HomeMy WebLinkAboutAMEND 2016-0001; PACIFIC RIDGE SCHOOL - WITHDRAWN; NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS; 2019-07-11;.
NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS
Pacific Ridge School Athletic Field Lighting
6269 El Fuerte Street
Carlsbad, California 92009
Prepared For
Pacific Ridge School
Attention: Robert Buscher
6269 El Fuerte Street
Carlsbad, California 92009
Phone: 760-448-9830
Prepared By
Eilar Associates, Inc.
Acoustical & Environmental Consulting
210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100
Escondido, California 92025
www.eilarassociates.com
Phone: 760-738-5570
Fax: 760-738-5227
Job #B80808N1
July 11, 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Project Description
2.2 Project Location
2.3 Applicable Noise Standards '
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.0
5.0
3.1 Existing Noise Environment
.3.2 Worst-Case Noise Environment
METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT
4.1 ( Methodology
4.2 Measurement Equipment
NOISE IMPACTS
5.1 Project-Generated Noise Impacts
5.2 CEQA Significance Determination
6.0 CONCLUSION
7.0 CERTIFICATION
8.0 REFERENCES
FIGURES
1. Vicinity Map
2. Assessor's Parcel Map
3. Satellite Aerial Photograph Showing Project Location
4. Topographic Map
5. Satellite Aerial Photograph Showing Noise Measurement Locations
1
1
3
5
6
10
11
11
6. Satellite Aerial Photograph Showing Anticipated Worst-Case Noise Contours and Receiver
Locations
APPENDICES
A. Project Plans
B. Pertinent Sections of the City of Carlsbad Noise Element to the General Plan
C. Cadna Analysis Data and Results
..
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed project, Pacific Ridge School Athletic Field Lighting project, consists of the addition of
a lighting system to the existing athletic field at Pacific Ridge School, to allow for sporting events to
extend later into the daytime hours than currently possible. Flag football, soccer, and lacrosse
sporting events are currently held at the athletic field, which is not expected to change as a result of
this project. No school ground expansion, grading, or increase in student capacity is proposed as
part of this project. Additionally, .it should be noted that sporting events are currently allowed to
occur during daytime hours (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.), limited to periods where sufficient natural light is
present. The proposed modifications, although allowing for events to extend to later hours, would
still limit events to occurring during the daytime hours, with the majority of events limited to an 8
p.m. cutoff, and up to eight Friday events extending to a 10 p.m. cutoff time. The project site is
located at 6269 El Fuerte Street in the City of Carlsbad, California.
Ari analysis of noise impacts from existing a,:id proposed sporting events was performed to
determine whether or not these activities are expected to exceed the applicable noise limits
contained within the City of Carlsbad Nois~ Element to the General Plan at surrounding properties.
As designed, with the currently proposed maximum occupancy and hours of operation, worst-case
anticipated noise levels from sporting events are not expected to exceed the City of Carlsbad noise
level limits at any surrounding noise-sensitive receivers. No mitigation is required.
Due to the project's location in proximity to a Multi-Habitat Planning Area (MHPA) that may be
suitable habitat for the Coastal Califqrnia Gnatcatcher, project-generated noise levels must not
exceed the noise limits set by the United States Department of Fish and Wildlife. Per U.S. Fish and
Wildlife regulations,. noise levels from construction activity must not exceed an hourly average noi.se
level of 60 dBA at potential gnatcatcher habitat. Noise impacts were evaluated to determine what
mitigation measures, if any, are necessary to bring noise levels into compliance with applicable
noi!:ie limits.
The proposed project is not expected to result in any significant impacts by the standards of the
County of Sa_n Diego's California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Significance Determination
Thresholds. Noise impacts from the project site are summarized in Section 5.1.
2.0 INTRODUCTION
This acoustical analysis report is submitted to satisfy the noise requirements of the City of Carlsbad.
Its ·purpose is to assess noise impacts from the proposed project_ uses, and to determine if
mitigation is necessary to reduce the noise impacts to comply with applicable noise limits.
All noise level or .sound level values presented herein are expresped in terms of decibels (dB), with
A-weighting, abbreviated "dBA," to appro~imate the hearing sensitivity of humans. Time-averaged
noise levels are expressed by the symbol "LEa" unless a different time' period is specified, "LEO" is
implied to mean a period of one hour. Some of the data may also be presented as octave-band-
filtered and/or A-octave-band-filtered data, which are a series of sound spectra centered about each
stated frequency, witli half of the bandwidth above and half of the bandwidth below each stated
frequency. This data is typically used for machinery noise analysis and barrier calculations.
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #880808N1 July 11, 2019 Page 1
Sound pressure is the actual noise experienced by a human or registered by a sound level
instrument. When sound pressure is used to describe a noise source , the distance from the noise
source must be specified in order to provide complete information. Sound power, on the other
hand, is a specialized analytical metric to provide information without the distance requirement, but
it may be used to calculate the sound pressure at any desired distance.
2.1 Project Description
The proposed project, Pacific Ridge School Athletic Field Lighting project, consists of the addition of
a lighting system to the existing athletic field at Pacific Ridge School, to allow for sporting events to
extend later into the daytime hours than currently possible. Flag football, soccer, and lacrosse
sporting events are currently held at the athletic field, which is not expected to change as a result of
this project. No school ground expansion, grading, or increase in student capacity is proposed as
part of this project. Additionally, it should be noted that sporting events are currently allowed to
occur during daytime hours (7 a.m . to 10 p.m.), lim ited to periods where sufficient natural light is
present. The proposed modifications, although allowing for events to extend to later hours, would
still limit events to occurring during the daytime hours, with the majority of events limited to an 8
p.m. cutoff, and up to eight Friday events extending to a 1 0 p.m. cutoff time. The project site is
located at 6269 El Fuerte Street in the City of Carlsbad, California. For additional details, please
refer to the project plans provided in Appendix A.
2.2 Project Location
The subject property is located at 6269 El Fuerte Street in the City of Carlsbad, California. The
Assessor's Parcel Numbers (APN) for this site are 213-122-18-00 and 213-122-19-00. For a
graphical representation of the site, please refer to the Vicinity Map, Assessor's Parcel Map,
Satellite Aerial Photograph, and Topographical Map, provided as Figures 1 through 4, respectively.
2.3 Applicable Noise Standards
Table 5-3 of the City of Carlsbad Noise Element to the General Plan provides noise standards for
non-transportation noise sources such as from noise associated with school sporting events. As
measured from the property line of noise-sensitive receivers, non-transportation noise sources must
not exceed an hourly average noise level of 55 dB Lrn between the hours of 7 a.m. and 1 0 p.m. and
45 dBA Lrn between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.; however, wnen noise sources are
predominantly comprised of music and/or speech, these limits should be reduced by 5 dBA. As the
athletic field operating hours are expected to be limited to between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m., noise from
activities on the athletic field must not exceed an hourly average noise levels of 50 dB Lrn at nearby
residential property lines.
Additionally, the project site is located in close proximity to a Multi-Habitat Planning Area (MHPA)
that may be a suitable habitat for any nesting birds, and specifically the Coastal California
Gnatcatcher, a species listed as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and a California
Species of Special Concern. Due to the potential presence of noise-sensitive species, project-
generated noise levels must not exceed an hourly average noise level of 60 dBA at the boundary of
potential gnatcatcher habitat, per U.S. Fish and Wildlife regulations.
Pertinent sections of the City of Carlsbad Noise Element to the General Plan are provided as
Appendix B.
