HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix L - Noise Technical Report
Noise Technical Report for the
Nakano Project
Chula Vista, California
Prepared for Tri Pointe Homes 13520 Evening Creek Drive North, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92128 Contact: Allen Kashani
Prepared by RECON Environmental, Inc. 3111 Camino del Rio North, Suite 600 San Diego, CA 92108 P 619.308.9333
RECON Number 3396-1 September 20, 2023
Jessica Fleming, Senior Air Quality and Noise Specialist
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... iii
1.0 Introduction and Background...................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Noise Characteristics ......................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Vibration Fundamentals ................................................................................................................... 6
2.0 Regulatory Setting ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Federal ................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 State ........................................................................................................................................................ 7
2.3 Local ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
3.0 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................................... 15
4.0 Thresholds of Significance .......................................................................................................... 17
4.1 City of Chula Vista Significance Determination Thresholds ............................................... 17
4.2 City of San Diego Significance Determination Thresholds ................................................. 18
5.0 Impact Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 19
5.1 Short-Term Construction Noise .................................................................................................. 19
5.2 Conventional Construction Activity Vibration ......................................................................... 25
5.3 Long-Term Operational Noise ..................................................................................................... 26
5.4 Land Use Noise Compatibility (Non-CEQA Analysis) ........................................................... 30
6.0 Mitigation Measures and Project Design Features ............................................................. 40
6.1 Mitigation Measures ....................................................................................................................... 40
6.2 Project Design Features ................................................................................................................. 42
7.0 References Cited .......................................................................................................................... 43
FIGURES
1: Project Location ................................................................................................................................................. 2 2: Project Location on Aerial Photograph ..................................................................................................... 3 3: Site Plan ................................................................................................................................................................ 4 4: Noise Assessment Locations ....................................................................................................................... 16 5: Existing Vehicle Traffic Noise Contours .................................................................................................. 24 6: Operational Noise Contours....................................................................................................................... 29 7: Future Vehicle Traffic Noise Contours..................................................................................................... 32 8: Noise Barriers .................................................................................................................................................. 35
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
TABLES
1: City of Chula Vista Exterior Property-Line Noise Limits ....................................................................... 9 2: City of Chula Vista Exterior Land Use/Noise Compatibility Guidelines ......................................... 10 3: San Diego Exterior Noise Limits .................................................................................................................. 11 4: City of San Diego Land Use – Noise Compatibility Guidelines ........................................................ 13 5: Measured Baseline Outdoor Ambient Noise Levels ............................................................................ 15 6: Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels ................................................................. 20 7: Estimated Distances between Construction Activities and the Nearest Existing City of San Diego and City of Chula Vista Noise-Sensitive Receptors..................................................... 21 8: Predicted Construction Noise Levels per Activity Phase at Sensitive Receptors ....................... 22 9: Predicted Construction Noise Levels at Sensitive Habitat ................................................................ 23 10: Roadway Segment ADT Volumes .............................................................................................................. 27 11: Traffic Noise Level with and without Project and Ambient Noise Increases ............................... 27 12: Predicted Project Stationary Source Operations Noise ..................................................................... 30 13: Future Vehicle Traffic Noise Levels ........................................................................................................... 32 14: Unmitigated and Mitigated Noise Levels at Exterior Use Areas ..................................................... 36 15: Predicted Net Sound Transmission Class of Sample Occupied Room Façade .......................... 39
ATTACHMENTS
1: Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data 2: Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output 3: SoundPLAN Data – Existing Vehicle Traffic Noise and Construction Noise at Sensitive Habitat 4: FHWA-RD-77-108 Off-Site Traffic Noise Calculations 5: SoundPLAN Data – Operational Noise 6: SoundPLAN Data – Future Vehicle Traffic Noise
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
iii
Acronyms and Abbreviations
ACC air-cooled condenser ADT average daily traffic ALUCP Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Caltrans California Department of Transportation CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CVMC Chula Vista Municipal Code
dB decibel
dB(A) A-weighted decibel
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
I-805 Interstate 805
ips inches per second
LAFCO Local Agency Formation Commission
Ldn day–night average noise level
Leq equivalent noise level
Lmax maximum sound level
Lmin minimum sound level
MSCP Multiple Species Conservation Plan
NSR noise-sensitive receptor
PPV peak particle velocity
project Nakano Project
RCNM Roadway Construction Noise Model
SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments
SDCRAA San Diego County Regional Airport Authority SDMC San Diego Municipal Code SLM sound level meter ST short-term STC sound transmission class
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 1
1.0 Introduction and Background
This technical noise report evaluates the potential noise impacts during construction and operation of the proposed Nakano project (project). This assessment is based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and the City of San Diego CEQA Significance Determination Thresholds (City of San Diego 2022).
1.1 Project Description
The project consists of development of 215 residential dwellings units consisting of 61 detached condominiums, 84 duplexes and 70 townhome dwelling units on 23.8 acres with approximately 5 acres of hardscaped/paved roadway area. However, to represent a conservative analysis of potential unit mix, the environmental analysis assumes a maximum of 221 residential units. The project site is located on the 450 block of Dennery Road, in the city of Chula Vista, California. Figure 1 shows the project location and Figure 2 shows an aerial photograph of the project site and vicinity. Figure 3 shows the site plan.
The project is evaluated under Scenario 1: No Annexation Scenario where the project would remain within the City of Chula Vista in addition to two Annexation scenarios.
Scenario 1, the No Annexation Scenario, assumes the project would stay in Chula Vista and not be annexed into San Diego. Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) approval of out of agency service agreements for services and utilities from San Diego would be required. Under this scenario, Chula Vista would issue grading and development permits for the project site; however, the City of San Diego would require a site development permit and grading permit for the off-site improvements associated with primary site access and secondary emergency access.
Two potential Annexation scenarios are described below. The key difference between the two Annexation scenarios would be the agency responsibility for issuance of grading and development permits for the project site.
In Annexation Scenario 2a, grading and development of the project site would not proceed until the LAFCO reorganization process is complete. In this scenario, the City of San Diego would issue grading and development permits for the project site and all off-site improvement areas after approval of the LAFCO reorganization.
In Annexation Scenario 2b, grading and site development would proceed prior to LAFCO reorganization. In this scenario, the City of Chula Vista would issue grading and development permits for the project site and City of San Diego would issue a grading permit for the off-site portions. Grading permits, recordation of a final map, and Chula Vista issuance of all final certificates of occupancy would be completed prior to approval of the LAFCO reorganization. Annexation of the project site to San Diego would not occur until after site development in Chula Vista is complete.
FIGURE 1
Regional Location
kj
USMC AIR
STATION
MIRAMAR
Los Penasquitos
Canyon Presv
Mission Trails
Regional Park
Cleveland
National
Forest
Batiquitos
Lagoon
Lake Hodges
San Vicente
Reservoir
Sweetwater
Reservoir
Lower Otay
Reservoir
D u l z u r a
C r e e k
S a n t a Y s a b e l C r e e k
O t a y R i v e r
E s c o n d i d o
C r e e k
S w e e t w a t e r
R i v e r
S a n D i e g o R i v e r
Jamul Indian
Village
Sycuan
Reservation
Barona
Reservation
Bonita
Bostonia
Casa de
Oro-Mount
Helix
Crest
Eucalyptus
Hills
Fairbanks
Ranch
Granite
Hills
Harbison
Canyon
Jamul
Lakeside
La Presa
Ramona
Rancho San
Diego
Rancho
Santa Fe
Spring
Valley
Winter
Gardens
UV163
UV282
UV78
UV56
UV54
UV75
UV125
UV905
UV67
UV94
UV52 §¨¦8
§¨¦805
§¨¦15
§¨¦5
S A N D I E G O
C O U N T Y
M
E
X
I C
O
Imperial
Beach
Lemon
Grove
Chula Vista
San Diego
El Cajon
Encinitas
La Mesa
Poway
San Marcos
Carlsbad
National
City
Santee
Coronado
Escondido
Solana
Beach
Del Mar
kj
USMC AIR
STATION
MIRAMAR
Los Penasquitos
Canyon Presv
Mission Trails
Regional Park
Cleveland
National
Forest
Batiquitos
Lagoon
Lake Hodges
San Vicente
Reservoir
Sweetwater
Reservoir
Lower Otay
Reservoir
D u l z u r a
C r e e k
S a n t a Y s a b e l C r e e k
O t a y R i v e r
E s c o n d i d o
C r e e k
S w e e t w a t e r
R i v e r
S a n D i e g o R i v e r
Jamul Indian
Village
Sycuan
Reservation
Barona
Reservation
Bonita
Bostonia
Casa de
Oro-Mount
Helix
Crest
Eucalyptus
Hills
Fairbanks
Ranch
Granite
Hills
Harbison
Canyon
Jamul
Lakeside
La Presa
Ramona
Rancho San
Diego
Rancho
Santa Fe
Spring
Valley
Winter
Gardens
UV163
UV282
UV78
UV56
UV54
UV75
UV125
UV905
UV67
UV94
UV52 §¨¦8
§¨¦805
§¨¦15
§¨¦5
S A N D I E G O
C O U N T Y
M
E
X
I C
O
Imperial
Beach
Lemon
Grove
Chula Vista
San Diego
El Cajon
Encinitas
La Mesa
Poway
San Marcos
Carlsbad
National
City
Santee
Coronado
Escondido
Solana
Beach
Del Mar
0 5Miles [
M:\JOBS\3396-1\common_gis\Reports\Nostec\Fig1.mxd 06/10/2022 bma
LOS
ANGELES
ORANGE RIVERSIDE
SAN BERNARDINO
SAN DIEGO
MEXICO
Project Locationkj
FIGURE 2
Project Location on Aerial Photograph
G O LDEN S K Y W A Y
BL
U
E
CO
R
AL
C
V
O
C
E A N M I S T P L
D E N N E R Y R D
§¨¦805
G O LDEN S K Y W A Y
BL
U
E
CO
R
AL
C
V
O
C
E A N M I S T P L
D E N N E R Y R D
§¨¦805
Image Source: NearMap (flown January 2023)
0 300Feet [
Project Boundary
M:\JOBS\3396-1\common_gis\Reports\Nostec\Fig2.mxd 05/16/2023 bma
M:\JOBS\3396-1\nos\graphics\Fig3.afdesign 05/15/23 bma
Map Source:Civil Sense, Inc.
FIGURE 3
Site Plan
0 120 Feet
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 5
While the physical improvements proposed would be the same under all project scenarios, the discretionary actions would differ. The No Annexation Scenario would include a City of Chula Vista General Plan Amendment, Tentative Map, Specific Plan, out of service agreements for services and utilities, and certification of the Environmental Impact Report. More specifically, the General Plan Amendment would change the land use designation to Specific Plan – Residential Medium and the Specific Plan would implement the R-3 zone in Chula Vista.
The Annexation scenarios would include the annexation of the site from the City of Chula Vista and Otay Water District to the City of San Diego, an annexation agreement, City of San Diego and City of Chula Vista Sphere of Influence revision, City of San Diego and City of Chula Vista General Plan Amendment, Otay Mesa Community Plan Amendment, prezone in San Diego, San Diego Resolution of Initiation and Chula Vista Resolution Support, a Tentative Map, and certification of the Environmental Impact Report. Under the Annexation scenarios, the site would be designated by the City of San Diego as Residential – Low Medium and zoned as RM-1-1 (Residential-Multiple Unit). The Local Agency Formation Commission would provide oversight of the annexation process.
For purposes of the environmental analysis, the responsibility for permitting and implementing required mitigation measures detailed in this report would be the City of Chula Vista for the No Annexation Scenario and the Annexation Scenario 2b. Therefore, the analysis for these two scenarios is combined. The analysis for Annexation Scenario 2a is addressed separately as the City of San Diego would have responsibility for implementing applicable mitigation for project under this scenario.
1.2 Noise Characteristics
Sound is mechanical energy transmitted by pressure waves in a compressible medium, such as air. Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired. The sound pressure level has become the most common descriptor used to characterize the loudness of an ambient sound level. The unit of measurement of sound pressure is a decibel (dB). Under controlled conditions in an acoustics laboratory, the trained, healthy human ear is able to discern changes in sound levels of 1 A-weighted dB [dB(A)] when exposed to steady, single-frequency signals in the mid-frequency range.
Outside such controlled conditions, the trained ear can detect changes of 2 dB(A) in normal environmental noise. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear, however, can barely perceive noise level changes of 3 dB. A change of 5 dB(A) is readily perceptible, and a change of 10 dB(A) is perceived as twice or half as loud (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2013). A doubling of sound energy results in a 3 dB(A) increase in sound, which means that a doubling of sound energy (e.g., doubling the number of daily trips along a given road) would result in a barely perceptible change in sound level.
Sound may be described in terms of level or amplitude (measured in dB), frequency or pitch (measured in hertz or cycles per second), and duration (measured in seconds or minutes). Because the human ear is not equally sensitive to sound at all frequencies, a special frequency-dependent rating scale is used to relate noise to human sensitivity. The dB(A) scale performs this compensation by discriminating against low and very high frequencies in a manner approximating the sensitivity of the human ear.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 6
Several descriptors of noise (also known as, noise metrics) exist to help predict average community reactions to the adverse effects of environmental noise, including traffic-generated noise. These descriptors include the equivalent noise level over a given period (Leq), the day–night average noise level (Ldn), and the community noise equivalent level (CNEL). Each of these descriptors uses units of dB(A).
Leq is a dB quantity that represents the constant or energy-averaged value equivalent to the amount of variable sound energy received by a receptor during a time interval. For example, a 1-hour Leq measurement of 60 dB(A) would represent the average amount of energy contained in all the noise that occurred in that hour. Leq is an effective noise descriptor because of its ability to assess the total time-varying effects of noise on sensitive receptors, which can then be compared to an established Leq standard or threshold of the same duration. Another descriptor is maximum sound level (Lmax), which is the greatest sound level measured during a designated time interval or event. The minimum sound level (Lmin) is often called the floor of a measurement period.
Unlike the Leq, Lmax, and Lmin metrics, Ldn and CNEL descriptors always represent 24-hour periods and differ from a 24-hour Leq value because they apply a time-weighted factor designed to emphasize noise events that occur during the non-daytime hours (when speech and sleep disturbance is of more concern). Time weighted refers to the fact that Ldn and CNEL penalize noise that occurs during certain sensitive periods. In the case of CNEL, noise occurring during the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.) receives no penalty. Noise during the evening (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) is penalized by adding 5 dB(A) to the actual levels, and nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) noise is penalized by adding 10 dB(A) to the actual levels. Ldn differs from CNEL in that the daytime period is longer (defined instead as 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.), thus eliminating the dB(A) adjustment for the evening period. Ldn and CNEL are the predominant criteria used to measure roadway noise affecting residential receptors. These two metrics generally differ from one another by no more than 0.5–1 dB(A), and are often considered or actually defined as being essentially equivalent by many jurisdictions.
1.3 Vibration Fundamentals
Vibration is oscillatory movement of mass (typically a solid) over time. It is described in terms of frequency and amplitude and, unlike sound, can be expressed as displacement, velocity, or acceleration. For environmental studies, vibration is often studied as a velocity that, akin to the discussion of sound pressure levels, can also be expressed in dB as a way to cast a large range of quantities into a more convenient scale and with respect to a reference quantity. Vibration impacts to buildings are generally discussed in terms of inches per second (ips) peak particle velocity (PPV), which will be used herein to discuss vibration levels for ease of reading and comparison with relevant standards. Vibration can also be annoying and thereby impact occupants of structures, and vibration of sufficient amplitude can disrupt sensitive equipment and processes (Caltrans 2020a), such as those involving the use of electron microscopes and lithography equipment. Common sources of vibration within communities include construction activities and railroads. Groundborne vibration generated by construction projects is usually highest during pile driving, rock blasting, soil compacting, jack hammering, and demolition-related activities where sudden releases of subterranean energy or powerful impacts of tools on hard materials occur. Depending on their distances to a sensitive receptor, operation of large bulldozers, graders, loaded dump trucks, or other heavy construction
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 7
equipment and vehicles on a construction site also have the potential to cause high vibration amplitudes.
2.0 Regulatory Setting
2.1 Federal
2.1.1 Federal Transit Administration
In its Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment guidance manual, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) recommends a daytime construction noise level threshold of 80 dB(A) Leq over an 8-hour period (FTA 2018) when detailed construction noise assessments are performed to evaluate potential impacts to community residences surrounding a project. Although this FTA guidance is not a regulation, it can serve as a quantified standard in the absence of such noise limits at the state and local jurisdictional levels.
2.2 State
2.2.1 California Code of Regulations, Title 24
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations sets standards that new development in California must meet. According to Title 24, interior noise levels are not to exceed 45 CNEL in any habitable room (International Construction Code 2019).
