HomeMy WebLinkAboutPIP 05-14; MAMMOTH PROFESSIONAL OFFICE BUILDING; ACOUSTICAL ANALYSIS REPORT; 2005-07-21I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0
2.0
3.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION •
2.1 Project Location
2.2 Project Description
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.1 Existing Noise Environment
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
3.2 Future Noise Environment
METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT
4.1 • Methodology
4.2 Measurement Equipment
IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
5.1 Exterior
5.2 Interior
CERTIFICATION
REFERENCES
FIGURES
1. Thomas Guide Map
2. Assessor's Parcel Map
3. Satellite Aerial Photograph
4. Topographic Map
5. Planned Land Use Map
1
2
3
5
7
10
11
6. McClellan-Palomar Airport 2014 Future Condition Noise Exposure Map Showing Project
Location
7. Site Plan Showing Future Traffic CNEL Contours and Noise Measurement Location
8. Site Plan Showing Future CNEL at the Proposed Outdoor Use Area
9. Site Plan Showing Future Combined CNEL at Exterior Building Facades
APPENDICES
A. Sound32 Data and Results
B. Exterior-to-Interior Noise Analysis
C. Sound Insulation Prediction Results
D. Excerpts of Typical Building Plans and Elevations
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed project, Carlsbad Professional Building, consists of the construction of a single, 3-
story, 51-unit office building to be located at the northeast intersection of Palomar Airport Road and
Loker Avenue East in the City of Carlsbad, California.
The primary noise sources in the vicinity of the project site include automobile and truck traffic noise
from Palomar Airport Road and Loker Avenue East, bus traffic, and aircraft overflight noise
associated with the McClellan-Palomar Airport. The current calculated on-site traffic noise level at
the southwest corner of the project site is 79.8 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Due to a
projected increase in traffic volume, the future (year 2030) traffic noise level at the southwest corner
is expected to increase to 80.9 CNEL.
Calculations show that future combined noise levels at the building facades will range from
64.0 CNEL at the 1st floor northeastern facade to 75.8 CNEL at the 2nd floor southern facade. Since
future exterior on-site noise levels will exceed 70 CNEL at some building facades, an exterior-to-
interior noise analysis was conducted to evaluate the sound reduction properties of proposed
exterior wall and window construction designs. Due to the elevated future exterior noise level
impacts at the proposed building facades, unmitigated future interior noise levels may exceed the
55 CNEL interior noise limit for general commercial office space.
Representative exterior-to-interior calculations show that the future interior noise levels will meet the
minimum requirements of 55 CNEL or less in general commercial office space with windows in the
closed position. Since the windows are fixed and are non-operable, mechanical ventilation, which
allows windows to be closed for an extended length of time, is required. For further details on
mitigation recommendations, please refer to Section 5.0 of this report.
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This acoustical analysis report is submitted to satisfy the acoustical requirements of the City of
Carlsbad for a Site Development Permit. Its purpose is to assess noise impacts from nearby
roadway traffic, bus traffic, and aircraft overflight and to identify project features or requirements
necessary to achieve an outdoor use courtyard noise level of 65 CNEL and interior noise levels of
55 CNEL or less in commercial office space, in compliance with the City of Carlsbad and State of
California noise regulations.
All noise level or sound level values presented herein are expressed in terms of decibels, with A-
weighting to approximate the hearing sensitivity of humans. Time-averaged noise levels are
expressed by the symbol LEa, for a specified duration. The CNEL is a 24-hour average, where
sound levels during evening hours of 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. have an added 5 dB weighting, and
sound levels during nighttime hours of 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. have an added 10 dB weighting. This
is similar to the Day-Night sound level, LoN, which is a 24-hour average with an added 10 dB
weighting on the same nighttime hours but no added weighting on the evening hours. Sound levels
expressed in CNEL are always based on A-weighted decibels. These metrics are used to express
noise levels for both measurement and municipal regulations, for land use guidelines, and for
enforcement of noise ordinances. Further explanation can be provided upon request.
2.1 Project Location
The project site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and
Loker Avenue East in the City of Carlsbad, California. The Assessor's parcel number (APN) for the
property is 209-083-22. The overall property is triangular in shape with an overall site area of
approximately 3.72 acres.
The project property is currently zoned Pl (Planned Industrial). In the project vicinity, the
surrounding property to the north, east, and west is zoned Industrial and to the south is zoned
Agricultural. The proposed project does not involve any rezoning, and the surrounding property to
the south is planned to be changed to Industrial.
The project location is shown on the Thomas Guide Map, Figure 1, following this report. An
Assessor's Parcel Map, Satellite Aerial Photograph, Topographic Map, and Planned Land Use Map
of this area are also provided as Figures 2 through 5.
2.2 Project Description
The proposed project consists of the construction of a single, 3-story, 51-unit office building to be
located at the northeast intersection of Palomar Airport Road and Loker Avenue East in the City of
Carlsbad, California.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.1 Existing Noise Environment
The primary noise sources in the vicinity of the project site include automobile and truck traffic noise
from Palomar Airport Road and Loker Avenue East, and aircraft overflight noise associated with the
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
McClellan-Palomar Airport. The bus stop on Loker Avenue East, to the west of the project site, will
contribute additional noise impacts of 0.5 to 1.0 decibels (dB) to the proposed building facade
fronting Loker Avenue East. No other noise source is considered significant. All roadway
classifications are from the San Diego Association of Governments (SanDAG) Transportation
Forecast Center.
3.1.1 Vehicle Traffic Noise
Palomar Airport Road is a six-lane, two-way prime arterial running east-west. The paved roadway
width is approximately 100 feet. The posted speed limit is 55 mph. Palomar Airport Road, in the
vicinity of the project site, currently carries a traffic volume of approximately 52,000 Average Daily
Trips (ADT), according to the San DAG 2000 Traffic Volume Forecast, Series 10, as listed in the
Transportation Forecast Information Center on the SanDAG website at http://www.sandag.com.