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #880808N1 July 11, 2019 Page 2
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
3.1 Existing Noise Environment
3.1.1 Ambient Noise
The ambient noise in the vicinity of the project site and neighboring residences is primarily
composed of noise from existing school activities, as well as traffic noise from El Fuerte Street.
Two long-term noise measurements were made beginning the afternoon of Tuesday, October 9,
2018 and running through the afternoon of Wednesday, October 10, 2018. The purpose of these
measurements was to determine existing ambient noise levels impacting the surrounding area. The
first sound level meter was placed in a bush in the sensitive habitat to the west of the athletic field ,
at a height of approximately 3 feet above the existing grade, to ensure the security of the meter and
to prevent tampering. The second sound level meter was placed in a bush to the south of the
athletic field (near the closest surrounding residential receivers) at a height of approximately 5 feet
above the existing grade, to ensure the security of the meter and to prevent tampering. It should be
noted that the second half of a flag football game occurred at the stadium during the 4 to 5 p.m.
hour on October 9, 2018. Noise levels during this event were found to be below the ambient noise
levels measured during many other hours when sporting events were not taking place on site,
indicating that noise levels from sporting events would not be expected to be the dominant source
of noise at surrounding properties and therefore would not have any significant impact on off-site
receivers. Results of these measurements are shown in Table 1, and a graphical representation of
the ambient noise measurement locations can be seen in Figure 5.
Table 1. Long-Tenn Measured Noise Levels on Site
Hourly Average Noise Level (dBA LE0)
Date Time Monitoring Monitoring
Location 1 Location 2
4 p.m. - 5 p.m. 48.9 45.7
5 p.m. - 6 p.m. 47.7 44.6
6 p.m. - 7 p.m. 46.6 .. * 40.4
October 9, 2018 7 p.m. - 8 p.m. 47.5 42.1
8 p.m. - 9 P.m. 49.9 "·~ 40.1 ~·
9 p.m. -10 p.m. 50.5 48.8
10 o.m . -11 o.m. 45.3 39.3
11 p.m. -12 a.m. 43.7 37.8
12 a.m. - 1 a.m. 40.9 37.7
1 a.m. - 2 a.m. 43.0 37.4
2 a.m. - 3 a.m. 41 .6 37.3
3 a.m. - 4 a.m. 40.4 37.3
4 a.m. - 5 a.m. 46.9 37.9
5 a.m . - 6 a.m. 47.8 38 .7
October 10, 2018 6 a.m. - 7 a.m. 46.0 =· 41.0 •
7 a.m. - 8 a.m . 49.1 43 .7
8 a.m. - 9 a.m. 52.4 !.:... -58.9 ...,;,I!'
9 a.m. -10 a.m. 49.8 48.2
10 a.m. -11 a.m. 49.4 47.0
11 a.m. -12 p.m . 50.8 45.0
12 p.m. - 1 p.m. 47.5 49.2
f ~ CM. k., ~ ~ -\-1 1./'t. 12ec, u _a ,:) ~ LA~ g.
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #B80808N1 July 11, 2019 Page 3
Table 1. Long-Tenn Measured Noise Levels on Site
Hourly Average Noise Level (dBA Leo)
Date Time Monitoring Monitoring
Location 1 Location 2
1 p.m. -2 p.m. 52.4 52.2
October 10, 2018 2 p.m. -3 P.m. 49.1 48.4
3 p.m. -4 p.m. 47.3 46.4
As shown in Table 1, measured ambient noise levels during proposed hours of use of the athletic
field at Monitoring Location 1 (sensitive habitat to the west of the athletic field) were observed to
range from 46 .6 dBA between the hours of 6 p.m. and 7 p.m. on October 9, to 52.4 dBA between 8
a.m. and 9 a.m. and between 1 p.m. and 2 p.m. on October 10. Measured ambient noise levels
during proposed hours of use of the athletic field at Monitoring Location 2 (near residential receivers
to the south of the athletic field) were observed to range from 40.1 dBA between the hours of 8 p.m.
and 9 p.m. on October 9, to 58.9 dBA between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m . on October 10.
3.1.2 Existing Sporting Event Noise
Measured Noise from Pre-Game Music
According to the client, the majority of sporting events do not currently include pre-game music;
however, the school has a small PA system that is used during pre-game warmups for some
events. When used, the sound system is only used for a maximum of 30 minutes before a game
starts. In order to measure noise levels of the existing system, the system was set up and adjusted
to its typical volume settings for a flag football game held on October 9, 2018. The sound system
consisted of a personal cellphone playing music through wireless connection to a small Bluetooth
receiver input into a Behringer Euro live E 1520A self-powered two-way loudspeaker. The volume
adjustment knob on the self-powered speaker was adjusted to "Line Level." Simultaneous noise
level measurements of music played over this system were conducted at two locations. The first
sound level measurement (CAL-1) was conducted directly in front of the loudspeaker, at a distance
of 15 feet from the speaker. The second sound level measurement (CAL-2) was conducted
approximately 165 feet south of the loudspeaker. Octave-band sound pressure levels of pre-game
music played through this sound system can be found in Table 2, and measurement locations are
shown graphically in Figure 5.
Table 2. Sound Pressure Level of Pre-Game Music at Sound Level Measurement Locations
Measurement Sound Pressure Level at Octave Band Frequency (dB) Total
Location 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K SK (dBA)
CAL-1 83.0 81.6 71 .7 77.1 71 .1 78.6 74.3 66.8 82.8
CAL-2 62.4 59.6 50.7 47.6 48.4 46.3 45.2 37.5 53.8
These noise measurements have been incorporated into the analysis of noise impacts detailed in
Section 5. •
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #B80808N1 July 11, 2019 Page4
Measured Noise from Persons on Field and in Bleachers
Flag football, soccer, and lacrosse sporting events are currently held at the athletic field , which is
not expected to change as a result of this project. Noise levels measurements were conducted
near the southwest corner of the playing field (at the CAL-2 measurement location described
above) during a flag football game at Pacific Ridge School on O~tober 9, 2018, to document noise
levels from an existing event, and for use in noise calculations to determine anticipated worst-case
noise impacts at nearby sensitive receivers. During noise level measurements, a total of 21
spectators were seated in the bleachers, and a total of approximately 40 people were located on
the athletic field. The sound level measurement was conducted over the course of the entire first
half of the game. Measured sound pressure levels of the flag football game (including spectator
noise as well as noise from on-field activities, including the use of whistles by referees) are shown
in Table 3, and measurement locations are shown graphically in Figure 5.
Table 3. Measured Sound Pressure Level of First Half of October 9, 2018
Flag Football Game at Pacific Ridge School
Measurement Sound Pressure Level at Octave Band Frequency (dB) Total
Location 63 125 250 500 1K 2K 4K SK (dBA)
CAL-2 55.3 52.4 50.4 50.1 53.3 51 .1 51 .5 31.4 58.1
This noise measurements have been incorporated into the analysis of noise impacts detailed in
Section 5.
3.2 Worst-Case Noise Environment
The worst-case noise environment in the vicinity of the project site will be primarily a result of the
same noise sources, with sporting events allowed to extend later into the daytime hours.
