IV.E.2. Artificial Light - planning.lacity.orgplanning.lacity.org/eir/NBC_UnivPlan/DEIR/files/IV.E.2. Artificial... · IV.E.2 Light and Glare - Artificial Light City of Los Angeles

City of Los Angeles NBC Universal Evolution Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report November 2010

Page i

WORKING DRAFT - Not for Public Review

Table of Contents E.2 Light and Glare - Artificial Light

1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1232

2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ................................................................................... 1239 a. Existing Regulatory Setting ................................................................................. 1239 b. Existing Local Area Conditions ............................................................................ 1240 c. Existing On-Site Conditions ................................................................................. 1240

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................................................................... 1248 a. Methodology ........................................................................................................ 1248 b. Thresholds of Significance .................................................................................. 1250 c. Project Design Features ...................................................................................... 1253 d. Project Impacts .................................................................................................... 1260

4. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .......................................................................................... 1276

5. PROJECT DESIGN FEATURES AND MITIGATION MEASURES ........................... 1277 a. Project Design Features ...................................................................................... 1277 b. Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................ 1277

6. LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER MITIGATION .................................................... 1277

Table of Contents


Page ii


List of Tables

79 Lighting Analysis Viewpoint Field Observation Data ....................................... 1237 80 Light Exposure Simulation Models .................................................................. 1252 81 Light Exposure Simulation Results .................................................................. 1272

List of Figures

174 Lighting Analysis Locations ............................................................................. 1235 175 Location of Sites and Viewpoints Analyzed ..................................................... 1251


Page 1232


IV. Environmental Impact Analysis E.2 Light and Glare - Artificial Light

1. Introduction

The following section is based in part on the Environmental Impact Lighting Analysis prepared by Francis Krahe & Associates dated March 2010. The Lighting Analysis is included as Technical Appendix G to this Draft EIR.

The term “artificial light” in this analysis refers to man-made evening and nighttime light. Artificial light sources are generally of two types, including: (1) point sources of light which include unshielded light sources (e.g., lenses or lamp reflectors); and (2) illuminated surfaces which may include light reflected off of the ground, walls, or trees. Residential uses are considered light-sensitive because they are typically occupied during the evening hours, and are occupied by persons who have expectations of privacy. Artificial light sources can be potentially invasive and interfere with residential privacy by intruding into an individual’s living environment, disrupting evening views and potentially adversely modifying neighborhood character.

Artificial light impacts are of two types: (1) aesthetics and (2) exposure. Light aesthetics refers to the viewer’s general aesthetic perception of light sources and their environment and focuses on the visual changes which take place as seen by an individual. Light exposure refers to the quantity of light, or light intensity, emitted by light sources and received by an individual. Light aesthetics and light exposure are each evaluated using different criteria, as described below.

Light aesthetics are evaluated based on the following criteria:

Changes in sky glow (the general white-to-orange glow that emanates from large expanses of lit area, such as cities). Substantial (i.e., highly noticeable) increases in sky glow could impact nighttime aesthetics by reducing the clarity of the night sky;

Proximity to light sources (i.e., a lit area within close proximity to a certain location would have a greater impact upon that location than a lit area further away); and

IV.E.2 Light and Glare - Artificial Light


Page 1233


Changes in large areas from unlit to lit conditions.

Based upon these criteria, the potential for impacts with regard to light aesthetics exists where light-sensitive (i.e., residential) uses: (1) are directly adjacent to or within close proximity of large areas where major changes in lighting conditions would occur; and (2) have clear, unobstructed views of these areas (obstructions may include physical obstructions and/or intervening light obstructions such as a lit urban corridor).

Light exposure is evaluated based on the following technical criteria:

Context: the unobstructed portion of the view that is available from any particular location. Field of view refers to the total view available from a given viewpoint. Context may be expressed as the proportion of the available field of view that is unobstructed. For example, if a particular viewpoint has views toward the Project Site, but large trees and fencing in the foreground obstruct 20 percent of the field of view, the context would be 80 percent (Context = (100 percent of the field of view) – (the proportion of foreground obstructions)).

Coverage: the proportion of the unobstructed field of view (i.e. the context) from a particular location that is occupied by the Project Site. Generally, the smaller the proportion of the unobstructed field of view occupied by the Project Site, the less influence the Project Site has on the total view. For instance, if half of the available context is occupied by the Project Site, coverage would be 50 percent (Coverage = (100 percent of the context) – (the area not visually occupied by the Project Site)).

Brightness/Contrast: brightness is the magnitude of the sensation that results when an individual views a surface from which light comes to the eye. This brightness at a location is determined partly by the numerically measurable luminance86 of the light source and partly by the conditions of observation, such as the visible contrast with the field of view and the state of adaption of the eye. “High,” “Medium,” and “Low” brightness are terms used to describe contrast ratios (the ratio of one surface luminance to the luminance of a second surface) of greater than 30:1, between 10:1 and 30:1, and below 10:1 surface-to-

86 Luminance describes the brightness of an illuminated surface, and is defined as the ratio of luminous intensity of a surface to the area of the surface that is illuminated. Luminance may also be described as a measure of reflected light from a specific surface in a specific direction over a standard area. It is measured in footlamberts (candelas per square foot). A candela is defined as a measure of light energy from a source at a specific standard angle and distance (the output of a 100 watt incandescent lamp is approximately equivalent to 150 candelas and that of a 200 watt incandescent lamp is approximately equivalent to 300 candelas).



Page 1234


background luminance, respectively. Contrast ratios above 30:1 are uncomfortable for the human eye to perceive.

Light Trespass: the light that falls on a property but originates on an adjacent property. It is usually measured at the adjacent property line and is expressed in terms of illuminance.87

Based on these criteria, the potential for light exposure impacts exists where sensations of high brightness/contrast are perceived from a given location with a nearby, unobstructed view of the Project Site or where substantial amounts of light fall on off-site sensitive uses.

As evidenced by the above discussions, artificial light impacts are largely a function of proximity to the Project Site. The Project Site is located within an urban environment, so that light emanating from any one source contributes to, rather than is solely responsible for, lighting impacts on a particular use. Since development surrounding the Project Site is already impacted by lighting from existing development within the area, new light sources must occupy a highly visible (prominent) amount of the field of view of light-sensitive uses to have any measurable effect.

There are several light-sensitive uses (i.e., residential neighborhoods) located in the vicinity of the Project Site. The Lighting Analysis selected 24 viewpoints for analysis from within these neighborhoods (refer to Figure 174 on page 1235).88 Viewpoints were selected along public rights of way where views of the Project Site were optimal for

87 Illuminance measures the amount of illumination (i.e., luminous flux) that falls on a given area from a light source. Luminous flux is defined as the mean value of total candelas produced by a light source, and describes the total amount of light emitted by a light source. The unit for measuring luminous flux is a lumen. One watt emitted at the peak of the spectral sensitivity of the eye is approximately equal to 683 lumens. Illuminance is measured in footcandles (lumen per square foot, or the light energy within a one square foot surface one foot away from a standard candle). Illuminance decreases with the square of the distance from the light source.

88 There are an infinite number of viewpoints, not all of which can be analyzed. The 24 viewpoints selected for analysis were chosen to assist in determining the degree to which existing and future Project-related artificial lighting would generally be seen. These viewpoints offer the best accessible views of the Project Site from each of the identified areas for purposes of analyzing artificial light impacts on the sensitive receptor site, and thus would be most influenced by Project-related changes in artificial light. They were selected to allow for a conservative analysis of Project impacts (i.e., impacts from artificial light would not be greater at other locations to the north, south, east, or west of the site). The majority of viewpoints in the vicinity of the Project Site do not have view exposure to the Project Site because of topography, orientation, and/or view blockage by vegetation or other residences. For example, a north-south oriented ridgeline bisects the Hollywood Manor neighborhood. Only the Hollywood Manor residences west of the ridgeline may have views of the Project Site.

170

LAU

RE

LC

AN

YO

NB

LVD

WILLOW GLEN

RD

NIC

HO

LS CANYON

RD

WO

ODDROW WILSON

D

R

101

170

134

S

TA

W

AND7

COY O

TE

CAN

YO N

R

D

LAURIED

R

VIN

ELAND AVE

LAN

KE

RSHIM BLVD

BON

NIE HILL DR

OAK GLEN DR

LAK

EH

OLLY

WO

OD DR

1

2 3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10

11

12

13

14

MOORPARK ST

KR

AF

T A

VE

KLIN ST

BLIX ST

VIN

ELA

ND

AV

E

SARAH ST

LAN

KE

RS

HIM

BLV

D

CA

ME

LLIA

AV

E

FAR

MD

ALE

AV

E

SPRING LN

AQUA VISTA ST

TU

JUN

GA

AV

E

BA

KM

AN

AV

E

ACAMA ST

FAIR

AV

E

BLOOMFIELD ST

WHIPPLE ST

ACAMA ST

MOORPARK ST

LED

GE

AV

E

RIVERSIDE DR

CA

HU

EN

GA

BLV

D

VALLEY SPRING LN

FO

RM

AN

AV

E

ES

TAT

ES

DR

ST

RO

HM

AV

E

OLI

VE A

VE

ALAMEDA AVE

RIVER

SIDE D

R

BO

B H

OP

E D

R

CA

LIFOR

NIA S

T

REVAL CT

FOREST LAWN DR

TALO

FA A

VE

REVIR SELEGNA SOL

DO

NA

EMIL

IA D

R

SARAH ST

LANDALE ST

PAS

S AV

E

WARNER BLVD

WARNER BLVD

RO

SE

ST

HOOD AVE

CLY

BO

UR

N AV

E

CLY

BO

UR

N AV

ENAVAJO ST

PO

NC

A A

VE

TOLUCA LAKE AVE VALLEYH

EART

DR

LAUREL CANYO

NBLVD

DONAPEGITA DR

DONA LOLA DR

BE

RR

Y D

R

EU

RE

KA

DR

FRUITLAND DR

VENTURA BLVD

BLUFFSIDE DR

VALLEYHEART

DR

BLUFFSID

E DR

MULHOLLAND DR

BAR

HAM

BLV

D

CAHUENGA BLVD

PRIM

ERA

AVE

TOLUCAEKAL

BE

NN

ET

T D

R

EV

ER

GREEN

D

R

15

16 17

18 1920

2122

23

24

Source: Francis Krahe & Associates, Inc.; Thomas Guide and Matrix Enviromental, 2010.

Legend

Project Site

View Point

Figure 174

Lighting Analysis Locations

#

Page 1235



Page 1236


purposes of analyzing artificial light impacts on sensitive receptor sites. These neighborhoods and their corresponding viewpoints are identified below in terms of their general location (north, south, east, or west of the Project Site):

North of the Project Site (across the Los Angeles River Flood Control Channel: Toluca Estates (Viewpoint 1)

Toluca Lake (Viewpoints 2, 3, and 24)

South of the Project Site (across the Hollywood (US 101) Freeway): Cahuenga Pass West (Viewpoints 4 and 9)

Cahuenga Pass East (Viewpoints 5, 6, and 7)

Mulholland Ridge (Viewpoint 8)

East of the Project Site: Hollywood Manor (Viewpoints 11, 12,

and 13)

Hollywood Knolls (Viewpoint 10)

Oakwood/Barham Blvd. (Viewpoint 14)

West of the Project Site (across Lankershim Boulevard): City View Lofts/Island residential area

(Viewpoint 15)

The Lighting Analysis also included viewpoints from the hotel and office uses located in the area adjacent to the Project Site’s southwestern corner. Hotel uses are not generally considered light-sensitive since their population is highly transitory in nature, and hotels are generally located in highly lit areas and provide screening for light interference within the hotel rooms. Office buildings are not considered light-sensitive uses. Viewpoints from these hotel and office uses include the following:

10 Universal City Plaza office building (Viewpoints 16, 17, and 18)

Sheraton Hotel (Viewpoints 19 and 20)

Hilton Hotel (Viewpoints 21, 22, and 23)

A summary of the field observation data collected at the 24 viewpoints evaluated in the Lighting Analysis is provided in Table 79 on page 1237. As shown therein, there are a total of eight viewpoints where the Project Site makes up a limited portion of the field of view (i.e., where the coverage is 30 percent or less).89 The areas with these viewpoints

89 An object which occupies less than 30 percent of the total field of view from a particular location is considered not to be prominent, since more than double the area of the object would be occupied by other views.