Loker Avenue East is a two-way local street running north-south. The paved roadway width is
approximately 48 feet. The speed limit is 25 mph. Loker Avenue East, in the vicinity of the project
site, currently carries a traffic volume of approximately 5,000 ADT, according to the SanDAG
website.
The current calculated on-site traffic noise level at the southwest corner of the project site is
79.8 CNEL. Current and future traffic volumes for the roadway sections near the project site are
shown in Table 1. For further roadway details and projected future ADT traffic volumes, please refer
to Appendix A: Sound32 Data and Results.
-.
Table 1; Overall-Roadway Traffic Informati0ri
.,
Speed Limit (mph)
Roadway .Name Current ADT Future (2030) ADT
Current Future
Palomar Airport Road 55 55 52,000 67,000
Loker Avenue East 25 25 5,000 6,000
Current truck percentages for Palomar Airport Road and Loker Avenue East were obtained from the
City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual. A truck percentage mix of 3.52% medium and 1.24%
heavy trucks was used for Palomar Airport Road and 1.83% medium and 0.28% heavy trucks was
used for Loker Avenue East.
3 .1 .2 Aircraft Noise
According to the current McClellan-Palomar Airport 2014 Future Condition Noise Exposure Map
(included as Figure 6), the proposed project site lies within the airport influence area and will be
exposed to aircraft overflight noise of approximately 55.0 CNEL. Noise from aircraft overflight will
affect the project's overall interior sound quality and is, therefore, included in this analysis. The
current calculated on-site combined noise level (traffic and aircraft) at the southwestern corner of
the property is 79.8 CNEL.
3.1.3 Measured Noise Level
An on-site inspection and traffic noise measurement were made on the morning of Friday, July 8,
2005. The weather conditions were as follows: clear skies, low humidity, temperatures in the low
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
70's with winds from the west at 2-4 mph. A "one-hour" equivalent measurement was made at the
southwest corner of the project site. The microphone position was placed approximately five feet
above the existing project site grade. Traffic volumes were recorded for automobiles, medium-size
trucks, and large trucks during the measurement period. After a continuous 15-minute sound level
measurement, there was no change in the LEa and results were then recorded. The measured noise
level and related weather conditions are found in Table 2. The calculated equivalent hourly vehicle
traffic count adjustment and a complete tabular listing of all traffic data recorded during the on-site
traffic noise measurement are found in Appendix A: Sound32 Data and Results.
..
.. . t:~iple ~/.0.n-S·ite Noise :Measure,ment-Conditions .. and·:~es·.uIts .• '· .. .. -~ , '
Date Friday, July 8, 2005
Time 10:30 p.m. -10:45 p.m.
Conditions Clear Skies, Winds from the West @ 2-4 mph,
Temperature Low ?O's with Low Humidity
Measured Noise Level 77.7 dBA LEa
3.1.4 Calculated Noise Level
Noise levels were calculated for the site using the methodology described in Section 4.1 (see next
page) for the location, conditions, and traffic volumes counted during the noise measurements. The
calculated noise levels (LEa) were compared with the measured on-site noise level to determine if
adjustments or corrections ( calibration) should be applied to the traffic noise prediction model,
Sound32. Adjustments are intended to account for site-specific differences, such as reflection and
absorption, which may be greater or lesser than accounted for in the model.
The measured noise level of 77.7 dBA LEa for Palomar Airport Road and Loker Avenue East was
compared to the calculated (modeled) noise level of 77.4 dBA Lrn, for the same conditions and
traffic flow. As there was only a 0.3 dBA difference between the measured and the calculated noise
level, no adjustment was deemed necessary to model future noise levels for this location. Please
refer to Table 3, for further evaluation .
. . .
Table ,3. -C:alcul~tea ·versus-Measared Traffic Noise.:pata
Roadways Calculated Measured Difference Correction
Palomar Airport Road and 77.4 dBA LEa 77.7 dBA LEa 0.3 dB none Loker Avenue East
3.2 Future Noise Environment
The future (year 2030) traffic volumes for Palomar Airport Road and Loker Avenue East were
obtained from the Traffic Forecast Information Center on the San Diego Association of
Governments (SanDAG) website, located at http://maximus.sandag.org/tfic/trfic30.html. The future
(year 2030) traffic volume for Palomar Airport Road is projected to be 67,000 ADT. The future (year
2030) traffic volume for Loker Avenue East is projected to be 6,000 ADT. The future (year 2030)
traffic noise level at the southwest corner of the project site is expected to increase to 80.9 CNEL.
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The same truck percentages from the existing traffic volumes were used for future traffic volume
modeling. The roadway classification, speed limit, alignment and roadbed grade elevations are
expected to remain the same for these sections of Palomar Airport Road and Loker Avenue East.
For further roadway details and projected future ADT traffic volumes, please refer to Appendix A:
Sound32 Data and Results.
4.0 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT
4.1 Methodology
4.1.1 Field Measurement
Typically, a "one-hour" equivalent sound level measurement (LEO, A-Weighted) is recorded for at
least one noise-sensitive location on the site. During the on-site noise measurement, start and end
times are recorded, vehicle counts are made for cars, medium trucks (double-tires/two axles), and
heavy trucks (three or more axles) for the corresponding road segment(s). Supplemental sound
measurements of one hour or less in duration are often made to further describe the noise
environment of the site.
For measurements of less than one hour in duration, the measurement time is long enough for a
representative traffic volume to occur and the noise level (LEo)to stabilize; 15 minutes is usually
sufficient for this purpose. The vehicle counts are then converted to one-hour equivalent volumes by
using the appropriate multiplier.
Other field data gathered includes measuring or estimating distances, angles-of-view, slopes,
elevations, roadway grades, and vehicle speeds. This data was checked against the available maps
and records.