2.2.2 California Department of Health Services Guidelines
The California Department of Health Services has developed guidelines of community noise acceptability for use by local agencies (State of California 2017). Selected relevant levels are listed here:
• Below 60 CNEL: normally acceptable for low-density residential use
• 50 to 70 CNEL: conditionally acceptable for low-density residential use
• Below 65 CNEL: normally acceptable for high-density residential use and transient lodging
• 60 to 70 CNEL: conditionally acceptable for high-density residential, transient lodging, churches, educational, and medical facilities
The normally acceptable exterior noise level for high-density residential use is up to 65 CNEL. Additionally, this exterior noise level limit is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan Noise Element, which considers multi- family units noise-sensitive land uses.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 8
2.2.3 California Department of Transportation
In its Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (Caltrans 2020a), Caltrans recommends 0.5 ips PPV as a threshold for the avoidance of structural damage to typical newer residential buildings exposed to continuous or frequent intermittent sources of groundborne vibration. For transient vibration events, such as blasting, the damage risk threshold would be 1.0 ips PPV (Caltrans 2020a) at the same type of newer residential structures. For older structures, these guidance thresholds would be more stringent: 0.3 ips PPV for continuous/intermittent vibration sources, and 0.5 ips PPV for transient vibration events. With respect to human annoyance, Caltrans guidance indicates that building occupants exposed to continuous groundborne vibration at a level of 0.1 ips PPV would find it either “strongly perceptible” or “begins to annoy” and thus for purposes of this assessment would be considered a likely significant impact. Although these Caltrans guidance thresholds are not regulations, they can serve as quantified standards in the absence of such limits at the local jurisdictional level.
2.3 Local
The following are summarized or reproduced portions of relevant City of Chula Vista and City of San Diego regulations and General Plan policies.
2.3.1 City of Chula Vista
2.3.1.1 City of Chula Vista Municipal Code 19.68 (Noise Ordinance)
The City of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance (Chula Vista Municipal Code [CVMC] Section 19.68) (City of Chula Vista 2020) contains regulations restricting land use related noise-generating activities and operations, so as to avoid noise nuisance in the community. Section 19.68.030 of the CVMC establishes the maximum allowable exterior noise limits, based upon the classification of the receiving land use. These standards typically apply to stationary sources such as noise from mechanical equipment (including mechanical ventilation and air condition noise, pool pump noise, etc.) or event noise, as opposed to traffic noise. For instance, a school, commercial enterprise, or industrial operation must not generate noise that exceeds a certain specified noise level at any property boundary where an adjacent residential use exists. The property-line noise standards are presented in Table 1.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 9
Table 1
City of Chula Vista Exterior Property-Line Noise Limits
Receiving Land Use Category
Noise Level (dB(A) Leq)
10 p.m. to 7 a.m. (Weekdays) 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. (Weekdays)
10 p.m. to 8 a.m. (Weekends) 8 a.m. to 10 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
Note: dB(A) = A-weighted decibels
Title 17 of the CVMC (Environmental Quality), Chapter 24, addresses managing noisy and disorderly conduct. Section 17.24.040.C.8 specifically addresses restrictions against generation of construction noise in overnight periods. The use of any tools, power machinery, or equipment, or the conduct of construction and building work in residential zones so as to cause noises disturbing to the peace, comfort, and quiet enjoyment of property of any person residing or working in the vicinity, shall be prohibited 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, except when the work is necessary for emergency repairs required for the health and safety of any member of the community (City of Chula Vista 2020).
Although the City does not set specific numerical limits for noise associated with temporary construction activities, it can be perceived as a nuisance; thus, the City restricts the times of day when construction may occur (7:00 a.m.–10:00 p.m., Monday–Friday, and 8:00 a.m.–10:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday).
2.3.1.2 City of Chula Vista General Plan Noise Element
The City of Chula Vista General Plan Noise Element establishes noise criteria for various land uses (City of Chula Vista 2005). The maximum allowable exterior noise level at outdoor usable areas for new residential development is an annual CNEL of 65 dB. The City’s exterior land use-noise compatibility guidelines for various land uses are depicted in Table 2. For residential development, the City typically applies the noise criteria at the backyards of single-family homes and at private patios, exterior balconies, and exterior common use areas of multi-family developments. The minimum amount of required exterior use space shall meet this criteria, with any additional are being provided being exempt from this requirement.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 10
Table 2
City of Chula Vista 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: Shaded box indicates allowable decibel level Source: City of Chula Vista 2005
Policy E21.1 of the Chula Vista General Plan requires the application of the exterior land use-noise compatibility guidelines listed in Table 2 to “new development, where applicable, and in light of project-specific considerations.” In addition, Objective E22 (Protect the community from the effects of transportation noise) of the City’s General Plan Noise Element, Policy E22.5 requires projects to construct appropriate mitigation measures to attenuate existing and projected traffic noise levels, in accordance with applicable standards, including the exterior land use/noise compatibility guidelines listed in Table 2.
For off-site project-related traffic, Chula Vista considers a noise impact to be significant if implementation of the project results in noise levels that exceed the exterior noise limits established in the City’s General Plan, including 65 CNEL for residences, schools, and recreational uses; 70 CNEL for offices, community parks and athletic fields; and 75 CNEL for commercial uses. For transportation-related noise, a significant impact would occur if the project results in a 3 dB(A) or greater increase in traffic noise on a roadway segment and the resultant noise level would exceed the General Plan exterior noise limits.
2.3.1.3 City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program Subarea
Plan
The municipalities of southwestern San Diego County collaborated in producing the Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subregional Plan (City of San Diego 1998). The MSCP Subregional Plan is implemented through individual Subarea Plans adopted by each jurisdiction in order to receive take authorization for impacts to covered species and habitats. The MSCP is implemented in Chula Vista through the City of Chula Vista’s MSCP Subarea Plan (City of Chula Vista 2003). The 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
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 11
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 construction noise threshold for sensitive biological resources is an hourly average noise level of 60 dB(A) and no clearing, grubbing, and/or grading is permitted within the MSCP Preserve during the breeding season of the sensitive species present. Within the City of Chula Vista Subarea Plan, the project area is designated as “Development Area Outside Covered Projects” (i.e., not designated a preserve or conservation area) and is not located immediately adjacent to any 75 percent or 100 percent Conservation Areas. The closest Chula Vista Subarea Plan conservation area (75 percent) is located approximately 197 feet north of the project area within the Otay River.
2.3.2 City of San Diego
2.3.2.1 City of San Diego Municipal Code 9.5 (Noise Ordinance)
Applicable noise standards for the project are codified in the following City of San Diego Municipal Code (SDMC) regulations (City of San Diego 2010):
SDMC Section 59.5.0401: Sound Level Limits
It shall be unlawful for any person to cause noise by any means to the extent that the one-hour average sound level exceeds the applicable limit given in Table 3, at any location in the City of San Diego on or beyond the boundaries of the property on which the noise is produced. The noise subject to these limits is that part of the total noise at the specified location that is due solely to the action of said person.
Table 3 San Diego Exterior Noise Limits
Land Use Time of Day One-Hour Average Sound Level (Decibels)
1. Single Family Residential 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.
10 p.m. to 7 a.m.
50 45
40
2. Multi-Family Residential (Up to a maximum density of 1/2000)
7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.
10 p.m. to 7 a.m.
55 50
45
3. All other Residential
7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
7 p.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.
60
55 50
4. Commercial 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.
65 60 60
5. Industrial or Agriculture Anytime 75
Source: City of San Diego 2010
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 12
The sound level limit at a location on a boundary between two zoning districts is the arithmetic mean of the respective limits for the two districts. Permissible construction noise level limits shall be governed by SDMC Sections 59.5.0404 of this article.
Fixed–location public utility distribution or transmission facilities located on or adjacent to a property line shall be subject to the noise level limits of Part A of this section, measured at or beyond six feet from the boundary of the easement upon which the equipment is located.
SDMC Section 59.5.0404: Construction Noise
It shall be unlawful for any person, between the hours of 7:00 p.m. of any day and 7:00 a.m. of the following day, or on legal holidays as specified in Section 21.04 of the SDMC, with exception of Columbus Day and Washington’s Birthday, or on Sundays, to erect, construct, demolish, excavate for, alter or repair any building or structure in such a manner as to create disturbing, excessive or offensive noise unless a permit has been applied for and granted beforehand by the Noise Abatement and Control Administrator. In granting such permit, the Administrator shall consider whether the construction noise in the vicinity of the proposed work site would be less objectionable at night than during the daytime because of different population densities or different neighboring activities; whether obstruction and interference with traffic particularly on streets of major importance, would be less objectionable at night than during the daytime; whether the type of work to be performed emits noises at such a low level as to not cause significant disturbances in the vicinity of the work site; the character and nature of the neighborhood of the proposed work site; whether great economic hardship would occur if the work were spread over a longer time; whether proposed night work is in the general public interest; and he shall prescribe such conditions, working times, types of construction equipment to be used, and permissible noise levels as he deems to be required in the public interest.
Except as provided in subsection C, hereof, it shall be unlawful for any person, including the City of San Diego, to conduct any construction activity so as to cause, at or beyond the property lines of any property zoned residential, an average sound level no greater than 75 dB during the 12-hour period from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
The provisions of subsection B. of this section shall not apply to construction equipment used in construction with emergency work, provided the Administrator is notified within 48 hours after commencement of work.
2.3.2.2 City of San Diego General Plan Noise Element
The City of San Diego General Plan Noise Element (2015) establishes noise compatibility guidelines for uses affected by traffic noise, as detailed in Table 4.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 13
Table 4
City of San Diego Land Use – Noise Compatibility Guidelines
Land Use Category
Exterior Noise Exposure (CNEL)
60 65 70 75
Parks and Recreational
Parks, Active and Passive Recreation
Outdoor Spectator Sports, Golf Courses; Water Recreational Facilities; Indoor Recreation Facilities
Agricultural
Crop Raising and Farming; Community Gardens, Aquaculture, Dairies; Horticulture Nurseries and Greenhouses; Animal Raising, Maintaining and
Keeping; Commercial Stables
Residential
Single Dwelling Units; Mobile Homes 45
Multiple Dwelling Units *For uses affected by aircraft noise, refer to Policies NE-D.2. & NE-D.3. 45 45
Institutional
Hospitals; Nursing Facilities; Intermediate Care Facilities; Kindergarten through Grade 12 Educational Facilities; Libraries; Museums; Child Care Facilities 45
Other Educational Facilities including Vocational/Trade Schools and Colleges and Universities 45 45
Cemeteries
Retail Sales
Building Supplies/Equipment; Food, Beverage, and Groceries; Pets and Pet Supplies; Sundries, Pharmaceutical, and Convenience Sales; Wearing Apparel
and Accessories
50 50
Commercial Services
Building Services; Business Support; Eating and Drinking; Financial Institutions;
Maintenance & Repair; Personal Services; Assembly and Entertainment (includes public and religious assembly); Radio and Television Studios; Golf Course Support
50 50
Visitor Accommodations 45 45 45
Offices
Business and Professional; Government; Medical, Dental, and Health Practitioner; Regional and Corporate Headquarters 50 50
Vehicle and Vehicular Equipment Sales and Services Use
Commercial or Personal Vehicle Repair and Maintenance; Commercial or Personal Vehicle Sales and Rentals; Vehicle Equipment and Supplies Sales and Rentals; Vehicle Parking
Wholesale, Distribution, Storage Use Category
Equipment and Materials Storage Yards; Moving and Storage Facilities; Warehouse; Wholesale Distribution
Industrial
Heavy Manufacturing; Light Manufacturing; Marine Industry; Trucking and Transportation Terminals; Mining and Extractive Industries
Research and Development 50
Compatible Indoor Uses Standard construction methods should attenuate exterior noise to an acceptable
indoor noise level.
Outdoor Uses Activities associated with the land use may be carried out.
45, 50 Conditionally
Compatible
Indoor Uses Building structure must attenuate exterior noise to the indoor noise level indicated
by the number for occupied areas.
Outdoor Uses Feasible noise mitigation techniques should be analyzed and incorporated to make the outdoor activities acceptable.
Incompatible Indoor Uses New construction should not be undertaken.
Outdoor Uses Severe noise interference makes outdoor activities unacceptable.
SOURCE: City of San Diego 2015.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 14
Applicable Noise Element policies with respect to the project include are as follows:
• NE-A.1. Separate excessive noise-generating uses from residential and other noise-sensitive land uses with a sufficient spatial buffer of less sensitive uses.
• NE-A.2. Assure the appropriateness of proposed developments relative to existing and future noise levels by consulting the guidelines for noise-compatible land use (shown on Table 4) to minimize the effects on noise-sensitive land uses.
• NE-A.3. Limit future residential and other noise-sensitive land uses in areas exposed to high levels of noise.
• NE-A.4. Require an acoustical study consistent with Acoustical Study Guidelines (Table NE-4) for proposed developments in areas where the existing or future noise level exceeds or would exceed the “compatible” noise level thresholds as indicated on the Land Use - Noise Compatibility Guidelines (see Table 4), so that noise mitigation measures can be included in the project design to meet the noise guidelines.
• NE-A.5. Prepare noise studies to address existing and future noise levels from noise sources that are specific to a community when updating community plans.
2.3.2.3 City of San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program Subarea
Plan
The MSCP is implemented in the City of San Diego through the City of San Diego’s MSCP Subarea Plan (City of San Diego 1997). The City of San Diego’s MSCP Subarea Plan identifies lands designated as Multi-Habitat Planning Area (MHPA), which is a “hard-line” preserve developed by the City of San Diego in cooperation with the wildlife agencies, developers, property owners, and various environmental groups. Within the MHPA, biological core resource areas and corridors targeted for conservation are identified and discussed, in which development restrictions may occur (City of San Diego 1997). Development adjacent to MHPA is subject to the City’s Land Use Adjacency Guidelines which include minimizing noise impacts to the MHPA as well as control of noise during the breeding season of sensitive species. No MHPA is located on-site and the nearest City of San Diego MHPA is approximately 180 feet west of the project site, across Interstate 805 (I-805). The project is located outside the City of San Diego Subarea Plan, with the exception that the project's primary and secondary access roads are located within the City of San Diego and the San Diego’s Subarea Plan. These off-site access road areas are subject to San Diego’s Subarea Plan which requires that noise impacts to certain sensitive species are avoided. Under the Annexation Scenario 2a, the project parcel would be annexed and developed into the City of San Diego and subject to the City of San Diego’s Subarea Plan (City of San Diego 1997) as well as the associated City of San Diego Biology Guidelines (City of San Diego 2018).
2.3.3 Brown Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
The Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for Brown Field identifies land uses compatible with annual noise levels due to operations at Brown Field. These land use compatibility noise levels are to
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 15
be used in determining whether a proposed land use is consistent with ALUCP policies and guidelines. The Brown Field Municipal ALUCP residential exterior and interior noise exposure standards are 65 CNEL and 45 CNEL, respectively (San Diego County Regional Airport Authority [SDCRAA] 2010).
3.0 Existing Conditions
Noise measurements were conducted near the project site on June 4, 2020, to quantify and characterize the existing outdoor ambient sound levels. Table 5 provides the location, date, and time period at which these baseline noise level measurements were performed by an attending Dudek field investigator using a Rion-branded Model NL-52 sound level meter (SLM) equipped with a 0.5-inch, pre-polarized condenser microphone with pre- amplifier. The SLM meets the current American National Standards Institute standard for a Type 1 (Precision Grade) sound level meter. The accuracy of the SLM was verified using a field calibrator before and after the measurements, and the measurements were conducted with the microphone positioned approximately 5 feet above the ground.
Four (4) short-term (ST) noise level measurement locations (ST1–ST4) that represent existing noise-sensitive receivers were selected on and near the project site. These locations are depicted as receivers ST1, ST2, ST3, and ST4 on Figure 4, Noise Assessment Locations. The measured Leq and Lmax noise levels are provided in Table 5. The primary noise sources at the sites identified in Table 5 consisted of traffic along adjacent roadways, the sounds of leaves rustling, audible distant aircrafts, and birdsong. As shown in Table 5, noise levels ranged from approximately 62 dB(A) Leq at ST1 to 65.6 dB(A) Leq at ST4. Beyond the summarized information presented in Table 5, detailed noise measurement data is included in Attachment 1, Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data (Dudek 2022).
Table 5
Measured Baseline Outdoor Ambient Noise Levels
Site Location/Address Date (yyyy-mm-dd), Time Leq dB(A) Lmax dB(A)
ST1 Southeast of project site boundary; north of Dennery Road 2020-06-04, 10:50 AM to 11:00 AM 62.0 75.1
ST2
South of southern project site boundary;
northeast corner of Kaiser Permanente parking structure
2020-06-04,
11:45 AM to 11:55 AM 62.1 66.3
ST3 East of project site; near 122 Golden Sky Way, San Diego, CA 92154 2020-06-04, 10:30 AM to 10:40 AM 62.8 64.5
ST4 Southwest corner of project site boundary 2020-06-04, 11:20 AM to 11:30 AM 65.6 74.6
Source: Attachment 1. Notes: Leq = equivalent continuous sound level (time-averaged sound level); Lmax = maximum sound level during the measurement interval; dB(A) = A-weighted decibels; ST = short-term noise measurement locations. Generally, the measured samples of daytime Leq agree with expectations: ST4 is above 65 dB(A) due largely to its proximity to Interstate 805, a major roadway; ST2 is farther up the bluff, south of the southern boundary of the project; and ST1 and ST3 are closer to the residential neighborhoods east of the project and much more distant from these sources of roadway traffic noise.
