Agenda packet — Newport Beach City Council, October 13, 2026 (part 4 of 4)

516
KENN ETH J. CATANZARITEATTORNEY AT LAW
Direct Dial:
(714) 678-2100
Via Email Only:

City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach CA, 92660

CATANZARITE LAW CORPORATION
Attorneys & Counselors at Law
2331 West Li ncoln Aven ue
Anaheim, Ca lifornia 92801
(714) 520-5544
Facsimile: (714) 520-0680
September 16, 2026
[email protected]
E-Mail Address:

[email protected]
Direct Fax:
(714) 399-0577
Re: Planning Commission Meeting September 17, 2026 - Agenda Item No. 4 - Five Crowns Restaurant/ PA2023-0202 / Proposed Resolution No.

PC2026-027 - Limited Objection and Conditional Non-Opposition; Request for Void Ab Initio / No-Baseline Clarification re Pending CUP / PA2025-0208 Dear Chair Salene, Members of the Planning Commission, City Staff, and City Attorney's Office:

Kenneth J. Catanzarite and Kim E. Catanzarite submit this limited objection and conditional non-opposition to Agenda Item No. 4 concerning Five Crowns Restaurant, PA2023-0202, the surrendered Limited Term Permit, City Council Resolution No. 2025-18, and proposed Resolution No. PC2026-027.

Petitioners do not object to the Planning Commission confirming that PA2023-0202 is no longer in effect, has not been in effect since surrender, and cannot be invoked by Five Crowns, Lawry's, FVP II, the City, or any other person in connection with any future discretionary approval or entitlement.

Petitioners support that purpose.

Petitioners object, however, to any resolution, staff report, CEQA finding, or subsequent City position that leaves room for P A2023-0202, Resolution No. 2025-18, or operations conducted under the Temporary Permit to be used directly or indirectly as a CEQA baseline, parking baseline, traffic baseline, noise baseline, lighting baseline, operational baseline, vested-rights theory, lawful-existing-use determination, or evidence of lawful ongoing or prior operation in connection with the pending new CUP / Use Permit Amendment application, P A2025-0208, or any other past or future approval.

The pending CUP / P A2025-0208 proceeding is the central issue. The City cannot take the position in litigation that P A2023-0202 is moot because it was surrendered, while simultaneously allowing the same smTendered temporary patio operation to become the baseline for the pending CUP / PA2025-0208.

Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 9 of 16 ends

517
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
September 16, 2026
Page No. 2
I. Petitioners Conditionally Support the Stated Purpose of Resolution No. PC2026-027 The Planning Commission staff report states that Ryan Wilson of Lawry's Restaurants Inc. surrendered P A2023-0202, and that the purpose of the present action is to confirm that P A2023-0202 has not been in force and effect since surrender and cannot be invoked in connection with any further discretionary approvals or entitlements requested by the Applicant.

Petitioners support that stated objective.

If P A2023-0202 was surrendered, then it no longer provides legal authority. If Resolution No. 2025-18 served only as the vehicle for approving P A2023-0202, then Resolution No. 2025-18 likewise has no independent legal utility after surrender of P A2023-0202.

Petitioners further agree that P A2023-0202 and Resolution No. 2025-18 should not be relied upon or invoked in connection with any future discretionary approval, including the pending CUP / P A2025-0208, any use permit amendment, coastal development permit, parking waiver, traffic analysis, CEQA determination, sound/noise analysis, lighting analysis, operational finding, or entitlement concerning Five Crowns.

II. The Resolution Should State PA2023-0202 and Resolution No. 2025-18 Are Void Ab Initio, or at Minimum Void and Without Legal Effect for Any Future Baseline or Entitlement Purpose
Petitioners' writ challenge contends that P A2023-0202 should never have been issued as a limited-term or temporary permit because the expanded patio, live entertainment, amplified sound, private events, parking impacts, noise impacts, lighting impacts, and related operations required a proper use permit amendment, CEQA review, parking analysis, noise analysis, and enforceable mitigation. Petitioners therefore do not agree that P A2023-0202 was valid until surrender. Petitioners contend it was invalid from inception.

For that reason, the resolution should not merely say that PA2023-0202 is no longer in effect as of the surrender date. If the City intends to use this Planning Commission action to resolve or moot the pending writ issues, the City must go further and make clear that P A2023-0202 and Resolution No. 2025-18 are void ab initio, or at minimum void and without legal force or effect for any future entitlement, baseline, CEQA, parking, traffic, noise, lighting, operational, existing-use, vested-rights, or evidentiary purpose.

The practical clarification is simple: for all future purposes, including P A2025-0208, P A2023-0202 must be treated as though it never conferred any lawful entitlement, vested right, baseline, approval, lawful existing use, or evidence of lawful ongoing operation.

II
Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 10 of 16 ends

518
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
September 16, 2026
Page No. 3
III. The Pending CUP / P A2025-0208 Is the Baseline Problem The City and Five Crowns are presently pursuing or processing the pending CUP/ Use Permit Amendment application, PA2025-0208. That application seeks to address, retain, formalize, or approve outdoor patio/courtyard operations, private events, live entertainment, parking, and related operational matters at Five Crowns.

That pending CUP proceeding is precisely why this resolution must be clear.

Petitioners are concerned that the City and Five Crowns will contend that P A2023-0202 is moot for purposes of Petitioners' writ challenge, but then use the same Temporary Permit operation as the "existing condition" or factual baseline for the pending CUP/ PA2025-0208.

That cannot be permitted.

If PA2023-0202 is surrendered, void, no longer in force, and incapable of being invoked for future approvals, then it cannot be revived indirectly as the CEQA baseline, parking baseline, traffic baseline, noise baseline, lighting baseline, operational baseline, or evidence of lawful existing use for PA2025-0208.

The lawful baseline for P A2025-0208 is UP 1822 and any other presently valid entitlement, not PA2023-0202, not Resolution No. 2025-18, not the prior Emergency Temporary Use Permit, and not post-surrender SEBRSS/bundled-event permits that Petitioners have separately challenged.

UP 1822 is the operative use permit. Petitioners contend UP 1822 limits the outdoor patio to 348 square feet and 24 outdoor patrons and does not authorize the expanded patio, full courtyard, live entertainment, amplified sound, private events, recurring weddings/receptions, lighting impacts, parking/valet impacts, or event-venue operations now being pursued through P A2025-0208 and other City mechanisms.

IV. Petitioners Object to Any Baseline Loophole
The City and Five Crowns appear to be attempting to preserve room to argue later that, although P A2023-0202 is no longer legally effective, the patio operations conducted under PA2023-0202 may still be used as "existing conditions" or as the factual baseline for P A2025-0208.

Petitioners object to that position.

The City cannot moot the Temporary Permit in litigation and then revive the surrendered Temporary Permit condition as the baseline for the pending CUP.

Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 11 of 16 ends

519
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
September 16, 2026
Page No. 4
Nor may the City use the surrendered Temporary Permit operation to avoid CEQA, avoid an Initial Study, avoid parking analysis from the lawful UP 1822 baseline, avoid noise analysis, avoid lighting analysis, avoid cumulative-impact review, or avoid evaluating the operational impacts of private events and live entertainment.

If the Temporary Permit is dead, it is dead for baseline purposes too. If it was unlawful from inception, it cannot become the foundation for permanent approval.

V. Requested Revisions to Resolution No. PC2026-027
Petitioners request that Resolution No. PC2026-027 be revised to add the following clarifying language:

II
PA2023-0202 and Resolution No. 2025-18 are void ab initio, or at minimum void and without legal force or effect for any future entitlement, baseline, CEQA, parking, traffic, noise, lighting, operational, existing-use, vested-rights, or evidentiary purpose. PA2023-0202 and Resolution No. 2025-18 shall be treated as having conferred no lawful continuing entitlement, no vested right, no lawful-existing-use determination, and no baseline for the pending CUP/ Use Permit Amendment application P A2025-0208 or any future discretionary approval concerning Five Crowns.

Petitioners further request the following language:

PA2023-0202, Resolution No. 2025-18, and any operations conducted under them shall not be relied upon, invoked, cited, used, or considered, directly or indirectly, as legal authority, a vested right, an entitlement, a lawful-existing-use determination, a CEQA baseline, a parking baseline, a traffic baseline, a noise baseline, a lighting baseline, an operational baseline, or evidence of lawful ongoing operation in connection with P A2025-0208 or any future discretionary approval, entitlement, permit, waiver, coastal development permit, use permit amendment, CEQA determination, parking determination, traffic analysis, noise analysis, lighting analysis, or land-use decision concerning Five Crowns.

Petitioners further request the following language:

Nothing in this Resolution determines, approves, validates, recognizes, ratifies, or authorizes any outdoor patio area, outdoor seating, outdoor patron count, private event use, live entertainment, amplified sound, lighting, valet/loading activity, parking condition, or event operation beyond that authorized by UP 1822 or any other presently valid entitlement.

Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 12 of 16 ends

520
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
September 16, 2026
Page No. 5
Petitioners further request the following language:

Nothing in this Resolution determines the merits of PA2025-0208, the pending CUP/ Use Permit Amendment application, any CEQA determination for PA2025-0208, any parking waiver, any use permit amendment, any coastal development permit, any noise or lighting violation, any nuisance issue, any SEBRSS/special-event/bundled permit issue, or any claim, defense, or remedy in pending litigation.

These revisions are necessary to prevent P A2023-0202 and Resolution No. 2025-18 from being used indirectly in P A2025-0208 for the same purpose the proposed resolution says they cannot serve directly.

VI. The Staff Report's CEQA Discussion Should Be Corrected Petitioners also object to staff report language that appears to rely on a Class 1 "Existing Facilities" rationale by describing the prior project as involving the temporary use of an approximately 1,350-square-foot outdoor dining area with an 850-square-foot tent canopy and exterior live entertainment at an existing restaurant.

That language is inappropriate for the action now before the Planning Commission.

The action now before the Planning Commission should be limited to confirming surrender, termination, and non-use of P A2023-0202 and Resolution No. 2025-18. The Planning Commission should not make any finding that validates, ratifies, approves, or re-approves the temporary 1,350-square-foot patio, live entertainment, tent canopy, temporary outdoor dining area, or operations conducted under P A2023-0202.

Most importantly, the Planning Commission should not create language that Five Crowns or the City may later cite in the pending CUP / P A2025-0208 proceeding as evidence that the 1,350-square-foot temporary patio with live entertainment is an "existing facility," "existing condition," "former use," "existing operation," or lawful baseline.

If the City's position is that this action merely confirms that P A2023-0202 is no longer in force and cannot be invoked, then the CEQA analysis should be limited to that te1mination/confirmation action. It should not contain language suggesting that the temporary patio and live-entertainment use qualifies as an existing facility or lawful baseline for P A2025-0208.

Petitioners request that the staff report and resolution be corrected to clarify that:

1. the Planning Commission is not approving, reapproving, validating, or ratifying the temporary patio or live-entertainment use;

2. the Planning Commission is not determining that the temporary patio qualifies as an existing facility for purposes of the pending CUP/ PA2025-0208; Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 13 of 16 ends

521
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
September 16, 2026
Page No. 6

3. the Planning Commission is not determining any CEQA baseline for P A2025-0208;

4. the Planning Commission is not determining any parking, traffic, noise, lighting, or operational baseline for P A2025-0208;

5. the Planning Commission is not determining that the temporary patio operation may be used as an existing-conditions baseline in any future CEQA, parking, traffic, noise, lighting, or land-use analysis.

VII. The Effective Date of Surrender Must Be Stated Accurately and Uniformly Petitioners also request that the City correct and clarify the effective date of surrender.

Counsel correspondence and City materials have referenced different surrender dates. The proposed resolution and staff report appear to use December 2, 2025. Counsel correspondence has referenced December 10, 2025.

The final resolution should state the accurate effective date and should use that date consistently. Petitioners' position is that PA2023-0202 has not been legally operative at any time after the effective surrender date stated in the final resolution and, for purposes of future approvals and baselines, should be treated as void ab initio or otherwise without legal effect.

VIII. The Resolution Should Not Be Used to Impair Pending Litigation or Petitioners' Rights
There are pending related Superior Court proceedings concerning Five Crowns, the City, the Temporary Permit, UP 1822, nuisance, enforcement, and related issues.

Petitioners reserve all rights, claims, remedies, objections, writ claims, nuisance claims, administrative claims, CEQA objections, land-use objections, and evidentiary positions.

Petitioners do not agree that adoption of Resolution No. PC2026-027, without the clarifying revisions requested above, moots all issues in the pending litigation.

If the City wants to use this Planning Commission action as a basis for a stipulation or mootness position in Superior Court, the resolution must be clear and complete. It must foreclose any later use of PA2023-0202, Resolution No. 2025-18, or operations conducted under the Temporary Permit as a baseline or evidence of lawful existing use in the pending CUP I P A2025-0208.

Absent the requested clarifying language, Petitioners will object to any contention that the resolution moots Petitioners' writ claims or eliminates the need for judicial relief.

II
II
II
Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 14 of 16 ends

522
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
September 16, 2026
Page No. 7
IX. P A2025-0208 Must Be Evaluated Independently Under the Correct Baseline The proposed resolution cannot be used to sanitize PA2025-0208.

P A2025-0208 must be evaluated independently under the governing law, including UP 1822, Title 20, Title 21, CEQA, parking requirements, traffic requirements, Chapter 10.26, Chapter 10.28, lighting requirements, nuisance law, and all applicable standards.

For PA2025-0208, the City may not use PA2023-0202, Resolution No. 2025-18, or the temporary patio operations conducted under them as the lawful existing baseline. If P A2023-0202 is void, surrendered, and of no further force and effect, then the City must evaluate P A2025-0208 against UP 1822 and presently valid legal entitlements, not against the surrendered temporary patio condition.

This is not a technical point. It affects every future finding for P A2025-0208, including:
• CEQA baseline;
• Class 1 exemption analysis;
• common-sense exemption analysis;
• Initial Study requirement;
• parking waiver analysis;
• traffic and valet analysis;
• noise analysis;
• lighting analysis;
• live entertainment findings;
• private event impacts;
• nuisance findings;
• compatibility with surrounding residential uses;
• consistency with UP 1822.

X. Petitioners Request Inclusion in the Record
Petitioners request that this limited objection be:

1. distributed to all Planning Commissioners before the September 17, 2026 hearing;

2. included in the administrative record for Agenda Item No. 4;

3. included in the P A2023-0202 file;

4. included in the P A2025-0208 I pending CUP file;

5. included in any City Attorney file or litigation file concerning Catanzarite v. City of Newport Beach and related Five Crowns matters;

6. included in any future administrative record concerning Five Crowns, UP 1822, PA2025-0208, the pending CUP I Use Permit Amendment application, SEBRSS permits, bundled-event pe1mits, special-event permits, parking, CEQA, noise, lighting, or nuisance issues.

II
II
Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 15 of 16 ends

523
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
September 16, 2026

Page 8 ends

XI. Conditional Non-Opposition and Reservation of Rights Petitioners conditionally do not oppose Resolution No. PC2026-027 if it is revised to make clear that PA2023-0202, Resolution No. 2025-18, and operations conducted under them are void ab initio, or at minimum void and without legal force or effect for any future baseline or entitlement purpose, and cannot be used directly or indirectly as any future baseline or evidence of lawful existing use, including in the pending CUP / PA2025-0208.

If the Planning Commission adopts the resolution without the requested clarifying language, Petitioners object and reserve all rights to argue that the resolution is incomplete, ambiguous, and insufficient to moot the pending writ issues or prevent use of the surrendered Temporary Permit as an improper baseline for P A2025-0208.

Petitioners also reserve all rights to appeal, seek call for review, supplement the Superior Court record, oppose any mootness stipulation that lacks adequate protections, and pursue all remedies necessary to prevent the surrendered Temporary Permit from being used to support P A2025-0208 or any future approval.

Very truly yours,
Kenneth J. Catanzarite
Catanzarite - Five Crowns - Planning Commission 9/17/26 Agenda Item 4

Page 16 of 16 ends

524

NEWPORT BEACH
City Council Staff Report

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

CITY OF
October 13, 2026
Agenda Item No. 17
ABSTRACT:

The property owner of 2700 Cliff Drive is proposing a new residential development with a three-car garage. The property abuts a 15-foot-wide alley along its northeasterly side and Riverside Avenue along its southeasterly side. The applicant is requesting that the City Council waive City Council Policy L-2 - Driveway Approaches to allow vehicular access to the proposed garage from Riverside Avenue rather than from the abutting alley.

