HomeMy WebLinkAboutIVc_Harbor and Bay Subcommittee Memo and EnclosuresAttachment No. 3
Harbor and Bay Subcommittee Memo with Enclosures
Community Development Department
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949 644-3200
newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment
Memorandum
To: Co-Chairs Evans and Greer, and GPAC Members
From: Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP, Principal Planner
Date: June 13, 2024
Re: GPAC Harbor and Bay Subcommittee Efforts
________________________________________________________________
The GPAC Harbor and Bay Subcommittee met on Tuesday, June 4 to review the
Harbor and Bay Existing Conditions and Background Analysis Report.
Subcommittee Chair Black will provide an overview of the Subcommittee’s
discussion and any actions at your upcoming meeting on June 19, 2024.
Enclosed for your reference are the following materials:
1. Action Minutes from the Subcommittee Meeting on June 4, 2024;
2. PowerPoint Presentation from the Subcommittee Meeting on June 4, 2024;
3. Comments received related to Dudek’s Harbor and Bay Existing Conditions
and Background Analysis Report; and
4. A revised Harbor and Bay Existing Conditions and Background Analysis
Report.
The GPAC Harbor and Bay Subcommittee will be seeking feedback on initial
considerations for outreach and visioning related to the Harbor and Bay Element.
The information contained in the report and supplemented by the action minutes
will be used as a tool to seek community input through the outreach and
engagement efforts.
Action Minutes: GPAC Harbor and Bay Subcommittee
Meeting Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024, at 4 p.m.
Location: Newport Beach Meeting Room at City Hall and Teams
GPAC and GPUSC Members in Attendance: Amber Snider, Jim Carlson, Jim Mosher, Curtis Black, and
Robert Rader
City Staff in Attendance: David Lee, Jerry Arregui, Paul Blank, Elizabeth Dickson (Consultant), Josh Baehr
(Consultant)
Others in Attendance: Chuck Fancher, George Hylkema, Adam Leverenz, and Anne Stenton and Wade
Womack of Newport Mooring Association
Brief Discussion Recap and Action Minutes
City staff initiated the meeting and discussed the following topics:
City Coordination
• Structural division of Harbor Commission and Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Department should
be considered.
o Harbor Commission is concerned with land uses that support the harbor but it’s not in
their purview.
▪ The 2006 adopted General Plan aimed to preserve harbor-related uses
▪ Boating as a recreational use has been lost in Newport Coast
▪ Water-dependent uses are in the water but also on the land
o Parks, Recreation, and Beaches doesn’t have enough emphasis on beaches.
o The City could consider restructuring to prevent confusion related to coastal tidelands
and water quality
o Further discussion with Harbor Commission and Parks, Recreation, and Beaches
Department is necessary.
• A Beach Commission should be considered.
Economics
• Tourism is driven by the beach and is what attracts visitors to the City.
• It is important to protect the beaches which in turn protects the economics of the City
• What is the value of beaches, harbor, and water recreation? What is the tax revenue? There needs
to be a consideration of total economics and City revenue when examining these topics.
o Both tourism dollars and property values contribute to city revenue
• There is a need to understand needed investment as compared to generation of tax revenues.
• Most tax revenues come from the homes and investments contribute to the home values.
• Need consideration of summer rentals of homes
• Balance between supporting and expanding tourism and preservation of community character
Coastal Needs and Community Infrastructure
• Sea level rise plan is needed
• Beach Nourishment – taking a phased approach
o Natural Solutions vs armoring
o Concerns on insurance issues compared to hazards
• Harbor and Bay Element should include beaches. Potential title should be “Harbor, Bay, and
Beaches.”
• Need to prevent threats to the vitality of water recreation.
• Should consider policies supporting lifeguarding – this topic intersects with the Safety Element
• Surfside Sunset project could benefit Newport Beach – one large project is needed over a
piecemealed project
• Knowing where to park a vehicle when visiting beaches. Perspectives supporting and against.
• Public restrooms close at 10 p.m. but people need them at later hours.
• Need for more Electric Boat Chargers – there is a group hired to install chargers at Marina Park
• Should consider that people live on boats.
Mooring:
• Mooring association
o Concerns about papers shared online and the committee weighing in on a mooring
realignment.
o Changes to the moorings and adding framework as if a lot of changes will be occurring.
o Mooring realignment - found a document online. Mooring field realignment and that is
going to lead to a major realignment and change harbor codes.
o There are boats on the harbor are used for residential purposes.
✓ Action: All GPAC members in attendance affirmed support for moving forward to full GPAC.
GPAC HARBOR AND BAY SUBCOMMITTEE
JUNE 04, 2024
Purpose and Process for Background
Analyses
Understand the
issues and
opportunities,
according to data
and experts
Establish a
baseline
Understand
Inform interested
parties and City
staff of key
findings
Provide initial
recommendations
based on findings
Inform Guide discussions
with community
members during
outreach and
engagement
Inform future
policy
development
Guide
Why are Background Analyses Important?
Process for GPAC Feedback
•Acts as liaison to City staff
•Reports to larger GPAC
Subcommittee
Chairperson
•Shared with respective
GPAC subcommittee
•Optional meeting and
taskforce
•“Big picture” and
recommendations feedback
Draft Document
Review •Share draft documents
•Share subcommittee
feedback
o Actionable meeting
minutes
Full GPAC
Harbor and Bay Element Analysis
Overview
•Optional Element –Not a mandated General Plan Element
•Adopted Element Addresses
•Economics (i.e. marine related uses, activities, and support facilities;
commercial uses along or dependent upon the water)
•Recreation (i.e. boating, kayaking, public spaces along water)
•Natural Resources (ecosystems, water quality, marine life)
•Community Character (i.e. coastal access, entertainment, design, visual)
•Background Analysis examines
•Land Use
•Economics
•Recreation and Public Access
•Natural Resources
Land Use
•Must be consistent with LCP
•Primarily residential and recreational/open spaces
•Commercial
•Marine Commercial
•Mixed Use
•Regulations beyond base-zone requirements include:
•Parking Management Plans
•Development on Bluffs
Harbor Economics
•Creates $787 million annual economic output (direct and indirect)
•Employment, tourism, and support services
•11% of total jobs
•Growth faster than County but not as fast as City
•50% of Jobs in Newport Harbor exist because of the Harbor
•Employment in maritime commercial declined from 2019-2020
•Could be due to technological advances
•Lower commercial and industrial land values cause market pressure to convert for residential uses
Boundary for Newport Harbor Economic Analysis
Tourism
•Approximately 9.5 million annual visitors
•$400 million in annual tourism-related spending (Newport Harbor alone)
•Does not include revenue generated through TOTs
•Visitors with longer stays, participate in more beach/water activities
•1/3 of hotels in City are in Newport Harbor
Newport Harbor
Hotels
Recreation and Public Access
•Boating
•Human or hand launched vessels
•Digital Mapping of Locations or Wayfinding?
•Mooring and Storage
•Community input on cost of slips
•Diving, Swimming, Surfing
•Thoughts and considerations?
•Kayaking, Fishing, and MORE
•Water quality for edible fishing
•Other thoughts and considerations?
Community
Facilities
Sensitive Environments
•Environmental Study Areas
(ESA) are considered ESHA,
unless proven otherwise
•Requires site-specific analysis
•Many Existing Wetlands in
the City
•GPAC has noted some as parts
of development and one near
BMW dealership
Considerations
Changing Coastlines
•Sea Level Rise Planning (SB 272)
•Prioritized for funding for implementing strategizes, if adopted by
2029
•Considering SLR with new infrastructure investments
Public Access
•Identifying vulnerable public access points
•Future public access points should consider potential vulnerability
Next Steps
•GPAC LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE INPUT
•Support this document for June 19th GPAC
•Outreach and Policy Considerations
•Harbor, Bay, and Beaches Element
Click to edit Master title style
Contact
NAME
TITLE
NAME
TITLE
P:
Email:
Website:
P:
Email:
Website:
Thank you!
Benjamin Zdeba, AICP
Principal Planner
P: 949-644-3253
Email: bzdeba@newportbeachca.gov
Jaime Murillo, AICP
Planning Manager
P:949-644-3209
Email:jmurillo@newportbeachca.gov
Comments on the Harbor &Bay Element Background Analysis
These comments on the Dudek Harbor and Bay Element Existing Conditions and Background Analysis
dated May 2024 are submitted by:GPAC member Jim Mosher (JMosher@newportbeachca.gov ),2210
Private Road,Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229).The opinions expressed are mine alone.
General Comments
I believe this is the seventh or eighth of Dudek’s background analyses,beginning with the
Resilience Existing Conditions Background Analysis.“Accepted”versions of each have been
posted to the “Newport,Together”Resource and Document Library page and less
systematically to the GPAC Subcommittee Laserfiche archive.
Although sometimes differently numbered,all but the first have followed a set pattern with
chapters entitled Introduction,General Plan and Regulatory Review (sometimes separated),
Existing Conditions,Issues and Opportunities,and Recommendations.Sometimes,as here,
there is an appended economic impact memo.
The first report,the Vision Statement Existing Conditions and Background Analysis dated
October 2023,promised (in Section 4.1,Next Steps,in apparent reference to the subsequent
“Existing Conditions”reports)that the first step would be:“An analysis of relevant data will be
conducted for all elements of the General Plan.This includes a study of existing regulations,
on-the-ground data,and progress made on the 2006 General Plan.”
I believe the reports’purpose is to guide the work of the GPAC,yet I have heard the consultant
refer to these as mere “conversation starters.”
As conversation starters,I have found most devoid of at least some information I would have
thought essential to the work of GPAC and that I expected from the initial promise,including
especially how conditions have changed since the current General Plan was written,whether
there are defects in the current plan obvious to an outside observer,whether the policies
adopted in 2006 were effective in achieving their stated goals,and (for the most part)whether
there are specific new issues that need to be addressed.
I have previously submitted detailed comments on the still pending Land Use Element Existing
Conditions Background Analysis.As with that,I find here that the General Plan and Regulatory
Review chapters simply recite policies with no insight as to whether they are good or bad,
complete or incomplete,how they compare to other cities,or (generally)how they interact.
Following the previous pattern,the Existing Conditions chapter fails to illuminate how conditions
have changed since the element was last revised,giving the GPAC ad hoc committee limited
insight into what those changes suggest about the current policies.
The Issues and Opportunities chapters tend to be very generic and in the few instances where
an issue is identified,its choice often seems quite arbitrary rather than comprehensive.
The Recommendations chapters tend to be even more generic,usually deferring to future
community input for what should be done.And while public input is fine,one might hope the
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 2 of 15
consultants would have provided more specific recommendations resulting from their
background analysis.
As an example,as last revised in 2006,the Harbor and Bay Element contains HB 5.2 (Berthing
and Moorings)calling for a variety of opportunities to accommodate “state and regional demand
for slip size and affordability,”HB 5.4 (Piers)dealing with residential piers,HB 5.6 (Mooring
Transfers)seeking to improve public access to moorings,HB 12.1 (Tideland Revenue)seeking
for the City to “Receive a market rate of return from all tideland users to recapture all related
City investment,services,and management costs,”Policy HB 12.3 (Tideland Leases and
Permits)calling for review of tidelands leases and permits “to reflect market value in the lease
rates,”and Policy HB 12.4 (Tideland Permit Fees)seeking to “Receive full cost recovery for
permit processing.”
Since those policies were written,a 2007 Orange County Grand Jury Report questioning
mooring transfer policy in Newport Harbor,the state legislature’s 2011 repeal of a relatively
short-lived statute exempting residential piers from tidelands rent obligations,and a general
rethinking of whether the tidelands need to pay for themselves by the Council’s Tidelands
Management Committee have significantly changed the “existing conditions”surrounding these
policies and have raised new “issues and opportunities”for revision,Yet,while a reevaluation of
tidelands rents is currently a hot button issue before the Harbor Commission,I can find none of
these policies even mentioned in the current background analysis,let alone identified as a
current issue or opportunity.
Similarly,one might think the fact that in 2024 the City has a Harbor Department,whereas in
2006 it did not,would be a significant change impacting the Harbor and Bay Element.Yet,as
best I can tell,it is not mentioned.
As with the other background analyses,of the information it does provide,much seems
inaccurate or incomplete,as detailed below.
Specific Comments
The present comments are generally confined to substantive errors and confusions,and rarely
point out grammatical typos.The page numbers refer to those appearing at the bottom of the
respective pages,which are six less than the electronic page numbers in the 70-page PDF.
Chapter 2 Introduction
Page 3:Much as it provides a table of Acronyms and Abbreviations on page iii,the report
should establish clear definitions of relevant terms and not add further confusion to them,as in
the opening phrase “Newport Bay,including Upper Newport Bay and Newport Harbor in Lower
Newport Bay,…”
Chapter 14 (Glossary)of the existing General Plan contains two successive entries labeled
“Newport Bay”(the second of which was likely intended to say “Newport Harbor”)which explain:
“The terms “Newport Bay”and “Newport Harbor”are often used interchangeably.However,
Newport Bay is an estuary consisting of the Lower Newport Bay (south of Pacific Coast
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 3 of 15
Highway)and the Upper Newport Bay (north of Pacific Coast Highway).Newport Harbor
generally refers to all the water area within Lower Newport Bay and within the Upper Newport
Bay,exclusive of the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve.”
In other words,the Upper Newport Bay Bridge on Coast Highway separates “Lower Newport
Bay”from “Upper Newport Bay.”1 “Newport Harbor”is not “in”“Lower Newport Bay.”Rather,
“Newport Harbor”is all of “Lower Newport Bay”plus that portion of “Upper Newport Bay”south
of the Ecological Reserve.The definitions of NBMC Title 17 (Harbor Code):
“The term “Newport Bay”shall mean the estuary consisting of the Lower Newport Bay and
the Upper Newport Bay.”
“The term “Newport Harbor”shall mean the water area within the Lower Newport Bay and
within the Upper Newport Bay,exclusive of the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve.”
Page 3:It would have seemed helpful for the report to note that the Harbor and Bay Element
was not newly added to the General Plan in 2006 (as the report might seem to imply)but
separately adopted by Resolution No.2001-45 (Item 25 at the June 12,2001,City Council
meeting)and revised in 2006.
Section 2.1 Element Purpose and Process
Page 3:The organization and use of Table 1 (Harbor and Bay Topics and Related General Plan
Requirements and Guidance)is confusing,since after the preceding paragraphs more of less
correctly presented the organization of the existing Harbor and Bay Element into topical areas
entitled Diversity of Land Uses,Diversity of Water Uses,Public Access,Water Quality and The
Environment,Visual Character,and Administration,2 Table 1 divides the topics differently,
omitting Visual Character and creating section names that don’t exist:“Natural Resources”
(possibly substituting for the parts of Water Quality and The Environment not related to water
quality?)and “Coastal Hazards”(not matching anything I can see in the existing plan).3
This same structure,differing from that of the current element,is employed in Chapter 4
(Existing Conditions)and Chapter 5 (Issues and Opportunities).
Is the consultant suggesting the Harbor and Bay Element should be reorganized into the topic
areas used in Tables 1 and 2 as well as in Chapters 4 and 5?
Additionally,Table 1 says there is no interrelationship between the Harbor and Bay Element and
state requirements for the Noise Element,even though the word “noise,”and the need to deal
3 Given this self-imposed rearrangement of topics,it is curious that the listing of “Coastal Hazards”
policies in the Harbor and Bay Element does not include the one policy that includes the word “hazards”
in its body:Policy HB 8.12 (Reduction of Infiltration)to avoid conditions that “would exacerbate geologic
hazards.”
2 The 2006 topic titles copy the original 2001 Harbor and Bay Element titles,where they differ only in that
“Diversity of Land Uses”and “Diversity of Water Uses”were a single topic titled “Diversity of Uses,”
perhaps because the 2001 element said it focused exclusively on the submerged lands.
1 A dedication plaque on the north pedestrian wall of the bridge also contains a line separating
“West”Pacific Coast Highway”from “East Pacific Coast Highway.”
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 4 of 15
with it,appears three times in the element,including in Policy HB 4.3 (Entertainment and Tour
Vessels)under Diversity of Water Uses.
Chapter 3 General Plan and Regulatory Review
Section 3.1 General Plan
Page 5:Despite the opening warning that “Ensuring consistency and coordination between
each of the General Plan elements is paramount in developing and implementing sound,
cohesive,and actionable policies,”the report fails to mention that many of the policies
appearing in the Harbor and Bay Element acknowledge themselves as exact duplicates of
policies appearing in other elements,and it fails to offer an opinion as to whether this is good or
practice.
And despite the claim that “Table 2 identifies how and where the harbor and bay are discussed
throughout the City’s adopted General Plan,”Table 2 seems very incomplete and sometimes
inaccurate.
Moreover,since it isn’t confined to “resilience,”the confusing title of Table 2 (“Resilience in the
Adopted General Plan”)appears to have been inadvertently copied for an earlier report.It was
presumably intended to be something like “Table 2 :Harbor and Bay Policies in the Adopted
General Plan.”
Even if its title were corrected,Table 2 is difficult to follow because it continues,without
explanation,to use the topic areas introduced in Table 1,which are not those of the current
element.That,plus the direction on page 15 to “Refer to the Resilience Element Existing
Conditions Background Analysis”for policies related to water quality,makes it hard to tell if all
the policies in the existing Harbor and Bay Element are listed.
Additionally,when one looks under Water Quality in Table 2 (Resilience in the Adopted General
Plan)of the Resilience Report,one finds very little,which leaves one wondering why it wasn’t
copied over like the rest.Of what little it does list,it mentions only three of the existing element’s
22 water quality policies,leaving one wondering why those three were chosen and the other 19
omitted.
It is also unclear why the prior Resilience Report would be a better authority as to water quality
issues than the prior Natural Resources Element Existing Conditions Background Analysis,
neither of which seem to mention most of the water quality policies in the Harbor and Bay
Element.
It seems notable that in reviewing the existing General Plan,and in particular the Harbor and
Bay Element,the consultant does not call attention to the absence of any existing General Plan
policies addressing sea level rise.
Nor did the consultant seem inspired to point out that the Circulation Element was updated and
renumbered subsequent to the last revision of the Harbor and Bay Element,so the
cross-references to the Circulation Element in the Harbor and Bay Element need to be
updated.This adds to the confusion,since Table 2 lists updated Circulation Element policy
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 5 of 15
numbers,which do not correlate with those readers encounter in the existing Harbor and Bay
Element.
As to the policies that are listed,I can detect no pattern,nor can I find any explanation,as to
why some are chosen and others are not.
Pages 7 -8:As an example,the first topic area in the policy section of the existing Harbor and
Bay Element is “Diversity of Land Uses,”which,in Table 2 of this report,starts at the bottom of
page 7.Table 2 lists Goal HB 1 and Policies HB 1.1 and 1.2,but it then inexplicably skips Goal 2
(“Retention of water-dependent and water-related uses and recreational activities as primary
uses of properties fronting on the Harbor”)with its supporting Policies HB 2.1 through 2.6 and
Goal 3 (“Enhanced and updated waterfront commercial areas”)with its supporting Policies HB
3.1 through 3.3,but it then includes Goal HB 6 (which the existing plan places in the “Public
Access”category)and lists its Policies HB 6.3 and 6.4 (which are duplicated as policies in the
General Plan’s Recreation Element).
One of the missing policies,Policy HB 2.3 is placed under “Diversity of Water Uses”even
though it most likely refers to landside uses,and three policies from the Land Use Element,
Policies LU 2.5,2.6 and 6.11.1 in this category,even though they also appear to have to do with
landside uses.
The goals and policies that existing plan identifies as actually supporting a “Diversity of Water
Uses”(Goals HB 4 and HB 5 and Policies HB 4.1 through 4.3 and HB 5.1 through 5.7)are
almost universally ignored,with,as best I can tell,a single one of them,Policy HB Policy 5.6,
(Mooring Transfers)listed in Table 2 of the present report in the “Public Access”category.
This rearrangement and omission of existing policies makes Table 2 difficult to follow,and
leaves readers wondering if any significance (other than sloppiness?)should be attached to it.
It also leaves one wondering why policies for such key harbor environmental issues as eelgrass
are not cross referenced from the current element and if the consultant thinks they should be.4
Similarly,the “Implementation Measures”column of Table 2 lists (without explanation)measure
titles from the existing General Plan’s Implementation Program provides no inside as to what the
status of the implementation is (we are apparently supposed to glean that from Table 3,but see
the comment on page 17,below).
Page 16:As to the accuracy of Table 2,I found it curious that on its last page,the
implementation measure for “Policy 8.4”(Marine Safety)from the Recreation Element is said to
be Imp.21.4:“Adopt and Implement Strategic Plan for Fiscal and Economic Sustainability.”
4 As Table 2 indicates,eelgrass (an exclusively “harbor and bay”issue)is mentioned in existing General
Plan Policies NR 11.3,11.4 and 11.5 under Goal NR 11 (“Protection of environmental resources in
Newport Harbor while preserving and enhancing public recreational boating activities”)of the Natural
Resources Element,but for unknown reasons,Policies NR 11.1 and 11.2 were copied into the existing
Harbor and Bay Element as Policies HB 10.3 and 10.1,but Policies NR 11.3,11.4 and 11.5 were not.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 6 of 15
That did not seem right,and further investigation of the Implementation Program reveals that
what is being quoted is the title of Imp.24.1.5 The correct title of Imp.21.4 is “Harbor Operations
and Management.”
But ignoring the error,shouldn’t one wonder why “marine safety”is not a topic in the existing
Harbor and Bay Element?
Section 3.2 Other Related Plans
Subsection 3.2.1 Relationship to the Local Coastal Program
Page 16:This subsection does not clearly explain that although something close to the City’s
current CLUP was certified in 2005 and adopted by Resolution No.2005-4,it was
comprehensively revised in 2009 to reflect the extensive changes made to the City’s General
Plan in 2006.Additionally,the report does not clearly explain the implications of footnote 1 that
“The CCC also maintains appeals jurisdiction in certain areas near the shoreline or in sensitive
ecological areas.”The practical effect of that (and the “certain areas”including all submerged
lands and tidelands)is the City does not have permitting authority over most of the development
within the scope of the Harbor and Bay Element.For example,all pier permits have to be
granted directly by the CCC.And in those areas,the City’s certified Local Coastal Program
serves only as guidance only,and is not binding on the CCC.
