HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit 5Exhibit No. 5
Sound Wall Analysis
Prepared by BonTerra Consulting
5.1 Op
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Walt Analysis
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN MASTER PLAN UPDATE
SOUND WALL PROJECT DESIGN FEATURE ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND
The primary source of noise at the Hoag loading dock is the arrival and departure of trucks.
Additional noise sources include a box crusher, trash compactor, and sterilizer. Hoag limits the
hours of access to the loading dock and West Hoag Drive (the road that runs along the western
side of the Upper Campus); gates are closed at 8:00 PM and open at 7:00 AM. This restriction
limits the loading dock noise to the hours when persons are generally considered less sensitive
to noise.
A noise study was prepared as a part of the Hoag Master Plan Update Draft EIR. On average,
three trucks arrived and then departed the loading dock in an hour with six trucks occurring
during the busiest hour (8:30 AM to 9:30 AM). In addition to trucks arriving and departing the
loading dock, general activity in the loading dock area also generates noise. This includes
handling of materials being delivered, backup beepers, and speech communication. General
traffic (i.e., non - delivery traffic) traveling on West Hoag Drive also contributes substantially to
the noise environment. The most significant noise event is trash removal. A truck arrives at the
loading dock, backs up to the trash compactor, and then pulls the compactor unit onto the back
of the truck (similar to the removal of a large trash dumpster), and drives away. The empty trash
compactor is returned to the site some time later. Hoag has indicated that this occurs every
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.
Existing Hoag loading dock activities exceed the City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance limits
on a regular basis. It should be noted that Final EIR No. 142 was certified and the PC Text and
Development Agreement between the City and Hoag approved prior to the City's Noise
Ordinance going into effect. By increasing the development at the Upper Campus, the proposed
project could result in an additional activity at the loading dock. However, a substantial increase
due to the proposed project is not expected when compared to buildout of Hoag consistent with
the existing Master Plan because overall activity level at Hoag would be the same.
The primary source of noise at the dock is from delivery trucks. While more delivery truck visits
to the loading dock could occur with the buildout of the Master Plan, it is likely that increased
deliveries would be accommodated through larger loads in a similar number of trucks. An
increase in the number of trucks is not expected to result in an increase in noise levels
generated by the loading dock but would instead increase the frequency of high noise levels
generated by truck activity. The Master Plan Update Draft EIR notes that activities in the loading
dock area currently and are expected to continue to exceed the noise limits contained in the
Noise Ordinance. Currently, the loading dock does not meet the levels established by the Noise
Ordinance for Zone III — Mixed Use category (60 dBA [Leq] or 80 dBA [Lmax] during the
daytime) which is the applicable standard for the condominiums adjacent to Hoag.
The Hoag Master Plan Update Draft EIR addressed options to mitigate for existing and future
noise in the loading dock area including a sound wall at the property line and a cover over the
loading dock area; the latter is still not considered feasible due to its limited effectiveness in
reducing noise levels'. The Draft EIR noted that a sound wall could be constructed along Hoag's
westerly property line to reduce noise levels at the residences. However, the geometry in this
area is not favorable for the construction of a 'traditional" sound wall (e.g., cinder block wall). It
has been calculated that the sound wall would need to be at least 25.5 feet high to provide the
' Testimony of Fred Greve, Mestre Greve Associates, to the Planning Commission on February 7, 2008.
5.3 kt�
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Anarysls
8 dB noise reduction to bring the loading dock noise into compliance with the Noise Ordinance.
The Draft EIR determined that a traditional wall would likely not be feasible due the height, cost,
construction impacts, as well as residents may not support a sound wall this tall and close to
their homes as many windows and balconies would look directly at a solid block wall.
Several other measures were recommended to provide some improvement in the noise levels
associated with the loading dock area including balcony barriers and window upgrades at
affected condominium units in Villa Balboa. These measures would achieve a noise reduction
but would be subject to homeowner and Homeowner Association approvals, if applicable.
The City and Hoag have continued to meet with the affected homeowners to address noise
measures. Because the owners of the Villa Balboa condominiums affected by loading dock -
related noise may not desire modifications to their condominiums, at the directive of the City
Council and Planning Commission, City staff and Hoag pursued additional mitigation options.
