HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 2 - Attachment 4 - Eilar LetterE#LAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
270 South Juniper street, Suite 700, Escondido, CA 92026
Phone: 760.738-5570 or 800438.8205 • Fax: 760-73"227
www.ellarassoclates.com • Into@ellarassoclates.com
October 13., 2017
Job 9880504N4
City of Chula Vista
Development Services Department
Attention: Caroline Young
275 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Subject: Response to Opposition to Was h -N -Go (DRI 5-0037; CUP 15.0023; PER16-0403)
As requested, Eilar Associates, Inc. has reviewed a letter from Procoplo, dated October 4, 2017,
regarding the Wash -N -Go car wash project, to be located at 495 Telegraph Canyon Road. This
letter expressed concerns regarding the complete noise study for the project, prepared by HMMH
and dated August 7, 2017. An earlier letter from Procopio, dated April 4, 2017, has also been
reviewed.
It is the opinion of the undersigned that, despite the concerns raised in the letter from Procopio, the
acoustical report prepared by HMMH adequately addressed the major noise sources associated
with the car wash site in comparison to the applicable Municipal Code noise limits. Comments
following the review of this letter are listed below.
1. The letter takes issue with the fact that the only noise source evaluated within the report is
the car wash dryer system. The letter lists a number of other sources, each of which is
addressed below.
a. Vacuums: The vacuums located on site are two central vacuum units, which will be
fully enclosed within the car wash building, per the study. The central unit contains
the motor of the vacuum, which is the primary source of noise associated with
vacuum equipment. The noise from the vacuum wand will consist of a light hiss that
is not expected to be significant at off-site receivers.
b. Intercoms: Any intercom systems that would be located on site would be expected to
have a minimal contribution to noise at off-site receivers in comparison to car wash
dryer noise, which is the dominant source of noise at the site. Additionally, due to
the brief duration of time during which intercoms would be operational, the impact on
overall hourly noise impacts would be less than significant.
c. Customer Noise (idling, radios, car horns): This is an unpredictable source of noise
that could be associated with any commercial site and is out of the control of the car
wash operators. Modeling of such noise sources would not be feasible. Posting
signage asking that users turn radios down and refrain from sounding horns would
be a reasonable compromise to attempt to address these noise sources.
Attachment 4
Response to Opposition to Wash -N -Go (DR1 "037; CUP15.0023; PER16-0003) October 13, 2017
Job #B50504N4 Page 2 of 3
2. This letter also states that the report "does not address. nuisance effects" of the sources
detailed in Item 1. The letter appears to treat "nuisance" noise as being interchangeable
with intermittent noise sources. While the operations of the car wash may be subjectively
considered a nuisance to neighbors, Section 19.58 of the City of Chula Vista Municipal
Code differentiates between "environmental' and "nuisance" noise and the applicable noise
limits for each category. Environmental noise disturbances are defined in the code as
"jt]hose noise disturbances resulting from land use activity normally permitted under the land
use code, or permitted by a conditional use permit issued by the city, but which exceed the
noise level limits set by this title for that particular land use." Alternatively, nuisance noise
disturbances are defined as "[t)hose noise disturbances, other than environmental noise
disturbances, which because of their unusual presence are considered harmful to health
and well-being, annoying, obnoxious and unpleasant." The code goes on to further detail
examples of environmental versus nuisance noise, with environmental noise sources
typically being associated with normal or permitted activities and nuisance noise being
associated with improperly maintained equipment, unpermitted uses, shoutingloutcrying,
private parties, and other such unpredictable noise sources.
Although the project is still in the application process for a CUP, it is. clear that the noise
impacts. associated with a car wash facility would fall into the "environmental noise"
category. Noise limits given in Section 19.68 of the code are given as hourly average noise
limits when pertaining to environmental noise, and noise limits not to be exceeded at any
time for nuisance noise. As detailed above, predictable operational noise impacts from the
car wash, whether intermittent or continuous, would be considered an environmental noise
impact. The acoustical report addressed noise impacts from the car wash in terms of hourly
noise limits and demonstrated compliance with applicable noise limits, per the code.
3. The letter also mentions that the report did not consider "periodic increases in ambient noise
levels" resulting from operation of the project. It is the opinion of the undersigned that the
noise analysis was performed in line with the regulations of the Municipal Code, which
simply state that, in the event that measured ambient noise levels exceed the permissible
exterior noise limit in the code, the noise limit shall be the ambient noise level. In past
comment letters for this project, Eilar Associates requested that the noise analysis set the
noise limit as the quietest measured hourly ambient noise level during potential hours of
operation, such that during most hours of operation, the operational noise levels would be
considerably lower than the ambient noise levels. This comment was addressed in the final
version.
4. The April 4 letter from Procopio also appears to reference the conditional use requirements
for car wash facilities listed in Section 19.58.050 of the Municipal Code, which states: "All
equipment used for the facility shall be soundproofed so that any noise emanating
therefrom, as measured from any point on adjacent property, shall be no more audible than
the noise emanating from the normal street traffic at a comparable distance." It is the
opinion of the undersigned that the documentation of ambient noise levels at the site and
the fact that car wash noise impacts have been mitigated to be less than the minimum
hourly ambient noise levels during potential hours of operation indicates that this condition
would be met by the proposed car wash.
Eiiar Associates, Inc. • 210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100, Escondido, CA 92025.750-738-5570 • Fax 760-738-5227
Response to opposition to Wash -N -Go (DR15-0037; CUP15-0023; PERM -0003)
Job #860504N4
Please call if you have any questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
.
Jo an Brothers, Principal Acoustical Consultant
October 13, 2017
Page 3 of 3
Amy Hoole enior Acoustical Consultant
E11ar Associates, Inc. ■ 210 South Juniper Street, Suite 140, Escondido, CA 92025 a 760-738-5570 • Fax 760.738-5227