Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit 22 - Exhibit 22 - Sound Wall AnalysisExhibit No. 22 Sound Wall Analysis Prepared by BonTerra Consulting 22.1 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BLANK 22.2 Hoag Memonat Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN MASTER PLAN UPDATE SOUND WALL PROJECT DESIGN FEATURE ANALYSIS BACKGROUND The primary source of noise at the Hoag loading dock and along West Hoag Drive is the arrival and departure of trucks. Additional noise sources include a box crusher, trash compactor, and sterilizer. Hoag limits the hours of access to the loading dock and West Hoag Drive (the road that runs along the western side of the Upper Campus); gates are closed at 8:00 PM and open at 7:00 AM. This restriction limits the vehicular traffic and loading dock noise to the hours when persons are generally considered less sensitive to noise. A noise study was prepared as a part of the Hoag Master Plan Update Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR). On average, three trucks arrived and then departed the loading dock in an hour with six trucks occurring during the busiest hour (8:30 AM to 9:30 AM). In addition to trucks arriving and departing the loading dock, general activity in the loading dock area also generates noise. This includes the handling of materials being delivered, backup beepers, and speech communication. General traffic (i.e., non - delivery traffic) traveling on West Hoag Drive also contributes substantially to the noise environment. The most significant noise event is trash removal. A truck arrives at the loading dock, backs up to the trash compactor, and then pulls the compactor unit onto the back of the truck (similar to the removal of a large trash dumpster), and drives away. The empty trash compactor is returned to the site some time later. Hoag has indicated that this occurs every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. Existing Hoag loading dock activities exceed the City of Newport Beach Noise Ordinance limits on a regular basis. It should be noted that Final EIR No. 142 was certified and the PC Text and Development Agreement between the City and Hoag approved prior to the City's Noise Ordinance going into effect. By increasing development at the Upper Campus, the proposed project could result in an additional activity at the loading dock. However, a substantial increase due to the proposed project is not expected when compared to buildout of Hoag consistent with the existing Master Plan because overall activity level at Hoag would be the same. The primary source of noise at the dock is from delivery trucks. While more delivery truck trips to the loading dock could occur with the buildout of the Master Plan, it is likely that increased deliveries would be accommodated through larger loads in a similar number of trucks. An increase in the number of trucks is not expected to result in an increase in noise levels generated by the loading dock but would instead increase the frequency of high noise levels generated by truck activity. The Master Plan Update Draft SEIR notes that activities in the loading dock area currently and are expected to continue to exceed the noise limits contained in the Noise Ordinance. Currently, the loading dock does not meet the levels established by the Noise Ordinance for Zone III — Mixed Use category (60 dBA [Leq] or 80 dBA [Lmax] during the daytime) which is the applicable standard for the condominiums adjacent to Hoag. The Hoag Master Plan Update Draft SEIR addressed options to mitigate for existing and future noise in the loading dock area including a sound wall at the property line and enclosure of the loading dock area; the latter is still not considered feasible due to its limited effectiveness in reducing noise levels'. The Draft SEIR noted that a sound wall could be constructed along Hoag's westerly property line to reduce noise levels at the residences. However, the geometry in this area is not favorable for the construction of a "traditional" sound wall (e.g., cinder block wall). It was calculated that the sound wall would need to be at least 25.5 feet high to provide ' Testimony of Fred Greve, Mestre Greve Associates, to the Planning Commission on February 7, 2008. 22.3 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbytenan Master Plan Update Sound Wali Analysis the 8 dB noise reduction to bring noise from the loading dock into compliance with the Noise Ordinance. The Draft SEIR determined that a traditional wall would likely not be feasible due the height, cost, construction impacts, as well as residents may not support a sound wall this tall, and close to their homes. Several other measures were recommended to provide some improvement in the noise levels associated with the loading dock area including balcony barriers and window /sliding glass door upgrades at affected condominium units in Villa Balboa. These measures would achieve a noise reduction but would be subject to homeowner and Homeowner Association approvals and would not mitigate noise to 55 db at Hoag's property line adjacent to Villa Balboa. The City and Hoag have continued to meet with the affected homeowners to address noise measures. Because the owners of the Villa Balboa condominiums affected by loading dock - related noise may not desire modifications to their condominiums, at the directive of the City Council and Planning Commission, City staff and Hoag have pursued