREET SWEEPING CAN BE UTILIZED. DO NOT UTILIZE A FIRE OR GARDEN HOSE TO CLEAN ROADS.
6. PROVIDE TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES TO
PREVENT SOIL EROSION AND DISCHARGE OF SOIL -BEARING WATER RUNOFF OR AIRBORNE
DUST TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND WALKWAYS, ACCORDING TO EROSION AND
SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DRAWINGS AND REQUIREMENTS OF AUTHORITIES HAVING
JURISDICTION
7. STOCKPILE LOCATIONS SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE ENGINEER PRIORTO CONSTRUCTION. WHEN EARTHWORK ACTIVITIES OCCUR, DUST CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED TO MINIMIZE DUST GENERATION. EXCAVATED SOIL SHALL BE HANDLED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SCAQMD. AT A MINIMUM, CONTRACTOR SHALL STOCKPILE SOIL USING A MINIMUM 20-MILLIMETER (MIL) HIGH DENSITY POLYETHYLENE (HOPE) BOTTOM LINER WITH BERMED SIDES CONSISTING OF 1 FOOT OF SOIL OR K RAILS. STOCKPILED MATERIAL WILL BE COVERED WITH A WEIGHTED 10-MIL (MIN) HDPE COVER AND SECURED DURING PERIODS WHEN MATERIAL IS NOT BEING
ADDED OR REMOVED TO SUPPRESS THE EMISSION OF DUST AND VOCS, AND TO PREVENT EXPOSURE TO RAINWATER. ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE ENCIRCLED WITH STRAW WATTLES SECURED USING SANDBAGS. DURING PERIODS OF ACTIVE USE, THE SOIL STOCKPILE WILL BE KEPT VISIBLY MOIST TO MINIMIZE DUST EMISSIONS.
B. DO NOT COMMENCE SITE CLEARING OPERATIONS UNTIL TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURESARE IN PLACE.
SITE CLEARING NOTES
1. CONDUCT SITE CLEARING OPERATIONS TO MINIMIZE INTERFERENCE WITH ROADS, STREETS, SIDEWALKS, AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES. DO NOT CLOSE OR OBSTRUCT STREETS,
SIDEWALKS, OR ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION AND THE ENGINEER.
2. PROTECTTREES, PLANT GROWTH, AND FEATURES DESIGNATED ON THE DRAWINGS TO REMAIN AS FINAL LANDSCAPING.
3. DISPOSAL: REMOVE SURPLUS SOIL MATERIAL, UNSUITABLE TOPSOIL, DEMOLISHED
MATERIALS, AND WASTE MATERIALS INCLUDING TRASH AND DEBRIS, AND LEGALLY DISPOSE OF THEM OFF SITE.
TRENCHING, PIPING, BACKFILLING, AND COMPACTING NOTES
1. ALL EXCAVATIONS DEEPER THAN ONE INCH SHALL BE PROPERLY BARRICADED AT ALL TIMES. ALL OPEN TRENCHES AND EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE COVERED WITH STEEL PLATES,
EXCEPT WHEN THE CONTRACTOR IS PHYSICALLY WORKING WITHIN THE AREA AND HAS PLACED BARRICADES TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEER.
2. WHERE TREES AND STUMPS HAVE BEEN REMOVED, ALL DISTURBED AND LOOSE
SOILS SHALL BE REMOVED, AND THE CAVITIES BACKFILLED AND COMPACTED WITH APPROVED MATERIALS.
3. CONTROLLED LOW STRENGTH MATERIAL (CLSM) AND PLACEMENT SHALL CONFORM TO STANDARD STD 323 OF CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.
CONTENT SHALL BE CLASS 100-E-110 (1-SACK) SLURRY.
4. PLACEMENT OF CLSM FILL: THE CLSM SHALL BE PLACED AS FILL OR BACKFILL WITHIN
2.5 HOURS AFTER WATER IS ADDED TO THE MIX. THE CONTROLLED DENSITY FILL (CDF) MIXTURE SHALL BE PLACED DIRECTLY INTO THE TRENCH. THE PIPE SHALL BE ANCHORED TO PREVENT MOVEMENT AND FLOATATION DURING PLACEMENT OF CLSM.
5. IMPORTED FILL SHALL MEET THE DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL'S CLEAN FILL ADVISORY GUIDELINES. FILL SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING PROPERTIES OR CHARACTERISTICS:
ALL PARTICLES SHALL BE LESSTHAN 3INCHES IN SIZE;
- NO LESS THAN 5 PERCENT AND NO MORE THAN 50 PERCENT OF THE MATERIAL SHALL PASS THE NO. 200 SIEVE;
- THE FINES (I.E., MATERIAL PASSING THE NO. 200 SIEVE) SHALL HAVE A PLASTICITY INDEX (PI) NO GREATER THAN 15; AND
-THE MATERIAL SHALL CONTAIN LESS THAN %PERCENT BY WEIGHT OF ORGANICSAND SHALL BE FREE OF OTHER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIALS (E.G., CONCRETE, PLASTIC, METAL, AND OTHER WASTES).
6. AGGREGATE BASE SHALL BE AN IMPORTED MATERIALOR DERIVED FROM ON -SITE MATERIAL THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CLASS 2 AGGREGATE BASE PRESENTED IN CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS SECTION 26-1.02B, Y-INCH MAXIMUM GRADATION.
AGGREGATE BASE MATERIAL SHOULD BE MOISTENED THOROUGHLY AND COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION AS DETERMINED BY ASTM METHOD D 1557.
7. GRADATION REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMEABLE BASE MATERIAL AS FOLLOWS
SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING SIEVE
GRAVEL OR CRUSHED ROCK
1 INCH
100
'T INCH
90-100
N4
35-65
N200
2-9
8. EXPANSIVE CLAY (ANY CLAY HAVING EXPANSION INDEX Eb70) SHALL NOT BE USED.
SOIL THAT CONTAINS MORE THAN 35% BY THE WEIGHT OF MATERIAL RETAINED ON A U.S.
STANDARD NO.4 SIEVE SHALL NOT BE USED.
9. ALL FILL SHALL BE PLACED IN LOOSE LIFTS NOT TO EXCEED S INCHES LOOSE DEPTH AND COMPACTED TO NOT LESS THAN 90% OF THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM D1557.
10. BACKFILL IN TRENCH ZONE SHALL BE COMPACTED TO NOT LESS THAN 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM D1557.
11. THE AREA OF STRUCTURAL FOUNDATIONS SHOULD FIRST BE STRIPPED AND CLEARED. AFTER THE AREA HAS BEEN GRADED, SUBGRADE AT THE PAD AREA SHOULD BE SCARIFIED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF 8INCHES BELOW EXPOSED SUBGRADE SURFACE, MOISTURE CONDITIONED TO BETWEEN 2%AND 4%ABOVE OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT AND COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 90% OF THE MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AS DETERMINED BY ASTM D1557. IF THE SUBGRADE SOIL IS SOFT OR DISTURBED, IT SHOULD BE EXCAVATED TO
EXPOSE COMPETENT NATIVE SOILS, THE RESULTING SUBGRADE SCARIFIED AND
CONDITIONED AS ABOVE, AND THE EXCAVATED MATERIAL REPLACED WITH COMPACTED FILL.
12. TRENCHING AND BACKFILL MATERIAL WHICH DOES NOT MEET THE SPECIFICATIONS SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED AT NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE OWNER.
13. POLYVINYL CHLORIDE(PVC)PIPE: SCHEDULE 40 AND 80 PVC PIPE SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM D1785. JOINTS SHALL BE LOW VOC SOLVENT CEMENT JOINTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D2672. SCHEDULE 40 AND SCHEDULE 80 PVC FITTINGS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM D2466 AND ASTM D2467, RESPECTIVELY.
14. PRIOR TO BACKFI LL, CONTRACTOR SHALL VACUUM TEST ALL PIPING AND FITTINGS.
APPLY VACUUM AT 100 INCHES OF WATER TO THE PIPING AND FITTINGS AND HOLD FOR 2 HOURS. DURING THE TEST, VACUUM SHALL NOT DROP MORE THAN 5%. MEASUREMENTS TO BE TAKEN ONCE EVERY TWENTY MINUTES.
15. FOR ELECTRICAL CONDUITS, USE NORMAL WEIGHT CONCRETE WITH MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH 3000 PSI AT 28 DAYS. USE 3/4" MAXIMUM AGGREGATE SIZE AND 4" MAXIMUM SLUMP. ANCHOR CONDUITS TO PREVENT MOVEMENT AND FLOATATION DURING PLACEMENT OF CONCRETE.
RESTORATION NOTES
1. TRENCH RESURFACING: ALL WORK INVOLVING ASPHALT CONCRETE SHALL BE IN
ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS AND AS DETAILED ON THE DRAWINGS.
2. ALL SURFACE MATERIALS SHALL BE RESTORED TO MATCH EXISTING MATERIALS AND CONDITIONS. MATERIALS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED TO RESTORE SURFACES INCLUDE CONCRETE, ASPHALTIC CONCRETE, SOIL/LANDSCAPING, AND PAVERS.
3. REPLACE SURFACE IMPROVEMENTS DAMAGED BY WORK OPERATIONS WITH THE EXISTING TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION TO AN EQUAL OR BETTER CONDITION.
4. CONDUCT WORK OPERATIONS SUCH THATAN ENTIRE AREA CAN BE PAVED WITHOUT INTERRUPTIONS.
5. REMOVE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROLS AND RESTORE AND STABILIZE AREAS DISTURBED DURING REMOVAL.
ww
_0:5
WUOO
w
O0Q
F=U
CQw-O
0 Ho
ow.
w0
O
Tn
W
F
0 Z
Q
w
W
Z
W
a
Ewd Eg
O E Y
z�5=�
wFnU�
/ ¢w52
3:-.0
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING,
owl
kTE 12/23/2022
2 OF 31
2010-234
IN I
'w
INK
,mol
i — RMING'"'A LN
Kwu
�10120.
�l�
r
BONNMM -�
-
��
vim`
.�-�
.,��r�ZM
�`�'",•
�
��
�I
���i�l
III
I
7�
�."���:..�
�
�b=' ��•
I '
1�1,f
`�
L
�
III 1
_ • ,I
_
�',t,, .
�.•
02 i
/��;'�„.mot'"'A�i➢
'�
t� ���
r�
.<i®' ��I
,�
�
�.����
ram, •�
� i
i
♦ - � —
�
I
I `
Oro,
To
SHEET
__�llran__-..%_,.
1� .
.�
5=��--
' ' • .a
..cis
OF I SHEET
20S
10-235
LEGEND
O AS%IAL/1Alfk£Nr f5 fM09I 5URfA[f
CGNOSiE IAKAIENr ft aUal K
® cavma vGWr av rNlmr
(J [yJ BCLW MV MMGI Mn CWIRGL YA(K
�+ fAPf BIDARiMEN1 CO19MC)MW NC NAILRA( CAWNB
(� rraE xroRavr ICI ra n<aaM
y f10W gMC)MW 18 /OG [Y SAY
GAS ME2R )C IGG O' CURB
ARG 1--
Q (Hilt SgNGARG WAifR METER
® NapTGPMC IKIL WATER ✓AU(r
© ffMR CUAN Bur BLCCN WALL
-Elli
O5 ffxfRYAA9NME BRMYf WA((
9M — llNiERLMd
SIA&5 SNOXM'G Na— aRECMW cOMRE2/MIAWMC NICE
O
�� SmFET UGNiYANHpE dl1EFlRP (GrIME
j m !/1PM4L/ Rlarl-cr-WAr
® rzR vA(FE --- ss -- SAAYIARY uR LINE
Assc3says PANa( NuueER — TO — ICI or xarz
� ¢rvr6R(Wr — —Ica cr uaE
a BRaN WxE1 MPCP/RN A4nV FEAT
me E(rcmM vuu BGx
Ev E(rcIRM vAu(r
TREATMENT
SYSTEM SITE
GRAPHIC SCALE
20 0 10 20
FEET
MONUMENT NOTES
MONX
DESCRIPTION
M2
ED 2" BRASS DISK IN
WELL MONUMENT. STAMPED "LS. 3118". PER
TRACT NO. 11185. M.B. 503/27-30
M22
FD 2" BRASS DISK IN
WELL MONUMENT, STAMPED "L.S. 3118", PER
TRACT NO. 11185, M.B. 503/27-30
MBB
ED 2" BRASS DISK IN
WELL MONUMENT. STAMPED "L5. 3118", PER
TRACT NO. 11785. M.B. 503/27-30
M24
FD 2- BRASS DISK IN
WELL MONUMENT, STAMPED "LE. 3118", PER
TRACT NO. 11785, M.B. 503/27-30
M UR
ED 2" BRASS DISK IN
WELL MONUMENT, STAMPED "L5. 3118", PER
TRACT NO. 11785, M.B. 503/27-30
M27
FD 2- BRASS DISK IN
WELL MONUMENT, STAMPED -LE. 3118", PER
TRACT NO. 11785, M.B. 503/2J-30
M28
ED 2" BRASS DISK IN
WELL MONUMENT, STAMPED "L.S. 3118", PER
TRACT NO. 11785. M.B. 503/21-30
\ J' oCITY
I Un11n EASEMENt GEaCA2U
_sue rmAmTvc anlGEas. Mee sos/z�aR
IS
q �
aueuc unmr EASM
rG mE an a NEWPaat eEAcx rcn T �, \ � \
IRACr NO lIlBS. MB BBJ/11-3G � \ \ \ '
1.2 \ L s 16B91MV Btv B�
I�
I III
s
REVISIONS
I UTILITY STATEMENT
PREPARED FOR
BASIS OF BEARINGS
BENCHMARK
SITE INFORMATION
SURVEYOR OF RECORD HEN COMPLPIGN DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 2022 NO.
DATE
REVISIONS
BY
BJMED UDUREs AND/OR PIPELINES SHOO HE ON ARE
PER ONE ANO APPARENT SNMACE EVIDENCE, RECORD
ORAWNGS OF THE CGRECe TED UTILIIY LINES OBTYNEO
FROM RELNBLE MG RESPONSIBLE SOURCES NW DOder9r0und Service Alert WITH CILVP9A $DMEYING, INC. FOE
WOOD PLC
100 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 1100
—AND CA 99612
PHONE: (510)663-4100
ME DOORgNATES SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON ME CAUFORNIA OF —HATE SYSTEM OF 1903, CCS03, ZONE 6, (2U21.15) IN ACCORDANCE i0 THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE ffCIONs 0001-BBI9; SAID COORDINAI6 ARE DETERMINED LOCALLY UPON HELD-GEARTED TIES TO THE FOLLOWNG IEICA SMARMET NORTH AMEMCA (S.NH A) CONPNUOUAY OPERAING REFERENCE STAIONS (C ORS):
ELEVAIDNS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASED UPON CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH BENCHMARK 35-23-]OR06,
EIEVAION 119.50 FEET (NAVO BE).
DESCFIPPON:
SITE NAME: FORMER FORD AERONUTRONIC PROPERTY - PARCEL 11 SIZE PDORESS 8I HILLSOALE DR, NEWPORi BEACH, CA 92fifi0 ASSESSgt'S PARCEL NOS.: 442-301-63, 442-301-64, 442-301-65, ,7 ,7 ,7
t�� VADA
CupvCu,N�, INC.
i i1 i T
0 O3/02/22
SUBMITTAL
dG
PRONDfOEOBY AN INDEPENDENT LOCATING CONTRACTOR NO
GUARAN- OR WPRFANIY, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, d' CDII: TOLL FREE IS WOE AS TO ME ALCURACY CH THOROUGHNESS OF SUCH 1 —800
INFBRAMOR IF MORE ACCURATE LOCAIONS OF
UNDERGROUND UTINES OR PIPE LINES ARE REQUIRED, ME 227-2600 MNY OR PIPELINE WLL HAVE i0 A VERIFIED BY HEW BEFOREKTOU pG PoMOLING. OLLVAfW SU—MI, INC. AND THE SURVEYOR
OF r2CORD SH4L NOT BE HEW LNBLE FOR ME NCAION
O 10 NOTE ME NCAION a
OF OR ME UTILITIES
NON -VISIBLE UTILITIES OR PIPELINES,
IM.N.A CMV:
NORTHING=2100252.04' EASING = 6106645.11'
SN.N.A. CASE:
NORTHING=2223989.44' EASING = 6056245.91'
DESCNIBED BY KS 2002 - FOUND 3 3\d° OCS
ALUMINUM BENCHMARK DISK STAMPED
-35-231GR06-. SET IN ME NORTHWEST CORNER Of
A 45 FT d FE CONCRETE CATCH BASIN. MONUMENT
IS LOCATED IN ME SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ME
Q< SOON AVENUE AND MACARIHUR
BOULEVARD,
BOULEVARD, 115 FT. WESTERLY 6 THE CENTERLINE
OF MAGARMUR BOULEVARD AND 52 FT. SONUMENY
OF ME CENTERLINE O< —A AVENUE MONUMENT
IS SET LLVEL WTH THE 4DEWAM(.
442-301-fib & 442-301-69
411 Jenks Cif., Suite 205, Corona, CA 92880
PROF.. 951-280-9960 Fax: 951-280-9746
TOIL Free 800-CALVADA—.-Ivada.wm
EST. 1989 JOB NO. 22145
Armando D. DuPont
RegiSo-OlioH No. 7780 SHEET 2 OF 4
20 10-236
H FORG�I- Tw7 �w
D
A \ 5
I w�`
1 c
:>T��� I .
I I
I ' _
\ -- -
I
WO�D�Uf�N
, t _
s I
1 II
I \ I �M�_ I/(Alb Yin •q 1 11,r,' 1\
.G� a FOR EXISTING CONDITIONS AT =
�..
FUTURE TREATMENT SITE
g REFER TO DRAWING G 5 m
Mx CITY EASEMENT
6'-0" ON EITHER SIDE I
OF WATER LINE , E
!` ko, of �)•-3_,� so_ .. `�T_ '� I
Pi
S.
i Ir m
� I
or
a 6
n
- i � -r hTh'. c-___ z � .�.
I M :. ��_-�- "r1 Ic __ --__ __
SYMBOLS
WATER LINE (SEE NOTE 1)
IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE
w
---ss--
SANITARY SEWER LINE
VALVE
(SEE NOTE 1)
FIRE HYDRANT
--- so --
STORM DRAIN LINE (SEE NOTE 1)
_
p
ELECTRICAL PULL BOX
w
a
--- E --
ELECTRIC LINE (SEE NOTE 2)
a o
STREET LIGHT PULL BOX
z
Y m
--- c --
GAS LINE (SEE NOTE 3)
w
m w o
U wzo
TELECOM PULL BOX
-- T -
TELECOM LINE (SEE NOTE 4)
LIGHT POST
lz
a
BAYRIDGE PARK PROPERTY
BOUNDARY
SIGN
-
®
SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
- AREA LIGHT
®
STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
. FOUNDATION MONUMENT
i
e
SEWER CLEANOUT
SOIL GAS PROBE
Y
O
UOU
m
WATER METER
PERIMETER SOIL GAS PROBE
z
rn
EXTENDED LIGHT POST
GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL
z
WATER CONTROL VALVE
U
4 Z.
UTILITY ALIGNMENT NOTES
1. CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH UTILITY ALIGNMENTS ARE FROM AS -BUILT INFORMATION IN THE
CITY'S GIS SYSTEM, SUPPLEMENTED BY TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF SURFACE FEATURES SUCH AS MANHOLES.
2. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON UTILITY ALIGNMENTS ARE FROM AS -BUILT INFORMATION IN
SCHEMATIC MAPS SHOWING EXISTING ELECTRICAL NETWORK, SUPPLEMENTED BY TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF SURFACE FEATURES SUCH AS DISTRIBUTION VAULTS.
3. SOCAL GAS UTILITY ALIGNMENTS ARE FROM AS -BUILT INFORMATION IN SCHEMATIC MAPS
SHOWING EXISTING GAS NETWORK, SUPPLEMENTED BY TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF SURFACE FEATURES SUCH AS METERS.
4. AT&T UTILITY ALIGNMENTS ARE FROM AS -BUILT INFORMATION IN SCHEMATIC MAPS
SHOWING EXISTING TELECOM NETWORK, SUPPLEMENTED BY TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY OF SURFACE FEATURES SUCH AS MANHOLES.
NOTES
1. REFER TO GENERAL NOTES ON DRAWING G-2
2. ALL STREETS IN PARCEL 10 ARE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENTS.
UTILITY CLEARANCE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
REQUIRED
REQUIRED
MIN. COVER
MIN.
MIN.
PER AGENCY
UTILITY
HORIZONTAL
VERTICAL
STANDARD
SOURCE
CLEARANCE
CLEARANCE
DETAIL*
SANITARY SEWER
2'
1'
--
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
STORM DRAIN
2'
1'
--
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
WATER MAIN
5'
1'
36"
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
WATER LATERAL
5'
1'
24"
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
GAS
2'
1'
30"
SOCAL GAS, NATURAL GAS
SERVICE REQUIREMENTS
ELECTRIC**
2'
1'
30"
SOCAL EDISON ELECTRICAL
SERVICE REQUIREMENTS
CABLE
2'
1'
24"
AT&T SPECIFICATIONS,
APPENDIX F
MONITORINGWELLS
3'
NA
NA
WSP EARTH AND
AND SOIL GAS PROBES
ENVIRONMENT USA
*PROVIDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY FIELD VERIFY THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTED DEPTH OF EACH UTILITY.
*CLEARANCES NOT SPECIFIED BY THE UTILITY. ASSUMED TO BE SIMILAR TO GAS AND CABLE. m¢
z_J
O W
w 0 0
h m z fQ
�o 0 W
aw o J
g z F
Ln
X
W
z-
z 8
ONE
zJ M@
M.
w F,nUo
/ ¢w5 mf
oop
3z�oV
VERIFY SCALE
BAR 11 ONE I111111
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
ATE 12/23/2022
5 OF 31
205 10-237
/
/
NOTES
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES REFER TO DRAWING G-2.
2. BASED ON THE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY CALVADA,
INC ON 2/24/2022. SEE DRAWING G4.
3. ELECTRIC AND TELECOM LINES NOT DETECTED BY
GEOVISION' UNDER FOOTPRINT OF TREATMENT
SYSTEM ON 7/8/2022. FIELD VERIFY.
/
4. WATER LINE DETECTED BY GEOVISION ON 7/8/2022.
/
FIELD VERIFY.
5WIDTH OF CITY EASEMENT FROM I R7
— — E — — — E —
—«
BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT S-BUIL1TS.
=E
E — — — — E — —
— — E_L—
— — --
96 HARTFORD DRIVE
E
E---- E---- E---- E----E----
UNDERGROUND UTILITY LOCATER
E----
SEE NOTE3
g4 HARTFORD DRIVE
--- E ---- E---- E---- E---- E---- E__— —_
E— E
I
I
ACCESS GAT
NORMALLY CLOSED
I
GRASSCRETE AC UNIT
\ SURFACING
t '
FUTURE PAD _ _ — —I '
\ LOCATION
— — — — — — t
_ I 014"
11111ill Jill,
,t-
/t
FIRE LANE /
I t
—_I�
CITY EASEMENT 6'-0" CITY S ESE TE 5 6 0 I o
SEE NOTE S t
� p�0 �O�Oa
I O Qo t � , SEE NOTE 3
0 SEE NOTE 4
• t j I LANDSCAPED AREA I op
I^ t'�� I I opp0apo
t''� L--------- ✓ -.r---
BAYRIDGE PARK, w
------ 7"—� � " a� a PROPERTY BOUNDARY P F
----
rCONCRETEPEDESTRIANPATH
ICV LEGEND
GRASS
ven
ICV IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE
--- W-- WATER LINE (CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH)
— — — E — — ELECTRIC LINE (SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON)
— — — T — — TELECOM LINE (AT&T)
• FOUNDATION MONUMENT
GRASSCRETE SURFACING
Nol
spa u
w'o
U i2
op-
�i za
wwm 3u
w4rc m
O03 rci
Ow= o,
� a3
0 I.
ol�
oQ -
7 �
ma
a
LU
y ~ O
z� N F-
}
aw N z
C F- F-
z (n
w X
�w
F-
w
w�
H �
z'z�^
�wA
5; E Y
wFnU�
/ ¢ 5d�
000 3z1oV
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING,
B-1'
ATE 12/23/2022
'ROJ 8622397107
IWG GE
iHEET 6 OF 31
206 10-238
J tl
0 t - sx�— vE—sK—sK� __ — 6•
�t ¢
f L_ _
a
SYMBOLS �3
w 4• \� \ HARTFORD DL24 ; � j I � � EXISTING FEATURES �k WATER LINE w > �a
Q ro
B I m .. - SANITARY SEWER LINE g a>
SVE_10 2 m U Q-
STORM DRAIN LINE w
ELECTRIC LINE
GAS LINE -
3'^ FOR PLAN AND PROFILE I - w I N�
SEE DWG 0- I s j '', �I U -- - - TELECOM LINE t2c
nm i
i
II��I�IIIIu
X I I s1 SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE ¢ � M ____m L_1_ 1 G
Q _--___- nlLy_L m-� _�_�_ os��- I �iiFv}iUo
sh" I I . J
L __ I 7LLNx
T EI E ' 3 .0
FOR PLAN AND PROFILE VERIFY SCALE
SEE DWG CS ' BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
O 1'—
/ \ 4
DATE 12/23/2022
PROJ 8622397107107
- ® DWG C-1
SHEET 7 OF 31
207 10-239
3 � O
0+50 1+00 t 1+50 2+00 2+
"DIA. 3+00 MATCH POINTA�
srE — s1s H— sys— aE srE— syst sys— s.E— srE— suE svE - sve arE— srE _ -5.0' �7.C1+3\ 8" DIA. o+zs
45 DEG. WE 6'x4" REDUCING TEE
_W----w----w----w---_ yy____w_ __y"____vy____vy_ yy____w____yv____yv____yv _yv____y,,____w____W ___yv___ ___vy__ _yp____ ____ ___yy____yy__'L_w____w - w- 1 .��- IW---w----w----wl FIw w1l w
Q 0+22 45 DEG. ELBOW I I z I
4"DIA. 3 SEE DWG c-6 0 �P
� I HARTFORD DR SEE BVE-10-fOPROFILE HjARTFO I
i
�,. WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. C5 C.8 CONDENSATE '
' CROSSWALK, TYP. i 2 ss- --Ss-- �---ss-- - ; PYARPKING AREA, 4"DIA. ; SEPARATOR j --ssir---ss--ss— — __ SEPARATOR Cb tl^ ------ -------- - - PSG; a Ili III `WELL SVE-10-10 9 ; —es--5s— — es— __- ___-ss _- _s _ --- 11— --- — _ssi _ ___ _ I� ___ CONDENSATE ,ss—ysr R -ss--sue— ; p ;
4 ^ ti05 WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. GI I
G 10
REMOVE AND REPLACE li 6
' CR09S GUTTER. SEE NOTE 3 �' $ m 0+00
!G-'-I'G-___G____ __ _G____G__ G____ G____ G___� \�_'�____L_-ems C---- ___ ___ - - - - --
® 63
�W GW�I W W IW I�3W
I I
O W W
WELL 6VE-10-12
SEE
DWG G
20 m19
N
N
O
19 3
18 20
m19
O
19 18
SVE-10-12
CONNECT TO BRITTANY, SEE DW
C-6
l Q
WELL VAULT
SEE DWG. C-9
8-SS
SCH 80 PVC
°.B SVE VACUUM LINE
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+50
Station
HARTFORD NORTH PROFILE
MATCH POINT
2+00
200
195
190
185
2+50 2-
LEGEND:
{(��( MINIMUM COVER, 1.5 FEET
y o L.�...../
UTILITY CLEARANCE
EXEMPTION REQUESTED
_ SCH 80 PVC SOIL VAPOR
e� EXTRACTION VACUUM LINE
m PIPE BEND
® WYE OR TEE CONNECTION
NOTES:
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, REFER TO DRAWING G-2.
2. CURVE PIPING RUNS WHEN FITTING ANGLE DOES NOT
ACHIEVE DESIGNED ALIGNMENT. DO NOT EXCEED
MANUFACTURERS MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED PIPE
DEFLECTION.
3. WHERE TRENCH CROSSES CONCRETE CROSS DRAIN,
REMOVE GUTTER BY SAW -CUTTING AT NEAREST JOINTS.
FIELD VERIFY JOINT LOCATIONS. REPLACE GUTTER IN
ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARD DETAIL 185,
MATCHING EXISTING WIDTH.
4. CONDENSATE SEPARATORS ARE THE SAME DIAMETER
AS THE PIPE DIAMETER IN THAT SECTION.
CONNECTTO SVE-10-10
C CONDENSATE
9 SEPARATOR
1.4'
iS-SD
1 C� SCH 80 PVC
SVE VACUUM LINE
T
1 24"SD
2+70 3+00
3+50 4+00
Station
HARTFORD NORTH PROFILE
4+50
200
195
m
m
w� y
yQ O
190
185
5+00
Station
SVE-10-10 PROFILE
m Imo`
W °
U w
Nol
zu
Boa
w'� c
Uo i2
20"
F=U -
CQCaw z m 3u
aorc m
�3
*Ow yz
o°' wz
y� a3
0 w Z�
N111 c
J
U.
O
w
IL
F ZLL
m
o ¢ O
0 J
IL
t7
Z
a
a
wz�
Ewd�g
E Y
z5;�}Pe
000,
w FnU�
000
aw5d�
3z1oV
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
0-1'
ATE 12/23/2022
'ROJ 8622397107
IWG C-2
MEET 8 OF 31
202
10-240
20 m 20
fD
19 19
31 CONDENSATE 2
CONNECTTO SEPARATOR
HARTFORD SOUTH
8"W TO 45 DEG. ELBOW,
B-W YP.
SCH 80 PVC
Cb
SVE VACUUM LINE
90 DEG.
ELBOW
TO SVE TREATMENT SYSTEM
7+50
WELL VAULT -_--
SVE-10-06 SEE DWG. C-9 c' 2 CONDENSATE
I C-e SEPARATOR
205
20 205
20 SVE-10-09
200
- __-
/
3 CITY EASEMENT 6-V
CONNECTTO
/ SOIL VAPOR REMEDIATION 19�
HARTFORD NORTH
SYSTEM BUILDING
200
m 20
200
m 19
195
;.::_::::
- -
I_
_
O
CONNECT TO
HARTFORD NORTH
24"SDV
ryr
l
3S"DIPj.
