City of Costa Mesa Request for Consideration of 375 Bristol Street

AIRPORT lAND USE COMMISSION
ORANGE
FOR
COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 • 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012
AGENDA ITEM 3
July 21,2016
TO:
Commissioners/Alternates
FROM:
KariA. Rigoni, Executive Officer
SUBJECT:
City of Costa Mesa Request or Consideration of375 Bristol Street Mixed-Use
Storage and Food Retail Project
Background
~
The project proponent Sanderson J Ray Development, is proposing to partially demolish an existing
automotive center at 375 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, and develop a new two-story, 744 unit mini
storage facility and ood retail. The proposed project also includes installation of rooftop-mounted
solar panels.
The site is located at the southern end of Bristol Street near Campus Drive, where the road splits into
a frontage road along the 73 Freeway creating only ~one-way access to the property (See Attachment
1 to view the Project Location Map). Existing uses on the site consist of independent automotive
repair shops, tire store, smog check, sound systems installations and various other retail tenants
offering food (sushi and sandwiches) as well as fitness gyms and studios. Proposed uses will
encompass 12,45o' square feet (SF) of existing retail maintaining the sushi and sandwich operations
(3,680 SF combined) and relocating other auto-related tenants·to the remaining available area of
approximately 8, 770 SF. The new mini-storage two-level building will total 89,560 SF plus l ,000 SF
for on-site management offic es for the storage OP.erations. The to al project will equal 103,010 SF
when completed.
The project is being referred to your Commission because of the project's location within the Airport
Planning Area for JW A and because the project requires a Zone Change. The site will be rezoned
from Planned Development Commercial (PDC) to General Business District (C2).
The City of Costa Mesa has scheduled public hearings on the proposed project as follows:
June 13,2016
September 2016
Planning Commission
City Council (TBD)
AELUP Issues
The project has been evaluated for conflicts with respect to aircraft noise, building heights, safety
zones, solar glare and the development of heliports.
,\gcnda Item 3- 13ristol Sl. Mini Storage
July 21,2016
i>ugc 2
Regarding Aircraft Noise Impacts
The proposed project is located within the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 1) for
JWA (see Attachment 2). The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed project
includes Mitigation Measure NOl-l which requires air conditioning or noise-attenuated passive
ventilation and wall assemblies designed to meet an interior noise level of 55 dBA CNEL for the
retail and restaurant uses on site, and Mitigation Measure NOI-2 which requires air conditioning or
noise-attenuated passive ventilation and wall assemblies designed to meet an interior noise level of
50 dBA CNEL for the storage and office portions of the project.
The mitigation measures listed above will ensure that the commercial and industrial structures are
sufficiently sound attenuated to allow normal work activities to be conducted per the noise policies
stated in Section 3.2.3 of the AELUP for JWA.
Regarding Height Restrictions
In Section 2.1.3 of the JWA A ELUP, the Commission has incorporated the standards for height limits
for determining obstructions and has incorporated the definitions of"imaginary surfaces" for airports
as defined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77. The project is located within the FAR Part
77 '"imaginary surfaces" referral area (see Attachments 3 and 4).
The proposed project is located within the AELUP Notification Area for JW A as shown in
Attachment 3. The proposed maximum height for the project is 58' above mean sea level (AMSL)
and does not penetrate the notilication surface at 76.3'AMSL. Because ofthe project's close
proximity to the airport, the project applicant filed Form 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and has received a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation. The FAA
Aeronautical Study No. 2016-A WP-2792-0E is included as Attachment 5.
Attachment 4 shows that the proposed project is located within the approach surface for JW A which
limits heights to 100' AMSL at the proposed project location. The proposed maximum building
height at this site is 58' AMSL which is 42' below the approach surface. Because the project does
not penetrate the approach surface, the project will not impact areas reserved for air navigation.
Regarding Safetv Zones
Attachment 6 contains the Safety Zone exhibit showing the proposed project site within Safety Zones
2, 3 and 6 for JWA. Attachment 7 shows a portion of the proposed project site within the Runway
Protection Zone (RPZ) for JWA. The uses within this eastern portion of the project site (within the
RPZ) will remain unchanged. However, upgrades to modernize the storefront fa~ade and signage
within the remaining footprint and building shell are proposed. The portion of the project within
Safety Zone 2 overlaps the RPZ in the eastern portion of the site and will maintain the existing
building and uses.
Typically, uses are not allowed, or are limited, within the RPZ if the RPZ is on airport property.
Parking lots, street and roads should normally be avoided within the RPZ as well as nonresidential
uses except if very low intensity in character and confined to the outer sides. New structures and
residential land uses are prohibited. The existing designated land uses and the buildings on the
proposed project site have been in place since 1989 and are not part of the airport property. As part
of this project, no new structures within the RPZ or Safety Zone 2 are being proposed. The project
would maintain the existing buildings.
i\gendil Item 3- Bristlll St. Mini Storage
July 21. 2016
Page 3
The remaining portions of the project are located within Safety Zones 3 and 6 for JWA. Safety Zone
3, the Inner Turning Zone, normally allows the proposed project uses: mini-storage, warehouses, light
industrial and vehicle repair services, and recommends limiting office and other commercial uses to
low intensities. To meet the density/intensity standards in the California Airport Land Use Planning
Handbook prepared in October 2011, the proposed project will provide 54 parking spaces. This
would limit the number of people visiting the food court and result in Jess than the average maximum
number of 150 people for nonresidential uses and Jess than the maximum single acre restriction of
450 people.
