Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0_Newport Beach Country Club - IBC_PA2008-152CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT August 4, 2011 Agenda Item: 3 SUBJECT: Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) 1600 E. Coast Highway • General Plan Amendment No. GP2008 -005 • Planned Community Development Plan Adoption No. PC2008 -001 • Development Agreement No. DA2010 -005 • Mitigated Negative Declaration No. ND2010 -010 • Temporary Structures Use (Limited Term) Permit No. XP2011 -005 APPLICANT: International Bay Clubs, Inc. PLANNER: Rosalinh M. Ung, Associate Planner (949)644 -3208, rung @newportbeachca.gov OBJECTIVE The purpose of this staff report is to provide the Planning Commission: 1) a detailed description and land use entitlement requests of the proposed project and 2) alternative recommendations for considering the application. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Conduct a public hearing; 2. Consider applicant's request and potential alternatives; 3. Provide appropriate direction to Planning staff; and 4. Continue the application to October 20, 2011, if applicable. Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 2 VICINITY MAP GENERAL PLAN i, a LOCATION GENERAL PLAN ON -SITE PR (Park & Recreation) NORTH PF, OS & RM SOUTH RS -D & PR PC -30 & R -1 CO -G, RM, CV, CO -R, & EAST MU -H3 /PR WEST OS, PF, CV & RM PL -]9 q ZONING ZONING CURRENT USE PC -47 Private Golf Course APF & GEF NPB Chamber of Commerce, residential development & NPB Fire Station PC -30 & R -1 Armstrong Garden Center, residential development & Coast Highway PC40, RMD, APF, Marriott Hotel, office & residential & PC -54 developments & tennis club PC -21 & PC-41 Residential development & Jamboree Rd Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 3 INTRODUCTION Project Setting The Newport Beach Country Club Golf Course is comprised of approximately 133 acres, spanning an area adjacent to Newport Center and extending from the golf course's entrance at Irvine Terrance and East Coast Highway to a point near the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive. The project area does not include the adjacent 10 -acre private tennis club (Tennis Club site). The subject property (Golf Club site) is presently improved with a 6,587 -yard, 18 -hole golf course and related practice facilities, a 23,469 square -foot clubhouse, a 6,050 square foot golf cart storage barn, a 2,010 square -foot greens keeper building, and 420 surface parking spaces. Main vehicular access to the subject property is from a private drive way (Country Club Drive) that connects to East Coast Highway at Irvine Terrace Drive, a signalized intersection. A secondary access to the subject property is from Newport Center Drive via Farallon Drive. Project Description The International Bay Clubs, Inc. (IBC) operates the Newport Beach Country Club clubhouse and golf course and leases the property from Golf Realty Fund, the property owner. As a long term lease holder, IBC proposes to redevelop the existing golf clubhouse. The following approvals are requested or required in order to implement the project as proposed: 1. A General Plan Amendment to increase the allowable development limit in Anomaly No. 74 in Statistical Area L1 (Newport Center /Fashion Island) of the General Plan Land Use Element by 21,000 gross square feet (from 35,000 square feet to 56,000 square feet). 2. A Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) adoption to provide zoning development standards and design guidelines for the golf course and its ancillary uses, pursuant to Chapter 20.35 of the Municipal Code (Attachment PC1). 3. A Development Agreement pursuant to Section 15.45.020.A.2.c of the Municipal Code. 4. A Temporary Structure Use Permit to allow the temporary use of structures during the clubhouse reconstruction, pursuant to Section 20.60.015 of the Municipal Code. Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 4 The application was deemed complete on November 5, 2009, and pursuant to Ordinance No. 2010 -21, the application is being considered and evaluated pursuant to the Zoning Code in effect prior to November 25, 2010. Proposed construction includes the replacement of the existing 23,270 square -foot golf clubhouse with an approximately 56,000 square -foot clubhouse, reconstruction of the existing parking lot and a new golf course maintenance facility. New Clubhouse The proposed two -story clubhouse will have the same core amenities as the existing clubhouse, including a golf shop, locker rooms, offices, dining areas, and a banquet facility. A fitness center will be included with the clubhouse for use by its members. A 90 -golf cart storage facility will be constructed at the basement level of the clubhouse. The increase in square footage from 23,270 to 56,000 is intended to improve service to its existing membership and to modernize the facility. The new clubhouse will be approximately 50 feet in height and is designed with the Prairie architectural style. Building materials will include natural stack stone, plaster, wood trellises, and roof shingles. Parking Lot The project includes the reconfiguration of the golf course existing parking lot to provide a new 345 -space parking lot with a separate bag drop -off area. The proposed total number of parking was based on a parking study prepared by Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. (Attachment PC2) for the applicant and evaluated by Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. (Attachment PC3) on behalf of the City. The study identified a need of 334 spaces for the use of the golf course, clubhouse and its ancillary uses. Three separate entrances to the clubhouse will be provided from the parking area. The existing private access easement for Armstrong Nursery located along the frontage of Coast Highway is proposed to remain at this time with a new entry configuration to improve safety and access. Maintenance Facility To the west of the proposed clubhouse would be a new 8,565 square -foot, single -story, free - standing maintenance facility that houses equipment, parts and tools (repair shop, offices, and an employee lounge). The facility would be completely fenced. No changes to the golf course are being proposed. The following table provides a summary of the existing and proposed improvements to the Golf Club site. Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 5 Existin Project Proposed Project Clubhouse Component Floor Areas . ft. Com onent Floor Areas . ft. 15 Floor Clubhouse 20,702 15 Floor Clubhouse 30,693 2 nd Floor Clubhouse 2,758 2 no Floor 20,520 Total 23,460 Bag Storage 3,606 Total 54,819 Cart Barn 6,050 Basement Cart Barn 5,704 Maintenance 2,010 Maintenance 8,565 Snack Bar 180 Snack Bar3 180 Restroom FacilitiesJ 630 Restroom Facilities 630 Starter Shack6 140 Starter Shack 140 Total 1 32,470 1 Total 70,0382 Buildin Hei hts Component Height (ft.) Component Height (ft.) Clubhouse 23' -9" Clubhouse 49' -6" Cart Barn 12' -0" Maintenance 18' -0" Maintenance 21'0" 'Exempt from General Plan Development Limits — Ancillary to Golf Course. 20f this total, 54,819 square feet count toward development limit per the General Plan. The cart barn, maintenance building, snack bar, restroom facilities, and starter shack are exempt from the General Plan development limit calculation as they are ancillary uses /structures to the golf course. 3Free- standing structures and are not a part of the golf clubhouse DISCUSSION General Plan The subject property has a General Plan Land Use Element designation of Parks and Recreation (PR) with a maximum allowable development limit of 35,000 gross square feet (GSF) per Anomaly No. 74. 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. Incidental buildings such as maintenance equipment sheds, supply storage, and restrooms are not included in determining intensity limits. The applicant proposes an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Element to increase the maximum allowable development limit by 21,000 GSF in Anomaly No. 74, from 35,000 to 56,000 GSF. The request is necessary in order to allow for the larger clubhouse. As proposed, the new golf clubhouse is approximately 54,819 square feet in size. The remaining 1,181 square feet would be used for future expansion. Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 6 A complete consistency analysis of each of the applicable General Plan policies is included in Table 9 of the Land Use and Planning Section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), pages 63 through 67. In summary, the proposed project is consistent with the General Plan provided the request to increase the maximum allowable development limit is approved. Coastal Land Use Plan The Coastal Land Use Plan designates the Golf Club site as Parks and Recreation (PR) which is identical to the General Plan Land Use designation. A complete consistency analysis of each of the applicable Coastal Land Use Plan policies is included in Table 12 of the Land Use and Planning Section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), pages 69 through 74. In summary, the proposed project is consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan. Planned Community Development Plan (PCDP) The subject property has a zoning designation of PC -47 for the Newport County Club Planned Community. This PC zoning designation was adopted in 1997 by Ordinance 97 -10, as a part of the City -wide amendment of the zoning districting maps in order to be consistent with the 1988 General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Code. The City later assigned the PC with a number of 47 for tracking purposes. Planned Community District Development Plan (development regulations) was not adopted when the PC District zoning designation was assigned to the subject property. PC -47 also includes the abutting Armstrong Nursery property and the Tennis Club site of the Newport Beach Country Club. The nursery is governed separately by Use Permit No. 3641, which is typical when a PC does not have development standards and the Tennis Club site is governed by Use Permit No. 1492. Upon approval of the proposed project, the boundary of the PC adoption will clearly define the boundary of newly adopted PC. As currently proposed, neither the nursery nor the Tennis Club site is a part of the proposed project. The applicant submitted a draft PCDP to create and provide zoning development standards and design guidelines for the proposed project. The proposed PCDP only covers the Golf Club site, which consists of the golf course, its clubhouse and the parking lot. It includes permitted uses of the golf course, clubhouse, ancillary support uses, maximum development limits, site development standards, and a plan review process for project compliance and implementation, which would be considered by the Community Development Director. The proposed PCDP encompasses only the Golf Club site and not the entire area within the area designated for the adoption of a planned community development plan (PC Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 7 47). The reason the entire area is not included is due to the fact that the applicant has a long -term lease interest only in the Golf Club site and they do not own or lease the nursery property or the Tennis Club site. Within the confines of the existing condition, staff believes the draft development plan is adequate to support the proposed project; but, the benefits of creating a single, cohesive and comprehensive large -scale planned development for the entire site could not achieved. Thus, the proposed planned community development plan does not achieve the basic goal of the PC designation and as such staff does not recommend its adoption. Code amendments are legislative acts. Neither the City Municipal Code nor State Planning Law set forth any required findings for either approval or denial of such amendments, unless they are determined not to be required for the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. 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. The following thresholds are applicable: 100 dwelling units, 100 a.m. peak hour trips, 100 p.m. peak hour trips, or 40,000 square feet of non- residential floor area. If any of the thresholds are exceeded with Council approval of the amendment, the amendment would be classified as a "major amendment' and be subject to voter consideration. Approved amendments, other than those approved by the electorate, are tracked for 10 years and factored into the analysis of future amendments as indicated. The subject property is located within Statistical Area L1 of the General Plan Land Use Element. There are no prior general plan amendments to this statistical area since 2006 when the General Plan Update was adopted. The proposed General Plan amendment would be the first amendment for this statistical area and would result in an increase of 21,000 GSF of non - residential floor area. No increase in residential development is being proposed. Lastly, there would be no increase to a.m. nor p.m. peak hour trip as the overall size of the golf course acreage remains the same as ITE predicts traffic based upon the number of acres devoted to the golf course use (there are no separate trip rates based on the clubhouse size). See tables below for trip calculations. Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 8 Trio Generation with Existina Status Land Use Size Acre Rate AM PM Golf Course 133 0.21 AM/ per acre 0.30 PM/ per acre 27.93 39.9 Trio Generation with Proposed Amendment Land Use Size Acre Rate PM Golf Golf Course 133 0.21 AM/ per acre 0.30 PM/ per acre 27.93 39.9 In summary, none of the three thresholds that require a vote pursuant to Charter Section 423 are exceeded. If the proposed General Plan amendment is approved by City Council, the amendment will become a prior amendment that will be tracked for ten (10) years. SB18 Tribal Consultation Guidelines Pursuant to Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code, 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 nine (9) tribe contacts should be provided notice regarding the proposed project. The appropriate tribe contacts supplied by the NAHC were provided notice on May 15, 2009. Section 65352.3 of the California Government Code requires 90 days to allow tribe contacts to respond to the request to consult unless the tribe contacts mutually agree to a shorter time period. Staff was contacted by a representative of the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians, who identified a potential for encountering Native American artifacts as the subject property is in proximity to several previously discovered cultural resources sites. Additional mitigation measure has been included in the environmental document to provide for the opportunity to have a Native American representative monitoring excavation activities. Development Agreement Municipal Code Section 15.45.020.A.2.c (Development Agreement Required) requires a development agreement as the project includes amendments of the General Plan and Zoning Code and construction of new non - residential development in Statistical Area L1 (Newport Center /Fashion Island). General Plan Policy LU6.14.8 does not require a development agreement. The proposed draft development agreement is being reviewed by the City Attorney and will be available for the Planning Commission consideration at the continued meeting. Temporary Structures Use Permit Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 9 In order to accommodate on -going golf club operation, three (3) temporary modular building are proposed to be used during the 36 -month construction of new golf clubhouse. These modular buildings would be placed to the north of the proposed clubhouse and would not interfere with the use of the golf course, construction activities or parking. They will be removed from the project site upon completion of the new clubhouse. Staff has no objection to the use of modular buildings during construction of the clubhouse. Environmental Review An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) have been prepared by Keeton Kreitzer Consulting in compliance with the Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and City Council Policy K -3 (Attachment PC4). The MND indicated that the potential adverse environmental impacts to the project, in terms of Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Noise, and Transportation/Traffic could be mitigated to below levels of significance. The MND also includes, as a part of the cumulative analysis, the future foreseeable project to redevelop the Tennis Club site proposed by Golf Realty Fund (GRF). The mitigation measures (MMs) and standard conditions (SCs) have been incorporated in the draft MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Planning Commission consideration. The Draft MND was circulated for public comment from October 7, 2010, to November 8, 2010. Comments were received and the consultant and staff have prepared written responses (Attachment PC5). The mitigation measures, standard conditions, and project design features have been incorporated in the draft MND and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Planning Commission consideration (Attachment PC6). Subsequent to the circulation of the MND, the applicant chose to revise their site plan to address operational issues related to the proposed project and the development proposed on Tennis Club site by Golf Realty Fund, the property owner. Revisions to the proposed site plan are based on discussions between the project applicant and the property owner which include: 1) the elimination of the upper parking lot that would have been located in proximity to the Tennis Club site; 2) the relocation of the proposed golf clubhouse approximately 50 feet nearer to the golf course; 3) the reduction in the height of the retaining wall separating the upper and lower tiers of the parking lot; and 4) the refinement of the access road to the Tennis Club site. These site plan refinements, which are intended to enhance the overall land use plan, will not result either in the creation of any new impacts or more severe impacts than those identified and described in the MND. Therefore, the analysis presented in the MND remains adequate and recirculation of the document is not required. The MND, Response to Comments, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been distributed to the Planning Commission for early review. These documents are not attached to this report due to the extensive volume, but are available at the City Hall Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 10 in the offices of the Planning Division and online at: http://www.newportbeachca.gov/index.aspx?page=1 325. Summary International Bay Clubs Inc. proposes a general plan amendment to increase the maximum floor area to 56,000 square feet, a net increase of 21,000 square feet. The request is necessary in order to accommodate the proposed new golf clubhouse as the General Plan Land Use Element limits total development on the subject site to 35,000 square feet per Anomaly No. 74. The proposed redevelopment of the golf clubhouse would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation in that the proposed reconstruction of the golf clubhouse will allow for the continuation of an existing use allowed by the PR designation of the site by the Land Use Element of the General Plan. 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. International Bay Clubs Inc. proposes a PCDP that provides the basic planning framework for the Golf Club site of the Newport Beach Country Club. It includes permitted uses of the golf course, clubhouse, ancillary supported uses, maximum development limits, site development standards, and a plan review process for project compliance and implementation, which would be considered by the Community Development Director. It does not; however, include the Tennis Club site as a single, cohesive and comprehensive large -scale planned development as required by the General Plan and Zoning Code Planned Community District regulations. The draft development agreement is being reviewed by the City Attorney to ensure that it is consistent with Municipal Code Section 15.45.020.A.2.c. Staff has no objection to the use of modular buildings during construction of the golf clubhouse. Staff does not object to a larger golf clubhouse and recommends project approval; however, staff does not believe the PCDP is appropriate as it does not provide the benefits of creating a single, cohesive and comprehensive large -scale planned development for the entire site. Thus, the proposed PCDP does not achieve the basic goal of the PC designation and as such staff does not recommend its adoption. Staff has prepared an alternative PCDP (Attachment PC7) that contains necessary development regulations to accommodate the applicant's project and the Tennis Club site in a manner consistent with the Golf Realty application. For comparison purposes, the following table provides a summary of the main land uses components included in the applicant's plan and staff's alternative plan. Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 11 Land Use Component Alternative Plan GRF Plan IBC Plan Golf Club Site Golf Clubhouse 56,000 sf.3 35,000 sf. 56,000 sf. Tennis Club Site Tennis Courts 7 7 N/A Tennis Clubhouse 3,725 sf. 3,725 sf. N/A Villas (single-unit residential 5 5 N/A Bungalows hotel unit 27 27 N/A Process of Site Plan Site Plan review by Planning Commission with conditions of approvals Yes No No Non-Legislative Modification process for Site Plan Yes No No Adopted via Planned Community Development Plan 2Requires an amendment to the Planned Community Development Plan, which must occur by adoption of an ordinance 'This maximum limit is dependent upon approval of GP2008 -005; should City Council not approve it — the maximum limit shall be 35,000 square feet As demonstrated in the table above, the alternative plan contains the same key land use components proposed by the applicant. The alternative plan also provides development limits proposed on the Tennis Club site by Golf Realty Fund. The alternative PCDP also provides a requirement that a site development review process be completed for construction of any new major building structure located on the Golf Club and Tennis Club sites (i.e. clubhouse, residential dwelling unit, hotel unit, spa facility, etc.), and would require consideration and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of grading or building permit. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure new development proposals within the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the standards set forth in the adopted PCDP. It should be noted that after the legislative approval (adoption of the PCDP), the applicant does not want to return to the Planning Commission for a project -level approval due to the further delay the consideration of their project. Alternatives Alternative #1 - Staff Proposal: To address the applicant's desire for a specific project -level approval, the applicant can be directed to repackage the project plans and specific project details as Site Development Review application which would be considered by the Planning Commission at the continued hearing. This approach in conjunction with a more flexible PCDP would provide a flexible regulatory framework through the legislation process while ensuring an appropriate project -level review by the Planning Commission. In Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 12 conjunction with the project approval, the City may incorporate project specific conditions of approval. Under this scenario, staff recommends the Planning Commission consider the following: 1. Continue all of the requested items to October 20, 2011, Planning Commission meeting to allow sufficient time for the applicant to modify their application to include a Site Development Review request; and 2. Direct staff to prepare a draft resolution for the following recommendations to the City Council: a. Approval of the general plan amendment, development agreement, temporary structures and uses permit, site development review, and mitigated negative declaration; and b. Approval of a PCDP as proposed by staff as an alternative to the PCDP as proposed by the applicant. Alternative #2 — Deny the Project: Should the Planning Commission conclude that the proposed project would not be compatible with the surrounding uses; the Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare a resolution for denial. Alternative #3 — Approve the Project as Submitted: Should the Planning Commission conclude that the proposed project would be compatible with the surrounding uses and the proposed PCDP meets the intent and purpose of the General Plan and Zoning Code Planned Community District regulations, the Planning Commission should direct staff to prepare a resolution for approval. Future Foreseeable Application on the Golf Club Site The City is currently reviewing an application filed by the Golf Realty Fund, the land owner of the Golf Club and Tennis Club sites. Golf Realty Fund is seeking land use entitlements (planned community development plan adoption, transfer of development rights, vesting tentative tract map, and temporary structures use permit) to redevelop the existing golf course and tennis club of the Newport Beach Country Club. The application also includes a development agreement. Site Plan Conflicts between IBC and Golf Realty Fund The applicant and Golf Realty Fund have submitted their own individual site plan for the Golf Club site. The following are some of the key conflicts between the two (2) proposed site plans: Newport Beach Country Club -IBC August 4, 2011 Page 13 • Size of golf clubhouse • Massing and location of golf clubhouse • Parking Lot layout and circulation • Landscaping along Coast Highway • Retention of views through the golf course Staff will continue working with the applicant and IBC to resolve these conflicts. The alternative PCDP is a working draft; and is subject to changes to accommodate both the applicant's and IBC's requests. Public Notice Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Pilot, mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the property (excluding roads and waterways) and posted at the site a minimum of 10 days in advance of this hearing consistent with the Municipal Code. The environmental assessment process has also been noticed consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act. Finally, the item appeared upon the agenda for this meeting, which was posted at City Hall and on the city website. The notice and posting were completed for the June 9, 2011, Planning Commission hearing. The Planning Commission continued this application to August 4, 2011 meeting. Since the continuation was to a certain date, no further notice and posting are necessary. Prepared by: M. Ung, Ass%iote Planner Submitted by: JWn Campbell, Principal Planner PC 1 Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan PC 2 Austin -Foust Parking Management Plan PC 3 Kimley -Horn Circulation and Parking Evaluation PC 4 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration' PC 5 Responses to Comments PC 6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program' PC 7 Alternative Planned Community Development Plan PC 8 Project plans Note: 'These attachments are not included in the staff report package due to their size and bulk. They are available at the City Hall in the offices of the Planning Division and online at: http:// www .newportbeachca.gov /index.aspx ?page =1325. F WSERS \PLN \Shared \PA's \PAs - 2008 \PA2008- 152\PC Staff Report.docxTmprt: 11nsa9 Attachment No. PC 1 Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan Land Uses, Development Standards Et Procedures Land Uses, Development Sbadnd&Pnoced Contents i Introduction and Purpose vf Development Plan ................................................................................. 2 A. Purpose ............................................................................................................................................. 2 B. Relationship tn Municipal Code ....................................................................................................... % O. Land Use and Development Regulations —...—.......—..—.......—..~.........^...-4 A. Permitted Uses .................................................................................................................................. 4 B. Development Limits .................... .................................................................................................... 4 IO. Site Development Standards ............................................................................................................... 5 A. Permitted Height of Structures ......... ............................................................................................... 5 B. Parking Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 5 C. Luudocayb`g--------------------------------------------. 6 D. Fencing ............................................................................................................................................. 6 E. Lighting ............................................................................................................................................ 6 F. Signs .................................................. .............................................................................................. 6 ll/ Planned Community Development Plan Administration .................................................................... k A. Process for New Structures .............................................................................................................. 8 B. Process for New Signs ...................................................................................................................... 8 Newport Beach Country Club Planned Connnmnity Development Plan O5K)4/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan The Newport Beach Country Club is a regionally significant recreational resource within the City of Newport Beach and is comprised of approximately 132 acres spanning an area adjacent to Newport Center and extending from the Club's entrance at Irvine Terrace and East Coast Highway to a point near the intersection of Jamboree Road and Santa Barbara Drive. The General Plan Land Use Element designates the Newport Beach Country Club as Parks and Recreation. The Recreation Element highlights the value of recreational facilities as important components in an urban environment, contributing to the residents' quality of life through both recreational and aesthetic value. The City of Newport Beach Municipal Code allows for property development regulations to be specified in a Planned Community (PC) District Development Plan for properties of ten (10) acres in size or larger. The Newport Beach Country Club PC Development Plan serves as the controlling zoning ordinance for the site and is authorized by Section 20.35 of the City of Newport Beach Codified Ordinances and is intended to implement the provisions of the Newport Beach General Plan. A. Purpose The Newport Beach Country Club PC district Development Plan contains the standards and regulations that specify how development of the facilities on the property shall be governed. The PC District is comprised of the Clubhouse and the Golf Course (see Figure 1). These components shall be governed by the Newport Beach Country Club PC Development Plan set forth herein, which includes land uses, development standards and administration. The Clubhouse and the parking lot are approximately 9 acres, while the Golf Course is approximately 123 acres. This Development Plan provides regulations which will govern future renovation of the components of the PC so that they meet the expectations of the market place and insure that the facilities continue as a world class recreational venue. B. Relationship to Municipal Code Whenever the development regulations of this plan conflict with the regulations of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, the regulations contained herein shall prevail. The Municipal Code shall regulate development whenever regulations are not provided within these district regulations. All words and phrases used in this Newport Beach Country Club PC Development Plan shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in Section V — Definitions. The Municipal Code referred to herein is the version of the Code in effect on the date this Planned Community is approved and specifically includes 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 Title 5 of the Municipal Code (Business Licenses and Regulations). Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 2 05/04/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section I. Introduction and Purpose of Development Plan Figure 1 - Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 05/04/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section II. Land Use and Development Regulations II. Land Use and Development Regulations A. Permitted Uses 1. General Permitted uses are those uses set forth in this Section. The Newport Beach Country Club includes the Golf Clubhouse, an 18 -hole championship golf course and ancillary support uses including a golf practice facility, golf cart storage area and maintenance building. The clubhouse includes amenities such as a restaurant, bars /cocktail lounges, banquet room, health and fitness facilities and personal improvement facilities. The uses identified are not comprehensive but rather major use categories. Specific uses are permitted consistent with the definitions provided in Section V of this Development Plan. Uses determined to be accessory or ancillary to permitted uses, which support the permitted uses, are also permitted. The Planning Director may determine other uses not specifically listed herein, provided they are consistent with the purpose of this Planned Community Development Plan. 2. Open Space The passive landscape areas surrounding the Golf Course and those separating the Golf Course Fairways represent a major benefit to the City of Newport Beach and its residents. These areas will be maintained and enhanced as integral components of the Golf Course and the community. Existing golf course perimeter fencing shall be retained and new fencing shall be extended around the parking area which lies between East Coast Highway and the golf clubhouse. 3. Special Events Special events are permitted and subject to Chapter 11.03 of the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code. B. Development Limits The total allowable gross floor area for the Newport Beach Country Club Clubhouse is 56,000 square feet. The gross floor area for all ancillary support uses, such as Golf Cart Storage and Golf Course maintenance buildings is not included in the square footage development limits and shall not require parking. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 4 05/04/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards III. Site Development Standards The following site development standards shall apply to the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community. A. Permitted Height of Structures 1. Standards for Allowable Heights The Newport Beach Country Club falls within the City of Newport Beach 32/50 foot height limitation zone. Through the adoption of this Planned Community District, building structures may exceed 32 feet up to 50 feet. 2. Setback Requirements Setbacks for the clubhouse and maintenance buildings are 10 feet which is the minimum setback distance from the property line to building or parking lot. No setbacks apply to the golf course. Setback areas for surface parking must be screened using fences, hedges, landscaping or other similar methods. B. Parking Requirements 1. General Standards Parking requirements for The Newport Beach Country Club are shown below on Table 1, Newport Beach Country Club Parking Requirements. Table 1— Newport Beach Country Club Parking Requirements Parking Reg uirements Use Category Number of Seats /Etc. Parking Requirement Number Required Golf Uses: - Regulation Courses 18 holes 8 spaces per hole, plus the 144 spaces required for additional uses on the site Eating & Drinking Establishments: - Fine Dining 58 seats 1 stall / 3 seats - Mixed Grille 90 seats or 146 - Boardroom / Private Dining 40 seats (1 stall / 35 so - Banquet Room 250 seats Other Uses: - Administration Offices 2,290 sf 4 stalls 11,000 square feet 9 - Pro Shop 2,160 sf 4 stalls 1 1,000 square feet 9 - Maintenance Facility 8,565 sf 2 stalls 1 1,000 square feet 18 - Health & Fitness Facilities (small) 1,800 sf 1 stall / 250 square feet 8 Total parking required: 334 Parking provided: - Standard 336 - Handicap 9 Total parking provided: 345 Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 5 05/04/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards 2. Valet Parking Valet parking is permitted and shall be consistent with a parking plan approved by the City Traffic Engineer. Events that require the use of satellite parking with shuttle service that involves use of the public right -of -way shall require approval by the City Traffic Engineer through a special event permit. C. Landscaping Landscaping plans shall be submitted to the Planning Director for approval and shall incorporate drought tolerant plant species. A Fencing Existing golf course perimeter fencing shall be retained and extended around the parking area which lies between East Coast Highway and the golf clubhouse. Fence height shall not exceed seven feet (7') with pilasters not to exceed seven feet eight inches (7' -8 ") in height, set at intervals with intervening landscape material for aesthetic purposes. E. Lighting Outdoor lighting shall be shaded and directed to minimize impact to surrounding uses. A photometric lighting plan shall be prepared by a certified electrical contractor and submitted for approval by the Planning Director. F. Signs 1. General Sign Standards All permanent and temporary signs in the Newport Beach Country Club that are visible from the street shall be consistent with the provisions of these sign standards, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Director. All permanent and temporary signs that are not visible from the street are not restricted. Sign illumination is permitted for all sign types. Signage details are described in Table 2 below. Signs that are visible from the street must consist of individual fabricated letters or routed -out letters in an opaque background. Enclosed "box" or "can" signs are not permitted, unless they are logos. Table 2 - Signage Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 05/04/11 Maximum Number Maximum Sign Size Sign Type Location Monument Sign NW Corner of PCH and Irvine Terrace 1 8' high maximum 180 sq. ft. Plaque Sign Entrance Drive at Guardhouse on 1 35 sq. ft. Irvine Terrace Delivery Sign Westerly Drive Isle at Connection with 1 20 sq. ft. Frontage Road Easement Directory Sign Throughout N/A 8' high maximum 8 sq. ft. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 05/04/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section III. Site Development Standards In addition to other signs permitted in this section, signs used to give direction to vehicular or pedestrian traffic are permitted. Sign content shall not be limited. Signs shall be subject to the review of the City Traffic Engineer to ensure adequate sight distance in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Directional signs that are visible from public right -of -ways are limited to a maximum of 10 square feet in size but are not limited in quantity, location, or design. Temporary signs that are visible from public right -of -ways and intended to be displayed for 60 days or less are permitted for purposes related to special events and holiday activities. A comprehensive sign program may be prepared if the applicant wishes to deviate from the sign standards identified herein. Comprehensive sign programs shall be submitted for review and consideration in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code Section 20.42.120. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 05/04/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration IV. Planned Community Development Plan Administration A. Process for New Structures 1. Purpose and Intent The purpose of the Plan Review process is to provide for review of development proposals for new structures within the Newport Beach Country Club PC district. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, all development proposals shall be subject to a Plan Review by the Planning Director for review to determine compliance with the PC Development Plan. Signs, tenant improvements, carts, kiosks, temporary structures and uses are exempt from this provision. 2. Review and Action Submittals shall be reviewed by the Planning Director, and the Planning Director shall approve the project if he /she makes the following findings: a. The proposed use and/or development is consistent with the General Plan. b. The proposed use and/or development is consistent with the Newport Beach Country Club PC Development Plan. The Planning Director action is the final action unless appealed in accordance with the Municipal Code. B. Process for New Signs Applications for new signs shall follow the process identified in the Municipal Code. Submittal shall be reviewed for consistency with the Development Plan. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan S 05/04/11 Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures Section V. Definitions V. Definitions All words and phrases used in this Newport Beach Country Club PC shall have the same meaning and definition as used in the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code unless defined differently in this section. Eating and Drinking Establishments: Establishments engaged in serving prepared food or beverages for consumption on or off the premises. Bars and Cocktail Lounges: Establishments engaged in selling or serving alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises or establishments having any of the following characteristics: Licensed as a "public premises" by the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Provides an area for serving alcoholic beverages that is operated during hours not corresponding to regular meal service hours. Food products sold or served incidentally to the sale or service of alcoholic beverages shall not be deemed as constituting regular food service. Delivery Sign: A sign solely for the purpose of guiding truck traffic to a specified delivery route /location. Directory Sign: A sign listing the tenants or occupants of a building or building complex. Monument Sign: Any sign that is supported by its own structure and is not part of or attached to any building. Personal Improvement: Includes those services that are personal and that promote the health and well -being of an individual. Plaque Sign: A sign showing the name of the building /facility that may contain a plate, decal or emblem with the facility logo. Sign: Any media, including their structure and component parts which are used or intended to be used out -of -doors to communicate information to the public. Temporary Sign: Any sign, banner, pennant, valance, or advertising display constructed of cloth, canvas, plywood, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials, with or without frames, intended to be displayed for a limited period of time. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan 9 05/04/11 Attachment No. PC 2 Austin -Foust Parking Management Plan RECLIVPDBY PLANNING DEPARTMENT JUN 3 02010 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City of Newport Beach NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB Parking Management Plan Prepared by: Austin -roust Associates, Inc. 2223 Wellington Avenue, Suite 300 Santa Ana, California 92701 -3161 (714) 667 -0496 June 21, 2010 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB Parking Management Plan The Newport Beach Country Club (NBCC) is a private membership club and includes the Golf Course and Clubhouse. The NBCC proposes the reconstruction of the existing clubhouse and golf course maintenance facility including, a reconfiguration of the existing parking lot, the private entry drive and access for deliveries. Under the proposed project, the clubhouse would be increased in size from 23,460 square feet (so up to 51,213 sf The increase in square footage is intended to improve service to its existing membership and to modernize the facility. Under the proposed project, the club membership is expected to be reduced. The new clubhouse will include: dining facilities, a banquet room, a pro shop, a fitness facility, locker rooms, staff offices, and a maintenance facility. With the exception of the 1,800 square foot fitness facility, which is a new use, the increase in square footage comes from enlarging existing uses such as locker moms, club storage, game room, etc. Four separate dining facilities will include: Fine Dining, Mixed Grille, Boardroon3/Private Dining, and a 250 -scat Banquet Room. The dining facilities will provide a maximum total seating of 438 persons if all four were occupied at one time. The existing site is shown in an aerial n3ap in Figure 1 and the proposed site plan is illustrated in Figure 2. ANALYSIS Table I shows the City's Zoning Code required parking spaces for the expanded facilities. The City's Parking Code requirement is 334 parking spaces and 348 spaces will be provided, resulting in a net M -space surplus over the City Parking Code requirement. The City's Parking Code rates typically apply to single stand -alone uses and uses open to the public. However the NBCC is private and requires a membership to use the facilities. Therefore the total parking spaces required may be excessive. The project will include four separate dining facilities, three areas for club members, and a banquet facility, which is available for special events. Combined, the dining facilities will provide a maximum sealing of 438 persons if all four were occupied at one time. While it is unlikely that all four dining areas will be fully occupied at the sane time, the proposed project exceeds the parking spaces required by the City Parking Code and will have a sufficient number of parking spaces available to accommodate all for uses at once. Neeyorl Beach Country Club I Auslin -Foust Associates, Inc. Parking Management Plan 483013rpt Figurc 1 AERIAL VIEW Newport Beach Country Club Z Austin-Foust Associates, Inc. Parldng Management Plan 483013base.dwg NOTE GQNSfKKiNYAV _ A; NENEIIIe CMLeRANNG FORrAA@5 '" —. ON 41E NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORTBEACH. crw, N W[Gi[OONI pNYGI NNNMO tYCYO ,py� py, fYpr . �r ar' nY°rssn fa .nenwNNeem mr .a..�.q, wr'rwrao]ra ..s,.Y.n •n.mma s rrl.usn.eaN1 as '�— esfws'� —way .]r rv,A. ggSe.,Pq� %Wu M1V 2MIiM Y tl.)AY GM enJNgYy uqe NM MYP SAKY 1N�NA/�] J.MO '.Y�r��w TI,NNp ]IAAe pplM +� �NU.+sN si �NwNy re. a.raNV� .auw °� •Nm. 'NN xifrga�saias.