/1�3
vI
B
3 1Ir
REMOVE AND REPLACE
195
19 195
19 190
REMOVE AND REPLACE CURB AND
I
DRA88CRETE. SEE
DRAW CRETE. SEE C-11
GUTTER NEARESTJOINTS AND
WELL VAULT
REPLACE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
E
3 190
19 SEE DWG. C-9
190
18 185
CITY STANDARD DETAILS
I
i
8+00
8+19
0+00
0+10
0+00 0+16
" II
Station
Station
Station
3 HARTFORD NORTH PROFILE
SVE-10-06 PROFILE
SVE-10-09 PROFILE
(CONTINUED)
O
D --- - - ---- ----
- - -G
O
WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. G-9
G 37
WELL SVE-10-06 Q'oo �8"DIA.
///
W7jo
�8
og
a
SEE PROFILESVl40-06
_-
N sE
71.25 1
8'&4"REDUCING
DEG. ELBOW
TEE
HARTFORD00
�-
_-c_-
-G--
-c - -
c----
-
-
�_
_�-
-W- 1+62
W6.0'
w
8" DIA.
-- w-- g" DI
_-- y,,____ y„
_ _
µ,_ - 4,�DLLTEEyQ{T1f d"Xe w---
��
____ __
_ _� ��/s8"X6"REDUCING
TEE WITH
6^ DIA. 11.25 DEG. ELBOW
"-
CENTRIC REDUCER
��
a
'"oo
so
T
-as-__-os- __as ____os
--asp
I F
fl/1R�F�RD �6" DI
�11. DE (ELBOW
_s=
SEE DWG ( 7
Cl l Iw
■■M
�"
4' IA. SEE PROFILE SVE-10-09 °' tt aLL
ems'
-� REMOVEAND REPLACE a�
WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. C-9-s-o �— `� a CROSS GUTTER. SEE NOTE \ W)tti
N60 <f
J zp
PSG-10-� WELL SVE-140B Icy, F / — --�` NFL OOQ ?F
I UrU
�1.m 3c
CONNECT TO SEABOROUGH,
CONNECT TO SVE-10-06
SEE DWG C-7
CONNECT TO SVE-10-09
3'
�8^W
1 1�.r /�
GB so PVC
B"uJ
1 `� B.W
J
SVE VACUUM LINE
O e"ss
Os^ss
8^ss a^ss
205
190
185
a o oc
�3
JpW yx
O x
Owz a3
200
y�
o
w zF
3 pC
W
95 -
m
O
w
IL
Z
o
a
o
a w
Q N
J
5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00 7+50 7+60 IL
Station
HARTFORD NORTH PROFILE Z
IL
a
w
/\ z„
�wd
LEGEND:
NOTES:
_ 68
On' _E
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, REFERTO DRAWING G-2.
�I
�
MINIMUM COVER, 1.5 FEET
2. CURVE PIPING RUNS WHEN FITTING ANGLE
+
z 5' e
y O
DOES NOT ACHIEVE DESIGNED ALIGNMENT. DO
w
UTILITY CLEARANCE
EXEMPTION REQUESTED
NOT EXCEED MANUFACTURERS MAXIMUM
RECOMMENDED PIPE DEFLECTION.
00p
3. WHERE TRENCH CROSSES CONCRETE CROSS
� o
3 z
SCH 80 PVC SOIL VAPOR
DRAIN, REMOVE GUTTER BY SAW -CUTTING AT
_
EXTRACTION VACUUM LINE
NEAREST JOINTS. FIELD VERIFY JOINT
VERIFY SCALE
LOCATIONS. REPLACE GUTTER IN
BAR IS
ONE INCH ON
m
PIPE BEND
ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARD DETAIL
ORIGINAL DRAWING,
Bit^
185, MATCHING EXISTING WIDTH.
®
WYE OR TEE CONNECTION
4. CONDENSATE SEPARATORS ARE THE SAME
DATE
12/23/2022
DIAMETER AS THE PIPE DIAMETER IN THAT
PROJ
8622397107
SECTION.
DWG
C-3
SHEET
9 OF 31
2Oj 10-241
SEE
6V 2 CONDENSATE
SEPARATOR "h \> �' y 5.
3 1 P SG-1032 __-- 4 + V
"
Q 1 REMOVE AND REP " -4-ss- 4 �__ss— — ss-__-s;-- ss y�--6`— — s - «��111.25 DEO ELBOW I __ E Lss- 4
s l_i F - rss-----ss---_s:- -�ss-
- aa- - _ - ° ° - al L__ss-T
T LACE ° - a REMOVE AND REPLACE 1 90 DEG ELBOW "
Q 1 CROSS GUTTER. SEE NOTE F r� WESTPORT { a- 9 s— ¢----s°---7 s°__ CROSSGUITER.SEE NOTE3 n
11.25 DEG. ELBOW
----
---------- __
0+00 1 � auE= sva� ava M =are— sre— aver avE� are— sv!— avE�- are— ava— sve— gvs � — svE arE}+=�sre—are_ � 3.7
QOwN 0+E00 2 ONDREANSAT\J -- N-_ - - --
SC.B'CTOR ---v___- _ -- ---EPA
W11 , I t
LL
Mi
TI VAULT. SEE DWG. G9
205
200
m
d
3 O
� 195
19 0+00
LEGEND:
MINIMUM COVER, 1.5 FEET
UTILITY CLEARANCE
EXEMPTION REQUESTED
_ SCH 80 PVC SOIL VAPOR
svE EXTRACTION VACUUM LINE
m PIPE BEND
® WYE OR TEE CONNECTION
NOTES:
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, REFER TO DRAWING G-2.
2. CURVE PIPING RUNS WHEN FITTING ANGLE
DOES NOT ACHIEVE DESIGNED ALIGNMENT. DO
NOT EXCEED MANUFACTURERS MAXIMUM
RECOMMENDED PIPE DEFLECTION.
3. WHERE TRENCH CROSSES CONCRETE CROSS
DRAIN, REMOVE GUTTER BY SAW -CUTTING AT
NEAREST JOINTS. FIELD VERIFY JOINT
LOCATIONS. REPLACE GUTTER IN
ACCORDANCE WITH CITY STANDARD DETAIL
185, MATCHING EXISTING WIDTH.
4. CONDENSATE SEPARATORS ARE THE SAME
DIAMETER AS THE PIPE DIAMETER IN THAT
SECTION.
2 CONDENSATE
REMOVE AND REPLACE
C8 CONDENSATE CE CONDENSATE
SEPARATOR REMOV�ROSS
AND REPLACE
CROSS GUTTER. SEE NOTE 3
CROSS
45 DEG. ELBOW, TYP.
GUTTER. SEE NOTE
SEPARATOR SEPARATOR
".2 W
2W
1.2"W 1.2"W 1.2"W
1.2"W 1.2-W
I I
71 .l .l
8 W
,a
1Y Rt'ro 3'
1.1' 1•
2-W
24"SD 45 DEG. ELBOW, TYP.
1'
"SD
GB SCH 80 PVC
08"SS
8"SS 0 0
SVE VACUUM LINE
8" SS CONNECT
O SVE-10-04
0+50
1+00 1+50
Station
HARTFORD SOUTH PROFILE
ss ____ ___ssi___aa WELLOVT_SEE DWG. C-9 Is ___J ss ____sr ____ ___ss �S-P 10-281
-�---- " I 4" DIA.
1 ? wa J
WELL SVE- ® q i
6'X 4'REDUCING
• TEE 6. DIA.
6 45 DEG. ELBOW, TYP.
M SEPARATOR TIM____M ___ M�vs M4fi DEG. ELBOW, TYP. M CONO ,H_ 2 CONDENSATE 2 CONDENSATE 2.6� L 2 ENSATE 4
- CA " 4 C-e SEPARATOR S.O Cb SEPARATOR
r--T - -- --^^-- ,-
0 5 3+00
re auET area auE�ays� auE— svE auE— m ems, av£� suE
_ -10-29 P-59
I a avE
MATCH P�OINTA _tan_ _ _ __�____D ____0 ____0 ____0 ___ 0____�____�____ ____.w __ _0 ___0 ____ __ _0 ____ ____ EX. 6' DIA. SOIL GAS PROBE /� -,,, n
1 205
m 200
� O
195
190
0 lI PSG-0j0-26-�*
F J ss =--svL WELL BVE10-05 __ As
6"DIA TEE
6' X 4' ECCENTRIC
REDUCER - -
PS e 10-27- M4+0
EX. 6" DIA. SOIL GAS PR
EX. 12" DIA. GROUNDWATER
205
200
195
190 =
2+00 2+50 2+80 p W'
.oa
yam
UD i2
0 F=U -
CQCaw �zu m 3u
-1U-2s q --ss--- ¢ m
pw-
4 WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. G9 ___ss ____ Ow. a3
HARTFOR f�
45 DEG. ELBOW, TYP. £ -2.6� oc
n
c
w
Ps 1
O
SVe�"DIA. SOIL GAS PROBE - d
--
fflfilffl
OBE y Z
6" IA. Q LL
��
bOra �� Z M
¢m Q
c J
IL
0 z
WELL VAULT WELL VAULT d
SEE DWG. C-9 SEE DWG. C-9 CONNECTTO HARTFORD SOUTH d
20 2 CONDENSATE
C-8 SEPARATOR
CONNECT TO SVE-10-05
ONNECT TO HARTFORD SOUTH
SVE-10-05
20 SVE-10-04
'W 9
2 W
,tiy
2RN 9 2
SCH 80 PVC
Y
BW
C 8
SVE VACUUM LINE
195
0 8'SS
08"SS 08"SS
08'SS
08"SS
190
205 q4
004
200 �wd�8
OON EY
i�im.
w FnUo
N�ry
0 a
195 x
VERIFY SCALE
BARIS 19O EINCHON
ORGNA�DRAWING.
3+00 3+50 4+00 4+50 5+00 0+00 0+25 0+00 0+23 '
Station Station Station DATE 12/23/2022
HARTFORD SOUTH PROFILE SVE-10-04 PROFILE SVE-10-05 PROFILE PROJ 8622397107 DWG C-4
SHEET 10 OF 31
210 10-242
31 SEE
DWG CL
I I �
III
i
I '
I n
I I
� I
3 'c4
I
i
I� `C25 CONDENSATE i
SEPARATOR
IrrI 1
l µ 3 SG.10i PSG 10-
-5.0' I
--
I I
a
I I
� I 6
I
I '
s
I r
ti-ss-
I
I
B
EX. 6" DIA. SOIL GAS PROBE
I z ® 2a2
10 Q I
I
I
3 WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. C-9
Prv& ``s,WELLSVE-10-01D
�n` SG-10-03 SG-10-03A
-6.7 a� � SG-10-05-
I
q
SG-10- -
-°,ss—_ss____ss____ss_-
_s'____
--ss----ss----
_ \a
s�DIA. HARTFORD
4" DIA. J
8' '^ X4" REDUCING TEE -2 6-2 5, 6n A.
i
� I
` 1 I -5.0'
�m
S
oaa � -10-20 T+ w ti
�- - sh-
EX. T DIA. SOIL GAS PROBE E%. 8" DIA. SOIL GAS PROBE
LEGEND:
((� MINIMUM COVER, 1.5 FEET
UTILITY CLEARANCE
EXEMPTION REQUESTED
SCH 80 PVC SOIL VAPOR
-'�`- EXTRACTION VACUUM LINE
m PIPE BEND
® WYE OR TEE CONNECTION
NOTES:
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, REFER TO DRAWING
G-2.
2. CURVE PIPING RUNS WHEN FITTING ANGLE
DOES NOT ACHIEVE DESIGNED ALIGNMENT.
DO NOT EXCEED MANUFACTURERS
MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED PIPE
DEFLECTION.
3. WHERE TRENCH CROSSES CONCRETE
CROSS DRAIN, REMOVE GUTTER BY
SAW -CUTTING AT NEAREST JOINTS. FIELD
VERIFY JOINT LOCATIONS. REPLACE
GUTTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY
STANDARD DETAIL 185, MATCHING
EXISTING WIDTH.
4. CONDENSATE SEPARATORS ARE THE SAME
DIAMETER AS THE PIPE DIAMETER IN THAT
SECTION.
G8 CONDENSATE
SEPARATOR
CONNECT TO SVE-10-011D
�
NNECT TO HARTFORD NORTH
2"W
1'
SCH 80 PVC
w t� 45 DEG. ELBOW,
w o
TYP.
0-8
SVE VACUUM LINE
O 8"SS O 8"SS
2" O
O 8'SS 8'SS O
O
5+00 5+50 6+00 6+50 7+00
Station
HARTFORD SOUTH PROFILE
200
195
CONNECT TO HARTFORD SOUTH
WELL VAULT
SEE DWG. G9
SVE-10-01D
8'w Or
O8"SS
200
195
7+34- 0+00 0+25VV
Station
SVE-10-1D PROFILE
m Imo`
W O
U w
Nol
wC �a
oa
Hz~
ULL i2
O .
F=U _
CQCaw z m 3u
Ono Dx
JOW rc,
z
O W z a3
E w
o �LL
Zu
111 o`D
J
w
IL
1-6
zLL
m
o ¢O
3o Z
aw Q
c J
IL
Z
a
a Q4
zz
- EW ddd�g
zS}fi5; E Y
e
wFnU�
/
3z.o-
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
BI-1'
)ATE 12/23/2022
'ROJ 8622397107
)WG C-5
MEET 11 OF 31
211 10-243
31 v
WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. C-B �pSG10-PSG
m 0
PS@-10-35
f
s____..____ss____
--------4-ss-i-_
- —ss— — --__y __��
u_
WELL SVE-10-s3
s'£
a qla.
a DIAL
WOODBURNE _
WELL SVE-1D92
s _ 1+Oo
., 00
suE �sE—yse�s�
0+00 I
e CONDENSATE
—
z
i 04
CROSSGUTTENOTE 3. "-✓-
i C B
SEPARATOR
w �-___n'
IPSG-10�4
�+
w----w----0+E�REMOVEAND
WELL VAULT. SEE DWG. C-9
_
SEE DWG C< !
I
C?e CONDENSATE
SEPARATOR
11.25 DEG. ELBOW
WELL VAULT
SEE DWG. C-9
SVE-10-03
SVE-10
2 CONNECT TO HARTFORD SOUTH
W
.2•W
2' .2.W "2.•W
1••W
1.1'
8 CONDENSATE
1 C-8 SCH 80 PVC
SVE VACUUM LINE
SEPARATOR
0+00
0+50
Station
WOODBURNE PROFILE
w' z
I
I
m I
F
REMOVE AND REPLACE
CROSS GUTTER, E NOTE 3
WELL VAULv____W_ --w- -IW---W----W- _w3A3
W 7 � T
ELL svE-10-1a 3
i
T.SEEDWG.C-9
E- svE� suE� sue- ave-H m- 's- svE svE avE syt- �SG-10-4 V4�
0+00 I
�PSGiD-a�16 RITTANY--I
_,�- - ss-- ss--
1 I
WELL VAULT
SEE DWG. C-9
205
WELL VAULT
SEE DWG. C-9
200
195
1+00 1+08190
® 1z
SEE DWG C-2'`s
•ATOR C'S / \
6"DIA,
SEE DWG C-2
N 00
WELL SVE-1D-11
REMOVE AND REPLACE
SVE-1613
CONNECT TO HARTFORD NORTH
CONNECT TO SVE-10-11
'2-W '2"W 2"W .m .2"W
z'W i.r
1•
OF
SCVEHVC
M
8"W
DANSAT
C
SE,
8'SS0
0+00
0+50 1+00
Station
BRITTANY PROFILE
200
195
190
185
1+38
LEGEND:
MINIMUM COVER, 1.5 FEET
UTILITY CLEARANCE
EXEMPTION REQUESTED
_ SCH 80 PVC SOIL VAPOR
srE EXTRACTION VACUUM LINE
m PIPE BEND
® WYE OR TEE CONNECTION
NOTES:
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, REFER TO DRAWING
G-2.
2. CURVE PIPING RUNS WHEN FITTING ANGLE
DOES NOT ACHIEVE DESIGNED ALIGNMENT.
DO NOT EXCEED MANUFACTURERS
MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED PIPE
DEFLECTION.
3. WHERE TRENCH CROSSES CONCRETE
CROSS DRAIN, REMOVE GUTTER BY
SAW -CUTTING AT NEAREST JOINTS. FIELD
VERIFY JOINT LOCATIONS. REPLACE
GUTTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY
STANDARD DETAIL 185, MATCHING
EXISTING WIDTH.
4. CONDENSATE SEPARATORS ARE THE SAME
DIAMETER AS THE PIPE DIAMETER IN THAT
SECTION.
CONNECT TO BRITTANY
20 200
m 19
195
O
19 190
18 185
0+00 0+22
Station
SVE-10-11 PROFILE
SVE-10-11
WELL VAULT
SEE DWG. C-9
0 8'SS
m Imo`
W O
U w
Nol
a
wC
Ki u
y6 1,
ULL i2
OpQ
F=Ud.
CQCaw z m 3u
R no °x
JOW rcz
w W z °z
w�
o �LL
zu
3-
111 u.
o`D
O
w
a
yN Z
zo Q LL
Z
O
aw QLo
c J
a
(7
z
a
a p4
�z,y
E W mm- g
5; E Y
wFnUo
/ HAM
000 , - m
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
obi
)ATE 12/23/2022
'ROJ 8622397107
)WG C-6
MEET 12 OF 31
212 10-244
31 20
m 20
m
n<i
O
19 19
4 z ® i
PSG- P -0-1 3 _M____M __ W
WELL 4" SVE-10N DIA. ---
I I I I I
--� f--------�Ei---aa----E--�Ri# BDB{JRY-�-- - ---s� --- „oo � -- I svE�suE—"f—sve Ir svE—sys�sve �ays—svF —d WELLSVE-f008 I 0+00
s° _ �Cl PSG-10-14 REMOVE ANDREPLACE CROSS ' C8 CONDE OREISEPAR I � IUTTERSEENOTE3WELL VAULT. SEEDWGC-9 ____w____w____.,;____w _T,_.,, REMOVE AND REPLACE CROSSGUTTER. SEE NOTE 3 WELL VAULT. SEE DWG,
�T__-
F�N I I I I
VAULT
CONDENSATE C REMO
E AND REPLACE
SEE C-S4Y7
B
SEPARATOR CROSS GU
ER. SEE NOTE 3 SVE-10-N
SVEG.
CON
ECT TO SEABOROUGH
•2"W .2'W •2•'W
1.1'
2•W 1.2"
1'
CA SCH 80 PVC
TSW
SVE VACUUM LINE
QB SS
Q
8•SS
205
WELL VAULT
SEE DWG. C-9
200
195
190
0+00 0+50 1+00 1+48
Station
BRADBURY PROFILE
SEE
DWG C-3
s
REMOVE AND REPLACE CROSS
I
b yW
t__ __
GUTTER. SEE NOTE 3
_
z 6��
_w__-- Ca_ ____w____w_ _ _ _
1 _
jM
SEPARATOR I T
svE _ _ _
__
wsve IIS _ _ w — m ®\1
3W
1`"' 3
1+Og
i auE�a.� suE�are—s
sle�srE lue—srx
— evs
�I s
1 svf � 1 1
7 1+82 11
',
M
3 SE BOROUGH „
REMOVE AND REPLACE SEE CROSS
GD ER. SEE NOTES
m
\ 1\
\ D
,
SEE
DWG CJ
CONNECTTO REMOVE AND REPLACE
REMOVE AND REPLACE
BRADBURY CROSS GUTTER. SEE NOTE 3
CROSS GUTTER. SEE NOTE 3
CONNECTTO
2 2 CONDENSATE
HARTFORD NORTH
SEPARATOR
---
2•W
1�2"W 1
1.2"W 1 2"W 1.2'bV
1. 1'2•W 1.2YJ
8^N
Q8 SCH 80 PVC
SVE VACUUM LINE
0+00
0+50 1+00
Station
SEABOROUGH PROFILE
205
200
195
190
1+50 1432
m Imo`
W O
U w
Nol
Boa
wM
UO 2 i
OpQ
F=U
_
CQCad.
w z m 3u
.4, oc
*Rn
03 �3
Oz
0.z a3
�
0 11
zu
3-
A
J
U.
LEGEND:
0 a
MINIMUM COVER, 1.5 FEET
j
Z co
UTILITY CLEARANCE
EXEMPTION REQUESTED
h
i o
Q LL
O
�
p1
Z
a
SCH 80 PVC SOIL VAPOR
rc
�
J
_
EXTRACTION VACUUM LINE
d
m PIPE BEND
Z
® WYE OR TEE CONNECTION
d
a
NOTES:
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, REFER TO DRAWING
G-2.
2. CURVE PIPING RUNS WHEN FITTING ANGLE
�z�
DOES NOT ACHIEVE DESIGNED ALIGNMENT.
DO NOT EXCEED MANUFACTURERS
0 wE Y
MAXIMUM RECOMMENDED PIPE
!
i } = e
DEFLECTION.
3. WHERE TRENCH CROSSES CONCRETE
w r w ^
m r =
CROSS DRAIN, REMOVE GUTTER BY
000
u Y
SAW -CUTTING AT NEAREST JOINTS. FIELD
3 �. o
VERIFY JOINT LOCATIONS. REPLACE
GUTTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY
VERIFY SCALE
STANDARD DETAIL 185. MATCHING
BAR IS
ONE INCH ON
EXISTING WIDTH.
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
4. CONDENSATE SEPARATORS ARE THE SAME
°
� 1•
DIAMETER AS THE PIPE DIAMETER IN THAT
DATE
12/23/2022
SECTION.
PROJ
8622397107
DWG
C-7
SHEET
13 OF 31
213
10-245
2"TEMPORARY PATCH.
FOR FINAL RESTORATION
SEE NOTE 3. DETECTABLE WARNING
TAPE MARKED
SAW CUT TO FULL DEPTH "SVE VACUUM LINE"
OF EXISTING ASPHALT ` EXISTING ASPHALT
I 12" I / PAVEMENT
i
VARIES PER
PROFILE, 18" MIN
CONTROLLED LOW
12"
STRENGTH MATERIAL
:.:. (CLSM)
3"
SAND BEDDING
SCH 80 PVC PIPE
4", 6" OR 8"DIA. PER
3"
PLANS
PIPE DIA. TRENCH WIDTH'W SEE
TABLE
'D' MIN.
4" 16"
6" 18"
8" 20"
NOTE: SURFACE RESTORATION IN
LANDSCAPE OR WALKWAYS TO
MATCH EXISTING
3 TYPICAL SVE VACUUM LINE
TRENCH SECTION (n
TRAFFIC RATED CHRISTY
FOR LOCATIONS, SEE PLAN
BOX OR APPROVED EQUAL.
AND PROFILE DRAWINGS
DIAMETER PER TABLE
LID MARKED "SVE"
CIRCULAR CONCRETE COLLAR
8"
0.5"
a
#4 BAR ALL LOCKABLE MONITORING
DEPTH VARIES AROUND WELL COMPRESSION PLUG
PER PIPING PROFILE. CONTROLLED LOW
STRENGTH MATERIAL
(CLSM)
0.1 % MIN - 0.1 % MIN
SCH 80 PVC PIPE
DIA. PER PLAN
CONDENSATE
CAPTURE SUMP
24"
SURFACE
RISER DIA. BOX DIA.
4 8"
6" 10"
3" SAND BEDDING
8" 12
ALLAROUND
COVER FACTORY MARKED "SVE"
3"
PVC END CAP
CONDENSATE
SEPARATOR DETAIL
SAW CUT TO FULL DEPTH
OF EXISTING ASPHALT
2" TEMPORARY PATCH.
FOR FINAL RESTORATION
SEE NOTE 3. 12"
2" X 18"
BOXOUT
18" 3/18" TOP
FLOOR PLATE
ELASTOMERIC
SEALANT T]
3"
RESIDENTIAL ° e
BUILDING
° a
d
EXISTING ASPHALT
PAVEMNT
24" MIN
12"
DETECTABLE WARNING
TAPE MARKED
"SVE VACUUM LINE"
CONTROLLED LOW
3"
STRENGTH MATERIAL
O O
(CLSM)
3„
NORMAL WEIGHT
3" 1.5"
3"
CONCRETE
ELECTRICAL CONDUIT TRENCH SECTION ( g )
NOTES
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES REFER TO DRAWING G-2.
2. ALL WORK IN ROADWAY TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH STANDARDS.
3. BACKFILLED TRENCH SHALL BE TEMPORARILY PATCHED AFTER APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET OF WORK IS COMPLETE. ACCESS TO THE DOORS AND GARAGES FOR RESIDENCES SHALL BE MAINTAINED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
4. SCHEDULE OF TRENCHING, BACKFILL AND TEMPORARY PATCHING TO BE AGREED WITH THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO START OF WORK.
5. FOR THE EXTENT OF FINAL PAVING, REFER TO DRAWING C-13.
6. CAP AND PROTECT PIPE BEFORE AND DURING INSTALLATION OF THE PREFABRICATED TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING.
TO TREATMENT
SYSTEM TEMPORARY PVC END CAP
' (SEE NOTE 6)
i SPRAY FOAM INSULATION
AROUND PIPE
FLOOR FRAMING
(BY OTHERS)
6 3/16"
REINFORCED CONCRETE PAD
° REFER TO TREATMENT
SYSTEM BUILDING
° FOUNDATION DRAWINGS
J PIPE CAST INTO SLAB WITH
TOP OF CLSM. 15„ -I 0.5" INSULATION FOAM ALL
FOR BACKFILL ROUND
DETAIL, SEE
DETAIL 1
8" 90 DEG SCH 80 PVC BEND
FORINVERT
ELEVATION REFER
TO DRAWING CJ
VACUUM LINE AT TREATMENT SYSTEM
PROFILE VIEW 4
TREATM
SYS
BUILDING
RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING
4TI-
FROM IN -GROUND
CONDENSATE SEPARATOR,
LOCATION PER PLAN
DUT
PRAY FOAM
ISULATION
ROUND PIPE
8" 90 DEG SCH 80 PVC BEND
VACUUM LINE AT TREATMENT SYSTEM
PLAN VIEW 5
of
ww
pa
H'o
Uw
oon
F=U
CQwHO
Hoo
0w
wE
0 I.
Qa
fn �
LL Z
N 0 to
h N O H
io JVQ
W
aw r N Z
coo
Z Z
w0
M U
r
lz.z�
mg
5; E Y
wFnU�
/ ¢ 5d�
oop 3z1oV
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
B-1'
1TE 12/23/2022
20J 8622397107
VG C-8
1EET 14 OF 31
2-14 10-246
31 L- TO SVE
SYSTEM
SAWCUT TO FULL DEPTH 36"
OF ASPHALT ALL AROUND
12 --n2 TRAFFIC RATED COVER
MATCH ROAD GRADE • • • • • •
BY SHIMMINGAND-_-_-_-_. . '
GROUTING TOP JOINT . . . . . .
18" OR BY OTHER MEANS - - -
COVER APPROVED BY - O
TYP THE ENGINEER - - - -
BACKFILL WITH . . . . .
CONTROLLED LOW - - -
STRENGTH MATERIAL •-•-•-•-•
(CLSM) . . . . 8
TO SVE `
SYSTEM _
FRAME
m
COVER, CUT -AWAY
TO SHOW INTERIOR
4" DIA. HOLE. SEAL WITH
LINK -SEAL OR SIMILAR
APPROVED PRODUCT
3/4" FREE DRAINING
CRUSHED GRAVEL
s"
MIN
DRAINAGE
6" HOLES q" 0 PVC WELL CASING
MIN
�1 SVE WELLHEAD SECTION BY OTHERS. CUT TO SUIT
A
NOTES:
1. SEE GENERAL NOTES (G-2) FOR TRENCHING, PIPING, BACKFILLING, COMPACTING AND OTHER DETAILS.
2. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING A COMPLETE AND FULLY FUNCTIONAL INSTALLATION.
3. THE WALL THICKNESS OF THE PRECAST BOX AND COVER DIMENSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY AND SUBJECT TO DESIGN BY THE CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUPPLIER, AND APPROVAL BY THE ENGINEER. THE COVER AND BOX COMBINATION SHALL BE DESIGNED TO MEET AASHTO H-20 MEDIUM DUTY.
EQUIPMENT
ITEM
DESCRIPTION
OPRECAST
CONCRETE WELL VAULT. AASHTO H-20 MEDIUM
DUTY. DESIGN BY CONTRACTOR'S SUPPLIER, P.E. STAMPED
COVER AND FRAME. AASHTO H-20 MEDIUM DUTY LOADING. LIFT
O2
ASSIST MECHANISM - STAINLESS STEEL SPRINGS OR SIMILAR.
STAINLESS STEEL AUTOMATIC HOLD OPEN ARM. LIFTING HANDLE.
SCREW DOWN LOCKING MECHANISM. CHECKER PLATE COVER
MARKED "SVE" BY MANUFACTURER
O4-
X 2' SCH 80 PVC REDUCING TEE
O2'
DIA. THREADED GATE VALVE, FULL PORT, BRASS
O1/4-
BRASS BALL VALVE
O6
4" DIA SCH 80 PVC BLIND FLANGE
O7
4" X T SCH 80 PVC ECCENTRIC REDUCER
O0-150-
W.C. VACUUM GAUGE, 2.5" DIAL, CENTER BACK CONNECTION, 1/4"NPT Q
t2u
Q al
Y -
W y
090 21c
}d W s3
F � _
U WW
ou
C -
O
1c
m ¢ z
N
O w
ozoA.
z
Boa
c
ynrc
UD i2
00Q
F=U
-
CQCaw
zo
3u
m
aorc n
�3
> OLL
TRAFFIC RATED COVER
wo
°_
WITH LIFT ASSIST 2
z 13
w
MECHANISM
E
0 w
3 o`c
AUTOMATIC
J
HOLD OPEN ARM
LL 7
y
0 >
hm
N
�o
z�
J_ Q
Q
a8
W
W J
�
� J
W
24"
lzz�
Ewd
8 OWN EY
/
w FnUo
jw5 mf
PARTIAL SECTION SHOWING COVER MECHANISM
—
B
z
--0
3 VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
oar
DATE 12/23/2022
�f�•cxEe
PROJ 8622397107
DWG C-9
SHEET 15 OF 31
215 10-247
0 0
i
/ z3
q96 HARTFORD DRIVE I
p#94 HARTFORD DRIVE raa�
!
i
-E----E--- E__ TO HARTFORD DRIVE j Paz
wu
F SEE NOTES O %
SITE ACCESS FROM Er t----E_ _ __ _ f ON G-0 DIVERT EXISTING DOWNSPOUT m> I HARTFORD DRIVE ONLY I E - E --- E---- N U Q E ___ __ E e-__-E____E____
E----E ---E PROTECTIO ITO MATCH EXISTING w o_
MAINTAIN 1 FT BUFFER MIN.