The northern portion of the project is located within Safety Zone 6 for the JW A short runway. The
proposed project does not include any features that should be avoided or limited within Safety Zone 6
and no prohibited uses are proposed.
Solar Glare Analvsis
The proposed project includes the installation of rooftop-mounted solar panels. Because of the
project's location within the approach/departure corridor for JWA, the airport and the ALUC
requested that a Glare Analysis be completed for the proposed solar panels. The project applicant
utilized the FAA recommended Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool (SGHAT). See Attachment 8 to
view results of the glare analysis.
To utilize the SGHAT tool, the applicant must enter site location, draw an outline ofthe proposed
solar energy system, and specify observer locations such as the Airport Traffic Control Tower and
final approach paths. Latitude, longitude, and elevation are automatically recorded through the
Google interface, providing necessary information for sun position and vector calculations. The tool
takes into account that ocular impact must be analyzed over the entire calendar year in one minute
intervals from when the sun rises above the horizon until the sun sets below the horizon. Additional
information regarding the orientation and tilt of the solar energy panels, reflectance, environment,
and ocular factors are entered by the applicant. The Glare Report showed that no glare impact is
predicted from the proposed solar panels. No glare would occur along the flightpath at any distance
from 2 miles out to half a mile from the control tower.
The applicant shared the results with the Operations Division of JWA and the FAA Air Traffic
Control Tower. JW A Operations Division is satisfied with the glare analysis as meeting FAA's
guidance for evaluating such projects. Upon review, operations did not have any concerns with the
proposed project. The Control Tower did not provide feedback on the analysis.
Heliports
Heliports are not proposed as part of project. The City of Costa Mesa General Plan includes
language that states proposals to develop new heliports must be submitted through the City to the
ALUC for review and action pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21661.5 and includes the
requirement that proposed heliport projects must comply fully with the State permit procedure
provided by law and with all conditions of approval imposed or recommended by FAA, by the ALUC
for Orange County and by Caltrans/Division of Aeronautics.
Agcndu Item 3- Bnstnl St Mm1 Storage
Jul) 21. 20 16
l'ugc-1
Environmental Compliance
A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared as the CEQA documentation to analyze the potential
impacts ofthe project. ALUC staffprovided comments on the initial study on June 10,2016 related
to the project being located within the RPZ and Safety Zones for JWA and the need to utilize the
FAA recommended SGHA T. See Attachment 9 to view the comment letter.
Conclusion
Attachment 10 to this report contains excerpts from the project submittal package received from the
City of Costa Mesa for your reference. ALUC staff has reviewed this project with respect to
compliance with the AELUP for JWA, including review of noise, height restrictions, imaginary
surfaces, safety zones, solar glare and environmental compliance. During the review process, the
City and applicant agreed that no new structures would be constructed within the RPZ andlor Safety
Zone 2.
Recommendation:
1. That the Commission finds the proposed 375 Bristol Street Mixed-Use Storage and Food
Retail Project Consistent with the AELUP for JWA.
Respectfully submitted,
~/~
.
~
Kari A. Rigoni
Executive Officer
Attachments:
1. Project Location Map
2. .IWA CNEL Contours
3. FAR Part 77 AELUP Notification Area for JWA
4. FAR Part 77 JW A Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces
5. FAA Form 7460-1 Aeronautical Study
6. Safety Zone Exhibit
7. RPZ Exhibit
8. Solar Panel Analysis Results
9. ALUC Comments on MND
10. Submittal Package from City of Costa Mesa
Upper Newport Bay
C:J Project Location
i=:i City Boundary
t
....
SOURCE ESRI, Orange County GIS
Costa Mesa IS/MND.150652
Figure 3
Study Area Map - Aerial Base
ATIACHMENT 1
Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white.
John Wayne Airport Impact Zones
lEGEND
.. - -- • s....,...
-ss- CNEL CONTOUR
Composite contour from
John Wayne Airport Project
Case-1990 and 2005
(see section 2.2.1)
CERTIFICATION
- - - · RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE
- • •-• CITY BOUNDARIES
-AIRPORT BOUNDARIES
ATTACHMENT 2
AELUP - 2007 I Jwoipzone-07<375N.8ris tol>. dgn
AELUP Notification Area for JWA
Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in whi te.
FAR PART77
Notification Area for John Wayne Airport: 20,000' Radius at 100:1 Slope
LEGEND
CERTIFICATION
---
..
·---=
: k*"'"·..
20,000'Radius
-· · - · CITY BOUNDARIES
AIRPORT BOUNDARIES
ATTACHMENT 3
AELUP · 2007 / Jwonotf - 07<375N.8ristoD. dgn
I
' Note: County Unincorporated areas are shown in white .
