City Council - Regular Meeting

You did? Who are they? Well, one's Walter Starr. And here's the other one. Ew. Ew. Of course. Yeah, he's there. I love it. You have my cell number? You have my cell number in your phone? You text me right away. There will be somebody, I have no doubt. That's okay, that's part of the process, right? That's part of the fun. Thank you. you Okay.

you

The world has changed. Thank you.

Antonella's next up.

Good afternoon. The time is four o'clock and I will now call the April 14th, 2026 regular city council meeting to order.

Madam Clerk, will call please. All council members present.

Now is the time for the invocation that will be led by Pastor Matt Hambrick, Costa Mesa First United Methodist.

Thank you. Let us pray. God of us all, we come to you with gratitude for all that we have been given. and we recognize our call to love our neighbors and even to love our enemies. We thank you for this amazing community that we're a part of called Newport Beach. We thank you for all those who make it what it is today, a place of promise and opportunity. We thank you for the leaders who will vote this evening and all the support staff who guide the running of our government, the police and the fire departments and all those behind the scenes who keep our community running and thriving. Grant us all wisdom and integrity as we lead and make decisions that will shape our future. this evening guide our hearts and our way toward justice and compassion, toward deeper love and care for all who rely on us. In this time when many things in our world are scary, we ask that you would allow us to lead with courage, with you, our God, as our guide. Amen.

Now please join me for the pledge to our great nation. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. We'll now move to proclamations. It is National Library Week and we are happy to have our library staff here as well as Chase Reif from the Library Board of Trustees. I'm going to go ahead and read the proclamation and then we'll hear from Chase. Whereas libraries spark creativity, fuel imagination, and inspire lifelong learning, offering a space where individuals of all ages can find joy through exploration and discovery. And whereas libraries serve as vibrant community hubs, connecting people with knowledge, technology, and resources while fostering civic engagement, critical thinking, and cultural enrichment. Whereas libraries provide free and equitable access to books, digital tools, and innovative programming, ensuring that all individuals have the support they need to learn, connect, and thrive. Whereas libraries empower job seekers, entrepreneurs, lifelong learners by providing access to resources, training, and opportunities that support career growth and economic success. Whereas libraries nurture young minds through story times, STEAM programs, and literacy, initiatives fostering curiosity and a love for learning that lasts a lifetime. Whereas libraries and dedicated librarians and library workers across the country are joining together to celebrate National Library Week under the theme Find Your Joy. Now therefore, I, Lauren Klyman, Mayor of the City of Newport Beach, on behalf of the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim April 19th to 25th, 2026, as National Library Week.

Great, thanks. I'm always excited to talk about the library. We're so fortunate to have such a strong library system here in the city, and it is doing really well and healthy. Our circulation numbers are doing well. Our programming, the number of people attending programs are through the roof and highest they've been in over a decade. And that's thanks to our staff. But we also have a lot of support from our citizens through the Friends of the Library and the Library Foundation.

and have a bright future ahead of us with witty hall coming online and a lot of great programming coming up thank you for this recognition we're looking forward to having your participation next week during our special story times we encourage the community to come out and visit the library and find something that sparks joy next week during national library week thank you so much thank you we'll now join you down there for a photo

Everyone's question a little bit more. One, two, three. LET'S GO AHEAD AND MOVE RIGHT INTO OUR STUDY SESSION ITEM. LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM CHANGES. I'LL NOW TURN IT OVER TO STAFF.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. I WILL BE PRESENTING THE UPDATES TO THE CITY'S LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM. The legislative platform serves 2 primary purposes. It establishes the city's policy positions to guide legislative advocacy efforts and authorizes the mayor to take positions on legislation that align with the city's adopted priorities. You'll see on the right a screenshot from the city's website. These are examples of letters signed by the mayor which reflect positions taken using this platform as a guide. They show how the city applies the platform in real time to communicate its stance on specific legislation. The legislative platform is something we periodically review and update to ensure it reflects the city's current priorities and evolving legislative trends. The last update to the platform was in 2023. Again, it serves as a framework for determining when to support or oppose legislation at the local, state and federal levels. And it allows the city to respond in a timely and consistent manner when new legislative issues arise. For this update, the city manager's office worked closely with department directors and federal and state lobbyists to review the existing platform and evaluate current legislation impacting Newport Beach. The proposed updates focus on several key sections where revisions were needed to reflect current priorities. The changes range from grammar cleanup to updating various sections to including new needs and adding two new sections, one for technology, digital infrastructure, and cybersecurity, and one for communications. You have both a red line and a clean version for review. We wanted to provide the council and the public an opportunity to review these changes before staff returns with a resolution and an updated legislative platform. Staff is planning to return with that formal item for consideration at the next council meeting. That concludes my presentation. Staff is available for any questions or suggestions on the content.

WELL DONE. FIRST PRESENTATION. NICELY DONE. ANY QUESTIONS UP HERE FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? WE WILL HOLD OFF AND GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC FOR COMMENTS.