additional mitigation options. SOUND WALL PROJECT DESIGN FEATURE At the February 7, 2008 Planning Commission hearing, the City discussed the option of a sound wall using a wall system called Sound Fighter® LSE Wall System. Sound Fighter® is a lightweight, sound absorbing wall system constructed with high - density polyethylene units which stack and interlock to the desired height. According to the manufacturer, the modules are locked in place at each end by vertical steel 4 -inch "H" beam columns. The modules are perforated on one side and the cavity is filled with an acoustic media and % -inch thick acoustical barrier board. The modules are stacked and interlocked to the desired wall height. Walls can be constructed up to 35 feet in height; the depth of the wall is approximately 6 inches. City staff, in consultation with Mestre Greve Associates, has determined that the construction of a sound wall using the specified materials provided by this manufacturer (or a different manufacture with a wall system with same sound attenuating qualities and construction implementation attributes) is feasible. As such, Hoag proposed the implementation of this sound wall as a Project Design Feature for the Hoag M aster Plan Update Project. City staff is recommending the inclusion of the following Project Design Feature (PDF) wording into the Hoag Master Plan Update Project: PDF.3.4 -2 Within 12 months following approval of the Master Plan Update Project by the City of Newport Beach and the expiration of any appeals, statute of limitations or referendum periods for challenging any of the Project approvals and subject to the City's issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall have constructed a sound wall of approximately 470 linear feet along West Hoag Drive within the boundaries of the Applicant's property. The sound wall would be constructed adjacent to Hoag Drive and set back approximately 3 to 6.5 feet from the edge of the existing curb. The sound wall shall range in height from approximately 17 to 23 feet between West Hoag Drive and the 280 Cagney Lane condominium building; and approximately 14 to 18.5 feet at the 260 Cagney Lane condominium. The location of the sound wall is provided in Exhibit 1. The sound wall shall be constructed using the Sound Fighter® LSE Wall System (or a sound wall system with the same sound attenuation capability and construction implementation capability). 22.4 Hoag Memonal Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update Sound Wail Analysis To the maximum degree feasible, the sound wall shall be constructed to retain existing vegetation which serves as a visual screen. Vegetation that is required to be removed associated with installation of the sound wall shall be replaced in -kind with specimen plant material as designated on a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plan shall be subject to review by the Villa Balboa Community Association, and review and approval by the City. The Applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of landscaping within the property boundaries of Hoag. Any future modifications made to the sound wall and /or landscaping shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. If the removal of vegetation is scheduled to proceed between March 1 and July 31, no more than seven days prior to the onset of construction activities that would impact trees associated with the sound wall, a qualified Biologist shall conduct a pre - construction bird nesting survey for the trees scheduled for removal to determine the presence of any active bird nest. If an active bird nest is found, the tree cannot be removed until the nest is deemed no longer occupied by the qualified Biologist. If no active nests are found, tree removal may commence. Trees removed anytime between August 1 and February 28 do not require any nesting bird surveys, or corresponding avoidance measures for nesting bird species. As noted in Project Design Feature 3.4 -2, Hoag would be responsible for the construction of the sound wall within its property limits. The setback distance from the West Hoag Drive curb varies to avoid existing underground utilities and minimize effects on existing vegetation. The sound wall varies in height from approximately 17 to 23 feet between West Hoag Drive and the 280 Cagney Lane condominium building (southern building); and from approximately 14 to 18.5 feet at the 260 Cagney Lane condominium building (northern building). The 14- foot -high segment would extend north of the 260 Cagney Lane building by approximately 40 feet. 280 Cagney Lane is a three -story building with condomiums units on three levels. 