SOUND WALL PROJECT DESIGN FEATURE
At the February 7, 2008 Planning Commission hearing, the City discussed the option of a sound
wall using a wall system called Sound Fighter® LSE Wall System. Sound Fighter® is a
lightweight, sound absorbing wall system constructed with high - density polyethylene units which
stack and interlock to the desired height. According to the manufacturer, the modules are locked
in place at each end by vertical steel 4 -inch "H" beam columns. The modules are perforated on
one side and the cavity is filled with an acoustic media and 1/2 -inch thick acoustical barrier board.
The modules are stacked and interlocked to the desired wall height. Walls can be constructed
up to 35 feet in height; the depth of the wall is approximately 6 inches.
City staff, in consultation with Mestre Greve Associates, has determined that the construction of
a sound wall using the specified materials provided by this manufacturer (or a different
manufacture with a wall system with same sound attenuating qualities and construction
implementation attributes) is feasible. As such, Hoag is proposing the implementation of this
sound wall as a Project Design Feature for the Hoag Master Plan Update Project.
City staff is recommending the inclusion of the following Project Design Feature wording into the
Hoag Master Plan Update Project:
PDF 3.4 -2 Within 12 months following approval of the Master Plan Update Project by
the City of Newport Beach and the expiration of any appeals, statute of
limitations or referendum periods for challenging any of the Project
approvals and subject to the City's issuance of a building permit, the
Applicant shall have constructed a sound wall of approximately 325 linear
feet along West Hoag Drive within the boundaries of the Applicant's
property. The sound wall would be constructed adjacent to Hoag Drive and
set back approximately 3 to 6.5 feet from the edge of the existing curb. The
sound wall shall range in height from approximately 17 to 23 feet between
West Hoag Drive and the 280 Cagney Lane condominium building; and
approximately 18.5 feet at the 260 Cagney Lane condominium. The
location of the sound wall is provided in Exhibit 1. The sound wall shall be
constructed using the Sound Fighter LSE Wall System (or a sound wall
system with the same sound attenuation capability and construction
implementation capability).
5.4
9A Exhibit 1
LEGEND
A
s R Existing Fence
0
Properly Line
Easement Line
----- - - - - -- 18.5'HighWall
- - 23' High Wall
\ -- --- --- - -- 17' High Wall
\ NOTE: Sound WaA beigt measured from
adjacent roadway surface.
ul \ 2A
noy C u65
CONC
o
4SPH
\ 5-
1� g
0\ o
o�
V&
n
y A
Nv
21745
s coxc a ` •. 80501
j� 57.E
SOUND WALL SECTION LOCATION PLAN
5.5
HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN March March ii, 2008 0 30 ge
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbytenan Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Anatvsis
To the maximum degree feasible, the sound wall shall be constructed to
retain existing vegetation which serves as a visual screen. Vegetation that
is required to be removed associated with installation of the sound wall
shall be replaced in -kind with specimen plant material as designated on a
landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect.
The plan shall be subject to review by the Villa Balboa Community
Association, and review and approval by the City.
The Applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping
within the property boundaries of Hoag. Any future modifications made to
the sound wall and /or landscaping shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Director.
If the removal of vegetation is scheduled to proceed between March 1 and
July 31, no more than seven days prior to the onset of construction
activities that would impact trees associated with the sound wall, a qualified
Biologist shall conduct a pre - construction bird nesting survey for the trees
scheduled for removal to determine the presence of any active bird nest. If
an active bird nest is found, the tree cannot be removed until the nest is
deemed no longer occupied by the qualified Biologist. If no active nests are
found, tree removal may commence. Trees removed anytime between
August 1 and February 28 do not require any nesting bird surveys, or
corresponding avoidance measures for nesting bird species.
As noted in recommended Project Design Feature 3.4 -2, Hoag would be responsible for the
construction of the sound wall within the property limits. The setback distance from the West
Hoag Drive curb varies to avoid existing underground utilities and minimize effects on existing
vegetation. The sound wall varies in height from approximately 17 to 23 feet between West
Hoag Drive and the 280 Cagney Lane condominium building (southern building); and
approximately 18.5 feet at the 260 Cagney Lane condominium building (northern building).
280 Cagney Lane is a three -story building with condomiums units on three levels. 260 Cagney
Lane is a four -story building with condominium units on the upper three levels and tuck -under
parking on the first level. Exhibit 1 depicts the proposed sound wall in relationship to the existing
condominium buildings, Hoag's property line, and the existing fencing between Villa Balboa and
Hoag.
