Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL EXPANSION_DEIR_197911111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 *NEW FILE* Hoag Memorial Hospital Expansion_DEIR_1979 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL EXPANSION n Prepared for: City of Newport Beach Department of Community Development 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 Prepared by: WESTEC Services, Inc. 180 East Main Street, Suite 150 Tustin, California 92680 (714) 838-4644 May, 1979 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page INTRODUCTION 1 1.0 DETAILED.PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3 1.1 Project Location 3 1.2 Project Objectives 3 1.3 Project Characteristics 8 2.0 SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACT AND PROPOSED MITIGATION 13 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 15 3.1 Land Use 15 3.2 Demographics 19 3.3 Traffic 22 3.4 Storm Drainage/Water Quality 33 3.5 Noise 35 3.6 Air Quality 38 3.7 Public Services/Utilities 46 4.0 ANY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSAL IS IMPLEMENTED 51 5.0 ALTERNATIVES 53 5.1 No Project 53 5.2 Change in Intensity of Land Use 53 6.0 GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS 55 7.0 CERTIFICATION OF ACCURACY AND QUALIFICATIONS 57 8.0 REFERENCES 59 9.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED 61 APPENDICES Appendix Title Page A Traffic Study A-1 B Air Quality Study B-1 C Correspondence C-1 D Attachment to the Draft D-1 i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page 1.1 Regional Map 2 1.2 Vicinity Map 5 1.3 Existing Site Plan 7 1.4 Proposed Project 9 3.1 Aerial Photo 16 3.2 Shadow Impacts 18 3.3 Land Use Suitability 37 3.4 Worst -Case CO Impacts 45 LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 1-1 Proposed Bed Complements and Unit Locations 10 3-1 Patient Origin and Service Area Population 21 3-2 Population Projections by Health Facility Planning Area 21 3-3 Hoag Memorial Hospital Expansion - Weekday Trip Generation 26 3-4 Maximum Parking Demand, Weekday 2:30-3:30 P.M. 32 3-5 Air Quality Summary - Newport Beach Area 40 3-6 Hoag Hospital Expansion -Related Regional Vehicular Pollutant Emissions 42 3-7 Hourly CO Concentrations (ppm) near Proposed Hoag Hospital Expansion for Worst -Case Dispersion Conditions and Maximum Hourly Traffic Volumes 44 ii II INTRODUCTION This document addresses the -environmental impacts of a pro- ' posed hospital expansion in the City of Newport Beach. It is designed to serve as an informational document for a series of decisions that must be made by governmental agencies regarding planning and ultimate land use of the property. Persons reviewing this document should keep in mind the fact that the material provided herein is, under state law, informa- tional in nature. It is intended to enable appropriate public agencies to evaluate the project for significant effect of environ- mental impacts on the environment, to examine and institute meas- ures to reduce adverse impacts, and consider alternatives to the project as proposed. The responsible public agencies remain obli- gated to balance possible adverse effects against other public objectives, including economic and social factors, in determining whether the project is approved. This report is being submitted to the City of Newport Beach in accordance with their procedural guidelines for implementation of CEQA and the State of California, Guidelines for the Preparation and Evaluation of Environmental Impact Reports under the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. This document has been prepared as a focused environmental impact report. As such, it will address those impacts identified by the City as potentially adverse or constraining to development relative to the proposed project. 1 SECTION 1.0 DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1.1 PROJECT LOCATION Hoag Memorial Hospital is located in the southwestern section of the City of Newport Beach (Figure 1.1). The existing complex was built in 1952 upon a 20-acre parcel of land on a bluff over- looking the Newport Bay and the Pacific Ocean. The triangularly - shaped property is bounded on the north and east by Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard, respectively. Newport Boulevard transitions to the Newport Freeway (55), forming a key north -south link between the beach community and inland areas of Orange County. The Pacific Coast Highway (Highway 1) is visible beneath the southern tip of the project site (Figure 1.2), and serves as a major east -west route. 1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES The existing hospital complex was initially built in 1952, and has since undergone nine major construction phases (see Figure 1.3). Over the course of time, many aspects of site layout and internal facility organization have become counterproductive in terms of efficiency and safety. Several of the existing buildings do not meet current building codes. Furthermore, several departments are confined to inadequate space. This has largely resulted as a func- tion of dramatic changes in the delivery of health care, demography„ and law (Bobrow/Thomas & Associates, 1979). As an outgrowth of this, a Master Plan was devised for Hoag Hospital. The Master Plan proposes a series of service zones and long-term replacement and ' expansion of facilities in seven phases. The proposed project 1 3 Regional Map 1.1 FIGURE 4 Se„ (VU.i JUUUl ir row II sr IL / li✓ �/� w oA po �h`_- .+nn r_ i i � BAY ..�• II O i I • O O ' Y—_ > > �❑ Trader W O Reso Ed I♦ •� Oix3 nl I • Trai r p sr Eli „y: ' Schwhlt.l0: %� °° °° ° ...�:.` ITt't.. .. � a•nj�/ C u h s Ire O O °lose Trader OO �Po O Park ' °•r°° I` ° °Sie:.:illlJ nnr r O{^F77=:�/119/,P�< O i 9 •Park`• 8 "ch �° U,wa Harpe rTanks •I IArt�y' .' Sch u' ,.� .\ i . _ • ter -'� Oti Oe •� 5 o o i �, • V qi,►.WN t to •�� ter i H o >\ O �� A l �HbsOrt T� � site,,, .a rkV n. a Ms 1: ♦ Q� r3 v� 0 r-� __��___�- _I , _ aiM OOP 4°> •� � .....t. �O Q�CiI I Bann '`` � �O ' y:: •. sT Light Harbor .q a LlBnto�.� : �� � �^ 331uoueht N ^cam„ h D� ohs ' Parking Arc>@ aD _Las Arenas .& W 34 OLieht 4,z Collins NEWPORT, BEACH ' l�jj�� B ` kT c `21 *• •N6Wport ,i SCALE 1 14000 DDT Vicinity Map 1.2 FIGURE N Existing Site Plan 11 1.3 FIGURE which this environmental report addresses is limited to Phases I and II of that document. The objectives of the proposed project as outlined by hospital planning staff are: "...to increase the services available to the community based on antici- pated growth of the service population; to provide a short stay unit; and to organize services into zones to enhance their operational efficiency ' and service accessibility for outpatients. These are to be accomplished within the context of a master plan for maximum site efficiency." 1.3 PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS The project involves construction of a new patient tower of ' ten stories, adjacent to the existing tower, and expansion of the first floor of the existing 1974 structure currently housing the ' radiology and laboratory departments and the emergency room. In- ' eluded in the new tower are 228 beds, many which replace beds in older buildings, a labor and delivery suite, an alternative birthing center, a radiation therapy suite, an expanded emergency room, and a medical short -stay unit (see Figure 1.4). The summary of proposed uses in the new tower indicates that it would be comparable in size ' and function to the existing tower (Table 1-1). The first floor expansion includes.expansion of the radiology and laboratory ' services. These elements represent approximately 217,600 square feet. It is estimated that completion of these facilities will be attained by 1984. 1 Construction of the proposed tower would not consume additional land, but would primarily occupy an area now serving as a court- , yard. Parking allowances would be correspondingly increased in relation to the increased service level of the hospital. This part of the project would necessitate expansion of the main parking I 8 1 Q C a� U ft! i a I O yOSpira� i Multi -functional Rd. and Ancillary ::•'•: Conference C r Pediatrics O.B. lobby Radiation t' r p / 40, Legend Buildings to be demolished New structures: 1. Parking 2. 10 story structure 3. Expansion of structure ,#2. 4. Expansion of existing structure DD�oo Proposed Project 1.4 FIGURE 'r g TABLE 1-1 PROPOSED BED COMPLEMENTS AND UNIT LOCATIONS (a) Floor Existing Tower loth 18 Medical/Surgical 9th 33 Medical/Surgical 8th 33 Medical/Surgical 7th 33 Medical/Surgical 6th 33 Medical/Surgical 5th 33 Medical/Surgical 4th 33 Perinatal(b) 3rd 25 Sub-Intensive(c) 2nd Mechanical 1st Surgery and Ancillary Services S Support Services 1984 Tower 34 Medical/Surgical 34 Medical/Surgical 34 Medical/Surgical 34 Medical/Surgical 34 Medical/Surgical 34 Medical/Surgical Labor and Delivery(b) 24 Critical Care(e) Mechanical Emergency Room, Short Stay Unit Radiation Therapy, Physical Therapy Result of Proposed Project Existing 1974 Tower Existing lst Floor 1952 Structure Proposed 1984 Tower(d) SUBTOTAL: Offsite TOTAL: Existing 2nd Floor 1957 Structure 241 24 (pediatric) 228 493 40 (psychiatric) 533 20 (rehabilitation) (a) Unit location assignments are preliminary, and subject to change based on space and architectural feasibility. (b) Perinatal (Maternity) beds and Labor and Delivery (includes Alternate Birthing Center) are arranged to be on the same level. (a) Sub -Intensive and Critical Care beds are arranged to be on the same level. (d) Estimated height of structure is approximately 15 fast per floor, or 150 feet, total, compared to existing tower height of 120 feet. SOURCE: Planning Staff, Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, 1979 11 I II structure into a portion of the undeveloped southern corner of the site. Demolition of the three-story north wing of the 1957 building housing obstetrics (O.B.) would occur after new construction is completed. New outpatient parking would replace the pediatric building (see Figure 1.4). Demolition of radiation therapy and the lnhhv would take n1_ace after their functions were relocated in SECTION 2.0 SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACT AND PROPOSED MITIGATION Topic Section Impact Mitigation Land Use 3.1 More intense use of land concentrated towards vertical None necessary. expansion rather than horizontal. Parking structure expansion will obstruct views of some Utilize landscaping and berms to minimize aesthetic residents in adjacent condominiums, impact. Patient tower will cast shadows upon non-residential area None identified. to north, maximum impact occurring in December, early morning. t.. Demographics 3.2 Project is based upon service area demands resulting from None necessary. regional growth. ' Traffic 3.3 Negligible increase in traffic volumes impacting Increase proposed parking expansion from 350 to 407 surrounding street systems; increased demand for parking spaces. spaces. Improvement of existing internal circulation network. The internal drives and circulation pattern in the eastern part of the hospital grounds should be reviewed for possible modification in the event that parking areas are reorganized as project design is refined. Location of new drive on Hospital Road would create Restrict turn movement from new driveway on Hospital hazardous left -turn movements. Road to "right -turns -out" only. Hydrology 3.4 Negligible increase in impervious surface and associated Provide and maintain onsite retention basins (i.e., pollutants carried in runoff to Newport Bay. grease traps, other means as determined necessary by City). Vacuum -sweep all surface parking areas on routine basis. I Short-term increase In noise levels associated with con- Limit hours of construction to normal work bourn. struction activity. . Insignificant Intense in ambient noise levels associated with increased traffic volumes. 1 Project -generated traffic would contribute negligibly to , regional airshed pollutants. Continued reliance upon the automobile for tranapor- ration, coupled with -IM—1 project Impacts precludes Localized Ievels of carbon monoxide from concentration significant mitigation. of traffic near hospital will not be significant. Public Services 3.7 Negligible but cumulative utilization of capacity of some Consumption of energy resources can be minimized at services (i.e.. water, sewer, solid waste, gam, elec- design and construction stages by compliance with tricity). applicable energy conservation regulations according to state standards. SECTION 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 3.1 LAND USE 3.1.1 Environmental Setting The Hoag Memorial Hospital occupies a 20-acre site on a bluff overlooking the Pacific Ocean. Construction of the initial hospital facility was completed in 1952. It continues to house some ancillary services and inpatient functions. Since that time, Hoag Hospital has undergone several expansions, the last completed in 1974. The latest expansion entailed construction of the tallest building within the facility, totaling ten.stories, nine of which comprise a patient tower. The pattern and extent of this previous site development has left little acreage available for expansion. Thus, future expansion must be vertically oriented. The predominant surrounding land use is commercial. Medical/business offices and convalescent facilities lie to the north, across Hospital Road. Mixed commercial uses occupy areas to the east along Newport Boulevard and to the south in the Bay area and along Pacific Coast Highway. Residential use in the immediate vicinity is confined to a condominium development at the western border of the project site. As depicted in Figure 3.1, an undeveloped portion of the adjacent residential area has been graded to accommodate additional condominium structures. 15 i I �. /�����wF I +4 • I i � f � f r r R, .( #I /Am { �A Aerial Photograph 3.1.2 Environmental Impact As previously indicated, construction of the proposed tower would not consume additional land, but would primarily occupy an area now serving as a courtyard. Parking allowances would be correspondingly increased in relation to the increased service level of the hospital. This part of the project would necessitate expansion of the main parking structure into a portion of the undeveloped southern corner of the site. Due to the developed nature of the site and its conform- ance with General Plan and Zoning designations, the proposed project would not significantly impact onsite land use. The primary land use concerns center around view and shadow impacts offsite asso- ciated with the predominantly vertical orientation of the proposed project. Views from the adjacent medical/business uses to the north are already limited by both their height (all less than ten stories) and the presence of the 1974 tower. Placement of the proposed tower adjacent to the existing tower would thus have little to no view impact. However, the rotation of shadows would significantly impact these structures. As diagrammed in Figure 3.2, the proposed tower will cast elongated shadows during the early morning and late afternoon hours (roughly 8-10 AM or 3-5 PM) during the winter months. Shadows cast by the existing tower during the same time frame do not presently affect these buildings. View impacts upon the existing condominium development immediately to the west would be related to the expansion of the parking facility at the south tip of the hospital site. A limited Ell 1 / 8 M 4 . M. �9 3 ' • . s„ •y m O '• r . r N , pacific Co Legend ' ast HW• 1. proposed 10 story structure 2. Current 10 story structure Approximate shadow from new structure © Approximate shadow from current structure 0_ 250' DD Shadow Impacts 3,2FIE woo 18 number of units in the new condominium structures with views oriented to the south and southeast might'have their views par- tially or wholly obstructed by the parking structure expansion. However, the precise extent of impact cannot be ascertained at this time in the absence of specific site and grading plans for the proposed project for comparison to pad elevations of the condominium development. The length of shadows formed by the proposed tower would have a minimal impact upon the adjacent condominium development as compared to that created by the existing 1974 tower. Winter shadows formed by the 1974 tower and proposed tower will each ex -tend across a portion of one of the condominium structures in the northeastern corner of the adjacent site until about midmorning (see Figure 3.2). During the summer months, the new tower will project shadows over even less area, comprised of a very narrow band along the eastern edge of the adjacent property (see Figure 3.2). The area would not be impacted beyond midmorning, however. 3.1.3 Mitigation Measures The adverse impacts of the parking structure can be par- tially mitigated through design and landscaping. However, it is possible that visual screening of the parking structure for aesthe- tic purposes might further obstruct views. The absence of other significant adverse impacts precludes the need for mitigation. 3.2 DEMOGRAPHICS 3.2.1 Environmental Setting Hoag Memorial Hospital is recognized as the dominant 19 general acute care facility for a radius of eight miles (Ayers, Miller, 1979). This corresponds to its primary service area, which is defined as that area from which 80 percent of the patients are drawn. The majority of this number, roughly 50 percent, reside in Newport Beach and Costa Mesa (Report on the State of the County, 1977). The balance of Hoag's primary service area is comprised of Huntington Beach, Santa Ana, Irvine, and Fountain Valley (see Table 3.1). Population projections through the year 1986 indicate that Hoag Hospital service area population will increase at an overall rate of about four percent annually (see Tables 3.1 and 3.2). 3.2.2 Environmental Impact The proposed project was designed to respond to increased demand for services as a direct result of regional growth and an increasing percentage of patients utilizing Hoag Hospital from the surrounding region, In order to define and support the need for , expansion of facilities, Hoag Hospital is required to submit a certificate of need for review by the Orange County Health Planning ' Council. Hoag Hospital has experienced much greater growth than ' most other institutions in the County. A review by the hospital planning staff indicates that the number of patients per thousand population admitted at Hoag from the surrounding planning areas (draw rate) has increased in the years 1976-1978. The percentage ' change in draw rate was then projected through the year 1990 and applied to the Department of Health's population projections for , Hoag Hospital's primary, secondary, and tertiary service areas according to each of the inpatient services provided (i.e., medical/ surgical; perinatal; pediatrics; intensive care; and psychiatric). 20 M M M M M M M M M = M i M M M M M M M N F-` TABLE 3.1 PATIENT ORIGIN AND SERVICE AREA POPULATION Hoag Patient 1976 Projected 1986 Percent Origin -- 1976 Population Population Increase Newport Beach 28 63,165 81',483 29 Costa Mesa 23 82,423 94,786 15 Huntington Beach 14 150,085 186,105 24 Santa Ana 6 183,296 207,124 13 Irvine (excludes northern area) 6 36,109 104,355 189 Fountain Valley 3 50,069 58,330 17 TOTAL 80 565,147 732,183 30 SOURCE: Report on the State of the County, 1976-77, Volume 6. TABLE 3.2 POPULATION PROJECTIONS BY HEALTH FACILITY PLANNING AREA 1977 1978 1980 1985 1990 Fullerton 273,797 282,770 306,701 349,962 395,096 Anaheim 320,869 324,169 326,906 336,270 344,894 Buena Park 165,392 165,878 167,118 169,514 172,500 Huntington Beach 319,287 320,474 327,291 339,609 352,635 Santa Ana 355,767 368,898 392,032 474,308 544,617 Newport Beach 169,101 172,745 181,402 205,.343 226,784 South Orange 184,103 198,211 225,774 289,055 351,425 1,788,316 1,833,145 1,927,224 2,164,061 2,387,951 SOURCE: California State Department of Health, Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, Orange County Administrative Office, Forecast and Analysis Center , Patient bed requirements were derived from the basic data and projected to the year 1988 at which time an optimal occupancy goal of 80-8'5 percent is anticipated. These planning allocations would thus allow for growth beyond the year of opening (1984) of the new facility. It is expected that implementation of subsequent phases of the Master Plan (not discussed as part of this report) would be sought if the 85 percent occupancy is attained prior to that time. Conversely, significantly lower occupancy rates could lead to under -utilization of the hospital facilities. Subsequent phases of the Master Plan would thus be indefinitely postponed. However, because of the present developed nature of the site, its level of utilization has little impact on the environment. 