260 Cagney Lane is a four -story building with condominium units on the upper three levels and tuck -under parking on the first level. Exhibit 1 depicts the proposed sound wall in relationship to the existing condominium buildings, Hoag's property line, and the existing fencing between Villa Balboa and Hoag. The 17- foot -high wall segment would be approximately 60 linear feet; the 23- foot -high wall segment would be approximately 140 linear feet; the 18.5 -foot -high wall segment would approximately 118 linear feet; and the 14- foot -high wall segment would be approximately 145 linear feet (rounded total to approximately 470 linear feet). Four cross sections have been prepared to conceptually show the relationship of the proposed sound wall to the 280 Cagney Lane and 260 Cagney Lane condominium buildings. Cross Sections A, B, BB, and C (Exhibits 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively) correspond to the cross section locations identified on Exhibit 1. Cross Section A (Exhibit 2) is taken at 280 Cagney Lane within the 17- foot -high section of the sound wall. At this location, the proposed sound wall would be located approximately 52 feet from the condominium building. Existing vegetation in this location exceeds the height of the proposed sound wall. Cross Section B (Exhibit 3) is taken from 280 Cagney Lane, north of Cross Section A within the 17- foot -high section of the sound wall. At this location, the sound wall would be located approximately 39 feet from the condominium building. Existing vegetation in this location is of a similar height to the sound wall. Cross 22.5 Hoag Memonat Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update Sound Wag Analysis Section BB (Exhibit 4) is taken near the northern end of the 280 Cagney Lane building within the 23- foot -high section of the proposed sound wall. At this location, the sound wall would be located approximately 21 feet from the condominium building. Existing vegetation is of a similar height to the proposed sound wall. Section C (Exhibit 5) is taken from 260 Cagney Lane within the 18.5 -foot -high section of the sound wall. At this location, the sound wall would be located approximately 17 feet from the condominium building. Existing vegetation in this location is taller than the proposed height of the sound wall. Installation It is anticipated that sound wall construction would take approximately four to six weeks, inclusive of landscaping. 22.6 22.7 THIS PACE. LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BLANK 22.8 n N N Sketch Section HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Wall Maximum distance from Face of Curb to Centerline of Wall M X Cr rh i March 11, 2008 Rabban /Herman design office ' I I ' LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 0 8 18 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BLANK 22.10 N N Concept Sketch Section HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN Curb to Corkerllne of Wall rn x e.f. March 11, 2008 Rabben /Herman design office LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 0 W 16 BLANK 22.12 Concept Sketch Section HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN N N w wan Z maXImum GISTence Trom race OT I I I Curb to Conterline of Wall x WINDS e�F Marcb11,2008 Rabben /HermandesignDflme LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 0 1\ r Rd BLANK 22.14 C L * Wall Maximum distance from Face of 16' -9" 1 Curb to Centerline of Wall Concept Sketch Section HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN March 11, 2008 Rabben /Herman design office LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS 0 rn x 16 _ i A, 22.16 Hoag Memorial Hospital Pres"nan Master Plan Update Sound Wall Analysis Sound Wall Footings: The installation of the proposed sound wall would require the placement of 30- inch - diameter (approximate) concrete footings at six -foot intervals on center. The bottom of the sound wall does not rest on grade but is elevated several inches (as determined by the Acoustical Engineers) above the existing natural grade. The Sound Fighter® system does not require the typical continuous concrete spread footings seen on most walls or sound walls. The system would allow for the retention of existing grades and contours, with grading limited to minor precise grading adjustments at the location of each concrete footing. No cut or fill is expected, with export limited to the soil removed as required to accommodate the new footings. Excavated soil from the footing would not be retained on the site. Landscape Materials: To the maximum degree feasible, the sound wall would be constructed to retain existing vegetation which serves as a visual screen. Along West Hoag Drive, existing vegetation ranges in height with the majority being between 25 feet and 32 feet with a smaller portion at 18 feet; this vegetation is located with the property boundaries of Hoag and is dominated by non - native ornamental landscaping. The most common plant species include Ficus ( Ficus sp.), Acacia (Acacia sp.), yellow plum pine (Podocarpus macrophyllus), cape honeysuckle (Tecomada capensis), Oleander (Nedum oleander), asparagus fern (Asparagus sp.), mock orange (Choisya temate), large sweet gum trees (Liquidambar sp.), gum (Eucalyptus sp.), and ivy (Hedera sp.). The estimate of the existing trees to be affected by installation of the proposed sound wall along the west edge of West Hoag Drive is provided below by sound wall segment. Overall, approximately 94 linear feet ( 20 percent) of the 470 linear feet of existing trees would be removed. • The 17 -foot -high (approximately 60 linear feet) wall segment (closest to 280 Cagney Lane) would require the removal of approximately 12 linear feet of the existing tree line. Approximately 80 percent of the trees would be retained along this segment of the proposed sound wall. • The 23- foot -high (approximately 140 linear feet) wall segment (closest to 280 Cagney Lane) would require the removal of approximately 42 linear feet of the existing tree line. Approximately 70 percent of the existing trees would be retained along this segment of the proposed sound wall. • The 18.5 -foot -high (approximately 118 linear feet) wall segment (closest to 260 Cagney