FAR PART 77
John Wayne Airport Obstruction Imaginary Surfaces
~
0
*
----Scote In F' eel
LEGEND
1!00
-··-• CITY BOUNDARIES
AIRPORT BOUNDARIES
CERTIFICATION
ATTACHMENT 4
AELUP - 2007 I jwohsurfoce- 07<375N.8ristol>.dgn
&)
Mail Processing Center
Federal Aviation Administration
Southwest Regional Office
Obstructi on Evaluation Group
10101 Hillwood Parkway
Fort Wonh. TX 76177
Aeronautical Study No.
2016-A WP-2792-0E
Issued Date: 04/26/2016
Walkie Ray
Sanderson J Ray Development
2699 Whire Road
Suite 150
Irvine. CA 9261~
**DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION**
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C.,
Section ++718 and if applk·able Titl~ I~ of lhe Code of Federal Regulations. part n. concerning:
Structure:
Location:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Heigh[S:
Building Bristol Street Stornge and Food Hall
Costa Mesa. CA
33-39-51.20N NAD 83
117-52-46.40W
29 feet site elevation (SE)
26 feet above ground level {AGLl
55 feet above mean sea level (_AMSL)
This aeronautical study revealed that the structure does not exceed obstruction sEandards and would not be a
hazard to air navigati·on provided the following condition( sl. if any. is( are) n~t:
ll is required that FAA Form 7460-2. Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration. bee-filed any time the
project is abandoned or:
_ _ At least 10 days prior to start of construction (7460-2, Part 11
_X_ Within 5 da)'S after the construction reaches its greatest height (7~2. Pan 2)
Based on this evaluaEion. marking and lighting are not necessary for aviation safety. However, if marking.'
lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis. we recommend il be installed and maintained in accordance
with FAA Advisory circular 70n460-t L.
ADVISORY RECOr---~tENDAllON · While the structure does not constitute a hazard to air navigation . it
would be located wichin the Runway Protection Zone i RPZ) of the John Wayne Airport+Orange County Ajrport,
Runway 2L.
Structures. which wiU result in the congregation of peop' e within an RPZ. are suongly discouraged in the
interest of protecting people and property on the ground. In cases where the airport owner can comrot the use of
the property. such structures are prohibited. In cases where the airpon owner exercises no such control. advisory
recommendations arc issued to inform the sponsor of the inad"·isability of the project from the standpoint of
safety to personnel and property.
Page 1 of 4
AITACHMENT 5
EXHIBIT F
This determination expires on 10/26/2017 unless:
Ca)
(b)
(c)
the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460~ 2. Notice of Actual
Construction or Aherntion. is received by this office.
e:uended. revised, or lenninated by the issuing office.
the construction is subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and an application for a consrruction permit has been filed . as required by the FCC. within
6 months of the date of this determination. In such case. the detennination e:\pires on the date
prescribed by the FCC for completion of consrmction. or rhe date the FCC denies the application.
NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST
BE E-ALED AT LEAST l5 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION
OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO
SIGNIACANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DE"I"EAAUNATION MAY BE
E:l.lGlBLE FOR ONE 8<TENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD.
This detennination is based. in part. on the foregoing description which incl udes specific coordinates . heights,
frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates . heights. and frequencies or use of greater power will
void this determination. Any future construction or alteration . including increase to heights, power. or the
addition of other transminers. requires separate notice ro rhe FAA.
lb..is determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes. derricks, etc., which may be
used during actual construction of the structure. However. this equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as
indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the
FA:\.
This dt!terminarion concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace
by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance resJX>nsibilities relating to any law, ordinance. or
regulation of any Federal. Stare, or local government body.
Any failure or malfunction that las1~ more than thirty 00) minutes and affects a top ligbt or flashing ohstruction
light. regardless of its posirion. should be reported immediately to (877) 487-6867 so a Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the normal operation is restored. notify the same number.
If we can be of further assistance. please contact our office ar (~25) 227-2625. On any furure correspondence
concerning this matter. please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2016-AWP-2792-0E.
Signature Control No: 28.5~320-289916329
Paul Holmquist
Specialist
Anachment(s}
Map(s )
Page 2 of 4
(ONE I
John Wayne Airport Safety Zone Reference Map
LEGEND
I RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE
2 INNER APPROACH / DEPARTURE ZONE
J. INNER TURNING ZOM;
4 OUTER APPROACH
.. - -SeeN kol t eel
DEPARTURE ZONE
CERTIFICATION
5 S10EUNE ZONf
6. TRAFFIC PATIERN ZONE
ATIACHMENT6
AELUP· 2007 I jwostzonerfm(3 75N.Bristoll.dgn
ATTACHMENT 7
6/23/16, 12.32 PM
Bristol Site Config 1 ForgeSolar
. ..
······~
FOJt9ijJ~ 0 I ~
r',: j,CING (IPRICINGJ1
... J • •
.--
MY PROJECTS (!PROJECTS/)
MY ACCOUNT VACCOUNTS/PROFILEI)
HELP (/HELP/)
Site config: Bristol
No site config description provided.
Created June 23, 2018 3:24p.m.