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name is Jim Mosier. Looking at the slide there, I just looked at the city website and I discovered that there is a page on which the letters that are sent and that the result of the legislative platform is letters being sent advocating positions for or against pending matters of litigation. I was not aware that there was such a page on our website, so I would just suggest that that might be better publicized. The letters are sent on behalf of the City Council but people could interpret them as being the position or opinions of the residents of Newport Beach and the residents might want to know whether they agree or don't agree with what their city is saying. So I think knowing about this page would be a good thing. It looks like it's existed for the last two years and I did not know about it. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other public comments on this item? Okay, seeing none, we'll bring it back up here. Are there any comments from the dais? Okay, do you need a motion or direction on this item?

As long as there's consensus with the council to move forward, we'll bring it back at the next council meeting.

Seems like there are no additional changes or comments. I think that's consensus. Okay. Madam Clerk, please read the notice regarding public comments on agenda and non-agenda items.

The city, the City Council of Newport Beach welcomes and encourages community participation. Public comments are invited on items listed on the agenda and non-agenda items. Speakers must limit comments to three minutes per person to allow everyone to speak. Written comments encouraged as well. The City Council has a discretion to extend or shorten the time limit on agenda and non-agenda items.

We'll now proceed with public comments on all agenda and non-agenda items. Please note that members of the public will still have an opportunity to comment on agenda items under consent, public hearing and closed session later in the meeting, provided they do not offer comments on the public hearing item or any consent or closed session items at this time.

Couple of slides. Clerk, please, page one.

The first thing on the top of this slide is an agenda item from a Harbor Commission meeting in March, and it was a proposed elimination of mooring length adjustment processes. Now, if an individual has, say, a 35-foot mooring and looks at a 36-foot boat, they can apply to the harbor master, and he'll come out and do an analysis and see if they can be granted an extension, typically coming in five-foot increments, I think the fee for that is about $500 if it's granted and no charge if it's not granted. The chair of the Harbor Commission during that March meeting, the top, above the top black bar is the way the minutes are reflected from that meeting and it notes that he summarized prior concerns including navigational safety, limited harbor capacity, public access, impacts, fairness among permit holders, and administrative burden. Having been at the meeting, that wasn't entirely reflective of what I thought it should be. And the next section of the page is transcribed from the video of that meeting. And Chair Beer said, quote, Newport Harbor is a fully built out harbor. There is no additional water area to expand into. So increasing mooring lengths effectively reallocates limited public water space to individual permittees. Longer mooring increases navigational risk. Public access to the harbor is declining. Expanded moorings exponentially reduce available water area for other harbor users, including kayaks, paddle boarders, rowing shells, and other human-powered craft. Incremental expansions create long-term crowding. Granting length increases to some permittees effectively grants additional public water space that is not available to others, close quote. Members of the public then noted that, well, those same statements should apply to residential pier expansions. And the minutes reflected that Chair Beer closed public comments and clarified that piers are governed by established project lines and noted that moorings present. different regulatory challenges. Next page, please. I walked into the Harvard Commission meeting last week, and Chair Beer appeared not to like me quoting directly what he said. So he submitted additional copy of minutes. Humorously, you'll notice that they're called DAFT minutes. I think that's somewhat appropriate. Having watched the video more than half a dozen times, The only word that Chair Beer had said that wasn't in the minutes is Pierhead in green. Those sections in red were not said. I think it problematic that the chair of the Harbor Commission is submitting things into the public record that may reflect what he wanted to say but he did not say during the meeting and this is why we have the problems in the tidelands we do now. I've been encouraging you to listen to people other than the Harbor Commission, and I hope this is an example of that. And if you can go to slide five, most concerning, This is a dock at a former harbor chair's neighborhood. While they continue to assault moorings in all manner of ways, docks at harbor commissioners' neighborhoods extend not only beyond the pier headline, the federally designated limit, they extend beyond the project line, which is where the Army Corps is supposed to be able to dredge to, and just the hypocrisy and entitlement is problematic, and I hope we can move beyond that. Thank you.

Any other speakers?

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name again is Jim Mosher. The main non-agenda comment I wanted to make is to thank our city clerk for her response to the comment I made at the last meeting about the importance of having readily available speaker cards so that people who want their name to be correctly spelled in the minutes, which in the absence of written documentation is very hard to accomplish, that they have an opportunity to provide the correct spelling for their names. I think that will save a lot of time, both for the clerk and for myself when I read those minutes. The second comment I wanted to make was to thank the mayor, I believe, for a slightly revised explanation of what this moment of comment is for, although I think people will have to listen to that extremely carefully to understand that any comment, even peripherally connected to a consent calendar item, will prevent them from talking about any consent calendar item when the consent calendar comes up and I think that's particularly important because at recent meetings nearly all of the city business is on the consent calendar and that's kind of a trap for people unaware of that new rule which is a new rule and I am not speaking on the consent calendar now thank you thank you