Page 1237


Table 79 Lighting Analysis Viewpoint Field Observation Data

Receptor Site

Number Contrast Ratio

(source to background)a

Coverage (% of context with

site visible)

Context (% of field of view with site visible)

Illuminance b (foot-candles)

Vertical (To Project)

Illuminance b (foot-candles) Vertical (Away)

Illuminance b (foot-candles)

Horizontal

1 HIGH / LOW 10-20 10-20 0.038 0.031 0.015 2 HIGH / HIGH 0-5 0-5 0.008 0.267 0.101 3 HIGH / LOW 0-5 0-5 0.051 0.453 0.754 4 HIGH/N/A 20-40 30-50 0.038 0.010 0.090 5 MID / LOW 20-40 30-40 0.353 0.115 0.804 6 MID / LOW 30-40 20-30 0.007 0.006 0.016 7 HIGH / LOW 50-60 20-30 0.058 0.027 0.035 8 HIGH / MID 20-30 50-60 0.004 0.003 0.003 9 MID / LOW 40-50 60-70 0.010 0.127 0.032 10 HIGH / LOW 30-40 90-100 0.007 0.003 0.003 11 HIGH / MID 60-70 60-70 0.012 0.062 0.132 12 HIGH / MID 50-60 60-70 0.014 0.130 0.042 13 HIGH / LOW 5-10 5-10 0.012 0.149 0.041 14 HIGH/ HIGH 10-20 60-70 0.030 0.169 0.044 15 LOW / LOW 80-90 70-80 1.324 0.022 0.777 16 MID / MID 60-70 60-70 0.021 0.004 0.005 17 MID / LOW 20-40 30 0.017 0.003 0.005 18 LOW / LOW 80-90 50 0.017 0.000 0.005 19 MID / HIGH 80-90 20-30 0.044 0.354 0.467 20 MID / MID 50-60 60-70 0.064 0.003 0.008 21 LOW / MID 70-80 60-70 0.023 0.000 0.001 22 MID / MID 30-40 30-40 0.015 0.000 0.002 23 HIGH / LOW 0-10 0-5 0.084 0.335 0.131 24 LOW / LOW 0-10 0-5 0.006 0.023 0.013

a Low = 3:1 to 10:1; Medium (MID ) = 10:1 to 30:1; High = > 30:1; N/A = not applicable b Low = < 1.0; Medium = 1.0 to 2.0; High = > 2.0

Source: Francis Krahe & Associates, 2010.



Page 1238


include Toluca Estates (Viewpoint 1), Toluca Lake (Viewpoints 2, 3 and 24), Mulholland Ridge (Viewpoint 8), Hollywood Manor (Viewpoint 13), Oakwood/Barham Boulevard (Viewpoint 14), and Hilton Hotel (Viewpoint 23). As these particular viewpoints experience views wherein the Project Site is not prominent, they would not be anticipated to be substantially affected by Project lighting and are not discussed further in this section (except for Viewpoint 1 as described below). In addition, the 10 Universal City Plaza office building (Viewpoints 16-18) is not considered a light-sensitive use and would therefore not be anticipated to be substantially affected by Project lighting. While hotels are also not generally considered light-sensitive, they are discussed below for informational purposes.

The illuminance values presented in Table 79 on page 1237 represent the amount of light that would be measured at each viewpoint. The amount of light trespass at each viewpoint is represented by the horizontal illuminance column.

While artificial light impacts at the eight viewpoints described above would not be substantially affected by Project lighting, Project lighting could have the potential to affect sensitive uses within areas where the Project Site covers 30 percent or more of both the available coverage and context, including Hollywood Manor (Viewpoints 11-12), Hollywood Knolls (Viewpoint 10), Cahuenga Pass West (Viewpoints 4 and 9), Cahuenga Pass East (Viewpoints 5-7), and City View Lofts/Island residential area (Viewpoint 15). The Project Site also covers more than 30 percent of the available coverage and context from the Sheraton Hotel (Viewpoints 19-20) and Hilton Hotel (Viewpoints 21-22). The following analysis examines the potential for Project-related lighting impacts to each of these areas utilizing the viewpoint within each area with the best views of the Project Site for purposes of analyzing artificial light impacts.90 Although the Project Site covers a less than substantial area of the context from Toluca Estates (Viewpoint 1), this neighborhood is included in the viewpoints analysis due to its close proximity to the Project Site (less than 125 feet away). See Technical Appendix G for analysis data from each of the 24 representative viewpoints.

90 In order to identify the maximum possible impacts and therefore provide a conservative analysis of artificial light, only the one accessible viewpoint within each of the light-sensitive areas with the best views of the Project Site for purposes of analyzing artificial light impacts (and thus most likely to be impacted by the Project) was selected for further analysis.



Page 1239


2. Environmental Setting

a. Existing Regulatory Setting

New development requires lighting for occupancy and safe use of the facilities. Lighting within new development areas is required to meet California Building Code minimum values for safety at egress paths and stairs, streets, and parking. Public safety and general liability considerations require more illumination than these code minimums in order to prevent accidents and deter criminal activity. Lighting for activities and functional uses within developments is customarily designed to meet the recommended illuminance values defined by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (Recommended Illuminance Guidelines). The analysis of Project lighting impacts includes simulation studies of prototypical building forms and the related lighting equipment necessary to meet code requirements and customarily provided for users and occupants to conform to the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America recommendations.

The City of Los Angeles regulates lighting with respect to building and safety, transportation, and Light Trespass. The City enforces the building code requirements of the California Building Code and the California Electrical Code which stipulate minimum light intensity values for exterior walkways, stairs, alleys, and roads designated as paths of egress from occupied buildings. The City of Los Angeles Planning and Municipal Code includes the lighting requirements listed in Section 12.21, General Provisions, paragraph A.5.k. The City of Los Angeles also enforces minimum roadway lighting standards for commercial and residential streets serving as collector or local streets conforming to Illuminating Engineering Society of North America and Caltrans standards. These lighting design standards specify minimum light intensity values to provide adequate safety for pedestrians and vehicular traffic passengers within the public right of way.

The County of Los Angeles enforces the building code requirements of the California Building Code and California Electrical Code which stipulate minimum light intensity values for exterior walkways, stairs, alleys and roads designated as paths of egress from occupied buildings.

The Illuminating Engineering Society of North America provides recommended illumination standards for the amount, type, and direction of light for typical road, outdoor space, and building lighting applications. These standards are widely recognized and accepted as best design practice minimums, and are therefore a consistent predictor of the type and direction of illumination for any given building type. Accordingly, the Lighting Analysis of the proposed Project assumed that, for all areas not stipulated by the applicable regulations, the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America standards would be the basis for establishing the amount and direction of light for the Project.



Page 1240


b. Existing Local Area Conditions

A variety of nighttime lighting conditions exist in the vicinity of the Project Site. The intensity of lighting generally increases from the dimly lit Santa Monica Mountains to the south of the Project Site to the highly lit urban areas of the San Fernando Valley and Burbank to the north. Along Lankershim Boulevard, the Hollywood Freeway and the Cahuenga/Ventura Boulevard corridor, a high level of existing artificial light sources are present which are typical for the major streets and highways in Southern California. Lighting along these thoroughfares includes freeway and street lights, illuminated signs, interior building lights, outdoor activity lights, parking lights, security lights, and automobile headlights. Along Barham Boulevard, and within the residential neighborhoods in the vicinity of the Project Site, less intrusive residential, street, and security lighting is present. In less developed areas, such as the Lakeside Golf Club golf course and the steep slopes and higher elevations of the Santa Monica Mountains, intermittent light sources are present which are associated with security and/or low density residential development. Universal City is currently a highly lit activity area that, along with the Cahuenga/Ventura Boulevard corridor, represents the southeastern corner of the San Fernando Valley artificial light environment. Additional information regarding existing conditions in the neighborhoods surrounding the Project Site is provided in Section IV.E.2.c below.

c. Existing On-Site Conditions

The Project Site currently contains a variety of nighttime lighting conditions which range from lit outdoor activity areas (such as Universal CityWalk) to more dimly lit underutilized areas, largely in the current Back Lot Area. Uses within the Entertainment Area and portions of the Business Area operate as centers of indoor and outdoor activity during nighttime hours. Universal Studios Hollywood operates until between 6 P.M. and 10 P.M. depending on the season; and Universal CityWalk operates until between 9 P.M. and 2 A.M. depending on the season. Parking structures associated with Universal Studios Hollywood and Universal CityWalk operate as late as 2 A.M. during peak periods. Both Universal Studios Hollywood and Universal CityWalk include lit pedestrian walkways, external ornamental lighting, retail and restaurant lighting, illuminated signs, entertainment venue lighting, interior structure lighting, lit parking lots, parking structures, and floodlights. Both Universal Studios Hollywood and Universal CityWalk also include occasional special light effects91 and pyrotechnic displays.

91 Special light effects may include lasers, floodlights or other lighting types which are either directed skyward or internally into Universal City.



Page 1241


Within the Business Area, many of the offices along Lankershim Boulevard are operating during evening hours and emit internal and security lighting. The current Back Lot and Studio Areas include lit parking facilities, a transportation fuel area, security and street lighting, and occasional temporary nighttime outdoor filming and special events when outdoor set lighting, activity lighting and light from automobiles are present. The Project Site also includes a variety of internal lit streets. Most of the underutilized Back Lot Area is not otherwise an area of nighttime activity and contains no permanent light fixtures.

The following discussion describes the lighting conditions in terms of both light aesthetics and light exposure as viewed from each of the light-sensitive areas analyzed in this section and described above. Photographs taken from these viewpoints are presented in the Lighting Analysis in Technical Appendix G to this Draft EIR. It should be noted that the data collected at each of these viewpoints was collected from locations within the public right of way at the point of most substantial view to the Project Site for purposes of analyzing artificial light impacts. These views from the public street may not represent the actual view from all vantage points in the area. However, while the actual visibility may be different than that of another vantage point, the overall field of view to the Project Site and of the adjacent terrain (including other development and roadways) is consistent for that general vicinity. As a result, observations of brightness will be consistent based upon the distance from the Project Site and the direction and field of view toward the Project Site. Thus, the impact of Project lighting as perceived at individual vantage points in the immediate vicinity of each receptor site would be substantially similar to those measured in the Lighting Analysis.

(1) Toluca Estates (Viewpoint 1)

(a) Light Aesthetics

Toluca Estates is located approximately 125 feet north and has southerly views of the Project Site. The foreground of this viewpoint’s field of view includes vegetation from residential landscaping within the Toluca Estates neighborhood and the unlit off-site Los Angeles River Flood Control Channel. The middle ground includes portions of the Project Site’s Business and Studio Areas, and the background includes a small portion of the Entertainment Area and the sky. This viewpoint is relatively close to the Project Site, but has substantial vegetation blocking the majority of the Project Site from view. Sky glow from this location does not appear to be substantial (i.e., the sky appears quite dark). Point sources of light at this location include neighborhood street lights and residential gate/front porch lights. One off-site high-rise building (the 10 Universal City Plaza building) and one Project Site parking structure are visible beyond the neighborhood’s vegetation. Project Site signage is not visible from this location.