Lane) would require the removal of approximately 18 linear feet of the existing tree line. Approximately 85 percent of the existing trees would be retained along this segment of the proposed sound wall. • The 14- foot -high (approximately 145 linear feet) wall segment (closest to 260 Cagney Lane and extending northerly) would require the removal of approximately 22 linear feet of the existing tree line. Approximately 85 percent of the existing trees would be retained along this segment of the proposed sound wall. The installation of replacement and additional plant material would require the removal of soil, as necessary, to accommodate the root ball and plant pit size specified by the Landscape Architect. Any native soil not used in the backfill mix (as specified) would be removed from the site with each tree placed as necessary to minimize any disruption to the existing adjacent natural grades. Staking would be required for a short period of time. As with the footings, no cut or fill is anticipated as part of the landscaping. Plant material on the east (Hoag) side of the proposed wall would be removed to avoid conflict with the wall. 22.17 Hoag Memonal Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update Vegetation that is required to be removed associated with installation of the sound wall would be replaced in -kind with specimen plant material as designated on a landscape and irrigation plan prepared by a licensed Landscape Architect. City staff is recommending that the landscape plan be subject to review by the Villa Balboa Community Association, with review and approval by the General Services, Planning, and Public Works Departments. All landscape plans for Hoag currently require review and approval by these three departments. Sidewalks and Curbs and Gutters: The existing concrete sidewalks and curb and gutter along the west side of West Hoag Drive would remain, with no changes to the natural grade. The sidewalk along the east (Hoag) side of the proposed sound wall would be extended following existing natural grade to a point at the northern limits of the loading dock. No cut or fill is anticipated; any import would be limited to provide a compacted base as specified by the Civil Engineer. All water runoff would be directed to the existing curb and gutter. CEQA ANALYSIS An analysis of the potential effects of the proposed sound wall Project Design Feature is provided below. Land Use and Related Planninq Program The Master Plan Update SEIR found that implementation of development on the Upper Campus under the Master Plan Update Project scenario would have no greater or different land use effect than the existing Master Plan analyzed in the 1992 Final EIR No. 142. Final EIR No. 142 found that the Master Plan project would result in a significant and unavoidable land use impact on residential units located directly adjacent to the western buildings of the Upper Campus. Although setback limits for Hoag are more stringent than City Code, the placement of hospital buildings closer to residential units located to the west of the Upper Campus was identified as a significant impact when considered in combination with shade and shadow and noise impacts in this location. Consistent with the conclusions of Final EIR No. 142, the Final SEIR finds that the Master Plan Update Project would also result in significant impacts to existing residential development west of the Upper Campus. However, the amendment to the Master Plan would not make these impacts more severe. Rather, the construction of a sound wall in the loading dock area of Hoag as a part of the Master Plan Update Project would reduce noise impacts at the condominiums west of Hoag. Therefore, the proposed projects land use impact when considered in combination with shade and shadow and noise impacts in this location would be reduced when compared to the existing Master Plan. However, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Transportation and Circulation Final EIR No. 142 found that all traffic impacts could be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. No new significant traffic impacts have been identified associated with the proposed Master Plan Update Project. Consistent with the conclusions of Final EIR No. 142, the proposed project's contribution and all project- specific cumulative traffic, circulation, and parking impacts can be mitigated to a level considered less than significant. The Master Plan Update SEIR also addressed construction activities. During construction activities, there are typically temporary increases in truck trips in the project area. All construction activities would be staged on Hoag's property. Because of the construction process associated with this sound wall system, construction- related traffic would be minimal. 