Hello. This is my third time speaking here. Appreciate it. I'm a 25-year resident of Newport Beach, and I was a victim of a hit and run accident on October 16, 2025. I just copied your mayor on the email and the chief. I'm sharing my story because I want people to feel safe driving in Newport Beach. Here's the details. I tried to get a status of the case from the officer assigned who said he sent the information over to DA and I should have called him. So I called them to get status. However, the number he gave me for the, whatever you call it, the case, there was no record of it. They even checked under my name and the hit and run driver's name. I sent an email, I won't mention the officer's name, but I sent the email back to the officer to confirm that the case number is correct and the date, but I got no reply. That's when I start copying you and everybody else on the planet, even the chief, no reply. So I end up Googling and say, who do you call to complain when you're not getting any action from the police department? So I called the OC Victim Witness Office and I spoke to this really nice lady. I've been traumatized by this event, sorry. Anyway, so she tried to call the Harper office courthouse and she also said there was no record with that number or my name or the hit-and-run driver's name. So despite several subsequent follow-up emails to the officer to confirm the case number, I received no response. So I actually called him today and I called the general number and they transferred me to his phone. I thought I'd leave a message, but he picked up. And he basically was pretty flip and attributed delay that the system, you know, it's in the system and it takes time. And I said, well, can you confirm the case number and the date you sent it over so I can try to find out if it's stuck there? I'll complain there. He was unwilling to give me any information. He was very flip, curt. He was working for me, I fired him. So, and he said he'd be no longer assistant since the case has been forwarded. So then I called back the police, the main number, and I said, hey, there was a lady who was helpful in the records department, can you transfer me to her? And her name was Megan. But I got Myra, who she was fantastic. And in 15 seconds, she was able to give me the case number. So for weeks, I've been trying to get this information. In 15 seconds, this guy could have given me this information. I called the courthouse. They gave me the record, the date set for the guy to come in. I just want people to be safe. This guy was driving. And he was, the 911 call occurred 30 minutes before the accident happened. And nothing, it took 45 minutes after that for the police to show up. I just don't want people to drive around, you know, if it's driving under-influenced, according to witness, people should feel safe and this officer shouldn't be flipped. And it took 15 seconds to get this information. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Mainz. Any other comments at this time?

Bye, guys.

Hello and good afternoon, city council members. My name is David Hahn, and I would like to take this opportunity to express my strong and sincere desire to become one of the Newport Beach Harbor Commission. I feel I am more informed and aware than most of the harbor activities and daily goings on, from weekend warriors, big boat parties, rentals, fishing charters, whale watching, fast boat tours, Duffy rentals, and of course, sailing school classes in both private charters and the yacht clubs. I have the distinct pleasure of knowing many Newport Harbor residents and stakeholders who lease the docks or moorings and some both. Being a current stakeholder myself and a permitted liveaboard for about nine years, I believe I can add a real and unique perspective to the Harbor Commission. I'm fully aware that it is a volunteer position. I am currently a son of the American Legion here in Newport Harbor and volunteer two to five times a week between three, six hours or longer, depending on the event. Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Fourth of July are some of the big ones, along with sailing for the blind and paddle boarding with a handicap, which is where we have a big wheelchair strapped to a gigantic paddle board and they paddle around the harbor. And let's see, it's just very rewarding to me to see the expression on their face when they realize they can do other things water related. and of course our biggest event fundraiser, the five consecutive days of the Christmas Boat Parade. I also want to mention I've been nominated and accepted a position on the Sons Board for the upcoming election this July, and so far I'm running unopposed. It's not the most desirable position, but it helps out, and I believe in giving back to organizations and causes that are bigger than myself. I do understand what work it entails, the time, the commitment needed to be a good, effective, dependable, and productive volunteer. I also have extensive international sailing, boating background from Mexico, the Philippines, Africa, Puerto Rico, Exuma, Bahamas, with more locations coming up hopefully. I also do part-time boat service and repair. You have to stay active, involved, and engaged to keep your mind sharp. I need all the help I can get. Thank you for your time, and I'm looking forward to your appointment of me as part of the Harbor Commission staff. I'm sure you'll be very satisfied with my determination, effectiveness, problem solving skills, with skills thinking outside of the box. I ran a plastic company for 25 years as CEO, and my motto was and has always been, everybody wins. It's good for you, it's good for me, it's good for us all. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, my name is Laura Curran. So as everyone knows, my favorite park at Newport is Civic Center Park and Sculpture Garden. But last Friday, I got to spend three and a half hours at Marina Park because the fire department, CERT, police department, the harbor department organized a mass casualty incident drill. So how many of you have been to a CERT training or are CERT trained? So you've been part of some of the drills. I encourage all of you to participate in the CERT training because once you're trained and whether you're in the adult program or the teen program, there are additional trainings. So this year, the trainings have included being on a Friday afternoon at the lifeguard station down at the pier with great coffee and donuts, CERT also follows the coffee and donut trend, and learning about floods and how to build a barrier for floods and learning that you should not go in the water necessarily to save people when there's a flood because it could create your own danger. but the mass casualty incident was really interesting and I laud the fire department the police department the harbor department and the Huntington Beach Police Department who participated because it was a joint effort where they talked about triaging between green yellow red conditions and they really helped us as volunteers understand how they manage the command situation and how they manage their communications and So I want to share with you that we are in a good situation as far as the expansion of the CERT program. So David Gibson and Mr. Matthew Miniker are now running that program. And they're expanding the program. And we're seeing growth. And I ask you to continue to support that and encourage residents who are interested in CERT to sign up. And then you can have not only the cool green vest, can wear with pride you'll get your head you'll get a hard hat gloves a range of equipment that everyone wants to have in their car so thank you for supporting cert and hope to see you all out at a cert drill in the future thank you any other speakers thank you my name is chase wickersham

I've been a homeowner in Corona Del Mar for 38 years.