Page 1242


(b) Light Exposure

As noted above, the context of the view from Toluca Estates includes a substantial amount of vegetation which severely limits the available field of view. As such, approximately 10-20 percent of the total field of view is available from this location. Project Site coverage within this limited context is approximately 10-20 percent (i.e., the Project Site makes up less than one-fifth of the available view from this location). Brightness/contrast at this location is provided primarily by front gate/front porch lights, and also by holiday lights during the winter season. The contrast ratio of the off-site front gate light sources to the background light sources was measured at 111:1 (high brightness). Signage on the off-site high rise building (10 Universal City Plaza) in the background contrasts with the night sky at a ratio of 4:1 (low brightness). The Project Site parking garage is visible as a lit surface with a contrast ratio to the night sky of 0:1 (low brightness). The horizontal illuminance (light trespass) measured at this viewpoint was 0.015 footcandles.92

(2) Hollywood Manor (Viewpoint 11)


Hollywood Manor is located directly adjacent to the eastern border of the Project Site. Viewpoint 11 has westerly views of the Project Site. The foreground of this location’s field of view includes fencing and vegetation associated with the edge of the Project Site. The middle ground is largely composed of the Project Site itself, with the current Back Lot, Entertainment, Studio, and portions of the Business Areas visible. The background includes several off-site high-rise structures (such as the 10 Universal City Plaza building) and Studio City. Visible light sources on the Project Site include neon signage, towers, illuminated building features, and building-mounted floodlights. Off-site visible light sources include neighborhood streetlights and lights from the Hilton and Sheraton Hotels and the 10 Universal City Plaza building. There is a medium amount of sky glow visible in the distance, looking toward the San Fernando Valley. With the exception of the streetlights, these light sources are generally set back at least 1,000 feet from the viewpoint. This is due to the relatively underdeveloped nature of the portion of the Project Site next to the Hollywood Manor neighborhood. One exception to the normally dark nighttime condition of this underdeveloped area is when occasional temporary night filming or special events occur on the Project Site. During these events, nighttime lighting can be of high brightness.

92 Recall that one footcandle is defined as the light energy within a one-square-foot surface one foot away from a standard candle.



Page 1243


(b) Light Exposure

The context of Viewpoint 11 is framed by fencing and vegetation. The proportion of the field of view not obstructed by these elements is approximately 60-70 percent. Within this context, Project Site coverage is approximately 60-70 percent, making the Project Site the primary view from this location. Sources of brightness include the Entertainment Area and neighborhood streetlights. Contrast ratios measured at this viewpoint were approximately 49:1 (high brightness) for a visible point light source on-site to the average luminance of the surroundings and 18:1 (medium brightness) for a visible lit surface on the Project Site. The light trespass measured at this location was 0.132 footcandles.

(3) Hollywood Knolls (Viewpoint 10)


This viewpoint is located within the Hollywood Knolls neighborhood at an elevation of over 1,000 feet above mean sea level (MSL). It is located approximately 2,000 feet east of the Project Site, beyond the Hollywood Manor neighborhood and across Barham Boulevard. The foreground of this view includes the hills and homes within the Hollywood Knolls neighborhood. The middle ground includes the Hollywood Manor neighborhood, along with the Project Site and the San Fernando Valley. The background view includes Studio City, the Verdugo Mountains, and the greater San Fernando Valley in the distance. A wide variety of light sources are visible from this location, including off-site city street and neighborhood lighting, along with lighting from the Project Site, including illuminated parking structures, signage, and architectural elements. There is a medium amount of sky glow visible from this location, due to broad views of the San Fernando Valley.

(b) Light Exposure

The context of this viewpoint is very open, with only limited foreground vegetation narrowing the available views. As such, approximately 90-100% percent of the total available field of view is available from this location. Within this context, Project Site coverage is approximately 30-40 percent. Sources of brightness/contrast include city streetlights and the general lighting of urban development. Contrast ratios measured at this viewpoint were approximately 42:1 (high brightness) for a visible point light source on-site to the average luminance of the surroundings and 9:1 (low brightness) for a visible lit surface on the Project Site. The light trespass measured from this location was approximately 0.003 footcandles.



Page 1244


(4) Cahuenga Pass West (Viewpoint 9)


Viewpoint 9 is located within the Cahuenga Pass West neighborhood, at over 900 feet in elevation and approximately 4,000 feet (about 3/4 mile) southwest of the Project Site. This viewpoint has northeasterly views of the Project Site. The foreground of this location’s field of view includes vegetation, slopes and residences associated with the Cahuenga Pass West residential neighborhood. The middle ground includes the Cahuenga Boulevard commercial corridor, the Hollywood Freeway, the Business Area, and the southwestern portions of the Studio and Entertainment Areas. Background views include the San Fernando Valley, Verdugo Mountains, and Cahuenga Peak. Light sources visible from this location include off-site roadway lighting, general lighting associated with the urban development of the San Fernando Valley, and prominent lighting from the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza office building and Hilton and Sheraton Hotels. Artificial light sources within the Business and Entertainment Areas, including signage, are also prominent from this location. Lights from vehicles traveling along the Hollywood Freeway are also visible. The sky glow visible from this location is at medium levels.

(b) Light Exposure

The context from this viewpoint is framed by neighborhood vegetation and residences along the periphery of the view. The context wherein distant views are possible is approximately 60-70 percent of the total field of view. Within this context, the Project Site covers approximately 40-50 percent of the view. Sources of brightness/contrast within this view include the off-site high-rise structures to the southwest of the Project Site, the Hollywood Freeway, and street lights. Glare from residential exterior lighting in the neighborhood is also present at this location. Contrast ratios measured at this viewpoint were approximately 14:1 (medium brightness) for a visible point light source on the Project Site to the average luminance of the surroundings and 4:1 (low brightness) for a visible lit surface on the Project Site. The light trespass was measured at approximately 0.032 footcandles at this location.

(5) Cahuenga Pass East (Viewpoint 5)


This viewpoint is located approximately 1,500 feet south of the Project Site at an elevation of approximately 850 feet above MSL. This viewpoint has northerly views of the Project Site. The foreground of this view consists of hedges, trees, and other neighborhood street-side vegetation. The middle ground includes the San Fernando Valley



Page 1245


and the Project Site. The background of this view includes the Verdugo Mountains. Sources of light perceived at this location include streetlights within the neighborhood, the Universal CityWalk parking garages, Project Site signage, and the general lighting of the urban San Fernando Valley. Sky glow from this location appears to be of medium brightness.

(b) Light Exposure

The context from this viewpoint is highly restricted due to the vegetation lining the neighborhood. Context wherein distant views are possible consists of approximately 30-40 percent of the total available field of view. Within this context, the Project Site covers approximately 20-40 percent of the view. Sources of brightness/contrast include the Universal CityWalk parking garages along with street lighting within the neighborhood. Contrast ratios measured at this viewpoint were approximately 17:1 (medium brightness) for a visible point light source on-site to the average luminance of the surroundings and 12:1 (low brightness) for a visible lit surface on the Project Site. The light trespass measured at this location was approximately 0.804 footcandles.

(6) City View Lofts/Island (Viewpoint 15)


The multi-family City View Lofts apartments at Lankershim Boulevard and Valleyheart Drive are located approximately 100 feet to the west of the Project Site, across Lankershim Boulevard. This location has easterly views toward the Project Site. The Business Area is the most visible portion of the Project Site from this viewpoint. The Island residential area just west of City View Lofts has only limited views of the Business Area.

The foreground of the City View Lofts viewpoint includes Lankershim Boulevard, the northeastern portion of Weddington Park (South), and Valleyheart Drive. The middle ground includes the Business Area on the Project Site. The background includes portions of the western slope of the Entertainment Area and Cahuenga Peak. Existing light sources seen from this location include residential street lights along Valleyheart Drive and commercial street lights along Lankershim Boulevard. Neon signage at the entrance to the Project Site is bright from this location. Additional light sources include parking garage lights for the on-site Carl Laemmle building and office lights from within the on-site Lew Wasserman building and the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza building. Sky glow and ambient illumination are high at this location.



Page 1246


(b) Light Exposure

The context from this viewpoint is not restricted by immediate foreground objects or vegetation. Thus approximately 70-80 percent of the total field of view is available to the observer. Within this context, the Project Site covers approximately 80-90 percent of the view. Sources of brightness/contrast include street lights, the neon entrance signage to the Project Site at Gate 2 (i.e., opposite Valleyheart Drive), automobile headlights, and parking garage/office building lighting. Contrast ratios measured at this viewpoint were approximately 8:1 (low brightness) for a visible point light source on-site to the average luminance of the surroundings and 5:1 (low brightness) for a visible lit surface on-site. The light trespass measured at this location was approximately 0.777 footcandles.

(7) Sheraton Hotel (Viewpoint 20)


The Sheraton Hotel is located approximately 300 feet southwest of the Project Site, across Universal Hollywood Drive. This location has northeasterly views of the Project Site. The Business and Entertainment Areas are the most visible on-site areas seen from this viewpoint. In the foreground of this viewpoint is the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza building. The middle ground includes the Business, Studio, and Entertainment Areas on the Project Site as well as the Lankershim Boulevard corridor. In the background is the greater San Fernando Valley and Ventura (134) Freeway. Sources of light seen from this location include office building lighting from the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza building and the Lew Wasserman and Carl Laemmle buildings on the Project Site, along with parking garage and entertainment area lighting and signage within the Entertainment Area. The off-site car dealership at the intersection of Lankershim Boulevard and Cahuenga Boulevard is an especially bright source of light. Vehicle headlights and street lights are also highly visible from this location. The overall sky glow is high as perceived from this viewpoint.

(b) Light Exposure

The proximity of the 10 Universal City Plaza building provides the only foreground view obstruction from this location, and the context of the view is reduced to approximately 60-70 percent of the total field of view. Within this context, the Project Site coverage is approximately 50-60 percent. Sources of brightness/contrast include the street and vehicle lights along Lankershim Boulevard, the Frankenstein parking garage within the Entertainment Area, the Carl Laemmle building, office lighting within the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza building and the car dealership lighting at the Lankershim/Cahuenga Boulevard intersection. Contrast ratios measured at this viewpoint



Page 1247


were approximately 23:1 (medium brightness) for a visible point light source on-site (parking garage) to the average luminance of the surroundings and 11:1 (medium brightness) for a visible lit surface on-site. The light trespass measured from this location was approximately 0.008 footcandles.93

(8) Hilton Hotel (Viewpoint 21)


The Hilton Hotel is located approximately 150 feet southwest of the Project Site, across Hotel Drive and Universal Hollywood Drive. The Hilton Hotel has northeasterly views of the Project Site. Viewpoint 21 looks northeasterly across the Business, Studio, and Entertainment Areas of the Project Site. In the foreground of this view are located Hotel Drive and Universal Hollywood Drive, along with the Frankenstein parking garage and Terminator 2 attraction. The middle ground includes Universal CityWalk attractions along with the Lew Wasserman and Carl Laemmle buildings. The background of this view includes the off-site Lankershim Boulevard corridor and greater San Fernando Valley. Major sources of light include the Frankenstein parking garage, Terminator 2: 3D attraction, Universal CityWalk, signage, vehicle headlights, and street lighting. The sky glow appears to be of high brightness from this location.

(b) Light Exposure

The view context from this location generally is not constricted by any vegetation or other objects; therefore, 60-70 percent of the total field of view is available. Within this wide context, the Project Site covers approximately 70-80 percent of the view. Sources of brightness/contrast within this view include the Frankenstein parking garage, Terminator 2 attraction, Universal CityWalk, vehicle headlights, and street lighting. Contrast ratios measured at this viewpoint were approximately 7:1 (low brightness) for a visible point light source on the Project Site to the average luminance of the surroundings and 29:1 (medium brightness) for a visible lit surface on the Project Site. The light trespass measured from this location was approximately 0.001 footcandles.

93 Hotel room lights were all off when the illuminance measurements were taken at the Sheraton and Hilton Hotels.



Page 1248


3. Environmental Impacts

a. Methodology

The analysis of potential artificial light impacts considers changes brought about by the proposed Project in terms of two issues, light aesthetics and light exposure. The analysis of light aesthetics considers how the Project could change how the nighttime sky is viewed from off-site locations resulting from the introduction of new on-site artificial light sources (i.e., changes in sky glow) as well as how the Project’s new sources of artificial light can change the nighttime appearance of the Project Site when viewed from off-site locations (i.e., changing an area of the Project Site from a currently unlit condition to one which is characterized by new on-site artificial light sources). The analysis of light exposure considers the amount of artificial light from the Project Site that is experienced at specific locations and evaluates this change using both objective and quantitative standards. In summary, the analysis of light aesthetics addresses overall changes in the nighttime artificial light environment when viewed in a broad context, whereas the analysis of light exposure looks specifically at changes in the artificial light environment at specific off-site locations.

