Agenda Packet as of 4-11-2025 — Newport Beach City Council, April 15, 2025 (part 3 of 5)

10-2
Request for Proposals and Evaluation

Staff developed an RFP solicitation with a scope of services detailing the required federal advocacy expertise and services. The City sought a consultant that would effectively promote the City’s legislative policy interests, and assist in the development of strategies for advancing actions at the federal level that are beneficial to the City in two areas:

1. Its ocean/harbor dredging and ocean -beach-related programs, projects and services including securing federal funding via the Army Corps of Engineers; and

2. Its efforts to mitigate the aircraft noise and air quality impacts John Wayne Airport’s operations have on the Newport Beach community and to prepare for the future, nationwide implementation of Advanced Air Mobility technologies.

The RFP was published on December 23, 2024 , when it was posted on the City’s electronic public procurement platform, PlanetBids, and distributed directly to known consultants providing these services. The RFP submission deadline was January 24, 2025, and the process yielded five proposals.

The RFP was evaluated in two phases. Phase 1, the Technical Evaluation, involved an evaluation panel consisting of staff from the City's Public Works Department and City Manager's Office independently reviewing each proposal and rating them on th e following technical factors:
• Qualifications and experience of the firm;
• Demonstrated understanding of the City’s current dredging and ocean -beach- related projects and/or current community issues related to John Wayne Airport and the future implementation of AAM technologies;
• Subject matter expertise and ability to perform the requested services.

The RFP instructed proposers that only those proposals earning a minimum of 70% of the available points from Phase 1 would be eligible to advance to Phase 2, the Cost Evaluation, in which the City's Purchasing Division staff would compare and calculate the costs from each proposal. Of the five proposals received by the City, two qualified to advance to the Cost Evaluation phase. Virtual interviews were conducted with the finalists to augment the evaluation panel's findings. The results of the panel scoring are provided in the table below.

Proposer Carpi & Clay Warwick Group
Consultants
Phase 1: Technical Review
-Proposal Review
Maximum 2400
2200 1840
Phase 2: Cost Review
Maximum 600
376.96
($9,550.00 Retainer)
600.00
($6,000 Retainer)
Total Score
Maximum 3000
2576.96 2440.00
Overall Rank 1 2
Professional Services Agreement with Carpi & Clay, Inc. for Federal Advocacy Services April 15, 2025

Page 3 ends

10-3
The RFP asked proposers to provide an all -inclusive, fixed -fee monthly retainer for services rendered. In Phase 2 (the Cost Evaluation) of the RFP evaluation, Purchasing Division staff members compared the proposed monthly retainers from each of the finalists and assigned points to each proposer wherein the proposal with the lowest retainer cost would receive the maximum of 600 points and each subsequent proposal would receive points proportion al to the difference in retainer cost. The results of the Cost Evaluation are included in the table.

Despite proposing a higher retainer than the other finalist, Carpi & Clay was rated as the top proposer for federal advocacy services by the evaluation panel, based on the content of the firm’s proposal and the interview City staff conducted with the firm’s lobbyists that would be assigned to work with Newport Beach. The firm’s proposal and interview demonstrated Carpi & Clay’s thorough understanding of the City’s harbor dredging and sand management projects as well as its aviation-related challenges and actions , particularly regarding aircraft noise, Advanced Air Mobility, and Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Further, the firm clearly demonstrated the depth of it s current Congressional and federal agency contacts, a key requirement of this RFP process. The firm has established connections with California’s Congressional delegation, members of Congress, Congressional committees, and staff within federal agencies, i ncluding the Department of Transportation (DOT), the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Carpi & Clay has previously provided federal advocacy services to the City and currently represents multiple cities on various federal legislative and regulatory matters.

Should the City Council approve the professional services agreement, t he firm’s lead lobbyists for the City’s project would be Julie Minerva, Channon Hanna and Zac Commins. Ms. Minerva is a recognized leader in infrastructure investments with a two-decade career in Washington, D.C., securing over two billion dollars in federal assistance for infrastructure projects including those related to navigation channels, environmental restoration and flood control. Ms. Minerva has strong relationships across Congress and federal agencies, including having extensive contacts at the Corps.

Ms. Hanna has more than 20 years of experience in federal transportation and aviation policy, including her previous work with the Senate Aviation Subcommittee . She has played a key role in drafting and negotiating FAA reauthorization bills and has extensive experience working with the FAA, DOT and the Office of Management and Budget.

Mr. Commins has a decade of experience in federal policy, funding and regulatory matters. His background includes roles on Capitol Hill and in local government, where he led efforts to secure funding fo r transportation projects, including provisions for quieter, lower-emission aircraft.

The technical ranking of Carpi & Clay reflects the firm’s comprehensive expertise in the City’s federal advocacy needs, particularly in infrastructure and aviation matters.

Professional Services Agreement with Carpi & Clay, Inc. for Federal Advocacy Services April 15, 2025

Page 4 ends

10-4
FISCAL IMPACT:

The adopted budget includes sufficient funding for this contract. It will be expensed to the Aviation Issues account in the City Manager's Office budget, 01020001 -811008 and to the Public Works Department budget, 010800005- 811008.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

NOTICING:

The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).

ATTACHMENT:

Attachment A – Professional Services Agreement

ATTACHMENT A
10-5

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH CARPI & CLAY, INC. FOR

FEDERAL ADVOCACY SERVICES
THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ("Agreement"') is made and entered into as of this 15th day of April, 2025 ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation and charter city ("City"), and CARPI & CLAY, INC., a California corporation ("Consultant"), whose address is 601 New Jersey Ave, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20001, and is made with reference to the following:

RECITALS
A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California"with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City.

B. City desires to engage Consultant to provide federal advocacy services related to dredging and airport matters ("Project").

C. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification and knowledge to provide the professional services described in this Agreement.

D. City has solicited and received a proposal from Consultant, has reviewed the previous experience and evaluated the expertise of Consultant, and desires to retain Consultant to render professional services under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, ii is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows:

1. TERM
The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date, and shall terminate on April 14, 2026 ("Initial Term"), unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.

City shall have the right to exercise two (2) additional one-year consecutive term extensions. Should City wish to exercise its option to extend, City shall notify Consultant in writing of such extension no less than ten (10) calendar days of the prior term end date.

2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
Consultant shall diligently perform all the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference ("Services" or "Work"). City may elect to delete certain Services within the Scope of Services at its sole discretion.
10-6

3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1 Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement and Consultant shall perform the Services in accordance with the schedule included in Exhibit A. In the absence of a specific schedule. the Services shall be performed to completion in a diligent and timely manner. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, if any, or perform the Services in a diligent and timely manner may result in termination of this Agreement by City.

3.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant shall not be responsible for delays due to causes beyond Consultant's reasonable control. However, in the case of any such delay in the Services to be provided for the Project, each party hereby agrees to provide notice within two (2) calendar days of the occurrence causing the delay to the other party so that all delays can be addressed.

3.3 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator as defined herein not later than ten (10) calendar days after the start of the condition that purportedly causes a delay. The Project Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions for unforeseeable delays that are beyond Consultant's control.

3.4 For all lime periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by hand-delivery or mail.

4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT

4.1 City shall pay Consultant for the Services on a time and expense not-to- exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant's compensation for all Work performed in accordance with this Agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed One Hundred Fourteen Thousand Six Hundred Dollars and 00/100 ($114,600.00) for the Initial Term, without prior written authorization from City. If the City exercises the option(s) to extend the Initial Term, each additional one-year extension shall not exceed One Hundred Fourteen Thousand Six Hundred Dollars and 00/100 ($114,600.00) per extension term. In no event shall the total amount of this Agreement, including extension terms, if any, exceed the total amount of Three Hundred Forty Three Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars and 00/100 ($343,800.00) without prior written authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City.

4.2 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the Work performed the preceding month. Consultant's bills shall include the name of the person who perfonmed the Work, a brief description of the Services performed and/or the specific task in the Scope of Services to which ii relates, the date the Services were performed, the number of hours spent on all Work billed on an hourly basis, and a description of any Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page2
10-7
reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) calendar days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff.

4.3 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically identified in Exhibit B to this Agreement or specifically approved in writing in advance by City.

4.4 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work performed without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any Work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement.

Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B.

5. PROJECT MANAGER

5.1 Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated Channon Hanna to be its Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project without the prior written consent of City. City's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non-key personnel.

5.2 Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of Services upon written request of City.

Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement.

5.3 If Consultant is performing inspection services for City, the Project Manager and any other assigned staff shall be equipped with a cellular phone to communicate with City staff. The Project Manager's cellular phone number shall be provided to City.

6. ADMINISTRATION
This Agreement will be administered by the City Manager. City's Assistant City Manager or designee shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the Services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement.

7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES
To assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to provide access to and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not to cause delays in Consultant's Work schedule.

Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page3
10-8

8. STANDARD OF CARE

8.1 All of the Services shall be performed by Consultant or under Consultant's supervIsIon. Consultant represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services required by this Agreement, and that it will perform all Services in a manner commensurate with community professional standards and with the ordinary degree of skill and care that would be used by other reasonably competent practitioners of the same discipline under similar circumstances. All Services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by City.

By delivery of completed Work, Consultant certifies that the Work conforms to the requirements of this Agreement, all applicable federal, state and local laws, and legally recognized professional standards.

8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has, shall obtain, and shall keep in full force and effect during the term hereof, at its sole cost and expense, all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that is legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement.

8.3 Consultant shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall Consultant be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, acts of God, or the failure of City to furnish timely information or to approve or disapprove Consultant's Work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by City, contractors, or governmental agencies.

9. HOLD HARMLESS

9.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to property), demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever (individually, a Claim; collectively, "Claims"), which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to any breach of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, any Work performed or Services provided under this Agreement including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent, reckless, and/or willful acts, errors and/or omissions of Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, vendors, suppliers, consultants, subcontractors, anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or for whose acts they may be liable, or any or all of them).

9.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorneys' fees in any action on or to enforce Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page4
10-9
the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by Consultant.

10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
It is understood that City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an agent or employee of City. The manner and means of conducting the Work are under the control of Consultant, except to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the expressed terms of this Agreement. No civil service status or other right of employment shall accrue to Consultant or its employees.

Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute approval for Consultant or any of Consultant's employees or agents, to be the agents or employees of City. Consultant shall have the responsibility for and control over the means of performing the Work, provided that Consultant is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Anything in this Agreement that may appear to give City the right to direct Consultant as to the details of the performance of the Work or to exercise a measure of control over Consultant shall mean only that Consultant shall follow the desires of City with respect to the results of the Services.

11. COOPERATION
Consultant agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's designated Project Administrator and any other agencies that may have jurisdiction or interest in the Work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Consultant on the Project.

12. CITY POLICY
Consultant shall discuss and review all matters relating to policy and Project direction with City's Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order to ensure the Project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies.

13. PROGRESS
Consultant is responsible for keeping the Project Administrator informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the Project, activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired.

14. INSURANCE
Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement or for other periods as specified in this Agreement, policies of insurance of the type, amounts, terms and conditions described in the Insurance Requirements attached hereto as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by reference.

Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page 5
10-10

15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS
Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the Services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be construed as an assignment: The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Consultant, or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member or cotenant if Consultant is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate or co-tenancy, which shall result in changing the control of Consultant. Control means fifty percent (50%) or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.

16. SUBCONTRACTING
The subcontractors authorized by City, if any, to perform Work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of any subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and any subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise required by law. City is an intended beneficiary of any Work performed by the subcontractor for purposes of establishing a duty of care between the subcontractor and City. Except as specifically authorized herein, the Services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City.

17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS

17.1 Each and every report, draft, map, record, plan, document and other writing produced, including but not limited to, websites, biogs, social media accounts and applications (hereinafter "Documents"), prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party. Additionally, all material posted in cyberspace by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party.

Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents, including all logins and password information to City upon prior written request.

17.2 Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and all liability arising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant, and City assumes Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page6
10-11
full responsibility for such changes unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has received from Consultant written consent for such changes.

17.3 All written documents shall be transmitted to City in formats compatible with Microsoft Office and/or viewable with Adobe Acrobat.

18. CONFIDENTIALITY
All Documents, including drafts, preliminary drawings or plans, notes and communications that result from the Services in this Agreement, shall be kept confidential unless City expressly authorizes in writing the release of information.

19. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY
Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement or alleged infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright, including costs, contained in Consultant's Documents provided under this Agreement.

20. RECORDS
Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the Services to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any Services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable.

Consultant shall allow a representative of City to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records and invoices during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow inspection of all Work, data, Documents, proceedings and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement.

21. WITHHOLDINGS
City may withhold payment to Consultant of any disputed sums until satisfaction of the dispute with respect to such payment. Such withholding shall not be deemed to constitute a failure to pay according to the terms of this Agreement. Consultant shall not discontinue Work as a result of such withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate right to appeal to the City Manager or designee with respect to such disputed sums.

Consultant shall be entitled to receive interest on any withheld sums at the rate of return that City earned on its investments during the time period, from the date of withholding of any amounts found to have been improperly withheld.

22. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page 7
10-12
resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the Work accomplished by Consultant, the additional design, construction and/or restoration expense shall be borne by Consultant. Nothing in this Section is intended to limit City's rights under the law or any other sections of this Agreement.

23. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS
City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project.

24. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

24.1 Consultant or its employees may be subject to the provIsIons of the California Political Reform Act of 197 4 (the "Act") and/or Government Code §§ 1090 et seq., which (1) require such persons to disclose any financial interest that may foreseeably be materially affected by the Work performed under this Agreement, and (2) prohibit such persons from making, or participating in making, decisions that will foreseeably financially affect such interest.

24.2 If subject to the Act and/or Government Code§§ 1090 et seq., Consultant shall conform to al! requirements therein. Failure to do so constitutes a material breach and is grounds for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from Consultant's violation of this Section.

25. NOTICES

25.1 All notices, demands, requests or approvals, including any change in mailing address, to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided.

25.2 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at:

Attn: Assistant City Manager
City Manager
City of Newport Beach
1 00 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660

25.3 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at:

Carpi & Clay, Inc.

Attn: Channon Hanna
Carpi & Clay, Inc.
601 New Jersey Ave, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20001

Page 8 ends

10-13

26. CLAIMS
Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Agreement, before making its final request for payment under this Agreement, Consultant shall submit to City, in writing, all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement. Consultant's acceptance of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement except those previously made in writing and identified by Consultant in writing as unsettled at the time of its final request for payment.

Consultant and City expressly agree that in addition to any claims filing requirements set forth in the Agreement, Consultant shall be required to file any claim Consultant may have against City in strict conformance with the Government Claims Act (Government Code sections 900 et seq.).

27. TERMINATION

27.1 In the event that either party fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period of two (2) calendar days, or if more than two (2) calendar days are reasonably required to cure the default and the defaulting party fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, and thereafter diligently take steps to cure the default, the non-defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof.

27.2 Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving no less than seven (7) calendar days' prior written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for Services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other infom,ation developed or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form.

28. STANDARD PROVISIONS

28.1 Recitals. City and Consultant acknowledge that the above Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement.

28.2 Compliance with all Laws. Consultant shall, at its own cost and expense, comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition, all Work prepared by Consultant shall confom, to applicable City, county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City.

28.3 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach, of any term, covenant or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page9
10-14
of the same or any other term, covenant or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character.

28.4 Integrated Contract. This Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein.

No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions herein.

28.5 Confticts or Inconsistencies. In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.

28.6 Interpretation. The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of the Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply.

28.7 Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to form by the City Attorney.

28.8 Severability. If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.

28.9 Controlling Law and Venue. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange, State of California.

28.10 Egual Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, age or any other impermissible basis under law.

28.11 No Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute or legal action arising under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall not be entitled to attorneys' fees.

28.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one (1) and the same instrument.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page 10
10-15
IN WFTNESS WHEREOF, 'lhe partie:s have ,caused this Agreement to be executed on 'the dates written below.

APPROVED
1 AS, TO FORM:

CllY .ATTORNEY 'S OFFICE
IDa.te: f D-11 2>': f
(~Li
ATliE:ST:

Date: -------

CITY OF NEWPOIRT 'BEACH,
a Callfomla munlcipa, corporation
Date: ------- -
By: ___________ _
~r Joe· StapJeto n
J/,J::J,, Mayor
'1:);
CONSULTANT: CA
1 RPI & CLAY. INC .. a
Ca lifomia corporaH□ n
Date:
---------
Sfg ned fn Coun terp art
B~------------ By: ________ ___ _
Le ilani I. Brown
City Olerk
K,enneth Carpi
Chief Executive Officer, Secretary,
Chief Flnandal Officer
[END
1 0F SIGNATURES]
Attachments: Exhibit A - Scope of Services
Exhibit B - Schedule of Billing Rates
Exhibit C - Insurance Requirements
Carpi & Clay. inc. Page 11
10-16
:IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties ha\le caused this Ag111eement to be e~cuted on the dates written be1ow.

APPROV1E'D AS TO IFORM:

CITY AnORNEY'S OFFICE
Date: 3 /,.~ 7 / Q~
ATTEST:

Date; ----- - -
By:. _______ _ ___ _
LejJani I Brown
City CJerk
CliTY OF NEWPORT IBEACH.
a Callfomia municipal corporation
Dale: --- -----
By: _ __________ _
Joe Stap~eton
Mayor
CONSUL TANT·: CARJPil & CLAY, m1NC., a
CaUfomia
Date: __ ..&--=-..- - __,.._ __
B~~-
Ke~ne1h eaipt ~
Chler Executive ,officer . Secretary.

Chier Financial Officer
(EIND OF S IGNIA.lURES]
A'llachments: E.xhibit A - Soope of Services
Exhibit B - Schedule of Billing Rates
Exhibit C- lns1.1rance Requirements
Carpt ,& Clay. Inc. Page 1
10-17
10-18
Carpi & Clay, Inc.

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Page A-1
10-19

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Consultant shall provide the following services related to the City's federal dredging programs within Newport Harbor, aviation and airport matters:

1. Federal Liaison Efforts
a. Represent and advocate for the City, and assist the City in developing relationships with the Congressional delegation and staff, Executive branch officials, and relevant staff members for appropriations, congressional committees and federal agencies;
b. Monitor and participate in relevant coalitions, organizations and forums, and inform the City of significant developments;
c. Schedule and arrange in-person visits/virtual appointments and prepare agendas for Newport Beach officials to meet with members of Congress, Congressional staff, Senate and House committee members, and federal agency officials in Washington, D.C.;
d. Advise City staff and officials on strategies for advocating the City's interests to elected and appointed federal officials and legislative staff, and assist in strategic plan development when requested; and e. Develop and help distribute issues analyses, background briefing/white papers, talking points, appropriations requests, correspondence and other materials as requested to convey the City's goals and priorities to members of Congress and the Administration.

2. Funding Advocacy
a. Develop strategies and advocate for opportunities to attract federal funds to support the City's dredging programs, projects and services within Newport Harbor and ocean beach-related projects; b. Identify, evaluate and assist the City in seeking any other federal grants or funding opportunities that may also apply to key projects; c. Advocate for the City's project and program interests in the relevant annual federal appropriations process or authorization legislation, and through any other appropriate Congressional, federal agency and administrative avenues;
d. Work with the relevant California delegation and staff on current appropriations requests;
Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page A-1
10-20
e. Assist with funding proposals such that they will be scored as advantageously as possible against the appropriations outlays and federal budget, and work with relevant Committee staff to discuss the City's projects and programs; and
f. As needed, provide white paper reports geared toward elected officials and their staff justifying project requests in simple and straightforward language.

Provide Congressional Representatives with the exact appropriations bill, agency, account and program from which the City is requesting funding. g. Identify and advocate for mechanisms that accelerate airline fleet transition to newer, quieter and lower emissions aircraft. h. Advocate for the safe implementation of Advanced Air Mobility including minimizing use over residential and populated areas, as well as addressing eVTOL crash, vertiport safety and fire prevention concerns. i. Advocate for measures to prevent drones from ftying into restricted airspace and allow for local enforcement of regulations related to the safe operation of drones.
j. Advocate for the granting of waivers for to allow for the efficient use of drones by local public safety authorities.

3. Legislative and Policy Advocacy
a. Keep the City well-informed of pertinent Federal legislation, policy, regulations and reports germane to the City's legislative platform and its policies, projects and programs. Proactively identify legislative opportunities, and analyze and track pertinent bills, amendments, resolutions and opportunities in a timely manner;
b. Assist in the development and proposal of bills, amendments, or bill language (such as the FM Reauthorization Act) needed to achieve the City's goals or advance its priorities. Work with legislative staff and officials to advocate the passage of the aforementioned bills or amendments; c. Conduct activities necessary to carry out the City's goals with respect to the passage, defeat or amendment of proposed legislation; and d. Be available as needed to meet/ conference with the City to provide timely legislative updates to City staff and respond to regular staff inquiries related to the advancement of the City's federal legislative goals.

4. Deliverables
a. A brief reporting/progress summary shall accompany the monthly invoices submitted to the City. This reporting shall describe the work performed during the month;
Carpi & Clay, Inc. PageA-2
10-21
b. At strategic times throughout the appropriations and budget calendar, provide a written status report to the City on pending relevant legislation, budgetary issues, administrative policies and other developments at the federal level that would be of interest to the City. Provide legislative updates and present to the City as needed; and
c. Participate in periodic meetings and be available for impromptu updates with City staff and officials as requested.

5. Project Team
As the specific personnel assigned to this Project is critical to the overall success of this engagement, the City reserves the right to re-assess the suitability of this contract in the event any members of the Project team are changed. Consultant's Project team is comprised of the following members: Ken Carpi, Channon Hanna, Julie Minerva, and Zac Commins.

Carpi & Clay, Inc. PageA-3
10-22

EXHIBIT B

SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES
Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page B-1
10-23

EXHIBITS

SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES
Consultant shall provide federal advocacy and government relations services, as described in Exhibit A, in accordance with the following Schedule of Billing Rates:

Federal Advocacv and Government Relations Services
Monthly Retainer: I $9,550
Travel outside of Washington, D.C. at the direction of the City would be in addition to the monthlv retainer and billed at costs.