ONI vartn and peaks at 1,000.0 W/m"'2
Analyze evary 1 mlnute(s)
0.5 ocular transmission coetficlenl
0.002 ft pupil diameter
0.017 ft eye focallenglh
11.3 mred s11n sublended angle
Summary of Results No glare pred•cted!
PVname
PV 41\'IY l
Tilt
Orientation
"Green• Glare
"Yellow" Glare
"Red" Glare
Energy Produced
deg
deg
min
min
min
kWh
10 0
160.0
0
0
0
223.200.0
Component Data
Flight Paths
Name: FP 1
Latitude
Longitude
Ground elevation
Height aboveground
Total elevation
deg
deg
ft
ft
ft
Threshold
33.675640
·117.869010
49
50
99
2-mlle point
33 649835
-1 17,884698
4
647
652
Description:
Threahold height 50 ft
Dlrealon ~ 206 .81
deg
Glide slope. 3.0 deg
Pilot view reatrided? No
Observation Points
Number
Latitude
Longitude
Ground elevation
Height above ground
Total Elevation
deg
deg
ft
ft
ft
33.677988
· 117.869906
50
60
110
Page 1 of 2
hHps //www forgesolar.com/prolects/243/conf,gs/1199/
ATTACHMENT 8
Bristol Site Config 1 ForgeSolar
6/23/16, 12:32 PM
PV array 1
Predicted energy output lassumlng aunny, clear akles all yearJ: 223,200.0 kWh
Axla tracking: Axed (no rotation)
Vertex
Latitude
Longitude
Ground elevation
Height above ground
Total elevaUon
deg
deg
It
It
ft
33.664389
·117.880236
31
20
51
2
33.664267
·117.880263
29
20
49
3
33.664194
-1n879654
30
20
50
4
33 664315
·117.879634
29
20
49
Tilt: 10.0 deg
Orientation: 160.0 deg
Rated power: 100.0 kW
Panel material: Smooth glass without AA coating
Vary reflectivity With aun position? Yes
Correlate alope error with surface type? No
Slope error: 10.0 mrad
No glare predlctedl
2015 C Sims lndustrlas, All Rights RaseNed. Privacy PoKey Vprivacy-poHcy/11 Terms of
Service Vterms-of-use/1
http 5://www. forgesoiar.c om/project 5/243/configs/1199/
Page 2 of 2
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
FOR
ORANGE
COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue • Costa Mesa, California 92626 • 949.252.5170 fax: 949.252.6012
June I 0, 2016
Mel Lee. AICP, Senior Planner
Cit) of Costa Mesa/Development Ser\'ices Department
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92628
Subject: Draft MND Bristol Mini-Storage Facility
Dear Mr. Lee:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) for the Bristol Min;-Storage Facility located at 375 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa,
CA. in the context of the Airport Land Usc Commission's Airport Environs Land Use
Phm.fiw.Jolm Wayne Ailporr (.IWA AELUP). The proposed project includes demolition
of the existing automotive strip mall and the development of a two-story, 774-unit MiniStorage Facilit) and 5,000 square foot Food Court Building. Loning of the project will be
amended to accommodate the proposed project.
The proposed project also includes installation of rooftop-mounted solar panels. Because
of the project's location within the approach/departure corridor for JW A, the project
applicant should prepare a Glare Analysis lor the proposed solar panels. The Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) requires the use of the Solar Glare Hazard Analysis Tool
(SGHAT) lor glare hazard analyses near airports (78 FR 63276). lnfonnation regarding
the SGHAT can be found at https: WW\\ .suhat.com/. The results of the glare analysis
should be discussed in the MND and be included as part of the City's submittal package
to the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) tor Orange County at the time of a request
lor ALUC consistency review.
We also request that the MND analyze the project's location within the Runway
Protection Zone (RPZ) and Safety Zones 2, 3 and 6 for JW A. The California Airport
Land Use Planning Handbook (issued by the State of California Department of
Transportation/ Division of Aeronautics, October 20 II) defines these safety zones and
describes uses that are allowed, prohibited. and uses that should be avoided within these
t.one~. The RPZ prohibits all new structures and residential land uses within this zone
and also states that parking lots. streets. and roads should be avoided. Safety Zone 2 is
the Inner Approach/Departure Lone where most eating establishments should be avoided.
Safet) Zone 3 is the Inner Turning Zone which limits office and other commercial uses to
ATTACHMENT 9
\I t <. L mnm..:nt~ Bmtul \lim Stnr.1g..:
() 10 16
P.1g..: 2
lo\\ intensities. Commercial and other nonresidential uses having higher usage intensities
should be a\ oided. Each zone also defines the risk of aircrati accidents as very high, high
and moderate risk. The MND should discuss what portions of the proposed project are
within each Safety Zone and RPZ for JW A and identify potential impacts. Please refer to
the AELUP for JWA, which discusses the Safety Zones and includes the Safety Zone
Exhibit for JW A in Appendix D. Specific mapping of the JWA RPZ and safety zones
can be made a\'ailable for the City's use.
