Newport Beach City Council
January 13, 2026

307
identifiedby Consultant inwritingas unsettledatthe time of itsfinalrequest forpayment.

Consultant and City expressly agree that inadditionto any claims filingrequirements set forthinthe Agreement, Consultant shallbe requiredto fileany claim Consultant may have against City in strictconformance with the Government Claims Act (Government Code sections 900 et seq.).

27. TERMINATION

27.1 Inthe event thateitherpartyfailsor refuses to perform any of the provisions of thisAgreement at the time and inthe manner required,that party shallbe deemed in defaultinthe performance of thisAgreement. Ifsuch defaultisnot cured withina period of two (2)calendar days, or ifmore than two (2)calendar days are reasonably required to cure the default and the defaultingparty failsto give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifyingthe nature of such defaultand the steps necessary to cure such default,and thereafterdiligentlytake steps to cure the default,the non-defaultingparty may terminate the Agreement forthwithby givingto the defaultingparty writtennotice thereof.

27.2 Notwithstandingthe above provisions,City shallhave the right,at itssole and absolute discretionand without cause, of terminatingthisAgreement at any time by giving no less than seven (7) calendar days’ priorwritten notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for Services satisfactorilyperformed and costs incurredup to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previouslypaid. On the effectivedate of termination. Consultant shall deliver to City all reports. Documents and other information developed or accumulated inthe performance of thisAgreement, whether in draft or final form.

28. STANDARD PROVISIONS

28.1 Recitals.Cityand Consultant acknowledge thatthe above Recitals are true and correctand are hereby incorporated by reference intothisAgreement.

28.2 Compliance with allLaws. Consultant shall,at itsown cost and expense, comply with allstatutes,ordinances, regulations and requirements of allgovernmental entities,includingfederal,state,county or municipal,whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition,allWork prepared by Consultant shallconform to applicable City, county, stateand federallaws, rules,regulationsand permit requirements and be subject to approval of the ProjectAdministratorand City.

28.3 Waiver. A waiver by eitherparty 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 conditioncontained herein, whether of the same or a different character.

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

No verbal agreement or implied covenant shallbe held to vary the provisionsherein.

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 9
308
In the event there are any conflictsor
inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto,the terms of thisAgreement shall govern.

28.5 Conflicts or Inconsistencies.

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 constructionwhich might otherwise apply.

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

28.8 Severability.Ifany term or portion of thisAgreement is held to be invalid, illegal,or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction,the remaining provisions of thisAgreement shallcontinue infullforce and effect.

28.9 Controlling Law and Venue. The laws of the State of Californiashallgovern this Agreement and allmatters relatingto itand any action brought relatingto this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdictionin the County of Orange, State of California.

28.10 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that itis an equal opportunity employer and itshall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because race, religiouscreed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition,maritalstatus, sex, sexual orientation, age or any other impermissible basis under law.

28.11 No Attorneys’Fees. Inthe event of any dispute or legalaction arisingunder thisAgreement, the prevailingparty shallnot be entitledto attorneys’fees.

28.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more counterparts, each of which shallbe deemed an originaland allof which together shall constituteone (1) and the same instrument.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 10
309
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the partieshave caused thisAgreement to be executed on the dates written below.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
Date:

CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a Californiamunicipal corporation
Date:
r^C.

By: By:
rAa Harp Lauren Kleiman
MayorCityAttorney
ATTEST:

Date;
CONSULTANT: Kimley-Horn and
Associates, Inc.,a North Carolina
Corporation
Date:

By: By:

Lena Shumway
City Clerk
Jason Marechal
Vice President
Date:

By:

Jacob Glaze
Assistant Secretary
[END OF SIGNATURES]
Attachments: Exhibit A - Scope of Services
ExhibitB - Schedule of BillingRates
ExhibitC - Insurance Requirements
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 11
310

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page A-1 311
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48

SCOPE OF WORK
Kimley-Homconfirmsthatwe canperformallservicesrequestedintheScopeofServices.

TASK 1.KICK-OFF MEETING
Kimley-HomwillinitiatetheProjectwithan in-personKick-OffMeetingtoalignexpectations,confirmrolesand responsibilities,and establisha clearunderstandingofgoals,constraints,and opportunitiesfortheProject.

The meetingwillincludetheCity'sprojectteam,Kimley-Horn’sprojectmanager,keytechnicalstaff,and a representativefrom Kosmont.

Topicswillinclude;
■ ReviewoftheCity’sgoals,vision,and expectationsfortheAirportAreaSpecificPlan ■ Overviewofknown opportunitiesand constraintswithinthe Projectarea ■ Discussionofexistingbackgroundinformation,plans,studies,and data sourcesavailable ■ Communicationprotocolsand pointsofcontact
■ Communityengagementapproachand scheduleoverview
■ Confirmationofprojectmilestonesand deliverables
■ Reviewofthepreliminaryprojectscheduleand refinementbased on Cityfeedback Kimley-Homwillleadthemeeting,preparea detailedagendainadvance,anddocumentkeyoutcomesthroughmeetingminutes.An initial projectschedulewillbe presentedand refinedwithCityinput.The schedulewiltbe updatedthroughouttheProject,toreflectadjustmentsin scope,priorities,ortimelines.

The Kimley-Hornteam willconductone on-sitevisitwithintheCitytoevaluateexistingsiteconditionsand understandthe localcontext, existingenvironment,and relationshiptosurroundinguses.Thistaskwillhappenafterthekick-offmeetingon thesame day.

Deliverables
Kick-OffMeetingAgenda {electronicformat- PDF)
InitialProjectSchedule(electronicformat-PDF)
Kick-OffMeetingMinutes(electronicformat- PDF)
SiteVisit
Schedule
The kick-offmeeting,sitevisit,and relatedpreparationswilltakeplacewithinthefirsttwo weeks oftheoverallprojecttimeline Month 1 Month 2
Task1 Kick-offMeeting
Kick-offMeeting1.1
TASK 2. PUBLIC OUTREACH
We recognizethatmeaningfulengagementwiththeNewportBeachcommunity,and coordinationwithJohnWayne Airportand adjacentCity of Irvineresidents,isessentialtothe success ofthisproject.Outreacheffortswillprioritizeconnectingwithresidentialneighborhoods,property owners,and businessownerswithintheProjectarea.WhileEnglishisthepredominantlanguagespokeninNewportBeach,we willallocate budgetfortranslationservices,as needed,tousereasonableprofessionalefforttoestablishaccessibility.Thismay includewrittenand/or verbaltranslation,dependingon communityrequests.

Toaccommodatevaryingworkschedules,publicmeetingswillbe offeredatdifferenttimesand heldinaccessible,familiarlocationssuch as CityHall,localcommunitycenters,and gatheringspaces.Engagementwillalsobe strengthenedbypartneringwithtrustedcommunityleaders and organizationstofosterinclusiveparticipation.

Additionally,we willseek inputfromthedevelopmentcommunityby invitinglocaland regionaldevelopmentexpertstoparticipateas technical advisors.Throughtheseefforts,we aim tocultivatean open,transparentdialoguethatreflectsthediverseneeds,values,and aspirationsof NewportBeach residents,businesses,and otherkeystakeholderswithintheProjectarea.

2.1 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT PLAN
IncollaborationwithCitystaff,Kimley-Hornwilldevelopa CommunityOutreachand EngagementPlan(Plan)thatoutlinesa comprehensive and inclusivestrategyforpublicengagementthroughoutallphasesoftheplanningprocess.The Planwillemphasizeequitableparticipationby identifyingunderservedcommunities,exploringeffectiveengagementmethodsforthosegroups,and assessinglanguageneedstodetermine theappropriateleveloftranslationsupport.

Kimley»>Horn43CITYOF NEWPORT BEACH • LPCAORNG008140.2025 312
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN. RFP NO. 25-48
Alloutreachandpromotionalmaterials,includingsocialmediacontent,willencouragethepublictorequesttranslationservicesinadvanceofproject meetings.ThePlanwillalsodefineengagementgoalsandobjectives,outlinea communicationsstrategy,providea scheduleofevents,andassign rolesandresponsibilities.Foreachoutreachactivity,thePlanwillspecifythepurpose,targetaudience,timeline,and logisticalconsiderations.

The scopeand deliveryofoptionaltranslationserviceswillbe determinedincoordinationwithCitystaffas theengagement planisfinalized.

Deliverables
DraftCommunityOutreachandEngagementPlan{electronicformat-Wordand PDF) FinalCommunityOutreachand EngagementPlan(electronicformat- Word and PDF) Schedule
The Planwillbe developedfollowingthekick-offmeetingand isexpectedtobe finalizedwithinthreeweeks,includingone roundofreviewand comments by theCity.

Month 1 Month 2
Task 2 Public Outreach

2.1 PublicOutreachand EngagementPlan

2.2 SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN AND POLLS
Socialmediaandonlinepollingwillbe usedthroughouttheProject,withparticularemphasisduringthevisioningand goal-settingphases aswellas publicreviewperiodsfortheDraftandFinalSpecificPlans.Ourprimarydigitalengagementtoolwillbe PublicCoordinate,Kimley- Florn'sinteractivemapping and surveyplatform.Thiscustomizabletoolsupportsmultilingualtranslation,layeredmap views,and integration withSurveyMonkey,whilealsogeneratingformattedreportstosupportfeedbackanalysis.PublicCoordinatecan also be used as an interactive activitystationatworkshopsorpop-upevents,incorporatinggamifiedelementstoenhanceparticipation.

To promotepublicinvolvement,outreachmaterials,includingsocialmedia graphicsand flyers,willbe developedtoadvertisekey milestones, upcoming events,and theoverallProjecttimeline.

Deliverables
PublicCoordinatepage
2 Surveys(electronicformat-Word and PDF)
2 ProjectFlyers(Oneintroductoryflyertobe developedand distributedattheProjectlaunchtoprovidean overviewand opportunities forcommunityinvolvement;and one concludingflyertobe issuednearProjectcompletiontosummarizeoutcomes,highlightkey recommendations)(electronicformat- PDF)
5 SocialMediaGraphicsandAccompanyingText
»
Schsiule
A socialmedia campaignand onlinepollswillbe conductedduringthevisioningphaseand againduringthecommunityworkshops heldto reviewtheDraftSpecificPlan.

Month2 Months Month4 Months Month6 MonthlS Month 14 Month 15

2.2 SocialMediaCampaignand Polls

2.3 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT/POP-UP EVENTS
We proposehostingtwo (2)Town HallMeetingsand one (1)pop-upeventtosupportrobustcommunityengagement.These events willbe held inaccessible,high-trafficlocations—suchas popularcommunityvenuesorduringCityevents—^togeneratebroadparticipation,Each event willincludedisplayboards,interactiveactivitystations,livepolling,and smallgroupdiscussionstogatherinputfrom a diversecross-sectionof thecommunity.A dedicatedchiidren’sstationwillalsobe includedtoencourageyouthengagement.Socialmedia postswillbe developedto promotetheseeventsand may be sharedwithneighboringstakeholderssuch as CityofIrvineresidentsand theJohn Wayne Airportteam.

Outreach Topics:

LookingattheFuture(1event):A pop-upeventfocusedon communityeducationand initialfeedback.Topicswillincludeexistinglanduse,key issues,communityneeds,and aspirationsforthefuture.The eventwillalsoservetobuildinterestinupcomingfocusgroups.

VisionEstablishmentMeetings(2events):PublicworkshopsdedicatedtodraftingtheProject'svision,mission,and goalsthroughcollaborative in-persondiscussions.

Note:TheCitywillberesponslbleforsecuringvenuesandcoordinatingeventnotifications.Kimley-Flornwilldevelopandprovidedigital outreach materials for distribution.

Kimley»>Horn44CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ■ LPCAORNG008140.2025 313
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48
Deliverables
Conducttwo(2)in-personmeetingsandone(1)inpersonpop-up event MeetingcollateralinEnglish- flyer,fact/informationsheets,and presentation{electronicformat- PDF) Meetingcollateralinadditionallanguages(ifrequestedbythepublic)-flyer,fact/informationsheet(electronicformat- PDF) Up tofifty(50)printedcopiesofone-pagefrequentlyaskedquestions(FAQs)foreachin-personevent Informationalandactivityboardsuptosix(6)boards(size24 X 36 inches)totalforalleventscombined »
»
Schedule
The scheduleforthePop-up eventsand two in-personmeetingsareshown below.

Month 2 Month 3 Month 4

2.3 StakeholderEngagement/Pop-UpEvents

2.4 VISION AND GOAL
WithinputfromCitystaffand thecommunity,Kimley-Hornwilldevelopa draftand finalVision,Mission,and GoalsStatementfortheSpecific Plan.Thisstatementwillbe shapedbyfeedbackcollectedthroughoutallphasesoftheplanningprocess,witha strongemphasison insights gatheredfrompublicengagementactivities.

As partofthistask,a visionreviewemailand pollwillbe distributedtobothfocusgroupsestablishedinTask2.3tosolicittargetedinputon the draftVisionstatement beforefinalization.

P IM IM
Deliverables
DraftVision,Mission,and GoalsStatement(electronicformat- Word andPDF) FinalVision,Mission,and GoalsStatement(electronicformat-Wordand PDF) Schedule
Thistaskwillbeginfollowingthefirstin-personmeeting.We anticipateapproximatelyfourweekstocompletetheDraft,followedbya four- week Cityreviewperiod.Finalreasonablyrequiredrevisionsand reportcompletionareexpectedtotakean additionaltwo weeks.

Month 2 Months Month 4 Month 5 Month 6
[cityReview^Final2.4 Visionand Goal Draft

2.5 COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
A CommunityWorkshopwillbe heldduringthepublicreviewperiodoftheDraftSpecificPlan.Thisin-personeventwillemphasizeinteractive participationand provideopportunitiesforattendeestoaskquestionsand gaina clearunderstandingofthePlan’scontentand implications.

NoterTheCitywillberesponsibleforsecuringvenuesandmanagingpublicnotifications.Kimley-Homwilldevelopandsupplydigltaloutreach materials for distribution.

