HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC2025-004 - RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 20.28.050 (HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO) OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS) OF TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) AND PENDING SECTION 21.28.070 [HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO) OVERLAY COASTAL ZONING DISTRESOLUTION NO. PC2025-004 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 20.28.050 (HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO) OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS) OF TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) AND PENDING SECTION 21.28.070 [HOUSING OPPORTUNITY (HO)
OVERLAY COASTAL ZONING DISTRICTS] IN TITLE 21 (LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN) OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE (PA2024-0205) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. 1. On September 24, 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance Nos. 2024-16 and 2024-17,
approving amendments to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code (“NBMC”), to establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts in Section 20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and to create multi-unit objective design standards in Section 20.48.185 (Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards). The new sections serve to implement Policy Actions 1A through 1G and 3A in
the General Plan 6th Cycle Housing Element ("Housing Element"). 2. Section 20.28.050 of the NBMC allows for new housing opportunities within five subareas to ensure the City can accommodate its 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) allocation. These subareas correspond to the Focus Areas identified in the
Housing Element and are as follows: Airport Area Environs Area (HO-1), West Newport Mesa Area (HO-2), Dover-Westcliff Area (HO-3), Newport Center Area (HO-4), and Coyote Canyon Area (HO-5). Properties identified within these subareas are eligible for specified development allowances conducive to residential development at the prescribed average density of 20 to 50 dwelling units per acre. The standards include but are not limited to
minimum lot area, setbacks, height, open space, landscaping, and parking. 3. On July 23, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-52, authorizing submittal of the Local Coastal Program Amendment to the California Coastal Commission to amend the City’s Coastal Land Use Plan and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation
Plan) of the NBMC to establish the Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts and their corresponding development standards applicable to properties located within the Coastal Zone to implement the Housing Element. 4. On November 19, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-85, initiating an
amendment to Section 20.28.050 of the NBMC and the pending complementary amendments in Title 21 of the NBMC, to review and make possible adjustments to certain development standards, including but not limited to building height limits specified in Table 2-16 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of Section
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 2 of 13
01-17-23
20.28.050 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) and pending Table 21.28-1 (Development Standards for Housing Opportunity Overlay Zones) of the NBMC.
5. An amendment to Table 2-16 of Section 20.28.050 and pending Table 21.28-1 of the NBMC is necessary to adjust the height limitations of certain properties within the HO-4 subarea to accommodate potential residential development with the intended prescribed density range, and to identify a certain number of units being allocated from the respective
development limits for a selected group of City-owned properties located within HO-1 and
HO-4 subareas. The corresponding Housing Opportunity Overlay District Maps in Section 20.80.025 and pending Section 21.80.035 would also be amended accordingly (“Amendment”).
6. A public hearing was held on January 23, 2025, in the Council Chambers at 100 Civic
Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act”) and Chapters 20.62 (Public Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the
Planning Commission at this public hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION. 1. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) as set forth in California
Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and its implementing guidelines set forth
in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 (“CEQA Guidelines”), the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-50 on July 23, 2024, certifying Final Program Environmental Impact Report SCH No. 2023060699 ("PEIR"), approving a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("MMRP"), and adopting Findings and a Statement
of Overriding Considerations related to the implementation of the Housing Element
involving amendments to the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC which are available at: Housing Implementation Program EIR.
2. Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162
of the CEQA Guidelines, when an environmental impact report (“EIR”) is adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR is required unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of
the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project
is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR due to the
involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 3 of 13
01-17-23
c. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was
adopted as complete, shows any of the following:
i. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous negative declaration;
ii. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than
shown in the adopted negative declaration; iii. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of
the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measures
or alternatives; or iv. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous negative declaration would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline
to adopt the mitigation measures or alternatives. 3. The Amendment, which include adjustment to the height limitations of certain properties within the HO-4 Subarea to accommodate potential residential development with the
intended prescribed density range, and to identify the number of units being allocated
from the residential development limits for certain City-owned properties within HO-1 and HO-4 Subareas, does not constitute substantial changes to the circumstances under which the project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in the EIR, nor has any new
information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental
impacts been identified as detailed in the CEQA Consistency Memorandum, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated by reference. Therefore, in accordance with Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, no additional environmental review is required to adopt the
Amendments.
SECTION 3. FINDINGS. Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) Amendment
An amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC is a legislative act. Neither Title 20 itself nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq., sets forth any required findings for approval of such amendments. However, Section 20.66.040 (Commission Recommendation) of the NBMC requires the Planning Commission to make and file a report
of its findings and recommendations with the Council.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 4 of 13
01-17-23
Findings and Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Title 20 of the NBMC serves as the City’s Zoning Code, which is a tool to ensure
consistency with and implementation of the General Plan. It is necessary to amend and update Title 20 from time to time to ensure the policies set forth by the General Plan are being implemented effectively.
2. The Amendment specific to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of the NBMC, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference will further enable the implementation of the Housing Element’s key objective, which is to accommodate the development of housing to fulfill City’s obligation to meet regional housing demands. Specifically, the Amendment will allow increased height limitations for certain properties
within HO-4 to accommodate residential developments within the intended prescribed
density range while furthering the longstanding vision for development in Newport Center, as noted in General Plan Land Use Element Policy 6.14.4 (Development Scale). Increased heights will accommodate density on smaller sites and/or fewer sites and will increase walkability for residents and activate the urban core of Newport Center to
create a true mixed-use community while decreasing development footprints and
encouraging increased open space and views through developments. 3. The Amendment will also allocate a portion of the development limits in HO-1 and HO-4 to City-owned sites where there is a potential for redevelopment with housing projects
within the Housing Element’s planning period.
Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) Amendment An amendment to Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the NBMC is a
legislative act. Neither Title 21 itself nor California Government Code Section 65000 et seq.,
sets forth any required findings for approval of such amendments. Findings and Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Housing Element includes Section 4 (Housing Plan), which sets forth programs and
strategies to facilitate and encourage the development of the City’s obligation to meet regional housing demand. Appendix B of the Housing Element is the Sites Analysis and identifies several sites to be rezoned to allow for potential redevelopment with housing projects. A number of these sites are within the Coastal Zone. As Title 20 has been
amended to add the new HO Overlay Zones with associated development standards,
similarly, the amendment to Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan to add the new Overlay Coastal Zones for properties within the Coastal Zone has been prepared and submitted to the California Coastal Commission for consideration.
2. The Amendment specific to Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the
NBMC, attached hereto as Exhibit “C,” and incorporated herein by reference, will create consistency in implementation between Titles 20 and 21 of the NBMC and will help to fulfill the Housing Plan, as the proposed Amendment will facilitate the development of housing consistent with the Housing Element.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 5 of 13
01-17-23
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. In accordance with Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162 of the of the CEQA Guidelines, no additional environmental review is required as the Amendment does not constitute substantial changes to the circumstances under
which the project would be undertaken that would result in new or more severe
environmental impacts than previously addressed in the EIR, nor has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified as detailed in the CEQA Consistency Memorandum, which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”
2. The Planning Commission hereby recommends to the City Council approval of the Amendment to Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of NBMC as part of the consideration of the adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element implementation programs, as contained in Exhibits “B” and “C,” and
identified as PA2024-0205, and with inclusion of Housing Element Site ID Nos. 146 and
147 with a maximum height limit of 50 feet (flat) and 55 feet (sloped) and Site ID No. 141 with a maximum height limit of 48 feet. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Lowrey, Rosene, and Salene NOES: None
ABSENT: None
RECUSED: Langford
BY:_________________________ Mark Rosene, Chair
BY:_________________________ David Salene, Secretary
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 6 of 13
01-17-23
Attachments: Exhibit A – CEQA Consistency Memorandum Exhibit B – Amendment to Chapter 20.28 (Overlay Zoning Districts (MHP, PM,
B, and H)) of Title 20 (Planning And Zoning)
Exhibit C – Amendment to Pending Chapter 21.28 (Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts (MHP, PM, B, C, H, and HO)) of Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan)
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 7 of 13
01-17-23
EXHIBIT “A”
CEQA CONSISTENCY MEMORANDUM
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Consistency Analysis
1
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Consistency Analysis
The purpose of this memo is to provide the City of Newport Beach (City) with information to substantiate
that the proposed changes to the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
(approved Project) are within the scope of the certified City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing
Implementation Program Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR; State Clearinghouse Number
2023060699). The proposed changes would increase the maximum building heights on specified housing
sites in the Newport Center Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning District, as set forth in Chapter
20.28 and pending Chapter 21.28 [Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts] of City of Newport
Municipal Code (Municipal Code), hereinafter referred to as “proposed Project.”
State California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Title 14, California Code of Regulations
[CCR] §§15000 et seq.) State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 provide guidance regarding when
additional environmental review is required. The following discussion identifies the applicable subsections
of State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 and provides justification for the City to make a
determination that subsequent review pursuant to CEQA is not required for the proposed Project, based
on the environmental analysis provided in the Final EIR and this consistency analysis.
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 ‒ Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations
(a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent
EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of
substantial evidence in light of the whole record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
As documented in the consistency analysis, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental
effects beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR would occur that would require substantive revisions
to the Final EIR. The proposed Project would not result in substantially increased impacts beyond what
was evaluated in the Final EIR.
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is
undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due
to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the
severity of previously identified significant effects.
As documented in the consistency analysis, there have been no changes in circumstances under which
the proposed Project is being undertaken compared to the Final EIR. The proposed Project would be
implemented within the same study areas evaluated in the Final EIR. The proposed Project would not
result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effect, as compared to those previously identified in the Final EIR.
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Consistency Analysis
2
(A) The project will have one or more significant environmental effects not discussed in the
previous EIR or negative declaration;
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in
the previous EIR;
No new information of substantial importance, which was not known at the time the Final EIR was
certified is now available or shows that the proposed Project will result in a new or more significant
environmental effect. As documented in the consistency analysis, the previously examined significant
effects would not be substantially more severe than shown in the Final EIR as a result of the proposed
Project. The Final EIR’s findings are applicable to the proposed Project.
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be
feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but
the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed
in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative.
No mitigation measures in the Final EIR were found infeasible, as documented in the consistency analysis.
All Final EIR mitigation measures would also apply to the proposed Project and are provided in
Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
As documented in the consistency analysis in this document, the proposed Project would not result in any
new significant environmental effects that are substantially different from those identified in the Final
EIR, nor would it substantially increase the severity of significant effects previously identified in the Final
EIR.
Therefore, a consistency analysis to the Final EIR is the appropriate documentation for the proposed
Project to supplement the Final EIR. The City will consider this consistency analysis with the Final EIR prior
to making a decision on the proposed Project.
Background
The Final EIR was previously prepared to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the
implementing actions associated with the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element for 2021-2029 (2021-2029
Housing Element). The Housing Element is one of the state-mandated General Plan elements and must
be updated every eight years to address existing and projected housing needs across all segments of the
community. The City Council adopted the 2021-2029 Housing Element on September 13, 2022. The State
of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) subsequently found the 2021-
2029 Housing Element to be in compliance with State housing law (i.e., certified) on October 5, 2022. The
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is a State housing law requirement that is part of the periodic
updating of local General Plan Housing Elements. It is a process that determines the existing and projected
housing needs (i.e., RHNA allocation) for all jurisdictions (cities and unincorporated county areas) to
provide opportunities for a mix of unit types, tenure, and affordability. Each jurisdiction must demonstrate
that its Housing Element can accommodate its RHNA allocation at all income levels. The City’s 6th Cycle
RHNA allocation is 4,845 housing units, including 1,456 Very-Low-Income and 930 Low-Income units.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Consistency Analysis
3
In addition to the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation, the Final EIR analysis accounted for additional housing units
as a buffer to address future “no net loss” to preclude the need to identify replacement sites during 6th
Cycle implementation.1 Therefore, the Final EIR conservatively analyzed a total development capacity of
9,914 units, including future residential development capacity of up to 9,649 units (4,845 RHNA plus a
5,069-unit buffer) on 247 housing sites, 25 units of pipeline projects, and 240 accessory dwelling units.
However, only a portion of the housing units identified on the housing sites are necessary to
accommodate the City’s RHNA planning obligation of 4,845 housing units.
The City is not required to build housing units to meet its RHNA allocation; it is only required to identify
potential sites and create the framework to allow the market the opportunity to develop these units. The
2021-2029 Housing Element does not directly construct new housing but facilitates the development of
housing units by adopting implementing actions.
The 2021-2029 Housing Element identifies six Focus Areas in the City with sufficient capacity to meet its
RHNA allocation for the 6th Cycle. The six Focus Areas in the 2021-2029 Housing Element are:
• Airport Area
• West Newport Mesa
• Dover-Westcliff
• Newport Center
• Coyote Canyon
• Banning Ranch
As part of the approved Project, amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element’s goals and policies
were adopted, including modifications to existing land use goals and policies, as well as the addition of
new policies that further the implementation of the 2021-2029 Housing Element. Amendments were also
adopted to the City’s Local Coastal Program Coastal Land Use Plan, including modifications to existing
policies and additions of new policies. To facilitate future housing development within the six identified
Focus Areas, five corresponding “Housing Overlay Zones” were proposed and adopted to increase the
maximum allowable density for future housing projects on identified housing sites within each Focus Area.