°oe�`"c.wer�Y�. GENERAL NOTES A mQpw 31 PROPOSED SITE PLAN ut. SnNUUM Figure 2 SITE PLAN Newport Beach Country Club Austin -Foust Associates, lac. Parking Management Plan 3 483013rptFig2.dwg Table I NBCC EXPANSIONPARKING REQUIREMENTS Land Use size Parking .Rates Required Spaces Golf Uses 181-loles 8Spaces per I -tole 144 Eating& Drinking Establishments Seats 1 Space per each 3 Seats (or I per each 75 sq. R of net public area) 146 Fine Dining 58 Mixed Grille 90 Boardroom/Private Dining 40 Banquet Room 250 Offices 2,290 sq. It 4 Spaces per 1,000 sq. R 18 Pro Shop 2,160 sq. ft Maintenance 8,565. sq. 111 2 Spaces per 1,000 sq. fl 18 Health/Fiutess Facilities (small) 1,800 sq. fl I Space per 250 sq. f1 8 TOTAL 334 Newpon Beach Country Club 4 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Parking Management. Plan 4830t3rpt Under the proposed project, the clubhouse facilities will be expanded from 23,460 square feet to about 51,213 square feet. No new services are proposed with the exception of the 1,800 square foot fitness room. No increase in club membership is expected; rather, a reduction in membership is platuned. The club currently staffs between 100 -120 employees depending oil the season; no change in staffing levels is proposed. Since no increase in NBCC membership or staff is expected, an accurate estimate of the future parking demand of the expanded facility can be determined from the existing parking demand. The existing NBCC parking facility was observed to determine existing parking demand and was counted for three days (Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, October 24 -26, 2008) from 7:00 AM — 9:00 PM on an hour - by -hour basis. The results (see Appendix) reveal Friday is the peak day with a maximum of 239 spaces occupied at noon. Saturday has a peak parking demand of 190 spaces and Sunday drops well off with a peak of only 115 spaces filled. With a forecasted decrease in chub membership and an unlikely increase in the number of NBCC employees, the expansion is not expected to pass the existing club's peak parking demand of 239 spaces. This leaves a surplus of 109 parking spaces out of the 348 spaces provided (excludes 5 parking spaces in gate controlled maintenance area). Employee parking was also analyzed as part of the parking management plan. The peak parking demand of 239 spaces included all members, guests and enployees parked on site. The exact percentage of employees that made up the 239 -space peak is unknown. The site plan will include five parking stalls in the gated maintenance area adjacent to the proposed clubhouse, which will be utilized for the maintenance employee parking. All other employees will be instructed to park in the 224 space lower lot (224 spaces at lowest level plus 50 spaces at the banquet entry area), leaning the 74 spaces in the upper lot reserved for members and guests only. Moreover, employees will be required to park in spaces furthest from the clubhouse leaving closer parking spaces available to members and guests. Even without the upper lot, the lower lots 274 space capacity is more than sufficient to handle the site's existing peak 239 space demand which includes employee parking (minus five maiutence spaces) with a total 35 spaces still available or a 13 percent vacancy. In the lower lot, no parking conflicts between employees and palrons is expected that would require designating specific spaces for members only versus parking for employees. Currently, the NBCC hosts a number of annual charity events and weddings. The special events usually occur on Saturday afternoons and evenings when the "normal" clubhouse parking demand is only about 190± spaces. This leaves a nvnimum of 158± spaces for special events such as weddings, etc. The new clubhouse will have a banquet room with a maximum capacity of 250 persons. The three other dining facilities are for club members, which have been accounted for in the parking counts. The City's Newport Beach Country Club 5 Austin -roust Associates, Inc. Parking Management Plan 433013rpt parking code requires eating and drinking establishments parking to be provided at the rate of one space per three seats. Therefore, the banquet room will require a total of 84 spaces. The available vacant spaces on Saturday afternoon are predicted to be about double that (160 ±) with the surplus increasing dramatically to over 230 spaces after 4:00 PM. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION Upon reviewing the site plan for the proposed expansion, all improvements to parking, internal circulation, and points of ingress and egress, it has been found the revised plan represents improvements over the existing conditions and is consistent with standard City regulations. However a few comments are in order. First, the site plan shows one traffic circle located at the Porte Cocherc. The traffic circle must have a minimum of a 40 -foot radius from the center of the circle (80 foot total diameter) for a standard size vehicle to maneuver through. Since the circle is not concentrically designed, the diameter provided is greater than the minimum 80 feet required to maneuver the circle. The proposed traffic circle shall also be signed properly to instruct drivers, members, and guests the direction of travel counterclockwise around the circle. Secondly, there is a proposed gate controlled driveway on the western edge of the site that links to an existing easement, which runs parallel to )vast Coast Highway. This easement allows file neighboring Armstrong Nursery access to the signalized intersection of Irvine Terrace and Bast Coast Highway. The driveway gate will remain open during service hours. All guests will be instructed to use the main entrance and will be required to check in at the guardhouse when visiting. CONCLUSIONS ]n summary, it is concluded that the 348 parking spaces exceeds the City's Parking Code requirement of 334 spaces at full operational capacity of the dining areas, club services, golf course and related uses, and will be more than adequate to serve file proposed NBCC clubhouse. Despite a significant increase in size of the facility, the current membership is not expected to increase and over time the membership is anticipated to actually drop. Ali existing peak parking demand of 239 spaces was observed to occur on Fridays at noon. The peak demand on Saturday is 190 spaces at noon, which drops to less than 100 by 5:00 PM when most special events such as wedding, ctc., occur. Newpon Beach Country Club 6 Anstin -Pons[ ASSOcialc5, Inc. Parking Managemcnt PInn 483013rpt In effect, the increased size of the clubhouse is not expected to result in any increase in parking demand. On the contrary, as the membership drops the parking demand is expected to follow suit. Newport Beach Country Club 7 Austin -Foust Associates, Inc. Parking Management Plan 483013rpt APPENDIX A Newport Beach Country Club A -1 Austin -roust Associates, Inc. Parking Management Plan 483013rpt 000 (0D O N O M t00 V N O a a0{ N O W O N 0 Spaces Occupied 9:00 PM a9 9 O 8:30 PM 0. rn c_ 8:00 PM �1O 'E V p N m O s q 7:30 PM H Ta 7:00 PM ii in w'a 6:30 PM 6:00 PM 5:30 PM 5:00 PM 4:30 PM 4:00 PM 3:30 PM 3:00 PM 2:30 PM O v 2:00 PM d E 1:30 PM F 1:00 PM 12:30 PM 12:00 PM 11:30 AM 11:00 AM 10:30 AM 10:00 AM 9:30 AM 9:00 AM 8:30 AM 8:00 AM 7:30 AM 7:00 AM TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES, INC. PARKING STUDY LOCATION: NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB FILENAME: 10808PK1 1600 E. COAST HWY DATE: 10/24/08 CITY: NEWPORT BEACH DAY: FRIDAY Time ZONES ZONES Period Beginning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL SPACES: 231 215 5 451 6:00 AM :30 AM 7:00 AM 32 10 0 42 :30 AM 36 15 0 51 8:00 AM 46 26 0 72 :30 AM 57 39 1 97 8:00 AM 72 48 1 121 :30 AM 79 55 2 136 10:00 AM 86 66 2 154 :30 AM 90 70 2 162 11:00 AM 108 73 2 183 :30 AM 111 75 2 188 12:00 PM 128 71 3 202 :30 PM 131 88 3 222 1:OD PM 141 94 4 239- :30 PM 127 90 3 220 2:00 PM 109 90 3 202 :30 PM 130 91 3 224 3:00 PM 114 88 2 204 :30 PM 132 89 2 223 4:00 PM 133 89 2 224 :30 PM 127 81 2 210 5:00 PM 108 75 2 185 :30 PM 90 72 2 164 6:00 PM 63 70 2 135 :30 PM 34 70 1 105 7:00 PM 23 66 1 90 :30 PM 19 57 1 77 8:00 PM 15 49 1 65 :30 PM 6 38 0 44 9:00 PM 5 32 0 37 :30 PM COMMENTS: SEE PHOTO FOR ZONES A -4 TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES, INC PARKING STUDY LOCATION: CITY: NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB 1600 E. COAST HWY NEWPORT BEACH FILENAME: DATE: DAY: 10808PK2 1.0/25/08 SATURDAY Time ZONES ZONES Period Beginning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL SPACES: 231 215 5 451 6:00 AM :30 AM 7:00 AM 60 8 1 69 :30 AM 81 8 2 91 8:00 AM 99 14 4 117 :30 AM 110 15 4 129 9:00 AM 115 21 4 140 :30 AM 119 20 4 143 10:00 AM 119 21 4 144 :30 AM 129 22 5 156 11:00 AM 140 30 5 175 :30 AM 151 31 5 187 12:00 PM 149 37 4 190--- :30 PM 145 40 1 186 1:00 PM 128 40 1 169 :30 PM 117 39 1 157 2:00 PM 108 40 1 149 :30 PM 102 32 2 136 3:00 PM 101 31 2 134 :30 PM 104 36 2 142 4:00 PM 95 44 2 141 :30 PM 88 46 1 135 5:00 PM 68 51 0 119 :30 PM 49 40 0 89 6:00 PM 34 49 0 83 :30 PM 47 55 0 102 7:00 PM 37 60 0 97 :30 PM 29 57 0 86 8:00 PM 28 58 0 86 :30 PM 24 '56 0 80 9:00 PM 22 46 0 68 :30 PM COMMENTS: SEE PHOTO FOR ZONES A -5 TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES, INC PARKING STUDY LOCATION: CITY: NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB 1600 E. COAST HWY NEWPORT BEACH FILENAME: DATE: DAY: 10808PK3 10/26/08 SUNDAY Time ZONES ZONES Period Beginning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TOTAL SPACES: 231 215 5 451 6:00 AM :30 AM 7:00 AM 21 6 0 27 :30 AM 41 8 0 49 8:00 AM 56 9 0 65 :30 AM 69 9 0 78 9:00 AM 72 10 0 82 :30 AM 75 12 0 87 10:00 AM 74 12 0 86 :30 AM 79 13 1 93 11:00 AM 81 14 1 96 :30 AM 84 18 1 103 12:00 PM 66 20 2 88 :30 PM 64 21 4 89 1:00 PM 86 24 5 115-- :30 PM 77 20 2 99 2:00 PM 67 22 2 91 :30 PM 72 15 2 89 3:00 PM 70 9 2 81 :30 PM 67 9 2 78 4:00 PM 74 9 2 85 :30 PM 68 9 3 80 5:00 PM 85 14 2 101 :30 PM 62 14 3 79 6:00 PM 54 12 3 69 :30 PM 51 11 3 65 7:00 PM 51 12 3 66 :30 PM 21 9 0 30 8:00 PM 10 3 0 13 :30 PM 7 2 0 9 9:00 PM 4 1 0 5 :30 PM COMMENTS: SEE PHOTO FOR ZONES A -6 I KAFhIC. uA I A SERVICES, INC. VEHICLE OCCUPANCY SUMMARY LOCATION: NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB 1600 E. COAST HWY CITY: NEWPORT BEACH FILENAME: DATE: DAY: DEPARTING VEHICLES 10808VOI 10/24/2008 FRIDAY TOTALS VEH. 111 31 4 0 0 0 146 286 55 3 1 0 0 345 TOTAL OCC. 111 62 12 0 0 0 185 286 110 9 4 0 0 409 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY ARRIVING = 1.27 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY DEPARTING = 1.19 COMMENTS: ' TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX OR+ TWO THREE FOUR. FIVE SIX OR+ 15 Min PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE TOTAL PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE TOTAL Period DRIVER INCLOG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG INCLOG VEHICLES DRIVER INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG VEHICLES Beginning ONLY DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER ARRIVING ONLY DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DEPARTING 4:00 PM 17 2 0 0 0 0 19 16 2 0 0 0 0 18 :15 PM 12 0 1 0 0 0 13 24 3 0 0 0 0 27 :30 PM 10 2 0 0 0 0 12 17 1 0 0 0 0 18 :45 PM 14 0 0 0 0 0 14 31 4 0 0 0 0 35 5:00 PM 6 2 0 0 0 0 8 28 8 1 1 0 0 38 :15 PM 5 2 0 0 0 0 7 30 2 0 0 0 0 32 :30 PM 7 4 0 0 0 0 11 24 1 0 0 0 0 25 :45 PM 10 3 0 0 0 0 13 22 2 0 0 0 0 24 6:00 PM 5 2 0 0 0 0 7 23 3 0 0 0 0 26 :15 PM 7 1 0 0 0 0 8 14 4 0 0 0 0 18 :30 PM 3 2 0 0 0 0 5 14 3 0 0 0 0 17 :45 PM 3 2 0 0 0 0 5 12 1 0 0 0 0 13 7:00 PM 4 1 0 0 0 0 5 2 3 0 0 0 0 5 :15 PM 3 2 1 0 0 0 6 6 7 0 0 0 0 13 :30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :45 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 7 3 0 0 0 0 10 X8:00 PM 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 0 7 :15 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 7 5 1 0 0 0 13 :30 PM 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 4 :45 PM 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 9:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM 10:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM 11:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM TOTALS VEH. 111 31 4 0 0 0 146 286 55 3 1 0 0 345 TOTAL OCC. 111 62 12 0 0 0 185 286 110 9 4 0 0 409 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY ARRIVING = 1.27 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY DEPARTING = 1.19 COMMENTS: ' TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES, INC. VEHICLE OCCUPANCY SUMMARY LOCATION: NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB FILENAME: 10808V02 1600 E. COAST HWY DATE: 10/2512008 CITY: NEWPORT BEACH DAY: SATURDAY ARRIVING VEHICLES DEPARTING VEHICLES TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX OR+ TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX OR+ 15 Min PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE TOTAL PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE TOTAL Period DRIVER INCLDG INCLOG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG VEHICLES DRIVER INCLDG INCLOG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG VEHICLES Beginning ONLY DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER ARRIVING ONLY DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DEPARTING 4:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM 5:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM 12 3 0 0 0 0 15 18 2 0 0 0 1 21 :45 PM 4 1 0 0 0 0 5 10 3 0 1 0 0 14 6:00 PM 2 3 0 1 0 0 6 8 3 0 0 1 0 12 :15 PM 15 7 1 1 0 0 24 7 3 0 1 0 0 11 :30 PM 6 5 0 1 0 0 12 10 2 0 0 0 0 12 :45 PM 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 7:00 PM 7 0 0 1 0 0 8 14 1 0 0 0 0 15 :15 PM 2 0 1 0 0 0 3 2 5 0 0 0 0 7 :30 PM 4 3 0 0 0 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 •45 PM 3 4 0 0 0 0 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 d3:00 Pm 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 :15 PM 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 :30 PM 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 0 7 :45 PM 1 2 1 0 0 0 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 9:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 0 8 :15 PM 3 1 0 0 0 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 :30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 A 0 2 :45 PM 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 5 3 0 0 0 0 8 10:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM 11:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM TOTALS VEH. 65 32 5 5 1 0 108 107 31 0 2 1 1 142 TOTAL OCC. 65 64 15 20 5 0 169 107 62 0 8 5 6 188 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY ARRIVING = 1.56 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY DEPARTING = 1.32 COMMENTS: TRAFFIC DATA SERVICES, INC. VEHICLE OCCUPANCY SUMMARY LOCATION: NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB FILENAME: 10808V03 1600 E. COAST HWY DATE: 10/26/2008 CITY: NEWPORT BEACH DAY: SUNDAY ARRIVING VEHICLES DEPARTING VEHICLES TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX OR+ TWO THREE FOUR FIVE SIX OR+ 15 Min PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE TOTAL PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE TOTAL Period DRIVER INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG VEHICLES DRIVER INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG INCLDG VEHICLES Beginning ONLY DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER ARRIVING ONLY DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DRIVER DEPARTING 4:00 PM 6 5 0 0 1 0 12 3 4 1 0 1 0 9 :15 PM 6 4 1 0 0 1 12 12 3 0 0 0 1 16 :30 PM 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 6 :45 PM 4 3 0 0 0 0 7 4 1 0 1 0 0 6 5:00 PM 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 2 1 0 1 0 11 :15 PM 3 3 0 0 0 0 6 12 4 0 0 0 0 16 :30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 :45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 6:00 PM 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 :15 PM 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 4 :30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 :45 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 9 6 1 0 0 0 16 :15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 :30 PM 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 4 1 0 0 0 14 > :45 PM 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 X8:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 8 :15 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 .2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 :15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :30 PM :45 PM 10:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM 11:00 PM :15 PM :30 PM :45 PM TOTALS VEH. 36 22 1 0 1 1 61 75 35 4 1 2 1 118 TOTAL OCC. 36 44 3 0 5 6 94 75 70 12 4 10 6 177 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY ARRIVING = 1.54 AVG. VEH. OCCUPANCY DEPARTING = 1.50 COMMENTS Attachment No. PC 3 Kimley -Horn Circulation and Parking Evaluation Circulation and Parking Evaluation for: Newport Beach Country Club Clubhouse Improvement Project In the City of Newport Beach Prepared for.• City of Newport Beach September, 2009 © Kimley -Hom and Associates, Inc. CIRCULATION AND PARKING EVALUATION FOR NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB CLUBHOUSE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Prepared for: City of Newport Beach Prepared by. Kimley -Horn and Associates, Inc. 765 The City Drive, Suite 400 Orange, California 92868 September, 2009 CIRCULATION AND PARKING EVALUATION FOR THE PROPOSED NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB CLUBHOUSE IMPROVEMENT PROTECT IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 — Proposed Site Plan .................. ............................... Figure 2 — Proposed Circulation Modifications — IBC Plan ... Figure 3 — Proposed Circulation Modifications — O'Hill Plan LIST OF TABLES Table 1— Summary of Existing and Proposed Uses ................. Table 2 — Summary of Parking Rates ........ ............................... Table 3 — Summary of Parking Required and Provided ........... .. .............. I ... .......... — I ... ..............................1 ..................... 2 ..................... 4 ..................... 4 �7 ............ 3 ............. 11 .................12 2 6 7 SITE CIRCULATION AND PARKING EVALUATION FOR THE PROPOSED NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB CLUBHOUSE MPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared to provide a site circulation and parking evaluation for the proposed Newport Beach Country Club Project in the City of Newport Beach. The Newport Beach Country Club (NBCC) is an existing private golf club located on East Coast Highway in the City of Newport Beach. The golf course operator proposes to remodel and enlarge the NBCC Clubhouse, reconstruct the golf cart barn and the golf course maintenance building, and reconfigure the golf course parking lot and entry. This report will provide a review of the proposed changes to the site uses, site access, and on -site circulation; and will provide an evaluation of the proposed parking and the adequacy of the parking supply. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Existing Project The Newport Beach Country Club is located on the north side of East Coast Highway, between Jamboree Road and Newport Center Drive, in the City of Newport Beach. The site is comprised of a private golf course and clubhouse on approximately 131.52 acres. The golf course operation consists of an 18 -hole championship golf course, putting green, golf clubhouse, and golf accessory buildings. The clubhouse contains dining and drinking areas for members, a pro shop, and men's and Women's locker rooms. Golf accessory buildings include a golf cart storage barn, a greens- keeper building, restroom facilities, a snack shack, and a starter shack. The primary access to the Newport Beach Country Club is provided via a drive aisle that connects to the end of Irvine Terrace, which in turn connects to East Coast Highway (State Highway 1). Irvine Terrace also provides access to the adjacent Corporate Plaza West development and the NBCC tennis courts. The intersection of Irvine Terrace at East Coast Highway is signalized. The main NBCC drive aisle splits in both directions from the end of Irvine Terrace, with the drive aisle to the left leading to the main parking area in front of the golf clubhouse, and the drive aisle to the right leading to the parking for the tennis courts. On the far side of the tennis parking area is a connection to Granville Drive, which in turn provides a direct connection to Newport Center Drive. NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project - l - September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation Parking for NBCC consists of a large surface parking lot in front of the golf clubhouse building with 420 parking spaces. Proposed Project The proposed project would result in renovation of the clubhouse building, with an increase in square footage from 23,460 square feet to 51,213 square feet. The golf cart, storage, and maintenance buildings would be increased from 8,060 square feet to a total of 17,875 square feet. The entry to the golf course, off Irvine Terrace, would be improved to provide a gated entry with a guard house, and a drop-off circle combined with a porte cochere entry. The parking would be improved to provide an upper lot adjacent to the clubhouse with 75 spaces, a lower lot across the main entrance aisle with 241 spaces, and 48 close -in spaces along the drive aisle in front of the clubhouse. A copy of the proposed project site plan is provided on Figure 1. A summary of the existing site uses and the proposed site changes is provided on Table 1. TABLE 1 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED USES Land Use Units Quantity r Existing Proposed Change Golf Course Holes 18 18 0 Clubhouse SF 23,460 51,213 27,753 Cart Barn / Maintenance SF 8,060 17,875 9,815 Parking Spaces 420 364 -56 Source: Newport Beach Country Club Proposed Site Plan (Sheet A -213), 05 -01-09 The site plan indicates that the project entry and circulation through the site will be modified, and the parking areas will be reconfigured. A total of 364 parking spaces would be provided to serve the golf course and clubhouse. NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project - 2 - September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation U ti N R ME Z Q J d W H O r W W U) WO Do IL 2 5a b V O 6 PROJECT TRAFFIC Project Trip Generation Based on trip generation rates for a golf course, which are based on the number of holes or the number of acres of the golf course t, the proposed project will not result in an increase in trips to and from the site. This is because the clubhouse and maintenance facilities are considered to be part of the golf course site. The trip generation for a golf course would change only if the number of holes or the number of acres changed. The increase in square footage of the related golf course facilities will not result in a change in trip generation. Therefore, no analysis of the project's traffic impact on the surrounding street system is necessary. SITE ACCESS AND CIRCULATION The project site plan reflects proposed on -site changes to the main parking area in front of the clubhouse, including landscaping and beautification of the area, and modifications to the site circulation. The site's primary access to the public street system at East Coast Highway (via Irvine Terrace) will remain. The NBCC site plan indicates that access to the golf clubhouse would be improved as follows: • The golf course entry off Wine Terrace would be gated with a guardhouse. • A new drive aisle with a drop -off circle would he added along the front of the clubhouse. Internal entry points to the main parking lot are shown at the middle of the main parking lot, across from the circle, and at the northwest corner of the lot. • The main parking lot (referred to as the "Lower Lot" on the site plan) would be reconfigured and improved to provide perimeter landscaping and raised curbs at the ends of the parking rows. • A total of 241 spaces will be provided in the main parking lot. A smaller parking lot to the east of the clubhouse (referred to as the "Upper Lot" on the site plan) will provide 75 spaces. An additional 48 spaces, including 8 handicap accessible spaces, will be provided along the drive aisle in front of the clubhouse. In total, the parking supply for the golf course and clubhouse will be 364 spaces. An evaluation of the adequacy of this parking supply is provided in the next section. Each of the drive aisles is shown to be 26 feet in width (typical). This meets the minimum drive aisle width for two -way drive aisles with 90- degree parking, as required by the City of Newport Beach Standard Plan STD - 805 -L -A, and therefore would provide adequate room for circulation, turning, and backing for 90- degree parking spaces. 1 Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation publication - 8t° Edition NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project - 4 - September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation • The site plan indicates that the typical parking space dimension is 8.5 feet wide by IS feet long. This exceeds the minimum 8.5 -by -17 -foot parking space dimension for 90- degree parking, as required by the City of Newport Beach Standard Plan STD - 805 -L -A. • The site plan indicates that eight handicapped parking spaces will be provided, including three van accessible spaces. This satisfies the minimum requirements of the American Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG) Section 4.1.2(5)a. • A secondary entrance to NBCC which is located immediately adjacent to the Irvine Terrace / East Coast Highway intersection connects to a service road that runs parallel to East Coast Highway between the parking lot and East Coast Highway. The site plan indicates modifications which would close access to the parking area from this access road, except at the far west corner of the parking lot. The site plan indicates that the road would be retained as a two-way road, and would connect to a drive aisle along the west edge of the property that would provide access to and from the maintenance buildings and delivery dock for the clubhouse. 'Ibis would allow service and delivery vehicles to access the delivery and maintenance portion of the site without inter- mixing with the general member and guest traffic. • This service road also provides access to the Armstrong Nursery business located immediately west of the NBCC property, and which has an access easement with NBCC to use this access road. The proposed modifications shown on the site plan improve circulation in this area by closing off access to and from the parking lot, however, even with the improvements, the intersection of the access road with Irvine Terrace creates an awkward and non - standard intersection immediately adjacent to the four -way signalized intersection of Irvine Terrace and West Coast Highway. City traffic engineering staff has indicated that this access road should be made one -way eastbound, to reduce the number of movements allowed at this intersection while continuing to provide access. to the signal for nursery customers who wish to head cast on Coast Highway. If this change were implemented, service and delivery vehicles for the golf course operation would be required to enter the golf course through the same entry as golf club members and guests, and circulate past the clubhouse and banquet entry area. An option would be to allow the inbound (westbound) flow only for golf course service and delivery vehicles, and to continue allow the outbound (eastbound) flow for both the golf course as well as nursery traffic. NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project - 5 - September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation SITE PARKING A document entitled "Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan" has been prepared to establish development standards for the NBCC golf course and clubhouse. The Planned Community Development Plan (PCD Plan) development standards include parking requirements for each of the proposed site uses. A summary of the parking rates specified in the NBCC PCD Plan, compared to the parking code requirements specified in the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code is provided on Table 2. TABLE2 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB CLUBHOUE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SUMMARY OF PARKING RATES Parkin Requirement Newport Beach Land Use. NBCC PCD Plan Zoning Code t As specified by the Golf Course 8 per hole Planning Director Eating and Drin king Establishment 1 per seats 1 per3 seats or or 1 per 35 SF 1 per 75 SF net public area or As specified by use permit 2 Office 4 per 1,000 SF 4 per 1,000 SF Pro Shop 4 per 1,000 SF 4 per 1,000 SF Maintentance Facility 2 per 1,000 SF 2 per 1,000 SF Health & Fitness Facility 4 per 1,000 SF As specified by use permit 1 Parking rates reflect parking requirements in the City of Newport Beach Zoning Code for each land use category, as if it were a standalone use. Z Parking. rates for eating and drinking establishments depend on the type of establishment As reflected on Table 2, the City's Zoning Code does not specify a parking rate for golf courses, but rather indicates that the parking requirement for "other commercial recreation uses" will be "As specified by the Planning Director ". The NBCC PCD Plan applies a parking rate to the golf course itself, and then also applies separate parking rates for each of the individual site uses associated with the golf course (dining and banquet facilities, pro shop, etc.), as if each were a stand -alone use. The PCD Plan has established a parking requirement of 8 parking spaces per hole for the golf course and separate parking requirements for each of the ancillary golf course uses. Based on the NBCC PCD Plan development standards, the parking requirement for all of the uses proposed for the NBCC project is summarized on Table 3. NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project - 6 - September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation TABLE 3 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB CLUBHOUSE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SUMMARY OF PARKING REQUIRED AND PROVIDED Parking Parking Land Use Quantity Unit Rate I Required Golf Course 18 Hole 8 144 Eating and Drinking Establishment - Fine Dining 58 Seats 0.333 19.3 -Mixed Grille 90 Seats 0333 30.0 - Boardroom /Private Dining 40 Seats 0333 133 -Banquet Room 250 Seats 0333 833 Sub -101a1 438 146 Offices 2.29 KSF 4 9.2 Pro Sh 2.16 KSF 4 8.6 Sub -total 4.45 4 18 Maintenance 2 8.565 KSF 2 18 Health Sc Fitness iacilityl 1.8 KSF 4 8 Total 334 Parkin Provided 364 Parking Surplus (Deficit) 30 ' Source: Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan, 0728108 z Fractional spaces are rounded up to the next whole number Using the individual parking standards for the golf course and each of the ancillary uses established by the NBCC. PCD Plan, the parking requirement for the proposed NBCC would be 334 spaces. The NBCC proposes a parking supply of 364 spaces, which exceeds its own standard by 30 spaces, By comparison, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation publication contains parking rates for golf courses based on empirical data collected at a number of golf course facilities, including 18 -hole golf courses. The ITE data indicates that the observed parking demand for an 18 -hole golf course ranged from 8.33 to 10.33 parking spaces per hole. The average of each of the peak parking demands for all golf courses studied was 8.68 spaces per hole. In each case, the parking data included the parking demand generated by the ancillary uses on the golf course site, including the uses in the clubhouse. Applying the peak parking rate reported by ITE — 10.33 spaces per hole — the NBCC Golf Course parking requirement would be 186 spaces (18 holes x 10.33 spaces per hole). NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project - 7 - September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation The NBCC PCD Plan parking requirement of 334 would be 148 spaces more than the parking supply that would be required by the peak ITE rate. The proposed parking supply of 364 spaces would exceed the peak ITE standard by 178 spaces. Based on this analysis, it is concluded that the proposed parking supply of 364 spaces for the NBCC golf course and clubhouse will be adequate to meet the day - today parking needs of the proposed NBCC project. A Parking Management Plan prepared for the golf course (Newport Beach Country Club Parking Management Plan, Austin -Foust Associates, Inc., April, 2009) provides a separate evaluation of the adequacy of the parking supply, based on parking data collection for the existing NBCC site uses, and forecasted parking needs for future uses. The parking evaluation indicated that the peak parking demand for the existing uses was 239 spaces at 1:00 PM on a typical Friday, and 190 spaces at noon on Saturday. This parking demand represented the demand for all site users at the time, including members, guests, and employees. When the parking that would be required for the banquet facility is added to the peak parking demand, the resulting parking requirement would be 323 spaces on a Friday and 274 spaces on a Saturday. This analysis represents a worst case condition, since large banquet events are not typically held in the midday on a Friday. On the basis of total parking supply, compared to forecasted parking required, the proposed parking supply of 364 spaces would be adequate to accommodate the peak parking needs based on the parking data collection and analysis. The Parking Management Plan indicates that a valet parking operation is proposed for the upper lot, for the convenience of members and guests. The upper lot would contain 75 spaces. The remaining parking supply available for self -park would be. 294 spaces. Employees will not be allowed to park in the upper lot. If all members and guests were to choose to bypass the valet-and self -park in the other parking areas, the total parking required for concurrent use of all facilities — 334 spaces — would not be completely accommodated in the general parking areas. The Parking Management Plan should contain the flexibility to allow the upper lot to be converted to general use on peak attendance days, event days, and generally when the parking supply in the other parking areas approaches capacity. In addition to the on -site parking supply, the Parking Management Plan indicates that additional parking that would be needed for special events at the NBCC would be accommodated through additional measures, such as off-site parking arrangements, shuttle service, and valet parking techniques, such as tandem parking or double parking. NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project - 8 - September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation COMPOSITE PLAN The proposed improvements to the golf clubhouse are proposed by the NBCC Golf Course operator. The NBCC owner has also proposed changes to the NBCC site, including changes to the tennis area on the remaining portion of the NBCC (immediately adjacent to the east ). The following provides a summary of inconsistencies between the two plans, and site circulation related issues that would arise if the Clubhouse improvements proposed by the Golf Course operator and the improvements to the remaining portion of NBCC proposed by the owner were to both be approved. For discussion purposes, the Clubhouse improvements proposed by the Golf Course operator will be referred to as the "IBC Plan," and the improvements to the tennis area of the site will be referred to as the "O'Hill Plan". An enlargement of the Irvine Terrace entry and the adjoining NBCC access drives is provided on Figure 2 for the IBC Plan and on Figure 3 for the O'Hill Plan. • The IBC Plan retains the secondary entrance and access road that parallels Coast Highway along the south edge of the golf course parking lot, with improvements as described previously. The O'Hill Plan shows the access road closed, and the affected area incorporated into the golf course parking lot. • The O'Hill Plan reflects a reconfiguration of the northern terminus of Irvine Terrace and the on -site drive aisles (referred to as Country Club Drive on the O'Hill Plan). The eastern leg of Country Club Drive is shown on the O'Hill Plan to be shifted approximately 30 feet to the south, closer to the Coast Highway, to accommodate the development of The Bungalows. On the other hand, the IBC Plan shows Irvine Terrace and Country Club Drive in the same location and configuration as exists today. At the boundary of the two plans, the reconfigured eastern leg of Country Club Drive on the O'Hill Plan would not align with the roadway configuration shown on the IBC Plan. The two applicants will need to work together to reconcile the discrepancy between the two plans at the point where the plans meet, such as: • The IBC Plan would need to be modified to shift Country Club Drive approximately 30 feet to the south to accommodate the development shown on the O'Hill Plan, or; • The bungalow development shown on the north side of Country Club Drive on the O'Hill Plan would need to be modified, reoriented, reduced, or shifted to the north to avoid the road in its current alignment, or; • Some combination of modification of both plans that would reconcile the discrepancy between the two plans. FOR Site Circulation and • The Upper Parking Lot on the IBC Plan appears to encroach into backyard areas for the Bungalows shown on the O'Hill Plan. Similarly, the two applicants will need to work together to reconcile the discrepancy between the two plans at the point where the plans meet. • If the Clubhouse improvements proposed by the Golf Course operator and the improvements to the remaining portion of NBCC proposed by the owner were to both be approved, these inconsistencies between the plans will need to be resolved by the applicants. NBCC Clubhouse Improvement Project -10- September, 2009 Site Circulation and Parking Evaluation a - o� Z a J d U N Z O f- Q U LL 0 O 2 Z O H U U O N W W N WO no 0 2w W d tj 0 k bP F � o n m mu C F m t ly East Coast Highway ro- 0 Z Q J a J J Z 0 Q v W D 0 2 Z _0 Q J 7 V v D M W N W �0 �a 00 �a a 0 Attachment No. PC 4 Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration (Not included in the staff report due to their size and bulk) a�w"'ogr CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard i P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 (949) 644 -3200 Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration To: From: Office of Planning and Research City of Newport Beach Planning Department 121 State Clearinghouse 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. BOX 3044 P.O. Box 1768 Sacramento, CA 95812 -3044 Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 County Clerk, County of Orange Q Public Services Division Date: 10/4/2010 Santa Ana, CA 92702 Public Review Period: 30 days (October 7, 2010 to November 8, 2010) Project Name: Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PA 2008 -152) Project Location: 1600 —1602 East Coast Highway, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Demolition of the existing golf course clubhouse and the construction of a new golf Project Description: clubhouse (51,213 square feet) and ancillary facilities (i.e., cart barn and bag storage). Finding: Pursuant to the provisions of City Council K -3 pertaining to procedures and guidelines to implement the California Environmental Quality Act, the City of Newport Beach has evaluated the proposed project and determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the Initial Study containing the analysis supporting this finding is 0 attached ❑ on file at the Planning Department. The Initial Study may include mitigation measures that would eliminate or reduce potential environmental impacts. This document will be considered by the decision - makers) prior to final action on the proposed project. If a public hearing will be held to consider this project, a notice of the time and location is attached. Additional plans, studies and /or exhibits relating to the proposed project may be available for public review. If you would like to examine these materials, you are invited to contact the undersigned. If you wish to appeal the appropriateness or adequacy of this document, your comments should be submitted in writing prior to the close of the public review period. Your comments should specifically identify what environmental impacts you believe would result from the project, why they are significant, and what changes or mitigation measures you believe should be adopted to eliminate or reduce these impacts. There is no fee for this appeal. If a public hearing will be held, you are also invited to attend and testify as to the appropriateness of this document. If you have any questions or would like further information, please contact the undersigned. Planner, Title Contact No. Email Date Rosalinh Un , Assoc. Planner 949 644 -3208 rung @newportbeac hca. ov October 5, 2010 Updated 01 -12 -10 C: \Documents and Seltin&My Flles\KKC- 0125.NB COUNTRY CLUB. 113MCirculated IS- MND\NOI.City of NB.doc NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PA2008 -152) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92658 -8915 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Rosalinh Ung, Planning Department (949) 644 -3208 4. Project Location: 1600 East Coast Highway Newport Beach, CA 92660 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Perry Dickey (949) 644 -9550 Newport Beach Country Club 1600 East Coast Highway Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General Plan Designation: PR (Parks and Recreation) Coastal Land Use Designation: OS (Open Space) 7. Zoning: Planned Community 8. Introduction: The subject property is currently occupied by the Newport Beach Country Club (NBCC), which is located within a Planned Community (PC) District that was adopted in 1997 by Ordinance No. 97 -10. The Planned Community (PC) designation encompasses Newport Beach Country Club facilities, which total approximately 132 acres. The General Plan Land Use Element designates the Country Club as Park and Recreation (PR), with a development limit of 35,000 square feet. The PC district is intended to provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive large -scale planning projects as set forth in Chapter 20.35.010 of the Newport Beach Zoning Code. A PC District Text was not adopted when the PC Distinct zoning designation was applied to the property in 1997. The applicant, who holds a long -term lease over the property, is proposing a PC District text to implement the proposed project. The subject lease expires on December 31, 2067. 9. Project Description: Project Location The subject property encompasses approximately 132 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. Existing Improvements The subject property currently supports the Newport Beach County Club, which encompasses a private golf club. The existing golf course consists of a 6,587 -yard, championship 18 -hole golf course with returning nines and related practice and golf club facilities. Existing golf accessory buildings on the site include a golf cart storage barn (6,050 square feet), a greenskeeper (maintenance) building (2,010 square feet), men's and women's restroom facilities (630 square feet), a snack bar (180 square feet), and a 140 - square foot starter shack. In addition, a clubhouse encompasses 23,460 square NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 2 feet that include a pro shop, locker rooms, offices, fine dining, a banquet facility, and employee facilities. The golf course parking lot is located directly off East Coast Highway and encompasses 420 surface parking spaces. The Existing Site Plan (refer to Exhibit 1) illustrates the relationship of the clubhouse and the ancillary structures that are proposed to be replaced. Project Description The applicant is proposing several improvements to the existing development, including the demolition and reconstruction of the existing golf course clubhouse at the Newport Beach Country Club in the area identified on Exhibit 2. In addition to the same core facilities that currently exist in the clubhouse (e.g., pro shop, locker rooms, offices, etc.), the new clubhouse will also include a fitness center for use by members. The proposed site plan is illustrated in Exhibit 3. The proposed project will necessitate the approval of a General Plan Amendment and adoption of a PC Development Plan and District Text that establishes land uses, development standards, and related procedures for the 132 -acre Planned Community. Table 1 provides a development summary. Table 1 Project Development Summary Newport Beach Country Club Existing Project I Proposed Project Clubhouse Com pi Floor Areas . ft. Co m onent Floor Areas . ft. 15 Floor Clubhouse 20,702 18 Floor Clubhouse 30,693 2 Floor Clubhouse 2,758 2" Floor 20,520 Total 23,460 Total 51,213 Cart Barn 6,050 Cart Barn 5,704 Bag Storage 3,606 Maintenance 2,010 Maintenance 8,565 Snack Bar 180 Snack Bar 180 Restroom Facilities 630 Restroom Facilities 630 Starter Shack 140 Starter Shack 140 Total 32,470 Total 70,038 Buildin Heights Component Height ft. Component Height ft. Clubhouse 23' -9" Clubhouse 49' -6" Cart Barn 12' -0" Maintenance 18' -0" Maintenance 21'0" 'Exempt from General Plan Development Limits — Ancillary to Golf Course. 20f this total, 54,819 square feet count toward development limit per the General Plan. The cart barn, maintenance building, snack bar, restroom facilities, and starter shack are exempt from the General Plan development limit calculation. SOURCE: Lee & Sakahara Architects, AIA i 7 u _ S /4qc� Y q � J <j X 8 � q �s • 9 II a I�. .I � •I 1 I �LLa, Z F Nw "' xc -_ it m Z) J U } Z 0 U U Q W 00 1 S L 0 w 0 6 W 3 Z z w LS 9 EXISTING BOUNDARY FOR NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB 3dY R � \ \' ne`Irtr A ir��..WY°de �Fl1utd "r. on IT WM i' 3 sX T� j 2 t 3A� GOLF COURSE YYl5 AC ��°` ' CREAGE SUMMARY _ '":;Y r oLFCwneE mere PIT OCVELO RAEM.NEI. YO IA / fj rmn u1w .c A CLUB HOUSE DEVELOPMENT AREA 8.02 AC �\ _ ,' TECHNICAL BITE PLAN 1 g • YSI e.F �d INTERNATIONAL BAY CLUBS INC. 1221 WEST OOASTHIC AJ NEW POST BWpSACH. CA MN33 (9.Bj 630 M(F.) i CONTACT: DAVID WOOTEN JERRYJOHNSON �EN °INFER SHEEN. s �y FUSGOE OF - -_- 2 Exhibit 2 r pgB33 � = • � � � I a � � jM1• �a7 S fill] prilij O'l As 51 a �. V � - - 3�vaa313+✓.�� .