HomeMy WebLinkAboutApn D - NoiseAPPENDIX D
Noise Impact Study
Otay Ranch Village 8 West
Sectional Planning Area
Project
Final Noise Technical Report
May 2013
Prepared for
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Prepared by
3570 Carmel Mountain Road, Suite 300
San Diego, California 92130
CONTENTS
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page i
May 2013
Contents
1.0 Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
2.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 1
2.2 Project Description ............................................................................................................. 2
3.0 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................... 10
3.1 Noise Basics....................................................................................................................... 10
3.1.1 Quantification of Noise ........................................................................................ 10
3.1.2 Noise Effects ........................................................................................................ 12
3.2 Environmental Vibration Basics ........................................................................................ 12
3.3 Regulatory Framework ..................................................................................................... 13
3.3.1 Federal ................................................................................................................. 13
3.3.2 State ..................................................................................................................... 13
3.3.3 Local ..................................................................................................................... 14
3.4 Existing Noise Environment .............................................................................................. 16
3.4.1 Existing Noise Levels ............................................................................................ 16
3.4.2 Transportation Noise Sources .............................................................................. 18
3.4.3 Operational Noise Sources .................................................................................. 19
3.4.4 Noise Sensitive Land Uses .................................................................................... 21
3.4.5 Vibration Sensitive Land Uses .............................................................................. 21
4.0 Methodology and Significance Criteria ................................................................................... 22
4.1 Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 22
4.1.1 Excessive Noise Levels ......................................................................................... 22
4.1.2 Groundborne Vibration ....................................................................................... 22
4.1.3 Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise ................................................................ 22
4.1.4 Temporary Increase in Ambient Noise ................................................................ 23
4.1.5 Aircraft Noise ....................................................................................................... 23
4.2 Significance Criteria .......................................................................................................... 23
5.0 Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures .............................................................................. 24
5.1 Impact Analysis ................................................................................................................. 24
5.1.1 Issue 1: Excessive Noise Levels ............................................................................ 24
5.1.2 Issue 2: Groundborne Vibration .......................................................................... 44
5.1.3 Issue 3: Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels ..................... 45
5.1.4 Issue 4: Construction Noise ................................................................................. 55
5.1.5 Issue 5: Aircraft Noise .......................................................................................... 59
5.1.6 Issue 6: General Plan Policies............................................................................... 59
6.0 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................. 61
7.0 References ............................................................................................................................. 61
Appendix A. Noise Data
CONTENTS
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page ii
May 2013
Figures
Figure 1 Project Vicinity ................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2 Existing and Planned Land Uses in the Project Vicinity ..................................................... 4
Figure 3 Site Utilization Plan ............................................................................................................ 5
Figure 4 Roadway Circulation System .............................................................................................. 8
Figure 5 Noise Measurement Locations ........................................................................................ 17
Figure 6 Noise Receiver Locations ................................................................................................. 31
Figure 7 Buildout (2030) Traffic Noise Contours ........................................................................... 32
Figure 8 Proposed Noise Wall Location ......................................................................................... 39
Figure 9 Development Phases ....................................................................................................... 56
Tables
Table 1 Village 8 West SPA Land Uses ............................................................................................. 2
Table 2 Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels ...................................................................................... 11
Table 3 Exterior Land Use/Noise Compatibility Guidelines ........................................................... 15
Table 4 Exterior Noise Limits ......................................................................................................... 16
Table 5 Ambient Sound Level Measurements (dBA) ..................................................................... 18
Table 6 Existing Off-Site Roadway Noise Levels ............................................................................ 20
Table 7 2030 Buildout On-site Roadway Traffic Volumes ............................................................. 33
Table 8 On-site 2030 Buildout Noise Levels .................................................................................. 34
Table 9 On-site 2030 Buildout Ground Level Traffic Noise Levels with
Implementation of Mitigation Measure Noi-1 ................................................................. 42
Table 10 Existing Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels .......................................................................... 47
Table 11 Year 2025 Traffic Noise Levels .......................................................................................... 48
Table 12 Unmitigated Year 2030 Traffic Noise Levels ..................................................................... 50
Table 13 Mitigated Year 2030 Traffic Noise Levels ......................................................................... 51
Table 14 Cumulative Traffic Noise Impacts ..................................................................................... 54
Table 15 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Noise Policies .................................... 60
1.0 SUMMARY
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 1
May 2013
1.0 Summary
This report assesses potential noise and vibration impacts associated with the implementation of the
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan, herein referred to as the project. The
project consists of approximately 300 acres of land in Otay Ranch known as Village 8 West, located
entirely within the City of Chula Vista, California, near the southeasterly edge of the City’s limits. Chula
Vista is located in San Diego County, approximately two miles south of the City of San Diego, and
approximately two miles north of the US-Mexico International Border. This report is intended to satisfy
the City's requirement for a noise impact analysis by examining the impacts of the proposed project on
noise-sensitive uses in the area and proposing mitigation measures where feasible to address significant
noise impacts.
Construction of the proposed Village 8 West project would not result in construction noise or
groundborne vibration that would result in a significant direct or cumulative impact with
implementation of the mitigation measures required in the Biological Resource Report prepared for the
proposed project. Buildout of the proposed project would result in significant traffic noise increases
along La Media Road, Main Street, Otay Valley Road, and Street A within the project site. Mitigation
measures Noi-1 through Noi-5 would reduce direct and cumulative impacts to a less than significant
level. Short-term increases in traffic noise off-site on La Media Road, Birch Road, and Magdalena
Avenue would be significant and unavoidable until roadway circulation system improvements are
complete. Completion of the roadway circulation system improvements are required as part of
required mitigation included in the traffic study prepared for the project. Long-term traffic noise
impacts would be less than significant with implementation of the circulation system improvements.
Operation of the proposed project would have the potential to result in excessive noise levels related to
heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, commercial land use, and recreational
facilities. Mitigation measures Noi-2 through Noi-4, and Noi-6 through Noi-8 would reduce direct and
cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Future residents of Village 8 West would have the
potential to be exposed to nuisance noise from Brown Field aircraft operations. Mitigation measure
Noi-9 would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
2.0 Introduction
2.1 Purpose
The objectives of this noise study are to:
1. Describe the existing noise environment and regulatory requirements;
2. Provide an assessment of the potential noise impacts that would result from implementation of
the project related to construction, traffic, and operational noise sources.
3. Compare the changes in estimated noise levels due to the implementation of the project to
applicable guidelines contained in local and state planning documents to determine significance.
4. Provide a general discussion of the potential impacts from groundborne vibration that would
result from implementation of the proposed project.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 2
May 2013
5. Provide mitigation measures where necessary to avoid or reduce significant noise impacts to the
degree feasible in order to meet applicable noise regulations and standards.
2.2 Project Description
Figure 1, Project Vicinity, and Figure 2, Existing and Planned Land Uses in the Project Vicinity, illustrate
the project’s location and surrounding uses. Village 8 West is one of the designated fourteen villages
within the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) area. As prescribed in the Otay Ranch GDP,
Village 8 West is proposed as an Urban Village with a mixed-use Town Center, higher density uses
around the Town Center and low-medium density residential uses to the south of the Town Center.
Urban Villages are intended to be adjacent to existing urban development and planned for transit-
oriented development with higher densities and mixed uses within one quarter mile of a transit stop or
station. Figure 3, Site Utilization Plan, illustrates the land use plan for the SPA. The proposed land uses
for Village 8 West are provided in Table 1. The Village 8 West SPA Plan includes the extension of a utility
easement off-site to the south of the SPA to extend sewer facilities to connect to existing facilities, and
connect the storm drain to Otay River. A 12-foot paved trail would be included within the 30-foot
easement to provide access to the offsite utilities and a trail connection to the Otay Valley Regional Park
trail system.
Table 1 Village 8 West SPA Land Uses
Land Use
Area
(Acres)
Residential
(Units)
Office
(Square feet)
Commercial
(Square feet)
Mixed Use 40.7 899 50,000 250,000
Multi-family 29.5 530 -- --
Cluster Single-Family/Town homes 26.2 290 -- --
Single-Family 67.0 331 -- --
Schools(1) 31.6 -- -- --
Community Purpose Facility (CPF) 5.8 -- -- --
Parks 27.9 -- -- --
Open Space 39.1 -- -- --
Arterial Rights-of-Way and Basin 32.5 -- -- --
Total 300.3 2,050 50,000 250,000
(1) If the proposed school sites are ultimately not chosen to be used by the school district, the sites would be
developed with multi-family residential uses. Maximum residential development for the site would remain
the same; densities in adjacent planning areas would be reduced to accommodate the additional
residential planning area(s).
0 250500
Feet
±Source: William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. 2010
PROJECT VICINITY
FIGURE 1Not to Scale
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
Source: William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. 2010
EXISTING AND PLANNED LAND USES IN THE PROJECT VICINITY
FIGURE 2
OtayOtay
RockRock
QuarryQuarry
FutureFuture
Village 4Village 4
FutureFuture
Village 8 EastVillage 8 East
Village Village
8 West8 West
OlympianOlympian
HighHigh
SchoolSchool
Ex. Vortac Ex. Vortac
SiteSite
Village 7Village 7
Otay Ranch Otay Ranch
CommunityCommunity
ParkPark
MSCPMSCP
Preserve AreaPreserve Area
Wolf
Canyon
Wolf
Canyon
(MS
C
P )
(MS
C
P )
Village 2Village 2
(Montecito)(Montecito)
H
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
R
o
a
d
H
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
R
o
a
d La
Media
R
d.
La
Media
R
d.
San Diego San Diego
ReservoirReservoir
OtayOtay
Land FillLand Fill
H
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
R
o
a
d
H
e
r
i
t
a
g
e
R
o
a
d
MainMain
St.St.
S
R
-
1
2
5
S
R
-
1
2
5
Chu la V ista C ity Lim it
Chu la V ista C ity Lim it
Sa n D i e g o C o unty
Sa n D i e g o C o unty
Otay RiverOtay River
Village 3Village 3
Village 2Village 2
WestWest
Sa n D i ego C i t y L i m it
Sa n D i ego C i t y L i m it
Planning Area 20Planning Area 20
Pl an n ing Ar e a 20
Pl an n ing Ar e a 20
(OS)
(OS)
(OS)
(OS)
(P)
(P)
(P)
(P)
(P)(P)
(S)
(S)
(LM)
(LM)
(LM)
(LMV)
(LMV)
(MH)
(MH)
(MH)
(M)
(M)
(MU)
(MU)
(MU)
(RI)
(RI)
(RI)
(RI)
(MU)
(LMV)
(S)
(P)(EUC)
Low Medium Density Residential (LM)
Low Medium Village Density Residential (LMV)
Medium Density Residential (M)
Medium High Density Residential (MH)
Mixed Use (MU)
Open Space (OS)
Park (P)
School (S)
Research and Limited Industrial (RI)
Planned Roadway
General Development Planned Land Uses
±Not to Scale
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
Eastern Urban Center (EUC)
0 400800
Feet ±SITE UTILIZATION PLAN
FIGURE 3
*
*
*
Source: William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. 2010
Low Medium Density Residential Village (LMV)
Land Use
Town Center (TC))
Medium High Density Residential (MH)
Medium Density Residential (M)
Open Space (OS)
Open Space (Preserve)
Park (P)
School
* Lotting and grading to be determined at Tentative Map
Town Center - 18-45 du/ac
Planning
Area
Gross
Acres Transect Target
Res. Units
Target C’ml
Sq.Ft. (K)
B1.4T-4: TC35 0
C6.9T-4: TC15636
F3.0T-4: TC5425
H-17.8T-4: TC33144
H-21.3T-4: TC0 12
J5.4T-4: TC16118
L14.2T-4: TC46065
X0.7T-4: TC0 0
Subtotal40.7
Medium High Density Residential - 11-18 du/ac
Planning
Area
Gross
Acres Transect Target
Res. Units
Target C’ml
Sq.Ft. (K)
I6.8T-3:NC1220
M8.5T-3:NC1530
O8.9T-3:NC1600
Subtotal29.5 0
Medium Density Residential
Attached/Detached - 6-11 du/ac
Planning
Area
Gross
Acres Transect Target
Res. Units
Target C’ml
Sq.Ft. (K)
Q14.7T-2:NG1600
U11.5T-2:NG1300
Subtotal26.2 0
Low Medium Density Residential Village -
3-6 du/ac
Planning
Area
Gross
Acres Transect Target
Res. Units
Target C’ml
Sq.Ft. (K)
N19.6T-2:NE1170
P26.9T-2:NE1240
V20.5T-2:NE90 0
Subtotal67.0 331 0
TOTAL163.4
Commercial and Residential
Community Purpose Facility (CPF)
Planning
Area
GDP
Land Use Gross AcresTransectDescription
RMH5.8SD: CPF
As defined by
CVMC Chapter
19.48
Subtotal 5.8
Potential School (S) Sites*
Planning
Area
GDP
Land Use
Gross Acres
(Ac.)TransectDescription
DTC20.2T-4: TCMiddle
SMH11.4T-3: NCElementary
Subtotal 31.6
Parks (P)
Planning
Area
GDP
Land Use
Gross Acres
(Ac.)TransectClassi?cation
AP17.4SD: PCommunity
GTC3.0SD: PTown Square
TP7.5SD: PNeighborhood
Subtotal 27.9
Open Space (OS)
Planning
Area
GDP
Land Use
Gross Acres
(Ac.)TransectClassi?cation
YCVOSP**15.6T-1: OPPreserve (MSCP)
OS-1OS23.5T-1: OSOpen Space
Subtotal 39.1
Other
Planning
Area
GDP
Land Use
Gross Acres
(Ac.)TransectDescription
WTC2.4SD: RBasin
Right-of-
Way NA30.1NAArterials
Subtotal 32.5
TOTAL 136.9
Public, Quasi Public, and Other
SPA Total Area: 300.3 Gross Acres
* School sites will revert to the underlying use if sites are not accepted by the school district.
Parcel D shall revert to Town Center and Parcel S shall revert to Medium High Density Residential.
** Chula Vista Open Space Preserve.
899300
E5.3T-3:NC 95 0
530
290
3002,050
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 6
May 2013
This page intentionally left blank.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 7
May 2013
The Village 8 West circulation system would provide a system of roadway and trail corridors to support
both vehicular and non-vehicular modes of transportation. This system includes the extension of existing
and planned roads, trails, and transit from adjacent villages as well as internal systems to serve the SPA.
Community streets are designed as “complete” streets, considering all modes of transportation by
providing vehicular travel lanes, bike lanes or bike routes, sidewalks, and transit lanes where
appropriate. The Village 8 West circulation system would organize traffic into a hierarchy of roadways,
arranged according to anticipated volumes and modes of travel. This organization is consistent with the
roadway classifications established by the Otay Ranch GDP. The proposed roadway circulation system is
shown on Figure 4.
Main Street would provide the main east-west connection through Village 8 West and is planned to be
extended east to provide a connection to Village 8 East and a future Main Street interchange at State
Route 125(SR-125). La Media Road would be extended from its existing terminus just north of the site
and become Otay Valley Road south of the proposed couplet in the Town Center.
Otay Valley Road would extend south and then curve to the east, providing a future connection to
Village 8 East. Otay Valley Road is planned to extend further to a future Otay Valley Road interchange at
SR-125. Central to the circulation concept for Village 8 West is the use of urban couplets on Otay Valley
Road and Main Street, through the heart of the Town Center. An urban couplet or Town Center Arterial
is an arterial roadway that splits into two one-way roadways through the urban core.
Secondary access through the village would be provided via a residential collector, Street A. The
residential collector would provide an alternate route through the village, connecting residential
neighborhoods to the Town Center. Street B would provide an additional connection to Village 8 East.
The remaining roadways in Village 8 West would be Parkway Residential Streets and private streets.
Parkway Residential Streets would provide direct access to single family homes in the southern and
western portions of the SPA. Additional private streets and lanes would be provided as part of the site
plan for single family cluster, multi-family, and mixed use neighborhoods.
The traffic impact analysis (TIA) prepared for Village 8 West (RBF 2013) analyzes the potential traffic
impacts of the proposed project under five scenarios:
■ Existing Plus Project includes project-generated trips associated with buildout of Village 8 West.
The project-generated trips were added to the existing roadway network.
■ Year 2015 includes project-generated trips associated with the construction of 105 single family
and 246 multi-family residential dwelling units in Village 8 West.
■ Year 2020 includes development assumed in 2015, plus project-generated trips associated with
the construction of 354 single family and 824 multi-family residential dwelling units, 50,000
square feet of office use, 40,000 square feet of commercial retail, and 5.5 acres of park within
Village 8 West.
■ Year 2025 includes development assumed in 2020 plus project-generated trips associated with
the construction of 162 single family dwelling units, 359 multi family dwelling units, an
elementary school, 150,000 square feet of commercial retail, and 13.1 acres of park space.
■ Year 2030 includes development assumed in 2025 plus a middle school, 60,000 square feet of
commercial retail, and 9.4 acres of park space.
0 400800
Feet ±Source: William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. 2010
ROADWAY CIRCULATION SYSTEM
FIGURE 4
Town Center Arterial
6-Lane Prime
4-Lane Major
Residential Collector
Parkway Residential*
Transition -6 Lane Prime to
4 Lane Town Center Arterial
Transition - 4 Lane Major to
4 Lane Town Center Arterial
GDP Roadway Designations
*Note: Alignment of parkway
residential streets to be
finalized by Tentative Map(s)
0 400800
Feet
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
2.0 INTRODUCTION
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 9
May 2013
Each traffic scenario includes assumptions for road improvements to be constructed by the applicant to
provide access and frontage to the development in Village 8 West assumed in each scenario. In
addition, the traffic study identifies mitigation measures to address potential long-term impacts to the
circulation system as a result of the project and cumulative development under each scenario. The
traffic scenario that considers full buildout of the Village 8 West SPA and cumulative development
through the Year 2030 with implementation of the mitigation measures is referred to as the Year 2030
Mitigated scenario. As described in the traffic study prepared for Village 8 West (RBF 2013), the 2030
buildout traffic scenario includes future roads that are proposed as part of the development plans for
other villages. According to the traffic report, if the equivalent dwelling unit assumption for the buildout
study year (2030) is reached prior to implementation of these roadways being open to traffic, then one
of the following steps shall be taken as determined by, and to the satisfaction of, the City Engineer to
mitigate potential traffic impacts:
1. Development in Village 8 West will stop until those assumed future roadways are constructed by
others; or
2. City and Otay Land Company shall meet to determine the need for the incomplete roadway
segments. A number of factors, including changes to the tolling structure at SR-125, may affect
the traffic patterns in the Otay Ranch. Additional traffic analysis of the roadway network and
levels of service assessment may be necessary to determine if such improvements are necessary
and the scope and timing of additional circulation improvements; or
3. Developer shall construct the missing roadway links and receive Transportation Development
Impact Fee (TDIF) credit for those improvements as applicable; or
4. An alternative measure is selected by the city in accordance with the Chula Vista Growth
Management Ordinance.
The measures listed above have been established in the traffic study to ensure that this circulation
system would be implemented concurrently with Village 8 West. This plan is required as mitigation in
the traffic study for the project’s potential traffic impacts and will be included in the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the proposed project.
The project area ranges in elevation from approximately 600 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) in the
east to 400 feet AMSL in the west. The project site is located less than 0.5 mile west of SR-125 and is
surrounded on three sides by undeveloped land. Rock Mountain is located to the west of the site, and
bluffs along the Otay River Valley are located to the south. The future location for Village 8 East
(currently undeveloped) is located to the east of the site; Otay Valley Regional Park and the Otay River
Valley form the southerly boundary; the Otay Valley Quarry and future Village 4 (currently undeveloped)
form the westerly boundary; and the partially developed Village 7, including Olympian High school, is
located adjacent to the northeast corner of the project area. An existing City of San Diego Reservoir
facility is located in approximately the center of the site. The facility is not part of the proposed project.
This noise technical report is being prepared in support of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) being
prepared for the Village 8 West SPA project. The EIR for Village 8 West is a Second Tier EIR. Pursuant to
CEQA Section 21093, the Village 8 West EIR tiers from the Supplemental EIR (SEIR 09-01) to the General
Plan Update EIR (EIR 05-01; SCH #2004081066). The SEIR addresses the General Plan/General
Development Plan Amendments (GPA/GDPA) that redefine boundaries for Villages 4, 7, and 8 to provide
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 10
May 2013
a clear definition of the proposed SPA. A program-level noise technical report has been prepared for the
GPA/GDPA (City of Chula Vista 2013). This technical report tiers from the analysis in the GPA/GDPA
noise technical report and provides more project-specific analysis. The analysis and conclusions of the
GPA/GDPA noise technical report are incorporated into the impact analysis sections for the proposed
project where appropriate. The noise technical report for the GPA/GDPA SEIR concluded that
implementation of the GPA/GDPA, including Village 8 West, would result in direct and cumulative
impacts related to increases in traffic noise. The report also concluded that implementation of the
GPA/GDPA would not result in exposure of noise-sensitive land uses to excessive noise from the Brown
Field airport and that operational noise sources would be less than significant with conformance to
General Plan and GDP Policies, and the City’s noise ordinance.
3.0 Environmental Setting
3.1 Noise Basics
3.1.1 Quantification of Noise
Noise is commonly defined as unwanted sound. Sound pressure magnitude is measured and quantified
using a logarithmic ratio of pressures, the scale of which gives the level of sound in decibels (dB). Sound
pressures in the environment have a wide range of values and the sound pressure level was developed
as a convenience in describing this range as a logarithm of the sound pressure. The sound pressure level
is the logarithm of the ratio of the unknown sound pressure to a reference quantity of the same kind.
To account for the pitch of sounds and the corresponding sensitivity of human hearing to them, the raw
sound pressure level is adjusted with an A-weighting scheme based on frequency that is stated in units
of decibels (dBA). Typical A-weighted noise levels are listed in Table 2.
A given level of noise may be more or less tolerable depending on the sound level, duration of exposure,
character of the noise sources, the time of day during which the noise is experienced, and the activity
affected by the noise. For example, noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that
which occurs during the day because sleep may be disturbed. Additionally, rest at night is a critical
requirement in the recovery from exposure to high noise levels during the day. In consideration of
these factors, different measures of noise exposure have been developed to quantify the extent of the
effects anticipated from these activities. For example, some indices consider the 24-hour noise
environment of a location by using a weighted average to estimate its habitability on a long term basis.
Other measures consider portions of the day and evaluate the nearby activities affected by it as well as
the noise sources. The most commonly used indices for measuring community noise levels are the
Equivalent Energy Level (Leq), and the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL).
Leq, the Equivalent Energy Level, is the average acoustical or sound energy content of noise,
measured during a prescribed period, such as 1 minute, 15 minutes, 1 hour, or 8 hours. It is the
decibel sound level that contains an equal amount of energy as a fluctuating sound level over a
given period of time.
CNEL, Community Noise Equivalent Level, is the average equivalent A-weighted sound level over a
24-hour period. This measurement applies weights to noise levels during evening and nighttime
hours to compensate for the increased disturbance response of people at those times. CNEL is the
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 11
May 2013
equivalent sound level for a 24-hour period with a +5 dBA weighting applied to all sound occurring
between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. and a +10 dBA weighting applied to all sound occurring between
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Similar to the CNEL, Ldn, the day-night average noise level, is a 24-hour
average Leq with a +10 dBA weighting applied to noise during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.
Ldn and CNEL are typically within one dBA of each other and, for most intents and purposes, are
interchangeable.
Table 2 Typical A-Weighted Noise Levels
Common Outdoor Activities
Noise Level
(dBA) Common Indoor Activities
— 110 — Rock band
Jet fly-over at 1000 feet
— 100 —
Gas lawn mower at 3 feet
— 90 —
Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph Food blender at 3 feet
— 80 — Garbage disposal at 3 feet
Noisy urban area, daytime
Gas lawn mower, 100 feet — 70 — Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet
Commercial area Normal speech at 3 feet
Heavy traffic at 300 feet — 60 —
Large business office
Quiet urban daytime — 50 — Dishwasher next room
Quiet urban nighttime — 40 — Theater, large conference room (background)
Quiet suburban nighttime
— 30 — Library
Quiet rural nighttime Bedroom at night
— 20 —
Broadcast/recording studio
— 10 —
Lowest threshold of human hearing — 0 — Lowest threshold of human hearing
Source: Caltrans 1998.
