HomeMy WebLinkAboutHoag Memorial Hospital Master Plan UpdateCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
March 6, 2008
Agenda Item 3
SUBJECT: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
Master Plan Update (PA 2007 -073)
One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California
• Certification of Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report
• General Plan Amendment No. 2007 -005
• Planned Community Development Plan Amendment No.
2007 -001
• Development Agreement Amendment No. 2007 -001
APPLICANT: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
CONTACT: James Campbell, Senior Planner
(949) 644 -3210 icampbelll(aacity.newport- beach.ca.us
INTRODUCTION
The Commission considered this project on January 31St and February 7, 2008.
During the first meeting, the project was introduced and public testimony was
received and several peripheral issues remained unresolved. At the second
meeting, discussion focused on noise, health risks associated with the
cogeneration facility, landscaping of the Lower Campus and lighting of the Lower
Campus.
Hoag has conducted a meeting with residents of Villa Balboa regarding the noise
mitigation strategies proposed at the February meeting. As a result of the
discussions related to noise and landscaping, Hoag has modified their requested
amendment of the Hoag Planned Community text (Exhibit #1).
Hoag has not conducted a meeting with Villa Balboa residents regarding the
cogeneration facility as the City study of the efficacy of modifying the facility to
abate emissions is not complete.
The City Attorney's office has provided a current draft of the proposed
amendment of the Development Agreement for the Commission's consideration
(Exhibit #2).
DATION
Conduct a public hearing and continue this item to March 20, 2008.
Hoag Master Plan Update
March 6, 2008
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Planned Community Text Changes
Exhibit #1 is the updated amendment of the Hoag PC text in an underline and
s#ti __
keeet format with the most recent changes from the prior draft
The recent changes will be discussed below.
1. Changes to Section VX - Internal Circulation
As noted in the January 31, 2008, staff report, Section VX (Internal Circulation)
requires the implementation of a "pilot program" that controls the usage of
service roads during non - working hours. Staff rejected Hoag's suggested
language and proposed the following:
"The project sponsor shall continue to limit the use of that portion of West Hoag Drive
adjacent to residential uses located on the Upper Campus. Except in emergency
situations, deliveries to loading areas shall not be scheduled after 8:00 PM or before
7:00 AM daily. The project sponsor shall physically restrict access to the roadway
between these hours and appropriate signage indicating permitted delivery hours and
access limitations shall be installed and maintained at all times. Deliveries and vehicular
access to loading area located along West Hoag Drive are allowed in emergency
situations where critical supplies or materials are necessary for the continued operation
of the hospital."
Hoag now suggests the following:
"The project sponsor shall continue to limit the use of that portion of West Hoag Drive
adjacent to residential uses located on the Upper Campus. Deliveries to loading areas
shall not be scheduled after 8:00 PM or before 7:00 AM daily. The project sponsor shall
physically restrict access to the roadway between these hours and appropriate signage
indicating permitted delivery hours and access limitations shall be installed and
maintained at all times. Night time deliveries and vehicular access to the loading area
located along West Hoag Drive are allowed where critical supplies, services or materials
are necessary for the continued operation of the hospital."
Staff does not object to the suggested change.
2. Changes to Section V.L — Loading Dock
As noted in the January 31, 2008, staff report, this section required modification
and staff suggested changing "should" and "may" within the second sentence to
"shall" and "will." With Hoag's proposal to install a noise barrier or sound
attenuation wall, the language could read:
"The project sponsor shall provide a sound wall along West Hoag Drive as shown in the
approximate location on Exhibit 4, please refer to Section Vlll, D. for landscaping
requirements related to the sound wall. Mitigation measures to reduce the noise levels in
Z
Hoag Master Plan Update
March 6, 2008
Page 3
the Loading Dock Area shall be incorporated into the design and operations of the hospital,
such mitigation will include relocation of the trash compactor and baler, limiting the hours of
truck deliveries to the loading dock area, enclosure of the trash compactor, use of acoustic
panels, etc."
This language would require Hoag to install the sound wall as presented at the
February 7, 2008, meeting by Fred Greve, the noise consultant hired by the City
to prepare the noise analysis for the SEIR. The approximate location is depicted
on a map exhibit that will be part of the PC text, which is the same location
exhibit presented at the meeting by Mr. Greve. It also makes a reference to
Section VIII, D for landscaping requirements, which is reflective of Hoag's desire to
screen the wall to soften its appearance.