Compensation to Consultant shall not exceed the annual amounts indicated below:

Contract Year Yearly Maximum Compensation
Year 1 - Initial Term $114,600
Year 2 - Optional Term Extension $114,600
Year 3 - Optional Term Extension $114,600

CONTRACT TOTAL
(Includes initial term and all optional $343,800
years)
Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page B-1
10-24

1. 2.

3. EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Provision of Insurance. Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Contract, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. Consultant agrees to provide insurance in accordance with requirements set forth here. If Consultant uses existing coverage to comply and that coverage does not meet these requirements, Consultant agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage.

Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City's Risk Manager.

Coverage Requirements.

A. Workers' Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance providing statutory benefits and Employer's Liability Insurance with limits of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) each employee for bodily injury by accident and each employee for bodily injury by disease in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Consultant shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees.

General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance, and if necessary excess/umbrella liability insurance, with coverage at least as broad as provided by Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence, four million dollars ($4,000,000) general aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from bodily injury, property damage, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract).

Automobile Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Contract, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page C-1
10-25
vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each accident.

D. Professional (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of two million dollars ($2,000,000) per claim and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the Effective Date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the Services required by this Agreement.

E. Excess/Umbrella Liability Insurance. If any Excess or Umbrella Liability policies are used to meet the limits of liability required by this contract, then said policies shall be "following form" of the underlying policy coverage, terms, conditions, and provisions and shall meet all of the insurance requirements stated in this contract, including, but not limited to, the additional insured and primary & non-contributory insurance requirements stated herein. No insurance policies maintained by the City, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Consultant's primary and excess/umbrella liability policies are exhausted.

4. Other Insurance Reguirements. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

A. Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this Contract shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees, or shall specifically allow Consultant or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these requirements to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subcontractors.

B. Additional Insured Status. All liability policies including general liability, excess/umbrella liability, and automobile liability, if required, but not including professional liability, shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees shall be included as additional insureds under such policies.

C. Primary and Non-Contributory. Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance and/or the primary source of recovery with respect to the City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees. All liability coverage shall apply on a primary basis and shall not require contribution from any insurance or self insurance maintained by City.

Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page C-2
10-26

5. D. Notice of Cancellation. All policies shall provide City with thirty (30) calendar days' notice of cancellation or nonrenewal of coverage ( except for nonpayment for which ten (10) calendar days' notice is required) for each required coverage.

Additional Agreements Between the Parties. The parties hereby agree to the following:

A. Evidence of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers' compensation and other endorsements as specified herein for each coverage. All of the executed documents referenced in this Contract must be returned to City within ten (10) regular City business days after the date on the "Notification of Award". Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City at all times during the term of this Contract. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the expiration of any such policy, evidence of insurance showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or extended shall be filed with the City. If such coverage is cancelled or reduced, Consultant shall, within ten (.10) days after receipt of written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage, file with the City evidence of insurance showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or has been provided through another insurance company or companies. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any lime.

B. City's Right to Revise Requirements. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the Contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving Consultant ninety (90) calendar days' advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to Consultant, City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant's compensation.

C. Right to Review Subcontracts. Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors or others with whom Consultant enters into contracts with on behalf of City will be submitted to City for review.

Failure of City to request copies of such agreements will not impose any liability on City, or its employees. Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that City is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors. For CGL coverage, subcontractors shall provide coverage with a format at least as broad as CG 20 38 0413.

Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page C-3
10-27
D. Enforcement of Agreement Provisions. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

E. Requirements not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available proceeds in excess of specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

F. Self-Insured Retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self insurance will not be considered to comply with these requirements unless approved by City.

G. City Remedies for Non-Compliance. If Consultant or any subconsultant fails to provide and maintain insurance as required herein, then City shall have the right but not the obligation, to purchase such insurance, to terminate this Agreement, or to suspend Consultant's right to proceed until proper evidence of insurance is provided. Any amounts paid by City shall, at City's sole option, be deducted from amounts payable to Consultant or reimbursed by Consultant upon demand.

H. Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant's performance under this Contract, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City.

I. Consultant's Insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the Work.

Carpi & Clay, Inc. Page C-4

11-1

NEWPORT BEACH

City Council Staff Report

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

CITY OF

April 15, 2025
Agenda Item No. 11
ABSTRACT:

The Newport Beach Junior Lifeguard Program provides youth ages 9 to 15 with ocean-based safety and skill building, and receives upward of 1,500 participants annually.

The Lifeguard Operations Division utilizes contracted video production services to produce professional-grade videos depicting the seven-week program for the benefit of its participants and their families . The existing video production services agreement expired following the completion of the 2024 Junior Lifeguard Program , and a new Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued. Bloc Films LLC (Bloc Films) was ranked as the highest rated proposer ; staff is requesting award of a new professional services agreement with Bloc Films.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
b) Approve a Professional Services Agreement with Bloc Films LLC with a two-year initial term, with three additional one-year extensions (for a total possible five-year term), for a total not-to-exceed amount of $375,760, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreement.

DISCUSSION:

The Newport Beach Junior Lifeguard Pro gram is a seven-week, ocean-based program for youth ages 9 to 15 that centers on ocean skill building, physical fitness, and lifeguarding skills. The program is managed by the Lifeguard Operations Division of the Fire Department and is one of the City of Newport Beach’s most popular youth -based educational programs. The City has historically contracted with a professional video production company to film the program as a benefit to the participants and their families as the videos highlight the progress of program participants as they undergo the various activities and events each week.

TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Jeff Boyles, Fire Chief - 949-644-3101, [email protected] PREPARED BY: Lili Banuelos, Assistant Management Analyst - 949-644-3360, [email protected]
TITLE: Approval of Professional Service Agreement with Bloc Films, LLC for Junior Lifeguard Video Production Services
--
Approval of Professional Service Agreement with
Bloc Films, LLC for Junior Lifeguard Video Production Services April 15, 2025

Page 2 ends

11-2
Following the expiration of the existing agreement at the conclusion of the 2024 season, Fire Department staff developed a new RFP solicitation for Junior Lifeguard video production services. RFP No. 25-17 was posted on the City’s online bidding platform (PlanetBids) on November 19, 2024 . A total of 16 responses were received by the January 13, 2025 deadline. One proposal was considered non-responsive for missing the required documentation. The 15 remaining proposals were evaluated via a multi -step process using a using a combination of technical qualifications (80% of total score) and cost (20% of total s core). A four-person evaluation panel consisting of Lifeguard Operations and Fire Administration staff reviewed each proposal, rating them on technical factors such as: qualifications and experience of the firm , the m ethod of approach, and quality of production sample(s) submitted. Only those proposals earning a passing score of 70% or more were allowed to continue in the evaluation process. The remaining eight firms were then evaluated by the City’s Purchasing Division on submitted costs per episode and ranked on the combined total of their cost and evaluation scores.

Finally, the top three ranked firms were invited to a panel interview with Lifeguard Operations staff.

Rank Proposer Technical
Score
(3200 Max
Points)
Cost Ratio
Score
(800 Max
Points)
Aggregate Score
(4000 Max Points)
1 Bloc Films LLC 2960 623.07 3583.07
2 Red 88 Media 2455 679.18 3134.18
3 Justin Phu Media 2130 800.00 2930.00
Based on this process, Bloc Films was ranked as the highest -qualified proposer. The company cited its extensive history and experience working with youth-focused programs and sports documentaries. Its experience filming in outdoor settings and recreational programs also demonstrated an ability to meet the quick turnaround times requested by City staff.

Therefore, staff is recommending the approval of a professional services agreement with Bloc Films LLC to provide video production services for the Fire Department’s Junior Lifeguard program. The agreement will be for a two-year initial term, with an option to extend for three additional one-year terms.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The submitted per episode cost of $10,336 by Bloc Films reflects the total cost of professionally filming (including underwater footage and aerial/drone footage) , editing and producing an episode, with each episode averaging seven to 10 minutes. The annual cost for all seven episodes would be $72,352. Additionally, at the request of the City, the City could opt for to pay the $400 fee necessary to secure official licensed music (instead of using royalty free options) for each episode.

Approval of Professional Service Agreement with
Bloc Films, LLC for Junior Lifeguard Video Production Services April 15, 2025

Page 3 ends

11-3
In comparison, the prior agreement was executed in 2019 with a not -to-exceed amount of $235,954. The agreement required a total of only six episodes, averaging seven to 10 minutes each, and came at an annual cost of $45,519, or approximately $7,587 per episode.

The pricing for Bloc films is reflective of rising costs in various industries in the post-pandemic era and is in-line with most current production rates in the professional film industry. Bloc Films agrees to hold the per episode rate for the duration of the agreement and any renewal terms.

Program enrollment has seen an approximate 12% increase compared to average program enrollment prior to 2020. This rise in demand reflects the continued growth in popularity and the community's recognition of the importance of the quality, ocean safety education provided by the program. In turn, a ctual revenues have exceeded r evenue estimates each year since FY 2020-21; FY 2025-26 revenues are estimated to be $1,239,000.

The Junior Lifeguard program takes place over the summer and crosses two different fiscal years. Expenses in year one of this agreement, which are for program year 2025, will be expensed to the Fiscal Year 2025 -26 budget. Additional funding of $ 25,412 is requested for the Fire Department's FY 2025-26 budget. If approved, the Junior Lifeguard Professional Services Account, 01040405 -811008, will be increased from $49,740 to $75,152 as part of the annual budget process for FY 2025-26.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Staff rec ommends the City Council find this action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. $788,581 $837,823
$1,040,040
$1,155,600 $1,198,400
$953,924
$1,187,147 $1,261,825 $1,193,425 $1,262,504
FY 2021 FY 2022 FY 2023 FY 2024 FY 2025
Junior Lifeguard Program Revenue
Budgeted Actuals■ ■
Approval of Professional Service Agreement with
Bloc Films, LLC for Junior Lifeguard Video Production Services April 15, 2025

Page 4 ends

11-4
NOTICING:

The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item).

ATTACHMENT:

Attachment A – Agreement

ATTACHMENT A
11-5

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH BLOC FILMS LLC FOR

JUNIOR LIFEGUARD VIDEO PRODUCTION SERVICES
THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into as of this 15th day of April, 2025 ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation and charter city ("City"), and BLOC FILMS LLC, a California limited liability company ("Consultant"), whose address is 38285 Aberdeen Drive, Murrieta, CA 92562, and is made with reference to the following:

RECITALS
A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as ii is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City.

B. . City desires to engage Consultant to provide Junior Lifeguard Video Production Services ("Project").

C. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification and knowledge to provide the professional services described in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows:

1. TERM
The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date, and shall terminate on April 15, 2027, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. This Agreement shall automatically renew for up to three (3) additional one (1) year terms, upon the same terms and conditions set forth herein, unless City provides written notice of its intent not to renew prior to the end of the active term. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the total term of this Agreement shall not exceed five (5) years.

3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE

3.1 Time is of the essence in the performance of Seivices under this Agreement and Consultant shall perform the Services in accordance with the schedule included in Exhibit A. In the absence of a specific schedule, the Services shall be performed to completion in a diligent and timely manner. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, if any, or perform the Services in a diligent and timely manner may result in termination of this Agreement by City.

3.4 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by hand-delivery or mail.

4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT

4.2 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the Work performed the preceding month. Consultant's bills shall include the name of the person who performed the Work, a brief description of the Services performed and/or the specific task in the Scope of Services to which it relates, the date the Services were performed, the number of hours spent on all Work billed on an hourly basis, and a description of any reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) calendar days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff.

4.3 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically identified in Exhibit B to this Agreement or specifically approved in writing in advance by City.

Bloc Films LLC Page2
11-7

Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B.

5. PROJECT MANAGER

5.1 Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated Nathaniel Ford to be its Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project without the prior written consent of City. City's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non-key personnel.

5.2 Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of Services upon written request of City.

Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement.

6. ADMINISTRATION
This Agreement will be administered by the Fire Department. City's Administrative Manager or designee shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the Services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement.

7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES
To assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement.

City agrees to provide access to and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not to cause delays in Consultant's Work schedule.

8. STANDARD OF CARE

8.1 All of the Services shall be performed by Consultant or under Consultant's supervision. Consultant represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services required by this Agreement, and that it will perform all Services in a manner commensurate with community professional standards and with the ordinary degree of skill and care that would be used by other reasonably Bloc Films LLC Page3
11-8
competent practitioners of the same discipline under similar circumstances. All Services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by City.

8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has, shall obtain, and shall keep in full force and effect during the term hereof, at its sole cost and expense, all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature-that is legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement.

9. HOLD HARMLESS

9.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorneys' fees in any action on orto enforce the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by Consultant.

Bloc Films LLC Page4
11-9

15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS
Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the Services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be construed as an assignment: The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any Bloc Films LLC Page5
11-10
of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Consultant, or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member or cotenant if Consultant is a partnership or joint-venture or syndicate or co-tenancy, which shall result in changing the control of Consultant. Control means fifty percent (50%) or more of the voting power or twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint-venture.

17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS

Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents, including all logins and password information to City upon prior written request.

17.2 Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and all liability a.rising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant, and City assumes full responsibility for such changes unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has received from Consultant written consent for such changes.

17.3 All written documents shall be transmitted to City in formats compatible with Microsoft Office and/or viewable with Adobe Acrobat.

Bloc Films LLC Page6
11-11

19. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY
Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement or alleged infringement ofany United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright, including costs, contained in Consultant's Documents provided under this Agreement.

20. RECORDS
Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the Services to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred· under this Agreement and any Services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable.

22. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the Work accomplished by Consultant, the additional design, construction and/or restoration expense shall be borne by Consultant. Nothing in this Section is intended to limit City's rtghts under the law or any other sections of this Agreement.

Bloc Films LLC Page 7
11-12

23. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS
City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project.

24. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

24.1 Consultant or its employees may be subject to the provisions of the California Political Reform Act of 197 4 (the "Act") and/or Government Code §§ 1090 et seq., which (1) require such persons to disclose any financial interest that may foreseeably be materially affected by the Work performed under this Agreement, and (2) prohibit such persons from making, or participating in making, decisions that will foreseeably financially affect such interest.

24.2 If subject to the Act and/or Government Code§§ 1090 et seq., Consultant shall conform to all requirements therein. Failure to do so constitutes a material breach and is grounds for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from Consultant's violation of this Section.

25. NOTICES

25.2 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at:

Attn: Administrative Manager
Fire Department
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660

25.3 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at:

26. CLAIMS
Attn: Nathaniel Ford
Bloc Films LLC
125 43rd Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Agreement, before making its final request for payment under this Agreement, Consultant shall submit to City, in writing, Bloc Films LLC Page8
11-13
all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement. Consultant's acceptance of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement except those previously made in writing and identified by Consultant in writing as unsettled at the time of its final request for payment.

27. TERMINATION

27.2 Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole and absolute discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving no less than seven (7) calendar days' prior written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for Services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other information developed or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form.

28. STANDARD PROVISIONS

28.1 Recitals. City and Consultant acknowledge that the above Recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement.

28.2 Compliance with all Laws. Consultant shall, at its own cost and expense, comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition, all Work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable City, county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City.

28.3 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach, of any term, covenant or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character.

Bloc Films LLC Page9
11-14

No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions herein.

28.5 Conflicts or Inconsistencies. In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.

28. 7 Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to fonm by the City Attorney.

28.9 Controlling Law and Venue. The laivs of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange, State of California.

28.10 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, sex, sexual orientation, age or any other impermissible basis under law.

28.11 No Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute or legal action arising under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall not be entitled to attorneys' fees.

28.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one (1) and the same instrument.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
Bloc Films LLC Page 10
11-15
INI WITNESS WHEREO'F, ~he part4es have caused lhis Agreement to be executed on ihe dates written balow.

AIPPROVED AS, T01 FO'RM:
1CIIITY An0
1 RNEY'S OFFICE
□ale : '1/ 3 / t~o1,s, p L
'By: J\w, W em~< fru
Aaro1. C. Harp d ~s
City Attomey 'tf14l
ATJEST:
'Dale : -------
!By:. __________ _ _
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
CtTY OF !NEWPORT BEACH ,
a Cafifomia municfpal corpor-at[on
Date: --------
By; ___________ _
Joe, Stap1e1on
Ma,yor
CO'NSULTANIT: Bl OC FILMS LL
1 C, a
CaHfomia Umited Oabifity company
Date: --------
By. ___________ _
Nalihan iel Ford
Managlng1 Member
[EIND
1 OF SIG NATURES]
.Attaollments:

Bkic Fitms LLC
Exhibit A - Swpe of Services
Exhibit 1B - Schedule of Billing !Rates
Exhibit C -
1 lnsurance Requirements

Page 11 ends

11-16
Bloc Films LLC

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Page A-1
11-17
Objective:

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Each year during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide the City's Fire Department with video production services related to the Junior Lifeguard Program.

Program Description:

The Junior Lifeguard Program is a youth-based athletic and educational program that takes place in an outdoor beach and ocean environment. Whi!e the majority of program activities take place within a two-mile radius of the Newport Beach Balboa Pier, there are field trip activities that take place all along the Newport Beach coastline. Consultant may be asked Io film any event taking place in conjunction with this program. Typical program enrollment is approximately 1,400 participants annually, who range from 9 to 15 years of age. This program is operated through the Fire Department's Lifeguard Division and is overseen by a Lifeguard Training Captain and a Junior Lifeguard Coordinator, who are the program administrators.

This is a seven (7) week program that typically takes place from mid-June to ear!y August. Classes take place Monday through Thursday, with occasional Friday and Saturday events. The anticipated 2025 program dates are June 17 - July 31, 2025.

The program has two separate sessions:

Morning session from 9:00AM Io 12:00PM
Afternoon session from 1 :00PM to 4:00 PM
Key program lessons, skills, and events JGs accomplish each summer:

Learning and exemplifying the 3 R's ... Respect, Represent, Responsible Entering and exiting the water safely
Negotiating the surf and shorebreak
• Safe. and successful pier jump
Buoy swims·
Long distance ocean swims
Paddling
Body surfing
Long distance runs
Identifying and swimming out of a rip current
Lifeguard safety and skills
Basic first aid and persona! safety
Team building and good sportsmanship
Each week staff teach JGs new skills to build their ocean abilities and prepare them for Ihe activities that take place throughout the program.

Page I 1
11-18
Special Program Events
In addition to the lessons and skills taught each program day, there are a collection special of events that take place throughout the ?-week program. Below is a brief description of those events.
• Field Trips
During the Junior Lifeguard program, special beach orientation field trips are scheduled for individual age groups to visit various locations in Newport Beach. The purpose of these field trips is to expose Junior Lifeguards to the various ocean conditions that exist in Newport Beach and help prepare them to assess conditions at any beach they visit. • JG Open House - Picnic in the Park
Time: This is a Thursday event that takes place from 5:00PM to 7:00PM On this day we hold a "Picnic in the Park" for JG families to meet their JG's instructor.

Families picnic and intermingle with staff during the event. Live music p!ays throughout the evening.
• Ben Carlson Day
lime: Takes place during normal JG session.

On July 6, 2014, Newport Beach Lifeguard and former JG Instructor, Ben Carlson made the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty while saving the life of another. Each year we pay tribute to the sacrifice he made. As part of Ben Carlson Day, JGs participate in a special running and ocean swim event during their normal JG session. • Gray Lunde lronman
Time: This is a Saturday event that takes place from 8:30AM to 11 :15AM This competition is held annually in memory of former Junior Lifeguard Gray Lunde. This was his favorite event in Junior Lifeguards.

Participants start the competition at Tower 74 (Santa Ana River Jetty), run to the Newport Pier (2.2miles), swim around Buddy's Buoy twice (400m), run to the Balboa Pier (1.7 miles), swim around Reenie's Buoy twice (400m), run to "G" Street, and back to the finish at the Balboa Pier for recognition.
• Santa Barbara Fiesta
Time: This is a Friday event.

Santa Barbara Fiesta is a day focused on fun and competition. This event is open to Junior Lifeguards of all competitive levels and from all age divisions. It takes place at Santa Barbara East Beach.

Page I 2
11-19
• Monster Mile
Time: This takes place on a Thursday from 1 0:00AM to 1 :00PM A!! JGs show up at the same time for Monster Mile. Monster Mile is a JG event that consists of-a 1 mi!e run from the Balboa Pier to 10th Street and a 1-mi!e swim back. Each year Mqnster Mile has a different theme and JGs are encouraged to wear costumes! • Regionals
Time:·This is a Friday event.

Regionals is an invite-only competitive event put on by CSLSA. JGs are selected for participation based on their competition results each week of JGs. The CSLSA Regionals event can take place anywhere in southern California.
• Graduation
Time: This is a Thursday event that takes place from 5:30PM to 7:00PM On the final day of JGs, we hold a graduation ceremony in the evening. The ceremony is held on the grassy area next to JGHQ. During the ceremony, special awards are distributed and JGs celebrate completing the NBJG program.

Production and Delivery Requirements:

1. Each year dliring the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall produce professional caliber videos capturing the highlights and common events of the Junior Lifeguard Program. The final product must be family friendly, loosely storied, and cover as wide a range of activities and as many junior lifeguards as possible.

2. To adequately capture a variety of program activities, Consultant shall be onsite capturing footage approximately 14 days during the program each year.

3. Consultant shall capture ground level footage and aerial footage. Consultant shall also capture footage from the vantage point of the ocean including underwater footage.

4. Consultant will be responsible for all pre-production, filming, editing, graphics, music licensing, digital conversion, equipment, and post-production associated with the scope of work described herein.

5. To capture staff and participant interviews and sound bites, Consultant shall include a professional audio package as part of the services rendered.

6. Deliverables include:
a) For each year during the term of this agreement, Consultant shall deliver five (5) to seven (?).episode-type videos, averaging seven (7) to ten (10) minutes in length. b) Episodes will include a combination of daily program activities, mixed in with major program events ( see Key lessons, skills, and events AND Special Program Events above). Footage captured shall include a mix of morning and afternoon session activities.

Page I 3
11-20
c) Examples of key filming events are listed in the table below. The be!Ow list is intended to provide proposers with a general idea of what events/activities may need to be captured.