(1) Light Aesthetics

Light Aesthetics are evaluated for each representative viewpoint discussed above in terms of perceived changes in sky glow and nearness to substantial changes in unlit to lit conditions. Existing lighting conditions for the lighting aesthetics analysis, identified through field observations, were compared to potential future lighting conditions on the Project Site based on the following general assumptions:

Development would occur at the maximum heights permitted within each Height Zone and the Height Exception as identified in Section II, Project Description, of this Draft EIR;

Development would occupy 100 percent of the development envelopes as permitted by the proposed City and County Specific Plans;

The proposed Project’s lit signage program would evolve at the maximum envelope permitted under the proposed Specific Plans, including the maximum size, height, and number of lit signs permitted in different areas of the site;

Off-site uses would remain constant; and

Future on-site nighttime light sources would be installed pursuant to the lighting standards set forth in the proposed City and County Specific Plans.



Page 1249


(2) Light Exposure

The nature of light, which travels outward as energy from a particular source, indicates that impacts due to light must occur as a function of proximity and the available field of view. As one moves away from a particular area (in this case, the Project Site), the relative importance of that area is reduced as distance causes the area to blend with the larger surroundings and intervening light sources become relatively more prominent.

Since light impacts are a function of the light source’s proximity to sensitive uses, a computer simulation model was performed to assess the potential Project impacts on two nearby sensitive uses with prominent views of the Project Site: The City View Lofts/Island residential area (Viewpoint 15) and Hollywood Manor (Viewpoints 11-13).94 These two receptor sites were selected due to the prominence of the potential development on the Project Site within the available context and coverage of the receptor sites. For example, Toluca Estates (Viewpoint 1) is located just across the Los Angeles River Flood Control Channel from the Project Site but has a low context and coverage with respect to the Project Site. Thus, light exposure impacts at Toluca Estates from potential Project development would be less than at other proximate viewpoints (City View Lofts/Island residential area) with higher context and coverage with respect to the Project Site.

For purposes of computer simulation, potential building sites on the Project Site were selected based on the proximity to these two off-site residential receptor sites. Although the analysis of these two building sites does not attempt to predict all of the possible configurations of development or potential views from off-site properties, it does evaluate those receptor sites that would be expected to be the most affected by development lighting on the Project Site, because of their proximity and uses. Since impacts steadily decrease as one moves outward from these locations, if light exposure impacts to these receptor locations are less than significant, then light exposure impacts to all locations would also be less than significant.

The computer simulation model predicts what the brightness (luminance) and light trespass (illuminance) would be for different Project development scenarios at each of the two building sites as experienced at the closest off-site light-sensitive uses (City View Lofts/Island residential area and Hollywood Manor). The two potential building sites and

94 The computer simulation model was produced using the software program AGI32, version 1.9, developed by Lighting Analysts, Illumination Engineering Software, Boulder, Colorado. The Lighting Analysis presented in Technical Appendix G contains an explanation of the assumptions used in the simulation model.



Page 1250


the related off-site viewpoints are shown in Figure 175 on page 1251. The computer study model was utilized to analyze lighting at these two portions of the Project Site as maximum potential impact conditions to evaluate the impact of the proposed Project on the full range of surrounding properties.

To evaluate the range of building densities proposed on the Project Site (and the correlated density of lighting equipment applied), and the potential for phased development, two building massing conditions were modeled at each study building site: (1) a single building constructed to the maximum height allowed under the proposed Specific Plans (Condition A); and (2) a group of buildings with building forms consistent with the development standards established in the proposed Specific Plans (Condition B).

For both massing condition A and B, three configurations of lighting components were modeled: (1) Test 1, minimum lighting; (2) Test 2, mid range lighting; and (3) Test 3, maximum lighting. These three configurations represent the range of potential lighting improvements associated with the building uses proposed (i.e., residential, neighborhood-serving commercial, amphitheatre, studio, studio office, office, entertainment retail, and entertainment uses). Lighting fixture types were also varied in the configurations from low brightness shielded sources in the minimum configurations to high brightness fixtures without lamp shielding in the maximum configurations. The variation of lamp shielding presents the range of source and surface brightness values.

Table 80 on page 1252 shows all 12 of the scenarios analyzed.

b. Thresholds of Significance

The City of Los Angeles CEQA Thresholds Guide (2006) provides that the determination of significance from nighttime illumination shall be made on a case-by-case basis, considering the following factors: the change in ambient illumination levels as a result of project sources and the extent to which project lighting would spill off the project site and effect adjacent light-sensitive areas.

Based on these criteria, the proposed Project would have a significant impact on light aesthetics if proposed Project lighting would substantially alter the character of off-site areas surrounding the Project Site.

Light exposure impacts would be classified as significant if any of the following would apply:

1. The Project results in high brightness illuminated surfaces that are directly visible from residential properties outside the Project Site;

Source: Francis Krahe & Associates, Inc., 2010.

Figure 175

Location of Sites and Viewpoints Analyzed

Page 1251



Page 1252


2. The Project results in high brightness point sources of light (above 300 candelas95 from any angle in the Studio, Entertainment, and Business Areas and above 150 candelas from any angle in the Mixed-Use Residential Area96) which are directly visible from off-site residential properties and which are located within 2,000 feet of these properties;

3. The Project generates light intensity levels of 2.0 foot-candles or more at the property line of the nearest off-site residentially-zoned property (light trespass),97

95 A candela is defined as a measure of light energy from a source at a specific standard angle and distance (the output of a 100 watt incandescent lamp is approximately equivalent to 150 candelas).

96 The high brightness threshold varies based upon the ambient brightness of the existing lighting context. The threshold for the eastern boundary of the Project Site (located mainly in the proposed Universal City Specific Plan) is 150 candelas. This value is established based upon its location adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods, the type of light sources common to this type of context (i.e. residential lighting, exterior porch lamps), and the candela value emitted by light sources found in such context. A 100-watt incandescent lamp is used as the metric for establishing the maximum light acceptable in this context. At the western Project Site boundary (located mainly in the proposed Universal Studios Specific Plan) a more urban context exists with higher lighting in both the private properties and the public street. Accordingly, the threshold for this urban area is increased to accommodate the higher illumination levels required for safety and common to the existing area. The threshold is increased to 300 candelas, approximating the candelas of a 200-watt incandescent source.

97 The 2.0 foot-candle threshold has been established by the City of Los Angeles in LAMC SEC. 93.0117. OUTDOOR LIGHTING AFFECTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

Table 80 Light Exposure Simulation Models

Building Site Scenario # Lighting Scenarios Modeled

#1 (Visible from

Hollywood Manor – Viewpoints 11-13)

1A-1 Single building, minimum lighting (SINGLE MIN) 1A-2 Single building, mid-range lighting (SINGLE MID) 1A-3 Single building, maximum lighting (SINGLE MAX) 1B-1 Multiple buildings, minimum lighting (MULTI MIN) 1B-2 Multiple buildings, mid-range lighting (MULTI MID) 1B-3 Multiple buildings, maximum lighting (MULTI MAX)

#2 (Visible from City

View Lofts/Island – Viewpoint 15)

2A-1 Single building, minimum lighting (SINGLE MIN) 2A-2 Single building, mid-range lighting (SINGLE MID) 2A-3 Single building, maximum lighting (SINGLE MAX) 2B-1 Multiple buildings, minimum lighting (MULTI MIN) 2B-2 Multiple buildings, mid-range lighting (MULTI MID) 2B-3 Multiple buildings, maximum lighting (MULTI MAX)

Source: Matrix Environmental, 2010.



Page 1253


4. The Project creates high brightness illuminated surfaces or high brightness sources which are directly visible from routinely usable outdoor spaces associated with commercial or institutional uses such as pedestrian oriented outdoor spaces or outdoor eating areas; or

5. Project lighting interferes with the performance of an off-site activity.

c. Project Design Features

(1) Universal Studios (County) Specific Plan

The proposed County Specific Plan would establish lighting regulations for the proposed Project within the County portions of the Business, Studio, and Entertainment Areas. These regulations would establish limits for the intensity, direction, shielding, and type of Light Sources that could occur at the Project Site. Adherence to the proposed County Specific Plan lighting regulations would: (1) avoid direct views of point sources of light above 300 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the Light Source from off-site residential uses outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plan and (2) require light sources to be designed to produce not more than 2.0 footcandles of illumination as measured at the property line of the nearest off-site residentially-zoned property outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plans. These proposed Specific Plan lighting requirements are based upon recommended practice standards defined by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. Light sources of 300 candelas are approximately equivalent to a 200-watt incandescent light bulb. Given the commonality of this intensity of artificial light within the highly residential areas to the east of the Project Site, light sources of this intensity would therefore not be considered prominent point sources of light. The proposed County Specific Plan lighting standards are summarized below.

(a) Proposed County Specific Plan Lighting Regulations

(i) Operational Project Lighting

All existing light sources as of the effective date of the proposed County Specific Plan within the County portions of the Entertainment, Business, and Studio Areas would be permitted and would not be required to comply with the proposed County Specific Plan. Additions or alterations to existing lighting would be permitted provided that such additions or alterations do not materially change the location or orientation of the existing lighting. In the event of any damage or destruction to existing lighting, such existing lighting may be replaced with comparable lighting. All lighting, both existing and new, would comply with the Los Angeles County Building Code with respect to the construction and installation of



Page 1254


lighting equipment. For all new on-site artificial light sources, the proposed County Specific Plan proposes standards to regulate the design, location, and orientation of new on-site artificial light sources. Thus, all new lighting within the County portions of the Entertainment, Business, and Studio Areas would be subject to the following lighting standards as set forth in the proposed County Specific Plan:

Animated, moving, programmed, flashing, neon, LCD and similar technologies of lighting displays or installations would be permitted.

Current and future technologies of light sources such as neon, LED, LCD, projected images and similar lighting displays or installations would be permitted.

Light Sources would be designed so as to produce not more than 2 foot-candles of illumination as measured at the property line of the nearest residentially zoned property outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plans.

Light Sources which emit no more than 300 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the light source would comply with the 2 foot-candle limitation above but would not otherwise be regulated by Title 21 or 22 of the Los Angeles County Code.98 Light sources of 300 candelas are approximately equivalent to a 200-watt incandescent light bulb.

Light Sources which exceed 300 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the Light Source would not be visible from Existing Off-Site Residential Uses located outside of the combined boundary of the proposed County and City Specific Plans. For purposes of this regulation, “not visible” would mean: i) that the Light Source would not be directly visible from the lot on which the residential use is located; or ii) that the Light Source is a minimum of 2,000 feet in distance from the residential use. Various forms of screening measures, which may or may not be physically attached to the Light Source, may be utilized in order to comply with this regulation. Such screening measures may include, but are not limited

98 According to Technical Appendix G to this Draft EIR, the off-site area adjoining the western Project Site boundary (located within the County Specific Plan) is characterized by a more urban context exists with higher artificial lighting conditions within both private and public locations (e.g., public street). Accordingly, the 300 candela standard is established to accommodate the higher illumination levels required for safety within these areas, as compared to the 150 candela standard set forth in the City Specific Plan which adjoins off-site areas along the Project Site’s eastern boundary whose existing artificial light levels are relatively lower than those found along the western boundary of the Project Site.



Page 1255


to, shielding measures attached to the light fixture or structure, other buildings or structures, and non-deciduous landscaping or landscape trellises.

New Light Sources which do not meet the above requirements would be subject to a Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to Los Angeles County Code Section 22.56.

Exceptions to the above proposed Specific Plan regulations are provided for the following:

Light Sources associated with Production Activities and Outdoor Special Light Effects would not be subject to the lighting regulations contained in the proposed County Specific Plan or by Title 21 or 22 of the Los Angeles County Code.

Decorative lights, which are temporarily installed between September 1 and January 15 of the next year.