The decibel level of a sound decreases (or attenuates) exponentially as the distance from the source of
that sound increases. For a single point source such as a piece of mechanical equipment, the sound
level normally decreases by about 6 dBA for each doubling of distance from the source. Sound that
originates from a linear, or “line” source such as a heavily traveled traffic corridor, attenuates by
approximately 3 dBA per doubling of distance, provided that the surrounding site conditions lack ground
effects or obstacles that either scatter or reflect noise. Noise from roadways in environments with major
ground effects due to vegetation and loose soils may either absorb or scatter the sound yielding
attenuation rates as high as 4.5 dBA for each doubling of distance. Other contributing factors that affect
sound reception include meteorological conditions and the presence of manmade obstacles such as
buildings and sound barriers.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 12
May 2013
3.1.2 Noise Effects
Noise has a significant effect on the quality of life. An individual’s reaction to a particular noise depends
on many factors such as the source of the noise, its loudness relative to the background noise level, and
the time of day. The reaction to noise can also be highly subjective; the perceived effect of a particular
noise can vary widely among individuals in a community. Because of the nature of the human ear, a
sound must be about 10 dBA greater than the reference sound to be judged as twice as loud. In general,
a 5 dBA change in community noise levels is clearly noticeable, and a 3 dBA change is the smallest
increment that is perceivable by most receivers. Generally, 1 to 2 dBA changes generally are not
detectable. Although the reaction to noise may vary, it is clear that noise is a significant component of
the environment, and excessively noisy conditions can affect an individual’s health and well-being. The
effects of noise are often only transitory, but adverse effects can be cumulative with prolonged or
repeated exposure. The effects of noise on a community can be organized into six broad categories:
sleep disturbance; permanent hearing loss; human performance and behavior; social interaction of
communication; extra-auditory health effects; and general annoyance.
3.2 Environmental Vibration Basics
Vibration is defined as any oscillatory motion induced in a structure or mechanical device as a direct
result of some type of input excitation. Vibration consists of waves transmitted through solid material.
There are several types of wave motion in solids, unlike in air, including compressional, shear, torsional,
and bending. The solid medium can be excited by forces, moments, or pressure fields. This leads to the
terminology of “structure-borne/ground-borne” vibration.
Vibration energy spreads out as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration amplitude to
decrease with distance away from the source. Soil properties also affect the propagation of vibration.
When groundborne vibration interacts with a building there is usually a ground-to-foundation coupling
loss, but the vibration can also be amplified by the structural resonances of the walls and floors.
Vibration in buildings is typically perceived as rattling of windows or items on shelves or the motion of
building surfaces. The vibration of building surfaces can also be radiated as sound and heard as a low-
frequency rumbling noise, known as groundborne noise.
Ambient and source vibration information for this study are expressed in terms of the peak particle
velocity (PPV) in inches per second (in/sec) that correlates best with human perception. The particle
velocity is the velocity of the soil particles resulting from a disturbance. Agencies such as California
Department of Transportation (Caltrans) use the PPV descriptor because it correlates well with damage
or complaints. Caltrans estimates that the threshold of perception is approximately 0.006 in/sec PPV
and the level at which continuous vibrations begins to annoy people is approximately 0.010 in/sec PPV.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 13
May 2013
3.3 Regulatory Framework
3.3.1 Federal
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Standards
Enforced by the Federal Aviation Administration, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 14, Part 150
prescribes the procedures, standards and methodology governing the development, submission, and
review of airport noise exposure maps and airport noise compatibility programs, including the process
for evaluating and approving or disapproving those programs. Title 14 also identifies those land uses
which are normally compatible with various levels of exposure to noise by individuals. The FAA has
determined that interior sound levels up to 45 dBA Ldn (or CNEL) are acceptable within residential
buildings. The FAA also considers residential land uses to be compatible with exterior noise levels at or
less than 65 dBA Ldn (or CNEL).
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Standards
CFR Title 23, Part 772 sets procedures for the abatement of highway traffic noise and construction noise.
Title 23 is implemented by the Department of Transportation FHWA. The purpose of this regulation is to
provide procedures for noise studies and noise abatement measures to help protect the public health
and welfare, to supply noise abatement criteria, and to establish requirements for information to be
given to local officials for use in the planning and design of highways. All highway projects which are
developed in conformance with this regulation shall be deemed to be in conformance with the
Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Highway Administration Noise Standards. Title 23
establishes 67 dBA as the worst-case hourly average noise level standard for impacts of federal highway
projects to land uses including residences, recreational uses, hotels, hospitals, and libraries [23 CFR
Chapter 1, Part 772, Section 772.19].
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Standards and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Standards
Although the FTA standards are intended for federally funded mass transit projects, the impact
assessment procedures and criteria included in the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment
Manual (May 2006) are routinely used for projects proposed by local jurisdictions. The FTA and FRA
have published guidelines for assessing the impacts of groundborne vibration associated with rail
projects, which have been applied by other jurisdictions to other types of projects. The FTA measure of
the threshold of architectural damage for conventional sensitive structures from groundborne vibration
is 0.2 inches/second PPV.
3.3.2 State
California Noise Control Act of 1973
Sections 46000 through 46080 of the California Health and Safety Code, known as the California Noise
Control Act of 1973, finds that excessive noise is a serious hazard to the public health and welfare and
that exposure to certain levels of noise can result in physiological, psychological, and economic damage.
It also finds that there is a continuous and increasing bombardment of noise in the urban, suburban, and
rural areas. The California Noise Control Act declares that the State of California has a responsibility to
protect the health and welfare of its citizens by the control, prevention, and abatement of noise. It is
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 14
May 2013
the policy of the state to provide an environment for all Californians free from noise that jeopardizes
their health or welfare.
California Noise Insulation Standards (CCR Title 24)
In 1974, the California Commission on Housing and Community Development adopted noise insulation
standards for hotels, motels, dormitories, and multi-family residential buildings (CCR Title 24, Part 2).
Title 24 establishes standards for interior room noise (attributable to outside noise sources). The
regulations also specify that acoustical studies must be prepared whenever a multi-family residential
building or structure may be exposed to exterior noise levels of 60 dBA CNEL (or Ldn) or greater. Such
acoustical analysis must demonstrate that the residence has been designed to limit intruding noise to an
interior CNEL (or Ldn) of a maximum noise level of 45 dBA [California's Title 24 Noise Standards, Chap. 2-
35].
2010 California Green Building Standards Code
Section 5.507 of the California Green Building Standards Code (CalGreen) establishes requirements for
acoustical control in non-residential buildings. The standards require that wall and roof-ceiling
assemblies making up the building envelope shall have a sound transmission class value of at least 50,
and exterior windows shall have a minimum sound transmission class of 30 for any of the following
building locations: 1) within 1,000 feet (300 meters) of right of ways of freeways, 2) within 5 miles (8
kilometers) of airports serving more than 10,000 commercial jets per year, and 3) where sound levels at
the property line regularly exceed 65 dBA, other than occasional sound due to church bells, train horns,
emergency vehicles and public warning systems. Wall and floor-ceiling assemblies separating tenant
spaces and tenant spaces and public places shall have a sound transmission class of at least 40.
Additionally, Section A5.507.5 requires that classrooms have a maximum interior background noise level
of no more than 45 dBA Leq.
3.3.3 Local
City of Chula Vista General Plan
The Environmental Element of the Chula Vista General Plan contains goals and policies related to
environmental noise in Section 3.5, Noise. The General Plan defines noise sensitive land uses (NSLU) as
residences, schools, hospitals, libraries, parks, and places of worship. To establish the compatibility of
various land uses with exterior noise levels, the City uses CNEL in its planning guidelines. Table 3
illustrates Chula Vista's exterior land use-noise compatibility guidelines. Shading in this table represents
the maximum noise level considered compatible for each land use category. These guidelines reflect the
levels of noise exposure that are generally considered to be compatible with various types of land uses.
The City of Chula Vista states that these guidelines are to be used at the land use planning stage, for
noise impact assessments, and to determine mitigation requirements for development proposals.
As stated in the General Plan, the noise control ordinance of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, discussed
below, establishes noise level limits for individual generators. The noise control ordinance limits in the
Municipal Code are used in noise impact assessments to determine mitigation requirements for
individual noise generators, such as industrial equipment, to ensure that they will not adversely impact
surrounding land uses. Conversely, the guidelines listed in Table 3 reflect the total noise exposure that is
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 15
May 2013
compatible with a particular land use, including vehicular traffic that contribute to permanent ambient
noise levels that are not regulated by the noise control ordinance.
Table 3 Exterior Land Use/Noise Compatibility Guidelines
Land Use
Annual CNEL in decibels
50 55 60 65 70 75
Residential
Schools, Libraries, Daycare Facilities, Convalescent Homes, Outdoor
Use Areas, and Other Similar Uses Considered Noise Sensitive
Neighborhood Parks, Playgrounds
Community Parks, Athletic Fields
Offices and Professional
Places of Worship (excluding outdoor use areas)
Golf Courses
Retail and Wholesale Commercial, Restaurants, Movie Theaters
Industrial, Manufacturing
Note: Shading represents the maximum noise level considered compatible for each land use category
Source: City of Chula Vista 2005
City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program Subarea Plan
The Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan regulates impacts to sensitive
biological resources, including noise impacts. In accordance with Section 7.5.2 of the Chula Vista
Subarea Plan, Adjacency Management Issues, uses in or adjacent to the Preserve should be designed to
minimize noise impacts. Berms or walls should be constructed adjacent to commercial areas and any
other use that may introduce noises that could impact or interfere with wildlife utilization of the
Preserve. Excessively noisy areas or activities adjacent to breeding areas, including temporary grading
activities, must incorporate noise reduction measures or be curtailed during the breeding season of
sensitive bird species, consistent with Table 3-5 of the MSCP Subregional Plan, included as Appendix A to
the MSCP Subarea Plan. In general, the noise threshold for sensitive biological resources is an hourly
average noise level of 60 dBA and no clearing, grubbing, and/or grading is permitted within the MSCP
Preserve during the breeding season of the sensitive species present.
City of Chula Vista Municipal Code
CVMC Chapter 19.68, Performance Standards and Noise Control (Noise Ordinance), establishes noise
criteria for Chula Vista. Section 19.68.030 defines exterior noise standards for various land uses. The
noise standards are not to be exceeded at the portion of a property used for a particular land use. For
nuisance noise, the noise standards cannot be exceeded at any time. Examples of nuisance noise
provided in the noise ordinance include pets in residential neighborhoods, private parties of limited
duration, sound amplifiers and musical instruments, and any activities in commercial areas other than
permitted uses. For environmental noise, the Leq in any one hour cannot exceed the noise standards.
These standards are shown in Table 4. The noise standards in Table 4 do not apply to construction
activities.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 16
May 2013
Table 4 Exterior Noise Limits
Receiving Land Use Category
Noise Level (dBA)(1,2,3)
10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (Weekdays) 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (Weekdays)
10:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. (Weekends) 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (Weekends)
All residential (except multiple dwelling) 45 55
Multiple dwelling residential 50 60
Commercial 60 65
Light industry – I-R and I-L zone 70 70
Heavy Industry – I zone 80 80
(1) Environmental Noise – Leq in any hour, Nuisance Noise – not be exceeded any time
(2) According to Section 19.68.030(B)(2), if the alleged offensive noise contains a steady, audible sound such as a whine,
screech or hum, or contains a repetitive impulsive noise such as hammering or riveting, the standard limits shall be
reduced by 5 dB.
(3) If the measured ambient level, measured when the alleged noise violation source is not operating, exceeds the standard
noise limit, the allowable noise exposure standard shall be the ambient noise level.
Source: City of Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.68.030
CVMC Section 19.68.050 regulates vibration from construction and operational sources. It prohibits
operating or permitting the operation of any device that creates a vibration that is above the vibration
perception threshold of any individual at or beyond the property boundary of the source if on private
property or at 150 feet from the source if on a public space or public right-of-way.
Construction noise is regulated by Section 17.24.040 of the Municipal Code. The ordinance prohibits
construction and building work in residential zones that would cause noises disturbing to the peace,
comfort, and quiet enjoyment of property of any person residing or working in the vicinity between the
hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and
8:00 a.m., Saturday and Sunday.
3.4 Existing Noise Environment
Existing noise sources, including transportation, operation, and construction that affect the project site
are described below.
3.4.1 Existing Noise Levels
An ambient sound level survey was conducted on March 18, 2011, to quantify the noise environment in
Village 8 West and surrounding vicinity. A total of four measurements were taken across the project site
and one was taken in the existing residential neighborhood north of the project site in Village 7. The
measurements were taken during the daytime (9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.) and were 15 minutes in duration.
A Larson Davis 820 ANSI (American National Standards Institute) Type I Integrating Sound Level Meter
calibrated with a Larson Davis CAL200 calibrator was used to record ambient sound levels. Weather
conditions during the measurements were calm with a mild temperature and partly-cloudy to clear
skies. Table 5 summarizes the measured Leq and noise sources for each monitoring location, and the on-
site monitoring locations are shown on Figure 5.
±
Source: Hale Engineering 2010
NOISE MEASUREMENT LOCATIONS
FIGURE 5
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
One additional noise
measurement was taken
off site at the southeast corner
of Fleishbein Street and
Kincaid Avenue.
Measured noise level was
57 dBA.
One additional noise
measurement was taken
off site at the southeast corner
of Fleishbein Street and
Kincaid Avenue.
Measured noise level was
57 dBA.
#1
53 dBA
#1
53 dBA
#2
42 dBA
#2
42 dBA
#4
55 dBA
#4
55 dBA
#3
43 dBA
#3
43 dBA
Not to Scale
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 18
May 2013
Table 5 Ambient Sound Level Measurements (dBA)
Site Location Daytime Noise Sources Date/Time Leq Lmax Lmin
1 Western edge of Planning Area E in the
northwest area of Village 8 West. Proposed
site of multi-family housing in Neighborhood
Center Zone.
Birds, planes taking off from Brown Field,
distant traffic
3-18-2011 /
9:11 a.m.
53 68 41
2 Northern boundary of Planning Area L in the
middle of Village 8 West. Proposed site of
mixed-use development in the Town Center.
Distant construction noise and traffic,
birds, rustling grasses
3-18-2011 /
9:36 a.m.
42 55 37
3 Lot 56 in Planning Area B in the southeast
area of Village 8 West. Proposed site of
single-family development in the
Neighborhood Edge Zone.
Birds, distant traffic and construction,
plane and helicopters flyovers
3-18-2011 /
9:58 a.m.
43 50 36
4 Eastern end of Main Street on the northeast
edge of Village 8 West at the intersection of
Magdalena Avenue and Main Street.
Occasional traffic on Main Street and
Magdalena Avenue, loudspeaker
announcements at Olympian High School,
distant noise from children playing
3-18-2011 /
12:01 p.m.
55 71 33
5 Southeast corner of Fleishbein Street and
Kincaid Avenue in the residential
development northwest of Olympian High
School and Wolf Canyon Elementary School
in Village 7.
Traffic, sanitation pickup trucks,
construction
3-18-2011 /
12:25 p.m.
57 76 36
Source: Atkins 2013. Ambient measurements were 15 minutes in duration.
The results of the ambient noise survey reflect noise levels that range between 42 dBA and 55 dBA Leq
within the project site. This is consistent with the noise measurement taken along the northern border
of the project site for the2013 GPA/GDPA SEIR, which measured a noise level of 52 dBA Leq. The
primary noise sources included birds, planes and helicopters taking off from Brown Field, and distant
traffic and construction. Although the SR-125 is the closest major roadway to the project site, traffic
noise was primarily from the I-805, located west of the project site. The measured noise level at the
existing residential development north of the project site in Village 7 was 57 dBA Leq. Noise sources in
this development include traffic, sanitation truck noise, and construction. As described previously, noise
levels up to 65 dBA CNEL are considered compatible with residential development as specified in the
Chula Vista General Plan. Based on the Chula Vista noise compatibility guidelines, ambient noise levels
measured within the project site and adjacent area would be compatible with the land uses proposed in
the SPA Plan and TM.
3.4.2 Transportation Noise Sources
Aviation
The nearest airport to the project site is Brown Field, located approximately 1.5 miles to the southwest
of Village 8 West. This general aviation airport is located in and operated by the City of San Diego. It
accommodates propeller and jet powered aircraft and serves as a port of entry for private aircraft
entering the United States from Mexico. It is also used for military and law enforcement agencies and is
classified as a “reliever airport” by the FAA. According the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP)
for Brown Field, the airport has an 8,000 foot long runway. The predominant runway alignments are
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 19
May 2013
east-west. The types of aircraft that use the airport vary from small single-engine pistons to large
corporate jets and military aircraft, including helicopters. There were 101,117 operations at Brown Field
in 2011, and 91,025 operations in 2010. Due to distance and the orientation of the runway, the project
area is not located within 60 dBA CNEL noise contour for the airport, or within the airport’s area of
influence.
Roadways
No paved roadways currently exist on the project site. A few dirt roads are located on the project site
for occasional vehicle trips for maintenance of the City of San Diego reservoir. Vehicular traffic along
roadways in the vicinity contributes to the overall noise environment on the project site. La Media Road
currently terminates at the northerly boundary of Village 8 West, and Magdalena Avenue terminates at
the northeast corner of the Village 8 West boundary. Magdalena Avenue serves Olympian High School,
which currently generates traffic and traffic noise, particularly at the beginning and end of school days.
Major roadways in the area surrounding Village 8 West include SR-125, located approximately 0.5 mile
east of the project site, and Olympic Parkway, which is located approximately 0.75 mile north of the
project site. Table 6 shows the existing noise levels generated by the roadways surrounding the project
site. Existing noise levels were calculated using the methodology described in Section 4.1.3, Permanent
Increase in Ambient Noise. As shown in Table 6, noise levels along Olympic Parkway, Birch Road, Main
Street, Hunte Parkway, Heritage Road, La Media Road, and Eastlake Parkway currently exceed the Chula
Vista noise compatibility standard of 65 dBA CNEL for residences, schools, and other NSLU.
Railroads
Chula Vista is served by the San Diego trolley system, which is operated by the San Diego Metropolitan
Transit System. The San Diego Trolley Blue Line passes through the western part of Chula Vista, along
the east side of I-5, with stations at E Street, H Street, and Palomar Street. Freight trains also utilize the
same rail line during nighttime hours. Two primary rail haulers of freight, the Burlington Northern Santa
Fe (BNSF) and the San Diego and Imperial Valley (SDIV) railroads, link the San Diego County coastal
region (including Chula Vista) to the larger national railway system. The SDIV operates freight service
on the SANDAG-owned railway in the southwestern part of San Diego County, including Chula Vista,
where it is known as the San Diego and Arizona Eastern (SD&AE) Railway. The rail line is located in the
coastal area of Chula Vista near Interstate 5, approximately 6 miles west of the project site. Due to
distance, railway noise is not audible at the project site.
3.4.3 Operational Noise Sources
The project site is currently undeveloped. A City of San Diego Reservoir facility is located in the
approximate center of the site. The reservoir is a passive facility that does not generate operational
noise. The lands surrounding the project site on the south, west, and east are primarily undeveloped.
Village 7, to the north of the project site, is partially developed. Olympian High School and Magdalena
Avenue border the northeast corner of Village 8 West. Land uses north of the high school include an
elementary school and residences. The portion of Village 7 east of La Media Road and north of Village 8
West is designated for future low density residential development. Village 7 has been planned in
accordance with the traditional village model consisting of predominantly low-medium village
residential neighborhoods, a small mixed use village core, and limited multi-family uses adjacent to
SR-125.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 20
May 2013
Table 6 Existing Off-Site Roadway Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Existing Average Daily
Trips
Noise Level at 50 feet
from Roadway
Centerline
(dBA CNEL)
Olympic Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 47,000 75
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 48,721 75
Heritage Road to La Media Road 50,538 75
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps 43,563 75
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway 40,478 79
Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway 13,926 70
East of Hunte Parkway 7,846 66
Birch Road La Media Road to SR-125 11,084 69
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 10,250 68
Main Street I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 26,896 73
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 18,729 71
Hunte Parkway Eastlake Parkway to Olympic Parkway 1,406 60
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road 9,580 67
Heritage Road
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 12,383 69
Main Street to Entertainment Circle 10,035 65
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de
Las Vistas (City of San Diego) 9,846 65
La Media Road East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 12,658 69
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 11,037 69
Magdalena Avenue Birch Road to Main Street 9,122 64
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway 18,945 70
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 9,199 68
Birch Road to Main Street 1,310 59
Source: RBF 2013 (traffic data); FHWA 2004 (noise level estimates).
Noise levels were calculated using the methodology described in Section 4.1.3, Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise.
Olympian High School is a source of operational noise. Noise sources associated with Olympian High
School includes bells, other signaling devices, and activities on the campus such as crowd noise and
loudspeakers at football games. Bells and other signaling devices are classified as stationary non-
emergency signaling devices by the city, and schools are prohibited in the noise ordinance from
sounding these devices for more than 120 seconds continually in an hourly period or intermittent
sounding over a five-minute period in any hour. Typically, the main sources of noise from high schools
to the surrounding area are organized sports activities at the football stadium that involve amplified
speakers and crowd noise. The football field is located on the east side of the campus, approximately
0.25 mile from the project site, and is separated from the site by the campus buildings. The Noise
Technical Report for Otay Ranch Villages 2 and 3, Planning Area 1B, and a Portion of Village 4 (RECON
2005) determined that the worst-case noise level for a championship game event at the Otay Ranch
High School would be 71 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from stadium loudspeakers located approximately
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 21
May 2013
30 feet above the playing field. This type of event is considered a worst-case scenario for game noise
because championship games generally include a full stadium of spectators. Otay Ranch High School has
a maximum stadium capacity of 5,500 people. The maximum capacity of the Olympian High School
stadium is 3,071 people; therefore, this estimate is conservative for Olympian High School (SUHSD
2011). When the speakers were not in use, crowd noise was estimated to emit a noise level of
approximately 65 dBA at 60 feet from the top of the stadium stands. Based on these estimates, football
games currently generate a noise level of 43 dBA at the Village 8 West site when speakers are in use,
and 39 dBA when crowd noise is the noise source, and thus do not exceed the city noise standards.
However, large events may occasionally be audible in the northeastern area of the SPA.
Village 8 East, to the east of the site, is also planned for mixed-use and residential development in the
GDP. Future land uses planned for Village 4, to the west of the project site, include residential
development and a community park. However, these areas have not yet been developed and do not
generate operational noise. Otay Valley Regional Park and the Otay River Valley form the southerly
boundary of the project site and are proposed to remain undeveloped.
Otay Valley Rock Quarry produces rock products for construction material. Rock material is extracted on
the site and processed into several types of building material, including aggregates, fill, sand, and rip
rap. The quarry also offers an on-site recycling service for concrete and asphalt paving materials (Otay
Valley Rock, LLC 2010). The quarry is located southwest of Village 4, approximately 0.3 mile from the
project site. The project site and the quarry are separated by Rock Mountain and operation of the
quarry is generally not audible on the project site. Intermittent noise from particularly loud operations,
such as blasting, is occasionally audible on the project site. The quarry has been approved to expand
operations east to within approximately 300 feet of the Village 8 West boundary. The Otay Valley
Quarry Reclamation Plan Amendment was approved, and the accompanying EIR certified, in June 2011.
3.4.4 Noise Sensitive Land Uses
Noise sensitive land uses (NSLUs) are land uses that may be subject to stress and/or interference from
excessive noise. The Chula Vista General Plan defines NSLUs as residences, schools, hospitals, libraries,
parks, places of worship, and outdoor use areas, including outdoor dining spaces. Industrial and
commercial land uses are generally not considered sensitive to noise. There are no NSLU currently
located on the project site. The nearest NSLU to the project site is Olympian High School, located across
Magdalena Avenue from the project, approximately 150 feet east of the northeast corner of the project
site. Other NSLU in the project vicinity are the Wolf Canyon Elementary school and residences located
north of the high school. The elementary school is located approximately 875 feet (0.2 mile) northeast
of the project site, and the nearest residence is located approximately 1,500 feet (0.3 mile) northeast of
the project site. Residences are also located 1,750 feet (0.3 mile) north of the project site. The Chula
Vista MSCP Subarea Plan defines sensitive wildlife species as noise sensitive. MSCP Preserve area is
located adjacent to the southern boundary of the Village 8 West SPA, and approximately 50 feet west of
Planning Area E.
3.4.5 Vibration Sensitive Land Uses
Land uses in which groundborne vibration could potentially interfere with operations or equipment,
such as research, manufacturing, hospitals, and university research operations (FTA 2006) are
4.0 METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 22
May 2013
considered vibration-sensitive. The degree of sensitivity depends on the specific equipment that would
be affected by the groundborne vibration. Excessive levels of groundborne vibration of either a regular
or an intermittent nature can result in annoyance to residential uses. The nearest vibration sensitive
land use to the project site is the Sharp Chula Vista Medical Center, located approximately 2.25 miles to
the northwest of the project site on Medical Center Court.
4.0 Methodology and Significance Criteria
4.1 Methodology
4.1.1 Excessive Noise Levels
Impacts related to potential exposure to excessive noise levels as a result of the Village 8 West SPA Plan
are assessed based on a comparison of the land uses proposed in the Site Utilization Plan (Figure 3) to
the noise levels potentially generated by on-site land uses and existing off-site noise sources. Estimated
noise levels are based on a variety of sources, including noise technical reports for similar facilities.