22.18 Hoag Memonal Hospital Presoyferian Master Plan Update Sound Wall Analysis Construction - related traffic control measures identified in the Master Plan Update Final SEIR would address any potential traffic construction effects. Mitigation Measure 101 requires a construction phasing and traffic control plan that identifies the estimated number of truck trips and measures to assist truck trips and truck movement in and out of the local street system. Mitigation Measure 103 requires Hoag to provide advance written notice of temporary traffic disruptions to affected area business and the public. Air Quality Consistent with the findings of Final EIR No. 142 for the existing Hoag Master Plan Project, the Master Plan Update Final SEIR finds the proposed project would result in air pollutant emissions that exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District's (SCAQMD) construction thresholds. The mitigation program included in the Final S EIR would reduce construction- related emissions but not to a level considered less than significant. The installation of the proposed sound wall would not result in air quality impacts beyond that addressed in the Final SEIR. Air quality emissions would be limited to excavation for the sound wall footings and removal/installation of landscaping materials. Construction vehicle emissions would be limited and within the assumptions set forth in the SE IR. With respect to potential effects on localized wind conditions in this location, the predominant wind direction is shown on Exhibit 6. According to wind data collected at John Wayne Airport, wind blows from a direction within the blue angle shown on the exhibit, 57.5 percent of the time. The blue angle roughly shows the wind predominantly coming from the south to the west - southwest quadrant. The wind is calm approximately 14 percent of the time and is from other directions the remaining time. The wind data shows that the wind normally would be directed towards the western end of the gap between the 280 and 260 Cagney Lane buildings. However, the exhibit also shows that this gap is blocked by another UIIa Balboa building. The eastern end of the gap between the 260 and 280 Cagney condominium buildings is obstructed by the Hoag West Tower. Additionally, existing vegetation ranges in height with the majority being between 25 feet and 32 feet with a smaller portion at 18 feet. This vegetation currently blocks most of the winds that might come through the gap. It is likely that little wind works it way through the gap between the buildings due to the density of the foliage. More likely is that the majority of wind is forced to rise over the buildings located to the west. The majority of wind would need to stay elevated to pass over the multi- storied structures of Hoag. While some breezes are present, it is unlikely that the proposed sound wall would alter significantly the wind patterns or wind strength in this area. The buildings in the area are much larger than the proposed sound wall and would continue to be the dominant factor in determining the wind patterns in the area. Additionally, existing vegetation along the property line currently has similar wind blocking and wind steering properties as the proposed sound wall given the identical location of the proposed sound wall. Therefore, breezes that are present from the south between the 260 and 280 Cagney Lane buildings and the existing vegetation would not be significantly affected. Similarly, breezes that are present from the west between the 260 and 280 Cagney Lane buildings would not be significantly affected. Noise Existing loading dock activities exceed the Noise Ordinance limits on a regular basis. It is anticipated that activities in the loading dock area will continue to exceed the noise limits contained in the Noise Ordinance. The proposed project contains exemption language to address this issue. Within the loading dock area, vehicles would be exempt from applicable 22.19 Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbytenan Master Plan Update Sound Wall Analysis noise standards and other loading dock area noise would be subject to limits of 65 dB (daytime) and 55 dB (nighttime). Modification of the Planned Community Development Plan, as proposed, would allow noise to exceed the Noise Ordinance criteria in the vicinity of the loading dock area, even after application of the mitigation program. As such, the proposed changes to the noise standards are identified in the Final SEIR as resulting in significant and unavoidable adverse impacts. The proposed sound wall would, however, reduce noise levels from vehicular traffic on West Hoag Drive and originating in the loading dock area from affecting residents of the 260 and 280 Cagney Lane condominiums by "absorbing" noise into the sound wall from Hoag. Noise originating from Villa Balboa to the sound wall is not expected to result in any significant noise impacts due to the distance of the proposed sound wall from the residential units, intermediate vegetation, and existing low sound levels from residential uses. The identified sound wall system is considered feasible and the Applicant has proposed that the sound wall be constructed as a Project Design Feature of the Master Plan Update Project. Installation of the sound wall would result in short-term construction- related noise. This would include soil excavation for the sound wall footings, tree cutting and trimming, stump grinding associated with tree removal, and wall construction. Tree stump grinding rather than excavation of trees with their associated root system would minimize effects on the health and number of trees. As addressed in the Master Plan Update SEIR, construction activities within 500 feet of residential areas have the potential to exceed the City's Noise Ordinance noise level limits. However, the Noise Ordinance exempts construction activities from the noise level limits during specific hours of the day. Noise - generating construction activities are permitted during the hours between 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM Monday