HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 - Reconsideration of the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)Q �EwPpRT
CITY OF
s NEWPORT BEACH
`q44:09 City Council Staff Report
October 25, 2022
Agenda Item No. 15
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232,
sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: David Lee, Associate Planner, dlee@newportbeachca.gov
PHONE: 949-644-3225
TITLE: Ordinance Nos. 2022-19 and 2022-20: Reconsideration of the Tennis
Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)
h\ 3� d:7±Tip 6
At its September 27, 2022, meeting, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the
Tennis Club at Newport Beach project and then remanded the project to the Planning
Commission for further review by including pickleball courts instead of tennis courts. At
the October 11, 2022 meeting, City Council approved a motion to reconsider the project
at the October 25, 2022 City Council meeting.
For the City Council's reconsideration is the adoption of three resolutions for
environmental clearance and planning applications for the project, and the introduction of
two ordinances to amend the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
Development Plan and approval of a second amendment to the approved project's
development agreement. If approved, the item will return to the City Council on
November 15, 2022, for the second reading and adoption of the two ordinances. The
requested local coastal program amendment (Title 21 Amendment) will not become
effective until approval by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) and adoption.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Conduct a public hearing;
b) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-65, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Adopting an Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. ND2010-008 for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Located at 1602 East Coast
Highway (PA2021-260);
c) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-66, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Approving a General Plan Amendment, Amendment to Major Site
Development Review No. SD2011-002, Amendment to Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2017-039, Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-003, and
Amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004 for the Tennis Club at Newport
Beach Located at 1602 East Coast Highway (PA2021-260);
15-1
Ordinance Nos. 2022-19 and 2022-20: Reconsideration of the Tennis Club at
Newport Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)
October 25, 2022
Page 2
d) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-67, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Authorizing Submittal of a Local Coastal Program Amendment to
the California Coastal Commission to Amend the Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community Development Plan (PC-47) for the Tennis Club Located at
1602 East Coast Highway (PA2021-260);
e) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, and introduce Ordinance
No. 2022-19, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach,
California, Approving an Amendment to the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community Development Plan (PC-47) for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Located
at 1602 East Coast Highway (PA2021-260), and pass on to second reading on
November 15, 2022; and
f) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, and introduce Ordinance
No. 2022-20, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach,
California, Approving the Second Amendment to the Development Agreement
(DA2008-001) for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Located at 1602 East Coast
Highway (PA2021-260), and pass on to second reading on November 15, 2022.
DISCUSSION:
The recommended actions would approve the applicant's requested amendments that do
not include pickleball. Staff has not evaluated the project for pickleball, and parking, traffic
and noise are issues that would need to be analyzed as part of the environmental review
process. Therefore, pickleball cannot be approved as part of the project and requires an
amended project application and further analysis prior to consideration.
The September 27, 2022, City Council staff report is attached with a complete summary
and analysis of the Proposed Project that does not include pickleball and related
entitlement findings (Attachment F).
NOTICING:
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property
within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and
waterways) including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days
before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code. Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which
was posted at City Hall and on the City website.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A
—Resolution No. 2022-65
Attachment B
—Resolution No. 2022-66
Attachment C —
Resolution No. 2022-67
Attachment D
—Ordinance No. 2022-19
Attachment E
—Ordinance No. 2022-20
Attachment F
— City Council Staff Report, Dated September 27, 2022
Attachment G
— City Council Minutes, Dated September 27, 2022
Attachment H
—Correspondence
15-2
Attachment A
Resolution No. 2022-65
15-3
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-65
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN
ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
NO. ND2010-008 FOR THE TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT
BEACH LOCATED AT 1602 EAST COAST HIGHWAY
(PA2021-260)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the
Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and
all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the
State of California;
WHEREAS, in 2012, the City Council approved an application by Golf Realty Fund,
Managing Owner ("Applicant") for the reconstruction of the 3,725-square-foot tennis
clubhouse, a reduction of tennis courts from 24 to seven courts, construction of a 27-room
boutique hotel with 9,700 square feet of ancillary uses, five single-family residential units,
and a development agreement for the property ("2012 Entitlements") located at 1602 East
Coast Highway, and legally described as Parcels A, B, C, and D of Parcel Map No. 2016-
151 (commonly referred as the "Tennis Club Site" or "Property");
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2018, the Zoning Administrator approved Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2017-039, authorizing the redevelopment of the Property
consistent with the 2012 Entitlements (2012 Entitlements and Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2017-039 are collectively referred to as the "Approved Project");
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Approved Project to
allow an increase in the number of future tennis courts from seven to eight, an increase in
the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41, an increase to the gross floor area of
ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, three attached condominium units and two single-
family residences in -lieu of five single-family residences, and an amendment to the 2012
Development Agreement to account for the aforementioned changes to the Approved
Project along with extending the term for an additional 10 years ("Project");
15-4
Resolution No. 2022-65
Page 2 of 8
WHEREAS, the following approvals are requested or required in order to
implement the Project:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") — An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of Table
LU2 of the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element to document
the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms authorized by City Council
Resolution No. 2012-10, and the addition of 14 hotel rooms for a total of 41 rooms
and one tennis courts for a total of eight tennis courts;
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment ("LCPA") — An
amendment to Section 21.26.055(S)(2) (Planned Community Coastal Zoning
District Development Standards, Newport Beach Country Club (PC-47, Tennis
Club) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") to modify the permitted
uses and development standards allowed on the Property;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment ("PCDP Amendment") —An
amendment to Planned Community Development Plan No. 47 (Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use regulations and
development standards on the Property;
• Major Site Development Permit Amendment ("SDA") — An amendment to the
existing site development review in accordance with PC-47 and Section
20.52.080 (Permit Review Procedures, Site Development Reviews) of the NBMC
for the construction of the Project;
• Coastal Development Permit Amendment ("CDPA") — A coastal development
permit for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the Property,
and implementation of the Project;
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment ("VTMA") — An amendment to Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15347 pursuant to Title 19 (Subdivisions) of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") for a lot reduction created for the Approved
Project and inclusion of the condominium ownership;
• Limited Term Permit Amendment ("XP") — A limited term permit to allow
temporary use of structures during construction on the Property, pursuant to
NBMC Section 20.52.040;
15-5
Resolution No. 2022-65
Page 3 of 8
• Development Agreement Amendment ("DA") — A second amendment to the
Development Agreement (DA2008-001), between the Applicant and the City,
pursuant to Sections 15.45.020(A)(2)(c) (Buildings and Construction,
Development Agreements Required, Development Agreement Required) and
15.45.070 (Buildings and Constructions, Development Agreements,
Amend ment/Cancellation) of the NBMC, which would provide vested rights to
develop the Project for an additional 10 years and provide negotiated public
benefits to the City; and
• Addendum to previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-
008 (SCH2O10091052) ("Addendum") — Pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H3/PR) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan and is located within
the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Zoning District;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H/PR) by the Coastal Land Use Plan and is located within the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Coastal Zone District;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8,
2022, in the City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California, at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project. A notice of
time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with California
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning Community
District Procedures), 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 hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2022-022 (5 ayes, 1 absent, 1 recusal) recommending approval of the Project to the
City Council;
15-6
Resolution No. 2022-65
Page 4 of 8
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 27, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map
Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public Hearings) and
21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to,
and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the City Council remanded the Project to the Planning
Commission on a future date by a majority vote (6 ayes, 1 nays);
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council
adopted a motion for reconsideration of the Project by a majority vote (4 ayes, 3 nays);
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public heading on October 25, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map
Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public Hearings) and
21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to,
and considered by, the City Council at this hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows:
Section 1: On March 27, 2012, the Newport Beach City Council approved
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) and an Errata to
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 (together referred to as "MND") that
addressed the potential environmental effects associated with the Approved Project. The
MND was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act as set
forth in Section 21000 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code, the State CEQA
Guidelines set forth in Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations,
("CEQA Guidelines"), and City Council Policy K-3. The MND is attached hereto as Exhibit
"A" and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code
and Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, when a negative declaration adopted for a
project, no subsequent negative declaration 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:
15-7
Resolution No. 2022-65
Page 5 of 8
a. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major
revisions of the previous negative declaration 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
negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects; or
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 negative declaration 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 measure or alternative; 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 measure or
alternative.
15-8
Resolution No. 2022-65
Page 6 of 8
Section 3: Although the Project necessitates an amendment to the General
Plan due to the increased number of hotel rooms and tennis courts, there are no proposed
changes to the land uses permitted per the General Plan land use designation.
Additionally, based on the changes associated with the Project, there are no conditions
that would require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental MND. As a result, an
Addendum to the MND was prepared pursuant to Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and
Negative Declarations) and 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration) of the
CEQA Guidelines.
Section 4: The following environmental topics were analyzed for the Project:
Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and
Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and
Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services,
Recreation, Transportation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. The Addendum
includes analysis of new topics that were not included in the previous MND; specifically,
it includes a new energy section and a new wildfire section. These additional analyses
are appropriate for inclusion in the Addendum, but do not result in new or increased
significant impacts that would require preparation of a subsequent MND pursuant to
Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Section 5: On the basis of the MND and entire environmental review record, the
additional tennis court, hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses, and conversion of three single-
family residences to condominium units will not result in any new significant impacts that
were not previously analyzed in the MND. The Addendum confirms and provides
substantial evidence that the potential impacts associated with this Project would either
be the same or less than those described in the MND, or as mitigated by applicable
mitigation measures in the MND. In addition, there are no 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 either the MND, nor
has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant
environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of
the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted MND is the appropriate
environmental document for the Project. In taking action to approve any of the requested
applications for the Project, the data presented in the MND, as augmented by the
Addendum for this Project, are considered as part of the record.
15-9
Resolution No. 2022-65
Page 7 of 8
Section 6: The Addendum to the MND, is hereby adopted by the City Council
given its analysis and conclusions. The Addendum to the MND and related referenced
documentation, constitute the administrative record upon which this decision was based,
are on file with the Planning Division, City Hall, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California.
Section 7: The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA
determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In
addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As
project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that
such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial
challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which
may be awarded to a successful challenger.
Section 8: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
Section 9: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
15-10
Resolution No. 2022-65
Page 8 of 8
Section 10: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 25t" day of October, 2022.
Kevin Muldoon
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Aaro C. Harp
City A tornev
Attachment(s): Exhibit A: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 and an
Errata to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008
(MND)
15-11
Exhibit "A"
Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 and an Errata to Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (MND)
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-
development/planning-division/projects-environmental-document-download-
aaae/environmental-document-download-Daae-arch
15-12
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 1
NNUMUMNOWNAwn
• 0 161 q0 I FAI OL•.::
1. Project Title: Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PA2005-140)
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Newport Beach
Planning Department
3300 Newport Boulevard,
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Contact Person and Phone Number: Rosalinh Ung, Planning Department
Rung@newportbeachca.gov
(949) 644-3208
4. Project Location: 1600-1602 East Coast Highway
Newport Beach, CA
5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Byron de Arakal
180 Newport Center Drive, Suite 219
Newport Beach, CA 92660
6. General Plan Designation: MU-H3 (Mixed Use Horizontal)
PR (Parks and Recreation)
7. Zoning: Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
8. Introduction:
The subject property is currently occupied by the Newport Beach Country Club (the "Golf Club") and The
Tennis Club formerly known as the Balboa Bay Racquet Club (the "Tennis Club"), which are located
within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC) District that was adopted in 1997 by
Ordinance No. 97-10. The Tennis Club and the Golf Club facilities total approximately 145 acres. The
adopted Land Use Element designates the Tennis Club site as Mixed Use — Horizontal 3 (MU-113). The
Golf Club is designated as Park and Recreation (PR). The applicant is proposing a Planned Community
Text adoption, Transfer of Development Rights, Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Coastal Development
Permit, and Development Agreement to implement the proposed project. A PC District Text was not
adopted when the PC District zoning was adopted in 1997. The proposed Planned Community Text is
intended to provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as a coordinated, cohesive,
comprehensive large-scale planning project as set forth in Chapter 20.35.010 of the Newport Beach
Zoning Code. The proposed Planned Community Text allows for limited mixed uses, including the private
Tennis Club, the private Golf Clubhouse, "The Bungalows" (a small boutique hotel consisting of twenty-
seven short-term visitor -serving units, a spa/fitness area, and concierge and guest meeting facilities), and
the Villas consist of five single -unit, semi -custom residential dwelling units.
9. Project Description:
Project Location
The subject property (refer to the Vicinity Map), encompasses approximately 145 acres adjacent to
Fashion Island in the City of Newport Beach. The site is generally bordered by East Coast Highway on
the south, Jamboree Road on the West, Santa Barbara Avenue and Newport Center on the north, and
Corporate Plaza West on the east and south.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 2
Existing Improvements
The Tennis Club presently consists of 24 tennis courts, a 3,725 square foot Tennis Clubhouse, and 125
surface parking spaces. The Golf Club presently consists of a 6,587-yard, championship 18-hole golf
course with returning nines and related practice and golf club facilities, a 23,460 square foot Golf
Clubhouse, golf cart storage barn (6,050 square feet), a greens keeper building (2,010 square feet),
men's and women's restroom facilities (630 square feet), a 180-square foot snack bar, and 140-square
foot starter shack. The Golf Clubhouse parking lot is located directly off East Coast Highway and
includes 420 surface parking spaces. Exhibit 1 illustrates the existing improvements.
Proposed Improvements
• The demolition of the existing Tennis Clubhouse and Golf Clubhouse;
• The construction of new Tennis Clubhouse and Golf Clubhouse;
• The construction of The Bungalows (a small boutique hotel consisting of twenty-seven
short-term visitor -serving units, a spa/fitness area, and concierge and guest meeting
facilities)'; and
• The construction of The Villas (five single-family residential dwelling units).
Table 1 provides a summary of the proposed project.
'All references to the "Bungalows" mean the small boutique hotel consisting of twenty-seven short-term visitor -
serving rental units, a spa/fitness area, and concierge and guest meeting facilities.
a
CONDOMINIUM
OFFICES
,
ggqNL/vF
N
�CgTCF
Fggq'�
a
\
BANK&OFFICES
,....,
' TENNIS CLUB
-3,725 SFs
OFFICES
GOLF CLUBHOUSE & ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
=32.470 SF s
G�fFYS1EElEII
� RETAIL NURSERY
OFFICES
IACUIC COAST HIGHWAY
wECEs
Exhibit 1
EXISTING USES
AERIAL MAP
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a r a s
EXHIBIT
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna Beach,CA 92651
949,767160 FAX 9493761560
1 OF 1
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 4
Existing Project
Proposed Project
Golf Clubhouse
Component
Floor Area (sq. ft.)pGreens
mponent
Floor Area (sq. ft.)
15 Floor Clubhouse
20,702
Clubhouse
18,069
"Floor Clubhouse
2,758
16,931
Total
23,460
35,000
Cart Barn
6,050
ra e
5,834
Snack Bar
180
ar
180
Restroom Facilities
630
Facilities
630
Greens Keeper
2,010
Kee er
2,010Starter
Shack
140
hack
140
Total
32,470
Total
43,794
Tennis Clubhouse & Courts
Component
Floor Area (sq. ft.)
Component
Floor Area (sq. ft.)
15 Floor Clubhouse
3,725
1S Floor Clubhouse
3,725
24 Courts
7 Courts
Total
3,725
Total
3,725
Bungalows
Component
Floor Area (sq. ft.)
Component
Floor Area (sq. ft.)
13 Golf Bungalows
N/A
14 Tennis Bungalows
N/A
Spa
7,490
Concierge & Guest
Meeting Facility
2,170
Total
9,6662
Villas
Component
Floor Area (sq. ft.)
Component
Floor Areas . ft.
5 SFR
N/A
Total
NIA
Building Heights
Component
Height (ft.)
Component
Height (ft.)
Golf Clubhouse
23'-9"
Golf Clubhouse
50
Tennis Clubhouse
Tennis Clubhouse
30
Villas
35
Bungalows
31
Cart Barn
12'-0"
Greens Keeper
18'-0"
Greens Keeper
18'-0
'Exempt from General Plan Development Limit —Ancillary to Golf Course
2Exempt from General Plan Development Limit — Ancillary to Hotel use
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 5
Each of the project components proposed for the Property is illustrated on Exhibit 2 and described below.
Tennis Clubhouse and Center Court
The Tennis Club portion of the project proposes seven tennis courts, six of which are existing,
plus a new stadium center court and construction of a new Tennis Clubhouse (3,725 square feet).
The existing Tennis Clubhouse is approximately 3,725 square feet with 24 tennis courts. Thirty-
eight (38) parking spaces are provided for the Tennis Clubhouse.
The Bungalows
As noted above, the proposed Bungalows consist of a small boutique hotel comprised of twenty-
seven (27) short-term visitor -serving units, a Concierge & Guest Meeting Facility, and The
Bungalow Spa. A total of 50 parking spaces is proposed for the Bungalows.
The Villas
Five (5) single-family residential dwelling units will be constructed adjacent to the Tennis Club
and 91h green of the golf course. These dwelling units will range in size from 2,201 square feet
(Plan A) to 5,297 square feet (Plan D). Twenty (20) parking spaces are proposed to
accommodate The Villas.
Golf Club Parking Lot and Private Hand Car Wash
The Golf Club Parking Lot and Entry will be redesigned to provide 300 on -site parking spaces. In
addition, an existing offsite Parking Agreement will continue to provide 554 parking spaces to
supplement the onsite Golf Club parking. The access easement that exists along the frontage of
PCH will be eliminated. In addition, a private hand car wash is also proposed within the parking
lot in the vicinity of Country Club Drive (refer to Exhibit 3). The area identified to accommodate
this project feature encompasses approximately 240 square feet (i.e., 12 feet wide and 20 feet
long). Use of the private hand car wash is limited to tennis and golf club members only.
Golf Clubhouse
The existing Golf Clubhouse will be demolished and a new Golf Clubhouse encompassing 40,834
square feet, including banquet/event facilities that can accommodate dining and special events
(e.g., weddings, banquets, etc.), will be constructed in its place. This clubhouse will include both
men's and women's locker rooms.
THE VILLAS A
i ra
THE GOLF CLUB 1 rr
J"Flu THE
BUNGALOWS
i 4
1
L. L.-_.
P AC�F IC COAST """N'A'
Exhibit 2
MASTER PLAN
• THE TENNIS CLUB
1 new stadium court
Tennis Clubhouse
• THE VILLAS
5 single family homes
• THE BUNGALOWS
27 guest rental units
• THE GOLF CLUB
NBCC
Planned Community
EXHIBIT
s t e a r n s
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna hach,CA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 3761560
1 OF I
COUNTRY
catch basin in
curb
6" wide X 2" high
concrete berm' peaestal switch
& timer
y zp, sandblasted
t g ti concrete paving
bronze linear slot
drain connected
to sewer
6" curb transitionmg
to 3" curb
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB
PRIVATE HAND
CAR WASH AREA
I '
I I
bronze linear slo
drain connected to
storm drain
Ct jJ8
DRIVE
is
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 8
Project Phasing — Tennis Club
The Tennis Club component of the proposed project will be implemented in four (4) construction and
demolition phases that are anticipated to occur over a period of approximately 38 months. The demolition
and construction activities of the Tennis Club component of the proposed project are identified and
described in Table 2.
Tennis Club Development Phasing
Duration
Phase
Description
(Months)
1
Construct Temporary Modular Clubhouse
1
Demolition
1
Construct The Villas (3), Private Street, New Tennis
14
2
Clubhouse and Parking Lots
Demolition
1
Construct Center Court and Bungalow Pool
3
3
Demolition
1
4
Construct Golf and Tennis Bungalows and Remaining
15
Villas
Total Schedule.
36
'Anticipated Start date is September 2011.
SOURCE: The Templeton Planning Group (July 2010)
The phasing plans for the Tennis club are related facilities are illustrated in Exhibit 4 through 10
�' � ssimxG
�. -.-= cosFcwxouss \�j
cu*s7oewe I T\ 1
�� mrnlilTilbl
ZZ
tn-
nnTrmp:rtl
PACIFIC LOW NIGxW AY — -----1--`
Exhibit 4
TENNIS CLUB
PHASEI- CONSTRUCTION
• Temporary Modular Tennis
Clubhouse (48'x6O')
LEGEND
❑ new building
❑ new sitework
❑ existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a r n s
ARCHITECTURE
500 B—dmy Laguna B—h,CA 92651
949 376 7160 - FAX 949 376 1560
JuN 10, xcs
1 of 7
hibit 5
TENNIS CLUB
PHASE I - DEMOLITION
* Tennis Club buildings
* 6 tennis courts
Portion of Tennis Club
parking lot
omit
4L
LEGEND
Existing area to be demolished
Existing structures (on property)
c�
1w
COAST"IOKWA
—j
NBCC
L P k anned Community
s t e a r n s 2 of
'PA ARCHITECTURE
500 B-d..y Laguna B—KCA 9256651
9493767160 FAX 949 3 76 10
THE VILLAS
\ pie r4E \
, C H E'
✓� OOIf CLU�IOUSF rE�E 1WnaCt6f
.4�VEOYFAREp4 �\
LCAIIt Ei0114GE r —' .lam �`\ �
l
�tj((liflfTT« �--'__. c-=' - J f __ '-r- �--r►c—et�io c?�sF x�swwer _ - y— --_� _
_ —
Exhibit 6
TENNIS CLUB
PHASEII- CONSTRUCTION
• The Villas
-3 single family homes
• private street from County Club
Drive to The Villas
• new Tennis Clubhouse &
parking lots
LEGEND
■ new building
❑ new sitework
existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
S t e a r n s 3of7
ARCHITECTURE
500 Br—Wd y Laguna B—h,CA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 376 1560
,uN M M
P
d1FEM
EJIIo
GULi%T.KOUSE
OMiMMOE / YY
` _
titlt�T f1111Rt1T1� f —
1
'a
CLU HOUSE �y 1
nffa
�f 11.11tf 1llI-9111
P►Clip
Exhibit 7
TENNIS CLUB
PHASE II - DEMOLITION
• 1 tennis court
• Remaining portion of previous
Tennis Club parking lot
*Temporary modular Tennis
Clubhouse
LEGEND
[; Existing area to be demolished
❑ Existing structures Ion property)
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a r n s
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna Beach,CA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 376 1550
July 10, 2M
n�
THE VILLAS
�F
4
• j \ A�� TENNIS
mnw ` a /
�' aa.auxou.c 7 4 / CLUBHOUSE
IIII
--� _ - Rat,
. � �-- --—PwtIP IC COASt NrGNYV AY - f
Exhibit 8
TENNIS CLUB
PHASE III - CONSTRUCTION
• Center Court
• Bungalow Pool
LEGEND
❑ new building
new sitework
`I existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a r a s 5of7
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna 8e h.CA 92651
9493767160 FAX 9493761SW
J0to. 20
THEVII;IKAS;
. P7
r�vr.Eoamx
rTxieAxu wnTm
�E.� FflAixcWALL
MITI.
egl�cwe..M
CART STOWS
7 /
1 = /
_ \
� IIIONwAr ___ -
-
. i ..r• � � xenn
Exhibit 9
TENNIS CLUB%NS
PHASE III - DEMOLITION
• 3 tennis courts
LEGEND
Existing area to be demolished
❑ Existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a r n s
ARCHITECTURE
500 emadwap Laguna 9gach,CA 92651
9493767160 FAX 949 376 1560
J.N 10. 2000
�. �, o
cAAtsTOAAeE GOLF
\,BUNGALOWS _---------
TE'iNIS
`Y
Ot
ao ;ps
Exhibit 10
TENNIS CLUB
PHASE IV - CONSTRUCTION
• new Golf Bungalows
13 botique hotel units
• new Tennis Bungalows
14 botique hotel units
• The Villas
2 single family homes
• Court 7
LEGEND
❑ new building
❑ new sitework
❑ existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
s t s r a s 7of7
ARCHeITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna Be h,. 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 376 1560
J.N 10. M
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 16
Project Phasing — Golf Clubhouse
The Golf Clubhouse component of the proposed project will be implemented in four (4) discrete
development phases. Although a definitive schedule has not been developed, demolition and
construction of this component are anticipated to occur over a period of approximately 34 months, as
described in Table 3.
Table 3
Golf Clubhouse Development Phasing
Duration
Phase
Description
(Months
1
Demolition
1
Construct East Side Parkin Lot and PCH Entr
4
2
Demolition
1
Construct West Side Parking Lot and Temporary Golf Club
6
Demolition
2
3
Construct New Golf Clubhouse
14
Demolition
2
4
Construct Greenskeeper Area and Golf Porte Cache and
Parkin
4
Total +heduie
34
'Start date to determined.
2Includes car wash.
SOURCE: The Templeton Planning Group (July 2010)
The phasing plans for the Golf club are related facilities are illustrated in Exhibit 11 through 18.
71
THEYI4�4S�
calm
� r
,
N1
eaFa@@xowE @ �i N ; CCU HOUSE I
Gilts .. VA
E ��
NUALUI I
i I� ice
@NW AY _
rot ,jam
—.,.
Exhibit 11
GOLF CLUB
PHASE I - DEMOLITION
• East side of existing Golf Clubhouse
parking lot
• Entry drive from PCH
LEGEND
Existing area to be demolished
❑ Existing structures Ion property)
NBCC
Planned Community
S t e a r n s 1of8
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna Onch,CA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 376 1560 —
Exhibit 12
GOLF CLUB
PHASE I - CONSTRUCTION
- East side of Golf Clubhouse
parking lot, restripe parking area
-X* at pone cochere
.11 Entry drive from PCH
THE V0,4Ai
A A
71
LEGEND
E] new building
110E F1 new sitework
A
Ej existing structures (an property)
11TIMIM11
------
ATENNIS'
� IR (VBUYGALOVVTTJII7 Itu Z�
Lo 33
IUM11111f XMIL
RIT11TIN8
QQ
'Acific c0A
NBCC
------ 01
Planned Community
s t e a r n s
ARCHITECTUREssr
500 Broadway Laguna B �&.CA 92551
949 37660 FAN49 3761560
0 ly
to
THE VI _
3f
A !
' F'Cl IMUS GOLF F q
�_Ta( J CMT CTOFADF/ \ �j��
\ 'rrrpppp��^u'
\ ��
�� / �, " fIZTfICCtIIDI[I)) (<� •��
��—,�, 1 � i�. ' � illlLL111TLQJl �IIIIj�
o i
rIIiTrlltml
mJJJ
I.
I z
�ntn1U
7,
i
=xhibit 13
GOLF CLUB?LANS
PHASE II - DEMOLITION
• West side of Golf Clubhouse
parking lot
LEGEND
Existing area to be demolished
❑ Existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a m s 3of6
ARCHITECTURE
Soo Broadway Laguna BIaoh,CA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 376 1560
�Y 'q''r it�� r•,., ,� .., RA �
. ✓. i THE VII;. /
r; �.
\�- �•i <1) Ern 1`I�.. /�+j, Z... �J
fit
NEFN 7
Exlsnwa , � o � \ "( �� �I % r h.` TENNIS
\ !�
BO cw•xou�E C HOUSE
xEH _ CMT LTOIIIWE
- !
TENIS
®0 ony U�T171'iCIJ�7.L iALOW
j'. 1/ /rI{rT CC[IDLCfC1T1Ii1� �lIllj!ILlTIll Q� a
�) `( �r)LrrL OI �U� ! !'r,. ,: L Ub�r�\!O` .�lj�,..,• r ;:.. 4.
_ w�
fi 14n( .
\S�fi1lZI]1 CP.TtLrLII. 711(1) 1
tE1111ffrIlll((1�11� _—�._ -
W1TIIIli/
--
nrr
�� tiMmrrllTn '—�� Zl11 '--1`� ------ 'r►clrlc cu�sr elaBw 4r
'�(r.I11111111I11rt! — `—
Exhibit 14
GOLF CLUB
PHASEII- CONSTRUCTION
• West side of Golf Club parking lot
• Temporary Golf Clubhouse
LEGEND
❑ new building
❑ new sitework
❑ existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
S t e a r n s
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna Beach, CA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 376 1560
December IC, lece
kr
Ta IyJ.f IS 411
g ` f p
w, THE VIIS:
TENNIS
co�uii Duff /•'f \ �� ) v r� -. CLUBHOUSES,
r�+FFn"/ CMTiTOM6E OOV CIU �Y U E{1 �TT��{ GOLF
.. lti m lLLLlL1
—�1 "BUNGALOWS
TENNIS
lt►I17f[ NGALOW
MIT]
SIll1TIlA IIllLC[LII[I �C11
J���1IIIItlTITI illlln[tTll� ,; nt� �olll I❑UUTIIITfIJII UT tf,ILL =II1r
Q-DI
_ -- --- -- -
-lplrrrtrrr—
co�sr xrexw�r —
's.J..�'=— - - —.
Exhibit 15
GOLF CLUB
PHASE III - DEMOLITION
• Golf Clubhouse
LEGEND
Existing area to be demolished
❑ Existing structures (on property)
NBCC
Planned Community
S t e a r n s 5of
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broa Y L.9— BeadtCA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 3761560
Exhibit 16
GOLF CLUB
PHASE III - CONSTRUCTION
• Golf Clubhouse
THE VILLAS
LEGEND
IL® new building
❑ new sitework
GOLF CLUBHOUSE ❑existing structures (on property)
ti t
• \ c C
,v
c ur cr0•Aae GOLF el O GOLF
rmm17 BUNGALOWS �� = A t9
TENNIS
TITIIITIIT1IlTi) n111n *--N AI cwe vmv • V,t. NGALO
'�I\TIIlYII �i
1 ,�,t� � r�.e�� ',�� 11L1]SiU [ill'fiilTrttl) 1 II[LIIf � L
- - %` ��� �TSS11Tli� ��� ���� • ' ' �%'�1Cllltlll— __-- �
I l' /(`y1T11Tu II11IllTI Jul.
— I11TI1TTIIT h✓NEICC
��
` ' li1TT111fTi11 /
[tliltin - - -
e Planned Community
AL
S t e a r n s 6 of 6
1 ARCHITECTURE
500 Bm cKvq Laguna Bead1,CA 92651
949 3767160 FAX 949 3 76 1560
Uec.mber 10,m
Exhibit 17
GOLF CLUB
PHASE IV - DEMOLITION
• Portion of Greenskeeper Area
-Temporary modular Golf Clubhouse
,. • Northern portion of Golf Clubhouse
>r
'� � -,� ,�j .�• „�" � Parking lot
1 c Ewe ;, ve IL
THE VILLAS
GOLF CLUBHOUSE "` ; ` 1 • ® LEGEND
I ,��• /
Existing area to be demolished
El Existing structures Ion property)
V
\\ y
�r
r
— - I ttrro(Fi i:� A • � ( i lv
Y
mt�L�OM�OE�] OOIECW O ~ GOLF - �� 1�_--� � � Y u
BUNGAL WS
nlll� �~ TENNIS
N,,; = tlrrarnf�til°b .r ,oYc' �ff771+. y NGALOW i
mm�tm 1n�F
Ttmrrnnrrr)
NLs
-1t TTTfflllill),� �
^`L11S II]lII[(1Tf'(/11ZpLLS
xst 1116
�Kw
V1TnTnIjM«I __—
' ttiu.tAlll-Iltt4ulij — =-_-_ --- — NBCC — a ed Community
Wd-
S t e a r n s 7 of 8
ARCHITECTURE
9493767160 Lag —FAX 949 376 92651 1560
1,
D—W IL, EW
wFp 1
61AN
a
GOLF CLUBHOUSE,,",
� l
1 �,�1 44FFV5[FFFFF i �`\"
(I(ffL❑�[fi� U
� 1r11rrilrl U11([�j�j�
f`\t1TTTTTi}iiu1fTT(I11iTiT(il. _� —
�iTtTr—�— —
Exhibit 18
GOLF CLUB
PHASE IV - CONSTRUCTION
• Portion of Greenskeeper Area
• golf porte cochere & parking
LEGEND
❑ new building
❑ new sitework
❑ existing structures Ion property)
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a r n s 8of8
ARCHITECTURE
500 Broadway Laguna Beach, CA 92651
949 376 7160 FAX 949 376 1560
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 25
Discretionary Approvals
Implementation of the proposed project will require approval of the following discretionary approvals by
the City of Newport Beach:
• Planned Community Text Adoption
• Transfer of Development Rights
• Approval -in -Concept for Coastal Development Permit
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map (Tennis Component)
• Development Agreement
• Temporary Use Permit
10. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
East Coast Highway abuts the site along a portion of the southern property boundary. In addition, the
Armstrong Garden Center and residential homes are also located along the southern property boundary.
Residential development west of Granville Drive and office buildings are located east and southeast of
the site, respectively. The Marriott Hotel is also located east of the golf course. Jamboree Road and
residential development are located along the western property limits. The Newport Beach Chamber of
Commerce, Santa Barbara Drive, residential development and the Newport Beach Fire Department are
located to the north.
LOCATION
GENERAL PLAN
ZONING
CURRENT USE
NB Country Club, including golf
ON -SITE
PR and MU-H3
PC-47
course, clubhouse and tennis
facilities
NORTH
PF, OS and RM
APF, GEIF
Newport Beach Chamber of
Commerce, Jamboree Road,
Santa Barbara Drive, residential
development and Newport
Beach Fire Department
Armstrong Garden Center,
SOUTH
RS-D and PR
PC-30, R-1
residential, office development
and East Coast Hi hwa
Marriott Hotel, office
EAST
CO-G, RM, CV, CO-R
PC-40, RMD, APF, PC-
development, and residential
54
develo ment
WEST �=S,,
CV, and RM
PC-21, PC-41
Residential development and
Jamboree Road
11. Other public agencies whose approval is required:
California Coastal Commission (CDP)
California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Section 401 Permit)
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 27
GENERAL PLAN
ROW_ _f
RS-D
RMi
8 DU
°q
luiLu
_
t,Q
=„49 °L 48
40
245 DU
,.
41 MU-H3
42
46
M U-H
CO-G
45
�Z
Z
35
72: v 36
h
1L
4°
34
CO-R
8ft
-k
PC-41
-AX
S A
PC-21
RSC
co 0
PC-39
-v
PC-30
�0IVE
rve-
RMC
z
PC-47
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 28
ZONING
PC-19
S qL
m
N TE
APE 1p
R,
�
E
Ir
� Z I, :C
-54 PC-23
MF
ROW
10
0
PC-40
b
64-8
R-1
ft
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 29
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected
by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially
Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics
❑ Agricultural Resources
❑ Air Quality
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Cultural Resources
❑ Geology & Soils
❑ Greenhouse Gas
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials
❑ Land Use & Planning
❑ Hydrology & Water Quality
❑ Mineral Resources
❑ Noise
❑ Population & Housing
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ Public Services
❑ Recreation
❑ Transportation/Traffic
❑ Utilities & Service Systems
❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions
in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent.
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. Q
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the
environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an
earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as
described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact"
or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be
addressed. ❑
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect
on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because
all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project,
nothi er is r fired. ❑
R16�o
S bm ted by: Rosalinh Ung, Ass ciat Planner Date
lanning Depart e
7:
es•116 1
Prepared by: Keeton K. Kreitzer, Consult t Date
Keeton Kreitzer Consultina
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 30
.0.
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
I.
AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a)
Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
❑
❑
® ❑
b)
Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within
❑
❑
2 ❑
a state scenic highway?
c)
Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
❑
❑
Q ❑
the site and its surroundings?
d)
Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
❑
❑
0
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
111.
AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES. Would the project:
a)
Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
❑
❑
❑
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
❑
❑
❑ El
Act contract?
c)
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or cause the
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources
❑
❑
❑
Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government Code Section
51104(g))?
d)
Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non -forest use)?
❑
❑
❑ LQ
e)
Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland,
❑
❑
❑ Q
to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?
III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air ® ❑ Q ❑
quality Ian?
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 31
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
b)
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or
❑ ❑ ® ❑
projected air quality violation?
c)
Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment
under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
❑ ❑ ® ❑
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d)
Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
❑ ❑ 0 ❑
concentrations?
e)
Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
people?
IV.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a)
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,
❑ ❑ ❑ I�
policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b)
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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c)
Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands
as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d)
Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident
or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native
❑ ❑ ❑
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e)
Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or
❑ ❑ ❑
ordinance?
f)
Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
❑ ❑ ❑ 2
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
V.
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a)
Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
❑ ❑ ❑
historical resource as defined in 15064.5?
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 32
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ ® ® ❑
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5?
C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource ® ® Q
or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) 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 on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
c) 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?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life
or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where
sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Q
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the ❑ ❑ Q ❑
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for
the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
❑ ❑ Q ❑
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 33
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
b) 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?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites which complied pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment?
e) For a project 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 airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working
in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h) 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?
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would
be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
❑ Q ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ Q ❑
❑ ❑ Q ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
❑ ❑
❑
Q
❑ ❑
Q
❑
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
❑ ❑ Q ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 34
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream
or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off -site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or
river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface
runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off -site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped
on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury
or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
k) Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during
or following construction?
1) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from
areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle
or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling,
hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas,
loading docks or other outdoor work areas?
m) Result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the
beneficial uses of the receiving waters?
n) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity
or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm?
o) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or
surrounding areas?
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
❑ ❑ Q ❑
❑
❑
2
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
2
❑
❑
❑
❑
2
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
2
❑
❑
21
❑
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
P
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 35
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not
limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, ❑ ❑ Q ❑
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
community conservation plan?
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
❑ ❑
® Q
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b)
Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan,
❑ ❑
❑ Q
specific plan, or other land use plan?
XII.
NOISE. Would the project result in:
a)
Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or noise
❑ ❑
Q ❑
ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
b)
Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground
❑ ❑
Q ❑
borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
c)
A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
❑ ❑
Q ❑
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
d)
A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the
❑ Q
❑ ❑
project?
e)
For a project located within an airport land use or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport
® ❑
❑ Q
or public use airport, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f)
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
❑ ❑
❑ Q
excessive noise levels?
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ Q ❑
indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 36
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
b)
Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating
❑
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
c)
Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the
❑ ❑ ❑
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
XIV.
PUBLIC SERVICES
a)
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically altered
government facilities, need for new or physically altered
government facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
❑ ❑ 2 ❑
Police protection?
❑ ❑ ® ❑
Schools?
❑ ❑ [J1 ❑
Other public facilities?
❑ ❑ ❑ [J1
XV.
RECREATION
a)
Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
❑ ❑ Q ❑
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated?
b)
Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction of or expansion of recreational facilities which
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Opportunities?
XVI.
TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project:
a)
Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of
the circulation system, taking into account all modes of
transportation, including mass transit and non -motorized travel
❑ Lj ❑ ❑
and relevant components of the circulation system, including
but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways,
pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 37
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program,
including, but not limited to level of service standard and travel
demand measures, or other standards established by the
county congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
XVII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e) 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?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
Potentially Less Than Less than No
Significant Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
❑ ❑ ❑ Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑✓
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑
❑
0
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ 2
❑ ❑ ® ❑
❑ ❑ 2 ❑
❑
❑
®
❑
❑
❑
2
❑
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 38
Potentially Less Than
Less than No
Significant Significant With
Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
XVII1. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
❑ ❑
® ❑
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of
the major period of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable ❑ ❑ Q ❑
when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable
future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
indirectly?
XIX. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This section of the Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the
proposed project and provides explanations of the responses to the Environmental
Checklist. The environmental analysis in this section is patterned after the questions
in the Environmental Checklist. Under each issue area, a general discussion of the
existing conditions is provided according to the environmental analysis of the
proposed Project's impacts. To each question, there are four possible responses:
• No Impact. The proposed project will not have any measurable environmental
impact on the environment.
• Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will have the potential for
impacting the environment, although this impact will be below thresholds that may be
considered significant.
• Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project will
have potentially significant adverse impacts which may exceed established
thresholds; however, mitigation measures or changes to the proposed project's
physical or operational characteristics will reduce these impacts to levels that are less
than significant. Those mitigation measures are specified in the following sections.
Each recommended mitigation measure has been agreed to by the applicant.
• Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project will have impacts that are
considered potentially significant and additional analysis is required to identify
mitigation measures that could reduce these impacts to insignificant levels. When an
impact is determined to be potentially significant in the preliminary analysis, the
environmental issue will be subject to detailed analysis in an environmental impact
report (EIR).
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 39
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project encompasses approximately 145 acres adjacent to
Fashion Island and is located north of Coast Highway. Newport Center Drive from Newport Center Drive
east/west to Farallon Drive is designated as a Coastal View Road. Although Coast Highway is not
designated as a Coastal View Road between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, a Public View
Point is located within Irvine Terrace Park, which is located south of that arterial and the subject property
in the Corona del Mar service area. Policies NR 20.2 and 20.3 in the Natural Resources Element of the
Newport Beach General Plan are intended to protect and enhance public view corridors. Specifically,
new development must restore and enhance the visual quality and protect and restore public views.
Similar policies in the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) are also intended to ensure that coastal views and
development within the coastal zone are protected and enhanced (refer to the analysis presented in
Section X.b).
To that end, the proposed Planned Community District (PCD) Regulations include development
standards to ". .. ensure harmony and continuity of the design parameters that are respectful of the
properties of its California coastal heritage." Guidelines have been included in the PCD regulations that
address building mass, scale, materials, landscape treatment, and community design to ensure
compatibility. Although the PCD regulations limit the maximum building height of a structure to 50 feet,
building heights for the proposed structures will range from 30 feet for The Bungalows, to 32 feet for the
Villas and the Tennis Clubhouse, to 50 feet for the Golf Clubhouse, which will be the largest structure
within the PCD. In addition, landscaping will be provided in all areas not devoted to structures, parking
and driveways, which consists of a combination of trees, shrubs, groundcover and hardscape
improvements. In addition, the Master Plan (refer to Exhibit 2) and the Preliminary Landscape Plan
(Exhibit 19) in the PCD Plan show a variable width landscape berm screening the golf club parking lot
along approximately 650 linear feet of East Coast Highway. The width varies from 20 feet to
approximately 60 feet. In addition, there is significant landscaping between each row of parking to further
soften the appearance of the golf club parking lot has also been provided. Landscape materials,
including trees, shrubs and groundcover are also proposed around the site perimeter to soften the
development edges between adjacent existing residential and commercial development. The preliminary
landscape plan includes a variety of accent/specimen trees (i.e., California oak, California pepper), spatial
definition trees (e.g., California sycamore, thornless citrus, lemon -scented gum, etc.) and background
trees (i.e., Aleppo pine, Brisbane box) along with other species of olive and palm trees to enhance the
aesthetic character of the site and to complement the existing development in the project environs. The
architectural style proposed for the project is classical California Mediterranean, which is consistent and
compatible with the surrounding development.
The design and implementation of the proposed project will not result in a substantial visual impact.
Although the proposed clubhouse will be approximately 11,500 square feet larger than the existing
structure, it is designed to be compatible with the nearby development. In addition, the proposed villas
are designed to be compatible with the character of the residential development to the north along
Granville. Views from the Public View Point in Irvine Terrace Park are primarily oriented to the south to
the harbor and ocean; however, with the integration of the landscaping and setbacks along Coast
Highway, views from the vantage and inland into Fashion Island the adjacent areas would not be
adversely affected. Significant visual impacts from the segment of Newport Center Drive designated as a
Coastal View Road would not occur because adequate landscape materials, setbacks, and building
heights have been integrated into the project design to enhance and protect views as intended by the
applicable Recreation Element policies. In addition, mechanical and trash enclosures as well as pool/spa
equipment, tennis courts, and ground mounted air conditioning compressor units will be screened by
walls and/or landscaping. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
are required.
A/TPORT
PRELIMINARY
LANDSCAPE PLAN
Mun AR¢)
IX1S
�' YZTw TAAxCT�tta T9E5.5 ('N'eoX M'NRuks RY£)
ninW.meCces
NLw.m1U4CtIpmHA
RIANTPNUSPNSIrc>FA
i""1. oiREE511rtlJx w.r+iW:+n5cu.1
��� elwtwu�enw'tr�c Aot ice:
z � a.racL'"s+o waTM)
�Cin.a� xEnEuxaovn
y�,K� wurti+w'rotpu. Mm'u5'Ar - e 4 Asra.wAo
T waas
Ho&xx CMFwEY%SS fa`aWTA WTE µn
fNaYMF IsVY. 5xhM
EXfSYwlGT�fTCT @^fNN
WS .MSIS WAUJureegmq!tiiEl
EWUM�iS
TUM a�rn�AroW Y
5.'reir(JlAf+4.!&E45cwcueawmlmsz¢) �qar p..
pkY✓.oC'v4/.
F%9xROC+�llu�iYl�M l�P➢[.¢f£'k Wn)LY'S
YwoMQt#ffw
fiRiaAoansvEC#s
�eN,wtN��P!
..cakiasxa=tes rrayxrot[
AccfntYMAta0.f�lce5l5WLLCNb�'aW.maX�
v�niTEENNTP ��
Cu �v ARn
boV'maHEtSPa
.�MxpPCP.E
NCIRO: /�CHav 4'fvPhvAi.Ns
�f..�'�kRG:n UnLLn45
Scuxtm�.umn �1
tars �tx511tF rde
YRrs'iR WLION MW�Hk15
IXa 1' KT V S & XOiS,Si c pM
rw Twus�
MRRMO WW�A%.0 weT.s4,s C»=EroEn
�Tf: PP,�9tq o Ytrvnixeio� �'ad0img p.nrn
�ssa..SYtfp Vf �.NTstM.
NBCC
Planned Community
MJSDesip Gmup EXHIBIT
Lardy AmN�Axdute
eg
Rmngn
Rryavwn�,cA§�'
"_ I OF I
UNEWPORT BEACH[�NTRYC08puNNEDC�MuwITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page41
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to,
tnmes, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings with a state scenic highway?
Less Significant Impact. The subject property is currently developed with private golf and tennis
facilities. As a reuu|t, the site has been substantially altered in order to accommodate the existing land
uses. The site is generally devoid of significant natural features such as rock outcroppings and/or native
or important habitat. The existing trees and vegetation that are located on the site are introduced
landscape species; no historic buildings exist on the site and the site is not located adjacent to a state
aoanio highway. Therefore, project implementation will not adversely affect existing scenic resources. No
significant impacts are anticipated and nomitigation measures are required.
C) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character orquality mfthe site
and its surroundings?
Less than Significant Impact.Project implementation includes the demolition of several existing
structures (e.g., Golf Clubhouse and ancillary facilities, Tennis C|ubhnuoe, etc.) and features (e.g., tennis
courts) and the construction of a new Golf Club clubhouse and related facilities for the Golf Cluboomponent. In addition, a new Tennis Club, The Bungalows and single-family residential uses (i.e.. The
Vi||an)are also proposed. As indicated previously, the subject property is not designated as an important
visual resource. Nonetheless, the PCO regulations prescribed development standards that oddn000
building height. setbacks, |anduooping, lighting, architectural character and other elements to ensure that
the aesthetic character of the site and surrounding area are not adversely affected. The maximum
building height of the Golf Clubhouse is 53.5 feet from the existing grade to the roof peak. The proposed
Tennis Clubhouse would have a maximum height of 30 feet above the existing grade. The maximum
bui|ding height nfthe bungalows is 31 feat, with minimum five feet setbacks. The Villas would not exceed
35feet (Villa D).aoprescribed inthe PCDregulations. The two land uses have been designed within the
property to be visually and aesthetically compatible with each other. In order to address the aesthetic
oharooter of the site along East Coast Highway, the proposed Golf Clubhouse component has been
designed with a variable landscape setback that will act as buffer along 650 linear feet of East CoastHighway. Although East Coast Highway is not designated as o eoanio corridor by the {}ih/, the wide,
variable landscape setback will enhance the character of that arterial and provide a significantly wider
buffer for the residents of Irvine Terrace. The setback will vary from 20 feet to 55 feet and will be
landscaped with a ground cover and a variety of shrubs and trees that complement the proposed
development. The Villas will be screened from the tennis courts with ofive'foot block wall plastered to
match the adjacent Villa or by 10'footohain link fence covered byawindscreen. Nnsignificant impacts
are anticipated and nomitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project create m new source ofsubstantial light mrglare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. The existing development is characterized by lighting that illuminates the
surface parking lot that serves the existing golf and tennis facilities. |naddition, lighting ioalso associated
with existing tennis courts and security lighting for the parking lot and structures. Project implementation
will result in the elimination of 17 lighted tennis courts and the intensification of development on the site
through the construction of the Tennis C|ubhouoe, new tennis facilities, the Bungalows and the Villas.
Lighting will also be provided for the same purpose as currently exists (i.e., security and parking lot
illumination). Lighting required to illuminate the proposed parking lots for the Golf Clubhouse and Tennis
Club facilities will comply with standards established by the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Proposed
lighting will not spill onto adjacent properties. The single-family residential dwelling units will be screened
from the tennis courts with a minimum 5-foot block wall or by e 10'footwindooroen chain link fence. One
of the proposed single-family residential dwelling units is proposed to be located near the one of the
existing tennis courts; hovvevor, a swimming pool is proposed between the tennis court and the residence
tuminimize the potential nuisance posed bythe tennis court lighting. |naddition, some ofthe Bungalows
will also be located in close proximity to the proposed tennis courts. Although it in anticipated that the
lighting will be energy efficient and will also be shielded or recessed nothat direct glare and reflections
are contained within the boundaries of the pnoperty, the applicant will be required to prepare a final
lighting/photometric plan to ensure that lighting on site meets the City's requirements. In addition, tennis
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 42
court lights will be turned off at 10:00 p.m. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. However, the project
shall incorporate the following standard condition prescribed by the City of Newport Beach for lighting.
SC-1 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall prepare a photometric study in
conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval by the Planning Department. The site shall not
be excessively illuminated based on the luminance recommendations of the Illuminating
Engineering Society of North America, or, if in the opinion of the Planning Director, the
illumination creates an unacceptable negative impact on surrounding land uses or environmental
resources. The Planning Director may order the dimming of light sources or other remediation
upon finding that the site is excessively illuminated.
I1. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES
a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland) as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact. No Prime Farmland, Farmland of State or Local Importance, or Unique Farmland occurs
within or in the vicinity of the site. The site and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built-up
Land" and "Other Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map. Further, neither the site nor the
adjacent areas are designated as prime, unique or important farmlands by the State Resources Agency
or by the Newport Beach General Plan. Therefore, no impact on significant farmlands would occur with
the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
No Impact. The Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element designates the site as "Parks and
Recreation" (PR) and "Mixed Use — Horizontal" (MU-H3) and the zone designation for the site is "Planned
Community." Therefore, there is no conflict with zoning for agricultural use, and the property and
surrounding properties are not under a Williamson Act contract. No significant impacts are anticipated
and no mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public
Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code Section 51104(g))?
No Impact. The project site is neither zoned nor designated as forest land. The site is currently
developed as a golf course and tennis club. Project implementation would not result in the conversion of
any forest land subject to the Public Resources Code. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -
forest use?
No Impact. As indicated above, the site is currently developed and is devoid of forest resources.
Project implementation will not result in the site's conversion of forest land to non -forest uses.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 43
e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their
location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non -forest use?
No Impact. The site is not being used for either agricultural or forest land purposes and, as indicated
previously, is not designated as agricultural or forest land. The subject property and the area surrounding
the site are developed with a variety of residential, professional office, retail, public facilities, and
recreational uses. Therefore, no agricultural or forest uses on the site or within the site's vicinity would be
converted to non-agricultural or non -forest use. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation
measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
III. AIR QUALITY
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality
plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) was adopted in June
2007, after extensive public review. The 2007 AQMP recognizes the interaction between photochemical
processes that create both ozone (03) and the smallest airborne particulates (PM2.5). The 2007 AQMP is
therefore a coordinated plan for both pollutants. Key emissions reductions strategies in the updated air
quality plan include:
• Ultra -low emissions standards for both new and existing sources (including on -and -off -
road heavy trucks, industrial and service equipment, locomotives, ships and aircraft).
• Accelerated fleet turnover to achieve benefits of cleaner engines.
• Reformulation of consumer products.
• Modernization and technology advancements from stationary sources (refineries, power
plants, etc.)
Development such as the proposed Newport Beach Country Club project does not directly relate to the
AQMP in that there are no specific air quality programs or regulations governing "general" development.
Conformity with adopted plans, forecasts and programs relative to population, housing, employment and
land use is the primary yardstick by which impact significance of master planned growth is determined. If
a given project incorporates any available transportation control measures that can be implemented on a
project -specific basis, and if the scope and phasing of a project are consistent with adopted forecasts as
shown in the Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP), then the regional air quality impact of project growth
would not be significant because of planning inconsistency. The SCAQMD, however, while
acknowledging that the AQMP is a growth -accommodating document, does not favor designating regional
impacts as less -than -significant just because the proposed development is consistent with regional
growth projections. Air quality impact significance for the proposed project has therefore been analyzed
on a project -specific basis.
A consistency determination plays an important role in local agency project review by linking local
planning and individual projects to the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). It fulfills the CEQA goal of
informing decision makers of the environmental efforts of the project under consideration at an early
enough stage to ensure that air quality concerns are fully addressed. It also provides the local agency
with ongoing information as to whether they are contributing to clean air goals contained in the AQMP. To
accurately assess the environmental impacts of new or renovated development, environmental pollution
and population growth are projected for future scenarios. There are two key indicators of consistency:
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 44
Indicator 1 Whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of
existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay
timely attainment of the AAQS or interim emission reductions in the AQMP.
The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is designated by the state and USEPA as non -attainment for
'03, PM10, and PM2.5. SCAQMD developed regional emissions thresholds to determine whether or
not a project would contribute to air pollutant violations. If a project exceeds the regional air
pollutant thresholds, then the project would substantially contribute to air quality violations in the
SCAB. In addition, the project would also contribute to air pollutant violations if localized
emissions result in an exceedance of the AAQS. Neither short-term nor long-term emissions
generated by the project exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for regional emissions (as shown in
detail below) and would therefore contribute to an increase in frequency or severity of air quality
violations and delay attainment of the AAQS or interim emission reductions in the AQMP.
Consequently, the project would not be consistent with the AQMP under the first indicator.
Indicator 2 Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. The AQMP
strategy is, in part, based on projections from local general plans.
The current zoning designation permits development through a planned community development
plan. Therefore, development of new land uses and their associated air pollutant emissions would
be accounted for in the assumptions of the AQMP. Furthermore, the purpose and intent of a
"Planned Community' is to encourage mixed -use development and integration of residential,
recreational, commercial, and retail uses. Because the proposed project would accommodate a
mix of recreational and residential uses within walking distance, there would be a limited
reduction in vehicle trips for residents within the project site and surrounding area for commercial
retail and recreational needs. This reduction in trips would likewise result in a reduction in air
pollution. Consequently, implementation of the project would not conflict with the AQMP under the
second indicator.
b) Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing
or projected air quality violation?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Project will be consistent with the relevant policies and
requirements established by the Land Use Element. Approval of the proposed project would not result in
any land use conflicts with existing, surrounding development. As indicated in Ill.c, below, neither
construction nor operational air emissions would exceed significance thresholds established by the
SCAQMD. These thresholds were developed to provide a method of assessing a project's individual
impact significance, and also to determine whether the project's impacts could be cumulatively
considerable. The proposed project would not, therefore, result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant. Since the South Coast Air Basin is in non -attainment with respect to
ozone and PM10, and the construction emissions would add to the regional burden of these pollutants,
compliance with a vigorous set of air pollution control measures related to dust control, paint emissions
etc.) is required to ensure that projects do not contribute directly to an air quality violation.
Air Pollution Control Measures
Dust Control Measures
• Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas.
• Prepare a high wind dust control plan and implement plan elements and terminate soil
disturbance when winds exceed 25 mph.
• Stabilize previously disturbed areas if subsequent construction is delayed.
• Water exposed surfaces 3 times/day.
• Cover all stockpiles with tarps.
• Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as soon as feasible.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 45
Exhaust Emission Measures
• Require 90-day low-NOx tune-ups for off -road equipment.
• Limit allowable idling to 5 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment.
• Utilize equipment whose engines are equipped with diesel oxidation catalysts if available.
• Utilize diesel particulate filter on heavy equipment where feasible.
Painting and Coating Measures
Use low VOC coatings and high pressure -low volume
c) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Less Than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in the demolition of the existing Golf
Clubhouse and the existing Tennis Clubhouse as well as related features, including asphalt parking lots,
etc., in order to accommodate the proposed uses. Potential air quality impacts are discussed below.
Short -Term (Construction) Emissions
Construction activities will result in short-term pollutant emissions that are summarized in Table 1, below.
With or without the use of mitigation, peak daily construction activity emissions will not exceed SCAQMD
CEQA thresholds and will be further reduced by recommended mitigation. The recommended emissions
mitigation measures are detailed in the "Mitigation" section of this report.
Construction equipment exhaust contains carcinogenic compounds within the diesel exhaust particulates.
The toxicity of diesel exhaust is evaluated relative to a 24-hour per day, 365 days per year, 70-year
lifetime exposure. Public exposure to heavy equipment emissions will be an extremely small fraction of
the above dosage assumption. Diesel equipment is also becoming progressively "cleaner" in response to
air quality rules on new off -road equipment. Any public health risk associated with project -related heavy
equipment operations exhaust is therefore not quantifiable, but small.
Construction activity air quality impacts occur mainly in close proximity to the surface disturbance area.
There may, however, be some "spill -over" into the surrounding community. That spill -over may be
physical as vehicles drop or carry out dirt or silt is washed into public streets. Passing non -project
vehicles then pulverize the dirt to create off -site dust impacts. "Spillover" may also occur via congestion
effects. Construction may entail roadway encroachment, detours, lane closures and competition between
construction vehicles (trucks and contractor employee commuting) and ambient traffic for available
roadway capacity. Emissions controls require good housekeeping procedures and a construction traffic
management plan that will maintain such "spill -over" effects at a less -than -significant level.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 46
p ra
Construction -Related Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)
Newport Beach Country Club
Activity
RAG
1NOX
CQ
S02-t
PM 0
PM2.5
CO2
Demolition of Structure
No Mitigation
2.2
18.4
9.4
0.0
2.2
1.1
1,895.0
Mitigation
2.2
15.9
9.4
0.0
1.4
0.4
1,895.0
Asphalt Demolition and Crushing/Reclamation
No Mitigation
3.2
31.3
14.1
0.0
1.8
1.3
3,191.0
Mitigation
3.2
26.7
14.1
0.0
0.8
0.3
3,191.0
Mass Grading
No Mitigation
9.0
88.7
41.3
0.0
11.0
5.1
9,004.8
Mitigation
9.0
79.3
41.3
0.0
2.3
1.6
9,004.8
Fine Grading
No Mitigation
3.3
26.1
15.1
0.0
8.3
2.8
2,552.3
Mitigation
3.3
22.2
15.1
0.0
0.9
0.3
2,552.3
Trenching
No Mitigation
3.8
30.5
17.7
0.0
1.6
1.5
3,095.5
Mitigation
3.8
25.9
17.7
0.0
0.3
0.2
3,095.5
Construction
No Mitigation
2.7
19.0
13.1
0.0
1.4
1.2
2,070.0
Mitigation
2.7
16.2
13.1
0.0
0.2
0.2
2,070.0
Construction and Paining
No Mitigation
11.6
17.7
12.9
0.0
1.3
1.2
2,087.4
Mitigation
10.7
15.1
12.9
0.0
0.2
0.2
2,087.4
SCAQMD Threshold
75
100
550
150
150
55
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
No
No
--
1No significance threshold has been adopted.
SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (July 2009)
Local Significance Thresholds
The SCAQMD has also developed analysis parameters to evaluate ambient air quality on a local level in
addition to the more regional emissions -based thresholds of significance. These analysis elements are
called Local Significance Thresholds (LSTs). LSTs were developed in response to Governing Board's
Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative 1-4 and the LST methodology was provisionally adopted in
October 2003 and formally approved by SCAQMD's Mobile Source Committee in February 2005.
Use of an LST analysis for a project is optional because they were derived for economically or socially
disadvantaged communities. For residential, hotel and recreational developments, the only source of LST
impact would be during construction. LSTs are only applicable to the following criteria pollutants: oxides
of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5). LSTs represent the
maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 47
most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, and are developed based on the
ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest
sensitive receptor.
The URBEMIS model estimates that the daily construction disturbance "footprint" will be 0.7 acres. LST
pollutant concentration data is currently published for 1, 2 and 5 acre sites. Utilizing data for a 1 acre site
and a source receptor distance of 50 meters, the LST thresholds are presented in Table 2. As indicated
in the table, project -related construction emissions would not exceed the relevant LSTs.
Local Significance Thresholds (pounds/day)
Newport Beach Country Club
North Coastal Orange County
CO
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
LST Threshold
528
163
13
5
Proposed Project
Unmitigated
9 — 41
18 — 89
1 — 11
1 —3
Mitigated
9 — 41
16 — 79
1-2
1 —2
SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (July 2009
Long -Term (Operational) Emissions
Possible project -related air quality concerns relate to the potential for impacts as a result of mobile source
emissions that will be generated by the recreational, residential, and hotel uses proposed for the project
site. The proposed project, however, replaces an existing facility and decreases existing tennis court
facilities with the Bungalows and The Villas. With respect to operational emissions, it is anticipated that
389 fewer daily trips will be generated as a result of this project.
Operational emissions for existing and proposed project -related traffic were calculated using a
computerized procedure developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for urban growth
mobile source emissions. The URBEMIS2007 model was run using the trip generation factors obtained
from the traffic report for this project. The model was used to calculate area source emissions and the
resulting vehicular operational emissions for existing uses in 2009 and proposed uses in 2012. A
comparison was made of the two scenarios and the results are shown in Table 3.
The few residential uses associated with the proposed project may generate small quantities of organic
compounds from cleaning products, personal care products, landscape maintenance, cooking, etc.
Because the existing site has no residential use component, the area source emissions are slightly higher
for the proposed project than for existing uses. As seen in Table 3, mobile source emissions in 2009 are
higher for existing uses than for the proposed project for an assumed 2012 build -out.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 48
Table 3
Project -Related Emissions Burden (pounds/day)
Newport Beach Country Club
ROG
NOx
CO
S02
PM'10
PM2.
L022
Existing Uses (2009
Area Sources
0.3
0.0
3.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
5.6
Mobile Sources
11.5
15.4
149.5
0.2
24.3
4.7
14,288.0
Total
11.8
15.4
152.6
0.2
24.3
4.7
14,293.6
Proposed Project (2012)
Area Sources
0.8
0.4
5.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
372.0
Mobile Sources
6.8
9.0
87.8
0.1
18.4
3.6
10,829.9
Total
7.6
9.4
92.9
0.1
18.4
3.6
11,201.9
Net Difference (Proposed versus Existing Uses)
Area Sources
0.5
0.4
2.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
366.4
Mobile Sources
-4.7
-6.4
-61.7
-0.1
-5.9
-1.1
-3,458.1
Total
-4.2
-6.0
-59.7
-0.1
-5.9
-1.1
-3,091.7
SCAQMD Threshold
55
55
550
150
150
55
Exceeds Threshold?
No
No
No
No
No
No
--
'No significance threshold has been adopted.
SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (July 2009)
Because the proposed project generates fewer trips than existing uses and since area source emissions
are minimal compared to mobile source emissions, the SCAQMD's recommended threshold levels will not
be exceeded. Operational emissions will be less than significant.
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less than Significant Impact. The area in which the subject property is located is dominated by non-
residential development, including professional office. Some residential development exists north of the
existing tennis club and a senior housing development is located west of the proposed project site near
Jamboree Road between Back Bay Road and Coast Highway; however, there are no hospitals, schools
or other sensitive receptors located near the proposed project site. Moreover, as discussed in the
preceding assessment of potential air quality impacts, the proposed project would not generate pollutant
emissions that would exceed established SCAQMD thresholds, either during the temporary construction
phases or over the long-term operating life of the proposed facilities and residences when occupied.
Although no significant impacts are anticipated, several conditions are prescribed to further reduce dust
and construction equipment exhaust emissions during the construction phase.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. A variety of odors would be associated with construction equipment exhaust emissions and
application of paints and other architectural coatings. The odors would be minor and temporary in nature
and would not significantly affect people residing or occupying areas beyond the immediate construction
zones. Subsequent to the completion of construction activities, development of the site with the proposed
Golf Club and Tennis Club, The Bungalows, and The Villas would not result in any significant change in
the kinds of odors that could be experienced in the project environs, which is composed of single-family
residential dwelling units similar to The Villas. Occasional, less than significant odors may occur in
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 49
conjunction with trash pick up and outdoor food preparation (e.g., barbeques), and possibly with outdoor
maintenance activities. Trash containers would be equipped with lids and would be stored inside the
dwelling units and garages. The proposed project will not generate unusual or large quantities of solid
waste materials, or utilize chemicals, food products, or other materials that emit strong odors that would
adversely affect the ambient air quality in the project environs. Therefore, the project does not have the
potential to create objectionable odors; and no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
Although no significant short-term (i.e., construction) or long-term (operational) air quality impacts will
occur as a result of the proposed project, the following measures are required by the South Coast AQMD
to further reduce construction emissions:
SC-2 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits air contaminants or other materials that cause
injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public,
or which endanger the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such persons or the public, or
which cause, or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property to be
emitted within the SoCAB.
SC-3 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403, which sets requirements for dust control associated with
grading and construction activities.
SC-4 Adherence to SCAQMD Rules 431.1 and 431.2, which require the use of low sulfur fuel for
stationary construction equipment.
SC-5 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1108, which sets limitations on ROG content in asphalt.
SC-6 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1113, which sets limitations on ROG content in architectural
coatings.
SC-7 Adherence to Title 24 energy -efficient design requirements as well as the provision of window
glazing, wall insulation, and efficient ventilation methods in accordance with the requirements of
the California Building Code.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project 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 California Department
of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. The subject property has been extensively altered as a result of site development. No
important biological resources are identified in the Natural Resources Element of the Newport Beach
General Plan (refer to Figure NR1) and no environmental study areas exist on the site (refer to Figure
NR2) in that Element. As previously indicated, the majority of the site is developed with golf and tennis
facilities, including parking lots. Virtually all of the vegetation existing within the limits of the site is
introduced landscape species. Furthermore, the site is entirely surrounded by residential and commercial
development as well as the Marriott Hotel and roadways. No sensitive habitat and/or sensitive plant or
animal species exist on the subject property. The proposed project will result in the demolition of some
existing structures, including the existing Golf and Tennis Clubhouses and several tennis courts in order
to accommodate the proposed new development. Project implementation will not result in any
modifications to sensitive habitat and/or sensitive species of plants or animals. Alteration of the site as
proposed will not result in any potentially significant direct or indirect impacts to sensitive habitat and/or
species. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 50
b) Would the project 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 Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. With the exception of two man-made lakes that are part of the existing golf course, no
riparian features exist within the limits of the site. The two lakes are not included within the development
limits and, therefore, will not be directly affected by the proposed new development. Grading and site
development proposed by the applicant will not result in any impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified either in the City's General Plan or Coastal Land Use Plan.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal
pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
No Impact. As indicated above, no riparian habitat exists on the subject property and no wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act occur on the site. Project implementation will not result in
any potential adverse affects to either wetlands or riparian species.
d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
No Impact. The subject property and the surrounding areas are developed and no migratory wildlife
corridors occur on site or in the immediate vicinity of the project site that would be affected by
development of the subject property. As a result, the proposed project will not interfere with resident,
migratory or wildlife species. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
required.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
No Impact. The site is devoid of protected habitat and/or species, including heritage trees. Project
implementation will not result in any conflicts with adopted policies or ordinances intended to protect
biological resources. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
No Impact. There are no local, regional or state habitat conservation plans that would regulate or guide
development of the project site. The subject property, which has been developed as private recreation
(i.e., Golf Club and Tennis Club) does not support native habitat and/or species and is not included in
either a Habitat Conservation Plan or a Natural Community Conservation Plan. No significant direct or
indirect impacts to an existing HCP and/or NCCP will occur as a result of project implementation; no
mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts to biological resources are anticipated; no mitigation measures are required
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 51
1
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource as defined §15604.5?
No Impact. The project site is currently developed with an 18-hole Golf Club, clubhouse and ancillary
facilities, and a private tennis club with 24 tennis courts. Figure HR1 in the City's Historical Resources
Element indicates that no historical resources are located on the site. Although no historic sites are
located on the subject property, the California Point of Historical Interest (2009) of the Office of Historic
Preservation, Department of Parks and Recreation, lists one property within a one-half mile radius of the
subject property. ORA-009, the site of the 1953 National Boy Scout Jamboree (i.e., present location of
Newport Center) is near the site. This site is also listed on the California Historic Resources Inventory.
No historic resources and/or properties within one-half mile of the site are identified by the California
Historical Landmarks (2009) of the Office of Historic Preservation, Department of Parks and Recreation,
or the National Register of Historic Places. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in
any direct or indirect impacts to the existing historic site (ORA-009). Furthermore, the site is not identified
by the City as possessing potentially important historic resources. Therefore, project implementation will
not result in potentially significant impacts to historic resources are anticipated and no mitigation
measures are required.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15604.5?
Less than Significant Impact. Thirty-eight (38) studies have been conducted within a one-half mile
radius of the subject property.2 However, none of the studies occurred within the project site. In addition,
19 investigations also occurred on the Newport Beach, Laguna Beach and Tustin 7.5-minute U.S.G.S.
quadrangle maps that are also potentially within one-half mile of the site. Although no site specific
surveys have been conducted on the subject property, the site has been substantially altered in order to
accommodate the existing golf and tennis facilities. The project proposes changes only to areas of the
site that have previously been altered by grading and prior development. The new Golf Clubhouse is
proposed to be located in the same area as the existing Golf Clubhouse. As a result, any grading and
site alteration that is anticipated would affect the same areas that have previously been altered in order to
accommodate the existing Golf Clubhouse and related facilities. Similarly, alteration of the Tennis Club
portion of the site necessary to accommodate the new Tennis Clubhouse, The Bungalows, and The Villas
will also affect areas that have previously been graded and substantially altered. As a result, project
implementation will not adversely affect archaeological/cultural resources that may exist on the site.
Although no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are necessary, the City will
require that a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist be present during grading and site alteration to
monitor grading and landform alteration (refer to SC-8). Implementation of this measure is consistent with
applicable Policy No. HR 2.2 of the Historic Resources Element of the Newport Beach General Plan.
The City of Newport Beach complied with the requirements of SB 18 by submitting a request to the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC). In addition, the City also sent a tribal consultation request to the
Native American representative, Mr. David Belardes (Chairperson, Juaneno Band of Mission Indians
Acjachemen Nation) on September 8, 2005 in compliance with both SB18 and Policy No. HR 2.3 that
requires notification of cultural organizations. The City did not receive a response to the SB18 consultation
request. Subsequent to that letter, a follow-up request was sent to Mr. Belardes on May 15, 2009 to apprise
the Native American representative of changes to the project and request consultation with the Native
Americans. To date, no response to the consultation request has been received by the City.
'"Record Search Results for the Proposed Newport Beach Country Club Project Located in the City of Newport Beach, California;
South Central Coastal Information Center; Letter dated June 2, 2009.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 52
c) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site
or unique geologic feature?
Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated above, the project area is located within an urbanized area
of the City of Newport Beach and has been previously graded and developed. Any near -surface
paleontological resources that may have existed at one time have likely been disturbed and/or destroyed
by prior development activities. Therefore, no potentially significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required. It is not likely that implementation of the project will result in any
potentially significant impacts to paleontological resources because of the prior development activities
that have taken place on the site. Nonetheless, as identified below, monitoring of the grading activities by
a qualified paleontologist will be required as prescribed below to ensure that in the event that fossils or
other important paleontological resources are encountered, appropriate measures can be taken to avoid
adverse impacts to those resources.
d) Would the project disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
No Impact. The project site and surrounding areas are highly disturbed due to past urban development
and there is no evidence of human remains or sites of Native American burials. Based on the degree of
disturbance that has already occurred on the site (i.e., golf and tennis facilities) and in the vicinity of the
project site (i.e., Newport Center), it is anticipated that project implementation would not result in
potentially significant impacts to human remains; however, as indicated below, a qualified
archaeological/paleontological monitor will be present on -site during grading to ensure that in the event
human remains are encountered, appropriate measures will be implemented in accordance with State law
regarding human remains.
Mitigation Measures
Although no significant impacts are anticipated, the following standard condition is required by the City to
ensure that potential impacts to cultural and/or scientific resources that may be encountered during
grading are avoided.
SC-8 A qualified archaeological/paleontological monitor shall be retained by the project applicant who
will be available during the grading and landform alteration phase. In the event cultural resources
and/or fossils are encountered during construction activities, ground -disturbing excavations in the
vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted by the monitor until the find has been
salvaged. Any artifacts and/or fossils discovered during project construction shall be prepared to
a point of identification and stabilized for long-term storage. Any discovery, along with supporting
documentation and an itemized catalogue, shall be accessioned into the collections of a suitable
repository. Curation costs to accession any collections shall be the responsibility of the project
applicant.
MM-1 The City shall provide an opportunity for a Native American representative to monitor excavation
activities. The representative shall be determined by the City based on input from concerned Native
American tribes (i.e., Gabrielino, Juaneno, and Tongvas).
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 53
1�L�cT�i7>�iZ � ► r �ilii�
people7) Would the project expose
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) 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 on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Less than Significant Impact. The site is located in the Newport Center/Fashion Island area of the City,
which is near the intersection of the Southwestern Block and the Central Block of the Los Angeles Basin.
The Southwestern Block is the westerly seaward portion of the Los Angeles Basin, which includes Palos
Verdes Peninsula and Long Beach, and is bounded on the east by the Newport -Inglewood Fault Zone
(NIFZ). The landward part of the NIFZ is a northwesterly -trending zone that extends from Beverly Hills on
the north to Newport Bay on the south, where it continues offshore to the south; however, it eventually
returns ashore again near La Jolla, where it is expressed by the Rose Canyon Fault. The NIFZ within the
project environs is not included on the State -published Alquist-Priolo Special Studies zonation map.
The subject property is located within a seismically active area. There are no known local or regional
active earthquake faults on the site, and the site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Zone. However, the site is
located within close proximity of several surface faults that are presently zoned as active or potentially
active by the California Geological Survey. The site is located approximately 3.7 kilometers (km) east of
the Newport -Inglewood fault zone. The site may also be located within in 1 km of the San Joaquin Hills
Blind Thrust, an inferred, low -angle fault system (e.g., blind thrust). These faults normally do not break
the ground surface during sizeable earthquakes. Another active fault that could generate seismic activity
that affects the subject property and surrounding area is the Elsinore Fault. The Newport -Inglewood and
Elsinore Fault Zones could produce earthquakes of magnitude 6 — 7 on the Richter Scale, with local
strong ground motion equivalent to at least Vill — IX on the modified Mercali Scale. Although episodes
on those faults could cause ground shaking at the project site, it is highly unlikely that the site would
experience surface rupture. Therefore, no significant ground rupture impacts would occur as a result of
project implementation.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. See response to Vl.a (i) above. As indicated above, the subject property
is located in the seismically active southern California region; several active faults are responsible for
generating moderate to strong earthquakes throughout the region. Due to the proximity of the site to the
San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust and the Newport -Inglewood Fault zone, the subject property has a
moderate to high probability to be subjected to seismic and associated hazards. A probabilistic seismic
hazard analysis of horizontal ground shaking was performed to evaluate the likelihood of future
earthquake ground motions occurring at the site. The maximum earthquake of 23 faults within an 80 km
radius of the site based on the seismic hazard analysis conducted for the project. The earthquake
magnitudes associated with each fault are presented in Table 4.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 54
Table 4
Seismic Source Model
Newport Beach Country Club
Fault
Distance
(km)
Seismolog Parameters
Maximum
M,
Fault Type'
Slip Rate
nntyr)
San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust
<1.0
6.6
bt
0.5
Newport Inglewood Offshore
3.7
7.1
rl-ss
1.5
Newport -Inglewood L.A. Basin)
4.1
7.1
rl-ss
1.0
Palos Verdes
22.9
7.3
rl-ss
3.0
Chino -Central Avenue
30.7
6.7
rl-r-o
1.0
Whittier
33.7
6.8
rl-ss
2.5
Elsinore -Glen Ivy
35.2
6.8
rl-ss
5.0
Puente Hill Thrust
35.2
7.1
bt
0.4
Coronado Bank
38.3
7.6
rl-ss
3.0
San Jose
47.7
6.4
11-r-o
0.5
Elsinore -Temecula
49.4
6.8
rl-ss
5.0
Elysian Park Thrust (upper)
54.8
6.4
r
1.3
Sierra Madre
58.2
7.2
r
2.0
Cucamonga
58.9
6.9
r
5.0
Raymond
60.6
6.5
II-r-o
1.5
Verdugo
63.2
6.9
r
0.5
Clamshell-Saw it
64.0
6.5
r
0.5
Hollywood
65.2
6.4
11-r-o
1.0
Rose Canyon
68.8
7.2
rl-ss
1.5
Santa Monica
70.7
6.6
11-r-o
1.0
San Jacinto -San Bernardino
74.1
6.7
rl-ss
12.0
San Jacinto -San Jacinto Valley
75.0
6.9
rl-ss
12.0
Malibu Coast
76.4
6.7
Il-r-o
0.3
'rl - right -lateral; II - left lateral; ss - strike -slip; r - reverse; o - oblique; bt - blind thrust
SOURCE: GMU Geotechnical, Inc. (May 2, 2008)
The maximum earthquake on the NIFZ is estimated to be 7.1 on the Richter Scale. Similarly, the
maximum earthquake on the San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust is 6.6. Other faults capable of producing
seismic activity that could affect the subject property include the San Jacinto Fault and the Whittier Fault,
which is a northern branch of the Elsinore Fault. Even though the project site and surrounding areas
could be subject to strong ground movements, incorporation of the recommendations included in the
preliminary geotechnical report, adherence to current building standards of the City of Newport Beach,
and compliance with current California Building Code standards would reduce the potential adverse
effects of ground movement hazards to a less than significant level.
iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
No Impact. Based on the geologic exploration undertaken on the subject property, the site is underlain
by sedimentary rocks of the Monterey Formation. These rocks do not have the potential for liquefaction.
Furthermore, no groundwater is present to the depths and no loose sands or coarse silt is present.
Therefore, the potential for liquefaction is negligible and less than significant. Proper design of the
proposed structures will ensure that ground failure, including that associated with liquefaction, will not
pose a significant hazard to the development.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 55
iv) Landslides?
No Impact. The site is generally devoid of slopes and no significant slopes are planned within the
property. Potential effects associated with slope stability are, therefore not anticipated to have an
adverse impact on the proposed project. No significant impacts are anticipated an no mitigation
measures are required.
b) Would the project result in soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the proposed project will
necessitate grading and excavation necessary to accommodate the proposed Golf Clubhouse, Tennis
Club, The Bungalows, and The Villas that will temporarily expose on -site soils to potential erosion. In that
interim period, it is possible that some erosion may occur, resulting in some sedimentation; however, in
order to ensure that erosion and sedimentation are minimized, the applicant will be required to prepare
and submit an adequate drainage and erosion control plan, which complies with current City standards.
Although it is possible that potential erosion could occur without the incorporation of appropriate
measures, implementation of the mandatory appropriate erosion controls will avoid potential erosion
impacts associated with site grading and development. Further, the proposed site will be engineered to
ensure that surface/subsurface drainage does not contribute to erosion or adversely affect the stability of
project improvements. Other efforts required to ensure that potential erosion is minimized include slope
protection devices, plastic sheeting, inspection for signs of surface erosion, and corrective measures to
maintain, repair or add structures required for effective erosion and sediment movement from the site. As
a result, potential impacts occurring from project implementation, including those anticipated during
grading and after development of the site, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level.
c) Would the project 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?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Refer to Section VI.a.iv, above. As previously
indicated, potential slope failure/landslide potential is not anticipated because no slopes are proposed
and no significant slopes exist on the subject property. Therefore, site preparation and design of the
proposed residence in accordance with the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical
report and compliance with the California Building Code will ensure that potential impacts will be avoided
or reduced to a less than significant level.
The depth of planned engineered fill is anticipated to be five to 10 feet following both design and
corrective grading. Total fill depths (i.e., new and existing fill) are anticipated to range from five to 25 feet.
All fill will be placed as engineered fill on top of existing suitable artificial fill, terrace deposits, or bedrock.
Post -grading settlement of the shallow -depth fills is anticipated to be minor as most of the grading related
to settlement (i.e., due to fill self weight) should be complete at the completion of grading. Secondary
compression is not anticipated due to: (1) the low plasticity of anticipated fill soils; (2) the low fill
thickness; and (3) the over -consolidated nature of the underlying terrace deposits and bedrock. Hydro -
compression of the fill soils should also be minor due to the fact that the fills will be placed above
optimum moisture content.
Significant post -grading settlement of the underlying bedrock due to loading from the proposed fills is not
anticipated. Similarly, hydro -collapse of the bedrock materials will be negligible due to the existing high
density and over -consolidated nature of the materials. For these reasons, post -grading settlements
related to grading are not anticipated to have a significant effect on structures and improvements.
Adherence to the recommendations in the preliminary geotechnical report will ensure that potential effects
associated with settlement would be avoided.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 56
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the California
Building Code (2007)), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the analysis conducted for the proposed
project, the on -site surface materials have a very low to low expansion index and a negligible sulfate
content. However, because testing results were in the upper limit of the "low" expansion classification, it
is anticipated that medium expansion potential may exist. The subject site is underlain by artificial fill,
colluvium, and terrace deposits overlying bedrock assigned to the Monterey Formation. Adherence to the
recommendations in the Report of Geotechnical Studies (GMU, 2008) prepared for the project will ensure
that impacts associated with expansive soils would be avoided. With the incorporation of these
recommendations, potential impacts will be less than significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal
of waste water?
No Impact. The project will be connected to existing sewer lines. No septic tanks or alternative waste
water disposal systems are proposed. Therefore, no significant impacts related to the implementation of
an alternative waste disposal system are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
As indicated in the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed project, construction of the proposed
improvements (i.e., Golf Club, Tennis Club, The Bungalows, and Villas) is feasible from a geotechnical
perspective. The following measures shall be implemented to ensure that no potentially significant
geotechnical impacts identified in the preceding analysis occur.
SC-9 All grading operations and construction shall comply with the applicable City of Newport Beach
Grading Code and Grading Manual and the most recent version of the California Building Code.
SC-10 Prior to issuance of the grading permit, an erosion control plan shall be submitted to and
approved by the City's Chief Building Official.
SC-11 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a soils engineering report and
final geotechnical report to the City's Building Department for approval.
MM-2 The project shall be designed to incorporate the recommendations included in "Revised
Preliminary Geotechnical Design Parameters for the NBCC Planned Community" (April 25, 2008)
and "Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15347"
(May 2, 2008) prepared by GMU Geotechnical that address site grading, site clearing,
compaction, bearing capacity and settlement, lateral pressures, footing design, seismic design,
slabs on grade, retaining wall design, subdrain design, concrete, surface drainage, landscape
maintenance, etc. The Building Department shall review the grading plan to ensure conformance
with recommendations contained in the final geotechnical report.
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Background
The earth's natural warming process is known as the "greenhouse effect." The greenhouse effect keeps
the earth warm and habitable, raising the temperature of the earth's surface by about sixty degrees
Fahrenheit. With the natural greenhouse effect, the average temperature of the earth is about 45
degrees Fahrenheit. Obviously, the earth would be much less inviting without the greenhouse effect.3 It is
'Climate Change 101: Understanding and Responding to Global Climate Change, published by the Pew Center on Global Climate
Change and the Pew Center on the States.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 57
normal for the earth's temperature to fluctuate over extended periods of time. For example, the climate of
the Northern Hemisphere varied from a relatively warm period between the eleventh and fifteenth
centuries to a period of cooler temperatures between the seventeenth century and the middle of the
nineteenth century.4 Viewed in historic terms, global climate change is a natural phenomenon.
Over the past one hundred years, the earth's average global temperature has generally increased by one
degree Fahrenheit. In some regions of the world, the increase has been as much as four degrees
Fahrenheit.5 Many scientists studying the particularly rapid rise in global temperatures Burin? the late
twentieth century say that natural variability does not alone account for what is happening now. Rather,
they say, human activity spawned by the industrial revolution has resulted in increased emissions of
carbon dioxide and other forms of "greenhouse gas" (GHG), primarily from the burning of fossil fuels
(during motorized transport, electricity generation, consumption of natural gas, industrial activity,
manufacturing, etc.) and deforestation, as well as agricultural activity and the decomposition of solid
waste. These scientists refer to the global warming context of the past century as the "enhanced
greenhouse effect" to distinguish it from the natural greenhouse effect.' While the increase in
temperature is known as "global warming," the resulting change in weather patterns is known as "global
climate change." Global climate change is evidenced in wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and air
temperature.
The human -produced GHGs believed to be responsible for the enhanced greenhouse effect and their
relative influence on the global warming process (i.e., their relative ability to trap heat in the atmosphere)
are estimated to be: carbon dioxide (CO2) (53 percent); methane (CH4) (17 percent); near -surface ozone
(03) (13 percent); nitrous oxide (N20) (12 percent); and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) (5 percent). The
most common GHG is CO2, which constitutes approximately 84 percent of all GHG emissions in
California (California Energy Commission, 2006). Worldwide, the State of California ranks as the 121h to
16th largest emitter of CO2 (the most prevalent GHG) and is responsible for approximately 2 percent of the
world's CO2 emissions (CEC 2006).
The warming pattern of the last 100 years, however, does not present a steady and consistent rise in the
earth's temperature. Scientists have noted significant warming between 1910 and 1940, moderate
cooling from 1940 to 1975, and a large warming again starting in 1975.$ Additionally, there remains
debate over the precise extent to which the enhanced greenhouse effect differs from the natural
greenhouse effect, as well as the amount of the change in temperature and climate which can be
attributed to human activity, as opposed to natural cycles. There is, however, general agreement within
the scientific community that increasing emissions of GHGs have significantly contributed to a trend of
increasing the Earth's average temperature and that human activity plays a significant role in those
emissions. It also is generally agreed that the warming of the earth produces changes in the Earth's
climate.
Methodology has been evolving over the past several years relative to the evaluation under CEQA of the
potential impacts of GHG emissions upon global climate change and, in turn, the impacts of global
climate change upon the environment. The evaluation contained in this MND reflects the City's thorough
investigation and analysis of the proposed Project's incremental contribution to greenhouse gas
emissions and the potential impacts those emissions may have on the environment. This evaluation has
been shaped by (i) the provisions of CEQA and its Guidelines (and, specifically, newly effective CEQA
Guidelines addressing the evaluation of GHG emissions) which dictate the required scope and extent of
'Id.
5Brohan, P., J.J. Kennedy, I. Haris, et al., Uncertainty estimates in regional and global observed temperature changes: a new
dataset from 1850. Journal of Geophysical Research, 2006. 111: p. D12106, doi:10.1029/2003JA009974.
slntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2001. "Comparison between modeled and observations of temperature rise since the
year 1860." In Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report, Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Third Assessment Report.
Robert T. Watson and the Core Writing Team, eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
7Clmmate Change 101: Understanding and Responding to Global Climate Change, published by the Pew Center on Global Climate
Change and the Pew Center on the States.
8 Id.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 58
impact analysis, and (ii) the City's recently employed methodology for the evaluation of GHG emissions
which supplements CEQA's requirements. Additional background is as follows:
AB 32 and Amended CEQA Guidelines
In adopting the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (commonly known as "AB 32"), the State
Legislature declared that "[g]lobal warming poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public
health, natural resources, and the environment of California." Further, the Legislature determined that
"the potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a
reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels
resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine
ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious disease,
asthma, and other human health -related problems." The Legislature added that "[g]lobal warming will
have detrimental effects on some of California's largest industries" and will "increase the strain on
electricity supplies necessary to meet the demand for summer air-conditioning in the hottest parts of the
state."
AB 32, however, did not amend CEQA or establish regulatory standards to be applied to new
development or environmental review of projects within the State. Rather, AB 32 initiated a long-term
program for "the development of [GHG] emissions reduction measures." Quoting from a public notice
prepared by the staff of the California Air Resources Board ("GARB") in connection with a meeting on
October 25, 2007, to consider "early discrete actions," AB 32 "creates a comprehensive, multi -year
program to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in California, with the overall goal of restoring
emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020." The Act recognizes that such an ambitious effort requires
careful planning and a well thought out set of strategies.
Despite some perceptions to the contrary, neither AB 32 nor subsequent actions taken to date by either
the Legislature, the Governor, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), or the Governor's Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) have established either (i) specific new regulatory standards as part of a
statewide or regional plan to curb global warming impacts, or (ii) thresholds of significance for the
evaluation of either direct or cumulative impacts under CEQA.
Certain milestones were, however, established by the Act, including an important milestone for the
adoption of amended CEQA Guidelines intended to address the methodology for evaluating GHG
impacts (the "Amended Guidelines"). Those Amended Guidelines have been adopted and became
effective on March 18, 2010. However, while the Amended Guidelines provide guidance to public
agencies in their analysis under CEQA of GHG emissions and call for a "good -faith effort, based to the
extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse
gas emissions resulting from a project" (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4), they do not establish any
specific thresholds to be used by agencies in evaluating the significance of potential GHG impacts.
Therefore, this MND evaluates potential GHG impacts by following the guidance of the Guidelines in the
context of the overall directives of CEQA for impact evaluation. To supplement that CEQA analysis, this
MND also evaluates potential GHG impacts using a separate threshold recently employed by the City for
the evaluation of GHG emissions.
Global Climate Change in the CEQA Context
The evaluation of a project's impacts on global climate change begins with an analysis of the project's
GHG emissions. Greenhouse gases include CO2, CH4, N20, and CFCs. CO2 is the GHG most focused
upon, because it exists in greatest volume in the atmosphere. Currently CO2 levels are approximately 380
ppm (parts per million). Prior to the industrial era (which began in the late 1800s), CO2 levels in the
atmosphere had not exceeded 280 ppm, for the last million years. Due to human activities after the onset
of the industrial era, GHGs, including CO2, have risen at exponential levels. It is well documented that
human activities are a direct cause of increases in GHG concentrations in the atmosphere over this time
period.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 59
A particular challenge to global climate change analysis under CEQA, however, is that while the
evaluation of a project's direct impacts may start with the simple question of whether the project
contributes to an environmental effect such as global climate change, it does not end there. Rather,
CEQA requires a legitimate determination as to whether the project contributes to a level that makes that
contribution significant. CEQA defines a "significant effect on the environment" as a substantial, or
potentially substantial, adverse change in the environment. Exactly what contribution to an impact is
required for an impact to be "significant" is evaluated through the establishment of a "threshold of
significance."9 A threshold of significance cannot be an arbitrary measure. With respect to global climate
change and absent an adopted regulatory standard, the establishment of a feasible and practical
significance threshold which meets the requirements of CEQA and the United States Constitution has
proved challenging.
Because GHGs are well mixed in the atmosphere and remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from
decades to centuries, GHG emissions from each single worldwide source commingle with emissions from
all other worldwide sources in a matter of days to influence climate change on a global, rather than local
or regional, basis.10 California GHG emissions, for example, do not specifically produce global climate
change impacts in California, but rather quickly commingle with GHG emissions from around the world to
influence global climate change patterns throughout the world. This "commingled" nature of GHG
emissions makes it infeasible to assess the relative contribution of any one project's GHG emissions to
worldwide GHG emissions without undue speculation.
So, while certain emissions may contribute to both air quality and global climate change impacts, air
quality impacts represent an entirely different phenomenon than global climate change impacts.
Therefore, the analysis of the impact of GHG emissions on global climate change requires different
methodology than does the analysis of the impact of the emission of air pollutants on air quality
conditions.
CEQA does not authorize the imposition of mitigation measures that do not comply with the doctrines of
"nexus" and "rough proportionality' (see CEQA Guidelines §15126.4(a)(4)(A and B). These doctrines
have been articulated by the United States Supreme Court and provide, in essence, that before mitigation
may be imposed upon a proposed project, (i) there must be a direct relationship (i.e., "nexus") between
the impacts of the project and the mitigation imposed and (ii) the mitigation required must be "roughly
proportional" to the project's contribution to the impact relative to existing conditions and other projects.
Thus, even if it were feasible to evaluate the impacts of a small project on global climate change,
mitigation of that project's contribution to global climate change may be required only if (i) the proposed
project's impact can be determined based upon an appropriate threshold of significance, (ii) feasible
mitigation can be identified which has a nexus to the impact, and (iii) the mitigation is roughly proportional
to the proposed project's relative contribution to the impact. These criteria also are infeasible, if not
impossible, to apply without speculation.
CEQA also allows a project to be evaluated for consistency with "applicable general plans and regional
plans" (see CEQA Guidelines §15125(e)). Such plans would include, for example, "the applicable air
quality attainment or maintenance plan." These plans involve legislative or regulatory programs applicable
to all projects within the region. They establish standards which are independent of the impact analysis
described in the CEQA Guidelines (see provisions beginning with Section 15126). Therefore, the
"measuring stick" of a regional plan does not require a typical CEQA impact analysis in order to ensure
compliance with that plan. While the program for GHG emissions reductions and maintenance which
ultimately is intended to result from AB 32 will likely constitute such a regional plan once it is adopted, that
AB 32 program does not yet exist and may not be in place for several years. No other program
establishing such regulatory standards has yet been adopted. Therefore, there is not yet a regional or
statewide plan regulating global warming by which the Proposed Project can be measured.
' CEQA Guideline §15064.7 defines a "threshold of significance" as "an identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a
particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the
agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant."
10Pew Center for Global Climate Change (2003). Designing a Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction for the U.S.,
retrieved March 12, 2007, from http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/USGas%2E.pdf.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 60
Each of these considerations bears on this MND's evaluation of the potential impacts of GHG emissions
on global climate change.
Threshold for Determining Significance
There is general scientific acceptance that global warming is occurring and that human activity is a
significant contributor to the process, suggesting to some that the emission of even a minute amount of
GHG contributes to the warming process. However, under CEQA, such a conclusion would result in an
improper threshold. The reasons are straightforward.
First, because regulatory programs establishing specific GHG emission standards have not been
adopted, the CEQA analysis of global climate change, must focus only on the "relative" — as opposed to
"absolute" — effects of a project, using existing environmental conditions as a baseline. That means that
the evaluation of a proposed project's potential GHG impacts must determine whether the proposed
project's contribution to global climate change is significant when compared to the conditions existing
when preparation of the EIR began.
Second, of precise relevance to any argument that even small amounts of GHG emissions are intended
to be prohibited by AB 32, AB 32 explicitly established the State's policy that "de minimis" emissions shall
not be subject to regulation. Specifically, AB 32 requires that CARB "recommend a de minimis threshold
of greenhouse gas emissions below which emission reduction requirements will not apply."
Direct Impacts
Given the scope and magnitude of global GHG emissions, there is little, if any, support in the scientific
and environmental communities for the proposition that an isolated project's relatively miniscule
contribution of GHG standing alone (i.e., a direct, as opposed to cumulative, project impact) would
significantly alter the course of global climate change. In its April 13, 2009, letter to the Secretary for
Natural Resources accompanying the proposed Amended Guidelines, OPR stated that the "impact
resulting from greenhouse gas emissions are cumulative in nature." In a 2008 Technical Advisory, CPR
noted that "climate change is ultimately a cumulative impact." Essentially, with the theoretically possible
exception of an extremely large project emitting extreme amounts of GHG, a project's "net"" contribution
to GHG emissions relative to existing conditions is subject to evaluation, if at all, only on a cumulative
basis.
Cumulative Impacts
With respect to cumulative impacts, CEQA establishes specific criteria for impact evaluation when
assessing whether an EIR must be prepared. (CEQA Guidelines §15064(h). The Initial Study and/or MND
must determine if the proposed project's effects would be "cumulatively considerable," meaning "that the
incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, the effects of current projects, and the effects of probable future projects." (CEQA
Guidelines §15065(h)(1)).
Section 15064(h)(3) of the Guidelines provides that a "lead agency may determine that a project's
incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not considerable if the project will comply with the
requirements in a previously approved plan or mitigation program which provides specific requirements
that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem." As noted above, no such plan or program
yet exists.
Section 15130 of the Guidelines sets forth the methodology by which an EIR must assess the significance
of cumulative impacts. Because the MND criteria set forth in Section 15064(h)(1) and 15064(h)(3) are
essentially the same as those set forth in the more detailed Section 15130, this MND utilizes that more
" "Net" refers to the relative, rather than absolute, contribution of a proposed project when compared to
the existing environmental conditions.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 61
detailed description as guidance in its evaluation of whether the Proposed Project's potential cumulative
impacts related to global climate change are significant and cumulatively considerable. Section 15130(b)
states that the "following elements are necessary (emphasis added) to an adequate discussion of
significant cumulative impacts:
"(1) Either:
(A) A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative
impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the agency, or
(B) A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning
document, or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified,
which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the
cumulative impact. Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available
to the public at a location specified by the Lead Agency."
Obviously, absent gross speculation, a list of past, current, and reasonably foreseeable future projects
throughout the world which potentially contribute to global warming is not feasible to assemble. And, as
discussed above, there is not yet an adopted or certified planning document which contains a summary of
projections based on known or likely worldwide projects. Therefore, this MND cannot feasibly evaluate
potential cumulative project global climate change impacts in the "necessary" manner currently required
by CEQA.
With this extensive background, the analysis of the potential effects of the Proposed Project is as follows:
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions either directly or indirectly, that
may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. During project construction, the URBEMIS2007 computer model predicts
that a peak activity day in the single worst case year of construction (2009 during demolition and grading)
will generate 9,004.8 pounds/day of CO2.
Equipment exhaust also contains small amounts of methane and nitric oxides, which are also GHGs.
Non-0O2 GHG emissions represent approximately a three percent increase in CO2_equivalent (CO2e)
emissions from diesel equipment exhaust. For purposes of analysis, it was assumed that the non-0O2
GHG emissions from construction equipment are negligible, and that the total project construction GHG
burden can be characterized by 40 peak activity days. The estimated annual GHG impact is estimated to
be 164 metric tons (MT)/year, if all the above activities were to occur in a single year.
For screening purposes, the temporary construction activity GHG emissions were compared to the
chronic operational emissions in the SCAQMD's interim thresholds. The proposed industrial operational
threshold is 10,000 metric tons (MT) of CO2e per year.12 Grading activities generating 164 MT are well
below this threshold. Construction activity GHG emissions are also below the proposed operational
screening criteria of 3,000 MT for non -industrial uses.13
The Proposed Project's daily operational CO2e emissions will be less than existing emissions from
reduced project -site travel. The annual reduction of 574 MT (631 "short" tons) of CO2e emissions will
offset the 196 MT of "new" CO2e emissions generated by the Proposed Project.
Because the Proposed Project will generate fewer GHG emissions than are generated under existing
environmental conditions and despite the challenge of establishing thresholds of significance for global
climate change impacts, it can be fairly stated that under any threshold which would be permitted by
CEQA, the Proposed Project will not have a significant impact on global climate change.
12Recommended by the South Coast Air Quality Management District.
13Id.
NBNPOnTBEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2O05140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PageG2
As a result, the Proposed Project will not produce GHG emissions to a level which will have a significant
impact onglobal climate change.
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable p|an, policy or regulation, adopted for the
purpose ofreducing the emissions mfgreenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed extensively obova, there is not yet a p|on, po|iuy, or
regulation adopted to reduce GHG emissions which is applicable tothe Proposed Project. The City of
Newport Boaoh, howevor, has implemented an informal policy for the environmental evaluation of
potential GHG impacts of proposed projects. That policy provides that, until more guidance is provided
from the expert agencies such as CARBand/or SCAQMD. the City intends toconsider projects emitting
1.600 metric tons of COzo or |eoa per year to be less than significant contributors to global climate
change, thereby not requiring further analysis. For projects exceeding the screening threshold of 1.600
metric tons Of CO2e emissions per year, the City will consider those projects to have significant impacts if
they either (1) are not substantially consistent with policies and standards set out in federa|, state, and
local plans designed to reduoaGHGs or(2)would emit more than 6.000 metric tons nfCO2e per year.
Projects that do not meet these thresholds would be considered tohave significant innpaotu, and thus
could be expected to impede the Stato'o mandatory requirement under AB 32 to reduce statewide GHG
emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. As set forth above, in a "worst case" year, the Proposed Project's daily
COze emissions during construction will equal no more than 184 metric tons. The operational activities of
the Proposed Pnojaot, which, under CEQA, must be evaluated not in ''abnn|ute" ternno, but rather by
comparison to existing environmental nonditions, will not only be well below the City'o informal threshold
at 196 metric tons per year on an absolute baois, but will actually reduce overall operational GHG
emissions byapproximately 378metric tons per year onanongoing basis.
Theroforo, not only will the Proposed Project not conflict with any adopted p|an, po|icy, or regulation
pertaining to GHG emissions and comply with the City'u informal GHG throaho|d, it will actually reduce
GHG emissions unolong-term basis. Aaaresult, the Proposed Project will not produce GHG emissions
toalevel which will have osignificant impact onglobal climate change.
Speculation and Guidelines Section 15Y45
Finally, it must also be noted that Section 15145 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that "[i]f, after thorough
investigation, a lead agency finds that a particular impact is too speculative for evaluation, the agency
should note its conclusion and terminate discussion ofthe impooi." Beyond the analysis contained inthis
K4ND, vvhiuh, standing a|one, complies with CEQA'o analysis nequinomento, baohnioo| data does not yet
exist that would allow the City to determine without the use of undue speculation how a project of this size
wou|d, relative to other proposed projects throughout the vvor|d, contribute to global climate change.
Evaluation using speculative ''par capita" or other projections of worldwide GHG emissions based upon
projections of population growth over many decades may provide valuable information, but would not
constitute an analysis of the "incremental affoctn" of the project in either of the contexts identified in
Section 15130(b) of the CE(JA Guidelines which are discussed above. Therefore, because (i) CEC>A
prohibits speculative analysis and (ii)the Proposed Pro]eot'e projected GHG emissions will not exceed
those generated under existing environmental conditions, further analysis is not required.
Mitigation Measures
Because there are no impacts related to global climate change, no mitigation measures are required.
However, it should be noted that the following standard conditions and project design features have been
incorporated into the Proposed Project and will contribute to the Proposed Projeot'o net long term
reduction ofGHG emissions.
SC'12 All new buildings shall meet Title 24requirements.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 63
PDF-1 Design of buildings shall take into account the location of building air intake to maximize
ventilation efficiency and incorporate natural ventilation.
PDF-2 The buildings shall incorporate energy -conserving heating and lighting systems.
PDF-3 The project shall incorporate fast-growing, low water use landscape to enhance carbon
sequestration and reduce water use.
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Construction activities associated with the
proposed project would include oil, gas, tar, construction materials and adhesives, cleaning solvents and
paint, and other similar construction -related materials. Transport of these materials to the site and use on
the site would only create a localized hazard in the event of an accident or spills. Hazardous materials
use, transport, storage and handling would be subject to federal, state and local regulations to reduce the
risk of accidents. Equipment maintenance and disposal of vehicular fluids is subject to existing
regulations, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Given the nature of
the project in terms of scope and size (i.e., redevelopment of existing private golf and tennis facilities), it is
anticipated that normal storage, use and transport of hazardous materials will not result in undue risk to
construction workers on the site or to persons on surrounding areas. The use and disposal of any
hazardous materials on the site and in conjunction with the project will be in accordance with existing
regulations. With the exception of quantities of pesticides, fertilizers, cleaning solvents, paints, etc., that
are typically used to maintain the golf course located on the property, on -going operation of the Newport
Beach Country Club and proposed residential and resort uses will not result in the storage or use of
significant quantities of hazardous materials beyond that currently used. As a result, no significant
impacts are anticipated related to the use, disposal and/or storage of hazardous materials in association
with the proposed uses. As indicated in Section Vlll.c, remediation of the ACM and LBP in accordance
with regulatory requirements would avoid any potential impacts previously identified. No additional
mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project 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?
Less than Significant Impact. According to historical sources and regulatory database information, the
subject property (1600 East Coast Highway) was previously equipped with a 550-gallon underground
gasoline storage (UST) tank that was installed in the southwestern corner of the property in 1965 and
removed in 1987. A Summary of Remedial Operations Report was prepared (1987), which revealed that
the tank had a dime -sized hole in the bottom. Subsequent sampling and laboratory analysis were
undertaken that indicated elevated levels of hydrocarbon, including aromatic constituents' benzene, were
present in the subsurface soil below the excavation pit. Excavation and sampling of the soils were
conducted, which indicated that the constituents analyzed were non-detect14 and closure was granted by
the Orange County Health Authority (sic). Based on the results of the previous investigation and
regulatory closure, the former 550-gallon UST in the southwestern portion of the subject property is not
expected to represent a significant environmental concern.
The proposed project's demolition and construction do not involve any activities and/or uses that would
utilize hazardous materials or other substances that would, if released into the environment, create a
safety or health hazard, other than those which are part of the existing environmental conditions because
they are currently used to maintain the golf course and related facilities. The nature of the existing golf
course use involves the application, storage, and mixing of pesticides and herbicides on the property.
14Partner Engineering and Science, Inc.; Addendum Letter dated March 29, 2010.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 64
The chemicals are utilized to service the golf course greens and fairways. The chemicals, fertilizers and
other hazardous materials will continue to be maintained on the premises in accordance with existing and
future regulatory storage and use requirements. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
In addition, two 55-gallon drums of waste oil within the maintenance area of the golf course were
observed during the field investigation conducted during the Phase I ESA. The drums were used to store
waste oil during golf cart repair activities and were stored over secondary containment. No spills, leaks or
drains were observed near the vicinity of the drains. Based on the good housekeeping practices and lack
of direct conduit to the subsurface of the subject property near the waste oil drums, these drums are not
expected to represent a significant environmental concern. No changes in these operations or activities
are anticipated as a result of project implementation. Continued compliance with regulatory requirements
will ensure that no potentially significant impact would occur. No mitigation measures are required.
Two ponds are located within the boundaries of the golf course. No violations were noted during the
research and information search. No hazardous materials were noted near the vicinity of the ponds,
which are located throughout the golf course. Based on the lack of documented releases and evidence of
hazardous materials near the ponds, they are not expected to pose a significant environmental concern
or hazard.
Finally, three (3) pole -mounted transformers were observed on the subject property. The transformers
are not labeled indicating PCB content. No staining or leakage was observed in the vicinity of the
transformers. Based on the good condition of the equipment, the transformers are not expected to
represent a significant environmental concern. The transformers appear to be owned by Southern
California Edison (SCE), which would be responsible for maintenance of these facilities. Additionally, no
other potential PCB -containing equipment (e.g., interior transformers, oil -filled switches, hoists, lifts, dock
levelers, hydraulic elevators, etc.) was observed on the subject property during the site reconnaissance.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
material, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Less than Significant Impact. Visual asbestos surveys were conducted by Con -Test in 1992 and also
during a Phase I ESA by prepared by Law/Crandall, Inc., in 1994. During that latter visual survey, several
areas within the Newport Beach Country Club facilities were observed to have asbestos containing
materials (ACM), including:
• Floor tile located in the back office of the first floor of the clubhouse.
• Vinyl flooring located on the second floor next to the ballroom of the clubhouse.
• Floor tile located on the first floor in the women's restroom near the office area of the
clubhouse.
• Vinyl flooring located on the first floor in the restaurant waiter's room of the clubhouse.
• Spray -applied acoustical ceiling located in the manager/receptionist offices, professional
shop, dressing room, and women's locker room of the clubhouse.
• Exterior plaster located outside the professional shop of the clubhouse.
• Air cell pipe insulation located in the restroom hallway of the kitchen, janitor storage
room, and the roof attic mechanical area of the clubhouse.
• Air cell duct insulation located in the roof attic mechanical area.
• Pipe elbow insulation located in the roof attic mechanical area of the clubhouse.
• Roof penetration sealant located at the perimeter flashings and penetrations of the low
and high roof of the clubhouse.
The visual asbestos survey conducted by Law/Crandall, Inc., also concluded that the ACM reported in a
prior survey conducted in 1992 by Con -Test was still present at the site. The Law/Crandall asbestos
survey recommended that the ACM be maintained in place by instituting an operations and maintenance
(O&M) program (i.e., repair damaged asbestos, clean up of contaminated areas, notification and training
of employees, routine inspections of ACM, etc.), which should continue until the ACM is removed.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 65
A limited visual evaluation of accessible areas was also conducted during the preparation of the most
recent Phase I ESA prepared by Partner Engineering and Science, Inc., for the presence of suspect
ACM. Based on that limited survey, suspect ACMs were noted in the acoustic ceiling tiles, vinyl floor tiles,
and drywall systems within the buildings located on the subject property. All of the ACM and PACM
(presumed asbestos -containing materials) were noted to be in good condition. Demolition of the existing
Golf Clubhouse and other structures, which were constructed in 1964, is proposed by the applicant.
Without proper remediation, it is possible that ACM could be released into the environment; however,
according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), ACM and PACM that are intact and in good
condition can, in general, be managed safely in -place under an Operations and Maintenance (O&M)
program until removal is dictated by renovation, demolition, or deteriorating material conditions. As
indicated above, an O&M program was recommended in 1994 following completion of the Law/Crandall
asbestos survey.
In addition to ACM, it is also possible that lead -based paint (LBP) may also exist within the structures;
however, due to the commercial nature of the current use of the property, LBP was not considered within
the scope of the Phase I ESA. Because the structures were built in 1964, it is also possible that LBP may
exist within the structures. Similar to ACM, the release of LBP into the environmental could pose a
potential health risk, given the proximity of the residential uses in the project environs. Therefore, prior to
any disturbance of the structures and construction materials within the project site, a comprehensive ACM
and LBP survey shall be conducted and appropriate measures prescribed to ensure that no release of
either ACM or LBP occurs, including during remediation and transport and disposal of those materials.
Remediation shall comply with all applicable regulatory requirements. Air emissions of asbestos fibers
and leaded dust would be reduced to below a level of significance through compliance with existing
federal, state, and local regulatory requirements.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials
sites which complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
No Impact. Information from standard federal, state, county, and city environmental record sources
provided by Track Info Services Environmental FirstSearch was included in the Phase I ESA. This
information revealed that with the exception of the UST previously discussed (refer to Section Vlll.b), the
subject property is not included on any lists of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5. Table 5 summarizes the results of the data base records searches,
which revealed that no environmental concerns were identified on the site or within the requisite
distances.
Based on the database search conducted for the proposed project and included in the Phase I ESA,
neither the subject property nor other properties identified within one mile of the site would expose the
site and/or future users to an environmental concern or hazard. No significant impacts are anticipated
and no mitigation measures are required.
Radon has been identified as a potentially hazardous element. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has developed a map to assist National, State, and local organizations to target their
resources and to implement radon -resistant building codes. The EPA has identified a limit of 4.0
picoCuries per Liter (pCi/L) as the "Action Limit" for Radon. Radon sampling was not conducted as part
of the Phase I ESA. However, review of the EPA Map of the Radon Zones places the subject property in
Zone 3, where average predicted radon levels are less than 2.0 pCi/L. Therefore, potential impacts are
anticipated to be less than significant.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 66
Table 5
t. ...
Newport
Applicable
Database
Radius
Results
Federal National Priorities List (NPL)
1 Mile
No sites
Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Information System
Y2 Mile
No sites
(CERCLIS)
Federal CERCLIS — No further Remedial Action
Y2 Mile
No sites
Planned (NFRAP)
Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
1 Mile
No sites
(RCRA) Corrective Action (CORRACTS) Facilities
Federal RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal
Y2 Mile
No sites
(TSD) List
Federal RCRA Generator List
1/8 Mile
2 facilities
Federal Institutional Controls/Engineering Controls
Y4 Mile
No sites
(IC/EC)
Federal Emergency Notification Systems (ERNS)
__
No sites on or adjacent to the
subject property
Tribal lands
1 Mile
No sites
State/Tribal Sites
1 Mile
No sites
State Spills Sites (SPILLS)
1/8 Mile
No sites
Solid Waste Landfill Facilities (SWLF)
Y2 Mile
No sites
State/Tribal Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Y2 mile
21 sites
1/8 Mile
8 sites
(LUST)
State/Tribal Underground Storage
The subject property and 3
Tank/Aboveground Storage Tank List (UST/AST)
3
additional sites
State/Tribal VCP
Y2 Mile
No sites
State/Tribal Brownfield Sites
Y2 Mile
No sites
'These sites are not located adjacent to the site and, based on the relative distance, are not expected
to pose a significant environmental concern.
2None of the UST sites identified in the database search include such facilities as the Newport Police
Department, service stations, etc., which do not pose a potential environmental concern or hazard to
the subject property.
3Neither the subject property nor the UST/AST sites identified in the Phase I ESA pose a potential
environmental concern or hazard.
SOURCE: Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. (April 3, 2009)
As indicated above, no recognized environmental conditions (REC)' were identified during the on -site
investigation and/or database search conducted for the proposed project and discussed in the Phase I
ESA. As a result, no potentially significant health hazards or environmental hazards are anticipated and
no mitigation measures are required.
'The presence or likely presence of any hazardous substance or petroleum product on a property under conditions that indicate an
existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products into structures
on the property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the property.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 67
e) For a project 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 airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The project site is located approximately 4.0 miles south of John Wayne Airport (JWA). A
portion of the Newport Beach Country Club property is located within the Airport Environs Land Use Plan
(AELUP) Notification Area (i.e., FAR Part 77) for JWA. Although operations at JWA would not pose a
safety hazard for the golf course and related facilities or future occupants and/or visitors at the site due to
the proximity of the project to the airport, the City is required to submit the PC Amendment to the Airport
Land Use commission (ALUC) for a determination of consistency in accordance with Section 4.3 of the
AELUP prior to adoption by the City. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation
measures are required.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The subject property is not located within proximity to a private airstrip. Development of the
site as proposed will not result in potential adverse impacts, including safety hazards, to people utilizing
the proposed golf and tennis amenities or others residing or working in the project area. Therefore, no
significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are
necessary.
g) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Newport Beach has prepared an Emergency Operations Plan
that designates procedures to be followed in case of a major emergency. Pacific Coast Highway is
designated as an evacuation route in the City. The project site is not designated for emergency use
within the Emergency Operations Plan. The primary concern of the Public Safety Element and the City of
Newport Beach is in terms of risks to persons and personal property. Although the site is subject to
seismic shaking, development pursuant to building and fire code requirements will ensure that the
potential impacts are minimized or reduced to an acceptable level. The site is not located within a flood
hazard area or subject to such potential disasters. Development of the subject property as proposed will
not adversely affect either the evacuation routes or the adopted emergency operations planning
program(s) being implemented by the City of Newport Beach. Potential circulation impacts associated
with construction will be temporary in nature and will be addressed through the Construction Staging Plan
that will be implemented (refer to Section XVI.f.) In addition, any construction vehicles within the public
right of way are prohibited from completely blocking vehicular and emergency access by the Vehicle
Code. As a result, potential short-term circulation impacts associated with construction would not be
significant.
h) Would the project 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?
No Impact. Neither the project site nor the surrounding areas are not located within a "Potential Fire
Hazard Area" as identified by the Newport General Plan Public Safety Element. The subject property is
located within an urbanized area of the City of Newport Beach. No significant areas of natural vegetation
and/or habitat exists on the site and the proposed project would not be directly affected by the potential
for wildland fires. There are no major urban or wildland fire hazards that pose a significant threat to the
development. Therefore, the site is not subject to a potential risk of wildland fires. No significant impacts
as a result of wildland fires will occur if the project is implemented and no mitigation measures are
necessary.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 68
Mitigation Measures
The following measures shall be implemented to ensure that no potentially significant hazards or
hazardous material impacts identified in the preceding analysis occur.
SC-14 Prior to any disturbance of the construction materials within the Golf Clubhouse and/or the Tennis
Clubhouse, a comprehensive ACM and LBP survey shall be conducted. Any repairs,
renovations, removal or demolition activities that will impact the ACM and/or LBP or inaccessible
ACM shall be performed by a licensed asbestos contractor. Inaccessible suspect ACM shall be
tested prior to demolition or renovation. Proper safety procedures for the handling of suspect
ACM and LBP shall be followed in accordance with federal, state and local regulatory
requirements federal and California Occupation Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and
Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Rule 1403, which sets forth specific procedures and
requirements related to demolition activities involving asbestos containing materials and
SCAQMD Regulation X - National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart M -
National Emission Standards For Asbestos, which include demolition activities involving
asbestos.
SC-15 During demolition, grading, and excavation, workers shall comply with the requirements of Title 8
of the California Code of Regulations Section 1532.1, which provides for exposure limits,
exposure monitoring, respiratory protection, and good working practice by workers exposed to
lead. Lead -contaminated debris and other wastes shall be managed and disposed of in
accordance with the applicable provision of the California Health and Safety Code.
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
Less than Significant impact. Waste discharges associated with this project that could affect water
quality would be limited to non -point source discharges, including potential storm water runoff of
construction materials and wastes and storm water runoff from the developed site. This project would not
generate any point sources of water pollution; all wastewater generated by the proposed project would
discharge directly to the City's sanitary sewer system, which would not affect the present permit to
operate the affected wastewater treatment plant. Because the proposed project consists of development
similar to existing and adjacent properties, the raw sewage that would be generated by the proposed
project would be similar in nature to that now generated and would not significantly affect wastewater
treatment.
Potentially adverse water quality impacts during the construction phases would be avoided through
compliance with existing regulatory programs administered by the City of Newport Beach and the Santa
Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). While it is impossible to anticipate all potential
environmental issues that could arise on a daily basis during the course of the project, the site will be
designed to address sediment and erosion control for both temporary (i.e., construction) and long-term
(i.e., operational) activities occurring on the subject property. The water quality features incorporated into
the project will be selected to address the main pollutants of concern for a project of this type, and for the
impacted water body, i.e. Newport Bay. Newport Bay, which is located approximately 0.5 mile from the
site, is listed as an "impaired" water body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with respect to
copper, nutrients, pathogens, pesticides (e.g., chlordane, DDT, PCBs, etc.), and sediment toxicity.