And I'm also a member of the Harborview Broadmoor Community Association, which is the HOA directly across MacArthur facing the city hall. uh... last march on the six i was informed of the daily pilot article about the planning commission's unanimous vote to approve these two huge towers on the edwards big ed uh... on the edwards big newport theater property i wasn't surprised that towers are going to be built there i was surprised the size of the towers at 270 plus feet. I've been talking to my neighbors about that. Most of my neighbors were surprised that there was not a public hearing. Most were upset that their views will be affected. And they didn't think there was anything they could do about it. On March 10th, the City Council voted to evaluate a new police facility in the Civic Center Park. Without any consideration or any other locations, I want to thank Robin Grant for being the dissenting vote on that. Again, my neighbors were concerned, not so much that the building's going to be built, but they didn't know anything about it. They're curious about the height. They want to know if there's a heliport. They want to know whether there's fuel storage requirements. And then, of course, the open issue, the open space and the park issue is a serious consideration. Is it true that the council is actually considering selling the Santa Barbara site to a developer who could be entitled to build a 300-foot apartment building on it? That scares everybody in the neighborhood. I've also heard from my neighbors that the 100 block of Newport Center Drive, including the car wash site, is now to be developed with a 150 foot height limit instead of the original 60 feet. Will there be public hearings for that? We'd like the residents to be involved in that discussion. Apparently, a city council has decided to transform Newport Center into something like Century City in Los Angeles. Unlike Century City, there are homes built around Newport Center where the views are critical to the value of the property. And the three HOAs facing MacArthur and the City Hall have a number of new residents in them that I'm sure are very concerned about these values and whether the values are going to be threatened. In addition, the decisions to build these large towers in Newport Center will significantly increase traffic density and will affect the basic culture of Newport Beach, which drew most of us here in the first place. I came here because it was a beach community, not a financial center with expensive high-rise condos. And I hope that the City Council will allow some public participation in this discussion and not do it behind closed doors. I really think there needs to be further discussion with residents, and I'm hoping that Ms. Kleinman will sit down with the HOAs that are directly facing MacArthur. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers? Could you use the microphone, please? Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm Cynthia Howard. I know some of you from previous years of experience. I've been a resident of Newport Beach, Corona Del Mar my entire life, raised our children here. We're fortunate enough they're still here. I came today just to listen, to see what might be said regarding the community input regarding the construction of the two towers. I came to support people who take time out of their day to voice a consideration and concern that the whole community is talking about. You contemplated fundamentally altering the character and nature of our community without public input. We have an opportunity on the ballot to talk about green light in November, and these actions are taking place prior to the vote. Many years ago, the community rallied and defeated what was proposed as a museum house. That was much more limited in scope project. That was defeated. The public congratulated themselves. We went on and said, yes, the public was heard. We spoke, we were heard, you listened, and it went away. Our payback for that is not a 11 story museum house. It is a 22 story double tower and another 300 foot tower down very adjacent to where the museum house was to originally been located So it doesn't seem that you've been listening to us as a community. I'm here as a resident of Irvine Terrace You're hearing from HOA in Harborview Hills Mayor Kleiman, you represent us. I know we haven't seen you at our Homeowners Association meetings yet, but I expect you'll be there and you've certainly been invited. And I just would like to say that there has not been full public disclosure. I came to support people who I overheard were going to speak to this issue. And I wanted to hear, just listen. I don't have prepared remarks because I'm not the official representative. I can be made the official representative of Irvine Terrace if I choose to be, but You know you guys have the issues you know you need to come access the community and I'm here today to support community members that take time out of their day to speak to these most important essential issues. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Any other comments. Okay, now is the time for council announcements, oral reports from council members on committee activities and the time for council members to request an item be placed on a future agenda. Council Member Wiegand, do you have any announcements or reports?

None this evening.

Council Member Bartow? No report. Council Member Grant? Named, no report. Council Member Weber?

None.

Council Member Stapleton?

I have none.

Mayor Pro Tem Blum?

Wow. I have none.

And I will just note that we have an aviation committee meeting coming up on April 27th at 5 p.m. right here at City Hall. Madam Clerk, would you please read the notice regarding public comments on consent calendar?

This is a time in which council members may pull items from the consent calendar for discussion, items 1 through 11. Public comments are also invited on consent calendar items. Speakers must limit comments to three minutes. Before speaking, please state your name for the record. If any item is removed from the consent calendar by a council member, members of the public are invited to speak on each item for up to three minutes per item. All matters listed on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and will be all enacted by one motion in the form listed below. Council members have received detailed staff reports on each of the items recommending an action. There will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time the City Council votes on the motion unless members of the City Council request specific items to be discussed and or removed from the consent calendar for separate action.