Deliverables
» Conductone (1)in-personworkshop
» MeetingcollateralinEnglish- flyer,fact/informationsheets,and presentation(electronicformat- PDF),meetingcollateralinadditional languages(ifrequestedbythepublic)-flyer,fact/informationsheet(electronicformat- PDF) » Informationaland activityboardsuptosix(6)boards(size24 X 36 inches)totalforalleventscombined Schedule
ThistaskwillduringtheDraftSpecificPlanreviewperiod.

Month 13 Month 14

2.5 CommunityWorkshop
Kimley»>Horn45CITYOF NEWPORT BEACH • LPCAORNG008140.2025 314
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48
TASK 3. EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT
Kimley-HornwillworkwiththeCityand preparea comprehensiveassessmentoftheexistingphysicai,regulatory,and market conditionswithin theProjectareautilizingCity’sCISinformationand otherresources.The ExistingConditionsReportwillprovidea foundationfordevelopingthe SpecificPlanby identifyingkeyassets,constraints,and trends.The analysiswillincludethefollowingtopicareas:

3.1 Land Use and Housing
■ inventoryofexistingandallowedlanduses,includingapplicablelandusedesignationsandzoningregulations,based on the General Plan and ZoningCode
• Quantificationofexistinghousingunits,includingaffordableand market-rateunits,incoordinationwiththeHousingElement ■ Reviewofpendingand recentlyapproveddevelopmentprojects,includingprojecttype,status,and scale ■ Identificationofplannedpublicand privatedevelopmentorinfrastructureprojectsthatmay influencefuturedevelopmentpatterns

3.2 Physicaland EnvironmentalConditions
■ Evaluationofthephysicalcharacteristicsand sizeofexistingstructures ■ Identificationand documentationofhistoricorpotentiallyhistoricresourceswithintheProjectarea ■ Reviewofenvironmentalconditions,includingareasofknown orsuspectedsoiland groundwatercontamination,based on available environmentaldatabasesand reports
■ Reviewapplicablestateagencydatabasesforbothactive,closedcasesand documented features{i.e.Undergroundstoragetank,reported soilboringlocationsetc.)fromboththeRegionalWaterQualityControlBoard(RWCB) and DepartmentofToxicSubstanceControl(DTSC) onlineapplicablewebsitesincludingGeotrackerand Envirostorforbothsoil,soilvaporand groundwatercontamination ■ Reviewofpubliclyavailablepermitsand approvalspertainingtoredevelopmentofsiteswithopen/closedcasestounderstandrequiredland use and/orengineeringcontrols.Kimley-HornwillrequestcopiesfromtheCityforexistingconditionevaluation ■ Based on theexistingconditions,landuse considerationswillbe carriedintotheSpecificPlanand developmentstandards needed to complywithstateagencycontrols,as warranted

3.3 Infrastructure and Public Realm
■ Assessmentofpublicrealmelementssuchas landscaping,sidewalks,lighting,streetfurniture,and open spaceconditions ■ Evaluationofexistingtransportationinfrastructure,includingroadwaynetwork,activetransportationfacilities,transitaccess, and connectivity
■ Overviewofutilityinfrastructuresystems{e.g.,water,sewer,stormwater,electricity,and broadband),includingcapacityand known constraints

3.4 Economic and Market Context
• Conducta high-levelanalysisoflocalpropertymarkettrendsaffectingthebroaderProjectarea ■ Use localrealestate market informationfrom localbrokers,and data sourcessuch as ESRI,CoStar,Placer.aimobileanalytics,Censusdata, and taxrecords(dependingon dataavailability)
■ Gatherhistoricaldataon absorptionrates,rents,vacancyrates,new constructionpipelines,and salesvalues across various realestate sectorstoquantifygrowthordeclineintheAirportArea overtime.The followingrealestateuseswillbe evaluated:

Retail
Office
Multifamily/Blended-Use
Kimley-Hornwillsynthesizefindingsintoa Strengths,Weaknesses,Opportunities,and Threats(SWOT)Analysistoinformtheplanningprocess and identifykeyopportunityareas.The draftExistingConditionsReportwillbe submittedtoCitystaffforreview.Based on Citycomments.

Kimley-HornwillrefinetheReportand incorporatereasonablyrequiredrevisions. »
Deliverables
» DraftExistingConditionalReport(electronicformat- Word and PDF) » FinalExistingConditionalReport(electronicformat- Word and PDF) Schedule
Thistaskwiiibeginfollowingthekick-offmeeting.We anticipateapproximatelytenweeks tocompletethedraftreport,followedby a four- week Cityreviewperiod.Finalreasonablyrequiredrevisionsand reportcompletionareexpectedtotakean additionalfourweeks.

Month 1 Month 2 Months Month 4 Months Months
Task 3 ExistingConditionsReport
CityReview] Final BDraft3.1 :ExistingConditionsReport
Kimley»>Horn46CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - LPCAORNG008140.2025 315
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48
TASK 4. SPECIFIC PLAN
Kimley-Homwillpreparea SpecificPlanthatreflectsand advancestheCity’sgoalsandvisionfortheProjectarea.The SpecificPlanwillbe developedthroughan iterative,collaborativeprocessthatintegratespublicengagement,stakeholderfeedback,and ongoingcoordinationwith Citystaff.The SpecificPlanwilladdressa fullrangeofplanningconsiderations,includinglanduse;airportlanduse compatibility:Housing Elementconsistency,specificallyincorporatingstrategiesfortheHO-1 {AirportArea)subarea;parksandopenspace;parkingstandards; circulationand mobility;urbandesignand thepublicrealm;and infrastructurecapacityand needs.

The SpecificPlanwillbevisuallyrichand user-friendly,incorporatingnarrativetext,maps,diagrams,conceptualillustrations,3D massingand scalestudies,andothergraphicstoeffectivelyconveytheplanningframeworkand developmentvision.

4.1 Create an Outline
Kimley-Hornwillpreparean initialoutlineincludingmajorcomponentssuch as:
■ RelationshiptotheGeneralPlanand HousingElement
■ PlanningAreaContextand Background
■ Visionand GuidingPrinciples
■ Land Use and Urban Form
■ Mobilityand Circulation
■ Infrastructureand Utilities
■ PublicRealm and Open Space
■ UrbanDesignStandardsand Guidelines
■ AffordableHousingand CommunityBenefits
■ ImplementationandAdministration
The outlinewillalsoidentifyproposedsectionsand subsections,clarifythePlan’spolicyframework,and providea roadmapfordrafting the fulldocument.

Deliverables
DraftOutline(electronicformat- Word and PDF)
FinalOutline(electronicformat-Word and PDF)
»
Schedule
The draftoutlinewillbe developedafterthedraftExistingConditionsReportiscompletedand initialpublicoutreachisconducted.We anticipateapproximatelyfourweeks tocompletethedraftand submitittoCitystaffforreview.One roundof consolidatedfeedback willbe requestedwithina four-weekreviewperiod.Basedon Citycomments,Kimley-Hornwillrefinetheoutline—aneffortexpectedtotakeabout twoweeks—before beginningthefulldraftoftheSpecificPlan.

Month5 I Month6„Month 4 Month 7
Task 4 SpecificPlan
Create an Outline.4.1 Draft CityReview Final6- *:

4.2 DraftSpecificPlan
Kimtey-HomwillpreparetheDraftSpecificPlanbasedon thefindingsfromtheExistingConditionsReport(Task2),which includesa comprehensivereviewoflanduse regulations,circulationand mobility,publicrealmand open space,and infrastructure.The DraftSpecific PlanwillalsoincorporatethecomponentsidentifiedintheapprovedOutline(Task4.1).

Key componentswillinclude;
Framework Plan and Land Use Alternatives:Preparea Framework Plantoillustratethevisiondevelopedthroughcommunity engagement activities,and createConceptualLand Use Alternativesthatidentifythedesiredlandusesand developmentintensities.The Land Use Alternativeswilladdressthefollowing:
■ Landusetypesand locations
■ Mastervehicular,bicycle,and pedestriancirculation
■ Majoramenities,parks,and open space
Basedon inputfromtheCity,Kimley-Hornwillpreparea PreferredLand Use Plan,incorporatingup totwo refinements,and providean illustrativelanduse planhighlightingprimaryopen space,communityfacilities,and otherpublicrealmoramenityelements.Thisexhibitwillbe usedforCityand communitypresentationsaswellas intheSpecificPlan.

Kimley»>Horn47CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH - LPCAORNG008140.2025 316
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48
Land Use Regulations:
■ ConsiderconsolidatingtheexistingOffice-Airport{OA}ZoningDistrictandplannedcommunities,includingNewportPlace,KollCenter, UptownNewport,and NewportAirportVillage,asshownon theExistingZoningMap. ■ Developa proposedzoningmap alongwitha clearand comprehensivesetofzoningregulationsthatdefineallowable land uses and identifyincentivesfordesiredusesthatwillsupportthe needs of futureresidents.As the area transitionsfrom a primarilynonresidential environmenttoa mixed-useneighborhood,theseregulationswillusereasonableprofessionaleffortstoestablishflexibilitywhileprotecting existingrights{includingexisting,permitted,andentitledlanduses).Accommodatinga balancedmixofusesalsoallowstheCitytocapture retailsalestaxrevenuethatmightotherwisebe losttosurroundingjurisdictionssuch as Irvineand CostaMesa.

AirportCompatibility(AELUP Compliance):AddresscompatibilitywiththeAirportEnvironsLand Use Plan(AELUP)forJohn Wayne Airport.

Thismay include:
■ Ensuringlanduse and developmentpatternsavoidconcentrationsofpeopleinsafetyzones,inaccordancewithapplicableprofessional standards,andcomplywithbuildingheightrestrictionsperFAR Part77 ■ Identifyingconsistencyreviewtriggersforproposedlanduses,zoningchanges,ordevelopmentregulationsthatfallwithintheAirport InfluenceArea,as definedintheAELUP
HousingOpportunity(HO-1)Sites:The City’s6thCycleHousingElementdesignatestheAirportAreaas a keyopportunitysite, accommodatingup to2,577 new infillresidentialunits.Unliketheprovisionsinthe2006 GeneralPlan,theseunitsmay be developedwithout theneedtodemolishorconvertexistinguses,and no minimum lotsizeisrequired.Adoptedin2024,theHO-1 OverlayZoningDistrict providesa flexibleregulatoryframeworkthatpermitsresidentialusesregardlessofexistingzoningorGeneralPlanlandusedesignations.It alsoestablishesminimum developmentstandards,includingbuildingheight,setbacks,and parkingrequirements.Projectsthatincludeatleast 20 percentofunitsas affordabletolower-incomehouseholdsqualifyforby-rightapproval,streamliningtheentitlementprocess.

As partoftheSpecificPlaneffort,we usetheHousingElementpreparedbytheCitywithassistancebyourfirmand integrateapplicable designguidelines,developmentstandards,andapprovalprocedurestouse reasonableprofessionalefforttoestablishalignmentwithCity objectivesand statehousingmandates.

Parks and Open Space: Evaluateopportunitiestointroduceorexpandopen spacewithintheProjectarea.Thisincludesidentifyinggaps inparkaccess,assessingunderutilizedsitesorpublicrights-of-wayforpotentialconversion,and exploringways toenhanceexistingopen spaces.Recommendationswillbe integratedwiththelanduseand urbandesignframework. ■ A seriesofexhibits,diagrams,andconceptualdrawingswillbedevelopedduringthisphaseandmay be utilizedinworkshopsand studysessions. ■ Up tothreehanddrawingswillbe providedtoillustratetheparksand open space.

ParkingRequirements:Updateparkingstandardsthatreflectanticipatedlandusechanges,promotewalkability,supportmixed-use development,and reducelandconsumptionwhilemaintainingfunctionality.

Circulationand Mobility:Discussthemodeland assumptionsfortheVMT analysisandcoordinatewiththeCitystafftoverifyplanned/ programmedprojectsand buildalternativestobe usedinmodeling.Reviewtheexistingand proposedGeneralPlanpolicies,zoning regulations,andotherCityand regionalplansrelatedtocirculationand mobility.EvaluatetheexistingstreetnetworkintheAirportareaand reviewopportunitiestoadd bikefacilities,improvepedestrianwalkways,and expandtransitservice.Evaluateopportunitiesformobilityhubs and multi-modalnetworks.As partofthistask,Kimley-Hornwillcompletea limitedtrafficanalysistosupplementanalysisconductedinthe City’sGeneralPlanUpdate,butfocusingon improvementsrecommendedinthisSpecificPlan.We willuseexistingand futuretrafficvolumes from theCity’sGeneralPlan.We willmodeltheimpactofrecommended improvements,includingbike,pedestrian,ortransitfacilities,atup to five(5)studyintersectionsorroadwaysegments.We willdocument the resultsin a technicalmemorandum.

Design and the PublicRealm: Establisha cohesivetheme forthepublicrealmthatenhanceswalkability,comfort,and community identity.

Thiswillincludestreetscapes,plazas,paseos,promenades,and othercivicspaces.Createone ormore masterlandscapepalettesthatdefine appropriateplantspecies,hardscapematerials,streetfurnishings,lighting,and otherdesignelements.Developpublicrealmdesignguidelines orform-basedcodestandardstoguidestreetscapedesign,setbacks,sidewalkwidths,lighting,furnishings,and the transitionbetween publicand privatespaces.Provideguidelinesforsignageand wayfindingsystemstouse reasonableprofessionalefforttoestablishlegibility, consistency,and integrationwiththeoveralldesigntheme.
■ A seriesofexhibits,diagrams,conceptualdrawings,3D massingand scalestudieswillbe developedduringthisphaseand may be utilized inworkshopsand studysessions.
■ Up tofourhand drawingswillbe providedtoillustratethepublicrealm. ■ Up tothree3D simulationrenderingswillbe providedforselectedkeyareas.The renderingswillillustratepedestrian-scaledspacessuch as courtyards,streetscapes,and plazas,incorporatingelementslikehardscapematerials,buildingfacades,landscaping,sitefurnishings, and human figures,as appropriate.

Kimley»>Horn48CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • LPCAORNG008140.2025 317
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48
High-LevelIllustrativeProforma:Identifyunderutilizedparcelswithdevelopmentpotentialtoassessopportunitiesfordevelopmentor redevelopmentwithintheProjectarea.Preparea preliminaryillustrativeproformaanalysisforup totwo potentialdevelopmentoptionsto evaluatethefeasibilityofmulti-familyprojects.Thishigh-levelproformawilloffera preliminaryunderstandingoffinanciallyfeasibleusesfor theCitytoconsiderintheSpecificPlan.