Because this project falls within the JWA airport planning area and requires a Zoning
Code Amendment. we recommend that the City refer the proposed project to the ALUC
for Orange County as required by Section 21676 of the California Public Utilities Code to
determine consistency \\ith the AELUP.for JJVA . With respect to project submittals,
please note that the Commission \\ants such referrals to be submitted to the ALUC tor a
determination between the Local Agency's expected Planning Commission and City
Council hearings. Since the ALUC meets on the third Thursday afternoon of each month.
submittals must be received in the ALUC office by the first of the month to ensure
sufficient time lor review, analysis, and agendizing.
Thank )OU again for the opportunity to comment on the MND. Please contact Lea
Choum at (949) 252-5123 or\ ia email at lchoum a ocair.com should you have any
questions related to the future referral of your project.
:;i:z:~.
Kari A. Rigoni
Executi\'e Oniccr
CITY OF COSTA MESA
P.O. BOX 1200 • 77 FAIR DRIVE • CALIFORNIA 92628·1200
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
June 30, 2016
Ms. Kari Rigoni
Planning Manager, Facilities
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION FOR ORANGE COUNTY
3160 Airway Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Email: Kari Rigoni, [email protected]
cc:
Lea Choum, [email protected]
Re: 375 BRISTOL MIXED-USE STORAGE AND FOOD RETAIL REVISED CONCEPT
DESIGN
Dear Kari,
Please accept this application for the above referenced project for review for a consistency
determination with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP).
1
Project Description
Rezone and Conditional Use Permit to partially demolish an existing automotive center at 375
Bristol and develop a new two-story, 744 unit mini storage facility. The Eastern portion of the
existing retail center (approximately 12,450 SF) and some of the existing tenants will remain
operational in place during and after construction.
2
Location of the Project (See Area Map and Site Plan)
The site, 375 Bristol, is located at the southern end of Bristol near Campus where the road
splits into a frontage road along the 73 Freeway creating only a one-way access to the
property. To the West there is a retail shopping center (Mon Arnie Bridal) and the Ayres Hotel.
The Newport Beach Golf Course is located to the East and the property line abuts an out-ofbounds area of play. The 55' wide concrete Santa Ana-Delhi Channel Watershed borders the
southerly portion of the property creating an approximately 70' buffer to the closest residential
use across the channel.
3
Existing and Proposed General Plan and Zoning Designations
Rezone R-15-01 for 3.18 acre site from PDC (Planned Development Commercial) to C2
(General Business District).
Planning Application PA-15-30 for Conditional Use Permit for the partial demolition of the
existing Bristol Autoplex automotive center and the development of a two-story, 744 unit ministorage facility with the existing 12,450 SF auto retail Eastern portion of the building to remain.
With renovation to the exterior factade.
ATIACHMENT 10
Building Division (714) 754-5273 • Code Enforcement (714) 754-5623 • Planning Division (714) 754-5245
FAX (714) 754-4856 • TOO (714) 754-5244 • www costamesaca gov
4
Existing and Proposed Uses
Existing uses on site consist of independent automotive repair shops, tire store, smog check,
sound systems installations and various other retail tenants offering food (sushi and
sandwiches) as well as fitness gyms and studios.
Proposed uses will encompass 12,450 of existing retail maintaining the sushi and sandwich
operations (3,680 SF combined) and relocating other auto-related tenants to the remaining
available area of approximately 8,770 SF. The new mini-storage two-level building will total
89,560 SF plus 1,000 SF for on-site management offices for the storage operations. The total
project will equal103,010 SF when completed.
5
Review Schedule
Planning Commission
City Council
June 13, 2016
September, 2016 (TBD)
6
CNEL Contour
The project is within the 65 CNEL Contour. Mitigation measure NOI-1 to be implemented
includes air conditioning or noise-attenuated passive ventilation and wall assemblies designed
to meet 55 dBA CNEL. Mitigation measure NOI-2 to be implemented includes air conditioning
or noise-attenuated passive ventilation and wall assemblies designed to meet 50 dBA CNEL
for the storage and office portions of the project.
7
Runway Protection Zone (RPZ)
A port of the existing building to remain is within the RPZ at the eastern portion of the project.
Since this building will not be replaced it will be allowed according to ACLU guidelines. The
restaurant uses will remain. Anticipated upgrades will be new storefront, facade and signage to
modernize building within the remaining footprint and building shell. See attached exhibit for an
aerial map showing the proposed project and its associated airport safety zone designations as
well as heights of surrounding existing buildings.
8
Height Restriction Zone
A 7460-1 Determination from the FAA received April26, 2016, states that "the structure does
not exceed obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation". See attached
Exhibit.
9
Applicable Sections of the CEQA documentation
IS/MND Exhibit C Mitigation Monitoring Program; Page 52, 53; Measures NOI-1, NOI-2.
10
Additional Documentation Required
Coordinates: Longitude 117° 52' 46.4" W; Latitude: 33° 39' 51.2" N: NAO 83
Height of Proposed Structures: New Building; Not to Exceed 29FT; Existing Building;
20FT
Elevation of Project Site Horizontal Datum: NAD83 Site Elevation 29FT; Structure
Height (AGL) 26FT; 55FT above mean sea level (AMSL)
Local Agency Building Height for project area: 30 FT
11
Exhibits
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Site Plan
Area Map
John Wayne Airport Safety Zone Reference Map
Aerial Showing Runway Protection Zone and Project Location
tS/MND Exhibit C Mitigation Monitoring Program; Pages 52, 53; NOI-1, NOI-2.