Page 17:I believe many,if not most,of what are described as amendments to the CLUP portion
of the LCP were actually amendments to the Implementation Plan.
Subsection 3.2.2 Relationship to Harbor Area Management Plan
Page 17:It is surprising the report does not mention that the creation of the Harbor Area
Management Plan6 was one of the goals of the existing Harbor and Bay Element.So the HAMP
is not mentioned in the current element except in the sense a HAMP was needed.
Subsection 3.2.3 Overview of Other Related Plans
It is rather amazing this section concludes without mentioning Title 17 (Harbor Code)of the
City’s Municipal Code.This is particularly remarkable in view of the stated purpose of the
original 2001 Harbor and Bay Element being a need “to control the content of Harbor
Regulations and Harbor Permit Policies,”with “Harbor Regulations”being defined (and
continuing to defined in the Glossary to the current General Plan)as “Title 17 of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code governing structures,uses and activities within the Harbor.”
6 The URL is copied from the HAMP link on the Harbor Commission page.The cover page says “April
2010 FINAL,”but it is unclear this is the HAMP ultimately “adopted”(without formal resolution)by the City
Council as Item 8 on its November 9,2010,consent calendar,since that item refers to a document stored
at a no longer active address.
5 As correctly indicated in Table 2,Imp.24.1,calling for the “Strategic Plan for Fiscal and Economic
Sustainability,”is cited elsewhere in the existing Harbor and Bay Element (as an implementation measure
for Policy HB 1.1.Although they are not listed in Table 2,it is also an implementation measure for Policies
HB 2.2,3.1 and 3.2.The Strategic Plan was,in fact,developed,adopted and once revised after adoption
of the 2006 General Plan,but it has since fallen into disuse.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 7 of 15
Page 17:In addition to omitting all Title 17 implementation measures,Table 3 (Local
Implementation and Administration),which is apparently intended to supplement the
“Implementation Measures”column of Table 2,is inexplicably organized under a different set of
topic areas,making the two unnecessarily difficult to correlate.It is also unclear why Table 3
refers readers to the Resilience Existing Conditions Background Analysis for implementation
and administration of “Coastal Hazards”and “Water Quality.”The sections that seem to be
referenced (in Table 3 of that prior report)are not lengthy and could easily have been copied for
ease of reference.It is also unclear why that earlier document did not list the Natural Resources
protections that are listed in this one.
Chapter 4 Existing Conditions
Page 21:See “page 3”comments,above.Again,the expression “Newport Harbor in Lower
Newport Bay”is awkward,since “Lower Newport Bay”is a smaller entity than “Newport Harbor.”
Section 4.1 Diversity of Land Uses
Pages 21 and 22:The text on page 21 says “The harbor and bay area includes three
mixed-use zones,three commercial zones,two open space and recreation zones,a public
facilities zone,and a private institutions zone.The extent and location of these zones are shown
in Figure 1.”It is strange,this doesn’t mention the residential zones.It is even stranger that
Figure 1 shows nothing of the sort.Instead,Figure 1 appears to show the “Overlay Coastal
Zoning Districts”described in Chapter 21.28 of the Municipal Code,most of which,such as the
Hoag Hospital height overlay district,would not normally be considered within the scope of the
Harbor and Bay Element.
Section 4.2 Diversity of Water Uses
Section 4.2.1 Vessel Launching
Pages 23-24:The author seems unaware of the hand launching of rowing shells and other
vessels under the western abutment of the Upper Newport Bay Bridge at Lower Castaways
Park (or their formerly being launched from the next to the eastern abutment).
Section 4.2.2 Mooring and Storage
Page 24:According to footnote 5,the Newport Mooring Association’s Moorings FAQ page was
used to conclude “These moorings are dispersed in 15 mooring fields throughout the harbor.Of
the 15 mooring fields,9 are classified as harbor and off-shore fields and 6 are classified as
on-shore fields.”7 However,it is unclear how these conclusions were arrived at since they are
inconsistent with the information on the NMA’s Mooring Fields page.That page lists 9 lettered
7 It seems strange the consultant relies on a third-party source for this information,and doesn’t have a
relevant City source.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 8 of 15
off-shore fields to which should be added the Newport Harbor Yacht Club field,the Balboa Yacht
Club field and the Harbor Patrol field,for a total of 12 off-shore fields.8
The NMA’s page also lists 8 lettered on-shore fields,which is inconsistent with the “6”claimed in
the report.
Page 24:The statement that “on-shore fields are those near the shore that use built shore
fixtures,such as docks or piers,for mooring”suggests the author has an incorrect conception of
on-shore moorings.The vessels on on-shore moorings are not tied to docks or piers.
Page 24:I don’t know if the count of 16 marinas is accurate,but the statement that “The Balboa
Yacht Basin Marina is the single marina owned and operated by the City”seems strange.
Although not used for long term storage of vessels other than City-owned boats,the marina at
Marina Park is City-owned and commonly referred to as a “marina.”It is even stranger that the
existence of Marina Park is not mentioned,as best I can tell,anywhere in the report.
Page 24:As to the count of public docks,had the consultants more recently consulted the City’s
Public Dock and Restroom Locations map,9 they might have noticed the new public dock
adjacent to the Balboa Marina just south of the Upper Newport Bay Bridge.I believe a public
dock is also being restored at the 29th Street end on the Peninsula.
Section 4.3 Public Access
Page 26:The source of Figure 2 (Coastal Access Map)is not indicated,and much of its
information is difficult to understand.For example it doesn’t indicate the boat ramp at the
Newport Dunes as a “Boat Access Point,”and although it does not seem related to the Harbor
and Bay Element,it marks only one ocean-facing pier (the Newport Pier,although Table 5
indicates there are two).The selection of “Beach Access”points seems rather arbitrary,10 and
also largely unrelated to the Harbor and Bay Element,while there being only four “Visual
Access”points for all of Newport Bay seems hard to believe.
Subsection 4.3.1 Public Access and Amenities
Page 26:The unhoused population of Orange County may find it interesting to read that,
according to Table 5 (Beach Access Amenities by Access Type),three of the 28 Beach Access
points (10.7%)have campgrounds.Oddly,Visit Newport Beach’s Where to Camp in Newport
10 A footnote to Table 5 says the Beach Access points are from the Indicators Project,but without
explanation of what that is.
9 A footnote says they consulted the map in October 2023,before the dock near Balboa Marina opened.
Even though it seems to be included in their Peninsula count,this map seems to be missing a public
docking opportunity that exists at the mixed use complex by the Crab Cooker according to the City’s
separate General Harbor Map (which,itself,is missing the new public dock by the expanded Balboa
Marina).The General Harbor Map also indicates a public dock on the Grand Canal at Park Avenue,which
would bring the number on Balboa Island to six (rather than the five indicated in the report)and it shows
the 29th Street dock.
8 It is unclear why the consultant refers to off-shore moorings as “harbor and off-shore moorings.”It might
also be noted that one of the off-shore fields,the G field,is over County tidelands.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 9 of 15
Beach page was aware of only one (the Newport Dunes Waterfront Resort and Marina)as of
July 6,2023.11 Without further explanation it is unclear if this table is referring to harbor beaches
or to Newport Beach beaches in general.
Subsection 4.3.2 (Public Access and Sea-Level Rise)
Page 27:Readers are instructed to read the Resilience Element Existing Conditions
Background Analysis to understand how beach access points and amenities may be lost to sea
level rise and it is “clear”those for boating and camping are most at risk.Unfortunately,for those
taking up the challenge,the word “camping”does not appear in that prior report,and it mentions
“boating”only with respect to water pollution.As best I can tell,the beach access points it says
may be at risk are those vulnerable to bluff and cliff erosion,and generally are along the coast,
not in the Newport Bay area that is the subject of the Harbor and Bay Element.
Evidently,we are supposed to look at “Figure 2 (Coastal Flooding in Newport Harbor)”and
“Figure 3 (Coastal Flooding in Newport Bay)”on pages 25 and 26 of the prior report12 and divine
how that relates to the very precise numbers in Table 6 (Loss of Beach Amenities Due to
Sea-Level Rise)in the present report.From Table 6,it looks like first one and then two of the
three campgrounds will be lost.But from Figures 2 and 3 of the prior report,the Newport Dunes
campsites don’t appear to be in danger,and we don’t know the location of the other two
campgrounds.13
Similarly,according to Figure 2 (Coastal Access Map)of the present report,the only two “Boat
Access”points recognized by Dudek are Marina Park and thew Newport Aquatic Center,and it
is unclear for Figures 2 and 3 of the prior report which of these Dudek thinks will be lost to sea
level rise.
Section 4.4 Natural Resources
Page 29:While I do not agree with that approach,if it was appropriate to defer all water quality
issues to the prior Resilience Report,why would it not be appropriate to defer to the prior
Natural Resources Report for all Natural Resources issues?
Subsection 4.4.1 Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas
Page 29:Many,but not all of the Environmental Study Areas identified in 2006 seem relevant to
the Harbor and Bay Element.
The present report is strangely silent on whether they have actually been studied in the
subsequent 18 years and what the conclusions were.Shouldn’t an existing conditions report
provide that information?
13 It seems unlikely those in the Crystal Cove wilderness would be vulnerable to sea level rise.
12 Those figures show expected flooding from an average storm with various amounts of sea level rise.It
is unclear from them how much flooding would occur from sea level rise alone.Would Marina Park be
continuously under water?
11 Visit Newport Beach is aware of two other campgrounds,both in the Crystal Cove wilderness,far from
Newport Bay and hardly what would be called access points to the Bay’s beaches.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 10 of 15
Subsection 4.4.2 Wetlands
Page 31:It is interesting to know there are competing technical definitions of “wetlands,”
although the ““three parameter definition”process used to designate wetlands by the U.S.Army
Corps of Engineers”is not disclosed,nor a reference to it provided.
It would have been more interesting to know the consultant’s conclusion as to the present extent
of wetlands in Newport Bay and its relevance to the Harbor and Bay Element.
Subsection 4.4.3 Marine and Coastal Resources
Page 32:The City’s “Oceanside beaches,including Newport Beach,Balboa Beach,Corona Del
Mar State Beach,and others”do not seem particularly relevant to the Harbor and Bay Element.
If the Back Bay View Park is relevant,then the County-administered Upper Newport Bay Nature
Preserve,which surrounds the Ecological Reserve,would seem equally relevant.
Section 4.5 Coastal Hazards
Page 32:As usual,I don’t find “Refer to the Resilience Existing Conditions and Background
Analysis”particularly helpful.It would have been helpful to summarize the information readers
are expected to extract by sifting through that prior report and what conclusions they are
expected to draw relevant to the Harbor and Bay Element.
Section 4.6 Recreational Water Quality
Page 32:It is interesting that while the present report previously deferred to the prior Resilience
Report for water quality matters,here it does not,even though Section 4.8 (Water Quality)of the
Resilience Report contains an extensive discussion of Recreational Water Quality existing
conditions (which is similar to,but also different from the present one).It is also interesting that
when we get to “Issues and Opportunities,”Section 5.6 of the present report will again fall silent
and defer to the prior Resilience Report for any insights regarding water quality issues affecting
the Bay.
And it is interesting that here the topic title has been restricted to “recreational”water quality,
whereas in all other chapters of this report it is “water quality”in general.This is particularly
curious since I believe there may be concerns about the availability of drinking water in the
harbor,with sometimes suggestions of converting moorings into floating dock systems providing
power and fresh water.
Page 33:Since it seems key to the schedule,it would have been helpful to indicate what “the
effective date of the EPA’s approval”was or might be.Has it already happened?
Page 34:Table 7 (Water Body Uses and Conditions)is largely inscrutable to me.To make
sense of Rows 4 and 5,I have to guess that in Row 4,“entire Lower Bay,including …”was
intended to read “entire Lower Bay,excluding …”I am pretty sure “Newport Beach”(by the
Newport Pier?)and “Balboa Beach”(by the Balboa Pier?)are not in Newport Bay.But without a
map I have no idea where “Costa Mesa Channel”is.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 11 of 15
Subsection 4.6.2 Efforts to Improve Recreational Water Quality
Page 34:The opening statement that “To address recreational water quality concerns,the City
created the Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee to advise the City Council on decisions
with the potential to impact water quality”seems a little misleading.
The Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee was technically created in 2012,the history of
City concern regarding the quality of water in the harbor is much longer,with the current
committee being a successor (after many intermediate iterations)to the Harbor Quality
Committee created by Resolution No.86-59 in 1986.The consultant is likely also unaware that
the Council has effectively disbanded the separate Environmental Quality Affairs Committee,
which was created a year later and has,at times,dealt with other environmental issues.
Section 4.7 Coordination with Partner Agencies
Page 35:This topic is a subset of the “Administration”goals in the existing Harbor and Bay
Element.I have found no explanation of why it was singled out for an existing conditions
analysis and the other administrative topics (such as tidelands rents,discussed in my General
Comments,above)should be ignored.
As to the analysis,it seems woefully short.
The key coordination policy in the existing element,oddly not mentioned at all in the present
report (see page 15 where it should appear in Table 2),is Policy HB 10.1,which called for a
CIty-funded study of the relative roles of City and County.
Shouldn’t this report explain if that review took place and what its outcome was?It seems to
have resulted in the creation of City Harbor Department,something also not mentioned in this
report.
More generally,shouldn’t this section of the report explain how jurisdictions are divided or
shared within the Harbor and Bay and who administers what?
A search on the word “sheriff”comes up blank as does “Harbor Department”and “Coast Guard.”
“Harbor Patrol”yields one hit on page 24 where a “launch site at the Newport Beach Harbor
Patrol Facility”is mentioned,but not what the Harbor Patrol does.”Department of Fish and
Game”does produce eight hits (all in Table 2),although the report fails to note the agency it is
likely referring to changed “Game”to “Wildlife”in 2013.
Subsection 4.7.1 Marine Protected Areas
Page 35:This subsection does not make clear that the Crystal Cove State Marine Conservation
Area is outside the range of the Harbor and Bay Element.It similarly fails to make clear that part
of Newport Harbor (the part north of Pacific Coast Highway’s Upper Newport Bay Bridge is in
the Upper Newport Bay State Marine Conservation Area (which is a type of Marine Protected
Area).
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 12 of 15
Subsection 4.7.2 Corona Del Mar State Beach
Page 35:It is unclear why this existing conditions topic is included since CdM State Beach is
outside the area dealt with by the Harbor and Bay Element –although the Harbor Commission
has considered the idea of expanding their scope to create a regulated off-shore anchorage
there.
Section 4.8 Relevant Projects in Progress
Page 35:The first “relevant project”mentioned (“to transfer certain select areas from CCC
permitting jurisdiction to the City”)seems to be a task assigned to Dudek by City staff through a
staff-initiated and approved contract (C-8848-1,On-Call PSA for Coastal Consulting Services).It
seems unusual that it has been presented to the CCC,since I do not recall it ever having been
publicly discussed by the City Council or any appointed body.
As to the second “relevant project”cited (an “application submitted to the CCC for the
re-organization of Mooring Field C”)it is surprising the report does not mention the controversy
surrounding it,for not everyone,including some of the affected mooring holders,agrees it will
“improve boating safety”within the field.
It is a bit hard to believe these are the only relevant projects in progress.Has the consultant
reviewed the Harbor Commission’s current objectives –not to mention the current controversy
over tidelands rents?
Chapter 5 Issues and Opportunities
Page 37:As noted in my General Comments at the start,above,this chapter follows the usual
pattern of being so generic that I am unable to put my finger on any specific issues,other than
sea level rise,identified by the consultant as a result of their background analysis.
Aren’t there continuing issues such as loss of marine-supporting uses,including in inland areas
such as West Newport Mesa,piers and docks that don’t align with federally mandated pierhead
lines,water circulation in the canals around Newport Island and many more?
And even as to sea level rise,why is there no mention of such possibilities as a tide gate at the
harbor entrance?
Page 38:As previously noted,deferring to the “Resilience Existing Conditions and Background
Analysis”for issues and opportunities regarding Coastal Hazards and Water Quality places an
unnecessary burden on the reader,who is presumably expected to sift through that document to
find within it the issues and opportunities relevant to the Harbor and Bay Element.
Shouldn’t the consultant have done that for the readers?
Chapter 6 Recommendations
Page 39:Calling the GPAC’s attention to Senate Bill No.272 (2023)is certainly helpful,
although it seems strange the recommendation about the need to respond to it is not supported
by any mention of the bill in the body of the report.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 13 of 15
Section 6.1 Plan for Sea-Level Rise
Page 39:It is interesting to learn that “The City has already completed a Sea Level Rise
Vulnerability Assessment (2019).”Since this seems to be the first mention of it,it would be even
more interesting to learn where it can be found.It does not appear to have been previously
mentioned in the present report,and while Subsection 4.1.3 of the frequently-cited Resilience
Report is titled “Vulnerability Assessment”(under “Coastal Hazards”),the subsequent
subsections mention assessments completed by Placer County (presumably not for sea level
rise),but not by our city.With some effort,I found the March 13,2018,Council agenda item
awarding the contract,an April 25,2019,notice of availability of the resulting study,with a
still-active link to the actual document dated April 20,2019.But it is not clear to me it was ever
formally received by the Council.
Section 6.2 Preserve Public Access
Page 39:Again,where specifically are the “access points with campgrounds and boating …
projected to be impacted first and most profoundly”by sea level rise?If the consultant has
identified these,why are the readers left to guess?
Section 6.3 Support a Mix of Coastal Land Uses
Page 40:This recommendation strikes me as using many words to say little,if anything,that
isn’t already obvious.
Section 6.4 Sea-Level Rise Public Project Checklist
Page 40:This would seem to be a subpart of Recommendation 6.1 (Plan for Sea-Level Rise).
Appendix A:Newport Beach General Plan Update Economic Support –
Harbor and Bay Element
Pages 41-64:I do not feel competent to comment on the credibility of this analysis.
It might be compared to the April 2,2018 Newport Beach Harbor,Economic and Fiscal Impact
Analysis by a different firm,found on the City’s website.Given the likely uncertainty of such
things,it is not entirely clear why a new analysis was paid for –or why the earlier one is not
cited in the later one.
The significance of dollar impact figures taken out of context of the larger economy is difficult for
me to comprehend.It is not clear to me what fraction of the overall City and regional economy
these constitute.I would also intuitively guess that one of the greatest economic impacts of
Newport Bay,the beaches,the harbor and the City’s coastal setting in general is the high
residential property values they create throughout nearby areas.It is not clear to me the
analysis reflects that.
Those two reports might be compared to Section 2.5 Economic Development of the 2004
Technical Background Report for the previous General Plan Update,which provided a
comprehensive “Fiscal Impact Analysis and Model”and a “Retail Commercial Market Analysis”
(starting on page 115 of the 934-page PDF).Starting on page 157 it gives a readable
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 14 of 15
multi-paragraph evolution of the Marine Industry sector in Newport Beach.The present report
reduces this to the less intelligible “The Newport Harbor began by developing a Traded Cluster
of maritime industries such as boatbuilding,shipbuilding,and commercial fishing.However,
overtime as the cluster matured it created a new cluster of water recreation industries and the
associated tourism that came from it.To understand the relative strength of existing clusters,
Pro Forma Advisors utilized a location quotient analysis to compare Newport Harbor to the
larger County region.”
It might also be noted that Section 12 (Fiscal Impact Analysis)of the Implementation Program of
the existing General Plan commits the City to implementation measures to develop and
maintain a model for assessing the fiscal impact of proposed General Plan amendments.The
model was developed by the firm that prepared the 2004 report and the City typically contracts
with them for the required analyses.
It is unclear why the present consultant is duplicating that effort,or if their subconsultant is using
the established model.
My Conclusions
Like the other background reports that have been prepared for the GPAC,I found this Harbor
and Bay Element analysis rather disappointing.
It is troubling that it does not analyze many of the policy topics in the existing plan,point out
errors,omissions and inconsistencies,or,other than with respect to sea level rise,provide
guidance on improvements needed.So is the absence of any discussion of changes in existing
conditions since the last update of the element.
The issues it identifies and recommendations it makes seem quite limited (and in some cases,
difficult to guess since it refers readers to a separate report where those relevant to the Harbor
and Bay Element are not clearly delineated).
The organization of the analysis,without explanation,into seven topic areas that differ from the
policy topic areas into which the existing element is organized makes it especially difficult to
use.For example,since it presents findings about ocean-facing beaches and other coastal
resources,does the consultant believe the Harbor and Bay Element would benefit from being
expanded to include them?
Whole topic areas seem missing.For example,marine safety and the division of jurisdiction
between agencies,including the proper role of the new City Harbor Department.
The absence of any mention of NBMC Title 17,whose development the element is supposed to
guide,and controversies that have arisen since 2006,such as tidelands rent issues,is
particularly striking.
In addition to the incompleteness of the information it provides,the unreliability of some of it is
also troubling.
May 2024 Harbor Background Report comments -Jim Mosher,6/2/2024 Page 15 of 15
Such seemingly trivial things as confusing the existing terminology of Upper Newport Bay,
Lower Newport Bay and Newport Harbor undermines its credibility.14 Does the consultant think
the terminology should be changed?Or do they just not understand it?
Finally,despite 21 footnotes,the sources of the information and misinformation presented is not
always obvious,and in some cases where the source is specified (such as the 2019 “Sea Level
Rise Vulnerability Assessment”),the reader is given no clue as to how to find that source to
verify what is concluded from it.A comprehensive list of sources consulted would have been
helpful.
14 Possibly the consultant was misled by the 2001 title,“Harbor and Bay Element,”which is redundant to
the extent “Harbor”refers to the water-covered portion of the harbor,since that is entirely,by definition,a
subpart of Newport Bay.The intended scope of the current element is not entirely clear,but “Harbor”
might now be thought of as adding to the “Bay”the manmade improvements and landside supporting
facilities that support recreational and commercial activities on the Bay.