The applicant's concept plans depict two alternatives. Option A provides a driveway from Riverside Avenue and option B relocates garage access to the alley. Because the submitted plans demonstrate that alley access can be physically incorporated into the project, and because street access would be inconsistent with the purpose and requirements of City Council Policy L-2, staff does not support the requested waiver.

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; b) Adopt Resolution No. 2026-92, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Denying a Request to Waive City Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) to Allow Vehicular Access for a Single-Unit Dwelling Located at 2700 Cliff Drive; or,
c) Alternatively, adopt A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Waiving City Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) to Allow Vehicular Access for a Single-Unit Dwelling located at from at 2700 Cliff Drive.

TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: David A. Webb, Public Works Director - 949-644-3311, [email protected]
PREPARED BY: Josh McDonald, Principal Civil Engineer - 949-644-3326, [email protected]
TITLE:

Resolution No. 2026–92: Denying a Request to Waive City Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) to Allow Vehicular Access for a Single-Unit Dwelling Located at 2700 Cliff Drive
525
Resolution No. 2026–92, Denying a Request to Waive City Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) to Allow Vehicular Access for a Single-Unit Dwelling Located at 2700 Cliff Drive
October 13, 2026

Page 2 ends

DISCUSSION:

The property located at 2700 Cliff Drive fronts Cliff Drive and Riverside Avenue, with a 15-foot-wide alley along the northeasterly property line. The property was recently purchased, and the current owner intends to demolish the existing improvements and redevelop the site. The existing property has experienced ongoing issues associated with the slope and retaining improvements along the Riverside Avenue frontage, which have resulted in multiple Code Enforcement cases. Following the recent acquisition of the property, the owner is seeking to move forward expeditiously with demolition and redevelopment.

As part of the proposed redevelopment, the applicant is requesting relief from City Council Policy L-2 to allow vehicular access to a proposed three-car garage on Riverside Avenue rather than from the abutting alley. The applicant previously requested administrative relief from Policy L-2 based primarily on the physical constraints of the existing alley, including its width and grade. After reviewing the request and site conditions and seeing that the existing home is accessed off the alley the Public Works Director determined that the circumstances did not constitute sufficient hardship to warrant administrative relief.

Pursuant to City Council Policy L-2, the applicant is now requesting that the City Council grant relief from application of the policy.

City Council Policy L-2 is intended to minimize the number and width of driveway openings to preserve on-street parking and reduce points of traffic conflict. Consistent with those objectives, the policy generally requires new residential development that abuts an alley to take vehicular access from the alley. City Council Policy L-2 allows the Public Works Director to approve minor dimensional variances where practical difficulties or hardships may result from strict application of the policy or where existing utilities that cannot be removed or relocated prevent alley access.

The applicant contends that the approximately 15-foot-wide alley, together with the existing grades and limited maneuvering area, makes alley access impractical for the proposed development. To illustrate the requested configuration and an alley-access alternative, the applicant submitted two conceptual site plans (Attachment E). Option A, which reflects the applicant's preferred design, provides access to the proposed threecar garage directly from Riverside Avenue. The proposed driveway would cross the public sidewalk and the on-street parking area shown along the Riverside Avenue frontage. The plan also identifies an existing fire hydrant near the easterly end of the frontage. Option B provides access to the proposed garage from the alley. Under the alley-access alternative, the garage is oriented perpendicular to the alley with a 5-foot setback at the garage frontage, similar to the next-door neighbor at 2704 Cliff Drive. The applicant's exhibits identify an approximately 25% driveway approach, an approximately 11% alley slope adjacent to the garage, and an approximately 14% slope farther south near Riverside Avenue.

Staff recognizes that the alley width, grade and garage configuration create constraints that must be considered in the design. However, based on the information submitted to 526
Resolution No. 2026–92, Denying a Request to Waive City Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) to Allow Vehicular Access for a Single-Unit Dwelling Located at 2700 Cliff Drive
October 13, 2026

Page 3 ends

date, staff does not believe those conditions establish the alley access infeasible or that relief from City Council Policy L-2 is warranted. The applicant's Option B demonstrates that the proposed project can be configured with a three-car garage taking access from the alley. The final configuration may require additional design refinement to address driveway grades and transitions, vehicle maneuvering, drainage and other applicable City standards, but those design considerations can be addressed through project and permit review.

The circumstances are also distinguishable from prior City Council Policy L-2 waivers considered by the City Council. In 2025, the City Council approved a waiver for 3601 Lake Avenue where an above-ground power pole physically restricted alley access. Relocating the pole would have required extensive utility work affecting additional facilities and neighboring properties. The project also retained an existing street curb opening, did not result in the loss of on-street parking, and provided alley access to the extent feasible.

Similarly, the 2020 request at 400 40th Street involved a corner lot where the proposed street frontage was already red-curbed, so the additional driveway did not remove an existing on-street parking space. Staff supported that request based on the particular site and parking conditions.

Those circumstances are not present at 2700 Cliff Drive. Here, the applicant's plans show an alley-access alternative, and the proposed Riverside Avenue driveway would introduce a new curb opening along a frontage where on-street parking is otherwise available. The driveway would also create an additional vehicle crossing of the public sidewalk and another point of conflict along Riverside Avenue. These effects are directly related to the purposes of City Council Policy L-2, which seeks to preserve on-street parking and minimize driveway-related traffic conflicts where alley access is available.

Based on the information provided, staff does not find that the site's alley width, grades or proposed garage configuration creates a practical difficulty or hardship sufficient to justify departing from City Council Policy L-2. Staff therefore recommends that the City Council deny the requested waiver and require vehicular access for the proposed development to be taken from the alley.

In the alternative, the City Council can waive City Council Policy L-2 and approve the vehicular access from Riverside Drive.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact related to this item.

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 527
Resolution No. 2026–92, Denying a Request to Waive City Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) to Allow Vehicular Access for a Single-Unit Dwelling Located at 2700 Cliff Drive
October 13, 2026

Page 4 ends

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). Notice of this public hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights-of-way and waterways), including the applicant, and posted on the subject property at least 10 days before the scheduled hearing, consistent with the provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.

Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the City website.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A – Resolution
Attachment B – Alternative Resolution
Attachment C – City Council Policy L-2 - Driveway Approaches Attachment D – Applicant's Waiver Request Letter
Attachment E – 2700 Cliff Drive Project Plans (Options A and B) Attachment F – Site/Parking Photographs
528
Attachment A
Resolution
529
RESOLUTION NO. 2026- __

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A
REQUEST TO WAIVE CITY COUNCIL POLICY L-2
(DRIVEWAY APPROACHES) TO ALLOW VEHICULAR

ACCESS FOR A SINGLE-UNIT DWELLING LOCATED
AT 2700 CLIFF DRIVE
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City Charter, of the City of Newport Beach (“City”), vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the City Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, the City is governed, in part, by its Charter, the Newport Beach Municipal Code (“NBMC”), and adopted City Council Policies; WHEREAS, Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) (“Council Policy L-2”), which sets requirements for driveways serving residential zones, prohibits the retention of curb openings for new developments on residential lots which abut an alley with limited exceptions;
WHEREAS, Council Policy L-2 makes an exception for corner lots to retain or relocate existing curb openings when one additional covered, non-tandem, off-street parking space beyond the requirements of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is provided onsite (“Additional Parking Space”) and no loss of on-street parking is proposed;
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to demolish the existing single family residence and accessory structures and construct a new single family residence at the property located at 2700 Cliff Drive, and legally described as Lot 5, Block 24 of First Addition to Newport Heights (“Property”);
WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed an application requesting a waiver of Council Policy L-2 to permit the proposed single family residence to have vehicular access to its proposed garage from Riverside Avenue rather than from the abutting alley (“Project”); WHEREAS, this Council Policy L-2 waiver request can only be approved by the City Council;
530
Resolution No. 2026-

Page 2 of 4 ends

WHEREAS, the Property is designated as Single Unit Residential Detached (RSD) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan ("General Plan") Land Use Element and is located within the Single-Unit Residential (R-1) Zoning District; WHEREAS, the Property is a corner lot bounded by Riverside Avenue, an approximately fifteen foot wide alley, and residential properties comprising the 2700 block of Cliff Avenue;
WHEREAS, the Property has experienced ongoing issues associated with the slope and retaining improvements along the Cliff Drive and Riverside Avenue frontage, which have prompted Code Enforcement to take action and resulted in an open codeenforcement case; WHEREAS, the Applicant contends that the dimensions of the alley, together with the existing grades and limited maneuvering area, makes alley access impractical for the proposed development;
WHEREAS, based on the application information submitted to date, Public Works department staff does not find that the identified conditions establish that alley access is infeasible or otherwise warrant relief from Policy L-2; WHEREAS, further, Public Works staff does not find that the alley width or grade, or the proposed garage configuration, creates a practical difficulty or hardship sufficient to justify departure from Council Policy L-2;
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby denies the request to waive City Council Policy L-2 and finds vehicular access for the proposed development will continue to be taken from the alley; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 13, 2026, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the City Council at this hearing.

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

Section 1: The City Council does hereby deny Applicant's request to waive City Council Policy L-2.
531
Resolution No. 2026-

Page 3 of 4 ends

Section 2: The City Council does hereby find that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 15303 (Class 3 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 because it has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment. The exceptions to this categorical exemption under Section 15300.2 are not applicable.

Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.

Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
532
Resolution No. 2026-

Page 4 of 4 ends

Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.

ADOPTED this 13th day of October, 2026.

ATTEST:

Lena Shumway
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Aaron C. Harp
City Attorney
Lauren Kleiman
Mayor
533
Attachment B
Alternative Resolution
534
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, WAIVING CITY
COUNCIL POLICY L-2 (DRIVEWAY APPROACHES) TO

ALLOW VEHICULAR ACCESS FOR A SINGLE-UNIT
DWELLING LOCATED AT 2700 CLIFF DRIVE
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City Charter, of the City of Newport Beach ("City"), vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the City Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers, and privileges or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, the City is governed, in part, by its Charter, the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC"), and adopted City Council Policies; WHEREAS, Council Policy L-2 (Driveway Approaches) ("Council Policy L-2"), which sets requirements for driveways serving residential zones, prohibits the retention of curb openings for new developments on residential lots which abut an alley with limited exceptions;
WHEREAS, Council Policy L-2 has a general exception for corner lots to retain or relocate existing curb openings when one additional covered, non-tandem, off-street parking space beyond the requirements of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is provided onsite ("Additional Parking Space") and no loss of on-street parking is proposed;
WHEREAS, the Applicant proposes to demolish the existing single family residence and accessory structures and construct a new single family residence at the property located at 2700 Cliff Drive, and legally described as Lot 5, Block 24 of First Addition to Newport Heights ("Property");
WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed an application requesting a waiver of Council Policy L-2 to permit the proposed single family residence to have vehicular access to its proposed garage from Riverside Avenue rather than from the abutting alley ("Project"); WHEREAS, this Council Policy L-2 waiver request can only be approved by the City Council;
535
Resolution No. 2026-

Page 2 of 4 ends

WHEREAS, the Property is designated as Single Unit Residential Detached (RSD) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan ("General Plan") Land Use Element and is located within the Single-Unit Residential (R-1) Zoning District; WHEREAS, the Property is a corner lot bounded by Riverside Avenue, an approximately fifteen foot wide alley, and residential properties comprising the 2700 block of Cliff Avenue;
WHEREAS, the Property has experienced ongoing issues associated with the slope and retaining improvements along the Cliff Drive and Riverside Avenue frontage, which have prompted Code Enforcement to take action and resulted in an open codeenforcement case; WHEREAS, the Applicant contends that the dimensions of the alley, together with the existing grades and limited maneuvering area, makes alley access impractical for the proposed development;
WHEREAS, based on the 1evidence presented at the public hearing, the City Council finds that the dimensions and grade of the alley, together with the limited maneuvering area associated with the proposed garage configuration, warrant relief from Council Policy L-2 for the Property;
WHEREAS, in addition to the listed exception in Council Policy L-2, the City Council has discretion to administer and waive policies contained in the Council Policy Manual;
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to waive Council Policy L-2 for the Property to allow vehicular access to the proposed garage from Riverside Avenue; WHEREAS, the City Council hereby approves the request to waive Council Policy L-2 to allow vehicular access for the proposed development from Riverside Avenue rather than from the abutting alley; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on October 13, 2026, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by, the City Council at this hearing. 536
Resolution No. 2026-

Page 3 of 4 ends

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

Section 1: The City Council does hereby waive City Council Policy L-2 for the Property to allow vehicular access to the proposed garage from Riverside Avenue rather than from the abutting alley. This waiver applies only to the driveway-access requirement addressed by this resolution and does not constitute approval of the proposed residential development or any other entitlement or permit required for redevelopment of the Property.

Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.

Page 4 of 4 ends

Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.

ADOPTED this 13th day of October, 2026.

ATTEST:

Lena Shumway
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY TTORNEY'S OFFICE
Aaron C. Harp
City Attorney
Lauren Kleiman
Mayor
538
Attachment C
City Council Policy L-2 - Driveway Approaches
539
L-2
1 DRIVEWAY APPROACHES
General
A. An encroachment permit shall be required prior to any driveway construction within the street right-of-way. All construction shall conform with the Standard Plans and Specifications of the City of Newport Beach, which may be amended from time-to-time. Brick, textured concrete or flat stone surfacing may be used subject to Public Works Department approval. Such brick, textured concrete or flat stone surfacing may not be used on Bayside Drive.

B. The number and width of driveway openings shall be kept to a minimum allowed by City standards so as to preserve on-street parking and to reduce the points of traffic conflict.

C. The term “Curb Opening“ shall mean the total width of the approach including the slope distances on the curb. The term ”Approach Bottom“ shall mean the total width of the approach less the slope distances on the curbs.

D. Curb openings shall not be constructed closer than five (5) feet to the beginning of the curvature of a curb return, crosswalk, fire hydrant, traffic signal/street light, utility pole/ anchor/ pedestal or trees, unless approved by the Public Works Department.

E. The entire curb opening shall be within the prolongation of the property lines except when cross easements provide for a common driveway along the mutual property line.

F. No permit shall be issued for driveways on Clubhouse Drive, Glen Drive, Balboa Island or on the ocean side of Ocean Boulevard without City Council approval.

No curb openings shall be permitted on Ocean Boulevard when access is available from an existing alley, street or improved private roadway.

G. No permit shall be issued if the driveway encroaches on a crosswalk area.

H. No permit shall be issued if the driveway construction requires the relocation of any public facility such as fire hydrants utility pole/ anchor/ pedestal, street tree, vault, vent pipes, or street lights without prior written approved of the Public Works Department and a deposit has been made to cover the cost of relocation.

The property owner shall pay all costs for the relocation of any public facilities.

J. No permit shall be issued unless the applicant agrees to remove any existing driveway opening that is or will be abandoned, and reconstruct curb, gutter and sidewalk (if applicable) to City Standards at no cost to the City. 540
L-2
2 K. Where practical, difficulties or hardships may result from the strict application of this policy, minor dimensional variances may be granted with prior written approval of the Public Works Director.

L. Nothing herein shall be construed as preventing any person from appealing to the City Council for relief from the applications of this policy.

M. No building permit shall be issued on a parcel whose access requires City Council review for an encroachment permit on public property, until said encroachment permit has been issued.

Residential Zones and Residential Uses - Special Requirements A. The width of the driveway approach bottom shall not exceed twenty (20) feet except when the driveway is to serve an enclosed three (3) or four (4) car garage, in which case the driveway approach bottom may be increased to twenty-five (25) feet or thirty-two (32) feet, respectively.

B. One (1) additional curb opening may be permitted to a single parcel subject to the following conditions:

1. The total width for all openings shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the total frontage of the parcel; and

2. The curb openings shall be separated by at least twenty (20) feet to retain maximum street parking.

C. For new developments, proposed new street curb openings or retention of existing street curb openings shall not be permitted for residential property which abuts an alley. All vehicle access shall be from the alley.