Noise levels at a particular receptor from a stationary noise source are based on an attenuation rate of 6
dBA for every doubling of distance. Future on-site traffic noise levels are calculated for buildout (2030)
traffic volumes along roadway segments using the FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5 (2006).
The modeling calculations take into account the posted vehicle speed, traffic volume, the estimated
vehicle mix, and site topography. The traffic volumes are based upon data from the traffic study
prepared for the project by RBF Consulting (2013). The Unmitigated Year 2030 scenario represents the
worst-case condition for off-site roadway noise impacts. However, the Mitigated Year 2030 scenario
included in the traffic study represents the worst-case condition for traffic that traverses the project site
because of the redistribution of regional traffic that would occur as a result of the implementation of
the required traffic measures. Therefore, this scenario was used for the analysis of long-term on-site
traffic noise impacts on proposed NSLU. There are currently no major sources of traffic noise and no
noise-sensitive land uses on the project site; therefore, the Existing Plus Project traffic scenario is not
applicable for the on-site analysis relating to noise exposure of NSLU.
4.1.2 Groundborne Vibration
Groundborne vibration impacts are assessed based on screening distances determined by the FTA and
Caltrans. According to the FTA, vibration sensitive land uses within 600 feet of a railroad may be
exposed to disruptive vibration (FTA 2006). According to Caltrans, major construction activity within
200 feet and pile driving within 600 feet may be potentially disruptive to sensitive operations (Caltrans
2002).
4.1.3 Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise
The potential for implementation of the Village 8 West SPA Plan to permanently increase ambient noise
levels as a result of increased traffic noise is assessed using standard noise modeling equations adapted
from the FHWA noise prediction model. The modeling calculations take into account the posted vehicle
speed, average daily traffic volume, and the estimated vehicle mix. The noise model assumes that
roadways would experience a decrease of approximately 3 dBA for every doubling of distance from the
4.0 METHODOLOGY AND SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 23
May 2013
roadway. The analysis is based on the project-specific traffic study prepared for Village 8 West by RBF
Consulting (RBF 2013), and the Village 8 West SPA Plan.
One ambient noise measurement was taken along Olympic Parkway between Heritage Road and La
Media Road to verify and/or calibrate model results. The measured 15-minute Leq at 50 feet from the
roadway centerline was 66 dBA and was measured during a non-peak daytime hour. The 5 minute
traffic count along the segment measured 222 passenger vehicles and five medium-duty trucks, or
approximately 2,724 vehicles per hour. If the 15-minute Leq is extrapolated to 24 hours, the measured
Leq of 66 dBA would result in a CNEL of 73 dBA. The noise level calculated along this segment by the
traffic noise model based on the ADT provided in the traffic study is 75 dBA (as shown on Table 6).
Therefore, the FHWA noise prediction model is similar, but more conservative than the measured noise
level. The noise model would be expected to be more conservative than measured noise levels because
the model cannot account for ground effects, wind, and other factors and that may reduce actual noise
level. Therefore, the modeled traffic noise levels represent a conservative analysis.
4.1.4 Temporary Increase in Ambient Noise
Impacts related to temporary increases in ambient noise levels are assessed using estimates of sound
levels from typical construction equipment provided by the FHWA in the Roadway Construction Noise
Model (FHWA 2008), assuming an attenuation rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from the source.
The construction equipment list was provided by the applicant.
4.1.5 Aircraft Noise
Impacts related to aircraft noise are assessed based on the ALUCP for Brown Field (SDCRAA 2004).
4.2 Significance Criteria
Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Chula Vista, implementation of the project
would result in a significant adverse impact if it would:
■ Threshold 1: Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the
Chula Vista General Plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. This
includes exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of the interior noise
standard of 45 dBA CNEL in single and multi-family residences, or noise levels that violate the
Chula Vista Noise Ordinance (Chapter 19.68 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code);
■ Threshold 2: Expose persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground
borne noise levels, which is defined as groundborne vibration equal to or in excess of 0.2 in/sec
PPV. Construction activities within 200 feet and pile driving within 600 feet of a vibration
sensitive use would be potentially disruptive to vibration-sensitive operations (Caltrans 1996).
■ Threshold 3: Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project. A substantial permanent increase would occur
if implementation of the proposed project results in an ambient noise level that exceeds the
exterior noise limits established in the Chula Vista General Plan, including 65 dBA CNEL for
schools, recreational uses, and residences; 70 dBA CNEL for offices, community parks and
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 24
May 2013
athletic fields; and 75 dBA CNEL for commercial uses. For transportation-related noise, a
significant impact would occur if the proposed project results in a 3 dBA CNEL or greater
increase in traffic noise on a roadway segment and the resultant noise level would exceed the
General Plan exterior noise limits;
■ Threshold 4: Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing without the project. Construction activity would be
considered significant if it violates the limits established in Section 17.24.040 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code. The ordinance prohibits construction and building work between the hours of
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m., Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and
8:00 a.m., Saturday and Sunday;
■ Threshold 5: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within 2 miles of a public use airport or private airstrip, expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise;
■ Threshold 6: Be inconsistent with General Plan, GDP or other objectives and policies regarding
noise thereby resulting in a significant physical impact.
5.0 Impact Analysis and Mitigation Measures
5.1 Impact Analysis
Potential project-related noise impacts from construction activity, transportation sources, and
operational sources are discussed below.
5.1.1 Issue 1: Excessive Noise Levels
Impact Analysis
The project would have the potential to generate noise levels in excess of established standards by
developing new stationary sources of noise, by increasing human activity throughout the project site,
and by constructing roadways. NSLU both on and beyond the project site may be affected by the
proposed project. Proposed NSLU associated within the project site include schools, parks, and
residential development. Other NSLU, including libraries and places of worship, are permitted to be
developed throughout the project area. Potential noise generating land uses on site include mixed-use
commercial and resident serving commercial; public or quasi-public uses including day care, schools, or
parks; and a CPF. This section addresses the potential for on-site sensitive receptors to be exposed to
excessive noise levels from the proposed roadways. The permanent increase in noise levels that would
occur as a result of increased traffic on roadways is addressed in Section 4.2.3, Issue 3: Substantial
Permanent Increase in Noise Levels.
Operational Noise Associated with Proposed Development
The proposed project includes a range of uses that have the potential to generate noise that may affect
adjacent noise-sensitive receptors. These uses include commercial development, residential
development, and recreational facilities. The noise technical report prepared for the GPA/GDPA
determined that operational impacts would be less than significant with conformance to Chula Vista
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 25
May 2013
noise ordinance; however, the analysis was at a programmatic level and did not take into account the
specific land uses and their placement proposed in the Village 8 West SPA Plan. The following analysis
tiers from the GPA/GDPA EIR, and determines whether the proposed land uses would have the potential
to conflict with Chula Vista’s noise standards.
Commercial Development and the Community Purpose Facility
Commercial development would be located throughout the Town Center. Potential operational noise
sources associated with commercial development within the project site include HVAC equipment,
commercial truck deliveries, loading docks, and parking lots. Future uses in the CPF are unknown at this
time. Therefore, it would speculative to analyze the potential noise generated by a specific use at the
CPF location. However, it can reasonably be assumed the CPF would include a structure for community
use that would involve HVAC equipment. Therefore, the CPF is included in the discussion of commercial
HVAC equipment below.
Mechanical HVAC equipment located on the ground or on rooftops of new buildings would have the
potential to generate noise levels which average 65 dBA at a distance of 50 feet (City of Santa Ana
2010), and may run continuously during the day and night. Depending on where it is located, HVAC
equipment could have the potential to generate noise that may exceed the city hourly noise limit for
adjacent single-family residences and NSLU (such as parks) of 55 dBA during daytime hours (45 dBA at
night), the limit for adjacent multi-family residences of 60 dBA during daytime hours (50 dBA at night),
or the limit for daytime-only NSLU (such as a school) of 55 dBA. For a single point source such as a piece
of mechanical equipment, the sound level normally decreases by about 6 dBA for each doubling of
distance from the source. Therefore, it is assumed that HVAC equipment would generate noise levels
that exceed 45 dBA within 500 feet for the equipment, 50 dBA within approximately 275 feet of the
equipment, and 55 dBA within 155 feet of the equipment. Consequently, residences or other NSLU
located in or in close proximity to a mixed-use building or other building that requires an HVAC system
could result in a potentially significant impact.
Large commercial facilities that would require HVAC systems are only permitted in the Town Center.
Within the mixed-use Town Center, residential development and commercial development would be
located adjacent to or with the same building as each other. The proposed middle school is in the Town
Center would potentially be exposed to excessive noise from a commercial HVAC unit. Additionally,
multi-family and single-family residences or other NSLU located on the northern edge of Planning Area N
in the Neighborhood Edge Zone, and the eastern edge of Planning Areas E and I and western edge of
Planning Areas M and O in the Neighborhood Center Zone would be located adjacent to Town Center
development and may be exposed to HVAC noise. Single-family residences in the Planning Areas Q and
U, the elementary school in Planning Area S, and multi-family residences in Planning Area O would be
located near the CPF site. HVAC noise would have the potential to exceed the city nighttime noise
standard of 45 dBA at single family residences up to 500 feet from the source. Therefore, proposed
schools with 155 feet of a commercial HVAC unit, multi-family residences within 275 feet of a
commercial HVAC unit, and single-family residences and parks within 500 feet, could be exposed to
noise levels that exceed the city noise standards. A potentially significant noise impact would occur. If
Planning Areas D was ultimately not chosen to be a school site and instead proposed for multi-family
residential development, a potentially significant impact related to HVAC noise would still occur in this
planning area.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 26
May 2013
Olympian High School is located approximately 150 feet east of the project site, and approximately 400
feet northeast of the nearest proposed commercial land use. Schools are a daytime NSLU. As discussed
above, HVAC units have the potential to generate noise levels which average 65 dBA at a distance of 50
feet, which would attenuate to 55 dBA at approximately 155 feet from the source. Therefore, HVAC
noise would not exceed the most conservative daytime standard of 55 dBA more than 155 feet from the
source. The nearest off-site residences are located approximately 1,800 feet north of the project site on
Fleishbein Street. The project would not result in a significant noise impact to existing off-site receivers
related to on-site HVAC equipment.
In addition to HVAC systems, commercial land uses also have the potential to generate noise from truck
deliveries, such as engines idling and beeping from backing warning signals at commercial loading docks.
Truck deliveries to Village 8 West would involve deliveries of supplies to the offices and commercial
uses. State law currently prohibits heavy-duty diesel delivery trucks from idling more than five minutes.
Therefore, noise from idling would be limited to five minutes during truck deliveries. Additionally, truck
trips would be periodic throughout the Town Center and would not be concentrated in one location.
Given the intermittent and short duration of noise from truck deliveries in a given location, truck
deliveries would not be a source of excessive ambient noise. Section 3.6 of the SPA Plan, Performance
Standards, includes standards for parking and loading. This section requires loading activities to be
located and operated so that they do not disturb neighboring residences, including compliance with the
city noise ordinance standards. Therefore, impacts related to truck deliveries and loading would be less
than significant.
Noise sources from parking lots include car alarms, door slams, radios, tire squeals. These sources
typically range from about 30 to 66 dBA at a distance of 100 feet (Gordon Bricken & Associates 1996),
and are generally short-term and intermittent. Parking lots have the potential to generate noise levels
that exceed 65 dBA depending on the location of the source; however, noise sources from the parking
lot would be different from each other in kind, duration, and location, so that the overall effects would
be separate and in most cases would not affect noise-sensitive receptors at the same time. Therefore,
noise generated from parking lots would be less than significant.
Residential Development
Residences would be developed across the project site. Multi-family residential development would be
located in the northern area of the site in the Town Center and Neighborhood Center Zone. Single-
family development would be located in the southern area of the site in the Neighborhood General and
Neighborhood Edge Zones. Noise generated from residential uses is generally described as nuisance
noise. Nuisance noise is defined as intermittent or temporary neighborhood noise from sources such as
amplified music, barking dogs, and landscape maintenance equipment that may be disturbing to other
residents. Nuisance noise impacts are more likely to occur in the more densely developed areas of the
project site (such as the Town Center and Neighborhood Center Zone) where residences would be closer
together and neighbors would be more likely to hear a neighbor’s dog or music. However, single-family
development would also likely be exposed to occasional nuisance noise. CVMC Section 19.68 prohibits
nuisance noise from exceeding the noise standards at any time. Compliance with the noise ordinance
would limit exposure to excessive nuisance noise. The Chula Vista Police Department enforces the
nuisance noise provisions of the noise ordinance. Additionally, nuisance noises would be different from
each other in kind, duration, and location, so that the overall effects would be separate and in most
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 27
May 2013
cases would not affect the receptors at the same time. Therefore, nuisance noise in residential
neighborhoods would not result in significant impact.
Community Park
Visitors to the Community Park would participate in active and passive recreational activities. Visitors
and recreational activity participants are expected to generate a range of noise levels typical of
recreational activities. Community centers and parks would generate incidental recreational noise such
as cheering for sports activities or children at play. Potential Community Park amenities and facilities
include play equipment, seating areas, athletic fields, a skate park, sport courts, multi-purpose fields, a
gymnasium, a recreation complex building, and walking trails. Passive recreational activities such as
walking, reading, and dining in open turf areas and group picnic areas will typically generate lower noise
levels as compared to active sports play. Normal park operating hours would be daily from 6:30 a.m. to
10:30 p.m.; however, indoor use areas (such as the gymnasium or recreation complex building at the
Community Park) may be in use past 10:30 p.m.
The Community Park in the northwest area of Village 8 West is part of a larger proposed community
park. The remaining park area is located in Village 4. The EIR for the Otay Ranch Village 2, 3, and
Portion of 4 SPA Plan (SCH #2003091012) included an analysis of noise that would potentially be
generated by activity at the Community Park (City of Chula Vista 2006). The analysis determined that
multi-purpose fields would have the potential to generate noise levels of approximately 54 dBA at 50
feet, and a skate park facility would have the potential to generate noise levels of 70 dBA at 50 feet. The
locations of any potential Community Park uses are not known at this time. However, consistent with
the Community Park analysis in the EIR for the Otay Ranch Village 2, 3, and Portion of 4 SPA Plan, skate
park noise is considered the worst-case noise level that could be generated at 50 feet from the
Community Park. Therefore, the Community Park would have the potential to exceed the daytime one-
hour 60 dBA Leq limit if the loudest noise sources are placed within 160 feet of the multi-family Town
Center and Neighborhood Center Zones. Potentially affected would be the residences in Planning Areas
B, C, E, and F.
According to CVMC Section 2.66.270, some parks in the city stay open as late as 10:30 p.m.; therefore,
the Community Park could be subject to the stricter city nighttime one-hour noise standard of 50 dBA
between 10:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. for multi-family residential uses if noise-generating activities are
expected to operate after 10 p.m. However, it is reasonable to assume that noise levels would generally
be lower than 70 dBA at 50 feet between 10:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. because activities would be winding
down in anticipation of park closing, and few children would be generating noise levels during the late
evening as high as those occurring during peak afternoon skate park hours. Therefore, noise levels from
parks would not be expected to exceed nighttime noise standards between 10:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m.
Electronic amplification equipment would not be permanently installed at the Community Park, but
temporary systems may be used in conjunction with active sport activities such as skating, softball,
soccer, court sports, and swimming. Public events may also occur that required amplified noise.
Activities that would include amplified noise or other temporary noise generating equipment would be
required to obtain a permit from the City of Chula Vista Director of Library and Recreation. If a permit is
not obtained, CVMC Section 2.66.185 prohibits any park or recreation center user to operate a radio,
television, stereo or any similar electronic or mechanical device capable of producing or emitting sound
at a volume where the sound is audible at a distance greater than 100 feet from the point of emission.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 28
May 2013
Activities that require permitted amplified noise would be limited to normal park operation hours.
Additionally, amplified noise would not be a constant source of noise. Activities would occur on various
dates and times, and at varied locations. Permitted uses would still be subject to the city hourly exterior
noise level limits established in the municipal code. The Chula Vista Police Department enforces the
nuisance noise provisions of the city municipal code and the Development Services Department
enforces the remaining provisions of the noise ordinance. Therefore, nuisance noise and permitted
amplified noise from events at the Community Park would not result in significant impact.
Scheduled maintenance by maintenance crews would occur on a daily basis at the Community Park.
Maintenance activities would include the use of gasoline-powered mowers, trimmers, blowers, and
edgers resulting in intermittent short-term temporary noise increases. Maintenance activities are
permitted uses and would be subject to the one-hour Leq noise limits of 60 dBA in multi-family
neighborhoods. Additionally, maintenance equipment would not be operating at any one location for
more than a few minutes, and all equipment would not be operating simultaneously. Due to the limited
amount of time equipment would be operating in one location, operation of landscape equipment
would generally not exceed the hourly noise level limit at a particular receptor. Therefore, landscape
maintenance would result in a less than significant impact.
Neighborhood Park
A Neighborhood Park is proposed in the southern area of the project site and would accommodate uses
such as athletic fields, sports courts, play equipment, and picnic areas. As discussed above under
Community Park, athletic fields would potentially generate noise levels of 54 dBA at 50 feet. Therefore,
the Neighborhood Park would generally not exceed the daytime noise limit of 55 dBA more than 45 feet
from the park. However, some residences may be located at the western edge of Planning Area T within
45 feet of the park and would have the potential to be exposed to excessive noise.
As noted earlier, some parks in the city remain open until 10:30 p.m.; therefore, the Neighborhood Park
could be subject to the stricter city nighttime one-hour noise standard of 45 dBA between 10:00 p.m.
and 10:30 p.m. for single-family residential uses if noise-generating activities from sports fields are
expected to operate after 10 p.m. Similar to the Community Park, it is reasonable to assume that noise
levels would generally be lower than those occurring during peak park activity hours. Therefore, noise
levels from Neighborhood Parks would not be expected to exceed nighttime noise standards between
10:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m.
Similar to the Community Park, use of electronic amplification equipment would be subject to the City’s
permit and operation of landscaping equipment would be subject to the City’s one-hour noise limits.
Therefore, a significant impact would not occur as a result of these activities.
Town Square and Other Recreation Facilities
A Town Square would be located in the middle of the Town Center in Planning Area G. Additional parks,
trails, and playgrounds are a permitted use throughout the SPA. The proposed trails throughout the
project site and the off-site trail connection to the Otay River Valley would be used for walking and
bicycling and would generally not support activities that would generate noise levels higher than normal
conservation. The Town Square and small playgrounds would not include athletic fields or other major
active use facilities. The Town Square and playground would generate noise levels less than the
Neighborhood Park noise level of 54.3 dBA at 50 feet. The neighborhood playgrounds would generally
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 29
May 2013
not be in use after dark, and nighttime activity in the Town Square would be expected to be limited to
normal conversation levels. Therefore, these facilities would not generate noise levels that exceed the
City’s noise level limits and significant impact would not occur. Similar to the Community Park and
Neighborhood Park, use of electronic amplification equipment and maintenance activities at these
facilities would not result in a significant impact.
Schools
A middle school and elementary school are proposed along the eastern boundary of the project site. The
middle school would be located in Planning Area D in the Town Center, and the Elementary School
would be located in Planning Area S in the Neighborhood Center Zone. Schools may generate noise
from amplified noise such as bells and loudspeaker announcements. Bells or other announcement
devices are classified at stationary non-emergency signaling devices by the city. The noise ordinance
prohibits schools from sounding these devices for more than 120 seconds continually in an hourly
period, or intermittent sounding over a five-minute period in any hour. The middle and elementary
school would comply with city noise standards and would not result in significant impact related to bells
and loudspeaker announcements.
The middle school and elementary school would also include recreational facilities such as sports fields
at the middle school, and an elementary school playground. Noise from these facilities would be limited
to daytime hours. The level of activity at these facilities during recess and afterschool activities is
assumed to be similar to active use of the multi-purpose fields at the Neighborhood and Communities
Parks. Therefore, the schools would have the potential to generate noise levels up to 54.3 dBA at 50
feet, which would exceed the daytime noise level limit of 55 dBA at single-family residences up to 45
feet from the schools, and the daytime noise level limit of 60 dBA up to 25 feet from the school.
Impacts from the schools would generally be limited to residences located directly adjacent to the
school property. All residences would be separated from the elementary school by a roadway and
would not be exposed to excessive noise from the elementary school. The middle school site is adjacent
to Planning Area C; however, a proposed slope would provide approximately 25 feet of separation
between Planning Area C and the Middle School. A potentially significant impact would not occur.
Similar to the Community Park and Neighborhood Park, use of electronic amplification equipment and
maintenance activities at the schools would not result in a significant impact.
Operational Noise Associated with Infrastructure Improvements
The infrastructure improvements associated with Village 8 West include pipelines and electrical lines,
which are passive systems and would not generate operational noise. Inspection of these facilities
would not require intensive activities that would result in excessive noise levels. Occasional
maintenance (2 to 4 times per year) may be required that necessitates the use of large equipment;
however, such activities would be infrequent, temporary, and limited to the area close to the
maintenance site. Maintenance equipment would be subject to the limits on operation hours in the
Chula Vista Noise Ordinance for construction and building work in residential zones. Therefore, impacts
that occur from operation of these facilities would be less than significant.
Exposure to Traffic Noise
The primary way in which the project could result in the exposure of proposed NSLU to excessive noise
levels is on-site vehicular traffic noise, which would be the main source of noise for the project.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 30
May 2013
Acoustical calculations were made for buildout (2030) traffic volumes along roadway segments using the
FHWA Traffic Noise Model (TNM) Version 2.5 (2004). The modeling calculations take into account the
posted vehicle speed, traffic volume, the estimated vehicle mix, and site topography. The traffic
volumes are based upon data from the traffic study prepared for the project by RBF Consulting (2013).
The Mitigated Year 2030 scenario included in the traffic study represents the worst-case condition for
project-generated traffic volumes on the project site; therefore, this scenario was utilized for the
analysis of long-term on-site traffic noise impacts on proposed NSLU. This scenario assumes full
buildout of the proposed Village 8 West development and circulation network, as well as cumulative
development through Year 2030. This scenario is more conservative than the Unmitigated Year 2030
scenario because implementation of the mitigation measures in the Traffic Impact Analysis would
redistribute trips along roadways and result in more regional traffic traversing the project site, resulting
in higher on-site traffic volumes. There are currently no major sources of traffic noise and no noise-
sensitive land uses on the project site; therefore, the Existing Plus Project traffic scenario is not
applicable for the on-site analysis relating to noise exposure of NSLU. Table 7 includes the traffic
assumptions for the on-site roadways based on the project traffic study.
Noise levels were modeled for a series of receiver locations throughout the project area to determine
the future noise traffic noise levels at locations where NSLU have been proposed according to the
tentative map (TM) for Village 8 West (July 2011), as shown in Figure 6. In areas where individual lots
have not been planned yet, receptor locations were placed 50 to 75 feet from the roadway centerline.
Noise levels were modeled for ground level and upper story receptors at each location. Buildings
proposed within Village 8 West range from two stories to four stories in height. The maximum floor
height for the transect zones ranges from 26 feet (zone T2) to 51 feet (zone T4).
A floor height of 26 feet was used to provide a general estimate of upper story receivers, and a distance
of 5 feet was added to the floor height to represent receiver ear height. The modeled noise level at
each receiver location is shown in Table 8. Receivers at different heights may experience higher or
lower noise levels than those provided in Table 8. Additionally, ground-level noise contours were
calculated for the primary site roadways: La Media Road, Main Street, Otay Valley Road, Street A, Street
B, and Magdalena Avenue. These contours are shown in Figure 7, and include the effects of future
grading on the property but do not take into account any noise mitigation measures or shielding
provided by the proposed buildings. Traffic noise modeling data is provided in Appendix A.
Existing measured daytime ambient noise levels on the project site range from 42 dBA to 55 dBA Leq.
As shown in Table 8, the increase in vehicular traffic on the project site would result in ambient noise
levels as high as 72 dBA (CNEL) at 50 feet from a major roadway. However, there are no existing NSLU
on the project site. Therefore, the increase in noise levels on the project site would not result in the
exposure of any on-site existing NSLU to noise levels in excess of the Chula Vista noise compatibility
guidelines. No impact related to existing on-site NSLU would occur.