FAA 7460-1 Determination Letter
ForgeSolar Glare Analysis for Roof Top Solar Photovoltaics
If you have any comments or questions, please contact me at (714) 754-5611 or at
[email protected].
1/LMel Lee, AICP
Senior Planner
City of Costa Mesa
cc: Annette Wiley, FAIA
220 Newport Center Drive, #11-166
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Maureen E. Wille
Sanderson J Ray Development
4667 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 420
Newport Beach, CA 92660
T
-
Q AIOIIIIIA••" ..... I
,,, •• •tilU.J
....
~~
II
~
111111 rmvll fill r: 1111 [ II
i
I
!
i
,_..
.__,._,
.,,..,
.fiiU'fO-IM
__
·--IDUii.CffiCI.
l&olle.QI'Q . . -
.,
U
I
I
.
I
I
I
I
Q
t
l
l
l
l
o
t
~
tlo44 ' • • t p ...
U\111.1.1••' ......
.. _ _ _
- ....,
. .. ,
.....
_.,
....
........""".........'
~
-- -·
~-------------------...
·---
Storage Level I 41.620 SF
Level2 47.940SF
Total Storage
89.560SF
Office
1.000 SF
AutoRetai
8.770 SF
Restaurant
3.680SF
Total
103.010SF
............,
"""'
,
I
Pa~ing Retail, Automotive
Parking Office
Parking Restaurant
Parking Restavrant
Pa~ing Storage
Parking Total
•f
•
~
411 000
8770 SF X 4 • 36
4/1000
1000 SF 11 4 :o 4
10/1000 for 3.000 3000 SF x 10/1000 = 30
12/1000 over 3,000 .6ao SF x I 2/1000 = 6
I1200 Units
744 Units : 4 Spaces
ao
SITE PLAN STUDY
2-STORY OPTION
JUNE 20, 2016
W ILEY
ARCHITECTS
0
f
.UJ
I
~
~
~
~
EXHIBITS
Hllltlr>gton Pal1t
--
@
Coot):IOI>(!) @
~
·~
)
NorwiJIIr,
r
Los Angeles County
Orange County
@
F"'-rw.
.
@ "'
Ocean
t
-
===-==- - - - - - - - - - - - - -·-- - - - - - - - - - - souRce: ESRI
Costa Mesa ISIMND.150652
Figure 1
Regional Location Map
·-·
.. :1
~"\
S1 I
)
C.:.1 Project Location
0
t
J.4UO
.
-..;,
~
..
~
E•IDC<~f'VI
I ~
~,."i •
I
I
'NEWPOR~
D
-/
Et
-1
BEACHSt
=1
''
\
~=-=-==~--------------------------- Costa
SOURCE. ESRI
Mesa ISI~·1ND.150652
figure 2
Study Area Map- Topographic Base
SOURCE ESRI. Orange County GIS
Costa Mesa IS/MN0.150652
Figure 3
Study Area Map - Aerial Base
John Wayne Airport Safety Zone Reference Map
LEGEND
1. RUNWIIY I'ROTB:llON ZONE
~ / OEPNIT\IRE ZONE
z. INNEJI
'
-. . -
Adopted by the
CERTIACATlON
Ai'flOtt Land Use Commission for Orange ewtty
Kari A. Rigoni, Executive Officer
Date
EXHIBITD
EXHIBIT E
•
Traffic Volume: 2014 traffic volumes were derived from Caltrans' Traffic Census
Program. The 2014 peak hour traffic volume on SR73 between Jamboree Road and Route
55 Junction was 12,800.
•
Vehicular Mix: 2014 truck traffic data was derived from Caltrans' Traffic Census
Program. It was determined approximately 2% of medium trucks and 0.5% of heavy
trucks.
Based on the above information, the predicted noise level at 50 feet from the center ofSR73
would be approximately 83 dBA. The distances to the Food Hall and the office of the storage
building would be 280 feet and 350 feet from the center ofSR73, respectively. Based on the noise
attenuation rate of 3 dBA per doubling the distance, the noise level at Food Hall would be 76
dBA and at the office of the storage building would be 75 d.BA.
With regard to air traffic noise at the project site, SNA ' s Noise Abatement Program Quarterly
Report from July 2015 to September 2015 was reviewed. Noise Monitoring Site (NMS) IS is
located approximately 1,000 feet to the south of the project site. However, the distance between
the project site and the extended runway centerline is relatively similar to the distance between
NMS IS and the extended runway centerline, it is determined that NMS lS noise data would
represent the air traffic noise at the project site. The air traffic noise at the project site would be
67.3 dBA.
The project site exterior noise would be the combination of noise levels from vehicular traffic and
air traffic. At the food hall, the exterior noise level would be 77 dBA (76 + 67.3 = 77 dBA). At
the office of the storage building, the exterior noise level would be 76 dBA (75 + 67.3 = 76 dBA).