4.1.2 Roadway Noise Calculation
The Sound32 Release 1.41 program released by the California Department of Transportation,
Division of New Technology, Materials and Research was used to calculate the future daytime
average hourly noise level (HNL) at various locations at the project site. The daytime average hourly
traffic volume is calculated as 0.058 times the ADT, based on the studies made by Wyle
Laboratories (see reference). The HNL is equivalent to the LEO, and both are converted to the CNEL
by adding 2.0 decibels, as shown in the Wyle Study. Future CNEL is calculated for desired receptor
locations using future road alignment, elevations, lane configurations, projected traffic volumes,
estimated truck mixes, and vehicle speeds. Noise attenuation methods may be analyzed, tested,
and planned with Sound32, as required. Further explanation can be supplied on request.
4.1.3 Exterior-to-Interior Noise Calculation
The City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual State Building Code, local municipalities, and other
agencies (such as HUD) require an acoustical analysis for any multi-unit residential or commercial
facility proposed in an area that has or will have high exterior noise levels. This analysis must
demonstrate building features and mitigation that will provide interior noise levels of 55 CNEL or
less in commercial space. CNEL is considered synonymous with LoN-
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Analysis for the interior noise levels requires consideration of:
• Number of unique assemblies in the wall (doors, window/wall mount air conditioners, sliding
glass doors, and windows)
• Size, number of units, and sound transmission data for each assembly type
• Length of sound impacted wall(s)
Depth of sound impacted room
• Height of exterior wall of sound impacted room
• Exterior noise level at wall assembly or assemblies of sound impacted room
The Composite Sound Transmission data is developed for the exterior wall(s) and the calculated
noise exposure is converted to octave-band sound pressure levels (SPL) by addition of an octave
data curve for typical traffic noise. The reduction in room noise due to absorption is calculated and
subtracted from the interior octave noise levels, and the octave noise levels are logarithmically
added to produce the overall interior room noise level. When interior noise levels exceed 45 CNEL,
the noise reduction achieved by each element is reviewed to determine what changes will achieve
the most cost-effective compliance. Windows are usually the first to be reviewed, followed by the
doors, and then the walls.
Modeling of wall assemblies using building plans is accomplished using INSUL Ver. 6.0, which is a
model-based computer program developed by Marshall Day Acoustics for predicting the sound
insulation of walls, floors, ceilings and windows. It is acoustically based on theoretical models that
require only minimal material information and can make reasonable estimates of the sound
transmission loss (TL) and Sound Transmission Class (STC) for use in sound insulation
calculations. INSUL can be used to quickly evaluate new materials or systems or investigate the
effects of changes to existing designs. It models individual materials using the simple mass law and
coincidence frequency approach and can model more complex assembly partitions as well. It has
evolved over several versions into an easy-to-use tool and has refined the theoretical models by
continued comparison with laboratory tests to provide acceptable accuracy for a wide range of
constructions. INSUL model performance comparisons with laboratory test data show that the
model generally predicts the performance of a given assembly within 3 STC points.
4 . .2 Measurement Equipment
Some or all of the following equipment was used at the site to measure existing noise levels:
Larson Davis Model 820 Integrating Sound Level Meter, Type 1, Serial# 0316
Larson Davis Model CA200 Calibrator, Serial # 0292
Hand-bearing magnetic compass, microphone with windscreen, tripods
Distance measurement wheel, digital camera
The sound level meter was field-calibrated immediately prior to the noise measurement and
checked afterward, to ensure accuracy. All sound level measurements conducted and presented in
this report, in accordance with the regulations, were made with a sound level meter that conforms to
the American National Standards Institute specifications for sound level meters ANSI SI .4-1983
(R2001 ). All instruments are maintained with National Bureau of Standards traceable calibration,
per the manufacturers' standards.
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5.0 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
5.1 Exterior
The future noise environment is primarily the result of vehicle traffic traveling on Palomar Airport
Road and Loker Avenue East, aircraft overflight noise associated with the McClellan-Palomar
Airport, and noise impacts from the local bus stop. Without mitigation, the future 80 CNEL traffic
noise contour will be located approximately 60 feet north of the Palomar Airport Road centerline.
The future 75 CNEL traffic contour will be located approximately 115 feet north of the Palomar
Airport Road centerline. The future 70 CNEL traffic contour will be located approximately 200 feet
north of the Palomar Airport Road centerline. For a graphical representation of these contours,
please refer to Figure 7: Site Plan Showing Future Traffic CNEL Contours and Noise Measurement
Location.
5.1.1 Outdoor Use Area
Without mitigation, future combined noise levels at the proposed courtyard outdoor use area will be
57.0 CNEL. Mitigation to provide an exterior noise level below 65 CNEL will not be necessary.
Table 4, Future Combined CNEL at Outdoor Use Areas, shows the future noise level at the
proposed courtyard outdoor use area. Please refer to Figure 8: Site Plan Showing Future CNEL at
the Proposed Outdoor Use Area.
· 'Tal;lle 4. Future Combined :CNEL ·at .Outdoor Us.e Areas
Exterior Aircraft Noise Exterior Combined Receiver Receiver Location Contour Level Traffic CNEL (CNEL) CNEL
R-1 Interior Courtyard 52.6 55.0 57.0
5.1.2 Exterior Building Facades
Calculations show that future combined noise levels, from vehicle traffic, aircraft overflight, and the
bus stop, at the building facades will range from 64. 0 CNEL at the 1st floor northeastern facade to
75.8 CNEL at the 2nd floor southern facade. Table 5 summarizes the combined noise impacts to the
exterior building facades. Please refer to Figure 9: Site Plan Showing Future Combined CNEL at
Exterior Building Facades.