- s • ® � �: c la:. I v. .1 ♦ ila � 3 .6 !n a S is ., dd 1 if y I: I I I o _ I I ;s F; 2 < m M c kr co V z D 0 U Q W in H tY 0 a_ w Z a a NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 6 The project has three main components, including: (1) the clubhouse; (2) a parking lot; and (3) a maintenance facility. Each of these components is described below. LLllII.LTl� The proposed project would replace the existing 23,460 square foot clubhouse with an approximately 51,213 square foot clubhouse. The new clubhouse will have the same core amenities as the existing clubhouse, including pro shop, locker rooms, offices, fine dining, a banquet facility and employee facilities. A new fitness center will be added to the clubhouse for use by members. With the exception of the fitness center, expansions of existing amenities without consequent intensification of use account for the increase in square footage. A cart storage facility has been incorporated into the new clubhouse design as a tuck -under cart barn. Access to the new clubhouse will be provided at three separate locations. The first access is located at the eastern side of the building and includes a circular driveway and a porte cochere that would provide access to the reception area and members' lobby. The second entry point is provided on the southern side of the building in the middle of the clubhouse. The entry point would be for golfers only, providing access to the locker rooms, showers, and restroom facilities. The third entry point is locate don the southwestern side of the building and would provide access to the banquet facilities. The proposed clubhouse will be two stories and approximately 49'6" in height, measured from the existing /natural grade. The new clubhouse facility would be located on an elevated pad to enhance views of the Pacific Ocean and of the golf course. Additionally, the new clubhouse will be situated approximately 100 feet closer to East Coast Highway than the current clubhouse. The variation of rooflines provides articulation and visual interest. All roof top appurtenances, including HVAC equipment, will be screened from public view as required by the Municipal Code requirements. Building materials will include natural stack stone, plaster, wood trellises, and glass, along with a copper, slate, or standing seam metal roof. Parking Lot The project also includes the reconstruction of the existing parking lot to provide approximately 348 parking spaces, including 45 spaces at the entry level, 224 spaces in the lower lot, 74 spaces in the upper lot and 5 spaces in the service yard. The upper lot will be used for regular member parking, with valet parking during special events. An entry driveway provides access into the parking lot from Irvine Terrace. The entry driveway will be provided with a guardhouse, which will . be in operation during special events held at the Newport Beach Country Club. All daily traffic will use this entry. An existing access easement for the adjacent Armstrong Garden Center enters into the site from Irvine Terrace and extends along the southern edge of the lower parking lot parallel to East Coast Highway and terminates at the eastern boundary of Armstrong's. The easement is between private parties and does not involve the project applicant. The entry to the access road will be moved approximately 85 feet to the north of where it currently intersects Irvine Terrace to improve the operation of the traffic signal at Irvine Terrace and East Coast Highway. This access road will maintain access across the site for the Armstrong Garden Center and will also provide access for regular deliveries, excluding 18 -wheel tractor - trailers, to the Country Club. It will also be available as a secondary access to the parking lot during special events. Maintenance Facility The existing 2,010 square foot maintenance building located west of the clubhouse will be demolished and replaced with a new freestanding golf course maintenance facility. The maintenance building is considered an ancillary use to the golf course, and is not counted towards the square footage development limit. The building would be enclosed with an eight - foot high masonry wall with plaster finish, and would include a repair shop, offices, and an employee lounge. Storage for equipment, parts, and tools would be provided inside the building. The facility would include a maintenance yard, adjacent to the building, and a freestanding chemical storage area. The existing aboveground fuel tanks will be relocated to a fuel island within the fenced maintenance area, approximately 50 feet from the proposed maintenance building (refer to Exhibit 2). Golf Course The 18 -hole golf course is established in the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community; no changes to the golf course are currently proposed. Men's and women's restroom facilities of approximately 630 square feet, a 140 - square foot starter shack, and a 180- square foot snack bar will also be provided for the golfers, along the northern side of the maintenance building. These facilities are not counted against the General Plan development limit. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 7 Temporary Facilities Temporary facilities will be utilized to maintain operation of the Newport Beach Country club during reconstruction. The temporary facilities will include lockers, a snack bar, pro shop, and a cart barn. The temporary facilities are shown on Exhibit 4 (Temporary Facility Site Plan). Discretionary Approvals Implementation of the proposed project will require approval of the following discretionary approvals by the City of Newport Beach: • General Plan Amendment • Planned Community Text Adoption • Temporary Use Permit • Development Agreement • Approval -in- Concept for Coastal Development 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 former Balboa Bay Tennis Club property is located immediately adjacent to the clubhouse area on the east. A development proposal for this property has been submitted to the City and is currently undergoing development review. The applicant of that project is proposing the replacement of the existing 3,725 square foot tennis clubhouse with a new 3,725 square foot tennis clubhouse and a 7,490 square foot spa. In addition, 17 of the 24 existing tennis courts will be eliminated. The project also proposes the construction of 27 hotel units (i.e., golf and tennis `bungalows ") with a 2,170 square foot guest center and five semi - custom single - family residential dwelling units. The Marriott Hotel is located further east of the golf course fairways. 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 PC -47 course, clubhouse and ancillary facilities Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce, Jamboree Road, NORTH PF, OS and RM APF, GEIF 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 CO -G, RM, CV, CO -R, Marriott Hotel, office EAST MU -H31PR PC -40, RMD, APF, PC -54 development, tennis club, and residential development WEST OS, PF, 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) D iq L' e c 0 a u tA t h �1 •���Yi �" 1`Yo e c � L , e � 4 e 1 c� � D +L D L? !l k } < W Z R -5 aka W W U- fN ff � 8 L m D J U z Z) 0 U <_ W m u F- 1■ -x i < m C6 a W 3 z Z k W fpa NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2O08 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 9 F.Wo %p obrNr Ao.+q,�E �avE Ten _ _OR 63 PI 0.3 FARP. kph /�rfp a Sa r'M0.5F,R �\ Sf Nb j 4 MU -W2R1 °4 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 10 F i % F x 40 > MU -H3 5 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 11 ZONING PC 41 V Y OS-A PC 54 PC -23 sr RSC PC -21 , � cn o APF J)1N �P PC-47 / 9 7� PC -39 PC -30 4p MFR(69d.u.) PC -56 ` ROW CQIS i ao y H� E UR s tic? R-1, E ifa Lit✓ ZA /It GEIF�C rSbF f�'Fq PC 40 PC -17 733ft NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 12 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: 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 DETERMINATION ❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials ❑ Land Use & Planning ❑ Hydrology & Water Quality ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise ❑ Population & Housing 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. ❑ 1 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. ❑ 1 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, nothing further is required. ❑ b•'T. to Submitt d by: Rosalinh Ung, Ass ci Planner Date Planning Department /o•.S•so Prepared by: Keeton K. Kreitzer, Consultant Keeton Kreitzer Consulting Date NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 13 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Aentially Less Than Less than No gnificant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within ❑ ❑ D ❑ a state scenic highway? C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of ❑ ❑ Q ❑ b) the site and its surroundings? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ C) adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? II. 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 2 Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Act contract? C) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or cause the rezoning of, forestland (as defined in Public Resources Code Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forestland or conversion of forestland to ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 non- forest use)? e) 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 forestland to non - forest use? III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air 11 El 0 El quality plan? NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008-152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 14 ]remlaiq Less I nan LeSS man NO gnificant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or ❑ El © ❑ projected air quality violation? G) 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 ❑ ❑ El ❑ (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑ concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of El El 11 0 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, ❑ ❑ ❑ D 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, ❑ ❑ ❑ Q 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 El El ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a El ❑ El resource as defined in §15064.5? NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 15 ro[ennany mess inan Less man NO Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an ❑ Q El El resource pursuant to §15064.5? G) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource ❑ ❑ ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ Q ❑ other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ Q ❑ ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ Q ❑ 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 ❑ Q ❑ ❑ or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where ❑ ❑ ❑ Q sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 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 ❑ ❑ Q ❑ the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 16 gnificant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 El 11 0 ❑ 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 ❑ D ❑ ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 71 ❑ 0 ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted El El 0 11 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 El ❑ ❑ 0 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 11 El 0 11 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? C) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 17 Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of a course of a stream or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ Q ❑ provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate ❑ ❑ ❑ Q Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which 11 ❑ El 121 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q failure of a levee or dam? D Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ k) Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or ❑ ❑ Q ❑ 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, ❑ ❑ Q ❑ 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 El ❑ Q 13 beneficial uses of the receiving waters? n) Create the potential for significant changes in the flow velocity ❑ L3 Q ❑ or volume of stormwater runoff to cause environmental harm? o) Create significant increases in erosion of the project site or ❑ 11 Q ❑ surrounding areas? X. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ Q ❑ NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 18 Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With 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, ❑ ❑ El ❑ or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? C) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 community conservation plan? XI. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ D ❑ ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground ❑ ❑ 0 El vibration or ground borne noise levels? C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 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 ❑ D ❑ ❑ 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 El El 0 11 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infractri ictnre19 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 19 Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating El 11 El 0 the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? G) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the 1-1 El El 21 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? Police protection? Schools? Other public facilities? XV. RECREATION El El El El ❑ 0 0 0 El a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 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 and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? ❑ 0 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 20 nennany Less inan Less man NO gnificant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? G) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses ❑ D ❑ ❑ (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ p ❑ f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting El El 0 ❑ alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? XVII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 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 El El ❑ 0 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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate ❑ 11 El 0 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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? 11 ❑ 0 ❑ NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 21 Potentially Less Than Less than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact With Mitigation Impact Incorporated XVIII. 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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 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 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 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 ❑ Q ❑ ❑ 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). The references and sources used for the analysis are also identified with each response. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 22 I. AESTHETICS a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project encompasses approximately 132 acres adjacent to Fashion Island and is located north of East Coast Highway. Newport Center Drive north of Farallon Drive is designated as a Coastal View Road on Figure NR3 in the Natural Resources Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. Although East Coast Highway is not designated as a Coastal View Road between Jamboree Road and MacArthur Boulevard, a Public View Point is identified on Figure NR3 within Irvine Terrace Park, which is located south of that arterial and the subject property in the Corona del Mar service area. Views from this location are oriented to the west and not inland to the subject property. Policies NR 20.2 and 20.3 in the Natural Resources Element are intended to protect and enhance public view corridors. Designation of the location as a Public View Point is intended to preserve views of the harbor and ocean. 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). Based on the design of the proposed project, implementation of the proposed project will not result in a substantial visual impact, and would not result in any significant changes to views from Newport Center Drive north of Farallon, which is identified as a Coastal View Road. Although the proposed clubhouse will be larger and taller than the existing structure, it will be designed to be compatible with the nearby development. In particular, variable rooflines proposed for the clubhouse are intended to provide visual relief for the larger structure. 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 this vantage point to the subject property and into Fashion Island and 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 of intervening heavy landscaping along that roadway as well as adequate landscape materials, setbacks, and building heights that have been integrated into the project design to enhance and protect views as intended by the applicable Natural Resource Element policies. In addition, mechanical and trash enclosures will be screened by walls and /or landscaping. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings with a state scenic highway? Less than Significant Impact. The subject property is currently developed with a private 18 -hole golf course and clubhouse. As a result, 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 scenic highway. A landscape plan has been developed that includes screening of the parking lot along East Coast Highway with a variety of trees and shrubs. Therefore, project implementation will not adversely affect existing scenic resources. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. C) Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less than Significant Impact. Project implementation includes the demolition of several existing structures (e.g., golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures) and the construction of a new golf course clubhouse and related facilities (i.e., cart barn and bag storage and maintenance buildings) for the Newport Beach Country Club. As indicated previously, the subject property is not designated as an important visual resource. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008-152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 23 In order to maintain the integrity of the visual character of the area, the proposed Planned Community (PC) Development Plan Regulations include development standards related to the limits of development, building heights and setbacks, landscaping, lighting, and signs. As indicated in the PC Development Plan regulations, the maximum building height is established at 50 feet for the clubhouse and ancillary structures. In addition, landscaping will be provided in the surface parking lot at a ratio of one tree for every five parking spaces. Landscape materials, including trees, shrubs and groundcover are also proposed around the site perimeter to soften the development edges between adjacent existing commercial development and proposed private recreation development (i.e., hotel units or tennis and golf "bungalows ") and single - family residential (i.e., five semi - custom single - family residential dwelling units). The preliminary landscape plan includes a variety of drought - tolerant accent/specimen trees (i.e., coast live oak, California fan palm, and African Sumac) to supplement the existing trees on the site (e.g., Hong Kong Orchid, Indian Laurel, etc), and a variety of background shrubs (e.g., California lilac, purple hopseed bush, toyon, etc.) and ground cover to ensure that the landscape complements the existing golf course and surrounding development areas. Species have been selected that complement the existing and proposed landscape character of the golf course and surrounding development. The Preliminary Landscape Plan is illustrated in Exhibit 5. Elevations of the proposed project are illustrated in Exhibit 6 (South and North Elevations) and Exhibit 7 (East and West Elevations). Sections through the proposed clubhouse site are presented in Exhibits 8 and 9, which illustrate the relationship of the proposed structure to the parking lot and areas adjacent to the site, including East Coast Highway. As indicated in those sections, the proposed finished grade of the clubhouse will be up to 12 feet higher than the finished grade of the existing site in order to enhance views from the clubhouse to the golf course as well as to the ocean. However, views to or through the site, including those from the bungalow units and semi - custom single - family lots proposed on the adjacent tennis club property, would not be significantly affected from any important public viewpoint or public corridor (refer to the discussion presented in Section La). Views from the Newport Center Drive segment that is designated as a Coastal View Road are effectively screened by the heavy landscaping that exists along that roadway; views of the site do not exist from this designated view corridor. The proposed clubhouse will be approximately 49' -6" high, measured from the existing grade (approximately 25 feet taller than the existing clubhouse) and situated on a building pad that would be up to 12 feet higher than the present finished grade of the existing clubhouse. The reconstructed clubhouse will be 30 feet higher than the existing clubhouse as a result of the raised building pad. The elevated building pad would allow for enhanced views to the south and the ocean as well as views over the golf course. The roof is characterized by several elements that vary in height to provide articulation. All of the mechanical equipment proposed to be located on the roof would be screened from view. Building materials for the proposed clubhouse include natural stack stone, plaster, wood trellises, and glass. In addition, copper, slate, or standing seam metal roof elements are also proposed to enhance the aesthetic character of the new building. Building elevations are illustrated in Exhibits 6 and 7. Site cross sections are provided in Exhibits 8 and 9 to illustrate the relationship of the proposed clubhouse to the existing golf course and East Coast Highway. As previously indicated, the golf course clubhouse property abuts an existing private tennis club on the east that is proposed to be redeveloped. That project includes development of the site with a new tennis clubhouse and spa, 27 hotel units (i.e., golf and tennis "bungalows ") and five semi - custom single - family residential dwelling units. The bungalows proposed will be situated adjacent to the upper parking lot of the proposed golf course clubhouse. The golf course parking lot elevation is approximately four feet lower than the pad elevation for the bungalows. As a result, light and glare from the headlights of the cars parked in the lot would not shine directly into the bungalows. Noise from the parking lot activities would also be reduced as a result of the difference in grade and the landscaping that will be provided to buffer the two uses. Finally, views from the bungalows, which would be direct over and beyond the parking lot, would not be adversely affected. In addition, the proposed golf course landscape plan (refer to Exhibit 5) incorporates a four -foot high screening hedge along the interface between the two properties, which would effectively eliminate any potential aesthetic impacts of the parking lot from the future bungalows. The parking lot has been designed so that spaces are not heavily concentrated along the edge of the lot adjacent to the units. The landscaping will be low to provide a buffer, but not block views. Therefore, no significant aesthetic impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. H6EPVNlpNpOiE6E mc.vn rte: �m:Mm�t�.ania � 4amu E WILX GGIF CO1Ri$E 0 Ei ISTNG NURSERY NOT A PART r .` ate' � � �' � � � '• Y N / I �- / PROPOSED CLUBHOUSE e W r COUNTRY NEWPORT BEACH, W1Y '�L� ru.werA ` , ;, w mm.aroveex ��IP uww.xnrinu vm er, :ems »w d« evw.w .w COAST HIGHWAY _. PV 7PNETIE(COYT) PLANT PP u(COM1 RANT PN M(CONY) L¢NDSCAPE PLAN L1.1 c. E SneAAR4 ✓awmm, 19-09 GYCB ei[i[I�li r iwr ss s.Rm _ L- amen moral MA . _. COUNTRY NEWPORT BEACH, W1Y '�L� ru.werA ` , ;, w mm.aroveex ��IP uww.xnrinu vm er, :ems »w d« evw.w .w PRELIMINARY .L - L¢NDSCAPE PLAN L1.1 c. E SneAAR4 ✓awmm, 19-09 GYCB ei[i[I�li r iwr ss s.Rm _ L- amen moral MA . _. ' •f Y4 1 i 1, G e� i 1 t �F kC CD J U Of H Z O U U Q m $ C ¢U W O m 3 n Lu Zz co z s I I S s lilt I a w ;o m J V Q' F— z D O U QU W m H O a w z m_ Irl Q � m Q $m N � U V U O F U N ZW Q t W 90 �� Fv� ggF LI i, Z 3 a ' �...o % LS7dl C) N Y IH � F l i al 4 S 2r: J,. NS r� w 1 P :f a z 0 ! w ,IS F- µ1 A� 9' l� i of e Cs q ® y� Z IFS I; r f ;I L.I R n 4GR RR5 t �e A �O I. yN N O I v I w N co J I U F- z 0 U 2 a W Of m C C Z i NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 29 d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare 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 course clubhouse and ancillary structures. Lighting will also be provided for the same purpose as that which currently exists (i.e., security and parking lot illumination). Lighting required to illuminate the proposed parking lots for the golf course clubhouse will comply with standards established by the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Proposed lighting will not spill onto adjacent properties. Lighting will be energy efficient and will also be shielded or recessed so that direct glare and reflections are contained within the boundaries of the property, as required by the PC Development Plan. Therefore, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measures 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. II. AGRICULTURE AND FOREST RESOURCES a) Would the project convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance 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. Furthermore, 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 the zoning designation for the site is "Planned Community" The existing use of the site is consistent with the adopted long -range land use plans (i.e., General Plan and zoning) adopted by the City for the subject property. Although the proposed project requires a General Plan Amendment and revisions to the PC Text, the proposed use will be consistent with the existing Golf Course Clubhouse use. 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(8)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104(g))? NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 30 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) 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. 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 agricultural purposes and, as indicated previously, is not designated as agricultural 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 uses on the site or within the site's vicinity would be converted to non - agricultural 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 by the South Coast Air Quality Management District in June 2007, after extensive public review. The 2007 AQMP recognizes the interaction between photochemical processes that create both ozone 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.) The proposed Newport Beach Country Club Golf Club House replacement 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 South Coast Air Quality Management District (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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008-152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 31 A consistency determination plays an important role in local agency project review by linking local planning and individual projects to the 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: 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 Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) or interim emission reductions in the AQMP. The South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is designated by the state and United States Environmental Protection Agency (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 South Coast Air Basin (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 and would therefore not 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 (refer to Table 1). Consequently, the project would be consistent with the AQMP under the first indicator. Indicator Whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. The AQMP strategy is, in part, based on projections from local general plans. The proposed new clubhouse would replace the existing clubhouse. Golf club operations potentially impact air quality primarily through traffic generation. Minor additional impact potential derives from combustion engine maintenance equipment (mowers, etc.) and on -site energy consumption. The proposed project will not create any increase in trip generation, or in golf course operational emissions. Future project - related emissions will be almost identical to those incorporated into the current AQMP. 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 SCAB is in non - attainment with respect to ozone and PM,(,, and the construction emissions would add to the regional burden of these pollutants, compliance with a vigorous set of air pollution control measures, including Rule 403) identified below that are mandated by the SCAQMD in the AQMP related to dust control, paint emissions, etc. to ensure that projects do not contribute directly to an air quality violation. As a result, no significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. However, the following air pollution control measures will be implemented to reduce potential impacts. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 32 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. 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 course clubhouse and related development, including asphalt parking lots, etc., in order to accommodate the proposed use. Potential construction- related 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 33 Table 1 Construction - Related Pollutant Emissions (pounds /day) Newport Beach Country Club Golf Clubhouse Replacement Activity ROG L NOx I CO I SOz I PM10 I PMs.e CO2 Demolition of Structure No Miti ation 3.1 24.7 13.6 0.0 5.9 2.3 2,760.5 Mitigation 3.1 21.7 13.6 0.0 4.8 1.3 2,760.5 Fine Grading No Mitigation 3.8 35.5 17.6 0.0 48.3 11.3 3,850.9 Miti anon 3.8 31.7 17.6 1 0.0 5.0 1.5 3,850.9 Construction No Mitigation 1.5 9.5 5.8 0.0 0.6 0.6 994.7 Mitigation 1.5 8.0 5.8 0.0 0.1 0.1 994.7 Construction and Painting and Pavin No Mitigation 3.6 20.9 14.3 0.0 1.6 1.5 2,203.4 Mitigation 3.5 17.8 14.3 0.0 0.3 0.2 2,203.4 SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No NOTE: Analysis Includes import of 39,055 cubic yards and on site maneuvering of 42,288 cubic yards. 'No significance threshold has been adopted. SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (September 2009 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 standard conditions 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 spillover 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 (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 34 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 recreational development such as a clubhouse replacement, 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 (PII and PM2.5)- LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the 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 0.5 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, mitigated project - related construction emissions would not exceed the relevant LSTs. Table 2 Local Significance Thresholds (poundstday) Newport Beach Country Club North Coastal Orange Coun CO NOx PM10 PM2.5 LST Threshold 528 163 13 5 Proposed Pro'ect Unmitigated 6_18 10 -35 1 — 48 1 — 11 Mitigated 6-18 8 -32 1-5 1-2 SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (September 2009 Long -Term (Operational) Emissions Possible project - related air quality concerns typically derive from the mobile source emissions generated from the recreational uses proposed for the project site. However, the proposed Clubhouse Replacement project replaces an existing facility and the proposed project will not result in an increase in trips to and from the site. Since the project would generate the same number of daily trips (643 per day) no study of operational emissions is necessary, but to quantify the results, an analysis was conducted. Operational emissions for 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 utilizing the trip generation factors obtained from the traffic consultant for this project was used to calculate area source emissions. The resulting vehicular operational emissions for uses in 2011 are shown in Table 3. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 35 Table 3 Project - Related Emissions Burden (pounds /day) Newport Beach Country Club As indicated in Table 3, project - related operational emissions will be less than significant; no mitigation measures are required. 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 property 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. As previously indicated (refer to Section Ill.b), although no significant air quality impacts are anticipated, several minimization measures are mandated by the SCAQMD to further reduce dust and construction equipment exhaust emissions during the construction phase. Implementation of those measures will minimize construction - related emissions. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 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 course clubhouse and ancillary buildings would not result in any significant change in the kinds of odors that could be experienced in the Immediate project environs, which is composed primarily of non- residential development. Occasional, less than significant odors may occur in 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 away from any nearby existing or future residential dwelling units in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project will not generate unusual or large quantities of solid waste materials, or utilize chemicals (except for landscape maintenance purposes), 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. ROG NOx CO LS02 PM10 PM1.6 COz Pro osed Project 2010 Area Sources 0.1 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.8 Mobile Sources 3.9 5.3 52.0 0.1 9.9 1.9 5,843.0 Total 4.0 5.3 53.5 0.1 9.9 1.9 5,845.8 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 (September 2009) As indicated in Table 3, project - related operational emissions will be less than significant; no mitigation measures are required. 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 property 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. As previously indicated (refer to Section Ill.b), although no significant air quality impacts are anticipated, several minimization measures are mandated by the SCAQMD to further reduce dust and construction equipment exhaust emissions during the construction phase. Implementation of those measures will minimize construction - related emissions. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 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 course clubhouse and ancillary buildings would not result in any significant change in the kinds of odors that could be experienced in the Immediate project environs, which is composed primarily of non- residential development. Occasional, less than significant odors may occur in 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 away from any nearby existing or future residential dwelling units in the vicinity of the project site. The proposed project will not generate unusual or large quantities of solid waste materials, or utilize chemicals (except for landscape maintenance purposes), 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 36 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 standard conditions 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 site is developed with an 18 -hole golf course, clubhouse, ancillary structures, and parking lot. 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 a 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 golf course clubhouse, cart barn, and maintenance building in order to accommodate a new clubhouse, cart barn /storage, and maintenance building totaling 70,038 square feet on 9 acres of the PC Development Plan Area. Project implementation will not result in any modifications to sensitive habitat and /or sensitive species of plans 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 (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 37 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 project limits and, therefore, will not be directly affected by the proposed development, which will include the construction of a new golf course club house and ancillary structures. 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. 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, based on the Natural Resources Element of the City's General Plan. 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 natural habitat and /or species, including heritage trees. Due to the nature and extent of development on the site and in the surrounding areas, 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 course) 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 will occur and no mitigation measures are required NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 38 V. CULTURAL RESOURCES a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined §15604.5? No Impact. The project property is currently developed with an 18 -hole golf course, clubhouse and ancillary facilities. 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; 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 with Mitigation. Thirty -eight (38) cultural resources surveys have been conducted within a one -half mile radius of the subject property. Of those surveys, none 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 course and clubhouse amenities. The new golf course clubhouse is proposed to be located in the same general area as the existing clubhouse, although it will be relocated approximately 100 feet closer to East Coast Highway. Any grading and site alteration that is anticipated would affect the same areas that have previously been altered in order to accommodate the existing clubhouse and related facilities. As a result, project implementation will not adversely affect archaeological /cultural resources that may exist on the site. Although no significant impacts are anticipated, a Native American representative indicated that the subject property is located in an area where several cultural resources sites have been discovered.' Therefore, the City will require that a qualified archaeologist/paleontologist be present during grading and site alteration to monitor grading and landform alteration (refer to MM -1). Implementation of this measure is consistent with applicable Policy No. HR 2.2 of the Historic Resources Element of the Newport Beach General Plan. Because project implementation would require the approval of a General Plan Amendment, 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, the City was contacted by Mr. Alfred Cruz of the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians who identified a potential for encountering Native American artifacts due to the location of the site within proximity to several previously discovered cultural resource sites in the area. Although the site has been previously excavated and developed, an additional mitigation measure has been included that provides for the opportunity to have a Native American representative monitor excavation activities. ' Telephone conversation with Mr. Alfred Cruz (Native American representing the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians); August 24, 2009. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 39 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 in MM -1, monitoring of the grading activities by a qualified paleontologist will be required in the event that fossils or other important paleontological resources are encountered, to ensure that 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 course, clubhouse, and surface parking lot) 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 in Section V.b, a Native American representative has indicated that because the site is located in an area where cultural resources have been discovered, a qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor will be contacted if, during grading, human remains are encountered, appropriate measures will be implemented in accordance with State law regarding human remains. Mitigation Measures 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 and shall be contacted if cultural resources are encountered. 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 During project grading, 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). VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS a) Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Less than Significant Impact. The site is located in the Newport Center 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 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 40 (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 VIII - 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 given the distance to those faults. Potential impacts would be less than significant with the incorporation of design features prescribed by the most current edition of the California Building Code. No significant ground rupture impacts would occur as a result of project implementation. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than Significant Impact. See response to We (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 strong ground shaking. 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 magnitudes of 23 faults within an 80 km radius of the site are presented in Table 4. Table 4 Seismic Source Model Newport Beach Country Club Fault Distance (km) Seismology Parameters Maximum Mw Fault Type' Slip Rate (mm! r San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust X1.0 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 rI -ss 2.5 Elsinore -Glen Ivy 35.2 6.8 rI -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 II-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 Verdu o 63.2 6.9 r 0.5 Clamshell -Saw it 64.0 6.5 r 0.5 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 41 Fault Distance (km) Se smology Parameters Maximum Mme. Fault Type' Slip Rate mrn r 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 II-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 II-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? Less than Significant 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. 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 and 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 course clubhouse 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 Best Management Practices (BMPs) 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 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 42 grading and after development of the site, will be avoided or reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of MM -4. 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 Impact. Refer to Section VI.a.iv, above. As previously indicated, potential slope failurellandslide 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 structures 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. Project implementation includes the importation of earth materials that will be placed on the site to raise the finished grade of the proposed clubhouse. The finished grade of the building pad will be up to 12 feet above the existing grade of the clubhouse. 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 conclusion 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. As required by the City of Newport Beach, the applicant will be required to prepare a detailed soils engineering report, which will be submitted to the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. The proposed golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures will be designed to comply with the CBC as well as the soils engineering report that will be prepared for the proposed project. Design of the proposed structures to comply with applicable design standards will ensure that potential soil and geotechnical construction will be minimized or avoided. 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 an analysis of the subject property (GMU, April and May 2008), 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. The subsequent soils engineering report that will be conducted for the proposed project will prescribe appropriate measures to address the existing on -site soils conditions, including expansive soils. 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 43 Mitigation Measures MM -3 Prior to issuance of the grading permit, an erosion control plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City's Chief Building Official. MM -4 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a soils engineering report and final geotechnical report to the City's Chief Building Office for approval. The project shall be designed to incorporate the recommendations included in those reports 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. 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. It is 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 2 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 3 Many scientists studying the particularly rapid rise in global temperatures during 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.5 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 12`h to 16`h largest emitter of CO2 (the most prevalent GHG) and is responsible for approximately 2 percent of the world's CO2 emissions (CEC 2006). 21d. 3Brohan. 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. "Intergovernmental 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 111 to the Third Assessment Report. Robert T. Watson and the Core Writing Team, ads. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 5C11mate 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 (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 44 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 1975.6 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 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 ( "CARB ") 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 (GARB), 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 6 Id. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 45 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 MIND 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. 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 "' 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 8 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, (1) 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. 7 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" 8Pew Center for Global Climate Change (2003). Designing a Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction for the U.S., retrieved March 12, 2007, from httD:// www. Dewclimate .oro /docUoloads/USGas%"2E.pdf. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008-152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 46 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. 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 MND 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 CARIB "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 200$ Technical Advisory, OPR 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 "9 contribution to GHG emissions relative to existing conditions is subject to evaluation, if at all, only on a cumulative basis. 9 "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 (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 47 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 MIND 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 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 MIND cannot feasibly evaluate potential cumulative project global climate change impacts in the standard manner currently required by CEQA. With this extensive background, the analysis of the potential effects of the Proposed Project is as follows: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. Implementation of the proposed project would contribute to long -term increases in greenhouse gases (GHGs) as a result of traffic increases (mobile sources) and minor secondary fuel combustion emissions from space heating, etc. Development occurring as a result of the proposed project would also result in secondary operational increases in GHG emissions as a result of electricity generation to meet project - related increases in energy demand. Electricity generation in California is mainly from natural gas -fired power plants. However, since California imports about 20 to 25 percent of its total electricity (mainly from the northwestern and southwestern states), GHG emissions associated with electricity generation could also occur outside of California. Space or water heating, water delivery, wastewater processing and solid waste disposal also generate GHG emissions. Short- term GHG emissions will also derive from construction activities. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 48 The General Reporting Protocol (GRP) in the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) divides project - related operational GHG emissions into three categories. These three sources include the following: Source 4 — On -site combustion of fossil fuels (space and water heating, fireplaces, landscape utility equipment, etc.) Source 2 — Consumption of purchased energy (electricity) Source 3 — Indirect emissions (transportation, solid waste disposal, fresh -and wastewater conveyance and treatment) For general development projects such as that proposed, Source 3 is typically a much larger contributor to the GHG burden than Sources 1 and 2. Project - related GHG emissions were aggregated into transportation and non - transportation sources. The transportation component is calculated and reported in the URBEMIS2007 computer model summarized in Table 1. Construction Emissions During project construction, the URBEMIS2007 computer model predicts that a peak activity day in the single "worst case" year of construction (2011 during demolition and grading) will generate 2,760 pounds /day of CO2 for demolition and 3,851 pounds /dayof CO2 during grading (refer to Table 1). 