Packed council agenda includes tennis and pickleball project, nighttime closure of public restrooms, library lecture hall update
By SARA HALL
Newport Beach City Council has a packed agenda full of notable items next week.
At the Tuesday (Nov. 14) study session and regular meeting, council will consider: Updated plans for the project at the Tennis at Newport Beach, which now includes pickleball courts; potential nighttime closure of public city restrooms; recent construction bids for the proposed Library Lecture Hall, which now includes a much more significant funding commitment from the Newport Beach Public Library Foundation; a number of additions, amendments, or deletions of provisions from the municipal code and council policies; housing element implementation and noise-related amendments and overriding the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission’s finding of inconsistency on the matter; water and sewer rate adjustments; and declaring a portion of city-owned property at the Balboa Yacht Basin as surplus land.
During the first public hearing of the night, council will consider several ordinances related to a previously contentious project at the Tennis and Pickleball Club at Newport Beach, located at 1602 East Coast Highway.
The amendments are to:
–Reduce the number of future tennis courts from seven to four courts and add 14 pickleball courts.
–Increase the number of future hotel rooms from 27 to 41 rooms.
–Increase the gross floor area of ancillary uses within the future hotel by 4,686 square feet.
–Provide three attached condominium units and two detached single-family residences in-lieu of five detached single-family residences.
The request also includes a new 15-year-term development agreement to ensure the orderly development of the property and certain public benefits to the city.
The contentious tennis club project bounced back and forth between City Council and the Planning Commission last year. Council essentially remanded it back to the PC for lack of pickleball being in the project. The most recent plans, approved unanimously by the PC on March 23, added 14 pickleball courts.
Click on photo for a larger image
Rendering courtesy of City of Newport Beach
A rendering of the site plan for the updated proposed project at the Tennis Club at Newport Beach
The project was originally approved in 2012 and looked to add a hotel and residential space to the property, as well as reconfigure the recreational uses. On March 27, 2012, the council at the time approved land use entitlements and executed a 10-year term development agreement to allow the redevelopment of the tennis club site into three distinct components focused on reconstructing the tennis club to reduce the number of courts, add a 27-room boutique hotel and construct five detached single-family residential villas.
The 2012 approved project has not been implemented and the property continues to operate as a private tennis club, with pickleball courts being introduced in 2019.
Last year, on September 8, the Planning Commission unanimously approved a legislative amendment to the 2012-approved project, which added the hotels rooms, changed the ratio of detached and attached residences, and added one tennis court (to a previously reduced number of tennis courts overall).
Earlier this year, at the March meeting, the primary difference was the addition of the pickleball courts.
To mitigate noise, a concern of neighboring residents at previous meetings, the sound buffer equipment will be installed around the perimeter of the courts, Jonathan Bailey, managing director of development for Golf Realty Fund and project manager, said in March. It’s the same specifications and manufacturer as being installed in the city courts, he added. They’ve also purposely placed the four tennis courts on the north corner of the property, nearest to the Granville community, and the pickleball courts on the south end, closer to the parking lots, since tennis is typically quieter than pickleball, he said.
Plans calls for two stadium pickleball courts with three rows of built-in seating. The project also includes a deck with tables and chairs, as well as a social area for members in the middle of all the courts.
Pending all the necessary approvals, they plan to break ground in 2032, which will narrowly miss the new 10-year term development agreement window.
The March approval also included a condition to update the development agreement to reflect the Consumer Price Index when it was re-drafted in 2023 and again going forward.
The project has been contentious at previous meetings, with the pickleball courts at the center of the discussion.
At the Sept. 27, 2022 council meeting, after about two hours of discussion and passionate public comment, a majority of councilmembers agreed to send it back to the Planning Commission, pending a parking study focused on pickleball courts, something the applicant indicated was the ultimate intent for the site but was not included in the plans for the club. A motion was initially made to approve the project, but it failed with then-Councilmembers Kevin Muldoon and Diane Dixon as the only supportive votes.
Then-Councilmember and now Mayor Pro Tem Will O’Neill offered a follow-up motion to continue the item until after the Planning Commission approves the project with the parking/traffic study for the pickleball courts. Ultimately, council approved the motion with a 6-1 vote, with Muldoon dissenting.
Before it could make it back on the Planning Commission’s agenda though, it was mentioned at the council’s Oct. 11, 2022, meeting. During the time on the agenda which allowed to reconsider a previous vote, then-Councilmember Joy Brenner said she had some questions about the project and that a request to reconsider seemed like the correct process. Brenner’s motion for reconsideration passed 4-3, with O’Neill, then-Mayor Pro Tem Noah Blom and Councilmember Brad Avery dissenting.