Council Member Weyand, do you have any items to pull from the consent calendar or conflicts to announce related to items one through 11?

No, I do not.

Council Member Bartow? No, I do not. Council Member Grant? None. Council Member Weber? None. Council Member Stapleton?

No conflict. Just want to note that on item 10, I am a board member of the Newport Beach Foundation.

Mayor Pro Tem Blum?

I have none.

I too do not have a conflict, but I am also an advisory board member for the Newport Beach Foundation on item number 10. Are there any members of the public who would like to speak on the consent calendar?

Adam Leverins, as far as consent item seven, it's a lease amendment for a suite at the city property at 1201 Dove Street. As I understand it, it's for a term of five years for a present tenant, and they have the assurance from the city that no construction would begin there until after the natural expiration of the lease. As you recall, that property was acquired with the intent that it be a police station location at some point in the future. I believe for $30 million. And if the city is issuing five-year leases to tenants, it kind of seems like that has been removed from consideration for a location for a new police station, which is kind of reflective of what was voted on at a previous meeting. But there's concern again that, what, $1.5 million is being spent to look at one site that a whole lot of people disapprove of. I imagine you've all been following the letters to the editor and the news items and whatnot. And to focus on one site that clearly is not very popular, if this is a way to exclude another site that was originally intended for a police station, that just looks concerning to people. And I hope you recognize that. Thank you.

Any other comments on consent?

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name again is Jim Mosher. I too am concerned about item number seven, which is extending for five years a lease at the property that we might be wanting to use as a new police headquarters. The staff report says that the approval includes a waiver of relocation assistance, but apparently at the end of the term. And so I would think you and the public would both want assurance that this is not in any way inhibiting what the council can do between now and 2030 with that property. Are we making promises that we are not going to do something during that time? And if so, why would we be doing that? It seems to be reducing our flexibility. And the main item I wanted to comment on though is item 10, which apparently two of you have an interest in. And since you don't read the title of the items, this is a donation of a plaque commemorating the our nation's 250th anniversary, which is being donated generously by the Newport Foundation and would go in one of our city parks. It's not clear from the motion that is here on the consent calendar or even from the staff report that in order to accept this donation, the city council has to waive its policy, which it established by resolution. not too long ago, and it violates the policy in two respects. One is we don't honor donations with plaques anymore because the city was having a problem with that. And second, even if we do have a donation, we only guarantee their maintenance for 10 years. And in this one, the agreement is promising that the city will maintain this for next 100 years. But the main issue I have with this when I read the plaque and when I read the one that was there for the bicentennial as well, they seem to be perpetually honoring the donor as much as they are commemorating what they're supposed to commemorate. And I would think if we want to be in keeping with our policy, we would accept this generous donation from the Newport Beach Foundation But they would be recognized as your policy requires just by a certificate thanking them for doing this. And in the public spirit, they are donating a plaque that would say the city of Newport Beach is honoring the 250th anniversary of our city. We're the citizens of Newport Beach. But I don't think it's appropriate to be honoring the donor as much as the event. Thank you.

Thank you. OK, we'll bring it back up here. Do I have a motion?

Yeah, Madam Mayor, I have a motion notating the changes to the minutes and that both Councilmember Stapleton and Mayor Kleinman are board members regarding item 10.

I have a motion. Do I have a second? I'll second. Councilmember Stapleton seconds. Let's go ahead and vote.

Motion carried by unanimous vote.

We will now move on to public hearing. Item number 12 is an appeal of the Acacia Atrium Medical Condominium Conversion Project at 20280 and 20312 Acacia Street. Do any council members have a conflict they would like to announce or have had any ex parte communications related to this matter? Councilmember Wiegand.

No, I did not have any.

Councilmember Bartow. No, I did not. Councilmember Grant. No ex-party communications regarding this appeal. Councilmember Weber.

No, I did not.

Councilmember Stapleton.

No communication.

Mayor Potem Blum.

I've had no communications regarding this matter, but I did receive a campaign donation, so I will recuse under an abundance of caution.

and I had a very brief conversation with the applicant and consultant, essentially just about the description of the project and the fact that it was coming before us. Mr. Jurgis, do we have a staff report?

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THIS ITEM IS AN APPEAL OF THE APPLICANT'S PROJECT, WHICH IS A CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION OFF ACASIA STREET. THEY'RE APPEALING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION ON THE CONVERSION. WE DO HAVE A STAFF PRESENTATION. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TURN IT OVER TO OSCAR ORSI WHO WILL GIVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE ALSO.