An exception may be made in the case of corner lots where the street on which the proposed new or existing curb opening is not located on an arterial street and the street frontage is available for the full depth of the lot, subject to the one of the following conditions:

1. A new curb opening from the street shall be permitted where existing utility conditions, that cannot be removed/relocated, prevent alley access and one (1) additional covered non-tandem off-street parking space beyond code required amount is being provided. The proposed new curb opening shall be located to maximize the remaining on-street parking; or 541
L-2
3 2. An existing curb opening can be maintained or relocated when one (1) additional covered non-tandem off-street parking spaces beyond code required amount is being provided and no loss of on-street parking is proposed.

In no case shall there be more than one (1) street curb opening on a residential property that abuts an alley.

D. Driveway grades must not exceed the listed applicable maximum slope depending on application. Driveways to lowered or entrances to subterranean parking must rise above the flood level or a minimum of six (6) inches above the flow line of the street or alley, whichever is greater, before transitioning to a downward slope. Slope transitions shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in length and the change of slope cannot exceed eleven percent (11%).

Driveways providing only parking access – Fifteen percent (15%) maximum slope.

Must have access directly from garage into residence.

Driveways providing vehicle and pedestrian access – Eight percent (8%) maximum slope.

Driveways providing required parking spaces on the driveway itself – Five percent (5%) maximum slope.

Minor variations from the listed maximum slopes and slope changes may be granted by the Public Works Director when unusual site conditions are encountered.

Commercial Uses
A. The width of the driveway approach bottom shall not exceed thirty-five (35) feet.

B. The total width of all driveways shall not exceed fifty (50%) of the frontage of the parcel.

C. Commercial driveway approaches may use a curb return design with a maximum curb radius of twenty-five (25) feet and a driveway approach bottom of greater than thirty-five (35) feet if the following conditions are satisfied:

1. The driveway serves as an entrance to a parking area or structure for 200 or more vehicles.
542
L-2
4 2. The number of driveways serving the parcel are at a minimum.

D. The curb return commercial driveway approach may incorporate a divided exit and entrance if the separation structure (median island) is continued on-site in such a manner as to provide proper traffic design.

Closure of Abandoned Driveway Approaches By City
The City may close any abandoned driveway approaches at locations where two (2) or more of the following criteria exist:

A. The abandoned driveway approach is adjacent to a parcel of property where redevelopment and possible subsequent closure of the approach is not believed imminent;
B. The driveway approach is at a location where there is a shortage of available onstreet parking; C. The removal of the driveway approach is needed for safe pedestrian and/or bicycle passage;
D. The closure of the abandoned driveway approach benefits not so much to the property owner as the pedestrian and vehicular traffic in the area; E. The parcel is adjacent to and can take access from a public alley.

When in the opinion of the Public Works Department, a curb cut or abandoned driveway approach should be closed, and the adjoining property owner protests the closing, the protester shall be notified that he shall have two (2) weeks to appeal the staff decision to the City Council. That appeal must be in writing and may be filed through the mail. If an appeal is not made, the City shall proceed with the closure. If an appeal is made, a hearing shall be held by the City Council, and the decision of the Council shall be final.

History
(1966, 01/24) – L-2 - Adopted
(1968, 02/26) – L-2 – Amended
(1970, 03/09) – L-2 – Amended
(1972, 02/14) – L-2 - Reaffirmed
(1972, 07/24) – L-2 - Amended
(1977, 11/14) – L-2 – Amended
(1982, 10/12) – L-2 - Amended
543
L-2
5 (1982, 10/25) – L-2 - Amended
(1987, 07/13) – L-2 - Amended
(1989, 11/27) – L-2 - Amended
(1992, 12/14) – L-2 - Amended
(1994, 01/24) – L-2 - Amended
(1996, 02/26) – L-2 - Amended
(2001, 05/08) – L-2 - Amended
(2006, 10/10) – L-2 - Amended
(2018, 08/14) – L-2 - Amended
544
Attachment D
Applicant's Waiver Request Letter
545
Eric and Nikki Prendergast
2700 Cliff Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92263
September 18, 2026
Newport Beach City Council Members
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
RE: L-2 Waiver Request – Vehicular Access from Riverside Avenue 2700 Cliff Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92663 | APN 049-031-004 Lot 5, Map of First Edition to Newport Heights, MM 4/94 Dear Newport Beach City Council Members,
My wife and I are the new owners of 2700 Cliff Drive, and we are very much committed to a timely and successful new build. Through design review, it became clear that the existing alley width and slope are nonconforming and potentially very unsafe. For these reasons, we are requesting an L-2 Waiver from the City and believe that we have realistic, concrete evidence to back this request.

We ask that you consider the conditions below in their entirety:
- Existing alley width & non-conforming condition: The alley is currently 15 feet in width. The narrow width of the alley is due to a legal non-conforming CMU wall constructed on the property line without a 5-foot alley setback. When providing our required alley setback of 5 feet, the alley is 20 feet wide. As documented in our model, using a 17-foot-long car, we have only 3 feet in total rear clearance when exiting the garage. Please see Sheet A2. - Alley slope: If constructed in the alley, the Easterly +/-7 feet of our 3-car garage would straddle a substantial slope of +/- 11%. It is at this 11% where a 90-degree turn into the garage must be executed. Prior to, and approaching this 11% slope, the alley slope is +/- 14% on the approach from Riverside. Please see Sheet A3 Option B. - Driveway slope: As noted above, the garage straddles a slope of +/- 11% while turning 90- degrees to our apron. With a 5-foot apron, the slope transition to the garage is +/-25%. This is within the City’s minimum apron depth but well over the City of Newport Beach’s maximum slope of 11%. The slope tolerance is noted in City Council Staff Report dated April 14, 2015. Please see Sheet A5.
- Conclusion: When combining the narrow 15’ alley with a non-conforming CMU wall, +/- 11% alley slope & +/- 25% approach slope, the crossfall presents a serious and present danger to not only property but vehicle drivers. These three issues when compounded present a hazardous condition to the entry and egress of a garage off the alley. Backing into the narrow-depth alley while negotiating a +/-11% alley slope and a +/-25% driveway approach multiplies the difficulty for myself, my family or others in the surrounding neighborhood.
546
We understand that Public Works’ concern includes:
- Parking: as noted in the City Council Staff Report dated April 14, 2015, the intent is to ‘preserve public on-street parking’. We previously lived on the Newport Peninsula for (10) years, and we have owned property on Balboa Island’s Little Island. We understand parking-impacted areas, but Newport Heights is not a parking-impacted area. We believe the Public Works policy is too rigid when applied in the case of Newport Heights. Please see Exhibit A for photographs with metadata. We have documented the available parking at multiple dates and times with all photos taken within one block of 2700 Cliff Drive. - Precedence: We understand the burden of precedence, but in this case we do not feel it would set any type of precedence moving forward. Our lot is a corner lot. We have a +/- 14% sloped alley straddling our garage elevation. Our garage opening would span a slope of +/- 11%. Our drive approach would be +/- 25%. We do feel that these are unique conditions within the city.

In closing, the Riverside Avenue garage is designed with a 20-foot-deep driveway extending from the sidewalk. Vehicles will back into the parking lane – not the travel lane – and come to a complete stop before proceeding forward into traffic. The driveway will also provide off-street parking for two vehicles.

We thank you for your time and consideration and encourage any questions or concerns from Planning, Engineering, Traffic, Community Development and Public Works so that we may move forward with our Riverside garage. We look forward to successfully bringing 2700 Cliff Drive back to life and constructing a home that is representative of our neighborhood and city that we love.

Respectfully Submitted,
Eric & Nikki Prendergast
547
Attachment E
2700 Cliff Drive Project Plans (Option A and B)
548
\\
A0

SLIM DESIGN
CONSULTING LLC.

RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TEL: (310) 467-1387
[email protected]
PLANS BY : FIRAS SLIM
2700 CLIFF DR, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663, USA PRENDERGAST RESIDENCE

EXISTING GRADING PLAN
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"
LEGEND
\\\\

MONUMENTS
549
R I V E R S I D E A V E ( 6 0 ' R / W ) ℄
A L L E Y ℄
C L I F F D R ( 8 0 ' R / W)
℄
front yard
conc. swale
drain pipe

8.0' high wall
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8173 on tc

12.40' to pc
42" wall
top of slope
drain pipe
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8173 on tc

11.91' to pc
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8516 on tc

11.91' to pc

75.07' tbm
top of curb
fd lt&t tagged ls 8173
on conc. gutter

12.40' to pc
access to
public r/w
fd lt&t tagged ls 5411 on
conc. slab 2.04' to pc
proposed
pool
20' front setback
east setback line
south setback line
proposed 3-car
garage
new retaining wall
36" high
non-obstructing
5'-0"
10'-0"
5'-0"
SETBACK 15'-0" ALLEY 11'-0"
D
R I V
E
W
A
Y

EDGE OF SIDEWALK
4'-0" setback
5'-0"
SETBACK 15'-0" ALLEY
PROPOSED 3-STORY

NEW SFR
apn: 049-031-004

CONCRETE SIDE WALK
30'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0"
existing fire
hydrant
p a r k i n g l a n e
p a r k i n g
l a n e
TRAVELED WAY 11'- 0" 11'-0" CURB

TRAFFIC VISIBILIBITY
15'-0" 15'-0"
CURB
4'-0"
5'-0" setback
2'-0"
15'-0"
SECOND

FLOOR LINE

PROPERTY LINE

THIRD FLOOR LINE
A1

SLIM DESIGN
CONSULTING LLC.

RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TEL: (310) 467-1387
[email protected]
PLANS BY : FIRAS SLIM
2700 CLIFF DR, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663, USA PRENDERGAST RESIDENCE

PROPOSED SITE PLAN (OPTION A)
SCALE : 1/8 " = 1'-0"
550

A L L E Y
℄
C L I F F D R ( 8 0 ' R / W)
℄
front yard
conc. swale
drain pipe
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8173 on tc

12.40' to pc
42" wall
top of slope
drain pipe
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8173 on tc

11.91' to pc
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8516 on tc

11.91' to pc
access to
public r/w
fd lt&t tagged ls 5411 on
conc. slab 2.04' to pc
proposed
pool
20' front setback
side setback
east setback line
south setback line
36" high
new retaining wall
5'-0"
4'-0" SETBACK
5'-0"
SETBACK 15'-0"ALLEY

PROPOSED
3-CAR GARAGE
PROPOSED 3-STORY

NEW SFR
apn: 049-031-004
33'-0"
existing fire
hydrant 11'-0"
R I V E R S I D E A V E ( 6 0 ' R / W ) ℄
p a r k i n g l a n e
t r a v e l l a n e
p a r k i n g
l a n e
20'-0"
3'-0" 17'-0" CAR 14 slope

CONCRETE SIDE WALK EDGE OF SIDEWALK
11 slope
90 turn
25
driveway approach
4'-0"
2'-0"

PROPERTY LINE
SECOND

FLOOR LINE

THIRD FLOOR LINE
A2

SLIM DESIGN
CONSULTING LLC.

RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TEL: (310) 467-1387
[email protected]
PLANS BY : FIRAS SLIM
2700 CLIFF DR, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663, USA PRENDERGAST RESIDENCE

PROPOSED SITE PLAN (OPTION B)
SCALE : 1/8 " = 1'-0"
551
℄

A L L E Y
33'-0"
4'-0" SETBACK
20' front setback
front yard
C L I F F D R ( 8 0 ' R / W)
℄
STALL 3: swept path hits N garage
wall/jamb (~3.3 ft overlap)
fd lt&t tagged ls 5411 on
conc. slab 2.04' to pc
access to
public r/w

PROPOSED
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8516 on tc

11.91' to pc
south setback line
42" wall
top of slope
conc. swale
TURNING CENTER (STALL 1)
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8173 on tc

11.91' to pc
drain pipe
side setback
proposed
pool
0 5 10
GRAPHIC SCALE (derived, see note 1)
15 20'
3-CAR GARAGE
apn: 049-031-004
PROPOSED 3-STORY

RESIDENTIAL ADDITION
STALL 1: swept path hits pier
between doors (~2 ft overlap)
36" high
new retaining wall
east setback line 5'-0"
O drain pipe
fd lt&t tagged
ls 8173 on tc

12.40' to pc

C NCRETE SIDE WA LK
p a rk i n g

EDGE OF SIDEWALK
l a ne
t r a v el l a
R I V E R S I D E A V E ( 6 0 ' R / W )
SCHEMATIC SECTION THROUGH DRIVEWAY APPROACH (perpendicular to alley) - NOT TO SCALE VERTICALLY GARAGE SLAB CREST: ~25% break
+/-25% APPROACH (~4.5 ft long)
15' ALLEY (+/-11% longitudinal grade)
SAG: ~25% break
PL / alley edge
City limits: ramp slope 15% max; change of slope 11% max, 5-ft min. transitions (NBMC 20.40 / PW Std. 160L).

Proposed: ~25% ramp with ~25% breaks at both ends. AASHTO P front overhang 3 ft x 25% = ~9 in. of ramp under the bumper (sag) - more than typical car front clearance; up to ~8 in. of ground rise inside the wheelbase at the crest (high-centering).

Vertical exaggerated 3x for clarity. Ramp length ~4.5 ft per A2. Shown rising to garage; breaks are the same magnitude if it falls.

Overall length
Overall width
Wheelbase
Front overhang
Rear overhang
Min. design turning radius (outer front wheel)
Centerline turning radius (CTR)
Min. inside radius (inside rear wheel)
Outer body swept radius (front corner) - computed
Template applied at minimum radius to all three stalls (swept paths shown). Radii dimensioned on Stall 1.

Swept paths computed from the template (rear-axle kinematics), not hand-drawn. n e
℄
DESIGN VEHICLE: AASHTO 'P' (PASSENGER CAR) - STANDARD TEMPLATE Per AASHTO 'A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets' (Green Book), design vehicle dimensions 19 ft
7 ft
11 ft
3 ft
5 ft
24 ft
21 ft

14.4 ft

25.6 ft
existing fire
hydrant
p a r k i n g
l a n e
5'-0"

SETBACK
20'-0"
15'-0"ALLEY 11'-0"
25 driveway approach
3'-0" 17'-0" CAR 14 slope
11  slope
90 turn

TURNING MOVEMENT EXHIBIT - ALLEY GARAGE ENTRY (OPTION B) Design vehicle: AASHTO 'P' passenger car - 19' L x 7' W, 11' wheelbase, 3' front / 5' rear overhang, min. centerline turn radius 21', inside radius 14.4'.

Maneuver: northbound up alley from Riverside Ave (+/-14% then +/-11%), single forward left turn at minimum radius into garage. Driver assumed to hug the far (east) alley line (0.3-1 ft off) - the most favorable case available.

RESULTS (swept width needed at door line = 11.2 ft; P car is only 7 ft wide):

Stall 1 - single door, ~10.7' opening < 11.2' swept width: hits pier. NOT FEASIBLE.

Stall 2 - double door, S bay: clears pier by only ~0.5 ft, with perfect driving.

Stall 3 - double door, N bay: swept path hits N wall/jamb ~3 ft. NOT FEASIBLE.

Any correction = multi-point turn / reversing within the public alley on an 11% grade.

VERTICAL (not shown in plan): The +/-25% driveway approach exceeds the 15% max. ramp slope in NBMC 20.40, and the alley-to-approach grade break (~25%) exceeds the 11% max. change of slope (5-ft min. transitions, PW Std. 160L). The turn above must be made while the vehicle climbs onto that break at an angle on an 11% alley.

NOTES: 1. Sheet A2 is marked NTS. Scale derived from the 15.00' alley R/W and 17'-0" dimensions (~10.4 pt/ft); verify against CAD/survey. 2. Door, pier and wall locations taken from A2 linework. 3. Exhibit for discussion - recommend confirmation with AutoTURN by a licensed civil engineer.

STALL 1 swept path STALL 2 swept path STALL 3 swept path R=24' (outer front wheel)
R=14.4' (inside rear wheel)
A2a

SLIM DESIGN
CONSULTING LLC.

RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TEL: (310) 467-1387
[email protected]
PLANS BY : FIRAS SLIM
2700 CLIFF DR, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663, USA PRENDERGAST RESIDENCE

GARAGE ACCESS & VEHICLE TURNING EXHIBIT ALONG ALLEY
SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0"
552
RIVERSIDE AVE 60' R/W
3-CAR GARAGE
36" HIGH

NEW RETAINING WALL
±14% SLOPE
4'-0" SETBACK
36" HIGH NEW
RETAINING WALL 36" high
±11% SLOPE
±25% DRIVEWAY

APPROACH
CURB
2'-0" SETBACK
A3

SLIM DESIGN
CONSULTING LLC.

RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TEL: (310) 467-1387
[email protected]
PLANS BY : FIRAS SLIM
2700 CLIFF DR, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663, USA PRENDERGAST RESIDENCE

ELEVATION ALONG ALLEY
SCALE : NTS

ELEVATION ALONG RIVERSIDE AVE
SCALE : NTS

OPTION A

OPTION B
553

PARKING LANE

TRAVELED WAY
CURB

PARKING LANE
A4

SLIM DESIGN
CONSULTING LLC.

RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TEL: (310) 467-1387
[email protected]
PLANS BY : FIRAS SLIM
2700 CLIFF DR, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663, USA PRENDERGAST RESIDENCE PERSPECTIVE VIEW ALONG RIVERSIDE AVE (60 R/W)

OPTION A
554
±25% DRIVEWAY APPROACH
±14% SLOPE
±11% SLOPE
±11% SLOPE
±25% DRIVEWAY

APPROACH
±11% SLOPE
±25% DRIVEWAY

APPROACH
PERSPECTIVE VIEW ALONG 15'-0" ALLEY
A5

SLIM DESIGN
CONSULTING LLC.

RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TEL: (310) 467-1387
[email protected]
PLANS BY : FIRAS SLIM
2700 CLIFF DR, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663, USA PRENDERGAST RESIDENCE

OPTION B
555
Attachment F
Site/Parking Photographs
556
Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:09 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5217.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 1 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:09 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5216.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 2 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:09 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5215.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 3 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:09 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5214.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 4 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:09 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5213.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 5 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:08 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5212.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 6 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:08 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5211.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 7 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:08 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5210.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 8 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:08 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5209.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 9 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:08 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5207.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 10 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:07 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:25 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5197.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 11 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/18/2026 at 08:07 am
Upload Date
09/18/2026 at 02:24 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5196.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 12 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:38 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5188.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 13 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:38 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5187.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 14 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:38 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5186.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 15 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5185.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 16 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5184.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 17 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5183.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 18 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5182.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 19 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5181.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 20 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5180.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 21 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5179.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 22 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5178.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 23 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:37 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5177.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 24 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:36 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:51 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5176.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 25 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 04:36 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5175.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 26 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 11:49 am
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
Photo Sep 17 2026, 11 49 …
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 27 of 136 ends

Page 28 of 136 ends

Page 29 of 136 ends

Page 30 of 136 ends

Page 31 of 136 ends

Page 32 of 136 ends

Page 33 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 11:48 am
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
Photo Sep 17 2026, 11 48 …
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 34 of 136 ends

Page 35 of 136 ends

Page 36 of 136 ends

Page 37 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/17/2026 at 11:47 am
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
Photo Sep 17 2026, 11 47 …
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 38 of 136 ends

Page 39 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5154.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 40 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5154.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 41 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5153.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 42 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5153.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 43 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:48 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5152.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 44 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5152.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 45 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5151.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 46 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5151.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 47 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5150.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 48 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5150.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 49 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5149.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 50 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5149.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 51 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5148.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 52 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5148.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 53 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5147.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 54 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:32 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5147.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 55 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5146.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 56 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5146.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 57 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5145.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 58 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:50 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5145.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 59 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5144.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 60 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5143.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 61 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5142.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 62 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5141.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 63 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5140.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 64 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5139.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 65 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5138.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 66 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5137.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 67 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5136.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 68 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 06:31 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:49 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5135.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 69 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:58 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5130.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 70 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:58 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5129.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 71 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:57 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5128.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 72 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:57 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5127.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 73 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:56 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5126.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 74 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:56 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5125.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 75 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:56 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5124.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 76 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:56 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5123.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 77 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:56 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5122.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 78 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:56 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5121.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 79 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:55 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5120.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 80 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:55 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5119.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 81 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 04:55 pm
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5118.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 82 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:38 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5113.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 83 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5112.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 84 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5111.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 85 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5110.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 86 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5109.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 87 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5108.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 88 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5107.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 89 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5106.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 90 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/16/2026 at 07:37 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:35 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5105.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 91 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5104.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 92 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5103.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 93 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5102.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 94 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:16 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5101.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 95 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:16 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5100.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 96 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:15 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5099.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 97 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:15 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5098.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 98 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:14 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5097.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 99 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:14 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5096.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 100 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:14 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5095.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 101 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:14 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5094.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 102 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:14 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5093.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 103 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:14 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5092.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 104 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:14 pm
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:33 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5091.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 105 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5080.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 106 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5079.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 107 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5078.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 108 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5077.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 109 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5076.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 110 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5075.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 111 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5074.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 112 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5073.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 113 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:17 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:41 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5072.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 114 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:16 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5071.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 115 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:16 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5070.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 116 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/15/2026 at 07:16 am
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:42 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5069.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 117 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/14/2026 at 10:02 am
Upload Date
09/17/2026 at 05:41 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5062.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 118 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/14/2026 at 10:01 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5058.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 119 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/14/2026 at 10:01 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5057.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 120 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/14/2026 at 10:01 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5056.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 121 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/14/2026 at 10:01 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5055.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 122 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
09/14/2026 at 10:00 am
Upload Date
09/16/2026 at 01:42 pm
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_5054.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 123 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:33 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4895.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 124 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:33 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4894.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 125 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:33 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4893.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 126 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:33 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4892.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 127 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:33 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4891.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 128 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4890.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 129 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4889.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 130 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4888.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 131 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4887.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 132 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4886.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 133 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4885.jpg
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 134 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4884.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 135 of 136 ends

Photos From Daily Log
Description
Taken Date
08/27/2026 at 05:32 pm
Upload Date
09/15/2026 at 09:44 am
Uploaded By
Eric Prendergast
File Name
IMG_4883.JPG
Printed on Fri Sep 18, 2026 at 02:28 pm PDT
2700 Cliff Dr.

Page 136 of 136 ends

From: City Clerk' s Office
Sent: September 25, 2026 12: 53 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Fairway Three PA2025- 0019 — Request for Council Record, Site 353 Disclosure, and Electronic Notice
From: N Kirby Alton < webmaster@altonhome. com>
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2026 12: 53: 02 AM ( UTC- 08: 00) Pacific Time ( US & Canada) To: Hannsun, Jenny < JHannsun@newportbeachca. aov>
Cc: Dept - City Council< CityCouncil@newportbeachca. gov>; Planning Commission planningcommission@newportbeachca. gov>; City Clerk' s Office < CityClerk@newportbeachca. gov> Subject: Fairway Three PA2025- 0019 — Request for Council Record, Site 353 Disclosure, and Electronic Notice
EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

Dear Ms. Hannsun, Mayor, and Members of the City Council:

I live in the apartment community across Santa Barbara Drive from the northern edge of Newport Beach Country Club and Housing Opportunity Site 353. I will be traveling outside California through early January and cannot attend upcoming hearings in person. Please place this correspondence in the public record for Fairway Three, PA2025- 0019, and confirm receipt.

I understand that the Planning Commission has recommended a Development Agreement that would give Eagle Four Partners up to five years of vested rights to pursue up to 78 residential units. I recognize that the agreement does not yet approve construction. However, that is precisely why the City Council should have basic, measurable information before vesting the unit count and development framework.

The current materials do not clearly identify the legal boundary or gross acreage of Site 353 or of the future Fairway Three project parcel. The location has also been described publicly as both the northeastern and northwestern portion of the country -club property.

My measurement of the apparent non -golf strip between Santa Barbara Drive and the existing golf -course edge is approximately one acre. At the reported 20 -to -50 dwelling - unit -per -gross -acre range, 78 units would require at least 1. 56 gross acres at the stated maximum density.

Before acting on the Development Agreement, please publish and include in the Council record:

1. A scaled, dimensioned exhibit identifying the exact Site 353 and Fairway Three project -parcel boundaries, their gross acreage, and their relationship to Santa Barbara Drive.
693

2. The City' s written density calculation for 78 units, including the exact gross -acre denominator and whether the 20 -to -50 dwelling -units -per -gross -acre range is a binding project -level standard, a subarea average, or another type of planning metric.

3. A statement identifying whether the project will rely on a density bonus, concession, incentive, waiver, transfer of density, or other exception.

4. A clear disclosure of whether any current golf -course land —including fairway, rough, tee, cart path, drainage/ irrigation area, landscaped buffer, or other club land — will be included in the development parcel, counted toward density, altered, or removed.

5. The complete CEQA Guidelines section 15183 consistency analysis, including its project -boundary and density assumptions.

6. The DA terms that define what is vested, including the unit count, site boundary, maximum height, setbacks, parking, access, landscape buffering, and any golf -course reconfiguration.

If these materials cannot be made available before the Council hearing, I respectfully request that the Council continue the item or condition approval so that no vested development rights become effective until the boundary, acreage, density method, and any effect on existing golf -course land are publicly defined.

Please also add my email address to the electronic noticing list for every future Fairway Three and Site 353 matter, including the Development Agreement, CEQA documents, Site Development Review, tentative tract map, grading/ building permits, public hearings, design changes, amendments, extensions, and related staff reports. Please advise of the City Council hearing date, the written -comment deadline, and whether remote public comment will be available.

Thank you,
N. Kirby Alton
3433 Colony Plz
Newport Beach, CA 92660
kirbya( a altonhome. com
694
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: October 12, 2026 3:50 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Agenda Item No. 16 (October 13, 2026) — Resolution No. 2026-91 — Appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2026-027 (Five Crowns Restaurant, 3801 East Coast Highway, PA2023-0202): Appellants’ Written Response to the Staff Report and Objections...

Attachments: 261013 Appellants Resp and Obj.PDF; 261013 Stmt Kenneth Catanzarite.PDF From: Becky Phillips <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2026 3:49:03 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <[email protected]>; Dept - City Council <[email protected]>; Shumway, Lena <[email protected]>; Harp, Aaron <[email protected]>; Montoya, Jose <[email protected]>; Jurjis, Seimone <[email protected]>; Murray, John <[email protected]>; Westmoreland, Liz <[email protected]>; Ginetta Giovinco <[email protected]>; Schuchert, Nicholas J. <[email protected]>; Lee, Chloe Ann <[email protected]> Cc: Kenneth Catanzarite <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item No. 16 (October 13, 2026) — Resolution No. 2026-91 — Appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2026-027 (Five Crowns Restaurant, 3801 East Coast Highway, PA2023- 0202): Appellants’ Written Response to the Staff Report and Objections to Pro [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

To Whom it May Concern,
Pursuant to the City of Newport Beach’s Agendas & Minutes page of their website, attached please find correspondence from Mr. Catanzarite dated today, October 12, 2026, which contains written comments in advance of the City Council meeting set for tomorrow, October 13, 2026 at 4:00 p.m. Mr.

Catanzarite’s statement is also attached hereto; he asks that both be included in the record for Agenda Item No. 16.

Should you have any issues opening or viewing the attachment, please advise.

Thank you.

Very truly yours,
Becky Phillips
Executive Legal Assistant
Catanzarite Law Corporation
2331 West Lincoln Avenue
Anaheim, CA 92801
Direct Dial: (714) 678-2108
695
Direct Fax: (714) 399-0589
Office Phone: (714) 520-5544
Office Fax: (714) 520-0680
NOTICE: This E-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521, is confidential, may be legally privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please: (i) notify the sender immediately that you have received the message in error; (ii) delete the message and all copies; and (iii) do not disclose, distribute or use the message in any manner. We have taken precautions to minimize the risk of transmitting software viruses, but we advise you to carry out your own virus checks on any attachment to this message. We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses. Thank you. 696

CATANZARITE LAW CORPORATION
Attorneys & Counselors at Law
2331 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California 92801
Tel. (714) 520-5544 [ Fax (714) 520-0680
Kenneth J. Catanzarite I Direct Dial (714) 678-2100 I [email protected] October 13, 2026
Via Email - For Distribution to the City Council and Inclusion in the Record for Agenda Item No. 16
Mayor Lauren Kleiman and Members of the City Council
City of Newport Beach, c/o City Clerk Lena Shumway
100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660 [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Re: Agenda Item No. 16 (October 13, 2026) - Resolution No. 2026-91 - Appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2026-027 (Five Crowns Restaurant, 3801 East Coast Highway, PA2023-0202): Appellants' Written Response to the Staff Report and Objections to Proposed Resolution No. 2026-91; Proposed Redline (Exhibit A)
Dear Mayor Kleiman and Members of the City Council:

Appellants Kenneth J. Catanzarite and Kim E. Catanzarite submit this written response to the October 13, 2026 staff report and their objections to proposed Resolution No. 2026-91. We ask that this letter and Exhibit A be distributed to each Councilmember before the hearing and included in the record for Agenda Item No. 16. This submission is delivered at or before the public hearing, as the City's notice of hearing and Government Code section 65009, subdivision (b) contemplate, and it preserves each issue it raises.

I. SUMMARY
The parties agree on more than the staff report suggests. Five Crowns surrendered P A2023- 0202; the City accepted the surrender; P A2023-0202 is of no further force or effect; and it cannot be used to support any future approval. Appellants supported that confirmation from the outset.

The dispute is about what the City does with City Council Resolution No. 2025-18, which approved PA2023-0202 and contains extensive findings about the Five Crowns outdoor operation and its effect on the neighborhood. That resolution is the subject of Appellants' pending petition, Catanzarite v. City of Newport Beach, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2025- 01501142-CU-WM-NJC, which asks the Court to vacate it.

The Council has two legitimate choices. First, it can rescind and vacate Resolution No. 2025-18 . That is what the appeal requested, it is what the pending petition seeks, and it would 697
City Council -Agenda Item No. 16 - Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 2 ends

finally resolve the merits of that dispute. Second, if the Council declines to rescind Resolution No. 2025-18, it should leave the question of mootness to the Superior Court, where it is pending, and not adopt a "finding" on that litigation issue.

What the Council should not do is what proposed Resolution No. 2026-91 does: leave Resolution No. 2025-18 fully in place, while declaring that it "presents no live controversy" and "has no independent utility," and simultaneously re-adopting, as "true and correct" operative findings, the very characterization of the patio that Appellants appealed. That combination would not end the controversy. It would keep Resolution No. 2025-l 8's findings available while creating a record designed to defeat the pending petition. That concern is not hypothetical: the City told the Superior Court that these proceedings would resolve the pending case, and the Court continued its hearing on the City's demurrer to see the result.

II. THE STAFF REPORT MISCHARACTERIZES THE APPEAL
A. The appeal identifies specific concerns and specific relief.

The staff rep01i states that "[t]he appeal letter did not cite specific concerns." That statement is incorrect, and the City's own Attachment D shows it. The appeal form itself states the reason for appeal:
"Limited appeal seeks de novo review to correct Section I, paragraph 2' s 'existing/ to remain' characterization and to obtain City Council vacatur and set-aside of Resolution No. 2025-18 and the decision granting P A2023-0202, matching the merits relief sough[t] in the pending writ. This appeal does not adjudicate PA2025-0208. Attorneys' fees, costs, and prevailing/successfulparty issues are reserved." The attached three-page Rider, titled "Limited Appeal and Request for De Novo Review - Request to Modify Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2026-027 and to Obtain City Council Vacatur and Set-Aside of Resolution No. 2025-18 and the Decision Granting PA2023- 0202," explains each ground under separate headings and requests nine numbered items of relief.

Among them, it asks the Council to:
(1) modify Section I, paragraph 2 of PC2026-027 by striking the "existing" / "to remain" characterization (Relief No. 2);
(2) state that the Planning Commission could confirm the surrender of PA2023-0202 but lacked authority to rescind, vacate, set aside, modify, or adjudicate City Council Resolution No. 2025-18 (Relief No. 3);
(3) vacate and set aside Resolution No. 2025-18 in its entirety, including its recitals, findings, CEQA determination, and conditions (Relief No. 4), and the decision granting P A2023-0202 (Relief No. 5);
698
City Council - Agenda Item No. 16 - Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 3 ends

( 4) state that Resolution No. 2025-18 and the decision granting PA2023-0202 have no continuing force or effect and "shall not be relied upon as operative City determinations" (Relief No. 6);
(5) direct the City Clerk to annotate Resolution No. 2025-18 accordingly (Relief No. 7);
( 6) state that the Council's action does not adjudicate or approve P A2025-0208 (Relief No. 8); and
(7) preserve all attorneys' fees, costs, and prevailing-party issues in the pending proceeding (Relief No. 9).

