Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit 8 - Exhibit 8 - 3-6-08 Planning Commission ReportExhibit No. 8 Planning Commission staff report dated March 6, 2008 l THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY BLANK k.,%- SCANNED CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT March 6, 2008 Agenda Item 3 SUBJECT: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian Master Plan Update (PA 2007 -073) One Hoag Drive, Newport Beach, California ■ Certification of Final Supplemental Environmental .Impact Report ■ General Plan Amendment No. 2007 -005 ■ Planned Community Development . Plan Amendment No. 2007 -001 ■ Development Agreement Amendment No. 2007 -001 APPLICANT: Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian CONTACT: James Campbell, Senior Planner (949) 644 -3210 icamobelllKr�citv.newport beach.ca.us INTRODUCTION The Commission considered this project on January 31st and February 7, 2008. During the first meeting, the project was introduced and public testimony was received and several peripheral issues remained unresolved. At the second meeting, discussion focused on noise, health risks associated with the cogeneration facility, landscaping of the.Lower Campus and lighting of the Lower Campus. Hoag has conducted a meeting with residents of Villa Balboa regarding the noise mitigation strategies proposed at the February meeting. As a result of the discussions related to noise and landscaping, Hoag has modified their requested amendment of the Hoag Planned Community text (Exhibit #1). Hoag has not conducted a meeting with Villa Balboa residents regarding the cogeneration facility as the City study of the efficacy of modifying the facility to abate emissions is not complete. The City Attorney's office has provided a current draft of the proposed amendment of the Development Agreement for the Commission's consideration (Exhibit #2). RECOMMENDATION Conduct a public hearing and continue this item to March 20, 2008. Y-3 DISCUSSION Planned Community Text Changes Exhibit #1 is the updated amendment of the Hoag strikeeet format with the most recent changes from The recent changes will be discussed below. 1. Changes to Section VX - Internal Circulation Hoag Master Plan Update March 6, 2008 Page 2 PC text in an underline and m the prior draft highlighted. As noted in the January 31, 2008, staff report, Section VX (Internal Circulation) requires the implementation of a "pilot program" that controls the usage of service roads during non - working hours. Staff rejected Hoag's suggested language and proposed the following: "The project sponsor shall continue to limit the use of that portion of West Hoag Drive adjacent to residential uses located on the Upper Campus. Except in emergency situations, deliveries to loading areas shall not be scheduled after 8:00 PM or before 7:00 AM daily. The project sponsor shall physically restrict access to the roadway between these hours and appropriate signage indicating permitted delivery hours and access limitations shall be installed and maintained at all times. Deliveries and vehicular access to loading area located along West Hoag Drive are allowed in emergency situations where critical supplies or materials are necessary for the continued operation of the hospital. " Hoag now suggests the following: "The project sponsor shall continue to limit the use of that portion of West Hoag Drive adjacent to residential uses located on the Upper Campus. Deliveries to loading areas shall not be scheduled after 8:00 PM or before 7:00 AM daily. The project sponsor shall physically restrict access to the roadway between these hours and appropriate signage indicating permitted delivery hours and access limitations shall be installed and maintained at all times. Night time deliveries and vehicular access to the loading area located along West Hoag Drive are allowed where critical supplies, services or materials are necessary for the continued operation of the hospital." Staff does not object to the suggested change. 2. Changes to Section V.L — Loading Dock As noted in the January 31, 2008, staff report, this section required modification and staff suggested changing "should" and "may" within the second sentence to "shall" and "will." With Hoag's proposal to install a noise barrier or sound attenuation wall, the language could read: "The project sponsor shall provide a sound wall along West Hoag Drive as shown in the approximate location on Exhibit 4; please refer to Section Vlll, D. for landscaping requirements related to the sound wall. Mitigation measures to reduce the noise levels in P. it 7 Hoag Master Plan Update March 6, 2008 Page 3 the Loading Dock Area shall be incorporated into the design and operations of the hospital, such mitigation will include relocation of the trash compactor and baler, limiting the hours of truck deliveries to the loading dock area, enclosure of the trash compactor, use of acoustic panels, etc.' This language would require Hoag to install the sound wall as presented at the February 7, 2008, meeting by Fred Greve, the noise consultant hired by the City to prepare the noise analysis for the SEIR. The approximate location is depicted on a map exhibit that will be part of the PC text, which is the same location exhibit presented at the meeting by Mr. Greve. It