A Housing Overlay Zone was not proposed for Banning Ranch. A sixth Housing Overlay Zone applies to the
5th Cycle Housing Element for 2014-2021 housing sites. In addition to the Housing Overlay Zones, the
Municipal Code was amended to add Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards and Zoning Maps were
amended to identify the Housing Overlay Zoning Districts.
The City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program was approved, and the Final
EIR was certified on July 23, 2024. Approval of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing
Implementation Program included the following discretionary actions:
• Certification of the City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Final
Program Environmental Impact Report. (Resolution No. 2024-50)
• General Plan Amendment. Amend the General Plan Land Use Element to include changes to goals
and policies consistent with the adopted and certified 2021-2029 Housing Element. (Resolution
No. 2024-51)
• Municipal Code Amendment. (1) Amend Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 20.28, Overlay
Zoning Districts, to include Section 20.28.050: Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts.
1 State housing laws require cities and counties to identify RHNA obligations by income category. A future housing applicant is
not required to meet affordability goals. The City is obligated to ensure there is no net loss when projects are developed such
that there are adequate opportunities for the City to meet its RHNA obligations. If there is a net loss, the City has 120 days to
provide rezoning that accommodates the net loss. Therefore, Newport Beach included a buffer to avoid the net loss scenario.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
(2) Amend the Zoning Map to identify the HO Overlay Zoning Districts. (3) Adopt City of Newport
Beach Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards. (Resolution Nos. 2024-17 and 2024-16).
• Local Coastal Program Amendment. Amend the Local Coastal Program for rezoning program
implementation for those sites located in the Coastal Zone. (Resolution No. 2024-52)
• City Charter Section 423. Approve a ballot measure for a major amendment to the General Plan
in compliance with City Charter Section 423. (Resolution No. 2024-58)
Proposed Project Description
The proposed Municipal Code Amendment would increase the maximum building height requirement for
specified housing sites in the Newport Center Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning District, as
outlined in the City of Newport Municipal Code (Municipal Code) Chapter 20.28 and pending Chapter
21.28. Specifically, the proposed Project would increase the maximum building heights for only 32 (all
within the Newport Center Focus Area) of the 247 housing sites identified in the 2021-2029 Housing
Element, as outlined in Table 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area - Existing and Proposed Height Limits and
depicted on Exhibit 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area Existing Height Limits, Exhibit 2: HO-4 Newport Center
Area Proposed Height Limits, and Exhibit 3: HO-4 Newport Center Area Existing/Proposed Height Limits.
No increases in development capacities or changes to other development standards or development areas
are proposed on any of these housing sites. Additionally, the proposed Project does not propose any
changes to the other 215 housing sites identified in the 2021-2029 Housing Element.
Table 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area - Existing and Proposed Height Limits
Housing Site Existing Height Proposed Height
148(1) 32’/37’ 60’
149 32’/37’ 60’
155 32’/37’ 85’
164 32’/37’ 60’
168 32’/37’ 60’
169 32’/37’ 60’
173(1) 32’/37’ 60’
175 32’/37’ 60’
181 50’ 50’
182 50’ 60’
185 32’/37’ 85’
186 32’/37’ 85’
187 32’/37’ 85’
192 50’ 85’
203 50’ 85’
212 32’ 50’
240 50’ 60’
257 50’ 60’
339 32’/37’(2) 110’
340 32’/37’ 85’
341 32’/37’ 85’
345 32’/37’ 270’
346 32’/37’ 270’
347 32’/37’ 270’
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Table 1: HO-4 Newport Center Area - Existing and Proposed Height Limits
Housing Site Existing Height Proposed Height
348 32’/37’ 270’
349 32’/37’ 270’
350 32’/37’ 270’
351 32’/37’ 270’
352 32’/37’ 270’
353 300’ 110’
354 50’ 60’
E 32’/37’ 270’
Notes:
1. The maximum allowable height for portions of Housing Sites 148 and 173 within the Newport Center Sight Plane would
not change. These sites' maximum allowable height would remain between 15’ to 32’.
2. The “32’/37’” limit reflects “flat/sloped” height limits.
In addition, the proposed Municipal Code Amendment would add footnotes for the Airport Area Housing
Opportunity (HO-1) Overlay Zoning District and HO-4 Overlay Zoning District to identify a certain number
of units being allocated from the respective development limits to a select group of City-owned
properties.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
-~_,fl Disclaimers •
While every effort has been, made to ensure
ewport Center Sight Plane (No Changes) , the accuracy of ,nformatoon depicted ,n th,
by Ordinance Nos 1371 1596 83•27 and 91,97. This area 1s ~ ex~ib1t,_ the City can~~t-make guarantees.
1ght by a uniform slope defined by contour Imes of elevation tf.J This ,s intended for ,mt,al analysis only.
sea tevet Sl~tures are generally limited to between 15 a.na , 4 Inquiries regarding ind1v1dual sites should
lght from ox/sung grad• '-be made for conf,rmation of the ,nformatio
al Zone -m,,.,..,,...,....,,,.,....,."""...._,""""'.,,,,_, presented herein.
'Tl!~•----This exhibit 1s intended to be reviewed in
conjunction with Exhibit 2 (Proposed Heig
Limits) and Exh1b1t 3 (Existing/Proposed
Exhibit 1
H0-4 Newport Center Area
Existing Height Limits
Oty of Newpon 8-0(h
GISOMsloa
Oeumber 01, 1014
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
-.# o· I • • ase Map Legend 1sc aimers
O ~ While every effort has been, made to ensure
Housing Opportunity Overlay (Coastal Zone) , the accuracy of 1nformatoon depicted ,n th,
exhibit, the City cannot make guarantees.
ous,ng Opportunity Overlay (Outside Coastal Zone) This ,s intended for initial analysis only.
C S. h Pl (N Ch ) • 4 Inquiries regarding indIvIdual sites should
ewport enter ,g t ane O anges '-be mac!e for conf,rmation of the ,nformatio
Coastal Zone Boundary presented herein.
"l~Qc;;:c;:.cmc;::,i~ This exhibit is intended to be reviewed in
Proposed Maximum Height conjunction with Exhibit 1 (Existing Height O 32/37 feet . Limits) a_nd_ Exhibit 3 (Existing/Proposed
Q 70feet
e ~~ ..
8 110 feet
C, 150 feet
G 270 feet
ote: All site:s without a height specified are subje
the height limit prescribed by the underlying
se zoning district (see Exhibits 1 and 3).
Exhibit 2
H0-4 Newport Center Area
Proposed Height Limits
Oty of Newpon 8-0(h
GISOMsloa
Oeumber 01, 1014
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Disclaimers
While every effort has been, made to ensure
the accuracy of information depicted in thi
Newport Center Sight Plane (No Changes) . ' exhibit, the City cannot make guarantees.
This is intended for initial analysis only.
. 4 Inquiries regarding individual sites should
'-be made for confirmation of the informatio
presented herein.
""'rn;; "'l~Q::;;:::ls:;;:;;~~,:;::,i~ This exhibit is intended to be reviewed in
Proposed Maximum Height conjunction with Exhibit 1 (Existing Height O 32/37 feet . Limits) and Exhibit 2 (Proposed Height Li
Q 70feet
e ~~ ..
8 110 feet
C, 150 feet
G 270 feet
ote: All site:s without a height specified are subje
the height limit prescribed by the underlying
se zoning district (see Exhibit 1).
Exhibit 3
H0-4 Newport Center Area
Existing /Proposed Height Limits
Oty of Newpon 8-0(h
GISOMsloa
Oeumber 01, 1014
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Consistency Analysis
See Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the mitigation measures and
standard conditions discussed below.
Aesthetics
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that impacts concerning aesthetics would be less than
significant and no mitigation was required, except that light and glare impacts would be significant and
unavoidable if housing development occurred within the Banning Ranch Focus Area. No feasible
mitigation measures were identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
Further, future housing development would be required to adhere to General Plan policies that govern
scenic quality, including updated policies in the City’s Land Use Element that support the City’s goal to
maintain scenic quality and minimize potential impacts from future housing development (e.g., Policy LU
1.1, which requires future housing developments to be designed in a manner that maintains and enhances
neighborhood character and views). Future housing development would also be subject to compliance
with adopted citywide design guidelines that are intended to ensure that future projects provide well-
designed corridors, community subareas, buildings, streets, and public spaces that contribute to a strong
sense of place.
Proposed Project. Consistent with the findings concerning the approved Project, the proposed Project
would also have a less than significant impact concerning aesthetics. The proposed Project would increase
the maximum allowable height on 32 housing sites but would not increase the residential development
capacities of any housing sites or change their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project.
None of the specified housing sites are located immediately in front of or adjacent to viewpoints.
Therefore, future development on these housing sites, even with the increased allowable height, would
not have the potential to obstruct views or degrade the visual quality of scenic vistas within the City.
Like the approved Project, the proposed Project would not directly construct new housing but would
increase the maximum allowable height on specified housing sites. Buildings associated with future
housing development on these housing sites could disrupt existing views, including coastal and open space
views. Future housing development would be required to adhere to General Plan policies that govern
scenic quality, including but not limited to Policy LU 5.6.1 through LU 5.6.3, Policy NR 20.1 through NR
20.4, and Policy NR 23.1 through 23.7. Future housing development would also be subject to compliance
with adopted citywide Design Guidelines, which would ensure that future individual development projects
provide well-designed corridors, community subareas, buildings, streets, and public spaces that
contribute to a strong sense of place. Therefore, the proposed amendment to the HO-4 Overlay Zoning
District would not conflict with applicable zoning, General Plan policies, and other regulations governing
scenic quality upon its adoption.
The proposed Project’s identified housing sites are in the Newport Center Area, where existing
development generates light/glare. Further, the proposed Project does not include revisions to lighting or
glare standards that would introduce new sources of substantial light or glare, which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning aesthetics would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Air Quality
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would result in significant
and unavoidable impacts concerning implementation of the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The approved Project was found not to be consistent
with the land planning growth strategies outlined in the 2022 AQMP and that it would exceed the
SCAQMD daily emissions thresholds during short-term construction and long-term operations. No feasible
mitigation measures were identified to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Further, because
buildout of the approved Project would result in construction and long-term operational emissions that
would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds, the Final EIR concluded a significant and unavoidable impact
would occur. At a programmatic level of analysis, there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce
long-term emissions to levels below the SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance.
Because localized significant thresholds (LSTs) are applicable only at the project-specific level and do not
apply to long-term planning documents such as Housing Elements, the Final EIR found that it is not feasible
to conclude that air pollutant emissions from future development projects would be reduced to levels
below SCAQMD LSTs. Thus, the Final EIR concluded that a significant and unavoidable impact would occur
concerning LSTs.
The approved Project could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations associated
with diesel particulate matter emissions from heavy trucks, which could result in health effects. Eight
housing sites (i.e., 63, 64, 65, 68, 84, 85, 131, and 336) are within the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
specified freeway buffer distances. The proximity of housing sites to State Route 73 could potentially
expose future development to toxic air contaminants (TACs) from these sources. Therefore, the Final EIR
concluded that impacts would be less than significant with Mitigation Measure (MM) AQ-1, which requires
a Health Risk Assessment for future residential development proposed within 500 feet of State Route 73.
Odors resulting from development facilitated by the approved Project may be perceived during
construction, but these are temporary, short-term impacts typical of construction operations and,
therefore, result in less than significant impacts.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on 32 housing
sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change their
development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The proposed Project would generally have no
change concerning air quality compared to the anticipated development assumed in the Final EIR. Like
the approved Project, residential development on the specified sites would result in construction and
long-term operational emissions that would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning air quality would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Biological Resources
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that impacts concerning biological resources would be
less than significant with mitigation incorporated. Sites with sensitive biological resources could result in
direct impacts concerning special-status wildlife and plant species. Additionally, the approved Project
could directly impact nesting birds during construction or operation. With Standard Condition (SC) BIO-1
and MM BIO-1 incorporated, impacts would be less than significant.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Future housing projects facilitated by the approved Project could directly impact sensitive vegetation
communities. Disturbance or removal of these vegetation communities associated with future
development on a site containing these resources could have a significant impact. Additionally, the Final
EIR concluded that an indirect impact to riparian habitats could result from the future development of
existing vacant sites. This impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level with MM BIO-1.
While the approved Project does not propose to alter a State or federally protected wetland on any
housing site, future development facilitated by the approved Project could directly or indirectly impact
wetlands through activities such as vegetation removal and grading activities. Adherence to federal and
State laws and regulations and General Plan and Local Coastal Program policies would ensure that any
future development facilitated by the approved Project would result in less than significant impacts on
State or federally protected wetlands.
All future development facilitated by the approved Project would be subject to the City’s development
review process and required to comply with relevant federal, State, and local regulations protecting
biological resources. General Plan Policy NR 10.3 through NR 10.7 and City Council Policy G-1 would ensure
that future development would not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, and therefore, no impact would occur.