TO ADJACENT RESIDENCE--E----E---__--E
RELOCATE AIR E-----E-----F_-- wm O�
U w_
REMOVE GRASSCRETE I / DURING THE WORK CONDITIONING UNIT ; WIDTH
OF FIRE LANE.
/ G?
RESTORE EXISTING. I APPROXIMATE NEW LOCATION OF
OVER FULL wa
/ / / / AIR CONDITIONING UNIT. FINAL LOCATION
SEE NOTE 4.
I / j � TO BE COORDINATED WITH ENGINEER
Nol
_ _____-_�--- - _---_—_—_ I V z y O iu
r- z
i - sz
_____ UO —_ - - - L-- \
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF WORK. F
\ AGREE LIMITS OF WORK WITH I U W
L _ ENGINEER BEFORE T 1I PROTECT TREE IN PLACE Q ol
MOBILIZING TO THE SITE 1
— oc
PINE TREE -
---� 14"DIATRUNK,, T I K Z=
FIRE LANE o
MAINTAIN ACCESS DURING THE WORK I
I
PINE TREE
$
20"DIA TRUNK N w z
z
CLEARAND13RUB -
co H
I
I VEGETATION, TVP. I I A o w r
WITHIN z Z.
Hill 11I I THE LIMTS
OF WORK c�
oc
-�� OVE TREE AND ROOTS AS -
1' NEEDED FOR CONSTRUCTION I tta
0 OF BUILDING PAD. WORK TO BE I I f w
i! I p�O LL w oZ
VALVE AND ASSOCIATED -- J w
IRRIGATION PIPING AND FITTINGS. I w P z a3
I REINSTALLSUIT FINAL PLANTING
PLANTING PLAN zF
4 ° ° 9
e 4 BAYRIDGE PARK° ° a ° ° Z
4 ° PROPERTY 4° ° 4 coO
° 4 ° ° ° ° n ° d BOUNDARY ° H
_ d ° ._---_ve-- ° d ° a e 4 41
° de ° ° 4 �z W �
SECURE SITE WITH SNOW ° d° ° ° ° 14 ° ° ° ° 4 ° ° Q
°4 FENCING OW OTHER ° 4 d' MAINTAIN PEDE-STR ACCESS G SIDEWALK °° 4 ° ° ° w o } d a ° ° APPROVED MEANS ° ° ° ° ° ° 3 W
° 4 ° 4 m :/i
a
4 ° °
4 ° e 4 ° Z D-
°d ° 4 ° ° ° ° ° 4 Z W
° 4 °e ° °p ° 4 ° e° e ° ° ICY U.I F_
° d
4Icv
ICY ICY IGV (/J
F
4 j Q
4 ° ° ICY Lu
H
NO ACCESS TO THE SITE FROM COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE LEGEND NOTES:
(ACCESS FROM HARTFORD DRIVE ONLY) ^ z i N
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES REFER TO DRAWING G-2. 1.z rc " 68
GRASSCRETE --- w-- EX. WATER LINE 2. IMPLEMENT EROSION CONTROLS AND DUST �I 2 �' E m CONTROL IN ACCORDANCE WITH NOTES ON G-2 ♦ >z 5
- cRAss ` FOOTPRINT OF FUTURE - E-- EX. ELECTRIC LINE w AND CITY REQUIREMENTS. � m s a
' TREATMENT SYSTEM °
-'-------- 3. DURING THE WORK, MAINTAIN PUBLIC ACCESS, '=�" BUILDING -- T - EX. TELECOM LINE 3 ? o
INCLUDING DISABLED ACCESS, USING DIVERSIONS
APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF VEGETATION TO BE 4. IF NECESSARY. REMOVE AND REPLACE GRASSCRETE IN VERIFY SCALE
WORK FOR TREATMENT REMOVED O
SYSTEM BUILDING ACCORDANCE WITH THE GRASSCRETE DESIGN BAR IS NE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING.
AND INSTALLATION GUIDES. MATCH EXISTING Bar
CONSTRUCTION THICKNESS OF GRAVEL BASE. DATE 12/23/2022
PROJ 8622397107
DWG C-10
SHEET 16 OF 31
210
10-248
7=
203
WALL OF EXISTING REINFORCED CONCRETE
1 203
RESIDENCE MAT FOUNDATION SEE
5" HIGH NATURAL
202
3"ABOVE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
STONE CURB
202
FGL,TYP. '201,25 FFL
201
201
r 200
EXISTING) ____
... .,
200 p
GROUND
0 LEVEL(EGL)
_______
y
199
SCARIFY AND T TO
199
Z
BASE OF MAT
a' AGGREGATE 12" BELOW BASE 01 M
�
�y 198
BASE SEE GRADING NOTES
198 -
CONCRETE
SCARIFY AND RECOMPACT
INFILL SEE
197
8'OIA.
SCH80 PVC PIPE
TO8-BELOW EGL
SEE GRADING NOTES
GRADING
NOTE4
197
96 O
196
95 -10 -9 -B -7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1
2 3 4 5 6
195
7 8 9
OFFSET (FT)
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING SITE CROSS-SECTION
-
NORTH -SOUTH
6'x6"CAPSTONE
6^
+201 25
RIVARIES
12`
APPROX. ExISTING
12"-21^ SIDEWALK
I FIX.
3"
+200.5 TO t199.5
-4"
"
36"
6"
^
CONCRETE
SEE GRADING
NOTE 4
,.
EDGING STONES
LANDSCAPE NOTE 2
I` 12"
CRUSHED STONE
BEDDING, 6- DEEP
%11 DETAIL OF STONE CURB
o
I b
GRADING NOTES
VOLUME
1. FOR GENERAL NOTES, REFER TO DWG. G-2
APPROXIMATIONS
2. BELOW FOUNDATIONS REMOVE ALL ROOTS, VEGETATIVE
MATTER, AND OTHER MATERIAL THAT COULD IMPACT BEARING
CAPACITY, AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.
CUT
5.58 CU VDS
3. SCARIFY, MOISTURE CONDITION, AND DOMPACTTOATLEAST
W% OF THE OPTIMUM DRY DENSITY. PERFORM ALL TESTING TO
VERIFY COMPLIANCE, INCLUDING MODIFIED PROCTOR TESTING
FILL
1.49 CU VDS
ON EXISTING SOILS AND ON -SITE COMPACTION TESTING.
3. AGGREGATE BASE TO BE 3/4" CALTRANS CLASS 2 (2018
CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, SECTION 26-1.02B),
THOROUGHLY MOISTENED AND COMPACTED TO 95% RELATIVE
NET
4 CU VDS CUT
COMPACTION, ASTM METHOD D 1557.
4. CONCRETE FOR INFILL AND CURB BEDDING TO MATCH
SPECIFICATION OF CONCRETE USED FOR MAT FOUNDATION.
SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS.
LANDSCAPING NOTES
TREATMENT SYSTEM
1. INSTALL ZERO WATER XERISCAPE LANDSCAPING IN DISTURBED
LAYOUT COORDINATES
AREAS. SUBMIT PLANTING PLAN, PLANT LIST, PLANT
ESTABLISHMENT PLAN FOR APPROVAL BEFORE START OF
A
WORK.
2. EDGINGSTONESTOBE12'HX6' X12"LLOCALSTONEWITH
rp
NATURALROUGHSURFACE. PROVIDESAMPLEFORAPPROVAL.
I I r� I
/
A
COORDII—EPOINT _
-CONNECTION
sysTEm suPFL RELOCATED AC V
3.2 FT / UNIT
3.5 FT �
_
CONDENSATE 2 ��i
ING TRE
�52.5 FT 1.0 FT EXISTPROTECTEN
-
SEPARATOR C"B
-
-
-
i F f'
RESTORE GRASSCRETE TO MATCH
EXISTING. SEE DWG. C-10
PLACE
1.0 GRAVEL EROSION 020"
- - , I PROTECTION- L
- _ _______ ______________________-______ -�- * = = SALVAGE OR .25 FFL 57' / MATCH EXISTING
' WALL FIRE RATED
T \ -OURS B— SIDES
EVE INLET PIPING CB /
BLS.ES GN INSTALL XERISCAPE OVER
1.2 FT �Ii \ azs lsxuv.wxs) / DISTURBED AREAS - SEE
LANDSCAPING NOTES
- 1
_
- _
FOOTPRINT OF 20'X 12' 12.5 FT
III PREFABRICATED BUILDING TO
BE PROVIDED BY TREATMENT A TREATMENT
SYSTEM SUPPLIER AND PLACED 1. SYSTEM MAT
ANG ANCHORED BV FOUNDATION
CONTRACTOR /
TT^ CITY EASEMENT 64"
- • -
IIII / / 5-HIGH NATURAL
STONE EDGI
/-�
+201.25 FFL \ 1.0
1.0 FT
-_ EXTENT OF UTILITY
- LOCATION BY GPR
-
20 FT
i /
III I
" I� +201.25 FFL
I
1.0 FT
236FT P ^� y ,.1' n PROPERTY BOUNDARY ;
BURIED ELECTRICAL" >
I BY EX. CONTRACTOR +.
n
RESTORE PATH
-�-TO EXISTING CONDITIONS C
AFTER CONSTRUCTION \
' <
s
n
CONDUIT
PER SOCASON n s
o
n
IIII,
1' SPECIFICATIONS s
VARIES
1 FT MIN. 1 FTTOCL
OFANCHOHOR,TVP.
+20125 FFL .., +201.0
TREATMENT SYSTEM BUILDING SITE CROSS-SECTION SCARIFY AND RECOMPACTTO 12"BELOW
BOTTOM OF FOUNDATION
LU Imo`
W
U w
Nol
a o.
z �
2 lc
LU
it
WOJ
m� FLUZ
Zo Z ~
cw HZU'
L< a
ILI
J Z
~ m Q
010111
z69
EwE g
OWN EY
}Ee
wFn.,
/ ¢ 5d�
001,
3„oV
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING,
0-1'
ATE 12/23/2022
'ROJ 8622397107
IWG C-11
;HEET 17 OF 31
227
10-249
I 1 L 1 s I 4 I o I o
AI
94 HARTFORD DR.
1 B
SECOND
STORY
WINDOW
96 HARTFORD DR.
i
EXISTING
EXISTING CONCRETE
GATE SIDEWALK
3.0 ft
�:74.5 ft� EL+200.0
EXISTING NEW CONSTRUCTION EXISTING
FRONT ELEVATION
LOOKING SOUTH FROM THE EXISTING FIRE LANE
DI
AIR EXHAUST
EX. FIRE LANE
18.8 ft
94 HARTFORD DR.
1 orklur4u
STORY
WINDOW
EXISTING NEW CONSTRUCTION EXISTING
SIDE ELEVATION
LOOKING WEST FROM COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE
0 4
0 FEET
1" = 4'
�N�NEER *b
�isi0aa
m�
w a
U Q
m
Q m U
Q
z
W
U
U O U
5N
W
a of
O
U �
K
N w Q
a o
Z
0 Y W
�oaa
' 0: 2
N U LL
°ioa
U a F 4
C Z 2 U
X6wyq
m6Wm
z a�
O �O LL'
0 �ioa
o
N 3 w
O
N`
z
O�
20=
K Z
Wacf
_U
y 2Z�
�Z OQ
F! af U
N sDm
zo moa
Q� a W W m
Q m N Q H
N r 0
a
=0�
NWZ
�o
zcj
z
� zirV -S
O1 EA
rcjyom
w O yN U o
® fa/1QN c
3dZ'.Ov
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
DATE 3/30/2023
PROJ 8622397107
DWG C-12
SHEET 1 OF 1
212
10-250
I
\\ SYMBOLS r°
EXISTING FEATURES
ss`
WATERLINE
z
SANITARY SEWER LINE �c 10
-s--- s - `-
s�_— STORM DRAIN LINE k
—__m� is
i
-s^ m - E ELECTRIC LINE = UNDERGROUND SVE PIPING o zx
x
SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL Zu
y. 3c
S E-10-07 I ® AREA TO BE REPAVED WITH 2" OF ASPHALTIC CONCRETE oc ,
o
AFTER COMPLETION OF WORK
( AREA OF LANDSCAPE AND HARDSCAPE TO BE RESTORED
Z
\) TO EXISTING CONDITIONS AFTER COMPLETION OF WORK Q
I ra
�a
AREA OF GRASSCRETE TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED
I !A Z
J cl
O
EXTENT OF CROSS -GUTTER TO BE REMOVED AND w' w J
REPLACED. SEE PIPING PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWINGS. z Q ~
i 1w Wo
NOTES c
SEE DWGS. C-10 1. WEATHER LIMITATIONS: DO NOT PAVE WHEN THE ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATURE IS > � AND C-11 BELOW 40F OR WHEN THE BASE IS WET.
2. MACHINE GRIND AND HAUL TO DUMP APPROXIMATELY 62,620 SO FT OF FAILED LU I
_ ------_-- ASPHALT AT 2" IN DEPTH.
SVE-10-01D l 3. CLEAN AND APPLY "TACK COAT' (FOR PROPER BONDING OF NEW ASPHALT) TO " - 4 PAVEMENT WITH UP TO VARIABLE
1y APPROXIMATELY 62,620 SO FT OF FAILED PAVEMENT.
THICKNESS OF HOT ASPHALT AFTER COMPACTION).
"
5. THE PAVEMENT SHALL CONSIST OF A MIXTURE OF MINERAL AGGREGATE AND - A DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS, OR AS DIRECTED BY THE E GRADES 8
S BINDER MIXED AT A CENTRAL MIXING PLANT, SPREAD AND COMPACTED 0 EPARED BASE COURSE, AND PLACED IN CONFORMITY WITH THE LINES, i ��
6. COMIPACTRASPHALT TO MAXIMUM COMPACTION USING MACHINE ROLLER AND/OR j a h 5 v 6 CITATORY EQUIPMENT. 7. CUT BACK RAGGED
FEATHERED EDGES TO A NEAT LINE BY MEANS OF A /
CONCRETE SD SAW. SASTRAIGHTCUTS SHALL BE VERTICAL AND IN A STRAIGHT LINE AS NEARLY ' '�^ o V PARALLEL TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE TRENCH AS PACTICABLE 3 z
8. CONDUCT A WATER FLOOD TEST IN THE PRESENCE OF THE ENGINEER UPON VERIFY SCALE TO 9A E R COMPLETION OF ALL PAVING OPERATIONS.
ERTY BAR IS NEINCHON
H
N0 G
E 9. FLOOD PAVEMENT UNIFORMLY, AND CORRECT BIRD BATHS AND DEPRESSIONS ORIGINAL DRAWING. — / I WHERE WATER PONDS MORE THAN 1/4-INCH IN ANY DIMENSION. 0 1' 0 10. REMOVE MATERIALS IN THE AREAS TO BE REPAIRED TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM LAYING DATE 12/23/2022 DEPTH OF ONE INCH. PATCH CUT AREAS AS SPECIFIED IN THIS SECTION. PROJ 8622397107 Fees 1 FEATHER -EDGE JOINTS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED.
DWG C-13
SHEET 19 OF 31
229
10-251
-VES AND
a
PIPING
Db
GLOBE
DWI
BALL
W
.-
R-N
CHECK
C�<
GATE
ORIFICE METERING
LUBRICATED PLUG
KMI
VACUUM RELIEF
S
CPERIC
ONSWATI
ONSER/ATON
VEM
PRESSURE RELIEF
PRESSURE REDUCING
INTERNAL RELIEF
3 PRESSURE REDUCING
EXTERNAL PRESSURE
PRESSURE REDUCING
DIFFERENT VL PRESSURE
PRESSURE REDUCING
VENTED
Pc
3 WAY
REDUCER
L�
Y-SIRNNTR
SAMPLE/TEST PORT
T
SCREWI PORT
FLANGE
�Ir
UNION
ORIFICE PLATE
IXI
VALVE NORMALLY OPEN
►T^/
VV&VVE NORMALLY CLOSED
'�
�J' ROTAMETER
OPERATORS
0 MOTOR MOTORIZED
VALVE
PA O
PNUEMATC
PNEEMAT11 VALVE
ACTUATOR
4 SOLENOID
VALVE
SOLENOID O
T MANUAL
MANUAL VALVE
)4
MANUAL
WITH GEAR
EGwPMEM/y�Lly\�
A6 \ SCREEN
VANE �v/ SCREEN
COMPRESSOR LIQUID RING PUMP FLAME
O ARRESTOR
HEAT EXCHANGER
I INDITE Y�
(pgf�y-�[ SILENCER
VAPOR/UOUID O CENTRIFUGAL FLAME CHECK
SEPARATOR PUMP
AIR STRIPPER
CENTRIFUGAL FAN METERING PUMP
LDfH-J aLp
AIR INTAKE S
,,,,�QQ�++QQ��,,,, FILTER/SIUDNILENCER
TER GEAR PUMP FLEX CONNECTOR
OIL/WA
SEPARATOR 1/1\/\LANAI PRURE �Cl REGENERATNE
ESSBLOWER
( BLOWER OIL FLOODED ROTARY INUNE
SCREW COMPRESSOR FILTER COMPRESSED AR
PARTIO
FILTER WITH DRAIN
CULATE
SCRUBBER
GAS BURNER
POSITIVE ROTARY CLAW PANEL
DISPLACEMENT BLOWER FILTER
11 BLOWER COMPRESSED NR
FILTER WITH DRAIN
CQ CATA
VENTILATION ELECTRIC CERAMIC HEAT CATALYST LIQUID FLOW MI
GAS QUENCH/ CONTROL PANEL FAN HEATER EXCHANGE MEDIA REACTOR
SCRUBBER
RANSDUCERS INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION
EXAMPLE: BUBSLESYMBOL INSTRUMENT LOCATION SYMBOL
I� CURRENT TO PNEUMATIC FIRST LETTER S O FIELD MOUNTED OI INTERLOCKS TRANSDUCER (MOUNTED SUCCEEDING (LEVERS }SEE ISA TABLE INSTRUMEM BEHIND -THE -PANEL) e NIG
INSTRUMENT ( EHIND-THEPANEL n PANEL
A ANALOG OM AUXILAARY LOCATION)
D DIGRAL BEHIND -THE -PANEL
E VOLTAGE MOUNTED INSTRUMENT
F FREQUENCY TYPE ACTION OR COMROL GREEN
I CURRENT (SEE ABBREVIATIONS) O
PILOT UGHT/ALARM LIGHTP PNEUMATIC
INSTRUMENT (LIGHT COLOR)
PF PULSE FREQUENCY IDEMIFlCATION e
PD PULSE DURATION PANEL MOUNTING
(AU%IL1VtY LOCATION)
INSTRUMENT LOCATION. TYPE
OR ABSENCE LINE DENOTES PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLS PRIMARY IODATION
LOCATION (SEE RIGHT) (SHRED)
PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLS
(NORMALLY INACCESSIBLE
PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLS AUXILIARY LOCATON
(NORMALLY INACCESSIBLE)
®PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLS
(SHARED)
PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLS AUXILARY LOCATION
(SHARED NORMALLY INACCESSIBLE)
TYPICAL LETTER SYMBOLS USED FOR IDENTIFYING INSTRUMENTS B INSTRUMENT COMPONENTS . SI
SPARK IGNITOR
aFIR
DOUBLACTINE-G
PNEUMATIC ACTUATOR
FLAME ROD
SPRING-REURN
UV
SINGLE -ACTING
PNEUMATIC ACTUATOR
SELF CHECKING
USCANNER
IMII- II
FLEXIBLE HOSE
CONNECTOR
COMPRESSED
MR RESEW R
SEA
Im
OBSEWATION
AIR FLOW
WE' PORT
INDICATOR
SELF -AGING
PLOT STATION
SIGHT
TUBE
PlToT
AIR
STATIC
FILTER
CASES
e� ON AND OFF
EVENT LIGHTS
�S OPENED AND
CLOSED POSDION UGHIS
yG OPENED AND
CLOSED POSITION
SWITCHES
®CX
COMPRESSOR /X PANEL
4EO-X
GEO TRAILER
®X PANEL
ePCP
ART SYSTEM
PANEL
�osa�mm000mo
®�®ate®tee®®e
TEMPERATURE DEGREES FAHRENHDT
PPM CONCENTRATION PARTS PER MILLION
MISCELLANEOUS
CONTINUATION PIPING MATERIAL
DWG NO ARROW 1 SPECIFICATION
CHANGE
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM LEGEND
SCFM VAPOR FLOW STANDARD CUBIC FEET PER MINUTE
GPM WATER FLOW GALLONS PER MINUTE
PSIG PRESSURE POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH GAGE
OPROCESS NO.
O
NOT IN CONTRACT
FOR COORDINATION ONLY
INSTRUMENTATION IDENTIFICATION LETTERS
FIRST -LETTER
SUCCEEDING -LETTERS
] OR
ANIABLE
MODIFIER
READOUT OR
PASSIVE FUNCTION
OUTPUT
FUNCTION
MODIFIER
-
ALARM
ION
-
-
-
-
-
-
CONTROL
-
DIFFERENTIAL
-
-
-
-
SENSOR PRIMARY ELEMENT
-
-
RATK) FRACTION
-
-
-
-
GLASS VIEWING DEVICE
-
-
-
-
-
HIGH
CAL
-
INDICATE
-
-
SCAN
ILE
TIME RATE OF CHANGE
-
CONTROL STATION
-
-
UGHT
-
Low
MOMENTARY
-
-
MIDDLE, INTERN
-
ORIFICE, RESTRICTION
-
-
A
-
PCW TE CONNECTION
-
-
INTEGRATE, TOTAUZE
-
-
-
-
RECORD
-
T
SAFETY
-
SWITCH
-
-
-
TRANSMIT
-
-
MULTIFUNCTION
I MULTIFUNCTION
IMULTIFUNCTION
IICAL ANALYSIS
-
-
VALVE, DAMPER, LOUVER
-
_
;ELL
X AXIS
UNCLASSIFIED
I UNCLASSIFIED
JUNCLASSIFIED
'RESENCE
V A%IS
-
RELAY. COMPUTE, CONVERT
-
)N
Z AXIS
-
DRIVER, ACTUATOR, UNCLASSIFIED
FINAL CONTROL ELEMEM
-
NOTE:
INSTRUMENT DESIGNATIONS BASED ON INSTRUMENT SOCIETY OF AMERICA, STANDARD S5.1
CONTROLABBRENATIONS
AC
TYPE, ACTION OR
ALTERNATING CURRENT
A
ANALOG INPUT
AO
ANALOG OUTPUT
AM
AUTO -MANUAL
ART
ART CONTROL PANEL
AS
ADJUSTABLE SPEED
CSO
DC
CAR SEAL OPEN
DIRECT CURRENT
OI
DIGITAL INPUT
DO
FAR
DIGITAL OUTPUT
FORWARD -AUTO -REVERSE
FR
PORNARD-REVERSE
HOA
HAND -OFT -AUTO
A
HAND -OFT -REMOTE
HLO
HIGH -LOW -OFF
HLOA
HIGH -LOW -OFF -AUTO
LCP
LOCAL CONTROL PANEL
LEL
LOWER EXPLOSIVE UNIT
LOS
LOCKOUT STOP
LR
LOCAL -REMOTE
M
MANUA
MA
MANUAL-ALRO
MCP
MAN CONTROL PANEL
NC
NORMALLY CLOSED
NO
NORMALLY OPEN
DA
OFF -AUTO
OC
OCA
OPEN -CLOSE
OPEN -CLOSE -AUTO
GO
ON -OFF
GOA
ON -OFF -AUTO
OCR
ON -OFF -REMOTE
OVA
ORGANIC VAPOR ANALYZER
PCP
PUMP CONTROL PANEL
PLC
PROGRAM LE LOGIC CONTROLLER
R
RESE
SG
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
SP
SMAPJB PORT
SR
SS
SPRING RETURN
-
--MEW
VAPOR EXTRACTION WELLS
MFU
VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVE
LINE LEGEND
PRIMARY PIPING
SECONDARY PIPING
COMPRESSED AR
//- PNEUMATIC SIGNAL
ELECTRICAL SIGNAL
� �F�)F� CAPILLARY
---MECHANICAL LINK
NON CONNECTING LINES
CONNECTING LINES
DATA LINK
TUUUU HOSE
r LINE SIZE
1 FLOW DIRECTION
OTHERS -*�- CCC
NOTES:
1. SPECIFICATIONS AND DIMENSIONS PRE SUBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTIFICATION.
2. REFERENCE ANSI/ISA-S5.1 FOR SYMBOLS NOT SHOWN ON THIS LEGEND.
M.
Z of
�0
Qa
0 W
y Z
Nc� Q o m
Z Q Q
EL- F- o
c d Lu Q
:)o
Z
W
Z W
Jq4 zi�y
5;
z�}Pe
w FnUo
/ ¢ n S2
3 z 1.
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IB ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
LATE 12/23/2022
'ROJ 3622397107
IWG I-1
THEFT 20 OF 31
220
10-252
2 3
4 5
6 EQUIPMENT CONTAINED
IN BUILDING FURNISHED
BY OWNER
0 Oz3
?m
Wi
a3
w
>a
U
Q
A
Y m n�
S-1001 V-0702 S-1002 F-1001 13-1001 E-1001 C-1001A/B
VAPOR -LIQUID DILUTION AIR INLINE ROTARY FAN VAPOR PHASE > fO
¢ °
SEPARATOR AIRVALVE FILTER FILTER LOBE
COOLER
GRANULAR ACTIVATED
-
BLOWERS
CARBON
�w
>
F
wo
U
WQ
Ow
C
w=
z g 3
4 z 'z
F-1001 6
x
8o
�+
B B-1001 E-1001
J
S-1002
6 a
o w r
z wz
o
FROM 1
z y -
m
EXTRACTION WELLS V-0702
C-1001A C-1001B
sp �a
Boa
S-1001
w 1.1 zz
00Q
F=U
-
CQCaw
z m 3w
aorc o0
no
rc3
w W
°z
P-1001
wz a3
y
o z�
T-1001
~
°Z.
T-1002
00 C
T-1001 T-1002
�L -
CONDENSATE SECONDARY
Q
P-1001 STORAGE TANK CONTAINMENT
CENTRIFUGAL
(D
PUMP
Q
h�
3 O
am
LL
o
V)
V)
LU
U
O
w
a
!Strearrr ia� — 1 t 3 i d 5 fi
l__________________ ______________________._. ___.______._._._ ____ __________ ____r________._____ 11okEyietric Flcwrare I,sufmil 6c2 662 667 662 -662 662 t-- - -- --------------- - - - --------- ----
�Xi01th`=1_E�riCFIGYff�3_,�:(aCf_C9;__: $�5 `a33 7O7 :6_87 07G 7CjG Temp. flog Fi 6_' _ E � _ '!75 f_Cl_ )g
_�---1
O .'n'E Y
- 2 @
D ,PraSgurF �},SStd ; 1'J.J 'i ~ E5.0h r
z
w
_T�_______r____
:F}0t':5Fiy (Ik .(.} O.Q34 0.054 .......... __-_--_--_-__----_--___r__-_--_--_--- R.ssilawrata{fu'hr},013 3,013 3A�33A1� '• 3,J13
/
z � o V
3 rRe4a`ite �.IL il�li _---__-.-.-_...-_-.. ___----._._......-__--_--_-_----.--- __r.-.. ._._�-_-_-5-..-... y; c} 1*0 16�
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
DRAWING.
ORIGINAL
D-1'
DATE
12/23/2022
PROJ
8622397107
DWG
1-2
FILENAME 1101.1-P--02 PFD.mw PLOT— —.22-2022 PLOTTIME. IOA6aM SHEET 21 OF 31
221 10-253
FROM
EVE
WELLS
EQUIPMENT CONTAINED
IN BUILDING FURNISHED
BY OWNER
BUILDING BOUNDARY
G _
H�7H
REGENERATIVEATIVE
BLOWER
19.4 HP VAC
3 PHASEHASE TEFC TEFL
3BA562O ]ATE6
B-1002 TO
REGENERATIVE BLOWER fN ATMOSPHERE
19.4 HP VAC
3 PHASEHASE TEFC TEFL
3BA9620.]AT66
-------------
I � I I
B-1003 Ir�H
REGENERATIVE BLOWER
19.411 208-230/4B0 VAC
3 PHASE TEFC j\T/7 LILJ
8 3BA9620-7AT66 -
G y
— HRHPi
B-1004
Ex6 RE GENERATIVE BLOWER
19.4 HP PHASE
TEFC VAC E-1001
F-1001 3 PHASE TEFC j
INLINE 3BA9620.]AT66 a HEA0E 146o VA
FER
ILTER b 3H3 PHASE
3 PHA_IBS —
AA-100
\ / /
X X
OR41N C-tO1A ORAI Q-10018
DEMISTER VAPOR -PHASE N VAPOR -PHASE
ACTIVATED ACTIVATED
S6 _ CARBON CARBON
LB 2,000LB
STEEL STEEL
I I
E-ID01
13 VAPOR
AN LIQUID J
IF SEPARATOR
VLS 320
siRAWER P-1001
TRANSFER PUMP O
CENTRIFUGAL Ff
—
1Y2HP2VAC
3 PHASE TEFC
AMT 368G95
u 10GPM @ 4 HEAD T-1001
CONDENSATE STORAGE TANK
T-1002
SECONDARY CONTAINMENT— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — M.
F
ww
tta
M
U12 w
F=U
CQw �O
0 "
Ho
ywz
E
0 I.
a
N 0
Z
h ao
ZG Z a
a z
aLu
F_
F
z
Z q4
limey
— EWd�g
5;
w FnU�
/
3z.oV
VERIFY SCALE
BAR IS ONE INCH ON
ORIGINAL DRAWING.