The 17- foot -high wall segment would be approximately 60 linear feet; the 23- foot -high wall
segment would be approximately 140 linear feet; and the 18.5- foot -high wall segment would
approximately 118 linear feet (rounded total to approximately 325 linear feet).
Four cross sections have been prepared to conceptually show the relationship of the proposed
sound wall to the 280 Cagney Lane and 260 Cagney Lane condominium buildings. Cross
Sections A, B, BB, and C (Exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively) correspond to the cross section
locations identified on Exhibit 1. Cross Section A (Exhibit 2) is taken at 280 Cagney Lane within
the 17- foot -high section of the sound wall. At this location, the proposed sound wall would be
located approximately 52 feet from the condominium building. Existing vegetation in this location
exceeds the height of the proposed sound wall. Cross Section B (Exhibit 3) is taken from
280 Cagney Lane, north of Cross Section A within the 17- foot -high section of the sound wall. At
this location, the sound wall would be located approximately 39 feet from the condominium
building. Existing vegetation in this location is of a similar height to the sound wall. Cross
Section BB (Exhibit 4) is taken near the northern end of the 280 Cagney Lane building within the
23- foot -high section of the proposed sound wall. At this location, the sound wall would be
located approximately 21 feet from the condominium building. Existing vegetation is of a similar
5.7 /
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Analysis
height to the proposed sound wall. Section C (Exhibit 5) is taken from 260 Cagney Lane within
the 18.5- foot -high section of the sound wall. At this location, the sound wall would be located
approximately 17 feet from the condominium building. Existing vegetation in this location is taller
than the proposed height of the sound wall.
Installation
It is anticipated that sound wall construction would take approximately 4 to 6 weeks inclusive of
landscaping.
Sound Wall Footings: The installation of the proposed sound wall would require the placement
of 30- inch - diameter (approximate) concrete footings at six -foot intervals on center. The bottom
of the sound wall does not rest on grade but is elevated several inches (as determined by the
Acoustical Engineers) above the existing natural grade. The Sound Fighter system does not
require the typical continuous concrete spread footings seen on most walls or sound walls. The
system would allow for the retention of existing grades and contours, with grading limited to
minor precise grading adjustments at the location of each concrete footing. No cut or fill is
expected, with export limited to the soil removed as required to accommodate the new footings.
Excavated soil from the footing would not be retained on the site.
Landscape Materials: To the maximum degree feasible, the sound wall would be constructed
to retain existing vegetation which serves as a visual screen. Along West Hoag Drive, existing
vegetation ranges in height with the majority being between 25 feet and 32 feet with a smaller
portion at 18 feet; this vegetation is located with the property boundaries of Hoag and is
dominated by non - native ornamental landscaping. The most common plant species include
Ficus ( Ficus sp.), Acacia (Acacia sp.), yellow plum pine (Podocarpus macrophyllus), cape
honeysuckle (Tecomaria capensis), Oleander (Nerium oleander), asparagus fern (Asparagus
sp.), mock orange (Choisya ternate), gum (Eucalyptus sp.), and ivy (Hedera sp.).
The estimate of the existing trees to be affected by installation of the proposed sound wall along
the west edge of West Hoag Drive is provided below by sound wall segment. Overall,
approximately 72 linear feet (22 percent) of the 325 linear feet of existing trees would be
removed.
The 17 -foot -high (approximately 60 linear feet) wall segment (closest to 280 Cagney
Lane) would require the removal of approximately 12 linear feet of the existing tree line.
Approximately 80 percent of the trees would be retained along this segment of the
proposed sound wall.
The 23- foot -high (approximately 140 linear feet) wall segment (closest to 280 Cagney
Lane) would require the removal of approximately 42 linear feet of the existing tree line.
Approximately 70 percent of the existing trees would be retained along this segment of
the proposed sound wall.
• The 18.5- foot -high (approximately 118 linear feet) wall segment (closest to 260 Cagney
Lane) would require the removal of approximately 18 linear feet of the existing tree line.
Approximately 85 percent of the existing trees would be retained along this segment of
the proposed sound wall.
The installation of replacement and additional plant material would require the removal of soil as
necessary to accommodate the root ball and plant pit size specified by the Landscape Architect.