Future development facilitated by the approved Project would be required to comply with the Central-
Coastal Natural Community Conservation Plan / Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) provisions. The
Central-Coastal NCCP/HCP is included as part of the General Plan policies. Compliance with the General
Plan policies would ensure that future development facilitated by the approved Project would not conflict
with the Central-Coastal NCCP/HCP provisions, and therefore, no impact would occur.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The proposed Project would not facilitate
additional construction activities, tree removals, nor expand future construction areas. Any future
development facilitated by the proposed Project would be subject to SC BIO-1, MM BIO-1, and applicable
General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan policies concerning biological resources, including General Plan
Policy NR 10.3 through NR 10.7 and City Council Policy G-1, which would reduce impacts concerning a less
than significant level.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning biological resources would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no
new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the
time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The
Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Cultural Resources
Approved Summary. The Final EIR found that future housing development could cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a historical resource on the housing sites. The developed housing
sites could be (now or in the future) occupied by historic (over 50 years) buildings. Because demolition of
a historically significant resource would have a physical effect on the environment, and neither the City’s
General Plan nor CEQA statutes precludes this demolition or alteration, the potential loss of historically
significant structures and resources would be a significant unavoidable impact that would not be
mitigated to a less than significant level with MM CUL-1.
The approved Project would potentially have direct impacts on archaeological resources. Future
development facilitated by the Project would be subject to City Council Policy K-5, which requires
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
preserving significant archeological (and tribal cultural resources) (see SC CUL-1). The Final EIR found that
this impact would be mitigated to a less than significant level with MM CUL-2.
The Final EIR found that the approved Project could impact human remains, which could be uncovered
during future grading activities facilitated by the approved Project. Following compliance with the
established regulatory framework and SC CUL-2, future housing development would have a less than
significant impact concerning human remains.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Any future development projects
facilitated by the proposed Project would be subject to the City’s development review process and
required to comply with applicable federal, State, and local laws that concern the preservation of historical
resources, including the National Historic Preservation Act and State CEQA Guidelines. Additionally,
because various structures on the specified housing sites could age beyond 50 years during Project
implementation, any future development facilitated on a site with buildings or structures aged 50 years
or more having its original structural integrity intact would be required to comply with MM CUL-1, which
requires the applicant to retain a qualified professional historian to determine whether the affected
buildings or structures are historically significant.
The housing sites affected by the proposed Project are in the Newport Center area, which is fully
developed. Any surface and shallow subsurface archaeological deposits at the specified housing sites have
likely been destroyed or heavily disturbed by previous development. However, future development
facilitated by the proposed Project still has the potential to disturb and potentially destroy subsurface
prehistoric/historic archaeological resources through grading and development; therefore, future
development facilitated by the proposed Project would be subject to City Council Policy K-5, which
requires preservation of significant archeological and tribal cultural resources, as set forth in SC CUL-1.
Compliance with General Plan Policy HR 2.1, Policy HR 2.2, and Policy NR 18.1 requires new development
projects to identify and protect important archaeological resources within the City. Specifically, General
Plan Policy HR 2.1 and Policy NR 18.1 require new development to protect and preserve archaeological
resources from destruction and avoid or mitigate impacts to such resources. General Plan Policy HR 2.2
would require any future development with the potential to affect archaeological resources to have a
qualified archeologist on site to monitor all ground-disturbing activities and outline the procedure if such
resources are found. General Plan Policy HR 2.3 and Policy NR 18.3 require the notification of cultural
groups to proposed development adversely impacting cultural resources and permitting monitoring
during grading. Additionally, Policy HR 2.4 and Policy NR 18.4 require any new development where on-
site preservation is infeasible to donate archaeological resources to responsible institutions. Compliance
with these City policies would ensure that future development facilitated by the proposed Project would
protect and preserve archaeological and tribal resources from destruction.
In addition to the noted General Plan policies, to ensure that archaeological resources are properly
identified prior to construction of any future development facilitated by the proposed Project, MM CUL-
2 is required, which requires the preparation of an archaeological survey where deemed necessary by the
City. Like the approved Project, following compliance with General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan policies
and MM CUL-2, the proposed Project’s potential to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance
of an archaeological resource would be reduced to a less than significant level.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning cultural resources would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the
time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The
Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Energy
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have a less than
significant impact concerning wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources
during construction or operations. Fuel consumption during construction of future housing development
facilitated by the approved Project would not be any more inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary than other
residential developments. The energy consumption associated with the approved Project operations
would occur from building energy (i.e., electricity and natural gas) use, water use, and transportation-
related fuel use. Approved Project operations would not substantially affect existing energy or fuel
supplies or resources. The approved Project would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local
requirements for energy efficiency, including the latest Title 24 standards. The future housing
development facilitated by the approved Project would be required to comply with existing energy
standards. The Final EIR concluded that compliance with State and local energy efficiency standards would
ensure that the approved Project meets all applicable energy conservation policies and regulations and
impacts were concluded to be less than significant.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Like the approved Project, any future
development projects facilitated by the proposed Project would be required to adhere to all federal, State,
and local requirements for energy efficiency, including the latest Title 24 standards. Any future housing
development facilitated by the proposed Project would be required to comply with the existing energy
standards, which would ensure that, like the approved Project, the proposed Project would not conflict
with applicable plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning energy would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Geology and Soils
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would result in no impact
or less significant impacts concerning geology and soils. The approved Project would not directly or
indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault
because no delineated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zones traverse the City. The City is within a
seismically active area that could be subject to strong seismic ground shaking, with the highest risks
originating from the Newport-Inglewood fault zone, the Whittier fault zone, the San Joaquin Hills fault
zone, and the Elysian Park fault zone. Future residential development would be subject to the City’s
development review process and would be required to demonstrate consistency with General Plan
policies, Municipal Code requirements, and seismic design standards required by the current California
Building Code (CBC). The housing sites are in seismically active areas, and there are housing sites located
in liquefaction and landslide hazard areas. Following compliance with the regulations for minimizing
potential seismic impacts, including compliance with the CBC, the approved Project was found to have a
less than significant impact concerning adverse effects involving strong seismic ground shaking and
seismic-related ground failure. Future residential development facilitated by the approved Project could
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
result in grading activities that would disrupt soil profiles, resulting in potential increased soil exposure to
wind and rain. However, future residential development would be required to comply with applicable
General Plan policies and Municipal Code regulations, the CBC, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Water Quality Control
Plan and therefore would not result in substantial erosion or loss of topsoil.
Some of the City’s areas are susceptible to earthquake-induced landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction, and/or collapse. However, adherence to the CBC, the City’s codes, and General Plan policies
would ensure the maximum practicable protection for users of buildings and infrastructure and associated
trenches, slopes, and foundations. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have a less than
significant impact concerning potential substantial adverse effects involving exposure to unstable
geological units or soils. The City contains surficial soils and bedrock with fine-grained moderately to highly
expansive components. The City’s Building Code adopts the latest CBC regulations, which require
geotechnical investigations that identify potentially unsuitable soil conditions and contain appropriate
recommendations for foundation type and design criteria that conform to the analysis and
implementation criteria described in Municipal Code Title 15, Building and Construction. General Plan
Safety Element Policy S.4.7 requires that development not be located on unstable soils or geological units.
Through compliance with applicable CBC requirements, General Plan Policy S.4.7, and Municipal Code
Title 15 requirements, the approved Project would not create substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property due to a project located on expansive soils.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. None of the 32 housing sites (see Table 1)
affected by the proposed Project are located in the liquefaction or landslide hazard areas identified in
Final EIR Table 4.6-1: Housing Sites Within Landslide Zones. Future residential development would be
subject to the City’s development review process and would be required to demonstrate consistency with
General Plan policies, Municipal Code requirements, and seismic design standards required by the current
CBC. Following compliance with applicable General Plan and Municipal Code policies and regulations, the
CBC, NPDES permits, and the RWQCB Water Quality Control Plan, the proposed Project would result in a
less than significant impact concerning geology and soils.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning geology and soils would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no
new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the
time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The
Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions would be
significant and unavoidable. The approved Project would increase GHG emissions from the construction
and operation of new housing. Projects would need to demonstrate compliance with the City’s GHG
thresholds. Due to the forecast population growth and GHG emissions associated with future housing
development and the lack of specificity of future development, program-level GHG emissions impacts
would be potentially significant and would not be mitigated to a less than significant level with MM GHG-
1. The approved Project would be consistent with the California Renewables Portfolio Standard Program,
Senate Bill (SB) 100, Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR) (Energy Code and CALGreen), SB
375. RTP/SCS and recommendations of the State Attorney General, California Office of Planning and
Research, and Climate Action Team. The approved Project would be consistent with applicable plans,
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
policies, and regulations. However, due to the magnitude of the approved Project’s GHG emissions, at a
programmatic level of analysis, impacts would be significant and unavoidable, and no feasible mitigation
measures exist to reduce this impact to a less than significant level.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The approved Project would increase GHG
emissions from construction and operation of new housing, like the approved Project. Future residential
development facilitated by the proposed Project would be subject to the City’s development review
process and would be required to demonstrate consistency with General Plan policies, Municipal Code
requirements, and other applicable local and State requirements. A case-by-case review of future
development provides flexibility to incorporate the latest analysis methods, technological advancements,
mitigation options, and GHG significance thresholds (including using thresholds that meet the latest GHG
reduction goals). Future housing projects on the specified sites would need to demonstrate compliance
with the City’s GHG thresholds. MM GHG-1 requires future housing development to conduct a project-
level GHG emissions impact assessment and mitigate potentially significant emissions to the extent
feasible. A future housing development project with GHG emissions below SCAQMD thresholds is
considered to have a less than significant impact. Future housing development projects that are allowed
“by right” (e.g., without a Conditional Use Permit, Planned Unit Development Permit, or other
discretionary action) would be required to submit documentation to the City demonstrating GHG
emissions would be less than significant or otherwise have to prepare CEQA documentation. Therefore,
the proposed Project would result in a less than significant impact concerning GHG emissions.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning GHG emissions would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have no impact or
a less than significant impact concerning hazards and hazardous materials, and no mitigation was
required. As part of the approved Project’s operations, hazardous materials would be limited to those
associated with common household fertilizers, pesticides, paint, solvents, and petroleum products.
Implementation of the approved Project would potentially create a hazard to the public or the
environment through exposure to contaminated materials as a result of a previous hazardous material
incident at a housing site or through the presence of asbestos-containing materials or lead-based paint.
Residential development is typically not associated with the handling of hazardous materials, substances,
or waste in significant quantities that would have an impact to surrounding schools, aside from
construction activities. Through compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and General Plan policies,
the approved Project would not create a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.
None of the housing sites are included on a hazardous site list compiled pursuant to California
Government Code Section 65962.5. Some housing sites are in the safety zones identified in the Airport
Environs Land Use Plans (AELUP) for John Wayne Airport. Housing in AELUP Safety Zone 3 would be
restricted to low-density residential uses consistent with the AELUP, and residential uses in Safety Zones
4 and 6 are considered less than significant. While future housing development in the City, including the
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Airport Area, would increase the number of residents and non-residents proximate to the John Wayne
Airport, individual projects would be subject to development review by the City. Where a General Plan
amendment, Specific Plan amendment, or a rezone is required, the project would also be subject to the
review of the Airport Land Use Commission.
Future development would increase housing density in some portions of the City, resulting in greater
population concentrations within certain areas. However, the approved Project would not change the
City’s circulation network. No land uses are proposed that would impair the implementation of or
physically conflict with the City’s Emergency Management Plan. Future residential development
facilitated by the approved Project in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) would result in
higher fire-related risks to people and structures. Compliance with the California Fire Code, CBC, would
reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Like the approved Project, through
compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and General Plan policies, the proposed Project would not
create a hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials or reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment.
As concluded in the Final EIR, none of the housing sites are included on a hazardous site list compiled
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65962.5. None of the 32 housing sites affected by the
proposed Project are located in the safety zones identified in the AELUP for John Wayne Airport. Future
development would increase housing density in certain areas of the City, resulting in greater population
concentrations within certain areas. However, the proposed Project would not change the City’s existing
circulation network. Like the approved Project, the proposed Project does not propose land uses that
would impair the implementation of or physically conflict with the City’s Emergency Management Plan.
Further, none of the specified housing sites affected by the proposed Project are within the VHFHSZ.
Therefore, the proposed Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment,
and a less than significant impact would occur. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning hazards and hazardous materials would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR.
Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been
known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than
significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Hydrology and Water Quality
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that there would be a less than significant impact
concerning hydrology and water quality. Future residential development facilitated by the approved
Project could result in potential impacts concerning water quality during earthwork and construction,
following construction, and after completion. Future projects would be required to implement post-
construction best management practices (BMPs) in project design to capture and treat runoff. Projects
would be required to demonstrate consistency with the General Plan, Municipal Code, and Local Coastal
Plan requirements, including those intended to protect water quality.
Future housing development facilitated by the approved Project would result in an incrementally
increased demand for groundwater as supplied by the City, Irvine Ranch Water District, and Mesa Water
District. Future housing projects would be required to incorporate features that would reduce impervious
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
areas as much as feasible and promote water infiltration and groundwater recharge. Compliance with
General Plan Natural Resources policies would ensure water conservation and reduce potential impacts
concerning groundwater supply.