0-1'
)ATE 12/23/2022
22 OF 31
222
10-254
(E)SCE JO
12.d7KV PULL
VAULT SECTION M
METERING
TOSCE
300KVA — MAIN d50A �P
SCE TRANSFORMER
1z.arcv TO
4MV,.30,3W
(2)292' -A3
&tKMGNO
CONCRETE ENCASED JIG FEEDER
LOAD CALCUTATONS: TYPICAL EACH 2OM
20HPBLOWERSx(4)
3HP HE
PANEL FOR PARCELStt10&11
1)BAMP
48AMP
112HFRUMP
V3HPVENTFAN
1.1 AN
RB AMP
SKVA CONTROLTRANSFORMER
25% OFIARGESTMOTOR
24 AMP
TAMP
FUTURE SPARE CAPACITY
,AMP
TOTAL LOAD 1IB7 AMP
AMPERES @ _R�
p_F1wi
H3E
LL
ESs
w2
65 ' �90
2 Qy
E-004
31 OF 33
22S
10-255
HOUR FIRE WALL.
THIS WALL ONLY.
❑WER FEEL THIS CORNER
TO 480 VAC PANEL
1 '
SVE INLET THROUGH
BOXOUT IN
FLOOR
5 �
NCHOR
POINTS, TYP 4 CORNERS
DETAILS
OF SIZE DETERMINED IN PE CALLS
15,_10„
o of
lJt�
1 IIII "-
IIII IIII M
�
_ �IIII
o ■- i II'� � 0� � 0
■1�1�1�1�1
�L
0 J�
•
n
LAYOUT VIEW
B' B
ROOF VIEW
c
J C
8„
DISCHARGE VILP A —A
LOUVERS
TRIM
SLATE ROCK
3'6"
PPROX
[ED WHITE
LOCKING INDUSTRIAL STYLE
VIEW D—D' DOOR KNOB
-HES TO HAVE
,ASKET
NBRICATEO
i, TV�,—�, JVERS
v •
WHITE LOUVERS
AND TRIM
L7 L \ / I L I f 1 N
H L V J U V
UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE
PROJECT TITLE:
DRAWING TITLE:
REV
DESCRIPTION
DATE
DWN
{ DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES
•
THESE MATERIALS ARE PROPRIETARY
`
WSP USA ENVIRONMENT &
r
SHEET 1 OF 1
DO NOT SCALE DRAWING
AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF H2K
BUILDING L A Y O U T
DRAWING NO.:
F
REVISIONS PER SUBMITTAL REVIEW
10/22
MK
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. BUYER SHALL HAVE THE
H2K
INFASTRUCTURE INC.
G
CHANGED TITLE BLOCK/LOUVER DIM
11/22
MK
DESIGNED BY: MK
USE OF MATERIALS AND INFORMATION
FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF INSTALLING
-�-�
NE�n/PORT BEACH, CAU011—Ol
r q q q
H
ADDED FIRE WALL NOTE
12/22
MK
PROJECT MCR.: MK
AND MAINTAINING THE EQUIPMENT SOLD BY
D
CHANGED STACK LOCATION ADDED DETAIL
8/22
MK
H2K TECHNOLOGIES, INC. NOT TO BE
I
T e c h n 0 to g I e S , Inc.
E
CHANGED TO METAL SIDING
10/22
MK
PROJECT NO.: 6011
REPRODUCED WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.
7550 Commerce St. Corcoran,
MN 55340, Tel: 763-746-9900 ©2014
22'
10-256
PGi
LAYOUT VIEW
VIEW Y—Y'
17TFW X—Y'
DISCHARGE TO STACK
7M HEAT EXHANGER
TO CARBON INLET
H L V 1 S 1 U N J
UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE
* DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES
< DO NOT SCALE DRAWING
THESE MATERIALS ARE PROPRIETARY
AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF H2K
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. BUYER SHALL HAVE THE
USE OF MATERIALS AND INFORMATION
FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF INSTALLING
AND MAINTAINING THE EQUIPMENT SOLD BY
12K TECHNOLOGIES, INC. NOT TO BE
REPRODUCED WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.
H2KCROSS
T e c h n o o g l e s, Inc.
7550 Commerce St. Corcoran, MN 55340, Tel: 763-746-9900©2014 PROJECT TITLE:
W S P USA ENVIRONMENT
& IN F A S T R U C T U R E INC
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
DRAWING TITLE:
B U I L D I N G
ELEVATION
O [� [� SECTIONS
C R J J
SHEET 1 OF 1
REV
DESCRIPTION
DATE
OWN
A
ADDED VIEW OF SMALLER PANEL
9/22
MK
DRAWING NO.:
6011-��A
B
CHANGES PER SUBMITTAL REVIEW
10/22
MK
DESIGNED BY: IIK
C
CHANGED TITLE BLOCK/ANCHORS
11/22
MK
PROJECT MGR.: MK
D
ADDED 2 HOUR FIRE RATING
12/22
MK
PROJECT NO.: 6011
2215
10-257
14 CAGE FORMEEDDL 14 GAGE FORMED STEEL
STEEWITHL ROOF, CAP TRUSSES, 1:12 PITCH WITH
TOP AND 1 1/2" BOTTOM
CONTINUOUSDR'LY FIANCES. STITCH WELD T/
WELDED ROOF, 24' DC
(2) LAYERS 5/B"
SHEETROCK CEILI
1" DRIP RAIL
ALONG BOTH SIDES
R19 MIN SPRAY
TYP. ROOF JOIST DETAIL FOAM INSULATIONUNDERSIDE OF
-
SKID FLOOR
C�fi%%1 N PERIMETER
FlWIfTH
ALL A LEWELDS
A
ALL AROUND
3/1fi" A-36 STEEL \
DECK
SPECIFICATIONS:
DESIGN PER 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE / ASCE 7-16
RISK CAT III, UNOCCUPIED BUILDING, TYPE LIB CONSTRUCTION.
1. WIND:
EXPOSURE: B
DESIGN WIND SPEED, MPH: 102
TURD FACTOR KZT: 1.0 2 HOUR R F
2. SEISMIC RATED WALL, THIS
SS: 1.313 WALL ONLY
S7: 0.468
SDS: 1.051
SOIL SITE CLASS: D DEFAULT
SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY: D
R: 6.5
IE: 1.25
V: 7.4KIPS
3. ROOF LIVE LOAD: 40 PER
4. FLOOR LIVE LOAD: 125 PSF OR A 2500 LB CONCENTRATED LOAD
FOUNDATION/CONCRETE PAD DESIGN BY OTHERS
MIN 400D PSI CONCRETE FOUNDATION/CONCRETE PAD
TO FULLY SUPPORT ENTIRE FLOOR AREA OF SKID
N.T.S.
ROOF TRUSSES
CONTINUOUSLY
WELDED TO WALL
PANELS AT ENDS
'LOCATE AS CLOSE
TO WALL STUDS AS
OSSIBLE
ttP.
""-3" ttP.
14 GACE STEEL
WALL FORMED
STEEL WALL
PANELS, 1 1/2"
FLINGS
2 LAYERS 5/8-
GYPSUM
WALLBOARD TYPE %
INTERIOR
3 1/2'. NO. 20
MSG STUD,
CORROSION
PROTECTED
1 1/2" FLANGE
24" MAX. WALL PANEL
3 1/2' ttP.
a GAUGE STEED
WALL PANEL
2 LAYERS 5/8"
GYPSUM
WALLBOARD TYPE %
INTERIOR
METAL IAA SIDING MINERAL WOOL
INSULATION TO FILL
ltt
TYP. 2 HOUR FIRE RATED WALL PANEL SECTION DETAIL
T LAYER 5/8"
GYPSUM
TYP. WALL PANEL DETAIL 14
/SEAMS BETWEEN PANELS SHALL BE
CAULKED WITH AN INDUSTRIAL CAULK TO
COMPLETELY SEAL BUILDING EXTERIOR
BEFORE PAINTING. EXTERIOR ENAMEL FINISH
ROOF, SKID AND ENCLOSURE
1 1/2" FLANGE
[�24" MAX. WALL PANEL WIDTH EXCEPT OVER DOOR
----
MAX 1/2" P.
3" P.
WALL PANELS
WELDED TO
ADJOINING PANEL
NxTERIORRIOR, AND 4"X4'X3 8 PT W 3 8
1 Q INTERIOR, I /2" / / / "
6" O WELD EVERY GUSSETS BACK UP TO
6' O.C. CHANNEL.
DIA. 3/4" DIA. HILTI HAS-E B7
J::�Ll"
IFT POINT HDG ROD WITH 5"
TYP. WALL PANEL SECTION DETAIL EMBEDMENT USING HILTI
HIT-HY 200 V3 ADHESIVE,
12" MIN EDGE DISTANCE
12 N.T.S.
17"
(2) 36" % V
i8 GAGE STEEL
P
12' OLYORETIIANE
INSULATED DOORS,
µ 3 IF 111GA1)
ALL PANEL STITCH NICKEL PLATED
WELDED TO TOP OF STEELLATCHES
CONTAINMENT LIP GE OVER D HARDWARE
EXTERIOR AND DOOR EDGE
WITH KEY LOCK
STITCH WELDED TO
SKID FLOOR C3%3.5 AT DOOR OPENING JAMBS
INTERIOR FULL EIGHT AND C5X6.7 HEADER,
LOUVER OPENINGS FRAMED WITH 14 GAGE STITCH WELD CHANNELS TO WALL PANELS, 1" FORMED STEEL CHANNEL TOP BOTTOM AND 3" DEPTH OF JAMBS PERPENDICULAR SIDES, STITCH WELDED TO SURROUNDING TO WALL PANEL (LIKE A STUD). 5" DEPTH WALL PANELS VERTICAL FOR HEADER.
NOTE:
1 1/2" X 3/16" FLOOR LOUVER LOCATION SHOWN ON ISOMETRIC IS
FOR GENERAL DETAIL ONLY AND IS NOT
PLATE RIGHT ANGLE BEND REPRESENTATIVE OF ACTUAL LOUVER
WELDED TO PERIMETER LOCATIONS. SEE SHEET 6011-01 FOR
CHANNEL. 1 1/2" WELD ACTUAL LOUVER LOCATIONS.
EVERY 6" O.C.
1" DIA HOLE
FOR ANCHORING
CENTERED IN 4"
PLATE
INSULATONVTO PILL
cavm
TYP. STANDARD WALL PANEL SECTION DETAIL
75 11 PAST CHANN
TYP. CORNER BOLT DOWN DETAIL
REVISIONS
UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE
* DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES
< DO NOT SCALE DRAWING
THESE MATERIALS ARE PROPRIETARY
AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF H2K
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. BUYER SHALL HAVE THE
USE
USE OF MATERIALS AND INFORMATION
FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF INSTALLING
AND MAINTAINING THE EQUIPMENT SOLD BY
12K TECHNOLOGIES, INC. NOT TO BE
REPRODUCED WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.
—►-�
l
L
H2K I
T e c h n o to g l e 5 , Inc.
7550 Commerce St, Corcoran, MN 55340, Tel: 763-746-9900©2011 PROJECT TITLE:
WSP ENVIRONMENT ix
INFASTRUCTURE INC.
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
DRAWING TITLE:
WELDED L ❑ E ❑ STEEL ENCLOSURE C L 0 S ❑ R E
M TRIO CONSTRUCTION
I S ❑ E f� l l�
ISOMETRIC
[DETAIL DRAWING
SHEET 1 OF 1
REV
DESCRIPTION
DATE
I OWN
CHANGES PER PE REVIEW
8/22
MK
DRAWN BY: MK
DRAWING NO. -
6011-04
B
CHANGES PER PE REVIEW
8/22
MK
DESIGNED BY: MK
C
ADDED WALL AND SHEATHING DETAILS
12/22
MK
PROJECT MGR.: MK
D
CHANGED SHEETROCK DESCRIPTION
12/22
MK
DATE: 08/02/2022
PROJECT NO.: BUT
220
10-258
TOWER FEED THIS CORNER 1
O 480 VAC PANEL
4 1
2'
6"
--- _LLA
20'
�n'_a"
SKID FRAMEWORK
6 3
ANCHOR POINTS, TYP 4 CORNERS
DETAILS OF SIZE DETERMINED IN PE CALCS
OR PLATE FLOOR
C-CHANNEL ON EDGE
I PERIMETER AND FLOOR JOIST
I �ATIDNCASDENOTED AD 0 VEON CENTER
SKID HEIGHT DETAIL - NOT TO SCALE
SKID TOP PLATE
H L V I S 1 U N J
UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE
* DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES
< DO NOT SCALE DRAWING
THESE MATERIALS ARE PROPRIETARY
AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF H2K
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. BUYER SHALL HAVE THE
USE OF MATERIALS AND INFORMATION
FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF INSTALLING
AND MAINTAINING THE EQUIPMENT SOLD BY
H2K TECHNOLOGIES, INC. NOT TO BE
REPRODUCED WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION.
H2K
T e c h n 0l O r 1 I e S , Inc.
7550 Commerce St. Corcoran, MN 55340, Tel: 763-746-9900©2014 PROJECT TITLE:
WSP USA ENVIRONMENT &
iN FASTRUCTURE INC
NEWPORT BEACH, CA
DRAWING TITLE:
SKID WELDMENT
SHEET 1 OF I
REV
DESCRIPTION
DATE
DWN
A
REVISIONS PER SUBMITTAL REVIEW
5/22
MK
DRAWING NO.:
6011-07D
B
ADDED FLOOR HEIGHT DETAIL
10/22
MK
DESIGNED BY: MK
C
CHANGED TITLE BLOCK/ANCHORS
11/22
MK
PROJECT MGR.: MK
D
ADDED ELECTRICAL BOXOUT
12/22
MK
PROJECT NO.: 6011
227
10-259
INCOMING POWER SUPPLY
480VAC, 3PHASE, 3WIRE WITH GROUND
SYSTEM FLA-125 AMPS
L3
L2---------------------
ll
0 b.
200AMP
1 MCI
2 SVE 9.4 —1 T
BLOWER #1 HP _ T3 L3
27 FLA _ — _ J 60AMP
3 MS3
"__L
SVE4 BLOWER #327 FLA
moo
60AMP
VFD#1
FF VFO WIRING
9 SVE BLOWER 3 DETAILS, SEE
HEAT EXCHANGER HP COLUMN 9
4.6 7 (BLK-14AWG)
MS_6
_ T10/L L1
9 VENT 1/3 -- _
FAN HP _ T3 L3 —
0 FLA
9 (BLK-14AWG)
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
LIGHTNING/
18 SURGE
SUPPRESSOR
19 15AMP
15AMP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MS2 I
0/LTI
— T _ 9.4 BLOWER
IVE
T3 _ HP BLOWER #2 I
60AMP �_ 7 FLA
I
(BLK-10AWG)
MS4
_ 0/LT1 —
SVE _ 8.4 I
HP BLOWER #4
GOAMP v_ 7 FLA
(BLK-10AWG)
I
M55 I
— — 1 0/LT1 —
1/2 MOISTURE SEPARATOR
HP TRANSFER PUMP
T3
15AMP _ _ 1.1 FLA
- I
(BLK-14AWG)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
—---------------------------------J
ISAMP
G
R
1 0
0 (BLK-14AWG)
0 O GROUND BUS
IN
O
\ G(SIZE DETERMINED BY
0'
\ NSTALLING ELECTRICIAN)
480V AC, 30, 3W WITH GROUND
0 NEMA 3R PANELBOARO B
0 WITH 2ODAMP NO MOUNTED U
00 NEXT TO CONTROL PANEL 5
r T
I I
I
I
I I
I
L H1
H3' H2 H4
r
ISKVA 400-120/240VAC
-VA
TRANSFORMER MOUNTED
(NEXT TO CONTROL PANEL
x1
I
I � x2
J
I I
ll� I
I
I
NEUTRAL BAR
I
I I
�_-+�
I
m m NEUTRAL
(BLK-OAWG)
BAR
I
I
I
0 I
I
I
_
CONTROL
�� ���
BUILDING - o- - - - -
o—
-POWERR
- POW
LIGHTING ISAMP
15AMP
I (600WATT5)
(BLK-I4AWG)
I
I
I
I
(BLK-14AWG)
I
I
I
I
r-----
GFCI
O O RECEPTACLE
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
F-------
20AMP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- -�
- _ - - (BELA)
(BLK-12AWG)
TO GROUND BUS
(SIZE DETERMINED BY
�
INSTALLING ELECTRICIAN)
H2K
K L \ / C / \ N C UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE . —►� PROJECT TITLE: DRAWING TITLE:
L V J V V J * DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES THESE MATERIALS ARE PROPRIETARY \ SHEET 2 OF 8 REV DESCRIPTION DATE DWN . AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF H2K .--►—� ��_ A RELEASE FOR SUBMITTAL OS 02 22 RC DRAWN BY: RC TECHNOLOGIES, IN C. BUYER SHALL HAVE THE WS P ENVIRONMENT & T r� /� T DRAWING NO.:
B RELEASE FOR RESUBMITTAL 05 25 22 RC DESIGNED BY: RC USE OF MATERIALS AND INFORMATION .—--� NEASTRUCTURE INC.ELECTRICAL SYSTEM C RELEASE FOR PRODUCTION 08 09 22 RC PROJECT MANAGER:TP FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF INSTALLING \ Y1 6 0 1 1 - 2 2 D CHANGED TITLE BLOCK 12 20 22 RC DATE: 04 18 22 AND MAINTAINING THE EQUIPMENT SOLD BY --�-� �—. NEWPORT BEACH, CA H2K TECHNOLOGIES, INC. NOT TO BE Technologies, �nc.
PROJECT NO.: 6011 REPRODUCED WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION. 7 7550 Commerce St. Corcoran, MN 55340, Tel: 763-746-9900©2022 10-260
Attachment E
Planning Commission Meeting Minutes from May 18, 2023
10-261
DocuSign Envelope ID: 23A974E3-E32D-4068-94E1 -F1 3D54E51 B1 6
NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS — 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
THURSDAY, MAY 18, 2023
REGULAR MEETING — 6:30 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER — 6:30 P.M.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE — Commissioner Klaustermeier
III. ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Chair Curtis Ellmore, Vice Chair Mark Rosene, Secretary Sarah Klaustermeier, Commissioner Brady Barto, Commissioner Tristan Harris, and Commissioner Jonathan Langford ABSENT: Commissioner Lee Lowrey
Staff Present: Deputy Community Development Director Jim Campbell, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, Senior Civil Engineer David Keely, Assistant Planner Jenny Tran, Principal Planner Jaime Murillo, and Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS
Lt. Colonel Bob Lang, Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association representative for John Wayne Airport (JWA), opposed the residential development on Campus Drive and the golf course.
Julian Steffenhagen, Pacific Flight Aviation flight instructor, noted that the noise map for JWA does not reflect the sound from 20 Left, sound impacts for residents, and consequences to employees, employers, and JWA users from construction at 20 Left.
John Mahany, SoCal Pilots Association President, opposed rezoning the land next to JWA to residential and noted the noise impacts to residents.
V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell announced that Item No. 3: Housing Element Implementation - Noise -Related Amendments (PA2022-0201) has been removed from the agenda and will return to the Planning Commission at a later date.
VI. CONSENT ITEMS
ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF MAY 4, 2023
Recommended Action: Approve and file
Jim Mosher noted the Planning Commission meeting start time change to 6:00 p.m. as per the meeting minutes and the 6:30 p.m. start time of tonight's meeting.
Motion made by Commissioner Langford and seconded by Commissioner Harris to approve the minutes of the May 4, 2023, meeting with Mr. Mosher's edits.
AYES:
Ellmore, Barto, Harris, Klaustermeier, Langford, and Rosene NOES:
None
ABSTAIN:
None
ABSENT:
Lowrey
10-262
DocuSign Envelope ID: 23A974E3-E32D-4068-94E1 -F1 3D54E51 B1 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2023
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 2 AERONUTRONIC FORD SOIL VAPOR REMEDIATION APPEAL (PA2022-0180) Site Location: Near 94 Hartford Drive
Summary:
An appeal of the Zoning Administrator's March 2, 2023, decision to approve a limited term permit for the construction and operation of a soil vapor extraction and treatment system. The project includes construction of a 20-foot wide by 12-foot deep by 10-foot-high treatment system building, an underground pipe network of approximately 2,400 linear feet, and 13 extraction wells for soil gas remediation. The applicant is requesting a limited term permit to operate the soil vapor extraction and treatment system for a term of approximately 12 months. A limited term permit is requested to allow a 3.2-foot separation between the treatment system building and nearest residential structure where the required separation is 8 feet between buildings, and to allow the treatment system building to encroach into the 5-foot front setback.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a de novo public hearing;
Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15330 under Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances), Section 15308 under Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment), and Section 15303 under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-023 denying the appeal and upholding and affirming the Zoning Administrator's Approval of a Limited Term Permit for a soil vapor extraction and treatment system filed as PA202-0180 (Attachment No. PC 1).
Commissioner Lowrey recused himself from Item No. 2 due to the project's proximity to his home.
Assistant Planner Tran used a presentation to review the appeal of the Aeronutronic Ford soil vapor remediation limited term permit, former Ford Facility map and background, vicinity map, project description, soil vapor extraction (SVE) and treatment system diagram, treatment system building location and design, Zoning Administrator action, appeal, water main and relocation of the treatment system building, alternative location considerations, concerns for timeframe, safety, quality of life, air quality monitoring, and home values, condition of approval, and recommended actions.
In response to Commissioner Harris' questions, Senior Civil Engineer Keely noted that the moratorium on Bison Avenue was issued by the City, lasts five years, and trenching in the public right-of-way would require extensive reconstruction of the street. Assistant Planner Tran indicated that the applicant and Homeowners' Association (HOA) agreed on the proposed location. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell clarified that the applicant would need to request an extension in writing to extend the Limited Term Permit and the Community Development Director can issue an extension for up to one year. Commissioner Harris asked if a representative for the HOA was in attendance, and no one responded.
In response to Commissioner Langford's question, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell indicated that the HOA has the authority to file the permit.
In response to Commissioner Rosene's question, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell noted that the Reginal Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has been working with Ford to remediate the site prior to the start of construction, Ford has met the standards, a methodology and threshold change, Ford's clean -
10-263
DocuSign Envelope ID: 23A974E3-E32D-4068-94E1 -F1 3D54E51 B1 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2023
up responsibility, the necessity of the permit to install the system and protect the residents, the testing efficiency, and volatile organic compound (VOC) level changes. He directed the questions to the RWQCB representative for greater clarity.
Except for Vice Chair Rosene who disclosed a phone call with the appellant, all Commissioners reported no ex parte communications.
Chair Ellmore opened the public hearing.
Daniella Hamann-Nazaroff of WSP, environmental consultant for Ford Motor Company, introduced the team and used a presentation to review the remediation area map, background, and human health factors.
Jessica Law, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) case manager, summarized the impact on human health from exposure to trichloroethylene (TCE), exceedance levels detected in the subject area, support for active remediation, and diminishing rates.
Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff continued the presentation to explain the project description and Bayridge Park SVE system, community engagement and concerns, and location analysis, alternatives, and decision. She reviewed the system safety for air quality, design, and electromagnetic fields, noted the SVE proven technology, and relayed factors for quality of life relative to noise and aesthetics, an anticipated one-year remediation period, and a summary. Lastly, she agreed to the conditions of approval.
In response to Commissioner Barto's request, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff explained the working relationship between the applicant and the HOA and confirmed the HOA's agreement on the remediation location.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene's inquiry, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff noted that the ground water concentration levels are low and attenuating naturally, there are no plans for active remediation of the ground water, the water flow paths from the former Ford facility, and the reasons for the project site location.
In response to Commissioner Harris' question, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff explained the push back from the HOA and community regarding taking away parking spots on Hartford Drive, the clean-up stages, and an intermittent pulse option at the end of the initial clean-up period.
In response to Commissioner Barto's question, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff relayed the process for soil vapor filtering and measuring the intake, middle, and effluent vapor levels to ensure permit discharge limits and public safety are being met. She noted an expectation of clean, breathable air emitted and explained the monitoring process.
In response to Commissioner Langford's question, Emily Miller of WSP, noted the flow rate coming into the blowers, a slowdown as it goes through the system and exits the stack, and no problem with exterior noise levels. Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff thought the stack flow speed at the exit would be less than what a dryer emits.
In response to Vice Chair Rosene's inquiry, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff reported that noise suppression has been thought through very thoroughly to minimize the impact and WSP guarantees that the system meets noise requirements and is as quiet or more than the average dishwasher.
Amy Santella, the appellant, 94 Hartford Drive, objected to the location of the SVE system three feet from her family home and asked for the location to be changed for the safety of her family.
Kevin Santella, the appellant, 94 Hartford Drive, reviewed site location options one, three, and four and urged the Planning Commission to deny the request and have Ford adequately review the infeasibilities.
In response to Commissioner Langford's question, Mr. and Mrs. Santella confirmed that they are currently residing at 94 Hartford Drive.
In response to Chair Ellmore's inquiry, Ms. Santella noted conversations with the HOA, having shared the appeal letters with the HOA board by email with no correspondence in return, being told by the HOA that they
10-264
DocuSign Envelope ID: 23A974E3-E32D-4068-94E1 -F1 3D54E51 B1 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2023
should move if they are not happy with the SVE location, and not ever being formally notified by the HOA of the project or the three -feet distance from their home.
Larry Cano, 92 Hartford Drive, noted other locations for the SVE system, threat to human health, parking alternatives, and concern for his safety.
Jim Mosher noted the option of the Zoning Administrator to refer the matter to the Planning Commission given the item is controversial, clarified that the focus of the appeal is for the SVE location, expressed interest in how long it would take for the vapor to be remedied by ground water dispersal, questioned the distance of the SVE to the neighboring building and alternative site locations, and thought the northwest corner option was dismissed too easily.
Leslie Pratt, 96 Hartford Drive, reviewed her medical history and addressed her concerns for health, parking issues, and decreased property value.
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill indicated that comment letters from Mr. Cano and Lee Healy were received and incorporated in the public comments for the record.
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell clarified that the Zoning Administrator could have referred the matter to the Planning Commission, but it is unusual to do so, and he sees no flaw in the application process.
Ms. Santella stated that if the item is not going to be denied, then she is requesting a continuance of the item to review the new location due to the short notice provided of the location change and proximity and impact to their home.
Chair Ellmore closed the public hearing.
Chair Ellmore stated that the Planning Commission will be making a decision on the land use and opine on the permit given the parameters they have as a body.
In response to Commissioner Barto's questions, Deputy Community Development Director Campbell explained the new SVE location distance to 94 Hartford Drive and the street and that it is located on a private street.
Vice Chair Rosene expressed his disappointment that no HOA representative attended the meeting, inquired about the possibility of the RWQCB overruling the HOA to select a more viable spot, and thought the infeasibility claim was centered around financial issues, the SVE should be located elsewhere, and the remediation needs to begin. He was not supportive of the application and thought the appellant had a strong argument.
Commissioner Klaustermeier concurred with Vice Chair Rosene and did not support the application Commissioner Harris concurred with Vice Chair Rosene, noted the 8-foot change at the end and the impact and concern for the slope on Bison Avenue, and expressed interest in sending the matter back to the HOA or the County to dictate the location.
Commissioner Langford thought that as the applicant and fee landowner, the HOA has the rights to direct the process and project location, disagreed with the HOA not attending the meeting, believed the remediation needs to get done, and noted that he is usually supportive of private property rights and wished he knew more about what the HOA has done to help the matter and that the HOA should do the hard work instead of forcing the Planning Commission to decide.
Chair Ellmore thought that this matter is between the HOA and the appellant, expressed confusion for the parking issues, noted an increased property value after the clean-up, indicated that the remediation needs to get done, and relayed not being prepared to make a motion either way.
10-265
DocuSign Envelope ID: 23A974E3-E32D-4068-94E1 -F1 3D54E51 B1 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2023
Assistant City Attorney Summerhill notified the Commission that a tie vote would be equivalent to the lower body's decision being approved and offered an option to continue the item until the next meeting.
Motion made by Chair Ellmore and seconded by Commissioner Harris to continue the item to the June 22, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, and implored the applicant and the appellant to talk with the HOA and ask them to return to the Planning Commission with the reason(s) why alternate locations are not plausible.
AYES:
Ellmore, Barto, Harris, Klaustermeier, and Rosene
NOES:
Langford
RECUSED:
Lowrey
ABSENT:
None
ITEM NO. 3 HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION - NOISE -RELATED AMENDMENTS (PA2022-0201)
Site Locations: Various sites in the Newport Beach Airport Area bounded by Campus Drive, Jamboree Road, and Route 73, including portions of the Newport Beach Golf Course on Irvine Avenue, the YMCA on University Drive, and several sites in the Santa Ana Heights area.
Summary:
Amendments to Newport Beach General Plan Land Use and Noise Elements, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), Newport Place Planned Community Development Standards (PC-11), and the Newport Airport Village Planned Community Development Plan (PC-60) to allow residential units identified by the certified 2021-2029 6th Cycle Newport Beach General Plan Housing Element to be located within the 65 dBA to 70 dBA CNEL noise contour areas specified by the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan, and as illustrated in the attached Noise Contours and Housing Opportunity Sites Map.
Recommended Action:
None. This item has been removed from the agenda.
Vill. STAFF AND COMMISSIONER ITEMS
ITEM NO.4 MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
None
ITEM NO. 5 REPORT BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR OR REQUEST FOR MATTERS
WHICH A PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER WOULD LIKE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA
Deputy Community Development Director Campbell announced that the City Council approved the timeshare and fractional home ownership code amendment and commercial parking rate amendment, and a second reading of both amendments will take place at the June 23 City Council meeting. He relayed that the General Plan Advisory Committee and General Plan Update Steering Committee meetings are canceled for June 7 due to a conflict with the Corona del Mar Residents Association annual meeting and are tentatively rescheduled for June 12.
Furthermore, he noted that the public hearing notice for this meeting was issued before the approved start time change and reflected a 6:30 p.m. start time and future Planning Commission meetings will start at 6:00 p.m. Lastly, he announced that the Planning Commission meeting on June 8 is cancelled and the next meeting on June 22 will include an agenda item for the Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180).
ITEM NO. 6 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES
10-266
DocuSign Envelope ID: 23A974E3-E32D-4068-94E1 -F1 3D54E51 B1 6 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
May 18, 2023
None
IX. ADJOURNMENT - With no further business, Chair Ellmore adjourned the meeting at 8:06 p.m.
The agenda for the May 18, 2023, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, May 11, 2023, at 6:16 p.m. in the Chambers binder, on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, and on the City's website on Thursday, May 11, 2023, at 6:39 p.m.