The pollutants of concern associated with the proposed project include sediment, nutrients, pathogens
(i.e., bacteria/viruses), and pesticides. Urban runoff pollutants and their potential sources are
summarized in Table 6.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 69
l
PollutantsUrban Runoff
..I4AWyJ
Pollutants
7 Potential Source
303(d) Listing
Sediment/Turbidity
Landscape Activities
Lower Newport Bay (801.14) Sediment
Nutrients
Fertilizers
Lower Newport Bay (801.14) Nutrients
Bacteria and Viruses
Animal Waste
Lower Newport Bay (801.14) Nutrients
Oil and Grease
Automobiles
N/A
Oxygen Demanding Substances
Landscape Activities
N/A
Trash and Debris
Human Waste
N/A
Pesticides
Landscape Activities
Lower Newport Bay (801.14 (Chlordane,
DDT, Organos hosphate pesticides
SOURCE: Adams Streeter, Civil Engineers, Inc. (January 14, 2009
Implementation of the water quality features prescribed in the NPDES Technical Study prepared for the
project, prior to issuance of the grading permit, will ensure that this project does not violate any water
quality standards during construction. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no additional
mitigation measures are required.
In accordance with the Water Quality Management Plan that will be prepared for the project, appropriate
BMPs will be incorporated to ensure that water quality impacts are minimized, including for the hand car
wash, which includes a feature to capture and clean the wash water before it enters the sanitary sewer
system. It is important to note that no water quality features exist within the limits of the project site. As a
result, surface runoff currently emanating on the site and entering Newport Harbor is not treated.
However, project implementation will incorporate BMPs that will treat the surface runoff associated with
the existing and proposed development and will discharge treated water that will meet discharge
requirements prescribed for Newport Harbor. Tables 10 (General Plan Policy Analysis) and 11(Coastal
Land Use Policy Analysis) in Section X (Land Use and Planning) provide a discussion of the project's
consistency with relevant General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan policies related to water quality. As
indicated in that discussion, the proposed project is consistent with meeting the intent of minimizing
potential water quality impacts. Therefore, no long-term water quality impacts are anticipated as a result
of project implementation.
b) Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially
with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing
nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned
uses for which permits have been granted)?
No Impact. This project would not result in a significant increase in water demand and the project's
potable and non -potable water demands would be met through a connection to the City's domestic water
system. The proposed project would actually result in some increased groundwater recharge through its
design, which includes a decrease in the amount of impervious surfaces (i.e., a concomitant increase in
the amount of pervious surfaces on the site), thereby resulting in increased groundwater recharge. No
water wells are proposed or required to meet the water demands of this project. There are no water wells
located on or near the site, and since this project would not affect any existing wells or require any new
water wells, the project will not result in the lowering of the water table. No significant impacts to
groundwater recharge are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 70
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site?
Less Than Significant Impact. No stream or river exists on site, which is developed with a Golf Club,
clubhouse and related ancillary facilities and the Tennis Club. The portion of the property that is the
subject of the proposed improvements encompasses less than 20 acres within five drainage areas.
Existing surface runoff generated on the subject property is directed through each drainage area to
existing on -site storm drain facilities before entering a 69-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) that
extends under Coast Highway and to a discharge point in Newport Harbor west of the site, which has
been identified as containing "environmentally sensitive areas" as defined by the 2003 Orange County
Drainage Area Management Plan (DAMP) and the Water Quality Control Plans for the Santa Ana Basin.
Although on -site soils would be exposed during grading of the property, a variety of Best Management
Practices (BMPs) would be implemented both during construction and during the long-term operation of
the proposed project. For example, sediment control BMPs will be installed and maintained at all
operational storm drain inlets and permanent erosion control BMPs (either physical or vegetation) shall be
in place and operational during grading and construction to ensure that on- and off -site erosion is
minimized. Furthermore, compliance with applicable building, grading and water quality codes and
policies, which are performed during the plan check stage, will ensure that surface flows can be
accommodated and water quality protected, including potential erosion. As a result, no significant
impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of a course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off -
site?
Less than Significant Impact. As indicated above, project implementation will alter the existing
drainage conditions on the site. At the present time, the development area (i.e., less than 20 acres) is
divided into five drainage areas. Drainage Areas A and B comprise the existing Golf Clubhouse and
parking lot, totaling 11.59 acres. Stormwater runoff occurring in Drainage Area A (7.7 acres) occurs as
sheet flow in a southeasterly direction towards a curb and gutter that empties into a catch basin in the
southerly corner of the parking lot. The catch basin is connected to an 18-inch RCP pipe, which connects
to an existing 24-inch RCP that runs parallel to Coast Highway. Area B, comprised of 3.89 acres that
encompass a portion of the grassy golf course, sheet flows towards Irvine Terrace Road and into a cross
gutter, where it is directed to two catch basins on Irvine Terrace Road. This flow ultimately connects to
the same 24-inch RCP pipe identified for Drainage Area A. The 25-year volume (Q25) for Drainage Areas
A and B is 26.56 cubic feet per second (cfs) at elevation 85.0 msl in the 24-inch RCP. The combined flow
conveyed in the 24-inch RCP enters an existing 69-inch RCP storm drain, which conveys the runoff to
Newport Bay where it is discharged.
Drainage Area C encompasses 5.62 acres within the tennis club area in the easterly portion of the
property. Surface runoff within Drainage Area C sheet flows over the tennis courts and onto the parking
lot; storm flows then sheet flow over the parking lot, through a curb cut-out and into a drainage sump
consisting of an 18-inch square inlet. Flows are conveyed from the inlet, via an 8-inch PVC pipe, which
also connects to the 69-inch RCP. The Q25 volume generated in Drainage Area C is 14.27 cfs, which
enters an existing 8-inch polyvinyl pipe (PVC) and then a 69-inch RCP. The existing 8-inch PVC pipe that
was installed during the Corporate Plaza West Extension is deficient (in size) and cannot efficiently
convey storm flows under the existing conditions.
The smallest drainage area (Drainage Area D) encompasses 0.19 acre in the southeastern corner of the
Balboa Bay Tennis Club. Less than 1 cfs (Q25) is directed south where it enters the parking lot of the
adjacent commercial office property and is accommodated in the existing storm runoff facilities of that
property.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 71
Drainage Area E encompasses 1.24-acres that remain within in the tennis club (six tennis courts and
entry to the parking lot). Runoff generated on the property sheet flows over the existing tennis courts into
a concrete v-ditch, into a curb and gutter, and finally into a 12-inch inlet. Flows travel from the inlet, via a
12-inch PVC, which transitions to an 18-inch RCP before entering the 24-inch RCP in Coast Highway. All
of the surface flows emanating on the site are conveyed in the existing 69-inch RCP that ultimately
discharges into Newport Harbor. A summary of the existing storm flows generated within each of the
drainage areas is presented in Table 7.
Existing Runoff
Newport Beach Country Club
Sub -Area
Area
In Acres)
Flow (Q)
(cfs)
A & B
11.59
26.56
C
5.62
14.27
D
0.19
0.82
E
1.24
4.16
Total
18.64
45.81
SOUCE: Adams -Streeter Civil Engineers Inc. (July 10, 2009
The proposed development is also divided into five drainage areas; however, these areas have been
reconfigured based on the grading associated with the project design. Drainage Areas A and B (11.68
acres) comprise nearly the same areas as previously identified; however, Drainage Area A has
decreased in size to 6.59 acres and Drainage Area B has increased in size to 5.09 acres. Storm flows
emanating from Drainage Areas A and B are proposed to be captured using a storm system comprised of
catch basins and pipes ranging in size from 8 inches to 24 inches. The proposed storm drain system will
be installed within the site's parking lot and within the site's entry westerly parkway and will connect to the
existing 24-inch RCP storm drain that connects to the existing 69-inch RCP storm drain. The post -
development runoff volume (Q25) is estimated to be 27.82 cfs. The existing 24-inch storm drain is not
adequate to accept and convey the existing or proposed storm flows. Therefore, this facility will be
upsized.
Drainage Area C will be expanded to encompass 6.16 acres, including some of the existing tennis courts,
a new center court, Tennis Clubhouse, pool, The Bungalows, and The Villas along with interior street and
paths. Storm flows for Area C will be captured using a storm drain system comprised of catch basins and
pipes ranging in size from eight to 30 inches. Because inadequate storm drain stubs were provided to the
project area (i.e., one 12-inch PVC pipe and one 8-inch PVC pipe), a 30-inch RCP will be constructed in
the parking lot of the adjacent property. This Drainage Area will generate a Q25 volume of 20.74 cfs.
Drainage Area D encompasses 0.63 acre in the southeastern corner of the tennis facility. This area will
consist of the newly designed and/or reconfigured parking lot for the Tennis Club. Storm flows emanating
in Drainage Area D will sheet flow in a southerly direction to the existing parking lot located on the
adjacent property. Once in the parking lot, it will sheet flow into existing catch basins and into the existing
69-inch RCP. This drainage area will generate a Q25 of 2.64 cfs.
Drainage Area E comprises the smallest of the five drainage areas and is located near the southwestern
limits of the tennis facility. The 0.19-acre area will generate a storm flow volume of 0.81 cfs (Q25), which
would travel to the southwest corner of the site where it would enter a catch basin that will connect to an
existing 8-inch PVC pipe that would also connect to the 69-inch RCP south of the subject property. Table
8 provides a summary of the post -development runoff conditions.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 72
Table 8
Post -Development Runoff
Newport Beach Country Club
Sub -Area
Area
(In Acres)
Flaw (Q)
(cfs)
A & B
11.68
27.82
C
6.16
20.74
D
0.63
2.64
E
0.19
0.81
Total
18.66
52.01
SOUCE: Adams -Streeter Civil Engineers Inc. (July 10, 2009)
Project implementation would result in an increase of approximately 13.5 percent in storm surface runoff
volume. Table 9 provides a comparison of the pre- and post -development runoff characteristics.
Table 9
Pre- and Post Development Runoff Comparison
Newport Beach Country Club
Sub -Area
Existing
Runoff (Q2s cfs
Developed
Runoff (025 cfs)
Difference
(Q25 cfs)
A & B
26.56
27.82
1.26
C
14.27
20.74
6.47
D
0.82
2.64
1.82
E
4.16
0.81
-3.35
Total
45.81
52.01
6.2
SOUCE: Adams -Streeter Civil Engineers Inc. (July 10, 2009
Although the land use for the proposed project has a lower runoff coefficient than that under existing
conditions, the overall flow volumes have increased as a result of the lower time of concentration that
occurs when the storm flows are routed in a pipe versus sheet flow under existing conditions. As
indicated above, project implementation will result in an increase of 6.2 cfs entering the 69-inch RCP that
will convey the storm flows to Newport Harbor. This increase in runoff equates to a 1.3 percent increase
in the existing 462 cfs that currently flows in this facility. Because the time of concentration within the 69-
inch RCP is much greater than the site's contribution in flow, the increased runoff generated by the
proposed project would be negligible and, therefore, would not have a significant impact on the existing
storm drain facilities.
The site will be graded and designed to facilitate post -development storm flows. Therefore, no significant
impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
e) Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
Less than Significant Impact. Although project implementation will result in a decrease in impervious
surfaces on the site, additional surface runoff would be generated (refer to the previous discussion in
Section IX.d). However, the post -development impervious surfaces would be reduced by approximately
2,300 square feet, which would not generate a significant amount of stormwater runoff (i.e., an increase
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 73
of 6.2 cfs). The existing storm drainage collection and conveyance facilities within the project area (i.e.,
18- and 24-inch pipes previously described) will be upgraded as determined necessary to provide
adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed project. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
f) Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. As indicated previously, Newport Bay is listed as an "impaired" water
body under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, with respect to metals, pesticides and priority
organics. Changes in surface runoff are anticipated as a result of the development of the subject property
as proposed that could result in potential impacts to water quality. However, the project will be designed
to comply with all relevant building, grading and water quality codes and policies to ensure that there will
not be an adverse effect on water quality, either during construction or during the operational life of the
project. The applicant will be required to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP),
which will identify both structural and non-structural features intended to minimize erosion and
sedimentation as well as other water quality impacts that would occur during the construction phase. In
addition, a Conceptual WQMP identifies several measures that would minimize potential water quality
impacts. Final plan check will include the preparation of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan
that must be found to meet applicable standards. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and
no mitigation measures are required.
g) Would the project place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a
federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard
delineation map?
No Impact. The subject property is not located within the 100-year flood plain as delineated on the Flood
Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the City of
Newport Beach. The site is located in Zone X (Other Areas), which is classified by FEMA as "Areas
determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain." During a 100-year storm, the site
would be protected from flooding, as the water surface for all street flows would remain within the gutter
and street; average depth of flow for the entire site is less than one foot. Secondary overflow for the site
is provided by outletting through the site's interior streets to the exit on Coast Highway. As a result, no
homes would be placed within the 100-year flood plain and no significant impacts would occur.
h) Would the project place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would
impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. No residential structures are proposed to be located within the 100-year flood zone. Refer to
the response to Section IX.g.
i) Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
No Impact. As indicated above, the project site is not located within a flood hazard area or within an area
subject to flooding due to dam or levee failure. Figure S3 (Flood Hazards) in the Newport Beach Safety
Element indicates that in the event of failure of either the San Joaquin Reservoir or the Big Canyon
Reservoir, the site would not be subject to flooding. Therefore, project implementation will not result in a
potentially significant impact; no mitigation measures are required.
j) Would the project be subject to inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is located inland of Coast Highway and is not within
the area of influence of Newport Harbor area. Tsunamis (i.e., seismic sea waves) are generated on
offshore faults by movement that is primarily vertical in nature. The subject property is not within a
Tsunami Hazard Zone illustrated on Figure S1 (Coastal Hazards) in the City's Safety Element. According
to that figure, in the event of a tsunami, surge waves would threaten the lower elevations along the
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 74
Newport Beach coastline and in Newport Bay; however, the site is not subject to the effects of a tsunami.
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Seiche is defined as a standing wave oscillation effect generated in a closed or semi -closed body of water
caused by wind, tidal current, and earthquake. Seiche potential is highest in large, deep, steep -sided
reservoirs or water bodies. The nearest such water bodies include San Joaquin Reservoir, which is
located approximately two miles northeast of the site and Big Canyon Reservoir, located approximately
one mile east-northeast of the subject property. The subject property is located well beyond the area that
could potentially be inundated as a result of a seiche. In addition, Newport Bay, which is located
approximately one-half mile east of the project area, lacks significant potential for damaging seiche
because it is very shallow. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures
are required.
k) Would the project result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or
following construction?
Less than Significant Impact. Refer to responses to Section IX.a and Section IX.f.
1) Would the project result in potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of
material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance
(including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery
areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas?
Less than Significant Impact. Stormwater discharge from the site will be virtually the same as the
stormwater currently generated on the site, which are those associated with the residential and recreation
uses. In addition, the proposed residential and bungalows would also contribute similar stormwater
pollutants that may include detergents, fertilizers, pesticides, automobile hydrocarbons, etc., typically
associated with those uses. Although some temporary impacts associated with construction of the
proposed structures may occur (refer to Sections IX.a through IX.f), no new long-term outdoor storage,
maintenance, fueling or work areas are proposed. The golf cart storage and maintenance areas, which
are currently located above grade, partially open on one side, are proposed to be fully enclosed in the
lower level of the new clubhouse. Project implementation will result in improvements to the stormwater
discharges associated with site development. The project will be designed to comply with all requisite
codes and policies prescribed by the City of Newport Beach to ensure that stormwater impacts during or
after construction are minimized or eliminated to the maximum extent possible. For example, the City's
standard practice is to require street sweeping as a construction control measure, rather than washing
down the street surface, to avoid runoff of construction wastes, sediment and debris into the storm drain
system or the bay. Other construction BMPs would include those that address sediment control and
waste management and materials pollution control. Little or no pollution control measures exist within the
property, which was developed before the more stringent regulatory controls were enacted. As a result,
with the implementation of such structural and non-structural BMPs as well as the project's compliance
with the requirements imposed by the City, no significant impacts are anticipated and no additional
mitigation measures are required.
m) Would the project result in the potential for discharge of stormwater to affect the beneficial
uses of the receiving waters?
Less than Significant Impact. Refer to responses to Section IX.a and Section IX.f.
n) Would the project create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity or
volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in a decrease in impervious surfaces
on the site. It must be noted that even though the land use for the proposed development has a lower
runoff coefficient than the existing condition, the overall flow volumes have increased. This is due to the
lower time of concentration that occurs when the storm flows are routed in a pipe versus the current
condition of sheet flow. However, the site would be graded in order to ensure that post -development
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 75
runoff is minimized and, further, is directed to existing storm drain facilities that have adequate capacity to
accommodate the increase flows. As a result, this project would not result in adverse impacts due to
changes in the flow velocity or volume of storm water runoff.
o) Would the project create significant increases in erosion of the project site or surrounding
areas?
Less than Significant Impact. See responses to IX.a through IX.f. As previously indicated, part of the
final plan check review includes the preparation of an adequate drainage and erosion control plan that
must be found to meet applicable City standards. Implementation of this plan will ensure that potentially
significant increases in erosion resulting from the proposed project will not occur. No mitigation measures
are required.
Mitigation Measures
The applicant has prepared an NPDES Technical Study that identifies a range of BMPs and related water
quality features to ensure that water quality impacts associated with the proposed project are reduced to
an acceptable level. Implementation of BMPs that will be refined and included in the Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will ensure that construction impacts are minimized. Similarly, BMPs
will also be refined and incorporated into the project design to avoid post -construction impacts to water
quality. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
SC-16 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall be required to submit a notice of
intent (NOI) with the appropriate fees to the State Water Quality Resources Control Board for
coverage of such future projects under the General Construction Activity Storm Water Runoff Permit
prior to initiation of construction activity at a future site. As required by the NPDES permit, a Storm
Water Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared and will establish BMPs in order to
reduce sedimentation and erosion.
SC-17 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a Water Quality
Management Plan (WQMP) for the project and submit the WQMP to the City of Newport Beach for
approval. The WQMP shall specifically identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used
to control predictable pollutant runoff, including flow/volume-based measures to treat the "first flush."
The WQMP shall identify at a minimum the routine structural and non-structural measures specified
in the Countywide NPDES Drainage Area Master Plan (DAMP), which details implementation of the
BMPs whenever they are applicable to a project, the assignment of long-term maintenance
responsibilities, and shall reference the locations of structural BMPs.
SC-18 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution and
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP will establish BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and
erosion and prevent construction pollutants from leaving the site. The project shall also incorporate
all monitoring elements as required in the General Construction Permit. The project applicant shall
also develop an erosion and sediment control plan to be reviewed and approved by the City of
Newport Beach prior to issuance of grading permit.
SC-19 Future site grading and construction shall comply with the drainage controls imposed by the
applicable building code requirements prescribed by the City of Newport Beach.
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING
a) Would the project divide an established community?
No Impact. The 145-acre site is developed with golf and tennis facilities. The proposed project includes
the construction of a larger Golf Clubhouse and modifications to the existing Tennis Club on the subject
property. As indicated previously, the area surrounding the subject property is entirely developed with
mixed -use development, including residential, professional office, commercial and governmental land
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 76
uses. Development of the site as proposed would not directly affect adjacent properties because it is
consistent with the applicable development standards and requirements for site development as
prescribed in the proposed Planned Community District development regulations. In particular, project
implementation does not include features that would physically divide or otherwise adversely affect or
change an established community (e.g., roadways, flood control channels, etc.).
The proposed Golf Clubhouse is in keeping with the intensity of development and existing character in the
project environs. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency and
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
Less than Significant Impact. The Newport Beach General Plan, the Coastal Land Use Plan and the
Newport Beach Zoning Code contain land use plans, policies and regulations of concern with respect to
avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Consistency of the proposed project with applicable
provisions and/or policies of the relevant Elements of the General Plan are addressed in Table 10.
Table 10
General Plan Policy Analysis
Newport Beach Country Club
Policy
No,
General Plan Policy
Consistency Analysis
Land Use Element
Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique
The proposed project includes an adoption of the PC
character of the different neighborhoods, business
District regulations, which will guide development
districts, and harbor that together identify Newport
occurring within the project site. The development
LU 1.1
Beach. Locate and design development to reflect
standards address building height, setbacks, landscaping,
Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity,
architectural character, etc., and are intended to ensure
and view sheds.
that the City's unique character, which reflects both land
use and architectural diversity, is maintained.
The area in which the site is located is characterized by a
variety of residential, commercial, recreation, and public
land uses that reflect a range of densities and a variety of
architectural styles, which contribute to the unique
While recognizing the qualities that uniquely define its
character of the City. The intensity of the proposed project
neighborhoods and districts, promote the identity of the
(i.e., larger Golf Club clubhouse and redeveloped tennis
LU 1.2
entire City that differentiates it as a special place within
center) and architectural character are compatible with the
the Southern California region.
variety of densities and styles within the area, which is
"identity"
consistent with the of the City. The architectural
character of the proposed clubhouse and related tennis
center development, including The Bungalows and The
Villas, is consistent with the City's desire to differentiate
Newport Beach from other coastal cities.
Enhance existing neighborhoods, districts, and
corridors, allowing for reuse and infill with uses that are
The character of the proposed Golf Club, Tennis Club, The
complementary in type, form, scale, and character.
Bungalows, and The Villas is compatible with the existing
Changes in use and/or density/intensity should be
land uses and development intensities in the project area.
considered only in those areas that are economically
Additionally, the proposed land uses are allowed under the
under performing, are necessary to accommodate
existing General Plan. The project has been designed to
Newport Beach's share of projected regional
be compatible with the existing residential, commercial,
LU 3.2
population growth, improve the relationship and reduce
and open space/recreation that exists in the vicinity of the
commuting distance between home and jobs, or
project site. In addition, the area in which the project is
enhance the values that distinguish Newport Beach as
located is adequately served by existing infrastructure,
a special place to live for its residents. The scale of
including circulation, sewer, water, and storm drainage
growth and new development shall be coordinated with
systems. As a result, project implementation will not
the provision of adequate infrastructure and public
adversely affect those systems or the provision of
services, including standards for acceptable traffic level
adequate service to nearby development.
of service.
LU 4.1
Accommodate land use development consistent with
The uses proposed by the applicant are consistent with
the Land Use Plan.
I the General Plan Land Use Element (i.e., land use
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 77
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy'
Consistency Analysis
designation), which designates the golf course site PR
(Parks and Recreation) and the tennis site MU-H3/PR.
The proposed Golf Clubhouse is within the 35,000 square
foot allowable development limit permitted in Anomaly 74
of the Land Use Element. The tennis facility is located in
Anomaly 46, which allocates 24 tennis courts with
residential permitted in accordance with the MU-H3
designation. Per LU 4.3 Transfer of Development Rights,
(Page 3-20.d of the General Plan) density transfers are
allowed within the Newport Center area (refer to LU
6.14.3). Based on this policy, the transfer of 27 hotel units
from Anomaly 43 to Anomaly 46 (i.e., subject property)
may be permitted, subject to the approval of the City with
the finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of
the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in any
adverse traffic impacts. In addition to the Transfer of
Development Intensity, within Newport Center there are
remaining 20 single-family units allocated for the Newport
Center to accommodate the 5 single-family homes needed
for The Villas. The proposed land uses are consistent with
the land use designation prescribed for the site as well as
the TDR and residential allocation within Newport Center.
Permit the transfer of development rights from a
property to one or more other properties when:
a. The donor and receiver sites are within the same
Statistical Area.
b. The reduced density/intensity on the donor site
provides benefits to the City such as, but not
limited to, the (1) provision of extraordinary open
space, public visual corridor(s), parking or other
amenities (2) preservation of an historic building or
property or natural landscapes; (3) improvement of
LU 4.3
the area's sale and development character; (4)
Refer to Policy 6.14.3.
consolidation of lots to achieve a better
architectural design than could be achieved
without lot consolidation; and/or (5) reduction of
local vehicle trips and traffic congestion.
c. The increment of growth transferred to the receiver
site complements and is in scale with surrounding
development, complies with community character
and design policies contained in this plan, and
does not materially degrade local traffic conditions
and environmental quality.
d. Transfer of Development Rights in Newport Center
is governed by Policy 6.14.3.
Although the site is not located adjacent to lower density
residential development (e.g., single-family detached), the
project has been designed to respect the proximity of the
existing residential development adjacent to the project
site. Specifically, single-family residential development is
Require that the height of development in
proposed in the area nearest to the existing residential
nonresidential and higher density residential areas
development to buffer the private recreation uses of the
LU 5.1.2
transition as it nears lower density residential areas to
Tennis Clubhouse. In addition, the proposed PC District
minimize conflicts at the interface between the different
text and regulations prescribe maximum building heights,
types of development.
setback requirements, etc., for each of the development
components to ensure land use compatibility. The
maximum building height has been established at 50 feet.
The height of the proposed Golf Clubhouse is proposed to
vary but would not exceed the maximum 50-foot height
limit prescribed for that use.
Require that properties developed with a mix of
As illustrated in the proposed site plan, the proposed
residential and non-residential uses be designed to
project includes a new golf clubhouse, tennis clubhouse
achieve high levels of architectural quality in
and related amenities, twenty-seven (27) short-term
LU 5.3.3
accordance with Policies 5.1.8 and 5.2.2 and planned
visitor -serving units (Bungalows). And five (5) single-family
to assure compatibility among the uses and provide
residential dwelling units. The proposed project provides
adequate circulation and parking. Residential uses
adequate parking for each of the proposed uses.
should be seamlessly integrated with non-residential
Vehicular and pedestrian circulation has been designed to
uses through architecture, pedestrian walkways, and
accommodate both residents of the Villas, as well as
No.
LU 5.3.4
LU 6.14.2
LU 6.14.3
LU 6,14.6
LU 6.14.8
ICllillial
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 78
General Plan Pollc5
landscape. They should not be com
walls or other design elements.
Require that sufficient acreage be developed for an
individual use located in a district containing a mix of
residential and non-residential uses to prevent
fragmentation and assure each use's viability, quality,
and compatibility with adjoining uses.
Provide the opportunity for limited residential, hotel,
and office development in accordance with the limits
specified by Tables LU1 and LU2.
Development rights may be transferred within Newport
Center, subject to the approval of the City with the
finding that the transfer is consistent with the intent of
the General Plan and that the transfer will not result in
any adverse traffic impacts.
Encourage that pedestrian access and connections
among uses within the district be improved with
additional walkways and streetscape amenities
concurrent with the development of expanded and new
uses.
Require the execution of Development Agreements for
residential and mixed -use development projects that
use the residential 450 units identified in Table LU2
(Anomaly Locations). Development Agreements shall
define the improvements and benefits to be contributed
by the developer in exchange for the City's
commitment for the number, density, and location of
the housina units.
guests and members of the Golf Club, and Tennis
Club/spa and Bungalows. The architectural character of
the uses is defined in the PC District Regulations to
ensure that compatibility between the proposed uses and
the nearby areas is maintained.
As indicated above, each of the uses has been designed
to complement the overall development proposed by the
applicant. The three distinct uses are connected via the
vehicular and pedestrian circulation system, including
sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. Land use
compatibility is achieved through a common landscape
theme and design guidelines in the PC District Regulations
to ensure that the architectural integrity of the project is not
compromised.
The project proposes a mix of land uses, including single-
family residential, golf and tennis facilities and visitor -
serving commercial (i.e., "Bungalows") uses. These uses
are permitted in Table LU1. Residential development is
permitted in Anomaly 46, as reflected in Table LU2.
Project implementation includes the transfer of 27 hotel
units from Anomaly No. 46 to the subject property. As
indicated in the analysis of traffic, the proposed project
would result in the generation of 221 daily vehicle trips for
the 27 bungalows. Project implementation will result in the
generation of 1,183 daily vehicle trips, including those
generated by the bungalows (221 trips), which equates to
a net reduction in not only daily trips (389), but also a.m.
and p.m. peak hour trips (35) when compared to the
existing land uses. The reduction of vehicle trips
anticipated as a result of the proposed project will not
result in any significant impacts to the existing traffic and
circulation conditions in the project area. Therefore, the
proposed project would not result in any significant traffic
impacts.
In addition, implementation of the proposed project is
consistent with the intent of the Newport Beach General
Plan, as reflected in this analysis. As indicated above, the
project has been designed to be consistent with the
surrounding land uses and promotes recreation and
tourism. The project is consistent with the relevant
policies in the Land Use and other elements of the
General Plan.
As indicated on the site plan, the proposed project
provides for both pedestrian and vehicular access
between the Golf and Tennis facilities. Sidewalks and
pedestrian pathways are incorporated into the circulation
system that are intended to accommodate pedestrians
utilizing the golf and tennis/spa facilities as well as the
future residents of the proposed Villas. The landscape
plan includes plants materials that are intended to reflect
and complement the existing character within the project
area.
The applicant has proposed a Development Agreement,
which must comply with the provisions of this policy,
including the identification of improvements and benefits
resulting from implementation of the proposed project.
Housing Element
The ro'ect site does not include an- existing housing
Support all reasonable efforts to preserve, maintain,
and improve availability and quality of existing housing
and residential neighborhoods, and ensure full
utilization of existing City housing resources for as long
into the future as physically and economically possible.
p 1
However, the applicant is proposing five (5) semi -custom,
single-family residential dwelling units on the subject
property, which will improve the availability and quality of
housing in the City. These dwelling units will supplement
tha Citv'¢ hnusinn cunnly
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 79
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy
Consistency Analysis
Historical Resources Element
Require that, in accordance with CEQA, new
Although it is unlikely that archaeological and/or
development protect and preserve paleontological and
paleontological resources would be encountered during
archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid
grading and/or construction, the City requires that a
and mitigate impacts to such resources. Through
certified archaeological/paleontological monitor be
FIR 2.1
planning policies and permit conditions, ensure the
available during grading to ensure that if such resources
preservation of significant archaeological and
are encountered, grading activities can be diverted in
paleontological resources and require that the impact
order to evaluate the resources and recommend
caused by any development be mitigated in
appropriate measures to protect and/or preserve them.
accordance with CEQA.
Circulation Element
The proposed project provides adequate parking as
demonstrated in the Traffic and Parking Evaluation
prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates and prescribed
Require that new development provide adequate,
in the PC District regulations for the project. The project
CE 7.1.1
convenient parking for residents, guest, business
will meet the anticipated parking demand on -site with 398
patrons, and visitors.
parking spaces. In addition to the parking proposed to
accommodate the proposed uses, additional parking within
two off -site parking easement areas encompass over 554
additional parking spaces that can be used for special
events.
As indicated above, the on -site parking provided totals 398
parking spaces, including 28 spaces that are allocated to
Site and design new development to avoid use of
the Tennis Clubhouse (28 required), 50 parking spaces for
CE 7.1.8
parking configurations or management programs that
the Bungalows/spa (49 required), and 300 parking spaces
are difficult to maintain and enforce.
for the Golf Club (244 required). In addition, 20 parking
spaces are also proposed to accommodate the 5 Villas (20
required).
Recreation Element
Require developers of new residential subdivisions to
The proposed project includes the development of five
provide parklands at five acres per 1,000 persons, as
semi -custom, single-family residential dwelling units. The
stated in the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance, or
residential component of the proposed project will be
R 1.1
to contribute in -lieu fees for the development of public
subject to the City's Park Dedication Fee Ordinance. It is
recreation facilities meeting demands generated by the
anticipated that the applicant will be required to pay the
development's resident population, as required in the
applicable in -lieu fee.
City's Park Dedications Fee Ordinance.
Natural Resources Element
Water conservation measures will be required to be
incorporated into the proposed project as prescribed in
Chapter 14.16 (Water Conservation and Supply Level
Establish and actively promote use of water conserving
Regulations) and Chapter 14.17 (Water -Efficient
devices and practices in both new construction and
Landscaping) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. In
NR 1.2
major alterations and additions to existing buildings.
addition, the proposed hand car wash will comply with
This can include the use of rainwater capture, storage,
Chapter 14.36 (Water Quality) to ensure that surface
and reuse facilities.
runoff associated with that use does not result in the
degradation of either surface or groundwater. Finally, the
BMPs are intended to meet the requirements prescribed in
Chapter 14.36.
Require all development to comply with the regulations
The project applicant will be required to comply with the
under the City's municipal separate storm drain system
NPDES requirements established by the City, including
NR 3.4
permit under the National Pollutant Discharge
the preparation of a SWPPP to address construction
Elimination System (NPDES).
activities and a WQMP for long-term operations of the
project.
As indicated above, the proposed project will implement
NR 3.5
Require that development does not degrade natural
BMPs to improve the quality of both construction -related
water bodies.
and long-term runoff emanating from the site prior to their
discharge into Newport Harbor.
Require new development applications to include a
NR 3.9
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) to minimize
Refer to Response to Policy No. NR 3.4.
runoff from rainfall events during construction and post -
construction.
Include site design and source control BMPs in all
The proposed project complies with the requirement to
NR 3.11
developments. When the combination of site design
prepare a SWPPP and WQMP to address both
and source control BMPs are not sufficient to protect
construction and post -development water quality impacts.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 80
Policy
No.
General Plan Policy'
Consistency Analysis
water quality as required by the NPDES, structural
Both site design and structural BMPs will be incorporated
treatment BMPs will be implemented along with site
into the project to ensure that surface flows emanating
design and source control measures.
from the subject property are treated prior to their
discharge into Newport Harbor. The SWPPP and WQMP
will be sufficient to protect water quality as prescribed by
the NPDES requirements of the City.
As required by the NPDES permit, a Storm Water Pollution
and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared and will
Require grading/erosion control plans with structural
establish both structural and non-structural BMPs in order to
BMPs that prevent or minimize erosion during and after
reduce sedimentation and erosion during the construction
NR 4.4
construction for development on steep slopes, graded,
phase. These measures will be incorporated in the
or disturbed area.
grading/erosion control plan (refer to SC-10) submitted to the
City of Newport Beach. In addition, the applicant has
prepared a WQMP to address post -development water
ualit im acts.
Require developers to use and operate construction
The proposed project will comply with all South Coast
NR 8.1
equipment, use building materials and paints, and
AQMD rules and requisite local, state and federal
control dust created by construction activities to
requirements to reduce air pollutant emissions during
minimize air pollutants.
construction.
Require new development to protect and preserve
paleontological and archaeological resources from
destruction, and avoid and minimize impacts to such
resources in accordance with the requirements of
NR 18.1
CEQA. Through planning policies and permit
Refer to Response to Policy No. HR 2.1.
conditions, ensure the preservation of significant
archaeological and paleontological resources and
require that the impact caused by any development be
mitigated in accordance with CEQA.
Because implementation of the proposed project requires
the approval of an amendment to the Land Use Element of
the Newport General Plan, it is subject to the provisions of
SB 18, which requires consultation with Native American
Notify cultural organizations, including Native American
representatives before adopting or amending a general
organizations, of proposed development that have the
plan. The City has complied with the requirements of SB
NR 18.3
potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Allow
18 by submitting a request to the Native American
qualified representative of such groups to monitor
Heritage Commission (NAHC). In addition, the City also
grading and/or excavation of development sites.
sent letters to the Native American representatives,
informing each of the proposed project. However, no
response was received by the City from any of the Native
American representations requesting consultation within
the 90-day statutory period..
Require new development, where on site preservation
and avoidance are not feasible, to donate scientifically
NR 18.4
valuable paleontological or archaeological materials to
Refer to Response to Policy No. HR 2.1.
a responsible public or private institution with a suitable
repository, located within Newport Beach or Orange
county, whenever possible.
Project implementation will not result in any significant
visual impacts to the segment of Newport Center Drive
north of Farallon, which is designated as a Coastal View
Protect and, where feasible, enhance significant scenic
Road, or to the Public View Point identified in Irvine
and visual resources that include open space,
Terrace Park located south of East Coast Highway. Views
NR 20.1
mountains, canyons, ridges, ocean, and harbor from
from vantages along Newport Center Drive will not be
public vantage points, as shown in Figure NR3.
significantly altered as a result of project implementation.
The development would not be visible from this Coastal
View Road because of the landscaping that exists along
the roadway, which blocks and/or filters views to the
subject property.
Protect and enhance public view corridors from the
NR 20.3
following roadway segments (shown in Figure NR3),
Refer to Response to Policy No. NR 20.1.
and other locations may be identified in the future
(Newport Center Drive).
The building mass and architectural character of the
proposed project will be regulated through the PC District
Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of
regulations that have been proposed. The City will ensure
NR 22.1
structures consistent with the unique character and
that these regulations do not compromise the unique
visual scale of Newport Beach.
aesthetic character of the City.
Policy
S 4.7
N 1.1
N 1.4
owt
N 1.8
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 81
Element
Conduct further seismic studies for new development
in areas where potential active faults may occur.
The proposed structures will be designed in accordance
with current adopted codes and regulations, including the
California Building Code, which prescribe the design
standards for new development to protect life and
property. In addition, site and structural design
recommendations are also included in the Preliminary
Geotechnical Report prepared that will be incorporated
into the proposed oroiect.
Noise Element
Require that all proposed projects are compatible with
the noise environment through use of Table N2, and
enforce the interior and exterior noise standards shown
in Table N3.
Require that applicants of residential portions of mixed -
use projects and high density residential developments
in urban areas (such as the Airport Area and Newport
Center) demonstrate that the design of the structure
will adequately isolate noise between adjacent uses
and units (common floor/ceilings) in accordance with
the California Building Code.
Encourage new mixed -use developments to site
loading areas, parking lots, driveways, trash
enclosures, mechanical equipment, and other noise
sources away from the residential portion of the
development.
Kegwre the employment or noise mitigation measures
for existing sensitive uses when a significant noise
impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs
when there is an increase in the ambient CNEL
produced by new development impacting noise
N 4.1
N 4.6
N 5.1
'Because the
Enforce interior and exterior noise standards outlined in
Table N3, and in the City's Municipal Code to ensure
that sensitive noise receptors are not exposed to
excessive noise levels from stationary noise sources,
such as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
Enforce the Noise Ordinance noise limits and limits on
hours of maintenance or construction activity in or
adjacent to residential areas, including noise that
results from in -home hobby or work -related activities.
Enforce the limits on hours of construction activity.
is not located within the harbor
The proposed uses, including the Golf Club and Tennis
Club, the Bungalows, and the villas are consistent with the
noise parameters prescribed in Table N2. The residential
uses will not be subject to exterior noise levels that exceed
65 dBA CNEL and the non-residential uses are also
consistent with the land use noise compatibility matrix
based on noise levels that to not exceed 75 dBA CNEL.
As indicated in the noise analysis prepared for the
proposed project (refer to Section XI I), project activities will
entail the continuation of long standing outdoor golf and
tennis uses and limited indoor activities. Outdoor
recreational activities at the Country Club represent a
continuation of existing activities, which are compatible
with the nearby residential and non-residential
development in the project environs. Although some noise
is associated with tennis, in particular, it is not so intrusive
that it would be disruptive or incompatible with the existing
uses. Furthermore, the proposed residential component
(i.e., the "Villas"), is not located adjacent to Coast Highway
or other high volumes arterials that would generate noise
levels that exceed exterior and/or interior standards.
Therefore, no significant long-term noise impacts would
occur.
No loading docks or other high noise generating features
are located in proximity to the proposed "Villas." A
mitigation measure requires that heating, venting, and air
conditioning (HVAC) equipment in or adjacent to residential
areas must not exceed applicable noise levels as required by
the Citv of Newport Beach.
Noise mitigation have been prescribed to ensure that
construction noise impacts are reduced to a less than
significant level. In addition, proper siting of HVAC
equipment will reduce operational noise levels in the
residential area in compliance with this policy.
The noise sensitive receptors (Le.,' residents of the
proposed Villas) would be protected from excessive
interior and exterior noise levels through compliance with
the noise standards adopted by the City and presented in
Table N3 of the Noise Element. Both interior and exterior
noise levels will comply with the adopted standards.
Construction hours will comply with the limits established
by the City of Newport Beach and prescribed in the Noise
Ordinance. In addition, operational noise associated with
the proposed tennis and golf facilities would also be
regulated by the City's Noise Ordinance.
Construction hours will be limited to those stipulated in the
City's Noise Ordinance, which will be strictly enforced by
the City of Newport Beach.
in the Harbor and Bay Element are not
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 82
Coastal Land Use Plan
As previously indicated, the subject property is located in the Coastal Zone delineated within the City of
Newport Beach and is, therefore, subject to the adopted policies contained within the adopted Coastal
Land Use Plan. Consistency with the applicable policies of that CLUP are presented in Table 11.
Table 11
Coastal Land Use Plan Policy Analysis
Newport Beach Country Club
Policy
No,
CLUP Policy
Consistency Analysis
Land Use
The proposed project is consistent with the land use
designation on the adopted Coastal Land Use Plan, which
designates the golf course site OS (Open Space) and the
tennis site MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal/Parks &
Recreation). The Open Space designation allows golf
courses. The MU-H/PR designation allows horizontally -
distributed mix of uses, which may include general or
Land uses and new development in the coastal zone shall
neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multi-
2.1.2-1
be consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan Map and all
family residential, visitor -serving and marine -related uses,
applicable LCP policies and regulations.
buildings that vertically integrate residential with
commercial uses, and active public or private recreational
uses, including parks, golf courses, marina support
facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private
recreation, and similar facilities. In addition, the project
addresses the relevant policies related to development of
the site and the protection of coastal resources identified
in the CLUP as discussed in this table.
General Development Policies
Project implementation will result in some intensification of
the development that exists within the limits of the
Planned Community. As previously indicated, the
Continue to allow redevelopment and infill development
proposed project does not exceed the intensity of
2 2 1 1
within and adjacent to the existing developed areas in the
development allocated in the General Plan for Anomaly
coastal zone subject to the density and intensity limits and
No. 46 and Anomaly No. 74. Because the proposed
resource protection policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan.
project would result in the redevelopment of the existing
uses, project implementation would not adversely affect
any coastal resources and development is consistent with
applicable coastal resource policies.
The proposed project is located in an area of the City of
Newport Beach that is adequately served by a range of
Require new development be located in areas with
public services and utilities, including police and fire
2 2 1 2
adequate public services or in areas that are capable of
protection; circulation; sewer, water and storm drains; and
having public services extended or expanded without
electricity and natural gas. Adequate service will continue
significant adverse effects on coastal resources.
to be provided to the proposed uses. The provision of
those public services and utilities will not result in any
significant adverse effects on coastal resources.
Residential Development
The proposed PC District regulations prescribe the
development standards for both residential and non-
residential land uses proposed for the project. The
maximum building height for the proposed single-family
Continue to maintain appropriate setbacks and density,
residential dwelling units (i.e., 5 units), which are located
floor area, and height limits for residential development to
in the vicinity of the existing residential development, will
2.7-1
protect the character of established neighborhoods and to
range from 21 feet for Villa A to approximately 35 feet for
protect coastal access and coastal resources.
Villa D. Similar to building height, the front, rear, and side
yard setbacks will vary, depending on the location and
relationship of The Villas to each other and to existing
residential development to the northeast, which are two
and three stories in height.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 83
Policy
No.
CLUP Policy
Consistency Anal sis
Hazards and Protective Devices
The project site is not located in the vicinity of a stream.
Require new development to provide adequate drainage
However, as required by the NPDES permit, a Storm
and erosion control facilities that convey site drainage in a
Water Pollution and Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be
2.8.7-2
non -erosive manner in order to minimize hazards
prepared and will establish both structural and non -
resulting from increased runoff, erosion and other
structural BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and
hydrologic impacts to streams.
erosion during the construction phase. These measures
will be incorporated in the grading/erosion control plans
submitted to the City of Newport Beach.
Require applications for new development, where
applicable (i.e., in areas of known or potential geologic or
With the exception of the potential effects of moderate to
seismic hazards), to include a geologic/soils/geotechnical
strong seismic shaking, the subject property is not located
study that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the
in an area characterized by potential coastal hazards.
proposed project site, any necessary mitigation
Preliminary geotechnical design parameters for the
2.8.7-3
measures, and contains a statement that the project site
proposed project have been recommended based on
is suitable for the proposed development and that the
subsurface exploration and laboratory testing of the site
development will be safe from geologic hazard. Require
soils. The proposed structures will be constructed based
such reports to be signed by a licensed Certified
on those design parameters.
Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer and
subject to review and approval by the City.
Transportation
The proposed project includes adequate parking to
accommodate all of the proposed uses, including the Golf
Club, Tennis Clubhouse, the Bungalows, and The Villas.
A total of 398 parking spaces is provided in the plan,
including 28 parking spaces allocated to the Tennis Club
(28 required), 50 parking spaces for The Bungalows/spa
(49 required), and 300 parking spaces for the Golf Club
(244 required). In addition, 20 parking spaces are
proposed to accommodate the five Villas (20 required).
Site and design new development to avoid use of parking
The parking plan provides for a surplus of 57 parking
2.9.3-1
configurations or parking management programs that are
spaces based on the proposed PC District parking
difficult to maintain and enforce.
requirements.
In addition to the on -site parking provided, the site plan
indicates that the an existing parking easement in favor of
the project site provides access to an additional 554
parking spaces in the evenings and on weekends and
holidays, if needed for parking overflow during tennis and
golf events. However, such events are subject to a
"special event permit," must be approved by the City. In
addition to other requirements, it must be shown that
adequate parking can be provided for such activities.
The proposed project provides adequate parking as
demonstrated in the Traffic and Parking Evaluation
Continue to require new development to provide off-street
prepared by Kimley-Horm and Associates and reflected in
parking sufficient to serve the approved use in order to
the PC district regulations. A surplus of 57 parking
2.9.3-2
minimize impacts to public on -street and off-street parking
spaces is available on -site. In addition, off -site parking is
available for coastal access.
also available for special events. An existing off -site
Parking Agreement will provide for an additional 554
parking spaces to accommodate the proposed project.
No impacts to coastal access are anticipated.
Require that all proposed development maintain and
2.9.3-3
enhance public access to the coast by providing adequate
Refer to Policy 2.9.3-1.
parking pursuant to the off-street parking regulations of
the Zoning Code in effect as of October 13, 2005.
The parking provided meets the minimum requirements
for dimensions and clearance; access to the parking is
adequate. A new drive aisle with a drop-off area will also
be added to the front of the Golf Clubhouse and a second
Continue to require off-street parking in new development
entry point to the main parking lot will be added at the
2.9.3-5
to have adequate dimensions, clearances, and access to
northwest corner of the lot. The parking rows in the main
insure their use.
parking lot will be reconfigured to an east -west orientation,
with access aisles provided on both ends of the parking
lot. Each of the drive aisles will be 26 feet wide, which
provides adequate room for circulation, turning, and
backing for 90-de ree parking aisles.
3.1.1-11
3.1.1-26
3.2.1-3
4.3.1-6
4.3.1-7
4.3.2-3
4.3.2-8
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 84
Shoreline and Bluff
Require new development to minimize impacts to public
access to and along the shoreline.
consistent wan the poucies above prowoe maximum
public access from the nearest public roadway to the
shoreline and along the shoreline with new development
except where (1) it is inconsistent with public safety,
military security needs, or the protection of fragile coastal
resources or (2) adequate access exists nearby.
Provide adequate park and recreational facilities to
accommodate the needs of new residents when allowing
new development.
Water
Require grading/erosion control plans to include soil
stabilization on graded or disturbed areas.
Require measures to be taken during construction to limit
land use disturbance activities such as clearing and
grading, limiting cut -and -fill to reduce erosion and
sediment loss, and avoiding steep slopes, unstable areas,
and erosive soils. Require construction to minimize
disturbance of natural vegetation, including significant
trees, native vegetation, root structures, and other
physical or biological features important for preventing
erosion or sedimentation.
Require that development not result in the degradation of
coastal waters (including the ocean, estuaries and lakes)
caused by changes to the hydrologic landscape.
To the maximum extent practicable, runoff should be
retained on private property to prevent the transport of
bacteria, pesticides, fertilizers, pet waste, oil, engine
coolant, gasoline, hydrocarbons, brake dust, tire residue,
and other pollutants into recreational waters.
Access
Although the subject property is located within the City's
coastal zone, it is not located along the Newport Beach
shoreline and, therefore, would not deter coastal access
in anv way.
As indicated above, direct shoreline access from the
subject property does not exist.
The proposed project site consists of 145 acres that
presently encompass a private golf and tennis facilities.
Although private in nature, these facilities will continue to
serve a segment of the City's recreational needs. In
addition, the five single-family residential dwelling units
proposed (i.e., The Villas) will be subject to the City's park
fee ordinance.
The project applicant is required to prepare and
implement BMPs pursuant to the Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will be required prior to the
issuance of the grading permit for the proposed project.
Implementation of these construction BMPs will ensure
that grading/erosion control measures are implemented.
These measures are intended to minimize erosion and
stabilize the site during grading. As indicated above, the
applicant will also be required to implement BMPs to
ensure that point source and non -point source pollutants
are minimized.
In accordance with the WQMP and SWPPP requirements,
BMPs will be required as part of the project's development
in order to ensure that the potential discharge of pollutants
of concern is minimized. The NPDES Technical Study
prepared for the project identifies a range of potential
BMPs that are intended to minimize erosion associated
with water and wind. Several potential erosion control
measures have been identified, including the use of
hydroseeding, hydromulch, preservation of existing
vegetation, scheduling of construction to avoid the climatic
conditions that contribute to potential erosion, soil binders,
velocity dissipation devices, etc. The SWPPP that will be
prepared and approved by the City of Newport Beach will
ensure that all appropriate BMPs are implemented to
ensure that potential construction -related water quality
impacts are reduced to the maximum extent practicable.
Because the site has been altered and developed with
existing golf and tennis facilities, project implementation
will not result in significant changes to the existing runoff
conditions; however, because both construction and post -
construction BMPs will be incorporated into the project
design, it is anticipated that some improvement in the
quality of the storm and related surface runoff emanating
from the site will occur when compared to the existing
runoff quality. As indicated above, the applicant will be
required to prepare a WQMP and SWPPP to ensure that
surface discharges do not degrade the receiving waters.
These plans must be approved by the City of Newport
Beach.
Consistent with this policy, the proposed project will be
required to incorporate BMPs that address on -site
retention and treatment of surface runoff. The WQMP
and SWPPP will include measures to prevent the
discharge of pollutants into the storm drain system.
Potential post -construction BMPs that may be
implemented include grassy swages, detention basins,
infiltration basins, infiltration trenches, porous pavement,
4.3.2-11
5WIPAPA
4.3.2-13
4.3.2-16
4.3.2-23
4.4.1-1
4.4.1-2
4.4.1-6
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 85
Require new development to minimize the creation of and
increases in impervious surfaces, especially directly
connected impervious areas, to be maximum extent
practicable. Require redevelopment to increase area of
pervious surfaces, where feasible.
Require development to protect the absorption,
purification, and retention functions of natural drainage
systems that exist on the site, to the maximum extent
practicable. Where feasible, design drainage and project
plans to complement and utilize existing drainage patterns
and systems, conveying drainage from the developed
area of the site in a non -erosive manner. Disturbed or
degraded natural drainage systems should be restored,
where feasible.
Site development on the most suitable portion of the site
and design to ensure the protection and preservation of
natural and sensitive site resources.
Require structural BMPs to be inspected, cleaned, and
repaired as necessary to ensure proper functioning for the
life of the development. Condition coastal development
permits to require ongoing application and maintenance
as is necessary for effective operation of all BMPs
(including site design, source control, and treatment
control).
Require new development applications to include a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP's
purpose is to minimize to the maximum extent practicable
dry weather runoff, runoff from small storms (less the 3/4"
of rain falling over a 24-hour period) and the concentration
of pollutants in such runoff during construction and post -
construction from the orooerty.
Scenic and Visual Re
Protect and, where feasible, enhance the scenic and
visual qualities of the coastal zone, including public views
to and along the ocean, bay, and harbor and to coastal
bluffs and other scenic coastal areas.
Design and site new development, including landscaping,
so as to minimize impacts to public coastal views.
Protect public coastal views from the following roadway
segments: Newport Center Drive.
Conslstency Analysis
hydrodynamic separator systems, etc. The BMPs will
ensure that runoff will be treated to prevent the continued
degradation of Newport Bay. Project implementation will
result in an improvement to surface water quality because
no or only limited treatment occurs at the present time.
Project implementation will result in an increase of 6.2 cfs
when compared to the existing runoff volume. This
increase in runoff equates to a 1.3 percent increase in the
existing 462 cfs that currently flows in this the existing 69-
inch RCP that transports the flows to Newport Bay where
it is discharged. As indicated above, the implementation
of BMPs will require detention and treatment prior to
discharae into Newport Harbor.
Only minor changes will occur to the existing drainage
systems that accommodate runoff from the site. Surface
flows will generally be directed in the same fashion and
into the same existing drainage facilities that currently
accept storm runoff generated on the site.
The site is generally devoid of natural and/or sensitive
resources because it has been substantially altered by
prior development of golf and tennis facilities. It is
anticipated that some additional pervious area of the
property will be improved with structures and impervious
surfaces on the Golf Club component; however, the
proposed development will occur in the same general
area of the site that is currently developed. No important
natural and/or sensitive site resources would be adversely
affected by the proposed project. The minor increase in
surface runoff attributed to site development would be
treated prior to its ultimate discharge into Newport Bay to
avoid potential impacts to the water quality in the Bay.
The SWPPP and WQMP that will be prepared for the
proposed project will include a maintenance plan and
program to ensure that the structural BMPs function
effectively and efficiently and that surface runoff meets
discharge requirements.
An NPDES Technical Study has been prepared and is the
precursor to the WQMP, which will identify both structural
and non -structure BMPs to treat surface runoff generated
on the site.
The project is not located along the ocean, bay or harbor
and is devoid of coastal bluffs and other features identified
by the City as important visual amenities.
A Landscape Concept Plan has been prepared that
incorporates a hierarchy of landscape materials, including
mature trees, shrubs, and ground cover in a thematic
approach to ensure that the aesthetic integrity of the site
is maintained and the character complements the coastal
character of the coastal zone within which the site is
located. In particular, a variable setback along East Coast
Highway will be landscaped and bermed to soften and
aesthetically enhance and screen the parking lot and to
provide enhanced views into the site to provide a greater
buffer between the park and residential development
located to the south, across East Coast Highway.
The segment of Newport Center Drive north of Farallon is
designated as a Coastal View Road. However, views
M
4.4.2-2
4.4.3-1 5
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 86
Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of
structures consistent with the unique character and visual
scale of Newport Beach.
Design and site new development to minimize the
removal of native vegetation, preserve rock outcroppings,
and protect coastal resources.
from vantages along Newport Center Drive will not be
significantly altered as a result of project implementation.
The development would not be visible from this Coastal
View Road because of the landscaping that exists along
the roadway, which blocks and/or filters views to the
Villas, The Bungalows, and the Tennis Club. The
proposed PC District regulations prescribe the
architectural character of the proposed structures as well
as development standards related to building height,
setbacks, landscaping, etc., to ensure that the mixed uses
are compatible with the surrounding development. As
indicated in the PC District regulations, the development
standards are intended to "... ensure the harmony and
continuity of design parameters that are respectful to the
properties of its California coastal heritage" The
development and design standards address building
mass, scale, materials, landscape treatment, and
community design.
The site has been substantially altered by development of
the existing golf and tennis facilities. As a result, no
significant rock outcroppings or other important visual
amenities exist on the site. No native vegetation will be
removed as a result of proiect implementation.
Paleontological and Cultural Resources
The proposed project includes the redevelopment of an
Require new development to protect and preserve existing golf and tennis facilities, which have resulted in
paleontological and archaeological resources from significant alteration of the existing site. Although it is not
destruction, and avoid and minimize impacts to such expected that significant cultural resources would be
4.5.1-1 encountered on the site during grading and construction,
resources. If avoidance of the resources is not feasible, a cultural resources monitor will be available during
require an in situ or site -capping preservation plan or a grading to ensure that should such resources be
recovery plan for mitigating the effect of the development. encountered, appropriate measures will be implemented
to protect artifacts and related materials.
4.5.1-2
4.5.1-3
4.5.1-4
Require a qualified paleontologistlarchaeologist to monitor
all grading and/or excavation where there is a potential to
affect cultural or paleontological resources. If grading
operations or excavations uncover
paleontological/archaeological resources, require the
paleontologist/archaeologist monitor to suspend all
development activity to avoid destruction of resources
until a determination can be made as to the significance
of the paleontological/archaeological resources. If
resources are determined to be significant, require
submittal of a mitigation plan. Mitigation measures
considered may range from in -situ preservation to recover
and/or relocation. Mitigation plans shall include a good
faith effort to avoid impacts to cultural resources through
methods such as, but not limited to, project redesign, in
situ preservation/capping, and placing cultural resources
areas in open space.
Notify cultural organizations, including Native American
organizations, of proposed developments that have the
potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Allow
qualified representatives of such groups to monitor
grading and/or excavation of development sites.
Where in situ preservation and avoidance are not
feasible, require new development to donate scientifically
valuable paleontological or archaeological materials to a
responsible public or private institution with a suitable
repository, located within Orange County, whenever
possible.
In the event human remains, cultural resources and/or
fossils are encountered, ground -disturbing excavations in
the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted
until a qualified archaeological/paleontological monitor
inspects the site to assess the significance of the find. A
Native American representative shall be contacted if there
is a likelihood that human remains could be of Native
American origin.
The City has notified representatives of the appropriate
Native American organizations as mandated by SB18.
Because the site has been altered by grading and
development that has occurred in the past, it is unlikely
that potential impacts to cultural resources would occur;
however, monitoring during grading will be required. In
the event important cultural resources are encountered,
Native American representatives will be notified.
Consistent with this policy, any discovery of artifacts
and/or resources, along with supporting documentation
and an itemized catalogue, will be accessioned into the
collections of a suitable repository.
4.5.1-5 Where there is a potential to affect cultural or As indicated above, it is not anticipated that cultural
paleontological resources, require the submittal of an I resources would be encountered based on the level of
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 87
Pofcy
No.
CLUP Policy
Consistency Analysis
archaeological/cultural resources monitoring plan that
disturbance that has taken place on the site. However,
identifies monitoring methods and describes the
should such resources be encountered during grading
procedures for selecting archaeological and Native
and construction, the archaeological/paleontological
American monitors and procedures that will be followed if
monitor will have the authority to halt or redirect grading
additional or unexpected archaeological/cultural
operations to avoid impacts and allow proper evaluation
resources are encountered during development of the
and disposition of the resources.
site. Procedures may include, but are not limited to,
provisions for cessation of all grading and construction
activities in the area of the discovery that has any
potential to uncover or otherwise disturb cultural deposits
in the area of the discovery and all construction that may
foreclose mitigation options to allow for significance
testing, additional investigation and mitigation.
Environmental Review
Require applications for new development, where
applicable, to include a geologic/soils/geotechnical study
that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the project
site, any necessary mitigation measures, and contains
A geological assessment has been prepared (refer to
statements that the project site is suitable for the
Section VI of this analysis, which describes the potential
proposed development and that the development will be
eotechnical constraints e. ground
g ( 9•. settlement,
safe from geologic hazard for its economic life. For
shaking, etc.) that affect site development. Several
4.6-9
development on coastal bluffs, including bluffs facing
recommendations have been identified to ensure that the
Upper Newport Bay, such reports shall include slope
proposed structures and project components are
stability analyses and estimates of the long-term average
adequately protected from potential soils, geologic and
bluff retreat rate over the expected life of the
seismic conditions.
development. Reports are to be signed by an
appropriately licensed professional and subject to review
and approval by qualified city staff member(s) and/or
contracted emplo ee(s).
c) Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan?
No Impact. As previously indicated, the subject property is currently developed with private golf and
tennis facilities. As a result, the project site does not support either sensitive habitat and/or species.
Furthermore, the property is not subject to a habitat conservation plan area or natural community
conservation plan area. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The project site is currently developed with private golf and tennis facilities. Neither the
Newport Beach General Plan (Land Use Element and/or Recreation and Open Space Element) nor the
State of California has identified the project site or environs as a potential mineral resource of Statewide
or regional significance. No mineral resources are known to exist and, therefore, project implementation
will not result in any significant impacts.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 88
b) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact. As indicated above, the Newport Beach General Plan does not identify the project environs
as having potential value as a locally important mineral resource site. Project implementation (i.e., new
Golf Club clubhouse, residential and resort uses) as proposed will not result in the loss of any locally
important mineral resource site and, therefore, no significant impacts will occur.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
XII. NOISE
a) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess
of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
Less than Significant Impact. There are several characteristic noise sources typically identified with
general development such as proposed at the Newport Beach Country Club. Construction activities,
especially heavy equipment, will create short-term noise increases near the project sites. Vehicular
traffic volumes on area roadways around the proposed project will slightly decrease as a result of
conversion of 17 tennis courts to less traffic -intrusive residential and hotel uses. This will result in a
very small area -wide traffic noise reduction. However, vehicular noise impacts on proposed on -site
residential uses were examined.
Project activities will entail the continuation of long standing outdoor golf and tennis uses and limited
indoor activities. Outdoor recreational activities at the Country Club represent a continuation of existing
activities, which are compatible with the nearby residential and non-residential development in the
project environs. Although some noise is associated with tennis, in particular, it is not so intrusive that it
would be disruptive or incompatible with the existing uses. No noise impact analysis was therefore
conducted for outdoor recreation because golf activities will remain at the existing level and tennis
activities will be reduced with the reduction in the number of tennis courts. The primary noise sources
for off -site uses that would be of possible concern would be any changes in the parking lot activity
noise. Additionally, any new HVAC equipment installed on the project site would be required to meet
noise standards as outlined in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. Noise impacts anticipated to
occur as a result of the proposed project are discussed in greater detail in Section Xll.c., below.
b) Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground
borne vibration or ground borne noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities generate groundborne vibration when heavy
equipment travels over unpaved surfaces or when it is engaged in soil movement. The effects of
ground -borne vibration include discernable movement of building floors, rattling of windows, shaking of
items on shelves or hanging on walls, and rumbling sounds. Within the "soft' sedimentary surfaces of
much of Southern California, ground vibration is quickly damped out. Because vibration is typically not
an issue, very few jurisdictions have adopted vibration significance thresholds. Vibration thresholds
have been adopted for major public works construction projects, but these relate mostly to structural
protection (cracking foundations or stucco) rather than to human annoyance. Groundborne vibration
attenuates quickly with distance. Vibration levels from the use of heavy equipment would be typical of
that used for other projects; no blasting or other extraordinary grading techniques would be necessary
to implementation the proposed project. Therefore, potential groundborne vibration would be expected
to be imperceptible at the nearest off -site homes. Construction activity vibration impacts are judged as
less than significant.
NEWPORTBEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005'140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Paga80
n) Would the project result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant Impact. Existing noise levels on the proposed project site derive mainly from
vehicular sources on the adjacent arterial roadways. The proposed project site is currently a
functioning Tennis and Golf Country Club. The surrounding area is developed with residential uses to
the northeast and southwest. The site is bound by Newport Canter Drive to the east, East Coast
Highway tothe south and Santa Barbaro Drive to the north.
Noise measurements were token in order to document existing baseline |eva|u in the area. On -site
noise levels in the vicinity of the future on -site residential uuao are in the 55-60 d8 range. Such levels
are well within Newport Beach residential noise standards of 85 dB CNEL. The Villas and The
Bungalows will be exposed totraffic along surrounding roadways. The projects residential component
lies approximata|y2.A0O feet from the Jamboree Road centerline and 2.700 feet from the MacArthur
Boulevard centerline. Thera are numerous intervening buildings separating the site from these
roadways. Given the setback distance and noise attenuation provided by existing building otruoturao,
noise from these roadways was not considered to provide a significant impact upon the proposed
project residential uses. East Coast Highway is approximately 450 feet from the closest proposed on -
site residential use and as such provides the largest potential traffic noise impact. Although other
roadways will add to the project noise exposure level, they will not dominate the noise environment.
As discussed abnve, noise meters placed in the approximate location of the proposed on -site
residential units demonstrated existing CNELo of55 dB CNEL in the center ofthe proposed residential
area and 80 dB CNEL at the approximate location of the closest residential unit. Existing office and
Country Club buildings assist in shielding the proposed residential area from traffic noise emanating
from East Coast Highway.
Project -related traffic will not contribute significantly tnthe ambient noise levels in the area. In addition,
the continuation of the tennis dub would similarly not contribute significantly to the ambient noise levels
and, iherefona, would not adversely affect the nearby residential development because the number of
tennis courts has been reduced and the noise levels would be expected to bethe same orless than
that currently associated with activities atthe Tennis Club facility.
As discussed earlier in this report, in year 2009, the section of PCH closest to the project site (between
Jamboree Road and Newport Center Drive) had a traffic count of 35,660 vehicles per day equating to a
noise level of 73.5 dB CNEL at 50 feet from the centerline. At 450 from the oenter|ine, at the
approximate location of the o|oaont proposed on -site reoidenoe, this noise level decays to 50 dB CNEL
due to distance spreading losses utilizing soft -site conditions. Several intervening buildings afford a
partial shielding accounting for approximately '3 dB CNEL. The predicted on -site CNEL is
approximately 50dB. The measured CNEL levels were 55and 5OdB. CNEL levels ascalculated from
both modeling and measurements are similar.
Newport Beach Traffic Engineering estimates a 1 percent growth rate per year for traffic along Pacific
Coast Highway. Assuming area bui|doutououra in 2028, there would baalmost 4O.U00 vehicles along
Pacific Coast Highway each doy, resulting in o +0.4d13 increase over existing. Thorefnre, the future
noise level for proposed on -site residential uses would be indistinguishable from existing CNEL levels in
the upper 50dBrange.
This noise level is well below the City of Newport Beach recommended exterior compatibility noise |*va|
of 85 dB CNEL for residential uses. Typical exterior to interior noise attenuation with open windows is
at least -10 d8 CNEL, and in modern construction, 20'30 d8 CNEL with closed windows. This
translates into interior levels of less than 51 dB CNEL with open windows and |aoa than 41 d8 CNEL
with o|naed windows. Interior levels will readily meet the 45 dB CNEL standard for habitable rooms.
There is no siting conflict for planned residential uses within the project site.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 90
The project's primary parking lot will remain along PCH and will accommodate 300 cars. Smaller lots
are scattered in the tennis court area and accommodate 20-38 cars each. On -site proposed parking
will accommodate 398 vehicles. In addition, to 554 parking stalls are also available to accommodate
parking for the project through a parking agreement with the adjacent Corporate Plaza West
development. Parking lot activities are sporadic but with a morning and evening peak hour volume.
Existing peak hour traffic volume is 129 vehicles per hour. Proposed peak hour traffic volume will be 94
vehicles per hour. Noise emanating from vehicles entering and exiting the proposed project site
improvements will be less than from existing site operations and will be spread over several areas.
Parking lot noise is not anticipated to be a noise nuisance.
The uses planned for the NBCC are a continuation of existing uses and do not represent any significant
new noise source and as such is not anticipated to generate noise that will affect off -site uses.
d) Would the project result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing with the project?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Temporary construction noise impacts will vary
markedly because the noise strength of construction equipment ranges widely as a function of the
equipment used and its activity level. Short-term construction noise impacts tend to occur in discrete
phases dominated initially by demolition of existing structures and large earth -moving sources, then by
foundation and parking lot construction, and finally for finish construction. The demolition and earth -
moving sources are the noisiest, with equipment noise typically ranging from 75 to 90 dBA at 50 feet from
the source.
Point sources of noise emissions are typically attenuated by a factor of 6 dB per doubling of distance
through geometrical (spherical) spreading of sound waves. The quieter noise sources will drop to a
65 dBA exterior/45 dBA interior noise level by about 200 feet from the source. For typical construction
scenario, the louder noise sources may require over 1,000 feet from the source to reduce the 90+ dBA
source strength to a generally acceptable 65 dBA exterior exposure level.
Grading involves recycling the 14,583 cubic yards of removed hardscape to implement the proposed
project. This hardscape would be removed and then crushed on -site to be utilized as fill material rather
than require importation of fill dirt. Analysis of this scenario involves quantifying noise from crushing
equipment that would operate on site.
Rock crusher noise depends upon the type of material processed. Hard rock with large individual pieces
is noisier than recycled asphalt. Asphalt is very soft material with the bulk of the noise coming from the
screens and not the crusher. Noise impacts from the crushing operations that would occur within the
project site are associated with the processing of the mostly concrete and broken asphalt rubble as the
bulk of the material processed by the on -site crusher. The debris crushed on -site is considered a "soft"
material.
Sound decays at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of source -receiver distance for propagation across a smooth,
hard surface. The drop-off rate across irregular, vegetated surfaces are somewhat faster. If there are
obstructions to the direct line -of -sight, the drop-off rate is much faster. Placement of a large barrier along
the line -of -sight can reduce levels by 15-20 dB from their unimpeded transmission. Audibility will also
depend upon background conditions. The closest off -site residence to possible crusher operations is
approximately 500 feet.
The noise impact from the crusher therefore depends on a very large number of variables:
• Type of material crushed
• Character of the underlying surface
• Source receiver distance
• Presence of any physical obstructions
• Masking effects of background levels
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 91
The noise envelope for a prototype crusher as a function of various variables is reflected in Table 12.
Rock Crusher Noise Envelope
Newport Country Club
Source Receiver Distance
(feet)
Soft Rock
Soft' Surface
50
85
100
78
200
70
400
63
500
60
800
57
'Unpaved, vegetated and irregular surface
SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (July 2009
The Noise Code identifies a desirable L25 noise exposure of 55 dB and L25 nighttime of 50 dB. Under
direct line of sight conditions, crusher noise could slightly exceed the City's noise standard at the closest
residences. Interruption of the line of sight would reduce noise levels by 10 dB or more and would meet
the City's noise standard. Therefore, use of a stockpile of rubble, or a temporary sound blanket as a
barrier between the crusher and the closest home(s), is required if the on -site recycling is selected (see
Mitigation Measure MM-8).
The project will also comply with the noise ordinance relating to permissible hours of construction
operations and will not start construction operations until 8:00am. According to the City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code, permissible hours of construction are 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. on weekdays and
8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Construction is not permitted on any national holiday or on any
Sunday. This exclusion from numerical standards ordinance compliance is presumed applicable to any
mobile construction equipment, but not to a possible rock crusher. These hours are included as conditions
on any project construction permits and these limits will serve to minimize any adverse construction noise
impact potential.
e) For a project 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 airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. John Wayne Airport is located approximately 4.0 miles north of the subject property. As
indicated in Section Vlll.e., a portion of the Newport Beach Country Club property is located within the
AELUP Notification Area (i.e., FAR Part 77) for JWA. Noise in the vicinity of the project site associated
with aircraft operations occurring at John Wayne Airport is below 60 dBA CNEL and therefore, the
proposed clubhouse will not be subjected to excessive noise levels. Nonetheless, the City is required to
submit the proposed PC Amendment to the ALUC for a determination of consistency in accordance with
Section 4.3 of the AELUP prior to adoption by the City. No significant impacts are anticipated and no
mitigation measures are required.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip or other aviation facility that
generates noise in the vicinity of the subject property. Development of the site as proposed will not result
in potential adverse impacts, including safety hazards, to people residing or working in the project area.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 92
Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation
measures are necessary.
Mitigation Measures
As indicated in the preceding analysis, potentially significant short-tem, construction noise impacts are
anticipated as a result of project implementation in the event that a rock crushing operation is located on
the subject property to utilize the on -site materials as fill. The following measures are recommended to
ensure that potential construction noise impacts associated with the potential rock crushing operation are
reduced to a less than significant level. Additional measures are also recommended to further reduce
temporary construction noise levels.
MM-3 During rock crushing operations, a sound blanket shall be used if a direct line of sight exists
between the crusher and any off -site homes.
MM-4 All construction equipment, stationary and mobile, shall be equipped with properly operating and
maintained muffling devices.
MM-5 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a construction schedule shall be developed that minimizes
potential project -related and cumulative construction noise levels.
MM-6 The construction contractor shall notify the residents of the construction schedule for the
proposed project, and shall keep them informed on any changes to the schedule. The notification
shall also identify the name and phone number of a contact person in case of complaints. The
contact person shall take all reasonable steps to resolve the complaint.
MM-7 Heating, venting, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment in or adjacent to residential areas shall be
shown by computation, based on the sound rating of the proposed equipment, not to exceed an A -
weighted sound pressure level of fifty (50) dBA or not to exceed an A -weighted sound pressure level
of fifty-five (55) dBA.
XII1. POPULATION AND HOUSING
a) Would the project 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?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation includes the development of five (5) single-family
detached residential dwelling units. Based on the City's population per household average of 2.19,15 the
proposed project would generate a total of 11 residents. The residential development proposed with this
project in Anomaly No. 46 (i.e., Tennis Clubhouse component) is permitted in accordance with the MU-H3
land use designation. As a result, the addition of the five single-family residential dwelling units is
consistent with the General Plan. Consequently, development of these dwelling units would not result in
either direct or indirect unanticipated growth in the City. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated
and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. As previously indicated, the project site is developed with the Newport Beach Country Club
and former Balboa Bay Tennis Club; both are private recreational facilities. No residential development
exists within the limits of the subject property. Project implementation, therefore, will not result in the
displacement of any existing residential dwelling units that would necessitate replacement elsewhere in
the City. No significant impacts will occur and no mitigation measures are required.
15Newport Beach Housing Element; Table H14
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 93
c) Would the project displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing?
No Impact. As indicated above, the subject property does not support existing residential uses;
therefore, no displacement of occupants will occur and no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically
altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection? Less than Significant Impact. Fire protection facilities and service to the
subject property are provided by the Newport Beach Fire Department (NBFD). In addition to the
City's resources, the NBFD also maintains a formal automatic aid agreement with the Orange
County Fire Authority (OCFA) and all neighboring municipal fire departments to facilitate fire
protection in the City should the need arise. Fire Station No. 3 -Fashion Island is the closest
responding fire station to the subject property. The project includes all necessary fire protection
devices, including fire sprinklers. The project must comply with the current Building and Fire
Codes adopted by the City. A code compliance analysis will be conducted by City staff to ensure
that adequate water pressure and related features required by the City are provided to ensure
that the project complies with the CFC and related City codes. Adequate water supplies and
infrastructure, including fire hydrants, exist in the vicinity of the project, and there is no
requirement for other new facilities or emergency services.
Police protection? Less than Significant Impact. The Newport Beach Police Department
(NBPD) is responsible for providing police and law enforcement services within the corporate
limits of the City. The Police Department headquarters is located at 870 Santa Barbara Drive, at
the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara, approximately two miles northeast of the
subject property. The NBPD currently has a ratio of 1.91 sworn officers for each 1,000 residents
in the City. This ratio is adequate for the current population. Police and law enforcement service
in the City is provided by patrols with designated "beats." Development of the subject site as
proposed would not require an expansion to local law enforcement resources and therefore would
not result in any environmental impacts involving construction of new law enforcement facilities.
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Schools? Less than Significant Impact. The provision of educational facilities and services in
the City of Newport Beach is the responsibility of the Newport -Mesa Unified School District.
Residential and non-residential development is subject to the imposition of school fees. Payment
of the State -mandated statutory school fees is the manner by which potential impacts to the
District's educational facilities are mitigated. The five single-family residential dwelling units (i.e.,
The Villas) included in the proposed project would not generate a significant number of new
students in the District. The five dwelling units were included in the General Plan Update
analysis. Based on the General Plan analysis of new dwelling units within the City, 6 the
proposed project would generate approximately 2 students. New or expanded school facilities
would not be required to provide classroom and support space for the low number of school age
children. However, as indicated above, the project applicant must pay the applicable school fee
16Newport Beach General Plan Update EIR; June 2006.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 94
to the school district, pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code, in order to
offset the incremental cost impact of expanding school resources to accommodate the increased
student enrollment associated with one new residence. With the payment of the mandatory
school fees, no significant impacts would occur as a result of project implementation.
Other public facilities? No Impact. Due to the reduction in residential density, no increased
demand for other public services is anticipated and there would be no need to construct any new
public facilities. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
XV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
Less Than Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project will result in the construction of
only five single-family homes, known as the Villas, 27 short-term hotel units, known as The Bungalows,
and a remodeled private Tennis Club, including the Tennis Clubhouse. The Bungalows will be available
for use by Tennis Club and Golf Club members, as well as the general public. Although residents of the
proposed Villas and visitors of the Bungalows would occasionally visit local and regional parks and
beaches, use of those public facilities by the future Villa residents and Bungalow guests would not
represent a substantial change in the intensity of usage and the impact would not result in substantial
physical deterioration of those park areas. The subject site is located in Service Area 9 (Newport Center),
which currently supports 19 acres of existing parkland, which exceeds the 10.9 acres of parkland "needs"
based on the City's currently a requirements. Nonetheless, the applicant would be subject to the
payment of in -lieu park fees (refer to XV.b) in accordance with Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code. No significant impacts to recreational facilities are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
required.
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction of or expansion
of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
No Impact. Development of the site as proposed would not require the construction of new or the
expansion of existing recreational facilities in the City of Newport Beach. However, as indicated above,
Title 19 (Subdivisions) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code requires the developer to pay a fee for the
proposed residential component of the project. This fee will be used to augment recreational facilities in
the City. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
NBmP0RTBEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY 140
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Paga85
o) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing
measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into
account all modes of transportation, including mass transit and non -motorized travel and
relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections,
streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Short-term traffic impacts are those resulting from
site preparation (i.e., grading and site preparation) and construction activities. With the exception of
heavy trucks traveling to and from the site in the morning and afternoon to be used during site preparation
and construction that occurs on -site, no other heavy truck traffic associated with hauling earth materials to
or from the site will occur. During the construction phnse, there will be periods oftime when heavy truck
traffic would occur that could result in some congestion on East Coast Highway. However, the number of
heavy trucks entering and leaving the project area would be limited tothose transporting equipment and
materials to the site. Other construction -related traffic impacts are associated with vehicles carrying
workers to and from the site and medium and heavy trucks carrying construction materials to the project
site, which may result in some minor traffic delays; howevar, potential traffic interference caused by
construction vehicles could create a temporary/short-term impact to vehicles using neighboring streets in
the morning and afternoon hours. Therahore, aside from potentially minor impacts resulting from the
increase in traffic that will occur as a result of construction -related tnaMiu (e.g., construction nnateria|o,
construction vvnrkera, atc.), no significant short-term impacts are anticipated to occur as a result nfproject
implementation. Nonethe|anu, the construction traffic impacts would be adequately addressed through
the implementation of a Construction Staging. Parking and Traffic Control Plan for each phase of
construction.
Project implementation would result in a net decrease in vehicular trips. As indicated in Table 13, the
proposed project would generate atoto| of 1.183 trips per day, including 80 a.m. peak hour trips and 04
p.m.peak hour trips. These figures are compared to the 1,572 daily trips and 72 a.m. peak hour and 129
p.m. peak hour trips currently generated by the existing golf and tennis facilities. The resulting decrease
in daily and peak hour trips vvou|d, thorofnna, not adversely affect any of the operational levels of service
ofthe intersections inthe project environs.
As indicated in Table 13, project implementation would result in the elimination of 17 tennis courts, which
would be replaced by The Bungalows and five single-family residential dwelling units. As a result, traffic
generated by the proposed project would decrease by 389 daily trips; a.m. and p.m. peak hour trips would
also decrease by and 35tripu. respectively. Since the proposed Newport Beach Country Club project
would generate |oee daily and peak hour traffic than the existing deve|opment, a detailed traffic analysis
was not conducted. No significant project -related or cumulative long-term traffic impacts would occur as o
result ofthe proposed project and nnmitigation measures are required.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 96
Table 13
1: VATA ..
Land Use
Unit
Trip Generation Rates
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily
In
Out
Total
In
Out
Total
Golf Club
Hole
35.74
1.76
0.47
2.23
1.23
1.51
2.74
Tennis Club
Court
38.70
0.66
0.66
1.32
1.68
1.68
3.36
Bungalows
Room
8.17
0.34
0.2
0.56
0.31
0.28
0.59
Residential
DU
9.57
0.19
0.56
0.75
0.64
0.37
1.01
-Single-Family
Land Use
Unit
Trip Generation Estimates
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Existing Development
Golf Club
18 Holes
643
32
8
40
22
27
49
Tennis Club
24 Courts
929
16
16
32
40
40
80
Total — Existing Uses
1,572
48
24
72
62
67
129
Proposed
Development
Golf Club
18 Holes
643
32
8
40
22
27
49
Tennis Clubhouse
7 Courts
271
5
5
10
12
12
24
Bungalows
27 Rooms
221
9
6
15
8
8
16
Residential
5 DU
48
1
3
4
3
2
5
-Single-Family
Total — Proposed Uses
1,183
47
22
69
45
49
94
Net New Trips
-389
-1
-2
-3
-17
-18
-35
'Trip generation rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (81" Edition).
SOURCE: Kimle -Horn Associates, Inc. June 2009)
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including,
but not limited to level of service standard and ravel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
No Impact. As indicated in Table 3 in Section XVI.a, project implementation will result in a net decrease
in vehicular trips. Neither the daily nor peak hour trips exceed those required to undertake a CMPAs a
result, intersection analysis. Traffic operations in the project area would not be adversely affected by
project -related traffic. Therefore, the proposed project would neither result in direct project -related
impacts nor contribute to the cumulative degradation of any intersection in the project environs.
Furthermore, project implementation would not conflict with either the County's CMP or other standard,
including those adopted by the City of Newport Beach. No significant cumulative impacts are anticipated
and no mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project result in a change in air traffic pattern, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. The proposed project site is located approximately four miles from John Wayne Airport and
is not located within an area that is affected by aircraft operations. The proposed Planned Community
District regulations for the project allow for a maximum building height of 50 feet. The proposed
structures would not necessitate any changes in the air traffic patterns because the project site is not
NEWP0nTBEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005'140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page07
located within the airport environs and would not affect airport operations. This project would have no
effect on the volumes of air traffic occurring at John Wayne Airport or any other airports in the region. No
significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to e design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Lass than Significant Impact. During the construction phaaes, o variety of construction vehicles,
including large delivery trucks, concrete pumpars, dump trucks, and a variety ofpassenger vehicles, will
travel toand from the subject property. {}nsome occasions, there will beanumber ofmedium and heavy
trucks that could add to local congestion levels and possibly affect through -traffic for short periods of time.
Although potential conflicts are anticipated to be |eaa than oignifioant, implementation of construction
traffic management plan (refer to K4M'10), which is required by the City of Newport Beaoh, would ensure
that any conflicts resulting during the construction phase would beminimized.
The project proposes changes to the main parking area in front of the Golf Clubhouse, including
landscaping and beautification of the area and minor changes to on -site circulation; the project site
aooauo to the public atnyat system at East Coast Highway (via Irvine Terrace) and at Granville Drive will
remain unchanged. Irvine Terrace will be improved with o landscaped median and will be striped to
delineate two inbound lanes and two outbound lanes. Hovvevar, in order to accommodate left -turn
movements, the left -turn pocket atthe intersection with East Coast Highway should be lengthened to
provide o minimum of 100 feet plus the transition. With the incorporation of this moauure, no significant
impacts are required.
In addition, a new drive aisle with a drop-off area will also be added to the front of the Golf Clubhouse and
a second entry point to the main parking lot will be added at the northwest corner of the lot. The parking
rnvva in the main body ofthe parking lot will be reconfigured to on eoat+waatorientaUun' with access
oiu|as provided on both ends of the parking lot. Each of the drive oin|aa will be 26 feat vvide, which
provides adequate room for circulation, turning, and backing for 00'd*gree parking aisles.
Pedestrian aooaun from the Golf Club parking lot is improved by o pedestrian walkway with enhanced
paving through the center of the parking lot, which connects directly to the Golf Clubhouse.
m) Would the project result ininadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant |nnpmot. The primary access to the project site is provided via a drive aisle that
connects to the end of Irvine Ternaoe, which in turn connects to East Coast Highway (i.e.. State Highway
1). Irvine Terrace also provides access tothe adjacent Corporate Plaza West development. The Irvine
Terrace/East Coast Highway intersection in a signalized intersection. As indicated in Section XV|A. Irvine
Terrace will beimproved with two inbound and two outbound lanes. |naddition tuthe project access from
Irvine Terraoe, the project proposes a new access and ou|-de-noc, which will provide aooeaa to The
Bungalows and The Villas. Indirect access iualso available from Farallon via Newport Center Drive east
of the site; hovvavor, aoueoo to The Tennis C|ub, The Bungalows, and The Villas would be from the
proposed cul-de-sac. Adequate emergency access exists to serve both components of the proposed
project. Nonetheless, the Newport Beach Fire Department will conduct code compliance analysis with
the City's Building Department to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided.
f) VVmu|d the project conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public
transit, bicycle, mrpedestrian facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. Aoindicated inTable 1O.the proposed project ioconsistent with relevant
policies articulated in the City'a Circulation Element of the General Plan. In oddition, public transportation
would not be impacted by the proposed. The project is located in an area of the City that in served by
public transportation (OCTA bus service) and public transit access is available in the project vicinity along
Coast Highway. The project is located in proximity to existing retail and commercial development. The
addition of five single-family residential dwelling units, 27 bungalows and spa would be adequately served
by the existing public transportation available along PCH and in the project environs. Similarly, neither
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 98
bicycle nor pedestrian facilities would be significantly altered as a result of the proposed project. Bicycle
lanes along Coast Highway would not be affected. In addition, walkways within the proposed project
would accommodate pedestrians. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are
required
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is proposed to minimize the level of impact associated with temporary
construction traffic:
MM-8 Prior to commencement of each major phase of construction, the Applicant shall submit a
Construction Staging, Parking and Traffic Control Plan for approval by the Public Works
Department, which shall address issues pertaining to potential traffic conflicts during peak traffic
periods, potential displacement of on -street parking, and safety.
• This plan shall identify the proposed construction staging area(s), construction crew
parking area(s), estimated number and types of vehicles that will occur during each
phase, the proposed arrival/departure routes and operational safeguards (e.g. flagmen,
barricades, etc.) and hourly restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic conflicts during peak
traffic periods and to ensure safety.
• If necessary, the Construction Staging, Parking Traffic Control Plan shall provide for an
off -site parking lot for construction crews which will be shuttled to and from the project
site at the beginning and end of each day until such time that the project site can
accommodate off-street construction vehicle parking.
• The plan shall identify all construction traffic routes, which shall avoid narrow streets
unless there is no alternative, and the plan shall not include any streets where some form
of construction is underway within or adjacent to the street that would impact the efficacy
of the proposed route.
• Dirt hauling shall not be scheduled during weekday peak hour traffic periods.
• The approved Construction Staging, Parking and Traffic Control Plan shall be
implemented throughout each major construction phase.
MM-9 The left -turn pocket on Irvine Terrace at the Coast Highway shall be increased in length to a
minimum of 100 feet plus transition in order to adequately accommodate left -turn movements.
XVII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS
a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
No Impact. Wastewater from the City's sewer system is treated by the Orange County Sanitation District
(OCSD), which is responsible for safely collecting, treating, and disposing the wastewater generated by
2.3 million people residing in central and northwest Orange County. Raw sewage generated in the City is
treated at the OCSD Treatment Plant No. 2 in Huntington Beach, which has a treatment capacity of 276
million gallons per day (mgd). Treatment of raw sewage includes preliminary treatment, primary
treatment, anaerobic digestion, secondary treatment, and solids handling. Treatment Plant No. 2 is
operating at approximately 55 percent of its design capacity.
Wastewater generated by the proposed project would be the same as other similar developments in the
City and would not contain hazardous waste or other pollutants. Based on sewage generation rates in
the City's General Plan EIR, the five single-family residential dwelling units would generate up to less
than 2,000 gallons per day (gpd) of raw sewage. In addition, the 27 bungalows would generate an
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 99
additional, 4,050 gallons per day utilizing the visitor serving (i.e., hotel) generation factor. Because the
Tennis Clubhouse and Golf Clubhouse and facilities currently exist, the increase in sewage generation
from these two uses is anticipated to be approximately 3,300 gallons per day as a result of the increase in
floor area associated with the Golf Clubhouse. The uses would generate approximately 7,750 gallons per
day of raw sewage, compared to the 5,450 gallons per day estimated based on the existing floor areas.
The additional sewage generated by the project would be incrementally insignificant when compared to
the 4.1 mgd increase anticipated as a result of buildout of the City's General Plan. The raw sewage
generated by the project would be disposed into the existing sewer system and would be transported to
OCSD Treatment Plant No. 2, which is adequate capacity to accommodate the City's buildout needs for
waste treatment. As a result, project implementation would not exceed existing treatment infrastructure
and expansion would not be required. Furthermore, the additional treatment needs would not exceed
wastewater treatment standards of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No significant impacts are
anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
No Impact. Water demand and wastewater generation will not increase significantly as a result of the
development of the five single-family residential dwelling units and 27 bungalows on the site. Based on
water demand rates, the proposed project would generate a demand for approximately 45,000 gallons
per day for the five single-family dwelling units and the 27 bungalow units." In addition, the Golf
Clubhouse and Tennis Clubhouse would create a demand for an additional 7,750 gallons per day
compared to the existing demand of 3,300 gallons per day. The proposed project is within the land use
projections of the City, which are the basis of future water demand demands and wastewater generation
within Newport Beach. The project will connect to existing water and wastewater facilities in the project
vicinity. No expansion of these facilities is necessary due to existing capacity. No significant impacts are
anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
c) Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage
facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Less than Significant Impact. The project will result in additional impervious surface areas by the new
buildings, streets, parking lots, walkways and other hardscape. The additional hardscape will result in a
small increase in runoff during storm periods. The site will be designed to ensure that surface runoff will
be directed to existing facilities. As indicated in Section VIII, some of the existing storm drain facilities do
not have adequate capacity to accommodate existing or future storm flows; however, deficient in -tract
facilities will be upgraded to accommodate post -development flows. All storm flows generated on the
subject property will be collected and conveyed to Newport Bay where it will be discharged. Therefore,
the increase in project -related storm flows will not result in a potentially significant impact and no
mitigation measures are required.
d) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Less than Significant Impact. See response to XVll.b above. The City of Newport Beach provides
water service within the project vicinity. The City's water supplies are imported water purchased from the
Municipal Water District of Orange County (MWDOC), groundwater pumped from the Orange County
Groundwater Basin, and reclaimed water. The City currently maintains a total system capacity of
approximately 100 million gallons in three facilities. According to the City's 2005 Urban Water
Management Plan (UWMP), water supplies can continue to meet the city's imported water needs until the
year 2030. Beyond that date, improvements associated with the State Water Project supply, additional
local projects, conservation, and additional water transfers would be needed to adequately serve the City.
17Assumes 2.19 persons per dwelling unit and bungalow, based on the City's population per household.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page100
However, during short-term periods of water supply reductions, the City would implement its water
shortage contingency plan.
As indicated in the City's General Plan EIR, additional development accommodated under the General
Plan, including the proposed project would increase water use within the City, thus increasing the need
for water treatment services. However, as indicated above, MWD has indicated that it can meet all of the
City's imported water needs through 2030. In addition, Orange County Water District anticipates that
there would also be sufficient groundwater supplies to meet projected future demand requirements in the
City. Future water demand based on the General Plan projections would not be increased significantly
with the addition of the proposed development. The demand created by the proposed project is
consistent with the City's long-range projections for development that are the basis of water demands in
Newport Beach. The General Plan has identified the minimization of water consumption as one of its
goals in the Natural Resources Element. The proposed project would be subject to the policies that
would achieve that goal, including limiting water usage, prohibitions on activities that waste water or
cause runoff, and water efficient landscaping and irrigation in conjunction with other water conserving
devices and practices in new construction. Specifically, water conservation measures will be required on
the proposed project as prescribed in Chapter 14.16 (Water Conservation and Supply Level Regulations)
and Chapter 14.17 (Water -Efficient Landscaping) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Therefore, no
significant direct or cumulative impacts are anticipated based on the findings in the City's General Plan
EIR; no mitigation measures are required.
e) Would the project 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?
No Impact. See response to XVll.b above. As indicated in that response, adequate sewer collection,
conveyance and treatment facilities exist to accommodate the incremental increase in raw sewage
resulting from the development of the proposed project. No impacts are anticipated and no mitigation
measures are required.
f) Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation will result in the generation of demolition debris
and some refuse during the construction phase; however, it would be relatively small and would not
adversely affect existing capacities at the County's sanitary landfills. The project includes recycling some
of the demolition materials generated during the construction phase. Asphalt and concrete will be
crushed on -site and utilized as fill material to accommodate the proposed project. As a result, the amount
of demolition materials that would require transport to and placement in one of the County's landfills
would be reduced by the recycling of the asphalt and concrete.
Based on the City's General Plan EIR, it is anticipated that the Orange County landfill system will have
adequate capacity to operate until 2035. Based on the solid waste generate rates presented in the
General Plan EIR, the five single-family residential dwelling units and the 27 bungalows would generate
less than 100 pounds per day of solid waste. Because the Golf Club and Tennis Club currently exist, no
significant increase in refuse would be anticipated as a result of the reconstruction of those facilities. With
the remaining capacity of approximately 44.6 million tons, as well as a 16-year lifespan at the Frank R.
Bowerman Sanitary Landfill (without the proposed expansion that would extend the life of this facility to
2053), the City-wide potential increase in solid waste due to General Plan buildout, including the
proposed project, would not result in the exceedance of capacity of that landfill. In addition, AB 939
mandates the reduction of solid waste. As a result, it is anticipated that at least a 50 percent reduction in
refuse would be required. Therefore, the project will not result in a significant increase in solid waste
production due to the proposed project. Existing landfills are expected to have adequate capacity to
service the site and use. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page 101
g) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statues and regulations related to
solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. Solid waste production will be picked up by either the City of Newport
Beach or a commercial provider licensed by the City of Newport Beach. All federal, state and local
regulations related to solid waste will be adhered to through this process. No significant impacts are
anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The environmental analysis conducted for the proposed project indicates that although the proposed
project could have the potential for significant adverse environmental impacts, the impacts would be
reduced to a less than significant level through the implementation of mitigation measures as prescribed
in the preceding analysis.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major period of California history or
prehistory?
Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project would not have the potential to degrade the quality
of the environment. The site is entirely developed with private recreational uses and has been altered
from its natural state. As a result, it does not support sensitive habitat and/or sensitive plant or animal
species. As a result, the proposed project would reduce the habitat of a wildlife species and/or threaten
to eliminate one or more sensitive plant species. No historic structures or sites are present in the project
area, which may be affected by the proposed project. The proposed project would not eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, no significant
impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Less than Significant Impact. Redevelopment of the site as proposed would result in a negligible
difference in long-term environmental effects associated with use of the site. Project implementation
would result in fewer vehicular trips and, therefore, a reduction in the pollutant emissions when compared
to the existing use of the site. No significant impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, public
health and safety, mineral resources, population and housing, agricultural resources or other
environmental issues would occur. In addition, the proposed project would result in an overall reduction
in the volume of storm runoff and an improvement in the quality of the water prior to its discharge when
compared to the existing use of the site. Therefore, the project would not contribute to the cumulative
degradation of the environment or exacerbate unacceptable environmental conditions (e.g., biological
resources, etc.) when considered with other projects proposed in the project environs.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page102
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The preceding analysis conducted for the
proposed project indicated that although project implementation could result in some potentially
significant environmental effects (e.g., soils and geology, hazards and hazardous materials, etc.), with the
implementation of mitigation measures prescribed in this analysis, the proposed project would not result
in significant environmental impacts on humans, either directly or indirectly.
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2005-140)
INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Page103
The following enumerated documents are available at the offices of the City of Newport Beach, Planning
Department, 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92660.
1. Newport Beach General Plan; City of Newport Beach; adopted July 25, 2006.
2. Final Program EIR - City of Newport Beach General Plan
3. Title 20, Zoning Code of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
4. City Excavation and Grading Code, Newport Beach Municipal Code.
5. Chapters 10.26 and 10.28, Community Noise Ordinance of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
6. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan 1997.
7. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Air Quality Management Plan EIR, 1997.
The following documents have been prepared specifically for this project, and are incorporated by
reference within this initial study. The documents are available at the office of the City of Newport Beach,
Planning Department.
1. Report of Geotechnical Studies and Review of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15347, Newport
Beach Country Club; GMU Geotechnical, Inc.; May 2, 2008.
2. Revised Preliminary Geotechnical Design Parameters for the NBCC Planned Community,
Newport Beach Country Club; GMU Geotechnical, Inc.; April 25, 2008.
3. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment; Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community;
Partner Engineering and Science, Inc.; April 3, 2009.
4. Traffic and Parking Evaluation for the Proposed Newport Beach Country Club Project in the City
of Newport Beach; Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc.; June 2009.
5. NPDES Technical Study (Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District Plan);
Adams -Streeter Civil Engineers, Inc.; January 14, 2009
6. Preliminary Hydrology Report for Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15347; Adams -Streeter Civil
Engineers, Inc.; July 13, 2009.
7. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District Plan; January 12, 2009.
8. Air Quality Analysis for the Newport Beach Country Club Project; Giroux & Associates; July 23,
2009.
9. Noise Assessment for the Newport Beach Country Club Project; Giroux & Associates; July 23,
2009.
10. Newport Beach Country Club Parking Supply Analysis; LSA Associates, Inc.; August 20, 2008.
Errata for the IS/MND
Newport Beach Country Club (PA 2005-140)
Golf Realty Fund
1. Page 4: Column 4 (Height (ft.)) under "Building Heights" in Table 2 (Summary of
Proposed Uses) to reflect a maximum building height
Change 50 feet to 53' 6" for the proposed Golf Course Clubhouse.
2. Page 5: Delete all of the text and replace it with the following:
The project site encompasses approximately 145 acres (refer to Table A), which are
divided into four sub -areas identified below. Each sub -area as well as the hand car
wash is described below and illustrated on Exhibit 2.
Table A
Land Use Allocations
Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District Plan
Golf Realty Fund
Sub Area
Approximate Area
Acres
The Tennis Club Sub -Area
4.62
The Villas Sub -Area
1.25
The Bungalows Sub -Area
3.44
The Golf Club Sub -Area'
133.01
Total
±145
'Includes Golf Clubhouse, Golf Parking Lot and Hand Car Wash
SOURCE: Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
District Plan (July 12, 2010)
Golf Clubhouse
The golf clubhouse floor plan has a maximum of 35,000 gross square feet, exclusive of
below grade cart storage, in two stories, including approximately 18,100 square feet on
the first floor and approximately 16,900 square feet on the second floor. The lower floor
will accommodate the following features: Grill, women's lounge and locker room, men's
locker room, and pro shop. Other features included on the first floor include a cart barn
and club storage. The second floor will accommodate a banquet room and kitchen,
dining room, lounge, foyer, offices, private meeting and dining rooms, and a "19'" hole."
Other features which currently exist and will continue to be part of the clubhouse
facilities include a snack stand (180 square feet), existing golf course restroom facilities,
and existing greens keeper buildings and area. The maximum height of the proposed
golf clubhouse is 53 feet 6 inches, measured from the existing grade to the mid -point of
the sloped roof. (The reference to a maximum 50-foot height limit reflected in Table 1
on page 4 of the initial study referenced in this comment is incorrect and will be revised
to reflect the 53 feet 6-inch maximum height noted in this description.)
Tennis Clubhouse and Courts
The maximum floor area of the tennis clubhouse is 3,725 gross square feet and will
have a maximum building height of 30 feet (measured from the existing grade to the
peak of the roof). The tennis clubhouse includes a lobby, pro shop, office and locker
rooms. A total of seven tennis courts, including one stadium court will replace the 24
tennis courts that currently exist on the subject property. Screening for the tennis courts
from The Villas E will also be provided in the form of a five-foot block wall that would be
designed to be compatible with the proposed Villa E, adjacent to the tennis courts. In
addition, the exterior perimeter of the tennis courts facing the Granville Condominiums,
Granville Drive, and the Tennis Club parking lot will also be screened, utilizing the
existing 10-foot high chain link fence covered by a wind screen.
Bungalows
The Bungalows proposed by the applicant will consist of 27 "hotel" units that
encompass approximately 29,044 square feet of floor area. A 2,170 square foot
Concierge and Guest Center is also included in this development component. In
addition, the Bungalow Spa, which is an auxiliary use for and part of the Bungalows,
encompasses 7,490 square feet. This facility will include a fitness center, spa, spa bar
and lounge. Other features include a Zen Garden, Jacuzzi and swimming pool. The
pool and/or spa equipment will be enclosed by five-foot block wall. The maximum
building height of the Bungalows is 31 feet, measured from the existing grade to the
peak of the roof.
Villas
The five Villas are proposed within a 1.25-acre sub -area. Lot sizes of the single-family
detached residential dwelling lots will vary from 5,295 square feet (Villa A) to 17,151
(Villa D) square feet. Homes will range in size from 2,201 square feet (Plan A) to 6,384
square feet (Plan D). The maximum building heights (measured from existing grade)
permitted for the Villas ranges from 23 feet (Villa A) to 39 feet (Villa D). Swimming
pools are also permitted for each of the five Villas.
2
Golf Club Parking Lot and Private Hand Car Wash
The proposed Golf Club Parking Lot has 300 on -site parking spaces. In addition, as
described in Response to Comment No. 4 of The Irvine Company, above, an existing
perpetual offsite Parking Agreement will continue to provide as many as 554 non-
exclusive parking spaces on weekends and holidays to supplement the onsite Golf Club
parking. The frontage road that exists adjacent to East Coast Highway will be
eliminated and replaced with landscaping. In addition, a private hand car wash area is
proposed within the parking lot in the vicinity of Country Club Drive. The area identified
to accommodate this project feature encompasses approximately 240 square feet (i.e.,
12 feet wide and 20 feet long). Use of the private hand car wash is limited to golf and
possibly tennis club members only.
3. Page 8, Table 2:
Delete Table 2 and replace it with the revised Table 2 below.
3
Table 2
Tennis Club Development Phasing
MND
Revised
Exhibit
Phasing
Duration
Plan
Description
(Months)
Reference
(5/25/11)
Phase
Installation of Temporary Modular
1
4
1
Tennis Clubhouse'
Demolition of Tennis Club building, 9
1
tennis courts, perimeter tennis court
fence remains, portion of Tennis Club
1
4
2
parking lot (61 parking spaces),
landscaping and small portion of
existing site wall
Construct The Villas (3), Private Street,
New Tennis Clubhouse and Parking
14
6
4
Lots refer to Exhibit 6
2
Demolition of 3 tennis courts, small
portion of Tennis Club parking lot and
1
5
3
remaining Tennis Club Building
Construct Center Court area and
3
8
6
Pool
3
-Bungalow
Demolition of 3 tennis courts,
remaining portion of old Tennis Club
1
7
5
parking lot and removal of Temporary
Modular Tennis Clubhouse
Demolition of 2 tennis courts, and
perimeter tennis court fence in front of
the 3 completed Villas — After
substantial completion of the Golf
1
9
7
4
Bungalows removal of perimeter tennis
court fence in front of the Golf
Bungalows.
Construct Golf and Tennis Bungalows
15
10
8
and remaining 2 Villas.
Total Schedule
36
'Anticipated Start date is September 2011
SOURCE: The Templeton Planning Group (May 2011)
4. Page 16, Table 3:
Delete Table 3 and replace with Table 3 below.
Table 3
Golf Clubhouse Development Phasing
MND
Duration
Exhibit
Phase
Description
Months
Reference
Demolition of East Side Golf Clubhouse Parking
1
11
1
Lot and PCH Entry'
Construct East Side Parking Lot and PCH Entry2
4
12
Demolition of West Side Golf Clubhouse Parking
1
13
Lot
2
Construct West Side Parking Lot and Temporary
6
14
Golf Club
Demolition of Golf Clubhouse
2
15
3
Construct New Golf Clubhouse
14
16
Demolition of portion of Greenskeeper Area,
Temporary modular Golf Clubhouse and
2
17
4
northern portion of Golf Clubhouse Parking Lot
Construct Greenskeeper Area and Golf Porte
4
18
Cache and Parkin
Total Schedule
34
'Start date to be determined.
21ncludes car wash.
SOURCE: The Templeton Planning Group (July 2010)
5. Page 39, Paragraph 2:
Change 50 feet to 53' 6" in Line 5 and Line 7.
6. Page 52, SC-8:
Revise SC-8 as indicated below:
5
SC-8 A qualified archaeological/paleontological monitor shall be retained by the
project applicant who will be available during the grading and landform
alteration phase. In the event cultural resources and/or fossils are
encountered during construction activities, ground -disturbing excavations
in the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted by the monitor
until the find has been salvaged. The area surrounding any cultural
materials or fossils encountered during grading shall also be investigated
to determine the extent of the site. Any artifacts and/or fossils discovered
during project construction shall be prepared to a point of identification
and stabilized for long-term storage. Any discovery, along with supporting
documentation and an itemized catalogue, shall be accessioned into the
collections of a suitable repository. Curation costs to accession any
collections shall be the responsibility of the project applicant.
7. Page 77, Table 10 (General Plan Policy Analysis): Policy LU 5.3.3:
Change 50 feet in Line 12 and Line 14 in Column 3 to 53' 6".
8. Page 80: Revise the consistency analysis for Natural Resources Element Policy
No. 18.3 as follows:
BeEa„se of the proposed project does not
requires the approval of an amendment to the Land Use Element of the Newport
General Plan and the projectt is not, therefore, subject to the provisions of SB
18, which requires consultation with Native American representatives before
adopting or amending a general plan. Nonetheless, tThe City has complies
therequirernents ef�v by emitting submitted a request to the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC)_. '�ditieR, Gityand has also sent
letters to the Native American representatives, informing each of the proposed
project. However, no response was received by the City from any of the Native
American representativeseRs requesting consultations„ithiRthe 90-day stat�t��
peried.
9. Page 82, Table 11 (Coastal Land Use Plan Policy Analysis): Policy 2.1.2.1:
Revised the consistency analysis in Column 3 to read:
The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation on the adopted
Coastal Land Use Plan, which designates the golf course site OS (Open
SpaGe)PR (Parks and Recreation) and the tennis site MU-H/PR (Mixed Use
Horizontal/Parks & Recreation). The Open Spa Parks and Recreation
designation allows golf courses. The MU-H/PR designation allows horizontally -
distributed mix of uses, which may include general or neighborhood commercial,
commercial offices, multi -family residential, visitor -serving and marine -related
uses, buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses, and
active public or private recreational uses, including parks, golf courses, marina
Co
support facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation,
and similar facilities. In addition, the project addresses the relevant policies
related to development of the site and the protection of coastal resources
identified in the CLUP as discussed in this table.
10. Page 96, Second sentence in the paragraph under (c):
Change 50 feet in Line 3 to 53' 6".
7
Attachment B
Resolution No. 2022-66
15-13
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-66
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, AMENDMENT TO MAJOR
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO. SD2011-002,
AMENDMENT TO COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO.
CD2017-039, AMENDMENT TO VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP NO. NT2005-003, AND AMENDMENT TO
LIMITED TERM PERMIT NO. XP2011-004 FOR THE TENNIS
CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH LOCATED AT 1602 EAST
COAST HIGHWAY (PA2021-260)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in the
Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to any and
all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any law of the
State of California;
WHEREAS, in 2012, the City Council approved an application by Golf Realty Fund,
Managing Owner ("Applicant") for the reconstruction of the 3,725-square-foot tennis
clubhouse, reduction of tennis courts from 24 to seven courts, construction of a 27-room
boutique hotel with 9,700 square feet of ancillary uses, five single-family residential units,
and a development agreement for the property ("2012 Entitlements") located at 1602 East
Coast Highway, and legally described as Parcels A, B, C, and D of Parcel Map No. 2016-
151 (commonly referred as the "Tennis Club Site" or "Property");
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2018, the Zoning Administrator approved Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2017-039, authorizing the redevelopment of the Property
consistent with the 2012 Entitlements (2012 Entitlements and Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2017-039 are collectively referred to as the "Approved Project"),
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Approved Project to
allow an increase in the number of future tennis courts from seven to eight, an increase in
the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41, an increase to the gross floor area of
ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, three attached condominium units and two single
family residences in -lieu of five single-family residences, and an amendment to the 2012
Development Agreement to account for the aforementioned changes to the Approved
Project along with extending the term for an additional 10 years ("Project");
15-14
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 2 of 26
WHEREAS, the following approvals are requested or required in order to implement
the Project:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") — An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of Table
LU2 of the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element to document
the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms authorized by City Council
Resolution No. 2012-10, and the addition of 14 hotel rooms for a total of 41 rooms
and one tennis courts for a total of eight tennis courts,
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment ("LCPA") — An
amendment to Section 21.26.055(S)(2) (Planned Community Coastal Zoning
District Development Standards, Newport Beach Country Club (PC-47, Tennis
Club) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") to modify the permitted
uses and development standards allowed on the Property;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment ("PCDP Amendment") —An
amendment to Planned Community Development Plan No. 47 (Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use regulations and
development standards on the Property;
• Major Site Development Permit Amendment ("SDA") — An amendment to the
existing site development review in accordance with PC-47 and Section
20.52.080 (Permit Review Procedures, Site Development Reviews) of the NBMC
for the construction of the Project;
• Coastal Development Permit Amendment ("CDPA") — A coastal development
permit for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the Property,
and implementation of the Project;
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment ("VTMA") — An amendment to Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15347 pursuant to Title 19 (Subdivisions) of the NBMC
for a lot reduction created for the Approved Project and inclusion of the
condominium ownership;
• Limited Term Permit Amendment ("XF) — A limited term permit to allow
temporary use of structures during construction on the Property, pursuant to
Section 20.52.040 of the NBMC;
• Development Agreement Amendment ("DA") — A second amendment to the
Development Agreement (DA2008-001), between the Applicant and the City,
15-15
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 3 of 26
pursuant to Sections 15.45.020(A)(2)(c) (Buildings and Construction,
Development Agreements Required, Development Agreement Required) and
15.45.070 (Buildings and Constructions, Development Agreements,
Amendment/Cancellation) of the NBMC, which would provide vested rights to
develop the Project for an additional 10 years and provide negotiated public
benefits to the City; and
• Addendum to previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND-2010-
008 (SCH2O10091052) ("Addendum") — Pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H3/PR) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan and is located within
the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Zoning District;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H/PR) by the Coastal Land Use Plan and is located within the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Coastal Zone District;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8,
2022, in the City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California, at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project. A notice of
time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with California
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning Community
District Procedures), 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 hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2022-022 (5 ayes, 1 absent, 1 recusal) recommending approval of the Project to the
City Council;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 27, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map
Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public Hearings) and
21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to,
and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
15-16
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 4 of 26
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the City Council remanded the Project to the Planning
Commission on a future date by a majority vote (6 ayes, 1 nays);
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council
adopted a motion for reconsideration of the Project by a majority vote (4 ayes, 3 nays);
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on October 25, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map
Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public Hearings) and
21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to,
and considered by, the City Council at this hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and determined that modifications to the Project made by the City
Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to the Planning
Commission for consideration and recommendation.
Section 2: The City Council hereby approves a General Plan Amendment,
Amendment to Major Site Development Review No. SD2011-002, Amendment to Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2017-039, Amendment to Tentative Vesting Tract Map No.
NT2005-003, and Amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004.
Section 3: An amendment to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use
Element is a legislative act. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor California
Government Code Section 65000 et seq., set forth any required findings for either
approval or denial of such amendments. Nonetheless, the GPA is consistent with the
following City of Newport Beach General Plan Land Use based upon the following:
Findings and Facts in Support of General Plan Consistency:
As part of the Approved Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2012-10, which
authorized the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms along with the
redevelopment of the Property including seven remaining tennis courts. The City Council
found that the conversion of tennis courts to hotel rooms was consistent with the General
Plan based upon the revitalization to Newport/Fashion Island area where the General
Plan encourages additional hotel development and housing units, and the fact that the
15-17
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 5 of 26
conversion did not create traffic impacts. At the time of the conversion, the 17 tennis
courts generated 658 average daily trips based upon ITE Trip Generation Rates (7tn
edition), while the 27 hotel rooms generated 221 average daily trips, resulting in a net
decrease of 389 daily trips.
With the amendment to the Approved Project, Anomaly No. 46 will be modified to include
14 additional hotel rooms and one tennis court. Together, a total of 41 hotel rooms
(27+14=41 rooms) and eight tennis courts will be included in Anomaly No. 46. No change
to the 3,725-square-foot tennis clubhouse is proposed. The GPA does not include a
change in land use designation and would remain as Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H3/PR).
The amendment to the Approved Project is consistent with the following General Plan
policies:
a. Land Use Element Policy LU1.1 (Unique Environment). Maintain and
enhance the beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods,
business districts, and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate
and design development to reflect Newport Beach's topography,
architectural diversity, and view sheds.
The Project includes an amendment to the PC-47 District regulations on the
Tennis Club site and reflects the proposed development on the Property.
PC-47 will continue to guide development occurring within the Property. The
development standards address building height, setbacks, landscaping,
and architectural character. The standards are intended to ensure that the
City's unique character is maintained through land use and architectural
diversity.
b. Land Use Element Policy LU1.2 (Citywide Identity). While recognizing
the qualities that uniquely define its neighborhoods and districts, promote
the identity of the entire City that differentiates it as a special place within
the Southern California region.
The area in which in the Property is located is characterized by a variety of
residential, commercial, and recreational land uses that reflect a range of
architectural styles, which contribute to the unique character of the City. The
intensity and architectural character of the Project are compatible with the
variety of densities and styles within the area, which are consistent with the
identity of the City. The architectural character of the Project, including the
15-18
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 6 of 26
bungalow -style hotel rooms, detached residential units, and attached
residential loft buildings, is consistent with the City's desire to differentiate
Newport Beach from other coastal cities.
C. Land Use Element Policy LU2.1 (Resident -Serving Land Uses).
Accommodate uses that support the needs of Newport Beach's residents
including housing, retail, services, employment, recreation, education,
culture, entertainment, civic engagement, and social and spiritual activity
that are in balance with community natural resources and open spaces.
The Project will continue to provide residents with recreational
opportunities, culture, entertainment, and civic engagement. The proposed
amendment remains supportive of recreational uses by providing one
additional tennis court to the previously approved seven courts. The
amendment also includes an additional 14 hotel rooms to the previously
approved 27-unit hotel development with additional hotel amenities for club
members such as a Performance Therapy Center and Yoga Pavilion.
d. Land Use Element Policy LU.2.6 (Visitor Serving Uses). Provide uses
that serve visitors to Newport Beach's ocean, harbor, open spaces, and
other recreational assets, while integrating them to protect neighborhoods
and residents
The Project provides visitors with an updated recreational facility as it
includes a new tennis clubhouse and eight tennis courts, which includes a
stadium size court. The tennis club is adjacent to a golf course with
amenities and is within 2,000 feet from the Newport Bay. The proposed 41
hotel rooms provide additional opportunities for visitors to enjoy the tennis
club and nearby recreational activities.
e. Land Use Element Policy LU3.2 (Growth and Change). Enhance existing
neighborhoods, districts, and corridors, allowing for reuse and infill with
uses that are complementary in type, form, scale, and character. Changes
in use and/or density/intensity should be considered only in those areas that
are economically underperforming, are necessary to accommodate
Newport Beach's share of projected regional population growth, improve
the relationship and reduce commuting distance between home and jobs,
or enhance the values that distinguish Newport Beach as a special place to
live for its residents. The scale of growth and new development shall be
15-19
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 7 of 26
coordinated with the provision of adequate infrastructure and public
services, including standards for acceptable traffic level of service.
The character of the tennis club, hotel development, and residential units
are compatible with the existing land uses and development intensities of
the surrounding area. Although the additional 14 hotel rooms and one tennis
court requires amendments to adopted plans and regulations, the existing
tennis club and hotel development that are the substance of the Approved
Project are allowed under the General Plan. The Project has been designed
to be compatible with the existing residential, commercial, and recreational
uses located within the vicinity of the Project site. In addition, the
surrounding area is adequately served by existing infrastructure, including
circulation, water, sewer, and storm drainage systems. As a result, the
implementation of the Project will not adversely affect those systems or the
provision of adequate service to nearby development.
f. Land Use Element Policy LU3.3 (Opportunities for Change). Provide
opportunities for improved development and enhanced environments for
residents in the following districts and corridors, as specified in Polices 6.3.1
through 6.22.7: Fashion Island/Newport Center: expanded retail uses and
hotel rooms and development of residential in proximity to jobs and
services, while limiting increases in office development.
The Project provides enhancement to the Property, which is currently being
used exclusively as a tennis club, to include 41 hotel rooms and ancillary
uses, and five residential units. The Project retains a total of eight tennis
courts and the reconstruction of the Tennis Clubhouse. The Project will be
utilized as a recreational facility for residents, guests, and club members.
g. Land Use Element Policy LU4.1 (Land Use Diagram). Accommodate
land use development consistent with the Land Use Plan.
The Project is consistent with the designation of the General Plan Land Use
Element, which designates the Property as MU-H3/PR. The Property is
located within Anomaly No. 46, which allocates 24 tennis courts with
residential permitted in accordance with the MU-1-13 designation. The GPA
includes an amendment to the Development Limit (Other) of Anomaly No.
46, to reduce the number of tennis courts to eight and to include 41 hotel
rooms.
15-20
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 8 of 26
h. Land Use Element Policy LU5.1.2 (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.
Although the Property is not located adjacent to lower density residential
development, the Project has been designed to respect the proximity of the
existing residential development adjacent to the Property. The amended
PC-47 prescribes maximum building heights and setback requirements for
each of the development components to ensure land use compatibility.
Building heights for the proposed structures will range from 46 feet for the
attached residential loft buildings, 39 feet for the detached residential units,
31 feet for the hotel rooms, and 30 feet for the Tennis Clubhouse, which are
within the maximum 50-foot building height allowed by PC-47.
i. Land Use Element Policy LU (5.3.3). Require that properties developed
with a mix of residential and non-residential uses be designed to achieve
high levels of architectural quality in accordance with Policies 5.1.9 and
5.2.1 and planned to assure compatibility among the uses and provide
adequate circulation and parking. Residential uses should be seamlessly
integrated with non-residential uses through architecture, pedestrian
walkways, and landscape. They should not be completely isolated by walls
or other design elements.