Compliance with the existing regulatory framework and General Plan policies would reduce, prevent, or
minimize soil erosion from project-related grading and construction activities. Future housing
development would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding
construction and operations impacts that could substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or the
course of a stream or river, including the City’s Erosion Control Section 15.10.130. Compliance with
General Plan policies and Municipal Code requirements would minimize stormwater runoff and would not
exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Compliance with General Plan
policies and Municipal Code requirements would reduce impacts concerning flood flows.
Three housing sites (i.e., 133, 134, and 334 in the Dover-Westcliff Focus Area) are in tsunami-evacuation
areas. The General Plan Safety Element establishes goals to minimize adverse effects of coastal hazards,
including tsunamis. Future housing projects within tsunami evacuation areas would be covered by the
established evacuation plan, including routes along the Balboa Peninsula and Mariner’s Mile. Additionally,
future projects would be required to adhere to all federal, State, and local requirements for avoiding and
minimizing impacts concerning flood hazards, tsunamis, or seiches, including General Plan policies and
Municipal Code regulations.
The City is under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB, which establishes water quality control
objectives and standards for both the region's surface and groundwater, as well as water quality discharge
requirements. Under Santa Ana’s RWQCB NPDES permit system, all existing and future municipal
discharges to surface waters within the City would be subject to these regulations. Future development
would be required to comply with NPDES standards and implement environmentally sustainable
practices, including but not limited to water-efficient landscaping, energy-efficient water fixtures, and
water quality BMPs to treat surface runoff from the future development sites.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or
change their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Like the approved Project, future
development facilitated by the proposed Project would be required to demonstrate consistency with
General Plan, Municipal Code, and Local Coastal Program requirements, including those intended to
protect water quality, groundwater supply, erosion control, and flood flows. The proposed Project would
not increase the development capacities of any housing sites; therefore, it would not result in an increased
demand for groundwater compared to the approved Project. None of the 32 sites affected by the
proposed Project are within tsunami evacuation areas. Following compliance with applicable General
Plan, Municipal Code, and Local Coastal Program policies and regulations, the proposed Project would
result in a less than significant impact concerning hydrology and water quality.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning hydrology and water quality would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR.
Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been
known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than
significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Land Use and Planning
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that there would be a less than significant impact
concerning land use and planning. The approved Project would not result in the division of an established
community because housing sites are located throughout the City rather than in a single concentrated
area. The approved Project did not propose any major roadways that would traverse an existing
community or neighborhood. The approved Project did not propose any changes to the existing General
Plan land use categories that govern land uses within the City, including the five land use designations
that solely accommodate residential development. No changes were proposed to the designations’
densities or housing types. The approved Project did propose amendments to the General Plan Land
Element goals and policies. However, upon approval, a less than significant impact concerning conflicts
with Municipal Code plans and standards adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect would occur. The approved Project was found to be consistent with applicable
existing and proposed General Plan goals and policies and the Local Coastal Program's existing and
proposed policies.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The proposed Project would not result in
the division of an established community because it does not propose any major roadways that would
traverse an existing community or neighborhood. The proposed Project involves a Zone Change to
increase the maximum building heights on specified housing sites in the HO-4 Overlay Zoning District, as
set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 20.28 and pending Chapter 21.28. The proposed Project is consistent
with the General Plan’s goals and objectives, including, but not limited to:
• Policy LU 5.1.2 – Compatible Interfaces. Require that the height of development in nonresidential
and higher density residential areas transition as it nears lower density residential areas to
minimize conflicts at the interface between the different types of development.
• Policy LU 6.14.4 – Newport Center/Fashion Island Development Scale. Reinforce the original
design concept for Newport Center by concentrating the greatest building mass and height in the
northeasterly section along San Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is highest, and
progressively scaling down building mass and height to follow the lower elevations toward the
southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway.
In addition, the proposed Project is consistent with the following Coastal Land Use Plan policies:
• Policy 2.2.2-4. Implement building design and siting regulations to protect coastal resources and
public access through height, setback, floor area, lot coverage, building bulk, and other property
development standards of the Zoning Code intended to control building height.
• Policy 2.7-1. Continue to maintain appropriate setbacks and density, floor area, and height limits
for residential development to protect the character of established neighborhoods and to protect
coastal access and coastal resources.
• Policy 4.4.2-2. Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of structures consistent with the
unique character and visual scale of Newport Beach.
• Policy 4.4.2-3. Implement the regulation of the building envelope to preserve public views
through the height, setback, floor area, lot coverage, and building bulk regulation of the Zoning
Code.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
The proposed Project would be consistent with or otherwise would not conflict with the identified General
Plan goals and policies. Therefore, the proposed Project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy,
or regulation adopted to mitigate an environmental effect. The findings of the Final EIR would, therefore,
apply to the proposed Project.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning land use and planning would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally,
no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the
time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The
Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Noise
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that with implementation of MM NOI-1, potential
traffic noise impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Impacts concerning construction noise,
operational stationary noise, and vibration would be less than significant on a project-specific and
cumulative basis. Implementation of MM NOI-1 and compliance with Municipal Code Section 20.30.080(F)
would also reduce impacts concerning housing development near John Wayne Airport to a less than
significant level.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The proposed Project would not intensify
construction activities, increase traffic volumes, or use of stationary mechanical equipment beyond the
levels evaluated in the Final EIR. As a result, project-level and cumulative noise level impacts of the
proposed Project would be the same as under the approved Project, the same mitigation measures would
apply, and no new mitigation measures are required.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning noise would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Population and Housing
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have less than
significant impacts on population and housing as it would not result in substantial unplanned population
growth and would not displace people or housing. Additionally, the approved Project did not include the
extension of roads or other infrastructure to unserved areas, which could induce indirect growth. The
Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would not induce substantial unplanned growth but would
accommodate projected growth in the region. The approved Project would be consistent with State and
local land use plans and would not displace a substantial number of housing units requiring replacement.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Therefore, because the proposed Project
would not result in additional residential units or non-residential square footage that would increase the
onsite population compared to the approved Project, like the approved Project, the proposed Project
would have less than significant impacts on population and housing.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning population and housing would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally,
no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the
time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The
Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Public Services
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have less than
significant impacts concerning fire and police protection services and facilities, schools, parks, and other
public facilities. Future housing development facilitated by the proposed Project could result in population
growth of approximately 21,811 persons. Future housing would incrementally increase the demand for
fire protection, emergency, police protection, school and library services. All future housing development
would be subject to the City’s development review process. At the program-level review, the Project
would not result in a need for expanded or newly constructed facilities, and impacts associated with public
services would be less than significant. Should construction of new facilities be required in the future,
each would undergo site-specific environmental review.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Therefore, because the proposed Project
would not result in additional residential units or non-residential square footage that would increase the
onsite population and, consequently, the demand for public services, compared to the approved Project,
the proposed Project would not substantially increase demand for public services and no significant
impacts would occur.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning public services would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Recreation
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have a less than
significant impact concerning the accelerated physical deterioration of existing parks and the need to
construct or expand existing recreational facilities, which would result in an adverse physical effect on the
environment. An increase in City residents associated with the future development of housing sites would
result in an increased demand for recreational facilities. Individual housing developments would occur
over time. Where a future housing project includes the subdivision of land, the housing development
would be required to provide land or in lieu fees for parks or recreation purposes to bear a reasonable
relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by future inhabitants (Municipal Code Section
19.52.030: Use of Park Dedications and Fees). While there would be an increased use of parkland and
recreational facilities resulting from the increase in residential population, the City provides for the
maintenance and enhancement of parks and recreational facilities through various funding sources.
Because of the City’s commitment to maintaining and enhancing such facilities and exploring potential
future funding sources, increased use of existing parks and recreational facilities would not result in
substantial physical degradation.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Therefore, because the proposed Project
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
would not result in additional residential units or non-residential square footage that would increase the
onsite population and, consequently, the demand for recreational facilities, compared to the approved
Project, the proposed Project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or
other recreational facilities, nor does it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities,
which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning recreation would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Transportation
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that the approved Project would have a less than
significant impact concerning transportation. Following compliance with Circulation Element policies and
Municipal Code regulations, the approved Project’s potential to conflict with a program, plan, ordinance,
or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadways, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities,
would be less than significant. The existing citywide VMT per service population (VMT/SP) for Newport
Beach is 30.9, whereas the approved Project’s VMT/SP is 30.3, which is a 0.6 VMT/SP decrease from
existing conditions. This suggests that the approved Project would decrease the amount of travel per
individual that is forecast to occur compared to the existing conditions and the 2006 General Plan Buildout
VMT. This is because the approved Project would develop more housing near where employment is
located, reducing Citywide VMT/SP compared to the 2006 General Plan Baseline (Buildout Land Use).
While Project implementation would decrease the Citywide VMT/SP, the VMT/SP varies for each
individual Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ). Future housing projects would be evaluated to determine if the VMT
screening criteria are met. The Final EIR concluded that potential VMT impacts could be mitigated through
compliance with MM TRANS-1, which outlines VMT-reduction measures for future projects that cannot
be screened out from the VMT analysis process. The approved Project did not propose any changes to the
existing roadway network. Future site-specific development would be subject to the City’s development
review process, including design and engineering reviews to ensure roads and access are configured in a
manner consistent with established roadway design standards. Future housing development would be
required to comply with applicable building and fire safety regulations required for the design of new
housing and emergency access and would be required to adhere to applicable State and local
requirements.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. As such, no new trips would be added by
the proposed Project. Further, the proposed Project does not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or
policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. The
proposed Project does not propose any changes to the existing roadway network. Future site-specific
development would be subject to the City’s development review process, which would include design and
engineering reviews to ensure roads and access are configured consistent with established roadway
design standards, MM TRANS-1, and applicable building and fire safety regulations. Therefore, following
compliance with MM TRANS-1, the proposed Project would have a less than significant impact concerning
transportation.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning transportation would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR concluded that the approved Project would have a less than
significant impact on tribal cultural resources with mitigation incorporated. In compliance with SB 18, AB
52, and the State Native American Heritage Commission, the City sent letters to multiple Native American
tribal representatives who may have knowledge regarding tribal cultural resources in the City. The City
received one response. The Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation responded on April 13, 2023,
noting their concurrence with the approved Project but would request consultation on future projects.
Future development facilitated by the Project would be subject to City Council Policy K-5, which requires
preserving significant archeological and tribal cultural resources, as outlined in SC CUL-1. Additionally,
compliance with these City policies would ensure that future development facilitated by the approved
Project would protect and preserve archaeological and tribal resources from destruction during new
development construction facilitated by the approved Project. This impact would be mitigated to a less
than significant level with MMs TCR-1 and TCR-2.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. The proposed Project would not result in
or facilitate additional demolition, changes in the excavation area, or other changes in ground disturbance
compared to the approved Project. Therefore, impacts concerning tribal cultural resources would be the
same as under the approved Project. Therefore, like the approved Project, the proposed Project’s
compliance with MM TCR-1 and MM TCR-2 would reduce potential impacts concerning tribal cultural
resources to less than significant.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning tribal cultural resources would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally,
no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the
time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The
Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Utilities and Service Systems
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that because the Urban Water Management Plans for
the City, Irvine Ranch Water District, and Mesa Water did not account for the population growth
associated with the approved Project, it could not be determined if there would be sufficient water
supplies available to serve future development facilitated by the approved Project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Despite compliance with
federal, State, and local requirements, the Final EIR concluded that the water demands from future
development facilitated by the approved Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact
concerning water supply. All other impacts concerning utilities and service systems were found to be less
than significant, and no mitigation was required.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would increase the maximum allowable height on specified
housing sites but would not increase the residential development capacities of any housing sites or change
their development areas, as assumed for the approved Project. Therefore, the proposed Project would
not increase the onsite service population and/or utilities demand. The proposed Project would not result
in new significant impacts or a substantial increase in the impacts identified in the Final EIR, and impacts
concerning utilities and service systems would be the same as under the approved Project.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning utilities and service systems would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR.
Additionally, no new information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been
known at the time the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than
significant. The Final EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Wildfire
Approved Project Summary. The Final EIR found that impacts concerning wildfire would be less than
significant with mitigation incorporated. Of the 247 housing sites, two sites are within a VHFHSZ area. The
remainder of the sites are not in or near a VHFHSZ area. These two housing sites would be required to go
through the City’s development review and permitting process and would be required to comply with the
regulations and measures described above (see Public Services) to maintain adequate availability of
emergency services during an emergency response or an emergency evacuation. Future residential
development in VHFHSZs would be subject to Section 4908 of the 2022 CFC, which requires compliance
with the State Responsibility Area Fire Safe Development Regulations specified in Title 14. Development
within or adjacent to areas designated as VHFHSZ can potentially exacerbate wildfire risk, particularly in
areas with steep topography and/or prevailing winds, as these conditions contribute to the spread of
wildfires. Adherence to mandatory fire prevention requirements and regulations, including the California
Fire Code Chapter 49, Requirements for WUI Fire Areas, would require applicants to prepare a fire
protection plan for any sites in the VHFHSZ or WUI areas. These impacts would be mitigated to less than
significant with MM W-1.
The need to install and maintain new infrastructure (e.g., roads, fuel breaks, emergency water resources,
power lines, or other utilities) would be evaluated as part of the development permit review process.