Any native soil not used in the backfill mix (as specified) would be removed from the site,
with each tree placed as necessary to minimize any disruption to the existing adjacent natural
Exhibit 2
0
x
63
9
� V
E�
i'
fv
W
3
y
v
m
0
v�
0
S c
�U
e
E
w
f
W
m
4
C
O
S
s
0
a
0
x
om
Exhibit 3
e
E
e�
�a
G—
9
e
a V 3
3
J
cv
m
.y
m
.e
s
s`
�K
m�
D
N
R
C
O a
W
•II m
v a
Y
v �
O a
� o
x
Boa
5.11
Exhibit 4
0
LL_
�m
E ►°�
le
gv
s+
4
co
e
s
e
W=
€r
mg
E
e
w
.a
r
m
c
2
*+ g
V
t d
CL
.v a
�+ C
S
J
cQ
i
o�
y 0
S
16\
5.13
Exhibit 5
w
S
0
1p
C �
r 6i
!8
i-
F
m
C
yO_
T
N1
Ic
v
YI
Go
_e
C
V
m 6
m U
� M
S
8
N
F�1
a
Y
W
Z
m
d
a
H
O
2
J
S
m
0
W
a
tQ3
O
S
lb�'
5.15
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Analysis
grades. Staking will be required for a short period of time. As with the footings, no cut or fill is
anticipated as part of the landscaping. Plant material on the east (Hoag) side of the proposed
wall would be removed to avoid conflict with the wall.
Vegetation that is required to be removed associated with installation of the sound wall would be
replaced in -kind with specimen plant material as designated on a landscape and irrigation plan
prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect. City staff is recommending that the landscape plan
be subject to review by the Villa Balboa Community Association, with review and approval by
the General Services, Planning, and Public Works Departments. All landscape plans for Hoag
currently require review and approval by these three departments.
Sidewalks and Curbs and Gutters: The existing concrete sidewalks and curb and gutter along
the west side of West Hoag Drive would remain, with no changes to the natural grade. The
sidewalk along the east (Hoag) side of the proposed sound wall would be extended following
existing natural grade to a point at the northern limits of the loading dock. No cut or fill is
anticipated; any import would be limited to provide a compacted base as specified by the Civil
Engineer. All water runoff would be directed to the existing curb and gutter.
CEQA ANALYSIS
An analysis of the potential effects of the proposed sound wall Project Design Feature is
provided below.
Land Use and Related Planning Program
The Master Plan Update SEIR found that implementation of development on the Upper Campus
under the Master Plan Update Project scenario would have no greater or different land use
effect than the existing Master Plan analyzed in the 1992 Final EIR No. 142. Final EIR No. 142
found that the Master Plan project would result in a significant and unavoidable land use impact
on residential units located directly adjacent to the western buildings of the Upper Campus.
Although setback limits for Hoag were more stringent than City Code, the placement of hospital
buildings closer to residential units located to the west of the Upper Campus was identified as a
significant impact when considered in combination with shade and shadow and noise impacts in
this location.
Consistent with the conclusions of Final EIR No. 142, the Final SEIR finds that the Master Plan
Update Project would also result in significant impacts to existing residential development west
of the Upper Campus. However, the amendment to the Master Plan would not make these
impacts more severe. Rather, the construction of a sound wall in the loading dock area of Hoag
as a part of the Master Plan Update Project would reduce noise impacts at the condominiums
west of Hoag. Therefore, the proposed project's land use impact when considered in
combination with shade and shadow and noise impacts in this location would be reduced when
compared to the existing Master Plan. However, this impact would remain significant and
unavoidable.
Transportation and Circulation
Final EIR No. 142 found that all traffic impacts could be mitigated to a level considered less than
significant. No new significant traffic impacts have been identified associated with the proposed
Master Plan Update Project. Consistent with the conclusions of Final EIR No. 142, the proposed
project's contribution and all project- specific cumulative traffic, circulation, and parking impacts
can be mitigated to a level considered less than significant.
5.17 `6
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Analysis
The Master Plan Update SEIR also addressed construction activities. During construction
activities, there are typically temporary increases in truck trips in the project area. All
construction activities would be staged on Hoag's property. Because of the construction process
associated with this sound wall system, construction - related traffic would be minimal.
Construction- related traffic control measures identified in the Master Plan Update Final EIR
would address any potential traffic construction effects. Mitigation Measure 101 requires a
construction phasing and traffic control plan that identifies the estimated number of truck trips
and measures to assist truck trips and truck movement in and out of the local street system.
Mitigation Measure 103 requires the Applicant to provide advance written notice of temporary
traffic disruptions to affected area business and the public.