3.2.3 Mitigation Measures The absence of adverse impacts precludes the need for mitigation. 3.3 TRAFFIC 3.3.1 Environmental Setting 3.3.1.1 Surrounding Circulation Network Traffic access to Hoag Memorial Hospital is provided at two points emanating from Hospital Road. The primary access is located directly across from Placentia Avenue. This access drive serves the emergency care and ambulance areas, doctor's parking area, visitor's and outpatient parking lots, and is the main visi- tor entrance to the hospital complex. The secondary access road is 22 I located westerly of the existing buildings. It provides direct ' access to the visitor's parking garage, truck loading docks and ' receiving areas, and is connected with the primary access road for ambulance circulation. Each of the internal access roads has two traffic lanes, one lane in each direction of travel. Egress traf- fic is controlled by stop signs on both access road approaches to ' Hospital Road. ' Hospital Road intersects with Placentia Avenue directly north of the main hospital entrance road and with Newport Avenue to ' the east and Superior Avenue to the west. Pacific Coast Highway, which is located south of the project site, connects with both ' Newport Boulevard and Superior Avenue. Physical characteristics of these roadways are detailed in Appendix A. 3.3.1.2 Traffic Generation Traffic counts taken in April, 1979 at both entrances to the hospital complex showed that the 420-bed facility generated 6,447 daily vehicle trip ends (total traffic in both directions) on a weekday, 4,404 on a Saturday, and 3,579 on a Sunday. The onsite counts showed that inbound traffic had two peaks, namely 7:00-8:00 ' a.m. and 3:00-4:00 p.m. Outbound traffic had a very pronounced peak, namely, 3:00-4:00 p.m. ' The peaking characteristic coincides with the employee ' arrival and departure periods. Employees are divided into three shifts. The first shift (1,122 employees, excluding medical staff) ' works from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., and most departures occur between 3:00 and 3:30 p.m. The second shift C453 employees) 23 starts at 3:00 p.m. and ends at 11:00 p.m. The third shift (193 ' employees) hours are 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. There is normally a 30-minute overlap between incoming and outgoing shift employees. ' Visitation hours are 2:00-4:OO'p.m. and 6:00-8:00 p.m. The 6:00-8:00 p.m. period is normally the peak visitor period. The , 6:00-8:00 p.m. hourly traffic is about one-half that of the total , 3:00-4:00 p.m, peak traffic. 3.3.1.3 Trip Generation Rates , Based upon onsite traffic counts and the number of beds ' at the present time, the weekday trip generation rate is 15.35 vehicle trip ends per bed. The weekday trip generation rate ' obtained from onsite traffic counts is slightly higher than the average rates for all types of hospitals reported in the Institute , of Transportation Engineers Information Report (average 12.16 day, 3 to 32), the Orange County Road vehicle trip ends per range Department (10 vehicle trip ends per day), and the City of Los ' Angeles (9.4 vehicle trip ends per day). ' 3.3.1.4 Parking The hospital has 1,145 parking spaces onsite, plus another ' 45 spaces on the Park Lido Nest site, for a total of 1,190 spaces for hospital use. The existing ratio of parking spaces per bed is 2.7:1. The peak parking demand occurs between 2:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. due to shifts overlapping. The peaking characteristic of ' parking accumulation at this time period of the day is evident from ' the hourly traffic counts at the entrances. The accumulative hourly difference between inbound and outbound traffic is equal to ' 24 1 the number of cars remaining onsite, referred to as "parking accumu- lation." A random sample of counts in the 958-car parking garage I on weekdays found that the numbers of empty spaces were as follows: at 2:00 p.m. - 157; at 3:00 p.m. - 30; and at 4:00 p.m. - 262. 3.3.2 Environmental Impact ' 3.3.2.1 Traffic Volume The projected future number of beds is 533, an increase of 113 from the existing total. The estimation of future trip generation is calculated in Table 3.3. These calculations suggest that approximately 1,750 additional vehicle trips (27 percent ,I increase from existing) would be generated on a weekday and 94 trips (27 percent increase from existing) during the 5:00-6:00 p.m. street peak hour. 3.3.2.2 Intersection Analyses The City of Newport Beach required an intersection ana- lysis for the intersections listed below as part -of this study. ' 1. Coast Highway and Superior Avenue 2. Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road 3. Placentia Avenue and Superior Avenue 4. Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard 5. Coast Highway and Orange 6. Coast Highway and Riverside 7. Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue ' 8. Hospital Road and Superior Avenue 1 The intersections numbered 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 are operated by traffic signals. These were analyzed in accordance with City Administration Procedure S-1 dated February 26, 1979. The fourth TADLE 3.3 HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL EXPANSION - WEEKDAY TRIP GENERATION 24-Hour 7-8 a.m. 3-4 p.m. 5-6 U.m. Existing Volumes 6,447 477 813 351 (April, 1979) 329 in 298 in 135 in, 148 out 515 out 216 out Generation Rate 15.35 1.13 1.94 .83 (Vehicle trip ends per bed) .78 in .71 in .32 in .35 out 1.23 out .51 out Project -Generated 1,735 128 219 94 Incremental Trips 88 in 80 in 36 in 40 out 139 out 58 out 26 intersection is a grade -separated interchange. The seventh inter- section is a four -way -stop -sign -controlled intersection. The last intersection is controlled by a stop sign on Hospital Road. Poten- tial impacts at each of the intersections would be negligible, according to the "l Percent Traffic Volume Analysis" worksheets con- tained in Appendix A. Results of that analysis are discussed in the paragraphs below. 1. Coast Highway and Superior Avenue. This intersection has an existing capacity utilization ratio of 0.94 in the evening peak hour. The estimated project generated peak hour traffic, as shown in Exhibit 4, is negligible. The generated additional traffic will be less than 1 percent of existing p.m. peak traffic. The "l Percent Traffic Volume Analysis" worksheet is shown in Appendix A. The potential traffic impact is negligible. 2. Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard. The existing intersection capacity utilization ratio in the p.m. peak hour is 0.79. The incremental project traffic would result in slightly higher capacity utilization, from 0.79 to 0.81. The T.C.U. work - sheet is shown in Appendix A negligible. The potential traffic impact is 3. Placentia Avenue and Superior Avenue. This inter- section has an existing p.m. peak hour capacity utilization factor of 0.54. The predominant movements are the Superior Avenue east- bound through movement and Placentia Avenue northbound right turn to eastbound on Superior Avenue. The project generated additional p.m. peak hour traffic would increase the existing T.C.U. by less 27 than 0.01, a negligible increase. There would be no adverse impact on this intersection. 4. Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard. This is a grade -separated interchange with Newport Boulevard crossing over Coast Highway. The estimated project -generated additional p.m. peak hour traffic would use the Newport Boulevard southbound off - ramp to Coast,Highway eastbound, and for traffic inbound to the hospital, Newport Avenue would be used. The potential traffic impact at this interchange is negligible. S. Coast Highway and Orange. The project -generated additional traffic is estimated at less than 1 percent of existing p.m. peak 2.5-hour traffic. The potential traffic impact is negligible. 6. Coast Highway and Riverside. The "1 Percent Traffic Volume Analysis" for this intersection suggests that the additional p.m. peak 2.5-hour traffic generated by the project will be less than 1 percent of existing traffic. The potential traffic impact would be negligible. 7. Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue. This intersec- tion is controlled by four-way stop signs. The hospital main entrance road is the south leg of the intersection. The four-way stop control appeared to be working efficiently during the p.m. peak hour. At this time of the day, the predominant traffic move- ments are right turns from Hospital Road westbound to northbound on Placentia Avenue, and Placentia Avenue southbound left -turn to eastbound on Hospital Road. The project -generated additional M. traffic on the main entrance would increase the existing peak hour volume by approximately 86 vehicles, and would not adversely impact the four-way stop intersection. Traffic signal control is not warranted. 8. Hospital Road and Superior Avenue. This is a "T" intersection where Hospital Road ends at Superior Avenue. Hospital Road is controlled by a stop sign. It has one left -turn lane and one right -turn lane on the approach to Superior Avenue. The pre- dominant movement is the left -turn movement, approximately 160 vehicles per hour in the p.m. peak hour. The project -generated additional traffic on the westbound approach is estimated at four left -turning vehicles during the p.m. peak hour, and would have negligible impact on the intersection. This intersection will be signalized by January, 1980 as a City -County project. 3.3.2.3 Site Access Presently egress from the hospital is facilitated by the four-way stop control at the main access road. The second drive westerly of the main entrance has direct access to the parking garage and truck docks, and provides for emergency vehicle circula- tion. A third drive is shown on the proposed site plan•, located easterly of the main entrance. The construction of an additional ingress puint easterly of the four-way stop intersection would reduce the traffic volume entering the existing main entrance, since approximately 66 percent of the hospital -generated traffic is oriented easterly on Hospital Road. Also, the proposed drive would P] provide more direct access to parking areas on the eastern part of the hospital complex. The main entrance carries approximately 334 vehicles during the p.m. peak hour. The new entrance would relieve the existing main entrance of congestion during periods of shift changes (3:00-3:30 p.m., particularly). However, the proposed third drive is located just westerly of the crest of a vertical curve on Hospital Road. Egress left -turn movements from this drive will be hazardous, since the exiting motorist's sight distance easterly over the crest of the hill is restricted. The exit drive should be so designed as to permit only right -turn movements onto Hospital Road. 3.3.2.4 Onsite Circulation The construction of the building housing the relocated admitting offices, would improve internal access compared with the presently circuitous access pattern. Owing to possible rearrange- ment of parking areas which may become necessary as the project is completed, the internal drives and circulation pattern in the eastern part of the hospital grounds should probably be revised. Internal circulation and access to the parking garage, emergency vehicle parking, and receiving areas are adequately designed for and do not present any problems. 3.3.2.5 Parking As previously identified, the peak parking condition occurs between 2:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m., when the first and second shifts overlap. The maximum parking demand at this time period of the day, with the proposed expansion, is estimated at 1,552 spaces. 30 II II I The method used to estimate parking demand is shown in Table 3.4. The projected parking demand represents an increase of 407 spaces above current onsite parking space provisions. The proposed project (identified as Phases I and I1 of the Hospital Master Plan) which calls for an addition of only 350 parking spaces is thus considered inadequate. 3.3.3 Mitigation Measures • The foregoing analysis showed that of all the five signalized intersections in the vicinity of the hospital, two of them would generate traffic in excess of 1 percent existing p.m. peak 2.5-hour traffic. The I.C.U. analysis for these two inter- sections was made, and the results showed that neither intersection has a projected I.C.U. greater than 0.90. Therefore, no mitigation measure is required. • The addition of 104 beds onsite, with a projected 25 percent increase in hospital personnel, will increase the parking demand by an estimated 407 spaces. Current expansion plans for 350 additional parking spaces, according to the proposed Master Plan, should thus be increased. Prior to occupancy in Phase II of the project, additional parking space should be provided onsite (such as at the northeast corner of the site) or through an offsite parking agreement. • The internal drives and circulation pattern in the eastern part of the hospital grounds should be reviewed for possible modification in the event that parking areas are reorganized as project design is refined. 31 TABLE 3.4 MAXIMUM PARKING DEMAND, WEEKDAY 2:30-3.30 P.M. Employees Projected lst shift - 1,403 (per Hospital Projected 2nd shift - 566 data) TOTAL - 1,969 1,969 X 1 - 1,406 (average daily employees on duty) Observed auto occupancy - 1.291 Employee parking 1,406 4 1.29 - 1,090 spaces Meeting Rooms 305 seats X 100% 4 1.412 people/ (concurrent use) car - 216 spaces Doctor's Parking Assume 25% of 400 staff doctors with car occupancy of•1.0/car require parking from 2:30-3:30 P.M. _ 100 spaces Visitor's 493 beds X 85% occupancy = 104 spaces Parking (onsite) 4 beds/visitor car (offsite) 40 beds X 85% occupancy n 9 spaces 4 beds/visitor car Emergency 29 (existing and future) - 29 spaces Power Plant 13 (existing and future) - 13 spaces TOTAL: 1,552 spaces 1Observed sample around 8:00 a.m. on Friday, May 40 1979: 69 cars with one person, 13 cars with 2 people, 2 bicycles, and 9 people walked. 2Observed sample of 118 vehicles on a Thursday, mid -afternoon. 3Based on offsite bed requirements as shown on Table 1.1. Not counted in total for onsite parking demand. 32 9 It is recommended that the proposed new opening onto Hospital Road be limited to right -turn egress only. 3.4 STORM DRAINAGE/HATER QUALITY 3.4.1 Environmental Setting The project site is an essentially developed piece of property with an in -place drainage system to convey all runoff from the site. Runoff eventually empties into the Upper Newport Bay in an area known as the Arches. Drainage from Hospital Road is picked up in culverts on the west side of Newport Boulevard, carried under Newport Boulevard, then south on the easterly side to the Arches. A second and third storm drain picks up drainage on the west side of Newport Boulevard between Hospital Road and Pacific Coast High- way. This then connects with the drain on the easterly side. Drainage from the main parking structure and a gully (located within the undeveloped southerly tip of the property) is carried south and then east to the main drain and on to the Arches. Recent problems with runoff from the site have been related to the slope facing Newport Boulevard between Hospital Road and Pacific Coast Highway. Slides which occurred during last winter's rains have left the slope exposed and subject to erosion (Evans, 1979). 3.4.2 Environmental Impacts Neither specific site plans nor grading plans have been formulated for the proposed expansion. Thus the need for storm drain improvements or modification of any existing onsite drainage cannot be assessed at this stage. However, total'storm runoff and 33 I peak discharge are expected to increase only slightly over existing levels as a result of project implementation. Runoff associated with an increased impervious surface would be directly related to the parking structure expansion. The lack of specific site and grading plans precludes quantification at this time, Urban runoff from completed development is expected to contain a greater number of pollutants (primarily hydrocarbons, rubber, and metal particles from parking areas and streets) as a result of intensified use of the land (primarily due to the pro- t posed parking structure expansion). First flows from surface parking and the upper level of parking structures will carry the most debris and pollutants. The amount is not expected to appreciate significantly over present levels, however, due to the relative size of the expansion compared to the balance of the project site. The pollutants carried from the project site will vary from time to data time in content, and are difficult to measure due to a limited !, base. Nevertheless, urban pollutants transported from this site, combined with the entire Newport Beach drainage area, will contribute to an overall impact on the waters of the upper Newport Bay. , 3.4.3 Mitigation Measures Grading plans will be submitted for review by the City. Onsite retention basins (i.e., grease traps and Other appropriate drainage facilities) as deemed necessary by the City shall be provided and properly maintained. The exposed slope (facing Newport Boulevard) should be improved as a condition of approval. Routine vacuum sweeping and cleanup of parking areas should be 34 [1 arranged to reduce the debris and pollutants carried into the tdrainage system. 1 3.5 NOISE 3.5.1 Environmental Setting Noise levels in the project area originate predominantly from vehicular traffic sources. Air traffic from the Orange County Airport presents an additional secondary discontinuous source. Current and projected noise levels were calculated on the basis of traffic volume figures appearing in the traffic analysis and applied to models published by Wyle Laboratories in Development of Ground Transportation Systems Noise Contours, Wyle Research Report WCR 73-8 (road traffic noise). These noise levels are represented by the Day -Night Average Sound Level (Ldn). The Ldn utilizes A -scale measurements of noise over a 24-hour period but applies a 10 dB(A) penalty to noise occurring in the evening (10:00 PM to 7:00 AM), since nighttime noise is considered more annoying than daytime noise. The widely accepted models developed by Wyle Laboratories are based on a large sample of field noise measure- ments and predict Ldn noise levels through consideration of certain traffic data such as average daily traffic (ADT), lane configura- tions, representative speeds, road grade, and percent of truck traffic. Present noise levels at a distance of 50 feet from the centerline of roadways on the streets immediately adjacent to Hoag Hospital are as follows: 35 Hospital Road East of Placentia Avenue 64 Ldn Hospital Road West of Placentia Avenue 62 Ldn Placentia Avenue 62 Ldn As indicated in Figure 3.3, the hospital, nursing home, and residents of the condominium project are exposed to exterior noise level considered "normally acceptable" by land use suitabi- lity guidelines. Noise levels are considered "clearly acceptable" for the business uses to the north. 3.5.2 Environmental Impact During the construction phase of the project, construc- tion equipment may cause high noise levels impacting some areas of the hospital and yet unbuilt condominiums to the west. Typical noise levels produced by earthmoving, materials handling, stationary - and impact -type equipment used during construction range between 75 and 90 dB(A) at a distance of 50 feet. Such noise levels would occur intermittently throughout the day. Furthermore, the exact impact will vary with the numbers, the types, and the conditions of construction equipment and vehicles operating. However, such noise levels could be highly irritating to patients. Long-term noise increases associated with project -generated traffic would be insignificant. Noise levels are estimated to increase by less than one decibel (dB). It is generally accepted that noise level increases of under two dB(A) are barely discern- ible to the normal human ear (Long Davy Associates, 1977). 3.5.3 Mitigation Measures Construction machinery should be maintained in sound mechanical condition and equipped with noise muffling devices. 