Exhibit 1 to the appeal sets out a proposed redline of PC2026-027 and a proposed Council disposition. These are specific concerns by any measure. The record should not state otherwise.

B. The appeal does not ask the Council to decide P A2025-0208.

The staff report states that Appellants' comments "primarily relate to the pending Conditional Use Permit application (PA2025-0208)." The appeal says the opposite: it "does not ask the Council to decide the merits of P A2025-0208" (Rider, § I), and it asks the Council to state that its action "does not adjudicate or approve PA2025-0208 or any successor application" (Relief No. 8). P A2025-0208 is mentioned for one reason: it shows why an unrescinded Resolution No. 2025-18, and its findings, have continuing practical consequences. Appellants are not asking the Council to approve or deny that application. They are asking that the surrendered temporary permit's findings not be carried into it.

C. The staff report misidentifies the record.

The staff report states that Appellants' pre-hearing public comments are included in Attachment D. They are in Attachment E. Attachment Dis the appeal and its Rider. The distinction matters: the staff report treats Appellants' September 16 comments as if they were the appeal, and then treats the appeal itself as having said nothing.

D. The Council is not merely being asked to "confirm an action that has already taken place."
The staff report concludes that "[t]he City Council is being asked to confirm an action that has already taken place." The surrender took place in December 2025. Proposed Resolution No. 2026-91 does something new. It declares that the Council's own Resolution No. 2025-18 "presents no live controversy" and "has no independent utility," and it declares its recitals "true and correct" and operative. Those are new determinations about a question pending before the Superior Court, made by a public entity that is a party to that litigation, after the Court issued a tentative ruling against the City on that question and continued the hearing at the City's request to await the outcome of these proceedings. The Council is also conducting a de novo hearing, as the staff report 699
City Council -Agenda Item No. 16 Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026
Page4
itself recommends, under NBMC Chapters 20.64 and 21.64. It is not limited to confirming the Planning Commission's action and may modify it.

III. THE SUPERIOR COURT'S TENTATIVE RULING ADDRESSES THE "NO LIVE CONTROVERSY" QUESTION
In Case No. 30-2025-01501142, the City and Five Crowns demurred on the ground that the surrender of PA2023-0202 made Appellants' challenge to Resolution No. 2025-18 moot. The Superior Court issued a tentative ruling overruling both demurrers. The City then represented that these pending City proceedings would resolve the case, and the Court continued the hearing to see the result. The tentative ruling explained:
"Although it is undisputed the L TP has been surrendered, there is nothing presented showing that Resolution No. 2025-18, by which the City approved Real Parties' LTP application, has been rescinded or that the findings therein no longer have any force or effect. ... The City has not shown how surrender of the L TP renders these findings and determinations a nullity or that these findings cannot be used in later proceedings involving the same parties and properties at issue."
The tentative ruling further stated that the City "failed to show that vacatur of Resolution No. 2025-18 would have no legal or practical effect," and that, in any event, the controversy over Five Crowns' outdoor operations "is likely to recur" because PA2025-0208 is pending.

Proposed Section 2 is evidently drafted with the tentative ruling in mind. It tracks the Court's language, but it does not supply what the Court found missing:
(I) It does not rescind or vacate Resolution No. 2025-18. The resolution, its findings, its CEQA determination, and its conditions all remain in place. (2) Its non-reliance sentence is too narrow to matter. It says only that Resolution No. 2025-18 "shall not be invoked for any further discretionary approvals or entitlements that the Applicant may request." It does not reach the resolution's findings. It does not bind the City or its staff, the property owner (FPV II Partnership), or any successor. It does not reach CEQA baseline or Class I comparisons, enforcement, or any other proceeding. And "invoked" is narrower than "relied upon" or "considered."
(3) "No live controversy" is a judicial question. Whether the pending petition is moot is for the Court, which has already ruled. The Court continued its hearing to learn whether the City would take action that actually changes the facts it identified, such as rescinding Resolution No. 2025-18. A declaration by the Council, a party to that litigation and sitting as the adjudicator of Appellants' appeal, that its own resolution presents "no live controversy" does not change those facts. It only adds a litigation position to an appeal decision.
700
City Council Agenda Item No. 16 - Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 5 ends

The proposed resolution also retreats from the City's own position. At the Planning Commission, the City described the purpose of this action as confirming that the rights under P A2023-0202 are void. The September 17, 2026 minutes (Attachment C) state the item's purpose as "to confirm that the rights afforded by the prior approval are void and have not been in force and effect since it was voluntarily surrendered on December 2, 2025," and record that Deputy City Attorney Jose Montoya "stated that the purpose of the action was solely to confirm that the rights afforded under P A2023-0202 are void." Neither PC2026-027 as described in the staff report nor proposed Resolution No. 2026-91 uses that word. Each says only that P A2023-0202 is "of no further force and effect." The Council should adopt the characterization its own counsel gave the Commission: the rights afforded by P A2023-0202 are void. Exhibit A does so.

If the Council intends that Resolution No. 2025-18 truly have no utility, the direct way to accomplish that is to rescind it. If the Council is not prepared to rescind it, the Council should not declare it a nullity for litigation purposes while leaving it legally intact.

IV. THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION RE-ADOPTS THE LANGUAGE

APPELLANTS APPEALED
The first ground of the appeal is the characterization of PA2023-0202 as a permit "to allow an existing temporary outdoor dining patio to remain for a limited term." Appellants objected to "existing" and "to remain" because those words can be cited later as a finding that the approximately 1,350-square-foot expanded area was a lawful, existing use, when the controlling permanent entitlement, Use Permit No. UP 1822, authorizes approximately 348 square feet of outdoor patio, four tables, and 24 outdoor patrons.

Proposed Resolution No. 2026-91 repeats that exact characterization in its fourth recital, and its fifth recital describes the expanded area as an addition to the Restaurant's "existing outdoor dining." Section 3 then provides that "[t]he recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are incorporated into the operative part of this resolution." Adopted as drafted, the resolution would do more than leave the disputed language in a historical narrative: the City Council would affirmatively find it true and make it operative, while denying the appeal that challenged it.

The same concern applies to Attachment B. The September 17, 2026 Planning Commission staff report, now in the Council's packet, contains an Environmental Review section stating that "[t]he proposed scope of work includes the temporary use of an outdoor dining area of approximately 1,350-square-feet including an 850-square-foot tent canopy with exterior live entertainment at an existing restaurant" and that "the project qualifies under the parameters of the Class 1 exemption." Neither the Planning Commission nor proposed Resolution No. 2026-91 relies on Class l; both rely on Guidelines sections 15060(c)(2)-(3) and 15321. The Council should say expressly that it does not adopt the Class 1 discussion, so that it cannot later be cited as a determination that the temporary operation was an "existing facility" with "negligible or no expansion of use."
701
City Council Agenda Item No. 16 -Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 6 ends

V. FACTUAL MATTERS THAT SHOULD BE CORRECTED
(1) Resolution number. The ninth recital refers to Planning Commission "Resolution No. 2026-027." The resolution is No. PC2026-027.
(2) Minutes. The September 17, 2026 minutes (Attachment C) record that Mr.

Catanzarite stated UP 1822 limited the patio to "four tables, and 26 patrons." His written statement, submitted the same day, states 24 outdoor patrons (four tables at six persons per table). The record should reflect 24.
(3) Title and disposition. The appeal requested specific relief that is warranted at least in part. The resolution should not state that the appeal is denied.

VI. REQUESTED ACTION
Appellants respectfully request that the Council adopt Resolution No. 2026-91 in the form shown in Exhibit A, which:
(1) grants the appeal in part and modifies the Planning Commission's decision; (2) replaces the "existing temporary outdoor dining patio to remain" recital with a neutral description, and states that the recitals are procedural history and not findings about the lawful scope of use;
(3) confirms, in the words the City's own counsel used before the Planning Commission, that P A2023-0202 and the rights it afforded are void and of no further force or effect;
(4) rescinds and vacates Resolution No. 2025-18 in its entirety, without any determination or concession by any party about its validity when adopted; (5) provides that neither Resolution No. 2025-18, its findings, PA2023-0202, nor any operation conducted under it may be relied upon by the City, the applicant, the owner, or any successor as an entitlement, an existing or former use, or a baseline, in P A2025-0208 or any other proceeding concerning Five Crowns; (6) disclaims the Class 1 discussion in Attachment B; and (7) reserves the merits of PA2025-0208 and all claims, defenses, remedies, fees, and costs in the pending judicial proceedings.

Alternative. If the City Attorney advises that the agenda description does not permit formal rescission of Resolution No. 2025-18 at this meeting, Appellants request that the Council (a) grant the appeal in part; (b) adopt the neutral recitals and the broader non-reliance provision in Exhibit A; ( c) delete the "no live controversy" and "no independent utility" language from Section 2; and ( d) direct staff to return at the next properly noticed meeting with a resolution rescinding Resolution No. 2025-18. Appellants object to adoption of proposed Section 2 in its current form under any circumstances.
702
City Council - Agenda Item No. 16 - Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 7 ends

VII. RECORD AND RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
Appellants request that this letter and Exhibit A; the September 22, 2026 appeal, Rider, and Exhibit 1; the September 16, 2026 Limited Objection and Conditional Non-Opposition; the September 17, 2026 Prepared Statement, Attachment A, and transmittal email; Mr. Catanzarite's oral statements; the September 1, 2026 letter; and the materials incorporated in them be included in the record for Agenda Item No. 16.

Nothing in this submission waives any claim, objection, position, or remedy of Appellants, including their position in Case No. 30-2025-01501142 that the petition is not moot and their right to seek attorneys' fees, costs, and prevailing-party status in that proceeding, including under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, whether the relief they seek is obtained by Council action or by judgment.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully submitted,
Catanzarite
zarite
ts Kenneth J. Catanzarite and Kim E.

Enclosure: Exhibit A -Proposed Redline of Resolution No. 2026-91 cc: Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney ([email protected]) Jose Montoya, Deputy City Attorney ([email protected]) Seimone Jurjis, City Manager ([email protected]) Jaime Murillo, Community Development Director ([email protected]) Liz Westmoreland, Deputy Community Development Director ([email protected])
Ginetta L. Giovinco, Esq.([email protected])
Nicholas J. Schuchert, Esq. ([email protected]) Chloe Ann Lee, Esq.([email protected])
703
City Council -Agenda Item No. 16 - Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 8 ends

EXHIBIT A
PROPOSED REDLINE OF RESOLUTION NO. 2026-91
Deletions shown in reds#ikefhroitg#: insertions shown in blue underline .

RESOLUTION NO. 2026-91

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, VENYiN~N ,«7~-,; .. ND
lJPll)O'l.,Dl'N'C GRANTING IN PART AN APPEAL AND MODIFYING

THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION CONFIRMING

VOLUNTARY SURRENDER OF A LIMITED TERM PERMIT TO

ALLOW A TEMPORARY OUTDOOR DINING AREA WITH LIVE
ENTERTAINMENT LOCATED AT 3801 EAST COAST HIGHWAY
(P A2023-0202) AND €70NFlRMINC RE~Ut:t@ NO. 20~§ :f-si
PRESEN1'8 N() f:,Jff C00tRCiVER8¥ , AND RESCINDING
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-18
WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach ("City") is governed, in part, by the Charter of the City of Newport Beach, Newport Beach Municipal Code, and Council Policies; WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City Charter vests the City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, an application was filed by Ryan Wilson, of Lawry 's Restaurants Inc. ("Applicant"), concerning property located at 3801 East Coast Highway, and legally described as Parcel 1 of Resubdivision 523, which is owned by FPV II Partnership ; WHEREAS, the Applicant applied for a limited term permit and coastal development permit ("CDP") to allow arr e'>tistin:g te¥Wp'o'rilr)' outdoot d1rrfn'g'=pa'fie to' ref'fu11W an approximately

1.350-square-foot expanded temporary outdoor dining area for a limited term at the Five Crowns Restaurant ("Project");
WHEREAS, the expanded 1,350-square-foot dining area includes an 850-square-foot canopy that was originally approved by an Emergency Temporary Use Permit ("ETUP") in 2020 as a temporary addition to the Restaurant's e'xi·sarrg; outdoor dining authorized under Use Permit No. UP 1822 ;
WHEREAS, nothing in these recitals determines or implies that the expanded area, or any activity conducted within it, constituted a lawful permanent existing use, a vested right, a permanent entitlement, an enlargement of Use Permit No. UP 1822, or an existing, former, historical, or baseline use for any purpose;
704
City Council - Agenda Item No. 16 - Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 9 ends

WHEREAS, on July 25, 2024, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Administrator, online via Zoom. [Remainder ofrecital unchanged.]
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the continued hearing, the Zoning Administrator adopted Resolution No. ZA2024-045 approving the Limited Term Permit PA2023-0202; WHEREAS, on August 28, 2024, Ken and Kim Catanzarite filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision [remainder unchanged];
[Recitals concerning the December 5, 2024 Planning Commission hearing, Resolution No.

PC2024-027, the subsequent appeal, the April 29, 2025 City Council hearing, and Resolution No. 2025-18 unchanged.]
WHEREAS, the Applicant voluntarily surrendered PA2023-0202 and the City accepted that surrender effective December 2, 2025 ;
WHEREAS, on September 17, 2026, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.

PC2026-027 by unanimous vote (6 ayes, 0 nays) confirming voluntary surrender of a limited term permit to allow a temporary outdoor dining area with live entertainment and confirming Resolution No. 2025-18 presents no live controversy;
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2026, an appeal was filed by Kenneth J. Catanzarite and Kim E. Catanzarit~ requesting, among other things, correction of the characterization of the expanded area as an "existing temporary outdoor dining patio" permitted "to remain," City Council rescission and vacatur of Resolution No. 2025-18 and the decision granting P A2023-0202, and preservation of all issues in pending judicial proceedings; and WHEREAS, a de novo public hearing was held by the City Council on October 13, 2026 [remainder unchanged].

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

Section 1: The appeal is granted in part, and the decision of the Planning Commission is modified as set forth in this resolution.

Section + 2_ : The City Council does hereby confirm that PA2023-0202 and the rights afforded by it are void and -i-s are of no further force and effect and ~ -have not been in effect as of December 2, 2025 .

Section ~ }_ : Tli'e ei:ty'--eo'u'J'fc:i;Hfa's coosMered¼h'e'-d 1 ec·fafrm"'-6'fiPl'eLPl1a¥fn'i¥i'w-e6'm1Wfosfo#
and firrtlier" oonfirmsiha't ~esdl1r:1ti.on'-·No. 20'2-5'=--l g--preselits=no~1 1 fve"Leoottbversy=m; a'=tle:st:dt-df=th'e'
' ,_,.. @ • ~ '/6' ' t •• <> ~ - § ba t \." 'I ' ' ~ vo I u ntary-=surrenEI er--of PA2 0 :, o~Oz-:-Resou'hdn'-lsfo':=2~'5'==1---=served s=ffi'n-ePH'dl e'i&=appfuve PA202'3'=0'2'01-; ~*ith' tlie surrerrdeY=-at .Pk1003 -020~, th'e' Resolutfom'-has n'o'=fodeperrd1e¥ft utfPity.

Resolufren'----flfo~0215' 1Lg slial~:---imt=l5e'==i1i\foked'==f&=any=ftrrth'eY &i·scrt#forrary==app'roval1s=or' emitlem'ents· tlia:f tlie Appli"c'imf=rrra5'=te'qu'est- City Council Resolution No. 2025-18 is rescinded and vacated in its entirety, including its recitals, findings, CEOA determination, approvals, and conditions, and every determination incorporated in it, and shall have no further force or effect. 705
City Council - Agenda Item No. 16 - Appellants' Response and Objections October 13, 2026

Page 10 ends

The City Clerk shall annotate the official record of Resolution No. 2025-18 as "RESCINDED AND VACATED - NO FORCE OR EFFECT," and shall place this resolution in the files for PA2023-0202 and PA2025-0208. Nothing in this Section constitutes a determination or concession by any party concerning the validity of P A2023-0202 or Resolution No. 2025-18 when approved or adopted.