FIGURE 4
Noise Measurement Locations
!(
!(
!(
!(
G O LDEN S K Y W A Y
BL
U
E
CO
R
AL
C
V
O
C
E A N M I S T P L
D E N N E R Y R D
§¨¦805
ST3
ST1
ST4
ST2
!(
!(
!(
!(
G O LDEN S K Y W A Y
BL
U
E
CO
R
AL
C
V
O
C
E A N M I S T P L
D E N N E R Y R D
§¨¦805
ST3
ST1
ST4
ST2
Image Source: NearMap (flown January 2023)
0 300Feet [Project Boundary
!(Measurement Location
M:\JOBS\3396-1\common_gis\Reports\Nostec\Fig4.mxd 05/16/2023 bma
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 17
4.0 Thresholds of Significance
The following significance criteria are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR 15000 et seq.) and intended to frame the assessment of potentially significant noise and vibration impacts associated with a studied project’s effects to the neighboring off-site community:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies;
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; and,
c. Expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels (for a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport).
The City of San Diego has adopted its own CEQA Significance Thresholds (and corresponding impact assessment metrics) that are presented in Section 4.2 below.
4.1 City of Chula Vista Significance Determination
Thresholds
The analysis for the No Annexation Scenario and Annexation Scenario 2b uses the following City of Chula Vista standards to evaluate potential noise and vibration impacts at on-site and off-site land uses under City of Chula Vista jurisdiction.
• Construction noise – The City regulates construction noise by restricting the allowable hours of construction. Section 9.40.110 of the CVMC exempts construction noise from the stationary noise standards, provided that construction occurs between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday. Through adherence to the limitation of allowable construction times provided in the CVMC, the construction-related noise levels would not exceed any municipal standards. However, since the City of Chula Vista lacks a quantified construction noise level threshold, consistent with the “or applicable standards of other agencies” clause in the first bulleted CEQA Guidelines Appendix G criterion above for noise, for purposes of information disclosure this assessment adopts the FTA guidance-based standard of 80 dB(A) over an 8-hour Leq at the exterior of a residential land use. This FTA standard would be applied to the nearest existing medium (zoned “R2”) and high-density (zoned “R3P13”) City of Chula Vista residential receptors that are approximately 700 feet northwest of the project site.
• Off-site project-attributed transportation noise – For purposes for this analysis, a direct roadway noise impact would be considered significant if increases in roadway traffic noise levels attributed to the project are greater than 3 dB(A) at an existing noise-sensitive land use.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 18
• Off-site project-attributed stationary noise – For purposes for this analysis, a noise impact would be considered significant if noise from typical operation of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning and other electro-mechanical systems associated with the project exceeded 55 dB(A) hourly Leq at the property line from 7:00 a.m. to 9:59 p.m., and 45 dB(A) hourly Leq from 10:00 p.m. to 6:59 a.m.
• Construction vibration – Guidance from Caltrans indicates that a vibration velocity level of 0.1 ips PPV received at a structure would be considered potentially annoying to occupants within (Caltrans 2020a). As for the receiving structure itself, aforementioned Caltrans guidance from Section 2 recommends that a vibration level of 0.3 ips PPV would represent the threshold for building damage risk to older residences, and 0.5 ips PPV to newer residential structures.
For purposes of disclosure, since current CEQA noise criteria listed above do not consider the impacts of the environment on a project, this analysis also evaluates compatibility of on-site noise levels with the City of Chula Vista exterior and interior noise standards of 65 CNEL and 45 CNEL, respectively, as well as the Brown Field Municipal ALUCP residential noise exposure standard of 65 CNEL (SDCRAA 2010).
4.2 City of San Diego Significance Determination
Thresholds
This analysis for the Annexation Scenario 2a uses the following City of San Diego CEQA Significance Determination Thresholds (City of San Diego 2022) to evaluate potential noise impacts at off-site land uses under City of San Diego jurisdiction. For the purposes of this assessment for the project, the aforementioned Caltrans guidance is used to determine potential vibration impacts.
Based on the City of San Diego’s CEQA Significance Determination Thresholds (City of San Diego 2022), noise impacts may be significant if the project would:
• Construction noise – Result in construction noise exposure levels that exceeds 75 dB(A) Leq (12-hour) at the property line of a residentially-zoned property from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (as identified in Section 59.0404 of the City of San Diego’s Municipal Code) or if non-emergency construction occurs during the 12-hour period from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. Additionally, where temporary construction noise would substantially interfere with normal business communication, or affect sensitive receptors, such as day care facilities, a significant noise impact may be identified.
• Project-attributed stationary noise – Result in the exposure of people to noise levels that exceed the City of San Diego’s adopted Noise Ordinance, SDMC Section 5.9.5.0401.
• Project-attributed transportation noise – Result in the exposure of people to transportation noise levels that exceed the sound level limits as presented in City of San Diego Land Use – Noise Compatibility Guidelines (refer to Table 4 above) and generates more than a 3 dB increase (City of San Diego 2022).
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 19
• Construction vibration – Result in the generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels. Guidance from Caltrans indicates that a vibration velocity level of 0.1 ips PPV received at a structure would be considered potentially annoying to occupants within (Caltrans 2020a). As for the receiving structure itself, aforementioned Caltrans guidance from Section 2 recommends that a vibration level of 0.3 ips PPV would represent the threshold for building damage risk to older residences, and 0.5 ips PPV to newer residential structures.
For purposes of disclosure, since current CEQA noise criteria listed above do not consider the impacts of the environment on a project, this analysis also evaluates compatibility of on-site noise levels with the City of San Diego exterior and interior noise standards of 65 CNEL and 45 CNEL, respectively, as well as the Brown Field Municipal ALUCP residential noise exposure standard of 65 CNEL (SDCRAA 2010).
5.0 Impact Discussion
5.1 Short-Term Construction Noise
5.1.1 Potential Effects to Neighboring Communities
Construction noise and vibration are temporary phenomena. Construction noise and vibration levels vary from hour to hour and day to day, depending on the equipment in use, the operations performed, and the distance between the source and receptor.
Equipment that would be in use during construction would include, in part, graders, backhoes, concrete saws, excavators, dump trucks, loaders, cranes, manlifts, cement mixers, pavers, rollers, welders, and air compressors. The typical maximum noise levels for various pieces of construction equipment at a distance of 50 feet are presented in Table 6. Usually, construction equipment operates in alternating cycles of full power and low power, producing average noise levels over time that are less than the listed maximum noise level. The average sound level of construction activity also depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of construction activities during that time.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 20
Table 6
Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels
Equipment Type
Typical Equipment
(Lmax, dB(A) at 50 Feet)
Air compressor 78
Backhoe 78
Concrete pump truck 81
Grader 85
Crane 81
Dump Truck 76
Roller 80
Manlift 75
Generator 72
Front End Loader 79
Paver 77
Concrete Saw 90
Welder 74
Source: U.S. Department of Transportation 2006 Note: Lmax = maximum sound level; dB(A) = A-weighted decibels.
Aggregate noise emission from project construction activities, broken down by sequential phase, was predicted at two distances to the nearest existing noise-sensitive receptor (NSR): 1) from the nearest position of the construction site boundary and 2) from the geographic center of the construction site, which serves as the time-averaged location or geographic acoustical centroid of active construction equipment for the phase under study. The intent of the former distance is to help evaluate anticipated construction noise from a limited quantity of equipment or vehicle activity expected to be at the boundary for some period of time, which would be most appropriate for phases such as site preparation, grading, and paving. The latter distance is used in a manner similar to the general assessment technique as described in FTA guidance for construction noise assessment (FTA 2018), when the location of individual equipment for a given construction phase is uncertain over some extent of (or the entirety of) the construction site area. Because of this uncertainty, all the equipment for a construction phase is assumed to operate—on average—from the acoustical centroid. Table 7 summarizes these two distances for each apparent closest NSR within the City of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista. For the former, the existing NSR would be one of the existing multi-family residential structures to the east of the project site on Golden Sky Way in the “River Edge Terrace” community; and for the latter, there are multi-family homes south of Rancho Drive immediately west of the I-805 southbound lanes.
At the project site boundary, and as detailed in Attachment 2 (Dudek 2022), this analysis assumes that up to only one piece of equipment of each listed type per phase will be involved in the construction activity for a limited portion of a typical 8-hour construction work shift. In other words, at such proximity, the operating equipment cannot “stack” or crowd the vicinity and still operate. For the acoustical centroid case, which is a geographic average position for all equipment during the indicated phase, this analysis assumes that the equipment may be operating up to all of eight (8) hours per day (i.e., comparable to a typical on-site work shift).
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 21
Table 7 Estimated Distances between Construction Activities and the Nearest Existing City of San Diego and City of Chula Vista Noise-Sensitive Receptors (NSR)
Construction Phase
(and Equipment Types Involved)
Distance from Construction
Site Boundary (feet)
Distance from Acoustical
Centroid of Site (feet)
Distance from Construction
Site Boundary (feet)
Distance from Acoustical
Centroid of Site (feet)
to City of San Diego NSR to City of Chula Vista NSR
Site Preparation (Dozer, Loader) 180 743 700 1,230
Grading (Excavator, Grader, Dozer, Scraper, Backhoe)* 60 743 700 1,230
Building Construction (Crane, Forklift, Loader, Welder, Generator) 210 743 700 1,230
Architectural Finishes (Air Compressor) 210 743 700 1,230
Paving (Roller, Backhoe, Dump Truck, Paver) 60 743 700 1,230
*Off-site improvement areas are accounted for in the grading phase of construction.
A Microsoft Excel–based noise prediction model emulating and using reference data from the Federal Highway Administration Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2008) was used to estimate construction noise levels at the nearest occupied noise-sensitive land use. (Although the RCNM was funded and promulgated by the Federal Highway Administration, it is often used for non-roadway projects, because the same types of construction equipment used for roadway projects are often used for other types of construction.) Input variables for the predictive modeling consist of the equipment type and number of each (e.g., two graders, a loader, a tractor), the duty cycle for each piece of equipment (e.g., percentage of time within a specific time period, such as an hour, when the equipment is expected to operate at full power or capacity and thus make noise at a level comparable to what is presented in Table 6, Typical Construction Equipment Maximum Noise Levels), and the distance from the noise-sensitive receptor. The predictive model also considers how many hours that equipment may be on site and operating (or idling) within an established work shift. For the City of San Diego receivers, the shielding provided by the topography of the project site, the slope to the east of the project site, and the elevation of the residential receivers was taken into account. For the more distant City of Chula Vista residential receivers, no topographical or structural shielding was assumed in the modeling. The RCNM has default duty-cycle values for the various pieces of equipment, which were derived from an extensive study of typical construction activity patterns. Those default duty-cycle values were used for this noise analysis, which is detailed in Attachment 2, Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output. Modeling results generated predicted construction noise levels as detailed in Table 8.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 22
Table 8 Predicted Construction Noise Levels per Activity Phase at Sensitive Receptors
Construction Phase
(and Equipment Types Involved)
12-Hour Leq at Nearest NSR to
Construction
Site Boundary
dB(A)
12-Hour Leq at Nearest NSR to
Acoustical
Centroid of Site
dB(A)
8-Hour Leq at Nearest NSR to
Construction
Site Boundary
dB(A)
8-Hour Leq at Nearest NSR to
Acoustical
Centroid of Site
dB(A)
at nearest City of San Diego NSR at nearest City of Chula Vista NSR
First Floor Receptors
Site Preparation (Dozer, Loader) 52.9 54.5 51.6 51.3
Grading (Excavator, Grader, Dozer, Scraper, Backhoe) 70.2 56.8 57.5 53.6
Building Construction (Crane, Forklift, Loader, Welder, Generator) 55.7 55.2 53.3 52.0
Architectural Finishes (Air Compressor) 47.0 43.5 44.6 40.3
Paving (Roller, Backhoe, Dump Truck,
Paver)
62.4 50.4 49.7 47.2
Second Floor Receptors
Site Preparation (Dozer, Loader) 63.2 54.5 51.6 51.3
Grading (Excavator, Grader, Dozer, Scraper, Backhoe) 74.0 56.8 57.5 53.6
Building Construction (Crane, Forklift, Loader, Welder, Generator) 63.3 55.2 53.3 52.0
Architectural Finishes (Air Compressor) 54.6 43.5 44.6 40.3
Paving (Roller, Backhoe, Dump Truck,
Paver)
66.2 50.4 49.7 47.2
Notes: Leq = equivalent noise level; dB(A) = A-weighted decibels; NSR = noise-sensitive receptor
As presented in Table 8, the estimated construction noise levels at the nearest City of Chula Vista NSR are predicted to be far less than 80 dB(A) Leq over an 8-hour period—even when phase activities may take place near the northwest project boundaries. At the nearest City of San Diego NSR, predicted 12-hour Leq values shown in Table 8 for each project construction phase are less than 75 dB(A). Hence, under these conditions, predicted operation of construction equipment and processes do not exceed both the FTA-based guidance construction noise threshold of 80 dB(A) 8-hour Leq and the City of San Diego code-based threshold for construction noise level of 75 dB(A) 12-hour Leq.
Compared to measurements of the daytime outdoor ambient sound level at representative sample locations as shown in Table 5, predicted construction noise levels ranging in the middle to upper sixties (for City of San Diego second floor receptors) of dB(A) as appearing in Table 8 are considerably higher and would be clearly perceptible to an average listener having healthy human hearing. However, at nearby off-site residences exposed to such construction-related noise, the increased noise levels would typically be relatively short term and temporary—lasting only as long as construction occurs during allowable hours. Construction activities associated with the project would be limited to those hours specified in the applicable city municipal code, which are detailed in Section 2.3, Local. More specifically, the No Annexation Scenario construction would be limited to 7:00 a.m.–10:00 p.m., Monday–Friday, and 8:00 a.m.–10:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday). Under the Annexation Scenario 2a, construction activities would be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and construction noise would not exceed 75 dB during that 12-hour period. Temporary construction noise would not interfere with normal business communication, or affect sensitive receptors. Thus, project would
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 23
comply with both the SDMC and the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code, and construction noise impacts would be less than significant under both the No Annexation and Annexation scenarios.
5.1.2 Potential Effects to Nearby Sensitive Biological Resources
Indirect noise impacts to sensitive biological resources result primarily from adverse edge effects on-site or off-site, and may be short term (temporary), related to construction, or long term, associated with development in proximity to biological resources within natural open space. Noise impacts would be significant if construction or operational noise levels would exceed 60 dB(A) Leq, or the existing ambient noise level if already above 60 dB(A) Leq during the breeding season.
Within the City of Chula Vista Subarea Plan, the project parcel is designated as “Development Area Outside Covered Projects” (i.e., not designated a preserve or conservation area) and is not located immediately adjacent to any 75 percent or 100 percent Conservation Areas. The closest conservation area (75 percent) is located approximately 197 feet north of the project area within the Otay River. While the project parcel and land to the north of the parcel is within the City of Chula Vista Subarea Plan, the land to the west, south and east of the parcel are located within the City of San Diego Subarea Plan. The nearest City of San Diego Subarea Plan MHPA area is located approximately 180 feet west of the project parcel, across I-805.
Noise in the vicinity of the project site is dominated by vehicle traffic on I-805. To determine the existing ambient noise level at the adjacent habitat, existing noise levels due to traffic on I-805 and Dennery Road were modeled using the SoundPLAN program. Based on Caltrans traffic counts, the existing volume on I-805 is 150,000 average daily traffic (ADT) (Caltrans 2020b). The existing traffic volumes on Dennery Road are 13,869 ADT south of Regatta Lane and 8,333 ADT north of Regatta Lane (LOS Engineers, Inc. 2022). Existing vehicle traffic noise contours are shown in Figure 5.
Existing ambient noise levels and maximum construction noise levels, which would occur during the grading phase) were calculated at three specific receivers located at the Chula Vista conservation areas and the San Diego MHPA (see Figure 5). The results are shown in Table 9. SoundPLAN data is provided in Attachment 3.