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 for demolition and 100 peak days for grading. The estimated annual GHG impact is estimated to be 70 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 screening level operational threshold is 3,000 metric tons (MT) of CO2- equivalent (CO2(e)) per year. Grading activities generating 70 MT are well below this threshold. Operational Emissions Assuming that maximum daily trips - generation occurs 365 days per year, the Clubhouse Replacement project daily operational CO2 emissions will be the same as existing emissions, 1,066 MT of CO2 per year. This is also less than the GHG significance screening criteria. Nonetheless, the landscape concept plan proposes fast- growing, low water use plant materials, which will enhance carbon sequestration and water usage, which will minimize greenhouse gas emissions associated with the proposed project. In addition, the project will comply with the current California Building Code (CBC) and other regulatory requirements related to energy conservation as well as compliance with solid waste reduction requirements prescribed in the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element (SRRE) to further reduce energy demands. Annual GHG emissions, from non - transportation sources associated with the clubhouse replacement are shown in Table 5. Because the project generates the same number of trips as existing uses, the transportation component is shown as zero. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 49 Table 5 Project - Related GHG Emissions Newport Beach Country Club Use Unit (KSF ) Electricity (Tons /MWHR) I Natural Gas (Tons /108 cu. ft.) I Solid Waste (Tons /Ton ) Water (Tons /MG' Clubhouse 69.09 687.4 4.0 62.9 7.9 Conversion Factor 0.363 54.6 0.46 4.62 CO2e Tons/Year 249.5 218.4 28.9 36.4 SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (September 2009 As indicated in Table 5, the proposed project - related non - transportation sources would generate 533.2 tons /year (484.7 MT /year) of CO2e as a result of project implementation. It is anticipated this amount would be approximately the same as that generated by the existing clubhouse facility. Even when combined with the transportation - related CO2e emissions (1,066 MT /year), the total operational emissions would remain below the 3,000 MT /year screening level and the 1,600 MT /year threshold employed by the City. Therefore, no significant climate change impacts are anticipated, either individually or cumulatively, and no mitigation measures are required. Although new GHG emissions will be well below the screening threshold, all GHG emissions are considered to have a cumulative global contribution. Implementation of reasonably available control measures is recommended. GHG reduction options on a project -level basis are similar to those measures designed to reduce criteria air pollutants (those with ambient air quality standards). Measures that reduce trip generation or trip lengths, measures that optimize the transportation efficiency of a region, and measures that promote energy conservation within a development will reduce GHG emissions. Additionally, carbon sequestering can be achieved through urban forestry measures. Reductions in the vehicular contribution are critical in achieving the goals of statewide /national GHG minimization programs. However, substantial mobile source tripNMT reduction or increases in vehicular fuel efficiency are not achievable on a project - specific basis. State or national programs are in place to significantly upgrade fuel efficiencies. Most project- specific discretionary actions for GHG reduction must focus on energy conversation. Recommended GHG reduction measures include: (1) construction of the new clubhouse to meet LEED specification; (2) incorporation of solid waste minimization and recycling programs; and (3) incorporation of fast - growing, low water use landscape to enhance carbon sequestration and reduce water use. These measures will reduce the generation of GHG emissions resulting from project implementation. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less than Significant Impact. The incremental increase in potential greenhouse gases associated with the proposed project would not be significant in the context of the contribution of worldwide GHG impacts and would not interfere with the State's mandatory requirements under AB 32 to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. In its draft interim guidance on establishing thresholds for GHG - emission- related impacts, the California Air Resources Board has set forth that small residential and commercial projects, emitting 1,600 metric tons of CO2e per year or less, would clearly not interfere with achieving the States emission reduction objectives in AB 32 (and EO S- 03 -05) and thus may be deemed categorically exempt from CEQA because the impacts would clearly not be significant.1e Construction 'OCalifornia State of, 2008. California Air Resources Board (GARB). Preliminary Draft Staff Proposal: Recommended Approaches for Setting Interim Thresholds for Greenhouse Gases Under the California Environmental Quality Act. October 24. Based on that same guidance, the City has applied in other EIRs an interim threshold for residential and commercial projects that emit in excess of 1,600 tonnes /year of CO2e. Until further guidance is provided by the State or other appropriate expert agencies, the City has considered projects to have significant impacts because they would interfere with the State's mandatory requirements under AB 32 to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 if they either (1) are not substantially consistent with policies and NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 50 activities would result in the generation of approximately 70 MT /year of CO2e; operational CO2e emissions are estimated to be less than 1,066 MT /year. These emissions are below 1,600 tons /year of CO2e and thus would clearly not interfere with achieving the State's emission reduction objectives in AB 32 (and EO S- 03 -05) and would clearly not be result in a significant GHG- related impact. Speculation and Guidelines Section 15145 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 of the impact." Beyond the analysis contained in this MND, which, standing alone, complies with CEQA's analysis requirements, technical data does not yet exist that would allow the City to determine without the use of undue speculation how a project of this size would, relative to other proposed projects throughout the world, contribute to global climate change. Evaluation using speculative "per 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 effects" of the project in either of the contexts identified in Section 15130(b) of the CEQA Guidelines which are discussed above. Therefore, because (i) CEQA prohibits speculative analysis and (ii) the Proposed Project's 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 Project's not long term reduction of GHG emissions. SC -9 All new buildings shall meet Title 24 requirements. SC -10 Water conservation design features shall be incorporated into building and landscape designs VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Ninyo & Moore prepared a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the proposed project (December 5, 2008). The findings and recommendations presented in the Phase I ESA are summarized in the following analysis; the document is on file and available for review at the City of Newport Beach Planning Department. 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 an existing golf course clubhouse and related 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, standards set out in federal, state, and local plans designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or (2) would emit more than 6,000 tonnes /year of CO2e. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 51 paints, etc., that are typically used to maintain the golf course located on the property, on -going operation of the Newport Beach Country Club 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 below, in Section Vlll.c, remediation of the asbestos containing materials (ACM) and lead based paint (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 - detect" 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. 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. 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. 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 � 1 Partner Engineering and Science, Inc.: Addendum Letter dated March 29, 2010. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 52 regulatory storage and use requirements. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 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 with Mitigation Incorporated. 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. 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 53 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, LLC in a database search on November 18, 2008. 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 6 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. IF-101M-1 Summary of Environmental Database Search Newport Beach Country Club Radius Database Searched Results Federal National Priorities List (NPL) 1 Mile No sites Federal Delisted NPL % Mile No sites Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System %: Mile No sites CERCLIS Federal CERCLIS – No further Remedial Action /: Mile No sites Planned NFRAP Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RCRA Corrective Action CORRACTS Facilities 1 Mile No sites Federal RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal y, Mile No sites TSD List Site and Federal RCRA Generator List Adjoining No sites Properties Federal Institutional Controls /Engineering Controls Site Site not listed IC /EC Federal Emergency Notification Systems ERNS Site Site not listed State Calsites Database (CALSITES) or State- /� Mile No sites Equivalent CERCLIS Solid Waste Landfill Facilities SWLF % Mile No sites State /Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST) %: Mile Site and 2 other sites Lists Site and State UST and AST Registration List Adjoining Site Properties State Brownfield List and State Institutional y, Mile No sites Control /En ineerin Control Registries State Voluntary Cleanup Programs (VCPS) /2 Mile No sites Indian Reservations 1 Mile No sites Tribal-Equivalent NPL 1 Mile No sites Tribal Equivalent CERCLIS 1 Mile No sites Tribal Landfill and /or Solid Waste Disposal Sites 1 Mile No sites Tribal LUST List 1 Mile No sites Site and Tribal UST and AST Registration List Adjoining No sites Properties Tribal Institutional Control /Engineering Control I Site Site not Listed NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 54 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. 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. 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? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located approximately 4.0 miles south of John Wayne Airport (JWA). A portion of the 132 -acre property is located within for 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 General Plan Amendment and PC Text Adoption 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. '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. Radius Database Searched Results Registries Tribal VCPS 1 Mile No sites Tribal Brownfield List 1 Mile No sites Other N/A Site 'Release of gasoline was discovered in 1965. The regulatory status of the site was "case closed" by 1987. The report indicated that "site not tested for methyl tert-butyl ether (MBTE). Includes unknown and not analyzed." This listing is assumed to be associated with the earlier UST located on the northern boundary of the maintenance facility. 'The site is listed on this database twice for USTs, which were removed in early 2003 'The description of the listing indicates "gasoline" and that the site was closed on September 1, 1987. No other information was listed. SOURCE: Nino & Moore December 5, 2008 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. 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. 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? Less than Significant Impact. The project site is located approximately 4.0 miles south of John Wayne Airport (JWA). A portion of the 132 -acre property is located within for 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 General Plan Amendment and PC Text Adoption 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. '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 (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 55 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 from a private airport, to people utilizing the golf clubhouse amenities proposed 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. 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 XVIA). 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 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 exist 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. Mitigation Measures SC -11 Prior to any disturbance of the construction materials within the Golf Clubhouse and maintenance building, 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 -12 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 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 56 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. The proposed project would result in the demolition of the existing golf course clubhouse and the reconstruction of a larger clubhouse facility in the same general area (i.e., approximately 100 feet to the south) on the subject property. Therefore, the raw sewage that would be generated by the proposed project would be similar in nature to that generated by the adjacent properties and would not significantly affect wastewater treatment. 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. 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. There are no pre- existing water quality issues identified for the site, nor has there been any indication of past soil contamination since the site was developed. The pollutants of concern associated with the proposed project include sediment, nutrients, pathogens (i.e., bacteria /viruses), and pesticides. However, implementation of the water quality features prescribed in the Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared for the project, which would be finalized prior to issuance of the grading permit, will ensure that this project does not violate any water quality standards during construction. Two options of addressing water quality are identified in the WQMP. Option 1 provides for the implementation of water quality features in the individual subdrainage areas on the site, while Option 2 would propose to treat stormwater generated on the subject property at a downstream location. In either case, the primary treatment mechanism under either option would include media filtration, and both options would provide a similar level of treatment for pollutants of concern. Project - related stormwater would be adequately treated in accordance with City and Water Quality Control Board requirements prescribed as part of the NPDES review process. As a result, no significant impacts are anticipated and no additional mitigation measures are required. In accordance with the Conceptual Water Quality Management Plan that will be prepared for the project, appropriate BMPs will be incorporated to ensure that water quality impact are minimized. Such BMPs include the incorporation of landscaping into the parking lot, driveways, and around the proposed clubhouse to maximize permeable area, porous pavement materials, construction of minimum width drive aisles, etc. 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 9 (General Plan Policy Analysis) and 12 in Section IX (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 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 57 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 demand for water would be similar to that currently generated by the existing clubhouse. Although the facility would be larger than the existing clubhouse, the use would be the same and would not create a significant increase in the demand for domestic water. 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. 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 course, clubhouse and related ancillary facilities. The portion of the property that is the subject of the proposed improvements encompasses less than 10 acres within seven sub- drainage areas. Under existing conditions, the project site generally sheet flows in a southwesterly direction to curb and gutter through the existing parking lot and drains to an existing catch basin at the south corner of the site, which ties into a 24 -inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) storm drain maintained by the City that extends in a southeasterly direction along East Coast Highway. A small portion of the project site along Irvine Terrace, the Club's entrance, drains along curb and gutter to the existing catch basins that discharge to the 24 -inch RCP through a 18 -inch RCP. There is no storm drain piping on -site in the existing condition. On -site runoff is conveyed on the subsurface to the nearby public storm drain system. Surface flows ultimately discharge into Newport Harbor west of the site. 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. 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. Under the post - development conditions, the existing outlet locations and the receiving public storm drain system will remain the same but the on -site drainage pattern will be modified by adding a private storm drainpipe system, which will convey the majority of the on -site drainage. The overall on -site tributary area will be almost identical to the existing conditions. 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 10 acres) is divided into seven drainage areas. Drainage Areas A -1 through A -7 B comprise the existing golf course clubhouse and parking lot. Stormwater runoff occurring in Drainage Areas A -1 through A -6 (6.39 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. As indicated in Table 7, the 25 -year storm flow (Q25) at this location is 19.1 cubic feet per second (cfs). The catch basin is connected to an 18 -inch RCP pipe, which connects to an existing 24 -inch NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 58 RCP that runs parallel to Coast Highway. Area A -7, Comprised of 1.0 acre that encompasses Irvine Terrace, 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 Areas A -1 through A -6. The Q25 storm flow at this juncture is 21.7 cfs. 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. Table 7 Existing Runoff Newport Beach Country Club Sub -Area Area In Acres) Flow (Q25) cfs A -1 0.22 0.9 A -2 0.77 3.6 A -3 1.24 7.0 A -4 1.30 10.9 A -5 1.06 13.9 A -6 1.80 19.1 A -7 1.00 21.7 Total 7.39 24.6 �SCUCE: Fuscoe Engineering Ma 2009 The proposed development area is also divided into eight drainage areas encompassing 7.62 acres. A storm drain system is proposed that would collect the stormwater generated on -site and convey it to the existing 18- and 24 -inch storm drains previously identified that parallel East Coast Highway. Table 8 reflects the post - development storm flows anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. Table 8 Post - Development Runoff Newport Beach Country Club Sub -Area Area In Acres Flow (0125) cfs A -1 0.27 1.2 A -2 0.86 4.3 A -3 1.08 7.8 A -4 0.53 9.3 A -5 1.67 15.0 A -6 1.01 18.0 A -7 1.71 23.4 A -8 0.49 24.6 Total 7.62 SOUCE: Fuscoe Engineering (May 2009) Based on the hydrology study prepared for the proposed project by Fuscoe Engineering, the proposed development will result in a slightly increased storm runoff at the project outlet. This is due to shortened time of concentration as a result of generally steeper gradient along the proposed curb and gutter. In the existing condition, the parking lot sheet flows perpendicular to curb and gutter along the southwesterly project boundary then turns southeast and runs at a fairly flat grade to the existing catch basin. Increase NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 59 in peak flow discharge at the project outlet is 2.9 cfs for a Q25 storm event. The site will be graded and designed to facilitate post - development storm flows. In addition, the existing outlet locations and the receiving public storm drain system will remain the same but the on -site drainage pattern will be modified by adding a private storm drain pipe system, which will convey the majority of the on -site drainage to the existing facility. 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. As indicated above, additional surface runoff would be generated (refer to the previous discussion in Section IX-d)- The existing storm drainage collection and conveyance facilities within the project area (i.e., 18- and 24 -inch pipes previously described) will continue to convey stormwater generated on -site to Newport Harbor where it will be discharged. 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. As previously indicated, the applicant will be required to prepare an 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 that will also be implemented, depending on the option selected by the City and applicant to achieve the pollutant reduction (i.e., on -site or off -site features) as illustrated in Exhibits 5 and 6. For example, Option 1 (i.e., individual drainage area treatment) treatment facilities may include the following measures to address water quality associated with the proposed elements: • Maintenance Yard, Clubhouse Building and Main parking Lot — StormFilter • Valet parking and Clubhouse Entry Parking — Porous Pavement Media Filter • Driveway and Guard House — Filterra Bioretention Unit Whereas Option 1 specifies individual treatment control BMPs for each subdrainage area for the project, Option 2 provides a treatment alternative that treats the entire project drainage area at one downstream location for ease of maintenance and cost. Under this option, one larger StormFilter unit is proposed, to be located at the southern corner of the main parking lot within the main storm drain line. In addition to the StormFilter unit, due to the activities in the maintenance yard, a catch basin insert is also proposed to pre -treat runoff from the maintenance yard. In addition to those post - development BMPs, final plan check will include the requirement for 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 COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 60 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 East Coast Highway. No residential development is proposed. Therefore, neither homes nor other structures 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 structures are proposed to be located within the 100 -year flood zone. Refer to the response to Section IX.g. 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 East 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 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 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. As indicated previously, stormwater discharges from the site will be slightly greater than the stormwater currently generated on the site with the existing clubhouse, parking lot and ancillary structures. Although some temporary impacts associated with construction of the proposed NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 61 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 are currently located above grade and are partially open on one side. These facilities 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 small increase in stormwater generated on the subject property. However, the site would be graded in order to ensure that post - development runoff is minimized and, further, is directed to a proposed on -site collection and conveyance system and would be directed to the 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, the proposed project will be required to identify BMPs, which will be included in the SWPPP that will be prepared and approved prior to issuance of the grading permit. In addition, structural and non - structural BMPs have also been identified in the Conceptual WQMP prepared for the project. Finally, as part of the final plan check review, the applicant is required to prepare 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 a Conceptual WQMP 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. In addition, implementation of BMPs that will be included in the 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 62 X. LAND USE AND PLANNING a) Would the project divide an established community? Less than Significant Impact, The 132 -acre site is developed with a golf course, clubhouse and ancillary facilities. The proposed project includes the construction of a larger golf course clubhouse and modifications to the existing parking lot that Serves the golf course. As indicated previously, the area surrounding the subject property is entirely developed with mixed -use development, including private recreation (i.e., private tennis complex), residential, professional office, and commercial land uses. As previously indicated, a development plan has been submitted on the private tennis complex site adjacent to the subject property that proposes the redevelopment of that site with a tennis clubhouse /spa, 27 hotel units, and five semi - custom single - family residential dwelling units. Development of the project site as proposed would not directly affect the majority of the 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.). In order to ensure that the proposed development is compatible with the potential future development of the adjacent tennis complex site, landscaping buffers have been integrated into the development plan to avoid potential land use conflicts. In addition, the golf course parking lot elevation is approximately four feet lower than the pad elevation for the bungalows. As a result, light and glare from the headlights of the cars parked in the lot would not shine directly into the proposed bungalows. Noise from the parking lot activities would also be reduced as a result of the difference in grade and the landscaping that will be provided to buffer the two uses. Finally, views from the bungalows, which would be direct over and beyond the parking lot, would not be adversely affected. The proposed golf course clubhouse and ancillary buildings exceed the maximum development intensity allowable under the Land Use Element for the subject site. The applicant is proposing a maximum development intensity of 56,000 square feet for the Planned Community, which is 21,000 square feet more than the 35,000 square feet allocated for the property. Although the project is in keeping with the character of development in the area, a General Plan Amendment is required (refer to Section Kb). With the exception of the fitness center, expansion of the existing amenities without a consequent intensification of use account for the increase in square footage. A discussion of the relationship of the proposed project to the relevant General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan (CLUP) policies is presented in Section X.b (refer to Tables 9 and 12, respectively). As indicated in that analysis, the proposed project is consistent with those policies. The City Council will determine if the increase in intensity proposed by the applicant meets the intent of the long -range goals and policies of the General Plan. 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. Project implementation will necessitate the approval of a General Plan Amendment, which would allow an increase in the development intensity on the project site, which is currently 35,000 square feet. The applicant is proposing to increase the maximum permitted floor area to 56,000 square feet. 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 9. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 63 Table 9 General Plan Policy Consistency Newport Beach Country Club Policy No General Plan Policy Consistency Analysis Land Use Element The proposed project includes an adoption of the PC District regulations, which will guide development occurring within the 132 -acre Newport Beach Country Maintain and enhance the beneficial and unique Club site. The development standards address character of the different neighborhoods, business development limits, permitted uses, building height. LU 1.1 districts, and harbor that together identify Newport setbacks, landscaping, lighting, signage, and parking and Beach. Locate and design development to reflect are intended to ensure that development within the PC is Newport Beach's topography, architectural diversity, consistent and compatible with the existing development and view sheds. in the project environs. The proposed project complies with the development standards prescribed by the City for the site and is compatible with the existing land uses in the project environs. 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 neighborhoods and districts, promote the identity of the project (i.e., larger golf course clubhouse) and LU 1.2 entire City that differentiates it as a special place within architectural character are compatible with the variety of the Southern California region. densities and styles within the Newport Beach Fashion Island area. The architectural character of the proposed clubhouse, which Incorporates variable rooflines, landscaping, and building elevations that are consistent with the City's desire to differentiate Newport Beach from other coastal cities. Enhance existing neighborhoods, districts, and The character of the proposed clubhouse is compatible corridors, allowing for reuse and infill with uses that are with the existing land uses and development intensities in complementary in type, form, scale, and character. the project area. The project has been designed to be Changes in use and/or densitylintensity should be compatible with the existing residential, commercial, and considered only in those areas that are economically open spacelrecreation that exist in the vicinity of the under performing, are necessary to accommodate project site. This analysis does not appear to be Newport Beach's share of projected regional consistent with the corresponding General Plan Policy LU 3.2 population growth, improve the relationship and reduce commuting distance between home and jobs, or The area in which the project is located is adequately enhance the values that distinguish Newport Beach as served by existing infrastructure, including circulation, a special place to live for its residents. The scale of sewer, water, and storm drainage systems. As a result, growth and new development shall be coordinated with project implementation will not adversely affect those the provision of adequate infrastructure and public systems or the provision of adequate service to nearby services, including standards for acceptable traffic development. level of service. The uses proposed by the applicant are consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element (i.e., land use designation). The project applicant is requesting an LU 4.1 Accommodate land use development consistent with increase in development intensity permitted in Anomaly the Land Use Plan. No. 74 (Statistical Area 1_1) from 35,000 square feet to a maximum of 56,000 square feet (Le., 21,000 square feet). The proposed clubhouse is otherwise consistent with the land use designation. Although the site is not located adjacent to lower density residential development (e.g., single - family detached), the project has been designed with respect to the proximity of Require that the height of development in proposed development on the adjacent tennis complex nonresidential and higher density residential areas site. No portion of the proposed golf course clubhouse LU 5.1.2 transition as it nears lower density residential areas to and related features would encroach into the area minimize conflicts at the interface between the different proposed for single - family detached residential types of development. development on the adjacent site. A portion of the upper parking lot would be located in close proximity to the future bungalow units proposed on the adjacent tennis complex property; however, adequate landscaping/screening has been provided to ensure that NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2OO8 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 64 Policy No. General Plan Policy' Consistency Analysis privacy issues are adequately addressed. In addition, the proposed project complies with the maximum building heights, setback requirements, etc., for future development within the 132 -acre property to ensure land use compatibility is not compromised. The subject property is located within the 32/50 height limits based on the current zoning. The proposed PC District regulations propose a maximum building height of 50 feet, which is permissible in the 32/50 height limit area with the adoption of the Planned Community, The height of the proposed golf course clubhouse is approximately 49' 6" and does not exceed the maximum height prescribed for that use with the adoption of the PC District Regulations. Housing Element Support all reasonable efforts to preserve, aintain, m The project site does not support any existing housing and and improve availability and quality of existing housing is not designated for residential use. No residential H 1.1 and residential neighborhoods, and ensure full development is proposed within the 132 -acre Planned utilization of existing City housing resources for as long Community. into the future as p h ysically and economical) ossible. Historical Resources Element Although archaeological and /or paleontological resources are not anticipated to be encountered during grading Require that, in accordance with CEQA, new andfor construction due to landform alteration that has development protect and preserve paleontological and occurred in the past, a Native American representative archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid has indicated that the site is located in an area of the City and mitigate impacts to such resources. Through that has yielded numerous cultural resources sites. Therefore, the City requires that a certified HR 2.1 planning policies and permit conditions, ensure the archaeological,paleontological monitor contacted itered. preservation of significant archaeological and during grading, such resources are encounun Grading paleontological resources and require that the impact activities can be diverted in order to evaluate the caused by any development be mitigated in resources and recommend appropriate measures to accordance with CEQA. protect and/or preserve them. In addition, a Native American representative will have the opportunity to monitor excavation activities. Circulation Element The proposed project has been designed to meet the minimum parking requirements established in the proposed PC Development Plan. Based on the proposed parking requirements in the PC Development Plan for the Require that new development provide adequate, proposed project, a total of 334 parking spaces is CE 7.1.1 convenient parking for residents, guest, business required. The project is proposing a total of 348 parking patrons, and visitors. spaces, including 74 spaces in the upper lot that will be available for valet parking during special events that may be hosted on at the Newport Beach Country Club. The proposed project provides a surplus of 14 parking spaces on -site. As indicated above, the on -site parking provided includes 348 parking spaces for the golf course clubhouse (334 required). By comparison, applying the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) peak parking requirement would result in a requirement for 186 parking spaces, or 162 fewer parking spaces than proposed by the applicant Site and design new development to avoid use of for the proposed project. The parking includes valet CE 7.1.8 parking configurations or management programs that parking for special events as well as general parking. The are difficult to maintain and enforce. PC Development Plan requires approval by the City Traffic Engineer for valet parking and satellite parking v ith shuttle service that involves use of the public right -of -way. The parking lots and drive aisles have been reviewed and approved by the City Traffic Engineer. In addition, eight handicapped parking spaces are also provided, which complies with ADA requirements. Recreation Element No applicable policies. I _.. ___ NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 65 Policy No. General Plan Polic Gonsisten g Analysis Natural Resources Element 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 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Elimination System (NPDES). Plan (SWPPP) to address construction activities and a WQMP for Ion -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. The proposed project complies with the requirement to prepare a SWPPP and WQMP to address both Include site design and source control BMPs in all construction and post- development water quality impacts. developments. When the combination of site design Both site design and structural BMPs will be incorporated NR 3.11 and source control BMPs are not sufficient to protect into the project as required by the City of Newport Beach water quality as required by the NPDES, structural to ensure that surface flows emanating from the subject treatment Bl will be implemented along with site property are treated prior to their discharge into Newport design and source control measures. Harbor. The SWPPP and WQMP will be sufficient to protect water quality as prescribed by the NPDES re uirements of the City. As required by the NPDES permit, a SWPPP will be prepared and will establish both structural and non - structural BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and erosion during the construction phase. These measures will be incorporated in the grading /erosion control plans submitted to the City of Newport Beach. In addition, the applicant has prepared a Conceptual WQMP to address post - development water quality impacts. The conceptual plan identifies two options for the treatment of storm water runoff. Require grading /erosion control plans with structural Option l involves individual treatment control BMPs for each NR 4.4 BMPs that prevent or minimize erosion during and of the sub - drainage areas within the project site and Option after construction for development on steep slopes, 2 involves treatment of runoff from the entire site at one graded, or disturbed area. downstream location. In accordance with the Countywide Model WQMP, the treatment BMPs will be sized to treat either the Stormwater Quality Design Flow or volume and would include storm filters, porous pavement or other features in the various sub - drainage areas identified in the plan for Option 1. For Option 2, a single large storm filter would be incorporated downstream to treat the stormwater runoff generated by the proposed project prior to its discharge into Newport Harbor. The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures that encompass 31,520 square feet and replace these facilities structures Reinforce the original design concept for Newport that would more than double the floor area to 69,088 Center by concentrating the greatest building mass square feet. In addition, the proposed clubhouse would and height in the northeasterly section along San increase in height to 46 feet (maximum) compared to the LU 6.14.4 Joaquin Hills Road, where the natural topography is existing 23' -9" clubhouse. Although this represents an highest and progressively scaling down building mass increase in both development intensity and height, the and height to follow the lower elevations toward the proposed clubhouse and ancillary facilities are consistent southwesterly edge along East Coast Highway. with the development intensity and building heights in the surrounding area, including the residential development to the northeast and commercial development to the east. The site will not be over built given the size of the golf course and the new building is within the permitted height. The proposed project has been designed to incorporate a Encourage that pedestrian access and connections sidewalk along the north side of the entry road west of among uses within the district be improved with Irvine Terrace to accommodate safe pedestrian access to LU 6.14.6 additional walkways and streetscape amenities the clubhouse and other features. In addition, sidewalks concurrent with the development of expanded and new are also proposed to be extended from the subject uses. property into the proposed tennis facility to the east, consistent with the City's desire to encourage pedestrian NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2OO8 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 66 Policy No. General Plan Policy Consistency Analysis access and connections between land uses. 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 polluta nis. 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 $8 18, which requires consultation with Native Notify cultural organizations, including Native American American representatives before adopting or amending a organizations, of proposed development that have the general plan. The City has complied with the NR 18.3 potential to adversely impact cultural resources. Allow requirements of SB 18 by submitting a request to the qualified representative of such groups to monitor Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). In grading and /or excavation of development sites. addition, the City 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 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 vantage points along Newport Center Drive will not public vantage points, as shown in Figure NR3. be significantly altered as a result of project implementation. The development would not be visible from this Coastal View Road because of the landscaping and development 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 regulations that have been proposed by the applicant. Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of The City will ensure that these regulations do not NR 22.1 structures consistent with the unique character and compromise the unique aesthetic character of the City. visual scale of Newport Beach. As previously indicated, the proposed project, which is subject to site plan review, has been designed to meet the development standards prescribed by the City, including building heights, landscaping, lighting, setbacks, etc. Safety Element The proposed structures will be designed in accordance Conduct further seismic studies for new development with current adopted codes and regulations, including the S 4.7 in areas where potential active faults may occur. California Building Code, which prescribe the design standards for new development to protect life and property. Noise Element N 1.1 Require that all proposed projects are compatible with The proposed use is consistent with the noise parameters the noise environment through use of Table N2, and rescribed in Table N2. The proposed golf course NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 67 Policy No. General Plan Poll ' Consistency Analysis enforce the interior and exterior noise standards shown clubhouse use is consistent with the land use noise in Table N3. compatibility matrix based on noise levels that do not exceed 75 dBA CNEL. Require the employment of noise mitigation measures for existing sensitive uses when a significant noise Noise mitigation measures have been prescribed to N 1.8 impact is identified. A significant noise impact occurs ensure that construction noise impacts are reduced to a when there is an increase in the ambient CNEL less than significant level. produced by new development impacting noise sensitive uses. Enforce interior and exterior noise standards outlined Aside from short-term construction noise impacts, no in Table N3, and in the City's Municipal Code to ensure sensitive receptors would be affected by project N 4.1 that sensitive noise receptors are not exposed to implementation following completion of the proposed golf excessive noise levels from stationary noise sources, o clubhouse. Both interior and exterior noise levels suchsuch as heating, ventilation, and air conditioning of f that that facility will comply with the adopted standards. equipment- ui ment. Enforce the Noise Ordinance noise limits and limits on Construction hours will comply with the limits established hours of maintenance or construction activity in or by the City of Newport Beach and prescribed in the Noise N 4.6 adjacent to residential areas, including noise that Ordinance. In addition, operational noise associated with results from in -home hobby or work- related activities. the proposed golf course clubhouse would also be regulated by the City's Noise Ordinance. Construction hours will be limited to those stipulated in the N 5.1 Enforce the limits on hours of construction activity. City's Noise Ordinance will be strictly enforced by the City of Newport Beach. 'Because the project is not located within the harbor area, policies articulated in the Harbor and Bay Element are not applicable. General Plan Amendment According to the General Plan Land Use Element, the subject site is designated as PR (Park and Recreation) and Table LU2 identifies the maximum development limit of 35,000 gross square feet per Anomaly No. 74. The proposed golf course clubhouse and bag storage encompass a total of 54,819 square feet'. The applicant is proposing to increase the development limit to 56,000 square feet 2 which exceeds the adopted allocation 35,000 square feet for the anomaly area by 21,000 square feet. Therefore, the proposed project will require the approval of a general plan amendment, subject conditions prescribed in the Charter Section 423, which was adopted by the City of Newport Beach in 2000. Charter Section 423 City Council Policy A -18 requires that proposed General Plan amendments be reviewed to determine if a vote would be required. If a project generates more than 100 peak hour trips, 40,000 square feet of non- residential floor area, or exceeds 100 dwelling units, a vote of the citizens would be required if the City Council approves the requested Amendment. The proposed amendment is seeking approval of 21, 000 square feet of non - residential floor area and does not includes any dwelling units. The proposed project generates no additional traffic when compared to the existing golf course, based on Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates. As indicated in Table 10, project implementation would not necessitate voter approval of the proposed project because it does not exceed the minimum threshold for maximum floor area (i.e., 40,000 square feet) established by Charter Section 423 for voter approval. 'In addition, an 8,565 square foot maintenance building, a 5,704 square foot cart barn, 630 square feet of men's and women's restroom facilities, 180 square feet snack bar, and 140 square foot starter shack are also proposed; however, these structures are not counted in the maximum structural floor area allocated in the General Plan for Anomaly No. 74. 2The difference of 1,181 square feet (56,000 — 54,819) will be reserved for future growth /expansion. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 68 Table 10 Charter Section 423 Evaluation Newport Beach Country Club Charter Section 423 Criterion Threshold Proposed Project Exceeds Threshold? A.M. Peak Hour Traffic 100 Trips 0.00 No P.M. Peak Hour Traffic 100 Trips 0.00 No No. of Dwelling Units 100 0 No Maximum Floor Area 40,000 Square Feet 21,000 No 'In excess of allocated floor area established in the General Plan. SOURCE: Charter Section 423 Based on the Charter Section 423 parameters, implementation of the proposed project would result in no change in the number of vehicle trips. As indicated in Table 11, no net change in project - related trip generation would occur because the applicant is not proposing any uses that would result in an increase in trip generation as compared to the existing condition. Table 11 Charter Section 423 Trip Generation Newport Beach Country Club 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 12. Trip Generation AM PM Land Use Size Rate Peak Hour Peak Hour Existing Trip Generation Golf Course 132 Acres 0.21 a.m. trips /acre 27.72 39.60 0.30 p.m. trips/acre Total 27.72 39.60 Proposed Trip Generation 0.21 a.m. trips /acre Golf Course 132 Acres 27.72 39.60 0.30 p.m. trips/acre Total 27.72 39.60 Project- Related Change 0.00 0.00 SOURCE: Charter Section 423 City of Newport Beach Planning Department 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 12. Policy No. 2.1.2 -1 2.2.1 -1 2.2.1 -2 2.8.7 -2 2.8.7 -3 2.9.3 -1 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 69 Table 12 Coastal Land Use Plan Policy Analysis Newport Beach Country Club CLUP Land uses and new development in the coastal zone shall be consistent with the Coastal Land Use Plan Map and all applicable LCP policies and regulations. Continue to allow redevelopment and infill development within and adjacent to the existing developed areas in the coastal zone subject to the density and intensity limits and resource protection policies of the Coastal Land Use Plan. Require new development be located in areas with adequate public services or in areas that are capable of having public services extended or expanded without significant adverse effects on coastal resources. Residential Require new development to provide adequate drainage and erosion control facilities that convey site drainage in a non - erosive manner in order to minimize hazards resulting from increased runoff, erosion and other hydrologic impacts to streams. Require applications for new development, where applicable (i.e., in areas of known or potential geologic or seismic hazards), to include a geologic/soils /geotechnical study that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the proposed project site, any necessary mitigation measures, and contains a statement that the project site is suitable for the proposed development and that the development will be safe from geologic hazard. Require such reports to be signed by a licensed Certified Engineering Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer and The proposed project is consistent with the land use designation on the adopted Coastal Land Use Plan, which designates the site OS (Open Space). This designation allows for golf courses, which would remain on the site. The project proposes only to replace the existing golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures, which would not result in a change in the land use designation. 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 Policies the development that could occur within the limits of the 132 -acre NBCC Planned Community. The proposed project will be subject to the provisions of Charter Section 423 as it requires a General Plan Amendment to increase the development limit from 35,000 square feet to 56,000 square feet. No change /amendment to the CLUP is 1 he proposed project is located in an area or the Uty of Newport Beach that is adequately served by a range of public services and utilities, including police and fire protection; circulation; sewer, water and storm drains; and electricity and natural gas. Adequate service will continue to be provided to the proposed uses. The provision of those public services and utilities will not result in any The project site is not located in the vicinity of a stream. However, as required by the NPDES permit, a SWPPP will be prepared and will establish both structural and non- structural BMPs in order to reduce sedimentation and erosion during the construction phase. These measures will be incorporated in the grading/erosion control plans submitted to the City of Newport Beach. In addition, the proposed project includes long -term BMPs to address With the exception of the potential effects of moderate to strong seismic shaking, the subject property is not located in an area characterized by potential coastal hazards. Preliminary geotechnical design parameters for the proposed project would be based on subsurface exploration and laboratory testing of the site soils as required in a preliminary geotechnical investigation. The proposed structures will be constructed based on those design parameters as well as parameters prescribed in the California Building Code. Site and design new development to avoid use of parking I I he proposed project includes adequate parking to configurations or parking management programs that are I accommodate the proposed golf course clubhouse and NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2O08-152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 70 Policy No. CLUP Policy Consistenc Ana sis. Foust Associates and Kimley -Horn and Associates. Both studies concluded that the on -site parking will be adequate to accommodate the proposed project. In addition, off -site parking that will also be available for special events will supplement the on -site parking to provide adequate parking for those events. A total of 348 parking spaces is provided in the plan, including 45 spaces at the entry level, 224 spaces in the lower lot, and 74 spaces in the upper lot, which would be used for valet parking during special events. There will also be 5 spaces in the service yard. The 348 parking spaces proposed by the applicant exceeds the ITE parking requirement of 186 by 162 spaces. The parking plan provides for a surplus of 14 parking spaces based on the proposed PC Development Plan parking requirements. Any additional parking required for special events occurring at the golf course would be prescribed by the City and must be provided prior to issuance of such permit. However, adequate parking has been provided based on the existing /proposed parking requirements for the golf course. Continue to require new development to provide off - street The proposed project provides adequate parking based 2.9.3-2 parking sufficient to serve the approved use in order to on the PC Development regulations. As indicated above, minimize impacts to public on- street and off - street a surplus of 14 parking spaces is available. No impacts arkin available for coastal access. to coastal access are anticipated. Require that all proposed development maintain and enhance public access to the coast by providing site t The project does not have direct coastal access (refer s 2.9.3 -3 adequate parking pursuant to the off -street parking to Policy 1). 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. Access to the parking lot will be provided through a guardhouse at the main entry, which would operate during special events held at the Newport Beach Country Club. A secondary access point from Irvine Continue to require off - street parking in new development Terrace will be maintained along an existing easement 2.9.3 -5 to have adequate dimensions, clearances, and access to that extends along the southern limits of the lower parking insure their use. lot, which parallels East Coast Highway. The secondary access paint will be moved approximately 85 feet northerly along Irvine Terrace, reducing a potential conflict with the signalized intersection. This access will maintain the easement across the site, provide an entry point for deliveries, and provide access to the parking lot during special events. Shoreline and Bluff Top Access Although the subject property is located within the City's 3.1.1 -11 Require new development to minimize impacts to public coastal zone, it is not located along the Newport Beach access to and along the shoreline. shoreline and, therefore, would not deter coastal access in any way. Consistent with the policies above provide maximum public access from the nearest public roadway to the 3.1.1 -26 shoreline and along the shoreline with new development As indicated above, direct shoreline access from the except where (1) it is inconsistent with public safety, subject property does not exist. military security needs, or the protection of fragile coastal resources or 2 adequate access exists nearby. Provide adequate park and recreational facilities to The proposed project encompasses 132 acres that 3.2.1 -3 accommodate the needs of new residents when allowing encompass a private golf course. Although private in new development, nature, the Newport Beach Country Club will continue to serve a segment of the City's recreational needs. Water Qualit The project applicant is required to prepare and Require grading /erosion control plans to include soil implement BI pursuant to the SWPPP that will be 4.3.1 -6 stabilization on graded or disturbed areas. required prior to the issuance of the grading permit for the proposed project. Implementation of these construction BMPS will ensure that radio /erosion control measures NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 71 Policy No. CLUP Policy Consistency Analysis 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 during construction. 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 Require measures to be taken during construction to limit discharge of pollutants of concern is minimized. The land use disturbance activities such as clearing and Conceptual WQMP prepared for the project identifies two grading, limiting cut - and -fill to reduce erosion and options for treating post - construction runoff, including sediment loss, and avoiding steep slopes, unstable Option 1 that would provide treatment within each sub - 4.3.1-7 areas, and erosive soils. Require construction to - drainage area storm filters, etc.) and Option 2, minimize disturbance of natural vegetation, including which would include a single treatment element nclu significant trees, native vegetation, root structures, and downstream that would treat stormwater generated on the other physical or biological features important for subject property prior to its discharge. The SWPPP that preventing erosion or sedimentation. will prepared and approved the City of Newport Beach h v.111 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 an existing golf course and clubhouse, 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 Require that development not result in the degradation of some improvement in the quality of the storm and related 43.2 -3 coastal waters (including the ocean, estuaries and lakes) surface runoff emanating from the site will occur when caused by changes to the hydrologic landscape. compared to the existing runoff quality. As indicated above, the applicant will be required prepare a SWPPP to ensure that surface discharges that occur during the construction phase to not degrade the receiving waters. The Conceptual WQMP prepared for the project addresses treatment of the post - construction runoff. These plans must be approved by the City of Newport Beach. The proposed project will comply with all of the Develop and maintain a water quality checklist to be used requirements prescribed by the City, including the use of 4.3.2 -5 in the permit review process to assess potential water a water quality checklist, to ensure that the BMPs quality impacts. prescribed in the SWPPP and WQMP are implemented and maintained. As previously indicated, a Conceptual WQMP has been Incorporate BMPs into the project design in the following prepared to address water quality impacts associated with progression: site design BMPs; source control BMPs, the proposed project. Site design BMPS include and treatment control BMPs. Include site design and maximizing the permeable area in the parking lot with source control BMPs in all developments. When the landscaping, paving portions of the parking lot with porous 4.3.2 -7 combination of site design and source control BMPs are pavement materials (Option 1), drive aisles will be not sufficient to protect water quality as required by the constructed to minimum widths, landscaping in the LCP or Coastal Act, structural treatment BMPs will be parking areas will be incorporated into the drainage implemented along with site design and source control design, etc. In addition, other structural BMPs would also BMPS. be incorporated into the project design in order to ensure that stormwater is adequately treated before discharging into the harbor. 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 To the maximum extent practicable, runoff should be and SWPPP will include measures to prevent the retained on private property to prevent the transport of discharge of pollutants into the storm drain system. 4.3.2 -8 bacteria, pesticides, fertilizers, pet waste, oil, engine Potential post - construction BMPs that may be coolant, gasoline, hydrocarbons, brake dust, tire residue, implemented include storm filters, porous pavement, etc. and other pollutants into recreational waters. 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. 4.3.2 -11 Require new development to minimize the creation of and Project implementation will result in an increase of 2.9 cfs increases in impervious surfaces, especially directly when compared to the existing runoff volume. This No. 4.4.2 -2 4.4.3 -12 4.4.3 -15 4.5.1 -1 4.5.1 -2 4.5.1 -3 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 73 CLUP Continue to regulate the visual and physical mass of structures consistent with the unique character and visual scale of Newport Beach. 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 Design and site new development to minimize the removal of native vegetation, preserve rock outcroppings, and protect coastal resources. Require new development to protect and preserve paleontological and archaeological resources from destruction, and avoid and minimize impacts to such resources. If avoidance of the resources is not feasible, require an in situ or site - capping preservation plan or a recovery plan for mitigating the effect of the development. 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 paleontologicallarchaeological 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 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. 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 and development that exists along the roadway, which blocks and /or filters The proposed development includes only a new but larger golf course clubhouse. As previously indicated, the proposed project complies with the development standards prescribed by the City, including building height, setback from East Coast Highway, etc. In addition, the incorporation of variable rooflines into the proposed clubhouse is complementary to and is in The site has been substantially altered by past development; however, on -site drainage will be designed to maximize the use of natural drainage systems. The BMPs identified in the Conceptual WQMP prepared for the proposed project identify water quality devices to treat stormwater generated on -site prior to its discharge into the harbor. The site has been substantially altered by development of the existing golf course and ancillary facilities, including the clubhouse. 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 The proposed project includes the redevelopment of an existing golf course clubhouse, which has resulted in significant alteration of the existing site. Although it is not expected that significant cultural resources would be encountered on the site during grading and construction, a Native American has indicated that the site in located in an area where numerous cultural resource sites have been encountered. Therefore, a cultural resources monitor will be available during grading to ensure that should such resources be encountered, appropriate measures will be implemented to protect artifacts and A qualified archaeological/paleontological monitor will be contacted during the grading and landform alteration phase in the event that human remains, cultural resources and /or fossils are encountered during construction activities. In addition, a Native American will also have the opportunity to monitor the grading activities. Ground - disturbing excavations in the vicinity of the discovery shall be redirected or halted until the monitor has determined the significance of the resources. Because the project requires the approval of a General Plan Amendment, the City has notified representatives of the appropriate Native American organizations as mandated by SB18. The site has been altered by grading and development that has occurred in the past; therefore, it is unlikely that potential impacts to cultural resources would occur; however, a qualified archaeological monitor 4.5.1 -4 4.5.1 -5 4.6 -9 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 74 CLOP vvnere 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 Where there is a potential to affect cultural or paleontological resources, require the submittal of an archaeologicallcultural resources monitoring plan that identifies monitoring methods and describes the procedures for selecting archaeological and Native American monitors and procedures that will be followed if additional or unexpected archaeological /cultural resources are encountered during development of the 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 Require applications for new development, where applicable, to include a geologiclsoils /geotechnical study that identifies any geologic hazards affecting the project site, any necessary mitigation measures, and contains statements that the project site is suitable for the proposed development and that the development will be safe from geologic hazard for its economic life. For development on coastal bluffs, including bluffs facing Upper Newport Bay, such reports shall include slope stability analyses and estimates of the long -term average bluff retreat rate over the expected life of the 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 to comments received from the Native American community (Mr. Alfred Cruz of the Juaneno Band of Mission Indians), Native American representatives will have the opportunity to monitor the site during the grading and site development chase. 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. As indicated above, it is not anticipated that cultural resources would be encountered based on the level of disturbance that has taken place on the site. However, should such resources be encountered during grading and construction, all grading will be halted or redirected to avoid impacts and allow proper evaluation and disposition of the resources. A geological assessment will be prepared (refer to Section VI of this analysis), which describes the potential geotechnical constraints (e.g., settlement, ground shaking, etc.) that affect site development. Several recommendations have been identified to ensure that the proposed structures and project components are adequately protected from potential soils, geologic and seismic conditions. 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 as a private golf course. 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008-152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 75 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 as a private golf course. Neither the Newport Beach General Plan (Land Use Element and /or Recreation and Open Space Element) nor the State of California Department of Conservation 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. 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 course club house and ancillary facilities) 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 MI. 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 Clubhouse. Construction activities, especially heavy equipment, will create short -term noise increases near the project site during construction. Based upon the traffic /circulation analysis discussed in Section XV of this study, vehicular traffic volumes on area roadways around the proposed project are predicted to remain the same with no change in area -wide traffic noise. Project activities will entail outdoor activities and limited indoor activities. Outdoor recreational activities at the Country Club are low key (i.e., golf) and represent a continuation of existing private golf activities. No impact analysis was therefore conducted for outdoor recreation. 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. 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 the same as for other NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 76 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, which are approximately 50 feet from the nearest construction activity. Construction activity vibration impacts are anticipated to be as less than significant. C) 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 private golf country club. The surrounding area is developed with residential uses to the northeast and southwest. The site is bounded by Newport Center Drive to the east, East Coast Highway to the south and Santa Barbara Drive to the north. Noise measurements were made in order to document existing baseline levels in the area. On -site noise levels in the project vicinity are in the 55 -60 dB range. As discussed above, noise meters placed in the approximate location of the proposed site demonstrated existing CNELs of 55 dB CNEL to 60 dB CNEL. As discussed in Section XV of this report, in year 2009, the section of East Coast Highway 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 feet from the centerline, this noise level decays to 59 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 56 dB. The measured CNEL levels were 55 and 59 dB. CNEL levels as calculated from both modeling and measurements are similar. Newport Beach Traffic Engineering estimates a one percent growth rate per year for traffic along East Coast Highway. Assuming area buildout occurs in 2020, there would be almost 40,000 vehicles along East Coast Highway each day, resulting in a +0.4 dB increase over existing noise levels. Therefore the future noise level would be indistinguishable from existing CNEL levels in the upper 50 dB range. The project also includes the reconfiguration of the existing parking lot and would provide approximately 348 parking spaces, including 45 spaces at the entry level, 233 spaces in the lower lot, 74 spaces in the upper lot and 5 spaces in the service yard. Parking lot activities are sporadic but with a morning and evening peak hour volume. Existing peak hour traffic volume is 40 vehicles per hour in the morning and 49 vehicles per hour in the afternoon. 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 grading activities, then by foundation and parking lot construction, and finally for building 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 77 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 for the proposed project requires import of 39,055 cubic yards of earth material. At 15 cubic yards per truck capacity, this would necessitate 2,604 round trips (a full truck in and an empty truck out), or 5,207 one -way trips (2,604 x 2). Grading is assumed to take place over a 26 week period. Utilizing a 26 week time frame, there would be 40 truck trips per day associated with dirt haul. The noise level from 44 truck passages per day at 45 mph is 66.6 dB CNEL at 50 feet from the roadway centerline. Although it is unlikely that all the trucks will travel the same route, a worst case analysis is presented based on this assumption. This noise signature was overlaid on the existing traffic noise on area roadways as reflected in Table 13. Table 13 Construction - Related Mobile-Source Noise Newport Beach Country Club As indicated above, the maximum noise increase along area arterials resulting from the increase in haul trucks is 2.3 dBA CNEL, which is less than the +3.0 dB significance threshold if all trucks traveled along Newport Center Drive. In reality, trucks will likely utilize several routes and thereby dilute the maximum noise impacts reflected in Table 13. However, even if all trucks were to utilize the same route the maximum noise impact associated with truck haul from grading activities is less than significant. According to the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, noise generating construction activities are permissible between 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. 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? Less than Significant 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 132 -acre 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 General Plan Amendment and PC Text Adoption 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. Existing Noise Noise from Noise Existing ADT (50 feet from Earthworks Increase from Roadway veh/day) centerline) Trucks Trucks MacArthur Boulevard 33,027 73.0 dB CNEL 66.6 dB CNEL 0.9 dB CNEL South of San Miguel East Coast Highway 35,660 73.4 dB CNEL 66.6 dB CNEL 0.8 dB CNEL Jamboree to Newport Center Dr. Jamboree Road 30,629 72.7 dB CNEL 66.6 dB CNEL 1.0 dB CNEL South of Santa Barbara Newport Center Drive 10,791 68.2 dB CNEL 66.6 dB CNEL 2.3 dB CNEL South of Anaca a SOURCE: Giroux & Associates (September 2009) _ As indicated above, the maximum noise increase along area arterials resulting from the increase in haul trucks is 2.3 dBA CNEL, which is less than the +3.0 dB significance threshold if all trucks traveled along Newport Center Drive. In reality, trucks will likely utilize several routes and thereby dilute the maximum noise impacts reflected in Table 13. However, even if all trucks were to utilize the same route the maximum noise impact associated with truck haul from grading activities is less than significant. According to the City of Newport Beach Municipal Code, noise generating construction activities are permissible between 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. 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? Less than Significant 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 132 -acre 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 General Plan Amendment and PC Text Adoption 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 78 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. Therefore, no significant impacts will occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation Measures MM -5 During construction operations, the applicant or contractor shall provide evidence to the City that all construction equipment, stationary and mobile is equipped with properly operating and maintained muffling devices. MM -6 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant or contractor shall prepare a Construction Management Plan (CMP), which confirms that potential project - related and cumulative construction noise levels are minimized and do not exceed levels prescribed in the City's Noise Ordinance. The CMP shall include a requirement that the construction contractor must notify the nearby 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 Prior to occupancy, 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 and be installed with a timing device that will deactivate the equipment during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. XIII. 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? No Impact. The proposed project includes only the demolition of the existing golf course clubhouse and ancillary structures, its reconstruction. No new or unplanned development is proposed that would induce substantial population growth. Furthermore, no new residential development is proposed. 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, which is a private recreational amenity in the City of Newport Beach. 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 79 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 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 California Fire Code (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. No residential development is proposed that would generate school -age children. New or expanded school facilities would not be required as a result of project implementation. However, as indicated above, the project applicant must pay the applicable school fee for non - residential projects to the school district, pursuant to Section 65995 of the California Government Code. No significant impacts would occur as a result of project implementation and no mitigation measures are required. Other public facilities? No Impact. The proposed project includes only the demolition of an existing use (i.e., golf clubhouse and ancillary structures), which will be replaced by a larger clubhouse in the same general area. As a result, an increased demand for other public services NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 80 is not 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? No Impact. The project will not result in the construction of any residential homes on the site. The subject site is located in Service Area 9 (Newport Center), which currently supports 19 acres of existing parkland, exceeding the 10.9 acres of parkland "needs" based on the City's current requirements. Because no residential development is proposed that would create a demand for public recreation within the City, the applicant would not be subject to the payment of in -lieu park fees required for residential subdivisions pursuant to Title 19 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Therefore, 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. As indicated above, no residential development is proposed and, no additional residents would be generated by the project that would result in potential impacts to recreational facilities in the City of Newport Beach. 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 XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC 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 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. However, once grading has been completed, the number of heavy trucks entering and leaving the project area would be limited to those transporting equipment and materials to the site. It is anticipated that 39,055 cubic yards of earth material would be imported to accommodate the proposed grading plan for the clubhouse and parking lot reconstruction. Based on 15 cubic yards per heavy truck, the importation of earth material would generate approximately 2,604 heavy truck trips during the site preparation phase. 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; however, potential traffic interference caused by haul NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 81 trucks and construction vehicles would create a temporary, short -term impact to vehicles using neighboring streets (East Coast Highway) in the morning and afternoon hours. Therefore, aside from potentially minor impacts resulting from the increase in traffic that will occur as a result of construction - related traffic (e.g., haul trucks, construction materials, construction workers, etc.), no significant short - term impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of project implementation. Nonetheless, the construction traffic impacts would be adequately addressed through the implementation of a Construction Staging, Parking and Traffic Control Plan. Based on trip generation rates for a golf course, which are based on the number of holes or the number of acres of the golf course, the proposed project will not result in an increase in trips to and from the site (refer to Table 14). This is because the clubhouse and ancillary structures are considered to be part of the golf course site. Since the trip generation estimates for a golf course would change only if the number of holes or the number of acres changed, the increase in floor area of the related golf course facilities will not result in a change in trip generation. Since the proposed Newport Beach Country Club project would generate the same number of daily (643 trips /day) and peak hour trips (40 a.m. peak hour trips and 49 p.m. peak hour trips) as the existing development, a detailed traffic analysis was not required. However, because of the adjoining development of the tennis club project, a traffic and parking /circulation evaluation has been prepared. Based on that analysis, with the implementation of the proposed tennis site, which consists of the elimination of 17 tennis courts, and the development of the site with a tennis clubhouse /spa, 27 "hotel' units, and five single - family semi - custom lots, trip generation on that site would decrease by approximately 25 percent from that currently generated by the existing tennis complex (i.e., 129 trips per day to 94 trips per day). Therefore, no significant project - related or cumulative long -term traffic impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project and no mitigation measures are required. Table 14 Summary of Project Trip Generation Newport Beach Country Club Land Use Unit Trip Generation Rates AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In Out Total Golf Course Hole 35.74 1.76 0.47 2.23 1.23 1.51 2.74 Land Use Unit Trip Generation Estimates AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out Total In I Out I Total Existing Develo ment Golf Course 18 Holes 643 32 8 40 22 27 49 'Trip generation rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (8'h trip generation rates in this table differ from those used to evaluate Charter Section 423 thresholds in Table 11. SOURCE: Keeton Kreitzer Consulting Edition). The A consistency analysis was presented in Section IX (Land Use and Planning), which evaluated the project's consistent with relevant policies of the Newport General Plan, including those articulated in the Circulation Element, and the Coastal Land Use Plan. As indicated in that analysis, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable policies of the Circulation Element. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 82 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? No Impact. As previously discussed [refer to Section X.b (Land Use and Planning)], the project does not generate more than 100 peak hour trips or propose 40,000 square feet of non - residential floor area. No additional traffic, when compared to the existing golf course, would be generated by the proposed project. Therefore, the project does not require voter approval pursuant to Charter Section 423. As indicated in Table 14 in Section XVI.a, project implementation will result in the same number of vehicular trips as currently generated by the existing clubhouse /golf course (i.e., 27.72 a.m. peak hour trips and 39.6 p.m. peak hour trips). Furthermore, because the proposed project does not generate additional vehicular trips, it is not subject to the County's Congestion Management Program (CMP); a CMP analysis is not required. As a result, intersection operations would not be adversely affected by project - related traffic. Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to either the long -term or cumulative degradation of any intersection in the project environs. No significant 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 clubhouse building is 49'- 6" measured from the natural grade within the permitted 32/50 height zone. As a result, neither the proposed clubhouse nor the ancillary structures would necessitate any changes in the air traffic patterns because the project site is not 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 a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. During the construction phases, a variety of construction vehicles, including large delivery trucks, concrete pumpers, dump trucks, and a variety of passenger vehicles, will travel to and from the subject property. On some occasions, there will be a number of medium 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 less than significant, implementation of a construction traffic management plan (refer to MM -13), which is required by the City of Newport Beach, would ensure that any conflicts resulting during the construction phase would be minimized. The proposed improvements to the golf course clubhouse proposed by the applicant, who is the long -term lease- holder, have also been evaluated along with the proposed development plan submitted by the property owner, which includes the golf course clubhouse and the adjacent tennis complex. Several inconsistencies have been identified between the two plans, resulting in circulation conflicts that require resolution. These conflicts are identified below and measures to rectify the circulation conflict are presented to mitigate them. The proposed development plan retains the secondary entrance and access road that parallels East Coast Highway along the south edge of the golf course parking lot. The two -way access road would be retained and stay connected to a drive aisle located at the southwest corner of the property to provide access to and from the maintenance buildings and delivery dock for the clubhouse. Service and delivery vehicles would also use this access road for deliveries without inter - mixing with the general member and guest traffic. It will also be available for access to the parking lot during special events. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 83 The service access road also provides vehicular access to the Armstrong Garden Center business located immediately west of the subject property, and which has an access easement with the underlying fee owner to use the access road. The intersection of the existing access road with Irvine Terrace creates an awkward and non - standard intersection immediately adjacent to the four -way signalized intersection at Irvine Terrace and East Coast Highway. The site plan proposes to improve the operation of the traffic signal at Irvine Terrace and East Coast Highway by moving the easterly end of the access road approximately 85 feet to the north of where it currently intersects Irvine Terrace. e) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. Access to the parking lot will be provided through a guardhouse at the main entry, which would operate during special events held at the Newport Beach Country Club. A secondary access point from Irvine Terrace will be maintained along an existing easement that extends along the southern limits of the lower parking lot, which parallels East Coast Highway. The secondary access point will be shifted approximately 85 feet north along Irvine Terrace and maintain access across the site to the Armstrong Garden Center. The access will also provide an entry point for deliveries. Adequate emergency access exists to serve the proposed project. Nonetheless, the Newport Beach Fire Department will conduct a code compliance analysis with the City's Building Department to ensure that adequate emergency access is provided. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in Table 9, the proposed project is consistent with long - range plans and policies articulated in the Newport Beach General Plan. The project is located in an area of the City that is served by public transportation (OCTA bus service) and public transit access is available in the project vicinity along East Coast Highway. The project is located in proximity to existing retail and commercial development. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measures MM -8 Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed project by the long -term lease holder and /or the redevelopment of the adjacent tennis complex as proposed by the underlying property owner, whichever occurs first, the circulation conflict at Irvine Terrace /Country Club Drive shall be resolved by one of the following methods. a. The proposed project shall be modified to shift Country Club Drive approximately 30 feet to the south to accommodate the tennis complex redevelopment plan; or b. The bungalow units proposed adjacent to the site on the north side of Country Club Drive proposed by the property owner as part of application PA 2005 -140 shall be modified, reoriented, reduced, or shifted to the north to avoid the road in its current alignment; or C. Some combination or modification of both plans shall be devised that would reconcile the discrepancy between the two plans. MM -9 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the existing access easement shall be revised so as to relocate its intersection with Irvine Terrace 85 feet northerly of where it currently exists. The new location shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to recordation. MM -10 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant or Contractor 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. NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 84 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 that 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 ensure safety. If necessary, the Construction Staging, Parking and 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. XVII. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS a) Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less than Significant 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. Because the golf course clubhouse currently exists, the site currently generates approximately 5,000 gallons per day of raw sewage.' Upon completion of the proposed project, that amount is expected to double to approximately 10,250 gallons per day based on the gross floor area of the proposed clubhouse. The raw sewage generated by the project would be disposed into the existing sewer system and would continue to be transported to OCSD Treatment Plant No. 2, which has 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 treatment needs for the proposed reconstructed clubhouse 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 golf course clubhouse on the site. The proposed project is within the land use projections of the City, which are the basis of future water demands and wastewater generation within ' Sewage generation rate of 200 gallons /day /1,000 square feet of commercial floor area (Final FIR, Newport Beach General Plan). NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 85 Newport Beach. Assuming a water demand factor similar to the sewage generation factor for commercial development (i.e., 200 gallons /day /1,000 square feet), the proposed project would generate a demand for approximately 10,250 gallons of domestic water per day, compared to the existing demand of about 5,000 gallons per day. 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 based on the City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). Satellite - linked irrigation controllers or appropriate best management practices will be incorporated into the landscape design for the new construction, which would be expected to reduce water demand. In addition, drought tolerant landscaping will also be encouraged within the PC, which would also result in lower water demands for irrigation. 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, in -tract facilities will be incorporated into the project design 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 XVI.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. 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 would increase water use within the City, thus increasing the need for water treatment services. However, as indicated above, the proposed project includes only the demolition of the existing smaller clubhouse and the reconstruction of a larger clubhouse approximately 100 feet south of the existing clubhouse location within the PC. As a result, the demand for domestic water would increase to approximately 10,250 gallons per day from the existing demand of about 5,000 gallons per day. As previously indicated, 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. Although the proposed project exceeds the maximum floor area permitted in the General Plan, future water demand based on the General Plan projections would not be increased significantly with the addition of the proposed development, which would increase demand by about 4,000 gallons per day over the maximum floor area permitted by the Land Use Element for the subject property. The demand created by the proposed project would exceed the City's long -range projections for development that are the basis of water demands in Newport Beach; however, 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 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 86 and practices in new construction. The PC Development Plan includes water conservation techniques that would be incorporated into the project design to ensure that domestic water demands are minimized. Specifically, water conservation measures will be required on the proposed project. 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 XVI.b above. As indicated in that response, the proposed project includes only the reconstruction of an existing clubhouse (albeit a larger facility) within Sub -Area 1 of the PC Development Plan area. No significant additional raw sewage would be generated by the proposed project. Adequate sewer collection, conveyance and treatment facilities exist to accommodate the incremental increase in raw sewage resulting from the development of the proposed project. Therefore, 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. 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. Long -term solid waste generation would be expected to be similar to that currently generated by the existing clubhouse because no change in the use is proposed. Therefore, no significant increase in refuse would be anticipated as a result of the reconstruction of the clubhouse and ancillary 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 serve the site and the proposed use. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. 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 NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 87 XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE The environmental analysis conducted for the proposed project indicates that although the proposed Newport Beach Country Club 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 a private recreational use (i.e., golf course and clubhouse) and has been altered from its natural state. As a result, it does not support sensitive habitat and /or sensitive plant or animal species. Therefore, the proposed project would not 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 Newport Beach Country Club as proposed would result in a negligible difference in long -term environmental effects associated with use of the site. Project implementation would result in the same number of vehicular trips and, therefore, no change in traffic conditions when compared to the existing use of the site. No significant impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, mineral resources, population and housing, agricultural resources or other environmental issues would occur. In addition, the proposed project would result in a similar 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 as a result of the implementation of BMPs and water quality features that would be implemented with the proposed project. 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. 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 (PA2008 -152) INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Page 88 SOURCE LIST 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. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan (Development Proposal); July 2009. 2. Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community Development Plan (Land Uses, Development Standards & Procedures); July 8, 2008. 3. Environmental Information Form; Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community; CAA Planning; July 28, 2008. 4. Traffic and Parking Evaluation for the Proposed Newport Beach Country Club Project in the City of Newport Beach; Kimley Horn and Associates, Inc.; September 2009. 5. Air Quality Analysis for the Newport Beach Country Club Project; Giroux & Associates; September, 2009. 6. Noise Assessment for the Newport Beach Country Club Project; Giroux & Associates; September, 2009. 7. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Newport Beach Country Club; Ninyo & Moore; December 5, 2008. 8. Newport Beach Country Club Parking Management Plan; Austin -Foust Associates, Inc.; June 21, 2010. Attachment No. PC 5 Response to Comments (Not included in the staff report due to their size and bulk) RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB (PA 2008 -152) MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION SCH NO. 2010101027 NEWPORT BEACH, CA INTRODUCTION The 30 -day public review period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) prepared for the Newport Beach Country Club project extended from October 7, 2010 through November 8, 2010. The City of Newport Beach received five (5) comment letters on the MND during the formal public review and comment period. In addition, four (4) comment letters were received after the close of the public review and comment period. Responses to the comments included in each of the letters received by the City have been prepared and are included with the Final MND. The comment letters were received from: 1. California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc. (October 14, 2010) 2. Southern California Gas Company (October 22, 2010) 3. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (November 2, 2010) 4. California Department of Transportation (November 8, 2010) 5. Friends for Good Planning (November 8, 2010) 6. The Irvine Company (November 9, 2010) 7. Paul T. Salata (November 12, 2010) 8. Jes Johnston (November 22; 2010) 9. Theodora Oringher Miller & Richman PC (December 10, 2010) Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152). Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 1 i cCRPA P.O. Box 54132 Irvine, CA 92619 -0132 October 14. 20 10 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Letter No. 1 California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, ins. An alliance of .American Indian and scientific communities working for the preservation of archaeological sites and other cultural resources. Associate Planner. Planning Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach. CA 92658 -8915 Dear Ms. I `ng: Ni-A1 y1,� C &i> pY Cr 0$pAF, rM Z�Vr C OCT 2 0,2010 DFNEWpnz) �E ACg Thank you for the opportunity to review the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for the Newport Beach Country club Planned Community (PA 2008 -152). We agree that the proposed project will not affect a historic resource and that significant impacts to archaeological resources may be unlikely. However. the project area was not inspected for the presence of archaeological remains when it was initially developed, therefore.. it is possible that buried archaeological resources arc present and could be impacted by the new excavation activities. Given that archaeological resources are almost always buried and that the proposed development will impact areas outside the existing building footprints, having a qualified archaeological monitor available. but not present. during ground disturbance in the areas and leaving it up to construction workers to discover cultural resources is not acceptable. A qualified archaeologist should be present to monitor any ground disturbing activities that occur outside the footprint of the existing buildings. Buried cultural materials are often encountered beneath roads. parking lots, landscaped areas and buildings that were constructed with relatively shallow excavations (no underground parking, or basements). Therefore, we strongly recommend that an archaeologist be present, ideally to monitor all ground disturbing activities, and minimally to monitor ground disturbing activities outside the existing building footprints. If you have any questions. please call me at (949) 559 -6390. or email pmartz'ri!calstatela.e lu. Sincerely. Patricia Martz. Ph.D. President California Cultural Resource Preservation Alliance, Inc. (October 14, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 As suggested in this comment and required by the MND (refer to page 39), "[A) qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be retained by the project applicant who will be available during the grading and landform alteration phase." The recommendations identified in this comment, which include investigation of the area surrounding any finds to determine the extent of the site if cultural resources are revealed during the landform alteration phase and the completion of data recovery prior to resuming work will be included in the revised mitigation measure as indicated below. 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 and shall be contacted if cultural resources are encountered. 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. Newpod Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 2 Southern California Gas Company RECEIVED BY 1 PLANNING DEPARTMENT A Setnpra En ui ergy uity OCT 2 7 2010 October 22, 2010 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 Attention: Rosalinh Ung Letter No. 2 Subject: Negative Declaration for Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PA 2008 -152) This letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed 1 project but only as an information service. Its intent is to notify you that the Southern California Gas Company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas facilities within the service area of the project could be altered or abandoned as necessary without any significant impact on the environment. Information regarding construction particulars and any costs associated with initiating 2 service may be obtained by contacting the Planning Associate for your area, Dave Baldwin at (714) 634 -3267. Sincerely, / v Mike Harriel Technical Supervisor Orange Coast Region - Anaheim M1 111S maneSdeAw 2. Southern California Gas Company (October 22, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Response to Comment No. 2 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page Department of Toxic Substances Control Maziar Movassaghi Acting Director Unda S. Adams 5796 Corporate Avenue Secretary for Cypress, California 90630 Environmental Protection November 2, 2010 Ms. Rosalinh Ung, Associate Planner City of Newport Beach Planning Department 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, California 92658 -8915 RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 0 3 7010 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB PLANNED COMMUNITY (PA2008 -152) PROJECT (SCH #), ORANGE COUNTY Dear Ms. Ung: The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your submitted draft Initial Study (IS) and purposed draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the above - mentioned project. The following project description is stated in your document: "The proposed project includes the construction of a large golf course clubhouse and modifications to the existing parking lot that serves the golf course. The project has three main components, including: (1) the clubhouse; (2) a parking lot; and (3) a maintenance facility. A new fitness center will be added to the clubhouse for use by members. The subject property encompasses approximately 132 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. In addition, the Armstrong Garden Center and residential homes are located along the southern property boundary. The site and adjacent areas are designated as "Urban and Built -up Land" and "Other Land" on the Orange County Important Farmland Map ". Based on the review of the submitted document DTSC has the following comments: — 11) The MND should evaluate whether conditions within the Project area may pose a threat to human health or the environment. Following are the databases of some of the regulatory agencies: 9 Printed an Reaycted Paper _Letter -No. 3 J- ' Amour Schv2rzenegger Governor Ms. Rosalinh Ung November 2, 2010 Page 2 • National Priorities List (NPL): A list maintained by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA)- • Envirostor (formerly CalSites): A Database primarily used by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, accessible through DTSC's website (see below) • Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS): A database of RCRA facilities that is maintained by U.S. EPA. • Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System (CERCLIS): A database of CERCLA sites that is maintained by U.S.EPA. • Solid Waste Information System (SWIS): A database provided by the California Integrated Waste Management Board which consists of both open as well as closed and inactive solid waste disposal facilities and transfer stations. • GeoTracker: A List that is maintained by Regional Water Quality Control Boards. • Local Counties and Cities maintain lists for hazardous substances cleanup sites and leaking underground storage tanks. • The United States Army Corps of Engineers, 911 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, California. 90017, (213) 452 -3908, maintains a list of Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS). 2) The MND should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation and /or remediation for any site within the proposed Project 2 area that may be contaminated, and the government agency to provide appropriate regulatory oversight. If necessary, DTSC would require an oversight agreement in order to review such documents. Any environmental investigations, sampling and /or remediation for a site should be conducted under a Workplan approved and overseen by a 3 regulatory agency that has jurisdiction to oversee hazardous substance cleanup. The findings of any investigations, including any Phase I or II Environmental Site Assessment Investigations should be summarized in 3 5 0 7 0 Ms. Rosalinh Ung November 2, 2010 Page 3 the document. All sampling results in which hazardous substances were found above regulatory standards should be clearly summarized in a table. All closure, certification or remediation approval reports by regulatory agencies should be included in the MND. 4) If buildings, other structures, asphalt or concrete -paved surface areas are being planned to be demolished. an investigation should also be conducted for the presence of other hazardous chemicals, mercury, and asbestos containing materials (ACMs). If other hazardous chemicals, lead -based paints (LPl3) or products, mercury or ACMs are identified, proper precautions should be taken during demolition activities. Additionally, the contaminants should be remediated in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies. 5) Future project construction may require soil excavation or filling in certain areas. Sampling may be required. If soil is contaminated, it must be properly disposed and not simply placed in another location onsite. Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) may be applicable to such soils. Also, if the project proposes to import soil to backfill the areas excavated, sampling should be conducted to ensure that the imported soil is free of contamination. 6) Human health and the environment of sensitive receptors should be protected during any construction or demolition activities. If necessary, a health risk assessment overseen and approved by the appropriate government agency should be conducted by a qualified health risk assessor to determine if there are, have been, or will be, any releases of hazardous materials that may pose a risk to human health or the environment. 7) If the site was used for agricultural, livestock or related activities, onsite soils and groundwater might contain pesticides, agricultural chemical, organic waste or other related residue. Proper investigation. and remedial actions, if necessary, should be conducted under the oversight of and approved by a government agency at the site prior to construction of the project. 8) If it is determined that hazardous wastes are, or will be, generated by the proposed operations, the wastes must be managed in accordance with the California Hazardous Waste Control Law (California Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.5) and the Hazardous Waste Control Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division Ms. Rosalinh Ung November 2. 2010 Page 4 4.5). If it is determined that hazardous wastes will be generated, the facility should also obtain a United States Environmental Protection Agency Identification Number by contacting (800) 618 -6942. Certain hazardous waste treatment processes or hazardous materials, handling, storage or uses may require authorization from the local Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Information about the requirement for authorization can be obtained by contacting your local CUPA. 9) DTSC can provide cleanup oversight through an Environmental Oversight Agreement (EOA) for government agencies that are not responsible parties, or a Voluntary Cleanup Agreement (VCA) for private 9 parties. For additional information on the EOA or VCA, please see www.dtsc. ca.gov /SiteCleanup /Brownfields, or contact Ms. Maryam Tasnif - Abbasi, DTSC's Voluntary Cleanup Coordinator, at (714) 484- 5489. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at rahmed a(�.dtsc.ca.gov, or by phone at (714) 484 -5491. Sincerely, Greg Holmes, Unit Chief Brownfields and Environmental Restoration Program cc Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento. California 95812 -3044 state. clea ring house(cDopr. ca. gov. CEQA Tracking Center Department of Toxic Substances Control Office of Environmental Planning and Analysis P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812 ADelacr1(aadtsc.ca.gov CEQA # 3041 3. California Department of Toxic Substances Control (November 2, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 Section Vlll.b of the MND summarizes the historical use of the site, the existence of several features that previously existed on the site, including a 550-gallon underground storage tank (UST), and the existence of waste oil drums, ponds and pole- mounted transformers. Although during removal of the UST in 1987 it was determined that the tank had leaked from a small hole, subsequent sampling and laboratory analysis determined that the levels of constituent materials were "non - detect" and regulatory closure was approved by the Orange County Health Authority. None of the other features on the site pose a health hazard, as discussed in throughout Section VIII. Response to Comment No. 2 Should contaminated soils or related conditions be encountered during grading and excavation of the site, the appropriate regulatory agency having jurisdiction will be notified in order to determine the nature and extent of further investigation and remediation that may be necessary as well as regulatory oversight responsibility. These agencies may include the Orange County Health Care Agency and/or California Regional Water Quality Control Board. As suggested in this comment, if determined necessary, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DISC) would require an oversight agreement in order to review subsequent investigations and /or remediation documents. Response to Comment No. 3 Table 5 in Section VIIIA of the MND (refer to pages 53 and 54) provides a summary of the findings presented in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted for the proposed project. 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. Therefore, the MND concluded that no significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Response to Comment No. 4 Refer to Response to Comment No. 1. Because the proposed project would require the demolition of several structures on the site, the MND discusses the potential for asbestos containing material (ACM) and lead based paint (LBP) to pose a potential health risk. However, SC -14 and SC -15 address the requirements prescribed by the regulatory agencies (e.g., SCAQMD) that pertain to ACM and LBP remediation. As indicated in the MND, compliance with these regulatory requirements will ensure that no significant release of either ACM or LBP will occur as a result of project implementation. Response to Comment No. 5 This comment is acknowledged. As indicated in this comment, soil excavation and filling will comply with regulatory requirements. Response to Comment No. 6 As indicated in Section VIII (Hazards and Hazardous Materials) of the MND, no significant potential hazards to human health, including to sensitive receptors, exist based on the findings presented in the Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments conducted for the proposed project. Nonetheless, SC -14 and SC -15, which require that demolition and construction activities comply with applicable State and federal regulations to ensure that potential exposure to hazardous materials does not occur. Newpon Beach Counby Club MND (PA 2008-152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 4 Response to Comment No. 7 Based on the prior Phase I and Phase II environmental site assessments conducted for the site, no soil or groundwater contamination is suspected (refer to Section Vlll.b of the_MND). However, as indicated in this comment, should soil and /or groundwater contamination be suspected during demolition, grading and /or construction, such activities would cease and appropriate health and safety procedures implemented as required by the regulatory agency having oversight. Response to Comment No. 8 Landscape maintenance of the project site has been and will continue to be provided to ensure that the golf course and related project elements, including those proposed are adequately maintained and no hazardous wastes are released from the maintenance activities. The project operation will comply with State and federal regulations. If determined necessary, an appropriate remedial action would be conducted prior to initiation of construction, as requested in this comment. Response to Comment No. 9 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA .2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 5 NO"E -2010 1518 Letter No. 4 ELA:; d 'OlnefHWAR %tlFeePH QMILt DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Dlsvict 12 3337 Michelson Drive, Suite 1 Irvine, CA 926124894 Tel: (949) 724 -2267 Fax; (949) 724-2592 io November 8, 2010 Post•il•FaxNote 7671 �� (.L^ psgas► L a '� Frum ! V! comact�IG.tnI C0' CaG7(�rft�S Phona 9�ra- . }o70$ Plwne4 f{ ycJ -aY£i% Fax a (HH- a9 Fe a q -7 ,2 T aZSq� Rosalinh Ung City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92658 Flexpourpower! 8e eaery eff(t!rnr! File: TGR/CEQA SCH #: N/A Log #: 2581 A SR -1 Subject: Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community (PA2005 -125) Dear Ms. Ung, Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Negative Deoloratiun for the Newport Bench Country Club Planned Community (PA2005 -125). The project proposes to demolish the existing golf clubhouse and to constrict a new golf clubhouse (51213 square feet) and ancillary facilities (i.e., cart bam and bag storage). The nearest State route to the project site is SR -). The California Department of Transportation (Department), District 12 is a commenting agency on this 2 project and we have no comment at this time. However, in the event of any activity within the Department's right -of -way, an encroachment permit will be required. Please continue to keep us informed of this project and any future developments, which could 3 potentially impact State transportation facilities. If you have any questions or need to contact us, please du not hesitate to call Damon Davis at (949) 440 -3487. Sine y," / C iris Herre, Brtutch Chief Local Development/Intergovernmental Review C: Tent' Roberts, Office of Planning and Research "Cuhrane lulpr4P u moblilly no oss California" TOTAL P.01 4. California Department of Transportation (November 8, 2010) Although this comment letter from the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans) identifies PA2005 -125 in the "Subject' line, it was received during the public comment period for the Newport Beach Country Club Project (PA2008 -152) proposed by The Newport Beach Country Club (NBCC), the long -term lease - holder, based on the reference to the new golf clubhouse (51,213 square feet). The reference to PA2005 -125 appears to be an oversight by Carrrans, which submitted the same comments on the MND for that project. Response to Comment No. 1 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Response to Comment No. 2 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Response to Comment No. 3 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concems under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 6 FRIENDS FOR GOOD PLANNING Letter No. 5 November 8, 2010 Hand - Delivered To Rosalinit Ung Planning Department City of Newport Beach Re: IBC MND (PA2008 -152) Dear Ms. Ung, I am a long time resident of Newport Beach, a member of The Tennis Club which is part of the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District (NBCC -PCD) and commercial real estate owner. At a court side meeting approximately two hundred of the tennis members recently became aware of IBC's Competing Plan for a portion of NBCC -PCD. Therefore, a group of us have formed "Friends for Good Planning' and in several weeks have enlisted over 100 members. We oppose IBC's "competing" proposed Golf Parking Lot and Clubhouse Plan (PA2008 -152) because, at a minimum it will delay the construction of the new Tennis Clubhouse with amenities, the Stadium Court and the resurfacing of the remaining tennis courts. Further, we adamantly oppose IBC's proposal to expand its already massive parking lot into the open space landscaped area at ourentty. In addition to its aesthetic impact this asphalt expansion, if it is not unambiguously rejected by the City, puts at risk the loss of our new Tennis Clubhouse and amenities. We have consulted with a CEQA lawyer and have the following objection to IBC's Mitigated Negative Declaration subject to additional MND and IBC Plan objections to be submitted prior to and at any IBC's public heating relating to their proposed plan. Zoning Code lCoMrehensive Planning. IBC's plan fundamentally fails to comply with the Citys planning regulations in at least two respects: a. Zoning Ordinance. IBC's plan disregards the zoning codes. It makes no attempt to plan the entire planned community as a "coordinated, comprehensive project" Since the 2 proposed improvements are directly adjacent to each other and they share the same entry off Pacific Coast Highway; flies in the face of our City's zoning ordinance. The MND does not adequately address IBC's non - compliance and inconsistency with the City's zoning ordinance. b. Penvilled Uses. A close look at IBC's proposed golf clubhouse design strongly suggests that IBC wants to build a banquet facility and a golf clubhouse, not a banquet facility 3 for a private golf clubhouse. It is out understanding that although IBC's leasehold area is designated only for Parks and Recreation uses by the general plan, IBC has acknowledged that its business plan includes an expanded public banquet business that 1602 M. COAST HIGHWAY • NEWPORT REACH, CA • 72660 IT &I E6NDSI +ORGO.OnPI,A.NNING.ORG has not /ling to do witli the>nembersbip of theprivalego#'clnG or the rectrational rue permitted by the Ciy'splammng trgulations. Not only will IBC's proposed banquet use be inconsistent with the general plan, but the use of the golf clubhouse commercial public banquets will greatly intensify from existing use. Therefore, it appears that the MND has missed the mark not only on evaluating general plan consistency, but also with respect to traffic, noise, and air quality impacts which could result from IBC's new business plan. IBC's plan (including its business plan for the property) needs to be analyzed to determine if IBC's real intent equates to a "change in use from a recreational and social private golf club such as Big Canyon and Shady Canyon to a new greatly expanded use in the form of commercial public banquet facilities similar to Irvine Hyatt Hotel, The Islands Hotel, Marriott Hotel, International Bay Club and Pelican Hill Resort. 2. Compatibility with Adjoining Land Uses. Among its many defects, IBC's plan is incompatible with the portion of Golf Realty Fund's that addresses the mixed use portion of the planned community. The mixed use area will include a new tennis clubhouse and stadium court, a boutique hotel with wonderful amenities; and five homes which we have heard will be called the "Villas." We understand that for the mixed use area, including our tennis club, to become a reality, it must be planned in conjunction with the golf portion of the planned community. Unlike with the Golf Realty Fund proposal which presents a 4 unified site plan and design scheme, IBC's plan appears to be totally unconcerned with how the golf area interfaces with the mixed use area. We are very concerned that the opportunity for construction of the Bungalows and renaissance of The Tennis Club could be lost if the poor planning approach of IBC is followed. The Bungalows will be a highly attractive visitor- serving use fox the City and the design of the golf clubhouse should respect the need for compatibility. If development of the mixed use area does not happen, that would mean the loss to the City of almost a million dollars or more yearly in revenues and the loss to us, the tennis members, of wonderfully new facilities. As best as we can tell, IBC is proposing that its golf proposal lie approved and simply be dropped next to Golf Realty Fund's proposal for the mixed use portion of the planned community. Unfortunately, that sounds a bit like the phrase about a camel being a horse designed by a committee. Because IBC's plan generally dismisses any need for coordinated planning within the planned community, the resulting site plan disregards the need for IBC's design to coordinate with the Golf Realty Fund's proposed design of the mixed use 5 site and the entry to the planned community from Coast I- lighway. There clearly will be insufficient buffering between the golf uses and the tennis, boutique hotel, and residential uses on the mixed use site. Where the golf site today has a turf area of about one act'e .in front of the location of the proposed Bungalows, IBC's plan removes that turf area and replaces it with parking. This will create aesthetic and noise impacts which will be detrimental to the Bungalows and the Villas, fat certain, and potentially to The Tennis Club as well. We would like to see the IVIND more completely address the lack of land use compatibility issues which the site plan raises. In addition to the setback question, our concerns regarding IBC's proposed banquet 6 facilities also raise land use compatibility issues. If, as it appears, the golf clubhouse will have a substantial public banquet operation independent of private golf club activities, then 7 U the inconsistency with the City's planning regulations which we discuss in Paragraph lb above also will produce land use incompatibilities. Banquets, need to build even more asphalt parking, and loud parties which occur far more often than would be expected just to serve the golf membership will impact adjoining uses, particularly the Bungalows and the Villas. All of these potential impacts need to be evaluated in the IvIND. 3. Aesthetics. By eliminating existing views to and through the golf course, failing to introduce extensive landscaping along Coast Highway, replacing an unsightly expanse of asphalt with a parking lot which only minimally takes advantage of an opportunity to reorient and heavily landscape the parking area, and hen adding even more asphalt to accommodate public banquet business, doubling the size of the existing golf clubhouse, moving the clubhouse substantially closet to Coast Highway, and proposing an architectural concept for the golf clubhouse which is inconsistent with the architectural theme of the mixed use area of the same planned community, a very good case can be made that the overall aesthetics of the site as a whole may be less appealing than what exists today. The MND needs to look at the complete package in terms of aesthetics to make sure that the existing horizontal expanse of asphalt is simply not replaced with an overwhelming vertical expanse of walls and buildings.. Some type of view simulation needs to be provided so that the public can understand and comment on the aesthetic qualities of the proposed project. 4. Traffic Circulation. Because ]BC's plan doesn't coordinate planning for the entire planned community, entering and exiting the site is not designed to maximize efficiency within the NBCC -PCD or to minimize potential conflicts with Coast Highway traffic. This is of particular concern to tennis members. The failure of IBC's plan to properly coordinate with the balance of the planned community leaves questions as to bow ingress and egress from the site will affect circulation patterns on Coast Highway and within the planned community_ For ingress and egress to the site to function properly, it must take into account all of the activities which will occur within the planned community, including activities at the tennis club. The MND must be revised and recirculated so that the community can better understand hoop the ingress and egress under IBC's plan will impact all uses within the NBCC -PCD. Friends for Good Planning look forward to introducing ourselves and our concerns regarding IBC's BIND and plan to the Planning Department, Planning Commission and City Council. We are passionate about The Tennis Club's existing improvements and protecting a very significant and highly visible area in the heart of Newport Beacb. Sincerely yours, . +udu i �' Michelle Freeman President 5. Friends for Good Planning (November 8, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 This comment expresses opposition to the proposed golf clubhouse expansion. This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Response to Comment No. 2 The concerns expressed in this comment are acknowledged. It is important to note that the Newport Beach Planned Community (PC -47) encompasses not only the Newport Beach County Club property (132 acres) and adjacent tennis club property but also the Armstrong Nursery property. As a part of City- wide rezone in 1997, by Ordinance 97 -10, the City rezoned the subject property, the tennis club and the Armstrong Nursery property from OS (Open Space) to PC (Planned Community). The City later assigned this PC with the number 47 for tracking purposes. There were no zoning regulations adopted for these properties at the time when the zone change was adopted: Upon approval of the proposed project, the boundary of this PC adoption along with its zoning regulations, will clearly define the boundary of the newly adopted PC. As currently proposed, neither the Armstrong Nursery property nor the tennis club is a part of this project. The Nursery is governed by Use Permit No. 3641 and the tennis club is governed by Use Permit No. 1492. Use Permits are often implemented and governed the development on projects when PC Districts do not have adopted development plans. The City of Newport does not require that the entirety of the property contained within PC-47, which includes not only the Newport Beach Country Club and the Tennis Club properties but also the Armstrong Nursery property, be planned as a single, integrated development. Therefore, the NBCC proposal to increase the size of the golf clubhouse is not inconsistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance as suggested in the comment letter. The MND remains adequate and complete; no revisions are necessary. Response to Comment No. 3 The proposed project includes a larger banquet facility than the existing banquet facility. It is designed and will be operated as ancillary to, but is not independent of, the golf course and clubhouse. The operation of the clubhouse along with its banquet facility within the golf course is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation of Parks and Recreation (PR). The land uses permitted in areas designated as PR include parks (both active and passive), golf courses, marina support facilities; aquatic facilities, tennis clubs and courts, private recreation, and similar facilities. The proposed banquet facilities will include a large "pre- function" space that will be used for a "meet and greet" or cocktail hour before a golf- related event moves into the banquet space, which is a common feature of modern facilities and will allow the club to have more flexibility relative to the use of banquet space. The larger banquet space will not change the operational characteristics of the Newport Beach Country Club. Rather, the design of the new facility is based on the principal of the Newport Beach Country Club retaining its private membership status and the desire to provide the type and quality of facilities found in modern, upscale venues. The banquet facility's function will not change from its current use and continues to include member - sponsored events such as weddings, business meetings; birthday parties and other special occasions. It is also used for member golf tournaments and special charitable events such as the Professional Golf Association (PGA) Toshiba Classic golf tournament. These special events require Special Event permits issued by the City. Although it is anticipated that usage of the new golf clubhouse will increase as a result of some increase in member- sponsored events and business meetings as well as public meetings and events, the increases will be limited. In this regard, the NBCC Business Plan for the Newport Beach Country Club has not changed. Therefore, the environmental analysis included in the initial study prepared for the proposed project has adequately and accurately evaluated the potential effects associated with the larger golf clubhouse, including the larger banquet space. The MND remains adequate and complete; no revisions are necessary. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 7 Response to Comment No. 4 These concerns are acknowledged. The upper parking area previously proposed by NBCC has been removed in order to eliminate potential conflicts associated with the parking area and the adjacent bungalows within the tennis club and single - family residential lots proposed by GRF. In addition, the golf clubhouse has been moved approximately 50 feet closer to the golf course and away from East Coast Highway, having the effect of reducing the building massing when viewed from Irvine Terrace. Other changes have also been incorporated related to landscaping, grading, etc., that are intended to address concerns of the property owner. The modifications to the site plan reflect changes that have improved the aesthetic character of the proposed project and will not result in any potentially significant adverse effect/impact. The conclusions presented in the initial study will not change. Therefore, the MIND remains adequate and complete and recirculation of the MIND is not necessary. Response to Comment No. 5 While it is important to ensure that the proposed uses are designed to be compatible with surrounding uses, including the uses proposed for the adjacent tennis club parcel within PC-47, the City does not require that the entire PC property be planned and designed as an integrated development, as indicated in Response to Comment No. 2. Nonetheless, other revisions to the NBCC site plan include redesign of the lower parking lot, which resulted in a reduction in the height of the retaining wall that separates the upper tier of parking spaces from the lower portion of the parking lot from approximately eight feet to about three feet. In addition, a landscaped slope will be located between the upper drive aisle and the lower parking lot, resulting in improved views from East Coast Highway and the adjacent properties. The limited existing views onto the grassy areas on either side of the existing golf clubhouse from East Coast Highway are also proposed to be preserved as a result of the revisions to the NBCC site plan. Noise impacts would not be expected to be different than those identified and described in the noise analysis prepared for the proposed project. Therefore, the MND remains adequate and complete. Response to Comment No. 6 The concerns expressed in this comment are acknowledged. Please refer to Response to Comment No. 3 above. Response to Comment No. 7 Refer to Response to Comment No. 5, which discusses changes to the site plan that improve visual impacts. The limited existing views onto the grassy areas on either side of the existing golf clubhouse from East Coast Highway will be preserved, as a result of the revisions to the lower parking lot and also shifting the golf clubhouse as described previously (refer to the attached revised site plans). The landscaping proposed by NBCC will be increased significantly over that which currently exists. To that end, NBCC is also proposing to provide significant landscaping along East Coast Highway, along the Irvine Terrace entry, and throughout the parking area. The landscape plan includes drought tolerant species as required by the California Coastal Commission since the subject property is located in the Coastal zone. In addition, if the access easement along the East Coast Highway frontage has been completely extinguished as suggested by the property owner, an alternative site plan can easily be implemented that would include additional setback area along East Coast Highway, which would further improve the aesthetic character. Therefore, with regards to the aesthetics, the MND remains adequate and complete. Response to Comment No. 8 The site plan has been revised to address circulation issues related to ingress and egress and the proposed tennis club circulation. The revised plan has been developed both with and without the access Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 8 easement along the East Coast Highway frontage in the event it is determined that the easement has been extinguished. The alignment of Irvine Terrace has been modified to be compatible with the adjacent proposed development. However, as suggested above, ingress and egress as well as circulation, both internally and as it affects the proposed tennis club development, will be subject to site plan review prior to project approval. The MND remains adequate and complete under the California Environmental Quality Act and recirculation is not necessary. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Pubric Comments May 2011 Page 9 November 9, 2010 Mr. Patrick Alford Letter No. 6 IRVINE COMPANY Since 1864 RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 12 2010 Planning Manager City of Newport Beach CITY OR NEWPORT BEACH 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Newport Beach Country Club Mitigated Negative Declaration PA2008 -152 Dear Mr. Alford: Please be advised that Irvine Company does not have any specific comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed expansion of the Newport Beach Country Club. However, Irvine Company has Special Land Use Restrictions (SLURS) on the property which requires the Irvine Company's review and approval of new building improvements, substantial exterior alteration, or additions to improvements as outlined below: 1 11. Irvine Company will review the International Bay Club (IBC) schematic plans and preliminary specifications. 12. Irvine Company will review the IBC final working drawings and specifications based 2 on the approved basic design concepts the schematic plans and preliminary specifications, including color and material palette and signage, if applicable. 3. Irvine Company will approve or disapprove the 113C plans within 15 days from receipt 3 of the plans. Written notice will be given or any disapproval along with an explanation for the disapproval. When approved, Irvine Company will sign and return one of the sets of plans. Irvine Company will not unreasonably withhold approval. 4 14. Irvine Company will review all signs that are visible and legible fi-om a distance of 50 feet from the property. Irvine Company will coordinate with IBC on SLUR compliance for the project. Sincerely, CO/wIlm Dan Miller, Senior Vice Pr sident Entitlementand Public Affairs 550 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660 -7 Sig, 949.720.2000 6. The Irvine Company (November 9, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Response to Comment No. 2 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Response to Comment No. 3 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Response to Comment No. 4 This comment is acknowledged. No environmental concerns under the California Environmental Quality Act are raised in this comment and no further response is necessary. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 10 PAUL T. SALATA L_ e_ �_f_@_r_ _N_O_. 7 3723 BIRCH STREET, SUITE 11 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 PHONE (949) 263 -0727 FAX (949) 263 -1141 November 12, 2010 Ms. Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach Planning Department Re: Comments on me's MND Dear Ms. Ung, I am a long time Newport Beach resident, Newport Beach Citizen of the Year, and the proud. founder of Irrelevant Week. Irecently learned of IBC's conflicting golf clubhouse and parking lot plan for NBCC Planned Community, which is delaying The Bungalows and new Tennis Clubhouse amenities. I also learned me submitted an impact review shortcut for their conflicting plan. 1 I 1) Aesthetic and Views from proposed expanded parking and large structure titled golf clubhouse, which exceeds the General Plan approved by voters of our City in November 2006. 2) Traffic and Use Conflicts of a huge banquet facility with separate entry and 2 requiring expanded parking with an open space recreational private golf clubhouse. 3) Conflict and Lack of Compatibility with the visitor - serving use ( "The 3 Bungalows ") which will generate substantial annual revenue for our City. (If me's banquet clubhouse and parking scheme are approved, the name needs to be changed to NBCC - Unplanned Community.) In summary, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is inadequate to address the substantial 4 negative impacts of IBC's competing golf clubhouse and expanded parking lot for NBCC Planned Community. Thank you, in advance, for fully addressing my concerns and comments. RECEIVED BY Sincerely, PLANNING DEPARTMENT NOV 16 20io Paul Salata CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Paul T. Salata (November 12, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 Refer to Response to Comment Nos. 5 and 7 of Comment Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning). The NBCC site plan has been revised to incorporate several changes to address the aesthetic character of the project and the visual impacts. In particular, changes to the parking proposed for the project have resulted in a five -foot reduction in the height of the retaining wall that separates the upper tier of parking spaces from the lower portion of the parking lot, from approximately eight feet as previously proposed to about three feet in the revised plan. In addition, a landscaped slope will also be located between the upper drive aisle and lower parking lot, which will allow for the preservation of the existing limited views onto the grassy areas on either side of the existing clubhouse from East Coast Highway and the landscaping has been increased to enhance the aesthetic character of the site when viewed from East Coast Highway. The commenter correctly states that the golf clubhouse exceeds the floor area allowed for the property by the Newport Beach General Plan. As indicated on page 67 of the MND, the subject site is designated as PR (Park and Recreation) and Table LU2 of the Newport Beach General Plan Land Use Element identifies the maximum development limit of 35,000 gross square feet for the property in accordance with Anomaly No. 74. The proposed golf clubhouse and bag storage encompass a total of 54,819 square feet. The applicant has submitted an application for a General Plan Amendment that proposes to increase the development limit to 56,000 square feet. The proposed General Plan Amendment is analyzed on pages 62 through 74 of the MND. City Council Policy A -18 requires that proposed General Plan amendments be reviewed to determine if a vote would be required. If a project generates more than 100 peak hour trips, 40,000 square feet of non- residential floor area, or exceeds 100 dwelling units, a vote of the citizens would be required if the City Council approves the requested Amendment. The proposed project generates no additional traffic when compared to the existing golf course, based on Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates. Trip generation rates are based on the number of holes comprising the golf course. Furthermore, project implementation would not necessitate voter approval of the proposed project because it does not exceed the minimum threshold for maximum floor area (i.e., 40,000 square feet) established by Charter Section 423 for voter approval. Response to Comment No. 2 Refer to Response to Comment No. 3 of Comment Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning). As indicated above and in Tables 10 and 11 of the MND (refer to page 68), the proposed project will not result in either increased trip generation or additional traffic. Response to Comment No. 3 Refer to Response to Comment No. 4 of Comment Letter No. 5. Response to Comment No. 4 The extensive analysis presented in the MND as well as the responses to the public comments adequately evaluated the potential impacts anticipated to occur as a result of implementing the clubhouse proposed by NBCC. In addition, please refer to Response to Comment No. 4 of Letter No. 9 (Theodora Oringher Miller & Richman). No additional analysis is required and the MND remains adequate and complete. Therefore, recirculation of the MND is not required. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 11 P Jes Johnston Corona del Mar. CA 92625 Jesse.johnston4vedzon.ne t 949 697 -3345 November 22, 2010 Planning Department City of Newport Beach C/O Rosalinh Ung P O Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 RE: Newport Beach Country Club Letter No. 8 "ECFfVEp 6Y r rvri nFP T.WN- DEC p 1 Z010 `- 17'y()F N'FWPORTBE,9CH As a resident of Irvine Terrace since 1987, myself and many other residents have always viewed the Newport Beach Country Club as on example of it's ownership not caring about the visual impact of their property on others. The IBC proposal for their 'renovation' continues this pattern. Their proposal is a sea of parking spaces with no curb view improvement from Coast Highway. The IBC proposal puts row parking along PCH and car parking right up against proposed high -end visitor bungalow patios and eliminates mature landscape adjacent to Armstrongs. This area needs a well thought out entrance and landscaped buffer, possibly re- allocating the access road that runs parallel to PCH. The City has the opportunity to influence the future quality of these assets $ and how they affect adjacent parcels. Their appearance and use directly impacts Irvine Terrace and the Newport Center area. Please do not approve the IBC submittal as currently proposed. Thank you for your consideration. Jes Johnston Resident, Irvine Terrace 8. Jes Johnston (November 22, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 Refer to Response to Comment Nos. 5 and 7 of Comment Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning). Response to Comment No, 2 Refer to Response to Comments Nos. 4 and 7 of Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning). Revisions to the site plan resulted in the elimination of the upper parking area that was located adjacent to the bungalows and near the single - family residential lots proposed on the adjacent parcel with the tennis club. The revised parking design results in less grading and facilitates pedestrian movement from the parking area to the golf clubhouse. Response to Comment No. 3 The proposed project will be subject to the Plan Review process required by the Planned Community District regulations proposed by NBCC to ensure that access, landscaping and visual character meet the rigorous parameters established by the City for each. Newpod Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 12 THEODORA I Los Angeles Office 10880 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1700 Los Angeles, Califomia 90024 -4 101 T (310) 557-2009 - 'F (310) 551 -0283 Tim Paane Direct Dial: (714) 549-6115 E -mail: tpnoneJalo umel.com Letter No. 9 :)RINGHER MILLER & RICHMA.N PC Attorneys at Law .venv.totounsel.com Reply to Orange County Office Orange County 535 Anton Boulevard, Ninth Floor Costa Mesa; California 92626 -7109 T (714) 549 - 6200- F (714) 549 -6201 December 10, 2010 Rosalinh Ung Associate Planner City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard P.O. Box 1768 Newport Beach, CA 92658 Re: IS /MND for IBC General Plan Amendment for Newport Beach Country Club Dear Ms. Ung: This letter is submitted on behalf of Golf Realty Fund ( "Owner"), the Managing Owner of the fee interest in the approximately 145 -acre property comprising the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District (the "NBCC PCD ").' Owner is submitting this letter to provide comments on the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (the "MND ") prepared by the City to assess the potential environmental impacts of a proposed project (the "IBC Plan ") submitted by International Bay Clubs, Inc. ( "IBC') for only the golf portion of the NBCC PCD, which comprises only approximately 132 acres of the NBCC PCD. The IBC Plan directly competes with a plan which Owner has submitted for the entire 145 acres of the NBCC PCD. Owner's comments are as follows: ' The NBCC PCD consists of approximately 145 acres. Approximately 132 of those acres are the subject of a 1992 lease to The Newport Beach Country Club, Ina, to be used solely for the operation of golf country dub. 2 Although the MND references the proposed project as including 132 acres, the proposed development activities appear to consist of improvements . only to a much smaller area consisting of the entry road, golf parking lot, golf clubhouse, and ancillary facilities located in the immediate vicinity of the golf clubhouse. 