The Project includes one additional tennis court to the tennis club, 41 hotel
rooms, two single-family residences, and two residential condominium
units. The Project provides adequate parking for each of the proposed uses.
Vehicular and pedestrian circulation has been designed to accommodate
the residents, as well as guests and members of the tennis club and hotel
development. The architectural character of the uses is defined in PC-47 to
ensure that compatibility between proposed uses and the surrounding area
is maintained.
f Land Use Element Policy LU5.3.4 (Districts Integrating Residential and
Nonresidential Uses). Require that sufficient acreage be developed for an
individual use located in a district containing a mix of residential and non-
residential uses to prevent fragmentation and assure each use's viability,
quality, and compatibility with adjoining uses.
15-21
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 9 of 26
Each of the uses has been designed to complement the overall Project. The
uses are connected by the vehicular and pedestrian circulation system,
including sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. Land use compatibility is
achieved through a common landscape theme and design guidelines in PC-
47 to ensure that the architectural integrity of the Project is not
compromised.
k. Land Use Element Policy LU6.14.2 (Newport Center). Provide the
opportunity for limited residential, hotel, and office development in
accordance with the limits specified by Tables LU1 and LU2.
The Project has a mix of land uses including single-family residential,
attached residential condominiums, recreational tennis club facilities, and
visitor -serving commercial uses. These uses are permitted in Table LU1
under the MU-H3/PR land use designation. The GPA proposes to amend
the development limits of Table LU2 to include eight tennis courts and 41
hotel rooms.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU6.14.6 (Pedestrian Connectivity and
Amenity). Encourage that pedestrian access and connections among uses
within the district be improved with additional walkways and streetscape
amenities concurrent with the development of expanded and new uses.
The Project provides for both pedestrian and vehicular access within the
Property. Sidewalks and pedestrian pathways are incorporated into the
circulation system that are intended to accommodate pedestrians utilizing
the tennis club, hotel facilities, and future residents. A landscape plan has
been provided which includes plant materials that are intended to reflect
and complement the existing character within the project area.
Tribal Consultation Finding:
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (S1318), a local government is
required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage
Commission ("NAHC") each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General
Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of
preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources.
15-22
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 10 of 26
Fact in Support of Finding of Consistency:
The City received comments from the NAHC indicating that 12 tribal contacts should be
provided notice regarding the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided
notice on June 9, 2022. California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires
notification 90 days prior to Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request
to consult. The Project will not be heard by the City Council until the 90-day period expires
on September 7, 2022.
Section 4: Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General
Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that
significantly increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-
residential floor area, increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM),
or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to the total
of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80 percent of the increases
resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a
Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the
preceding 10 years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that
proposed amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the
Newport Beach electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all
General Plan amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for 10 years to determine
if minor amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds
indicated above.
Facts in Support Finding of Consistency with Charter Section 423:
1. The Property is within Statistical Area L1. Prior amendments within the past ten
years are Vivante Senior Housing and Residences at Newport Center. Charter
Section 423 counts 80 percent of prior increases, which results in a cumulative
increase of 94 dwelling units, 23 AM trips, and 43 PM trips between both projects.
There were no square footage increases.
2. The GPA results in an increase of 14,000 square feet (at the rate of 1,000 square
feet per hotel unit) of non-residential floor area, 9.51 AM trips, and 12.42 PM trips.
When combined with 80 percent of the prior increases, this results in cumulative
increases of 14,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, 32.51 AM trips, and
55.42 PM trips. As none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are
15-23
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 11 of 26
exceeded, no vote of the electorate is required if the City Council chooses to
approve the GPA.
Section 5: On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved Site Development
Review No. SD2011-002, which authorized the construction of Approved Project. The
proposed changes to the Approved Project, necessitate an amendment to the SDA.
In accordance with Section 4.0 of the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
(PC-47) (Site Development Review), the following findings and facts in support of
Amendment to Site Development Review No. SD2011-002 are set forth as follows:
Findina of Consistencv with Section 4.30 ):
The Site Development Plan shall be in compliance with all other provisions of the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 4.3(1):
1. PC-47 requires that a site development review process to be completed for
construction of any new major building structure located on the subject site and
would require consideration and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the
issuance of grading or building permits. An amendment to the previously approved
site development review has been submitted for the Property and meets provisions
stated in the draft PCDP and thereby meets the intent specified in Section
20.52.080 (Planning and Zoning, Permit Review Procedures, Site Development
Reviews) of the NBMC.
2. The Project includes an amendment to the PC-47 to incorporate revisions to the
Approved Project. These revisions include the addition of one tennis court, the
addition of 14 hotel rooms, and the conversion of three single-family residences to
residential condominium units. Should the PC-47 amendment be approved, the
SDA complies with all provisions of the PC-47, as the proposed development
complies with all development criteria specified in the PC-47 in order to provide a
coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive large-scale planning project.
Findina of Consistencv with Section 4.3
The Site Development Plan shall be compatible with the character of the neighboring
uses and surrounding sites and shall not be detrimental to the orderly and harmonious
development of the surroundings and of the City.
15-24
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 12 of 26
Fact in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 4.3(2):
The architecture, landscaping components, circulation design, and all other project
components reflected in the SDR are compatible with the character of the neighboring
uses and surrounding sites. The additional 14 hotel rooms and attached residential
condominium buildings are of similar architectural style to the Approved Project's
bungalow -styled rooms. As a result, the Project is not detrimental to the orderly and
harmonious development of the surroundings and the City.
Finding of Consistency with Section 4.3(3):
The Site Development Plan shall be sited and designed to maximize of aesthetic quality
of the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan as viewed
from surrounding roadways and properties, with special consideration given to the mass
and bulk of buildings and the streetscape on East Coast Highway.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 4.3(3):
1. The Property is separated from East Coast Highway by a commercial office plaza
which comprises of three two-story office buildings (1200 Newport Center Drive).
The office plaza includes landscaping along East Coast Highway with trees and
various plantings. The Newport Beach Country Club golf clubhouse is located
approximately 150 feet west of the Property. Additionally, the Property is
approximately 250 feet from East Coast Highway and is not visible to motorists
travelling on the street.
2. The Project is designed consistent with the Approved Project's architectural style
with landscaping, circulation, signage and other components which visually
connect the tennis clubhouse and attached residential structures to the smaller
structures such as the hotel rooms and single-family residences. Therefore, the
aesthetic quality of PC-47 is continued to be maximized as viewed from the
surrounding roadways and properties.
3. The Project seeks to add additional hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses, and attached
residential buildings to the Property. However, the overall footprint of the Project is
not expanding and will not affect the mass of the Project as viewed from
surrounding roadways and properties.
15-25
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 13 of 26
Findina of Consistencv with Section 4.3(4):
Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access ways,
landscaping and other site features shall give proper consideration to functional aspects
of site development.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 4.3(4):
1. The site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular
access ways, landscaping, and other site features maximizes the functionality of
the proposed uses, while avoiding conflicts between uses and activities. The
Project's multiple components (tennis club, residential, and hotel) have been
designed and sited to function cohesively not only with each other, but also with
the adjacent existing golf course uses.
2. The Project promotes additional functionality between residential and hotel
components, as residential condominiums are attached to hotel rooms in two
separate loft buildings. Underground parking is provided in the loft buildings, with
additional street parking and parking lots to serve hotel and tennis club guests.
Each of the two single-family residences provide a two -car garage to serve its
residents.
Section 6: On April 10, 2013, the California Coastal Commission, which had
permitting jurisdiction for coastal development permits at the time, issued a notice of intent
to issue CDP No. 5-12-160 for the Approved Project. A one (1)-year extension was
granted on June 2, 2015. However, the CDP subsequently expired. The City obtained
CDP permitting authority in January of 2017. On November 20, 2018, the City's Zoning
Administrator approved the CDP, which authorized the redevelopment of the Approved
Project. The Project requires an amendment to Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039.
In accordance with Section 21.52.015(F) (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan,
Coastal Development Permits, Findings and Decisions) the following findings and facts
in support of Amendment to Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-039 are set forth
as follows:
Finding of Consistency with Section 21.52.015(F)(1):
Conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program.
15-26
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 14 of 26
Facts in Support of Findina of Consistencv with Section 21.52.015(F)(1):
1. The Coastal Land Use Plan designates the Tennis Club site as Mixed -Use
Horizontal/Parks and Recreation (MU-H/PR). Policy 2.1.8-1 of the Coastal Land
Use Plan allows the horizontal intermixing of hotel rooms, single-family residences,
attached residential condominiums, and tennis club facilities on the project site
(formerly known/referenced as the Balboa Bay Tennis Club). Permitted uses
include those permitted by the MU-H and PR land use designations. A complete
consistency analysis of each of the applicable Coastal Land Use Plan policies is
included in Table 11 of the Land Use and Planning Section of the previously
adopted MND, pages 82 through 87, as well as in Table 5-5 of the Land Use and
Planning Section of Addendum to the MND. Furthermore, facts have been
provided in this resolution which support the proposed amendment to the Local
Coastal Program Implementation Plan. In summary, the Project is consistent with
the Coastal Land Use Plan.
2. The MU-H coastal land use designation identifies a maximum density/intensity limit
of 1.5 floor area ratio ("FAR"), with a minimum FAR of 0.25 and a maximum FAR
of 0.5 for retail uses and a maximum of 1.0 for residential. The Project proposes
65,595 square feet of nonresidential floor area (approximately 0.21 FAR) for the
hotel rooms, concierge & guest center, and ancillary hotel uses which include a
performance therapy center, yoga pavilion, office, common area, and a spa and
fitness center. Additionally, five residential dwelling units totaling 20,653 square
feet (approximately 0.06 FAR). The proposed density/intensity of the hotel and
single-family units comply with the FAR limitations identified in the Coastal Land
Use Plan.
3. The PR category applies to land used or proposed for active public or private
recreational use. Permitted uses include parks (both active and passive), golf
courses, marina support facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private
recreation, and similar facilities. The PR designation on the Property is applicable
to the existing and proposed private tennis club and tennis courts. The
density/intensity limitations include incidental buildings, such as maintenance
equipment sheds, supply storage, and restrooms, not included in determining
intensity limits. The proposed tennis club and ancillary uses are consistent with
this land use designation.
4. The Property is part of the 145-acre planned community (PC-47), which has been
adopted to regulate developments within the Property and the adjacent Golf Club
15-27
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 15 of 26
Site, and is in conformance with the Coastal Land Use Plan designation pursuant
to Section 21.26.055(S)(2) of the NBMC.
5. The Project conforms to all applicable development standards in the proposed
amendment to PC-47, including density/intensity, setbacks, building heights, and
parking.
6. The Property is not located in an area known for the potential of seismic activity or
liquefaction. All projects are required to comply with the California Building Code
("CBC") and Building Division standards and policies. Geotechnical investigations
specifically addressing liquefaction are required to be reviewed and approved prior
to the issuance of a building permit. Permit issuance is also contingent on the
inclusion of design mitigation identified in the investigations. Construction plans
are reviewed for compliance with approved investigations and CBC prior to
building permit issuance.
7. Elevations on the Property range from 104 feet up to 120 feet North American
Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) above mean sea level. These site elevations
are well above projected sea level rise in Newport Bay for the next 75 years and
the site is not subjected to other coastal hazards.
8. The Project is required to develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan ("SWPPP") since the Project involves clearing, grading, and
ground disturbance of more than one acre. Pursuant to Section 21.35.030 (Local
Coastal Program Implementation Plan, Water Quality Control, Construction
Pollution Prevention Plan) of the NBMC, when a SWPPP is required, a
Construction Pollution Prevention Plan ("CPPP") is required to implement
temporary Best Management Practices ("BMP") during construction to minimize
erosion and sedimentation and to minimize pollution of runoff and coastal waters
derived from construction chemicals and materials. A CPPP has been prepared
and will be reviewed by the City's Engineer Geologist prior to issuance of
grading/building permits for site grading. Construction plans and activities will be
required to adhere to the approved CPPP/SWPPP.
9. A Water Quality and Hydrology Plan ("WQHP") is required Pursuant to Section
21.35.050 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, Water Quality Control,
Water Quality and Hydrology Plan) of the NBMC since the Project is considered a
development of water quality concern and includes the development of five
dwelling units, more than 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area, and a
parking area in excess of 5,000 square feet. The WQHP/WQMP will be reviewed
15-28
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 16 of 26
and approved by the City's Engineer Geologist prior to the issuance of building
permits for site grading. The WQHP/WQMP includes a polluted runoff and
hydrologic site characterization, a description of site design BMP, and
documentation of the expected effectiveness of the proposed BMP. Construction
plans will be reviewed for compliance with the approved WQHP/WQMP prior to
building permit issuance.
10. An Analysis of the Fiscal and Economic Impacts was prepared on August 29, 2022,
by Kosmont Companies to analyze the construction of new visitor
accommodations in the coastal zone in accordance with Section 21.48.025 (Local
Coastal Program Implementation Plan, Standards for Specific Land Uses, Visitor
Accommodations) of the NBMC. The report provides a feasibility analysis stating
that the anticipated average daily room rate for all 41 rooms is approximately $920
and the statewide average daily room rate is $205.69. Therefore, the proposed
accommodations are not considered lower cost accommodations. The report
considers the specific location of the Property as an inappropriate location for low
cost accommodations. Additionally, low cost accommodations are not feasible due
to prohibitive land and construction costs. The Property does not currently provide
accommodations of any kind and implementation of the Project would not impact
low-cost accommodations. While the Project does not include any lower cost
rooms, and the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan defines it as an
impact, there is no impact on the provision of lower -cost visitor accommodations
in the Coastal Zone. The Project features larger guest facilities to accommodate a
higher occupancy per room, kitchens in a majority of the hotel rooms, and separate
living rooms with sofa beds, all which offset higher costs of accommodations.
Finding of Consistency with Section 21.52.015(F)(2):
Conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal
Act if the project is located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline of
any body of water located within the coastal zone.
Facts in Support of Findina of Consistencv with Section 21.52.015(F)(2):
1. The Property is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or
shoreline. The Property will not affect the public's ability to gain access to, use,
and/or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities. Vertical access to Newport
Bay is available via existing public access at 1601 Bayside Drive, which is located
approximately 1,600 feet southwest of the subject property.
15-29
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 17 of 26
2. Coastal Land Use Plan, Policy 4.4.1-6 and Figure 4-3 (Coastal Views) identify the
closest public view road as Newport Center Drive, located approximately 170 feet
east of the Property and the closest public viewpoint as Irvine Terrace Park,
located 525 feet south of the Property. Coastal views from these view corridors
and viewpoints are directed toward the Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Since
the Property is located to the north of Irvine Terrace Park, the Project will not affect
coastal views due to its orientation. From Newport Center Drive, there is a zero to
40-foot grade difference to the project area below. The maximum height allowed
in PC-47 is 50 feet for the attached condominium lofts, 39 feet for the two single-
family villas, 30 feet for the tennis clubhouse, and 31 feet for the hotel rooms.
Therefore, the majority of the Project would sit below the existing grade elevations
along Newport Center Drive, minimizing the visibility of the project site and would
not obstruct public coastal views. During construction, construction equipment
would be obscured by vegetation and the grade differential so it would not obstruct
coastal views from motorists traveling along Newport Center Drive. The Project will
not impact coastal views.
Section 7: On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved Tentative Vesting
Tract Map No. 15347, which authorized the creation of seven separate lots for the tennis
club, five single-family residences, and 27 hotel rooms, and lettered lots for common
areas and a private street. The Applicant proposes an amendment to the vesting tentative
tract map to accommodate the Project, which consists of two single -unit residential
dwellings, three residential condominiums, 41 hotel rooms, a tennis clubhouse, their
common open space areas and a private street to support the proposed uses. The TVMA
reflects the combination of two previously divided lots which were intended for two
detached single-family residences. This results in the elimination of one lot for a total of
six separate lots. No changes to the lots created for common areas and a private street
are proposed. The map of the VTMA has also been modified to include residential
condominium portion of the Project.
In accordance with Section 19.12.070 (Subdivisions, Tentative Map Review, Required
Findings for Action on Tentative Maps) the following findings and facts in support of
Tentative Vesting Tract Map Amendment No. NT2005-003 are set forth as follows:
Findina of Consistencv with Section 19.12.070(A)(1):
That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are consistent
with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with applicable provisions of
the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code.
15-30
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 18 of 26
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(1):
1. The Project is consistent with the MU-H3/PR General Plan designation of the
Property.
2. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed revisions to the
approved vesting tentative tract map and determined it is consistent with the Title
19 (Subdivisions) of the NBMC and applicable requirements of the Subdivision
Map Act set forth in California Government Code Section 664410 et seq.
3. Conditions of approval have been included to ensure compliance with Title 19
(Subdivisions) of the NBMC.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(2):
That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(2):
1. The Property is entirely developed and does not support any environmental
resources.
2. The Property is located in the Newport Center and Fashion Island area. The
Property is currently improved with a private tennis club. Given its location, this site
is ideal for the development of a recreation and mixed -use project as allowed by
the General Plan Land Use Element.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(3):
That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or
their habitat. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision -making body may nevertheless
approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was prepared for the project
and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality
Act that specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the environmental impact report.
15-31
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 19 of 26
Fact in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(3):
An Addendum to the MND has been prepared and concludes that no significant
environmental impacts will result from the Project in accordance with the proposed
subdivision map revision.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(4):
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(4):
1. The VTMA is required for the subdivision of parcels in order to accommodate the
development of the tennis club and courts, two single -unit residential dwellings,
and 41 hotel rooms on the Property. All construction for the project will comply with
all Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes, which are in place to prevent serious
public health problems. Public improvements will be required of the developer per
Section 19.28.010 of the NBMC and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act.
Compliance with all ordinances of the City and all conditions of approval for the
Project will ensure that the Project will not cause any serious health problems.
2. All mitigation measures will be implemented as outlined in the Addendum to the MND
to ensure the protection of the public health.
3. No evidence is known to exist that would indicate that the planned subdivision pattern
will generate any serious public health problems.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(5):
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision -making body may approve a
map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that
these easements will be substantially equivalent to easements previously acquired by the
public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established
by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to the
City Council to determine that the public at large has acquired easements for access
through or use of property within a subdivision.
15-32
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 20 of 26
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(5):
1. The design of the Project will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public
at large for access through or use of property within the Property.
2. An easement through the Property will be retained by the City to sewer and utilities
purposes.
3. No other public easements for access through or use of the Property have been
retained for use by the public at large.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(6):
That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, if
the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation
Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land
would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will result in
residential development incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the land.
Fact in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(6):
The Property is not subject to the Williamson Act since the Property is not considered an
agricultural preserve and is less than 100 acres.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(7):
That, in the case of a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California
Business and Professions Code: (a) there is an adopted specific plan for the area to be
included within the land project; and (b) the decision -making body finds that the proposed
land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(7):
1. The Property is not a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California
Business and Professions Code.
2. The Property is not located within a specific plan area.
15-33
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 21 of 26
Findina of Consistencv with Section 19.12.070(A)(8):
That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been
satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(8):
The VTMA and improvements are subject to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations
("California Building Standards Code") that requires new construction to meet minimum
heating and cooling efficiency standards depending on location and climate. The Newport
Beach Building Division enforces the California Building Standards Code and will ensure
compliance through the plan check and inspection process.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(9):
That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and
Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City's share of the
regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the
public service needs of the City's residents and available fiscal and environmental
resources.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(9):
1. The proposed amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with
Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 65584 of the California
Government Code regarding the City's share of the regional housing need. The
Project does not involve the elimination of residential rooms and therefore will not
affect the City's ability to meet its share of housing needs.
2. Public services are available to serve the Project and the Addendum to the MND
prepared for the Project indicates that the Project's potential environmental
impacts are properly mitigated.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(10):
That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer system
will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional Water
Quality Control Board.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(10):
15-34
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 22 of 26
1. Waste discharge into the existing sewer system will be not violate Regional Water
Quality Control Board ("RWQCB") requirements.
2. Sewer connections have been conditioned to be installed per City Standards, the
applicable provisions of Chapter 14.24 (Sewer Connection, Permits), and the latest
revision of the Uniform Plumbing Code.
Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(11):
For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the coastal zone, that the subdivision
conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public
access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 19.12.070(A)(11):
1. The Property is located in the coastal zone and subject to a coastal development
permit.
2. The Property does not have access to any beaches, shoreline, coastal waters,
tidelands, coastal parks or trails.
3. Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Sections 19.12.070(A)(5) and
(A)(6) are hereby incorporated by reference.
Section 8: In accordance with Section 20.52.040 (Planning and Zoning, Permit
Review Procedures, Limited Term Permits) the following findings and facts in support of
Amendment to Limited Term Permit XP2011-004 are set forth as follows:
Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(1):
The operation of the limited duration use at the location proposed and within the time period
specified would not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, nor
endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health,
interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the
requested limited duration use.
15-35
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 23 of 26
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(1):
1. The limited term permit will allow two temporary modular trailers and portable
toilets. Both modular trailers are approximately 33 feet long and 13 feet wide. One
modular trailer is proposed to be used as a construction office located at the
southwest portion of the Property and will be staged at this location through the
entire duration of the Project. The second modular office is proposed to be used
as a temporary office for tennis club operations and will be located on the easterly
portion of the Property through the construction phase of the project
(approximately 16 months after construction begins). The portable toilets are
proposed to serve the temporary tennis club office and located nearby.
2. The operation of the temporary modular trailers is proposed to exceed 90 days
from the date of the permit. The construction office is proposed to be staged for
the duration of all construction activities, which is estimated to be approximately
20 months. The tennis club office is proposed to be staged for approximately 16
months, and will be removed upon completion of the Project.
Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(2):
The subject lot is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the limited duration use
without material detriment to the use and enjoyment of other properties located adjacent to
and in the vicinity of the lot.
Fact in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(2):
The Property is approximately seven acres in size. Based on the construction phasing
plan, there is adequate area to accommodate the proposed modular trailers and portable
toilets throughout the various phases of construction. The construction trailer will be
located within an area which is fenced off from public view and access.
Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(3):
The subject lot is adequately served by streets or highways having sufficient width and
improvements to accommodate the kind and quantity of traffic that the limited duration use
would or could reasonably be expected to generate.
15-36
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 24 of 26
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(3):
1. The Property has an existing parking lot with two entrances currently taken from
Clubhouse Drive, which has a westerly outlet to East Coast Highway and an
easterly outlet to Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive.
2. During the various phases of construction, the easterly entrance to the parking lot
will remain available to the public for parking and will provide direct access for the
modular office trailer and portable toilets, while the westerly entrance will be for
construction access only. The construction trailer is intended for construction use
only and not for the public. There are no traffic issues anticipated.
Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(4):
Adequate temporary parking to accommodate vehicular traffic to be generated by the limited
duration use would be available either on -site or at alternate locations acceptable to the
Zoning Administrator.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(4):
1. The proposed trailers will not create additional parking demand since it will be
utilized as offices for construction activities and employees displaced during the
renovation of the tennis clubhouse.
2. A portion of the existing parking lot will remain, with access available on the
easterly side of the lot from Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive. The
remaining parking lot provides adequate parking for employees and members of
the tennis club.
Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(5):
The limited duration use is consistent with all applicable provisions of the General Plan, any
applicable specific plan, the Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
Facts in Support of Finding of Consistency with Section 20.52.040(G)(5):
1. The temporary trailers are conditioned to comply with all applicable provisions of
the General Plan, Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
2. The Property is not located within a specific plan area.
15-37
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 25 of 26
Section 9: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
Section 10: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 11: An Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008
(MND) was prepared for the Project in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA") set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 2100 et seq.;
CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in CCR Title 14, Division 6 Chapter 3 ("CEQA
Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California
Environmental Quality Act) to ensure that the Project will not result in new or increased
environmental impacts. On the basis of the MND and entire environmental review record,
the additional tennis court, hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses, and conversion of three
single-family residences to condominium units will not result in any new significant
impacts that were not previously analyzed in the MND. The Addendum confirms and
provides substantial evidence that the potential impacts associated with this Project would
either be the same or less than those described in the MND, or as mitigated by applicable
mitigation measures in the MND. In addition, there are no 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 either the MND, nor
has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant
environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of
the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2022- thereby
adopting an addendum to the previously adopted MND. Resolution 2022- including
all findings contained therein, is hereby incorporated by reference.
15-38
Resolution No. 2022-66
Page 26 of 26
Section 12: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 25th day of October, 2022.
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Aaro E.
Harp
City torney
Attachment(s):
Kevin Muldoon
Mayor
Exhibit "A" - General Plan Amendment for the Tennis Club at
Newport Beach
Exhibit "B" - Conditions of Approval for the Tennis Club at Newport
Beach
15-39
EXHIBIT "A"
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
15-40
Anomaly
Number
Statistical
Area
Land Use
Designation
Development
Limit (sf)
Development
Limit (Other)
Additional Information
46
L1
MU-H3/PR
3,725
8 Tennis Courts
Residential permitted in
accordance with MU-
H3
41 Hotel
Rooms*
*27 rooms converted
from 17 tennis courts
per Council Resolution
2012-10 and 14 rooms
per General Plan
Amendment PA2022-
260
15-41
EXHIBIT "B"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
(Project -specific conditions are in italics)
Planning Division
1. The project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor
plans and building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval
(except as modified by applicable conditions of approval).
2. The project is subject to compliance with all applicable submittals approved by the
City of Newport Beach ("City") and all applicable City ordinances, policies, and
standards, unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
3. Notwithstanding the legislative actions (ie. General Plan Amendment, Planned
Community Development Plan, and Local Coastal Program Amendment) activities
reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-260 shall expire unless exercised
within 24 months from the date of approval as specified in Section 20.54.060 of the
Newport Beach Municipal Code, unless an extension is otherwise granted by the City
for a period of time provided for in the Development Agreement pursuant to the
provisions of California Government Code Section 66452.6(a).
4. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment, as reviewed under Planning Activity
No. PA2021-260, shall expire in accordance with the Subdivision Code, unless an
extension is otherwise granted consistent with the Subdivision Code and Subdivision
Map Act. The expiration date shall be extended for the unexpired term of the Second
Amendment to Development Agreement between City of Newport Beach and Golf
Realty Fund.
5. The project shall consist of the followings:
a. Tennis Club: A 3,725 square -foot tennis clubhouse and eight (8) tennis courts;
b. Hotel: Forty-one (41) hotel rooms of 47,484 square feet, a 2,200 square -foot
concierge and guest meeting facility, a 7,500 square -foot spalfitness center,
and 4,686 square feet of ancillary uses; and
c. Residential: two (2) single-family units and three (3) condominium units
6. Pickleball courts shall not be permitted after the issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the Tennis Clubhouse and Spa and Fitness Center unless the
property owner and/or picklebali facility operator follows any and all City of Newport
Beach General Plan, Municipal Code, or other applicable requirements in order to
continue the use of pickleball courts.
15-42
7. The project shall be subject to all applicable development standards prescribed in
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, as reviewed under Planning
Activity No. PA2021-260, for the Tennis Club site, such as but not limited to,
building height, building setbacks, parking, lighting, sign standards, etc.
8. Upon the effective date of Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan
Amendment, as reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-260, Site
Development Permit No. SD2011-002, Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004, and
Vesting Tentative Map No. NT2005-003, approved for the Approved Project, shall
be deemed of no further force.
9. The temporary modular building to accommodate on -going tennis club operation
during the construction of new tennis clubhouse shall be located on the existing
tennis courts, shall not interfere with the construction activities or parking, and shall
be removed from the project site upon completion/occupancy of the new
clubhouse.
10. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay all applicable
development fees (i.e. school, park in -lieu, transportation corridor agency), unless
otherwise addressed separately in the Development Agreement.
11. Prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map and the issuance of building permits,
the Final Tract Map shall be signed by all of the current record owners of the
property, which presently include: (1) Elliot Feuerstein as Managing Member of
Mesa Shopping Center -West LLC; (2) Elliot Feuerstein as Managing Member of
Mesa Shopping Center -East LLC; (3) Irving Chase as General Partner of Fainbarg
Ill L.P.; and (4) Robert O Hill as Executive Director of Golf Realty Fund LP.
12. Any substantial change to the approved plans, shall require an amendment to all
non -legislative activities reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-260, or the
processing of new permits.
13. This Site Development Review, Coastal Development Permit, and Limited Term
Permit may be modified or revoked by the City Council or Planning Commission
should they determine that the proposed development, uses, and/or conditions
under which it is being operated or maintained is detrimental to the public health,
welfare or materially injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or if the
property is operated or maintained so as to constitute a public nuisance.
14. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit "F" shall be
incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of
the building permits.
15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Division an additional copy of the approved architectural plans for inclusion in the
Site Development Review file. The plans shall be identical to those approved by
15-43
all City departments for building permit issuance. The approved copy shall include
architectural sheets only and shall be reduced in size to 11 inches by 17 inches.
The plans shall accurately depict the elements approved by this Site Development
Review and shall highlight the approved elements such that they are readily
discernible from other elements of the plans.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape
and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. These plans shall
incorporate drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and
the plans shall be approved by the Planning Division.
17. All landscape materials and irrigation systems shall be maintained in accordance
with the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a
healthy and growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing
and trimming. All landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All
irrigation systems shall be kept operable, including adjustments, replacements,
repairs, and cleaning as part of regular maintenance.
18. Prior to the final of issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall
schedule an inspection by the Planning Division to confirm that all landscaping was
installed in accordance with the approved plan.
19. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare photometric
study in conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division.
The survey shall show that lighting values are "l" or less at all property lines.
20. Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of Planned Community
Development Plan Amendment, as reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-
260 and Section 20.30.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Exterior on -site
lighting shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No direct rays or
glare are permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or create a public
nuisance. "Walpak" and up -lighting type fixtures are not permitted. Parking area
lighting shall have zero cut-off fixtures.
21. The entire project shall not be excessively illuminated based on the outdoor lighting
standards contained within Section 20.30.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code, or, if in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the illumination
creates an unacceptable negative impact on surrounding land uses or
environmental resources. The Community Development Director may order the
dimming of light sources or other remediation upon finding that the site is
excessively illuminated.
22. Prior to the final of issuance of a certificate of occupancy or final of building permits
for each component of the project (i.e. residential, hotel, or tennis club) the
applicant shall schedule an evening inspection by the Code Enforcement Division
to confirm control of all lighting sources.
15-44
23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid
administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the
Planning Division.
24. All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of
Chapter 10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than
depicted below for the specified time periods unless the ambient noise level is
higher:
Between the hours of 7:OOAM
and 10:00PM
Between the hours of
10:OOPM and 7.00AM
Location
Interior
Exterior
Interior
Exterior
Residential Property
45dBA
55dBA
40dBA
50dBA
Residential Property located within
100 feet of a commercial property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
50dBA
Mixed Use Property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
50dBA
Commercial Property
N/A
65dBA
N/A
60dBA
25. The construction and equipment staging area for each phase of the project shall
be located in the least visually prominent area on the site and shall be properly
maintained and/or screened to minimize potential unsightly conditions.
26. A screen and security fence that is a minimum of six feet high shall be placed
around the construction site during construction for each phase of the project.
27. Construction equipment and materials shall be properly stored on the site when
not in use for each phase of the project.
28. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any
future owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by
either the current business owner, property owner or the leasing agent.
29. Construction activities shall comply with Section 10.28.040 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code, which restricts hours of noise -generating construction activities
that produce noise to between the hours of 7.-00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise -generating
construction activities are not allowed on Sundays or Holidays.
30. Deliveries and refuse collection for the facility shall be prohibited between the hours
of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays and between the hours of
10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m. on Sundays and Federal holidays, unless otherwise
approved by the Director of Community Development.
31. A Special Events Permit is required for any event or promotional activity outside
the normal operational characteristics of the approved use, as conditioned, or that
would attract large crowds, involve the sale of alcoholic beverages, include any
15-45
form of on -site media broadcast, or any other activities as specified in the Newport
Beach Municipal Code to require such permits.
32. All proposed signs shall be in conformance with the provision of the Planned
Community Development Plan Amendment, as reviewed under Planning Activity No.
PA2021-260, and Chapter 20.42 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be
reviewed and approved by the City Tragic Engineer if located adjacent to the
vehicular ingress and egress.
33. The final location of the signs shall be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer and shall
conform to City Standard 110-L to ensure that adequate vehicular sight distance is
provided.
34. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold
harmless City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers,
employees, and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations,
damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties,
liabilities, costs and expenses (including without limitation, attorney's fees,
disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever which may arise
from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's approval of The Tennis
at Newport Beach Project Amendment including, but not limited to, General Plan
Amendment, Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment, Planned Community
Development Plan Amendment, Amendment to Major Site Development
Review No. SD2011-002, Amendment to Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039, Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-003,
Amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004, & Second Amendment
to Development Agreement No. DA2008-001(PA2021-260). This indemnification
shall include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs
of suit, attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim,
action, causes of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City,
and/or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify
the City for all of City's costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in
enforcing the indemnification provisions set forth in this condition. The applicant shall
pay to the City upon demand any amount owed to the City pursuant to the
indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition.
Fire Department
35. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be required for the residential and hotel
components of the project.
36. A fire alarm system shall be required for the hotel component of the project.
37. A Fire Master Plan shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Division for approval.
The plan shall include information on the following (but not limited to) subjects: fire
department vehicle access to the project site, secondary emergency vehicle
15-46
access, firefighter access (hose pull) around structures, fire lane identification,
location of fire hydrants and other fire department appliances, and the location and
type of gates or barriers that restrict ingress/egress.
38. All portions of the perimeter of all structures shall be located within 150' of a fire
lane as measured along an approved route. A portion of the proposed structure
exceeding this distance is considered "out of access" and shall be corrected during
plan check review by one of the following methods:
a. Provide additional fire lanes to bring the entire structure "in access", or
b. Propose an alternate form of mitigation via the Alternate Methods and
Materials provisions of the fire code for the Fire Marshal's review. There is
no guarantee that the Alternate Methods and Materials proposal will be
approved as proposed.
39. Fire department access roads shall comply with Newport Beach Fire Guidelines
C.01 and C.02.
40. Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building
or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the
jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of
this section and shall extend to within 150 feet (45 720 mm) of all portions of the
facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as
measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility.
41. An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire
protection shall be provided to the premises. Fire -flow requirements for buildings
or portions of buildings and facilities shall be determined by Appendix B of the 2019
California Fire Code.
42. Fire hydrants shall be spaced along fire department access roads in compliance
with the 2019 California Fire Code Appendix C.
43. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or
within the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus
access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility
or building, on -site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided.
44. Additional facilities or changes to the current facilities shall require submitted plans
to the Newport Beach Fire Prevention Division for all changes, additions and
modifications to existing or new fire protection systems.
45. The use or storage of portable propane heaters shall be prohibited. Heaters for
future outdoor areas shall be fixed and plumbed with natural gas.
15-47
46. All fire hydrants and fire access road shall be installed and approved by the Fire
Department prior to the delivery of combustible material on site.
Building Division
47. Pursuant to CBC Chapter 1, Division 1.9, all temporary construction trailers, modular
office buildings, and safe pedestrian passageways around the construction sites shall
be disabled accessible.
48. All temporary modular office buildings shall be approved by the State of California for
the proposed use.
49. Foundations for temporary construction trailers and modular office buildings shall be
designed to provide anchorage for these structures against seismic and wind loads;
and provided with temporary utility connections.
50. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City's Building
Division and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most
recent, City -adopted version of the California Building Code. The construction plans
must meet all applicable State Disabilities Access requirements. Approval from the
Orange County Health Department is required prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
51. The applicant shall employ the following best available control measures
("BACMs") to reduce construction -related air quality impacts:
Dust Control
• Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.
• Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
• Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging
areas.
• Sweep or wash any site access points within two hours of any visible dirt
deposits on any public roadway.
• Cover or water twice daily any on -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty
material.
• Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if winds exceed 25 mph.
Emissions
Require 90-day low-NOx tune-ups for off road equipment.
Limit allowable idling to 30 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment.
15-48
Off -Site Impacts
• Encourage car-pooling for construction workers.
• Limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods.
• Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways.
• Wet down or cover dirt hauled off -site.
• Sweep access points daily.
• Encourage receipt of materials during non -peak traffic hours.
• Sandbag construction sites for erosion control.
Fill Placement
The number and type of equipment for dirt pushing will be limited on any
day to ensure that SCAQMD significance thresholds are not exceeded.
Maintain and utilize a continuous water application system during earth
placement and compaction to achieve a 10 percent (10%) soil moisture
content in the top six-inch surface layer, subject to review/discretion of the
geotechnical engineer.
52. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) and Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the General Permit for
Construction Activities shall be prepared, submitted to the State Water Quality
Control Board for approval and made part of the construction program. The project
applicant will provide the City with a copy of the NOI and their application check as
proof of filing with the State Water Quality Control Board. This plan will detail
measures and practices that will be in effect during construction to minimize the
project's impact on water quality.
53. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a
Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the proposed project, subject to the
approval of the Building Division and Code and Water Quality Enforcement
Division. The WQMP shall provide appropriate Best Management Practices
(BMPs) to ensure that no violations of water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements occur, and must show amount of stormwater retained prior to going
into the proprietary filtration system.
54. A list of "good housekeeping" practices will be incorporated into the long-term post -
construction operation of the site to minimize the likelihood that pollutants will be
used, stored or spilled on the site that could impair water quality. These may
include frequent parking area vacuum truck sweeping, removal of wastes or spills,
limited use of harmful fertilizers or pesticides, and the diversion of storm water
15-49
away from potential sources of pollution (e.g., trash receptacles and parking
structures). The Stage 2 WQMP shall list and describe all structural and non-
structural BMPs. In addition, the WQMP must also identify the entity responsible
for the long-term inspection, maintenance, and funding for all structural (and if
applicable Treatment Control) BMPs.
Public Works Department
55. The Final Tract Map shall be legible, scaled, dimensioned, and complete with all
necessary pertinent information and details such as easement limits and
descriptions; annotated lot lines, centerlines, and boundary lines; signature
certificates; curve and line tables; etc.
56. The Final Tract Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system
(NAD88). Prior to Map recordation, the surveyor/engineer preparing the Map shall
submit to the County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital -graphic file
of said Map in a manner described in the Orange County Subdivision Code and
Orange County Subdivision Manual. The Final Tract Map to be submitted to the
City of Newport Beach shall comply with the City°s CADD Standards.
Scanned images will not be accepted.
57. Prior to recordation, the Final Map boundary shall be tied onto the Horizontal
Control System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in
Sections 7-9-330 and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange
County Subdivision Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one -inch iron pipe with
tag) shall be set On Each Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer. Monuments shall be protected in place if installed prior to completion of
construction project.
58. A hydrology and hydraulic study and a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain
facilities for the on -site improvements shall be prepared by the applicant and
approved by the Public Works Department prior to Final Tract Map recordation.
59. Easements for public emergency and security ingress/egress, weekly refuse
service, and public utility purposes on all private streets shall be dedicated to the
City.
60. No structures shall be constructed within the limits of any utility easements.
61. All easements shall be recorded as a part of the Final Tract Map.
62. All applicable fees shall be paid prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map.
63. Construction surety in a form acceptable to the City, guaranteeing the completion
of the various required public improvements, shall be submitted to the Public
Works Department prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map.
15-50
64. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard
improvement plan formats. All plan sheets shall be sealed and signed by the
California licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans.
65. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current
edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard
Drawings.
66. All storm drains and sanitary sewer mains shall be installed with MacWrap.
67. All runoff discharges shall comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -
storm runoff retention requirements.
68. New concrete sidewalks, curbs, gutters, curb disabled access ramps, roadway
pavement, traffic detector loops, traffic signal devices, and street trees shall be
installed along the development's Coast Highway frontage.
69. Public improvements may be required along the development's Granville Drive
frontage upon building permit plan check submittal.
70. All on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water and electrical systems shall be privately
owned, operated, and maintained. The water system shall be owned operate and
maintained by the City.
71. All curb return radii shall be 5-feet (5) minimum.
72. Each detached residential dwelling unit or bungalow building shall be served with
an individual water service and sewer lateral connection.
73. All overhead utilities serving the entire proposed development shall be made
underground.
74. ADA compliant curb ramps shall be installed within the interior parking area.
75. The intersection of the public streets, internal roadways, and drive aisle shall be
designed to provide adequate sight distance per City of Newport Beach Standard
Drawing Standard105. Slopes, landscaping, walls, signs, and other obstructions
shall be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the
sight lines (sight cone) shall not exceed 24-inches in height and the monument
identification sign must be located outside the line of sight cone. The sight distance
may be modified at non -critical locations, subject to approval by the Traffic
Engineer.
15-51
76. Any damage to public improvements within the public right-of-way attributable to
on- site development may require additional reconstruction within the public right-
of-way at the discretion of the Public Works Inspector.
77. The parking lot and vehicular circulation system shall be subject to further review
and approval by the City Traffic Engineer. Parking layout shall be per City Standard
805. Parking layout shall be full dimensioned. On -street parking spaces shall be 8
feet wide by 22 feet long. Drive aisles to parking areas shall be 26 feet wide
minimum. The one-way drive aisle adjacent to the hotel's concierge office and
guest meeting building shall be 14 feet wide minimum with no parking, otherwise
the drive aisle shall be widened to accommodate parking.
78. Cul-de-sacs shall comply with City Standards 102 and 103 and shall have a
minimum diameter of 80 feet curb to curb.
79. County Sanitation District fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of any building
permits.
80. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a sewer and water demand study shall
be submitted for review by the Public Works and Utilities Department.
81. Prior to the commencement of demolition and grading of the project, the applicant
shall submit a construction management plan (CMP) to be reviewed and approved
by the Community Development Director, City Fire Marshal, and City Traffic
Engineer. The plan shall include discussion of project phasing, parking
arrangements during construction, anticipated haul routes and construction
mitigation. Upon approval of the CMP, the applicant shall be responsible for
implementing and complying with the stipulations set forth in the approved CMP.
82. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a sewer system management plan shall
be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works and Utilities Department.
83. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, various water and sewer easement for
City mains located on the adjacent properties shall be obtained and conveyed to
the City.
84. A storm drain easement on behalf of the project shall be obtained from the adjacent
property owner prior to issuance of a building permit. Provide documentation of
said easement.
85. The City sewer manhole located within 1600 East Coast Highway shall be
relocated to an area outside of the landscape and parking stalls. The manhole
location shall be accessible at all time. A new sewer easement shall be provided
for the sewer manhole and sewer main within the 1600 East Coast Highway
property.
15-52
86. The public sewer connection to the OCSD main shall utilize the existing OCSD
manhole located within East Coast Highway unless otherwise approved by OCSD
and the City. Final design shall be approved by OCSD and the City.
87. The existing private sewer main from the proposed point of connection to the City's
manhole located near East Coast Highway shall be video inspected and any
damage repaired prior.
88. Utility easements shall be provided for all City water meters, fire hydrants, valves
and back flow devices.
15-53
Attachment C
Resolution No. 2022-67
15-54
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-67
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING
SUBMITTAL OF A LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT TO THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL
COMMISSION TO AMEND THE NEWPORT BEACH
COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PC-47) FOR THE TENNIS CLUB
LOCATED AT 1602 EAST COAST HIGHWAY (PA2021-
260)
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 30500 of the California Public Resources
Code, the California Coastal Act requires each county and city to prepare a local coastal
program ("LCP") for that portion of the coastal zone within its jurisdiction;
WHEREAS, the California Coastal Commission effectively certified the City's
Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan on January 13, 2017, and the City of
Newport Beach ("City") added Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan)
("Title 21 ") to the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") whereby the City assumed
coastal development permit -issuing authority as of January 30, 2017;
WHEREAS, in 2012, the City Council approved an application by Golf Realty Fund,
Managing Owner ("Applicant") for the reconstruction of the 3,725-square-foot tennis
clubhouse, a reduction of tennis courts from 24 to seven courts, construction of a 27-room
boutique hotel with 9,700 square feet of ancillary uses, five single-family residential units,
and a development agreement for the property ("2012 Entitlements") located at 1602 East
Coast Highway, and legally described as Parcels A, B, C, and D of Parcel Map No. 2016-
151 (commonly referred as the "Tennis Club Site" or "Property");
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2018, the Zoning Administrator approved Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2017-039, authorizing the redevelopment of the Property
consistent with the 2012 Entitlements (2012 Entitlements and Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2017-039 are collectively referred to as the "Approved Project");
15-55
Resolution No. 2022-67
Page 2 of 5
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Approved Project to
allow an increase in the number of future tennis courts from seven to eight, an increase in
the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41, an increase to the gross floor area of
ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, three attached condominium units and two single-
family residences in -lieu of five single-family residences, and an amendment to the 2012
Development Agreement to account for the aforementioned changes to the Project along
with extending the term of the 2012 Development Agreement for an additional 10 years
("Project");
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H3/PR) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan and is located within
the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Zoning District;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H/PR) by the Coastal Land Use Plan and is located within the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Coastal Zone District;
WHEREAS, the Project includes an amendment to Title 21 (Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan) ("Title 21 ") related to development standards for the Tennis Club site
located within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47),
WHEREAS, Title 21 includes specific development standards for the Approved
Project and, as a result, an amendment to Title 21 is necessary to revise the development
standards listed in Section 21.26.055(S) which specifically refers to the PC-47
development standards of the "Tennis Club," "The Villas," and "The Bungalows";
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 13515 of the California Code of Regulations Title
14, Division 5.5, Chapter 8 ("Section 13515"), drafts of Local Coastal Program Amendment
No. PA2021-260 were made available and a Notice of Availability was distributed on July
29, 2022, at least six weeks prior to the anticipated final action date;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8,
2022, in the City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California, at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project. A notice of
time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with California
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), Section 13515, and
Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map Review), 20.56
(Planning Community District Procedures), 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 hearing;
15-56
Resolution No. 2022-67
Page 3 of 5
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2022-022 by a unanimous vote (5 ayes, 1 absent, 1 recusal) recommending approval
of the Project to the City Council;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 27, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, Section 13515, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12
(Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public
Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the City Council remanded the Project to the Planning
Commission on a future date by a majority vote (6 ayes, 1 nays);
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council
adopted a motion for reconsideration of the Project by a majority vote (4 ayes, 3 nays);
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on October 25, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, Section 13515, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12
(Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public
Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was
presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as
follows..
Section 1: The City Council does hereby authorize City staff to submit Local
Coastal Program Amendment No. PA2021-260, amending Chapter 21.26.055(S)
(Newport Beach Country Club) of Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan)
of the NBMC, attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and incorporated herein by reference, to the
California Coastal Commission for review and approval.
Section 2: Local Coastal Program Amendment No. PA2021-260 shall not
become effective until approval by the California Coastal Commission and adoption,
including any modifications suggested by the California Coastal Commission, by
resolution(s) and/or ordinance(s) of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach.
15-57
Resolution No. 2022-67
Page 4 of 5
Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and are
incorporated into the operative part of this resolution.
Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 5: An Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008
(MND) was prepared for the Proposed Project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") set forth in California Public Resources Code Section
2100 et seq.; CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in CCR Title 14, Division 6
Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures
for the California Environmental Quality Act). On the basis of the MND and entire
environmental review record, the additional tennis court, hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses,
and conversion of three single-family residences to condominium units will not result in
any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the MND. The
Addendum confirms and provides substantial evidence that the potential impacts
associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those described in the
MND, or as mitigated by applicable mitigation measures in the MND. In addition, there
are no 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 either the MND, nor has any new information regarding the
potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council
adopted Resolution No. 2022- thereby adopting an addendum to the previously
adopted MND. Resolution 2022- including all findings contained therein, is hereby
incorporated by reference.
15-58
Resolution No. 2022-67
Page 5 of 5
Section 6: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the
City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution.
ADOPTED this 25th day of October, 2022.
Kevin Muldoon
Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Aaron/C. Harp
City ttorney
Attachment(s): Exhibit A — Local Coastal Program Amendment No. PA2021-260
Related to Standards of the Tennis Club Property
located within the Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community (PC-47)
15-59
Exhibit "A"
Local Coastal Program Amendment No. PA2021-260 Related to Standards of the
Tennis Club Property located within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community (PC-47)
15-60
Exhibit "A"
Local Coastal Program Amendment No. PA2021-260 Related to Standards of the
Tennis Club Property located within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community (PC-47)
Amend Section 21.26.055.S (Newport Beach Country Club) of Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to read as follows:
S. Newport Beach Country Club (PC-47).
2. Tennis Club.
a. Density/intensity limit: seven eight (8) tennis courts; and three thousand seven
hundred twenty-five (3,725) square foot clubhouse.
b. Height: thirty (30) feet for clubhouse.
c. Parking: bNeRty eight 29` spao thirty-two (32) spaces
3. Residential.
a. Detached Residential (Villas)
L Density/intensity limit: two single-family dwelling units.
ii. Development Standards:
Villa Designation
Villa A (TTM Lot #1)
Villa B (TTM Lot #2)
Lot Size
5,000 square feet minimum
Lot Coverage (Maximum)
70%
65%
39 feet, measured in accordance with the Height and Grade
Building Height
definition of Section 2.0 General Conditions and
Regulations
Building Side Yard Setbacks
3 feet minimum
Building Front and Rear Yard
5 feet minimum
Setbacks
Enclosed Parking Space for
2
2
Each Unit
Open Guest Parking Space
One space - could be located on the private driveway — No
for Each Unit
overhang to the private street/cul-de-sac is allowed
15-61
b. Attached Residential (Condominiums)
i. Density/intensity limit: three (3) attached residential units.
ii. Setbacks: five (5) feet from any property line.
iii. Height: forty-six (46) feet (to be located atop of the 2-story hotel
buildings).
iv. Parking: three (3) enclosed spaces and one guest space per
dwelling unit.
a. Density/Intensity Limit: forty-one (41) short-term guest rental Ufl#6 rooms.
The maximum total allowable gross floor area for the hotel rooms shall be twenty
-
eight thousand three hundFed(28 300) forty-seven thousand four hundred
eighty-four (47,484) square feet with a two thousand two hundred (2,200) square -
foot concierge a+;d guest center, four thousand six hundred eighty-six (4,686)
square feet of ancillary hotel uses, and a seven thousand five hundred (7,500)
square -foot spa facility.
b. Setbacks: five feet from any property line.
c. Height: thirty-one (31) feet.
d. Parking: . forty-one (41) parking spaces.
15-62
Attachment D
Ordinance No. 2022-19
15-63
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-19
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY
CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
(PC-47) FOR THE TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
LOCATED AT 1602 EAST COAST HIGHWAY (PA2021-
260)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in
the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to
any and all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any
law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, in 2012, the City Council approved an application by Golf Realty
Fund, Managing Owner ("Applicant") for the reconstruction of the 3,725-square-foot tennis
clubhouse, reduction of tennis courts from 24 to seven courts, construction of a 27-room
boutique hotel with 9,700 square feet of ancillary uses, five single-family residential units,
and a development agreement for the property ("2012 Entitlements") located at 1602 East
Coast Highway, and legally described as Parcels A, B, C, and D of Parcel Map No. 2016-
151 (commonly referred as the "Tennis Club Site" or "Property");
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2018, the Zoning Administrator approved Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2017-039, authorizing the redevelopment of the Property
consistent with the 2012 Entitlements (2012 Entitlements and Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2017-039 are collectively referred to as the "Approved Project");
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Approved Project to
allow an increase in the number of future tennis courts from seven to eight, an increase in
the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41, an increase to the gross floor area of
ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, three attached condominium units and two
single family residences in -lieu of five single-family residences, and an amendment to the
2012 Development Agreement to account for the aforementioned changes to the
Approved Project along with extending the term for an additional 10 years ("Project');
15-64
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, the following approvals are requested or required in order to
implement the Project:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") — An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of
Table LU2 of the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element to
document the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms authorized by
City Council Resolution No. 2012-10, and the addition of 14 hotel rooms for a
total of 41 rooms and one tennis courts for a total of eight tennis courts,
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment ("LCPA") — An
amendment to Section 21.26.055(S)(2) (Planned Community Coastal Zoning
District Development Standards, Newport Beach Country Club (PC-47, Tennis
Club) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") to modify the permitted
uses and development standards allowed on the Property;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment ("PCDP Amendment") —
An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan No. 47 (Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use regulations and
development standards on the Property;
• Major Site Development Permit Amendment ("SDA") — An amendment to the
existing site development review in accordance with PC-47 and Section
20.52.080 (Permit Review Procedures, Site Development Reviews) of the
NBMC for the construction of the Project;
• Coastal Development Permit Amendment ("CDPA") — A coastal development
permit for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the
Property, and implementation of the Project;
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment ("VTMA") — An amendment to Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15347 pursuant to Title 19 (Subdivisions) of the NBMC
for a lot reduction created for the Approved Project and inclusion of the
condominium ownership;
• Limited Term Permit Amendment ("XP") — A limited term permit to allow
temporary use of structures during construction on the Property, pursuant to
Section 20.52.040 of the NBMC;
15-65
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 3 of 7
• Development Agreement Amendment ("DA") — A second amendment to the
Development Agreement (DA2008-001), between the Applicant and the City,
pursuant to Sections 15.45.020(A)(2)(c) (Buildings and Construction,
Development Agreements Required, Development Agreement Required) and
15.45.070 (Buildings and Constructions, Development Agreements,
Amendment/Cancellation) of the NBMC, which would provide vested rights to
develop the Project for an additional 10 years and provide negotiated public
benefits to the City; and
• Addendum to previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-
008 (SCH2010091052) ("Addendum") — Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably
foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H3/PR) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan and is located
within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Zoning District;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H/PR) by the Coastal Land Use Plan and is located within the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Coastal Zone District;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8,
2022, in the City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California, at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project. A notice of
time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with California
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning
Community District Procedures), 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 hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2022-022 (5 ayes, 1 absent, 1 recusal) recommending approval of the Project to the
City Council;
15-66
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 4 of 7
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 27, 2022, in
the City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance
with the Ralph M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12
(Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public
Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral,
was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the City Council remanded the Project to the
Planning Commission on a future date by a majority vote (6 ayes, 1 nays);
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council
adopted a motion for reconsideration of the Project by a majority vote (4 ayes, 3 nays);
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on October 25, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map
Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public Hearings) and
21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented
to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and determined that modifications to the Project made by the City
Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to commission for
consideration and recommendation.
15-67
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 5 of 7
Section 2: An amendment to PC-47, which is the zoning document for the
Property, is a legislative act. Neither PC-47, Chapter 20.66 (Planning and Zoning,
Amendments) and Chapter 20.56 (Planning and Zoning, Planned Community District
Procedures) of Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) of NBMC, or Article 2 (Adoption of
Regulations) of Chapter 4 (Zoning Regulations) of Division 1 (Planning and Zoning) of
Title 7 (Planning and Land Use) of the California Government Code set forth any
required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments. Nevertheless,
amending PC-47 to change the development standards as it relates to the Tennis Club
is consistent with the purpose of the Planned Community Districts as specified in
Section 20.56.010 (Planned Community District Procedures — Purpose) of the NBMC
for the reasons set forth below:
1. The Project is consistent with the intent and purpose of PC-47 in that the tennis
club, hotel, and residential uses and their development standards have already
been allowed and in place on the Property. The proposed changes to the building
height, setbacks, and parking standards in order to accommodate the Project are
within the development standards in place for the Approved Project.
2. PC-47 provides guidelines for architectural design to include coordinated and
cohesive architecture which exhibits quality that is keeping with the surrounding
area in Newport Center. The Project includes additional hotel rooms and two
attached residential condominium loft buildings. The proposed additions have
consistent architecture with the Approved Project, which has cohesive
architectural features that include smooth plaster exterior siding, clay -tile roofs,
and stone veneer exterior accent finishes.
3. PC-47 permits structures to be a maximum of 50 feet in height. The Project
includes two attached residential condominium loft buildings which features
condominiums on the third level atop of a two -level hotel building. The loft
buildings are proposed at a maximum of 46 feet high and comply with the height
limit. All other structures are consistent with the maximum heights prescribed in
PC-47.
Section 3: The City Council hereby approves the Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, as set forth in Exhibit I," which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference and finds that the amendment to
PC-47 complies with the purpose set forth in Section 20.56.010 (Purpose) of the NBMC,
with all other provisions of the existing Planned Community District Regulations and
exhibits remaining unchanged and in full force and effect.
15-68
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 6 of 7
Section 4: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are
incorporated into the substantive portion of this ordinance.
Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The
City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
Section 6: An Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008
(MND) was prepared for the Proposed Project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") set forth in California Public Resources Code
Section 2100 et seq.; CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in CCR Title 14,
Division 6 Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation
Procedures for the California Environmental Quality Act) to ensure that the Proposed
Project will not result in new or increased environmental impacts. On the basis of the
MND and entire environmental review record, the additional tennis court, hotel rooms,
ancillary hotel uses, and conversion of 3 single-family residences to condominium units
will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the
MND. The Addendum confirms and provides substantial evidence that the potential
impacts associated with this Project would either be the same or less than those
described in the MND, or as mitigated by applicable mitigation measures in the MND. In
addition, there are no 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 either the MND, nor has any new information regarding
the potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council
adopted Resolution No. 2022- , thereby adopting an addendum to the previously
adopted MND. Resolution 2022- , including all findings contained therein, is hereby
incorporated by reference.
Section 7: Except as expressly modified in this ordinance, all other sections,
subsections, terms, clauses and phrases set forth in the NBMC or other planned
community shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect.
15-69
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 7 of 7
Section 8: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage
of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be
published pursuant to City Charter Section 414.
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Newport Beach held on the 25th day of October, 2022, and adopted on the 15th day of
November, 2022, by the following vote, to -wit -
AYES:
1►My,01
ABSENT:
KEVIN MULDOON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
AAROt4/C. HARP, C(IfY ATTORNEY
Attachment(s): Exhibit 1 - Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
Development Plan Amendment
15-70
Exhibit 1
Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community Development Plan
Adoption: March 27, 2012, Ordinance No. 2012-2
Amendment: October 11, 2022, Ordinance No._
15-71
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction and Purpose................................................................................ 4
2.0 General Conditions and Regulations...............................................................
5
3.0 Land Use and Development Regulations........................................................
10
3.1
Golf Club..............................................................................................
10
A. Golf Course.....................................................................................
10
B. Golf Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses .................................................
10
1. Building Area.............................................................................
10
2. Building Height..........................................................................
10
3. Permitted Ancillary Uses............................................................
10
4. Parking......................................................................................
11
5. Fencing......................................................................................
11
3.2
Tennis Club..........................................................................................
11
A. Tennis Courts..................................................................................
11
1. Number of Courts......................................................................
11
B. Tennis Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses .............................................
12
1. Building Area.............................................................................
12
2. Building Height..........................................................................
12
3. Permitted Ancillary Uses............................................................
12
4. Parking......................................................................................
12
3.3
The Venus Residential .........................................................................
12
1. NumbeF Gf Detached Residential ....................................
13
2. Develepment StandaFds. Attached Residential ........................
14
3.4
The Bwngalew6 Hotel...........................................................................
14
1. Number of ks Rooms............................................................
14
2. Permitted Ancillary Uses............................................................
14
3. Building Area.............................................................................
15
4. Building Height..........................................................................
15
5. Building Setbacks......................................................................
15
6. Parking......................................................................................
15
3.5
Signs....................................................................................................
15
A. Sign Allowance...............................................................................
15
B. Sign Standards...............................................................................
16
4.0 Site
Development Review...............................................................................
17
4.1
Purpose................................................................................................
17
4.2
Application............................................................................................
17
4.3
Findings................................................................................................
17
4.4
Contents...............................................................................................
18
4.5
Public Hearing - Required Notice........................................................
18
4.6
Expiration and Revocation Site Plan Review Approvals .......................
19
2
15-72
4.7 Fees..................................................................................................... 19
4.8 Minor Changes by the Community Development Director .................... 19
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit Name Exhibit Number
VicinityAerial Map................................................................................................ A
Conceptual Master Site Plan................................................................................ B
LIST OF TABLES
Table Name Page
The Villas Development Standards...................................................................... 13
3
15-73
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District (the PCD) is composed
of the Golf Club, Tennis Club, Bungalows and Villas facilities, totaling approximately 4-33
140 acres. The PCD has been developed in accordance with the Newport Beach
General Plan and is consistent with the Local Coastal Land Use Plan.
The purpose of this PCD is to provide for the classification and development of
coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive planning project with limited mixed uses,
including the private Qgolf Gclub, Ttennis Gclub, 2-7 shot to pm rental units 41-rooms
boutique hotel Galled the Bungalows with a spa/fitness area center and ancillary
uses, and 5 semi StOM oiRgle-, Rit residential dwellings units galled the Villas
Whenever the regulations contained in the PCD Regulations conflict with the regulations
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained in the PCD
Regulations shall take precedence. The Newport Beach Municipal Code shall regulate
all development within the PCD when such regulations are not provided within the PCD
Regulations.
2
15-74
2.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS AND REGULATIONS
1. Alcoholic Beverage Consumption
The consumption of alcoholic beverages within the PCD shall be in compliance with the
State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and the Newport Beach
Municipal Code. A use permit shall be required if the establishment operates past 11:00
p.m. any day of the week and a minor use permit shall be required if the establishment
operates until 11:00 p.m. any day of the week.
2. Amplified Music
All amplified music played after 10:00 p.m. within the PCD shall be confined within the
interior of a building unless a Special Events Permit is obtained.
3. Archaeological/Paleontological Resources
Development of the site is subject to the provisions of City Council Policies K-5 and K-6
regarding archaeological and paleontological resources.
4. Architectural Design
All development shall be designed with high quality architectural standards and shall be
compatible with the surrounding uses. The development should be well -designed with
coordinated, cohesive architecture and exhibiting the highest level of architectural and
landscape quality in keeping with the PCD's prominent location in the Newport Center
Planning Area. Massing offsets, variation of roof lines, varied textures, openings,
recesses, and design accents on all building elevations shall be provided to enhance
the architectural style. Architectural treatments for all ancillary facilities (i.e. storage,
truck loading and unloading, and trash enclosures) shall be provided.
5. Building Codes
Construction shall comply with applicable provisions of the California Building Code and
the various other mechanical, electrical and plumbing codes related thereto as adopted
by the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
6. Exterior Storage Areas
There shall be no exterior storage areas permitted with the exception of the
greenskeeper/maintenance area which shall be enclosed by a minimum six-foot
plastered block wall.
5
15-75
7. Flood Protection
Development of the subject property will be undertaken in accordance with the flood
protection policies of the City.
8. Grading and Erosion Control
Grading and erosion control measures shall be carried out in accordance with the
provisions of the Newport Beach Excavation and Grading Code and shall be subject to
permits issued by the Community Development Department.
9. Gross Floor Area
Gross floor area shall be defined as the total area of a building including the
surrounding exterior walls.
10. Height and Grade
The height of any structure within the PCD shall not exceed fifty (50) feet, unless
otherwise specified. The height of a structure shall be the vertical distance between the
highest point of the structure and the grade directly below. In determining the height of a
sloped roof, the measurement shall be the vertical distance between the grade and the
midpoint of the roof plane, provided that no part of the roof shall be extend more than
five (5) feet above the permitted height in the height limitation zone, and any
amendments shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Director
11. Landscaping/Irrigation
Landscaping and irrigation shall be provided in all areas not devoted to structures,
parking lots, driveways, walkways, and tennis courts to enhance the appearance of the
development, reduce heat and glare, control soil erosion, conserve water, screen
adjacent land uses, and preserve the integrity of PCD. Landscaping and irrigation shall
consist of a combination of trees, shrubs, groundcover and hardscape improvements.
Landscaping shall be prepared in accordance with the Landscaping Standards and
Water -Efficient Landscaping Sections of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and
installed in accordance with the approved landscape plans prepared by a licensed
landscape architect.
12. Lighting —Outdoor
All new outdoor lighting shall be designed, shielded, aimed, located and maintained to
shield adjacent uses/properties and to not produce glare onto adjacent uses/properties.
Lighting plans shall be prepared in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Section of the
C
15-76
Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be prepared by a licensed electrical
engineer. All lighting and lighting fixtures that are provided shall be maintained in
accordance with the approved lighting plans.
13. Lighting — Parking & Walkways
All lighting and lighting fixtures that are provided shall be maintained in accordance with
the approved lighting plans. Light standards within parking lots shall be the minimum
height required to effectively illuminate the parking area and eliminate spillover of light
and glare onto adjoining uses/properties and roadways.
Parking lots and walkways accessing buildings shall be illuminated with a minimum of
0.5 foot-candle average on the driving or walking surface during the hours of operation
and one hour thereafter. Lighting plans shall be prepared in compliance with the
Outdoor Lighting Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be prepared
by a licensed electrical engineer.
If the applicant wishes to deviate from this lighting standard, a lighting plan may be
prepared by the applicant and submitted to the Community Development Director for
review and approval.
14. Loading Areas for Non -Residential Uses
All loading and unloading of goods delivery shall be performed onsite. Loading
platforms and areas shall be screened from public view.
15. Parking Areas
Parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, turnaround areas, and landscaping
areas of the parking lots shall be kept free of dust, graffiti, and litter. All components of
the parking areas including striping, paving, wheel stops, walls, and light standards of
the parking lots shall be permanently maintained in good working condition. Access,
location, parking space and lot dimensions, and parking lot improvements shall be in
compliance with the Development Standards for Parking Areas Section of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code.
16. Property Owner Approval
Written property owner approval shall be required for the submittal of any site
development review application and/or prior to grading and/or building permit issuance.
17. Outdoor Paging
Outdoor paging shall be permitted at the Ggolf Sclub to call individuals to the tees and
at the Ttennis Sclub to call points during tennis tournaments.
7
15-77
18. Sewage Disposal
Sewage disposal service facilities for the PCD will be provided by Orange County
Sanitation District No. 5 and shall be subject to applicable regulations, permits and fees
as prescribed by the Sanitation District.
19. Screening of Mechanical Equipments
All new mechanical appurtenances (e.g., air conditioning, heating, ventilation ducts and
exhaust vents, swimming pool and spa pumps and filters, transformers, utility vaults and
emergency power generators) shall be screened from public view and adjacent land
uses. The enclosure design shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. All rooftop equipment (other than vents, wind turbines, etc.) shall be
architecturally treated or screened from off -site views in a manner compatible with the
building materials prior to final building permit clearance for each new or remodeled
building. The mechanical appurtenances shall be subject to sound rating in accordance
with the Exterior Noise Standards Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Rooftop screening and enclosures shall be subject to the applicable height limit.
20. Screening of the Villas residential units from tennis courts
Adequate buffering between the Villas residential units and tennis courts shall be
provided and subject to the Site Development Review process. The exterior perimeter
of the tennis courts facing Granville Condominiums, Granville Drive, and the Ttennis
Gelubhouse parking lot shall be screened by a minimum ten -foot -high chain link fence
covered by a wind screen. Wind screen shall be maintained in good condition at all
time.
21. Screening of the Villas' Pool/Spa Equipment
All pool and/or spa equipment shall be enclosed by a minimum five-foot high block wall
plastered or otherwise textured to match the building.
22. Special Events
Temporary special community events, such as such as PGA Senior Classic golf
tournaments, Team Tennis, Davis Cup Matches, and other similar events, are permitted
in the PCD, and are subject to the Special Events Chapter of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code. Temporary exterior storage associated with approved special events
may be permitted provided it is appropriately screened and regulated with an approved
Special Event Permit.
15-78
23. Temporary Structures and Uses
Temporary structures and uses, including modular buildings for construction -related
activities are permitted.
24. Trash Container Storage for Residential Dwellings
Trash container storage shall be out of view from public places, and may not be located
in the required parking areas. If trash container storage areas cannot be located out of
public view, they shall be screened from public view. Screening shall consist of fences,
walls, and landscaping to a height at least 6 inches above the tops of the containers.
25. Trash Enclosures for Non -Residential Uses
All trash enclosures for non-residential uses shall be provided and in accordance with
the Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials Storage of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code.
26. Tennis Club Site Phasing Plan -
The phasing plan for the tennis club site which consists of the tennis club, vi4as.
residential units and clews hotel rooms shall be subject to a site development
review process.
27. Water Service
Water service to the PCD will be provided by the City of Newport Beach and will be
subject to applicable regulations, permits and fees as prescribed by the City.
0
15-79
3.0 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
3.1 Golf Club
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of the golf course and clubhouse.
A. Golf Course
An 18-hole championship golf course and related facilities (i.e. putting green,
driving range, snack bar, starter shack, restroom facilities, etc.).
B. Golf Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses
1. Building Area
The maximum allowable gross floor area for a golf clubhouse building
shall be 56,000 square feet, exclusive of any enclosed golf cart storage
areas ramp and washing area. The greens keeper/maintenance buildings,
snack bar, separate golf course restroom facilities, starter shack, and
similar ancillary buildings are exempt from this development limit.
2. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for the Golf Clubhouse shall be 50
feet and shall be measured in accordance with the Height and Grade
definition of Section 2.0 General Conditions and Regulation of the PCD.
3. Permitted Ancillary Use
The following ancillary uses are allowed:
• Golf shop
• Administrative Offices
• Dining, and event areas
• Kitchen & Bar areas
• Banquet Rooms
• Men and Women's Card Rooms
• Health and fitness facility
• Restroom and Locker facilities
• Golf Club storage areas
• Employee lounge/lunch areas
• Meeting rooms
• Golf Cart Parking Storage and Washing Area
15-80
• Separate Snack Bar
• Separate Starter Shack
• Separate Golf Course Restrooms
• Hand Carwash Area
• Greenskeeper Maintenance Facility
• Temporary Construction Facilities
• Guard House
• Others (subject to an approval of the Community Development
Director)
4. Parking
Parking for the Golf Course and Golf Clubhouse shall be in accordance
with following parking ratios (source: from Table 2 of the Circulation and
Parking Evaluation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., September 2009
for Newport Beach Country Club — Clubhouse Improvement Project):
Golf Course: 8 spaces per hole
Golf Clubhouse:
Dining, assembly & meeting rooms: 1 per 3 seats or 1 per 35
square feet
Administrative Office: 4 per 1,000 square feet
Pro Shop: 4 per 1,000 square feet
Maintenance Facility: 2 per 1,000 square feet
Health and Fitness Facility: 4 per 1,000 square feet
The design of the parking lot and orientation of vehicular aisles and
parking spaces shall be subject to the review and approval of the City
Traffic Engineer and Community Development Director.
5. Fencing
Golf Course perimeter fencing shall be wrought -iron with a maximum
permitted height of six (6) feet.
3.2 Tennis Club
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of the tennis courts and clubhouse.
A. The Tennis Courts
1. Number of courts
11
15-81
The maximum allowable tennis courts shall be seven eight lighted tennis
courts (a+x seven lighted championship courts and one lighted stadium -
center court).
B. Tennis Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses
1. Building Area
The maximum allowable gross floor area for the Tennis Clubhouse shall
be 3,725 square feet.
2. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for the Tennis Clubhouse shall be
30 feet and shall be measured in accordance with the Height and Grade
definition of Section 2.0 General Conditions and Regulations of the PCD.
3. Permitted Ancillary Uses
The following ancillary uses are allowed:
• Tennis Shop
• Administrative Offices
• Concessions
• Restroom and Locker facilities
• Storage areas
• Spectator seating
• Others (subject to an approval of the Community Development
Director)
4. Parking
Parking for the Tennis Clubhouse and Courts shall be a minimum of 2-9 32
parking spaces.
3.3. Ths Residential
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of the vitas units.
12
15-82
A. Detached Residential (The Villas)
1. Number of Units
The maximum allowable number of single-family residential units shall be
five-(55) two (2).
2. Development Standards
The following development standards shall apply to the Villas:
The Villas Development Standards Table
Villa
Villa A
Villa B
Designation
TTM Lot #1
TTM Lot #2
Lot Size
5,000 square feet minimum
Lot Coverage
70%
65%
(Maximum)
39 feet, measured in accordance with the
Building Height
Height and Grade definition of Section
2.0 General Conditions and Regulations
Building Side
Yard Setbacks
3 feet minimum
Building Front
and Rear Yard
5 feet minimum
Setbacks
Enclosed Parking
Space for Each
2
2
Unit
Open Guest
One space - could be located on the
Parking Space for
private driveway — No overhang to the
Each Unit
private street/cul-de-sac is allowed
13
15-83
B. Attached Residential
1. Number of Units
The maximum allowable number of attached residential units shall
be three (3).
2. Building Setbacks
The building setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet from any
property line.
3. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for attached residential units
to be located atop of the 2-story hotel buildings shall be 46 feet,
measured in accordance with the Height and Grade definition of
Section 2.0 General Conditions and Regulations.
4. Parking
Parking for the attached residential units shall be a minimum of 3
enclosed parking spaces and one guest parking space per unit.
3.4. The Bunqalews Hotel
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of the bungalows, concierge and guest center, and spa facility.
1. Number of Units Rooms
The maximum allowable number of the Bungalows rooms shall be 27- 41, to be
built in a clustered setting of single and two-story buildings.
2. Permitted Ancillary Uses
The following ancillary uses are allowed:
• Administrative Offices
• Concierge office and guest meeting facility
• Performance Therapy Center
• Spa and Fitness Center
• Swimming pool and Jacuzzi
rrarving Winhc sHaGks and light breakfast and I, ,nGh itomc
vv. ... .� ... n.v, v..an v,w u, ,u light v,�..w"u...a and ,u, wrr--rc�r�-r.�
14
15-84
• Yoga Pavilion
3. Building Area
The maximum allowable gross floor area for the b6ngalows hotel rooms shall be
28,300 47,484 square feet with a 2,200 square foot concierge & guest center,
4,686 square feet of ancillary hotel uses, and a 7,500 square -foot spa facility.
4. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for the bungalows hotel rooms shall be
31 feet, measured in accordance with the Height and Grade definition of Section
2.0 General Conditions and Regulations of the PCD.
5. Building Setbacks
The building setback requiFerneRt shall be a minimum of 5 feet from any
property line.
6. Parking
Parking for the bURgalews hotel rooms shall be a minimum of 34 41 parking
spaces located in proximity to the use.
3.5 Signs
A. Sign Allowance
1. One (1) single or double-faced, ground -mounted entrance
identification sign shall be allowed at Newport Beach Tennis Club's
main entrance (Country Club Drive and Irvine Terrace). Total
maximum signage area shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square
feet and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height.
2. One (1) single or double-faced, ground -mounted entrance
identification sign shall be allowed at or near the vicinity of the
Newport Beach Country Club's secondary entrance (Granville).
Total maximum signage area shall not exceed seventy-five (75)
square feet and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height.
3. Building identification signs shall be allowed; one for each street
frontage. If freestanding, this sign type shall not exceed a maximum
height of five (5) feet in height. The maximum signage area shall
not exceed seventy (70) square feet.
4. Vehicular and pedestrian directional signs shall be allowed. This
sign type may occur as a single -faced or double-faced sign. The
15
15-85
sign shall be sized to allow for proper readability given the number
of lines of copy, speed of traffic, setback off the road and viewing
distance. This sign type shall not exceed a maximum of six (6) feet
in height.
5. One (1) single or double faced, ground -mounted identification sign
shall be allowed at the entrance road to the Bungalows. Total
maximum signage area shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square
feet and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height and fifteen (15) feet
in length.
B. Sign Standards
The design and materials of all permanent signs in the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community District shall be in
accordance with Sign Section 3.5, unless otherwise approved by
the Community Development Director.
2. All permanent signs shall be subject to a sign permit issued by the
Community Development Department.
3. All signs shall be subject to the review of the City Traffic Engineer
to ensure adequate sight distance in accordance with the
provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
4. Sign illumination is permitted for all sign types. No sign shall be
constructed or installed to rotate, gyrate, blink or move, or create
the illusion of motion, in any fashion.
5. All permanent signs together with the entirety of their supports,
braces, guys, anchors, attachments and d6cor shall be properly
maintained, legible, functional and safe with regards to appearance,
structural integrity and electrical service.
6. Temporary signs that are visible from any public right-of-way shall
be allowed up to a maximum of sixty (60) days and subject to a
temporary sign permit issued by the Community Development
Department.
7. If the applicant wishes to deviate from the sign standards identified
herein, a comprehensive sign program may be prepared or a
modification permit application may be submitted for review and
consideration by the Zoning Administrator in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
16
15-86
4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
4.1 Purpose
The purpose of the Site Development Review process is to ensure new
development proposals within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community Development are consistent with the goals and policies of the
General Plan, provisions of this Planned Community Development Plan, the
Development Agreement and the findings set forth below in sub -section 4.3.
4.2 Application
An approval of Site Development Review application by the Planning
Commission shall be required for the construction of any new structure prior to
the issuance of a grading or building permit or issuance of an approval in concept
for Coastal Commission. Signs, tenant improvements to any existing buildings,
kiosks, and temporary structures are exempt from the site development review
process and subject to the applicable City's permits. The decision of Planning
Commission is the final, unless appealed in accordance with the Newport Beach
Municipal Code.
4.3. Findings
In addition to the general purposes set forth in sub -section 4.1 and in order to carry
out the purposes of this chapter as established by said section, the Site
Development Review procedures established by this Section shall be applied
according to and in compliance with the following findings:
The development shall be in compliance with all other provisions of the
Planned Community District Plan;
2. The development shall be compatible with the character of the
neighboring uses and surrounding sites and shall not be detrimental to the
orderly and harmonious development of the surroundings and of the City;
3. The development shall be sited and designed to maximize the aesthetic
quality of the project as viewed from surrounding roadways and
properties, with special consideration given to the mass and bulk of
buildings and the streetscape on Coast Highway, and
17
15-87
4. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular
access ways, landscaping and other site features shall give proper
consideration to functional aspects of site development.
4.4. Contents
The Site Development Review application shall include all of the information and
materials specified by the Community Development Director and any additional
information review by the Planning Commission in order to conduct a thorough
review of the project in question. The following plans/exhibits may include, but
not limited to the following:
An aerial map showing the subject property, adjacent properties and
identifying their uses.
2. Comprehensive elevations and floor plans for new structures with
coordinated and complimentary architecture, design, materials and colors.
3. A parking and circulation plan showing golf cart and pedestrian paths in
addition to streets and fire lanes.
4. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated preliminary landscape plan.
5. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated lighting plan showing type,
location and color of all exterior lighting fixtures.
6. Comprehensive text and graphics describing the design philosophy for the
architecture, landscape architecture, material and textures, color palette,
lighting, and signage.
7. Text describing drainage and water quality mitigation measures.
B. A statement that the proposed new structure is consistent with the goals,
policies, and actions of the General Plan and Planned Community
Development Plan.
4.5 Public Hearing —Required Notice
A public hearing shall be held on all site development review applications. Notice
of such hearing shall be mailed not less than ten (10) days before the hearing
date, postage prepaid, using addresses from the last equalized assessment roll
or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses, to
owners of property within a radius of three hundred (300) feet of the exterior
boundaries of the subject property. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to
obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required
by this Section. In addition to the mailed notice, such hearing shall be posted in
IiB
15-88
not less than two (2) conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten
(10) days prior to the hearing.
4.6 Expiration and Revocation Site Development Review Approvals
1. Expiration. Any site development review approved in accordance with the
terms of this planned community development plan shall expire within
twenty-four (24) months from the effective date of final approval as
specified in the Time Limits and Extensions Section of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code, unless at the time of approval the Planning Commission
has specified a different period of time or an extension is otherwise
granted.
2. Violation of Terms. Any site development review approved in accordance
with the terms of this planned community development plan may be
revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such site development review
are violated or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith.
3. Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on
any proposed revocation after giving written notice to the permittee at
least ten (10) days prior to the hearing, and shall submit its
recommendations to the City Council. The City Council shall act thereon
within sixty (60) days after receipt of the recommendation of the Planning
Commission.
4.7. Fees
The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution of the Newport Beach
City Council to the City with each application for Site Development Review under
this planned community development plan.
4.8 Minor Changes by the Director
The following minor changes to an approved site plan may be approved
by the Director in compliance with Section 20.54.070 (Changes to an
approved project) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code:
a) Minor relocation of any proposed structure.
b) Reduction in the square footage of any structure and a
commensurate reduction in required parking, if applicable.
c) Reconfiguration of the golf clubhouse parking lot, including drive
aisles and/or parking spaces, subject to review and approval of the
City Traffic Engineer.
d) Reconfiguration of parking lot landscaping.
e) Modification of the approved architectural style.
f) Any other minor change to the site plan provided it does not
19
15-89
increase any structure area, height, number of units, number of
hotel rooms, and/or change of use.
2. Any proposed changes that are not deemed minor shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Commission.
20
15-90
H [A —
Ivy 0/4.
NIP
130
000N
47
Exhibit A
21
15-91
Exhibit B
4� 10
' •
• S4" CILEME!
NCO
� m
• if ��
l
Q
Q
00
�¢o .tea �� ■
P�`0O �� GO • ~ " Golf Course
�31 + GoN%i.'
& Tennis Clubhouse, ■
�Cq •Hotel, & Residential p
i T HWY AOi . • .L
80� 00 tir�� :..N,EDER �--=.,--.... Z
O •? O
pq
r 1 m
rm
R 4Z, a 70
z `�<<�
r� 0 899ft
22
15-92
Attachment E
Ordinance No. 2022-20
15-93
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-20
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT (DA2008-001) FOR THE TENNIS CLUB AT
NEWPORT BEACH LOCATED AT 1602 EAST COAST
HIGHWAY (PA2021-260)
WHEREAS, Section 200 of the City of Newport Beach ("City") Charter vests the
City Council with the authority to make and enforce all laws, rules, and regulations with
respect to municipal affairs subject only to the restrictions and limitations contained in
the Charter and the State Constitution, and the power to exercise, or act pursuant to
any and all rights, powers and privileges, or procedures granted or prescribed by any
law of the State of California;
WHEREAS, in 2012, the City Council approved an application by Golf Realty
Fund, Managing Owner ("Applicant") for the reconstruction of the 3,725-square-foot tennis
clubhouse, reduction of tennis courts from 24 to seven courts, construction of a 27-room
boutique hotel with 9,700 square feet of ancillary uses, five single-family residential units,
and a development agreement for the property ("2012 Entitlements") located at 1602 East
Coast Highway, and legally described as Parcels A, B, C, and D of Parcel Map No. 2016-
151 (commonly referred as the "Tennis Club Site" or "Property"), -
WHEREAS, Development Agreement No. DA2008-001 ("Agreement") adopted
pursuant to Ordinance No. 2012-3 was executed and recorded, as document number
20140000363691
WHEREAS, on November 20, 2018, the Zoning Administrator approved Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2017-039, authorizing the redevelopment of the Property
consistent with the 2012 Entitlements (2012 Entitlements and Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2017-039 are collectively referred to as the "Approved Project");
WHEREAS, on July 12, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2022-
16, approving an amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2008-001 to extend
the term of the agreement for one additional year ("First Amendment");
15-94
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting an amendment to the Approved Project to
allow an increase in the number of future tennis courts from seven to eight, an increase in
the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41, an increase to the gross floor area of
ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, three attached condominium units and two
single family residences in -lieu of five single-family residences, and an amendment to the
2012 Development Agreement to account for the aforementioned changes to the
Approved Project along with extending the term for an additional 10 years ("Project");
WHEREAS, the following approvals are requested or required in order to
implement the Project:
• General Plan Amendment ("GPA") — An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of
Table LU2 of the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element to
document the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms authorized by
City Council Resolution No. 2012-10, and the addition of 14 hotel rooms for a
total of 41 rooms and one tennis courts for a total of eight tennis courts;
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment ("LCPA") — An
amendment to Section 21.26.055(S)(2) (Planned Community Coastal Zoning
District Development Standards, Newport Beach Country Club (PC-47, Tennis
Club) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") to modify the permitted
uses and development standards allowed on the Property;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment ("PCDP Amendment") —
An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan No. 47 (Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use regulations and
development standards on the Property;
• Major Site Development Permit Amendment ("SDA") — An amendment to the
existing site development review in accordance with PC-47 and Section
20.52.080 (Permit Review Procedures, Site Development Reviews) of the
NBMC for the construction of the Project;
• Coastal Development Permit Amendment ("CDPA") — A coastal development
permit for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the
Property, and implementation of the Project;
• Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment ("VTMA") — An amendment to Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15347 pursuant to Title 19 (Subdivisions) of the NBMC
15-95
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 3 of 7
for a lot reduction created for the Approved Project and inclusion of the
condominium ownership;
• Limited Term Permit Amendment ("XP") — A limited term permit to allow
temporary use of structures during construction on the Property, pursuant to
Section 20.52.040 of the NBMC;
• Development Agreement Amendment ("DA") — A second amendment to the
Development Agreement (DA2008-001), between the Applicant and the City,
pursuant to Sections 15.45.020(A)(2)(c) (Buildings and Construction,
Development Agreements Required, Development Agreement Required) and
15.45.070 (Buildings and Constructions, Development Agreements,
Amend ment/CanceIlation) of the NBMC, which would provide vested rights to
develop the Project for an additional 10 years and provide negotiated public
benefits to the City; and
• Addendum to previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND-2010-
008 (SCH2010091052) ("Addendum") — Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably
foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H3/PR) by the City of Newport Beach General Plan and is located
within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Zoning District;
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and
Recreation (MU-H/PR) by the Coastal Land Use Plan and is located within the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC-47) Coastal Zone District;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8,
2022, in the City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California, at which time the Planning Commission considered the Project. A notice of
time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with California
Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), and Chapters 15.45
(Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning
Community District Procedures), 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 hearing;
15-96
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 4 of 7
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No.
PC2022-022 (5 ayes, 1 absent, 1 recusal) recommending approval of the Project to the
City Council;
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on September 27, 2022, in
the City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance
with the Ralph M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12
(Tentative Map Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public
Hearings) and 21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral,
was presented to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing;
WHEREAS, at the hearing, the City Council remanded the Project to the
Planning Commission on a future date by a majority vote (6 ayes, 1 nays);
WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council
adopted a motion for reconsideration of the Project by a majority vote (4 ayes, 3 nays);
and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on October 25, 2022, in the
City Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A
notice of time, place and purpose of the hearing was given in accordance with the Ralph
M. Brown Act, and Chapters 15.45 (Development Agreements), 19.12 (Tentative Map
Review), 20.56 (Planning Community District Procedures), 20.62 (Public Hearings) and
21.62 (Public Hearings) of the NBMC. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented
to, and considered by, the City Council at this hearing.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ordains as
follows:
Section 1: The City Council has considered the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and determined that modifications to the Project made by the City
Council, if any, are not major changes that require referral back to commission for
consideration and recommendation.
15-97
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 5 of 7
Section 2: The City Council finds the Second Amendment is consistent with
provisions of California Government Code Sections 65864 to 65869.5 and Chapter
15.45 (Development Agreements) of the NBMC that authorize binding agreements that:
(i) encourage investment in, and commitment to, comprehensive planning and public
facilities financing; (ii) strengthen the public planning process and encourage private
implementation of the local general plan; (iii) provide certainty in the approval of projects
in order to avoid waste of time and resources; and (iv) reduce the economic costs of
development by providing assurance to the property owners that they may proceed with
projects consistent with existing policies, rules, and regulations. The City Council finds
the Second Amendment is consistent with Land Use Element of the General Plan which
designates the Tennis Club site as Mixed Use Horizontal 3/Park and Recreation (MU-
H3/PR). The MU-H3/PR designation on the Tennis Club site provides for the horizontal
intermixing of regional commercial office, hotel, single-family and multi -family residential
and ancillary commercial uses. The PR designation allows active public or private
recreational uses including parks (both active and passive), golf courses, marina
support facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation, and
similar facilities. The Project necessitates an amendment to the General Plan due to the
increased number of hotel rooms and tennis courts. However, there are no proposed
changes to the land uses permitted per the General Plan land use designation and the
Project is consistent with all applicable General Plan Land Use policies.
Additionally, the City Council finds the Second Amendment is entered into
pursuant to, and constitutes a present exercise of, the City's police power and is in the
best interest of the health, safety, and general welfare of the City, residents, and the
public.
The City Council finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA determinations
and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In addition, project
opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges. As project
applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate that such
applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial challenge,
and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which may be
awarded to a successful challenger.
Section 3: The Second Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2008-
001 which is attached hereto as Exhibit 'A," and incorporated herein by reference
between the City of Newport Beach and GRF to accommodate the development of
Project and to extend the term of the agreement to September 23, 2032, is hereby
approved.
15-98
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 6 of 7
Section 4: An Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008
("MND") was prepared for the Project in compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act ("CEQA") set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 2100 et
seq.; CEQA's implementing regulations set forth in CCR Title 14, Division 6 Chapter 3
("CEQA Guidelines") and City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the
California Environmental Quality Act) to ensure that the Project will not result in new or
increased environmental impacts. On the basis of the MND and entire environmental
review record, the additional tennis court, hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses, and
conversion of 3 single-family residences to condominium units will not result in any new
significant impacts that were not previously analyzed in the MND. The Addendum
confirms and provides substantial evidence that the potential impacts associated with
this Project would either be the same or less than those described in the MND, or as
mitigated by applicable mitigation measures in the MND. In addition, there are no
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 either the MND, nor has any new information regarding the potential for
new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in
accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council adopted
Resolution No. 2022- , thereby adopting an addendum to the previously adopted
MND. Resolution 2022- , including all findings contained therein, is hereby
incorporated by reference.
Section 5: The recitals provided in this ordinance are true and correct and are
incorporated into the substantive portion of this ordinance.
Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The
City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section,
subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or
unconstitutional.
15-99
Ordinance No. 2022-
Page 7 of 7
Section 7: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage
of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be
published pursuant to City Charter Section 414.
This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City
of Newport Beach held on the 25th day of October, 2022, and adopted on the 15th day
of November, 2022, by the following vote, to -wit:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
KEVIN MULDOON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
LEILANI I. BROWN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
AARO HARP, ITY ATTORNEY
Attach ent(s): Exhibit "A" — Second Amendment to Development Agreement
No. DA2008-001
15-100
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Clerk
(Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only)
This First Amendment is recorded at the request and
for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is
exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant
to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383.
SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
and
GOLF REALTY FUND
CONCERNING PROPERTIES LOCATED AT TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
WITHIN THE
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
15-101
SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5)
This SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Second
Amendment") is entered into and effective on the date it is recorded with the Orange County
Recorder ("Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ("City"), and
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California limited partnership ("Property Owner"). City and
Property Owner are sometimes collectively referred to in this Second Amendment as the
"Parties" and individually as a "Party."
RFCTTAT q
A. Property Owner is the managing owner of and owns a fee interest in title to that
certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California
which is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" and depicted
on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit "B" ("Property"). The Property consists of
approximately seven (7) acres within the area shown on the City's Zoning Map as the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community District. The Property comprises the Tennis Club at
Newport Beach site shown on Exhibit "B" which consists of The Villas Sub -Area, The Tennis
Club Sub -Area, and The Bungalows Sub -Area.
B. City and Property Owner entered into that certain Development Agreement
between the City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund dated March 27, 2012, and recorded in
the Official Records of Orange County on January 29, 2014, as document number 201400003 63 69
("Agreement") attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by reference for a term of
ten (10) years.
C. On November 20, 2018, the City approved Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039 to allow the demolition of the eighteen (18) existing tennis courts and construction
of the Tennis Club, Villas and Bungalows at the Tennis Property, however, the Agreement was
not amended or modified.
D. City and Property Owner entered into the First Amendment to Development
Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund pursuant to Ordinance No.
2022-16 and recorded in the Official Records of Orange County on XX, XXXX, as document
("First Amendment"), attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by reference.
E. The Parties now wish to enter into this Second Amendment to increase the number
of tennis courts from seven (7) to eight (8), increase the number of hotel rooms from twenty-seven
(27) to forty-one (41), increase the gross floor area of ancillary hotel uses by four thousand six
hundred eight -six (4,686) square feet, and construct three (3) attached condominium units and two
(2) single-family residences in lieu of five (5) single-family residences.
F. On September 8, 2022, the Planning Commission held the public hearing on the
Second Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff,
Property Owner, and members of the public. Consistent with applicable provisions of the
Development Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution
No. PC2022-022, recommending the City Council approve the Second Amendment.
1
15-102
G. On September 27, 2022, the City Council held a noticed public hearing on the
Second Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff,
Property Owner, and members of the public. At the hearing, the City Council remanded the
Project to the Planning Commission on a future date by a majority vote (6 ayes, 1 nays). At the
City Council meeting on October 11, 2022, the City Council adopted a motion for reconsideration
of the Project by a majority vote (4 ayes, 3 nays). On October 25, 2022, consistent with applicable
provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the City Council held the second
reading and adopted Ordinance No. 2022- approving the Second Amendment.
H. This Second Amendment is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General
Plan ("General Plan"), including without limitation the General Plan's designation of the Property
as "MU-H3/PR" (Mixed Use Horizontal /(Parks and Recreation) (Anomaly 46); Coastal Land Use
Plan designation as "MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal / Parks & Recreation"; the Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community District that was adopted in 1997 by Ordinance No. 97-10, and
amended in 2022 by Ordinance No. 2022- in order to establish appropriate zoning to regulate
land use and development of the Property consistent with the General Plan; and Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2005-002 approved for the Property
on March 27, 2012 by Ordinance No. 2012-2 and amended on October 11, 2022 by Ordinance No.
2022-
I. In recognition of the significant public benefits that this Second Amendment
provides, the City Council finds that this Second Amendment: (i) is consistent with the City of
Newport Beach General Plan as of the date of its adoption; (ii) is in the best interests of the health,
safety, and general welfare of City, its residents, and the public; (iii) is entered into pursuant to,
and constitutes a present exercise of, City's police power; (iv) is consistent and has been approved
consistent with the Addendum No. ND2022-001 to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) and Errata to Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. ND2010-008 (together referred as "MND") for the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community District (PA2021-260 amending PA2005-002) approved by the City Council, both of
which analyze the environmental effects of the proposed development of the Project on the
Property; and (v) is consistent and has been approved consistent with provisions of California
Government Code section 65867 et seq. and Chapter 15.45 City of Newport Beach Municipal
Code ("NBMC").
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Property Owner agree as follows:
1. Definitions. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to add or revise the
following definitions. Unless added or revised, all other definitions set forth in Section 1 of the
Agreement shall remain unchanged:
"Adopting Ordinance" shall mean City Council Ordinance No. 2022- approving and
adopting this Second Amendment.
"Agreement" shall mean this Development Agreement, as the same may be amended from
time to time including, the First Amendment and Second Amendment.
2
15-103
"Agreement Date" shall mean November 15, 2022 which date is the date the City Council
adopted the Adopting Ordinance.
"Development Plan" shall mean the amendment to Newport Beach Planned Community
Development Plan No. PC2005-002 adopted pursuant to Ordinance No. 2022- ; amendment to
Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-003 adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 2022-;
amendment to Site Development Review No. SD2011-002 adopted pursuant to Resolution No.
2022-; amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004 adopted pursuant to Resolution
No. 2022- ; General Plan Amendment adopted pursuant to Resolution No. 2022- ;
amendment to Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-039 adopted pursuant to Resolution No.
2022; and Local Coastal Program Amendment No. PA2021-260.
"Development Regulations" shall mean the following regulations as they are in effect as
of the Agreement Date and to the extent they govern or regulate the development of the Property,
but excluding any amendment or modification to the Development Regulations adopted, approved,
or imposed after the Agreement Date that impairs or restricts Property Owner's rights set forth in
this agreement, unless such amendment or modification is expressly authorized by this Agreement
or is agreed to by Property Owner in writing: the General Plan, the Coastal Land Use Plan, the
Development Plan, the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan; and, to the extent not
expressly superseded by the Development Plan or this Agreement, all other land use and
subdivision regulations governing the permitted uses, density and intensity of use, design,
improvement, and construction standards and specifications, procedures for obtaining required
City permits and approvals for development, and similar matters that may apply to development
of the Project on the Property during the Term of this Agreement that are set forth in Title 15 of
the Municipal Code (buildings and construction), Title 19 of the Municipal Code (subdivisions).
Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning and zoning) and Title 21 of the Municipal Code (local
coastal program implementation plan), but specifically excluding all other sections of the
Municipal Code, including without limitation Title 5 of the Municipal Code (business licenses and
regulations). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the term "Development Regulations," as used herein,
does not include any City ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy governing
any of the following: (i) the conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; (ii) taxes and
assessments; (iii) the control and abatement of nuisances; (iv) the granting of encroachment
permits and the conveyance of rights and interests which provide for the use of or entry upon
public property; or (v) the exercise of the power of eminent domain.
"Effective Date" shall mean the latest of the following dates, as applicable: (i) the date that
is thirty (30) days after the Agreement Date; (ii) if a referendum concerning the Adopting
Ordinance, the Development Plan, or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before
the Agreement Date is timely qualified for the ballot and a referendum election is held concerning
the Adopting Ordinance or any of such Development Regulations, the date on which the
referendum is certified resulting in upholding and approving the Adopting Ordinance and the
Development Regulations; or (iii) if a lawsuit is timely filed challenging the validity of the
Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development Regulations approved on or
before the Agreement Date, the date on which said challenge is finally resolved in favor of the
validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, the Development Plan and/or the
applicable Development Regulations, which such finality is achieved by a final non -appealable
judgment, voluntary or involuntary dismissal (and the passage of any time required to appeal an
involuntary dismissal), or binding written settlement agreement. Promptly after the Effective Date
3
15-104
occurs, the Parties agree to cooperate in causing an appropriate instrument to be executed and
recorded against the Property memorializing the Effective Date.
"Project" shall mean all on -site and off -site improvements that Property Owner is
authorized and/or may be required to construct with respect to each parcel of the Property, as
provided in this Second Amendment and the Development Regulations, as amended by this
Second Amendment, and/or as the same may be modified or amended from time to time consistent
with this Second Amendment and applicable law.
2. Term of Agreement. Section 2.4 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
The term of this Agreement ("Term") shall commence on the Effective Date of Second
Amendment and shall terminate on the "Termination Date."
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, if any
Party reasonably determines that the Effective Date will not occur because (i) the Adopting
Ordinance or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date for
the Project has/have been disapproved by City's voters at a referendum election or (ii) a final non -
appealable judgment is entered in a judicial action challenging the validity or legality of the
Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development Regulations for the Project
approved on or before the Agreement Date such that this Agreement and/or any of such
Development Regulations is/are invalid and unenforceable in whole or in such a substantial part
that the judgment substantially impairs such Party's rights or substantially increases its obligations
or risks hereunder or thereunder, then such Party, in its sole and absolute discretion, shall have the
right to terminate this Agreement upon delivery of a written notice of termination to the other
Party, in which event neither Party shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder except
that Property Owner's indemnity obligations set forth in Article 10 shall remain in full force and
effect and shall be enforceable, and the Development Regulations applicable to the Project and the
Property only (but not those general Development Regulations applicable to other properties in
the City) shall be repealed by the City after delivery of said notice of termination except for the
Development Regulations that have been disapproved by City's voters at a referendum election
and, therefore, never took effect.
The Termination Date shall be the earliest of the following dates: (i) September 23, 2032;
(ii) such earlier date that this Agreement may be terminated in accordance with Articles 5, 7, and/or
Section 8.3 of this Agreement and/or Sections 65865.1 and/or 65868 of the Development
Agreement Statute; or (iii) completion of the Project in accordance with the terms of this
Agreement, including Property Owner's complete satisfaction, performance, and payment, as
applicable, of all Development Exactions, the issuance of all required final occupancy permits,
and acceptance by City or applicable public agency(ies) or private entity(ies) of all required offers
of dedication.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the
provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section 13.10 (as well as any other Property Owner
obligations set forth in this Agreement that are expressly written to survive the Termination Date)
shall survive the Termination Date of this Agreement.
0
15-105
3. Public Benefit Fee. Section 3.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
As consideration for City's approval and performance of its obligations set forth in this
Agreement, Property Owner shall pay to City a fee that shall be in addition to any other fee or
charge to which the Property and the Project would otherwise be subject to (herein, the "Public
Benefit Fee") in the total sum of five hundred two thousand two hundred fifty dollars
($502,250.00) broken down as follows: (i) ninety-three thousand dollars and 00/100 ($93,000.00
per residential dwelling unit) for a sum of four hundred sixty-five thousand dollars and 00/100
($465,000.00) for the residential units; and (ii) ten dollars and 00/100 ($10.00) per square foot of
the three thousand seven hundred twenty-five (3,725) square foot Tennis Clubhouse for a sum of
thirty-seven thousand two hundred fifty dollars and 00/100 ($37,250.00), with the unpaid balance
of said Public Benefit Fee increased on the first January 1 following the Effective Date of this
Agreement by the percentage increase in the CPI Index between the Effective Date and said
January 1st date (the first "Adjustment Date") and thereafter with the unpaid balance of said Public
Benefit Fee increased on each subsequent January 1 during the Term of this Agreement (each, an
"Adjustment Date") by the percentage increase in the CPI Index in the year prior to the applicable
Adjustment Date. The amount of the percentage increase in the CPI Index on the applicable
Adjustment Dates shall in each instance be calculated based on the then most recently available
CPI Index figures such that, for example, if the Effective Date of this Agreement falls on July 1
and the most recently available CPI Index figure on the first Adjustment Date (January 1 of the
following year) is the CPI Index for November of the preceding year, the percentage increase in
the CPI Index for that partial year (a 6-month period) shall be calculated by comparing the CPI
Index for November of the preceding year with the CPI Index for May of the preceding year (a 6-
month period). In no event, however, shall application of the CPI Index reduce the amount of the
Public Benefit Fee (or unpaid portion thereof) below the amount in effect prior to any applicable
Adjustment Date. Property Owner shall pay the Public Benefit Fee at the following time(s): (i) As
to the residential dwelling units, prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any residential
unit; and (ii) as to the tennis clubhouse, prior to the issuance of the first building permit.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, during the Term
of this Agreement, City shall not increase the Public Benefit Fee except pursuant to the CPI Index
as stated in this Section 3.1. The Public Fee Benefit Fee shall be calculated based on the total
square feet of construction for the tennis clubhouse. Property Owner shall not be entitled to any
credit or offset to the Public Benefit Fee for any existing buildings or structures. Property Owner
acknowledges by its approval and execution of this Agreement that it is voluntarily agreeing to
pay the Public Benefit Fee, that its obligation to pay the Public Benefit Fee is an essential term of
this Agreement and is not severable from City's obligations and Property Owner's vesting rights
to be acquired hereunder, and that Property Owner expressly waives any constitutional, statutory,
or common law right it might have in the absence of this Agreement to protest or challenge the
payment of such fee on any ground whatsoever, including without limitation pursuant to the Fifth
and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, California Constitution Article I
Section 19, the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. ), or
otherwise. In addition to any other remedy set forth in this Agreement for Property Owner's
default, if Property Owner shall fail to timely pay any portion of the Public Benefit Fee when due
City shall have the right to withhold issuance of any further building permits, occupancy permits,
or other development or building permits for the Development Plan.
5
15-106
4. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. Section 5 of the Agreement is hereby
amended in its entirety to read as follows
This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual written
and executed consent of the Parties in compliance with California Government Code Section
65868 and Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.45.070 or by unilateral termination by City
in the event of an uncured default of Property Owner.
5. Procedure. Section 7.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read
as follows:
The Zoning Administrator shall conduct a duly noticed hearing and shall determine, on the
basis of substantial evidence, whether or not Property Owner has, for the period under review,
complied with the terms of this Agreement. If the Zoning Administrator finds that Property Owner
has so complied, the annual review shall be concluded. If the Zoning Administrator finds, on the
basis of substantial evidence, that Property Owner has not so complied, written notice shall be sent
to Property Owner by first class mail of the Zoning Administrator's finding of non-compliance,
and Property Owner shall be given at least ten (10) calendar days to cure any noncompliance that
relates to the payment of money and thirty (30) calendar days to cure any other type of
noncompliance. If a cure not relating to the payment of money cannot be completed within thirty
(30) calendar days for reasons which are beyond the control of Property Owner, Property Owner
must commence the cure within such thirty (30) calendar days and diligently pursue such cure to
completion. If Property Owner fails to cure such noncompliance within the time(s) set forth
above, such failure shall be considered to be a Default and City shall be entitled to exercise the
remedies set forth in Article 8 below.
6. General Provisions. Section 8.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
In the event of any material default, breach, or violation of the terms of this Agreement
("Default'), the Parry alleging a Default shall deliver a written notice (each, a "Notice of Default")
to the defaulting Party. The Notice of Default shall specify the nature of the alleged Default and
a reasonable manner and sufficient period of time (twenty (20) calendar days if the Default relates
to the failure to timely make a monetary payment due hereunder and not less than thirty (30)
calendar days in the event of non -monetary Defaults) in which the Default must be cured ("Cure
Period'). During the Cure Period, the Party charged shall not be considered in Default for the
purposes of termination of this Agreement or institution of legal proceedings. If the alleged
Default is cured within the Cure Period, then the Default thereafter shall be deemed not to exist.
If a non -monetary Default cannot be cured during the Cure Period with the exercise of
commercially reasonable diligence, the defaulting Party must promptly commence to cure as
quickly as possible, and in no event later than thirty (30) calendar days after it receives the Notice
of Default, and thereafter diligently pursue said cure to completion. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the City is not required to give Property Owner notice of default and may immediately
pursue remedies for a Property Owner Default that result in an immediate threat to public health,
safety or welfare.
7. Full Force and Effect. Except as modified by this Second Amendment, the entire
Agreement, First Amendment its exhibits, and the exhibits attached hereto, are incorporated
herein to this Second Amendment and shall remain in full force and effect.
no
15-107
8. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein
by reference.
9. Recordation. The City Clerk shall record this Second Amendment in the Office
of the County Recorder of the County of Orange within the period required by California
Government Code Section 65858.5 and Section 15.45.100 of the NBMC.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
7
15-108
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
"PROPERTY OWNER"
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California
limited partnership
By: O Hill Capital, a California limited
partnership
Its General Partner
By:
Robert O Hill, General Partner
"CITY"
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California
municipal corporation
IIn
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney
Kevin Muldoon, Mayor
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description of Property
Exhibit B — Depiction of Property
Exhibit C — Development Agreement Recorded January 29, 2014
Exhibit D — First Amendment to Development Agreement
15-109
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of } SS.
On , 20 before me, , Notary Public,
personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis
of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (seal)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of } SS.
On , 20 before me, , Notary Public,
personally appeared , proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
(seal)
I
15-110
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
PARCELS A, B, C AND D OF PARCEL MAP 2016-151, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED IN
BOOK 402 PAGES 24 THROUGH 32 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF
SAID COUNTY.
A-1 15-111
EXHIBIT B
DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
SHMT f OF 9 SHEM
PARCEL MAP NO. 2016-151
'�
M THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
Un 14
as OF Sft't SWUM M
COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
�m OF EXTAME PARM MP M 2AS-ill
PAUW w a=4 iv RL.S 7075 SEf'1 M3M 2015
SCR fNAMX AAV COV*YAkT RIM= crtr
BGIUASDARY EST &JSWrVT AAD SH7TyX
i
1
rauw owaws+oV
TRACT Mltj
14a++14v �[ btM+ �d�s
F.M. Siff.
1 �rIB. I5: r 41.r4
PAF
j.iaa.oair
�iPl�ip•�fn�c
PAid%t C
1N
A A ALM if \\\j
l IPAAL£L 13
wA=49" w
5
1
w awIO I'� AW
�T 5
_ � r L'3 i45 l 7-$
11
I
I
I
I
I
PA
I
I
10
smxr 7
sir
15-112
EXHIBIT C
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND
GOLF REALTY FUND RECORDED JANUARY 29, 2014
Available separately due to bulk at:
https://www.nemTortbeachca.gov/govemment/departments/communi .-development/planning-
division/development-agreements
C-1
15-113
EXHIBIT D
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH AND GOLF REALTY FUND
15-114
EXHIBIT D
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH AND GOLF REALTY FUND
15-115
10/5/22. 1226 PNI Batch 14786849 Confirmation
Recorded in Official Records, Orange County
Hugh Nguyen, Clerk -Recorder
Il Il I illll IIIII III III I III) illlli illy �� (� NO FEE
3 R 0 0 3 9 9 3 6 8 6 S k
RECORDING REQUESTED BY 2022000326056 12:22 pm 10105/22
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: 9 RW9A Al 42
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 123.00 0.00 0.000.000.00 0.00
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Clerk
(Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only)
This First Amendment is recorded at the request and
for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is
exempt from the payment of a recording fee
pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEIVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
and
I
GOLF REALTY FUND
CONCERNING PROPERTIES LOCATED AT TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
WITHIN THE
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
I
I
https bgs.sort ire -recording. con)/Batch/Confirm ationi14786849 t
15-116
1015/22, 12:26 PM
Batch 14786849 Confirmation
FIRST ATMENDME1NT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5)
This FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "First
Amendment") is entered into and effective on the date it is recorded with the Orange County
Recorder ("]Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ("City"), and
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California limited partnership "Property Owner"). City and
Property Owner are sometimes collectively referred to in this First Amendment as the
"Parties" and individually as a "Party."
RECITALS
A. Property Owner is the managing owner of and owns a fee interest in title to that
certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California
which is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" and
depicted on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit `B" ("Property"). The Property consists of
approximately seven (7) acres within the area shown on the City's Zoning Map as the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community District. The Property comprises the Tennis Club at
Newport Beach site shown on Exhibit `B" which consists of The Villas Sub -Area, The Tennis
Club Sub -Area, and The Bungalows Sub -Area.
B. City and Property Owner entered into that certain Development Agreement
between the City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund dated March 27, 2012, and recorded
in the Official Records of Orange County on January 29, 2014, as document number
2014000036369 ("Agreement") attached hereto as Exhibit "C" with a ten (10) year term.
C. On November 20, 2018, the City approved Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039 to allow the demolition of the 18 existing tennis courts and construction of the
Tennis Club, Villas and Bungalows at the Tennis Property, however, the Agreement was not
amended or modified.
D. The Parties now wish to enter into that First Amendment extending the term for
an additional year and updating certain provisions.
E. On May 12, 2022, the Planning Commission opened the noticed public hearing on
this First Amendment and continued the item to May 26, 2022.
F. On May 26, 2022, the Planning Commission held the public hearing on this First
Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff. Property
Owner, and members of the public. Consistent with applicable provisions of the Development
Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2022-
008, recommending the City Council approve this First Amendment.
hltps:Ngs.secure-recording.com/Batch/Confirmation/'I4786849 1 b?117
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Citv Clerk
(Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only)
This First Amendment is recorded at the request and
for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is
exempt from the payment of a recording fee
pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
and
GOLF REALTY FUND
CONCERNING PROPERTIES LOCATED AT TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
WITHIN THE
NEWI'ORT BEACI-$ COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
15-118
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5)
This FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "First
Amendment") is entered into and effective on the date it is recorded with the Orange County
Recorder ("Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ("City"), and
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California limited partnership "Property Owner"). City and
Property Owner are sometimes collectively referred to in this First Amendment as the
"Parties" and individually as a "Party."
RECITALS
A. Property Owner is the managing owner of and owns a fee interest in title to that
certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California
which is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" and
depicted on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit "B" ("Property"). The Property consists of
approximately seven (7) acres within the area shown on the City's Zoning Map as the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community District. The Property comprises the Tennis Club at
Newport Beach site shown on Exhibit `B" which consists of The Villas Sub -Area, The Tennis
Club Sub -Area, and The Bungalows Sub -Area.
B. City and Property Owner entered into that certain Development Agreement
between the City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund dated March 27, 2012, and recorded
in the Official Records of Orange County on January 29, 2014, as document number
2014000036369 ("Agreement") attached hereto as Exhibit "C" with a ten (10) year term.
C. On November 20, 2018, the City approved Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039 to allow the demolition of the 18 existing tennis courts and construction of the
Tennis Club, Villas and Bungalows at the Tennis Property, however, the Agreement was not
amended or modified.
D. The Parties now wish to enter into that First Amendment extending the term for
an additional year and updating certain provisions.
E. On May 12, 2022, the Planning Commission opened the noticed public hearing on
this First Amendment and continued the item to May 26, 2022.
F. On May 26, 2022, the Planning Commission held the public hearing on this First
Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Property
Owner, and members of the public. Consistent with applicable provisions of the Development
Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2022-
008, recommending the City Council approve this First Amendment.
15-119
G. On June 28, 2022, the City Council held a noticed public hearing on this First
Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff. Property
Owner, and members of the public. On July 12. 2022, consistent with applicable provisions of
the Development Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the City Council held the second reading
and adopted Ordinance No. approving this First Amendment.
H. This First Amendment is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General
Plan ("General Plan"), including without limitation the General Plan's designation of the
Property as "MU-H3/PR" (Mixed Use Horizontal /(Parks and Recreation) (Anomaly 46); Coastal
Land Use Plan designation as "MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal / Parks & Recreation"; the
Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District that was adopted in 1997 by
Ordinance No. 97-10 in order to establish appropriate zoning to regulate land use and
development of the Property consistent with the General Plan; and Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community Development Plan No PC2005-002 approved for the Property on March 27,
2012 by Ordinance No. 2012-2.
1. The City Council finds that this First Amendment: (i) is consistent with the City
of Newport Beach General Plan as of the date of this First Amendment; (ii) is in the best
interests of the health, safety, and general welfare of City, its residents, and the public; (iii) is
entered into pursuant to, and constitutes a present exercise of, City's police power; (iv) is
consistent and has been approved consistent with the Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) and an Errata to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-
008 (together referred as "MND") for the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
District (PA2005-002) approved by the City Council, both of which analyze the environmental
effects of the proposed development of the Project on the Property; and (v) is consistent and has
been approved consistent with provisions of California Government Code section 65867 et seq.
and Chapter 15.45 City of Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC").
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Property Owner agree as follows:
1. Term of Agreement. Section 2.4 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its
entirety to read as follows:
"The term of this Agreement (the "Tenn") shall commence on the
Effective Date and continue until 2023, unless
otherwise terminated or modified pursuant to its terms.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to
the contrary, the provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section
13.10 (as well as any other Property Owner obligations set forth in
this Agreement that are expressly written to survive the
Termination Date) shall survive the Termination Date of this
Agreement."
2. Attorneys' Fees. Section 8.10 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
15-120
"In any judicial proceeding, arbitration, or mediation (collectively,
an "Action") between the Parties that seeks to enforce the
provisions of this Agreement or arises out of this Agreement, the
prevailing Party shall not recover any of its costs and expenses,
regardless of whether they would be recoverable under California
Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5 or California Civil Code
section 1717 in the absence of this Agreement. These costs and
expenses include, but are not limited to, court costs, expert witness
fees, attorneys' fees, City staff costs (including overhead), and
costs of investigation and preparation before initiation of the
Action."
3. Notices. Section 13.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read
as follows:
"Any notice or demand that shall be required or permitted by law
or any provision of this Agreement shall be in writing. If the
notice or demand will be served upon a Party, it either shall be
personally delivered to the Party; deposited by a reliable courier
service that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery
with courier charges prepaid. The notice or demand shall be
addressed as follows:
TO CITY: City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Manager
With a copy to: City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Attorney
TO PROPERTY OWNER: Golf Realty Fund
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Robert O'Hill
Either Party may change the address stated in this Section 13.1 by
delivering notice to the other Party in the manner provided in this
Section 13.1, and thereafter, notices to such Party shall be
addressed and submitted to the new address. Notices delivered in
accordance with this Agreement shall be deemed to be delivered
upon the earlier of: (1) the date received or (iii) three business days
after deposit in the mail as provided above."
15-121
4. Full Force and Effect. Except as modified by this First Amendment, the entire
Agreement, its exhibits, and the exhibits attached hereto, are incorporated herein to this First
Amendment and shall remain in full force and effect.
5. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein
by reference.
6. Recordation. The City Clerk shall record this First Amendment in the Office of
the County Recorder of the County of Orange within the period required by California
Government Code Section 65858.5 and Section 15.45.100 of the NBMC.
(SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGEI
15-122
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
"PROPERTY OWNER"
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California
limited partnership
Its:
"CITY"
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
uldoon, Mayor
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description of Property
Exhibit B — Depiction of Property
Exhibit C — Development Agreement Recorded January 29, 2014
E
15-123
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of 4�>tr } ss.
On _ -S r—p ,,r,�� `] , 20 2 2before me, _ � _ , Notary Public,
personally appeared F.o b�r-� v j k"� 11 , wh roved to me on the basis
of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct. » Fr».. SUSAN BERG...
IMIM(!.t S s
• �� COMM # 2399874 z
WITNESS my hand and official seal. • s ORANGE Courttyr 2
California Notary Pub) •
Comm Exp Apr. 19, 2028:
...........................
Signs re �— (seal)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of } SS.
On , 20 before me, , Notary Public,
personally appeared , proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
C:7
(seal)
15-124
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL ;DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 94-102, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange,
State of California, as per Map filed in Book 316, Pages 3 to 6, inclusive, of Parcel Maps, in the
office of the County Recorder of Orange County.
A-
15-125
THE VILLAS
1 �
i I
7(�tSTi
0
EXHIBIT B
DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
MASTER PLAN
• THE TENNIS CLUB
I new stadium court
Tennis Clubhouse
• THE VILLAS
5 single family homes
• THE BUNGALOWS
27 guest rental units
THE GOLF CLUB
15-126
EXHIBIT C
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 29, 2014
C-1
15-127
F— '—,,"`I�r�rd*f).
d Official Records, Orange County
r �tiugtl. NClerk-Recorder
RECORDING REQUESTED BY �I�� I�IllNO FEE
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO - - ; � $t 0 6 4 T t ` u
1t114.100036369 8:05 am 091Z9/14
City of Newport Beach =!'V 22 Al 32
3300 Newport Boulevard ':-O MD.00 0.00 0.00 93.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Newport Beach, CA 92663-3884
Attn: City Clerk
(Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only)
This Agreement is recorded at the request and for
the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is
exempt from the payment of a recording fee
pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383.