The installation of the wall would be on Hoag's property on the Villa Balboa side of
the 25 to 32 foot high row of trees that presently separates West Hoag Drive and
the loading dock from Villa Balboa. The dense row of trees would need to be
trimmed back on the Villa Balboa side to accommodate the wall and the existing
trees will provide an effective screen of the wall on the Hoag side. As noted, Hoag
will plant sufficient landscaping on the Villa Balboa side of the wall for screening
purposes.
Hoag met with roughly 20 residents of Villa Balboa on February 23, 2008, to
discuss the sound wall and issues related to it. Residents and owners of 260 and
280 Cagney Lane (the closest two buildings) were invited to participate.
Absentee owners were mailed notices and were informed where to obtain
additional information should they so choose. Staff, Mr. Greve and
Councilmember Rosansky observed and participated in the informational
discussion. Hoag provided story poles to show the approximate location and
height of the wall and the group inspected the area. Varying comments were
heard ranging from support to judicious concern to opposition. Concerns raised
were: loss of light, loss of air circulation, proximity of the wall to residents, wall
maintenance, loss of landscaping, replacement landscaping and landscape
maintenance. Some residents want the wall to be extended further to the north
and others wanted a more uniform height and some residents don't want the wall
at all. There is no official position by the community and testimony may augment
the debate.
It should be noted that a sound wall in this area was identified in the Draft SEIR
as infeasible and Mr. Greve, Bonterra Consulting and City staff no longer hold
that belief. Bonterra Consulting is preparing an analysis of the impact of the wall
that will be provided at the hearing for consideration.
The suggested language for Section V.L also includes a requirement that Hoag
implement several improvements to the loading dock area as identified in the
mitigation measures. That plan is in plan check presently and is nearly ready for
building permit issuance.
3
Hoag Master Plan Update
March 6, 2008
Page 4
The sound wall is part of a comprehensive mitigation strategy based upon the
mitigation measures within the SEIR and the revised PC text that Hoag has
agreed to implement, which will significantly reduce noise. Those measures are:
1. Mechanical equipment upgrades and equipment enclosures on the roof of the
ancillary building.
2. Closure of openings or the installation of sound attenuating louvers on the
West Tower.
3. Upgrades to the loading dock area including the enclosure of equipment and
the installation of sound absorbing panels.
4. New windows, balcony barriers and in some cases wall upgrades for those
units with cedar siding. These features would be implemented for those units
that are not protected by the sound wall. Should no sound wall is be
constructed, all the units within 260 and 280 Cagney Lane that face Hoag and
several units that face the gap between them as determined by the noise
consultant will be offered these upgrades.
The primary noise source at night is mechanical equipment and the noise will be
reduced to 55 dBA. The primary noise source during the day is vehicle noise and
loading dock activities are also a factor. The most effective solution the City's
noise consultant could devise, from a noise perspective, is the proposed sound
wall. As noted by the noise consultant during the February 7, 2008, hearing,
enclosing the loading dock was examined and it was found to provide inferior
noise attenuation to the proposed soundwall as vehicle noise would not be
addressed fully. Lastly, enclosing the loading dock would exceed the cost of the
sound wall and as such, enclosing the loading dock as potentially envisioned by
the PC text is not recommended.
3. Changes to Section V. M — Noise Standards
The February 7, 2008, staff report mistakenly describes the applicability of the
existing noise limit within the PC text. On Page 8 it indicates that mechanical
equipment noise is regulated and on Page 17 the reports indicates that all noise
cannot exceed 55 decibels (dB) at Hoag property lines. Neither of these
references is correct. The existing provision reads as follows:
"New mechanical appurtenances on building rooftops and utility vaults, excluding
communications devices on the Upper Campus shall be screened from view in a manner
compatible with building materials. Rooftop mechanical appurtenances or utility vaults
shall be screened on the Lower Campus. Noise shall not exceed 55 dBA at all property
lines. No new mechanical appurtenances may exceed the building height limitations as
defined in these district regulations."