Curtis Ellmore, Chair
Sale �f aUS I fo&flfl°
Sarah Klaustermeier, Secretary
10-267
Attachment F
Planning Commission Staff Report from June 22, 2023
10-268
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
June 22, 2023
Agenda Item No. 2
SUBJECT: Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) ■ Limited Term Permit
SITE LOCATION: 94 Hartford Drive [NH]
APPECANT: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
APPLICANT: WSP USA
OWNER: Bayridge Park Homeowners Association
PLANNER: Jenny Tran, Assistant Planner
949-644-3212, [email protected]
PROJECT SUMMARY
An appeal of the Zoning Administrator's March 2, 2023, decision to approve a limited term permit for the construction of a soil vapor extraction and treatment system. The system consists of an underground pipe network (approximately 2,400 linear ft.), 13 soil gas extraction wells, and a 240-square-foot remediation treatment building for a term of approximately 12 months. A limited term permit allows a 3.2-foot separation distance between the treatment system building and nearest residential structure where the required separation is 8 feet between buildings and to allow the treatment system building to encroach into the 5-foot front setback per the PC-24 (Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community) development standards.
This item was continued from the May 18, 2023, Planning Commission meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a de novo public hearing;
2) Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15330 under Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances), Section 15308 under Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment), and Section 15303 under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and
10-269
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, June 22, 2023
3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-023 denying the appeal and upholding and affirming the Zoning Administrator's Approval of a Limited Term Permit for a soil vapor extraction and treatment system filed as PA202-0180 (Attachment No. PC 1).
DISCUSSION
Mav 18. 2023. Plannina Commission Hearin
The Planning Commission considered this item at a public hearing held on May 18, 2023.
For reference, the May 18, 2023, Planning Commission staff report is included as Attachment No. PC 2, which includes a detailed project description, project plans, overview of the appeal, alternatives analysis, and public outreach efforts.
At the hearing, the Planning Commission received a detailed presentation from staff and the applicant, including an update to the proposed location of the proposed treatment system building needed to avoid impacts to an underground City water line. Five members of the public expressed their concerns with the proposed location of the treatment system building. The draft minutes from this hearing are provided as Attachment No. PC 3. In summary, the Planning Commission discussion focused on the following two primary concerns:
• Safety: Safety concerns with the proposed treatment system building located 3feet from the resident at 94 Hartford Drive were expressed. The proximity will meet building and safety standards and the applicant has managed to reposition the vent as far from 94 Hartford as possible. The applicant also provided information detailing the soil vapor remediation process and the monitoring steps that will be followed to ensure the system will be operated in accordance with the permit requirements set by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
In staff's opinion, concerns about the safety of the treatment system are misplaced and delaying the system's installation further is more concerning given the potential health implications for a larger number of homes in the community. • Alternative Locations: The applicant and the Homeowners Association (HOA) board considered different locations, but they seemed to focus more on parking spaces lost and costs rather than avoiding the impact to residents at 94 Hartford.
Most Commissioners seemed to view the applicant's reasons for dismissing alternative locations as impractical to be insufficient. Staff believes the alternative analysis and the discussion during the May 18 Planning Commission Hearing did not adequately address the infeasibilities of the alternative locations. Regrettably, no representative from the Homeowners Association (HOA) was present at the meeting to communicate the complex decision to approve the building location that was presented.
10-270
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, June 22, 2023
Ultimately, the Planning Commission continued the item and directed the applicant and the appellant to further discuss the alternative locations with the HOA board.
Revised Location of Treatment Svstem Buildin
As explained at the May 18, 2023, hearing, the applicant located a water main underneath the footprint of the proposed location of the treatment system building. Due to this water main, the location of the treatment system building required to be shifted north approximately 8.5 feet from the proposed location that was approved during the Zoning Administrator Hearing held on March 2, 2023. The relocation maintains a 3-foot separation from the resident at 94 Hartford Drive. The revised plans illustrating the revised location is included as Attachment No. PC 4. The relocation was reviewed and approved by Public Works and two new Conditions of Approval were presented as follows and have incorporated into the attached draft resolution:
o Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit and enter into an encroachment agreement and approved as to form by the City Attorney's Office for the installation of the treatment system building. o The building foundation shall be constructed only of a slab and shall not be constructed with stem walls or deepened footings.
licants Response to Plannina Commission and Public Comments To assist the Planning Commission with their discussion, the applicant has prepared a thorough Response to Comments document that includes a summary response to the main concerns raised by the appellants at the hearing. The document also includes detailed responses to all comments and questions raised by the public, including residents of the Bayridge Park community, and by the Planning Commission (Attachment No. PC 5). The response provided from the applicant further explains the safety in the design of the soil vapor extraction system and the stringent air quality standards dictated and permitted by SCAQMD. The response also provides a supplemental discussion of alternative locations explaining that the proposed location is the best choice to allow for remediation work that quickly addresses vapor intrusion in the community. Additionally, the applicant has met with HOA representatives and the President of the HOA will be available at the June 22nd hearing to explain why the proposed location is the most appropriate for the treatment system building.
SUMMARY AND ALTERNATIVES
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Water Board") has required Ford to address the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the soil before it becomes a more significant issue. After discussions with the applicant and Water Board staff, City staff is convinced a treatment system is not only necessary, but also urgently needed to protect residents' health and property values. Additionally, the extensive alternatives considered 10-271
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, June 22, 2023
suggest a thoughtful process where the HOA decided what is in the best interest of the overall community. Simply put, the proposed building location impacts fewer residents, and the building is temporary.
If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, the Planning Commission may deny the application and provide facts in support of denial to be included in a resolution for denial.
Should the Commission believe an alternative site is more suitable for the proposed facility, then the Commission can deny the application without prejudice to allow the applicant to pursue an identified alternative location. An alternative location cannot be approved at this meeting and a new application will need to be submitted in accordance with NBMC Sections 20.54.080 (Resubmittals).
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice of the public hearing held on May 18, 2023, for this application was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways), including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled hearing, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code. At the May 18, 2023, public hearing, the Planning Commission continued the hearing to a date certain to June 22, 2023, so no additional notice is required. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website.
Prepared by:
z -
Jenny Tran, AAstdKPIanner
JM/jt
Submitted by:
Jim Campbell
Deputy Community Development Directar
Attachments: PC 1
Draft Resolution for Approval
PC 2
May 18, 2023, Planning Commission Staff Report
PC 3
Draft May 18, 2023, Planning Commission Minutes
PC 4
Revised Treatment System Building Plans
PC 5
Response to Comments dated June 8, 2023
PC 6
Public Correspondences
10-272
Attachment No. PC 1
Draft Resolution for Approval
10-273
RESOLUTION NO. PC2023-023
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ZONING
ADMINSTRATOR'S APPROVAL OF A LIMITED TERM PERMIT
FOR A SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM
LOCATED AT 94 HARTFORD DRIVE [NH] (PA2022-0180)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
1. An application was filed by WSP USA ("Applicant"), in regard to the property located adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive, and legally described Lot 4 of Tract No. 12164 ("Property") requesting approval of a limited term permit.
2. The Property is located within the area that was formerly the Ford Aeronutronic facility operated by Ford Motor Company from 1957 to 1993. The primary operation of the facility consisted of aerospace and electronic research, development, and production. As part of on -site operations and as common practice at the time, volatile organic compounds ("VOC") were used to clean the metal parts of the operating equipment. The facility was demolished between 1993 and 1996 and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Water Board"), the leading regulatory agency for the former Ford Aeronutronic facility and related off -site areas, has overseen remediation work to address the environmental impacts of the facility operations. Remedial technologies such as bioremediation, excavation, disposal of soils & groundwater, and soil vapor treatment systems were used.
3. The site was subsequently rezoned and redeveloped for residential purposes in the 1990s and ongoing monitoring of groundwater and site conditions continues. Although remediation actions were previously conducted, the Water Board has determined that further remediation is necessary due to more stringent regulatory standards and advances in equipment sensitivity and detection limits.
4. The Applicant is proposing the construction of a soil vapor extraction and treatment system consisting of a 20-foot width by 12-foot depth by 10-foot height treatment system building, an underground pipe network (approximately 2,400 linear ft.), and 13 extraction wells for soil gas remediation for a term of approximately 12 months. A limited term permit is requested to allow a 3.2-foot separation distance between the treatment system building and the nearest residential structure where the required separation is 8 feet between buildings and to allow the treatment system building to encroach into the 5-foot front setback per the PC-24 (Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community) development standards ("Project").
10-274
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 2 of 13
5. The Property is designated Multiple Residential (RM) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community (PC-24) Zoning District.
6. The Property is not located within the coastal zone; therefore, a coastal development permit is not required.
7. A public hearing was originally scheduled on January 26, 2023. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"). The Zoning Administrator continued the item to the meeting of March 2, 2023.
8. A public hearing was held on March 2, 2023. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the NBMC. Evidence both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Zoning Administrator at this hearing.
9. The Zoning Administrator adopted Resolution No. ZA2023-010 approving Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180).
10. On March 14, 2023, Ms. Amy Santella and Mr. Kevin Solomita filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision objecting to the location of the soil vapor extraction and treatment system building due to safety concerns from the proximity to the residents.
11. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on May 18, 2023, in the City Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing. The Planning Commission continued the meeting to June 22, 2023.
12. A public hearing was held by the Planning Commission on June 22, 2023, in the City Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Chapter 20.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
1. This Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") under Section 15330/Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances), under Section 15308/Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment), and under Section 15303/Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, 10-275
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 3 of 13
Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
2. The Class 30 exemption allows minor cleanup actions taken to prevent, minimize, stabilize, mitigate, or eliminate the release or threat of release of hazardous waste or substance which are small or medium removal actions costing $1 million or less. The cleanup action shall not require the onsite use of a hazardous waste incinerator or thermal treatment unit, or the relocation of residences or businesses. The action shall not involve the potential release into the air of VOC as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 25123.6, except for small-scale in situ soil vapor extraction and treatment systems which have been permitted by the local Air Quality Management District ("AQMD"). The cleanup action must be consistent with all applicable state and local environmental permitting requirements such as off -site disposal, and air quality rules, and approved by the regulatory body with jurisdiction over the site.
3. The Project is consistent with the intent of the Class 30 exemption for minor cleanup actions as it proposes to mitigate the presence of VOC in the soil without the use of a hazardous waste incinerator or thermal treatment unit. The Project will not relocate any residences or businesses. Coordination with the Water Board has commenced and a permit for the release of VOC into the air in small-scale in situ soil vapor extraction and treatment systems will be obtained. The Project is consistent with all applicable state and local environmental permitting requirements and is approved by the Water Board.
4. The Class 8 exemption allows actions taken by regulatory agencies as authorized by state law or local ordinance to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment. Construction activities and relaxation of standards allowing environmental degradation are not included in this exemption.
5. The Project has been mandated by the Water Board as part of the required ongoing monitoring of groundwater and site conditions of the former Ford Facility. The Project will remediate the existence of VOC observed in the soil in order to protect the environment as well as the residents of the community. No construction activities or relaxation of standards that would cause environmental degradation are proposed and the Project is consistent with the intent of the Class 8 exemption.
6. The Class 3 exemption allows the construction of new, small facilities or structures including accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences.
7. The Project proposes the construction of a small 240-square-foot treatment system building for the purpose of soil vapor remediation. The soil vapor extraction and treatment system is intended to remediate the presence of VOCs for the residents in the Bayridge Park community.
8. The exceptions to this categorical exemption under Section 15300.2 are not applicable.
The Project location does not impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical 10-276
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 4 of 13
concern, does not result in cumulative impacts, does not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, does not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway, is not a hazardous waste site, and is not identified as a historical resource.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
In accordance with Section 20.52.040(G) (Limited Term Permits) of the NBMC, the following findings, and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
A. The operation of the limited duration uses at the location proposed and within the period specified would not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, nor 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 requested limited duration use;
Facts in Suaaort of Findin
The treatment system building will be located adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive, along Country Club Drive, outside of common residential areas of the Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association. The building will be visually hidden from residents' sight as much as possible. The building will be designed with a gable roof and provide exterior siding painted to match the architectural exterior of the surrounding residential units along Hartford Drive. A new xeriscape landscape will be planted in and around the new treatment system building, which will help soften the visual impact of the structure.
2. An Acoustical Engineering Analysis was prepared by Yanchar Design & Consulting Group dated February 8, 2023. The predicted noise level in the Acoustical Engineering Analysis at the exterior of the treatment system building and adjacent residences of 92 and 96 Hartford Drive on the Property is 48.8 dBA which is consistent with the allowable exterior noise standards of 55 dBA from 7.00 am to 10:00 pm and 50 dBA from 10.00 pm to 7.00 am in the NBMC. The predicted noise level at 61 Hillsdale Drive, the nearest off -site residence, is calculated to be 34.9 dBA. Therefore, the treatment system building is expected to meet the requirements of the City's regulations for both the same property and nearest adjacent residential property.
3. To minimize impacts to the community and adjacent residences from noise and construction, Condition of Approval Nos. 17 and 18 have been added requiring the treatment system building to be constructed off -site and an acoustic audit of the unit running at its maximum capacity prior to installation. The intent of the off -site acoustic audit is to ensure it complies with the City's noise standards prior to transportation to the building site.
After installation of the treatment system building on -site, a subsequent acoustic audit will be required to be conducted to further ensure the building complies with the City's noise standards.
10-277
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 5 of 13
4. The wall of the treatment system building adjacent to the building at 94 Hartford Drive will be constructed with a two (2)-hour fire rated wall in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) and Building Division standards and policies. Construction plans will be reviewed for compliance with the CBC and Building Division before building permit issuance.
5. The building will be secured to the concrete pad with anchors chosen for the earthquake risk parameters of the City of Newport Beach area. The treatment system building will additionally be secured with a monitoring system that will safely shut down the system in the event of an earthquake or other unforeseen natural disasters and an operations manager will be alerted of the shutdown. The treatment system will be monitored and inspected for potential damages prior to restart.
6. The treatment system is designed to meet the standards of AQMD for the release of VOCs into the air at a level that is protective of the health of the community. The treatment system will incorporate two (2) granular activated carbon filters that will remove VOCs in the soil before the air is discharged from the treatment system. As stated by the Applicant, total VOC concentration will be measured using a real-time monitor at least once a day for the first seven (7) days of operation to confirm the system is operating as designed and within permit specifications which are set to be protective of public health. Subsequent monitoring will continue weekly, or more frequently as required by AQMD. All findings will be reported to the Water Board and will be made available to the public. Laboratory samples will be collected and analyzed on a frequency required by AQMD to confirm the efficacy of the granular activated carbon filter vessels and the treatment system overall.
7. The treatment system includes multiple redundancies to ensure concentrations of organic compounds released from the exhaust stack, if any, are below the AQMD emission limits.
These emission limits are based on risk calculations that consider the most sensitive populations, including infants and young children. As stated by the Applicant, the vapors emitted are not acutely toxic. However, concentrations higher than the screening levels are currently being detected in the indoor of many homes in the Bayridge Park community and can cause effects over time which constitutes an urgency to implement remediation methods in the community.
Finding:
B. The subject lot is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the limited duration use without material detriment to the use and enjoyment of other properties located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the lot;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Property is within Planning Area 8 (Attached Residential) of the PC-24 Zoning District, which is approximately 12 acres in size. The proposed building will be located adjacent to the residence of 94 Hartford Drive and Country Club Road and will not negatively impact on -site vehicular circulation.
10-278
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 6 of 13
2. As conditioned, the treatment system building will require an acoustic audit prior to transportation of the building onto the Property and after installation on -site to ensure it meets the allowable exterior noise standards of the NBMC.
3. The treatment system will be located within a new prefabricated building, which is 20 feet by 12 feet and 240 square feet in size. The building is 10-feet 2-inches to the top of the roof and 13-feet 5-inches to the top of the air exhaust. The existing dwelling is two (2)-stories and the proposed treatment system building will be visually hidden from the residents of the Bayridge Park community as much as possible.
4. The treatment system building will be located on private property and will not impact pedestrian or vehicular access along Country Club Drive.
5. Given its location, the treatment system building will be most visible to the adjacent residents of 94 Hartford Drive and to the residents of the One Ford Road community that takes access from Country Club Drive. As designed and conditioned, the treatment system building will be designed with a gable roof and provide exterior siding painted to match the architectural exterior of the surrounding residential units along Hartford Drive and landscaped with new xeriscape plantings to help soften the visual impacts from the adjacent private street.
6. Locations along Bison Avenue, a public right-of-way, were considered for the Project; however, the area was determined to not provide adequate space for the placement of the building. Significant grading into the slope would be required to install the building and the construction of new retaining walls would be needed to not impact the structural integrity of the existing retaining walls surrounding the Bayridge Park community. Given that this is a temporary project, this alternative was deemed infeasible.
7. Additional locations along Country Club Drive were considered providing a greater separation from 94 Hartford Drive. Unfortunately, the landscape parkway was either too narrow to accommodate the facility or too steep, requiring significant grading that would impact the condition of the Bayridge Park community and structural integrity of the existing retaining walls surrounding the community.
8. Alternative locations were considered within the Bayridge Park community within landscaped areas that provided adequate building separation from residents. These areas would require significant removal of existing trees within the community and the placement of the treatment system building will cause a disruption to existing drainage and creek beds.
Additionally, placement of the treatment system building in these areas will create heavy visual impacts within the community and remove much needed parking for the residents.
9. In total, seven (7) options were considered for the location of the soil vapor extraction system where the factors included: disruption to the neighborhood, proximity to homes, impact on parking, permitting complexity, implementation complexity, and power connection complexity. These factors were reviewed on a scale from low, medium, high, to infeasible.
Six (6) of the options encountered infeasibilities due to either impact on parking, permitting 10-279
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 7 of 13
complexity, implementation complexity, or power connection complexity. Due to these infeasibilities, the location adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive was selected.
Finding:
C. The subject lot is adequately served by streets or highways having sufficient width and improvements to accommodate the kind and quantity of traffic that the limited duration use would or could reasonably be expected to generate;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The proposed treatment system building will be located adjacent to an existing private street, which is an entryway into the One Ford Road community. The building location is within an existing sloped and landscaped area that will not interfere with any circulation drive aisles.
2. The soil vapor extraction and treatment system will require ongoing on -site monitoring and maintenance that will consist of one (1) or two (2) field staff visiting the site approximately once a month to collect samples and perform maintenance as needed. No large commercial vehicles are required for monthly monitoring and maintenance and no impact or increase in traffic is expected.
3. Carbon changeouts that require a vacuum truck and one (1) truck trailer and boom lift attachment parked on Country Club Drive are to take place two (2) times per year for four (4) to six (6) hours at a time. This routine maintenance has a low frequency and will not completely obstruct the traffic circulation on Country Club Drive. Country Club Drive is a private street in a private community and is not subject to additional permits from Public Works. The Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association and One Ford Road Homeowner's Association will be notified at least seven (7) days before maintenance.
Finding:
D. Adequate temporary parking to accommodate vehicular traffic to be generated by the limited duration use would be available either on -site or at alternate locations acceptable to the Planning Commission; and
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. Planning Area 8 of the PC-24 Zoning District requires a minimum of two (2) guest parking spaces per cluster unit development where cluster unit development is defined as a combination or arrangement of attached or detached dwellings and their accessory structures on contiguous or related building sites. As conditioned, field staff performing on - site monitoring and maintenance will utilize the on -site guest parking spaces within the Bayridge Park Community during monthly visits.
2. Fact 3 in support of finding C is incorporated here by reference. 10-280
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 8 of 13
Finding:
E. The limited duration use is consistent with all applicable provisions of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The limited term permit would allow the limited duration use to deviate from setback requirements and building separation requirements of the PC-24 Zoning District pursuant to Section 20.52.040 (Limited Term Permits) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
2. The temporary (one [1]-year duration) treatment system building is conditioned to comply with all other applicable provisions of the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
3. The treatment system building is conditioned to comply with all applicable provisions of the City's allowable exterior noise level. Condition of Approval Nos. 17 and 18 have been added requiring an acoustic audit of the prefabricated building and treatment system unit running at its maximum capacity prior to installation, and a subsequent audit after installation.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. This Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15330 under Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances), under Section 15308 under Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment), and under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby upholds the Zoning Administrator's approval of the Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180), subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit 'A" which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
3. This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal is filed with City Clerk by the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 10-281
-82:1547A.7;36893A0-"A,,#+),$.#A.#,,-A$ &(A)$.!A/!#-%$.%!,!& Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 9 of 13
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OF JUNE , 2023.
AYES: Barto, Ellmore, Langford, and Rosene
NOES: Klaustermeier and Harris
RECUSED: Lowrey
ABSENT: None
BY:
Curtis tinore, una!r
BY: SaW wusi-fwfl(`LI°
Sarah Klaustermeier, Secretary
10-282
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 10 of 13
INN I =� iV_1%
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Division
1. The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans, and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval (except as modified by applicable conditions of approval).
2. The Project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
3. The Applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. A material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be caused the revocation of this limited term permit.
4. This Limited Term Permit may be modified or revoked by the Zoning Administrator if determined that the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being operated or maintained are detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained to constitute a public nuisance.
5. This Limited Term Permit shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of final issuance of the building permit unless an extension of up to one (1) additional period of 12 months is granted by the Zoning Administrator in compliance with Section 20.54.060 (Time Limits and Extensions) of the Zoning Code. A letter requesting the extension shall be submitted to the Planning Division no later than thirty (30) days before the expiration date of this permit.
6. Upon completion of this soil remediation project, the applicant is required to obtain a demolition permit from the City's Building Division and the site shall be returned to its former conditions prior to construction.
7. The treatment system building shall be designed with a gable roof and provide siding painted to match colors that are architecturally compatible with surrounding residential units.
8. Maintenance vehicles shall utilize residential guest spaces within the Bayridge Park community with approval from the Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association when working at the soil vapor extraction system and treatment facility.
9. Maintenance requiring large commercial vehicles shall be permitted to park on Country Club Road no more than two (2) times per calendar year unless otherwise required for health and safety. The applicant shall notify the Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association and the One Ford Road Homeowner's Association in writing at least seven (7) days before performing maintenance.
10-283
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 11 of 13
10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the A/C unit serving 94 Hartford shall be relocated so that it does not interfere with the building separation between the prefabricated building and the residential unit.
11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project plans shall be modified to demonstrate that any disturbed landscape areas shall be replanted with water -efficient landscaping by Chapter 14.17 (Water Efficient Landscaping).
12. Prior to the issuance of a final building permit, the applicant shall obtain approval for a Permit to Construct (P/C) from the South Coast Quality Air Management District.
13. Any change in operational characteristics, expansion in the area, or other modification to the approved plans, shall require additional review from the Planning Division and may require an amendment to this Limited Term Permit or the processing of a new Limited Term Permit.
14. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit "A" shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans before issuance of the building permits.
15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. These plans shall demonstrate the restoration of surrounding landscaping to provide further screening for the treatment system building.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning Division.
17. The treatment system unit shall be constructed off -site and prior to the transportation of the prefabricated treatment system unit to the project site and after installation of the structure, an acoustic audit shall be performed to ensure that the noise level observed at the exterior of the structure meets the allowable exterior noise standards of Chapter
10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The results of the acoustic audit shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to final inspection of the building permit.
10-284
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 12 of 13
18. All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter
10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than depicted below for the specified periods unless the ambient noise level is higher:
Between the hours of 7:00 AM
and 10:00 PM
Between the hours of 10:00
PM and 7:00 AM
Location
Interior
Exterior
Interior
Exterior
Residential Property
45dBA
55dBA
40dBA
50dBA
Residential Property located within
100 feet of a commercial property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
50dBA
Mixed Use Property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
50dBA
Commercial Property
N/A
65dBA
N/A
60dBA
19. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the current business owner, property owner, or leasing agent.
20. Construction activities shall comply with Section 10.28.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, which restricts hours of noise -generating construction activities that produce noise to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise -generating construction activities are not allowed on Sundays or Holidays.
21. This approval shall expire and become void unless exercised within 24 months from the actual date of review authority approval, except where an extension of time is approved in compliance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
22. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits or authorization from the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The project shall be designed, implemented, operated, and maintained in accordance with said permits or authorization from both agencies.
23. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs, and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements, and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation including, but not limited to, Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180). This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorney's fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by the applicant, City, and/or the parties initiating or bringing the such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of the City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages that which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions outlined in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City 10-285
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2023-023
Paae 13 of 13
upon demand any amount owed to the City under the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition.
Fire Department
24. A three (3)-foot wide walkway shall be provided on at least one (1) side of the lot from Country Club Drive for Fire Department access.
Building Division
25. The Applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City's Building Division and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City - adopted version of the California Building Code.
26. A list of "good housekeeping" practices will be incorporated into the long-term post - construction operation of the site to minimize the likelihood that pollutants will be used, stored, or spilled on the site that could impair water quality. These may include frequent parking area vacuum truck sweeping, removal of wastes or spills, limited use of harmful fertilizers or pesticides, and the diversion of stormwater away from potential sources of pollution (e.g., trash receptacles and parking structures). The Stage 2 WQMP shall list and describe all structural and non-structural BMPs. In addition, the WQMP must also identify the entity responsible for the long-term inspection, maintenance, and funding for all structural (and if applicable Treatment Control) BMPs.
Electrical, Mechanical, and Plumbing Division
27. All exhaust air shall terminate outside of the treatment system building in accordance with the requirements of California Mechanical Code 502.0.
28. Discharged liquid waste or sewage shall be connected properly to the drainage system of the premises in accordance with the requirements pursuant to California Plumbing Code, Chapter 7.
29. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall ensure the location of the exhaust is adequately sited away from any residential building openings.
Public Works Division
30. Prior to the start of construction, the applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit and enter into an encroachment agreement and approved as to form by the CityAttorney's Office for the installation of the treatment system building.
31. The building foundation shall be constructed only of a slab and shall not be constructed with stem walls or deepened footings.
10-286
Attachment No. PC 2
May 18, 2023, Planning Commission Staff
Report
10-287
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
May 18, 2023
Agenda Item No. 2
SUBJECT: Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) ■ Limited Term Permit
SITE LOCATION: 94 Hartford Drive [NH]
APPECANT: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
APPLICANT: WSP USA
OWNER: Bayridge Park Homeowners Association
PLANNER: Jenny Tran, Assistant Planner
949-644-3212, [email protected]
PROJECT SUMMARY
An appeal of the Zoning Administrator's March 2, 2023, decision to approve a limited term permit for the construction of a soil vapor extraction and treatment system. The system consists of an underground pipe network (approximately 2,400 linear ft), 13 soil gas extraction wells, and a 240 square foot remediation treatment building for a term of approximately 12 months. A limited term permit allows a 3.2-foot separation distance between the treatment system building and nearest residential structure where the required separation is 8 feet between buildings and to allow the treatment system building to encroach into the 5-foot front setback per the PC-24 (Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community) development standards.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a de novo public hearing;
2) Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15330 under Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances), Section 15308 under Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment), and Section 15303 under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and
3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2023-023 denying the appeal and upholding and affirming the Zoning Administrator's Approval of a Limited Term Permit for a soil vapor extraction and treatment system filed as PA202-0180 (Attachment No. PC 1). 1 10-288
2 10-289
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
INTRODUCTION
Project Setting and Background
The project site is located within the Bayridge Park Homeowners Association (HOA) community. This community is located within the area that was the former Ford Aeronutronic facility, north of the approximate location of the former facility building as shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1— Former Ford Aeronutronic Property Vicinity Map Parse I , ❑ �',
Subject Property
I i� �1b,2r1 / \
I � �
MO
I � —
Former Ford
A—i-nlc FaclSty
I Approoimato locatlnn
1 of former Chip Sta..gR. J
I Bin Area t
4 `
Main Aron I 1
i
•. a � 1; l
%o
`11 �
1 Formnr ATC Aroa
— — -- t - 6i9 Canto❑ CMaR
.. L:. ��c•io�Gbtx GeoEye Eyaaid Geugray'-r :vL- .+ ..a tr:: uSW uSLS .ieroGRiO iGR ryrpr..nn.np fo"r ApprylFpM1t Wilily
�--1 pcoMary
Fpmrrfaolity
u Fd Wilily buldng
L—� F".n *ym O%Ne
F—I Arre,henlal C —led (AM
_ — _ HislM.[a4 arrpya 16d[kRlletl dying
tk.tlapmenll
PARCEL tO WE ViflNiTY MAP
Former Po-d Awv utron.[ Prpperty
Newport Reach CalitUrrlla
Gate' WAfRP21 r4"• 7
From 1957 to 1993, Ford Motor Company operated the Ford Aeronutronic facility on approximately 200 acres bound by Bison Avenue to the north, MacArthur Boulevard to the east, Ford Road to the south, and Jamboree Road to the west. The primary operation of the facility consisted of aerospace and electronic research, development, and production. As part of on -site operations and as common practice at the time, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were used to clean the metal parts of the operating equipment. The facility was demolished between 1993 and 1996 and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board ("Water Board") oversaw site cleanup and 10-291
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
remediation to address the environmental impacts of past facility operations.
Bioremediation, excavation, disposal of soils & groundwater, and soil vapor treatment systems have been used both on and off site. Ongoing monitoring of groundwater and site conditions has continued since the site was redeveloped for residential purposes in the 1990s.
The level of VOCs found during the continued monitoring were at levels below the Water Board's environmental screening levels. However, in 2016, the Water Board's environmental screening levels were updated due to advances in equipment sensitivity and detection limits and to comply with more stringent regulatory standards. Due to the update, the level of VOCs found in 2016 and continuing today were determined to be above the screening levels warranting action.
The existing buildings do not have a vapor barrier designed to address VOCs and the Water Board has determined that the VOCs detected in soil gas could potentially intrude through cracks in building foundations and impact the indoor air quality. Indoor air sampling was conducted within the Bayridge Park community and they determined the need to install a soil vapor extraction and remediation system to mitigate vapor intrusion.
The applicant is working on behalf of Ford at the direction of the Water Board.
Project Description
The soil vapor extraction (SVE) and treatment system, as described in a Remedial Design and Implementation Plan and approved by the Water Board on January 28, 2022, consists of 13 vapor extraction wells, 2,400 feet of piping, and a treatment system housed in a prefabricated steel building with a floor area of 240 square feet. A vacuum pump (also known as a "blower") will extract vapor from the soil through the wells and deliver it to the treatment system where granular activated carbon removes the VOCs and then clean vapor is discharged into the atmosphere. Coordination with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) has commenced and a permit for the release of VOCs into the air in small-scale in situ SVE and treatment systems will be obtained.
The treatment system building will house the treatment system, which is comprised of four vacuum pumps, one heat exchanger, associated carbon vessels, holding tanks, and pumps.