The request led to déjà vu on the dais when council held a public hearing on Oct. 25, 2022, to reconsider the project amendment. Again, councilmembers and a passionate crowd discussed the project for more than two hours and it ultimately ended exactly the same way it did at the Sept. 27 meeting: A motion to approve the project failed, with Muldoon and Dixon again as the only supportive votes. O’Neill then offered the same follow-up motion he suggested at the earlier September meeting: Send the item back to the Planning Commission. Ultimately, the motion passed 5-2 with Muldoon and Dixon dissenting.
At the Oct. 25, 2022, meeting, public speakers echoed many of the previous comments, including pleas from pickleball players, confusion and distrust on both sides, and private business litigation matters brought into a public forum.
The pickleball courts were continuously a notable point of contention at past meetings and plans submitted to the city last October finally included courts for the popular sport. At that time, some public speakers changed their opposition to support because the promise of pickleball was finally written into a submitted plan.
Managing owner of Newport Beach Country Club and Golf Realty Fund Robert O Hill previously said pickleball wasn’t initially included because they wanted to get the hotel lease done and the city doesn’t currently have a process to evaluate the impact of pickleball (traffic, parking and environmental studies).
At this year’s March Planning Commission meeting, as well as previous meetings, Brett Feuerstein and Ryan Chase (the other 50% title owners of the land, as managers of a few different LLC and an LP) noted that they were in arbitration with Golf Realty Fund. They asserted that GRF does not have the authority to submit the application without their consent. They hoped the legal dispute would be concluded by July.
The city has previously recognized O Hill as the managing member and has the ability to bring it forward.
The project involves a Local Coastal Program amendment, which requires approval from the California Coastal Commission. If the CCC does not approve the project, the entire application would not become effective.
Earlier in the meeting, during the study session, council will review and discuss potential nighttime closure of public restrooms.
Currently, most of the restroom facilities are open seven days a week, 24 hours a day, throughout the year. Staff surveyed other Southern California cities and found that 26 of the 27 respondent cities close their public restrooms at night.
According to the staff report, all restrooms are cleaned twice daily year-round, and high-use restrooms in the beach areas receive additional cleaning service from April through October. Public works, police and recreation staffers have reported routinely responding to incidents of vandalism and loitering in several of the public restrooms.
Staff discussed the item during the September 26 meeting. At the time, council directed staff to return with additional information, including cost estimates and a timeline, for the nightly, automatic closure of some or all of the city’s 34 stand-alone public restroom facilities.
At the September meeting, there was general consensus among councilmembers that at least some of the city’s restrooms should be closed at night and that automatic locks would be less expensive in the long run than the ongoing cost of manual locking. However, councilmember opinions varied regarding the locking method, timing and number of restrooms to be closed, as well as concerns with addressing automatic locks that are damaged or circumvented.
Staff is proposing a phased implementation, starting with restrooms at 15th Street, Channel Place Park, Sunset Ridge Park, Civic Center Park, 28th Street Fire Station, Marina Park Lighthouse and 38th Street.
Phase two includes Balboa Pier, Washington Street, Corona del Mar State Beach West and Corona del Mar State Beach East, Little Corona, 58th Street, Orange Street, Bob Henry Park, Mariners Park and Cliff Drive Park restrooms.
The third phase will cover facilities at Newport Pier, 19th Street, Irvine Terrace Park, East Bluff Park and Bonita Creek Park.
The fourth and final phase recommends restrooms at Port Carney, Port Westbourne, Bonita Canyon Park East, Bonita Canyon Park Middle, Bonita Canyon Park West, Grant Howald Park, Arroyo Park, San Miguel, Balboa Island Fire Station, Balboa Island Ferry Landing, Lawn Bowling and Coastal Peak Park.
The process could take approximately 24 months if council chooses to have all city restrooms converted to automatic locking. In the meantime, if council desires, they can hire a security contractor to manually lock the facilities until the project is completed.
According to the staff report, some facilities only require changing out the lockset on the door. Staff estimates the cost to purchase and install a lockset on an existing door is approximately $3,000.
The remainder of the restrooms have gates or doors that will need to be retrofitted. This will involve working with a door fabrication firm to make and change out doors and gates, as well as make and change the entire door housing frames in several cases. The cost per gate or door retrofit is $23,000 for those facilities that have two entrances, and $46,000 for those restrooms with four entrances.
The total estimated cost to install automatic locks on all 34 locations is $561,150. The estimated annual maintenance cost of all 34 would be approximately $122,192.
Click on photo for a larger image
Art courtesy of RCA/City of Newport Beach
The conceptual design for the planned library lecture hall
Also during the study session, council will review and discuss the recent construction bids for the proposed Library Lecture Hall, overall project cost and any potential project funding adjustments or other actions that would be necessary, including commitments from the Newport Beach Public Library Foundation, in order to proceed with construction of the project.