Although the third sentence does not indicate the regulated noise source, the
provision is read in the context of the paragraph and, therefore, the regulated
`1
Hoag Master Plan Update
March 6, 2008
Page 5
noise source is new mechanical appurtenances on building rooftops and utility
vaults. As noted in the prior report, Hoag is suggesting the elimination of the 55
dBA noise standard. Noise would then be limited by Chapter 10.26 (Community
Noise Control) except for the loading dock area where Hoag is requesting a
higher limit. The current limit applicable in this case as measured at the
residences are:
Hoag had previously requested the following limits to be measured at the
property line rather than at the residences:
7AM -10 PM
Daytime
10 PM- 7AM
Nighttime
Le 15 min
60 dBA
50 dBA
Hoag had previously requested the following limits to be measured at the
property line rather than at the residences:
If the sound wall noted above is installed, these previously proposed limits will
not be necessary and Hoag has amended their request as follows:
7AM -10PM
Daytime
10PM -7AM
Ni httime
Le 15 min
70 dBA
58 dBA
If the sound wall noted above is installed, these previously proposed limits will
not be necessary and Hoag has amended their request as follows:
It must be noted that although Hoag is suggesting a higher noise limit than the
Municipal Code, existing noise levels experienced by residents will be reduced to
or below the proposed limits with the implementation of the mitigation measures
identified in the SERI and the proposed sound wall. Additional noise attenuation
is not possible without resorting to an extremely high noise barrier (37 feet in
some cases) and identifying a noise standard that can actually be achieved will
avoid a perpetual violation.
In addition to the change in the requested noise standards, Hoag sought to
exempt vehicle noise and noise from activities occurring at the loading dock.
Hoag has revised their requests to exempt only noise vehicle noise with the
following provision:
`Within the Loading Dock Area, during daytime hours, vehicles shall be exempt from
applicable noise standards as listed above."
There in no practical way for Hoag to control vehicle noise other than to close the
road entirely.
Hoag also plans to control vehicle idling with the following provision:
7AM -10 PM
Daytime
10 PM -7AM
Nighttime
L 15 min
65 dBA
55 dBA
It must be noted that although Hoag is suggesting a higher noise limit than the
Municipal Code, existing noise levels experienced by residents will be reduced to
or below the proposed limits with the implementation of the mitigation measures
identified in the SERI and the proposed sound wall. Additional noise attenuation
is not possible without resorting to an extremely high noise barrier (37 feet in
some cases) and identifying a noise standard that can actually be achieved will
avoid a perpetual violation.
In addition to the change in the requested noise standards, Hoag sought to
exempt vehicle noise and noise from activities occurring at the loading dock.
Hoag has revised their requests to exempt only noise vehicle noise with the
following provision:
`Within the Loading Dock Area, during daytime hours, vehicles shall be exempt from
applicable noise standards as listed above."
There in no practical way for Hoag to control vehicle noise other than to close the
road entirely.
Hoag also plans to control vehicle idling with the following provision:
Hoag Master Plan Update
March 6, 2008
Page 6
"Non - refrigerated delivery trucks will be instructed not to idle on West Hoag Drive as
they are queuing to enter the Loading Dock Area."
Staff is concerned that this provision is insufficient for several reasons. Even with
the proposed sound wall, vehicles could idle at the loading dock. Vehicles should
not stop and idle while on West Hoag Drive in any event as this impedes vehicle
circulation and the roadway is a designated fire lane. Any vehicles queuing for
the loading dock space should wait at a more appropriate location. Idling should
not be permitted in the loading dock area at all except for refrigerated trucks that
must idle to maintain necessary refrigeration. The most effective solution is to
prohibit idling in the loading dock area and on West Hoag Drive with the
exception of refrigerated trucks at the loading dock. It would be Hoag's
responsibility to properly manage the loading dock area and staff does not
recommend additional regulations to define how it is to be accomplished. Staff
recommends the following language to replace Hoag's suggested language:
"Vehicle idling shall be prohibited on West Hoag Drive and within the loading dock areas,
except that refrigerated vehicles may idle while at the loading docks when refrigeration is
necessary."
4. Changes to Section VIII — Hoag Hospital Landscape Regulations
There are two areas for change. First, additional landscaping is proposed to
screen or soften facilities located on the Lower Campus. A specific list and
schedule of the enhancements was included in the February 7, 2008, staff report.
Secondly, a new provision is proposed to ensure that the proposed sound wall is
also screened. The applicant's suggested language is below with a suggested
edits by staff noted in.
"Replace and enhance existing trees, shrubs and groundcover in areas altered by the
planned Lower Campus utility upgrade project to improve and unify Hoag landscaping
along the West Coast Highway frontage and to screen parking areas, buildings or other
structures. Installation would occur within 90 days after underground utility installation."