General Plan Update
Harbor and Bay Element
Existing Conditions and
Background Analysis
MAY JUNE 2024
Prepared for:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Prepared by:
27271 Las Ramblas
Mission Viejo, California 92691
Printed on 30% post-consumer recycled material.
i
MAY JUNE 2024
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................ iii
1 Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................................. 1
2 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Element Purpose and Process............................................................................................................... 3
3 General Plan and Regulatory Review .................................................................................................................. 5
3.1 General Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2 Other Related Plans ............................................................................................................................ 16
3.2.1 Relationship to the Local Coastal Program .......................................................................... 16
3.2.2 Relationship to Harbor Area Management Plan .................................................................. 17
3.2.3 Overview of Other Related Plans ...................................................................................... 1817
4 Existing Conditions ........................................................................................................................................ 2221
4.1 Diversity of Land Uses ..................................................................................................................... 2221
4.1.1 Mixed-Use Coastal Zoning Districts .................................................................................. 2422
4.1.2 Commercial Coastal Zoning Districts ................................................................................ 2423
4.1.3 Special Purpose Coastal Zoning Districts ......................................................................... 2423
4.2 Diversity of Water Uses ................................................................................................................... 2523
4.2.1 Vessel Launching ............................................................................................................... 2523
4.2.2 Mooring and Storage ......................................................................................................... 2524
4.2.3 Harbor Support Facilities ................................................................................................... 2725
4.3 Public Access ................................................................................................................................... 2725
4.3.1 Public Access and Amenities ............................................................................................ 2926
4.3.2 Public Access and Sea-Level Rise .................................................................................... 3027
4.4 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................................... 3329
4.4.1 Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas ......................................................................... 3329
4.4.2 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................ 3531
4.4.3 Marine and Coastal Resources ......................................................................................... 3631
4.5 Coastal Hazards .............................................................................................................................. 3632
4.6 Recreational Water Quality ............................................................................................................. 3632
4.6.1 Recreational Water Quality Concerns ............................................................................... 3632
4.6.2 Efforts to Improve Recreational Water Quality ................................................................. 3934
4.7 Coordination with Partner Agencies ............................................................................................... 4035
4.7.1 Marine Protected Areas ..................................................................................................... 4135
4.7.2 Corona Del Mar State Beach............................................................................................. 4235
4.8 Relevant Projects in Progress ......................................................................................................... 4235
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
ii
MAY JUNE 2024
5 Issues and Opportunities .............................................................................................................................. 4337
5.1 Diversity of Land Uses ..................................................................................................................... 4337
5.2 Diversity of Water Uses ................................................................................................................... 4337
5.3 Public Access ................................................................................................................................... 4337
5.4 Natural Resources ........................................................................................................................... 4438
5.5 Coastal Hazards .............................................................................................................................. 4438
5.6 Water Quality ................................................................................................................................... 4438
5.7 Coordination with Partner Agencies ............................................................................................... 4438
6 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................ 4539
6.1 Plan for Sea-Level Rise ................................................................................................................... 4539
6.2 Preserve Public Access ................................................................................................................... 4539
6.3 Support a Mix of Coastal Land Uses .............................................................................................. 4640
6.4 Sea-Level Rise Public Project Checklist ......................................................................................... 4640
TABLES
1 Harbor and Bay Topics and Related General Plan Requirements and Guidance ............................................ 3
2 Resilience in the Adopted General Plan ............................................................................................................. 5
3 Local Implementation and Administration .................................................................................................. 1817
4 Mooring and Storage Facilities ..................................................................................................................... 2625
5 Beach Access Amenities by Access Type ..................................................................................................... 2926
6 Loss of Beach Amenities Due to Sea-Level Rise ......................................................................................... 3228
7 Water Body Uses and Conditions ................................................................................................................. 3934
FIGURES
1 Zoning Districts ............................................................................................................................................. 2322
2 Coastal Access Map ...................................................................................................................................... 2725
3 Environmental Study Areas .......................................................................................................................... 3430
APPENDIX
Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................................... 4841
iii
MAY JUNE 2024
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation/Term Spelled Out Form
CCC California Coastal Commission
City City of Newport Beach
CLUP Coastal Land Use Plan
ESHA Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area
LCP Local Coastal Program
MPA Marine Protected Area
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
iv
MAY JUNE 2024
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
1
MAY JUNE 2024
1 Executive Summary
This report comprehensively assesses seven harbor- and bay-related topics that support the character of the coastal
zone in Newport Beach: diversity of land uses, diversity of water uses, public access, natural resources, coastal
hazards, recreational water quality, and coordination with partner agencies. It identifies how the City of
Newport Beach (City) is already addressing these topics, and how the City could further address the topics through
its General Plan Update to preserve and improve the quality of these resources.
The policies of the Harbor and Bay Element guide development on and near the water, and provide a cohesive
vision for the continued operation and enhancement of the area as part of the General Plan Update. The Harbor
and Bay Element works in concert with the Local Coastal Program (LCP) (including the Coastal Land Use Plan and
Implementation Plan), which incorporates California Coastal Act policies and serves as the standard of review for
the City’s permitting in the coastal zone. The Harbor and Bay Element also aligns with the Harbor Area Management
Plan, which is an integrated resource management tool intended to plan for key sediment management, water
quality, restoration, and public use projects in Newport Harbor.
The City currently has extensive resources throughout the Newport Bay and Harbor and Newport Bay area that are
of great value to its residents and visitors. To best manage the harbor and bay, the City will need to work with
interested parties to address sea-level rise and the requirements of the California Coastal Act while furthering
identified City priorities. Water-dependent uses, including boating and fishing, should be protected and promoted
in coordination with adhering to environmental laws that enhance coastal recreation. Planning and development
standards should be informed by the best available science and projections of sea-level rise. Public access should
be enhanced whenever new development or redevelopment is proposed at the water’s edge. Visitor-supporting
uses, including low-cost options, should be prioritized and protected. Recreational water quality must be protected
through public education and appropriate stormwater facilities, paying special attention to the impacts of
rainstorms and non-point-source pollution. Lastly, the City should coordinate with the various regulating agencies,
land managers, and interested parties to create consistent and collaborative management of Newport Bay and
Harbor and Newport Bay.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
2
MAY JUNE 2024
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
3
MAY JUNE 2024
2 Introduction
Newport Bay, which is the estuary consisting of including UpperLower Newport Bay and Newport Harbor in Lower
Upper Newport Bay, and Newport Harbor, the water area within Newport Bay outside of the Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve, isare an integral part toof Newport Beach’s identity, providing a beautiful natural resource
that offers economic and recreational opportunities. Protection of Newport Bay and Harbor and the opportunities
it offers is of great importance, which is reflected in the Harbor and Bay Element of the City’s General Plan. The
Harbor and Bay Element is one of four optional elements that the City included in the 2006 General Plan. The
intent of the adopted Harbor and Bay Element is to balance competing interests, preserve diverse land uses,
retain recreational opportunities and public access, and protect the natural environment.
The City is currently in the process of a comprehensive update to the General Plan. This report serves as initial
technical support for the City’s update to the Harbor and Bay Element. This document provides a high-level overview
of the adopted Harbor and Bay Element, discusses goals and polices related to the harbor and bay, provides
pathways to ensure continuity between goals and policies that may appear in other elements, analyzes available
data related to the harbor and bay, and concludes with recommendations to strengthen and enhance the updated
Harbor and Bay Element as part of the General Plan Update. The updated Harbor and Bay Element will build upon
the adopted General Plan’s vision of balancing the needs of residents, businesses, and visitors while ensuring that
Newport Bay and Harbor isare accessible and preserved, and offers recreational opportunities.
2.1 Element Purpose and Process
The adopted Harbor and Bay Element’s goals and policies aim to preserve the diversity and charm of
Newport Beach’s waterfront without unduly restricting the rights of waterfront property owners. Goals and policies
within the adopted Harbor and Bay Element have been organized to address water- and land-related issues, the
provision of public access, water quality and environmental issues, visual characteristics, and coordination with
State and Federal agencies that manage land in the coastal zone.
The General Plan Guidelines authored by the California Office of Planning and Research dictate required elements
and contents of a general plan. The Harbor and Bay Element is not a required element of the City’s General Plan,
but it includes regulations related to land use, conservation, safety, and open spaces, all of which are required
elements of a general plan (see Table 1). Specifically, the Harbor and Bay Element addresses public access,
diversity of land uses, diversity of water uses, natural resources, coastal hazards, recreational water quality, and
coordination with partner agencies. Some of these topics are also covered in the Land Use, Natural Resources,
Safety, Recreation, and Circulation Elements (see Section 3.1, General Plan). The Harbor and Bay Element relates
to land in the coastal zone, which is regulated by the LCP (see Section 3.2, Other Related Plans).
Table 1. Harbor and Bay Topics and Related General Plan Requirements
and Guidance
Topic
Land Use
Element
Circulation
Element
Housing
Element
Conservation
Element
Open
Space
Element
Noise
Element
Safety
Element
Public Access Related Related Related N/A Related N/A N/A
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
4
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 1. Harbor and Bay Topics and Related General Plan Requirements
and Guidance
Topic
Land Use
Element
Circulation
Element
Housing
Element
Conservation
Element
Open
Space
Element
Noise
Element
Safety
Element
Diversity of
Land Uses
Required Related N/A Related Related N/ARelat
ed
N/A
Diversity of
Water Uses
Required Related N/A Related Related N/A N/A
Public Access Related Related Related N/A Related N/A N/A
Natural
Resources
Related N/A N/A Required Required N/A N/A
Coastal
Hazards
Required N/A N/A Related N/A N/A Required
Recreational
Water Quality
Related N/A N/A Required Required N/A Related
Coordination
with Partner
Agencies
N/A N/A N/A Related N/A N/A N/A
Notes:
N/A = not appliable
5
MAY JUNE 2024
3 General Plan and Regulatory Review
3.1 General Plan
This section provides a summary of findings from review of the adopted Harbor and Bay Element, as well as an
overview of the following adopted General Plan elements that relate to the Harbor and Bay Element: Land Use,
Natural Resources, Safety, Recreation, and Circulation. Since the recent update to the Circulation Element, policy
numbers have changed and cross references may be inconsistent, but the specific policies are outlined below for
reference as they relate to the Harbor and Bay. Ensuring consistency and coordination between each of the General
Plan elements is paramount in developing and implementing sound, cohesive, and actionable policies. Table 2
identifies how and where the harbor and bay are discussed throughout the City’s adopted General Plan.
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
Diversity of Land Uses
Harbor and Bay
Element
Policies under Goal 1 address
supporting visitors and residents by
protecting the character and charm of
the harbor and waterfront:
▪ Policy 1.1, Preservation and
Enhancement of Water-Dependent
and Related Uses
Policy 1.2, Waterfront Public Spaces
1.1 (Imp 2.1, 14.3, 14.6, 21.1, 24.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Coordinate with California Coastal
Commission
▪ Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
▪ Adopt and Implement Strategic Plan for Fiscal
and Economic Sustainability
1.2 (Imp 20.1, 20.2, 20.3)
▪ Design, Fund, and Construct Streetscape
Improvements
▪ Design, Fund, and Construct Waterfront
Promenade
Fund and Construct Public View Sites
Policies under Goal 6 maintain public
access to coastal resources:
▪ Policy 6.3, Provision of Visitor
Facilities in Newport Harbor
Policy 6.4, Enhancement of Guest and
Public Facilities
6.3 (Policy R8.3) (Imp 14.3, 23.1)
▪ Interagency Coordination to Provide New
Facilities
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
6.4 (Policy R8.5) (Imp 2.1, 23.1)
▪ Support Facilities
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
6
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
Diversity of Water Uses
Harbor and Bay
Element
A policy under Goal 2 addresses the
retention of water-dependent and
water-related recreational activities:
Policy 2.3, Marine Support Uses
2.3 (Imp 2.1, 14.3, 14.6, 21.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
A policy under Goal 6 addresses
serving the needs of the boating
community:
Policy 6.4, Enhancement of Guest and
Public Facilities
6.4 (Policy R8.5) (Imp 2.1, 23.1)
▪ Support Facilities
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
Land Use
Element
Policies under Goal 2 address
preserving harbor supporting uses:
▪ Policy 2.5, Harbor and Waterfront
Uses
Policy 2.6, Visitor Serving Uses
2.5 (Imp 2.5; 5.1; 21.4; 24.4)
▪ Ensure that Private Development and Capital
Improvements are Consistent with the
General Plan
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Review and Revise Coastal Land Use Plan for
Consistency with the General Plan
Adopt and Implement Strategic Plan for Fiscal
and Economic Sustainability
A policy under Goal 6 addresses
water-oriented uses:
Policy 6.11.1, Priority Uses
6.4 (Imp 8.1; 21.1)
▪ Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
Review Codes and Ordinances for Consistency
with the General Plan and Update Periodically
Public Access
Circulation
Element
A policy under Goal 5.4 addresses
pedestrian infrastructure:
Policy 5.4.3, Newport Harbor Trails
and Walkways
5.4.3 (Imp 16.11)
Maintain Trails
Harbor and Bay
Element
Policies under Goal 1 address public
access to Newport Harbor:
▪ Policy 1.1, Preservation and
Enhancement of Water-Dependent
and Related Uses
Policy 1.2, Waterfront Public Spaces
1.1 (Imp 2.1, 14.3, 14.6, 21.1, 24.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Coordinate with California Coastal
Commission
▪ Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
7
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
▪ Adopt and Implement Strategic Plan for Fiscal
and Economic Sustainability
1.2 (Imp 20.1, 20.2, 20.3)
▪ Design, Fund, and Construct Streetscape
Improvements
▪ Design, Fund, and Construct Waterfront
Promenade
Fund and Construct Public View Sites
A policy under Goal 2 addresses public
access facilities:
Policy 2.6, Public Access Facilities
2.6 (Imp 2.1, 21.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
A policy under Goal 5 addresses
access to moorings:
Policy 5.6, Mooring Transfers
5.6 (Imp 2.1, 21.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
Policies under Goal 6 address public
access to coastal resources:
▪ Policy 6.1, Provision of Public
Coastal Access
▪ Policy 6.2, Long Range Plan for
Public Trails and Walkways
Policy 6.6, Marine Terminals
6.1 (Policy R9.1) (Imp 2.1, 5.1, 20.2)
▪ Provision of Public Coastal Access
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Review and Revise Coastal Land Use Plan for
Consistency with the General Plan
▪ Design, Fund, and Construct Waterfront
Promenade
6.2 (Policy CE 5.4.3) (Imp 23.1, 23.2)
▪ Newport Harbor Trails and Walkways
▪ Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
▪ Maintain and Improve Parks and Recreation
Facilities
6.6 (Policy CE 5.5.1) (Imp 16.12)
▪ Marine Terminals
Marine Transportation
Policies under Goal 7 address public
access to Upper Newport Bay:
▪ Policy 7.2, Management of Upper
Newport Bay Ecological Reserve
(UNBER)
7.2 (Policy NR 16.3) (Imp 14.3, 14.7, 14.11,
14.16)
▪ Management of Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve (UNBER)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
8
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
Policy 7.3, Management of Upper
Newport Bay Ecological Reserve
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Other Agencies
7.3 (Policy NR 16.4) (Imp 14.3, 23.4)
▪ Management of Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
Maintain Recreation Programs for Newport
Beach’s Residents
Recreation
Element
A policy under Goal 9 addresses the
provision and maintenance of public
access to coastal resources:
Policy 9.4, Bay/Harbor Encroachments
9.4 (Imp 2.1)
Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with the
General Plan
Natural Resources
Harbor and Bay
Element
Policies under Goal 7 look to protect
Upper Newport Bay with the standards
applicable to our nation’s most
valuable natural resources:
▪ Policy 7.1, Funding Support for
Upper Newport Bay Ecosystem
Restoration Project
▪ Policy 7.2, Management of Upper
Newport Bay Ecological Reserve
(UNBER)
▪ Policy 7.3, Management of Upper
Newport Bay Ecological Reserve
Policy 7.6, Water Quality Study
7.1 (Policy NR 16.1) (Imp 14.12, 14.13, 14.14)
▪ Funding Support for Upper Newport Bay
Ecosystem Restoration Project
▪ Coordinate with United States Army Corps of
Engineers
▪ Coordinate with United States Fish and
Wildlife Service
▪ Coordinate with Environmental Protection
Agency
7.2 (Policy NR 16.3) (Imp 14.3, 14.7, 14.11,
14.16)
▪ Management of Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve (UNBER)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Other Agencies
7.3 (Policy NR 16.4) (Imp 14.3, 23.4)
▪ Management of Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Maintain Recreation Programs for Newport
Beach’s Residents
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
9
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
7.6 (Policy NR 3.22) (Imp 8.1, 17.1)
▪ Water Quality Study
▪ Review Codes and Ordinances for
Consistency with the General Plan and
Update Periodically
Maintain and Implement Urban Water
Management Plans and Encourage Conservation
Policies under Goal 8 look to enhance
and protect natural water bodies:
▪ Policy 8.2, Water Pollution
Prevention
▪ Policy 8.5, Natural Water Bodies
▪ Policy 8.13, Natural Wetlands
Policy 8.19, Natural Drainage Systems
8.2 (Policy NR 3.2) (Imp 6.1, 8.1, 17.1, 18.1,
19.1)
▪ Water Pollution Prevention
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
▪ Review Codes and Ordinances for
Consistency with the General Plan and
Update Periodically
▪ Maintain and Implement Urban Water
Management Plans and Encourage
Conservation
▪ Maintain and Implement Sewer Master Plan
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
8.5 (Policy NR 3.5) (Imp 6.1, 19.1)
▪ Natural Water Bodies
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
▪ Maintain Storm Drainage Facilities
8.13 (Policy NR 3.13) (Imp 6.1, 19.1)
▪ Natural Wetlands
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
▪ Maintain Storm Drainage Facilities
8.19 (Policy NR 3.19) (Imp 7.1)
▪ Natural Drainage Systems
Review Building and Construction Code for
Consistency with General Plan
A policy under Goal 10 looks to
improve intergovernmental
coordination over harbor and bay
management:
Policy 10.3, Harbor Area Management
Plan
10.3 (Policy NR 11.1) (Imp 21.1)
▪ Harbor Area Management Plan
Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
10
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
Natural
Resources
Element
Policies under Goal 3 look to improve
water quality by using natural
wetlands and protecting natural water
bodies:
▪ Policy 3.5, Natural Water Bodies
▪ Policy 3.13, Natural Wetlands
Policy 3.19, Natural Drainage Systems
3.5 (Policy HB 8.5) (Imp 6.1, 19.1)
▪ Natural Water Bodies
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
▪ Maintain Storm Drainage Facilities
3.13 (Policy HB 8.13) (Imp 6.1, 19.1)
▪ Natural Wetlands
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
▪ Maintain Storm Drainage Facilities
3.19 (Policy HB 8.19) (Imp 6.1)
▪ Natural Drainage Systems
Review the Subdivision Ordinance for Consistency
with the General Plan
A policy under Goal 4 looks to improve
water quality by restoring natural
systems:
Policy 4.3, Restore Natural Hydrologic
Conditions
4.3 (Imp 6.1, 14.11, 14.3, 19.1)
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
Review the Subdivision Ordinance for Consistency
with the General Plan
Policies under Goal 10 look to protect
biological resources from urban
development:
▪ Policy 10.1, Terrestrial and Marine
Resource Protection
▪ Policy 10.2, Orange County
Natural Communities
Conservation Plan
▪ Policy 10.3, Analysis of
Environmental Study Areas
▪ Policy 10.4, New Development
Siting and Design
▪ Policy 10.5, Development in Areas
Containing Significant or Rare
Biological Resources
▪ Policy 10.6, Use of Buffers
▪ Policy 10.7, Exterior Lighting
▪ Policy 10.8, Standards for Buck
Gully and Morning Canyon
▪ Policy 10.9, Development on
Banning Ranch
10.1 (Imp 14.7, 14.11, 14.12, 14.16)
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Coordinate with United States Army Corps of
Engineers
▪ Other Agencies
10.2 (Imp 2.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
10.3 (Imp 2.1, 6.1,)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
10.4 (Imp 2.1)
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
11
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
Policy 10.10, Giant Kelp Reforestation ▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
10.5 (Imp 2.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
10.6 (Imp 2.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
10.7 (Imp 2.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
10.8 (Imp 2.1, 6.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
10.9 (Imp 2.1, 14.7, 14.11, 14.12)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Coordinate with United States Army Corps of
Engineers
10.10 (Imp 14.3, 14.11, 14.12, 21.1)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Coordinate with United States Army Corps of
Engineers
Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
Policies under Goal 11 protect
environmental resources in Newport
Harbor:
▪ Policy 11.1, Harbor Area
Management Plan
▪ Policy 11.3, Eelgrass Protection
11.1 (Policy HB 10.3) (Imp 21.1)
▪ Harbor Area Management Plan
▪ Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
11.3 (Imp 21.1)
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
12
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
▪ Policy 11.4, Interagency
Coordination on Establishing
Eelgrass Restoration Sites
Policy 11.5, Eelgrass Mitigation
▪ Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
11.4 (Imp 14.3, 14.7, 14.11, 14.13, 14.16)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Coordinate with United States Fish and
Wildlife Service
▪ Other Agencies
11.5 (Imp 14.3, 14.7, 14.11, 14.12, 21.1)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Coordinate with United States Army Corps of
Engineers
Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
Policies under Goal 12 protect
sensitive coastal dune habitats:
▪ Policy 12.1, Exotic Vegetation
Removal and Native Vegetation
Restoration
Policy 12.2, Dune Habitat Protection
12.1 (Imp 2.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
12.2 (Imp 23.1, 23.2)
▪ Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
Maintain and Improve Parks and Recreation
Facilities
A policy under Goal 13 protects,
maintains, and enhances wetlands:
Policy 13.1, Wetland Protection
13.1 (Imp 1.2, 2.1, 21.1)
▪ Update and Revise the General Plan to
Reflect Changing Conditions and Visions
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
A policy under Goal 14 ensures deep-
water channels and water-related
developments do not impact the
capacities of wetlands or estuaries:
Policy 14.4, Wetland or Estuary
Capacity
14.4 (Imp 6.1, 14.11)
▪ Review the Subdivision Ordinance for
Consistency with the General Plan
California Public Utilities Commission
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
13
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
Policies under Goal 16 protect and
manage Upper Newport Bay with the
standards applicable to our nation’s
most valuable natural resources:
▪ Policy 16.1, Funding Support for
Upper Newport Bay Ecosystem
Restoration Project
▪ Policy 16.2, Big Canyon Creek
Restoration Project
▪ Policy 16.3, Management of Upper
Newport Bay Ecological Reserve
(UNBER)
▪ Policy 16.4, Management of Upper
Newport Bay Ecological Reserve
▪ Policy 16.5, Public Uses within
Upper Newport Bay Ecological
Reserve
Policy 16.6, Water-Related Education
and Research within Upper Newport
Bay
16.1 (Policy HB 7.1) (Imp 14.12, 14.13, 14.14)
▪ Funding Support for Upper Newport Bay
Ecosystem Restoration Project
▪ Coordinate with United States Army Corps of
Engineers
▪ Coordinate with United States Fish and
Wildlife Service
▪ Coordinate with Environmental Protection
Agency
16.2 (Imp 14.3, 14.7)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
16.3 (Policy HB 7.2) (Imp 14.3, 14.7, 14.11,
14.16)
▪ Management of Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve (UNBER)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Coordinate with the California Resources
Agency, Department of Fish and Game
▪ California Public Utilities Commission
▪ Other Agencies
16.4 (Policy HB 7.3) (Imp 14.3, 23.4)
▪ Management of Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Maintain Recreation Programs for Newport
Beach’s Residents
16.5 (Policy HB 7.4) (Imp 2.1, 23.1)
▪ Public Uses within Upper Newport Bay
Ecological Reserve
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
16.6 (Policy HB 7.5) (Imp 2.1, 23.1)
▪ Water-Related Education and Research
within Upper Newport Bay
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
14
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
Policies under Goal 17 look to
maintain and expand open space
resources:
▪ Policy 17.1, Open Space
Protection
▪ Policy 17.2, Other Uses of Public
Sites Designated for Open Space
Policy 17.3, New Open Space Areas
17.1 (Imp 1.2, 2.1)
▪ Update and Revise the General Plan to
Reflect Changing Conditions and Visions
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
17.2 (Imp 1.2, 2.1)
▪ Update and Revise the General Plan to
Reflect Changing Conditions and Visions
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
17.3 (Imp 1.2, 2.1)
▪ Update and Revise the General Plan to
Reflect Changing Conditions and Visions
Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with the
General Plan
Policies under Goal 23 protect natural
landscapes, such as bluffs, from
development:
▪ Policy 23.1, Maintenance of
Natural Topography
▪ Policy 23.3, Open Space
Dedication or Preservation for
New Planned Communities
▪ Policy 23.4, New Development on
Blufftops
Policy 23.7, New Development Design
and Siting
23.1 (Imp 2.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
23.3 (Imp 2.1, 3.1, 4.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
▪ Preparation of New Specific Plans
▪ New “Planned Community” Development
Plans
23.4 (Imp 2.1)
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan
23.7 (Imp 2.1)
Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with the
General Plan
Coastal Hazards
Harbor and Bay
Element
Policies under Goal 9 address the
need for and design of bulkheads:
▪ Policy 9.1, Design of New or
Renovated Bulkheads
▪ Amend the Zoning Code for Consistency with
the General Plan:
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
15
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
▪ Policy 9.2, Protection of
Beach Profile
- Codify requirements and standards for the
location and design of development to
protect terrestrial and marine
environmental resources and protect
against environmental hazards
▪ Review and Revise the Coastal Land Use Plan
for Consistency with the General Plan
Safety Element Policies under Goal 2 address the
need to protect people and property
from coastal hazards related to storm
surges and seiches:
▪ Policy 2.1, Wave Up-Rush and
Impact Reports
▪ Policy 2.2, Shoreline Management
Plan
▪ Policy 2.5, Shoreline Protection
Alternatives
▪ Develop Harbor Area Management Plan
▪ Maintain Hazards Database
Policies under Goal 3 address adverse
effects of coastal erosion:
▪ Policy 3.1, Coastal Hazard Studies
▪ Policy 3.2, Beach Width
Monitoring
▪ Policy 3.3, Maintenance of Beach
Width and Elevations
▪ Develop Harbor Area Management Plan
▪ Maintain Hazards Database
Recreational Water Quality
Refer to the Resilience Element Existing Conditions Background Analysis
Coordination with Partner Agencies
Harbor and Bay
Element
Policies under Goal 6 address
maintaining public access by working
with partner agencies:
▪ Policy 6.3, Provision of Visitor
Facilities in Newport Harbor
▪ Policy 6.6, Marine Terminals
6.3 (Policy R8.3) (Imp 14.3, 23.1)
▪ Interagency Coordination to Provide New
Facilities
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
6.6 (Policy CE 5.5.1) (Imp 16.12)
▪ Marine Terminals
▪ Marine Transportation
Recreation
Element
Policies under Goal 8 address harbor-
related recreation:
▪ Policy 8.3, Interagency
Coordination to Provide New
Facilities
▪ Policy 8.4, Marine Safety
▪ Policy 8.5, Support Facilities
8.3, 8.5, 8.6 (Imp 14.3, 21.1, 23.1)
▪ Coordinate with Orange County
▪ Review and Update Harbor and Tidelands
Improvement Plans
▪ Maintain and Update Parks and Recreation
Facility Plans
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
16
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 2. Harbor and Bay Considerations in the Adopted General Plan
Element Goal/Key Policies Implementation Measures
▪ Policy 8.6, Public Recreational
Access
▪ Policy 8.7, Marine Recreational
Programs
▪ Adopt and Implement Strategic Plan for Fiscal
and Economic Sustainability
8.4 (Imp 21.4)
▪ Adopt and Implement Strategic Plan for Fiscal
and Economic Sustainability
8.7 (Imp 23.4)
▪ Maintain Recreation Programs for Newport
Beach’s Residents
3.2 Other Related Plans
Newport Bay and Harbor and Newport Bay are special areas that require additional custom planning efforts. This
includes the LCP, which allows the City to have regulating and permitting authority in the coastal zone, and the
Harbor Area Management Plan, which addresses sediment management, water quality, restoration, and public use
projects.