Table 9 Predicted Construction Noise Levels at Sensitive Habitat
Receiver Location
Existing Ambient Noise Level Maximum
Construction Noise Level [dB(A) Leq]
Average Daytime Hourly Noise Level [dB(A) Leq]
Peak Hour Noise Level [dB(A) Leq]
1 Chula Vista Conservation Area – West 71 72 57
2 Chula Vista Conservation Area – East 60 62 58
3 San Diego MHPA - 180 feet to the West 77 79 57
FIGURE 5
Existing Vehicle Traffic Noise Contours
!(
!(
!(
D E N N E R Y R D
OCEAN
M
IS
T
PL
G
OLDEN S K Y W AY
§¨¦805
1
2
3
!(
!(
!(
D E N N E R Y R D
OCEAN
M
IS
T
PL
G
OLDEN S K Y W AY
§¨¦805
1
2
3
Image Source: NearMap (flown January 2023)
0 250Feet [Project Boundary
!(Habitat Receivers
City of San Diego MSCP Subarea Plan
City of San Diego MHPA
City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan
75% Conservation Area - Habitat Preserve
Vehicle Traffic Noise
50 CNEL
55 CNEL
60 CNEL
65 CNEL
70 CNEL
75 CNEL
M:\JOBS\3396-1\common_gis\Reports\Nostec\Fig5.mxd 05/16/2023 bma
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 25
As shown, existing ambient noise levels currently exceed 60 dB(A) Leq. During daytime hours when construction activity noise would occur, pre-existing outdoor ambient sound in the MSCP preserve areas north of the project site are already dominated by I-805 traffic noise that is greater than 60 dB(A) as shown in Table 9. Therefore, construction noise levels would not have the potential to result in a construction noise impact to sensitive species inhabiting proximate preserve areas as the pre-existing outdoor noise environment is already in excess of 60 dB(A) Leq. On this basis, potential construction noise impacts to sensitive wildlife species inside the MSCP preserve would be considered less than significant. However, as further detailed in the Biological Resources Technical Report (RECON 2023), Least Bell’s vireo are located on and adjacent to the project site outside the MSCP preserve. Indirect impacts to least Bell’s vireo may occur if construction activities are conducted during this species’ breeding season of March 15 to September 15. Occupied suitable habitat (southern willow scrub, mule fat scrub) for this species occurs both on-site and adjacent to the project impact area and construction is likely to cause noise levels within these habitat areas to exceed 60 dB(A) Leq, which would be considered a significant indirect impact requiring mitigation under both cities’ Subarea Plans. Implementation of mitigation measures SD-BIO-5 and CV-BIO-5, as detailed in the Biological Resources Technical Report would be required.
5.2 Conventional Construction Activity Vibration
Construction activities may expose persons to excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise, causing a potentially significant impact. Caltrans has collected groundborne vibration information related to construction activities (Caltrans 2020a). Information from Caltrans indicates that continuous vibrations with a velocity amplitude of approximately 0.1 ips PPV can be characterized as being “strongly perceptible” or “begins to annoy” building occupants. For context, heavier pieces of construction equipment, such as a bulldozer that may be expected on the project site, have peak particle velocities of approximately 0.089 ips or less at a reference distance of 25 feet (FTA 2018).
Groundborne vibration attenuates rapidly, even over short distances. The attenuation of groundborne vibration as it propagates from source to receptor through intervening soils and rock strata can be estimated with expressions found in FTA and Caltrans guidance. By way of example, for a bulldozer operating on site and as close as the eastern project boundary (i.e., approximately 60 feet from the nearest receiving occupied structure on Golden Sky Way, when the project emergency access roadway would be graded) the estimated vibration velocity level would be 0.024 ips per the equation as follows (FTA 2018):
PPVrcvr = PPVref * (25/D)^1.5 = 0.024 = 0.089 * (25/60)^1.5;
where PPVrcvr is the predicted vibration velocity at the receiver position, PPVref is the reference value at 25 feet from the vibration source (the bulldozer), and D is the actual horizontal distance to the receiver. Therefore, at this predicted PPV that is less than the 0.1 ips PPV guidance-based threshold adopted herein, the impact of vibration-induced annoyance to occupants of nearby existing homes would be less than significant under both the No Annexation and Annexation scenarios.
Construction vibration, at sufficiently high levels, can also present a building damage risk. However, the predicted 0.024 ips PPV at the nearest residential receiver 60 feet away from on-site operation
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 26
of the bulldozer during grading would not surpass the guidance limit of 0.3 to 0.5 ips PPV for preventing damage to residential structures (Caltrans 2020a). Because the predicted vibration level at 60 feet (in the City of San Diego) is less than both the annoyance and building damage risk thresholds, vibration from project conventional construction activities is considered less than significant. The nearest City of Chula Vista existing residential receptor is even more distant from the project, and would therefore also be expected to experience a less than significant impact.
Once operational, the project would not be expected to feature major on-site producers of groundborne vibration. Anticipated mechanical systems like pumps are designed and manufactured to feature rotating components (e.g., impellers) that are well-balanced with isolated vibration within or external to the equipment casings. On this basis, potential vibration impacts due to project operation would be less than significant.
5.3 Long-Term Operational Noise
5.3.1 Off-Site Roadway Traffic Noise
The project would increase traffic volumes on local roadways. However, the project would not substantially alter the vehicle classifications mix on local or regional roadways nor would the project alter the speed on an existing roadway or create a new roadway. Thus, the primary factor affecting off-site noise levels would be increased traffic volumes. While changes in noise levels would occur along any roadway where project-related traffic occurs, for noise assessment purposes, noise level increases are assumed to be greatest nearest the project site, as this location would represent the greatest concentration of project-related traffic. A substantial noise increase is defined as an increase of 3 dB(A) above existing conditions.
The roadways included in the traffic impact analysis are Dennery Road and Palm Avenue. Traffic noise levels were calculated based on the total average daily traffic volumes on each roadway segment. For modeling purposes, “hard” ground conditions were used for the analysis of future conditions since a majority of the project area is paved and the hard site provides the most conservative impact assessment. Modeled off-site noise levels do not account for shielding provided by intervening barriers and structures.
Existing (year 2020), near term (year 2025), and future (year 2062) traffic volumes on Dennery Road and Palm Avenue with and without the project were obtained from the Local Mobility Analysis prepared for the project (LOS Engineers, Inc. 2022). Table 10 summarizes the roadway segment volumes.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 27
Table 10 Roadway Segment ADT Volumes
Roadway Segment
Average Daily Traffic
Speed
(mph) Year 2020
Year 2020 +
Project
Year
2025
Year 2025 +
Project
Year
2062
Year 2062 +
Project
Dennery Road
Palm Avenue to Regatta Lane 13,869 15,733 13,994 15,858 19,500 21,364 35
Regatta Lane to Landing Driveway 8,333 10,235 8,473 10,375 12,500 14,402 35
Landing Driveway to Red Coral 8,224 10,126 8,354 10,256 12,500 14,402 35
Palm Avenue
I-805 Southbound Ramps to I-805 Northbound Ramps 36,383 37,315 38,031 38,963 46,000 46,932 45
I-805 Northbound Ramps to Dennery Road 49,173 50,733 51,613 53,173 59,500 31,060 45
mph = miles per hour
SOURCE: LOS Engineering, Inc. 2023. Using these parameters, noise levels were calculated at 50 feet from the centerline using the FHWA RD-77-108 model. Table 11 presents a conservative assessment of traffic noise levels based on the existing (year 2020), near term (year 2025), and future (year 2062) noise levels without and with the project. Table 11 also summarizes the direct and cumulative traffic noise level increases due to the project. Noise level calculations are contained in Attachment 4. It is noted that this traffic volume data is considered conservative, as the Local Mobility Analysis (LOS Engineering, Inc. 2023) utilized a 221-unit project scenario that has higher volumes than the proposed 215-unit project.
Table 11 Traffic Noise Level with and without Project and Ambient Noise Increases (CNEL)
Roadway Segment
Year 2020 Year 2025 Year 2062 Cumulative
Increase Over Existing No Project Project Increase No Project Project Increase No Project Project Increase
Dennery Road Palm Avenue to Regatta Lane 69.6 70.2 0.6 69.6 70.2 0.6 71.1 71.5 0.4 1.9
Regatta Lane to Landing Driveway 67.4 68.3 0.9 67.5 68.3 0.8 69.2 69.8 0.6 2.4
Landing Driveway to Red Coral 67.3 68.2 0.9 67.4 68.3 0.9 69.2 69.8 0.6 2.5
Palm Avenue
I-805 Southbound
Ramps to I-805
Northbound Ramps
75.9 76.0 0.1 76.1 76.2 0.1 76.9 77.0 0.1 1.1
I-805 Northbound Ramps to Dennery Road
77.2 77.3 0.1 77.4 77.5 0.1 78.0 78.1 0.1 0.9
Note: Increase calculations may vary due to independent rounding.
As shown, the project would result in direct noise level increases ranging from 0.4 to 0.9 dB(A) on Dennery Road, and a direct noise level increase of 0.1 dB(A) on Palm Avenue. Cumulatively, when
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 28
comparing future year 2062 traffic noise levels to existing noise levels, the increase would range from 0.9 to 2.5 dB(A). The project would not result in a direct or cumulative noise increase of more than 3 dB. Therefore, the project would result in less than significant direct and cumulative impacts related to traffic noise for both the No Annexation and Annexation scenarios.
5.3.2 Stationary Operations Noise
The proposed residential project will add a variety of noise-producing mechanical equipment discussed below. Most of these noise-producing equipment or sound sources would be considered stationary, or limited in mobility to a defined area. Predicted noise levels associated with the post-construction operation of the project on-site stationary equipment have been calculated using the SoundPLAN model.
The project includes 61 detached condominiums that function similar to single-family home structures, 84 duplexes, and 70 townhome dwelling unit structures. Each of these 215 structures would be expected to feature mechanical ventilation and an outdoor-exposed air-cooled condenser (ACC) that provides cooling (expressed herein as refrigeration tonnage). For purposes of this analysis, each single-family structure was assigned an ACC rated for 1.5 to 3 tons of cooling, which can be represented by a Carrier 16NA18 model having a sound pressure level of 68 dB(A) at a distance of one meter (Carrier 2012). Each duplex and multi-family structure would have two such Carrier units (or comparable from a different manufacturer) or a larger unit delivering twice the refrigeration capacity but emitting a 3 dB(A) (i.e., double the sound energy) higher noise level. The locations of these anticipated ACC units, assumed to be point-type sources at a height of one meter above local grade, are shown in Figure 6.
The project would also include pocket parks throughout the site. These pocket parks would include mostly passive uses such as benches, shade structures, trails, and decorative landscaping that would not be a significant source of noise. However, pocket parks may also include play structures or tot-lots that would generate noise from children at play. Noise levels due to children at play are not anticipated to exceed Chula Vista or San Diego noise level limits; however, as a conservative analysis, these noise sources were also included in the SoundPLAN modeling. A sound power level of 55 dB(A) was modeled at each pocket park location (Navcon Engineering, Inc. 2018).
Noise levels were modeled at receivers located at the multi-family residential uses to the east and at the project property lines. The results are summarized in Table 12. SoundPLAN data is provided in Attachment 5.
FIGURE 6
Operational Noise Contours
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")
")")")")
")")")")
")")")")
")")")
")
")")")")")")")")")")")")
")
")")")
")")")")
")")")")
")")
")")
")")")")
")")")
")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
D E N N E R Y R D
OCE
A
N
MI
S
T
PL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")
")")")")
")")")")
")")")")
")")")
")
")")")")")")")")")")")")
")
")")")
")")")")
")")")")
")")
")")
")")")")
")")")
")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")
")")")")")")")")")")")")")")
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
D E N N E R Y R D
OCE
A
N
MI
S
T
PL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Image Source: NearMap (flown January 2023)
0 200Feet [Project Boundary
Covenant of Easement
!(Receivers
")HVAC
Site Plan
Operational Noise
40 dB(A) Leq
45 dB(A) Leq
50 dB(A) Leq
55 dB(A) Leq
60 dB(A) Leq
M:\JOBS\3396-1\common_gis\Reports\Nostec\Fig6.mxd 07/17/2023 bma
Pocket
Park
Pocket
Park
Pocket
Park
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 30
Table 12 Predicted Project Stationary Source Operations Noise
Modeled Receiver Position Receiver Position Description Predicted hourly Leq [dB(A)]
R01 Near southwestern corner of River Edge Terrace building north of Golden Sky Way 36.1
R02 Near River Edge Terrace building east of Golden Sky Way 34.7
R03 Near River Edge Terrace building east of Golden Sky Way 35.5
R04 Near River Edge Terrace building west of Ocean Mist Place 39.6
R05 Near River Edge Terrace building west of Ocean Mist Place 39.7
R06 Near River Edge Terrace building west of Ocean Mist Place 37.6
R07 Near River Edge Terrace building south of Ocean Mist Place 29.9
REPL Approximate midpoint of eastern project property line 43.5
RSPL Approximate midpoint of southern project property line 38.9
RWPL Approximate midpoint of western project property line 45.4
RNPL Approximate midpoint of northern project property line 43.8
The most restrictive City of Chula Vista noise level limit for multi-family uses is 50 dB(A) Leq, and the most restrictive City of San Diego noise level limit for multi-family uses is 45 dB(A) Leq. Predicted aggregate pocket park and ACC operation noise levels, even assuming all units are operating on a hot summer night, at receiver positions along the River Edge Terrace property line (R01 through R07) would be less than 45 dB(A) and thus be considered compliant with both the City of Chula Vista and the City of San Diego noise ordinance limits, resulting in a less than significant impact related to stationary operational noise for both the No Annexation and Annexation scenarios.
Furthermore, the predicted stationary-source operation noise level of 29.9 to 39.7 dB(A) at Receivers R01 through R07 are substantially lower than the predicted transportation noise level of 60 CNEL as shown in Figure 5; hence, noise from the project’s residential air-conditioning units is not expected to cause more than an imperceptible dB increase to the outdoor ambient sound level at off-site receivers, which would be considered a less than significant impact for both the No Annexation and Annexation scenarios.
As previously discussed, noise impacts would be significant if construction or operational noise levels would exceed 60 dB(A) Leq, or the existing ambient noise level if already above 60 dB(A) Leq during the breeding season. As discussed in Section 5.1.2, least Bell’s vireo have been observed on and adjacent to the project site. As shown in Table 12, operational noise levels at the property boundaries would range from 38.9 to 45.4 dB(A) Leq at the property lines. These noise levels would be less at greater distances from the property line. Additionally, as shown in Figure 6, operational noise levels within the avoided on-site areas that would be placed in a covenant of easement as detailed in the Biological Resources Technical Report, are not projected to exceed 60 dB(A) Leq. Therefore, operational noise levels would not exceed 60 dB(A) Leq within the on-site drainage or adjacent habitat areas that may support least Bell’s vireo. Impacts would be considered less than significant.
5.4 Land Use Noise Compatibility (Non-CEQA Analysis)
CEQA requires analysis of a project’s effects on the environment and is not intended to evaluate the impacts of the environment on a project. Therefore, the analysis of potential adverse effects of
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 31
existing noise levels on the project is not a required analysis under CEQA. However, for the purposes of disclosure and land use consistency analysis, a noise compatibility analysis is provided of on-site noise levels with the City of Chula Vista and City of San Diego exterior and interior noise standards of 65 CNEL and 45 CNEL, respectively, as well as the Brown Field Municipal ALUCP residential noise exposure standard of 65 CNEL (SDCRAA 2010).
5.4.1 Aviation Noise Exposure
There are no private airstrips within the vicinity of the project site. The closest airport to the project site is the Brown Field Municipal Airport approximately 2.3 miles southeast of the site. Although the project site is located within “Review 2 Area” Airport Influence Area per Exhibit III-6 of the Brown Field Municipal ALUCP (SDCRAA 2010), the project site is located outside of the 55 CNEL future aviation noise contour and thus well below the 65 CNEL compatibility standard. Hence, future residences would not be exposed to significant aircraft noise levels under both the No Annexation and Annexation scenarios.
5.4.2 Traffic Noise Exposure
The SoundPLAN program was used to calculate on-site vehicle traffic noise levels. The SoundPLAN program uses the FHWA Traffic Noise Model algorithms and reference levels to calculate noise levels at selected receiver locations. The model uses various input parameters, such as projected hourly average traffic rates; vehicle mix, distribution, and speed; roadway lengths and gradients; distances between sources, barriers, and receivers; and shielding provided by intervening terrain, barriers, and structures. Receivers, roadways, and barriers were input into the model using three-dimensional coordinates. The locations of future buildings were obtained from project plans and drawings. Project site grading and area topography were taken into account.
The main source of traffic noise at the project site is from vehicle traffic on I-805 and Dennery Road. Future year 2062 with project traffic volumes for Dennery Road (see Table 10) were obtained from the Local Mobility Analysis prepared for the project (LOS Engineers 2022). Future year 2050 traffic volumes for I-805 were obtained from San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Series 14 traffic projections (SANDAG 2022). I-805 has a future year 2050 traffic volume of 157,250 (73,700 ADT on the northbound segments and 81,500 ADT on the southbound segments). A vehicle classification mix of 93.0 percent automobiles, 3.7 percent medium trucks, and 3.3 percent heavy trucks was obtained from Caltrans truck counts (Caltrans 2020c).
Vehicle traffic noise level contours across the project site were calculated using SoundPLAN. These contours take into account shielding provided by proposed buildings, topography, and proposed grading. These noise contours are shown in Figure 7. As shown, first-floor noise levels would exceed 70 CNEL across the western portion project site closest to I-805. Noise levels would be less than 65 CNEL across the eastern half of the project site.
To determine exterior noise levels at the exterior use areas and the first-, second-, and third-floor building façades, noise levels were modeled at 75 specific receiver locations, as shown in Figure 7. Exterior noise levels were modeled at first- through third-floor elevations. The results are summarized in Table 13. SoundPLAN data are provided in Attachment 6.