The primary source of noise associated with the existing and proposed use of the athletic field is
from spectators seated in bleachers located to the west of the athletic field, as well as coaches,
players, referees, and others located on the athletic field . According to information provided by the
client, typical spectator attendance at sporting events is approximately 50, although the maximum
number of people that would be seated in the bleachers at any given time is 250. In addition to
these spectators, it was assumed that a maximum of approximately 40 people would be located on
the athletic field itself at any given time (accounting for athletes, coaches, and referees). As a
worst-case scenario, the athletic field has been modeled with a maximum capacity of 250
spectators seated in the bleachers, and with 40 people located on the field. Worst-case noise
impact calculations are detailed in Section 5.1 .
4.0 METHODOLOGY AND EQUIPMENT
4.1 Methodology
Modeling of noise impacts from activities associated with current and future activities held on the
athletic field is accomplished using Cadna Version 2018, which is a model-based computer
program developed by DataKustik for predicting noise impacts in a wide variety of conditions.
Cadna (Computer Aided Noise Abatement) assists in the calculation, presentation, assessment,
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #B80808N1 July11,2019 Page 5
and alleviation of noise exposure. ·It allows for the input of project information such as noise source
data, barriers, structures, and topography to create a detailed model and uses the most up-to-date
calculation standards to pr.edict outdoor noise impacts. Noise standards used by Cadna that are
particularly relevant to this analysis include ISO 9613 (Attenuation of sound during propagation
outdoors). Cadna provides results that are in line with basic acoustical calculations fQr distance
attenuation and barrier insertion loss. Further explanation may be provided upon request.
4.2 Measurement Equipment
The following equipment was used at the site to measure existing ambient noise levels, as well as
noise from a sample sporting event:
• Larson Davis Model LxT Type 1 Sound Level Meter, Serial # 4084
• Larson Davis Model LxT Type 1 Sound Level Meter, Serial # 4085
• Larson Davis Model CA250 Type 1 Calibrator, Serial # 2625
• Larson Davis Model 720 Type 2 Sound Level Meter, Serial# 0462
• Larson Davis Model 720 Type 2 Sound Level Meter, Serial# 0309
• Larson Davis Model CA 150 Type 2 Calibrator, Serial # 5954 '
• Distance measurement wheel, tripods, tape measure, digital camera
The sound level meters were field-calibrated immediately prior to the noise measurement and
checked afterwards, to ensure accuracy. All sound level measurements conducted and presented
in this report, in accordance with·the regulations, were ·made with sound level meters that conform
to the American National Standards Institute specifications for sound level meters (ANSI S1 .4). All
instruments are maintained with National Bureau of Standards traceable calibration, per the
manufacturer's standards.
5.0 NOISE IMPACTS
5.1 Project-Generated Noise Impacts
In order to approximate noise levels of spectators seated in bleachers located to the west of the
athletic field, as well as coaches, players, referees, and others located on the athletic field.,
measurements shown in a study prepared by Pearsons, Bennett, and Fidell for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency titled Speech Leve{ s in Various Noise Environments (Report No.
EPA-600/1-77-025) were consulted. This study shows noise levels of spe·ech for males, females,
and children for five different vocal efforts: casual, normal, raised, loud, and shouted. For this
analysis, measurements for "shouted" voices were considered to be appropriate for all noise
sources. According to this study, at a distance of one meter (3.28 feet), an average male will
generate a noise level of approximately 89 dBA when shouting, an average female will generate a
noise· level of approximately 82 dBA when shouting, and an average child. will generate a noise
level of approximately 82 dBA when shouting. These noise levels are considered to be
representative of anticipated noise levels from people at sporting events, and have been
incorporated into the analysis of noise impacts detailed in Sections 5.1.1 and·. 5.1.2.
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #880808N1 July 11, 2019 Page6
5.1.1 Noise Model Calibration
Modeled Noise from Pre-Game Music
Measured octave-band sound pressure levels of pre-game music shown in Table 2 have been
incorporated into a Cadna noise model. Features such as the topography of the site and
surrounding area, barriers, the source (sound system) location , ground absorption, the gymnasium
building and other site specific features were incorporated into the noise model. In order to
determine the accuracy of the Cadna noise model, calculations were performed with receivers input
into the noise model at the same locations as those where measurements were conducted. A
comparison of measured and modeled results can be found below, in Table 4. Please refer to
Appendix C for additional information, and to Figure 5 for a graphical representation of noise
measurement locations.
Table 4. Comparison of Measured and Modeled Results of Pre-Game Music
Receiver Approximate Distance Noise Level of Music (dBA Leo)
Location From Source (ft) Measured Modeled Difference
CAL-1 15 82 .8 82 .2 -0 .6
CAL-2 165 53 .8 55.1 1.3
As shown above, as modeled results are within three decibels of measured results at all
measurement locations, the noise model can be considered to be representative of the observed
conditions on site.
Modeled Noise from Persons on Field and in Bleachers
During noise level measurements of the flag football game on October 9, 2018 (described in
Section 3.1.2), a total of 21 spectators were seated in the bleachers, and a total of approximately 40
people (including coaches, athletes, photographers, and referees) were located on the athletic field.
Using the source noise level data for persons shouting, obtained from the Pearsons, Bennett, and
Fidell study described above, these noise sources were input into the Cadna noise model. Half of
the persons seated in the bleachers were modeled as female, and the other half modeled as male.
Each noise source (person) was calculated as shouting for 1 O minutes out of every hour, which is
considered appropriate as not all people are expected to shout, there are breaks in activity
throughout athletic events when people are expected to be much quieter, spectators are often quiet
between plays at sporting events so that the players and coaches can hear each other more
effectively on the field, people take breaks in conversation for listening, et cetera. As sources are
expected to move around the athletic field during sporting events, the athletic field was modeled as
an area source, with a total of 40 moving point sources located in the field area. Each noise source
(person) on the athletic field was modeled as a child shouting, with sources active for 10 minutes
out of an hour. Features such as the topography of the site and surrounding area, barriers, the
source (sound system) location, ground absorption, the gymnasium building and other site specific
features were incorporated into the noise model. In order to determine the accuracy of the Cadna
noise model, calculations were performed with the receiver input into the noise model at the same
location as where measurements were conducted. A comparison of measured and modeled results
can be found below, in Table 5. Please refer to Appendix C for additional information and to Figure
5 for a graphical representation of noise measurement locations.
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #B80808N1 July11,2019 Page 7
Table 5. Comparison of Measured and Modeled Results of Noise from
Persons on Field and in Bleachers
Noise Level of Persons on Field and in Bleachers
Receiver Approximate Distance From (dBA LEa)
Location Center of Bleachers (ft) Measured Modeled Oifference
CAL-2 170 58.1 61.4 +3.3
As shown above, although modeled results are just over 3 decibels above measured results at the
measurement location, the noise model can be considered to be representative of the observed
conditions on site, as it differs by only slightly more than 3 dBA. Additionally, as the modeled noise
levels were higher than measured noise levels, the noise model can be considered as being
conservative. It should also be noted that the measured noise level during the sporting event
included the use of whistles by referees, and therefore, the model accounts for the presence of this
noise source.
5.1.2 Worst-Case Noise Environment
In order to predict anticipated worst-case noise impacts associated with athletic events, all 250
noise sources located in the bleachers were modeled as shouting , with half of all persons modeled
as female, and the other half modeled as male. Each noise source (person) was calculated as
shouting for 1 O minutes out of every hour, which is considered excessive as not all people are
expected to shout, there are breaks in activity throughout athletic events when people are expected
to be much quieter, people take breaks in conversation for listening, et cetera. As sources are
expected to move around the athletic field during sporting events, the athletic field was modeled as
an area source, with a total of 40 moving point sources located in the field area. Each noise source
(person) on the athletic field was modeled as a child shouting, with sources active for 1 O minutes
out of an hour. As shown above in Section 5.1.1, these assumptions were demonstrated to be
appropriate for modeling noise levels from the event held on October 9, 2018 (including the use of
wh istles by referees), and would therefore be appropriate for modeling noise from a worst-case
scenario. For this reason , this analysis is considered to be representative of noise levels generated
on site in a worst-case (full capacity) event.