Examples of past videos are viewable on the Newport Beach Junior Lifeguard website here: https://nbig.net/Videos.html
• Junior Lifeguard Program Opening Day
• Picnic in the Park
• Pier Jumps (3 to 4 days)
• Monster Mi!e
• Pier Swim
• Paddle Day
• Competition Day
• Ben Carlson Day
• Gray Lunde lronman
• Last, Day
• Graduation
Required events and content themes are discussed at the pre-program meeting each year and are subject to change.
d) Regular availability to shoot throughout each week of the program is required. e) Episodes must be screened and approved by the program administrators prior to final edits.
f) Epi~odes must be delivered to program administrators for review within two weeks of the time the event content took p!ace.
g) Final edits of episodes shall be sent electronica!!y and must be downloadable. h) Footage must be provided to the City as high caliber video files with a preferred quality of 4K resolution, but no less than 1080p resolution.

7. The City shall so!e!y own and retain all rights of ownership of the video episodes, including but not limited to, at its sole discretion, use of footage from the episodes on socia! media outlets; City approve¢ websites, and on any other promotional platform deemed by the City to be appropriate.

8. The video episodes and all footage captured under the scope of this agreement shall belong solely to the City of Newport Beach and shall not be used in any capacity outside the scope of this agreement without prior written consent of the City.

9. Dates for each year's deliverables wi!! be discussed .prior to the beginning of the current Junior Lifeguard season.

10. Consultant and its representatives must submit to and pass a criminal background investigation by providing a complete set of fingerprints to the City via the Newport Beach Police Department at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the start of filming for the JUnior Guard Pro'gram. The cost of background check services shall be borne by the Consultarit.

Page [ 4
11-21
• •DRAFT ••
2025 NBJG Program Calend
J v1
hily 14
1',M,,900.NOOl'l
PM: I 00'-'I 00 p ff\
Ju l,.

PD Doy
!>:00 t l.00
Mvl
Jilt
flclur• Doy
.. M lD 00 l1JQ "'"'
PM NOOfl '1.00 P-"'-
Juty l!i-
July ZZ.

Ju~2~ hm 16
Jul'y 2
l!l•n Cafl'°n
Ev•nt Doy
July
1111), 16
Cuarina
Julv 2l
Mi, JQ
Pie nk In lhe
ftwk
5;00. 1,IXI p.,_m,
i:ly
J&;1v 10
Juty 1A
Mon1t.rMlle
St>:«l • l•QO p,n,
hlly l
La,lt Dov:

AN.. 10..12 l f'~ I..J
GtoduGKon:

5.l0-1:I.IDp.m
~ntu larba1a
.,1c

Page 15 ends

11-22

EXHIBIT B

SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES
Bloc Films LLC Page B-1
11-23

EXHIBITS

SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES
Junior Lifeguard Video, Per Episode $10,336
Licensed Music, Per Song $400
11-24

EXHIBITC

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

1. Provision of Insurance. Without limiting Contractor's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of Work, Contractor shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Contract, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. Contractor agrees to pmvide insurance in accordance with requirements set forth here. If Contractor uses existing coverage to comply and that coverage does not meet these requirements, Contractor agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the existing coverage.

2. Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City's Risk Manager.

3. Coverage Requirements.

Workers' Compensation Insurance. Contractor shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance providing statutory benefits and Employer's Liability Insurance with limits of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) each employee for bodily injury by accident and each employee for bodily injury by disease in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In addition, Contractor shall require each subcontractor to similarly maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance in accordance with California law for all of the subcontractor's employees.

Contractor shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers, employees, and any person or entity owning or otherwise in legal control of the property upon which Contractor performs the Project and/or Services contemplated by this Agreement.

General Liability Insurance. Contractor shall maintain commercial general liability insurance, and if necessary excess/umbrella liability insurance, with coverage at least as broad as provided by Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, ·in an amount not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence, four million dollars ($4,000,000) general aggregate and four million dollars ($4,000,000) completed operations aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from bodily Bloc Films LLC Page C-1
11-25
C.

G.
injury, property damage, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a business contract).

Automobile Liability Insurance. Contractor shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of Contractor arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this Contract, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each accident.

Sexual Abuse/Molestation. Sexual abuse/molestation coverage shall be included under the Commercial General Liability or obtained in a separate policy with a limit no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $3,000,000 in the aggregate.

Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount of two million dollars ($2,000,000) per claim and four million dollars ($4,000,000) in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the Effective Date of this Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three years after completion of the Services required by this Agreement.

Drone Liability Insurance including bodily injury, property damage, products and completed operations, personal & advertising injury, cyber liability including cyber security and invasion of privacy, and non-owned aircraft with combined single limit not less than $2,000,000. Legal defense coverage shall not exhaust the combined single limit.

Excess/Umbrella Liability Insurance. If any Excess or Umbrella Liability policies are used to meet the limits of liability required by this contract, then said policies shall be "following form" of the underlying policy coverage, terms, conditions, and provisions and shall meet all of the insurance requirements stated in this contract, including, but not limited to, the additional insured and primary & non-contributory insurance requirements stated herein. No insurance policies maintained by the City, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shail be called upon to contribute to a loss until the Contractor's primary and excess/umbrella liability policies are exhausted.

Bloc Films LLC Page C-2
11-26
4~ Other Insurance Requirements. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

A. Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to -this Contract shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers, employees, and any person or entity owning or otherwise in legal control of the property upon which Contractor performs the Project and/or Services contemplated by this Agreement or shall specifically a!low Contractor or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these requirements to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss.

Contractor hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subcontractors.

B. Additional Insured Status. All liability policies including general liability, products and completed operations, excess/umbrella liability, drone liability, and automobile liability, if required, shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers, employees, and any person or entity owning or otherwise in legal control of the property upon which Contractor performs the Project and/or Services contemplated by this Agreement shall be included as additional insureds under such policies.

C. Primary and Non-Contributory. Contractor's insurance c9verage shall be primary insurance and/or the primary source of recovery with respect to City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City sha!I be excess of Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it.

D. Notice of Cancellation. All policies shall provide City with thirty (30) calendar days' notice of cancellation or nonrenewal of coverage (except for nonpayment for which ten (10) calendar days' notice is required) for each required coverage.

5. Additional Agreements Between the Parties. The parties hereby agree to the following:

A. Evidence of Insurance. Contractor shall provide certificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers' compensation and other endorsements as specified herein for each coverage. All of the executed documents referenced in this Contract must be returned to City within ten (10) regular City business days after the date on the "Notification of Award". Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with Bloc Films LLC Page C-3
11-27
B.

City at all times during the term of this Contract. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the expiration of any such policy, evidence of insurance showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or extended shall be filed with the City. If such coverage is cancelled or reduced, Contractor shall, within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage, file with the City evidence of insurance showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or has been provided through another insurance company or companies. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

City's Right to Revise Reguirements. The City reserves the right at any time during the term of the Contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving Contractor sixty (60) calendar days' advance written notice of such .change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to Contractor, City and Contractor may renegotiate Contractor's compensation.

Right to Review Subcontracts. Contractor agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors or others with whom Contractor enters into contracts with on behalf of City will be submitted to City for review.

Failure of City to request copies of such agreements will not impose any liability on City, or its employees. Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors. For CGL coverage, subcontractors shall provide coverage with a format at least as broad as CG 20 38 04 13.

Enforcement of Contract Provisions. Contractor acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to infonm Contractor of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

Requirements not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Exhibit A are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Contractor maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for higher limits maintained by the Contractor. Any available proceeds in excess of specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.·
Bloc Films LLC Page C-4
11-28
F. Self-Insured Retentions. Contractor agrees not to self-insure or to use any self-insured retentions on any portion of the insurance required herein and further agrees that it will not allow any indemnifying party to self-insure its obligations to City. If Contractor's existing coverage includes a self-insured retention, the self-insured retention must be declared to City. City may review options with Contractor, which may include reduction or elimination of the self-insured retention, substitution of other coverage, or other solutions. Contractor agrees to be responsible for payment of any deductibles on their policies.

G. City Remedies for Non-Compliance. If Contractor or any subcontractor fails to provide and maintain insurance as required herein, then City shall have the right but not the obligation, to purchase such insurance, to tenminate this Contract, or to suspend Contractor's right to proceed until proper evidence of insurance is provided. Any amounts paid by City shall, at City's sole option, be deducted from amounts payable to Contractor or reimbursed by Contractor upon demand.

H. Timely Notice of Claims. Contractor shall give City prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Contractor's performance under this Contract, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies. City assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they are likely to involve City.

I. Contractor's Insurance. Contractor shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgement may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the Work.

J. Coverage Renewal. Contractor will renew the coverage required here annually as long as Contractor continues to provide any Work under this or any other Contract or agreement with City. Contractor shall provide proof that policies of insurance required herein expiring during the tenm of this Contract have been renewed or replaced with other policies providing at least the same coverage. Proof that such coverage has been ordered shall be submitted prior to expiration. A coverage binder or letter from Contractor's insurance agent to this effect is acceptable. A certificate of insurance and/or additional insured endorsement as required in these specifications applicable to the renewing or new coverage must be provided to City with five (5) calendar days of the expiration of the coverages.

Bloc Films LLC Page C-5

12-1

NEWPORT BEACH

City Council Staff Report

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

CITY OF

April 15, 2025
Agenda Item No. 12
ABSTRACT:

Consistent with City Council Resolution No. 2024 -85, which was adopted on November 19, 2024, City of Newport Beach staff has been working on an amendment to the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts in Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) (Amendment). Due to nine affected properties being located within the John Wayne Airport (JWA) Notification Area, the City is required to submit the Amendment to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commissio n (ALUC) for a consistency determination with the JWA Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) pursuant to Section 4.3 of the AELUP and Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code (CPUC). The ALUC conducted a hearing on the matter on February 20, 2025, and continued it to March 20, 2025, when it found the Amendment to be inconsistent with the AELUP.

For the City Council’s consideration is a recommendation to override the ALUC’s finding of inconsistency. This action would authorize staff to formally provide notice, pursuant to CPUC Section 21676(b), to the ALUC and the State Department of Transportation , Aeronautics Program, of the City’s intention to override the ALUC’s inconsistency finding.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
a) Conduct a public hearing;
b) Find that the proposed overriding action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director - 949-644-3232, [email protected]
PREPARED BY: Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner - 949-644-3208, [email protected]

Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP, Planning Manager - 949-644-3253, [email protected]
TITLE: Resolution No. 2025-13: Notice of Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission’s Determination of Inconsistency for an Amendment to the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts (PA2024-0205)
--
Resolution No. 2025-13: Notice of Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission’s Determination of Inconsistency for an Amendment to the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts (PA2024-0205) April 15, 2025

Page 2 ends

12-2
c) Adopt Resolution No. 202 5-13, A Resolution of th e City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Notifying the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission and State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program of the City’s Intention to Find that the Amendment to Section 20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and Pending Section 21.28.070 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts ) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code Related to the Implementation of the Housing Element is Consistent with the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan (PA2024-0205).

DISCUSSION:

On September 24, 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2024-16, approving an amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, to establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts in Section 20.28.050 Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts]. The City Council also adopted Ordinance No. 2024-17 to create multi -unit objective design standards in Section 20.48.185 (Multi -Unit Objective Design Standards). The new sections serve to implement Policy Actions 1A through 1G and 3A in the General Plan 6 th Cycle Housing Element (Housing Element).

The adoption of these ordinances provided new housing opportunities within five subareas to ensure the City can meet its 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation: Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1), West Newport Mesa Area (HO-2), Dover-Westcliff Area (HO -3), Newport Center Area (HO -4), and Coyote Canyon Area (HO -5). These subareas correspond directly to the Focus Areas identified in Appendix B (Adequate Sites Analysis) of the Housing Element.

Properties identified within these subareas are eligible for special development allowances intended to be conducive to residential development at the prescribed average density of 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre (du/ac). Additionally, the ordinances created multi-unit objective design standards and development standards, which include but are not limited to minimum lot area, setbacks, height, open space, landscaping, and parking.

On July 23, 2024, alongside the introduction of Ordinance No. 2024-16, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-52, authorizing the submittal of the corresponding Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to amend the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC. The LCPA would establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Dist ricts and their corresponding development standards applicable to properties located within the Coastal Zone of the City to implement the Housing Element. The City filed the LCPA application on August 16, 2024, and received its notice of complete filing on January 7, 2025. The LCPA will be scheduled for a CCC public hearing for consideration.

Resolution No. 2025-13: Notice of Intent to Override Orange County Airport Land Use Commission’s Determination of Inconsistency for an Amendment to the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts (PA2024-0205) April 15, 2025

Page 3 ends

12-3
On November 19, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-85, initiating an amendment to Section 20.28.050 in Title 20 and the pending complementary section in Title 21 of the NBMC, to review and make possible adjustments to certain development standards, including but not limited to building height limits.

Proposed Amendment

Table 2 -16 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of Section 20.28.050 in Title 20 identifies that heights within the HO-4 Subarea are limited to those in the underlying base zoning district. Given the variety of zoning d istricts, maximum height limits range as high as 300 feet and as low as 32 feet. Due to the lower base height limits, an adjustment to allowable building heights is necessary to accommodate residential developments within the intended prescribed density ra nge of 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre. It should be emphasized that there are no changes proposed to the Newport Center Sight Plane, as established by Ordinance Nos. 1371, 1596, 83 -27, and 91 -97, which serves to maintain residential views across the southeasterly quadrant of Newport Center.

Table 1 below summarizes the locations and proposed specified heights for potential housing sites taking advantage of the HO Overlay Zoning Districts along with their existing allowed base heights.

Table 1, HO-4 properties with proposed height increase
Location Description Base Heights Proposed Height
Newport Beach Tennis Club in Eastbluff 32 feet 32 feet1 AT&T Switching Station on Ford Road 32 feet 48 feet2
St. Michael’s and All Angels Church/Newport
Center United Methodist
32 feet 50 feet (flat)2
55 feet (sloped)
Armstrong Gardens, Newport Beach Country
Club’s surface parking lot, maintenance yard, and
tennis courts
32 feet, 50 feet 70 feet
Northern portion of Corporate Plaza outside the
Newport Center Sight Plane
32 feet 70 feet
100 Block Newport Center 32 feet, 50 feet 85 feet
Underutilized parking structure 65 feet 85 feet
Chase bank 32 feet 110 feet
Newport Beach Country Club golf course portion 50 feet 110 feet Southern portion of 200 Block Newport Center
excepting Regal Edwards Big Newport site
32 feet 150 feet
300 Block Newport Center and Regal Edwards
Big Newport Site
32 feet 270 feet

1 This site is in a well -established neighborhood in Eastbluff where anything higher than the base height limit would likely not be compatible with surrounding development. Limiting the height to 32 feet eliminates the potential to seek a site development review to increase the height and further encourages a lower density of 20 dwelling units per acre for neighborhood compatibility.
2 These sites have been included as part of the Planning Commission’s review and recommendation of the Amendment, which is discussed under the “Planning Commission Review and Recommendation” header below.

Page 4 ends

12-4
Allocating Units to City-Owned Properties
The proposed Amendment would also allocate dwelling units from the development limits of HO-1 and HO-4 Subareas to one City-owned property within each subarea.

The City acquired real property at 1201 Dove Street in 2023 with the intention of potentially redeveloping it in the future as the new headquarters for the Newport Beach Police Department (NBPD); however, alternative uses for the site are possible. Of the 2,577-unit development limit in HO -1, a total of 179 units (50 du/ac) would be allocated to Site ID No. 77 (1201 Dove Street) from the Housing Element Sites Inventory. This gives the City flexibility on the final use in the future.

Newport Beach Fire Station No. 3 and the NBPD’s headquarters are currently located at 868 and 870 Santa Barbara Drive , respectively. Both sites are City-controlled and have the potential for redevelopment with housing projects within the Housing Element’s planning period. Of the 2,439 -unit development limit in HO -4, a total of 199 units (50 du/ac) would be allocated to Site ID No. 362 (868 and 870 Santa Barbara Drive) from the Housing Element Sites Inventory.

Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Amendment

Table 2-16 of Section 20.28.050 in Title 20 would be amended as illustrated in the redlined version below (all other information in the table and footnotes would remain the same):

TABLE 2-16

(11) Of the 2,577 base development units, 179 units (50 du/ac) shall be allocated to Site ID No. 77 (1201 Dove Street) from the 6th Cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory. (12) Of the 2,439 base development units for HO -4, 199 units (50 du/ac) shall be allocated to Site ID No. 362 (868 and 870 Santa Barbara Drive) from the 6 th Cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory.

Page 5 ends

12-5
Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) Amendment

For those properties located in the Coastal Zone, the proposed amendment to Table 21.28-1 and updated or added maps to Section 21.80.032 in Title 21 would mirror proposed changes as proposed to Table 2-16 and Section 20.80.25 in Title 20.

Planning Commission Review and Recommendation
On January 23, 2025, the Planning Commission considered the Amendment. Four members of the public addressed the Planning Commission, inclu ding a representative from Saint Michael and All Angels Church requesting the inclusion of Site ID No. 147 in the height limitation adjustments for HO -4 Subarea. The Planning Commission also received written comments, including one from the property owner of Site ID No. 141 requesting its inclusion in the height limitation adjustments for HO-4 Subarea.

At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2025 -004 by a unanimous vote of (5 ayes and 1 recused) recommending the City Council approve the Amendment with inclusion of Site ID Nos. 146 and 147 with a maximum height limit of 50 feet (flat) and 55 feet (sloped) and Site ID No. 141 with a maximum height limit of 48 feet. The January 23, 2025 , Planning Commission staff report, Planning Commission minutes excerpts, and Planning Commission Reso lution No. PC202 5-004 are included in this staff report as Attachments B, C and D, respectively.

Airport Land Use Commission Review
Section 4.3 of the AELUP and Section 21676(b) of the California Public Utilities Code require the City to submit General Plan and Zoning Code amendments to the ALUC for a consistency determination with the AELUP.

On February 20, 2025, the ALUC conducted a public hearing on the Amendment and after two failed motions, the ALUC continued the matter to its March 20, 2025, meeting by a unanimous vote (5 ayes, 0 nays).

On March 20, 2025, the ALUC conducted a second public hearing on the Amendment and after one failed motion, the ALUC determined (5 ayes and 1 nay) the Amendment is inconsistent with the AELUP.

The February 20 and March 20, 2025, ALUC staff reports are included as Attachments E and F, and the ALUC inconsistency determination letter is included as Attachment G. It is notable that for both staff reports, ALUC staff recommended the ALUC make the determination that the Amendment is consistent with the AELUP.

ALUC Override Process
As a final review authority on legislative acts, the City Council may choose to override the ALUC’s determination by following a two -step process, which is established in CPUC Section 21676. The first step in the process is to conduct a public hearing to adopt a resolution of intention to override, a copy of which would be sent to the ALUC and State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program to provide formal notif ication of the City’s intent.

Page 6 ends

12-6
The second step in the process is that not less than 45 days after notification has been sent to the ALUC and State Department of Transportation , Aeronautics Program, the City Council may conduct a second public hearing to c onsider adopting a resolution to override the ALUC. At this time, the Council may also consider the Amendment and take final action on the application.

The following points are important to consider:
 The City Council’s adoption of the attached notification resolution does not constitute approval of the Amendment, nor does it predispose the City Council’s future action on either the Amendment or the consistency determination;
 The attached resolution notifying the ALUC and the State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program of the City’s intent, and the resolution to overrule the ALUC, which will be presented at a future hearing, must be adopted by a two - thirds majority vote. Since there are seven City Council members, five affirmative votes are needed to pass the resolution;
 Should the City Council ultimately overrule the ALUC decision, that action will not immediately affect the City’s status as a consistent agency with the AELUP. The ALUC would need to place an item on one of its future agendas to consider deeming the City an inconsistent agency; and
 CPUC Section 21678 states that if the City overrides the ALUC’s action or recommendation, the operator of the airport shall be immune from liability from damages to property or personal injury caused by or resulting directly or indirectly from the City’s decision to overrule the ALUC determination.

The draft resolution provided as Attachment A to this report includes a preliminary analysis of the Amendment’s consistency with the AELUP.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact related to this item.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Final action on the Amendment is not being considered at this time. A complete environmental analysis of the Amendment is contained in the attached January 23, 2025 Planning Commission Staff Report for which a consistency analysis to the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report ( PEIR) identified by State Clearinghouse Number (SCH No.) 2023060699 is being proposed. The consistency analysis determined that the Amendment is consistent with the Housing Element and within the scope of PEIR. Under State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, no additional environmental review is required.

Page 7 ends

12-7
Nevertheless, the action that is currently before the Cit y Council is consideration of adopting a resolution of intent to override the ALUC’s finding that the Project is not consistent with the AELUP.

The City Council finds the adoption of this resolution is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Specifically, the resolution does not have the potential for resulting in either a di rect physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because it is limited to the notification of the City’s intent to overrule the ALUC determination and it does not authorize the future development of any property within the Amendment’s area or commit the City to approve the Amendment. Potential project impacts will be analyzed when the City Council considers a project.