Section 4: Neither Resolution No. 2025-18, its recitals, findings, determinations, or conditions, nor PA2023-0202, nor any operation conducted under P A2023-0202, shall be relied upon, invoked, cited, or considered, directly or indirectly, by the City, the Applicant, the owner of the property, or any successor, as legal authority, a vested right, an entitlement, a lawful-existinguse determination, an enlargement of Use Permit No. UP 1822, evidence of an existing, former, or historical use, or a CEOA, parking, traffic, noise, lighting, or operational baseline, in P A2025- 0208 or any other proceeding concerning the Five Crowns Restaurant.

Section 5: Nothing in this resolution determines the merits of P A2025-0208 or any successor application, the scope of Use Permit No. UP 1822, or any CEOA, parking. noise, lighting, special-event, enforcement, or nuisance matter, or determines or affects any claim, defense, remedy, mootness contention, attorneys' fees, costs, or prevailing-party status in any pending judicial proceeding.

Section 3'. .Q : The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct §n'dLare incorp'oFated i"nl'o fh'e ope-rativ&patt-6'f1iltfs rdSol utfo!'f as a statement of procedural history, and do not constitute findings concerning the lawful scope of use of the property • Section 4 7: [Severability- unchanged.]
Section .§1 ~ : The City Council finds that this action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) [remainder unchangedL The City Council does not adopt the Class 1 (Existing Facilities) discussion in the Planning Commission staff report dated September 17, 2026, and makes no determination that any temporary outdoor dining area, canopy, tent, or live-entertainment use is an existing facility, an existing or former use, or a baseline for any purpose - Section @ .2. : This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. 706

CATANZARITE LAW CORPORATION
2331 West Lincoln Avenue, Anaheim, California 92801 I (714) 520-5544 STATEMENT OF KENNETH J. CATANZARITE
Newport Beach City Council - October 13, 2026 - Agenda Item No. 16 Resolution No. 2026-91-Appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2026-027 (Five Crowns, P A2023-0202)
For inclusion in the record/or Agenda Item No. 16
Good afternoon, Mayor Kleiman and Members of the Council. I am Ken Catanzarite. My wife Kim and I own 352 and 354 Hazel Drive, directly across from the Five Crowns courtyard, and we are the appellants.

I incorporate our written response and objections, delivered to the Clerk and the Council, with its Exhibit A redline of Resolution No. 2026-91, and all of our prior submissions.

I will make four points.

First, the staff report misstates our appeal. It says the appeal "did not cite specific concerns." Attachment D, the City's own exhibit, is our appeal. The form states the reason for appeal. The three-page Rider explains each ground and requests nine numbered items of relief, with a proposed redline. Staff also says our comments "primarily relate" to the pending CUP. The appeal says the opposite: it asks the Council not to decide PA2025-0208. And staff cites our comments as Attachment D; they are Attachment E. The record should be accurate.

Second, Section 2 does not do what it says. It declares that Council Resolution No. 2025- 18 "presents no live controversy" and "has no independent utility," but leaves that resolution and every one of its findings in place. Whether our pending case is moot is a question for the Superior Court. The Court's tentative ruling found that the City had not shown that Resolution No. 2025- 18 was rescinded, that its findings had lost force, or that they could not be used in later proceedings.

The City then told the Court that these proceedings would resolve the case, and the Court continued its hearing to see what the City does. A declaration does not change those facts. Rescission does.

Section 2 also drops the word Deputy City Attorney Jose Montoya used. At the Planning Commission, he stated that the purpose of this action was to confirm that the rights under PA2023- 0202 are "void." The minutes, Attachment C, record that. The draft resolution says only "no further force and effect." Exhibit A restores "void."
Section 2's non-reliance sentence is also too narrow. It says only that the resolution "shall not be invoked" by "the Applicant" for future approvals. It does not reach the findings. It does not bind the City, the owner, or any successor. And it does not reach the CEQA baseline or the pending CUP.

Third, the resolution re-adopts the very language we appealed. Its recitals again describe an "existing temporary outdoor dining patio" permitted "to remain." Section 3 then declares every recital "true and correct" and operative. The permanent entitlement, UP 1822, 707
City Council - Agenda Item No. 16 - Statement of Kenneth J. Catanzarite October I 3, 2026

Page 2 ends

allows about 348 square feet, four tables, and 24 outdoor patrons. A Council finding that a surrendered 1,350-square-foot temporary area was "existing" is exactly what we asked you not to make. And Attachment B still carries a Class 1 "existing facilities" analysis that neither the Commission nor this resolution relies on. The Council should disclaim it.

Fourth, the Council has two legitimate choices. You can rescind Resolution No. 2025- 18, as the appeal requests. That would resolve the merits of the pending case. Or, if you will not rescind it, you should leave mootness to the Court and strike the "no live controversy" and "no independent utility" language. What you should not do is keep the resolution alive while declaring it meaningless for purposes of our lawsuit.

We ask that you adopt the resolution in the form of our Exhibit A. It grants the appeal in part; replaces the "existing / to remain" recital with neutral language; confirms that PA2023-0202 and its rights are void; rescinds and vacates Resolution No. 2025-18 without any concession by any party about its validity when adopted; bars reliance on that resolution, its findings, or the temporary operation by the City, the applicant, the owner, or any successor; disclaims the Class 1 analysis; and reserves PA2025-0208 and all litigation issues.

If the City Attorney advises that rescission cannot occur tonight, grant the appeal in part, adopt the corrected recitals and the broader non-reliance provision, strike the "no live controversy" language, and direct staff to return with a rescission resolution. We object to Section 2 as drafted in any event.

We reserve all rights in the pending litigation, including our position that it is not moot and our right to attorneys' fees and costs. Thank you.

Kenneth J. Catanzarite
for Appellants Kenneth J. Catanzarite and Kim E.

Catanzarite
708
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: October 08, 2026 10:14 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Notice- Hazardous Conditions and Need for Immediate Mitigation From: Denys Oberman <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2026 10:13:49 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Dept - City Council <[email protected]>; Jurjis, Seimone <[email protected]>
Cc: City Clerk's Office <[email protected]>; Denys Oberman <[email protected]>
Subject: Notice- Hazardous Conditions and Need for Immediate Mitigation [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD
Council Members and StaffIn follow up to my prior email, I am hereby confirming the following:

As anticipated and voiced in our prior requests, the Ocean DID surge and flooded the oceanfront boardwalk between west 12th and 15th streets, and into the oceanfront properties and back alleyways and roads. This just happened in the past 30-40 minutes.

We called the NBPD with a call for service, and they said, “they are working on it”. We see no workers in the area.

There were two Police officers in a car and 12th street and they said, “there is nothing we can do”. Why did they not call for Munic services or CERT-type help to at least get some cones out to detour pedestrians and bikes.

We have been repeatedly run in circles by the City as to who to call for Protection. Perhaps the City does not know…This is unacceptable.

Had the burm previously constructed been extended as we have been requesting and as was previously done in a portion of the Peninsula, this safety hazard and damage would not have occurred.

It needs to be taken care of tonight or tomorrow morning, 709
There is no excuse why the City did not take timely and reasonable measures to protect public safety and our properties.

Thank you
Denys H Oberman
Resident and Community stakeholder
Regards,
Denys H. Oberman, CEO
OBERMAN Strategy and Financial Advisors
19200 Von Karman Ave, 6th Floor
Irvine, CA 92612
Tel (949) 476-0790
Cell (949) 230-5868
Email: [email protected]
www.obermanassociates.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The documents accompanying this transmission contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at 949/476-0790 or the electronic address above, to arrange for the return of the document(s) to us. 710
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: October 08, 2026 9:19 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Notice of Hazardous Conditions and Request for Immediate Mitigation From: Denys Oberman <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2026 9:18:46 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Notice of Hazardous Conditions and Request for Immediate Mitigation [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

Please enter this correspondence into the public record in connection with the Oct 13 Council meeting.

Thank you.

Regards,
Denys H. Oberman, CEO
OBERMAN Strategy and Financial Advisors
19200 Von Karman Ave, 6th Floor
Irvine, CA 92612
Tel (949) 476-0790
Cell (949) 230-5868
Email: [email protected]
www.obermanassociates.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The documents accompanying this transmission contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at 949/476-0790 or the electronic address above, to arrange for the return of the document(s) to us.

From: Denys Oberman <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2026 8:49 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; Denys Oberman <[email protected]> Subject: Notice of Hazardous Conditions and Request for Immediate Mitigation Mayor and Council MembersWe are a group of residents who live on the Oceanfront of Balboa Peninsula.

The City has been aware of the imminent threat of extraordinary ocean surges and flooding associated with approaching hurricanes’El Nino conditions.

In fact, the City is planning a “Study Session”on October 13th to discuss the problem . 711
Some limited mitigation has been underway at the Balboa Pier. A small stretch of burm was erected up to the walkway at oceanfront and west 12th.

We are alarmed at the rate of surge and rise, getting close to our homes ( which are in one of the widest beach stretches on central Peninsula.

In efforts to address this issue and preserve safety, we have contacted both our Council representative Joe Stapleton, and several members of City staff.

Our District representative Stapleton claimed as recently as this morning that he “did not know anything about what the City is doing”, and further made no offer to initiate contact with the Municipal services/Public Works department to get some immediate action underway. My neighbors and I are astonished at the apparent lack of concern expressed by our Council representative, and including his lack of leadership to facilitate action with the PW/ Municipal Services department.

We were finally able to reach a staff member in Municipal Services who assured us that the City would construct a burm tomorrow/Friday Oct 9th in this area of 12th-13th street and in front of Newport Elementary school.

He confirmed that the City is aware of the storms, the ocean surges, and the expectation that the largest surges and surf was forthcoming by Sat morning.

We understand that the City Council may be preoccupied with the upcoming elections, but adequate proactive measures NEED TO BE TAKEN IMMEDIATELY to ensure the safety and security of residents, and public at large.

This is yet one more example substantiating residents’ concern that the City leadership is unwilling /unable to proactively address legitimate public safety concerns.

We have been taking photos , and also encourage each and all of you to actually see for yourself the threat and the importance of timely action.

Denys H Oberman
Resident and Community leader
Regards,
Denys H. Oberman, CEO
712
OBERMAN Strategy and Financial Advisors
19200 Von Karman Ave, 6th Floor
Irvine, CA 92612
Tel (949) 476-0790
Cell (949) 230-5868
Email: [email protected]
www.obermanassociates.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The documents accompanying this transmission contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately at 949/476-0790 or the electronic address above, to arrange for the return of the document(s) to us. 713
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: October 11, 2026 2:05 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Public Comment
Attachments: E-mail - High Tide Warning - Recommendations - 10-08-2026.pdf From: Ad lever <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2026 2:04:53 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comment
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

Hello,
Please have that attached, from the City's Harbor Dept., included with the agenda/public comment, for the City Council Meeting of 10/13/2026.

Thank you,
Adam
714
From: Newport Beach Harbor Department <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2026 3:34 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Preparing for Elevated Tide Levels in Newport Harbor October 8, 2026
SUBJECT: Preparing for Elevated Tide Levels in Newport Harbor To Those Who Enjoy Newport Harbor:

We have observed several high tides well in excess of predictions in the last 60 days. In anticipation of continued high tides, I’d like to call your attention to concerns associated with elevated tide levels in Newport Harbor.

Elevated water levels can:
• Put docks, gangways, pilings, cleats and shore connections under greater strain. • Cause boats to ride higher and potentially lift over or pull against dock lines and mooring tackle.
• Allow boats to surge, yaw or collide with neighboring vessels. • Submerge electrical cords, shore-power connections, fuel systems, pumps and other equipment.
• Flood low-lying docks, access roads, parking areas, storage spaces and shoreline structures. • Make gangways unusually steep or allow them to bind, shift or come off their supports. • Increase the effects of wind, wakes, swell and storm surge when they occur at the same time. • Carry floating debris into slips and channels.
• Create electrical-shock, slip-and-fall, drowning and navigation hazards.

The National Weather Service (NWS) has previously noted that measured high tides at Newport Beach exceeded predictions by approximately 6–7 inches, illustrating why users should not rely only on the published astronomical tide prediction. Our own observations at the Balboa Yacht Basin Tide Gauge have indicated tides 12-14 inches above predictions in the last 30 days.

Recommended precautions for all harbor users
Before the highest tides:

1. Inspect your boat, slip, dock and mooring in person. Check for chafed lines, loose shackles, damaged cleats, worn fenders, deteriorated floats and obstructions.

2. Keep bilge pumps operational. Test automatic and manual pumps, verify that discharge hoses are clear and confirm that batteries are charged.

3. Remove or secure loose property. Stow cushions, coolers, tools, sails, portable fuel containers, ladders, paddleboards, dinghies and other items that could float away or damage neighboring property.

4. Check electrical equipment. Keep shore-power connections, extension cords, battery chargers and electrical devices above expected water levels. Do not handle electrical equipment while standing in water.

5. Photograph the condition of your property before the event and keep records of any damage.
715

6. Make an emergency contact plan. Ensure the Harbor Department, marina office, dockmaster and your insurer have current contact information and that someone can inspect the vessel if you are away.

7. Monitor conditions several times daily. Use NWS coastal advisories (forecast.weather.gov) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Newport Beach tide station (tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov), which provides tide predictions and water-level information for Newport Bay entrance.

Mooring permittees
Mooring holders should pay particular attention to the entire mooring system—not just the pennants:
• Inspect the mooring buoy, pennants, chafe gear, thimble, shackles, swivels, chain, sinker and connection points.
• Replace visibly worn or undersized lines and add chafe protection where lines pass through hawseholes or rub against cleats.
• Use appropriately sized lines and fenders, but do not create a rigid arrangement that prevents the boat from rising and falling with the water.
• Confirm that the boat cannot swing into pilings, docks, seawalls or nearby vessels at the expected water level and under wind or wake conditions. • Remove unnecessary weight and secure hatches, lockers and deck equipment. • If the vessel is small, lightly built or unattended, arrange for a responsible person to check it during each high-tide cycle.
• Contact the Harbor Department before making any change to the authorized mooring configuration. Do not relocate or modify a mooring without approval.

Dock permittees and private dock owners
Dock owners and permittees should:
• Inspect pilings, brackets, floats, hinges, rollers, cleats and connections to shore. • Confirm that floating docks can travel freely on their piles and are not obstructed by debris, utility lines, stairs or adjacent structures.
• Check that gangways have adequate clearance and will not become trapped, excessively steep or disconnected as the dock rises.
• Secure gangways and shore connections as designed; do not improvise with unsafe ropes or temporary supports.
• Verify that dock boxes, storage lockers, hose reels, electrical pedestals and lighting are secured and rated for wet conditions.
• Remove objects that could block float movement or damage neighboring docks. • Inspect for undermining, erosion, settlement, exposed anchors and damage around shoreline attachments.
• Keep people off a dock that is visibly unstable, overloaded, electrically compromised or being overtopped.

Any structural damage, failure of a piling, broken connection or electrical hazard should be reported promptly to the appropriate harbor or marina authority and addressed by qualified professionals. 716
Anyone storing boats in Newport Harbor
For boats stored afloat:
• Do not leave the vessel unattended if it has known leaks, weak mooring hardware, deteriorated lines or unreliable bilge pumps.
• Close and latch hatches and ports, secure the engine compartment and verify that cockpit drains are clear.
• Make sure fenders are positioned for the likely direction of movement and that lines allow controlled vertical movement.
• Check that dinghies and tenders are securely tied and cannot become floating debris. • Avoid boarding during flooding, strong current, unstable gangways or electrical hazards.

For boats stored on trailers or land:
• Keep the trailer, wheels, brakes and tow vehicle outside areas that may flood. • Do not assume a parking lot or storage area is safe merely because it is above the normal high tide; unusual water levels, drainage backup and wave overtopping can reach low areas. • Remove or elevate valuable equipment, spare parts, batteries, electronics and personal property.
• Follow the storage facility’s evacuation or relocation instructions.

During the elevated-tide period
• Avoid walking or driving through moving or unknown-depth water. • Do not drive around barricades.
• Do not board or work on a vessel during lightning, heavy surf, unstable dock conditions or suspected electrical contact.
• Report floating debris, damaged docks, parted mooring lines, fuel spills or vessels in distress immediately.
• Call 911 for immediate danger; contact the Harbor Department or marina management for non-emergency maintenance and property issues.