Anticipated worst-case project generated noise levels are shown below in Table 6. For a graphical
representation of all receiver locations, and noise contours please refer to Figure 6. Additional
information can be found in Appendix C: Cadna Analysis Data and Results.
Table 6. Calculated Worst-Case Project-Generated Noise Levels at Surrounding Property Lines
Receiver Receiver Location Noise Limit Noise Level In Compliance? Number (dBA) (dBA)
R1-1 South Residential Property Line 50 40 Yes
R1-2 South Residential Second Story 50 45 Yes
R2-1 South Residential Property Line 50 47 Yes
R2-2 South Residential Second Story 50 50 Yes
R3 West Residential Property Line 50 49 Yes
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #B80808N1 July 11, 2019 Page 8
Table 6. Calculated Worst-Case Project-Generated Noise Levels at Surrounding Property Lines
Receiver Receiver Location Noise Limit Noise Level In Compliance? Number (dBA) (dBA)
R4 Edge of Sensitive Habitat 60 60 Yes
As shown above, with the anticipated maximum number of persons present at a sporting event,
including the use of a sound system to play pre-game music, noise levels from the anticipated
project are not expected to exceed the City of Carlsbad noise level limits at any surrounding noise-
sensitive receivers. Additionally, all other residential properties in the project vicinity are located at
a further distance from the project site or receive additional shielding due to intervening topography
and are therefore expected to receive lesser noise impacts due to noise levels being further
reduced over a greater distance.
5.2 CEQA Significance Determination
As the City of Carlsbad does not have any CEQA Significance Determination Thresholds, the
County of San Diego Guidelines for Determining Significance for Noise were applied to this project,
to determine if there are any potentially significant noise impacts associated with this project. Noise
impacts to and from the project site are summarized below and classified per the County of San
Diego Significance Determination Thresholds for Noise. This list summarizes conclusions made
within the report and classifies the level of significance as : Potentially Significant Impact, Less than
Significant with Mitigation Incorporated, Less than Significant Impact, or No Impact.
Italics are used to denote language from the County of San Diego's Guidelines for Determining
Significance for Noise document.
Would the project:
1. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
Less Than Significant Impact. As shown in Table 6, anticipated worst-case noise impacts are
shown to be in compliance with City of Carlsbad noise limits at all adjacent sensitive receivers. For
this reason , this noise impact is considered less than significant.
2. Result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or
ground borne noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Construction activities are not expected to include equipment that
generates significant levels of ground borne noise and vibration. For this reason, this noise impact
is considered less than significant.
3. Result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant Impact. According to Section 4.1 the County of San Diego CEQA
Significance Determination Thresholds for Noise document, a project will have a significant impact if
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #B80808N1 July11,2019 Page 9
its implementation will increase existing noise levels by 1 O dBA or more. According to ambient
noise level measurements made in the vicinity of the project site, existing ambient noise levels at
Monitoring Location 1 (sensitive habitat to the west of the athletic field) were observed to range
from 46.6 dBA to 52.4 dBA during proposed hours of use of-tbe athletic field. Existing ambient
noise levels at Monitoring Location 2 (near residential receivers to the south of the athletic field)
were observed to range from 40.1 dBA to .58.9 dBA. Noise impacts to nearby residential receiver
properties are expected to be below 50 dBA, and therefore, it is not anticipated that there will be a
significant increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity.
4. Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant Impact. Due to the combination of large setback distances between
proposed construction activities and adjacent properties, shielding from the surrounding
topography, the limited scale of anticipated construction activities associated with the proposed
project (there will be no grading or other significant construction activities associated with the
proposed project), and brief duration of construction activities, noise impacts from construction
activities associated with the proposed project are not anticipated-to be significant at surrounding
sensitive receivers. For this reason, this noise impact is considered less than significant.
5. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less Than Significant Impact. Although the project site is located within two miles of McClellan
Palomar Airport, it is located outside the 60 CNEL noise contour of this airport. Therefore, the
proposed project would not expose people working in the project area to excessive noise levels
from such uses. , •
6. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The project site is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the
proposed project would not expose people working in the project area to excessive noise levels ,
from such uses.
6.0 CONC.LUSION
Calculations show that anticipated worst-case noise levels associated with sporting events held at
the Pacific Ridge School athletic field are not expected to exceed the City of Carlsbad noise level
limits at any surrounding noise-sensitive receivers, including at the boundary of the nearby sensitive
habitat. Additionally, this project is not expected to cause any significant impacts on adjacent noise
sensitive receivers, per County of San Diego Guidelines for Determining Significance for Noise.
This analysis is based upon a current worst-case scenario of anticipated, typical noise levels based
on the project plans and description and measurements conducted during a flag football event held
at the athletic filed on October 9, 2018. These conclusions and recommendations are based on the
best and most current project-related information available at the time this study was prepared. .
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #880808N1 July 11, 2019 Page 10
7.0 CERTIFICATION
This report is based on the related project information received as well as measured noise levels on
site, and represents a true and factual analysis of the acou·stical impact issues associated with the
Pacific Ridge School Athletic Field Lighting project, located at 6269 El Fuerte Street, in the City of
Carlsbad, California. This report was prepared by Jonathan Brothers.
8.0 REFERENCES
1. Beranek, Leo L., Acoustical Measurements, Published for the Acoustical Society of America
by the American Institute of Physics, Revised Edition, 1988.
2. City of San Marcos Noise Element to the General Plan.
3. Pearsons, K.S., Bennett, R.L., & Fidell, S., Speech Levels in Various Noise Environments
(Report No. EPA-600/1-77-025), U.S. Environmental.Protection Agency, 1977.
4. DataKustik, CadnaA (Computer Aided Noise Abatement), Version 2018.
Eilar Associates, Inc. Job #B80808N1 July 11, 2019 Page 11
FIGURES
SH
s,,
Palomar Airport Rd
Alga Norte
Comnwmty Pork
Dogwood Rd
Eilar Associates, Inc.
210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100
Escondido, California 92025
760-738-5570
~· L!"
,JJ
-~
LI,.
Pa/o,.,.,_ w ,,,a,,".
"1/rport Rd
1~
(<fJ~
Os
~------;f:'b Project ~
• ..a-~-i Location
Vicinity Map
Job# B80808N1
"'
Ra c.hu TtCS
Figure 1
San Diego County
Assessor's
Parcel Numbers:
#1 213-122-18-00
#2 213-122-19-00
Eilar Associates, Inc.
210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100
Escondido, California 92025
760-738-5570
Assessor's Parcel Map
Job # B80808N1 Figure 2
Eilar Associates, Inc.
210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100
Escondido, California 92025
760-738-5570
Satellite Aerial Photograph
Job# B80808N1 Figure 3
,... -I I.
r
--------{ ·-... .__ .... I/ --._-___ ,,_,_..,._=--~~ p ..
Eilar Associates, Inc.
210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100
Escondido, California 92025
760-738-5570
Topographic Map
Job# B80808N1 Figure 4
Eilar Associates, Inc.