NOTICING:

Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot in a one-eighth-page format at least 10 days before the scheduled meeting, consistent with Section 20.62.020(B)(2)(c) of the NBMC. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A – Resolution No. 2025-13 Intent to Override ALUC’s Determination Attachment B – Planning Commission Staff Report, dated January 23 , 202 5 (No Attachments)
Attachment C – Planning Commission Minute Excerpts, dated January 23, 2025 Attachment D – Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Attachment E – ALUC Staff Report, dated February 20, 2025 (No Attachments) Attachment F – ALUC Staff Report, dated March 20, 2025 Attachment G – ALUC Determination Letter, dated March 21, 2025

Attachment A
Resolution No. 2025-__ Intent to Override ALUC’s Determination 12-813
12-9
13RESOLUTION NO. 2025-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, NOTIFYING THE

ORANGE COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION

AND STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,

AERONAUTICS PROGRAM OF THE CITY'S INTENTION

TO FIND THAT THE AMENDMENT TO SECTION

20.28.050 (HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO) OVERLAY

ZONING DISTRICTS) AND PENDING SECTION

21.28.070 (HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO) OVERLAY

COASTAL ZONING DISTRICTS) OF THE NEWPORT

BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE 2008 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT
ENVIRONS LAND USE PLAN (PA2024-0205)
'
I
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance Nos. 2024-16 and 2024-17 on September 24, 2024, amending Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), to establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts in Section 20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and to create multi-unit objective design standards in Section 20.48.185 (Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards) to implement Policy Actions 1A through 1G and 3A in the General Plan 6th Cycle Housing Element ("Housing Element");
WHEREAS, Section 20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) of the NBMC allows for new housing opportunities within five subareas consisting of the Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1 ), West Newport Mesa Area (HO-2), Dover-Westcliff Area (HO-3), Newport Center Area (HO-4), and Coyote Canyon Area (HO-5) to accommodates the City's 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment ("RHNA") allocation;
12-10
Resolution No. 2025-

Page 2 ends

WHEREAS, properties identified within these subareas are eligible for specified development allowances conducive to residential development at the prescribed average density of 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre along with minimum lot area, setback, height, open space, landscaping, and parking development standards; WHEREAS, the City Council also adopted Resolution No. 2024-52 on July 23, 2024, authorizing submittal of the Local Coastal Program Amendment ("LCPA") to the California Coastal Commission ("CCC") amending the City's Coastal Land Use Plan and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC and establishing the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts and their corresponding development standards applicable to properties located within the Coastal Zone of the city to implement the Housing Element;
WHEREAS, the City filed the LCPA application with the CCC on August 16, 2024, and received a letter from CCC staff on January 7, 2025, confirming the City's application is complete and pending a hearing date;
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-85 on November 19, 2024, initiating an amendment to Section 20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) of the NBMC and the pending complementary amendments in Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC, to adjust certain development standards, including but not limited to, building height limits specified in Table 2-16 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of Section

20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and pending Table 21.28- 1 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of Section 21.28.070 of the NBMC;
WHEREAS, an amendment to Table 2-16 of Section 20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and pending Table 21.28-1 of the NBMC is necessary to adjust the height limitations of certain properties within the Newport Center Area (HO-4) to accommodate potential residential development with the intended prescribed density range, and to identify a certain number of units being allocated from the respective development limits for a selected group of City-owned properties located within Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1) and Newport Center Area (HO-4) ("Amendment");
WHEREAS, the Amendment includes a revIsIon to the Housing Opportunity Overlay District Maps in Section 20.80.025 and pending Section 21.80.035 of the NBMC; 12-11
Resolution No. 2025-

Page 3 ends

WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 23, 2025, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California to consider the Amendment. 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 Chapters 20.62 (Public Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC.

Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing;
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2025-004 by a unanimous vote of (5 ayes, 1 recusal) recommending the City Council approve the Amendment;
WHEREAS, eight of the 35 properties in Newport Center Area (HO-4) are within the John Wayne Airport ("JWA") Notification Area; however, none of the eight properties are located within any noise contour area or safety zones of the 2008 John Wayne Airport Environs Land Use Plan ("AELUP");
WHEREAS, the City-owned property at 1201 Dove Street in Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1) is located within Safely Zone 6 of the AELUP, 60 dBA CNEL noise contour of the AELUP, and 60 dBA CNEL noise contour of the City's Noise Element; WHEREAS, due to a portion of the properties being located within the JWA Notification Area, California Public Utilities Code ("CPUC") Section 21676(b) requires the City to refer the Amendment to the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission ("ALUC") to review for consistency with the AELUP;
WHEREAS, on February 20, 2025, the ALUC conducted a public hearing on the Amendment and after two failed motions, the ALUC continued the Amendment to its March 20, 2025, meeting by a unanimous vote (5 ayes, 0 nays); WHEREAS, on March 20, 2025, the ALUC conducted a second public hearing on the Amendment and after one failed motion, the ALUC determined the Amendment is inconsistent with the AELUP (5 ayes, 1 nay);
WHEREAS, pursuantlo Sections 21670 and 21676 of the CPUC, the City Council may, after a public hearing, propose to overrule ALUC with a two-thirds vote, if it makes specific findings that the Amendment is consistent with the purpose of Section 21670 of the CPUC to protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly e~pansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public's exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses; and 12-12
Resolution No. 2025-~

Page 4 of 7 ends

WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on April 15, 2025, by the City Council in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California to consider the Amendment. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, CPUC Section 21676(b), and Chapters

20.62 (Public Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this public hearing.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows:

Section 1: The City Council finds the Amendment is consistent with the purposes of Section 21670 of the CPUC and the AELUP of protecting the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring the orderly expansion of airports and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public' s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around public airports to the extent that these areas are not already devoted to incompatible uses.

Findings and Facts in Support of Findings:

A. The Amendment is consistent with the noise standards of the AELUP.

The AELUP guides development proposals to provide for the orderly development of JWA and the surrounding area through implementation of the standards in Section 2 (Planning Guidelines) and Section 3 (Land Use Policies).

Implementation of these standards is intended to protect the public from the adverse effects of aircraft noise, to ensllre that people and facilities are not concentrated in areas susceptible to aircraft accidents, and to ensure that no structures or activities adversely affect navigable airspace.

Of the nine properties either wholly or partially within the JWA Notification Area, the City-owned site at 1201 Dove Street is the only one located within the AELUP's 60 dBA noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 2), and City's Noise Element 60 dB CNEL noise contour. The remaining eight properties are far removed from any identified noise impact zone.

Section 2.1.1 of the AELUP sets forth the CNEL standards, and Sections 3.2.3 and

3.2.4 of the AELUP define the noise exposure in the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour (Noise Impact Zone 2) as" Moderate Noise Impact". Section 3, Table 1 (Limitations on Land Use Due to Noise) of the AELUP identifies residential uses as "normally consistent" for the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour. Accordingly, residential units may 12-13
Resolution No. 2025-~

Page 5 ends

be consistent with proper sound-attenuation and careful design considerations.

For any residential sites and uses within Noise Impact Zone "2," the City will ensure future development is consistent with the AELUP considerations and the City's General Plan Land Use and Noise Element policies and the development standards specified in the NBMC to ensure compatibility.

B. The Amendment is consistent with the safety standards of the AELUP.

Of the nine properties either wholly or partially within the JWA Notification Area, the City-owned site at 1201 Dove Street is the only one located within the AELUP's Safety Zone 6, with the remaining eight being far removed from any safety zone.

Section 2.1.2 (Safety Compatibility Zones) of the AELUP sets forth allowable land uses within each safety zone of JWA environs. Allowed uses in Safety Zone 6 include residential and most nonresidential uses, excepting outdoor stadiums and similar uses with very high intensities. Uses that should be avoided include children's schools, large day-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes. Risk factors associated with Safety Zone 6 generally include a low likelihood of accident occurrence.

Furthermore, the City's General Plan Safety Element Policy S 8.6 demonstrates that the City acknowledges the importance of the JWA Safety Zones in providing, "S 8.6 John Wayne Airport Traffic Pattern Zone - Use the most currently available John Wayne Airport (JWA) Airport Environs Land Use Plan (AELUP) as a planning resource for evaluation of land use compatibility and land use intensity in areas affected by JWA operations. In particular, future land use decisions within the existing JWA Clear Zone/Runway Protection Zone (Figure SS) should be evaluated to minimize the risk to life and property associated with aircraft operations."
C. The Amendment is consistent with the height standards of the AELUP.

All sites within the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zones are subject to the current heights allowed by the base zoning district unless otherwise identified on the associated zoning map for each Housing Opportunity (HO) subarea. No height increase is proposed within Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1 ), which is nearest to JWA All height increases are proposed in Newport Center Area (HO-4). 12-14
Resolution No. 2025-

Page 6 ends

Furthermore, in no event will the City's rezoned height limits in Newport Center Area (HO-4) be inconsistent with the parameters outlined in Subsection 3.2.6 (Height Restriction Zone) of the AELUP and FAA standards.

Section 2: Based on the foregoing findings, the City Council provides this notice of intention to overrule the ALUC' s determination that the Amendment is inconsistent with the AELUP.

Section 3: The City Council hereby directs City staff to provideALUC and State Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Program, with notice of the City's intention to overrule the ALUC' s determination that the Amendments are inconsistent with the AELUP.

Section 4: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.

Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 6: The City Council finds the adoption of this resolution is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has mo potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.

Specifically, the Amendment does not have the potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment because it is limited to the City's proposal to overrule the ALUC's determination and does not commit the City to approve the Amendment. Furthermore, the Amendment has been evaluated pursuant to CEQA and independently reviewed. All potential environmental effects for the Amendment have been adequately addressed in the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report ("PEIR") (SCH No. 2023060699) which was done in compliance with the California Environmental Quality 12-15
Resolut[on No. 2025-_

Page 7 of 7 ends

Ad. ( .. CIEQA·) as set forth fn 1he Public Resources Code Section 21000 &t seq., Tide 14, Division 6. Chapter 3 of1he California Code of'Regul'.ations ("CECA Guidelines"), aoo City Council Policy K-3 (lmplementatron Procedures 'for 'the California EnvJron mental Quality Act) r,elated to the 611'1 Cycle Hou,sing Element Implementation involving amendments lo the, General Plan. Coastal Land Use Plan, 1irtle 20 (Plannrng and Zoning) and Title 21 {Local Coastal Program bnplementation Plan) of the N1BMC. Lastt;,, lhe Amendmenrt,does not consti~ute subst:arirt1ial changes to ·the circumstances under whidl the project sha 11 lbe undertaken Hla1 would result in new or more severe environmental Impacts than previously addr,essed in tne P EIR, nor has any new infom1ation regarding the potentral for new or more sev,ere significant environmental impacts been mdentified as de1arled in tfl.e, p,repared CEQA Cons1$tency Memorandum.

See ti on 7: Tti is re sol u~on shall take effect immed iatety upon its. adoption by the Cily Counoil, and the, City C1Jerk sha II certify tile v,ote adopting lhe rt"solution.

ADOPTED1 1his 15th day of April, 2025.

ATTEST:

Leilani I. Brown
CUy Clerk
,A
1 PPROVED, AS TO1 FO:RM:

C ITV JTORNEY'S OFFICE
-._(_ (,a_
. Harp
City Atto mey
Joe Sta p,eton
Mayor

Attachment B
January 23, 2025 Planning Commission Staff Report (No Attachments) 12-16

CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
January 23, 2025
Agenda Item No. 3

SUBJECT: Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts Amendments (PA2024-0205)
 Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Amendment
 Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) Amendment SITE LOCATION: Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1) and Newport Center Area (HO-4) APPLICANT: City of Newport Beach

PLANNERS:

Rosalinh Ung, Principal Planner
[email protected], 949-644-3208

Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP, Planning Manager
[email protected], 949-644-3253

PROJECT SUMMARY

Amendments to Table 2-16 of Section 20.28.050 in Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and pending Table 21.28- 1 of Section 21.28.070 in Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) to adjust the height limitations of certain properties within the Newport Center Area (HO -4) Subarea to accommodate potential residential development with in the intended prescribed density range, and to identify a number of units being allocated from the respective development limits for a group of City -owned properties located within the Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1) and HO-4 Subareas. The corresponding Housing Opportunity Overlay District Maps in Section 20.80.025 and pending Section 21.80.032 would also be amended accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION

1) Conduct a public hearing;

2) Find that al l potential environmental effects for the amendments have been adequately addressed in the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identified by State Clearinghouse Number (SCH No.) 2023060699, and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said document for the approval of the amendments; and

3) Adopt R esolution No. PC2025-004 (Attachment No. PC 1), recommending City Council approve the amendments to the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts (PA2024-0205).

12-17
Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts Amendments (PA2024-0205)
Planning Commission, January 23, 2025

Page 2 ends

BACKGROUND

On September 24, 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2024-16 approving an amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC , to establis h the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts in Section 20.28.050 [Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts]. The City Council also adopted Ordinance No. 2024-17 to create multi-unit objective design standards in Section 20.48.185 (Multi -Unit Objective Design Standards). The new sections serve to implement Policy Actions 1A through 1G and 3A in the General Plan 6
th Cycle Housing Element (Housing Element).

The adopti
on of these ordinances provided new housing opportunities within five subareas to ensure the City can meet its 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation: Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1), West Newport Mesa Area (HO-2), Dover-Westcliff Area (HO -3), Newport Center Area (HO -4), and Coyote Canyon Area (HO-5). These subareas correspond directly to the Focus Areas identified in Appendix B (Adequate Sites Analysis) of the Housing Element and excerpted in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1, Housing Element focus areas for residential development

Properties identified within these S ubareas are eligible for special development allowances intended to be conducive to residential development at the prescribed average density of 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre. Additionally, the ordinances created multi-unit objective design standards and development standards, which include but are not limited to minimum lot area, setbacks, height, open space, landscaping, and parking.

On July 23, 2024, alongside the introduction of Ordinance No. 2024-16, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024- 52 authorizing the submittal of the corresponding Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) to the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to 12-18
Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts Amendments (PA2024-0205)
Planning Commission, January 23, 2025

Page 3 ends

amend the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC. The LCPA would establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts and their corresponding development standards applicable to properties located within the Coastal Zone of the City to implement the Housing Element. The City initially submitted its LCPA application on August 16, 2024, and most recently received its notice of complete filing on January 7, 2025. The LCPA will be scheduled for a CCC public hearing for consideration.

On November 19, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-85, initiating an amendment to Section 20.28.050 in Title 20 and the pending complementary section in Title 21 of the NBMC, to review and make possible adjustments to certain development standards, including but not limited to building height limits specified in Table 2- 16 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of Section 20.28.050 [Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts ] and pending Table 21.28- 1 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of the NBMC.

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

Specifying Height Limitations

Since the implementation of the HO Overlay Zoning Districts , City staff has met with several prospective developers, and it has become apparent that the height limits applicable to some sites within the HO -4 Subarea cannot accommodate the intended densities.

Currently, Table 2-16 (Development Standards For Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of Section 20.28.050 identifies that heights within this Subarea are limited to those in the underlying base zoning district. Given the variety of zoning districts in HO -4, maximum height limits range as high as 300 feet and as low as 32 feet. Due to the lower base height limits, an adjustment to allowable building heights is appropriate and necessary to accommodate residential developments within the intended prescribed density range of 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre.

Adjusting these heights is also in
furtherance of the longstanding
vision for development in Newport
Center, which includes taller
buildings around the center to
create a downtown- like feel while
preserving open view corridors .

This intention is depicted in a
photograph of a carboard cutout
model from its earliest planning
efforts, provided as Figure 2 above.

More importantly, t he proposed
Figure 2, 1960s cardboard model of Newport Center
(Real Estate Masterwork Series; Emmert, Frost)
12-19
Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts Amendments (PA2024-0205)
Planning Commission, January 23, 2025

Page 4 ends

increases are also consistent with General Plan Land Use Element Policy 6.14.4 (Development Scale), excerpted below.

LU 6.14.4 Development Scale. Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest and progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway. (Imp 2.1, 3.1, 4.1)

The benefits of increasing heights include accommodating density on smaller sites and/or fewer sites, increasing walkability for residents and activating the urban core of Newport Center to create a true mixed- use community, and decreasing development footprints and encouraging increased open space and views through developments.

City staff has prepared a series of three exhibits depict ing: 1) existing height limits ; 2) proposed height limits; and 3) existing height limits with proposed height limits overlaid.

Those exhibits are provided as Attachment No. PC 2 for reference and are intended to be reviewed together.

Table 1 below summarizes t he locations and proposed specified heights for potential housing sites taking advantage of the HO Overlay Zoning Districts along with their existing allowed base heights.

It should be emphasized that there are no changes proposed to the Newport Center Sight Plane, as established by Ordinance Nos. 1371, 1596, 83-27, and 91-97, which serves to maintain residential views across the southeasterly quadrant of Newport Center 12-20
Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts Amendments (PA2024-0205)
Planning Commission, January 23, 2025

Page 5 ends

Table 1, HO-4 properties with proposed height increase
Location Description Base Heights Proposed Height
Newport Beach Tennis Club in Eastbluff 32 feet 32 feet1 Armstrong Gardens, Newport Beach Country
Club’s surface parking lot, maintenance yard, and
tennis courts
32 feet, 50 feet 70 feet
Northern portion of Corporate Plaza outside the
Newport Center Sight Plane
32 feet 70 feet
100 Block Newport Center 32 feet, 50 feet 85 feet
Underutilized parking structure 65 feet 85 feet
Chase bank 32 feet 110 feet
Newport Beach Country Club golf course portion 50 feet 110 feet Southern portion of 200 Block Newport Center
excepting Regal Edwards Big Newport site
32 feet 150 feet
300 Block Newport Center and Regal Edwards
Big Newport Site
32 feet 270 feet
1 This site is in a well- established neighborhood in Eastbluff where anything higher than the base height limit would likely not be compatible with surrounding development. Limiting the height to 32 feet eliminates the potential to seek a site development review to increase the height and further encourages a lower density of 20 dwelling units per acre for neighborhood compatibility.

Allocating Units to City-Owned Properties

The proposed amendments would also allocate a certain number of units from the development limits of HO-1 and HO -4 Subareas to a small group of City -owned properties.

868 and 870 Santa Barbara Drive is the current location of Newport Beach Fire Station No. 3 and the NBPD’s headquarters. Both sites are City-controlled and have the potential for redevelopment with housing projects within the Housing Element’s planning per iod.

Of the 2,439 -unit development limit in HO -4, a total of 199 units (50 du/ac) would be allocated to Site ID No. 362 (868 and 870 Santa Barbara Drive) from the Housing Element Sites Inventory.

12-21
Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts Amendments (PA2024-0205)
Planning Commission, January 23, 2025

Page 6 ends

Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Amendment

Table 2-16 of Section 20.28.050 would be amended as illustrated below:

TABLE 2-16

DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FORHOUSING OPPORTUNITY OVERLAY ZONES Development Feature
Housing Opportunity Subareas
HO-1 HO-2 HO-3 HO-4 HO-5 HO-6
Development Limit
(units)(1)
2,577(11) 1,107 521 2,439(12) 1,530 N/A
Height Per Base
Zone
unless
otherwise
identified
on the
map
65 ft. 65 ft.(6) Per Base
Zone
unless
otherwise
identified
on the
map(7)
65 ft. All
Standards
Per Base
Zone
(11) Of the 2,577 base development units, 179 units (50 du/ac) shall be allocated to Site ID No. 77 (1201 Dove Street) from the 6th Cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory. (12) Of the 2,439 base development units for HO-4, 199 units (50 du/ac) shall be allocated to Site ID No. 362 (868 and 870 Santa Barbara Drive) from the 6th Cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory.

Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment

For those properties located in the Coastal Zone, the proposed amendment to Table

21.28-1 and updated or added maps to Section 21.80.032 of Title 2 1 would mi rror proposed changes as proposed to Table 2-16 and Section 20.80.25 of the NBMC.

Environmental Review

All potential environmental effects for the amendments have been adequately addressed in the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identified by State Clearinghouse Number (SCH No.) 2023060699, and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said document for the approval of the amendments. Copies of the previously prepared environmental document are available for public review and inspection at the Planning Division or at the City of Newport Beach website here: Housing Implementation Program EIR (PA2022-0245).

A consistency analysis was prepared by Kimley -Horn & Associates, Inc. on January 9, 2025, and is attached as Exhibit “A” of Draft Resolution (Attachment No. PC 1 ). It was determined that the amendments are consistent with the Housing Element and within the scope of EIR. Under State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164, no additional environmental review is required.

12-22
Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning and Coastal Zoning Districts Amendments (PA2024-0205)
Planning Commission, January 23, 2025

Page 7 ends

Public Notice

Prepared by:

_________________________
Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP
Planning Manager
Submitted by:

ATTACHMENTS
PC 1 Draft Resolution
PC 2 Draft Height Exhibits 1, 2, and 3

01/18/23
12-23

Attachment C
January 23, 2025 Planning Commission Minutes Excerpt
12-24

NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 100 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE
THURSDAY, JANUARY 23, 2025
REGULAR MEETING – 6:00 P.M.

I. CALL TO ORDER – 6:00 p.m.

II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Commissioner Ellmore

III. ROLL CALL

PRESENT: Chair Mark Rosene, Vice Chair Tristan Harris , Secretary David Salene, Commissioner Curtis Ellmore, Commissioner Jonathan Langford, and Commissioner Lee Lowrey

ABSENT: None

Staff Present: Assistant City Manager Seimone Jurjis, Deputy Community Development Director Jaime Murillo, Assistant City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill, Principal Civil Engineer Kevin Riley, Planning Manager Ben Zdeba, Assistant Planner Daniel Kopshever, Administrative Assistant Clarivel Rodriguez, Department Assistant Savannah Martinez

IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Jim Mosher suggested revising the public notice ads to be more accessible to the public.

V. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCES - None

VI. CONSENT ITEMS

ITEM NO. 1 MINUTES OF JANUARY 9, 2025

Recommended Action: Approve and file

Motion made by Commissioner Ellmore and seconded by Chair Rosene to approve the meeting minutes of January 9, 2025, as amended by Mr. Mosher.

AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Langford, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None

VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS

ITEM NO. 2 NEWPORT IRVINE MEDICAL CENTER (PA2024-0070)
Site Location: 3300 Irvine Avenue

Summary:

A request to remodel an existing, three-story office building and convert the land use from professional office to medical office. To partially accommodate the increased parking demand, the existing surface parking lot will be restriped and a three-level parking structure Docusign Envelope ID: 487E8151-985A-4999-9214-C5D43B660D3C 12-25
Planning Commission Meeting
January 23, 2025

with solar canopy will be constructed. The following approvals are required to implement the project as proposed:

• Major Site Development Review: To allow an increase in building height in accordance Section 20.52.080 (Site Development Reviews) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) for the new architectural features (i.e., parapets) which are proposed for 41 feet 6 inches above existing grade and 45 feet above existing grade, where the base height limit permits a maximum of 32 feet;
• Staff Approval: To waive 61 of the 392 parking spaces required, or 15.5% of the parking requirement, in accordance with Section 20.40.110(D) (Adjustments to Off -Street Parking Requirements) of the NBMC; and
• Traffic Study: To consider the projected 1,496 net increase in average daily vehicle trips, pursuant to Section 15.40.030(A) (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the NBMC.