InfrastructureEvaluation:Evaluatetheadequacyoftheexistingwater,sewer,and stormdraininfrastructureby reviewingtheCity’s UrbanWater Management Plan,Sewer MasterPlan,and StormDrainMasterPlan,and by identifyinganypotentialdeficiencieswithinthese systems.Itisassumedthatexistingconditiondeficienciesand systemcapacitiesareaddressedwithinthecurrentmasterplans.Based on this evaluation,KH willprovidea generalnarrativethatoutlinesthepotentialimpactsoftheproposedSpecificPlanon theseutilitysystemsand the recommendationsfornecessaryupgradesand potentialfinancingoptions.Capacitycalculationsand sizingof new facilitiesare excluded.

Deliverables
» 1StDraftSpecificPlan{electronicformat- Word and PDF)
2nd DraftSpecificPlan(electronicformat- Word and PD^
» 3rdDraftSpecificPlan(electronicformat- Word and PDF)
»
Schedule
The firstSpecificPlanwillbe developedfollowingtheCity'sreviewoftheDraftOutline(Task4.1).We anticipateapproximately12 weeks to finalizethefirstdraftand submitittoCitystaffforreview.Consolidatedfeedbackwillbe requestedwithina four-weekreviewperiod.Based on Citycomments,Kimley-HornwillpreparethesecondDraft,an effortexpectedtotakeapproximatelyeightweeks,and submitittoCitystaff for review.Another round of consolidatedfeedback willbe requestedwithina four-weekreviewperiod.Basedon thesecondroundofCity comments,Kimley-HornwillfinalizethethirdDraft,anticipatedtotakeaboutthreeweeks,and releaseittothepublicforreview.

Months Months Month 10 Month 12 Month 13 Month 14 Month 15 Task 4 SpecificPlan

4.2 DraftSpecificPlan #1 Draft CityReview #2 Draft CityReview| #3 Draft PiiJlicReview

4.3 Revisions to the SpecificPlan
Kimley-Hornwillincorporatecomments fromthepublicintotheproposedthirdDraftSpecificPlan.PertheRFP,we anticipatepreparingup to two additionaldraftsofthespecificplan.

Deliverables
4thDraft(electronicformat- Word and PDF)
5thDraft(electronicformat- Word and PDF)
Schedule. > V.

The fourthDraftSpecificPlanwillbe developedfollowingthepublicreviewofthethirdDraftSpecificPlan(Task4.2).We anticipate approximatelysixweeks tofinalizethefourthDraftand submitittoCitystaffforreview.Consolidatedfeedbackwillbe requestedwithina four- week reviewperiod.Basedon Citycomments,Kimley-HornwillpreparethefifthDraft,an effortexpectedtotakeapproximatelytwo weeks and submitittoCitystaffforStudySessions.

Month15 [ Month16 | Month17 Month 18
Task 4 SpecificPlan

4.3 RevisionstotheSpecificPlan #4 Draft CityReview " |! Draft

4.4 FinalSpecificPlan
The FinalSpecificPlanwillbe developedfollowingtheincorporationofcomments fromtheseventhDraftSpecificPlan(Task5.2).

Deliverables
FinalSpecificPlan(electronicformat- Word and PDF)»
Schedule
We anticipateapproximatelytwo weeks tofinalizetheFinalPlanand submitittotheCityforpublicreleaseand preparationforhearings.

Month 21 Month 22 Month 23 Month 24
Task 4 SpecificPlan
FinalSpecificPlan Public Review4.4
Kimley»>Hom49CITYOF NEWPORT BEACH ■ LPCAORNG008140.2025 318
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48
TASK 5. PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL
Followingthepublicworkshopand communityreviewoftheDraftSpecificPlan,Kimley-Hornwillleada multi-phasepublichearingprocessto presenttherevisedDraftSpecificPlantokeydecision-makingbodies,includingthePlanningCommission,CityCouncil,and AirportLand Use Commission (ALUC).Kimley-HornwillcoordinatewithCitystafftoprepareforand participateina seriesofstudysessionsand formalhearings so thatthePlanisclearlycommunicated,responsivetofeedback,and positionedforadoption.

5.1Study Sessions- PlanningCommission and CityCouncil
SpecificPlan:Kimley-Hornwillprepareand presentprofessionalpresentationssummarizingtheSpecificPlan'svision,organization,key components,and changesmade inresponsetopublicinputattwo separatePlanningCommissionand CityCouncilStudySessions.

5.2 Plan Refinement
Kimley-HornwillrevisethefifthDraftSpecificPlanbasedon feedbackreceivedduringthestudysessions.

Deliverables
6thDraft(electronicformat- Word and PDF)
7thDraft(electronicformat-Wordand PDF)
Schedule
The sixthDraftSpecificPlanwillbe developedfollowingthestudysessions(Task5.1).We anticipateapproximatelythreeweeks tocomplete thesixthDraftand submitittoCitystaffforreview.Consolidatedfeedbackwillbe requestedwithina three-weekreviewperiod.Based on Citycomments,Kimley-HornwillpreparetheseventhDraft,an effortexpectedtotakeapproximatelytwoweeks,and submitittoCity staffto review.

5.3 PublicHearings- Formal Adoption Process
Kimley-Homwillprepareand assisttheCitystaffwiththepresentationmaterialsfortheFinalSpecificPlanatthefollowingpublichearings; ■ PlanningCommissionPublicHearing
■ AirportLand Use Commission(ALUC)Hearing
■ CityCouncilPublicHearing
Deliverables
PresentationMaterials,includingPowerPointpresentationsand supportinggraphics,maps,and visuals,as needed MeetingAttendanceand Participationat:
»
»
One PlanningCommissionStudySession
One CityCouncilStudySession
One PlanningCommissionPublicHearing
One CityCouncilPublicHearing
One ALUC PublicHearing
Schedule
The schedule forTask 5 isshown below.

Month18 I Month19 | Month20 | Month21 | Month22 | Month 23 I Month 24 Task5 PlannningCommissionand CityCouncil ' V .

StudySessions(2)5.1
:t - *A
City City5.2 Plan Refinement
PublicHearings(3)in
#6 Draft #7 Draft
ReviewReview ; VsX "

5.3 Hearings
Kimley»>HornsoCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ■ LPCAORNG008140.2025 319
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48
TASK6.CEQA
The City,as theleadagency,may choosetopreparean Addendum toan approvedproject{s}ifsome changesor additionsarenecessarybut none of the conditionsdescribed in CEQA StatuteSection 21166 and CEQA GuidelinesSection15162 callingforpreparationofa subsequent EIR have occurred.” Pursuant to PRC Section 21166 and StateCEQA GuidelinesSection15162, when an EIRhas been previouslycertified fora project,no subsequentorsupplementalEIRshallbe preparedfora projectunlesstheleadagencydeterminesthat one or more of the followingthreeconditionsaremet:changesina proposedprojectresultinnew orsubstantiallymore severeimpactsthanwere disclosedin thepreviousEIR;changesinthecircumstancessurroundingtheprojectresultinnew orsubstantiallymore severeimpactsthanwere disclosed inthepreviousEIR;ornew informationhas come tolightshowingthatnew orsubstantiallymore severeimpactsthanwere disclosedinthe previousEIR.

Iftheprojectdoes nottriggertheconditionsdescribedinCEQA GuidelinesSection15162, an Addendum totheapprovedprojectfs)isthe appropriateCEQA documentation.An Addendum allowsthemost streamlinedpathbecausean Addendum need notbe circulatedforpublic reviewand does notrequireNativeAmericantribalconsultationunderAssemblyBill(AB)52.

6.1 Technical Assessments

6.1.1Modeling and VMT Analysis
Model Verification.Priortodevelopingfutureyearforecasts,thebaseyearOCTAM modelnetworkwillbe reviewedtomake necessary corrections.ThisincludesreviewofTAZ connections,number oflanes,and roadwayconnections.Inadditionto networkverification,the existinglanduse and roadwaynetworkwithinthestudyareainthebaseyearmodel willbe checkedforaccuracyand modified to refiect currentconditions.The base yearmodel willthenbe executed,and themodelvolumeswillbe compared againstexistingdemand volumesto confirmthemodelreasonablenesswithinthestudyarea.

Model Runs and Forecasts.Usingtheverifiedand correctednetworkbasedon existingmodelverificationprocess,model forecasts willbe developedforup totwo {2}futureprojectalternativesand one (1)no buildalternative.Forthepurposesoftheanalysis,we haveassumed thattheopeningyearwouldbe 2028 and horizonyearwould be 2048. The forecasts willincludeVMT and futureroadwayvolumes.Induced demand analysiswillbe conductedforFuturePlusprojectconditionsforbuildalternatives.Postprocessingofvolumeswillbe completedto deriveintersectionlevelturningmovementvolumesforthetrafficoperationsLOS analysis.

We willpreparea technicalmemorandum summarizingthetrafficforecastsandVMT analysisand submittoprojectteam forreviewand comments. We willrespondtoone roundofreviewand writtencomments and preparea FinalMemorandum. Once approved,we willproceed withthetechnicalevaluationoftheproject.

Deliverables
» Memo documentingmodelforecasts,VMT analysis,and induceddemand analysis(electronicformat- PDF)

6.1.2AirQualityAnalysis
Kimley-Ftornwillmodeland analyzetheSpecificPlan’sairqualityimpacts.Thisanalysiswillidentifytheexistingairqualityenvironmentand applicableregulatoryframeworkand assesstheSpecificPlan'slong-termairqualityimpactsinaccordancewithSCAQMD regulationsand standards.We willmodelcriteriapollutantemissionsusingtheCaliforniaEmissionsEstimatorModel (CalEEMod)based on theSpecificPlan’s developmentcapacity,vehicletripgeneration,and vehiclemiles traveleddata.Modeled emissions willbe compared toSCAQMD thresholds.

AlthoughitisspeculativetoanalyzeconstructionimpactsfromtheSpecificPlan’sfulldevelopmentpotentialattheprogramlevel,construction emissionsforup tothreepotentialprojectsizeswillbe modeledwithCalEEMod.Carbonmonoxidehotspotswillbe assessedqualitatively.

The SpecificPlan’sexistingand potentialfuturesourcesoftoxicaircontaminantswillbe addressed.SpecificPlanconsistencywiththelatest applicableAirQualityManagement Plan(AQMP)willbe addressed.

6.1.3EnergyAnalysis
CEQA requiresan EIRtodescribe,where relevant,thewasteful,inefficient,and unnecessaryconsumptionofenergycausedby a project.This Sectionwillprogrammaticallyanalyzeexistingand projectenergyconsumptionassociatedwithoperations,buildings,and transportation- relatedenergyundertheproposedSpecificPlan.

6.1.4GreenhouseGas EmissionsAnalysis
KimleyHornwillmodeland analyzetheSpecificPlan'sGHG emissions.GHG emissionswillbe basedon theSpecificPlan’sdevelopment capacityandtheresultingtripgeneration/vehiclemilestraveleddata.ThisanalysiswillidentifytheexistingGHG environmentandapplicable regulatoryframeworkandassesslong-termGHG emissionsimpactsinaccordancewithCaliforniaAirPollutionControlOfficersAssociation (CAPCOA)and SCAQMD guidance.Climatechangeprotocolsareconstantlyevolving.As such,climatechangeimpactswillbe analyzed inaccordancewiththelatestguidanceand regulations.ConsistencywiththeCity’sGeneralPlan,StateScopingPlan,and theRegional TransportationPlanand SustainableCommunitiesStrategy(RTP/SCS)willalsobe evaluated.

Kimley»>Horn-5iCITYOF NEWPORT BEACH - LPCAORNG008140.2025 320
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48

6.1.5Noiseand VibrationAnalysis
KimleyHornwillmodeland analyzetheProjectarea'sexistingand futurenoiselevels.Thisanalysiswillidentifytheexistingnoiseenvironment {includingnoisemeasurementsandtrafficnoisemodelingand applicableregulatoryframework.)Kimley-Hornwillevaluate construction noisebasedon a programmaticunderstandingoftheproject(i.e.,usinggeneralassumptionsand a singledevelopmentphase).An analysis ofconstructionvibrationimpactswillbe basedon theFederalTransitAdministration's(FTA’s)vibrationanalysisguidance.On-sitenoise generatingactivitieswillbe addressedand analyzedata programmaticlevelforpotentialimpactsand willbe discussed inthe context of the applicableLandUse Noiseand CompatibilityMatrixand Interior/ExteriorNoiseGuidelines.Completedworkproductswillprovideessential informationforanalyzingpotentialimpactsresultingfrom landuse changes.Usingtrafficdata,we willanalyzetheexistingand futuretraffic noiselevelswithinSpecificPlanarterialroadways.

Assumptions/Limitationsare listedbelow.
■ Kimley-Hornwillbe providedthefollowingprojectdetailtosupporttheanalysis:
» CEQA projectdescription,proposedSpecificPlanlanduseand zoningmaps,and existingand proposedSpecificPlanlanduse inventories(residentialdwellingunitsand nonresidentialbuildingarea,as applicable). » Trafficdatawillincludedailytripgeneration,vehiclemilestraveled(VMT)data,and roadwaysegmentAverageDaily Traffic(ADT)volumes.
« Thisscopeaccommodatesrevisionsbasedon one consoiidatedset of comments to the extentthatthe revisionsare withintheapproved scopeofservicesand thatno new modelingoradditionalanalysisisrequired.Additionalcomments can be addressedon a time and materials basis.
■ Thisscopeassumes thebaselineconditions,projectdescription,and approachwillnotchange once Clientissues the Authorizationto Proceed(ATP).Revisionsorchangestotheprojectthatrequirere-analysisareexcluded. ■ Deliverableswillbe providedas expeditiouslyas practicablewiththegoalofapproximately8 weeks of receiptofthe requesteddata. ■ Deliverableswillbe providedelectronically.
■ Thisscopeexcludesmeetings/hearings.
■ Feesand timeframesstatedhereinarevalidforsixty(60)daysafterthedateofthisscopeofwork.ShouldATP be receivedafter60 daysof thedateon thisscopeofwork,feeswillbe adjustedaccordingly.