36 - CNEL 2. - NEF 3. CLEARLY ACCEPTABLE The noise exposure is such that the activities assoc- iated with the land use may be carried out with essen- cially no interference from aircraft noise. (Residential areas: indoor and outdoor noise environments are pleasant.) NORMALLY ACCEPTABLE The noise exposure is great enough to be of some concern, but common building construction will make the indoor environ- ment acceptable, even for sleeping quarters. NORMALLY UNACCEPTABLE The noise exposure is sig- nificantly more severe so that unusual and costly building construction is necessary to insure adequate performance of activities. (Residential areas: barriers must be errected between the site and promi- nent noise sources to make the outdoor environment tolerable.) CLEARLY UNACCEPTABLE The noise exposure is so severe that construction costs to make the indoor environment acceptable for the performance of activiites would be pro- hibitive. (Residential areas: the outdoor environment would be intolerable for normal residential use.) 1. Composite Noise Rating 2. Community Noise Equivalent Level - comparable to Ldn 3. Noise Exposure Forecast Source: HUD, "Aircraft Noise Impact: Planning Guidlines for Local Agencies" Wilsey and Ham, and Bolt, Beranek and Newman, 1972. Land Use Suitability 11 3.3 FIGURE Construction work hours should be coordinated with hospital ad- , ministrative staff to minimize disturbance of patients. where possible, sensitive patients should be housed away from intensive work areas. ' 3.6 AIR QUALITY I 3.6.1 Environmental Setting Baseline air quality in Newport Beach is among the best in southern California. In summer, clean ocean breezes usually , maintain healthful air (low ozone levels) except when a polluted indus- air mass moves southeastward along the coastline from more trialized/populated areas of the basin. In winter, Newport Beach is far enough removed from the heaviest traffic concentrations such that the frequency of standard exceedances for carbon monoxide or nitrogen dioxide is similarly low. To the extent that Orange County creates its own air quality problems, the principal source of those problems is the , automobile. Although vehicular sources continue to decline with additional stringent automobile emission standards, the rate of air , quality improvement will not be sufficient to attain all AAQS by ' 1987 as required by law. In order to accelerate the rate of air quality improve- ment, an air quality management plan (AQMP) is currently under consideration in the South Coast Air Basin. It relies heavily on t stationary source control and on technological improvements in emissions control. If the AQMP is not successful in offsetting the pollutant increases associated with continued county growth, growth ' M limitations may have to be instituted that might ultimately negate requirements for improved health care services such as the proposed project. The data from the two AQMP monitoring stations nearest the project sites are shown in Table 3.5. They indicate that AAQS for all pollutant species except sulfur dioxide may sometimes be exceeded in the area. Given the range of differences between the Costa Mesa and Laguna Beach measurements, baseline levels around Hoag Hospital may be expected to be somewhat intermediate between the two stations. Based on the expectations of the AQMP in reducing oxidants and continued automobile emissions improvements for carbon monoxide and the oxides of nitrogen, Newport Beach should come close to meeting almost all clean air standards by the 1987 deadline except perhaps for particulates. Compared to other locations in the County and the entire basin, the Hoag Hospital location is exceed- ingly good from a healthful air quality view. 3.6.2 Environmental Impacts Minor additional pollutants will result from the demoli- tion of the pediatrics building and the old north wing and the construction of the new structure itself. The additional energy consumption due to increased electrical demand may also generate stationary source pollutants that are emitted at power plants throughout the basin. Using the EPA's standard construction/demolition emission factor of 1.2 tons/acre/month of activity and assuming 50 percent control by regular watering, the project -related fugitive dust 39 . TABLE 3.5 AIR QUALITY SUMMARY - NEWPORT BEACH AREA Pollutant Standard (AAQS) 1975 Costa Mesa 1976 1977 1975 Laguna Beach 1976 1977 Oxidant 19 days 17 days 38 days -- -- — 1 hr. >0.08 ppm 0.18 ppm 0.16 ppm 0.18 ppm — -- -- Oxidant 11 days 10 days 31 days --- -- -- 1 hr. >0.10 ppm 0.18 ppm 0.16 ppm 0.18 ppm -- -- -- t Nitrogen Dioxide 3 days 8 days 0 days 2 days — --- 1 hr. >0.25 ppm 0.35 ppm 0.34 ppm 0.23 ppm 0.35 ppm -- -- Carbon Monoxide 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 1 hr. >35 ppm 31 ppm 27 ppm 18 ppm 16 ppm 20 ppm 13 ppm o Carbon Monoxide 40 days 57 days- 20 days 4 days 4 days 0 days 8 hr. >9 ppm 23 ppm -- — 10 ppm -- — Carbon Monoxide 31 days 24 days 5 days 2 days 0 days 0 days 12 hr. >10 ppm 20 ppm -- — 10 ppm -- — Sulfur Dioxide --- Not — — -- — 1, 3, 24 hrs, annual --- exceeded — — -- Suspended Particulates 372 28% 21% 15% 27% --- 24 hrs. >100 11g/m3 177 µg/m3 -- 202 µg/m3 164 µg/m3 — 15 Suspended Particulates Annual Mean >60 µg/m3 74 µg/m3 73 Ug/m3 -- 73 µg/m3 74 µg/m3 — CODE: Frequency Exceeded Maximum Level during Interval Shown --- Not observed or reported rf � a� tr r r •r rr ■r ar rr �r s r r� r r� tr rr burden is less than one ton per month since less than one acre of property is involved. The daytime southwestern winds will carry this dust across Hospital Road and may create a temporary nuisance on cars parked along the street and the medical offices parking lot across the street from the hospital. The principal air quality concern of this project, since hospital patients constitute a class of receptors particularly susceptible to additional respiratory distress, is that the increased traffic levels may cause a local (microscale) degradation of air quality. When the proposed expansion is completed, it will generate an additional 1,686 vehicle trips per day in Orange County. Based on conservative trip lengths and using automotive emission factors developed by CalTrans, project -generated traffic will contribute slightly less than one ton of additional pollutants (mostly CO) to the regional airshed. By 1985, emission improvements reduce this total to less than one-half ton per day. Compared to a current county -wide burden of 2,000 tons per day and incremental pollutant impact of the existing and additional hospital -related traffic as shown in Table 3.6 is correspondingly small. While any regional impacts are understandibly minimal, the additional concentration of automobile traffic near the hospital may create localized pollutant "hot spots." Since the proposed new structure is close to the Hospital Road/Placentia Avenue intersec- tion, the carbon monoxide transport from this intersection toward the hospital was analyzed with a computer dispersion model. South of Hospital Road, the maximum hourly CO concentra- tion is about 8 ppm. East of Placentia Avenue, maximum levels on 1 41 TABLE 3.6 HOAG HOSPITAL EXPANSION -RELATED REGIONAL VEHICULAR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS (Pollutant emissions in tons per year) 1980 Proiect ComDletion "' Existing Hospital Traffic Project -Generated Traffic TOTAL EMISSIONS: 1985 Emission Levels Existing Hospital Traffic Project -Generated Traffic TOTAL EMISSIONS Carbon Total Reactive Oxides Sulfur Total Monoxide Hydro- Hydro- of Dioxide Suspended Carbons Carbons Nitrogen Particulates (CO) (TUC) (RHC) (NOx) (SO2) (TSP) 737.0 62.6 54.8 82.9 4.0 9.1 187.0 15.9 13.9 21.0 1.0 2.3 924.0 78.5 68.7 103.9 5.0 11.4 487.8 38.8 33.2 58.3 4.0 7.5 123.7 9.8 8.4 14.8 1.0 1.9 611.5 48.6 41.6 73.1 5.0 9.4 Mr sort "Nam r r M M M M rr M spa r ar r am M I the sidewalk near the intersection are less than 6 ppm. The project contribution along both roadway segments is less than 0.5 ppm which is well below the limits of accuracy of the computer model itself (usually assumed to be about 1 ppm). A breakdown of the contribu- tion of the two roadways is shown in Table 3.7. Compared to the hourly CO standard of 35 ppm, there is little potential, even with worse -case traffic and weather, that the air around the hospital would become unhealthful. When the two CO patterns in Table 3.7 are combined, the resulting CO distribution at ground level is indicated in Figure 3.4. Near the new building, maximum CO levels are 2 ppm. Since the air conditioning intake is on the roof instead of the ground, very little of the automotive emissions will ever enter the hospital complex. Since neither the rush hour traffic or the restricted• dispersion last for long, the longer -period CO standard should similarly not be threatened unless regional background levels 1 become quite high as they do at the Costa Mesa monitoring station and other inland locations. Based on typical hospital electricity and natural gas requirements, the additional 200,000+ square feet of space will cause an additional 60 tons of pollutants to be emitted, mainly from power plants. Compared to the vehicular contribution of over 200 tons per year, the 60 tons of stationary source pollutants is iconsiderably less. Any ambient regional air quality impacts will be similarly incrementally minimal. 1 43 r TABLE 3.7 HOURLY CO CONCENTRATIONS (ppm) NEAR PROPOSED HOAG HOSPITAL EXPANSION FOR WORST -CASE DISPERSION CONDITIONS AND MAXIMUM HOURLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (1 Hour Standard - 35 ppm) Project - Existing Related Traffic Traffic Combined Distance South of Hospital Road (feet) 0 7.86 0.49 8.35 25 7.21 0.45 7.65 50 6.59 0.41 7.00 100 4.77 0.30 5.07 200 1.71 0.11 1.82 400 0.20 0.01 0.21 800 0.12 0.01 0.13 Distance East of Placentia Avenue (Feet) 0 5.07 0.29 5.36 25 4.65 0.26 4.91 50 4.25 0.24 4.49 100 3.08 0.17 3.25 200 1.11 0.06 1.17 400 0.13 0.01 0.14 800 0.08 0100 0.08 44 Win tion `" 1\ 0.0 Worst -case CO /Y °SP1, / Ra Q° Units in ppm. Legend New structures Current structures Impacts 11 3.4 FIGURE 45 ' 3.6.3 Mitigation Measures As the major source of project -related pollutants is from ' automobile traffic, there is little potential for mitigation since is beyond automotive emissions control the authority of local agencies. The fact that the maximum hospital traffic (visitors and ' employees) occurs at 3-4 PM is slightly beneficial in relieving Newport Beach traffic congestion later in the evening. "Standard" mitigation measures of promoting transit use or carpools by visitors and employees should be encouraged, but their effectiveness is more cosmetic than significant in reducing project -related air pollutants. 3.7 PUBLIC SERVICES/UTILITIES 3.7.1 Environmental Setting The following agencies were contacted with respect to , service provided to the present facility and proposed expansion: , City of Newport Beach Fire Police Public Works Orange County Sanitation District , Utility Companies Southern California Gas Company Southern California Edison Company Correspondence from responding agencies are contained in Appendix C.* ' The present hospital complex is served by each of the above agencies. The project site has been provided with all necessary infrastructure. 46 ' 3.7.2 Environmental Impact None of the agencies contacted noted a significant change or adverse impact in the level of service which would be provided as a consequence of project implementation (see Appendix Q . Pertinent comments are summarized below for reference. Fire At the present time no problems are foreseen with servicing Hoag Hospital or the surrounding area. However, future growth projects in this area of Newport Beach may require expansion of the fire department (Wagner, 1979). Police There is a natural increase in thefts at a construction site, thus increasing the assigned area police officers' report - taking time and consequently increasing the detectives' investiga- tive time. Also, there is a minimal delay in response to emergency calls due to diminished access accompanying a construction site. The proposed project would not otherwise significantly impact the level of service provided (Connolly, 1979). Public Works ' Water and sewer service for Hoag Memorial Hospital is provided by the City. The existing water and sewer facilities should be adequate to serve the proposed expansion, and the construc- tion of new facilities would not be required. In addition, there are no plans to increase the capacity of the existing City water and sewer facilities at the hospital site (Nolan, Malkemus, 1979). 47 r Sanitation District Sanitation District No. 5 of Orange County has planned ' capacity for the proposed development. In anticipation of this proposed project, when Trunk "B" of the Coast Highway Trunk was constructed it was recommended to Hoag Hospital to expand their , lateral so that the additional sewage generated could be handled. Hoag Hospital expanded their lateral at that time (Reid, 1979). , Southern California Edison Company ' Total system demand is expected to increase annually. However, the electric loads of the project are within parameters of projected load growth which Bdison is planning to meet in this area. Unless the demand for electrical generating capacity exceeds Edison estimates, and provided that there are no unexpected outages to. ' major sources of electrical supply, the company expects to meet electrical load requirements for the next several years (Wright$ 1979). Southern California Gas Company Gas service to the project could be provided from an existing main without significant impact. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the timq con- tractual arrangements are made. Should the Public Utilities Commis- ' sion or federal regulatory agencies take any action which affects , gas supply or the condition under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions (Richardson, 1979). 48 1 I 3.7.3 Mitigation Measures The general lack of impacts obviates the need for miti- gation. However, the consumption of energy resources can be ' minimized at design and construction stages by conformance with applicable energy conservation regulations according to state standards. I 1 11 r I U 1 49 I SECTION 4.0 ANY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSAL IS IMPLEMENTED • Some obstruction of views from adjacent residences over- looking parking structure. • Extensive shadow casting in non-residential area to north of site during winter months (maximum in December). Significant but temporary increases in noise related to construction activity. 51 SECTION 5.0 ALTERNATIVES The developed nature of the project site limits the range of alternative land uses which may be considered appropriate. Alternatives to the proposed project include: • No project • Change in intensity of land use The primary impacts of these alternatives are addressed below. 5.1 NO PROJECT The "no project" alternative would retain the present level of services and preclude reallocation and concentration of certain functions into a more centralized location. Opportunities for enhanced efficiency (such as improved circulation) and modernization of facilities would consequently be diminished. The limited number of impacts identified in earlier sections of this report could be avoided if the project were withdrawn. However, the need for expanding services would remain an unresolved issue. 5.2 CHANGE IN INTENSITY OF LAND USE The proposed project includes replacement of some structures as well as expansion both vertically (patient tower) and horizontally (parking structure). A less intense use of the land could be achieved only by reducing the spectrum or number of services provided by the existing hospital. Decreasing the degree of services expansion (roughly 27% addition to bed capacity) could permit a reduction in the final height of the proposed tower and corres- 53 pondingly mitigate shadow impacts. Other measurable benefits of this alternative would be negligible, however, due to the general lack of significant project impacts (i.e., traffic, air quality, noise, public services). View impacts upon the adjacent residential area would not be alleviated without total elimination of the proposed parking structure expansion. As,parking requirements correlate to service levels, elimination of the parking structure would not be warranted unless the present patient bed levels were maintained. 54 I I SECTION 6.0 GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACTS Implementation of the project would result in the expansion of existing facilities and services on a previously developed piece of property. As.such, it would not constitute an impetus for a major expansion of urban growth but would lead to more intense use of the land. The proposed centralization of certain hospital functions and expansion of patient service capabilities represents a response to rather than an instigation of growth in the area. The provision of infrastructure or new municipal services would not be required due to the developed nature of the property. However, the proposed project would negligibly but cumulatively impact several service systems (including police, fire, water, sewer, and solid waste) in conjunction with other ongoing growth in the area. Project -induced traffic would similarly cumulatively impact capacity levels of the surrounding circulation system. I 55 SECTION 7.0 CERTIFICATION OF ACCURACY AND QUALIFICATIONS We hereby affirm that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, the statements and information herein contained are in all respects true and correct and that all known information concerning the potentially significant environmental effects of the project has been included and fully evaluated in this draft EIR. t ' btichael W. Wright Principal -in -Charge Preparation Staff NiGruver Project Manage This report was prepared by WESTEC Services, Inc. of Tustin, California. Members of the WESTEC Services professional staff contributing to this report are listed below: Michael W. Wright, A.I.P. William R. Foley, A.I.P. Hans Giroux Nina Gruver Barbara Stewart Mohle/Perry $ Associates I I 57 M.A., Geography B.A., Political Science Ph.D. Candidate, Meteorology B.A., Geography B.A., Studio Arts, Graphics Concentration Traffic and Transportation Engineers (Consultant to WESTEC Services) 1 I SECTION 8.0 ' REFERENCES ' Bobrow/Thomas $ Associates (BTA), Master pZan Hoag MemoriaZ Hospi- taZ Presbyterian, 1979. ' California Air Resources Board. Air Quality Data, 1975-77, Volume 789, Sacramento, California. California Department of Transportation (CalTrans), ENFAC5 com- puter program and CALINE 2. California State Department of Health, Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, Orange County Administrative Office, Forecast and Analysis Center, Population projections. ' Long/Davy Associates. Noise AnaZysis prepared for WESTEC Services, 1977. Mohle/Perry $ Associates. Traffic study for Hoag MemoriaZ Hospital Presbyterian expansion. 1979. ' South Coast Air Quality Maintenance District, Air Quality Handbook for EnvironmentaZ Impact Reports, E1 Monte, California, 1,977. ' U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Procedures for areawide health facility planning. Public Health Service Publication No. 930-B-3-1963. ' U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Aircraft noise impact: planning guidelines for ZocaZ agencies, Wilsey & Ham, and Bolt, Beranek & Newman, 1972. ' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Compilation of air pollutant emission factors, AP-42 research, Research Triangle Park, ' North Carolina, 1978. Wyle Laboratories. Development of ground transportation systems noise contours for the San Diego region. Wyle Research Report WCR 73-8. 11 59 I 1 SECTION 9.0 ORGANIZATIONS AND PERSONS CONSULTED Connolly, Wayne, Newport Beach Police Department. Correspondence . regarding police services, March 27, 1979. Evans, Jim, Newport Beach Public Works Department. Telephone conversation regarding storm runoff and drainage, May 25, 1979. Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, Jane Maradei. Telephone con- versation regarding scheduling patterns for doctors in rela- tion to parking needs, April 24, 1979. Ibid, Brad Miller. Meeting regarding project scope, March, 1979. Ibid, Douglass Myers. Meetings and telephone conversations regarding hospital functions, organization, and project details, March and April, 1979. Meza, Ron, BTA. Meetings and telephone conversations regarding project design and master plan, March and April, 1979. Nolan, Benjamin B., Newport Beach Public Works Department. Corres- pondence regarding water and sewer services, March 28, 1979. Reid, Dennis, County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. Corres- pondence regarding sewage facilities, March 26, 1979. ' Richardson, D.C., Southern California Gas Company. Correspondence regarding provision of gas services, March 20, 1979. ' Wagner, A.J., Newport Beach Fire Department. Correspondence regarding fire service, April 4, 1979. Wright, C.V., Southern California Edison Company. Correspondence ' regarding provision of electricity, March 6, 1979. ' . 