FIGURE 7
Future Vehicle Traffic Noise Contours
!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
OCEA
N
M
I
S
T P L
GOLDE N S KY W AY
D E N N E R Y R D
§¨¦805
123456
7
89
10
11 12 13 14
15
16 17 18 19
202122
23
24 25 26
27
28 29 30 31 32
33343536
37
38 39 40
41 42 43
44 45 46 47
484950
51
52 53 54 55
56575859
60
61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
73
74
75
!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
OCEA
N
M
I
S
T P L
GOLDE N S KY W AY
D E N N E R Y R D
§¨¦805
123456
7
89
10
11 12 13 14
15
16 17 18 19
202122
23
24 25 26
27
28 29 30 31 32
33343536
37
38 39 40
41 42 43
44 45 46 47
484950
51
52 53 54 55
56575859
60
61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
73
74
75
Image Source: NearMap (flown January 2023)
0 250Feet [Project Boundary
!(Receivers
Site Plan
Vehicle Traffic Noise
50 CNEL
55 CNEL
60 CNEL
65 CNEL
70 CNEL
75 CNEL
M:\JOBS\3396-1\common_gis\Reports\Nostec\Fig7.mxd 10/28/2022 bma
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 33
Table 13 Future Vehicle Traffic Noise Levels
Receiver Location
Exterior Noise Level (CNEL)
First Floor Second Floor Third Floor
1 Duplex Backyard 47 51 54
2 Mini Park 51 54 58
3 Duplex Backyard 55 56 58
4 Duplex Backyard 59 58 60
5 Duplex Backyard 59 61 64
6 Duplex Backyard 63 67 70
7 Building Façade 67 69 72
8 Building Façade 63 64 66
9 Building Façade 64 67 69
10 Building Façade 68 71 73
11 Duplex Backyard 66 68 69
12 Duplex Backyard 58 59 62
13 Duplex Backyard 56 57 60
14 Duplex Backyard 54 56 59
15 Building Façade 70 73 74
16 Building Façade 69 71 72
17 Building Façade 67 68 69
18 Building Façade 65 65 66
19 Building Façade 63 64 65
20 Building Façade 64 65 66
21 Building Façade 65 66 67
22 Building Façade 67 68 69
23 Building Façade 72 74 75
24 Building Façade 67 68 69
25 Building Façade 64 64 65
26 Building Façade 61 62 63
27 Building Façade 73 74 75
28 Building Façade 70 71 72
29 Building Façade 67 69 70
30 Building Façade 65 66 67
31 Building Façade 63 64 65
32 Building Façade 61 62 63
33 Building Façade 62 62 64
34 Building Façade 63 64 66
35 Building Façade 64 65 67
36 Building Façade 68 69 71
37 Building Façade 72 73 74
38 Condo Backyard 66 67 69
39 Condo Backyard 62 63 65
40 Condo Backyard 61 62 64
41 Building Façade 70 70 71
42 Building Façade 70 70 70
43 Building Façade 70 70 70
44 Building Façade 69 69 69
45 Building Façade 67 67 67
46 Building Façade 63 64 64
47 Building Façade 60 61 62
48 Building Façade 60 61 63
49 Building Façade 63 63 64
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 34
Table 13 Future Vehicle Traffic Noise Levels
Receiver Location
Exterior Noise Level (CNEL)
First Floor Second Floor Third Floor
50 Building Façade 66 66 67
51 Building Façade 70 71 71
52 Condo Backyard 69 69 69
53 Condo Backyard 66 67 66
54 Condo Backyard 64 65 65
55 Condo Backyard 63 64 64
56 Building Façade 61 63 63
57 Building Façade 63 64 64
58 Building Façade 65 65 66
59 Building Façade 67 67 68
60 Mini Park 71 71 71
61 Condo Backyard 69 69 69
62 Condo Backyard 69 68 68
63 Condo Backyard 68 68 68
64 Condo Backyard 68 67 67
65 Condo Backyard 67 67 67
66 Mini Park 63 62 63
67 Condo Backyard 67 67 66
68 Condo Backyard 66 66 66
69 Condo Backyard 66 66 66
70 Condo Backyard 66 65 65
71 Condo Backyard 65 65 65
72 Condo Backyard 65 64 64
73 Eastern Property Line 48 49 52
74 Eastern Property Line 48 50 53
75 Eastern Property Line 44 46 51
Bold = Exceeds 65 CNEL at exterior use area 5.4.2.1 Exterior Noise
No Annexation Scenario and Annexation Scenario 2b
Under the No Annexation Scenario and Annexation Scenario 2b, the project would be developed within the City of Chula Vista; therefore, the City of Chula Vista standards apply. The City of Chula Vista’s exterior noise level standard for residential uses is 65 CNEL. This noise level is applicable at the exterior use areas. The interior noise level standard is 45 CNEL.
As shown in Table 13, exterior noise levels are projected to range from 44 to 75 CNEL. The exterior use areas include the mini parks (Receivers 2, 60, and 66) and the backyards of the duplexes (Receivers 1, 3 through 6, and 11 through 14) and detached condominiums (Receivers 38 through 40, 52 through 55, 61 through 65, and 67 through 72). As shown in Table 13, exterior noise levels are projected to exceed the residential standard of 65 CNEL at the mini park closest to I-805 (Receiver 60) and at the backyards closest to I-805 (Receivers 11, 38, 52, 53, 61 through 65, and 67 through 70). To reduce exterior noise levels at these locations, as a project design feature, six-foot barriers were modeled as shown in Figure 8. The resulting noise levels at the exterior use areas are summarized in Table 14.
FIGURE 8
Noise Barriers
!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
D E N N E R Y R D
OCE
A
N
MIS
T
PL
GOLDEN S K Y W AY
123456
7
89
10
11 12 13 14
15
16 17 18 19
202122
23
24 25 26
27
28 29
30 31 32
33343536
37
38 39 40
41 42 43
44 45 46 47
484950
51
52 53 54 55
56575859
60
61 62 63 64 65 66
67 68 69 70 71 72
73
74
75
!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
D E N N E R Y R D
OCE
A
N
MIS
T
PL
GOLDEN S K Y W AY
123456
7
89
10
11 12 13 14
15
16 17 18 19
202122
23
24 25 26
27
28 29
30 31 32
33343536
37
38 39 40
41 42 43
44 45 46 47
484950
51
52 53 54 55
56575859
60
61 62 63 64 65 66
67 68 69 70 71 72
73
74
75
Image Source: NearMap (flown January 2023)
0 200Feet [Project Boundary
!(Receivers
6-foot Backyard Barrier
6-foot Park Barrier Site
Plan
M:\JOBS\3396-1\common_gis\Reports\Nostec\Fig8.mxd 05/16/2023 bma
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 36
Table 14 Unmitigated and Mitigated Noise Levels at Exterior Use Areas
Receiver
Exterior Noise Level (CNEL)
Without Barrier With Barrier
1 Duplex Backyard 47 47
2 Mini Park 51 51
3 Duplex Backyard 55 55
4 Duplex Backyard 59 59
5 Duplex Backyard 59 59
6 Duplex Backyard 63 63
11 Duplex Backyard 66 64
12 Duplex Backyard 58 58
13 Duplex Backyard 56 56
14 Duplex Backyard 54 54
38 Condo Backyard 66 65
39 Condo Backyard 62 63
40 Condo Backyard 61 61
52 Condo Backyard 69 65
53 Condo Backyard 66 63
54 Condo Backyard 64 63
55 Condo Backyard 63 62
60 Mini Park 71 67
61 Condo Backyard 69 63
62 Condo Backyard 69 62
63 Condo Backyard 68 62
64 Condo Backyard 68 61
65 Condo Backyard 67 61
66 Mini Park 63 62
67 Condo Backyard 67 59
68 Condo Backyard 66 63
69 Condo Backyard 66 62
70 Condo Backyard 66 60
71 Condo Backyard 65 58
72 Condo Backyard 65 57
Bold = Exceeds 65 CNEL at exterior use area
As shown in Table 14, without incorporation of the six-foot barriers shown in Figure 8, exterior noise levels at the proposed backyards would exceed 65 CNEL at Receivers 11, 38, 52, 53, 61 through 65, and 67 through 70. With the incorporation of noise barriers, noise levels at the mini park would be reduced, but not to 65 CNEL or less. However, as discussed in Section 2.3.1.2, the minimum amount of required exterior use space shall meet the 65 CNEL criteria, with any additional area being exempt from this requirement. As the mini park is in excess of minimum required exterior use space, it is not subject to the 65 CNEL exterior noise level. Construction of the six-foot backyard barriers identified in Figure 8 would be required to reduce exterior noise levels at the backyards to 65 CNEL or less. The following project design feature would be required as a condition of approval.
PDF-CV- NOS-1 On-Site Noise Barriers. Exterior noise levels at the backyards (Receivers 11, 38, 52, 53, 61 through 65, and 67 through 70) as identified on Figure 8 shall be reduced to the City of Chula Vista’s threshold of 65 CNEL for residential uses. Noise reduction for exterior traffic noise impacts can be accomplished through
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 37
on-site noise barriers. Six-foot sound walls as identified on Figure 8 shall be constructed. The sound attenuation walls must be solid and free of cracks or holes. They can be constructed of masonry, wood, plastic, plexi-glass, fiberglass, steel, or a combination of those materials, as long as there are no cracks or gaps, through or below the wall. Any seams or cracks must be filled or caulked. If wood is used, it can be tongue and groove and must be at least one-inch total thickness or have a density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot.
With the incorporation of project design feature PDF-CV-NOS-1, exterior noise levels at all backyards would be reduced to the City of Chula Vista’s compatibility standard 65 CNEL or below.
Annexation Scenario 2a
Under Annexation Scenario 2a, the project would be annexed to the City of San Diego. Multi-family residential uses are “compatible” with exterior noise levels up to 60 CNEL, and “conditionally compatible” with exterior noise levels up to 70 CNEL. In “conditionally compatible” areas, feasible noise mitigation techniques should be analyzed and incorporated to make the outdoor activities acceptable, and building structures must attenuate exterior noise levels to an indoor noise level of 45 CNEL. Additionally, as stated in Section B of the City’s Noise Element, although not generally considered compatible, the City conditionally allows multi-family and mixed-use residential uses up to 75 CNEL in areas affected by motor vehicle traffic noise with existing residential uses. Any future residential use exposed to noise levels up to 75 CNEL must include attenuation measures to ensure an interior noise level of 45 CNEL and be located in an area where a community plan allows multi-family and mixed-use residential uses. The project would also include pocket parks. Parks are “compatible” in areas up to 70 CNEL and “conditionally compatible” in areas up to 75 CNEL. Refer to Section 5.3.2.2. for Interior Noise Analysis.
As shown in Figure 7 and Table 13, exterior noise levels are projected to exceed 70 CNEL only at the receivers located closest to I-805 (Receivers 23, 27, 37, and 60). However, Receivers 23, 27, and 37 do not represent exterior use areas, and were modeled for the purposes of the interior noise analysis below. Noise levels at Receiver 60 (Mini Park) would exceed the parks compatibility level of 70 CNEL and noise levels at the residential exterior use areas would be exposed to the “conditionally compatible” range of 60 to 70 CNEL at (Receivers 11, 38, 52, 53, 61 through 65, and 67 through 70). The following project design feature would be required as a condition of approval.
PDF-SD-NOS-1 On-Site Noise Barriers. Exterior noise levels at the backyards and at the mini park (Receivers 11, 38, 52, 53, 60, 61 through 65, and 67 through 70) as identified on Figure 8 shall be reduced to the City of San Diego noise compatibility standards for residential and park uses (60 CNEL and 70 CNEL, respectively). Noise reduction for exterior traffic noise impacts can be accomplished through on-site noise barriers. Six-foot sound walls as identified on Figure 6 shall be constructed. The sound attenuation walls must be solid and free of cracks or holes. They can be constructed of masonry, wood, plastic, plexi-glass, fiberglass, steel, or a combination of those materials, as long as there are no cracks or gaps, through or below the wall. Any seams or cracks must be filled or caulked. If wood is used, it can be tongue and groove and must be at least one-inch total thickness or have a density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 38
As shown in Table 14, construction of the six-foot park barrier would reduce noise levels to 67 CNEL at the mini park (Receiver 60) which would result in noise compatible with the City’s exterior noise level standard for parks. For the receivers located in areas exposed to the “conditionally compatible” range of 60 to 70 CNEL, construction of the six-foot backyard barriers shown in Figure 8 (PDF-SD-NOS-1) would reduce exterior noise levels to 65 CNEL or less. While the noise levels at residential receivers would be above the exterior noise exposure compatibility level of 60 CNEL identified in the City of San Diego General Plan Noise Element (City of San Diego 2015), interior residential noise levels would be controlled to the 45 CNEL interior noise limit as discussed below.
5.4.2.2 Interior Noise
No Annexation and Annexation Scenarios
Typically, with the windows open, building shells provide approximately 15 dB(A) (i.e., an average of 12–18 dB(A) [OPR 2017]) of exterior-to-interior noise reduction; while with windows closed residential construction generally provides a minimum of 25 dB(A) attenuation (FHWA 2011). Arithmetically adding this minimum 25 dB(A) closed-window exterior-to-interior sound insulation performance to the acoustical goal of 45 CNEL interior background sound level means up to 70 CNEL exterior noise level (i.e., 25+45=70) would not be anticipated to cause an exceedance to the inhabited indoor space. But Table 13 shows that the 1st floor through 3rd floor façade locations at the western portion of the project site are anticipated to be exposed to an exterior noise level greater than 70 CNEL, resulting in interior noise levels that would exceed the compatibility standard of 45 CNEL.
For these future occupied residences, where predicted exterior noise exposure would exceed 70 CNEL as shown in Table 13, an exterior-to-interior noise analysis was performed to assess compliance with the interior background sound level threshold of 45 CNEL. This analysis involves estimating the composite sound transmission class (STC) of sample project exterior wall assemblies, including fenestration, that are typical of modern energy-efficient residential building construction.
This exterior-to-interior noise assessment presumes the above exterior wall assembly features represent a minimum for purposes of sound insulation performance and are compatible with the Design Guidelines outlined in the Specific Plan. Results of this analysis for the three listed façade receptor positions (and their associated inhabited interior spaces, such as a bedroom or living room) appears in Table 15.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 39
Table 15 Predicted Net Sound Transmission Class of Sample Occupied Room Façade
Modeled Receiver Position Occupied Room Façade
Predicted Net STC for Scenario
No Window Closed Window Window Open (1-foot tall)
6 Proposed SW Duplex – 2nd or 3rd Floor
“Bedroom 4” (facing I-805)1 n/a 38 13
37 Proposed NW Single-Family – 2nd Floor
“Primary Bedroom” (facing I-805)2 40 n/a n/a
37 Proposed NW Single-Family – 2nd Floor
“Bedroom 4” (facing I-805)3 n/a 39 14
STC = sound transmission class; I-805 = Interstate 805; n/a = not applicable
1per Nakano Design Guidelines, room has 10.5-foot-long wall; analysis assumes 9 feet tall; window is 4’ x 4’
2per Nakano Design Guidelines, room has 16-foot-long wall; analysis assumes 9 feet tall; no window
3per Nakano Design Guidelines, room has 13-foot-long wall; analysis assumes 9 feet tall; window is 4’ x 4’ n/a = not applicable
Table 15 illustrates that partially open windows greatly compromise the sound insulation performance of the studied wall assemblies, consistent with aforementioned guidance. However, when such windows are closed, all studied sample facades are anticipated to exhibit a predicted STC rating of at least 38, and thus would provide sufficient exterior-to-interior sound insulation from outdoor traffic noise to yield interior background sound levels that are less than 45 CNEL and thus compliant with the City and state standards. Recall that none of the predicted exterior traffic noise levels at the studied receptor locations exceeded 75 CNEL; thus, the STC rating value (for closed windows and doors) subtracted from these exterior noise values must result in interior noise levels of less than 45 CNEL (e.g., 75 – 38 = 37 CNEL, which is less than 45).
To ensure that the interior noise level standard for residential uses of 45 CNEL can be met, a site-specific interior noise analysis would be required prior to issuance of a building permit to ensure that window, door, and wall components would achieve a necessary sound transmission class rating required to reduce interior noise levels to 45 CNEL or less. As a condition of approval, the following project design feature would be required:
PDF-NOS-2 Interior Noise An exterior-to-interior noise analysis shall be conducted by the project applicant for the proposed dwelling units expected to be exposed to noise levels in excess of 60 CNEL (e.g., units facing Interstate 805) prior to issuance of building permits. Installation of mechanical ventilation systems or air conditioning systems and sound-rated windows shall be required if the predicted interior background noise due to traffic noise intrusion through the building envelope assemblies exceeds the 45 CNEL interior standard. The acoustical analysis shall substantiate that the resulting interior background noise levels, with appropriate implementation of interior comfort systems and sound insulation, would be less than this noise standard.