Source: Atkins 2011
NOISE RECEIVER LOCATIONS
FIGURE 6
P
V
N
DA
LI
Y
Q
S
U
T
O
J
M
OS-1
Not a Part
C
R
E
F H-1G
W
B
H-2
G
St
reet
A
Street E
Street D
Main Street EB
Main Street WB
Str
eet C
Street L
Ot
ay
Va
ll
e
y
R
o
ad
La
M
e
d
ia
R
oad
S
B
Street I
L
a
M
e
d
ia
R
o
a
d
Stre
e
t F
St
r
e
e
t K
Street B
Magd
a
l
e
na
A
venue
Stree
t U
La M
edia Road NB
La Me
d
i
a Road
Main Street EB
Stre
et K
Q
36
5
U
8
7
9
14
2
11
15
12
13
20
19
V4
2323
N1
18
17
16
10
21
22
14
N99
N96
N49
N40
V42
P55
P29 P75
N64
N105
N109
N115
N112
P102
N102
N107
N117
City of San Diego
Reservoir
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
0 750
Feet
500 1,000 1,500250 Feet
Legend
Receiver Locations
Roadways
V8W Tentative Map
Planning Areas
Transect, Zone
TC, Town Center
SD, Basin
SD, Community Purpose Facility
SD, Neighborhood Park
SD, Park
T-1, Open Space
T-1, Open Space Preserve
T-2, Neighborhood Edge
T-2, Neighborhood General
T-3, Neighborhood Center
T-4, Town Center
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 33
May 2013
Table 7 2030 Buildout On-site Roadway Traffic Volumes
Roadway Segment
Speed
(mph)(1)
ADT
Volume(2)
Vehicle Mix
Autos MDT HDT
La Media Road NB, northern project boundary to northern end of
couplet 30 10,800 95% 3% 2%
La Media Road NB, EB Main Street to WB Main Street 30 15,100 95% 3% 2%
La Media Road NB, split to EB Main Street 30 17,380 95% 3% 2%
La Media Road SB, northern project boundary to northern end of
couplet 30 12,150 95% 3% 2%
La Media Road SB, WB Main Street to EB Main Street 30 13,940 95% 3% 2%
La Media Road SB, EB Main Street to split 30 18,750 95% 3% 2%
Otay Valley Road Southern end of couplet to Street A 45 39,530 95% 3% 2%
Otay Valley Road Street A to eastern project boundary 45 35,400 95% 3% 2%
Main Street WB, eastern project boundary to Street A 30 21,400 95% 3% 2%
Main Street WB, Street A to La Media Road NB couplet 30 19,450 95% 3% 2%
Main Street WB, La Media Road NB to SB couplet 30 11,500 95% 3% 2%
Main Street WB, SB La Media Road couplet to western project
boundary 30 14,810 95% 3% 2%
Main Street EB, western project boundary to La Media Road SB 30 19,560 95% 3% 2%
Main Street EB, SB La Media Road to NB La Media Road 30 21,120 95% 3% 2%
Main Street EB, NB La Media Road to Street A 30 21,000 95% 3% 2%
Main Street EB, Street A to eastern project boundary 30 24,450 95% 3% 2%
Street A WB Main Street to EB Main Street 30 3,650 97% 2% 1%
Street A EB Main Street to Street B 30 8,300 97% 2% 1%
Street A Street B to Otay Valley Road 25 13,750 97% 2% 1%
Street B Street A to eastern project boundary 25 7,900 97% 2% 1%
Magdalena Ave Santa Luna Street to Main Street 25 11,100 95% 3% 2%
La Media Road NB, Birch Road to northern project boundary 45 18,000 95% 3% 2%
Street A South of Otay Valley Road 25 8500 97% 2% 1%
(1) On-site roadway speed is the posted speed limit proposed for the roadway provided in the SPA Plan.
(2) ADT volumes are based on the peak hour intersection volumes provided in the TIA in Exhibits 39 and 41 (RBF 2013). ADT is
assumed to be ten times the peak hour volume.
MDT = medium duty trucks; HDT = heavy duty trucks
Note: Traffic volumes assume the future construction of the road improvements required in the implementation program
described in the project traffic study. This condition is referred to as the Year 2030 Mitigated scenario in the project traffic study.
Source: RBF 2013.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 34
May 2013
Table 8 On-site 2030 Buildout Noise Levels
Receiver
Location(1)
Planning
Area Receiver Type
Acceptable
Noise
Level(2)
Ground Level
Traffic Noise
Level (dBA
CNEL)
Upper Story
Traffic Noise
Level (dBA
CNEL)
Significant
Impact?
Lot N1 N Single-Family Residence 65 59 59 No
Lot P29 P Single-Family Residence 65 56 56 No
Lot N40 N Single-Family Residence 65 59 59 No
Lot N49 N Single-Family Residence 65 59 59 No
Lot N64 N Single-Family Residence 65 57 57 No
Lot N96 N Single-Family Residence 65 59 59 No
Lot N99 N Single-Family Residence 65 61 61 No
Lot N102 N Single-Family Residence 65 62 62 No
Lot N105 N Single-Family Residence 65 65 65 No
Lot N107 N Single-Family Residence 65 65 65 No
Lot N109 N Single-Family Residence 65 66 66 Yes
Lot N112 N Single-Family Residence 65 66 66 Yes
Lot N115 N Single-Family Residence 65 67 67 Yes
Lot N117 N Single-Family Residence 65 67 67 Yes
Lot P55 P Single-Family Residence 65 56 56 No
Lot P75 P Single-Family Residence 65 58 58 No
Lot P102 P Single-Family Residence 65 58 58 No
Lot V4 V Single-Family Residence 65 58 58 No
Lot V42 V Single-Family Residence 65 59 59 No
#1 C Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 64 64 No
#2 H-1 Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 66 65 Yes
#3 L Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 67 67 Yes
#4 A Multi-Family Residences, Commercial,
Community Park 65 64 64 No
#5 F Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 66 65 Yes
#6 J Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 68 67 Yes
#7 R CPF 65 72 72 Yes
#8 S Elementary School 65 72 71 Yes
#9 D Middle School 65 67 67 Yes
#10 C/D Multi-Family Residences, Commercial, Middle
School 65 66 66 Yes
#11 B Multi-Family Residences 65 66 66 Yes
#12 E Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 64 64 No
#13 I Multi-Family Residences 65 67 66 Yes
#14 G Town Square 65 68 68 Yes
#15 L Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 66 67 Yes
#16 M Multi-Family Residences 65 68 68 Yes
#17 H-2 Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 66 66 Yes
#18 L Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 64 64 No
#19 S Elementary School and CPF 65 66 66 Yes
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 35
May 2013
Table 8 continued
Receiver
Location(1)
Planning
Area Receiver Type
Acceptable
Noise
Level(2)
Ground Level
Traffic Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Upper Story
Traffic Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Significant
Impact?
#20 S Multi-Family Residences and Elementary
School 65 63 62 No
#21 D Middle School 65 63 62 No
#22 C Multi-Family Residences, Commercial 65 68 67 Yes
#23 Q Single-Family Residences 65 63 64 No
#Q Q Single-Family Residences 65 70 70 Yes
#U U Single-Family Residences 65 70 70 Yes
(1) Receivers #1 through 23 are located 50 feet from the roadway centerline. Receptors at Planning Areas Q and U are located
75 feet from the roadway centerline. Lot noise levels are calculated at the lot location and vary in distance from the
roadway centerline. See Figure 6 for receptor locations. Upper story receivers are assumed to be located at a floor height
of 26 feet.
(2) 65 dBA CNEL is the most conservative noise level that is acceptable for the land uses associated with the receiver location.
Some land uses have an acceptable noise level higher than 65 dBA CNEL, including commercial land use.
Note: Significant impacts are shown in bold and shading.
Source: FHWA 2004. See appendix for noise model outputs.
As shown in Table 8 and on Figure 7, the ground level and upper story receivers in single-family
residential lots in Planning Area N closest to Otay Valley Road, just south of the couplet, would
potentially be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dBA CNEL, which is the city exterior noise level
limit for residences. Additionally, as shown in Table 8 and the noise contours in Figure 7, ground floor
and upper story multi-family residences and outdoor use areas in Planning Areas B, C, H-1, H-2, J, and L;
ground level multi-family residences and outdoor use areas in Planning Area F; the Town Square
(Planning Area G), and the middle school (Planning Area D) in the Town Center would potentially be
exposed to noise levels in excess of the city noise compatibility guidelines from north and southbound
La Media Road and east and westbound Main Street. If Planning Area D is ultimately not chosen to be
used as a school site and instead developed with multi-family residential uses, the residential
development would potentially be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dBA CNEL and impacts would
also be significant. Ground level and upper story multi-family residences and outdoor use areas in
Planning Areas I and M would potentially be exposed to excessive noise levels from eastbound Main
Street.
The elementary school (Planning Area S) and CPF (Planning Area R) would potentially be exposed to
excessive noise levels from Otay Valley Road and Street A, north of Otay Valley Road. If Planning Area S
is ultimately not chosen to be used as a school site and instead developed with multi-family residential
uses, the residential development would potentially be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dBA CNEL
and impacts would also be significant. The Neighborhood Park (Planning Area T), which is subject to a
65 dBA CNEL standard, would potentially be exposed to excessive noise levels from Otay Valley Road.
Single-family residences and outdoor use areas in Planning Areas Q and U along Otay Valley Road would
potentially be exposed to excessive noise levels. Finally, some office uses would be potentially located
in the Town Center, which are compatible with noise levels up to 70 dBA CNEL. As shown in Figure 7,
traffic noise would not exceed 70 dBA CNEL outside of the roadway right-of-way in the Town Center,
except for along La Media Road at the southern end of the couplet. If offices are located in this area,
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 36
May 2013
they may be exposed to noise levels in excess of 70 dBA CNEL. Therefore, potentially significant impacts
to residences, parks, schools, and offices would potentially occur as a result of traffic noise that exceeds
the city noise compatibility guidelines. As shown in Figure 7, noise levels would not exceed 70 dBA CNEL
at the Community Park. Therefore, a potentially significant impact to the Community Park as a result of
traffic noise would not occur.
Multi-family residences throughout the Town Center and Neighborhood Center Zone would potentially
be exposed to exterior noise levels of 65 dBA CNEL or greater from traffic noise, which would exceed the
city noise compatibility guidelines, and would also trigger the Title 24 requirement for the preparation of
acoustical studies for all multi-family residences potentially exposed to noise levels greater than 60 dBA
CNEL. Outdoor usable areas, such as outdoor dining patios, in the Town Center would also potentially
be exposed to noise levels in excess of 65 dBA CNEL from traffic noise. Additionally, as shown in Table 8
and Figure 7, single-family residences along Otay Valley Road would potentially be exposed to exterior
noise levels in excess of 60 dBA CNEL. Interior noise levels would have the potential to exceed 45 dBA
CNEL in multi-family residences in the Town Center and Neighborhood Center Zone and single-family
residences along Otay Valley Road; therefore, a potentially significant impact related to interior noise
levels would also occur.
Also seen in Figure 7, Street B and Magdalena Avenue would not generate noise levels of 65 CNEL or
greater. The noise contours in Figure 7 show that traffic noise in all of the commercial areas in the Town
Center are projected to be below the 75 dBA CNEL standard for commercial uses that do not include
outdoor usable areas, and that noise levels for the Community Park would not exceed 70 dBA CNEL.
Therefore, impacts to commercial uses and the Community Park as a result of traffic noise would be less
than significant. As discussed in the previous paragraph, commercial or retail uses that include outdoor
useable space such as an outdoor dining area are compatible with noise levels up to 65 dBA CNEL and
would have the potential to be exposed to traffic noise in excess of this standard.
MSCP Preserve Area
Following construction, the southernmost residences in Village 8 West would be located adjacent to
MSCP Preserve area, and the off-site trail would traverse the Preserve. However, residences and trails
are not sources of substantial noise. Occasional maintenance activities would be required along the trail
and edge of development, such as vegetation and sediment removal; however, these activities would
not require heavy construction equipment that would generate excessive noise. Occasional vehicle trips
would not result in a substantial increase in noise levels. As described in the Preserve Edge Plan in the
SPA Plan, a manual weeding program would be prepared for the Preserve edge. Occasional maintenance
of the off-site utilities may require heavy equipment; however, such activities would be infrequent and
temporary. The Chula Vista MSCP Plan states that infrastructure repairs and maintenance are allowable
as needed in the MSCP Preserve. Maintenance would be subject to the MSCP requirement that, to the
extent practicable, access for non-emergency routine maintenance will be limited during bird breeding
seasons (April 1 through June 31) in areas where breeding and/or nesting activity may occur. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
Another MSCP preserve area (Wolf Canyon) is located approximately 50 feet west of the corner of
Planning Area A and E. Planning Area E is planned for residential development and would not be a
source of substantial noise. Planning Area A would be developed as a community park. The Community
Park would potentially include sports fields, playgrounds, and other uses that could generate noise
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 37
May 2013
levels of 60 dBA up to 170 feet from the park. However, an energy dissipater for drainage would be
located in the southwest corner of Planning Area A, at the bottom of a steep slope, as shown on the TM,
provided in Figure 3-16. No park uses would be developed on this steep slope. The steep slope and
drainage feature would provide an approximately 170 feet buffer, or more, between the Community
Park and the edge of Planning Area A closest to the Preserve. Therefore, the preserve area to the
southwest of Planning Area A would be located at least 170 feet from active park uses in the Community
Park and would not be exposed to substantial noise levels. Impacts would be less than significant.
Impacts from Operation of Off-site Facilities
As discussed above under existing conditions, the Otay Valley Rock Quarry is located southwest of
Village 4, approximately 0.3 mile from the project site. According to the EIR prepared for the proposed
quarry reclamation plan amendment, daytime average noise levels along the perimeter of the quarry
range from approximately 45 dBA to 55 dBA (City of Chula Vista 2011). The project site and the quarry
are separated by Rock Mountain and operation of the quarry is generally not currently audible on the
project site, as demonstrated by the ambient noise measurements taken at the site. Intermittent noise
from particularly loud operations, such as blasting, is occasionally audible on the project site. Due to the
temporary and periodic nature of noise from the quarry operations, it would not result in a significant
impact to development in Village 8 West.
Olympian High School is a source of operational noise from bells or other signaling devices and activities
on the campus such as cheering and loudspeakers at football games. As mentioned previously, the
football field is located on the east side of campus, approximately 0.25 mile from the project site, and is
separated from the site by the campus buildings. Noise levels for a high school championship game
have been estimated to be 71 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. This estimate was used to represent the
worst-case scenario for football games at Otay Ranch High School. Otay Ranch High School has a greater
stadium capacity than Olympian High School, and therefore this estimate represents a conservative
estimate of noise generated by Olympian High School. Based on this estimate, football games currently
generate a worst-case noise level of 43 dBA at the Village 8 West boundary when speakers are in use.
The noise measurement taken outside of Olympian High School during lunchtime recess as part of this
analysis measured a noise level of 55 dBA Leq at the edge of the project area adjacent to the school,
which would not exceed the 60 dBA Leq noise limit for multi-family residences in the Town Center.
Therefore, noise from Olympian High School would not result in a significant impact to Village 8 West.
The San Diego Trolley Blue Line and SD&AE freight line pass through the western part of Chula Vista
approximately 6 miles west of the project site. No noise contours have been established for rail line
operations in Chula Vista. According the EIR prepared for the Downtown San Diego community, noise
levels generated by railroad activity along the streets adjacent to the railroad tracks do not exceed 65
dBA CNEL. The rail line that runs through downtown San Diego is the same line that extends to Chula
Vista and serves the trolley and freight lines. Diesel train engines may produce short-term levels of 85
dBA during maneuvering events and nuisance noise from train horns and crossing bells may reach a
noise level of 95 dBA at a distance of 50 feet. It was determined in the EIR that, in cases where there are
no noise obstructions, noise could be audibly intrusive in residential interiors up to 1,000 feet away
(CCDC 2006). Due to distance, Village 8 West would not be exposed to railroad noise. No impact would
occur.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 38
May 2013
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would minimize exposure to on-site NSLU from excessive traffic
noise, and minimize noise generated from operational sources including HVAC equipment, commercial
equipment, and recreational facilities.
Noi-1 Noise Attenuation in the Neighborhood Edge Zone (Planning Area N) and Neighborhood
General Zone (Planning Areas Q and U). Prior to the approval of grading permits for residential
development along Otay Valley Road within Planning Areas N, Q, and U in the Neighborhood
Edge and Neighborhood General Zones (as shown in Figure 6), the applicant shall be responsible
for the preparation of a subsequent acoustical study based on the final map design and
implementation of any measures recommended as a result of the analysis to the satisfaction of
the Development Services Director (or their designee). The study shall include, but not be
limited to the following:
1. Location, height, and building material of the noise barriers in accordance with Figure 8.
Heights are provided relative to final pad elevation. Required heights may be achieved
through construction of walls, berms or a wall/berm combination;
2. A detailed analysis which demonstrates that barriers and/or setbacks have been
incorporated into the project design, such that noise exposure to residential receivers
placed in all useable outdoor areas, including multi-family residential patios and balconies,
are at or below 65 dBA CNEL; and
3. Should grading, lot configuration, and/or traffic assumptions change during the processing
of any final maps, the barriers shall be refined to reflect those modifications.
Noi-2 Site-Specific Acoustic Analysis – Single-Family Residences. Concurrent with design review and
prior to the approval of building permits for single-family residential development where the
exterior noise level exceeds 65 dBA CNEL (Planning Areas N, Q, and U), the applicant shall
prepare an acoustical analysis ensuring that interior noise levels due to exterior noise sources
will be at or below 45 dBA CNEL. Design-level architectural plans will be available during design
review and will permit the accurate calculation of transmissions loss for habitable rooms. For
these lots, it may be necessary for the windows to be able to remain closed to ensure that
interior noise levels meet the interior standard of 45 dBA CNEL. Consequently, the design for
these units may need to include ventilation or an air conditioning system to provide a habitable
interior environment with the windows closed based on the result on the interior acoustical
analysis.
0 500 1,000 1,500250 Feet
Source: Atkins 2011
APPROXIMATE NOISE BARRIER LOCATIONS
FIGURE 8
P
V
N
D
I
A
Y
L
Q
S
U
T
O
M
OS-1
C
J
R
E
F H-1G
W
B
H-2
G
St
ree
t
A
Street
E
Stre
e
t D
Main Street EB
Main Street WB
Str
eet C
Street L
Otay Valley Road
La
M
edia Roa
d S
B
Street I
St
r
ee
t F
S
t
re
et
K
L
a
M
e
dia
R
o
a
d
Street B
Magdalena
A
v
e
nu
e
Stree
t
U
La M
e
d
ia
Road NB
Stree
t K
La M
e
dia
Road
Main Street EB
Q
36
5
U
8
7
9
14
2
11
15
12
13
20
19
V4
N1
18
17
16
10
21
22
14
N99
N96
N49
N40
V42
P55
P29 P75
N64 N105
N109
N115
N112
P102
N102
N107
N117
City of San Diego
Reservoir
Not a Part
2323
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
0 750
Feet
Legend
Receiver Locations
Noise Barrier
Height
3 feet
6 feet
Roadways
Planning Areas
V8W Tentative Map
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 40
May 2013
Noi-3 Site-Specific Acoustic Analysis – Multi-Family Residences. Concurrent with design review and
prior to the approval of building permits for multi-family areas where first and/or second floor
exterior noise levels exceed 60 dBA CNEL and/or where required outdoor area (patios or
balconies) noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL (Planning Areas B, C, E, F, H1, H2, I, J, L, M, and O),
the applicant shall prepare an acoustical analysis demonstrating compliance with California’s
Title 24 Interior Noise Standards (i.e., 45 dBA CNEL) and the City’s Exterior Land Use/Noise
Compatibility Guidelines for outdoor use areas (i.e., 65 dBA CNEL). Design-level architectural
plans will be available during design review and will permit the accurate calculation of
transmissions loss for habitable rooms. For these areas, it may be necessary for the windows to
be able to remain closed to ensure that interior noise levels meet the interior standard of 45
dBA CNEL. Consequently, the design for buildings in these areas may need to include a
ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment with the
windows closed based on the result on the interior acoustical analysis.
Noi-4 Site-Specific Acoustic Analysis – Non-Residential NSLU. Concurrent with design review and
prior to the approval of building permits for any non-residential noise sensitive land use
(schools, neighborhood parks, outdoor use areas, some Community Purpose Facility uses, etc.)
area where exterior noise levels exceed 65 dBA CNEL (Planning Areas B, C, D, F, G, H1, H2, I, J,
M, L, R, S, and T), the applicant shall be responsible for the preparation of an acoustical analysis
ensuring that exterior noise levels at the boundary of the proposed noise sensitive land use will
be below 65 dBA CNEL and implementation of any measures recommended as a result of the
analysis. Measures to reduce noise levels may include, but would not be limited to, setback of
structures from the roadway, installing acoustic barriers, or orienting outdoor activity areas
away from roadways so that surrounding structures provide noise attenuation. The analysis
shall also demonstrate that barriers or setbacks have been incorporated into the project design,
such that, when considered with proposed construction specifications, ground level and upper
story interior noise levels shall not exceed 45 dBA CNEL. Roof-ceiling assemblies making up the
building envelope shall have a sound transmission class value of at least 50, and exterior
windows shall have a minimum sound transmission class of 30 in compliance with the California
Green Building standards code.
Noi-5 Site-Specific Acoustic Analysis – Office Uses. Concurrent with design review and prior to the
approval of building permits for any office area where exterior noise levels exceed 70 dBA CNEL
(Planning Areas H2, J, and L), the applicant shall prepare an acoustical analysis, and construct
any attenuation measures identified therein, to ensure that exterior noise levels at the property
line of the proposed office building will be below 70 dBA CNEL. Measures to reduce noise levels
may include, but would not be limited to, setback of structures from the roadway, installing
acoustic barriers, or, in mixed-use buildings, orienting offices away from roadways so that
surrounding structures provide noise attenuation.
Noi-6 HVAC Mechanical Equipment Shielding. Concurrent with design review and prior to the
approval of building permits for non-residential development requiring HVAC equipment, the
applicant shall prepare a report demonstrating that HVAC equipment is designed to ensure that
noise levels from the equipment will not exceed the Chula Vista noise ordinance standards.
Noise from HVAC equipment shall be reduced by either the installation of acoustical shielding
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 41
May 2013
around all new rooftop HVAC equipment, or by placing the HVAC equipment below grade in
basement space.
Noi-7 Shielded Private Outdoor Usable Space for Town Center Residences. Private usable outdoor
space for new residential or commercial development such as patios, balconies, or outdoor
dining areas in the Town Center shall be located or protected from noise to ensure noise levels
are below 65 dB CNEL. The proposed plan for private residential open space shall be designed to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to design review.
Noi-8 Site Specific Acoustic Analysis - Community Park and Neighborhood Park. Concurrent with the
preparation of site-specific plan(s) and prior to the approval of a precise grading plan for the
Community Park or Neighborhood Park, the applicant shall prepare, or in the case the City being
the lead on the preparation of the site specific plan, the applicant shall fund the preparation of
an acoustical analysis to ensure that noise levels generated from any active uses at the
Community Park or Neighborhood Park, such as sports fields and a skate park, do not exceed the
exterior noise limits of the receiving land use category as identified in the Chula Vista Noise
Ordinance. The applicant shall be responsible for the implementation of any measures
recommended as a result of the analysis. Measures to reduce noise levels may include, but
would not be limited to, siting of structures or buildings to provide setbacks between active
areas and adjacent noise sensitive uses or construction of a wall to provide noise attenuation.
Final noise attenuation design shall be determined by a site-specific acoustic analysis conducted
by a qualified acoustical engineer, to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director, or
their designee.
Significance After Mitigation
Table 9 shows on-site ground level traffic noise levels with implementation of mitigation measure Noi-1.
Table 9 applies only to the receptors that would be affected by the proposed noise wall. Walls are not
feasible along La Media Road, Main Street, Street A, or Otay Valley Road north of Planning Area N
because a wall would conflict with the Village 9 SPA policies. The SPA requires frontages along all public
roads in the Town Center and Neighborhood Center Zone. These roadways include La Media Road/Otay
Valley Road (within the couplet), Main Street, and Street A (see pages 3-26 and 3-30 of the Village 8
West SPA). Additionally, the SPA requires that buildings be oriented toward the street (see pages 4-12,
4-17, 4-18, 4-20, 4-22, and 4-38 of the Village 8 West SPA). Noise walls would block building frontages
and views from buildings oriented toward the roadway, which would create conflicts with the SPA vision
for cohesive character, pedestrian-friendly sidewalks, and quality public streetscapes within the SPA.
Walls are feasible along the portions of Otay Valley Road south of the couplet shown in Figure 8 because
the residences affected by the wall would be oriented towards public residential streets and are not
required to provide frontages along Otay Valley Road. Walls are not feasible for all potential traffic
noise impacts in the SPA; therefore, measures Noi-2 through Noi-5 are included to mitigate the traffic
noise impacts to the remaining receptors. With implementation of the above measures (Noi-1 through
Noi-8), operational noise sources would comply with the City’s noise ordinance, the General Plan noise
compatibility guidelines, and CalGreen. Operational noise impacts would be reduced to a less than
significant level.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 42
May 2013
Table 9 On-site 2030 Buildout Ground Level Traffic Noise Levels with Implementation of
Mitigation Measure Noi-1
Receiver Location Receiver Type
Ground Level
Traffic Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
Ground Level Traffic
Noise Level with
Implementation of Noi-1
(dBA CNEL)
Significant
Impact?