3.2.1 Relationship to the Local Coastal Program
The California Coastal Act is a State law that governs development in the coastal zone, and the California Coastal
Commission (CCC) is the State agency that implements the California Coastal Act. The CCC maintains regulatory
authority and permitting jurisdiction over the use of land and water in the coastal zone until a local government
prepares an LCP that includes both a Land Use Plan and an Implementation Plan. Generally, the Land Use Plan is
either a portion of a city’s General Plan or a distinct plan that indicates the kinds, locations, and intensities of land
uses in that city’s coastal zone and includes resource protection and development policies. In Newport Beach, the
Coastal Land Use Plan is a distinct document. The Implementation Plan is made up of zoning ordinances and maps
that implement and further delineate the policies of the Land Use Plan, and it can be a distinct ordinance or part of
a city’s larger zoning code. In Newport Beach, the Implementation Plan has been incorporated into the Newport
Beach Municipal Code under Title 21, Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan. After approval of the LCP by the
local government, the CCC reviews the LCP for consistency with the policies of the California Coastal Act and certifies
it. Once a local government’s LCP is certified, the CCC delegates permitting authority for development within the
coastal zone to that local government.1 The LCP is thusly the standard regulatory and permitting guide for
development in a city’s coastal zone.
1 The California Coastal Commission (CCC) retains permitting jurisdiction in select areas, including tidelands, submerged lands, and
public trust lands. The CCC also maintains appeals jurisdiction in certain areas near the shoreline or in sensitive ecological areas.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
17
MAY JUNE 2024
The Newport Beach LCP was certified by the CCC in 20172 and has been amended regularly to clarify and update
existing policies and to incorporate new policies to reflect emerging planning issues and the best available science.3
Thus, the City’s LCP is the permitting authority for development in most of the coastal zone in Newport Beach, aside
from tidelands, submerged lands, and public trust lands, which fall under CCC permitting jurisdiction. Additionally,
while Newport Coast is within the City’s boundary, the Newport Beach LCP does not address Newport Coast.
Prior to the annexation of Newport Coast into the City of Newport Beach, the Newport Coast was addressed in the
County of Orange County LCP, which was developed and certified by the CCC in 1988, when a majority of county
lands were undeveloped and unincorporated. As the Newport Coast segment of the County of Orange County LCP
has not been updated since its certification, it is still the regulatory document for areas in the Coastal Zone in
Newport Coast. the Newport Beach LCP supersedes as the regulatory and permitting authority of the Newport
Coast.
The Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP), one-half of the City’s LCP, includes goals, objectives, and policies
that govern the use of land and water within the coastal zone of Newport Beach. Specifically, the CLUP addresses
public access, the marine environment, land resources, development, and industrial development in its three
chapters: Land Use and Development, Public Access and Recreation, and Coastal Resource Protection. Approved
amendments to the CLUP LCP include multiple housing-related amendments that dictate floor-to-area ratios,
building heights, accessory dwelling unit regulations, short-term lodging units, and nonconforming residential
structures. Additional amendment topics include parking requirements, flood hazard overlay districts, land use
regulations, and landscape standards. Each amendment must be certified by the CCC before it takes effect as part
of the LCP.
Both the CLUP and the Harbor and Bay Element of the General Plan include goals, objectives, and policies that
apply to land and water uses in the harbor and bay. There is overlap between the topics and policies in the
documents, and they are designed to work together with consistency and cohesion between the two, especially as
relating to California Coastal Act conformity. One important distinction is that the Harbor and Bay Element is not
part of the LCP, and thus is not certified by the CCC. As such, whenever any potential conflicts between policies in
the two documents should arise, or if the Harbor and Bay Element is silent on a particular topic, the policies of the
CLUP and the LCP take precedence over those of the Harbor and Bay Element.
3.2.2 Relationship to Harbor Area Management Plan
The Harbor Area Management Plan is a resource management tool for the City to use to move forward with key
sediment management, water quality, restoration, and public use projects critical in meeting the following overall
goals: (1) maintain the beneficial uses of the Upper and Lower Newport Bay; (2) provide a practical framework to
meet regulatory requirements in the current and anticipated municipal discharge permits, sediment management
permits, total maximum daily loads, and other regulatory programs for Newport Bay; and (3) support a sustainable
estuary ecosystem able to be integrated with upstream sustainable watersheds and adjacent coastal area systems.
2 The Land Use Plan portion of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) was first certified by the CCC in 2005, and the Implementation
Plan followed in 2017. An LCP is not considered certified until both the Land Use Plan and Implementation Plan are approved by
the CCC.
3 Local governments are allowed up to four major amendments per year.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
18
MAY JUNE 2024
3.2.3 Overview of Other Related Plans
As stated above, the City regulates the Harbor and Bay Element through the Implementation Plan portion (Title 21)
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the CLUP portion of the LCP, and the Harbor Area Management Plan. Table
3 provides an overview of these plans organized by relevant topic areas, as they pertain to the California Coastal
Act. In any instance where conflict may arise between different policies, management plans, and zoning codes, the
policy that has been certified by the CCC takes precedence.
Table 3. Local Implementation and Administration
Public Access
▪ The Harbor Area Management Plan, adopted in 2010, addresses marine habitat restoration, including
eelgrass and fisheries, boat anchorages, marinas, and other development activities. This plan lays out
objectives and goals to achieve a sustainable Newport Bay, including protecting recreational values by
improving community and public access to the shoreline, beach, trails, and bays through waterfront and
infrastructure improvement projects. Furthermore, the plan recognizes that Newport Bay serves a variety of
uses and users, including recreation, wildlife, and businesses, which requires a balance of public access
improvements with enhancement and protection of environmental resources.
▪ The Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, which the City of Newport Beach (City) adopted in 2017
following California Coastal Commission approval, sets forth policies and procedures that govern the use of
land and water in the coastal zone within City limits and its sphere of influence (except Newport Coast and
Banning Ranch). Implementation Plan Chapter 21.30A, Public Access and Recreation, contains impact
determination procedures and development standards that maximize the provision of public access
throughout Newport Beach’s shoreline through maintaining existing amenities and requiring the creation of
new access points, where appropriate, for new development. Appendix B, Coastal Access Signing Program,
of the Implementation Plan sets standards for wayfinding, public access, and informational, regulatory, and
identification signage throughout the plan area.
- The Newport Beach Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) includes extensive and thorough policies for
maintaining and expanding public access opportunities because public access to the built and natural
environments in and around Newport Beach is important because of the significant draw these
environments are for visitors and residents. The CLUP includes a chapter titled Public Access and
Recreation that provides procedures and standards to preserve and improve public access to the
shoreline and coastal bluffs in conjunction with development. Several policies include multiple public
access categories, for example, providing access to waterfront-oriented commercial uses such as dining
and recreation as a way of promoting public access to the nearby beach and waterfront. The CLUP
contains more than 40 policies that support and protect public access to coastal resources. These
policies include the provision of direct access to the shoreline, waterfront, beaches, harbors, bays, and
other water-related areas in and around Newport Beach, including the creation of a network of
connected walkways and trails throughout Newport Harbor and shorelines beyond. Additionally, the CLUP
includes a significant number of policies that protect public view corridors, public-centered amenities,
and access to natural resources, including bluffs, trails, parks, and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat
Areas. Many of these policies protect public access from potential threats, often new development. New
development must minimize impacts to public access through siting and design, and provide access
easements in cases where impacts cannot be avoided. The CLUP also has several policies dealing
specifically with bay and harbor encroachments such as piers, floats, and bulkheads, and their potential
impacts to public access. This existing comprehensive policy sufficiently protects public access in
Newport Beach.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
19
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 3. Local Implementation and Administration
Visitor Serving
▪ Appendix B, Coastal Access Signing Program, of the Implementation Plan explains how the City will provide
wayfinding, public access, informational, regulatory, and identification signage throughout the coastal zone.
Appendix B ensures that visitors can navigate the area and its many attractions with ease. Furthermore,
the Implementation Plan includes Chapter 21.40, Off-Street Parking, which ensures visitor
accommodations include sufficient off-street parking. In addition, Chapter 21.46, Transfer of Development
Rights, ensures that properties within visitor-serving commercial (CV) coastal zoning districts are not
transferred to non-visitor-serving commercial coastal zoning districts. This chapter protects visitor-serving
areas from non-conforming land uses. Also included in this chapter are approval qualifications for
authorizing the transfer of development rights in these areas, which include the presence of visitor-serving
amenities or areas.
▪ The CLUP includes a chapter titled Public Access and Recreation that serves visitors by providing them with
many opportunities to access natural resources and recreational opportunities, which are a significant draw
to the area. The CLUP promotes a variety of visitor-serving uses through several different policies. These
visitor-serving policies cover retail, restaurants, recreation, accommodations, and institutional
establishments, such as museums. Many of these policies encourage visitor-serving retail in specific areas
around Newport Beach, including Balboa Village, Balboa Island, Balboa Peninsula, Mariners Mile, Lido
Village, Back Bay Landing Site, and others. Most visitor-serving policies include the promotion of retail,
recreation, or marine-related activities. Existing visitor-serving policies are sufficient to ensure the continual
draw of visitors to this area.
Harbor and Boating
▪ The Harbor Area Management Plan, adopted in 2010, addresses marine habitat restoration, including
eelgrass and fisheries, boat anchorages, marinas, and other water-related development activities.
Specifically, this plan includes dredging requirements and contaminated sediment management, eelgrass
capacity and management tools, strategies to replenish beaches, harbor channel and pierhead regulations,
harbor area management tools, and funding options for various improvement and restoration projects. This
plan looks to manage Newport Harbor properly by balancing harbor-related activities, such as boating and
development, with enhancement of environmental resources.
▪ Appendix A, Sea Level Rise, of the Implementation Plan explains how the City will undertake a proactive
program to monitor the rate of sea-level rise and implement protective measures. These measures may
impact Newport Harbor and the boating industry in the area because infrastructure near the bay may
become inundated by sea-level rise. In addition to Appendix A, the Implementation Plan includes a chapter
titled Harbor and Bay Regulations that provides procedures and regulations for harbor-related uses. This
chapter covers the establishment of channels and harbor lines, locations for boat anchorage and mooring,
protection of vessel launching and docking facilities, and protection of coastal access to harbors.
▪ The Coastal Land Use Plan promotes the protection and enhancement of the commercial and recreational
boating and maritime communities in Newport Beach through related harbor and boating policies. Through
the policies in the chapter titled Land Use and Development and the chapter titled Public Access and
Recreation, the CLUP promotes harbor support systems that allow vessels and the boating community to
thrive in Newport Beach, including vessel maintenance, fuel docks, and other supportive systems.
Natural Resources
▪ The Harbor Area Management Plan, adopted in 2010, addresses marine habitat restoration, harbor
infrastructure, and other water-related development activities. This plan looks to balance marine and
bayfront development with natural resource protection. Some specific natural resources are protected
through this plan through eelgrass capacity and management tools, natural beach replenishment
strategies, water quality analysis and improvements, sediment control, and improved management and
restoration of the Upper Newport Bay. This plan recognizes that economic development and visitor-serving
uses in the area rely on the natural resources of Newport Bay to attract businesses and visitors.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
20
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 3. Local Implementation and Administration
▪ The Habitat Protection section of the Implementation Plan sets development standards to protect sensitive
habitat areas from any significant disruption, restore the quality of coastal water resources and the biological
productivity of the area, and protect wetlands as a significant water quality and natural habitat resource.
▪ The Coastal Resource Protection chapter of the CLUP contains extensive policies protecting biological
resources, including those in and around the harbor and bay, such as eelgrass. The CLUP policies require
the protection and enhancement of existing sensitive resource areas, and impact avoidance/mitigation for
new development. There are also policies specifically directed at minimizing environmental effects from
dredging, diking, and filling of coastal waters. These existing CLUP policies comprehensively protect
important natural resources within the harbor and bay.
Coastal Hazards
▪ Refer to the Resilience Existing Conditions Background Analysis.
Water Quality
▪ Refer to the Resilience Existing Conditions Background Analysis.
Coordination with Partner Agencies
▪ The Harbor Area Management Plan, adopted in 2010, addresses marine habitat restoration, including
eelgrass and fisheries, boat anchorages, marinas, and other development activities. This plan uses
coordination and partner agencies primarily to fund the priority elements and projects identified in this
plan. Furthermore, the plan identifies potential State and Federal partners, as well as grant funding and
local partnerships, for these projects. A specific example is a partnership with watershed leads to improve
water quality in the harbor and meet current requirements for total maximum daily loads. Generally, this
plan relies on many types of public and private partnerships to achieve the overarching goals of harbor
development and natural resource protection in the plan area.
▪ The CLUP addresses natural areas, including Upper Newport Bay and other natural areas, managed by
partner agencies, and provides a framework for monitoring ecological conditions in the area, evaluating
biological and aquatic resources, protecting Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas, creating open space
designations, managing trails, addressing development impacts to natural resources, and other related
topics. In various chapters, the CLUP specifically lays out coordination efforts with the County of Orange,
California Coastal Commission, State Department of Parks and Recreation, California Coastal Conservancy,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, National Marine Fisheries Service, Natural Resources Conservation
Service, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
3.3 Harbor Code
The Newport Beach Harbor Code is a comprehensive set of regulations within the Ccity's municipal code that
addresses the management and use of Newport Harbor. It begins with general provisions, defining key terms and
outlining the code's jurisdiction and applicabilityregulations within Newport Harbor and adjacent areas. The code
includes detailed harbor management regulations, covering vessel movement, mooring, anchoring, and docking,
and specifying the responsibilities and authority of the Harbor Master or equivalent official. It sets requirements for
obtaining mooring permits, designates specific mooring areas, and establishes rules for the duration and conditions
of mooring and anchoring.
The code also regulates vessel operations, including speed limits, wake restrictions, the operation of personal
watercraft, and safety equipment requirements. Sanitation, waste disposal, and hazardous waste management are
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
21
MAY JUNE 2024
also addressed in the code to prevent pollution, protect water quality, and safeguard marine life and habitats.
Commercial activities within the harbor are also governed by the code, which outlines permits and regulations for
commercial vessels and businesses, including charter services and water taxis.
Public use and access to the harbor are addressed with rules for public docks, piers, and recreational facilities, as
well as guidelines for public events and activities within the harbor area. The code specifies access rights and
restrictions for the general public. Enforcement procedures are outlined, detailing the process for enforcing harbor
regulations, penalties and fines for violations, and the appeals process for contested violations and penalties.
3.4 SB 272
Senate Bill 272 (SB 272) mandates that local governments within the coastal zone develop sea level rise plans by
January 1, 2034. These plans, integrated into local coastal programs or subregional shoreline resiliency plans, must
be approved by either the California Coastal Commission (CCC). The bill requires the CCC, in coordination with the
Ocean Protection Council and the California Sea Level Rise State and Regional Support Collaborative, to establish
preparation guidelines for these plans by December 31, 2024. Additionally, SB 272 stipulates that local
governments with approved plans will be prioritized for state funding for adaptation strategies and projects.
The City has already completed a Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment (2019) identifying likely sea-level rise
impacts throughout Newport Beach, including Newport Harbor. These vulnerabilities should be addressed through
development of adaptation strategies that follow the latest CCC guidance. The combination of sea-level rise
projections, land uses, and existing development patterns will help identify areas that are good candidates for
adaptation measures, such as hard armoring (e.g., seawalls, bulkheads, riprap, revetments, caissons), structural
elevation, sacrificial structures, development removal based on trigger points, floodproofing, adaptive design,
relocation, and nature-based solutions (e.g., beach nourishment, dune enhancement, wetland restoration, living
shorelines).
22
MAY JUNE 2024
4 Existing Conditions
Newport Bay, including Upper Newport Bay and Newport Harbor in Lower Newport Bay, is a vital component of the
City’s natural resources, community identity, and economy. Newport Harbor historically contained commercial and
industrial uses, which have been replaced by a range of recreational and boating activities, such as sport fishing,
kayaking, diving, wind surfing, sailboat racing, and excursion and entertainment boat activities, as well as
visitor-serving commercial and recreational uses and waterfront residences, which are central to the City’s identity
and charm. This existing conditions and background analysis reviews eight topic areas central to maintaining the
character of the harbor and bay.
4.1 Diversity of Land Uses
While Newport Harbor and Bay are those areas that consist of water, use of land adjacent to the Harbor and Bay
helps to ensure that there is access to beaches and recreation, enhances the vibrancy of beach neighborhoods,
and creates economic opportunities that exist due to the proximity to the water, Residents and visitors are drawn
to the harbor and bay because the balance of development and natural resources provides many recreation,
shopping, and dining opportunities. Additionally, the area provides key employment opportunities that are unique
to Newport Harbor. The economic impact of employment in Newport Harbor is detailed in Appendix A to this report,
which provides context to the economic output from both employment and tourism spending . The harbor and bay
area includes three mixed-use zones, three commercial zones, two open space and recreation zones, a public
facilities zone, and a private institutions zone. The extent and location of these zones are shown in Figure 1.