Air Quality
Consistent with the findings of Final EIR No. 142 for the existing Hoag Master Plan Project, the
Master Plan Update Final EIR finds the proposed project would result in air pollutant emissions
that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) construction
thresholds. The mitigation program included in the Final EIR would reduce construction- related
emissions but not to a level considered less than significant. The installation of the proposed
sound wall would not result in air quality impacts beyond that addressed in the Final EIR. Air
quality emissions would be limited to excavation for the sound wall footings and
removal /installation of landscaping materials. Construction vehicle emissions would be limited
and within the assumptions set forth in the EIR.
With respect to potential effects on localized wind conditions in this location, the predominant
wind direction is shown on Exhibit 6. According to wind data collected at John Wayne Airport,
wind blows from a direction within the blue angle shown on the exhibit, 57.5 percent of the time.
The blue angle roughly shows the wind predominantly coming from the south to the west -
southwest quadrant. The wind is calm approximately 14 percent of the time and is from other
directions the remaining time.
The wind data shows that the wind normally would be directed towards the western end of the
gap between the 280 and 260 Cagney Lane buildings. However, the exhibit also shows that this
gap is blocked by another Villa Balboa building. The eastern end of the gap between the 260
and 280 Cagney buildings is obstructed by the Hoag West Tower. Additionally, existing
vegetation ranges in height with the majority being between 25 feet and 32 feet with a smaller
portion at 18 feet. This vegetation currently blocks most of the winds that might come through
the gap. It is likely that little wind works it way through the gap between the buildings due to the
density of the foliage. More likely is that the majority of wind is forced to rise over the buildings
that lie to the west. The majority of wind would need to stay elevated to pass over the multi-
storied structures of Hoag Hospital.
While some breezes are present, it is unlikely that the proposed sound wall would alter
significantly the wind patterns or wind strength in this area. The buildings in the area are much
larger than the proposed sound wall and would continue to be the dominant factor in
determining the wind patterns in the area. Additionally, existing vegetation along the property
line currently has similar wind blocking and wind steering properties as the proposed sound wall
given the identical location of the proposed sound wall. Therefore, breezes that are present from
the south between the 260 and 280 Cagney Lane buildings and the existing vegetation would
not be significantly affected. Similarly, breezes that are present from the west between the 260
and 280 Cagney Lane buildings would not be significantly affected.
♦% F
� Y
r , i
J
u /
G• �
r Y
el
y l:
v
� "' If
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound WaN Analysis
Noise
Existing loading dock activities exceed the Noise Ordinance limits on a regular basis. It is
anticipated that activities in the loading dock area will continue to exceed the noise limits
contained in the Noise Ordinance. The proposed project contains exemption language to
address this issue. Within the loading dock area, vehicles would be exempt from applicable
noise standards and other loading dock area noise would be subject to limits of 65 dB (daytime)
and 55 dB (nighttime). Modification of the Planned Community Development Plan, as proposed,
would allow noise to exceed the Noise Ordinance criteria in the vicinity of the loading dock area,
even after application of the mitigation program. As such, the proposed changes to the noise
standards are identified in the Final EIR as resulting in significant and unavoidable adverse
impacts.
The proposed sound wall would, however, reduce noise levels originating in the loading dock
area from affecting residents of the 260 and 280 Cagney Lane condominiums by "absorbing"
noise into the sound wall from Hoag rather than deflecting noise. Noise originating from Villa
Balboa to the sound wall is not expected to result in any significant noise impacts due to the
distance of the proposed sound wall from the residential units, intermediate vegetation, and
existing low sound levels from residential uses. The identified sound wall system is considered
feasible and the Applicant is therefore proposing that the sound wall be constructed as a Project
Design Feature of the Master Plan Update Project.
Installation of the sound wall would result in short-term construction - related noise. This would
include soil excavation for the sound wall footings, tree cutting and trimming, stump grinding
associated with tree removal, and wall construction. Tree stump grinding rather than excavation
of trees with their associated root system would minimize effects on the health and number of
trees.
As addressed in the Master Plan Update Final EIR, construction activities within 500 feet of
residential areas has the potential to exceed the City's Noise Ordinance noise level limits.
However, the Noise Ordinance exempts construction activities from the noise level limits during
specific hours of the day. Noise - generating construction activities are permitted during the hours
between 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM Monday through Friday, between 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on
Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays or federal holidays. Construction activities are not
proposed outside these hours. Compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance is considered to
result in no significant short-term noise impacts.