6.1.6Culturaland PaleontologicalResourcesAssessment
Kimley-Hornwillpreparea Culturaland PaleontologicalResourcesAssessment.The purposeofthisassessmentisto determine whether the SpecificPlanareacontains,orcouldreasonablycontain,culturaland/orpaleontologicalresources,and toevaluatethepotentialforsignificant impactstosuch resourcesas definedunderCEQA.

Kimley-Homculturalresourcesstaffwillconducta culturalresourcesrecordssearchthroughtheSouthCentral Coastal Information Center (SCCIC)toidentifyifanypreviouslyrecordedculturalresources,includingbotharchaeologicaland historicbuiltenvironmentresources,are locatedwithintheprojectstudyareaplusa one-milebuffer.Staffwillalsorequesta paleontologicalrecordssearchrequestthroughthe NaturalHistoryMuseum ofLosAngelesCounty(NHMLAC).Additionaldesktopresearchwillincludea reviewofdigitalpaleontologicalrecords availablethroughtheUniversityofCaliforniaMuseum ofPaleontology(UCMP),as wellas evaluationofthesite’sgeomorphology,geology,and landusehistorythroughavailablehistoricaerialsand topographic/geologymaps.

BecauseofthedevelopednatureoftheSpecificPlanarea,a pedestriansurveyforarchaeologicaland paleontologicalresources willnot be conducted.As Projectimplementationhasthepotentialfordevelopmentoverseveralyears,existingbuildingsor other structurescould reach an age of50 yearsorolder.Generally,structures50 yearsofage orolderhavethepotentialtobe historicresource and must have retained theiroriginalintegrityand contexttobe considereda historicairesource.Basedon desktopresearch,theassessmentwillidentifysiteswith thepotentialtocontaina structurethatwould meet thecriteriaas a historicalresources.Historicallysignificantresourceswouldbe identified throughsite-specificevaluationinconjunctionwithfuturedevelopmentpriortotheapprovalofdevelopmentpermits.

6.1.7Water SupplyAssessment (Optional)
The SpecificPlanareaiswithintheserviceboundariesoftheCityofNewportBeachand theIrvineRanchWaterDistrict.A WaterSupply Assessment(WSA) wouldbe requiredinaccordancewithSenateBill(SB)610 shouldtheproposedSpecificPlanprojectincludea proposed residentialdevelopmentofmore than500 dwellingunitsora proposedshoppingcenterorbusinessestablishmentemployingmore than 1,000personsorhavingmore than500,000squarefeetoffloorspace.BecausetheSpecificPlanhasnotbeen prepared,thistaskisincluded as an optionaltask.ItisalsonotedthattheAirportAreaSpecificPlanareaisdevelopedand althoughtheamount ofdevelopmentmay exceed theresidentialand/ornonresidentialdevelopmentlimitsestablishedby SB 610,thenetchange indevelopmentwould be a determinative factoras towhethera WSA wouldbe required.Ifa WSA isrequired,Kimley-HornwouldcoordinatewithboththeCityand theIrvineRanch WaterDistricttodeterminetheappropriatescopeand partytopreparetheWSA.

Kimley»>Horn 52CITYOF NEWPORT BEACH • LPCAORNG008140.2025 321
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48

6.2 Addendum

6.2.1 Mobilization
As noted,theKimley-Hornenvironmentalteam willbe earlyintheprocesstoassistinthepreparationoftheExistingConditionsReport, provideinputtotheSpecificPlan,and provideexpertisetotheCitytodeveloptheappropriatestrategyandtechnicalapproachfor CEQA documentation.As we move intotheCEQA stageoftheproject,we willhavea meetingwithCitystaffto confirm the overall approachand schedule.

6.2.2 Native American TribalConsultation
Preparationofan Addendum wouldrequirecompliancewithSenateBill(SB)18 becausetheprojectincludesthe preparationofa Specific Plan.Preparationofan EIRwouldrequirecompliancewithSB 18 and AssemblyBill(AB)52.Kimley-HornwillprovideNativeAmerican communicationsassistancerelatedtoSB 18 and AB 52,as directedby theCity.Kimley-HornwillcontacttheNativeAmericanHeritage Commission(NAHC)torequesta SacredLandsFile(SLF)search and obtain a listof tribalcontacts for notificationregardingSB 18.Usingthe NAHC-providedlist.Kimley-HornwillpreparedraftSB 18 notificationlettersforCitydistribution,withthepurposeofidentifyinganyknown culturalresourceswithintheSpecificPlanareaboundaries.UsingtheCity’slistoftribesthathaverequestednotificationunderAB 52,Kimley- HornwillalsopreparedraftAB 52 lettersforCitydistribution.Draftlettersforboth SB 18 and AB 52 willbe submittedtotheCityforreview.

The Citywillbe responsibleforfinalizingand distributingalltribalnoticesandforconductingconsultationupon request.Kimley-Hornwill supporttheCityby preparingsupportingdocumentationand incorporatingtribaloutreachresultsintotheEIR,as appropriate.Kimley-Horn's culturalresourcesexpertscan participateinconsultationmeetingsorextendedtribalcoordinationifrequestedby theCity.Thissupplemental work effortisnotassumed inthisScope ofWork.

6.2.3ProjectDescription
Kimley-HornwilluseinformationprovidedinthedraftSpecificPlantopreparetheCEQA ProjectDescriptionthat articulatesthe characteristics oftheproject.The ProjectDescriptionwilldetailtheproject’slocation,environmentalsetting,backgroundand history,characteristics, discretionaryactions,goals/objectives,constructionschedule/phasing,and requiredpermitsand approvals.The draftProjectDescription willbe providedtotheCityforreviewand approvalpriortopreparationoftheCEQA documentationand ourtechnicalanalysestoensure concurrencewiththekeyelementsoftheprojectthatwillbe carriedthroughintotheanalyses.

Deliverables
» DraftCEQA ProjectDescription:1 roundofreviewbasedon one setofconsolidatedCitycomments (electronicformat- Word and PDF) » RevisedCEQA ProjectDescription

6.2.4 Addendum
Kimley-Hornhas preparedseveralAddendums fortheCityofNewportBeach.AlthoughStateCEQA GuidelinesSection 15164 does not stipulatetheformatorcontentofan Addendum, thetopicalareasaddressedintheGeneralPlanUpdateEIRand GeneralPlanHousing ImplementationProgramEIRwouldbe usedasguidanceforthisAddendum.ThiscomparativeanalysisprovidestheCitywiththefactualbasis fordeterminingwhetheranychangesintheproject,any changesincircumstances,orany new informationsince the EIRs were certifiedwould requireadditionalenvironmentalrevieworpreparationof an EIR.

Foreach environmentaltopic,theAddendum willprovidea summary ofthefindingsoftheEIRsfortherespectivethresholdquestion;an evaluationofthepotentialimpactsoftheproposedproject:and a determinationofwhethertheimpactconclusions are consistentwith the significancedeterminationssetforthinthecertifiedEIRs.Eachtopicalanalysiswillalsoaddresscumulativeimpactsand theGeneralPlan policiesand standardconditionsand regulationsand mitigationmeasuresthatareapplicabletomitigatesignificantimpactsoftheproject.

FollowingthereviewoftheScreencheckDraftAddendum by theCity,Kimley-HornwillrevisetheAddendum toincorporateone consolidated setofcomments.The RevisedAddendum willbe providedina versionthatshows allrevisionsintrackchangefor ease of review as well as a "clean"versionof the reviseddocument. The Revised Addendum willbe resubmittedtotheCityforreviewand Kimley-Hornwilladdressany finalcomments priortofinalizingtheAddendum. Ifsubstantialnew analysisisrequestedthathas notpreviouslybeen preparedorconsidered intheAddendum, and/orsubstantivechangestotheProjectDescriptionoccur,a budgetaugmentwillbe required.

Deliverables
» ScreencheckAddendum (electronicformat- Word and PDF)
» RevisedScreencheckAddendum (electronicformat- Word and PDF) » FinalAddendum (electronicformat- Word and PDF)
Kimley»>Horn53CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • LPCAORNG008140.2025 322
PROPOSAL FOR AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, RFP NO. 25-48

6.2.5ProjectMeetings,Management, and Coordination
Throughouttheproject,Kimley-Hornstaffwillbe involvedinthemanagementoftheenvironmentaldocumentpreparationand communication withtheCityand internalKimley-Hornteam.Thistaskisintendedtoensurethatallwork productsareofthehighestquality.The estimated schedulefortheAddendum isapproximately6 months.Thistaskassumes two virtualmeetingspermonth forboth CEQA approaches.

AttendanceatPlanningCommissionand CityCouncilhearingsassociatedwiththeCEQA processareassumedinTask 5 ofthisproposal.

Deliverables
Bi-monthlymeetingsbytwo members oftheKimley-HornCEQA team Ongoingprojectmanagement and administration
TASK 7. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
Kimley-Hornwillprovidecomprehensiveprojectmanagement and coordinationservicestosupportthesuccessfuldeliveryoftheSpecificPlan.

ThisincludesconsistentcommunicationwithCitystaff,strategicoversight,and ongoingtasktrackingtoensurealignmentwiththeproject scope,schedule,and expectations.

7.1 Bi-Weekly CoordinationMeetings
Kimley-Homwillconductbi-weeklycoordinationmeetingswithCitystaffthroughoutthedurationoftheProject.Thesemeetingswillprovidea forumforprogressupdates,issueresolution,schedulealignment,and discussionofongoingand upcomingworkefforts.The meetingswill:
■ Be heldprimarilyvirtuallytosupportschedulingflexibilityand costefficiency ■ Includeatleastfivein-personmeetings,inadditiontothosescheduledunderothertasks{e.g.,workshopsand publichearings) ■ Be ledby theKimley-HornProjectManagerand supportedby relevantteam members andsubconsultantsas needed ■ Be accompaniedbymeetingagendas,summaries,andactionitem liststo ensure clearcommunication and follow-through

7.2ProjectManagement Oversight
Kimley-Horn’sprojectmanagerwilloverseetheday-to-dayoperationsand overalldirectionoftheconsultantteam,including:
• Coordinatingeffortsacrossdisciplinesand managingsubconsultants ■ Trackingdeliverables,schedulemilestones,and scopeadherence ■ Preparingmonthlyinvoicesand progressreportssummarizingwork completed,upcomingactivities,and anychangesinscopeorschedule ■ Maintainingprojectrecordsand ensuringqualitycontrol
■ ServingastheprimarypointofcontactfortheCitythroughouttheprojectduration A SharePointsite,accessibleviaMicrosoftTeams, willbe establishedand maintainedforfilesharing,document review,and collaborativeediting.

Shouldadditionalcoordinationmeetingsbe necessarydue tothecomplexityofprojectphasesoremergingissues,Kimley-Hornwillprovide justificationand seekCityapprovalinadvance,
Deliverables
» Bi-weeklycoordinationmeetings(upto25 total),includingatleastfivein-personmeetings » Meetingagendas,summaries,and actionitems
» Monthlyinvoicesand progressreports
» SharePointsiteaccessfordocumentsharingand collaboration Kimley»>Horn54CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • LPCAORNG008140.2025 323

EXHIBIT B

SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page B-1 324
mwT«eilM«*cKtnk. tntunngrMtipMency acnunMiy. mS a Ohi unMntsidng ofhow rMouoM »> MnuM ttvoughoullh«ProiecLTh« coniprahtntMO co« brookOovnn piotndM batow ana* ttM «locai»a ttoun pw City of Newport Beach
Airport Area Specific Plan - ADD
December S, 2025
KMey^tom and AoMCiatM. irtc.
»r. ProtatMond 1 Prohutional Anjfyil Support StaffSt. Ptolaaalanid 1 St. Prpfcaawful I KHU^R

ESCALATION

TOTAL PROJECT
COST
KH HOURS KHCOST KOSMONT COST EXPENSES CONTlNGENCr
£Ss£s: £SL iJS. ilS.nao J22. 2SS, S1I
ft4^ imftffHiiHni 2Z I S.2I0 I 1HAS t SAW s SIS ISAM4
vr niiLCffm t 121S. 158.66 S 38SO4. 10
3«STfpylCt i
TT rf TT “
TT -! k S,«7A»
LS? .* 209-'3
I 78411U u

2.1 10 S. 7 7»4 4
TT .'alMa^CaPWWn aid Pels S} 10 25 8 W I 15 230 i ILIK1 4 IT J. 30 18 02 i a^io
12825
i 863.46 am
3»S7TT WbieriatdGod 3 6 IS 10 10 SO S 13 IOC
16 12 800 T 403 642.3 Corwtunffr 'Wala^et*W«^«1oa 2 2 8 10 10 20 6 t 13204 3 1.900 1.9CC
t 2.S00
KHTawiMa-'Setil
i I.SOO' Vatanaa rtM »6 2^36 Mwdtl
sijniS Rtpert 10 02
063.40,
i l*JWi10,610sT ^S30
160,116
L %25 1£
iz-irzKTTiT Til 184 717 t 1,17644 t

4.1 CttaHyiOuigtp 4 12 6 66.54 3067
ISo 101.2CS 6 TmS 7 7.16042 20 40 120 60 K 111,245

57.470 5 1.716 344S 20 80 238 sai86
Fnd Sptdte Pbh 7 2 060 8 5048 2.10044 6
■IT n6a»6uii>jr»R«»i4w(Op6ar«d) 24 16.800 X 432 60 17.23312 24 gSr- NairteeCo-idsol^’andc'ffyCwntff iT IJo 6 218 66,768 X

11.340 8
1,872.11 8 im t 1466 •!£li

16.562331 7351 a 10 20 2 8
MMO T 721 1$52 4 4 30 40 2 100 24.101
72 16040 T 5102353 Pufflt H4emo8 (3) 30 40
•ptS lar 2-3 KH Ta4m $ 1.SS0
u 44 M 178 148.77 6 8 4.731i8 3 31 1H
Tt^masiudrVMTArSNS- ■79?16 34 J- . -» I - 100 23 070 X 721 IS 8 51 61 11 030 8 436 00 H 470
SO 9035 8 »o77GHG I 42 »3a«
12 24611.780 810 54 45? 75
» 259814 3? 6300 6«80
X 7 020 X 216 3412 18 7 236
Tw.816Tfe«ICe^A;gn 16 16 iil3ej
1 254.b0i
475 5-,
24 90 60 I - - I 41 910 $

19.406^aseedan Rti'CtJ :2--.-7:. 30 ,30 i
iX 40 58 16 320 % 415.27 liTM
1,766.61 T Tiltand Coofdewtloai 4 16 16 120 86 26 244 68,840 X 42^61 3007.1 >rm»c1Ma-r»y--nl»ndCoo«df»atOfi «sa9.Re=r ■ -
60 59.5« 3 . 1 75961 _4 10 10 120 244 3
•Tt 2 KH Team■SCTC—T
$ 1.050
bdNTnolN^ •26466 MMT
TOTAL HOOPS m jK 347 308 123 476 178 2244
TOTAL COST W.766 848.640 634.990 1 »“*■««« 1 880,401 872411 824400 888.480 i 8M438 88,000 8384207$ 18.182,88 i. 1 Mllj 8 26460 8 325

PROPOSED PRICING - AIRPORT AREA SPECIFIC PLAN

TASK COST
Kick-OffMeeting $ 10,004
Public Outreach $ 79,612
ExistingConditions Report $ 33,803
Specific Plan $ 192,851
InfrastructureReview (Optional) $ 17,233
Planning Commission and CityCouncil $ 60,772
CEQA (Optional) $ 153,006
Project Management and Coordination $ 62,350
Contingency $ 20,000
Total Project Cost $ 612,398
326

EXHIBIT C

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

1. Provision of Insurance. Without limitingConsultant’s indemnificationof City,and priorto commencement of Work, Consultant shallobtain,provide and maintain at itsown expense during the term of thisAgreement, policiesof insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactoryto 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 existingcoverage.