Lot N109 Single-Family Residence 66 62 No
Lot N112 Single-Family Residence 66 62 No
Lot N115 Single-Family Residence 67 61 No
Lot N117 Single-Family Residence 67 61 No
Planning Area Q Single-Family Residence 70 65 No
Planning Area U Single-Family Residence 70 65 No
Source: FHWA TNM 2.5. See appendix for noise model outputs.
Note: As part of measure Noi-1, the noise barrier for receivers in Lots N109-N117 is assumed to be 3 feet in height,
and the noise barrier for Planning Areas Q and U is assumed to be 6 feet in height as shown in Figure 8. Noise levels
for upper level receivers were not attenuated discernibly from the implementation of Noi-1.
Cumulative Impacts
Buildout of Village 8 West, along with future regional growth, and other projects to be developed within
the project vicinity would result in increases in traffic that would cumulatively increase traffic noise. The
potential noise impacts that would result from cumulative projects and regional growth are included in
the Buildout (2030) scenario. As shown in the noise contours in Figure 7, noise levels at the proposed
locations of residences, parks, schools, and offices would potentially exceed the Chula Vista noise
compatibility standards along Main Street, Otay Valley Road, and Street A. Therefore, a cumulative
impact would occur. These NSLU and roadways would only be developed with implementation of the
Village 8 West SPA Plan; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would result in a
cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. However, implementation of
mitigation measures Noi-1 through Noi-5 would require future development to implement measures
that would reduce noise levels to be compatible with the Chula Vista noise compatibility guidelines.
Therefore, cumulative impacts from the project would be reduced to a contribution that is less than
cumulatively considerable.
Village 8 West would be adjacent to future development to the east in Village 8 East, to the West in
Village 4, and to the north in Village 7. According to the GDP, these villages would be developed with
similar land uses compared to Village 8 West, including commercial, residential, and parkland
development. Similar to Village 8 West, the residential land uses in adjacent villages would generate
nuisance noise that would not be considered a significant impact. However, the mixed-use and
commercial development would potentially include HVAC systems and commercial uses that would have
the potential to result in significant impacts to NSLU up to 275 feet away from the source, and single-
family residences up to 500 feet from the source. Activities at future parks would have the potential
generate excessive noise levels at NSLU up to 300 feet from playgrounds or other facilities. If
commercial development or parkland would be located along the edge of a future village adjacent to the
project site, residences and schools along the eastern edge Village 8 West would have the potential be
exposed to excessive noise levels. Likewise, development of the schools, parks, and structures requiring
HVAC systems in Village 8 West would result in potentially significant impacts to NSLU along the
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 43
May 2013
adjacent edges of neighboring villages, if residences in the adjacent would be occupied prior to
construction of the schools and commercial development in Village 8 West. Therefore, a potentially
significant cumulative impact would occur. Mitigation measures Noi-2 through Noi-4 and Noi-7 would
reduce impacts related to exposure of NSLU in Village 8 West to noise from adjacent villages to a less
than cumulatively considerable level. Additionally, mitigation measures Noi-6 and Noi-8 would reduce
the potentially significant impacts of the proposed schools, parks, and commercial buildings in Village 8
West to a less than cumulatively considerable level.
Operation of the existing quarry currently generates noise levels that range from approximately 45 dBA
to 55 dBA at the edge of the quarry property (City of Chula Vista 2011) and does not exceed the city
noise standards for Village 8 West. However, quarry operations have been approved to expand to
approximately 300 feet from the western boundary of Village 8 West. Currently, mining is concentrated
in the central portion of the quarry, approximately 1,000 feet from the site boundary. Similar mining
activities would occur as operations expand. Therefore, based on existing noise levels, operation of
mining equipment at the quarry boundary closest to the Village 8 West SPA would result in daytime
noise levels up to 65 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptors in Village 8 West and would potentially
exceed the City’s noise standards. Potentially affected sensitive receptors include the single-family and
multi-family residences closest to the western for the proposed project. However, the existing
Declaration of Covenants of Operation for the quarry includes provisions to ensure that the quarry does
not exceed the city noise ordinance standards at surrounding residences (City of Chula Vista 2008).
These covenants include the following:
1. Upon issuance of the building permit for the first residential development within 1,500 feet of'
an active Mining Operation or rock crushing activity, a noise mitigation plan shall be completed
that identifies any mitigation or modifications to operations as may be needed to limit noise
levels in order to be in compliance with the City's Noise Ordinance. A letter, verifying
compliance with this standard shall be prepared by a qualified acoustician and sent to the City's
Director of Planning and Building for review and approval prior to the occupancy of the first
residential unit.
2. Once the first residence is occupied within 1,500 feet from the outer perimeter of an active
Mining Operation, Mine Operators (including mining and processing plant operations) shall
confirm that noise levels are in compliance with the noise standards set forth in the City's Noise
Ordinance.
3. Mine equipment maintenance can occur 24 hours per day, as long as such activity is in
compliance with the noise standards set forth in the City's Noise Ordinance (Municipal Code
Section 19.68.030)
Therefore, implementation of the existing covenants for operation at the quarry would ensure that the
expansion of the quarry and cumulative residential development surrounding the quarry would not
result in the cumulatively considerable exposure of NSLU to excessive noise from quarry operation.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 44
May 2013
5.1.2 Issue 2: Groundborne Vibration
Impact Analysis
The main concern associated with groundborne vibration from this type of project is annoyance,
however, vibration-sensitive instruments and operations, such as those found in hospitals and
laboratories, can be disrupted at much lower levels than would typically affect other uses. In extreme
cases, the vibration can cause damage to buildings, particularly those that are old or otherwise fragile.
No vibration-sensitive land uses are proposed as part of the project; however, excessive levels of
groundborne vibration may be an annoyance to residences. Some common sources of groundborne
vibration are trains, and construction activities such as blasting, pile-driving and heavy earth-moving
equipment. Vibration sensitive land uses within 600 feet of a railroad may be exposed to disruptive
vibration (FTA 2006). Beyond 600 feet, vibration impacts would not occur. Since the project is located
more than 6 miles away from the trolley and freight rail line in western Chula Vista, vibration from
railroads would not be felt at the project site. Blasting and earth moving activities occur at the Otay
Valley Rock Quarry. However, the quarry is located approximately 0.3 mile (1,600 feet) from the project
site. Vibration from quarry operations would not be felt at the project site. Therefore, the primary
source of groundborne vibration occurring as part of the project is construction activity.
Vibration-sensitive instruments and operations may require special consideration during construction.
Vibration criteria for sensitive equipment and operations are not defined and are often case specific. In
general, the criteria must be determined based on manufacturer specifications and recommendations
by the equipment user. As a guide, major construction activity within 200 feet and pile driving within
600 feet may be potentially disruptive to sensitive operations (Caltrans 2002). No pile driving is
anticipated to be necessary; however, construction activities on site may require blasting, which is also a
significant source of groundborne vibration.
The nearest vibration-sensitive land use to the project site is the Sharp Chula Vista Medical Center,
located approximately 2.25 miles northwest of the project site on Medical Center Court. At 2.25 miles
from the nearest construction activity, the research facility would be located outside of the vibration
screening distances for major construction activity (200 feet) and pile driving (600 feet). Therefore
construction activity would not affect any off-site vibration-sensitive land use. Because construction
across the project site would be phased, new construction on the project site would have the potential
to expose developed on-site residences to groundborne vibration because construction activities would
likely take place within 200 feet of a residence. If blasting is required during the Orange Phase, it would
occur prior to any construction on-site; therefore, it would not expose any structures to groundborne
vibration. However, blasting in the Blue Phase may occur after some construction in the Orange Phase
is completed. It is unknown how development would be phased within each phase; therefore,
development in the Orange Phase would potentially be located within 600 feet of blasting in the Blue
Phase. If blasting is required, the City Engineer and Fire Marshal will require compliance with blasting
restrictions placed on grading plans.
It should be noted that ground vibrations from construction activities do not often reach the levels that
can damage structures or affect activities that are not vibration-sensitive, although the vibrations may
be felt by nearby persons in close proximity and result in annoyance (FTA 2006). Additionally, the
Village 8 West development would consist of new buildings constructed in accordance with all building
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 45
May 2013
codes and would not be susceptible to vibration damage. Vibration impacts would be temporary and
would cease following construction. Therefore, impacts related to groundborne vibration during
construction would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the Village 8 West SPA Plan would not result in a significant groundborne vibration
impact; therefore, no mitigation is required.
Significance After Mitigation
No mitigation is required because impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Cumulative Impacts
In order to result in a cumulative vibration impact, major construction activities would have to be
located within 200 feet of another project, or within 600 feet for pile driving. The future cumulative
projects that would potentially be located within 600 feet of Village 8 West construction activity include
a mixed-use village and residential development in Village 8 East, residential development and a
community park in Village 4, and residential development in Village 7. These land uses are not
considered vibration sensitive.
However, the existing quarry would potentially expand to approximately 300 feet from the western
boundary of Village 8 West. Village 8 West would remain outside of the 200 feet screening distance for
the operation of heavy equipment at the quarry.
Occasional blasting operations may occur within 600 feet for the Village 8 West boundary. However, the
proposed residential, commercial, and park land uses along the western edge of Village 8 West are not
vibration sensitive. Additionally, according to the Declaration of Covenants of Operation for the quarry,
blasting would be limited to the hours between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. and would not disturb sleep.
The Mining Operator is also required to retain a qualified blasting specialist to develop a site specific
blasting program report to assess, control, and monitor ground vibration from blasting, for any
residences located within 1,000 feet of the mining operation. The Mine Operator is required to provide
public notification of the blasting schedule for residents within 1,000 feet of blasting. The Mine
Operator will give a monthly blasting schedule in writing to residences within 1,000 feet of potential
blast locations. The notice will disclose the anticipated blasting schedule and provide a contact phone
number for the blasting contractor. Unscheduled changes to the blasting schedule will require the
blasting schedule to be reissued no less than 24 hours prior to the blasting. Therefore, cumulative
groundborne vibration impacts would be less than significant.
5.1.3 Issue 3: Substantial Permanent Increase in Ambient
Noise Levels
Impact Analysis
This section addresses the potential for implementation of the SPA Plan and TM to permanently
increase ambient noise levels as a result of increased traffic noise. The potential for other noise sources
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 46
May 2013
associated with project implementation to result in increases in noise levels that would expose NSLU to
excessive noise levels is addressed in Section 4.2.1, Issue 1: Excessive Noise Levels.
The noise technical report prepared for the GPA/GDPA SEIR determined that potential impacts related
to increases in traffic under the GPA/GDPA would be significant (City of Chula Vista 2013). However, the
report was based on a programmatic traffic analysis for the GPA/GDPA area. The following analysis tiers
from the GPA/GDPA EIR, and updates the noise analysis based on the project-specific traffic study
prepared for Village 8 West by RBF Consulting (RBF 2013), and the Village 8 West SPA Plan (January
2012). The potential for Village 8 West to permanently increase traffic noise is addressed under the
following scenarios: existing plus project, interim (Year 2025), and buildout (Year 2030) with and without
implementation of the mitigation measures proposed in the traffic study to reduce traffic congestion.
The interim Year 2015 and Year 2020 traffic scenarios were not analyzed for traffic noise because fewer
trips would be generated on the study area roadways under these scenarios compared to the Year 2025
and Year 2030 scenarios (RBF 2013). In addition, the roadways affected by the mitigation required for
the Year 2025 scenario result in lower traffic volumes than the Unmitigated Year 2025 scenario (see
Table 22 in the TIA, Year 2025 Levels of Service Without and With Proposed Mitigation); therefore, the
Mitigated Year 2025 scenario is not included in the traffic noise analysis.
Traffic levels for each roadway are included in the appendix. Noise levels for area roadways were
calculated using standard noise modeling equations adapted from the FHWA noise prediction model.
The modeling calculations take into account the posted vehicle speed, average daily traffic volume, and
the estimated vehicle mix. Noise levels are estimated at locations 50 feet from the roadway centerline.
Noise levels at distances further from the source than the specific receptor would be lower due to
attenuation provided by increased distance from the noise source. Generally, noise from heavily
traveled roadways would experience a decrease of approximately 3 dBA for every doubling of distance
from the roadway.
Existing Plus Project Scenario
Existing and future increases in traffic, with and without the proposed project, are provided in Table 10.
As shown in Table 10, 17 of the 22 existing roadway segments currently generate noise levels that
exceed 65 dBA CNEL, without implementation of the project. In this scenario, project-related traffic
noise increases would cause noise along one roadway that currently does not exceed 65 dBA CNEL to
exceed 65 dBA CNEL. Project-related traffic noise would result in an increase of three decibels or more
along three roadway segments that already exceed 65 dBA CNEL. One roadway that currently does not
exist would exceed 65 dBA CNEL with implementation of project. Five roadway segments would result
in a significant noise impact under the Existing Plus Project scenario:
■ Birch Road, La Media Road to SR-125
■ Birch Road, SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway
■ La Media Road, Olympic Parkway to Birch Road
■ La Media Road, Birch Road to Main Street
■ Magdalena Avenue, Birch Road to Main Street
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 47
May 2013
Table 10 Existing Plus Project Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Existing Plus Project
Existing
Existing +
Project
Exceeds 65
dBA CNEL?
Increase in
Noise Level
Significant
Impact?
Olympic
Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 75 76 Yes +1 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 75 76 Yes +1 No
Heritage Road to La Media Road 75 76 Yes +1 No
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps 75 75 Yes 0 No
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway 79 80 Yes +1 No
Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway 70 71 Yes +1 No
East of Hunte Parkway 66 67 Yes +1 No
Birch Road La Media Road to SR-125 69 72 Yes +3 Yes
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 68 71 Yes +3 Yes
Main Street I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 73 73 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 71 71 Yes 0 No
Hunte
Parkway
Eastlake Parkway to Olympic Parkway 60 63 No N/A No
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road 67 68 Yes +1 No
Heritage
Road
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 69 71 Yes +2 No
Main Street to Entertainment Circle 65 65 No N/A No
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de
Las Vistas (City of San Diego) 65 65 No N/A No
La Media
Road
East Palomar Street to Olympic
Parkway 69 71 Yes +2 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 69 74 Yes +5 Yes
Birch Road to Main Street Does Not Exist 72 Yes N/A Yes
Magdalena
Avenue Birch Road to Main Street 64 68 Yes +4 Yes
Eastlake
Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway 70 71 Yes +1 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 68 70 Yes +2 No
Birch Road to Main Street 59 64 No N/A No
Note: The existing scenario represents conditions in 2010. Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from roadway centerline. Noise
levels are based upon traffic data provided by RBF Consulting (2013). Traffic levels for each roadway are included in the appendix.
Decibel levels are rounded to the nearest whole number. Significant impacts shown in bold and shading. See appendix for data
sheets.
Unmitigated Year 2025 Scenario
The Unmitigated Year 2025 scenario includes development of all proposed residential development, the
elementary school, 240,000 square feet of commercial development, and 18.6 acres of park space in
Village 8 West, as well as cumulative development anticipated by Year 2025. In addition to the existing
street network and improvements that would be implemented through the Year 2020, this scenario
assumes construction of La Media Road/Otay Valley Road to Street A and the half of the Main Street
couplet east of Otay Valley Road (see TIA Table 21, 2025 Roadway Segment Level of Service). Year 2025
traffic noise levels, with and without the proposed project, are provided in Table 11. As shown in
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 48
May 2013
Table 11, all of the 25 roadway segments that would exist by Year 2025 would exceed 65 dBA CNEL
without project traffic.
Table 11 Year 2025 Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment Year 2025
Year 2025 +
Project
Exceeds 65
dBA CNEL?
Increase in
Noise Level
Significant
Impact?
Olympic
Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 75 75 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 74 75 Yes +1 No
Heritage Road to La Media Road 76 76 Yes 0 No
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps 76 76 Yes 0 No
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway 80 80 Yes 0 No
Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway 74 74 Yes 0 No
East of Hunte Parkway 69 70 Yes +1 No
Birch Road La Media Road to SR-125 74 75 Yes +1 No
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 74 75 Yes +1 No
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 74 74 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 73 73 Yes 0 No
Street A to Eastlake Parkway 72 72 Yes 0 No
Hunte
Parkway
Eastlake Parkway to Olympic Parkway 72 72 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road 69 69 Yes 0 No
Heritage
Road
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 74 75 Yes +1 No
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/ Hunte
Parkway 73 73 Yes 0 No
Main Street to Entertainment Circle 68 68 Yes 0 No
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de
Las Vistas (City of San Diego) 68 68 Yes 0 No
La Media
Road
East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 71 71 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 73 74 Yes +1 No
Birch Road to Main Street 70 73 Yes +3 Yes
Magdalena
Avenue Birch Road to Main Street 66 67 Yes +1 No
Eastlake
Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway 70 70 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 72 72 Yes 0 No
Birch Road to Main Street 75 76 Yes +1 No
Otay Valley
Road Village 9 Access to University Avenue Does Not
Exist 64 No N/A No
Note: Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from roadway centerline. Noise levels are based upon traffic data provided by RBF
Consulting (2013). Traffic levels for each roadway are included in the appendix. Decibel levels are rounded to the nearest
whole number. Significant impacts shown in bold and shading. See appendix for data sheets.
In the Year 2025 scenario, project-related traffic would result in an increase of three decibels or more
along one roadway segment that would exceed 65 dBA CNEL without project traffic. This one roadway
segment would result in a significant impact under the Year 2025 scenario:
■ La Media Road, Birch Road to Main Street
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 49
May 2013
Unmitigated Year 2030 Scenario
The Unmitigated Year 2030 scenario compares buildout (Year 2030) traffic volumes with and without
the implementation of the project, and without implementation of the mitigation measures identified in
the Traffic Impact Analysis. This scenario assumes full buildout of the proposed Village 8 West
development and circulation network, as well as cumulative development through Year 2030.
Unmitigated Year 2030 traffic noise levels, with and without the project, are provided in Table 12. As
shown in Table 12, 27 of the 31 roadway segments would exceed 65 dBA CNEL without project-related
traffic.
In the Unmitigated Year 2030 scenario, project-related traffic noise increases would not cause any
roadway segments to exceed 65 dBA CNEL or result in an increase of three decibels or more along
roadways that would exceed 65 dBA CNEL without implementation of the SPA Plan and TM. The project
would not result in any significant impacts from noise increases along roadways under the Unmitigated
Year 2030 scenario.
Mitigated Year 2030 Scenario
The Mitigated Year 2030 scenario compares buildout (Year 2030) traffic volumes with and without the
implementation of the project, assuming implementation of the traffic mitigation measures identified in
the Traffic Impact Analysis (RBF 2013). This scenario assumes full buildout of the project development
and circulation network, as well as cumulative development through Year 2030. Mitigated Year 2030
traffic noise levels, with and without the project, are provided in Table 13. As shown in Table 13, 27 of
the 31 roadway segments would exceed 65 dBA CNEL without project-related traffic.
In the Mitigated Year 2030 scenario, project-related traffic noise increases would not cause any roadway
segments to exceed 65 dBA CNEL or result in an increase of three decibels or more along roadways that
would exceed 65 dBA CNEL without implementation of the SPA Plan and TM. The project would not
result in any significant impacts from noise increases along roadways under the Mitigated Year 2030
scenario.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 50
May 2013
Table 12 Unmitigated Year 2030 Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Unmitigated
Year 2030
Unmitigated
Year 2030 +
Project
Exceeds
65 dBA
CNEL?
Increase
in Noise
Level
Significant
Impact?
Olympic
Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 75 75 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 74 74 Yes 0 No
Heritage Road to La Media Road 73 74 Yes +1 No
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps 75 75 Yes 0 No
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway 80 80 Yes 0 No
Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway 74 74 Yes 0 No
East of Hunte Parkway 72 72 Yes 0 No
Birch Road La Media Road to SR-125 76 76 Yes 0 No
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 76 76 Yes 0 No
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 76 76 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 75 75 Yes 0 No
Heritage Road to Couplet 70 71 Yes +1 No
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 69 69 Yes 0 No
SR-125 to Street A 75 76 Yes +1 No
Street A to Eastlake Parkway 73 73 Yes 0 No
Hunte
Parkway
Eastlake Parkway to Olympic Parkway 74 74 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road 70 70 Yes 0 No
Heritage
Road
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 75 75 Yes 0 No
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street/ Hunte Pkwy 75 75 Yes 0 No
Main Street to Entertainment Circle 73 73 Yes 0 No
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de
Las Vistas (City of San Diego) 72 73 Yes +1 No
La Media
Road
East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 73 73 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 73 73 Yes 0 No
Birch Road to Main Street 73 73 Yes 0 No
Magdalena
Avenue Birch Road to Main Street 64 65 No N/A No
Eastlake
Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway 71 71 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 73 73 Yes 0 No
Birch Road to Main Street 74 74 Yes 0 No
Otay Valley
Road
Street A to SR-125 62 63 No N/A No
SR-125 to Village 9 Access 62 63 No N/A No
Village 9 Access to University Avenue 64 64 No N/A No
Note: Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from roadway centerline. Noise levels are based upon traffic data provided by RBF
Consulting (2013). Traffic levels for each roadway are included in the appendix. Decibel levels are rounded to the nearest whole
number. The bold text indicates a significant impact. See appendix for data sheets.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 51
May 2013
Table 13 Mitigated Year 2030 Traffic Noise Levels
Roadway Segment
Mitigated
Year 2030
Mitigated Year
2030 + Project
Exceeds 65
dBA CNEL?
Increase in
Noise Level
Significant
Impact?
Olympic
Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 75 75 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 74 74 Yes 0 No
Heritage Road to La Media Road 73 74 Yes +1 No
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps 75 75 Yes 0 No
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway 80 80 Yes 0 No
Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway 74 74 Yes 0 No
East of Hunte Parkway 72 72 Yes 0 No
Birch Road La Media Road to SR-125 72 72 Yes 0 No
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 74 74 Yes 0 No
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 76 76 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 75 75 Yes 0 No
Heritage Road to Couplet 70 71 Yes +1 No
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 70 71 Yes +1 No
SR-125 to Street A 77 77 Yes 0 No
Street A to Eastlake Parkway 75 75 Yes 0 No
Hunte
Parkway
Eastlake Parkway to Olympic Parkway 74 74 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road 70 70 Yes 0 No
Heritage
Road
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 75 75 Yes 0 No
Olympic Pkwy to Main Street/Hunte Pkwy 75 75 Yes 0 No
Main Street to Entertainment Circle 73 73 Yes 0 No
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de
Las Vistas (City of San Diego) 72 73 Yes +1 No
La Media
Road
East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 73 73 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 73 73 Yes 0 No
Birch Road to Main Street 69 70 Yes +1 No
Magdalena
Avenue Birch Road to Main Street 64 65 No N/A No
Eastlake
Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway 71 71 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 73 73 Yes 0 No
Birch Road to Main Street 72 72 Yes 0 No
Otay Valley
Road
Street A to SR-125 64 65 No N/A No
SR-125 to Village 9 Access 64 65 No N/A No
Village 9 Access to University Avenue 64 64 No N/A No
Note: Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from roadway centerline. Noise levels are based upon traffic data provided by RBF
Consulting (2013). Traffic levels for each roadway are included in the appendix. Decibel levels are rounded to the nearest whole
number. The bold text indicates a significant impact. See appendix for data sheets.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 52
May 2013
Mitigation Measures
Existing Plus Project Scenario
Five roadway segments would result in a significant noise impact under the Existing Plus Project
scenario: Birch Road, La Media Road to SR-125; Birch Road, SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway; La Media Road,
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road; La Media Road, Birch Road to Main Street; and Magdalena Avenue,
Birch Road to Main Street. Traffic-related noise could be reduced either by constructing noise barriers,
lowering traffic speeds, or by reducing traffic. However, implementation of the Village 8 West SPA Plan
is planned to be constructed in a series of phases over a period of up to 20 years, and over time would
include the construction of new roadways that would provide new connections from the project area to
the regional transportation system. These new connections would reduce long-term traffic on the
roadways surrounding the project site by routing some cumulative traffic through Village 8 West instead
of the surrounding roadways. Additionally, these connections would direct traffic generated by Village 8
West away from the existing off-site roadways and reduce associated traffic noise. The 2030 buildout
traffic scenario includes future roads that are proposed as part of the development plans for other
villages. However, according to the traffic report, if the equivalent dwelling unit assumption for the
buildout study year (2030) is reached prior to implementation of these roadways being open to traffic,
then one of the following steps shall be taken as determined by, and to the satisfaction of, the City
Engineer:
1. Development in Village 8 West will stop until those assumed future roadways are constructed by
others; or
2. City and Otay Land Company shall meet to determine the need for the incomplete roadway
segments. A number of factors, including changes to the tolling structure at SR-125, may affect
the traffic patterns in the Otay Ranch. Additional traffic analysis of the roadway network and
levels of service assessment may be necessary to determine if such improvements are necessary
and the scope and timing of additional circulation improvements; or
3. Developer shall construct the missing roadway links and receive Transportation Development
Impact Fee (TDIF) credit for those improvements as applicable; or
4. An alternative measure is selected by the city in accordance with the Chula Vista Growth
Management Ordinance.