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
and
GOLF REALTY FUND
CONCERNING PROPERTIES LOCATED IN NEWPORT CENTER
WITHIN THE
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
At "0773 03.07.12 0
V
15-128
,�,°JELOPiL ENT AGREEMENT
(Pursuant to California Government C'nde gPrtinne 6cQ6,1_p earn z�
VdVVJvJJ
This DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is dated for reference
purposes as of the 2A'day of ( a(-C h , 2012 (the "Agreement Date"), and is being entered
into by and between the City of Newport Beach ("City"), and Golf Realty Fund, a California
limited partnership "Property Owner"). City and Property Owner are sometimes collectively
referred to in this Agreement as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party."
RECITALS
A. Property Owner is the managing owner of and owns a fee interest in title to that
certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California
which is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" and
depicted on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit B (the, "Property"). The Property consists of
approximately 7 acres within the area shown on the City's Zoning Map as the Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community District. The Property comprises the area shown on Exhibit
B as The Villas Sub- Area, The Tennis Club Sub -Area, and The Bungalows Sub -Area.
B. In order to encourage investment in, and commitment to, comprehensive planning
and public facilities financing, strengthen the public planning process and encourage private
implementation of the local general plan, provide certainty in the approval of projects in order to
avoid waste of time and resources, and reduce the economic costs of development by providing
assurance to property owners that they may proceed with projects consistent with existing land
use policies, rules, and regulations, the California Legislature adopted California Government
Code sections 65864-65869.5 (the "Development ApXeement Statute") authorizing cities and
counties to enter into development agreements with persons or entities having a legal or
equitable interest in real property located within their jurisdiction.
C. On March 13, 2007, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2007-6, entitled
"Ordinance Amending Chapter 15.45 of City of Newport Beach .Municipal Code Regarding
Development Agreements" (the "Development Agreement Ordinance"). This Agreement is
consistent with the Development Agreement Ordinance.
D. As detailed in Section 3 of this Agreement, Property Owner has agreed to provide
the following significant public benefits as consideration for this Agreement: Visitor -Serving
Uses within the Coastal Zone, and other economic contributions including the payment of a
Public Benefit Fee.
E. This Agreement is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General Plan
("General Plan"), including without limitation the General Plan's designation of the Property as
"MU-H3/PR" (Mixed Use Horizontal /(Parks and Recreation) (Anomaly 46), the Coastal Land
Use Plan's designation as "MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal / Parks & Recreation", the
Newport Beach Country Chub Planned Community District that was adopted in 1997 by
Ordinance No. 97-10 in order to establish appropriate zoning to regulate land use and
development of the Property consistent with the General Plan, and the Newport Beach Country
Club Planned Community Development Plan No PC2005-002 approved for the Property on
March 27, 2012 by Ordinance No. Z p Z.- 2 .
A10-00773 �4 01.06.11 FINAL - 1 -
15-129
F. In recognition of the significant public benefits d1hat this Agreement provides, 'the
City Council has found that this Agreement: (i) is consistent with the City of Newport Beach
General Plan as of the date of this Agreement; NO is in the hest intPreStc of the health safety, an4
general welfare of City, its residents, and the public; (iii) is entered into pursuant to, and
constitutes a present exercise of, City's police power, (iv) is consistent and has been approved
consistent with the Final Environmental Impact Report for the City of Newport Beach General
Plan 2006 Update (State Clearinghouse No. 2006011119) and the Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 for the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District
(PA,` 005— i4o) approved by the City Council on or before the Agreement Date, both of
which analyze the environmental effects of the proposed development of the Project on the
Property, and (v) is consistent and has been approved consistent with provisions of California
Government Code section 65867 and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code chapter 15.45.
G. On October 20, 2011 and November 17, 2011 , City's Planning Commission held
public hearings on this Agreement, and on November 17, 2011, made findings and
determinations with respect to this Agreement, and recommended to the City Council that the
City Council approve this Agreement.
H. On January 24, 2012 and March 13, 2012 , the City Council also held public
hearings on this Agreement and considered the Planning Commission's recommendations and
the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Property Owner, and members of the
public. On March 27, 2012 , consistent with applicable provisions of the Development
Agreement Statute and Development Agreement Ordinance, the City Council adopted its
Ordinance No. 2012-3 (the "Adopting Ordinance"), finding this Agreement to be consistent with
the City of Newport Beach General Plan and approving this Agreement.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Property Owner agree as follows:
Definitions.
In addition to any terms defined elsewhere in this Agreement, the following terms when
used in this Agreement shall have the meanings set forth below. -
"Action" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.10 of this Agreement.
"Adopting Ordinance" shall mean City Council Ordinance No. 2012-3 approving and
adopting this Agreement.
"Agreement" shall mean this Development Agreement, as the same may be amended
from time to time.
"Aureernent Date" shall mean March 27, 2012, which date is the date the City Council
adopted the Adopting Ordinance.
"CEpA" shall mean the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public
Resources Code Sections 21000-21177) and the implementing regulations promulgated
A I O-Q0773 v4 01.06.I 1 FINAL
15-130
thereunder by the Secretary for Resources (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, section
15000 et seq.) ("CEQA Guidelines'), as the same may be amended from time to time.
"gly" shall mean the City of Newport Beach, a California charter city.
"City Council" shall mean the governing body of City.
"City's Affiliated Parties" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 10.1 of this
Agreement.
"Claim" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 10.1 of this Agreement.
"CPI Index" shall mean the Consumer Price Index published from time to time by the
United States Department of Labor for all urban consumers (all items) for the smallest
geographic area that includes the City or, if such index is discontinued, such other similar index
as may be publicly available that is selected by City in its reasonable discretion.
"Cure Period" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.1 of this Agreement.
"Default" shall have the meaning ascribed to that term in Section 8.1 of this Agreement.
"Develop" or "Devel0ment" shall mean to improve or the improvement of the Property
for the purpose of completing the structures, improvements, and facilities comprising the Project,
including but not limited to: grading; the construction of infrastructure and public facilities
related to the Project, whether located within or outside the Property; the construction of all of
the private improvements and facilities comprising the Project; the preservation or restoration, as
required of natural and man-made or altered open space areas; and the installation of
landscaping. The terms "Develop" and "Development," as used herein, do not include the
maintenance, repair, reconstruction, replacement, or redevelopment of any structure,
improvement, or facility after the initial construction and completion thereof.
"Development Agreement Ordinance" shall mean Chapter 15.45 of the City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code.
"Development Agreement Statute" shall mean California Government Code Sections
65864-65869.5, inclusive.
"Development Exactions" shall mean any requirement of City in connection with or
pursuant to any ordinance, resolution, rule, or official policy for the dedication of land, the
construction or installation of any public improvement or facility, or the payment of any fee or
charge in order to lessen, offset, mitigate, or compensate for the impacts of Development of the
Project on the environment or other public interests.
"Development Plan" shall mean the Newport Beach Planned CommunityDevelopment
Plan No. PC2005-002 for the Property adopted by Ordinance No. 2012-2, Vesting Tentative
Tract Map No. NT2005-003, Site Development Review No. SD2011-002 as approved by
Resolution No. 2012-10 for the Property, Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004, and
AlOM773 v401.06.11 FINAL
15-131
Conversion of Development Rights as approved by City Council on or before the Agreement
Date, as the same may be amended from time to time consistent with this Agreement.
"Development Regulations" shall mean the following regulations as they are in effect as
of the Agreement Date and to the extent they govern or regulate the development of the Property,
but excluding any amendment or modification to the Development Regulations adopted,
approved, or imposed after the Agreement Date that impairs or restricts Property Owner's rights
set forth in this Agreement, unless such amendment or modification is expressly authorized by
this Agreement or is agreed to by Property Owner in writing: the General Plan; the Development
Plan; and, to the extent not expressly superseded by the Development Plan or this Agreement, all
other land use and subdivision regulations governing the permitted uses, density and intensity of
use, design, improvement, and construction standards and specifications, procedures for
obtaining required City permits and approvals for development, and similar matters that may
apply to development of the Project on the Property during the Tenn of this Agreement that are
set forth in Title 15 of the Municipal Code (buildings and construction), Title 19 of the
Municipal Code (subdivisions), and Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning and zoning), but
specifically excluding all other sections of the Municipal Code, including without limitation Title
5 of the Municipal Code (business licenses and regulations). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the
term "Development Regulations," as used herein, does not include any City ordinance,
resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy governing any of the following: (i) the
conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; (ii) taxes and assessments; (iii) the control
and abatement of nuisances; (iv) the granting of encroachment permits and the conveyance of
rights and interests which provide for the use of or the entry upon public property; or (v) the
exercise of the power of eminent domain.
"Effective Date" shall mean the latest of the following dates, as applicable: (i) the date
that is thirty (30) days after the Agreement Date; (ii) if a referendum concerning the Adopting
Ordinance or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date is
timely qualified for the ballot and a referendum election is held concerning the Adopting
Ordinance or any of such Development Regulations, the date on which the referendum is
certified resulting in upholding and approving the Adopting Ordinance and such Development
Regulations and becomes effective, if applicable; (iii) if a lawsuit is timely filed challenging the
validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development
Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date, the date on which said challenge is
finally resolved in favor of the validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement,
and/or the applicable Development Regulations, whether such finality is achieved by a final non -
appealable judgment, voluntary or involuntary dismissal (and the passage of any time required to
appeal an involuntary dismissal), or binding written settlement agreement; or (iv) the date of
approval of a coastal development permit for the Project; (v) the date of or if a lawsuit is timely
filed challenging the validity or legality of the approval of a coastal development permit for the
Project, the date on which said challenge is finally resolved in favor of the validity or legality of
the coastal development permit for the Project, whether such finality is achieved by a final non -
appealable judgment, voluntary or involuntary dismissal (and the passage of any time required to
appeal an involuntary dismissal), or binding written settlement agreement. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, the Effective Date shall be no later than one hundred eighty (180) days from the
Agreement Date. Promptly after the Effective Date occurs, the Parties agree to cooperate in
causing an appropriate instrument to be executed and recorded against the Property
memorializing the Effective Date.
A10-00M v401.06.11 FINAL 4
15-132
"Environmental Laws" means all federal, state, regional, county, municipal, and local
laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations which are in effect as of the Agreement Date,
and all federal, state, regional, county, municipal, and local laws, statuies, rules, ordinances,
rules, and regulations which may hereafter be enacted and which apply to the Property or any
part thereof, pertaining to the use, generation, storage, disposal, release, treatment, or removal of
any Hazardous Substances, including without limitation the following: the Comprehensive
Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, 42 U.S.C. Sections 9601,
et M., as amended ("CERCLA"); the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. Sections 6901, et seM.., as amended
("RCRA"); the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C.
Sections 11001 et sep_, as amended; the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C.
Section 1801, et seq., as amended; the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401 et sea., as
amended; the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Section 1251, et seq., as amended; the Toxic
Substances Control Act, 15 U.S.C. Sections 2601 et sN., as amended; the Federal Insecticide,
Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 7 U.S.C. Sections 136 et sQ., as amended; the Federal Safe
Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 300f et secs., as amended; the Federal Radon and Indoor
Air Quality Research Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 7401 et sea., as amended; the Occupational Safety
and Health Act, 29 U.S.C. Sections 651 et sect., as amended; and California Health and Safety
Code Section 25100, et sue.
"General Plan" shall mean City's 2006 General Plan adopted by the City Council on July
25, 2006, by Resolution No. 2006-76, as amended through the Agreement Date but excluding
any amendment after the Agreement Date that impairs or restricts Property Owner's rights set
forth in this Agreement, unless such amendment is expressly authorized by this Agreement, is
authorized by Sections 8 or 9, or is specifically agreed to by Property Owner. The Land Use
Plan of the Land Use Element of the General Plan was approved by City voters in a general
election on November 7, 2006.
"Hazardous Substances" means any toxic substance or waste, pollutant, hazardous
substance or waste, contaminant, special waste, industrial substance or waste, petroleum or
petroleum -derived substance or waste, or any toxic or hazardous constituent or additive to or
breakdown component from any such substance or waste, including without limitation any
substance, waste, or material regulated under or defined as "hazardous" or "toxic" under any
Environmental Law.
"Mortgage" shall mean a mortgage, deed of trust, sale and leaseback arrangement, or any
other form of conveyance in which the Property, or a part or interest in the Property, is pledged
as security and contracted for in good faith and for fair value.
"Mortgagee" shall mean the holder of a beneficial interest under a Mortgage or any
successor or assignee of the Mortgagee.
"Notice of Default" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 8.1 of this Agreement.
"ftart or "Parties" shall mean either City or Property Owner or both, as determined by
the context.
A10-00773 A 01.06.11 FINAL
15-133
"PIoicei" shalt mean all on -site and off -site improvements that Property Owner is
authorized and/or may be required to construct with respect to each parcel of the Property, as
nrnzrit�rui in 4slai� A mravrr,en+ rl o-l.., 71.,..,,1...-_.., n t - s
o ,�,.,, _ _ :c:. c�iieu �w u•..v<,iu tzt%rat z�cbutatiolls, as lne same may be modufieo or
amended from time to time consistent with this Agreement and applicable Iaw,
"Property" is described in Exhibit A and generally depicted on Exhibit B as The Tennis_
Club, The Villas, and The Bungalows Sub -Areas shown on Exhibit B .
"Property Owner" shall mean Golf Realty Fund, a California limited partnership and any
successor or assignee, including lessees, to all or any portion of the right, title, and interest of
Golf Realty fund in and to ownership of all or a portion of the Property.
"Public Benefit Fee" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 3.1 of this Agreement.
"Subsequent Development Approvals" shall mean all discretionary development and
building approvals that Property Owner is permitted to obtain to Develop the Project on and with
respect to the Property after the Agreement Date consistent with the Development Regulations.
"Term" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section 2.4 of this Agreement.
"Termination Date" and "Lot Termination Date" shall have the meaning ascribed in
Section 2.4 of this Agreement.
"Transfer" shall have the meaning ascribed in Section l l of this Agreement.
General Provisions.
2.1 Plan Consistency, Zoning Implementation.
This Agreement and the Development Regulations applicable to the Property are
consistent with the General Plan.
2.2 Binding Effect of Agreement.
The Property is hereby made subject to this Agreement. Development of the Property is
hereby authorized and shall be carried out in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
2.3 Property Owner Representations and Warranties Regarding Ownership of the
Property and Related Matters Pertaining to this Agreement
Property Owner and each person executing this Agreement on behalf of Property Owner
hereby represents and warrants to City as follows: (i) Property Owner or any co-owner
comprising Property Owner is a legal entity and that such entity is duly formed and existing and
is authorized to do business in the State of Califomia; (ii) if Property Owner or any co-owner 0
comprising Property Owner is a natural person that such natural person has the legal right and
capacity to execute this Agreement; (iii) that all actions required to be taken by all persons and
entities comprising Property Owner to enter into this Agreement have been taken and that
.U0-00773 vA 01.06.11 FTNAL h
15-134
Property Owner has the legal authority to enter into this Agreement; (iv) that to the best of
Property Owner's knowledge, Property Owner's entering into and performing its obligations set
forth in this Agreement aril! not result in a violation of any obligation, contractual or otherwise,
that Property Owner or any person or entity comprising Property Owner has to any third party;
(v) that neither Property Owner nor any co-owner comprising Property Owner is the subject of
any voluntary or involuntary petition in bankruptcy; and (vi) that to the best of Property Owner's
knowledge, Property Owner has the authority and ability to enter into or perform any of its
obligations set forth in this Agreement.
2.4 Term.
The term of this Agreement (the "Term") shall commence on the Effective Date and shall
terminate on the "Termination Date."
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, if either
Party reasonably determines that the Effective Date of this Agreement will not occur because (1)
the Adopting Ordinance or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the
Agreement Date for the Project has/have been disapproved by City's voters at a referendum
election or (ii) a final non -appealable judgment is entered in a judicial action challenging the
validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, a coastal development permit for
the Project and/or any of the Development Regulations for the Project approved on or before the
Agreement Date such that this Agreement and/or any of such Development Regulations is/are
invalid and unenforceable in whole or in such a substantial part that the judgment substantially
impairs such Party's rights or substantially increases its obligations or risks hereunder or
thereunder, then such Party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon delivery of a
written notice of termination to the other Party, in which event neither Party shall have any
further rights or obligations hereunder except that Property Owner's indemnity obligations set
forth in Article 10 shall remain in full force and effect and shall be enforceable, and the
Development Regulations applicable to the Project and the Property only (but not those general
Development Regulations applicable to other properties in the City) shall similarly be null and
void at such time.
The Termination Date shall be the earliest of the following dates: (i) the tenth (loth)
anniversary of the Effective Date, as said date may be extended in accordance with Section 5 of
this Agreement; (ii) such earlier date that this Agreement may be terminated in accordance with
Articles 5, 7, and/or Section 8.3 of this Agreement and/or Sections 65865.1 and/or 65868 of the
Development Agreement Statute; (iii) as to any separate legal lot within the Property (but not as
to the balance of the Property or the portion thereof that remains subject to this Agreement at
such time), upon the "Lot Terinination Date" (defined below); or (iv) completion of the Project
in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including Property Owner's complete
satisfaction, performance, and payment, as applicable, of all Development Exactions, the
issuance of all required final occupancy permits, and acceptance by City or applicable public
agency(ies) or private entity(ies) of all required offers of dedication.
As used herein, the term "Lot Termination Date" for any separate legal lot within the
Property means the date on which all of the following conditions have been satisfied with respect
to said Iot: (i) the lot has been finally subdivided and sold or leased (for a period longer than one
year), individually or in a "bulk" of four or fewer lots, to a member of the public or other
AIO-00773 v401,06.11 FINAL 7
15-135
ultimata; user; (ii) a final Certificate of Occupancy or '-Reiease of Utilities" has been issued for
the building or buildings approved for construction on said lot.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the
provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section 13.10 (as well as any other Property Owner
obligations set forth in this Agreement that are expressly written to survive the Termination
Date) shall survive the Termination Date of this Agreement.
3. Public Benefits.
3.1 Public Benefit Fee.
As consideration for City's approval and performance of its obligations set forth in this
Agreement, Property Owner shall pay to City a fee that shall be in addition to any other fee or
charge to which the Property and the Project would otherwise be subject (herein, the "Public
Benefit Fee") in the sum of (i) Ninety-three thousandDollars ($ 93,000per each residential
dwelling units; and (ii) Ten dollars ($10) per square foot of construction for the proposed golf
clubhouse'; and (iii) Ten dollars ($10) per square foot of construction to the proposed tennis
clubhouse, with the unpaid balance of said Public Benefit Fee increased on the first January I
following the Effective Date of this Agreement by the percentage increase in the CPI Index
between the Effective Date and said January I" date (the first "Adjustment Date") and thereafter
with the unpaid balance of said Public Benefit Fee increased on each subsequent January 1
during the Term of this Agreement (each, an "Adjustment Date") by the percentage increase in
the CPI Index in the year prior to the applicable Adjustment Date. The amount of the percentage
increase in the CPI Index on the applicable Adjustment Dates shall in each instance be calculated
based on the then most recently available CPI Index figures such that, for example, if the
Effective Date of this Agreement falls on July 1 and the most recently available CPI Index figure
on the first Adjustment Date (January I of the following year) is the CPI Index for November of
the preceding year, the percentage increase in the CPI Index for that partial year (a 6-month
period) shall be calculated by comparing the CPI Index for November of the preceding year with
the CPT Index for May of the preceding year (a 6-month period). In no event, however, shall
application of the CPI Index reduce the amount of the Public Benefit Fee (or unpaid portion
thereof) below the amount in effect prior to any applicable Adjustment Date. Property Owner
shall pay the Public Benefit Fee at the following time(s): (i) As to the residential dwelling units,
at the issuance of the building permit for each individual residential unit; and (ii) as to the golf
clubhouse and tennis clubhouse construction, at the time each building permit is issued to
Property Owner or on Property Owner's behalf. Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in
this Agreement to the contrary, during the Term of this Agreement City shall not increase the
Public Benefit Fee except pursuant to the CPI Index as stated in this Section 3.1. The Public Fee
Benefit Fee shall be calculated based on the total square feet of construction for the proposed
golf clubhouse and proposed tennis clubhouse Property Owner shall not be entitled to any credit
or offset to the Public Benefit Fee for any existing buildings or structures. Property Owner
The City has entered into a separate Development Agreement with The Newport Beach Country Club, Inc.,
Development Agreement No. 'Qp i (the "NBCC DA"), pertain. ng to the development of a golf
clubhouse on the adjacent property. This requirement to pay a Public Benefit Fee for the construction of
the golf clubhouse shall not apply to Property Owner, unless Property Owner itself, or its successors or
assignees, is seeking issuance of permits for the construction of a golf clubhouse on the adjacent property.
A 10-00773 0 01.06.1 1 FINAL
15-136
aclmowledges by its approval and execution of this Agreement that it is voluntarily agreeing to
pay the Public Benefit Fee, that its obligation to pay the Public Benefit Fee is an essential term of
this Apr PP_ment and is not ca���m� f.-..P.-. l�:a�.�.. t7:_.,,x� i n _
-,: �..:y s outt�dtlons and Property Owner's vesting .rights
to be acquired hereunder, and that Property Owner expressly waives any constitutional, statutory,
or common law right it might have in the absence of this Agreement to protest or challenge the
payment of such fee on any ground whatsoever, including without limitation pursuant to the
Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, California Constitution
Article I Section 19, the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et
seq.), or otherwise. In addition to any other remedy set forth in this Agreement for Property
Owner's default, if Property Owner shall fail to timely pay any portion of the Public Benefit Fee
when due City shall have the right to withhold issuance of any further building permits,
occupancy permits, or other development or building permits for the Project.
3.2 Other Public Benefits.
The development of the Project will include the addition of Visitor -Serving Uses
consistent with the City's Coastal Land Use Plan and will provide a unique amenity for those
visitors whose interests include tennis. It is anticipated that the Property will continue to host
numerous events of significant social and economic benefit to the City, its citizens, businesses
and charitable institutions.
4. Development of Project
4.1 Applicable Regulations; Property Owner's Vested Rights and City's Reservation
of Discretion With Respect to Subsequent Development ApDrovals
Other than as expressly set forth in this Agreement, during the Term of this Agreement,
(i) Property Owner shall have the vested right to Develop the Project on and with respect to the
Property in accordance with the terms of the Development Regulations and this Agreement and
(ii) City shall not prohibit or prevent development of the Property on grounds inconsistent with
the Development Regulations or this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein
is intended to limit or restrict City's discretion with respect to (i) review and approval
requirements contained in the Development Regulations, (ii) exercise of any discretionary
authority City retains under the Development Regulations, (iii) the approval, conditional
approval, or denial of any Subsequent Development Approvals applied for by Property Owner.,
or that are required, for Development of the Project as of the Agreement Date provided that all
such actions are consistent with the Development Regulations, or (iv) any environmental
approvals that may be required under CEQA or any other federal or state law or regulation in
conjunction with any Subsequent Development Approvals that may be required for the Project,
and in this regard, as to future actions referred to in clauses (i)-(iv) of this sentence, City reserves
its full discretion to the same extent City would have such discretion in the absence of this
Agreement. In addition, it is understood and agreed that nothing in this Agreement is intended to
vest Property Owner's rights with respect to any laws, regulations, rules, or official policies of
any other governmental agency or public utility company with jurisdiction over the Property or
the Project, or any applicable federal or state laws, regulations, rules, or official policies that may
be inconsistent with this Agreement and that override or supersede the pro•risions set forth in this
Agreement, and regardless of whether such overriding or superseding laws, regulations, rules, or
n10-00773 ,,101.06a1 RNAL 9
15-137
official policies are adopted or applied to the Property or the Project prior or subsequent to the
Agreement Date.
Property Owner has expended and will continue to expend substantial amounts of time
and money in the planning and entitlement process to permit Development of the Project in the
future. Property Owner represents and City acknowledges that Property Owner would not make
these expenditures without this Agreement, and that Property Owner is and will be making these
expenditures in reasonable reliance upon obtaining vested rights to Develop the Project as set
forth in this Agreement.
Property Owner may apply to City for permits or approvals necessary to modify or
amend the Development specified in the Development Regulations, provided that unless this
Agreement also is amended, the request does not propose an increase in the maximum density,
intensity, height, or size of proposed structures, or a change in use that generates more peak hour
traffic or more daily traffic. In addition, Property Owner may apply to City for approval of
minor amendments to existing tentative tract maps, tentative parcel maps, or associated
conditions of approval, consistent with City of Newport Beach Municipal Code section
19.12.090. This Agreement does not constitute a promise or commitment by City to approve any
such permit or approval, or to approve the same with or without any particular requirements or
conditions, and City's discretion with respect to such matters shall be the same as it would be in
the absence of this Agreement.
4.2 No Conflicting Enactments.
Except to the extent City reserves its discretion as expressly set forth in this Agreement,
during the Term of this Agreement City shall not apply to the Project or the Property any
ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, or other measure relating to Development of the Project that
is enacted or becomes effective after the Agreement Date to the extent it conflicts with this
Agreement. This Section 4.2 shall not restrict City's ability to enact an ordinance, policy, rule,
regulation, or other measure applicable to the Project pursuant to California Government Code
Section 65866 consistent with the procedures specified in Section 4.3 of this Agreement. In
Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo (1984) 37 Cal.3d 465, the California Supreme
Court held that a construction company was not exempt from a city's growth control ordinance
even though the city and construction company had entered into a consent judgment (tantamount
to a contract under California law) establishing the company's vested rights to develop its
property consistent with the zoning. The California Supreme Court reached this result because
the consent judgment failed to address the timing of development. The Parties intend to avoid
the result of the Pardee case by acknowledging and providing in this Agreement that Property
Owner shall have the vested right to Develop the Project on and with respect to the Property at
the rate, timing, and sequencing that Property Owner deems appropriate within the exercise of
Property Owner's sole subjective business judgment, provided that such Development occurs in
accordance with this Agreement and the Development Regulations, notwithstanding adoption by
City's electorate of an initiative to the contrary after the Agreement Date. No City moratorium
or other similar limitation relating to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the Development of all or
any part of the Project and whether enacted by initiative or another method, affecting subdivision
maps, building permits, occupancy certificates, or other entitlement to use, shall apply to the
Project to the extent such moratorium or other similar limitation restricts Property Owner's
.AIOM773 va 01-06.11 FPJAL 10
15-138
vested rights in this Agreement or otherwise conflicts with the express provisions of this
Agreement.
4.3 Reservations of Authority.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the laws,
rules, regulations, and official policies set forth in this Section 4.3 shall apply to and govern the
Development of the Project on and with respect to the Property.
4.3.1 Procedural Regulations. Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies,
petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals,
and any other matter of procedure shall apply to the Property, provided that such procedural
regulations are adopted and applied City-wide or to all other properties similarly situated in City.
4.3.2 Processing and Permit Fees. City shall have the right to charge and
Property Owner shall be required to pay all applicable processing and permit fees to cover the
reasonable cost to City of processing and reviewing applications and plans for any required
Subsequent Development Approvals, building permits, excavation and grading permits,
encroachment permits, and the like, for performing necessary studies and reports in connection
therewith, inspecting the work constructed or installed by or on behalf of Property Owner, and
monitoring compliance with any requirements applicable to Development of the Project, all at
the rates in effect at the time fees are due.
4.3.3 Consistent Future City Regulations. City ordinances, resolutions,
regulations, and official policies governing Development which do not conflict with the
Development Regulations, or with respect to such regulations that do conflict, where Property
Owner has consented in writing to the regulations, shall apply to the Property.
4.3.4 Development Exactions Applicable to Property. During the Term of this
Agreement, Property Owner shall be required to satisfy and pay all Development Exactions at
the time performance or payment is due to the same extent and in the same amount(s) that would
apply to Property Owner and the Project in the absence of this Agreement; provided, however,
that to the extent the scope and extent of a particular Development Exaction (excluding any
development impact fee) for the Project has been established and fixed by City in the conditions
of approval for any of the Development Regulations approved on or before the Agreement Date,
City shall not alter, increase, or modify said Development Exaction in a manner that is
inconsistent with such Development Regulations without Property Owner's prior written consent
or as may be otherwise required pursuant to overriding federal or state laws or regulations
(Section 4.3.5 hereinbelow). In addition, nothing in this Agreement is intended or shall be
deemed to vest Property Owner against the obligation to pay any of the following (which are not
included within the definition of "Development Exactions") in the full amount that would apply
in the absence of this Agreement: (i) City's normal fees for processing, environmental
assessment and review, tentative tract and parcel map review, plan checking, site review and
approval, administrative review, building permit, grading permit, inspection, and similar fees
imposed to recover City's costs associated with processing, reviewing, and inspecting project
applications, plans, and specifications; (ii) fees and charges levied by any other public agency,
utility, district, or joint powers authority, regardless of whether City collects those fees and
charges; or (iii) community facility district special taxes or special district assessments or similar
A 10-00773 c4 0 L06.11 FINAL I I
15-139
assessments, business license fees, builds or other security required for public improvements,
transient occupancy taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, sewer lateral connection fees, water
CPiVTC'e r_.gnn ctinn fps new water meter fad " at..,
- �, uiev �,�::v},iicy IUA PdydDle Llnoer
Chapter 3.12 of City's Municipal Code.
4.3.5 Overriding Federal and State Laws and Regulations. Federal and state
laws and regulations that override Property Owner's vested rights set forth in this Agreement
shall apply to the Property, together with any City ordinances, resolutions, regulations, and
official policies that are necessary to enable City to comply with the provisions of any such
overriding federal or state laws and regulations, provided that (i) Property Owner does not waive
its right to challenge or contest the validity of any such purportedly overriding federal, state, or
City law or regulation; and (ii) upon the discovery of any such overriding federal, state, or City
law or regulation that prevents or precludes compliance with any provision of this Agreement,
City or Property Owner shall provide to the other Party a written notice identifying the federal,
state, or City law or regulation, together with a copy of the law or regulation and a brief written
statement of the conflict(s) between that law or regulation and the provisions of this Agreement.
Promptly thereafter City and Property Owner shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable
attempt to determine whether a modification or suspension of this Agreement, in whole or in
part, is necessary to comply with such overriding federal, state, or City Iaw or regulation. In
such negotiations, City and Property Owner agree to preserve the terms of this Agreement and
the rights of Property Owner as derived from this Agreement to the maximum feasible extent
while resolving the conflict. City agrees to cooperate with Property Owner at no cost to City in
resolving the conflict in a manner which minimizes any financial impact of the conflict upon
Property Owner. City also agrees to process in a prompt manner Property Owner's proposed
changes to this Agreement, the Project and any of the Development Regulations as may be
necessary to comply with such overriding federal, state, or City law or regulation; provided,
however, that the approval of such changes by City shall be subject to the discretion of City,
consistent with this Agreement.
4.3.6 Public Health and Safety. Any City ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation,
program, or official policy that is necessary to protect persons on the Property or in the
immediate vicinity from conditions dangerous to their health or safety, as reasonably determined
by City, shall apply to the Property, even though the application of the ordinance, resolution, rule
regulation, program, or official policy would result in the impairment of Property Owner's
vested rights under this Agreement.
4.3.7 Uniform Building Standards. Existing and future building and building -
related standards set forth in the uniform codes adopted and amended by City from time to time,
including building, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, housing, swimming pool, and fire codes,
and any modifications and amendments thereof shall all apply to the Project and the Property to
the same extent that the same would apply in the absence of this Agreement.
4.3.8 Public Works Improvements. To the extent Property Owner constructs or
installs any public improvements, works, or facilities, the City standards in effect for such public
improvements, works, or facilities at the time of City's issuance of a permit, license, or other
authorization for constn3ction or installation of same shall apply.
A10-00773 A 01.06.11 FINAL 1 !
15-140
4.3.9 No Guarantee or Reservation of Utility Capacity. Notwithstanding any
other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, nothing in this Agreement is intended
nr zhnll lie lnfnmrnf� to ,-cr+„:ro 0 4" do .. a.... . r_ " ,
-- --- ,1 ...,. .� ;..,,.. .._--.7 11. on_fltaLILe t,, vs rc5ci'i� tv U1 Aux UJU UCr1C11t Uf r oDe-i-LV
Owner or the Property any utility capacity, service, or facilities that may be needed to serve the
Project, whether domestic or reclaimed water service, sanitary sewer transmission or wastewater
treatment capacity, downstream drainage capacity, or otherwise, and City shall have the right to
limit or restrict Development of the Project if and to the extent that City reasonably determines
that inadequate utility capacity exists to adequately serve the Project at the time Development is
scheduled to commence.
4.4 Tentative Subdivision Maps
City agrees that Property Owner may file and process new and existing vesting tentative
maps for the Property consistent with California Government Code sections 66498.1-66498.9
and City of Newport Beach Municipal Code chapter 19.20. Pursuant to the applicable provision
of the California Subdivision Map Act (California Government Code section 66452.6(a)), the life
of any tentative subdivision map approved for the Property, whether designated a "vesting
tentative map" or otherwise, shall be extended for the Term of this Agreement.
5. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement
Other than modifications of this Agreement under Section 8.3 of this Agreement, this
Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual written and executed
consent of the Parties in compliance with California Government Code section 65868 and City of
Newport Beach Municipal Code section 15.45.060 or by unilateral termination by City in the
event of an uncured default of Property Owner.
6. Enforcement.
Unless this Agreement is amended, canceled, modified, or suspended as authorized
herein or pursuant to California Government Code section 65869.5, this Agreement shall be
enforceable by either Party despite any change in any applicable general or specific plan, zoning,
subdivision, or building regulation or other applicable ordinance or regulation adopted by City
(including by City's electorate) that purports to apply to any or all of the Property_
7. Annual Review of Property Owner's Compliance With Agreement
7.1 General.
City shall review this Agreement once during every twelve (12) month period following
the Effective .Date for compliance with the terms of this Agreement as provided in Government
Code Section 65865.1. Property Owner (including any successor to the Property Owner
executing this Agreement on or before the Agreement Date) shall pay City a reasonable fee in an
amount City may reasonably establish from time to time to cover the actual and necessary costs
for the annual review. City's failure to timely provide or conduct an annual review shall not
constitute a Default hereunder by City.
T2 Property Owner Obligation to Demonstrate Good Faith Compliance
AIM0773 A 01.06.11 FINAL 13
15-141
During each annual review by City, Property Owner is required to demonstrate good faith
compliance with the terms of the Agreement. Property Owner agrees to furnish such evidence of
o-t, tic Y•
b wa. n .inuj`,cevsevt. .n .'ILY, rn tt3�+ l�.[t3LJ11aUle eXel-16C :it ii5 e:ati.CLULrora, may reG_uire, thirty
(30) days prior to each anniversary of the Effective Date during the Term.
7.3 Procedure.
The City Council of City shall conduct a duly noticed hearing and shall determine, on the
basis of substantial evidence, whether or not Property Owner has, for the period under review,
complied with the terms of this Agreement. If the City Council finds that Property Owner has so
complied, the annual review shall be concluded. If the City Council finds, on the basis of
substantial evidence, that Property Owner has not so complied, written notice shall be sent to
Property Owner by first class mail of the City Council's finding of non-compliance, and Property
Owner shall be given at least ten (10) days to cure any noncompliance that relates to the payment
of money and thirty (30) days to cure any other type of noncompliance. If a cure not relating to
the payment of money cannot be completed within thirty (30) days for reasons which are beyond
the control of Property Owner, Property Owner must commence the cure within such thirty (30)
days and diligently pursue such cure to completion. If Property Owner fails to cure such
noncompliance within the time(s) set forth above, such failure shall be considered to be a Default
and City shall be entitled to exercise the remedies set forth in Article 8 below.
7.4 Annual Review a Non -Exclusive Means for Determining and Requiring Cure of
Property Owner's Default.
The annual review procedures set forth in this Article 7 shall not be the exclusive means
for City to identify a Default by Property Owner or limit City's rights or remedies for any such
Default.
Events of Default.
8.1 General Provisions.
In the event of any material default, breach, or violation of the terms of this Agreement
("Default"), the Party alleging a Default shall have the right to deliver a written notice (each, a
"Notice of Default") to the defaulting Party. The Notice of Default shall specify the nature of the
alleged Default and a reasonable manner and sufficient period of time (ten (10) days if the
Default relates to the failure to timely make a monetary payment due hereunder and not less than
thirty (30) days in the event of non -monetary Defaults) in which the Default must be cured (the
"Cure Period"). During the Cure Period, the Party charged shall not be considered in Default for -
the purposes of termination of this Agreement or institution of legal proceedings. if the alleged
Default is cured within the Cure Period, then the Default thereafter shall be deemed not to exist.
If a non -monetary Default cannot be cured during the Cure Period with the exercise of
commercially reasonable diligence, the defaulting Party must promptly commence to cure as
quickly as possible, and in no event later than thirty (30) days after it receives the Notice of
Default, and thereafter diligently pursue said cure to completion.
8.2 Default by Property Owner.
A I OJJ0773 A 01.06.11 FINA L 14
15-142
If Property Owner is aiieged to have committed a non -monetary Default and it disputes
the claimed Default, it may make a written .request for an appeal hearing before the City Council
tart4iAin fen ki j y Ys --- -0 ii`-118 ilie -4-1- 01 '�JG1s` uu, and a public nearing snail lie scheduled ai
the next available City Council meeting to consider Property Owner's appeal of the Notice of
Default. Failure to appeal a Notice of Default to the City Council within the ten (10) day period
shall waive any right to a hearing on the claimed Default. if Property Owner's appeal of the
Notice of Default is timely and in good faith but after a public hearing of Property Owner's
appeal the City Council concludes that Property Owner is in Default as alleged in the Notice of
Default, the accrual date for commencement of the thirty (30) day Cure Period provided in
Section 8.1 shall be extended until the City Council's denial of Property Owner's appeal is
communicated to Property Owner.
8.3 City's Option to Terminate Agreement
In the event of an alleged Property Owner Default, City may not terminate this
Agreement without first delivering a written Notice of Default and providing Property Owner
with the opportunity to cure the Default within the Cure Period, as provided in Section 8.1, and
complying with Section 8.2 if Property Owner timely appeals any Notice of Default with respect
to a non -monetary Default. A termination of this Agreement by City shall be valid only if good
cause exists and is supported by evidence presented to the City Council at or in connection with
a duly noticed public hearing to establish the existence of a Default. The validity of any
termination may be judicially challenged by Property Owner. Any such judicial challenge must
be brought within thirty (30) days of service on Property Owner, by first class mail, postage
prepaid, of written notice of termination by City or a written notice of City's determination of an
appeal of the Notice of Default as provided in Section 8.2. It is the intention of the Parties that,
while the City Council may declare a default and initiate termination of this Agreement on the
basis of substantial evidence in the administrative record, if the declaration of default is
contested in court, the court will review the default claim de novo and base its decision on
whether the preponderance of evidence supports the City Council's finding of breach.
8.4 Default by City.
If Property Owner alleges a City Default and alleges that the City has not cured the
Default within the Cure Period, Property Owner may pursue any equitable remedy available to it
under this Agreement, including, without limitation, an action for a writ of mandamus, injunctive
relief, or specific performance of City's obligations set forth in this Agreement. Upon a City
Default, any resulting delays in Property Owner's performance hereunder shall neither be a
Property Owner Default nor constitute grounds for termination or cancellation of this Agreement
by City and shall, at Property Owner's option (and provided Property Owner delivers written
notice to City within thirty (30) days of the commencement of the alleged City Default), extend
the Terra for a period equal to the length of the delay.
8.5 Waiver.
Failure or delay by either Party in delivering a Notice of Default shall not waive that
Party's right to deliver a future Notice of Default of the same or any other Default.
8.6 Specific Performmance Remedy
A10-00773 „401,06.11 FINAL 15
15-143
Due to the size, nature, and scope of the Project, it will not be practical or possible to
restore the Property to its pre-existing condition once implementation of this Agreement has
bcguri. r"aacr sueh implumeniailon, both Property Owner and Citymay ha foreclosed 1 �.
a,, from other
choices they may have had to plan for the development of the Property, to utilize the Property or
provide for other benefits and alternatives. Property Owner and City have invested significant
time and resources and performed extensive planning and processing of the Project in agreeing to
the terms of this Agreement and will be investing even more significant time and resources in
implementing the Project in reliance upon the terms of this Agreement. It is not possible to
determine the sum of money which would adequately compensate Property Owner or City for
such efforts. For the above reasons, City and Property Owner agree that damages would not be
an adequate remedy if either City or Property Owner fails to carry out its obligations under this
Agreement. Therefore, specific performance of this Agreement is necessary to compensate
Property Owner if City fails to carry out its obligations under this Agreement or to compensate
City if Property Owner falls to carry out its obligations under this Agreement.
8.7 Monetary Damages_
The Parties agree that monetary damages shall not be an available remedy for either Party
for a Default hereunder by the other Party; provided, however, that (i) nothing in this Section 8.7
is intended or shall be interpreted to limit or restrict City's right to recover the Public Benefit
Fees due from Property Owner as set forth herein; and (ii) nothing in this Section 8.7 is intended
or shall be interpreted to limit or restrict Property Owner's indemnity obligations set forth in
Article 10 or the right of the prevailing Party in any Action to recover its litigation expenses, as
set forth in Section 8.10.
8.8 Additional City Remedy for Property Owner's Default
in the event of any Default by Property Owner, in addition to any other remedies which
may be available to City, whether legal or equitable, City shall be entitled to receive and retain
any Development Exactions applicable to the Project or the Property, including any fees, grants,
dedications, or improvements to public property which it may have received prior to Property
Owner's Default without recourse from Property Owner or its successors or assigns.
8.9 No Personal Liability of City Officials Employees or Agents
No City official, employee, or agent shall have any personal Iiability hereunder for a
Default by City of any of its obligations set forth in this Agreement.
8.10 Recovery of Legal Expenses by Prevailing Party in Any Action
In any judicial proceeding, arbitration, or mediation (collectively, an "Action") between
the Parties that seeks to enforce the provisions of this Agreement or arises out of this Agreement,
the prevailing Party shall recover all of its actual and reasonable costs and expenses, regardless
of whether they would be recoverable under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5
or California Civil Code section 1717 in the absence of this Agreement. These costs and
expenses include expert witness fees, attorneys' fees, and costs of investigation and preparation
before initiation of the Action. The right to recover these costs and expenses shall accrue upon
initiation of the Action, regardless of whether the Action is prosecuted to a final judgment or
decision.
A 10-00773 v4 01.06.1 1 FTNAI. 16
15-144
9. Force Majeure.
Neither Party shall be deemed to be in Default where failure or delay in performance of
any of its obligations under this Agreement is caused, through no fault of the Party whose
performance is prevented or delayed, by floods, earthquakes, other acts of God, fires, wars, riots
or similar hostilities, strikes or other labor difficulties, state or federal regulations, or court
actions. Except as specified above, nonperformance shall not be excused because of the act or
omission of a third person. In no event shall the occurrence of an event of force majeure operate
to extend the Term of this Agreement. In addition, in no event shall the time for performance of
a monetary obligation, including without limitation Property Owner's obligation to pay Public
Benefit Fees, be extended pursuant to this Section.
10. Indemnity Obligations of Property Owner.
10.1 Indemnity Arising From Acts or Omissions of Property Owner.
Property Owner shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's officials,
employees, agents, attorneys, and contractors (collectively, the "City's Affiliated Parties") from
and against all suits, claims, liabilities, losses, damages, penalties, obligations, and expenses
(including but not limited to attorneys' fees and costs) (collectively, a "Claim") that may arise,
directly or indirectly, from the acts, omissions, or operations of PropertyOwner or Property
Owner's agents, contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in the course of Development
of the Project or any other activities of Property Owner relating to the Property or pursuant to
this Agreement. City shall have the right to select and retain counsel to defend any Claim filed
against City and/or any of City's Affiliated Parties, and Property Owner shall pay the reasonable
cost for defense of any Claim. The indemnity provisions in this Section 10.1 shall commence on
the Agreement Date, regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs, and shall survive the
Termination Date.
10.2 Third Party Litigation.
In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, Property Owner shall
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's Affiliated Parties from and against any
Claim against City or City's Affiliated Parties seeking to attack, set aside, void, or annul the
approval of this Agreement, the Adopting Ordinance, any of the Development Regulations for
the Project (including without limitation any actions taken pursuant to CEQA with respect
thereto), any Subsequent Development Approval, or the approval of any permit granted pursuant
to this Agreement. Said indemnity obligation shall include payment of attorney's fees, expert
witness fees, and court costs. City shall promptly notify Property Owner of any such Claim and
City shall cooperate with Property Owner in the defense of such Claim. If City fails to promptly
notify Property Owner of such Claim, Property Owner shall not be responsible to indemnify,
defend, and hold City harmless from such Claim until Property Owner is so notified and if City
fails to cooperate in the defense of a Claim Property Owner shall not be responsible to defend,
indemnify, and hold harmless City during the period that City so fails to cooperate or for any
losses attributable thereto. City shall be entitled to retain separate counsel to represent City
against the Claim and the City's defense costs for its separate counsel shall be included in
Property Owner's indemnity obligation, provided that such counsel shall reasonably cooperate
with Property Owner in an effort to minimize the total litigation expenses incurred by Property
A10-00"3 A 01.06.11 FINAL 17
15-145
Owner. In the event either City or Property Owner recovers any attorney's fees, expert witness
fees, costs, interest, or other amounts from the party or parties asserting the Claim, Property
lam.._.._- _ 1 /1 1 9
vw►xei Shall be enddud to retain the same ( provided it has Bally nertbr-red its indemnity
obligations hereunder). The indemnity provisions in this Section 10.2 shall commence on the
Agreement Date, regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs, and shall survive the
Termination Date.
10.3 Environmental Indemnity.
In addition to its indemnity obligations set forth in Section 10.1, from and after die
Agreement Date Property Owner shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City and City's
Affiliated Parties from and against any and all Claims for personal injury or death, property
damage, economic loss, statutory penalties or fines, and damages of any kind or nature
whatsoever, including without limitation attorney's fees, expert witness fees, and costs, based
upon or arising from any of the following: (i) the actual or alleged presence of any Hazardous
Substance on or under any of the Property in violation of any applicable Environmental Law; (ii)
the actual or alleged migration of any Hazardous Substance from the Property through the soils
or groundwater to a location or locations off of the Property; and (iii) the storage, handling,
transport, or disposal of any Hazardous Substance on, to, or from the Property and any other area
disturbed, graded, or developed by Property Owner in connection with Property Owner's
Development of the Project. The foregoing indemnity obligations shall not apply to any
Hazardous Substance placed or stored on a separate legal lot within the Property after the Lot
Termination Date for said lot, as provided in Section 2.4 of this Agreement. The indemnity -
provisions in this Section 10.3 shall commence on the Agreement Date, regardless of whether the
Effective Date occurs, and shall survive the Termination Date,
11. Assignment.
Property Owner shall have the right to sell, transfer, or assign (hereinafter, collectively, a
"Transfer") Property Owner's fee interest in to the Property, in whole or in part, to any person,
partnership, joint venture, firm, or corporation (which successor, as of the effective date of the
Transfer, shall become the "Property Owner" under this Agreement) at any time from the
Agreement Date until the Termination Date; provided, however, that no such Transfer shall
violate the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code Section 66410 et seq.) or
City's local subdivision ordinance and any such Transfer shall include the assignment and
assumption of Property Owner's rights, duties, and obligations set forth in or arising under this
Agreement as to the Property or the portion thereof so Transferred and shall be made in strict
compliance with the following conditions precedent: (i) no transfer or assignment of any of
Property Owner's rights or interest under this Agreement shall be made unless made together
with the Transfer of all or a part of the Property; and (ii) prior to the effective date of any
proposed Transfer, Property Owner (as transferor) shall notify City, in writing, of such proposed
Transfer and deliver to City a written assignment and assurnption, executed in recordable form
by the transferring and successor Property Owner and in a form subject to the reasonable
approval of the City Attorney of City (or designee), pursuant to which the transferring Property
Owner assigns to the successor Property Owner and the successor Property Owner assumes from
the transferring Property Owner all of the rights and obligations of the transferring Property
Owner with respect to the Property or portion thereof to be so Transferred, including in the case
of a partial Transfer the obligation to perform such obligations that must be performed off of the
A10-00773 v401.06.11 FINAL 18
15-146
portion of the Property so 'Transferred that are a condition precedent to the successor Property
Owner's right to develop the portion of the Property so Transferred.
Notwithstanding any Transfer, the transferring Property Owner shall continue to be
jointly and severally liable to City, together with the successor Property Owner, to perform all of
the transferred obligations set forth in or arising under this Agreement unless the transferring
Property Owner is given a release in writing by City, which release shall be only with respect to
the portion of the Property so Transferred in the event of a partial Transfer. City shall provide
such a release upon the transferring Property Owner's full satisfaction of all of the following
conditions: (i) the transferring Property Owner no longer has a legal or equitable interest in the
portion of the Property so Transferred other than as a beneficiary under a deed of trust; (ii) the
transferring Property Owner is not then in Default under this Agreement and no condition exists
that with the passage of time or the giving of notice, or both, would constitute a Default
hereunder, (iii) the transferring Property Owner has provided City with the notice and the fully
executed written and recordable assignment and assumption agreement required as set forth in
the first paragraph of this Section 11; and (iv) the successor Property Owner either (A) provides
City with substitute security equivalent to any security previously provided by the transferring
Property Owner to City to secure performance of the successor Property Owner's obligations
hereunder with respect to the Property or the portion of the Property so Transferred or (B) if the
transferred obligation in question is not a secured obligation, the successor Property Owner
either provides security reasonably satisfactory to City or otherwise demonstrates to City's
reasonable satisfaction that the successor Property Owner has the financial resources or
commitments available to perform the transferred obligation at the time and in the manner
required under this Agreement and the Development Regulations for the Project.
12. Mortgagee Rights.
12.1 Encumbrances on Property..
The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Property Owner in any
manner from encumbering the Property, any part of the Property, or any improvements on the
Property with any Mortgage securing financing with respect to the construction, development,
use, or operation of the Project.
12.2 Mortgagee Protection.
This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the lien of any Mortgage. Nevertheless,
no breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any
Mortgage made in good faith and for value. Any acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or
interest in the Property or part of the Property by a Mortgagee (whether due to foreclosure,
trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, lease termination, or otherwise) shall be subject to all
of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee who takes title to the Property or
any part of the Property shall be entitled to the benefits arising under this Agreement.
12.3 Mortgagee Not Obligated.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this Section 12.3, a Mortgagee will not have any
obligation or duty under the terms of this Agreement to perform the obligations of Property
Owner or other affirmative covenants of Property Owner, or to guarantee this pertormance
A10-00773 va 01,06.11 FINAL 19
15-147
except that: (i) tilc Mortgagee small have no right to develop the Project under the Development
Regulations without fully complying with the terms of this Agreement; and (ii) to the extent that
anri covenant to DP a e r1, t o 2naa2�
_ J13-Y —v ilia iS a vatuiii VII Lv WU i-L LviIii alicu oI a v
by City, that performance shall continue to be a condition precedent to City's performance.
12.4 Notice of Default to Mortgage!,-,, Right of Mortgagee to Cure
Each Mortgagee shall, upon written request to City, be entitled to receive written notice
from City of: (i) the results of the periodic review of compliance specified in Article 7 of this
Agreement, and (H) any default by Property Owner of its obligations set forth in this Agreement.
Each Mortgagee shall have a further right, but not an obligation, to cure the Default
within ten (10) days after receiving a Notice of Default with respect to a monetary Default and
within thirty (30) days after receiving a Notice of Default with respect to a non -monetary
Default. If the Mortgagee can only remedy or cur a non -monetary Default by obtaining
possession of the Property, Chen the Mortgagee shall have the right to seek to obtain possession
with diligence and continuity through a receiver or otherwise, and to remedy or cure the non -
monetary Default within thirty (30) days after obtaining possession and, except in case of
emergency or to protect the public health or safety, City may not exercise any of its judicial
remedies set forth in this Agreement to terminate or substantially alter the rights of the
Mortgagee until expiration of the thirty (30)-day period. In the case of a non -monetary Default
that cannot with diligence be remedied or cured within thirty (30) days, the Mortgagee shall have
additional time as is reasonably necessary to remedy or cure the Default, provided the Mortgagee
promptly commences to cure the non -monetary Default within thirty (30) days and diligently
prosecutes the cure to completion.
AIO-00773 va 01.06.11 FFNAL 20
15-148
13. Miscellaneous Terms.
13.1 Notices.
.Any notice or demand that shall be required or permitted by law or any provision of this
Agreement shall be in writing. If the notice or demand will be served upon a Party, it either shall
be personally delivered to the Party; deposited in the United States avail, certified, return receipt
requested, and postage prepaid; or delivered by a reliable courier service that provides a receipt
showing date and time of delivery with courier charges prepaid. The notice or demand shall be
addressed as follows:
TO CITY: City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Post Office Box 1768
Newport Beach, California 92663-3884
Attn: City Manager
With a copy to: City Attorney
City of Newport Beach
3300 Newport Boulevard
Post Office Box 1768
Newport Beach, California 92663-3884
TO PROPERTY OWNER: Golf Realty Fund
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, California 92660
Attn: Robert O Hill
With a copy to: Tim Paone
Cox Castle & Nicholson, LLP
19800 MacArthur Blvd., Suite 500
Irvine, CA. 92612
Either Party may change the address stated in this Section 13.1 by delivering notice to the
Other Party in the manner provided in this Section 13.1, and thereafter notices to such Party shall
be addressed and submitted to the new address_ Notices delivered in accordance with this
Agreement shall be deemed to be delivered upon the earlier of: (i) the date received or (iii) three
business days after deposit in the mail as provided above.
13.2 Private Undertaking.
Any future Development of the Project is a private undertaking. Neither Party will be
acting as the agent of the other in any respect, and each Party will be an independent contracting
entity with respect to the teams, covenants, and conditions set forth in this Agreement. This
Agreement forms no partnership, joint venture, or other association of any kind. The only
relationship between the Parties is that of a government entity regulating the Development of
private property by the owner or user of the Property.
A10-007-13 A01.06.11 RNAL 21
15-149
13.3 Cooperation.
Each Party shall cooperate. with and pro -ode reasonable assistance to the o+cr Part- to
y
the extent consistent with and necessary to implement this Agreement. Upon the request of a
Party at any time, the other Party shall promptly execute, with acknowledgement or affidavit if
reasonably required, and file or record the required instruments and writings and take any actions
as may be reasonably necessary to implement this Agreement or to evidence or consummate the
transactions contemplated by this Agreement.
13.4 Estoppel Certificates.
At any time, either Party may deliver written notice to the other Party requesting that that
Party certify in writing that, to the best of its knowledge: (i) this Agreement is in full force and
effect and is binding on the Party; (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either
orally or in writing or, if this Agreement has been amended, the Party providing the certification
shall identify the amendments or modifications; and (iii) the requesting Party is not in Default in
the performance of its obligations under this Agreement and no event or situation has occurred
that with the passage of time or the giving of Notice or both would constitute a Default or, if
such is not the case, then the other Party shall describe the nature and amount of the actual or
prospective Default.
The Party requested to furnish an estoppel certificate shall execute and return the
certificate within thirty (30) days following receipt. Requests for the City to furnish an estoppel
certificate shall include reimbursement for all administrative costs incurred by the City including
reasonable attorneys fees incurred by the City in furnishing an estoppels certificate.
13.5 Rules of Construction.
The singular includes the plural; the masculine and neuter include the feminine; "shall" is
mandatory; and "may" is permissive.
13.6 Time Is of the Essence.
Time is of the essence regarding each provision of this Agreement as to which time is an
element.
13.7 Waiver.
The failure by a Party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this
Agreement by the other Party, and failure by a Party to exercise its rights upon a Default by the
other Party, shall not constitute a waiver of that Party's right to demand strict compliance by the
other Party in the future.
13.8 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be
identical and may be introduced in evidence or used for any other purpose without any other
counterpart, but all of which shall together constitute one and the same agreement.
AIO-00773 v401.06.11 FMAL 22
15-150
13.9 Eniire Agreement.
T11i.s Aor(,e.mf-n (,nnsifivtaf6- on
g- tra �ArnentivaU1 Supers -3es ttl prior agreements and understandings, both written and oral, between the Parties with respect to
the subject matter addressed in this Agreement.
13.10 Severability.
The Parties intend that each and every obligation of the Parties is interdependent and
interrelated with the other, and if any provision of this Agreement or the application of the
provision to any Party or circumstances shall be held invalid or unenforceable to any extent, it is
the intention of the Parties that the remainder of this Agreement or the application of the
provision to persons or circumstances shall be rendered invalid or unenforceable. The Parties
intend that neither Party shall receive any of the benefits of the Agreement without the full
performance by such Party of all of its obligations provided for under this Agreement. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, the Parties intend that Property Owner shall not receive
any of the benefits of this Agreement if any of Property Owner's obligations are rendered void or
unenforceable as the result of any third party litigation, and City shall be free to exercise its
legislative discretion to amend or repeal the Development Regulations applicable to the Property
and Property Owner shall cooperate as required, despite this Agreement, should third party
litigation result in the nonperformance of Property Owner's obligations under this Agreement.
The provisions of this Section 13.10 shall apply regardless of whether the Effective Date occurs
and after the Termination Date.
13.11 Construction.
This Agreement has been drafted after negotiation and revision. Both City and Property
Owner are sophisticated parties who were represented by independent counsel throughout the
negotiations or City and Property Owner had the opportunity to be so represented and voluntarily
chose to not be so represented. City and Property Owner each agree and acknowledge that the
terms of this Agreement are fair and reasonable, taking into account their respective purposes,
terms, and conditions. This Agreement shall therefore be construed as a whole consistent with
its fair meaning and applicable principle or presumptions of contract construction or
interpretation, if any, shall be used to construe the whole or any part of this Agreement in favor
of or against either Party.
13.12 Successors and Assigns, Construcrive Notice and Acceptance
The burdens of this Agreement shall be binding upon, and the benefits of this Agreement
shall inure to, all successors in interest to the Parties to this Agreement. All provisions of this
Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the
land. Each covenant to do or refrain from doing some act hereunder with regard to Development
of the Property: (i) is for the benefit of and is a burden upon every portion of the Property, (ii)
runs with the Property and each portion thereof, and (iii) is binding upon each Party and each
successor in interest during its ownership of the Property or any portion thereof. Every person
or entity who now or later owns or acquires any right, title, or interest in any part of the Project
or the Property is and shall be conclusively deemed to have consented and agreed to every
provision of this Agreement. This Section 13.12 applies regardless of whether the instrument by
AIO.00773 A 01.06.I 1 HNAL 23
15-151
which such person or entity acquires the interest refers to or acknowledges this Agreement and
regardless of whether such person or entity has expressly entered into an assignment and
assumption agreement as provided for ii--i Section 1 I.
13.13 No Third Party Beneficiaries
The only Parties to this Agreement are City and Property Owner. This Agreement does
not involve any third party beneficiaries, and it is not intended and shall not be construed to
benefit or be enforceable by any other person or entity.
13.14 Applicable Law and Venue.
This Agreement shall be construed and enforced consistent with the internal laws of the
State of California, without regard to conflicts of law principles. Any action at law or in equity
arising under this Agreement or brought by any Party for the purpose of enforcing, construing, or
determining the validity of any provision of this Agreement shall be filed and tried in the
Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, or the United States District Court
for the Central District of California. The Parties waive all provisions of law providing for the
removal or change of venue to any other court.
13.15 Section Headings.
All section headings and subheadings are inserted for convenience only and shall not
affect construction or interpretation of this Agreement.
13.16 Ineomoration of Recitals and Exhibits
All of the Recitals are incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Exhibits A and
B are attached to this Agreement and incorporated by this reference as follows:
EXHIBIT I DESCRIPTION
DESIGNATION
A I Legal Description of Property
B I Depiction of the Property I
13.17 Recordation.
The City Clerk of City shall record this Agreement and any amendment, modification, or
cancellation of this Agreement in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange
within the period required by California Government Code section 65868.5 and City of Newport
Beach Municipal Code section 15.45.090. The date of recordation of this Agreement shall not
modify or amend the Effective Date or the Termination Date.
AIO-00773 vA 01.06.11 HNAL 24
15-152
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
"PROPERTY OWNER"
By:
Its:
By:
Its:
"CPIY„
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ROVED AS TO FORM:
12,
Aaron Harp, City Attorney i
A1MOM A 01.06.11 FINAL 25
a
CITY OF NE --ORTBEAG
By: --
Its: Mayor
15-153
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On NO V 1 �-I , 2 C, 1'> , before me, PV N 010L VE -/ , a NotaryPublic
in and for said State, personally appeared Na v -t L\-lNiL3
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
Witness my hand and official seal. JENNIfEA aNfr4 Mt1LVEY
Commission # 2045022
Notary Public - California i
Orange County
No Pubc in and fo My Comm. Ex ires 0012, 2017+
said and State 1
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me , a Notary
Public in and for said State, personally appeared
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
Witness my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for
said County and State
15-154
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
%E y EI..,OPIVIE1w 1 AGREENviEN
"PROPERTY OWNER"
By:
Its:
By:
Its:
«Cilly„
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
By:
Its: Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
ROVED AS TO FORM:
Lv
on Harp, City Attomey 7 12,
A10-00773 va 01.06.11 RNAL 25
15-155
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
CGUt3TY OF GRANGE
On I j 1 4-1 i _C) i -4- ,before me,a Notary Public
in and for said State, personally appeared F--o gE n--t- V rt t I
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/aFe
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshetdmy�executed the same
in hWhw/their authorized capacity(40, and that by his/her/their signatures(() on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(&) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
--------------------
Witness my hand and official seal, SHANE THOMAS JOHNS"
Commission # 1991314
i ' a Notary Public - Ca5fornia z
Orange County >
My Comm. Expires Sep 16, 2016
Notary Public in and for
said County and State
ACKNONVLEUGNIENT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me, , a Notary
Public in and for said State, personally appeared
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
Witness my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for
said County and State
15-156
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL UESi:RI fION OF PROPERTY.
The Property:
Parcel I and Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 94-102, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange,
State of California, as per Map filed in Book 316, Pages 3 to 6, inclusive, of Parcel Maps, in the
office of the County Recorder of Orange County.
A 10-00773 v4 01.06.11 1.7NAL
15-157
m:I1.0 10 6,
DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
TO BE INSERTED
A10.007n r40LKIIFRaL
Paea
15-158
THE VILLAS
THE
BUNGAL
EXHIBIT B
DEPICTION OF PROPERY
MASTER PLAN
-THE TENNIS CLUB - Sub•Aiea
I new stadium court
Tennis Clubhouse
• THE VILLAS - Sub Area
5 single family homes
• THE BUNGALOWS Sub Area
27 guest rental units
• THE GOLF CLUB • Sub Area
NOT A PART
THE
INIS CLUB
71
NBCC
Planned Community
s t e a m s LXHIBIT
ARC HITEC URE
I OF 1
15-159
Attachment F
City Council Staff Report, Dated September 27, 2022
15-160
September 27, 2022
Agenda Item No. 15
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director - 949-644-3232,
sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov
PREPARED BY: David Lee, Associate Planner, dlee@newportbeachca.gov
PHONE: 949-644-3225
TITLE: Ordinance Nos. 2022-19 and 2022-20: Tennis Club at Newport
Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)
ABSTRACT:
The applicant requests an amendment to the approved Tennis Club at Newport Beach
project to 1) increase the number of future tennis courts from seven to eight courts;
2) increase the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms; 3) increase the gross
floor area of the ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet; and 4) provide three attached
condominium units and two detached single-family residences in -lieu of five detached
single-family residences. The request also includes a 10-year term extension to the
approved project's development agreement to ensure the orderly development of the
property and certain public benefits to the City of Newport Beach (City).
For the City Council's consideration is the adoption of three resolutions for environmental
clearance and planning applications for the project, and the introduction of two ordinances
to amend the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan and
approval of a second amendment to the approved project's development agreement. If
approved, the item will return to the City Council on October 11, 2022, for the second
reading and adoption of the two ordinances. The requested local coastal program
amendment (Title 21 Amendment) will not become effective until approval by the
California Coastal Commission (CCC) and adoption.
RECOMMENDATION:
a) Conduct a public hearing;
b) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-65, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Adopting an Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. ND2010-008 for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Located at 1602 East Coast
Highway;
15-161
c) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-66, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Approving a General Plan Amendment, Amendment to Major Site
Development Review No. SD2011-002, Amendment to Coastal Development Permit
No. CD2017-039, Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-003, and
Amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004 for the Tennis Club at Newport
Beach Located at 1602 East Coast Highway (PA2021-260);
d) Adopt Resolution No. 2022-67, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport
Beach, California, Authorizing Submittal of Local Coastal Program Amendment to the
California Coastal Commission to Amend the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community Development Plan (PC-47) for the Tennis Club Located at 1602 East
Coast Highway (PA2021-260);
e) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, and introduce Ordinance
No. 2022-19, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach,
California, Approving an Amendment to the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community Development Plan (PC-47) for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Located
at 1602 East Coast Highway, and pass on to second reading on October 11, 2022;
and
f) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, and introduce Ordinance
No. 2022-20, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach,
California, Approving the Second Amendment to the Development Agreement
(DA2008-001) for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Located at 1602 East Coast
Highway (PA2021-260), and pass on to second reading on October 11, 2022.
DISCUSSION:
The subject property is approximately seven acres in size and presently improved with a
private tennis club consisting of a 3,725-square-foot tennis clubhouse, 14 tennis courts,
32 pickle ball courts, and a 125-space surface parking lot. The subject property is located
adjacent to the Newport Beach Country Club golf course and is west of the Corporate
Plaza West Planned Community, which consists of several office buildings. The site is
also located directly south of the Granville residential community.
On March 27, 2012, the City Council approved land use entitlements and executed a
10-year term development agreement (DA) to allow the redevelopment of the tennis club
site into three distinct components:
1) Tennis Club — Reconstruct the existing 3,725-square-foot tennis clubhouse, and
reduce the total number of tennis courts from 24 to seven courts, including one
lighted stadium court;
2) Hotel (Bungalows) - Construct a 27-room boutique hotel with ancillary uses
consisting of a spa and fitness center and a concierge guest center; and
3) Residential (Villas) - Construct five detached single-family residences.
15-162
The project described above (Approved Project) has not been implemented to date and
continues to operate as a private tennis club, with pickleball courts being introduced in
2019.
On June 28, 2022, the City Council approved the first amendment to the DA previously
approved in 2012, which authorized the extension of the DA by one year. This provided
City staff additional time to review an amendment to the Approved Project that was
submitted by the applicant on November 2, 2021.
Since the proposed project involves a Local Coastal Program Amendment requiring
subsequent approval by the California Coastal Commission (CCC), if the CCC does not
approve the amendment, the entire application would not become effective.
Project Description
The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Approved Project to add one tennis
court for a total of eight tennis courts, to add 14 hotel units for a total of 41 hotel units with
additional ancillary uses, and to allow three of five single-family residential units to be
converted to condominiums (Proposed Project).
The applicant's project description and project plans are available online at
https://ecms.newportbeachca.gov/\Neb/O/fol/2834530/Rowl.aspx
Table 1 below provides a summary of the Approved Project comparing it to the Proposed
Project.
Table 1 — Proiect Comparison
Use
Approved Project
Proposed Project
Tennis
Clubhouse (3,725 sq. ft.)
No Change
7 Tennis Courts
8 Tennis Courts (+1)
Hotel
27 Hotel Rooms
41 Hotel Rooms (+14)
Concierge Center (2,200 sq. ft.)
No Change
Spa/Fitness Center (7,500 sq. ft.)
No Change
+4,686 sq. ft. of Ancillary Uses
Performance Therapy (+852 sq. ft.),
Yoga Pavilion (+633 sq. ft.),
Administrative Office (+2,620 sq. ft.),
Common Area (+581 sq. ft.)
Residential
5 Detached Single -Family
2 Detached Single -Family Residences
Residences
3 Attached Condominiums
15-163
General Plan
The subject property has a General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed -Use Horizontal
3/Parks and Recreation (MU-H3/PR). The Mixed Use Horizontal 3 designation on the
subject site provides for the horizontal intermixing of regional commercial office, hotel,
single-family and multi -family residential, and ancillary commercial uses. The PR
designation applies to land used or proposed for active public or private recreational use.
Permitted uses include parks (both active and passive), golf courses, marina support
facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation, and similar facilities.
The project site is designated as Anomaly No. 46 by the existing Land Use Element,
which limits development intensity to 3,725 square feet for a tennis club building and
24 tennis courts at the subject property. Residential use is also permitted in Anomaly
No. 46 in accordance with MU-H3/PR designation. As part of the Approved Project, the
City Council authorized the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms on a traffic
neutral basis. Since the Approved Project did not include a General Plan Amendment,
the conversion did not change Anomaly No. 46.
The applicant seeks no changes to the General Plan designations, but rather requests to
increase the number of hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms and the number of tennis courts
from seven to eight courts. The subject property would remain Mixed -Use Horizontal
3/Parks and Recreation (MU-H3/PR). The Proposed Project is consistent with the
MU-H3/PR designation as it includes a mix of land uses including single-family residential,
attached residential condominiums, recreational tennis club facilities, and visitor -serving
commercial uses. These uses are permitted as stated above. A complete consistency
analysis of each of the applicable General Plan policies is provided in the attached Draft
Resolution (Attachment B) and included in Table 5-12 of the Land Use and Planning
Section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum.
Charter Section 423 (Measure S)
Pursuant to City Charter Section 423 and Council Policy A-18, an analysis must be
prepared to establish whether a proposed General Plan Amendment (if approved)
requires a vote by the electorate. Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any
major amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that
significantly increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-
residential floor area or increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips
(AM/PM) or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to
the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80 percent of the increases
resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a
Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the
preceding 10 years.
15-164
The subject property is within Statistical Area L1. Only 14 hotel rooms are required to be
analyzed for Charter Section 423 since the 27 hotel rooms have been previously
converted from the 17 tennis courts. The proposed GPA results in an increase of
14,000 square feet (1,000 square feet per hotel room), 9.51 AM trips, and 12.42 PM trips
based on the most recent ITE trip rates pursuant to City Council Policy A-18. Prior
amendments within the past 10 years are the Vivante Senior Housing and Residences at
Newport Center projects. Charter Section 423 requires consideration of 80 percent of
prior increases, which results in a cumulative increase of 94 dwelling units, 23 AM trips,
and 43 PM trips between both projects. There were no nonresidential gross square
footage increases with these two prior amendments. When combined with 80 percent of
the prior amendment increases, this results in cumulative increases of 14,000 square
feet, 32.51 AM trips, and 55.42 PM trips. As a result, no vote of the electorate is required
should the City Council choose to approve the General Plan Amendment.
Local Coastal Program
The proposed amendment to the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan (Title 21)
is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP), which designates the property as
MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal/Parks and Recreation). This designation allows a
horizontally distributed mix of uses, which may include general or neighborhood
commercial, commercial offices, multi -family residential, visitor -servicing and marine -
related uses, buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses, and
active public or private recreational uses, including parks, golf courses, marina support
facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation, and similar facilities.
The Proposed Project is a request to increase existing uses which have been previously
permitted. The project includes a mixture of uses which include a tennis club and eight
tennis courts, a 41-unit hotel development and ancillary uses, and five residential units.
All of these uses are intended to provide an updated recreational facility to serve the
residents and visitors of the city. Additionally, the amendment is consistent with the
applicable land use policies of the CLUP, as provided in the attached draft resolution.
Therefore, an amendment to the CLUP is not necessary.
Title 21 includes specific development standards for the Approved Project. As a result,
an amendment to Title 21 is necessary to revise the development standards listed in
Section 21.26.055.S, which specifically refers to the Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community (PC-47) development standards of the "Tennis Club", "The Villas",
and "The Bungalows." The following amendments are proposed:
1. The amendment increases the density and intensity limit for the number of tennis
courts from seven to eight courts. The addition of the tennis court increases the
minimum required parking from 28 spaces to 32 spaces (four spaces per court).
2. The amendment converts three of the five single-family residences to attached
residential condominium units. Therefore, the amendment revises the density and
intensity limit for the Villas from five to two single-family residences and removes
previous development standards for three single-family residences referred to as
Villas C, D and E.
15-165
3. The amendment includes new development standards for attached residential
condominiums, which have a density limit of three units and maximum gross floor area
of 15,035 square feet. The maximum height allowed for the condominium buildings is
50 feet. The buildings are required to be set back five feet from any property line. The
remaining single-family residences require a minimum of two enclosed parking spaces
and one guest parking space per unit, while the proposed attached condominiums
require a minimum of three enclosed parking spaces and one guest parking space per
unit.
4. The amendment revises the density and intensity limits for the bungalows from 27 to
41 short-term guest rental rooms. Additionally, the maximum allowable gross floor
area increases from 28,300 to 47,484 square feet, and square footage for ancillary
hotel uses are included. A minimum of one space per hotel unit is required.
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment
In 2012, the City Council adopted NBCC Planned Community Development Plan (PC-47)
for the subject site as part of the Approved Project that also includes the adjacent Newport
Beach Country Club golf course site. All proposed changes as part of the Proposed
Project are limited to the tennis club property and do not apply to the golf club.
The Proposed Project is consistent with the intent and purpose of PC-47 in that the tennis
club, hotel, and residential uses and their development standards have already been
allowed and are in place on the tennis club site. The proposed changes are minor
adjustments to the building height, setbacks, and parking standards in order to
accommodate the Proposed Project. Additionally, PC-47 provides guidelines for
architectural design to include coordinated and cohesive architecture which exhibits
quality that is in keeping with the surrounding area in Newport Center. The Proposed
Project includes additional hotel rooms and two attached residential condominium loft
buildings. The proposed additions are designed to be compatible with the approved
architectural design of the Approved Project. PC-47 permits structures to be a maximum
of 50 feet in height. The Proposed Project includes two attached residential condominium
loft buildings and additional hotel rooms to be at a maximum of 46 feet high and comply
with the height limit.
Site Development Review
On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved Site Development Review No. SD2011-
002, which authorized construction of the Approved Project. The proposed changes to
the Approved Project necessitate an amendment to the approved Site Development
Review.
The proposed development complies with all Site Development Review criteria specified
in PC-47 to provide a coordinated, cohesive and comprehensive large-scale planning
project. The Approved Project features a distinct and cohesive architectural style (Figure
2), and includes landscaping components, signage and circulation design, which are
compatible with the character of the neighboring uses and surrounding sites.
15-166
The additional 14 hotel rooms and attached residential condominium buildings are
designed to be of similar architectural style, which includes smooth plaster exterior siding,
clay tile roofs, and stone veneer exterior accent finishes. As a result, the Proposed Project
is compatible with the Approved Project, and is not detrimental to the orderly and
harmonious development of the surroundings and of the city.
The Proposed Project promotes additional functionality between residential and hotel
components, as residential condominiums are attached to hotel units in two separate loft
buildings. Underground parking is provided in the loft buildings, with additional street
parking and parking lots to serve hotel and tennis club guests. Each of the two single-
family residences provide a two -car garage to serve its residents. The project has been
designed to include a surplus of 40 spaces beyond what is required.
The development is designed to maximize aesthetic quality as viewed from surrounding
properties. The property is separated from East Coast Highway by a commercial office
plaza which is comprised of three two-story office buildings at 1200 Newport Center Drive.
The office plaza includes landscaping along East Coast Highway with trees and various
plantings. The Newport Beach Country Club golf clubhouse is located approximately 150
feet west of the property. The development's multiple components (tennis club,
residential, and hotel) have been designed and sited to function cohesively, not only with
each other, but also with the adjacent golf course uses and surrounding development.
Coastal Development Permit
The subject property is located within the Coastal Zone. Therefore, the Proposed Project
requires a coastal development permit.
The Proposed Project is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan, which designates the
site as Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and Recreation (MU-H/PR). The MU-H land use
designation of the Coastal Land Use Plan allows the horizontal intermixing of hotel units,
single-family residences, attached residential condominiums, and tennis club facilities on
the project site. Additionally, the MU-H designation identifies a maximum density/intensity
limit of 1.5 floor area ratio (FAR), with a minimum FAR of 0.25 and a maximum FAR of
0.5 for retail uses and a maximum of 1.0 for residential. The project proposes 65,595
square feet of nonresidential floor area (approximately 0.21 FAR) for the hotel rooms,
concierge & guest center, and ancillary hotel uses which include a performance therapy
center, yoga pavilion, office, common area, and a spa and fitness center. The five
residential dwelling units total 20,653 square feet (approximately 0.06 FAR). The
proposed density/intensity of the hotel and residential units comply with the FAR
limitations identified in the Coastal Land Use Plan.
The PR coastal land use designation applies to land used or proposed for active public
or private recreational use. Permitted uses include parks (both active and passive), golf
courses, marina support facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private
recreation, and similar facilities. The PR designation on this site is applicable to the
existing and proposed private tennis club and tennis courts.
15-167
The density/intensity limitations include incidental buildings, such as maintenance
equipment sheds, supply storage, and restrooms, not included in determining intensity
limits. The proposed tennis club and ancillary uses are consistent with this land use
designation.
The property is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline and
will not affect the public's ability to gain access to, use or view the coast and nearby
recreational facilities. Coastal Land Use Plan, Policy 4.4.1-6 and Figure 4-3 (Coastal
Views) identify the closest public view road as Newport Center Drive, located
approximately 170 feet east of the project site and the closest public viewpoint as Irvine
Terrace Park, located 525 feet south of the project site. Coastal views from these view
corridors and viewpoints are directed toward Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Since
the project site is located to the north of Irvine Terrace Park, the Proposed Project will not
affect coastal views due to its orientation. From Newport Center Drive, there is a zero to
40-foot grade difference to the project area below.
An analysis of the fiscal and economic Impacts was prepared on August 29, 2022, by
Kosmont Companies to analyze the construction of new visitor accommodations in the
coastal zone in accordance with the requirements of Section 21.48.025 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan, Standards for Specific Land Uses, Visitor
Accommodations) of the NBMC. The report provides a feasibility analysis stating that the
anticipated average daily room (ADR) rate for all 41 rooms is approximately $920 and the
statewide average daily room rate is $205.69. Because the anticipated ADR will well
exceed the statewide average, the proposed accommodations are not considered lower
cost accommodations. The report considers the specific location of the property as an
inappropriate location for low-cost accommodations. Additionally, low-cost
accommodations are not feasible due to prohibitive land and construction costs. The
property does not currently provide accommodations of any kind and implementation of
the Project would not directly impact low-cost accommodations. While the Project would
not include any lower cost accommodations, the Local Coastal Program Implementation
Plan would identify the Project as generating an impact simply by not providing lower -
cost accommodations. There is no impact on the provision of lower -cost visitor
accommodations in the Coastal Zone as creating lower cost accommodations at the site
is infeasible and there is no nexus to an actual impact; therefore, no mitigation is required.
The Project features larger guest facilities with bedrooms, separate living rooms with sofa
beds, and many rooms with kitchens. These features will accommodate more occupants
per room, which lowers the costs per occupant.
Tentative Vesting Tract Map
On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved a Vesting Tentative Tract Map, which
authorized the creation of separate lots for five single-family residences, 27 hotel rooms,
and lettered lots for common areas and a private street. The applicant proposes an
amendment to the vesting tentative tract map to accommodate the Proposed Project.
15-168
The amended map reflects the combination of two previously divided lots, which results
in the elimination of one lot. These two lots were intended for two detached -single family
residences. The map has also been modified to include residential condominium portion
of the Proposed Project.
All construction for the project has been conditioned to comply with all Building, Public
Works, and Fire Codes, which are in place to prevent serious public health problems. The
Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed revisions to the approved vesting
tentative tract map and determined it is consistent with the Newport Beach Subdivision
Code (Title 19) and applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
Limited Term Permit
The applicant is requesting a limited term permit (LTP) to allow two temporary modular
trailers and portable toilets during construction. Both modular trailers are approximately
33 feet long and 13 feet wide. One modular trailer is proposed to be used as a
construction office located at the southwest portion of the property and will be staged at
this location through the entire duration of the Proposed Project, which is estimated to be
approximately 20 months. The second modular office is proposed to be used as a
temporary office for tennis club operations and will be located on the easterly portion of
the property through the construction of the tennis clubhouse, which is estimated to be
approximately 16 months. The portable toilets are proposed to serve the temporary tennis
club office and located nearby.
Development Agreement
On March 27, 2012, the City Council approved a Development Agreement between the
City and the Applicant for the Approved Project. The DA was executed and recorded, on
January 29, 2014, with a 10-year term. The DA provides vested rights to develop the
Approved project and the City negotiated public benefit fees of ninety-three thousand
$93,000 per each residential dwelling unit and $10 per square foot of construction for the
tennis clubhouse, for a grand total of $502,250. These fees are subject to annual
adjustments, based on the CPI Index.
On July 12, 2022, the City Council approved the First Amendment to the DA to extend
the term of the agreement by one year. The DA will expire on September 23, 2023. In
accordance with Section 15.45.020.A.2.c (Development Agreement Required) of the
NBMC, a reconsideration of the agreement is required as the Proposed Project, which
includes an amendment to PC-47 and a General Plan Amendment to increase the
number of hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms, which is new non-residential development in
Statistical Area L1 (Newport Center/Fashion Island).
The applicant requests an additional 10-year term of agreement (Second Amendment),
pursuant to Section 15.45.070 (Amendment/Cancellation). The Second Amendment
provides assurance that the applicant may proceed with the Proposed Project in
accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and conditions of approval.
15-169
Additionally, the Second Amendment to the DA helps the applicant avoid a waste of
resources and escalated costs of the Proposed Project while encouraging a commitment
to private participation in comprehensive planning.
The Second Amendment (Attachment E) also specifies the updated permitted uses,
density and intensity, and maximum height and size of proposed buildings, consistent
with the Proposed Project. Additionally, the Second Amendment to the Agreement
includes all mandatory elements, including public benefits that are appropriate to support
conveying the vested development rights consistent with the City's General Plan, NBMC,
and Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. No changes to the public benefit fees are
proposed.
A more complete summary and analysis of the Proposed Project and related entitlement
findings can be found in the attached September 8, 2022 Planning Commission staff
report (Attachment F).
Planning Commission Review and Recommendation
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 8, 2022. The main topics
discussed by the Planning Commission were confirmation of the applicant's request to
maintain the existing private tennis club with tennis courts, the City's process for
conversion of tennis courts to pickleball courts, tennis club and pickleball club operations
as they relate to occupancy, parking, traffic, and noise impacts to the surrounding uses,
and level of details on the submitted plans for project approval. Nine members of the
public addressed the Planning Commission regarding the Proposed Project. At the
conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 (5 ayes, 1 absent,
and 1 recused) to adopt Resolution No. PC2022-022, recommending the City Council
approve the Proposed Project. The Planning Commission staff report, meeting minutes,
and resolution are attached for reference as Attachments F, G and H.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant is required to reimburse the City for all costs associated with the review of
the application. The applicant has agreed to the terms of the draft Second Amendment
stated above that requires the payment of $502,250 in addition to all required permit fees
and development impact fees.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
On March 27, 2012, the Newport Beach City Council approved Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) and an Errata to Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (together referred as WND") that addressed the potential
environmental effects associated with the Approved Project.
15-170
Although the Project necessitates an amendment to the General Plan due to the
increased number of hotel rooms and tennis courts, there are no proposed changes to
the land uses permitted per the General Plan land use designation. Additionally, based
on the changes associated with the Project, there are no conditions that would require
the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental MND. As a result, an Addendum to the
MND was prepared pursuant to Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative
Declarations) and 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration) of the CEQA
Guidelines.
On the basis of the MND and entire environmental review record, the additional tennis
court, hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses, and conversion of three (3) single-family
residences to condominium units will not result in any new significant impacts that were
not previously analyzed in the MND. The Addendum confirms and provides substantial
evidence that the potential impacts associated with this Proposed Project would either be
the same or less than those described in the MND, or as mitigated by applicable mitigation
measures in the MND. In addition, there are no substantial changes to the circumstances
under which the Proposed Project would be undertaken that would result in new or more
severe environmental impacts than previously addressed in either the MND, nor has any
new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant environmental
impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA
Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted MND is the appropriate
environmental document for the Proposed Project. In taking action to approve any of the
requested applications for the Proposed Project, the data presented in the MND, as
augmented by the Addendum for this Proposed Project, are considered as part of the
record.
6,rot 11 rig l0rev
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property
within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and
waterways) including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days
before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City
Hall and on the City website.
ATTACHMENTS:
AttaGhmi en+i..Tt A Reseliutieni- No. 2022 65
Atta Ghh-rmen�/
+o-�s I
i.�-rc-�Re� itinrazroni-rNo� 20z2-66
AttaGhmrrceRt�—Ftl2.`elit'"crvrni No. 2022 67
AttaGhmont D Orrd TnoN� (1� Q
AttaGhmrre c E QrdiRaRGe Ne. 2022 20
Attachment F — Planning Commission Staff Report, Dated September 8, 2022
Attachment G — Planning Commission Minute Excerpts, Dated September 8, 2022
Attachment H —Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
15-171
Attachment F
Planning Commission Staff Report, Dated September 8, 2022 (without attachments)
15-172
PO
cgL'FOP-
SUBJECT:
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
September 8, 2022
Agenda Item No. 3
Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)
■ General Plan Amendment
■ Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment
■ Planned Community Development Plan Amendment
■ Major Site Development Review Amendment (SD2011-002)
■ Coastal Development Permit Amendment (CD2017-039)
■ Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment (NT2005-003)
■ Limited Term Permit Amendment (XP2011-004)
■ Development Agreement Amendment (DA2008-001)
■ Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND2010-008)
SITE 1602 East Coast Highway
LOCATION:
APPLICANT: Robert O' Hill (Golf Realty Fund, Managing Owner)
OWNER: Dba NBCC L & I
PLANNER: David Lee, Associate Planner
949-644-3225 or dlee@newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
The applicant requests an amendment to the approved Tennis Club at Newport Beach
project to 1) increase the number of future tennis courts from seven (7) to eight (8) courts,
2) increase the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms, 3) increase the gross
floor area of the ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, and 4) provide three (3)
attached condominium units and two (2) detached single-family residences in -lieu of five
(5) detached single-family residences. The request also includes a 10-year term
extension to the approve project's Development Agreement to ensure the orderly
development of the property and certain public benefits to the City.
RECOMMENDATION
1) Conduct a public hearing;
2) Find that the Proposed Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were
not previously analyzed in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-
008 (SCH 2O10091052) for the Approved Project, and the addendum has been
prepared to address reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from
the Proposed Project; and
15-173
3) Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-022, recommending the City Council approval of
PA2021-260, which includes adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Addendum, and approval of a General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Land Use
Plan Amendment, Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, Major Site
Development Review Amendment, Coastal Development Permit Amendment,
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment, Limited Term Permit Amendment, and
Development Agreement Amendment for The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project
located at 1602 East Coast Highway.
15-174
VICINITY MAP
-
Granville Dr.
A.
TAO
41
Golf Course!
,��� ,. �' , °� �, �� �"
Subject Property
III
Ft'�' •� �o� ae...^
�
_ Oro o b4 '. � y 1 ' ♦ �. � fS I
�� � ��. . 4' n^' �.
14
GENERAL PLAN
ZONING
%
a f
A
'
a
LOCATION
GENERAL PLAN
ZONING
CURRENT USE
MU-H3/PR (Mixed -Use
ON -SITE
Horizontal 3/Parks and
PC-47 (Newport Beach
Tennis Club
Recreation
Country Club)
NORTH
RM (Multiple Residential
RM (Multiple Residential)]
mily residences
SOUTH
CO-G (General
PC-40 (Corporate Plaza
Commercial Office
West)Offices
EAST =1
CO-G =F
OG Office -General
Offices
WEST =1
PR 11
PC-47
Golf Club
15-175
INTRODUCTION
Project Setting and Background
The subject property is approximately seven (7) acres in size and presently improved with
a private tennis club consisting of a 3,725-square-foot tennis clubhouse, 14 tennis courts,
32 pickle ball courts, and a 125-space surface parking lot. The subject property is located
adjacent to the Newport Beach Country Club Golf Course and west of the Corporate Plaza
West Planned Community, which consists of several office buildings. The site is also
located directly south of the Granville residential community.
On March 27, 2012, the City Council approved land use entitlements and executed a 10-
year term development agreement (DA) to allow the redevelopment of the tennis club site
into three distinct components:
1) Tennis Club — Reconstruct the existing 3,725-square-foot tennis clubhouse, and
reduce the total number of tennis courts from 24 to seven (7) courts, including one
lighted stadium court;
2) Hotel (Bungalows) - Construct a 27-room boutique hotel with ancillary uses
consisting of a performance therapy center, yoga pavilion, hotel office, common
area, and a spa and fitness center; and
3) Residential (Villas) - Construct five (5) detached single-family residences.
Since the project site is located in the Coastal Zone, a coastal development permit (CDP)
is required to implement the project. On April 10, 2013, the California Coastal Commission
(CCC), which had permitting jurisdiction for Coastal Development Permits (CDP) at the
time, issued a notice of intent to issue CDP No. 5-12-160 for the project. However, the
CDP eventually expired without action. The City obtained CDP permitting authority in
January of 2017, and on November 20, 2018, the City's Zoning Administrator approved
a CDP authorizing the redevelopment of the tennis club consistent with the 2012
entitlements. The CDP is scheduled to expire on November 20, 2022, after receiving two,
one-year time extensions. The project includes both the 2012 City Council and 2018
Zoning Administrator approvals (commonly referred to as "Approved Project").
15-176
The exhibit below illustrates the proposed site plan for the Approved Project:
The Approved Project has not been implemented to date and continues to operate as a
private tennis club, with pickleball courts being introduced in 2019.
On June 28, 2022, the City Council approved the first amendment to the DA previously
approved in 2012, which authorized the extension of the DA by one year. This provided
City Staff additional time to process an amendment to the Approved Project, which was
submitted by the applicant on November 2, 2021.
Project Description
The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Approved Project to add one tennis court
for a total of eight (8) tennis courts, 14 hotel rooms for a total of 41 hotel units with additional
15-177
ancillary uses, and to allow three (3) of five (5) single-family residential units to be converted
to condominiums ("Proposed Project").
The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the Proposed
Project:
• General Plan Amendment: An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of Table LU2 of the
2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element to amend the allowable
development limits for the tennis club site;
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment: An amendment to Local
Coastal Implementation Plan Section 21.26.055.S.2 (Tennis Club of Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community Coastal Zoning District Development
Standards) to amend land use regulations for the tennis club site;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment: An amendment to Planned
Community Development Plan No. 47 (Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community) to amend land use regulations and development standards on the
tennis club site;
• Major Site Development Review: A site development review in accordance with
Section 4.0 (Site Development Review) of Planned Community Development Plan
No. 47 and NBMC Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) for the
construction of the Proposed Project;
• Coastal Development Permit: An amendment to Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039 for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the
tennis club site, and implementation of the Proposed Project;
• Tentative Vesting Tract Map: An amendment to Tentative Vesting Tract Map
pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code to create separate lots for the tennis
club site;
• Limited Term Permit: A limited term permit to allow temporary use of structures
during construction pursuant to Section 20.60.015 of the Municipal Code;
• Development Agreement: A second amendment to the Development Agreement
(DA2008-001), between the applicant and the City pursuant to Section 15.45 of
the Municipal Code, which would provide vested right to develop the Proposed
Project while also providing negotiated public benefits and extend the term of
Agreement for an additional 10 (ten) years; and
15-178
• Addendum to the 2010 Mitigated Negative Declaration: Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the addendum addresses reasonably
foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the proposed development.
The Proposed Project does not increase the overall footprint of the Approved Project. The
Proposed Project introduces two (2) new loft buildings, which includes a mixture of
attached residential condominiums atop of two levels of hotel rooms and are a maximum
height of 46 feet. The additional hotel amenities, which includes a hotel office, common
area, performance therapy center, and yoga pavilion, are located within the first floor of
one of the loft buildings (Bungalow Lofts). The remainder of the hotel rooms remain as
bungalow -style buildings as previously envisioned and approved, have a maximum height
of 31 feet, and are located throughout the project site. Parking is available for each
component of the project, as there are multiple parking lots, street parking, and
underground parking available for residents, the tennis club, and hotel guests. A total of
131 parking spaces are provided, where 91 spaces are required (Table 4, below). The
Proposed Project features a distinct architectural style, which includes smooth plaster
exterior siding, clay -tile roofs, and stone veneer exterior accent finishes that is compatible
with the surrounding uses and area. The exhibit below illustrates the site plan for the
Proposed Project:
15-179
The anticipated duration of construction of the Proposed Project is approximately 20
months, which will begin with the demolition of the existing tennis and pickleball courts
and portion of the parking lot. Six (6) tennis courts are to be maintained for use during
construction. The construction of the hotel rooms, tennis club house and stadium court
will follow immediately and will be completed with the construction of the residential units.
A Phasing Plan is included as part of the Project Plans and is attached to the Staff Report
(Attachment No. PC 6).
The property has an existing parking lot with two (2) entrances currently taken from
Clubhouse Drive, which has a westerly outlet to East Coast Highway and an easterly
outlet to Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive. During the various phases of
construction, the easterly entrance to the parking lot will remain available to the public for
parking and will provide direct access for the modular office trailer and portable toilets,
while the westerly entrance will be for construction access only. A Construction
15-180
Management Plan is included as an attachment to the Staff Report (Attachment No. PC
4). Table 1 provides a summary of the Approved Project comparing it to the and the
Proposed Project:
Table 1 — Proiect Comparison
Use
Approved Project
Proposed Project
Tennis
Clubhouse (3,725 sq. ft.)
No Change
7 Tennis Courts
8 Tennis Courts (+1)
Hotel
27 Hotel Rooms
41 Hotel Rooms (+14)
Concierge Center (2,200 sq. ft.)
No Change
Spa/Fitness Center (7,500 sq. ft.)
No Change
+4,686 sq. ft. of Ancillary Uses
Performance Therapy (+852 sq. ft.),
Yoga Pavilion (+633 sq. ft.),
Administrative Office (+2,620 sq. ft.),
Common Area +581 sq. ft.
Residential
5 Detached Single -Family
2 Detached Single -Family
Residences
Residences
3 Attached Condominiums
DISCUSSION
Analysis
General Plan
The subject property has a General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed -Use Horizontal
3/Parks and Recreation (MU-H3/PR). The Mixed Use Horizontal 3 designation on the
subject site provides for the horizontal intermixing of regional commercial office, hotel,
single-family and multi -family residential, and ancillary commercial uses. The PR
designation applies to land used or proposed for active public or private recreational use.
Permitted uses include parks (both active and passive), golf courses, marina support
facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation, and similar facilities.
The project site is designated as Anomaly No. 46 by the existing Land Use Element,
which limits development intensity to 3,725 square feet for a tennis club building and 24
tennis courts at the subject property. Residential use is also permitted in Anomaly No. 46
in accordance with MU-H3/PR designation. As part of the Approved Project, the City
Council authorized the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms on a traffic neutral
basis. Since the Approved Project did not include a General Plan Amendment, the
conversion did not change Anomaly No. 46.
15-181
The applicant seeks no changes to the General Plan designations, but rather requests to
increase the number of hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms (+14) and number of tennis
courts from 7 to 8 courts (+1). The subject property would remain Mixed -Use Horizontal
3/Parks and Recreation (MU-H3/PR). The Proposed Project is consistent with the MU-
H3/PR designation as it includes a mix of land uses including single-family residential,
attached residential condominiums, recreational tennis club facilities, and visitor -serving
commercial uses. These uses are permitted as stated above. A complete consistency
analysis of each of the applicable General Plan policies is provided in the attached Draft
Resolution (Attachment No. PC 1) and included in Table 5-12 of the Land Use and
Planning Section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum.
Charter Section 423 (Measure S)
Pursuant to City Charter Section 423 and Council Policy A-18, an analysis must be
prepared to establish whether a proposed General Plan Amendment (if approved)
requires a vote by the electorate. Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any
major General Plan amendment to the General Plan. A major General Plan amendment
is one that significantly increases allowed density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of
non-residential floor area, or increases traffic by more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips
(AM/PM) or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units. These thresholds apply to
the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80 percent of the increases
resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood (defined as a
Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted within the
preceding ten years.
The subject property is within Statistical Area L1. Only 14 hotel rooms are required to be
analyzed for Charter Section 423 since the 27 hotel rooms have been previously
converted from the 17 tennis courts. The proposed GPA results in an increase of 14,000
square feet (1,000 square feet per hotel room), 9.51 AM trips, and 12.42 PM trips based
on the most recent ITE trip rates pursuant to City Council Policy A-18. Prior amendments
within the past ten years are Vivante Senior Housing and Residences at Newport Center
projects. Charter Section 423 requires consideration of 80 percent of prior increases,
which results in a cumulative increase of 94 dwelling units, 23 AM trips, and 43 PM trips
between both projects. There were no nonresidential gross square footage increases with
these two prior amendments. When combined with 80 percent of the prior amendment
increases, this results in cumulative increases of 14,000 square feet, 32.51 AM trips, and
55.42 PM trips. Table 2 below illustrates the calculations and none of the thresholds
specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, therefore no vote of the electorate is
required should the City Council choose to approve the General Plan Amendment.
15-182
Table 2 - Charter Section 423 Calculations
Unit
Floor area
Trip rates
AM trips
PM Trips
Tennis Clubhouse
N/A
N/A
N/A
Tennis Courts
1 court
N/A
1.67/Court AM
3.88/Court PM
1.67
3.88
Hotel
14 rooms
14,0001
0.56 AM/room
0.61 PM/room
7.84
8.54
Total - Project
N/A
14,000
N/A
9.51
12.42
Vote Required Project
N/A
No
N/A
No
No
80% of Prior Amendments
N/A
0
N/A
23
43
Total- Project + Prior
Amendments
N/A
14,000
N/A
32.51
55.42
Vote Required Project +Prior
Amendments
N/A
No
i
N/A
No
No
i
Nursuant to Council Holicy A-18, each hotel room equals 1,000 square feet, so there is a 14,000 square toot increase.
Upon approval of the project, the Proposed Project will be added to L1 Tracking Table as
such:
Project Name
Date
Amendment
Square
Dwelling
AM Peak
PM Peak
Approved
Description
Footage
Unit
Hour Trip
Hour Trip
Change
Chan a
Change
Change
Vivante Senior
8/13/2019
Private Institutions
(Reduction:
90
26
52
Housing
(PI) to Mixed Use
45,028 to
Horizontal (MU-
16,000)
H3
Residences at
9/28/2021
Regional
0
28
3
2
Newport Center
Commercial Office
(CO-R) to Planned
Community (PC-
61
Tennis Club at
TBD
14 Hotel Rooms
14,000
0
9.51
12.42
Newport
and 8 Tennis
Beach
Courts
100% Totals
14,000
118
38.51
66.42
80% Totals
11,200
94
30.80
53.14
Remaining
28,800
6
69.20
46.86
Capacity
Without Vote
Local Coastal Program
The proposed amendment to the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan (Title 21)
is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP), which designates the property as
MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal/Parks and Recreation). This designation allows
horizontally -distributed mix of uses, which may include general or neighborhood
commercial, commercial offices, multi -family residential, visitor -servicing and marine -
related uses, buildings that vertically integrate residential with commercial uses, and
15-183
active public or private recreational uses, including parks, golf courses, marina support
facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation, and similar facilities.
The Proposed Project is a request to increase existing uses which have been previously
permitted. The project includes a mixture of uses which include a tennis club and eight
(8) tennis courts, a 41-unit hotel development and ancillary uses, and five (5) residential
units. All of these uses are intended to provide an updated recreational facility to serve
the residents and visitors of the City. Additionally, the amendment is consistent with
applicable land use policies of the CLUP, as provided in the attached Draft Resolution.
Therefore, an amendment to the CLUP is not necessary.
Title 21 includes specific development standards for the Approved Project. As a result,
an amendment to Title 21 is necessary to revise the development standards listed in
Section 21.26.055.S, which specifically refers to the Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community (PC-47) development standards of the "Tennis Club", "The Villas",
and "The Bungalows." The following amendments are proposed:
1. The amendment increases the density and intensity limit for the number of tennis
courts from seven (7) to eight (8) courts. The addition of the tennis court increases
the minimum required parking from 28 spaces to 32 spaces (4 spaces per court).
There is no change to the 3,725-square-foot limit for the tennis clubhouse.
2. The number of residential units remains unchanged. However, the amendment
converts three (3) of the five (5) single-family residences to attached residential
condominium units. Therefore, the amendment revises the density and intensity limit
for the Villas from five (5) to two (2) single family residences and removes previous
development standards for three single family residences referred to as Villas C, D,
and E.
3. The amendment includes new development standards for attached residential
condominiums, which have a density limit of three (3) units and maximum gross floor
area of 15,035 square feet. The maximum height allowed for the condominium
buildings is 50 feet. The buildings are required to be set back five (5) feet from any
property line. The remaining single-family residences require a minimum of two (2)
enclosed parking spaces and one guest parking space per unit, while the proposed
attached condominiums require a minimum of three (3) enclosed parking spaces and
one guest parking space per unit.
4. The amendment revises the density and intensity limits for the bungalows from 27 to
41 short-term guest rental rooms. Additionally, the maximum allowable gross floor
area increases from 28,300 to 47,484 square feet, and square footage for ancillary
hotel uses are included. A minimum of one (1) space per hotel unit is required.
15-184
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment
In 2012, the City Council adopted NBCC Planned Community Development Plan (PC-47)
for the subject site as part of the Approved Project that also includes the adjacent Newport
Beach Country Club Golf Course site. All proposed changes as part of the Proposed
Project are limited to the Tennis Club property and do not apply to the Golf Club.
The Proposed Project is consistent with the intent and purpose of PC-47 in that the tennis
club, hotel, and residential uses and their development standards have already been
allowed and is in place on the tennis club site. The proposed changes are minor
adjustments to the building height, setbacks, and parking standards in order to
accommodate the Proposed Project. Additionally, PC-47 provides guidelines for
architectural design to include coordinated and cohesive architecture which exhibits
quality that is keeping with the surrounding area in Newport Center. The Proposed Project
includes additional hotel rooms and two (2) attached residential condominium loft
buildings. The proposed additions are designed to be compatible with the approved
architectural design of the Approved Project. PC-47 permits structures to be a maximum
of 50 feet in height. The Proposed Project includes two (2) attached residential
condominium loft buildings and additional hotel rooms to be at a maximum of 46 feet high
and comply with the height limit.
Site Development Review
On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved Site Development Review No. SD2011-
002, which authorized construction of the Approved Project. The proposed changes to
the Approved Project, necessitate an amendment to the approved Site Development
Review. In accordance with Section 4.0 of PC-47 (Site Development Review), the
following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
1. The development shall be in compliance with all other provisions of the Planned
Community District Plan;
2. The development shall be compatible with the character of the neighboring uses
and surrounding sites and shall not be detrimental to the orderly and harmonious
development of the surroundings and of the City;
3. The development shall be sited and designed to maximize the aesthetic quality of
the project as viewed from surrounding roadways and properties, with special
consideration given to the mass and bulk of buildings and the streetscape on Coast
Highway; and
4. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access
ways, landscaping and other site features shall give proper consideration to
functional aspects of site development.
15-185
The proposed development complies with all Site Development Review criteria specified
in PC-47 in order to provide a coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive large-scale
planning project. The Approved Project features a distinct and cohesive architectural style
(Figure 2), and includes landscaping components, signage, and circulation design, which
are compatible with the character of the neighboring uses and surrounding sites. The
additional 14 hotel rooms and attached residential condominium buildings designed to be
of similar architectural style, which includes smooth plaster exterior siding, clay -tile roofs,
and stone veneer exterior accent finishes. As a result, the Proposed Project is compatible
with the Approved Project, and not detrimental to the orderly and harmonious
development of the surroundings and of the City.
Figure 1: Rendering of Architectural Style (Pictured: Attached Condominium and Hotel Loft Building)
The Proposed Project promotes additional functionality between residential and hotel
components, as residential condominiums are attached to hotel units in two (2) separate
loft buildings. Underground parking is provided in the loft buildings, with additional street
parking and parking lots to serve hotel and tennis club guests. Each of the two (2) single-
family residences provide a two (2)-car garage to serve its residents. The project has
been designed to include a surplus of 40 spaces beyond what is required. Table 4 below
shows the required and provided parking for the proposed project.
15-186
Table 4: Reauired and Provided Parkina
Use
Parking Rate
Required
Provided
Tennis Club
4 per court
32 spaces
51 spaces
Single -Family Residences
2 per unit enclosed
1 per unit guest
4 enclosed spaces
2 guest spaces
4 enclosed spaces
4 guest spaces
Attached Condominiums
3 per unit enclosed
1 per unit guest
9 enclosed spaces
3 guest spaces
9 enclosed spaces
3 guest spaces
Hotel
1 per unit
41 spaces
60 spaces
Total
N/A
91 spaces
131 spaces
Surplus
40 spaces
The development is designed to maximize aesthetic quality as viewed from surrounding
properties. The property is separated from East Coast Highway by a commercial office
plaza which comprises of three (3) two (2)-story office buildings at 1200 Newport Center
Drive. The office plaza includes landscaping along East Coast Highway with trees and
various plantings. The Newport Beach Country Club golf clubhouse is located
approximately 150 feet west of the Property. The development's multiple components
(tennis club, residential, and hotel) have been designed and sited to function cohesively
not only with each other, but also with the adjacent golf course uses and surrounding
development.
Coastal Development Permit
The subject property is located within the Coastal Zone. Therefore, the Proposed Project
requires a coastal development permit. Per Section 21.52.015.E of NBMC, the required
findings to approve a coastal development permit are as follows:
1. Conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program;
2. Conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the
Coastal Act if the project is located between the nearest public road and the sea
or shoreline of any body of water located within the coastal zone.
The Proposed Project is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan, which designates
site as Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and Recreation (MU-H/PR). The MU-H land use
designation of the Coastal Land Use Plan allows the horizontal intermixing of hotel units,
single-family residences, attached residential condominiums, and tennis club facilities on
the project site. Additionally, the MU-H designation identifies a maximum density/intensity
limit of 1.5 floor area ratio (FAR), with a minimum FAR of 0.25 and a maximum FAR of
0.5 for retail uses and a maximum of 1.0 for residential. The project proposes 65,595
square feet of nonresidential floor area (approximately 0.21 FAR) for the hotel rooms,
concierge & guest center, and ancillary hotel uses which include a performance therapy
center, yoga pavilion, office, common area, and a spa and fitness center. The five (5)
residential dwelling units totals 20,653 square feet (approximately 0.06 FAR). The
15-187
proposed density/intensity of the hotel and residential units comply with the FAR
limitations identified in the Coastal Land Use Plan.
The PR coastal land use designation applies to land used or proposed for active public
or private recreational use. Permitted uses include parks (both active and passive), golf
courses, marina support facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private
recreation, and similar facilities. The PR designation on this site is applicable to the
existing and proposed private tennis club and tennis courts. The density/intensity
limitations include incidental buildings, such as maintenance equipment sheds, supply
storage, and restrooms, not included in determining intensity limits. The proposed tennis
club and ancillary uses are consistent with this land use designation.
The property is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline and
will not affect the public's ability to gain access to, use, or view the coast and nearby
recreational facilities. Vertical access to Newport Bay is available via existing public
access at 1601 Bayside Drive, which is located approximately 1,600 feet southwest of the
subject property. Elevations on the subject property range from 104 feet up to 120 feet
North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) above mean sea level. These site
elevations are well above projected sea level rise in Newport Bay for the next 75 years
and the site is not subjected to other coastal hazards. Potential liquefaction risk (if any)
must be mitigated with foundation designs consistent with the Building Code.
Coastal Land Use Plan, Policy 4.4.1-6 and Figure 4-3 (Coastal Views) identify the closest
public view road as Newport Center Drive, located approximately 170 feet east of the
project site and the closest public viewpoint as Irvine Terrace Park, located 525 feet south
of the project site. Coastal views from these view corridors and viewpoints are directed
toward the Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Since the project site is located to the
north of Irvine Terrace Park, the Proposed Project will not affect coastal views due to its
orientation. From Newport Center Drive, there is a zero to 40-foot grade difference to the
project area below.
The Planned Community Text amendment includes maximum building heights for all
structure types (Table 3, above). The majority of the project would sit below the existing
grade elevations along Newport Center Drive, minimizing the visibility of the project site
and would not obstruct public coastal views. During construction, equipment would be
obscured by vegetation and the grade differential so it would not obstruct coastal views
from motorists traveling along Newport Center Drive. The Proposed Project will not impact
coastal views.
An Analysis of the Fiscal and Economic Impacts was prepared on August 29, 2022, by
Kosmont Companies to analyze the construction of new visitor accommodations in the
coastal zone in accordance with the requirements of Section 21.48.025 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan, Standards for Specific Land Uses, Visitor
Accommodations) of the NBMC. The report provides a feasibility analysis stating that the
anticipated average daily room (ADR) rate for all 41 rooms is approximately $920 and the
15-188
statewide average daily room rate is $205.69. Because the anticipated ADR will well
exceed the Statewide average, the proposed accommodations are not considered lower
cost accommodations. The report considers the specific location of the Property as an
inappropriate location for low-cost accommodations. Additionally, low-cost
accommodations are not feasible due to prohibitive land and construction costs. The
Property does not currently provide accommodations of any kind and implementation of
the Project would not directly impact low-cost accommodations. While the Project would
not include any lower cost accommodations, the Local Coastal Program Implementation
Plan would identify the Project as generating an impact simply by not providing lower -
cost accommodations. There is no impact on the provision of lower -cost visitor
accommodations in the Coastal Zone as creating lower cost accommodations at the site
is infeasible and there is no nexus to an actual impact; therefore, no mitigation is required.
The Project features larger guest facilities with bedrooms, separate living rooms with sofa
beds and many rooms with kitchens. These features will accommodate more occupants
per room, which lowers the costs per occupant.
Tentative Vesting Tract Map
On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved a Vesting Tentative Tract Map, which
authorized the creation of separate lots for five (5) single-family residences, 27 hotel rooms,
and lettered lots for common areas and a private street. The applicant proposes an
amendment to the vesting tentative tract map to accommodate the Proposed Project, which
consists of two (2) single -unit residential dwellings, three (3) residential condominiums, 41
hotel rooms, a tennis clubhouse, their common open space areas and a private street to
support the proposed uses.
In accordance with Section 19.12.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, and the
following finding and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
1. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are
consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with applicable
provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code,
2. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development;
3. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish
or wildlife or their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision
making body may nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental
impact report was prepared for the project and a finding was made pursuant to
Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act that specific economic,
social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in the environmental impact report;
4. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems;
5. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property
15-189
within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the decision making body may
approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be
provided and that these easements will be substantially equivalent to ones previously
acquired by the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to
easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no
authority is hereby granted to the City Council to determine that the public at large
has acquired easements for access through or use of property within a subdivision;
6. That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map
Act, if the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a
subdivision of the land would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the
subdivision will result in residential development incidental to the commercial
agricultural use of the land,
7. That, in the case of a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California
Business and Professions Code: (1) There is an adopted specific plan for the area to
be included within the land project; and (2) the decision making body finds that the
proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area;
8. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been
satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map
Act,
9. That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act
and Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City's share of
the regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region
against the public service needs of the City's residents and available fiscal and
environmental resources;
10. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer
system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and
11. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision
conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public
access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act.
The amended map reflects the combination of two (2) previously divided lots, which results
in the elimination of one (1) lot. These two (2) lots were intended for two (2) detached -single
family residences. The map has also been modified to include residential condominium
portion of the Proposed Project.
The project site is located in the Newport Center and Fashion Island area. The site is
currently improved with a private tennis club. Given its location, this site is ideal for the
development of a recreation and mixed -use project as allowed by the General Plan Land
Use Element. Additionally, the Addendum to the MND concludes that no significant
environmental impacts will result with the Proposed Project in accordance with the
proposed subdivision map revision.
15-190
All construction for the project has been conditioned to comply with all Building, Public
Works, and Fire Codes, which are in place to prevent serious public health problems. The
Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed revisions to the approved vesting
tentative tract map and determined it is consistent with the Newport Beach Subdivision
Code (Title 19) and applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
Limited Term Permit
The applicant is requesting a limited term permit (LTP) to allow two (2) temporary modular
trailers and portable toilets during construction. In accordance with Section 20.52.040
(Limited Term Permits) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the following findings and
facts in support of such findings are set forth:
1. The operation of the requested limited duration use at the location proposed and
within the time period specified would not be detrimental to the harmonious and
orderly growth of the City, nor endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a
hazard to the public convenience, health, interest, safety, or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the requested limited duration
use;
2. The subject lot is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the limited duration
use without material detriment to the use and enjoyment of other properties located
adjacent to and in the vicinity of the lot;
3. The subject lot is adequately served by streets or highways having sufficient width
and improvements to accommodate the kind and quantity of traffic that the limited
duration use would or could reasonably be expected to generate;
4. Adequate temporary parking to accommodate vehicular traffic to be generated by
the limited duration use would be available either on -site or at alternate locations
acceptable to the Zoning Administrator; and
5. The limited duration use is consistent with all applicable provisions of the General
Plan, any applicable specific plan, the Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
Both modular trailers are approximately 33 feet long and 13 feet wide. One modular trailer
is proposed to be used as a construction office located at the southwest portion of the
property and will be staged at this location through the entire duration of the Proposed
Project, which is estimated to be approximately 20 months. The second modular office is
proposed to be used as a temporary office for tennis club operations and will be located
on the easterly portion of the property through the construction of the tennis clubhouse,
which is estimated to be approximately 16 months. The portable toilets are proposed to
serve the temporary tennis club office and located nearby.
Development Agreement
On March 27, 2012, the City Council approved a Development Agreement between the
City and the Applicant for the Approved Project. The DA was executed and recorded, on
January 29, 2014, with a ten-year term. The DA provides vested rights to develop the
15-191
Approved project and the City negotiated the following public benefit fees of ninety-three
thousand dollars ($93,000) per each residential dwelling unit and ten dollars ($10) per
square foot of construction for the tennis clubhouse (Table 5). These fees are subject to
annual adjustments, based on the CPI Index.
Table 5: Proiected Public Benefit Fees (Subiect to Adiustment)
Use
Multi tier
Fee Rate
Total
Residential
5 units
$93,000 per unit
$465,000
Tennis Clubhouse
3,725 square feet
$10 per square foot
$37,250
Grand Total
$502,250
On July 12, 2022, the City Council approving the First Amendment to the DA to extend
the term of the agreement by one year. The DA will expire on September 23, 2023.
In accordance with Section 15.45.020.A.2.c (Development Agreement Required) of the
NBMC, a reconsideration of the agreement is required as the Proposed Project, which
includes an amendment to PC-47 and a General Plan Amendment to increase the
number of hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms, which is new non-residential development in
Statistical Area L1 (Newport Center/Fashion Island).
The applicant requests an additional 10-year term of agreement ("Second Amendment"),
pursuant to Section 15.45.070 (Amendment/Cancellation). The Second Amendment
provides assurance that the applicant may proceed with the Proposed Project in
accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and conditions of approval.
Additionally, the Second Amendment to the DA helps the applicant avoid a waste of
resources and escalated costs of the Proposed Project while encouraging a commitment
to private participation in comprehensive planning.
In addition to the 10-year term extension, the Second Amendment (Exhibit "E" of the Draft
Resolution) specifies the updated permitted uses, density and intensity, and maximum
height and size of proposed buildings, consistent with the Proposed Project. Additionally,
the Second Amendment to the Agreement includes all mandatory elements, including
public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying the vested development rights
consistent with the City's General Plan, NBMC, and Government Code Sections 65864
et seq. No changes to the public benefit fees are proposed.
Environmental Review
On March 27, 2012, the Newport Beach City Council approved a Mitigated Negative
Declaration and its Errata to Mitigated Negative Declaration (together referred to as
"MND") that addressed the potential environmental effects associated with the Approved
Project. The MND was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K-3.
15-192
Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162
of the CEQA Guidelines, when a negative declaration adopted for a project, no
subsequent negative declaration 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:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions
of the previous negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects;
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous negative
declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
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 negative
declaration was adopted as complete, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the
previous negative declaration.
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe
than shown in the adopted negative declaration.
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 negative declaration would substantially
reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project
proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
On the basis of the earlier MND and entire environmental review record including the
Addendum, the Proposed Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were
not previously analyzed in the MND. The Addendum confirms and provides substantial
evidence that the potential impacts associated with the Proposed Project would either be
the same or less than those described in the MND, or as mitigated by applicable mitigation
measures and standard conditions of approval in the MND. In addition, there are no
substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Proposed Project would be
undertaken that would result in new or more severe environmental impacts than
previously addressed in either the MND, nor has any new information regarding the
15-193
potential for new or more severe significant environmental impacts been identified.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to
the previously adopted MND is the appropriate environmental document for the Proposed
Project. In taking action to approve any of the requested applications for the Proposed
Project, the data presented in the MND, as augmented by the Addendum for this
Proposed Project, are considered as part of the record.
The City contracted with an environmental consultant, Chambers Group, to prepare the
Addendum. The entire Addendum and its technical appendixes are available online at the
City's website at www.newportbeachca.gov/cega.
Summary
In summary, staff believes the findings for the project approval can be made with specific
conditions of approval. The applicant proposed a general plan amendment to increase
the number of hotel rooms and one (1) additional tennis court. According to the applicant,
the request is necessary to provide a viable hotel development and adjust residential type
in responding to the needs of the community. The Proposed Project is consistent with the
General Plan's MU-H3/PR designation as it still includes and maintains a mix of land uses
including single-family residential, attached residential condominiums, recreational tennis
club facilities, and visitor -serving commercial uses. The proposed general plan
amendment would not require a voter approval pursuant to Charter Section 423 analysis.
Due to the lack of environmental impacts and apparent compatibility with the surrounding
uses, staff does not object to the GPA request.
The Proposed Project is also consistent with the Local Coastal Program. The Coastal
Land Use Plan designates the property as MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal/Parks and
Recreation). This designation allows horizontally -distributed mix of uses, which includes
multi -family residential, visitor -servicing uses, and tennis clubs and courts. The Proposed
Project is within the maximum density/intensity limit allowed per MU-H designation.