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 latesteditionof Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City’sRisk Manager.

2. Coverage Requirements.3.

A. Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance, statutory limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with limitsof at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) each accident forbodilyinjuryby accident and each employee for bodilyinjuryby disease in accordance with the laws of the State of California,Section 3700 of the Labor Code.

Consultant shallsubmit to City,along with the certificateof insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement infavorof City,itsCityCouncil, boards and commissions, officers,agents, volunteers,employees and any person or entityowning or otherwise in legalcontrolof the property upon which Consultant performs the Project and/or Services contemplated by this Agreement.

General LiabilityInsurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liabilityinsurance, and if necessary umbrella liabilityinsurance, with coverage at leastas broad as provided by Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than two milliondollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence, fourmilliondollars($4,000,000) general aggregate. The policy shall cover liabilityarising from premises, operations, personal and advertisinginjury,and liabilityassumed under an insured contract(including the tortliabilityof 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 bodilyinjuryand propertydamage forallactivities of Consultant arisingout of or in connection with Work to be performed under this B.

C.

Page C-1Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. 327
Agreement, includingcoverage forany owned, hired,non-owned or rented vehicles,in an amount not less than one milliondollars($1,000,000) combined single limiteach accident.

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

Other Insurance Requirements. The policiesare to contain,or be endorsed to contain,the followingprovisions;
Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to thisAgreement shallbe endorsed to waive subrogation against City,itsCityCouncil,boards and commissions, officers,agents, volunteers, employees and any person or entityowning or otherwise in legalcontrolof the property upon which Consultant performs the Projectand/or Services contemplated by thisAgreement or shall specificallyallow Consultant or others providinginsurance evidence incompliance with these requirements to waive theirrightof recovery priorto a loss.Consultant hereby waives its own rightof recovery against City,and shallrequiresimilarwrittenexpress waivers from each of its subconsultants.

D.

4. A.

B. Additional Insured Status. All liabilitypoliciesincluding general liability, excess liability,pollutionliability,and automobile liability,ifrequired,but not includingprofessionalliability,shallprovide or be endorsed to provide that City,itsCity Council, boards and commissions, officers,agents, volunteers, employees and any person or entityowning or otherwise in legalcontrolof the property upon which Consultant performs the Projectand/or Services contemplated by thisAgreement shallbe included as insureds under such policies.

C. Primary and Non Contributory.Ailliabilitycoverage shallapply on a primary basis and shallnot requirecontributionfrom any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City.

D. Notice of Cancellation.Allpoliciesshallprovide Citywith thirty(30) calendar days’ notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which ten (10) calendar days’ notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.

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

5. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page C-2 328
A. Evidence of Insurance.Consultant shallprovidecertificates of insurance to City as evidence of the insurance coverage requiredherein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement forworkers’ compensation and other endorsements as specifiedhereinforeach coverage. Insurance certificates and endorsement must be approved by City’sRisk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certificationof insurance shall be kept on filewith Cityat alltimes during the term of thisAgreement. The certificatesand endorsements foreach insurancepolicyshallbe signed by a person authorized by thatinsurerto bind coverage on its behalf. At least fifteen(15) days priorto the expirationof any such policy, evidence of insurance showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or extended shallbe filedwith the City. Ifsuch coverage is cancelled or reduced, Consultantshall,withinten (10)days afterreceipt of writtennotice of such cancellationor reductionof coverage, filewith 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 rightto require complete, certifiedcopies of all required insurance policies,at any time.

B. City’sRight to Revise Requirements. City reserves the rightat any time during the term of the Agreement to change the amounts and types of insurance requiredby givingConsultant sixty(60) calendar days’ advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to Consultant, City and Consultant may renegotiate Consultant’scompensation.

C. Right to Review Subcontracts.Consultant agrees that upon request, all agreements with subcontractors or others with whom Consultant enters into contractswith on behalf of Citywillbe submitted to City for review. Failure of Cityto request copies of such agreements willnot impose any liabilityon City, or its employees. Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting allthe requirements stated herein,and Consultant shallensure that City is an additional insured on insurance requiredfrom subcontractors.ForCGL coverage, subcontractors shallprovide coverage with a format at leastas broad as CG 20 38 04 13.

D. Enforcement of Agreement Provisions. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failureon the part of City to inform Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligationson Citynor does itwaive any rightshereunder.

E. Reguirements not Limiting.Requirements of specificcoverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitationon coverage, limitsor otherrequirements,or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specificreferenceto a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarificationonly as itpertainsto a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be allinclusive,or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. Ifthe Consultant maintains higher limitsthan the minimums shown above, the City requiresand shall be Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page C-3 329
entitledto coverage for higher limitsmaintained by the Consultant. Any availableinsurance proceeds in excess of the specifiedminimum limits of insurance and coverage shallbe availableto the City.

Self-insured Retentions. Any self-insuredretentionsmust be declared to and approved by City.City reserves the rightto require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self- insurance willnot be considered to comply with these requirements unless approved by City.

City Remedies for Non-Compliance. IfConsultant or any subconsultant fails to provide and maintain insurance as required herein,then City shallhave the rightbut not the obligation,to purchase such insurance, to terminate this Agreement, or to suspend Consultant’s right to proceed until proper evidence of insurance isprovided. Any amounts paid by Cityshall,at City’s sole option,be deducted from amounts payable to Consultant or reimbursed by Consultant upon demand.

F.

G.

Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shallgive Cityprompt and timelynotice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from Consultant's performance under this Agreement, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liabilitypolicies.City assumes no obligationor liabilityby such notice,but has the right(but not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims ifthey are likelyto involve City.

H.

I. Consultant’s Insurance. Consultant shallalso procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additionalkinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary foritsproper protectionand prosecution of the Work.

Page C-4Kimley-Horn and Associates. Inc. 330

Attachment B
Work Plan Summary
331
Work Plan Summary
# Task Title Description and Subtasks
1 Kick-Off
Meeting
To align expectations, confirm roles and responsibilities, and establish clear understanding of goals, constraints, and opportunities for the project. 2 Public
Outreach
Public meetings and online virtual engagement opportunities for the public to provide input on the development and revisions of the Specific Plan.

2.1 Public Outreach and Engagement Plan

2.2 Social Media Campaign and Polls

2.3 Stakeholder Engagement/Pop-Up Events

2.4 Vision and Goal

2.5 Community Workshop

3 Existing
Conditions
Report
Comprehensive assessment of the existing physical, regulatory, and market conditions within the project area. Provides a foundation for developing the Specific Plan by identifying key assets, constraints, and trends.

3.1 Land Use and Housing

3.2 Physical and Environmental Conditions

3.3 Infrastructure and Public Realm

3.4 Economic and Market Context

4 Specific Plan Specific Plan that reflects and advances the City’s goals and vision for the project area. It will be developed through an iterative, collaborative process that integrates public engagement, stakeholder feedback, and ongoing coordination with City staff. Upon conclusion of the project, it is anticipated that KHA will have prepared up to seven drafts of the Specific Plan. Major components include:
• Relationship to the General Plan and Housing Element
• Planning Area Context and Background
• Vision and Guiding Principles
• Land Use and Urban Form
• Mobility and Circulation
• Infrastructure and Utilities
• Public Realm and Open Space
• Urban Design Standards and Guidelines
• Housing and Community Benefits
• Implementation and Administration

4.1 Create an Outline

4.2 Draft Specific Plan

4.3 Revisions to the Specific Plan

4.4. Final Specific Plan

This task includes the optional “Infrastructure Evaluation” previously referenced. This subtask involves evaluation of the adequacy of existing water, sewer, and storm drain infrastructure by reviewing available literature 332
# Task Title Description and Subtasks
and by identifying any potential deficiencies in the systems. A narrative will be provided that outlines potential impacts from the Specific Plan on these utility systems and the recommendations for necessary upgrades and potential financing options.
5 Planning
Commission
and City
Council
Following the public workshop and community review of the Draft Specific Plan, the project will be reviewed by the Airport Land Use Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council.

5.1 Study Sessions – Planning Commission and City Council

5.2 Plan Refinement

5.3 Public Hearings – Formal Adoption Process

6 CEQA Preparation of an Addendum to the General Plan Housing Element Implementation Program EIR.

6.1 Technical Assessments
• Modeling and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
• Air Quality Analysis
• Energy Analysis
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis
• Noise and Vibration Analysis
• Cultural and Paleontological Resources Assessment

6.2 Addendum
• Mobilization
• Native American Tribal Consultation
• Project Description
• Addendum
• CEQA Project Meetings, Management, Coordination

7 Project
Management
and
Coordination
Comprehensive project management and coordination to support successful delivery of the Specific Plan.

7.1 Bi-Weekly Coordination Meetings

7.2 Project Management Oversight

333

Attachment C
Budget Amendment
334
335

NEWPORT BEACH

City Council Staff Report

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

CITY OF

January 13, 2026
Agenda Item No.19
ABSTRACT:

At its December 11, 2025, meeting, the City Arts Commission approved 10 sculptures and four alternates for the exhibition within Civic Center Park, as selected through a survey of Newport Beach residents. The City Arts Commission requests the City Council’s consideration and approval of the selections and alternates. If approved, the 10 Phase X sculptures will be on display for a three-year period, with installation commencing in June 2026.

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 10 sculptures and their placement and four alternate sculptures within Civic Center Park as selected by the public and recommended by the City Arts Commission for the temporary sculpture exhibit.

DISCUSSION:

The Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Par k (Exhibition) is an integral feature of the Newport Beach Civic Center. Civic Center Park, which turned nearly half a million square feet of undeveloped land into a new public park, was designed by renowned landscape architectural firm Peter Walk and Partners (PWP). PWP developed a master plan for art in the park, and identified various spots in the park where art, particularly sculpture, may be exhibited. The City Arts Commission (Commission) determined that a rotating exhibition was an optimal approach t o bringing sculptures to Newport Beach in a cost - efficient manner. In August 2013, the Newport Beach City Council authorized the Commission to implement an inaugural rotational sculpture exhibit in Civic Center Park.

The acquisition program developed by the Commission for the Exhibition created a model in which pieces are loaned for a two -year period (or phase). In 2025, this program was TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Melissa Hartson, Library Services Director - 949-717-3801, [email protected]
PREPARED BY: Rebecca Lightfoot, Library Services Manager – 949-717-3819, [email protected]
TITLE: Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Park – Phase X 336
Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Park – Phase X
January 13, 2026

modified to a three -year exhibition period. The artists are provided with a small honorarium to loan their work to the City of Newport Beach.

The City is responsible for installing the art, while the artists are responsible for the maintenance and repair of their work. Admission is free and the Exhibition continues to be enjoyed by residents and guests of all ages and sensibilities. In essence, the Exhibition has become a “museum without walls” that offers the temporary display of public art in a unique, natural setting. Moreover, the City can exhibit a well-balanced representation of public art, with artistic merit, durability, practicality and site responsiveness as criteria in the selection of work. The rotational nature of the Exhibition ensures that residents and guests are exposed to a variety of work. Bo rrowing the pieces remains a cost -effective alternative to owning and maintaining permanent public art.

Since 2014, the Commission has presented nine phases of the Exhibition, with the installation of Phase IX occurring in June 202 4. The City entered into a professional services agreement with Arts Orange County (Arts OC) for $135,080 for Phase X of the Exhibition. This amount includes project coordination and management fees, in addition to installation and de-installation fees.

Arts OC was established in 1995 as the nonprofit, countywide arts council of Orange County, California. Arts OC has been recognized by the California Arts Council as a model agency based on the quality of its work and has served as the officially designated arts agency and state-local partner of the County of Orange since its inception. The Arts OC project team successfully managed all previous phases of the exhibition and has strong working relationships with the Commission and City staff.

Community Input
Since the Exhibition’s inception, the Commission has increased public engagement by offering residents opportunities to become part of the selection process. For Phase X, the CAC included the following elements in the process:
a) As in previous phases, the CAC did not utilize an ad hoc subcommittee for Phase X.

The entire Commission reviewed the submitted pieces for inclusion in the Phase X Exhibition online survey, during City Arts Commission regular meetings. b) For Phase X, the Commission turned the selection process over to the public. Through an online survey, Newport Beach residents voted for their favorite sculptures and voted for the pieces for inclusion in Phase X , resulting in 10 sculptures and four alternates selected by the public.