The condition listed above has been established in the traffic study to ensure that the circulation system
would be implemented concurrently with the phased development of Village 8 West. The condition will
be incorporated into the Transportation/Traffic section of the Village 8 West EIR as mitigation.
Year 2025 Scenario
One roadway segment would result in a significant impact under the Year 2025 scenario: La Media Road,
Birch Road to Main Street. As described above under the Existing Plus Project scenario, the buildout
circulation network for Village 8 West would reduce long-term traffic noise. The traffic study mitigation
will be incorporated into the Transportation/Traffic section of the Village 8 West EIR. The MMRP for the
proposed project will include requirements to ensure that the circulation network is implemented
concurrently with development.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 53
May 2013
Unmitigated and Mitigated Year 2030 Scenarios
In the Unmitigated and Mitigated Year 2030 (Buildout) scenarios, Village 8 West not result in a
significant traffic noise increase on any roadway.
Significance After Mitigation
Existing Plus Project Scenario and Unmitigated Year 2025 Scenario
Short-term increases in traffic noise off-site on La Media Road, Birch Road, and Magdalena Avenue
would be significant and unavoidable until the proposed roadway circulation system is complete.
Completion of the off-site circulation system improvements, such as the extension of Otay Valley Road
to SR-125, would reduce project-related traffic noise increases by redistributing project-related traffic so
that it would be not concentrated on the impacted roadways. Implementation of the Village 8 West
circulation system would reduce project-generated traffic volumes on off-site roadways by providing
new transportation routes and would reduce the project’s short-term increases in noise levels during
interim years on La Media Road, Birch Road, and Magdalena Avenue to a less than significant level.
Impacts would be significant and unavoidable until the proposed circulation system is complete. With
implementation of the proposed circulation system, future and long-term traffic noise impact would be
less than significant.
Unmitigated and Mitigated Year 2030 Scenarios
Implementation of Village 8 West would not result in a significant traffic noise increase on any roadway
in the Unmitigated Year 2030 or Mitigated Year 2030 scenario without mitigation.
Cumulative Impacts
Buildout of Village 8 West, along with future regional growth, and other projects to be developed within
the project vicinity would result in increases in traffic that would cumulatively increase traffic noise. The
potential noise impacts that would result from cumulative projects and regional growth are included in
the Mitigated Year 2030 scenario. Table 14 compares Mitigated Year 2030 traffic noise levels to existing
conditions. As shown in Table 14, 17 of the 22 existing roadway segments currently generate noise
levels that exceed 65 dBA CNEL, without cumulative development. Cumulative growth, including the
proposed project, would result in six new roadway segments that would exceed 65 dBA CNEL.
Cumulative growth would cause three existing roadway segments to exceed 65 dBA, and would result in
an increase in traffic noise of 3 dBA CNEL or more on 12 existing roadway segments. A cumulatively
considerable impact would occur on a total of 21 roadway segments. The project’s contribution to the
cumulative noise impact is based on the increase in traffic noise attributable to the proposed project
under the Year 2030 Mitigated scenario. Implementation of the proposed project would result in a 1
dBA increase on five impacted roadways. A 1 dBA noise increase is generally not discernable, although
project traffic would incrementally contribute to an already noisy environment that may exceed
compatibility standards for NSLU in the vicinity. The significance threshold for traffic-related noise
increases is 3 dBA CNEL; therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in
cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative roadway noise impact.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 54
April 2013
Table 14 Cumulative Traffic Noise Impacts
Roadway Segment Existing
Mitigated Year
2030
Increase in
Noise Level
Significant
Cumulative Impact?
Increase Attributable
to Proposed Project(1) Cumulatively Considerable
Contribution?
Olympic Parkway
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 75 75 0 No 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 75 74 -1 No 0 No
Heritage Road to La Media Road 75 74 -1 No +1 No
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps 75 75 0 No 0 No
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway 79 80 +1 No 0 No
Eastlake Parkway to Hunte Parkway 70 74 +4 Yes 0 No
East of Hunte Parkway 66 72 +6 Yes 0 No
Birch Road La Media Road to SR-125 69 72 +3 Yes 0 No
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway 68 74 +6 Yes 0 No
Main Street
I-805 to Brandywine Avenue 73 76 +3 Yes 0 No
Brandywine Avenue to Heritage Road 71 75 +4 Yes 0 No
Heritage Road to Couplet Does Not Exist 71 N/A Yes +1 No
Magdalena Avenue to SR-125 Does Not Exist 71 N/A Yes +1 No
SR-125 to Street A Does Not Exist 77 N/A Yes 0 No
Street A to Eastlake Parkway Does Not Exist 75 N/A Yes 0 No
Hunte Parkway Eastlake Parkway to Olympic Parkway 60 74 +14 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road 67 70 +3 Yes 0 No
Heritage Road
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 69 75 +6 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte Parkway Does Not Exist 75 N/A Yes 0 No
Main Street to Entertainment Circle 65 73 +8 Yes 0 No
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de
Las Vistas (City of San Diego) 65 73 +8 Yes +1 No
La Media Road
East Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway 69 73 +4 Yes 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 69 73 +4 Yes 0 No
Birch Road to Main Street Does Not Exist 70 N/A Yes +1 No
Magdalena Avenue Birch Road to Main Street 64 65 0 No N/A No
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway 70 71 +1 No 0 No
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road 68 73 +5 Yes 0 No
Birch Road to Main Street 59 72 +13 Yes 0 No
Otay Valley Road
Street A to SR-125 Does Not Exist 65 N/A No N/A No
SR-125 to Village 9 Access Does Not Exist 65 N/A No N/A No
Village 9 Access to University Avenue Does Not Exist 64 N/A No N/A No
(1) Based on the results in Table 13. The project’s contribution to the cumulative noise impact is based on the increase in traffic noise attributable to the proposed project under the Year 2030 Mitigated
scenario. If the project’s contribution is less than three decibels, the project’s contribution is not cumulatively considerable.
Note: Noise levels are calculated at 50 feet from roadway centerline. Noise levels are based upon traffic data provided by RBF Consulting (2013). Traffic levels for each roadway are included in the appendix.
Decibel levels are rounded to the nearest whole number. The bold text indicates a significant impact. See appendix for data sheets.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 55
May 2013
5.1.4 Issue 4: Construction Noise
Impact Analysis
Construction of the development proposed in the SPA Plan and TM would generate noise that could
expose nearby receptors to elevated noise levels that may disrupt communication and routine activities.
The magnitude of the impact would depend on the type of construction activity, equipment, duration of
the construction phase, distance between the noise source and receiver, and intervening structures.
Sound levels from typical construction equipment range from 60 dBA to 90 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the
source (FHWA 2008). Noise from construction equipment generally exhibits point source acoustical
characteristics. Strictly speaking, a point source sound decays at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance
from the source. The rule applies to the propagation of sound waves with no ground interaction.
Construction of the development proposed as part of the project would be completed in five phases,
generally west to east, as shown in Figure 9. The final order of phasing has not been determined;
however, the Orange Phase and Blue Phase would be constructed first because these phases would
involve blasting. The Orange Phase would involve construction of a portion of the Town Center
including the Town Square, multi-family residences, and commercial development. Multi-family and
single-family residences in the Neighborhood Commercial and Neighborhood Edge Zones would also be
developed. The Blue Phase would involve construction of single-family residences in the Neighborhood
General and Neighborhood Edge Zones. The Yellow Phase would involve construction of the remaining
Town Center area, the Community Park, and multi-family development in the Neighborhood
Commercial Zone. The Purple Phase would involve construction of the Neighborhood Park and single-
family residences in the Neighborhood Edge and Neighborhood General Zones. The Green Phase would
involve construction of multi-family residences in the Neighborhood Commercial Zone, the elementary
school site, and the Community Purpose Facility. Construction of the off-site trail and utilities would
occur during one of these phases.
The construction timeframe for the entire buildout of the project is expected to begin in 2013 and last
for 8 to 12 years. All phases would involve grading and site preparation, as well as utilities installation,
surface improvements including paving and landscaping, building construction, and external/internal
building work. Grading for each phase would last approximately three months, utilities installation
would take approximately two months, surface improvements would take approximately two months,
and building construction would take place over two years. The grading, utility installation, and surface
improvement activities of one phase would overlap with the last nine months of building construction in
the previous phase. Although it is unlikely, it is possible that all four categories of construction activities
could occur simultaneously on the site within different development phases. Construction of the off-
site improvements would require vegetation clearing, underground utility installation, and paving.
Standard equipment, such as dozers, loaders, scrapers, and miscellaneous trucks would be used for
construction of most of the project facilities. The grading, utility installation, and surface improvement
activities in each phase would be completed prior to any building construction. However, building
construction within each phase would not take place all at once; some areas would be completed before
other structures within the phase are under construction. Therefore, building construction activities
would have the potential to expose residents within developed, occupied buildings within an area to
construction noise in adjacent areas.
0 400800
Feet ±Source: William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. 2010
DEVELOPMENT PHASES
FIGURE 9
Purple
Green
Plan AreaTarget UnitsC’ml Sq. Ft (K)
Orange
Orange
Yellow
Yellow
Green
Yellow
Blue
Purple
Orange
Plan AreaTarget UnitsC’ml Sq. Ft (K)
Blue
Plan AreaTarget UnitsC’ml Sq. Ft (K)
Yellow
Plan AreaTarget UnitsC’ml Sq. Ft (K)
B 35 0
G (Town Sq.)0 0
H2 0 12
H1 33 144
I 122 0
J 161 18
N 117 0
Subtotal468174
P 124 0
Q 160 0
284Subtotal 0
A (Comm. Park)0 0
D (Mid. Sch’l)0 0
C 156 36
E 95 0
F 54 25
L 460 65
Subtotal765126
Plan AreaTarget UnitsC’ml Sq. Ft (K)
T (Neigh Park)0 0
V 90 0
U 130 0
Subtotal220 0
M 153 0
R (CPF)0 0
O 160 0
S (Elem. Sch’l)0 0
Subtotal 3130
Total 2,050300
OTAY RANCH VILLAGE 8 WEST NOISE TECHNICAL REPORT
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 57
May 2013
Because the order of the development phases is unknown, the estimated noise level at a particular on-
site receptor cannot be conclusively determined. However, based on the construction equipment list
provided by the applicant and typical equipment noise levels determined by the Roadway Construction
Noise Model (RCNM) (FHWA 2008), noise levels from simultaneous operation of the five noisiest pieces
of construction equipment (excavator, roller, crane, dozer, and scraper) for each construction activity
that could occur simultaneously from any development phase in the same location would have the
potential to generate noise levels of up to 87 dBA at 50 feet from the construction site. These estimates
are conservative because construction equipment for a single construction activity would be spread out
over several acres and would not be operating all at once.
The nearest existing receptor to the project site is Olympian High School, located approximately 150
west of the project site. Construction in the northeast corner of the site in the Yellow Phase would
generate the greatest amount of construction noise at the school. At this distance, the worst-case
construction noise level would be approximately 77 dBA during grading operations. Simultaneous
construction activities are not likely to occur within the same phase; therefore, the high school would be
exposed to Yellow Phase construction, but would not be exposed to simultaneous construction activities
from other phases. Additionally, on-site land uses would potentially be exposed to construction noise as
buildings in some areas become occupied while other areas of Village 8 West are under construction.
Although the Chula Vista exterior noise limits do not apply to construction activity, the noise level from
construction would potentially exceed the day time exterior noise standards and may be considered
disruptive to residences and the high school during construction operations.
In addition to the grading, utility installation, surface improvement, and building construction activities
required for all five phases, blasting would be required along the southwest boundary of the project site
during the grading activities of the Orange Phase and Blue Phase. A typical blasting operation includes
drilling a hole, filling the hole with explosive material, capping the hole, and detonating the material.
Sound levels from a rock drill have been measured at 90 to 100 dBA at 50 feet. Blasting is a short-term
event, typically lasting no more than several seconds. Additionally, a rock crushing crushing/processing
facility would be used during some construction activities in the Orange Phase and Blue Phase of
construction where rock removal is involved. Noise measurements that have been conducted for
portable rock crushing operations indicated that rock crushing activity would generate a 1-hour average
noise level of approximately 86 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the primary crusher (Dudek 2007). All
blasting in the Orange Phase would take place prior to development on the project site. The nearest
existing NSLU is Olympian High School, located approximately 2,800 feet from the blasting area, which is
limited to the western edge of the project site. At this distance, noise from the rock drill and rock
crusher would be reduced to 65 dBA and 51 dBA. Although the Chula Vista exterior noise limits do not
apply to construction activity, the noise level from rock drilling would not exceed the day time exterior
noise standard for non-residential land use. However, rock blasting during the grading phase of the Blue
Phase would occur during the construction phase of the Orange Phase. Some buildings in the Orange
Phase may be constructed and occupied prior to blasting activities and exposed to substantial noise
from rock drilling and blasting activities.
Although the on-site residences could be exposed to excessive construction noise levels, the exposure
would be short-term, and would cease upon project buildout. Additionally, construction activities
associated with buildout of the project would occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, and between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday,
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 58
May 2013
which is the limit specified in the Chula Vista construction noise ordinance. Because construction would
comply with the applicable regulation for construction noise, temporary increases in noise level from
construction activities at the on-site residences would be less than significant.
Noise from construction activities would also have the potential to impact sensitive wildlife species in
the MSCP Preserve areas to the south and west of the project site. The Biological Resources Report
prepared for Village 8 West (URS 2012) determined that construction noise exceeding an hourly average
sound level of 60 dBA would potentially impact special status wildlife species by inhibiting audible
communication between potential mates and between parents and offspring. Based on the worst-case
construction noise level of 87 dBA at 50 feet, determined using the RCNM model, and an attenuation
rate of 6 dBA for every double of distance, construction activities would have the potential to exceed 60
dBA up to 1,100 feet from the source. Blasting activities would have the potential to exceed 60 dBA up
to 1,600 feet from the source. Assuming that construction noise would be emanating from a location on
the project site closest to the MSCP Preserve areas (in the southern parcels within Planning Area P or
the southern and western parcels within Planning Area V, the western portion of Planning Area E, and
the southwest area of Planning Area A), construction noise would exceed 60 dBA within the MSCP
Preserve area and significant construction noise impact would occur.
The Biological Resource Report includes mitigation that will be incorporated into the Biological
Resources section of the Village 8 West EIR to reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The
report’s proposed mitigation requires pre-construction surveys, acoustical analyses to demonstrate that
the average hourly 60 dBA noise level standard would not be exceeded at the location of any occupied
sensitive habitat areas, and use of noise abatement methods that may include, but are not limited to,
installation of noise abatement at the source, and/or installation of noise abatement at the receiving
areas. These requirements will be included in the MMRP for the proposed project. Therefore, this
impact would be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of the proposed
biological resources mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measures
With implementation of the mitigation measures required in the Biological Resources Report, the
proposed project would not result in significant temporary noise impacts from construction activities.
No additional mitigation is required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts related to temporary construction noise would be less than significant with implementation of
the mitigation measures required in the Biological Resources Report.
Cumulative Impacts
Construction noise impacts are localized in nature because they are limited to the construction site
where construction equipment is operating. As discussed above, sound levels from project construction
would be up to 87 dBA Leq at 50 feet from the source (FHWA 2008). However, the cumulative projects
and the proposed project would be subject to the Chula Vista construction noise ordinance, which limits
the hours of construction to 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and between the hours
of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday. Compliance with the Chula Vista ordinance would
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 59
May 2013
reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The proposed project would comply with the Chula Vista
construction limits; therefore, the proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable
contribution to a significant cumulative impact.
5.1.5 Issue 5: Aircraft Noise
Impact Analysis
The project site is located 1.5 miles northeast of the Brown Field airport. As discussed in Section 3.4.5,
the project site is currently subject to overflights of planes and helicopters taking off from Brown Field,
which are audible on the project site. The project site is not located within the 60 dBA CNEL noise
contour of Brown Field, and is not anticipated to be exposed to excessive noise levels from the airport in
excess of city standards. However, overflights from Brown Field may be considered a nuisance to
residents. In accordance with standard condition #46 in Section 5-300 of the City’s Subdivision Manual,
applicants are required to record an Airport Overflight Agreement against the property to the
satisfaction of the Director of Development Services prior to recordation of any Final Map. This
condition would run with the property, and as such, potential nuisance noise from aircraft overflights
would be disclosed to future residents. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant
Mitigation Measures
Impacts related to aircraft noise would be less than significant; therefore, no mitigation measures are
required.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts related to aircraft noise would be less than significant without mitigation.
Cumulative Impacts
No additional aviation uses are planned to be introduced in the immediate vicinity of the project site. In
addition, the project does not propose any new air traffic. No new air traffic is proposed in the Otay
Ranch GDP. No NSLU would be exposed to excessive noise levels from aviation as a result of the
proposed project. Impacts related to nuisance noise from overflights are site specific and are not
cumulative in nature. Therefore, a cumulative impact related to aviation would not occur.
5.1.6 Issue 6: General Plan Policies
Impact Analysis
Table 15 evaluates the consistency of the proposed project with the applicable General Plan policies. As
shown in this table, the project would be consistent with the General Plan policies that pertain to noise.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with any applicable General Plan policies. No
mitigation is required.
5.0 IMPACT ANALYSIS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 60
May 2013
Table 15 Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan Noise Policies
Applicable Policies Evaluation of Consistency
Objective E21: Protect people from excessive noise through
careful land use planning and the incorporation of
appropriate mitigation techniques.
Policy E 21.1: Apply the exterior land use-noise
compatibility guidelines listed in Table 9-2 of this
Environmental Element to new development, where
applicable, and in light of project-specific considerations.
Policy E 21.2: Where applicable, the assessment and
mitigation of interior noise levels shall adhere to the
applicable requirements of the California Building Code with
local amendments and other applicable established City
standards.
Policy E 21.4: Continue to implement and enforce the City’s
noise control ordinance.
The proposed SPA Plan is consistent with these noise policies. This
noise impact analysis utilized the land use-noise compatibility
guidelines in the Environmental Element, the Chula Vista Noise
Ordinance, and CCR Title 24 as thresholds for determining
significance between different land uses. The Noise Ordinance
would continue to be enforced with implementation of the SPA
Plan. As discussed under Issue 1 and Issue 3, the project would
have the potential result in noise impacts that would conflict with
the noise compatibility guidelines, the Noise Ordinance, and CCR
Title 24; however, mitigation measures Noi-1 through Noi-8,
including compliance with CalGreen, and buildout of the proposed
circulation network would reduce potential impacts to a less than
significant level, consistent with state and city standards. No
significant noise impacts would occur as a result of project
construction.
Objective E22: Protect the community from the effects of
transportation noise.
Policy E 22.1: Work to stabilize traffic volumes in residential
neighborhoods by limiting throughways and by facilitating
the use of alternative routes around, rather than through,
neighborhoods.
Policy E 22.3: Employ traffic calming measures, where
appropriate, such as narrow roadways and on-street
parking, in commercial and mixed use districts.
Policy E 22.4: Encourage walking; biking; carpooling; use of
public transit; and other alternative modes of
transportation to minimize vehicular use and associated
traffic noise.
The proposed SPA Plan is consistent with these noise policies.
Village 8 West would connect to existing arterials, La Media Road
and Main Street, and would include the Main Street and Otay Valley
Road arterial roadways that traverse the project site. These
roadways would serve as major throughways for the site and would
minimize the use of streets within the residential districts as
throughways. In addition, on-site streets are intentionally narrow
with on-site parking to encourage slower traffic and encourage
other modes of transportation such as bus, transit, walking and
bicycling. Other traffic calming measures include bulb outs at corner
sidewalks, traffic signals and/or signs, posted speed limit signs and
allowing bicycles to share the road right-of-way. A bus rapid transit
route is provided through the SPA Plan to encourage the use of
public transit within the SPA Plan area as well as to/from other
parts of Otay Ranch and the city.
The mixed use nature of the project, which places residences,
employment, services and entertainment in close proximity, would
also result in a significant reduction of vehicle trips thereby
reducing vehicular traffic volumes and noise impacts. The SPA Plan
does not prohibit the use of new technologies to minimize traffic
noise. As discussed under Issue 1 and Issue 3, the project would
have the potential result in the exposure of on-site and off-site
receptors to excessive traffic noise. However, mitigation measures
Noi-1 through Noi-5 and buildout of the proposed circulation
network would reduce potential impacts to a less than significant
level.
Significance After Mitigation
Impacts related to General Plan policies would be less than significant without mitigation.
Cumulative Impacts
Consistency with General Plan policies is project specific. Similar to the proposed project, the
cumulative projects in Chula Vista would be required to demonstrate compliance with applicable
6.0 CONCLUSION
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 61
May 2013
General Plan policies prior to project approval. Therefore, a significant cumulative impact would not
occur.
6.0 Conclusion
Construction of the proposed Village 8 West project would not result in construction noise or
groundborne vibration that would result in a significant direct or cumulative impact with
implementation of the mitigation measures required in the Biological Resource Report prepared for the
proposed project. Buildout of the proposed project would result in significant traffic noise increases
along La Media Road, Main Street, Otay Valley Road, and Street A within the project site. Mitigation
measures Noi-1 through Noi-5 would reduce direct and cumulative impacts to a less than significant
level. Short-term increases in traffic noise off-site on La Media Road, Birch Road, and Magdalena
Avenue would be significant and unavoidable until the proposed roadway circulation system is
complete. Completion of the proposed roadway circulation system is required in the traffic study
prepared for the proposed project. Long-term traffic impacts would be less than significant with
implementation of the circulation system. Operation of the proposed project would have the potential
to result in excessive noise levels related to HVAC equipment, commercial land use, and recreational
facilities. Mitigation measures Noi-2 through Noi-4 and Noi-6 through Noi-8 would reduce direct and
cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Future residents of Village 8 West would have the
potential to be exposed to nuisance noise from Brown Field aircraft operations. Mitigation measure
Noi-9 would reduce impacts to a less than significant level.
7.0 References
California Air Resources Board. 2006. Final Regulation Order – Requirements to Reduce Idling Emissions
from New and In-Use Trucks, Beginning in 2008. October 16.
California Department of Transportation. 1998. Technical Noise Supplement – A Technical Supplement
to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. October.
California Department of Transportation. 2002. Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations (TAV-02-
01-R9201). February 20.
Centre City Development Corporation. 2006. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Proposed San
Diego Downtown Community Plan, Centre City Planned District Ordinance, and 10th
Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Centre City Redevelopment Project. March.
City of Anderson. 2008. The Vineyards at Anderson Draft Environmental Impact Report. February.
City of Chula Vista. 2005. Chula Vista Vision 2020 General Plan. December 13.
City of Chula Vista. 2005b. Chula Vista Vision 2020 General Plan Update Final Environmental Impact
Report. December.
City of Chula Vista. 2008. Declaration of Covenants of Operation of the Otay Ranch Pit/Rock Mountain
Mine. Document #2008-0639472. December 16.
7.0 REFERENCES
Otay Ranch Village 8 West Noise Technical Report
Page 62
May 2013
City of Chula Vista. 2012. Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Otay Land Company
General Plan Amendment and Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendment (EIR 09-01).
Prepared by RECON Environmental, Inc.
City of San Diego. 2012. Letter from Wayne J. Reiter, Airport Noise Abatement Offices Regarding: Public
Notice of the Availability of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR 09-01) for
Amendments to the City of Chula Vista General Plan (GPA 09-01) and Otay Ranch General
Development Plan (PCM 09-11). June 21.
City of Santa Ana. 2010. City of Santa Ana Transit Zoning Code (SD 84A and SD 84B) Final Environmental
Impact Report (SCH No. 2006071100). Prepared by PBS&J. May.
Dudek. 2007. Acoustical Assessment Report – Fanita project, City of Santee. August 2007.
Federal Highway Administration. 2004. Traffic Noise Model Version 2.5. February.
Federal Highway Administration. 2008. Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Version 1.1.
December 8.
Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planning and Environment. 2006. Transit Noise & Vibration
Impact Assessment. May 2006.
Gordon Bricken and Associates. 1996. Acoustical Analysis Addendum to the Adopted Environmental
Impact Report Disneyland Resort, City of Anaheim. February 1996.
Inter-Noise. 2009. Acoustical Analysis Methodology for Urban Rooftop Playgrounds in New York City.