Potential impacts associated with infrastructure improvements, including any required fire safety
measures, would be identified. Applicants would be required to address wildfire exposure by complying
with the wildfire protection building construction requirements contained in the then-current CBC,
including Chapter 7A, California Residential Code, Section R327, and California Referenced Standards
Code, Chapter 12-7A. The natural environment of the wildland-urban Interface (WUI) sites indicates
people and structures are highly prone to wildfires and downslope or downstream flooding due to runoff,
post-fire instability, or drainage. Future housing development would be subject to development review
by the City. Each development would be engineered and constructed to maximize stability and preclude
safety hazards to on-site and adjacent areas. Adherence to State and City codes and emergency and
evacuation plans set by the City and County would prevent impacts to people or structures from significant
risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes.
Proposed Project. The proposed Project would not affect the two housing sites within the VHFHSZ.
Therefore, no impacts concerning wildfire would occur as a result of the proposed Project.
Conclusion. Accordingly, no new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects
concerning wildfire would occur beyond what was evaluated in the Final EIR. Additionally, no new
information of substantial importance that was not known and could not have been known at the time
the Final EIR was certified is available that would change the prior finding of less than significant. The Final
EIR’s findings apply to the proposed Project.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Attachment A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM
THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN
HOUSING IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
(STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2023060699)
PA2022-0245
Prepared for City of Newport Beach
Community Development Department
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
Prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
1100 W. Town & Country Road, Suite 700
Orange, California 92868
APRIL 2024
Kimley >>> Horn
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 1
PURPOSE OF MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that all public agencies establish monitoring
and/or reporting procedures for mitigation adopted as conditions of approval in order to mitigate or avoid
significant environmental impacts. This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) has been
developed to provide a vehicle by which to monitor the Mitigation Program outlined in the City of
Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program Final Program Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2023060699. The MMRP has been prepared in conformance with
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code. Specifically, Section 21081.6 states:
(a) When making findings required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081 or
when adopting a mitigated negative declaration pursuant to paragraph (2) of
subdivision (c) of Section 21080, the following requirements shall apply:
(1) The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes
made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate
or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring
program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.
For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the
request of a responsible agency or a public agency having jurisdiction by law over
natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the
lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring
program.
(2) The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other
material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is
based.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15097 provides clarification of mitigation monitoring and reporting
requirements and guidance to local lead agencies on implementing strategies. The reporting or
monitoring program must be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. The City of
Newport Beach is the Lead Agency for the Project and is therefore responsible for ensuring the
implementation of the MMRP. The MMRP has been drafted to meet the requirements of Public Resources
Code Section 21081.6 as a fully enforceable monitoring program.
BACKGROUND
The Mitigation Program identified in the Program EIR outlines General Plan Policies, Coastal Land Use Plan
Policies, standard conditions of approval, and mitigation measures for which implementation of future
housing development associated with the proposed Project would be consistent with.
The MMRP defines the following for each Mitigation Program element:
▪ Definition. The Mitigation Program element contains the criteria for mitigation, either in the form
of adherence to certain adopted regulations or identification of the steps to be taken in
mitigation.
▪ Time Frame. In each case, a time frame is provided for performance of the mitigation or the
review of evidence that mitigation has taken place. The performance points selected are designed
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 2
to ensure that impact-related components of Project implementation do not proceed without
establishing that the mitigation is implemented or ensured. All activities are subject to the
approval of all required permits from agencies with permitting authority over the specific activity.
▪ Monitoring/Reporting Method. The actions required to ensure the measure is implemented are
noted.
▪ Responsible Party or Designated Representative. Unless otherwise indicated, an applicant would
be the responsible party for implementing the mitigation, and the City Newport Beach or
designated representative would be responsible for monitoring the performance and
implementation of the mitigation measure. To guarantee that the mitigation will not be
inadvertently overlooked, a supervising public official acting as the Designated Representative is
the official who grants the permit or authorization called for in the performance. Where more
than one official is identified, permits or authorization from all officials shall be required.
The last column of the MMRP table will be used by the parties responsible for documenting when
implementation of the measure has been completed. The ongoing documentation and monitoring of
mitigation compliance will be completed by the City of Newport Beach. The completed MMRP and
supplemental documents will be kept on file at the City of Newport Beach Community Development
Department.
The mitigation measures and/or the performance standards of the mitigation measures identified in the
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program EIR would be implemented as part
of consideration of subsequent projects within the City. Implementation would consist of determining
whether subsequent projects are consistent with the General Plan, utilization of policies and action items
as conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures and any applicable City-initiated planning activities.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 3
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
4.1: Aesthetics
Threshold 4.1-1: Have a
substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.5.5 (Banning
Ranch)
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 20.1,
NR 20.2, NR 20.3, NR 20.4, NR 23.1, NR 23.2, NR 23.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.4.1-2, 4.4.1-3, 4.4.1-4, 4.4.1-5,
4.4.1-7, 4.4.3-1
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.30; Chapter 20.52 Section 20.52.080;
Chapter 21.30
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.1-2: Conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic
quality.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 3.2, LU 5.1.2, LU
5.1.6, LU 5.1.9 (Not applicable to Newport Center and Airport
Area), LU 5.3.1, LU 5.3.3, LU 5.3.5, LU 5.3.6, LU 5.6.1, LU 6.10.2
(Cannery Village), Policy LU 6.14.4 (Newport Center), LU 6.15.3
(Airport Area), LU 6.15.6 (Airport Area), LU 6.15.22 (Airport Area),
LU 6.15.27 (Airport Area), LU 6.16.6, LU 6.17.3 (West Newport), LU
6.18.3 (West Newport), LU 6.19.7 (Mariners’ Mile), LU 6.19.8
(Mariners’ Mile), LU 6.19.9 (Mariners’ Mile), LU 6.19.12 (Mariners’
Mile)
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 20.3,
NR 21.1, NR 23.6
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.4.1-8, 4.4.2-4, 4.4.4-1, 4.4.4-6
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.30; Chapter 20.52 Section 20.52.080;
Chapter 21.30; City of Newport Beach Multi-Unit Objective Design
Standards
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.1-3: Create a new
source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in
the area.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 5.6.2, LU 5.6.3
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.30 Section 21.30.070; City of Newport
Beach Multi-Unit Objective Design Standards
Regarding Banning Ranch, consistent with the City of
Newport Beach General Plan Program EIR, there are no
feasible mitigation measures to reduce this impact to a
less than significant level. No mitigation is required for
the other housing sites.
- -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 4
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
4.2: Air Quality
Threshold 4.2-1: Conflict with or
obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR
6.3, NR 7.1, NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules
and Regulations: Rule 401, Rule 402, Rule 403, Rule 445, Rule
1113, Rule 1120, Rule 1143
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this
impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Threshold 4.2-2: Result in a
cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is in
nonattainment under an
applicable federal or State
ambient air quality standard.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR
6.3, NR 7.1, NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules
and Regulations: Rule 401, Rule 402, Rule 403, Rule 445, Rule
1113, Rule 1120, Rule 1143
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this
impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Threshold 4.2-3: Expose
sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant
concentrations.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1, NR
6.3, NR 7.1, NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules
and Regulations: Rule 401, Rule 402, Rule 403, Rule 445, Rule
1113, Rule 1120, Rule 1143
Note: There are no feasible mitigation measures to
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The
following mitigation measure is applicable.
MM AQ-1: A project-specific Health Risk Assessment
shall be conducted for future residential development
proposed within 500 feet of the State Route 73 right-of-
way, pursuant to the recommendations set forth in the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) Air Quality and
Land Use Handbook. The Health Risk Assessment shall
evaluate a project per the following South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds:
▪ Cancer Risk: Emit carcinogenic or toxic contaminants
that exceed the maximum individual cancer risk of 10
in one million.
▪ Non‐Cancer Risk: Emit toxic contaminants that exceed
the maximum hazard quotient of one in one million.
The SCAQMD has also established non-carcinogenic risk
parameters for use in HRAs. Noncarcinogenic risks are
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Preparation during
development review
process.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 5
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
quantified by calculating a “hazard index,” expressed as
the ratio between the ambient pollutant concentration
and its toxicity or Reference Exposure Level (REL). An REL
is a concentration at or below which health effects are
not likely to occur. A hazard index less of than one (1.0)
means that adverse health effects are not expected. If
projects are found to exceed the SCAQMD’s Health Risk
Assessment thresholds, mitigation shall be incorporated
to reduce impacts to below SCAQMD thresholds.
Threshold 4.2-4: Result in other
emissions (such as those leading
to odors) adversely affecting a
substantial number of people.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 7.2, NR
8.1
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rules
and Regulations: Rule 402
No mitigation. - -
4.3: Biological Resources
Threshold 4.3-1: Have a
substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a
candidate, sensitive, or special-
status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the CDWG or
USFWS.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3,
NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.7, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch)
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.3, S 6.4, S 6.5
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.1.1-13
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on
project-specific basis
SC BIO-1: Prior to the commencement of any proposed
actions (e.g., site clearing, demolition, grading) during
the breeding/nesting season (September 1 through
February 15), a qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction survey(s) to identify any active nests in
and adjacent to the project site no more than three days
prior to initiation of the action. Costs associated with the
biologist shall be the responsibility of the project
applicant. If the biologist does not find any active nests
that would be potentially impacted, the proposed action
may proceed. However, if the biologist finds an active
nest within or directly adjacent to the action area (within
100 feet) and determines that the nest may be impacted,
the biologist shall delineate an appropriate buffer zone
around the nest using temporary plastic fencing or other
suitable materials, such as barricade tape and traffic
cones. The buffer zone shall be determined by the
biologist in consultation with applicable resource
agencies and in consideration of species sensitivity and
Prior to the
commencement of
any proposed actions
(e.g., site clearing,
demolition, grading)
during the
breeding/nesting
season (September 1
through February 15)
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 6
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
existing nest site conditions, and in coordination with the
construction contractor. The qualified biologist shall
serve as a construction monitor during those periods
when construction activities occur near active nest areas
to ensure that no inadvertent impacts on these nests
occur. Only specified construction activities (if any)
approved by the qualified biologist shall take place within
the buffer zone until the nest is vacated. At the
discretion of the qualified biologist, activities that may be
prohibited within the buffer zone include but not be
limited to grading and tree clearing. Once the nest is no
longer active and upon final determination by the
biologist, the proposed action may proceed within the
buffer zone.
The qualified biologist shall prepare a survey
report/memorandum summarizing his/her findings and
recommendations of the preconstruction survey. Any
active nests observed during the survey shall be mapped
on a current aerial photograph, including documentation
of GPS coordinates, and included in the survey
report/memorandum. The completed survey
report/memorandum shall be submitted to the City of
Newport Beach Community Development Department
prior to construction-related activities that have the
potential to disturb any active nests during the nesting
season.
MM BIO-1: Applications for future housing development
facilitated by the Project, where the City has determined
a potential for impacts to special-status wildlife and
plants species, shall be required to comply with the
following mitigation framework:
Prior to the issuance of any permit for future
development consistent with the Project, a site-specific
general biological resources survey shall be conducted to
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Submittal during
development review
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 7
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
identify the presence of any sensitive biological
resources, including any sensitive plant or wildlife
species. A biological resources report shall be submitted
to the City to document the results of the biological
resources survey. The report shall include (1) the
methods used to determine the presence of sensitive
biological resources; (2) vegetation mapping of all
vegetation communities and/or land cover types; (3) the
locations of any sensitive plant or wildlife species; (4) an
evaluation of the potential for occurrence of any listed,
rare, and narrow endemic species; and (5) an evaluation
of the significance of any potential direct or indirect
impacts from the proposed project. If potentially
significant impacts to sensitive biological resources are
identified, future project site grading and site plans shall
incorporate project design features required by the
applicant to minimize direct impacts on sensitive
biological resources to the extent feasible, and the report
shall also recommend appropriate mitigation to be
implemented by the applicant to reduce the impacts to
below a level of significance. The project design features
shall be submitted to the Community Development
Director or their designee for review and approval.
process; Prior to
issuance of first
permit.
Threshold 4.3-2: Have a
substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other
sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by
the California Department of
Fish and Wildlife Service or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3,
NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.7, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch)
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.1.1-13
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on
project-specific basis
MM BIO-1 would apply. If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Submittal during
development review
process; Prior to
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 8
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
issuance of first
permit.
Threshold 4.3-3: Have a
substantial adverse effect on
State or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3,
NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch), NR 13.1, NR
13.2
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.7-2, 2.2.1-2
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on
project-specific basis
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.3-4: Interfere
substantially with the
movement of any native or
migratory fish or wildlife
species; inhibit established
native resident or migratory fish
or wildlife corridors; or impede
the use of native wildlife
nursery sites.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3,
NR 10.4, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch)
Municipal Code: Chapter 7.26
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on
project-specific basis
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.3-5: Conflict with
any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3,
NR 10.4, NR 10.5, NR 10.6, NR 10.7, NR 10.9 (Banning Ranch), NR
13.1, NR 13.2
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.3, S 6.4, S 6.5
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.7-2, 2.2.1-2, 2.8.8-1, 2.8.8-2,
2.8.8-4, 4.1.1-2, 4.1.1-3, 4.1.1-6, 4.1.1-13, 4.1.1-17, 4.3-8
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.3-6: Conflict with
the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or
State habitat conservation plan.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 10.3,
NR 10.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.1.1-2, 4.1.1-3, 4.1.1-13, 4.1.1-17,
4.3-8
Municipal Code: Chapter 13.08, 21.30, 21.20B, 21.52
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 9
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Federal and State Regulatory Requirements determined on
project-specific basis
4.4: Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.4-1: Cause a
substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to Section
15064.5.