As shown in Figure 1, land use inadjacent to the Newport Bay and Harbor is primarily comprised of open space (OS)
and parks and recreation (PR), single residential unit detached (RSD) and two unit residential (RT), some multiple
unit residential (RM), and various kinds of commercial (CN, CC, CG, and mixed use). Land use is most diverse in
areas along the Pacific Coast Highway and Balboa Peninsula. Development adjacent to Newport Harbor is more
dense and offers walkability and a wide variety of uses, which is typical of beach neighborhoods. These land use
designations implement and delineate the policies of the Land Use Plan, andCoastal Zoning Districts are adopted
as Title 21, “Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan,” of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and implement
the land use designations and policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan.
23
MAY JUNE 2024
Figure 1. Zoning Coastal Land Use Plan Districts
24
MAY JUNE 2024
4.1.1 Mixed-Use Coastal Zoning Districts
The Mixed-Use Coastal Zoning Districts include fivethreefive sepaerate districts with varied land use regulations and
purposes. The Mixed-use Vertical District (MU-V) s promotes mixed-use structures that include retail, offices,
restaurants, and other similar uses on the ground floor, with residential dwelling units above. The Mixed-Use Mariners
Mile District (MU-MM)s includes properties on the inland side of Coastal Highway in the Mariners Mile Corridor.
Properties bordering the highway must be developed for non-residential uses, and the rest of the zoning district can
be developed as freestanding non-residential uses, multi-unit dwellings, or mixed-use structures with residential
spaces existing above non-residential ground floor uses. The Mixed-Use Cannery Village and 15th Street (MU-CV/15th
St.) and 15th Street District applies to communities in this area that intend to cohesively develop a neighborhood that
contains multi-family residential, mixed-use, and non-residential land uses. To enhance pedestrian activity and
interest, the zoning district requires ground-floor uses along street frontages to be non-residential. The Mixed-Use
Water dDistricts (MU-W1) appliesy to all waterfront properties along the Mariners Mile Corridor where both non-
residential uses and residential dwellings are permitted. In these districts, 50% or more of the square footage in a
mixed-use development must be used for non-residential uses, including marine-related and visitor-serving uses.
Lastly, the second Mixed-Use Water District (MU-W2) applies to all waterfront properties where marine-related uses
can combine with general commercial, visitor-serving commercial, and residential dwellings on upper floors.
4.1.2 Commercial Coastal Zoning Districts
The Commercial Coastal Zoning Districts include seven zones, three of which are explicitly visitor-serving. The
Commercial Recreational and Marine Coastal Zoning District provides for areas appropriate for commercial
development on or near the waterfront that will encourage the continuation of coastal-dependent and
coastal-related uses, maintain the marine character, encourage mutually supportive businesses, encourage
visitor-serving and recreational uses, and encourage physical and visual access to the bay. The Commercial
Visitor-Serving Coastal Zoning District is intended to provide for areas appropriate for accommodations, goods, and
services intended to primarily serve visitors of Newport Beach. The Commercial Visitor-Serving—Lido Village Zoning
District provides for a range of accommodations (e.g., hotels, motels, hostels), goods, and services intended to
primarily serve visitors to Newport Beach.
4.1.3 Special Purpose Coastal Zoning Districts
Special Purpose Coastal Zoning Districts are split into six sub-districts based on the individual special purpose of
each district. The Open Space (OS) Coastal Zoning Districts protects and enhances natural resources in Newport
Beach while providing areas for a range of public and private uses. Additionally, these this districts protects open
space areas in residential and non-residential developments where no further development is allowed. The Planned
Community (PC) Coastal Zoning Districts looks to diversify land uses by providing appropriate areas for the
development of comprehensive projects. These This districts balances the environmental and physical arrangement
of land uses to ensure a well-coordinated and functional built environment. The Public Facilities (PF) Coastal Zoning
Districts includes appropriate areas for public facilities, such as community centers, libraries, public utilities,
schools, cultural institutions, and various governmental facilities. The Private Institutions (PI) Coastal Zoning
Districts provides areas for private facilities that serve the general public, including meeting facilities, care homes,
cultural institutions, health care facilities, marinas, museums, private schools, social clubs, and other similar
facilities. The Parks and Recreation (PR) Coastal Zoning Districts provides areas for public and private recreation,
including aquatic facilities, golf courses, marina facilities, tennis clubs, and other similar recreation-related facilities.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
25
MAY JUNE 2024
Lastly, the Tidelands and Submerged Lands (TS) Coastal Zoning Districts looks to protect, maintain, and enhance
natural resources that exist in tidelands and submerged lands in Newport Bay, the Pacific Ocean, and other adjacent
lands. However, these this zoning districts does not apply to historical tidelands and submerged lands that have
been filled or reclaimed.
4.2 Diversity of Water Uses
Newport Beach offers many harbor- and boating-related opportunities to support recreation on Newport Bay and
the wider Pacific Ocean. There are various anchorage and mooring facilities for people to dock or store their boats,
which are described in detail below. Furthermore, there are many vessel launching, renting, and maintenance
facilities that support the local boating community.
4.2.1 Vessel Launching
Vessel launching facilities include ramps and docks that support motorboats, sailboats, yachts, kayaks, and rowing
shells. Public boat launching facilities in Newport Beach include the Newport Dunes launch ramp and multiple
hand-carried-boat launching locations. There are 46 hand-carried-boat launching sites in the Newport Harbor:
21 street-end beaches where people can launch human-powered (non-motorized) boats on Balboa Peninsula,
22 street-end beaches on Balboa Island, 1 launch site at the Newport Aquatic Center, 1 launch site at the
Newport Beach Harbor Patrol Facility, and 1 launch site at Newport Dunes.4 Vessel launching is also provided at
the Orange Coast College David A. Grant Collegiate Rowing Center and the Boy Scout Newport Sea Base through
participation in their various programs. Private vessel launching facilities are provided at commercial marinas, boat
yards, yacht clubs, and boating associations for members.
4.2.2 Mooring and Storage
Vessel mooring refers to a location, often a dock, slip, or fixed mooring buoy, in a marina where boats can be tied
off or moored in water. Vessel storage facilities refer to off-water locations where vessels can be stored. Both
mooring and storage often occur for longer periods of time compared to short-term docking. Mooring and storage
facilities can serve personal vessels, rental boats, charter boats, yacht and sailing club vessels, commercial vessels,
and vessels for sale.
Newport Harbor contains more than 1,6200 moorings, including on- and off-shore facilities. These moorings are
dispersed in 15 mooring fields throughout the harbor. Of the 15 mooring fields, 9 7 are classified as harbor and
off-shore fields and 6 8 are classified as on-shore fields. Off-shore fields are those in open water with floating
mooring buoys affixed by tackle to the ocean floor, and on-shore fields are those near the shore that use built shore
fixtures, such as docks or piers, for mooring. The 9 harbor and off-shore mooring fields contain more than 800
moorings. Additionally, there are 6 on-shore mooring fields. Anchorages refer to places without designated mooring
buoys where vessels can use anchoring tackle to temporarily anchor outside of navigation channels. Public vessel
4 City of Newport Beach. 2001. “Boat (Hand-Carried) Launch Sites.” March 15, 2001. Accessed October 24, 2023.
https://newportharborfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/BoatLaunchSites.pdf.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
26
MAY JUNE 2024
anchorage, where vessels can anchor for up to 72 hours, within Newport Harbor is restricted to areas at either end
of Lido Isleis limited to between Lido Island and Bay Island.5,6
Newport Harbor has 16 marinas providing more than 2,100 slips. The Balboa Yacht Basin Marina is the single
marina owned and operated by the City. This marina contains 172 slips for vessels 20 to 75 feet in length.7 Several
commercial marinas in Newport Harbor also offer guest slips. Balboa Island and Balboa Peninsula each provide
public docks for loading and unloading purposes, including five docks on Balboa Island and six docks along the
Balboa Peninsula. Furthermore, two other public docks exist in Newport Harbor: the Rhine Warf public dock and
the Central Avenue public dock.8 Many vessels in Newport Harbor are berthed at piers that are connected to
residential properties. Newport Harbor contains more than 1,200 piers, with the majority of them being privately
owned. In addition to public and residential piers, several commercial piers exist in Newport Harbor, which are
primarily used for charter boats and entertainment. See Table 4 for additional mooring and storage information.
Vessels are also stored in on-land “dry” facilities, usually on trailers, boat stands, and enclosed boat racks. Dry boat
storage is provided at some boat yards, yacht clubs, boating associations, and other similar facilities, often for a
fee or included with membership fees.
Members of the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) have expressed interest in mooring, with regard to the
Orange County Grand Jury (2007)9 investigation and report on a loophole for transferring mooring permits. The
report examined the issue of the use of public lands for private property as it relates to small or derelict vessels
being sold at vastly inflated prices because they include the moorings they occupy, effectuating a permit transfer.
As noted by representatives from the Mooring Association at a GPAC Subcommittee meeting held on June 4th, 2024,
this continues to be an important topic under consideration by the City. While this is an important topic, the GPAC
Harbor and Bay Element Subcommittee concluded that costs and realignments related to mooring should not be a
topic for the General Plan Update.
Table 4. Mooring and Storage Facilities
Facility Total Number On Shore Harbor/Off Shore
Mooring Fields 15 6 9
Piers 1,200 N/A N/A
Marinas 16 N/A N/A
Boat Slips 2,100 N/A N/A
Notes:
N/A = not applicable
5 Newport Mooring Association. 2015–20192024. “Mooring FAQs.” Accessed October 24, 2023June 5, 2024.
https://newportmooringassociation.org/
mooring-faqs.
6 City of Newport Beach. 2024. “Anchorages”. Accessed June 5, 2024.
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/harbor/anchorages
7 City of Newport Beach. n.d. “Balboa Yacht Basin Marina.” Accessed October 24, 2023. https://www.newportbeachca.gov/
government/departments/harbor/balboa-yacht-basin-marina.
8 City of Newport Beach. n.d. “Public Dock and Restroom Locations.” Accessed October 24, 2023.
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/harbor/resources-services.
9 Orange County Grand Jury. 2007. “Newport Harbor Moorings: Are they Held in the Public Trust or for Private Profit?” Accessed
June 7, 2024. https://www.ocgrandjury.org/sites/jury/files/2023-08/newportharbormoorings.pdf
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
27
MAY JUNE 2024
Although moorings are located on California State Tidelands, a publicly-owned resource, a loophole for transferring
mooring permits – which are scarce and high in demand – has emerged between private owners. Small or derelict
vessels are sold at vastly inflated prices because they include the moorings they occupy, effectuating a permit
transfer. These circumstances led to an investigation and report by the Orange County Grand Jury (2007)10, which
examined the issue of the use of public lands for private property. Among other items, the report concluded that
fees charged for mooring permit processing should be set at a fair market value for the use of public tidelands and
that those fees should only be spent on tidelands, such as dredging or water clean-up activities.
4.2.3 Harbor Support Facilities
With such a large boating presence in Newport Beach, it is crucial that harbor support facilities exist to maintain,
repair, and construct vessels. Additionally, harbor support includes fuel, supply, cleaning, waste removal, and other
related facilities. These facilities provide the necessary amenities and operational support systems to maintain the
lively maritime community of Newport Beach. Land use conflicts and an increase in real estate prices have
threatened these support facilities, moving many of them to inland locations. The City has used land use controls
in an effort to protect these essential maritime facilities.
4.3 Public Access and Amenities
Newport Beach has an extensive system of accessways to ocean beaches and the bay (see Figure 2, Coastal
Support Access Facilities Map). Public access features into Newport Harbor and Bay include public beaches, parks,
shoreline trails, walkways, and boardwalks. In compliance with the California Coastal Act, the City will continues to
require all new development causing or contributing to adverse public access impacts to provide easements or
dedications in areas where public access is inadequate through the Coastal Development Permit process. Chapter
21.30A of Title 21 of the City’s Municipal Code provides regulations pertaining to public access and recreation along
the Harbor and Bay, which is intended to ensure that public rights of access to the shoreline are protected.
Existing public access is detailed in the City’s LCP. Facilities supporting the public utilizing Newport Harbor and Bay
are shown in Figure 2, Support Facilities Map. This shows key public facilities including restrooms, showers, picnic,
and recreational areas. These public accessways are described in detail in the Coastal Land Use Plan and
summarized and updated herein, as applicable.
Figure 2. Coastal Access Support Facilities Map
10 Orange County Grand Jury. 2007. “Newport Harbor Moorings: Are they Held in the Public Trust or for Private Profit?” Accessed
June 7, 2024. https://www.ocgrandjury.org/sites/jury/files/2023-08/newportharbormoorings.pdf
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
28
MAY JUNE 2024
Source: City of Newport Beach. 2009. “Local Coastal Program: Coastal Land Use Plan.”
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
29
MAY JUNE 2024
4.3.1 Public Access and Amenities
In Newport Beach, shoreline access types are classified in six categories: beach access, boat access,
historic/cultural sites, natural resources, piers, and visual access points. Of the 43 access points, most of them are
categorized as beach access. Many of these sites include parking, access for people with disabilities, and
restrooms. Some sites include fishing and boating opportunities, and three sites include campgrounds. Table 5
shows the percentages of each access type that include a specific amenity, such as restrooms or parking.
Table 5. Beach Access Amenities by Access Type
Access Type
Access
Points
(number)
Parking
(percent)
Disabled
Access
(percent)
Restroom
(percent)
Campground
(percent)
Fishing
(percent)
Boating
(percent)
Beach Access 28 67.90% 53.6% 46.4% 10.7% 46.4% 35.7%
Boat Access 2 100% 100% 100% 0% 50% 100%
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
30
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 5. Beach Access Amenities by Access Type
Access Type
Access
Points
(number)
Parking
(percent)
Disabled
Access
(percent)
Restroom
(percent)
Campground
(percent)
Fishing
(percent)
Boating
(percent)
Historic/Cultural
Site
2 100% 100% 100% 0% 50% 50%
Natural
Resource
5 100% 80% 80% 0% 0% 20%
Pier 2 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 0%
Visual Access 4 75% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Notes: All boat access locations include boating facilities, and some access types other than boating access also include boating facilities.
Access Type = Generalized feature type of coastal access.
Parking = Parking available at access site (percent yes).
Disabled Access = Disabled access and/or disabled access facilities available at access site (percent yes).
Restrooms = Restrooms available at access site (percent yes).
Campground = Camping facilities at access site (percent yes).
Fishing = Fishing is a recognized activity at access site and fishing facilities may be present (percent yes).
Boating = Boating is a recognized activity at access site and boating facilities may be present (percent yes).
Beach Access = Site classified by Indicators Project as having “Beach Access” (percent yes).
4.3.24.3.1 Public Access and Sea-Level Rise
Based on future projections, many beach access sites and amenities at these sites will be inaccessible due to
climate-change-related water inundation. However, the specific timing and extent of sea-level rise is unknown
beyond theoretical models. Refer to the Resilience Existing Conditions Background Analysis for a detailed
discussion of forecasted sea-level rise impacts. . Table 6 details what percentage of amenities will be lost according
to multiple projected scenarios.
The Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMoS) model, which projects sea level rise and storm frequency
scenarios11, indicates which areas in Newport Beach would experience be inundated by various levels of sea level
rise. According to a sea level rise scenario of 1.6 feet of sea level rise scenario, which is forecast to occur between
2040 and 2050 under a medium-high aversion scenario12., aA community center on Balboa Island, several
restrooms and shower located near the coast on Balboa Peninsula and Balboa Island, and two playgrounds and
picnic areas in the northern part of Balboa Peninsula would be inundated in this scenario. With 2.5 feet of sea level
rise, projected to occur by 2050 under a medium-high aversion scenario, several more restrooms and playgrounds,
and one additional community center, could be at risk of inundationed.It is clear from the data that access points
that offer boating and camping are most at risk from sea-level-rise. However, these two amenities are not as
common as parking, disabled access, and restrooms, which means loss of these three amenities would be more
widespread overall.
11 Our Coast, Our Future (OCOF). 2018. “Hazard Map.” https://ourcoastourfuture.org/hazard-map/
12 According to California Coastal Commission sea level rise projections using the Los Angeles Tide Guage, a medium-high risk
aversion scenario has a 0.5% probability that sea level rise exceeds 1.2 feet in 2040 and 1.8 feet in 2050. California Coastal
Commission. 2018. “Sea Level Rise Guidance Update.”
https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/assets/slr/guidance/2018/0_Full_2018AdoptedSLRGuidanceUpdate.pdf See pp. 302.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
31
MAY JUNE 2024
Beach erosion is projected to increase with sea level rise, potentially threatening public access to the beach. Storms with
high-energy waves often carry sand away from the dry beach to offshore bars or submerged berms and cause increased
erosion of dunes and coastal bluffs13. With heightened risk of high-intensity storms, whereas once-a--century water levels
are expected to become an annual event, beaches are expected to be increasingly vulnerable to erosion14. Specifically,
Balboa Peninsula is an area of significant concern for erosion.
Thus, sea level rise and resulting beach erosion could impede public access by reducing or eliminating lateral access
(movement up and down the beach) in some parts of Balboa Peninsula. Access to the beach from local streets (e.g.,
from Summit Street on the north end of the peninsula to Channel Road near the harbor entrance) will not likely be
impacted by sea level rise unless the dry beach itself completely erodes at access points or sea levels reach the
street.
13 California Coastal Commission. 2018. “Briefing on shoreline protective devices and their effects on beaches and coastal
processes.” https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/reports/2018/8/w6e/W6e-8-2018_report.pdf
14 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, California Natural Resources Agency, and California Energy Commission. 2018. “Los
Angeles Region Report.” California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. https://climateassessment.ca.gov/regions/.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
32
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 6. Loss of Beach Amenities Due to Sea-Level Rise
Sea-Level
Rise
Scenario
Access
Points
Inundate
d
(number)
Access Type
(percent)
Parkin
g
(perce
nt)
Disable
d
Access
(perce
nt)
Restro
om
(perce
nt)
Campgr
ound
(percent
)
Fishin
g
(perce
nt)
Boatin
g
(perce
nt)
2030, High
Emissions
(0.25
meters)
11 Beach Access:
90.9%
Natural Resource:
9.1%
18.2% 16% 17.4% 33.3% 17.6% 42.9%
2050, High
Emissions
(0.5 meters)
16 Beach Access:
75%
Historic/Cultural
Site: 12.5%
Natural Resource:
12.5%
30.3% 32% 39.1% 33.3% 29.4% 64.3%
2100, Low
Emissions
(1.25
meters)
20 Beach Access:
80%
Historic/Cultural
Site: 10%
Natural Resource:
10%
39.4% 40% 47.8% 66.7% 41.2% 71.4%
2100, High
Emissions
(1.5 meters)
22 Beach Access:
81.8%
Historic/Cultural
Site: 9.1%
Natural Resource:
9.1%
45.5% 48% 52.2% 66.7% 47.1% 71.4%
Source: California Coastal Commission. 2024. YourCoast. https://www.coastal.ca.gov/YourCoast/#/map
USGS. 2021. Our Coasts Our Future. https://ourcoastourfuture.org/
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
33
MAY JUNE 2024
4.4 Natural Resources
Newport Beach contains extensive natural resources because it is located in a unique area situated between the
Pacific Ocean, Upper Newport Bay, and other surrounding natural areas. Some natural resources that are significant
to the character of Newport Beach include Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas, wetlands, and marine and
coastal resources. Protection of these valuable resources is crucial not only to the flora and fauna that thrive in
these areas, but to community members and visitors who receive environmental and aesthetic benefits from these
pristine habitats.
4.4.1 Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas
Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs) are defined by the California Coastal Act as “any area in which
plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in
an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments”
(Section 30107.5).15 These areas are often categorized by the presence of rare, sensitive, endangered, threatened,
or especially valuable species or habitats. ESHAs can be designated based on the presence of a particular plant or
animal species, or on a particular habitat (e.g., vegetation assemblage, landform indicators). Because they are
particularly ecologically important areas, ESHAs come with increased development regulations to protect their
continued existence, as mandated by California Coastal Act Section 30240.
ESHAs contain many different types of habitats, including wetlands, woodlands, riparian areas, grasslands, and
coastal beaches, to name a few. Within the Newport Beach Sphere of Influence, ESHAs include dune habitats, scrub
habitats, chaparral habitats, riparian habitats, marsh habitats, coastal grasslands, vernal pools, freshwater seeps,
wetlands, and alkali meadows.16,17 Figure 3 shows environmental study areas (ESA), which are presumed to but
may or may not contain an ESHA. The lack of ESHA presence must beis confirmed with a site-specific biological
survey, which would be included in an application for a Coastal Development Permit.
15 California Coastal Act. 2023. “Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas.” Accessed October 24, 2023.
https://www.coastal.ca.gov/coastact.pdf.
16 City of Newport Beach California. 2005. Coastal Land Use Plan. Accessed October 27, 2023. https://www.newportbeachca.gov/
government/departments/community-development/planning-division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/local-coastal-
program/coastal-land-use-plan.
17 Within these various habitats and natural areas are numerous plant and animal species designated federally and by the state
as endangered or threatened. These species are listed by location in the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB).
Reference the Flora and Fauna sections of the Natural Resources Element for specific information.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
34
MAY JUNE 2024
Figure 3. Environmental Study Areas
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
35
MAY JUNE 2024
4.4.2 Wetlands
Wetlands are defined in Section 30121 of the California Coastal Act as “lands within the coastal zone which may
be covered periodically or permanently with shallow water and include saltwater marshes, freshwater marshes,
open or closed brackish water marshes, swamps, mudflats, and fens.”18 Additionally, Title 14 Section 13577 of the
California Code of Regulations establishes a “one parameter definition” of a wetland as follows:
[L]and where the water table is at, near, or above the land surface long enough to promote the
formation of hydric soils or to support the growth of hydrophytes, and shall also include those types
of wetlands where vegetation is lacking and soil is poorly developed or absent as a result of
frequent and drastic fluctuations of surface water levels, wave action, water flow, turbidity or high
concentrations of salts or other substances in the substrate. Such wetlands can be recognized by
the presence of surface water or saturated substrate at some time during each year and their
location within, or adjacent to, vegetated wetlands or deep-water habitats.19
The US Army Corps of Engineers has established a three-part definition of wetlands that includes vegetation, soil,
and hydrology based on its 1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual20. Within that definition, wetland vegetation consists
of plants that require saturated soils to survive or have a competitive advantage over other species due to their
tolerance of prolonged wet soil conditions. Wetland soils are hydric soils, which form under saturated, flooded
conditions, resulting in anaerobic conditions (i.e., low oxygen levels). Wetland hydrology is characterized by
permanent or periodic inundation at mean water depths less than or equal to 6.6 feet, or the soil is saturated to
the surface at some time during the growing season of prevalent vegetation.