The city received three bids on October 12, according to the staff presentation for the item. The lowest qualified bid was from AMG & Associates for a base bid of about $19.07 million.
The total all-in project cost projected at approximately $23.44 million.
On April 25, council unanimously rejected all construction bids, as they came in well over the estimated cost. The city had received five bids for the project on February 28, but all were significantly higher than the latest engineer’s estimate, which was approximately $14 million as of November 2022. At the time of the April meeting, all bids were between $17 million and $20 million.
According to next week’s presentation, the funding memorandum of understanding with the Newport Beach Public Library Foundation is still in place and commits the city to a 50/50 split with the foundation, up to $13 million, or $6.5 million each.
However, as of October 25, the Foundation advised city staff they have $8.2 million in hard commitments available now: $7 million to be placed in the escrow account prior to contract award and $1.2 million to be collected over next three years.
They also identified that they already have another approximately $1 million in soft pledges that should be available after contract award.
The Foundation has also committed to taking on further fundraising campaign efforts to raise the remaining contributions, up to 50% of the total project cost, or approximately $11.72 million.
Next week, staff is asking council to decide whether or not to accept a bid and award a construction contract, and, if proceeding, determine how to fill the funding gap.
The project first started at the March 12, 2019 study session, when the council at the time expressed support for the lecture hall project and the architect team selection process. At the meeting, the library supporters agreed to partner with the city on this project. Council directed staff to return with a recommendation for awarding the design contract for developing concept and final design plans.
On July 9, 2019, council adopted a resolution establishing the Library Lecture Hall Design Committee. Over the last few years, the committee was tasked with developing the facility concept. They narrowed down and selected an architect, pored over design ideas, considered seating, indoor/outdoor activity, sight lines and orientation of the entrance. The group worked on parking issues and the building’s connection to the library, compared various sizes, configurations, and blueprints and discussed how to incorporate the bamboo courtyard. They also reflected on current and future programming.
With the support of the LLHDC, Robert R. Coffee Architects + Associates was unanimously selected. On Nov. 19, 2019, council voted 5-2, with councilmembers Kevin Muldoon and Marshall “Duffy” Duffield dissenting, to approve land use agreements with the Irvine Company and a professional services agreement with RCA. The design contract included developing conceptual designs, attending community and LLHDC meetings, and presenting concepts to council.
On April 30, 2021, staff and the project architect presented the project concept to the Irvine Company. Following some changes and LLHDC approval, the revised concept plan was approved by TIC on August 18 of that year.
During a study session on Sept. 28, 2021, staff presented the final revised conceptual design, project cost estimate and tentative funding terms for the MOU with the Library Foundation. At that meeting, councilmembers provided direction on the project and, following a straw vote, asked that the lecture hall return to council for formal approval.
On Nov. 31, 2021, City Council approved the conceptual design. Councilmembers voted 6-1, with Muldoon dissenting, in favor of the floor plan and exterior architectural style. The action also approved the overall cost estimate of $12.81 million and MOU with the Foundation.
Last up during regular business, council will consider an ordinance and resolutions that would add, amend and repeal provisions of the municipal code and council policies.
The council’s Municipal Code and Council Policy Review Ad Hoc Committee reviewed the documents to provide recommendations concerning deleting or reducing language, and the advisability of applying sunset provisions for new and existing code provisions. They also requested recommendations regarding council policy changes from several city boards and commissions. The committee was comprised of Mayor Noah Blom, Mayor Pro Tem Will O’Neill and Councilmember Lauren Kleiman.
At the October 24 council study session, staff shared a presentation on the proposed changes and councilmembers were, overall, encouraged by the suggested changes.
Next week, staff is returning with an ordinance and resolutions to implement the proposed changes.
Also during regular business next week, council will consider ordinances and resolutions related to adopting housing element implementation and noise-related amendments and to override the Orange County Airport Land Use Commission’s finding of inconsistency on the matter.
The city of Newport Beach is required to submit the housing element implementation, noise-related amendments to the Airport Land Use Commission for a consistency determination with the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for John Wayne Airport. The commission conducted a hearing on the matter on August 17 and found the amendments to be inconsistent with the plan.
Councilmembers voted 5-0 on September 12 in support of a resolution that notified ALUC about the city’s intent to override their finding. Councilmember Joe Stapleton was absent and Councilmember Erik Weigand recused himself.
Over the last few years, a citizen committee was charged with site selection for where housing units should be planned for in the city in an effort to meet the state mandated Regional Housing Needs Assessment.
The housing element includes an inventory of potential candidate housing sites by income category to meet the city’s RHNA allocation. The airport area is one focus area and includes 62 new housing opportunity sites that could accommodate up to 2,577 housing units.