August 23.
Ogden Environmental and Energy Services Company, Inc. 1992. Final Environmental Impact Report Otay
Ranch (EIR 90-01). December.
Otay Land Company, LLC. 2012. Section Planning Area (SPA) Plan for Village 8 West, Otay Ranch, City of
Chula Vista, California. Prepared by William Hezmalhalch Architects, Inc. January.
Otay Valley Rock, LLC. 2010. Otay Valley Rock, LLC website. Accessed June 8, 2010, available at
http://www.otayrock.com/
RBF Consulting. 2013. Otay Ranch Village 8 West Traffic Impact Analysis Report. March 8.
RECON Environmental, Inc. 2005. Revised Noise Technical Report for Otay Ranch Village Two and Three,
Planning Area 18B, & a Portion of Village Four. December 19.
San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. 2004. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, Brown Field,
San Diego, California. October 4.
Sweetwater Unified High School District. 2011. Facility Capacities. November 14.
URS. 2012. Otay Land Company Village 8 West Biological Resources Report. October.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to
Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety. Washington, D.C. March.
Appendix
Noise Data
C:
\
L
A
R
D
A
V
\
S
L
M
U
T
I
L
\
1
8
M
A
R
1
1
.
b
i
n
In
t
e
r
v
a
l
Da
t
a
Si
t
e
Lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
Da
t
e
Ti
m
e
Du
r
a
t
i
o
n
Le
q
SE
L
Lm
a
x
Lm
i
n
Pe
a
k
Uw
p
k
L
(
5)L(10)L(50)L(90)
1
NW
Ed
g
e
of
V8
We
s
t
‐
Fu
t
u
r
e
MF
18
M
a
r
11
9:
1
1
:
4
2
9
0
0
5
2
.
8
8
2
.
3
6
7
.
7
4
0
.
8
8
4
8
6
.
3
5
7
.
9
5
4
.
9
4
5
4
2
.
2
2
Mi
d
d
l
e
of
V8
W
‐
Fu
t
u
r
e
MU
18
M
a
r
11
9:
3
6
:
2
9
9
0
0
4
2
.
4
7
2
5
5
.
4
3
6
.
7
8
4
8
6
.
3
4
7
.
2
4
5
.
2
3
9
.
7
3
8
.
2
3
So
u
t
h
e
r
n
Ed
g
e
of
V8
W
e
s
t
‐
Fu
t
u
r
e
SF
18
M
a
r
11
9:
5
8
:
0
1
9
0
0
4
2
.
8
7
2
.
3
5
0
.
1
3
6
.
4
7
6
.
3
0
4
5
.
9
4
5
.
1
4
2
.
2
3
9
.
2
4
NE
Ed
g
e
of
V8
We
s
t
ne
a
r
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
of
Ma
g
d
a
l
e
n
a
Av
e
n
u
e
an
d
Ro
c
k
Mt
n
Ro
a
d
18
M
a
r
11
12
:
0
1
:
5
4
9
0
0
5
5
.
3
8
4
.
8
7
0
.
9
3
2
.
9
9
2
.
4
9
5
.
1
6
1
.
7
5
5
.
1
4
2
3
6
.
1
5
SE
Co
r
n
e
r
of
Fl
e
i
s
h
b
e
i
n
& Ki
n
c
a
i
d
‐
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
ju
s
t
no
r
t
h
of
Ol
y
m
p
i
a
n
an
d
Wo
l
f
Ca
n
y
o
n
Sc
h
o
o
l
s
18
M
a
r
11
12
:
2
5
:
2
8
9
0
0
5
7
.
3
8
6
.
8
7
6
.
1
3
5
.
5
8
9
.
8
9
9
.
9
6
3
.
8
6
0
.
6
4
2
.
5
3
8
.
4
TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS AND NOISE CONTOURS
Project Number:
Project Name: Otay Ranch Village 8 West
Off-site Roadway Segments
Background Information
Model Description:FHWA Highway Noise Prediction Model
Source of Traffic Volumes:RBF 2011
Community Noise Descriptor:Ldn: CNEL: X
"-" = contour is located within the roadway right-of-way.
Assumed 24-Hour Traffic Distribution:DayEveningNightDistance is from the centerline of the roadway segment
Total ADT Volumes77%13%10%to the receptor location.
Medium-Duty Trucks87%5%8%
Heavy-Duty Trucks89%3%8%
DesignVehicle Mix Distance from Centerline of Roadway
Analysis Condition MedianADTSpeedAlphaMediumHeavy CNEL at Distance to Contour
LanesWidthVolume(mph)FactorTrucksTrucks 50 Feet 70 CNEL65 CNEL60 CNEL55 CNEL
Olympic Parkway
805 to Brandywine - Existing61047,000450.52.0%1.0%75.0 1072314981,073
805 to Brandywine - Existing + Project61056,478450.52.0%1.0%75.8 1212615631,212
805 to Brandywine - 202561041,736450.52.0%1.0%74.5 99213460991
805 to Brandywine - 2025 + Project61043,300450.52.0%1.0%74.6 1022194711,016
805 to Brandywine - 2030 (UM)61051,300450.52.0%1.0%75.4 1142455281,137
805 to Brandywine - 2030 (UM) + Project61051,300450.52.0%1.0%75.4 1142455281,137
805 to Brandywine - 2030 (M)61051,300450.52.0%1.0%75.4 1142455281,137
805 to Brandywine - 2030 (M) + Project61051,300450.52.0%1.0%75.4 1142455281,137
Olympic Parkway
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - Existing61048,721450.52.0%1.0%75.1 1102375101,099
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - Existing + Project61059,061450.52.0%1.0%76.0 1252695801,249
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 202561040,590450.52.0%1.0%74.3 97210451973
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2025 + Project61042,600450.52.0%1.0%74.5 1002164661,005
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (UM)61034,800450.52.0%1.0%73.7 88189407878
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (UM) + Project61034,800450.52.0%1.0%73.7 88189407878
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (M)61034,800450.52.0%1.0%73.7 88189407878
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (M) + Project61034,800450.52.0%1.0%73.7 88189407878
Olympic Parkway
Heritage Road to La Media Road - Existing61050,538450.52.0%1.0%75.3 1132435231,126
Heritage Road to La Media Road - Existing + Project61065,617450.52.0%1.0%76.4 1342896221,340
Heritage Road to La Media Road - 202561059,549450.52.0%1.0%76.0 1262715831,256
Heritage Road to La Media Road - 2025 + Project61062,900450.52.0%1.0%76.2 1302816051,303
Heritage Road to La Media Road - 2030 (UM)61033,039450.52.0%1.0%73.4 85183394848
Heritage Road to La Media Road - 2030 (UM) + Project61033,300450.52.0%1.0%73.5 85184396852
Heritage Road to La Media Road - 2030 (M)61033,039450.52.0%1.0%73.4 85183394848
Heritage Road to La Media Road - 2030 (M) + Project61033,300450.52.0%1.0%73.5 85184396852
Olympic Parkway
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - Existing61043,563450.52.0%1.0%74.6 1022204731,020
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - Existing + Project61048,302450.52.0%1.0%75.1 1092355071,092
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - 202561055,530450.52.0%1.0%75.7 1202585561,199
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - 2025 + Project61056,200450.52.0%1.0%75.7 1212605611,208
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - 2030 (UM)61043,900450.52.0%1.0%74.7 1022214761,025
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - 2030 (UM) + Project61043,900450.52.0%1.0%74.7 1022214761,025
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - 2030 (M)61043,900450.52.0%1.0%74.7 1022214761,025
La Media Road to SR-125 Ramps - 2030 (M) + Project61043,900450.52.0%1.0%74.7 1022214761,025
Olympic Parkway
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - Existing81040,478450.52.0%1.0%79.2 2044409472,040
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - Existing + Project81044,786450.52.0%1.0%79.6 2184701,0132,183
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - 202581049,030450.52.0%1.0%80.0 2324991,0762,318
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - 2025 + Project81049,700450.52.0%1.0%80.1 2345041,0862,339
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (UM)81049,400450.52.0%1.0%80.0 2335021,0812,330
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project81049,400450.52.0%1.0%80.0 2335021,0812,330
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (M)81049,400450.52.0%1.0%80.0 2335021,0812,330
SR-125 Ramps to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project81049,400450.52.0%1.0%80.0 2335021,0812,330
Olympic Parkway
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - Existing61013,926450.52.0%1.0%69.7 -103221477
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - Existing + Project61018,234450.52.0%1.0%70.9 -123265571
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - 202561034,853450.52.0%1.0%73.7 88189408879
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - 2025 + Project61035,300450.52.0%1.0%73.7 89191411886
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - 2030 (UM)61034,200450.52.0%1.0%73.6 87187403868
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project61034,200450.52.0%1.0%73.6 87187403868
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - 2030 (M)61034,200450.52.0%1.0%73.6 87187403868
Eastlake Oarkway to Hunte Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project61034,200450.52.0%1.0%73.6 87187403868
Olympic Parkway
East of Hunte Parkway - Existing4107,846450.52.0%1.0%65.8 -56121261
East of Hunte Parkway - Existing + Project41010,000450.52.0%1.0%66.8 -66143307
East of Hunte Parkway - 202541017,953450.52.0%1.0%69.4 -98211454
East of Hunte Parkway - 2025 + Project41018,400450.52.0%1.0%69.5 -99214461
East of Hunte Parkway - 2030 (UM)41029,839450.52.0%1.0%71.6 64137296637
100019662
3 Traffic Noise Contours 08 07 12.xlsAtkins 8/27/2012
East of Hunte Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project41030,100450.52.0%1.0%71.6 64138297641
East of Hunte Parkway - 2030 (M)41029,839450.52.0%1.0%71.6 64137296637
East of Hunte Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project41030,100450.52.0%1.0%71.6 64138297641
Birch Road
La Media to SR-125 - Existing61011,084450.52.0%1.0%68.7 -88190409
La Media to SR-125 - Existing + Project61022,717450.52.0%1.0%71.8 66142307661
La Media to SR-125 - 202561040,825450.52.0%1.0%74.4 98210453976
La Media to SR-125 - 2025 + Project61051,100450.52.0%1.0%75.3 1132445261,134
La Media to SR-125 - 2030 (UM)61053,156450.52.0%1.0%75.5 1162515401,164
La Media to SR-125 - 2030 (UM) + Project61054,200450.52.0%1.0%75.6 1182545471,179
La Media to SR-125 - 2030 (M)61025,695450.52.0%1.0%72.3 72154333717
La Media to SR-125 - 2030 (M) + Project61026,200450.52.0%1.0%72.4 73157337726
Birch Road
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - Existing61010,250450.52.0%1.0%68.4 -84180389
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - Existing + Project61018,005450.52.0%1.0%70.8 -122263566
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - 202561039,852450.52.0%1.0%74.3 96207446961
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - 2025 + Project61047,000450.52.0%1.0%75.0 1072314981,073
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (UM)61064,156450.52.0%1.0%76.3 1322846131,320
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project61065,200450.52.0%1.0%76.4 1332876191,334
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (M)61036,604450.52.0%1.0%73.9 91196421908
SR-125 to Eastlake Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project61037,200450.52.0%1.0%74.0 92198426918
Main Street
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - Existing61026,896450.52.0%1.0%72.5 74159343739
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - Existing + Project61027,327450.52.0%1.0%72.6 75161347747
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - 202561040,706450.52.0%1.0%74.3 97210452975
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - 2025 + Project61041,600450.52.0%1.0%74.4 99213459989
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - 2030 (UM)61057,384450.52.0%1.0%75.8 1232645691,225
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - 2030 (UM) + Project61061,300450.52.0%1.0%76.1 1282765941,280
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - 2030 (M)61055,512450.52.0%1.0%75.7 1202585561,198
I-805 tp Brandywine Avenue - 2030 (M) + Project61059,300450.52.0%1.0%76.0 1252705811,252
Main Street
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - Existing61018,729450.52.0%1.0%71.0 -125270581
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - Existing + Project61018,729450.52.0%1.0%71.0 -125270581
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 202561030,306450.52.0%1.0%73.1 80172372801
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2025 + Project61031,200450.52.0%1.0%73.2 82176379816
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (UM)61047,762450.52.0%1.0%75.0 1082345031,084
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (UM) + Project61052,200450.52.0%1.0%75.4 1152485341,150
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (M)61045,932450.52.0%1.0%74.9 1062284901,056
Brandywine Ave to Heritage Road - 2030 (M) + Project61050,200450.52.0%1.0%75.3 1122415201,121
Main Street
Heritage Road to Couplet - Existing40DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Heritage Road to Couplet - Existing + Project40DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Heritage Road to Couplet - 202540DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Heritage Road to Couplet - 2025 + Project40DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Heritage Road to Couplet - 2030 (UM)4038,635350.52.0%1.0%69.9 49107229494
Heritage Road to Couplet - 2030 (UM) + Project4044,900350.52.0%1.0%70.6 55118254546
Heritage Road to Couplet - 2030 (M)4038,635350.52.0%1.0%69.9 49107229494
Heritage Road to Couplet - 2030 (M) + Project4044,900350.52.0%1.0%70.6 55118254546
Main Street
Magdalena to SR-125 - Existing40DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Magdalena to SR-125 - Existing + Project40DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Magdalena to SR-125 - 202540DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Magdalena to SR-125 - 2025 + Project40DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Magdalena to SR-125 - 2030 (UM)4028,401350.52.0%1.0%68.6 -87187403
Magdalena to SR-125 - 2030 (UM) + Project4033,100350.52.0%1.0%69.3 4596207446
Magdalena to SR-125 - 2030 (M)4041,272350.52.0%1.0%70.2 52111240517
Magdalena to SR-125 - 2030 (M) + Project4048,100350.52.0%1.0%70.9 57123266572
Main Street
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - Existing624DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - Existing + Project624DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - 2025624DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - 2025 + Project624DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - 2030 (UM)62431,484450.52.0%1.0%75.0 1082335021,081
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - 2030 (UM) + Project62435,400450.52.0%1.0%75.5 1172525431,169
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - 2030 (M)62447,493450.52.0%1.0%76.8 1423066601,422
SR-125 Ramps to Street A - 2030 (M) + Project62453,400450.52.0%1.0%77.3 1543317141,538
Main Street
Street A to Eastlake - Existing616DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Street A to Eastlake - Existing + Project616DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Street A to Eastlake - 202561619,696450.52.0%1.0%71.8 66142306660
Street A to Eastlake - 2025 + Project61622,600450.52.0%1.0%72.4 72156336723
Street A to Eastlake - 2030 (UM)61623,456450.52.0%1.0%72.6 74160344742
Street A to Eastlake - 2030 (UM) + Project61624,500450.52.0%1.0%72.8 76164354763
Street A to Eastlake - 2030 (M)61640,689450.52.0%1.0%75.0 1072314971,071
Street A to Eastlake - 2030 (M) + Project61642,500450.52.0%1.0%75.1 1102375121,102
Hunte Parkway
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - Existing6101,406450.52.0%1.0%59.7 ---103
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - Existing + Project6102,699450.52.0%1.0%62.6 --74160
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - 202561022,119450.52.0%1.0%71.7 65140301649
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - 2025 + Project61024,800450.52.0%1.0%72.2 70151325700
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM)61039,217450.52.0%1.0%74.2 95205441951
3 Traffic Noise Contours 08 07 12.xlsAtkins 8/27/2012
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project61040,000450.52.0%1.0%74.3 96208447963
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M)61039,217450.52.0%1.0%74.2 95205441951
Eastlake to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project61040,000450.52.0%1.0%74.3 96208447963
Hunte Parkway
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - Existing4109,580450.52.0%1.0%66.6 -64139299
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - Existing + Project41011,734450.52.0%1.0%67.5 -74159342
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - 202541015,553450.52.0%1.0%68.7 -89191413
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - 2025 + Project41016,000450.52.0%1.0%68.9 -91195420
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - 2030 (UM)41020,439450.52.0%1.0%69.9 49107230495
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - 2030 (UM) + Project41020,700450.52.0%1.0%70.0 50108232499
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - 2030 (M)41020,439450.52.0%1.0%69.9 49107230495
Olympic Parkway to Otay Lakes Road - 2030 (M) + Project41020,700450.52.0%1.0%70.0 50108232499
Heritage Parkway
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - Existing61012,383450.52.0%1.0%69.2 -95205441
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - Existing + Project61017,553450.52.0%1.0%70.7 -120258556
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 202561040,866450.52.0%1.0%74.4 98211454977
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2025 + Project61043,100450.52.0%1.0%74.6 1012184701,012
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM)61050,439450.52.0%1.0%75.3 1122425221,124
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project61050,700450.52.0%1.0%75.3 1132435241,128
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M)61050,439450.52.0%1.0%75.3 1122425221,124
Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project61050,700450.52.0%1.0%75.3 1132435241,128
Heritage Parkway
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - Existing610DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - Existing + Project610DNE450.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - 202561031,160450.52.0%1.0%73.2 82176379815
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - 2025 + Project61032,500450.52.0%1.0%73.4 84181389839
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - 2030 (UM)61042,039450.52.0%1.0%74.5 100215462996
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - 2030 (UM) + Project61042,300450.52.0%1.0%74.5 1002154641,000
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - 2030 (M)61042,039450.52.0%1.0%74.5 100215462996
Olympic Parkway to Main Street/Hunte - 2030 (M) + Project61042,300450.52.0%1.0%74.5 1002154641,000
Heritage Parkway
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing4010,035400.52.0%1.0%65.3 -53114245
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing - Existing + Project 4010,035400.52.0%1.0%65.3 -53114245
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing - 20254019,053400.52.0%1.0%68.1 -81174375
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing - 2025 + Project4019,500400.52.0%1.0%68.2 -82177381
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing - 2030 (UM)4059,834400.52.0%1.0%73.1 81173374805
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing - 2030 (UM) + Proj 4061,400400.52.0%1.0%73.2 82176380819
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing - 2030 (M)4059,834400.52.0%1.0%73.1 81173374805
Main Street to Entertainment Circle - Existing - 2030 (M) + Projec 4061,400400.52.0%1.0%73.2 82176380819
Heritage Parkway
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - Existing409,846400.52.0%1.0%65.3 -52112242
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - Existing + Projec 409,846400.52.0%1.0%65.3 -52112242
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - 20254019,053400.52.0%1.0%68.1 -81174375
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - 2025 + Project4019,500400.52.0%1.0%68.2 -82177381
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - 2030 (UM)4051,034400.52.0%1.0%72.4 72156336724
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - 2030 (UM) + Pro 4052,600400.52.0%1.0%72.5 74159343739
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - 2030 (M)4051,034400.52.0%1.0%72.4 72156336724
Entertainment Circle to Avenida de Las Vistas - 2030 (M) + Proje 4052,600400.52.0%1.0%72.5 74159343739
La Media Road
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - Existing61012,658450.52.0%1.0%69.3 -96208447
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - Existing + Project61019,982450.52.0%1.0%71.3 -131281606
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 202561016,696450.52.0%1.0%70.5 -116250538
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2025 + Project61019,600450.52.0%1.0%71.2 -129278599
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM)61028,334450.52.0%1.0%72.8 77165355765
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project61029,900450.52.0%1.0%73.0 79171368793
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M)61028,334450.52.0%1.0%72.8 77165355765
E. Palomar Street to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project61029,900450.52.0%1.0%73.0 79171368793
La Media Road
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - Existing61015,888450.52.0%1.0%70.3 -112242520
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - Existing + Project61043,031450.52.0%1.0%74.6 1012184691,011
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 202561026,742450.52.0%1.0%72.5 74159342736
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2025 + Project61035,900450.52.0%1.0%73.8 90193416896
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (UM)61026,473450.52.0%1.0%72.5 73158340732
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (UM) + Project61028,300450.52.0%1.0%72.8 76165355765
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (M)61026,473450.52.0%1.0%72.5 73158340732
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (M) + Project61028,300450.52.0%1.0%72.8 76165355765
La Media Road
Birch Road to Main - Existing610DNE400.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Birch Road to Main - Existing + Project61031,451400.52.0%1.0%72.1 69148318685
Birch Road to Main - 202561020,927400.52.0%1.0%70.3 -113242522
Birch Road to Main - 2025 + Project61035,000400.52.0%1.0%72.5 74159342736
Birch Road to Main - 2030 (UM)61035,129400.52.0%1.0%72.5 74159342738
Birch Road to Main - 2030 (UM) + Project61038,000400.52.0%1.0%72.9 78168361777
Birch Road to Main - 2030 (M)61015,129400.52.0%1.0%68.9 -91195421
Birch Road to Main - 2030 (M) + Project61018,000400.52.0%1.0%69.6 -102219472
Magdalena Avenue
Birch Road to Main Street - Existing4109,122350.52.0%1.0%64.0 --92198
Birch Road to Main Street - Existing + Project41020,755350.52.0%1.0%67.6 -74159343
Birch Road to Main Street - 202541014,292350.52.0%1.0%65.9 -58124268
Birch Road to Main Street - 2025 + Project41020,100350.52.0%1.0%67.4 -72156336
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (UM)41010,090350.52.0%1.0%64.4 --99212
3 Traffic Noise Contours 08 07 12.xlsAtkins 8/27/2012
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (UM) + Project41012,700350.52.0%1.0%65.4 -53115247
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (M)4109,772350.52.0%1.0%64.3 --96208
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (M) + Project41012,300350.52.0%1.0%65.3 -52112242
Eastlake Parkway
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - Existing41018,945450.52.0%1.0%69.6 -101218471
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - Existing + Project41024,115450.52.0%1.0%70.7 55119257553
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - 202541020,530450.52.0%1.0%70.0 50107230496
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - 2025 + Project41021,200450.52.0%1.0%70.1 51109235507
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM)41023,739450.52.0%1.0%70.6 55118254547
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (UM) + Project41024,000450.52.0%1.0%70.6 55119256551
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M)41023,739450.52.0%1.0%70.6 55118254547
Otay Lakes Road to Olympic Parkway - 2030 (M) + Project41024,000450.52.0%1.0%70.6 55119256551
Eastlake Parkway
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - Existing6109,199450.52.0%1.0%67.9 -78168362
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - Existing + Project61014,369450.52.0%1.0%69.8 -105226487
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 202561024,253450.52.0%1.0%72.1 69149320690
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2025 + Project61024,700450.52.0%1.0%72.2 70150324698
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (UM)61027,339450.52.0%1.0%72.6 75161347747
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (UM) + Project61027,600450.52.0%1.0%72.7 75162349752
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (M)61027,339450.52.0%1.0%72.6 75161347747
Olympic Parkway to Birch Road - 2030 (M) + Project61027,600450.52.0%1.0%72.7 75162349752
Eastlake Parkway
Birch Road to Main Street - Existing6101,310450.52.0%1.0%59.4 ---99
Birch Road to Main Street - Existing + Project6103,895450.52.0%1.0%64.2 --95204
Birch Road to Main Street - 202561049,016450.52.0%1.0%75.2 1102385121,103
Birch Road to Main Street - 2025 + Project61054,600450.52.0%1.0%75.6 1192555501,185
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (UM)61041,039450.52.0%1.0%74.4 98211455980
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (UM) + Project61041,300450.52.0%1.0%74.4 98212457984
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (M)61022,656450.52.0%1.0%71.8 66142306659
Birch Road to Main Street - 2030 (M) + Project61022,800450.52.0%1.0%71.8 66143307662
Otay Valley Road
Street A to SR-125 - Existing414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Street A to SR-125 - Existing + Project414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Street A to SR-125 - 2025414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Street A to SR-125 - 2025 + Project414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Street A to SR-125 - 2030 (UM)4145,995350.52.0%1.0%62.3 --71154
Street A to SR-125 - 2030 (UM) + Project4147,300350.52.0%1.0%63.2 --81175
Street A to SR-125 - 2030 (M)4149,362350.52.0%1.0%64.3 --96207
Street A to SR-125 - 2030 (M) + Project41411,400350.52.0%1.0%65.1 --110236
Otay Valley Road
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - Existing414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - Existing + Project414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - 2025414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - 2025 + Project414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - 2030 (UM)4145,995350.52.0%1.0%62.3 --71154
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - 2030 (UM) + Project4147,300350.52.0%1.0%63.2 --81175
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - 2030 (M)4149,362350.52.0%1.0%64.3 --96207
SR-125 to Village 9 Access - 2030 (M) + Project41411,400350.52.0%1.0%65.1 --110236
Otay Valley Road
Village 9 Access to University - Existing414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Village 9 Access to University + Project414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Village 9 Access to University - 2025414DNE350.52.0%1.0%#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!#VALUE!