61 F 1 1 1 J i L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 APPENDICES APPENDIX A TRAFFIC STUDY A-1 I TRAFFIC AND PARKING ANALYSIS rFOR HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL EXPANSION 1 NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA I I I MAY 81 1979 I PREPARED BY ' MOHLE, PERRY & ASSOCIATES 2565 EAST CHAPMAN AVENUE, SUITE 124 ' FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA 92631 1 A-3 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE .INTRODUCTION 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4 TRAFFIC GENERATION 7 Hospital Generated Traffic Volumes 7 Trip Generation Rates 9 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 11 TRAFFIC IMPACT 13 Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis 13 Site Access 15 On -Site Circulation 16 PARKING 17 Existing'Supply 17 Parking Demands 19 MITIGATION MEASURES AND CONCLUSIONS 25 APPENDIX - 1% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS AND INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION p ., I II 1 I IJ INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings and recommendations of a traffic and parking study conducted for the Hoag Memorial Hospital in Newport Beach. The project location is shown in Exhibit 1. The Hoag Memorial Hospital is the second largest employer in Newport Beach and the third largest acute care hospital in Orange County. It has 420 beds at the present time. The hospital expansion plan is divided into seven phases. The traffic and parking study described in this report deals with the currently contemplated expansion, namely, the first two phases, to be completed in 1984. As illustrated in Exhibit 2, implementation of the first two phases includes two new buildings marked A and B. Building A is a multi -story, multi -function facility including patient rooms and laboratories. Building B will be constructed over the existing pediatric building site and will accommodate the admit- ting offices and the radiation therapy center. The existing structures housing the radiation therapy and admitting functions would be demolished after relocation to Building B is completed. The projected number of beds is 533. Staff increase is projected at 2,210, an increase of 25%. The proposed expansion plan includes a new entrance to the hospital complex easterly of the existing main entrance on Hospital Road. A-7 EXHIBIT PROJECT LOCATION MAP ,w' d r Z a S f o y Hnsprfr.L Rd. No.w�r M1.MORIA:. Nos��t^1. H �Q a 6a.�.st H10MyyA �. Z PFtaa frCT Lac�-7cw . l A-8 PHA Con of bui. med, Sur, Pat, lab etc PHA, Relc of The: Hui: and of stri EXHIBIT 2. PROPOSED EXPANSION of to Building B, and demolition of shaded structure. S EXISTING CONDITIONS Traffic access to Hoag Memorial Hospital is from Hospital Road. There are two access points. The primary entrance is located directly across from Placentia Avenue. This access drive serves the emergency care and ambulance areas, doctor's parking area, visitor's and outpatient parking lots, and is the main visitor entrance to the hospital complex. The secondary access road is located westerly of the existing buildings. It provides direct access to the visitors parking garage, truck loading docks and receiving areas, and is connected with the primary access road for ambulance circulation. Each of the access roads has two traffic lanes, one lane in each direction of travel. Egress traffic is controlled by stop signs on both access road approaches to Hospital Road. Hospital Road is striped for four traffic lanes (two in each direction) plus left turn pockets at its intersections with Placentia Avenue and Newport Boulevard. The intersection of Hospital Road with Placentia and the main entrance road to the hospital is controlled by four-way stop signs. Placentia Avenue is striped for two traffic lanes, one in each direction. Its northbound approach to Superior Avenue is striped for two lanes, without a left turn pocket. Its inter- section with Superior Avenue is signalized. The southbound approach is striped for one through lane, one right turn and one left turn lane each. Hospital Road connects Newport'Boule- vard to the east and Superior Boulevard to the west. Its intersection with Newport Boulevard is signalized. Its west- bound approach to Superior Boulevard is controlled by a stop A-10 I II I U II sign. This approach is striped for three lanes westbound, one for right turns, one for left turns, and an optional left or through lane. Superior Avenue is striped for four traffic lanes, two in each direction. At its intersection with Placentia Avenue, it is striped for two lanes plus a left turn pocket in each direc- tion of approach to the signalized intersection. Newport Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway are designated State highways serving local as well as regional travel demand. Newport Boulevard is designated State Route 55. It is striped for three traffic lanes plus a left turn pocket on each approach to Hospital Road. Coast Highway is designated State Route 1. It is generally striped for four traffic lanes, two in each direction. Special lane configurations are provided at its signalized intersection with Superior Avenue and its grade separated interchange with Newport Boulevard. The existing daily and evening peak hour traffic volumes on the streets and highways in the vicinity of the hospital are shown in Exhibit 3. According to the City of Newport Beach Master Plan of Streets and Highways (December, 1978), Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard are both designated "Major Road" (six lanes divided). Superior Avenue is a designated "Primary Road" (four lanes divided). Placentia Avenue is a designated "Secondary Road" (four lanes undivided). Hospital Road between Placentia and Newport Boulevard is designated "Secondary Road", and between Placentia and Superior Avenues it is a local street. A-11 EXHIBIT 3, EXISTPNG TRAFFIC VOLUMES u co PbUK-WAY y ciki) M 1 Norr�T�,.a Rv. 13.RsA eel. Ctal� $ � s rif � tip a NOfP�Y�. V H "l�►FFIa d d �7iO�Q Lo�iT HIpN�y,, �. x -24Ri LtzG.a�ntc� JXXXx ven-m wa Cxx?�X> PM. pFc, K14OUR VO4-uMr+ nlr�ac...LR A-12 TRAFFIC GENERATION HOSPITAL GENERATED TRAFFIC VOLUMES Traffic counts taken in April, 1979, on both entrances to the hospital complex showed that the 420-bed facility generated 6,447 daily vehicle trip ends (total traffic in both directions) on a weekday, 4,404 on a Saturday, and 3,579 on a Sunday. The hourly fluctuation of hospital generated traffic is illustrated in Exhibit 4. The on -site counts showed that inbound traffic had two peaks, namely, 7:00-8:00 a.m. and 3:00- 4:00 p.m. Outbound traffic had a very pronounced peak, namely, 3:00-4:00 p.m. The peaking characteristic coincides with the employee arrival and departure periods. Employees are divided into three shifts. The first shift (1,122* employees) works from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., and most departures occur between 3:00 and 3:30 p.m. The second shift (453 employees) starts at 3:00 p.m. and ends at 11:00 p.m. The third shift (193 employees) hours are 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. There is normally a 30- minute overlap between incoming and outgoing shift employees. visitation hours are 2:00-4:00 p.m. and 6:00-8:00 p.m. The 6:00-8:00 p.m. period is normally the peak visitor period. The 6:00-8:00 p.m. visitor peak traffic is small compared with the 3:00-4:00 p.m. peak employee traffic. The overall 6:00-8:00 p.m. hourly traffic is about one-half that of the 3:00-4:00 p.m. peak traffic. *Excludes non-resident doctors. A-13 r TRIP GENERATION RATES Based upon on -site traffic counts, the weekday traffic to and from the hospital was 6,447 vehicles per day. There are 420 beds at the present time. The weekday trip generation rate is therefore 15.35 vehicle trip ends per bed. A trip end is defined as a two -directional vehicle movement at the origin or destination of a trip. The weekday trip generation rate obtained from on -site traffic counts is slightly higher than the average rates for all types of hospitals reported in the Institute of Transpor- tation Engineers Informational Report* (average 12.16 vehicle trip ends per day, range 3 to 32), the Orange County Road Department (10 vehicle trip ends per day) and tfie City of Los Angeles (9.4 vehicle trip ends per day). It is concluded that the trip generation rates derived from the actual counts should be used for planning the expan- sion of this facility. On a per employee basis, the weekday trip generation rate is 3.65 vehicle trip ends per full -time -equivalent employee. There are 1,768 full -time -equivalent employees. The ITE report indicates,a range of 2 to 11 vehicle trips per employee. 1 The existing gross building floor area is 525,650 square feet. On a per unit floor area basis, the weekday trip genera- tion rate is 12.26 vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet. jThe ITE report only indicates an average value of about 17 vehicle trips per 1,000 square feet of floor area. *"Trip Generation" by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1976. ' A-15 The future number of beds is the most reliable information on this project compared with other planning data such as future equivalent -full-time employees and floor area. There- fore, for the purpose of this study, the projection of trip generation is based upon trip ends per bed. The projected future number of beds is 533, an increase of 113 from the existing. The estimation of future trip genera- tion is calculated, in the following table. TABLE 1. HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL EXPANSION - WEEKDAY VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION 24-Hour 7-8 a.m. 3-4 p.m. 5-6 p.m. Existing Volumes 61447 477 813 351 (April, 1979) $29 in 298 in 135 in 148 out 515 out 216 out Generation Rate 15.35 1.13 1.94 .83 (vehicle trip ends per bed) ,78 in .71 in .32 in .35 out 1.23 out .51 out Project Generated 11735 128 219 94 Incremental Trips 88 in 80 in 36 in 40 out 139 out 58 out The above calculation suggests that approximately 1,750 additional vehicle trips (27% increase from existing) would be generated on a weekday and 94 trips (27% increase from existing) during the 5:00-6:00 p.m. street peak hour. A-16 H J 1 F-I II II J TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT The distribution of traffic to and from the hospital was estimated from on -site counts of traffic movements at the main entrance to the hospital. The "turning movement" counts showed that 27% of the generated traffic was oriented north -south on Placentia Avenue, 66% easterly on Hospital Road, and 7% west- erly on Hospital Road. The estimated incremental traffic volumes were assigned to the adjacent streets and intersections in proportion to the existing directional distribution and percentages of turning movements. This method assumes that future employee residence locations and visitor origins would not be significantly changed. Exhibit 5 shows the estimated project generated weekday daily and evening peak hour (5:0076:00 p.m.) traffic volumes. A-17 I EXHIBIT ASSIGNMENT OF PROJECT GENERATED INCREMENTAL TRAFFIC /cat 4 6) i v � 0 • d o. (61 y tut "r rr po) �{4t 4p6*4T/..%- Rv. t621 1146 MLh RN:. J Nof♦IrN. 3 t ee�hxr HtgMw�Y test - LL�G$ND ( A K RM. Pfahlt IioU1G � �• P.M. A-18 U I TRAFFIC IMPACT INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS The following intersections in the vicinity of the hospital were investigated. They are: 1. Coast Highway and Superior Avenue 2. Newport Boulevard and Hospital Road 3. Placentia Avenue and Superior Avenue 4. Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard 5. Coast Highway and Orange 6. Coast Highway and Riverside 7. Hosprital Road and Placentia Avenue 8. Hospital Road and Superior Avenue The signalized intersections numbered 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6 above were analyzed in accordance with City Administrative Procedure S-1 dated February 26, 1979. 1. Coast Highway and Superior Avenue. This intersection has an existing capacity utilization ratio of 0.94 in the evening peak hour. The estimated project generated peak hour traffic, as shown in Exhibit 4, is negligible. The generated additional traffic will be less than 18 of existing p.m. peak traffic. The "1% Traffic Volume Analysis" worksheet is shown in the appendix. The potential traffic impact is negligible. 2. Hospital Road and Newport Boulevard. The existing intersection capacity utilization ratio in the p.m. peak hour is 0.79. The incremental project traffic would result in slightly higher capacity utilization, from 0.79 to 0.81. The I.C.U. worksheet is shown in the appendix. The potential traffic impact is negligible. 3. Placentia Avenue and Superior Avenue. This intersec- tion has an existing p.m. peak hour capacity utilization factor of 0.54. The predominant movements are the Superior Avenue eastbound through movement and Placentia Avenue northbound right turn to eastbound on Superior Avenue. The project gener- ated additional p.m. peak hour traffic would increase the existing I.C.U. by less than 0.01, a negligible increase. There would be no adverse impact on this intersection. 4. Coast Highway and Newport Boulevard. This is a grade - separated interchange with Newport Boulevard crossing over Coast Highway. The estimated project generated additional p.m. peak hour traffic would use the Newport Boulevard southbound offramp to Coast Highway eastbound, and for traffic inbound to the hospital, Newport Avenue would be used. The potential traffic impact at this interchange is negligible. 5. Coast Highway and Orange. The project generated additional traffic is estimated at less than 13 of existing p.m. peak 2h hour traffic. The potential traffic impact is negligi- ble. 6. Coast Highway and Riverside. The "1% Traffic Volume Analysis" for this intersection suggests that the additional p.m. peak 2� hour traffic generated by the project will be less than 1% of existing traffic. The potential traffic impact would be negligible. 7. Hospital Road and Placentia Avenue. This intersection is controlled by four-way stop signs. The hospital main entrance road is the south leg of the intersection. The four-way stop control appeared to be working efficiently during the p.m. peak hour. At this time of the day, the predominant traffic move- ments are right turns from Hospital Road westbound to northbound on Placentia Avenue, and Placentia Avenue southbound left turn A-20 i I to eastbound on Hospital Road. The project generated additional traffic on the main entrance would increase the existing peak hour volume by approximately 86 vehicles, and would not signifi- cantly adversely impact the four-way stop intersection. Traffic signal control is not warranted. ' 8. Hospital Road and Superior Avenue. This is a "T" intersection where Hospital Road ends at Superior Avenue. ' Hospital Road is controlled by a stop sign. It has two left turn lanes and one right turn lane on the approach to Superior Avenue. The predominant movement is the left turn movement, approximately 160 vehicles per hour in the p.m. peak hour. ' The project generated additional traffic on the westbound approach is estimated at four left turning vehicles during the - p.m. peak hour, and would have negligible impact on the inter- section. This intersection will be signalized by January, 1980, (estimated) as a City -County project. ISITE ACCESS Presently egress from the hospital is facilitated by the four-way stop control at the main access road. The second drive westerly of the main entrance has direct access to the parking garage and truck docks and provides for emergency vehicle circulation. 1 A third drive is shown on the proposed site plan (Exhibit 2). This third drive is located easterly of the main entrance. The construction of an additional egress point easterly of the I four-way stop intersection would reduce the traffic volume exiting from the main entrance, since approximately 66% of the hospital generated traffic is oriented easterly on Hospital Road. The main entrance carries approximately 334 vehicles I A-21 during the p.m. peak hour. The new exit would relieve the main entrance of congestion during periods of shift changes (3:00- 3:30 p.m., particularly). The proposed third drive is located just westerly of the crest of a vertical curve on Hospital Road, Egress left turn movements from this drive will be hazardous, since the exiting motorist's sight distance easterly over the crest of the hill is restricted. The exit drive should be so designed as to permit only right turn movements onto Hospital Road. ON -SITE CIRCULATION The construction of Building B housing the relocated admitting offices would improve internal access compared with the presently circuitous access pattern. Owing to possible rearrangement of parking areas which may become necessary as the Buildings A and B are completed, the internal drives and circulation pattern in the eastern part of the hospital ground would probably be revised. Internal circulation and access to the parking garage, emergency vehicle parking and receiving areas are adequately designed for and do not present any problem.' A-22 PARKING EXISTING SUPPLY The hospital has 1,145 parking spaces on -site plus another 45 spaces on the Park Lido West site, for a total of 1,190 spaces for hospital use. There are 420 beds at present. The existing ratio of parking spaces per bed is 2.7:1. The break- down of parking spaces by hospital facility is shown in the following table. The parking areas are shown in Exhibit 5. II. EXISTING PARKING Parking Structure: 4 floors Top deck TOTAL Emergency Power Plant Rad. Therapy Surgicenter Visitor/Dr. Overflow Conf. Center Doctor's Lot MA/Main Entrance TOTAL Park Lido West TOTAL *available for hospital A-23 TOTAL 752 206 958 29 13 4 14 38 5 64 20 1,145 45* 1,190 EMERGENCY PARKING to be removed (17 spaces) AND AMBULAN PARKING RADIATION THERAPY PARKING EXHIBIT 5, PARKING AREAS SURGICAL CENTER PARKING o be removed VISITOR PARKING/ DOCTOR'S OVERFLOW PARKING V DOCTOR'S PARKING -- ,,, ADMITTING AND DISCHARGE PARKING EMPLOYEE AND VISITOR PARKING A-24 I PARKING DEMANDS In addition to analyzing existing demands, three methods ' of calculating future demands were analyzed. IEXISTING DEMAND The existing parking demand on an average weekday can be calculated using the following equation.l ' Y = -1101 + 0.909 x2 + 0.349 x3 + 1191.5 x4 ' where Y is the parking demand in spaces, x2 is the number of beds, x2 = 420 at present, ' x3 is the number of employees, x3 = 17682 FTE x4 is the occupancy, x4 = 85%2 Substituting the values of x2, x3 and x4 into the equation, the existing parking demand Y is found to be 911 spaces. This does not include parking for the conference center and other meeting rooms. The peak parking demand occurs between 2:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. when the first and second shifts overlap, namely when the second shift employees arrive while the first shift employees are still at the hospital. The peaking characteristic of parking accumulation at this time period of the day is evident 1Source: "Hospital Parking and Access", Eno Foundation for Transportation, Inc. 2Source: From Hoag Hospital staff information. ' A-25 from the hourly traffic counts at the entrances. The hourly counts of inbound and outbound traffic were shown in Exhibit 4. The accumulative hourly difference between inbound and outbound traffic is equal to the number of cars remaining on -site, namely, "parking accumulation". A random sample of counts in the 958-car parking garage on weekdays found that the number of empty spaces were as follows: at 7:30 a.m. - 480, at 2:00 p.m. - 157, at 3:00 p.m. - 30,* and at 4:00 p.m. - 262. Counts in the garage at 3:00 p.m. when the shift overlap occurs were made on three weekdays and found that the empty spaces were as follows: Monday - 30, Wednesday - 56, Thursday - 79. The doctor'; parking lot had the following empty spaces at 3:00 p.m.: 25 on a Wednesday and 17 on a Thursday. At 7:30 p.m. on a Thursday, there were 36 empty spaces. The following parking areas were found fully occupied at 3:00 p.m. on a Thursday: visitor's, Surgical and emergency. The outpatient/discharge/admitting parking area had two empty spaces. FUTURE DEMAND BY REGRESSION MODEL The projected traffic parking demand can be calculated using the same formula used in the foregoing. The values of x2, x3 and x4 are projected by the hospital staff as follows: x2 , number of beds = 533 x3 , number of employees = 2,210 (25% increase from existing) x4 occupancy = 85% II 11 A-26 11 I I I 1.1 I I! I! The projected parking demand is: Y = -1,101 + 0.909 x2 + 0.349 x3 + 1,191.5 x4 _ -1,101 + 0.909 (533) + 0.349 (2,210) + 1,191.5 (85%) = 1,168 spaces In addition, there are eight meeting rooms which from time to time are used by outside groups. The seating capacities are as follows: board room - 45, planning room - 10, medical library - 15, nursing conference - 12, meeting rooms A and B - 30 each, auditorium 1 and 2 - 100 each. In February, 1979, two of the workdays had five meetings each day. Assuming the largest five meeting rooms are occupied, the total seating capacity is 305. Assuming an 80% occupancy, the number of persons attending these meetings is 244. Based on an observed automobile occupancy of 1.41*, the number of parking spaces needed is 173. The projected parking demand is 1,168 + 