General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 1.2,
HR 1.4, HR 1.5, HR 1.6, HR 1.7
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.8.6
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-1, 4.5.1-2, 4.5.1-4
Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Places of Historical
and Architectural Significance (K-2)
Note: There are no feasible mitigation measures to
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The
following mitigation measure is applicable.
MM CUL-1: Applications for future development
facilitated by the Project, where the City has determined
a potential for impacts to historic resources, shall be
required to comply with the following mitigation
framework:
For any building/structures in excess of 50 years of age
having its original structural integrity intact, the applicant
shall retain a qualified professional historian to
determine whether the affected building/structure is
historically significant. The evaluation of historic
architectural resources shall be based on criteria such as
age, location, context, association with an important
person or event, uniqueness, or structural integrity, as
indicated in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. A
historical resource report shall be submitted by the
applicant to the City and shall include the methods used
to determine the presence or absence of historical
resources, identify potential impacts from the proposed
project, and evaluate the significance of any historical
resources identified.
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Determination made
during development
review process;
Submittal of report as
part of CEQA review.
Project Applicant
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
Threshold 4.4-2 : Cause a
substantial adverse change in
the significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5.
General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1,
HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 18.1,
NR 18.3, NR 18.4
SC CUL-1: In compliance with City Council Policy K-5,
prior to the issuance of a grading permit by the City of
Newport Beach, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
archaeologist to periodically monitor ground-disturbing
activities onsite and provide documentation of such
retention to the City of Newport Beach Community
Development Director. The archaeologist shall train
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 10
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-1, 4.5.1-2, 4.5.1-3, 4.5.1-4,
4.5.1-5
Municipal Code: Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and
Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).
project construction workers on the types of
archaeological resources that could be found in site soils.
The archaeologist shall periodically monitor project
ground-disturbing activities. During construction
activities, if Native American resources (i.e., Tribal
Cultural Resources) are encountered, a Cultural Resource
Monitoring and Discovery Plan (CRMDP) shall be created
and implemented to lay out the proposed personnel,
methods, and avoidance/recovery framework for tribal
cultural resources monitoring and evaluation activities
within the project area. A consulting Native American
tribe shall be retained and compensated as a
consultant/monitor for the project site from the time of
discovery to the completion of ground disturbing
activities to monitor grading and excavation activities. If
archaeological resources are encountered, all
construction work within 50 feet of the find shall cease,
and the archaeologist shall assess the find for importance
and whether preservation in place without impacts is
feasible. Construction activities may continue in other
areas. If, in consultation with the City and affected Native
American tribe (as deemed necessary), the discovery is
determined to not be important, work will be permitted
to continue in the area. Any resource that is not Native
American in origin and that cannot be preserved in place
shall be curated at a public, nonprofit institution with a
research interest in the materials, such as the South
Central Coastal Information Center at California State
University, Fullerton.
During the
development review
process; Compliance
with City requirements
for archaeological,
paleontological, and
tribal cultural
resources. Monitoring
during ground
disturbing activities.
MM CUL-2: Prior to any earth-disturbing activities (e.g.,
excavation, trenching, grading) that could encounter
undisturbed soils, the project-level applicant for future
development shall retain an archaeologist who meets
the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
Project Applicant
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 11
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Standards for Archaeology to determine if site-specific
development allowed under the General Plan Update
could result in a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. The
investigation shall include, as determined appropriate by
the archaeologist and the City of Newport Beach, an
updated records search of the South Central Coastal
Information Center of the California Historical Resources
Information System, updated Native American
consultation, and a pedestrian survey of the area
proposed for development. The results of the
investigation shall be documented in a technical report
or memorandum that identifies and evaluates any
archaeological resources within the development area
and includes recommendations and methods for
eliminating or avoiding impacts on archaeological
resources or human remains. The measures shall include
as appropriate, subsurface testing of archaeological
resources and/or construction monitoring by a qualified
professional and, if necessary, appropriate Native
American monitors identified by the applicable tribe
and/or the Native American Heritage Commission.
the identified housing
sites.
During the
development review
process; prior to
ground-disturbing
activities. Compliance
with City requirements
for archaeological,
paleontological, and
tribal cultural
resources. Monitoring
during ground
disturbing activities.
Threshold 4.4-3: Disturb any
human remains, including those
interred outsides of dedicated
cemeteries.
General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1,
HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-2
Municipal Code: Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and
Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).
SC CUL-2: California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, and Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98 mandate the process to
be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of
any human remains in a location other than a dedicated
cemetery. California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5 requires that in the event that human remains
are discovered within the project site, disturbance of the
site shall be halted until the coroner has conducted an
investigation into the circumstances, manner and cause
of death, and the recommendations concerning the
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Compliance with
regulatory
requirements during
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 12
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
treatment and disposition of the human remains have
been made to the person responsible for the excavation,
or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner
provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources
Code. If the coroner determines that the remains are not
subject to his or her authority and if the coroner
recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains
to be those of a Native American, he or she shall contact,
by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American
Heritage Commission.
ground disturbing
activities.
4.5: Energy
Threshold 4.5-1: Result in
potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during Project
construction or operation.
General Plan Housing (H) Element Policies: Policy Action 5G
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.25
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.18
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.5-2: Conflict with or
obstruct a State or Local plan for
renewable energy or energy
efficiency
General Plan Housing (H) Element Policies: Policy Action 5G
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.25
No mitigation. - -
4.6: Geology and Soils
Threshold 4.6-1: Expose people
or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving rupture of a
known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 4.7
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.12
Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 13
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
on other substantial evidence of
a known fault.
Threshold 4.6-2: Expose people
or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving strong
seismic ground shaking.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 4.7
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.12
Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.6-3 : Directly or
indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury,
or death involving seismic-
related ground failure, including
liquefaction, and landslides.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11,
S 4.3, S 4.7
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.12
Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.6-4: Result in
substantial soil erosion or the
loss of top soil.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11,
S 3.12, S 4.3
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.9, NR
3.11, NR 3.12, NR 3.14, NR 3.15, NR 3.19, NR 3.20, NR 4.4
Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.6-5: Be located on a
geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the
Project, and potentially result in
on or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11,
S 4.3, S 4.7
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.12
Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.6-6: Be located on
expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 3.9, S 3.10, S 3.11,
S 4.3
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.4,
NR 3.9
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 14
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property.
Municipal Code: Title 15, Chapter 15.04
Threshold 4.6-7: Directly or
indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site
or unique geologic feature.
General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1,
HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 18.1,
NR 18.3, NR 18.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5.1-2, 4.5.1-5
Municipal Code: Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and
Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).
4.7: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Threshold 4.7-1: Generate
greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that
may have a significant impact
on the environment.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1,
NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
Note: There are no feasible mitigation measures to
reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The
following mitigation measure is applicable.
MM GHG-1: Prior to demolition, grading, or building
permit approval, and in accordance with SCAQMD’s
guidance, a project-specific Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Assessment shall be prepared for residential
developments that would exceed SCAQMD’s 3,000
MTCO2e proposed threshold of significance (or those in
place at the time of the development application). Future
development shall mitigate GHG emissions to below
SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance to the extent
feasible.
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
Threshold 4.7-2: Conflict with
an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gas.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 6.1,
NR 7.2, NR 8.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.19
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this
impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 15
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
4.8: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Threshold 4.8-1: Create a
significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-2: Create a
significant hazard to the public
or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions
involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-3: Emit hazardous
emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous material,
substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20, Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-4: Be located on a
site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would
it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.1, S 7.2
Municipal Code: Section 15.55.040 (Methane Overlay Zone)
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-5: Be located
within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles
of a public airport or public use
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 8.6
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.3
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.080(F)
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 16
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard or excessive
noise for people residing or
working in the project area
Threshold 4.8-6: Impair
implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.8-7: Expose people
or structures to a significant risk
of loss, injury, or death involving
wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where
residences are intermixed with
wildlands.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2, S 6.7, S 6.4, S 6.5
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.8-1, 2.8.8-2, 2.8.8-4
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20, Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
4.9: Hydrology and Water Quality
Threshold 4.9-1: Violate any
water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements
or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or groundwater
quality.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1,
NR 3.5, NR 3.7, NR 3.16, NR 4.1, NR 4.3, NR 3.11, NR 3.14, NR 3.15,
NR 3.19
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.2-1, 4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-7, 4.3.2-8,
4.3.2-12, 4.3.2-13, 4.3.2-14, 4.3.2-23
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.9-2: Substantially
decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that
the project may impede
sustainable groundwater
management of the basin
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.5,
NR 4.1, NR 4.3, NR 3.4, NR 3.11, NR 3.14, NR 3.19, NR 3.20
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-9, 4.3.2-12, 4.3.2-13,
4.3.2-15, 4.3.2-17, 4.3.2-24
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.17
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 17
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Threshold 4.9-3: Substantially
alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would:
i) result in substantial erosion or
siltation on-or off-site;
ii) increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding
on- or off-site;
iii) create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned
storm water drainage systems
or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff; or
iv) impede or redirect flood
flows.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1,
NR 3.4, NR 3.5, NR 3.9, NR 3.11, NR 3.14, NR 3.19, NR 3.20,NR 4.1,
NR 4.3, NR 4.4
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 2.7, S 5.1, S 5.3
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.4.10
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.1-5, 4.3.1-7, 4.3.1-8, 4.3.2-1,
4.3.2-2, 4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-7, 4.3.2-8, 4.3.2-9, 4.3.2-10, 4.3.2-11, 4.3.2-
12, 4.3.2-13, 4.3.2-14, 4.3.2-15, 4.3.2-17, 4.3.2-22, 4.3.2-23, 4.3.2-
24
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36, Chapter 15.50
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.9-4: In flood hazard,
tsunami, or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to
Project inundation.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 2.7, S 3.9, S 3.10,
S 3.11, S 3.12 S 5.1, S 5.3
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.11
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.1-5, 4.3.1-6, 4.3.1-7, 4.3.2-2,
4.3.2-6, 4.3.2-22
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36, Chapter 15.50
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.9-5: Conflict with or
obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater
management plan
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR
3.5, NR 3.7, NR 3.16, NR 4.1
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.3.2-6
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36, Chapter 15.50
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 18
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
4.10: Land Use and Planning
Threshold 4.10-1: Physically
divide an established
community.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.3, LU 6.2.1,
LU 6.2.5
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-3, 2.7-1
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.10-2: Cause a
significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental
effect.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.3, LU 3.8, LU
6.2.1, LU 6.2.3, LU 6.2.5, LU 6.14.2, LU 3.2, LU 5.1.2, LU 5.3.3, LU
5.6.1, LU 6.15.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.1-1, 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2, 2.2.1-3,
2.2.2-1, 2.7-1, 2.7-2, 2.7-5
No mitigation. - -
4.11: Noise
Threshold 4.11-1: Result in the
generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in
excess of standards established
in the local general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.
General Plan Noise (N) Element Policies: N 1.1, N 1.2, N 1.3, N 1.4,
N 1.5, N 1.6, N 1.7, N 1.8, N 2.1, N 2.2, N 2.3, N 4.1, N 4.6, N 5.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 10.26. Section 10.28.040, Section
20.30.080.C, Section 20.30.080.F (John Wayne Airport)
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this
impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Threshold 4.11-2: Result in the
exposure of persons to or
generation of excessive
groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels.
General Plan Noise (N) Element Policies: N 1.1, N 1.2, N 1.3, N 1.4,
N 1.5, N 1.6, N 1.7, N 1.8, N 2.1, N 2.2, N 2.3, N 4.1, N 4.6, N 5.1
Municipal Code: Chapter 10.26. Section 10.28.040, Section
20.30.080.C, Section 20.30.080.F
MM NOI-1: To avoid impacts to vibration sensitive land
uses (i.e., non-engineered timber and masonry buildings)
located within a 50-foot radius of pile driving activities,
prior to demolition, grading, or building permit approval,
the following measures shall be specified on the Project
plans and implemented during construction:
▪ Pile driving within a 50-foot radius of vibration
sensitive land uses shall utilize alternative installation
methods (e.g., pile cushioning, jetting, predrilling, cast-
in-place systems, resonance-free vibratory pile drivers)
such that vibration velocities from the alternative
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
During the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first to
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 19
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
construction activity would fall below the 0.2
inch/second threshold.
▪ The preexisting condition of all vibration sensitive land
uses within a 50-foot radius of proposed pile driving
shall be documented during a preconstruction survey.
The preconstruction survey shall determine conditions
that exist before construction begins for use in
evaluating damage caused by pile driving, if any.
Fixtures and finishes susceptible to damage and within
a 50-foot radius of pile driving shall be documented
(photographically and in writing) prior to demolition,
grading, or building permit approval. All damage shall
be repaired/restored to its preexisting condition.
demolition, grading, or
building permit.