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
:; • ,: ·:·; '·iibi~ 5. ·l.;Jt~~~--·Cq!ji'~iri;g Exte~lrir:;13~"il~ing 'Fa~-~a~··c·Nei:,. ' '.: ., '
:.: ,' '·:. . -· ,,,', ·-•' .• .• ,, -', -', ' ·, ,"-, .·• <, -,·-.-•• ,,
. '
Receiver
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
R-6
R-7
R-8
R-9
R-10
R-11
R-12
R-13
R-14
R-15
Floor Receiver Location Exterior Traffic CNEL
South Facade 70.8
2nd South Facade 75.8
3rd South Facade 75.7
1st West Facade 69.1
2nd West Facade 72.7
3rd West Facade 72.6
1st Northwest Facade 64.7
2nd Northwest Facade 65.4
3rd Northwest Facade 65.3
1~ Northeast Facade 62.9
2nd Northeast Facade 63.6
3~ Northeast Facade 64.3
1st East Facade 64.8
2~ East Facade 66.5
East Facade 68.8
5.2 Interior
Bus Stop
Penalty (dB)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Aircraft Noise
Contour Level
(CNEL)
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
'55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
55.0
Combined
Exterior Facade
CNEL
70.9
75.8
75.7
69.7
73.3
73.2
66.0
66.7
66.6
64.0
64.6
65.2
65.7
67.3
69.5
The City of Carlsbad requires buildings to be designed in order to attenuate, control, and maintain
interior noise levels to below 55 CNEL or less in general office space. Current exterior building
construction is generally expected to achieve at least 15 decibels of exterior-to-interior noise
attenuation, with windows opened. Therefore, proposed project building structures exposed to
exterior noise levels greater than 70 CNEL could be subject to interior noise levels exceeding the
55 CNEL noise limit for general commercial space.
Future noise levels will exceed 70 CNEL at the southern and western facades. Due to the elevated
worst-case exterior noise level impacts at these building facades, an exterior-to-interior noise
analysis was conducted to evaluate the sound reduction properties of proposed exterior wall,
window, and door construction designs. Please refer to Appendix B: Exterior-to-Interior Noise
Analysis.
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The architectural building plan specifications for the typical exterior wall assembly incorporated into
this acoustical analysis are:
Single layer of 2½-inch thick MetalStudCrete panel exterior
2-inch wide by 6-inch deep steel studs, placed 16-inches on-center
Single layer of 5½-inch thick faced fiberglass (R-19) batt insulation
Single layer of %-inch thick Type X gypsum board
According to the Sound Transmission Loss Test Report No. TL03-102 by Western Electro-Acoustic
Laboratory, Inc., the above exterior wall proposed for this project results in an approximate STC
rating of 53, which was incorporated into our analysis. Please refer to Appendix C: Sound Insulation
Prediction Results.
Our exterior-to-interior analysis also incorporates STC 32 windows as the minimum recommended
configuration for the project. The window assembly is constructed as follows:
• STC 32 (¼-inch thick single glazed window)
The listed window STC value is based on "Center-of-Glass" test data. Any window and frame
configurations may be used as long as they meet or exceed the minimum STC ratings and
corresponding octave band performances for the above windows. Window "Center-of-Glass"
performance for the recommended window is provided in Appendix C: Sound Insulation Prediction
Results.
With the proposed exterior wall assembly and window configurations specified above, all offices will
comply with the City of Carlsbad interior noise code regulations, with windows and doors in a closed
position. Please refer to Table 6, showing future interior noise levels with the recommendations
made herein.
"
Tabl~ :6,. 'fut~r,e· 1riter.i9r Noise Levels with Mitigatio~:·,R:e~ominendations
.. . ,.
Interior
Room Exterior Facade Minimum Window CNEL Mechanical Ventilation (CNEL) Rating (\.•Jindov,s
closed)
Northwest Facade-Office 5A 66.7 STC 32 35.7 Required
-South Facade -Office 2A 75.8 STC 32 44.1 Required
West Facade-Office 7A 73.3 STC 32 42.7 Required
Representative exterior-to-interior calculations show that the future interior noise levels will meet the
minimum requirements of 55 CNEL or less in general commercial space with windows in the closed
position. Since the windows are fixed and are non-operable, mechanical ventilation, which allows
windows to be closed for an extended length of time, is required. The mechanical ventilation shall
meet the criteria of the Uniform Building Code (Chapter 12, Section 1203.3 of the 2001 California
Building Code, based on the 1997 Uniform Building Code), including the capability to provide
sufficient fresh air exchanges, as required by the Code. The ventilation system shall not
compromise the sound insulation capability of the exterior wall or be dependent on ventilation
through windows.
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7 .0 REFERENCES
1. 2001 California Building Code, Based on the 1997 Uniform Building Code, Appendix Chapter 12,
Division II -Sound Transmission Control, Section 1208 -Sound Transmission Control.
2. 2001 California Building Code, Based on the 1997 Uniform Building Code, Chapter 12, Section
1203.3 -Ventilation.
3. 2001 California Noise Insulation Standards, effective 11/01/02, Based on 1997 Uniform Building
Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24.
4. California Department of Transportation, Sound32 Traffic Noise Model.
5. City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual.
6. Harris, Cyril M., Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, 3rd Edition,
Acoustical Society of America, 1998.
7. Heeden, Robert A, Compendium of Materials for Noise Control, U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, November 1978.
8. Irvine, Leland K., Richards, Roy L., Acoustics and Noise Control Handbook for Architects and
Builders, Kreiger Publishing Company, 1998.
9. NBS Building Sciences Series 77, Acoustical and Thermal Performance on Exterior Residential
Walls, U.S. Department of Commerce/National Bureau of Standards, November 1976.
10. Western Electro-Acoustic Laboratory, Inc., 1711 Sixteenth Street, Santa Monica, California
90404, 213-80-9268, Sound Transmission Loss Vs. Glazing Type, Window Size and Air
Filtration, January 1985. The research described in this report was prepared for the California
Association of Window Manufacturers, 823 North Harbor Boulevard, Suite E, Fullerton,
California 92632, 714-525-7088.
Eilar Associates Job #A50705N1 July 21, 2005 Page 11
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRAFFIC DATA
LANE
NO.
1
2
LANE DATA ---------
LANE SEG.
NO. NO.
AUTO
VPH MPH
1500 55
ll00 55
GRADE
COR.