173 = 11341. PARKING REQUIREMENTS BY CITY CODE The following is an analysis of parking demands based on the City's Zoning Ordinance. *Based upon a Thursday mid -afternoon sample of 118 vehicle count. A-27 PRESENT (1979) 420 beds x 1 car per bed 10 resident doctors x 1 car per doctor 1,122 employees* x 1 car per employee Conference Center 1 car/5 seats PROJECTED (1984) 533 beds x 1 car per bed 10 resident doctors x 1 car per doctor 11403 employees* x 1 car per employee Conference Center 1 car/5 seats 420 10 1,122 73 1,625 spaces 533 10 1,403 73 2,019 spaces Under the City Code requirement, 2,019 parking spaces would have to be provided for the expanded hospital complex. The Code requirement for the existing (1979) conditions is 1,625 spaces. The total available number of spaces is 1,190. The Code requirement is therefore 435 spaces more than the existing spaces. As it was discussed in the foregoing, counts by MPA at 3:00 p.m. showed that there were 30 empty spaces in the garage alone. The 3:00 p.m. is the peak parking condition of the day. Therefore, it appears that the Code requirements are higher than actual demand. *Number of employees in largest shift, namely, first shift 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. A-28 D C i I� I I PARKING DEMAND ANALYSIS BASED ON FACILITY AND 'VEHICLE OCCUPANCY The following parking demand analysis is based on person facility occupancy and vehicle occupancies to determine parking space demand. The peak parking condition occurs between 2:30 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. when the first and second shifts overlap. The maxi- mum parking demand at this time period of the day with the proposed expansion is estimated at 1,561* spaces. The method used to estimate parking demand is shown in Table III. This third analysis is considered the most realistic of the three because more of the specific factors influencing the actual demand at this hospital have been considered in the analysis. .In summary, the demand analyses have provided the following: Existing supply of parking spaces = 1,190* Estimated demand for parking spaces for 533 bed facility: 1) Eno Foundation formula 1,341 2) City Code 2,019 3) Facility and vehicle occupancy method 1,561 It is concluded from the results of the foregoing compara- tive analyses that an additional 371* spaced need to be provided to support an increase of 113 beds and 25% increase in person- nel. The 371 spaces represent an approximate 31% increase•of parking spaces. The expansion plan presently calls for an addition of 350 parking spaces. It is concluded that 371 parking spaces should be provided for the expanded facility. *New information was provided y the applicant subsequent to com- pletion of this report which increased onsite parking needs. Ad- justments in parking requirements are contained in the main body of the report, page 30. A-29 I TABLE III: MAXIMUM PARKING DEMAND, WEEKDAY 2:30-3:30 P.M. Employees Projected lst shift = 1,403 (per Hospital Projected 2nd shift = 566 data) TOTAL = 1,969 (shifts overlapped) 1,969 x 7 = 11406 (average daily employees on duty) Observed auto occupancy = 1.29* Employee parking 1,406 : 1.29 = 1,090 spaces Meeting Rooms 305 seats x 100% t 1.41 people/ (concurrent use) car = 216 spaces Doctor's Assume 25% of 400 staff doctors Parking with car occupancy of 1.0/car require parking from 2:30-3:S0 P.M. = 100 spaces (Visitor's 533 beds x 85$ occupancy = 113 spaces Parking beds visitor car (Emergency 29 (existing and future) = 29 spaces (Power Plant 13 (existing and future) = 13 spaces ** TOTAL 1,561 spaces *Observed sample around 8:00 a.m. on Friday, May 4, 1979: 69 cars with one person, 13 cars with 2 people, 2 bicycles and 9 people walked. ** New information was'rorovided by the aroolicant subseauent to completion of this report. It is contained in the main body of the report, page 32. I 11 I I I I I 11 I -1 I A-30 11 i 1 MITIGATION MEASURES AND CONCLUSIONS The foregoing analysis showed that of all the five signal- ized intersections in the vicinity of the hospital, two of them would generate traffic in excess of 1% existing p.m. peak 2h 1 hour traffic. The Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) analysis for these two intersections was made and the results 1 showed that neither intersection has a projected I.C.U. greater than 0.90. Therefore, no mitigation measure is required. 1 It is recommended that the proposed new opening onto Hospital Road be limited to "right turns out" only. I IF J I 1 The addition of 113 beds with a projected 25% increase in hospital personnel will increase the parking demand by an esti- mated 370'kspaces. The current expansion plan calls for 350 additional parking spaces. New information regarding this issue was provided by the City subsequent to completion of this report. It is contained in the main body of the report, page 31. A-31 APPENDIX 1% TRAFFIC VOLUME ANALYSIS AND INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION 'WORKSHEETS A-32 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection (iasr�t�Nwar- P�ALPi/JA-Sub glop. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/spring 1978) Approach Existing Peak 24 Peak 2h Hour Regional Approved Projected 1% of Projected Project Direction I Hour Volume Growth Projects Peak 24 Hour Peak 21s Hour Volume Peak 2h Hour Volume Peak 2h Hourl Volt" Volume Volume I Northbound �O Cl $ -- —' �0 5 gj 17 -' 1 �Southbound Z30,2j -- Z�jO `F) I Eastbound 3zo2 �o% ¢(�, 3317 stbound 3460 ..74 352 38$6 3q — 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 231 Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. A-33 DATE :`T-3o- PROJECT: Ffot+,G ME.MOF.AAL HO5Pl-r^L EXFA'.fJ51(=N FORM I ' PROJECT: HOAG MEMQ9JAL HOSPITAL INTERSECTION: 4 AST-dlaHW,AY- jNL870A - DATE: 4-3p-%� r✓' U pE R101L i!nl• D N• MOVEMENT 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 14185 NL NT _ NR SL ST SR + EL 2. ET ' ER WL WT WR _ _ ' PROPOSED SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS YEAR t A-34 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection 1 eWr,*R-' BG. — N06pI1AL KD. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1979) ' Existing Peak 24 Approved Projected Projected IfAppro a:hh Direction Peak 2k Hour Hour Regional Projects Peak 2� Hour 1% of Peek 24 Hour Project Peak 24 Hourl I Volume Growth Volum= Peek 2N Hour Volume Voluak Volume Vale" i ' Northbound -3569 i ' i5outhbound — 3551 i Eastbound` 1955 76 ' estbounde 4371 10 2O [j Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volume 0 Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required.. ' A-35 DATE:4-3o—�'� ' PROJECT: f �o,4.G MEMaR3AL }�iO�p1Ta�L F�)'.d.►J51oN FARM I PROJECT: HOA.CG MEM0%1AL H05PITAL ' WERSECTION: 14Abj C BLdD.— H05PIrAL RD. bATE: —3G—%q 1 P_M.pu PROPOSED SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS I YEAR ' A -so I INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Intersection Newagpi- at.- NaSprrAL kj>. (Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average inter pr ni g lloveuent EXISTING Lanes Cap PROPOSED Lanes Cap EXIST PK HR Vol. EXIST V/C Ratio REGIONAL GROWTH VOL. CONITTED PROJECT VOL. PROJECTED Y/C Ratio w/o Protect Vol. PROJECT Volume PROJECT V/C Ratio NL I -1b00 153 •lo* S • loob NT 7 3-,+800 100 .25 - NR qq - SL I -lboo 30 -02 — •ores ST 3 - 80 1450 - • 3 g SR to-9 .32 g EL I - I o0 16 •10 8 •10g4 ET I - lbo0 X31 •►4 I •/ Iq ER I-r oo 36 •2-3 18 •1406 WL AP3 - WT X-5wo 2A5 •131, 10 •/344 WR YELLOWTIKE ' 10 . EXISTING INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION EXISTING PLUS CNNITTED PLUS REGIONAL MONTH W NWOSEO IMPROVINENTS I.C.U. EXISTING PLUS CONITTED PLUS REGIONAL GROWTH PLUS PROTECT I.C.U. 8 117 x[� Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 0 Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 Projected plus project traffic I..C.U. with systems improvements will be less than or equal to 0.90 --------------------------------- Description of system improvement: 7V 19 u A-37 DATE: 4-30-74 PROJECT: ��'°'GI /(�EM012JAL. �IOSpIT4N- rcXP.4n1SfOn1 FORM II 3 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection FLAGEN rlg - 511 paxtog. (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1979) Approach Direction Existing Peak 2y Hour volume Peek A Hour Regional Growth Yoluma Approved projects Peak 24 Hour V lume Projected Peak 24 Hour Volume 1% Of Projected Peak 24 Hour Volume Prof act ' Peek 28 Hours Voluak Northbound .L '1 L'b—t ^ �— 1 e) 15outhbound 6 58 ^ 7 l o Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2. Hour Traffic Volume Q Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilisation (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. I r F 11 A-38 DATE:-4 —3c-79 I PROJECT: Ha>,e.G MEMol21^l., N©SPIT^I- FORM z r PROJECT: HOAG MEMORIAL HC.5PI-rAL INTERSECTION: _FL_AC6iq-rIA - 5Up>r12109_ _DATE: bee D U PROPOSED SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS YEAR A-39 INTERSECTION CAPACITY UTILIZATION ANALYSIS Intersection i�LRG6N TIA— 6U PE iz IOR. {Existing Traffic Volumes Based on Average nter pr ng 9 9 Novurnt EXISTING Lines Cap PROPOSED Lana Cap EXIST PK RA Vol. EXIST V/C Ratio REGIONAL GROWTH VOL. CO MITTED PROJECT VOL. PROJECTED V/C Ratio w/o Protect Vol. PROJECT Volume PROJECT V/C Ratio NL 15 NT I-3200 Flo •1569 11 •16�2" NR 2-77 b SL 1-I60o z8 •0115 40175 ST 1-1(600 09 48( 1 0713 SR 1-160o 3.r !zoo — •0700 EL I--Ua 39 •02-t4 ?5 • e 263 ET 2.-3=o 540 .use .1703* ER g — WL 1-l600 156 -0975 '- •o975* WT -320o x19 o a — •o a� WR (y _ TELLONTiNE 10 f +10 EXISTING IN761ISECTIN WACITV UTILIZATION EXISTING PLUS C"11711D PLUS REGIWAL GWM Y/►110POSED tWNVG n$ I.C.0 EXISTING PLUS COIMtTTO PLUS REGINk &VM PLUS PROJECT I.C.U. 7 I I I I I I I i I ❑x Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be less than or equal to 0.90 Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. will be greater than 0.90 ❑ Projected plus project traffic I.C.U. with systems improvements will be less than or equal to 0.90 �. -------------------------...----� Description of system improvement: .� I A-40 DATE• 4-3o-m ■ PROJECT: HcAA-q M`'-MOKJAL WasrITaL F.APA.NSIOPJ FORM II I I I I I I I I I I l� I I C I I I� I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection Cost-s7- 141G Pi w ^ Y — ga (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1978) Approach Direction Existing Peak 2k Hour Peak 24 Hour Regional Approved Projects Projected Peak 21s Hour 1% of Projected Peak 24 Hour Project Vol we Growth Peak 24 Hour Voluae Volume Peak 2y Hour Volume Volume Vol une Northbound / (O , Lf 2, i ._. ISouthbound '�' I -- t Eastbound �.� I o 57 �j-l<, a713 �7 I estbound 5088 110 338 5$3(� 55 g © Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 211 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. A-41 DAT 4 3o i� PROJECT: Hc>^Cr MEM0R1AL HOSPlT^L F,xP.4Nsaon� FORM I PROJECT: HoAc7 MEMOPJAL 1405}PJTAL WERSECTION: pA5 �_ �f CrHWAY- BRA r a DATE: -3c, I•n+.P.N• MOVEMENT 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1 6.5 NL NT ,• NR _.._ SL ST _ SR EL ET ER 2 WL WT WR PROPOSED SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS YEAR A-42 I I 1% Traffic Volume Analysis Intersection CoA.s-r HIGHWAY— R1VERs1J>C (Existing Traffic Volumes based on Average Winter/Spring 1978) Approach Gi rection I Existing Peak 2h Hour Volume Peak 2y Hour Regional Growth Vol une Approved Projects Peak 2y Hour Volume Projected Peak 2h Hour Volume 1% of Projected Peak 2y Hour Vol=@ Project Peak 211 Hour] VOluw Northbound 30 '—' 30 1 -- 1Southbound c bund 3666 Iq 0 1 $S � f L 3871 B4- 356 4311 43 16 x❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be less than 1% of Projected Peak 2.11 Hour Traffic Volume ❑ Project Traffic is estimated to be greater than 1% of Projected Peak 2h Hour Traffic Volumen. Intersection Capacity Utilization (I.C.U.) Analysis is required. A-43 c IPROJECT: HoP.UMaA4nP .AL HObPITAL rzxrA,,151czN FORM I PROJECT: H0^Gr 106MQJZJAL HOSPITAL I INTERSECTION:efQi0.ST��GIiLUA`L— 1�IV�RSID� DATE: Mf t A-44 APPENDIX B AIR QUALITY STUDY B-1 HOAG HOSPITAL EXPANSION AIR QUALITY STUDY MAY, 1979 Prepared by: Hans D. Giroux Air Quality Analyst WESTEC Services, Inc. 180 East Main Street, Suite 150 Tustin, California 92680 (714) 838-4644 M Ll f! 1. INTRODUCTION The Hoag Hospital Expansion, because it will generate addi- tional vehicular traffic around the hospital site, may increase the air pollution exposure of patients and staff. Given, however, that the hospital on the bluff above the ocean is among the best ven- tilated areas of southern California, such potential degradation is very minimal. Since hospital patients constitute a class of recep- tors particularly susceptible to additional respiratory distress, it is important to quantify the impact of air pollutants as well as possible. As noted in the following discussion, the impact of additional traffic near Hoag is insignificant and is considerably less than if the hospital were located at a more stagnant inland location. 2. METEOROLOGY/CLIMATOLOGY The Mediterranean climate around Newport Beach, as with all of southern California, is controlled by the position and strength of the subtropical high-pressure center over the Pacific Ocean. The influence of the high center and the proximity to the moderating effects of the ocean create the characteristic climatic features of the area -- cool summers and warm winters, comfortable humidities, low rainfall totals confined to the winter months, refreshing onshore breezes, and persistent temperature inversions that lead to potentially degraded air quality throughout the year. The average annual temperature of 61OF is dominated by the oceanic marine air influence with only 14 degrees temperature difference between January (54°F) and August (68°F). Temperatures rarely exceed 90°F or drop below freezing. In contrast to the homogeneity of temperature, rainfall is highly variable. Most of the 11.88 inches of rain falls from late November to early April. Precipitation totals undergo irregular cyclical variations with the rainfall in a very wet month (7-8 inches), often exceeding the entire annual total (3-4 inches) during drought conditions. Winds around Newport Beach, which control both the initial rate of dilution from pollutant sources and the ultimate regional trajectory, are usually favorable in maintaining excellent air quality in southern California coastal environs. Newport Beach experiences three prevailing wind directions. At night (especially in cooler months), a light offshore breeze from the northeast blows out to sea. During the early morning hours, a southeasterly wind' parallel to the coastline blows toward Long Beach. In the after- noon, the parallel wind component is replaced by a brisk wind perpendicular to the coastline from the southwest. In spite of the lack of local s-tagnation, winds nevertheless contribute to poor area air quality. The drainage component during winter evenings may bring emissions from inland areas toward the coast. The reversal of the sea breeze the next day then allows I B-5 these pollutants to "slosh" back and forth across the coastal areas. A second consideration is that despite the good ventilation characteristics at Newport Beach itself, the fact that average wind speeds are low (5.2 mph) means that reactive pollutants have ample time to be converted from exhaust hydrocarbons to unhealthy oxi- dants in their slow traverse across the basin, Thus, although Newport Beach normally has excellent air quality due to the clean southeast and southwest winds, any locally generated emissions will adversely impact inland air quality. In addition to the problem of weak winds, two types of temper- ature inversions form in southern California that contribute to any potential air.quality problems. When the sinking air in the high pressure center is undercut by a shallow layer of cool marine air, a marine/subsidence inversion is created. This inversion allows for local mixing, but places an effective lid on the entire basin. Low-level capping inversions are present on 80 percent of all summer afternoons and are primarily responsible for basinwide ozone and visibility problems. On cool, clear, winter nights, the air , near the ground cools by contact, while the air aloft remains warm. These radiation inversions thus formed on 70 percent of all winter nights inhibit vertical mixing near pollutant sources such as freeways or parking facilities and cause localized pollution "hot spots." Under light, offshore winds, the vehicular pollutants trapped at inland sites may drift toward Newport Beach and lead to somewhat degraded air quality. In•contrast to the rest of the air basin, where summers are by far the worst smog season, winters with localized pollutant levels may actually be of more concern in the Newport Beach area. 3. AIR QUALITY Baseline air quality in Newport Beach is among the best in southern California. In summer, clean ocean breezes usually main- tain healthful air (low ozone levels) except when a polluted air mass moves southeastward along the coastline from more industrialized/ populated areas of the basin. In winter, Newport Beach is far enough removed from the heaviest traffic concentrations such that the frequency of standard exceedances for carbon monoxide or nitro- gen dioxide is similarly low. Ambient air quality standards (AAQS) are an outgrowth of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1970. They are designed to protect that segment of the population most sensitive to respiratory dis- tress (called sensitive receptors and normally include hospital patients) from any known or anticipated adverse effects of air pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency promulgated stan- dards for six pollutant species, with states retaining the right to adopt even stricter standards. Since California has unique air quality problems and California state AAQS predate the federal standards, some diversity between federal and state clean air requirements naturally exists. The AAQS currently applicable in California are shown in Table 3.1. M. TABLE 3.1 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS APPLICABLE IN CA4IFORNIA California Standards Federal Standards Averaging Concentration Primary I Secondary Pollutant Tlme Photochemical Sznte as Oxidants 1 Hour 0.10 ppm 160 ug/ma Pnmary (Measured as Ozone) (200 ug/m3) (0.08 ppm) * Standard Carbon Mono,tioe 12 Hours 10 ppm I (11 mg/m3) Same as 8 Hours 10 mgrm3 --' (9 ppm) Primary 1 Hour 40 ppm 40 mg/ma (46 mg/m3) (35 ppm) Standard Ndrogen Dioxide Annual Average a me as _ _ _ (0.05 ppm) eery Standard 1 Hour 0.25 ppm • (470 ug/m3) Sulfur Dioxide Annual Average - _ _ 80 uglmt - - • 10.03 ppm) 24 Hours 0.05 ppm in comb. w/ 365 ug/m3 0.10 ppm Ox or (0.14 ppm) --- 100 ug/ma TSP 3 Hours _ 1300 ug/m3 _ _ _ (0.5 PPm) 1 Hour 0.5 ppm :. (1310 ug/mt) Suspenaeo Particulate Annual Geo- 60 ug/m3 75 ug/mt 60 ugrmt Matter metric Mean 24 Hours I 100 ug/rat 260 ug/ins 750 ug/m3 Lead 'Particulate) 30-Day Averace 1.5 ug/mt I -- Hydrogen Sulfide 1 Hour 0.03 ppm --- (42 uglm3) - - Hydrocarbons Same, as (Corrected far Methane) 3 Hours --- 160 ug/mt Pnmary (6-9 a.m.) (0.24 ppm) Standard Ethylene 8 Hours 0.1 ppm --- I Hour 0.5 ppm --- --- Visibility-Reducing 1 observation In sufficient Panicles amount to reduce the prevailing - visibility to 10 --- -^ miles when the relative humidity a is less than 70% Sulfate (Particulate) 24 Hours 25 ug+m3 --- -- ppm - parts per million pptm - parts per ten million ppnm - parts per nunared million * Recommended for revision to 0.12 ppm by EPA ug/mt - micrograms per cubic meter ** Short-term standard to be developed as required by Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 B-7 To the extent that Orange County creates its own air quality problems, the principal source of those problems is the automobile, Of the 2,000 tons of pollutants emitted in the County each day, 99 percent of the carbon monoxide (CO), 83 percent of the oxides of nitrogen (NOx), 67 percent of the reactive hydrocarbons (RHC), and 52 percent of the particulates (TSP) are due to vehicular sources. Although vehicular sources continue to decline with additional stringent automobile emission standards, the rate of air quality improvement will not be sufficient to attain all AAQS by 1987 as required by law. In order to accelerate the rate of air quality improvement, an air quality management plan (AQMP) is currently under consideration in the South Coast Air Basin. It relies heavily on stationary source control and on technological improvements in emissions control. if the AQMP is not successful in offsetting the pollutant increases associated with continued County growth, growth limita- tions may ultimately have to be instituted that might ultimately negate requirements for improved health care services such as the proposed project. The nearest air quality monitoring stations to Newport Beach that can be used to characterize existing air quality are in Costa Mesa