through Friday, between 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays, and at no time on Sundays or federal holidays. Construction activities are not proposed outside these hours. Compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance is considered to result in no significant short -term noise impacts. Aesthetics Final EIR No. 142 identified that the Master Plan Project would not result in significant aesthetic or visual impacts. The Final EIR found that shade and shadow effects would contribute to a significant unavoidable land use impact but that as an individual project effect, shade and shadow impacts were considered less than significant. The Master Plan Update Final SEIR finds that the proposed project would not result in any significant visual impacts either prior to or after mitigation. As proposed, at its closest point, the sound wall would be approximately 17 feet from the 260 Cagney Lane building. However, it should be noted that there are no residential units on the first level of the 260 Cagney Lane building because there is tuck -under parking on the first level. The balconies on the second level of this building (first level of residences) are at an elevation that is similar to or higher than the proposed 18.5 -foot -high segment of sound wall in this location (see Exhibit 5). Existing vegetation in this location is taller than the proposed height of the sound wall; any removed landscaped materials would be replaced. Corresponding to the other cross sections provided in this analysis, the proposed sound wall would range in distance set back from the condominiums from 21 feet (Cross Section BB, Exhibit 4) to 52 feet (Cross Section A, Exhibit 2). 22.20 � „, S � �{ ;� THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BLANK 22.22 Hoag Memonat Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update Sound Wait Analysis Currently, residents with condominium units that have windows and/or balconies facing west look out onto a landscaped area which includes the dense vegetation described in this analysis. While this vegetation is dense and tall (typically 25 to 32 feet in height), sunlight filters through the vegetation. Because the proposed sound wall is opaque, sunlight would not be able to filter through the wall. To preclude the perception of a dark surface behind the existing dense vegetation, it is recommended that the proposed sound wall be constructed in a light color, such as light tan. The sound wall can be constructed in any color specified; a light color would better emulate existing conditions. With respect to potential shade and shadow effects on the adjacent condominium units, the City does not have adopted significance criteria for shade and shadow. In a recent CEQA document, the City required that a shade study be prepared to show that "...new development will not add shade to the designated residential areas beyond existing conditions for more than three hours between the hours of 9 AM and 3 PM Pacific Standard Time, or for more than four hours between the hours of 9 AM and 5 PM Pacific Daylight Time (see Addendum to the City of Newport Beach General Plan 2006 Update Final Environmental Impact Report, November 2007). To provide some context for how other jurisdictions address this issue, the City of Costa Mesa uses the following significance criteria: Cast shade or shadow onto sensitive uses in adjacent off -site areas for more than two hours between the hours of 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM. The shade and shadow analysis included in Final EIR No. 142 was based on a worst -case assumption of structures in the Upper Campus built to the maximum height limits established for the Upper Campus: Tower Zone (up to 235 feet above mean sea level) and the Midrise Zone (up to 140 feet above mean sea level). These height limits do not change with the proposed project. Table 4.9.6 of Final EIR No. 142 (page 4 -176) identifies for the two condomiums buildings in Villa Balboa closest to Hoag the duration of shade under existing conditions and future conditions. Future conditions would be applicable for both the existing and proposed Master Plans. TABLE 4.93 — STRUCTURAL COVERAGE/SHADOW DURATION Final EIR No. 142 noted that the existing Master Plan would result in greater morning shade and shadow on the adjacent condominium development because of continued development within the Tower and Midrise Zones. However, Final EIR No. 142 concluded that this would not be considered a significant impact of the Master Plan because of the short duration during the y ear; the fact that the shading effects only affect a portion of the structures during the early morning Building "A" is the 260 Cagney Lane condominium building; Building "B" is the 280 Cagney Lane condominium building. 