Threshold 4.11-3: For a project
located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport
land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport,
would the Project expose
people residing or working in
the project area to excessive
noise levels.
General Plan Noise (N) Element Policies: N 1.2, N 1.5A, N 2.2,
N 3.1, N 3.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.3
Municipal Code: Chapter 10.26. Section 10.28.040, Section
20.30.080.C, Section 20.30.080.F (John Wayne Airport)
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 20
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
4.12: Population and Housing
Threshold 4.12-1: Induce
substantial population growth in
an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 1.4, LU 3.2, LU
6.2.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.1-1, 2.1.10-1, 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2,
2.2.1-3, 2.2.2-1, 2.7-1, 2.7-2, 2.7-5
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.12-2: Displace
substantial numbers of existing
housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere or displace
substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 1.4, LU 3.2, 6.2.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.1.1-1, 2.1.10-1, 2.2.1-1, 2.2.1-2,
2.2.1-3, 2.2.2-1, 2.7-1, 2.7-2, 2.7-5
No mitigation. - -
4.13: Public Services
Threshold 4.13-1: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for fire
protection.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2,
LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
Municipal Code: Chapter 3.12, Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.13-2: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2,
LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 21
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for
police protection.
Municipal Code: Chapter 3.12
Threshold 4.13-3: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for
schools.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2,
LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
Municipal Code: Chapter 19.48
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.13-4: Result in
substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could
cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives for
libraries.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2,
LU 6.1.1, LU 6.1.2, LU 6.2.5, LU 4.1
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.7
Municipal Code: Chapter 3.12
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 22
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
4.14: Recreation
Threshold 4.14-1: Increase the
use of existing neighborhood,
community and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated
General Plan Recreation (R) Element Policies: R 1.1, R 1.2, R 2.1,
R 2.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.5.2, LU 6.15.13,
LU 6.15.16
Local Coastal Program Policies: 3.2.1-3, 3.2.1-4, 3.2.2-3
Municipal Code: Chapter 19.52
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.14-2
Include recreational facilities or
require the construction or
expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an
adverse physical effect on the
environment.
General Plan Recreation (R) Element Policies: R 1.1, R 1.2, R 2.1,
R 2.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.5.2, LU 6.15.13,
LU 6.15.16
Local Coastal Program Policies: 3.2.1-3, 3.2.1-4, 3.2.2-3
Municipal Code: Chapter 19.52
No mitigation. - -
4.15: Transportation
Threshold 4.15-1: Conflict with a
program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation
system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities.
General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 1.1.1, CE 1.1.2,
CE 2.1.2, CE 2.2.5, CE 2.3.3, CE 5.2.6, CE 5.2.7, CE 5.2.11, CE 5.4.1,
CE 5.4.6, CE 7.1.4, CE 7.1.5, CE 7.1.7, CE 8.1.1, CE 8.1.9, CE 8.1.13,
CE 8.1.14, CE 9.1.9, CE 9.1.10, CE 9.1.12
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 6.15.18,
LU 6.15.19, LU 6.15.20
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.9.1-2, 2.9.1-3, 2.9.1-10, 2.9.2-4,
2.9.3-1, 2.9.3-2, 2.9.3-3, 2.9.3-5, 2.9.3-6, 2.9.3-7, 2.9.3-10, 2.9.3-11,
2.9.3-14
Municipal Code: Chapter 15.40, Chapter 20.44
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Traffic Management
Policy (L-26)
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.15-2: Conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b).
General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 7.1.1, CE 7.1.2
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.44
MM TRANS-1: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Prior to
issuance of a building permit, one or more of the
following measures shall be implemented to reduce VMT-
related impacts associated with future projects that are
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 23
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Traffic Management
Policy (L-26)
not able to be screened out of the VMT analysis process
such that the development’s VMT is below the low VMT
thresholds recommended by the Office of Planning and
Research or adopted by the City of Newport Beach at the
time of the development application:
▪ Modify the project’s-built environment characteristics
to reduce VMT generated by a project.
▪ Implement Transportation Demand Management
strategies pursuant to reduce VMT generated by a
project.
▪ Participate in a Fair Share Traffic Impact Fee program
or VMT mitigation banking program, if available.
Examples of potential measures to reduce VMT include,
but are not limited to, the following:
▪ Improve or increase access to transit.
▪ Increase access to common goods and services, such
as groceries, schools, and daycare.
▪ Incorporate affordable housing into the project.
▪ Orient the project toward transit, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities.
▪ Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit
service.
▪ Provide traffic calming.
▪ Provide bicycle parking.
▪ Limit or eliminate parking supply.
▪ Unbundle parking costs.
▪ Implement or provide access to a commute reduction
program.
▪ Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing
programs.
▪ Provide transit passes.
the identified housing
sites in the Coastal
Zone.
Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit.
Department and Public
Works Department
Threshold 4.15-3: Increase
hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g. sharp curves
or dangerous intersections) or
General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 2.2.5, CE 2.2.7,
CE 2.2.8, CE 5.4.1, CE 5.4.2, CE 8.1.10
Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 24
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
incompatible uses (e.g. farm
equipment)
Threshold 4.15-4: Result in
inadequate emergency access.
General Plan Circulation (CE) Element Policies: CE 2.2.7
Municipal Code: Chapter 9.04
No mitigation. - -
4.16: Tribal Cultural Resources
Threshold 4.16-1: Cause a
substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in
Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms
of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or
object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe,
and that is: a) listed or eligible
for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources,
or in a local register of historical
resources as defined in Public
Resources Code section
5020.1(k) or b) a resource
determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported
by substantial evidence, to be
significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code section
5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resources Code section
General Plan Historical Resources (HR) Element Policies: HR 2.1,
HR 2.2, HR 2.3, HR 2.4
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 18.1,
NR 18.3, NR 18.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 4.5-1, 4.5-2, 4.5-3, 4.5-4, 4.5-5
Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
Newport Beach City Council Policy Manual: Paleontological and
Archaeological Resource Protection Guidelines (K-5).
SC CUL-1: In compliance with City Council Policy K-5,
prior to the issuance of a grading permit by the City of
Newport Beach, the Applicant shall retain a qualified
archaeologist to periodically monitor ground-disturbing
activities onsite and provide documentation of such
retention to the City of Newport Beach Community
Development Director. The archaeologist shall train
project construction workers on the types of
archaeological resources that could be found in site soils.
The archaeologist shall periodically monitor project
ground-disturbing activities. During construction
activities, if Native American resources (i.e., Tribal
Cultural Resources) are encountered, a Cultural Resource
Monitoring and Discovery Plan (CRMDP) shall be created
and implemented to lay out the proposed personnel,
methods, and avoidance/recovery framework for tribal
cultural resources monitoring and evaluation activities
within the project area. A consulting Native American
tribe shall be retained and compensated as a
consultant/monitor for the project site from the time of
discovery to the completion of ground disturbing
activities to monitor grading and excavation activities. If
archaeological resources are encountered, all
construction work within 50 feet of the find shall cease,
and the archaeologist shall assess the find for importance
and whether preservation in place without impacts is
feasible. Construction activities may continue in other
areas. If, in consultation with the City and affected Native
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Determination made
during development
review process;
Submittal of report as
part of CEQA review.
Project Applicant
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 25
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the
resource to a California Native
American tribe.
American tribe (as deemed necessary), the discovery is
determined to not be important, work will be permitted
to continue in the area. Any resource that is not Native
American in origin and that cannot be preserved in place
shall be curated at a public, nonprofit institution with a
research interest in the materials, such as the South
Central Coastal Information Center at California State
University, Fullerton.
SC CUL-2: California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, and Public
Resources Code Section 5097.98 mandate the process to
be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of
any human remains in a location other than a dedicated
cemetery. California Health and Safety Code Section
7050.5 requires that in the event that human remains
are discovered within the project site, disturbance of the
site shall be halted until the coroner has conducted an
investigation into the circumstances, manner and cause
of death, and the recommendations concerning the
treatment and disposition of the human remains have
been made to the person responsible for the excavation,
or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner
provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources
Code. If the coroner determines that the remains are not
subject to his or her authority and if the coroner
recognizes or has reason to believe the human remains
to be those of a Native American, he or she shall contact,
by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American
Heritage Commission.
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Compliance with
regulatory
requirements during
ground disturbing
activities.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development Director
MM TCR-1: Unanticipated Discovery of Tribal Cultural
and Archaeological Resources: Upon discovery of any
tribal, cultural, or archaeological resources during
ground-disturbing activities for future development
facilitated by the Project, the applicant shall immediately
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 26
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
cease such activities in the immediate vicinity. The find
will then be assessed by a qualified archeologist retained
by the applicant and a tribal monitor/consultant
approved by the consulting tribe. The applicant shall
promptly notify the City Planning Division to the
discovery of resources. If the resources are Native
American in origin, the consulting tribe shall coordinate
with the landowner regarding treatment and curation of
these resources. Typically, the tribe will request
preservation in place or recovery for educational
purposes. At the direction of the qualified archaeologist
and tribal monitor/ consultant, and in coordination with
the Planning Division, work may continue on other parts
of the affected site while evaluation and, if necessary,
additional protective measures are completed at the
affected portion of the site pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5(f). If a resource is determined
by the qualified archaeologist to constitute a “historical
resource” or “unique archaeological resource,” time and
funding to allow for sufficient implementation of
avoidance measures must be made available. The
treatment plan established for the resources shall be in
accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.5(f) for historical resources.
Preservation in place (i.e., avoidance) is the preferred
manner of treatment upon identification of unique
archeological resources (PRC §21083.2(b)). If
preservation in place is not feasible, treatment may
include implementation of archaeological data recovery
excavations to remove the resource along with
subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. All tribal
cultural resources shall be returned to the consulting
tribe. Any historic archaeological material that is not
Native American in origin shall be curated at a public,
non- profit institution with a research interest in the
the identified housing
sites.
During ground-
disturbing and
excavation activities.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 27
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
materials. Acceptance and curation of the historic
archeological materials will be at the discretion of the
institution. If no institution accepts the archaeological
material, they shall be offered to the consulting tribe or
the responsible public or private institution with suitable
repository for educational purposes.
MM TCR-2: If evidence of an archaeological site or other
suspected historical resource as defined by CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.5, including darkened soil
representing past human activity (“midden”), that could
conceal material remains (e.g., worked stone, fired clay
vessels, faunal bone, hearths, storage pits, or burials) are
discovered during any project-related earth-disturbing
activities (including projects that would not encounter
undisturbed soils), all earth-disturbing activity within 100
feet of the find shall be halted and the Community
Development Department shall be notified. The project-
level applicant shall retain an archaeologist who meets
the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards for Archaeology to assess the
significance of the find. Impacts to any significant
resources shall be mitigated to a less than significant
level through data recovery or other methods
determined adequate by the archaeologist and that are
consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Archaeological Documentation. Any
identified cultural resources shall be recorded on the
appropriate DPR 523 form and filed with the appropriate
Information Center.
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
During ground-
disturbing and
excavation activities.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
4.17: Utilities
Threshold 4.17-1: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.2
Municipal Code: Chapter 21.20.105
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 28
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
expanded water facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant environmental
effects.
Threshold 4.17-2: Have
sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project
and reasonably foreseeable
future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry
years
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR
1.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.16, Chapter 14.17
There are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce this
impact to a less than significant level.
- -
Threshold 4.17-3: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
expanded wastewater
treatment facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant environmental
effects.
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR
1.2, LU 2.8, NR 3.4, NR 3.11, NR 3.15
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU
6.4.10
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.17-4: Result in a
determination by the
wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to
the provider’s existing
commitments
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 3.11,
NR 3.15
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8
Municipal Code: Chapter 14.36
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.17-5: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
expanded storm water drainage
facilities, the construction of
General Plan Natural Resources (NR) Element Policies: NR 1.1, NR
1.2, NR 3.4, NR 3.11, NR 3.15
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2, LU
6.4.10
Municipal Code: Chapter 19.28.080, Chapter 21.35
SC UTIL-1: The project shall be required to comply with
the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 14.16
related to water conservation and supply level
regulations in effect during the construction and
operation of the project, and Municipal Code Chapter
14.17 with respect to water-efficient landscaping.
Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit and first
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 29
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
which could cause significant
environmental effects
Certificate of
Occupancy.
SC UTIL-2: The project shall be required to comply with
Section 19.28.080 (Storm Drains) of the City’s Municipal
Code which requires developers to design and construct
all drainage facilities necessary for the removal of surface
water from the site (e.g., open/closed channels, catch
basins, manholes, junction structures), and to protect
off-site properties from a project’s water runoff. The
storm drain system must be designed in accordance with
the standards of the Orange County Flood Division. A
drainage fee is also charged to fund improvements to the
City’s drainage facilities.
Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit and first
Certificate of
Occupancy. Evidence
of payment of fees.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
SC UTIL-3: The Applicant shall prepare and obtain
approval of a Construction and Demolition Waste
Management Plan (CDWMD) for the project. The CWMP
shall list the types and weights or volumes of solid waste
materials expected to be generated from construction.
The CDWMP shall include options to divert from landfill
disposal, nonhazardous materials for reuse or recycling
by a minimum of 65 percent of total weight or volume.