Aesthetics
Final EIR No. 142 identified that the Master Plan Project would not result in significant aesthetic
or visual impacts. The Final EIR found that shade and shadow effects would contribute to a
significant unavoidable land use impact but that as an individual project effect, shade and
shadow impacts were considered less than significant. The Master Plan Update Final EIR finds
that the proposed project would not result in any significant visual impacts either prior to or after
mitigation.
As proposed, at its closest point, the sound wall would be approximately 17 feet from the
260 Cagney Lane building. However, it should be noted that there are no residential units on the
first level of the 260 Cagney Lane building because there is tuck -under parking on the first level.
The balconies on the second level of this building (first level of residences) are at an elevation
that is similar to or higher than the proposed 18.5- foot -high segment of sound wall in this
location (see Exhibit 5). Existing vegetation in this location is taller than the proposed height of
the sound wall; any removed landscaped materials would be replaced. Corresponding to the
5.21
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Analysis
other cross sections provided in this analysis, the proposed sound wall would range in distance
set back from the condominiums from 21 feet (Cross Section BB, Exhibit 4) to 52 feet (Cross
Section A, Exhibit 2).
Currently, residents with condominium units that have windows and /or balconies facing west
look out onto a landscaped area which includes the dense vegetation described in this analysis.
While this vegetation is dense and tall (typically 18 to 23 feet in height), sunlight filters through.
Because the proposed sound wall is opaque, sunlight would not be able to filter through the
wall. To preclude the perception of a dark surface behind the existing dense vegetation, it is
recommended that the proposed sound wall be constructed in a light color, such as light tan.
The sound wall can be constructed in any color specified; a light color would better emulate
existing conditions.
With respect to potential shade and shadow effects on the adjacent condominium units, the City
does not have adopted significance criteria for shade and shadow. In a recent CEQA document,
the City required that a shade study be prepared to show that "...new development will not add
shade to the designated residential areas beyond existing conditions for more than three hours
between the hours of 9 AM and 3 PM Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours
between the hours of 9 AM and 5 PM Pacific Daylight Time (see Addendum to the City of
Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Environmental Impact Report, November
2007). To provide some context for how other jurisdictions address this issue, the City of Costa
Mesa uses the following significance criteria: Cast shade or shadow onto sensitive uses in
adjacent off -site areas for more than two hours between the hours of 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM.
The shade and shadow analysis included in Final EIR No. 142 was based on a worst -case
assumption of structures in the Upper Campus built to the maximum height limits established for
the Upper Campus: Tower Zone (up to 235 feet above mean sea level) and the Midrise Zone
(up to 140 feet above mean sea level). These height limits do not change with the proposed
project. Table 4.9.13 of Final EIR No. 142 (page 4 -176) identifies for the two condomiums
buildings in Villa Balboa closest to Hoag the duration of shade under existing conditions and
future conditions. Future conditions would be applicable for both the existing and proposed
Master Plans.
TABLE 4.9.B — STRUCTURAL COVERAGE/SHADOW DURATION
Time of Year
Building Condition
Summer Solstice
Equinox
Winter Solstice
Existing
Future
Existing
Future
Existing
Future
Building AZ
8 AM
30%
35%
40%
70%
15%
85%
9 AM
5%
8%
15%
20%
5%
35%
10 AM
00%
0%
0%
0%
0%
00%
Building B
8 AM
0%
45 -50%
0%
25%
1%
30%
9 AM
0%
15%
0%
10%
0%
0%
10 AM
o%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Final EIR No. 142 noted that the existing Master Plan would result in greater morning shade and
shadow on the adjacent condominium development because of continued development within
2 Building "A" is the 260 Cagney Lane condominium building; Building 'B" is the 280 Cagney Lane
condominium building.
5.22
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Anatysis
the Tower and Midrise Zones. However, Final EIR No. 142 concluded that this would not be
considered a significant impact of the Master Plan because of the short duration during the year;
the fact that the shading effects only affect a portion of the structures during the early morning
hours; and the fact that the increased shade would not substantially limit solar energy access to
the structures (see page 4 -179).
Since the proposed project would not alter the maximum allowable height of buildings or
structures at Hoag, these potential impacts would not be different from what was previously
addressed. Applying the City of Costa Mesa's significance criteria and the City of Newport
Beach's study criteria for a recent Addendum, neither the existing Master Plan nor the proposed
project would have a significant shade /shadow impact.