22.23 Hoag Memonal Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update Sound Wall AnaWs hours; and the fact that the increased shade would not substantially limit solar energy access to the structures (see page 4 -179). Since the proposed project would not alter the maximum allowable height of buildings or structures at Hoag, these potential impacts would not be different from what was previously addressed. Applying the City of Costa Mesa's significance criteria and the City of Newport Beach's study criteria for a recent Addendum, neither the existing Master Plan nor the proposed project would have a significant shadelshadow impact. As a part of this analysis of the proposed sound wall, a shade and shadow analysis was conducted for the Summer solstice (June 21) and a Winter day (January 21) for the time periods of 8:00 AM, 10:00 AM, and noon; see Exhibits 7 and 8, respectively. The greatest effect the sound wall would have on the existing condominiums would be during the Winter during the 8:00 AM time period; shadows would extend across the frontage of the 260 Cagney Lane building but would have moved away from the building by 10:00 AM. This affects is greatly less than assumed in Final EIR No. 142 with respect to buildout of the Master Plan. As such, no significant shade /shadow impacts are associated with the sound wall. Biological Resources To identify any biological constraints by the proposed construction of a soundwall, a biological survey was conducted on February 25, 2008, by BonTerra Consulting Principal Ann Johnston. All plant and wildlife species observed were recorded in field notes. The proposed sound wall occurs in an area dominated by non - native, ornamental landscaping. No native plant species were observed during the field survey. The most common plant species included Ficus, Acacia, yellow plum pine, cape honeysuckle, Oleander, asparagus fem, mock orange, gum, sweet gum, and ivy. Due to the presence of non - native landscape species that are actively maintained (trees and scrubs thinned and cut back routinely), the area of the proposed sound wall is not expected to provide extensive habitat for wildlife species. Those species that may present include species common to urban settings such as side - blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana), Anna's hummingbird (Calypte anna), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), American crow (Corvus brachyrhynchos), European starling (Stumus vulgaris), and California ground squirrel (Spermophilus beecheyi). The proposed sound wall location does not occur within an area that has the potential to support special status biological resources including plants, wildlife, or regulated natural features. Due to the lack of these resources, the proposed sound wall construction would not be subject to any permitting processes from State or federal resource agencies. However, because a few ornamental trees and large shrubs occur on the site that could support nesting birds, it is recommended that the treellarge shrub removals are done outside,the nesting season (typically March 1 through July 31). This recommendation is based on recent interpretations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) and expectations of many local and state agencies. If the removal of vegetation is scheduled to proceed between March 1 and July 31, it is recommended that a qualified Biologist conduct a pre - construction bird nesting survey for the trees scheduled for removal to determine the presence of any active bird nest. If an active bird nest is found, the tree cannot be removed until the nest is deemed no longer occupied. If no active nests are found, tree removal may commence. Trees removed anytime between August 1 and February 28 do not require any nesting bird surveys, or corresponding avoidance measures for nesting bird species. 22.24 Y� ,Y Exhibit 7 t Shadow Study for Sound Wall {Summer] e l r � NX`` mA t� ........ ..... J" 21 ad U.00 ma+ 22.25 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BLANK 22.26 Exhibit 8 Shadow Study for Sound Wall(Winter) 22.27 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BLANK 22.28 Hoag Memonal Hospital Prasbytenan Master Plan Update Sound Wall Analms CEQA Determination Implementation of this Project Design Feature would not result in any new or greater significant effects than have already been addressed in the Master Plan Update SEIR or whose impacts could not be mitigated to a level that is considered less than significant. Therefore, based on CEQA Guidelines §15088.5(a), the addition of this information does not require recirculation of the SEIR. This section of the CEQA Guidelines states: A lead agency is required to recirculate an EIR when significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the draft EIR for public review under Section 15087 but before certification. As used in this section, the term 'information' can include changes in the project or environmental setting as well as additional data or other information. New information added to an EIR is not "significant" unless the EIR is changed in a way that deprives the public of a meaningful opportunity to comment upon a substantial adverse environmental effect of a project or of a feasible way to mitigate or avoid such an effect (including a feasible project alternative) that the project's proponents have declined to implement. "Significant new information" requiring recirculation include, for example, a disclosure showing that: (1) A new significant environmental impact would result from the project or from a new mitigation proposed to be implemented. (2) A substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact would result unless mitigation measures are adopted that reduce the impact to a level of insignificance. (3) A feasible project alternative or mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project, but the project's proponents decline to adopt it. (4) The draft EIR was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded (Mountain Lion Coalition v. Fish & Game Com. (1989) 214 Cal A pp.3d 1043). 22.29