210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100
Escondido, California 92025
760-738-5570
Satellite Aerial Photograph Showing Noise Measurement Locations
Job# B80808N1 Figure 5
Eilar Associates, Inc.
210 South Juniper Street, Suite 100
Escondido, California 92025
760-738-5570
Satellite Aerial Photograph Showing Anticipated
Worst-Case Noise Contours and Receiver Locations
Job# B80808N1
Figure 6
>= 45.0
>= 50.0
>= 55.0
>= 60.0
>= 65.0
>= 70.0
APPENDIX A
Project Plans
..
~
~I
g
'
ij
<?
I
11
·m
l
~
..
,
'-
-
PA
C
I
A
C
RI
D
G
E
SC
H
O
O
L
BR
E
S
S
I
RA
N
C
H
CA
F
L
S
B
A
D
,
CA
~
-l
t
&
T
C
U
Ho
f
m
a
n
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8'g
l
l
.
.
t
n
g
..
.
.
.
ca
r
r
i
e
r
j
o
h
n
s
o
n
+
CU
L
T
I
J
R
3
--
-
-
-
-
-
-
_
..
.
.
.
.
.
, __
_
_
_
APPENDIX B
Pertinent Sections of the City of Carlsbad
Noise Element to the General Plan
. C
Noise is an important and complex issue in
Carlsbad. Almost every part of the city is
susceptible to noise impacts, due mainly to the
presence of major noise generators. Significant
sources of noise in the city include McClellan~
Palomar Airport, and major transportation
corridors such as Interstate 5, Highway
78, and railroad tracks. The city's land
use pattern generally accommodates these
conditions with industrial uses clustered close
to the airport, and commercial, residential
Table 5-3 provides standards for noise from non-transportation noise sources
such as, but not limited to, industrial facilities, automotive servicing, car washes,
equipment yards, nightclubs, hotels, and shopping centers. These standards
apply to the noise sources themselves, as measured at the edge of the property
line; noise caused by motor vehicles traveling to and from the site is exempt
from this standard.
TABLE 5-2: ALLOWABLE NOISE EXPOSURE1
LAND USE OUTDOOR ACTIVITY2•3 INTERIOR SPACES
AREAS (DBA CNEL) (DBA CNEL)
Residential 604 45
Motels, Hotels 65 45
Hospitals, Residential Care 65 45
Facilities, Schools, Libraries,
Museums, Churches, Day
Care Facilities
Playgrounds, Parks, 65 50
Recreation Uses
Commercial and Office Uses 65 50
Industrial Uses 70 65
1 Development proposed within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Area of Influence shall also be subject
to the noise compatibility policies contained in the ALUCP.
2 For non-residential uses, where an outdoor activity area is not proposed, the standard does not ap-
ply. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall
be applied to the property line of the receiving use.
3 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to the allowable maximum, levels
up to 5 dB higher may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures
have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table.
4 An exterior noise exposure level of 65 dBA CNEL is allowable for residential uses in a mixed-use
project and for residential uses within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Area of Influence, pursuant to
the noise compatibility policies contained in the ALUCP.
TABLE 5-3: PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR NON-
TRANSPORTATION SOURCES (AS MEASURED AT
PROPERTY LINE OF SOURCE/SENSITIVE USE)
NOISE LEVEL DESCRIPTOR DAYTIME NIGHTTIME
(7 A.M. TO 10 P.M.) (10 P.M. TO 7 A.M.)
Hourly Leq, dB 55
Maximum Level, dB 75
45
65
Each of the noise levels specified above shall be lowered by 5 dB for simple tone noises, noises consist-
ing primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
General Plan
5
z 0 -· (J> lb
5-17
APPENDIX C
Cadna Analysis Data and Results
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model -Sound Levels
.Name ID Type Oktave Se>ectrum (dB) Source
Weight 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 A lin
Loudspeaker L 1 Lw(c) 104.3 104.4 95.1 100.8 97.0 101.4 97.2 90.1 105.7 109.7 Measured Spectrum
Male Shouting L 2 Lw(c) 57.8 81 .3 90.8 94.5 91 83.5 75.5 97.3 97.5 Pearsons et al. (1977)
Female Shouting L 3 Lw (c) 41.8 67.3 81 88.1 87 80.3 71.5 91 .8 91 .5 Pearsons et al. (1977)
Child Shouting L 4 Lw (c) 56.1 65.8 80.6 86.6 86 81 69 90.8 90.4 Pearsons et al. (1977)
Hotel Noise -Page 1 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model -Point Sources -Pre-Game Music Calibration
Name ID Resull PWL Operating Time Lw/LI Helqht Coordinates
Level Day I Night Type I Value X y z
(dBA) (min/hr) I (min/hr) I (ml (ml (ml (ml
Loudspeaker S 1 105.7 60 I 0 Lw I L 1 0.91 538.35 305.12 73.45
Cadna Noise Model -Point Sources -Persons on Field and in Bleachers Calibration
Name ID Resull PWl Operating Time Lw/LI Height Coordinates
Level Day Night Type Value X y z
(dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Male S 74 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 527.05 306.73 78.33
Female S 75 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.15 307.96 78.33
Male S 76 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 527.05 309.12 78.33
Female S 77 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.15 310.44 78.33
Male S 86 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.01 302.60 77.73
Female S 87 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.01 303.46 77.73
Male S 98 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.80 306.73 77.43
Female S 99 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 528.90 307.93 77.43
Female s 107 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.56 307.93 77.13
Male s 108 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 529.50 308.89 77.13
Female s 117 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 530.23 309.61 76.83
Male s 124 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 530.79 308.85 76.53
Male s 150 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.82 311 .43 78.63
Female s 151 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 526'72 312.29 78.63
Male s 158 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 527.74 314.11 78.33
Female s 159 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.68 314.87 78.33
Female s 161 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 528.08 312.13 78.03
Male s 162 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 528.17 312.82 78.03
Male s 182 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 530.09 315.40 77.13
Female s 183 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 530.16 316.30 77.13
Female S 197 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 531.71 311 .80 76.23
Cadna Noise Model -Point Sources -Worst-Case Noise Model
Name ID Resull PWL Operating Time Lw/ LI Height Coordinates
Level Dav Nlaht Type Value X y z
(dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Loudspeaker S 1 105.7 10 0 Lw L 1 0.91 538.35 305.12 73.45
Male S 2 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 525.59 295.56 78.63
Female S 3 91 .8 10 0 lw L 3 6.09 525.59 296.55 78.63
Male S 4 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 525.63 297.41 78.63
Female S 5 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 525.69 298.18 78.63
Male S 6 97.3 . 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 525.84 299.14 78.63
Female S 7 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 525.98 300.76 78.63
Male S 8 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 526.21 295.45 78.33
Female S 9 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.27 296.55 78.33
Male s 10 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 526.32 297.51 78.33
Female S 11 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.36 298.70 78.33
Male ·s 12 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 526.40 299.80 78.33
Female S 13 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.52 300.82 78.33
Male S 14 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 526.80 295.59 78.03
Female s 15 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 526.86 296.43 78.03
Male S 16 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 526.88 297.43 78.03
Female s 17 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 526.94 298.66 78.03
Male S 18 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 526.96 299.80 78.03
Female S 19 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 526.92 300.89 78.03
Male S 20 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 527.40 295.41 77.73
Female S 21 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 527.44 296.32 77.73
Hotel Noise -Page 2 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC .
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model -Point Sources -Worst-Case Noise Model
Name ID Resull PWL Operating Time Lw/LI Height Coordinates
Level Dav Nlaht Type Value X y z
(dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Male S 22 97.3 30 0 Lw L 2 5.19 527.44 297.45 77.73
Female S 23 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 527.59 298.59 77.73
Male S 24 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 527.61 299.7 77.73
Female S 25 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 527.69 300.76 77.73
Male S 26 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 527.9 295.26 77.43
Female S 27 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 528.02 296.26 77.43
Male S 28 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.13 297.28 77.43
Female S 29 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 528.09 298.59 77.43
Male S 30 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.,21 299.7 77.43
Female S 31 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 528.25 300.76 77.43
Male S 32 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 528.52 295.36 77.13
Female S 33 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 528.52 296.24 77.13
Male S 34 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 528.67 297.2 77.13
Female S 35 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 528.78 298.47 77.13
Male S 36 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 528.9 299.72 77.13
Female S 37 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 528.94 300.74 77.13
Male S 38 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.07 295.3 76.83
Female S 39 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 529.17 296.49 76.83
Male S 40 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.3 297.43 76.83
Female S 41 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 529.32 298.24 76.83
Male S 42 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.44 299.45 76.83
Female S 43 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 529.5 300.8 76.83
Male S 44 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 529.69 295.26 76.53
Female S 45 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 529.73 296.39 76.53
Male S 46 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 529.84 297.41 76.53
Female S 47 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 529.88 298.3 76.53
Male S 48 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 530.05 299.32 76.53
Female S 49 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.19 300.87 76.53
Male S 50 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 530.34 295.3 76.23
Female S 51 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 530.44 296.53 76.23
Male S 52 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 530.42 297.7 76.23
Female S 53 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 530.57 298.47 76.23
Male S 54 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 530.55 299.32 76.23
Female S 55 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 530.57 300.68 76.23
Male S 56 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 530.9 295.36 75.93
Female S 57 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531.05 296.45 75.93
Male S 58 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 531 297.76 75.93
Female S 59 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531 .11 298.51 75.93
Male S 60 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 531.1 7 299.45 75.93
Female S 61 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531.23 300.49 75.93
Male S 62 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.19 302.73 78.63
Female S 63 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 526.12 303.99 78,.63
Male S 64 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.29 305.38 78.63
Female S 65 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 526.39 306.7 78.63
Male S 66 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.49 307.66 78.63
Female S 67 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 526.49 308.65 78.63
Male S 68 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.52 309.48 78.63
Female S 69 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 526.45 310.47 78.63
Male S 70 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 526.79 302.67 78.33
Female S 71 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.75 303.72 78.33
Male S 72 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 526.79 304.78 78.33
Female S 73 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.72 305.71 78.33
Male S 74 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 527.05 306.73 78.33
Female S 75 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.15 307.96 78.33
Male S 76 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 527.05 309.12 78.33
Female S 77 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.15 310.44 78.33
Male S 78 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 527.28 302.43 78.03
Female S 79 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 527.38 303.56 78.03
Male S 80 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 527.51 304.75 78.03
Hotel Noise -Page 3 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model • Point Sources • Worst-Case Noise Model
Name ID Result. PWL Operating Time Lw/ Li Heiaht Coordinates
Level Day Night Type Value X y z
(dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Female S 81 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 527.51 305.78 78.03
Male S 82 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 527.61 306.70 78.03
Female S 83 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 527.74 307.79 78.03
Male S 84 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 527.71 308.98 78.03
Female S 85 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 528.01 310.21 78.03
Male S 86 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.01 302.60 77.73
Female S 87 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.01 303.46 77.73
Male S 88 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.21 304.82 77.73
Female S 89 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.24 305.61 77.73
Male S 90 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.37 306.70 77.73
Female S 91 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.37 307.86 77.73
Male S 92 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.34 309.02 77.73
Female S 93 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.34 310.08 77.73
Male S 94 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.60 302.60 77.43
Female S 95 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 528.47 303.49 77.43
Male S 96 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.64 304.62 77.43
Female S 97 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 528.70 305.61 77.43
Male S 98 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.80 306.73 77.43
Female S 99 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 528.90 307.93 77.43
Male S 100 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.94 309.12 77.43
Female S 101 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 529.00 310.21 77.43
Male S 102 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 529.17 302.50 77.13
Female S 103 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.20 303.63 77.13
Male S 104 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 529.37 304.92 77.13
Female S 105 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.33 306.07 77.13
Male S 106 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 529.40 306.97 77.13
Female S 107 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.56 307.93 77.13
Male S 108 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 529.50 308.89 77.13
Female S 109 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.66 309.88 77.13
Male S 110 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.80 302.14 76.83
Female S 111 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 529.73 303.43 76.83
Male S 112 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.89 304.29 76.83
Female S 113 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 529.86 305.28 76.83
Male S 114 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 530.09 306.27 76.83
Female S 115 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 530.13 307.6 76.83
Male S 116 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 530.16 308.36 76.83
Female S 117 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 530.23 309.61 76.83
Male S 118 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 530.46 302.14 76.53
Female S 119 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.36 303.36 76.53
Male S 120 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 530.39 304.32 76.53
Female S 121 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.52 305.64 76.53
Male S 122 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 530.62 306.44 76.53
Female S 123 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.62 307.56 76.53
Male S 124 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 530.79 308.85 76.53
Female S 125 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.82 309.84 76.53
Male S 126 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.05 302.2 76.23
Female S 127 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 531.02 303.26 76.23
Male S 128 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.05 304.19 76.23
Female S 129 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 531.02 305.11 76.23
Male S 130 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.15 306 .. 14 76.23
Female S 131 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 531.12 307 76.23
Male S 132 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.25 308.39 76.23
Female S 133 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 531.35 309.71 76.23
Male S 134 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 531.55 302.17 75.93
Female S 135 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531.61 303.26 75.93
Male S 136 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 531.68 304.19 75.93
Female S 137 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531.81 305.25 75.93
Male S 138 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 531.85 306.3 75.93
Female S 139 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531.88 307.2 75.93
Hotel Noise• Page 4 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES , INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model • Point Sources • Worst-Case Noise Model
Name ID Result. PWL Operating Time Lw/LI Height Coordinates
Level Day Night Type Value X y z
(dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) (m) (ml (m) (m)
Male S 140 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 532.01 308.22 75.93
Female S 141 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 532.01 309.38 75.93
Male S 142 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.16 303.33 78.63
Female s 143 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.79 303.14 78.33
Male s 144 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 527.38 303.01 78.03
Female s 145 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.02 303.01 77.73
Male s 146 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.55 303.11 77.43
Female s 147 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.38 303.01 77.13
Male s 148 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.85 302.77 76.83
Female s 149 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.39 302.84 76.53
Male s 150 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.82 311.43 78.63
Female s 151 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 526.72 312.29 78.63
Male s 152 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.85 313.19 78.63