Recommended Actions:

1. Conduct a public hearing;

2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15332 under Class 32 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines, because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and

3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2025- 003, approving the Site Development Review, Staff Approval, and Traffic Study filed as PA2024-0070.

Commissioner Langford recused himself due to real property interests by his employer.

Assistant Planner Kopshever used a presentation to review the project location, public comment concern, vicinity map and land use, project description and approvals, key site development review findings, existing view from Irvine Avenue, rendering of the proposed project, scale and compatibility, setbacks and open space, height comparison, parking waiver, traffic study, changes to the resolution, and action recommended.

Ex parte communications included the Commissioners meeting with either the applicant or the applicant’s consultant and touring the property.

Chair Rosene opened the public hearing.

Jason Krotts, applicant, agreed to the conditions of approval and supported staff’s recommendations and revisions.

Chair Rosene closed the public hearing.

Motion made by Commissioner Ellmore and seconded by Commissioner Lowrey to approve the item as amended.

AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene
NOES: None
RECUSE: Langford
ABSENT: None

Docusign Envelope ID: 487E8151-985A-4999-9214-C5D43B660D3C 12-26
Planning Commission Meeting
January 23, 2025

ITEM NO. 3 HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO) OVERLAY ZONING AND COASTAL ZONING DISTRICT AMENDMENTS (PA2024-0205)
Site Location: Various

Summary:

An amendment to Table 2- 16 of Section 20.28.050 [ Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts] in Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and pending Table 21.28-1 of Section

21.28.070 [Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts] in Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) to:
(1) adjust the height limitations of certain properties within the Newport Center Area (HO-4) Subarea to accommodate residential development with the intended prescribed density range; and (2) to identify a certain number of units being allocated from the respective development limits for a select group of City -owned properties located within the Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1) and Newport Center Area (HO-4) Subareas. The corresponding maps in Section 20.80.025 and pending Section 21.80.032 would also be amended accordingly.

Recommended Actions:

1. Conduct a public hearing;

2. Find that all potential environmental effects for the amendments have been adequately addressed in the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identified by State Clearinghouse Number (SCH No.) 2023060699, and the City of Newport Beach intends to use said document for the approval of the amendments; and

3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2025-004 (Attachment No. PC 1), recommending City Council approve the amendments to the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts (PA2024-0205.)

Commissioner Langford recused himself due to real property interests by his employer.

Planning Manager Zdeba used a presentation to highlight the background of the Housing Element and its implementation program , Housing Opportunity (H O) O verlay Zoning Districts, proposed amendments, HO-4: existing and proposed heights, vision for Newport Center, benefits of increased height, CEQA compliance, written correspondence received, staff’s recommendation, and next steps.

In reply to Commissioner Lowrey ’s question, Planning Manager Zdeba indicated that subsequent requests can be made by private developers as an applicant once the initial amendment is completed.

Assistant City Manager Jurjis noted that increased heights are needed to make housing projects pencil, meet minimum density requirements, and provide a marketable product.

In response to Secretary Salene’s inquiry, Planning Manager Zdeba reviewed the creation and purpose of the Newport Center Sight Plane, and stated that no changes are proposed to it so the residents across MacArthur Boulevard who are looking west maintain their views protected.

There were no ex parte communications among the Commissioners except for Commissioner Lowrey who spoke with property owners, stakeholders, and concerned citizens.

Docusign Envelope ID: 487E8151-985A-4999-9214-C5D43B660D3C 12-27
Planning Commission Meeting
January 23, 2025

Chair Rosene opened the public hearing.

Jim Mosher thought the housing overlays are unfair and inequitable. He expressed concerns that the current proposal seems counterproductive, public noticing is inequitable, and views will be impacted.

Debbie Stevens, Harborview Hills Community Association, thanked staff for protecting the Newport Center Sight Plane, questioned the view by the cinema and inquired about the public notice process.

Tom Nicholson, 21 Shoal Drive, asked for the Commission to consider the Saint Michael’s Church, Housing Element Site ID 147 for inclusion in the height limitation adjustments for HO-4.

Larry Tucker noted that there is less density with more height, greater land residual value with bigger units, reduced impacts with height, and the unit height does not affect the sight plane.

Planning Manager Zdeba noted that housing projects under the overlay will likely require a site development review to address compliance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) and General Plan, including analysis from public viewpoints. Furthermore, he reviewed public noticing practices.

Chair Rosene closed the public hearing.

Vice Chair Harris and Commissioner Ellmore thought Newport Center is an appropriate location for height and supported the two additional properties.

Motion made by Commissioner Ellmore and seconded by Vice Chair Harris to approve the item as recommended.

AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene
NOES: None
RECUSE: Langford
ABSENT: None

VIII. 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 TO BE

PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA

Deputy Community Development Director Murillo indicated that the February 6 Planning Commission
meeting is canceled, and no items are agendized for the February 20 meeting.

Jim Mosher announced pending California Coastal Commission (CCC) Items 3 and 5 are scheduled for the CCC meeting in Long Beach on February 5.

ITEM NO. 6 REQUESTS FOR EXCUSED ABSENCES - None

IX. ADJOURNMENT - With no further business, Chair Rosene adjourned the meeting at 6:42 p.m.

Docusign Envelope ID: 487E8151-985A-4999-9214-C5D43B660D3C 12-28
Planning Commission Meeting
January 23, 2025

The agenda for the January 23, 2025, Planning Commission meeting was posted on Thursday, January 16, 2025, at 5:05 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, January 16, 2025, at 4:49 p.m.

_______________________________
Mark Rosene, Chair

_______________________________
David Salene, Secretary

Docusign Envelope ID: 487E8151-985A-4999-9214-C5D43B660D3C 12-29

Attachment D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004
12-30
RESOLUTION NO. PC2025-004

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY

OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE

CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDME NT TO SECTION

20.28.050 ( HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO) OVERLAY ZON ING
DISTRICTS) OF TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) AND
PENDING SECTION 21.28.070 [ HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO)
OVERLAY COASTAL ZONING DISTRICTS] IN TITLE 21 (LOCAL

COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN) OF THE
NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE (PA2024-0205)

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.

1. On September 24, 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance Nos. 2024-16 and 2024-17, approving amendments to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”), to establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts in Section 20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and to create multi-unit objective design standards in Section 20.48.185 (Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards). The new sections serve to implement Policy Actions 1A through 1G and 3A in the General Plan 6
th Cycle Housing Element ("Housing Element").

2. Section 20.28.050 of the NBMC allows for new housing opportunities within five subareas to ensure the City can accommodate its 6
th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment
(“RHNA”) allocation. These subareas correspond to the Focus Areas identified in the Housing Element and are as follows: Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1), West Newport Mesa Area (HO-2), Dover-Westcliff Area (HO-3), Newport Center Area (HO-4), and Coyote Canyon Area (HO-5). Properties identified within these subareas are eligible for specified development allowances conducive to residential development at the prescribed average density of 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre. The standards include but are not limited t o minimum lot area, setbacks, height, open space, landscaping, and parking.

3. O n July 23, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-52, authorizing submittal of the Local Coastal Program Amendment to the California Coastal Commission to amend the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC to establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts and their corresponding development standards applicable to properties located within the Coastal Zone to implement the Housing Element.

4. On November 19, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024- 85, initiating an amendment to Section 20.28.050 of the NBMC and the pending complementary amendments in Title 21 of the NBMC, to review and make possible adjustments to certain development standards, including but not limited to building height limits specified in Table 2-16 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of Section Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-31
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004

Page 2 of 13 ends

01-17-23

20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and pending Table 21.28- 1 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of the NBMC.

5. A n amendment to Table 2 -16 of Section 20.28.050 and pending Table 21.28- 1 of the NBMC is necessary to adjust the height limitations of certain properties within the HO-4 subarea to accommodate potential residential development with the intended prescribed density range, and to identify a certain number of units being allocated from the respective development limits for a selected group of City-owned properties located within HO-1 and HO-4 subareas. The corresponding Housing Opportunity Overlay District Maps in Section

20.80.025 and pending Section 21.80.035 would also be amended accordingly (“Amendment”).

6. A public hearing was held on January 23, 2025, in the 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 Chapters 20.62 (Public Hearings) and 21.62 (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. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) as set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing guidelines set forth in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-50 on July 23, 2024, certifying Final Program Environmental Impact Report SCH No. 2023060699 ("PEIR"), approving a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP"), and adopting Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations related to the implementation of the Housing Element involving amendments to the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC which are available at: Housing Implementation Program EIR.

2. Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when an environmental impact report (“EIR”) is adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:

a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;

b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-32
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004

Page 3 of 13 ends

01-17-23
c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was adopted as complete, shows any of the following:

i. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous negative declaration;

ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the adopted negative declaration;

iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives; or

iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous negative declaration would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives.

3. T he Amendment, which include adjustment to the height limitations of certain properties within the HO -4 Subarea to accommodate potential residential development with the intended prescribed density range, and to identify the number of units being allocated from the residential development limits for certain City -owned properties within HO -1 and HO -4 Subareas , does not constitute substantial changes to the circumstances under which the p roject would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the EIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified as detailed in the CEQA Consistency Memorandum, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated by reference. Therefore, in accordance with Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines , no additional environmental review is required to adopt the Amendments.

SECTION 3. FINDINGS.

Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Amendme
nt

An amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is a legislative act. Neither Title 20 itself nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq., sets forth any required findings for approval of such amendments. However, Section 20.66.040 (Commission Recommendation) of the NBMC requires the Planning Commission to make and file a report of its findings and recommendations with the Council.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-33
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004

Page 4 of 13 ends

01-17-23
Findings and Facts in Support of Finding:

1. Title 20 of the NBMC serves as the City’s Zoning Code, which is a tool to ensure consistency with and implementation of the General Plan. It is necessary to amend and update Title 20 from time to time to ensure the policies set forth by the General Plan are being implemented effectively.

2. The Amendment specific to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC , which is attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference will further enable the implementation of the Housing Element’s key objective, which is to accommodate the development of housing to fulfill City’s obligation to meet regional housing demands.

Specifically, the Amendment will allow increased height limitations for certain properties within HO-4 to accommodate residential developments within the intended prescribed density range while furthering the longstanding vision for development in Newport Center, as noted in General Plan Land Use Element Policy 6.14.4 (Development Scale).

Increased heights will accommodate density on smaller sites and/or fewer sites and will increase walkability for residents and activa te the urban core of Newport Center to create a true mixed- use community while decreasing development footprints and encouraging increased open space and views through developments.

3. The Amendment will also allocate a portion of the development limits in HO -1 and HO- 4 to City-owned sites where there is a potential for redevelopment with housing projects within the Housing Element’s planning period.

Title 21 (Local Coa
stal Program Implementation Plan) Amendment

An amendment to Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC is a legislative act. Neither Title 21 itself nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq., sets forth any required findings for approval of such amendments.

Findings and Facts i
n Support of Finding:

1. The Housing Element includes Section 4 (Housing Plan), which sets forth programs and strategies to facilitate and encourage the development of the City’s obligation to meet regional housing demand. Appendix B of the Housing Element is the Sites Analysis and identifies several sites to be rezoned to allow for potential redevelopment with housing projects. A number of these sites are within the Coastal Zone. As Title 20 has been amended to add the new HO Overlay Zones with associated development standards, similarly, the amendment to Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan to add the new Overlay Coastal Zones for properties within the Coastal Zone has been prepared and submitted to the California Coastal Commission for consideration.

2. The Amendment specific to Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC, attached hereto as Exhibit “C,” and incorporated herein by reference, will create consistency in implementation between Titles 20 and 21 of the NBMC and will help to fulfill the Housing Plan , as the proposed Amendment will facilitate the development of housing consistent with the Housing Element.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-34
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004

Page 5 of 13 ends

01-17-23
SECTION 4. DECISION.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:

1. I n accordance with Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the of the CEQA Guidelines, no additional environmental review is required as the Amendment does not constitute substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the EIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified as detailed in the CEQA Consistency Memorandum, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”

2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of the Amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 ( Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of NBMC as part of the consideration of the adopted 6 th Cycle
Housing Element implementation programs, as contained in Exhibits “B” and “C,” and identified as PA2024-0205, and with inclusion of Housing Element Site ID Nos. 146 and 147 with a maximum height limit of 50 feet (flat) and 55 feet (sloped) and Site ID No. 141 with a maximum height limit of 48 feet.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 23
RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025.

AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene

NOES: None

ABSENT: None

RECUSED: Langford

BY:_________________________
Mark Rosene, Chair

BY:_________________________
David Salene, Secretary

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-35
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004

Page 6 of 13 ends

01-17-23
Attachments: Exhibit A – CEQA Consistency Memorandum
Exhibit B – Amendment to Chapter 20.28 (Overlay Zoning Districts (MHP, PM, B, and H)) of Title 20 (Planning And Zoning)
Exhibit C – Amendment to Pending Chapter 21.28 (Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts (MHP, PM, B, C, H, and HO)) of Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan)

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-36
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004

Page 7 of 13 ends

01-17-23
EXHIBIT “A”

CEQA CONSISTENCY MEMORANDUM

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-37
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Consistency Analysis

1 City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Consistency Analysis
The purpose of this memo is to provide the City of Newport Beach (City) with information to substantiate that the proposed changes to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program (approved Project) are within the scope of the certified City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR; State Clearinghouse Number 2023060699). The proposed changes would increase the maximum building heights on specified housing sites in the Newport Center Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning District, as set forth in Chapter

20.28 and pending Chapter 21.28 [Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts] of City of Newport Municipal Code (Municipal Code), hereinafter referred to as “proposed Project.” State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations [CCR] §§15000 et seq.) State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 provide guidance regarding when additional environmental review is required. The following discussion identifies the applicable subsections of State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 and provides justification for the City to make a determination that subsequent review pursuant to CEQA is not required for the proposed Project, based on the environmental analysis provided in the Final EIR and this consistency analysis.

State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 ‒ Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

As documented in the consistency analysis, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR would occur that would require substantive revisions to the Final EIR. The proposed Project would not result in substantially increased impacts beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR.
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

As documented in the consistency analysis , there have been no changes in circumstances under which the proposed Project is being undertaken compared to the Final EIR. The proposed Project would be implemented within the same study areas evaluated in the Final EIR. The proposed Project w ould not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effect, as compared to those previously identified in the Final EIR. (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-38
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Consistency Analysis

2 (A) The project will have one or more significant environmental effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
No new information of substantial importance, which was not known at the time the Final EIR was certified is now available or shows that the proposed Project will result in a new or more significant environmental effect. As documented in the consistency analysis, the previously examined significant effects would not be substantially more severe than shown in the Final EIR as a result of the proposed Project. The Final EIR’s findings are applicable to the proposed Project. (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure o r alternative.

No mitigation measures in the Final EIR were found infeasible, as documented in the consistency analysis.

All Final EIR m itigation measures would also apply to the proposed Project and are provided in Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

As documented in the consistency analysis in this document, the proposed Project would not result in any new significant environmental effects that are substantially different from those identified in the Final EIR, nor would it substantially increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in the Final EIR.

Therefore, a consistency analysis to the Final EIR is the appropriate documentation for the proposed Project to supplement the Final EIR. The City will consider this consistency analysis with the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the proposed Project.

Background
The Final EIR was previously prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the implementing actions associated with the City’s 6 th Cycle Housing Element for 2021 -2029 (2021-2029 Housing Element). The Housing Element is one of the state- mandated General Plan elements and must be updated every eight years to address existing and projected housing needs across all segments of the community. The City Council adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element on September 13, 2022. The State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) subsequently found the 2021- 2029 Housing Element to be in compliance with State housing law (i.e., certified) on October 5, 2022. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is a State housing law requirement that is part of the periodic updating of local General Plan Housing Elements. It is a process that determines the existing and projected housing needs (i.e., RHNA allocation) for all jurisdictions (cities and unincorporated county areas) to provide opportunities for a mix of unit types, tenure, and affordability. Each jurisdiction must demonstrate that its Housing Element can accommodate its RHNA allocation at all income levels. The City’s 6 th Cycle
RHNA allocation is 4,845 housing units, including 1,456 Very-Low-Income and 930 Low-Income units.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-39
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Consistency Analysis

3 In addition to the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation, the Final EIR analysis accounted for additional housing units as a buffer to address future “no net loss” to preclude the need to identify replacement sites during 6 th Cycle implementation.1 Therefore, the Final EIR conservatively analyzed a total development capacity of 9,914 units, including future residential development capacity of up to 9,649 units (4,845 RHNA plus a 5,069-unit buffer) on 247 housing sites, 25 units of pipeline projects, and 240 accessory dwelling units.

However, only a portion of the housing units identified on the housing sites are necessar y to accommodate the City’s RHNA planning obligation of 4,845 housing units.

The City is not required to build housing units to meet its RHNA allocation; it is only required to identify potential sites and create the framework to allow the market the opportunity to develop these units. The 2021-2029 Housing Element does not directly construct new housing but facilitates the development of housing units by adopting implementing actions.

The 2021-2029 Housing Element identifies six Focus Areas in the City with sufficient capacity to meet its RHNA allocation for the 6th Cycle. The six Focus Areas in the 2021-2029 Housing Element are:
• Airport Area
• West Newport Mesa
• Dover-Westcliff
• Newport Center
• Coyote Canyon
• Banning Ranch
As part of the approved Project, amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element’s goals and policies were adopted, including modifications to existing land use goals and policies, as well as the addition of new policies that further the implementation of the 2021-2029 Housing Element. Amendments were also adopted to the City’s Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan, including modifications to existing policies and additions of new policies. To facilitate future housing development within the six identified Focus Areas, five corresp onding “Housing Overlay Zones” were proposed and adopted to increase the maximum allowable density for future housing projects on identified housing sites within each Focus Area.

A Housing Overlay Zone was not proposed for Banning Ranch. A sixth Housing Overlay Zone applies to the 5 th Cycle Housing Element for 2014 -2021 housing sites. In addition to the Housing Overlay Zones, the Municipal Code was amended to add Multi -Unit Objective Design Standards and Zoning M aps were amended to identify the Housing Overlay Zoning Districts.

The City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program was approved , and the Final EIR was certified on July 23, 2024 . Approval of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program included the following discretionary actions:
• Certification of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Final Program Environmental Impact Report. (Resolution No. 2024-50) • General Plan Amendment. Amend the General Plan Land Use Element to include changes to goals and policies consistent with the adopted and certified 2021 -2029 Housing Element. (Resolution No. 2024-51)
• Municipal Code Amendment. (1) Amend Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 20.28, Overlay Zoning Districts, to include Section 20.28.050: Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts.

1 State housing laws require cities and counties to identify RHNA obligations by income category. A future housing applicant is not required to meet affordability goals. The City is obligated to ensure there is no net loss when projects are developed such that there are adequate opportunities for the City to meet its RHNA obligations. If there is a net loss, the City has 120 days to provide rezoning that accommodates the net loss. Therefore, Newport Beach included a buffer to avoid the net loss scenario.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-40

(2) Amend the Zoning Map to identify the HO Overlay Zoning Districts. (3) Adopt City of Newport Beach Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards. (Resolution Nos. 2024-17 and 2024-16). • Local Coastal Program Amendment . Amend the Local Coastal Program for r ezoning program implementation for those sites located in the Coastal Zone. (Resolution No. 2024-52) • City Charter Section 423. Approve a ballot measure for a major amendment to the General Plan in compliance with City Charter Section 423. (Resolution No. 2024-58) Proposed Project Description
The proposed Municipal Code Amendment would increase the maximum building height requirement for specified housing sites in the Newport Center Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning District, as outlined in the City of Newport Municipal Code (Municipal Code) Chapter 20.28 and pending Chapter

21.28. Specifically, the proposed Project would increase the maximum building heights for only 32 (all within the Newport Center Focus Area) of the 247 housing sites identified in the 2021 -2029 Housing Element, as outlined in Table 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area - Existing and Proposed Height Limits and depicted on Exhibit 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area Existing Height Limits, Exhibit 2: HO-4 Newport Center Area Proposed Height Limits, and Exhibit 3: HO-4 Newport Center Area Existing/Proposed Height Limits.

No increases in development capacities or changes to other development standards or development areas are proposed on any of these housing sites. Additionally, the proposed Project does not propose any changes to the other 215 housing sites identified in the 2021-2029 Housing Element.

Table 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area - Existing and Proposed Height Limits Housing Site Existing Height Proposed Height
148(1) 32’/37’ 60’
149 32’/37’ 60’
155 32’/37’ 85’
164 32’/37’ 60’
168 32’/37’ 60’
169 32’/37’ 60’
173(1) 32’/37’ 60’
175 32’/37’ 60’
181 50’ 50’
182 50’ 60’
185 32’/37’ 85’
186 32’/37’ 85’
187 32’/37’ 85’
192 50’ 85’
203 50’ 85’
212 32’ 50’
240 50’ 60’
257 50’ 60’
339 32’/37’(2) 110’
340 32’/37’ 85’
341 32’/37’ 85’
345 32’/37’ 270’
346 32’/37’ 270’
347 32’/37’ 270’
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-41

Table 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area - Existing and Proposed Height Limits Housing Site Existing Height Proposed Height
348 32’/37’ 270’
349 32’/37’ 270’
350 32’/37’ 270’
351 32’/37’ 270’
352 32’/37’ 270’
353 300’ 110’
354 50’ 60’
E 32’/37’ 270’
Notes:

1. The maximum allowable height for portions of Housing Sites 148 and 173 within the Newport Center Sight Plane would not change. These sites' maximum allowable height would remain between 15’ to 32’.

2. The “32’/37’” limit reflects “flat/sloped” height limits.

In addition, the proposed Municipal Code Amendment would add footnotes for the Airport Area Housing Opportunity (HO-1) Overlay Zoning District and HO-4 Overlay Zoning District to identify a certain number of units being allocated from the respective development limits to a select group of City -owned properties.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-42

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-43
--~ Ill NIIIPllllC.W&11;l11PIIMfkt~
z.,,,~,t'=#l&=,-r,-:r~:==-::~
~,il!!llllil!!!il!M~Sl!IW!!li!lfNM ..... lr!illld'lf.,...._-,fl/l/l aa---...--- lililllllW.... • • •
-~zan.~.