Based on Table 4.12-2, the noise level up to 77.5 dBA would be conditionally acceptable as it is
noted that new construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of
the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the
design. Conventional construction, but with closed windows and fresh air supply systems or air
conditioning will normally suffice. Therefore, impacts related to interior noise would be
potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
NOl-l:
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall show evidence, and the
Development Services Director shall approve, an alternative form of ventilation,
such as air conditioning systems or noise-attenuated passive ventilation, shall be
included in the building design to ensure that windows can remain closed for
prolonged periods of time in order to meet the commercial (food hall) interior
noise standard of 55 dBA CNEL established by the City. In addition, prior to
issuance of building permits, the developer shall show evidence, and the
Development Services Director shall approve, that all project wall assemblies
(windows, doors, and wall combinations) have been designed and will be
constructed to meet the interior noise standard of 55 dBA CNEL.
B~&tol Mln~Stotage FaCility (744 units I and Food Coull Buldlng (5.000 oq. ll.l
lnl~al SIUdy I Mitigated NegaU.. Dedanlllon
78
ESA/150652
~2016
NOI-2:
Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall show evidence, and the
Development Services Director shall approve, an alternative form of ventilation,
such as air conditioning systems or noise-attenuated passive ventilation, shall be
included in the building design of the proposed office within the self-storage
facility to ensure that windows can remain closed for prolonged periods of time
in order to meet the office interior noise standard of 50 dBA CNEL established
by the City. In addition, prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall
show evidence, and the Development Services Director shall approve, that all
project wall assemblies (windows, doors, and wall combinations) have been
designed and will be constructed to meet the interior noise standard of 50 dB A
CNEL.
Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOl-l and NOI-2 would reduce the potential noise
impact to less than significant. In order to meet the interior noise standard for office building of
50 dBA and for commercial (food hall) of 55 dBA, at least 26 dBA of exterior to interior noise
reduction would be required for the proposed office within the self-storage facility, and at least 27
dBA of exterior noise reduction would be required for the proposed food hall. Mitigation
measures to incorporate such design would be required in order to reduce potential impacts to a
less than significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measures NOl-l for the proposed food
hall interior noise level and Mitigation Measure NOI-2 for the proposed office use within the selfstorage facility would reduce noise impacts to less than significant.
b)
Exposure of people to generation or excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Less-than-Significant Impact. Ground-borne vibration would be generated from the operation
of heavy construction equipment at the project site, which could potentially affect the existing
sensitive land uses surrounding the site. Once completed the proposed project, there would be no
operational sources causing ground-borne vibration.
The closest off-site structure to the project site is the commercial building to the northwest and
residential structures to the south. Distances to the commercial building and residential structures
are approximately 30 feet and 100 feet, respectively.
Ground-borne vibration levels resulting from construction activities at the project site were
estimated using data published by the Federal Transit Administration (ITA) in its Transit Noise
and Vibration Impact Assessment (2006) document. The FTA has adopted vibration standards
that are used to evaluate potential building damage impacts related to construction activities,
which are shown in Table 4.12-3.
Brllld ~~Drage Fdly (744 Lrlitl) and Food Cour1 Building (5,000 oq. ll)
Initial Sludy/Millgaled Negal~Ye Doldarallon
79
ESA/150052
P.lay 2016
(I
EXHIBIT F
Mail Processing Center
Federal Aviatioo Adminislralion
Southwest Regional Office
Obstruction Evaluation Group
10101 Hillwood Park-way
Fori Worth, TX 76177
Aeronautical S1udy No.
2016-A WP· 2792-0E
Issued Date: 04126/2016
Walkie Ray
Sanderson J Ray Development
2699 White Road
Suite 150
Irvine. CA 92614
•• DETERMINATION OF NO HAZARD TO AIR NAVIGATION ••
The Federal Aviation Administration has conducted an aeronautical study under the provisions of 49 U.S.C..,
Section 44718 and if applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77. conceming:
Structure:
Location:
Lati1ude:
Longitude:
He ights:
Building Bristol Street Storage and Food Hall
Costa Mesa. CA
33-39-51.20N NAD 83
I 17-52-46.40W
29 feet site elevalion (SE)
26 feet above ground level (AGL)
55 feet above mean sea level (AMSL)
This aeronautical study revealed that the structure does not exceed obstruction standards and would nol be a
hazard 10 air navigation provided the following condilion(s), if any . is( are) met:
It is required that FAA Form 7460-2. Notice of Actual Construction or Alteration , be e.filed any time the
project is abandoned or:
_
At least I 0 days prior to stan of construction (7460-2 , Part I)
_ X_ Within 5 days afler the construction reaches its greatest height (7460-2, Part 2)
Based on this evaluation, marking and Iighting are not necessary for aviation safety. However. if marking/
lighting are accomplished on a voluntary basis . we recommend it be installed and maintained in accordance
with FAA Advisory circular 70n460-l L.
ADVISORY RECOMMENDATION • While the structure does not constitute a hazard to air navi gation, it
would be located within the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) of the John Wayne Airport-Orange County Airport,
Runway 2L
Structures, which will resull in the congregation of people within an RPZ, are strongly discouraged in the
interest of protecting people and pro perty on the ground. In cases where the airport owner can contro' the use o f
the property, such structures are prohibited. In cases where the airport owner exercises no such control . advisory
recommendations are issued to inform the sponsor of the inadvisability of the project from the standpoint of
safety to personnel and property.