and Laguna Beach. Although the exposed location of Hoag Hospital may yield somewhat better air quality than the higher traffic density at the Costa Mesa station along Harbor Boulevard on the Fairview -State Hospital grounds, the general regional charac- teristics found near Newport Beach should be well represented by the existing monitoring resources. The data from the two AQMP monitoring sites are shown in Table 3.2. They indicate that AAQS for all pollutant species except sulfur dioxide may sometimes be exceeded in the area. Given the range of differences between the Costa Mesa and Laguna Beach meas- urements, baseline levels around Hoag Hospital may be expected to be somewhat intermediate between the two stations. Based on the expectations of the AQMP in reducing oxidants and continued automo- bile emissions improvements for carbon monoxide and the oxides of nitrogen, Newport Beach should come close to meeting almost all clean air standards by the 1987 deadline except perhaps for parti- culates. Compared to other locations in the County and the entire basin, the Hoag Hospital location is exceedingly good from, a health- ful air quality view. 4. AIR QUALITY IMPACT The principal air quality concern of this project, especially since it is a hospital, is that the increased traffic levels may cause a local (microscale) degradation of air quality. As noted previously, air quality on the bluff is extremely good because of excellent ventilation and a clean, oceanic air influx. As traffic levels increase at the Hospital Road/Placentia Avenue intersection, it I 11 B-8 W 6 ,10" " i 00" " " Vww " " " " M ISR " TABLE 3.2 AIR QUALITY SUMMARY - NEWPORT BEACH AREA Pollutant Standard (AAQS) 1975 Costa Mesa 1976 1977 1975 Laguna Beach 1976 1977 Oxidant 19 days 17 days 38 days --- --- --- 1 hr. >0.08 ppm 0.18 ppm 0.16 ppm 0.18 ppm --- --- --- Oxidant 11 days 10 days 31 days --- --- --- 1 hr. >0.10 ppm 0.18 ppm 0.16 ppm 0.18 ppm --- --- --- Nitrogen Dioxide 3 days 8 days 0 days 2 days --- --- 1 hr. >0.25 ppm 0.35 ppm 0.34 ppm 0.23 ppm 0.35 ppm --- --- Carbon Monoxide 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days 0 days oy 1 hr. >35 ppm 31 ppm 27 ppm 18 ppm 16 ppm 20 ppm 13 ppm Carbon Monoxide 40 days 57 days 20 days 4 days 4 days 0 days 8 hr. >9 ppm 23 ppm --- --- 10 ppm --- --- Carbon Monoxide 31 days 24 days 5 days 2 days 0 days 0 days 12 hr. >10 ppm 20 ppm --- --- 10 ppm --- --- Sulfur Dioxide --- Not --- --- --- --- 1, 3, 24 hrs., annual --- exceeded --- --- --- --- Suspended Particulates 37% 28% 21% 15% 27% --- 24 hrs. >100 pg/m3 177 pg/m3 --- 202 pg/m3 164 pg/m3 --- 159159 pg/m3 Suspended Particulates Annual Mean >60 pg/m3 74 pg/m3 73 11g/m3 --- 73 pg/m3 74 Ug/m3 --- CODE: Frequency Exceeded Maximum Level during Interval Shown --- Not observed or reported . however, that healthful air could ultimately be threatened by automobile exhaust. Minor additional pollutants will result from the demolition of the pediatrics building and the old north wing and the construction of the new structure itself, The additional energy consumption due to increased electrical demand may also generate stationary source pollutants that are emitted at power plants throughout the basin. Using the EPA's standard construction/demolition emission factor of 1.2 tons/acre/month of activity and assuming 50 percent control by regular watering, the project -related fugitive dust burden is less than one ton per month since less than one acre of property is involved. The daytime southwest winds will carry this dust across Hospital Road and may create a temporary nuisance on cars parked along the street and the medical offices parking lot across the street from the hospital. When this phase of the expansion is completed, it will gen- erate an additional 1,686 vehicle trips per day in Orange County. Based on conservative trip lengths and using automotive emission factors developed by CalTrans, project -generated traffic will contribute slightly less than one ton of additional pollutants (mostly CO) to the regional airshed. By 1985, emission improve- ments 'reduce this total to less than one-half tons per day. Compared to a current county -wide burden of 2,000 tons per day and regional emissions of almost 10,000 tons per day, the incremental pollutant impact of the existing and additional hospital -related traffic as shown in Table 4.1 is correspondingly small. While any regional impacts are understandably minimal, the additional concentration of automobile traffic near the hospital may create localized pollutant "hot spots." Since the proposed new structure is close to the Hospital Road/Placentia Avenue inter- action, the carbon monoxide transport from this intersection toward the hospital was analyzed with a computer dispersion model. The model selected was the CalTrans roadway model called CALINE 2 and emission estimates were based on the emission factor generation code called VFAC S. The two models were merged with the worst - case meteorological conditions (Pasquill "F" stability and light (2 mph) winds blowing from the intersection directly toward the new wing] and maximum hourly traffic at the intersection (5-6 PM). South of Hospital Road, the maximum hourly CO concentration is about 8 ppm. East of Placentia Avenue, maximum levels on the sidewalk near the intersection are less than 6 ppm, The project contribution along both roadway segments is less than 0.5 ppm which is well below the limits of accuracy of the computer model itself (usually assumed to be about 1 ppm). A breakdown of the contribu- tion of the two roadways is shown in Table 4.2. Compared to the hourly CO standard of 35 ppm, there is little potential, even with worse -case traffic and weather, that the air around the hospital E TABLE 4.1 HOAG HOSPITAL EXPANSION -RELATED REGIONAL VEHICULAR POLLUTANT EMISSIONS 1980 Proiect Completion Existing Hospital Traffic to Project -Generated F, Traffic TOTAL EMISSIONS: 1985 Emission Levels Existing Hospital Traffic Project -Generated Traffic TOTAL EMISSIONS Carbon Total Reactive Oxides Sulfur Total Monoxide Hydro- Hydro- of Dioxide Suspended Carbons Carbons Nitrogen Particulates (CO) (THC) (RHC) (NOx) (SO2) (TSP) 737.0 62.6 54.8 82.9 4.0 9.1 187.0 15.9 13.9 21.0 1.0 2.3 924.0 78.5 68.7 103.9 5.0 11.4 487.8 38.8 33.2 58.3 4.0 7.5 123.7 9.8 8.4 14.8 1.0 1.9 611.5 48.6 41.6 73.1 5.0 9.4 TABLE 4.2 HOURLY CO CONCENTRATIONS (ppm) NEAR PROPOSED HOAG HOSPITAL EXPANSION FOR WORST -CASE DISPERSION CONDITIONS AND MAXIMUM HOURLY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (1 Hour Standard = 35 ppm) Project - Existing Related Traffic Traffic Combined Distance South of Hospital Road (feet) 0 7.86 0.49 8.35 25 7.21 0.45 7.65 50 6.59 0.41 7.00 100 4.77 0.30 5.07 200 1.71 0.11 1.82 400 0.20 0.01 0.21 800 0.12 0.01 0.13 Distance East of Placentia Avenue (Feet) 0 5.07 0.29 5.36 25 4.65 0.26 4.91 50 4.25 0.24 4.49 100 3.08 0.17 3.25 200 400 I'll 0.13 0.06 0.01 1.17 0,14 800 0.08 0.00 0.08 B-12 r� LJ I ,It I would become unhealthful. When the two CO patterns in Table 4.2 are combined, the re- sulting CO distribution at ground level is indicated in Figure 4.1. Near the new building, maximum CO levels are 8 ppm. Since the air conditioning intake is on the roof instead of the ground, very little of the automotive emissions will ever enter the hospital complex. Since neither the rush hour traffic on the restricted dispersion last for long, the longer -period CO standard should similarly not be threatened unless regional background levels become quite high as they do at the Costa Mesa monitoring station and other inland locations. Based on typical hospital electricity and natural gas require- ments, the additional 200,000+ square feet of space will cause an additional 60 tons of pollutants to be emitted, mainly from power plants. The breakdown of the energy use pollutant generation is shown in Table 4.3. Compared to the vehicular contribution of over 200 tons per year, the 60 tons of stationary source pollutants is considerably less. Any ambient regional air quality impacts will be similarly incrementally minimal. S. MITIGATION MEASURES Since the major source of project -related pollutants is from automobile traffic, there is little potential for mitigation, since automotive emissions control is beyond the authority of local agen- cies. The fact that the maximum hospital traffic (visitors and employees) occurs at 3-4 PM is slightly beneficial in relieving Newport Beach traffic congestion later in the evening. "Standard" mitigation measures of promoting transit use or carpools by visitors and employees should be encouraged, but their effectiveness is more cosmetic than in significantly reducing project -related air pollutants. B-13 Q c d l9 Wind/ ction f 12.0 0.0 1 yosp�ta/ Ra 8. .16 t 4.0 Z •j .d Legend ,...::: "��� �"':i" New structures Current structures DD Worst -case CO Impacts 4.1 FIGURE a-14 TABLE 4.3 HOAG HOSPITAL EXPANSION STATIONARY SOURCE EMISSIONS Electrical Natural Gas Generation Combustion Total (tons/year) (tons/year) (tons/year) so 28.486 0.016 28.502 NO 27.390 2.611 30.001 x TSP 5.478 0.261 5.739 NC 2.191 Negligible 2.191 CO Negligible 0.522 0.522 Electrical Consumption - 21,912 MWH/year Natural Gas Combustion - 52.2 million cubic feet/year B-15 APPENDIX C CORRESPONDENCE C-1 0 746-NG2244 March 19, 1979 j RE: Hoag Memorial Hospital - Expansion j WESTEC Services, Inc. is currently under contract to the City of Newport Beach for preparation of an environmental impact report for the Hoag Memorial Hospital. A map of the project location is enclosed for identification. The proposed project calls for long-term expansion of facili- ties entailing renovation of some structures and demolition of others to permit construction of new, larger facilities. This analysis will address the first two phases of the project, expected to be completed about the year 1985. Although site plans (including design and square footage) are not yet developed, the project will increase patient capacity from the existing 420-bed level to 530 beds. Construction of a multi -story medical tower will be coor- dinated with demolition of the three-story north wing of_a 1957 structure. The parking capacity of the hospital will be corres- pondingly increased (to 1,145 spaces) to provide adequate parking levels for both visitors and staff. We would appreciate it if you would supply us with the follow- ing information as it pertains to the proposed project. 1. What is the level of service you provide in the area? 2. Do you foresee any problems in servicing this project? 3. Will the project adversely impact the level of service provided by your agency? 4. Will the project create a need for expanding existing facilities or staff or the construction of new facili- ties? S. Are there any plans for expansion of facilities? j To avoid unnecessary delays, please call me at (714) 838-4644 if you .have any questions or need additional information. Thank you for your cooperation. ` ' Sincerely, Nina Gruver Environmental Planner NG:sc ' Enclosures: Location map C-3 I A.J. Wagner Fire Department 475 32nd Street Newport Beach, California 92663jDear Chief Wagner:j the names, locations, and distances of your serving this area? j 11 I I 6. What are facilities 7. What is your response time for emergency and non -emergency calls? Charle's R. Gross Police Department City of Newport Beach 870 Santa Barbara Drive Newport Beach, California 92660jDear Chief Gross:j the names, locations, and distances of your serving this area? F I 6. What are facilities 7. What is your response time for emergency and non -emergency, calls? Benjamin B. Nolan Public {Yorks City of Newport Beach 870 Santa Barbara Drive Newport Beach, California 92660jDear Mr. locations and current operating serving the site? Nolan:j 6. What are the capacities of facilities 7. What are generation/consumption rates used by your agency in assessing demand? J - Joe Devlin Utilities Department City of Newport Beach 870 Santa Barbara Drive Newport Beach, California 92660jDear Mr. Devlin:] 6. the locations and current operating capacities serving the site? What are of facilities 7. What are generation/consumption rates used by your agency in assossing demand? i C-4 I W.R..Perkins Southern California Gas Company P.O. Box 3334 Anaheim, California 92803jDear Mr. Perkins:j 6. What are the locations and current operating capacities of facilities serving the site? 7. What are generation/consumption rates used by your agency in assessing demand? j C.V. Wright Southern California Edison Company Westminster, California 92683jDear Mr. Wright:j 6. What are the locations and current operating capacities of facilities serving the site? 7. What are generation/consumption rates used by your agency in assessing demand? j Dennis M. Reed County Sanitation Districts of Orange County P.O. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, California .92708jDear Mr. Reed:j 6. What are the locations and current operating capacities of facili- ties serving the site? • F 7. What are generation/consumption rates used by your agency in assessing demand? Cry gW Pp e9 NEWPORT BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT 475 32nd Street a Newport Beach, California 92663 (714) 644-3603 LEO K LOVE C'CeFFlee Chief April 4, 1979 Ms. Nina Gruver WESTEC Service, Inc. 180 East Main Street Tustin, California 92680 RE: Hoag Memorial Hospital -Expansion Dear Ms. Gruver: The present facilities serving your location are'fire station H2, 475 32nd Street, and fire station #6, 1348 Irvine. These stations service your area with two engines and a paramedic unit. A ladder truck and Battalion Chief also respond to this area from the fire station in Fashion Island. The Newport Beach Fire Department is a full paid department with all six fire stations manned on a twenty-four hour basis. The ISO rating for the fire department is a 4. At the present time we see no problems with servicing Hoag Hospital or the surrounding area. However, future growth projects in this area of Newport Beach may require expansion of the fire department. The response time for the first engine to arrive from the station on 32nd Street is about one to three minutes depending on conditions. Should you need any further information, please contact us. Very truly yours, 14 A. J. WAGN R Fire Marshal AJW:rw C-6 I! NEWPORT BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 7000, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 CHARLES R. GROSS (714)644-3654 Chief of Police March 27, 1979 Nina Gruver Westec services, 'Inc. 180 East Main Street Tustin, California 92680 RE: HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL EXPANSION Dear Ms. Gruver: Your recent correspondence requested specific information regarding a possible impact on our facility by yqur proposed expansion project of Hoag Hospital. The following.is a list of responses to your questions: 1. What is the level of service you provide in the:•area? a.' A police unit is assigned 24 hours a day patrolling approximately a 2 square mile area which includes your proposed project location. 2. Do you foresee any problems in servicing this project? a. There is a natural increase in thefts at a construction site, thus increasing the assigned area police officers' report taking time and consequently increasing the detectives' investigative time. Also, there is a minimal delay in response to emergency calls due to diminished access accompanying a construction site. 3. Will the project adversely impact the level of service provided by your agency? a. Not significantly. 4. Will the project create a need for expanding existing facilities or staff or the construction of new facilities? a. No. 1 5. Are there any plans for expansion of facilities? a. No. I I C-7 870 Santa Barbara Drive, Newport Beach Hoag Memorial Hospital Expansion Page 2 6. What are the names, locations, and distances of your facilities serving this area? a. Newport Beach Police Department, 870 Santa Barbara Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660. Approximately 3.5 miles from your project. 7. What is your response time for emergency and non -emergency calls? a. Emergency response time surveys indicate approximately 5 minutes. Non-8mergency response time surveys indicate approximately 25 minutes. NOTE: Response time to either type of call can depend on: 1. Location of assigned unit at time of call. 2. Traffic conditions 3. Time of day. 4. Seasonal influx of recreational vehicles. 5. Weather conditions. If you have any questions in reference to the above responses, please contact Sergeant W. Kerr, (714) 644-3660. Sincerely, Wayne Connolly, Captain Commander, Administrative Division I I U I II I I IL li �I '! I CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 640-2281 March 28, 1979 Westec Services, Inc. 180 East Main Street Tustin,'CA 92680 Attention: Nina Gruver Subject: Hoag Memorial Hospital Expansion Gentlemen: This is in response to your letter of March 19, 1979 requesting utility information in connection with the preparation of an environmental impact report for the subject expansion. Water and sewer service for Hoag Memorial Hospital is provided by the City. The existing water and sewer facilities should be adequate to serve the proposed expansion, and the construction of new facilities would not be required. In addition, there are no plans to increase the capacity of. the existing City water and sewer facilities at the hospital site. Water and sewer atlas maps showing the location of existing facilities are available for public inspection at the Public Works Department counter between the hours of 8:00 to 12:00 AM and 1:00 to 5:00 PM. If you have any questions or desire additional information, please feel free to call the Subdivision Engineer, Dick Hoffstadt, at 640-2281. Ve truly y�� Benjamin B. Nolan Public Works Director WBD:em C=9 City Hall • 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, California 92663 .IWby I COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS � � ATEL REA BPH OOON E91 54 CI0-291 A 0 0 OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA 962.2411 P. 0. BOX 8127. FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA 92708 10Q44 ELLIS AVENUE (EUCLID OFF -RAMP, 8AN DIE00 FREEWAY) March 26, 1979 1 WESTEC Services, Inc. 180 East Main Street Tustin, California 92680 Attention: Nina Gruver Environmental Planner Subject: Hoag Memorial Hospital Expansion Sanitation District No. 6 of Orange County has planned capacity for the proposed development, in anticipation of this proposed project when Trunk "B" of the Coast Highway Trunk was constructed, it was recommended to Hoag Hospital to expand their lateral so that the additional sewage generated could be handled. Hoag Hospital expanded their lateral at that time. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Dennis M. Reid Senior Engineer DMR:cb I I C-10 Southern California Edison Company 2STY NSTER C441FORN 4 92663 March E, 1979 City of Newport Beach Dept. of Co-Munity Develoorient 3300 ! Newport c,lvd. Newport 3each, CF 92c63 Subject: E.I.R. - :;aster Facilities Plan for hoax ,Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 - 1990), 301 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, California Gentlemen: This is to advise that the subject property is located within the service territory of the Southern California Edison Company and that the electric loads of the project are witnin parameters of projected lcad growth which Edison is plannin3 to meet in this area. Unless the demand for electrical generating canacity exceeds our estimates, and provided that there are no unexpected outages to major sources of elec- trical supply, we expect to meet our electrical load requirements for the next several years. Our total system demand is expected to continue to increase annually; and, if our plans to proceed with future construction of new generating facili- ties are delayed, our ability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1984. In addition, the major fuel used in Edison's generating facilities is low sulfur fuel oil. :;e now believe that our low sulfur fuel oil inventory, together with our contractual commitments for delivery and our customers' conservation efforts will pe rncurrent iit us to meet the forecasted demands for electricity through 1979. It is our intention to continue to do everything that can reasonably be accoc;plished to provide our customers with a continuous and sufficient supply of electricity. CVW:da Very truly yours, C. V. Wright Customer Service Planner ao tea. C-11 I! S.Nvl. .a .�! 1 '✓WLti '-i.Y. .�.