Exhibit 1
., .. ,,...
lfdlliltMll!y'~IIB!IMM:ftllllde:M6nldfe
M~ di.-dlipli:lldil l'!il
Cl!Ml.•aljWIIIIClt,_....,...IL
Mll~M_.,__. •. ........................ _
....... fu.out'A111ilil&i.Atfw .... 1hr1
µ 11 d , dl 1wQill.,
Mtll!llhllllft inllndllid •• Nill did II
m•••~2<Pw4:ufttlli#lt
lldltt•~·~··~ HlilN Llllill). • •
Ho-4 Newport Center Area
Ex• at H • hi 1 1-11 IS'nftl - 811 . wm- I

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-44
--~
- .....,.~o,.tai,~z.t
Ill Houiiig~~~QiiMII~
... llfi1ICMI c.- llgl'lPlltw(Na,0.0-,
111,,, .... .,, ..... ___
8WMfMt:
...... ·-~ • ffllNt
1:::

IIIIIK.M.-..-.ablffM 1p1r:llil•1111tflll1IINI
............ ,11.11111•1JJ• ....,..,.
.................... ,. .... . . .

Exhibit 2
., .. ,,...
lfdlliltMll!y'~IIB!IMM:ftllllde:M6nldfe
M~ di.-dlipli:lldil l'!il
Cl!Ml.•aljWIIIIClt,_....,...IL
Mll~M_.,__. •. ........................ _
....... fu.out'A111ilil&i.Atfw .... 1hr1
µ 11 d , dl 1wQill.,
Mtll!llhllllft inllndllld tD1iil mdl 111111
m•••6fiMt~~
lldltt•~·~-~ HlilN LWfll). • •
Ho-4 Newport Center Area
Proposed Height Umits

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-45
--~
...... C::.W .... ~{NDaitngN)
-tlDUIIIIS~lli
111,,, .... .,, ..... ___
8WMfMt:
...... ·-~ • ffllNt
1:::

IIIIIKMINNWllhDUl:ablffM 1p1r:llil•1111tflll1IINI
tDllwftilltllt_.pnmllH•lf•__.,..11
.................. 1). . . .

Exhibit 3
., .. ,,...
lfflllltMll!y'~IIB!IMM:ftllllde:M6nldfe
--~-i--dlipli:lldill'!il
Cl!Ml.•aljWIIIIClt,_....,...IL
Mll~Mlflll8'__.CIIIJ . .,..........,....., ..... _
Mfflallil'fu.w:W-...A1w-..1hr1
µ 11 d , dl 1wQill,
Miiuchll:Ut inllndllld tD1M mdl 111111
m•••~1~Hillrlllt
lldltt•~2~HIWtU'll-lfit ..

Ho-4 Newport Center Area
Exitllng/Proposecl Height Limits

Consistency Analysis
See Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the mitigation measures and standard conditions discussed below.

Aesthetics
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that impacts concerning aesthetics would be less than significant and no mitigation was required , except that light and glare impacts would be significant and unavoidable if housing development occurred within the Banning Ranch Focus Area . No feasible mitigation measures were identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

Further, future housing development would be required to adhere to General Plan policies that govern scenic quality, including update d policies in the City’s Land Use Element that support the City’s goal to maintain scenic quality and minimize potential impacts from future housing development (e.g., Policy LU

1.1, which requires future housing developments to be designed in a manner that maintains and enhances neighborhood character and views). Future housing development would also be subject to compliance with adopted citywide design guidelines that are intended to ensure that future projects provide well - designed corridors, community subareas, buildings, streets, and public spaces that contribute to a strong sense of place.

Proposed Project. Consistent with the findings concerning the approved Project, the proposed Project would also have a less than significant impact concerning aesthetics. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on 32 housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project.

None of the specified housing sites are located immediately in front of or adjacent to viewpoints.

Therefore, future development on these housing sites, even with the increased allowable height, would not have the potential to obstruct views or degrade the visual quality of scenic vistas within the City.

Like the approved Project, the proposed Project would not directly construct new housing but would increase the maximum allowable height on specified housing sites . Buildings associated with future housing development on these housing sites could disrupt existing views, including coastal and open space views. Future housing development would be required to adhere to General Plan policies that govern scenic quality, including but not limited to Policy LU 5.6.1 through LU 5.6.3, Policy NR 20.1 through NR

20.4, and Policy NR 23.1 through 23.7. Future housing development would also be subject to compliance with adopted citywide Design Guidelines, which would ensure that future individual development projects provide well- designed corridors, community subareas, buildings, streets, and public space s that contribute to a strong sense of place. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the HO -4 Overlay Zoning District would not conflict with applicable zoning, General Plan policies, and other regulations governing scenic quality upon its adoption.

The proposed Project’s identified housing sites are in the Newport Center Area , where existing development generates light/glare. Further, the proposed Project does not include revisions to lighting or glare standards that would introduc e new sources of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning aesthetics would occur beyond what w as evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-46

Air Quality
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts concerning implementation of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) . The approved Project was found not to be consistent with the land planning growth strategies outlined in the 2022 AQMP and that it would exceed the SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds during short-term construction and long-term operations. No feasible mitigation measures were identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Further, because buildout of the approved Project would result in construction and long- term operational emissions that would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, the Final EIR concluded a significant and unavoidable impact would occur. At a programmatic level of analysis, there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce long-term emissions to levels below the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.

Because localized significant thresholds (LSTs) are applicable only at the project-specific level and do not apply to long-term planning documents such as Housing Elements, the Final EIR found that it is not feasible to conclude that air pollutant emissions from future development projects would be reduced to levels below SCAQMD LSTs. Thus, the Final EIR concluded that a significant and unavoidable impact would occur concerning LSTs.

The approved Project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations associated with diesel particulate matter emissions from heavy trucks , which could result in health effects. Eight housing sites (i.e., 63, 64, 65, 68, 84, 85, 131, and 336) are within the California Air Resources Board (CARB) specified freeway buffer distances . The proximity of housing sites to State Route 73 could potentially expose future development to toxic air contaminants (TACs) from these sources. Therefore, the Final EIR concluded that impacts would be less than significant with Mitigation Measure (MM) AQ-1, which requires a Health Risk Assessment for future residential development proposed within 500 feet of State Route 73.

Odors resulting from development facilitated by the approved Project may be perceived during construction, but these are temporary, short -term impacts typical of construction operations and, therefore, result in less than significant impacts.

Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on 32 housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The proposed Project would generally have no change concerning air quality compared to the anticipated development assumed in the Final EIR. Like the approved Project, residential development on the specified sites would result in construction and long-term operational emissions that would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning air quality would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Biological Resources
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that impacts concerning biological resources would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Sites with sensitive biological resources could result in direct impacts concerning special-status wildlife and plant species. Additionally, the approved Project could directly impact nesting birds during construction or operation. With Standard Condition (SC) BIO-1 and MM BIO-1 incorporated, impacts would be less than significant.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-47

Future housing projects facilitated by the approved Project could directly impact sensitive vegetation communities. Disturbance or removal of these vegetation communities associated with future development on a site containing these resources could have a significant impact. Additionally, the Final EIR concluded that an indirect impact to riparian habitats could result from the future development of existing vacant sites. This impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level with MM BIO-1.

While the approved Project does not propose to alter a State or federally protected wetland on any housing site, future development facilitated by the approved Project could directly or indirectly impact wetlands through activities such as vegetation removal and grading activities. Adherence to federal and State laws and regulations and General Plan and Local Coastal Program policies would ensure that any future development facilitated by the approved Project would result in less than significant impacts on State or federally protected wetlands.

All future development facilitated by the approved Project would be subject to the City’s development review process and required to comply with relevant federal, State, and local regulations protecting biological resources. General Plan Policy NR 10.3 through NR 10.7 and City Council Policy G-1 would ensure that future development would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and therefore, no impact would occur.

Future development facilitated by the approved Project would be required to comply with the Central- Coastal Natural Community Conservation Plan / Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) provisions . The Central-Coastal NCCP/HCP is included as part of the General Plan policies. Compliance with t he General Plan policies would ensure that future development facilitated by the approved Project would not conflict with the Central-Coastal NCCP/HCP provisions, and therefore, no impact would occur.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning biological resources would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Cultural Resources
Approved Summary. The Final EIR found that future housing development could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource on the housing sites. The developed housing sites could be (now or in the future) occupied by historic (over 50 years) buildings. Because demolition of a historically significant resource would have a physical effect on the environment, and neither the City’s General Plan nor CEQA statutes precludes this demolition or alteration, the potential loss of historically significant structures and resources would be a significant unavoidable impact that would not be mitigated to a less than significant level with MM CUL-1.

The approved Project would potentially have direct impacts on archaeological resources. Future development facilitated by the Project would be subject to City Council Policy K- 5, which requires Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-48

preserving significant archeological (and tribal cultural resources) (see SC CUL-1). The Final EIR found that this impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level with MM CUL-2.

The Final EIR found that the approved Project could impact human remains, which could be uncovered during future grading activities facilitated by the approved Project. Following compliance with the established regulatory framework and SC CUL -2, future housing development would have a less than significant impact concerning human remains.

The housing sites affected by the proposed Project are in the Newport Center area, which is fully developed. Any surface and shallow subsurface archaeological deposits at the specified housing sites have likely been destroyed or heavily disturbed by previous development. However, future development facilitated by the proposed Project still has the potential to disturb and potentially destroy subsurface prehistoric/historic archaeological resources through grading and development ; therefore, future development facilitated by the proposed Project would be subject to City Council Policy K -5, which requires preservation of significant archeological and tribal cultural resources, as set forth in SC CUL-1.

Compliance with General Plan Policy HR 2.1, Policy HR 2.2, and Policy NR 18.1 requires new development projects to identify and protect important archaeological resources within the City. Specifically, General Plan Policy HR 2.1 and Policy NR 18.1 require new development to protect and preserve archaeological resources from destruction and avoid or mitigate impacts to such resources. General Plan Policy HR 2.2 would require any future development with the potential to affect archaeological resources to have a qualified archeologist on site to monitor all ground-disturbing activities and outline the procedure if such resources are found. General Plan Policy HR 2.3 and Policy NR 18.3 require the notification of cultural groups to proposed development adversely impacting cultural resources and permitting monitoring during grading. Additionally, Policy HR 2.4 and Policy NR 18.4 require any new development where on - site preservation is infeasible to donate archaeological resources to responsible institutions. Compliance with these City policies would ensure that future development facilitated by the proposed Project would protect and preserve archaeological and tribal resources from destruction.

In addition to the noted General Plan policies, to ensure that archaeological resources are properly identified prior to construction of any future development facilitated by the proposed Project, MM CUL- 2 is required, which requires the preparation of an archaeological survey where deemed necessary by the City. Like the approved Project, following compliance with General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan policies and MM CUL-2, the proposed Project’s potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource would be reduced to a less than significant level.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning cultural resources would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-49

new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Energy
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have a less than significant impact concerning wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction or operations. Fuel consumption during construction of future housing development facilitated by the approved Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other residential developments. The energy consumption associated with the approved Project operations would occur from building energy ( i.e., electricity and natural gas) use, water use, and transportation - related fuel use. Approved Project operations would not substantially affect existing energy or fuel supplies or resources. The approved Project would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for energy efficiency, including the latest Title 24 standards. The future housing development facilitated by the approved Project would be required to comply with existing energy standards. The Final EIR concluded that compliance with State and local energy efficiency standards would ensure that the approved Project meets all applicable energy conservation policies and regulations and impacts were concluded to be less than significant.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning energy would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Geology and Soils
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would result in no impact or less significant impact s concerning geology and soils. The approved Project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault because no delineated Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault zones traverse the City. The City is within a seismically active area that could be subject to strong seismic ground shaking , with the highest risks originating from the Newport -Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone. Future residential development would be subject to the City’s development review process and would be required to demonstrate consistency with General Plan policies, Municipal Code requirements, and seismic design standards required by the current California Building Code (CBC). The housing sites are in seismically active areas, and there are housing sites located in liquefaction and landslide hazard areas. Following compliance with the regulations for minimizing potential seismic impacts, including compliance with the CBC, the approved Project was found to have a less than significant impact concerning adverse effects involving strong seismic ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure. Future residential development facilitated by the approved Project could Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-50

result in grading activities that would disrupt soil profiles, resulting in potential increased soil exposure to wind and rain. However, future residential development would be required to comply with applicable General Plan policies and Municipal Code regulations, the CBC, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Water Quality Control Plan and therefore would not result in substantial erosion or loss of topsoil.

Some of the City’s areas are susceptible to earthquake-induced landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, and/or collapse. However, adherence to the CBC, the City’s codes, and General Plan policies would ensure the maximum practicable protection for users of buildings and infrastructure and associated trenches, slopes, and foundations. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have a less than significant impact concerning potential substantial adverse effects involving exposure to u nstable geological units or soils. The City contains surficial soils and bedrock with fine-grained moderately to highly expansive components . The City’s Building Code adopts the latest CBC regulations, which require geotechnical investigations that identify potentially unsuitable soil conditions and contain appropriate recommendations for foundation type and design criteria that conform to the analysis and implementation criteria described in Municipal Code Title 15, Building and Construction. General Plan Safety Element Policy S.4.7 requires that development not be located on unstable soils or geological units.

Through compliance with applicable CBC requirements, General Plan Policy S.4.7 , and Municipal Code Title 15 requirements, the approved Project would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property due to a project located on expansive soils.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning geology and soils would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be significant and unavoidable. The approved Project would increase GHG emissions from the construction and operation of new housing. Projects would need to demonstrate compliance with the City’s GHG thresholds. Due to the forecast population growth and GHG emissions associated with future housing development and the lack of specificity of future development, program -level GHG emissions impacts would be potentially significant and would not be mitigated to a less than significant level with MM GHG-

1. The approved Project would be consistent with the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, Senate Bill (SB) 100, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) (Energy Code and CALGreen), SB 375. RTP/SCS and recommendations of the State Attorney General, California Office of Planning and Research, and Climate Action Team. The approved Project would be consistent with applicable plans, Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-51

policies, and regulations. However, due to the magnitude of the approved Project’s GHG emissions, at a programmatic level of analysis, impacts would be significant and unavoidable, and no feasible mitigation measures exist to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.

Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The approved Project would increase GHG emissions from construction and operation of new housing, like the approved Project. Future residential development facilitated by the proposed Project would be subject to the City’s development review process and would be required to demonstrate consistency with General Plan policies, Municipal Code requirements, and other applicable local and State requirements. A case -by-case review of future development provides flexibility to incorporate the latest analysis methods, technological advancements, mitigation options, and GHG significance thresholds (including using thresholds that meet the latest GHG reduction goals). Future housing projects on the specified sites would need to demonstrate compliance with the City’s GHG thresholds. MM GHG-1 requires future housing development to conduct a project - level GHG emissions impact assessment and mitigate potentially significant emissions to the extent feasible. A future housing development project with GHG emissions below SCAQMD thresholds is considered to have a less than significant impact. Future housing development projects that are allowed “by right” (e.g., without a Conditional Use Permit, Planned Unit Development Permit, or other discretionary action) would be required to submit documentation to the City demonstrating GHG emissions would be less than significant or otherwise have t o prepare CEQA documentation. Therefore, the proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact concerning GHG emissions.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning GHG emissions would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have no impact or a less than significant impact concerning hazards and hazardous materials , and no mitigation was required. As part of the approved Project’s operations, hazardous materials would be limited to those associated with common household fertilizers, pesticides, paint, solvents, and petroleum products.

Implementation of the approved Project would potentially create a hazard to the public or the environment through exposure to contaminated materials as a result of a previous hazardous material incident at a housing site or through the presence of asbestos -containing materials or lead-based paint.

Residential development is typically not associated with the handling of hazardous materials, substances, or waste in significant quantities that would have an impact to s urrounding schools, aside from construction activities. Through compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and General Plan policies, the approved Project would not create a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

None of the housing sites are included on a hazardous site list compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5. Some h ousing sites are in the safety zones identified in the Airport Environs Land Use Plans ( AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. Housing in AELUP Safety Zone 3 would be restricted to low-density residential uses consistent with the AELUP, and residential uses in Safety Zones 4 and 6 are considered less than significant. While future housing development in the City, including the Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-52

Airport Area, would increase the number of residents and non -residents proximate to the John Wayne Airport, individual projects would be subject to development review by the City . Where a General Plan amendment, Specific Plan amendment, or a rezone is required, the project would also be subject to the review of the Airport Land Use Commission.

Future development would increase housing density in some portions of the City, resulting in greater population concentrations within certain areas. However, the approved Project would not change the City’s circulation network. No land uses are proposed that would impair the implementation of or physically conflict with the City’s Emergency Management Plan. Future residential development facilitated by the approved Project in the Very High Fire Ha zard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) would result in higher fire-related risks to people and structures. Compliance with the California Fire Code, CBC, would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.

As concluded in the Final EIR, n one of the housing sites are included on a hazardous site list compiled pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5 . None of the 32 housing sites affected by the proposed Project are located in the safety zones identified in the AELUP for John Wayne Airport. Future development would increase housing density in certain areas of the City, resulting in greater population concentrations within certain areas. However, the proposed Project would not change the City’s existing circulation network. Like the approved Project, the proposed Project does not propose land uses that would impair the implementation of or physically conflict with the City’s Emergency Management Plan.

Further, none of the specified housing sites affected by the proposed Project are within the VHFHSZ.

Therefore, the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment , and a less than significant impact would occur. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning hazards and hazardous materials would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR.

Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that there would be a less than significant impact concerning hydrology and water quality. Future residential development facilitated by the approved Project could result in potential impacts concerning water quality during earthwork and construction, following construction, and after completion. Future projects would be required to implement post - construction best management practices (BMPs) in project design to capture and treat runoff. Projects would be required to demonstrate consistency with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and Local Coastal Plan requirements, including those intended to protect water quality.

Future housing development facilitated by the approved Project would result in an incrementally increased demand for groundwater as supplied by the City, Irvine Ranch Water District, and Mesa Water District. Future housing projects would be required to incorporate features that would reduce impervious Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-53

areas as much as feasible and promote water infiltration and groundwater recharge. Compliance with General Plan Natural Resources policies would ensure water conservation and reduce potential impacts concerning groundwater supply.

Compliance with the existing regulatory framework and General Plan policies would reduce, prevent, or minimize soil erosion from project -related grading and construction activities. Future housing development would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding construction and operations impacts that could substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or the course of a stream or river, including the City’s Erosion Control Section 15.10.130. Compliance with General Plan policies and Municipal Code requirements would minimize stormwater runoff and would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Compliance with General Plan policies and Municipal Code requirements would reduce impacts concerning flood flows.

Three housing sites (i.e., 133, 134, and 334 in the Dover-Westcliff Focus Area) are in tsunami-evacuation areas. The General Plan Safety Element establishes goals to minimize adverse effects of coastal hazards, including tsunamis. Future housing projects within tsunami evacuation areas would be covered by the established evacuation plan, including routes along the Balboa Peninsula and Mariner’s Mile. Additionally, future projects would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and minimizing impacts concerning flood hazards, tsunamis, or seiches, including General Plan policies and Municipal Code regulations.

The City is under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB, which establishes water quality control objectives and standards for both the region's surface and groundwater, as well as water quality discharge requirements. Under Santa Ana’s RWQCB NPDES permit system, all existing and future municipal discharges to surface waters within the City would be subject to these regulations. Future development would be required to comply with NPDES standards and implement environmentally sustainable practices, including but not limited to water -efficient landscaping, energy-efficient water fixtures , and water quality BMPs to treat surface runoff from the future development sites.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning hydrology and water quality would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-54

Land Use and Planning
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that there would be a less than significant impact concerning land use and planning. The approved Project would not result in the division of an established community because housing sites are located throughout the City rather than in a single concentrated area. The approved Project did not propose any major roadways that would traverse an existing community or neighborhood. The approved Project did not propose any changes to the existing General Plan land use categories that govern land uses wit hin the City, including the five land use designations that solely accommodate residential development. No changes were proposed to the designations’ densities or housing types. The approved Project did propose amendments to the General Plan Land Element goals and policies. However, upon approval, a less than significant impact concerning conflicts with Municipal Code plans and standards adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would occur. The approved Project was found to be consistent with applicable existing and proposed General Plan goals and policies and the Local Coastal Program's existing and proposed policies.

Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The proposed Project would not result in the division of an established community because it does not propose any major roadways that would traverse an existing community or neighborhood. The proposed Project involves a Zone Change to increase the maximum building heights on specified housing sites in the HO-4 Overlay Zoning District, as set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 20.28 and pending Chapter 21.28. The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan’s goals and objectives, including, but not limited to:
• Policy LU 5.1.2 – Compatible Interfaces. Require that the height of development in nonresidential and higher density residential areas transition as it nears lower density residential areas to minimize conflicts at the interface between the different types of development. • Policy LU 6.14.4 – Newport Center/Fashion Island Development Scale. Reinforce the original design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest, and progressively scaling down building mas s and height to follow the lower elevations toward the southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway.