The treatment system building would provide a separation from the adjacent residential structure ranging from 3-feet to 4-feet 6-inches, where the PC-24 (Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community) development standards require a minimum separation of 8 feet between structures. The building would also encroach approximately 5 feet into the required 5-foot front setback adjacent to Country Club Drive.
The location of the treatment system within the 10-foot tall prefabricated steel building will be located adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive as it has been identified as the most feasible and least impactful location (See Alternative Locations Studied section). 5 10-292
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
The location is also adjacent to Country Club Drive and will not encroach on or obstruct the public utility easement or easement for emergency and security ingress and egress.
The location will not obstruct any windows or doors of the residence of 94 Hartford Drive.
The separation between structures ranges from 3 feet to 4 feet 6 inches and no venting will be located on the side facing the residence at 94 Hartford Drive. An existing air conditioning compressor located between the existing residence and the proposed treatment system will be relocated to allow for the placement of the treatment system building.
Zonina Administrator Hearina and Decision
A noticed public hearing was held on March 2, 2023, online via Zoom. During the hearing, the applicant provided a presentation to discuss the various components of the project including: project background, community outreach and concerns, an alternative locations analysis map, safety, timeframe, and remediation. Three members of the public spoke in opposition to the selected location of the treatment system building. After considering all public comments and findings, both written and oral, the Zoning Administrator adopted Resolution No. ZA2023-010 approving Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180). The minutes from this hearing are attached as Attachment No. PC 5.
Appeal of the Zoning Administrator Decision
On March 14, 2023, Ms. Amy Santella and Mr. Kevin Solomita filed a timely appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision citing safety concerns related to the location of the SVE and treatment system building and its proximity to the residents. The appeal cited six factors of concern: location, timeframe, safety, quality of life, air quality monitoring, and home values (Attachment No. PC 2). The appellants own and reside at 94 Hartford Drive.
On April 7, 2023, the applicant provided a written response to the appeal that addressed the concerns outlined in the Appellant's letter (Attachment No. PC 3). The response from the applicant addressed the six factors that were cited by the appellant and included examples of SVE systems within Orange County that are on commercial properties. The applicant explains that SVE systems are not unsafe for residential properties, but that most SVE systems are on commercial properties since contamination typically stems from commercial or industrial uses. The applicant also included an example of a SVE system on a residential property in Marina, California.
The detection of residual VOCs in the soil gas have potential to cause harm to the residents of the Bayridge Park community where soil gas may move through the building's foundations and impact the indoor air quality of these homes. The proposed treatment system building will use a SVE and treatment system to remediate the presence of VOCs found in this residential development.
Pursuant to Section 20.64.030(C)(3) (Conduct of Hearing), a public hearing on an appeal is conducted "de novo," meaning that it is a new hearing. The prior decision of the Zoning 0 10-293
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
Administrator to approve Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180) has no force or effect. The Planning Commission is not bound by the Zoning Administrator's prior decision.
DISCUSSION
General Plan
The subject property is categorized as Multiple Residential (RM) by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. The RM land use category is intended to provide primarily for multi- family residential development containing attached or detached dwelling units. The parcel is comprised of attached cluster unit developments as well as attached and detached single unit dwellings. The proposed treatment system building is located near a detached dwelling unit. The proposed SVE system is considered temporary and an accessory use to the primary function as a residential community.
Zoning Code
The property is designated as Area 8 of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community (PC- 24) Zoning District. This Planned Community was designated for residential development and for the expansion of Research and Development uses of the former Ford Aeronutronic Facility. Since the demolition of the facility, the Planned Community now provides for residential and ancillary uses only. The proposed temporary treatment system building is ancillary in use to the entire Bayridge Park HOA community and serves to provide a remediation method for the presence of VOCs.
Area 8 of the PC-24 Zoning District requires a minimum front yard setback of 5 feet from the back of sidewalk and a minimum of 8 feet separation from any primary residential structures. Pursuant to Section 20.52.040 (Limited Term Permits), a limited term permit allows limited duration uses that might not meet the development or use standards of the applicable zoning district, but may otherwise be acceptable because of their temporary or limited nature. The purpose of the limited term permit is to allow the treatment system building to be located in the front setback and within 3.2-feet of the nearest residential structure due to the limited duration of the treatment system building. The use of the SVE and treatment system is ancillary to the residential uses as it is intended to remediate the presence of VOCs for the health and safety of the residents.
Limited Term Permit Findings
In accordance with Section 20.52.040 (Limited Term Permits) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC), the Planning Commission must also make the following findings for approval of a LTP:
The operation of the requested limited duration use at the location proposed and within the time period specified would not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, nor endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a 7 10-294
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the requested limited duration use;
2. The subject lot is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the limited duration use without material detriment to the use and enjoyment of other properties located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the lot;
3. The subject lot is adequately served by streets or highways having sufficient width and improvements to accommodate the kind and quantity of traffic that the limited duration use would or could reasonably be expected to generate;
4. Adequate temporary parking to accommodate vehicular traffic to be generated by the limited duration use would be available either on -site or at alternate locations acceptable to the Zoning Administrator; and
5. The limited duration use is consistent with all applicable provisions of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
The treatment system building is proposed to operate for a one-year duration to remediate the presence of VOCs in the community. If conditions warrant, the system can be extended one additional year. Condition of Approval Nos. 17 and 18 have been added to ensure the treatment system building will meet the allowable exterior noise levels of the NBMC to minimize any nuisances for the residents of the community. A permit from AQMD is required for the emission of vapors from the treatment system and the treatment system building is required to be reviewed by the Building Division, Life Safety Services Division (Fire Department), and Electrical, Mechanical, and Plumbing Division to ensure the system will not endanger, jeopardize, or create a hazard to the health, interest, safety, and welfare of the public.
Seven locations were considered for the treatment system building that are analyzed in the Alternative Locations Studied section and in Attachment No. PC 7. The alternative locations analysis determined that the subject location was the most feasible due to the impacts on parking, significant grading, and voltage drops in power connection for the alternative locations.
Throughout the duration of the limited term permit, field staff will visit the site approximately once a month for monitoring and maintenance of the system and will utilize the guest parking spaces available on -site as conditioned. Additionally, maintenance requiring large commercial vehicles will be performed approximately two times during the year. During visits for monitoring and maintenance, the Bayridge Park HOA and One Ford Road HOA will be notified in writing at least seven days before performing maintenance.
The NBMC allows the deviations from the setback requirement and separation from building requirements of the PC-24 Zoning District with approval of a Limited Term Permit. g 10-295
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
Staff believes that facts exist in support of each finding, which are detailed in the attached draft Resolution for approval (Attachment No. PC 1).
Aesthetics
Given its location, the treatment system building will be most visible to the adjacent residents of 94 Hartford Drive and to the residents of the One Ford Road community that takes access from Country Club Drive. As designed and conditioned, the treatment system building will be designed with a gable roof and provide exterior siding painted to match the architectural exterior of the surrounding residential units along Hartford Drive and landscaped with new xeriscape plantings to help soften the visual impacts from the adjacent private street.
Noise Impact
An Acoustical Engineering Analysis was prepared by Yanchar Design & Consulting Group updated February 8, 2023. The predicted noise level in the Acoustical Engineering Analysis at the exterior of the treatment system building and adjacent residences of 92 and 96 Hartford Drive on the property is 48.8 dBA which is consistent with the allowable exterior noise standards of 55 dBA from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and 50 dBA from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. in Section 10.26.025 (Exterior Noise Standards) of the NBMC. The predicted noise level at 61 Hillsdale Drive, the nearest off -site residence, is calculated to be 34.9 dBA. Therefore, the treatment system building is expected to meet the requirements of the City's regulations for both the same property and nearest adjacent residential property (Attachment No. PC 6).
The Acoustical Engineering Analysis includes an Addendum dated February 10, 2023, to address a concern raised regarding the potential conflict between the recommendation to provide an airtight construction at all exterior walls and the treatment system building utilizing venting louvers. The Addendum addresses the discrepancy and clarifies that in the context of the acoustical analysis, "airtight" refers to the sealing of joints between the building and penetrations, such as between the building and louvers. Such seals will be provided in the structure. The treatment system building will incorporate venting louvers for weather protection. The interior design of the building will incorporate the use of sound foam and sound blankets to be installed to create a sound deadening plenum to eliminate the line of sight for sound to escape through the venting louvers.
To ensure compliance with the City's noise standards, Condition of Approval Nos. 17 and 18 have been added requiring an acoustic audit of the prefabricated building and treatment system unit running at its maximum capacity prior to installation, and a subsequent audit after installation. The treatment system building will be built and tested off -site, including the installation of sound deadening methods to decrease the exterior noise levels from the treatment system. The building will be tested off -site to meet the allowable exterior noise standards per the NBMC and will not be transported to the site for installation until the sound level is less than or equal to 50 dBA at all points 3-feet from 9 10-296
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
the building, including at the louvers. After installation of the prefabricated building, testing will be conducted to ensure the building continues to meet the required noise standard.
Alternative Locations Studied
The applicant has prepared an exhibit illustrating alternative locations that were considered but rejected either due to community opposition or site infeasibility. In total, seven options were considered, including alternative locations at the Bayridge Community, along the Bison Avenue landscape parkway, and additional locations along the Country Club Drive parkway. The factors considered included: disruption to the neighborhood, proximity to homes, impact on parking, permitting complexity, implementation complexity, and power connection complexity. These factors were reviewed on a scale from low, medium, high, and infeasible. Six of the options encountered infeasibilities due to either impact on parking, permitting complexity, implementation complexity, or power connection complexity that are summarized in Attachment No. PC 7. Due to these considerations, the location of the proposed treatment building adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive was selected.
Public Outreach
Overall Outreach
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, Ford, and the applicant WSP has conducted an extensive outreach program since 2018 that spanned 11 residential communities and eight commercial properties. The public outreach targeted specific communities within the project area, including Bayridge Park (Attachment B of Attachment No. PC 8). The project -wide outreach included:
• Fact sheets distributed via US mail to over 1,800 addresses and to a project email list with over 300 emails.
• Work notices notifying communities of upcoming work for soil vapor extraction and testing as directed by the Water Board.
• Signed access agreements to allow testing to measure contaminants found in indoor air.
• Several websites detailing the project overview and frequently asked questions, a project YouTube page hosting all recordings of community meetings since November 2020, and availability of key technical and community outreach documents on the Water Board website.
Bayridge Park Outreach
1 D 10-297
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
Specific activities were conducted with the Bayridge Park community to bring awareness to the proposed clean-up plan and allow for the community to voice concerns regarding the project. The outreach for the community included:
• A 30-day public comment period held by the Water Board from June 7 to July 9, 2021, that described the site and environmental conditions, possible remediation technologies, and the selection of the SVE and treatment system as the preferred method of remediation. Prior to the public comment period, a postcard was mailed to the community on May 12, 2021, and a fact sheet was distributed via US mail and email on June 3, 2021. During the virtual public meeting on June 10, 2021, the community voiced concerns about the concept plans for the five soil vapor treatment system buildings shown in Attachment No. PC 8. The raised concerns were regarding the impact to the community from construction activities, parking reduction, and visual impacts.
• Due to the concerns raised from the community, it was decided, in coordination with the Bayridge Park Homeowners Association and residents, that the treatment system was reduced to one larger treatment system building located outside of the common areas of the Bayridge Park community. The community was notified of these changes to the concept plans in August 2021 via distribution of a Response to Comments from the Water Board.
• In October 2021, the residents of the Bayridge Park community were notified via US mail and email from the HOA representative for a meeting to be held to provide additional information on the design of the SVE and treatment system. On November 4, 2021, an in -person meeting was held at the Bayridge Park community where 13 residents were in attendance. Continued concerns were expressed regarding the design of the project and the overall level of impact to the community.
• Since conceptualizing alternative locations for the treatment system building, seven potential locations were considered where six (of the seven locations included infeasible impacts for various reasons previously discussed. • Since August 2022, monthly emails have been sent to over 170 residents of the community to inform residents of the work completed, upcoming work, anticipated impacts, and upcoming community meetings.
• A Zoning Administrator Hearing with the City of Newport Beach for this project was scheduled to be held on January 26, 2023 and a public notice was posted on -site and mailed to all residences within a 300-foot radius of the construction site on January 13, 2023. The public notice was also published in the Daily Pilot on January 14, 2023. In anticipation of the Zoning Administrator Hearing, a pre - construction meeting with the community was held on January 18, 2023, to provide 11 10-298
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
more information on the construction of the SVE system. Residents were notified of the meeting via US mail and email in November 2022 and a subsequent notification was sent via US mail and email in January 2023 of a relocation of the pre -construction meeting. Sixteen residents attended the meeting with similar concerns regarding the construction inconveniences and location of the treatment system building.
• Substantial public correspondences with concerns from the community were received from January 24 to January 26, 2023, (Attachment A of Attachment No.
PC 8) and in order to adequately address these public correspondences, the applicant requested a continuance from the scheduled January 26, 2023, Zoning Administrator Hearing. A "Response to Comments" was prepared by Ford and WSP dated February 10, 2023, to address the concerns raised from the public correspondences (Attachment No. PC 8). Ford and WSP has attempted to work individually with the residents who submitted public correspondences to the project to resolve concerns prior to the construction of the system. To date, the residents have declined to engage in conversation with the applicant and a summary of the outreach conducted is seen in Attachment C and D of Attachment No. PC 8.
One Ford Road Homeowners Association Outreach
Due to the placement of the treatment system building that is adjacent to Country Club Drive, the One Ford Road Homeowners Association was contacted since the community's entrance is accessed along Country Club Drive. On December 9, 2022, an email was sent to the HOA outlining the construction activities that will impact access along Country Club Drive and the approximate timeline for these construction activities.
The One Ford Road Homeowners Association will be notified in writing at least seven days prior to construction activities and flagmen/cones will be utilized to help traffic safely navigate past the construction activities (Attachment No. PC 9).
SUMMARY AND ALTERNATIVES
The Water Board has required Ford to address the VOCs in the soil before it becomes a significant issue. The proposed system is necessary to protect residents and the extensive alternatives considered suggest the proposed project is the least impactful to the overall community. If the Planning Commission believes that there are insufficient facts to support the findings for approval, the Planning Commission may deny the application and provide facts in support of denial to be included in a resolution for denial.
Should the Commission believe an alternative site is more suitable for the proposed facility, then the Commission can deny the application without prejudice to allow the applicant to pursue an identified alternative location. An alternative location cannot be approved at this meeting and a new application will need to be submitted in accordance with NBMC Sections 20.54.080 (Resubmittals).
12 10-299
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15330 under Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances) and under Section 15308 under Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
The Class 30 exemption allows minor cleanup actions taken to prevent, minimize, stabilize, mitigate, or eliminate the release or threat of release of hazardous waste or substance which are small or medium removal actions costing $1 million or less. The cleanup action shall not require the onsite use of a hazardous waste incinerator or thermal treatment unit, or the relocation of residences or businesses. The action shall not involve the potential release into the air of volatile organic compounds as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 25123.6, except for small-scale in situ soil vapor extraction and treatment systems which have been permitted by the local Air Quality Management District. The cleanup action must be consistent with all applicable state and local environmental permitting requirements such as off -site disposal, and air quality rules, and approved by the regulatory body with jurisdiction over the site.
The proposed soil vapor extraction and treatment system is consistent with the intent of the Class 30 exemption for minor cleanup actions as it proposes to mitigate the presence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the soil without the use of a hazardous waste incinerator or thermal treatment unit. The project will not relocate any residences or businesses. The system will be regulated by the South Coast Air Quality Management District and emissions from the treatment system will meet applicable standards. The estimated valuation of the project will not exceed $1 million. The project is consistent with all applicable state and local environmental permitting requirements and is approved by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board.
The Class 8 exemption allows actions taken by regulatory agencies as authorized by state law or local ordinance to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment. Construction activities and relaxation of standards allowing environmental degradation are not included in this exemption.
The proposed soil vapor extraction and treatment system for soil vapor remediation has been mandated by the State of California Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project will remediate the existence of volatile organic compounds observed in the soil in order to protect the environment as well as the residents of the community.
No construction activities or relaxation of standards that would cause environmental degradation are proposed and the project is consistent with the intent of the Class 8 exemption.
is 10-300
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
The Class 3 exemption allows the construction of new, small facilities or structures including accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences.
The Project proposes the construction of a small 240-square-foot treatment system building for the purpose of soil vapor remediation. The soil vapor extraction and treatment system is intended to remediate the presence of VOCs for the residents in the Bayridge Park community.
The exceptions to this categorical exemption under Section 15300.2 are not applicable.
The project location will not impact an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern, does not result in cumulative impacts, does not have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, does not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway, is not a hazardous waste site, and is not identified as a historical resource.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice of this application was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways), including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled hearing, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website.
Prepared by:
a ;� -
Jenny Tran, AlgrstdKPlanner
J M/jt
Submitted by:
Jim Campbell
Deputy Community Development Director
Attachments: PC 1
Draft Resolution for Approval
PC 2
Appeal Form
PC 3
Applicant's Response to Appeal
PC 4
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
PC 5
Zoning Administrator Minutes from March 2, 2023
PC 6
Acoustical Engineering Analysis and Addendum
PC 7
Alternative Location Analysis
14 10-301
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Appeal (PA2022-0180) Planning Commission, May 18, 2023
PC 8 Applicant's Response to Comments and Public Outreach Overview
PC 9 Outreach to the One Ford Road Community
PC 10 Project Plans
15 10-302
1- 0 10-303
Attachment No. PC 1
Draft Resolution for Approval
1-7 10-304
1- g 10-305
Resolution No. PC2023-023 is not available at the time this went to publishing. The Resolution will be provided at a later time.
19 10-306
2 L-) 10-307
Attachment No. PC 2
Appeal Form
21 10-308
22 10-309
Appeal Application
City Clerk's Office
100 Civic Center Drive 1 P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
949-644-3005
Clerk's Date & Time Stamp
1 : 33
Appeals are time sensitive and must be received by the City Clerk specified time period from a decision or final action by a decision -maker. It is advisable to consult with the Department managing the issue if there is question with regards to appealing an action. This is an appeal of the:
❑ (CDD222)Community Development Director Action to the Planning Commission - $1715 X (CDD222)Zoning Administrator Action to the Planning Commission - $1715 ❑ (CDD222)Coastal Development Application CDP Appeal from Zoning Admin to the Planning Commission (only if appeal is solely based on the CDP portion of the application) — No Fee ❑ (CDD222)Planning Commission Action to the City Council - $1715 ❑ (CDD222)Community Development Director Action to the Harbor Commission _ $1250 ❑ (CDD222)Harbor Commission Action to the City Council (CDD — Planning) - $940 ❑ (CDD222)Hearing Officer Action to the City Council - $1715 ❑ (CDD223)Building Official/Fire Marshal Action to the Building/Fire Board of Appeals - $1715 © (CDD224)Chief of Police Action on an Operator License to the City Manager - $946 ❑ (RS3073)City Manager Action on a Special Events Permit to the City Council - $1823 ❑ (HBROOI )Harbormaster Action to the Harbor Commission - $1250 ❑ (HBR001 )Harbor Commission Action to the City Council (Harbor Department) - $940 ❑ (PBWO18)Public Works Director Action to Harbor Commission - $1250 ❑ (PBWO 1 8)Harbor Commission Action to City Council (Public Works Department) - $940 ❑ Other - Specify decision -maker, appellate Body, Municipal Code authority and fee:
Appellant Information:
Name(s): Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
Address: 94 Hartford Drive
City/StatelZip: Newport Beach, CA 92660
Phone: 908-370-7003
Email: [email protected]
Appealing Application Regarding:
Name of AppIicant(s): Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Date of Fina] Decision: March 2, 2023 Project No.: PA2022-0180 Activity No.: NIA
Application Site Address: 94 Hartford drive
Description of application: Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediatiow Limited term permit for the construction of a soil vapor extraction and treatment system for a term of 12 months.
Reasons) for Appeal (attach a separate sheet if necessary): we strongly object to 94 Hartford Drive as the location of the soil vapor extraction unit based on the safety of our child. The unit is proposed to be 3 feet away from our home, violating the 8-foot separation distance for this area. NO studies have ever been conducted to show the safety of a soil vapor extraction unit within 3 feet of a home. It was never disclosed in writing that the unit was 3 feet from our home unit) the public notice for the permit application was posted. Please see attached for contin ed information. }} Signature of Appellant: �— Date: .`7 J N 123
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:
Appeal filed and Administrative Fee received: 1'Y1�C1-t 20 ,.:. fme
City rk ��
cc: Department i , Deputy Director, Staff, File F:VUsersICI&*kSriamdFo"sL4pp6aiApplfcarion Updated 1112021
r
r�Lrs'oPr�
2S
10-310
Appeal Application: Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Appellant Information: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation at 94 Hartford Drive March 14. 2023
Reason for Appeal:
To Whom It May Concern:
We strongly abject to 94 Hartford Drive as the location of the soil vapor extraction unit to clean up the hazardous waste in the soil and groundwater from the former Ford Aeronutronics facility.
We are not asking to stop the remediation; we are asking to change the location based on the safety of our child.
Our concerns were not adequately addressed at the public hearing. We have not received ANY of the data that we have requested to show the SAFETY of the soil vapor extraction unit to be within 3 FEET of our home with our child. NO studies have ever been conducted to show the safety of a soil vapor extraction unit within 3 feet of a home.
The unit is proposed to be THREE FEET away from our home, violating the 8-foot separation distance for this area. The location is arbitrary and capricious and was not the original proposal by Ford/WSP. It was stated multiple times in community meetings, the original project summary, and by the Newport Beach City Assistant Planner that the original proposal of 5-5 smaller extraction units were turned down by the HOAIBoard due to loss of parking spots.
It is absolutely unacceptable and appalling to have parking be valued over safety. As previously stated, NO studies have ever been conducted to show the safety of a soil vapor extraction unit within 3 feet of a home. Without this data, it is unacceptable to ask us to be the guinea pigs of this major operation. How in good conscience can Ford/WSP, The Water Board, and the city grant a hazardous waste clean-up unit 3 feet from a home with a child? Per the South Coast Air Quality Management District, "all basin residents have the right to live and work in an environment of clean air, free of airborne health threats," and the "government is obligated to protect public health."
It was never even disclosed in writing that the unit was 3 feet from 94 Hartford Drive, violating the 8-foot separation distance UNTIL the Public Notice for the permit application was posted.
Finding out this information ONLY by receiving the public notice is unacceptable and did not provide enough time for residents to be fully aware of the entire impact of the system.
We sent in our original objections prior to the January 201 public hearing. To date, we have not received any responses in writing sent directly to us and instead, found the responses buried in the city website archives. Please see below additional objections and data we are requesting and have a right to receive. After discussion with Jessica Law, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, we have a right to the requested data, and she would be asking questions like us. 1 of e
24 10-311
Appeal Application: Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Appellant Information: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
1. Location
• The original project summary/zoning administrator staff report posted on the city website was changed after our objections were received. Prior to the January 2611 meeting, the document stated:
"The treatment system will be located adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive as it has been identified as the moss_ feasible location to reduce the visual impact frown surrounding residents. r
• This statement shows the primary reason was for aesthetics and this original document did not mention that other locations studied were not feasible. • Multiple community outreach meetings by FordIWSP stated that other locations could not be used due to parking.
• After our objections were received, the new amended project summary for March 2nd includes alternative locations studied and states "Due to these infeasibilities the location adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive was selected."
• The Newport Beach City Assistant Planner confirmed on 2/23/23 via phone call that other locations were rejected by the HDAIBoard due to parking spots. • It was never disclosed at the Bayridge pre -construction meeting that the structure was 3 feet from a home, violating the setback distance. • Per discussion with the Newport Beach City Fire Marshal, this is unique and unusual that a structure like this would be so close to a home.
■ There is significant risk involved with having the structure in such proximity to a home.
There is no buffer zone if any of the electrical equipment malfunctions, a fire starts insides, there is a natural disaster, etc. The Fire Marshal also stated that there is usually some leniency with "temporary permits." This is, again, unacceptable to overlook safety due to something being "temporary" (for a minimum of 3 years). ■ Stated earlier, it was never disclosed in writing that the unit was 3 feet from 94 Hartford Drive violating the 8-foot separation distance UNTIL the Public Notice for the permit application was posted. Finding out this information ONLY by receiving the public notice is unacceptable and did not provide enough time for residents to be fully aware of the entire impact of the system.
The location of the exhaust was changed in renderings and pointed out by the Zoning Administrator during the public hearing. We are requesting that this be verified and looked at again. A window is missing on the plan.
2 4
25 10-312
Appeal Application: Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Appellant Information: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
■ We are requesting an external consultant who is not employed by Ford/WSP review the original plans that did not include having the system 3 feet from our home to determine these infeasibiiities objectively.
2. Timeframe
■ The Newport Beach City Assistant Planner confirmed via phone call on 2/23/23 that the 3-foot setback separation difference can possibly be exempt due to the nature of a temporary permit vs. a permanent structure.
■ We strongly object that the city grants a temporary permit that disregards the setback distances and overlooks safety.
■ Regarding a temporary permit of 12 months, it was stated multiple times in community meetings that this unit will be in place for l year. However, at the 2/22/23 community meeting, it was stated that there will be - I+ year of remediation implementation and then "-2+years" of monitoring to determine if additional remediation is needed. —1+ year*
`2+ years
Remedy
Post
:nplernenlation
Remediation
Monitoring
■ Per Ken Connor, Professional Engineer WSP, at 2/22/23 meeting: the system will be on "for a year, then turn it off, then maybe turn it back on later." ■ This shows this unit will be 3 feet from 94 Hartford Drive for an UNKNOWN period, but a minimum of 3 years, further extending the time of exposure to all safety risks listed below. This is not transparent for what we were told of being in place for 1 year and then removed.
■ Furthermore, it is impossible to quantify the amount of hazardous waste in the ground and how much additional remediation will be needed after this treatment starts. • It was stated at the 2/22/23 meeting by Jessica Law: "in historical remediations, we've seen at other sites, we cleaned up, gat their good bill of health, and we come hack later, and concentrations increased." Although she also states they have confidence in 3 of 9
20 10-313
Appeal application: Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Appellant Information: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
this remediation, there is no guarantee. 2/22/23 Jessica Law also stated: "It is still important to confirm, because assumptions can be wrong, and so from the regulatory perspective, we don't like assumptions, they can give you a direction, but we want them always confirmed with analytical data."
■ Ford/WSP cannot say definitively that this will last "i year."
3. Safely
We requested data on the health effects of the proximity of electromagnetic fields of the system, specifically relating to child development, as we live at our home with our infant son. At the pre -construction meeting, it was stated that this —240 square foot structure will be "packed" with equipment to maximize the area of the shed. All this electrical and engineering equipment will emit electromagnetic fields and radiation. ■ In addition, per Jessica Law 2/22/23 meeting: "assumptions can be wrong, and so from the regulatory perspective, we don't like assumptions, they can give you a direction, but we want them always confirmed with analytical data." We are in turn, asking for data, not assumptions of the safety of the proximity of this unit. NO studies have ever been conducted to show the safety of a soil vapor extraction unit within 3 feet of a home. + The response from Ford/WSP is the top Google search if you type in "EMF and health." (Response from Ford/WSP below):
"The World Health Organization has studied the relationship between electromagnetic faelds and human health extensively and concluded. "Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences_ from exposure to law level electromagnetic fields. " • The response from Ford/WSP above does not include anything specific regarding child development that we asked for. Please refer to the following studies that dispute the WHO's claim and specifically address major concerns with child development — associating cancer in children since children have developing nervous systems and their skull thickness is less than an adult, increasing the risk of radiation penetration.
From the World Health Organization:
"Concerns have been expressed that exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields at power frequencies (50/60 Hz) could lead to an increased incidence of cancer in children and other adverse health effects. The evidence comes primarily from residential epidemiological studies. These studies suggest that children exposed to ELF magnetic fields have an associated increased risk of leukemia." (R1)
From the National LibrM of Medicine/ Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics:
4 0-f 9
27 10-314
Appeal Application: Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Appellant Information: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
"A developing child's brain is vulnerable to electromagnetic radiation. The developing nervous system is more conductive and absorbs more electromagnetic energies than those of adults [4].
Therefore, different standards are required to protect children." "The skull thickness of adults is approximately 2 mm. However, the skull thickness of a 5-year- old child is approximately 0.5 mm and 1 mm in 10 years [�9]. Therefore, radiation penetration is larger in children than in adults [39,40J. As a child's head diameter is smaller, the energy - absorbing "hot spots," the most sensitive parts of RF, are more pronounced [41 ]. Several engineering strategies to avoid the hazard of RF do not consider a child's head specificity [a." (R2)
From Cancer.gov:
"Numerous epidemiologic studies and comprehensive reviews of the scientific literature have evaluated possible associations between exposure to non -ionizing EMFs and risk of cancer in children (13—_L5). Most of the research has focused on leukemia and brain tumors, the two most common cancers in children." (R3)
From American Academy of Pediatrics: The Sensitivi(y of Children to Electroma netic-Fields:
"Consistent epidemiologic evidence of an association between childhood leukemia and exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields has led to their classification by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a "possible human carcinogen." Concerns about the potential vulnerability of children to radio frequency (RF) fields have been raised because of the potentially greater susceptibility of their developing nervous systems; in addition, their brain tissue is more conductive, RF penetration is greater relative to head size" (R4) • It was stated by Ken Connor, Professional Engineer at 2/22/23 meeting: this is "tried and true technology." Please provide data that shows that these systems have been within 3 feet of homes for 12 months or longer. We requested this information before and did not receive anything.
■ We are also requesting data again that shows the efficacy of a larger unit. It was stated that the proposed unit was determined through 3-D computer modeling. Please provide real life examples of a unit of this size and within 3 feet of a home, size of the remediation zone, number of wells, and how long the system was in place. We would also like to see comparable areas of remediation and how long the SVE systems were in place.
4. Qualily of Life
• The hazardous waste unit directly next to our home will greatly impact our quality of life.
We previously stated that our air conditioner will need to be relocated, which we did not 5 p f �
22 10-315
Appeal Application: Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Appellant Information: Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita
agree to; as well as our home containing the original windows, 30+ years old. further increasing the noise impact.
• A response from Ford below:
Ford has contacted the person who made this comment in an attempt to address this concern. This will include covering the cost for the installation of a state-of-the-art air conditioner and having plans in place for temporary relocation, if needed. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation. "
■ We should not have to temporarily relocate from the home that we OWN and pay taxes to live here.
■ This response shows that there is an issue acknowledged by Ford/WSP with the proximity and we would need to relocate.