MEDIUM TRKS
VPH MPH
68 55
56 55
X y
HEAVY TRKS
VPH MPH DESCRIPTION
40
36
55
55
z
Palomar Westbound
Palomar Eastbound
SEGMENT
DESCRIPTION
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 NO -800.0 88.0 439.0 Ll Pl
2 NO -350.0 33.0 439.0 11 P2
3 NO 0.0 33.0 439.0 11 P3
4 NO 400.0 33.0 439.0 11 P4
5 NO 700.0 -7.0 439.0 11 P5
1000.0 -90.0 439.0 11 P6
2 1 NO -800.0 37.0 439.0 12 Pl
2 NO -350.0 -18.0 439.0 12 P2
3 NO 0.0 -18.0 439.0 12 P3
4 NO 400.0 -18.0 439.0 12 P4
5 NO 700.0 -70.0 439.0 12 P5
1000.0 -140.0 439.0 12 P6
BARRIER DATA
Barrier No. 1 Description: wall
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
SEG.
1
2
X
50.0
59.0
84.0
y
lll. 0
88.0
80.0
GROUND
(Z0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
TOP
(Z)
437.0 *Bl Pl
437.0 *Bl P2
437.0 *Bl P3
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
* %437
* %437
* %437
Barrier No. 2 Description: berm
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
SEG.
1
2
X
84.0
202.0
535.0
RECEIVER DATA
Eilar Associates
y
76.0
76.0
76.0
GROUND
(Z0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
#A50705N1 Sound32 Data
TOP
(Z)
439.0 *B2 Pl
440.0 *B2 P2
445.0 *B2 P3
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
* %439
* %440
* %445
July 18, 2005 Page 3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REC.
NO.
1
X
119. 0
y
60.0
REC REC ID DNL PEOPLE
1 TestLoc 67. 500.
DROP-OFF RATES
ALL LANE/RECEIVER PAIRS
K -CONSTANTS
ALL LANE RECEIVER/PAIRS
z
442.0
LEQ (CAL)
77.4
3. 0 OBA
0. 0 OBA
DNL PEOPLE ID
67 500 TestLoc
*********************************************************************************
Current ADT Traffic Noise Data
*********************************************************************************
* * SOUND32 (CALTRANS VERSION OF STAMINA2/OPTIMA) * *
INPUT DATA FILE
BARRIER COST FILE
DATE
Untitled
TRAFFIC DATA
LAl\JE
NO.
1
2
3
LANE DATA ---------
LANE SEG.
NO. NO.
AUTO
VPH MPH
1436 55
1436 55
283 25
GRADE
COR.
CUR.TXT
CALIF$.DTA
07-14-2005
MEDIUM TRKS
VPH MPH
53 55
53 55
5 25
X y
HEAVY TRKS
VPH MPH DESCRIPTION
19
19
0
55
55
25
z
Palomar Westbound
Palomar Eastbound
Loker Ave
SEGMENT
DESCRIPTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 NO -800.0 88.0 439.0 Ll Pl
2 NO -350.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P2
3 NO 0.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P3
4 NO 400.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P4
5 NO 700.0 -7.0 439.0 Ll PS
1000.0 -90.0 439.0 Ll P6
2 1 NO -800.0 37.0 439.0 L2 Pl
2 NO -350.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P2
3 NO 0.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P3
4 NO 400.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P4
Eilar Associates #A50705N1 Sound32 Data July 18, 2005 Page4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5 NO 700.0 -70.0 439.0 L2 P5
1000.0 -140.0 439.0 L2 P6
3 1 NO 0.0 0.0 432.0 L3 Pl
2 NO 0.0 100.0 432.0 L3 P2
3 NO 41. 0 210.0 432.0 L3 P3
4 NO 97.0 280.0 432.0 L3 P4
283.0 456.0 432.0 L3 PS
BARRIER DATA
Barrier No. 1 Description: wall
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
SEG.
1
2
X
50.0
59.0
84.0
y
111. 0
88.0
80.0
GROUND
(Z0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
TOP
(Z)
437.0 *Bl Pl
437.0 *Bl P2
437.0 *Bl P3
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
* %437
* %437
* %437
Barrier No. 2 Description: berm
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
SEG. X
1 80.0
2 42.0
3 54.0
4 84.0
5 202.0
535.0
RECEIVER DATA
REC.
NO.
1
X
119. 0
y
197.0
114. 0
84.0
76.0
76. 0
76.0
y
60.0
REC REC ID DNL PEOPLE
1 TestLoc 67. 500.
DROP-OFF RATES
ALL LANE/RECEIVER PAIRS
K -CONSTANTS
GROUND
(Z0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
z
442.0
LEQ(CAL)
76.8
3.0 DEA
Eilar Associates #A50705N1 Sound32 Data
TOP
(Z)
435.0
435.0
435.0
439.0
440.0
445.0
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
DNL PEOPLE
67 500
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
Pl * %435
P2 * %435
P3 * %435
P4 * %439
PS * %440
P6 * %445
ID
TestLoc
July 18, 2005 Page 5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ALL LANE RECEIVER/PAIRS= 0.0 DEA
~********************************************************************************
Future Traffic ADT Without Proposed Building to Produce Noise
Contours
*********************************************************************************
* * SOUND32 (CALTRANS VERSION OF STAMINA2/OPTIMA) * *
INPUT DATA FILE
BARRIER COST FILE
DATE
Untitled
TRAFFIC DATA ------------
LANE AUTO
NO. VPH MPH
FUTCON.TXT
CALIF$.DTA
07-14-2005
MEDIUM TRKS
VPH MPH
HEAVY TRKS
VPH MPH DESCRIPTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1850 55 68 55 24 55 Palomar Westbound
2 1850 55 68 55 24 55 Palomar Eastbound
3 340 25 6 25 0 25 Loker Ave
LANE DATA ---------
LANE SEG. GRADE SEGMENT
NO. NO. COR. X y z DESCRIPTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 NO -800.0 88.0 439.0 Ll Pl
2 NO -350.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P2
3 NO 0.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P3
4 NO 400.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P4
5 NO 700.0 -7.0 439.0 Ll PS
1000.0 -90.0 439.0 Ll P6
2 1 NO -800.0 37.0 439.0 L2 Pl
2 NO -350.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P2
3 NO 0.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P3
4 NO 400.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P4
5 NO 700.0 -70.0 439.0 L2 PS
1000.0 -140.0 439.0 L2 P6
3 1 NO 0.0 0.0 432.0 L3 Pl
2 NO 0.0 100. 0 432.0 L3 P2
3 NO 41. 0 210.0 432.0 L3 P3
4 NO 97.0 280.0 432.0 L3 P4
283.0 456.0 432.0 L3 PS
BARRIER DATA
Barrier No. 1 Description: wall
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
GROUND TOP BARRIER
Eilar Associates #A50705N1 Sound32 Data July 18, 2005 Page6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SEG.