In addition, the proposed Project is consistent with the following Coastal Land Use Plan policies:
• Policy 2.2.2-4. Implement building design and siting regulations to protect coastal resources and public access through height, setback, floor area, lot coverage, building bulk, and other property development standards of the Zoning Code intended to control building height. • Policy 2.7-1. Continue to maintain appropriate setbacks and density, floor area, and height limits for residential development to protect the character of established neighborhoods and to protect coastal access and coastal resources.
• Policy 4.4.2-2. Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of structures consistent with the unique character and visual scale of Newport Beach.
• Policy 4.4.2-3. Implement the regulation of the building envelope to preserve public views through the height, setback, floor area, lot coverage, and building bulk regulation of the Zoning Code.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-55

The proposed Project would be consistent with or otherwise would not conflict with the identified General Plan goals and policies. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted to mitigate an environmental effect. The findings of the Final EIR would, therefore, apply to the proposed Project.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning land use and planning would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Noise
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that with implementation of MM NOI -1, potential traffic noise impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Impacts concerning construction noise, operational stationary noise, and vibration would be less than significant on a project -specific and cumulative basis. Implementation of MM NOI-1 and compliance with Municipal Code Section 20.30.080(F) would also reduce impacts concerning housing development near John Wayne Airport to a less than significant level.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning noise would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Population and Housing
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have less than significant impacts on population and housing as it would not result in substantial unplanned population growth and would not displace people or housing. Additionally, the approved Project did not include the extension of roads or other infrastructure to unserved areas, which could induce indirect growth. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would not induce substantial unplanned growth but would accommodate projected growth in the region. The approved Project would be consistent with State and local land use plans and would not displace a substantial number of housing units requiring replacement.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-56

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning population and housing would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Public Services
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have less than significant impacts concerning fire and police protection services and facilities, schools, parks, and other public facilities. Future housing development facilitated by the proposed Project could result in population growth of approximately 21,811 persons. Future housing would incrementally increase the demand for fire protection, emergency, police protection, school and library services. All future housing development would be subject to the City’s development review process. At the program -level review, the Project would not result in a need for expanded or newly constructed facilities, and impacts associated with public services would be less than significant. Should construction of new facilities be required in the future, each would undergo site-specific environmental review.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning public services would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Recreation
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have a less than significant impact concerning the accelerated physical deterioration of existing parks and the need to construct or expand existing recreational facilities, which would result in an adverse physical effect on the environment. An increase in City residents associated with the future development of housing sites would result in an increased demand for recreational facilities. Individual housing developments would occur over time. Where a future housing project includes the subdivision of land, the housing development would be required to provide land or in lieu fees for parks or recreation purposes to bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by future inhabitants (Municipal Code Section

19.52.030: Use of Park Dedications and Fees). While there would be an increased use of parkland and recreational facilities resulting from the increase in residential population, the City provides for the maintenance and enhancement of parks and recreational facilities through various funding sources.

Because of the City’s commitment to maintaining and enhancing such facilities and exploring potential future funding sources, increased use of existing parks and recreational facilities would not result in substantial physical degradation.

would not result in additional residential units or non-residential square footage that would increase the onsite population and, consequently, the demand for recreational facilities , compared to the approved Project, the proposed Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities, nor does it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning recreation would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Transportation
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have a less than significant impact concerning transportation. Following compliance with Circulation Element policies and Municipal Code regulations, the approved Project’s potential to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, would be less than significant. The existing citywide VMT per service population (VMT/SP) for Newport Beach is 30.9, whereas the approved Project’s VMT/SP is 30.3, which is a 0.6 VMT/SP decrease from existing conditions. This suggests that the approved Project would decrease the amount of travel per individual that is forecast to occur compared to the existing conditions and the 2006 General Plan Buildout VMT. This is because the approved Project would develop more housing near where employment is located, reducing Citywide VMT/SP compared to the 2006 General Plan Baseline (Buildout Land Use).

While P roject implementation would decrease the Citywide VMT/SP, the VMT/SP varies for each individual Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ). Future housing projects would be evaluated to determine if the VMT screening criteria are met. The Final EIR concluded that potential VMT impacts could be mitigated through compliance with MM TRANS-1, which outlines VMT -reduction measures for future projects that cannot be screened out from the VMT analysis process. The approved Project did not propose any changes to the existing roadway network. Future site-specific development would be subject to the City’s development review process, including design and engineering reviews to ensure roads and access are configured in a manner consistent with established roadway design standards. Future housing development would be required to comply with applicable building and fire safety regulations required for the design of new housing and emergency access and would be required to adhere to applicable State and local requirements.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning transportation would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-58

information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Tribal Cultural Resources
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have a less than significant impact on tribal cultural resources with mitigation incorporated. In compliance with SB 18, AB 52, and the State Native American Heritage Commission, the City sent letters to multiple Native American tribal representatives who may have knowledge regarding tribal cultural resources in the City. The City received one response. The Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation responded on April 13, 2023, noting their concurrence with the approved Project but would request consultation on future projects.

Future development facilitated by the Project would be subject to City Council Policy K-5, which requires preserving significant archeological and tribal cultural resources, as outlined in SC CUL-1. Additionally, compliance with these City policies would ensure that future development facilitated by the approved Project would protect and preserve archaeological and tribal resources from destruction during new development construction facilitated by the approved Project. This impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level with MMs TCR-1 and TCR-2.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning tribal cultural resources would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Utilities and Service Systems
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that because the Urban Water Management Plans for the City, Irvine Ranch Water District, and Mesa Water did not account for the population growth associated with the approved Project, it could not be determined if there would be sufficient water supplies available to serve future development facilitated by the approved Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Despite compliance with federal, State, and loc al requirements, the Final EIR concluded that the water demands from future development facilitated by the approved Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact concerning water supply. All other impacts concerning utilities and service systems were found to be less than significant, and no mitigation was required.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-59

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning utilities and service systems would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR.

Wildfire
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that impacts concerning wildfire would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Of the 247 housing sites, two sites are within a VHFHSZ area. The remainder of the sites are not in or near a VHFHSZ area. These two housing sites would be required to go through the City’s development review and permitting process and would be required to comply with the regulations and measures described above (see Public Services) to maintain adequate availability of emergency services during an emergency response or an emergency evacuation. Future residential development in VHFHSZs would be subject to Section 4908 of the 2022 CFC, which requires compliance with the State Responsibility Area Fire Safe Development Regulations specified in Title 14. Development within or adjacent to areas designated as VHFHSZ can potentially exacerbate wildfire risk, particularly in areas with steep topography and/or prevailing winds , as these conditions contribute to the spread of wildfires. Adherence to mandatory fire prevention requirements and regulations, including the California Fire Code Chapter 49, Requirements for WUI Fire Areas, would require applicants to prepare a fire protection plan for any sites in the VHFHSZ or WUI areas. These impacts would be mitigated to less than significant with MM W-1.

The need to install and maintain new infrastructure (e.g., roads, fuel breaks, emergency water resources, power lines, or other utilities) would be evaluated as part of the development permit review process.

Potential impacts associated with infrastructure improvements , including any required fire safety measures, would be identified. Applicants would be required to address wildfire exposure by complying with the wildfire protection building construction requirements contained in the then -current CBC, including Chapter 7A , California Residential Code, Section R327, and California Referenced Standards Code, Chapter 12 -7A. The natural environment of the wildland -urban Interface (WUI) sites indicates people and structures are highly prone to wildfires and downslope or downstream flooding due to runoff, post-fire instability, or drainage. Future housing development would be subject to development review by the City. Each development would be engineered and constructed to maximize stability and preclude safety hazards to on -site and adjacent areas. Adherence to State and City codes and emergency and evacuation plans set by the City and County would prevent impacts to people or structures from significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes.

Proposed Project. The proposed Project would not affect the two housing sites within the VHFHSZ.

Therefore, no impacts concerning wildfire would occur as a result of the proposed Project.

Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects concerning wildfire would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-60

Attachment A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-61

MITIGATION MONITORING AND

REPORTING PROGRAM

THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN

HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM

(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2023060699)
PA2022 -0245

Prepared for City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660

Prepared by Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc.
1100 W. Town & Country Road, Suite 700
Orange, California 92868

APRIL 2024

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-62
Kimley>>> Horn
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 1

PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all public agencies establish monitoring and/or reporting procedures for mitigation adopted as conditions of approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant environmental impacts. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been developed to provide a vehicle by which to monitor the Mitigation Program outlined in the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2023060699. The MMRP has been prepared in conformance with Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Specifically, Section 21081.6 states:
(a) When making findings required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or when adopting a mitigated negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 21080, the following requirements shall apply:
(1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.

For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of a responsible agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program.
(2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 provides clarification of mitigation monitoring and reporting requirements and guidance to local lead agencies on implementing strategies. The reporting or monitoring program must be designed to ensure compliance during projec t implementation. The City of Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for the Project and is therefore responsible for ensuring the implementation of the MMRP. The MMRP has been drafted to meet the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 as a fully enforceable monitoring program.

BACKGROUND
The Mitigation Program identified in the Program EIR outlines General Plan Policies, Coastal Land Use Plan Policies, standard conditions of approval, and mitigation measures for which implementation of future housing development associated with the proposed Project would be consistent with.

The MMRP defines the following for each Mitigation Program element:
▪ Definition. The Mitigation Program element contains the criteria for mitigation, either in the form of adherence to certain adopted regulations or identification of the steps to be taken in mitigation.
▪ Time Frame. In each case, a time frame is provided for performance of the mitigation or the review of evidence that mitigation has taken place. The performance points selected are designed Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-63
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 2
to ensure that impact -related components of Project implementation do not proceed without establishing that the mitigation is implemented or ensured. All activities are subject to the approval of all required permits from agencies with permitting authority over the specific activity. ▪ Monitoring/Reporting Method. The actions required to ensure the measure is implemented are noted.
▪ Responsible Party or Designated Representative. Unless otherwise indicated, an applicant would be the responsible party for implementing the mitigation, and the City Newport Beach or designated representative would be responsible for monitoring the performance and implementation of the mitigation measure. To guarantee that the mitigation will not be inadvertently overlooked, a supervising public official acting as the Designated Representative is the official who grants the permit or authorization called for in the performance. Where more than one official is identified, permits or authorization from all officials shall be required.

The last column of the MMRP table will be used by the parties responsible for documenting when implementation of the measure has been completed. The ongoing documentation and monitoring of mitigation compliance will be completed by the City of Newport Beach . The completed MMRP and supplemental documents will be kept on file at the City of Newport Beach Community Development Department.

The mitigation measures and/or the performance standards of the mitigation measures identified in the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program EIR would be implemented as part of consideration of subsequent projects within the City. Implementation would consist of determining whether subsequent projects are consistent with the General Plan, utilization of policies and action items as conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures and any applicable City-initiated planning activities.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-64
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 3
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials

4.1: Aesthetics
Threshold 4.1-1: Have a
substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.5.5 (Banning Ranch)
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 20.1, NR 20.2, NR 20.3, NR 20.4, NR 23.1, NR 23.2, NR 23.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.4.1-2, 4.4.1-3, 4.4.1-4, 4.4.1-5,

4.4.1-7, 4.4.3-1
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.30; Chapter 20.52 Section 20.52.080; Chapter 21.30
No mitigation. - -

Threshold 4.1-2: Conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic
quality.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 3.2, LU 5.1.2, LU

5.1.6, LU 5.1.9 (Not applicable to Newport Center and Airport Area), LU 5.3.1, LU 5.3.3, LU 5.3.5, LU 5.3.6, LU 5.6.1, LU 6.10.2 (Cannery Village), Policy LU 6.14.4 (Newport Center), LU 6.15.3 (Airport Area), LU 6.15.6 (Airport Area), LU 6.15.22 (Airport Area), LU 6.15.27 (Airport Area), LU 6.16.6, LU 6.17.3 (West Newport), LU

6.18.3 (West Newport), LU 6.19.7 (Mariners’ Mile), LU 6.19.8 (Mariners’ Mile), LU 6.19.9 (Mariners’ Mile), LU 6.19.12 (Mariners’ Mile)
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 20.3, NR 21.1, NR 23.6
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.4.1-8, 4.4.2-4, 4.4.4-1, 4.4.4-6 Municipal Code: Chapter 20.30; Chapter 20.52 Section 20.52.080; Chapter 21.30; City of Newport Beach Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards
No mitigation. - -

Threshold 4.1-3: Create a new
source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in
the area.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 5.6.2, LU 5.6.3 Municipal Code: Chapter 20.30 Section 21.30.070; City of Newport Beach Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards
Regarding Banning Ranch, consistent with the City of
Newport Beach General Plan Program EIR, there are no
feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. No mitigation is required for the other housing sites.
- -

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-65
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 4
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials

4.2: Air Quality
Threshold 4.2-1: Conflict with or
obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR

6.3, NR 7.1, NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules and Regulations: Rule 401, Rule 402, Rule 403, Rule 445, Rule 1113, Rule 1120, Rule 1143
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
- -

Threshold 4.2-2: Result in a
cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is in
nonattainment under an
applicable federal or State
ambient air quality standard.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR

Threshold 4.2-3: Expose
sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR

6.3, NR 7.1, NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules and Regulations: Rule 401, Rule 402, Rule 403, Rule 445, Rule 1113, Rule 1120, Rule 1143
Note: There are no feasible mitigation measures to
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The following mitigation measure is applicable.

MM AQ-1: A project-specific Health Risk Assessment
shall be conducted for future residential development
proposed within 500 feet of the State Route 73 right-of- way, pursuant to the recommendations set forth in the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) Air Quality and
Land Use Handbook. The Health Risk Assessment shall
evaluate a project per the following South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds:
▪ Cancer Risk: Emit carcinogenic or toxic contaminants
that exceed the maximum individual cancer risk of 10
in one million.
▪ Non‐Cancer Risk: Emit toxic contaminants that exceed
the maximum hazard quotient of one in one million.

The SCAQMD has also established non-carcinogenic risk
parameters for use in HRAs. Noncarcinogenic risks are
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Preparation during
development review
process.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-66
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 5
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
quantified by calculating a “hazard index,” expressed as the ratio between the ambient pollutant concentration
and its toxicity or Reference Exposure Level (REL). An REL is a concentration at or below which health effects are not likely to occur. A hazard index less of than one (1.0) means that adverse health effects are not expected. If
projects are found to exceed the SCAQMD’s Health Risk
Assessment thresholds, mitigation shall be incorporated to reduce impacts to below SCAQMD thresholds.

Threshold 4.2-4: Result in other
emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 7.2, NR

8.1 South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules and Regulations: Rule 402
No mitigation. - -

4.3: Biological Resources
Threshold 4.3-1: Have a
substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special-
status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the CDWG or
USFWS.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3, NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.7, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch) General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.3, S 6.4, S 6.5 Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.1.1-13
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on project-specific basis
SC BIO-1: Prior to the commencement of any proposed
actions (e.g., site clearing, demolition, grading) during the breeding/nesting season (September 1 through
February 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction survey(s) to identify any active nests in and adjacent to the project site no more than three days prior to initiation of the action. Costs associated with the biologist shall be the responsibility of the project
applicant. If the biologist does not find any active nests that would be potentially impacted, the proposed action may proceed. However, if the biologist finds an active
nest within or directly adjacent to the action area (within 100 feet) and determines that the nest may be impacted, the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone around the nest using temporary plastic fencing or other suitable materials, such as barricade tape and traffic
cones. The buffer zone shall be determined by the
biologist in consultation with applicable resource
agencies and in consideration of species sensitivity and Prior to the
commencement of
any proposed actions
(e.g., site clearing,
demolition, grading)
during the
breeding/nesting
season (September 1
through February 15)
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-67
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 6
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
existing nest site conditions, and in coordination with the construction contractor. The qualified biologist shall
serve as a construction monitor during those periods
when construction activities occur near active nest areas to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests
occur. Only specified construction activities (if any)
approved by the qualified biologist shall take place within the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. At the
discretion of the qualified biologist, activities that may be prohibited within the buffer zone include but not be
limited to grading and tree clearing. Once the nest is no longer active and upon final determination by the
biologist, the proposed action may proceed within the
buffer zone.

The qualified biologist shall prepare a survey
report/memorandum summarizing his/her findings and
recommendations of the preconstruction survey. Any
active nests observed during the survey shall be mapped on a current aerial photograph, including documentation of GPS coordinates, and included in the survey
report/memorandum. The completed survey
report/memorandum shall be submitted to the City of
Newport Beach Community Development Department
prior to construction-related activities that have the
potential to disturb any active nests during the nesting season.

MM BIO-1: Applications for future housing development
facilitated by the Project, where the City has determined a potential for impacts to special-status wildlife and
plants species, shall be required to comply with the
following mitigation framework:

Prior to the issuance of any permit for future
development consistent with the Project, a site-specific general biological resources survey shall be conducted to If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Submittal during
development review
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-68
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 7
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
identify the presence of any sensitive biological
resources, including any sensitive plant or wildlife
species. A biological resources report shall be submitted to the City to document the results of the biological
resources survey. The report shall include (1) the
methods used to determine the presence of sensitive
biological resources; (2) vegetation mapping of all
vegetation communities and/or land cover types; (3) the locations of any sensitive plant or wildlife species; (4) an evaluation of the potential for occurrence of any listed, rare, and narrow endemic species; and (5) an evaluation of the significance of any potential direct or indirect impacts from the proposed project. If potentially
significant impacts to sensitive biological resources are identified, future project site grading and site plans shall incorporate project design features required by the
applicant to minimize direct impacts on sensitive
biological resources to the extent feasible, and the report shall also recommend appropriate mitigation to be
implemented by the applicant to reduce the impacts to
below a level of significance. The project design features shall be submitted to the Community Development
Director or their designee for review and approval.
process; Prior to
issuance of first
permit.

Threshold 4.3-2: Have a
substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by
the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife Service or U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3, NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.7, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch) Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.1.1-13
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on project-specific basis
MM BIO-1 would apply. If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Submittal during
development review
process; Prior to
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-69
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 8
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
issuance of first
permit.

Threshold 4.3-3: Have a
substantial adverse effect on
State or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3, NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch), NR 13.1, NR

13.2 Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.7-2, 2.2.1-2
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on project-specific basis
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.3-4: Interfere
substantially with the
movement of any native or
migratory fish or wildlife
species; inhibit established
native resident or migratory fish
or wildlife corridors; or impede
the use of native wildlife
nursery sites.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3, NR 10.4, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch)
Municipal Code: Chapter 7.26
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on project-specific basis
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.3-5: Conflict with
any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3, NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.7, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch), NR

13.1, NR 13.2
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.3, S 6.4, S 6.5 Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.7-2, 2.2.1-2, 2.8.8-1, 2.8.8-2,

2.8.8-4, 4.1.1-2, 4.1.1-3, 4.1.1-6, 4.1.1-13, 4.1.1-17, 4.3-8 No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.3-6: Conflict with
the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or
State habitat conservation plan.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3, NR 10.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.1.1-2, 4.1.1-3, 4.1.1-13, 4.1.1-17,

4.3-8
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-70
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 9
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on project-specific basis

4.4: Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.4-1: Cause a
substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to Section
15064.5.

General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 1.2, HR 1.4, HR 1.5, HR 1.6, HR 1.7
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.8.6
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-1, 4.5.1-2, 4.5.1-4 Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Places of Historical and Architectural Significance (K-2)
Note: There are no feasible mitigation measures to
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The following mitigation measure is applicable.

MM CUL-1: Applications for future development
facilitated by the Project, where the City has determined a potential for impacts to historic resources, shall be required to comply with the following mitigation
framework:

For any building/structures in excess of 50 years of age having its original structural integrity intact, the applicant shall retain a qualified professional historian to
determine whether the affected building/structure is
historically significant. The evaluation of historic
architectural resources shall be based on criteria such as age, location, context, association with an important
person or event, uniqueness, or structural integrity, as indicated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. A
historical resource report shall be submitted by the
applicant to the City and shall include the methods used to determine the presence or absence of historical
resources, identify potential impacts from the proposed project, and evaluate the significance of any historical resources identified.

If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Determination made
during development
review process;
Submittal of report as
part of CEQA review.

Project Applicant

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

Threshold 4.4-2 : Cause a
substantial adverse change in
the significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5.

General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1, HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 18.1, NR 18.3, NR 18.4
SC CUL-1: In compliance with City Council Policy K-5,
prior to the issuance of a grading permit by the City of Newport Beach, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
archaeologist to periodically monitor ground-disturbing activities onsite and provide documentation of such
retention to the City of Newport Beach Community
Development Director. The archaeologist shall train
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-71
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 10
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-1, 4.5.1-2, 4.5.1-3, 4.5.1-4,

4.5.1-5
Municipal Code: Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).
project construction workers on the types of
archaeological resources that could be found in site soils.

The archaeologist shall periodically monitor project
ground-disturbing activities. During construction
activities, if Native American resources (i.e., Tribal
Cultural Resources) are encountered, a Cultural Resource Monitoring and Discovery Plan (CRMDP) shall be created
and implemented to lay out the proposed personnel,
methods, and avoidance/recovery framework for tribal
cultural resources monitoring and evaluation activities within the project area. A consulting Native American
tribe shall be retained and compensated as a
consultant/monitor for the project site from the time of discovery to the completion of ground disturbing
activities to monitor grading and excavation activities. If archaeological resources are encountered, all
construction work within 50 feet of the find shall cease, and the archaeologist shall assess the find for importance and whether preservation in place without impacts is
feasible. Construction activities may continue in other areas. If, in consultation with the City and affected Native American tribe (as deemed necessary), the discovery is
determined to not be important, work will be permitted
to continue in the area. Any resource that is not Native American in origin and that cannot be preserved in place shall be curated at a public, nonprofit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the South
Central Coastal Information Center at California State
University, Fullerton.

During the
development review
process; Compliance
with City requirements
for archaeological,
paleontological, and
tribal cultural
resources. Monitoring
during ground
disturbing activities.

MM CUL-2: Prior to any earth-disturbing activities (e.g., excavation, trenching, grading) that could encounter
undisturbed soils, the project-level applicant for future development shall retain an archaeologist who meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
Project Applicant

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-72
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 11
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Standards for Archaeology to determine if site-specific development allowed under the General Plan Update
could result in a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. The
investigation shall include, as determined appropriate by the archaeologist and the City of Newport Beach, an
updated records search of the South Central Coastal
Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System, updated Native American
consultation, and a pedestrian survey of the area
proposed for development. The results of the
investigation shall be documented in a technical report or memorandum that identifies and evaluates any
archaeological resources within the development area
and includes recommendations and methods for
eliminating or avoiding impacts on archaeological
resources or human remains. The measures shall include
as appropriate, subsurface testing of archaeological
resources and/or construction monitoring by a qualified professional and, if necessary, appropriate Native
American monitors identified by the applicable tribe
and/or the Native American Heritage Commission.
the identified housing
sites.

During the
development review
process; prior to
ground-disturbing
activities. Compliance
with City requirements
for archaeological,
paleontological, and
tribal cultural
resources. Monitoring
during ground
disturbing activities.

Threshold 4.4-3: Disturb any
human remains, including those
interred outsides of dedicated
cemeteries.

General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1, HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-2
Municipal Code: Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).