Thank you, City Manager Jurgis. Oscar Orozco here with the Planning Division, presenting the Acacia Atrium Medical Office Condominiums Appeal. The project site, as previously mentioned, is at 20280 and 20312 Acacia Street, as depicted in this aerial image. The existing site is comprised of an existing three-story office building, approximating 27,000 square feet. It is developed with a surface parking lot of 108 parking spaces. Notably, there is a parking space depicted here in red towards the front of the property that will be converted to a turnaround parking space, or excuse me, a turnaround space for the purposes of improving circulation, but there will be 108 parking spaces as far as the supply goes. There's also a 5-foot street dedication located towards the front, and that's for the purposes of capturing the sidewalk. The original project that was presented to the Planning Commission at the request of the applicant was a conversion of a professional office building to a 100% medical office building. The project implementation required a tentative parcel map to create the 12-unit condominium subdivision, as well as a conditional use permit to establish the medical office use as required by the Santa Ana Heights specific plan, and a conditional use permit to waive 32 parking spaces, which is based off of the full 100% medical office parking rate. The project also triggered the requirement to process a traffic study, which is due to the fact that the project would have increased the average daily trips by more than 300 daily trips. THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED AND DENIED THE PROJECT AT THE NOVEMBER 20, 2025 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OUTLINED A FEW KEY CONCERNS OVER THE PROJECT REQUEST. THOSE ARE DEPICTED HERE. THE FIRST OF WHICH WOULD BE THE PERCENTAGE OF THE PARKING SPACE THAT WERE BEING REQUESTED TO BE WAIVED. SO AS PROPOSED THE PARKING OR THE REQUEST WOULD HAVE BEEN FOR 22.8% PARKING WAIVER OF THE OVERALL AND THE PROJECT DID NOT INCLUDE ANY SORT OF ALTERNATIVES SUCH AS A PARKING STRUCTURE OR LIFT SYSTEM TO OFFSET THE REQUEST OR REQUIRED PARKING. THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO CITED THE CONCERN OVER MANAGEMENT OF PARKING AND ENFORCEMENT OF PARKING RELATED MATTERS. THEY CITED CHALLENGES WITH SEPARATE OWNERSHIP GOING FROM AN INDIVIDUAL SINGLE OWNER TO SEPARATION OF 12 OWNERS AND THE DIFFICULTIES WITH ENFORCING ANY SORT OF PARKING RELATED ISSUES THAT MAY HAVE COME FROM THE APPROVAL OF THE WAIVER. In addition, the original project did not include a contingency plan, so any sort of like backup plan should the site require more parking. They highlighted that as a concern. And then lastly, just the precedent that would be set by approving such a large parking waiver at the 22.8%, which they found to be inconsistent with some of their past approvals for medical office conversions. THE APPLICANT SUBSEQUENTLY APPEALED THE DECISION BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITING THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID NOT IDENTIFY THE REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR SUPPORTIVE DENIAL ON THE CONDOMINIUM SUBDIVISION MAP AS WELL AS DENIED THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BASED ON LACK OF INFORMATION DESPITE EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATING THAT THE ORIGINAL PROJECT MET THE REQUIREMENTS. Since the appeal, the applicant has voluntarily revised their project to help alleviate and directly address some of the comments and concerns that were outlined by the Planning Commission. THIS TABLE DEPICTS THE ORIGINAL PROJECT THAT WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AS WELL AS THE REVISED PROJECT THAT IS NOW BEING PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY. SO THE ORIGINAL PROJECT AS MENTIONED WAS A FULL 100% MEDICAL OFFICE CONVERSION WHICH YIELDED A TOTAL PARKING REQUIREMENT OF 140 SPACES AND DUE TO THE 108 SPACES THAT EXIST WOULD HAVE REQUIRED BASED OFF THE REQUEST 32 SPACE PARKING WAIVER. THIS WAS SUPPORTED BY A STUDY THAT WAS PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT WITH A VERY NARROW MARGIN. The project also included the conversion of one space into a rideshare space such as uber and lyft pickup drop-off on-site Now the revised project as presented today reduces the overall request of the 100% medical office down to 67% medical office and the remaining component of the office building would be dedicated for professional office use and outpatient surgery and I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT OUT PATIENT SURGERY IS NOT CONSIDERED MEDICAL OFFICE BY THE MUNICIPAL CODE. IT'S A SEPARATE LAND USE WITH ITS OWN PARKING REQUIREMENTS WHICH EQUATE TO THAT OF A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. WITH THE REVISED AND REDUCTION IN THE OVERALL MEDICAL REQUEST, THE OVERALL PARKING DROPS FROM THE 140 SPACES THAT WERE ORIGINALLY REQUIRED TO 126 WHICH IS NOW AN 18 SPACE PARKING SPACE WAIVER REQUEST OR 14.2%. THE PROJECT CONTINUES TO INCLUDE THE ONE SPACE TO BE CONVERTED INTO A RIDESHARE PICKUP DROP OFF SPACE BUT ALSO NOW AND VERY IMPORTANT TO KNOW IS THAT THE APPLICANT IS ALSO NOW PROVIDING AND PROPOSING A VALLEY PLAN AS PART OF THEIR PROJECT AS KIND OF THAT BACK UP SHOULD THERE BE A CONCERN OVER PARKING ONCE THE BUILDING BECOMES FULLY OCCUPANT. THE VALLEY PLAN AS MENTIONED HERE WAS REVIEWED BY OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND IS DEPICTED ON THIS MAP HERE. IT WAS STRATEGICALLY LOCATED TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE PARCEL TO ENSURE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SPACES AS WELL AS ENSURING THAT THE SITE WOULD STILL BE USABLE FOR PATRONS OF THE BUILDING AS A METHOD OF SELF-PARKING AND NOT DETERRING THOSE USERS. THE INCREASE IN PARKING SUPPLY WITH THE ADDITIONAL VALLEY AREA which is 14 spaces increases the overall supply to a total of 122 spaces which is only four spaces shy of the total 126 parking spaces that are required With that being said, the revisions being made, or having been made by the applicants, staff believes are addressing the appeal, or excuse me, addressing the concerns made by the Planning Commission for the appeal. More specifically, the percentage of the parking spaces being waived has now significantly been reduced down to almost, or a little less than half of the original request. The project also now includes management tools and enforcement tools for staff to be able to ensure that should there be a parking deficit at full occupancy, there is a means and methods to address via the valet plan. And then lastly, the concerns over precedent by the Planning Commission are addressed via ensuring that this waiver is a lot closer in line at the 14.4, or excuse me, 14.2% waiver to other projects that the Planning Commission have previously approved. With that being said, this concludes my presentation. I am available for questions. We also have city traffic engineer Kevin Riley available for questions relating to parking, and the applicant also has a presentation available for you.