1 THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & MCHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 2 1. Inadequate Project Description. At the beginning of Section 10, the MND asks the following question: 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? (Page 62, Section X(b)). To adequately respond to this question, the MND needs a complete and accurate Project Description that it can evaluate for consistency and compliance with the City's General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan, and Zoning Ordinance.3 Unfortunately, the MND's Project Description is both incomplete and misleading. The MND acknowledges on Page 1 that the NBCC PCD is "intended to provide for the classification and development of parcels of land as coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive large -scale planning projects as set forth in Section 20.35.010 of the Newport Beach Zoning Code." Yet the MND fails to provide a clear depiction of how the boundaries of the IBC Plan relate to the boundaries of the entire NBCC PCD. A depiction, narrative, or other description directly acknowledging that not all of the NBCC PCD is included within IBC's proposed planned community development regulations would force a discussion of compliance with, among other planning regulations, Chapter 20.35 of the Zoning Ordinance. As set forth in Paragraph 2 below, the MND never undertakes that discussion. In fact, a reader not previously aware of the boundaries of either the entire NBCC PCD or the IBC Plan most likely would read through the MND and wrongly conclude that the IBC Plan encompasses the entire NBCC PCD. This erroneous impression starts with the MND's recital of the Zoning Ordinance's statement that "coordinated, cohesive, [and] comprehensive' planning of the entire NBCC PCD is required, thus leaving the reader with the mistaken belief that the IBC Plan actually is proposing coordinated planning for the entire NBCC PCD. This incorrect impression then grows as a result of what is then both directly stated 3 For purposes of this letter, all references to the "Zoning Ordinance are references to the City's Zoning Ordinance in effect prior to November 25, 2010, which Owner assumes will apply to the IBC Plan. As a note, however, relative to the comments made in this letter, . there would appear to be no significant substantive differences between the Zoning Ordinances which were effective before and after November 25, 2010. THEODORA OR[NGHER MILLER & RICHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 3 1 in and omitted from the MND. For example, the MND acknowledges on Page 2 that the IBC Plan "will necessitate the approval of a General Plan Amendment and adoption of a PC Development Plan and District Text that establishes land uses, development standards, and related procedures for the 132 -acre Planned Community." On its face, this statement disregards the basic fact that the IBC Plan's project site is NOT a " T32 -acre Planned Community," but rather a portion of the larger NBCC PCD adopted by the City in 1997 through Ordinance No. 97 -10. There simply is no "132 -acre Planned Community" as the MND states. The MND's reference to the "former Balboa Bay Tennis Club property" in Paragraph 10 on Page 7 treats that area as just another adjacent property; rather than as an integral part of the NBCC PCD, Further, the exhibits entitled "Existing Boundary for Newport Beach Country Club," "Vicinity Map, "General Plan," and "Zoning;" as well as the chart in Paragraph 10, all avoid any reference to the remainder of the NBCC PCD. The property boundaries depicted in these exhibits, combined with the text in the Paragraph 10 chart, the reference to the "132 -acre Planned Community," and the treatment of the remainder of the NBCC PCD as just another adjacent property would incorrectly suggest to most readers that the IBC Plan encompasses the entire NBCC PCD. From a CEQA perspective, the collective effect of these omissions is that the Project Description is both so incomplete and so misleading that most readers would be compelled to conclude mistakenly that the evaluation of the IBC Plan's consistency and compliance with the "coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive" requirement of the City's planned community regulations simply is not an issue. Therefore, the Project Description fails to describe the IBC Plan in a manner which fully and accurately informs the public, the Planning Commission, and the City Council of potential conflicts between the IBC Plan and the City's planning regulations. Because it lacks a clear Project Description that would allow the reader to understand the relationship between the IBC Plan boundaries, the boundaries of the NBCC PCD, and the City's planning regulations, the MND must, at a minimum, be revised and recirculated. Perhaps then, as will be discussed in the following Section, the revised CEQA document (perhaps an EIR) will include the required evaluation of the IBC Plan against the requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance. 2 THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RICHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 4 2. Zoning Ordinance Requirements for Comprehensive Planning. The IBC Plan includes a "development plan ,4 for the NBCC PCD which it refers to as a "Planned Community Text" (the "IBC PC Text "). The submittal by IBC of the IBC PC Text suggests that IBC believes that a development plan for a planned community does not require inclusion of the entire planned community to achieve "coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive large scale planning." Neither the IBC Plan as a whole nor the IBC PC Text makes any attempt to plan the entire NBCC PCD as a "coordinated, comprehensive project" or to explain why it does not do so. If, as we understand its position to be, IBC believes that the Zoning Ordinance allows for the adoption of planned community development regulations for only one portion of a planned community, the Zoning Ordinance simply does not provide such a process. Therefore, while it is incumbent upon the MND to evaluate the IBC PC Text for consistency with Chapter 20.35 of the Zoning Ordinance, nowhere in the ensuing 85 pages after the first and only mention of Chapter 20.35 on Page 1 does the MND mention Chapter 20.35 again. The comprehensive coordination of planning within the NBCC PCD was the reason for creating the NBCC PCD in the first instance and the decision by IBC to proceed with its planning as if the NBCC PCD never existed certainly requires evaluation by the MND for consistency with the requirements of Chapter 20.35. This becomes particularly problematic when placed in the context of Owner's proposed planned community development plan for the entire NBCC PCD. Owner submitted, as the Zoning Ordinance requires, a development plan for all of the NBCC PCD, addressing the types and intensity of uses, coordinated design and architecture, shared ingress and egress to and from East Coast Highway, parking relationships, lighting, landscaping, and other matters integral to developing a "coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive" development plan for the NBCC PCD. Not only did IBC not follow the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, but the IBC Plan fails to take into account the proposed development plan of Owner. As a result, rather than addressing the complete absence of planned community coordination in the IBC Plan, the MND simply avoids the issue and provides a strange and inadequate mitigation measure (MM-8, discussed in Paragraph 7 of this letter) to reconcile the competing plans for the sole and shared access point to the NBCC PCD from East Coast Highway. " Chapter 20.35 of the Zoning Ordinance uses the term *development plan' to describe the development regulations to be prepared to establish the development standards and regulations for a planned community district (see Section 20:35.050 of the Zoning Ordinance). 2 3 THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RLCHmAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 5 Therefore, because the proposed IBC PC Text does not encompass the entire NBCC PCD, the IBC Plan conflicts with the spirit, intent, and letter of the Zoning Ordinance. Irrespective of what its ultimate conclusion might be, the MND must reach that conclusion only after evaluating the potential for the IBC PC Text to conflict with the provisions of Chapter 20.35 of the Zoning Ordinance. There is no doubt that there is a "fair argument" - if not a certainty - that Chapter 20.35 requires the preparation of a development plan for the entirety of a planned community district, particularly where, such as here, there are mutual planning considerations. For example, the NBCC PCD consists of contiguous areas which share the same primary access road from East Coast Highway. Where is the opportunity for "coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive large -scale planning" if IBC is allowed to plan its leasehold independently of the rest of the NBCC PCD? IBC may be proceeding on the basis of some unarticulated and novel interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance to justify its ignoring the apparent requirement that a single development plan be prepared for the entire NBCC PCD. However, that novelty alone creates at this stage of the process a "fair argument' of a potential environmental impact which necessitates not merely the revision and recirculation of the MND, but perhaps the preparation of an EIR for the IBC Plan. 3. Nonconforming Use. a. Scope of Analysis and Mitigation. Though not clear from the MND, IBC has indicated that its "business plan" involves expansions of its banquet operations for the general public, as opposed to members of the golf club.6 In fact, IBC has indicated that its business plan involves a reduction in the number of golf club members, even though it is seeking a general plan amendment to significantly increase the size of its clubhouse and meeting and banquet facilities. While, under CEQA, the financial terms of IBC's "business plan," standing alone, may not be relevant to the analysis of a project's environmental effects, if that business plan discloses intended but undisclosed uses or intensity of use as the reason for the proposed improvements, then the `Worst s Although IBC has characterized its intent as being an "expansion' of public banquet operations which it believes it always has conducted on this site; Owner has not been aware of such activities other than charitable golf tournaments and the Toshiba Classic GOvmer, as Managing Owner of the entire NBCC PCD, has rejected approval of the IBC Plan under the lease for, among many other reasons, the proposed public commercial banquet facilities. 3 THEODORA ORINGHERMILLER & RicHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 6 case" analysis of the proposed project must take into account those intended uses at their maximum intensity. Here, the MND has not performed a "worst case" analysis of the IBC Plan as CEQA requires because it has assumed, without verification, that the significantly expanded banquet facilities and parking are designed to meet the needs of members, as opposed to the general public. This distinction, of course, is critical to understanding the potential intensity of use which the expanded facility will experience. Therefore, IBC should provide to the City its business plan for the proposed banquet facilities so that the anticipated usage can be properly evaluated to determine both (1) the intensity of use of the property for purposes, among others, of assessing potential traffic, noise, air quality, and parking impacts, (2) compliance with the use provisions of the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and CLUP, and (3) the need for mitigation to assure that use of the property complies with the General Plan. Such evaluation should address whether the business plan anticipates a private golf club level of banquet activity or a public commercial hotel level of banquet use. The MND must then propose mitigation measures to assure that usage does not exceed the "worst case" analysis performed by the MND. Otherwise, the expansion could occur with use assumptions consistent with typical private golf clubs, but with actual planned use consistent with a typical private golf club operation COMBINED WITH a typical public commercial banquet facility operation. Under CEQA, the addition of these essential mitigation measures requires recirculation of the MND. Additionally, this information pertaining to IBC's intended use of the expanded banquet facilities for public purposes raises a "fair argument" that such use will result in an environmental impact not yet identified by the MND. As a result, an EIR evaluating this expanded use of the golf club must be prepared. b. Compliance with General Plan and Zoning. In addition to properly quantifying and then evaluating the intensity of use which would result from the expanded meeting and public commercial banquet facilities, the MND must also assess whether the proposed use would conflict with local planning regulations such as the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, and the Coastal Land Use Plan (the "CLUP "). Once again, this evaluation relates back to the following question posed by the MND at the beginning of Section 10 of, the MND: 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 3 THEODORA ORINCHER MILLER & RICHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 7 general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Page 62, Section X(b)). In Paragraph 1 of this comment letter, this question was presented in the context of whether the Project Description is adequate. In Paragraph 2 above, it arises with respect to whether the IBC Plan complies with the "comprehensive planning" requirements for planned community districts. In both cases, the MND has come up short. This same question arises in yet a third context in which the MND fails to properly assess a potential conflict with local planning regulations. IBC has stated that in expanding its banquet operations for the general public, it is simply expanding operations which have historically existed at the golf club. While this may, at least to some degree, be true and while some private golf clubs may, to a limited extent, make their banquet facilities available for non- members' use, the scale of expansion proposed by IBC and IBC's explanation to Owner of IBC's "business plan° clearly indicate that IBC intends to use the golf clubhouse banquet facility for non - member public meetings and public banquets to an extent which is far more aggressive than typical of a private golf club. As discussed in Paragraph 3a above, further analysis and mitigation might place appropriate controls on the expansion of banquet facilities for general public use. Chapter 20.35 of the Zoning Ordinance presents yet another concern with respect to the extent of expanded public use of the proposed golf clubhouse. To the extent that IBC is proposing a public commercial banquet facility within a private golf club, the potential for a conflict with local planning regulations clearly exists. As the MND states, the golf club portion of the NBCC PCD is designated solely for Parks and Recreation uses under the General Plan. Section 20.35.030A of the Zoning Ordinance allows for "[I]and uses existing at the time of establishment of a PC District shall be permitted to continue as a nonconforming use..." Those uses, however, must "terminate in accordance with a specific abatement schedule submitted and approved as part of the development plan." While it is Owner's position that general commercial public banquet uses are not permitted under either the Lease or the Zoning Ordinance, if it is IBC's contention that such uses have historically existed at the site and that it now wants to expand those uses, then the MND must evaluate the IBC Plan to determine if the actual, though undisclosed, proposed uses are 3 THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RMCHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 8 among the uses allowed in property designated PR (Parks and Recreation) under the General Plan. If they are found to be nonconforming, then the IBC Plan must be further evaluated for compliance with Section 20.35.030A which requires that an abatement schedule be submitted and approved as part of the IBC PC Text. If they are somehow determined to comply with the General Plan use provisions, then the assumptions of the MND must be modified to evaluate the potential environmental effects of a public commercial banquet facility in addition to the effects of a private golf club operated for the benefit of its members. As of now, the MND only appears to assume use by members of the private golf club. At Page 3 -17 of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan, Table LU1 describes the "Uses' and "Density /Intensity" for property, such as the IBC project site, designated Parks and Recreation (PR). Under "Uses," the Land Use Element provides as follows: "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." Under the column entitled "Density /Intensity," the Land Use Element provides as follows: "Not applicable for public uses. Private uses in this category may include incidental buildings, such as maintenance equipment sheds, supply storage, and restrooms, not included in determining intensity limits. For golf courses, these uses may also include support facilities for grounds maintenance employees. Other types of buildings and developments are limited as specified in Table LU2." Table LU2 sets forth "Anomaly Locations" and identifies any variations from or additions to the uses, densities, and /or intensities for a property which are not otherwise addressed in the text of the Land Use Element. The IBC project site is identified as Anomaly 74, as noted in Table 9 on Page 63 of the MND. The only addition to the other provisions of the Land Use Element is the establishment of a 35,000 square foot development limit for the IBC project site. This, of course, is the limit which IBC seeks to greatly increase to allow what IBC claims are "expanded" public commercial banquet facilities. It is notable, ,3 U THEODORA ORINGHERMILLER & RIGHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 9 however, that nothing in Table LU2 allows the IBC Plan area to be used in any manner not permitted by the PR designation. As a further note, the Zoning Ordinance defines "Park and Recreational Facilities" as "[Noncommercial (emphasis added) parks, playgrounds, recreation facilities, and open spaces." Thus, there is no support in either the General Plan or the Zoning Ordinance for the notion that a commercial public banquet facility is anything other than a nonconforming use in an area designated PR by the General Plan. The MND fails to evaluate the IBC PC Text in the context of (1) Table LU1, which does not allow public banquet facilities under a PR designation making those existing from the time of the adoption of the NBCC PCD clearly nonconforming uses, (2) Table LU2 which does not expand on the uses permitted by the PR designation for this site, and (3) Section 20.35.030 which requires that the nonconforming banquet uses be terminated "in accordance with a specific abatement schedule submitted and approved as part of the development plan." Therefore, there is not merely a "fair argument," but perhaps clear proof, that the IBC Plan directly conflicts with several provisions of local regulations. The MND failed to conduct the very analysis which has been laid out in this comment letter. Because there is far more than a "fair argument" that the continuation and expansion of an existing nonconforming general commercial use presents a conflict with local planning regulations, an EIR needs to be prepared to address this conflict. 4. Aesthetics. a. Public View Impacts. The MND fails to fully evaluate the potential aesthetic impacts of the IBC Plan. It appears that the IBC Plan unnecessarily obscures existing public views to and through the golf course by placing a series of massive walls between East Coast Highway and the golf course. Because the MND has failed to provide view simulations which would allow a thorough evaluation of the impacts to those public views, there is no way for the public, the Planning Commission, or the City Council to fully understand the overwhelmingly adverse aesthetic impacts which the IBC Plan is likely to deliver. Nonetheless, the IBC Plan provides enough raw information to paint the following picture in words: The golfers' entry and access drive is separated from the parking lot by a significant change in elevation and a retaining wall that U THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RIGHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 10 extends up to 15 feet in height. The retaining wall and a proposed 8' high masonry wall on top of that retaining wall will create a significantly elevated building pad. On top of that elevated pad, located 100 feet closer to East Coast Highway than the current golf clubhouse and flanked by walls which may be as much as 23 feet above the current grade of East Coast Highway, will be a massive new golf clubhouse. The pleasant public views to and through the golf course which exist today will be lost forever. The elevations provided are inadequate to analyze public views from East Coast Highway or the exit from Irvine Terrace. In order to properly evaluate the IBC Plan's potential impacts on existing public views, the IBC MND must include photographs of the existing conditions and view simulations of the proposed project from, at a minimum, these points. b. Massing. These same factors also will create an imposing and overwhelming visual mass that will be out of scale with its surroundings, result in significant impacts to views of the site from East Coast Highway, and demean the overall aesthetic character of the site. Visual simulations also are needed to fully understand the impact of the massing created by the combination of the walls, the elevation changes, and the massive clubhouse. c. Landscape Plan. The MND references the proposed landscape plan as Exhibit 5, but there is no Exhibit 5 to the MND and none of the other exhibits appear to be the landscape plan. As a result, the MND does not adequately describe the proposed landscape plan and how it results in a less than significant impact. Information required includes, but is not limited to, general specifications of the landscape plan, measurement of setbacks, landscape widths, and a plant palette. As one example of this general deficiency, the MND states that the IBC Plan proposes landscaping and setbacks from and along East Coast Highway. However, not only does the MND not include a landscape plan, the text of the MND fails to describe the size and scale of those setbacks and /or landscape buffers. The MND's exhibits (including Exhibit 3 "Proposed Site Plan" and Exhibit 9 "Site Sections ") suggest that there is no material change from the current minimal landscape buffering along East Coast Highway. The MND should provide an accurate comparison to existing conditions so that the reader understands that the only change to the landscape buffer along East Coast Highway is the placement of pilasters and fencing in the area behind the sidewalk. 4 TFIEODORA ORINGRER MILLER & RICHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 11 d. Minimal Parking Lot Landscaping. Even without the complete landscape plan, the parking lot plan discloses that, to accommodate parking lanes perpendicular to the golf clubhouse and provide the parking required for the substantial square footage increase called for by IBC's 'requested general plan amendment, landscaping in the parking lot will provide minimal screening to soften the visual impact of both parked cars and the massing of large walls and the expansive golf clubhouse. While there may be a temptation to dismiss this concern by assuming that the new parking lot landscaping and view from East Coast Highway "must" be better than the current parking lot landscaping and view, "anything would be better than what's there today" does not suffice for an aesthetic impact analysis under CEQA. Such an analysis should not be made in isolation (i.e., looking only at the parking lot and not the overall "viewscape" from East Coast Highway) and cannot be made without examining view simulations which accurately compare existing conditions with the proposed conditions, including the proposed massive walls and golf clubhouse structure. Clearly, a "flair argument" can be made that the proposed parking lot landscaping, in combination with the other imposing visual elements of the proposed project, will create a visual experience from East Coast Highway which is not just overwhelming, but overwhelmingly negative. e, Bungalow Views. The MND states that "...views to or through the site including those from the bungalow units and semi - custom single - family lots proposed on the adjacent tennis club property, would not be significantly affected from any important public view point or public corridor...." This conclusion is not supported by any substantial evidence or analysis in the MND. View simulations should be provided to demonstrate the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of this statement. The IBC Plan places a one -acre parking lot where a grass extension of the golf course now fronts the future location of Owner's proposed Bungalows, impeding ocean, sunset, and turf views from those proposed Bungalows. The MND must examine technical data to evaluate these potential impacts and must provide evidence not only to support its conclusion that the Bungalow views will not be impacted, but to overcome any "fair argument" that those views will be impacted. Should the City consider these views to be unprotected private views, it is critical to keep in mind that, because the NBCC PCD is a planned community, "coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive" planning consistent with Chapter 20.35 would avoid such view conflicts. Therefore, these view conflicts represent a THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RICHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 12 potential significant impacts arising from the failure of the IBC Plan to comprehensively plan as required by the Zoning Ordinance, as opposed (or in addition) to impacts upon future private views. f. Compatibility. The MND states that the proposed golf clubhouse design will be compatible with nearby development, but doesn't offer support for that conclusion. This conclusory statement does not evaluate the Prairie style of architecture proposed by IBC relative to existing and proposed architecture for either the remainder of the planned community or of other surrounding development, including Newport Center. The proposed Prairie style architecture has significant potential to clash with its surroundings, including Owner's proposed development which was designed to blend with its California Coast setting and its Newport Center surroundings. This clash of design styles exemplifies the failure of the IBC Plan to include the entire NBCC PCD in a .coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive° development plan and creates a "fair argument° that the project will result in a significant and adverse aesthetic impact. g. Light, Glare, and Noise: Irvine Terrace. The MND fails to address potential light, glare, and noise impacts on the Irvine Terrace community. An analysis needs to be done, at a minimum, to determine if the expanded uses proposed for the golf clubhouse, the movement of the golf clubhouse 100 feet closer to the Irvine Terrace community, and the design of the parking lot will result in light, glare, and /or noise impacts to the Irvine Terrace community. h, Light, Glare, and Noise: The Bungalows. The MND states that because the golf course parking lot elevation is approximately four feet lower than the pad elevation of Owners proposed Bungalows, there will not be significant light, glare, or noise impacts. There is no technical data to support this conclusion. The proposed IBC parking lot is in close proximity to large picture windows of four Bungalows. Absent any conclusive analysis to the contrary, it appears obvious from the proximity of IBC's proposed parking lot to the proposed Bungalows that there is, at a bare minimum, a "fair argument' that light, glare, and noise from the directly adjacent parking lot will have significant impacts on the occupants of The Bungalows. These potential impacts are summarily dismissed and must be further evaluated to determine if the unsupported conclusions have merit. A photometric survey should be prepared and incorporated into the MND in order to adequately analyze impacts of parking lot light and glare on the adjacent Bungalows. 5 THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RICHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 13 5. Traffic and Parking. a. Construction Traffic. The MND inadequately analyzes construction traffic impacts. The MND states on Page 80 that there will be 2,604 heavy truck trips during project construction in order to import 39,055 cubic yards of dirt. The MND then concludes that there will be no significant impact because a Construction Staging, Parking and Traffic Control Plan is required (Mitigation Measure MM -10). This is an improper deferral of both analysis of the potential impacts and determination of appropriate mitigation. The number of trucks, truck routes, types of vehicles and hourly restrictions could be determined now, at least on a general level. This information is needed to determine whether there is a significant short term traffic impact. The impact analysis cannot be deferred to some later date where it will be completed without public review or comment. Clearly, absent analysis of the potential for noise, traffic (both congestion and intersection conflicts), dirt spillage, and air quality impacts, there is an obvious "fair argument" that an adverse impact could potentially result from 2,604 heavy truck trips traveling past or through residential areas, Newport Center, and East Coast Highway. Therefore, a revised and recirculated MND must be prepared. b. General Traffic Generation. The IBC Plan proposes to increase the size of the golf clubhouse by 27,753 square feet, more than doubling its current size. Yet, the MND concludes that there will be no increase in vehicle trips based on ITE trip generation rates. This could only be true if the new golf clubhouse will have no more visitors than the existing clubhouse has today. That, in turn, can be projected to occur only if it is assumed that use of the golf clubhouse and the greatly expanded banquet facilities is limited to members and their guests, as required by the General Plan. This critical assumptions simply is not supported by either the facts in the MND or, perhaps most important, IBC's business plan to increase banquet activity as reflected by its expanded banquet facilities. Even if IBC is limited to banquets and other social gatherings only for its members, their guests, and even occasional charitable golf events, it clearly intends to increase the volume of such activities in order to justify its investment in the expanded banquet facilities. We find it difficult to reconcile the facts that (1) the size of the clubhouse will more than double with most of the expansion devoted to non -golf activities, (2) banquet facilities will be greatly expanded, (3) those banquet facilities will not be restricted to members and their guests (the IBC Plan notably 5 THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RICNMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 14 does not include such a restriction), (4) a guardhouse will be added to control access to the site during special events, and (5) parking will be increased well beyond what is required for an 18 -hole golf course (if not to accommodate the proposed commercial banquet facilities, then why ?), yet there will be no increase in vehicle trips. This conclusion simply has not taken into consideration the 'worst case° factual assumptions required by CEQA. It assumes no greater use of the clubhouse or its banquet facilities than exists today, despite the clear capacity for substantially greater use and the normal expectation that the considerable investment to be undertaken by IBC most certainly will result in greater use and, therefore, greater revenues to justify that investment. That "worst case° analysis must assume maximum usage of the golf club and the expanded clubhouse facilities. That has not been done. IBC's desire to substantially increase the size of its banquet facility clearly evidences, at a minimum, an expectation of increased use whether or not the facilities are made accessible to the public, but also strongly suggests that the existing use will be transformed into a public banquet and special event facility. This is hardly the recreational use permitted by the General Plan on the golf club (i.e., Parks and Recreation) portion of the NBCC PCD. The true result is likely to be greater intensity of use, increased traffic, and greater parking demands, potential impacts which are not evaluated by the MND using the required "worst case" scenario. For the current assessment to be adequate, the City must require mitigation to limit the use of the golf clubhouse to its current levels, IBC must agree to that mitigation, and the MND (or, if then required, an EIR) must then be revised and recirculated. Otherwise, the traffic analysis must be revised to assume use of the facilities to their full and unrestricted capacity, an Initial Study must determine if there is a "fair argument" that there could be a potential significant traffic impact, and the appropriate environmental document must then be prepared and circulated for public review. c. Conflict with Owner's Proposed Planned Community Regulations. The MND fails to explain the conflict between the IBC Plan's proposed project parking and circulation design and the parking and circulation design of Owner's pending planed community regulations for the entire NBCC PCD. Again, this results from IBC's failure to provide a "coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive plan for the entire planned community. (See the discussion of MM-8 in Paragraph 7 of this letter.) In addition, the MND does not explain why the unsightly and potentially hazardous "Frontage Road" will be maintained. 0 7 THEODORA ORINGHER MILLER & RICHMAN PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 15 6. Ingress and Egress. With respect to ingress and egress, the failure of the IBC Plan to properly coordinate with the balance of the NBCC PCD leaves questions as to how ingress and egress from the site will affect circulation patterns on Coast Highway. As discussed extensively throughout these comments, comprehensive design for the entire NBCC PCD is what the Zoning Ordinance requires and what the IBC Plan fails to do. The MND fails to adequately address this very important potentially significant impact. The result is Mitigation Measure MM -8 which is discussed in Paragraph 7 immediately below. 7. Mitigation Measure MM-8. It seems appropriate to finish these comments with a discussion of Mitigation Measure MM -8. MM -8 highlights the chaos presented by IBC's failure to present a development plan which includes the entire planned community. MM -8 suggests two ways to potentially resolve circulation conflicts between the IBC Plan and Owner's proposed plan. It then provides a third alternative to resolve those conflicts if the first two don't work: "Some combination or modification of both plans shall be devised that would reconcile the discrepancy between the two plans. This Mitigation Measure essentially says "Even though the City's Zoning Ordinance says the City should only consider a 'coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive' plan, if the City nonetheless approves two inconsistent plans for this planned community, nobody gets to build until the parties redesign their respective projects in any way they choose. They don't even need the City's approval of whatever it is they decide to do." Obviously, this is not an adequate mitigation measure and simply reflects IBC's desire to ignore the fundamental purpose of planned community planning and "go it alone." Conclusion. The IBC Plan, including the proposed general plan amendment to greatly expand the golf clubhouse to operate a commercial banquet facility for the public, has not been adequately evaluated by the MND. Given the many "fair arguments" that the 8 IBC Plan will produce environmental impacts as a result, among other factors, of its various conflicts with the City's land use regulations, an EIR may be appropriate to address those conflicts and the resulting environmental impacts. At an absolute minimum, the MND must be revised and recirculated for public review and comment, after which an additional assessment can be made as to whether an EIR is required. L THEODORA ORINCHER MILLER& RICHMAN.PC Rosalinh Ung December 10, 2010 Page 16 The inadequacies in IBC's environmental review, however, do not justify any delay in the City taking action on Owner's proposed development regulations for the entire NBCC PCD. Unlike IBC, Owner has approached the planning for the NBCC PCD in precisely the manner set forth in the City's various land use regulations and should not be penalized for doing so. IBC may in the future exercise whatever rights it may have under its lease and City regulations to seek an amendment to the approved NBCC PCD development regulations, subject, of course, to proper environmental review, the maintenance of "coordinated, cohesive, and comprehensive" planning, public input (including that of Owner), public hearings, and, ultimately, the discretion of the City Council. 826472.7180981.10002 Sincerely, Tim Paone 9. Theodora Oringher Miller & Richman PC (December 10, 2010) Response to Comment No. 1 The concerns expressed in this comment are acknowledged. Refer to Response to Comment No. 2 of Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning). Response to Comment No. 2 As indicated in Response to Comment No. 2 of Comment Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning) and permitted by the City of Newport Beach, the PC District regulations proposed by NBCC address only the Newport Beach Country Club golf clubhouse and ancillary facilities and not the entire PCD area within PC-47. This comment also indicates that the property owner has submitted PC District Regulations that address the entire PC; however, as indicated above, PC -47 encompasses the Armstrong Nursery property, which is not addressed in the PC District Regulations submitted by the property owner. It must be understood that while the property owner's proposed PC District Regulations address the NBCC and tennis club parcels, NBCC is the lease holder for only the NBCC parcel; as such, NBCC, unlike the property owner, is not able to propose either future land uses or development regulations for a property not within its control. As indicated in Response to Comment No. 1 above, reconciliation of the two site plans will occur during the Plan Review process of each by the City of Newport Beach. Mitigation Measure No. 8 (MM -8) of the MND was prescribed to address potential circulation and access conflicts between the proposed project and that submitted by the property owner. Although the proposed site plan has been revised by NBCC to address these issues, the proposed site plan will be subject to the Plan Review process by the City to ensure that such potential conflicts are adequately addressed. Response to Comment No. 3 As stated on page 62 of the MND and in the NBCC Planned Community Text, NBCC proposes to increase the size of the golf clubhouse from 23,270 square feet up to 56,000 square feet. The increase in square footage is intended to improve service to its existing membership and to modemize the facility. With the exception of the 1,800 -square foot fitness facility, which is a new use, the increase in square footage comes from enlarging existing uses such as locker rooms, club storage, game room, etc. Four separate dining facilities are proposed that include fine dining, mixed grille, boardroom /private dining, and a 250 -seat banquet room. At the present time, the banquet facility is available for member sponsored events such as weddings, business meetings, birthday parties and other special occasions. It is also used for member golf tournaments and special charitable events such as the Professional Golf Association (PGA) Toshiba Classic golf tournament. All events, including public events, taking place at the NBCC are booked through the NBCC catering department. With a new golf clubhouse, it is expected that the usage of the banquet facilities will increase, to a limited degree, by some increase in member - sponsored events and business meetings, and an increase in public meetings and events. For example, the number of Monday tournaments might increase; however, such increase is expected to be limited to a maximum increase of four or five events per year due to limited availability. Please refer to Response to Comment No. 3 of Comment Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning). Response to Comment No. 4 Please refer to Response to Comment No. 4 of Comment Letter No. 5 (Friends for Good Planning). Exhibits 1 and 2 depict the revised location of the golf clubhouse, which is now proposed to be approximately 50 feet closer to the golf course and away from East Coast Highway. As a result, the building massing associated with the golf clubhouse, when viewed from Irvine Terrace has been reduced Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Pubfic. Comments May 2011 Page 13 by the relocation of the proposed structure 50 feet into the golf course. Exhibit 3, which has also been attached to these responses, provides a comparison of the previously proposed location of the golf clubhouse with the updated proposal. The location of the golf clubhouse would be relocated in both site development scenarios. In addition, visual simulations have been prepared as requested in this comment to illustrate the aesthetic characteristics of the proposed golf clubhouse. These visual simulations are attached. As can be seen in View A - Existing (refer to the attached Photo Simulations Key Plan), although the existing clubhouse can be seen from this vantage point, landscaping obscures much of the view of the clubhouse from this location. The visual simulation illustrating the post - development conditions is depicted in View A - Proposed, which has also been attached. As can be seen in that simulation, although the existing vegetation will continue to provide some screening of the new golf clubhouse, the proposed golf clubhouse is larger than the existing structure and will be a dominant feature in the landscape when viewed from location A. The character of the new clubhouse is more modern when compared to the existing clubhouse and will rise up to about 43 feet above the finished grade. View 'B - Existing illustrates the existing view from the easterly corner of the project site adjacent to the bungalows proposed on the tennis club parcel. In this view, little landscaping exists between the vantage point and the existing clubhouse, which is evident in the middle ground, along with the surface parking lot The clubhouse is even more dominant in the view from location B. As can be seen, the circular drive of the porte cochere and the clubhouse would be in the direct line of site from location B. The parking area has been extensively landscaped to provide visual relief. In order to ensure that the architectural character of the proposed golf clubhouse is compatible with the surrounding development, the proposed project, including signage, must be reviewed by the Irvine Company (refer to Comment Letter No. 6). Views onto the NBCC parking area were identified by the property owner, specifically with respect to a retaining wall that had been depicted in previous site plans to deal with the elevation change from East Coast Highway to the NBCC golf clubhouse. The lower parking area has been redesigned to reduce the height of the retaining wall from approximately eight feet to approximately three feet In addition, a landscaped slope will be located between the upper drive aisle and the lower parking lot. As a result of these site plan modifications, the limited existing views onto the grassy areas on either side of the existing golf clubhouse from East Coast Highway are now preserved as depicted on the attached revised site plans based on the revisions to the lower parking lot and also the shifting of the golf clubhouse as described above. In addition to the site plan revisions identified and described above, the NBCC plan(s) provide significant landscaping along East Coast Highway, along the Irvine Terrace entry and throughout the parking area. The landscape species proposed are drought tolerant species as required by the California Coastal Commission. if the Nursery access easement has been completely extinguished as noted by the property owner, an alternative site plan that has been prepared to respond to the elimination of the easement can be implemented in which case some additional set -back area can be achieved along East Coast Highway. Based on that alternative design, secondary access for delivery trucks can be provided between the Armstrong Nursery property and the golf clubhouse parking area as depicted on the revised site plan. In any case, the proposed landscaping will be increased significantly over that which exists today. The proposed landscaping will be effective in buffering the proposed development from the Irvine Terrace residential development and traffic utilizing East Coast Highway. With the elimination of the upper parking lot, the potential noise, light and glare concerns