The amendment to the Planned Community Development Plan is consistent with the
intent and purpose of PC-47 in that the tennis club, hotel, and residential uses and their
development standards have already been allowed and in place on the tennis club site.
The proposed changes to the building height, setbacks, and parking standards in order
to accommodate the Proposed Project are within the development standards in place for
the Approved Project.
The Proposed Project meets all of the findings for the required Site Development Review
as specified in PC-47. The proposed amendments maintain a coordinated, cohesive, and
comprehensive large-scale planning project, which includes a distinct architectural style.
The Proposed Project is compatible with the character of the neighboring uses and
surrounding sites and is not detrimental to the orderly and harmonious development of
the surroundings and of the City.
15-194
The Proposed Project meets all of the findings for the required Coastal Development
Permit. As previously stated, the amendment is consistent with the City's Local Coastal
Program. Additionally, the amendment will not affect the public's ability to gain access to,
use, or view the coast and nearby recreational facilities.
The proposed revisions to the approved vesting tentative tract map is consistent with the
Newport Beach Subdivision Code (Title 19) and applicable requirements of the
Subdivision Map Act. The amended map reflects the combination of two previously divided
lots, which results in the elimination of one lot. These two lots were intended for two (2)
detached -single family residences. The map has also been modified to include attached
residential condominiums.
The Proposed Project requires an amendment to the City's Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan (Title 21). This amendment requires the consideration of California
Coastal Commission. As a result, the Proposed Project only becomes effective upon the
approval by Coastal Commission. Upon such approval, the following discretionary permits
approved for the Approved Project are to become null and void:
1. Site Development Review Permit No. SD2011-002
2. Tentative Tract Map No. ND2010-008
3. Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004
Altarnafivac
1. The Planning Commission may require or suggest specific design changes that
are necessary to alleviate any areas of concern. If the requested changes are
substantial, staff will return with a revised resolution incorporating new findings
and/or conditions.
2. If the Planning Commission chooses to deny the Proposed Project, the applicant
would retain the vested right to build the Approved Project until the termination
date of the DA (September 23, 2023). After the expiration of DA, the Approved
Project could still be implemented with the approval of new discretionary permits
(i.e., site development review permit, tentative tract map, limited term permit). The
City, however, would not receive the negotiated public benefit fee as prescribed in
the DA.
Public Notice
Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to all owners of property
within 300 feet of the boundaries of the site (excluding intervening rights -of -way and
waterways) including the applicant and posted on the subject property at least 10 days
before the scheduled meeting, consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
Additionally, the item appeared on the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City
Hall and on the City website.
15-195
Prepared by:
Submitted by:
David S. L e Jim Campbell
Associate Planner Deputy Community Development Director
ATTACHMENTS
PC 1 Draft Resolution with Findings and Conditions
PC 2 Project Description
PC 3 LSA's Traffic and Parking Analysis Update
PC 4 MurowDC's Construction Management Plan
PC 5 Fiscal and Economic Impacts Analysis
PC 6 Project Plans
:AUsers\PLN\.Shared\PA's\PAs-2021\PA2021-260TCTC-Staff Report.docx01/12/18
15-196
Attachment G
Planning Commission Minute Excerpts, Dated September 8, 2022
15-197
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
Recommended Action:
1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15303 Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), because it has no significant
effect on the environment;
2. Waive City Council Policy L-6, Encroachments in Public Rights -of -Way, for non -compliant private
improvements consisting of stairs, handrails, retaining walls, and planters that encroach into the
Cliff Drive public right-of-way, contingent upon all conditions of the Encroachment Permit process
being met; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-021 waiving City Council Policy L-6 and approving Encroachment
Permit No. N2022-0147.
Commissioners disclosed no ex parte communications.
Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Secretary Rosene to approve the recommended
action.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, Rosene, and Weigand
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
VII. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
ITEM NO. 3 TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH PROJECT AMENDMENT (PA2021-260)
Site Location: 1602 East Coast Highway
Summary:
An amendment to the 2012 approved Tennis Club at Newport Beach project to: 1) increase the number
of future tennis courts from 7 to 8 courts, 2) increase the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41
rooms, 3) increase the gross floor area of the ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet, and 4) provide
3 attached condominium units and 2 detached single family residences in -lieu of 5 detached single-
family residences. The proposed changes to the 2012 approved project require the consideration of the
following land use:
• General Plan Amendment: An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of Table LU2 of the 2006 Newport
Beach General Plan Land Use Element to amend the allowable development limits for the tennis club
site;
• Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment: An amendment to Local Coastal
Implementation Plan Section 21.26.055.S.2 (Tennis Club of Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community Coastal Zoning District Development Standards) to amend land use regulations for the
tennis club site;
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment: An amendment to Planned Community
Development Plan No. 47 (Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use
regulations and development standards on the tennis club site;
• Maior Site Development Review Amendment (SD2011-002): A site development review in
accordance to Section 4.0 (Site Development Review) of Planned Community Development Plan No.
47 and Newport Beach Municipal Code (NBMC) Section 20.52.80 (Site Development Reviews) for
the construction of the proposed project;
• Coastal Development Permit Amendment (CD2017-039): An amendment to Coastal Development
Permit No. CD2017-039 for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the tennis club
site, and implementation of the project;
Page 2 of 9
15-198
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
• Tentative Vesting Tract Map Amendment (NT2005-003): An amendment to Tentative Vesting Tract
Map pursuant to Title 19 of the Municipal Code to create separate lots for the tennis club site;
• Limited Term Permit Amendment (XP2011-004): A limited term permit to allow temporary use of
structures during construction pursuant to Section 20.60.015 of the Municipal Code;
• Development Agreement Amendment (DA2008-001): A second amendment to the Development
Agreement between the Applicant and the City, pursuant to NBMC Sections 15.45 (Development
Agreement), which would provide vested right to develop the proposed project while also providing
negotiated public benefits and extend the term of Agreement for additional ten years; and
• Addendum to the 2010 Mitigated Negative Declaration (ND2010-008): Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the addendum addresses reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the proposed development
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find that the Proposed Project will not result in any new significant impacts that were not previously
analyzed in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) for the
Approved Project, and the addendum has been prepared to address reasonably foreseeable
environmental impacts resulting from the Proposed Project; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-022 recommending City Council approval of PA2021-260, which
includes adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum, and approval of a General Plan
Amendment, Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment, Planned Community Development Plan
Amendment, Major Site Development Review Amendment, Coastal Development Permit
Amendment, Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment, Limited Term Permit Amendment, and
Development Agreement Amendment for The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project located at
1602 East Coast Highway.
Commissioner Weigand recused himself due to the Levine Act for a campaign contribution.
Associate Planner Lee used a presentation to review the requested amendment to a previously approved project,
project location, land use, previously approved project inclusions and site plan, 2012 approved entitlements,
proposed amendment details and site plan, site plan comparisons, requested project entitlements, CEQA review,
findings, an additional condition for future consideration for pickleball use, and recommended action.
In response to Vice Chair Ellmore's inquiry, Deputy Director Campbell noted that traffic, parking, and noise are
focus areas for the City as pickleball courts develop and confirmed the tennis and pickleball parking ratio of four
spaces to one court and 12 spaces to one court and the application is for tennis courts only.
In response to Secretary Rosene's question, Deputy Director Campbell stated that property development other
than tennis courts would require future application and review.
Commissioners Lowrey, Harris, Secretary Rosene, and Chair Kleiman disclosed conversations with the property
owner, applicant, and consultants. Vice Chair Ellmore disclosed no ex parte communication.
Chair Kleiman opened the public hearing.
Robert O'Hill, managing owner of Newport Beach Country Club, used a presentation to review the modifications
included in the Bungalow and Lofts Plan B amendment, project renderings, Bungalow Loft first floor and top floor
drawings, a floor plan for the Clubhouse and Bungalow Spa, and photos of the pool attendant area, fitness center
desk area, men's and women's locker rooms, massage area, and koi pond area. Mr. O'Hill estimated City gains
of $1,300,000, accepted the new condition, thanked staff for their work, and agreed to abide by the conditions
established by the City.
In response to Chair Kleiman's request, Mr. O'Hill agreed with the conditions as drafted and the new conditions in
the staff report.
Page 3 of 9
15-199
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
In response to Commissioner Harris' inquiry, Mr. O'Hill reported adequate parking accommodations and noted
monetary investments to resurface tennis courts for conversion to pickleball courts.
Sean Abdali, The Tennis Club owner and operator, noted Newport Beach having the first private pickleball club in
the world and today the largest, relayed having formed an event company to help run events, identified the different
parking needs for pickleball and tennis users and electric bikes, and explained an agreement with the Irvine
Company for parking space use Monday — Friday, at Corporate Plaza West on weekends and holidays, and
Newport Beach County Club operators on Mondays. Furthermore, he noted a reduction in large events to
accommodate parking availability, residential support of the plan to preserve the Club, and a reduction in noise
with improved pickleball equipment in the future.
Paul Christ, Granville Community Association representative, shared enthusiasm for Mr. O'Hill's plans, concerns
for pickleball noise causing reduced property value, suggested installing a sound blanket and a restriction on
amplified sound, and questioned the surface area of the tennis and pickleball courts.
Tracey Miller represented Club members who are in opposition to the project and read their statements of concern.
Bret Feuerstein and Ryan Chase, 50 percent owners of The Tennis Club property, noted an arbitration in progress
to determine if Golf Realty Fund has the authority to unilaterally process the application, opposed the proposed
plan, thanked staff for their work, and expressed interest in finding a solution that enables The Tennis Club to grow
and thrive, and noted a concern that there are no pickleball courts in the applicant's plan.
Jim Mosher expressed concern for clarity in the Land Use table of the General Plan Amendment relative to the
specific allowable development at the "anomaly site," questioned the Greenlight analysis by the City, believed that
the 2012 approval was not approved by the voters, and is of the opinion that a Greenlight vote is required for the
amendment.
Denys Oberman commended staff for bringing up fluid items associated with the use, particularly, impacts of
pickleball noise, events, and capacity within the City and requested the Planning Commission remand the plan to
obtain a committal characterization of what is being proposed and assure compatibility with the surrounding area.
Mark Susson noted contradictions in the proposal and parking, noise, and traffic issues at The Tennis Club.
Deidre Machowski encouraged the Planning Commission to move forward with the plan.
Rogin Moore, The Tennis Club member and employee, challenged anyone claiming having received threatening
emails from Mr. Abdali, noted meetings with members and Mr. Abdali to share the plans and gain input, and
relayed no known opposition.
Mr. O'Hill clarified the participants that, in his opinion, supported the approval of the General Plan Amendment
after two previous failed attempts.
Mr. Abdali addressed the noise issues.
At the request of Chair Kleiman, Deputy Director Campbell indicated that City Council policy is being followed
and the amendment does not require a Greenlight vote, pickleball was not examined because it was not
requested in the application and would be subject to review with the added condition if requested in the future,
and special event permits are required for tournaments. Furthermore, he indicated that existing tennis court
conversion requirements are dependent on how the tennis court was originally established, private court
conversion requirements are left up to the Homeowner Associations, and an analysis to identify if the
conversion is consistent with the entitlements would be required for this project along with environment, traffic,
parking, and noise reviews.
Chair Kleiman clarified the multi -step process for approval of the project.
Chair Kleiman closed the public hearing.
Page 4 of 9
15-200
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
September 8, 2022
In response to Secretary Rosene's question, Deputy Director Campbell agreed that the plans are conceptual
and noted that a plan check took place in 2016, more detailed designs have been put forth through the building
division, and the applicant acknowledges an update to the drawings is needed to meet the new building code,
indicated being comfortable moving forward with the recommendation, and assured the Commission that any
deviations from standards in the drawings will be cleaned up at the plan check stage.
Commissioner Lowrey expressed comfort with the findings by staff and explanations of what the General Plan
calls for and noted the popularity of pickleball among all ages, honoring the General Plan, and providing
recreational facilities.
Vice Chair Ellmore concurred with Commissioner Lowrey and clarified that the project is for tennis courts.
Commissioner Lowrey noted that staff will need to identify the parameter for approval relative to pickleball court
development.
Motion made by Commissioner Lowrey and seconded by Vice Chair Ellmore to approve the recommended
action and the additional condition.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, and Rosene
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Weigand
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
ITEM NO. 4 BAY ISLAND GENERAL PLAN, ZONING CODE, LCP AMENDMENTS (PA2022-087)
Site Location: Bay Island
Summary:
Amendments to the General Plan, Title 20 (Planning and Zoning), and Title 21 (Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code increasing the development limit specified
for Bay Island from 23 dwelling units to 25 dwelling units. The amendments were initiated by the applicant
who seeks to return the maximum residential density of Bay Island to 25 units, consistent with prior
entitlement under Use Permit No. UP3618.
Recommended Action:
1. Conduct a public hearing;
2. Find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15303 under Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines,
because it has no potential to have significant effect on the environment; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. PC2022-023 (Attachment No. PC 1) recommending the City Council
approve General Plan Amendment No. GP2022-001, Code Amendment No. CA2022-005, and
Local Coastal Program Amendment No. LC2022-003.
Senior Planner Crager used a presentation to review the Bay Island amendments, Bay Island map,
introduction/background, updated General Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program maps, CEQA
review, recommended action, and next steps.
Commissioner Weigand disclosed an island tour with Coralee Newman, Commissioners Lowrey and Vice
Chair Ellmore disclosed no ex parte communications, Commissioner Harris and Secretary Rosene disclosed
having spoken with the applicant, and Chair Kleiman disclosed having received a message from the applicant's
consultant.
Page 5 of 9
15-201
Attachment H
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
15-202
RESOLUTION NO. PC2022-022
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2010-008, GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT, PLANNED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT,
AMENDMENT TO MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW NO.
SD2011-002, AMENDMENT TO COASTAL DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT NO. CD2017-039, AMENDMENT TO VESTING
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. NT2005-003, AMENDMENT TO
LIMITED TERM PERMIT NO. XP2011-004, AND SECOND
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. DA2008-
001 FOR THE TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH LOCATED
AT 1602 EAST COAST HIGHWAY (PA2021-260)
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS.
An application was filed by Golf Realty Fund, Managing Owner ("Applicant"), with respect
to property located at 1602 East Coast Highway, and legally described as Parcels A, B, C,
and D of Parcel Map No. 2016-151 (commonly referred as the 'Tennis Club Site" or
"Property").
2. On January 24, 2012, the City Council authorized the redevelopment of the Property to
include a reconstruction of the 3,725-square-foot tennis clubhouse, a reduction of tennis
courts from 24 to seven (7) courts, and a construction of 27-room boutique hotel with 9,700
square feet of ancillary uses, and five (5) single-family residential units. On November 20,
2018, the Zoning Administrator approved Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-039,
authorizing the redevelopment if the subject property consistent with the 2012 approval
(commonly referred to as "Approved Project").
3. The Applicant is requesting land use approvals to amend the Approved Project which
consists of the following:
a. Increase the number of future tennis courts from seven (7) to eight (8);
b. Increase the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms;
c. Increase the gross floor area of ancillary hotel uses by 4,686 square feet;
d. Provide three attached condominium units and two (2) single family residences
in -lieu of five (5) single-family residences; and
15-203
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 2 of 43
e. Amending the 2012 Development Agreement to account for the aforementioned
changes to the Project along with extending the term of the 2012 Development
Agreement for an additional 10 years ("Project").
The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the Project:
a. General Plan Amendment ("GPA") — An amendment to Anomaly No. 46 of Table
LU2 of the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element to document the
conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms authorized by City Council
Resolution No. 2012-10, and the addition of 14 hotel rooms for a total of 41 rooms
and one tennis courts for a total of eight tennis courts;
b. Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment (" LCPA") — An
amendment to NBMC Section 21.26.055.S.2 (Planned Community Coastal Zoning
District Development Standards, Newport Beach Country Club (PC-47, Tennis
Club) to modify the permitted uses and development standards allowed on the
Property;
c. Planned Community Development Plan Amendment ("PCDP Amendment") —
An amendment to Planned Community Development Plan No. 47 (Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community) to amend land use regulations and
development standards on the Property;
d. Major Site Development Permit Amendment ("SDA") — An amendment to the
existing site development review in accordance with PC-47 and NBMC Section
20.52.80 (Permit Review Procedures, Site Development Reviews) for the
construction of the Project;
e. Coastal Development Permit Amendment ("CDPA") — A coastal development
permit for the demolition of existing structures, further subdivision on the Property,
and implementation of the Project;
f. Tentative Vesting Tract Map Amendment ("VTMA") — An amendment to Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. 15347 pursuant to Title 19 (Subdivisions) of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC") for a lot reduction created for the Approved
Project and inclusion of the condominium ownership;
g. Limited Term Permit Amendment ("XP") — A limited term permit to allow
temporary use of structures during construction on the Property, pursuant to NBMC
Section 20.52.040;
h. Development Agreement Amendment ("DA") — A second amendment to the
Development Agreement (DA2008-001), between the Applicant and the City,
pursuant to Sections 15.45.020(A)(2)(c) (Buildings and Construction ,Development
Agreements Required, Development Agreement Required) and 15.45.070
(Buildings and Constructions, Development Agreements,
Amendment/Cancellation) of the NBMC, which would provide vested right to
15-204
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 3 of 43
develop the Project for a term of ten years and provide negotiated public benefits
to the City; and
Addendum to previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND-
2010-008 (SCH2O10091052) ("Addendum") — Pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the Addendum addresses reasonably
foreseeable environmental impacts resulting from the Project.
4. The Property is designated Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and Recreation (MU-H31PR) by
the General Plan Land Use Element and is located within the Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community (PC-47) Zoning District.
5. The Property is located within the coastal zone. The Coastal Land Use Plan category is
Mixed -Use Horizontal/Parks and Recreation (MU-HIPR) and it is located within the
Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC47) Coastal Zone District.
6. A public hearing was held on September 8, 2022 in the City Council Chambers, located at
100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose
of the hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950
et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"), California Government Code Section 65867 and Section
15.45.050 (Public Hearing -Notice) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Evidence,
both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission
at this hearing.
SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION.
On March 27, 2012, the Newport Beach City Council approved Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) and an Errata to Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (together referred to as "MND") that addressed the
potential environmental effects associated with the Approved Project. The MND was
prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act as set forth in
Section 21000 et seq. of the California Public Resources Code ("CEQA"), the State
CEQA Guidelines set forth in Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of
Regulations, ("CEQA Guidelines"), and City Council Policy K-3.
2. Pursuant to Section 21166 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15162
of the CEQA Guidelines, when a negative declaration adopted for a project, no
subsequent negative declaration 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 negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects;
15-205
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 4 of 43
b. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous negative
declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or
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
negative declaration was adopted as complete, shows any of the following:
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 measure or alternative; 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 measure or alternative.
3. Although the Project necessitates an amendment to the General Plan due to the
increased number of hotel rooms and tennis courts, there are no proposed changes to
the land uses permitted per the General Plan land use designation. Additionally, based
on the changes associated with the Project, there are no conditions that would require
the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental MND. As a result, an Addendum to the
MND was prepared pursuant to Section 15162 (Subsequent EIRs and Negative
Declarations) and 15164 (Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration) of the CEQA
Guidelines.
4. The following environmental topics were analyzed for the Project: Aesthetics, Air
Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils,
Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water
Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services,
Recreation, Transportation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. The Addendum
includes analysis of new topics that were not included in the previous MND; specifically,
it includes a new energy section and a new wildfire section. These additional analyses
are appropriate for inclusion in the Addendum, but none result in new or increased
significant impacts that would require preparation of a subsequent MND pursuant to
Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines.
15-206
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 5 of 43
5. On the basis of the MND and entire environmental review record, the additional tennis
court, hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses, and conversion of three (3) single-family
residences to condominium units will not result in any new significant impacts that were
not previously analyzed in the MND. The Addendum confirms and provides substantial
evidence that the potential impacts associated with this Project would either be the same
or less than those described in the MND, or as mitigated by applicable mitigation
measures in the MND. In addition, there are no 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 either the MND, nor
has any new information regarding the potential for new or more severe significant
environmental impacts been identified. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of
the CEQA Guidelines, an addendum to the previously adopted MND is the appropriate
environmental document for the Project. In taking action to approve any of the requested
applications for the Project, the data presented in the MND, as augmented by the
Addendum for this Project, are considered as part of the record.
6. The Addendum to the MND, is hereby recommended for adoption by the City Council
given its analysis and conclusions. The Addendum to the MND and related referenced
documentation, constitute the administrative record upon which this decision was based,
are on file with the Planning Division, City Hall, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach,
California.
7. The Planning Commission finds that judicial challenges to the City's CEQA
determinations and approvals of land use projects are costly and time consuming. In
addition, project opponents often seek an award of attorneys' fees in such challenges.
As project applicants are the primary beneficiaries of such approvals, it is appropriate
that such applicants should bear the expense of defending against any such judicial
challenge, and bear the responsibility for any costs, attorneys' fees, and damages which
may be awarded to a successful challenger.
SECTION 3. REQUIRED FINDINGS.
General Plan Amendment
An amendment to the 2006 Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element is a legislative
act. Neither Title 20 (Planning and Zoning) nor California Government Code Section 65000 et
seq., set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments.
Findinq and Facts in Support of Findings:
As part of the Approved Project, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2012-10, which
authorized the conversion of 17 tennis courts to 27 hotel rooms along with the
redevelopment of the Property. The Approved Project included a 3,725-square-foot
tennis clubhouse and seven (7) tennis courts, five (5) single-family residential units, and
a 27-room boutique hotel with a 2,200 square -foot concierge and guest meeting facility
and a 7,500 square -foot spa and fitness center. The City Council found that the
15-207
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 6 of 43
conversion of tennis courts to hotel rooms is consistent with the General Plan based on
the following:
a. The Project provides revitalization to Newport/Fashion Island area where the
General Plan encourages additional hotel development and housing units; and
b. The conversion does not create traffic impacts. At the time of the conversion, the
17 tennis courts generated 658 average daily trips based upon ITE Trip
Generation Rates (71h edition), while the 27 hotel rooms generated 221 average
daily trips, resulting in a net decrease of 389 daily trips.
2. The Project includes a GPA to amend the development limits for Anomaly 46. The
development limits will be updated to reflect 27 hotel rooms which has been approved
by the conversion of 17 un-used tennis courts and seven (7) remaining tennis courts, as
part of the Approved Project. The GPA will also include the proposed 14 additional hotel
rooms and one tennis court. Together, a total of 41 hotel rooms (27+14=41 rooms) and
eight tennis courts will be included in Anomaly 46. No change to the 3,725-square-foot
tennis clubhouse is proposed. The GPA does not include a change in land use
designation and would remain as Mixed -Use Horizontal 3/Parks and Recreation (MU-
H3IPR).
3. The Project GPA is consistent with the following City of Newport Beach General Plan
Land Use policies, applicable to the Project (additional policy analysis is included in the
MND Addendum attached hereto as Exhibit "A"):
a. Land Use Element Policy LU1.1(Unique Environment). Maintain and enhance
the beneficial and unique character of the different neighborhoods, business
districts, and harbor that together identify Newport Beach. Locate and design
development to reflect Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, and
view sheds.
The Project includes an amendment to the PC-47 District regulations on the
Tennis Club site and reflects the proposed development on the Property. PC-47
will continue to guide development occurring within the Property. The
development standards address building height, setbacks, landscaping, and
architectural character. The standards are intended to ensure that the City's
unique character is maintained through land use and architectural diversity.
b. Land Use Element Policy LU1.2 (Citywide identity). While recognizing the
qualities that uniquely define its neighborhoods and districts, promote the identity
of the entire City that differentiates it as a special place within the Southern
California region.
The area in which the Property is located is characterized by a variety of
residential, commercial, and recreational land uses that reflect a range of
architectural styles, which contribute to the unique character of the City. The
intensity and architectural character of the Project are compatible with the variety
15-208
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 7 of 43
of densities and styles within the area, which are consistent with the identity of
the City. The architectural character of the Project, including the bungalow -style
hotel rooms, detached residential units, and attached residential loft buildings, is
consistent with the City's desire to differentiate Newport Beach from other coastal
cities.
c. Land Use Element Policy LU2.1 (Resident -Serving Land Uses).
Accommodate uses that support the needs of Newport Beach's residents
including housing, retail, services, employment, recreation, education, culture,
entertainment, civic engagement, and social and spiritual activity that are in
balance with community natural resources and open spaces.
The Project will continue to provide residents with recreational opportunities,
culture, entertainment, and civic engagement. The proposed amendment
remains supportive of recreational uses by providing one additional tennis court
to the previously approved seven (7) courts. The amendment also includes an
additional 14 hotel rooms to the previously approved 27-unit hotel development
with additional hotel amenities for club members such as a Performance Therapy
Center and Yoga Pavilion.
d. Land Use Element Policy LU.2.6 (Visitor Serving Uses). Provide uses that
serve visitors to Newport Beach's ocean, harbor, open spaces, and other
recreational assets, while integrating them to protect neighborhoods and
residents
The Project provides visitors with an updated recreational facility as it includes a
new tennis clubhouse and eight (8) tennis courts, which includes a stadium size
court. The tennis club is adjacent to a golf course with amenities and is within
2,000 feet from the Newport Bay. The proposed 41 hotel rooms provide additional
opportunities for visitors to enjoy the tennis club and nearby recreational
activities.
e. Land Use Element Policy LU3.2 (Growth and Change). Enhance existing
neighborhoods, districts, and corridors, allowing for reuse and infill with uses that
are complementary in type, form, scale, and character. Changes in use and/or
density/intensity should be considered only in those areas that are economically
underperforming, are necessary to accommodate Newport Beach's share of
projected regional population growth, improve the relationship and reduce
commuting distance between home and jobs, or enhance the values that
distinguish Newport Beach as a special place to live for its residents. The scale
of growth and new development shall be coordinated with the provision of
adequate infrastructure and public services, including standards for acceptable
traffic level of service.
The character of the tennis club, hotel development, and residential units are
compatible with the existing land uses and development intensities of the
surrounding area. Although the additional 14 hotel rooms and one (1) tennis court
15-209
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 8 of 43
requires amendments to adopted plans and regulations, the existing tennis club
and hotel development that are the substance of the Approved Project are
allowed under the existing General Plan. The Project has been designed to be
compatible with the existing residential, commercial, and recreational uses
located within the vicinity of the project site. In addition, the surrounding area is
adequately served by existing infrastructure, including circulation, water, sewer,
and storm drainage systems. As a result, the implementation of the Project will
not adversely affect those systems or the provision of adequate service to nearby
development.
f. Land Use Element Policy LU3.3 (Opportunities for Change). Provide
opportunities for improved development and enhanced environments for
residents in the following districts and corridors, as specified in Polices 6.3.1
through 6.22.7: Fashion island/Newport Center: expanded retail uses and hotel
rooms and development of residential in proximity to jobs and services, while
limiting increases in office development.
The Project provides enhancement to the Property, which is currently being used
exclusively as a tennis club, to include 41 hotel rooms and ancillary uses, and
five residential units. The Project retains a total of eight tennis courts and the
reconstruction of the Tennis Clubhouse. The Project will be utilized as a
recreational facility for residents, guests, and club members.
g. Land Use Element Policy LU4.1 (Land Use Diagram). Accommodate land use
development consistent with the Land Use Plan.
The Project is consistent with the designation of the General Plan Land Use
Element, which designates the Property as MU-H31PR. The Property is located
within Anomaly 46, which allocates 24 tennis courts with residential permitted in
accordance with the MU-1-13 designation. The GPA includes an amendment to
the Development Limit (Other) of Anomaly 46, to reduce the number of tennis
courts to eight (8) and to include 41 hotel rooms.
h. Land Use Element Policy LU5.1.2 (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.
Although the Property is not located adjacent to lower density residential
development, the Project has been designed to respect the proximity of the
existing residential development adjacent to the Property. The amended PC-47
prescribes maximum building heights and setback requirements for each of the
development components to ensure land use compatibility. Building heights for
the proposed structures will range from 46 feet for the attached residential loft
buildings, 39 feet for the detached residential units, 31 feet for the hotel rooms,
and 30 feet for the tennis clubhouse, which are within the maximum 50-foot
building height allowed by PC-47.
15-210
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 9 of 43
Land Use Element Policy LU (5.3.3). Require that properties developed with a
mix of residential and non-residential uses be designed to achieve high levels of
architectural quality in accordance with Policies 5.1.9 and 5.2.1 and planned to
assure compatibility among the uses and provide adequate circulation and
parking. Residential uses should be seamlessly integrated with non-residential
uses through architecture, pedestrian walkways, and landscape. They should not
be completely isolated by walls or other design elements.
The Project includes one additional tennis court to the tennis club, 41 hotel rooms,
two (2) single family residences, and three (3) residential condominium units. The
Project provides adequate parking for each of the proposed uses. Vehicular and
pedestrian circulation has been designed to accommodate the residents, as well
as guests and members of the tennis club and hotel development. The
architectural character of the uses is defined in PC-47 to ensure that compatibility
between proposed uses and the surrounding area is maintained.
f Land Use Element Policy LU5.3.4 (Districts Integrating Residential and
Nonresidential Uses). Require that sufficient acreage be developed for an
individual use located in a district containing a mix of residential and non-
residential uses to prevent fragmentation and assure each use's viability, quality,
and compatibility with adjoining uses.
Each of the uses has been designed to complement the overall Project. The uses
are connected by the vehicular and pedestrian circulation system, including
sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. Land use compatibility is achieved through
a common landscape theme and design guidelines in PC-47 to ensure that the
architectural integrity of the Project is not compromised.
k. Land Use Element Policy LU6.14.2 (Newport Center). Provide the opportunity
for limited residential, hotel, and office development in accordance with the limits
specified by Tables LU1 and LU2.
The Project has a mix of land uses including single-family residential, attached
residential condominiums, recreational tennis club facilities, and visitor -serving
commercial uses. These uses are permitted in Table LU1 under the MU-H31PR
land use designation. The GPA proposes to amend the development limits of
Table LU2 to include eight (8) tennis courts and 41 hotel rooms.
1. Land Use Element Policy LU6.14.6 (Pedestrian Connectivity and Amenity).
Encourage that pedestrian access and connections among uses within the district
be improved with additional walkways and streetscape amenities concurrent with
the development of expanded and new uses.
The Project provides for both pedestrian and vehicular access within the
Property. Sidewalks and pedestrian pathways are incorporated into the
circulation system that are intended to accommodate pedestrians utilizing the
15-211
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 10 of 43
tennis club, hotel facilities, and future residents. A landscape plan has been
provided which includes plant materials that are intended to reflect and
complement the existing character within the project area.
4. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65352.3 (SB18), a local government
is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the Native American Heritage
Commission ("NAHC") each time it considers a proposal to adopt or amend the General
Plan. If requested by any tribe, the local government must consult for the purpose of
preserving or mitigating impacts to cultural resources. The City received comments from
the NAHC indicating that twelve (12) tribal contacts should be provided notice regarding
the proposed amendment. The tribal contacts were provided notice on June 9, 2022.
California Government Code Section 65352.3 requires notification 90 days prior to
Council action to allow tribal contacts to respond to the request to consult. The Project
will not be heard by the City Council until the 90-day period expires on September 7,
2022.
423 Charter Analysis
Finding:
Charter Section 423 requires voter approval of any major General Plan amendment to the
General Plan. A major General Plan amendment is one that significantly increases allowed
density or intensity by 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, increases traffic by more
than 100 peak hour vehicle trips (AM/PM), or increases residential dwelling units by 100 units.
These thresholds apply to the total of increases resulting from the amendment itself, plus 80
percent of the increases resulting from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood
(defined as a Statistical Area as shown in the General Plan Land Use Element) and adopted
within the preceding ten years.
Council Policy A-18 (Guidelines for Implementing Charter Section 423) requires that proposed
amendments to the General Plan be reviewed to determine if a vote of the Newport Beach
electorate would be required. This policy includes a provision that all General Plan
amendments be tracked as "Prior Amendments" for ten (10) years to determine if minor
amendments in a single Statistical Area cumulatively exceed the thresholds indicated above.
Facts in Support of Findings:
1. The Property is within Statistical Area L1. Prior amendments within the past ten (10)
years are Vivante Senior Housing and Residences at Newport Center. Charter Section
423 counts 80 percent of prior increases, which results in a cumulative increase of 94
dwelling units, 23 AM trips, and 43 PM trips between both projects. There were no
square footage increases.
2. The GPA results in an increase of 14,000 square feet (at the rate of 1,000 square feet
per hotel unit) of non-residential floor area, 9.51 AM trips, and 12.42 PM trips. When
combined with 80 percent of the prior increases, this results in cumulative increases of
14,000 square feet of non-residential floor area, 32.51 AM trips, and 55.42 PM trips. As
15-212
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 11 of 43
none of the thresholds specified by Charter Section 423 are exceeded, no vote of the
electorate is required if the City Council chooses to approve the GPA.
Local Coastal Program Amendment
Finding:
As set forth in Section 30500 of the California Public Resources Code, the California Coastal
Act requires each county and city to prepare a local coastal program ("LCP") for that portion of
the Coastal Zone within its jurisdiction. The California Coastal Commission effectively certified
the City's LCP Implementation Plan on January 13, 2017, and the City of Newport Beach
("City") added Title 21 (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan) ("Title 21") to the NBMC
whereby the City assumed coastal development permit -issuing authority as of January 30,
2017.
Facts in Support of Findings:
An amendment to Title 21 is necessary to revise Section 21.26.055(S), specifically referring to
the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PC47) development standards of the
"Tennis Club", "The Villas", and "The Bungalows":
Tennis Club - The LCPA increases the density and intensity limit for the number of tennis
courts from seven (7) to eight (8) courts. The additional tennis court increases the minimum
required parking from 28 spaces to 32 spaces. There is no change to the 3,725-square-
foot limit for the Tennis Clubhouse.
2, The Residential (Villas) - The number of residential units remains unchanged. However,
the LCPA converts three (3) of the five (5) single-family residences to attached residential
condominium !nits. Therefore, the amendment revises the density and intensity limit for
The Villas from five (5) to two (2) single family residences and removes previous
development standards for Villas C, D, and E. The LCPA also includes new development
standards for attached residential condominiums, which have a density limit of three (3)
units and maximum gross floor area of 15,035 square feet. The maximum height allowed
for the attached residential buildings is 46 feet. The buildings are required to be set back
five (5) feet from any property line. The remaining single-family residences require a
minimum of two enclosed parking spaces and one guest parking space per unit, while the
proposed attached condominiums require a minimum of three enclosed parking spaces
and one guest parking space per unit.
3. The Hotel (Bungalows) - The LCPA revises the density and intensity limits for the
bungalows from 27 to 41 short-term guest rental rooms. Additionally, the maximum
allowable gross floor area increases from 28,300 to 47,484 square feet. Square footage
for ancillary hotel uses are also included. A minimum of one (1) space per hotel unit is
required.
4. The LCPA is consistent with other applicable land use policies of the Coastal Land Use
Plan as provided below:
15-213
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 12 of 43
a. Coastal Land Use Element Policy 2.1.2-1 (District/Corridor Policies).
Development in each district and corridor shall adhere to policies for land use
type and densitylintensity contained in Table 2.1.1-1, except as modified in
Sections 2.1.3 to 2.1.8.
The MU-HIPR designation allows horizontally -distributed mix of uses, which may
include general or neighborhood commercial, commercial offices, multi -family
residential, visitor -servicing and marine -related uses, buildings that vertically
integrate residential with commercial uses, and active public or private
recreational uses, including parks, golf courses, marina support facilities, aquatic
facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation, and similar facilities.
The Project is consistent with the land use designation on the adopted Coastal
Land Use Plan, which designates the subject property MU-HIPR (Mixed Use
Horizontal/Parks & Recreation). The Project includes a mixture of uses which
include a tennis club and eight (8) tennis courts, a 41-unit hotel development and
ancillary uses, and five (5) residential units. All of these uses are intended to
provide an updated recreational facility to serve the residents and visitors of the
City. Additionally, the residential units will supplement the City's housing supply.
c. Coastal Land Use Element Policy 2.1.8-1 (Balboa Bay Tennis Club). Allow
the horizontal intermixing of short-term rental units and single-family homes with
the expanded tennis club faculties. Permitted uses include those permitted by the
MU-H and PR categories.
The Project includes the mix of 41 hotel rooms with five (5) residential units, which
consists of two (2) single-family residences and three attached condominium
units. The hotel and residential uses are consistent with both the MU-H and PR
categories.
5. Pursuant to Section 13515 of the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 5.5,
Chapter 8, drafts of the LCPA were made available and a Notice of Availability was
distributed on August 1, 2022 at least six (6) weeks prior to the anticipated final action
date.
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment
The Property has a zoning designation of PC-47, which was adopted in 1997 by Ordinance 97-
10 as a part of the City-wide amendment to the districting maps in order to be consistent with
the 1988 General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Code. Development regulations through
a Planned Community District Development Plan was not adopted when the PC District zoning
designation was assigned to the Property.
On March 27, 2012, the City Council adopted a Planned Community Development Plan
(PCDP), which is the zoning document to PC-47 to provide use regulations, density and
intensity of the proposed uses, and very specific development regulations (building height,
15-214
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 13 of 43
square footage, setbacks, and parking standards). The PCDP included architectural styling and
a complete internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation system for both the Golf and Tennis
Club sites. PC-47 also includes site development review regulations to ensure new
development proposals within the Newport Beach Country Club are consistent with the goals
and policies of the General Plan, provisions of PC-47, and the approved Development
Agreement_
Findings:
An amendment to PC-47, which is the zoning document for the Property, is a legislative act.
Neither PC-47, Chapter 20.66 (Planning and Zoning, Amendments) and Chapter 20.56
(Planning and Zoning, Planned Community District Procedures) of Title 20 (Planning and
Zoning) of NBMC, or Article 2 (Adoption of Regulations) of Chapter 4 (Zoning Regulations) of
Division 1 (Planning and Zoning) of Title 7 (Planning and Land Use) of the California
Government Code set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such
amendments.
Facts in Support of Findings:
The proposed amendment to PC-47 to allow an additional 14 hotel rooms and ancillary uses,
one tennis court, and the conversion of three of five single-family dwelling units to
condominiums is consistent with the intent of PC-47 and the purpose of Planned Community
Districts as specified in NBMC Section 20.56.010 (Planning and Zoning, Planning Community
District Procedures, Purpose) for the following reasons:
The Project is consistent with the intent and purpose of PC-47 in that the tennis club,
hotel, and residential uses and their development standards have already been allowed
and in place on the Property. The proposed changes to the building height, setbacks,
and parking standards in order to accommodate the Project are within the development
standards in place for the Approved Project.
2. PC-47 provides guidelines for architectural design to include coordinated and cohesive
architecture which exhibits quality that is keeping with the surrounding area in Newport
Center. The Project includes additional hotel rooms and two (2) attached residential
condominium loft buildings. The proposed additions have consistent architecture with
the Approved Project, which has cohesive architectural features that include smooth
plaster exterior siding, clay -tile roofs, and stone veneer exterior accent finishes.
3. PC-47 permits structures to be a maximum of 50 feet in height. The Project includes two
(2) attached residential condominium loft buildings which features condominiums on the
third level atop of a two (2)-level hotel building. The loft buildings are proposed at a
maximum of 46 feet high and comply with the height limit. All other structures are
consistent with the maximum heights prescribed in PC-47.
15-215
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 14 of 43
Site Development Review Amendment
On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved Site Development Review No. SD2011-002,
which authorized the construction of Approved Project. The proposed changes to the Approved
Project, necessitate the SDA.
In accordance with Section 4.0 of PC-47 (Site Development Review), the following findings and
facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
A. The Site Development Plan shall be in compliance with all other provisions of the
Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan.
Facts in Support of Finding:
PC-47 requires that a site development review process to be completed for construction
of any new major building structure located on the subject site and would require
consideration and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of grading
or building permits. An amendment to the previously approved site development review
has been submitted for the Property and meets provisions stated in the draft PCDP and
thereby meets the intent specified in Section 20.52.080 (Planning and Zoning, Permit
Review Procedures, Site Development Reviews) of the NBMC.
The Project includes an amendment to the PC-47 to incorporate revisions to the
Approved Project. These revisions include the addition of one (1) tennis court, the
addition of 14 hotel rooms, and the conversion of three (3) single-family residences to
residential condominium units. Should the PC-47 amendment be approved, the SDA
complies with all provisions of the PC-47, as the proposed development complies with
all development criteria specified in the PC-47 in order to provide a coordinated,
cohesive, and comprehensive large-scale planning project.
Finding:
B. The Site Development Plan shall be compatible with the character of the neighboring
uses and surrounding sites and shall not be detrimental to the orderly and harmonious
development of the surroundings and of the City.
Fact in Support of Finding:
The architecture, landscaping components, circulation design, and all other project
components reflected in the SDR are compatible with the character of the neighboring
uses and surrounding sites. The additional 14 hotel rooms and attached residential
condominium buildings are of similar architectural style to the Approved Project's
bungalow -styled rooms. As a result, the Project is not detrimental to the orderly and
harmonious development of the surroundings and the City.
15-216
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 15 of 43
Finding:
C. The Site Development Plan shall be sited and designed to maximize of aesthetic quality
of the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan as viewed
from surrounding roadways and properties, with special consideration given to the mass
and bulk of buildings and the streetscape on East Coast Highway.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The Property is separated from East Coast Highway by a commercial office plaza which
comprises of three two-story office buildings (1200 Newport Center Drive). The office
plaza includes landscaping along East Coast Highway with trees and various plantings.
The Newport Beach Country Club golf clubhouse is located approximately 150 feet west
of the Property. Additionally, the Property is approximately 250 feet from East Coast
Highway and is not visible to motorists travelling on the street.
2. The Project is designed consistent with the Approved Project's architectural style with
landscaping, circulation, signage and other components which visually connect the
tennis clubhouse and attached residential structures to the smaller structures such as
the hotel rooms and single-family residences. Therefore, the aesthetic quality of PC-47
is continued to be maximized as viewed from the surrounding roadways and properties.
3. The Project seeks to add additional hotel rooms, ancillary hotel uses, and attached
residential buildings to the Property. However, the overall footprint of the Approved
Project is not expanding and will not affect the mass of the Project as viewed from
surrounding roadways and properties.
Finding:
D. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access ways,
landscaping and other site features shall give proper consideration to functional aspects
of site development.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular access
ways, landscaping, and other site features maximizes the functionality of the proposed
uses, while avoiding conflicts between uses and activities. The Project's multiple
components (tennis club, residential, and hotel) have been designed and sited to
function cohesively not only with each other, but also with the adjacent existing golf
course uses.
2. The Project promotes additional functionality between residential and hotel components,
as residential condominiums are attached to hotel rooms in two (2) separate loft
buildings, Underground parking is provided in the loft buildings, with additional street
parking and parking lots to serve hotel and tennis club guests. Each of the two (2) single-
family residences provide a two (2)-car garage to serve its residents.
15-217
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 16 of 43
Coastal Development Permit Amendment
On April 10, 2013, the California Coastal Commission, which had permitting jurisdiction for
coastal development permits at the time, issued a notice of intent to issue CDP No. 5-12-160
for the Approved Project. A one (1)-year extension was granted on June 2, 2015. However, the
CDP subsequently expired. The City obtained CDP permitting authority in January of 2017. On
November 20, 2018, the City's Zoning Administrator approved the CDP, which authorized the
redevelopment of the Approved Project. The Project requires an amendment to the previously
approved CDP.
In accordance with Section 21.52.015(F) (Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, Coastal
Development Review Procedures, Coastal Development Permits, Findings and Decision) of
the NBMC, the following findings and facts in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
E. Conforms to all applicable sections of the certified Local Coastal Program.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The Coastal Land Use Plan designates the Tennis Club site as Mixed -Use
Horizontal/Parks and Recreation (MU-H/PR). Policy 2.1.8-1 of the Coastal Land Use
Plan allows the horizontal intermixing of hotel rooms, single-family residences, attached
residential condominiums, and tennis club facilities on the project site (formerly
known/referenced as the Balboa Bay Tennis Club). Permitted uses include those
permitted by the MU-H and PR land use designations. A complete consistency analysis
of each of the applicable Coastal Land Use Plan policies is included in Table 11 of the
Land Use and Planning Section of the previously adopted Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND), pages 82 through 87, as well as in Table 5-5 of the Land Use and
Planning Section of Addendum to the MND. Furthermore, facts have been provided in
this Resolution which support the proposed amendment to the Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan. In summary, the proposed project is consistent with the Coastal
Land Use Plan.
2. The MU-H coastal land use designation identifies a maximum density/intensity limit of
1.5 floor area ratio ("FAR"), with a minimum FAR of 0.25 and a maximum FAR of 0.5 for
retail uses and a maximum of 1.0 for residential. The Project proposes 65,595 square
feet of nonresidential floor area (approximately 0.21 FAR) for the hotel rooms, concierge
& guest center, and ancillary hotel uses which include a performance therapy center,
yoga pavilion, office, common area, and a spa and fitness center. Additionally, five (5)
residential dwelling units totaling 20,653 square feet (approximately 0.06 FAR). The
proposed density/intensity of the hotel and single-family units comply with the FAR
limitations identified in the Coastal Land Use Plan.
3. The PR category applies to land used or proposed for active public or private
recreational use. Permitted uses include parks (both active and passive), golf courses,
15-218
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 17 of 43
marina support facilities, aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation,
and similar facilities. The PR designation on this site is applicable to the existing and
proposed private tennis club and tennis courts. The density/intensity limitations include
incidental buildings, such as maintenance equipment sheds, supply storage, and
restrooms, not included in determining intensity limits. The proposed tennis club and
ancillary uses are consistent with this land use designation.
4. The Property is part of the 145-acre planned community (PC-47), which has been
adopted to regulate developments within the Property and the adjacent Golf Club Site,
and is in conformance with the Coastal Land Use Plan designation pursuant to Section
21.26.055(S)(2) of the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan.
5. The Project conforms to all applicable development standards in the proposed
amendment to PC-47, including density/intensity, setbacks, building heights, and
parking.
6. The Property is not located in an area known for the potential of seismic activity or
liquefaction. All projects are required to comply with the California Building Code ("CBC")
and Building Division standards and policies. Geotechnical investigations specifically
addressing liquefaction are required to be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance
of a building permit. Permit issuance is also contingent on the inclusion of design
mitigation identified in the investigations. Construction plans are reviewed for
compliance with approved investigations and CBC prior to building permit issuance.
7. Elevations on the Property range from 104 feet up to 120 feet North American Vertical
Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) above mean sea level. These site elevations are well above
projected sea level rise in Newport Bay for the next 75 years and the site is not subjected
to other coastal hazards.
8. The Project is required to develop and implement a Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Plan ("SWPPP") since the Project involves clearing, grading, and ground disturbance of
more than one acre. Pursuant to Section 21.35.030 (Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan, Water Quality Control, Construction Pollution Prevention Plan) of
the NBMC, when a SWPPP is required, a Construction Pollution Prevention Plan
("CPPP") is required to implement temporary Best Management Practices (BMPs)
during construction to minimize erosion and sedimentation and to minimize pollution of
runoff and coastal waters derived from construction chemicals and materials. A CPPP
has been prepared and will be reviewed by the City's Engineer Geologist prior to
issuance of grading/building permits for site grading. Construction plans and activities
will be required to adhere to the approved CPPP/SWPPP.
9. A Water Quality and Hydrology Plan (WQHP) is required Pursuant to Section 21.35.050
(Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan, Water Quality Control, Water Quality and
Hydrology Plan) of the NBMC since the Project is considered a development of water
quality concern and includes the development of five dwelling units, more than 10,000
square feet of impervious surface area, and a parking area in excess of 5,000 square
feet. The WQHP/WQMP will be reviewed and approved by the City's Engineer Geologist
15-219
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 18 of 43
prior to the issuance of building permits for site grading. The WQHPNVQMP includes a
polluted runoff and hydrologic site characterization, a description of site design BMP's,
and documentation of the expected effectiveness of the proposed BMPs. Construction
plans will be reviewed for compliance with the approved WQHP/WQMP prior to building
permit issuance.
10. An Analysis of the Fiscal and Economic Impacts was prepared on August 29, 2022, by
Kosmont Companies to analyze the construction of new visitor accommodations in the
coastal zone in accordance with the requirements of Section 21.48.025 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan, Standards for Specific Land Uses Visitor
Accommodations) of the NBMC. The report provides a feasibility analysis stating that
the anticipated average daily room rate for all 41 rooms is approximately $920 and the
statewide average daily room rate is $205.69. Therefore, the proposed accommodations
are not considered lower cost accommodations. The report considers the specific
location of the Property as an inappropriate location for low cost accommodations.
Additionally, low cost accommodations are not feasible due to prohibitive land and
construction costs. The Property does not currently provide accommodations of any kind
and implementation of the Project would not impact low-cost accommodations. While
the Project does not include any lower cost rooms, and the Local Coastal Program
Implementation Plan defines it as an impact, there is no impact on the provision of lower -
cost visitor accommodations in the Coastal Zone. The Project features larger guest
facilities to accommodate a higher occupancy per room, kitchens in a majority of the
hotel rooms, and separate living rooms with sofa beds, all which offset higher costs of
accommodations.
Findinq:
F. Conforms with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the
Coastal Act if the project is located between the nearest public road and the sea or
shoreline of any body of water located within the coastal zone.
Fact in Support of Finding:
The Property is not located between the nearest public road and the sea or shoreline.
The Property will not affect the public's ability to gain access to, use, and/or view the
coast and nearby recreational facilities. Vertical access to Newport Bay is available via
existing public access at 1601 Bayside Drive, which is located approximately 1,600 feet
southwest of the subject property.
2. Coastal Land Use Plan, Policy 4.4.1-6 and Figure 4-3 (Coastal Views) identify the
closest public view road as Newport Center Drive, located approximately 170 feet east
of the Property and the closest public viewpoint as Irvine Terrace Park, located 525 feet
south of the Property. Coastal views from these view corridors and viewpoints are
directed toward the Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. Since the Property is located
to the north of Irvine Terrace Park, the Project will not affect coastal views due to its
orientation. From Newport Center Drive, there is a zero to 40-foot grade difference to
the project area below. The maximum height allowed in PC-47 is 46 feet for the attached
15-220
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 19 of 43
condominium lofts, 39 feet for the two (2) single-family residences, 30 feet for the tennis
clubhouse, and 31 feet for the hotel rooms. Therefore, the majority of the Project would
sit below the existing grade elevations along Newport Center Drive, minimizing the
visibility of the project site and would not obstruct public coastal views. During
construction, construction equipment would be obscured by vegetation and the grade
differential so it would not obstruct coastal views from motorists traveling along Newport
Center Drive. The Project will not impact coastal views.
Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment
On January 24, 2012, the City Council approved Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 15347, which
authorized the creation of seven separate lots for the tennis club, 5 single-family residences, and
27 hotel rooms, and lettered lots for common areas and a private street. The Applicant proposes
an amendment to the vesting tentative tract map to accommodate the Project, which consists of
two (2) single -unit residential dwellings, three (3) residential condominiums, 41 hotel rooms, a
tennis clubhouse, their common open space areas and a private street to support the proposed
uses. The VTMA reflects the combination of two (2) previously divided lots which were intended
for two (2) detached single-family residences. This results in the elimination of one lot for a total
of six (6) separate lots. No changes to the lots created for common areas and a private street are
proposed. The map of the VTMA has also been modified to include residential condominium
portion of the Project.
In accordance with Section 19.12.070 (Subdivisions, Tentative Map Review, Required Findings
for Action on Tentative Maps) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, and the following finding
and facts in support of such findings are set forth -
Finding:
A. That the proposed map and the design or improvements of the subdivision are
consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, and with applicable
provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and this Subdivision Code.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The Project is consistent with the MU-H31PR General Plan designation of the site.
2. The Public Works Department has reviewed the proposed revisions to the approved
vesting tentative tract map and determined it is consistent with the Title 19 and
applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act.
3. Conditions of approval have been included to ensure compliance with Title 19.
Finding:
B. That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of development.
Facts in Support of Finding:
15-221
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 20 of 43
The Property is entirely developed and does not support any environmental resources.
2. The Property is located in the Newport Center and Fashion Island area. The Property is
currently improved with a private tennis club. Given its location, this site is ideal for the
development of a recreation and mixed -use project as allowed by the General Plan Land
Use Element.
Finding
C. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements will not cause
substantial environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife
or their habitat. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, the decision -making body may
nevertheless approve such a subdivision if an environmental impact report was
prepared for the project and a finding was made pursuant to Section 21081 of the
California Environmental Quality Act that specific economic, social, or other
considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified
in the environmental impact report.
Fact in Support of Findin :
An Addendum to the MND has been prepared and concludes that no significant environmental
impacts will result with the Project development of the Property in accordance with the
proposed subdivision map revision.
Finding:
D. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause
serious public health problems.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The VTMA is required for the subdivision of parcels in order to accommodate the
development of the tennis club and courts, two (2) single -unit residential dwellings, and
41 hotel rooms on the Property. All construction for the project will comply with all
Building, Public Works, and Fire Codes, which are in place to prevent serious public
health problems. Public improvements will be required of the developer per Section
19.28.010 of the NBMC and Section 66411 of the Subdivision Map Act. Compliance with
all ordinances of the City and all Conditions of Approval for the Project will ensure that
the Project will not cause any serious health problems.
2. All mitigation measures will be implemented as outlined in the Addendum to the MND to
ensure the protection of the public health.
3. No evidence is known to exist that would indicate that the planned subdivision pattern will
generate any serious public health problems.
15-222
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Pape 21 of 43
Finding:
E. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision. in this connection, the decision -making body may approve a
map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided and that
these easements will be substantially equivalent to easements previously acquired by
the public. This finding shall apply only to easements of record or to easements
established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby
granted to the City Council to determine that the public at large has acquired easements
for access through or use of property within a subdivision.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The design of the Project will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at
large for access through or use of property within the Property.
2. An easement through the Property will be retained by the City to sewer and utilities
purposes.
3. No other public easements for access through or use of the Property have been retained
for use by the public at large.
Finding:
F. That, subject to the detailed provisions of Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act,
if the land is subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act), the resulting parcels following a subdivision
of the land would not be too small to sustain their agricultural use or the subdivision will
result in residential development incidental to the commercial agricultural use of the
land.
Fact in Support of Finding:
The Property is not subject to the Williamson Act since the Property is not considered an
agricultural preserve and is less than 100 acres.
Finding:
G. That, in the case of a `land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California
Business and Professions Code: (a) there is an adopted specific plan for the area to be
included within the land project; and (b) the decision -making body finds that the
proposed land project is consistent with the specific plan for the area.
Facts in Support of Finding:
15-223
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 22 of 43
The Property is not a "land project" as defined in Section 11000.5 of the California
Business and Professions Code.
2. The Property is not located within a specific plan area.
Finding:
H. That solar access and passive heating and cooling design requirements have been
satisfied in accordance with Sections 66473.1 and 66475.3 of the Subdivision Map Act.
Fact in Support of Finding:
The VTMA and improvements are subject to Title 24 of the California Building Code that
requires new construction to meet minimum heating and cooling efficiency standards
depending on location and climate. The Newport Beach Building Division enforces Title
24 compliance through the plan check and inspection process.
Findinq
That the subdivision is consistent with Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and
Section 65584 of the California Government Code regarding the City's share of the
regional housing need and that it balances the housing needs of the region against the
public service needs of the City's residents and available fiscal and environmental
resources.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The proposed amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map is consistent with Section
66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act and Section 65584 of the California Government
Code regarding the City's share of the regional housing need. The Project does not
involve the elimination of residential rooms and therefore will not affect the City's ability
to meet its share of housing needs.
2. Public services are available to serve the Project and the Addendum to the MND
prepared for the Project indicates that the project's potential environmental impacts are
properly mitigated.
Finding.-
J. That the discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision into the existing sewer
system will not result in a violation of existing requirements prescribed by the Regional
Water Quality Control Board.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. Waste discharge into the existing sewer system will be not violate Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) requirements.
15-224
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 23 of 43
2. Sewer connections have been conditioned to be installed per City Standards, the
applicable provisions of Chapter 14.24 (Sewer Connection, Permits), and the latest
revision of the Uniform Plumbing Code.
Finding-
K. For subdivisions lying partly or wholly within the Coastal Zone, that the subdivision
conforms with the certified Local Coastal Program and, where applicable, with public
access and recreation policies of Chapter Three of the Coastal Act.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The Property is located in the Coastal Zone and subject to a coastal development permit.
2. The Property does not have access to any beaches, shoreline, coastal waters, tidelands,
coastal parks or trails.
3. Facts in support of Findings E and F are hereby incorporated by reference.
Limited Term Permit
In accordance with Section 20.52.040 (Planning and Zoning, Permit Review Procedures,
Limited Term Permits) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the following findings and facts
in support of such findings are set forth:
Finding:
A, The operation of the limited duration use at the location proposed and within the time period
specified would not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the City, nor
endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the public convenience, health,
interest, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of
the requested limited duration use;
Facts in Support of Finding:
The limited term permit will allow two (2) temporary modular trailers and portable toilets.
Both modular trailers are approximately 33 feet long and 13 feet wide. One (1) modular
trailer is proposed to be used as a construction office located at the southwest portion
of the Property and will be staged at this location through the entire duration of the
Project. The second modular office is proposed to be used as a temporary office for
tennis club operations and will be located on the easterly portion of the Property through
the construction phase of the project (approximately 16 months after construction
begins). The portable toilets are proposed to serve the temporary tennis club office and
located nearby.
15-225
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 24 of 43
2. The operation of the temporary modular trailers is proposed to exceed 90 days from the
date of the permit. The construction office is proposed to be staged for the duration of
all construction activities, which is estimated to be approximately 20 months. The tennis
club office is proposed to be staged for approximately 16 months, and will be removed
upon completion of the Project.
Finding-
B. The subject lot is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the limited duration use
without material detriment to the use and enjoyment of other properties located adjacent
to and in the vicinity of the lot,
Facts in Support of Finding:
The Property is approximately seven (7) acres in size. Based on the construction phasing
plan, there is adequate area to accommodate the proposed modular trailers and
portable toilets throughout the various phases of construction. The construction trailer
will be located within an area which is fenced off from public view and access.
Finding:
C. The subject lot is adequately served by streets or highways having sufficient width and
improvements to accommodate the kind and quantity of traffic that the limited duration use
would or could reasonably be expected to generate, -
Facts in Support of Finding:
The Property has an existing parking lot with two (2) entrances currently taken from
Clubhouse Drive, which has a westerly outlet to East Coast Highway and an easterly
outlet to Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive.
2. During the various phases of construction, the easterly entrance to the parking lot will
remain available to the public for parking and will provide direct access for the modular
office trailer and portable toilets, while the westerly entrance will be for construction
access only. The construction trailer is intended for construction use only and not for the
public. There are no traffic issues anticipated.
Finding:
D. Adequate temporary parking to accommodate vehicular traffic to be generated by the
limited duration use would be available either on -site or at alternate locations acceptable
to the Zoning Administrator, and
15-226
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 25 of 43
Facts in Support of Finding:
The proposed trailers will not create additional parking demand since it will be utilized
as offices for construction activities and employees displaced during the renovation of
the tennis clubhouse.
2. A portion of the existing parking lot will remain, with access available on the easterly
side of the lot from Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive. The remaining parking lot
provides adequate parking for employees and members of the tennis club.
Finding:
E. The limited duration use is consistent with all applicable provisions of the General Plan,
any applicable specific plan, the Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The temporary trailers are conditioned to comply with all applicable provisions of the
General Plan, Municipal Code, and other City regulations.
2. The Property is not located within a specific plan area.
Develor)ment Agreement Amendment
On March 27, 2012, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach ("City") adopted Ordinance
No. 2012-3 approving Development Agreement No. DA2008-001 ("Agreement") between the
City and the Applicant for the Approved Project. The Agreement was executed and recorded,
as document number 2014000036369 on January 29, 2014, with a ten-year term.
On July 12, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2022-16, approving First
Amendment to Agreement to extend the term of the Agreement by one (1) year.
Finding:
In accordance with Section 15.45.020(A)(2)(c) (Buildings and Construction, Development
Agreement, Development Agreement Required) of the NBMC, an amendment to the DA is
required as the Project, which includes an amendment to PC-47 and a General Plan
Amendment to increase the number of hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms, which is new non-
residential development in Statistical Area L1 (Newport Center/Fashion Island). Additionally,
the Applicant requests an additional 10-year term of Agreement, pursuant to Section 15.45.070
(Buildings and Construction, Development Agreement, Amendment/Cancellation) of the
NBMC. The Second Amendment to the Agreement satisfies the requirements of Chapter 15.45
(Buildings and Construction, Development Agreements) of the NBMC as follows:
15-227
Planning Commission Resolution No, PC2022-022
Paae 26 of 43
Facts in Support of Finding:
1. The Second Amendment provides assurance that the Applicant may proceed with the
Project in accordance with existing policies, rules and regulations, and conditions of
approval. Additionally, the Second Amendment to the Agreement helps the Applicant
avoid a waste of resources and escalated costs of the Project while encouraging a
commitment to private participation in comprehensive planning.
2. The Second Amendment to the Agreement specifies the term of Agreement to be
extended for a period of ten (10) years, as well as the updated permitted uses, density
and intensity, and maximum height and size of proposed buildings, consistent with the
Approved Project. Additionally, the Second Amendment to the Agreement includes all
mandatory elements, including public benefits that are appropriate to support conveying
the vested development rights consistent with the City's General Plan, NBMC, and
Government Code Sections 65864 et seq.
3. Public benefits include the payment of ninety-three thousand dollars ($93,000) per each
residential dwelling unit and ten dollars ($10) per square foot of construction for the
tennis clubhouse.
SECTION 4. DECISION.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends the
followings to the City Council:
a. Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration Addendum No. ND2022-001 to Mitigated
Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 and Errata to Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052), as depicted in Exhibit "A";
b. Approve General Plan Amendment, as depicted in Exhibit B;
c. Approved Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment; as depicted
in Exhibit C
d. Approve Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, as depicted in
Exhibit D;
e. Approve amendment to Major Site Development Review No. SD2011-002, with
conditions of approval as depicted in Exhibit F;
f. Approve amendment to Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-039 with
conditions of approval as depicted in Exhibit F;
g. Approve amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-003, with
conditions of approval as depicted in Exhibit F
15-228
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 27 of 43
h. Approve amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004, with conditions of
approval as depicted in Exhibit F; and
i. Approve Second Amendment to Development Agreement No. DA2008-001, as
depicted in Exhibit E.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 8T" DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022.
AYES: Ellmore, Harris, Kleiman, Lowrey, and Weigand
NOES: None
RECUSED: Weigand
ABSENT: Klaustermeier
BY:
Lauren Kleiman, Chairman
BY: '-'ZZ
Mark Rosene, Secretary
15-229
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Pape 28 of 43
EXHIBIT "A"
ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2010-008 AND ERRATA TO
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. ND2010-008 (SCH NO. 2010091052)
Available separately due to bulk at:
www.newportbeachca.g oq v/cegaa
15-230
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 29 of 43
EXHIBIT "B"
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO ANOMALY NO. 46 OF TABLE LU2 OF THE 2006
NEWPORT BEACH GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT
15-231
Anomaly
Number
Statistical
Area
Land Use
Designation
Development
Limit (so
Development
Limit Other
Additional Information
46
L1
MU-H31PR
3,725
8 Tennis
Residential permitted
Courts
in accordance with
MU-H3
41 Hotel
*27 rooms converted
Rooms*
from 17 tennis courts
per Council
Resolution 2012-10
and 14 rooms per
General Plan
Amendment PA2022-
260
15-232
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 30 of 43
EXHIBIT "C"
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN AMENDMENT
15-233
Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment Related to Development
Standards of the Tennis Club portion within the Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community (PC-47) (PA2021-260)
Amend Section 21.26.055.S (Newport Beach Country Club) of Title 21 (Local Coastal
Program Implementation Plan) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to read as follows:
S. Newport Beach Country Club (PC-47).
2. Tennis Club.
a. Density/intensity limit: seven eight (8) tennis courts; and three thousand seven
hundred twenty-five (3,725) square foot clubhouse.
b. Height: thirty (30) feet for clubhouse.
c. Parking: twenty-eight (28) spaces thirty-two (32) spaces
3. Residential.
a. Detached Residential (Villas)
i. Dens ityli ntens ity limit: two single-family dwelling units.
ii. Development Standards:
Villa Designation
Villa A (TTM Lot #1)
Villa B (TI'M Lot #2)
Lot Size
5,000 square feet minimum
Lot Coverage (Maximum)
70%
65%
39 feet, measured in accordance with the Height and Grade
Building Height
definition of Section 2.0 General Conditions and
Regulations
Building Side Yard Setbacks
3 feet minimum
Building Front and Rear Yard
5 feet minimum
Setbacks
Enclosed Parking Space for
2
2
Each Unit
Open Guest Parking Space
One space - could be located on the private driveway — No
for Each Unit
overhang to the private street/cul-de-sac is allowed
15-234
b. Attached Residential (Condominiums)
i. Density/intensity limit: three (3) attached residential units.
ii. Setbacks: five (5) feet from any property line.
iii. Height: forty-six (46) feet (to be located atop of the 2-story hotel
buildings).
iv. Parking: three (3) enclosed spaces and one guest space per
dwelling unit.
4 (The BwAgak ..s Hotel
a. Density/Intensity Limit: forty-one (41) short-term guest rental Units rooms.
The maximum total allowable gross floor area for the hotel rooms shall be twenty
eight tl;Gussand three huRdFed (28,300) forty-seven thousand four hundred
eighty -flour (47,484) square feet with a two thousand two hundred (2,200) square -
foot concierge and guest center, four thousand six hundred eighty-six (4,686)
square feet of ancillary hotel uses, and a seven thousand five hundred (7,500)
square -foot spa facility.
b. Setbacks: five feet from any property line.
c. Height: thirty-one (31) feet.
d. Parking: . forty-one (41) parking spaces.
15-235
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 31 of 43
EXHIBIT "D"
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT
15-236
Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community Development Plan
Adoption: March 27, 2012, Ordinance No. 2012-2
Amendment: , 2022, Ordinance No._
15-237
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Introduction and Purpose...............................................................................
4
2.0 General Conditions and Regulations..............................................................
5
3.0 Land
Use and Development Regulations.......................................................
10
3.1
Golf Club..............................................................................................
10
A. Golf Course....................................................................................
10
B. Golf Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses ................................................
10
1. Building Area.............................................................................
10
2. Building Height..........................................................................
10
3. Permitted Ancillary Uses...........................................................
10
4. Parking......................................................................................
11
5. Fencing.....................................................................................
11
3.2
Tennis Club..........................................................................................
11
A. Tennis Courts.................................................................................
11
1. Number of Courts......................................................................
11
B. Tennis Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses ............................................
12
1. Building Area.............................................................................
12
2. Building Height..........................................................................
12
3. Permitted Ancillary Uses...........................................................
12
4. Parking......................................................................................
12
3.3
Thp �r Residential .......... ..............
12
1. NuFnbeF Of Detached Residential ...................................
13
2. Attached Residential .......................
14
14
The 6 Figalaws,Hotel................... ................... :........... ..... :................ ..
14
1. Number of Units Rooms...........................................................
14
2. Permitted Ancillary Uses...........................................................
14
3. Building Area.............................................................................
15
4. Building Height..........................................................................
15
5. Building Setbacks......................................................................
15
6. Parking......................................................................................
15
3.5
Signs....................................................................................................
15
A. Sign Allowance...............................................................................
15
B. Sign Standards...............................................................................
16
4.0 Site
Development Review..............................................................................
17
4.1
Purpose...............................................................................................
17
4.2
Application.............................................................
4.3
Findings...............................................................................................
17
4.4
Contents..............................................................................................
18
4.5
Public Hearing - Required Notice........................................................
18
4.6
Expiration and Revocation Site Plan Review Approvals ......................
19
2
15-238
4.7 Fees..................................................................................................... 19
4.8 Minor Changes by the Community Development Director ................... 19
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit Name Exhibit Number
VicinityAerial Map............................................................................................... A
Conceptual Master Site Plan............................................................................... B
LIST OF TABLES
Table Name
Page
The Villas Development Standards...................................................................... 13
K3
15-239
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District (the PCD) is composed
of the Golf Club, Tennis Club, Bungalows and Villas facilities, totaling approximately 4-33
140 acres. The PCD has been developed in accordance with the Newport Beach
General Plan and is consistent with the Local Coastal Land Use Plan.
The purpose of this PCD is to provide for the classification and development of
coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive planning project with limited mixed uses,
including the private Ggolf Gclub, -Ttennis Cclub, 27 short teFm FeRtal HRits 41-room
boutique hotel called the Bungalews with a spa/fitness area center and ancillary
uses, and 5 GeMi-GUStG Y' single „nit residential dwellings units called the VMas.
Whenever the regulations contained in the PCD Regulations conflict with the regulations
of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained in the PCD
Regulations shall take precedence. The Newport Beach Municipal Code shall regulate
all development within the PCD when such regulations are not provided within the PCD
Regulations.
EI
15-240
2.0 GENERAL CONDITIONS AND REGULATIONS
1. Alcoholic Beverage Consumption
The consumption of alcoholic beverages within the PCD shall be in compliance with the
State of California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control and the Newport Beach
Municipal Code. A use permit shall be required if the establishment operates past 11:00
p.m. any day of the week and a minor use permit shall be required if the establishment
operates until 11:00 p.m. any day of the week.
2. Amplified Music
All amplified music played after 10:00 p.m. within the PC shall be confined within the
interior of a building unless a Special Events Permit is obtained.
3. Archaeological/Paleontological Resources
Development of the site is subject to the provisions of City Council Policies K-5 and K-6
regarding archaeological and paleontological resources.
4. Architectural Design
All development shall be designed with high quality architectural standards and shall be
compatible with the surrounding uses. The development should be well -designed with
coordinated, cohesive architecture and exhibiting the highest level of architectural and
landscape quality in keeping with the PCD's prominent location in the Newport Center
Planning Area. Massing offsets, variation of roof lines, varied textures, openings,
recesses, and design accents on all building elevations shall be provided to enhance
the architectural style. Architectural treatments for all ancillary facilities (i.e. storage,
truck loading and unloading, and trash enclosures) shall be provided.
5. Building Codes
Construction shall comply with applicable provisions of the California Building Code and
the various other mechanical, electrical and plumbing codes related thereto as adopted
by the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
6. Exterior Storage Areas
There shall be no exterior storage areas permitted with the exception of the
greenskeeper/maintenance area which shall be enclosed by a minimum six-foot
plastered block wall.
5
15-241
7. Flood Protection
Development of the subject property will be undertaken in accordance with the flood
protection policies of the City.
8. Grading and Erosion Control
Grading and erosion control measures shall be carried out in accordance with the
provisions of the Newport Beach Excavation and Grading Code and shall be subject to
permits issued by the Community Development Department.
9. Gross Floor Area
Gross floor area shall be defined as the total area of a building including the
surrounding exterior walls.
10. Height and Grade
The height of any structure within the PCD shall not exceed fifty (50) feet, unless
otherwise specified. The height of a structure shall be the vertical distance between the
highest point of the structure and the grade directly below. In determining the height of a
sloped roof, the measurement shall be the vertical distance between the grade and the
midpoint of the roof plane, provided that no part of the roof shall be extend more than
five (5) feet above the permitted height in the height limitation zone, and any
amendments shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Director
11. Landscaping/Irrigation
Landscaping and irrigation shall be provided in all areas not devoted to structures,
parking lots, driveways, walkways, and tennis courts to enhance the appearance of the
development, reduce heat and glare, control soil erosion, conserve water, screen
adjacent land uses, and preserve the integrity of PCD. Landscaping and irrigation shall
consist of a combination of trees, shrubs, groundcover and hardscape improvements.
Landscaping shall be prepared in accordance with the Landscaping Standards and
Water -Efficient Landscaping Sections of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and
installed in accordance with the approved landscape plans prepared by a licensed
landscape architect.
12. Lighting — Outdoor
All new outdoor lighting shall be designed, shielded, aimed, located and maintained to
shield adjacent uses/properties and to not produce glare onto adjacent uses/properties.
Lighting plans shall be prepared in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Section of the
0
15-242
Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be prepared by a licensed electrical
engineer. All lighting and lighting fixtures that are provided shall be maintained in
accordance with the approved lighting plans.
13. Lighting — Parking & Walkways
All lighting and lighting fixtures that are provided shall be maintained in accordance with
the approved lighting plans. Light standards within parking lots shall be the minimum
height required to effectively illuminate the parking area and eliminate spillover of light
and glare onto adjoining uses/properties and roadways.
Parking lots and walkways accessing buildings shall be illuminated with a minimum of
0.5 foot-candle average on the driving or walking surface during the hours of operation
and one hour thereafter. Lighting plans shall be prepared in compliance with the
Outdoor Lighting Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be prepared
by a licensed electrical engineer.
If the applicant wishes to deviate from this lighting standard, a lighting plan may be
prepared by the applicant and submitted to the Community Development Director for
review and approval.
14. Loading Areas for Non -Residential Uses
All loading and unloading of goods delivery shall be performed onsite. Loading
platforms and areas shall be screened from public view.
15. Parking Areas
Parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, turnaround areas, and landscaping
areas of the parking lots shall be kept free of dust, graffiti, and litter. All components of
the parking areas including striping, paving, wheel stops, walls, and light standards of
the parking lots shall be permanently maintained in good working condition. Access,
location, parking space and lot dimensions, and parking lot improvements shall be in
compliance with the Development Standards for Parking Areas Section of the Newport
Beach Municipal Code.
16. Property Owner Approval
Written property owner approval shall be required for the submittal of any site
development review application and/or prior to grading and/or building permit issuance.
17. Outdoor Paging
Outdoor paging shall be permitted at the Ggolf Gclub to call individuals to the tees and
at the Ttennis Gclub to call points during tennis tournaments.
7
15-243
18. Sewage Disposal
Sewage disposal service facilities for the PCD will be provided by Orange County
Sanitation District No. 5 and shall be subject to applicable regulations, permits and fees
as prescribed by the Sanitation District.
19. Screening of Mechanical Equipments
All new mechanical appurtenances (e.g., air conditioning, heating, ventilation ducts and
exhaust vents, swimming pool and spa pumps and filters, transformers, utility vaults and
emergency power generators) shall be screened from public view and adjacent land
uses. The enclosure design shall be approved by the Community Development
Department. All rooftop equipment (other than vents, wind turbines, etc.) shall be
architecturally treated or screened from off -site views in a manner compatible with the
building materials prior to final building permit clearance for each new or remodeled
building. The mechanical appurtenances shall be subject to sound rating in accordance
with the Exterior Noise Standards Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
Rooftop screening and enclosures shall be subject to the applicable height limit.
20. Screening of the Villas residential units from tennis courts
Adequate buffering between the Villas residential units and tennis courts shall be
provided and subject to the Site Development Review process. The exterior perimeter
of the tennis courts facing Granville Condominiums, Granville Drive, and the Ttennis
Gclubhouse parking lot shall be screened by a minimum ten -foot -high chain link fence
covered by a wind screen. Wind screen shall be maintained in good condition at all
time.
21. Screening of the Pool/Spa Equipment
All pool and/or spa equipment shall be enclosed by a minimum five-foot high block wall
plastered or otherwise textured to match the building.
22. Special Events
Temporary special community events, such as such as PGA Senior Classic golf
tournaments, Team Tennis, Davis Cup Matches, and other similar events, are permitted
in the PCD, and are subject to the Special Events Chapter of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code. Temporary exterior storage associated with approved special events
may be permitted provided it is appropriately screened and regulated with an approved
Special Event Permit.
15-244
23. Temporary Structures and Uses
Temporary structures and uses, including modular buildings for construction -related
activities are permitted.
24. Trash Container Storage for Residential Dwellings
Trash container storage shall be out of view from public places, and may not be located
in the required parking areas. If trash container storage areas cannot be located out of
public view, they shall be screened from public view. Screening shall consist of fences,
walls, and landscaping to a height at least 6 inches above the tops of the containers.
25. Trash Enclosures for Non -Residential Uses
All trash enclosures for non-residential uses shall be provided and in accordance with
the Solid Waste and Recyclable Materials Storage of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code.
26. Tennis Club Site Phasing Plan -
The phasing plan for the tennis club site which consists of the tennis club, "'i&
residential units and 136IRgalews hotel rooms shall be subject to a site development
review process.
27. Water Service
Water service to the PCD will be provided by the City of Newport Beach and will be
subject to applicable regulations, permits and fees as prescribed by the City.
0
15-245
3.0 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
3.1 Golf Club
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of the golf course and clubhouse.
A. Golf Course
An 18-hole championship golf course and related facilities (i.e. putting green,
driving range, snack bar, starter shack, restroom facilities, etc.).
B. Golf Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses
1. Building
The maximum allowable gross floor area for a golf clubhouse building
shall be 56,000 square feet, exclusive of any enclosed golf cart storage
areas ramp and washing area. The greens keeperlmaintenance buildings,
snack bar, separate golf course restroom facilities, starter shack, and
similar ancillary buildings are exempt from this development limit.
2. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for the Golf Clubhouse shall be 50
feet and shall be measured in accordance with the Height and Grade
definition of Section 2.0 General Conditions and Regulation of the PCD.
3, Permitted Ancillary Uses
The following ancillary uses are allowed:
• Golf shop
• Administrative Offices
• Dining, and event areas
• Kitchen & Bar areas
Banquet Rooms
• Men and Women's Card Rooms
• Health and fitness facility
• Restroom and Locker facilities
• Golf Club storage areas
• Employee lounge/lunch areas
• Meeting rooms
• Golf Cart Parking Storage and Washing Area
ikel
15-246
• Separate Snack Bar
• Separate Starter Shack
• Separate Golf Course Restrooms
• Hand Carwash Area
• Greenskeeper Maintenance Facility
• Temporary Construction Facilities
• Guard House
• Others (subject to an approval of the Community Development
Director)
4. Parking
Parking for the Golf Course and Golf Clubhouse shall be in accordance
with following parking ratios (source: from Table 2 of the Circulation and
Parking Evaluation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., September 2009
for Newport Beach Country Club — Clubhouse Improvement Project):
Golf Course. 8 spaces per hole
Golf Clubhouse:
Dining, assembly & meeting rooms: 1 per 3 seats or 1 per 35
square feet
Administrative Office: 4 per 1,000 square feet
Pro Shop: 4 per 1,000 square feet
Maintenance Facility: 2 per 1,000 square feet
Health and Fitness Facility: 4 per 1,000 square feet
The design of the parking lot and orientation of vehicular aisles and
parking spaces shall be subject to the review and approval of the City
Traffic Engineer and Community Development Director.
5. Fencing
Golf Course perimeter fencing shall be wrought -iron with a maximum
permitted height of six (6) feet.
3.2 Tennis Club
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of the tennis courts and clubhouse.
A. The Tennis Courts
1. Number of courts
11
15-247
The maximum allowable tennis courts shall be seven eight lighted tennis
courts (s* seven lighted championship courts and one lighted stadium -
center court).
B. Tennis Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses
1. Building Area
The maximum allowable gross floor area for the Tennis Clubhouse shall
be 3,725 square feet.
2. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for the Tennis Clubhouse shall be
30 feet and shall be measured in accordance with the Height and Grade
definition of Section 2.0 General Conditions and Regulations of the PCD.
3. Permitted Ancillary Uses
The following ancillary uses are allowed:
• Tennis Shop
• Administrative Offices
• Concessions
• Restroom and Locker facilities
• Storage areas
• Spectator seating
• Others (subject to an approval of the Community Development
Director)
4. Parkinq
Parking for the Tennis Clubhouse and Courts shall be a minimum of 2-8 32
parking spaces.
3.3. Tt's Residential
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of theylas units.
12
15-248
A. Detached Residential (The Villas)
1. Number of Units
The maximum allowable number of single-family residential units shall be
five-(5} two (2).
2. Development Standards
The following development standards shall apply to the Villas:
The Villas Development Standards Table
Villa
Villa A
Villa B
Designation
TTM Lot #1
TTM Lot #2
Lot Size
5,000 square feet minimum
Lot Coverage
70%
66%
(Maximum)
39 feet, measured in accordance with the
Building Height
Height and Grade definition of Section
2.0 General Conditions and Regulations
Building Side
3 feet minimum
Yard Setbacks
Building Front
and Rear Yard
5 feet minimum
Setbacks
Enclosed Parking
Space for Each
2
2
Unit
Open Guest
One space - could be located on the
Parking Space for
private driveway — No overhang to the
Each Unit
private street/cul-de-sac is allowed
13
15-249
B. Attached Residential
1. Number of Units
The maximum allowable number of attached residential units shall
be three (3).
2. Buildinq Setbacks
The building setback shall be a minimum of five (5) feet from any
property line.
3. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for attached residential units
to be located atop of the 2-story hotel buildings shall be 46 feet,
measured in accordance with the Height and Grade definition of
Section 2.0 General Conditions and Regulations.
4. Parkinq
Parking for the attached residential units shall be a minimum of 3
enclosed parking spaces and one guest parking space per unit.
3.4. The 13unqalows Hotel
Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and
placement of the bungalows, concierge and guest center, and spa facility.
1. Number of Units Rooms
The maximum allowable number of the Bungalows rooms shall be 2-7 41, to be
built in a clustered setting of single and two-story buildings.
2. Permitted Ancillary Uses
The following ancillary uses are allowed:
• Administrative Offices
• Concierge office and guest meeting facility
• Performance Therapy Center
• Spa and Fitness Center
• Swimming pool and Jacuzzi
m in^drinks, SRaGks light hrca;lrfac} ;nrl Inr h i}omc
14
15-250
• Yoga Pavilion
3. Building Area
The maximum allowable gross floor area for the bungalows hotel rooms shall be
2999 47,484 square feet with a 2,200 square foot concierge & guest center,
4,686 square feet of ancillary hotel uses, and a 7,500 square -foot spa facility.
4. Building Height
The maximum allowable building height for the bungalows hotel rooms shall be
31 feet, measured in accordance with the Height and Grade definition of Section
2.0 General Conditions and Regulations of the PCD.
5. Building Setbacks
The building setback requirement shall be a minimum of 5 feet from any
property line.
6. Parking
Parking for the meows hotel rooms shall be a minimum of 34 41 parking
spaces located in proximity to the use.
3.5 Signs
A. Sign Allowance
1. One (1) single or double-faced, ground -mounted entrance
identification sign shall be allowed at Newport Beach Tennis Club's
main entrance (Country Club Drive and Irvine Terrace). Total
maximum signage area shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square
feet and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height.
2. One (1) single or double-faced, ground -mounted entrance
identification sign shall be allowed at or near the vicinity of the
Newport Beach Country Club's secondary entrance (Granville).
Total maximum signage area shall not exceed seventy-five (75)
square feet and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height.
3. Building identification signs shall be allowed; one for each street
frontage. If freestanding, this sign type shall not exceed a maximum
height of five (5) feet in height. The maximum signage area shall
not exceed seventy (70) square feet.
4. Vehicular and pedestrian directional signs shall be allowed. This
sign type may occur as a single -faced or double-faced sign. The
15
15-251
sign shall be sized to allow for proper readability given the number
of lines of copy, speed of traffic, setback off the road and viewing
distance. This sign type shall not exceed a maximum of six (6) feet
in height.
5. One (1) single or double faced, ground -mounted identification sign
shall be allowed at the entrance road to the Bungalows. Total
maximum signage area shall not exceed seventy-five (75) square
feet and shall not exceed five (5) feet in height and fifteen (15) feet
in length.
B. Sign Standards
1. The design and materials of all permanent signs in the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community District shall be in
accordance with Sign Section 3.5, unless otherwise approved by
the Community Development Director.
2. All permanent signs shall be subject to a sign permit issued by the
Community Development Department.
3. All signs shall be subject to the review of the City Traffic Engineer
to ensure adequate sight distance in accordance with the
provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
4. Sign illumination is permitted for all sign types. No sign shall be
constructed or installed to rotate, gyrate, blink or move, or create
the illusion of motion, in any fashion.
5. All permanent signs together with the entirety of their supports,
braces, guys, anchors, attachments and decor shall be properly
maintained, legible, functional and safe with regards to appearance,
structural integrity and electrical service.
6. Temporary signs that are visible from any public right-of-way shall
be allowed up to a maximum of sixty (60) days and subject to a
temporary sign permit issued by the Community Development
Department.
7. If the applicant wishes to deviate from the sign standards identified
herein, a comprehensive sign program may be prepared or a
modification permit application may be submitted for review and
consideration by the Zoning Administrator in accordance with the
applicable provisions of the Newport Beach Municipal Code.
W.
15-252
4.0 SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
4.1 Purpose
The purpose of the Site Development Review process is to ensure new
development proposals within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community Development are consistent with the goals and policies of the
General Plan, provisions of this Planned Community Development Plan, the
Development Agreement and the findings set forth below in sub -section 4.3.
4.2 Application
An approval of Site Development Review application by the Planning
Commission shall be required for the construction of any new structure prior to
the issuance of a grading or building permit or issuance of an approval in concept
for Coastal Commission. Signs, tenant improvements to any existing buildings,
kiosks, and temporary structures are exempt from the site development review
process and subject to the applicable City's permits. The decision of Planning
Commission is the final, unless appealed in accordance with the Newport Beach
Municipal Code.
4.3. Findings
In addition to the general purposes set forth in sub -section 4.1 and in order to carry
out the purposes of this chapter as established by said section, the Site
Development Review procedures established by this Section shall be applied
according to and in compliance with the following findings:
The development shall be in compliance with all other provisions of the
Planned Community District Plan;
2. The development shall be compatible with the character of the
neighboring uses and surrounding sites and shall not be detrimental to the
orderly and harmonious development of the surroundings and of the City;
3. The development shall be sited and designed to maximize the aesthetic
quality of the project as viewed from surrounding roadways and
properties, with special consideration given to the mass and bulk of
buildings and the streetscape on Coast Highway; and
17
15-253
4. Site plan and layout of buildings, parking areas, pedestrian and vehicular
access ways, landscaping and other site features shall give proper
consideration to functional aspects of site development.
4.4. Contents
The Site Development Review application shall include all of the information and
materials specified by the Community Development Director and any additional
information review by the Planning Commission in order to conduct a thorough
review of the project in question. The following plans/exhibits may include, but
not limited to the following:
1. An aerial map showing the subject property, adjacent properties and
identifying their uses.
2. Comprehensive elevations and floor plans for new structures with
coordinated and complimentary architecture, design, materials and colors.
3. A parking and circulation plan showing golf cart and pedestrian paths in
addition to streets and fire lanes.
4. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated preliminary landscape plan.
5. A comprehensive, cohesive and coordinated lighting plan showing type,
location and color of all exterior lighting fixtures.
6. Comprehensive text and graphics describing the design philosophy for the
architecture, landscape architecture, material and textures, color palette,
lighting, and signage.
7. Text describing drainage and water quality mitigation measures.
8. A statement that the proposed new structure is consistent with the goals,
policies, and actions of the General Plan and Planned Community
Development Plan.
4.5 Public Hearing —Required Notice
A public hearing shall be held on all site development review applications. Notice
of such hearing shall be mailed not less than ten (10) days before the hearing
date, postage prepaid, using addresses from the last equalized assessment roll
or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses, to
owners of property within a radius of three hundred (300) feet of the exterior
boundaries of the subject property. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to
obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required
by this Section. In addition to the mailed notice, such hearing shall be posted in
m
15-254
not less than two (2) conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten
(10) days prior to the hearing.
4.6 Expiration and Revocation Site Development Review Approvals
1. Expiration. Any site development review approved in accordance with the
terms of this planned community development plan shall expire within
twenty-four (24) months from the effective date of final approval as
specified in the Time Limits and Extensions Section of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code, unless at the time of approval the Planning Commission
has specified a different period of time or an extension is otherwise
granted.
2. Violation of Terms. Any site development review approved in accordance
with the terms of this planned community development plan may be
revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such site development review
are violated or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith.
3. Public Hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on
any proposed revocation after giving written notice to the permittee at
least ten (10) days prior to the hearing, and shall submit its
recommendations to the City Council. The City Council shall act thereon
within sixty (60) days after receipt of the recommendation of the Planning
Commission.
4.7. Fees
The applicant shall pay a fee as established by Resolution of the Newport Beach
City Council to the City with each application for Site Development Review under
this planned community development plan.
4.8 Minor Changes by the Director
The following minor changes to an approved site plan may be approved
by the Director in compliance with Section 20.54.070 (Changes to an
approved project) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code:
a) Minor relocation of any proposed structure.
b) Reduction in the square footage of any structure and a
commensurate reduction in required parking, if applicable.
c) Reconfiguration of the golf clubhouse parking lot, including drive
aisles and/or parking spaces, subject to review and approval of the
City Traffic Engineer.
d) Reconfiguration of parking lot landscaping.
e) Modification of the approved architectural style.
f) Any other minor change to the site plan provided it does not
19
15-255
increase any structure area, height, number of units, number of
hotel rooms, and/or change of use.
2. Any proposed changes that are not deemed minor shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Commission.
20
15-256
Exhibit A
21
15-257
Exhibit B
oQ' . a • 1
ti •
oQ7 r r
A !
�Q r
r `
�Q r
_A
o •
y�P • •~ • Golf Course
•
• Golf Clubhouse
-4, • & Parking Lot
A
r }�WY F piy .
r
22
•
•
Tennis Clubhouse, r
Hotel, & Residential j
C#]
FI
899(t
15-258
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 32 of 43
EXHIBIT "E"
SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
15-259
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Citv Clerk
(Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only)
This First Amendment is recorded at the request and
for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is
exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant
to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383.
SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
and
GOLF REALTY FUND
CONCERNING PROPERTIES LOCATED AT TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
WITHIN THE
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
15-260
SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5)
This SECOND AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "Second
Amendment") is entered into and effective on the date it is recorded with the Orange County
Recorder ("'Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ("City"), and
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California limited partnership ("Property Owner"). City and
Property Owner are sometimes collectively referred to in this Second Amendment as the
"Parties" and individually as a "Party."
RECITALS
A. Property Owner is the managing owner of and owns a fee interest in title to that
certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California
which is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" and depicted
on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit "B" ("Property"). The Property consists of
approximately seven (7) acres within the area shown on the City's Zoning Map as the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community District. The Property comprises the Tennis Club at
Newport Beach site shown on Exhibit "B" which consists of The Villas Sub -Area, The Tennis
Club Sub -Area, and The Bungalows Sub -Area.
B. City and Property Owner entered into that certain Development Agreement
between the City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund dated March 27, 2012, and recorded in
the Official Records of Orange County on January 29, 2014, as document number 2014000036369
("Agreement") attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein by reference for a term of
ten (10) years.
C. On November 20, 2018, the City approved Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039 to allow the demolition of the eighteen (18) existing tennis courts and construction
of the Tennis Club, Villas and Bungalows at the Tennis Property, however, the Agreement was
not amended or modified.
D. City and Property Owner entered into the First Amendment to Development
Agreement between the City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund pursuant to Ordinance No.
2022-16 and recorded in the Official Records of Orange County on XX, XXXX, as document
("First Amendment"), attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and incorporated herein by reference.
E. The Parties now wish to enter into this Second Amendment to increase the number
of tennis courts from seven (7) to eight (8), increase the number of hotel rooms from twenty-seven
(27) to forty-one (41), increase the gross floor area of ancillary hotel uses by four thousand six
hundred eight -six (4,686) square feet, and construct three (3) attached condominium units and two
(2) single-family residences in lieu of five (5) single-family residences.
F. On September 8, 2022, the Planning Commission held the public hearing on the
Second Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff,
Property Owner, and members of the public. Consistent with applicable provisions of the
Development Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution
No. PC2022-022, recommending the City Council approve the Second Amendment.
15-261
G. On September 27, 2022, the City Council held a noticed public hearing on the
Second Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff,
Property Owner, and members of the public. On October 13, 2022, consistent with applicable
provisions of the Development Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the City Council held the second
reading and adopted Ordinance No. 2022 approving the Second Amendment.
H. This Second Amendment is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General
Plan ("General Plan"), including without limitation the General Plan's designation of the Property
as "MU-H3/PR" (Mixed Use Horizontal /(Parks and Recreation) (Anomaly 46); Coastal Land Use
Plan designation as "MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal / Parks & Recreation"; the Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community District that was adopted in 1997 by Ordinance No. 97-10, and
amended in 2022 by Ordinance No. 2022 in order to establish appropriate zoning to regulate
land use and development of the Property consistent with the General Plan; and Newport Beach
Country Club Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2005-002 approved for the Property
on March 27, 2012 by Ordinance No. 2012-2 and amended on October 13, 2022 by Ordinance No.
2022-
I. In recognition of the significant public benefits that this Second Amendment
provides, the City Council finds that this Second Amendment: (i) is consistent with the City of
Newport Beach General Plan as of the date of its adoption; (ii) is in the best interests of the health,
safety, and general welfare of City, its residents, and the public; (iii) is entered into pursuant to,
and constitutes a present exercise of, City's police poorer; (iv) is consistent and has been approved
consistent with the Addendum No. ND2022-001 to the previously adopted Mitigated Negative
Declaration No. ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) and Errata to Mitigated Negative Declaration
No. ND2010-008 (together referred as "MND") for the Newport Beach Country Club Planned
Community District (PA2021-260 amending PA2005-002) approved by the City Council, both of
which analyze the environmental effects of the proposed development of the Project on the
Property; and (v) is consistent and has been approved consistent with provisions of California
Government Code section 65867 et seq. and Chapter 15.45 City of Newport Beach Municipal
Code ("NBMC").
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Property Owner agree as follows:
1. Definitions. Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to add or revise the
following definitions. Unless added or revised, all other definitions set forth in Section 1 of the
Agreement shall remain unchanged:
"Adopting Ordinance" shall mean City Council Ordinance No. 2022-` approving and
adopting this Second Amendment.
"Agreement" shall mean this Development Agreement, as the same may be amended from
time to time including, the First Amendment and Second Amendment.
`Agreement Date" shall mean October 13, 2022 which date is the date the City Council
adopted the Adopting Ordinance.
15-262
"Development Plan" shall mean the Newport Beach Planned Community Development
Plan Amendment No. PC2021-001 adopted by Ordinance No. 2022- which amends Newport
Beach Planned Community Development Plan No. PC2005-002; Vesting Tentative Tract Map
Amendment No. NT2021-002 adopted by Resolution No. 2022- which amends Vesting
Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-003; Site Development Review Amendment No. SD2021-004
adopted by Resolution No. 2022- which amends Site Development Review No. SD2011-002;
Limited Term Permit No. XP2022-007 adopted by Resolution No. 2022- which amends
Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004; General Plan Amendment No. GP2021-004; Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2021-068 adopted by Resolution No. 2022- which amends
Coastal Development Permit No. CD2017-039; and Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan
Amendment No. LC2021-004 adopted by Ordinance No. 2022-
"Development Regulations" shall mean the following regulations as they are in effect as
of the Agreement Date and to the extent they govern or regulate the development of the Property,
but excluding any amendment or modification to the Development Regulations adopted, approved,
or imposed after the Agreement Date that impairs or restricts Property Owner's rights set forth in
this agreement; unless such amendment or modification is expressly authorized by this Agreement
or is agreed to by Property Owner in writing: the General Plan, the Coastal Land Use Plan, the
Development Plan, the Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan; and, to the extent not
expressly superseded by the Development Plan or this Agreement, all other land use and
subdivision regulations governing the permitted uses, density and intensity of use, design,
improvement, and construction standards and specifications, procedures for obtaining required
City permits and approvals for development, and similar matters that may apply to development
of the Project on the Property during the Term of this Agreement that are set forth in Title 15 of
the Municipal Code (buildings and construction), Title 19 of the Municipal Code (subdivisions).
Title 20 of the Municipal Code (planning and zoning) and Title 21 of the Municipal Code (local
coastal program implementation plan), but specifically excluding all other sections of the
Municipal Code, including without limitation Title 5 of the Municipal Code (business licenses and
regulations). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the term "Development Regulations," as used herein,
does not include any City ordinance, resolution, code, rule, regulation or official policy governing
any of the following: (i) the conduct of businesses, professions, and occupations; (ii) taxes and
assessments; (iii) the control and abatement of nuisances; (iv) the granting of encroachment
permits and the conveyance of rights and interests which provide for the use of or entry upon
public property; or (v) the exercise of the power of eminent domain.
"Effective Date" shall mean the latest of the following dates, as applicable: (i) the date that
is thirty (30) days after the Agreement Date; (ii) if a referendum concerning the Adopting
Ordinance, the Development Plan, or any of the Development Regulations approved on or before
the Agreement Date is timely qualified for the ballot and a referendum election is held concerning
the Adopting Ordinance or any of such Development Regulations, the date on which the
referendum is certified resulting in upholding and approving the Adopting Ordinance and the
Development Regulations; or (iii) if a lawsuit is timely filed challenging the validity of the
Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development Regulations approved on or
before the Agreement Date, the date on which said challenge is finally resolved in favor of the
validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance, this Agreement, the Development Plan and/or the
applicable Development Regulations, which such finality is achieved by a final non -appealable
judgment, voluntary or involuntary dismissal (and the passage of any time required to appeal an
involuntary dismissal), or binding written settlement agreement. Promptly after the Effective Date
3
15-263
occurs, the Parties agree to cooperate in causing an appropriate instrument to be executed and
recorded against the Property memorializing the Effective Date.
"'Project" shall mean all on -site and off -site improvements that Property Owner is
authorized and/or may be required to construct with respect to each parcel of the Property, as
provided in this Second Amendment and the Development Regulations, as amended by this
Second Amendment, and/or as the same may be modified or amended from time to time consistent
with this Second Amendment and applicable law.
2. Term of Agreement. Section 2.4 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
The term of this Agreement ("Term") shall commence on the Effective Date of Second
Amendment and shall terminate on the "Termination Date.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, if any
Party reasonably determines that the Effective Date of Second Amendment will not occur because
(i) the Adopting Ordinance of Second Amendment or any of the Development Regulations
approved on or before the Agreement Date of Second Amendment for the Project has/have been
disapproved by City's voters at a referendum election or (ii) a final non -appealable judgment is
entered in a judicial action challenging the validity or legality of the Adopting Ordinance of Second
Amendment, this Agreement, and/or any of the Development Regulations for the Project approved
on or before the Agreement Date of Second Amendment such that this Agreement and/or any of
such Development Regulations is/are invalid and unenforceable in whole or in such a substantial
part that the judgment substantially impairs such Party's rights or substantially increases its
obligations or risks hereunder or thereunder, then such Party, in its sole and absolute discretion,
shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon delivery of a written notice of termination
to the other Party, in which event neither Party shall have any further rights or obligations
hereunder except that Property Owner's indemnity obligations set forth in Article to shall remain
in full force and effect and shall be enforceable, and the Development Regulations applicable to
the Project and the Property only (but not those general Development Regulations applicable to
other properties in the City) shall be repealed by the City after delivery of said notice of termination
except for the Development Regulations that have been disapproved by City's voters at a
referendum election and, therefore, never took effect.
The Termination Date shall be the earliest of the following dates: (i) the tenth (loth)
anniversary of the Effective Date; (ii) such earlier date that this Agreement may be terminated in
accordance with Articles 5, 7, and/or Section 8.3 of this Agreement and/or Sections 65865.1 and/or
65868 of the Development Agreement Statute; or (iii) completion of the Project in accordance
with the terms of this Agreement, including Property Owner's complete satisfaction, performance,
and payment, as applicable, of all Development Exactions, the issuance of all required final
occupancy permits, and acceptance by City or applicable public agency(ies) or private entity(ies)
of all required offers of dedication.
As used herein, the term "Lot Termination Date" for any separate legal lot within the
Property means the date on which all of the following conditions have been satisfied with respect
to said lot: (i) the lot has been finally subdivided and sold or leased (for a period longer than one
year), individually or in a "bulk" of four or fewer lots, to a member of the public or other ultimate
4
15-264
user; (ii) a final Certificate of Occupancy or -Release of Utilities" has been issued for the building
or buildings approved for construction on said lot
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, the
provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section 13.10 (as well as any other Property Owner
obligations set forth in this Agreement that are expressly written to survive the Termination Date)
shall survive the Termination Date of this Agreement.
3. Public Benefit Fee. Section 3.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
As consideration for City's approval and performance of its obligations set forth in this
Agreement, Property Owner shall pay to City a fee that shall be in addition to any other fee or
charge to which the Property and the Project would otherwise be subject (herein, the "Public
Benefit Fee") in the total sum of five hundred two thousand two hundred fifty dollars
($502,250.00) broken down as follows: (i) ninety-three thousand dollars and 00/100 ($93,000.00
per residential dwelling unit) for a sum of four hundred sixty-five thousand dollars and 00/100
($465,000.00) for the residential units; and (ii) ten dollars and 00/100 ($10.00) per square foot of
construction for the three thousand seven hundred twenty-five (3,725) square foot Tennis
Clubhouse for a sum of thirty-seven thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($37,250.00). with the
unpaid balance of said Public Benefit Fee increased on the first January 1 following the Effective
Date of this Agreement by the percentage increase in the CPI Index between the Effective Date
and said January l' date (the first "Adjustment Date") and thereafter with the unpaid balance of
said Public Benefit Fee increased on each subsequent January 1 during the Term of this Agreement
(each, an "Adjustment Date") by the percentage increase in the CPI Index in the year prior to the
applicable Adjustment Date. The amount of the percentage increase in the CPI index on the
applicable Adjustment Dates shall in each instance be calculated based on the then most recently
available CPI Index figures such that, for example, if the Effective Date of this Agreement falls on
July 1 and the most recently available CPI Index figure on the first Adjustment Date (January 1 of
the following year) is the CPI Index for November of the preceding year, the percentage increase
in the CPI Index for that partial year (a 6-month period) shall be calculated by comparing the CPI
Index for November of the preceding year with the CPI Index for May of the preceding year (a 6-
month period). In no event, however, shall application of the CPI Index reduce the amount of the
Public Benefit Fee (or unpaid portion thereof) below the amount in effect prior to any applicable
Adjustment Date. Property Owner shall pay the Public Benefit Fee at the following time(s): (i) As
to the residential dwelling units, prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any residential
unit; and (ii) as to the tennis clubhouse, prior to the issuance of the first building permit.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to the contrary, during the Term
of this Agreement, City shall not increase the Public Benefit Fee except pursuant to the CPI Index
as stated in this Section 3.1. The Public Fee Benefit Fee shall be calculated based on the total
square feet of construction for the tennis clubhouse. Property Owner shall not be entitled to any
credit or offset to the Public Benefit Fee for any existing buildings or structures. Property Owner
acknowledges by its approval and execution of this Agreement that it is voluntarily agreeing to
pay the Public Benefit Fee, that its obligation to pay the Public Benefit Fee is an essential term of
this Agreement and is not severable from City's obligations and Property Owner's vesting rights
to be acquired hereunder, and that Property Owner expressly waives any constitutional, statutory,
or common law right it might have in the absence of this Agreement to protest or challenge the
payment of such fee on any ground whatsoever, including without limitation pursuant to the Fifth
15-265
and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, California Constitution Article I
Section 19, the Mitigation Fee Act (California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. ), or
otherwise. In addition to any other remedy set forth in this Agreement for Property Owner's
default, if Property Owner shall fail to timely pay any portion of the Public Benefit Fee when due
City shall have the right to withhold issuance of any further building permits, occupancy permits,
or other development or building permits for the Development Plan.
4. Amendment or Cancellation of Agreement. Section 5 of the Agreement is hereby
amended in its entirety to read as follows
This Agreement may be amended or canceled in whole or in part only by mutual written
and executed consent of the Parties in compliance with California Government Code Section
65868 and Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 15.45.070 or by unilateral termination by City
in the event of an uncured default of Property Owner.
5. Procedure. Section 7.3 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read
as follows:
The Zoning Administrator shall conduct a duly noticed hearing and shall determine, on the
basis of substantial evidence, whether or not Property Owner has, for the period under review,
complied with the terms of this Agreement. If the Zoning Administrator finds that Property Owner
has so complied, the annual review shall be concluded. If the Zoning Administrator finds, on the
basis of substantial evidence, that Property Owner has not so complied, written notice shall be sent
to Property Owner by first class mail of the Zoning Administrator's finding of non-compliance,
and Property Owner shall be given at least ten (10) calendar days to cure any noncompliance that
relates to the payment of money and thirty (30) calendar days to cure any other type of
noncompliance. If a cure not relating to the payment of money cannot be completed within thirty
(30) calendar days for reasons which are beyond the control of Property Owner, Property Owner
must commence the cure within such thirty (30) calendar days and diligently pursue such cure to
completion. If Property Owner fails to cure such noncompliance within the time(s) set forth
above, such failure shall be considered to be a Default and City shall be entitled to exercise the
remedies set forth in Article 8 below.
6. General Provisions. Section 8.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
In the event of any material default, breach, or violation of the terms of this Agreement
("Default"), the Party alleging a Default shall deliver a written notice (each, a "Notice of Default")
to the defaulting Party. The Notice of Default shall specify the nature of the alleged Default and
a reasonable manner and sufficient period of time (twenty (20) calendar days if the Default relates
to the failure to timely make a monetary payment due hereunder and not less than thirty (30)
calendar days in the event of non -monetary Defaults) in which the Default must be cured ("Cure
Period'). During the Cure Period, the Party charged shall not be considered in Default for the
purposes of termination of this Agreement or institution of legal proceedings. if the alleged
Default is cured within the Cure Period, then the Default thereafter shall be deemed not to exist.
If a non -monetary Default cannot be cured during the Cure Period with the exercise of
commercially reasonable diligence, the defaulting Party must promptly commence to cure as
quickly as possible, and in no event later than thirty (30) calendar days after it receives the Notice
of Default, and thereafter diligently pursue said cure to completion. Notwithstanding the
on
15-266
foregoing, the City is not required to give Property Owner notice of default and may immediately
pursue remedies for a Property Owner Default that result in an immediate threat to public health,
safety or welfare.
7. Full Force and Effect. Except as modified by this Second Amendment, the entire
Agreement, First Amendment its exhibits, and the exhibits attached hereto, are incorporated
herein to this Second Amendment and shall remain in full force and effect.
Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein
by reference.
9. Recordation. The City Clerk shall record this Second Amendment in the Office
of the County Recorder of the County of Orange within the period required by California
Government Code Section 65858.5 and Section 15.45.100 of the NBMC.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
15-267
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
"PROPERTY OWNER"
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California
limited partnership
By:
Its:
By:
Its:
"CITY"
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California
municipal corporation
In
ATTEST:
Leilani I. Brown, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney
Kevin Muldoon, Mayor
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description of Property
Exhibit B — Depiction of Property
Exhibit C — Development Agreement Recorded January 29, 2014
Exhibit D — First Amendment to Development Agreement
8
15-268
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of 4 SS.
On 120 before me, Notary Public,
personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis
of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (seal)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of } SS.
On 20 before me, , Notary Public,
personally appeared , proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
0
(seal)
15-269
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
PARCELS A, B, C. AND D OF PARCEL MAP 2016-151, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECORDED IN
BOOK 402 PAGES 24 THROUGH 32 INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF
SAID COUNTY.
ME
15-270
EXHIBIT B
DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
13 HOTFL UNifS ,{ / ••� - EXISTING TENNIS COURTS
1 / i FalnxaY�otta rC r , -� y \ /
• ( -4 `zt •
r %
I SINGLE�"'�
HOME
FAMILY.'UT
f, \ 2
1SINGLc -�- l•� -
'FAMILY TT •-�••• ` /
HOME f- I II ��!" .�7"
PARKING LOT' /•
%VIII�!
Uu17jG6�.L �UN17-ACC� OENTER r.CLIRT.r
a `614jgalow - CrN1Tmb
\.. � Caaaiiiiaaaaaa PaJJ a}b �\. � �
... .. I HOTFC\\
i�1NR l - - Q H�,TEL lll���NNN���TS ` `� TENNIS CLUBHOUSE
F ncho Valmoia 1 ' i .2 C�00 r� FITNESS CEN7Ep
Bun9 ow s r r.• �}1. \ f SPA /
- r } •; T
7.
I HOTE I % ,�\ J�I`HOTEL
/ NIT _ 14
/ HOTEL T11�NrT i/, J r; `
RI /
UNIYT
>> ', `�"`"l° ial°rcta d POC1lJ4AEA' /
RaPvho2.
}1NIT _ I HOT
V.E(�
aneho V neia 1 �{7NIT 4 '•° ,.�
�4n9apila.Sun,c-4.,T
I II7cL Z
y`/+�3 HOTE t UNIT
_ /v J UNI 1 FLdn�Sa,Yalanc'��' � -
\� 17 }TO •Cagurnx,M �fa�e4 ;A1 5CONCIERGE �ud�alo '�, PARKING LOT,•
13lIhGnga .�, 7'!,[ � ^,TALLS
14/'•
J
Oa�l vn w r 21 H0TOTE�L
15-271
EXHIBIT C
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AND
GOLF REALTY FUND RECORDED JANUARY 29, 2014
Available separately due to bulk at:
newortbeachea. ov' overnment/de artment5,'community-develo mend tannin -
div ision/development-ap,reements
C-1
15-272
EXHIBIT D
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH AND GOLF REALTY FUND
!M
15-273
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Clerk
(Space Above This Line Is for Recorder's Use Only)
This First Amendment is recorded at the request and
for the benefit of the City of Newport Beach and is
exempt from the payment of a recording fee
pursuant to Government Code §§ 6103 and 27383.
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
between
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
and
GOLF REALTY FUND
CONCERNING PROPERTIES LOCATED AT TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH
WITHIN THE
NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
15-274
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5)
This FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "First
Amendment") is entered into and effective on the date it is recorded with the Orange County
Recorder ("Effective Date") by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ("City"), and
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California limited partnership "Property Owner"). City and
Property Owner are sometimes collectively referred to in this First Amendment as the
"Parties" and individually as a "Party."
RECITALS
A. Property Owner is the managing owner of and owns a fee interest in title to that
certain real property located in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California
which is more particularly described in the legal description attached as Exhibit "A" and
depicted on the site map attached hereto as Exhibit "B" ("Property"). The Property consists of
approximately seven (7) acres within the area shown on the City's Zoning Map as the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community District. The Property comprises the Tennis Club at
Newport Beach site shown on Exhibit "B" which consists of The Villas Sub -Area, The Tennis
Club Sub -Area, and The Bungalows Sub -Area.
B. City and Property Owner entered into that certain Development Agreement
between the City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund dated March 27, 2012, and recorded
in the Official Records of Orange County on January 29, 2014, as document number
2014000036369 ("Agreement") attached hereto as Exhibit "C" with a ten (10) year term.
C. On November 20, 2018, the City approved Coastal Development Permit No.
CD2017-039 to allow the demolition of the 18 existing tennis courts and construction of the
Tennis Club, Villas and Bungalows at the Tennis Property, however, the Agreement was not
amended or modified.
D. The Parties now wish to enter into that First Amendment extending the term for
an additional year and updating certain provisions.
E. On May 12, 2022, the Planning Commission opened the noticed public hearing on
this First Amendment and continued the item to May 26, 2022.
F. On May 26, 2022, the Planning Commission held the public hearing on this First
Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Property
Owner, and members of the public. Consistent with applicable provisions of the Development
Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. PC2022-
008, recommending the City Council approve this First Amendment.
15-275
G. On June 28, 2022, the City Council held a noticed public hearing on this First
Amendment and considered the testimony and information submitted by City staff, Property
Owner, and members of the public. On July 12, 2022, consistent with applicable provisions of
the Development Agreement Statute and Ordinance, the City Council held the second reading
and adopted Ordinance No. approving this First Amendment.
H. This First Amendment is consistent with the City of Newport Beach General
Plan ("General Plan"), including without limitation the General Plan's designation of the
Property as "MU-H3/PR" (Mixed Use Horizontal /(Parks and Recreation) (Anomaly 46); Coastal
Land Use Plan designation as "MU-H/PR (Mixed Use Horizontal / Parks & Recreation"; the
Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District that was adopted in 1997 by
Ordinance No. 97-10 in order to establish appropriate zoning to regulate land use and
development of the Property consistent with the General Plan; and Newport Beach Country Club
Planned Community Development Plan No PC2005-002 approved for the Property on March 27,
2012 by Ordinance No. 2012-2.
I. The City Council finds that this First Amendment: (i) is consistent with the City
of Newport Beach General Plan as of the date of this First Amendment; (ii) is in the best
interests of the health, safety, and general welfare of City, its residents, and the public; (iii) is
entered into pursuant to, and constitutes a present exercise of, City's police power; (iv) is
consistent and has been approved consistent with the Mitigated Negative Declaration No.
ND2010-008 (SCH 2O10091052) and an Errata to Mitigated Negative Declaration No_ ND2010-
008 (together referred as "MND") for the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
District (PA2005-002) approved by the City Council, both of which analyze the environmental
effects of the proposed development of the Project on the Property; and (v) is consistent and has
been approved consistent with provisions of California Government Code section 65867 et seq.
and Chapter 15.45 City of Newport Beach Municipal Code ("NBMC").
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, City and Property Owner agree as follows:
1. Term of Agreement. Section 2.4 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its
entirety to read as follows:
"The term of this Agreement (the "Tenn") shall commence on the
Effective Date and continue until 2023, unless
otherwise terminated or modified pursuant to its terms.
Notwithstanding any other provision set forth in this Agreement to
the contrary, the provisions set forth in Article 10 and Section
13.10 (as well as any other Property Owner obligations set forth in
this Agreement that are expressly written to survive the
Termination Date) shall survive the Termination Date of this
Agreement."
2, Attorneys' Fees. Section 8.10 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety
to read as follows:
15-276
"In any judicial proceeding, arbitration, or mediation (collectively,
an "Action") between the Parties that seeks to enforce the
provisions of this Agreement or arises out of this Agreement, the
prevailing Party shall not recover any of its costs and expenses,
regardless of whether they would be recoverable under California
Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5 or California Civil Code
section 1717 in the absence of this Agreement. These costs and
expenses include, but are not limited to, court costs, expert witness
fees, attorneys' fees, City staff costs (including overhead), and
costs of investigation and preparation before initiation of the
Action."
3. Notices. Section 13.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety to read
as follows:
"Any notice or demand that shall be required or permitted by law
or any provision of this Agreement shall be in writing. If the
notice or demand will be served upon a Party, it either shall be
personally delivered to the Party; deposited by a reliable courier
service that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery
with courier charges prepaid. The notice or demand shall be
addressed as follows:
TO CITY: City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Manager
With a copy to: City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: City Attorney
TO PROPERTY OWNER: Golf Realty Fund
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Robert O'Hill
Either Party may change the address stated in this Section 13.1 by
delivering notice to the other Party in the manner provided in this
Section 13.1, and thereafter, notices to such Party shall be
addressed and submitted to the new address. Notices delivered in
accordance with this Agreement shall be deemed to be delivered
upon the earlier of. (i) the date received or (iii) three business days
after deposit in the mail as provided above."
3
15-277
4. Full Force and Effect. Except as modified by this First Amendment, the entire
Agreement, its exhibits, and the exhibits attached hereto, are incorporated herein to this First
Amendment and shall remain in full force and effect.
Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and incorporated herein
by reference.
6. Recordation. The City Clerk shall record this First Amendment in the Office of
the County Recorder of the County of Orange within the period required by California
Government Code Section 65858.5 and Section 15.45.100 of the NBMC.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGEI
4
15-278
SIGNATURE PAGE TO
FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
"PROPERTY OWNER"
GOLF REALTY FUND, a California
limited partnership
By:
Its:-
By. -
Its:.
"CITY"
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California
municipal corporation
Kevin Muldoon, Mayor
ATTEST:
Leilani 1. Brown, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Aaron C. Harp, City Attorney
Attachments: Exhibit A — Legal Description of Property
Exhibit B — Depiction of Property
Exhibit C — Development Agreement Recorded January 29, 2014
15-279
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of ) SS.
On , 20 before me, , Notary Public,
personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis
of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) istare subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (seal)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate
verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
document to which this certificate is attached, and not the
truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
State of California
County of )SS.
On , 20 before me, , Notary Public,
personally appeared , proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that helshe/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)
acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature
51
(seal)
15-280
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
Parcel I and Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 44-102, in the City of Newport Beach, County of Orange,
State of California, as per Map filed in Book 316, Pages 3 to 6, inclusive, of Parcel Maps, in the
office of the County Recorder of Orange County.
A- l
15-281
THE PILL
EXHIBIT B
DEPICTION OF PROPERTY
IS CLUB
,'
B-1
MASTER PLAN
• THE TENNIS CLUB
1 new stadium court
Tennis Clubhouse
• THE VILLAS
5 single family homes
• THE BUNGALOWS
- 27 guest rental units
• THE GOLF CLUB
15-282
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paoe 33 of 43
EXHIBIT "F"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
(Project -specific conditions are in italics)
Planning Division
The project shall be in substantial conformance with the approved site plan, floor plans and
building elevations stamped and dated with the date of this approval (except as modified
by applicable conditions of approval).
2. The project is subject to compliance with all applicable submittals approved by the City
of Newport Beach ("City") and all applicable City ordinances, policies, and standards,
unless specifically waived or modified by the conditions of approval.
3. Nolkithstanding the legislative actions (ie. General Plan Amendment, Planned Community
Development Plan, and Local Coastal Program Amendment) activities reviewed under
Planning Activity No. PA2021-260 shall expire unless exercised within 24 months from the
date of approval as specified in Section 20.54,060 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code,
unless an extension is otherwise granted by the City for a period of time provided for in the
Development Agreement pursuant to the provisions of California Government Code
Section 66452.6(a).
4. The Vesting Tentative Tract Map Amendment, as reviewed under Planning Activity No.
PA2021-260, shall expire in accordance with the Subdivision Code, unless an extension
is otherwise granted consistent with the Subdivision Code and Subdivision Map Act. The
expiration date shall be extended for the unexpired term of the Second Amendment to
Development Agreement between City of Newport Beach and Golf Realty Fund.