Great, thank you. Do any council members have any questions for staff before I bring up the appellant? Council Member Wiegand?

Yeah, on the valet plan, is there a specific time of day that that must be implemented, like a certain window, or is it supposed to be all hours of business operation?

THANK YOU. THE VALLEY PLAN IS CURRENTLY CONDITIONED IN THE PROJECT AS BEING A METHOD FOR IMPLEMENTATION SHOULD THERE BE AN IDENTIFIED DEFICIT ON THE PROPERTY, AND IT WOULD BE CONTIGENED UPON THE FULL DAY. THERE WOULDN'T BE A SPECIFIC HOURS AFTER HOURS OR WHAT HAVE YOU, IT WOULD BE THE FULL DAY.

I wasn't going to ask a question yet, but I will since you brought up the valet plan. I'm interested. So the valet plan is a contingency plan, which I think is great. A lot of times we consider things and we think, well, if it doesn't work, we'll change it. So it sounds like there's a good backup, and I appreciate that. I'm just wondering, as far as the valet plan goes, how does it attach to the properties? Is it something that's you know, typically there'd be something recorded on the property or how does, you know, if this property is sold, um, and you know, obviously we get a comfort level with the project applicant now, but in future times, if the project is sold and continues to, and has an issue later down the road, how do we implement, how do we enforce that parking agreement?

Yes, good evening. Council Member Grant, Jaime Murillo, your Community Development Director. And so with this condition, it's applied to the entitlements for the overall project approval. It runs with the land, so it's part of their vested land use right. But we'll always be able to go back and enforce that condition if there's ever a need in the future.

Okay, great.

That was my question. Okay, we'll go ahead and bring up the appellants.

Good evening, Council. My name is Patrick Strader from Starpoint Ventures. I'm here representing CGM, the developer and owner of the property. We have a presentation, but I think I'm going to skip it unless there are any specific questions. I just want to take you back to Planning Commission had some concerns at the original project, but your staff has been fantastic, as you all know. HAIME AND OSCAR HAVE REALLY BEEN COLLABORATIVE SINCE THAT PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING. TWO OF THE UNITS WERE DROPPED FROM MEDICAL TO STANDARD OFFICE. TO THE QUESTIONS ABOUT VALE, CGM WILL MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP OF THIS. SURE, IT COULD SELL IN THE FUTURE. as planning director stated, it would run with the property. The reason the valet is a potential condition is as the units are sold, the condo units, there will be continued analysis of the parking needs. So without knowing who the exact doctors are that will be in each space, it's hard to forecast what the parking needs will be. But as it fills up and as they continue to analyze it, they will continue to come back and report to city staff and implement the valet parking if necessary. And as we were going through this, I actually had to go over to pick up my wife from a colonoscopy appointment over across from Hogue. And they have the exact same valet situation there in the buildings right across the street from Hogue. So I got to see it work firsthand. It was actually pretty helpful. That parking lot is very tiny for the number of people coming in that that specific center all day long. They're just kind of rotating in every 30 minutes for colonoscopies. So until we know in this center who the actual doctors are, it's impossible to kind of forecast what the parking needs would be. But Planning Commission had some serious concerns about the nine units. It's been dropped to seven. It didn't have the valet parking CONDITION ON IT AS AN ALTERNATIVE AT PLANNING. I'VE SPOKEN TO THE COMMISSIONERS THAT HAD CONCERN AND EXPLAINED TO THEM WHAT WE'VE DONE AND THEY NO LONGER HAVE THAT CONCERN. I WAS WORRIED THEY MIGHT COME AND SPEAK AGAINST THE PROJECT IF THEY DID. BUT THEY SEEM TO BE FINE WITH THE COMPROMISE. STAFF HAS BEEN INCREDIBLE AT GETTING TO THIS POINT. in the presentation that we prepared it talks about all of the work that they've done on the exterior of the building to beautify it a couple million dollars worth of work it also talks about the studies that the parking consultant looked at at other buildings but unless you guys have specific questions i won't waste your time on that it's here if you need any of it project owner is here and the rest of the team is here if you guys have any specific questions but thank you very much for hearing the appeal tonight thank you okay are there any questions for the appellant

I see none. We'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Are there any comments on this item?