Implementation of project design feature PDF-NOS-2 would ensure that the interior background noise level for inhabited rooms would meet the state and both City of San Diego and City of Chula Vista interior noise standard of 45 CNEL.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 40
6.0 Mitigation Measures and Project Design
Features
6.1 Mitigation Measures
Noise impacts associated with short-term construction noise to neighboring communities, vibration, off-site traffic noise, and stationary noise would be less than significant. No mitigation would be required. However, short-term construction noise would result in indirect impacts to least Bell’s vireo. With implementation of mitigation measures CV-BIO-5 in the No Annexation Scenario and Annexation Scenario 2b and SD-BIO-5 in the Annexation Scenario 2a, construction noise impacts to sensitive wildlife species would be reduced to less than significant.
CV-BIO-5 Least Bell’s Vireo Avoidance. For any work proposed between March 15 and September 15, a pre-construction survey for the least Bell’s vireo shall be performed in order to reaffirm the presence and extent of occupied habitat. The pre-construction survey area for the species shall encompass all potentially suitable habitat within the project work zone, as well as a 300-foot survey buffer. The pre-construction survey shall be performed to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director (or their designee) by a qualified biologist familiar with the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. The results of the pre-construction survey must be submitted in a report to the Development Services Director (or their designee) for review and approval prior to the issuance of any land development permits and prior to initiating any construction activities. If least Bell’s vireo is detected, a minimum 300-foot buffer delineated by orange biological fencing shall be established around the detected species to ensure that no work shall occur within occupied habitat from March 15 through September 15. On-site noise reduction techniques shall be implemented to ensure that construction noise levels not exceed 60 dB(A) Leq at the location of any occupied sensitive habitat areas. The Development Services Director (or their designee) shall have the discretion to modify the buffer width depending on site-specific conditions. If the results of the pre-construction survey determine that the survey area is unoccupied, the work may commence at the discretion of the Development Services Director (or their designee) following the review and approval of the pre-construction report.
SD-BIO-5 Direct Impact Avoidance and Noise Restrictions for Least Bell’s Vireo
Prior to the preconstruction meeting, the City Manager (or appointed designee) shall verify that the following project requirements regarding the least Bell’s vireo are shown on the construction plans:
No clearing, grubbing, grading, or other construction activities shall occur between March 15 and September 15, the breeding season of the least Bell’s vireo, until the following requirements have been met to the satisfaction of the City Manager:
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 41
A. A Qualified Biologist (possessing a valid Endangered Species Act Section 10(a)(1)(a) Recovery Permit) shall survey those wetland areas that would be subject to construction noise levels exceeding 60 decibels [dB(A)] hourly average for the presence of the least Bell’s vireo. Surveys for this species shall be conducted pursuant to the protocol survey guidelines established by the USFWS within the breeding season prior to the commencement of construction. If the least Bell’s vireo is present, then the following conditions must be met: I. Between March 15 and September 15, no clearing, grubbing, or grading of occupied least Bell’s vireo habitat shall be permitted. Areas restricted from such activities shall be staked or fenced under the supervision of a Qualified Biologist; and II. Between March 15 and September 15, no construction activities shall occur within any portion of the site where construction activities would result in noise levels exceeding 60 dB(A) hourly average at the edge of occupied least Bell’s vireo or habitat. An analysis showing that noise generated by construction activities would not exceed 60 dB(A) hourly average at the edge of occupied habitat must be completed a qualified acoustician (possessing current noise engineer license or registration with monitoring noise level experience with listed animal species) and approved by the City Manager at least two weeks prior to the commencement of construction activities. Prior to the commencement of any of construction activities during the breeding season, areas restricted from such activities shall be staked or fenced under the supervision of a qualified biologist; or III. At least two weeks prior to the commencement of construction activities, under the direction of a qualified acoustician, noise attenuation measures (e.g., berms, walls) shall be implemented to ensure that noise levels resulting from construction activities will not exceed 60 dB(A) hourly average at the edge of habitat occupied by the least Bell’s vireo. Concurrent with the commencement of construction activities and the construction of necessary noise attenuation facilities, noise monitoring* shall be conducted at the edge of the occupied habitat area to ensure that noise levels do not exceed 60 dB(A) hourly average. If the noise attenuation techniques implemented are determined to be inadequate by the qualified acoustician or biologist, then the associated construction activities shall cease until such time that adequate noise attenuation is achieved or until the end of the breeding season (September 16).
*Construction noise monitoring shall continue to be monitored at least twice weekly on varying days, or more frequently depending on the construction activity, to verify that noise levels at the edge of occupied habitat are maintained below 60 dB(A) hourly average or to the ambient noise level if it already exceeds 60 dB(A) hourly average. If not, other measures shall be implemented in consultation with the biologist and the City Manager, as necessary, to reduce noise levels to below 60 dB(A) hourly average or to the ambient noise level if it already exceeds 60 dB(A) hourly average. Such measures may include, but are not limited to, limitations on the placement of construction equipment and the simultaneous use of equipment.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 42
B. If least Bell’s vireo are not detected during the protocol survey, the Qualified Biologist shall submit substantial evidence to the City Manager and applicable resource agencies which demonstrates whether or not mitigation measures such as noise walls are necessary between March 15 and September 15 as follows: I. If this evidence indicates the potential is high for least Bell’s vireo to be present based on historical records or site conditions, then condition A.III shall be adhered to as specified above. II. If this evidence concludes that no impacts to this species are anticipated, no mitigation measures would be necessary.
6.2 Project Design Features
Due to the project site’s location adjacent to I-805, future residents would be exposed to exterior and interior noise levels that exceed the City of Chula Vista and City of San Diego land use compatibility levels. With implementation of project design features PDF-CV-NOS-1, PDF-SD-NOS-1 and PDF-NOS-2, on-site exterior and interior traffic noise levels would be reduced to within the compatibility standards. The following project design features would be required as a condition of approval for each scenario as specified.
The following project design feature applies to the No Annexation Scenario and Annexation Scenario 2b:
PDF-CV-NOS-1 On-Site Noise Barriers. Exterior noise levels at the backyards (Receivers 11, 38, 52, 53, 61 through 65, and 67 through 70) as identified on Figure 8 shall be reduced to the City of Chula Vista’s threshold of 65 CNEL for residential uses. Noise reduction for exterior traffic noise impacts can be accomplished through on-site noise barriers. Six-foot sound walls as identified on Figure 8 shall be constructed. The sound attenuation walls must be solid and free of cracks or holes. They can be constructed of masonry, wood, plastic, plexi-glass, fiberglass, steel, or a combination of those materials, as long as there are no cracks or gaps, through or below the wall. Any seams or cracks must be filled or caulked. If wood is used, it can be tongue and groove and must be at least one-inch total thickness or have a density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot.
The following project design feature applies to Annexation Scenario 2a:
PDF-SD-NOS-1 On-Site Noise Barriers. Exterior noise levels at the backyards (Receivers 11, 38, 52, 53, 61 through 65, and 67 through 70) as identified on Figure 8 shall be reduced to the City of San Diego noise compatibility standards for residential and park uses (60 CNEL and 70 CNEL, respectively). Noise reduction for exterior traffic noise impacts can be accomplished through on-site noise barriers. Six-foot sound walls as identified on Figure 8 shall be constructed. The sound attenuation walls must be solid and free of cracks or holes. They can be constructed of masonry, wood, plastic, plexi-glass, fiberglass, steel, or a combination of those materials, as long as there are no cracks or gaps, through or below the wall. Any seams or cracks must be filled
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 43
or caulked. If wood is used, it can be tongue and groove and must be at least one-inch total thickness or have a density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot.
The following project design feature applies to all scenarios:
PDF-NOS-2 Interior Noise. An exterior-to-interior noise analysis shall be conducted by the project applicant for the proposed dwelling units facing the adjoining major highway (e.g., I-805) prior to issuance of building permits. Installation of mechanical ventilation systems or air conditioning systems and sound-rated windows shall be required if the predicted interior background noise due to traffic noise intrusion through the building envelope assemblies exceeds the 45 CNEL interior standard. The acoustical analysis shall substantiate that the resulting interior background noise levels, with appropriate implementation of interior comfort systems and sound insulation, would be less than this noise standard.
In addition, for all proposed dwelling units in project areas where exterior noise levels (largely attributed to I-805 acoustical contribution) are expected to exceed 60 CNEL, mechanical ventilation and/or air conditioning systems shall be installed so as to allow closed windows and thus ensure attainment of the 45 CNEL interior background sound level due to exterior-to-interior noise intrusion.
7.0 References Cited
California, State of 2017 2017 State of California General Plan Guidelines. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 2013 Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. September. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tens-sep2013-a11y.pdf 2020a Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. Division of Environmental Analysis, Environmental Engineering, Hazardous Waste, Air, Noise, Paleontology Office. Sacramento, California. April. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/ environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf. 2020b Traffic Census Program. Traffic Volumes: Annual Average Daily Traffic. Year 2020. 2020c Traffic Census Program. Truck Traffic: Annual Average Daily Truck Traffic. Year 2020. Carrier 2012 CA16NA 018-061 Single-Stage Air Conditioner w/ Puron Refrigerant. Catalog No: CA16NA-06PD. https://resource.carrierenterprise.com/is/content/Watscocom/ carrier_ca16na03600g_article_1404816 230548_en_ss?_ga=2.123164302.489492439. 1570570581-792571132.1570570581
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 44
Chula Vista, City of 2003 MSCP Subarea Plan. https://www.chulavistaca.gov/home/showdocument?id=7106 2005 City of Chula Vista General Plan Environmental Element. 2013 City of Chula Vista Sensitive Areas (map). July 24th. https://www.chulavistaca.gov/ home/showpublisheddocument/12728/636064180193700000 2020 Chula Vista Municipal Code. Updated February 25, 2020. https://chulavista.municipal.codes/CVMC. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 2008 Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM), Software Version 1.1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Environmental Measurement and Modeling Division. Washington, D.C. December 8, 2008. 2011 Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance. FHWA-HEP-10-025. December 2011. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/regulations_and_guidance/ analysis_and_abatement_guidance/revguidance.pdf. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 2018 Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. FTA Report No. 123. September. International Construction Code 2019 California Building Code. Section 1206 – Sound Transmission. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CABCV12019JUL21S/cover. LOS Engineering, Inc. 2023 Local Mobility Analysis Report. June 30. Navcon Engineering, Inc. 2018 SoundPLAN Essential version 4.1. RECON Environmental, Inc. (RECON) 2023 Biological Resources Technical Report for the Nakano Project Chula Vista, California. May. San Diego, City of 1997 Multiple Species Conservation Program, City of San Diego MSCP Subarea Plan. March. 2010 City of San Diego Municipal Code, Article 9.5: Noise Abatement and Control. 2015 City of San Diego General Plan Noise Element.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
Page 45
2018 San Diego Municipal Code Land Development Code, Biology Guidelines. Amended February 1, 2018. 2021 A Resolution of the Council of the City of San Diego Adopting a New Citywide Park Development Impact Fee. https://docs.sandiego.gov/council_reso_ordinance/rao2021/R-313688.pdf 2022 City of San Diego CEQA Significance Determination Thresholds. September. San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) 2022 Series 14: Regional Growth Forecast. https://tfic.sandag.org/ San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA) 2010 Brown Field Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Amended December 20. U.S. Department of Transportation 2006 FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model: User’s Guide. Final Report. FHWA-HEP-06-015. DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-06-02. Cambridge, Massachusetts: DOT, Research and Innovative Technology Administration. August 2006.
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ATTACHMENTS
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ATTACHMENT 1
Baseline Noise Measurement Field Data
Field Noise Measurement Data
Record: 1279
Project Name Nakano
Observer(s)Connor Burke
Date 2020-06-04
Meteorological Conditions
Temp (F)68
Humidity % (R.H.)77
Wind Light
Wind Speed (MPH)6
Wind Direction East
Sky Overcast
Instrument and Calibrator Information
Instrument Name List (ENC) Rion NL-52
Instrument Name (ENC) Rion NL-52
Instrument Name Lookup Key (ENC) Rion NL-52
Manufacturer Rion
Model NL-52
Serial Number 553896
Calibrator Name (ENC) LD CAL150
Calibrator Name (ENC) LD CAL150
Calibrator Name Lookup Key (ENC) LD CAL150
Calibrator Manufacturer Larson Davis
Calibrator Model LD CAL150
Calibrator Serial #5152
Pre-Test (dBA SPL)94
Post-Test (dBA SPL)94
Windscreen Yes
Weighting?A-WTD
Slow/Fast?Slow
ANSI?Yes
Monitoring
Record #1
Site ID ST3
Site Location Lat/Long 32.589889, -117.031977
Begin (Time)10:30:00
End (Time)10:40:00
Leq 62.8
Lmax 64.5
Lmin 60
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 61.7
L50 62.8
L10 63.9
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background)Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Traffic
Other Noise Sources Additional Description 805 traffic dominant
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Page 1/5
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Comments / Description Facing west
Monitoring
Record #2
Site ID ST1
Site Location Lat/Long 32.587685, -117.031401
Begin (Time)10:50:00
End (Time)11:00:00
Leq 62
Lmax 75.1
Lmin 54.9
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 56.6
L50 58.8
L10 65.10
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background)Birds, Distant Aircraft, Distant Traffic
Other Noise Sources Additional Description 805 traffic dominant
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Page 2/5
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Monitoring
Record #3
Site ID ST4
Site Location Lat/Long 32.588248, -117.035646
Begin (Time)11:20:00
End (Time)11:30:00
Leq 65.6
Lmax 74.6
Lmin 61.2
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 62.6
L50 64.8
L10 67.1
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background)
Other Noise Sources Additional Description 805 traffic dominant
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Page 3/5
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Monitoring
Record #4
Site ID ST2
Site Location Lat/Long 32.586611, -117.033279
Begin (Time)11:45:00
End (Time)11:55:00
Leq 62.1
Lmax 66.3
Lmin 55
Other Lx?L90, L50, L10
L90 58.7
L50 61.8
L10 64.4
Other Lx (Specify Metric)L
Primary Noise Source Traffic
Other Noise Sources (Background)Birds, Distant Traffic
Other Noise Sources Additional Description 805 traffic dominant
Is the same instrument and calibrator being used
as previously noted?
Yes
Are the meteorological conditions the same as
previously noted?