also makes a reference to Section VIII, D for landscaping requirements, which is reflective of Hoag's desire to screen the wall to soften its appearance. The installation of the wall would be on Hoag's property on the Villa Balboa side of the 25 to 32 foot high row of trees that presently separates West Hoag Drive and the loading dock from Villa Balboa. The dense row of trees would need to be trimmed back on the Villa Balboa side to accommodate the wall and the existing trees will provide an effective screen of the wall on the Hoag side. As noted, Hoag will plant sufficient landscaping on the Villa Balboa side of the wall for screening purposes. Hoag met with roughly 20 residents of Villa Balboa on February 23, 2008, to discuss the sound wall and issues related to it. Residents and owners of 260 and 280 Cagney Lane (the closest two buildings) were invited to participate. Absentee owners were mailed notices and were informed where to obtain additional information should they so choose. Staff, Mr. Greve and Councilmember Rosansky observed and participated in the informational discussion. Hoag provided story poles to show the approximate location and height of the wall and the group inspected the area. Varying comments were heard ranging from support to judicious concern to opposition. Concerns raised were: loss of light, loss of air circulation, proximity of the wall to residents, wall maintenance, loss of landscaping, replacement landscaping and landscape maintenance. Some residents want the wall to be extended further to the north and others wanted a more uniform height and some residents don't want the wall at all. There is no official position by the community and testimony may augment the debate. It should be noted that a sound wall in this area was identified in the Draft SEIR as infeasible and Mr. Greve, Bonterra Consulting and City staff no longer hold that belief. Bonterra Consulting is preparing an analysis of the impact of the wall that will be provided at the hearing for consideration. The suggested language for Section V.L also includes a requirement that Hoag implement several improvements to the loading dock area as identified in the mitigation measures. That plan is in plan check presently and is nearly ready for building permit issuance. TS- Hoag Master Plan Update March 6, 2008 Page 4 The sound wall is part of a comprehensive mitigation strategy based upon the mitigation measures within the SEIR and the revised PC text that Hoag has agreed to implement, which will significantly reduce noise. Those measures are: 1. Mechanical equipment upgrades and equipment enclosures on the roof of the ancillary building. 2. Closure of openings or the installation of sound attenuating louvers on the West Tower. 3. Upgrades to the loading dock area including the enclosure of equipment and the installation of sound absorbing panels. 4. New windows, balcony barriers and in some cases wall upgrades for those units with cedar siding. These features would be implemented for those units that are not protected by the sound. wall. Should no sound wall is be constructed, all the units within 260 and 280 Cagney Lane that face Hoag and several units that face the gap between them as determined by the noise consultant will be offered these upgrades. The primary noise source at night is mechanical equipment and the noise will be reduced to 55 dBA. The primary noise source during the day is vehicle noise and loading dock activities are also a factor. The most effective solution the City's. noise consultant could devise, from a noise perspective, is the proposed sound wall. As noted by the noise consultant during the February 7, 2008, hearing, enclosing the loading dock was examined and it was found to provide inferior noise attenuation to the proposed soundwall as vehicle noise would not be addressed fully. Lastly, enclosing the loading dock would exceed the cost of the sound wall and as such, enclosing the loading dock as potentially envisioned by the PC text is not recommended. 3. Changes to Section V. M — Noise Standards The February 7, 2008, staff report mistakenly describes the applicability of the existing noise limit within the PC text. On Page 8 it indicates that mechanical equipment noise is regulated and on Page 17.the reports indicates that all noise cannot exceed 55 decibels (dB) at Hoag property lines. Neither of these references is correct. The existing provision reads as follows: "New mechanical appurtenances on building rooftops and utility vaults, excluding communications devices on the Upper Campus shall be screened from view in a manner compatible with building materials. Rooftop mechanical appurtenances or utility vaults shall be screened on the Lower Campus. Noise shall not exceed 55 dBA at all property lines. No new mechanical appurtenances may exceed. the building height limitations as defined in these district regulations." Although the third. sentence does not indicate the regulated noise source, the provision is read in the context of the paragraph and, therefore, the regulated 00-tv.0 Hoag Master Plan Update March 6, 2008 Page 5 noise source is new mechanical appurtenances on building rooftops and utility vaults. As noted in the prior report, Hoag is suggesting the elimination of the 55 dBA noise standard. Noise would then