Emergency Light Sources or Light Sources used for repair or construction as required by governmental agencies.

Light Sources owned or controlled by any public agency for the purpose of directing or controlling navigation, traffic or for highway or street illumination.

Light Sources associated with Signs would not be subject to these lighting regulations and would be subject to the lighting regulations contained in the Signage section, Section 18, of the proposed County Specific Plan.

Hotel rooftop lighting for sports/recreational uses, such as pools, tennis or paddle courts, which would not comply with the standards listed above would comply with the following lighting standard: Such uses would be lighted by horizontally mounted, rectilinear-type, sharp cut-off fixtures shielded in such a manner that the bulb or lamp cannot be viewable from Existing Off-Site Residential Uses outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plans. Such light sources would be mounted at a height of 20 feet or less above the rooftop surface.

(ii) Construction Lighting

All construction lighting within the County portions of the Entertainment, Business, and Studio Areas would be subject to the following lighting standards:

Construction activities would be shielded or directed to restrict any direct illumination onto property located outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plans.



Page 1256


(b) Signage Regulations

The proposed County Specific Plan sets forth requirements governing the maximum number of signs, maximum area per sign, and maximum height for new signage. Electronic Message signs would be limited to no more than three foot-candles from sunset to 10:00 P.M. and no more than two foot-candles from 10:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M., as measured at the property line of the nearest residentially zoned property outside the combined boundaries of the proposed City and County Specific Plan, and would be turned off from 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. For a detailed discussion of permitted signs relative to the proposed County Specific Plan, refer to the discussion of the Design Plan within Section II, Project Description, of this Draft EIR. All existing signage within the Entertainment, Business, and Studio Areas would continue to be permitted and as such, is exempt from the proposed County Specific Plan. All signage, both existing and new, would comply with Title 21 or Title 22 of the Los Angeles County Code with respect to the construction and installation of sign structures. In accordance with the proposed County Specific Plan, the City and County portions of the Entertainment, Business, and Studio Areas would be divided into four Sign Districts. The locations of these four Sign Districts are shown in Figure 19, Section II, Project Description, of this Draft EIR. The key regulations, as set forth in Section 18 of the proposed County Specific Plan, for each of these four Sign Districts are summarized in Section II, Project Description, of this Draft EIR.

It should be noted that only that portion of a wall, mural, or supergraphic which contains a commercial message would count as sign area.

(2) Universal City Specific Plan (City Specific Plan)

The proposed City Specific Plan would establish lighting regulations for the proposed Project within the Mixed-Use Residential Area and the City portions of the Entertainment and Business Areas. These regulations would establish limits for the intensity, direction, shielding, and type of light sources that could occur at the Project Site. Adherence to the proposed City Specific Plan lighting regulations would: (1) avoid direct views of point sources of light above 150 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the Light Source (within the Mixed-Use Residential Area of the Project Site)99 from Existing Off-Site Residential Uses outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plans and (2) require light sources to be designed to produce not more than 2.0 foot-candles of

99 These regulations would also apply to the City portions of the Business and Entertainment Areas of the Project Site.



Page 1257


illumination as measured at the property line of the nearest off-site residentially-zoned property outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plans. These proposed Specific Plan lighting requirements are based upon recommended practice standards defined by the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America. Light sources of 150 candelas are equivalent to a 100-watt incandescent light bulb and are commonly used for exterior porch lights in residential areas. Given the commonality of this intensity of artificial light within the residential areas to the east of the Project Site, light sources of this intensity would therefore not be considered prominent point sources of light. The proposed City Specific Plan lighting standards are summarized below.

(a) Proposed City Specific Plan Lighting Regulations

(i) Operational Project Lighting

All existing light sources as of the effective date of the proposed Specific Plan within the Mixed-Use Residential Area and City portions of the Entertainment and Business Areas would be permitted and would not be required to comply with the proposed City Specific Plan. Additions or alterations to existing lighting would be permitted provided that such additions or alterations do not materially change the location or orientation of the existing lighting. In the event of any damage or destruction to existing lighting, such existing lighting may be replaced with comparable lighting. New lighting fixtures would be constructed and installed in conformance with applicable provisions of the City of Los Angeles Building Code. All new lighting within the Mixed-Use Residential Area and City portions of the Business and Studio Areas would be subject to the following lighting standards:

Animated, moving, programmed, flashing, neon, LCD and similar technologies of lighting displays and installations would be permitted.

Current and future technologies of Light Sources such as neon, LED, LCD, projected images and similar lighting displays or installations would be permitted.

Light Sources would be designed so as to produce not more than 2 foot-candles of illumination as measured at the property line of the nearest residentially zoned property outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed City and County Specific Plans.

Except for Light Sources within the Studio Production Area, Light Sources which emit no more than 150 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above



Page 1258


horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the light source would comply with the 2 foot-candle standard above but would not otherwise be regulated.100 Light sources of 150 candelas are approximately equivalent to a 100-watt incandescent light bulb.

Except for Light Sources within the Studio Production District, Light Sources which exceed 150 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the Light Source would not be visible from Existing Off-Site Residential Uses located outside of the combined boundary of the proposed City and County Specific Plans. For purposes of this Regulations, “not visible” would mean: i) that the Light Source would not be directly visible from the lot on which the residential use is located; or ii) that the light source is a minimum of 2,000 feet in distance from the residential use. Various forms of screening measures, which may or may not be physically attached to the Light Source, may be utilized in order to comply with this regulation. Such screening measures may include, but are not limited to, shielding measures attached to the light fixture or structure, other buildings or structures, and non-deciduous landscaping or landscape trellises.

Within the Studio Production District, Light Sources which emit no more than 300 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the light source would comply with the 2 foot-candle limitation above but would not otherwise be regulated.

Within the Studio Production District, Light Sources which exceed 300 candelas within the range from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal as measured at the Light Source would not be visible from Existing Off-Site Residential Uses located outside of the combined boundaries of the proposed County and City Specific Plans. For purposes of this regulation, “not visible” would mean: i) that the Light Source would not be directly visible from the lot on which the residential use is located; or ii) that the Light Source is a minimum of 2,000 feet in distance from the residential use. Various forms of screening measures, which may or may not be physically attached to the Light Source, may be utilized in order to comply with this regulation. Such screening measures may include, but are not limited to, shielding measures attached to the light fixture or structure, other buildings or structures, and non-deciduous landscaping or landscape trellises.

100 According to Technical Appendix G to this Draft EIR, the off-site area adjoining the eastern Project Site boundary (located within the City Specific Plan), is a more residential setting that is characterized by relatively lower artificial lighting levels. The type of light sources common within this area includes residential lighting, such as exterior porch lamps. Accordingly, the threshold for this area is 150 candelas to accommodate the existing lower illumination levels within the adjoining off-site areas.



Page 1259


New Light Sources which cannot meet the above requirements would be subject to a Zoning Administrator Conditional Use Permit, pursuant to the Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 12.24.

Exceptions to the above proposed Specific Plan regulations are provided for the following:

Light Sources associated with Production Activities and Outdoor Special Light Effects would not be subject to the lighting regulations contained in the proposed City Specific Plan or in the Los Angeles Municipal Code.

Decorative lights, which are temporarily installed between September 1 and January 15 of the next year.

Emergency Light Sources or temporary Light Sources used for repair or construction as required by governmental agencies.

Light Sources owned or controlled by any public agency for the purpose of directing or controlling navigation, traffic or for highway or street illumination.

Light Sources associated with Signs would be subject to the lighting regulations set forth in the proposed City Specific Plan.

Light sources associated with Outdoor Special Light Effects permitted in the Studio Production District would not be subject to the lighting regulations contained in Section 9 of the proposed City Specific Plan or in the Los Angeles Municipal Code.

(ii) Construction Lighting

All construction lighting within the Mixed-Use Residential Area and City portions of the Business and Studio Areas would be subject to the following lighting standards:

Light sources related to construction activities would be shielded or directed to restrict any direct illumination onto property located outside of the combined proposed City and County Specific Plan boundaries.

(b) Signage Regulations

In accordance with the proposed City Specific Plan, the Mixed-Use Residential Area and City portions of the Business and Entertainment Areas would be divided into six Sign Districts. Signage within each Sign District is regulated with regard to the following: maximum number of signs as well as maximum sign area and height within each Sign District. For a discussion of permitted signs relative to the proposed City Specific Plan,



Page 1260


refer to Section 9 of the proposed City Specific Plan as well as the discussion of the Design Plan in Section II, Project Description, of this Draft EIR. In addition, Electronic Message signs would be limited to no more than three foot-candles from sunset to 10:00 P.M. and no more than two foot-candles from 10:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M., as measured at the property line of the nearest residentially zoned property outside the combined boundaries of the proposed City and County Specific Plan, and would be turned off from 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M.

(c) Land Use and Design Standards

Within the designated Open Space Districts No. 1 and No. 2, no artificial lighting would be permitted between the hours of dusk and dawn, except for (a) low-level wayfinding and security lighting that is oriented downward and (b) signage as provided in Section 9 of the proposed City Specific Plan.

d. Project Impacts

Potential Project impacts with regard to light aesthetics are described below for the viewpoints defined previously in this section as those with the best views of the Project Site where the coverage is 30 percent or greater. Impacts at the other viewpoints where the coverage with respect to the Project Site is less than 30 percent or where receptors would consist of non-light sensitive uses (e.g., office buildings) would not be significantly impacted by potential Project lighting. Although the Project Site covers a less than substantial area of the context from Toluca Estates, this neighborhood is included in the impact analysis due to its proximity to the Project Site (less than 125 feet away).

(1) Light Aesthetics

(a) Toluca Estates (Viewpoint 1)

Toluca Estates is located approximately 125 feet north of the Project Site and has southerly views of the Project Site. This viewpoint is relatively close to the Project Site, but has substantial vegetation currently blocking the majority of the Project Site from view. Existing sky glow from this location is low. Existing point sources of light at this location include neighborhood street lights and residential gate/front porch lights. One off-site high-rise building (the 10 Universal City Plaza building) and one Project Site parking structure are visible beyond the neighborhood’s vegetation.

The proposed Project could add new point sources of light (such as parking garages or street lights) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and interior



Page 1261


building lights) within the Business and Studio Areas. This lighting would add incrementally to the existing lit environment at these locations. However, existing vegetation blocks nearly all views from this location toward the Project Site. The existing mature vegetation within and surrounding this location serves to screen light sources and darken the neighborhood from the effects of sky glow. Due to this heavy vegetation, it is anticipated that any new Project lighting would not be highly visible to the residents in this area, and any potential changes in sky glow would not be substantial. Furthermore, the proposed County Specific Plan requires all light sources that are visible from off-site residential uses to emit less than 300 candelas (equivalent to a 200 watt incandescent light bulb).

Freestanding lit signs and lighted signage could be developed with buildings within the Lankershim Edge and Northern Edge Sign Districts. Light sources associated with such signage would not be subject to lighting regulations in Section 16 of the proposed County Specific Plan. Signage within the Lankershim Edge Sign District is limited to two (2) Area Identification Signs of up to 500 square feet each, Building Identification Signs of up to 500 square feet each limited to one per building face, Tenant Identification Signs of up to 3 square feet per linear foot of frontage if affixed to building or 25 square feet if freestanding, and up to 10 On-Site Signs, including a maximum of two (2) Electronic Message signs and three (3) Supergraphics. However, permitted Electronic Message signs would be limited to no more than 3 foot-candles from sunset to 10:00 P.M. and no more than 2 foot-candle from 10:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M. as measured at the nearest residentially zoned property outside the combined boundaries of the City and County Specific Plan, and would be turned off from 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. Project signage would not be oriented toward the Toluca Estates vantage point, and all signs located within 500 feet of the combined boundaries of the County and City Specific Plans would be aesthetically treated to buffer the view of the back of the sign from off-site uses, as required under the regulations of the Specific Plan. In addition, illuminated Animated and Electronic Message Signs in the Lankershim Edge Sign District would not be on a west or north facing Building Face located north of the intersection of Lankershim Boulevard and James Stewart Avenue.