The most important preparation is to treat the predicted tide as a baseline, not a guaranteed maximum. NOAA notes that observed water levels can differ from predictions, and coastal flooding can occur when elevated water levels coincide with high tide, wind, swell or drainage limitations (tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov).

These are general safety measures, not a substitute for the City’s, marina operator’s, dock engineer’s or insurer’s requirements.

Sincerely,
Paul Blank
City of Newport Beach Harbormaster
Harbor Department
City of Newport Beach
[email protected]
949-270-8159
717
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: October 12, 2026 3:16 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Letter for the mayor and City Council meetings prior to Tuesday, October 13th meeting
From: Lisa Kassel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2026 3:14:57 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: City Clerk's Office <[email protected]>
Subject: Letter for the mayor and City Council meetings prior to Tuesday, October 13th meeting [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

October 12, 2026
TO: Mayor Lauren Kleiman; Mayor Pro Tem Noah Blom; Councilmembers Joe Stapleton, Michelle Barto, Erik Weigand, Robyn Grant, and Sara J. Weber
RE: REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE BEACH RESTORATION AND PROTECTION PLAN Dear Mayor Kleiman and Councilmembers,
We sincerely thank the City for its recent emergency response, particularly authorizing Beador Contractors to bring in sand and construct protective berms near 57th and 58th Streets early Sunday morning. That effort provided important protection for our homes and peace of mind for residents.

We also commend the Beador Construction team for its hard work and swift action during this critical response.

We would now welcome clarity on the next steps: How will the City restore and maintain our beaches, strengthen coastal protection, and respond more quickly to future threats?

OUR REQUESTS FOR THE PATH FORWARD

1. Restore our beaches as quickly as possible. Replenish sand near 48th–51st Streets, 57th–58th Streets, and vulnerable areas of the Balboa Peninsula.

2. Develop lasting solutions. Work with coastal engineers to assess ongoing sand replenishment, jetty improvements, and other effective options.

3. Pursue available funding. Seek federal, state, county, and City resources and move planned sand-delivery projects forward promptly.

4. Strengthen emergency readiness. Plan timely berm construction, ample sandbags, clear alerts, and assistance for older and vulnerable residents. 718

5. Share a clear plan. Outline responsible agencies, funding, milestones, and schedules for beach restoration and maintenance.

WE APPRECIATE THE RESPONSE AND HOPE TO LEARN FROM THE TIMELINE • Timing of protection. El Niño concerns arose in August, and the Governor issued an emergency proclamation September 21. Flooding occurred Thursday and Friday, while protective sand work near our homes took place Sunday. Could the City explain this timeline and how future responses may be accelerated?
• Impact on residents. Earlier measures may have reduced erosion, risks to property, and the considerable anxiety felt throughout the neighborhood. • Support for neighbors. Some residents in their 80s and 90s relied on neighbors for assistance, and sandbag supplies reportedly ran out Friday. We hope future plans will address these needs.

OUR BEACHES ARE VITAL TO NEWPORT BEACH
Our beaches protect homes and businesses and support tourism, City revenue, property values, and our community’s identity. Families return summer after summer to enjoy this coastline. Investing in its protection benefits everyone.

We value the emergency steps already taken and hope they will be the beginning of a sustained effort. What is the long-term plan to restore and maintain the beaches, and how will the City ensure timely action going forward?
We would appreciate a written response outlining current measures, longer-term options, funding opportunities, and an anticipated schedule.

Sincerely,
The Kassel Family
Lisa Dan & Kevin
5705 Seashore Drive
--
Lisa Hope Kassel
[email protected]
719
October 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 IV. Matters Which Councilmembers Have Asked to be Placed on a Future Agenda (Non-Discussion Item)
This section of the agenda exists because of the part of Council Policy A-1 that prohibits Council members from being able to place an item on a future agenda for discussion unless at least two other Council members express interest in the same topic. The rationale for this seems to be to avoid City staff being forced to waste time preparing background information regarding a matter with insufficient Council interest.

While that rationale makes some sense, that it is a “non-discussion item” is particularly puzzling.

In a better-functioning democracy there would be a (possibly separate?) mechanism for a Council member, on their own sole initiative, to place an item on the agenda for discussion without a staff report so they, or members of the public they represent, have an opportunity to create interest in it.

Without such an opportunity, this policy encourages the generation of interest in a potential future agenda item to take place outside public view. A Council member, or members of the public, seeking a Council discussion needs to privately lobby other Council members to get the needed votes in support. This is fundamentally at odds with the most basic transparency goal that the public’s business be done in public: inaction by the Council is often as significant as action, yet when a topic of public interest does not appear on an agenda, the public does not know which Council members would have liked to see it, and which blocked it.

Regarding the current policy, since few questions about the proposals are ever asked, it is not obvious that all Council members understand that despite the “non-discussion” designation the policy actually says “Any Council Member may ask clarifying questions regarding the item to ensure understanding of the matter; however, the City Council will not discuss or debate the item” (the latter admonition presumably being intended only to indicate the time to “discuss or debate” what action, if any, to take on the topic itself – not the question of whether to prepare a staff report – will be when it comes back with that report and a possible staff recommendation).

The first of Councilmember Weigand’s proposals for future agenda items is certainly one where without asking clarifying questions it is far from obvious what the Council would be asking staff to do in preparation for that future item. The request is to “Consider reviewing the City’s Integrated Pest Management Policy and exploring to eliminate the spraying of synthetic herbicides in parks and greenbelt areas citywide.”
By way of background, the City’s Parks & Trees webpage provides a link to what it says is the City’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) Program. The document found at that link does not identify when or by whom it was approved. The fact that it identifies Dan Sereno, who retired in 2019, as the Superintendent in charge suggests it is not recent. 720
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 9 Under Section 709 of our City Charter, the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission is the body charged with advising the Council “in all matters pertaining to parks,” and arguably would be the body setting City policy regarding spraying of parks.

Despite this Charter requirement, as Item 6 on the April 29, 2025, consent calendar, the Council (without discussion) created a 3-Councilmember “Integrated Pest Management Ad Hoc Advisory Committee” to “review the City' s Integrated Pest Management program and make recommendations to the entire City Council regarding revisions thereto,” apparently bypassing PB&R (the creation of the ad hoc was itself the result of a prior “A-1” request for a future agenda item presented on the April 15, 2025, agenda)..

The Council ad hoc committee has so far made one recommendation, to halt synthetic herbicide use on sod athletic fields, which was presented and approved (without consulting PB&R) as Item 19 on the August 25, 2026, agenda. In doing so, the Council was said to have approved an “Athletic Field Sod Management Program,” although its relation to the City’s Integrated Pest Management program remains unclear. Since the IPM has not been revised to incorporate it, it may be regarded as a separate policy overriding any directions contrary to it in the IPM.

In view of this background, is Councilmember Weigand asking staff to work with the existing Council Ad Hoc to bring back as a future Council agenda item a revised IPM addressing his concern?
If so, would any recommendation of the ad hoc first be reviewed by PB&R? Or is the request to bypass both PB&R and the Council Ad Hoc, and have staff simply present as a future agenda item for consideration by the full Council a revised IPM eliminating the spraying of synthetic herbicides in parks and greenbelt areas citywide? As to Councilmember Weigand’s second proposal of a future agenda item, it is to install security cameras at the harbor entrance, apparently for use by law enforcement agencies, including the Border Patrol. While I think that is a topic worth discussing, should this return as a future agenda item, I don’t think the conclusion regarding the topic is so obvious as for it to come back on the consent calendar item to be approved without discussion. Given the recent blowback in some cities about the indiscriminate deployment of Flock cameras, it seems safe to say not every American is comfortable with the idea of the country becoming a surveillance state, or of their local government helping to make it possible for all human activity in all places to be surreptitiously monitored and recorded.

Item 1. Approval of Minutes
The passages shown in italics below are from the draft minutes, with suggested corrections shown in strikeout underline format.
2026-09-22 CC Minutes

Page 1 ends

(Newport Heights resident) presented a detailed review of 12 prior City undergrounding petitions, alleging that undergrounding proponents Michael Henn and Andrea Bird were 721
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 9 improperly allowed by City Engineer Michael Sinicori Sinacori to insert self-serving and misleading language—including phrases such as "nonbinding" and "no financial obligation"—into the AD 118-2 petition, language that does not appear in any prior City petition.”

Page 3 ends

Newport Beach's designation as an official Tennis Town by the USTA Southern California, and recognized the Lido Legacy Live charity concerts, which raised over $120,000 for the Junior Lifeguard Scholarship Program and the Friends of Oasis OASIS Senior Center.”

Page 3 ends

thanked Mike Zimmerman and the Friends of Oasis OASIS for their car show, recognized residents who attended his District 1 Town Hall covering topics including the 4th of July, sand replenishment, and public safety, and thanked City staff who participated.”

Page 3 ends

37-year-old paddler, a member of the Olsen Olson family, passed away during the Ben Did Go paddle event on Saturday after a medical emergency at mile 10, leaving behind a wife and two young children, and asked the City to rally around the family.”

Page 3 ends

Stahr argued that the curfew ordinance effectively applies year-round to minors between 10 PM and 6 AM Citywide and shuts down a large area on three designated days, voiced concern that the ordinance may violate the California Coastal Act, criticized the records retention policy for potentially allowing Council meeting videos to be discarded shortly after meetings, and questioned why the $4,500,000 drone purchase lacked a comparative analysis of alternatives.”

Page 4 ends

clarified that Title 21 of the Local Coastal Program governs land use entitlements and development, not law enforcement, and that the ordinance does not restrict public access to the beach.”
[comment: The minutes are accurate, but the statement recorded is not. Title 21 is intended to provide rules for entitlement of development, but, like the Coastal Act which it is intended to ensure compliance with, it is also intended to protect the physical and visual integrity of the coast and public access to it, including setting beach hours and requiring Coastal Commission approval of any revision to them.]

Page 4 ends

agenda..”
[comment: Item 11 was “Bonita Creek Park Athletic Field Turf Replacement - Award of Contract.” It does not appear to be on the present (October 13) agenda.] 722
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 4 of 9 2026-09-18 CC Minutes-Special
(The draft minutes do not have page numbers, so the numbers below refer to the 692-page revised agenda packet.)

Page 26 ends

approximately 6:17 PM and reconvened in open session thereafter.” [comment: With three public speakers preceding this, “6:17 PM” does not seem plausible if the meeting was called to order at 6:16 p.m. as it says on the first page.] Item 3. Resolution No. 2026-88, Authorizing the Use of the City’s Official Seal as Part of a Collaboration with Hoag Hospital to Wrap a City Fire Department Ambulance with Pinktober Wrap in Support of Breast Cancer Awareness Month
This item made more sense when the nearly identical request for last October was presented as Item 11 on the September 23, 2025, consent calendar. That report said it would take “less than a week” to wrap the ambulance if the Council approved it.

But assuming the Fire Department has not gone ahead before obtaining this approval, with the present request coming on October 13, even if approved, the month will be more than half over before the wrapped ambulance goes into service.

That said, it seems commendable the Department is aware of NBMC Sec. 1.16.050, which it believes requires a Council ordinance or resolution before undertaking this activity.

That is probably debatable.

For those unfamiliar with its history NBMC Sec. 1.16.050 was last revised in response to then-Councilmember Scott Peotter’s use of the City seal on communications expressing his purely personal opinions on a number of topics (see Item 15 from August 11, 2015).

As I noted in written comments at the time of its adoption on the September 8, 2015, consent calendar, the resulting revisions left the code’s intent essentially unintelligible, such that it now possibly prohibits any use of the seal, even by the City.

One might note that many others do not seem to feel so circumspect as the Fire Department.

For example, a number of outside organizations who receive sponsorship money from the City seem to feel free to use the City seal in recognition of the City’s support, likely without benefit of an ordinance or resolution giving them express permission (see for example, the Christmas Boat Parade sponsors or the Newport-Ensenda Race sponsors). It would seem like the City Manager could be empowered to give that permission.

In any event, it would have seemed helpful to provide an image of what the wrapped ambulance is proposed to look like. If it is like this image, apparently from last year, the wrapped ambulance would seem to advertise Hoag Hospital, but it is not clear how it promotes awareness of the importance of early detection of breast cancer, or if it includes the pink ribbons flanking the NBFD seal described in the staff report:
723
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 5 of 9 The wrapping looks very much like the a conventional NBFD ambulance with the exception of the normal red color altered to pink
1 and the word “Hoag” added to the vehicle:

Much as we admire Hoag Hospital, if the objective is to support Breast Cancer Awareness Month, I am not sure why it is advertising “Hoag” rather than using the space to explain why this ambulance is pink.

I am also not sure the unusual color will be as reassuring as it might be to all the individuals in the high-stress, traumatic circumstances that receive the much-needed services provided by the ambulance.

Considering how many health-threatening issues could be advertised, might a little more understated yet at the same time more explicit recognition of this one be better? Item 4. Resolution No. 2026-89: Amending City Council Policy F-14 This item is disturbing to me.

As best I can tell, revisions to Policy F-14 were last reviewed by the Finance Committee as Item D at its November 10, 2022, meeting, with those changes adopted by the Council as Item 4 on the December 13, 2022, consent calendar.

Since then, changes have been made much more surreptitiously.

As part of Item 13 on December 9, 2025, consent calendar, changes were made that were supposedly limited to recognizing name changes to this and about two dozen other Council 1 It is not evident from the photo where the pink ribbons that the staff report says will be placed next to the NBFD seal are.
724
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 6 of 9 policies associated with a major reorganization of City Departments. To the best of my recollection, the Finance Committee did not review or provide any advice on the reorganization.

Then as part of on February 24 of this year, Item 11 appeared under Current Business in which a Council ad hoc committee recommended without explanation substantive revisions to 17 Council policies, including 4 financial policies, none of which were reviewed by the Finance Committee. The revision to Policy F-14 was the insertion of the cost of living escalator to the dollar limits on staff contracting authority.

That revision, found in Section D at the end, had it been subjected to discussion or debate might well have been found problematic. In particular, rather than being written to adjust the dollar limits in response to CPI, as might seem reasonable, it is written to continuously ratchet up (and only up) the staff dollar limits. In particular, it explicitly states that an adjustment is made only when the CPI goes up, and the adjustment is always rounded up to the nearest $1,000 (never down). This means that in a year with a minimal amount of inflation, which would justify little or no increase in the limits, they go up by $1,000 anyway, and in years such as the present, when the 3.40% CPI increase would justify a $4,077 increase in the $120,000 limit, it goes up by $5,000 instead, effectively giving those subject to that limit a $923 “bonus” for no obvious reason. That “error” is compounded in future years, since the increase the next year is based on that inflated limit from the prior year, and not on the correctly rounded one.

The dollar limits presumably have some logical basis. Adjusting them only upward, and by more than can be justified by changes in CPI, would seem to ignore that basis. A better way would be to establish a base amount in a base year, and then in each subsequent year set the limit to the base amount adjusted by the most recent CPI compared to the base CPI.

More disturbing than the failure to correct the CPI adjustment that was inserted without adequate review in February, is the further insertion, again without any review by the Finance Committee, of the proposed new Section A.4. (Claims and Risk Management). The staff report asserts that this is simply implementing “claims resolution authority approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2026-27 budget.” However, that is deeply misleading.

The budget adoption was Item 19 on the June 9, 2026, agenda, and as I indicated in written comments at the time, the proposed budget adoption resolution included without explanation two novel provisions. One established a "$150, 000 for a Performance - Based Incentive Compensation Program." The other, relevant here was:
“Section 9: Subject to the availability of funds budgeted or approved by the City Council for such purpose, the City Manager and Risk Manager are authorized to compromise, settle, and resolve workers' compensation matters, liability claims, disputes, and litigation matters on behalf of the City in amounts not exceeding forty percent (40%) and thirty percent (30%), respectively, of the City's self-insured retention, as established from time to time under the City's insurance or risk financing programs, or the amount of their respective City Council approved contracting authority, whichever is greater." Where this came from is unknown to me, and what it even means is unclear. Does it allow repeated settlements at 30 or 40% of the City’s nominal self-insured retention? Or only those percentages of the City’s remaining self-insured retention after prior actions using it? 725
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 7 of 9 That is bad enough, but the proposed revisions to Policy F-14 go well beyond this including a new provision not previously seen that the City Manager can settle workers’ compensation matters in any amount, and simply needs to report the settlement to the Council within 10 days.