Submittal during the
development review
process; Prior to
issuance of the first
permit and first
Certificate of
Occupancy. Evidence
of payment of fees.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department
Threshold 4.17-6: Require or
result in the relocation or
construction of new or
expanded electric power,
natural gas, or
telecommunication facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant environmental
effects.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8, LU 3.2,
LU 6.4.10
Municipal Code: Chapter 20.49, Chapter 21.49
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.17-7: Generate
solid waste in excess of State
and local standards, or in excess
of the capacity of local
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8
Municipal Code: Chapter 12.63.030, Chapter 20.30.120
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 30
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals.
Threshold 4.17-8: Comply with
federal, State, and local
management and reduction
statutes and regulations related
to solid waste.
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 2.8
Municipal Code: Chapter 12.63.030, Chapter 20.30.120
No mitigation. - -
4.18: Wildfire
Threshold 4.18-1: If located in
or near State Responsibility
Areas (SRAs) or lands classified
as Very High Fire Hazard
Severity Zones (VHFHSZ), would
the Project substantially impair
an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation
plan.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 7.6
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.1-2, 2.8.1-3, 2.8.8-3, 2.8.8-4,
2.8.8-6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20.050, Chapter 9.04, Chapter 15.04.
MM W-1: Prior to issuance of a grading permit for sites
within or adjacent to a Very High Fire Hazard Safety Zone
(VHFHSZ), the project applicant shall prepare a Fire
Protection Plan (FPP). Prior to preparation of an FPP, the
project applicant hall coordinate with City of Newport
Beach Fire Department to ensure that modeling of the
FPP and design of the Project is appropriate to meet the
requirements and standards of the City. The FPP shall be
subject to the review and approval from the Fire
Department. The FPP shall assess the Project’s
compliance with current regulatory codes and ensure
that impacts resulting from wildland fire hazards have
been adequately mitigated. The FPP shall also specifically
identify the need for fire protection systems, water
availability for structural firefighting, construction
requirements, fire department access, locations and
spacing of fire hydrants, fire-smart landscaping, and
appropriate defensible space around structures (Fuel
Modification Zones).
If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
the identified housing
sites.
Submittal during the
development review
process; prior to
issuance of first permit
and Certificate of
Occupancy.
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department and Fire
Department
Threshold 4.18-2
If located in or near State
Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or
lands classified as Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ),
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2, S 6.3, S 6.4, S 6.5
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.1-1, 2.8.1-2, 2.8.1-3, 2.8.8-3,
2.8.8-4, 2.8.8-6
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20.050, Chapter 9.04, Chapter 15.04.
MM W-1 If found to be
applicable on a
project-specific basis
for future housing on
City of Newport Beach
Community
Development
Department and Fire
Department
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 31
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
would the Project, due to slope,
prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks,
and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire.
the identified housing
sites.
Submittal during the
development review
process; prior to
issuance of first permit
and Certificate of
Occupancy.
Threshold 4.18-3
If located in or near State
Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or
lands classified as Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ),
would the Project require the
installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such
as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or
other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing
impacts to the environment.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2, S 6.3
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2. 2.8.1-3, 2.8.8-1, 2.8.8-2
No mitigation. - -
Threshold 4.18-4
If located in or near State
Responsibility Areas (SRAs) or
lands classified as Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ),
would the Project expose people
or structures, to significant risks,
including downslope or
downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or
drainage changes.
General Plan Safety (S) Element Policies: S 6.2
General Plan Land Use (LU) Element Policies: LU 5.6.4
Local Coastal Program Policies: 2.8.8-3, 2.8.8-4
Municipal Code: Chapter 2.20.050, Chapter 9.04, Chapter 15.04
No mitigation. - -
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
City of Newport Beach 32
City of Newport Beach General Plan Housing Implementation Program
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Impact Thresholds
General Plan Policies, Local Coastal Program Coastal Land
Use Plan (Local Coastal Program) Policies,
Regulatory Requirements
Mitigation Measures (MM)/Conditions of
Approval
Implementation
Timing
Responsible Party for
Implementation/
Approval
Verification
Date Initials
Notes:
1 Action 5G is referenced from the City of Newport Beach Housing Element.
Acronyms:
The following acronyms denote what element from the City of Newport Beach General Plan policies are referenced from.
LU = Land Use Element
HR = Historical Resources
CE = Circulation Element
R = Recreation Element
NR = Natural Resource Element
S = Safety Element
N = Noise Element
I
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 9 of 13
01-17-23
EXHIBIT “B”
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 20.28 (OVERLAY ZONING DISTRICTS (MHP, PM, B, H)) OF TITLE 20 (PLANNING AND ZONING) Table 2-16 of Section 20.28.50 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Zoning Districts) of Chapter 20.28 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code would be amended as follows, currently shown in
redline-strikeout format for ease of reference only:
TABLE 2-16
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR HOUSING OPPORTUNITY OVERLAY ZONES
Development Feature
Housing Opportunity Subareas
HO-1 HO-2 HO-3 HO-4 HO-5 HO-6
Development Limit
(units)(1)
2,577(11) 1,107 521 2,439(12) 1,530 N/A
Lot Size/Dimension Per Base Zone
Lot area required per
unit (sq. ft.)(2)
Minimum: 2,178 (20
du/ac)
Maximum: 871 (50 du/ac)
Minimum:
2,178 (20 du/ac)
Maximum:
871 (50 du/ac)
Minimum:
2,178 (20
du/ac)
Maximum:
726 (60
du/ac)(10)
All
Standards
Per Base
Zone
Setbacks
Front 0 ft.(3) 10 ft.(3) 10
ft.(3)(4)
0(3) 10 ft.(3)
Rear 0 20 ft. 20 ft. 0 20 ft.
Side 0(4)
Street Side 0(3) 10 ft.(3) 10 ft.(3) 0 ft.(3) 10 ft.(3)
Height Per Base Zone unless
otherwise identified on
the map
65 ft. 65 ft.(6) Per Base
Zone
unless
otherwise
Identified
on the
map(7)
65 ft.
Building Separation 10 ft.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) No restriction(8)
Common Open Space(9) Minimum 75 square feet/dwelling unit. (The minimum dimension (length
and width) shall be 15 feet.)
Private Open Space(9) 5% of the gross floor area for each unit. (The minimum dimension (length
and width) shall be 6 feet.)
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 10 of 13
01-17-23
TABLE 2-16
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR HOUSING OPPORTUNITY OVERLAY ZONES
Development Feature
Housing Opportunity Subareas
HO-1 HO-2 HO-3 HO-4 HO-5 HO-6
Fencing See Section 20.30.040 (Fences, Hedges, Walls, and Retaining Walls).
Landscaping See Chapter 20.36 (Landscaping Standards).
Lighting See Section 20.30.070 (Outdoor Lighting).
Outdoor Storage/Display See Section 20.48.140 (Outdoor Storage, Display, and Activities).
Parking See subsection (D)(3) of this section and Chapter 20.40 (Off-Street
Parking).
Satellite Antennas See Section 20.48.190 (Satellite Antennas and Amateur Radio Facilities).
Signs See Chapter 20.42 (Sign Standards).
(1) Development limits are additional residential development opportunities beyond the base allowances in
this Title or the General Plan. These limits shall not include density bonus units or units that are either identified as pipeline units in the 6th Cycle Housing Element (Table B-2) or units that were applied for and predate the effective date of the HO Overlay Zoning Districts. Furthermore, eligible units are only counted against the development limits when they are either entitled or are issued a building permit if allowed by
right. However, 25% of the development limit within each HO Overlay Zoning District that includes
properties within the Coastal Zone shall be reserved until such a time as the City’s Local Coastal Program
has been amended to allow for housing consistent with the implementation of the 6th Cycle Housing Element. Following the City’s Local Coastal Program Amendment, priority for the reserved units will be given to sites located within the Coastal Zone. (2) Minimum/maximum allowable density range may be based on an average density of the entire project site, excluding density bonus units.
(3) Any portion of the building that is over 20 feet in height shall be setback a minimum 20 feet from the street
right-of-way. (4) Except in the Mixed-Use Mariners Mile (MU-MM) Zoning District wherein residential uses are only allowed beginning 100 feet north of Coast Highway. (5) The combined total from both sides shall be 15 feet.
(6) The height shall be limited to 35 feet in the Shoreline Height Limit Area, as identified in Map H-1.
(7) “Base Zone” includes all height limitations established by the Sight Plane Ordinance (Ordinance No. 1371
and Ordinance No. 1596).
(8) The FAR in this table only applies to residential floor area, including any supporting facilities. In mixed-use developments, the FAR for nonresidential is still applicable. (9) For purposes of this section, common and private open space in HO-1 may include enclosed shared amenities such as a clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis court, basketball court, racquetball court,
weightlifting facility, children’s playground equipment, sauna, jacuzzi, day care facility, or any other
recreational amenities/facilities as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director.
(10) This density is intended for the former Coyote Canyon Landfill site only. The Sage Hill School site is limited to a maximum of 20 dwelling units. (11) Of the 2,577 base development units, 179 units (50 du/ac) shall be allocated to Site ID No. 77 (1201 Dove
Street) from the 6th Cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory.
(12) Of the 2,439 base development units for HO-4, 199 units (50 du/ac) shall be allocated to Site ID No. 362
(868 and 870 Santa Barbara Drive) from the 6th Cycle Housing Element Sites Inventory.
I I I I
-
-
-
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 11 of 13
01-17-23
The following map would be updated in Section 20.80.025 (Housing Opportunity Overlay District maps) of Chapter 20.80 (Maps) of the NBMC and will be provided prior to City Council
consideration:
HO-4 – Newport Center Area (PDF)
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 12 of 13
01-17-23
EXHIBIT “C”
AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 21.28 (OVERLAY COASTAL ZONING DISTRICTS (MHP, PM, B, C, H, AND HO)) OF TITLE 21 (LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN) Table 21.28-1 of Section 21.28.070 (Housing Opportunity (HO) Overlay Coastal Zoning Districts) of Chapter 21.28 of Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) of the of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code would be amended as follows, currently shown in redline-strikeout format
for ease of reference only, and subject to California Coastal Commission review and approval: TABLE 21.28-1
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR HOUSING OPPORTUNITY OVERLAY ZONES
Development
Feature
Housing Opportunity Subareas
HO-1 HO-2 HO-3 HO-4
Lot
Size/Dimension
Per Base Zone
Lot area
required per
unit (sq. ft.)1
Minimum:
2,178 (20 du/ac)
Maximum:
871 (50 du/ac)
Minimum:
2,178 (20 du/ac)
Maximum:
871 (50 du/ac)
Setbacks
Front 0 ft.(2) 10 ft.(2) 10 ft.(2)(3) 0(2)
Rear 0 20 ft. 20 ft. 0
Side 0(4)
Street Side 0(2) 10 ft.(2) 10 ft.(2) 0 ft.(2)
Height Per Base Zone
unless otherwise
identified on the
map
65 ft. 65 ft.(5) Per Base Zone unless otherwise
Identified on map (6)(8)
Building
Separation
10 ft.
Floor Area
Ratio (FAR)
No restriction(6)
Common Open
Space(7)
Minimum 75 square feet/dwelling unit. (The minimum dimension [length and width]
shall be 15 feet.)
Private Open
Space
5% of the gross floor area for each unit. (The minimum dimension [length and width]
shall be 6 feet.)
Fencing See Section 21.30.040 (Fences, Hedges, Walls, and Retaining Walls).
Landscaping See Section 21.30.075 (Landscaping) and 21.30.085 (Water Efficient Landscaping).
Lighting See Section 21.30.070 (Outdoor Lighting).
Parking See Subsection (D)(2) below and Chapter 21.40 (Off-Street Parking).
Signs See Chapter 21.30.065 (Sign Standards).
(1) Minimum/maximum allowable density range may be based on an average density of the entire
project site, excluding density bonus units.
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2025-004 Page 13 of 13
01-17-23
(2) Any portion of the building that is over 20 feet in height shall be setback a minimum 20 feet from
the street right-of-way.
(3) Except in the Mixed-Use Mariners Mile (MU-MM) Zoning District wherein residential uses are only
allowed beginning 100 feet north of Coast Highway.
(4) The combined total from both sides shall be 15 feet.
(5) The height shall be limited to 35 feet in the Shoreline Height Limit Area, as identified in Map H-1.
(6) The FAR in this table only applies to residential floor area, including any supporting facilities. In
mixed-use developments, the FAR for nonresidential is still applicable.
(7) For purposes of this section, common and private open space in HO-1 may include enclosed shared
amenities such as a clubhouse, swimming pool, tennis court, basketball court, racquetball court,
weightlifting facility, children’s playground equipment, sauna, jacuzzi, day care facility, or any other
recreational amenities/facilities as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director.
(8) “Base Zone” includes all height limitations established by the Sight Plane Ordinance (Ordinance No.
1371 and Ordinance No. 1596).
The following map would be updated/added to pending Section 21.80.032 (Housing Opportunity Overlay District maps) of Chapter 20.80 (Maps) of the NBMC: HO-4 – Newport Center Area (PDF)
Docusign Envelope ID: 2FA025FF-02F7-490D-B67E-DFEC9AD2E41D