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, as I think you know by now, my name is Jim Mosher. It seems to me, since the project has been modified to address concerns of the Planning Commission, it probably would have been more appropriately sent back to the Planning Commission to see if they still have problems with it, rather than treat it as an appeal. Mr. Strater says that they don't. I don't know if that's true or not. But the comment I wanted to make is, I don't know if you've looked carefully at the agenda packet, but if you look at page 757, it's the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting. There was only one speaker at the Planning Commission meeting, and that was the co-founder of a company that owns another office building at 3300 Irvine Avenue. And he thought this applicant was being treated differently than he had been treated. And he was wondering if what was before the Planning Commission had been approved by the Planning Commission, the waiver there and other concessions would apply retroactively to his project. You now have a different application before you. But you might ask of staff whether this party who testified at the Planning Commission meeting, would they be treated differently? Would he still have a reason to ask if he could be retroactively given the same concessions that this applicant is being given? We're told by the staff that it's consistent with past precedent. When it was before the Planning Commission, this person thought it was not the same way that they had been treated. Is this any different than the way that other applicant was treated? I think that's an important question. Thank you.

Thank you.

THE CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS BRETT. I'M HOPING TO BE ONE OF THE CONDO OWNERS IN THIS BUILDING. MY PARENTS STARTED THE PRACTICE HERE 47 YEARS AGO. I JOINED THEM 20 YEARS AGO. MY DAD SHORTLY RETIRED A YEAR AND A HALF AGO. And we've been fortunate to outgrow our space and looking for areas to move to. And there are not a lot of medical buildings out. And this was a beautiful building, newly worked on and upgraded. And I just encourage the passing there is just another spot for serving our growing population in the area and things like that. And the sellers has been helpful for me as a first time potential buyer coming in like that. So again, I encourage the passing of this resolution. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers on this item? With that, I will close the public hearing. Are there any other?

questions or comments for um just a couple more clarifications just for the record so um not that i don't think it was particularly clear but maybe just a few more items i think um the chi i understand mr um um mr mosher's comment about um going back to the planning commission but here we are today and this is our hearing so you know we'll push forward through it and i appreciate all the work that the planning commission did and then all of the work that the applicant did to um make sure that there was a sufficient response and it appears that we're getting closer if not across the finish line just a few things for the record so when we change the use from all medical to I guess partial medical and partial office slash surgery center it's fairly obvious but I'll just confirm that it reduces the amount of parking necessary presumably the office slash Surge Center has a lower parking requirement because that's what's happening here. I mean, I think we were implying that. And I had had a conversation with the city manager just earlier today. I just want to confirm the street parking around there. It's not restricted parking. There is overflow. I don't want to call it overflow, but there is street parking in the vicinity as well.

Yeah, there's some street parking available in that vicinity.

And we haven't had any concerns from the, other than maybe there was one question that was raised from one adjacent property owner perhaps. There's not really been a lot of concern about the over parking on the street at this juncture?

That's correct. We're in good shape. With this application, we've not heard any concerns regarding the impacts to on street parking.

Okay. I appreciate you clarifying the record.

Okay, seeing no other questions or comments, I will, given the accommodations that the appellant has made and seemingly some support from staff on those changes, we'll move the item for approval. Do I have a second? Second from Council Member Weber. Let's go ahead and vote.

Motion carried unanimously and Mayor Pro Tem Blum recused.

Madam Clerk, please read the statement on motions for reconsideration.

A motion to reconsider the vote on any action taken by the City Council at either this meeting or the previous meeting may be made only by one of the council members who voted with the prevailing side.

Are there any motions for reconsideration? Hearing none, we'll move on to closed session. Do any council members have a conflict to announce related to closed session?

Yeah, I do, if I can find it. They're going to close session items involving the holidays in the Walgreens why don't have a financial conflict, I'm going to recuse myself out of the abundance out of an abundance of caution because when I was the mayor. I provided a state of the city update that one of the properties that issue in the litigation which could because construed as a creating a bias.

Thank you. Are there any comments from the public on closed session. Seeing none, Mr. Harp, please announce our closed session items.

Thank you very much. The City Council will adjourn to closed session to meet with legal counsel regarding three existing litigation matters titled Adam Holliday versus Newport Beach, Robert Wellborn versus Newport Beach, and Brian McDonough versus Newport Beach. Thank you.

We are adjourned to closed session.

Thank you.

Yeah, but that's what

I can't. But then...

Yeah. And the first time. Clothes to be comfortable.

Mr. Harp, is there a closed session report?

Thank you. There is no closed session report this evening.

With that, we are adjourned.