Village 9 Access to University + Project4149,700350.52.0%1.0%64.4 --98212
Village 9 Access to University - 2030 (UM)4148,195350.52.0%1.0%63.7 --88189
Village 9 Access to University - 2030 (UM) + Project4149,500350.52.0%1.0%64.3 --97209
Village 9 Access to University - 2030 (M)4147,462350.52.0%1.0%63.3 --83178
Village 9 Access to University - 2030 (M) + Project4149,500350.52.0%1.0%64.3 --97209
3 Traffic Noise Contours 08 07 12.xlsAtkins 8/27/2012
TR
A
F
F
I
C
N
O
I
S
E
L
E
V
E
L
S
A
N
D
N
O
I
S
E
C
O
N
T
O
U
R
S
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
N
u
m
b
e
r
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
N
a
m
e
:
Ot
a
y
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
On
-
s
i
t
e
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
s
e
g
m
e
n
t
s
(
2
0
3
0
w
/
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
m
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
)
Ba
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Mo
d
e
l
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
:
F
H
W
A
H
i
g
h
w
a
y
2
.
5
N
o
i
s
e
P
r
e
d
i
c
t
i
o
n
M
o
d
e
l
So
u
r
c
e
o
f
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
:
R
B
F
,
J
a
n
2
0
1
2
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
N
o
i
s
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
o
r
:
Ldn
:
CN
E
L
:
X
"-
"
=
c
o
n
t
o
u
r
i
s
l
o
c
a
t
e
d
w
i
t
h
i
n
t
h
e
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
r
i
g
h
t
-
o
f
-
w
a
y
.
As
s
u
m
e
d
2
4
-
H
o
u
r
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
:
D
a
y
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
N
i
g
h
t
Di
s
t
a
n
c
e
i
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
c
e
n
t
e
r
l
i
n
e
o
f
t
h
e
r
o
a
d
w
a
y
s
e
g
m
e
n
t
To
t
a
l
A
D
T
V
o
l
u
m
e
s
7
7
%
1
3
%
1
0
%
to
t
h
e
r
e
c
e
p
t
o
r
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
.
Me
d
i
u
m
-
D
u
t
y
T
r
u
c
k
s
8
7
%
5
%
8
%
He
a
v
y
-
D
u
t
y
T
r
u
c
k
s
8
9
%
3
%
8
%
De
s
i
g
n
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
M
i
x
Di
s
t
a
n
c
e
f
r
o
m
C
e
n
t
e
r
l
i
n
e
o
f
R
o
a
d
w
a
y
20
3
0
W
i
t
h
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
w
i
t
h
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
M
i
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
d
i
a
n
A
D
T
S
p
e
e
d
A
l
p
h
a
M
e
d
i
u
m
H
e
a
v
y
CN
E
L
a
t
Distance to Contour
#
R
o
a
d
w
a
y
S
e
g
m
e
n
t
L
a
n
e
s
W
i
d
t
h
*
V
o
l
u
m
e
(
m
p
h
)
F
a
c
t
o
r
T
r
u
c
k
s
T
r
u
c
k
s
50
F
e
e
t
70 CNEL65 CNEL60 CNEL55 CNEL
1
La
M
e
d
i
a
R
o
a
d
No
r
t
h
b
o
u
n
d
,
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
t
o
2
0
1
0
,
8
0
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
64
-4494202
2
La
M
e
d
i
a
R
o
a
d
N
B
,
E
B
m
a
i
n
t
o
W
B
M
a
i
n
2
0
1
5
,
1
1
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
66
-57124266
3
La
M
e
d
i
a
R
o
a
d
N
B
,
s
p
l
i
t
t
o
E
B
m
a
i
n
2
0
1
7
,
3
8
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
67
3370151325
4
La
M
e
d
i
a
R
o
a
d
SB
,
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
t
o
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
2
0
1
2
,
1
5
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
64
-4698212
5
La
M
e
d
i
a
R
o
a
d
S
B
,
W
B
M
a
i
n
t
o
E
B
2
0
1
3
,
9
4
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
66
-58126271
6
La
M
e
d
i
a
R
o
a
d
S
B
,
E
B
M
a
i
n
t
o
s
p
l
i
t
2
0
1
8
,
7
5
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
68
3576163351
7
Ot
a
y V
a
l
l
e
y R
o
a
d
So
u
t
h
e
r
n
e
n
d
o
f
c
o
u
ple
t
t
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
4
0
3
9
,
5
3
0
4
5
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
72
71153330712
8
Ot
a
y
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
o
a
d
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
t
o
e
a
s
t
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
4
0
3
5
,
4
0
0
4
5
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
72
69149320690
9
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
W
B
,
e
a
s
t
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
t
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
2
0
2
1
,
4
0
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
67
-68146315
10
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
W
B
,
S
t
A
t
o
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
N
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
2
0
1
9
,
4
5
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
66
-60130279
11
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
W
B
,
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
N
B
t
o
S
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
2
0
1
1
,
5
0
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
66
-54116251
12
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
WB
,
S
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
t
o
w
e
s
t
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
2
0
1
4
,
8
1
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
64
-4597208
13
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
EB
,
w
e
s
t
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
t
o
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
2
0
1
9
,
5
6
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
67
-63136292
14
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
EB
,
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
S
B
t
o
N
B
2
0
2
1
,
1
2
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
68
3780173374
15
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
E
B
,
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
N
B
t
o
S
t
A
2
0
2
1
,
0
0
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
66
-59128275
16
Ma
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
E
B
,
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
t
o
e
a
s
t
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
2
0
2
4
,
4
5
0
3
0
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
68
3780173374
17
St
r
e
e
t
A
We
s
t
b
o
u
n
d
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
t
o
e
a
s
t
b
o
u
n
d
M
a
i
n
2
0
3
,
6
5
0
3
0
0
.
5
2
.
0
%
1
.
0
%
66
-57124266
18
St
r
e
e
t
A
E
a
s
t
b
o
u
n
d
M
a
i
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
t
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
2
0
8
,
3
0
0
3
0
0
.
5
2
.
0
%
1
.
0
%
64
-4698212
19
St
r
e
e
t
A
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
t
o
O
t
a
y
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
o
a
d
2
0
1
3
,
7
5
0
2
5
0
.
5
2
.
0
%
1
.
0
%
66
-62134288
20
St
r
e
e
t
B
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
t
o
e
a
s
t
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
2
0
7
,
9
0
0
2
5
0
.
5
2
.
0
%
1
.
0
%
63
-3677166
21
Ma
g
d
a
l
e
n
a
A
v
e
n
u
e
B
i
r
c
h
R
o
a
d
t
o
M
a
i
n
S
t
2
0
1
1
,
1
0
0
2
5
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
63
-3678168
22
a
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
B
i
r
c
h
R
d
t
o
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
N
B
2
0
9
,
0
0
0
4
5
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
68
3473158341
22
b
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
B
i
r
c
h
R
d
t
o
n
o
r
t
h
e
r
n
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
S
B
2
0
9
,
0
0
0
4
5
0
.
5
3
.
0
%
2
.
0
%
68
3473158341
23
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
s
/
o
O
V
R
2
0
8
,
5
0
0
2
5
0
.
5
2
.
0
%
1
.
0
%
63
-3780173
10
0
0
1
9
6
6
2
4
O
n
-
s
i
t
e
O
t
a
y
V
8
W
t
r
a
f
f
i
c
n
o
i
s
e
c
o
n
t
o
u
r
s
0
7
-
2
4
-
1
2
.
x
l
s
x
A
t
k
i
n
s
7/24/2012
Ot
a
y
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
T
N
M
2
.
5
N
o
i
s
e
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
G
r
o
u
n
d
F
l
o
o
r
3/
8
/
2
0
1
2
Re
c
e
i
v
e
r
T
N
M
#
S
i
t
e
#
P
k
H
r
L
e
q
W
/
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
C
N
E
L
*
C
N
E
L
w
/
b
a
r
r
i
e
r
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
N
B
n
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
2
1
65
.
6
6
5
.
6
0
64
.
1
6
4
.
1
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
N
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
8
2
67
.
4
6
7
.
4
0
65
.
9
6
5
.
9
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
N
B
s
p
l
i
t
t
o
M
a
i
n
7
9
3
68
.
7
6
8
.
7
0
67
.
2
6
7
.
2
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
S
B
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
-
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
3
4
65
.
9
6
5
.
9
0
64
.
4
6
4
.
4
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
S
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
7
5
67
.
5
6
7
.
5
0
66
6
6
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
S
B
s
p
l
i
t
t
o
M
a
i
n
8
0
6
69
.
2
6
9
.
2
0
67
.
7
6
7
.
7
0
50
f
t
O
t
a
y
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
m
i
d
6
9
7
73
.
8
7
3
.
8
0
72
.
3
7
2
.
3
0
50
f
t
O
t
a
y
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
e
a
s
t
7
1
8
73
.
6
7
3
.
6
0
72
.
1
7
2
.
1
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
e
/
o
S
t
A
4
9
9
68
.
5
6
8
.
5
0
67
6
7
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
W
B
e
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
0
1
0
67
.
7
6
7
.
7
0
66
.
2
6
6
.
2
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
W
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
7
7
1
1
67
6
7
0
65
.
5
6
5
.
5
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
W
B
w
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
4
1
2
65
.
8
6
5
.
8
0
64
.
3
6
4
.
3
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
E
B
n
e
a
r
w
e
s
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
5
5
1
3
68
6
8
0
66
.
5
6
6
.
5
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
E
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
9
1
4
69
.
6
6
9
.
6
0
68
.
1
6
8
.
1
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
E
B
e
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
6
1
1
5
67
.
6
6
7
.
6
0
66
.
1
6
6
.
1
0
50
f
t
E
B
M
a
i
n
e
a
s
t
6
3
1
6
69
.
6
6
9
.
6
0
68
.
1
6
8
.
1
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
u
p
p
e
r
6
2
1
7
67
.
4
6
7
.
4
0
65
.
9
6
5
.
9
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
m
i
d
6
6
1
8
65
.
9
6
5
.
9
0
64
.
4
6
4
.
4
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
m
i
d
l
o
w
e
r
7
0
1
9
67
.
9
6
7
.
9
0
66
.
4
6
6
.
4
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
7
5
2
0
64
.
3
6
4
.
3
0
62
.
8
6
2
.
8
0
50
f
t
M
a
g
d
a
l
e
n
a
A
v
e
4
8
2
1
64
.
4
6
4
.
4
0
62
.
9
6
2
.
9
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
e
a
s
t
4
6
2
2
69
6
9
0
67
.
5
6
7
.
5
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
l
o
w
e
r
6
8
2
3
64
.
6
6
3
.
7
0
.
9
63
.
1
6
2
.
2
0.9
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
2
4
N
1
60
.
8
6
1
0
.
2
59
.
3
5
9
.
5
-0.2
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
2
4
4
N
1
0
2
63
.
6
6
1
.
2
2
.
4
62
.
1
5
9
.
7
2.4
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
5
8
8
N
1
0
5
66
.
2
6
2
.
6
3
.
6
64
.
7
6
1
.
1
3.6
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
7
4
3
N
1
0
7
66
.
6
6
3
.
2
3
.
4
65
.
1
6
1
.
7
3.4
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
9
8
7
N
1
0
9
67
.
2
6
3
.
6
3
.
6
65
.
7
6
2
.
1
3.6
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
1
2
4
2
N
1
1
2
67
.
1
6
3
4
.
1
65
.
6
6
1
.
5
4.1
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
1
5
8
6
N
1
1
5
68
.
6
6
2
.
9
5
.
7
67
.
1
6
1
.
4
5.7
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
1
7
3
N
1
1
7
68
.
7
6
2
.
9
5
.
8
67
.
2
6
1
.
4
5.8
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
4
0
4
0
N
4
0
60
.
9
6
0
.
6
0
.
3
59
.
4
5
9
.
1
0.3
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
4
9
5
N
4
9
60
.
5
6
1
.
5
0
.
6
59
6
0
-1
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
6
4
4
1
N
6
4
58
.
2
5
7
.
9
0
.
3
56
.
7
5
6
.
4
0.3
5
V
8
W
T
N
M
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
0
3
-
0
8
-
1
2
.
x
l
s
x
A
t
k
i
n
s
1
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
9
6
8
9
N
9
6
60
.
9
6
0
.
9
0
59
.
4
5
9
.
4
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
9
9
9
4
N
9
9
62
.
9
6
2
.
8
0
.
1
61
.
4
6
1
.
3
0.1
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
1
0
2
3
7
P
1
0
2
59
.
9
5
8
.
7
1
.
2
58
.
4
5
7
.
2
1.2
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
2
9
3
5
P
2
9
57
.
4
5
7
0
.
4
55
.
9
5
5
.
5
0.4
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
5
5
3
4
P
5
5
57
.
1
5
6
.
7
0
.
4
55
.
6
5
5
.
2
0.4
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
7
5
3
6
P
7
5
59
.
5
5
8
.
9
0
.
6
58
5
7
.
4
0.6
75
f
t
P
A
Q
9
2
Q
71
.
8
6
6
.
4
5
.
4
70
.
3
6
4
.
9
5.4
75
f
t
P
A
U
7
2
U
71
.
4
6
6
.
3
5
.
1
69
.
9
6
4
.
8
5.1
Pa
r
c
e
l
V
4
3
1
V
4
59
.
8
5
9
.
4
0
.
4
58
.
3
5
7
.
9
0.4
Pa
r
c
e
l
V
4
2
2
7
V
4
2
60
.
6
6
0
.
4
0
.
2
59
.
1
5
8
.
9
0.2
*
C
N
E
L
i
s
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
t
o
b
e
1
.
5
d
B
A
l
e
s
s
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
L
e
q
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
,
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
F
T
A
g
u
i
d
a
n
c
e
(
F
T
A
2
0
0
6
)
.
5
V
8
W
T
N
M
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
0
3
-
0
8
-
1
2
.
x
l
s
x
A
t
k
i
n
s
2
Ot
a
y
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
T
N
M
2
.
5
N
o
i
s
e
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
U
p
p
e
r
F
l
o
o
r
(
2
6
f
e
e
t
)
3/
8
/
2
0
1
2
Re
c
e
i
v
e
r
T
N
M
#
S
i
t
e
#
P
k
H
r
L
e
q
W
/
B
a
r
r
i
e
r
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
C
N
E
L
*
C
N
E
L
w
/
b
a
r
r
i
e
r
R
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
N
B
n
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
2
1
65
6
5
0
63
.
5
6
3
.
5
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
N
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
8
2
66
.
9
6
6
.
9
0
65
.
4
6
5
.
4
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
N
B
s
p
l
i
t
t
o
M
a
i
n
7
9
3
68
6
8
0
66
.
5
6
6
.
5
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
S
B
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
-
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
3
4
65
.
6
6
5
.
6
0
64
.
1
6
4
.
1
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
S
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
7
5
66
.
9
6
6
.
9
0
65
.
4
6
5
.
4
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
S
B
s
p
l
i
t
t
o
M
a
i
n
8
0
6
68
.
6
6
8
.
6
0
67
.
1
6
7
.
1
0
50
f
t
O
t
a
y
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
m
i
d
6
9
7
73
.
1
7
3
.
1
0
71
.
6
7
1
.
6
0
50
f
t
O
t
a
y
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
e
a
s
t
7
1
8
72
.
8
7
2
.
8
0
71
.
3
7
1
.
3
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
e
/
o
S
t
A
4
9
9
68
.
4
6
8
.
4
0
66
.
9
6
6
.
9
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
W
B
e
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
0
1
0
67
.
1
6
7
.
1
0
65
.
6
6
5
.
6
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
W
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
7
7
1
1
67
6
7
0
65
.
5
6
5
.
5
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
W
B
w
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
4
1
2
65
.
4
6
5
.
4
0
63
.
9
6
3
.
9
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
E
B
n
e
a
r
w
e
s
t
b
o
u
n
d
a
r
y
5
5
1
3
67
.
5
6
7
.
5
0
66
6
6
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
E
B
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
5
9
1
4
69
.
2
6
9
.
2
0
67
.
7
6
7
.
7
0
50
f
t
M
a
i
n
S
t
E
B
e
/
o
c
o
u
p
l
e
t
6
1
1
5
68
6
8
0
66
.
5
6
6
.
5
0
50
f
t
E
B
M
a
i
n
e
a
s
t
6
3
1
6
69
.
2
6
9
.
2
0
67
.
7
6
7
.
7
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
u
p
p
e
r
6
2
1
7
67
.
5
6
7
.
5
0
66
6
6
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
m
i
d
6
6
1
8
65
.
4
6
5
.
4
0
63
.
9
6
3
.
9
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
m
i
d
l
o
w
e
r
7
0
1
9
67
.
2
6
7
.
2
0
65
.
7
6
5
.
7
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
7
5
2
0
63
.
5
6
3
.
5
0
62
6
2
0
50
f
t
M
a
g
d
a
l
e
n
a
A
v
e
4
8
2
1
63
.
8
6
3
.
8
0
62
.
3
6
2
.
3
0
50
f
t
L
a
M
e
d
i
a
R
d
e
a
s
t
4
6
2
2
68
.
1
6
8
.
1
0
66
.
6
6
6
.
6
0
50
f
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
A
l
o
w
e
r
6
8
2
3
65
6
3
.
9
1
.
1
63
.
5
6
2
.
4
1.1
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
2
4
N
1
60
.
8
6
0
.
5
0
.
3
59
.
3
5
9
0.3
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
2
4
4
N
1
0
2
67
.
9
6
7
.
9
0
66
.
4
6
6
.
4
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
5
8
8
N
1
0
5
69
.
8
6
9
.
8
0
68
.
3
6
8
.
3
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
7
4
3
N
1
0
7
70
.
5
7
0
.
5
0
69
6
9
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
0
9
8
7
N
1
0
9
70
.
7
7
0
.
7
0
69
.
2
6
9
.
2
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
1
2
4
2
N
1
1
2
70
.
7
7
0
.
7
0
69
.
2
6
9
.
2
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
1
5
8
6
N
1
1
5
71
.
1
7
1
.
1
0
69
.
6
6
9
.
6
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
1
1
7
3
N
1
1
7
71
.
1
7
1
.
1
0
69
.
6
6
9
.
6
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
4
0
4
0
N
4
0
60
.
8
6
0
.
5
0
.
3
59
.
3
5
9
0.3
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
4
9
5
N
4
9
62
.
2
6
1
.
5
0
.
7
60
.
7
6
0
0.7
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
6
4
4
1
N
6
4
59
.
7
5
9
.
2
0
.
5
58
.
2
5
7
.
7
0.5
5
V
8
W
T
N
M
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
0
3
-
0
8
-
1
2
.
x
l
s
x
A
t
k
i
n
s
1
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
9
6
8
9
N
9
6
62
.
5
6
2
.
3
0
.
2
61
6
0
.
8
0.2
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
9
9
9
4
N
9
9
65
.
7
6
5
.
5
0
.
2
64
.
2
6
4
0.2
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
1
0
2
3
7
P
1
0
2
59
.
6
5
8
.
6
1
58
.
1
5
7
.
1
1
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
2
9
3
5
P
2
9
57
.
3
5
6
.
8
0
.
5
55
.
8
5
5
.
3
0.5
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
5
5
3
4
P
5
5
56
.
5
5
6
.
2
0
.
3
55
5
4
.
7
0.3
Pa
r
c
e
l
P
7
5
3
6
P
7
5
59
.
3
5
8
.
8
0
.
5
57
.
8
5
7
.
3
0.5
75
f
t
P
A
Q
9
2
Q
71
.
4
7
1
.
3
0
.
1
69
.
9
6
9
.
8
0.1
75
f
t
P
A
U
7
2
U
70
.
7
7
0
.
7
0
69
.
2
6
9
.
2
0
Pa
r
c
e
l
V
4
3
1
V
4
59
.
6
5
9
.
2
0
.
4
58
.
1
5
7
.
7
0.4
Pa
r
c
e
l
V
4
2
2
7
V
4
2
60
.
6
6
0
.
3
0
.
3
59
.
1
5
8
.
8
0.3
*
C
N
E
L
i
s
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
t
o
b
e
1
.
5
d
B
A
l
e
s
s
t
h
a
n
t
h
e
L
e
q
f
o
r
t
h
e
P
e
a
k
H
o
u
r
,
i
n
a
c
c
o
r
d
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
F
T
A
g
u
i
d
a
n
c
e
(
F
T
A
2
0
0
6
)
.
5
V
8
W
T
N
M
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
0
3
-
0
8
-
1
2
.
x
l
s
x
A
t
k
i
n
s
2
V8
W
R
C
N
M
0
3
1
2
1
2
.
t
x
t
R
o
a
d
w
a
y
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
N
o
i
s
e
M
o
d
e
l
(
R
C
N
M
)
,
V
e
r
s
i
o
n
1
.
1
Re
p
o
r
t
d
a
t
e
:
0
3
/
1
2
/
2
0
1
2
Ca
s
e
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
:
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
8
W
e
s
t
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
*
*
*
*
R
e
c
e
p
t
o
r
#
1
*
*
*
*
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e
s
(
d
B
A
)
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
D
a
y
t
i
m
e
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
N
i
g
h
t
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
On
s
i
t
e
A
d
j
a
c
e
n
t
U
s
e
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
6
5
.
0
6
0
.
0
5
5
.
0
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
S
p
e
c
A
c
t
u
a
l
R
e
c
e
p
t
o
r
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
I
m
p
a
c
t
U
s
a
g
e
L
m
a
x
L
m
a
x
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
S
h
i
e
l
d
i
n
g
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
D
e
v
i
c
e
(
%
)
(
d
B
A
)
(
d
B
A
)
(
f
e
e
t
)
(
d
B
A
)
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ex
c
a
v
a
t
o
r
N
o
4
0
8
5
.
0
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Ro
l
l
e
r
N
o
2
0
8
5
.
0
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Cr
a
n
e
N
o
1
6
8
5
.
0
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Do
z
e
r
N
o
4
0
8
5
.
0
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Sc
r
a
p
e
r
N
o
4
0
8
5
.
0
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
o
i
s
e
L
i
m
i
t
s
(
d
B
A
)
N
o
i
s
e
L
i
m
i
t
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
n
c
e
(dBA)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
------------
C
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
(
d
B
A
)
D
a
y
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
N
i
g
h
t
D
a
y
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
N
i
g
h
t
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
------------
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x Leq
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
---- ------
Ex
c
a
v
a
t
o
r
8
5
.
0
8
1
.
0
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Ro
l
l
e
r
8
5
.
0
7
8
.
0
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Cr
a
n
e
8
5
.
0
7
7
.
0
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Do
z
e
r
8
5
.
0
8
1
.
0
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Sc
r
a
p
e
r
8
5
.
0
8
1
.
0
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
T
o
t
a
l
8
5
.
0
8
6
.
9
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
*
*
*
*
R
e
c
e
p
t
o
r
#
2
*
*
*
*
B
a
s
e
l
i
n
e
s
(
d
B
A
)
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
L
a
n
d
U
s
e
D
a
y
t
i
m
e
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
N
i
g
h
t
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Sc
h
o
o
l
C
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
6
5
.
0
6
0
.
0
5
5
.
0
E
q
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
S
p
e
c
A
c
t
u
a
l
R
e
c
e
p
t
o
r
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
I
m
p
a
c
t
U
s
a
g
e
L
m
a
x
L
m
a
x
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
S
h
i
e
l
d
i
n
g
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
D
e
v
i
c
e
(
%
)
(
d
B
A
)
(
d
B
A
)
(
f
e
e
t
)
(
d
B
A
)
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Ex
c
a
v
a
t
o
r
N
o
4
0
8
5
.
0
1
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Ro
l
l
e
r
N
o
2
0
8
5
.
0
1
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Cr
a
n
e
N
o
1
6
8
5
.
0
1
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Do
z
e
r
N
o
4
0
8
5
.
0
1
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
Sc
r
a
p
e
r
N
o
4
0
8
5
.
0
1
5
0
.
0
0
.
0
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
N
o
i
s
e
L
i
m
i
t
s
(
d
B
A
)
N
o
i
s
e
L
i
m
i
t
E
x
c
e
e
d
a
n
c
e
(dBA)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
------------
C
a
l
c
u
l
a
t
e
d
(
d
B
A
)
D
a
y
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
N
i
g
h
t
D
a
y
E
v
e
n
i
n
g
N
i
g
h
t
Pa
g
e
1
V8
W
R
C
N
M
0
3
1
2
1
2
.
t
x
t
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
------------
Eq
u
i
p
m
e
n
t
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x
L
e
q
L
m
a
x Leq
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
---- ------
Ex
c
a
v
a
t
o
r
7
5
.
5
7
1
.
5
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Ro
l
l
e
r
7
5
.
5
6
8
.
5
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Cr
a
n
e
7
5
.
5
6
7
.
5
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Do
z
e
r
7
5
.
5
7
1
.
5
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Sc
r
a
p
e
r
7
5
.
5
7
1
.
5
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
T
o
t
a
l
7
5
.
5
7
7
.
4
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N
/
A
N/A
Pa
g
e
2