be limited by Chapter 10.26 (Community Noise Control) except for the loading dock area where Hoag is requesting a higher limit. The current limit applicable in this case as measured at the residences are: Hoag had previously requested the following limits to be measured at the property line rather than at the residences: 7AM -10PM Daytime 10PM -7AM Nighttime L 15 min) 60 dBA 50 dBA Hoag had previously requested the following limits to be measured at the property line rather than at the residences: If the sound wall noted above is installed, these previously proposed limits will not be necessary and Hoag has amended their request as follows: 7AM -10 PM Daytime 10 IPM —7AM Nighttime Le 15 min 70 dBA 58 dBA If the sound wall noted above is installed, these previously proposed limits will not be necessary and Hoag has amended their request as follows: It must be noted that although Hoag is suggesting a higher noise limit than the Municipal Code, existing noise levels experienced by residents will be reduced to or below the proposed limits with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the SERI and the proposed sound wall. Additional noise attenuation is not possible without resorting to an extremely high noise barrier (37 feet in some cases) and identifying a noise standard that can actually be achieved will avoid a perpetual violation. In addition to the change in the requested noise standards, Hoag sought to exempt vehicle noise and noise from activities occurring at the loading dock. Hoag has revised their requests to exempt only noise vehicle noise with the following provision: "Within the Loading Dock Area, during daytime hours, vehicles shall be exempt from applicable noise standards as listed above." There in no practical way for Hoag to control vehicle noise other than to close the road entirely. Hoag also plans to control vehicle idling with the following provision: 875 7AM -10PM Daytime 10 IPM —7AM Nighttime Le 15 min) 1 65 dBA 55 dBA It must be noted that although Hoag is suggesting a higher noise limit than the Municipal Code, existing noise levels experienced by residents will be reduced to or below the proposed limits with the implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the SERI and the proposed sound wall. Additional noise attenuation is not possible without resorting to an extremely high noise barrier (37 feet in some cases) and identifying a noise standard that can actually be achieved will avoid a perpetual violation. In addition to the change in the requested noise standards, Hoag sought to exempt vehicle noise and noise from activities occurring at the loading dock. Hoag has revised their requests to exempt only noise vehicle noise with the following provision: "Within the Loading Dock Area, during daytime hours, vehicles shall be exempt from applicable noise standards as listed above." There in no practical way for Hoag to control vehicle noise other than to close the road entirely. Hoag also plans to control vehicle idling with the following provision: 875 Hoag Master Plan Update March 6, 2008 Page 6 "Non - refrigerated delivery trucks will be instructed not to idle on West Hoag Drive as they are queuing to enter the Loading Dock Area." Staff is concerned that this provision is insufficient for several reasons. Even with the proposed sound wall, vehicles could idle at the loading dock. Vehicles should not stop and idle while on West Hoag Drive in any event as this impedes vehicle circulation and the roadway is a designated fire lane. Any vehicles queuing for the loading dock space should wait at a more appropriate location. Idling should not be permitted in the loading dock area at all except for refrigerated trucks that must idle to maintain necessary refrigeration. The most effective solution is to prohibit idling in the loading dock area and on West Hoag Drive with the exception of refrigerated trucks at the loading dock. It would be Hoag's responsibility to properly manage the loading dock area and staff does not recommend additional regulations to define how it is to be accomplished. Staff recommends the following language to replace Hoag's suggested language: "Vehicle idling shall be prohibited on West Hoag Drive and within the loading dock areas, except that refrigerated vehicles may idle while at the loading docks when refrigeration is necessary." 4. Changes to Section VIII — Hoag Hospital Landscape Regulations There are two areas for change. First, additional landscaping is proposed to screen or soften facilities located on the Lower Campus. A specific list and schedule of the enhancements was included in the February 7, 2008, staff report. Secondly, a new provision is proposed to ensure that the proposed sound wall is also screened. The applicant's suggested language is below with a suggested edits by staff noted in. "Replace and enhance existing trees, shrubs and groundcover in areas altered by the planned Lower Campus utility upgrade project to improve and unify Hoag landscaping along the West Coast Highway frontage and to screen narking areas, buildings. or other structures. Installation would occur within 90 days after underground utility installation." "To enhance visual quality, safety and erosion control along the Lower Campus, the north slope above the Lower Campus retaining wall