Page 1 of 4
This detennination expires on 10/26/2017 unless:
(a)
(b)
(c)
the construction is started (not necessarily completed) and FAA Form 7460-2, Notice of Actual
Construction or Aherntion, is received by this office.
extended. revised, or tenninated by the issuing office.
the construction is subject to the licensing authority of lhe Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) and an application for a construction pennit bas been filed. as required by the FCC, within
6 months of the date of this detennination. In such case, the detennination expires on the date
prescribed by the FCC for completion of constmction, or the date the FCC denies the application.
NOTE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF THIS DETERMINATION MUST
BEE-FILED AT LEAST 15 DAYS PRIOR TO THE EXPIRATION DATE. AFTER RE-EVALUATION
OF CURRENT OPERATIONS IN THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE TO DETERMINE THAT NO
SIGNIFICANT AERONAUTICAL CHANGES HAVE OCCURRED, YOUR DETERMINATION MAY BE
ELIGIBLE FOR ONE EXTENSION OF THE EFFECTIVE PERIOD.
This detennination is based, in part, on the foregoing description which includes specific coordinates, heights.
frequency(ies) and power. Any changes in coordinates, heights, and frequencies or use of greater power will
void this determination. Any future construction or alteration , including increase to heights, power, or the
addition of other transminers. requires separate notice to the FAA.
This determination does include temporary construction equipment such as cranes, derricks, etc., which may be
used during actual construction of the structure. However,tbis equipment shall not exceed the overall heights as
indicated above. Equipment which has a height greater than the studied structure requires separate notice to the
FAA.
This detennination concerns the effect of this structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace
by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of compliance responsibilities relating to any law, ordinance, or
regulation of any Federal, Stare, or local government body.
Any failure or malfunction that lasts more than thirty (30) minutes and affects a top light or flashing ohstruction
light, regardless of its position, should be reported immediately to (877) 487~6867 so a Notice to Airmen
(NOTAM) can be issued. As soon as the nonnal operation is restored, notify the same number.
If we can be of further assistance, please contact our office at (425) 227-2625. On any future correspondence
concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2016-AWP-2792-0E.
Signature Control No: 28564.5320-289916329
Paul Holmquist
Specialist
Anacbment(s)
Map(s)
Page 2 of 4
(ONE)
' Bro st ol S1te Conhg
EXHIBIT G
1ForgeSolar
. ........
. j : . . Fo Ji9~$o ~!CING
······~
~
(i PAICINGI)
MY PROJECTS !/PROJECTS/)
MY ACCOUNT (IACCOUNTSIPAOFILEJ)
6123116 12 32 PM
HELP (/HELP/)
Site config: Bristol
No site config description provided.
Created June 23, 2016 3:24p.m.
ONI varies and peaks at 1,000.0 W/m"2
Analyze every 1 minute(s)
0.5 ocular transmission coefficient
0.002 ft pupil diameter
0.0171t eye focal length
9.3 mrad sun subtended angle
Summary of Results
PVname
No glare predicted!
Tilt
PV array 1
10.0
Orientation
"Green• Glare
"Yellow• Glare
"Red" Giant
Energy Produced
deg
min
min
min
kWh
160.0
0
0
0
223.200 0
Component Data
Flight Paths
Name: FP 1
utitude
Longitude
Ground elevation
Height above ground
Total elevation
deg
deg
It
It
It
Threshold
33 675640
·117.86901 0
49
50
2-mile point
33 649835
·11 7.884698
4
647
Description:
Threshold height: 50 ft
Direction: 206.81 deg
Glide slope: 3.0 deg
Pilot view restricted? No
652
Observation Points
Number
Latitude
Longitude
Ground elevation
Height above ground
Total Elevation
deg
deg
It
ft
ft
33.677988
· 117 869906
60
110
https llwww lorgesolar com/projects l 243/conligsf 11991
Page 1 ol 2
' Bristol ~1te Config 1 ForgeSolar
6/23/16, 12:32 PM
PV array 1
Predicted energy output (assuming sunny, clear sides all year): 223,200.0 kWh
Axis tracking: Fixed (no rotation)
Tilt; 10.0 deg
Latitude
Longitude
Ground elevation
Height above ground
Total elevation
deg
deg
ft
ft
ft
33.664389
-1 , 7.880236
31
20
51
2
33.664267
-117.880263
29
20
49
3
33.664194
-117.879654
30
20
50
4
33 664315
-117.879634
29
20
49
Vertex
Orientation: 160.0 deg
Rated power: 100.0 kW
Panel material: Smooth glass without AA coating
Vary reflectivity with sun position? Yes
Correlate slope em:1r with surface type? No
Slope enror: 10.0 mrad
No glare predicted!
2015 C Sims Industries, All Rights Reserved. Privacy Polley Vprivacy-pollcyl) 1Terms of
Service Vterms-of-usel)
htt ps :/twww. forge solar. comtprojects/243/configs/1199/
Page 2 of 2