"To enhance visual quality, safety and erosion control along the Lower Campus, the
north slope above the Lower Campus retaining wall will be regraded to allow shrubs, and
ground cover, and a new irrigation system will be installed."
"Plantings and irrigation are to be maintained in accordance with the approved plans."
Approximately 870 linear feet of green screen (consisting of .......Z shall W#I be installed
along the Pasi€is West Coast Highway frontage of Hoag's property west of the signalized
intersection that provides vehicular access to the Lower Campus to assist in the pro vide
screening of views of the west parking lot buildings or other structures from PaeifisWest
Coast Highway."
"The project sponsor shall provide a sound wall along West Hoag Drive in the approximate
location as shown on Exhibit 4. Existing landscaping on Villa Balboa's side of the wall shall
Hoag Master Plan Update
March 6, 2008
Page 7
be preserved to the extent feasible or replaced with specimen plant material as designated
on a plan to be approved by the Planning Director after consultation with the Villa Balboa
Community Association. Any future modifications made to said wall and landscaping lanan
shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director."
Amended Development Agreement
The current draft of the proposed amendment of the Development Agreement is
attached as Exhibit #2. The principal differences are such that the previously
contemplated provisions related to noise and landscaping have been removed
and provisions to address those issues are proposed within the PC text. Hoag
has dropped their request to waive an administrative fee for the City to issue
revenue bonds and the term of the agreement is not proposed to be extended
past the present term that expires in 2019.
Environmental Review
As noted in the prior report, the City certified the Hoag Hospital Master Plan Final
EIR No. 142 in 1992 for the Hoag Hospital Master Plan allowing for up to
1,343,238 sq. ft. of uses at Hoag, inclusive of the Upper and Lower Campuses.
The City has prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act to evaluate the
proposed project.
The principal project feature that could cause a physical change to the
environment are the proposed changes to the General Plan, Planned Community
Development Plan and Development agreement that would allow Hoag to
reallocate up to 225,000 gross sq. ft. of entitled, but un -built building area from
the Lower Campus to the Upper Campus. The current maximum gross building
area allowable on the Upper Campus is 765,349 sq. ft. with 67,228 sq. ft.
remaining to be constructed. The current maximum gross building area allowable
on the Lower Campus is 577,889 sq. ft. with 389,740 sq. ft. remaining to be
constructed. Again, up to 225,000 sq. ft. of Lower Campus entitlement could be
constructed on the Upper Campus.
The SEIR evaluates the potential impacts of such a physical change and
concludes that there would be no greater impact than that identified in the prior
SEIR. A more complete summary is contained within the January 31, 2008, staff
report. Responses to comments received during the comment period have been
prepared for consideration, made available for public comment and were
transmitted to the Commission with the January staff report.
Several letters were submitted just prior to or at the January 31, 2008, hearing
and staff and Bonterra Consulting, the preparer of the SEIR, have reviewed the
late comments and believe they do not present any significant new information
that would invalidate the findings of the SEIR. Staff may present additional
Hoag Master Plan Update
March 6, 2008
Page 8
responses at the next meeting for clarification. Additional comments were made
during the prior hearings related to a concern that the cogeneration facility could
pose a health risk. During the February 7, 2008, hearing, John Pehrson of CDM,
the preparer of the Health Risk assessment for the SEIR, testified that the facility
emissions will remain below SCAQMD thresholds and that health risks due to
Legionella, a bacteria that can cause legionnaires disease, are insignificant with
standard maintenance and operation of the facility.
The suggested changes to the PC text that would lead to a physical change to
the environment (sound wall, additional landscaping, etc.) are being evaluated
and the results of that analysis will be presented at the next hearing for public
review. The changes to the Amended Development Agreement do not represent
any potential physical change to the environment. Staff will prepare suggested
findings recommending certification of the SEIR to the City Council if advisable
for the next hearing.
SUMMARY
Staff believes a viable and effective noise mitigation program has been identified.
It is not known at this time whether residents of Villa Balboa desire the sound
wall. Hoag could build the wall entirely on their property; however, community
acceptance is desirable. The project including the recent changes to the PC text
and Amended Development Agreement can be supported provided that the
Commission determined that the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and
any additional supplemental analysis is adequate. Lastly, cogeneration facility
emissions are currently being investigated and the findings of that review will be
presented at the next Planning Commission hearing.
EXHIBITS
Submitted by:
David Lepo, Plan n' Director
1. Revised Planned Community Text
2. Revised Amended Development Agreement
i