Female S 153 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 6.09 526.85 314.34 78.63
Male S 154 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.85 315.07 78.63
Female S 155 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.51 311 .60 78.33
Male S 156 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 527.61 312.26 78.33
Female s 157 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.65 313.05 78.33
Male S 158 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.79 527.74 314.11 78.33
Female s 159 91 .8 10 0 Lw L_3 5.79 527.68 314.87 78.33
Male s 160 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 528.08 311 .27 78.03
Female S 161 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 528.08 312.13 78.03
Male s 162 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 528.17 312.82 78.03
Female s 163 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 528.24 313.91 78.03
Male s 164 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 528.21 315.24 78.03
Female s 165 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.49 528.17 316.46 78.03
Male s 166 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.70 311.37 77.73
Female s 167 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.74 312.26 77.73
Male s 168 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.74 313.19 77.73
Female s 169 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.80 314.24 77.73
Male s 170 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.19 528.84 315.24 77.73
Female s 171 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.87 316.56 77.73
Male S 172 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 529.2 311.37 77.43
Female S 173 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 529.46 312.29 77.43
Male S 174 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 529.33 313.35 77.43
Female S 175 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 529.46 314.44 77.43
Male S 176 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 529.56 315.24 77.43
Female s 177 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.89 529.6 316.46 77.43
Male s 178 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 529.89 311.17 77.13
Female S 179 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.86 312.23 77.13
Male s 180 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 530.03 313.38 77.13
Female s 181 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 530.03 314.54 77.13
Male s 182 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.59 530.09 315.4 77.13
Female s 183 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 530.16 316.3 77.13
Male s 184 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 530.59 311.37 76.83
Female s 185 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 530.52 312.16 76.83
Male s 186 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 530.66 313.42 76.83
Female S 187 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 530.69 314.24 76.83
Male S 188 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 530.69 315.27 76.83
Female S 189 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.29 530.75 316.53 76.83
Male S 190 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 530.75 311.17 76.53
Female S 191 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 531.05 312.49 76.53
Male S 192 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 531.09 313.45 76.53
Female S 193 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 531.25 314.41 76.53
Male S 194 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.99 531.45 315.44 76.53
Female s 195 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 531.45 316.56 76.53
Male s 196 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.58 311.07 76.23
Female s 197 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 531.71 311.8 76.23
Male s 198 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.75 312.59 76.23
Hotel Noise • Page 5 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model -Point Sources -Worst.Case Noise Model
Name ID Result PWl Operating Time Lw/ll Height Coordinates
Level Day Night Type Value X y z
(dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) (m) (ml (m) (m)
Female S 199 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 531.85 313.52 76.23
Male S 200 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.85 314.77 76.23
Female S 201 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.69 532.04 315.93 76.23
Male S 202 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 532.31 311 75.93
Female S 203 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 532.01 312.03 75.93
Male S 204 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 532.34 313.15 75.93
Female S 205 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 532.21 314.34 75.93
Male S 206 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.39 532.24 315.2 75.93
Female S 207 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 532.61 316.36 75.93
Male S 208 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.12 302.76 76.23
Female S 209 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531 .6 302.66 75.93
Male S 210 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.08 301.76 78.63
Female S 211 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.82 301.92 78.33
Male S 212 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 527.34 301.92 78.03
Female S 213 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.03 302.03 77.73
Male S 214 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.55 301.76 77.43
Female S 215 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.23 301.66 77.13
Male S 216 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.81 301.55 76.83
Female S 217 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.28 301 .5 76.53
Male S 218 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531 .02 301 .5 76.23
Female S 219 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 531.44 301 .5 75.93
Male S 220 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.5 307.33 78.63
Female S 221 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.5 307.49 78.33
Male S 222 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 527.92 307.38 78.03
Female S 223 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.34 307.43 77.73
Male S 224 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 529.08 307.38 77.43
Female S 225 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 529.55 307.38 77.13
Male S 226 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 530.13 307.22 76.83
Female S 227 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 530.6 307.28 76.53
Male S 228 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531 .23 307.43 76.23
Female S 229 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 532.02 307.75 75.93
Male S 230 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 526.88 313.84 78.63
Female S 231 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 527.63 313.63 78.33
Male S 232 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 528.22 313.43 78.03
Female S 233 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 528.97 313.63 77.73
Male S 234 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 529.59 313.97 77.43
Female S 235 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 530.14 314.09 77.13
Male S 236 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 530.8 313.84 76.83
Female S 237 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 531.09 313.93 76.53
Male S 238 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 531.93 314.13 76.23
Female S 239 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 532.43 313.88 75.93
Male S 240 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 525.97 299.5 78.63
Female S 241 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.34 299.34 78.33
Male S 242 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 5.49 526.93 299.34 78.03
Female S 243 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.19 527.55 299.25 77.73
Male S 244 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.89 528.18 299.17 77.43
Female S 245 91.8 10 0 Lw L 3 4.59 528.59 299.17 77.13
Male S 246 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 4.29 529.18 298.96 76.83
Female S 247 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.99 529.97 298.8 76.53
Male S 248 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 3.69 530.68 298.8 76.23
Female S 249 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 3.39 53 1.09 299.05 75.93
Male S 250 97.3 10 0 Lw L 2 6.09 525.51 296.17 78.63
Female S 251 91 .8 10 0 Lw L 3 5.79 526.13 296.17 78.33
Hotel Noise -Page 6 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model • Area Sources • Persons on Field and in Bleachers Calibration
Name ID Resull PWL Result. PWL" Operating Time Lw/ Li Moving Pt. Src Coordinates
Level Level Day Night Type Value Number X y z Ground
(dBA) (dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) Day (m) (m) (m) (m)
546.97 354.87 74.06 72.54
Playing Field AS_1 106.8 69.3 10 0 PWL-Pt L_4 40 602.42 351 .09 74.06 72.54
595.28 251 .1 74.06 72.54
538.99 254.88 74.06 72.54
Cadna Noise Model • Area Sources • Worst-Case Noise Model
Name ID Result PWL Resull PWL" Operating Time Lw/ Li Movina Pl Src Coordinates
Level Level Day Night Type Value Num_ber X y z Ground
(dBA) (dBA) (min/hr) (min/hr) Day (m) (m) Im) (m)
546.97 354.87 74.06 72.54
Playing Field AS_1 106.8 69.3 10 0 PWL-Pt L_4 40 602.42 351 .09 74.06 72.54
595.28 251 .1 74.06 72.54
538.99 254.88 74.06 72.54
Hotel Noise -Page 7 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model -Barriers -All Models
Name ID Coordinates
X y z Ground
(m) (m) (m) (m)
519.68 226.59 74.37 72.54
528.55 226.07 74.37 72.54
537.64 225.59 74.37 72.54
543.05 225.44 74.37 72.54
543.94 228.17 74.37 72.54
545.78 232.58 74.37 72.54
547.62 235.52 74.37 72.54
549.61 239.04 74.37 72.54
Perimeter Wall BA_1 553.45 242.77 74.37 72.54
556.76 245.61 74.37 72.54
561.43 247.92 74.37 72.54
562.35 248.08 74.37 72.54
573.77 247.17 74.37 72.54
596.07 245.31 74.37 72.54
597.2 245.71 74.37 72.54
597.4 246.17 74.37 72.54
598.19 254.64 74.37 72.54
601 .76 299.38 74.37 72.54
Cadna Noise Model -Buildings -All Models
Name ID Coordinates
X y z Ground
(m) (m) (m) (m)
x(m) y (m) z(m) Ground (m)
545.06 395.05 78.64 72.54
Gymnasium BL_1 616.26 392.93 78.64 72.54
616.9 356.39 78.64 72.54
545.48 358.5 78.64 72.54
526.34 315.45 77.41 72.54
527.53 315.51 76.81 72.54
Bleachers BL_2 527.53 316.97 76.81 72.54
533.05 316.83 74.71 72.54
531.44 294.62 74.71 72.54
525.08 294.87 77.41 72.54
Hotel Noise -Page 8 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model -Contour Lines -All Models
Name ID Coordinates
X y z
(m) (m) (m)
649.28 229.93 60.96
614.43 105.04 60.96
Terrain Line 1 T_1 595.07 52.5 60.96
343.9 57.96 60.96
437.98 100.8 60.96
495.53 166.33 60.96
494.06 206.05 65.53
502.66 214.78 65.53
Terrain Line 2 T_2 556.9 210.68 65.53
566.42 227.48 65.53
605.58 226.82 65.53
604.52 356.36 72.54
641 .74 355.6 72.54
669.46 543.35 72.54
666.1 637.86 72.54
557.73 634.5 72.54
542.48 497.52 72.54
541.2 375.53 72.54
Terrain Line 3 T_3 525.54 320.51 72.54
514.16 259.78 72.54
494.06 231.87 72.54
494.75 227.49 72.54
543.53 224.53 72.54
559 244.93 72.54
599.5 244.83 72.54
604.52 356.36 72.54
146.68 72.01 91.44
176.02 88.68 91.44
211 .35 112.68 91 .44
229.36 130.68 91.44
244.02 182.02 91.44
260.03 227.36 91.44
276.69 246.02 91.44
294.03 246.02 91.44
317.37 229.36 91.44
351.37 212.02 91.44
376.04 210.02 91.44
Terrain Line 4 T_4 418.04 231 .36 91.44
442.71 256.69 91.44
462.05 292.03 91.44
474.71 335.37 91 .44
502.05 386.71 91.44
512.05 429.38 91.44
503.38 498.05 91.44
524.72 573.39 91.44
518.05 620.73 91.44
524.05 646.07 91.44
581.39 670.73 91.44
626.06 708.07 91.44
630.73 748.74 91.44
Hotel Noise -Page 9 of 12
EI LAR ASSOCIATES, INC .