Yes
Page 4/5
Description / Photos
Site Photos
Photo
Comments / Description Facing north
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
Page 5/5
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ATTACHMENT 2
Construction Noise Modeling Input and Output
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per FTA Guidance =80
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 8 per FTA Guidance =8
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 700 0.0 53.8 8 480 50 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 1 40 79 700 0.0 50.8 8 480 47 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Site Preparation Phase:51.6
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 700 0.0 52.8 8 480 49 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Grader 1 40 85 700 0.0 56.8 8 480 53 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dozer 1 40 82 700 0.0 53.8 8 480 50 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Scraper 1 40 84 700 0.0 55.8 8 480 52 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Backhoe 1 40 78 700 0.0 49.8 8 480 46 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Grading Phase:57.5
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 700 0.0 52.8 7 420 44 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Gradall 1 40 83 700 0.0 54.8 8 480 51 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Generator 1 50 72 700 0.0 43.8 8 480 41 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 1 40 79 700 0.0 50.8 7 420 46 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 700 0.0 44.8 8 480 41 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Building Construction Phase:53.3
Paving Paver 1 50 77 700 0.0 48.8 8 480 46 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dump Truck 1 40 76 700 0.0 47.8 8 480 44 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Roller 1 20 80 700 0.0 51.8 8 480 45 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Paving Phase:49.7
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 700 0.0 49.8 6 360 45 5 5 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.0 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:44.6 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 CV_rcptr_1stfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per FTA Guidance =80
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 8 per FTA Guidance =8
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 700 0.0 53.8 8 480 50 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 1 40 79 700 0.0 50.8 8 480 47 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Site Preparation Phase:51.6
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 700 0.0 52.8 8 480 49 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Grader 1 40 85 700 0.0 56.8 8 480 53 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dozer 1 40 82 700 0.0 53.8 8 480 50 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Scraper 1 40 84 700 0.0 55.8 8 480 52 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Backhoe 1 40 78 700 0.0 49.8 8 480 46 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Grading Phase:57.5
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 700 0.0 52.8 7 420 44 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Gradall 1 40 83 700 0.0 54.8 8 480 51 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Generator 1 50 72 700 0.0 43.8 8 480 41 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 1 40 79 700 0.0 50.8 7 420 46 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 700 0.0 44.8 8 480 41 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Building Construction Phase:53.3
Paving Paver 1 50 77 700 0.0 48.8 8 480 46 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dump Truck 1 40 76 700 0.0 47.8 8 480 44 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Roller 1 20 80 700 0.0 51.8 8 480 45 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Paving Phase:49.7
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 700 0.0 49.8 6 360 45 5 13 0 350 350 700 350.0 350.2 700.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:44.6 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 CV_rcptr_2ndfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per FTA Guidance =80
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 8 per FTA Guidance =8
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 3 40 82 1230 0.0 48.3 8 480 49 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 4 40 79 1230 0.0 45.3 8 480 47 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Site Preparation Phase:51.3
Grading Excavator 2 40 81 1230 0.0 47.3 8 480 46 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Grader 1 40 85 1230 0.0 51.3 8 480 47 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dozer 1 40 82 1230 0.0 48.3 8 480 44 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Scraper 2 40 84 1230 0.0 50.3 8 480 49 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Backhoe 2 40 78 1230 0.0 44.3 8 480 43 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Grading Phase:53.6
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 1230 0.0 47.3 8 480 39 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Gradall 3 40 83 1230 0.0 49.3 8 480 50 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Generator 1 50 72 1230 0.0 38.3 8 480 35 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 3 40 79 1230 0.0 45.3 8 480 46 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 1230 0.0 39.3 8 480 35 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Building Construction Phase:52.0
Paving Paver 2 50 77 1230 0.0 43.3 8 480 43 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dump Truck 2 40 76 1230 0.0 42.3 8 480 41 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Roller 2 20 80 1230 0.0 46.3 8 480 42 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Paving Phase:47.2
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 1230 0.0 44.3 8 480 40 5 5 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.0 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:40.3 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 CV_rcptr_AC_1stfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per FTA Guidance =80
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 8 per FTA Guidance =8
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 8-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 3 40 82 1230 0.0 48.3 8 480 49 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 4 40 79 1230 0.0 45.3 8 480 47 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Site Preparation Phase:51.3
Grading Excavator 2 40 81 1230 0.0 47.3 8 480 46 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Grader 1 40 85 1230 0.0 51.3 8 480 47 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dozer 1 40 82 1230 0.0 48.3 8 480 44 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Scraper 2 40 84 1230 0.0 50.3 8 480 49 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Backhoe 2 40 78 1230 0.0 44.3 8 480 43 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Grading Phase:53.6
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 1230 0.0 47.3 8 480 39 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Gradall 3 40 83 1230 0.0 49.3 8 480 50 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Generator 1 50 72 1230 0.0 38.3 8 480 35 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 3 40 79 1230 0.0 45.3 8 480 46 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 1230 0.0 39.3 8 480 35 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Building Construction Phase:52.0
Paving Paver 2 50 77 1230 0.0 43.3 8 480 43 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dump Truck 2 40 76 1230 0.0 42.3 8 480 41 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Roller 2 20 80 1230 0.0 46.3 8 480 42 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Paving Phase:47.2
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 1230 0.0 44.3 8 480 40 5 13 0 615 615 1230 615.0 615.1 1230.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:40.3 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 CV_rcptr_AC_2ndfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 12 per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =12
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 12-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 180 10.2 56.9 8 480 51 110 155 150 128 52 180 134.1 52.2 185.5 0.80 12.1 10.2
Front End Loader 1 40 79 180 10.2 53.9 8 480 48 110 155 150 128 52 180 134.1 52.2 185.5 0.80 12.1 10.2
Total for Site Preparation Phase:52.9
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 60 12.0 67.3 8 480 62 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Grader 1 40 85 60 12.0 71.3 8 480 66 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Dozer 1 40 82 60 12.0 68.3 8 480 63 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Scraper 1 40 84 60 12.0 70.3 8 480 65 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Backhoe 1 40 78 60 12.0 64.3 8 480 59 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Total for Grading Phase:70.2
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 210 7.6 57.0 7 420 47 110 155 150 158 52 210 163.0 52.2 214.8 0.46 9.6 7.6
Gradall 1 40 83 210 7.6 59.0 8 480 53 110 155 150 158 52 210 163.0 52.2 214.8 0.46 9.6 7.6
Generator 1 50 72 210 7.6 48.0 8 480 43 110 155 150 158 52 210 163.0 52.2 214.8 0.46 9.6 7.6
Front End Loader 1 40 79 210 7.6 55.0 7 420 49 110 155 150 158 52 210 163.0 52.2 214.8 0.46 9.6 7.6
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 210 7.6 49.0 8 480 43 110 155 150 158 52 210 163.0 52.2 214.8 0.46 9.6 7.6
Total for Building Construction Phase:55.7
Paving Paver 1 50 77 60 12.0 63.3 8 480 59 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Dump Truck 1 40 76 60 12.0 62.3 8 480 57 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Roller 1 20 80 60 12.0 66.3 8 480 58 145 155 150 8 52 60 9.4 52.2 60.8 0.85 12.3 12.0
Total for Paving Phase:62.4
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 210 7.6 54.0 6 360 47 110 155 150 158 52 210 163.0 52.2 214.8 0.46 9.6 7.6
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:47.0 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 SD_rcptr_1stfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 12 per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =12
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 12-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 1 40 82 180 0.0 67.1 8 480 61 110 164 150 128 52 180 134.1 53.9 187.9 0.03 1.6 0.0
Front End Loader 1 40 79 180 0.0 64.1 8 480 58 110 164 150 128 52 180 134.1 53.9 187.9 0.03 1.6 0.0
Total for Site Preparation Phase:63.2
Grading Excavator 1 40 81 60 8.3 71.1 8 480 65 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Grader 1 40 85 60 8.3 75.1 8 480 69 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Dozer 1 40 82 60 8.3 72.1 8 480 66 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Scraper 1 40 84 60 8.3 74.1 8 480 68 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Backhoe 1 40 78 60 8.3 68.1 8 480 62 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Total for Grading Phase:74.0
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 210 0.0 64.6 7 420 54 110 164 150 158 52 210 163.0 53.9 216.8 0.00 0.1 0.0
Gradall 1 40 83 210 0.0 66.6 8 480 61 110 164 150 158 52 210 163.0 53.9 216.8 0.00 0.1 0.0
Generator 1 50 72 210 0.0 55.6 8 480 51 110 164 150 158 52 210 163.0 53.9 216.8 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 1 40 79 210 0.0 62.6 7 420 56 110 164 150 158 52 210 163.0 53.9 216.8 0.00 0.1 0.0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 210 0.0 56.6 8 480 51 110 164 150 158 52 210 163.0 53.9 216.8 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Building Construction Phase:63.3
Paving Paver 1 50 77 60 8.3 67.1 8 480 62 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Dump Truck 1 40 76 60 8.3 66.1 8 480 60 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Roller 1 20 80 60 8.3 70.1 8 480 61 145 164 150 8 52 60 9.4 53.9 62.9 0.35 8.5 8.3
Total for Paving Phase:66.2
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 210 0.0 61.6 6 360 55 110 164 150 158 52 210 163.0 53.9 216.8 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:54.6 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 SD_rcptr_2ndfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 12 per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =12
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 12-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 3 40 82 743 0.0 53.3 8 480 52 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 4 40 79 743 0.0 50.3 8 480 51 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Site Preparation Phase:54.5
Grading Excavator 2 40 81 743 0.0 52.3 8 480 50 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Grader 1 40 85 743 0.0 56.3 8 480 51 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dozer 1 40 82 743 0.0 53.3 8 480 48 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Scraper 2 40 84 743 0.0 55.3 8 480 53 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Backhoe 2 40 78 743 0.0 49.3 8 480 47 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Grading Phase:56.8
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 743 0.0 52.3 8 480 43 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Gradall 3 40 83 743 0.0 54.3 8 480 53 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Generator 1 50 72 743 0.0 43.3 8 480 38 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 3 40 79 743 0.0 50.3 8 480 49 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 743 0.0 44.3 8 480 39 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Building Construction Phase:55.2
Paving Paver 2 50 77 743 0.0 48.3 8 480 47 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dump Truck 2 40 76 743 0.0 47.3 8 480 45 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Roller 2 20 80 743 0.0 51.3 8 480 46 145 155 150 691 52 743 691.0 52.2 743.1 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Paving Phase:50.4
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 743 0.0 49.3 8 480 44 110 155 150 691 52 743 692.2 52.2 744.4 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:43.5 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 SD_rcptr_AC_1stfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
To User: bordered cells are inputs, unbordered cells have formulae noise level limit for construction phase at occupied building, per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =75
allowable hours over which Leq is to be averaged: 12 per City of San Diego (59.5.0404(b)) =12
Construction Activity Equipment
Total
Equipment Qty
AUF % (from
FHWA RCNM)
Reference Lmax
@ 50 ft. from
FHWA RCNM
Client Equipment Description, Data Source and/or
Notes
Source to NSR
Distance (ft.)
Temporary Barrier
Insertion Loss (dB)
Additional Noise
Reduction
Distance-
Adjusted Lmax
Allowable
Operation Time
(hours)
Allowable
Operation Time
(minutes)
Predicted 12-
hour Leq
Source
Elevation (ft)
Receiver
Elevation (ft)
Barrier
Height (ft)
Source to
Barr. ("A")
Horiz. (ft)
Rcvr. to Barr.
("B") Horiz.
(ft)
Source to
Rcvr. ("C")
Horiz. (ft)
"A" (ft) "B" (ft) "C" (ft)
Path Length
Diff. "P" (ft)Abarr (dB) ILbarr (dB)
Site Preparation Dozer 3 40 82 743 0.0 53.3 8 480 52 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 4 40 79 743 0.0 50.3 8 480 51 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Site Preparation Phase:54.5
Grading Excavator 2 40 81 743 0.0 52.3 8 480 50 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Grader 1 40 85 743 0.0 56.3 8 480 51 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dozer 1 40 82 743 0.0 53.3 8 480 48 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Scraper 2 40 84 743 0.0 55.3 8 480 53 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Backhoe 2 40 78 743 0.0 49.3 8 480 47 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Grading Phase:56.8
Building Construction Crane 1 16 81 743 0.0 52.3 8 480 43 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Gradall 3 40 83 743 0.0 54.3 8 480 53 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Generator 1 50 72 743 0.0 43.3 8 480 38 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Front End Loader 3 40 79 743 0.0 50.3 8 480 49 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Welder / Torch 1 40 73 743 0.0 44.3 8 480 39 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Building Construction Phase:55.2
Paving Paver 2 50 77 743 0.0 48.3 8 480 47 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Dump Truck 2 40 76 743 0.0 47.3 8 480 45 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Roller 2 20 80 743 0.0 51.3 8 480 46 145 164 150 691 52 743 691.0 53.9 743.2 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Paving Phase:50.4
Architectural Coating Compressor (air) 1 40 78 743 0.0 49.3 8 480 44 110 164 150 691 52 743 692.2 53.9 745.0 0.00 0.1 0.0
Total for Architectural Coating Phase:43.5 5
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 SD_rcptr_AC_2ndfl
Noise Technical Report for Nakano Appendix B -- Construction Noise Analysis
Equipment Description Impact
Device?
Acoustical
Use Factor
(%)
Lesser of or
available
Lmax
Spec. 721
Lmax
Measured
Lmax @50ft
(dBA, slow)
All Other Equipment > 5 HP No 50 85 85 -- N/A --
Auger Drill Rig No 20 84 85 84
Backhoe No 40 78 80 78
Bar Bender No 20 80 80 -- N/A --
Blasting Yes -- N/A -- 94 94 -- N/A --
Boring Jack Power Unit No 50 80 80 83
Chain Saw No 20 84 85 84
Clam Shovel (dropping) Yes 20 87 93 87
Compactor (ground) No 20 80 80 83
Compressor (air) No 40 78 80 78
Concrete Batch Plant No 15 83 83 -- N/A --
Concrete Mixer Truck No 40 79 85 79
Concrete Pump Truck No 20 81 82 81
Concrete Saw No 20 90 90 90
Crane No 16 81 85 81
Dozer No 40 82 85 82
Drill Rig Truck No 20 79 84 79
Drum Mixer No 50 80 80 80
Dump Truck No 40 76 84 76
Excavator No 40 81 85 81
Flat Bed Truck No 40 74 84 74
Front End Loader No 40 79 80 79
Generator No 50 72 72 81
Generator (<25KVA, VMS signs) No 50 70 70 73
Gradall No 40 83 85 83
Grader No 40 85 85 -- N/A --
Grapple (on backhoe) No 40 85 85 87
Horizontal Boring Hydr. Jack No 25 80 80 82
Hydra Break Ram Yes 10 90 90 -- N/A --
Impact Pile Driver Yes 20 95 95 101
Jackhammer Yes 20 85 85 89
Man Lift No 20 75 85 75
Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram) Yes 20 90 90 90
Pavement Scarafier No 20 85 85 90
Paver No 50 77 85 77
Pickup Truck No 40 55 55 75
Pneumatic Tools No 50 85 85 85
Pumps No 50 77 77 81
Refrigerator Unit No 100 73 82 73
Rivit Buster/chipping gun Yes 20 79 85 79
Rock Drill No 20 81 85 81
Roller No 20 80 85 80
Sand Blasting (Single Nozzle) No 20 85 85 96
Scraper No 40 84 85 84
Shears (on backhoe) No 40 85 85 96
Slurry Plant No 100 78 78 78
Slurry Trenching Machine No 50 80 82 80
Soil Mix Drill Rig No 50 80 80 -- N/A --
Tractor No 40 84 84 -- N/A --
Vacuum Excavator (Vac-truck) No 40 85 85 85
Vacuum Street Sweeper No 10 80 80 82
Ventilation Fan No 100 79 85 79
Vibrating Hopper No 50 85 85 87
Vibratory Concrete Mixer No 20 80 80 80
Vibratory Pile Driver No 20 95 95 101
Warning Horn No 5 83 85 83
Welder / Torch No 40 73 73 74
Nakano_RCNM-FTA-emulator-with-barriers_mcs021722 Dudek Project No. 12476.02 RCNM_UG_Table1_data
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ATTACHMENT 3
SoundPLAN Data – Existing Vehicle Traffic Noise and
Construction Noise at Sensitive Habitat
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Existing Vehicle Traffic and Construction at Sensitive Habitat
Traffic values Control Constr. Affect. Gradient
Station ADT Vehicles type Vehicle name day evening night Speed device Speed veh. Road surface Min / Max
km Veh/24h Veh/h Veh/h Veh/h km/h km/h % %
I-805 Northbound Traffic direction: In entry direction
0+000 75003 Total - 4813 2500 1083 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -2.08
0+000 75003 Automobiles - 4476 2325 1007 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -2.08
0+000 75003 Medium trucks - 178 93 40 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -2.08
0+000 75003 Heavy trucks - 159 83 36 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -2.08
0+000 75003 Buses - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -2.08
0+000 75003 Motorcycles - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -2.08
0+000 75003 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -2.08
0+912 - - - - - -
I-805 Southbound Traffic direction: In entry direction
0+000 75003 Total - 4813 2500 1083 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.484848485
0+000 75003 Automobiles - 4476 2325 1007 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.484848485
0+000 75003 Medium trucks - 178 93 40 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.484848485
0+000 75003 Heavy trucks - 159 83 36 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.484848485
0+000 75003 Buses - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.484848485
0+000 75003 Motorcycles - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.484848485
0+000 75003 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.484848485
0+906 - - - - - -
Dennery Road Traffic direction: In entry direction
0+000 13866 Total - 890 462 200 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 102
0+000 13866 Automobiles - 828 430 196 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 102
0+000 13866 Medium trucks - 33 17 2 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 102
0+000 13866 Heavy trucks - 29 15 2 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 102
0+000 13866 Buses - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 102
0+000 13866 Motorcycles - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 102
0+000 13866 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 102
0+442 8334 Total - 535 278 120 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1
0+442 8334 Automobiles - 498 259 117 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1
0+442 8334 Medium trucks - 20 10 1 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1
0+442 8334 Heavy trucks - 18 9 1 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1
0+442 8334 Buses - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1
0+442 8334 Motorcycles - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1
0+442 8334 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1
0+764 - - - - - -
Road
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Existing Vehicle Traffic and Construction at Sensitive Habitat
Source name Reference Day Evening Night Cwall CI CT
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
Construction Lw/unit 117.3 - - - - -
Noise Level Corrections
Construction
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Existing Vehicle Traffic and Construction at Sensitive Habitat
Construction Noise Level
No. X Y Height Day Evening Night CNEL
(meters) dB(A)
1 496664.13 3605899.48 26.71 70.5 67.6 64 72.4 57.4
2 496945.74 3605949.98 32.76 60.2 57.4 53.7 62.1 57.5
3 496554.05 3605847.58 45.47 76.9 74.1 70.4 78.8 56.7
Coordinates
(meters)dB(A)
Existing Traffic Noise Level
Receivers
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Existing Vehicle Traffic and Construction at Sensitive Habitat
Source name Day Evening Night CNEL
1 1.Fl 70.7 67.6 64.0 72.4
Construction 57.4 - - 54.4
Dennery Road 29.5 26.6 21.1 30.4
I-805 Northbound 68.7 65.9 62.3 70.6
I-805 Southbound 65.7 62.8 59.2 67.6
2 1.Fl 62.1 57.4 53.7 62.8
Construction 57.5 - - 54.5
Dennery Road 38.9 36.0 30.8 40.0
I-805 Northbound 57.5 54.7 51.0 59.4
I-805 Southbound 56.8 53.9 50.3 58.7
3 1.Fl 77.0 74.1 70.4 78.8
Construction 56.7 - - 53.7
Dennery Road 38.4 35.6 30.2 39.5
I-805 Northbound 71.5 68.6 65.0 73.4
I-805 Southbound 75.5 72.6 69.0 77.4
dB(A)
Noise Level
Contributions
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ATTACHMENT 4