1
2
X
50.0
59.0
84.0
y
111. 0
88.0
80.0
(Z0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
(Z)
437.0 *Bl Pl
437.0 *Bl P2
437.0 *Bl P3
Barrier No. 2 Description: berm
Type -(4)CONCRETE
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
* %437
* %437
* %437
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
SEG. X
1 80.0
2 42.0
3 54.0
4 84.0
5 202.0
535.0
RECEIVER DATA -------------
REC.
NO. X
y
197.0
114. 0
84.0
76.0
76.0
76.0
y
GROUND
(Z0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
z
TOP
(Z)
435.0
435.0
435.0
439.0
440.0
445.0
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
DNL PEOPLE
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
Pl * %435
P2 * %435
P3 * %435
P4 * %439
PS * %440
P6 * %445
ID -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 119. 0 60.0 442.0 67 500 TestLoc
2 50.0 70.0 440.0 67 500 R-2
3 120.0 70.0 443.0 67 500 R-3
4 190.0 70.0 443.0 67 500 R-4
5 260.0 70.0 443.0 67 500 R-5
6 330.0 70.0 443.0 67 500 R-6
7 400.0 70.0 443.0 67 500 R-7
8 50.0 140.0 440.0 67 500 R-8
9 120.0 140.0 438.0 67 500 R-9
10 190.0 140.0 439.0 67 500 R-10
11 260.0 140.0 440.0 67 500 R-11
12 330.0 140.0 441. 0 67 500 R-12
13 400.0 140.0 442.0 67 500 R-13
14 50.0 210.0 437.0 67 500 R-14
15 120.0 210.0 438.0 67 500 R-15
16 190.0 210.0 439.0 67 500 R-16
17 260.0 210.0 440.0 67 500 R-17
18 330.0 210.0 441. 0 67 500 R-18
19 400.0 210.0 442.0 67 500 R-19
20 120.0 280.0 437.0 67 500 R-20
21 190.0 280.0 439.0 67 500 R-21
22 260.0 280.0 439.0 67 500 R-22
23 330.0 280.0 439.0 67 500 R-23
24 400.0 280.0 439.0 67 500 R-24
25 190.0 350.0 439.0 67 500 R-25
26 260.0 350.0 439.0 67 500 R-26
27 330.0 350.0 439.0 67 500 R-27
28 400.0 350.0 439.0 67 500 R-28
REC REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ(CAL)
--------------------------------
1 TestLoc 67. 500. 77.9
2 R-2 67. 500. 76. 8
3 R-3 67. 500. 7 6. 7
Eilar Associates #A50705N1 Sound32 Data July 18, 2005 Page 7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4 R-4 67. 500. 76.7
5 R-5 67. 500. 76.7
6 R-6 67. 500. 76.7
7 R-7 67. 500. 76.5
8 R-8 67. 500. 71. 3
9 R-9 67. 500. 68. 2
10 R-10 67. 500. 68.0
11 R-11 67. 500. 68.0
12 R-12 67. 500. 67.5
13 R-13 67. 500. 67.2
14 R-14 67. 500. 69.9
15 R-15 67. 500. 67.0
16 R-16 67. 500. 66.2
17 R-17 67. 500. 66.2
18 R-18 67. 500. 66.1
19 R-19 67. 500. 66.2
20 R-20 67. 500. 67. 5
21 R-21 67. 500. 65.8
22 R-22 67. 500. 65.3
23 R-23 67. 500. 65.1
24 R-24 67. 500. 65.0
25 R-25 67. 500. 66.6
26 R-26 67. 500. 65. 0
27 R-27 67. 500. 64.5
28 R-28 67. 500. 64.4
--------------------------------
DROP-OFF RATES
ALL LANE/RECEIVER PAIRS 3. 0 DBA
K -CONSTANTS
ALL LANE RECEIVER/PAIRS 0.0 DBA
*********************************************************************************
Future Traffic ~..DT With Proposed Buildings in Place for Exterior Noise Levels
*********************************************************************************
* * SOUND32 (CALTRANS VERSION OF STAMINA2/OPTIMA) * *
INPUT DATA FILE
BARRIER COST FILE
DATE
Untitled
FUT.TXT
CALIF$.DTA
07-14-2005
==================================================-===========================-
TRAFFIC DATA
LANE
NO.
1
2
3
AUTO
VPH MPH
1851
1851
340
55
55
25
Eilar Associates
MEDIUM TRKS
VPH MPH
68
68
6
55
55
25
HEAVY TRKS
VPH MPH DESCRIPTION
24
24
0
55
55
25
Palomar Westbound
Palomar Eastbound
Loker Ave
#A50705N1 Sound32 Data July 18, 2005 Page 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--------------------------------===============================================
LANE DATA
---------
LANE SEG. GRADE SEGMENT
NO. NO. COR. X y z DESCRIPTION
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 NO -800.0 88.0 439.0 Ll Pl
2 NO -350.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P2
3 NO 0.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P3
4 NO 400.0 33.0 439.0 Ll P4
5 NO 700.0 -7.0 439.0 Ll PS
1000.0 -90.0 439.0 Ll P6
2 1 NO -800.0 37.0 439.0 L2 Pl
2 NO -350.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P2
3 NO 0.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P3
4 NO 400.0 -18.0 439.0 L2 P4
5 NO 700.0 -70.0 439.0 L2 PS
1000.0 -140.0 439.0 L2 P6
3 1 NO 0.0 0.0 432.0 L3 Pl
2 NO 0.0 100.0 432.0 L3 P2
3 NO 41. 0 210.0 432.0 L3 P3
4 NO 97.0 280.0 432.0 L3 P4
283.0 456.0 432.0 L3 PS
===============================================================================
BARRIER DATA
Barrier No. 1 Description: wall
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
SEG.