■ Per 2/22/23 meeting: Daniela Hamann-Nazaroff, Associate Engineer WSP: "Based on feedback, a lot of people commented and called that design was too intrusive to neighbors' homes and livelihoods, and asked if we could reconsider and redesigned.
Worked with the HOA/Board to reduce the number of wells, feet of piping, and number of containers. The foriginall containers were too impactful, ugly, disruptive." • The current design disrupts our home and livelihood and is intrusive to our home.
5. Air Ouality Monitoring
• We expressed concern that there is no real-time/ continuous monitoring to ensure the air quality levels are acceptable for a home with an infant inside. This is essential for the entire duration of the project.
Ford Response 2.6: In accordance with the Air District Permit, total VOC concentration will be measured using a real-time monitor (such as a photoionization detector) at least once a day for the first seven days ofoperation to confirm the system is operating as designed and within permit specifications which are set to be protective of public health. Fallowing the first seven days, monitoring will continue weekly or more frequently if required by the Air District. In addition to the real-time monitoring, analytical sampling will be conducted at least once a month and analyzed by an independent laboratory in accordance with the Air Districts Rule 304.
Samples will be analyzed for specific VOCs to verb compliance with the permit and reported to the Air District. All data will also be reported to the Water Board and be available to the public on the State Water Boards document repository geotracker. ca.gov. 10-316
Appeal Application: Project File No.: PA2022-0180
Appellant Information., Amy Santella and Kevin Solomita ■ This response only shows that real-time monitoring will occur ONCE a day for the first seven days; after it will be weekly or more frequently if required. ■ We confirmed with Jessica Law that the photoionization detector stated above is NOT "lab quality." This confirms that there is no real-time monitoring that accurately shows the total VOC concentration emitted 3 feet from our home. ■ We understand that it can be remotely shut off, however, the above response from Ford/WSP states that there is NO continuous air quality monitoring. If an activated carbon filter fails, toxic vapors can be expelled within 3 feet of our home prior to remote shut off. This is unacceptable to be this close to homes if there is no continuous air quality monitoring of VOCs.
■ In addition, Ford/WSP response has changed from each meeting, showing discrepancies about this concern. At the January pre -construction meeting, it was stated there is no continuous monitoring. At the 2122/23 meeting it was stated yes, there is continuous monitoring. Now their response in writing show no continuous monitoring again.
At 2/22/23 meeting, Jessica Law stated she understands the concerns regarding continuous air quality monitoring and stated a third -party engineer could possibly provide this, but not for the entire duration, due to cost. This was confirmed on a phone call on 2/27/23. Again, this is unacceptable to have residents exposed to possible VOCs emitted 3 feet from our home with NO CONTINUOUS monitoring. ■ Per South Coast Air Quality Management District: "Air contaminants pose health risks to those that are exposed to them. Students, along with the elderly, pregnant women, and persons with existing health problems, are particularly susceptible to health effects from toxic emissions that may occur from certain types of sources. These emissions sources may emit compounds that can cause a variety of health effects, including neurological, respiratory, and developmental effects as well as cancer. Several studies have shown that risk decreases dramatically with increased distance from sources of emissions."
■ In addition, the South Coast Air Quality Management District requires public notice if "a facility applies to permit a new or modified emission source located within 1,000 feet from the outer boundary of a school." Children are known to be more susceptible to health effects from emissions. If schools have protections within 1,000 feet due to risks for children, how can this be placed THREE feet from our home with an infant?
6. Home Values
After discussion with a California Real Estate Broker: our home value would be "destroyed" when we disclose there is a hazmat treatment facility directly outside of our 7 of 9
3D 10-317
�2 10-319
Attachment No. PC 3
Applicant's Response to Appeal
S3 10-320
�4 10-321
RESPONSE TO APPEAL
BAYRIDGE PARK COMMUNITY OBJECTIONS PROJECT FILE NO. PA2022-0180 Former Ford Aeronutronics Property, Newport Beach, CA
April 7, 2023
The Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) is requiring Ford Motor Company (Ford) to safely remove volatile organic compounds (VOCs) found in soil from historical aerospace research operations at the Former Ford Aeronutronics Facility. As part of this process, WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc. (WSP), as environmental consultants for Ford, submitted an application for a limited term permit for the construction of a Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) system to the City of Newport Beach. SVE systems are a common engineering technology used to remove chemicals from soil and numerous SVE systems operate safely and efficiently in residential areas throughout the United States.
A City of Newport Beach Zoning Administrator Hearing (Hearing) for this project was held on March 2, 2023 and details for the project were made available for public comment as Agenda Item No.2 (02 Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation PA2022-0180 (newportbeachca.gov)). The project was approved, but during the 10-day appeal period that followed the Hearing, one appeal was filed by residents of the Bayridge Park Community. This letter provides responses to the concerns issued by the Appellants. The concerns will be addressed in the upcoming Planning Commission Hearing on May 18, 2023.
In addition, Ford/WSP has been working individually with the residents who submitted public correspondences to resolve concerns prior to the construction of the system.
Comments from the Appellants have been reprinted in italics. The responses, clarifications, and formatting added by WSP is not in italics. Some comments provided by the appellants have been combined based on similarities between bullet points provided in the original letter that were better answered together. The original letter is attached for reference as Attachment 1.
APPELLANTS INFORMATION: AMY SANTELLA AND KEVIN SOLOMITA Comment (General): We strongly object to 94 Hartford Drive as the location of the soil vapor extraction unit to clean up the hazardous waste in the soil and groundwater from the former Ford Aeronutronics facility. We are not asking to stop the remediation; we are asking to change the location based on the safety of our child.
Our concerns were not adequately addressed at the public hearing. We have not received ANY of the data that we have requested to show the SAFETY of the soil vapor extraction unit to be within 3 FEET of our home with our child. NO studies have ever been conducted to show the safety of a soil vapor extraction unit within 3 feet of a home.
The unit is proposed to be THREE FEET away from our home, violating the 8-foot separation distance for this area. The location is arbitrary and capricious and was not the original proposal by Ford/WSP. It was stated multiple times in community meetings, the original project summary, and by the Newport Beach City Assistant Planner that the original proposal of 5-6 smaller extraction units were turned down by the HOA/Board due to loss of parking spots.
3'5 10-322
It is absolutely unacceptable and appalling to have parking be valued over safety. As previously stated, NO studies have ever been conducted to show the safety of a soil vapor extraction unit within 3 feet of a home. Without this data, it is unacceptable to ask us to be the guinea pigs of this major operation. How in good conscience can Ford/WSP, The Water Board, and the city grant a hazardous waste clean-up unit 3 feet from a home with a child? Per the South Coast Air Quality Management District, "all basin residents have the right to live and work in an environment of clean air, free of airborne health threats, " and the "government is obligated to protect public health."
It was never even disclosed in writing that the unit was 3 feet from 94 Hartford Drive, violating the 8-foot separation distance UNTIL the Public Notice for the permit application was posted. Finding out this information ONLY by receiving the public notice is unacceptable and did not provide enough time for residents to be fully aware of the entire impact of the system.
We sent in our original objections prior to the January 26th public hearing. To date, we have not received any responses in writing sent directly to us and instead, found the responses buried in the city website archives. Please see below additional objections and data we are requesting and have a right to receive. After discussion with Jessica Law, Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, we have a right to the requested data, and she would be asking questions like us.
Comment 1.1: The original project summary/zoning administrator staff report posted on the city website was changed after our objections were received. Prior to the January 26th meeting, the document stated:
"The treatment system will be located adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive as it has been identified as the most feasible location to reduce the visual impact from surrounding residents. "
Response to Comment 1.1: When substantial public comments were received before the January 26, 2023, Zoning Administration Hearing, WSP/Ford requested a continuance for the hearing to March 2, 2023 to address comments and provide additional information to support the responses. An Alternative Location Analysis and response to comments were provided to the City of Newport Beach, which was added to the zoning administrator staff report for the project.
Comment 1.2: This statement shows the primary reason was for aesthetics and this original document did not mention that other locations studied were not feasible. Multiple community outreach meetings by Ford/WSP stated that other locations could not be used due to parking. After our objections were received, the new amended project summary for March 2nd includes alternative locations studied and states "Due to these infeasibilities the location adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive was selected. " The Newport Beach City Assistant Planner confirmed on 2123123 via phone call that other locations were rejected by the HOA/Board due to parking spots.
so 10-323
Response to Comment 1.2: The Alternative Location Analysis includes the following criteria:
disruption to neighborhood, proximity to homes, impact on parking, permitting complexity, implementation complexity, and power connection proximity. None of the alternatives were determined to be infeasible due to aesthetic concerns, rather by community concerns voiced early in the design process or engineering concerns (which included space constraints).
Lessening community impacts to the greatest degree possible was a guiding factor in designing the Water Board -required SVE system. Ford representatives worked closely with the Bayridge Homeowners Association (HOA) and community members to select this location and presented it to the community for review and comment through both fact sheets and at two separate community meetings held at Bayridge Park on November 4, 2021, and January 18, 2023. Fact sheets and meeting invitations were provided to all Bayridge Park owners and occupants. WSP is confident this system, as designed, will operate safely, quietly, and effectively.
Comment 1.3: It was never disclosed at the Bayridge pre -construction meeting that the structure was 3 feet from a home, violating the setback distance. Per discussion with the Newport Beach City Fire Marshal, this is unique and unusual that a structure like this would be so close to a home. There is significant risk involved with having the structure in such proximity to a home. There is no buffer zone if any of the electrical equipment malfunctions, a fire starts insides, there is a natural disaster, etc. The Fire Marshal also stated that there is usually some leniency with "temporary permits." This is, again, unacceptable to overlook safety due to something being "temporary" (for a minimum of 3 years). Stated earlier, it was never disclosed in writing that the unit was 3 feet from 94 Hartford Drive violating the 8-foot separation distance UNTIL the Public Notice for the permit application was posted. Finding out this information ONLY by receiving the public notice is unacceptable and did not provide enough time for residents to be fully aware of the entire impact of the system.
Response to Comment 1.3: The location and construction of the SVE treatment system complies with all local and state building and fire safety codes. The SVE treatment system building is designed to meet the fire -rating criteria of the California Building Code for a building of this classification at a 3-foot separation from an existing residential building. The 8-foot setback developmental standard was set forth in a 1979 document (PC-24 - Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community) that provided standards to follow during the development of the community and is more stringent than the requirements of local and state building and fire codes. A Limited Term Permit is a common process that the City uses to evaluate the if it is appropriate to approve a project that has elements that vary from the development standards.
The City Zoning Administrator approved the project during the Public Hearing on March 2, 2023 and concurred that the construction of the treatment system was an acceptable variance from the developmental standards.
The location has been reviewed and approved by the City of Newport Beach Fire Department.
The building is designed to meet the fire -rating criteria of the California Building Code for a building of this classification at a 3-foot separation from an existing residential building. There is 10-324
no leniency in the California Building Code requirements regardless of the expected lifetime of the building.
Comment 1.4: The location of the exhaust was changed in renderings and pointed out by the Zoning Administrator during the public hearing. We are requesting that this be verified and looked at again. A window is missing on the plan.
Response to Comment 1.4: The location of the exhaust was updated during the design process with the building manufacturers and is accurate on the rendering shown during the public hearing. The exhaust is located approximately 20 feet from the window on the back side of 94 Hartford. The rendering did not show the window on the side of the building near the fire lane because the window is farther over than the rendering shows, but the distance is approximately 30 feet from the stack. The Treatment System Building Elevation drawing, Attachment 2, has been updated to show distance to both windows. The California Mechanical Code requires environmental air duct exhausts to terminate not less than 3 feet from openings to the building.
Comment 1.5: We are requesting an external consultant who is not employed by Ford/WSP review the original plans that did not include having the system 3 feet from our home to determine these infeasibilities objectively.
Response to Comment 1.5: WSP designed this SVE system with community safety in mind and to carefully balance the need to conduct this work while minimizing impacts to the community. This included evaluating multiple locations to place the SVE treatment system, and after performing the analysis, this is the selected location. The location has been reviewed by objective third parties, including the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board that operates for the protection of human health and the environment, and the City of Newport Beach. If you would like to hire an external consultant to re-evaluate, we would support that process by meeting with them to explain the details of the Alternative Location Analysis.
SECTION 2: TIMEFRAME
Comment 2.1: The Newport Beach City Assistant Planner confirmed via phone call on 2123123 that the 3-foot setback separation difference can possibly be exempt due to the nature of a temporary permit vs. a permanent structure. We strongly object that the city grants a temporary permit that disregards the setback distances and overlooks safety. Regarding a temporary permit of 12 months, it was stated multiple times in community meetings that this unit will be in place for 1 year. However, at the 2122123 community meeting, it was stated that there will be - 1 + year of remediation implementation and then "-2+ years" of monitoring to determine if additional remediation is needed. Per Ken Connor, Professional Engineer WSP, at 2122123 meeting: the system will be on "for a year, then turn it off, then maybe turn it back on later." This shows this unit will be 3 feet from 94 Hartford Drive for an UNKNOWN period, but a minimum of 3 years, further extending the time of exposure to all safety risks listed below. This is not transparent for what we were told of being in place for 1 year and then removed. Furthermore, it is impossible to quantify the amount of hazardous 2 10-325
waste in the ground and how much additional remediation will be needed after this treatment starts. It was stated at the 2/22/23 meeting by Jessica Law: "in historical remediations, we've seen at other sites, we cleaned up, got their good bill of health, and we come back later, and concentrations increased. " Although she also states they have confidence in this remediation, there is no guarantee. 2/22/23 Jessica Law also stated: "It is still important to confirm, because assumptions can be wrong, and so from the regulatory perspective, we don't like assumptions, they can give you a direction, but we want them always confirmed with analytical data. " Ford/WSP cannot say definitively that this will last "I year. "
Response to Comment 2.1: WSP anticipates that once the system is operational, remediation can be completed within a year. This schedule is based on the results of mass removal seen during the three-week SVE Pilot Study in 2020 compared to the amount of mass estimated to in the subsurface (Final Feasibility Study dated 8/23/21) and current trends of soil gas concentrations in the area. Investigations, including soil vapor, groundwater, and indoor air sampling, have been ongoing since 2018 in Bayridge Park to aid in determining the location and quantifying the amount of organic chemicals in the ground. Once remedial goals are met or concentrations entering the treatment system have reached the point of diminishing returns, WSP will recommend decommissioning the system. Decommissioning and removal will require Water Board approval. It should be noted that the organic chemicals that are being remediated by this system are not classified as hazardous waste.
SECTION 3: SAFETY
Comment 3.1: We requested data on the health effects of the proximity of electromagnetic fields of the system, specifically relating to child development, as we live at our home with our infant son. At the pre -construction meeting, it was stated that this -240 square foot structure will be "packed" with equipment to maximize the area of the shed. All this electrical and engineering equipment will emit electromagnetic fields and radiation.
The response from Ford/WSP is the top Google search if you type in "EMF and health. " (Response from Ford/WSP below):
"The World Health Organization has studied the relationship between electromagnetic fields and human health extensively and concluded: "Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields. " The response from Ford/WSP above does not include anything specific regarding child development that we asked for. Please refer to the following studies that dispute the WHO's claim and specifically address major concerns with child development- associating cancer in children since children have developing nervous systems and their skull thickness is less than an adult, increasing the risk of radiation penetration. �� 10-326
From the World Health Organization:
"Concerns have been expressed that exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields at power frequencies (50/60 Hz) could lead to an increased incidence of cancer in children and other adverse health effects. The evidence comes primarily from residential epidemiological studies. These studies suggest that children exposed to ELF magnetic fields have an associated increased risk of leukemia. " (RI) From the National Library of Medicine/Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics "A developing child's brain is vulnerable to electromagnetic radiation. The developing nervous system is more conductive and absorbs more electromagnetic energies than those of adults [±]. Therefore, different standards are required to protect children. " "The skull thickness of adults is approximately 2 mm. However, the skull thickness of a 5- year- old child is approximately 0.5 mm and 1 mm in 10 years [39]. Therefore, radiation penetration is larger in children than in adults [39,40]. As a child's head diameter is smaller, the energy- absorbing "hot spots, " the most sensitive parts of RF, are more pronounced [41]. Several engineering strategies to avoid the hazard of RF do not consider a child's head specificity [6]. " (R2)
From Cancer.gov:
"Numerous epidemiologic studies and comprehensive reviews of the scientific literature have evaluated possible associations between exposure to non -ionizing EMFs and risk of cancer in children (13-15). Most of the research has focused on leukemia and brain tumors, the two most common cancers in children. " (R3)
From American Academy of Pediatrics: The Sensitivity of Children to Electromagnetic Fields:
"Consistent epidemiologic evidence of an association between childhood leukemia and exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields has led to their classification by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a "possible human carcinogen. " Concerns about the potential vulnerability of children to radio frequency (RF) fields have been raised because of the potentially greater susceptibility of their developing nervous systems; in addition, their brain tissue is more conductive, RF penetration is greater relative to head size" (R4)
Response to Comment 3.1: Many appliances and equipment in and around our homes produce EMFs. This is also true of the electrical equipment that will operate inside of the SVE treatment system building. Once directly outside of the building, the intensity of the EMFs will be reduced greatly because the SVE treatment building will be constructed from steel, which is a recommended EMF shielding material. The intensity continues to drop sharply the farther away you are from the source. Every time you double the distance from the source, you lower the amount of radiation by four times. This is known as the inverse -square law. That is to say the intensity at one inch away from the blower versus 36 inches away from the blower is a 99% reduction, further reducing any potential exposure.
40 10-327
Comment 3.2: In addition, per Jessica Law 2122123 meeting: "assumptions can be wrong, and so from the regulatory perspective, we don't like assumptions, they can give you a direction, but we want them always confirmed with analytical data." We are in turn, asking for data, not assumptions of the safety of the proximity of this unit. NO studies have ever been conducted to show the safety of a soil vapor extraction unit within 3 feet of a home. It was stated by Ken Connor, Professional Engineer at 2122123 meeting: this is "tried and true technology. " Please provide data that shows that these systems have been within 3 feet of homes for 12 months or longer. We requested this information before and did not receive anything.
Response to Comment 3.2: Soil vapor extraction systems are a common way to treat organic chemical vapors found in soil and operate safely, efficiently, and quietly at locations throughout the United States. The system planned for Bayridge Park is a top -of -the -line system designed to meet South Coast Air Quality Management District (Air District) permit requirements, which are set at levels protective of the health of even the most sensitive individuals (e.g. immunocompromised individuals, seniors, children).
Here are a few examples of SVE systems, of similar size and visible to the public, that are currently in operation in Orange County. These examples are in commercial areas, not because SVE systems are unsafe in residential neighborhoods, but because most contamination stems from industrial/commercial operations. As Jessica mentioned, the design of the system at Bayridge Park has included additional noise abatement and aesthetic enhancements because it is planned for a residential area. So, please keep that in mind if you choose to see one of these systems.
• Sunny Fresh Cleaners #5 (GT ID: T10000017533), located at 2547 Eastbluff Drive, Irvine, CA: Former dry cleaner site that is currently a boutique yoga fitness studio. The site is located within Eastbluff Village Center retail shopping center that also includes a Ralph's grocery store, a Bank of America branch, and the Eastbluff Medical Walk-in and Urgent Care Center. This SVE system is located behind the boutique yoga fitness studio building, about 500 feet from residences, and across the street from tennis courts. The SVE system includes a blower and two carbon tanks, similar in size to the system's design at Bayridge Park.
• Campus Cleaners (GT ID: SLT8R0703954), located at 4515-A Campus Avenue, Irvine, CA: Former dry cleaner site located within Campus Drive shopping center, which is now a retail shopping center that includes Great Clips and several restaurants. This SVE system is next to one of the commercial buildings about 100 feet from residences. The location of the SVE System (Site 1 SVE System) is shown on Figure 2 of this report:
3Q22 Remedial Progress Report. The SVE system includes a blower and two carbon tanks, similar in size to the system's design at Bayridge Park. 41 10-328
Here is another example of an SVE system that was not in Orange County, but was in a residential neighborhood in an area of California with similar regulatory requirements. • Former Ford Ord (GT ID: DOD100196800), located in Marina, CA: Former carbon tetrachloride storage area within the former military base, which is now a residential development. The SVE system operated out of an unused garage in 2004. Photos of the SVE System are included in Appendix G this report: docs.fortordcleanup.com - /ar pdfs/AR-OUCTP-0011.1/Volume I -RI/. The SVE system includes a blower and two carbon tanks, although the carbon tanks are twice the size of the system design for Bayridge Park.
Comment 3.3: We are also requesting data again that shows the efficacy of a larger unit. It was stated that the proposed unit was determined through 3-D computer modeling. Please provide real life examples of a unit of this size and within 3 feet of a home, size of the remediation zone, number of wells, and how long the system was in place. We would also like to see comparable areas of remediation and how long the SVE systems were in place.
Response to Comment 3.3: The soil vapor extraction rate at each well, which is a rate based on known factors about the specific site conditions, such as soil type, groundwater table elevation, and data from the successful small scale pilot test, would be the same when using the 5 smaller SVE treatment units or the one larger SVE treatment unit. Computer modeling is considered an important tool in SVE design by the Army Corps of Engineers and is explained in detail in their Engineer Manual on SVE and Bioventing'. The modeling software used by a third - party expert, Mutch Associates, to interpret the data for this site is called ModFlow, which is used industry -wide for modelling the transport of groundwater and soil gas through the subsurface. The model is calibrated with site -specific, pilot test data and is the most effective way to predict the performance of the SVE technology at this specific location. Additional information about the model and the results are presented in the 2021 Remedial Design and Implementation Plan — Parcel 10 (available at. https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov /esi/uploads/aeo report/4708529472/SL188023848.PDF)
SECTION 4: QUALITY OF LIFE
Comment 4.1: The hazardous waste unit directly next to our home will greatly impact our quality of life. We previously stated that our air conditioner will need to be relocated, which we did not agree to; as well as our home containing the original windows, 30+ years old, further increasing the noise impact. A response from Ford below. - "Ford has contacted the person who made this comment in an attempt to address this concern. This will include covering the cost for the installation of a state -of the -art air ' United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2002. Soil Vapor Extraction and Bioventing — Engineer Manual. June 3.
42 10-329
conditioner and having plans in place for temporary relocation, if needed. To date, the person has declined to engage in conversation. "
We should not have to temporarily relocate from the home that we OWN and pay taxes to live here. This response shows that there is an issue acknowledged by Ford/WSP with the proximity and we would need to relocate.
Response to Comment 4.1: This system was designed with community safety in mind and to carefully balance the need to conduct this work while minimizing impacts to the community. This SVE system is not a "hazardous waste unit"— it is a temporary remediation system to extract and clean up low levels of organic chemicals found in the soil and soil vapor to achieve cleanup goals, as directed by the Water Board. There are no hazardous wastes that are handled/processed/treated or generated by the SVE remediation system. We understand that this will be a temporary disruption for this resident and that is why Ford is willing to discuss options (i.e., new windows, temporary relocation, or other mitigation) to lessen this disruption.
Ford/WSP will continue to attempt to contact the person(s) who made these comments to address this concern.
Comment 4.2: Per 2122123 meeting: Daniela Hamann-Nazaroff, Associate Engineer WSP:
"Based on feedback, a lot of people commented and called that design was too intrusive to neighbors' homes and livelihoods, and asked if we could reconsider and redesigned.
Worked with the HOA/Board to reduce the number of wells, feet of piping, and number of containers. The {original} containers were too impactful, ugly, disruptive." The current design disrupts our home and livelihood and is intrusive to our home.
Response to Comment 4.2: The draft FS/RAP proposed an SVE system with 27 wells and 5 treatment systems. The public was notified of this proposed SVE system through a public comment period held from June 7 — July 9, 2021, a fact sheet announcing the comment period, which was distributed prior to the start of the comment period, and a public meeting held on June 10, 2021. Public comments received during the meeting and in subsequent emails did not support the proposed plan of 5 treatment buildings. After multiple additional rounds of design document review and public comment, and in consultation with the Bayridge Park HOA, the treatment systems were reduced to one and the location selected to house that larger system was outside of 94 Hartford Drive. This process continues to balance the need to conduct this work to provide long-term protection of public health and the environment, while minimizing impacts to the community. The system has been designed to operate safely, efficiently, and quietly in a residential area and will be regularly maintained and monitored to ensure it is operating as planned.
4 3 10-330
SECTION 5: AIR QUALITY MONITORING
General: We expressed concern that there is no real-time/ continuous monitoring to ensure the air quality levels are acceptable for a home with an infant inside. This is essential for the entire duration of the project.
Ford Response 2.6: In accordance with the Air District Permit, total VOC concentration will be measured using a real-time monitor (such as a photoionization detector) at least once a day for the first seven days of operation to confirm the system is operating as designed and within permit specifications which are set to be protective of public health. Following the first seven days, monitoring will continue weekly or more frequently if required by the Air District. In addition to the real-time monitoring, analytical sampling will be conducted at least once a month and analyzed by an independent laboratory in accordance with the Air Districts Rule 304. Samples will be analyzed for specific VOCs to verify compliance with the permit and reported to the Air District. All data will also be reported to the Water Board and be available to the public on the State Water Boards document repository geotracker. ca. gov.
Comment 5.1: This response only shows that real-time monitoring will occur ONCE a day for the first seven days; after it will be weekly or more frequently if required. We confirmed with Jessica Law that the photoionization detector stated above is NOT "lab quality. " This confirms that there is no real-time monitoring that accurately shows the total VOC concentration emitted 3 feet from our home.
Response to Comment 5.1: The monitoring schedule for the system planned for Bayridge Park is designed to meet Air District permit requirements, which are set at levels protective of the health including sensitive populations (e.g., infants and children).
The Air District requires the use of an approved organic vapor analyzer that meets EPA Method 21 requirements, such as a photoionization detector (PID), to collect instantaneous data of organic compound concentrations at the inlet to the treatment system, between the two granular activated carbon (GAC) filter vessels, and at the exhaust stack. There are two in -line GAC filter vessels to provide a safety factor. If concentrations of organic compounds are detected at 50% of the discharge limits between the two GAC filters, the carbon media will be replaced. The SVE treatment system includes multiple redundancies to ensure concentrations of organic compounds entering the system are treated and not being emitted through the exhaust stack at concentrations over the effluent limits, which is located more than 15 feet from any residential windows. Per the California Mechanical Code, the required distance of an environmental exhaust from a building opening is 3 feet.
There will be laboratory samples collected and analyzed on a frequency required by the Air Permit and outlined in the Operation and Maintenance Manual to confirm the efficacy of the GAC treatment and the system overall. The Operation and Maintenance Plan will be available on geotracker.ca.gov before the SVE system is commissioned for operation. 44 10-331
Comment 5.2: We understand that it can be remotely shut off; however, the above response from Ford/WSP states that there is NO continuous air quality monitoring. If an activated carbon filter fails, toxic vapors can be expelled within 3 feet of our home prior to remote shut off. This is unacceptable to be this close to homes if there is no continuous air quality monitoring of VOCs.
Response to Comment 5.2: The SVE treatment system includes multiple redundancies to ensure concentrations of organic compounds released from the exhaust stack, if any, are below the South Coast Air Quality Monitoring District (Air District) emission limits. The Air District emission limits are based on risk calculations that consider the most sensitive populations, including infants and young children. The main redundancy is there are two in -line GAC filter vessels that adsorb the organic compounds, and the carbon media will be replaced with virgin carbon when concentrations of organic compounds are detected in the first vessel. The vapors are not acutely toxic, however concentrations higher than the screening levels are being detected in the indoor air of many homes in the Bayridge Park community and can cause health effects over time, which is why the treatment system implementation is urgent.
Comment 5.3: In addition, Ford/WSP response has changed from each meeting, showing discrepancies about this concern. At the January pre -construction meeting, it was stated there is no continuous monitoring. At the 2122123 meeting it was stated yes, there is continuous monitoring. Now their response in writing show no continuous monitoring again.
At 2122123 meeting, Jessica Law stated she understands the concerns regarding continuous air quality monitoring and stated a third -party engineer could possibly provide this, but not for the entire duration, due to cost. This was confirmed on a phone call on 2127123. Again, this is unacceptable to have residents exposed to possible VOCs emitted 3 feet from our home with NO CONTINUOUS monitoring.
Response to Comment 5.3: The frequency of sampling will align with the Air District permit requirements, however Ford/WSP will base the schedule of replacing the GAC with clean media on the detections at the midstream sampling point. The system will be turned off as soon as there is a detection in the midstream at 50% of the inlet concentration until a carbon changeout is scheduled. This proactive carbon changeout approach is done out of an abundance of caution to ensure compliance with the Air District permit is met at all times.
Comment 5.4: Per South Coast Air Quality Management District: "Air contaminants pose health risks to those that are exposed to them. Students, along with the elderly, pregnant women, and persons with existing health problems, are particularly susceptible to health effects from toxic emissions that may occur from certain types of sources. These emissions sources may emit compounds that can cause a variety of health effects, including neurological, respiratory, and developmental effects as well as cancer. Several studies have shown that risk decreases dramatically with increased distance from sources of emissions. "In addition, the South Coast Air Quality Management District requires public notice if "a facility applies to permit a new or modified emission source located within 1,000 feet from the outer boundary of a school. " Children are known to be more susceptible to 45 10-332
health effects from emissions. If schools have protections within 1, 000 feet due to risks for children, how can this be placed THREE feet from our home with an infant? Response to Comment 5.4: The South Coast Air Quality Monitoring District (Air District) sets their Permits to Operate emission limits, which are required for this project, based on risk calculations that are designed to protect the most sensitive populations, including infants and young children. The measurements to confirm compliance with these emission limits are collected before the air is diluted with the ambient air outside of the treatment system, which is the most conservative location to measure effluent concentrations. The Air District has the right to deny or revoke the Permit to Operate if there is any concern about the efficacy of the air pollution control equipment.
The Air District's notification process is required of any construction within 1,000 feet of a school. That is just notification to keep families who attend the school (but may live further away) informed. The Air District can still grant a Permit to Operate to projects within 1,000 feet of a school as long as emissions limits will be met.
SECTION 6: HOME VALUES
Comment 6.1: After discussion with a California Real Estate Broker: our home value would be "destroyed" when we disclose there is a hazmat treatment facility directly outside of our main living area window. There would also be no possible way to quantify the loss due to this unique and unfortunate situation.
Response to Comment 6.1: This SVE treatment system is not a hazmat treatment facility. This project does not handle, generate, treat or transport any hazardous materials or hazardous waste. Ford/WSP has and will continue to add steps into this project to lessen community impacts during construction and operation of the SVE system.