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model • Contour Lines • All Models
Name ID Coordinates
X y z
(m) (m) (m)
961.95 758.79 91.44
910.62 732.79 91 .44
859.28 677.45 91 .44
823.27 626.77 91.44
785.94 566.1 91.44
767.93 529.43 91.44
759.93 496.09 91.44
767.93 474.76 91.44
789.94 456.76 91.44
839.28 436.75 91 .44
873.28 422.09 91.44
883.28 414.75 91.44
879.95 396.75 91 .44
851.28 374.08 91.44
Terrain Line 5 T_5 801.27 346.75 91.44
767.93 319.41 91.44
745.93 287.41 91.44
737.26 252.07 91.44
740.6 224.07 91.44
760.6 214.73 91.44
798.6 224.07 91.44
863.94 248.74 91 .44
969.29 264.07 91.44
990.62 258.74 91.44
993.96 248.74 91.44
913.28 156 06 91.44
901 .28 130.72 91.44
898.61 101.39 91.44
909.28 75.38 91.44
919.28 62.72 91.44
308.52 746.44 121.92
306.4 715.22 121.92
313.81 662.83 121.92
342.38 621.03 121.92
375.72 582.92 121.92
384.19 560.7 121.92
373.08 494.02 121.92
392.66 432.64 121.92
389.48 397.18 121.92
376.25 362.25 121.92
355.09 341.61 121.92
327.57 338.44 121.92
276.77 353.79 121.92
251 .89 360.14 121.92
Terrain Line 6 T_6 236.02 356.43 121.92
212.73 325.21 121.92
180.98 293.46 121.92
157.17 281.82 121.92
125.95 295.05 121.92
114.3 320.98 121.92
131.77 368.6 121.92
125.95 389.77 121.92
103.72 404.59 121.92
88.37 423.11 121.92
79.38 463.86 121.92
86.79 508.31 121.92
100.02 535.83 121.92
114.3 569.17 121.92
104.78 608.33 121.92
92.08 686.12 121.92
Hotel Noise • Page 10 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model • Contour Lines (3 of 3)
Name ID Coordinates
X y z
1ml 1ml 1m1
1186.64 699.99 121.92
1153.31 691.99 121.92
1099.3 699.99 121.92
1062.63 688.65 121.92
987.29 643.32 121.92
932.62 629.32 121.92
909.28 615.98 121.92
884.61 576.64 121.92
881 .95 554.64 121.92
897.28 535.97 121.92
931 .95 520.64 121.92
988.62 521.97 121.92
1014.63 518.64 121.92
1024.63 499.3 121.92
1013.96 463.96 121.92
1006.63 437.3 121.92
Terrain Line 7 T_7 983.96 391.96 121.92
985.96 374.62 121.92
1013.29 365.29 121.92
1082.63 360.62 121.92
1149.97 375.96 121.92
1179.98 387.29 121.92
1187.98 378.62 121.92
1181.31 340.62 121 .92
1153.31 285.95 121.92
1121.3 249.94 121.92
1072.63 213.27 121.92
1050.63 195.94 121.92
1047.3 185.94 121.92
1047.3 179.93 121.92
1085.3 179.27 121 .92
1154.64 190.6 121 .92
1197.31 227.27 121 .92
709.36 677.23 81
705.13 634.89 78
701.95 597.32 75
696.13 528 72
Terrain Line 8 T_8 694.01 490.42 70
686.08 430.09 71
680.78 368.71 66
667.02 312.08 66
649.28 229.93 65
1189.5 16~.25 103.63
1142.46 129.65 103.63
1027.37 104.44 103.63
964.37 103.6 103.63
945.05 131.33 103.63
966.89 177.53 103.63
1070.21 269.09 103.63
1082.82 295.97 103.63
1044.17 305.21 103.63
901.37 298.49 103.63
813.16 282.53 103.63
Terrain Line 9 T_9 798.04 290.09 103.63
810.64 316.14 103.63
893.81 368.22 103.63
940.01 413.58 103.63
947.57 447.18 103.63
878.69 462.3 103.63
827.44 493.38 103.63
806.44 521.95 103.63
818.2 568.99 103.63
858.52 626.95 103.63
919.85 686.59 103.63
981.17 713.48 103.63
1018.13 742.88 103.63
Hotel Noise -Page 11 of 12
EILAR ASSOCIATES, INC.
Acoustical and Environmental Consulting
Cadna Noise Model -Noise Levels at Receivers -Pre-Game Music Calibration
Name ID Level Lr Height Coordinates
Day X y z
(dBA) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Calibration 1 CAL-1 82.2 1.52 542.90 304.94 74.06
Calibration 2 CAL-2 55.1 1.52 539.64 254.63 74.06
Cadna Noise Model -Noise Levels at Receivers -Persons on Field and In Bleachers Calibration
Name ID Level Lr Height Coordinates
Day X y z
(dBA) (m) (m) (m) (m)
Calibration 2 CAL-2 61.4 1.52 539.64 254.63 74.06
Cadna Noise Model -Noise Levels at Receivers -Worst-Case Noise Model
Name ID Level Lr Height Coordinates
Dav X y z
(dBA) (m) (m) (m) (m)
R 1 -Property Line R1-1 40.4 1.52 532.97 209.12 66.74
R 1-Second Story R1-2 45.3 4.57 536.09 194.04 68.45
R2-Property Line R2-1 46.9 1.52 587.72 203.31 66.41
R2-Second Story R2-2 50.4 4.57 580.67 200.09 69.42
R3-Property Line R3 48.5 1.52 379.94 378.77 123.44
Sensitive Habitat R4 59.9 1.52 487.17 308.58 86.01
Hotel Noise -Page 12 of 12