As a part of this analysis of the proposed sound wall, a shade and shadow analysis was
conducted for the Summer and Winter solstice for the time periods of 8:00 AM, 10:00 AM, and
noon; see Exhibits 7 and 8, respectively. The greatest effect the sound wall would have on the
existing condominiums would be during the Winter solstice during the 8:00 AM time period;
shadows would extend across the frontage of the 260 Cagney Lane building but would have
moved away from the building by 10:00 AM. This affects is greatly less than assumed in Final
EIR No. 142 with respect to buildout of the Master Plan. As such, no significant shade /shadow
impacts are associated with the sound wall.
Biological Resources
To identify any biological constraints by the proposed construction of a soundwall, a biological
survey was conducted on February 25, 2008, by BonTerra Consulting Principal Ann Johnston.
All plant and wildlife species observed were recorded in field notes. The proposed sound wall
occurs in an area dominated by non - native, ornamental landscaping. No native plant species
were observed during the field survey. The most common plant species included Ficus, Acacia,
yellow plum pine, cape honeysuckle, Oleander, asparagus fern, mock orange, gum, and ivy. In
addition, there are several large sweet gum trees (Liquidambar sp.) on the adjacent
condominium property that have large canopies that are growing into the vegetation on the site.
Due to the presence of non - native landscape species that are actively maintained (trees and
scrubs thinned and cut back routinely), the area of the proposed sound wall is not expected to
provide extensive habitat for wildlife species. Those species that may present include species
common to urban settings such as side - blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), Anna's hummingbird
(Calypte anna), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura),
American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), European starling (Sturnus vulgaris), and California
ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyl).
The proposed sound wall location does not occur within an area that has the potential to support
special status biological resources including plants, wildlife, or regulated natural features. Due to
the lack of these resources, the proposed sound wall construction would not be subject to any
permitting processes from State or federal resource agencies. However, because a few
ornamental trees and large shrubs occur on the site that could support nesting birds, it is
recommended that the tree /large shrub removals are done outside the nesting season (typically
March 1 through July 31). This recommendation is based on recent interpretations of the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and expectations of many local and state agencies. If the
removal of vegetation is scheduled to proceed between March 1 and July 31, it is recommended
that a qualified Biologist conduct a pre - construction bird nesting survey for the trees scheduled
for removal to determine the presence of any active bird nest. If an active bird nest is found, the
tree cannot be removed until the nest is deemed no longer occupied. If no active nests are
found, tree removal may commence. Trees removed anytime between August 1 and
5.23
fib''
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update
Sound Wall Analysis
February 28 do not require any nesting bird surveys, or corresponding avoidance measures for
nesting bird species.
CEQA Determination
Implementation of this Project Design Feature would not result in any new or greater significant
effects than have already been addressed in the Master Plan Update Supplemental EIR or
whose impacts could not be mitigated to a level that is considered less than significant.
Therefore, based on CEQA Guidelines §15088.5(a), the addition of this information does not
require recirculation of the EIR. This section of the CEQA Guidelines states:
A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is
added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public
review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term
'information' can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as
additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not "significant'
unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity
to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of a project or of a feasible
way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the
project's proponents have declined to implement. "Significant new information" requiring
recirculation include, for example, a disclosure showing that:
(1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a
new mitigation proposed to be implemented.
(2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result
unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of
insignificance.
(3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from
others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental
impacts of the project, but the project's proponents decline to adopt ft.
(4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory
in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded
(Mountain Lion Coalition v. Fish & Game Com. (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 1043).
5.24
t
W
\
§ i
/ e
Y /
G
� / O
pO N
1 3
P2.A 1
� a
lip
u � t
/
/ � e
i�
iY
Imilli
1
L
E
E
vi
L.
0
co
3
0
.0
s
co
N
N
�b�
W
dool�
Imilli
1
L
E
E
vi
L.
0
co
3
0
.0
s
co
N
N
�b�
co
s
W
�x m
/
j
/
o
�
a
/
P
�
�
y : .6� ='per
✓
'.
c
�x m
/
j
p!p
Will
911g[
11E
um
/-\
L
4)
C
N
L
0
3
0
ea
t
N
\( V
/
o
�
/
N
p!p
Will
911g[
11E
um
/-\
L
4)
C
N
L
0
3
0
ea
t
N
\( V