will be regraded to allow shrubs, and ground cover, and a new irrigation system will be installed." "Plantings and irrigation are to be maintained in accordance with the approved plans." Approximately 870 linear feet of green screen (consisting of .......) she W# be installed along the Rae#is West Coast Highway frontage of Hoag's orouerty west of the signalized intersection that provides vehicular access to the Lower Campus to assist -in the pro vide screening of views of the west parking lot, buildings or other structures from €?asihs West Coast Highway." "The project sponsor shall provide a sound wall along West Hoag Drive in the approximate location as shown on Exhibit 4. Existing landscaping on Villa Balboa's side of the wall shall 8. s� I Hoag Master Plan Update March 6, 2008 Page 7 be preserved to the extent feasible or replaced with specimen plant material as designated on a plan to be approved by the Planning Director after consultation with the Villa Balboa Community Association. Any future modifications made to said wall and landscaping lean shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director." Amended Development Agreement The current draft of the proposed amendment of the Development Agreement is attached as Exhibit #2. The principal differences are such that the previously contemplated provisions related to noise and landscaping have been removed and provisions to address those issues are proposed within the PC text. Hoag has dropped their request to waive an administrative fee for the City to issue revenue bonds and the term of the agreement is not proposed to be extended past the present term that expires in 2019. Environmental Review As noted in the prior report, the City certified the Hoag Hospital Master Plan Final E/R No. 142 in 1992 for the Hoag Hospital Master Plan allowing for up to 1,343,238 sq. ft. of uses at Hoag, inclusive of the Upper and Lower Campuses. The City has prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act to evaluate the proposed project. The principal project feature that could cause a physical change to the environment are the proposed changes to the General Plan, Planned Community Development Plan and Development agreement that would allow Hoag to reallocate up to 225,000 gross sq. ft. of entitled, but un -built building area from the Lower Campus to the Upper Campus. The current maximum gross building area allowable on the Upper Campus is 765,349 sq. ft. with 67,228 sq. ft. remaining to be constructed. The current maximum gross building area allowable on the Lower Campus is 577,889 sq. ft. with 389,740 sq. ft. remaining to be constructed. Again, up to 225,000 sq. ft. of Lower Campus entitlement could be constructed on the Upper Campus. The SEIR evaluates the potential impacts of such a physical change and concludes that there would be no greater impact than that identified in the prior SEIR. A more complete summary is contained within the January 31, 2008, staff report. Responses to comments received during the comment period have been prepared for consideration, made available for public comment and were transmitted to the Commission with the January staff report. Several letters were submitted just prior to or at the January 31, 2008, hearing and staff and Bonterra Consulting, the preparer of the SEIR, have reviewed the late comments and believe they do not present any significant new information that would invalidate the findings of the SEIR. Staff may present additional g.9 Hoag Master Plan Update March 6, 2008 Page 8 responses at the next meeting for clarification. Additional comments were made during the prior hearings related to a concern that the cogeneration facility could pose a health risk. During the February 7, 2008, hearing, John Pehrson of CDM, the preparer of the Health Risk assessment for the SEIR, testified that the facility emissions will remain below SCAQMD thresholds and that health risks due to Legionella, a bacteria that can cause legionnaires disease, are insignificant with standard maintenance and operation of the facility. The suggested changes to the PC text that would lead to a physical change to the environment (sound wall, additional landscaping, etc.) are being evaluated and the results of that analysis will be presented at the next hearing for public review. The changes to the Amended Development Agreement do not represent any potential physical change to the environment. Staff will prepare suggested findings recommending certification of the SEIR to the City Council if advisable for the next hearing. SUMMARY Staff believes a viable and effective noise mitigation program has been identified. It is not known at this time whether residents of Villa Balboa desire the sound wall. Hoag could build the wall entirely on their property; however, community acceptance is desirable. The project including the recent changes to the PC text and Amended Development Agreement can be supported provided that the Commission determined that the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and any additional supplemental analysis is adequate. Lastly, cogeneration facility emissions are currently being investigated and the findings of that review will be presented at the next Planning Commission hearing. EXHIBITS Submitted by: David Lepo, Plan r Director P. /0