These revisions have apparently not even been reviewed by an ad hoc committee. They should not be on the consent calendar for adoption without discussion.

Item 5. Resolution No. 2026-90: Accepting a Grant from the State of California, Division of Boating and Waterways for the Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange Program (SAVE)
It would have been helpful to provide a reference to when the previous grant for this service was before the Council.

The staff report (under “Fiscal Impact”) says this is a “two-year grant program and will conclude on September 30, 2028.” Yet the chart on page suggests the City is currently in the midst of executing a two-year grant for 2005-2007.

How do these interact? Will both grants be available in 2027? Item S.20. Resolution No. 2026-93: Ratifying the Proclamation of a Local Emergency Issued on October 9, 2026
Was the title of Resolution No. 2026-93, as presented in Attachment A, intended to read:
“A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, (i) RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY ISSUED ON OCTOBER 9, 2026, BY CITY MANAGER SEIMONE JURJIS, THE

DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, AND (ii) APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN ACTIONS RELATED THERETO” Otherwise, it seems strange to have a “(i)” without any following roman numerals.

Or was there some other part “(ii)” intended that was omitted entirely? Item 6. Witte Hall - Notice of Completion for Contract No. 7444-3 (19F11)
The staff report acknowledges the construction was “substantially completed on June 25, 2026, six months after the original contract completion date of December 23, 2025,” and that there was a dispute between the City and the contractor as to who was responsible for the delay.

Considering the frequently changing completion date was frustrating to potential users, it would have been helpful to detail the principal reasons for the long delay (something the staff report appears to be silent regarding other than “5 rain days”) Similarly, the “Fiscal Impact” section acknowledges that “the Newport Beach Public Library Foundation committed to funding 50% of the total project costs,” but the report does not clearly show this defraying the $20,498,664 contract total twice shown, or relate that to the $12.5 million check being presented under agenda Item II. Detailing the total project costs, in addition to those of Contract No. 7444-3 would have been helpful. 726
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 8 of 9 Item 7. Crean Mariners Branch Library Fire Line Replacement - Award of Contract No. 10165-1 (26F02)
Staff is seeking approval of a month-long $352,500 contract to replace a fire sprinkler system that was installed with incorrect welding material at the Mariners Branch Library during its original construction in 2005-2006.

The report raises several obvious questions:

1. Was the correct welding material called out or implied in the construction drawings?

2. Should use of the incorrect material have been detected during project inspection?

3. What steps have been taken to prevent this problem recurring in future City projects? Additionally, will execution of the contract require closure of the facility to the public? If so, when and for how long? The staff report says “Work is tentatively scheduled to start on December 19, 2026, and to be completed by January 16, 2027.” But as Item 6 at its July 20, 2026, meeting, the Board of Library Trustees approved a schedule assuming the facility would be open to the public on all those days other than Christmas and New Year’s eves and days.

Item 8. Fiscal Year 2026-27 Traffic Signal Rehabilitation Project - Award of Contract No. 10209-1 (27T01)
The Attachment A map shows a “HAWK signal” to be installed on PCH at Orchid Avenue in Corona del Mar. This is apparently the “pedestrian hybrid beacon” referred to in the Abstract and on page 2, although there is no explanation of what a “HAWK signal” is. Will this be the first of its kind in Newport Beach?
Item 11. Professional Services Agreement with Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin for Hearing Adjudication Services
The staff report provides no explanation of how Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin was selected over, say, hiring an additional officer from a firm that previously bid for the services (or if Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin was one of those).

It also does not explain if the City charges any fee to defray this anticipated up to $187,500.

Additionally, it says this contract is needed to deal with “an unanticipated and significant increase in requests to appeal administrative citations issued during the heightened enforcement period associated with the Fourth of July Safety Enhancement Zone.” However, the contract is proposed to run through June 30, 2028.

But NBMC Sec. 1.05.060 requires appeals of administrative citations to be filed within 21 days of their issuance, and as the report says, the hearing must be conducted no more than 60 days after the date of filing, with the result issued (according to Sec. 1.05.065) no more than 45 days after that. That would seem to suggest all hearing officer business associated with citations issued on July 4, 2026, will be completed no later than November 7, 2026.

What is the rush to procure nearly two years of supplemental hearing officer capacity when the need cited is expected to end in barely a month? Does the City expect to continue issuing citations at a higher-than-normal rate? For what, specifically? 727
October 13, 2026, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 9 of 9 Also, how will the public learn the outcome of the Fourth of July citation appeals? Item 13. Appointment to the Finance Committee
Although the process by which citizens are chosen for appointment to the City’s Boards, Commissions and Committees is becoming increasingly opaque, with a single nominee being advanced for public consideration by the full Council, it is good to see the present staff report indicating at least the number of applications from which that single nominee was opaquely selected.

I would observe that before the Council awards contracts, the staff report lists the names of the vendors who submitted bids.

If we were to show similar respect to the persons who took the trouble to submit applications for appointment we might consider at least listing their names.

Item 14. Annual Review of Visit Newport Beach Audited Financial Statements and Expenditure Report
I seem to recall that at one of the recent Council Candidate Forums a question came up about how much of the $7.4 million per year that Visit Newport Beach receives from the City goes toward marketing the short term lodging industry in our town. It seems safe to guess one will not be able to find the answer here.
728
From: Sheryl Vanlandingham <[email protected]>
Sent: October 05, 2026 1:12 PM
To: [email protected]; City Clerk's Office; Planning Commission Subject: Commercial Corridor- Corona Del Mar, CA
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

October 5, 2025
Subject: Corona Del Mar- Commercial Corridor
Dear City Council, Planning Commissioners and Community Development Manager Murillo, Thank you for the important work you do for the city of Newport Beach and its residents.

I am a resident of Corona Del Mar and I ask you not to approve the proposed re-zoning of the CdM commercial corridor to allow new 2nd-and 3rd-floor mixed-use dense apartments, reduced or waived parking, excessive alcohol use permits, and rooftop amenities with extended late night hours.

Residents participated in community outreach sessions by the city. The majority of neighborhood feedback presented to the city planners opposed re-zoning for mixed-use housing, code changes and added extended hours amenities.

The CdM Village was designed as a small, walkable commercial area intended to serve the nearby residents and visitors.

Adding housing apartments in an already highly dense area with traffic and parking issues plus late rooftop uses is not conducive to maintaining its character and charm we have come to know, expect and love.

It would push traffic, noise, and overflow parking onto the streets of nearby neighborhoods.

That is not “preserving existing character” nor does it add any benefit to the neighborhood. It changes the Village into something residents already rejected and we don’t need it looking like or becoming the
We ask when doing your diligent review you:

Drop proposed allowance for new residential units above storefronts along the CdM corridor.

Keep parking requirements to serve customers and neighbors and increase those requirements by adding city parking solutions and round-the-year Red Trolley services. 729
Do not allow rooftop amenities which would become night-time entertainment next to homes and increase alcohol and drug-related crimes.

Honor the resident outreach record instead of advancing the one recommendation the community is most opposed to.

Respectfully, I urge you to listen to the recommendations of the CdM residents.

Thank you
Sincerely,
Sheryl Vanlandingham
308 Narcissus
Corona Del Mar, CA
[email protected]
730
From: [email protected]
Sent: October 01, 2026 4:55 PM
To: City Clerk's Office; [email protected]; Planning Commission Subject: Public Comment - Planning Case PA2024-0002 | Prioritizing Existing Residential Quality of Life, Pedestrian Safety, Parking, & Public-Safety Analysis Attachments: CDM_CorridorPublicCommentLetter_KeithRicker_FinalDraft_20260930.pdf [EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

Good Day To You, City of Newport Beach City Clerk, City Council & Planning Commission:

Please find attached a .PDF file containing a document that I respectfully request to be included on record for Public Comment regarding Planning Case PA2024-0002.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated assistance regarding my above request… Keith W. Ricker
315 Dahlia Place;
[email protected]
731
Corona del Mar Commercial Corridor | Public Comment
September 30, 2026

CORONA DEL MAR COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR STUDY
Public Comment • Planning Case PA2024-0002
Via City Clerk — for distribution to the Newport Beach Planning Commission and City Council Re: Public Comment - Planning Case PA2024-0002 | Prioritizing Existing Residential Quality of Life, Pedestrian Safety, Parking, & Public-Safety Analysis
Dear City Clerk, Planning Commissioners & Members of the City Council:

I am submitting these comments concerning the Corona del Mar Commercial Corridor Study and its proposed implementing amendments. I support practical pedestrian-safety improvements, accessibility, and more effective visitor and employee parking. My position is that the project’s overarching goal should be to preserve and improve the existing quality of life for residents living in and around the corridor. I oppose rezoning and additional business-use expansion that would increase commercial intensity without a demonstrated need and documented protections for nearby neighborhoods.

Pedestrian Safety and Parking Improvements
Please identify improvements that can proceed independently under existing land-use regulations, such as safer crossings and sidewalks, appropriate traffic-calming measures, clearer parking information, coordinated use of existing parking, and strategies to reduce visitor and employee parking spillover onto residential streets. Evaluate these measures against existing conditions before coupling them with additional development or commercial-use permissions.

Rezoning and Additional Commercial Activity
I oppose the proposed rezoning (mixed-use, high density residential development) and expansion of permitted commercial uses because of the potential to intensify existing problems involving traffic congestion, limited parking, neighborhood noise, nighttime activity, and public safety.

Rezoning that permits additional businesses, expanded restaurants, rooftop entertainment, extended operating hours, or increased alcohol-related activity would create opportunities for greater commercial intensity. My concern is that these changes could exacerbate existing conditions and negatively affect the quality of life of residents living in and around the corridor.

Before considering such amendments, I request that the City demonstrate a documented need for additional commercial development and provide evidence that the anticipated increases in activity can be accommodated without worsening existing neighborhood conditions.

Specifically, I ask the City to explain why rezoning and expanded commercial activity are necessary to accomplish the project's objectives when improvements to pedestrian safety, parking 732
Corona del Mar Commercial Corridor | Public Comment
management, accessibility, and existing infrastructure could potentially be implemented under current land-use regulations.

The project's overarching objective should be to preserve and improve the existing quality of life for Corona del Mar residents, rather than increase commercial activity without demonstrating a corresponding residential benefit.

Existing Police Department Findings on Crime and Alcohol-License Concentration The Newport Beach Police Department memorandum dated April 3, 2025, prepared for a proposed Type 47 restaurant at 3025–3027 East Coast Highway (PA2024-0231), presents relevant baseline information. It reports a Crime Count of 299 in Reporting District 44, versus a citywide reportingdistrict average of 112—approximately 167% above that average. The memorandum identifies RD44 as a high-crime area for the applicable Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) review. It further reports that DUI, public-intoxication, and liquor-law violations represented 32% of arrests in that district; the memo also identifies drug offenses as the largest arrest category. These figures are from the memo’s reporting period and statutory methodology, not a current citywide crime-rate comparison.

For the same restaurant application, the Police Department reported 15 active on-sale licenses and approximately 4,515 residents in Census Tract 627.02, or one on-sale license for every 301 residents, compared with one per 822 residents countywide. The memorandum concluded that this application location met the statutory undue-concentration criteria for alcohol licenses. It also stated that the Department had no objection to that particular restaurant application if specified conditions or similar safeguards were imposed. That qualification matters: the memorandum does not amount to a blanket objection to all future alcohol permits or prove that the corridor amendments will cause additional crime.

Given those documented conditions, I request that the City expressly address this question before considering broader restaurant, bar, rooftop, or alcohol-related permissions: What measurable benefit to existing residents would justify any additional alcohol-licensed activity in an area already identified under the applicable ABC criteria as having undue concentration, and how would potential public-safety and neighborhood impacts be evaluated and controlled? Residential Compatibility: Measurable Outcomes and Accountability Please publish the baseline measures, anticipated outcomes, monitoring methods, and response thresholds for neighborhood noise, nighttime activity, privacy, outdoor lighting, public safety, traffic, and parking spillover. The City should identify the geographic area, data sources, frequency of measurement, responsible department, public reporting schedule, and corrective steps to be considered if conditions worsen. Where relevant, this evaluation should distinguish existing problems from incremental impacts attributable to any newly authorized uses.

In particular, please specify whether monitoring would include evening and weekend residential parking occupancy; noise complaints and verified nighttime noise measurements; police calls for service and relevant incident or arrest categories; alcohol-related enforcement data; vehicle and pedestrian conditions at key intersections; and complaints concerning rooftop lighting and privacy.

Explain how residents could report issues, how trends would be assessed, and what enforceable permit conditions or review processes would be available when defined thresholds are exceeded. 733
Corona del Mar Commercial Corridor | Public Comment
Public Input and Transparent Review
Please publish complete available community survey results, clarify how resident and business feedback informed the amendments, and provide a side-by-side presentation of the proposed regulatory text and current standards. I request that the City place the April 2025 Police Department memorandum and any updated, geographically comparable public-safety and ABC-license concentration analysis into the corridor project record, and explain how staff considered this information. Residents should have an opportunity to review that analysis before decisions are made.

Please include this letter in the public record for PA2024-0002 and distribute it to the Planning Commission and City Council. Thank you for considering these comments and for distinguishing practical improvements to the existing corridor from proposals that would increase development or commercial activity.

Respectfully,
Keith W. Ricker
315 Dahlia Place
[email protected]
References
City of Newport Beach, Corona del Mar Commercial Corridor Study (official project page):
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-development/planningdivision/current-projects-and-cases/corona-del-mar-commercial-corridor-study Newport Beach Planning Commission, September 17, 2026, Item 5, PA2024-0002:
https://newportbeach.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?GUID=316E64F8-B3D1-457A-9EF1- 0949D4186085&ID=8209387
Newport Beach Police Department, memorandum from Wendy Joe, April 3, 2025, Restaurant at 3025–3027 East Coast Highway, PA2024-0231, attached to City legislative file 25-1084:
https://newportbeach.legistar.com/View.ashx?GUID=E2AAF291-66CC-4404-9876- 684CBFA4802B&ID=14594528&M=F
734
From: ��City Clerk's Office Sent: ��October 08, 2026 10:04 PM
To: ��Mulvey, Jennifer Subject: ��FW: Subject: Request for City Support � Modest Covered Wire Dog Run at Bayview Landing for Seniors From: pamela <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2026 10:03:48 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) To: Schmillen, Justin <[email protected]>; Recreation <[email protected]>; Jurjis, Seimone <[email protected]>; Kleiman, Lauren <[email protected]>; City Clerk's Office <[email protected]>; PBR Commission <[email protected]>
Subject: Subject: Request for City Support � Modest Covered Wire Dog Run at Bayview Landing for Seniors
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button above.

Justin Schmillen, Recreation & Senior Services Director Seimone Jurjis, City Manager
Mayor Lauren Kleiman
Dear Director Schmillen and the Newport Beach Recreation & Senior Services team, I am a resident of Bayview Landing (1121 Back Bay Drive), the City�s affordable senior apartments. Many of us no longer drive and are confined to walking our pets around the planters on the property. Health challenges limit us to very short distances, so we never get to see our dogs run and play. We also have to carry sticks because of coyotes�one day while I was bending over to clean up after my pup, a coyote came up from behind and tried to get my dog. Newer tenants who are allergic to dogs have led management to post more restrictions on where dogs can go, making life even more confining and creating conflict.

There is available space in the back garden area for a modest dog run. We are asking the City to help donate and install a compact, fully enclosed stainless chain-link dog run with a basic roof covering, stainless front entry door, and benches along the sides. This would let seniors safely enjoy their pets, reduce coyote risk, and ease tension�supporting healthy senior living.

Please note that onsite managers do not have authority for this improvement; Related Companies managers must be contacted. Onsite maintenance works very hard and simply 735
does not have the time to install something like this, so a quick, professional installation would also be important.

I would be glad to meet on-site or provide more details. Thank you for considering this practical request on behalf of Bayview Landing seniors and their companion animals.

I humbly ask the city clerk to please distribute this request to the city council.

Respectfully,
Pamela Crane and Spike the Wonder Doggie
Bayview Landing Resident
949-554-8150
736
[email protected]
Example of a simple dog run play yard.
737
738

Newport Beach City CouncilOctober 13, 2026

Newport Beach City Council
October 13, 2026