Prior to launc hing the public survey, the Commission, along with a curatorial panel, consisting of arts professionals Genevieve Williams and Virginia Arce , evaluated all 337
Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Park – Phase X
January 13, 2026

submissions for Phase X at the October 9, 2025, City Arts Commission meeting. Pieces that met the following criteria were included in the public survey:

1. Artistic Merit — the artist has strong professional qualifications, and the artwork is of high quality and demonstrates originality and artistic excellence.

2. Durability — the artwork is made of high - quality materials, requires minimal maintenance and can withstand the outdoor elements of coastal Orange County.

3. Practicality — the artwork is appropriate for audiences of all ages and does not exhibit unsafe conditions that may bear on public liability.

4. Site Appropriateness — the scale of the artwork is suitable for the environment, and the artwork is suitable for viewing from all angles.

Using these criteria, the Commission approved 30 submitted pieces for the public survey.

The online public survey launched on October 15, 2025, and closed on December 5, 2025. The survey was publicized through Stu News Newport on multiple occasions, included in the City Manager’s Week in Review, and pos ted to social media and on Arts OC’s website, SparkOC.com. In addition, the survey was disseminated to the 3 5,000+ subscribers to the Library and Cultural Arts email distribution list and the City’s email subscribers for current news and topics of interest . Survey flyers and Library website banner advertisements rounded out the survey marketing.

Survey participants were required to provide a valid email address, report the ZIP code of their residence and complete a CAPTCHA security step to affirm that they were not a bot.

Arts OC deleted any entries that did not provide a Newport Beach ZIP code. The poll also captured the IP address, time of voting and type of device used to vote. Arts OC used these tools to identify potential cases of double-votes. For example, if two votes from the same IP address happened within minutes, voted for the same works and had similar enough email addresses, Arts OC deleted one of them. If the email addresses were different enough, Arts OC deferred on the side of permitting them , since it could have been the product of multiple people voting on the same computer from the same household.

After these steps were completed, the Commission had a validated total of 23 0 voters, casting 1,736 votes. The results are ranked in the following table.

338
Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Park – Phase X
January 13, 2026

Artist Work Votes Public
Ranking
CAC
Ranking
Ten Final Selections:

Daley, Catherine Cosmos: Starry, Starry Night 132 1 1t
Harris, Diego Wind Tree 126 2 7t
Linke, Harold Spiral Dance 101 3 24t
Knecht, Zan Coming Through 99 4 16t
Robertson, Tamara Open Heart 94 5 5t
Martinek, Clark Intended Destination 77 6 24t
Gall, Alex Voyage of a Giant 71 7t 10t
Plaisted, Chris The Wave 71 7t 24t
Bassoff, Solomon Joy Ride 65 9 10t
Banks, John Art in Old English 63 10 10t
Four Alternate Selections:

Meyer, Nicholas Emergence 54 16t 1t
Seese, Kirk Dragonfly 62 11 5t
Idelchik, Ilya Reaching for Life 61 12 16t
Muzzarelli, Aldo The Butterfly Enchanter 57 13 21t

Behan, Sonny Abhaya 56 14 24t
Johansen, Nathan Germination 55 15 41t
Pettit, Michael Escargot 54 16t 21t
Reinertson, Lisa Wolf Rider-Ophelia’s Return 53 18 7t
Bannon, John Drop 52 19 4
Kimball, Tyler Celestial Gates; Lunar Gate and
Solar Gate
51 20 41t
Nelson, John Randall Yip, Yip, Yip 47 21 21t
Vogel, Patrick Dragon’s Tail 44 22t 7t
Rench, Chris Caught Up 44 22t 16t
Elliot, Marguerite From Earth to Sky 36 24 10t
Benefiel, Joan The Space Between 25 25 19t
Litman, Adrian Susnes FRUTTI DI MARE 23 26 19t
tal, lee Blooming Reflection – Purple
Clematis
22 27 10t
Barrett, Alex TOOTHFAIRY 21 28 10t
Wise, Jess Glode Focused Anomaly 15 29 3
Mang, Tiimo Warning Beacon 5 30 24t

339
Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Park – Phase X
January 13, 2026

At its December 11, 2025, regular meeting, the Commission received the public survey results. The 10 pieces that received the highest number of public votes were recommended for installation, and four alternate sculptures were selected. The motion to approve the full slate of 10 sculptures passed unanimously (7 –0). Chair Heather Ignatin noted object ions to two pieces —Clark Martinek’s Intended Destination and Solomon Bassoff’s Joy Ride—but voted in favor of the overall package.

Subject to the City Council’s consideration and approval, installation of the 10 pieces will commence on June 1, 2026, and continue through June 19, 2026.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The adopted budget includes sufficient funding for the Phase X installation. It will be expensed to the Exhibition’s Phase X Project Account No. 01060603-811059-L2601.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

Staff recommends 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.

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 – Newport Beach Civic Center Sculpture Exhibition Phase X Recommended Selections
340
1(:3257%($&+&,9,&&(17(5
6&8/3785((;+,%,7,21
3+$6(;
5(&200(1'('6(/(&7,216
3352&(666722'$7(

/kDZQhhQ][h
‡ g]ZkOÂhjjPg]kOP/IdjÃʍ<gjQhjhO<YYIgs]q[Igh<gjQhjgIdhIjEqIgIQ[pQjIGj]hkDZQj IYQOQDYIq]gXhjPg]kOPjPI
<YYN]g[jgs¥<X<
<¦dY<jN]gZ
‡ NjIggIpQIqN]gIYQOQDQYQjs<[GhkQj<DQYQjsN]g]kjG]]gQ[hj<YY<jQ][ÈÊhkDZQhhQ][hqIgI dgIhI[jIGN]ggIpQIq

kgsQ[O
‡ g]Z/IdjÄÁjPg]kOP$EjƍjPIWkgsE][hQhjQ[O]N<YY<EjQpIgjh ]ZZQhhQ][ZIZDIgh<[G
jq]]kjhQGIOkIhjhP<GjPI]dd]gjk[Qjsj]gIpQIq<ddYQE<jQ][Z<jIgQ<Yh][ <<[GhE]gI
I<EP<ddYQE<jQ][Ng]ZÂj]Ȑ
‡ jjPI$EjÊgjh
]ZZQhhQ][!IIjQ[OjPIWkgsgIpQIqIGjPIgIhkYjh]NhE]gQ[O<[G<NjIg GQhEkhhQ][<[GE][hkYj<jQ][qQjPgjh$g<[OI
]k[jsgIdgIhI[j<jQpIhÄÁq]gXhqIgIEP]hI[
N]gdgIhI[j<jQ][Q[<dkDYQEd]YY
+kDYQE+]YY
‡ +]YYq<hdkDYQhPIG][<GIGQE<jIGd<OI][gjh$
’hqIDhQjI/d<gX$
E]ZqPQEPQhDkQYj][
jPI7]gG+gIhhdY<jN]gZ7]gG+gIhhdYkOQ[E<YYIG0]j<Y+]YYOI[Ig<jIGjPId]YY<[GE]YYIEjIG p]jIh
‡ +]YYq<h]dI[j]"Iqd]gj
I<EPgIhQGI[jhN]gp]jQ[ONg]Z$Ej]DIgÆjPg]kOPIEIZDIgÂƐ ‡ +kDYQEd]YYgIhkYjhqIgIj<DkY<jIG<[GdgIhI[jIGj]gjh ]ZZQhhQ][Ighj]OkQGIdg]EIhh]N
NQ[<YQvQ[O.IE]ZZI[GIG/IYIEjQ][h<[GYjIg[<jIh

ATTACHMENT A
341
338%/,&&32///6800$5<

‡ +<gjQEQd<[jhE]kYGp]jIN]gkdj]jI[N<p]gQjIq]gXh
‡ /IEkgQjsZI<hkgIhQ[EYkGI
‡ 1hIghgIfkQgIGj]E]ZdYIjI<
+0
N]gZGIhQO[IGj]E<jEPD]jDIP<pQ]g
‡ 1hIghgIfkQgIGj]hkDZQj<p<YQGIŸZ<QY<GGgIhh<[Gdg]pQGIjPIQg;+E]GI<[GEQjs]N gIhQGI[EI][Ysp]jIhNg]Z"Iqd]gj
I<EP;+E]GIhqQYYDIE]k[jIG
£ 1hIghgIfkQgIGj]dg]pQGI<p<YQGŸZ<QY<GGgIhh
‡ ]gI<EPq]gX<hQ[OYIQZ<OIWkGOIGj]DIjPIDIhjj]gIdgIhI[jjPIq]gXq<hdY<EIG][<hYQGIqQjP QGI[jQE<YGQZI[hQ][h<[GdY<Q[DY<EXD<EXOg]k[GqQjPjPIq]gX’hjQjYI<[G<gjQhj’h[<ZIDIY]q ‡ 0PI]gGIg]NjPIq]gXhQ[jPId]YYqIgIg<[G]ZQvIGN]gI<EPpQhQj]gŽh]jP<j[]hQ[OYIq]gXO<Q[h <Gp<[j<OINg]ZjPIQgd]hQjQ][
‡ .<qp]jIY]Oh]ND]jP<EEIdjIG<[GGIEYQ[IGp]jQ[O<jjIZdjhqIgIIr<ZQ[IGj]GIjIEj<[sd<jjIg[h ]gp]jIgDIP<pQ]gqPQEPQ[gjh$g<[OI
]k[js’hWkGOZI[jZ<sOQpIgQhIj]<ZQhYI<GQ[O
Q[jIgdgIj<jQ][]NjPI“p]QEI]NjPIE]ZZk[Qjs”
‡ +kDYQEd]YYgIhkYjh<gI[][ŸDQ[GQ[O<[G<GpQh]gsj]DIkhIGQ[NQ[<YWkgsGQhEkhhQ][hN]ghIYIEjQ[OhY<jI ]NQ[<YQhjh
‡ NjIgE][EIg[hIrdgIhhIGDsgjh
]ZZQhhQ][Igh<[G QDg<gs/j<NNgjh$
Z<GIkdG<jIhj]jPId]YY
Q[EYkGQ[OjPIN]YY]qQ[O
£ g<dPQEGIhQO[jqI<Xhj]Q[EgI<hIjPIpQhQDQYQjs]NjPIEQgEYI j]DIEYQEXIG][k[GIgI<EPq]gX £ 0PIhIEkgQjshIjjQ[OqPQEPY]EXIG]kj+<GGgIhhIhN]gÃÅP]kg h<NjIgZkYjQdYIp]jIhq<h gIGkEIGj]ÂP]kgj]Q[EgI<hId<gjQEQd<jQ][<j QDg<gs+ h
£ NjIggIpQIq<j]j<Y]NÃÄÁp]jIghE<hjÈÄÇIYQOQDYIp]jIh 66$03/((9,(::2))32//

,QGLYLGXDO6OLGHHQODUJHV
ZKHQFOLFNHG
342
3+$6(;
5(&200(1'('6(/(&7,216



<YIs
<jPIgQ[I
¥7Q[Gh]g
¦

]hZ]h/j<ggs/j<ggs"QOPj
/QvIÂÁ°rÆ°rÄÁ±
7IQOPjÃÁÁYDh
!IGQkZYkZQ[kZ+YIrQOY<hh/j<Q[YIhh/jIIY
<YIs
<jPIgQ[I
]hZ]h/j<ggs/j<ggs"QOPj
343
<ggQhQIO]
¥1ddIg <XI
¦
7Q[G0gII
/QvIÉ°ɱrÈ°ñ7rÄ°ȱ7
7IQOPjÃÆÁYDh
!IGQkZ
]gjI[/jIIY]pIg/jIIY.ID<g
<ggQhQIO]7Q[G0gII
Q[XI<g]YG
¥ <XI$hqIO]$.¦
/dQg<Y<[EI
/QvIÂÅŔrÅÁ”rÆÁ”
7IQOPjÈÆYDh
!IGQkZGp<[EIGE]Zd]hQjIqQjP<
d]YsEPg]ZIqPQjINQ[QhPEYQZ<jIgIhQhj<[j
g]k[GhjIIYdY<jIN]gZ]k[jQ[O
Q[XI<g]YG/dQg<Y<[EI
344
[IEPj;<[
¥g<[G.<dQGh!¦

]ZQ[O0Pg]kOP
/QvIÂÁ’rƒrÒ
7IQOPjÄÁÁYDh
!IGQkZ.IEsEYIGE]gjI[hjIIY
[IEPj;<[
]ZQ[O0Pg]kOP
.]DIgjh][0<Z<g<
¥$QY
Qjs ¦
$dI[I<gj
/QvIÂÁ°rÂÁ°rÂɱD<hIŒrŒ
7IQOPjÅÁÁYDh
!IGQkZ7IYGIG/jIIY
.]DIgjh][0<Z<g<$dI[I<gj
345
!<gjQ[IX
Y<gX
¥!QjEPIYY/¦
[jI[GIGIhjQ[<jQ][
/QvIÂŒrÃÔrÃÔ
7IQOPjÄÆÁYDh
!IGQkZ/jIIYg][
!<gjQ[IX
Y<gX[jI[GIGIhjQ[<jQ][
<YYYIr
¥6Qhj<
¦
6]s<OI]N<Q<[j
/QvIÈñrÉűrÉÁ±
7IQOPjÃÄÁYDh
!IGQkZ/jIIY
]gjI[/jIIY/]Y<g 
<YYYIr6]s<OI]N<Q<[j
346
+Y<QhjIG
PgQh
¥"Iq!QYN]gG
0¦
7<pI0PI
/QvIȐƒrǒ7rŒ
7IQOPjÆÁÁYDh
!IGQkZ/jIIY/j<Q[YIhh/jIIY
+Y<QhjIG
PgQh7<pI0PI

<hh]NN/]Y]Z][
¥"]gjP/<[
k<[
¦

]s.QGI
/QvIÉÁ”rÂÄǔ7rÇĔ
7IQOPjÇÆÁYDh
!IGQkZ
][EgIjI/jIIYY<hh

<hh]NN/]Y]Z][
]s.QGI
347

<[Xh
]P[
¥I[GIgh]["6¦
gjQ[$YG[OYQhP
/QvIÉÔrÇÁ”7rÇÁ”
7IQOPjÄÇÁYDh
!IGQkZ/jIIY

<[Xh
]P[gjQ[$YG[OYQhP
3+$6(;
$/7(51$7(6



348
!IsIg"QEP]Y<h
¥0IZIEkY<
¦
ZIgOI[EI
/QvI[›<
7IQOPj[›<
!IGQkZ+]qGIgŸE]<jIG/jIIY
!IsIg"QEP]Y<hZIgOI[EI
/IIhIQgX
¥ kjPIgpQYYI!¦
g<O][NYs
/QvIÂŒrŐƒ7rŐƒ
7IQOPj[›<
!IGQkZ/jIIY<[G.Idkgd]hIGkj]+<gjh
/IIhIQgXg<O][NYs
349
GIYEPQXYs<
¥/<[QIO]
¦
.I<EPQ[O]g QNI
/QvIÂĒrÒ7rÒ
7IQOPj[›<
!IGQkZ!Ij<Y!<hPQDIgOY<hh.IhQ[d]rs
+<hjI
GIYEPQXYs<.I<EPQ[O]g QNI
!kvv<gIYYQYG]
¥!<kYGQ[/
¦

kjjIgNYs[EP<[jIg0PI
/QvIÈɱrÂƱrÂƱ
7IQOPjÉÁYDh
!IGQkZ/jIIY.IhQ[/j][Iq<gI+<hjI
!kvv<gIYYQYG]
kjjIgNYs[EP<[jIg0PI
350
55(&200(1'('',167$//$7,2116,7(6
,QFOXGLQJ3KDVH,;ZRUNV
7+$1.<28
351
January 13, 2026, City Council Agenda Comments The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by: Jim Mosher ( [email protected] ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229) Item II. STUDY SESSION From the agenda notice, it appears City staff has some very specific code and policy changes it plans to present to the City Council under this heading. Most likely they will involve revising Municipal Code Chapter 20.49 (and possibly Chapter 21.49) and City Council Policy L-23. It is unfortunate staff has not provided any preview of their presentation, so that the Council members

and

the

public

could

research

their

suggestions

and

not

have

to

make

snap

decisions

as

to

which

should

be

advanced.