1
2
X
50.0
59.0
84.0
y
111.0
88.0
80.0
GROUND
(ZO)
0.0
0.0
0.0
TOP
(Z)
437.0 *Bl Pl
437.0 *Bl P2
437.0 *Bl P3
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
* %437
* %437
* %437
Barrier No. 2 Description: berm
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=O
SEG. X
1 80.0
2 42.0
3 54.0
4 84.0
5 202.0
535.0
Eilar Associates
y
197.0
114.0
84.0
76.0
76.0
76.0
GROUND
(Z0)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
#A50705N1 Sound32 Data
TOP
(Z)
435.0
435.0
435.0
439.0
440.0
445.0
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
*B2
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
Pl * %435
P2 * %435
P3 * %435
P4 * %439
PS * %440
P6 * %445
July 18, 2005 Page 9
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Barrier No. 3 Description: building
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
BARRIER
SEG. X y
GROUND
(Z0)
TOP
(Z) HEIGHTS AT ENDS
1 149.0 114. 0 0.0 476.0 *B3 Pl * %476
2 115.0 192.0 0.0 476.0 *B3 P2 * %476
3 256.0 338.0 0.0 476.0 *B3 P3 * %476
4 314.0 282.0 0.0 476.0 *B3 P4 * %476
5 351. 0 198.0 0.0 476.0 *B3 PS * %476
6 351.0 117 .0 0.0 476.0 *B3 P6 * %476
149.0 114. 0 0.0 476.0 *B3 P7 * %476
Barrier No. 4 Description: building 2
Type -(4)CONCRETE
Height Increment (DELZ)= 0.0 No. Height Changes (P)=0
SEG. X y
GROUND
( zo)
TOP
(Z)
BARRIER
HEIGHTS AT ENDS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
l 175.0 154.0 0.0 0.0 *B4 Pl * 0
2 162.0 183.0 0.0 0.0 *B4 P2 * 0
3 257.0 281. 0 0.0 0.0 *B4 P3 * 0
4 281.0 258.0 0.0 0.0 *B4 P4 * 0
5 311.0 189.0 0.0 0.0 *B4 PS * 0
6 311.0 156.0 0.0 0.0 *B4 P6 * 0
175.0 154.0 0.0 0.0 *B4 P7 * 0
===============================================================================
RECEIVER DATA
-------------
REC.
NO. X y z DNL PEOPLE ID
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
l 119.0 60.0 442.0 67 500 TestLoc
2 245.0 198.0 439.0 67 500 Courtyrd
3 248.0 110.0 439.0 67 500 s 1st
4 248.0 110.0 452.0 67 500 s 2nd
5 248.0 110.0 465.0 67 500 s 3rd
6 125.0 150.0 439.0 67 500 w 1st
7 125.0 150.0 452.0 67 500 w 2nd
8 125.0 150.0 465.0 67 500 w 3rd
9 179.0 267.0 439.0 67 500 NW 1st
10 179.0 267.0 452.0 67 500 NW 2nd
11 179.0 267.0 465.0 67 500 NW 3rd
12 320.0 281. 0 439.0 67 500 NE 1st
13 320.0 281. 0 452.0 67 500 NE 2nd
14 320.0 281. 0 465.0 67 500 NE 3rd
15 356.0 198.0 439.0 67 500 E 1st
16 356.0 198.0 452.0 67 500 E 2nd
Eilar Associates #A50705N1 Sound32 Data July 18, 2005 Page 10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
17 356.0 198.0 465.0 67 500 E 3rd
REC REC ID DNL PEOPLE LEQ{CAL)
--------------------------------
1 TestLoc 67. 500. 77.9
2 Courtyrd 67. 500. 50.6
3 s 1st 67. 500. 68.8
4 s 2nd 67. 500. 73.8
5 s 3rd 67. 500. 73.7
6 w 1st 67. 500. 67.1
7 w 2nd 67. 500. 70.7
8 w 3rd 67. 500. 70.6
9 NW 1st 67. 500. 62.7
10 NW 2nd 67. 500. 63.4
11 NW 3rd 67. 500. 63.3
12 NE 1st 67. 500. 60.9
13 NE 2nd 67. 500. 61. 6
14 NE 3rd 67. 500. 62.3
15 E 1st 67. 500. 62.8
16 E 2nd 67. 500. 64.5
17 E 3rd 67. 500. 66.8
--------------------------------
=========================--====================================================
DROP-OFF RATES
ALL LANE/RECEIVER PAIRS= 3.0 DEA
-------====--------------------====-==-=--------===============================
K -CONSTANTS
ALL LANE RECEIVER/PAIRS= 0.0 DEA
-------==---------------------------------------=-=-==----=-=--=-=--===========
Eilar Associates #A50705N1 Sound32 Data July 18, 2005 Page 11
---------- -- - ------EXTERIOR TO INTERIOR NOISE REDUCTION ANALYSIS
Project Name: Carlsbad Professional Building Wall 1 of 1
Project# : A50705N1
Room Name: Northwest Facade -Second Floor Office SA Room Type: Moderate
125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Reverberation Time (sec) : 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 • Moderately Reflective Room
Room Absorption (Sabins) : 75 75 75 75 93 93
Noise Level 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Source 1: Traffic 66.7 CNEL 50.0 55.5 58.0 62.0 62.0 56.0 : Traffic Spectrum
Source 2: <N/A> 0.0 CNEL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Source 3: <NIA> 0.0 CNEL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Source 4: <N/A> 0.0 CNEL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Overall: 66.7 CNEL 50.0 55.5 58.0 62.0 62.0 56.0 : Effective Noise Spectrum
Assembl~ T~[!e O[!en Width Height Q!Y Total Area 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
STC 53 MetalStudCrete Exterior Wall N 11.5 12 84.3 34 43 49 54 58 65
STC 32 1 /4" Monolithic Window N 3.83 4.67 3 53.7 20 24 29 33 31 37
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Room Depth: 13.5 ft Overall Area: 138 ft2
Volume: 1863 ft'
Number of Impacted Walls:
Windows Open 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Interior Noise Level: 35.7 CNEL 50.0 55.5 58.0 620 62.0 56.0 : Exterlor Wall Noise Exposure