Based on these definitionsWhile the US Army Corps of Engineers also defines wetlands, an area is designated as a
wetland under the California Coastal Act if it meets one of the wetland parameters provided aboveby the California
Coastal Act or the California Code of Regulations. The California Coastal Act wetland definition does not distinguish
a wetland designation based on the quality of the wetland, which means that degraded or poorly functioning
wetlands are afforded the same protection under this act. This designation process is similar to, but more
conservative than, the “three parameter definition” process used to designate wetlands by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, which requires wetlands to meet all three established parameters.
Wetlands within Newport Beach include the Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve and freshwater creeks that lead
into the Pacific Ocean. For development permitting purposes, identification of wetlands always relies on an
on-the-ground, site-specific survey and habitat delineation at the time of application rather than a static map
because these features can be ephemeral and change over time.
18 California Coastal Act. 2023. “Wetlands.” Accessed October 24, 2023. https://www.coastal.ca.gov/coastact.pdf.
19 California Coastal Commission. 2013. LCP Update Guide, “Section 4, Environmentally Sensitive Habitats and Other Natural
Resources.” July 31, 2013. Accessed October 24, 2023.
https://documents.coastal.ca.gov/assets/lcp/LUPUpdate/LUPGuidePartI_4_ESHA_July2013.pdf#:~:text=%22Wetland%22%20
means%20lands%20within%20the%20coastal%20zone%20which,swamps%2C%20mudflats%2C%20and%20fens.%20CCR%2
0%C2%A713577%28b%29%20%28in%20part%29.
20 US Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Experiment Station. 1987. “Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual.” Accessed
June 7, 2024. https://www.nab.usace.army.mil/Portals/63/docs/Regulatory/Pubs/wlman87.pdf
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
36
MAY JUNE 2024
4.4.3 Marine and Coastal Resources
Newport Beach contains a significant quantity of marine and coastal resources due to its unique location along the
Pacific Ocean. Newport Beach is bisected by Newport Bay, which flows through the Newport Harbor into the
Pacific Ocean. The prevalence of marine and coastal resources in the area plays a large role in the character of
Newport Beach. The Pacific Ocean, Newport Bay, and other marine and coastal resources provide Newport Beach with
ecological, recreational, economic, and aesthetic value. Development in and around Newport Beach is concentrated
around the vast marine and coastal resources. The area is a hub for visitors who are drawn by the pristine coastline
and marine-related opportunities. A large portion of marine and coastal resources in Newport Beach are protected to
ensure that they are sustained as a significant contributor to the area and its people.
Marine and coastal resources in Newport Beach include the following:
▪ The Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve
▪ Oceanside beaches, including Newport Beach, Balboa Beach, Corona Del Mar State Beach, and others
▪ City parks, including Castaways Park, West Jetty View Park, Back Bay View Park, and others
▪ Piers, including Balboa Pier, Newport Beach Pier, and other public piers
▪ Beachfront and bay facilities and amenities, including trails, restrooms, sports facilities, access points, and others
▪ Islands, coves, and bays
▪ Scenic and visual resources
▪ Groundwater resources
4.5 Coastal Hazards
Refer to the Resilience Existing Conditions and Background Analysis.
4.6 Recreational Water Quality
Recreational waters, including sandy beach areas, tidepools, Newport Harbor, and Newport Bay, are central to
Newport Beach’s economy, culture, and landscape. Therefore, ensuring that these recreational waters are safe for
public enjoyment year-round is essential. Recreational water quality varies throughout Newport Beach and is
threatened by contaminated storm runoff, trash, and boating-related pollution. This section details the water quality
in Newport Beach, as well as the existing threats to water quality and efforts to address those threats.
4.6.1 Recreational Water Quality Concerns
According to Heal the Bay, a trusted nonprofit organization that regularly collects water quality information from
nearly 500 locations along the West Coast, Newport Beach experiences varied water quality based on seasonal
weather conditions. Within the Newport Bay watershed there are eight monitored waterbodies that are each graded
as “good”, “unknown”, or “impaired” based on water quality standards. Out of the eight distinct waterbodies, one
is graded “good”, three are “unknown”, and four are “impaired” (see Table 7, Water Body Uses and Conditions, for
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
37
MAY JUNE 2024
specific water body impairments).21 In general, water quality is best when the weather is dry and worse during and
immediately following rainy weather. This is because stormwater runoff collects bacteria, pollution, and debris from
urban areas. This runoff eventually flows into Newport Bay and the ocean via creeks and rivers, including the
Santa Ana River and San Diego Creek, as well as stormwater drains and channels. For this reason, water quality
tends to decline after it rains near the terminus of the Santa Ana River and in Newport Bay, where San Diego Creek,
Big Canyon Creek, and other stormwater channels drain.
According to Heal the Bay’s 2021–2022 and 2022–2023 Beach Report Cards, water near the Santa Ana River
jetty and Newport Bay experienced good water quality when the weather was dry, receiving grades of A and A+ in
nearly every location sampled. However, these locations experienced poor-to-fair water quality after rain events,
mostly receiving grades of C, D, and—especially during the unusually wet winter of 2022—a grade of F. One exception
is Vaughn’s Launch in Newport Bay, which received a grade of F during both wet and dry weather, and was featured
on the 2021–2022 statewide “Beach Bummers” list. This location is affected by polluted runoff from Big Canyon
Creek, which is known to carry pollutants from residential areas and Jamboree Road, a major thoroughfare. In
contrast, water quality tends to be consistently good in Corona del Mar and Crystal Cove. Nearly all locations
sampled in these areas earned grades of A and A+ on the 2021–2022 and 2022–2023 Beach Report Cards during
both wet and dry weather, earning them a spot on Heal the Bay’s “Honor Roll.” 22,23
Another concern for recreational waters is trash. Significant amounts of trash end up in Newport Beach’s
recreational waters via the Santa Ana River, San Diego Creek, other creeks and stormwater channels, ocean
currents, and from littering. Although the exact quantities of trash are unknown, volunteers pick up large quantities
of trash along beaches and in Upper Newport Bay each year.24
Other water quality concerns in Newport Bay are related to boating. Chemicals used to paint and clean boats, and
fuel leaks from watercraft and unauthorized dumping by boaters can contaminate the bay. In recent years, copper
contamination from hull cleaning and painting has been a topic of concern for the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board, which has jurisdiction over Newport Bay. In December 2022, the Regional Water Quality Control
Board adopted a Basin Plan amendment to reduce the water quality limit, or total maximum daily load, for copper,
and developed a plan to reduce boating-related copper contamination by 60% over the next 12 years.25 According
to a bay-wide water sampling effort conducted in 2019, the bay-wide average concentration of copper was
2.6 micrograms per liter, which is below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water quality limit for copper of
3.1 micrograms per liter.26 Still, concentrations of copper in 5 out of the 47 locations sampled exceeded
4.0 micrograms per liter. It is expected that Basin Plan implementation of programs to reduce copper
contamination, including educational campaigns for hull cleaning, will begin as soon as possible and shall not
exceed a timeline of more than 12 years from the effective date of the United States Environmental Protection
21 EPA. n.d. “How’s My Waterway?” https://mywaterway.epa.gov/community/Newport%20Beach,%20CA,%20USA/overview.
22 Heal the Bay. 2022. “2021–2022 Beach Report Card.” June 2022. https://healthebay.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/
06/Beach-Report-Card-2021-2022.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery.
23 Heal the Bay. 2023. “2022–2023 Beach Report Card.” June 2023. https://healthebay.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/
Beach-Report-Card-2022-2023.pdf.
24 City of Newport Beach. n.d. “Make A Splash, Pick Up Trash.”
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/public-works/ocean-water-quality/make-a-splash-pick-up-trash.
25 Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board. 2022. Substitute Environmental Document for Proposed Basin Plan
Amendment for Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for Copper in Newport Bay, Orange County, California. October 2022.
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/72561/638023698939070000.
26 City of Newport Beach. 2021. “Copper Total Maximum Daily Load for Newport Bay City of Newport Beach Factsheet.”
August 2021. https://www.newportbeachca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/70483/637667929237170000.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
38
MAY JUNE 2024
Agency’s approval of the total maximum daily loads (TMDL) for copper detailed in the Basin Plan. The TMDL for
copper and other metals was established in 2002. Subsequently, Upper and Lower Newport Bay were delisted for
the general metals category in 2014 and 2006, respectively. However, an assessment using 2002-2014 data,
reported in a 2022 Santa Ana Water Board staff report27, reveals continued impairment due to copper. Thus, Santa
Ana Water Board staff proposed a Basin Plan amendment to incorporate TMDLs for copper. Approval by US EPA
appears to be pending., which has not yet occured. The existing plan also includes a phased schedule to achieve
60% reduction of copper discharges as follows:
▪ 20% reduction no later than 4 years from the effective date of the EPA’s approval
▪ 40% reduction no later than 8 years from the effective date of the EPA’s approval
▪ 60% reduction no later than 12 years from the effective date of the EPA’s approval
27 California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region. 2022. ”Staff Report: Metals Impairment Assessment and
Copper (Cu) Total Maximum Daily Load for Newport Bay, Orange County, California.” Staff Report Metals Impairment Assessment
and Copper (Cu) Total Maximum Daily Loads for Newport Bay, Orange County, California
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
39
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 7. Water Body Uses and Conditions
Water Body Issues Identified Waterbody Uses Conditions
Balboa Beach PCBs, pesticides Fish and shellfish consumption Impaired
Big Canyon Creek None Aquatic life Unknown
Fishing and boating Unknown
Costa Mesa Channel None Aquatic life Unknown
Lower Newport Bay
(entire Lower Bay,
including Rhine Channel,
Turning Basin, and South
Lido Channel to east end
of H-J Moorings)
Bacteria and other
microbes, metals, nitrogen
and/or phosphorus, PCBs,
pesticides, total toxic
chemicals
Fish and shellfish consumption Impaired
Swimming and boating Good
Marine habitat Impaired
Lower Newport Bay
(Turning Basin and South
Lido Channel to east end
of H-J Moorings)
None Marine habitat Unknown
Upper Newport Bay
(Ecological Reserve)
Bacteria and other
microbes, nitrogen and/or
phosphorus, PCBs,
pesticides, sediment, total
toxic chemicals
Aquatic life Impaired
Fish and Shellfish Consumption Impaired
Swimming and boating Impaired
Marine habitat Impaired
Newport Beach None Swimming and boating Good
Rhine Channel Mercury, metals, PCBs,
total toxic chemicals
Aquatic life Impaired
Fish and shellfish consumption Impaired
Marine habitat Impaired
4.6.2 Efforts to Improve Recreational Water Quality
To address recreational water quality concerns, the City created the Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee to
advise the City Council on decisions with the potential to impact water quality. Additionally, the City has been
improving stormwater infrastructure and has led several educational campaigns to reduce the amount of trash and
pet waste that ends up in recreational waters.
The City has completed or begun working on several stormwater management projects intended to improve water
quality in Newport Bay. Perhaps the most impactful of these projects is the Lower Big Canyon Water Quality and
Restoration project, which is in an area of Newport Bay with a known stormwater pollution problem. Phase 1 of
this project involved diverting stormwater flows from Jamboree Road and contaminated groundwater seeps into
a new bioswale basin that naturally filters out pollutants from stormwater before it enters Big Canyon Creek.
Phase 2 involved restoring wetland habitat near the terminus of Big Canyon Creek, which will provide additional
filtration as the water enters Newport Bay.28 Phase 3 was recently approved by the CCC and will realign a portion
of Big Canyon Creek and restore 15 acres of degraded salt marsh habitat to improve water quality and provide a
transitional adaptation area for sea-level rise. Another notable project is the San Diego Creek Water Wheel. This
28 City of Newport Beach. 2018. Resource Efficiency and Water Quality Annual Report 2017–2018.
https://online.anyflip.com/cgexi/jggd/mobile/index.html.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
40
MAY JUNE 2024
project will use innovative technology to create a self-sustained debris removal system at the terminus of
San Diego Creek. It will consist of a water wheel that removes trash from water flowing into Upper Newport Bay
and transfers it to a large trash bin using a conveyer belt. This trash will be collected by waste management staff
and properly disposed of. The project is expected to reduce the amount of trash entering Newport Bay by 50% to
80% upon completion in spring 2024.29 Currently, the City monitors its recreational water quality using
deployable, solar-powered buoys that detect water quality and will deploy surface debris-collecting rovers in
2024.
4.7 Coordination with and Administration Partner
Agencies
Administration of Newport Harbor and Bay involves coordination between agencies at all levels of government as
well as internal coordination between various City departments, decision makers, and advisory bodies. Several
commissions and committees are involved in administrative and advisory matters pertaining to Newport Bay and
Harbor, including advising the City Council, reviewing relevant administrative decisions, making certain permitting
decisions, among other functions. Additionally, a variety of City departments are involved in the enforcement and
administration of adopted applicable regulations.
These bodies are summarized below:
4.7.1 Harbor Commission
Newport Harbor, supporting various recreational and commercial activities, residential communities, and biological
resources, is overseen by the Harbor Commission, which advises the Cityprovides the City with an advisory body
pertaining to Newport Harbor. The Harbor Commission's responsibilities include advising the City Council on the
use, control, and regulation of vessels within the harbor, making decisions on harbor permits, serving as an
appellate body for harbor-related administrative decisions, and advising on proposed harbor improvements. It also
provides recommendations on land use and property development applications, suggests regulations and programs
for the Harbor and Bay Element of the General Plan, the Harbor Area Management Plan, and the Tidelands Capital
Plan, and advises on the implementation of the Tidelands Capital Plan, including dredging priorities, beach sand
replenishment, and harbor amenities.
4.7.2 Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission
The Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission is tasked with advising the City Councila City advisory body that
advises on matters related to parks, beaches, recreation, parkways, and street trees; assistings in planning and
promoting parks and recreation programs with the cooperation of schools and other agencies; establishinges
policies for the acquisition, development, and improvement of parks, beaches, playgrounds, and the management
of trees and shrubs, subject to City Council authority; and performings additional duties as prescribed by ordinance
in accordance with the City Charter.
29 California Natural Resources Agency. n.d. “Newport Bay Water Wheel Project.” https://bondaccountability.resources.ca.gov/
Project.aspx?ProjectPK=23038&PropositionPK=48.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
41
MAY JUNE 2024
Orange County Coastal Coalition (joint government
committee)
The Orange County Coastal Coalition, established in 1999, is a joint government committee established to enhance
collaboration on issues affecting coastal communities, including raising funds to support critical coastal projects
such as beach erosion and sand nourishment. The Coalition focuses on a range of coastal issues in addition to
beach erosion and sand nourishment, including ocean water quality, habitat enforcement, rocky intertidal zone
protection, beach maintenance, and bluff erosion.
Newport Coast Advisory Committee (Citizens Advisory
Committee)
The Newport Coast Advisory Committee, a citizens advisory committee, provides the City Council with guidance on
various matters, including general issues of importance to the community, the interest in and planning of a
community center, the equitable allocation of $18 million in assessment district relief for single-family homeowners,
and the maintenance standards and quality for slopes, parks, and medians within Newport Coast.
4.7.3 Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee (Citizens
Advisory Committee)
The Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee, a citizen advisory committee advises the City Council on policies,
projects, and programs that protect and improve water quality and habitats in Newport Bay and the ocean. This
includes strengthening existing regulations, implementing the Tidelands Infrastructure Capital Plan concerning sea
level rise, sand replenishment, and other related capital projects. Additionally, the Committee recommends
educational initiatives about the importance of Newport Bay and the ocean and addresses any matters referred by
the City Council or City Manager.
4.6.34.7.4 Marine Protected Areas
A Marine Protected Area (MPA) is a designated area within the State’s waters that is managed to protect and
conserve marine ecosystems, biodiversity, and marine resources. MPAs are established with the goal of balancing
the conservation of these ecosystems with sustainable recreational and commercial uses of the ocean. MPAs were
first established in California in 1999 under the California Marine Life Protection Act. This act developed a statewide
collaborative network for interested parties to work toward a shared goal of marine conservation. The California
Department of Fish and Wildlife and the California Department of Parks and Recreation are key partner agencies
for local governments to work with on marine protection efforts. Newport Beach contains two MPAs: Crystal Cove
State Marine Conservation Area and Upper Newport Bay State Marine Conservation Area.
The Crystal Cove State Marine Conservation Area is located just offshore from Crystal Cove State Park and includes
coves, tidepools, and other natural areas where visitors can explore many unique marine species, including
nudibranchs, limpets, sea stars, and others. Upper Newport Bay State Marine Conservation Area is the largest
natural protected estuary in Southern California. It exists as a crucial rest stop for migratory birds and is an
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
42
MAY JUNE 2024
important home for many other plants and animal species. During migratory winter months, up to 30,000 birds can
be seen here in a single day.30 Both MPAs are managed by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
4.6.44.7.5 Corona Del Mar State Beach
Corona Del Mar State Beach is managed by the California Department of Parks and Recreation and is a valuable
marine resource to the community of Newport Beach that is popular for surfing and diving. The park includes a
0.5-mile-long sandy beach that is enclosed by large rocky cliffs. Newport Beach should coordinate with State
agencies to ensure the protection of this valuable marine area.
4.74.8 Relevant Projects in Progress
There are several projects in progress by the City that could affect the harbor and bay. The City’s Planning Division
has submitted a “Section 30613 Request” to the CCC to revise the Post-LCP Certification Permit and Appeal
Jurisdiction Map and to transfer certain select areas from CCC permitting jurisdiction to the City. This would mainly
affect permitting procedures for shorefront residential properties, but could also impact some commercial,
industrial, or City-owned properties by reducing the need for direct coordination with the CCC. The request is
currently under review by CCC staff.
The City Harbor Department has a pending Coastal Development Permit application submitted to the CCC for the
re-organization of Mooring Field C within Newport Harbor. This project would improve boating safety and increase
navigable water area in and around the field while also adding new mooring buoys. Implementation of the project
in Mooring Field C would serve as a pilot project for the future reorganization of all the mooring fields in
Newport Harbor. The Coastal Development Permit is anticipated to be approved in 2024. Optimization of the
mooring fields is part of a larger project by the Harbor Department to improve Newport Harbor’s overall mooring
system, which also includes streamlining and clarifying mooring permit procedures. These procedural
improvements would necessitate text changes to Municipal Code Sections 17.25.020 and 17.60.040, but would
not require any changes to the Harbor and Bay Element or the LCP.
30 California Department of Parks and Recreation. n.d. “Crystal Cove SMCA, Upper Newport Bay SMCA.” Accessed November 2, 2023.
https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=27900#:~:text=In%20the%20waters%20adjacent%20to,Marine%20Conservation%20Area
%20(SMCA).
43
MAY JUNE 2024
5 Issues and Opportunities
5.1 Diversity of Land Uses
The harbor and bay currently support a diverse array of land uses encompassing coastal-dependent,
coastal-related, and non-coastal-related uses. These uses include residential, commercial, industrial, and resource
protection/open space uses. The California Coastal Act and CCC explicitly prioritize and encourage the following
coastal-dependent or related land uses: public access and recreation, visitor serving, aquaculture, commercial and
recreational boating and fishing, sensitive habitat preservation, agriculture, and scenic areas. The City has its own
priorities that extend beyond the coastal zone, as do its various residents and visitors. As individual properties
redevelop or entire neighborhoods or districts around the harbor and bay change over time, the proportion and
availability of certain land uses will also inevitably shift. Maintaining a diversity of uses that are appropriate for the
harbor and bay will require careful coordination between short-term and long-term planning efforts.
5.2 Diversity of Water Uses
Newport Harbor and the associated commercial and recreational boating culture have significant impacts on
water-related uses. Sea-level rise is forecasted to inundate boating access points, mooring facilities, and some
boating-serving industries. Boating-related infrastructure is challenging to adapt or migrate inland, but such
ocean-dependent uses are prioritized by the CCC for armoring that would otherwise not be allowed for
non-ocean-dependent uses. Long-term planning for and protection of commercial and recreation boating resources
is a key priority of the Harbor and Bay Element.
Members of the GPAC have expressed the importance of expanding the Harbor and Bay Element to include beaches,
so as to more comprehensively address coastal issues, such as environmental issues and conservation efforts.
This can help better plan for the Harbor, Bay, and beaches more comprehensively.
5.3 Public Access
The City maintains extensive public access to the coast, allowing for public enjoyment and recreation for residents
and visitors. Some low-lying public access points may be threatened by sea-level rise. As beaches and amenities
become inundated by regular high tides, beach access will become scarcer, potentially threatening access points.
Based on the existing development pattern in Newport Beach, access points that include boating or camping are
at the greatest risk of inundation. Another potential impact to beach access includes future land use restrictions,
which could be put into place to reduce erosion, protect natural habitats, or for other resource conservation reasons.
Although the California Coastal Act and LCP encourage and prioritize public access to the shoreline, they also allow
for limitations to public access in cases where such access would significantly negatively impact public safety,
private property owner rights, or natural resources. As such, there could be instances where limiting public shoreline
access in favor of other considerations results in greater overall public benefits. Recognizing that, it becomes even
more important that public access be maximized in the areas where it is most appropriate. The City will also need
to balance the recreational and ecological values and resources of the coastline to best create adaptation strategies
to maintain public access to the coast in the face of sea-level rise.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
44
MAY JUNE 2024
5.4 Natural Resources
Natural resources in Newport Beach include biological marine and coastal resources, beaches, islands, wetlands,
and other ESHAs. The biggest threats to these natural resources include pollution; habitat destruction from
development; and the effects of climate change, such as the migration of species and habitats to more suitable
climates. Careful coordination between City and State natural resources managers will be critical in adapting natural
areas and increasing ecologically based adaptation solutions. Additionally, as species migrate northward as a result
of climate change, natural resource managers across the region will be required to work together to define receiving
areas for migrating threatened species. Similarly, as habitat types and locations may change throughout
Newport Beach over time, it is important to ensure that habitat protection and development restriction policies are
flexible enough to move with the resource and recognize potential impacts that may not have existed in the past.