5. The project shall consist of the followings:
a. Tennis Club: A 3,725 square -foot tennis clubhouse and eight (8) tennis courts,-
b. Hotel.- Forty-one (41) hotel rooms of
concierge and guest meeting facility, a
4,686 square feet of ancillary uses; and
47,484 square feet, a 2,200 square -foot
7,500 square -foot spa/fitness center, and
c. Residential: two (2) single-family units and three (3) condominium units
6. Pickleball courts shall not be permitted after the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for
the Tennis Clubhouse and Spa and Fitness Center unless the property owner and/or
Pickleball facility operator follows any and all City of Newport Beach General Plan,
Municipal Code, or other applicable requirements in order to continue the use of Pickleball
courts.
15-283
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 34 of 43
7. The project shall be subject to all applicable development standards prescribed in
Planned Community Development Plan Amendment, as reviewed under Planning
Activity No. PA2021-260, for the Tennis Club site, such as but not limited to, building
height, building setbacks, parking, lighting, sign standards, etc.
8. Upon the effective date of Local Coastal Program Implementation Plan Amendment, as
reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-260, Site Development Permit No.
SD2011-002, Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004, and Vesting Tentative Map No.
NT2005-003, approved for the Approved Project, shall be deemed of no further force.
9. The temporary modular building to accommodate on -going tennis club operation during
the construction of new tennis clubhouse shall be located on the existing tennis courts,
shall not interfere with the construction activities or parking, and shall be removed from
the project site upon completion/occupancy of the new clubhouse.
10. Prior to the issuance of a buildinq permiL the applicant shall pay all applicable
development fees (i.e. school, park in -lieu, transportation corridor agency), unless
otherwise addressed separately in the Development Agreement.
11. Prior to recordation of the Final Tract Map and the issuance of building permits the Final
Tract Map shall be signed by all of the current record owners of the property, which
presently include: (1) Elliot Feuerstein as Managing Member of Mesa Shopping Center -
West LLC; (2) Elliot Feuerstein as Managing Member of Mesa Shopping Center -East
LLC; (3) Irving Chase as General Partner of Fainbarg 11l L.P.; and (4) Robert O Hill as
Executive Director of Golf Realty Fund LP.
12. Any substantial change to the approved plans, shall require an amendment to all non -
legislative activities reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-260, or the
processing of new permits.
13. This Site Development Review, Coastal Development Permit, and Limited Term Permit
may be modified or revoked by the City Council or Planning Commission should they
determine that the proposed development, uses, and/or conditions under which it is
being operated or maintained is detrimental to the public health, welfare or materially
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity or if the property is operated or
maintained so as to constitute a public nuisance.
14. A copy of the Resolution, including conditions of approval Exhibit "F" shall be
incorporated into the Building Division and field sets of plans prior to issuance of the
building permits.
15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Planning
Division an additional copy of the approved architectural plans for inclusion in the Site
Development Review file. The plans shall be identical to those approved by all City
departments for building permit issuance. The approved copy shall include architectural
sheets only and shall be reduced in size to 11 inches by 17 inches. The plans shall
accurately depict the elements approved by this Site Development Review and shall
15-284
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 35 of 43
highlight the approved elements such that they are readily discernible from other
elements of the plans.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a landscape and
irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. These plans shall incorporate
drought tolerant plantings and water efficient irrigation practices, and the plans shall be
approved by the Planning Division.
17. All landscape materials and irrigation systems shall be maintained in accordance with
the approved landscape plan. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and
growing condition and shall receive regular pruning, fertilizing, mowing and trimming. All
landscaped areas shall be kept free of weeds and debris. All irrigation systems shall be
kept operable, including adjustments, replacements, repairs, and cleaning as part of
regular maintenance.
18. Prior to the final of issuance of a certificate of occui2ancy, the applicant shall schedule
an inspection by the Planning Division to confirm that all landscaping was installed in
accordance with the approved plan.
19. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare photometric study
in conjunction with a final lighting plan for approval by the Planning Division. The survey
shall show that lighting values are I" or less at all property lines.
20. Lighting shall be in compliance with applicable standards of Planned Community
Development Plan Amendment, as reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-260
and Section 20.30.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Exterior on -site lighting
shall be shielded and confined within site boundaries. No direct rays or glare are
permitted to shine onto public streets or adjacent sites or create a public nuisance.
"Walpak" and up -lighting type fixtures are not permitted. Parking area lighting shall have
zero cut-off fixtures.
21. The entire project shall not be excessively illuminated based on the outdoor lighting
standards contained within Section 20.30.070 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code,
or, if in the opinion of the Community Development Director, the illumination creates an
unacceptable negative impact on surrounding land uses or environmental resources.
The Community Development Director may order the dimming of light sources or other
remediation upon finding that the site is excessively illuminated.
22. Prior to the final of issuance of a certificate of occupancy or final of building permits for
each component of the proiect i.e. residential hotel or tennis club the applicant shall
schedule an evening inspection by the Code Enforcement Division to confirm control of
all lighting sources.
23. Prior to the issuance of a building_ permit, the applicant shall pay any unpaid
administrative costs associated with the processing of this application to the Planning
Division.
24. All noise generated by the proposed use shall comply with the provisions of Chapter
15-285
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 36 of 43
10.26 and other applicable noise control requirements of the Newport Beach Municipal
Code. The maximum noise shall be limited to no more than depicted below for the
specified time periods unless the ambient noise level is higher:
Between the hours of TOOAM
and 10:OOPM
Between the hours of
10:00PM and TOOAM
Location
Interior
Exterior
Interior
Exterior
Residential Property
45dBA
55dBA
40dBA
50clBA
Residential Property located within
100 feet of a commercial property
45dBA
60dBA
45dBA
50dBA
Mixed Use Property
45dBA
6OdBA
45dBA
50cIBA
Commercial Property
NIA
65dBA
NIA
60clBA
25. The construction and equipment staging area for each phase of the project shall be
located in the least visually prominent area on the site and shall be properly maintained
and/or screened to minimize potential unsightly conditions.
26. A screen and security fence that is a minimum of six feet high shall be placed around
the construction site during construction for each phase of the project.
27. Construction equipment and materials shall be properly stored on the site when not in
use for each phase of the project.
28. Should the property be sold or otherwise come under different ownership, any future
owners or assignees shall be notified of the conditions of this approval by either the
current business owner, property owner or the leasing agent.
29. Construction activities shall comply with Section 10.28.040 of the Newport Beach
Municipal Code, which restricts hours of noise -generating construction activities that
produce noise to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6.30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and 8.00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise -generating construction activities are
not allowed on Sundays or Holidays.
30. Deliveries and refuse collection for the facility shall be prohibited between the hours of
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and Saturdays and between the hours of 10:00
p.m. and 9:00 a.m. on Sundays and Federal holidays, unless otherwise approved by the
Director of Community Development.
31. A Special Events Permit is required for any event or promotional activity outside the
normal operational characteristics of the approved use, as conditioned, or that would
attract large crowds, involve the sale of alcoholic beverages, include any form of on -site
media broadcast, or any other activities as specified in the Newport Beach Municipal
Code to require such permits.
32. All proposed signs shall be in conformance with the provision of the Planned Community
Development Plan Amendment, as reviewed under Planning Activity No. PA2021-260, and
Chapter 20.42 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and shall be reviewed and approved
by the City Traffic Engineer if located adjacent to the vehicular ingress and egress.
15-286
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 37 of 43
33. The final location of the signs shall be reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer and shall
conform to City Standard 110-L to ensure that adequate vehicular sight distance is
provided.
34. To the fullest extent permitted by law, applicant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless
City, its City Council, its boards and commissions, officials, officers, employees, and agents
from and against any and all claims, demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of
action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including
without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature
whatsoever which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to City's
approval of The Tennis at Newport Beach Project Amendment including, but not limited
to, General Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Land Use Plan Amendment, Planned
Community Development Plan Amendment, Amendment to Major Site
Development Review No. SD2011-002, Amendment to Coastal Development
Permit No. CD2017-039, Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-
003, Amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004, & Second Amendment
to Development Agreement No. DA2008-001 (PA2021-260). This indemnification shall
include, but not be limited to, damages awarded against the City, if any, costs of suit,
attorneys' fees, and other expenses incurred in connection with such claim, action, causes
of action, suit or proceeding whether incurred by applicant, City, and/or the parties initiating
or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall indemnify the City for all of City's costs,
attorneys' fees, and damages which City incurs in enforcing the indemnification provisions
set forth in this condition. The applicant shall pay to the City upon demand any amount
owed to the City pursuant to the indemnification requirements prescribed in this condition.
Fire Department
35. An automatic fire sprinkler system shall be required for the residential and hotel
components of the project.
36. A fire alarm system shall be required for the hotel component of the project.
37. A Fire Master Plan shall be submitted to the Fire Prevention Division for approval. The
plan shall include information on the following (but not limited to) subjects: fire
department vehicle access to the project site, secondary emergency vehicle access,
firefighter access (hose pull) around structures, fire lane identification, location of fire
hydrants and other fire department appliances, and the location and type of gates or
barriers that restrict ingress/egress.
38. All portions of the perimeter of all structures shall be located within 150' of a fire lane as
measured along an approved route. A portion of the proposed structure exceeding this
distance is considered "out of access" and shall be corrected during plan check review
by one of the following methods:
a. Provide additional fire lanes to bring the entire structure "in access", or
15-287
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 38 of 43
b. Propose an alternate form of mitigation via the Alternate Methods and Materials
provisions of the fire code for the Fire Marshal's review. There is no guarantee
that the Alternate Methods and Materials proposal will be approved as proposed.
39. Fire department access roads shall comply with Newport Beach Fire Guidelines C.01
and C.02.
40. Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or
portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The
fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and shall
extend to within 150 feet (45 720 mm) of all portions of the facility and all portions of the
exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around
the exterior of the building or facility.
41. An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection
shall be provided to the premises. Fire -flow requirements for buildings or portions of
buildings and facilities shall be determined by Appendix B of the 2019 California Fire
Code.
42. Fire hydrants shall be spaced along fire department access roads in compliance with
the 2019 California Fire Code Appendix C.
43. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within
the jurisdiction is more than 400 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as
measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on -site fire
hydrants and mains shall be provided.
44. Additional facilities or changes to the current facilities shall require submitted plans to
the Newport Beach Fire Prevention Division for all changes, additions and modifications
to existing or new fire protection systems.
45. The use or storage of portable propane heaters shall be prohibited. Heaters for future
outdoor areas shall be fixed and plumbed with natural gas.
46. All fire hydrants and fire access road shall be installed and approved by the Fire
Department prior to the delivery of combustible material on site.
Building Division
47. Pursuant to CBC Chapter 1, Division 1.9, all temporary construction trailers, modular office
buildings, and safe pedestrian passageways around the construction sites shall be
disabled accessible.
48. All temporary modular office buildings shall be approved by the State of California for the
proposed use.
15-288
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Page 39 of 43
49. Foundations for temporary construction trailers and modular office buildings shall be
designed to provide anchorage for these structures against seismic and wind loads; and
provided with temporary utility connections.
50. The applicant is required to obtain all applicable permits from the City's Building Division
and Fire Department. The construction plans must comply with the most recent, City -
adopted version of the California Building Code. The construction plans must meet all
applicable State Disabilities Access requirements. Approval from the Orange County
Health Department is required prior to the issuance of a building permit.
51. The applicant shall employ the following best available control measures ("BACMs") to
reduce construction -related air quality impacts:
Dust Control
• Water all active construction areas at least twice daily.
• Cover all haul trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard.
• Pave or apply water four times daily to all unpaved parking or staging areas.
• Sweep or wash any site access points within two hours of any visible dirt deposits
on any public roadway.
• Cover or water twice daily any on -site stockpiles of debris, dirt or other dusty
material.
• Suspend all operations on any unpaved surface if winds exceed 25 mph.
Emissions
• Require 90-day low-NOx tune-ups for off road equipment.
• Limit allowable idling to 30 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment.
Off -Site Impacts
• Encourage car-pooling for construction workers.
• Limit lane closures to off-peak travel periods.
• Park construction vehicles off traveled roadways.
• Wet down or cover dirt hauled off -site.
• Sweep access points daily.
• Encourage receipt of materials during non -peak traffic hours.
• Sandbag construction sites for erosion control.
Fill Placement
• The number and type of equipment for dirt pushing will be limited on any day to
ensure that SCAQMD significance thresholds are not exceeded.
• Maintain and utilize a continuous water application system during earth
placement and compaction to achieve a 10 percent (10%) soil moisture content
in the top six-inch surface layer, subject to review/discretion of the geotechnical
engineer.
52. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) and Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with the General Permit for Construction
Activities shall be prepared, submitted to the State Water Quality Control Board for
approval and made part of the construction program. The project applicant will provide
the City with a copy of the NOI and their application check as proof of filing with the State
15-289
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 40 of 43
Water Quality Control Board. This plan will detail measures and practices that will be in
effect during construction to minimize the project's impact on water quality.
53. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Water
Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the proposed project, subject to the approval of
the Building Division and Code and Water Quality Enforcement Division. The WQMP
shall provide appropriate Best Management Practices (BMPs) to ensure that no
violations of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements occur, and must
show amount of stormwater retained prior to going into the proprietary filtration system.
54. A list of "good housekeeping" practices will be incorporated into the long-term post -
construction operation of the site to minimize the likelihood that pollutants will be used,
stored or spilled on the site that could impair water quality. These may include frequent
parking area vacuum truck sweeping, removal of wastes or spills, limited use of harmful
fertilizers or pesticides, and the diversion of storm water away from potential sources of
pollution (e.g., trash receptacles and parking structures). The Stage 2 WQMP shall list
and describe all structural and non-structural BMPs. In addition, the WQMP must also
identify the entity responsible for the long-term inspection, maintenance, and funding for
all structural (and if applicable Treatment Control) BMPs.
Public Works Department
55. The Final Tract Map shall be legible, scaled, dimensioned, and complete with all
necessary pertinent information and details such as easement limits and descriptions;
annotated lot lines, centerlines, and boundary lines; signature certificates; curve and line
tables; etc.
56. The Final Tract Map shall be prepared on the California coordinate system (NAD88).
Prior to Map recordation, the surveyor/engineer preparing the Map shall submit to the
County Surveyor and the City of Newport Beach a digital -graphic file of said Map in a
manner described in the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County
Subdivision Manual. The Final Tract Map to be submitted to the City of Newport
Beach shall comply with the City"s CADD Standards. Scanned images will not be
accepted.
57. Prior to recordation, the Final Map boundary shall be tied onto the Horizontal Control
System established by the County Surveyor in a manner described in Sections 7-9-330
and 7-9-337 of the Orange County Subdivision Code and Orange County Subdivision
Manual, Subarticle 18. Monuments (one -inch iron pipe with tag) shall be set On Each
Lot Corner unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Monuments shall be
protected in place if installed prior to completion of construction project.
58. A hydrology and hydraulic study and a master plan of water, sewer and storm drain
facilities for the on -site improvements shall be prepared by the applicant and approved
by the Public Works Department prior to Final Tract Map recordation.
15-290
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Pane 41 of 43
59. Easements for public emergency and security ingress/egress, weekly refuse service,
and public utility purposes on all private streets shall be dedicated to the City.
60. No structures shall be constructed within the limits of any utility easements.
61. All easements shall be recorded as a part of the Final Tract Map.
62. All applicable fees shall be paid prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map.
63. Construction surety in a form acceptable to the City, guaranteeing the completion of the
various required public improvements, shall be submitted to the Public Works
Department prior to the City approval of the Final Tract Map.
64. Street, drainage and utility improvements shall be submitted on City standard
improvement plan formats. All plan sheets shall be sealed and signed by the California
licensed professionals responsible for the designs shown on the Plans.
65. All improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current
edition of the City Design Criteria, Standard Special Provisions, and Standard Drawings.
66. All storm drains and sanitary sewer mains shall be installed with MacWrap.
67. All runoff discharges shall comply with the City's water quality and on -site non -storm
runoff retention requirements.
68. New concrete sidewalks, curbs, gutters, curb disabled access ramps, roadway
pavement, traffic detector loops, traffic signal devices, and street trees shall be installed
along the development's Coast Highway frontage.
69. Public improvements may be required along the development's Granville Drive frontage
upon building permit plan check submittal.
70. All on -site drainage, sanitary sewer, water and electrical systems shall be privately
owned, operated, and maintained. The water system shall be owned operate and
maintained by the City.
71. All curb return radii shall be 5-feet (5) minimum.
72. Each detached residential dwelling unit or bungalow building shall be served with an
individual water service and sewer lateral connection.
73. All overhead utilities serving the entire proposed development shall be made
underground.
74. ADA compliant curb ramps shall be installed within the interior parking area.
15-291
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paae 42 of 43
75. The intersection of the public streets, internal roadways, and drive aisle shall be
designed to provide adequate sight distance per City of Newport Beach Standard
Drawing Standard105. Slopes, landscaping, walls, signs, and other obstructions shall
be considered in the sight distance requirements. Landscaping within the sight lines
(sight cone) shall not exceed 24-inches in height and the monument identification sign
must be located outside the line of sight cone. The sight distance may be modified at
non -critical locations, subject to approval by the Traffic Engineer.
76. Any damage to public improvements within the public right-of-way attributable to on- site
development may require additional reconstruction within the public right-of-way at the
discretion of the Public Works Inspector.
77. The parking lot and vehicular circulation system shall be subject to further review and
approval by the City Traffic Engineer. Parking layout shall be per City Standard 805.
Parking layout shall be full dimensioned. On -street parking spaces shall be 8 feet wide
by 22 feet long. Drive aisles to parking areas shall be 26 feet wide minimum. The one-
way drive aisle adjacent to the hotel's concierge office and guest meeting building shall
be 14 feet wide minimum with no parking, otherwise the drive aisle shall be widened to
accommodate parking.
78. Cul-de-sacs shall comply with City Standards 102 and 103 and shall have a minimum
diameter of 80 feet curb to curb.
79. County Sanitation District fees shall be paid prior to the issuance of any building permits.
80. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a sewer and water demand study shall be
submitted for review by the Public Works and Utilities Department.
81. Prior to the commencement of demolition and grading of the project, the applicant shall
submit a construction management plan (CMP) to be reviewed and approved by the
Community Development Director, City Eire Marshal, and City Traffic Engineer. The plan
shall include discussion of project phasing, parking arrangements during construction,
anticipated haul routes and construction mitigation. Upon approval of the CMP, the
applicant shall be responsible for implementing and complying with the stipulations set
forth in the approved CMP.
82. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a sewer system management plan shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Public Works and Utilities Department.
83. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, various water and sewer easement for City
mains located on the adjacent properties shall be obtained and conveyed to the City.
84. A storm drain easement on behalf of the project shall be obtained from the adjacent
property owner prior to issuance of a building permit. Provide documentation of said
easement.
15-292
Planning Commission Resolution No. PC2022-022
Paqe 43 of 43
85. The City sewer manhole located within 1600 East Coast Highway shall be relocated to
an area outside of the landscape and parking stalls. The manhole location shall be
accessible at all time. A new sewer easement shall be provided for the sewer manhole
and sewer main within the 1600 East Coast Highway property.
86. The public sewer connection to the OCSD main shall utilize the existing OCSD manhole
located within East Coast Highway unless otherwise approved by OCSD and the City.
Final design shall be approved by OCSD and the City.
87. The existing private sewer main from the proposed point of connection to the City's
manhole located near East Coast Highway shall be video inspected and any damage
repaired prior.
88. Utility easements shall be provided for all City water meters, fire hydrants, valves and
back flow devices.
15-293
Attachment G
City Council Minutes Excerpts, Dated September 27, 2022
15-294
City of Newport Beach
City Council Meeting
September 27, 2022
b) Accept a check in the amount of $200,000 from the Friends of the Newport Beach Library and
approve Budget Amendment No. 23-013 to increase expenditures by the same amount in
Division 0106052 (Friends of the Library).
13. Confirmation of Appointments to the Ad Hoc Municipal Code and Council Policy Review
Committee [241100-2022]
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and
b) Confirm Mayor Kevin Muldoon's appointments of himself, Mayor Pro Tem Noah Blom, and
Council Member Will O'Neill (Chair) to the Ad Hoc Municipal Code and Council Policy Review
Committee.
14. Acceptance of the State of California Office of Traffic Safety Selective Traffic
Enforcement Program Grant PT23055 (C-8201-7) [381100-20221
a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action
will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly;
b) Authorize the City Council to accept a $350,000 Selective Traffic Enforcement Program (STEP)
award granted to the NBPD by the OTS per City Council Policies F-3 and F-25. To comply with
City Council Policy F-3, the City Council must formally accept the award of $350,000 and create
a new appropriation to expend the funds; and
c) Approve Budget Amendment No. 23-015 increasing NBPD revenue estimates and expenditure
appropriations by $350,000.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Blom, seconded by Mayor Muldoon, to approve the Consent Calendar;
and noting the recusal by Mayor Muldoon to Item 6, the "no" votes by Mayor Muldoon to Items 3 and 8,
and the amendments to Items 1 and 11.
The motion carried unanimously.
XVI. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR — None
XVII. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS — None
XVIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
15. Ordinance Nos. 2022-19 and 2022-20: Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment
(PA2021-260) (C-5068) [381100-20221
Community Development Director Jurjis and Associate Planner Lee utilized a presentation to
review the project location, land use, previously approved project, proposed amendments, previous
and proposed site plan comparisons, project entitlements, CEQA review, proposed Condition
No. 6, and recommended actions.
In response to Council Member O'Neill's question, Community Development Director Jurjis
confirmed that the applicant submitted an application for tennis courts and the City is not
prohibiting pickleball courts.
Mayor Muldoon opened the public hearing.
Robert O Hill provided the project background and utilized a presentation to review the amended
plans, display renderings, floor plans, photos, and a letter from Kory Kramer of Eagle Four Partners.
He further recommended working together with Eagle Four Partners and provided other potential
partners and tax revenue benefits.
Volume 65 - Page 401 15-295
City of Newport Beach
City Council Meeting
September 27, 2022
In response to Council Member Dixon's questions, Mr. 0 Hill identified a new lap pool on the
rendering, stated the 28 pickleball courts will remain, agreed to comply with Condition No. 6, which
Community Development Director Jurjis agreed the applicant can start right away with a parking
study, and outlined units that will help the City meet affordable housing development goals.
Mayor Pro Tem Blom noted changes in Mr. 0 Hill's previous affordable housing participation and,
as per Community Development Director Jurjis, the applicant's permit is expired and requires
updates to the plan and plan checks by the Building Department. In response to Mayor Pro Tem
Blom's question, Mr. 0 Hill stated that it is best for pickleball and the applicant to not include
pickleball in the amendment in order to complete the hotel lease and parking requirements. Mayor
Pro Tem Blom noted that the current pickleball courts exist without a City process, the City will not
take away the existing courts, and encouraged Mr. 0 Hill to go through the process to make everyone
happy at the same time by adding the pickleball courts to the plan. In response to Mr. 0 Hill's
question, Community Development Director Jurjis relayed that the applicant's return date to
Council is unknown until after the study is conducted.
Council Member Dixon supported a parallel path and in response to her question, Community
Development Director Jurjis stated that the City will not get in the way of the existing pickleball
courts, and Mr. 0 Hill confirmed that pickleball will continue indefinitely as codification with the
California Coastal Commission (CCC) and traffic study take place.
Brett Feuerstein and Ryan Chase, 50% owners of The Tennis Club at Newport Beach property,
noted an arbitration in progress to determine if Golf Realty Fund has the authority to unilaterally
process the application, opposed the proposed plan, thanked staff for their work, expressed interest
in finding a solution that enables The Tennis Club to grow and thrive, and expressed concern that
there are no pickleball courts in the plan and the proposed lease is for twenty years.
Sean Abdali, President of Grand Slam Tennis and The Tennis and Pickleball Club operator, stated
the Club is the largest and most prestigious in America with passionate pickleball members,
promised to one day offer majority pickleball, expressed interest in a 72-year lease and new
clubhouse, noted a petition opposing the construction of a hotel and tennis court demolition, and
asked that Council support Plan B.
Dalen Lawrence opposed the amendment.
Stacy Evans read a statement from Nick Bollettieri in support of Plan B.
John Rosen opposed the amendment.
Darcy Bouzeos opposed the amendment.
Debbie Schwartz pointed out a discrepancy in the pickleball court plans and requested that Council
deny the amendment.
Michelle Hatch expressed the opinion that Mr. 0 Hill and Mr. Abdali used deception tactics and
urged Council to oppose Plan B.
Gerald Kelleher relayed instances that have led him to question trust in the operator and owner.
Leo Figueroa supported the amendment and the Club providing both tennis and pickleball.
Rick Tarbell encouraged Council to include 28 pickleball courts as a condition in the amendment,
otherwise he opposed the amendment.
Robin, employee and member of The Tennis Club at Newport Beach, confirmed a 1,300-person
membership and Club intention to offer pickleball.
An unidentified speaker expressed the opinion that non -transparency exists at The Club.
Volume 65 - Page 402 15-296
City of Newport Beach
City Council Meeting
September 27, 2022
Dawna Baroda Clark expressed an interest in preserving The Tennis Club at Newport Beach and
was curious about alternatives.
Lewis Lanzner noted a discrepancy in the number of pickleball and tennis courts.
Jim Mosher questioned the amount that Council can approve in the General Plan Amendment
without a vote of the public pursuant to the City Charter and suggested providing Mr. O Hill with
a total development limit on the property and allowing him to determine the amount of hotel rooms
he can fit within 40,000 square feet.
Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Muldoon closed the public hearing.
In response to Council Member Dixon's question, Community Development Director Jurjis
confirmed that Council has the authority to vote on this amendment.
Council Member Dixon supported the project and proposed a motion to approve the General Plan
and Coastal Development Permit amendments and amend the Community Development Plan to
include a condition requiring 28 pickleball courts, of which Mr. O Hill agreed. Community
Development Director Jurjis stated that the study and entitlement processing are for tennis courts
and confirmed pickleball courts cannot be incorporated without adding a second amendment. City
Attorney Harp indicated that Council cannot require Mr. O Hill to oblige without an analysis and a
statement of intent of Council to provide 28 pickleball courts could be included, but it would not be
binding without an analysis.
Council Member O'Neill noted that all owners must sign off on the plan in order for the map to be
recorded and the applicant can proceed to CCC contingent upon approval. In response to his inquiry,
Community Development Director Jurjis noted that the applicant would need to repeat the CCC
process if the applicant decides to convert to pickleball courts after the project was approved by CCC
for tennis courts, and noted the challenges related to the plan being a Local Coastal Plan
Amendment. Council Member O'Neill relayed why he previously voted "no" on the amendment for
the development agreement and expressed frustrations about the project.
In response to Council Member Brenner's question, Community Development Director Jurjis
indicated that Council can deny, continue, or approve the application. Furthermore, he
acknowledged the pending arbitration case and that Mr. O Hill can submit the entitlements for
Council review.
In response to Mayor Muldoon's request, City Attorney Harp explained that the City has determined
that Mr. O Hill has the authority to process the application under the Newport Beach Municipal
Code provisions and the arbitration is separate from the City.
Mayor Muldoon noted that the Newport Beach Tennis Club is thriving under Mr. Abdali's
leadership, pickleball is the fastest growing sport in America and a better profit opportunity than
tennis courts, and the maps are not showing pickleball courts because they need to split the tennis
courts. In response to Mayor Muldoon's question, Mr. O Hill agreed to have 26-28 pickleball courts,
contingent on the traffic study results.
Motion bMayor Muldoon, seconded by Council Member Dixon, to a) adopt Resolution
No. 2022-65, AResolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting an
Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010-008 for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach
Located at 1602 East Coast Highway (PA2021-260); b) adopt Resolution No. 2022-66, A Resolution
of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving a General Plan Amendment,
Amendment to Major Site Development Review No. SD2011-002, Amendment to Coastal
Development Permit No. CD2017-039, Amendment to Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. NT2005-003,
and Amendment to Limited Term Permit No. XP2011-004 for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach
Volume 65 - Page 403 15-297
City of Newport Beach
City Council Meeting
September 27, 2022
Located at 1602 East Coast Highway (PA2021-260); c) adopt Resolution No. 2022-67, A Resolution
of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Authorizing Submittal of a Local Coastal
Program Amendment to the California Coastal Commission to Amend the Newport Beach Country
Club Planned Community Development Plan (PC-47) for the Tennis Club Located at 1602 East Coast
Highway (PA2021-260); d) waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, and
introduce Ordinance No. 2022-19, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach,
California, Approving an Amendment to the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community
Development Plan (PC-47) for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Located at 1602 East Coast
Highway (PA2021-260), and pass on to second reading on October 11, 2022; and e) waive full
reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, and introduce Ordinance No. 2022-20, An
Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Approving the Second
Amendment to the Development Agreement (DA2008-001) for the Tennis Club at Newport Beach
Located at 1602 East Coast Highway (PA2021-260), and pass on to second reading on October 11,
2022.
Council Member Avery stated that the project is not ready to come to Council, but he believes it is
a great location, facility, and plan and would be a shame if it cannot be brought together for everyone
to win.
In response to Council Member Dixon's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis
explained the series of steps to obtain a permit, Mr. O Hill clarified that the new plan documents
will not include pickleball courts because they already exist and will remain, indicated he agrees
with the conditions approved by the Planning Commission and substitute condition suggested by
staff, shared a willingness to start the traffic study immediately to gain official approval, and
clarified the demolition of tennis courts for the development of a hotel. Community Development
Director Jurjis reiterated the application process for pickleball courts and stated that, if Council
approves the item, Mr. O Hill will submit a fully revised application to the City.
Council Member Dixon discussed next steps and acknowledged the existing pickleball courts,
missing traffic study requirement, and stated that this is a fine project. Community Development
Director Jurjis noted the entitlements are for tennis courts until Mr. O Hill submits a revised
application featuring pickleball courts, which the City will then submit to the CCC.
Council Member Brenner expressed the opinion that the applicant made it difficult for Council, the
project is not ready for approval, and expressed a desire for the applicant to make the project
happen.
With Mayor Pro Tem Blom and Council Members Avery, Brenner, Duffield, and O'Neill
voting "no," the motion failed 2-5.
Motion by Council Member O'Neill, seconded by Council Member Duffield, to continue the
item until the meeting after the Planning Commission approves plans that include pickleball courts.
With Mayor Muldoon voting "no," the motion carried 6-1.
16. Call for Review — Denial of Reforestation Request for 938 Sandcastle Drive [100-20221
Public Works Director Webb and Parks and Trees Superintendent Pekar utilized a presentation to
review the denial, provide background on the initial request, initial inspection findings, staff denial,
reforestation process, Parks, Beaches, and Recreation Commission (PB&R) August 2, 2022 meeting
details, and basis for the call for review to Council.
In response to Council Member Avery's questions, Parks and Trees Superintendent Pekar noted the
current tree is 15 years old, a replacement tree would take many years to grow, the new tree would
not reach the same height as the current tree, and urban forest planting adds more trees. than losing
trees.
Volume 65 - Page 404 15-298
Attachment H
Correspondence
15-299
Received after Agenda Printed
September 27, 2022
Written Comments
September 27, 2022, City Council Agenda Comments
The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(@-yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229)
Item 1. Minutes for the September 13, 2022 City Council Meeting
The passages shown in italics below are from the draft minutes with suggested corrections
shown in c*�, &eout underline format. The page numbers refer to Volume 65.
Page 381, Item SS2, paragraph 3: "Nancy Scarbrough noted sentiment shared among
residents regarding fractional ownership during recent community events, asked that Council
consider the residents' dissatisfaction, and direct City staff to further explore options to
regulate or restrict fractional home ownership." [or "..., and City staff to further explore ..."]
Page 383, first full paragraph: "Council MemberAvery noted that, even before Pacaso, the
City was starting to lose local control to the State, experienced more density and traffic,
agreed with implementing a moratorium, cautioned the potential cost to the City, supported
looking at what other cities have done and updating the NBMC, and mitigate mitipatin_g the
impacts." [or "... updating the NBMC,—anal to mitigate the impacts."]
Page 384, last two bullets:
` Met with Denis L-,abenge LaBonge and Amber Snyder regarding the Fire Safety Council
and home hardening efforts.
* Attended the General Plan Update Planning Steering Committee meeting, Sherman
Gardens Annual Garden Party, League of California Cities Conference, two-day Source -to -
Sea Water Conference ..."
Page 390, paragraph 5: "Suzanne F^`�er Forster, VP of Banning Ranch Conservancy,
provided an update on the Banning Ranch acquisition effort, ..."
Item Xlll. MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ASKED TO BE
PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA (NON -DISCUSSION ITEM)
Item 1, the draft minutes of the September 13 meeting, on page 385, shows two requests for
future agenda items, only one of which appears here, under Item XIII.
The other was for "a future agenda item to consider directing staff to review the status of a
general aviation issue regarding private jet bias and bring back a report to Council with a plan of
action and remedies."
I can imagine this could have been withdrawn, perhaps on an assurance that the Aviation
Committee was looking into it, but it is always troubling to the public to see requests made on
their behalf and then seemingly not acted upon.
Item 10. School Resource Officer Program Agreement
It is good to see the school district sharing in the cost of this effort, unlike the equally -necessary
crossing guards for which the City appears to pay the full cost.
15-300
Item 12. Budget Amendment to Accept a Check from the Friends of
the Newport Beach Library and Appropriate Funds to the Library's
Fiscal Year 2022-23 Maintenance and Operation Budget
It is good to see the Friends continue their remarkable success at fundraising, primarily through
the sale of donated books.
Formerly the Library Foundation was the larger contributor, serving as the primary conduit for
monetary donations. The last few years, however, it seems contributions to the library through
them have been largely diverted to their Lecture Hall project, which it could be argued benefits
their private organization at least as much as it benefits the library.
Item 13. Confirmation of Appointments to the the [sic] Ad Hoc
Municipal Code and Council Policy Review Committee
Since this committee will apparently focus solely on deleting words from the City's codes and
policies, it seems ironic the agenda notice for this item (as shown above) contains a word that
could be deleted.
That said, one would not guess the committee's very limited function from the notice, and I
would have hoped the committee was charged with "review" — that is looking for improvements,
rather than only deletions.
It might be noted that at least with regard to the Council Policy Manual, prior to 2017, Policy D-3
required an at least annual review not just for deletions, but "for any needed additions, changes
or deletions deemed appropriate." It is not clear why the Council dropped that review.
Item 15. Ordinance Nos. 2022-19 and 2022-20: Tennis Club at Newport
Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)
It is not clear why the notice copied above focuses on the two ordinances being introduced,
since the item recommends the Council also adopt three resolutions, some of which may have
more immediate effect.
That said, it is frustrating to spend several hours preparing three pages of written comments to
the Planning Commission on this topic, and see them not passed on to the Council, but reduced
to a single sentence buried on page 15-193 of the agenda packet and neither acknowledged nor
addressed anywhere else in the staff report.
For those interested, those earlier comments are likely somewhere in the 347 page PDF
document Community Development staff has used to archive part of the September 8, 2022,
Planning Commission agenda Item 3, as well as, for a little while, starting on page 60 of the 77
pages of "Item No. 3b - Additional Materials Received" posted at the time of the hearing, and
included here by reference.
The essence of those earlier comments was that staff is deceptively suggesting the City Council
has the power to approve this very substantial proposed amendment to the General Plan
without the City Charter Section 423 ("Green light") vote by the people that it clearly requires.
15-301
Staff's entire response to date consists of Deputy Director Campbell's dismissal of those
comments starting at 1:03:55 in the Planning Commission video: "We've done the Greenlight
analysis. We don't agree with Mr. Mosher's viewpoint on the analysis. To adopt his point of view
would suggest that the City Council did not approve entitlements for this club and so the
increase here with the General Plan Amendment is only 14, 000 square feet and that is pursuant
to Council policy, you know with every hotel room equals 1,000 square feet. So, we're following
City Council policy to a T on this analysis and it does not result in a vote of the electorate."
This is the same Deputy Director Campbell who, as Principal Planner, wrote a November 9,
2011, memo to the Planning Commission stating that changing the voter -approved allocation for
tennis courts at this site into an allocation for hotel rooms or building floor area would require
processing a General Plan amendment.
Yet because Greenlight votes are triggered by General Plan amendments and amending the
Plan in 2012 would have triggered a Greenlight vote, the entitlements he refers to above as
having been previously approved by the Council were approved without processing a General
Plan amendment and therefore without any Greenlight tracking.
As a result, everything being requested to be added to the General Plan — 41 hotel rooms, not
14 — is being added for the first time.
In addition, counting it's not clear counting hotel rooms larger than 1,000 sf as being 1,000 sf
and ignoring the requests for large amounts of ancillary square footage is "we're following City
Council policy to a T," for if one looks at Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) in the General Plan
Land Use Element (starting on page 3-18), one sees about half specify a square foot
development limit that includes the hotel rooms, and about half specify a development limit in
addition to the hotel rooms. The presently proposed amendment on page 15-59 of the staff
report is different in appearance from those, and especially unusual in its footnote purporting to
explain the origin of the 41 hotel rooms.
In the present case, Condition 5 on page 15-50 of the staff report indicates the "41 hotel rooms"
will be adding not the assumed 41,000 sf, but rather allowing 61,870 sf of development not
currently in the General Plan. Either way, this over the 40,000 sf requiring voter approval.
To be sure, the applicant, Mr. O Hill, may have had a good faith belief that when voters
approved the comprehensive General Plan update with of Measure V in 2006, they approved
enough entitlements for his projected development. For indeed they did, approving on Anomaly
46 not just the existing 3,725 sf clubhouse and 24 tennis courts, but making it eligible for the
"MU-H3" floating pool of 540 residences and 65 hotel rooms.
But by the time Mr. O Hill submitted his proposal in 2011, other developers had gobbled up all of
the MU-H3 floating pool except for 5 residences, which he claimed as his. But (and despite any
City Council approvals in 2012) there was no provision left in the General Plan for the 27 or 41
hotel rooms he might like to build.
To copy from my comments to the Planning Commission, according to pages 7 and 11 of
Resolution No. 2006-77, what was presented to voters and approved by them in 2006 was:
15-302
Anomaly it
Number
46 Ll MJ-H3fPP 3.72u 24 TEnJs courts
A dddiorra! f rsfcrm pf fa rr
Residerl;al pe'lmiftCd ill
eccordance wi N i,11U-HI
and since no amendments to Anomaly 46 have ever been processed, that is exactly what the
General Plan continues to allow at Anomaly 46.
The current City Council resolution proposes to amend that to read:
Anomaly Statistical Land Use
Number Area Designation
46 L1 MU-H3/PR
Development
Limit (0)
3,725
Development
Limit (Other)
8 Tennis Courts
41 Hotel
Rooms*
Additional Information
Residential permitted in
accordance with MU-
H3
*27 rooms converted
from 17 tennis courts
per Council Resolution
2012-10 and 14 rooms
per General Plan
Amendment PA2022-
260
Whatever the footnote might say, the 41 hotel rooms, comprising at least 41,000 sf (and more
realistically 61,870 sf) are entirely new, and have never been in the General Plan before.
Since either of those is more than 40,000 sf, voter approval is required.
But staff says "no."
As proof the 27 hotel rooms were not previously added to the General Plan in 2012 "per Council
Resolution 2012-10," had they been added then, there would have been evidence of them in the
City's Charter Section 423 Statistical Area Tracking Tables for the 10 years following that.
But there is no such record because there was no amendment and no prior Greenlight tracking.
Shown below is the City's Greenlight Tracking Table for Newport Center (Statistical Area L1) as
captured by the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine on March 1, 2021.
15-303
City of Newport Beach
Charter Secdon423 Trackirg Table
Statistical Area U (Newport Center)
Post 2006General Plan Amendments Approved
Land Use Element
July 1, 2015
(Updated April 15, 20161
(Updated August 13r 2019)
Project Name
Address
Date
Approved
Project%GPA
Number
Amendment
Description
Square Footage
Change
Dwelling Unit
Change
AM Peak Hour
Trip Change
PM Peak Hour
Trip Change
Newport Be mh Country Club
(Clubhouse}
1t2412012
PA20❑S-152
OP20OB-005
Parks and Recreation
{PR) - No Change
21,0❑0
0
N/A
N/A
Viva nteSenior Huusng
8f1312019
PA2019-189
GP201S-003
Private Institutions(PI)
to Mixed Use Horizontal
{MLLH9)
❑
(Reduction:
45,028 to 16,DCO)
90
26
=_
100% Tot@s
21,DD6
90
26
=_
80%Totals
16,800
72
21
A2
Remaining Capacity Without
vote
23,200
28
79
58
GPA— General Plan Amendment
CLUP—OoaAaILand Use P an
10096Totals —Cum ulutive increases Fes uhingfrom approved GPM:,. Decreases are not included.
80% Totals -Charter Section 423 requires that 800Aof square footage, dwe hng unrt and peak hourtrlp increases of "Prior Amendmentr' be tracked For a period of 10years and added to
proposed general plan amendments located within the same Statlrtical Area to determine if the 423 GPA Thresholds are exceeded and a vote of the electorate required- Decreases in any
category are not tracked.
Charter Section423Thres1holds: 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor arear 'Do duelling units,100 AM or PM Peak Hour trips
Note that this prior tracking table does show 21,000 sf added for the neighboring Newport
Beach Country Club golf clubhouse on January 24, 2012, which is the reason amending the
General Plan to add 27 hotel rooms for the Tennis Club at that time would have broken the
40,000 sf Greenlight limit and required voter approval.
In effect, staff is saying they could avoid a Greenlight vote in 2012 by claiming no General Plan
amendment took place in 2012, and they can avoid a Greenlight vote in 2022 by claiming a
General Plan amendment did take place in 2012. The contradiction should be self-evident.
One might argue that since the golf Country Club floor area increase is more than 10 years in
the past and has dropped off the Greenlight tracking, Mr. O Hill could avoid a vote now by
simply removing one or two hotel rooms from his proposal (assuming the Council is OK
counting his rooms as 1,000 sf each and ignoring the large amount of ancillary development he
desires).
But even then, the point is that the amount new allocation presently being added to the General
Plan is much more than staff's claimed "14,000 sf' and needs to be properly acknowledged, for
it becomes part of the Greenlight tracking that affects future General Plan amendment requests
for the next 10 years.
15-304
Item 16. Call for Review — Denial of Reforestation Request for 938
Sandcastle Drive
Considering residents are expected to share in maintaining the City trees in the public parkways
adjacent to their homes (primarily by watering them), this appeal by a prominent city figure
highlights what could be government over -control in deciding what kind of tree that jointly -
maintained tree should be.
However, a key expectation of all governments is that the rules they create will be applied
equally to all, without favoritism.
In the present case, the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission's consistent interpretation
of the City's current policy has been to deny requests to replace healthy City street trees that
are not causing significant damage, especially with a less well -developed specimen.
PB&R sometimes even denies replacement of trees that do seem to be causing damage, as the
Council may recall from the appeal it heard as Item 20 on August 24, 2021, and upheld 5:2.'
So, if the current rule creates what the Council sees as over -control, I think the response should
be a modified rule rather than applying the existing rule differently from the way it has been
applied to others.
The appellant, and all those others, can then come back with a renewed request under the new
rule, whatever it may be.
Item 18. Community Development Block Grant Program Year 2021-22,
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
I need to study this item more carefully, but the explanation of the status of substantial amounts
of expenditure planned for the last year that either were not spent or have not yet been "drawn"
(and why they were not spent or drawn) is less than clear.
In addition, with the loan for long -ago improvements in Balboa Village finally payed off, it is not
clear to me what the plan is to spend the newly -available money in future years.
It might be noted that CDBG funds were used to develop the original OASIS center, and many
think there should be a facility offering similar or supplemental services on the west side of
town.
One of the two trees that was the subject of that denied appeal later suffered limb failures after a night of
Santa Ana winds, and was replaced.
15-305
Received after Agenda Printed
September 27, 2022
Written Comments
September 27, 2022, City Council Agenda Comments
The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(@-yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229)
Item 1. Minutes for the September 13, 2022 City Council Meeting
The passages shown in italics below are from the draft minutes with suggested corrections
shown in c*�, &eout underline format. The page numbers refer to Volume 65.
Page 381, Item SS2, paragraph 3: "Nancy Scarbrough noted sentiment shared among
residents regarding fractional ownership during recent community events, asked that Council
consider the residents' dissatisfaction, and direct City staff to further explore options to
regulate or restrict fractional home ownership." [or "..., and City staff to further explore ..."]
Page 383, first full paragraph: "Council MemberAvery noted that, even before Pacaso, the
City was starting to lose local control to the State, experienced more density and traffic,
agreed with implementing a moratorium, cautioned the potential cost to the City, supported
looking at what other cities have done and updating the NBMC, and mitigate mitipatin_g the
impacts." [or "... updating the NBMC,—anal to mitigate the impacts."]
Page 384, last two bullets:
` Met with Denis L-,abenge LaBonge and Amber Snyder regarding the Fire Safety Council
and home hardening efforts.
* Attended the General Plan Update Planning Steering Committee meeting, Sherman
Gardens Annual Garden Party, League of California Cities Conference, two-day Source -to -
Sea Water Conference ..."
Page 390, paragraph 5: "Suzanne F^`�er Forster, VP of Banning Ranch Conservancy,
provided an update on the Banning Ranch acquisition effort, ..."
Item Xlll. MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ASKED TO BE
PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA (NON -DISCUSSION ITEM)
Item 1, the draft minutes of the September 13 meeting, on page 385, shows two requests for
future agenda items, only one of which appears here, under Item XIII.
The other was for "a future agenda item to consider directing staff to review the status of a
general aviation issue regarding private jet bias and bring back a report to Council with a plan of
action and remedies."
I can imagine this could have been withdrawn, perhaps on an assurance that the Aviation
Committee was looking into it, but it is always troubling to the public to see requests made on
their behalf and then seemingly not acted upon.
Item 10. School Resource Officer Program Agreement
It is good to see the school district sharing in the cost of this effort, unlike the equally -necessary
crossing guards for which the City appears to pay the full cost.
15-306
Item 12. Budget Amendment to Accept a Check from the Friends of
the Newport Beach Library and Appropriate Funds to the Library's
Fiscal Year 2022-23 Maintenance and Operation Budget
It is good to see the Friends continue their remarkable success at fundraising, primarily through
the sale of donated books.
Formerly the Library Foundation was the larger contributor, serving as the primary conduit for
monetary donations. The last few years, however, it seems contributions to the library through
them have been largely diverted to their Lecture Hall project, which it could be argued benefits
their private organization at least as much as it benefits the library.
Item 13. Confirmation of Appointments to the the [sic] Ad Hoc
Municipal Code and Council Policy Review Committee
Since this committee will apparently focus solely on deleting words from the City's codes and
policies, it seems ironic the agenda notice for this item (as shown above) contains a word that
could be deleted.
That said, one would not guess the committee's very limited function from the notice, and I
would have hoped the committee was charged with "review" — that is looking for improvements,
rather than only deletions.
It might be noted that at least with regard to the Council Policy Manual, prior to 2017, Policy D-3
required an at least annual review not just for deletions, but "for any needed additions, changes
or deletions deemed appropriate." It is not clear why the Council dropped that review.
Item 15. Ordinance Nos. 2022-19 and 2022-20: Tennis Club at Newport
Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)
It is not clear why the notice copied above focuses on the two ordinances being introduced,
since the item recommends the Council also adopt three resolutions, some of which may have
more immediate effect.
That said, it is frustrating to spend several hours preparing three pages of written comments to
the Planning Commission on this topic, and see them not passed on to the Council, but reduced
to a single sentence buried on page 15-193 of the agenda packet and neither acknowledged nor
addressed anywhere else in the staff report.
For those interested, those earlier comments are likely somewhere in the 347 page PDF
document Community Development staff has used to archive part of the September 8, 2022,
Planning Commission agenda Item 3, as well as, for a little while, starting on page 60 of the 77
pages of "Item No. 3b - Additional Materials Received" posted at the time of the hearing, and
included here by reference.
The essence of those earlier comments was that staff is deceptively suggesting the City Council
has the power to approve this very substantial proposed amendment to the General Plan
without the City Charter Section 423 ("Green light") vote by the people that it clearly requires.
15-307
Staff's entire response to date consists of Deputy Director Campbell's dismissal of those
comments starting at 1:03:55 in the Planning Commission video: "We've done the Greenlight
analysis. We don't agree with Mr. Mosher's viewpoint on the analysis. To adopt his point of view
would suggest that the City Council did not approve entitlements for this club and so the
increase here with the General Plan Amendment is only 14, 000 square feet and that is pursuant
to Council policy, you know with every hotel room equals 1,000 square feet. So, we're following
City Council policy to a T on this analysis and it does not result in a vote of the electorate."
This is the same Deputy Director Campbell who, as Principal Planner, wrote a November 9,
2011, memo to the Planning Commission stating that changing the voter -approved allocation for
tennis courts at this site into an allocation for hotel rooms or building floor area would require
processing a General Plan amendment.
Yet because Greenlight votes are triggered by General Plan amendments and amending the
Plan in 2012 would have triggered a Greenlight vote, the entitlements he refers to above as
having been previously approved by the Council were approved without processing a General
Plan amendment and therefore without any Greenlight tracking.
As a result, everything being requested to be added to the General Plan — 41 hotel rooms, not
14 — is being added for the first time.
In addition, counting it's not clear counting hotel rooms larger than 1,000 sf as being 1,000 sf
and ignoring the requests for large amounts of ancillary square footage is "we're following City
Council policy to a T," for if one looks at Table LU2 (Anomaly Locations) in the General Plan
Land Use Element (starting on page 3-18), one sees about half specify a square foot
development limit that includes the hotel rooms, and about half specify a development limit in
addition to the hotel rooms. The presently proposed amendment on page 15-59 of the staff
report is different in appearance from those, and especially unusual in its footnote purporting to
explain the origin of the 41 hotel rooms.
In the present case, Condition 5 on page 15-50 of the staff report indicates the "41 hotel rooms"
will be adding not the assumed 41,000 sf, but rather allowing 61,870 sf of development not
currently in the General Plan. Either way, this over the 40,000 sf requiring voter approval.
To be sure, the applicant, Mr. O Hill, may have had a good faith belief that when voters
approved the comprehensive General Plan update with of Measure V in 2006, they approved
enough entitlements for his projected development. For indeed they did, approving on Anomaly
46 not just the existing 3,725 sf clubhouse and 24 tennis courts, but making it eligible for the
"MU-H3" floating pool of 540 residences and 65 hotel rooms.
But by the time Mr. O Hill submitted his proposal in 2011, other developers had gobbled up all of
the MU-H3 floating pool except for 5 residences, which he claimed as his. But (and despite any
City Council approvals in 2012) there was no provision left in the General Plan for the 27 or 41
hotel rooms he might like to build.
To copy from my comments to the Planning Commission, according to pages 7 and 11 of
Resolution No. 2006-77, what was presented to voters and approved by them in 2006 was:
15-308
Anomaly it
Number
46 Ll MJ-H3fPP 3.72u 24 TEnJs courts
A dddiorra! f rsfcrm pf fa rr
Residerl;al pe'lmiftCd ill
eccordance wi N i,11U-HI
and since no amendments to Anomaly 46 have ever been processed, that is exactly what the
General Plan continues to allow at Anomaly 46.
The current City Council resolution proposes to amend that to read:
Anomaly Statistical Land Use
Number Area Designation
46 L1 MU-H3/PR
Development
Limit (0)
3,725
Development
Limit (Other)
8 Tennis Courts
41 Hotel
Rooms*
Additional Information
Residential permitted in
accordance with MU-
H3
*27 rooms converted
from 17 tennis courts
per Council Resolution
2012-10 and 14 rooms
per General Plan
Amendment PA2022-
260
Whatever the footnote might say, the 41 hotel rooms, comprising at least 41,000 sf (and more
realistically 61,870 sf) are entirely new, and have never been in the General Plan before.
Since either of those is more than 40,000 sf, voter approval is required.
But staff says "no."
As proof the 27 hotel rooms were not previously added to the General Plan in 2012 "per Council
Resolution 2012-10," had they been added then, there would have been evidence of them in the
City's Charter Section 423 Statistical Area Tracking Tables for the 10 years following that.
But there is no such record because there was no amendment and no prior Greenlight tracking.
Shown below is the City's Greenlight Tracking Table for Newport Center (Statistical Area L1) as
captured by the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine on March 1, 2021.
15-309
City of Newport Beach
Charter Secdon423 Trackirg Table
Statistical Area U (Newport Center)
Post 2006General Plan Amendments Approved
Land Use Element
July 1, 2015
(Updated April 15, 20161
(Updated August 13r 2019)
Project Name
Address
Date
Approved
Project%GPA
Number
Amendment
Description
Square Footage
Change
Dwelling Unit
Change
AM Peak Hour
Trip Change
PM Peak Hour
Trip Change
Newport Be mh Country Club
(Clubhouse}
1t2412012
PA20❑S-152
OP20OB-005
Parks and Recreation
{PR) - No Change
21,0❑0
0
N/A
N/A
Viva nteSenior Huusng
8f1312019
PA2019-189
GP201S-003
Private Institutions(PI)
to Mixed Use Horizontal
{MLLH9)
❑
(Reduction:
45,028 to 16,DCO)
90
26
=_
100% Tot@s
21,DD6
90
26
=_
80%Totals
16,800
72
21
A2
Remaining Capacity Without
vote
23,200
28
79
58
GPA— General Plan Amendment
CLUP—OoaAaILand Use P an
10096Totals —Cum ulutive increases Fes uhingfrom approved GPM:,. Decreases are not included.
80% Totals -Charter Section 423 requires that 800Aof square footage, dwe hng unrt and peak hourtrlp increases of "Prior Amendmentr' be tracked For a period of 10years and added to
proposed general plan amendments located within the same Statlrtical Area to determine if the 423 GPA Thresholds are exceeded and a vote of the electorate required- Decreases in any
category are not tracked.
Charter Section423Thres1holds: 40,000 square feet of non-residential floor arear 'Do duelling units,100 AM or PM Peak Hour trips
Note that this prior tracking table does show 21,000 sf added for the neighboring Newport
Beach Country Club golf clubhouse on January 24, 2012, which is the reason amending the
General Plan to add 27 hotel rooms for the Tennis Club at that time would have broken the
40,000 sf Greenlight limit and required voter approval.
In effect, staff is saying they could avoid a Greenlight vote in 2012 by claiming no General Plan
amendment took place in 2012, and they can avoid a Greenlight vote in 2022 by claiming a
General Plan amendment did take place in 2012. The contradiction should be self-evident.
One might argue that since the golf Country Club floor area increase is more than 10 years in
the past and has dropped off the Greenlight tracking, Mr. O Hill could avoid a vote now by
simply removing one or two hotel rooms from his proposal (assuming the Council is OK
counting his rooms as 1,000 sf each and ignoring the large amount of ancillary development he
desires).
But even then, the point is that the amount new allocation presently being added to the General
Plan is much more than staff's claimed "14,000 sf' and needs to be properly acknowledged, for
it becomes part of the Greenlight tracking that affects future General Plan amendment requests
for the next 10 years.
15-310
Item 16. Call for Review — Denial of Reforestation Request for 938
Sandcastle Drive
Considering residents are expected to share in maintaining the City trees in the public parkways
adjacent to their homes (primarily by watering them), this appeal by a prominent city figure
highlights what could be government over -control in deciding what kind of tree that jointly -
maintained tree should be.
However, a key expectation of all governments is that the rules they create will be applied
equally to all, without favoritism.
In the present case, the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission's consistent interpretation
of the City's current policy has been to deny requests to replace healthy City street trees that
are not causing significant damage, especially with a less well -developed specimen.
PB&R sometimes even denies replacement of trees that do seem to be causing damage, as the
Council may recall from the appeal it heard as Item 20 on August 24, 2021, and upheld 5:2.'
So, if the current rule creates what the Council sees as over -control, I think the response should
be a modified rule rather than applying the existing rule differently from the way it has been
applied to others.
The appellant, and all those others, can then come back with a renewed request under the new
rule, whatever it may be.
Item 18. Community Development Block Grant Program Year 2021-22,
Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
I need to study this item more carefully, but the explanation of the status of substantial amounts
of expenditure planned for the last year that either were not spent or have not yet been "drawn"
(and why they were not spent or drawn) is less than clear.
In addition, with the loan for long -ago improvements in Balboa Village finally payed off, it is not
clear to me what the plan is to spend the newly -available money in future years.
It might be noted that CDBG funds were used to develop the original OASIS center, and many
think there should be a facility offering similar or supplemental services on the west side of
town.
One of the two trees that was the subject of that denied appeal later suffered limb failures after a night of
Santa Ana winds, and was replaced.
15-311
September 27, 2022
Item No. 15
From: Rieff, Kim
To: Mulvey. Jennifer
Subject: FW: Pickleball- AGAINST the project amendment
Date: September 20, 2022 11:54:54 AM
-----Original Message -----
From: Denise Larson <jdsealbeach@gmail.com>
Sent: September 19, 2022 1:58 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Pickleball- AGAINST the project amendment
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
TO: Newport Beach City Council
RE: Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment - Project File No.: PA2021-260
FROM: Denise Larson
POSITION: AGAINST the project amendment
One of the property owners has proposed to replace the Tennis and Pickleball Club of Newport Beach with a small
hotel and a fraction of the tennis courts. The 35 Pickleball courts will be demolished. This will result in the loss of
an incredibly -frequently -used facility that literally serves thousands of Newport Beach residents. Every day, literally
hundreds of residents use the club. The project, if passed, will represent an immediate, huge loss for Newport Beach
residents and others who attend from surrounding city's.
This Amendment proposal is coming up for a City Council vote on September 27th, and we urge the Council to
deny it.
I live in Seal Beach but I'm at the club 5 days a week. I shop and frequent restaurants on daily basis along with my
husband.
When the clubs has a tournament, we often get a hotel room to save travel time since they usually start early.
It's such a special place.
We were mislead by management in signing a petition several months ago
I do not support the current Plan B.
Please deny Plan B!
Denise Larson
714-747-5550
15-312
September 27, 2022
Item No. 15
From: Rieff, Kim
To: Mulvey. Jennifer
Subject: FW: Project No PA2021-260
Date: September 20, 2022 11:55:39 AM
-----Original Message -----
From: Alison Sims <afsims@prodigy.net>
Sent: September 19, 2022 9:46 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Project No PA2021-260
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
TO: Newport Beach City Council
RE: Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment - Project File No.: PA2021-260
FROM: (Name)
POSITION: AGAINST the project amendment
Dear Council Members:
One of the property owners has proposed to replace the Tennis and Pickleball Club of Newport Beach with a small
hotel and a fraction of the tennis courts. The 35 Pickleball courts will be demolished. This will result in the loss of
an incredible facility that serves thousands of Newport Beach residents. Every day, hundreds of residents use the
club. The project, if passed, will represent an immediate, huge loss for Newport Beach residents, myself included.
I am so thankful for my daily Pickleball matches for both exercise and friendships. As a physician for 30 years, it
has saved my sanity these past 2 years while working hard at the front lines of the pandemic in urgent care. I can
attest that ALL 2000+ members feel that this club that accommodates hundreds of us daily has made our lives richer
and healthier.
This Amendment proposal is coming up for a City Council vote on September 27th, and we urge the Council to
deny it.
Thank you for your consideration of all the residents'/members' involved in this proposal.
Sincerely,
Alison Sims, M.D.
Marque Urgent Care, Newport Beach CA
Sent from my iPhone
15-313
TO: Honorable Mayor, Newport Beach City Council Members and City Manager
FR: Don & Judy Cole- NB Residents and Members of the NB Tennis & Pickleball Club
Re: The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment- PA2021-260
Robert O'Hill- the managing owner of the property- has proposed to replace the Tennis and
Pickleball Club of Newport Beach with a boutique bungalow hotel and a fraction of the courts
that currently exist. The members of the "Club" have been misled all along the process into
supporting the proposed amendment and inadvertently, the Project itself. While earlier this year
the members supported a campaign to stop the development of high rise apartments on the
property- proposed by O'Hill's other partners, it is not true that those petitions supported O'Hill's
plan or amendment as was stated to the Planning Commission at the last meeting, and to Stu
News Newport the following day.
O'Hill stated to the Club membership on multiple occasions that the tennis courts represented
on the original plans as tennis were only there because there was no pickleball 10 years ago
when the original plans were approved. He explained that the plan was to build out the facility
into an upgraded venue with only pickleball courts. Site plans as follows were presented to the
members by O'Hill at a July 7 meeting:
15-314
,EW [�fIER
NICK BOLLETTIERI
STADIUM TENNIS &
PICKLE BALL COU9-
2 NEWSTAViL0ARMEMICOURI
2q EnS'W P1C r Ma COURTS
26 TOTALPIclVLE&gLCOms
t,j Nw STAow Tam C%RRTS
O'Hill and Abdali (the managing director of the Club) both reiterated that there will be NO tennis
courts (even the center stadium tennis court would be replaced with pickleball) and NO
interruption in play. Further, O'Hill committed that the site plans for the City would be updated to
reflect Pickleball for the next presentation to the Planning Commission and then to the City
Council. As it turned out, the plans that were submitted were not updated as promised and were
submitted with all tennis courts. When confronted, O'Hill and Abdali continued to promise that
pickleball will continue even if the plans don't designate Pickleball. The day before the Planning
Commission meeting on September 8, O'Hill and Abdali asked the members NOT to come to
the podium for individual public comments at the Planning Commission meeting to save time,
but to stand all at once when requested to represent their endorsement of the plans. So at the
Planning Commission Meeting- AFTER public comments were complete, AFTER several NBPC
members stood upon request to support the amendment, and right before the vote- the
commissioners and staff clarified there is NO pickleball under this plan. A condition of approval
for the amendment is that "Pickleball courts shall not be permitted after the issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy for the Tennis Clubhouse and Spa and Fitness Center unless the
property owner and/or pickleball facility operator shall follow any and all City of Newport Beach
General Plan, Municipal Code, or other applicable requirements in order to continue the use of
pickleball courts". Sadly, the amendment passed.
Pickleball IS the Tennis Club today and yet the 35 existing PB courts (which are not even
reflected on the as built/existing plan) will be demolished per the new plans. This will result in
15-315
the loss of an incredibly and frequently used facility that serves thousands of Newport Beach
residents. The project, if passed will represent a huge loss for Newport Beach residents. It is
home to almost 2000 residents playing pickleball each week and that number continues to grow.
The Club houses tennis and pickleball camps, programs and youth activities along with
countless charity functions and major tournaments that serve thousands. It has become clear
that the proposal for hotel units and a few tennis courts turns it into something that serves only
the property owner- not the interests of the City of Newport Beach residents. Pickleball and
these types of events will vanish and already there are not enough pickleball courts in Newport
Beach. Bonita Canyon and the few new additional courts planned in Newport Coast are woefully
inadequate.
We need more open space with more recreational areas to enjoy outdoor physical activity and
the benefits that come with it. The Club- which spans 60 years of our city's history- is a rare
facility that serves every age group in Newport- from our kids to our seniors. Replacing the Club
with hotel rooms and a minimized recreation space will only enrich a few at the expense of .
We urge the City Council to deny this plan amendment. Thank you.
15-316
Received after Agenda Printed
September 27, 2022
Item No. 15
From: City Clerk"s Office
To: Mulvey, Jennifer; Rieff, Kim
Subject: FW: Petition Asking Council to Reject PA2021-260 (476 Signatures)
Date: September 26, 2022 11:57:35 AM
Attachments: Save Our Club Signatures - 9-26-2022.pdf
3.0 Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment PA2021-260.pdf.pdf
From: Dalen Lawrence <dalenlawrence@icloud.com>
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2022 11:56:45 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Petition Asking Council to Reject PA2021-260 (476 Signatures)
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Greetings City of Newport Council Members:
I am submitting the attached petition asking the City Council to vote against
and reject The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment
(PA2021-260) submitted by Golf Realty Fund.
My name is Dalen Lawrence and I live in Eastbluff. This completely digital
petition was generated and administered using the services of
gooetitions.com. The signatures all have verifiable email addresses and
represent a high level of quality.
Our group collected 476 signatures mainly by posting links on a member
only chat forum. The overwhelming majority of these names are members
of TTC. Also, the majority of the households represent Newport Beach
residents. These names were collected in 15 days. Had we more time,
there would be significantly more signatures.
The petition language is simple:
We the undersigned call on the Newport Beach City Council to deny the following Development
Plan Amendment:
The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260) submitted by Golf Realty
Fund that includes the demolition of the club and its replacement by a hotel.
The language of the petition comes from Page 8 of the planning commission
hearing. (Attached)
15-317
Please consider our petition in making your decision.
Thank you,
Dalen Lawrence
851 Domingo Dr. #13
Newport Beach, CA 92660
206-556-0936
15-318
Save Our Club
Published by Friend Of TTC on 12th Sep 2022
We strongly oppose the plan to demolish The Tennis Club at Newport Beach and replace it with a
hotel.
For 60 years, generations of Newport Beach families have utilized this club as a recreation
destination and it is currently home to nearly 2000 members that have built a community around the
clubs 31 pickleball courts, 15 tennis courts and a newly remodeled clubhouse.
Not only does this historic club provide its members with life changing mental and physical health
benefits from playing pickleball and tennis, it is also home to many of the communities philanthropic
events which support local schools and charities. In addition it has become one of the countries
largest pickleball and tennis event venues supporting the City's hospitality industry.
We the undersigned call on the Newport Beach City Council to deny the following Development
Plan Amendment:
The Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260) submitted by Golf Realty
Fund that includes the demolition of the club and its replacement by a hotel.
Powered by GoPetition
15-319
Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment (PA2021-260)
Planning Commission, «HearingDATE»
Page 8
The anticipated duration of construction of the Proposed Project is approximately 20
months, which will begin with the demolition of the existing tennis and pickleball courts
and portion of the parking lot. Six (6) tennis courts are to be maintained for use during
construction. The construction of the hotel rooms, tennis club house and stadium court
will follow immediately and will be completed with the construction of the residential units.
A Phasing Plan is included as part of the Project Plans and is attached to the Staff Report
(Attachment No. PC 6).
The property has an existing parking lot with two (2) entrances currently taken from
Clubhouse Drive, which has a westerly outlet to East Coast Highway and an easterly
outlet to Granville Drive and Newport Center Drive. During the various phases of
construction, the easterly entrance to the parking lot will remain available to the public for
parking and will provide direct access for the modular office trailer and portable toilets,
while the westerly entrance will be for construction access only. A Construction
11
15-320
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
1 1 1
Region
1
Mr
Dalen
Lawrence
islandviking63@gmail.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 12, 2022
2
Rachel
Hong
rachel@ebsmdservice.com
208 East balboa blvd
Newport Beach
Ca
92661
USA
Sep 13, 2022
3
Mr
Ken
Block
block333@me.com
1531, Santanella
Terrace
Corona del mar
Ca
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
4
Renee
Carter
reneecarterl2@gmail.com
Dana Point
Orange
County
Sep 13, 2022
5
Hannah
Doolin
hannandoolinl5@gmail.com
221 E 20th St #B
Costa Mesa
CA
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
6
Sawyer
Shrock
nachotaco6@gmail.com
217 E Bay
Newport Beach
CA
92661
USA
Sep 13, 2022
7
Samantha Nikki
Hoyt
samanthanikk@gmail.com
204 Via Eboli
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
8
Mrs
Catherine
Raack
catraack@gmail.com
1942 Port Ramsgate
PI
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 13, 2022
9
Mrs
Deborah
Schwartz
debbiek.schwartz@gmail.com
65 Ocean Vista
Newport Beach
California
192660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
10
Lynn
Salo
lynndsalo@gmail.com
308 B Iris Ave
Corona del Mar
Californis
92625
Sep 13, 2022
11
Mr
Cooper
Hagmaier
coophag@gmail.com
217 E Bay
Newport Beach
CA
92661
USA
Sep 13, 2022
12
Michelle
Hatch
tnsdiva@yahoo.com
50 Seaborough
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 13, 2022
13
Carol
McPhillips
carolmcp@yahoo.com
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
14
Mr
Neil
Schwartz
neil@century2lmasters.com
65 ocean vista
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
15
Mrs
Lisa
Daly-mcgraw
ldaly949@gmail.com
2006 Windward Lane,
Newport Beach, Ca
92660
Newport beach
Ca
us
Sep 13, 2022
Please save our beautiful club from becoming a hotel.
16
Imaggie IKehrer maggiekehrerl3@gmail.com 131 Ensueno West lIrvine ICA 192620 1 ISep 13, 2022
Pickleball courts bring in money for the city. The Club is a premium club with 33 pickleball courts. It is known as one of the best facilities in the United States. Save pickleball and the Club as it is.
17
Natalie
Adams
neadamss27@gmail.com
274 Palmer, Unit 1/2
Costa Mesa
Ca
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
18
Mr
Jon
Rosen
'rosen0l@aol.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
19
Charlotte
Saydah
csaydah@gmail.com
531 Promontory Drive
West
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
20
Ms
Camille
Burke
camille.burke@gmail.com
117 Collins Avenue
Newport Beach
Ca
92662
USA
Sep 13, 2022
I have been playing at this Club since the 1960s when it was the Tennis Club for the Balboa Bay Club. It has been a great part of Newport Beach.
21
Piper
Vaughn
pipervm@gmail.com
364 16th Place, A
Newport Beach
CA
92627
Sep 13, 2022
22
Mrs.
Kathy
Ursini
kathyursini@gmail.com
1836 Port Taggart
Place
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 13, 2022
23
Melissa
Link
longhornlink@hotmail.com
Corona del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 13, 2022
24
Sandy
Selak
sandyselak@msn.com
2744 W Keller Ave
Santa Ana
CA
92704
USA
Sep 13, 2022
25
Cyndi
Devereaux
cyndidevereaux@icloud.com
132 Via Yella
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
Sep 13, 2022
26
Mr
Scott
Brown
scottb@crestlinefunding.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
27
Mr
Todd
Habermehl
plover00basics@icloud.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
28
Mr.
Steve
De Silva
stevendesilva@gmail.com
Newport Beach
Ca
Sep 13, 2022
29
Mr
Brandon
Zakour
b_zakour@yahoo.com
9281 Sunridge Drive,
Huntington Beach
CA
92646
USA
Sep 13, 2022
30
Scott
Warner
maltoman@yahoo.com
4104 River
Newport Beach
California
Newport Beach
USA
Sep 13, 2022
31
Mr
Mark
Colon
mark999colon@yahoo.com
164 Merrill pl #D
Costa Mesa
CAlifornia
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
32
Jeffrey
Bethel
'bethel@lee-associates.com
Newport Beach
CA
USA
Sep 13, 2022
33
jMr.
Joshua
Brown
'oshua@yshift.com
3918 Teakwood
Santa Ana
CA
92707
Sep 13, 2022
34
Darcy
Bouzeos
darcy@dlbltd.com
6300 San Joaquin
Plaza
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-321
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
city
State
Postcode
Region
Date
35
Kevin
Dayan
dayan.kevin@hotmail.com
Irvine
CA
USA
Sep 13, 2022
36
Mr
Dave
Strauss
dave.strauss@icloud.com
507 Playa
Newport Beach
Ca
92670
Sep 13, 2022
37
B
Tropp
bernardtropp@gmail.com
Irvine
CA
92603
Sep 13, 2022
38
Ms
Dawna
Clark
dawna.clark@hotmail.com
211 Garnet Ave
Newport Beach
California
92662
USA
Sep 13, 2022
39
Mr
Chris
Gambino
Gambinochris@gmail.com
798 Via Los Altos
Laguna Woods
California
92637
Sep 13, 2022
Cg
40
jDanielle
ITheriot
denyelltheriot@yahoo.com
1105 via Antibes
lNewport Beach
ICA
192663
JUSA
ISep 13, 2022
41
Mr
lHarold
ISchneider
hofftheback@gmail.com
115 Curl dr
jCorona Del Mar
10range
192625
1
ISep 13, 2022
Overall more revenue will come in through the tennis and Pickleball venue.
42
lCraig
lReese
craig.reese@me.com
1169A East 21st Street
lCosta Mesa
ICA
192627
JUSA
ISep 13, 2022
43
Ms.
lKatherine
I Skinner
kskinn22@gmail.com
11000 South Coast Dr
ICosta Mesa
ICA
192626
1
ISep 13, 2022
Pickleball has brought together people from all over OC to share a positive and healthy "addiction" to this sport. Keep our paddles up!!
44
Istacy lWyatt wyattfour@aol.com 1416 39th INewport Beach California 92663 ISep 13, 2022
Newport Beach does not currently have enough public Pickleball courts to offer its residents. The few currently offered are always impacted at peak hours. These club courts provide a much needed and
utilized venue to our community. Please vote to preserve the Pickleball courts.
45
Ms
Stephanie
Kwock
stephaniekwock@gmail.com
905 Via Lido Nord
Newport Beach
California
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
46
Mrs
Wendy Hafer
Cox
whafercox@aol.com
2407 Bunya St
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
47
Mr
Andrew
Matlaf
ocshotcalla@yahoo.com
17 Elderberry
Irvine
California
92603
USA
Sep 13, 2022
48
Brandy
Habermehl
brandyhabermehl@gmail.com
1942 Port Cardigan
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
49
Mr.
113rian
jTong
brianktong@me.com
313 Vista Baya
lCosta Mesa
California
192627
IUSA
Sep 13, 2022
50
Mr
jPeter
lGrande
pete_grande@hotmail.com
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 13, 2022
51
Mrs.
lCate
jHeck
cateheck@gmail.com
201 Via Ravenna
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
52
Ms
ILili
113ender
Ilili bender@yahoo.com
432 Cabrillo Terrace
Corona del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
I strongly agree with this petition! Club members have been lied to by the club manager Sean and half landowner O'Hill. That is not fair or appropriate.
53
Dr.
RICHARD
STERLING
richardbsterling@gmail.com
11561 Ranch Hill
North Tustin
California
92705
USA
Sep 13, 2022
54
Ms.
Judith
Tong
'udydtong@gmail.com
313 Vista Baya
Costa Mesa
California
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
55
Becky
Fallon
beckyfallonl5@gmail.com
PO Box 1755
Newport Beach
California
92659
Sep 13, 2022
56
Ann
Macias
annc.macias@gmail.com
47 Pinzon
Rancho Santa
Margarita
California
92688
USA
Sep 13, 2022
57
Mrs
jNancy
Vohnson
mommananl@gmail.com
12815 , Ebbtide Rd
lCorona Del Mar
lCalifornia
192625
IUSA
jSep 13, 2022
This club has changed my life for the better. The community, the exercise I'm getting, the relationships I've made. I've played in tournaments/fundraisers and daily ladders and live ball glasses. I'm a very
active member.
58
Mrs
Kathleen
Murphy
mikekathymurphy29@gmail.com
105 7th Street
Newport Beach
California
92661
USA
Sep 13, 2022
59
Mrs.
Lynn
Richardson
hbrunnerl0@aol.com
Newport Beach
California
92661
USA
Sep 13, 2022
60
Mrs
Carol
Crisostomo
'zuswon@att.net
18317 Goldbark way
Yorba linda
Ca
92886
Sep 13, 2022
61
Kathleen
Bauer
kdbauer5@gmail.com
115 via jucar
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
Sep 13, 2022
62
Nancy
Kelleher
nancykelleher3@gmail.com
119 Topaz Ave
Newport Beach
CA
92662
Sep 13, 2022
63
Mrs
Beverley
McMullen
bmcmullen413@gmail.com
2716 Vista del Oro
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
64
John
'ohn
ballas
ballasl@att.net
3981 BALMORAL DR,
Street Address 2,
Apartment or Suite
Number
Yorba Linda
CA
92886
USA
Sep 13, 2022
65
jMrs
Susan
Vigil
vigil.susan@gmail.com
newport beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
66
Ims.
jMerTy
jPatton
merrypatton@gmail.com
1122 Magnolia
ICosta Mesa
ICA
192627
Sep 13. 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-322
#
Title First name Last name Email Address Postcode 1
67
Mr IMason Wei mkwei202@yahoo.com 11238 INewport Beach ICA 192660 JUSA JSep 13, 2022
Pickleball for life
68
Mr jKyle IVittitoe kyle.vittitoe@gmail.com 124351 Lake Shore Ln ILake Forest lCalifornia 192630 JUSA ISep 13, 2022
This club is like no other I have been apart of and has had a deeply positive influence on me all who participate in its supportive and friendly atmosphere. This unique and rare community has given so much
back to us all and to lose it would be truly tragic. What I want most is to allow my two young boys to grow up a part of this wonderful place without fear of losing it. I humbly ask that you please consider
keeping our community together. Thank you. -Kyle Vittitoe
69
Ms.
Michelle
Poage
mpoagee@yahoo.com
14841 Rattan St
Irvine
California
92604
Sep 13, 2022
70
Mrs
Patti
Blood
ocpattib@gnail.com
2063 Monrovia Ave
Costa Mesa
California
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
71
Mrs
Maria
Solomon
mariasolomon72@me.com
1539 Sylvia Lane
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
72
Denise
Larson
'dsealbeach@gmail.com
840 Driftwood Ave
Seal Beach
Ca
90740
USA
Sep 13, 2022
I'm so sad to hear the club might actually be torn down. We love the club and it has changed our lives for the better. New friends, exercise, competition and community. We spend 5 days a week at the club,
playing shopping and eating out in Newport. We have even considered moving closer to the club. That is how much we love it. It would be a terrible loss for us, all members and Newport Beach.
73
eff
Larson
'effrey.n.larson@gmail.com
840 Driftwood Avenue
Seal Beach
CA
90740
USA
Sep 13, 2022
74
Marshall
Solomon
msolomon72@me.vom
1539 Sylvia Lane
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
75
Mr
Paul
Jensen
terratec@att.net
4600 Wayne Rd
Corona Del Mar
USA
92625
Sep 13, 2022
76
Mrs
Jane
Newcombe
'anenew@sbcglobal.net
1351 Canterbury Ln
Fullerton
CA
92831-1042
USA
Sep 13, 2022
Please consider a plan that will keep our club and keep Pickleball. The community needs this!
77
IMS Isusan M Imaguire suzimag5l@me.com 1654 Catalina ILaguna Beach ICA 192651 JUSA ISep 13, 2022
Please keep Pickleball at The Tennis club at Newport Beach. as it has united our community- pickleball is sport that is inclusive to all- the reason why it is growing so fast in our country is because it supports
living a healthy lifestyle. The sport of pickleball is life changing Please don't pass on the opportunity to make a positive impact in so many peoples lives.
78
Ms ILaura Iseverson Lseverson5@gmail.com 11865 Port Taggart PI INewportBeach ICA 192660 JUSA ISep 13, 2022
This club promotes community and connection. Especially during a time when there was disconnection, Covid brought fear and isolation. Do not take away something that promotes health and well-being for
2000 members!
79
Julie
Taylor
'ulietaylor@cox.net
21 Rochelle
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 13, 2022
80
Ms
Pam
Cherpas
pamelaschwarz777@gmail.com
5611 Seashore
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
81
Marianne
Hauser
mariannehauser5@yahoo.com
603, Marigold Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
82
Ms.
Erin
Hendricks
erin@roadrunner.com
3207-A Broad St
Newport Beach
Usa
92663
Sep 13, 2022
83
Karen
Lamie
karenlamie49@gmail.com
23 Jupiter Hills Dr
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 13, 2022
84
janell
Stojkovich
'anellagoode@gmafl.com
3395 Michelson Dr,
#4143
Irvine
CA
92612
Sep 13, 2022
85
Ms
IKelly
jPierce
chelseyfierce@aol.com
1306 Encina
INewport Beach
10range
192660
IUSA
ISep 13, 2022
Leave our club alone.
86
Ms jDana. lReston danareston@gmafl.com 1131 Turquoise Ave INewport Beach JUSA 1922662 1 ISep 13, 2022
Please save our club. The T&PCNB is truly a community gathering place that has highly improved the lives of its members. We are a huge Newport Beach based community who gather for sport, friendship,
physical and mental health well being. And numerous charitable events which benefits EVERYONE in our Newport Beach community. And, Newport Is a tight community. That's what makes it SO SPECIAL
AND UNIQUE. Please don't allow greed to diminish our treasured community. There are MANY ways for the owners to monetize this property without destroying something that is so dear and life affirming to
so many. DANA RESTON
87
Mr
Paul
Holmes
paulholuk@yahoo.co.uk
113 e 15th street, apt
1
Newport Beach
California
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
88
Mrs
Kym
Whitney
kymwhitney@live.com
Newport Beach
California
USA
Sep 13, 2022
89
Manel
Bozarth
manal@agentinc.co
3500 E. Coast Hwy.
#110
Corona del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
Safe Pickleball courts for the health and well-being of our community.
90
Mr 113rian ISchuler bk.schulz@yahoo.com 11601 Harrow PI INewport Beach lCalifornia 192660 1 ISep 13, 2022
If this proposal in fact does not allow for Pickleball courts, I am 100% against this. We were apparently lied to by owner and managing partner. Please don't allow this plan to move forward.
Powered by GoPetition
15-323
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
1 1 1
Region
91
Ken
Arsenian
kenarsen@yahoo.com
3301 Clay Street
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 13, 2022
92
Ed
Abels
eda823@gmail.com
3334 East Coast Hwy
-403
Corona del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
93
Mr.
Evan
Shinder
evan@oneplusonemfg.com
325 Monte Carlo
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
94
Mr
Tracy
Shimazu
tracyshimazu@icloud.com
19 Seabird Ct
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
95
jMr
Veffrey
Blackburn
blackburnjr07@gmail.com
125515 lone Pine Circle
Laguna hills
CA
192653
USA
Sep 13, 2022
96
Ms
Tracy
Wood
tracy-wood@cox.net
530 S Bay Front
I Newport beach
Ca
92662
Sep 13, 2022
97
Mr
ames
jBaur
imBaur23@gmail.com
12135 Iris Place
ICosta Mesa
California
192627
JUSA
ISep 13, 2022
Save our Club!!
98
Mrs. IYolanda INewton yolandamarie@me.com 1412 Flower st. lCosta Mesa ICa 192627 JUSA ISep 13, 2022
I'm a member and have been for years. My kids now grown adults learned to play tennis here. It's a community institution. We don't need another hotel!
99
Ms
oanne
IMotshagen
'mots@hotmail.com
1228 magnolia street
ICosta Mesa
ICalifornia
192627
JUSA
Sep 13, 2022
100
Ms.
ace
Williams
ace.promo@gmail.com
12935 Newport Ave.
Apt #A
Tustin, CA
Orange
County
92780
Sep 13, 2022
Save our club!
101
Ms. lRenee lHadley flyingmamal4l5@aol.com I INewport Beach ICA 192660 1 ISep 13, 2022
Please save our wonderful club. It's such a part of my active lifestyle.
102
Mr
Ro
Polits
detente-betters_Ou@icloud.com
255 Marigold Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
103
Bev
McCabe
beverlymccabe02@gmail.com
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 13, 2022
104
Mr
Chris
Patterson
cjpatterson8@gmail.com
1111 CAMPANILE
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
105
Mary Ann
Soden
masoden@cox.net
Newport Beach
California
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
We have plenty of hotels. This club is building community and wellness for residents of all ages.
106
Lisa
Gels
lisagels77@gmail.com
534 san bernardino
lave
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 13, 2022
Please keep the Newport Beach TTC as is. It's a tremendous benefit to the community. We don t need More development!!!!
107
Mrs
Kristen
Ridge
kristenridge@yahoo.com
Corona del Mar
2710 Bayside
Dr
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
108
Scarlett
Lambert
scarlettlambertl@gmail.com
newport beach
CA
USA
Sep 13, 2022
109
Lori
Williams
lw1230@gmail.com
1518 Antigua Way
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
I feel strongly that our community does not need another hotel in this area. We already have the Hyatt, Marriott and the soon to be Pendry servicing the area. Stop making developers richer and keep
Newport - Newport.
110
Mrs
Carol
Rogers
csrogersl@me.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
ill
Lori
Welton
lwelton4@gmail.com
PO Box 8114
CA
92658
USA
Sep 13, 2022
112
Steve
Fenton
irvinepainting@hotmail.com
5405 Alton Parkway,
#336
Irvine
CA
92604
USA
Sep 13, 2022
113
Mrs
Marianne
Perkins
mbperkinsfamily@gmail.com
16 Meryton
Irvine
Ca
92603
Sep 13, 2022
While our club claims it won't be torn down completely, the hotel and bungalows are an unwanted addition. Who wants to pay for a luxury hotel room and wake up to Pickleball noise anyway? Dumb all
around.... someone is thinking with their wallet and not their head.
114
Kelly
Lewis
lirishgirl@sbcglobal.net
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 13, 2022
115
Mrs
Diane
Brown
dianemb@uci.edu
21 Honors Dr
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 13, 2022
116
Lisa
Spiegelman
lspiegs@aol.com
11 BORDEAUX
NEWPORT BEACH
CA
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
117
Mrs
Shelly
Read
shellylread@gmail.com
5 Castaways North
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
118
Ms
Christine
Puccio
ckpuccio@aol.com
313 Princeton Dr
Costa Mesa
California
92626
Sep 13, 2022
119
oclene
White
'white@prolineprocessing.com
535 San Bernardino
ave
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-324
#
Title First name Last name Email Address State Postcode
Ms. Cathy Kanode ckanode200l@yahoo.com 16033 Warmington Huntington Beach California 92649 USA Sep 13, 2022
Lane i
Please save our Pickleball courts!
120
121
IDenise ISchuler thankstu@yahoo.com 11601 Harrow pl INewport beach ICA 192660 1 ISep 13, 2022
It's unfortunate that the manager of the club is threatening members by termination of membership to speak out against the proposed plan. Picklball should be included in the new plan.
122
Mr.
Brian
Thune
brian-thune(@vahoo.com
34 Mountain View
Irvine
Ca
92603
Sep 13, 2022
123
Mrs
Debby
Wiesner
debby@backbayfunding.com
4815 Lido Sands Dr
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
124
Kim
Villani
kimnoelvillani@gmail.com
903 W. 17th St. #39
Costa Mesa
CA
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
125
Krista
Jajonie
kristajajonie@hotmail.com
1516 Abalone Place
Newport Beach
CA
92662
Sep 13, 2022
126
Nancy
O'Brien
nanobrienll@gmail.com
290 Crescent Bay Dr
Laguna Beach
California
92651
USA
Sep 13, 2022
We have been continually lied to by the managing owner that the new proposal includes pickleball and nothing will change for our membership Pickleball is the fastest growing sport in America and is good
for newport beach in more ways than a hotel. It will draw people to fill our hotels. I strongly oppose replacing TTC with a hotel
127
Dr
NICK
NAMIHAS
nnamihas@yahoo.com
2800 1st Avenue
Corona del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
128
Ace
Clark
ace.genec@gmail.com
Corona del Mar
California
Sep 13, 2022
129
Annette
Juptner
annette@juptner.com
Newport Beach
Orange
92660
Sep 13, 2022
130
Wendy
Balden
baldens@pacbell.net
301 Poinsettia Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
131
Mrs.
Brittany
Hobson
bhobson4514@outlook.com
617 poinsettia avenue
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
132
Angelique
Garbers
amgarbers3@yahoo.com
Newport beach
California
Sep 13, 2022
133
Mr
Hesham
Hebeish
hhebeish@cox.net
2105 west place dr
Costa Mesa
Ca
92627
Sep 13, 2022
134
Mark
McDermott
mactnyt@gmail.com
26026 View Point
Drive East
Dana Point
Ca
92677
USA
Sep 13, 2022
135
Mrs
Theresa
Hartsell
theresa.hartsell@cox.net
25 Versailles
Newport Beach
California
92657
Sep 13, 2022
136
Mrs
Emily
Stolan
volcom4em@aol.com
44 Harcourt
92657
Ca
92657
USA
Sep 13, 2022
137
Mrs
Emily
Coats
emmycoatsl@me.com
12140 Ahern Court
Tustin
CA
92782
USA
Sep 13, 2022
138
Mrs.
Jennifer
Rolfes
rolffam5@fmail.com
2006 Seadrift Drive
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
139
Christine
Anderson
christine.anderson@me.com
114 Via Xanthe
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
140
Mr
Donald
Stolan
don@cmilending.com
92657
Newport coast
Ca
92657
USA
Sep 13, 2022
141
Mrs
Sharon
Roy
sroyhome@pacbell.net
1837 Port Wheeler PI
Newport Beach
Orange
County,
California
92660
Sep 13, 2022
Closing the tennis club would be a major blow to the residents of Newport Beach as well as the members of the tennis club. Newport Beach does not need another hotel!
142
Judy
Cole
lagunahouse@roadrunner.com
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
143
Donald
Cole
lagunahouse@me.com
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
144
Lisa
Giger
lisa.giger@gmail.com
1960 Port Weybridge
Place
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 13, 2022
145
Rod
Rodgers
rgrodgersl@gmail.com
423 Canal Street
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
146
Veannie
iLawrence
eannie@rancholaslomas.com
I
INB
ICA
192660
1
1Sep 13, 2022
147
Ms
JLeslie
ICasserly
lesliem57@gmail.com
1290 crescent bay drive
Laguna beach
JCaliforma
192651
JUSA
ISep 13, 2022
This club serves a huge community not only to its members but to multiple charities and tournaments that bring revenue to the city. I am a Newport Beach homeowner.
148
Noah
Sharifi
noahsharifi4@gmail.com
20 WHARFSIDE DR
NEWPORT COAST
CA
92657
USA
Sep 13, 2022
149
Liz
Reichert
liz@reichertfamily.net
6285 Sunnyside Circle
Huntington Beach
Ca
92648
Sep 13, 2022
150
Eric
Reichert
eric@ocmgmt.com
6285 Sunnyside Circle
Huntington beach
Ca
92648
Sep 13, 2022
151
Mr
Alan
Wiesner
alan@wordsandpicturescreative.com
4815 Lido Sands Drive
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 13, 2022
Am very disheartened that people can stand in front of a group and outright lie to them so easily.
Powered by GoPetition
15-325
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
1 1 1
Region
152
Michele
Calder
m.calderl@verizon.net
NPB
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
153
jenifer
Brown
info@natural-illumination.com
220 Newport Center
Dr # 2
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 13, 2022
154
Mrs
Rebecca
Moore
rebparkf@yahoo.com
612 Poinsettia Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 13, 2022
155
Mrs
Laura
Henigan
heniganml@gmail.cim
612 Acacia Ave
Corona Del Mar
Ca
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
Please keep pickleball at this club. There is a huge demand for the sport and the city doesn't provide enough
courts.
156
Tracey
Miller
tmill21@comcast.net
112 28th St
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 13, 2022
157
Kimberley
Gaskill
kimberleygaskill@yahoo.com
1611 Bayside Drive
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 13, 2022
158
Niki
Parker
nikiparker.np@gmail.com
336 Vista baya
Costa Mesa
CA
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
159
jaleah
Brown
'"oybrown2@gmail.com
9562 Chevy Chase Dr
Huntington Beach
Ca
92646
Sep 13, 2022
160
Mr
Roy
Glauthier
rglauthier@aol.com
336 Vista Baya,
Costa Mesa
CA
92627
USA
Sep 13, 2022
161
Mr
Lance
Reichert
lance@ocmgmt.com
9971 Oceancrest
Drive
Huntington Beach
California
92646
USA
Sep 13, 2022
162
jillian
Gabrielli
sarisilkrugs@gmail.com
3334 W. Coast Hwy
#431
Corona del Mar
Ca
92625
USA
Sep 13, 2022
163
June
Marchigiani
'une326vs@yahoo.com
326 Vista Suerte
Newport Beach
Orange
county
92660
Sep 13, 2022
164
Mrs
Sandy
Bruss
brussfam@cox.net
41 Blue Summit
Irvine
CA
92603
Sep 13, 2022
Being part of this
pickleball community is very important to the well being of my family as well as the community.
165
Chris
Hagmaier
cjhagmaier@gmail.com
208 E Balboa Blvd
Newport Beach
California
92661
USA
Sep 13, 2022
166
Mrs
Christine
Lissoy
christinelissoy@me.com
108 Pearl Avenue
Newport Beach
CA
92662
Sep 13, 2022
167
Mrs
Kathryn
Smith
ksdesignmail@gmail.com
309 N Star Ln
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
168
Rochelle
Belove
Drbelove@aol.com
1126 Whitesails Way
Corona Del Mar
Orange
County
92625
Sep 14, 2022
I am opposed to the removal of the Pickleball courts and new plan going in it's place. As a resident, I use the TTC Club EVERY day for exercise, social well being, and general health that I can't get anywhere
else.
169
Ms
1Lynn
lGosselin
lynninsb@gmail.com
1415 Santa Ana Ave
Newport Beach
ICA
192663
USA
Sep 14, 2022
170
Mrs
INancy
113rundage
NancyBrundage@cox.net
11837 Port Manleigh PI
INewport Beach
lCalifornia
192660
JUSA
ISep 14, 2022
this is a very unique club and serves a wide variety of residents within the city. Newport needs to preserve its recreation facilities.
171
Dr.
Lori
Burri
loriburriphd@gmail.com
235 Driftwood Road
Newport Beach
Ca
92625
Sep 14, 2022
172
Mr
Alex
Crisostomo
alexcrisostomo@att.net
18317 Goldbark way
Yorba Linda
California
92886
USA
Sep 14, 2022
173
Ms
Patti
Quicksilver
pquickll03@gmail.com
1000 San Joaquin hills
rd
Newport beach
California
92660
Sep 14, 2022
174
Mr
cole
crisostomo
colecrisostomo@icloud.com
goldbark way
yorba linda
ca
92886
Sep 14, 2022
I love this club so much, it brings me and my family together!!
175
Brooklyn
Crisostomo
xanil024@gmail.com
Yorba Linda
California
USA
Sep 14, 2022
176
Ms
Jolene
Rankin
'olenebcrankin@gmail.com
12106 Pintado
Irvine
Orange
92618
USA
Sep 14, 2022
177
Mr
Tayler
Acosta
tayacosta@yahoo.com
12106 Pintado
Irvine
CA
92618
USA
Sep 14, 2022
Dont.
178
Daniel
Belove
drdanbelove@hotmail.com
1126 Whitesails Way
Corona Del Mar
Orange
County
92625
Sep 14, 2022
179
Susan
Lucero
susanlucero802@yahoo.com
320 E. 18th Street
Costa Mesa
CA
92627
USA
Sep 14, 2022
180
Mr
Jim
Balding
'im.balding@theantgroup.com
26 Fremont
Irvine
CA
92620
USA
Sep 14, 2022
Pickleball better serves the community as a whole. Open space in Orange County is disappearing at an alarming rate. We need to preserve the recreational spaces we have, we can't go back and make more.
181
Mr lCurt Istockman I curt. stockman@gmail.com 1435 Goldenrod Avenue Corona Del Mar CA 92625 USA Sep 14, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-326
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
1 1 1
Region
182
Mimi
Pardini
mimipardini@gmail.com
435 Goldenrod Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 14, 2022
183
Mrs
Jane
Miller
'pgsmiller@gmail.com
1967 Aliso Avenue
Costa Mesa
Orange
County
92627
USA
Sep 14, 2022
184
Andrea
Anderson
akozlak@gmail.com
1838 Port Charles PI
Newport beach
Ca
92660
Sep 14, 2022
185
Mrs
Marlene
Dandler
marlenedandler@me.com
Newport beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
186
Dr.
Cory
Muehlhauser
dreorym@sbcglobal.net
1854 Port Taggart
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
Keep our Pickle ball Club as is!
187
Dr.
Anne -Marie
Angeloff
amangeloff@gmail.com
2345 Port Carlisle
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
188
Jacquelyn
Mitchell
'acquimitche1178@gmail.com
1963 Port Dunleigh
Circle
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
189
Mrs
Cari
Hudy
carihudy@hotmail.com
1872 Port Wheeler
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
190
Mr
Curt
FauntLeRoy
curt@universalasphalt.com
1960 PORT CHELSEA
Inewport beach
lCalifornia
192660
JUSA
ISep 14, 2022
191
Mrs
IPOIIY
lVerfaillie
phackathorn@hotmail.com
1621 PORT ABBEY PL
INEWPORT BEACH
ICA
192660
JUSA
ISep 14, 2022
Please keep all of the courts at the The Tennis Club at Newport Beach. We need more athletic facilities, not fewer, and we especially need more pickle ball courts, as the city council is FULLY aware of.
192
Michele
Bethel
michelebethel6@gmail.com
1930 Port Townsend
Circle
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 14, 2022
193
Mr.
Jim
Kline
'kline@surterreproperties.com
1957 Port Chelsea
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
194
Rachel
Krebs
rachel.yelsey@gmail.com
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 14, 2022
195
Mr.
Patrick
Rolfes
patrolfes@gmail.com
2006 Seadrift Dr.
Corona del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 14, 2022
196
Captain
Robert
Martin
rob@freespeedaviation.com
1800 Port Sheffield
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
Me and 7 buddies played for 2 hours this morning before work and will be back again tomorrow evening after work. We need this club!!
197
Mrs
Marni
Clark
g.mclark@cox.net
1966 Port Ramsgate
Pl.
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
198
Mr
Jerry
Schmitt
'erryschmitt@cox.net
1974 Port Locksleigh
PI
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
199
Ms
Patricia
Chinnici
chinnici@trilliumgp.com
1729 Port Charles
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
200
im
Olsen
gr8realtor@aol.com
California
INewport Beach
jUnited States
192660
1
ISep 14, 2022
201
Mrs
IPamela
IJensen
'ensenpamela4@gmail.com
1701 Port Ashley PI
INewport Beach
ICA
192660
JUSA
ISep 14, 2022
Please oppose the proposal to tear down the pickleball/tennis courts in Newport Beach.
202
IKasey IMartin kaseykmartin@gmail.com 11800 Port Sheffield INewport Beach ICA 192660 1 ISep 14, 2022
Save our PB club!
203
Mrs.
Colleen
Masterson
colleenmasterson5@gmail.com
1830 Port Renwick
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
204
Mrs
Nancy
Best
lnancybest@gmail.com
1839 Port Charles
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
205
Mrs.
jean
Shenk
'eannieshenk@yahoo.com
1815 Port Margate
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
206
Mrs.
Mary Ann
Haly
maryannhaly@gmail.com
1824 Port Margate
Place
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 14, 2022
207
Wendy
McManigal
wendy.mcmanigal@gmail.com
1960 Port Nelson P1
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
208
Mr
Jeff
Schaffer
'pcchaffer@gmail.com
1806 Port Margate PI
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
209
Brian
Semmelroth
beemmelroth@verizon.net
Huntington Beach
Ca
92646
USA
Sep 14, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-327
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
1 1 1
Region
210
Mrs.
Corey
Anthony
coreyau99@hotmail.com
1830 Port Stirling PI
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
211
Mrs
Jackie
Hart
'slhart@gmail.com
1833 Port Ashley PI
Newport beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
212
Mrs.
Chelsea
Rokos
crrokos@gmail.com
2144 Port Durness PI
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
213
Ms
Ethel
Parsons
parsons9ll3@me.com
226 1/2 Agate Ave.
Newport Beach
CA
92662
USA
Sep 14, 2022
214
Ms.
Cathy
Sturdivant
cathybeane@yahoo.com
210 43rd Street
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 14, 2022
215
Mrs
Elizabeth
McCullagh
ElizabethMcCullagh@gmail.com
1727 Port Barmouth
PI
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
216
Mrs
Kris
Anderson
brenshel@sbcglobal.net
Newport beach
Ca
92660
Sep 14, 2022
217
Ms
Wendy
Mangiaracina
design-tunas.Od@icloud.com
231 Driftwood Road
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 14, 2022
218
Mr
George
Mangiaracina
gmangiaracina@nyc.rr.com
231 Driftwood Road
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
ISep 14, 2022
219
Mr
Marco
Mangiaracina
wendymangia@hotmail.com
231 Driftwood Road
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 14, 2022
220
Ms
Avriel
Webb
avrielw@gmail.com
11620
Orange
ICA
92869
Sep 14, 2022
Responsible city government needs to protect recreational and open spaces for a better future.
221
Tamara
Watt
tamarawatt@att.net
343 Promontory Drive
West
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
222
ohn
IJacobs
'acobsconstruct@aol.cim
835 Driftwood Ave
Seal Beach
California
90740
USA
Sep 14, 2022
Save TTC
223
Mr.
Douglas
Muehlhauser
dougmuehlhauser@protonmail.com
1854 Port Taggart
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
The City Council should deny the plan amendment!
224
Mrs.
Stacey
Schneider
staceyRschneider@gmail.com
212 Morning Canyon
Road
Corona del Mar
California
92625
USA
Sep 14, 2022
225
Mr
josh
Matlaf
'oshmatlaf@yahoo.com
17 Jupiter Hills Dr
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
226
Ms
Adelle
Walker
awalkerconsultingoc@gmail.com
409 canal street
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 14, 2022
227
Melody
Williams Dapp
meldapp@gmail.com
1807 Port Renwick
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
228
Karen
Aspinall
karen_aspinall@yahoo.com
9436 Residencia
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
229
Keri
Roth
keri roth@yahoo.com
9436 Residencia
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 14, 2022
230
Ms
Patti
Kohler
pckohler@gmail.com
330 Vista Trucha
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
231
Mrs
Beverley
Kashe
mkashe2308@aol.com
374 Villa point Dr
Newport Beach
ca
92660
Sep 14, 2022
No hotels please . Save the Tennis Club.
232
Ms
Mary
Meronk
mameronk@gmail.com
7 Lilian
Irvine
California
92614
USA
Sep 14, 2022
233
Julie
Meggers
'ulie@meggers.com
1815 Port Ashley
Place
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
234
Mrs
Sheri
Gail
sherigail@roadrunner.com
2419 Vista Nobleza
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 14, 2022
235
Mr.
Paul
King
peakay@gmail.com
1819 Newport Hills
Drive East
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
236
Mrs.
Mary
Raymond
mraymondl@roadrunner.com
40 Linda Isle
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Canada
Sep 14, 2022
237
Remie
Whistler
remie.whistler@cox.net
825 Hibiscus Court
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 14, 2022
238
Mrs.
Monica
Rakunas
mrakunas@gmail.com
1948 Port Nelson Pl.
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
Please do not take away The Tennis Club! I have been wanting to become a member here for some time and they are so popular that I am on a waitlist. It's one place that people like me can meet other
friendly people that also enjoy tennis and pickle ball. We just had the Vea Hotel open up in Fashion Island, the Island Hotel has been sitting vacant during ALL of covid and beyond, we have plenty of good
hotels and the last thing we need is another one and taking away something our community needs, uses and can't wait to get off that waitlist to be a part of. Thank you for your time.
239
Ikenette
imolway
kgbmolway@gmail.com
116 Villeneuve
newport beqch
california
92657
Sep 14, 2022
240
Mrs
Amy
Langdale
amy_langdale@yahoo.com
1942 Port Edward
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-328
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
leannemkahn@gmail.com
Address
1 1 1
Region
241
Ms
Leanne
Kahn
1801 Port Kimberly
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
242
Mrs
Kirsten
Minasian
kirsten.minasian@sbcglobal.net
1853 Port Taggart Pl.
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
243
Mrs
Pamela
Christian
luv2embracelife@gmail.com
45 Dartmouth
Irvine
CA
92612
USA
Sep 14, 2022
244
Ms
Laura
Zublin
laurazublin@gmail.com
1981 Port Dunleigh
Circle
Newport beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
245
Ms
Santina
Lopez
lsantina995@gmail.com
417 promontory dr
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
246
Mrs
Linda
Uphoff
ouphoff@aol.com
Newport Beach
Usa
92662
Sep 14, 2022
247
Cari
Zylstra
clzylstral@gmail.com
1951 Port Eddward PI
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 14, 2022
248
Kelly
Milrot
kmilrot@gmail.com
2200 Vista Huerta
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 14, 2022
249
Mrs
Dede
Rossi
dederossi57@gmail.com
4025 E Sixth St
Long Beach
CA
90814
Sep 14, 2022
250
Mrs.
Veronica
jKlein
nikkiatl@att.net
428 Begonia Ave
jCorona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 14, 2022
251
Mrs
Mary Lee
IRiddell
mlphotos@me.com
461 seaward rd
1corona. del mar
CA
192625
1
ISep 15, 2022
252
Ms
Ahndi
Imarx
ahndimarx@gmail.com
320 Marigold Ave
jCorona Del Mar
CA
192625
JUSA
ISep 15, 2022
We need this club for the health of the community. There are plenty of hotels in the area!
253
Ms.
lGeorgina.
Islim
georgina.slim@gmail.com
123 1/2 Pearl Ave
Newport Beach
California
92662
USA
Sep 15, 2022
254
Mrs
Christy
Marr
christymarr2l@gmail.com
ikarolhatch@gmail.com
2238 Port Carlisle
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
255
IKAROL
1HATCH
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 15, 2022
No more hotel growth!
256
Mrs
Gina
Polley
gpilley968@aol.com
3641 Daffodil
Corona Del Mar
Ca
92625
Sep 15, 2022
257
Mrs
Elizabeth
Hunt
elizabethdhunt@gmail.com
Newport Beach
California
USA
Sep 15, 2022
258
Ms
Diana
Glazer
dglaz@sbcglobal.net
2107 yacht grayling
Newport beach
CA
92660
Sep 15, 2022
259
Bahram
Mandavi
bahram.mandavi@gmail.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 15, 2022
260
Mr.
Bahman
Mandavi
bahman.Emandavi@gmail.com
Trovare
Newport Beach
California
92657
USA
Sep 15, 2022
Have taken lessons there as a child, teen, and adult over the years. Currently going back and forth for work between OC and Northern California but will be back 100% in 2023 and had hoped to explore
membership and lessons again at NBTC. .
261
Mrs.
Janet
DiChiro
'anetdichiro@aol.com
2821 Blue Water
Drive
Corona del Mar
California
92625
Sep 15, 2022
262
Ms
Carol
Walsh
cdreyw@gmail.com
18 Scripps Aisle
IRVINE
CA
92612
Sep 15, 2022
263
Mrs
Robyn
Zieper
robyn@zieper.com
6 Limoges
Newport Coast
CA
92657
Sep 15, 2022
264
Nicole
jorenby
nicolema6e02@yahoo.com
702 goldenrod ave
Corona del Mar
California
92625
USA
Sep 15, 2022
265
Mr.
Jason
Hong
'ason@ebsmdservice.com
208 E. Balboa
Boulevard
Newport Beach
CA
92661
USA
Sep 15, 2022
266
Shelly
Summers
shellysummers@mac.com
Huntington Beach
CA
92648
USA
Sep 15, 2022
267
Mrs.
Gwen
Cruttenden
gwencrutt@yahoo.com
301 apolena avenue
Balboa Island
CA
92662
Sep 15, 2022
268
Jim
Mortimer
'mortimer8787@gmail.com
295 High Dr.
Laguna Beaach
US
92651
Sep 15, 2022
269
Mrs
Pam
Hardenbergh
pamhardenbergh@gmail.com
330 Vista Baya
Costa mesa
California
92627
USA
Sep 15, 2022
270
Mrs
Dorothy
Joynt
dorothyljoynt@gmail.com
9 ironwood drive
Newport Beach
Ca, usa
92660
Sep 15, 2022
271
Dr
Theo
Frot
theo.frot@gmail.com
1748 Port Manleigh
Circle
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
272
Aaron
Rose
aaron@planomatic.com
2007 PORT BRISTOL
CIRCLE
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
273
Mrs
georgianne
ramm
rammfam@cox.net
1966 Port Edward
Place
Newport Beach
california
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-329
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
Region
274
Ashley
Rose
ashleycostanza@gmail.com
2007 port bristol
circle
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 15, 2022
275
Sherri
Mcquaid
sherrismcquaid@gmail.com
4104 River Ave
Newport Beach
California
92663
USA
Sep 15, 2022
276
Ms.
Karla
Jondle
karlamou@hotmail.com
4462 Oceanridge Dr
Huntington Beach
CA
92649
USA
Sep 15, 2022
277
Peggy
Hoyt
phoyt@roadrunner.com
1530 Serenade
Terrace
Corona del Mar
California
92625
USA
Sep 15, 2022
278
Mrs
Elizabeth
Morgan
lizmorgan42@hotmail.com
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
279
Mr
Jacob
Furgatch
'furgatch@cox.net
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
280
Mr
Dominic
Bulone
dbulone07@gmail.com
1530 Serenade
Terrace
Corona del Mar
California
92625
USA
Sep 15, 2022
281
Mrs
Sharon
Griffin
sheri@griffin6.com
2001 Port Chelsea PI
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 15, 2022
282
Mr
Scott
Clegg
scottclegghb@gmail.com
1320, W Bellerive Ln
Coeur dAlene
ID
83814
USA
Sep 15, 2022
283
Grace Alipour
Grace
Alipour
gracealipour@gmail.com
Irvine
CA
92612
Sep 15, 2022
284
Sheila
Cole
sheila.cole247@yahoo.com
602 Avocado Ave. Unit
A
Corona Del Mar
California
92625
USA
Sep 15, 2022
285
Dr.
Kim
Vieira
kimtpcs@aol.com
17925 SKY PARK
CIRCLE, SUITE K
Irvine
CA
92614
USA
Sep 15, 2022
Been a member there off and on for 40 years. Historical location and used to bring in families to the East Bluff/ Bluff home sales too. Palisades TC may sell someday soon.
286
Lisa
Winter
lisa.winter@live.com
Newport Beach
California
92662
Sep 15, 2022
287
Mr
William
Mccullough
mac@pmllc.net
418 Morning Canyon
Road
Newport beach
Ca
92625
Sep 15, 2022
288
Teri
Springer
idahogrll@aol.com
19486 sandcastle
Huntington Beach
CA
92648
USA
Sep 15, 2022
289
Casey
Sharifi
crosharifi@gmail.com
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 15, 2022
290
Jody Clegg
Jody
Clegg
cleggjody@gmail.com
6712, Morning Tide
Drive
Huntington Beach
Ca
92648
USA
Sep 15, 2022
291
Keith
McCabe
wishinfish@aol.com
46 Clermont
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 15, 2022
292
Lori
Chipps
lorichipps@gmail.com
6217 San Joaquin
Plaza
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
293
Helen
Fedalen
fedalen@cox.net
3021 Carob
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 15, 2022
294
Mary
Keenan
keenan552002@yahoo.com
209 34th Street Unit B
Newport Beach
Orange
92663
USA
Sep 15, 2022
295
Sara
Naheedy
snaheedy@gmail.com
Newport beach
CA
92625
USA
Sep 15, 2022
296
Mr
Gary
Hoffman
d0801@hotmail.com
604 n kaufman
Houston
Texas
77536
Sep 15, 2022
297
Aaron
Brown
ambrown219@aol.com
Newport Beach
Ca
USA
Sep 15, 2022
298
Teri
Burch
tdburch@cox.net
Newport Coast
CA
92657-1008
Sep 16, 2022
299
Mrs
Kristen
McGuinness
kmcguinness@cox.net
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 16, 2022
300
Mr
Gerald
Kelleher
'errykelleher3@gmail.com
119 Topaz Ave
Newport Beach
CA
92662
Sep 16, 2022
301
Steve
Foigelman
steve@loanleaders.com
1241 Winslow Ln
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
Sep 16, 2022
302
Mr
Karl
Dumas
karldumas@gmail.com
1356 Coral Drive
Laguna Beach
CA
92651
Sep 16, 2022
303
Dr
Kathy
Abels
ksabels5ll@gmail.com
Corona del Mar
Ca
92625
ISep 16, 2022
304
Mrs
Jennifer
Patel
'nguyen42@gmail.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 16, 2022
305
Darcy
Lee
honeycutofficial@gmail.com
Newport Beach
Ca
Sep 16, 2022
306
Kristin
Leffel
kml.peterson@gmail.com
1806 port Sheffield
place
Newport Beach
Us
92660
Sep 16, 2022
307
IMs.
Paige
Nichols
nancy@avalontech.com
13301 Michelson
Irvine
California
92612
IUSA
Sep 16, 2022
308
Ims
lKathleen
lWiesinger
krwiesinger@yahoo.com
19 Ocean Vista
lNewport Beach
lCalifornia
192660
JUSA
ISep 16, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-330
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
1 1 1
Region
309
Alison
Yonkers
yonkers_4@yahoo.com
304 1/2 Fernleaf Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 16, 2022
310
Mrs
Kara
Greer
karagreer46@gmail.com
2015 Port Bristol
Circle
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 16, 2022
311
Mrs.
Joanna
Girard
troycygnet@gmail.com
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 16, 2022
312
Lena
Fancher
therussian-89@hotmail.com
4716 E vista st
Long Beach
Ca
90803
Sep 16, 2022
Please no hotel.
313
Cindy
Freyman
cinfreyman@gmail.com
24 Morning View Dr
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 16, 2022
314
Ms
Lisa
Goon
lisagoon@cox.net
Port Bristol Circle
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
USA
Sep 16, 2022
315
George
Taylor
taylorgro@yahoo.com
332 Vista Trucha
Newport Beach
Calif
92660
USA
Sep 16, 2022
316
Ms
Julie
Pernecky
'pmgmt@msn.com
308 Sapphire Ave
Newport Beach
California
92662
USA
Sep 16, 2022
317
Keith
Forrester
krforrester@live.com
Newport Beach
California
92663
Sep 16, 2022
318
Miss
Keira
Raack
raackkeira@gmail.com
1942 Port Ramsgate
PI
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 17, 2022
319
Miss
Alexa
Raack
alexaraack@gmail.com
1942 Port Ramsgate
PI
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 17, 2022
320
Mr
Justin
jSmith
'ustinhalos@yahoo.com
214 Topaz
Newport beach
Ca
92662
1USA
ISep 17, 2022
Please don't allow
this club to be torn down
321
Ms
anet
Hathaway
anethathaway@hotmail.com
1982 Port Edward
Circle
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 17, 2022
The Pickleball & Tennis Club is a valuable community resource for ALL Newport Beach residents. Please do. It allow this to be turned into a hotel.
322
Dr
Denise
Aliba
dedeakiba@cox.net
1000 sea lane
Corona Del mar
United States
92625
Sep 17, 2022
323
khosrow
mandavi
armanis321@yahoo.com
Newport Beach
Calfornia
Sep 17, 2022
324
Fahimeh
Mandavi
fahimehl23@aol.com
Newport Beach
CA
Sep 17, 2022
325
Mr
Grant
Nachman
grant.nachman@gmail.com
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 17, 2022
326
Mrs
Debbie
Logan
debbiedlogan@yahoo.com
1829 Port Taggart
Place
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 17, 2022
This club is well
loved by an entire community, please do not take it away!
327
Mrs
Diana
Chen
brooklineshopgirl@gmail.com
INewport Beach
Ica
192660
1
ISep 17, 2022
328
Dr.
Alison
Sims
afsims@prodigy.net
1701 Avocado Ave
ICorona Del Mar
ICA
192625
JUSA
ISep 17, 2022
329
Cindy
Galloway
cindygallowayl@gmail.com
11227 Outrigger Drive
jCorona Del Mar
Ica
192625
1
ISep 18, 2022
Please, continue pickleball.
330
Dr.
ICindy
IBollman
dreindybollman@gmail.com
I
INewport Beach
ICA
192660
1
ISep 18, 2022
331
1 La Vonne
jEarl
lavonneearl@mac.com
I
INewport Beach
lCalifornia
I
JUSA
ISep 18, 2022
Save the club! We have enough hotels. Our community depends on this.
332
IPaul IVrebalovich pvrebalovich@yahoo.com 12034 Baypointe Drive INewport Beach Icalifornia 192660 1 ISep 18, 2022
The club is home to too many members and to take it away would be harming the community greatly.
333
Holly
Anderson
hollyjal3@gmail.com
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
Sep 18, 2022
334
Cindy
Lightner
cslightl@aol.com
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 18, 2022
335
Christine
Gartner
christinelee3@gmail.com
1830 Port Ashley
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 18, 2022
336
Cc
Knowles
ccbegonia@yahoo.com
Ca
Corona del mar
Usa
92625
Sep 18, 2022
337
Richard
Counsman
counsman@gmail.com
437 Carnation Ave
Corona del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 18, 2022
F338
I strongly request that Council deny
the plan to demolish pickleball courts to build a luxury hotel at the Tennis Club at Newport Beach.
Mrs. Catherine
Anderson catherine.anderson05@gmail.com 1979 Port Claridge PI Newport Beach CA 192660 1 ISep 18, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-331
#
Title First name Last name Email Address city State Postcode
Please do not approve a project that does not explicitly allow Pickleball to remain onsite at The Tennis Club of Newport Beach. The pickleball courts are a vibrant and well used addition to our community and
another hotel is not needed in the area.
Lori Junkins lorijunkins@gmail.com 1409 High Bluff Dr Newport beach California 92550 Sep 18, 2022
Mrs Holly Tharp hhtharp@yahoo.com 4 Bargemon Newport Coast CA 92657 Sep 18, 2022
339
340
341
Dr
Paul
Tharp
daddybiskit@me.com
4 Bargemon
Newport Coast
CA
92657
Sep 18, 2022
342
Mitch
Junkins
mjunkins@thecdmco.com
1409 High Bluff Dr
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 18, 2022
343
Ms
Susan
Machado
smp9395@yahoo.com
614 Larkspur Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 18, 2022
344
SHERRI
JFryer
dnsfryer@gmail.com
225 Opal Ave
INewport Beach
JCalifornia
192662
USA
Sep 18, 2022
345
Cathy
lEusey
cathyeusey@gmail.com
INewport Beach
ICA
I
Sep 18, 2022
346
Ms
Tere
IMiller
tam308@icloud.com
1817 E. Balboa Blvd
INewport Beacj
JCa
192661
JUSA
Sep 18, 2022
I've lived a block away from the tennis club for 29 years. I'm NOT in favor of a hotel being built in this very small neighborhood.
347
Mr. JLance ackson lance.paul.jackson@outlook.com 11817 E. Balboa Blvd JNewport Beach JCa 92661 USA ISep 18, 2022
NO! No hotel in Peninsula Point!!
348
Elizabeth
Beazley
elizabeth.beazley@kyl.com
Fountain Valley
Ca
92708
Sep 18, 2022
349
Mr and Mrs
Bridget
Gaffney
gaffneybridgetl@gmail.com
2652 Crestview Drive
Newport Beach
California
92663
Sep 18, 2022
350
Ms.