There is not even a reference to Item VI at the November 18, 2025, meeting, where as a future agenda item, the Council voted to direct staff to more specifically: “ As part of the City’s update of the Municipal Code related to wireless communications, direct City

staff

to

prepare

amendments

to

the

Municipal

Code

as

well

as

associated

policies

and

procedures

to

streamline

the

permitting

and

deployment

of

wireless

communication

facilities.

Staff’s

updates

and

recommendations

should

include,

but

not

be

limited

to,

simplifying

the

permitting

process

for

wireless

facilities

on

both

public

and

private

property;

establishing

clear,

predictable,

and

expedited

review

timelines;

implementing

standardized

application

requirements

and

processes;

and

reducing

carrier

costs

associated

with

deploying

wireless

facilities
.”
As I indicated then, the creation of NBMC Chapter 20.49 in 2014 was an effort to improve the transparency

of,

and

assure

public

participation

in,

decisions

about

the

location

of

cell

sites.

I

fear

the

revisions

will

diminish

that

transparency.

As to City Council Policy L-23 (“The Siting of Wireless Telecommunications Equipment on City-Owned

Land”),

that

was

not

revised

as

part

of

the

2014

effort

to

increase

transparency.

It
was changed as part of Item 5 on the Council’s August 14, 2018, consent calendar, which was itself part of former Mayor O’Neill’s push to reduce the volume of City regulations. The redline changes made at that time start on page 176 of the staff report. Those changes had previously been reviewed, but with no additional explanation, as part of Item 4 at the June 21, 2018, Planning Commission meeting. The minutes of that meeting indicate I pointed out, among other things, that the policy continues to imply on its last page that there is something about “Encroachment Permits (Telecom)” in NBMC Chapter 13, even though the word “Telecom” does not seem to appear anywhere in that chapter. Much more importantly, Policy L-23 continues to enshrine

a

highly

problematic

process

by

which

contracts

for

siting

wireless

facilities

on

public

property

are

approved

by

a

process

of

private

inaction

by

the

City

Council.

In

effect,

the

City

Manager

is

instructed

to

seek

approval

through

a

private

hub-and-spokes

polling

of

the

Council,

unknown

to

the

public.

It

is

the

opposite

of

a

transparent

public

process

352
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 10

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS

1. See “PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONSENT CALENDAR,” below for two items expected, but not

found

on

the

consent

calendar.

2. The absence of an item number for this agenda item suggests, once again, a need for the Council to revise its Policy A-1 to show an accurate and predictable sequence of events for it and the public to expect at Council meetings. While the “ frequently asked questions, City Council Meetings 101 ” link on the City’s City Council Meetings page seems to have gone missing, those who read the “ City Council Meeting Information ” at the bottom of the City Manager’s On the Agenda page will find a description of the Council meeting format that bears increasingly little resemblance to the reality, including its reference to the regular meetings

starting

at

“6

p.m.”

and

its

instruction

to

look

for

the

consent

calendar

as

Item

XIII

on

the

agenda.

3. Another matter of concern regarding Policy A-1 is the lack of clarity from the Council as to the desired

level

of

accessibility

to

Council

agenda

materials

in

Newport

Beach.

The

boilerplate
at the bottom of the first page of the current agenda continues to say “ staff reports are available in the City Council Chambers lobby .” For most of the City’s history this meant the City

Clerk

made

paper

copies

of

the

reports

freely

available,

so

the

public

could

follow

along

with

what

the

Council

was

deliberating.

This

is

still

the

case

at

most

City

board,

commission

and

committee

meetings.

However, the new City Clerk feels this is not in alignment with state law and has chosen to provide

the

public

with

a

single

shared

printed

copy

located

in

a

“Do

Not

Remove”

binder

in

the

lobby,

and

insists

any

additional

copies

must

be

paid

for

by

those

asking

for

them

(even

though

there

does

not

appear

to

be

a

mechanism

for

making

such

requests

at

the

meeting).

Although

in

theory

people

attending

the

meetings

with

electronic

devices

in

tow

can

access

the

materials

online,

the

electronic

device

most

audience

members

are

likely

to

have

is

a

cell

phone,

and

the

electronic

versions

of

the

agenda

documents

are

hardly

planned

for

readability

on

one.

The

predictable

result

is

the

public

attending

Council

meetings

will

be

even

more

in

the

dark

than

ever

on

what

they

are

witnessing.

It seems worth noting that although the Council members, unlike the audience, have desktop-sized

screens

on

which

to

view

the

proceedings,

at

least

three

appreciate

having

printed

copies,

as

well,

to

refer

to,

which

are

provided

to

them.

The

City

Attorney

also

appears

to

refer

to

a

printed

copy.

Although the Council has not set such a fee, the City Clerk refers to Government Code Section 54954.1 (part of the “Brown Act”), which allows a city council to set a fee for people asking that printed copies of the agenda materials be mailed to them.

The Clerk might be reminded of Section 54953.7, which states that: “ Notwithstanding any other provision of law, legislative bodies of local agencies may impose requirements upon themselves

which

allow

greater

access

to

their

meetings

than

prescribed

by

the

minimal

353
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 10 standards set forth in this chapter. In addition thereto, an elected legislative body of a local agency

may

impose

those

requirements

on

appointed

legislative

bodies

of

the

local

agency
.”

In other words, while a city may charge, they are not required to. The decision is up to the Council,

not

the

Clerk.

The Council may also wish to be aware of the Declaration of Rights in Article I, Section 3(b) of the California Constitution which guarantees the people’s “ right of access to information concerning

the

conduct

of

the

people’s

business
”

and

says

that

the

Brown

Act

shall

be

liberally

construed

to

promote

access.

The suspension of ready access to information about what is going on at the Council’s meetings

seems

inconsistent

with

that

right.

Indeed,

that

the

Brown

Act

finds

it

necessary

to

allow

a

legislative

body

to

impose

a

fee

for

mailing

agenda

packets

implies

that

imposing

a

fee

is

understood

to

be

the

exception

to

the

rule,

and

that

if

not

mailed,

there

would

be

no

fee

charged

for

obtaining

copies

of

agenda

materials.

As to the practical effects of restricting access to printed copies, I can certainly testify that at least

for

me,

printed

copies

of

materials

have

a

physical

reality

that

encourages

more

careful

review

than

is

likely

to

happen

when

something

exists

only

virtually.

An additional problem is there does not seem to be any mechanism provided for downloading

or

viewing

the

equivalent

of

the

former

paper

staff

reports:

the

electronic

versions

require

multiple

separate

files

to

be

viewed

and

those

files

lack

the

sequential

page

numbers

that

the

printed

copies

had

in

the

lower

right

of

each

page.

Item III. MATTERS WHICH COUNCILMEMBERS HAVE ASKED TO BE PLACED

ON

A

FUTURE

AGENDA

(NON-DISCUSSION

ITEM)
At the December 9 meeting, the Council unanimously requested a future study session on the topic

of

whether

surplus

funds,

including

those

currently

used

to

pay

down

CalPERS

debt,

could

be

better

directed

to

other

investments

–

a

topic

that

would

normally

first

be

(and

has

been)
discussed by the Finance Committee (but without participation by the full Council). Now the Mayor is requesting the Council consider suspending the FInance Committee meetings while a three-member

Council

ad

hoc

committee

reviews

whether

there

is

a

better

way

to

conduct

business.

While I agree that discussion and re-evaluation is almost always valuable, I do not think it’s a good

idea

to

shut

down

the

existing

Finance

Committee’s

meetings

while

that

re-evaluation

is
going on. The existing committee, which will be meeting on Thursday, has a fairly substantial work plan for the year, including a first review of the staff-proposed budget in May. Suspending the meetings will likely result in most of the things on the work plan never being publicly discussed

at

all.

That

hardly

advances

the

objective

of

increasing

transparency.

.

PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONSENT CALENDAR

1. The consent calendar at the first Council meeting of the year, such as this meeting, normally asks

the

full

Council

to

confirm

the

Mayor’s

appointments

of

Council

members

to

the

various

354
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 4 of 10 committees, local and external, on which Council members serve. The City Clerk’s Roster of Boards, Commissions and Committees shows many of those appointments ending on January 13, 2026. The absence of a Council appointments item on the present agenda leaves

uncertainty

as

to

who

is

and

will

be

representing

the

Council

in

those

positions.

2. Speaking of appointments, as best I can tell, the last time the Council received on its consent calendar one of the requested “bi-monthly” reports on the progress of the General Plan Update was as Item 19 on September 9, 2025, more than four months ago. The absence of those reports from the Council agendas is not for lack of activity on the part of the 3-member General Plan Update Steering Committee or the 24-member General Plan Advisory Committee. What makes this relevant to appointments is that, despite the direction in the enabling resolutions that a decision to terminate the committees is up to the City Council,

Community

Development

staff

has

apparently

instructed

the

City

Clerk

to

not

advertise

the

vacancies

on

these

two

committees

that

are,

per

the

enabling

resolutions,
scheduled to occur at the Council’s first meeting in February. Given that Council Policy A-2 calls for scheduled vacancies to be advised two months in advance, this means that if the Council

wished

to

continue

the

committees

beyond

February

10,

re-appointments

could

not

be

made

in

a

timely

way.

If

staff

does

want

the

Council

to

terminate

the

committees,

there

should

be

an

item

on

the

agenda

asking

the

Council

to

do

that.

The

decision

is

not

up

to

City

staff

on

its

own.

Item 2. Minutes for the December 9, 2025, City Council Meeting The passages shown in italics below are from the draft minutes with suggested corrections shown

in
strikeout underline format. The page numbers refer to Volume 66. Page 463 , Item II. PRESENTATIONS, bullet 2, paragraph 2: “ Mayor Pro Tem Kleiman expressed

gratitude

for

the

volunteers

who

make

3rd

Thursdays

possible,

emphasizing

that

their

dedication

and

hard

work
bring bringing the community and local businesses together and

highlighted

the

event's

success

in

fostering

stronger

community

connections

and

engagement
.”

Mosher

questioned

if

there

were

any

recommendations

from
the Council Policy Review
Committee

and

suggested

amending

Council

Policy

A-1
.”

Blom,

to

approve

the

Consent

Calendar,

including

amendments

to

Agenda

Item

No.

1,

the

Minutes;

noting

the

recusal

of

Mayor

Stapleton

on

Agenda

Item

No.

11,

and

the

removal

of

Agenda

Item

No.

13 for

further

discussion
.”

[ comment : Normally the reason for the recusal would be stated in the minutes, usually as a note

following

the

item.

I

do

not

see

the

reason

for

this

recusal

in

the

present

minutes.]

Leung”

and

two

segments

of

“Public

Comments”

appear

to

be

listed

as

subsections

under

Item

19. (Appointment

to

Fill

an

Unscheduled

Vacancy

on

the

City

Arts

Commission).

355
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 5 of 10

Manager

Leung

stepped

down

from

the

dais

and

Assistant

City

Manager

Seimone

Jurjis

took

his

proper

place

at

the

dais
.”

[ comment : Since the Assistant City Manager did not become City Manager until December 27,

it

is

a

bit

difficult

to

see

how

sitting

in

the

City

Manager’s

seat

was

his

“proper

place”

on

December

9. Should

it

be

“
future

place”?]

City

Council

on

an

equal

basis

to

nominate

and

elect
the mayor .” Page 471 , Item 22, paragraph 1: “ Mayor Kleiman in presiding, placed all members of the City Council

on

an

equal

basis

to

nominate

and

elect
the mayor pro tem .”
[ comment : The minutes record what was supposed to happen according to the last page of the printed agenda: “ The Mayor presides over the election of the Mayor Pro Tem. The Mayor, in

presiding,

places

all

members

of

the

Council

on

an

equal

basis

to

nominate

and

elect
.”
However, the video indicates it didn’t happen that way. Instead, Mayor Kleiman directed the City Clerk to conduct the election.]

Council

Policy

A-1.

The

following

seating

order

was

determined

(left

to

right):

Erik Weigand – Michelle Barto – Robyn Grant – Lauren Kleiman – Noah Blom – Joe Stapleton – Sarah

J.