5.5 Coastal Hazards
Refer to the Resilience Existing Conditions and Background Analysis.
5.6 Water Quality
Refer to the Resilience Existing Conditions and Background Analysis.
5.7 Coordination with Partner Agenciesand
Administration
Adapting to climate change will require a regional approach to allow for large-scale adaptation infrastructure and
programs. Coordinating technical and planning resources will support interagency solutions and increase
competitive positioning for grant opportunities. Although there are defined interagency coordination measures
aimed at creating cohesive climate change guidance and requirements throughout the region and State, there is
also the potential for different agencies to have different priorities, policies, and mandates. In planning at the local
level, the City must be sure to resolve or address any areas where partner agencies have different guidance,
recognizing the relevant regulatory hierarchies.
In addition to interagency coordination, internal coordination is essential to ensuring that policies are implemented.
Members of the GPAC have expressed a desire to increase internal coordination to appropriately oversee cross-
cutting issues such as natural resources protection, sand nourishment, and economic development. One such
strategy could include the establishment of a Beach Commission, akin to the Harbor Commission, tasked with
overseeing beach preservation and protection efforts, beach-related recreation, and economic development related
to coastal tourism.
45
MAY JUNE 2024
6 Recommendations
Access to the coast for residents and visitors is essential to the identity and charm of Newport Beach. The following
recommendations are provided to ensure long-term safe access for diverse coastal uses and to provide a pathway
for compliance with State laws, such as Senate Bill 272.
6.1 Plan for Sea-Level Rise
Sea-level rise is a profound threat to Newport Beach, and phased strategies adapting to short-term storm threats
and long-term development plans will need to be developed. The City has already completed a Sea Level Rise
Vulnerability Assessment (2019) identifying likely sea-level rise impacts throughout Newport Beach, including
Newport Harbor. These vulnerabilities should be addressed through development of adaptation strategies that
follow the latest CCC guidance. The combination of sea-level rise projections, land uses, and existing development
patterns will help identify areas that are good candidates for adaptation measures, such as hard armoring (e.g.,
seawalls, bulkheads, riprap, revetments, caissons), structural elevation, sacrificial structures, development removal
based on trigger points, floodproofing, adaptive design, relocation, and nature-based solutions (e.g., beach
nourishment, dune enhancement, wetland restoration, living shorelines). Although the CCC has been encouraging
and funding the adoption of sea-level rise planning policies in LCPs by local governments for many years, Senate Bill
272 was recently passed by the State Senate and now requires that all local governments within the coastal zone
prepare a Sea Level Rise Plan by 2034. Local governments that approve such a plan before 2029 will be prioritized
for receiving funding for implementation of adaptation measures. Policies and programs identified through the
City’s adaptation planning may require formal amendments and updates to both the LCP and the General Plan.
Given the legislative deadline of 2034, the City does not necessarily need to address the Senate Bill 272 mandate
in this current General Plan Update process, but it is important to keep this future requirement in mind as the
current update is prepared so that its policies will not conflict with or preclude future sea-level rise adaptation
measures. Furthermore, it is a general recommendation that sea-level rise planning efforts be undertaken sooner
rather than later.
6.2 Preserve Public Access
Shoreline access points and their associated public amenities will likely be increasingly inundated and potentially
permanently unusable due to sea-level rise. Specifically, access points with campgrounds and boating are projected
to be impacted first and most profoundly in Newport Beach. This is of considerable concern because camping and
commercial and recreational boating facilities are a priority to the City and the California Coastal Act. Although each
access point will need to be assessed individually for site-specific considerations, in general, any amenity or facility
that is lost or restricted because of sea-level-rise impacts should be replaced through the creation of a comparable
use elsewhere, such that overall public access levels throughout the coastal zone are at least maintained, or ideally
expanded. Also, and as discussed in Section 4.3, Public Access, the provision of any new public access points must
be carefully planned so as to not only protect and enhance existing sensitive habitats, but also provide for their
continued adaptation and possible migration considering sea-level-rise effects.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
46
MAY JUNE 2024
6.3 Support a Mix of Coastal Land Uses
The harbor and bay currently have a diverse mix of land uses, including single-family and multifamily residential;
commercial retail, dining, and services; industrial uses; public access and recreation areas; public facilities; fishing
and boating facilities; and natural resource areas. To further City goals and priorities, and to maintain consistency
with the California Coastal Act, the City should strive to maintain a healthy mix of land uses in the harbor and bay,
especially prioritizing coastal-dependent and coastal-related uses, meaning uses that are dependent upon or
significantly enhanced by a location on or near the water. Land use designations and development patterns should
continue to serve the needs of the City, its residents, and its visitors. Use types should also be distributed evenly
throughout the harbor and bay so as to dilute potential impacts and protect popular areas from degradation due to
overuse. As the effects of sea-level rise manifest, potentially making existing areas unusable, and properties around
the harbor and bay are redeveloped, the proportion and mixture of coastal-dependent and coastal-related uses
should be carefully maintained.
6.4 Sea-Level Rise Public Project Checklist
To address the potential effects of sea-level rise on new infrastructure, the City could consider adopting a
sea-level-rise infrastructure checklist. This would include a step-by-step process for various City departments to
ascertain if sea-level rise would affect a particular project over the life of the infrastructure. This should also include
an assessment if a project can accommodate temporary flooding or needs to operate during hazard events, and an
assessment of how difficult rebuilding and recovery would be. This would allow project proponents to create
adaptation strategies, prioritizing critical projects that face profound risk and would be challenging to rebuild.
Typical steps in an infrastructure checklist include the following:
▪ Project lifespan: Determining how long the project is expected to last
▪ Project location: Determining the extent of sea-level rise at the project site
▪ Damage: Analyzing how much potential coastal hazards would likely damage the project, including what
would need to be rebuilt once floodwaters recede
▪ Disruption: Accessing how long, if at all, rebuilding would take after a hazard event
▪ Adaptation Strategies: Choosing adaptation strategies that would best mitigate the potential damage
and disruption
6.5 GPAC Considerations
Through two meetings in Spring of 2024, the Harbor and Bay Subcommittee reviewed and discussed harbor and
bay-related issues, existing conditions, and how these should be addressed in the General Plan Update. The
following considerations were proposed and received verbal support from Subcommittee members:
• Expand Harbor and Bay Element to include beaches so as to more comprehensively address coastal issues,
such as environmental issues and conservation efforts.
• Establish a Beach Commission, akin to the Harbor Commission, tasked with overseeing beach preservation
and protection efforts, beach-related recreation, and economic development related to coastal tourism.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
47
MAY JUNE 2024
Assess the impact of increasing fees for the usage of slips for boat storage.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
48
MAY JUNE 2024
Appendix A
To: Elizabeth Dickson - Dudek
From: Lance Harris - Pro Forma Advisors
Date: May 10, 2024
re: Newport Beach General Plan Update Economic Support – Harbor and Bay Element
Executive Summary
Newport Harbor is the largest recreational boat harbor on the west coast and a thriving industry cluster that not only includes
maritime related businesses (i.e., shipyards, fueling facilities, boat rentals, charters, ferry services) but also food and beverage,
retail, and hotel industries that service the community as well as overnight and daytrip visitors. While the Newport Harbor began
with maritime industries, overtime as the industry cluster matured it created a new industry cluster of water recreation industries
and the associated tourism that came from it.
Beyond the maritime industries and related visitor serving business activity in Newport Harbor, the area also has one of the largest
residential presences of any harbor in California. While there are benefits of having residents in the area, the dramatic appreciation
in housing prices places pressure on commercial land uses due to their lower land value. For example, the median sales per square
foot for industrial development is approximately one-third that of residential. As such, protecting employment serving commercial
space (retail, office, and industrial) in Newport Harbor will be critical to continue to support and maintain the economic activity
created by the industry cluster.
Much of the economic activity comes from Newport Harbor’s ability to attract tourists. In fact, it is estimated that over 9.5 million
overnight and day-trip tourists visit Newport Harbor annually. Based on visitor spending patterns, Newport Harbor is estimated to
account for slightly over 30 percent of all direct tourism related spending (nearly $400 million) in the City of Newport Beach. This
includes spending on accommodations, entertainment, restaurants, retail, etc. during their stay within Newport Harbor, which for
day-trip visitors is estimated to average slightly under four hours. The typical length of stay reflects the visitors’ participation in
beach or water based recreational activities, which typically occur over longer time periods.
Based on an analysis of maritime and visitor serving industries that would not be located there “but for” the harbor, it is estimated
that Newport Harbor creates $547.4 million in direct economic output. This level of economic activity supports approximately 4,440
direct jobs with earnings of $195.8 million. In total, Newport Harbor is estimated to support approximately 5,900 indirect jobs or
1,500 additional indirect jobs in Orange County. In total it is estimated Newport Harbor creates $787 million in total economic
output to the county’s economy.
Beyond the economic output and associated jobs and earnings created by Newport Harbor, the area also produces significant
fiscal benefit to the City of Newport Beach. Property tax from housing and commercial development along with sales and transient
occupancy tax provide significant revenue to the City’s General Fund. The analysis could be considered generally conservative as
it does not quantify additional visitor spending captured in the City of Newport Beach that was induced from visits to Newport
Harbor. Similarly, by not quantifying the fiscal impacts of Newport Harbor the study underestimates the overall economic benefit to
the City of Newport Beach.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
49
MAY JUNE 2024
Memo Organization
This memorandum includes two sections. The first section presents a base economic overview of the Newport Harbor, which is
defined as a 4.3 square mile boundary as presented in Figure 1 that is roughly approximate to the Newport Harbor and surrounding
area. 1 This section reviews historic and projected level of employment, industry clusters, and real estate market trends that might
place pressure on the replacement of marine uses and harbor support facilities. The second section provides an economic impact
assessment of the existing businesses and support activities of the Newport Harbor’s commercial uses (e.g. maritime and
commercial fishing) as well as the relative impact of the tourism related economic benefits that the Newport Harbor creates in the
regional economy.
Figure 1: Newport Harbor, City of Newport Beach, and Orange County Map
1
Newport Harbor includes 21.6 miles of water frontage plus an additional 15.5 miles of water frontage in the Back Bay. This analysis
focuses on the Newport Harbor area.
Newport Harbor
City of
Newport
Beach
Orange County
Newport Harbor
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
50
MAY JUNE 2024
Base Economic Overview
Introduction
Newport Harbor is an extensive small craft harbor with more than 9,000 recreational boats berthed in its facilities, serving as the
largest recreational boat harbor on the west coast. As such, it is one of the most popular tourist destinations for all aspects of
boating and water activities in Orange County (County). The harbor is a thriving economy home to not only maritime related
businesses (i.e., shipyards, fueling facilities, boat rentals, charters, ferry services) but also food and beverage, retail, and hotel
industries that service the substantial visitor activity.
Historic Employment
The following analysis examines jobs located in the Newport Harbor based on 2021 data from OnTheMap. OnTheMap was
developed by the US Census to provide geographic patterns of jobs by their employment location. Using the previously defined
area, in 2021 there were an estimated 8,850 workers (part and full time) employed in the Newport Harbor. As shown below in
Figure 2 total jobs in the area peaked in 2017 and experienced lows in years impacted by recessions in the early 2000s, post Great
Recession years, and COVID-19 (2020).
Figure 2: Historic Number of Jobs in Newport Harbor (2002 – 2021)
Source: US Census (OnTheMap) based on Pro Forma defined area for Newport Harbor
This employment base represents approximately 11 percent of the total jobs in the City of Newport Beach (City). Since 2011,
employment in Newport Harbor has grown by a growth rate of 1.1 percent per year. The employment growth in Newport Harbor
has lagged slightly behind the City (1.25 percent per year) but has grown faster than the larger County area (0.87 percent per
year). The following figures provide a comparison of in-place employment growth in Newport Harbor, the City, and larger County
area between 2011 and 2021.
Figure 3: In-Place Employment Index (2011 – 2021)
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
To
t
a
l
J
o
b
s
Year
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
51
MAY JUNE 2024
Source: US Census (OnTheMap) based on Pro Forma defined area for Newport Harbor
Projected Employment
Based on data provided from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the City’s employment base is not
projected to increase dramatically over the next 10 to 20 years (Figure 4). SCAG’s Local Data Exchange process was developed to
gather the most updated information available from local jurisdictions covering land use, growth, and related plan inputs to inform
the development of Connect SoCal 2024, which was adopted in April 2024. Based on SCAG’s estimates, the City will increase
employment by less than 1,000 jobs by 2035. This represents a total growth rate of one percent from 2019 to 2035, which is
significantly lower than the employment growth compared to the County, which is projected to increase by 7.6 percent or 137,000
jobs during the same period.
111.6113.2
109.1
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
105.0
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
In
-Pl
a
c
e
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
I
n
d
e
x
(
2
0
1
1
=
1
0
0
)
Year
Newport Harbor City of Newport Beach Orange County
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
52
MAY JUNE 2024
Figure 4: Employment Projection (2019 - 2035)
Source: SCAG (2024)
Industry Composition
The following Table 1 provides information on the number of jobs in Newport Harbor by the 2-digit NAICS classification and job
growth (or loss) between 2011 and 2021. In total, just over 900 jobs were added over the 10-year period. Several industries had
job growth but the rapid expansion of Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services accounted for nearly half of the job gains. In
contrast, the greatest job loss came within the Administration & Support, Waste Management and Remediation, Real Estate and
Rental and Leasing, and Public Administration industries. Most of the industries that exhibited the most volatility was not directly
connected to maritime related activities.
900
137,000
1.0%
7.6%
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
City of Newport Beach Orange County
Pe
r
c
e
n
t
G
r
o
w
t
h
Nu
m
e
r
i
c
G
r
o
w
t
h
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
53
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 1: Jobs by NAICS Industry Sector (2021)
Industry Sector Number Percent Number Change
(2011-2021)
Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 2 0.0% -1
Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 0 0.0% 0
Utilities 0 0.0% 0
Construction 270 3.1% 156
Manufacturing 81 0.9% 56
Wholesale Trade 151 1.7% -93
Retail Trade 941 10.6% 148
Transportation and Warehousing 326 3.7% -59
Information 258 2.9% 166
Finance and Insurance 384 4.3% 166
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 344 3.9% -193
Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 887 10.0% 440
Management of Companies and Enterprises 1 0.0% -12
Administration & Support, Waste Management and Remediation 68 0.8% -205
Educational Services 44 0.5% -39
Health Care and Social Assistance 646 7.3% 271
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 350 4.0% -87
Accommodation and Food Services 3,105 35.1% -8
Other Services (excluding Public Administration) 790 8.9% 371
Public Administration 203 2.3% -158
Total 8,815 100.0% 919
Source: OnTheMap, US Census
Industry Clusters
Strong concentrations of related industries in one location are called industry clusters. Industry clusters consist of a variety of
companies, suppliers, service providers, etc. that support one another. Strong industry clusters in an area can support the local
economy and help position specific regions for uniquely competitive for jobs and private investment. A strong industry cluster is
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
54
MAY JUNE 2024
defined by a cluster that has high employment specialization in a region. Two cluster types make up a regional economy: Local
and Traded Clusters.
A Local Cluster consists of groups of industries that primarily serve the local market. As such, Local Clusters are not typically
impacted by the competitive advantages of a particular location. Most of the employment in a region comes from local clusters.
They are not directly exposed to competition from outside of their direct geography. Some examples of local clusters include health
services like dentists or personal services like hair salons, which service the residents of the City instead of people from outside the
local economy.
In contrast, Traded Clusters are complementary, competing, and interdependent industries that drive wealth creation through the
export of goods and services. In addition to exporting, companies in the Traded Clusters exhibit two other distinct characteristics:
strong business transaction relationships and close geographic proximity. In Traded Clusters, transactions between these firms
are stronger than their transactions with the rest of the economy. Also, by locating within proximity to each other, businesses can
gain a collective and competitive advantage that might not be achieved otherwise. In essence, the concentration of businesses
within a set geography helps create a synergy between cluster firms.
Traded Clusters are thought to be conducive for new business creation for two main reasons. First, they act as a driver of the local
economy because Traded Cluster firms require goods and services from local businesses to meet the demand for their exports.
Second, as they mature in their business cycle, cluster firms create demand for new types of products and services, some of which
are not supplied by existing firms. As a result, business clusters can generate demand for the creation of new firms in the local
economy.
The Newport Harbor began by developing a Traded Cluster of maritime industries such as boatbuilding, shipbuilding, and
commercial fishing. However, overtime as the cluster matured it created a new cluster of water recreation industries and the
associated tourism that came from it. To understand the relative strength of existing clusters, Pro Forma Advisors utilized a
location quotient analysis to compare Newport Harbor to the larger County region.
Location Quotient Analysis
The location quotient (LQ) is a tool that measures the relative concentration of different industries in specific localities relative to a
larger level of geography. In most cases, the LQ would compare a county to a state or national level of employment concentration.
However, it is useful to get a proxy for relative employment concentration among industries within a sub-regional level geography.
The calculation helps evaluate Newport Harbor’s strength or weakness relative to the County as a whole. A concentrated (high) LQ
means that a given industry is represented more than one would expect, given its total level of employment. The following
describes the LQ:
• LQ > 1.0 means that an industry is more concentrated in Newport Harbor than in the County.
• LQ < 1.0 means that an industry is less concentrated in Newport Harbor than in the County.
• LQ = 1.0 means that an industry is equally concentrated in Newport Harbor as in the County.
Because industries with a LQ greater than 1.0 indicates relatively high production of a particular service, it is likely that some
amount of that industry is being exported. Employment in that industry (or the portion of employment that causes the LQ to exceed
1.0) is then assigned to the economic base and is given credit for supporting the economy. Conversely, if an industry has a LQ less
than one, it is assumed to be a local-serving or non-basic industry. For comparison purposes, it is often useful to focus on the
outlier industries with a LQ greater than 1.25 or less than 0.75. The assumption is that industries falling within 0.75 and 1.25 are
probably producing at levels sufficient to meet local demand in the local area.
As shown in below in Figure 5, there are several industries in the Newport Harbor with a LQ greater than 1.25. These included
Transportation and Warehousing, Information, Real Estate, Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation, Accommodation and Food
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
55
MAY JUNE 2024
Services, and Other Services. The maritime related industries in Newport Harbor tend to be in industries such as Manufacturing
(e.g. ship building and repair), Wholesale Trade (e.g. wholesale marine equipment), Retail Trade (e.g. water activity related sales),
Transportation and Warehousing (e.g. charter rentals), and Other Services (e.g. marine repairs). Other secondary industries that
service the community as well as visitors include Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation and Accommodations and Food Services.
Many of these industries with such a high LQ represent the maritime related Traded Cluster of industries in Newport Harbor.
Figure 5: Newport Harbor Location Quotient (2021)
Source: OnTheMap, US Census
1.93 1.82 1.56
2.72
4.23
3.24
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
Q
u
o
t
i
e
n
t
LQ 0.75 LQ 1.25 LQ
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
56
MAY JUNE 2024
Newport Harbor Related Employment
Utilizing data available from California’s Employment of Development Department (EDD), Pro Forma Advisors estimates that
approximately 50 percent (4,424 jobs) of the total employment (8,851 jobs) within the defined area directly relate to Newport
Harbor and are representative to the previously discussed Newport Harbor traded industry cluster. While the total number of may
be higher, the review of EDD data attempts to isolate industries that would not be located there “but for” the harbor and its related
activates. The following Table 2 provides a consolidated summary of the Newport Harbor industry cluster by 2 Digit NAICS code.
Table 2: Newport Harbor Job Cluster by NAICS Industry Sector (2021)
Industry Sector Total in Newport
Harbor
Total in Newport
Harbor Industry
Cluster
Percent of Total
Newport Harbor
Industry Cluster
Manufacturing 81 64 79%
Wholesale Trade 151 52 34%
Retail Trade 941 316 34%
Transportation and Warehousing 326 164 50%
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 344 172 50%
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 350 350 100%
Accommodation and Food Services 3,105 3,105 100%
Other Services (excluding Public Administration) 790 201 25%
Total 8,815 4,424 50.0%
Note: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing industries was estimate by Pro Forma Advisors. All other businesses were surveyed using EDD data and
then placed in their respective NAICS Industry Sector.
Source: OnTheMap, US Census, Pro Forma Advisors, California EDD
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
57
MAY JUNE 2024
Real Estate Pressure to Harbor Uses
Beyond the noted maritime industries and related visitor serving business activity in Newport Harbor, the area also has an
estimated 15,700 residents. The number of people residing in the harbor is one of the largest residential presences in any harbor in
California. While there are benefits of having residents to provide additional market support to existing business, the value of those
homes inherently place pressure on non-residential land uses.
Since the first quarter (Q1) of 2015, the median sales price of homes in the City of Newport Beach has increased by over 80
percent from $1.58 to $2.90 million (Figure 6). These reported sales do not isolate a median price for houses within Newport
Harbor, which are likely to be higher than the median due to proximity to the water and associated harbor views. The dramatic
appreciation in housing prices places pressure on commercial land uses due to their lower land value.
Figure 6: Newport Beach Median Sales Price by Quarter (2015 - 2023)
Source: California Association of Realtors
Typically, traditional maritime commercial uses would utilize industrial space. Using the previously discussed employment data the
following Figure 7 provides a comparison of job change for industries that typically utilize industrial space, which for the purposes of
this analysis uses the Utilities, Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, and Transportation and Warehousing industries. In all three
regions, the industries have experienced a decline since 2011. Interestingly, up until 2018, Newport Harbor had been going against
the trends until the loss of approximately 250 jobs in between 2019 and 2021. Commercial real estate, such as Industrial spaces,
rely on various market demand beyond just job growth but it is an important indicator that typically reflects overall demand for
commercial real estate. It should be noted that in some cases advances in technology have decreased the required number of jobs
while not impacting the overall demand for commercial space (i.e., lower number of jobs per square feet of commercial space).