-1 ... t,nw y w .T -s. ! . ORANGE COUNTY OIVISION P. O 80X 1311, ANAHEIM. CALIF. V2 4 March 20, 1979 Westec Services, Inc. 180 East Main Street Tustin, California 92680 Subject: Hoag -Memorial Hospital Expansion This letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the proposed 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 service to the project could be pro- vided from an existing main as shown on the attached atlas sheet without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the condition under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Estimates of gas usage for non-residential projects are developed on an in- dividual basis and are obtained from the Commercial -Industrial Market Services Staff. We have developed several programs which are available, upon request, to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact this office for assistance. attach. Sincerely,, D. C. Richardson Technical Supervisor C-12 SOUTHERN COUNTIES CAS COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA Q o rL 1 , O C I I a r.• J ' J♦ I A. ta.wJ^cv oe• �' � ' +M'.O.NI, IOi'/A</.CTLy I ,�• I ���G I.!'< 1'0 a vv�• sV t 3 as t•� aa't�� ,sa"J:y*'e�1'� 'r3 e. V rAs� pM I N tp1'a sl � AN �Jfo. e ',pl 'eii'"off' ♦ ��� �M. Jo (, V 4N V n ♦I 21 F�• Q. h 18 P — �• ♦�.< a ..) •�.. ,; K-J.. .1 .11 l "I04!• .,L. ... K_'i.iJST .�J%'n OV —�- e. �_.._ �. _���) f i._ ..�._ �_ �_�♦H^•- Ju _____ .�- il//( )�I(G'('-� --. 1, ' .,l H J•}b ldPT' ._.._ �_ ,�'•_ • a d ',i �F /a 1 2 a r J + J' I I 11 1 1 I 1 F i 1 �i i 1 E i i I 1 Ll MAY 25, 1979 ATTACHMENT TO THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT -MASTER FACILITIES PLAN FOR HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN State Clearinghouse No. 790319331 A public review period for the Non -Statutory Advisement was established from March 1 through 20, 1979. A copy'af-the " �► City's Mailing List and Office of Planning and Research mailing is enclosed along with response. A Notice of Preparation was mailed to all "Responsible Agencies." A copy of the City's mailing list and responses to the Notice of Preparation is enclosed. The Draft EIR has been reviewed by the City's Environmental Affairs Committee. D-2 t !+Q •2y��yb `�0 e•°• °• Y�``E ic� �ti K��G� t`�&vie yNbv G' ��t,� w p�roS�q,p�•�'$yo� . C oR�s er= Ent BruetYtS ----- • - uNrreb srArE•s consr oqugo sr a' -- -- Ac,�ucv .s. _.. _.._ H%Amb 1f CO/1)07/33/eN _ Da v»ra•rmrorrm � 1 Cis A i GAmer 3- 7•I -_-�� PAgcs °i aCeae>.ve.o vrwrmgvl- WA7lr4 affUcoae" 1 •—_-.•- Cw .%/ UAW. lC 9'r AIR Acsoa Acrs 1 1 --_-•_• olnpAD SrArr MNaS /..V MMlsuvC T•I GRLr2a ei s � •1 1 p.l --- --• � •— COA -racL CAMMrs31°Nl( 'tFLZ-5 y C'ti MTndvl • SrA.TI Of CA•t t $2, Aar►. oo r1eAc7N / 3� i CzToiVA L OR. Co. AWV$f& WQ Mnx.t o;nraA- Jam/ S.C.A. G � 1 •/ 1 1 I 1' S.A. �. w.o.a.D •i 3•I C4"IC bC aMto 6f SOArR,J •� o M1or Cowory I 1 gHlrrAr j tnr4S AiR.poar kAN o 1 ArnPotr ( Con7nlrss/oil -� , COSTA MOTO) 1 rnur "v OrsT. .ra U2Nlr nANGy tvnre °nrnier 3-I 11 D-3 q. yRPRJ 6� °4 P oJa C m eP CosrA. Me3A _. czv v OF ¢.0 ue Zr4_.. C=TF °R �UAMAMTMU IFXM C.E f �ql-NOus' / DIRFge7 >:T°lL2 oc --r C tnfu.QITV DN. _ CST" ; 1 — RNF O/ReforbR bR ? &lUI4/NFEi I T i PMN Reure'w 1 0112121°a C-VulROfu"Iew 7. AFF IAI COMM. 1 'dip W1TI 1 •/ - �. SOECIAI, mut S. p 0, M. � •1 �l•r:'. A. F. c/IfemaFR oe comldsnc ltARpoR DISTR C FRCIND-r oc t y UWR urAWW OA u.P.Me R-.T. la.c.1 1 , 2 •I I �'y b-4 yPV ti 4�66 °�P 4`J ae ° °4l\� �Ur L °��`°�' a��,� bpFtp ICj��'� °�o`p,a�a 6r'r' ao�4� vGr4y °`°•c�'Y°``T' �r� ��A`• e���N T14 s 1RUuV� NAtq�rrYj ---•l. -- , seftax • sort �rrraler r e 7a COAST C6"mmmt &T SO4TNGTLN O. � OAS" C=P I 11047rYf• ,:, eIIr3nN cr . • TSLgPH•ON I TftEcaw�t Noa�oWuett$ ,. G m wrr ieRfs ' THM Mlles. I •—_•--••----•- U..Wacr cNrs . L_ - - - •- •-- - -... ...._ .... I .... .__.. _.._.-- I I i LidaSl,ps r�srw� _ __ _ N rc � "� l0 I r 3• aII nnR• lisN. 34 - - CP1IG 0.o I'YSSU • • 1 �'.•�1.`J•1N i•KS'�N• ,tea .. • 111 � cu N6•U art �a^'t u r . �4rr��ula�r D- 5 — _ --- --- y ^s c°.; I y,C iu�i; rc• ! vEM Kc; can nrsse . NUNSTATUTORY ADVISEMENT b File No, To: Prom: City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development N.B. 79-020 (Attached) 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY March 20. 1979 PROJECT TITLE -Draft Environmental Impact Report - Master Facilities Plan for ^ Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) � rn c PROJECT LOCATION: Ge 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 z a g DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES e u % The proposed project includes the construction of facilities at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian from present to approximately 1990 in accordance with a Master Facilities Plan filed as an amendment to the hospitals existing use permit v with the City of Newport Beach. The project will involve the construction of a hospital tower, parking structure, and renovation of existing facilities. En- corachment permits on State Highwa may be needed and appropriate ermits from u ieu d N t N tiU 01 am oe DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (USE ADOITIOffAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): W T U C O J 6C�ln o rnw" G CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE W GrD C 0 DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPERTISE/IIITEREST: LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS (USE ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): N W M K Q 1 O W W C W .~� CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DATE MAILED BY LEAD AGENCY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE DATE RECEIVED BY INTERESTED PARTY DATE RESPtlIISE RECEIVED BY THE February 23, 1979 LEAD AGEIICY 11 D-6 I 1 4 9 tJ �• c_ i4: 1 EDMUND G. BROWN JR. GOVERNOR March 15, 1979 � cde iTf �Ilzdiftll lia GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO 95814 TO: A 1 Reviewing Agencies FROM: R n a%PAffice of Permit Assistance SUBJECT: Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian, City of Newport Beach--SCH r79031933 Attached is a request for consultation on the Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian being proposed by the City of Newport Beach. For your convenience, the City has prepared a response form. Please send your responses to Fred Talarico Department of Community Development City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 If you have any questions, please let me know. RB/ln Attachments ,cc: Fred Talarico 1�7 MAR 91979,- `J fii1- D-7 March 15, 1979 Distribution List Request for Consultation for City of Newport Beach's Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hosptial Presbyterian SCH n79031933 Mr. Joseph A. Stuart Executive Officer District Headquarters South Coast Air Quality Management District 9420 Telstar Avenue El Monte, CA 91731 ATTN: Sanford Weiss Director, Air Programs William Lockett Air Resources Board 1131 S Street Sacramento, CA 95814 K. E. McKenn Department of Transportation District 7 120 South Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90012 Kenneth Buell Environmental Health Service Branch Department of Health 714 P Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Saleem A. Farag Office of Statewide Planning and Development Department of Health 714 P Street Sacramento, CA 95814 R. Montgomery Department of Fish and Came Region 5 350 Golden Shore Long Beach, CA 90802 James Hargrove Department of General Services 1015 L Street Sacramento, CA 95814 cc: Fred Talarico Department of Community Development City of Newport Beach D.8 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 L .."..,. Wit Pr11;R = 9 19i9^- NEWPORI' d CAUP, NUNSTATUIORY ADVISEMENT A File No. To: From: City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development N.B. 79-020 (Attached) 3300 W. Newport Beach, CA Blvd. CA92663 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY March 20, 1979 PROJECT TITLE:Draft Environmental Impact Report - Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) PROJECT LOCATION: �o 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 a u DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES The proposed project includes the construction of facilities at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian from present to approximately 1990 in accordance with a -W+ q Master Facilities Plan filed as an amendment to the .hospitals existing, use permit „ v with the City of Newport Beach. The project will involve the construction of a LL hospital tower, parking structure, and renovation of existing facilities. En- corachment permits on State Highway may be needed and appropriate permits from 9 m m . can N9W r A DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (USE A=IONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): W v � I) Zncrecor to emi5sz t4s clue- -4-o Comple}mc( praSect. co a o 0 2) cc lNot sr?e'te, in, M, A a,rouucl pc.r1C%n5 Z+V-ue•tVre. m in ooa $) 1�otevtval a&mbus%.m , on. prem%ses. u a,-c o w a u. u w CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE Fobert W. Grapes A%Q SPECIAL2S'r Z13-572G42o DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPERTISE/INTEREST: LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS (USE ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): N W h C 6 G W r N , W C W z CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- DATE RECEIVED BY GATE RESPOPlSE LEAD AGENCY SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED PARTY RECEIVED BY THE February 23, 1979 MARCH 1211979 LEAD AGENCY c �c 4 0` D-9 14UNSTATUTORY ADVISEMENT File Il . To: From: City of Newport Beach i Dept. of Community Development N.B. 79-020 (Attached) Newport Beach, CA1v92663 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR CO*1ENTS BY lurch 20, 1979 A c PROJECT TITLE:Draft Environmental Impact Report - Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) PROJECT LOCATION: 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 a g g DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES e a m The proposed project includes the construction of facilities at Hoag Memorial g Hospital Presbyterian from present to approximately 1990 in accordance with a u Master Facilities Plan filed as an amendment to the hospitals existing use permit v with the City of Newport Beach. The project will involve the construction of a W hospital tower, parking structure, and renovation of existing facilities. En- corechment permits on State Highwa may be needed and appropriate ermits from DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOIiR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (USE A10TIIONUU.PAGES AS NECESSARY): CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPERTISE/INTEREST: rl�e G 7-6(. & %G, C.C. Sulri' ;yip !b`Js G:. G cc�.tir�tyE J%nd��iir! '. 9:? s ct LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS (USEADDITIDt(AL PAGES AS NECESSARY): GJL" S�Z" iL•J CNv•��i✓Mc',1/:11� I)N3;xrS 7`N.�:•TtcbotLd i?csoLt' �%P,oM pk'cv'i.�,�1G'. ic-L�-nr�✓�> st�Grc� ro o i H,S h W C = CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- DATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIDLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED PARTY RECEIVED BY THE February 23, 1979 LEAD AGENT /�� D-10 1 I I 1 1 I b NUNSTATUIORY ADVISEMENT File No. To: From: City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development N.B. 79-020 (Attached) 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY March 20, 1979 PROJECT TITLE:Draft Environmental Impact Report - Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) �N c PROJECT LOCATIOtl: 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 u DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 6 The proposed project includes the construction of facilities at Hoag Memorial W a Hospital Presbyterian from present to approximately 1990 in accordance with a mMaster Facilities Plan filed as an amendment to the hospitals existing use permit v with the City of Newport Beach. The project will involve the construction of a LL hospital tower, parking structure, and renovation of existing facilities. En- corachment permits on State Highwa may be needed and appropriate permits from n'no preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. a m DESCRIBEE PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOQR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT /SPEECCIFIC 6 Glt d ` LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (USE ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): } W TNb 9 ^ / 1/ /W V/-�•/"'�iV Off+ V -"I J 6C�t2 m E a o rnm^ ,n x u m �+.- c o C TACT PERSON TITLE PHONE 7 /79 r,6 ,-J-3 DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPERTISE/INTEREST: LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS (USE ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): W 6` W� N W C i e CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE �Va DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- DATE PECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED PARTY RECEIVED BY THE February 23, 1979 LEAD AGENCY D-11 /S�irlctiCE6��ED � :.L MAR 31979:�- NE4YPr� OF ZAcff, •• NUNSTATUIORY AnviSEMENT File No. To: From: City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development N.B. 79-020 (Attached) 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 A PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY March 20, 1979 PROJECT TITLE:Draft Environmental Impact Report - Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) PROJECT LOCATION: 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 The proposed project includes the construction of facilities at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian from present to approximately 1990 in accordance with a Master Facilities Plan filed as an amendment to the hospitals existing use Perm with the City of Newport Beach. The project will involve the construction of a hospital tower, parking structure, and renovation of existing facilities. En - DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOJR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (USEAlIIII1CHAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE m +' DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPORTISE/INTEREST: 7 Traffic Impacts LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS (USE ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): 8 Additional traffic generation f= hospital expansions h a and its impact on Newport Boulevard, Superior Avenue and is Placentia Avenue, 44 H O W CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE Greg Shaffer Assistant Planner (73.4) 754-5245 . DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- DATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIBLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED PARTY RECEIVED BY THE February 23, 1979 LEAD AGENCY 3/5/79 D-12 A NUNSTATUIURY ADVISEMENT File No. To: From: City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development N.B. 79-020 (Attached) 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY March 20, 1979 rn V �o PROJECT TITLE:Oraft Environmental Impact Report - Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) PROJECT LOCATION: =� 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 z •• H ' $ DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES The proposed project includes the construction of facilities at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian from present to approximately 1990 in accordance with a u Master Facilities Plan filed as an amendment to the hospitals existing use permit ° v with the City of Newport Beach. The project will involve the construction of a hospital tower, parking structure, and renovation of existing facilities. En- corachment permits on State Highwa may be needed and appropriate permits fromis preparation of the Draft Envlronmental impact Report. DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOQR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT a O. 01 L ,n •O U W A c LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (USE A=rONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): } Noon � � 6 m a c .`r-- in u � �' �e� ••�- c c �o— •r y CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DATE MI1II LEAD AG', February ti ORANGE COUNTY DIVISION • P, 0. SOX 33N. ANAHEIM, CALIF. SM March 51 1979 City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach) California 92663 Subject: plaster Plan for Facilities for Hoag Hemorial Hospital., File N.B. 79-020 This letter is not to be interpreted as a contractual commitment to serve the , proposed 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 service to the project could be pro- vided from an existing main as shown on the attached atlas sheet without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with ' the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual arrangements are made. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the condition under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Estimates of gas usage for non-residential projects are developed on an in- dividual basis and are obtained from the Commercial -Industrial Ilarket Services Staff. We have developed several programs which are available, upon request, to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact this office for assistance, Sincerely, D. C. Richardson U Technical Supervisor �ti, Ran l.= M attach. +� Ang `•t'`ne %W,oatro:lgj�.� 9' i D-14 I I I I I Southern California Edison Company WESTMINSTER. CALIFORNIA 92583 March 6, 1979 City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development 3300 W. Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92663 d Subject E.I.R. - Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 - 1990), 301 Newport Blvd., Newport Beach, California va+.nd s.dxr Gentlemen: ' This is to advise that the subject property is located within the service territory of the Southern California Edison Company and that the electric loads of the project are within parameters of projected load growth which Edison is planning to meet in this area. Unless the demand for electrical generating capacity exceeds 'our estimates, and provided that there are no unexpected outages to major sources of elec- trical supply, we expect to meet our electrical load requirements for the next several years. Our total system demand is expected to continue to increase annually; and, if our plans to proceed with future construction of new generating facili- ties are delayed, our ability to serve all customer loads during peak demand periods could become marginal by 1984. In addition, the major fuel used in Edison's generating facilities is low sulfur fuel oil. We now believe that our low sulfur fuel oil inventory, ' together with our contractual commitments for delivery and our customers' conservation efforts will permit us to meet the current forecasted demands for electricity through 1979. It is our intention to continue to do everything that can reasonably be continuo.us accomplished to provide our customers with a continuous and sufficient ' supply of electricity. truly yours, , `1����; C. V. Wright"�E�' /�� Customer Service Planner !s. Re^=E;lL0 •` CV4l:da �� CITY 6F • ° W YCALI r c�iC4 N D-15 ` NONSTATU109Y ADVISEMENT File No. To: T From: City of Newport Beach Dept. of Community Development N.B. 79-020 (Attached) Newport Beach, tCA1v92663 PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR COMMENTS BY March 20, 1979 _�rT71 PROJECT TITLE:Oraft Environmental Impact Report - Master Facilities Plan for �1 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) ^p PROJECT LOCATION: Y ,.m 301 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 A u � a $ $ DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT AND MAJOR LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES a ` The proposed project includes the construction of facilities at Hoag Memorial m Hospital Presbyterian from present to approximately 1990 in accordance with a -+ ti Master Facilities Plan filed as an amendment to the hospitals existing use permit with the City of Newport Beach. The project will involve the construction of a i hospital tower, parking structure, and renovation of existing facilities. En- corachment permits on State Highwa may be needed and appropriate permits from preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Report. v DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOQR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT e.� a g.wt u LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: (USE ADDTTMNAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): ZI W uYO J tlC rin W U N7;d O 01 d �r 12 . r H CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DESCRIBE SPECIFIC AREA OF EXPERTISEIINTEREST: LIST SPECIFIC ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS (USE ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECESSARY): W F. 6' 6 O W H N W i CONTACT PERSON TITLE PHONE DATE MAILED BY DATE RECEIVED BY RESPON- DATE RECEIVED BY DATE RESPONSE LEAD AGENCY SIDLE AGENCY WHERE APPLICABLE INTERESTED PARTY RECEIVED BY THE February 23, 1979 LEAD AGENCY "112V NOTICE OF PREPARATION LIST Department of Fish & Game 1416 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 State of California State Lands Commission 1807 13th Street Sacramento, CA 95814 State of California Air Resources Board P. 0. Box 2815 Sacramento, CA 95812 CALTRANS 1120 N Street Sacramento, CA 95814 S.A.R.W.Q.C.B. 6833 Indiana Avenue S-2 Riverside, CA 92506 Department of Health Office of STatewide Health Planning & Dev. 714 P Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Orange County Health Planning Council 202 Fashion Lane, S-219 Tustin, CA 92680 County Sanitation District P. 0. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 South Coast Air Quality Management District 9420 Telstar Avenue E1 Monte, CA 91731 S.C.A.G. 600 S. Commonwealth Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90005 D-17 0 IJ .A o v M b m L J Id' N .�. 0 1 0r tb C5 e"e r0 O w ?4 b Nz¢ VP)}AOl CJ h vYe w N •« •R{� .Gil ,C � .p o IL > _ RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL--30e tT epiDof Health Office of Statewide CT) STREET AND NO. ea an. eY. 714 P Street N P.On STATE AND ZIP CODE +—� Sacramgxn$o�CA_95Q14 M OPTIOXAI SERVICES IOR AODlT10NAl FFES - _ 1. Shewe to whom And CFti Q�FhsreQ «.,« ^ 1S RETURN Wilh deitluy to Atltl only .... 65 Whet delivered RECEIPT Z. Showi is whom, d0a and whlN dallrotod « 35 SERVICES Wilh dellvsli Addfessee onb-••-••-• 65 OEZ7VEft 0 AODRESSEE OONLY.............•.._.«..»..•.«......... .... SO + QSPECIALDE "WRY (aattd FN raqulred)••••••-W-••«-••-••••••'•'«' z P5 Farm RO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROYIOEO— 3800 Apr. 1973 NOt FOfl INTERNATIONAL MAIL wen a v, ^r v. r • Y ' Y .�i N b 0 •_ O ri y RECEIPT'FOR CERTIFIED MAIL-30¢ (See other ride) F, ■ +CPO: 11ts 0./50-70 IAIAIL f7� SENT TO CALTRANS�� PORDATE rr 6 .• Y }+ STREET AND NO. 1120 N Street P.O.. STATE AND ZIP CODE sajizr_arttento, CA_95814 ; m awnOwu saancrs FDa ADDInaXAI FEFs r•''.. RETURN 1. snewe m wnem ono nu +mruu ..„-.:.«. A.P Y, ; RECEIPT With dolivery to Add ill11 only «.._..«. 550 T. Shows to whom, data and when delivered « 350^" SERYICU With dollvory to addreule Only _v.....„ $50 •e DELIVER TO ADDRESSEE ONLY«..„....._.«„«.......«««._.«..._.• SO _ � SPECIAL DELIVERY (+%{n fN ngOind) ••«••••••«•.«-««.•-.•••«•• Is�7le PS Perm 3U00 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDEO— (Sea olh+t ride) Apr.1971 NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL ,Colo rderAO_110.1U L .. urn...:. »e�vtatp�.'Y'n'.•,"'y._�. Y; _1AAI a H RECEIPT -FOR CERTIFIED MAIL-30¢ (plus postage*!) N SENT TO State PORTOMAPK ATE 1) State Lands Commission )• STREET AND O NO.I8U-Uthat> P.O.. STATE AND ZIP CODE 1� Sacramento, CA 95814 c DPTIDNAL SERVICES FON ADOIfIONAI FEES RETURN f. Shoes to whom led dill ati(Virr� a _.7 . to# RECEIPT With dedvery t0 sddreefld only..„.... 55{ 2. shows to whom, data and where delivered.. 35d SERVICES In dehvep to Addressee only.._....... 650 i e'—5001EN Ck ADDRESSEE —ONLY ............ ................ «.«....«.......... 50d Q SPECIAL OLl1VEhY (adrd fo requirad-........«................... PS Form 3600 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED— (Sea other side) ` Apr. 1971 NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL a 0P00OU 0-es0110 , DD18• +— O JQjq^(]v \ Ca O o u C d! W ,c, Oc�Q f•rrf}IT a� 1 �= u 7 K m Z � 111 F' u i •C C = t O w O O ' 301 (Plus postage) POSTMARK i F.ECEIPI'FOR CERTIFIED Pfl AIL— { OR DATE SENT TO S.C.A.G• r' STREET AND NO- 600 S. Commonwealth Avenue CYi o n .STATE AND ZIP CODE — rft gn005 RECEIPT SERVICES [/ DELIVER T SPECIAL OEIIVERY PS Form 3800 Apr. 1971 m u � u •i e O o r • O N M SET,ICES FOR Auuu•�^^- '- ) 'o With delivery to zddresseeeon Y•,........... 65C flows to wham, date and whew dehrered .. 35C Witty -delivery to addressee only •••••••^••• 85� 50G EE ONLY —� 1 •% rztre fee re4uired)••••••••••••"""'""�••••' Sae other side) 3 NU INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED— ( j NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL a CPO: 1972 0 40.7+3 MAIL C ;l WF• J Wts ..,• iZ a -C,E: , RECEIPT -FOR CERTIFIED MAIL-3ui (plus postage) OR DATE SENT TO L4 S.A.R.W.Q.C.B. e E- STREET AND6 0 3 Indiana Ave. , S-2 P.O., STATE AND ZIP CODE n4lesrcide. CA 92506 RECEIPT W S• DELIVER TC Auu�_c"� d) .•.•••,_,,,,,,._............. SPECIAL DELIVERY (extro foo require PROVIDED— RAGE i r,� , See other side) i ' t r PS FoV rm 3B00 jigO ANCE . HOT RFOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL a CPO Ien O _ 460 i4d UKN RECEIFT REGISTERED, INSURED AND CERTIFIED MAIL Y Y M 4 Y . � � � � o ST • H ��,•(RO O �' •� _ .. W O a R P.ECEIPT, FOR CERTIFIED MAIL-30s1 (plus postage) SENT TO POSTMARK Department of Fish & Game OR DATE F Q STREET AND NO. (r� 1416 St•h Street P.O., STATE AND ZIP CODE t M Sacramento,_ CA_ 95814 OPTIONAL SERVICES. FOR FOOIiiONAL. FEES x _ '_, RECEIPT S. Shows to wham, data and where deltvered ., 35G SERVICES '� With delivery to addressee Only........... S_SG � DELIVER TO FOORESSEE ONLY .:....... ... ..... ..................... .... Q SPECIAL OELIVEFY (extra fee req. i red)•••• .• ••••••••••••••••� •••••••• ' �j PS Farm 3800 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROYMEO— (See other side) � Apr. 1971 NOT FOR VITERHATIONAL MAIL vCPp;IBT30-Sea-:43 _D-�9 .�A`t, r t�:�'"u.:..,,.y,Nat�!�n}�GY{^s.�«.siL`.rv•Y .^ .i ''e '''•nYc;r^}i « ri�.Y..�•wf, � ' W n 44 in AR a (+' i O,. �' • v.. ; q: i 1 r� i • ,41 W C "^ y V�Ai7 1�i �6 • O _ t•�tLN•iL:'.`N bn1 t.T ..F"}+�'I.'1'•,. {?:' .ti is.•• ••- 0. !S n RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL-304 (plus postage) 1 s:• :ry, " SENT TO South Coast Air Quality POSTMARK OS DATE ;3 � "� Manaaemen�0jgi:rict ,�;, t% CY) STREET AND No. '� •� .• 9420 Teistar Avenue P.O., STATE AND 21P CODE ��t •" El Monte CA W31 01,11"AL SERVICES F—W DO TI AL FEES RMAN t• Sows to whom snd all de nre0 ,.„.: T61 t with delivery to etldnssu only,W.„ 61f RECEIPT y. Shows to whom, dslland whin d00ond . 35d s ... • SERVICES With d01nry to etldressee only _....... 65@ �a•r , Y DELIVER TO ADDRESSEE ONLT...„........„.......,.....•„..•.„.,...ww. EO@ • �;�;� O SPECIAL OELTYERI' (rxtre fer nqul red) 1�e PS Form 3800 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIOEO— (So@ other stile) Apr.1911 NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL eCPO, in0-460-Tf3 ...•_.,.;,.,, r.4,�, .r _�....,.,;��.L'l) �r '• "y '•uo•dMo-w�irwa�} �.I.d) ^. •� . J. S'IVIIINI 3SI mu '+t fin•. •,,..+,,ti',_�, S.Ha3'10 a3A1930 01 3'19VNn S Na3'IOI _ Od r to @� :st m— +� on b4 a a aa' _ 3D78t•11 Q• cm Q ` I Y S W J �•� I•YV1.V Y ` 7nd9e pozuo an UI I �;. I I >s , u■xr -c:. IN•ffivs"sd e, I 7A N O (t O � ftuofr,Jo = +T;; C r^ '0N 03an J w cm • � ,� •� G tOOIY„e,e � W¢ �• i`O COW'•��w 'ON 03an6 C J �1q{Y+^.�� arW� aln O i'• q,i. rtlL J' 4Y'a I Q Ba Cc I •On•14i I LU v ! i— G1 L ,LmNwo u �,. t LA. OJ CO SI o 44 loto 0'Ltouno3 , c ���" rts N u V a) o� iSO,UdA11hP 0 b N ca c Eiy'ks • C3 La�al V059 G. N N r0 I• fS 059 A]'iAHop i O 4 IaIAS, IQ W O ..♦... �• Gi' 6 L.1•{ N N N y a. {W 4o L 159 .... �. aCC( { ui°�Iu @ w f ASC "IWAll ,K- 00S•L• "AliAlt'JPLMN LL' I ICKMION n G •(aa0 )P it D- 20 uo aosds oOt no aids .,aT, w.L316� 8 6 6 Z T £ •om - J 89TETE •ox V f REbEIPTFOR CERTIFIED IMAIL30ss (plu SENT TO s postage) County Sanitation District POR DATER sTRer_ AWJ) NO. P. 0 S'-M Aria ZIP CODE co co --&=tain—VqU. 7 S N a S 10 no and date —A�DPTI?HAL SERVICEENNEN—AL06fiU�R-8— • U v9f to addressee only ... ....... 64� RECEIPT I deliver SERVICE s towh a to and where d' I I ledIth delivery I,addresseeanIy 850• DELIVER 0 REL ............. .....SpECIAD Cl E —rquira PS Fa •AFormr. 1971 3800 "0 INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIOro— HIT Ill INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Other side) GPO: D-21 I STATE OF CALIFORNIA—BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 7, P.O. BOX 2001, LOS ANGELES 90051 CERTIFIED MAIL ! `ire , March 19, 1979 M City of Newport Beach Hoag Hospital ' Mr. Fred Talarico Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach �► 3300 West Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, California 92663 , Dear Mr. Talarico; Caltrans be document the will reviewing any prepared on above project for full compliance with CEQA. Our main concern will be the affect any increase in traffic will have on the freeway/highway arterial system. We would like the Circulation section to contain , the following; o E.�cisting traffic counts and projected ultimate counts for Route 55, Route 1, and Superior Avenue. o ICUs for intersections which may be affected by increase in traffic due to this as well as any other project proposed for the area. The area in question has the potential for archaeological ' sensitivity. We would like the document to fully address this point. further information this Sue For any on matter you may call Ms. McCullough at (213) 620-3758. Sincerely., , K. D, STEELE Senior Transportation Engineer Environmental Planning Branch LS On V eJveOJ DtYJlr,J,� :aW Dnn7' nt £ MAR211979_�k. s 2 DaJ.iF :� D-22 STATE OF CALIFORNIA EDMUND C. BROWN JR., Coramor ' STATE LANDS CO)"ISSION EXECUTIVE OFFICE 1807 - 13th Street KENNETH CORY, Controller Sacramento, California b5814 MIKE CURB, Leutenant Governor 'J-"0 ' RICHARD T. SILBERMAN, Director of Finance WILLIA�M F. ('JO RTHR OP \^ Executive Officer r- L March S, 1979 1 ti Fred Talarico ' Environmental Coordinator City of Newport Beach 3300 West Newport Blvd. ' Newport Beach, CA 92663 Dear Mr. Talarico: ' The State Lands Commission would like to request a copy of the Initial Study for the following -project: ' Draft Environmental Impact Report Master Facilities Plan for Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian (1979 to approximately 1990) Upon receipt of the Initial Study, we will make appropriate comments. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, JANE E. SMITH, Secretary Planning and Environmental Coordination js Co e��a •, D-23 N NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT EIR TO: Dennis Reid c/o Orange County Sanitation District No. 5 P. 0. Box 8127 Fountain Vallay, CA 92708 FROM: Community Development Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 I PLEASE RETURN THIS NOTICE WITH YOUR AGENCY'S COMMENTS BY March 30, 1979 PROJECT TITLE: Draft Environmental Impact Report - "Ford Aeronutronic" comments in respect to our Nonstatutory Advisement are also attached and have been forwarded to the City Consultant for inclusion in the field of investigation for the Draft EIR. DESCRIBE SPECIFIC PERMIT AUTHORITY OF YOUR AGENCY RELATED TO THIS PROJECT: DATE MAILED BY LEAD AGENCY: DATE RECEIVED BY RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: „ D,24, DATE RESPONSE RECEIVED BY LEAD AGENCY: 11 I I!� 1 II 1 1 I J II II II FEDERAL GRANT APPLICATION/AWARD NOTIFICATION 1 APPLICATION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE (916) 445.0613 yr ma a.v ITE 9131 TO BE COMPLETED ev APPLICANT 2FEOEflAI EMPLOYER ID NO. � I pry � real Unit 4.AODRESS trbc✓/%�/LT iv -STnR Or P. O. BO% OL(4j 3 3 ov w N w� f5. CITY 6. COUNTY ATE B.ZIPCODE 9.PROGTITLE/NO.ITAnlogofFWDDMOnlCAalnanml ' War TY EOFACTION TYPE OF CHANGE IComplma It 10b or 100 was chocked) 14. EXISTING FED GRANT ID ,ONew a mod"'. 1�Olnemud Dollars, i"Ol.aoanew Dun[lon eO Other Scope c," bOComi astlnn b ODaCnasad 0.11. b O Decreased Ouredon It OCancellatlon • p in. 19. APPLICANT TYPE FUNGSREOUESTFOIFn GarW Flow OMypmtapalVlor Mall I5. REPUESTED FUND START 19 - Enter Lester A. Sun, F. School District 20 FEDERAL To. FUhOS DURATION Mantbd B. Innntete G. CommuniW ActionApen< 21, 4TA)f ( �,'- .00 • yr m0 C. Sub St..Obt H. S,.ntored Or,anna1c1 bLOCAL f(11 .00 PROJECT START 1,�_. 0.County 1. Indian. aaTH! l6�yo oa P17.ESt. 1o, ESTJROJECT DURATION ___�(M.M.) E. City J. Othor(Spedtyln Remark 2a TOTALIXL2h2 (IS Co'.- E 00 R 38. BRIfiF TITLE OF G9 Foc✓�r�E1 01��/ Fad De 4 A[ APPLICANTS PROJECT /'T. T 25. DEFCRIPTION OF APPLICANT'. PR JECT (PWpmel NAG s v 27. ANRA OF P ROJ//EJJCT��I��M/PPACT (Indlaate City. Coumy'atater in'.) n10 WIDE' COU T 28. CO pRE5810NAt 019TRICi 39.EmlronmenLet j CLEARINOMOUSBO)TO WHICH SUBM1TTEp. 04 APPllmnt OhMCn Imn peed By PeopOySnt✓Fadmal ApenCYT et ❑Yasr [ 7 ❑No amten Is DAne Witlg eONaho , .a PMEfTITLEOFCONTACTPER50N bADDHESS-SOaetar P. O. So% EPHONE NO. - S01F v,) ; t -// CICO �9 in thelist siumhe UgSras an 31.d1NVI50NMENTAL DOCUMENT REVIEW REQUIRED YES NOO arnlomtlopI raq re 1,i.Wlva is physics, I Off LL1I Enwronmenul lmmct Snnmam(Report) AnaMW 1 m'.1 y GeoloOleSlawy Quatlnn9n ma01n WNMth ❑Or4h EIR ❑ FineI EIR 1Does Yowa��ncy )+awe project is laaeW. Na,ouw Declaration Attpchad 120 mWasl ci In,htsa "mtw Nang stitched. Document Will So Forwarded On a glq&mfty end Plan? AppyO%IrntaN Mon Day Ymr 91a a wrW by If No Federal PX%amDaONat Require An Environmental DOWmem AUKS � _ e Pro1etT E%ampt UrWer Slota CatamrlralEmmptlon, COn_ YES CL AamCtdWl- If.yeAis i. YES, 'NO"❑ 1 � _• dl. ITEMS 32.35 TO BE COMPLETED BY CLEARINGHOUSE MULTIP 32. CLEARINGHOUSE IO 0CLEARINGHOUSE D 15 33. a IqCTION BASED ON 33. b ACTION TAKEN NEVI OF STATE APPLICATION /] 34 / P 4 111CnlOn e0 In Comment eOW.Wild IDENTIFIER ISAO C A - Af,l]A Ilmtlan b WlMaut COmmanl dOUnfavanbla Stare Number WIDE/ COun,W CITY County' City COun[y/ City Ceuntyl City County/ C.W County/r' CFW T' Co. ASTATE 35. CLrF.ARINOHOUSE Plnp Arm Arm PI p Am Pin, Ana Pinp Ana Plnp Ana T Iff1PACT CODE Yn No 2 35. STATE PLAN REQUIRED ]T. REACT da 30•a A R FC OFFICIAL CLEPHINGHO4SE I �y ❑Yet No W. FINAL CH ACTION OAT ITEMS 09.42 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT BEFORE BEN fING FORM TO FEOE RAL AGENCY P U.CERTIFICATION - The aPPlimnt C-Wflrtm Met to she bast M Ma knowledge and saner the as data an true and Chack b0%If dael,gbu M uppllmnt. e0s. and 1111r,0 Mlaiefmhe, bars duly aodhorlted by the gowlnln9 body of Nownsill, at4ChR1. rAMElPflnt 40.a Of TYPO) Is TITLE c SIGNATURE of Authorbed RePressenntlyer dTELEPHONENUMBER R •TE T 41. O MAILED TO FEOSnALISTATE AGENCY ve m0 day 42. NAME OF FEDERAL I STATEAOENCY TOWHICH THIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED 3 ITEMS 4354 TO BE COMPLETED BY FEDERAL OFFICE EVALUATING AND RECOMMENDING ACTION CN THE APPLICATION 43. GRANT APPLICATION 10 52. Apallcetlon Rind. 53.a E.. Action net, 53b RPI to Almacanl {IAedgned by Federal Agency) Vr mo day yr no a.w Always CO.S1010 w tern dev 5 aORb 19 19 4q. 04ANTOR AGENCY _ R Amended APP6L. R R.V.Eapeata cad 54. Exp. Action RA;voa R Suuw.ucm Sri r. APOliunt P E Racalved E lD AUon E R V V V 45. OfIGANIZATIONAL UNIT 8 yr mo day 3 Yr mo dev 11 m0 day S yr 11- T 1 4 I 19�_� I 19 9� 0 45.A1MINiSTERING OFFICE N 19��� N 19 1s - N S 19� S 19� 19_�� S 19_�� 4T..$DRESS-Street Of P. O. Box 48. CITY 49. STATE 1 50. ZIP CODE 51. TELEPHONENUMBER ' ITEMS5565 TO BE COMPLETEDBY THE FEDERAL OFFICE APPROVING THE GRANT APPLICATION IIIrr��ATTLACTION FINAL OATES Yr m0 day FUNDSAPPROVEDIFO,Change, Show On[yAmr. of/rep.(+IOr Dec. !•l. P 65.013Awerdad bO RPIeCIed CQWrthdfawn I9--- 60. FEDERAL AMOUNT IF Yf of) I JS .00 A 56. FyNDS AVAILABLE 9__- St. STATE SNARE S DO R 5T. FADING DATE 9___ 62. LOCAL SNARE �29 IS .00 T 6J. OTNffl ( I S .00 50. FEDERAL GRANT ID 64. TOTAL 160, 61, 62, 63) 5 59. FM DERAL FUND ACCOUNT NUMBER 66. MULTIPLE PROGRAM -LINK n 1)c INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FORM CA,189 Tb"t )nstctirhmts are designed to artist In complaling the APPLICANT portion$ of this Form CA 189 �h rw portions are PART i and PART a Slid are SHADED P4RT T BOX NO, TITLE, INSTRUCTION 1. APPLICATION DATE — 0916 appllodlOn It rat to IN clearinghouse. A'XAMP14' dr nil Jty 71 Uf UJ 2. FEDERAL EMPLOYER IA. - Ttdt matte is isolated to buniNu pHllel by IRS. It hat 9 dgQL If you do net Na m I,D, Or need aadnaw In 10011111,11 n, correct the IunWna wml EXAMP14 456624694 3. APPLICANT— Use aeral iatws.MAXIMUM IO CHARACTERS RnCI W Irg spool. 111wassrY.ablrawae. EXAMPLE.- STATE //E71LT11 DA'PT'US 101107'SIR VICE a. ADDRESS - Use petal iattere MAXIMUM 2$ CHARACTERS Ilnaludir4iMa3l. EXAMPI.e. Jg16W0OD.3=KAPE B. CITY — Use lateral letter$. MAXIMUM If CHARACTERS ilntludlrg speeeal. EXAMPLE: SACRAMENTO 1 COUNTYY— Use apital letters. MAXIMUM 16 CHARACTERS RXAMPI,E: SACRAMENTD 7. STATE-Ufeaeullwtwa.AfAXIMUM2CHARACTERS a. 21P CODE -Enter vow alp ado EXAMPLE. 93814 1 PROGRAM TITLEMUMBER—Obtain this lnlRmelbn tram the funding neural or the State# of Federel OomaHeAedfrna. Do rot indudo daeiml Point. Plea a velated prawn dlle in MrsnlNsts followbq atalq number. EXAMPLE: 13I0Jl8Uln21r1 £dug ID. TYPE OF ACTION— Enter X In the IWORlap bee. 11,12.13. TYPE OF CHANCE— Complete only It You Will, daaod box 10b or Hit. is. EXISTING FED. GRANT I.D.— It you hat thanked llem Los or lot ar forms hie RMbus prrespomana Mtn a Federal Agency concerning Vow Rlanl9rent enlwlblAOWIWw. KSAUPLE: OSDA:b0RJ9Ul 11 AEOUMADPUNDSrART—Enwop wleadm. 11 FUNDS START.-Enterappoplat}deer, 17. EST.PAOJECTSTAIIT—Enteroapreprlet6d&tL 11 EST. PROJECT DURATION —Enter apweRiaY"% 19. APPLICANT TYPE — Enter the apROprlae letter in IN box Reviled. Federal ep picks use induct 20, 21, 22, 23, 24. FUNDS REQUESTED — Enter $FRowuto lees 611m/undllea Ipolved,fnlw O. 25. ORIEF TITLE OF MAX/MUM 60CHARACTERS gICANT O'udiCno,pcial.se Nltm. EXAMPI.£: CONSMVCTPONOPNEWHOUSINC 26. DESCRIPTION OF APPLICANTS PROJECT UrURPOSEI - Uae Rplral Idler. MAXIMUM 200 CHARACTERS lntludbg Inns). TO estimates, per, Iim, ! Ilnh, Meet dattelRlon pmeess, intelligible to 00rM01tlent6 lnclWle,lf aDpfoRlera, slue and amount of rota/burl/Rmu mNchbg font, and mmn of others with wheat coordination his been wrbllshW. 27. AREA OF IMPACT - Use capitol lettn. Always Include awry or counties of Impact. include city if apptlplelt. It me YAlhin !bans of a mimed dlv Or town. gin tough station In Box 26 atbN. ledlale whether Incomes Is stalenide, VOIRLYnyldf Or misllnoounW. 11 mWlFaoiny. lilt aunty of waWt Insfeed 1icIL 21L CONORES610NA1. 016TNCT—MAXIMUM2NUMERAL.E 29. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT?— Enwao Xlnappcoprlese bow. It X D in YES - attach a Lear. 20. CLIARiNGHOUS919 TO WHICH SUBMITTED — Enter 46 X In the ApwoPoaa box. 21s, NAfor ME he action OF CONTACT has the mONt compl— Enter ete Into mmatim regarding It* IrOPmal Wln pqq be mntated It necessary, Do Mot plus IN Lem of tilt ad. Ahtnte, Om, example, unrest a rnth general responsibility far IN pollen, The canted Rraoq will recnw an acknonledRmnl of relaiyl, the Stele Charineheuer IantillUllan number, and, Votes arnp1e0ei1 Of the in", any commmu 9enwalsd from the protect fwiay, 31b, ADDRESS 319 TELEPHONE - Enter Put IntWm ion lot the Paton who me the moil complete Information taswding the ROmtal who the be Lentacted If century. Do not Girt the nAaw of the eOminlxtetor Ile, txample, mayml with general resmnsullitY to IN project. 3101Aih ITEMS FOR CAUPORNIAREVIEW— Sid. b Endrenmental RRserr RgY41df —1/ gar, Gllforn4 requires A minimum of 20 coolM of attach mnttsueh n EIR1, Neptlw Otdwfllonl, men. eta, for taulew proposer, It mN atuUwd, be lira to fill In An aproximle data tile* duaa inif will be forwtMrd fe,miM. If m, Indlate rum. If Riled is sump Under State Gtaewlal exemption, lilt which ant Has '13 WMIIna for IN ImPltmnratltn of the California ErwPonrdnw OWIEY Act of 1970.1 31s. Will the Fmlaa raqu9$ ReleatbM—"if Pace be required to pout from their statistical a A mull Of this project? SH. Dcseyow AgencYhm$CivUA4huAllkmaga Atdm Polity and Nan? — S'114*OIMSIWY. Mg. Dose /400, Part IV NP1Y? - This fiction require the execution of a Msmorandwn of Aplemem I between an Aflawidppapo ClaerinphoVw and any fNlerallY•lundld. iPMIoollnafasGMn1M omlty, which shrer its tenllarsel it a. has MOA ban aaatad? —A mpy of the Mfmmmdum of Agreements must be M19cmd to IN A011110UMa bW ZbOUld net be submhtrl fa review to the Stata ClaNnpheeef. 311L If Project it 0hydCM in miWf a tequkM as "hmmen ll document, lie the US. paolapled " �IfatitsaWlle mulch) In Which aM portal It HeataL V PART 1 r The Original of Form CA•109 will be returned to You by top Suu Claringhoim As atoll as not that you sent to the Afawldl Clewinghoum, EACH FORM MUST BE INCLUDED IN THE AL APPLICATION It attchePACKET. d to Uw ppNaOon to the funding Agency, an the -and 311. CERTIFICATiION — It A lotto from the But$ CIIRla9heua confirm complananof the rMulredrauNW NSRpcbtd.aw X In boa, AOs. NAME does. TITLE elk, SID IATUNE a0d, TELEPHONE NO, — COmpleu this iEfnrmetbn for the Moron WHO 1fSIGNS GRANT APPLICATl. IONIS S FORF YOUR AGENCY. at. DATE MAILED TO FEDERAL AOENCV - Enter APRnprlal$ dot. 12. NAME OF IS SUBMITTED — Enter NCY the abbrom iflon CH se IlNganattsc adImIL n Irinw .u1M InxlnNlnM In n,Na AAM111NmIM MMI WI.GMkIM DB17 k ........ v....r .... _...._._.. .__. O$Mrlmntal 10 No. __ __ Currant vex _ Oepxtmnlal ID Na. 6WNl War any FOmMa TOTAL ll STATE OPERATIONS 21 W.LASSI3TAHe6 OI aTAL OIITLAV _.._._ .. _ _. .... ... _.._._.. _ ._.._._..,�._�....e... [/......hu-..Mir Aa uexm N[nq Per uccn,.n..n ........................n.._........ Oaoxtminlal ho No. Cupp vur ............ ...... Dfmrlmnlal ID Ne. ._.._._____.._.. lutlwl Year _ Carry FatwxA TOTAL ll STATE OPERATION! 21 LOCALA6515TANCE 2) CAPITALCUTLAY D-26