Nancy
Buchanan
nancyculinaryrose@me.com
379 Catalina Shore
Drive
Costa Mesa
California
92627
USA
Sep 18, 2022
This club has served the community for over 60 years. It's presence has allowed to city to direct resources elsewhere. If the club is eliminated, the city will need to provide additional rec facilities. Far better
to preserve the club and all the benefits it provides to the community. Given the popularity of pickleball, this is also a benefit to the owner by appealing to the pickleball community as a pickleball destination!
351
Maryann
McQuiddy
maryannmcquiddy@yahoo.com
ilulucdm@aol.com
79 Cerrero Court
Rancho Mission
Viejo
CA
92694
Sep 18, 2022
352
mrs.
Louise
Winders
521 Dahlia Ave
Corona Del Mar
JCaliforma
192625
JUSA
ISep 19, 2022
I oppose demolishing the NB Tennis Club and replacing
it with a hotel.
353
Melissa
Housel
melissabqueen@aol.com
304 1/2 Collins Ave.
Newport Beach
California
92662
Sep 19, 2022
354
Mrs
sara
benson
benson.sara@yahoo.com
1847 Port taggart
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 19, 2022
355
Mrs
Maurine
Hawkins
mhawkins25@gmail.com
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 19, 2022
356
Ms
Wendy
Isbell
wendyeisbell@aol.com
283 Broadway
Costa Mesa
CA
92627
Sep 19, 2022
This club is a neighborhood home and has been for generations! It's setting is perfect for that and not that big a deal for a hotel. Please stop this change!
357
Diane
Millar
dentaltchr@aol.com
19 Sea Terrace
Newport Coast
CA
92657
Sep 19, 2022
358
Maggi
Arguello
timmaggi.arguello@verizon.net
Huntington Beach
Orange
county
92648
USA
Sep 19, 2022
359
Joanne
Wu
'oannejwu@yahoo.con
1842 Port Taggart P1
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 19, 2022
Please save the tennis club
360
Ms.
Gayanne
Stanley
gayannes@gmail.com
PO BOX 11027
Costa Mesa
CA
92627
USA
Sep 19, 2022
361
Mrs
Darlene
Welling
darlenewelling@yahoo.com
48 Canyon Ridge
Irvine
CA
92603
USA
Sep 19, 2022
362
Mr
Jason
Atkins
hdof06@me.com
10311 Kamuela drive
Huntington beach
CA
92646
Sep 19, 2022
363
Ms
Tiffanie
Atkins
hairdresser on fire@verizon.net
10311 Kamuela drive
Huntington Beach
CA
92646
Sep 19, 2022
364
Wendy
Meyer
wendy@newporthearing.com
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 19, 2022
365
Dr
Cynthia
Boccara
dreynthia@wellness4life.com
20701 Beach Blvd,
#18
Huntington Beach
CA
92648
USA
Sep 19, 2022
We only support a proposal that specifies 25+ pickleball courts explicitly
366
Mrs IClicia Inhauser-Huang clicia@cliciasdesigns.com 135 sea terrace I Newport beach JCalifornia 192657 1 ISep 19, 2022
We have too many hotels already! We need to preserve the city and provide places for the actual residents to enjoy!
367
Ms ISheri Imyers fokuspilates@icloud.com 11372 Terrace Way JLaguna Beach lCalifornia 192651 1 ISep 19, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-332
#
Title First name Last name Email Address Postcode
368
JLorna ILea lornalea2018@gmail.com 2 Teramo Ct INewport Coast California 192657 1 1Sep 19, 2022
369
lHolly JWylie wylieholly@gmail.com 116761 Baruna Lane lHuntington beach JCalifornia 192649 1 ISep 19, 2022
This is an important place of fun and recreation for so many. A hotel can be placed elsewhere if needed.
370
Mr.
ordan
Gold
orddango@gmail.com
19746 Oceanaire
Circle
Huntington Beach
CA
92648
Sep 19, 2022
I have been involved with growing Pickleball in Newport Beach as a volunteer since 2014. My wife received an award from the City for her work in getting pickleball started in this town. Pickleball must
remain at TTC. It's the fastest growing sport in America and TTC is the largest club on the West Coast. Save our club!
371
Rosemary
Cumming
rosecumming@gmail.com
1820 Newport hills E
Newport Beach
USA
92660
Sep 19, 2022
372
Julie
Barrett
darts-ruses.Or@icloud.com
213 Dahlia Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 19, 2022
373
Mrs.
Rebecca
Dewey
rebecca@deweygroup.com
37 Bridgeport Rd
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 19, 2022
374
Ms
Judy
Mann
'1em3333@gmail.com
613 dahlia ave
Newport beach
California
92725
USA
Sep 19, 2022
375
Ludmila
waldron
lsherbak@hotmail.com
Newport Beach
ca
92660
USA
Sep 19, 2022
376
Mrs
Jrhonda
Igatley
srgatley@gmail.com
711 lido park drive
INewport Beach
JCa
192663
JUSA
Sep 19, 2022
377
JElaine
lRothman
erothman6l@gmail.com
9 Madison
INewport Beach
JCalifornia
I
I
Sep 19, 2022
378
Ms
JKathleen
ITemple
templekathy@yahoo.com
2034 Baypointe Drive
INewport Beach
ICA
192660
JUSA
ISep 19, 2022
• Our Club!
379
Ms. Imerrie lWeinstock merrie.weinstock@gmail.com JPort Taggart Place INewport Beach JCalifornia 192660 1 ISep 19, 2022
We need more recreation and fewer hotels in Newport Beach!
380
Patricia &
Edward
Carels
patc092380@gmail.com
1500 Cornwall Ln
Newport Bch., Ca.
CA
92660
USA
Sep 19, 2022
381
Mrs
lynne
weir
duggins.lynne@gmail.com
1808 Port Seabourne
Way
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 19, 2022
382
Mrs
Corre
Larkin
corremyer@gmail.com
1207 Berkshire Lane
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 19, 2022
383
Mr
Greg
Minasian
maddirobbinson@gmail.com
1853 Port Taggart
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 19, 2022
384
Mr
Rod
Newcombe
rod.newcombe50@gmail.com
1351 Canterbury Ln
Fullerton
CA
92831
USA
Sep 19, 2022
Please reconsider this plan. Do not take away our Pickleball club and family! With almost 2,000 members we are a strong group that wants the best for the area, club and it's members. No big hotel, condos
etc! Keep it recreational and keep Pickleball!
385
Ms
Gianna
Minasian
gianna.minasian@gmail.com
1853 Port Taggart
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 19, 2022
386
Dr
Heather
Bowling
heather.bowling.@gmail.com
Newport Coast
2 Rochelle
92657
Sep 19, 2022
387
Denise
Salvucci
deniselisa@mac.com
705 Goldenrod Avenue
Corona del Mar
California
92625
Sep 19, 2022
388
Mrs
Kerry
Hacker
kerry25@me.com
1401 Dove Street,
Suite 640
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 19, 2022
We do not need another hotel and it would be a terrible location and add so much traffic to that area
389
Mr. ILany IFisher lfisherl5@yahoo.com JP.O. Box 591 lCorona Del Mar Ica Icorona Del Mar JUSA ISep 19, 2022
The local community needs this club. It doesn't need another hotel and it's' accompanying traffic
390
Ms IPatricia JDreyfus padreyfus@gmail.com 11209 KEEL DR ICORONA DEL MAR JCalifornia 192625 1 ISep 19, 2022
We do not need another hotel. This has always been a family area, welcoming to tourists. This is another step to remove activities for people who live here. Greed should not be more important than
recreation.
391
Mrs
JBeth
JProkoxki
ekprokoxki@hotmail.xom
1821 Hibiscus Ct
JCorona del Mar
ICA
192625
JUSA
ISep 20, 2022
392
Mr.
JDavid
JBadajoz
dbadajoz@gmail.com
121 Encore Ct.
INewport Beach
JCalifornia
192663
1
ISep 20, 2022
Keep one of the jewels of Newport Beach
393
Mrs
Carol
Light
the4lights@cox.net
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 20, 2022
394
Ms
Robin
Dykhouse
freeasabirdrd@gmail.com
127 Jasmine Creek
Corona Del Mar
US
92625
Sep 20, 2022
395Jayne
VanOpynen
'vanopynen@hotmail.com
127 Jasmine Creek
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 20, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-333
#
Title
First name
Last name
Email
Address
City
State
Postcode
1 I
396
Mr
Steve
Weinstock
steve.weinstock@cox.net
1872 Port Taggart
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 20, 2022
397
Dr.
Gary
Dreyfus
gary.dreyfus@gmail.com
1209 Keel Drive
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 20, 2022
398
Melodie
Melodie
Perone
melodieperone@gmail.com
708 1/2 Marigold
Corona del mar
Ca
92625
Sep 21, 2022
399
Ms
Tricia
Tedio-Smith
ttediosmith@gmail.com
30052 Corsair
Laguna Niguel
California
92677
USA
Sep 21, 2022
400
Mrs
Kim
Nicolas
knicol@me.com
Newport Beach
Ca
Sep 21, 2022
401
Mr
Chris
Martin
cm98xx@aol.com
98Navarre
Irvine
Ca
92612
Sep 21, 2022
402
Mr
Edward
Post
ned@nedtpost.com
2 Hampshirite Court
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 21, 2022
403
Scott
Lissoy
scott@farwestindustries.com
108 Pearl Ave
Newport Beach
Ca
92662
USA
Sep 21, 2022
404
Mrs
Jeanne
Conwell
'kconwell@yahoo.com
1507 Serenade
Terrace
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
Sep 21, 2022
405
Ms
Riley
Ridge
rileygraceridge@icloud.com
2710 Bayside Dr
CdM
CA
92625
USA
Sep 21, 2022
406
Ms
Marilyn
Stemper
marilynstemper@gmail.com
713 Iris Ave
Corona Del Mar
CA
92625
USA
Sep 21, 2022
407
Jerry
Burch
'wburch@cox.net
22 Avignon,
Newport Coast
CA
92657
USA
Sep 21, 2022
408
Gwen Burnett
Gwen
Burnett
gwenrnason7@gmafl.com
451 Hawthorne Rd
Laguna Beach
California
92651
Sep 21, 2022
409
Anonymous
Victoria
Clement
vbclement@gmail.com
Newport Beach
CA
92625
USA
Sep 21, 2022
410
Mr
Greg
Steininger
gsteininger1226@gmail.com
708 1/2 Heliotrope
Ave
Corona Drl Mar
CA
92625
Sep 21, 2022
411
Ms
Cathy
Hanley
cate.hanley@gmail.com
2076 Tablelands Way
Costa Mesa
lCalifornia
192627
USA
Sep 21, 2022
412
Mrs
Shelly
Johnston
Saipanastasia@gmail.com
503 Marigold Avenue
Corona Del Mar
ICA
192625
USA
Sep 21, 2022
A hotel a block from a high school is a really really horrible idea
413
Mrs
Deborah
Oconnor
deborah.oconnor93@gmail.com
8 Tesoro
Newport Coast
California
92657
Sep 21, 2022
414
Mrs
Lauren
Murphy
hunnemurpb@yahoo.com
12 Old Course Drive
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 21, 2022
415
Mrs.
Traci
Semmelroth
theydorff@gmail.com
10202 Cynthia Drive
Huntington Beach
CA
92646
Sep 21, 2022
416
Stephanie
Milstein
sgmilstein@gmail.com
3315 San Joaquin
Plaza
Newport Beach
California
92660
Sep 21, 2022
417
Mr
jEddy
lChavez
eddy@premium-shirts.com
13410 San Joaquin
lNewport
jCa
192660
Sep 21, 2022
418
IKevin
IYurtin
kyurtin@gmail.com
I
INewport Beach
ICA
192660
Sep 21, 2022
Pickle ball is a vital part of the community here in Newport! We don't need more hotels in the area. The Hyatt is right around the corner.
419
Ms.
Jennifer
Simpson
'enncdm@gmail.com
1828 Baypointe Drive
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 21, 2022
420
Mr
Jeff
Thompson
't.fleet@msn.com
120 Newport Center
Dr.
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 21, 2022
421
Mr.
Ken
Bassman
kenb@bassmanblaine.com
19 Colonial Dr.
Newport Beach
CA
92660
Sep 21, 2022
422
Candice
Stansfield
cjstansfield@icloud.com
140 Liberty
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 21, 2022
Keep recreation options available for locals !! We don't need more traffic and tourism!
423
Ms
Maddie
Rosen
maddierosenl@aol.com
124 Lessay
Newport coast
CA
92657
Sep 22, 2022
424
Mrs
Karen
Luchesi
kluchesi43@gmail.com
43 Goleta Point Dr.
Corona del Mar, CA
CA
92625
Sep 22, 2022
425
Mrs.
Lori
Kreutziger
teamkrtzgr@me.com
18522 Villa Drive
Villa Park
CA
92861
USA
Sep 22, 2022
426
Ms
Rosemary
Hezlep
mickiehez@gmail.com
1426, OUTRIGGER DR
CORONA del MAR
CA
92625
Sep 22, 2022
TTC ONLY DOES POSITIVE THINGS FOR THE RESIDENTS OF NEWPORT BEACH AND MANY OTHERS WHO TRAVEL FROM FAR AND NEAR TO ENJOY OUR BEAUTIFUL CLUB.
427
Sydney Rosen I Sydney lRosen sydlrosen@gmail.com 1124 lessay INewport Beach lCalifornia 192657 Sep 22, 2022
This club has fostered more relationships with people in this town than I had my entire years growing up in Newport Beach. Pickleball has been an activity for kids and parents of all ages to collaborate and
enjoy and has brought people back into my life from years and years ago in the best way possible. Getting rid of this club would do a massive disservice to not only its members but the community ad a whole
428
jMr IMax jPremer maxpremer@gmail.com 12904B Windsor Rd jAustin JTX 178703 JUSA ISep 22, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-334
#
Title First name Last name Email Address Postcode Region Date
We don't need another hotel - we need more lifestyle complexes just like this pickle ball compound.
429
Mr IShane jPremer shpremer@gmail.com 120 Molino INewport Beach lCalifornia 192660 1 ISep 22, 2022
Save the courts!
430
Mrs.
lCorinne
iMorgenstern
cori448@aol.com
1448 Rivera Terrace
jCorona Del Mar
lCalifornia
192625
1
ISep 22, 2022
431
Mr.
I Steve
jErlinger
sterlinger@sbcglobal.neti
1510 1/2 Acacia Ave
jCorona Del Mar
ICa, Orange
192625
1
ISep 22, 2022
Aren't there enough hotels not to mention multi family units in NB yet? Congestion already out of control!
432
Ms
Cathy
Newton
newton.cb21@gmail.com
460 Vista Trucha
lNewport Beach
ICa
92660-3521
JUSA
ISep 22, 2022
433
Mr
Gary
Newton
newtongf@aol.com
460 Vista Trucha
INewport Beach
ICa
192660
JUSA
ISep 22, 2022
434
Mindy
Thigpen
Mindylou@cox.net
708 Emerald Bay
ILaguna Beach
lCalifornia
ILaguna Beach
JUSA
ISep 22, 2022
This club has been around since I was a little girl. I am now 67 years old. It is part of the history of Newport Beach and means so much to so many. Please keep it as is. Thank you, Mindy Thigpen
435
Mrs ICarolyn ohnson lollie763@hotmail.com 15102 Canterbury Dr lCypress ICa 199630 1 ISep 22, 2022
I am outraged!
436
Spencer
York
york.spencer@gmail.com
1310 Watson Avenue
Costa Mesa
CA
92626
USA
Sep 22, 2022
437
Mrs
Martha
Duque
m_e_duque@yahoo.com
1915 Port Cardiff
Place
Newport Beach
CA
92660-5416
USA
Sep 22, 2022
438
Mr.
Neil
Whitney
neil.whitney@hotmail.com
1417 Sea Ridge Drive
Newport Beach
California
92660
USA
Sep 22, 2022
439
Andrea
Sarkisian
asarkisian@mac.com
Irvine
CA
92612
Sep 22, 2022
440
Ms
jMaureen
iSchaller
maureenschaller@aol.com
12307 Alta Vista Dr
lNewport Beach
lCalifornia
192660
IUSA
ISep 22, 2022
As a former member of the Newport
Beach Tennis Club, we do not need a hotel in the residential area of Eastbluff.
441
Rick
Brown
rbrownx3@gmail.com
21 Honors Dr
Newport Beach
CA
92660
USA
Sep 22, 2022
442
Mr..
Mike
Skillman
mskillman@aol.com
2602 Circle Drive
Newport Beach
CA
92663
USA
Sep 22, 2022
443
Mr
Randy
Higbee
randy@randyhigbeegallery.com
20061 Waterford Lane
Huntington Beach
California
92646
USA
Sep 22, 2022
444
Dr
Darrin
Fryer
darrinfryer@yahoo.com
225 Opal Ave
Newport Beach
Ca
92662
Sep 22, 2022
445
Rochelle
Lorito
rochelleb50ll@msn.com
3421 Fela Ave
Long Beach
California
90808
USA
Sep 22, 2022
446
Ms
Lori
Sakamoto
lorisak@me.com
3282 Oak Knoll Dr
Los Alamitos
Ca
90720
USA
Sep 22, 2022
447
ISherri
ISkillman
Cr8vsherri@skillman.ws
12602 Circle Drive
INewport Beach
ICA
192663
JUSA
Sep 22, 2022
I've been a tennis & Pickleball member for almost 30 years & strongly object to the proposed hotel. Local Orange County residents need open spaces to recreate, not more buildings/hotels.
448
Ms.
IDiane
ITagami
dmtagami@outlook.com
1353 Ramona Way
ICosta Mesa
lCalifornia
92627
USA
ISep 22, 2022
449
Mr.
jPhilip
IMiller
pmiller@avocetenv.com
11967 Aliso Avenue
ICosta Mesa
lCalifornia
192627
JUSA
ISep 22, 2022
TTC is a more valuable asset to the residents of Newport Beach and surrounding cities than another hotel.
450
Julie
Evans
surfsidea8@vetizon.net
Po342
Surfside
Usa
90743
Sep 22, 2022
451
Mr
Todd
White
toddwhite316@gmail.com
535 San Bernardino
Ave
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
Sep 22, 2022
452
Drs Kurt and
Lori
Lori
Openshaw
stores4openshaw@gmail.com
1987 Port Trinity
Circle
Newport Beach
ca
92660
Sep 23, 2022
PLEASE PLEASE leave these courts for residents! We all need more places to stay / be active. We certainly do not need any hotels!
453
Mr
Sean
kanawati
sean-kanawati@yahoo.com
Seal beach
CA
90740
Sep 23, 2022
454
Dr
James
Fitzpatrick
'im.fitzpatrick@comcast.net
21 Bridington
Laguna Niguel
California
92677
USA
Sep 23, 2022
455
Shaun
Skeris
shaunskeris@gmail.com
4572 Ironwood
Avenue
Seal Beach
CA
90740
USA
Sep 23, 2022
456
Mr
Brian
McCarthy
briancmccarthy@sbcglobal.net
313 34th st
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
Sep 23, 2022
No way. Traffic and crowds are already unmanageable
457
jDr.
IDouglas
ICitro
expand2504@aol.com
122 Pearl Avenue
Newport Beach
CA
92662
USA
Sep 23, 2022
458
1Mr
jAnthony
ICasassa
casassatony@gmail.com
28 Shade Tree
Irvine
Ca
92603
Sep 23, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-335
#
Title First name Last name Email Address city State Postcode
459
Mr lGeorge lGelfer ggelfer@takeyausa.com 125 Via Lucca, Apt J433 Irivine ICA 192612 1 1Sep 23, 2022
I was member 250 and watched the club expand to over 1,800 members creating a strong healthy community. We understand the land owners have the right to develop the land to maximize revenue. All we
ask is that Picklball be a center point of the future facility.
460
IGary JBIack Igblackfirell8@gmail.com 1709 1/2 Iris Ave jCorona del Mar ICalifornia 92625-2253 JUSA ISep 23, 2022
Pickleball is the fastest growing sport in America and it would be a shame for Newport Beach to give up this opportunity to support the sport for it's residents and give up the opportunity to be a major
national venue for pickleball and tennis!
461
Mr
Lewis
Lanzner
whatwhat22@mac.com
223 Canal Street
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 23, 2022
462
Mr and Mrs
Dave Lamb
patricia
Lamb
patlamb47@yahoo.com
801 Via Lido Soud
Newport Beach
Ca
92663
Sep 23, 2022
463
Mr
Victor
Orta
orta-victor@hotmail.com
668 W Main St # A
Tustin
California
92780
Sep 23, 2022
We need more places for recreation to exercise and socialize with other people. This is a location that helps keep the community healthy and should not be closed down.
464
Carl
Mazzie
carlmazzie@gmail.com
Newport
Ca
USA
Sep 23, 2022
465
Heidi
Lynn
Heidilynnl@cox.net
7 Purple Sage
Irvine
California
92603
USA
Sep 24, 2022
466
Ellen
Wheeler
fourwheels@roadrunner.com
505 Redlands Avenue
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 24, 2022
Please save our pickleball courts!!! Do NOT allow the courts to be demolished, you would be doing a huge disservice to our community.
467
Mrs.
Linda
Young
linda@eliteocproductions.com
1044 Santiago Drive
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 24, 2022
468
Mr.
Burton
Young
burton.young@sperrycga.com
104; Santiago Drive
Newport Beach
Ca
92660
Sep 24, 2022
469
William
Duffy
willduffy@gmail.com
952 TURTLE CREST
DR,
IRVINE
CA
92603
USA
Sep 24, 2022
I love TTC and use the facilities with my wife and daughter more 10-hours per week. We would have difficulty finding another pickleball option if TTC were unavailable for play. There are no other adequate
pickleball options in the area. Please save our club. It is more than just courts, it is a community.
470
Laura
Curcio
ljetjensen@gmail.com
6 Navarre
Irvine
California
92612
Sep 24, 2022
471
Mr
Matthew
Curcio
mlcurcio89@hotmail.com
6 Navarre
Irvine
Ca
92612
USA
Sep 24, 2022
472
Cathy
Husen
cathyhusen9@gmail.com
20 Encore Ct
Newport Beach
CA
92663
Sep 24, 2022
473
Mrs
Carrie
Benvenuti
cmbenvenuti@cox.net
10 Venezia
Newport coast
Ca
92657
USA
Sep 24, 2022
474
Lee Ann
McCarthy
goleeleel7@gmail.com
1128 Portola Oaks
Drive
Lake Forest
CA
92610
USA
Sep 25, 2022
475
ITony
jMcCarthy
tony@mccarthylaw.biz
1128 Portola oaks dr
ILake Forest
ICA
192610
JUSA
ISep 25, 2022
476
Mrs.
IToni
jMurTay
Itoni murray@sbcglobal.net
602 Avocado Ave.
jCorona Del Mar
ICA
192625
1
ISep 25, 2022
Powered by GoPetition
15-336
Received after Agenda Printed
September 27, 2022
Item No. 15
From: Rieff, Kim
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Save the Pickleball club - Vote No on O"Hills plan B
Date: September 26, 2022 2:00:18 PM
-----Original Message -----
From: Williams <gclhl@cox.net>
Sent: September 26, 2022 1:21 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Save the Pickleball club - Vote No on O'Hills plan B
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Dear City Council,
Please DO NOT approve Mr. O'Hill's hotel resort/tennis plan as currently proposed.
I am a Corona del Mar homeowner with family members who also own a home in the Port Streets. We've tried to
play pickleball regularly at the Bonita Canyon Sports Park but courts are very difficult to secure.
We've gotten there at the crack of dawn on cold foggy mornings in winter, only to find people playing on the courts
prior to 7 am while
others are waiting. Even a court reservation system will not solve the
problem of too many Newport Beach pickleball players in a city unprepared for the explosion of the sport.
So we joined the TTC Pickleball Club to get constant and regular access to courts. We have been promised by 50%
landowner Mr. O'Hill and operator Sean, that if the hotel/tennis resort is approved by you on
Tuesday, it will actually become a hotel/pickleball resort. If that is
not guaranteed, and I believe that it cannot be guaranteed based on Mr.
O'Hill's plan B as submitted to you, then please do not approve O'Hill's plan B.
Brett and Ryan, the other 50% co -landowners, state they will keep and update the current pickleball club. That's
exactly what we want. But that can only happen if you vote No on O'Hill's plan B.
Thank you,
The Williams family's of Harbor View and the Port Streets.
15-337
Eagle Four Partners
1400 NEWPORT CENTER DR.
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
(949)240-1020
May 23, 2022
Sean Bollettieri-Abdali
Grand Slam Tennis
11 Clubhouse Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Re: The Tennis Club Property
Dear Sean:
I appreciate you and Robert 0 Hill taking the time to meet with me recently to discuss
the proposed development projects for the Tennis Property. Newport Beach Country Club is
aligned with The Tennis Club in opposing high density apartments on the Tennis Property.
As T told Robert ® Hall and you recently, the minor amendment to the Tennis Property
entitlements for the boutique hotel use, showing 42 visitor serving Bungalows and Lofts with 3
Penthouse Condoinliniun-as and 2 Villa single family homes on leasehold land is a beautiful
project.
We are interested in learning more about the proposed minor amendment and resulting
project in the days and weeks ahead. We are also keenly interested in continuing to explore
opportunities that may arise from the development of the hotel and residential portion of the
Tennis Property.
All the best,
Rory 1 amer
CC ,tin Campbell.
Assistant Development Director
15-338
Received after Agenda Printed
September 27, 2022
Item No.15
September 23, 2022
DELIVERED VIA EMAIL ONLY. citycouncilgnewportbeachca.gov
Newport Beach City Council
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Re: September 27, 2022, City Council Agenda
Objection to Agenda Item No. 15
Project No. PA2021-260
Dear Honorable City Council Members:
We write to you today to express our objection to Agenda Item No. 15. As you may know,
we own 50% of the property at 1602 East Coast Highway ("Tennis Property"), where The Tennis
Club at Newport Beach is located. Our co-owner Golf Realty Fund, LP ("GRF") owns the other
50% of the Tennis Property; Robert O Hill represents GRF. We and GRF hold our ownership
interests in the Tennis Property as tenants in common, not as an LLC or partnership, which means
the individual owners retain significant rights.
Our families have lived in the City of Newport Beach ("City") since the 1920s, and we
own and operate a number of commercial, residential, and recreational properties throughout the
City. For example, one our families' patriarchs, Alan Fainbarg, operated one of the first beach
rental shops on Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula in the 1930s. We have the interests of the
City at heart, and as generational families with deep roots here we see it as our duty to be involved
with and to give back to this community, which we have done and continue to do, including
through our philanthropic work.
As you may know, we are engaged in an arbitration with GRF to establish rights and
obligations of the owners under our private Owners in Common Agreement' for the Tennis
Property ("OIC Agreement"). A central issue in the arbitration proceeding is whether GRF has the
authority to unilaterally apply for the plans and entitlements for the Tennis Property that are before
the City Council on September 27, 2022. It is our position that GRF does not have the authority
under the OIC Agreement to apply for the plans and entitlements without our consent. That said,
we recognize this is a private dispute between private parties, and we are not seeking to involve
the City in our private dispute. Instead, we are giving you this background information to help you
understand our objection to the proposed planning application and its approvals and entitlements,
which is further explained in the attached Arbitration Demand.
' A copy of the OIC Agreement is attached as Exhibit A to the Arbitration Demand from the pending
arbitration, and a copy of the Arbitration Demand is enclosed with this correspondence as Exhibit 1 and is
hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
15-339
Also, we attended the City's Planning Commission hearing on September 8, 2022, where
we expressed to City staff and commissioners (among other things) our long-term commitment to
pickleball at the Tennis Club. We recognize the explosion of pickleball as a sport and realize its
growing popularity in our community and the club members' desire for pickleball. In fact, we have
been working on a lease with a prominent Newport Beach business operator that would: preserve
the club, preserve the pickleball courts, preserve the tennis courts and significantly upgrade the
club's facilities. The lease would be for 10 years and can be extended for an additional 10 years
should the tenant so desire — making the total possible term 20 years. We sent this lease to Mr. O
Hill and we hope he gives it fair consideration.
We also expressed at the September 8th Planning Commission hearing our concern that
the plans and entitlements for which GRF is applying do not provide for pickleball courts or reflect
pickleball as a future use at the Tennis Club. We also understood the City staff and commissioners
to say at the September 8th hearing that not only does GRF's plans not provide for pickleball at
the Tennis Club but if GRF's project were to be approved and constructed that pickleball would
be eliminated as a use at the Tennis Club. We hope that we could all agree that elimination of
pickleball would not be good for the pickleball members nor the future of the Tennis Club.
We were likewise very concerned to hear a statement read at the September 8th Planning
Commission hearing on behalf of an apparently large contingency of club members who oppose
GRF's project but did not attend the hearing out of fear because Mr. Abdali allegedly threatened
to kick such members out of the Tennis Club if they did attend and oppose the project. We have
heard that, unlike the Planning Commission hearing and despite the alleged threats against them,
members from the Tennis Club may appear at the City Council hearing to express their
dissatisfaction with GRF's project.
Thank you for your consideration of our letter. We appreciate the service you perform for
our shared community.
Sincerely,
Brett Feuerstein
as Manager of
Mesa Shopping Center -East, LLC
and Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, LLC
R
q�w ew"
Ryan Chase
as Manager of Fainbarg III, LP
cc: Grace K. Leung, City Manager (gleung@newportbeachca.gov)
Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director (sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov)
Robert O Hill, Golf Realty Fund (roh@golfrealtyfund.com)
Enclosures: Exhibit 1: March 25, 2022, Arbitration Demand from the Pending Arbitration with
Exhibit A only; Exhibits B to H to the Arbitration Demand can be provided upon
request
15-340
Exhibit 1
15-341
MICHAEL YODER (SBN 83059)
myoder@omm.com
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
610 Newport Center Drive
17th Floor
Newport Beach, California 92660-6429
Telephone: +1 949 823 6900
Facsimile: +1 949 823 6994
JACOB C. GONZALES (SBN 235555)
igotyples@.j*cg-law.com
1cg I law
23 Corporate Plaza Drive, Suite 150
Newport Beach, California 92660-7901
Telephone: +1 949 313 8545
Attorneys for Claimants
MESA SHOPPING CENTER -EAST, LLC
MIRA MESA SHOPPING CENTER -WEST, LLC and
FAINBARG III, LP
JUDICIAL ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION SERVICES
ARBITRATION PROCEEDING — ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE
MESA SHOPPING CENTER -EAST, LLC, a
California limited liability company; MIRA
MESA SHOPPING CENTER -WEST, LLC, a
California limited liability company; and
FAINBARG III, LP, a California limited
partnership,
Claimants,
V.
GOLF REALTY FUND LP, a California
limited partnership fka O HILL PROPERTIES,
a California limited partnership,
Respondent.
JAMS Case No. 5200000090
CLAIMANTS' DEMAND FOR
ARBITRATION AND STATEMENT OF
CLAIMS FOR:
(1) DECLARATORY AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF;
(2) BREACH OF CONTRACT;
(3) BREACH OF THE COVENANT OF
GOOD FAITH AND FAIR
DEALING;
(4) ACCOUNTING; AND
(5) DECLARATORY RELIEF
Claimants Mesa Shopping Center -East, LLC, Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, LLC,
and Fainbarg III, LP (collectively "Co -Owners" or "Claimants"), hereby allege as follows:
15-342
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The parties, tenant in common owners of the approximate 7-acre Newport Beach
tennis club property commonly known as 1602 E. Coast Highway, Newport Beach, CA 92660
(the "Tennis Property"), are no strangers to arbitration. This action marks their fifth such
proceeding. In 2013, Respondent obtained an arbitration award that allowed him to complete a
few remaining discretionary entitlements, which he had been pursuing for almost 15 years, for his
so-called "master plan" to redevelop the Tennis Property. In 2020, Co -Owners obtained an
arbitration award finding they had not consented, and were not required to consent, to
Respondent's master plan to redevelop the Tennis Property. It was also established at the 2020
arbitration that Respondent had finished processing the few remaining discretionary entitlements
for his master plan. Thus, any right Respondent had under the 2013 award to process his
discretionary entitlements had run its course.
2. Co -Owners were surprised to learn in late November 2021 that Respondent was
applying for new entitlements for the Tennis Property without their knowledge or consent.
Respondent submitted new entitlement applications to the City of Newport Beach (the "City")
over Co -Owners' instructions that he did not have their consent —express or implied —to process
any more entitlements or to spend ownership funds doing so. Respondent concealed from Co -
Owners that he had submitted new applications, and when Co -Owners finally learned of the new
entitlement applications, they made multiple requests to Respondent in writing to stop and to
provide them with information about his entitlement applications. Respondent ignored Co -
Owners' requests.
3. Co -Owners also learned in December 2021 that Respondent had allowed a new
operator to start a restaurant at the Tennis Property without obtaining the Co -Owners' consent as
required under the parties' written agreement for the Property, and that Respondent had submitted
a liquor license application purportedly on behalf of the Property ownership along with that
operator without notifying Co -Owners. Co -Owners then discovered in February 2022 that alcohol
was being sold at the Tennis Property without a liquor license. Co -Owners asked Respondent in
writing for basic information about the new operator at the Tennis Property, including to be
15-343
provided any purported lease with the operator, and that Respondent stop the unlawful sale of
alcohol. Respondent ignored their request for information and Co -Owners are informed and
believe, and thereon allege, that alcohol continues to be sold at the Tennis Property without a
license.
4. Respondent is ignoring Co -Owners' rights and his duties to them by treating the
Tennis Property as though it is his to do with as he pleases. Respondent has spent significant
ownership funds while failing to respond to Co -Owners' requests for basic information and
running afoul of his limited duties as managing owner. Rather than cooperate and seek to work
toward a consensus with Co -Owners, Respondent is attempting to present them with a fait
accompli for his development project for the Tennis Property while exposing them to real liability
by placing an operator at the Property without Co -Owners' consent and allowing that operator to
unlawfully sell alcohol. Co -Owners bring this arbitration to remove Respondent as managing
owner or, alternatively, to enjoin him from further breaches of his agreement with Co -Owners.
II. THE PARTIES
5. Claimant Mesa Shopping Center -East, LLC ("Mesa East"), is a California limited
liability company with its principal place of business in the City of San Diego.
6. Claimant Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, LLC ("Mesa West"), is a California
limited liability company with its principal place of business in the City of San Diego.
7. Claimant Fainbarg III, LP ("Fainbarg III"), is a California limited partnership with
its principal place of business in the City of Costa Mesa.
8. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Respondent Golf
Realty Fund, LP ("GRF" or "Respondent"), is a California limited partnership, which is managed
by Robert O Hill, with its principal place of business in the City of Newport Beach.
III. VENUE AND JURISDICTION
9. This action stems from the Agreement Between Real Property Owners — Balboa
Bay Club Racquet Club of March 8, 1994 (the "OIC Agreement"), for the Tennis Property, the
legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit A to the OIC Agreement. Exhibit A attached
hereto is a copy of the OIC Agreement.
15-344
10. Section 26 of the OIC Agreement states: "All disputes arising under this
agreement will be resolved by submission to arbitration at the Orange County offices of Judicial
Arbitration & Mediation Services Inc. (`JAMS') for binding arbitration. The parties may agree on
a retired judge from the JAMS panel. If they are unable to agree, JAMS will provide a list of three
available judges and each party may strike one. The remaining judge will serve as the arbitrator at
the arbitration hearing.... Nothing in this paragraph shall in any way limit or otherwise restrict a
party's right or ability to obtain injunctive relief or appointment of a receiver through the Court
system."
11. Pursuant to the OIC Agreement, the claims set forth in this Arbitration Demand
are subject to arbitration before a retired judge at JAMS in the County of Orange. Co -Owners
reserve the right to obtain injunctive relief through the Court system as provided in Section 26.
IV. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
A. Tenant in Common Ownership of the Tennis Property
12. In around 1994, the parties acquired the Tennis Property. Tenant in common
ownership in the Tennis Property is apportioned as follows:
• Claimant Fainbarg III has a 25% interest,
• Claimant Mesa East has a 15% interest,
• Claimant Mesa West has a 10% interest, and
• Respondent has a 50% interest.
13. The parties also co-own (as tenants in common) the adjacent Newport Beach
Country Club located at One Clubhouse Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 (f/k/a 1600 E. Pacific
Coast Highway, Newport Beach, CA 92660) (the "Golf Property"). Pursuant to the Agreement
Between Real Property Owners — Newport Beach Country Club of September 30, 1992, the terms
of which are almost identical to the OIC Agreement, tenant in common ownership in the Golf
Property is apportioned the same as the ownership in the Tennis Property.
14. Under two essentially identical agreements, for years O Hill Properties, now
known as Golf Realty Fund, both controlled by Robert O Hill (hereinafter referred to as "O
Hill"), acted as the managing owner, under limited powers, for the tenant in common owners of
15-345
the Tennis and Golf Properties. As both Properties were under long-term triple net leases to
tenants, the fundamental job of O Hill was to collect rents, pay the minimal expenses associated
with overseeing the Properties, and then pay distributions to all the tenant in common owners.
15. The OIC Agreement provides the managing owner with only limited authority
over the Tennis Property, as most decisions are reserved to the tenant in common owners or
require at least a majority vote. For example, before O Hill (as the managing owner) could make a
material expenditure for a capital improvement at the Tennis Property he must first obtain the
written consent of at least one of the Co -Owners. See OIC Agreement § 7(d). Similarly, any
conveyance of an interest in the Tennis Property, including a leasehold interest, must be in a
writing signed by all the owners. Id. § 3. Aside from the limited powers given to the managing
owner to collect rents and pay ordinary expenses, the OIC Agreement expressly provides that
each tenant in common owner retains the right to deal with his interest in the Tennis Property as
such owner sees fit. Id. § 1.
B. History of Problems with O Hill's Management
1. Past Problems with Tennis Property
16. Early on, in the 1990s, O Hill explored ways to redevelop the Tennis Property. He
sought to rezone the Tennis Property from open space recreational to a mixed use, which would
allow commercial and residential development. Co -Owners were supportive of O Hill's initial
efforts to obtain an upzoning of the Tennis Property from open space to mixed use and had no
objection to his use of limited ownership funds for that purpose. O Hill developed several ideas
for possible site plans but spent relatively modest amounts of ownership funds doing so.
17. In around 2007, however, O Hill started spending considerable amounts of
ownership funds, prompting Co -Owners to begin asking questions and requesting information to
better understand both what O Hill planned, and the underlying economics of a possible Tennis
Property redevelopment. O Hill only reluctantly turned over information for his development plan
for the Tennis Property, which O Hill referred to as his "Master Plan," which involved obtaining
discretionary entitlements for the Tennis Property for the following three specific uses: 5 single
family residential units (referred to as the villas), 7 tennis courts with a new tennis clubhouse/spa
15-346
building, and a hotel with 27 rooms (referred to as the bungalows).
18. Within a year or so of initiating their fact-finding process, it became apparent to
Co -Owners that O Hill's proposed Master Plan did not maximize the Tennis Property's value for
all the tenant in common owners, or that O Hill at least had not provided Co -Owners with
meaningful information to support his proposed Master Plan's economics. It was also apparent
that O Hill's Master Plan was really about his personal interests in developing the Tennis
Property even though those interests were not shared by Co -Owners, and he was pursuing those
interests at Co -Owners' expense. On February 20, 2008, Co -Owners asked O Hill in writing to
stop — formally objecting to his further processing discretionary entitlements for his Master Plan.
Rather than stop, O Hill ramped up his spending of ownership funds on his discretionary
entitlements for his proposed Master Plan.
2. 2011-13 Arbitration with Judge Fromholz
19. In April 2011, the Co -Owners commenced a JAMS arbitration proceeding with
Hon. Judge Hayley Fromholz (Ret.) to enjoin O Hill from further processing his discretionary
entitlements for his Master Plan. Judge Fromholz issued his decision in May 2013. Exhibit B
attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Judge Fromholz' May 17, 2013, Final Award.
20. Judge Fromholz found the OIC Agreement did not expressly give O Hill (as
managing owner) expansive powers, and that the Agreement was ambiguous in that it neither
clearly authorized nor restricted O Hill from pursuing the discretionary entitlements for his
Master Plan: "The Agreements do not expressly give the Managing Owner expansive powers. For
example, Recital C of the Agreements states merely that the `Owners ... believe it necessary and
appropriate to have one Owner be the managing Owner for purposes of accounting and
administration." (Fromholz Award at 8, underline added.)
21. In addition to finding the OIC Agreement was ambiguous, Judge Fromholz
concluded that Co -Owners had sat on the sidelines and waited too long to protest the few
remaining discretionary entitlements O Hill was processing for his Master Plan. Judge Fromholz
found that O Hill could finish the limited work left to complete the discretionary entitlements for
his Master Plan since he had purportedly been pursuing them for almost 15 years and very little
15-347
remained for O Hill to do (hereinafter, "2012 Discretionary Entitlements"): "At the time that
[Co -Owners] voiced their objection in February 2008, O Hill had been actively_ pursuing the
discretionary entitlements for nearly fifteen years. Voters approved the general amendment and
the only remaining [discretionary] entitlements were the development standards such as height
limits, landscaping, vehicle access, and parking. Thus, very little remained to complete the NBCC
Plan." (Id. at 9, underline added.)
22. Judge Fromholz found that, as of May 2013, the only items that remained for O
Hill to complete his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements were ministerial development standards:
"Currently, the development standards for the NBCC Land such as height limits, landscaping,
vehicle access, and parking, are still undetermined. The development standards are the final
discretionary entitlements for the NBCC Land. Proceedings are continuing to be held before the
City to determine the development standards." (Id. at 4, underline added.)
3. 2015-16 Arbitration with Justice Sonenshine
23. Following the conclusion of the parties' arbitration with Judge Fromholz, and for
almost two years, Co -Owners made multiple written requests to O Hill asking to be provided
meaningful information about his 2012 Entitlements and Master Plan. O Hill ignored Co -Owners'
requests. Thus, in April 2015, Co -Owners initiated another arbitration against O Hill, this time
with the Hon. Justice Sheila Prell Sonenshine (Ret.), to obtain an order allowing them to access
information concerning the work -product resulting from the hundreds of thousands of dollars of
ownership funds spent by O Hill on his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements and Master Plan, and to
enforce their contractual right to have an audit performed concerning those expenditures.
24. In August 2016, Co -Owners prevailed in the parties' arbitration with Justice
Sonenshine and obtained the audit they were seeking, information concerning O Hill's
expenditure of ownership funds on his Master Plan and O Hill's stipulation to provide annual
written status and financial reports as required under section 7 of the OIC Agreement. Justice
Sonenshine also awarded Co -Owners their attorneys' fees and costs as the prevailing parties.
4. 2017-20 Arbitration with Justice King
25. In 2017, O Hill sued Co -Owners seeking to force them to go along with the
15-348
development of his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements and Master Plan — i.e., the construction of a
27-room hotel, 5 villa residences, and a new tennis clubhouse and 7 courts. In March and May
2019, an evidentiary hearing was held with the Hon. Justice Jeffrey King (Ret.) at JAMS, and on
April 8, 2020, Justice King issued his Final Award. Exhibit C attached hereto is a true and
correct copy of Justice King's April 8, 2020 Final Award, which was confirmed and entered as a
Judgment on March 26, 2021, in Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2020-01159790-
CU-PA-CJC.
26. By his Final Award, Justice King denied all of O Hill's claims against the Co -
Owners and found in favor of the Co -Owners on all of their cross -claims against O Hill,
determining, among other things, that:
• Co -owners had not already consented, were not estopped from withholding
their consent, and had no duty to consent, under the OIC Agreement (or
otherwise) to the sale, lease or improvement of the Tennis Property as part of
O Hill's 2012 Discretionary Entitlements and Master Plan.
• Under the OIC Agreement each owner has the unfettered right to refuse for any
reason to sell its interest the Tennis Property or any portion thereof.
• Relative to the leasing of the Tennis Property or portions thereof, no owner
may refuse to lease the Tennis Property or portions thereof for an objectively
unreasonable reason.
• The Co -owners' refusal to consent to the sale or lease of, or construction of
improvements on, the Tennis Property as part of O Hill's 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements and Master Plan was not objectively unreasonable.
(Justice King Final Award at 32-33.)
27. Also, O Hill acknowledged in the arbitration with Justice King that as of
November 2018, he had completed his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements (which, in 2013, Judge
Fromholz said he could finish processing since very little remained to complete them). Indeed,
Justice King made it a point to say in his Final Award that O Hill had finally completed his 2012
Discretionary Entitlements:
15-349
Judge Fromholz states at page 4 of his decision, "[c]urrently, the
development standards for the NBCC Land such as height limits,
landscaping, vehicle access and parking are still undetermined. The
development standards are the final discretionary entitlements for the
NBCC Land. Proceedings are continuing to be held before the City to
determine the development standards." To a reader it somewhat leaves the
impression that he believed the process of entitlements was near
completion. Entitlements were not completed until about five and one-half
years later.
(King Final Award at 5, fn. 3, emphasis added.)
The master plan has three elements: there are 27 bungalows, 5 villas and
the tennis club/spa. The tennis/spa building is an amenity for the
bungalows and villas. The entity. By November 2018 he had: the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community text, a zone change, site plan
approval, state Water Quality Control Board approval, grading plan, storm
drain plan, dry utility plans and street improvement plans, through plan
check. They had all the entitlement approvals necessga to do the "bake -
off.
(Id. at 10, underline added.)
28. Thus, any right O Hill had to process his few remaining 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements under Judge Fromholz' award had run its course as of November 2018.
C. Ongoing Issues with O Hill's Management
1. In November 2021, Co -Owners Learned O Hill Was Applying for and
Processing New Entitlements for the Tennis Property with the City
29. Co -Owners prevailed in the 2015-16 arbitration with Justice Sonenshine because
O Hill was spending significant ownership funds on his Master Plan while refusing to provide
Co -Owners with information about such expenditures. Co -Owners prevailed in the 2017-2020
15-350
arbitration with Justice King because, after O Hill had finally completed his 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements, it was determined that under the OIC Agreement O Hill could not compel Co -
Owners to go along with the development of the Tennis Property as part of O Hill's Master Plan,
and Co -Owners were not estopped from, nor being unreasonable, in withholding their consent to
O Hill's Master Plan.
30. After Justice King issued his Final Award, Co -Owners sent O Hill a series of
letters on November 13, 2019, June 9, 2020 and July 28, 2020, putting him on notice that any
right he had to process his few remaining 2012 Discretionary Entitlements under Judge
Fromholz' 2013 award (since O Hill had completed them) had run its course and that award did
not support O Hill processing new entitlements for the Tennis Property, that he did not have Co -
Owners' consent to seek new entitlements and that he was not to spend ownership funds doing so.
31. Yet, in November 2021, Co -Owners discovered that O Hill, without their
knowledge or consent and over their objections, was seeking City approval for a new project he
had devised without Co -Owners' input, which, Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon
allege, would significantly change his Master Plan by, without limitation, increasing the number
of hotel rooms from 27 to 41 (hereinafter the "2021 Project").
32. Co -Owners are further informed and believe, and thereon allege, that for his 2021
Project, O Hill is applying for and processing, or that he intends to apply for and process, with the
City, the following new entitlements for the Tennis Property: General plan amendment, PC text
amendment, development agreement amendment, amendment to tract map, major site
development review amendment, limited term permit amendment, coastal development permit
amendment, traffic study and compliance with CEQA (hereinafter "New 2021 Entitlements").
Exhibit D attached hereto are copies of O Hill's Community Development Planning Permit
Application that Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, O Hill submitted to the
City in November 2021 and the NBCC Tennis Property Entitlement Amendment & Project
Description that Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, O Hill submitted to the
City in February 2022.
33. On November 23, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter expressing surprise that he
15-351
was processing his New 2021 Entitlements and reminding O Hill that he did not have their
consent to process any more entitlements for the Tennis Property and was not to spend ownership
funds doing so. Co -Owners asked O Hill in writing to stop, and to provide them with copies of
the submittals he made to the City for his 2021 Project and his New 2021 Entitlements as well as
for meaningful economic data he believed supported his 2021 Project. O Hill ignored Co -
Owners' requests.
34. On December 6, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill another letter again asking to be
provided the information requested in their November 23 letter regarding his 2021 Project and his
New 2021 Entitlements, and that he stop processing his New Entitlements. O Hill again ignored
Co -Owners' requests.
35. On January 21, 2022, Co -Owners again sent O Hill a letter asking that he provide
them with copies of his submissions to the City for his 2021 Project and New 2021 Entitlements,
and that he stop processing his New Entitlements. O Hill once more ignored Co -Owners'
requests.
36. O Hill has refused to comply with Co -Owners' requests that he provide them with
copies of his submittals to the City regarding his 2021 Project and his New 2021 Entitlements,
and that he stop processing his New Entitlements, and it is clear that O Hill will only comply if
ordered to do so and enjoined from taking further action in connection with his New 2021
Entitlements and from spending ownership funds on them.
2. In December 2021, Co -Owners Learned O Hill Is Processing a Liquor
License for a Tenant at the Tennis Property He Never Disclosed
37. In October 2014, Grand Slam Tennis and its manager Sean Abdali (hereinafter
collectively "Abdali"), started operating the tennis club at the Tennis Property without a written
lease, apparently based upon a purported oral month -to -month agreement with O Hill calling for a
$7,000 monthly license fee. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, the purported
month -to -month arrangement with Abdali continues today, and the fee/rent Abdali is paying is well
below market.
38. When Co -Owners learned Abdali was operating the tennis club, they asked O Hill
15-352
to get a basic written lease in place with Abdali that would provide for the monthly rent to be paid,
length of the term, and Abdali's obligation to pay the property taxes and maintain liability insurance
covering all the owners. In response to Co -Owners' request for a basic written lease with Abdali,
O Hill apparently purported to promise Abdali, without Co -Owners' knowledge or consent, that he
could operate the tennis club for 25 years.
39. At the arbitration with Justice King, O Hill testified that he intentionally did not
involve Co -Owners when making purported promises to Abdali regarding the tennis club, nor did
O Hill seek Co -Owners' approval before making such purported promises. Abdali testified Co -
Owners never made any promises to him, and that he knew he needed Co -Owners to sign (as
owners) any lease for the tennis club.
40. As part of the arbitration with Justice King, O Hill sought a declaration that Co -
Owners had to sign a 22-year proposed lease with Abdali that O Hill had prepared and given to
Abdali without Co -Owners' knowledge or consent. Yet, O Hill also testified at the arbitration that
"[u]nder the [OIC] agreement each owner must consent to any grant of a leasehold interest" and
that "a majority [of owners] must agree as it relates to a lease." (King Final Award at 11.) O Hill's
testimony is consistent with section 3 of the OIC Agreement, stating: "The Owners acknowledge
and agree that ... any leasehold interest [in the Tennis Property] ... may be granted, conveyed or so
encumbered by the execution of the applicable instrument by each Owner." (Underline added.)
41. Justice King denied O Hill's claim, and agreed with Co -Owners, finding that Co -
Owners had acted reasonably in declining to sign the proposed lease O Hill negotiated with Abdali.
(King Final Award at 25-26.)
42. After Justice King issued his Final Award, Co -Owners sent O Hill letters on June 9,
2020, and July 28, 2020, again asking that he get a basic written lease in place for the tennis club
setting forth the tennis club operator's obligations to pay rent, taxes and insurance, and with a
reasonable lease term in the range of one to three years. O Hill ignored Co -Owners' requests.
43. In late November 2021, Co -Owners learned from reviewing the tennis club
website (https://thetennisclubnb.com) that the club had 31 new pickleball courts. Apparently,
several of the tennis courts at the club had been converted to pickleball courts, but O Hill bad not
15-353
informed Co -Owners about the new pickleball courts. Thus, on November 23, 2021, Co -Owners
once again sent O Hill a letter asking (1) for an update on the status of a basic, straightforward
written lease with Abdali, and (2) for an accounting of the tennis club's operations so they could
understand how the 31 new pickleball courts at the club were impacting its membership and
revenues. O Hill ignored Co -Owners' requests.
44. On or about December 8, 2021, Co -Owners learned that without their knowledge
or consent, a liquor license application was being processed for the Tennis Property with the City,
and that the applicant for the liquor license was Clubhouse ATP, LLCan entity Co -Owners had
not heard of —and the application had been executed by O Hill on behalf of the Tennis Property
ownership. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Exhibit E attached
hereto is a copy of an application for a liquor license at the Tennis Property submitted by O Hill
and Clubhouse ATP to the City on or about August 8, 2021.
45. Co -Owners also learned that Clubhouse ATP was, concurrent with its application
with the City, also applying for a liquor license with the California Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control ("ABC"). Exhibit F attached hereto is a copy of an ABC website printout of
December 9, 2021, showing Clubhouse ATP's pending application for a liquor license.
46. On December 10, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter expressing surprise that
Clubhouse ATP (an entity about which he had not informed them) and O Hill were seeking a
liquor license for the Tennis Property. Co -Owners were concerned about, among other things,
potential exposure and liability as property owners should alcohol be sold at the Tennis Property.
Co -Owners asked O Hill to halt the liquor license application until they could understand what
protections against liability and exposure would be in place, including insurance, along with
asking O Hill to provide them with copies of the submittals made to the City and ABC as part of
the use permit and liquor license applications as well as any purported lease agreement made with
Clubhouse ATP for the Tennis Property. O Hill ignored Co -Owners' requests.
47. On December 16, 2021, the City Zoning Administrator approved O Hill's and
Clubhouse ATP's use permit application for a liquor license at the Tennis Property. In response to
the Co -Owners' objections, including that O Hill did not have the authority to sign the use permit
15-354
application on behalf of the ownership, the Zoning Administrator informed Co -Owners that it
viewed their objections as pertaining to matters between the Tennis Property's owners in which
the City did not want to get involved. The City also told Co -Owners they should take whatever
action they believed appropriate to stop O Hill from proceeding with the use permit application.
Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that as a condition for the Zoning
Administrator agreeing to approve the use permit application, the City required O Hill to sign an
agreement to indemnify and defend the City against any legal challenges to the use permit.
48. On January 3, 2022, Co -Owners filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's
approval of the use permit for a liquor license, and informed the City of their intent to commence
this arbitration seeking, among other things, a legal determination and declaration that O Hill did
not, and does not, have the authority to sign and submit the use permit application for a liquor
license on behalf of the Tennis Property ownership, and before he could do so he was required to
get the Co -Owners' consent (which he did not have). Pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code
(NBMC) section 20.64.030-B. La., a use permit approval by the City Zoning Administrator that is
appealed has no force or effect as of the day the appeal is filed.
49. At the time of the submission of this Arbitration Demand to JAMS, Co -Owners'
appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval of the use permit had not yet been heard by the
City's Planning Commission.
50. Because O Hill refused to respond to —let alone acknowledge —Co -Owners'
requests for information about Clubhouse ATP, including their requests for copies of the submittals
to the City and ABC for the use permit and liquor license O Hill and Clubhouse ATP were seeking
along with any purported lease agreement with Clubhouse ATP, Co -Owners submitted a public
records request to the City for documents relating to the use permit. In January 2022, the City
produced responsive documents, including correspondence involving O Hill, that made it apparent
that O Hill had purported to convey a leasehold interest in the tennis property to Clubhouse ATP,
or he allowed Abdali to do so, without Co -Owners' knowledge or written consent as required under
section 3 of the OIC Agreement. For example, the City produced the following:
(a) November 10, 2021, email from Patrick Rolfes of Clubhouse ATP to Liz
15-355
Westmoreland at the City regarding the use permit, stating: "We subleased
the space on July 7, 2021 and we are hopeful we can get through this process
so we can start doing business."
(b) November 18, 2021, email from Liz Westmoreland at the City to O Hill
stating that if the City grants the use permit and the ABC issues the liquor
license to Clubhouse ATP that "it will be on the applicant [i.e., Clubhouse
ATP] to comply with his private agreements including lease terms, etc." O
Hill responded on November 19, 2021, saying: "Understood."
51. Co -Owners are also informed and believe, and thereon allege, that as part of the
application for a liquor license at the Tennis Property that a written agreement was submitted to the
ABC purporting to show Clubhouse ATP had a right to tenancy at the Tennis Property. Again, any
such agreement purporting to convey a leasehold interest to Clubhouse ATP was made without Co -
Owners' knowledge or consent and in violation of their rights under the OIC Agreement.
3. In February 2022, Co -Owners Learned O Hill Was Allowing Alcohol to
Be Sold at the Tennis Property Without a License
52. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act requires an establishment to be licensed before
it can sell alcohol and any person violating the statute is guilty of a misdemeanor. Cal. Bus. Prof.
Code §§ 23300, 23301.
53. In February 2022, Co -Owners were surprised to learn alcohol was being sold at the
Tennis Property without a liquor license apparently at a restaurant called the Clubhouse Grill being
operated by Clubhouse ATP. O Hill had failed to inform Co -Owners a restaurant was open and
operating at the Tennis Property, let alone selling alcohol without a license.
15-356
54. Below are pictures of alcohol being sold at the Clubhouse Grill on February 8,
2022:
f
f
Picture of the cooler at Clubhouse Grill on Tuesday, February 8, 2022, stocked with beer,
martini glasses, and beer taps.
4
r
Picture of Indian Pale Ale (IPA) draft
beer purchased on tap at Clubhouse
Grill on Tuesday, February 8, 2022.
15-357
Thank you for your order. Below is a receipt for your recent visit to ClubHouse Grill_
trouble viewing this email'
Picture of receipt from
Clubhouse Grill showing
IPA draft beer purchased on
Tuesday, February 8, 2022,
for $7.00.
ClubHouse Grill
11 Clubhouse Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Server:
Check
Gues ount='
Ord a red: 2JB/22 -
How was your visit?
1 IPA
$7.00
55. Below are pictures of alcohol being sold at the Clubhouse Grill on Sunday,
February 13, 2022:
15-358
k'-L mus
, TUBE
5 E A c
Thank you for your order_ Below is a receipt for your recent visit to Clu bHouse Gril I
trouble viewing this email'
Picture of receipt from
Clubhouse Grill showing
Bloody Mary with Titos Vodka
purchased on Sunday, February
13, 2022, for $12.00.
J ClubHouse Gril I
11 Clubhou&e Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
SZer.
Check
Guest aunt'
Ordered: 2113122-
How Was your visit?
1 Tib= $17-00
56. Below are pictures of alcohol being sold at the Clubhouse Grill on Sunday,
February 20, 2022:
15-360
Picture of receipt from
Clubhouse Grill showing a
mixed drink with Titos Vodka
purchased on Sunday,
February 20, 2022 for $12.00.
•' Rio IJ ` w
4
NEWPORT OGACH
CTubHause Grill
11 Clubhouse Drive
Newport Beach, CA 928BO
Server; -
ck
Guest
Guest Count;
0rdefed:
1 Titas
2J2D122 -
$12.00
15061
57. On February 22, 2022, Co -Owners sent O Hill (as managing owner) a letter asking
that he take whatever action necessary to cause anyone unlawfully selling alcohol at the Tennis
Property —including Clubhouse ATP and Abdalito immediately cease and desist doing so. Co -
Owners expressed to O Hill that in addition to exposing them to substantial financial liability by
allowing alcohol to be sold at the Tennis Property, selling alcohol without a license was a crime.
58. On March 3, 2022, O Hill responded to Co -Owners' February 22, 2022, letter. He
did not agree to stop the unlawful sale of alcohol at the Tennis Property nor deny it was taking
place. Rather, O Hill somewhat bewilderingly stated that alcohol had been served at the Tennis
Property "at tournaments and special events with a special catering permit for over 50 years" and
that a "special permit" had been obtained by the Orange County Youth Sports Foundation for a
January 29, 2022, event at the Tennis Property.
59. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that even after O Hill
received Co -Owners' February 22, 2022, cease and desist letter, alcohol continues to be sold at the
Tennis Property without a liquor license and, thus, unlawfully.
4. In January 2022, O Hill Recommenced His Efforts to Interfere with Co -
Owners' Exploration of a Tennis Property Redevelopment Opportunity
60. In the past, when Co -Owners have tried to explore redevelopment opportunities for
the Tennis Property, O Hill has taken the position that his Master Plan is the only project that could
get approved and any alternative opportunities were unworkable and not worth considering. O
Hill's modus operandi is to hijack the process by not only refusing to cooperate in exploring
redevelopment alternatives to his Master Plan but to block their fair consideration by attempting to
manufacture community opposition to any such alternative project.
61. For example, in 2012 and unbeknownst to Co -Owners, O Hill hired the Chatten
Brown law firm to file a lawsuit against the City in the name of the no -growth group "Friends of
Good Planning", seeking to enjoin the City from processing the adjacent Golf Property tenant's
plan to construct a new $40 million clubhouse because it was at odds with O Hill's Master Plan and
despite the fact that the Golf Property lease plainly gave that right to the tenant. In March 2012, O
Hill attended a City Council meeting and represented that he was in no way supporting or
15-362
sponsoring the Friends of Good Planning lawsuit. In March 2017, Chatten Brown sued O Hill
personally for unpaid legal fees it had incurred at his direction for the Friends of Good Planning
lawsuit in 2012. In June 2017, O Hill paid Chatten Brown $15,000 using Tennis Property ownership
funds to settle that lawsuit — without informing Co -Owners.
62. In 2019, upon learning that Co -Owners were trying to obtain a redevelopment
proposal for the Tennis Property from the ownership group operating the adjacent Golf Property,
O Hill and Abdali (the tennis club operator) launched the website savethetennisclub.org seeking to
spread misinformation about the potential redevelopment project and circulating a petition
opposing it. Their website called out the Co -Owners' principals by name, Elliot Feuerstein and Iry
Chase, claiming they "want to upend the General Plan approved by the voters of Newport Beach
and eliminate the Tennis Club and the promised enhancements all together."
63. Thus, on January 5, 2021, when Co -Owners learned the City was updating its
Housing Element to address the state mandate for more housing and was accepting proposals for
projects that may help meet the housing need, and that Ryan Co. (an established developer) was
interested in entering into a long-term ground lease for the Tennis Property and constructing a
multifamily redevelopment project there that could pay the owners millions in rent each year, Co -
Owners sent O Hill a letter asking that he have an open mind, and to not interfere, as they attempted
to meaningfully explore a lease proposal with Ryan Co.
64. On January 19, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a copy of a letter they informed him
they intended to send to the City letting it know they were in discussion with a few developers
interested in redeveloping the Tennis Property and these projects would seem to be good candidates
for participation in the City's Housing Element Update, and Co -Owners hoped to share details
about the projects with the City soon and to start exploratory discussions. O Hill did not object to
Co -Owners sending their letter to the City.
65. On December 6, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter letting him know they had
negotiated and were in the process of drafting a proposed lease with Ryan Co. and expected to be
able to share that lease with him for discussion within 30-60 days. Co -Owners also restated their
request to O Hill that he not interfere with their efforts to secure a lease proposal from Ryan Co.
15-363
66. On or about January 13, 2022, Co -Owners learned that a petition was being
circulated at the tennis club and to its members to drum -up opposition to a Ryan Co. project at the
Tennis Property. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that petition was
generated by the current tennis club operator Abdali and O Hill, or at least with O Hill's knowledge.
Exhibit G attached hereto is a copy of the Petition to Stop the Massive Development Proposed to
Replace the Tennis Club at Newport Beach.
67. Co -Owners also learned of a new website—savethetennisclub.com/tennis-club/
further seeking to solicit opposition to Ryan Co. which Co -Owners are informed and believe, and
thereon allege, was generated by Abdali and O Hill, or with O Hill's knowledge. Exhibit H attached
hereto is a copy of the savethetennisclub.com/tennis-club/ webpage. This is the same type of
interference O Hill and Abdali engaged in 2019 when they created the website savethetenniclub.org
upon learning of Co -Owners' efforts to solicit a proposal for a long-term ground lease for the Tennis
Property from the operators of the adjacent Golf Property.
68. On January 21, 2022, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter stating that the petition being
circulated at the tennis club and the savethetennisclub.com website opposing Co -Owners' efforts
regarding Ryan Co., which at that point merely consisted of obtaining a proposal, were acts of
interference that needed to stop, and if it was shown that O Hill was involved as Co -Owners
suspected that his conduct constituted a breach of his fiduciary duties and raised questions about
his suitability to act as managing owner. Co -Owners asked that O Hill stop his efforts to incite
opposition to a potential Ryan Co. project and that he instruct Abdali in writing to do the same.
69. On January 28, 2022, O Hill responded claiming to have no knowledge of the
savethetennisclub.com website, but also saying he would not instruct Abdali to stop with his efforts
to drum -up opposition to a potential Ryan Co. project, while taking an "I told you so" position and
saying he was not surprised activists were mobilizing to oppose the project — at the same time
conceding he had discussed the Ryan Co. project with those activists. O Hill's behavior once more
shows the lengths he will go to prevent any consideration of alternatives to his Master Plan.
15-364
IV. CO -OWNERS' ARBITRATION CLAIMS AGAINST O HILL
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Declaratory and Injunctive Relief)
70. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 69, above.
71. Despite Co -Owners' November 23, 2021, December 6, 2021, and January 21, 2022,
letters asking O Hill to confirm in writing he had stopped processing his New 2021 Entitlements,
and Co -Owners' December 10, 2021, letter to O Hill asking that he stop processing the use permit
for a liquor license at the Tennis Property, O Hill has failed to acknowledge the requests in Co -
Owners' letters and continues to process such applications. As such, Co -Owners bring this
arbitration to seek a legal determination and declaration that O Hill does not, and did not, have the
authority to process his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license.
72. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -Owners and O Hill
concerning their respective rights and obligations under the OIC Agreement. Co -Owners contend
that in November 2018 O Hill finished processing his few remaining 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements, and, thus, any right he had to process his Discretionary Entitlements ran its course
and O Hill cannot continue to spend ownership money further entitling his already fully entitled
Master Plan — especially since he cannot compel Co -Owners to consent to his Master Plan as
Justice King determined, and that he was required to disclose any new entitlements or
development plan to Co -Owners (and to continue to provide them with meaningful information
regarding the same) and to obtain their consent before he could spend ownership funds and
process his New 2021 Entitlements and the use permit for a liquor license at the Tennis Property,
and that he does not have the Co -Owners' consent to seek them.
73. An additional actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -Owners
and O Hill under the OIC Agreement, in that Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon
allege, that O Hill is purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property, or is
allowing Abdali to do so with O Hill's knowledge, including to Clubhouse ATP, without Co -
Owners' knowledge or written consent as required under section 3 of the OIC Agreement.
15-365
74. Further, after Co -Owners sent O Hill their February 22, 2022 cease and desist
letter to stop the unlawful sale of alcohol at the Tennis Property, Co -Owners are informed and
believe, and thereon allege, that alcohol continues to be sold at the Tennis Property without a
liquor license. Thus, an additional actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -
Owners and O Hill, and Co -Owners also seek a legal determination and declaration that O Hill
must take any and all action necessary to cause anyone unlawfully selling alcohol at the Tennis
Property to immediately cease and desist doing so.
75. Because of the urgency and importance of the issues presented by the parties'
dispute, it is necessary and appropriate for the Arbitrator to resolve this dispute by issuing a
declaration determining the respective rights and obligations of the parties with respect to the OIC
Agreement.
76. Co -Owners have no adequate remedy at law and will suffer irreparable damage
unless O Hill is enjoined from further taking the action identified herein. Co -Owners therefore
seek a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction restraining O
Hill, and agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further action in
connection with the conduct identified herein.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Breach of the OIC Agreement)
77. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 76, above.
78. Recital C of the OIC Agreement states that O Hill's limited purpose as managing
owner concerns accounting and administration duties, and section 7—specifying O Hill's limited
authority under the OIC Agreement as managing owner —does not authorize O Hill to process
entitlements for the Tennis Property. O Hill breached the OIC Agreement by processing, and
spending ownership funds processing, his New 2021 Entitlements and the use permit for the
liquor license without Co -Owners' knowledge or consent. Co -Owners learned about O Hill
processing his New Entitlements and use permit with the City in November and December 2021,
and despite Co -Owners' express written objections, and in breach of the OIC Agreement, O Hill
15-366
has persisted in processing them.
79. Section 3 of the OIC Agreement states that any conveyance of a leasehold interest
in the Tennis Property must be in a writing signed by all the owners. Id. § 3. Co -Owners are also
informed and believe, and thereon allege, that, in breach of section 3 of the OIC Agreement, O
Hill has purported to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property without Co -Owners'
knowledge or consent, including to Clubhouse ATP.
80. Section 7 of the OIC Agreement sets forth the duties of the managing owner, and
section 7(e) provides that the managing owner is paid "an asset management fee" for performing
those duties. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that O Hill breached
section 7 of the OIC Agreement by allowing alcohol to be sold at the Tennis Property without a
liquor license and, thus, unlawfully and/or is being grossly negligent in performing his duties as
managing owner by not preventing the unlawful sale of alcohol there.
81. Co -Owners have performed their obligations under the OIC Agreement except
those which they have been excused or prevented from performing.
82. As a direct and proximate result of O Hill's breaches of the OIC Agreement, Co -
Owners have suffered, and will continue to suffer, direct and foreseeable damages, including but
not limited to, O Hill's improper and unauthorized expenditure of material sums of ownership
money, in an amount to be determined at the arbitration hearing.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing)
83. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 82, above.
84. The OIC Agreement is subject to an implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing that all parties would act in good faith and with reasonable efforts to perform their
contractual duties —both explicit and fairly implied —and not to impair the rights of other parties
to receive the rights, benefits, and reasonable expectations under the Agreement.
85. O Hill breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by:
(a) processing his New 2021 Entitlements and use permit with the City and
15-367
spending ownership funds doing so without Co -Owners' consent;
(b) purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property —or
allowing Abdali to do so with his knowledge, including to Clubhouse
ATPwithout Co -Owners' consent;
(c) interfering with Co -Owners' efforts to obtain a lease proposal from Ryan
Co.; and
(d) allowing alcohol to be sold at the Tennis Property without a liquor license.
86. Co -Owners have performed their obligations under the OIC Agreement except
those which they have been excused or prevented from performing.
87. O Hill's failure to act in good faith has denied Co -Owners the full benefit of their
bargain under the OIC Agreement.
88. As a result of O Hill's breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, Co -
Owners have suffered, and will continue to suffer, direct and foreseeable damages, in an amount
to be determined at the arbitration hearing.
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Accounting)
89. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 88, above.
90. Co -Owners are unaware of the exact amount of ownership funds spent by O Hill
on his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license at the Tennis Property. The
information necessary to ascertain those amounts is strictly within O Hill's control. Accordingly,
Co -Owners seeks a forensic accounting of those amounts.
91. Co -Owners are unaware of the financial impact the new pickleball courts (see
paragraph 41 above) have had on the tennis club's operation, and whether Clubhouse ATP or any
other purported tenant is paying to, or sharing with, O Hill any income being generated by or at
the tennis club other than the monthly rent O Hill reflects on the distribution summaries he
provides to Co -Owners. The information necessary to ascertain those amounts is strictly within O
Hill's control. Accordingly, Co -Owners seek a forensic accounting of those amounts and the
15-368
tennis club's operations.
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Declaratory Relief)
92. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 91, above.
93. Section 7(b) of the OIC Agreement provides that the owners of a majority of
ownership interests in the Tennis Property not owned by the managing owner may elect to
remove the managing owner for "cause" and appoint a new managing owner. Section 7(b) defines
"cause" as "fraud, gross negligence or material default of a material obligation by Managing
Owner."
94. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -Owners and O Hill
concerning their respective rights and obligations under the OIC Agreement. Co -Owners are
informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that cause exists, including based on O Hill's
conduct alleged herein, to remove him as managing owner under the OIC Agreement.
95. Co -Owners have no adequate remedy at law and will suffer irreparable damage
unless O Hill is enjoined from taking any further action purportedly on the basis that he is the
managing owner. Co -Owners therefore seek a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction
and permanent injunction restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and
assigns, from taking any further action as the managing owner (including prohibiting him from
spending Tennis Property funds, submitting entitlement applications purportedly on behalf of the
Tennis Property owners, or purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property), and
that O Hill and any other person or entity (including NBCC Land or NBCC L&I) with
possession, custody or control of property of, or records relating to, the Tennis Property
(including any bank account(s) and/or books and records), shall by personal service or otherwise
fully cooperate with and assist the succeeding managing owner in taking and maintaining
possession, custody, or control of such property and records and immediately transfer or deliver
them to the succeeding managing owner.
15-369
WHEREFORE, Co -Owners pray for an Arbitrator's Award on their claims as follows:
ON THE FIRST CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1. For a determination and declaration that O Hill was required to disclose to and
obtain Co -Owners' consent before he could spend ownership funds on and process his New 2021
Entitlements and the use permit for a liquor license, and that he does not have the Co -Owners'
consent to seek his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license and he must halt
their processing and withdraw them from the City.
2. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further
action processing his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license, or spending
ownership funds thereon, without first obtaining the consent of one or more of the Co -Owners.
3. For a determination and declaration that, under section 3 of the OIC Agreement, O
Hill was required to disclose to Co -Owners and obtain their written consent prior to purporting to
convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property, including to Clubhouse ATP.
4. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further
action purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property, including to Clubhouse
ATP.
5. For a determination and declaration that O Hill must take any and all action
necessary to cause anyone unlawfully selling alcohol at the Tennis Property to immediately cease
and desist doing so.
6. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, and any alleged tenant
or licensee to whom O Hill has purported to convey a tenancy or other right to occupy or operate
at the Tennis Property, from engaging in the unlawful sale of alcohol at the Tennis Property
without a liquor license.
15-370
ON THE SECOND AND THIRD CLAIMS FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT AND
BREACH OF THE IMPLIED COVENANT
7. For damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
ON THE FOURTH CLAIM FOR AN ACCOUNTING
8. For a forensic accounting (1) of the exact amount of ownership funds spent by O
Hill on the 2021 Project, 2021 New Entitlements and the use permit for a liquor license at the
Tennis Property, and (2) of the tennis club's operations and revenues.
ON THE FIFTH CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF
9. For a determination and declaration that cause exists under the OIC Agreement to
remove O Hill as managing owner.
10. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further
action purportedly on the basis as managing owner (including prohibiting him from spending
Tennis Property funds, submitting entitlement applications purportedly on behalf of the Tennis
Property owners, or purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property), and that O
Hill and any other person or entity (including NBCC Land or NBCC L&I) with possession,
custody or control of property of, or records relating to, the Tennis Property (including any bank
account(s) and/or books and records), shall by personal service or otherwise fully cooperate with
and assist the succeeding managing owner in taking and maintaining possession, custody, or
control of such property and records and immediately transfer or deliver them to the succeeding
managing owner.
ON ALL CLAIMS:
11. For attorneys' fees incurred in this action pursuant to section 27 of the OIC
Agreement.
12. For costs of suit and out-of-pocket expenses.
13. For such other relief as the Arbitrator deems just and proper.
15-371
Dated: March 25, 2022 MICHAEL YODER
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
JACQB C. GONZALES
1c9 I law
By:
acob 4on es
Attorneys for Co -Os Claimants
Mesa Shopping Center -East LLC,
Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West LLC, and
Fainbarg III LP
15-372
Exhibit A
15-373
RECORDlNQ REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
O Hill Properties
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
sU
AGREEMENT BETWEEN REAL PROPERTY OWNERS
BALBOA BAY CLUB RACQUET CLUB
Newport Beach, California
This Agreement Between Real Property Owners ("Agreement") is entered into by
and between O Hill Properties, a California limited partnership ("O Hill"), The Fainbarg Trust
dated April 19, 1982 ("TFC"), Mesa Shopping Center -East, a California general partnership
(Mesa -East), Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, a California general partnership ("Mira Mesa -
West"), and Newport Beach Country Club, a California limited partnership ("NBCC Ltd").
O Trill, TFT, Mesa -Fast, Mira Mesa -West, and NBCC Ltd are sometimes referred to
singularly as an "Owner" or "party" or collectively as the "Owners" or "parties".
RECITALS
A. The Owners desire to own, lease, manage, maintain, refinance, encumber and
hold for investment, as tenants in common, that certain real property comprising
approximately 6.099 acres with improvements thereon, commonly identified as Balboa Bay
Club Racquet Club located at 1602 East Pacific Coast Highway, in Newport Beach, California
and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached (the "Property").
B. The Owners have discussed the co -ownership of the Property and have
concluded that to avoid conveyancing and ownership problems created by death, marital or
other dissolution, bankruptcy or insolvency, disputes and the like, it is in the best interest of
each Owner that the holding of the Property be governed by an agreement which defines the
rights and duties of each Owner in the form of this Agreement.
C. The Owners also believe it necessary and appropriate to have one Owner be the
managing Owner for purposes of accounting and administration.
6110193
15-374
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and the conditions and
covenants hereinafter contained, the Owners hereby agree as follows:
1. AGREIIIdENT AS TENANTS IN COMMON. The Owners agree to hold
title to the Property as tenants in common to own, manage, maintain, lease, finance, refinance,
and/or hold the Property for investment in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The
Owners may conduct such other activities with respect to the Property as are related to or
compatible with the ownership of real estate. Subject to the provisions of this Agreement,
each Owner retains the right to deal with his Interest in the Property (as defined in Section 3
below) as such Owner sees fit.
2. TERM. This Agreement shall become effective on the acquisition of the
Property by the Owners, and shall continue thereafter until terminated pursuant to Section 13
below.
3. TITLE TO THE PROPERTY; CONVEYANCES AND LIENS. Concurrently
with the recordation hereof, title to the Property shall be acquired by, and in the name of, the
Owners as their interests appear in Exhibit "B" attached (each an "Interest") and shall
thereafter be held in the name of the Owners as tenants in common. The Owners acknowledge
and agree that the Property, or any interest therein, including any leasehold interest, any deed
of trust granted or other encumbrances or liens placed thereon, may be granted, conveyed or
so encumbered by the execution of the applicable instrument by each Owner, or if an Owner
is obligated to convey, lease or encumber its interest in accordance with the terms of Section 4
of this Agreement and fails to do so within the time limits set forth herein, by the Managing
Owner and the Additional Owner (both as defined in Section 7 below) in accordance with the
powers of attorney granted to the Managing Owner and the Additional Owner as described in
Section 7(c) below. Such conveyance or encumbrance by the.Managing Owner and the
Additional Owner under such powers of attorney shall be binding upon each Owner.
4. FINANCING, REFINANCINGS, SALE AND LEASING.
(a) The Owners acknowledge that concurrently with the acquisition of the
Property, the Owners shall place financing on the Property which may have a balloon payment
at the due date thereof (the "Acquisition Financing"). Each Owner acknowledges that there
will be refinancings of the Acquisition Financing from time to time. The Managing Owner
shall have the right to obtain such refinancing for the Property on then market rates and terms.
Each Owner shall have a duty to fully cooperate and not interfere or impede, in any manner,
-2-
15-375
in such refinancings including but not limited to signing appropriate documentation (e.g. notes,
deeds of trust, assignments of rents and leases, guarantees and the like) within ten (10) days
after being requested to do so by Managing Owner. Each Owner shall be responsible for its
respective share, as determined by its pro rats ownership Interest in the Property, of the
payments of principal and interest and other costs owing under the Acquisition Financing and
refinancings . The Acquisition Pinanci ng and refinancings, however, may be a joint and
several obligation of the Owners. Refinancing shall only be permitted within two (2) years of
the due date of the financing which then encumbers the Property and the amount shall not
materially exceed the remaining principal balance of the then existing loan balance plus
refinancing related costs, unless the new loan is non -recourse to the Owners and is approved
by sixty-five percent (65 %) or more of the ownership Interests in the Property.
(b) The Managing Owner shall list the property for sale and convey or
otherwise transfer the Property if such transaction is approved by seventy percent (70%) or
more of the ownership Interests in the Property. Each Owner shall have a duty to fully
cooperate and not interfere or impede in any manner with such sale approved by seventy
percent (70%) or more of the ownership Interests in the Property, including but not limited to
the signing of a grant deed, sale agreements, assignment of leases and escrow instructions
within ten (10) days after being requested to do so by Managing Owner. Any Owner who
desires an exchange of its equity in the Property under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue
Code shall have the right to arrange for such exchange of its undivided ownership Interest,
provided that under no circumstances shall the inability of any Owner to consummate such an
exchange delay the sale of the Property. The other Owners, at no cost or expense shall
cooperate in such exchange, however, no Owner shall be required to take title to an exchange
or other property as a part of such duty to cooperate.
(c) Managing Owner may amend, terminate or extend the ground lease of
the Property only with the prior written consent of the Owners of a majority of the ownership
Interests in the Property. Each Owner shall execute, any such amendment, termination or
extension approved by a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property within ten (10)
days after being requested to do so by Managing Owner.
(d) Any Owner who has a duty to execute any refinancing, sale or lease
documentation and fails or refuses to do so shall be liable for all costs, liabilities, damages,
claims and expenses including attorney's fees and legal costs which results to the other Owners
from such failure or refusal.
5. LIMPPATION OF OWNERS. Each Owner shall be subject to the following
limitations:
-3-
15-376
(a) Each Owner hereby irrevocably waives any and all rights that such
Owner may have to withdraw from the terms of this Agreement, maintain an action for the
partition of the Property (unless Owners of 65 % or more of the Interests in the Property join
or consent to such action), or otherwise force a sale of the Property during the term hereof,
except as expressly provided herein.
(b) No Owner shall be entitled to interest on such Owner's contribution
toward the purchase of the Property. No Owner shall have the right to withdraw or reduce
such Owner's contribution toward the purchase of the Property. No Owner shall have the
right to demand property other than cash in return for such Owner's contribution toward the
purchase of the Property. No Owner shall have priority over any other Owner either as to the
return of contributions toward the purchase of the. Property or as to other distributions.
6. CASH CALLS. Each Owner shall pay (1) such Owner's share of losses and
negative cash flow necessary to cover the costs of owning the Property in proportion to such
Owner's respective Interest in the Property and (ii) any involuntary lien which encumbers an
Owner's Interest (such as a tax, judgment or execution Tien or an attachment) (a "Cash Call").
If an Owner fails to pay its Cash Calll within twenty (20) days from the date set for such
payment in a written notice that such amount must be paid from the Managing Owner (or any
other Owner if the Managing Owner fails to send out a written notice when such Cash Call is
necessary), such failure shall automatically constitute a granting by such Owner (a "Defaulting
Owner") to the other Owners of the following alternative options in addition to all other
remedies available at law: (i) the other Owners may advance the Defaulting Owner's required
Cash Call, in the proportions agreed upon by such other Owners, and absent such an
agreement, in the proportion which the Interest of an Owner desiring to make such advance
bears to the Interests of all Owners desiring to make such advance, and the Defaulting Owner
shall convey (or if necessary, the Managing Owner and any Additional Owner under the
powers of attorney granted in Section 7(c) below shall convey) by grant deed a portion of
Defaulting Owner's Interest in the Property in the proportion in which such advance bears to
the Defaulting Owner's equity in the Property (the "Transferred Portion"). The determination
of equity in the Property shall be based upon a ten percent (10%) capitalization rate of the
preceding twelve (12) months net operating income, less the Defaulting Owner's prorata share
of liens entered into by, or which encumber the Interests of, all of the Owners (the "Collective
Liens") and outstanding or reasonably projected extraordinary expenses for the next one (1)
year period. The Defaulting Owner shall remove liens from the title to the Transferred
Portion so that the Transferred Portion conveyed to the Owners making such advance shall be
free and clear of liens (except the Collective Liens), If the Defaulting Owner is unable to
-4-
15-377
deliver free and clear title to the Transferred Portion, the other Owners may purchase, at the
same price paid for the Transferred Portion so much of the Interest of the Defaulting Owner
(the "Additional Portion") so that enough cash is generated to allow for the delivery of the
Transferred Portion and the Additional Portion by the Defaulting Owner to the other Owners
free and clear. If the Property is not subject to a long term ground lease or long term ground
leases (of if any such leases are then in default beyond any curative period), the equity in the
Property of the Defaulting Owner shall be 90% of the appraised value of the entire Property
subject to all non monetary encumbrances thereof, based upon the highest and best use
reasonably available for the Property, as determined by an independent MAI appraiser selected
by a majority of the ownership Interests owned by the Non Defaulting Owners (the cost of
which appraisal shall be charged to the Defaulting Owner) times the percentage Interest of the
Defaulting Owner in the Property, and the Defaulting Owner's prorata share of the Collective
Liens shall be subtracted therefrom; (ii) the other Owners may admit an additional owner upon
the terms and conditions of this Agreement, which additional owner shall advance the
Defaulting Owner's required Cash Call and receive a portion of the Defaulting Owner's
Interest in the Property on. the same basis as preceding subparagraph (i); (iii) the Managing
Owner may borrow in the name of or on behalf of the Defaulting Owner the amount of the
Cash Call and pledge or otherwise encumber the Interest in the Property of the Defaulting
Owner to secure the loan, or (iv) the other Owners may advance to the Defaulting Owner the
amount of such unpaid Cash Call owing by Defaulting Owner in which case a Promissory
Note shall be executed by Defaulting Owner in'favor of the other Owners who have advanced
the Cash Call of the Defaulting Owner, a copy of which Promissory Note is attached as
Exhibit "C" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference ("Promissory Note"). At the.
election of the Owners who make an advance to the Defaulting Owner, the Promissory Note
shall be secured by a deed of trust upon the Defaulting Owner's entire interest in the Property,
and the Defaulting Owner shall execute all documents reasonably necessary to effectuate such
encumbrance.
If an expense, loss or damages are incurred by the Owners as the result of a Defaulting Owner
not making a Cash Call on or before the date set for the Cash Call in the written notice sent
out by the Managing Owner (or the other Owners, as applicable), the Defaulting Owner shall
immediately pay such expense or loss in addition to any other damages caused by such failure.
7. MANAGING OWNER.
(a) The Owners hereby appoint 0 Hill and its successors and assigns as
Managing Owner. The duties of Managing Owner shall be as follows:
(i) Managing Owner shall perform all of the duties of Managing Owner
-5-
15-378
as set forth in this Agreement.
(H) Managing Owner is authorized to take actions which are consistent
with the terms of this Agreement, to carry out this Agreement including but not limited to the
right to hire andlor retain on behalf of the Owners accountants, lawyers, appraisers, mortgage
brokers, insurance agents and consultants which Managing Owner deems appropriate in its
reasonable discretion,.
(iii) Managing Owner shall approve and coordinate the payment of the
expenses of the ownership of the Property,
(iv) Managing Owner shall maintain the books and records of the
Owners at the principal business office of Managing Owner.
(v) Managing Owner shall have a fiduciary duty to prepare a written
status and financial report for the Property and provide copies to each Owner within ninety
(90) days after request from another Owner, and within seventy-five (75) days after the end of
each calendar year.
(b) The Owners of a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property
shall have the right to select a new Managing Owner in place of O Hill, its successors and
assigns if Robert O Hill is no longer the person primarily responsible for the overall
management of the entity which constitutes the Managing Owner. In the event a Managing
Owner sells its entire interest in the Property or resigns as Managing Owner, the Owners by
election of the Owners who own a majority of the Interests in the Property shall appoint a new
Managing Owner. At any time, Managing Owner may be removed with cause by the written
election of the Owners of a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property not owned by
the Managing Owner, and a new Managing Owner shall be appointed by the Owners who own
a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property. The votes cast by the Managing Owner
in favor of a new Managing Owner may not be cast for the removed Managing Owner or any
transferee of the removed Managing Owner's interests, If the removed Managing Owner does
not vote to appoint a new Managing Owner within ten (10) days of being requested to do so by
the other Owners, then the new Managing Owner shall be appointed by Owners of a majority
of the ownership Interests in the Property not owned by Managing Owner. Such resignation
or removal, and the new appointment shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County
Recorder. In the event there is no Managing Owner, all actions of the Owners with respect to
the Property shall require the unanimous written consent of the Owners, "Cause" as used
herein shall mean fraud, gross negligence or a material default of a material obligation by
Managing Owner. The reasons for removal of a Managing Owner shall be material and
specifically stated in the written notice of removat.
(c) Managing Owner is hereby appointed as attorney in fact for each Owner
for the purpose of taking all actions which are approved in writing by the requisite percentage
-6-
15-379
of ownership Interests in the Property or which the Managing Owner is otherwise allowed or
authorized to take hereunder, including execution of deeds, deeds of trusts, notes, assignment
of leases, assignments of rents and leases, guarantees, lease amendments, extensions or
terminations, all in the name, place and stead and on behalf of each Owner with the same
validity and effect as if such Owner had executed same. Each Owner specifically agrees to be
bound by all actions validly taken under such power of attorney. This power of attorney is
coupled with an interest and is irrevocable. Each Owner also hereby appoints each other
Owner as attorney in fact for such Owner for purposes of acting as an additional signatory to
any action undertaken by Managing Owner pursuant to the provisions of Section 4 hereof, and
of the power of attorney granted Managing Owner herein (each, an "Additional Owner").
(d) Except for the protection of the Property or in the case of an emergency,
no material sums shall be expended for capital improvements without the prior written consent
of Owners who hold a majority of the Interests in the Property.
(e) As compensation for the duties of Managing Owner under this
Agreement, Managing Owner shall be reimbursed reasonable out of pocket costs incurred and
paid to unaffiliated third parties and shall receive an asset management fee which shall be
equal to one-half percent ('!z %) of the gross receipts from the operations of the Property,
payable monthly. Managing Owner may deduct such amounts due Managing Owner or third
parties from revenue received from the.Property, but shall identify amounts charged to the
Owners, on at least a quarterly basis.
(f) The Managing Owner shall not have the right to retain counsel at the
Owner's expense for a dispute between the Owners, unless the dispute results from a breach or
default under the terms of this Agreement by an Owner or the Owners, other than the
Managing Owner.
8. DISTRIBUTIONS. Distributions of cash to the Owners shall be made as
follows:
(a) Cash from operations shall be distributed to the Owners in accordance
with their respective Interests in the Property on a monthly basis; provided, however, that the
Managing Owner shall be entitled to maintain reasonable reserves for any future anticipated
expenditures related to the ownership of the Property.
(b) Refinancing proceeds shall be distributed to the Owners in accordance
with their respective Interests in the Property; provided, however, the Managing Owner shall
be entitled to retain on behalf of the Owners the following refinancing proceeds: (i) such
portion of the refinancing proceeds as the Owners of a majority of the Interests in the Property
deem necessary for capital improvements to the Property, and (ii) such portion of the
refinancing proceeds as may be necessary to establish reasonable reserves for anticipated future
-7-
15-380
expenditures of the Owners.
(c) Net proceeds from the sale of the Property shall be distributed to the
Owners in accordance with their respective interests in the Property. Net proceeds from the
sale of the Property shall be defined as the gross proceeds from the sale of the Property, less
(i) all costs associated with such sale, (ii) payment of any encumbrance against the Property
(unless assumed by the buyer with seller released from liability thereon), (iii) payment of any
other expenses related to ownership of the Property, and (iv) reasonable reserves for the
payment of any future expenses related to the Property anticipated by the Managing Owner,
during the one (1) year following the sale of the Property. The Managing Owner shall account
for and distribute such reserve to the Owners within one (1) year following the sale of the
Property, except to the extent that such reserve is still required to be maintained for a specific,
then readily identifiable reasonably anticipated future expense. in the event the Managing
Owner retains such reserves for a period in excess of 12 months for such specific purpose,
such reserve shall be accounted for and distributed as soon as reasonably possible following
satisfaction or elimination of the obligation for which the reserve was created.
(d) Notwithstanding Section 8(a), Section 8(b) and Section 8(c) to the
contrary, (i) cash that would otherwise be distributed to an Owner shall instead be distributed
to the other Owners to the extent provided in the Promissory Note, or to otherwise discharge
all obligations of a Defaulting Owner under Section b above and (ii) the reserves retained
under Section 8(a), Section 8(b) and Section 8(c) above shall not exceed $100,000 in the
aggregate, without the prior written consent of the Owners of a majority of the Interests in the
Property,
9. BOOKS AND RECORDS. Such books of account and records as are
maintained by or for the Property shall be kept at the principal business office of the Managing
Owner and be open to inspection by any Owner or accredited representative of any Owner, at
a reasonable time upon reasonable advance notice. 'Each Owner shall have the right to make a
separate audit of such books and records of the Property at such Owner's own expense;
provided, however, if the audit is requested by Owners of at least fifty percent (50%) of the
Interests in the Property, the audit shall be at the expense of all of the Owners.
10. CONTINUATION. The bankruptcy, foreclosure, tax lien, attachment or
execution of judgment or other involuntary lien, insanity, disability, distribution, death or
dissolution of or against an Owner shall not terminate the effects of this Agreement. Upon
such an occurrence, the Interest in the Property of such Owner shall become vested in the
guardian, administrator, executor, tnistee, other legal representative or person or entity -
entitled to the Interest in the Property of such Owner, who shall acquire all of the rights and
-8-
15-381
obligations provided in this Agreement and shall be subject to and bound by all of the terms
and conditions of this Agreement; provided, however, in the case of involuntary liens,
attachments, judgments or executions that such legal representative or person or entity shall be
entitled only to receive distributions on account of such Interest in the Property as provided for
in Section 8 above and shall have no management or other decision malting authority.
11. INCOME TAR CONSEQUENCES. Each.Owner acknowledges that the tax
consequences of an investment in the Property is a matter upon which such Owner's own
personal tax adviser must conclude. Each Owner shall bear the income tax consequences of
such,Owner's interest in the Property, which may be different than (i) such Owner's pro rata
share of the purchase price of the Property as a result of the effects of a.carryover basis in the
Property, or (ii) such Owner's actual share of the cash distributions from the Property.
12. . TENANCY IN COMMON - NOT A PARTNERSHIP. Each Owner agrees
that the Ownership of the Property is a tenancy in common and not a partnership. Each
Owner agrees to remain excluded from all of the provisions of Subchapter K of Chapter 1 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Each Owner hereby covenants and agrees
that each Owner shall report on such Owner's respective Federal and State income tax return,
such Owner's respective share of items of income, deduction and credit which results from
holding of its Interest in the Property, in a manner consistent with a tenancy in common
commencing with the taxable year of the acquisition of the Property. No Owner shall notify
the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (the "Commissioner") that such Owner desires that the
Owners be treated as a partnership and that Subchapter K of the Code applies. Each Owner
hereby agrees to indemnify and hold each other Owner free and harmless from all cost,
liability, tax consequence and expense, including attorneys fees, which results from any Owner
so notifying the Commissioner.
13. TERMINATION.
This Agreement shall be immediately terminated upon the happening of any of
the following events:
(a) The sale or other disposition of all of the Property.
(b) The unanimous decision of the Owners that this Agreement be
terminated, in which event the Owners shall hold the Property as tenants in common and shall
be governed by the laws of the State of California.
(c) The purchase by one Owner of all the Interests of the other Owners in
the Property.
I Us
15-382
14. ONION TO PURCHASE.
(a) If an Owner desires to seR its Interest in the Property or a portion of its
Interest in the Property, O Hill and its successors, as consideration for its role in the
acquisition of the Property, shall have a first right to purchase all or a portion of such Interest
in the Property. A selling Owner shall notify O Dill in writing of the portion of the Interest
selling Owner desires to sell and selling Owner's desired price for such Interest. O Hill shall
have thirty (30) days from the date it receives proper written notice to notify selling Owner
that it will purchase all or a specific portion of the Interest being offered for sale by selling
Owner. 0 Hill and selling Owner shall meet and try to agree on a purchase price. If, after
thirty (30) days, O Hill and selling Owner are unable to agree on a purchase price then, at
their expense, each will retain an MAI appraiser to appraise the entire Property without
discount for partial ownership subject to all non monetary encumbrances thereof, including but
not limited to any ground lease of the Property, based upon the highest and best use reasonably
available for the Property. Such appraisals shall be completed within sixty (60) days and
exchanged between the parties. If the values of the two MAI appraisals are within five percent
(5 %) of each other, using the larger number as the denominator, the appraised value of the
entire Property shall be an average of the two appraisals, less three percent (3 %). If the two
MAI appraisals are not within five percent (5 %) of each other then the two (2) designated
appraisers shall agree upon and retain a third appraiser who will be given the completed
appraisals and all appropriate back-up valuing information and such third appraiser shall first
attempt to mediate a compromise value between the three (3) appraisers. If the compromise
value cannot be reached between the three (3) appraisers within thirty (30) days then the third
appraiser shall reach a conclusion as to value (which shall be not less than the lower of the two
(2) appraisals, and no greater than the higher of the two appraisals) and the two closest
conclusions as to value shall be averaged and the average, less three percent (3%) shall be
deemed the appraised value of the entire Property. The purchase price shall be such appraised
value times the ownership Interest percentage being sold, less the selling Owner's prorata
share of any Collective Liens. The purchase shall be completed on or before one hundred and
twenty (120) days after the purchase price is finally determined. The Interest being sold shall
be delivered free and clear of all liens (except the Collective Liens). Any Interest of the
selling Owner not purchased by O Hill may be purchased on the same basis by the other
Owners. Such other Owners shall elect to purchase such interest within ten (10) days after
being advised in writing of the amount of the above determined purchase price. If the other
Owners elect to purchase in the aggregate more than the Interest being offered, each Owner
may purchase the portion of the Interest so offered as agreed upon by the other Owners
desiring to purchase a portion of the offered Interest, and absent an agreement reached
between them, each may purchase a percentage of the remainder of the Interest which the
-10-
15-383
amount offered to be purchased by an Owner bears to the amount offered to be purchased by
all Owners, but not less than that portion of the remainder of the interest offered which the
then Interest of such Owner bears to the then Interests of all Owners electing to purchase such
remainder. Any interest not purchased by an Owner may be sold to a third party reasonably
approved by the Managing Owner. If such sale does not occur within one (1) year after the
purchase price is determined, the sale shall again be subject to the above provision.
(b) The following transfers ("Permitted Transferee") shall not be subject to
the provisions of Section 14(a) above:
(i) A transfer to any lineal descendent of a current trustee or general
partner of one of the Owners;
(ii) A transfer to a trust for the benefit of any lineal descendent of a
current trustee or current general partner of any of the Owners;
(iii) A transfer to any successor trustee or distribution to a beneficiary,,
where one of the current Owners is a trust; and
(iv) A transfer to any partner or group of partners who consist of one of
the current existing partners of an Owner, where such Owner is a partnership.
(c) The rights of O Hill and its successors under Section 14(a) above shall
expire upon the sale of the Interest of O Hill to a person or entity in which O Hill, or a
Permitted Transferee of O Hill, has no interest.
15. NOTICES. All notices under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be
deemed to have been duly given if delivered personally or mailed, postage prepaid, by
certified United States mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the Owner to be notified.
Such notice shall be deemed to have been given as of the date. so delivered, if delivered in
person, or upon deposit thereof in the United States mail. For the purposes of notice, the
addresses of the Owners until changed as hereinafter provided, shall be as set forth in Exhibit
"B" attached hereto. Each Owner shall have the right to change the address to which notice to
such Owner is to be given by giving written notice thereof to all other Owners. Managing
Owner shall maintain a current list of each recognized. Owner of the Property (as described in
Section 19 below), and the address and percentage interest owned by each such Owner.
Managing Owner shall provide such information to any Owner upon written request to do so.
16. UNENFORCEABLE TERMS. In the event that any provision of this
Agreement shall be unenforceable or inoperative as a matter of law, the remaining provisions
shall remain in full force and effect.
17. TIME OF ESSENCE. Time is the essence of this Agreement and the
-11-
15-384
provisions contained herein and each and every provision hereof.
18. AMENDMENTS. This Agreement may be amended. only by a written
amendment signed by all Owners whose signatures shall be notarized and recorded in the .
County of Orange. Any amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be dated, and if
any conflict arises between the provisions of said amendment or modification and provisions
incorporated in earlier documents, the most recent provisions shall be controlling.
19. BINDING EFFECT. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be
binding upon the Property and the Owners and their respective heirs, successors, legal
representatives and. assigns. Each subsequent Owner of a portion of the Property shall be
bound by the provisions hereof as if such subsequent Owner had assumed this Agreement. No
subsequent Owner need be recognized as such until such subsequent Owner has given each
other Owner written notice of the acquisition of such interest in the Property by such
subsequent Owner pursuant to the notice provisions of Section 15 above, which each Owner
and each subsequent Owner agrees to do or cause to be done.
20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire agreement
between the Owners and supersedes any prior or concurrent written or oral agreement between
said parties concerning the subject matter contained herein. There are no representations,
agreements, arrangements or understandings, oral or written, between or among the Owners
relating to the subject matter contained in this Agreement, which are not fully expressed
herein.
21, GENDER. All pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to
the masculine, feminine or neuter, singular or plural, as the identity of the person, persons,
entity or entities may require.
22, CAPTION HEADINGS. Captions at the beginning of each numbered Section
of the Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties and shall not be deemed part of
the context of this Agreement.
23. NEGOTIATED TRANSACTION. The provisions of this Agreement were
negotiated by all of the parties hereto and said Agreement shall be deemed to have been
drafted by all of the parties thereto.
24. FURTHER ASSURANCES. Each Owner hereby agrees to promptly sign any
-12-
15-385
additional instruments or documents which are necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent
and purpose of this Agreement.
25. SPOUSES. Some of the Owners are married and may in the future take title to
an Interest in the Property with their respective spouses (the "Married Owners"). For the
protection of the remaining Owners, any interest in the Property held by Married Owners shall
be deemed to be held by the husband, as to an undivided one-half (x/2) interest and by the wife,
as to an undivided one-half (112-) interest. For the purpose of voting upon any issue upon which
the Owners may vote pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the husband and
wife shall each be deemed to own an undivided one-half (�A) interest in the interest of such
Married Owners. Each Married Owner acknowledges and agrees that he/she shall do nothing
to impede or impair the rights of the other Owners in an attempt to gain leverage upon his/her
spouse. In the event an Owner takes title to an Interest in the Property solely in their name,
they shall obtain and record a quitclaim deed from their respective spouses so that the Owner
in whose name the interest in the Property is held shalt have the right, power and authority to
deal with the Property alone and without the consent of his/her spouse. In the event that any
such Owner fails to obtain such quitclaim deed and damages result to the remaining Owners,
such Owner who so fails to obtain such quitclaim deed shall be liable for the resulting
damages.
26. ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES: ALL DISPUTES ARISING UNDER THIS
AGREEMENT WILL BE RESOLVED BY SUBMISSION TO ARBITRATION AT THE
ORANGE COUNTY OFFICES OF JUDICIAL ARBITRATION & MEDIATION
SERVICES, INC. ("TAMS") FOR BINDING ARBITRATION. THE PARTIES MAY
AGREE ON A RETIRED MOB FROM THE YAMS PANEL. IF THEY ARE UNABLE
TO AGREE, JAMS WILL PROVIDE A LIST OF THREE AVAILABLE JUDGES AND
EACH PARTY MAY STRIKE ONE. THE REMAINING JUDGE WILL SERVE AS THE
ARBITRATOR AT THE ARBITRATION HEARING. THE PARTIES AGREE THAT
ARBITRATION MUST BE INITIATED WITHIN ONE YEAR AFTER THE CLAIMED
BREACH OCCURRED AND THAT THE FAILURE TO INITIATE ARBITRATION
WITHIN THE ONE-YEAR PERIOD CONSTITUTES AN ABSOLUTE BAR TO TIM
INSTITUTION OF ANY NEW PROCEEDINGS. THE AGGRIEVED PARTY CAN
INITIATE ARBITRATION BY SENDING WRITTEN NOTICE OF AN INTENTION TO
ARBITRATE BY REGISTERED OR CERTIFMD MAIL TO THE OTHER PARTY AND
TO JAMS. THE NOTICE MUST CONTAIN A DESCRIPTION OF THE DISPUTE, THE
AMOUNT INVOLVED, AND THE REMEDY SOUGHT, IF AND WHEN A DEMAND
FOR ARBITRATION IS MADE BY EITHER PARTY, THE PARTIES AGREE TO
-13-
15-386
EXECUTE A SUBMISSION AGREEMENT, PROVIDED BY JAMS, SETTING FORTH
THE RIGHTS OF THE PARTIES IF THE CASE IS ARBITRATED AND THE RULES
AND PROCEDURES TO 13B FOLLOWED AT THE ARBITRATION HEARING. THE
ARBITRATOR SHALL, AT THE MOTION OF A PARTY, PERMIT AND ORDER SUCH
DISCOVERY ON THE PART OF SUCH PARTY AS HE DETERMINES TO BE
REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE TO THE DISPUTE BEFORE HIM.
NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE, AT LEAST TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THE
ARBITRATION, EACH PARTY MUST MAKE A FULL DISCLOSURE TO THE OTHER
PARTY OF (i) ALL DOCUMENTS TO BE PRESENTED BY SUCH PARTY AND (ii)
ANY WITNESSES TO BE CALLED BY SUCH PARTY.
NOTHING IN THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL IN ANY WAY LIMIT OR OTHERWISE
RESTRICT A PARTY' S RIGHT OR ABILITY TO OBTAIN INJUNCTIVE RELIEF OR
APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM.
NOTICE: BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE AGREEING TO HAVE
ANY DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE "ARBITRATION
OF DISPUTES" PROVISION DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED
BY CALIFORNIA LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT
POSSESS TO HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN COURT OR JURY TRIAL. BY
Mln4LING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGHTS
TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, EXCEPT AS PROVIDED HEREIN, UNLESS THOSE
RIGHTS ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE "ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES"
PROVISION. IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO ARBITRATION AFTER AGREEING TO
THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF THE CALWORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR
AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY.
WE HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUBMIT
DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE "ARBI RATION OF
DISPUTES" PROVISION TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION.
O Hill: L2mrzi TFT: f ' 1 Mesa -East: 145K- I I Ef: — }
Mira Mesa West f &2 [ ]' NBCC Ltd:
27. COST OF ENWRCE VIENT. Should any dispute arise between the parties
hereto or their legal representatives, successors or assigns concerning any provision of this
-14-
15-387
Agreement or the rights and duties of any person in relation thereto, the party prevailing in
such dispute shall be entitled, in addition to such other relief that may be granted, to
reasonable attorneys fees and legal costs in connection with such dispute. For purposes of this
Paragraph, a dispute shall include, but not be limited to, an arbitration proceeding or a court
action for injunctive relief.
28. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the
State of California and the venue for any dispute shall be Orange County, California.
EXECUTED as of March 0f994, at Newport Beach, California.
Owners:
O MU Properties, a
California limited partnership
By: / r
Robert O U 1,
its General Partner
The Fainbarg Trust,
dated April 19, 1982
By: ON- t
Allan Fain arg, TMstee
Newport Beach Country Club,
a California limited partnership
By: O Hill Properties,
a California limited partnership
Its General Partner
$Y
f�- . �
Robert �WFM -
General Partner
-15-
Mesa Shopping Center -East
A California General Partnership
By:-..Q.,Q
Arnold D. Feuerstein
Managing General Partner
By:
Elliot Feuerstem.
Managing General Partner
Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West
A California General Partnership
BY:• ---
Arnold D. Feuerstein
Managing General Partner
Elliot Feuerstein
Managing General Partner
15-388
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On elkiE1'4 ', 1 `i'1 , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Robert O Hill, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Lary Public in and or sai@ County acid State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
YVONNi N. RiTCHOT
z ? t COM #055585 z
z ,p Notary Pobric calilotnta
ORANGE COUNTY
tornm exphes FED 09,1906
On before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Allau Fainbnally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
N in and for said County a d State
-16-
1
8Wt*MM'0XP1r09FE609
B iCNE N. RI
coMu. #M585 a
Z Notary PubliaCWtMia
R ORANGE COUNTY 49�]r r"'�
15-389
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On �7744e k � /991� , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Robert 0 Hill, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Lary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
`YVONNE N. RITONQT
comm, #953895
•'o NOLW PubBo- Noma
ORANGE COUNTY
hfy comm. erpkm FEB 09,1M
On di � 95/ , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Arnold D. Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person,
or the entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
SI./!✓YlIlfr/Crl1,�II1f �iJJSt
INC
SORMUOUMy
T I 5 !
On IeAdAm f / y yV, before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Elliot Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
-17-
Sr./y✓-�^✓r✓./Y.r✓� 1.�` ma's .irr ,
15-390
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Arnold D. Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person,
or the entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Elliot Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
-18-
15-391
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
Parcel Y:
That portion of Block 93 of Irvine's Subdivision in the City of Newport Beach, County of
Orange, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous Maps in
the Office of the County Recorder of said County described as follows:
Lot A as shown on that certain Parcel Map filed October 10, 1967 in Book 10 Page 20 of
Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, and Parcels 1, 2 and 3 as
shown on that certain Parcel Map filed February 11, 1977 in Book 92 Pages 13 and 14 of
Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County.
Parcel 2:
As easement for ingress and egress over the most Southerly 190.00 feet of Parcel 1, in the
City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on that certain Parcel
Map filed October 10, 1967 in Book 10 Page 20 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County
Recorder of said County.
15-392
EXMIT "B"
OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY
Name and Address of Owner Interest in property
Allan and Sara Fainbarg, Trustees 25%
of The Painbarg Trust dated
April 19, 1982
890 W. Baker
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Mesa Shopping Center -East 15 %
c/o Arnold Feuerstein
2293 W. Ball Road
Anaheim, CA 92805
Mica Mesa Shopping Center -West 10%
clo Arnold Feuerstein
2293 W. Bail Road
Anaheim, CA 92805
With a copy of any notices to:
Mesa Shopping Center -East
c/oElliot Feuerstein
8294 Mira Mesa Blvd.
San Diego, CA 92126
Newport Beach Country Club 25 %
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Robert O Hill
O Hill Properties 25 %
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Robert O Hill
15-393
FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
to
PROMISSORY NOTE
Newport Beach, California
("Maker") hereby promises to pay
, or order ("Holder"), at
or such other place or places as
may be designated by Holder from time to time, the sum of
payable as specified herein. This Promissory Note ("Note") shall bear
interest at the prime commercial lending rate of Bank of America, plus two and one half
percent (21h %) per annum but not to exceed the maximum rate allowed by law. This Note
shall be due and payable on or before the date which is two (2) years from the date of this
Note.
Maker and Holder intend that this Note shall be recourse to Maker. However, it is Maker's
and Holder's intention that Holder's first recourse shall be against the proceeds that would be
otherwise payable to Maker as a result of Maker's ownership of an undivided % interest
in certain real property commonly known as The Newport Beach Country Club, and legally
defined in any Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents encumbering such real property as
security for this Note ("Property").
As a credit against sums owed by Maker to Holder, Holder shall be entitled to receive 100%
of the cash distributions which would otherwise be distributed to Maker as a result of its
ownership interest in the Property, up to an aggregate sum equal to the principal amount of
this Note ($ ) plus accrued interest.
Maker hereby agrees to pay all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees,
incurred by Holder and arising out of or related to the collection of any amounts due hereunder
or the enforcement of any rights provided for herein, or in any other instrument now or -
hereafter securing Maker's obligations under this Note, whether or not suit is filed.
Maker waives all rights of set-off, deduction and counter claim with respect to this Note. Any
amount which Maker contends are owed by Holder shall be sought by independent action. To
The extent permitted by applicable law, the defense of any statute of limitations is hereby
waived by Maker.
This Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
California.
This Note is secured by a Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, encumbering Maker's
ownership interest in the Property, executed by Maker for the benefit of Holder.
15-394
From: pmchrist@earthlink.net
Sent: September 12, 2022 11:35 AM
To: Lee, David
Cc: Mark Susson
Subject: Need for Pickleball restrictions - The Tennis Club at Newport Beach
Importance: High
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Hello David,
Following the Sept 8 2022 Planning Commission meeting, I thought it appropriate to provide
scope to my request that the Tennis Club at Newport Beach install a Sound Blanket around the
perimeter of the courts similar to or more dense than what has been installed at the Pickleball
Courts at the city's Bonita Canyon Sport Park.
I visited the Bonita Canyon Sports Park over the weekend and noted that the Sound
Blanket protects the closest residences that are +/- 300 feet away from the Pickleball Courts.
By comparison, the closest Granville residence is +/- 75 feet away from the Pickleball Courts at
the Tennis Club at Newport Beach, 1602 E Coast Highway.
My impression of the Planning Commissioners comments at the Sept. 8 2022 hearing is that
there appears to be universal concern by its members relative to the noise generated by and at
the Pickleball courts both from the sounds emanating from the pickleball racket impacting the
pickleball and the amplified microphone, music, blaring announcements, and the like that I and
fellow Granville resident Mark Susson spoke of at the Sept. 8 2022 meeting.
Please keep me posted on what I suggest are needed additional impositions on the Golf Realty
Fund's application regarding the additions to the Tennis Club at Newport Beach's site, to be
considered at the N.B. City Council Sept. 27, 2022 meeting.
Thank you,
Paul Christ
949-212-8426
15-395
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Importance:
FYI
Lee, David
September 08, 2022 4:52 PM
Rodriguez, Clarivel
Campbell, Jim; Jurjis, Seimone
FW: Emailing: Stu Newport News-07-12-2022 - The Tennis Club at
Newport Beach
Stu Newport News-07-12-2022 - The Tennis Club at Newport
Beach.pdf
High
-----Original Message -----
From: pmchrist@earthlink.net <pmchrist@earthlink.net>
Sent: September 08, 2022 4:47 PM
To: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Emailing: Stu Newport News-07-12-2022 - The Tennis Club at Newport Beach
Importance: High
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hello David,
Attached is an article published in the "Stu News Newport" indicating that Golf Realty Fund is intending
to add one additional tennis court thus totaling eight courts vs. the previously planned seven.
The Article also discusses the Tennis Club at Newport Beach's plans to add additional Pickleball Courts
up to a maximum of 50 courts.
It thus appears that the Golf Realty Fund's application purposely ignored mentioning the retention of
existing people courts and the plan to add additional courts?
As a citizen (taxpayer) of Newport Beach CA I consider the Golf Realty Fund's Application incomplete.
Perhaps the Planning Commission can briefly review this material prior to the September 8, 2022
meeting?
Thank you,
Paul Christ
15-396
Front Page Philanthropy Letters Archives Sign Up Contact Us
Stu News Laguna
i'L
Newport
Beach
90.1OF
Search our site...
Search
Fair Game
By TOGA JOHNSON
The news appears very good for local plckleballers
Last week we were left questioning what was going on locally with The Tennis & Pickleball Club at
Newport Beach. There was momentarily a concern that the club, arguably the largest pickleball club in the
world, was in some type of jeopardy.
Absolutely not true, especially if landowner/managing partner Robert O Hill and TTPC owner Sean
Bollettieri-Abdali have anything to say about it.
First, O Hill took me step-by-step through his elaborate plans to basically re -develop the entire site
into the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District. It's impressive!
The plan continues to build on the pickleball sensation, with 26 courts and the ability to easily expand
to 30. Included in that are two new pickleball stadium courts.
And to not disappoint tennis players, the plan expands the tennis courts footprint from seven to eight
courts.
Other highlights include a new clubhouse, a wonderful fitness facility, complete with spa, a lap -pool,
and, are you ready for this, bungalows for short-term stays, penthouse suite lofts, complete with elevated ocean views, condos
and a hotel.
Some of those units encroach on land closer to the golf course but in no way close to interfere with play or change the
layout.
O Hill touted the fact that the new additions would bring in some $1.5 million in tax revenue to the city and additionally offer
marquee players a unique place to stay when coming to town for a golf tournament at nearby Newport Beach Country Club or
for onsite tennis and pickleball events.
E
15-397
Click on photo for a larger image
Courtesy of Robert O Hill & Stearns Architecture
Proposed master site plan for the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District
Click on photo for a larger image
Courtesy of Robert O Hill & Stearns Architecture
The proposed spa/fitness area
When the subject of possibly turning the club in to something else came up, O Hill clearly stated that he's "a steward of
community" and "feels a responsibility" to uphold the best facilities for golfers, pickleballers and tennis players alike.
O Hill holds the land lease under Newport Beach Country Club, hence his interest in golf, too.
Bollettieri-Abdali is excited, too, but in fairness to him, cautiously optimistic about the future.
First, let me explain the "cautiously optimistic" part. Sean admits he's on "a short-term lease" which is never a perfect
situation, but O Hill, in his address to the members last Thursday, said that Boll ettieri-Abdali is the person he wants and plans to
move forward with long-term.
He also reiterated that to me several times.
Bollettieri-Abdali, in fact, told me that he has an agreed upon 75-year lease on the table waiting approval by O Hill's "other
partners," who at this point seem to have a dysfunctional relationship across the owner's group, which Sean calls unfortunate.
Sean told me his agreement was submitted last December, but to this point it's been crickets.
While he's waiting, Bollettieri-Abdali has other, bigger plans. Try a major league professional pickleball team, perhaps the
Newport Beach Crashers, taking shape. Other cities, too, are in the developmental stage.
To his credit, he can get things done. When he arrived eight years ago to assume control of the facility it had 97 members
and virtually too many unused courts. It also had rundown facilities.
He told me he personally reworked virtually every corner of the facility to bring it back to life. And despite the rumored 1,800
members claimed last week, Sean says the real number, counting a number of younger people that play, is more in the 1,300
range.
15-398
His one parting comment to me was that he hopes to sit down with 0 Hill's partners (Elliot Feuerstein and Irving Chase)
and "break bread," discussing what their interests and concerns are, to once and for all get the long-term lease finalized.
For 0 Hill, he's already gone through a number of plans checks, spending much of the last nearly 20 years getting all
approvals through with the city for this project. He hopes to be in front of the city come September for permits
This from the City of Newport Beach, the Utilities Department is geared up for the King tides, a series of some of the
highest tides of the year. Even though no rain is forecasted, city crews have placed sandbags in strategic areas on the Peninsula
and Balboa Island. Also, staff has installed the stop gap boards on the south side seawall of Balboa Island.
Each night, dozens of staff will be mobile with truck -mounted pumps to pump the seepage in the streets created by the King
tides' height and resulting pressure.