FHWA RD-77-108 Off-Site Traffic Noise Calculations
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ATTACHMENT 5
SoundPLAN Data – Operational Noise
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Operation
Level
Source name Reference Leq1 Cwall CI CT
dB(A)dB(A)dB(A)dB(A)
HVAC1 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC2 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC3 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC4 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC5 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC6 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC7 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC8 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC9 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC10 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC11 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC12 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC13 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC14 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC15 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC16 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC17 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC18 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC19 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC20 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC21 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC22 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC23 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC24 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC25 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC26 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC27 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC28 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC29 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC30 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC31 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC32 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC33 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC34 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC35 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC36 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC37 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC38 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC39 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC40 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC41 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC42 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC43 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC44 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC45 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC46 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC47 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC48 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC49 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC50 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC51 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC52 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC53 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC54 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC55 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC56 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC57 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC58 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC59 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC60 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC61 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC62 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC63 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC64 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC65 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC66 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC67 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC68 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC69 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC70 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC71 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC72 Lw/unit 76 - - -
Corrections
Noise Source
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Operation
HVAC73 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC74 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC75 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC76 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC77 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC78 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC79 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC80 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC81 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC82 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC83 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC84 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC85 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC86 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC87 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC88 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC89 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC90 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC91 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC92 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC93 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC94 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC95 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC96 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC97 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC98 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC99 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC100 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC101 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC102 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC103 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC104 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC105 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC106 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC107 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC108 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC109 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC110 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC111 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC112 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC113 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC114 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC115 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC116 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC117 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC118 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC119 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC120 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC121 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC122 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC123 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC124 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC125 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC126 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC127 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC128 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC129 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC130 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC131 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC132 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC133 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC134 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC135 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC136 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC137 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC138 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC139 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC140 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC141 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC142 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC143 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC144 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC145 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC146 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC147 Lw/unit 76 - - -
Noise Source
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Operation
HVAC148 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC149 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC150 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC151 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC152 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC153 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC154 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC155 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC156 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC157 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC158 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC159 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC160 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC161 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC162 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC163 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC164 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC165 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC166 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC167 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC168 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC169 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC170 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC171 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC172 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC173 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC174 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC175 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC176 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC177 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC178 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC179 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC180 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC181 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC182 Lw/unit 76 ---
HVAC183 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC184 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC185 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC186 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC187 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC188 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC189 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC190 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC191 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC192 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC193 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC194 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC195 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC196 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC197 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC198 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC199 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC200 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC201 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC202 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC203 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC204 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC205 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC206 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC207 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC208 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC209 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC210 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC211 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC212 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC213 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC214 Lw/unit 76 - - -
HVAC215 Lw/unit 76 - - -
Park1 Lw/unit 55 - - -
Park2 Lw/unit 55 - - -
Park3 Lw/unit 55 - - -
Park4 Lw/unit 55 - - -
Park5 Lw/unit 55 - - -
Noise Source
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Operation
No.X Y Height Noise Level
m dB(A) Leq
1 497015.59 3605890.54 47.83 36.1
2 497010.86 3605836.20 48.44 34.7
3 497009.68 3605805.48 48.95 35.5
4 497000.23 3605760.59 48.69 39.6
5 496999.05 3605715.11 49.50 39.7
6 496996.69 3605667.26 49.66 37.6
7 497038.03 3605635.37 51.19 29.9
8 496967.68 3605735.78 38.26 43.5
9 496812.41 3605560.69 54.77 38.9
10 496652.46 3605715.51 34.75 45.4
11 496822.43 3605865.82 31.98 43.8
Coordinates
(meters)
Receivers
Noise Technical Report
Nakano Project
ATTACHMENT 6
SoundPLAN Data – Future Vehicle Traffic Noise
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Vehicle Traffic
Traffic values Control Constr. Affect. Gradient
Station ADT Vehicles type Vehicle nameday evening night Speed device Speed veh. Road surface Min / Max
km Veh/24h Veh/h Veh/h Veh/h km/h km/h % %
I-805 Northbound Traffic direction: In entry direction
0+000 73704 Total - 4729 2457 1065 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1.875
0+000 73704 Automobiles - 4398 2285 990 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1.875
0+000 73704 Medium trucks - 175 91 39 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1.875
0+000 73704 Heavy trucks - 156 81 35 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1.875
0+000 73704 Buses - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1.875
0+000 73704 Motorcycles - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1.875
0+000 73704 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -1.875
0+912 - - - - - -
I-805 Southbound Traffic direction: In entry direction
0+000 81504 Total - 5230 2717 1177 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.516129032
0+000 81504 Automobiles - 4864 2527 1095 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.516129032
0+000 81504 Medium trucks - 194 101 44 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.516129032
0+000 81504 Heavy trucks - 173 90 39 89 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.516129032
0+000 81504 Buses - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.516129032
0+000 81504 Motorcycles - - - - 105 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.516129032
0+000 81504 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -0.516129032
0+906 - - - - - -
Dennery Road Traffic direction: In entry direction
0+000 21432 Total - 1371 712 316 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 1.375
0+000 21432 Automobiles - 1275 662 309 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 1.375
0+000 21432 Medium trucks - 51 26 4 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 1.375
0+000 21432 Heavy trucks - 45 23 3 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 1.375
0+000 21432 Buses - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 1.375
0+000 21432 Motorcycles - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 1.375
0+000 21432 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) 1.375
0+442 14400 Total - 924 480 208 - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -8.25
0+442 14400 Automobiles - 859 446 203 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -8.25
0+442 14400 Medium trucks - 34 18 2 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -8.25
0+442 14400 Heavy trucks - 30 16 2 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -8.25
0+442 14400 Buses - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -8.25
0+442 14400 Motorcycles - - - - 56 none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -8.25
0+442 14400 Auxiliary vehicle - - - - - none - - Average (of DGAC and PCC) -8.25
0+764 - - - - - -
Road
3396.1 Nakano
SoundPLAN Data - Vehicle Traffic
No. X Y Floor Height Day Evening Night Lden Day Evening Night Lden Day Evening Night Lden
1 496915.02 3605622.56 3.Fl 43.55 52.6 49.8 45.6 54.2 52.6 49.8 45.6 54.2 0 0 0 0
2 496862.79 3605613.92 3.Fl 43.57 55.6 52.8 49.0 57.5 55.6 52.7 49.0 57.4 0 0 0 0
3 496771.28 3605615.38 3.Fl 42.65 56.3 53.5 49.8 58.2 56.2 53.4 49.7 58.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
4 496733.70 3605615.35 3.Fl 42.34 57.8 55.0 51.3 59.7 58.1 55.2 51.6 60.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
5 496697.63 3605614.83 3.Fl 42.35 61.7 58.9 55.3 63.6 61.9 59.1 55.4 63.8 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
6 496662.79 3605614.34 3.Fl 42.35 67.7 64.9 61.3 69.6 67.4 64.6 61.0 69.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3
7 496656.15 3605634.57 3.Fl 42.20 70.1 67.3 63.6 72.0 70.2 67.3 63.7 72.1 0 0 0 0
8 496703.49 3605645.08 3.Fl 41.56 64.4 61.6 57.9 66.3 64.4 61.6 57.9 66.3 0 0 0 0
9 496676.19 3605644.68 3.Fl 41.24 66.8 64.0 60.4 68.7 66.8 64.0 60.3 68.7 0 0 0 0
10 496667.19 3605653.53 3.Fl 41.24 71.3 68.5 64.9 73.2 71.4 68.5 64.9 73.3 0 0 0 0
11 496675.35 3605663.82 3.Fl 41.33 67.4 64.5 60.9 69.3 67.4 64.5 60.9 69.3 0 0 0 0
12 496694.86 3605664.40 3.Fl 41.58 59.8 57.0 53.3 61.7 59.9 57.0 53.4 61.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
13 496711.02 3605664.28 3.Fl 41.74 58.3 55.5 51.9 60.2 58.4 55.5 51.9 60.3 0 0 0 0
14 496730.08 3605664.05 3.Fl 41.85 56.9 54.0 50.4 58.8 56.9 54.1 50.4 58.8 0 0 0 0
15 496667.25 3605673.90 3.Fl 41.47 72.3 69.5 65.9 74.2 72.4 69.6 65.9 74.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
16 496676.12 3605682.84 3.Fl 41.63 70.3 67.4 63.8 72.2 70.3 67.4 63.8 72.2 0 0 0 0
17 496693.97 3605682.81 3.Fl 41.69 66.9 64.1 60.4 68.8 66.9 64.1 60.4 68.8 0 0 0 0
18 496712.16 3605682.93 3.Fl 41.83 64.3 61.5 57.9 66.2 64.3 61.5 57.8 66.2 0 0 0 0
19 496730.02 3605682.85 3.Fl 41.85 62.7 59.9 56.3 64.6 62.7 59.9 56.2 64.6 0 0 0 0
20 496724.66 3605695.08 3.Fl 41.84 63.6 60.8 57.1 65.5 63.6 60.8 57.1 65.5 0 0 0 0
21 496704.70 3605695.12 3.Fl 41.76 64.9 62.1 58.4 66.8 64.9 62.1 58.5 66.8 0 0 0 0
22 496686.11 3605694.80 3.Fl 41.72 67.3 64.4 60.8 69.2 67.3 64.4 60.8 69.2 0 0 0 0
23 496670.36 3605702.54 3.Fl 41.57 73.2 70.4 66.7 75.1 73.2 70.4 66.7 75.1 0 0 0 0
24 496682.74 3605714.04 3.Fl 41.40 67.3 64.5 60.9 69.2 67.3 64.5 60.9 69.2 0 0 0 0
25 496702.02 3605714.16 3.Fl 41.41 63.1 60.3 56.7 65.0 63.1 60.3 56.7 65.0 0 0 0 0
26 496721.99 3605714.16 3.Fl 41.63 61.0 58.1 54.5 62.9 61.0 58.1 54.5 62.9 0 0 0 0
27 496670.27 3605723.09 3.Fl 41.36 73.4 70.5 66.9 75.3 73.4 70.5 66.9 75.3 0 0 0 0
28 496681.18 3605733.06 3.Fl 41.08 70.5 67.6 64.0 72.4 70.5 67.6 64.0 72.4 0 0 0 0
29 496696.61 3605733.11 3.Fl 41.02 68.3 65.4 61.8 70.2 68.3 65.4 61.8 70.2 0 0 0 0
30 496712.56 3605733.43 3.Fl 41.28 65.5 62.6 59.0 67.4 65.5 62.6 59.0 67.4 0 0 0 0
31 496729.75 3605733.27 3.Fl 41.44 63.4 60.6 56.9 65.3 63.4 60.6 56.9 65.3 0 0 0 0
32 496749.80 3605733.19 3.Fl 41.54 61.1 58.2 54.6 63.0 61.1 58.2 54.6 63.0 0 0 0 0
33 496749.29 3605745.54 3.Fl 41.44 61.7 58.9 55.2 63.6 61.7 58.9 55.2 63.6 0 0 0 0
34 496729.34 3605744.75 3.Fl 41.40 63.6 60.8 57.2 65.5 63.6 60.8 57.2 65.5 0 0 0 0
35 496713.15 3605744.75 3.Fl 41.19 65.0 62.2 58.5 66.9 65.0 62.2 58.5 66.9 0 0 0 0
36 496693.99 3605744.07 3.Fl 40.93 68.6 65.7 62.1 70.5 68.6 65.7 62.1 70.5 0 0 0 0
37 496682.87 3605755.00 3.Fl 40.85 72.3 69.4 65.8 74.2 72.2 69.4 65.8 74.2 0 0 0 0
38 496698.67 3605763.73 3.Fl 40.78 66.8 63.9 60.3 68.7 66.7 63.8 60.2 68.6 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
39 496712.99 3605763.84 3.Fl 40.95 63.2 60.3 56.7 65.1 63.1 60.3 56.6 65.0 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
40 496725.69 3605763.93 3.Fl 41.03 61.6 58.8 55.2 63.5 61.6 58.8 55.1 63.5 0 0 0 0
41 496696.27 3605782.90 3.Fl 40.63 69.4 66.5 62.9 71.3 69.4 66.5 62.9 71.3 0 0 0 0
42 496714.87 3605783.27 3.Fl 40.70 68.3 65.4 61.8 70.2 68.3 65.4 61.8 70.2 0 0 0 0
43 496731.98 3605783.27 3.Fl 40.80 67.7 64.9 61.2 69.6 67.7 64.9 61.2 69.6 0 0 0 0
44 496748.72 3605784.02 3.Fl 41.00 66.9 64.1 60.5 68.8 66.9 64.1 60.4 68.8 0 0 0 0
45 496765.84 3605783.27 3.Fl 41.02 65.2 62.4 58.7 67.1 65.2 62.4 58.8 67.1 0 0 0 0
46 496782.58 3605784.02 3.Fl 41.21 62.2 59.4 55.7 64.1 62.2 59.4 55.7 64.1 0 0 0 0
47 496797.46 3605783.27 3.Fl 41.21 60.5 57.7 54.0 62.4 60.5 57.7 54.0 62.4 0 0 0 0
48 496795.60 3605795.18 3.Fl 41.22 60.8 57.9 54.3 62.7 60.8 57.9 54.3 62.7 0 0 0 0
49 496776.95 3605796.13 3.Fl 41.03 62.4 59.6 55.9 64.3 62.4 59.6 55.9 64.3 0 0 0 0
50 496760.09 3605796.83 3.Fl 40.89 64.7 61.9 58.2 66.6 64.7 61.9 58.2 66.6 0 0 0 0
51 496754.09 3605805.95 3.Fl 40.58 68.7 65.9 62.2 70.6 68.7 65.9 62.2 70.6 0 0 0 0
52 496761.13 3605813.91 3.Fl 40.63 66.9 64.1 60.4 68.8 66.9 64.1 60.5 68.8 0 0 0 0
53 496774.53 3605813.91 3.Fl 40.70 64.5 61.7 58.1 66.4 64.7 61.8 58.2 66.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
54 496788.38 3605814.15 3.Fl 40.75 63.0 60.1 56.5 64.9 62.8 59.9 56.3 64.7 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2
55 496801.43 3605814.15 3.Fl 41.03 61.7 58.9 55.3 63.6 61.8 58.9 55.3 63.7 0 0 0 0
56 496805.93 3605828.23 3.Fl 40.78 61.4 58.6 55.0 63.3 61.2 58.3 54.7 63.1 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3
57 496791.38 3605828.23 3.Fl 40.46 62.5 59.6 56.0 64.4 62.3 59.4 55.8 64.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2
58 496776.84 3605827.77 3.Fl 40.55 63.6 60.7 57.1 65.5 63.7 60.9 57.2 65.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
59 496759.06 3605828.12 3.Fl 40.43 65.6 62.8 59.1 67.5 65.8 63.0 59.3 67.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
60 496744.51 3605838.16 3.Fl 40.09 68.9 66.1 62.4 70.8 68.9 66.1 62.4 70.8 0 0 0 0
61 496758.13 3605845.43 3.Fl 40.08 66.9 64.0 60.4 68.8 66.7 63.8 60.2 68.6 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2
62 496772.45 3605845.55 3.Fl 40.08 66.1 63.3 59.6 68.0 66.2 63.3 59.7 68.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
63 496785.61 3605845.55 3.Fl 40.08 65.9 63.0 59.4 67.8 65.8 63.0 59.3 67.7 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
64 496799.47 3605845.78 3.Fl 40.08 65.4 62.6 58.9 67.3 65.4 62.6 59.0 67.3 0 0 0 0
65 496812.86 3605845.90 3.Fl 40.08 64.9 62.1 58.4 66.8 64.9 62.1 58.4 66.8 0 0 0 0
66 496826.02 3605841.28 3.Fl 40.4 60.6 57.7 54.1 62.5 60.7 57.9 54.2 62.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
67 496838.76 3605847.4 3.Fl 40.67 64.3 61.5 57.8 66.2 64.3 61.5 57.8 66.2 0 0 0 0
68 496853.3 3605849.94 3.Fl 41.28 63.9 61.1 57.5 65.9 64.0 61.2 57.5 65.9 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
69 496871.08 3605852.94 3.Fl 41.34 63.7 60.9 57.2 65.6 63.7 60.9 57.3 65.6 0 0 0 0
70 496894.41 3605856.87 3.Fl 41.34 62.9 60.1 56.4 64.8 63.1 60.2 56.6 65.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
71 496910.57 3605859.52 3.Fl 41.34 62.6 59.8 56.1 64.5 62.7 59.9 56.3 64.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
72 496934.93 3605863.56 3.Fl 41.34 62.1 59.2 55.6 64.0 62.1 59.3 55.7 64.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
73 496960.41 3605791.26 3.Fl 40.93 50.5 47.6 43.6 52.2 50.4 47.6 43.6 52.2 0 0 0 0
74 496947.84 3605734.28 3.Fl 41.33 51.3 48.5 44.4 53.0 51.3 48.5 44.4 53.0 0 0 0 0
75 496951.15 3605692.28 3.Fl 41.85 49.4 46.6 42.1 50.9 49.4 46.6 42.1 50.9 0 0 0 0
DifferenceCoordinates Noise Level without Barrier Noise Level with Barrier
Receivers