Signage lighting may add incrementally to the existing lit environment at this location. However, existing vegetation blocks nearly all views from this location toward the Project Site. The existing mature vegetation within and surrounding this location serves to screen light sources and darken the neighborhood from the effects of sky glow. Due to this heavy vegetation, it is anticipated that any new Project signage lighting would not be highly visible to the residents in this area, and any potential changes in sky glow would not be substantial. Therefore, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.



Page 1262


(b) Hollywood Manor (Viewpoint 11)

Hollywood Manor is located directly adjacent to the eastern edge of the Project Site. The majority of homes in Hollywood Manor are east facing and/or are below the ridgeline and do not have views of the Project Site. Viewpoint 11 has westerly views of the Project Site and is representative of those homes in this area that do have views of the Project Site. Currently visible on-site light sources include neon signage, towers, illuminated building features, streetlights, and building-mounted floodlights. Additional off-site street lighting and lights from the off-site Hilton and Sheraton Hotels and off-site 10 Universal City Plaza building are also visible. There is a medium amount of sky glow visible in the distance, looking toward the San Fernando Valley. With the exception of the neighborhood streetlights, these existing light sources are generally set back at least 1,000 feet from the viewpoint. The portion of the Mixed-use Residential Area adjacent to Hollywood Manor is normally dark except during occasional temporary night filming on the Project Site. During these filming events, nighttime lighting can be of very high brightness.

The proposed Project would include new point sources of light (such as street lights, building safety lights, and garages) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and building interiors) within the proposed Mixed-Use Residential Area. Although these new light sources would bring lighting closer to this viewpoint, within the two Open Space Districts, only low level wayfinding and security would be allowed under the proposed City Specific Plan, would serve as a buffer between the rest of the proposed Mixed-Use Residential Area and this viewpoint. The proposed City Specific Plan regulations would establish limits for the intensity, direction, shielding and type of light sources that could occur in the Mixed-Use Residential Area. These regulations would restrict direct views of point sources of light above 150 candelas, which is equivalent to a 100-watt incandescent light bulb that is commonly used for exterior porch lights in residential areas, and would require light sources to not produce more than 2.0 foot-candles of illumination at off-site residential properties. Light sources of this intensity would not be considered prominent in a residential environment. Project lighting and lighting associated with potential informational signage development in the Open Space District adjacent to Hollywood Manor would be restricted by the proposed City Specific Plan, and the Universal Mixed-Use Signage District would be separated from Hollywood Manor by the Open Space District. Although the Project’s potential lighting could introduce light sources to an area where few light sources currently exist, this lighting would not substantially alter the character of the Hollywood Manor area.

The Open Space No. 1 District would be located in the foreground view with the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District in the background. Although additional sign districts, beyond the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District, could perceivably be viewed from these areas, they are not included in this analysis, given the distance from these residences, the wide view affordable, and the overall allowable sign heights. Based on the above, varying



Page 1263


sign types and heights would be allowed within the view from this location. However, in the immediately adjacent area, signage within the Open Space No. 1 District is limited to 20 feet above grade and a maximum individual size of 25 square feet. Signage in the Open Space No. 1 District may only be lit if the lighting is directed onto the sign and provides only enough light sufficient to light the sign.

As with general Project lighting, lighting associated with signage development could increase the amount of sky glow visible from this viewpoint. However, the limited sources of lit signage allowed in the Open Space District, the restrictions imposed on signage within the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District, and the fact that signage within the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District would be separated from the viewpoint by the Open Space District, all contribute to reducing the effect of signage lighting for those Hollywood Manor homes that have visual access to this portion of the Project Site. Therefore, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.

(c) Hollywood Knolls (Viewpoint 10)

This viewpoint is located within the Hollywood Knolls neighborhood at an elevation of over 1,000 feet MSL. It is located approximately 2,000 feet east of the Project Site, beyond the Hollywood Manor neighborhood and across Barham Boulevard. A wide variety of light sources are visible from this location, including city street and neighborhood lighting, along with lighting from the Project Site including illuminated parking structures, signage, and architectural elements. There is a medium amount of sky glow visible from this location, due to broad views of the San Fernando Valley.

The proposed Project could add new point sources of light (such as parking garages or street lights) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and interior building lights) within each of the districts on the Project Site. This lighting would add incrementally to the existing lit environment at these locations. It is not anticipated that any one of these new point sources or illuminated surfaces would particularly stand out when viewed from this location due to its high elevation and relatively long distance away from the Project Site. The existing Project Site, along with the Studio City and greater San Fernando Valley areas, currently provides a variety of prominent light sources visible from this location. Incremental increases in sky glow as seen from this location would blend in with the existing highly lit urban landscape. Thus, potential increases in sky glow due to additional lighting within the Project Site would not be substantial. Furthermore, the proposed City and County Specific Plans require all light sources that are visible from off-site residential uses to emit less than 150 candelas in the Mixed-Use Residential Area or 300 candelas in the Business, Studio and Entertainment Areas, respectively.



Page 1264


Since it is conservatively assumed that all vegetation would be removed from the Project Site under the proposed Project, a largely uninterrupted, broader view of the Project Site from the Hollywood Knolls neighborhood could occur. As such, signage in the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District and the Universal City Barham Sign could be visible from this vantage point with or without the development of buildings. Lighting of signage within the Open Space Districts is only allowed to the degree that it is sufficient to directly light the sign. The Universal City Barham Sign is not oriented towards the Hollywood Knolls area.

Given the neighborhood’s elevation and distant vantage point, as well as the neighborhood’s expansive field of view, Project signage would appear as only a small proportion of the total view area. As such, Project signage would not represent a dominant component of the overall view given the wide vista around and over the Project Site available from this viewpoint. Therefore, while the lighting of Project signage in the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District and Universal City Barham Sign Districts could represent a change from existing conditions, such changes would not be substantial in light of the expansive vistas available from this neighborhood. Thus, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.

(d) Cahuenga Pass West (Viewpoint 9)

Viewpoint 9 is located within the Cahuenga Pass West neighborhood, at over 900 feet in elevation and approximately 4,000 feet southwest of the Project Site. This viewpoint has northeasterly views of the Project Site, primarily of the Business and Entertainment Areas. Light sources visible from this location include off-site roadway lighting, general lighting associated with the urban development of the San Fernando Valley, and prominent lighting from the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza office building, off-site Hilton and Sheraton Hotels, and within the Entertainment and Business Areas within the Project Site. Hollywood Freeway lights are visible from this location as well. There is a medium amount of sky glow currently visible at this location.

The proposed Project could add new point sources of light (such as parking garages or street lights) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and interior building lights) within the Business and Entertainment Areas on the Project Site that could be visible from this vantage point. This lighting would add incrementally to the existing lit environment at this location. However, the Entertainment Area is currently a prominent source of light, and therefore the incremental increase in lighting would not be substantial (i.e., since the Project Site already appears as a bright location, it cannot change from a dark to light area). Furthermore, this location’s elevation and distance from the Project Site means that the Project Site appears as only one area of light within the larger, highly lit urban nighttime landscape. Thus, potential increases in sky glow due to additional lighting



Page 1265


within the Entertainment Area would not be anticipated to be substantial since a medium amount of sky glow already exists at this location. Furthermore, the proposed City and County Specific Plans require all light sources that are visible from Existing Off-Site Residential Uses to emit less than 150 candelas in the Mixed-Use Residential Area or 300 candelas in the Business, Studio and Entertainment Areas, respectively.

Lit signage developed (on building facades and freestanding signs with or without buildings) within the Studio Administration Sign District, Technical Lot Sign District, and the southern portions of the Studio & Entertainment Sign District would be visible from this viewpoint. With the exception of Electronic Message signs, the lighting of signage within these Sign Districts would not be limited or regulated under the proposed Specific Plans, except in terms of maximum number, sign area, or sign height. As a result, new lit signage could result in a change of view from the Cahuenga Pass West residential area. The visual prominence of the existing Project Site would increase with certain allowable sign types (i.e., Electronic Message), and placement of lighted signs on building facades or up to the maximum height allowable in the Height Zone. In order to limit potential impacts, Electronic Message signs would be limited to no more than 3 foot-candles from sunset to 10:00 P.M. and no more than 2 foot-candles from 10:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M. as measured at the nearest residentially zoned property outside the combined boundaries of the proposed City and County Specific Plan, and would be turned off from 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. Thus, given the existing visible light sources and the distant vantage point, potential Project signage lighting would not result in a substantial change compared to current conditions. Thus, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.

(e) Cahuenga Pass East (Viewpoint 5)

This viewpoint is located approximately 1,500 feet south of the Project Site at an elevation of approximately 850 feet above MSL. This viewpoint currently has northerly views of the Project Site. Sources of light perceived at this location include streetlights within the Cahuenga Pass East neighborhood, the Universal CityWalk parking garages, and the general lighting of the highly urbanized San Fernando Valley. The Entertainment Area is the primary portion of the Project Site currently visible from this location. Sky glow from this location appears to be of medium brightness.

The proposed Project could add new point sources of light (such as parking garages or street lights) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and interior building lights) within the Entertainment Area on the Project Site. This lighting would add incrementally to the existing lit environment at this location. However, as with the Cahuenga Pass West neighborhood, the Entertainment Area is currently a prominent source of light seen from this viewpoint, and therefore the incremental increase in lighting



Page 1266


would not be substantial. Furthermore, this location’s elevation and distance from the Project Site means that the Project Site appears as only one area of light within the larger urban nighttime landscape. Thus, potential increases in sky glow due to additional lighting within the Entertainment Area would not be substantial. Furthermore, the proposed City and County Specific Plans require all light sources that are visible from off-site residential uses to emit less than 150 candelas in the Mixed-Use Residential Area or 300 candelas in the Business, Studio and Entertainment Areas, respectively.

Views to the north from the Cahuenga Pass East residential area viewpoint could potentially include Project signage developed in conjunction with buildings within the Studio Administration Sign District, southern portions of the Studio & Entertainment Sign District, Technical Lot Sign District, and small portions of the Visitor Gateway Sign District. The visual prominence of the existing Project Site could increase, given the allowable sign types (i.e., Electronic Message), overall density, and placement of signs on building facades or up to the maximum height allowable in the Height Zone. Nevertheless, the Entertainment Area is currently a prominent source of light seen from this viewpoint. To address potential impacts, Electronic Message signs would be limited to no more than 3 foot-candles from sunset to 10:00 P.M. and no more than 2 foot-candles from 10:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M. as measured at the nearest residentially zoned property outside the combined boundaries of the proposed City and County Specific Plans, and would be turned off from 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. Further, given this neighborhood’s elevation and distant vantage point, potential Project signage lighting would not result in a substantial change compared to current conditions. Thus, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.

(f) City View Lofts/Island Residential Area (Viewpoint 15)

The City View Lofts apartments at Lankershim Boulevard and Valleyheart Drive are located approximately 100 feet to the west of the Project Site, across Lankershim Boulevard. This location has easterly views toward the Project Site. The Business Area is the most visible portion of the Project Site from this viewpoint. Existing light sources seen from this location include residential street lights along Valleyheart Drive and commercial street lights along Lankershim Boulevard. Neon signage at the entrance to the Project Site is bright from this location. Additional light sources include parking garage lights for the on-site Carl Laemmle building and office lights from within the on-site Lew Wasserman building and the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza building. The existing sky glow and ambient illumination are high at this location.

The proposed Project could add new point sources of light (such as parking garages or street lights) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and interior



Page 1267


building lights) within the Business Area on the Project Site. This lighting would add incrementally to the existing lit environment at this location. However, this viewpoint already observes a high level of urban nighttime lighting along off-site Lankershim Boulevard locations and within the Project Site’s Business Area; therefore, any incremental increases would not be substantial. Thus, the existing high amount of sky glow would not be anticipated to substantially increase, since new incremental increases in light would not noticeably alter the already bright sky. Furthermore, the proposed City and County Specific Plans require all light sources that are visible from off-site residential uses to emit less than 150 candelas in the Mixed-Use Residential Area or 300 candelas in the Studio, Entertainment and Business Areas, respectively.