The tide heights for the week are: Tonight, (Tuesday) July 12, a peak of 7.2 ft. at 8:40 p.m., Wednesday, July 13, a peak of
7.3 ft. at 9:29 p.m., Thursday, July 14, a peak of 7.1 ft. at 10:18 p.m. and Friday, July 15, a peak of 6.7 ft. at 11:08 p.m.
(Measurements are in mean lower low water and actual tide heights are expected to be six to 12 inches higher than predicted.)
a..
Newport Beach Fire Chief Jeff Boyles and Fire Marshall Kevin Bass will be the featured speakers at the Corona del Mar
Chamber of Commerce's Good Morning CdMI, on Thursday, July 14 from 8-9:30 a.m.
Click on photo for a larger image
Courtesy of CdM Chamber of Commerce
The topic is Summer Fire Prevention, Protection & Preparedness. The meeting, planned for the Bahia Corinthian Yacht
Club, will also offer complimentary coffee and pastry, There is no fee and no RSVP is required to attend.
Good Morning CdM!, a community government affairs discussion group, is the Chamber's monthly meeting connecting
residents with important current community topics and also with legislative updates from the offices of local representatives.
Expected to be on hand will be Newport Beach City Councilmember Joy Brenner, a local representative from
congresswoman Michelle Steel's office, Assemblywoman Cottie Petrie -Norris and OC Supervisor Lisa Bartlett.
The Bahia Corinthian Yacht Club is located at 1601 Bayside Drive, Corona del Mar.
aam
The Balboa Island Museum is hosting a Speaker Event this Thursday, July 14 at 6 p.m. with Catalina Museum for Art &
History Deputy Director and Chief Curator Johnny Sampson. Johnny will discuss the history of Catalina Island and the
historic landmarks therein.
For tickets, go here.
Front Page Who we are:
Shaena Stabler, President & CEO - Shaena@StuNewsNewport.com
Philanthropy
Lana Johnson, Editor - Lana@StuNewsNewport.com
Letters Tom Johnson, Publisher -Tom@StuNewsNewport.com
Archives Amy Senk, Duncan Forgey, Len Bose, Nancy Gardner and Sara Hall are our writers
and/or columnists.
Sign Up
Michael Sterling is our Webmaster & Designer.
Contact Us Email: Shaena@StuNewsNewport.com for questions about advertising
Stu News Laguna 949.315.0259
Email 10"=6VlCt11NhQ%nlcnlciernnrt nnm with rMIA/C r1M1=0Q=C lottere atr
15-399
From: Phoebe Loos <stayloos@cox.net>
Sent: September 29, 2022 9:53 PM
To: Sommers, Brad; Jurjis, Seimone; murray@newportbeachca.gov;
Lee, David
Cc: 'Mark Susson'; John French; pmchrist@earthlink.net
Subject: RE: Pickleball
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
I would like to add to what Mark is saying.
I have lived on Granville for 22 years. The pickleball facility is a terrible neighbor,
and in fact, has negatively impacted the life of those of us in this area (not just
Granville) in the following ways:
1. Club manager Sean Ballesteros personally promised me a few months ago he
would install speed bumps to try and control the dangerous situation of
pickleball players coming into and out of the Club at excessive speed without
looking to see if someone is driving down Granville. There have been multiple
near collisions. Nothing effective has been done by the Club to remedy this
situation. The recent grant of a wine/beer license will only make matters
worse.
2. As stated below by Mark, the noise from the sport itself, from the players
cheering, and from the loudspeakers during tournaments is unreasonable in a
facility literally within a few feet of homes.
3. The club has made no effort to maintain even minimally acceptable
landscaping around the clubhouse and parking lot. An old, unsightly, Pizza
van has been parked there continuously for months if not years. At times
trash is piled 3 or 4 feet high in the corner next to the dumpster. Many
areas have simply been allowed to go to weeds, which are chopped to the
ground every six months or so.
4. Sean told me it is his goal for his club to host national pickleball
tournaments. Even the local ones involve cars parked on curbs, in the weeds,
in the red zones, spilling out onto Granville and the parking lot for the office
buildings. Where is he going to put the cars from even larger tournaments?
In short, a Club being managed as this one is does not belong in a residential
neighborhood. There needs to be immediate traffic control, sound attenuation,
15-400
parking enforcement, and landscaping consistent with what is seen in the rest of
this well cared for area. I would respectfully ask the City to support the residents
who have made their homes here.
Phoebe Loos
1105 Granville Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
949 644 4146
From: Mark Susson <mark@sussonlaw.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2022 9:33 AM
To: John French<iohn@frenchassetmanagement.com>; Loos Phoebe <stayloos@cox.net>; paul christ
<pmchrist@earthlink.net>
Subject: Fwd: Pickleball
My correspondence to and from the City this morning.
Sent from my iSus iPhone
Mark Susson
Attorney
Susson Law
2 Corporate Plaza Drive
Suite 275
Newport Beach, CA, 92660
(949) 706-6900 office
Marl<(@sussonlaw.com
PLEASE NOTE NEW FIRM NAME, NEW TELEPHONE NUMBER AND NEW EMAIL ADDRESS EFFECTIVE
IMMEDIATELY
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Jurjis, Seimone" <sluriis@newportbeachca.gov>
Date: September 28, 2022 at 9:28:38 AM PDT
To: Mark Susson <mark@sussonlaw.com>
Cc: "Murray, John" <jmurray@newportbeachca.gov>, "Lee, David"
<dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RE: Pickleball
Hi Mark,
Thanks for reaching out. You bring up some good points. I'm copying John Murray, who
15-401
is the City's Code Enforcement Supervisor. He is meeting with the club membership and
will be discussing these complaints as well as other issues that have come up.
We are going to work with the club to get them back as good neighbors to the
community. Please continue to work with John as we move forward.
Thanks
SEIMONE JURJIS, P.E., C.B.O.
Community Development Department
Community Development Director
siuriis@newportbeachca.gov
949-644-3282
-----Original Message -----
From: Mark Susson <mark@sussonlaw.com>
Sent: September 28, 2022 9:22 AM
To: Jurjis, Seimone <siuriis@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Pickleball
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender
and know the content is safe.
Thanks for allowing me to contact you directly.
I have been a resident of Newport Beach since 1968. 1 attended CDM high school, UC
Irvine, and Loyola law school. My wife and I are both practicing attorneys in the area.
For many years, my family was a member of the Balboa Bay Club and the Balboa Bay
Tennis Club. In the late 60s through the late 70s, my family lived at Granville. I think we
were one of the first few residents to move in when they were built in 1969. When I
went off the law school in 1979, my parents moved to the other side of the bay.
After raising our children in Irvine, my wife and I moved back to Granville in 1997. We
have been there ever since. Both of us have served lengthy periods on the Granville
board. Since 1997, we have been members of the Newport Beach Country Club.
I sat through both the planning commission meeting and the city council meeting within
the last 60 days. These were my first meetings of this kind. Frankly, I was a bit
concerned that the plans submitted never even mentioned Pickleball and I was
wondering if the developer was trying to do an end run. At the end of the day, it
appears that the city council was well aware of what was going on and I think made the
right decision. While I do not know Mr O'Hill, I have been friends with the Chase Family
for many, many years. I have the utmost respect for the Chases.
Against all that background, please allow me to offer you a few thoughts.
At the end of the day, I think that there will be pickleball courts, in one form or another,
on the subject property. I am hoping that with appropriate safeguards the residents of
15-402
Granville and the members of the country club and the members of the pickleball courts
can peacefully co -exist. Having said that, here are the issues that I think need to be
addressed:
One. There needs to be some type of sound attenuation material used on all of the
fencing. I believe the city has done this at the Bonita Canyon courts and the current
operator has promised for years now that he was going to do the same. That has never
happened. I think the sound issue needs to be dealt with immediately, presumably with
the help of sound experts.
Two. The city needs to analyze the hours of operation of the club. Currently, I believe
play begins before 8 AM and I know that play continues well past 8 PM. I believe the city
courts close at dusk which is about 7:20 PM or thereabouts. The hours of operation are
impacted directly by the sound issue so my guess is the hours of operation may be a
moving target if the proper safeguards are taken with regard to sound.
Three. When the tennis club was built, I believe there were 24 tennis courts. I suspect
that one half of those courts were used for doubles and one half for singles. Now,
depending upon who you believe, I think we have approximately 40 Pickleball courts,
mostly taken by doubles, and the amount of people using the courts has increased
probably three or four fold. I believe this has led to a serious parking issue. The current
operator does not maintain the parking lot in a very safe condition and on numerous
occasions there have been cars parked along the curb, even adjacent to painted red
curbs. I myself have called the police on numerous occasions because the lawyer in me
believes that an emergency situation could give rise to real problems with cars parked
everywhere resulting in serious injury.
Four. From time to time, there are lighting issues as the current operator has installed
lights which shine directly down the ninth fairway of the golf course and anyone at
Granville sitting on their patio will find themselves looking into a bright light
(presumably LED) and frankly, once you see it, that's all you see. This is especially true in
the summer months when many people eat outside on the patio. I called the current
operator several times and he advised me that this was not his light. Only after repeated
calls did he apparently learn for the first time that it was his light and apparently he had
it repositioned.
Five. The public address system at the courts is very loud. There have been countless
mornings where, during a tournament, I can hear every announcement for every
individual who will soon be defaulted if they do not show up on a specific court. Keep in
mind my unit is 1047 and we are halfway up the block. I can only imagine what it sounds
like in the units closer to the courts.
Six. The people accessing the Pickleball courts from Civic Center Dr. or Newport Center
Drive seem to pull onto Granville and make a straight beeline to the parking lot without
ever looking for people exiting Granville. I understand there has been at least one
collision and perhaps more. This is clearly an accident waiting to happen. I believe there
needs to be a stop sign at the exit from the pickleball parking lot onto Granville, if not a
stop sign and a speed bum. I spoke with the city traffic department some weeks ago
15-403
and was told that they would consider painting an extension on the double yellow line,
that leads from Newport Center Drive to just in front of the bank, to keep that line going
until it reaches the guard house. The hope is that the line would alert people coming
across Newport Center Drive onto Granville and into the parking lot of the fact that
Granville is a active street with two way traffic.
Having played tennis at the club for years, having played racquetball at the Newport
Beach Athletic Club for many, many years and now as a Pickleball player, I am certainly
familiar with the difference between the various games. Pickleball is not tennis. The
biggest issue we all need to face is the sound created by contact between the ball and
the paddle. Clearly, this is not a new issue to the city as I have been following, to some
extent, the litigation over at the San Joaquin courts.
We have sound issues, we have traffic issues, we have hours of operation issues, lighting
issues, etc. We also have mega tournaments at the site. The operator admitted at the
planning commission meeting that these tournaments belong at a tournament facility
like Indian Wells. I could not agree more. All I want at the end of the day is to make sure
that the operator of the courts is a good neighbor. To date, that has not been the case. I
am happy to help the City in any way I can.
Sent from my iSus iPhone
Mark Susson
Attorney
Susson Law
2 Corporate Plaza Drive
Suite 275
Newport Beach, CA, 92660
(949) 706-6900 office
Mark@sussonlaw.com
PLEASE NOTE NEW FIRM NAME, NEW TELEPHONE NUMBER AND NEW EMAIL ADDRESS
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
15-404
From: Campbell, Jim
Sent: September 08, 2022 4:41 PM
To: Jurjis, Seimone; Summerhill, Yolanda; Lee, David
Subject: Fwd: The Tennis Club hearing tonight 6:30pm
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Sean Bollettieri-Abdali <sean(@nbcctennis.com>
Date: September 8, 2022 at 2:57:19 PM PDT
To: "Weigand, Erik" <eweigand@newportbeachca.gov>, lowrey@newportbeachca.gov,
"Klaustermeier, Sarah"<sklaustermeier@newportbeachca.gov>, "Rosene, Mark"
<mrose ne@newportbeachca.gov>, "Ellmore, Curtis" <CEIImore@newportbeachca.gov>,
"Kleiman, Lauren" <Ikleiman@newportbeachca.gov>, "Campbell, Jim"
<JCampbell@newportbeachca.gov>, Howard Bidna <hbidna@bidnakeys.com>
Subject: The Tennis Club hearing tonight 6:30pm
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
Dear Planning Commissioners,
We are once again in front of you tonight in regards to the future of The Tennis Club
aka:The Tennis & Pickleball Club at Newport Beach.
As owner and operator of the club, I would like to remind you that we had previously
turned in to Newport Beach City attorney almost 2,000 petitions in support of the
Managing Owner's Plan B. I can tell you that the majority of my club is in favor of the
plan being in discussion tonight.
We desperately need the new facilities to operate the club for many years ahead.
Further, our neighbors such as Eagle Four, Newport Beach Country Club and others are
in favor of this plan and have provided a letter which was sent to Jim Campbell. I have
also built a strong business relationship with the Irvine Company, with whom we have a
contractual parking agreement and another easement in the works along with an
existing easement for up to 554 parking stalls.
For over one month, I along with my staff have hosted a Monday morning event, with
complimentary coffee and pastries to discuss this plan and answer questions. 100% of
the members we spoke with are in favor of this plan and many of them want this to
happen sooner rather than later. Not one individual opposed this plan.
15-405
Tonight, I suspect we will get some opposition speaking against this plan, but be aware
that some individual(s) have started a public forum, hiding under falsified names, and
posting anonymous posts, especially the last 36 hours. I hope that this will not confuse
you or any of our community members.
As owner of the club and tenant of the property, I respect all my landlords. I truly pray
and hope they will agree on this Plan. It's a win/win for all sides. They will be known as
heros in saving the club that means so much to hundreds of people in the City of
Newport Beach, not to mention out of State members and guests. We have built a
strong community which we are proud of, one that is saving lives and keeping people
healthy. Please help us in getting this plan approved.
Please feel free to contact me if you are to have any questions, at 213-909-6211.
Many aces,
Sean
Sean Bollettieri Abdali / President
The Tennis Club at Newport Beach
Eleven Club House Dr. Newport Beach CA 92660
P: 949.759.0711
www.thetennisclubnb.com
15-406
From: justin smith <justinhalos@yahoo.com>
Sent: September 07, 2022 5:25 PM
To: Jurjis, Seimone
Cc: Lee, David
Subject: TTC Committe Questions
Attachments: 1.png; 2.png; 3.png
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Dear Mr. Jurjis
Having seen this letter from Sean Abdali, the Club President of The Tennis Club at Newport Beach I am
confused. I see Sean's claim below highlighted in yellow that he "will have 30-32 pickleball
courts". However when I see the plan the City has reviewed and is looking to approve, it does not show
any pickleball courts. Can you please let me know if pickleball courts are being approved with this plan?
Thank you and regards,
Justin Smith,
Newport Beach
15-407
The Tennis Club at Newport Beach
❑ear TTG members,
As we are wrapping up summer and our tournament
and event season, I would like to update you on some
items.
As many of you know I've been traveling to Florida
back and forth for my 91 yr old father, who is now in
hospice care. This is a difficult time for our family but I
like to thank you for your prayers and positive
thoughts.
Please note, the project was originally submitted more
than 10 years ago when our address and name was
different and there was no such thing as Pickleball, On
Thursday the Managing Owner is requesting to
change the previous plan of 7 courts to 8 courts!l! This
equates to 30-32 Pickleball courts, and increases the
hotel rooms from 27A2. More details below.
TENNIS CLUB AT NEWPORT BEACH PROJECT
AMENDMENT (PA2021-260} Site Location: 1602
East Coast Highway
Summary:
An amendment to the 2012 approved Tennis Club at
Newport Beach project to; 1) increase the number of
future tennis courts from 7 to 8 courts, 2) increase the
number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms, 3)
increase the gross floor area of the ancillary hotel
uses by 4,686 square feet, and 4) provide 3 attached
condominium units and 2 detached single family
residences in -lieu of 5 detached single-family
residences. The proposed changes to the 2012
approved project require the consideration of the
following land use:
The Managing Owner, Robert O'Hill will be
holding a meeting at TTG this Wednesday
September 8th at 6pm in the Clubhouse. Feel
free to come if you have any questions.
15-408
The club will support a plan that preserves our club
and the one submitted, will allow me to provide up to
30-32 Pickleball courts. The new plan will deliver
much needed facilities, such as a new locker room for
showers, changing room, Restaurantfbar, Pro Shop,
and two stadium FIB courts. We, the club, appose any
plan that eliminates our club period.
Please join the Managing Owner tomorrow,
Wednesday at Glom for a Q&A session at the
Clubhouse Grill.
WARNING: It was brought to our attention this
afternoon that few individuals are stirring the pat with
untrue facts and negative thoughts about the
Thursday hearing. I am very concerned that these
individuals wil'l spoil us having a club. The plan for
Thursday night, guarantees our club to be preserved
and I will have 30-32 Pickleball courts to deliver to
you, along with other much needed and important
facilities, such as showers, locker rooms, and better
restrooms.
If you have any information on who these individuals
may be or who's chat roam it belongs to, please let me
know in confidence by texting me at 213-909-6211.
Events & Tournaments:
. Pickleball:
The club has taken a very strong stand in putting
a pause on all new events and tournaments, and
set guidelines to ensure member experience is
not jeopardized and protect cur facility with the
wear and tear. We will be announcing the
guidelines we have set for all new bookings and
have asked the event company to reach out to
already committed events to move some things,
such as start time and number of courts.
. Tennis:
UTR Tennis tournaments have been reduced and
more matches will continue to move off -site,
including our new facility in Coto. We have also
reduced a large number of our Junior
Performance activities.
15-409
In conclusion, with any plan passing by the City it will
still require 70% vote from all Landlords. So far, the
landlords have litigated against one another for gears.
Let's assume all the landlords agree to one given plan,
then it will still tale multiple years for it to start the
Process.
What we DO NOT want to happen is to have club
members confused to oppose the only plan that will
keep our club operating, offering what we offer today.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact rye b
phone at 1 - 09-6 11.
Many aces,
Sear?
15-410
From:
Sent:
' To:
Subject:
JIM CAMPBELL
Community Development Department
Deputy Community Development Director
icampbell(a)ne wportbeachca. qov
949-644-3210
Campbell, Jim
September 08, 2022 4:54 PM
Lee, David; Summerhill, Yolanda
FW: TCC Pickleball and Tennis Club
From: rtarbelll@gmail.com <rtarbelll@gmail.com>
Sent: September 08, 2022 4:54 PM
To: Planning Commissioners<PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: TCC Pickleball and Tennis Club
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Commissioners, I am a resident of CDM (465 Seaward Rd, CDM, 92625) and a member of the TCC club.
There has been a lot of confusion relating to the redevelopment of the club into a hotel and 8 tennis
courts. We have been told that the pickleball courts will remain in the new development, but it appears
they are being eliminated based on the agenda item description I read today. It appears to me that
there is more of a community benefit from having the pickleball courts remain in place versus
eliminating the pickleball courts then and keeping 8 tennis courts. That being said, I don't see anything
the applicant is asking for that is not consistent with the property zoning so maybe there is nothing that
the PC can do but if it is possible to designate the construction of the Pickleball courts over the tennis
courts then I would encourage the PC to make this condition a requirement. Thank you for your service.
FrTWA Rick Tarbell
Cell (714) 396 8995
COMMUNITIES http://twacommunities.com/
"Innovarim HOLOS1170 r0Fiftaif CommunidaS"
15-411
From: Lee, David
Sent: October 06, 2022 10:29 AM
90�-P-
Hi
If a revised application includes a public spa and fitness center, we would need to evaluate the entire
facility and operation to make the determination on parking it separately from the hotel.
Thanks,
DAVID S. LEE
Community Development Department
Associate Planner
dlee(a)newportbeachca. gov
949-644-3225
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bav C, Newport Beach, California 92660 1 newportbeachca.gov
From: Susan Kramer <susan@pennrecords.com>
Sent: October 05, 2022 2:52 PM
To: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RE: Project File No: PA 2021-260 Parking Considerations
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
David: Sorry to bother you again and I promise only (1) more question
until next year when the next chapter unfolds with I am sure more
twists and turns.
1. If the Spa and Fitness Center was open to the public would that
change the parking spaces needed?
Thanks a lot. You have been terrific!
Best regards,
Susan Kramer
Corporate Accounts
15-412
Penn Records Management - Corporate Offices:
2551 S. Garnsey St. (Serving Orange County)
Santa Ana, Calif. 92707
14;�- 15622 Producer Lane (Serving Los Angeles Area)
Huntington Beach, Calif. 92649
Tele. 714/549-0224 susanennrecords.com
www.pennrecords.com
From: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, October 5, 2022 7:57 AM
To: Susan Kramer <susan@pennrecords.com>
Subject: RE: Project File No: PA 2021-260 Parking Considerations
Hi Susan,
See my responses to each number, below:
1. Noted, that's helpful information.
2. Noted as well. Parking would need to be evaluated for pickleball if the application comes in.
3. The spa and fitness center was proposed as an ancillary use for the hotel. The hotel and tennis
club parking requirements were accounted for in the required and proposed parking. There may
be overlap in where tennis members / hotel guests park their cars. However, it was all
accounted for from a parking count stand point.
4. 1 do not know this information regarding membership plans. This would be a question for the
ownership. Again, parking for tennis and hotel use were accounted for.
The rest of your questions regarding noise are great questions, but not for me to answer. My job is to
analyze the project which was submitted, which was for tennis courts only. We'll see what happens in
the near future with the project.
Again, let me know if you need anything else!
Thanks,
DAVID S. LEE
Community Development Department
Associate Planner
dleena.newportbeachca. aov
949-644-3225
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bay C, Newport Beach, California 92660 1 newportbeachca.gov
From: Susan Kramer <susan@pennrecords.com>
Sent: October 04, 2022 3:10 PM
15-413
To: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RE: Project File No: PA 2021-260 Parking Considerations
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
David: I appreciate that you have a complicated job ahead of you to write the
codes for Pickleball. Since I am at TTC (3) weekdays and (1) Saturday I have
a lot of experience with the hassle of parking in the current parking lot.
Having watch both the Planning Commission and the City Council meetings,
there are a few inaccuracies that were presented by Sean and Mr. OHill:
Primarily women play pickleball Monday — Friday. Families & Couples
play on the weekend. As I play tennis 3 week day mornings, I can attest
that I have never seen (2) women arrive together. The majority of
women arrive singly very similar to tennis players. If the code is 4 parking spaces
per court for tennis it should be the same for pickleball on weekdays.
However, these are the days when the least amount of parking is available.
2. Pickleball players have different start times so when the courts are
full, it is difficult for those players arriving later to find parking.
Hard to say (4) spaces per court when players overlap.
3. Does SPA & Fitness Center have its own parking or is it shared with
the parking lot for Pickleball?
4. Does Pickleball membership include the SPA and Fitness Center? If
so parking spaces may be used longer periods of time — not freeing
them up for members who arrive later.
I am also a little curious about the loud pickleball whacking noise.
Why would someone buy a high priced Condo with such a loud
background noise every day and evening coming in your windows?
Why would someone book a pricey hotel room near the pickleball courts
for the same reason?
If for any reason I can answer questions for you, I would be happy to do so.
Obviously I would like tennis & pickleball players to co -exist as we are now
but am very curious how this all plays out.
GOOD LUCK!
Best regards,
15-414
Susan Kramer
From: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 7:52 AM
To: Susan Kramer <susan@pennrecords.com>
Subject: RE: Project File No: PA 2021-260 Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment
Hi Susan,
No, the 2012 project is not expired. The development agreement was extended one year until
September of 2023.
If there is a project resubmitted to the City for pickleball, we will conduct the necessary studies to
determine requirements and standards. Since the project that went to City Council last week was for
tennis only, we only analyzed the project for tennis.
Let me know if you have other questions. Thank you.
DAVID S. LEE
Community Development Department
Associate Planner
dlee(anewportbeachca,gov
949-644-3225
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bay C, Newport Beach, California 92660 1 newportbeachca.Bov
From: Susan Kramer <susan@pen nrecords.com>
Sent: October 03, 2022 3:05 PM
To: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RE: Project File No: PA 2021-260 Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
David: Thank you for the courtesy of our reply. Is the original 2012 approved
Newport Beach Project now expired?
Or does the Planning Commission have to create guidelines for
Pickleball courts in order for this pending project to be reconsidered?
15-415
If so, (8) tennis courts converted to Pickleball Courts = 32 Pickleball Courts.
The current plan only calls for (32) parking spaces so this will be a problem
as each court could have (4) players x 32 = 128 parking spaces needed.
Best regards,
Susan Kramer
Corporate Accounts
Penn Records Management — Corporate Offices:
2551 S. Garnsey St. (Serving Orange County)
Santa Ana, Calif 92707
15622 Producer Lane (Serving Los Angeles Area)
Huntington Beach, Calif. 92649
Tele. 714/549-0224 susan( pennrecords.com
www.pennrecords.com
From: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2022 2:31 PM
To: Susan Kramer <susan@pennrecords.com>
Subject: RE: Project File No: PA 2021-260 Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment
Hi Susan,
There is a video uploaded onto Youtube from the City's account. The item begins at approximate 2
hours 23 minutes into the video.
The item was not approved, and was further continued onto a future Planning Commission meeting.
Let me know if you have more questions!
DAVID S. LEE
Community Development Department
Associate Planner
dlee(a)newportbeachca.gov
949-644-3225
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
100 Civic Center Drive, First Floor Bay C, Newport Beach, California 92660 1 newportbeachca.aov
15-416
From: Susan Kramer <susan@pennrecords.com>
Sent: October 03, 2022 1:59 PM
To: Lee, David <dlee@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Project File No: PA 2021-260 Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
David: As the Minutes and Video from the City Council Meeting Sept 27th are not posted
online as of yet, could you please advise the status of the 2012 approved Tennis Club
at Newport Beach project. I am a friendly spectator and a member of the Tennis Club
so not to worry. I do not play pickleball but I hear lots of untrue rumors.
Thank you for your assistance in keeping the information accurate.
Best regards,
Susan Kramer
1851 Port Seabourne Way, Newport Beach, Calif. 92660
15-417
On the Agenda: City Council
Meeting for Oct. 25
Our next City Council meeting is Tuesday, October 25. Items of
interest are highlighted below. The entire agenda and reports can
be viewed here.
The regular meeting will begin at 4 p.m. Agenda items include:
• A resolution to establish an ad hoc citizens' advisory committee to provide input and make
recommendations to address residential crime and burglary. The committee would include
three community members with backgrounds in public safety or criminal justice. If approved,
the committee will be advertised and qualified residents invited to apply.
• Approve a $3.4-million, 10-year agreement with Axon Enterprises for the purchase of body -
worn cameras, in -car video systems and tasers for the Police Department, along with related
hardware, software and services. Among other improvements, the agreement would expand
the use of body -worn cameras departmentwide.
Reconsideration of a development project amendment for the Tennis Club at Newport
Beach. The Tennis Club, located at 1602 E. Coast Highway, is seeking to amend a
previously approved development agreement. The Council voted 5-2 on September 27 to
continue the item, directing the Planning Commission to consider the inclusion of pickleball
courts instead of tennis courts. On October 11, the Council voted 4-3 to reconsider the
applicant's original request. The applicant is seeking to increase the number of tennis courts,
hotel rooms, and hotel floor space, and reduce the number of single-family residences, along
with a 10-year term extension.
A resolution that would amend a lease agreement with the Lido House Hotel, 3300 Newport
Blvd. The applicant is requesting to add 15,103 square feet to the previously approved
130-room Lido House Hotel to allow the construction of five new rentable cottages, increased
storage space, enlarged meeting rooms, a new greenhouse seating room, expansion of
three existing hotel rooms, and an enclosed area on the rooftop terrace. The amendment
also includes demolition of the former Fire Station No. 2 building to create additional public
and private parking spaces.
October 25, 2022
Agenda Item No. 15
From: Rieff, Kim
To: Mulvey. Jennifer
Subject: FW: Letter to City Council Objecting Agenda Item No. 15 at Sept. 27 Hearing
Date: October 20, 2022 2:33:51 PM
Attachments: Letter to City Council Re Co -Owners Obiecting to Agenda Item No. 15 at 9.27.22 Hearing.pdf
2022.09.23 Co -Owners Itr. to City Council - Exhibit 1 (OIC Agmt w. Ex. A Only).pdf
From: Brett Feuerstein <brett@mesacenters.com>
Sent: October 20, 2022 2:25 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Leung, Grace <gleung@newportbeachca.gov>; Jurjis, Seimone <sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov>;
Robert 0 Hill <roh@ohill.com>; Ryan Chase <ryanlylechase@gmail.com>
Subject: Letter to City Council Objecting Agenda Item No. 15 at Sept. 27 Hearing
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Honorable City Council Members:
We understand at the upcoming City Council hearing on October 25, 2022, the City Council will
reconsider the Tennis Club at Newport Beach Project Amendment, which was Agenda Item No. 15 at
the City Council's September 27, 2022 hearing. At that September 27th hearing, the Council
Members voted 6-1 to refer the Project Amendment back to the Planning Commission for further
consideration and the inclusion of pickleball courts (with the necessary CEQA and impact analysis).
As we have previously expressed to the City Council, we believe the Council Members made the right
decision in referring the Project Amendment back to the Planning Commission so that it can be
revised to clearly provide for pickleball courts. We also believe this decision reflected good
governance because it provides the only guarantee to ensure that the applicant follows through on
his promises to include pickleball courts.
By this email, we are re -submitting our September 23, 2022, letter to you (which we previously
submitted in advance of the City Council's September 27th hearing) so that it may be a part of the
record for the October 25th hearing. Our September 23rd letter, among other things, expresses our
concern that the current Project Amendment does not provide for pickleball courts or reflect
pickleball as a future use at the Tennis Club. As we understand it, the Project Amendment being
considered at the October 25th hearing still does not do so, and the only way to guarantee pickleball
as a use going forward is for the City Council to stay the course with their original decision on
September 27th to refer the project back to the Planning Commission to allow for the incorporation
of pickleball courts into the plans.
Thank you for your consideration of our comments.
Best,
Brett
Brett Feuerstein
8294 Mira Mesa Blvd
San Diego, CA 92126
(858) 271-4682
(858) 271-5161 Fax
brett(@mesacenters.com
Mira Mesa Shopping Center - West, LLC
8294 Mira Mesa Blvd. San Diego, California 92126
Office (858) 271-4682 Fax (858) 271-5161
September 23, 2022
DELIVERED VIA EMAIL ONLY. citycouncilgnewportbeachca.gov
Newport Beach City Council
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
P.O. Box 1768
Newport Beach, CA 92658-8915
Re: September 27, 2022, City Council Agenda
Objection to Agenda Item No. 15
Project No. PA2021-260
Dear Honorable City Council Members:
We write to you today to express our objection to Agenda Item No. 15. As you may know,
we own 50% of the property at 1602 East Coast Highway ("Tennis Property"), where The Tennis
Club at Newport Beach is located. Our co-owner Golf Realty Fund, LP ("GRF") owns the other
50% of the Tennis Property; Robert O Hill represents GRF. We and GRF hold our ownership
interests in the Tennis Property as tenants in common, not as an LLC or partnership, which means
the individual owners retain significant rights.
Our families have lived in the City of Newport Beach ("City") since the 1920s, and we
own and operate a number of commercial, residential, and recreational properties throughout the
City. For example, one our families' patriarchs, Alan Fainbarg, operated one of the first beach
rental shops on Bay Avenue on the Balboa Peninsula in the 1930s. We have the interests of the
City at heart, and as generational families with deep roots here we see it as our duty to be involved
with and to give back to this community, which we have done and continue to do, including
through our philanthropic work.
As you may know, we are engaged in an arbitration with GRF to establish rights and
obligations of the owners under our private Owners in Common Agreement' for the Tennis
Property ("OIC Agreement"). A central issue in the arbitration proceeding is whether GRF has the
authority to unilaterally apply for the plans and entitlements for the Tennis Property that are before
the City Council on September 27, 2022. It is our position that GRF does not have the authority
under the OIC Agreement to apply for the plans and entitlements without our consent. That said,
we recognize this is a private dispute between private parties, and we are not seeking to involve
the City in our private dispute. Instead, we are giving you this background information to help you
understand our objection to the proposed planning application and its approvals and entitlements,
which is further explained in the attached Arbitration Demand.
' A copy of the OIC Agreement is attached as Exhibit A to the Arbitration Demand from the pending
arbitration, and a copy of the Arbitration Demand is enclosed with this correspondence as Exhibit 1 and is
hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.
Also, we attended the City's Planning Commission hearing on September 8, 2022, where
we expressed to City staff and commissioners (among other things) our long-term commitment to
pickleball at the Tennis Club. We recognize the explosion of pickleball as a sport and realize its
growing popularity in our community and the club members' desire for pickleball. In fact, we have
been working on a lease with a prominent Newport Beach business operator that would: preserve
the club, preserve the pickleball courts, preserve the tennis courts and significantly upgrade the
club's facilities. The lease would be for 10 years and can be extended for an additional 10 years
should the tenant so desire — making the total possible term 20 years. We sent this lease to Mr. O
Hill and we hope he gives it fair consideration.
We also expressed at the September 8th Planning Commission hearing our concern that
the plans and entitlements for which GRF is applying do not provide for pickleball courts or reflect
pickleball as a future use at the Tennis Club. We also understood the City staff and commissioners
to say at the September 8th hearing that not only does GRF's plans not provide for pickleball at
the Tennis Club but if GRF's project were to be approved and constructed that pickleball would
be eliminated as a use at the Tennis Club. We hope that we could all agree that elimination of
pickleball would not be good for the pickleball members nor the future of the Tennis Club.
We were likewise very concerned to hear a statement read at the September 8th Planning
Commission hearing on behalf of an apparently large contingency of club members who oppose
GRF's project but did not attend the hearing out of fear because Mr. Abdali allegedly threatened
to kick such members out of the Tennis Club if they did attend and oppose the project. We have
heard that, unlike the Planning Commission hearing and despite the alleged threats against them,
members from the Tennis Club may appear at the City Council hearing to express their
dissatisfaction with GRF's project.
Thank you for your consideration of our letter. We appreciate the service you perform for
our shared community.
Sincerely,
Brett Feuerstein
as Manager of
Mesa Shopping Center -East, LLC
and Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, LLC
R
q�w ew"
Ryan Chase
as Manager of Fainbarg III, LP
cc: Grace K. Leung, City Manager (gleung@newportbeachca.gov)
Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director (sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov)
Robert O Hill, Golf Realty Fund (roh@golfrealtyfund.com)
Enclosures: Exhibit 1: March 25, 2022, Arbitration Demand from the Pending Arbitration with
Exhibit A only; Exhibits B to H to the Arbitration Demand can be provided upon
request
Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MICHAEL YODER (SBN 83059)
myoder@omm.com
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
610 Newport Center Drive
17th Floor
Newport Beach, California 92660-6429
Telephone: +1 949 823 6900
Facsimile: +1 949 823 6994
JACOB C. GONZALES (SBN 235555)
igotyples@.j*cg-law.com
1cg I law
23 Corporate Plaza Drive, Suite 150
Newport Beach, California 92660-7901
Telephone: +1 949 313 8545
Attorneys for Claimants
MESA SHOPPING CENTER -EAST, LLC
MIRA MESA SHOPPING CENTER -WEST, LLC and
FAINBARG III, LP
JUDICIAL ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION SERVICES
ARBITRATION PROCEEDING — ORANGE COUNTY OFFICE
MESA SHOPPING CENTER -EAST, LLC, a
California limited liability company; MIRA
MESA SHOPPING CENTER -WEST, LLC, a
California limited liability company; and
FAINBARG III, LP, a California limited
partnership,
Claimants,
V.
GOLF REALTY FUND LP, a California
limited partnership fka O HILL PROPERTIES,
a California limited partnership,
Respondent.
JAMS Case No. 5200000090
CLAIMANTS' DEMAND FOR
ARBITRATION AND STATEMENT OF
CLAIMS FOR:
(1) DECLARATORY AND
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF;
(2) BREACH OF CONTRACT;
(3) BREACH OF THE COVENANT OF
GOOD FAITH AND FAIR
DEALING;
(4) ACCOUNTING; AND
(5) DECLARATORY RELIEF
Claimants Mesa Shopping Center -East, LLC, Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, LLC,
and Fainbarg III, LP (collectively "Co -Owners" or "Claimants"), hereby allege as follows:
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I. INTRODUCTION
1. The parties, tenant in common owners of the approximate 7-acre Newport Beach
tennis club property commonly known as 1602 E. Coast Highway, Newport Beach, CA 92660
(the "Tennis Property"), are no strangers to arbitration. This action marks their fifth such
proceeding. In 2013, Respondent obtained an arbitration award that allowed him to complete a
few remaining discretionary entitlements, which he had been pursuing for almost 15 years, for his
so-called "master plan" to redevelop the Tennis Property. In 2020, Co -Owners obtained an
arbitration award finding they had not consented, and were not required to consent, to
Respondent's master plan to redevelop the Tennis Property. It was also established at the 2020
arbitration that Respondent had finished processing the few remaining discretionary entitlements
for his master plan. Thus, any right Respondent had under the 2013 award to process his
discretionary entitlements had run its course.
2. Co -Owners were surprised to learn in late November 2021 that Respondent was
applying for new entitlements for the Tennis Property without their knowledge or consent.
Respondent submitted new entitlement applications to the City of Newport Beach (the "City")
over Co -Owners' instructions that he did not have their consent —express or implied —to process
any more entitlements or to spend ownership funds doing so. Respondent concealed from Co -
Owners that he had submitted new applications, and when Co -Owners finally learned of the new
entitlement applications, they made multiple requests to Respondent in writing to stop and to
provide them with information about his entitlement applications. Respondent ignored Co -
Owners' requests.
3. Co -Owners also learned in December 2021 that Respondent had allowed a new
operator to start a restaurant at the Tennis Property without obtaining the Co -Owners' consent as
required under the parties' written agreement for the Property, and that Respondent had submitted
a liquor license application purportedly on behalf of the Property ownership along with that
operator without notifying Co -Owners. Co -Owners then discovered in February 2022 that alcohol
was being sold at the Tennis Property without a liquor license. Co -Owners asked Respondent in
writing for basic information about the new operator at the Tennis Property, including to be
-2-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
93
provided any purported lease with the operator, and that Respondent stop the unlawful sale of
alcohol. Respondent ignored their request for information and Co -Owners are informed and
believe, and thereon allege, that alcohol continues to be sold at the Tennis Property without a
I license.
4. Respondent is ignoring Co -Owners' rights and his duties to them by treating the
Tennis Property as though it is his to do with as he pleases. Respondent has spent significant
ownership funds while failing to respond to Co -Owners' requests for basic information and
running afoul of his limited duties as managing owner. Rather than cooperate and seek to work
toward a consensus with Co -Owners, Respondent is attempting to present them with a fait
accompli for his development project for the Tennis Property while exposing them to real liability
by placing an operator at the Property without Co -Owners' consent and allowing that operator to
unlawfully sell alcohol. Co -Owners bring this arbitration to remove Respondent as managing
owner or, alternatively, to enjoin him from further breaches of his agreement with Co -Owners.
II. THE PARTIES
5. Claimant Mesa Shopping Center -East, LLC ("Mesa East"), is a California limited
liability company with its principal place of business in the City of San Diego.
6. Claimant Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, LLC ("Mesa West"), is a California
limited liability company with its principal place of business in the City of San Diego.
7. Claimant Fainbarg III, LP ("Fainbarg III"), is a California limited partnership with
its principal place of business in the City of Costa Mesa.
8. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Respondent Golf
Realty Fund, LP ("GRF" or "Respondent"), is a California limited partnership, which is managed
by Robert O Hill, with its principal place of business in the City of Newport Beach.
III. VENUE AND JURISDICTION
9. This action stems from the Agreement Between Real Property Owners — Balboa
Bay Club Racquet Club of March 8, 1994 (the "OIC Agreement"), for the Tennis Property, the
legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit A to the OIC Agreement. Exhibit A attached
hereto is a copy of the OIC Agreement.
-3-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10. Section 26 of the OIC Agreement states: "All disputes arising under this
agreement will be resolved by submission to arbitration at the Orange County offices of Judicial
Arbitration & Mediation Services Inc. (`JAMS') for binding arbitration. The parties may agree on
a retired judge from the JAMS panel. If they are unable to agree, JAMS will provide a list of three
available judges and each party may strike one. The remaining judge will serve as the arbitrator at
the arbitration hearing.... Nothing in this paragraph shall in any way limit or otherwise restrict a
party's right or ability to obtain injunctive relief or appointment of a receiver through the Court
system."
11. Pursuant to the OIC Agreement, the claims set forth in this Arbitration Demand
are subject to arbitration before a retired judge at JAMS in the County of Orange. Co -Owners
reserve the right to obtain injunctive relief through the Court system as provided in Section 26.
IV. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
A. Tenant in Common Ownership of the Tennis Property
12. In around 1994, the parties acquired the Tennis Property. Tenant in common
ownership in the Tennis Property is apportioned as follows:
• Claimant Fainbarg III has a 25% interest,
• Claimant Mesa East has a 15% interest,
• Claimant Mesa West has a 10% interest, and
• Respondent has a 50% interest.
13. The parties also co-own (as tenants in common) the adjacent Newport Beach
Country Club located at One Clubhouse Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 (f/k/a 1600 E. Pacific
Coast Highway, Newport Beach, CA 92660) (the "Golf Property"). Pursuant to the Agreement
Between Real Property Owners — Newport Beach Country Club of September 30, 1992, the terms
of which are almost identical to the OIC Agreement, tenant in common ownership in the Golf
Property is apportioned the same as the ownership in the Tennis Property.
14. Under two essentially identical agreements, for years O Hill Properties, now
known as Golf Realty Fund, both controlled by Robert O Hill (hereinafter referred to as "O
Hill"), acted as the managing owner, under limited powers, for the tenant in common owners of
-4-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
W.
the Tennis and Golf Properties. As both Properties were under long-term triple net leases to
tenants, the fundamental job of O Hill was to collect rents, pay the minimal expenses associated
with overseeing the Properties, and then pay distributions to all the tenant in common owners.
15. The OIC Agreement provides the managing owner with only limited authority
over the Tennis Property, as most decisions are reserved to the tenant in common owners or
require at least a majority vote. For example, before O Hill (as the managing owner) could make a
material expenditure for a capital improvement at the Tennis Property he must first obtain the
written consent of at least one of the Co -Owners. See OIC Agreement § 7(d). Similarly, any
conveyance of an interest in the Tennis Property, including a leasehold interest, must be in a
writing signed by all the owners. Id. § 3. Aside from the limited powers given to the managing
owner to collect rents and pay ordinary expenses, the OIC Agreement expressly provides that
each tenant in common owner retains the right to deal with his interest in the Tennis Property as
such owner sees fit. Id. § 1.
B. History of Problems with O Hill's Management
1. Past Problems with Tennis Property
16. Early on, in the 1990s, O Hill explored ways to redevelop the Tennis Property. He
sought to rezone the Tennis Property from open space recreational to a mixed use, which would
allow commercial and residential development. Co -Owners were supportive of O Hill's initial
efforts to obtain an upzoning of the Tennis Property from open space to mixed use and had no
objection to his use of limited ownership funds for that purpose. O Hill developed several ideas
for possible site plans but spent relatively modest amounts of ownership funds doing so.
17. In around 2007, however, O Hill started spending considerable amounts of
ownership funds, prompting Co -Owners to begin asking questions and requesting information to
better understand both what O Hill planned, and the underlying economics of a possible Tennis
Property redevelopment. O Hill only reluctantly turned over information for his development plan
for the Tennis Property, which O Hill referred to as his "Master Plan," which involved obtaining
discretionary entitlements for the Tennis Property for the following three specific uses: 5 single
family residential units (referred to as the villas), 7 tennis courts with a new tennis clubhouse/spa
-5-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
I
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
W.
building, and a hotel with 27 rooms (referred to as the bungalows).
18. Within a year or so of initiating their fact-finding process, it became apparent to
Co -Owners that O Hill's proposed Master Plan did not maximize the Tennis Property's value for
all the tenant in common owners, or that O Hill at least had not provided Co -Owners with
meaningful information to support his proposed Master Plan's economics. It was also apparent
that O Hill's Master Plan was really about his personal interests in developing the Tennis
Property even though those interests were not shared by Co -Owners, and he was pursuing those
interests at Co -Owners' expense. On February 20, 2008, Co -Owners asked O Hill in writing to
stop — formally objecting to his further processing discretionary entitlements for his Master Plan.
Rather than stop, O Hill ramped up his spending of ownership funds on his discretionary
entitlements for his proposed Master Plan.
2. 2011-13 Arbitration with Judge Fromholz
19. In April 2011, the Co -Owners commenced a JAMS arbitration proceeding with
Hon. Judge Hayley Fromholz (Ret.) to enjoin O Hill from further processing his discretionary
entitlements for his Master Plan. Judge Fromholz issued his decision in May 2013. Exhibit B
attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Judge Fromholz' May 17, 2013, Final Award.
20. Judge Fromholz found the OIC Agreement did not expressly give O Hill (as
managing owner) expansive powers, and that the Agreement was ambiguous in that it neither
clearly authorized nor restricted O Hill from pursuing the discretionary entitlements for his
Master Plan: "The Agreements do not expressly give the Managing Owner expansive powers. For
example, Recital C of the Agreements states merely that the `Owners ... believe it necessary and
appropriate to have one Owner be the managing Owner for purposes of accounting and
administration." (Fromholz Award at 8, underline added.)
21. In addition to finding the OIC Agreement was ambiguous, Judge Fromholz
concluded that Co -Owners had sat on the sidelines and waited too long to protest the few
remaining discretionary entitlements O Hill was processing for his Master Plan. Judge Fromholz
found that O Hill could finish the limited work left to complete the discretionary entitlements for
his Master Plan since he had purportedly been pursuing them for almost 15 years and very little
-6-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
remained for O Hill to do (hereinafter, "2012 Discretionary Entitlements"): "At the time that
[Co -Owners] voiced their objection in February 2008, O Hill had been actively_ pursuing the
discretionary entitlements for nearly fifteen years. Voters approved the general amendment and
the only remaining [discretionary] entitlements were the development standards such as height
limits, landscaping, vehicle access, and parking. Thus, very little remained to complete the NBCC
Plan." (Id. at 9, underline added.)
22. Judge Fromholz found that, as of May 2013, the only items that remained for O
Hill to complete his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements were ministerial development standards:
"Currently, the development standards for the NBCC Land such as height limits, landscaping,
vehicle access, and parking, are still undetermined. The development standards are the final
discretionary entitlements for the NBCC Land. Proceedings are continuing to be held before the
City to determine the development standards." (Id. at 4, underline added.)
3. 2015-16 Arbitration with Justice Sonenshine
23. Following the conclusion of the parties' arbitration with Judge Fromholz, and for
almost two years, Co -Owners made multiple written requests to O Hill asking to be provided
meaningful information about his 2012 Entitlements and Master Plan. O Hill ignored Co -Owners'
requests. Thus, in April 2015, Co -Owners initiated another arbitration against O Hill, this time
with the Hon. Justice Sheila Prell Sonenshine (Ret.), to obtain an order allowing them to access
information concerning the work -product resulting from the hundreds of thousands of dollars of
ownership funds spent by O Hill on his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements and Master Plan, and to
enforce their contractual right to have an audit performed concerning those expenditures.
24. In August 2016, Co -Owners prevailed in the parties' arbitration with Justice
Sonenshine and obtained the audit they were seeking, information concerning O Hill's
expenditure of ownership funds on his Master Plan and O Hill's stipulation to provide annual
written status and financial reports as required under section 7 of the OIC Agreement. Justice
Sonenshine also awarded Co -Owners their attorneys' fees and costs as the prevailing parties.
4. 2017-20 Arbitration with Justice King
25. In 2017, O Hill sued Co -Owners seeking to force them to go along with the
-7-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
development of his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements and Master Plan — i.e., the construction of a
27-room hotel, 5 villa residences, and a new tennis clubhouse and 7 courts. In March and May
2019, an evidentiary hearing was held with the Hon. Justice Jeffrey King (Ret.) at JAMS, and on
April 8, 2020, Justice King issued his Final Award. Exhibit C attached hereto is a true and
correct copy of Justice King's April 8, 2020 Final Award, which was confirmed and entered as a
Judgment on March 26, 2021, in Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2020-01159790-
CU-PA-CJC.
26. By his Final Award, Justice King denied all of O Hill's claims against the Co -
Owners and found in favor of the Co -Owners on all of their cross -claims against O Hill,
determining, among other things, that:
• Co -owners had not already consented, were not estopped from withholding
their consent, and had no duty to consent, under the OIC Agreement (or
otherwise) to the sale, lease or improvement of the Tennis Property as part of
O Hill's 2012 Discretionary Entitlements and Master Plan.
• Under the OIC Agreement each owner has the unfettered right to refuse for any
reason to sell its interest the Tennis Property or any portion thereof.
• Relative to the leasing of the Tennis Property or portions thereof, no owner
may refuse to lease the Tennis Property or portions thereof for an objectively
unreasonable reason.
• The Co -owners' refusal to consent to the sale or lease of, or construction of
improvements on, the Tennis Property as part of O Hill's 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements and Master Plan was not objectively unreasonable.
(Justice King Final Award at 32-33.)
27. Also, O Hill acknowledged in the arbitration with Justice King that as of
November 2018, he had completed his 2012 Discretionary Entitlements (which, in 2013, Judge
Fromholz said he could finish processing since very little remained to complete them). Indeed,
Justice King made it a point to say in his Final Award that O Hill had finally completed his 2012
Discretionary Entitlements:
-8-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Judge Fromholz states at page 4 of his decision, "[c]urrently, the
development standards for the NBCC Land such as height limits,
landscaping, vehicle access and parking are still undetermined. The
development standards are the final discretionary entitlements for the
NBCC Land. Proceedings are continuing to be held before the City to
determine the development standards." To a reader it somewhat leaves the
impression that he believed the process of entitlements was near
completion. Entitlements were not completed until about five and one-half
years later.
(King Final Award at 5, fn. 3, emphasis added.)
The master plan has three elements: there are 27 bungalows, 5 villas and
the tennis club/spa. The tennis/spa building is an amenity for the
bungalows and villas. The entity. By November 2018 he had: the Newport
Beach Country Club Planned Community text, a zone change, site plan
approval, state Water Quality Control Board approval, grading plan, storm
drain plan, dry utility plans and street improvement plans, through plan
check. They had all the entitlement approvals necessga to do the "bake -
off.
(Id. at 10, underline added.)
28. Thus, any right O Hill had to process his few remaining 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements under Judge Fromholz' award had run its course as of November 2018.
C. Ongoing Issues with O Hill's Management
1. In November 2021, Co -Owners Learned O Hill Was Applying for and
Processing New Entitlements for the Tennis Property with the City
29. Co -Owners prevailed in the 2015-16 arbitration with Justice Sonenshine because
O Hill was spending significant ownership funds on his Master Plan while refusing to provide
Co -Owners with information about such expenditures. Co -Owners prevailed in the 2017-2020
-9-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
arbitration with Justice King because, after O Hill had finally completed his 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements, it was determined that under the OIC Agreement O Hill could not compel Co -
Owners to go along with the development of the Tennis Property as part of O Hill's Master Plan,
and Co -Owners were not estopped from, nor being unreasonable, in withholding their consent to
O Hill's Master Plan.
30. After Justice King issued his Final Award, Co -Owners sent O Hill a series of
letters on November 13, 2019, June 9, 2020 and July 28, 2020, putting him on notice that any
right he had to process his few remaining 2012 Discretionary Entitlements under Judge
Fromholz' 2013 award (since O Hill had completed them) had run its course and that award did
not support O Hill processing new entitlements for the Tennis Property, that he did not have Co -
Owners' consent to seek new entitlements and that he was not to spend ownership funds doing so.
31. Yet, in November 2021, Co -Owners discovered that O Hill, without their
knowledge or consent and over their objections, was seeking City approval for a new project he
had devised without Co -Owners' input, which, Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon
allege, would significantly change his Master Plan by, without limitation, increasing the number
of hotel rooms from 27 to 41 (hereinafter the "2021 Project").
32. Co -Owners are further informed and believe, and thereon allege, that for his 2021
Project, O Hill is applying for and processing, or that he intends to apply for and process, with the
City, the following new entitlements for the Tennis Property: General plan amendment, PC text
amendment, development agreement amendment, amendment to tract map, major site
development review amendment, limited term permit amendment, coastal development permit
amendment, traffic study and compliance with CEQA (hereinafter "New 2021 Entitlements").
Exhibit D attached hereto are copies of O Hill's Community Development Planning Permit
Application that Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, O Hill submitted to the
City in November 2021 and the NBCC Tennis Property Entitlement Amendment & Project
Description that Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, O Hill submitted to the
City in February 2022.
33. On November 23, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter expressing surprise that he
-10-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
was processing his New 2021 Entitlements and reminding O Hill that he did not have their
consent to process any more entitlements for the Tennis Property and was not to spend ownership
funds doing so. Co -Owners asked O Hill in writing to stop, and to provide them with copies of
the submittals he made to the City for his 2021 Project and his New 2021 Entitlements as well as
for meaningful economic data he believed supported his 2021 Project. O Hill ignored Co -
Owners' requests.
34. On December 6, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill another letter again asking to be
provided the information requested in their November 23 letter regarding his 2021 Project and his
New 2021 Entitlements, and that he stop processing his New Entitlements. O Hill again ignored
Co -Owners' requests.
35. On January 21, 2022, Co -Owners again sent O Hill a letter asking that he provide
them with copies of his submissions to the City for his 2021 Project and New 2021 Entitlements,
and that he stop processing his New Entitlements. O Hill once more ignored Co -Owners'
requests.
36. O Hill has refused to comply with Co -Owners' requests that he provide them with
copies of his submittals to the City regarding his 2021 Project and his New 2021 Entitlements,
and that he stop processing his New Entitlements, and it is clear that O Hill will only comply if
ordered to do so and enjoined from taking further action in connection with his New 2021
Entitlements and from spending ownership funds on them.
2. In December 2021, Co -Owners Learned O Hill Is Processing a Liquor
License for a Tenant at the Tennis Property He Never Disclosed
37. In October 2014, Grand Slam Tennis and its manager Sean Abdali (hereinafter
collectively "Abdali"), started operating the tennis club at the Tennis Property without a written
lease, apparently based upon a purported oral month -to -month agreement with O Hill calling for a
$7,000 monthly license fee. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, the purported
month -to -month arrangement with Abdali continues today, and the fee/rent Abdali is paying is well
below market.
38. When Co -Owners learned Abdali was operating the tennis club, they asked O Hill
-11-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
to get a basic written lease in place with Abdali that would provide for the monthly rent to be paid,
length of the term, and Abdali's obligation to pay the property taxes and maintain liability insurance
covering all the owners. In response to Co -Owners' request for a basic written lease with Abdali,
O Hill apparently purported to promise Abdali, without Co -Owners' knowledge or consent, that he
could operate the tennis club for 25 years.
39. At the arbitration with Justice King, O Hill testified that he intentionally did not
involve Co -Owners when making purported promises to Abdali regarding the tennis club, nor did
O Hill seek Co -Owners' approval before making such purported promises. Abdali testified Co -
Owners never made any promises to him, and that he knew he needed Co -Owners to sign (as
owners) any lease for the tennis club.
40. As part of the arbitration with Justice King, O Hill sought a declaration that Co -
Owners had to sign a 22-year proposed lease with Abdali that O Hill had prepared and given to
Abdali without Co -Owners' knowledge or consent. Yet, O Hill also testified at the arbitration that
"[u]nder the [OIC] agreement each owner must consent to any grant of a leasehold interest" and
that "a majority [of owners] must agree as it relates to a lease." (King Final Award at 11.) O Hill's
testimony is consistent with section 3 of the OIC Agreement, stating: "The Owners acknowledge
and agree that ... any leasehold interest [in the Tennis Property] ... may be granted, conveyed or so
encumbered by the execution of the applicable instrument by each Owner." (Underline added.)
41. Justice King denied O Hill's claim, and agreed with Co -Owners, finding that Co -
Owners had acted reasonably in declining to sign the proposed lease O Hill negotiated with Abdali.
(King Final Award at 25-26.)
42. After Justice King issued his Final Award, Co -Owners sent O Hill letters on June 9,
2020, and July 28, 2020, again asking that he get a basic written lease in place for the tennis club
setting forth the tennis club operator's obligations to pay rent, taxes and insurance, and with a
reasonable lease term in the range of one to three years. O Hill ignored Co -Owners' requests.
43. In late November 2021, Co -Owners learned from reviewing the tennis club
website (https://thetennisclubnb.com) that the club had 31 new pickleball courts. Apparently,
several of the tennis courts at the club had been converted to pickleball courts, but O Hill bad not
-12-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
W.
informed Co -Owners about the new pickleball courts. Thus, on November 23, 2021, Co -Owners
once again sent O Hill a letter asking (1) for an update on the status of a basic, straightforward
written lease with Abdali, and (2) for an accounting of the tennis club's operations so they could
understand how the 31 new pickleball courts at the club were impacting its membership and
revenues. O Hill ignored Co -Owners' requests.
44. On or about December 8, 2021, Co -Owners learned that without their knowledge
or consent, a liquor license application was being processed for the Tennis Property with the City,
and that the applicant for the liquor license was Clubhouse ATP, LLCan entity Co -Owners had
not heard of —and the application had been executed by O Hill on behalf of the Tennis Property
ownership. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Exhibit E attached
hereto is a copy of an application for a liquor license at the Tennis Property submitted by O Hill
and Clubhouse ATP to the City on or about August 8, 2021.
45. Co -Owners also learned that Clubhouse ATP was, concurrent with its application
with the City, also applying for a liquor license with the California Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control ("ABC"). Exhibit F attached hereto is a copy of an ABC website printout of
December 9, 2021, showing Clubhouse ATP's pending application for a liquor license.
46. On December 10, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter expressing surprise that
Clubhouse ATP (an entity about which he had not informed them) and O Hill were seeking a
liquor license for the Tennis Property. Co -Owners were concerned about, among other things,
potential exposure and liability as property owners should alcohol be sold at the Tennis Property.
Co -Owners asked O Hill to halt the liquor license application until they could understand what
protections against liability and exposure would be in place, including insurance, along with
asking O Hill to provide them with copies of the submittals made to the City and ABC as part of
the use permit and liquor license applications as well as any purported lease agreement made with
Clubhouse ATP for the Tennis Property. O Hill ignored Co -Owners' requests.
47. On December 16, 2021, the City Zoning Administrator approved O Hill's and
Clubhouse ATP's use permit application for a liquor license at the Tennis Property. In response to
the Co -Owners' objections, including that O Hill did not have the authority to sign the use permit
-13-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
application on behalf of the ownership, the Zoning Administrator informed Co -Owners that it
viewed their objections as pertaining to matters between the Tennis Property's owners in which
the City did not want to get involved. The City also told Co -Owners they should take whatever
action they believed appropriate to stop O Hill from proceeding with the use permit application.
Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that as a condition for the Zoning
Administrator agreeing to approve the use permit application, the City required O Hill to sign an
agreement to indemnify and defend the City against any legal challenges to the use permit.
48. On January 3, 2022, Co -Owners filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's
approval of the use permit for a liquor license, and informed the City of their intent to commence
this arbitration seeking, among other things, a legal determination and declaration that O Hill did
not, and does not, have the authority to sign and submit the use permit application for a liquor
license on behalf of the Tennis Property ownership, and before he could do so he was required to
get the Co -Owners' consent (which he did not have). Pursuant to Newport Beach Municipal Code
(NBMC) section 20.64.030-B. La., a use permit approval by the City Zoning Administrator that is
appealed has no force or effect as of the day the appeal is filed.
49. At the time of the submission of this Arbitration Demand to JAMS, Co -Owners'
appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval of the use permit had not yet been heard by the
City's Planning Commission.
50. Because O Hill refused to respond to —let alone acknowledge —Co -Owners'
requests for information about Clubhouse ATP, including their requests for copies of the submittals
to the City and ABC for the use permit and liquor license O Hill and Clubhouse ATP were seeking
along with any purported lease agreement with Clubhouse ATP, Co -Owners submitted a public
records request to the City for documents relating to the use permit. In January 2022, the City
produced responsive documents, including correspondence involving O Hill, that made it apparent
that O Hill had purported to convey a leasehold interest in the tennis property to Clubhouse ATP,
or he allowed Abdali to do so, without Co -Owners' knowledge or written consent as required under
section 3 of the OIC Agreement. For example, the City produced the following:
(a) November 10, 2021, email from Patrick Rolfes of Clubhouse ATP to Liz
-14-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Westmoreland at the City regarding the use permit, stating: "We subleased
the space on July 7, 2021 and we are hopeful we can get through this process
so we can start doing business."
(b) November 18, 2021, email from Liz Westmoreland at the City to O Hill
stating that if the City grants the use permit and the ABC issues the liquor
license to Clubhouse ATP that "it will be on the applicant [i.e., Clubhouse
ATP] to comply with his private agreements including lease terms, etc." O
Hill responded on November 19, 2021, saying: "Understood."
51. Co -Owners are also informed and believe, and thereon allege, that as part of the
application for a liquor license at the Tennis Property that a written agreement was submitted to the
ABC purporting to show Clubhouse ATP had a right to tenancy at the Tennis Property. Again, any
such agreement purporting to convey a leasehold interest to Clubhouse ATP was made without Co -
Owners' knowledge or consent and in violation of their rights under the OIC Agreement.
3. In February 2022, Co -Owners Learned O Hill Was Allowing Alcohol to
Be Sold at the Tennis Property Without a License
52. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act requires an establishment to be licensed before
it can sell alcohol and any person violating the statute is guilty of a misdemeanor. Cal. Bus. Prof.
Code §§ 23300, 23301.
53. In February 2022, Co -Owners were surprised to learn alcohol was being sold at the
Tennis Property without a liquor license apparently at a restaurant called the Clubhouse Grill being
operated by Clubhouse ATP. O Hill had failed to inform Co -Owners a restaurant was open and
operating at the Tennis Property, let alone selling alcohol without a license.
-15-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
54. Below are pictures of alcohol being sold at the Clubhouse Grill on February 8,
1 2022:
Picture of Indian Pale Ale (IPA) draft
beer purchased on tap at Clubhouse
Grill on Tuesday, February 8, 2022.
-16-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Thank you for your order. Below is a receipt for your recent visit to ClubHouse Grill_
trouble viewing this email'
Picture of receipt from
Clubhouse Grill showing
IPA draft beer purchased one
Tuesday, February 8, 2022,
for $7.00.
ClubHouse Grill
11 Clubhouse Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
server:
Che4l�
Gues ount='
Ord a red: 2JB/22 -
How was your visit?
1 IPA $7.00
55. Below are pictures of alcohol being sold at the Clubhouse Grill on Sunday,
February 13, 2022:
-17-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
sit W. WR it F
tip
j!
tail
CLUB ly
BE jkc " / "' I 3w.
Irmo! �m
A 4:w
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Thank you for your order_ Below is a receipt for your recent visit to Clu bHouse Gril I
trouble viewing this email'
Picture of receipt from
Clubhouse Grill showingCZ
Bloody Mary with Titos Vodka
purchased on Sunday, February 1
13, 2022, for $12.00.
ClubHouse Grill
11 Clubhou&e Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Server.
Check
Guest aunt■
Ordered: 2113122-
How Was your visit?
1 Tib=
$17-00
56. Below are pictures of alcohol being sold at the Clubhouse Grill on Sunday,
February 20, 2022:
-19-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Picture of receipt from
Clubhouse Grill showing a
mixed drink with Titos Vodka
purchased on Sunday,
February 20, 2022 for $12.00.
MbHoma Grill
11 CIwhhause Drive
Newport Beach, CA 928BO
Server; - -40
Check
Guest Count;
Ordefed: 2J20l2 -
1 Titas
$12.00
-20-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
W.
57. On February 22, 2022, Co -Owners sent O Hill (as managing owner) a letter asking
that he take whatever action necessary to cause anyone unlawfully selling alcohol at the Tennis
Property —including Clubhouse ATP and Abdalito immediately cease and desist doing so. Co -
Owners expressed to O Hill that in addition to exposing them to substantial financial liability by
allowing alcohol to be sold at the Tennis Property, selling alcohol without a license was a crime.
58. On March 3, 2022, O Hill responded to Co -Owners' February 22, 2022, letter. He
did not agree to stop the unlawful sale of alcohol at the Tennis Property nor deny it was taking
place. Rather, O Hill somewhat bewilderingly stated that alcohol had been served at the Tennis
Property "at tournaments and special events with a special catering permit for over 50 years" and
that a "special permit" had been obtained by the Orange County Youth Sports Foundation for a
January 29, 2022, event at the Tennis Property.
59. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that even after O Hill
received Co -Owners' February 22, 2022, cease and desist letter, alcohol continues to be sold at the
Tennis Property without a liquor license and, thus, unlawfully.
4. In January 2022, O Hill Recommenced His Efforts to Interfere with Co -
Owners' Exploration of a Tennis Property Redevelopment Opportunity
60. In the past, when Co -Owners have tried to explore redevelopment opportunities for
the Tennis Property, O Hill has taken the position that his Master Plan is the only project that could
get approved and any alternative opportunities were unworkable and not worth considering. O
Hill's modus operandi is to hijack the process by not only refusing to cooperate in exploring
redevelopment alternatives to his Master Plan but to block their fair consideration by attempting to
manufacture community opposition to any such alternative project.
61. For example, in 2012 and unbeknownst to Co -Owners, O Hill hired the Chatten
Brown law firm to file a lawsuit against the City in the name of the no -growth group "Friends of
Good Planning", seeking to enjoin the City from processing the adjacent Golf Property tenant's
plan to construct a new $40 million clubhouse because it was at odds with O Hill's Master Plan and
despite the fact that the Golf Property lease plainly gave that right to the tenant. In March 2012, O
Hill attended a City Council meeting and represented that he was in no way supporting or
-21 -
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
sponsoring the Friends of Good Planning lawsuit. In March 2017, Chatten Brown sued O Hill
personally for unpaid legal fees it had incurred at his direction for the Friends of Good Planning
lawsuit in 2012. In June 2017, O Hill paid Chatten Brown $15,000 using Tennis Property ownership
funds to settle that lawsuit — without informing Co -Owners.
62. In 2019, upon learning that Co -Owners were trying to obtain a redevelopment
proposal for the Tennis Property from the ownership group operating the adjacent Golf Property,
O Hill and Abdali (the tennis club operator) launched the website savethetennisclub.org seeking to
spread misinformation about the potential redevelopment project and circulating a petition
opposing it. Their website called out the Co -Owners' principals by name, Elliot Feuerstein and Iry
Chase, claiming they "want to upend the General Plan approved by the voters of Newport Beach
and eliminate the Tennis Club and the promised enhancements all together."
63. Thus, on January 5, 2021, when Co -Owners learned the City was updating its
Housing Element to address the state mandate for more housing and was accepting proposals for
projects that may help meet the housing need, and that Ryan Co. (an established developer) was
interested in entering into a long-term ground lease for the Tennis Property and constructing a
multifamily redevelopment project there that could pay the owners millions in rent each year, Co -
Owners sent O Hill a letter asking that he have an open mind, and to not interfere, as they attempted
to meaningfully explore a lease proposal with Ryan Co.
64. On January 19, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a copy of a letter they informed him
they intended to send to the City letting it know they were in discussion with a few developers
interested in redeveloping the Tennis Property and these projects would seem to be good candidates
for participation in the City's Housing Element Update, and Co -Owners hoped to share details
about the projects with the City soon and to start exploratory discussions. O Hill did not object to
Co -Owners sending their letter to the City.
65. On December 6, 2021, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter letting him know they had
negotiated and were in the process of drafting a proposed lease with Ryan Co. and expected to be
able to share that lease with him for discussion within 30-60 days. Co -Owners also restated their
request to O Hill that he not interfere with their efforts to secure a lease proposal from Ryan Co.
-22-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
66. On or about January 13, 2022, Co -Owners learned that a petition was being
circulated at the tennis club and to its members to drum -up opposition to a Ryan Co. project at the
Tennis Property. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that petition was
generated by the current tennis club operator Abdali and O Hill, or at least with O Hill's knowledge.
Exhibit G attached hereto is a copy of the Petition to Stop the Massive Development Proposed to
Replace the Tennis Club at Newport Beach.
67. Co -Owners also learned of a new website—savethetennisclub.com/tennis-club/
further seeking to solicit opposition to Ryan Co. which Co -Owners are informed and believe, and
thereon allege, was generated by Abdali and O Hill, or with O Hill's knowledge. Exhibit H attached
hereto is a copy of the savethetennisclub.com/tennis-club/ webpage. This is the same type of
interference O Hill and Abdali engaged in 2019 when they created the website savethetenniclub.org
upon learning of Co -Owners' efforts to solicit a proposal for a long-term ground lease for the Tennis
Property from the operators of the adjacent Golf Property.
68. On January 21, 2022, Co -Owners sent O Hill a letter stating that the petition being
circulated at the tennis club and the savethetennisclub.com website opposing Co -Owners' efforts
regarding Ryan Co., which at that point merely consisted of obtaining a proposal, were acts of
interference that needed to stop, and if it was shown that O Hill was involved as Co -Owners
suspected that his conduct constituted a breach of his fiduciary duties and raised questions about
his suitability to act as managing owner. Co -Owners asked that O Hill stop his efforts to incite
opposition to a potential Ryan Co. project and that he instruct Abdali in writing to do the same.
69. On January 28, 2022, O Hill responded claiming to have no knowledge of the
savethetennisclub.com website, but also saying he would not instruct Abdali to stop with his efforts
to drum -up opposition to a potential Ryan Co. project, while taking an "I told you so" position and
saying he was not surprised activists were mobilizing to oppose the project — at the same time
conceding he had discussed the Ryan Co. project with those activists. O Hill's behavior once more
shows the lengths he will go to prevent any consideration of alternatives to his Master Plan.
- 23 -
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
W.
IV. CO -OWNERS' ARBITRATION CLAIMS AGAINST O HILL
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Declaratory and Injunctive Relief)
70. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs I through 69, above.
71. Despite Co -Owners' November 23, 2021, December 6, 2021, and January 21, 2022,
letters asking O Hill to confirm in writing he had stopped processing his New 2021 Entitlements,
and Co -Owners' December 10, 2021, letter to O Hill asking that he stop processing the use permit
for a liquor license at the Tennis Property, O Hill has failed to acknowledge the requests in Co -
Owners' letters and continues to process such applications. As such, Co -Owners bring this
arbitration to seek a legal determination and declaration that O Hill does not, and did not, have the
authority to process his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license.
72. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -Owners and O Hill
concerning their respective rights and obligations under the OIC Agreement. Co -Owners contend
that in November 2018 O Hill finished processing his few remaining 2012 Discretionary
Entitlements, and, thus, any right he had to process his Discretionary Entitlements ran its course
and O Hill cannot continue to spend ownership money further entitling his already fully entitled
Master Plan — especially since he cannot compel Co -Owners to consent to his Master Plan as
Justice King determined, and that he was required to disclose any new entitlements or
development plan to Co -Owners (and to continue to provide them with meaningful information
regarding the same) and to obtain their consent before he could spend ownership funds and
process his New 2021 Entitlements and the use permit for a liquor license at the Tennis Property,
and that he does not have the Co -Owners' consent to seek them.
73. An additional actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -Owners
and O Hill under the OIC Agreement, in that Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon
allege, that O Hill is purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property, or is
allowing Abdali to do so with O Hill's knowledge, including to Clubhouse ATP, without Co -
Owners' knowledge or written consent as required under section 3 of the OIC Agreement.
-24-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
74. Further, after Co -Owners sent O Hill their February 22, 2022 cease and desist
letter to stop the unlawful sale of alcohol at the Tennis Property, Co -Owners are informed and
believe, and thereon allege, that alcohol continues to be sold at the Tennis Property without a
liquor license. Thus, an additional actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -
Owners and O Hill, and Co -Owners also seek a legal determination and declaration that O Hill
must take any and all action necessary to cause anyone unlawfully selling alcohol at the Tennis
Property to immediately cease and desist doing so.
75. Because of the urgency and importance of the issues presented by the parties'
dispute, it is necessary and appropriate for the Arbitrator to resolve this dispute by issuing a
declaration determining the respective rights and obligations of the parties with respect to the OIC
Agreement.
76. Co -Owners have no adequate remedy at law and will suffer irreparable damage
unless O Hill is enjoined from further taking the action identified herein. Co -Owners therefore
seek a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction restraining O
Hill, and agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further action in
connection with the conduct identified herein.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Breach of the OIC Agreement)
77. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 76, above.
78. Recital C of the OIC Agreement states that O Hill's limited purpose as managing
owner concerns accounting and administration duties, and section 7—specifying O Hill's limited
authority under the OIC Agreement as managing owner —does not authorize O Hill to process
entitlements for the Tennis Property. O Hill breached the OIC Agreement by processing, and
spending ownership funds processing, his New 2021 Entitlements and the use permit for the
liquor license without Co -Owners' knowledge or consent. Co -Owners learned about O Hill
processing his New Entitlements and use permit with the City in November and December 2021,
and despite Co -Owners' express written objections, and in breach of the OIC Agreement, O Hill
- 25 -
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
has persisted in processing them.
79. Section 3 of the OIC Agreement states that any conveyance of a leasehold interest
in the Tennis Property must be in a writing signed by all the owners. Id. § 3. Co -Owners are also
informed and believe, and thereon allege, that, in breach of section 3 of the OIC Agreement, O
Hill has purported to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property without Co -Owners'
knowledge or consent, including to Clubhouse ATP.
80. Section 7 of the OIC Agreement sets forth the duties of the managing owner, and
section 7(e) provides that the managing owner is paid "an asset management fee" for performing
those duties. Co -Owners are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that O Hill breached
section 7 of the OIC Agreement by allowing alcohol to be sold at the Tennis Property without a
liquor license and, thus, unlawfully and/or is being grossly negligent in performing his duties as
managing owner by not preventing the unlawful sale of alcohol there.
81. Co -Owners have performed their obligations under the OIC Agreement except
those which they have been excused or prevented from performing.
82. As a direct and proximate result of O Hill's breaches of the OIC Agreement, Co -
Owners have suffered, and will continue to suffer, direct and foreseeable damages, including but
not limited to, O Hill's improper and unauthorized expenditure of material sums of ownership
money, in an amount to be determined at the arbitration hearing.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing)
83. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 82, above.
84. The OIC Agreement is subject to an implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing that all parties would act in good faith and with reasonable efforts to perform their
contractual duties —both explicit and fairly implied —and not to impair the rights of other parties
to receive the rights, benefits, and reasonable expectations under the Agreement.
85. O Hill breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by:
(a) processing his New 2021 Entitlements and use permit with the City and
-26-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
99
spending ownership funds doing so without Co -Owners' consent;
(b) purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property —or
allowing Abdali to do so with his knowledge, including to Clubhouse
ATPwithout Co -Owners' consent;
(c) interfering with Co -Owners' efforts to obtain a lease proposal from Ryan
Co.; and
(d) allowing alcohol to be sold at the Tennis Property without a liquor license.
86. Co -Owners have performed their obligations under the OIC Agreement except
those which they have been excused or prevented from performing.
87. O Hill's failure to act in good faith has denied Co -Owners the full benefit of their
bargain under the OIC Agreement.
88. As a result of O Hill's breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, Co -
Owners have suffered, and will continue to suffer, direct and foreseeable damages, in an amount
to be determined at the arbitration hearing.
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Accounting)
89. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 88, above.
90. Co -Owners are unaware of the exact amount of ownership funds spent by O Hill
on his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license at the Tennis Property. The
information necessary to ascertain those amounts is strictly within O Hill's control. Accordingly,
Co -Owners seeks a forensic accounting of those amounts.
91. Co -Owners are unaware of the financial impact the new pickleball courts (see
paragraph 41 above) have had on the tennis club's operation, and whether Clubhouse ATP or any
other purported tenant is paying to, or sharing with, O Hill any income being generated by or at
the tennis club other than the monthly rent O Hill reflects on the distribution summaries he
provides to Co -Owners. The information necessary to ascertain those amounts is strictly within O
Hill's control. Accordingly, Co -Owners seek a forensic accounting of those amounts and the
-27-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
tennis club's operations.
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Declaratory Relief)
92. Co -Owners incorporate by reference as though set forth in full, each and all the
allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 91, above.
93. Section 7(b) of the OIC Agreement provides that the owners of a majority of
ownership interests in the Tennis Property not owned by the managing owner may elect to
remove the managing owner for "cause" and appoint a new managing owner. Section 7(b) defines
"cause" as "fraud, gross negligence or material default of a material obligation by Managing
Owner."
94. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Co -Owners and O Hill
concerning their respective rights and obligations under the OIC Agreement. Co -Owners are
informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that cause exists, including based on O Hill's
conduct alleged herein, to remove him as managing owner under the OIC Agreement.
95. Co -Owners have no adequate remedy at law and will suffer irreparable damage
unless O Hill is enjoined from taking any further action purportedly on the basis that he is the
managing owner. Co -Owners therefore seek a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction
and permanent injunction restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and
assigns, from taking any further action as the managing owner (including prohibiting him from
spending Tennis Property funds, submitting entitlement applications purportedly on behalf of the
Tennis Property owners, or purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property), and
that O Hill and any other person or entity (including NBCC Land or NBCC L&I) with
possession, custody or control of property of, or records relating to, the Tennis Property
(including any bank account(s) and/or books and records), shall by personal service or otherwise
fully cooperate with and assist the succeeding managing owner in taking and maintaining
possession, custody, or control of such property and records and immediately transfer or deliver
them to the succeeding managing owner.
-28-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREFORE, Co -Owners pray for an Arbitrator's Award on their claims as follows:
ON THE FIRST CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1. For a determination and declaration that O Hill was required to disclose to and
obtain Co -Owners' consent before he could spend ownership funds on and process his New 2021
Entitlements and the use permit for a liquor license, and that he does not have the Co -Owners'
consent to seek his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license and he must halt
their processing and withdraw them from the City.
2. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further
action processing his New 2021 Entitlements or the use permit for a liquor license, or spending
ownership funds thereon, without first obtaining the consent of one or more of the Co -Owners.
3. For a determination and declaration that, under section 3 of the OIC Agreement, O
Hill was required to disclose to Co -Owners and obtain their written consent prior to purporting to
convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property, including to Clubhouse ATP.
4. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further
action purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property, including to Clubhouse
ATP.
5. For a determination and declaration that O Hill must take any and all action
necessary to cause anyone unlawfully selling alcohol at the Tennis Property to immediately cease
and desist doing so.
6. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, and any alleged tenant
or licensee to whom O Hill has purported to convey a tenancy or other right to occupy or operate
at the Tennis Property, from engaging in the unlawful sale of alcohol at the Tennis Property
without a liquor license.
-29-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ON THE SECOND AND THIRD CLAIMS FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT AND
BREACH OF THE IMPLIED COVENANT
7. For damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
ON THE FOURTH CLAIM FOR AN ACCOUNTING
8. For a forensic accounting (1) of the exact amount of ownership funds spent by O
Hill on the 2021 Project, 2021 New Entitlements and the use permit for a liquor license at the
Tennis Property, and (2) of the tennis club's operations and revenues.
ON THE FIFTH CLAIM FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF
9. For a determination and declaration that cause exists under the OIC Agreement to
remove O Hill as managing owner.
10. For a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction
restraining O Hill, and his agents, representatives, successors and assigns, from taking any further
action purportedly on the basis as managing owner (including prohibiting him from spending
Tennis Property funds, submitting entitlement applications purportedly on behalf of the Tennis
Property owners, or purporting to convey a leasehold interest in the Tennis Property), and that O
Hill and any other person or entity (including NBCC Land or NBCC L&I) with possession,
custody or control of property of, or records relating to, the Tennis Property (including any bank
account(s) and/or books and records), shall by personal service or otherwise fully cooperate with
and assist the succeeding managing owner in taking and maintaining possession, custody, or
control of such property and records and immediately transfer or deliver them to the succeeding
managing owner.
ON ALL CLAIMS:
11. For attorneys' fees incurred in this action pursuant to section 27 of the OIC
Agreement.
12. For costs of suit and out-of-pocket expenses.
13. For such other relief as the Arbitrator deems just and proper.
-30-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated: March 25, 2022
MICHAEL YODER
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
JACQB C. GONZALES
1c9 I law
By:
11-Acob C Gon es
Attorneys for Co-Ownlzr§70aimants
Mesa Shopping Center -East LLC,
Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West LLC, and
Fainbarg III LP
-31-
ARBITRATION DEMAND AND STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
Exhibit A
RECORDlNQ REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
O Hill Properties
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
sU
AGREEMENT BETWEEN REAL PROPERTY OWNERS
BALBOA BAY CLUB RACQUET CLUB
Newport Beach, California
This Agreement Between Real Property Owners ("Agreement") is entered into by
and between O Hill Properties, a California limited partnership ("O Hill"), The Fainbarg Trust
dated April 19, 1982 ("TFC"), Mesa Shopping Center -East, a California general partnership
(Mesa -East), Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West, a California general partnership ("Mira Mesa -
West"), and Newport Beach Country Club, a California limited partnership ("NBCC Ltd").
O Trill, TFT, Mesa -Fast, Mira Mesa -West, and NBCC Ltd are sometimes referred to
singularly as an "Owner" or "party" or collectively as the "Owners" or "parties".
RECITALS
A. The Owners desire to own, lease, manage, maintain, refinance, encumber and
hold for investment, as tenants in common, that certain real property comprising
approximately 6.099 acres with improvements thereon, commonly identified as Balboa Bay
Club Racquet Club located at 1602 East Pacific Coast Highway, in Newport Beach, California
and legally described in Exhibit "A" attached (the "Property").
B. The Owners have discussed the co -ownership of the Property and have
concluded that to avoid conveyancing and ownership problems created by death, marital or
other dissolution, bankruptcy or insolvency, disputes and the like, it is in the best interest of
each Owner that the holding of the Property be governed by an agreement which defines the
rights and duties of each Owner in the form of this Agreement.
C. The Owners also believe it necessary and appropriate to have one Owner be the
managing Owner for purposes of accounting and administration.
6110193
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and the conditions and
covenants hereinafter contained, the Owners hereby agree as follows:
1. AGREIIIdENT AS TENANTS IN COMMON. The Owners agree to hold
title to the Property as tenants in common to own, manage, maintain, lease, finance, refinance,
and/or hold the Property for investment in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The
Owners may conduct such other activities with respect to the Property as are related to or
compatible with the ownership of real estate. Subject to the provisions of this Agreement,
each Owner retains the right to deal with his Interest in the Property (as defined in Section 3
below) as such Owner sees fit.
2. TERM. This Agreement shall become effective on the acquisition of the
Property by the Owners, and shall continue thereafter until terminated pursuant to Section 13
below.
3. TITLE TO THE PROPERTY; CONVEYANCES AND LIENS. Concurrently
with the recordation hereof, title to the Property shall be acquired by, and in the name of, the
Owners as their interests appear in Exhibit "B" attached (each an "Interest") and shall
thereafter be held in the name of the Owners as tenants in common. The Owners acknowledge
and agree that the Property, or any interest therein, including any leasehold interest, any deed
of trust granted or other encumbrances or liens placed thereon, may be granted, conveyed or
so encumbered by the execution of the applicable instrument by each Owner, or if an Owner
is obligated to convey, lease or encumber its interest in accordance with the terms of Section 4
of this Agreement and fails to do so within the time limits set forth herein, by the Managing
Owner and the Additional Owner (both as defined in Section 7 below) in accordance with the
powers of attorney granted to the Managing Owner and the Additional Owner as described in
Section 7(c) below. Such conveyance or encumbrance by the.Managing Owner and the
Additional Owner under such powers of attorney shall be binding upon each Owner.
4. FINANCING, REFINANCINGS, SALE AND LEASING.
(a) The Owners acknowledge that concurrently with the acquisition of the
Property, the Owners shall place financing on the Property which may have a balloon payment
at the due date thereof (the "Acquisition Financing"). Each Owner acknowledges that there
will be refinancings of the Acquisition Financing from time to time. The Managing Owner
shall have the right to obtain such refinancing for the Property on then market rates and terms.
Each Owner shall have a duty to fully cooperate and not interfere or impede, in any manner,
-2-
in such refinancings including but not limited to signing appropriate documentation (e.g. notes,
deeds of trust, assignments of rents and leases, guarantees and the like) within ten (10) days
after being requested to do so by Managing Owner. Each Owner shall be responsible for its
respective share, as determined by its pro rats ownership Interest in the Property, of the
payments of principal and interest and other costs owing under the Acquisition Financing and
refinancings . The Acquisition Pinanci ng and refinancings, however, may be a joint and
several obligation of the Owners. Refinancing shall only be permitted within two (2) years of
the due date of the financing which then encumbers the Property and the amount shall not
materially exceed the remaining principal balance of the then existing loan balance plus
refinancing related costs, unless the new loan is non -recourse to the Owners and is approved
by sixty-five percent (65 %) or more of the ownership Interests in the Property.
(b) The Managing Owner shall list the property for sale and convey or
otherwise transfer the Property if such transaction is approved by seventy percent (70%) or
more of the ownership Interests in the Property. Each Owner shall have a duty to fully
cooperate and not interfere or impede in any manner with such sale approved by seventy
percent (70%) or more of the ownership Interests in the Property, including but not limited to
the signing of a grant deed, sale agreements, assignment of leases and escrow instructions
within ten (10) days after being requested to do so by Managing Owner. Any Owner who
desires an exchange of its equity in the Property under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue
Code shall have the right to arrange for such exchange of its undivided ownership Interest,
provided that under no circumstances shall the inability of any Owner to consummate such an
exchange delay the sale of the Property. The other Owners, at no cost or expense shall
cooperate in such exchange, however, no Owner shall be required to take title to an exchange
or other property as a part of such duty to cooperate.
(c) Managing Owner may amend, terminate or extend the ground lease of
the Property only with the prior written consent of the Owners of a majority of the ownership
Interests in the Property. Each Owner shall execute, any such amendment, termination or
extension approved by a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property within ten (10)
days after being requested to do so by Managing Owner.
(d) Any Owner who has a duty to execute any refinancing, sale or lease
documentation and fails or refuses to do so shall be liable for all costs, liabilities, damages,
claims and expenses including attorney's fees and legal costs which results to the other Owners
from such failure or refusal.
5. LIMPPATION OF OWNERS. Each Owner shall be subject to the following
limitations:
-3-
(a) Each Owner hereby irrevocably waives any and all rights that such
Owner may have to withdraw from the terms of this Agreement, maintain an action for the
partition of the Property (unless Owners of 65 % or more of the Interests in the Property join
or consent to such action), or otherwise force a sale of the Property during the term hereof,
except as expressly provided herein.
(b) No Owner shall be entitled to interest on such Owner's contribution
toward the purchase of the Property. No Owner shall have the right to withdraw or reduce
such Owner's contribution toward the purchase of the Property. No Owner shall have the
right to demand property other than cash in return for such Owner's contribution toward the
purchase of the Property. No Owner shall have priority over any other Owner either as to the
return of contributions toward the purchase of the. Property or as to other distributions.
6. CASH CALLS. Each Owner shall pay (1) such Owner's share of losses and
negative cash flow necessary to cover the costs of owning the Property in proportion to such
Owner's respective Interest in the Property and (ii) any involuntary lien which encumbers an
Owner's Interest (such as a tax, judgment or execution Tien or an attachment) (a "Cash Call").
If an Owner fails to pay its Cash Calll within twenty (20) days from the date set for such
payment in a written notice that such amount must be paid from the Managing Owner (or any
other Owner if the Managing Owner fails to send out a written notice when such Cash Call is
necessary), such failure shall automatically constitute a granting by such Owner (a "Defaulting
Owner") to the other Owners of the following alternative options in addition to all other
remedies available at law: (i) the other Owners may advance the Defaulting Owner's required
Cash Call, in the proportions agreed upon by such other Owners, and absent such an
agreement, in the proportion which the Interest of an Owner desiring to make such advance
bears to the Interests of all Owners desiring to make such advance, and the Defaulting Owner
shall convey (or if necessary, the Managing Owner and any Additional Owner under the
powers of attorney granted in Section 7(c) below shall convey) by grant deed a portion of
Defaulting Owner's Interest in the Property in the proportion in which such advance bears to
the Defaulting Owner's equity in the Property (the "Transferred Portion"). The determination
of equity in the Property shall be based upon a ten percent (10%) capitalization rate of the
preceding twelve (12) months net operating income, less the Defaulting Owner's prorata share
of liens entered into by, or which encumber the Interests of, all of the Owners (the "Collective
Liens") and outstanding or reasonably projected extraordinary expenses for the next one (1)
year period. The Defaulting Owner shall remove liens from the title to the Transferred
Portion so that the Transferred Portion conveyed to the Owners making such advance shall be
free and clear of liens (except the Collective Liens), If the Defaulting Owner is unable to
-4-
deliver free and clear title to the Transferred Portion, the other Owners may purchase, at the
same price paid for the Transferred Portion so much of the Interest of the Defaulting Owner
(the "Additional Portion") so that enough cash is generated to allow for the delivery of the
Transferred Portion and the Additional Portion by the Defaulting Owner to the other Owners
free and clear. If the Property is not subject to a long term ground lease or long term ground
leases (of if any such leases are then in default beyond any curative period), the equity in the
Property of the Defaulting Owner shall be 90% of the appraised value of the entire Property
subject to all non monetary encumbrances thereof, based upon the highest and best use
reasonably available for the Property, as determined by an independent MAI appraiser selected
by a majority of the ownership Interests owned by the Non Defaulting Owners (the cost of
which appraisal shall be charged to the Defaulting Owner) times the percentage Interest of the
Defaulting Owner in the Property, and the Defaulting Owner's prorata share of the Collective
Liens shall be subtracted therefrom; (ii) the other Owners may admit an additional owner upon
the terms and conditions of this Agreement, which additional owner shall advance the
Defaulting Owner's required Cash Call and receive a portion of the Defaulting Owner's
Interest in the Property on. the same basis as preceding subparagraph (i); (iii) the Managing
Owner may borrow in the name of or on behalf of the Defaulting Owner the amount of the
Cash Call and pledge or otherwise encumber the Interest in the Property of the Defaulting
Owner to secure the loan, or (iv) the other Owners may advance to the Defaulting Owner the
amount of such unpaid Cash Call owing by Defaulting Owner in which case a Promissory
Note shall be executed by Defaulting Owner in'favor of the other Owners who have advanced
the Cash Call of the Defaulting Owner, a copy of which Promissory Note is attached as
Exhibit "C" hereto and incorporated herein by this reference ("Promissory Note"). At the.
election of the Owners who make an advance to the Defaulting Owner, the Promissory Note
shall be secured by a deed of trust upon the Defaulting Owner's entire interest in the Property,
and the Defaulting Owner shall execute all documents reasonably necessary to effectuate such
encumbrance.
If an expense, loss or damages are incurred by the Owners as the result of a Defaulting Owner
not making a Cash Call on or before the date set for the Cash Call in the written notice sent
out by the Managing Owner (or the other Owners, as applicable), the Defaulting Owner shall
immediately pay such expense or loss in addition to any other damages caused by such failure.
7. MANAGING OWNER.
(a) The Owners hereby appoint 0 Hill and its successors and assigns as
Managing Owner. The duties of Managing Owner shall be as follows:
(i) Managing Owner shall perform all of the duties of Managing Owner
.5-
as set forth in this Agreement.
(H) Managing Owner is authorized to take actions which are consistent
with the terms of this Agreement, to carry out this Agreement including but not limited to the
right to hire andlor retain on behalf of the Owners accountants, lawyers, appraisers, mortgage
brokers, insurance agents and consultants which Managing Owner deems appropriate in its
reasonable discretion,.
(iii) Managing Owner shall approve and coordinate the payment of the
expenses of the ownership of the Property,
(iv) Managing Owner shall maintain the books and records of the
Owners at the principal business office of Managing Owner.
(v) Managing Owner shall have a fiduciary duty to prepare a written
status and financial report for the Property and provide copies to each Owner within ninety
(90) days after request from another Owner, and within seventy-five (75) days after the end of
each calendar year.
(b) The Owners of a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property
shall have the right to select a new Managing Owner in place of O Hill, its successors and
assigns if Robert O Hill is no longer the person primarily responsible for the overall
management of the entity which constitutes the Managing Owner. In the event a Managing
Owner sells its entire interest in the Property or resigns as Managing Owner, the Owners by
election of the Owners who own a majority of the Interests in the Property shall appoint a new
Managing Owner. At any time, Managing Owner may be removed with cause by the written
election of the Owners of a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property not owned by
the Managing Owner, and a new Managing Owner shall be appointed by the Owners who own
a majority of the ownership Interests in the Property. The votes cast by the Managing Owner
in favor of a new Managing Owner may not be cast for the removed Managing Owner or any
transferee of the removed Managing Owner's interests, If the removed Managing Owner does
not vote to appoint a new Managing Owner within ten (10) days of being requested to do so by
the other Owners, then the new Managing Owner shall be appointed by Owners of a majority
of the ownership Interests in the Property not owned by Managing Owner. Such resignation
or removal, and the new appointment shall be recorded in the office of the Orange County
Recorder. In the event there is no Managing Owner, all actions of the Owners with respect to
the Property shall require the unanimous written consent of the Owners, "Cause" as used
herein shall mean fraud, gross negligence or a material default of a material obligation by
Managing Owner. The reasons for removal of a Managing Owner shall be material and
specifically stated in the written notice of removat.
(c) Managing Owner is hereby appointed as attorney in fact for each Owner
for the purpose of taking all actions which are approved in writing by the requisite percentage
-6-
of ownership Interests in the Property or which the Managing Owner is otherwise allowed or
authorized to take hereunder, including execution of deeds, deeds of trusts, notes, assignment
of leases, assignments of rents and leases, guarantees, lease amendments, extensions or
terminations, all in the name, place and stead and on behalf of each Owner with the same
validity and effect as if such Owner had executed same. Each Owner specifically agrees to be
bound by all actions validly taken under such power of attorney. This power of attorney is
coupled with an interest and is irrevocable. Each Owner also hereby appoints each other
Owner as attorney in fact for such Owner for purposes of acting as an additional signatory to
any action undertaken by Managing Owner pursuant to the provisions of Section 4 hereof, and
of the power of attorney granted Managing Owner herein (each, an "Additional Owner").
(d) Except for the protection of the Property or in the case of an emergency,
no material sums shall be expended for capital improvements without the prior written consent
of Owners who hold a majority of the Interests in the Property.
(e) As compensation for the duties of Managing Owner under this
Agreement, Managing Owner shall be reimbursed reasonable out of pocket costs incurred and
paid to unaffiliated third parties and shall receive an asset management fee which shall be
equal to one-half percent ('!z %) of the gross receipts from the operations of the Property,
payable monthly. Managing Owner may deduct such amounts due Managing Owner or third
parties from revenue received from the.Property, but shall identify amounts charged to the
Owners, on at least a quarterly basis.
(f) The Managing Owner shall not have the right to retain counsel at the
Owner's expense for a dispute between the Owners, unless the dispute results from a breach or
default under the terms of this Agreement by an Owner or the Owners, other than the
Managing Owner.
8. DISTRIBUTIONS. Distributions of cash to the Owners shall be made as
follows:
(a) Cash from operations shall be distributed to the Owners in accordance
with their respective Interests in the Property on a monthly basis; provided, however, that the
Managing Owner shall be entitled to maintain reasonable reserves for any future anticipated
expenditures related to the ownership of the Property.
(b) Refinancing proceeds shall be distributed to the Owners in accordance
with their respective Interests in the Property; provided, however, the Managing Owner shall
be entitled to retain on behalf of the Owners the following refinancing proceeds: (i) such
portion of the refinancing proceeds as the Owners of a majority of the Interests in the Property
deem necessary for capital improvements to the Property, and (ii) such portion of the
refinancing proceeds as may be necessary to establish reasonable reserves for anticipated future
-7-
expenditures of the Owners.
(c) Net proceeds from the sale of the Property shall be distributed to the
Owners in accordance with their respective interests in the Property. Net proceeds from the
sale of the Property shall be defined as the gross proceeds from the sale of the Property, less
(i) all costs associated with such sale, (ii) payment of any encumbrance against the Property
(unless assumed by the buyer with seller released from liability thereon), (iii) payment of any
other expenses related to ownership of the Property, and (iv) reasonable reserves for the
payment of any future expenses related to the Property anticipated by the Managing Owner,
during the one (1) year following the sale of the Property. The Managing Owner shall account
for and distribute such reserve to the Owners within one (1) year following the sale of the
Property, except to the extent that such reserve is still required to be maintained for a specific,
then readily identifiable reasonably anticipated future expense. in the event the Managing
Owner retains such reserves for a period in excess of 12 months for such specific purpose,
such reserve shall be accounted for and distributed as soon as reasonably possible following
satisfaction or elimination of the obligation for which the reserve was created.
(d) Notwithstanding Section 8(a), Section 8(b) and Section 8(c) to the
contrary, (i) cash that would otherwise be distributed to an Owner shall instead be distributed
to the other Owners to the extent provided in the Promissory Note, or to otherwise discharge
all obligations of a Defaulting Owner under Section b above and (ii) the reserves retained
under Section 8(a), Section 8(b) and Section 8(c) above shall not exceed $100,000 in the
aggregate, without the prior written consent of the Owners of a majority of the Interests in the
Property,
9. BOOKS AND RECORDS. Such books of account and records as are
maintained by or for the Property shall be kept at the principal business office of the Managing
Owner and be open to inspection by any Owner or accredited representative of any Owner, at
a reasonable time upon reasonable advance notice. 'Each Owner shall have the right to make a
separate audit of such books and records of the Property at such Owner's own expense;
provided, however, if the audit is requested by Owners of at least fifty percent (50%) of the
Interests in the Property, the audit shall be at the expense of all of the Owners.
10. CONTINUATION. The bankruptcy, foreclosure, tax lien, attachment or
execution of judgment or other involuntary lien, insanity, disability, distribution, death or
dissolution of or against an Owner shall not terminate the effects of this Agreement. Upon
such an occurrence, the Interest in the Property of such Owner shall become vested in the
guardian, administrator, executor, tnistee, other legal representative or person or entity -
entitled to the Interest in the Property of such Owner, who shall acquire all of the rights and
-8-
obligations provided in this Agreement and shall be subject to and bound by all of the terms
and conditions of this Agreement; provided, however, in the case of involuntary liens,
attachments, judgments or executions that such legal representative or person or entity shall be
entitled only to receive distributions on account of such Interest in the Property as provided for
in Section 8 above and shall have no management or other decision malting authority.
11. INCOME TAR CONSEQUENCES. Each.Owner acknowledges that the tax
consequences of an investment in the Property is a matter upon which such Owner's own
personal tax adviser must conclude. Each Owner shall bear the income tax consequences of
such,Owner's interest in the Property, which may be different than (i) such Owner's pro rata
share of the purchase price of the Property as a result of the effects of a.carryover basis in the
Property, or (ii) such Owner's actual share of the cash distributions from the Property.
12. . TENANCY IN COMMON - NOT A PARTNERSHIP. Each Owner agrees
that the Ownership of the Property is a tenancy in common and not a partnership. Each
Owner agrees to remain excluded from all of the provisions of Subchapter K of Chapter 1 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Each Owner hereby covenants and agrees
that each Owner shall report on such Owner's respective Federal and State income tax return,
such Owner's respective share of items of income, deduction and credit which results from
holding of its Interest in the Property, in a manner consistent with a tenancy in common
commencing with the taxable year of the acquisition of the Property. No Owner shall notify
the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (the "Commissioner") that such Owner desires that the
Owners be treated as a partnership and that Subchapter K of the Code applies. Each Owner
hereby agrees to indemnify and hold each other Owner free and harmless from all cost,
liability, tax consequence and expense, including attorneys fees, which results from any Owner
so notifying the Commissioner.
13. TERMINATION.
This Agreement shall be immediately terminated upon the happening of any of
the following events:
(a) The sale or other disposition of all of the Property.
(b) The unanimous decision of the Owners that this Agreement be
terminated, in which event the Owners shall hold the Property as tenants in common and shall
be governed by the laws of the State of California.
(c) The purchase by one Owner of all the Interests of the other Owners in
the Property.
I Us
14. ONION TO PURCHASE.
(a) If an Owner desires to seR its Interest in the Property or a portion of its
Interest in the Property, O Hill and its successors, as consideration for its role in the
acquisition of the Property, shall have a first right to purchase all or a portion of such Interest
in the Property. A selling Owner shall notify O Dill in writing of the portion of the Interest
selling Owner desires to sell and selling Owner's desired price for such Interest. O Hill shall
have thirty (30) days from the date it receives proper written notice to notify selling Owner
that it will purchase all or a specific portion of the Interest being offered for sale by selling
Owner. 0 Hill and selling Owner shall meet and try to agree on a purchase price. If, after
thirty (30) days, O Hill and selling Owner are unable to agree on a purchase price then, at
their expense, each will retain an MAI appraiser to appraise the entire Property without
discount for partial ownership subject to all non monetary encumbrances thereof, including but
not limited to any ground lease of the Property, based upon the highest and best use reasonably
available for the Property. Such appraisals shall be completed within sixty (60) days and
exchanged between the parties. If the values of the two MAI appraisals are within five percent
(5 %) of each other, using the larger number as the denominator, the appraised value of the
entire Property shall be an average of the two appraisals, less three percent (3 %). If the two
MAI appraisals are not within five percent (5 %) of each other then the two (2) designated
appraisers shall agree upon and retain a third appraiser who will be given the completed
appraisals and all appropriate back-up valuing information and such third appraiser shall first
attempt to mediate a compromise value between the three (3) appraisers. If the compromise
value cannot be reached between the three (3) appraisers within thirty (30) days then the third
appraiser shall reach a conclusion as to value (which shall be not less than the lower of the two
(2) appraisals, and no greater than the higher of the two appraisals) and the two closest
conclusions as to value shall be averaged and the average, less three percent (3%) shall be
deemed the appraised value of the entire Property. The purchase price shall be such appraised
value times the ownership Interest percentage being sold, less the selling Owner's prorata
share of any Collective Liens. The purchase shall be completed on or before one hundred and
twenty (120) days after the purchase price is finally determined. The Interest being sold shall
be delivered free and clear of all liens (except the Collective Liens). Any Interest of the
selling Owner not purchased by O Hill may be purchased on the same basis by the other
Owners. Such other Owners shall elect to purchase such interest within ten (10) days after
being advised in writing of the amount of the above determined purchase price. If the other
Owners elect to purchase in the aggregate more than the Interest being offered, each Owner
may purchase the portion of the Interest so offered as agreed upon by the other Owners
desiring to purchase a portion of the offered Interest, and absent an agreement reached
between them, each may purchase a percentage of the remainder of the Interest which the
-10-
amount offered to be purchased by an Owner bears to the amount offered to be purchased by
all Owners, but not less than that portion of the remainder of the interest offered which the
then Interest of such Owner bears to the then Interests of all Owners electing to purchase such
remainder. Any interest not purchased by an Owner may be sold to a third party reasonably
approved by the Managing Owner. If such sale does not occur within one (1) year after the
purchase price is determined, the sale shall again be subject to the above provision.
(b) The following transfers ("Permitted Transferee") shall not be subject to
the provisions of Section 14(a) above:
(i) A transfer to any lineal descendent of a current trustee or general
partner of one of the Owners;
(ii) A transfer to a trust for the benefit of any lineal descendent of a
current trustee or current general partner of any of the Owners;
(iii) A transfer to any successor trustee or distribution to a beneficiary,,
where one of the current Owners is a trust; and
(iv) A transfer to any partner or group of partners who consist of one of
the current existing partners of an Owner, where such Owner is a partnership.
(c) The rights of O Hill and its successors under Section 14(a) above shall
expire upon the sale of the Interest of O Hill to a person or entity in which O Hill, or a
Permitted Transferee of O Hill, has no interest.
15. NOTICES. All notices under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be
deemed to have been duly given if delivered personally or mailed, postage prepaid, by
certified United States mail, return receipt requested, addressed to the Owner to be notified.
Such notice shall be deemed to have been given as of the date. so delivered, if delivered in
person, or upon deposit thereof in the United States mail. For the purposes of notice, the
addresses of the Owners until changed as hereinafter provided, shall be as set forth in Exhibit
"B" attached hereto. Each Owner shall have the right to change the address to which notice to
such Owner is to be given by giving written notice thereof to all other Owners. Managing
Owner shall maintain a current list of each recognized. Owner of the Property (as described in
Section 19 below), and the address and percentage interest owned by each such Owner.
Managing Owner shall provide such information to any Owner upon written request to do so.
16. UNENFORCEABLE TERMS. In the event that any provision of this
Agreement shall be unenforceable or inoperative as a matter of law, the remaining provisions
shall remain in full force and effect.
17. TIME OF ESSENCE. Time is the essence of this Agreement and the
-11-
provisions contained herein and each and every provision hereof.
18. AMENDMENIS. This Agreement may be amended. only by a written
amendment signed by all Owners whose signatures shall be notarized and recorded in the .
County of Orange. Any amendment or modification of this Agreement shall be dated, and if
any conflict arises between the provisions of said amendment or modification and provisions
incorporated in earlier documents, the most recent provisions shall be controlling.
19. BINDING EFFECT. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall be
binding upon the Property and the Owners and their respective heirs, successors, legal
representatives and. assigns. Each subsequent Owner of a portion of the Property shall be
bound by the provisions hereof as if such subsequent Owner had assumed this Agreement. No
subsequent Owner need be recognized as such until such subsequent Owner has given each
other Owner written notice of the acquisition of such interest in the Property by such
subsequent Owner pursuant to the notice provisions of Section 15 above, which each Owner
and each subsequent Owner agrees to do or cause to be done.
20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire agreement
between the Owners and supersedes any prior or concurrent written or oral agreement between
said parties concerning the subject matter contained herein. There are no representations,
agreements, arrangements or understandings, oral or written, between or among the Owners
relating to the subject matter contained in this Agreement, which are not fully expressed
herein.
21, GENDER. All pronouns and any variations thereof shall be deemed to refer to
the masculine, feminine or neuter, singular or plural, as the identity of the person, persons,
entity or entities may require.
22, CAPTION HEADINGS. Captions at the beginning of each numbered Section
of the Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties and shall not be deemed part of
the context of this Agreement.
23. NEGOTIATED TRANSACTION. The provisions of this Agreement were
negotiated by all of the parties hereto and said Agreement shall be deemed to have been
drafted by all of the parties thereto.
24. FURTHER ASSURANCES. Each Owner hereby agrees to promptly sign any
-12-
additional instruments or documents which are necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent
and purpose of this Agreement.
25. SPOUSES. Some of the Owners are married and may in the future take title to
an Interest in the Property with their respective spouses (the "Married Owners"). For the
protection of the remaining Owners, any interest in the Property held by Married Owners shall
be deemed to be held by the husband, as to an undivided one-half (x/2) interest and by the wife,
as to an undivided one-half (112-) interest. For the purpose of voting upon any issue upon which
the Owners may vote pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the husband and
wife shall each be deemed to own an undivided one-half (�A) interest in the interest of such
Married Owners. Each Married Owner acknowledges and agrees that he/she shall do nothing
to impede or impair the rights of the other Owners in an attempt to gain leverage upon his/her
spouse. In the event an Owner takes title to an Interest in the Property solely in their name,
they shall obtain and record a quitclaim deed from their respective spouses so that the Owner
in whose name the interest in the Property is held shalt have the right, power and authority to
deal with the Property alone and without the consent of his/her spouse. In the event that any
such Owner fails to obtain such quitclaim deed and damages result to the remaining Owners,
such Owner who so fails to obtain such quitclaim deed shall be liable for the resulting
damages.
26. ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES: ALL DISPUTES ARISING UNDER THIS
AGREEMENT WILL BE RESOLVED BY SUBMISSION TO ARBITRATION AT THE
ORANGE COUNTY OFFICES OF JUDICIAL ARBITRATION & MEDIATION
SERVICES, INC. ("TAMS") FOR BINDING ARBITRATION. THE PARTIES MAY
AGREE ON A RETIRED MOB FROM THE YAMS PANEL. IF THEY ARE UNABLE
TO AGREE, JAMS WILL PROVIDE A LIST OF THREE AVAILABLE JUDGES AND
EACH PARTY MAY STRIKE ONE. THE REMAINING JUDGE WILL SERVE AS THE
ARBITRATOR AT THE ARBITRATION HEARING. THE PARTIES AGREE THAT
ARBITRATION MUST BE INITIATED WITHIN ONE YEAR AFTER THE CLAIMED
BREACH OCCURRED AND THAT THE FAILURE TO INITIATE ARBITRATION
WITHIN THE ONE-YEAR PERIOD CONSTITUTES AN ABSOLUTE BAR TO TIM
INSTITUTION OF ANY NEW PROCEEDINGS. THE AGGRIEVED PARTY CAN
INITIATE ARBITRATION BY SENDING WRITTEN NOTICE OF AN INTENTION TO
ARBITRATE BY REGISTERED OR CERTIFMD MAIL TO THE OTHER PARTY AND
TO JAMS. THE NOTICE MUST CONTAIN A DESCRIPTION OF THE DISPUTE, THE
AMOUNT INVOLVED, AND THE REMEDY SOUGHT, IF AND WHEN A DEMAND
FOR ARBITRATION IS MADE BY EITHER PARTY, THE PARTIES AGREE TO
-13-
EXECUTE A SUBMISSION AGREEMENT, PROVIDED BY JAMS, SETTING FORTH
THE RIGHTS OF THE PARTIES IF THE CASE IS ARBITRATED AND THE RULES
AND PROCEDURES TO 13B FOLLOWED AT THE ARBITRATION HEARING. THE
ARBITRATOR SHALL, AT THE MOTION OF A PARTY, PERMIT AND ORDER SUCH
DISCOVERY ON THE PART OF SUCH PARTY AS HE DETERMINES TO BE
REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE TO THE DISPUTE BEFORE HIM.
NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE, AT LEAST TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THE
ARBITRATION, EACH PARTY MUST MAKE A FULL DISCLOSURE TO THE OTHER
PARTY OF (i) ALL DOCUMENTS TO BE PRESENTED BY SUCH PARTY AND (ii)
ANY WITNESSES TO BE CALLED BY SUCH PARTY.
NOTHING IN THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL IN ANY WAY LIMIT OR OTHERWISE
RESTRICT A PARTY' S RIGHT OR ABILITY TO OBTAIN INJUNCTIVE RELIEF OR
APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER THROUGH THE COURT SYSTEM.
NOTICE: BY INITIALING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE AGREEING TO HAVE
ANY DISPUTE ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE "ARBITRATION
OF DISPUTES" PROVISION DECIDED BY NEUTRAL ARBITRATION AS PROVIDED
BY CALIFORNIA LAW AND YOU ARE GIVING UP ANY RIGHTS YOU MIGHT
POSSESS TO HAVE THE DISPUTE LITIGATED IN COURT OR JURY TRIAL. BY
Mln4LING IN THE SPACE BELOW YOU ARE GIVING UP YOUR JUDICIAL RIGHTS
TO DISCOVERY AND APPEAL, EXCEPT AS PROVIDED HEREIN, UNLESS THOSE
RIGHTS ARE SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED IN THE "ARBITRATION OF DISPUTES"
PROVISION. IF YOU REFUSE TO SUBMIT TO ARBITRATION AFTER AGREEING TO
THIS PROVISION, YOU MAY BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE UNDER THE
AUTHORITY OF THE CALWORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. YOUR
AGREEMENT TO THIS ARBITRATION PROVISION IS VOLUNTARY.
WE HAVE READ AND UNDERSTAND THE FOREGOING AND AGREE TO SUBMIT
DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE MATTERS INCLUDED IN THE "ARBI RATION OF
DISPUTES" PROVISION TO NEUTRAL ARBITRATION.
O Hill: L2mrzi TFT: f ' 1 Mesa -East: 145K- I I Ef: — }
Mira Mesa West f &2 [ ]' NBCC Ltd:
27. COST OF ENWRCE VIENT. Should any dispute arise between the parties
hereto or their legal representatives, successors or assigns concerning any provision of this
-14-
Agreement or the rights and duties of any person in relation thereto, the party prevailing in
such dispute shall be entitled, in addition to such other relief that may be granted, to
reasonable attorneys fees and legal costs in connection with such dispute. For purposes of this
Paragraph, a dispute shall include, but not be limited to, an arbitration proceeding or a court
action for injunctive relief.
28. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the
State of California and the venue for any dispute shall be Orange County, California.
EXECUTED as of March 0f994, at Newport Beach, California.
Owners:
O Hill Properties, a
California limited partnership
By: / r
Robert O U 1,
its General Partner
The Fainbarg Trust,
dated April 19, 1982
By: ON - t
Allan Fain arg, TMstee,
Newport Beach Country Club,
a California limited partnership
By: O Hill Properties,
a California limited partnership
Its General Partner
$Y
f�- . �
Robert �WFM -
General Partner
-15-
Mesa Shopping Center -East
A California General Partnership
By:-..Q.,Q
Arnold D. Feuerstein
Managing General Partner
By:
Elliot Feuerstein
Managing General Partner
Mira Mesa Shopping Center -West
A California General Partnership
By:• ---
Arnold D. Feuerstein
Managing General Partner
By;
Elliot Feuerstein
Managing General Partner
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On elkiE1'4 ', 1 `i 7 , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Robert O Hill, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Lary Public in and or sai@ County acid State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
YVONNi N. RiTCHOT
z ? t COM #055585 z
z ,p Notary Pobric calilotnta
ORANGE COUNTY
tornm exphes FED 09,1906
On before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Allau Fainbnally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
N in and for said County a d State
-16-
1
8Wt*MM'0XP1r09FE609
B iCNE N. RI
coMu. #M585 a
Z Notary PubliaCWtMia
R ORANGE COUNTY 49�]r r"'�
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On �7744e k � /991� , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Robert 0 Hill, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
�Xitary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
`YVONNE N. RITONQT
comm, #953895
•'o NOLW Pvbft- Irma
ORANGE COUNTY
hfy comm. erpkm FEB 09,106
On di � 95/ , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Arnold D. Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person,
or the entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
SI./!✓YlIlfr/Crl1,�II1f �iJJSt
INC
tORMUCOUNly
Ex I 5 !
On jeAdAm If y y , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Elliot Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
Sr.��✓-�^✓r✓./Y.r✓• 1.�` ma's .irr ,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Arnold D. Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to
me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person,
or the entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
On , before me a Notary Public in and for said County and State,
personally appeared Elliot Feuerstein, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory
evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he
executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the
entity upon behalf of which person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public in and for said County and State
-18-
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
Parcel 1:
That portion of Block 93 of Twine's Subdivision in the City of Newport Beach, County of
Orange, State of California, as per Map recorded in Book 1 Page 88 of Miscellaneous Maps in
the Office of the County Recorder of said County described as follows:
Lot A as shown on that certain Parcel Map filed October 10, 1967 in Book 10 Page 20 of
Parcel Maps in the Office of the County Recorder of said County, and Parcels 1, 2 and 3 as
shown on that certain Parcel Map filed February 11, 1977 in Book 92 Pages 13 and 14 of
Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County Recorder of said County.
Parcel 2:
As easement for ingress and egress over the most Southerly 190.00 feet of Parcel 1, in the
City of Newport Beach, County of Orange, State of California, as shown on that certain Parcel
Map filed October 10, 1967 in Book 10 Page 20 of Parcel Maps, in the Office of the County
Recorder of said County.
EXHIBIT "B"
OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY
Name and Address of Owner 'Interest in property
Allan and Sara Fainbarg, Trustees 25%
of The Fainbarg Trust dated
April 19, 1982
890 W. Baker
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Mesa Shopping Center -East 15 %
c/o Arnold Feuerstein
2293 W. Ball Road
Anaheim, CA 92805
Mica Mesa Shopping Center -West 10%
clo Arnold Feuerstein
2293 W. Bail Road
Anaheim, CA 92805
With a copy of any notices to:
Mesa Shopping Center -East
c/o EJlliot Feuerstein
8294 Mira Mesa Blvd.
San Diego, CA 92126
Newport Beach Country Club 25 %
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Robert O Hill
O Hill Properties 25 %
One Upper Newport Plaza
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Attn: Robert O Hill
FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
to
PROMISSORY NOTE
Newport Beach, California
("Maker") hereby promises to pay
, or order ("Holder"), at
or such other place or places as
may be designated by Holder from time to time, the sum of
payable as specified herein. This Promissory Note ("Note") shall bear
interest at the prime commercial lending rate of Bank of America, plus two and one half
percent (21h %) per annum but not to exceed the maximum rate allowed by law. This Note
shall be due and payable on or before the date which is two (2) years from the date of this
Note.
Maker and Holder intend that this Note shall be recourse to Maker. However, it is Maker's
and Holder's intention that Holder's first recourse shall be against the proceeds that would be
otherwise payable to Maker as a result of Maker's ownership of an undivided % interest
in certain real property commonly known as The Newport Beach Country Club, and legally
defined in any Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents encumbering such real property as
security for this Note ("Property").
As a credit against sums owed by Maker to Holder, Holder shall be entitled to receive 100%
of the cash distributions which would otherwise be distributed to Maker as a result of its
ownership interest in the Property, up to an aggregate sum equal to the principal amount of
this Note ($ ) plus accrued interest.
Maker hereby agrees to pay all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys fees,
incurred by Holder and arising out of or related to the collection of any amounts due hereunder
or the enforcement of any rights provided for herein, or in any other instrument now or -
hereafter securing Maker's obligations under this Note, whether or not suit is filed.
Maker waives all rights of set-off, deduction and counter claim with respect to this Note. Any
amount which Maker contends are owed by Holder shall be sought by independent action. To
The extent permitted by applicable law, the defense of any statute of limitations is hereby
waived by Maker.
This Note shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of
California.
This Note is secured by a Deed of Trust with Assignment of Rents, encumbering Maker's
ownership interest in the Property, executed by Maker for the benefit of Holder.