23.8 28.0 33.0 370 351 41.1 : Transmission Loss
Windows Closed 2.4 6.6 11.6 15.6 13.7 19.7 : Noise Reduction
Interior Noise Level: 35.7 CNEL 18.7 18.7 18.7 18,7 19.7 19.7 : Absorption
28.8 30.2 27.6 27.6 28.6 16.6 : Noise Level
35.7 CNEL WINDOWS OPEN
125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
50.0 55.5 580 62.0 62.0 56.0 : ExteriorWall Noise Exposure
23.8 28.0 330 370 351 41.1 : Transmission Loss
2.4 6.6 11.6 15.6 137 19.7 : Noise Reduction
18.7 18.7 18.7 187 19.7 19.7 : Absorption
28.8 30.2 27.6 27.6 28.6 16.6 : Noise Level
35.7 CNEL WINDOWS CLOSED
Page 1
- ---- ----- -- - ------EXTERIOR TO INTERIOR NOISE REDUCTION ANALYSIS
Project Name: Carlsbad Professional Building Wall 1 of 1
Project# : A50705N1
Room Name: South Facade -Second Floor Office 2A Room Type: Moderate
125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Reverberation Time (sec) : 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 : Moderately Reflective Room
Room Absorption (Sabins) : 88 88 88 88 110 110
Noise Level 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Source 1: Traffic 75.8 CNEL 59.1 64,6 67.1 71.1 71.1 65.1 : Traffic Spectrum
Source 2: <N/A> 0.0 CNEL 0,0 0.0 0,0 0,0 0.0 0,0
Source 3: <N/A> 0.0 CNEL 0,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Source 4: <N/A> 0.0 CNEL 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Overall: 75.8 CNEL 59.1 64.6 67.1 71.1 71.1 65.1 : Effective Noise Spectrum
Assemblll TJlpe Open Width Height Q!ll Total Area 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz ~
STC 53 MetalStudCrete Exterior Wall N 11.5 12 84.3 34 43 49 54 58 65
STC 32 1/4" Monolithic Window N 3.83 4.67 3 53.7 20 24 29 33 31 37
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Room Depth: 16 ft Overall Area: 138 ft2
Volume: 2208 fl'
Number of Impacted Walls:
Windows Open 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Interior Noise Level: 44.1 CNEL 59.1 64.6 67.1 71.1 71.1 65.1 : Exterior Wall Noise Exposure
23,8 28.0 33,0 37,0 35.1 41.1 : Transmission Loss
Windows Closed 2.4 6,6 11.6 156 13.7 19.7 : Noise Reduction
Interior Noise Level: 44.1 CNEL 19,5 19,5 19,5 19.5 204 204 : Absorption
37.2 38,5 36,0 36.0 37,0 25.0 : Noise Level
44.1 CNEL WINDOWS OPEN
125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
591 64.6 67.1 71.1 71.1 65.1 : Exterior Wall Noise Exposure
23.8 280 330 37.0 351 41.1 : Transmission Loss
2.4 6.6 116 156 13.7 19.7 : Noise Reduction
19,5 19.5 19.5 19.5 20.4 20.4 : Absorption
37,2 38.5 36.0 36,0 37,0 25.0 : Noise Level
44.1 CNEL WINDOWS CLOSED
Page2
------ --- --------- -
EXTERIOR TO INTERIOR NOISE REDUCTION ANALYSIS
Project Name: Carlsbad Professional Building Wall 1 of 1
Project# : A50705N1
Room Name: West Facade -Second Floor Office 7 A Room Type : Moderate
125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Reverberation Time (sec) : 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 . Moderately Reflective Room
Room Absorption (Sabins) : 81 81 81 81 101 101
Noise Level 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Source 1: Traffic 73.3 CNEL 56.6 62.1 64.6 68.6 68.6 62.6 : Traffic Spectrum
Source 2: <NIA> o.o CNEL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Source 3: <NIA> 0.0 CNEL 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Source 4: <NIA> 0.0 CNEL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Overall: 73.3 CNEL 56.6 62.1 64.6 68.6 68.6 62.6 : Effective Noise Spectrum
Assemblll Tl,'.pe Open Width Height Q!y Total Area 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
STC 53 MetalStudCrete Exterior Wall N 14 12 105.4 34 43 49 54 58 65
STC 32 114" Monolithic Window N 3.83 4.67 3.5 62.6 20 24 29 33 31 37
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<N/A> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
<NIA> N 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Room Depth: 12 ft Overall Area: 168 ft'
Volume: 2016 ft'
Number of Impacted Walls:
Windows Open 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
Interior Noise Level: 42.7 CNEL 56.6 62.1 64.6 686 68.6 62.6 : Exterior Wall Noise Exposure
24.0 28.2 33.2 37.2 35.3 41.3 : Transmission Loss
Windows Closed 1.8 5.9 11.0 15.0 13.0 19.0 : Noise Reduction
Interior Noise Level: 42.7 CNEL 19.1 19.1 19.1 19.1 20.0 20.0 : Absorption
35.8 37.1 34.6 346 35.6 236 : Noise Level
42.7 CNEL WINDOWS OPEN
125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1KHz 2KHz 4KHz
56.6 621 646 68.6 686 62.6 : Exterior Wall Noise Exposure
24.0 282 332 37.2 353 41.3 : Transmission Loss
1.8 5.9 11 0 15.0 130 19.0 : Noise Reduction
19.1 19.1 191 19.1 200 20.0 :Absorption
358 37.1 34.6 34.6 356 23.6 : Noise Level
42.7 CNEL WINDOWS CLOSED
Page3