Weber
”

[ comment : This breaks with tradition and will be confusing to many readers who will find this opposite

to

the

order

in

which

they

will

see

the

Council

members

in

photos

and

video.

Normally,
1 the

minutes

list

the

members

in

the

order

they

are

seen

by

the

public

and

staff

(that

is,

starting

with

Councilmember

Weber

on

the

left).

These

minutes,

instead,

use

“stage”

directions,

listing

the

members

as

seen

from

the

rear

of

the

dais,

looking

out

toward

the
audience. While it is true page 12 of Council Policy A-1 says “ the Mayor Pro Tempore shall always be seated immediately next to and to the right of the Mayor ,” this was probably meant

to

be

understood

as

“
at

the

Mayor’s

right
.
”

In

any

event,

staff

and

the

audience

see

the

Mayor

Pro

Tem

seated

to

the

left

of

the

Mayor,

and

it

would

seem

best

for

the

minutes

to

list

the

names

in

the

order

seen

by

everyone

other

than

the

Council

members

themselves.

Alternatively,

the

draft

minutes

could

be

amended

to

say

“
(left

to

right, as seen looking
toward

the

audience) ” ]

prioritizes

four

“Cs"
:”

1 See, for example, the minutes of Dec. 10, 2024, Dec. 12, 2023, and I suspect all prior minutes, which list the

Council

seating

as

seen

from

the

room,

not

looking

toward

the

room.

356
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 6 of 10 [ comment : It might be noted that City Charter Section 404 places on the Mayor “ the primary but not exclusive responsibility for interpreting the policies, programs and needs of the City government

to

the

people,

and,

as

occasion

requires,

the

Mayor

may

inform

the

people

of

any

change

in

policy

or

program
.”

I

believe

this

means

the

Mayor

is

expected

to

communicate

to

the

public

the

policies

set

by

the

full

Council,

and

any

changes

to

them

that

the

full

Council

agrees

to.

I

do

not

believe

it

was

meant

to

empower

the

Mayor

to

unilaterally

set

or

change

the

City’s

priorities,

especially

since

mayors

in

Newport

Beach

do

not

campaign

on

a

platform

that

is

publicly

revealed

prior

to

their

selection.]

Item 3. Ordinance No. 2025-37: Amending Various Positions of the Newport

Beach

Municipal

Code

to

Reflect

Organizational

Restructuring

to

the

City

Attorney,

Finance,

Human

Resources,

and

Public

Works

Departments
The staff report acknowledges that an error was made in the number of positions being moved from

one

department

to

another

at

the

time

Ordinance

No.

2025-37

was

introduced

for

a

first

reading

on

December

9. It does not inform the Council or the public that the text being introduced for second reading and adoption

differs

from

the

text

introduced

on

December

9. The

changes

seem

to

be

largely
(although, since they are not listed, I cannot be sure entirely) in response to comments I submitted to the December 9 meeting citing “Technical Defects” in the original version. Some of those

might

be

what

are

called

“scrivener’s

errors”

that

might

come

within

the

compass

of

the
City Clerk’s City Charter Section 412 authority to correct “typographical or clerical errors” between the two readings. However, the Council does not seem to have ever codified the procedure

for

making

such

corrections,

including

whether

the

Council

needs

to

be

informed

of

what

has

been

changed.

In

other

cases,

it

might

not

be

obvious

what

the

original

intent

was,

making

any

revision

to

create

some

new

meaning

more

than

the

correction

of

“typographical

or

clerical

errors.”

In the present case, due to the elimination in the second reading of a change that was proposed on December 9, we now have the odd circumstance of Subparts 41 (electronic agenda packet page 48) and 43 (electronic agenda packet page 49) which purport to “amend” NBMC Sections 3.30.010 and 3.32.320 actual amend those sections to “new” wordings that are identical to their present wording (which will surely be confusing to the contractor we pay to make the changes online).

As

to

NBMC

Section

3.32.320,

it

might

be

noted

that

to

be

grammatical,

the

existing

title

(“
Establishment

or

Changing

Appropriations

Limit”)

would

need

to

be

changed

to:

“
Establishing

or

Changing

Appropriations

Limit.”

But

for

reasons

unknown

to

me,

City

staff

does

not

seem

inclined

to

recommend

that

change

to

the

Council.

Assuming the adoption of this ordinance is approved, when will the City website be revised to reflect

the

new

departmental

structure?

Immediately?

Or

when

Section

6 (agenda

packet

page

25)

says

it

will

be

effective

(30

days

after

adoption)?

357
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 7 of 10 Item 4. Resolution No. 2026-1: Updating the List of Designated Employees

for

2026

Under

the

City’s

Conflict

of

Interest

Code

This item seems to assume the Council will approve the departmental restructuring being proposed

in

agenda

Item

3,

but

does

not

fully

embrace

it.

For example, on electronic agenda packet pages 106 (clean) and 111 (redline) it changes the former title “Finance Department” to “Administrative Services & Finance Department.” Yet, my understanding

of

Ordinance

No.

2025-37

is

that

what

was

formerly

the

Finance

Department

will

become

a

division

within

the

new

Administrative

Services

Department.

There

will

no

longer

be

a

Finance

Department

(see

the

revised

NBMC

Chapter

2.12 (Administrative

Departments)),

and

indeed,

Ordinance

No.

2025-37

went

to

great

lengths

to

eliminate

all

references

to

the

Finance

Department

in

the

Municipal

Code.

I am also unable to correlate the positions listed under the new Municipal Operations Department

with

the

list

of

positions

provided

in

Attachment

B

to

the

present

agenda

Item

3. For

example,

I

do

not

see

a

“Deputy

Director

of

Municipal

Operations”

or

the

various

“Manager”

positions

listed

in

Attachment

B.

It is also unclear to me what has happened to the City’s Risk Manager position, which has moved

from

the

former

Human

Resources

Department

to

the

City

Attorney’s

Office.

I

am

guessing

it

was

formerly

a

position

in

the

“Human

Resources

Manager”

category,

but

I

don’t

see

any

new

“Manager”

positions

being

added

to

the

City

Attorney’s

Office.

Item 6. Amendment to On-Call Services Agreement with Vortex Services,

LLC,

for

Pipe

Lining

Services
The staff report indicates the entire funding anticipated to be needed for a five-year contract has been

exhausted

in

half

the

time,

so

an

equal

allotment

is

needed

for

the

final

two-and-a-half

years.

Why

was

the

original

estimate

so

far

off?
It might also be noted that at the time of the original Council approval of contract C-8558-2 as part of Item 10 on June 13, 2023, a separate $250,000 contract (C-9337-1) for the same on-call services was approved with a different vendor (Southwest Pipeline and Trenchless Corp.). This is

not

mentioned

in

the

staff

report.

What

is

the

status

of

that

other

contract?

Is

it

also

over

budget?

Item 9. Amendment to Landscape Services Agreement for Medians and

Roadsides

with

Brightview

Landscape

Services,

Inc.

(Contract

No.

8651-1)
This contract for a total value of a little over $21 million is quite large. Does the City have any plan

to

evaluate

the

possible

advantages

of

“insourcing”

the

bulk

of

these

services

and

using

contractors

only

to

provide

workload

flexibility?

358
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 8 of 10 Item 10. Corporation Yard, Utility Yard and Oilfield Gate Rehabilitation –

Notice

of

Completion

for

Contract

No.

9749-1
The staff report is a bit confusing in that only the Corporation Yard, Utility Yard and Oilfield are mentioned

in

the

title,

yet

the

body

of

the

report

mentions

the

contract

also

rehabilitated

a

gate

at

the

Big

Canyon

Reservoir.

This

was

apparently

not

a

last-minute

add-on,

as

the

same
discrepancy between title and body existed when the contract was awarded as Item 5 on April 15, 2025 (which has been archived as presented, with an unrelated and erroneous project location

map),

Item 11. Accept a Restricted Donation from the Newport Beach Police Foundation

and

Approve

Purchase

of

New

Patrol

Rifles
The generosity of the Newport Beach Police Foundation is appreciated, but iIs 120 the total number

of

patrol

officers

and

sergeants

or

the

number

deployed

at

any

one

time?
It seems reasonable to have a rifle available in each patrol vehicle. But if there are fewer than 120

vehicles,

it

is

a

bit

hard

to

envision

a

situation

in

which

120

assault

rifles

would

be

needed

at

one

time.

Item 14. Authorizing Receipt of Services Under the Regional Early Action

Planning

(REAP)

2.0 Program

for

Housing

Element

Implementation
I don’t know how much dues Newport Beach pays to be a member of OCCOG, but if I understand

the

staff

report

OCCOG

is

offering,

at

no

additional

cost

to

the

City,

to

assist

with
completing “Action 4H” promised in our 6th Cycle General Plan Housing Element. That sounds like a good deal for us, but setting aside that the Housing Element promised Action 4H

would

be

completed

within

12 months

of

its

adoption

on

September

13,

2022

(which

would

mean

we

are

already

a

couple

of

years

beyond

the

original

deadline),

it

is

not

clear

how

the

new

deadline

of

completing

this

sub-task

by

June

30,

2026,

can

be

accomplished.

As I read the timeline presented on page 263 and 264 of the electronic agenda packet, the consultant to be employed by OCCOG proposes to complete their work a month early (in May 2026),

but

to

accomplish

that,

they

would

have

to

have

completed

by

December

the

3 months

it

takes

to

prepare

a

draft

Mixed-Use

Zoning

Evaluation

Report.

Since

they

have

presumably

not

yet

even

begun

work

on

that

report,

and

it

is

already

January,

is

a

May

completion

date

still

reasonable?
Regardless of the deadline, the need to understand the viability of mixed use zoning seems especially

urgent

in

view

of

the

recently

published

California

Court

of

Appeals

opinion

in

the
case of New Commune DTLA, LLC et al. v. City of Redondo Beach et al. , 115 Cal.App.5th 111 (2025). As I understand it, the court found that despite certifications by HCD, Housing Elements that,

like

Newport

Beach’s,

merely

provide

an

opportunity

to

construct

housing

are

not

compliant

with

state

law.

To

be

compliant,

cities

have

to

actually

rezone

properties

so

that

when

and

if

they

redevelop,

they

will

be

required

to

add

housing.

In

particular,

a

city

cannot

rely

on

more

than

359
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 9 of 10 50% of its lower-income unit RHNA requirement to be accommodated on non-vacant sites unless

those

sites,

if

they

were

to

redevelop,

are

required

to

devote

at

least

50%

of

the

floor

area

to

residential

development.

Item 15. Grants and Donations Report for the Quarter Ending December

31,

2025

It is interesting to know the City received an Emergency Management Performance Grant of $12,901

from

FEMA.

It

would

be

even

more

interesting

to

know

what

Emergency

Management

it

was

for.

Item 17. Confirmation of Nominations to Fill Two (2) Unscheduled Vacancies

on

the

Water

Quality/Coastal

Tidelands

Committee
The City’s Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee is one of only two Newport Beach standing

Boards,

Commissions

and

Committees

that

I

can

think

of

(the

other

being

the

Aviation

Committee)

that

have

a

small,

but

devoted,

citizen

audience

sufficiently

interested

that

they

would

seemingly

attend

regardless

of

the

topics

on

a

particular

agenda.

It is not clear from the staff report if the nominations committee interviewed the nine applicants.

If

they

did,

I

would

be

curious

to

know

if

they

asked

whether

the

applicants

had

ever

bothered

to

attend

a

meeting

of

the

committee?
Given all four nominees’ professed interest in the committee’s work, I am straining to recall seeing

any

of

them

at

one.

Item 18. Professional Services Agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates,

Inc.

for

Preparation

of

the

Airport

Area

Specific

Plan

(PA2025-0035)
It seems odd that while the staff report goes to some length to describe the multi-step vendor selection

process,

it

does

not

provide

the

scores

obtained

in

any

of

those

steps,

but

only

an

overall

score.

My comments on Item 14, above, mention a recently published California Court of Appeals opinion in the case of New Commune DTLA, LLC et al. v. City of Redondo Beach et al. , 115 Cal.App.5th 111 (2025). The City of Redondo Beach has petitioned the California Supreme Court to review that opinion, and a decision on that is expected by February 18. However, unless

accepted

for

review

and

overturned,

this

opinion

would

profoundly

alter

the

City’s

housing

plans.

Instead

of

having

a

wide

variety

of

sites

in

the

Airport

Area

on

which

housing

is

an

option,

the

City

would

have

to

rezone

specific

properties

to

require

housing

to

be

built

on

them

when

they

redevelop

(and

with

a

reasonable

expectation

that

they

will

redevelop).

It is not clear to me how that eventuality would affect this task. Might it be premature to contract for

a

specific

plan

before

it

is

known

if

rezoning

will

be

required?

360
January 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 10 of 10 Item 19. Sculpture Exhibition in Civic Center Park - Phase X Given the wide variation in artistic tastes, I applaud the Council and the Arts Commission’s continuing

commitment

to

allowing

the

public

to

decide

on

at

least

the

10 primary

selections.

That said, the selection process remains imperfect. The 30 choices submitted for public review (which can be seen in a handout to the Commission’s December 11, 2025, meeting) were winnowed from a list of 79 submissions (which can be seen in an earlier handout to the Commission’s October 9, 2025, meeting). Since the Commissioners themselves did not agree on

the

merit

of

most

of

the

submissions,

some

of

each

individual

Commissioner’s

top

choices

did

not

make

it

into

the

public

poll.

Had

they

been

included,

it

is

quite

possible

they

would

have

been

among

the

public’s

top

10,

just

as

it

is

likely

that

if

a

different

set

of

230

residents

had

been

polled,

their

top

10 would

have

been

different

from

the

top

10 of

those

who

did

vote.

It is not obvious how to improve the process, but its imperfection should be recognized.

Written Comments Received on Agenda and Non-Agenda Items after Agenda

Posting

I do not know why, but pages 351 through 360 of the 360-page electronic agenda packet for the present meeting, which I downloaded on January 8, 2026, and which I am basing these comments on, consist of written comments I submitted on December 8, 2025, in advance of the December 9, 2025, City Council meeting, and refer to that agenda. My written comments regarding

the

January

13,

2026,

agenda

items

are

those

provided

above.

361
For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in

Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.

Get Adobe Reader Now!
362