Compliance with
regulatory
requirements during
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-73
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 12
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
treatment and disposition of the human remains have
been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources
Code. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner
recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains
to be those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American
Heritage Commission.
ground disturbing
activities.

4.5: Energy
Threshold 4.5-1: Result in
potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during Project
construction or operation.

General Plan Housing (H) Element Policies: Policy Action 5G General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.25 Municipal Code: Chapter 15.18
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.5-2: Conflict with or
obstruct a State or Local plan for
renewable energy or energy
efficiency
General Plan Housing (H) Element Policies: Policy Action 5G General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.25 No mitigation. - -

4.6: Geology and Soils
Threshold 4.6-1: Expose people
or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving rupture of a
known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 4.7
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.12 Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-74
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 13
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
on other substantial evidence of
a known fault.

Threshold 4.6-2: Expose people
or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving strong
seismic ground shaking.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 4.7
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.12 Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.6-3 : Directly or
indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving seismic-
related ground failure, including
liquefaction, and landslides.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11, S 3.12, S 4.3
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.9, NR

3.11, NR 3.12, NR 3.14, NR 3.15, NR 3.19, NR 3.20, NR 4.4 Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.6-5: Be located on a
geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the
Project, and potentially result in
on or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11, S 4.3, S 4.7
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.12 Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.6-6: Be located on
expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11, S 4.3
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.4, NR 3.9
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-75
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 14
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property.

Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
Threshold 4.6-7: Directly or
indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site
or unique geologic feature.

General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1, HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 18.1, NR 18.3, NR 18.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-2, 4.5.1-5
Municipal Code: Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).

4.7: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold 4.7-1: Generate
greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that
may have a significant impact
on the environment.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
Note: There are no feasible mitigation measures to
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The following mitigation measure is applicable.

MM GHG-1: Prior to demolition, grading, or building
permit approval, and in accordance with SCAQMD’s
guidance, a project-specific Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment shall be prepared for residential
developments that would exceed SCAQMD’s 3,000
MTCO2e proposed threshold of significance (or those in
place at the time of the development application). Future development shall mitigate GHG emissions to below
SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance to the extent
feasible.

If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

Threshold 4.7-2: Conflict with
an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gas.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-76
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 15
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials

4.8: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold 4.8-1: Create a
significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-2: Create a
significant hazard to the public
or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions
involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-3: Emit hazardous
emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous material,
substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20, Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-4: Be located on a
site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.1, S 7.2
Municipal Code: Section 15.55.040 (Methane Overlay Zone) No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-5: Be located
within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 8.6
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.3
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.080(F)
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-77
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 16
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard or excessive
noise for people residing or
working in the project area
Threshold 4.8-6: Impair
implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-7: Expose people
or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with
wildlands.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2, S 6.7, S 6.4, S 6.5 Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.8-1, 2.8.8-2, 2.8.8-4 Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20, Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -

4.9: Hydrology and Water Quality
Threshold 4.9-1: Violate any
water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater
quality.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR 3.5, NR 3.7, NR 3.16, NR 4.1, NR 4.3, NR 3.11, NR 3.14, NR 3.15, NR 3.19
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.2-1, 4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-7, 4.3.2-8,

4.3.2-12, 4.3.2-13, 4.3.2-14, 4.3.2-23
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.9-2: Substantially
decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that
the project may impede
sustainable groundwater
management of the basin
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.5, NR 4.1, NR 4.3, NR 3.4, NR 3.11, NR 3.14, NR 3.19, NR 3.20 Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-9, 4.3.2-12, 4.3.2-13,

4.3.2-15, 4.3.2-17, 4.3.2-24
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.17
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-78
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 17
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Threshold 4.9-3: Substantially
alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or
siltation on-or off-site;
ii) increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding
on- or off-site;
iii) create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainage systems
or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood
flows.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR 3.4, NR 3.5, NR 3.9, NR 3.11, NR 3.14, NR 3.19, NR 3.20,NR 4.1, NR 4.3, NR 4.4
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 2.7, S 5.1, S 5.3 General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.4.10
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.1-5, 4.3.1-7, 4.3.1-8, 4.3.2-1,

4.3.2-2, 4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-7, 4.3.2-8, 4.3.2-9, 4.3.2-10, 4.3.2-11, 4.3.2- 12, 4.3.2-13, 4.3.2-14, 4.3.2-15, 4.3.2-17, 4.3.2-22, 4.3.2-23, 4.3.2- 24 Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36, Chapter 15.50
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.9-4: In flood hazard,
tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to
Project inundation.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 2.7, S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11, S 3.12 S 5.1, S 5.3
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.11 Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.1-5, 4.3.1-6, 4.3.1-7, 4.3.2-2,

4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-22
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36, Chapter 15.50
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.9-5: Conflict with or
obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater
management plan
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR

3.5, NR 3.7, NR 3.16, NR 4.1
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.2-6
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36, Chapter 15.50
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-79
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 18
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials

4.10: Land Use and Planning
Threshold 4.10-1: Physically
divide an established
community.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.3, LU 6.2.1, LU 6.2.5
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-3, 2.7-1 No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.10-2: Cause a
significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental
effect.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.3, LU 3.8, LU

6.2.1, LU 6.2.3, LU 6.2.5, LU 6.14.2, LU 3.2, LU 5.1.2, LU 5.3.3, LU

5.6.1, LU 6.15.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.1-1, 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2, 2.2.1-3,

2.2.2-1, 2.7-1, 2.7-2, 2.7-5
No mitigation. - -

4.11: Noise
Threshold 4.11-1: Result in the
generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.

General Plan Noise (N) Element Policies: N 1.1, N 1.2, N 1.3, N 1.4, N 1.5, N 1.6, N 1.7, N 1.8, N 2.1, N 2.2, N 2.3, N 4.1, N 4.6, N 5.1 Municipal Code: Chapter 10.26. Section 10.28.040, Section

20.30.080.C, Section 20.30.080.F (John Wayne Airport)
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Threshold 4.11-2: Result in the
exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels.

General Plan Noise (N) Element Policies: N 1.1, N 1.2, N 1.3, N 1.4, N 1.5, N 1.6, N 1.7, N 1.8, N 2.1, N 2.2, N 2.3, N 4.1, N 4.6, N 5.1 Municipal Code: Chapter 10.26. Section 10.28.040, Section

20.30.080.C, Section 20.30.080.F
MM NOI-1: To avoid impacts to vibration sensitive land
uses (i.e., non-engineered timber and masonry buildings) located within a 50-foot radius of pile driving activities, prior to demolition, grading, or building permit approval, the following measures shall be specified on the Project plans and implemented during construction:
▪ Pile driving within a 50-foot radius of vibration
sensitive land uses shall utilize alternative installation methods (e.g., pile cushioning, jetting, predrilling, cast- in-place systems, resonance-free vibratory pile drivers) such that vibration velocities from the alternative
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

During the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first to
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-80
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 19
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
construction activity would fall below the 0.2
inch/second threshold.
▪ The preexisting condition of all vibration sensitive land uses within a 50-foot radius of proposed pile driving
shall be documented during a preconstruction survey.

The preconstruction survey shall determine conditions
that exist before construction begins for use in
evaluating damage caused by pile driving, if any.

Fixtures and finishes susceptible to damage and within
a 50-foot radius of pile driving shall be documented
(photographically and in writing) prior to demolition,
grading, or building permit approval. All damage shall be repaired/restored to its preexisting condition.
demolition, grading, or
building permit.

Threshold 4.11-3: For a project
located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport
land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport,
would the Project expose
people residing or working in
the project area to excessive
noise levels.

General Plan Noise (N) Element Policies: N 1.2, N 1.5A, N 2.2, N 3.1, N 3.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.3
Municipal Code: Chapter 10.26. Section 10.28.040, Section

20.30.080.C, Section 20.30.080.F (John Wayne Airport)
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-81
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 20
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials

4.12: Population and Housing
Threshold 4.12-1: Induce
substantial population growth in
an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 1.4, LU 3.2, LU

6.2.3 Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.1-1, 2.1.10-1, 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2,

2.2.1-3, 2.2.2-1, 2.7-1, 2.7-2, 2.7-5
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.12-2: Displace
substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere or displace
substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 1.4, LU 3.2, 6.2.3 Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.1-1, 2.1.10-1, 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2,

2.2.1-3, 2.2.2-1, 2.7-1, 2.7-2, 2.7-5
No mitigation. - -

4.13: Public Services
Threshold 4.13-1: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for fire
protection.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
Municipal Code: Chapter 3.12, Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.13-2: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-82
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 21
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for
police protection.

Municipal Code: Chapter 3.12
Threshold 4.13-3: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for
schools.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
Municipal Code: Chapter 19.48
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.13-4: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for
libraries.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
Municipal Code: Chapter 3.12
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-83
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 22
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials

4.14: Recreation
Threshold 4.14-1: Increase the
use of existing neighborhood,
community and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated
General Plan Recreation (R) Element Policies: R 1.1, R 1.2, R 2.1, R 2.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.5.2, LU 6.15.13, LU 6.15.16
Local Coastal Program Policies: 3.2.1-3, 3.2.1-4, 3.2.2-3 Municipal Code: Chapter 19.52
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.14-2
Include recreational facilities or
require the construction or
expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the
environment.

General Plan Recreation (R) Element Policies: R 1.1, R 1.2, R 2.1, R 2.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.5.2, LU 6.15.13, LU 6.15.16
Local Coastal Program Policies: 3.2.1-3, 3.2.1-4, 3.2.2-3 Municipal Code: Chapter 19.52
No mitigation. - -

4.15: Transportation
Threshold 4.15-1: Conflict with a
program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities.

General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 1.1.1, CE 1.1.2, CE 2.1.2, CE 2.2.5, CE 2.3.3, CE 5.2.6, CE 5.2.7, CE 5.2.11, CE 5.4.1, CE 5.4.6, CE 7.1.4, CE 7.1.5, CE 7.1.7, CE 8.1.1, CE 8.1.9, CE 8.1.13, CE 8.1.14, CE 9.1.9, CE 9.1.10, CE 9.1.12
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.18, LU 6.15.19, LU 6.15.20
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.9.1-2, 2.9.1-3, 2.9.1-10, 2.9.2-4,

2.9.3-1, 2.9.3-2, 2.9.3-3, 2.9.3-5, 2.9.3-6, 2.9.3-7, 2.9.3-10, 2.9.3-11,

2.9.3-14
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.40, Chapter 20.44
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Traffic Management Policy (L-26)
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.15-2: Conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b).

General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 7.1.1, CE 7.1.2 Municipal Code: Chapter 20.44
MM TRANS-1: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Prior to
issuance of a building permit, one or more of the
following measures shall be implemented to reduce VMT-
related impacts associated with future projects that are If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-84
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 23
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Traffic Management Policy (L-26)
not able to be screened out of the VMT analysis process such that the development’s VMT is below the low VMT
thresholds recommended by the Office of Planning and
Research or adopted by the City of Newport Beach at the time of the development application:
▪ Modify the project’s-built environment characteristics to reduce VMT generated by a project.
▪ Implement Transportation Demand Management
strategies pursuant to reduce VMT generated by a
project.
▪ Participate in a Fair Share Traffic Impact Fee program or VMT mitigation banking program, if available.

Examples of potential measures to reduce VMT include,
but are not limited to, the following:
▪ Improve or increase access to transit.
▪ Increase access to common goods and services, such
as groceries, schools, and daycare.
▪ Incorporate affordable housing into the project.
▪ Orient the project toward transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities.
▪ Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit
service.
▪ Provide traffic calming.
▪ Provide bicycle parking.
▪ Limit or eliminate parking supply.
▪ Unbundle parking costs.
▪ Implement or provide access to a commute reduction
program.
▪ Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing
programs.
▪ Provide transit passes.
the identified housing
sites in the Coastal
Zone.

Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit.

Department and Public
Works Department
Threshold 4.15-3: Increase
hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or
General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 2.2.5, CE 2.2.7, CE 2.2.8, CE 5.4.1, CE 5.4.2, CE 8.1.10
Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-85
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 24
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
incompatible uses (e.g. farm
equipment)
Threshold 4.15-4: Result in
inadequate emergency access.

General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 2.2.7 Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -

4.16: Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.16-1: Cause a
substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms
of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or
object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe,
and that is: a) listed or eligible
for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources,
or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section
5020.1(k) or b) a resource
determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code section
5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code section
General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1, HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 18.1, NR 18.3, NR 18.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5-1, 4.5-2, 4.5-3, 4.5-4, 4.5-5 Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).

SC CUL-1: In compliance with City Council Policy K-5,
prior to the issuance of a grading permit by the City of Newport Beach, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
archaeologist to periodically monitor ground-disturbing activities onsite and provide documentation of such
retention to the City of Newport Beach Community
Development Director. The archaeologist shall train
project construction workers on the types of
archaeological resources that could be found in site soils.

The archaeologist shall periodically monitor project
ground-disturbing activities. During construction
activities, if Native American resources (i.e., Tribal
Cultural Resources) are encountered, a Cultural Resource Monitoring and Discovery Plan (CRMDP) shall be created
and implemented to lay out the proposed personnel,
methods, and avoidance/recovery framework for tribal
cultural resources monitoring and evaluation activities within the project area. A consulting Native American
tribe shall be retained and compensated as a
consultant/monitor for the project site from the time of discovery to the completion of ground disturbing
activities to monitor grading and excavation activities. If archaeological resources are encountered, all
construction work within 50 feet of the find shall cease, and the archaeologist shall assess the find for importance and whether preservation in place without impacts is
feasible. Construction activities may continue in other areas. If, in consultation with the City and affected Native If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Determination made
during development
review process;
Submittal of report as
part of CEQA review.

Project Applicant

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-86
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 25
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe.

American tribe (as deemed necessary), the discovery is
determined to not be important, work will be permitted
to continue in the area. Any resource that is not Native American in origin and that cannot be preserved in place shall be curated at a public, nonprofit institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the South
Central Coastal Information Center at California State
University, Fullerton.

SC CUL-2: California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, and Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98 mandate the process to
be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of
any human remains in a location other than a dedicated
cemetery. California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5 requires that in the event that human remains
are discovered within the project site, disturbance of the site shall be halted until the coroner has conducted an investigation into the circumstances, manner and cause
of death, and the recommendations concerning the
treatment and disposition of the human remains have
been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources
Code. If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner
recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains
to be those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American
Heritage Commission.

If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Compliance with
regulatory
requirements during
ground disturbing
activities.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director

MM TCR-1: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural
and Archaeological Resources: Upon discovery of any
tribal, cultural, or archaeological resources during
ground-disturbing activities for future development
facilitated by the Project, the applicant shall immediately If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-87
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 26
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
cease such activities in the immediate vicinity. The find will then be assessed by a qualified archeologist retained by the applicant and a tribal monitor/consultant
approved by the consulting tribe. The applicant shall
promptly notify the City Planning Division to the
discovery of resources. If the resources are Native
American in origin, the consulting tribe shall coordinate with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of
these resources. Typically, the tribe will request
preservation in place or recovery for educational
purposes. At the direction of the qualified archaeologist and tribal monitor/ consultant, and in coordination with the Planning Division, work may continue on other parts of the affected site while evaluation and, if necessary, additional protective measures are completed at the
affected portion of the site pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5(f). If a resource is determined by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical resource” or “unique archaeological resource,” time and funding to allow for sufficient implementation of
avoidance measures must be made available. The
treatment plan established for the resources shall be in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(f) for historical resources.

Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred manner of treatment upon identification of unique
archeological resources (PRC §21083.2(b)). If
preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may
include implementation of archaeological data recovery
excavations to remove the resource along with
subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. All tribal cultural resources shall be returned to the consulting
tribe. Any historic archaeological material that is not Native American in origin shall be curated at a public, non- profit institution with a research interest in the the identified housing
sites.

During ground-
disturbing and
excavation activities.

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-88
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 27
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
materials. Acceptance and curation of the historic
archeological materials will be at the discretion of the institution. If no institution accepts the archaeological material, they shall be offered to the consulting tribe or the responsible public or private institution with suitable repository for educational purposes.

MM TCR-2: If evidence of an archaeological site or other suspected historical resource as defined by CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5, including darkened soil
representing past human activity (“midden”), that could conceal material remains (e.g., worked stone, fired clay vessels, faunal bone, hearths, storage pits, or burials) are discovered during any project-related earth-disturbing
activities (including projects that would not encounter undisturbed soils), all earth-disturbing activity within 100 feet of the find shall be halted and the Community
Development Department shall be notified. The project-
level applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards for Archaeology to assess the
significance of the find. Impacts to any significant
resources shall be mitigated to a less than significant level through data recovery or other methods
determined adequate by the archaeologist and that are
consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Archaeological Documentation. Any
identified cultural resources shall be recorded on the
appropriate DPR 523 form and filed with the appropriate Information Center.

If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

During ground-
disturbing and
excavation activities.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

4.17: Utilities
Threshold 4.17-1: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.2 Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-89
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 28
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
expanded water facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant environmental
effects.

Threshold 4.17-2: Have
sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project
and reasonably foreseeable
future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry
years
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR

1.2 General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2 Municipal Code: Chapter 14.16, Chapter 14.17
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Threshold 4.17-3: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
expanded wastewater
treatment facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant environmental
effects.

General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR

1.2, LU 2.8, NR 3.4, NR 3.11, NR 3.15
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU

6.4.10 Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.17-4: Result in a
determination by the
wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing
commitments
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.11, NR 3.15
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.17-5: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
expanded storm water drainage
facilities, the construction of
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR

1.2, NR 3.4, NR 3.11, NR 3.15
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU

6.4.10 Municipal Code: Chapter 19.28.080, Chapter 21.35 SC UTIL-1: The project shall be required to comply with the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.16
related to water conservation and supply level
regulations in effect during the construction and
operation of the project, and Municipal Code Chapter

14.17 with respect to water-efficient landscaping.

Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit and first
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-90
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 29
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
which could cause significant
environmental effects
Certificate of
Occupancy.

SC UTIL-2: The project shall be required to comply with Section 19.28.080 (Storm Drains) of the City’s Municipal Code which requires developers to design and construct
all drainage facilities necessary for the removal of surface water from the site (e.g., open/closed channels, catch
basins, manholes, junction structures), and to protect
off-site properties from a project’s water runoff. The
storm drain system must be designed in accordance with
the standards of the Orange County Flood Division. A
drainage fee is also charged to fund improvements to the City’s drainage facilities.

Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit and first
Certificate of
Occupancy. Evidence
of payment of fees.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

SC UTIL-3: The Applicant shall prepare and obtain
approval of a Construction and Demolition Waste
Management Plan (CDWMD) for the project. The CWMP
shall list the types and weights or volumes of solid waste materials expected to be generated from construction.

The CDWMP shall include options to divert from landfill disposal, nonhazardous materials for reuse or recycling by a minimum of 65 percent of total weight or volume.

Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit and first
Certificate of
Occupancy. Evidence
of payment of fees.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department

Threshold 4.17-6: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
expanded electric power,
natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant environmental
effects.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU 6.4.10
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.49, Chapter 21.49
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.17-7: Generate
solid waste in excess of State
and local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8
Municipal Code: Chapter 12.63.030, Chapter 20.30.120
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-91
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 30
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals.

Threshold 4.17-8: Comply with
federal, State, and local
management and reduction
statutes and regulations related
to solid waste.

General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8
Municipal Code: Chapter 12.63.030, Chapter 20.30.120
No mitigation. - -

4.18: Wildfire
Threshold 4.18-1: If located in
or near State Responsibility
Areas (SRAs) or lands classified
as Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), would
the Project substantially impair
an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation
plan.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.1-2, 2.8.1-3, 2.8.8-3, 2.8.8-4,

2.8.8-6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20.050, Chapter 9.04, Chapter 15.04.

MM W-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit for sites within or adjacent to a Very High Fire Hazard Safety Zone (VHFHSZ), the project applicant shall prepare a Fire
Protection Plan (FPP). Prior to preparation of an FPP, the project applicant hall coordinate with City of Newport
Beach Fire Department to ensure that modeling of the
FPP and design of the Project is appropriate to meet the requirements and standards of the City. The FPP shall be subject to the review and approval from the Fire
Department. The FPP shall assess the Project’s
compliance with current regulatory codes and ensure
that impacts resulting from wildland fire hazards have
been adequately mitigated. The FPP shall also specifically identify the need for fire protection systems, water
availability for structural firefighting, construction
requirements, fire department access, locations and
spacing of fire hydrants, fire-smart landscaping, and
appropriate defensible space around structures (Fuel
Modification Zones).

If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.

Submittal during the
development review
process; prior to
issuance of first permit
and Certificate of
Occupancy.

City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department and Fire
Department

Threshold 4.18-2
If located in or near State
Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or
lands classified as Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ),
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2, S 6.3, S 6.4, S 6.5 Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.1-1, 2.8.1-2, 2.8.1-3, 2.8.8-3,

2.8.8-4, 2.8.8-6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20.050, Chapter 9.04, Chapter 15.04.

MM W-1 If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department and Fire
Department

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-92
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 31
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
would the Project, due to slope,
prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire.
the identified housing
sites.

Submittal during the
development review
process; prior to
issuance of first permit
and Certificate of
Occupancy.

Threshold 4.18-3
If located in or near State
Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or
lands classified as Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ),
would the Project require the
installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such
as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2, S 6.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2. 2.8.1-3, 2.8.8-1, 2.8.8-2

No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.18-4
If located in or near State
Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or
lands classified as Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ),
would the Project expose people
or structures, to significant risks,
including downslope or
downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or
drainage changes.

General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 5.6.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.8-3, 2.8.8-4
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20.050, Chapter 9.04, Chapter 15.04 No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-93
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

City of Newport Beach 32
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Notes:
1 Action 5G is referenced from the City of Newport Beach Housing Element.

Acronyms:

The following acronyms denote what element from the City of Newport Beach General Plan policies are referenced from.

LU = Land Use Element
HR = Historical Resources
CE = Circulation Element
R = Recreation Element
NR = Natural Resource Element
S = Safety Element
N = Noise Element

Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D 12-94
I
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004

Page 9 of 13 ends

Newport Beach City CouncilApril 15, 2025

Newport Beach City Council
April 15, 2025