Project signage within the Lankershim Edge Sign District would be visible from this location. However, the proposed County Specific Plan prohibits Electronic Message signs in this District from directly facing the City View Lofts. In addition, the light levels of Electronic Message signs would be limited to no more than three foot-candles from sunset to 10:00 P.M. and no more than two foot-candles from 10:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M., as measured at the property line of the nearest residentially zoned property outside the combined boundaries of the proposed City and County Specific Plan, and would be turned off from 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. Given the existing high illumination levels in this area and the restriction on orientation and light levels of Electronic Message signs, potential Project signage lighting would not result in a substantial change compared to current conditions. Thus, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.

(g) Sheraton Hotel (Viewpoint 20)

The Sheraton Hotel is located approximately 300 feet southwest of the Project Site, across Universal Hollywood Drive. This location has northeasterly views of the Project Site. The Business and Entertainment Areas are the most visible on-site areas seen from this viewpoint. Sources of light seen from this location include office building lighting from the off-site 10 Universal City Plaza and on-site Lew Wasserman and Carl Laemmle buildings, along with parking garage and entertainment area lighting from the Entertainment Area. The off-site car dealership at the intersection of Lankershim Boulevard and Cahuenga Boulevard is currently an especially bright source of light. Vehicle headlights and street lights are also highly visible from this location. The overall sky glow is currently high as perceived from this viewpoint.

The proposed Project could add new point sources of light (such as parking garages or street lights) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and interior building lights) within the Business and Entertainment Areas on the Project Site. This lighting would add incrementally to the existing lit environment at this location. However,



Page 1268


this viewpoint already experiences a high level of urban nighttime lighting from the Business and Entertainment Areas and the off-site Lankershim Commercial corridor; therefore, any incremental increases would not be substantial (i.e., they would not be highly noticeable). The existing high amount of sky glow would also not be anticipated to substantially increase. Furthermore, this location does not contain residential properties and thus would not expose permanent residences to high brightness lighting. Existing outdoor dining areas near this viewpoint would not experience an appreciably greater amount of sky glow as compared to existing conditions.

With respect to signage, the southwest portion of the Project Site would provide signage in the southern portions of the Studio & Entertainment Sign District and the Studio Administration Sign District that would abut the off-site Sheraton Hotel area. Signage developed within this sign district could represent a substantial increase in signage type (i.e., Electronic Message or other pixilated lighting) and size within the southwestern frontage of the Project Site visible from the Sheraton Hotel. However, given the existing light sources in the Entertainment and Business Areas and off-site 10 Universal City Plaza building and car dealership, and vehicle headlights; the existing visual prominence of the Project Site; the restrictions on Electronic Message sign light levels; and the character of the hotel located in an entertainment center, potential Project signage lighting would not result in a substantial change compared to current conditions. Thus, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.

(h) Hilton Hotel (Viewpoint 21)

The Hilton Hotel is located approximately 150 feet southwest of the Project Site, across Hotel Drive and Universal Hollywood Drive. This viewpoint currently looks northeasterly across the Business, Studio, and Entertainment Areas. Major sources of light include the Frankenstein parking garage, Terminator 2 attraction, Universal CityWalk, vehicle headlights, and street lighting. The sky glow appears to be of high brightness from this location. The proposed Project could add new point sources of light (such as parking garages or street lights) and new illuminated surfaces (such as exterior building facades and interior building lights) within the Business, Studio and Entertainment Areas on the Project Site. This lighting would add incrementally to the existing lit environment at this location. However, this viewpoint already experiences a high level of urban nighttime lighting from the Business and Entertainment Areas (especially from Universal CityWalk); therefore, any incremental increases would not be substantial. Similarly, the existing high amount of sky glow would not be anticipated to substantially increase, since lighting would not go from low to high levels. Furthermore, this location does not contain residential properties and thus would not expose permanent residences to high brightness lighting. Existing outdoor dining areas near this viewpoint would not experience an appreciably greater amount of sky glow as compared to existing conditions.



Page 1269


With respect to signage, the southwest portion of the Project Site would provide signage in the Studio and Entertainment Sign District and the Studio Administration Sign District that would abut the off-site Hilton Hotel area. Signage developed within this sign district could represent a general increase in signage type (i.e., Electronic Message or other pixilated lighting) and size within the southwestern frontage of the Site visible from the Hilton Hotel. However, given the existing light sources from parking garages, attractions and signage in the Entertainment Area, vehicle headlights, and street lighting; the existing visual prominence of the Project Site; the restrictions on Electronic Message sign light levels and the character of the hotel located in an entertainment center, potential Project signage lighting would not result in a substantial change compared to current conditions. Thus, the Project’s potential lighting would not substantially alter the character of this off-site area, and light aesthetics impacts at this viewpoint would be less than significant.

(2) Light Exposure

As discussed in the “methodology” section, above, light exposure is a function of proximity and field of view. As one moves away from a particular area, the relative importance of that area is reduced as distance causes the area to blend with the larger surroundings and the intervening light sources become relatively more prominent. For this reason, the computer simulation model discussed above was used to assess the light exposure impacts on the Hollywood Manor and the City View Lofts/Island residential areas from potential building sites located on the Project Site in areas closest to these off-site uses. Since impacts steadily decrease as one moves outward from these locations, if light exposure impacts to these locations are less than significant, then light exposure impacts to all locations must be less than significant.

This light exposure discussion analyzes the data generated by the 12 scenarios (previously identified in Table 80 on page 1252, above) modeled by the computer simulation. The computer simulation model predicts what the brightness (luminance) and light trespass (illuminance) would be for different Project building development scenarios at each of the two selected building sites in the northwestern and southeastern portions of the Project Site. The model also accounts for existing background luminance and illuminance that would remain following Project development. In addition to analyzing building development, the computer simulation model was also used to analyze potential light exposure impacts from proposed signage.

As described above, two conditions for each building site were analyzed in the computer model: single building (Condition A) and multiple buildings (Condition B). The Building Site #1 single building model consists of a multi-story structure with a maximum height of 150 feet located at pad elevation 760 MSL as per the maximum building heights



Page 1270


allowed under the proposed City Specific Plan. The Building Site #1 multiple building scenario includes three multi-story buildings with maximum heights of 150 feet located at pad elevation 760 MSL as per the maximum building heights allowed under the proposed City Specific Plan. To represent high transmission conditions for maximum interior lighting visible to off-site view positions, 75% of the building exterior surfaces was modeled as glass curtain wall. The remaining 25% of the building exteriors were modeled as opaque, high reflectance surface to represent a high brightness surface. At each upper floor, exterior balconies were modeled with an exterior light source adjacent to this high reflectance, opaque panel to test maximum surface brightness. This configuration of opaque surface and adjacent light source produces a high surface brightness. The combination of maximum brightness from within the interior and the extent of high brightness exterior surfaces tested the maximum light trespass values at the residential property line.

Two off-site viewpoints were utilized within the model for Building Site #1 to calculate the luminance directed toward these positions which represent adjacent residential receptor sites in the Hollywood Manor residential area. The luminance is calculated to evaluate the apparent brightness and contrast ratio of the brightest object or surface to the background average brightness, as viewed from the two viewpoints to the Project Site. The two viewpoint locations utilized in the model for Building Site #1 were as follows: (1) located at 200 feet from the model building and 50 feet higher than building ground level and (2) located at 350 feet from the model building and 100 feet higher than building ground level.

The Building Site #2 single building model consists of a multi-story structure with a maximum height of 290 feet as per the maximum building heights allowed under the proposed County Specific Plan.101 The Building Site #2 multiple building scenario includes a group of multi-story buildings with two buildings at a maximum height of 290 feet and one building at a maximum building height of 160 feet, all located at a pad elevation of 560 feet MSL per the maximum building heights allowed under the proposed County Specific Plan.102 The exterior building surfaces at Building Site #2 were modeled similar to Building Site #1, with glass and opaque wall conditions.

101 The Building Site #2 single building model at 290 feet consists of 24 stories at a pad elevation of 560 feet MSL. Please refer to Section II, Project Description, for additional information regarding permitted building heights and building stories.

102 The Building Site #2 multiple building model at 290 feet consists of consists of two buildings of 24 stories each at a pad elevation of 560 feet MSL. The one building of 160 feet consists of 13 stories also at a pad elevation of 560 feet MSL.



Page 1271


Two off-site viewpoints were utilized within the model for Building Site #2 to calculate the luminance directed toward these positions which represent adjacent residential receptor sites in the City View Lofts/Island residential area. The luminance is calculated to evaluate the apparent brightness and contrast ratio of the brightest object or surface to the background average brightness, as viewed from the two viewpoints to the Project Site. The two viewpoint locations utilized in the model for Building Site #2 were as follows: (1) located at 150 feet from the model building and 10 feet above the building ground level and (2) located at 500 feet from the model building and 10 feet above the building ground level.

As discussed previously in the Methodology discussion above, for both the single and multiple building conditions, three test calculations were prepared to evaluate the minimum, mid-range, and maximum design extent of lighting elements for each Building Site. These calculation studies include standard light fixture elements which approximate actual lighting improvements associated with the proposed development building type and scale (see the Lighting Analysis in Technical Appendix G for fixture specifications).

Table 81 on page 1272, summarizes the brightness ratios (luminance) and light trespass values (illuminance) for each of the scenarios analyzed. Table 81 shows the two study sites and the viewpoints from which the scenarios were simulated.

(a) Brightness

As discussed in the introduction to this section, “High,” “Medium,” and “Low” brightness are terms used to describe contrast ratios of greater than 30:1, between 10:1 and 30:1, and below 10:1 surface-to-background luminance, respectively. Brightness ratios of above 30:1 are uncomfortable for the human eye to perceive. As shown in Table 81 on page 1272, a total of two scenarios produced brightness ratios of above 30:1 (indicating high brightness). These two scenarios included the following:

The single building, maximum lighting scenario at Building Site #1, Viewpoint 1 (impacting the Hollywood Manor neighborhood) producing a brightness ratio of 60.8:1; and

The single building, maximum lighting scenario at Building Site #1, Viewpoint 2 (impacting the Hollywood Manor neighborhood) producing a brightness ratio of 30:1.

A total of 9 scenarios produced brightness ratios of between 10:1 and 30:1 (medium brightness). A total of 13 scenarios produced brightness ratios of less than 10:1 (low brightness).



Page 1272


Table 81 Light Exposure Simulation Results

Building Site: Viewpoint

Lighting Scenarios & Results:

Single Building, Minimum Lighting

Single Building, Mid-Range Lighting

Single Building, Maximum Lighting

Multiple Buildings, Minimum Lighting

Multiple Buildings, Mid-Range Lighting

Multiple Buildings, Maximum Lighting

Brightness Ratio a

Light Trespass b,c

Brightness Ratio

Light Trespass

Brightness Ratio

Light Trespass

Brightness Ratio

Light Trespass

Brightness Ratio

Light Trespass

Brightness Ratio

Light Trespass

#1 (Visible from Hollywood

Manor – Viewpoints 11-13)

Viewpoint 1 13.9:1 0.2 12.8:1 0.4 60.8:1 1.5 6.4:1 0.5 4.3:1 0.6 27.3:1 2.3

Viewpoint 2 11.4:1 0.2 8.9:1 0.4 30:1 1.5 8.2:1 0.5 6.4:1 0.6 16.7:1 2.3

#2 (Visible from The Island –

Viewpoint 15)

Viewpoint 1 5.6:1 0.5 7.1:1 1.1 6.1:1 3.4 4.9:1 0.6 6:1 1.2 6.3:1 4.5

Viewpoint 2 15.4:1 0.5 16.1:1 1.1 14.3:1 3.4 10:1 0.6 9.5:1 1.2 8.8:1 4.5

a The Brightness Ratio values are measured in footlamberts. Footlamberts are candelas per square foot. A candela is defined as a measure of light energy from a source at a specific standard angle and distance (the output of a 100 watt

incandescent lamp is approximately equivalent to 150 candelas). Ratios of 30:1 are considered “high”; between 10:1 and 30:1 “medium”; and under 10:1 “low” brightness. b The Light Trespass values are expressed in foot-candles. A foot-candle is the light energy within a one square foot surface one foot away from a standard candle. c For each scenario, notice that the light trespass values are the same for viewpoints 1 and 2. This is due to the fact that light trespass values are always measured at the edge of the residential property line (not at the viewpoints

themselves). This method provides the most conservative analysis, since as one moves further into the residential areas, light trespass values decrease.