Council adopted the 2020-2029 housing element last September and the California Department of Housing and Community Development certified the document as substantially compliant with state housing laws on Oct. 5, 2022.
Several of the sites identified in the housing element are proximate to John Wayne Airport and within the existing 65 dBA Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise contour area. City staff argues that the potential sites are necessary for the city to meet the RHNA allocation. No development would be directly authorized by the proposed amendments.
At the September meeting, City Attorney Aaron Harp explained that changing the noise contours does have impacts as far as what can be developed and what the requirements are for that development, but no units are being added.
When the housing element was initially drafted, the ALUC reviewed these sites and found the entire document to be inconsistent with the AELUP. Ultimately, council overruled the airport commission’s determination, finding it inconsistent with state law, and adopted the housing element with these sites included.
Recently, ALUC determined that the amendments needed for city code to allow residential in this specific CNEL noise contour area are also inconsistent with the AELUP. In their determination letter, ALUC cited sections in the Airport Environs Land Use Plan for JWA related to aircraft noise, safety compatibility, assisting local agencies in ensuring compatible land uses in the vicinity of existing airports and the general policy of the AELUP.
In an October 11 letter to the city, ALUC reiterated its determination of inconsistency. Commission Vice Chair Mark Monin wrote that because of the city’s proposed amendment and potential residential uses that would occur within CNEL 60 and 65, and specific safety zones identified in the airport plan, includes exposure to significant risks, noise and aircraft overflight, the city’s proposed actions are inconsistent with the AELUP.
Also during next week’s meeting, council will hold a public hearing and consider water and sewer rate adjustments.
Council conducted a study session on August 22 and approved the 2023 water and sewer rate studies on September 26. The completed studies analyze the cost of services, revenues and reserves, and recommend increases to the water and sewer rates.
According to the staff report, increases are needed to fund the higher costs to purchase and pump water, to operate the system, and to fund the increased capital improvement program to rehabilitate and maintain the city’s water and sewer infrastructure for the long term.
Staff sent notices to all affected property owners and customers per state law. At the hearing, staff will tabulate the results of protests received and, if a majority protest is not received, approve the five-year water and sewer rate increase effective Jan. 1, 2024.
The increased replacement and rehabilitation of the water and sewer system pipes and components are estimated to cost $45 million over the next five years. Current and future inflationary costs are also impacting the CIP, as well as all operational costs for materials, supplies, labor and electricity. The cost of pumping groundwater and purchasing imported water also continues to increase.
If approved, water and sewer rate adjustments will commence on Jan. 1, 2024, and will adjust annually on Jan. 1 of each subsequent year. The total amount of a customer’s bill will depend on the amount of water consumed. Based on the typical single-family residential customer with a 5/8-inch metered connection and consuming 10 HCF per month, the bills will increase approximately $4.77 per month for water and $2.20 per month for sewer services, per household, for the first year. After that, the average rate increase for water will be $5.50 in 2025, and $6 for the next three years. For sewer, the average rate increase will be $2.50 in 2025, $3 in 2026, and $3.50 in 2027 and 2028.
Rate studies were previously completed in 2017 for sewer and 2019 for water.
Earlier in the regular meeting, during the consent calendar (items considered routine and usually voted in one motion without discussion unless a councilmember pulls the item), council will consider declaring a portion of city-owned property at the Balboa Yacht Basin as surplus land.
At the June 13 study session, staff provided an overview of the BYB property. The BYB was constructed in the late 1940s, and is a mixed-use property with a marina, shipyard and other commercial uses.
According to the staff report, the improvements on a portion of the BYB have reached the end of their useful life and require a significant investment to continue operating and generating revenue. At the June meeting, council directed staff to solicit proposals to ground lease and redevelop a portion of the BYB. To do that, the city must comply with the Surplus Lands Act and approve a resolution declaring a portion of the BYB as surplus. A notice of availability and a request for proposals will subsequently be issued to identify potential partners for redevelopment of the property.
The council agenda is available online here. The study session starts at 4 p.m., followed by the closed session, and the regular meeting at 6:30 p.m.
The meeting can be watched live on the local NBTV channel (Spectrum 3 or Cox 852) or on the city’s website here.
Members of the public may speak in person in council chambers (there is not a remote or online option to participate).
Questions and comments can be submitted in writing for City Council consideration by sending them to the city clerk at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. To give the council adequate time to review comments, submit any written comments by 5 p.m. on November 13 (the day before the City Council meeting). Correspondence received by this deadline will be uploaded to the agenda packet by November 13 at 5:30 p.m. and can be viewed here.
Material received after the deadline and prior to 2 p.m. on November 14 (the day of the meeting) will be provided to the council in hard copy and will be available to the public at the meeting.
~~~~~~~~
Sara Hall covers City Hall and is a regular contributor to Stu News Newport.