Figure 7: In-Place Industrial Serving Employment Index (2011 – 2021)
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
$4,000,000
Q1
2
0
1
5
Q2
2
0
1
5
Q3
2
0
1
5
Q4
2
0
1
5
Q1
2
0
1
6
Q2
2
0
1
6
Q3
2
0
1
6
Q4
2
0
1
6
Q1
2
0
1
7
Q2
2
0
1
7
Q3
2
0
1
7
Q4
2
0
1
7
Q1
2
0
1
8
Q2
2
0
1
8
Q3
2
0
1
8
Q4
2
0
1
8
Q1
2
0
1
9
Q2
2
0
1
9
Q3
2
0
1
9
Q4
2
0
1
9
Q1
2
0
2
0
Q2
2
0
2
0
Q3
2
0
2
0
Q4
2
0
2
0
Q1
2
0
2
1
Q2
2
0
2
1
Q3
2
0
2
1
Q4
2
0
2
1
Q1
2
0
2
2
Q2
2
0
2
2
Q3
2
0
2
2
Q4
2
0
2
2
Q1
2
0
2
3
Q2
2
0
2
3
Q3
2
0
2
3
Q4
2
0
2
3
Sa
l
e
s
P
r
i
c
e
I
n
d
e
c
x
(
Q
1
2
0
1
5
=
1
0
0
)
Me
d
i
a
n
S
a
l
e
s
P
r
i
c
e
Median Home Price Sales Price Index
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
58
MAY JUNE 2024
Note: Industrial jobs defined as those jobs in the Utilities, Wholesale, Manufacturing, and Trade and Transportation industries.
Source: US Census (OnTheMap) based on Pro Forma defined area for Newport Harbor
The City’s industrial market is a small submarket within the larger Airport Area industrial market area (including the cities of Costa
Mesa, Fountain Valley, Irvine, Santa Ana, and Tustin). As of the 1Q 2024, the City had almost 608,000 square feet of new rentable
industrial space within 49 buildings. This industrial supply is only one percent of the larger Airport Area industrial market. The
current vacancy is estimated at 2.7 percent or approximately 16,500 vacant square feet in the City.
Historically, the City’s industrial submarket has shown no growth over the last five to ten years. Over that time the number of
buildings surveyed in the analysis has not changed. Rather, there has been a slight change in net rentable square feet. Vacancy
rates have swung more dramatically in the City because of the low net rentable area compared to the larger market areas. The
following Figure 8 provides a snapshot of vacancy rates from Q1 2017 through Q1 2024. Overall, the markets have been strong
with vacancy rates lower than five percent.
Figure 8: Industrial Market Vacancy (Q12017 – Q12024)
85.3
92.1
95.4
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
105.0
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
130.0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
In
-Pl
a
c
e
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
I
n
d
e
x
(
2
0
1
1
=
1
0
0
)
Year
Newport Harbor Newport Beach Orange County
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
59
MAY JUNE 2024
Source:
VOIT Real Estate Services
Despite exhibiting relative strength in the industrial market, the City and Newport Harbor will continue to face pressure replacing
industrial and underutilized commercial space with residential uses. As shown below in Figure 9, since 2017 the median sales per
square foot for industrial development is approximately one-third that of residential comparing the City to the County. Commercial
industrial, retail, and office space provide space for employment in the City. Protecting commercial space in Newport Harbor will be
critical to continue to maintain the cluster of maritime activities.
Figure 9: Newport Beach Sales per Square Foot Comparison by Land Use (Q12017 – Q12022, and 2023)
Source:
VOIT Real Estate Services; California Association of Realtors
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
4.5%
Q1 2018 Q1 2019 Q1 2020 Q1 2021 Q1 2022 Q1 2023 Q1 2024
Va
c
a
n
c
y
Newport Beach Airport Area Total Orange County Total
$245 $266 $235 $275 $283 $359 $390 $392 $397 $425
$716 $712 $755 $764
$866
$1,094 $1,048
$1,175 $1,216 $1,203
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
Q1 2017 Q1 2018 Q1 2019 Q1 2020 Q1 2021 Q1 2022 Q1 2023 Q2 2023 Q3 2023 Q4 2023
Me
d
i
a
n
S
a
l
e
s
P
r
i
c
e
p
e
r
S
q
u
a
r
e
F
o
o
t
Industrial (Orange County)Residential (Newport Beach)
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
60
MAY JUNE 2024
Economic Impact Overview
Introduction
This economic impact analysis is an evaluation of sales, spending, and other economic activities conducted in the defined Newport
Harbor area. In addition to capturing the direct economic activities in Newport Harbor, related spending and activities directly tied
to the economic activities taking place Newport Harbor are also included. All economic impacts are based on the estimated
existing maritime related businesses and the associated impacts of tourism in Newport Harbor.
Economic Impact Overview
This section provides a general explanation of economic impact analysis, describes the components of economic impact, and
presents the methodology and key assumptions used to estimate the economic impact in this report.
Definitions
Economic impact can be described as the sum of the economic activity within a defined geographic region resulting from an initial
change (positive or negative) in the economy. This initial change spurs a series of subsequent economic activities (the re-spending
of dollars) because of interconnected economic relationships. In this case, the study isolates the overall economic impacts of
Newport Harbor on the County’s economy.
Economic Impact is reported in terms of:
Output: Output represents the value of industry production. In the Bureau of Economic Analysis’ Regional Input-Output Modeling
System (RIMS II) these are annual production estimates for the year of the data set and are in producer prices, which is analogous
to industry sales.
Employment or Jobs: In RIMS II a job is equivalent to the average monthly jobs in the corresponding industry. Thus, 1 job lasting
12 months, 2 jobs lasting 6 months each and 3 jobs lasting 4 months are all equivalent. A job could be either full-time or part-time,
but not full-time equivalent. The one-time construction impact is inclusive of an estimate for all jobs over the development period.
Earnings: All forms of employment income including employee compensation.
Economic impact is composed of Direct, Indirect, and Induced Impact, which is commonly referred to as the “multiplier effect.”
The following provides definitions of the various economic activities:
Direct Impact: Direct Impact is the initial change in the economy (i.e. Output, Jobs, and Earnings).
Indirect Impact: Additional Output, Employment, and Earnings generated because of the purchases of the industries that supply
goods and services to the development under consideration.
Induced Impact: Additional Output, Employment, and Earnings generated by re-spending of Earnings for household purchases.
Total Impact: The cumulative impact of the above components.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
61
MAY JUNE 2024
Economic Multipliers
Economic multipliers measure the re-spending of dollars in an economy and are used to calculate the Total Impact. Economic
multipliers are developed using an accounting framework called Input-Output (I-O) tables, which are tables that provide information
on all production activities and transactions between producers and consumers in an economy.
This analysis uses RIMS II to derive multipliers, key economic data, and total economic impact. RIMS II is an economic impact
assessment system that assembles economic accounts using I-O tables and social accounting formats to derive multipliers. The
RIMS II system is widely used throughout the public and private sectors to estimate the economic impact of changes in a regional
economy.
The study utilizes Type I multipliers, which have not been adjusted to account for local household spending. Type I multipliers, by
definition, account for only the direct and indirect impacts of a final-demand change. The direct impact relates to the first round of
inputs purchased by the final-demand industry. The indirect impact relates to the subsequent rounds of inputs purchased by
supporting industries. The sum of the direct and indirect impacts is often called the interindustry effect.
However, Type II multipliers not only account for the interindustry effect, but they also account for the induced impact of a final-
demand change. The induced impact relates to the spending of workers whose earnings are affected by a final-demand change.
This impact is often called the household-spending effect. In studies using Type II multipliers, all changes in household purchases
must exclude the spending of workers who already both live and work in the region. In this study, no adjustment has been made to
estimate the number of employees that both work in Newport Harbor and live in the County because of the lack of available data.
As such, the findings should be considered conservative as it only accounts for Indirect economic impacts.
Key Assumptions
The following are key assumptions:
• All monetary totals are presented in non-inflated 2021 dollars.
• The analysis evaluates the gross economic impact of Newport Harbor on the County.
• Spending expected to flow outside the County is excluded from the analysis.
• Many of the totals in the analysis are rounded or presented in millions of dollars and thus totals may not add due to
rounding.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
62
MAY JUNE 2024
Methodology
In summary, the following figure describes the process of calculating impacts through a RIMS II economic impact model.
Figure 10: Illustrative Economic Impact Methodology
Source: Pro Forma Advisors
Maritime Employment Impacts (Annual)
Direct Impacts
Table 3 summarizes the estimate for the Job estimate by industry for Newport Harbor and the associated mapping to the RIMS II
multipliers. Jobs are determined based on the previous section’s Base Economic Overview. Employment estimates by industry are
used as inputs for the RIMS II I-O model. Related Earnings and Output are estimated using the RIMS II I-O model. Each industry
has unique multipliers, which will be applied to each category of spending. Based on the number of in-place employment by
industry, the Direct impacts of Newport Harbor is estimated to be $547.4 million in Output and 4,424 jobs with annual earnings of
$195.8 million. In total, this suggests an average earning of $44,300 per Job per year.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
63
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 3: Newport Harbor Direct Impacts Estimate (2021)
Industry Sector RIMS II Industry Output
(Millions)
Earnings
(Millions)
Jobs Average
Earnings
Manufacturing Miscellaneous Manufacturing $16.0 $5.0
64 $77,900
Wholesale Trade Wholesale Trade $12.9 $4.3
52 $81,900
Retail Trade Other Retail $34.3 $13.3
316 $42,000
Transportation and Warehousing Water Transportation $47.2 $12.3
164 $74,800
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Real Estate $35.6 $7.7
172 $45,000
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Amusement, Gambling, and
Recreation Industries $42.0 $13.6
350 $38,700
Accommodation and Food Services Accommodation $96.3 $34.6 685 $50,600
Food Service and Drinking
Places $239.6 $95.0
2,420 $39,300
Other Services
(excluding Public Administration) Other Services $23.4 $10.0
201 $49,800
Total
$547.4 $195.8
4,424 $44,300
Note: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing industries was estimate by Pro Forma Advisors. All other businesses were surveyed using EDD data and
then placed in their respective NAICS Industry Sector. Accommodation and Food and Drinking Places employment was split based on Data Axle’s
estimated distribution between the industries, which is 22 percent and 78 percent, respectively.
Source: OnTheMap, US Census, Pro Forma Advisors, California EDD, BEA
Total Industry Impacts
Using the multipliers in Table 4, Direct output is expected to create $787.0 million ($547.4 million x 1.438) in Total Output in the
County. Newport Harbor’s Output is estimated to create total Earnings of $296.8 million ($547.4million x 0.542). Total Jobs
supported by Newport Harbor, which include full-time and part-time employment, are estimated at 5,904 jobs (10.786 jobs for
every million in Output) or 1,480 additional indirect jobs created in the County (Table 5). Detailed tables are provided in the
Appendix of this document.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
64
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 4: Newport Harbor Adjusted Multiplier (2021)
Industry Sector RIMS II Industry Output Earnings Jobs
Manufacturing Miscellaneous Manufacturing 1.405 0.455 5.943
Wholesale Trade Wholesale Trade 1.456 0.533 7.317
Retail Trade Other Retail 1.148 0.529 11.116
Transportation and Warehousing Water Transportation 1.518 0.602 12.489
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Real Estate 1.323 0.353 6.548
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Amusement, Gambling, and
Recreation Industries 1.356 0.447 9.920
Accommodation and Food Services Accommodation 1.431 0.540 9.340
Food Service and Drinking
Places 1.496 0.579 12.267
Other Services (excluding Public
Administration)
Other Services
1.467 0.598 10.876
Total 1.438 0.542 10.786
Source: Pro Forma Advisors, BEA
Table 5: Total Economic Impact of Newport Harbor (2021)
Output Earnings Jobs
Direct Impact $547.4 $195.8 4,424
Indirect Impact $239.6 $101.1 1,480
Total Impact $787.0 $296.8 5,904
Source: Pro Forma Advisors, BEA
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
65
MAY JUNE 2024
Visitor Impacts
While visitor impacts are captured in the analysis above (as it is assumed that all of the spending occurs in Newport Harbor), a
further examination of Newport Harbor’s ability to attract visitors is analyzed to better understand its role in the overall economic
activity. Pro Forma Advisors utilized Placer.ai, a foot traffic data provider, to determine the number of annual visitors. For
consistency with the base year multipliers, visitor spending data, and employment data the calendar year 2021 was the basis for
the estimate. However, to the extent possible, additional information has been provided for calendar years 2022 and 2023 to
provide additional insights on visitor activity in Newport Harbor.
Historic Footfall
In 2023 it is estimated that there were over 30.5 million visits from people (6.5 unique visitors) that spent more than 10 minutes
within Newport Harbor annually (Figure 11). Since 2021, the total number of visits (excluding residents and employees) has
remained relatively consistent. It is estimated that the average length of stay is slightly under 4 hours (230 minutes) with a median
stay of slightly over 1.5 hours (101 minutes). The typical length of stay reflects the visitors’ participation in water based recreational
activities, which typically occur over longer time periods. Figure 12 demonstrates that those individuals staying over 150 minutes
skew the average significantly higher than the median length of stay.
Figure 11: Newport Harbor Footfall (2021 – 2023)
Source:
Placer.ai, Pro Forma Advisors
Figure 12: Newport Harbor Footfall (2021 – 2023)
Source: Placer.ai, Pro Forma Advisors
Overnight Visitation
Overnight visitors are analyzed using Placer.ai’s Trip Origination reports for Newport Harbor, the City, and the County to estimate
the relative impact of tourism and any additional impacts Newport Harbor has on the larger tourism industry in the County. Unlike
31.0 32.1 30.5
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
2021 2022 2023Fo
o
t
f
a
l
l
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
0%
14%10%8%8%6%6%5%4%4%
36%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
- 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0 15.0
10
-
1
4
15
-
2
9
30
-
4
4
45
-
5
9
60
-
7
4
75
-
8
9
90
-
1
0
4
10
5
-
1
1
9
12
0
-
1
3
4
13
5
-
1
4
9
>1
5
0
Fo
o
t
f
a
l
l
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
Length of Stay (Minutes)
Total Percent of Total
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
66
MAY JUNE 2024
total footfall, which includes visitation from any distance, overnight visitor counts the total number of separate overnight trips (i.e.,
trips that include one or more overnight stays) made to Newport Harbor in 2023. This could include multiple visits by the same
person (so long as these visits are in separate months). As shown below in Figure 13 the City currently represents approximate 19
percent of total visitors, 25 percent of visit nights, and 28 percent of estimated visitors’ spending potential. In fact, the potential per
cap spending potential of guests is over 40 percent higher than the County visitor profile.
Figure 13: City of Newport Beach and Orange County Overnight Visitor Estimate (2023)
Source: Placer.ai, Pro Forma Advisors
Newport Harbor is a major destination for visitors in the City. Currently the Newport Harbor consists of approximately one-third of
the City’s hotel supply with a significant number of smaller, independent hotel operator (please see Appendix). Based on the 2021
overnight visitor estimates to the City, it is estimated that Newport Harbor attracted approximately 580,000 overnight visitors.
Overnight visitors are defined as visitor trips taken by individuals that stay overnight away from home or travel more than 50 miles
one-way on a non-routine trip, as defined by the California Tourism Marketing Act. These overnight visitors would include both
those individuals staying in hotels or motels, friends, and family, etc.
8.8
20.4
4.3
1.7
5.0
1.2
0 5 10 15 20 25
Visitors (Millions)
Visit Nights (Millions)
Estimated Visitor's Spending Potential (Billions)
City of Newport Beach Orange County
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
67
MAY JUNE 2024
Daytrip Visitation
In addition to overnight visitors, Newport Harbor’s water related activities attracts a significant number of day-trip visitation. The
following visitation numbers and patterns are for those individuals visiting Newport Harbor in calendar year 2021 and their home
location was over 30-miles away. As noted in Figure 14, day-trip visitation (which excludes overnight visitors) trends to peak in the
summer months of June, July, and August when Newport Harbor attracts a significant number of people to Newport Beach. Since
2021, annual visitation has ranged from approximately 9 million to 10 million daytrip visitors annually (Figure 15). While the
economic impacts of those visitors spending money in the City and not in Newport Harbor has not been quantified, the draw of the
Newport Harbor to attract people throughout Southern California provides additional economic benefit to the City and larger
County economy.
Figure 14: Daytrip Visitation by Month (2021)
Source: Placer.ai, Pro Forma Advisors
Figure 15: Daytrip Visitation by Year (2021 - 2023)
Source: Placer.ai, Pro Forma Advisors
For the purposes of the economic impact analysis, typical visitor spending patterns as presented in Table 5 were used to estimate
Newport Harbor’s share of visitor spending in the City. Based on the Direct spending, by category, it is estimated that the Newport
Harbor accounts for 31 percent of all overnight tourism related spending in the City.
4.8%4.6%
7.5%8.0%8.4%
12.9%
18.8%
10.5%
6.8%5.7%5.7%6.2%
0%
2%
4%6%
8%
10%12%
14%
16%18%
20%
Ja
n
u
a
r
y
Fe
b
r
u
a
r
y
Ma
r
c
h
Ap
r
i
l
Ma
y
Ju
n
e
Ju
l
y
Au
g
u
s
t
Se
p
t
e
m
b
e
r
Oc
t
o
b
e
r
No
v
e
m
b
e
r
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
-
1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000
4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000 9,000,000
10,000,000
11,000,000
2021 2022 2023
Da
y
t
r
i
p
V
i
s
i
t
o
r
s
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
68
MAY JUNE 2024
Table 5: Total Direct Visitor Spending in City and Newport Harbor (2021)
Category
Percent of Visitor
Spending by Category
Estimate of Overnight
Spending in City of
Newport Beach
($MM)
Estimate of Direct Spending
in Newport Harbor ($MM)
Newport Harbor
Percent Capture
of Newport
Beach Visitor
Spending
Accommodations 25% $322.9 $96.3 30%
Food Service 27% $347.7 $239.6 69%
Food Stores 5% $59.1 $7.1 12%
Local Trans & Gas 3% $36.6 $0.7 2%
Arts, Ent. & Rec. 21% $271.9 $42.0 15%
Retail Sales 18% $234.1 $11.6 5%
Air Transportation 2% $27.6 $- 0%
Total 100% $1,300.0 $397.3 31%
Source: Dean Runyan Associates; Pro Forma Advisors
Additional Impacts
Beyond the Output, Earnings, and Jobs created by Newport Harbor, the area also includes the housing and commercial
development that provides property tax to the City. Furthermore, retail businesses create sales tax and the hotels within Newport
Harbor provide hotel occupancy tax to the City. As previously noted, the analysis could be considered conservative as it does not
quantify additional visitor spending in the City not captured but induced from Newport Harbor. Similarly, not quantifying the fiscal
impacts of Newport Harbor also underestimates the overall economic benefit.
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
69
MAY JUNE 2024
Appendix
The following data is providing the detailed calculations summarized in the memorandum.
Appendix Table 1: Newport Harbor Indirect Impacts Estimate (2021)
Industry Sector RIMS II Industry Output
(Millions)
Earnings
(Millions)
Jobs Average
Earnings
Manufacturing Miscellaneous Manufacturing $6.5 $2.3
31 73,600
Wholesale Trade Wholesale Trade $5.9 $2.6
42 61,700
Retail Trade Other Retail $5.1 $4.9
66 74,400
Transportation and Warehousing Water Transportation $24.5 $16.2
426 38,000
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Real Estate $11.5 $4.8
61 78,600
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Amusement, Gambling, and
Recreation Industries $15.0 $5.2
66 78,200
Accommodation and Food Services Accommodation $41.5 $17.4
214 81,200
Food Service and Drinking Places $118.8 $43.7 520 84,100
Other Services
(excluding Public Administration) Other Services $10.9 $4.0
53 74,900
Total $239.6 $101.1
1,480 68,300
Note: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing industries was estimate by Pro Forma Advisors. All other businesses were surveyed using EDD data and
then placed in their respective NAICS Industry Sector. Accommodation and Food and Drinking Places employment was split based on Data Axle’s
estimated distribution between the industries, which is 22 percent and 78 percent, respectively.
Source: OnTheMap, US Census, Pro Forma Advisors, California EDD, BEA
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
70
MAY JUNE 2024
Appendix Table 2: Newport Harbor Total Impacts Estimate (2021)
Industry Sector RIMS II Industry Output
(Millions)
Earnings
(Millions)
Jobs Average
Earnings
Manufacturing Miscellaneous Manufacturing $22.5 $7.3
95 76,500
Wholesale Trade Wholesale Trade $18.8 $6.9
94 72,900
Retail Trade Other Retail $39.4 $18.1
382 47,600
Transportation and Warehousing Water Transportation $71.7 $28.4
590 48,200
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Real Estate $47.1 $12.6
233 53,900
Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation
Amusement, Gambling, and
Recreation Industries $56.9 $18.7
416 45,000
Accommodation and Food Services Accommodation $137.9 $52.0 899 57,900
Food Service and Drinking
Places $358.4 $138.7
2,940 47,200
Other Services
(excluding Public Administration) Other Services $34.3 $14.0
254 55,000
Total
$787.0 $296.8
5,904 50,300
Note: Real Estate and Rental and Leasing industries was estimate by Pro Forma Advisors. All other businesses were surveyed using EDD data and
then placed in their respective NAICS Industry Sector. Accommodation and Food and Drinking Places employment was split based on Data Axle’s
estimated distribution between the industries, which is 22 percent and 78 percent, respectively.
Source: OnTheMap, US Census, Pro Forma Advisors, California EDD, BEA
HARBOR AND BAY ELEMENT EXISTING CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND ANALYSIS / GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE
71
MAY JUNE 2024
Appendix Figure 2: Hotel Map (2024)
Note: Indep = Independent Hotel, Upper Upsc = Upper Upscale, and Upper Mid = Midscale. All
chain scale definitions are provided by Smith Travel Research. Chain Scale segments are grouped
primarily according to actual average room rates. An independent hotel, regardless of average room
rate, is included as a separate Chain Scale category. The Chain Scale segments are Luxury, Upper
Upscale, Upscale, Upper Midscale, Midscale, Economy and Independent.
Source: Smith Travel Research and Pro Forma Advisors
▪
City of
Newport
Beach Newport Harbor