Source: Matrix Environmental, 2010; Francis Krahe & Associates, Inc., 2010.



Page 1273


As noted above, both the proposed City and County Specific Plans would require that new visible light sources within the Project Site be limited to a maximum of 150 candelas in the Mixed-Use Residential Area and 300 candelas in the Business, Studio and Entertainment Areas of the site from 45 degrees above horizontal to 21 degrees below horizontal. Application of the proposed City Specific Plan requirements to the modeled scenarios described above for Building Site #1 resulted in a reduction of the calculated brightness ratios below 30:1 for each of the two viewpoints within the Hollywood Manor neighborhood (to ratios of 11.5 and 8.7, respectively). Therefore, as the proposed Project would not generate brightness ratios of 30:1 or greater at residential property lines, impacts due to brightness would be less than significant. Because the level of brightness impact is lessened with increasing distance away from the light source, impacts at viewpoints farther removed from the Project Site would also be less than significant.

As described in the Light Aesthetics impacts discussion above, the potential Project lighting and lit signage would be sufficiently distant from the Hollywood Knolls, Cahuenga Pass West, and Cahuenga Pass East areas such that the potential level of brightness impacts would also be less than significant. The existing ambient illumination levels in the City View Lofts, Sheraton Hotel and Hilton Hotel areas are high. As brightness is measured as a ratio of the surface-to-background luminance, given the high background luminance, the introduction of additional lighting and lit signage in these areas would constitute a less than significant brightness impact. Further, the proposed County Specific Plan restricts Project Electronic Message signage from directly facing the City View Lofts area and limits the light levels to no more than 3 foot-candles from sunset to 10:00 P.M. and no more than 2 foot-candles from 10:00 P.M. to 2:00 A.M. as measured at the nearest residentially zoned property outside the combined boundaries of the proposed City and County Specific Plan, and would be turned off from 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. In the Hollywood Manor area there is an existing medium amount of sky glow from existing light sources within the Project Site. Project lighting and lighting associated with potential signage development in the Open Space Districts adjacent to Hollywood Manor would be restricted by the proposed City Specific Plan, and the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District would be separated from Hollywood Manor by Open Space District No. 1. As noted above, the simulation model also analyzed potential light exposure impacts from proposed signage. As discussed in more detail in the Lighting Analysis (included as Technical Appendix G), the modeling analysis confirmed that with implementation of the signage regulations in the proposed City and County Specific Plans proposed signage would not result in significant brightness impacts at any of modeled viewpoints. Therefore, brightness impacts from the Project’s potential signage lighting would be less than significant.

Similarly, impacts from on-site light sources on off-site motor vehicles traveling along the various roadways adjacent to the Project Site would be less than significant based on compliance with the lighting regulations contained in the proposed Specific Plans, which



Page 1274


would prohibit lighting that could result in brightness ratios greater than 30:1 at off-site residential uses. The type of lighting to be allowed under the proposed Specific Plans would not be expected to cause a dangerous distraction to drivers along Lankershim Boulevard, Barham Boulevard, or the Hollywood Freeway.

(b) Light Trespass

Light trespass is the light that falls on a subject property but originates on an adjacent property. Light trespass is measured in foot-candles. A foot-candle is the light energy within a one-square-foot surface one foot away from a standard candle. It should be noted that for each modeled scenario, the light trespass values are the same for viewpoints 1 and 2. This is due to the fact that light trespass values are always measured at the edge of the residential property line (not at the viewpoints themselves). This method provides the most conservative analysis, since as one moves further into the residential areas, light trespass values decrease. As shown in Table 81 on page 1272, a total of three of the modeled scenarios would produce light trespasses of 2.0 foot-candles or more. These scenarios include the following:

The single-building, maximum lighting scenario at Building Site #2 (measured at The Island property line) with a light trespass of 3.4 foot-candles;

The multiple-buildings, maximum lighting scenario at Building Site #1 (measured at the Hollywood Manor property line) with a light trespass of 2.3 foot-candles; and

The multiple-buildings, maximum lighting scenario at Building Site #2 (measured at The Island property line) with a light trespass of 4.5 foot-candles.

The remaining modeled scenarios produced light trespass values of below 2.0 foot-candles.

As noted above, both the proposed City and County Specific Plans would require that no light source of the Project cast more than 2.0 foot-candles onto any residentially-zoned property outside the Project Site. Therefore, the three modeled scenarios that produce light trespass values of 2.0 foot-candles or more would not be permitted per the standards set forth in the proposed City and County Specific Plans. As such, development pursuant to these scenarios would be required to undergo lighting or other design modifications until the light trespass onto adjacent residential properties falls below 2.0 foot-candles. Adjustments to the lighting configurations utilized in the computer simulation reveal that installation of lighting in conformance with the 2.0 foot-candle lighting regulations in the proposed City and County Specific Plans would reduce off-site impacts below the light trespass thresholds described above (see Lighting Analysis in Technical



Page 1275


Appendix G for additional detail). As the proposed Project would not generate light intensity levels of 2.0 foot-candles or more at residential property lines, impacts due to light trespass would be less than significant.

As described above, the potential Project lighting and lit signage would be sufficiently distant from the Hollywood Knolls, Cahuenga Pass West, and Cahuenga Pass East areas that the potential light trespass impacts would also be less than significant. The proposed County Specific Plan restricts Project Electronic Message signage from directly facing the City View Lofts area and limits the light levels of Electronic Message signs; therefore, light trespass impacts associated with potential Project signage on the City View Lofts / Island residential area would be less than significant. In the Hollywood Manor area, Project lighting and lighting associated with potential signage development in the Open Space Districts adjacent to Hollywood Manor would be restricted by the proposed City Specific Plan, and the Universal Mixed-Use Sign District would be separated from Hollywood Manor by Open Space District No. 1. As noted above, the simulation model also analyzed potential light exposure impacts from proposed signage. As discussed in more detail in the Lighting Analysis (included as Technical Appendix G ), the modeling analysis confirmed that with implementation of the signage regulations in the proposed City and County Specific Plans proposed signage would not result in significant light trespass impacts at any of modeled viewpoints. Therefore, light trespass impacts from the Project’s potential signage lighting in the Hollywood Manor area would be less than significant.

(3) Construction Impacts

High intensity outdoor lighting typically accompanies nighttime construction activities. This light can be intrusive for adjacent light-sensitive uses and typically consists of floodlights, spot lights and/or headlights associated with construction equipment and hauling trucks. Nighttime construction activities could affect adjacent residential and other light-sensitive uses, but would not be anticipated to affect those light-sensitive uses located farther away. This is because construction lighting, while bright, is highly focused on the particular area undergoing work. Therefore, uses which are not adjacent to the Project Site would not be anticipated to be substantially affected by construction lighting. Each of the two proposed Specific Plans requires that all lighting related to construction activities would be shielded or directed to restrict any direct illumination of property located outside the Project Site. Furthermore, nighttime construction activities are not anticipated to occur frequently; when such activities do occur their duration would be relatively brief, generally limited to a few hours in the evening during the winter months. Given the temporary nature and short duration of nighttime construction activities associated with Project construction activities and the requirement in the proposed Specific Plans that lighting for such activities be shielded or directed to restrict any direct illumination of property located outside the



Page 1276


Project Site, impacts associated with nighttime construction lighting would be less than significant.

(4) Impacts Under No Annexation Scenario

The proposed annexation/detachment of land areas between the City of Los Angeles and County of Los Angeles would not alter the potential for artificial light impacts; the potential significance level of any artificial light impacts would be independent of jurisdictional boundaries. As such, potential impacts would remain the same (i.e., less than significant), if the proposed annexation/detachment was not implemented.

4. Cumulative Impacts

Development of the proposed Project in combination with future developments in the proximity to the Project Site could contribute to increased artificial light emissions as seen by off-site sensitive uses. However, most of the related projects are located too distant from the Project Site to result in a cumulative impact, and not enough information is available regarding those related projects that could result in a cumulative impact, with the exception of the proposed Metro Universal project. As a result, the analysis of cumulative impacts focuses on the potential impacts of the proposed Project combined with those of the proposed Metro Universal project.

The area around the Project Site is an urban environment, with urban lighting characteristics. Based on City of Los Angeles land use designations in the area (i.e., regional center and general commercial), it is anticipated that light in the vicinity of the Project Site could increase during the time the Project is under construction. Specifically, the proposed Metro Universal project, located on the Universal City Metro Red Line Station property across Lankershim Boulevard from the Project Site, is currently proposing a media production facility, two high-rise office buildings and an above-ground parking structure, all of which could contribute to added nighttime lighting in the vicinity of the proposed Project.

The Metro Universal Draft EIR concludes that animated or moving signage located 25 or more feet above grade would have a significant impact on a number of locations that are located around both the proposed Metro Universal project site as well as the proposed Project Site. The development of the other related projects that are located within the viewsheds of the proposed Metro Universal project could potentially add to this impact depending on the final design of each of the other related projects. The existing level of ambient lighting in the Project area is high, due to the high density of development already present. The proposed Project, in conjunction with the proposed Metro Universal project, would cause a cumulative increase in the ambient light levels emanating from this area



Page 1277


from buildings and signage. The cumulative effect of increased building lighting would be to reinforce the perception of the area as a high-density urban node, which would not vary substantially from the existing perception and would be less than significant. However, consistency of future development with applicable City and County lighting standards, and implementation of measures to reduce the potential impact of additional artificial light sources on a project-by-project basis would reduce the incremental increase in artificial light levels attributable to the development of these related projects. The proposed Project’s artificial light sources are comprehensively regulated by both the proposed City and County Specific Plans. While the proposed Project would increase artificial light levels in the Project area, the regulations set forth in the proposed City and County Specific Plans control the Project’s potential artificial light sources to a sufficient degree so as to not to be considered cumulatively considerable. Therefore, development of the Proposed Project would result in less than significant cumulative lighting impacts.

5. Project Design Features and Mitigation Measures

a. Project Design Features

The proposed City and County Specific Plans include project design features that govern the respective portions of the Project Site and provide certain regulations with respect to building lights and signage, which reduce the potential for light impacts emitted from the Project Site and related activities. The proposed City and County Specific Plans are included as Appendices A-1 and A-2 to this Draft EIR.

b. Mitigation Measures

As described in the above analysis, proposed Project nighttime lighting would be less than significant due to the regulations set forth in the proposed City and County Specific Plans; therefore, no mitigation measures are required or recommended.

6. Level of Significance After Mitigation

Operational Project lighting exposure impacts due to brightness and light trespass would be less than significant for all locations surrounding the Project Site, since application of the lighting regulations in the proposed County and City Specific Plans would reduce brightness ratios experienced at off-site residential locations to less than 30:1 and since light trespass onto adjacent properties would not be permitted to exceed 2.0 foot-candles. As light trespass impacts decrease with distance, if adjacent properties are not substantially impacted, properties further away would also experience less than significant



Page 1278


impacts. Project light aesthetics impacts from structures and landscaping would also be less than significant for each location analyzed since the Project would not result in directly visible light sources in excess of 150 candelas in the Mixed-Use Residential Area or 300 candelas in the Business, Studio or Entertainment Areas, and would not substantially alter the character of off-site areas surrounding the Project Site. Project light aesthetics impacts from lighted signage would be less than significant given the regulations in the proposed Specific Plans, the existing light environment and distance to offsite receptors. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts with respect to artificial light.

Documents

IV.E.2. Artificial Light - planning.lacity.orgplanning.lacity.org/eir/NBC_UnivPlan/DEIR/files/IV.E.2. Artificial... · IV.E.2 Light and Glare - Artificial Light City of Los Angeles