to the bungalows proposed on the adjacent tennis court parcel suggested in this comment would not occur, no noise generating uses or obtrusive lighting and /or glare would be generated as a result of the proposed project as revised. All parking proposed for the golf clubhouse and ancillary facilities is confined to the parking lot Therefore, the MND remains adequate and complete and no revisions are required. Newport Beech Country Club MND(PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 14 Response to Comment No. 5 The reconstruction of the Newport Beach Country Club Golf Clubhouse will involve the demolition of the existing golf clubhouse, site preparation, including grading and the importation of soil required, and the construction of the new golf clubhouse. As indicated on page 80 of the MND and referenced in this comment, 2,604 truck trips import the earth material would be necessitated in order to create the building site. In addition, demolition of the existing clubhouse will also result in an additional 2;523 cubic yards of debris that must also be hauled from the site. Finally, construction of the new golf clubhouse floor slab and footings will require approximately 1,765 cy of concrete, which would generate additional heavy trucks. During the reconstruction process, there will be times when a substantial number of heavy truck trips will be required to transport construction- related materials to (import) and from (export) the site. The table below summarizes the site preparation and construction trip generation anticipated to occur during each of the phases of the proposed project, including demolition, grading and site preparation, and building slab and footings. The heavy truck trips would occur sequentially. Estimated Short-term (Construction) Trips Newport Beach Country Club As indicated in the preceding table, the site preparation and construction phase would extend over a two - month period. Heavy truck trips during the demolition phase would occur for a 17 -day period, following by 27 days for the grading /site preparation phase; construction of the building slab /footings would last an additional 14 days for a total of 58 (consecutive) days. These heavy truck trips will utilize East Coast Highway and access the subject property via Irvine Terrace. As prescribed in Mitigation Measure No. 10 (MM -10) of the MND, no heavy truck trips will occur during the morning or afternoon peak hours to ensure that no impacts to the peak hour service levels along East Coast Highway occur. While some delays may occur as a result of the heavy truck trips, the Construction Staging, Parking and Traffic Control Plan will be submitted to the City's Public Works Department for review to ensure that each issue is adequately Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 15 No. of No. of No. of Phase Description TripsiDay Trips/Day Tri slPhase Days Demolition of existing golf clubhouse and maintenance building(s), resulting in 2,523 cubic yards of rubble. Ten Demolition (10) cubic yards per truck and 15 15 250 17 trips /day results in a total of 17 days for the transport of demolition material from the site. The project will require the importation of 39,055 cubic yards of Grading/ soil to the site. Based on 15 cubic Site Yards /truck, a total of 2,604 trucks 96 2,604 27 Preparation trips will be generated by the importation of soil to the site. This phase would last approximately 27 days based on 96 trips/day. Construction of the new golf clubhouse floor slab and footings will Building Slab/ require approximately 1,765 cubic Footings yards of concrete. Utilizing 8 cubic 16 1,765 14 yards /delivery truck and 16 deliveries /day, this phase would extend over a 14-day period. As indicated in the preceding table, the site preparation and construction phase would extend over a two - month period. Heavy truck trips during the demolition phase would occur for a 17 -day period, following by 27 days for the grading /site preparation phase; construction of the building slab /footings would last an additional 14 days for a total of 58 (consecutive) days. These heavy truck trips will utilize East Coast Highway and access the subject property via Irvine Terrace. As prescribed in Mitigation Measure No. 10 (MM -10) of the MND, no heavy truck trips will occur during the morning or afternoon peak hours to ensure that no impacts to the peak hour service levels along East Coast Highway occur. While some delays may occur as a result of the heavy truck trips, the Construction Staging, Parking and Traffic Control Plan will be submitted to the City's Public Works Department for review to ensure that each issue is adequately Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 15 addressed in that plan, including the identification of construction traffic routes, staging areas, and the scheduling of dirt hauling. This plan must be implemented during each phase of construction to ensure that potential temporary traffic and circulation impacts are avoided or minimized to an acceptable level. Implementation of the Construction Staging, Parking and Traffic Control Plan has been employed in the past on similar projects (e.g., Aerie Residential Project in Corona Del Mar) that generate large numbers of heavy truck trips to ensure that the adverse effects of construction traffic resulting from project implementation (e.g., delays, nuisance, etc.) are minimized. This measure was determined to effectively reduce the potential impacts to an acceptable level (i.e., less than significant) for the Aerie Residential project, which generated a significantly greater number of heavy truck trips over a longer period of time (approximately six months) within a residential neighborhood. Because the proposed project takes direct access from Coast Highway, which can accommodate significantly greater volumes of vehicles on a daily and hourly basis and, furthermore, because the heavy truck traffic would utilize only arterial roadways and would not occur during peak traffic hours, the project- related impacts during the construction phase(s) would be less than significant with the implementation of MM -10. The NBCC project proposed by NBCC has been revised to eliminate the upper parking lot including minor changes to the main parking lot resulting a lost of approximately 100 parking spaces. This comment suggests that the proposed plan includes more parking than is necessary for the NBCC. Please note that approximately 334 parking spaces are required to accommodate the proposed project (i.e., golf course /clubhouse) based on the requirements prescribed for these facilities. The revised site plan (refer to attachments provided with these responses) indicate that a total of 345 parking spaces are provided, including 336 "standard" parking spaces and 9 handicapped spaces, resulting in an "excess" of 11 spaces in the revised altemative site plan with the frontage road. If the frontage road can be eliminated because the easement has been extinguished, the parking lot proposed for that alternative would accommodate up to 357 parking spaces, including 348 standard spaces and 9 handicapped spaces. The additional parking spaces provided in these plans would be utilized during special events occurring at the NBCC. Therefore, the MND remains adequate and complete. Response to Comment No. 6 The property owner has stated that the easement providing for the frontage road access was extinguished some years ago and, therefore, that access does not need to be retained. A search of the Orange County Recorder records confirmed one easement has in fact been extinguished, but another easement may still exist. As previously described (refer to Response to Comment No. 4 above), NBCC has developed a site plan without the frontage road. In addition, NBCC has also designed a site plan retaining the frontage road which the applicant has included until the City is satisfied that there is in fact no easement allowing for the continued nursery access over the frontage road. Other modifications to the circulation plan have addressed the differences in the two plans to ensure that adequate ingress and egress to and from East Coast Highway are provided and internal circulation conflicts between the two plans are avoided. These plans as well as those submitted by the property owner are subject to the Plan Review process to ensure that the circulation plans are compatible and comply with City requirements. Therefore, the MND remains adequate and complete. Response to Comment No. 7 As indicated in Response to Comment No. 1 above, the City does not require the applicant to prepare a "coordinated, cohesive, comprehensive" PC for the several parcelsnand uses comprising PC-47. Rather, PC District designation was placed over the property to require the various existing land uses to adopt development regulations in the absence of any such regulations for the parcels in question. Finally, as previously discussed, the applicant has revised the site plan to address many of the land use compatibility issues identified in this and prior comments related to differences in the two proposed plans. The PC District text proposed by the applicant includes development standards for the NBCC parcel only. Although MM -8 was included to address the circulation conflict related to Irvine Terrace/Country Club Newport : Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008-152) Responses to Public. Comments May 2011 Page 16 Drive that provides access to the adjacent tennis club property, the inclusion of that mitigation measures is based on the site plan evaluated in the MND, which has been revised to address the location /alignment of Country Club Drive to avoid these conflicts. Response to Comment No. 8 The MND prepared for the NBCC golf clubhouse proposed by NBCC identified the potential impacts anticipated to occur as a result of its implementation, including construction traffic, air pollutant emissions (albeit less than significant), construction noise, etc. The modifications to the site plan reflect changes that have improved the aesthetic character of the proposed project and will not result in any potentially significant adverse effect/impacts (refer to Response to Comment No. 7 of Comment Letter No. 5 and Response to Comment No. 4 above). The conclusions presented in the initial study will not change. Therefore, recirculation of the MND is not necessary. Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2019 Page 17 U3993 =36 049" L >z $� m m� O z IPA a I� alp 4 � }t3'. mi TO m 5 D_ N m e 5� V i �• f - pG S s I E Tom'"'.. ;. � l - �✓ 41,E Lv 9 _ 35 o C; All < t az a � C to fi r8 9 C Fn Z X i i ? Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 18 CL R v\ l APB S Y� 9 1 Tom'"'.. ;. � l - �✓ 41,E Lv 9 _ 35 o C; All < t az a � C to fi r8 9 C Fn Z X i i ? Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 18 m s C x 7 n D D 1 A TI D 7 L 9 1 MY 6I� . z o �a m �0 0 £p$ M {1 { y i ti J arc. � e , IF J J ti _ t, a -, - HIM [ilk z oA O { t F m m x Z TJ.I E v L L C$� rn V A Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 19 m z M o p ° O m 2 F W D s C7 2 n O c z NO 1 I�6 S � � L X Q M Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 20 3 X Q M Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 20 1 CWW 1 CWT C a_ m a Y' W N v �b v. Wt o. yVy e 0 TtMtl3L JIlW11 �- I i /• 2 � w • V 1 CWW 1 CWT C a_ m a Y' W N v �b v. Wt o. yVy e 0 1r _i W J U Ln O z r-I r-1 s-1 N u }CO W Y U v> > O ~ z H = gU U D U � a w N m F O O� 2 a z Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 21 TtMtl3L JIlW11 �- I i r r, 17 r. n r' r r ` I 1r _i W J U Ln O z r-I r-1 s-1 N u }CO W Y U v> > O ~ z H = gU U D U � a w N m F O O� 2 a z Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 21 C7 Z X w Q Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 22 0 w O CL O W a Q Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 23 I a C7 Z P Ln x w m Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008 -152) Responses to PubLc Comments May 2011 Page 24 0 W N O CL O m a t m Newport Beach Country Club MND (PA 2008-152) Responses to Public Comments May 2011 Page 25 Attachment No. PC 6 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Not included in the staff report due to their size and bulk) MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB — INTERNATIONAL BAY CLUBS, INC. INITIAL STUDY /MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (PA2008 -152) May 24, 2011 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Newport Beach prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Initial Study for the proposed Newport Beach Country Club project located in the City of Newport Beach. The MND indicated that the potential adverse environmental impacts of the project, in terms of Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Noise, and Transportation/Traffic could be mitigated to below levels of significance. The mitigation measures and standard conditions have been incorporated into the project and the MND is scheduled for adoption by the City of Newport Beach, in conjunction with the approval of the project. Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code (PRC) and CEQA Guidelines section 15097 require the Lead Agency for each project which is subject to the CEQA to monitor performance of the mitigation measures included in any environmental document to ensure that implementation does, in fact, take place. The PRC requires the Lead Agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program that is designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. In accordance with PRC Section 21081.6 and CEQA Guidelines section 15097, this MMRP has been prepared for the Newport Beach Country Club project. Table 1 lists the mitigation measures or standard conditions, responsible parties, time frame for implementation, and monitoring parties. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Page 2 Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA 2008 -152) Newport Beach, CA SC /MM Method of Timing of No. Mitigation Measure Verification Implementation Responsibility Aesthetics 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 Division. The site shall not be excessively illuminated based on the luminance recommendations of the Illuminating SC -1 Engineering Society of North America, or, if in the Approval of Prior to issuance of Planning Division opinion of the Planning Director, the illumination photometric study building permit 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. Agricultural and Forest Resources No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Air Quality Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 402, which prohibits air contaminants or other materials that cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable During construction SC -2 number of persons or to the public, or which endanger Periodic monitoring activities Community Development the comfort, repose, health, or safety of any such during construction Department 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. Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 403, which sets requirements for dust control associated with grading Periodic monitoring During construction Community Development SC -3 and construction activities. during construction activities Department Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Page 3 SC /MM Method of Timing of No. Mitigation Measure Verification Implementation Responsibility Adherence to SCAQMD Rules 431.1 and 431.2, which periodic monitoring During construction Community Development SC -4 require the use of low sulfur fuel for stationary during construction activities Department construction equipment. SC -5 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1108, which sets Periodic monitoring During construction Community Development limitations on ROG content in asphalt. during construction activities Department SC -6 Adherence to SCAQMD Rule 1113, which sets Periodic monitoring During construction Community Development limitations on ROG content in architectural coatings. during construction activities Department Adherence to Title 24 energy - efficient design requirements as well as the provision of window Submit evidence of SC -7 glazing, wall insulation, and efficient ventilation compliance during Prior to issuance of Building Division methods in accordance with the requirements of the building plan check building permits Uniform Building Code. process Biological Resources No significant impacts to biological resources are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Cultural Resources A qualified archaeological /paleontological monitor shall be retained by the project applicant who will be present available during the grading and landform alteration phase and shall be contacted if cultural resources are encountered. In the event that 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 Submit proof of monitor until the find has been salvaged. The area qualified Prior to issuance of SC -8 surrounding any cultural materials or fossils archaeological/ grading permit Planning Division encountered during grading shall also be investigated paleontological to determine the extent of the site. Any artifacts and /or monitor 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. The City shall provide an opportunity for a Native Submit proof of MM -1 American representative to monitor excavation activities. Native American Prior to issuance of planning Division The representative shall be determined by the City based observer grading permit on input from concerned Native American tribes i.e., Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Page 4 SC /MM Method of Timing of No. Mitigation Measure Verification Implementation Responsibility Gabrielino, Juaneno, and Ton vas . Ge logy and Soils Prior to issuance of the grading permit, an erosion Approval of erosion Prior to issuance of MM -3 control plan shall be submitted to and approved by the control plan grading permit Building Division City's Chief Buildin Official. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit a soils engineering report and final geotechnical report to the City's Chief Building G#ise—Offcial for approval. The project shall be designed to incorporate Submittal of soils MM -4 the recommendations included in those reports that engineering report Prior to issuance of Building Division address site grading, site clearing, compaction, bearing and final geotechnical grading permit capacity and settlement, lateral pressures, footing report design, seismic design, slabs on grade, retaining wall design, subdrain design, concrete, surface drainage, landscape maintenance, etc. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Submit evidence of SC -9 All new buildings shall meet Title 24 requirements. compliance during Prior to issuance of Building Division building plan check building permit process Water conservation design features shall be Submit evidence of Prior to issuance of Planning Division and SC -10 incorporated into building and landscape designs. compliance building permit Public Works Department Hazards and Hazardous Materials Prior to any disturbance of the construction materials within the Golf Clubhouse and /or the Tennis Clubhouse, a comprehensive asbestos containing materials (ACM) and lead based paint (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 Submit ACM and LBP Prior to issuance of SC -11 licensed asbestos contractor. Inaccessible suspect survey and site demolition permit for Building Division ACM shall be tested prior to demolition or renovation. inspection buildings 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 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Page 5 SC /MM Method of Timing of No. Mitigation Measure Verification Implementation Responsibilit 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. 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, Periodic monitoring SC -12 respiratory protection, and good working practice by g demolition and during uring demolition, grading Building Division workers exposed to lead. Lead - contaminated debris site inspection and excavation and other wastes shall be managed and disposed of in accordance with the applicable provision of the California Health and Safety Code. Hydrology and Water Quality The applicant has prepared a Conceptual WQMP 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. In addition, implementation of BMPs that will be included in the 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. Land Use and Planning No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Mineral Resources No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Noise During construction operations, the applicant or contractor shall provide evidence to the City that all Submit construction During construction MM -5 construction equipment, stationary and mobile is schedule and site operations Building Division equipped with properly operating and maintained inspection muffling devices. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant or contractor shall prepare a Construction Management Submit construction Prior to issuance of MM -6 Plan (CMP), which confirms that potential project- management plan grading permit Building Division related and cumulative construction noise levels are minimized and do not exceed levels prescribed in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Page 6 SC /MM Method of Timing of No. Mitigation Measure Verification Implementation Responsibili City's Noise Ordinance, The CMP shall include a requirement that the construction contractor must notify the nearby 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. Prior to occupancy, heating, venting, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment in or adjacent to Submit evidence of residential areas shall be shown by computation, based HVAC equipment on the sound rating of the proposed equipment, not to sound rating Prior to issuance of MM -7 exceed an A- weighted sound pressure level of fifty (50) (adjacent to building permit Building Division dBA or not to exceed an A- weighted sound pressure level residential areas) of fifty -five (55) dBA and be installed with a timing device during building plan that will deactivate the equipment during the hours of check process 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Population and Housing No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Public Services No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Recreation No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Traffic and Circulation Prior to issuance of grading permits for the proposed project by the long -term lease holder and /or the redevelopment of the adjacent tennis complex as proposed by the underlying property owner, whichever occurs first, the circulation conflict at Irvine Terrace /Country Club Drive shall be resolved by one of Submittal of modified Prior to issuance of Planning Division and MM -8 the following methods. circulation plan grading permit Public Works Department a. The proposed project shall be modified to shift Country Club Drive approximately 30 feet to the south to accommodate the tennis complex redevelopment plan; or Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Page 7 SC /MM Method of Timing of No. Mitigation Measure Verification Implementation Responsibili b. The bungalow units proposed adjacent to the site on the north side of Country Club Drive proposed by the property owner as part of application PA 2005 -140 shall be modified, reoriented, reduced, or shifted to the north to avoid the road in its current alignment; or c. Some combination or modification of both plans shall be devised that would reconcile the discrepancy between the two plans. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the existing access easement shall be revised so as to relocate its MM -9 intersection with Irvine Terrace 85 feet northerly of Submittal of revised Prior to issuance of Planning Division and where it currently exists. The new location shall be access easement grading permit Public Works Department approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to recordation. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant or Contractor 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 Approval of Prior to commencement of MM -10 occur during that phase, the proposed construction staging, each major phase of Planning Division and arrival /de arture routes and operational p p parking and traffic construction Public Works Department safeguards (e.g. flagmen, barricades, etc.) and control plan hourly restrictions, if necessary, to avoid traffic conflicts during peak traffic periods and ensure safety. If necessary, the Construction Staging, Parking and 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 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Page 8 SC /MM Method of Timing of No. Mitigation Measure Verification Implementation Responsibili 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. Utilities and Service Systems No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Newport Beach Country Club (PA2008 -152) May 2011 Pago 9 Attachment No. PC 7 Alternative Planned Community Development Plan ,A^k Newport Beach Country Club Alternative Planned Community IW , Development Plan Ordinance No. Adopted 'Ne ?011 7r TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number 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 3.2 Tennis Club ........................................................... ............................... 11 A. Tennis Courts .................................................. ............................... 11 1. Number of Courts ....................................... ............................... 11 B. Tennis Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses ............. ............................... 11 1. Building Area .............................................. ............................... 11 2. Building Height ........................................... ............................... 11 3. Permitted Ancillary Uses ............................ ............................... 12 4. Parking ....................................................... ............................... 12 3.3 The Villas .............................................................. ............................... 12 1. Number of Units ......................................... ............................... 12 2. Development Standards ............................. ............................... 13 3.4 The Bungalows ..................................................... ............................... 13 Number of Units ......................................... ............................... 13 2. Building Area .............................................. ............................... 13 look1. 3. Building Height ........................................... ............................... 13 4. Building Setbacks ....................................... ............................... 14 5. Parking ....................................................... ............................... 14 3.5 ggns ..................................................................... ............................... 14 A. Sign Allowance ................................................ ............................... 14 B. Sign Standards ................................................ ............................... 14 4.0 Site Development Review ............................................... ............................... 16 4.1 Purpose ................................................................ ............................... 16 4.2 Application ............................................................ ............................... 16 4.3 Standards ............................................................. ............................... 16 4.4 Public Hearing - Required Notice ......................... ............................... 17 4.5 Expiration and Revocation Site Plan Review Approvals ...................... 17 4.6 Fees ...................................................................... ............................... 17 2 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit Name Exhibit Number VicinityAerial Map ................................................................ ............................... A Conceptual Master Site Plan ................................................ ............................... B IF77CLFTiin LIST OF TABLES 3 Page .......... 13 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District (the PCD) is composed of the Tennis Club and the Golf Club facilities, totaling approximately 145 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 limited mixed uses, including the private Tennis and Golf Clubs, 27 short -term rental units called the Bungalows with a spa /fitness area, and 5 semi - custom single -unit residential dwellings called 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. rw kA 0 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. t.w 2. Amplified Music All amplified music played after 7:00 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 rovisions t Council Policies K -5 and K -6 P 1 P Y regarding archaeological and paleon' gical resource 4. Architectural Design All development shall be designed with high quality architectural standards and shall be compatible with the surrounding uses. The development shall be well- designed and planned, exhibit a high level of architectural and landscape quality. 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 complyvAth applicable provisions of the California Building Code and the various other mechanical, electrical and plumbing codes related thereto as adopted by the Newport Beach MuClcipal 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 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 arid; 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 determined and measured in accordance with the Grade Establishment and Height Limits and Exceptions Sections of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, and any amendments shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director V 11. Landscaping /Irrigation Landscaping and irrigation shall be provided in all areas not devoted to structures, parking lots and driveways 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 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. 2 13. Lighting — Parking Lots & 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 from all affected parties shall be required for the submittal of any site development review application and /or prior to building permit issuance. 17. Outdoor Paging Outdoor paging shall be permitted at the Golf Club to call individuals to the tees and at the Tennis Club to call points during tennis tournaments. 7 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 from Tennis Courts Adequate buffering between the Villas 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 Tennis Clubhouse 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 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. 0 23. 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. 24. 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. 25. Tennis Club Site Phasing Plan The phasing plan for the tennis club site which is consisted of the tennis club, villas and bungalows shall be subject to a site development review process. 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 7. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS & 6illllllllllllll << .7f991R11. 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 practice facilities (i.e. putting green driving range, etc.). B. Golf Clubhouse and Ancillary Uses Building Area The maximum allowable gross floor area for a golf clubhouse building shall be 56,000 square feet. The cart barn, maintenance building, and snack bar, separate restroom facilities, and starter shack located at the golf course are exempt from this development limit. 2. Building Height The maximum allowable building height for the Golf Clubhouse shall be 50 feet for pitched roof and 45 feet for flat roof design, and shall be measured in accordance with the Height Limits and Exceptions Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 3. Permitted Ancillary Uses The following ancillary uses are allowed: • Golf shop • Administrative Offices • Dining, assembly, and event facilities • Health and fitness facility • Restroom and Locker facilities • Cart and club storage areas • Employee lounge /lunch areas • Meeting rooms • Hand Carwash Area • Golf Course Maintenance Facility • Others (subject to an approval of the Community Development Director) 10 8. 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 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 s 3.2 Tennis Club per 35 Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and placement of the tennis courts and clubhouse. A. The Tennis Courts Y * 1. Number of courts The maximum allowable tennis courts shall be seven lighted tennis courts (six lighted championship courts and one 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 for sloped roof and 25 feet for flat roof design, and shall be measured in accordance with the Height Limits and Exceptions Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 11 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 28 parking spaces. 3.3. The Villas Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and placement of the villas. 1. Number of Units The maximum allowable number of single - family residential units shall be five (5) single -unit residential dwellings. 2. Development Standards The following development standards shall apply to the Villas: 12 The Villas Development Standards Table Villa Villa A Villa B Villa C Villa D Villa E Designation TTM Lot #1 TTM Lot #2 TTM Lot TTM Lot TTM Lot #3 #4 #5 Lot Size 5,000 square feet minimum Lot Coverage 60% maximum 39 feet for sloped roof and 34 feet for flat roof design, measured in Building Height accordance with the Municipal Code Section 20.30.060 (Height Limits and Exceptions) Building Side Yard 3 feet minimum Setbacks Building Front and Rear Yard 5 feet minimum Nbe Setbacks A Enclosed Parking Space for Each 2 2 3 3` 2 Unit Open Guest One space - could be located on the private driveway — No Parking Space for overhang to the private street /cul -de -sac is allowed Each Unit 3.4. The Bungalows Refer to Exhibit B - Conceptual Master Site Plan for the general location and placement of the bungalows, concierge and guest center, and spa facility. Number of Units The maximum allowable number of the Bungalows shall be 27 short-term guest rental units to be built in a clustered setting of single and two -story buildings. 2. Building Area The maximum allowable gross floor area for the bungalows shall be 28,300 square feet with a 2,200 square foot concierge & guest center and a 7,500 square -foot spa facility. 3. Building Height The maximum allowable building height for the bungalows shall be 31 feet for sloped roof and 26 feet for flat roof design, measured in accordance with the Height Limits and Exceptions Section of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. 13 4. Building Setbacks The setback requirement shall be a minimum of 5 feet from any property line. 5. Parking Parking for the bungalows shall be a minimum of 34 parking spaces located in proximity to the use. AL 3.5 Signs A. Sign Allowance 1. 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 main entrance (Irvine Terrace and Coast Highway). Total maximum signage area shall not exceed one hundred eighty (180) square feet and shall not exceed ten (10) 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 sign area shall not exceed forty (40) square feet and shall not exceed six (6) 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 six (6) feet in height. The maximum sign area shall not exceed forty (40) 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 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 eight (8) feet in height. B. Sign Standards All permanent signs in the Newport Beach Country Club Planned Community District that are visible from any public right -of -way shall be consistent with Sign Section 3.5, unless otherwise approved by the Community Development Director. 14 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, bli_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. 15 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 standards set forth below in sub - section 4.3. 4.2 Application 4 A site development review application shall be required for the construction of any new building structure prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit or issuance of an approval in concept for Coastal Commission. The application must be signed /authorized by all affected property owners in order to be deemed complete. The application shall be considered and approved by the Planning Commission; and the Planning Commission's decision is the final action unless appealed in accordance with the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Signs, cart barn, maintenance building, golf course's ancillary structures (i.e. free - standing restroom facilities, snack bar, and starter shack), 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. 4.3. Standards 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 standards, when applicable: The development is in compliance with all other provisions of the Planned Community District Plan; 2. 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. 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 16 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. 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 not less than two (2) conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. IAL � 4.5 Expiration and Revocation Site Development Review Approvals 1. Expiration. Any site development review granted in accordance with the terms of this planned community development plan shall expire within twenty -four (24) months from the date of approval if a building permit has not been issued prior to the expiration date and subsequently construction is diligently pursued until completion, unless at the time of approval the Planning Commission has specified a different period of time. 2. Violation of Terms. Any site development review granted 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. 4.6. 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. 17 Attachment No. PC 8 Project Plans RECEIVED BY PLANNING DEPARTMENT Newport Beach, California MY OF NEWPORT 13EACI-.,! SHEET INDEX: A -1A EXISTING SITE PLAN / DEMOLITION PLAN A -1 B TEMPORARY FACILITIES SITE PLAN A -2A PROPOSED OVERALL SITE PLAN A -213 PROPOSED SITE PLAN (WITH ACCESS EASEMENT) A -3 GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A -4 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A -5 BASEMENT LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A -6 ROOF PLAN A -7 ELEVATIONS (SOUTH & NORTH ELEVATIONS) A -8 ELEVATIONS (EAST & WEST ELEVATIONS) A -9 CLUBHOUSE SECTIONS (SECTION A -A, B -B, C -C) A -10 SITE SECTIONS (SECTION A -A, B -B, C -C, D -D) A -11 MAINTENANCE BUILDING FLOOR PLAN & ELEVATIONS A -12 MAINTENANCE BUILDING ROOF PLAN A -13 MAINTENANCE BUILDING ELEVATIONS (SOUTH & NORTH) A -14 MAINTENANCE BUILDING ELEVATIONS (EAST & WEST) A -15 PERIMETER FENCE DESIGN A -16 PHOTO SIMULATIONS L -1.1 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 0-1 TECHNICAL SITE PLAN 0-2 EXISTING BOUNDARY PLAN EXISTING MAINTENANCE B'. (TO BE DEMOLISHED) (Z-10S ld DOS'�ING CLUBHOUSE X �y NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA X X i� W Ir�Ste: r =ww. l r oeotz oaoeae 0e 11 osoo-+t VICINITY MAP (N.ra) EXISTING SITE PLAN / DEMOLITION PLAN AAA ARCH= AIA to a U) Z gage xmga o U W mxa'9 d7, m NJ I..f� Z 0 U Q o LU W U L1 O Q w 00 O w 3� Z z ppI w 1 1 � f i rya a.. �5 to a U) Z gage xmga o U W mxa'9 d7, m NJ I..f� Z 0 U Q o LU W U L1 O Q w 00 O w 3� Z z VICINITY MAP N.TS.) NEWPORT BEACI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE C 1p NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB US PARKING REQUIREMENTS PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY • BuYEInBOmpwcy Group: h2 •CdvNr Typ.: Type VA(pully SprinNomd) • IB=EC 2006 sue; r =zuo�a� P �--r gip• PROPOSED OVERALL SITE PLAN A_y LEE & SAKAHARA e NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 00012 oaosoe ^RCHITI .„��m",.TECTp^,; ", 0 zo avz+-0e oe.,s.os '^'ate °°'•• ^ ^, ooao-,p n.za+o Db,Zn oSDo-n EXSMG "ZT NOTE A: REFMTO CML DRAWNG FOR GRADES ON SME NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORT BEACH, =Fomm L PARKING REQUIREMENTS LSECATEGGRY wmm PARKMG 101= Wr' W Uw : -P,o�om jsMbs sl I" 9ABOC 1,313 (WtTMACCESSEASEMD M - Mbm6fNllfe 80a A-28 -&�l 40m awwlv 8- �365ef '4 edgbz 7mtl pmjm (t stag /35ap -== m � 0=: lz� Lp— A ZM$1 t A 0 �M,00011 18 pealft, um. Ama =131S3aam Aroe =131.Si00roa • 8 mo" r=7 �4FAaeas I=e IMIJ250 T.Wp=kb.m* - 334 336 9 ==w-8 Fla.ta.a; 341 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY GENERAL NOTES coOmaG¢,T9s0: TY V4(FWySVkM.M 9ABOC 1,313 (WtTMACCESSEASEMD M A-28 N &Aft ZM awwlv 8- �365ef edgbz 7mtl pmjm a.me He9ft lz� maNCBwc: W�v wna.wg- M. Ama =131S3aam Aroe =131.Si00roa ttl 3Pt�al 49910 e! L) Z) 3) E�YemtemnaemMmvrmhm09amassahmMN GENERAL NOTES coOmaG¢,T9s0: TY V4(FWySVkM.M scan: r•ao4r PROPOSM SSE PLAN (WtTMACCESSEASEMD M A-28 LEE & &wANARA ARCH9EM AIA I GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (30,693 S.F.) AREA TABULATION: -UPPER LEVEL: 20,520 SF - GROUND LEVEL: 30.693 SF TOTAL: 51,213 SF NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB WIT 0. 1w NTW 6RTREACHC0Un'TRVf JM 1"FC.F.M1 NR(Rti I.UNl+vftitr.ULn JU.���nllt NIN'�xLxilf «,M uolexReRmRaoM nx ea+u.Nlm fx<wM �N IMIi4',µµMp�xnLlJ V. nieo'innTU[.Nr91n1 MnNnolx T11 rxLaolNi xnrsrowm: vn[LUVNTINc cnmPrma as +.+ �lnxnar . moxR aooM .NOOe aNN'Hi IP A0.TLR Mlle eavas �T 1. UROi�11UP 21 P TUO C`I('1! �\OMfE '. RRfaNINUHUOAi umcv xnrm v: uon!scnan arum 11 . IAUIL" T:Am Nnt1M Ni. . 1INmL-\1'm 10W(0. r UOInR-11NI1 A I 1U RT1 " R RfN1N M 'UAll M1't Rt uIwoar rxmwlcf. conTarnLT .. voles mrq:x xanM rvrxr m. concouRJe. I, Prmeesmnx �'runlNRU•e nrnn: i. rnno uol.rex's Ln'nn 5, MI:N'x I.U( %kN xtgMlMxl' \CORr.P00.i(NU Ax. LnW O_Y!C.R CV. MxJ'.1 I.A.Ik«1M W. MLV'M1 LAVATUNY 51. M N'S µMOWER :. hUH'µµtLN1RWM MEN'µ UM Mf.� x IAII. PATIU 11 IA� VN.111. LANI IaUON .11AIK rNRI+IC%1!p )µnfAtf Cl+l'.µ 0. nl. fl(xPUNAnUN nµXn nwNn w,vne vnw N4lclln,nvcrox M..v IR 1'.I: MRn'IWI2K 1 F2 I 4l'_M4K� I.UfK M IYMI.1 OININf. aL'xI:N x1:r+N n f.1.I:Vn f11R )I. .. pAl Tn N1µYIIE I1 wmox nvmLnwiN «m ln'RUR II`. TOWr(:I %I I, nICHANIncAL IXI .M'IAI 1.11 P m:x R"W"I Ntocnxraounn. i"I,1w %IR4YTUnncr. cnxTwn+n u41 C'R. i .. cl T1111 wa. l +, nnrcr aw.TOw+a. as .rnlx GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliillillillillilillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliillillililllilim LEE & SAKAHA IA NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 08012 0808-00 ARCHITECTS pm ,zzsoe 0&18-09 05A9.11 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (20,520 S.F.) AREA TABULATION: -UPPER LEVEL: 20,520 SF - GROUND LEVEL: 30,693 SF TOTAL: $1,213 SF NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA N1.11VAT0If OM' <UNC.lml..I IOARD IxAf:� ROA RD ROOH'I'0.1VATI: UIM1'IM1'6 li'Rw\C[ aANRV YTONAOIi (MFANRIDxI`RftIN TON IOIfNY 10. M'k'ANUUI fI�RMfI: 11. G011 ILfVAIOR 1!. R,m`AND \I1 conT aw. 1 n. u. IlIr" m IAmE xuTmn.1 r. Mln'sxl:Tlolw Ix. ? ORnnr' ii1Ila h : nnoxr- risxRnce +erlmcnoN m MNQ..1. M U:xVICf LIVIDOR 4TIA<RfI Y.LYVni011 THIN M \OIICTtiI'xVltt,�I:VI'IO.0 +NANeuersrnanic. . fnvrtox JI. ouM9wnxNx I. .Tmx ax wA'I m fOTwAml >n <xnvxnw: xT mfo . "Io nv rr i�. x LINItlUI OY✓Ae LlauoAI s 1Y IA ow1.1lfc4l IL LW,N l`lc 0.x 1Cll in lD vaivarlAmX miviSl`N a Reea rcrtnu:N Rl .111, 1, or IA rt AlI'�µHI:YiHdi.M fl L�'0.rtiT0.lFIM 'f.YTINI:I.I'. fVl('ll(YfHXImX Y'f iNIUININ(f µOOH V Y.UIN TI:RRn l t ll : I . IVICI!%TATIOM1 y >, u1Nr.loom uwr. mm�u,: ne M1 Mlxl'D.1 MI \I'.DOPI1. 11 LI: YIi0.NA(i' me rrt M. 'YAIx Ill TON1Yt OW12 09U4U8 id1M8 0930.10 06 11 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN LEE & SAKAHARA ARCH=S AIA II I 9UILOINGOHOVC� —� � CART BARN (5,704 S.F I r— -i.I , LI ra r4 (ANCILLARY USE) AREA TABULATION: -CART BARN: 5,704 SF -BAG STOR.(GROUND FLR.): 3.606 SF TOTAL: 9,310 SF NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB l(All, I =: :V', RT REACH C.I IRV CIA IR NN nnnvxv not ro .•�ox.,rn: Ki RFT( \Ih RHORNI ,Nnf.1. TONAaV 11 F:tF STORAGE CJ.FV WlllR\R�TtTORn4'f 4R1'If:IRfL[vATOR II STnlli LEE & SARAHARA NEWPORT BEACH, cAuFoRNA 0W12 07 -Ima ARCHrrECrs' ASIA a -,a0e 00 osoa11 n NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB ,K— I �. ma =ru^ OF PITCH 2 TYPICAL CCHERE ROOF PLAN iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliillillillillilillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliillillillillillillilliillillilillI 111 1, SAKAHARA NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA OW12 m -,sae ARCHITECTS AIA _ tataae �I osa»o .mxwaure P� k BANQUET ENIF2Y / BANCUEf ROOM Fl7 ES CENTER exrewa+ruana wnaxowmenrwoa�oPearxwn SOUTH ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA sw 11W =ry V 10' 1. 8 OB012 V.1m9 09]0.10 00.12.11 O$00.11 ELEVATIONS ARHITECiSIA EAST ELEVATION x.NP9LSiPG1(9IOUE WEST ELEVATION NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORIA scw.e +ns =+w. ELEVATIONS LEE & SAKAHARA oeott o>- +sae AR HRKiS AIA 2. ae 0e 0 asoan p z 0 I- L) W CO m m 0 I- L) W I d El ( LLI co ; i (' � \ ) | | § ) ! § ) § UZI j \ § � \ § � � G � \| 4, § j ) , ! ® ^ ) /;§ 4 \ m \ §( z ! f m Mil Mil e \ A \1 e ! . ,) q{ \ [ C0 \\! ) | | § ) ! § ) § UZI j \ § � \ § � � G � \| 4, § j ) , ! ® ^ § /;§ 4 \ m \ §( z ! f m Mil Mil e \ A \1 e ! . ,) q{ ;/ !/ !> i ! ( ; | � m D U � � 2 D O U -r Q w ! m / � £ O ( a y 7 ( 2 k j . \1 d ,) ;/ !/ !> i ! ( ; | � m D U � � 2 D O U -r Q w ! m / � £ O ( a y 7 ( 2 k EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION n k, LFA,. INK NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORT BEACH, CAUFORNIA TO GOLF \ GATE' COURSE SOUTH ELEVATION m NORTH ELEVATION EOUIPMENTSTOR ACCESS ORNE IDµ FLOOR PLAN (ONE STORY, ANCILLARY USE) TOTAL AREA: 8b15 OF MAINTENANCE BLDG. FLOOR PLAN & ' ELEVATIONS A_q LEE & SAK HARA OW12 07-1S08 ARCH= AIA 0a10 01m -11 •I ROOF PLAN INATA go] ME 001 MAINTENANCE BLDG. NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 09012 °pp�p° I M1�La'411Y osoa -„ NORTH ELEVATION NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB SCALE: MAINTENANCE BLDG. LEE & SAKAHARA NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA U012 07.15-00 ARCHITECS AIA usw.,, EAST ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB SCALE n_V MAINTENANCE BLDG. ELEVATIONS LEE & SAKAHARA NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA 08012 0 -1w A,.RCHrrrECrS AIA aeao-io asaa.n PERIMETER FENCE DESIGN NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA PERIMETER p FENCE DESIGN LEE & SAKAHARA W12 11x210 ARCHITECTS AIA 01 it mli .S It'll m r,7�7 �� � ��� "•_ N! w \� /!k \ .. |...l.. | ((§ § | || |m §( |(h §\ §N If � § ...,... ! ! (q § §)§ § §b § i / \ § E 2 J ( ..,,...., | |! | |a | | |! � § ...,... ! ! (q § §)§ § §b § i / \ § E 2 J �3 a g 1 s ss IIS Ig gps @I�g ; �81P @* �� 2 �8hm II i.flfl4 p¢ 18 �ina @ pg AA 1ggg1 i 99 pg[ @@ § a 1 {li E341Es S &(rP8�3 @� @ @@ �i $ ; E � E B B E € � � � P I $ 111 6 6 8 C B 9 t8 i1 @8[ €1 � � r � -➢ '� ..:;: r � � � i l � � i � .III ! � �1 �g•�2�6 - �� � 1 �aa Blau. fe58 a €..:,o[a[¢f• @ � (� @ I � I e� I � a ' a . �➢ a l !; 11 na 11i is ei1gig e➢¢ ® ®e a & e k g§ 4 @ p p¢p¢ Bill sus: i� m LL gigi g I I. es Z 00 5 .I U � ✓Y , • II 8S F— O Al r 55e8zyR � °�. ➢�Ig BSS 46 Qgl99�f���.. - -- � 4 sit'; E ➢�� e °9 `£ ➢388 V �offtIN z[e¢8e€ EFQaE� Ks; i EXISTING BOUNDARY FOR NEWPORT BEACH COUNTRY CLUB . � 4 . _ � GOLFCOIlPSE 1'125 AC It}?�� PARCEL 1 a�ACf SULOAAIIY ... ... A CIXPCYRtl 4L,M T._. PM 79-7049.09 ACi '•�''... �!' NTPL MRM j J CLUB HOUSE DEVELOPMENT AREA 9.02 AC " .,, r, TECHNICAL SITE PLAN t r IMERlIAAL SAYCLUSS INC. •h � 1 tY2t vlE5TCpPSTHK✓N+wti T"+4 }�^w m o nm R9 �R H, CA 92661 M'Irv. (9a9�OZ=(F;: A FUSCOE DF 2