Comment 6.2: Our view from our main living area window would change from a 50-70-year-old pine tree that birds and squirrels frequent, to a 20'x12'x10' shed/hazmat treatment facility, in addition to workers that will need to come in and out to maintain the facility.
Response to Comment 6.2: Ford/WSP has adjusted the planned aesthetic design based on feedback from the community to match the architectural exterior of the surrounding residential units along Hartford Drive and landscaped with new xeriscape plantings to help soften the visual impacts from the adjacent private street. The pine tree removal was suggested by a professional arborist and will be replaced by healthy landscaping. Staff will be quiet and courteous during their operation and maintenance visits. WSP will work directly with impacted residents by providing a notice of work at least one week in advance of larger maintenance activities (i.e. carbon changeouts, decommissioning) that will happen at a lower frequency.
Comment 6.3: Even if this structure is "temporary, " there is no way of predicting if we will need to sell or rent out our home in the upcoming 3+ years that the structure will be in place (1 + 40 10-333
year running, -2+ years monitoring per the reports); nor should we have to explain ourselves to Ford/WSP on whether or not we plan to move or rent out the home that we OWN. We would need to disclose a soil vapor extraction unit is 3 feet away from our home that is cleaning out hazardous waste. What other homes have ever had a soil vapor extraction unit 3 feet away.►? No one will buy our home for fair market value with this structure adjacent to our window.
Response to Comment 6.3: The Water Board, Ford and WSP have been conducting community outreach since the beginning of this project in 2018 and have provided a variety of information on environmental investigation and future remediation. During this time, several individuals expressed concern about declining home sale prices. To date, there has not been a decline in home sales or sale prices.
Ford will work directly with any Bayridge Park resident to fairly address any real property diminution resulting from the operation of this system should they decide to put their home on the market during the time the soil vapor treatment system is actively operating.
One of the primary goals, along with the protection of public health, is to achieve the remediation goals and obtain site closure from the Water Board, which will negate the future need for notification for home buyers.
47 10-334
4 2 10-335
Attachment No. PC 4
Adopted Zoning Administrator Resolution
No. ZA2023-010
4 9 10-336
50 10-337
RESOLUTION NO. ZA2023-010
A RESOLUTION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
LIMITED TERM PERMIT FOR A SOIL VAPOR EXTRACTION AND
TREATMENT SYSTEM LOCATED AT 94 HARTFORD DRIVE [NH]
(PA2022-0180).
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
An application was filed by Emily Miller of WSP USA, in regards to the property located adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive, and legally described Lot 4 of Tract No. 12164 requesting approval of a Limited Term Permit for a soil vapor extraction and treatment system.
The applicant requests a limited term permit for the construction of a soil vapor extraction and treatment system for a term of 12 months. The soil vapor extraction and treatment system will consist of a 20-foot width by 12-foot depth by 10-foot height treatment system building, an underground pipe network (approximately 2,400 linear ft), and 13 extraction wells for soil gas remediation. The project requests a 3.2-foot separation distance where the required separation is 8 feet between buildings and encroachment in the 5-foot front setback per the PC-24 (Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community) development standards.
2. The subject property is designated Multiple Residential (RM) by the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community (PC24) Zoning District.
3. The subject property is not located within the coastal zone.
4. A public hearing was originally scheduled on January 26, 2023, online via Zoom. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). The Zoning Administrator indicated that the matter would not be considered at that time and was continued to the meeting of March 2, 2023.
5. A public hearing was held on March 2, 2023, online via Zoom. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC). Evidence both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Zoning Administrator at this hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15330 under Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances) and under Section 15308 under Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the 51 10-338
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 2 of 11
Environment) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
2. The Class 30 exemption allows minor cleanup actions taken to prevent, minimize, stabilize, mitigate, or eliminate the release or threat of release of hazardous waste or substance which are small or medium removal actions costing $1 million or less. The cleanup action shall not require the onsite use of a hazardous waste incinerator or thermal treatment unit, or the relocation of residences or businesses. The action shall not involve the potential release into the air of volatile organic compounds as defined in Health and Safety Code Section 25123.6, except for small-scale in situ soil vapor extraction and treatment systems which have been permitted by the local Air Quality Management District. The cleanup action must be consistent with all applicable state and local environmental permitting requirements such as off -site disposal, and air quality rules, and approved by the regulatory body with jurisdiction over the site.
3. The proposed soil vapor extraction and treatment system is consistent with the intent of the Class 30 exemption for minor cleanup actions as it proposes to mitigate the presence of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the soil without the use of a hazardous waste incinerator or thermal treatment unit. The project will not relocate any residences or businesses. Coordination with the South Coast Quality Air Management District (SCQAMD) has commenced and a permit for the release of volatile organic compounds into the air in small-scale in situ soil vapor extraction and treatment systems will be obtained. The project is consistent with all applicable state and local environmental permitting requirements and is approved by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. SCQAMD, as the lead agency, will adopt this CEQA exemption with their authorization of the project scope.
4. The Class 8 exemption allows actions taken by regulatory agencies as authorized by state law or local ordinance to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement, or protection of the environment where the regulatory process involves procedures for protection of the environment. Construction activities and relaxation of standards allowing environmental degradation are not included in this exemption.
5. The proposed soil vapor extraction and treatment system for soil vapor remediation has been mandated by the State of California Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board as part of the required ongoing monitoring of groundwater and site conditions of the former Ford Facility. The project will remediate the existence of volatile organic compounds observed in the soil in order to protect the environment as well as the residents of the community. No construction activities or relaxation of standards that would cause environmental degradation are proposed and the project is consistent with the intent of the Class 8 exemption.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
In accordance with Section 20.52.040 (Limited Term Permits) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the following findings, and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
01-17-23
52 10-339
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 3 of 11
Finding:
A. The operation of the limited duration uses at the location proposed and within the period specified would not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, nor 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 requested limited duration use;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The treatment system building will be located adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive, along Country Club Drive, outside of common residential areas of the Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association. The building will be visually hidden from residents' sight as much as possible. The building will be designed with a gable roof and provide exterior siding painted to match the architectural exterior of the surrounding residential units along Hartford Drive. A new xeriscape landscape will be planted in and around the new treatment system building, which will help soften the visual impact of the structure.
2. An Acoustical Engineering Analysis was prepared by Yanchar Design & Consulting Group dated February 8, 2023. The predicted noise level in the Acoustical Engineering Analysis at the exterior of the treatment system building and adjacent residences of 92 and 96 Hartford Drive on the property is 48.8 dBA which is consistent with the allowable exterior noise standards of 55 dBA from 7:00 am to 10:00 pm and 50 dBA from 10:00 pm to 7:00 am in the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The predicted noise level at 61 Hillsdale Drive, the nearest off -site residence, is calculated to be 34.9 dBA. Therefore, the treatment system building is expected to meet the requirements of the City's regulations for both the same property and nearest adjacent residential property. To ensure compliance with the City's noise standards, Condition of Approval Nos. 17 and 18 have been added requiring an acoustic audit of the prefabricated building and treatment system unit running at its maximum capacity prior to installation, and a subsequent audit after installation.
3. To minimize impacts to the community from noise and construction, the treatment system building will be conditioned to be constructed off -site. The acoustic audit of the prefabricated building will be conducted off -site to ensure it complies with the City's noise standards prior to transportation of the treatment system building to the building site. After installation of the treatment system building on -site, a subsequent acoustic audit will be conducted to further ensure the building complies with the City's noise standards.
4. The wall of the treatment system building adjacent to the building at 94 Hartford Drive will be constructed with a two (2)-hour fire rated wall in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) and Building Division standards and policies. Construction plans will be reviewed for compliance with the CBC and Building Division before building permit issuance.
01-17-23
5S 10-340
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 4 of 11
5. The building will be secured to the concrete pad with anchors chosen for the earthquake risk parameters of the City of Newport Beach area. The treatment system building will additionally be secured with a monitoring system that will safely shut down the system in the event of an earthquake or other unforeseen natural disasters and an operations manager will be alerted of the shutdown. The treatment system will be monitored and inspected for potential damages prior to restart.
6. The treatment system is designed to meet the standards of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for the release of VOCs into the air at a level that is protective of the health of the community. The treatment system will incorporate two (2) granular activated carbon filters that will remove VOCs in the soil before the air is discharged from the treatment system. Continuous monitoring will be conducted as required by SCAQMD and findings will be reported to SCAQMD and the Water Board and will be made available to the public.
Finding:
B. The subject lot is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the limited duration use without material detriment to the use and enjoyment of other properties located adjacent to and in the vicinity of the lot;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The subject lot is within Planning Area 8 (Attached Residential) of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community, which is approximately 12 acres in size. The proposed building will be located adjacent to the residence of 94 Hartford Drive and Country Club Road and will not negatively impact on -site vehicular circulation.
2. As conditioned, the treatment system building will require an acoustic audit prior to transportation of the building onto the property and after installation on -site to ensure it meets the allowable exterior noise standards of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
3. The treatment system will be located within a new prefabricated building, which is 20 feet by 12 feet and 240 square feet in size. The building is 10-feet 2-inches to the top of the roof and 13-feet 5-inches to the top of the air exhaust. The existing dwelling is two (2)-stories and the proposed treatment system building will be visually hidden from the residents of the Bayridge Park community as much as possible.
4. The treatment system building will be located on private property and will not impact pedestrian or vehicular access along Country Club Drive.
5. Given its location, the treatment system building will be most visible to the adjacent residents of 94 Hartford Drive and to the residents of the One Ford Road community that takes access from Country Club Drive. As designed and conditioned, the treatment system building will be designed with a gable roof and provide exterior siding painted to match the architectural exterior of the surrounding residential units 01-17-23
54 10-341
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 5 of 11
along Hartford Drive and landscaped with new xeriscape plantings to help soften the visual impacts from the adjacent private street.
6. Locations along Bison Avenue, a public right-of-way, were considered for the project; however, the area was determined to not provide adequate space for the placement of the building. Significant grading into the slope would be required to install the building and the construction of new retaining walls would be needed to not impact the structural integrity of the existing retaining walls surrounding the Bayridge Park community. Given that this is a temporary project, this alternative was deemed infeasible.
7. Additional locations along Country Club Drive were considered providing a greater separation from 94 Hartford Drive. Unfortunately, the landscape parkway was either too narrow to accommodate the facility or too steep, requiring significant grading that would impact the condition of the Bayridge Park community and structural integrity of the existing retaining walls surrounding the community.
8. Alternative locations were considered within the Bayridge Park community within landscaped areas that provided adequate building separation from residents. These areas would require significant removal of existing trees within the community and the placement of the treatment system building will cause a disruption to existing drainage and creek beds. Additionally, placement of the treatment system building in these areas will create heavy visual impacts within the community and remove much needed parking for the residents.
9. In total, seven (7) options were considered for the location of the soil vapor extraction system where the factors included: disruption to the neighborhood, proximity to homes, impact on parking, permitting complexity, implementation complexity, and power connection complexity. These factors were reviewed on a scale from low, medium, high, to infeasible. Six (6) of the options encountered infeasibilities due to either impact on parking, permitting complexity, implementation complexity, or power connection complexity. Due to these infeasibilities, the location adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive was selected.
Finding-
C. The subject lot is adequately served by streets or highways having sufficient width and improvements to accommodate the kind and quantity of traffic that the limited duration use would or could reasonably be expected to generate;
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The proposed treatment system building will be located adjacent to an existing private street, which is an entryway into the One Ford Road community. The building location is within an existing sloped and landscaped area that will not interfere with any circulation drive aisles.
01-17-23
55 10-342
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 6 of 11
2. The soil vapor extraction and treatment system will require ongoing on -site monitoring and maintenance that will consist of one (1) or two (2) field staff visiting the site approximately once a month to collect samples and perform maintenance as needed. No large commercial vehicles are required for monthly monitoring and maintenance and no impact or increase in traffic is expected.
3. Carbon changeouts that require a vacuum truck and one (1) truck trailer and boom lift attachment parked on Country Club Drive are to take place two (2) times per year for 4 to 6 hours at a time. This routine maintenance has a low frequency and will not completely obstruct the traffic circulation on Country Club Drive. Country Club Drive is a private street in a private community and is not subject to additional permits from Public Works. The Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association and One Ford Road Homeowner's Association will be notified at least seven (7) days before maintenance.
Finding:
D. Adequate temporary parking to accommodate vehicular traffic to be generated by the limited duration use would be available either on -site or at alternate locations acceptable to the Zoning Administrator; and
Fact in Support of Finding:
1. Planning Area 8 of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community requires a minimum of two (2) guest parking spaces per cluster unit development where cluster unit development is defined as a combination or arrangement of attached or detached dwellings and their accessory structures on contiguous or related building sites. As conditioned, field staff performing on -site monitoring and maintenance will utilize the on -site guest parking spaces within the Bayridge Park Community during monthly visits.
Finding:
E. The limited duration use is consistent with all applicable provisions of the General Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
Facts in Suaaort of Findina:
1. The limited term permit would allow the limited duration use to deviate from setback requirements and building separation requirements of the Aeronutronic Ford Planned Community (PC24) Zoning District pursuant to Section 20.52.040 (Limited Term Permits) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
2. The temporary (one [1]-year duration) treatment system building is conditioned to comply with all other applicable provisions of the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
01-17-23
50 10-343
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 7 of 11
3. The treatment system building is conditioned to comply with all applicable provisions of the City's allowable exterior noise level. Condition of Approval Nos. 17 and 18 have been added requiring an acoustic audit of the prefabricated building and treatment system unit running at its maximum capacity prior to installation, and a subsequent audit after installation.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds this project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15330 under Class 30 (Minor Actions to Prevent, Minimize, Stabilize, Mitigate or Eliminate the Release or Threat of Release of Hazardous Water or Hazardous Substances) and Section 15308 under Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment.
2. The Zoning Administrator of the City of Newport Beach hereby approves the Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180), subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.
3. This action shall become final and effective 14 days following the date this Resolution was adopted unless within such time an appeal or call for review is filed with the Community Development Director by the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning, of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2O23. , AICP, Zoning Administrator
01-17-23
'57 10-344
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 8 of 11
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Planning Division
The development shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans, and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval (except as modified by applicable conditions of approval).
2. The project is subject to all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
3. The applicant shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws. A material violation of any of those laws in connection with the use may be caused the revocation of this limited term permit.
4. This Limited Term Permit may be modified or revoked by the Zoning Administrator if determined that the proposed uses or conditions under which it is being operated or maintained are detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or maintained to constitute a public nuisance.
5. This Limited Term Permit shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of final issuance of the building permit unless an extension of up to one (1) additional period of 12 months is granted by the Zoning Administrator in compliance with Section 20.54.060 (Time Limits and Extensions) of the Zoning Code. A letter requesting the extension shall be submitted to the Planning Division no later than thirty (30) days before the expiration date of this permit.
6. Upon completion of this soil remediation project, the applicant is required to obtain a demolition permit from the City's Building Division and the site shall be returned to its former conditions prior to construction.
7. The treatment system building shall be designed with a gable roof and provide siding painted to match colors that are architecturally compatible with surrounding residential units.
8. Maintenance vehicles shall utilize residential guest spaces within the Bayridge Park community with approval from the Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association when working at the soil vapor extraction system and treatment facility.
9. Maintenance requiring large commercial vehicles shall be permitted to park on Country Club Road no more than two (2) times per calendar year unless otherwise required for health and safety. The applicant shall notify the Bayridge Park Homeowner's Association and the One Ford Road Homeowner's Association in writing at least seven (7) days before performing maintenance.
01-17-23
'5g 10-345
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 9 of 11
10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the A/C unit serving 94 Hartford shall be relocated so that it does not interfere with the building separation between the prefabricated building and the residential unit.
11. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the project plans shall be modified to demonstrate that any disturbed landscape areas shall be replanted with water -efficient landscaping by Chapter 14.17 (Water Efficient Landscaping).
12. Prior to the issuance of a final building permit, the applicant shall obtain approval for a Permit to Construct (P/C) from the South Coast Quality Air Management District.
13. Any change in operational characteristics, expansion in the area, or other modification to the approved plans, shall require additional review from the Planning Division and may require an amendment to this Limited Term Permit or the processing of a new Limited Term Permit.
14. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit "A" shall be incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans before issuance of the building permits.
15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. These plans shall demonstrate the restoration of surrounding landscaping to provide further screening for the treatment system building.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning Division.
17. The treatment system unit shall be constructed off -site and prior to the transportation of the prefabricated treatment system unit to the project site and after installation of the structure, an acoustic audit shall be performed to ensure that the noise level observed at the exterior of the structure meets the allowable exterior noise standards of Chapter
10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The results of the acoustic audit shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to final inspection of the building permit.
01-17-23
�� 10-346
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 10 of 11
18. All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter
10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than depicted below for the specified periods unless the ambient noise level is higher:
Between the hours of 7:00 AM
and 10:00 PM
Between the hours of 10:00
PM and 7:00 AM
Location
Interior
Exterior
Interior
Exterior
Residential Property
45dBA
55dBA
40dBA
50dBA
Residential Property located within
100 feet of a commercial property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
50dBA
Mixed Use Property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
50dBA
Commercial Property
N/A
65dBA
N/A
60dBA
19. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the current business owner, property owner, or leasing agent.
20. Construction activities shall comply with Section 10.28.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, which restricts hours of noise -generating construction activities that produce noise to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise -generating construction activities are not allowed on Sundays or Holidays.
21. This approval shall expire and become void unless exercised within 24 months from the actual date of review authority approval, except where an extension of time is approved in compliance with the provisions of Title 20 Planning and Zoning of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
22. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents from and against any claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs, and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements, and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation including, but not limited to, Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180). This indemnification shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit, attorney's fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by the applicant, City, and/or the parties initiating or bringing the such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of the City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages that which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions outlined in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City under the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition.
01-17-23
00 10-347
Zoning Administrator Resolution No. ZA2023-010
Paae 11 of 11
Fire Department
23. A three (3)-foot wide walkway shall be provided on at least one (1) side of the lot from Country Club Drive for Fire Department access.
Building Division
24. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City's Building Division and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City - adopted version of the California Building Code.
25. A list of "good housekeeping" practices will be incorporated into the long-term post - construction operation of the site to minimize the likelihood that pollutants will be used, stored, or spilled on the site that could impair water quality. These may include frequent parking area vacuum truck sweeping, removal of wastes or spills, limited use of harmful fertilizers or pesticides, and the diversion of stormwater away from potential sources of pollution (e.g., trash receptacles and parking structures). The Stage 2 WQMP shall list and describe all structural and non-structural BMPs. In addition, the WQMP must also identify the entity responsible for the long-term inspection, maintenance, and funding for all structural (and if applicable Treatment Control) BMPs.
Electrical, Mechanical, and Plumbing Division
26. All exhaust air shall terminate outside of the treatment system building in accordance with the requirements of California Mechanical Code 502.0.
27. Discharged liquid waste or sewage shall be connected properly to the drainage system of the premises in accordance with the requirements pursuant to California Plumbing Code, Chapter 7.
28. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall ensure the location of the exhaust is adequately sited away from any residential building openings. 01-17-23
0 10-348
02 10-349
Attachment No. PC 5
March 2, 2023, Zoning Administrator
Minutes
O3 10-350
04 10-351
NEWPORT BEACH ZONING ADMINISTRATOR MINUTES
100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, NEWPORT BEACH
ZOOM
THURSDAY, MARCH 2, 2023
REGULAR MEETING — 10:00 A.M.
CALL TO ORDER — The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m.
Staff Present (Remote): Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP, Zoning Administrator Jenny Tran, Assistant Planner
David Keely, Senior Civil Engineer
REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES
None
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 16, 2023
Action: Approved
IV. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 2 Spanos Residence Coastal Development Permit (PA2022-0214) Site Location: 2761 Bay Shore Drive Council District 6
Jenny Tran, Assistant Planner, provided a brief project description stating that this project is to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new 1,977-square-foot two-story single-family residence with a 669-square-foot garage and 617-square-foot upper exterior terrace. She noted that the project includes a pool, 2,311 square feet of landscaped area, hardscape walls, and drainage facilities. Furthermore, she indicated that the property is within the R-1 Zoning district and RSD General Plan category and complies with all development standards, does not involve a change in land use, density, or intensity that results in an increased demand for public access. In addition, she relayed that the property is approximately 155 feet from Newport Bay and separated from the water by Bay Shore Drive and a row of existing residential development.
Ms. Tran noted that the project site is not located adjacent to a coastal view road, public viewpoint, public beach, or public accessway as identified in the Coastal Land Use Plan and the proposed development is consistent with the existing neighborhood and does not have the potential to visually impact the community from public views. She stated that the project is conditioned to provide a final landscape plan as part of the approval for the final building permits and staff recommends the approval of this application.
Zoning Administrator Zdeba clarified that while the project location is near Coast Highway, a coastal view road, it is in a segment that does not have a coastal view. He added that the community was developed in 1941, as a private gated community prior to the Coastal Act.
Zoning Administrator Zdeba opened the public hearing.
Tony Weiland, applicant, stated that he reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all the required conditions, noted the project is consistent with the neighborhood, smaller in size than the existing residence, set back 47 feet from the street, has no visual impact and improves views for neighbors, and the materials will match the existing neighboring house owned by the same owners. In response to Zoning Administrator Zdeba's question, Mr. Weiland confirmed that although the house is owned in common with the neighboring house, there will be no improvements across the lot line and no formal merging of the lots.
Seeing that no one from the public wished to comment, Zoning Administrator Zdeba closed the public hearing. 05 10-352
Zoning Administrator Zdeba noted the project is compatible with the allowable development envelope in the Bay Shores community, meets all the findings, is consistent with the Class 3 exemption, and the exemptions to the Class 3 exemption do not apply. He approved the project subject to the conditions in Exhibit "A." Action: Approved
ITEM NO. 3 Aeronutronic Ford Soil Vapor Remediation Limited Term Permit (PA2022-0180) Site Location: 94 Hartford Drive Council District 4
Jenny Tran, Assistant Planner, provided a project description stating that the request is to allow a Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) and treatment system for a 12-month term within the Bayridge Park Homeowners Association.
The project would consist of approximately 2,400 linear feet of underground piping, 13 extraction wells, and a 12-foot by 10-foot treatment system building. The Limited Term Permit allows for a deviation from select development standards. She noted that the proposed location is adjacent to 94 Hartford Drive and Country Club Drive, the project proposes a three-foot separation between the building and an encroachment into the five-foot setback. The treatment system will use a blower to extract vapor from the soil through wells, and pipes will deliver the extracted vapors to the treatment system where granular activated carbon will remove the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and discharge clean vapor. She noted that the applicant is conditioned to obtain a permit from the South Coast Quality Air Management District (SCAQMD) for the release of treated vapors. She reviewed the remediation efforts of the former Ford Aeronutronic facility once located at the project site, including an overview of residential use rezoning, additional VOC remediation mandates by the Santa Ana Regional Quality Control Board, the Acoustical Engineering Analysis, measures to reduce exterior noise, Newport Beach Municipal Code maximum allowable exterior noise levels, and measures to satisfy compliance with noise standards. Furthermore, Ms. Tran relayed an Alternative Location Analysis and six factors used to select the project site, public meetings by the applicant on November 4, 2021, and January 18, 2023, extensive public outreach by the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, Ford, and WSP to those impacted from the remediation, project conditions that soften community impact, and Demolition Permit requirements upon completion of the soil remediation project.
Before opening the public hearing, Zoning Administrator Zdeba clarified that public comments are not to be used for questions and answers. He encouraged speakers to provide a list of all comments, concerns, and questions. He asked speakers to limit comments to four minutes and emphasized his interest in hearing thoughts and concerns on this matter.
Daniela Haman n-N azaroff, WSP Project Manager, whose company is responsible for the environmental investigation and clean up associated with Ford former Aeronutronic facility, introduced the team, used a presentation to review the project background, human health impacts, project description, community engagement and concerns, and system safety. Jessica Law, the Case Manager from the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, used the presentation to review the vapor intrusion health risks, investigation, short-term solutions, and SVE system, and displayed a map outlining the investigation and remediation areas.
Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff continued the presentation to relay the details of the Bayridge Park SVE System, project community outreach, community concerns, alternative location analysis map, location summary, parking impacts, location decision, system safety for air quality, safety in design, safety for electromagnetic fields, and SVE is a proven technology, and, lastly, the quality of life relative to noise and aesthetics and timeframe for remediation.
In response to Zoning Administrator Zdeba's question, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff confirmed four alternative locations were explored and three more locations at the City's request, that parking is a high priority for the HOA and the community based on feedback, and that the construction timeline would extend an additional six months to a year for the project if the parking area in the northwestern part of Bayridge Park is used to accommodate additional piping and trenching.
At the request of Zoning Administrator Zdeba, Senior Civil Engineer Keely provided traffic safety information that deemed site five on Bison Avenue infeasible and confirmed that the Public Works Director is aware of the potential location and not supportive of site five for the reasons he outlined. 00 10-353
In response to Zoning Administrator Zdeba's questions, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff confirmed that site six lacked space on the southern portion of Country Club Drive and the northern portion has a grade difference and slope challenges. She thought the $1 million cost evaluation for the Class 30 exemption of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) is appropriate and stated with confidence that the project meets the exemption. Furthermore, she indicated that the project information phone line is a good contact method for the community and her willingness to share her cell phone number for questions or concerns. Emily Miller, WSP, clarified that the building plans will be updated to match the actual vent location. Ms. Law noted that facilities are typically located closest to the extraction well and have had no complaints.
Zoning Administrator Zdeba invited the public to speak.
Amy Santella noted a list of six main categories of concern that she submitted in writing. She identified there is a window on her unit that is missing from the plan and requested a continuance to have the distance of the missed window measured to meet the requirement prior to granting a permit. She objected to the project location and asked for it to be changed for the safety of her child. She requested that an external consultant review the infeasibilities, noted no real-time monitoring to show the total VOC concentration emitted from the building three feet from her home, suggested a longer project time frame and confirming assumptions with analytical data, requested data regarding safety and child and infant development, and asked the City to protect the well-being of her family and ensure the distance requirements.
Leslie Pratt concurred with Ms. Santella, shared her medical background and concerns, and asked to be treated fairly.
Lee Healy expressed concern for quality of life, noted the source of parking issues, inquired about an alternate location, and requested information about the closest open active SVE system.
Seeing no other members of the public wishing to speak, Zoning Administrator Zdeba encouraged the applicant to address any concerns or questions raised.
In response to public comment, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff relayed that the northeast location was part of the analysis and deemed infeasible with HOA and public input and nearest SVE system is in the Newport North Shopping Center. Ms. Law noted that the SVE system at the Newport North Shopping Center is managed by the local oversight program, uses a chain link fence, and may not have noise dampening.
In response to Zoning Administrator Zdeba's inquires, Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff and Ms. Miller concurred that the California Building Code for a SVE discharge is a minimum of three feet and the distance of the proposed building exceeds this and offers protection in any direction and agreed to provide an update. Ms. Law confirmed that agencies conduct substantial and significant SVE monitoring, reiterated the importance of getting this facility online, elaborated on the remediation timeline and health safety factors, and indicated that the soil gas plume would be contained. Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff noted that the understanding of who is impacted could change if the remaining 40 percent of the homes were sampled.
Ms. Hamann-Nazaroff of WSP stated that she had reviewed the draft resolution and agrees with all the required conditions. Furthermore, she agreed to a possible additional condition by the Zoning Administrator that would require the exhaust vent location be fully compliant with all codes and regulations, including distances from windows or other openings.
Zoning Administrator Zdeba closed the public hearing.
Zoning Administrator Zdeba related to and expressed empathy for those who spoke. He stated that this is a difficult situation and reiterated the importance of finding an expeditious solution given the health concerns and regulatory agencies' directives. He indicated that, although the building is roughly three feet from the residential unit, it would be fully compliant with all building and safety, and fire code requirements. He noted that monitoring tools have become more sensitive for a better reading of data with more science behind the potential impacts to health, and that the regulatory agencies involved would be closely monitoring the facility for safety and compliance. He clarified the 12-month temporary limited term permit would become effective at the issuance 07 10-354
of the final building permit with the option, not a guarantee, of requesting a 12-month extension. He added that the Limited Term Permit could be revoked if the operation constituted a nuisance and that an additional public hearing and approval would be necessary if the project required more time than two years.
Zoning Administrator Zdeba highlighted the conditions of approval, including the additional condition regarding adequate separation of the vent from the window, walked through facts to support all the findings, and found the project to be exempt under Class 30 and Class 8 of CEQA. He approved the submitted project as the best option given the practical difficulties at alternative locations, subject to the conditions of approval in Exhibit "A." Zoning Administrator Zdeba informed the public that the decision is appealable to the Planning Commission within 14 calendar days, as outlined in Title 20 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Action: Approved
V. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS
None
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The hearing was adjourned at 11:20 a.m.
The agenda for the Zoning Administrator Hearing was posted on February 23, 2023, at 4:30 p.m. on the digital display board located inside the vestibule of the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive and on the City's website on February 23, 2023, at 4:30 p.m.
Jaiffie Murillo
Zoning Administrator
02 10-355
Attachment No. PC 6
Acoustical Engineering Analysis
and Addendum
09 10-356
70 10-357
Yanchar Design & Consulting Group
26o-
741 F tola Parkway - SE Suite 1
Footl-�ill fl-l" California 0261 O
040.770.6601 - 940.770.6575 fax
www.wave-s pace.com
WSP USA Environment & Infrastructure Inc.
555 12th Street, Suite 215
Oakland, California 94607
USA
T:1-510-663-4100
F:1-833-778-3465
www.wsp.com
February 10, 2023
Project 8622397107.03.3D
Jenny Tran, Assistant Planner
City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
Planning Division
100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bay B
Newport Beach, California 92660
Subject: Limited Term Permit Application No. PA2022-0180 Acoustical Engineering Analysis — Addendum
Soil Vapor Treatment System
Bayridge Park
Newport Beach, California
Dear Jenny Tran:
The purpose of the letter is to respond to comments from the City of Newport Beach (City) on the Acoustical Engineering Analysis Report (Acoustical Report), dated October 15, 2022, prepared by Yanchar Design & Consulting Group (Yanchar), and submitted as part of the requirements for issuing of a Limited Term Permit for a proposed soil vapor treatment system to be installed adjacent to the residence at 94 Hartford Drive in the Bayridge Park Homeowners Association property.
The comments which were made verbally during a call with WSP staff on January 25, 2022 are summarized below: